56

only as its own and preserving it, but showing that the Spirit is not from the Father by way of generation? Through the Son, therefore, the Spirit has its being and is conceived as from the Father; through itself, it is projected immediately from the Projector. Therefore, as we said, he did not call the Son a cause, but only caused, and likewise the Spirit caused; and in the same way, with respect to the cause, he distinguished these from the Father, although according to the Latin version, he should not have spoken thus.

But, as we said, first to divide the cause through (p. 288) what is for them mediate, seen in the hypostases, then proceeding with the argument and saying that the Son is conceived straightway from the Father and adding the reason, you should have said, if you were thinking according to the Latins, that the Son might be revealed not only as caused, but also as cause. But he by no means says this, but 'that,' he says, 'he might be revealed as the only one who is begotten'—which is the same as saying caused in this manner. Where then here do you see the Son, not only proclaimed as being caused?

And take this to mind, that this great one said the mediation of the Son is not cooperating, but not excluding, that is, not preventing the Spirit also from proceeding immediately from the Father. Let us make the meaning clear, as far as possible, also through examples. From the fire immediately both the light and the steam come forth; for the one is not through the other. The fire, therefore, having taken hold of matter, is by nature disposed to steam and at the same time to give light, begetting the light, as it were, and sending forth the steam, From the light-giver, then, the light is proximately and through itself is conceived from it; likewise also the steam from the steamer. But if one should say the steam is from the light-giver, one will say it is through the light, having conceived the steam as from the light-giver through the light, the mediation of the light both preserving the only-begotten for itself and not excluding the steam from its relation to the light-giver, that is, not preventing it from being immediately from it.

But if you wish, let us add another example, not new nor unfamiliar to the theologians, for the sake of greater clarity. Cain was the son of Adam and his only-begotten before he begot the others, but Eve was a part; and she would have become and been conceived then as a part of the Father in all truth through Cain, both being and being conceived and (p. 290) and being called a part of the father, having acquired this, the mediation of this son both preserving for himself at that time the only-begotten and not preventing Eve from being a part of the father; but not for this reason was Eve mediately and not immediately taken at the beginning from Adam. Leaving, therefore, the temporal beginning and interval and the generation from conjugal union and all other things that are not appropriate to divinity, consider the example in relation to the words of the saint and you will understand the truth.

But thus through the Son we conceive from the generative one—which is the same as to say from the Father—the Spirit, which is not begotten; for it is through the Son that He is and is called Father. And through the Spirit Itself, being not begotten but proceeding, we conceive immediately from the one who sends it forth—which is the same as to say from the Projector. For why does the great Gregory, the theologian so-called, call the one fontal divinity not only Father, but also Projector? Is it not Father of the begotten, and Projector of the projection? As, therefore, the begotten is to the begetter, so also will the projection be to its projector, that is, each immediately. But if you speak of the projection of the Father, you will say it is through the Son.

I wished also to show more about the 'through', but what need is there still for words, since it has been interpreted for us by the Holy Spirit himself? For I, investigating who was the first to say the Holy Spirit is through the Son, or rather who through divine inspiration this

56

μόνον ἴδιον καί συντηροῦντα, τό δέ Πνεῦμα δεικνύντα οὐ γεννητῶς ὄν ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός; ∆ιά τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἄρ᾿ ἔχει τό εἶναι καί νοεῖσθαι ἐκ Πατρός τό Πνεῦμα˙ δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ ἐκ προβολέως ἀμέσως καί αὐτό προβαλλομένου. ∆ιό, καθάπερ ἔφημεν, οὐδ᾿ αἴτιον, ἀλλ᾿ αἰτιατόν εἶπε μόνον τόν Υἱόν καί ἐπίσης τῷ Πνεύματι αἰτιατόν˙ καί ὁμοίως κατά τό αἴτιον ταῦτα διέστειλεν ἀπό Πατρός, καίτοι κατά τήν τῶν Λατίων ἐκδοχήν οὐχ οὕτως ἔδει φάναι.

Ἀλλά, καθάπερ ἔφημεν, τό αἴτιον πρῶτον διελεῖν διά (σελ. 288) τοῦ κατ᾿ αὐτούς ἐμμέσου ὑποστάσεσιν ὁρώμενον, εἶτα τῷ λόγῳ προϊών καί ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός εὐθύς νοεῖσθαι τόν Υἱόν εἰπών καί τήν αἰτίαν προστιθείς, ἐχρῆς εἰπεῖν, εἰ κατά Λατίνους ἦν φρονῶν, ἵνα μή μόνον αἰτιατός ὁ Υἱός, ἀλλά καί αἴτιος ἀναφανῇ˙ ὁ δέ, τοῦτο μέν οὐδαμῶς φησιν, ἀλλ᾿ "ἵνα", φησί, "μόνος ὤν γεννητός ἀναφανῇ" ταὐτό δ᾿ εἰπεῖν αἰτιατός τόν τρόπον τοῦτον. Ποῦ τοίνυν ἐνταῦθ᾿ ὁρᾶτε τόν Υἱόν, οὐ μόνον αἰτιατός ὤν ἀνακηρύττεται;

