36

It has been sufficiently said that God is properly and fittingly called Father, and that it is a name not of passion, but of relationship, either according to grace, as in the case of men, or according to nature, as in the case of the Only-begotten; but let us grant that this expression, like countless others, is tropical and is spoken metaphorically. Just as, therefore, when we hear of God being angry, and sleeping, and flying, and of other such things which, according to a superficial understanding, present unseemly meanings, we neither erase the expressions of the Spirit nor do we understand what is said in a corporeal sense; why indeed, since this expression has been so continuously adopted by the Spirit, do we not also investigate its God-befitting meanings? Or shall we erase this one expression alone from Scripture, maligning it on account of its human usage? But let us consider it thus. Since two things are signified by the term 'to beget' according to common usage here, both the passion of the one begetting and the relationship to the one begotten, when it is said by the Father to the Only-begotten, 'From the womb before the morning star I have begotten you,' and, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten you'; which of these two should we say is represented by the verb? The passible aspect of those who beget, or the kinship of nature? For I say the latter; and I do not think that even they, unless carried away into glaring melancholy, would ever oppose it. So if the expression is proper to God, why do you dishonor it as foreign? but if it is transferred from human things, having chosen its sound meaning, flee the worse of its significations. For it is surely possible with a word of many meanings, having been led to the correct understanding through the saying, to rise above the lowly and shameful aspect of its meaning. And do not say to me: What is 29.628 this generation? and of what sort? and how could this be? For we shall not, because the manner is ineffable and completely incomprehensible, on that account cast out the steadfastness of our faith in the Father and the Son. For if we were to measure all things by comprehension, and to suppose that what is incomprehensible to our reasonings does not exist at all, the reward of faith will be gone, and the reward of hope will be gone. How would we still be worthy of the blessings laid up for faith in things unseen, we who are persuaded only by what is evident to reasoning? From what cause did the nations become futile, and their senseless heart was darkened? Is it not because, following what appears from their reasonings, they disobey the proclamation of the Spirit? And whom does Isaiah lament as lost? "Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight." Is it not such people? Passing over many things in between, therefore, both all he overtly asserted about the Son not being begotten, and all he contrived for having it accepted that the Only-begotten is a creature and a thing made, I will turn to the most crucial points of his impiety, noting only this much about what was adduced, that wishing to obscure with words the blasphemy which he had previously constructed in fact, and to soften the shamelessness of his argument, he said that the Only-begotten shares a commonality with creation, forgetting his own doctrines, which in the subsequent arguments he set forth with bare and unconcealed expression. By which he fell again into a shameless and most manifest self-contradiction. For he writes thus: {EUN.} But let no one, hearing that the Son is a thing made, be vexed, as if the substance were made common by the commonality of the names. {BAS.} How then, O wisest of men, if the difference of substance necessarily follows from the difference of names (for we remember, of course, that he explained these things in the arguments above), will not the commonality of substance now follow from the commonality of names? For he does not appear to have uttered this argument once, or in passing. Since even now, immediately, as if regretting what he had said—that the commonality of names will not also make the substances common—he adds again after a little, attacking those who hold the opposite view to him. 29.629 {EUN.} That it was necessary, if they had any care for the truth, of things that differ

