76

he has returned to his own vomit, how many times he repeated it, how many times he poured it forth. Therefore, shall we not also become burdensome to the many by the futility of the things he puts forward, and dragging our own argument down with them? And perhaps to be silent in such matters was more fitting; but lest anyone think that we are giving up the argument through weakness in refutation, we offer these things in response to what has been said. It is not permissible for you to call the Father 20unbegotten of the Son,20 even if the title of Father signifies that the one who has begotten is not from a cause. For just as, according to the example we mentioned, when we hear the dignity of "king" we understand two things from the name, both that the one preeminent in authority is subject to no one, and that he rules over his subjects, so also the title of Father provides us with a double meaning in the case of God, both the <relation> understood with respect to the Son and that He is dependent on no pre-conceived cause. Just as, therefore, it is not possible to say in the case of a king, that if the two things are signified by the same title, both ruling over his subjects and having no one preceding him, it is permissible to call him not "ruler of the nation," but "kingless of his subjects," nor to say by such a combination, that just as he is called "king of the nation," so also he will be named "kingless of the nation," in the same way, when the term "Father" both indicates the Son and presents the concept of the unbegotten, it is not permissible, by improperly transferring the meaning, to ridiculously attach the concept of the unbegotten to the affinity with the Son by saying that the unbegotten is 20unbegotten of the Son.20 1.1.606 But on top of these statements, as if he has mounted the truth and refuted the absurdity of his opponents, he utters such boastful things. 20And who ever,20 he says, 20being of sound mind, thought it right for the natural concept to be silenced, but honored madness?20 No one, O most wise man, and therefore not our argument either, which said that the title of "unbegotten" accords with our concepts and that one must hold it unshaken in our hearts, but that instead of the term distorted by you, the title of Father is sufficient and leads to that concept. For remember the words you yourself quoted, that it did not 20think it right for the natural concept to be silenced, but 20honored madness,20 as you call it; but it advises to safely be silent only on the title of "unbegotten," that is, its utterance in syllables, as it has been wrongly understood and at the same time has not even been stated by Scripture, but the meaning, it says, especially accords with our concepts. 1.1.608 But these are our points. But he who slanders the sophists and arms his argument with truth and accuses us of our errors does not blush while jesting with sophisms in his arguments about dogmas and imitating those at banquets who elicit laughter through certain witticisms. For behold the gravity and reason of the structure of his syllogism; for I will mention the same things again. 20For if it is the same to say "unbegotten" or "Father," it will be permissible for us, leaving behind the term "Father," and taking up "unbegotten," to say: The unbegotten is unbegotten of the Son; for just as the unbegotten is Father of the Son, so conversely the Father is unbegotten of the Son. For this is similar to that.20 For it is just as if someone were to say with right and sound reason that it makes no difference to call Adam either "father of all men" or "first of men to be formed by God" (for the same thing is signified by both), and then some dialectician like him, pouncing on these statements, were to imitate such a construction, that if it is the same thing to call him either "first to be formed by God" or "father of those after him," it will be permissible, leaving behind the term "father," and taking up "first-formed," to say: Adam is not the father of Abel, but the first-formed; for just as the first-formed is father of a son, so conversely the father is first-formed of the son—if these things were said in a tavern, how much

