2

having received the effusion of wisdom attainable by the saints, and by the (14∆_014> putting off of the life according to nature having made the soul their substance, and for this reason possessing Christ alone as their life, and, to say what is even greater, he having become the soul of their soul and being manifested to all through all their deeds and words and thoughts, so that from this it is believed that the things set forth are not theirs, but Christ's, who by grace has substituted himself for them.

But how can I say "Lord Jesus," having not yet received the Spirit of holiness? How can I speak the mighty acts of the Lord, I who have a speech impediment, and who have nailed my mind to the relation with corruptible things? How can I make any of his praises heard, I who am deaf, and who have the hearing of my soul completely turned away from the blessed voice of the Word, through my friendship with the passions? How will the Word be manifest to me, who am vanquished by the world, when he is of a nature to conquer the world but not to be manifest to the world, if indeed he is naturally unknowable to a matter-loving disposition? How is it not audacious, for the accursed to intrude upon the saints, and for the impure to undertake things concerning the pure? For this reason I would have refused the undertaking of what was commanded, fearing the blame of presumption, had I not feared more the danger of disobedience. Therefore, being caught between these two, I choose rather the blame for presumption as more tolerable, fleeing the danger of disobedience as unpardonable. And by the mediation of the saints and the help of your prayers, with Christ our great God and Savior granting the ability to think piously and to speak fittingly, I will make my response on each chapter as concisely as possible [the discourse is for a teacher who is able to furnish great things from small ones], beginning from Gregory the God-minded, as he is closer to us in time.

1. OF ST. GREGORY THE THEOLOGIAN, FROM THE [ORATION] ON THE SON, "FOR THIS REASON THE MONAD..."

(14∆_016> Of Saint Gregory the Theologian, from the first oration on the Son, concerning the passage: “For this reason a monad, having from the beginning moved to a dyad, has stood at a Triad.” And again, of the same author, from the second 1036 Oration on Peace, concerning the passage: “The Monad having been moved, because of its richness, and the dyad having been surpassed; for it is beyond matter and form, from which bodies are constituted, and the Triad having been defined, because of its perfection.”

If, servant of God, having considered the apparent disagreement, you were perplexed about the true

harmony, it is not possible to find a more unified meaning in these expressions. For it is the same thing for the dyad to be surpassed and not to stop at the dyad, and again for the Triad to be defined and for the motion of the monad to stop at the Triad, if indeed we profess a monarchy that is not without honor, as if circumscribed in one person, nor again disordered, as if poured out into infinity, but one which the Triad of equal honor by nature—Father and Son and holy Spirit—constitutes, whose richness is their connaturality and the one leap of their splendor, with the Godhead neither being poured out beyond these, lest we introduce a crowd of gods, nor being limited within these, lest we be condemned for a poverty of Godhead. This is not, therefore, an explanation of the cause of the super-essential cause of beings, but a demonstration of a pious doctrine concerning it, if indeed the Godhead is a Monad, but not a dyad, and a Triad, but not a multitude, as being without beginning, incorporeal, and without internal strife.

For the monad is truly a Monad; for it is not a principle of things after it, according to a contraction of an extension, such that it would naturally be poured out, proceeding into a multitude, but is the enhypostatic being of a consubstantial Triad. And the Triad is truly a Triad, not being completed by a dissoluble number (for it is not a composition of monads, such that it might suffer division), but the single-substanced existence of a tri-hypostatic monad. For the (14∆_018> Triad is truly a Monad, because it is so, and the Monad is truly a Triad, because it so subsists; since also one Godhead

2

τήν ἐφικτήν τοῖς ἁγίοις χύσιν τῆς σοφίας εἰσδεξαμένων, καί τῇ (14∆_014> ἀποθέσει τῆς κατά φύσιν ζωῆς ψυχῆς οὐσίαν πεποιημένων, καί διά τοῦτο ζῶντα μονώτατον τόν Χριστόν ἐσχηκότων, καί τό δή μεῖζον εἰπεῖν, ψυχήν αὐτοῖς τῆς ψυχῆς γεγενημένον καί διά πάντων ἔργων τε καί λόγων καί νοημάτων πᾶσιν ἐμφανιζόμενον ὡς ἐντεῦθεν ἐκείνων μέν οὐκ εἶναι πεπεῖσθαι τά προτεθέντα, Χριστοῦ δέ κατά χάριν αὐτοῖς ἑαυτόν ὑπαλλάξαντος.

Ἀλλά πῶς εἴπω Κύριον Ἰησοῦν, μήπω Πνεῦμα λαβών ἁγιότητος; Πῶς λαλήσω τάς δυναστείας τοῦ Κυρίου, ὁ μογίλαλος, καί τόν νοῦν τῇ σχέσει προσηλώσας τῶν φθειρομένων; Πῶς ἀκουστάς ποιήσω κἄν τινας αἰνέσεις αὐτοῦ, ὁ κωφός, καί τό τῆς ψυχῆς ἀκουστικόν διά τήν πρός τά πάθη φιλίαν ἔχων παντελῶς ἀπεστραμμένον τοῦ Λόγου τήν μακαρίαν φωνήν; Πῶς ἐμφανής ὁ Λόγος γενήσεταί μοι, τῷ ἡττημένῳ τῷ κόσμῳ, νικᾷν τόν κόσμον, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐμφανίζεσθαι τῷ κόσμῳ πεφυκώς, εἴπερ φιλύλῳ διαθέσει κατά φύσιν ἐστίν ἀνεπίγνωστος; Πῶς οὐ τολμηρόν, τοῖς ἁγίοις τόν ἐναγῆ, καί τοῖς καθαροῖς ἐγχειρεῖν τόν ἀκάθαρτον; ∆ιό παρῃτησάμην ἄν τήν ἐπί τοῖς κεκελευσμένοις ἐγχείρησιν, τόν τῆς προπετείας ψόγον φοβούμενος, εἰ μή πλέον ἐδεδοίκειν τῆς ἀπειθείας τόν κίνδυνον. ∆υοῖν οὖν τούτων μέσος ληφθείς τῆς προπετείας αἱροῦμαι μᾶλλον ψόγον ὡς ἀνεκτότερον, φεύγων ὡς ἀσύγγνωστον τῆς ἀπειθείας τόν κίνδυνον. Καί τῇ μεσιτείᾳ τῶν ἁγίων καί βοηθείᾳ τῶν ὑμετέρων εὐχῶν, Χριστοῦ τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καί Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν χορηγοῦντος τό νοεῖν εὐσεβῶς καί λέγειν δεόντως, περί ἑκάστου κεφαλαίου τήν ἀπόκρισιν ὡς οἷόν τε ποιήσομαι σύντομον [πρός διδάσκαλον ὁ λόγος μικροῖς πορίζεσθαι μεγάλα δυνάμενον], ἀρχόμενος ἀπό Γρηγορίου τοῦ θεόφρονος, ὡς μᾶλλον ἡμῖν ὄντος τῷ χρόνῳ προσεχεστέρου.

Α' ΤΟΥ ΑΓ. ΓΡΗΓΟΡΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΘΕΟΛ., ΕΚ ΤΟΥ ΠΕΡΙ ΥΙΟΥ, "∆ΙΑ ΤΟΥΤΟ ΜΟΝΑΣ ..».

(14∆_016> Τοῦ ἁγίου Γρηγορίου τοῦ Θεολόγου, ἐκ τοῦ περί Υἱοῦ πρώτου λόγου εἰς τό· «∆ιά τοῦτο μονάς ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς εἰς δυάδα κινηθεῖσα μέχρι Τριάδος ἔστη». Καί πάλιν τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐκ τοῦ δευτέρου 1036 Εἰρηνικοῦ εἰς τό· «Μονάδος μέν κινηθείσης, διά τό πλούσιον, δυάδος δέ ὑπερβαθείσης· ὑπέρ γάρ τήν ὕλην καί τό εἶδος, ἐξ ὧν τά σώματα, Τριάδος δέ ὁρισθεῖσης, διά τό τέλειον».

Εἰ μέν τήν δοκοῦσαν εἶναι διαφωνίαν, δοῦλε Θεοῦ, σκοπήσας τήν ἀληθῆ

συμφωνίαν ἠπόρησας, οὐκ ἔστι κατ᾿ ἔννοιαν τούτων τῶν φωνῶν ἑνικωτέραν εὑρεῖν. Ταυτόν γάρ ἐστιν ὑπερβαθῆναι δυάδα καί μή στῆναι μέχρι δυάδος, καί πάλιν ὁρισθῆναι Τριάδα καί μέχρι Τριάδος στῆναι τῆς μονάδος τήν κίνησιν, εἴπερ μοναρχίαν πρεσβεύομεν οὐκ ἀφιλότιμον, ὡς ἑνί προσώπῳ περιγεγραμμένην, ἤ πάλιν ἄτακτον, ὡς εἰς ἄπειρον χεομένην, ἀλλ᾿ ἥν ὁμότιμος φύσει Τριάς Πατήρ καί Υἱός καί Πνεῦμα συνίστησιν ἅγιον, ὧν πλοῦτος ἡ συμφυΐα καί τό ἕν ἔξαλμα τῆς λαμπρότητος, οὔτε ὑπέρ ταῦτα τῆς θεότητος χεομένης, ἵνα μή δῆμον θεῶν εἰσαγάγωμεν, οὔτε ἐντός τούτων ὁριζομένης, ἵνα μή πενίαν θεότητος κατακριθῶμεν. Οὐκ ἔστιν οὖν αἰτιολογία τοῦτο τῆς ὑπερουσίου τῶν ὄντων αἰτίας, ἀλλ᾿ εὐσεβοῦς περί αὐτῆς δόξης ἀπόδειξις, εἴπερ μονάς, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ δυάς, καί Τριάς, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ πλῆθος, ἡ θεότης, ὡς ἄναρχος, ἀσώματός τε καί ἀστασίαστος.

Μονάς γάρ ἀληθῶς ἡ μονάς· οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἀρχή τῶν μετ᾿ αὐτήν, κατά διαστολῆς συστολήν, ἵνα χεθῇ φυσικῶς εἰς πλῆθος ὁδεύουσα, ἀλλ᾿ ἐνυπόστατος ὀντότης ὁμοουσίου Τριάδος. Καί Τριάς ἀληθῶς ἡ Τριάς, οὐκ ἀριθμῷ λυομένῳ συμπληρουμένη (οὐ γάρ ἐστι μονάδων σύνθεσις, ἵνα πάθῃ διαίρεσιν) , ἀλλ᾿ ἑνούσιος ὕπαρξις τρισυποστάτου μονάδος. Μονάς γάρ ἀληθῶς ἡ (14∆_018> Τριάς, ὅτι οὕτως ἐστί, καί Τριάς ἀληθῶς ἡ μονάς, ὅτι οὕτως ὑφέστηκεν· ἐπειδή καί μία θεότης