76

recognizes the substance of the three, but foolishly tries to contemplate from this some multiplicity and difference according to it.

Twelfth Inscription Since there are some who dare to say that the Spirit's welling up and proceeding and shining forth and appearing from the Son does not indicate its existing essentially and hypostatically from the Son, but the distribution of spiritual gifts from him, for the refutation of such foolishness the present scriptural citations have been selected, which declare that the Son wells up and shines forth and has appeared from the Father; for surely no one will say that it is not the Son who is welling up and shining forth and has appeared from the Father essentially and hypostatically, but the gifts of the Son.

Twelfth Counter-inscription That which has its existence from something by way of generation or by way of procession is said also to proceed from it and to be sent forth and to shine forth, (p. 372) if indeed it is light, and whatever is similar to these. But not everything that proceeds or is sent forth or shines forth from something also has its existence from that one by way of generation or by way of procession and is in its own hypostasis. But this man, the one who composed these inscriptions, accuses of audacity those who think piously and intelligently, being audacious himself with regard to impiety.

FIRST EPISTLE TO AKINDYNOS (p.398)

THAT THE LATINS SAY THERE ARE TWO PRINCIPLES OF THE ONE SPIRIT

AND THAT THEOLOGICAL SYLLOGISMS OUGHT TO BE CALLED DEMONSTRATIVE RATHER THAN DIALECTICAL

You perhaps think we should give an account of why we do not write more frequently; but we think we ought to apologize even for writing after a long time. And what is the apology? Necessity, from which, as from a geometrical corollary, you might have, O beloved, the reason also for my former silence; for even now I have come to write unwillingly, under an unavoidable necessity. For these reasons, then, you yourself must endure both the long-windedness and the rusticity of my words. What then is it that compelled me? We have heard that a book *Against the Latins* has been brought forth by the man who is fine in other respects and in his arguments, and especially in the chief form of these, Barlaam the Calabrian, and we had a desire to come across the book. This year, then, during the feast of Pentecost, someone came bringing us the desired thing. We received it, then, with joy, and we went through it and approved the counter-arguments most highly. But it was very much my desire to converse also with the Father of the Word; but since he is settled so far away with you, I decided it was necessary through you to ask something of the most necessary things.

He accuses those of the Latins with whom he has conversed, that they make two principles of the Spirit's divinity, namely the Father and the Son, from both

76

οὐσίας ἐπιγινώσκει τῶν τριῶν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐνθεωρεῖν πειρᾶται πληθυσμόν τινα καί διαφοράν ἐντεῦθεν κατ᾿ αὐτήν ἀφρόνως.

Ἐπιγραφή δωδεκάτη Ἐπειδή εἰσίν τινες ἀποτολμῶντες καί λέγοντες τό ἀναβλύζειν καί προϊέναι καί

ἐκλάμπειν καί πεφηνέναι ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα μή δηλοῦν τό οὐσιωδῶς καί ἐνυποστάτως ὑπάρχειν αὐτό ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ἀλλά τήν ἐξ αὐτοῦ τῶν πνευματικῶν χαρισμάτων διανομήν, εἰς ἔλεγχον τῆς τοιαύτης ἀνοίας ἐξελέγησαν αἱ παροῦσαι γραφικαί χρήσεις, αἱ δηλοῦσαι ἀναβλύζειν καί ἐκλάμπειν καί πεφηνέναι τόν Υἱόν ἐκ Πατρός˙ οὐ γάρ δή τις ἐρεῖ ὡς οὐχ ὁ Υἱός ἐστιν ὁ ἀναβλύζων καί ἐκλάμπων καί πεφηνώς ἐκ Πατρός οὐσιωδῶς καί ἐνυποστάτως, ἀλλά τά χαρίσματα τοῦ Υἱοῦ.