76

ἐπὶ τὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἔμετον ἐπανέδραμε, ποσάκις ἐπανέλαβε, ποσάκις ἐξέ βλυσεν. ἆρ' οὖν οὐκ ἐπαχθεῖς καὶ ἡμεῖς τοῖς πολλοῖς γενησόμεθα τῇ ματαιότητι τῶν παρ' αὐτοῦ προφερομένων καὶ τὸν ἡμέτερον λόγον συμπερισύροντες; Καὶ ἴσως τὸ σιωπᾶν ἦν ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ἁρμοδιώ τερον· ἀλλ' ἵνα μή τις τῇ περὶ τὸν ἔλεγχον ἀσθενείᾳ καθ υφιέναι νομίσῃ τὸν λόγον, ταῦτα τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἀποκρι 1.1.604 νούμεθα. οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι λέγειν 20υἱοῦ ἀγέννητον20 τὸν πατέρα, κἂν ἡ τοῦ πατρὸς κλῆσις τὸ μὴ ἐξ αἰτίας εἶναι τὸν γεγεννηκότα σημαίνῃ. ὥσπερ γὰρ κατὰ τὸ ῥηθὲν ἡμῖν ὑπόδειγμα τὴν τοῦ βασιλέως ἀξίαν ἀκούσαντες δύο ἐκ τοῦ ὀνόματος ἐνοήσαμεν, τό τε ὑποτετάχθαι μηδενὶ τὸν κατ' ἐξουσίαν προέχοντα, καὶ τὸ τῶν ὑποχειρίων κρατεῖν, οὕτω καὶ ἡ τοῦ πατρὸς προσηγορία διπλῆν ἡμῖν ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν σημασίαν παρέχεται, τήν τε πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν νοουμένην <σχέσιν> καὶ τὸ μηδεμιᾶς αὐτὸν ἐξῆφθαι προεπινοουμένης 1.1.605 αἰτίας. ὥσπερ οὖν οὐκ ἔστιν ἐπὶ τοῦ βασιλέως εἰπεῖν, ὅτι εἰ τὰ δύο διὰ τῆς αὐτῆς προσηγορίας σημαίνεται, τό τε κρατεῖν τῶν ὑποχειρίων καὶ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν τὸν προηγούμενον, ἔξεστι μὴ ἄρχοντα τοῦ ἔθνους, ἀλλ' ἀβασίλευτον τῶν ὑποτεταγ μένων προσαγορεύειν, οὐδὲ συντιθέντας τὸ τοιοῦτο λέγειν, ὅτι ὥσπερ βασιλεὺς ἔθνους λέγεται, οὕτω καὶ ἀβασίλευτος τοῦ ἔθνους ὀνομασθήσεται, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον καὶ τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς φωνῆς τόν τε υἱὸν ἐνδεικνυμένης καὶ τὴν τοῦ ἀγεν νήτου ἔννοιαν παριστώσης οὐκ ἔξεστι μετατιθέντας παρὰ τὸ δέον τὴν σημασίαν τῇ πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν οἰκειότητι γελοίως προσκολλᾶν τοῦ ἀγεννήτου τὴν ἔννοιαν ἐν τῷ λέγειν ὅτι τοῦ 20υἱοῦ ἀγέννητος ὁ ἀγέννητος20. 1.1.606 Ἐπὶ τούτοις δὲ τοῖς εἰρημένοις ὡς ἐπιβὰς τῆς ἀλη θείας καὶ διελέγξας τῶν ἀντιτεταγμένων τὸ ἄτοπον οἷα μεγαλαυχούμενος φθέγγεται. 20καὶ τίς πώποτε20, φησί, 20σωφρονῶν σιωπᾶσθαι τὴν φυσικὴν ἔννοιαν ἐδι καίωσε, τὴν δὲ παράνοιαν ἐτίμησεν20; οὐδείς, ὦ σοφώτατε, οὔκουν οὐδὲ ὁ ἡμέτερος λόγος ὁ εἰπὼν τὴν τοῦ ἀγεννήτου προσηγορίαν ταῖς ἐννοίαις συμβαίνειν καὶ δεῖν ταύτην ἔχειν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἀκίνητον, ἀντὶ δὲ τῆς δια στραφείσης παρ' ὑμῶν φωνῆς τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς προσηγορίαν 1.1.607 ἱκανὴν εἶναι καὶ πρὸς ἐκείνην ἄγειν τὴν ἔννοιαν. μνήσθητι γὰρ ὧν αὐτὸς παρέθου ῥημάτων, ὅτι οὐχὶ 20σιωπᾶσθαι τὴν φυσικὴν ἔννοιαν ἐδικαίωσε, τὴν δὲ παρά νοιαν20, ὡς αὐτὸς ὀνομάζεις, 20ἐτίμησεν20· ἀλλὰ τὴν προσ ηγορίαν μόνην τοῦ ἀγεννήτου, τοῦτ' ἔστι τὴν ἐν ταῖς συλ λαβαῖς προφοράν, ὡς κακῶς ἐξειλημμένην καὶ ἅμα μηδὲ παρὰ τῆς γραφῆς εἰρημένην ἀκινδύνως σιωπᾶν συμβουλεύει, τὸ δὲ σημαινόμενον καὶ μάλιστα ταῖς ἐννοίαις ἡμῶν συμ βαίνειν φησίν. 1.1.608 Ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν παρ' ἡμῶν τοιαῦτα. ὁ δὲ τοὺς σοφι στὰς διαβάλλων καὶ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ καθοπλίζων τὸν λόγον καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων πλημμελημάτων κατηγορῶν οὐκ ἐρυθριᾷ ἐν τοῖς περὶ τῶν δογμάτων λόγοις διὰ σοφισμάτων ἀστεϊ ζόμενος καὶ μιμούμενος τοὺς ἐν τοῖς συμποσίοις διὰ κομ ψευμάτων τινῶν ἐφελκομένους τὸν γέλωτα. θεᾶσθε γὰρ τὸ ἐμβριθὲς καὶ λελογισμένον τῆς τοῦ συλλογισμοῦ συμπλοκῆς· τῶν αὐτῶν γὰρ πάλιν ἐπιμνησθήσομαι. 20εἰ γὰρ ταὐτόν ἐστιν εἰπεῖν ἀγέννητος ἢ πατήρ, ἐξέσται ἡμῖν καταλιποῦσι τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς φωνήν, μεταλα βοῦσι δὲ τὸ ἀγέννητον εἰπεῖν· ὁ ἀγέννητος υἱοῦ ἐστιν ἀγέννητος· ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ ἀγέννητος υἱοῦ πατήρ, οὕτως ἔμπαλιν υἱοῦ ἀγέννητος ὁ 1.1.609 πατήρ. παραπλήσιον γὰρ τοῦτο ἐκείνῳ20. ὥσπερ γὰρ εἴ τις τὸν Ἀδὰμ ὀρθῷ καὶ ὑγιαίνοντι λόγῳ μηδὲν δια φέρειν λέγοι ἢ πατέρα πάντων ἀνθρώπων ἢ πρῶτον ἀνθρώ πων ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πεπλάσθαι λέγειν (ταὐτὸν γὰρ δι' ἑκα τέρων σημαίνεσθαι), εἶτά τις τῶν κατ' αὐτὸν διαλεκτικῶν ἐφαλλόμενος τοῖς εἰρημένοις μιμοῖτο τὴν τοιαύτην πλοκήν, ὅτι εἰ ταὐτόν ἐστιν ἢ πρῶτον αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πεπλάσθαι λέγειν ἢ πατέρα τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα, ἐξέσται καταλιποῦσι τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς φωνήν, μεταλαβοῦσι δὲ τὸ πρωτόπλαστον εἰπεῖν· ὁ Ἀδὰμ τοῦ Ἄβελ οὐχὶ πατήρ ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ πρωτόπλαστος· ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ πρωτόπλαστος υἱοῦ πατήρ, οὕτω τὸ ἔμπαλιν 1.1.610 υἱοῦ πρωτόπλαστος ὁ πατήρ-εἰ ταῦτα ἐν καπηλείῳ λέγοιτο, πόσον