36

κυρίως καὶ προσηκόντως Πατὴρ λέγεται ὁ Θεὸς, καὶ ὡς οὐχὶ πάθους, ἀλλ' οἰκειώσεώς ἐστιν ὄνομα, ἢ τῆς κατὰ χάριν, ὡς ἐπὶ τῶν ἀνθρώ πων, ἢ τῆς κατὰ φύσιν, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ Μονογενοῦς, ἱκανῶς εἴρηται· δῶμεν δὲ εἶναι τροπικὴν, καὶ ἐκ μετα φορᾶς λέγεσθαι, ὥσπερ καὶ ἄλλας μυρίας καὶ τὴν φωνὴν ταύτην. Ὡς τοίνυν, ὀργιζόμενον, καὶ ὑπνοῦντα, καὶ πετόμενον ἀκούοντες τὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ἄλλων τοιούτων ἀπρεπεῖς κατὰ τὸν πρόχειρον νοῦν τὰς ἐμφάσεις παρεχομένων, οὔτε τὰς φωνὰς τοῦ Πνεύμα τος διαγράφομεν, οὔτε σωματικῶς τῶν λεγομένων ἀκούομεν· τί δήποτε οὐχὶ καὶ, τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης οὕτω συνεχῶς παραληφθείσης ὑπὸ τοῦ Πνεύματος, τὰς θεοπρεπεῖς αὐτῆς ἐννοίας διερευνώμεθα; ἢ μόνην ταύτην τῆς Γραφῆς ἀπαλείψομεν, ἐκ τῆς ἀνθρω πίνης χρήσεως συκοφαντοῦντες αὐτήν; Οὑτωσὶ δὲ σκοπῶμεν. ∆ύο σημαινομένων ἐκ τῆς τοῦ γεννᾷν προσηγορίας κατὰ τὴν ὧδε συνήθειαν, πάθους τε τοῦ γεννῶντος καὶ τῆς πρὸς τὸ γεννώμενον οἰκειώσεως, ὅταν παρὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς τῷ Μονογενεῖ λέγηται τὸ, Ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε. καὶ τὸ, Υἱός μου εἶ σὺ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε· πότερον τούτων παρίστασθαι φῶμεν διὰ τοῦ ῥήματος; τὸ ἐμ παθὲς τῶν γεννώντων, ἢ τὴν τῆς φύσεως οἰκειότητα; Ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ τοῦτό φημι· καὶ οὐδὲ τούτους ἡγουμαί ποτε μὴ οὐχὶ εἰς λαμπρὰν μελαγχολίαν παρενεχθέν τας ἐναντιώσεσθαι. Ὥστε εἰ μὲν οἰκεία τῷ Θεῷ ἡ φωνὴ, τί ἀτιμάζεις ὡς ἀλλοτρίαν; εἰ δὲ ἐκ τῶν ἀν θρωπίνων μετακεκόμισται, τὸ ὑγιὲς αὐτῆς ἐκλεξά μενος, φύγε τὸ χεῖρον τῶν δηλουμένων. Ἔξεστι γὰρ δήπου ἐν πολυσήμῳ τῇ λέξει, πρὸς τὴν ὀρθὴν ἔννοιαν ὁδηγηθέντα διὰ τοῦ ῥήματος, τὸ ταπεινὸν καὶ αἰσχρὸν τῆς ἐμφάσεως ὑπερβῆναι. Καὶ μή μοι λέγε· Τίς δὲ 29.628 ἡ γέννησις; καὶ ποταπή; καὶ πῶς ἂν γένοινο αὕτη; Οὐ γὰρ, ἐπειδὴ ὁ τρόπος ἄῤῥητος καὶ ἀπερινόητος παντελῶς, ἤδη καὶ τὸ πάγιον τῆς εἰς Πατέρα καὶ Υἱὸν πίστεως ἐκβαλοῦμεν. Εἰ γὰρ μέλλοιμεν πάντα τῇ καταλήψει μετρεῖν, καὶ τὸ τοῖς λογισμοῖς ἀπερί ληπτον μηδὲ εἶναι τὸ παράπαν ὑπολαμβάνειν, οἰχήσε ται μὲν ὁ τῆς πίστεως, οἰχήσεται δὲ ὁ τῆς ἐλπί δος μισθός. Πῶς δ' ἂν εἴημεν ἔτι τῶν μακαρισμῶν ἄξιοι. τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει τῶν ἀοράτων ἀποκειμένων, οἱ μόνοις τοῖς κατὰ λογισμὸν ἐναργέσι πειθόμενοι; Πόθεν ἐματαιώθη τὰ ἔθνη, καὶ ἐσκοτίσθη ἡ ἀσύνετος αὐτῶν καρδία; Οὐκ ἐπειδὴ τοῖς ἐκ τῶν λογισμῶν φαινομένοις ἀκολουθοῦντες, τῷ κηρύγματι τοῦ Πνεύ ματος ἀπειθοῦσι; Τίνας δὲ ὁ Ἡσαΐας ὡς ἀπολωλό τας ὀδύρεται; Οὐαὶ οἱ σοφοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐνώπιον αὐτῶν ἐπιστήμονες. Οὐ τοὺς τοιούτους; Πολλὰ τοίνυν ὑπερβὰς τῶν ἐν μέσῳ, ὅσα τε περὶ τοῦ μὴ γεγεννῆσθαι τὸν Υἱὸν ἐκ τοῦ προφανοῦς διετείνα το, καὶ ὅσα περὶ τοῦ παραδεχθῆναι αὐτῷ τὸ κτίσμα εἶναι καὶ ποίημα τὸν Μονογενῆ ἐτεχνάσατο, ἐπὶ τὰ καιριώτατα τῆς ἀσεβείας τρέψομαι, τοσοῦτον μόνον τοῖς παρεθεῖσιν ἐπισημηνάμενος, ὅτι ἣν προλαβὼν τῷ ἔργῳ κατεσκεύασε βλασφημίαν, ταύτην βουληθεὶς ἐπισκιάσαι τῷ ῥήματι, καὶ τὸ ἀναιδὲς τοῦ λόγου καταπραῧναι, ἔφη κοινοποιεῖν τὸν Μονογενῆ πρὸς τὴν κτίσιν, ἐπιλαθόμενος αὐτὸς τῶν ἑαυτοῦ δογμάτων, ἃ ἐν τοῖς κατόπιν λόγοις γυμνῇ καὶ ἀπα ρακαλύπτῳ τῇ φωνῇ ἐξετίθετο. Ὑφ' ὧν πρὸς ἀν αίσχυντον πάλιν καὶ περιφανεστάτην ἐναντιολογίαν ἐξέπεσε. Γράφει δὲ οὕτως· {ΕΥΝ.} Μηδεὶς δὲ, τὸν Υἱὸν ἀκούων ποίημα, δυσχε ραινέτω, ὡς κοινοποιουμένης τῆς οὐσίας ὑπὸ τῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων κοινωνίας. {ΒΑΣ.} Πῶς οὖν, ὦ σοφώτατε, εἰ τῇ διαφορᾷ τῶν ὀνομάτων τὸ παρηλλαγμένον τῆς οὐσίας ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἕπεται (μεμνήμεθα γὰρ δήπου ἐν τοῖς ἄνω λόγοις ταῦτα διεξιόντος), οὐχὶ νῦν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῶν ὀνομάτων τὸ κοινὸν τῆς οὐσίας ἀκολουθήσει; Οὐδὲ γὰρ ἅπαξ, οὐδὲ ἐκ παρέργου τοῦτον τὸν λόγον παραφθεγξάμε νος φαίνεται. Ἐπεὶ καὶ νῦν εὐθὺς, ὥσπερ μεταμε ληθεὶς ἐφ' οἷς εἴρηκεν, ὅτι ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων κοινωνία οὐ κοινοποιήσει καὶ τὰς οὐσίας, πάλιν ἐπάγει μετὰ μικρὸν, τῶν ἀντιδιατιθεμένων αὐτῷ καθαπτό μενος. 29.629 {ΕΥΝ.} Ὅτι ἐχρῆν, εἴπερ αὐτοῖς ἦν τῆς ἀληθείας φροντὶς, παρηλλαγμένων