Ἀντεπιγραφή δωδεκάτη Τό γεννητῶς ἔκ τινος ἤ ἐκπορευτῶς τήν ὕπαρξιν ἔχον ἐξ αὐτοῦ καί προϊέναι

λέγεται καί ἐκπέμπεσθαι καί ἐκλάμπειν, (σελ. 372) εἴπερ φῶς ἐστι, καί ὅσα παραπλήσια τούτοις. Οὐ μή πᾶν τό προϊόν ἤ ἐκπεμπόμενον ἤ ἐκλάμπον ἔκ τινος καί ἐξ ἐκείνου γεννητῶς ἤ ἐκπορευτῶς τήν ὕπαρξιν ἔχει καί ἐν ἰδίᾳ ὑποστάσει ἐστίν. Οὗτος δέ, ὁ τάς ἐπιγραφάς ταύτας συγγραψάμενος, τόλμαν ἐγκαλεῖ τοῖς εὐσεβῶς καί νουνεχῶς φρονοῦσι τολμητίας ὤν αὐτός περί τό δυσσεβεῖν.

ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ Α' ΠΡΟΣ ΑΚΙΝ∆ΥΝΟΝ (σελ.398)

ΟΤΙ ΛΑΤΙΝΟΙ ΤΟΥ ΕΝΟΣ ΠΝΕΥΜΑΤΟΣ ∆ΥΟ ΛΕΓΟΥΣΙΝ ΑΡΧΑΣ

ΚΑΙ ΟΤΙ ΤΟΥΣ ΘΕΟΛΟΓΙΚΟΥΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΙΣΜΟΥΣ ΑΠΟ∆ΕΙΚΤΙΚΟΥΣ ΜΑΛΛΟΝ ∆ΕΙ ΚΑΛΕΙΝ Ἤ ∆ΙΑΛΕΚΤΙΚΟΥΣ

Σύ μέν ἡμᾶς ἴσως χρῆν εἶναι λόγον ἀποδοῦναι δοκεῖς, ὅτι μή συχνότερον

ἐπιστέλλομεν˙ ἡμεῖς δέ καί τοῦ διά πλείστου γράφειν ἀπολογήσασθαι δεῖν οἰόμεθα. Τίς δέ ἡ ἀπολογία; Τό ἀναγκαῖον, ὅθεν ὡς ἐκ τοῦ γεωμετρικοῦ πορίσματος σχοίης ἄν, ὦ φιλότης, καί τῆς πρῴην ἀγραφίας τό αἴτιον˙ καί νῦν γάρ ἄκων ἐπί τό γράφειν ἦλθον ὑπ᾿ ἀνάγκης ἀπαραιτήτου. Ταῦτ᾿ ἄρα καί αὐτός τῆς τε μακρηγορίας καί τῆς ἀγροικίας τῶν ρημάτων ἀνάσχου. Τί ποτ᾿ οὖν ἐστι τό βιασάμενον; Ἀκηκόαμεν ἐξενηνέχθαι βιβλίον Κατά Λατίνων τῷ καλῷ τά τε ἄλλα καί περί τούς λόγους καί τούτων μάλιστα τό κορυφαῖον εἶδος Καλαβρῷ Βαρλαάμ καί δι᾿ ἐφέσεως ἦν ἡμῖν ἐντυχεῖν τῷ βιβλίῳ. Τῆτες τοίνυν κατά τήν ἑόρτιον Πεντηκοστήν ἥκει τις ἡμῖν τό ποθούμενον φέρων. Ἐδεξάμεθα τοίνυν ἄσμενοι, διήλθομέν τε καί ἀπεδεξάμεθα τάς ἀντιρρήσεις ἐς τά μάλιστα. Πάνυ δέ ἦν μοι βουλομένῳ προσεντυγχάνειν καί τῷ τοῦ Λόγου Πατρί˙ τούτου δέ ἐπί τοσοῦτον ἀπῳκισμένου σύν σοί, διά σοῦ δεῖν ἔγνων ἐρέσθαί τι τῶν ἀναγκαιοτάτων.

Ἐγκαλεῖ τοῖς προσδιειλεγμένοις τῶν Λατίνων, ὅτι δύο ἀρχάς ποιοῦσι τῆς τοῦ Πνεύματος θεότητος, τόν Πατέρα δηλονότι καί τόν Υἱόν, ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων