Warning: file_exists(): Unable to find the wrapper "tttps" - did you forget to enable it when you configured PHP? in /home/u114152123/domains/locusmariologicus.org/public_html/wp-content/plugins/schema-and-structured-data-for-wp/admin_section/common-function.php on line 5331
It appears you’ve provided a snippet of HTML code with placeholders for “bsf_rt_marker” and a figure block for an image. Since you’ve requested a translation, here is the English translation of the visible text:``This translates to:``
Adamantius (4th Century)
Adamantius is not the name of an author, but a character in the *Dialogue on the Right Faith*, falsely attributed to Origen and translated into Latin by Rufinus of Aquileia.The *Dialogue* is placed by modern scholarship after the Council of Nicaea (325), due to its use of various expressions from that period, but within the first half of the 4th century.In the *Dialogue*, Adamantius, the orthodox, and some disciples of gnostic sects, including Marino, are confronted before the pagan moderator Eutropius. The work is divided into 5 books, all focused on what they affirm about the true Incarnation of the Word. Books IV and V, concerning Mary, are the most significant, emphasizing the reality of Christ’s Incarnation and highlighting her real and virgin motherhood. The *Dialogue* presents arguments that will become common against Manichaeans in the second half of the 4th century regarding the dignity of the Incarnation and the womb of a woman.The author employs the term *Homoousios*, key to the Council of Nicaea (325) and orthodoxy against Arianism, which denied the consubstanciality of the Word of God with the Father, acknowledging only a similarity. This shows that the *De recta in Deum fide* cannot be from an earlier period.Furthermore, he speaks of *assuming man*, rather than *assuming human nature*. This is the usual expression throughout the 3rd and 4th centuries. Only later, after the clarifications of the Councils of Ephesus (431) and Chalcedon (451), did greater attention be given to the abstract term, as it better expresses the two natures, divine and human, united in the unique person of the Word.> (Dialogue on the Right Faith, I, 1. IV, V)> Adamantius: I believe in one God, the Creator and *demiurgos* of the universe, and the Word of God, proceeding from Him, and consubstantial with him who always is, and in the last times assumed man from Mary, and was crucified and rose from the dead.> Marino: The subject of our discussion is Christ. I maintain that he took a celestial body. Now, state your position.> Adamantius: I say that he took it from the same substance as the first man Adam, from which we also sprang.> Marino: At the outset, we debate whether it is not shameful to affirm that the Word of God assumed the flesh of a woman.Adamantius: It would be shameful for divinity, if any passion could come upon the Word of God.Marinus: How?Adamantius: You said it is shameful to say that the Word of God became flesh. But divinity does not feel shame, nor does it seek or desire glory: these are “passions”. Now, divinity is incapable of passions. But I want to question you briefly.Marinus: Go ahead.Adamantius: Who created man?Marinus: God!Adamantius: The Father of the Word, that is, of Christ?Marinus: The Father with the Word.Adamantius: How did He create him?Marinus: As the Scripture says: “Let us make man in our image and after our likeness. And God formed man from the dust of the earth.”Adamantius: After forming him from the dust, did God change him for better or worse?Marinus: Clearly for better!Adamantius: Well, if God was not ashamed to take the dust of the earth and from the worst make the best, He should not be ashamed to take that which He formed?Marinus: How do you say that?Eutropius: You said yes or no, that man was made of clay?Marinus: Yes.Eutropius: Well, is clay or man more honorable and glorious?Marinus: Man!Eutropius: Then it is foolish to say that God was not ashamed to take the worst, but the best. For if it was not shameful for God to take the dust of the earth, how would it be shameful for God to take man made in His likeness? (… )Marinus: The same Word became flesh, without taking anything from outside.Adamantius: But is the Word of God mutable or immutable?Marinus: Immutable! (… )Adamantius: If you say that the Word became flesh, but without taking a human body, you reveal who suffered on the cross.Marinus: He suffered, but apparently.Eutropius: In appearance, that is, fantastically, not in reality.Adamantius: If apparently He suffered and not in reality, apparently Herod judged Him, apparently Pilate washed his