Καί τοῦτο δέ μοι λάβε κατά νοῦν, ὅτι μηδέ συνεργοῦσαν εἴρηκε ὁ μέγας οὗτος τήν μεσιτείαν τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ἀλλά μή ἀπείργουσαν, τουτέστι μή κωλύουσαν ἀμέσως ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός καί τό Πνεῦμα ἐκπορεύεσθαι. Ποιήσωμεν δ᾿ ὡς ἔνι φανεράν καί διά παραδειγμάτων τήν διάνοιαν. Ἐκ τοῦ πυρός ἀμέσως καί τό φῶς καί ὁ ἀτμός προέρχεται˙ οὐ γάρ ἕτερον διά θατέρου. Τό τοίνυν πῦρ ἐπειλημμένον ὕλης ἀτμίζειν ἅμα καί φωτίζειν πέφυκε, τό μέν φῶς οἷα δή γεννῶν, τόν ἀτμόν δέ ἐκπορεῦον, Ἐκ μέν οὖν τοῦ φωτίζοντος τό φῶς προσεχῶς καί ἔστι καί δ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ νοεῖται ἐξ αὐτοῦ˙ ὡσαύτως καί ὁ ἀτμός ἐκ τοῦ ἀτμίζοντος. Εἰ δέ τόν ἀτμόν φαίη τις ἐκ τοῦ φωτίζοντος, διά τό φῶς ἐρεῖ, διά τοῦ φωτός νοήσας τόν ἀτμόν ἐκ τοῦ φωτίζοντος, τῆς μεσιτείας τοῦ φωτός καί ἑαυτῷ τό μονογενές φυλαττούσης καί τόν ἀτμόν μή ἀπειργούσης τῆς πρός τό φωτίζον σχέσεως, τουτέστι μή ἐμποδιζούσης ἀμέσως εἶναι ἐξ αὐτοῦ.

Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ βούλεσθε, καί ἕτερον παράδειγμα προσθῶμεν, οὐ καινόν οὐδ᾿ ἄηθες τοῖς θεολόγοις, σαφηνείας χάριν πλείονος. Ὁ Κάϊν υἱός ὑπῆρχε τοῦ Ἀδάμ καί μονογενής αὐτῷ πρό τοῦ τεκεῖν τούς ἄλλους, ἡ δέ Εὔα τμῆμα˙ καί ἐγένετο ἄν καί ἐνοεῖτο τότε τμῆμα Πατρός ἐπ᾿ ἀληθείας πάσης διά τοῦ Κάϊν καί εἶναι καί νοεῖσθαι καί (σελ. 290) καί λέγεσθαι πατρός τμῆμα κτησαμένη, τῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ τούτου μεσιτείας καί τό μονογενές ἑαυτῷ τότε φυλαττούσης καί τήν Εὔαν πατρός εἶναι τμῆμα μή κωλυούσης˙ ἀλλ᾿ οὐ διά τοῦτο ἐμμέσως τε καί οὐκ ἀμέσως ἡ Εὔα τήν ἀρχήν ἐκ τοῦ Ἀδάμ ἐτμήθη. Ἀφείς τοίνυν τήν χρονικήν ἀρχήν τε καί διάστασιν καί τήν ἐκ συζυγίας γέννησιν καί τ᾿ ἄλλ᾿ ὅσα μή θεότητι κτάλληλα, σκόπει πρός τούς τοῦ ἁγίου λόγους τό παράδειγμα καί συνήσεις τἀληθές.

Ἀλλ᾿ μέν οὕτω δι᾿ Υἱοῦ νοοῦμεν ἐκ γεννητικοῦ, ταὐτόν δ᾿ εἰπεῖν ἀπό Πατρός, τό μή γεννητόν ὑπάρχον Πνεῦμα˙ διά τόν Υἱόν γάρ ἐστί τε καί λέγεται Πατήρ. ∆ι᾿ αὐτοῦ δέ τοῦ Πνεύματος, οὐ γεννητοῦ ὄντος ἀλλ᾿ ἐκπορευτοῦ, ἀμέσως ἐκ τοῦ ἐκπορεύοντος αὐτό νοοῦμεν, ταὐτόν δ᾿ εἰπεῖν ἐκ προβολέως. ∆ιά τί γάρ καί ὁ φερώνυμος θεολόγος Γρηγόριος ὁ μέγας οὐ Πατέρα μόνον, ἀλλά καί προβολέα τήν μόνην πηγαίαν θεότητα καλεῖ; Οὐ Πατέρα μέν γεννήματος, προβολέα δέ προβλήματος; Ὥσπερ οὖν ἔχει τό γέννημα πρός τόν γεννήσαντα, οὕτως ἕξει καί τό πρόβλημα πρός τόν προβολέα ἑαυτοῦ, ἀμέσως δηλαδή ἑκάτερον. Ἐάν δέ τό πρόβλημα Πατρός λέγῃς, διά τόν Υἱόν ἐρεῖς.

Ἐβουλόμην δέ καί περί τῆς "διά" διά πλειόνων δεῖξαι, ἀλλά τίς ἔτι χρεία λόγων, δι᾿ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἡμῖν ἑρμηνευθείσης; Ἐγώ γάρ ἐξετάζων τίς ὁ πρῶτος εἰρηκώς τό ἅγιον Πνεῦμα δι᾿ Υἱοῦ, μᾶλλον δέ τίς ὁ δι᾿ ἐπιπνοίας θείας τοῦτο