ACC ~ Mark 10 v18a

ON RIGHTLY NAMING THE GOOD

EPHREM THE SYRIAN: The rich man called Jesus “good,” [1] as if he were offering him a favor, just as some favor others with honorary titles. [The Lord] fled from that by which people favored him, so that he might show that he had received this goodness from the Father through nature and generation, and not [merely] in name. “Only one is good,” [2] [he said], and did not remain silent, but added, “the Father,” so that he might show that the Son is good in just the way that the Father is good. COMMENTARY ON TATIAN’S DIATESSARON. [3]

[1] Mk 10:17; Lk 18:18.

[2] Mt 19:17; cf. Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19.

[3] Leloir 1963:140; JSSS 2:229-30**.

LATER ERRORS ECHO THE SAME FALSE PREMISE

HILARY OF POITIERS: He who is by nature God of God must possess the nature of his origin, which God possesses. The indistinguishable unity of a living nature cannot be divided by the birth of a living nature. [1] But the troublers of church unity, under cover of the saving confession of the gospel faith, are subversively trying to take captive the truth by undermining it. By forcing their own interpretations on words spoken with other meanings and intentions, they are robbing the Son of his distinctive unity [with the Father]. [2] ON THE TRINITY 9.2. [3]

[1] Cf. Mt 16:15-16; Jn 1:1-18; Gal 4:4.

[2] Cf. 2 Pet 2—3.

[3] Cetedoc 0433, 62A.9.2.1; NPNF 2 9:155**. This false premise is analogous to misleading theories of heretics, among them the Arians and the Modalists.

HOW THE SKEWED PREMISE SHAPES THE REPLY

HILARY OF POITIERS: A complete understanding of the reply must come from the reason that prompted the question, for the answer will be directed to the matter that led to the inquiry. … He voiced his objection to the title of “good master” in such a way as to challenge the faith of the questioner rather than the designation of himself as a master or as good. ON THE TRINITY 9.2. [1]

[1] Cetedoc 0433, 62A.9.15.12 and 62A.9.16.5; FC 25:335**. The motivation of the questioner is what is in question.

THE OVERTURNING OF THE PREMISE IN THE QUESTION

JEROME: The question is something like a priest who, while inwardly despising his bishop, yet continues to address him openly as “bishop.” Whereupon the bishop answers, “To you I am not the bishop; you may leave my presence.” HOMILY 53. [1]

[1] Cetedoc 0592, 142.66; FC 48:379**.