hands, apparently Judas also betrayed Him (… ). So, human salvation is also all appearance, not reality. How then does Christ say of Himself: I am the truth? (… )Adamantius: Before the Word of God descended and assumed man from the womb of a woman, no one had ascended to heaven. But after Him, those who are of Christ did. Indeed, the Apostle says: “Christ, the firstfruits, then those who belong to Christ” (1 Cor 15:23). But the Apostle prophesied: “He who descended is the same as he who ascended” (Eph 4:10), to show the immutability of the Word. For he who descended is the same as he who ascended, without becoming something other than what He was: God.Eutropius: These words (of the Apostle) confirm Adamantius’ statement. But I want both of you to propose your own definition regarding this.Adamantius: The Word of God descended and assumed man from the Virgin Mary, immaculately conceived, in her womb, and Christ was born without the union of man, conceived by Mary through the work of the Holy Spirit, He who submitted to all “passions” human, to save man.Marinus: Was the Word present while man suffered?Eutropius: Say your sentence first!Adamantius: Allow me to respond. Then say yours. Yes, the Word of God was present to man, but He did not become indignant: like a diamond struck by iron, it remains firm and, in fact, damages whoever seeks to harm it. Or like asbestos thrown into fire, it remains unharmed and intact, not broken. But even fire, cut by a knife, does not split: for the compactness of fire, returning to itself, remains undivided. If then material things show their strength against other material things, much less can they perish, the Word of God, who by nature is impassible and unchanging, remaining impassible, keeping “passions” at bay. But if you wish, I will show you from the Gospel that He was born of Mary.Marinus: We also confess He was born through Mary, but not from Mary. Indeed, just as water passes through a pipe without carrying anything, so too the Word came through Mary, but not from her.Adamantius: Let’s read the Gospel!Eutropius: Read!Adamantius: I have read what the angel said to Mary: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore, the child to be born will be holy, and He will be called the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).Eutropius: You might say that the voice of the angel was also apparent. But what is truer than this, when the angel says: “Therefore also the Holy One who is to be born of you”? He did not say: “who will be born through you,” but “out of you.” It is not foolish to say: “like through a pipe” and confess that the Word passed through Mary, but deny that he took anything from her? And if you deny this for some sort of decorum, as if divinity could be offended! You do not realize, Marino, that you accept what is most shameful, deny what is most worthy and most in line with the divine plan? In fact, if the Word did not find shame in passing through Mary, he did not find shame in taking anything from her. Besides, what need did he have to pass, if he did not have to take anything?Adamantius: If he did not “assume humanity from Mary,” how would the words of the Apostle be understood? How could he be the firstborn among the dead, the firstfruits of those who sleep?To delve deeper into the Marian testimony of the Church Fathers, consult the encyclical Redemptoris Mater by Saint John Paul II on Mary in Christian tradition.For further study: explore Mariology, Marian theology, Marian apparitions, and the Postgraduate Program in Mariology.
Graduate Studies in Mariology
Do you want to deepen your formation in Mariology? Get to know the Graduate Program in Mariology from Locus Mariologicus, an academic formation that combines theological rigor, spiritual life, and the living tradition of the Church.
In Mary’s face, we contemplate Christ’s face. A mariological meditation on the relationship between Mother and Son in Christian faith. Deepen this reflection.
Mary, Servant of the Lord, illuminates the meaning of life, faith, and Christian mission in the world. She deepens the beauty of the Marian vocation to serve the baptized.
Explore Mary’s role in the life of the Church, as Mother and model of faith. A theological reflection on her presence in the Christian community. Let us delve deeper into this mystery.
Learn from Mary the art of the Trinitarian mystical prayer, according to John Paul II, and discover how Christian holiness is lived simply in daily life.
Discover how the Trinity’s relationship with Mary reveals divine communication and the human model of response to grace in this Marian theological study.
Responses