78

79 (79). ..».... BUT IF FOR PAUL THERE WAS A BRINGING FORTH OF WHAT THE THIRD HEAVEN PROVIDED..».

From the same discourse, on the text, “But if for Paul there was a bringing forth of what the third heaven provided, and the procession up to that point, or ascent, or assumption.”

Those who have wisely studied the divine words say that 1237 of names

in summary, some are of essence, others of relation, and others of grace or perdition. For example, of essence, as when they say "man"; of relation, as when they say "a good," or "a holy," or "a wise man," or the opposite, "a wicked man," or "a foolish," or "an unclean one"; (for relation, representing how each of the things distinguished by their diametrical opposites stands, justly names it from the inherent volitional disposition it possesses) and of grace, when the man is named God in words, the man who has become obedient to God through all things, according to the text, I said, you are gods, having the state of being called God neither by nature nor by relation, but becoming and being named so by adoption and grace; for the grace of adoption is altogether unrelated, having no capacity whatsoever in nature (14∆_322> receptive of itself, since it is no longer grace, but a manifestation of the energy according to natural capacity. And so, again, what happens would not be paradoxical, if deification were according to the receptive capacity of nature. For deification would reasonably be a work of nature, and not a gift of God, and such a one would be able to be God by nature and be properly so called. For the natural capacity of each of the beings is nothing other than an inviolable movement of nature toward activity. And how does deification cause the one being deified to stand outside of himself, if it itself were contained within the limits of nature, I am unable to comprehend.

Likewise, and from the opposite side, perdition and hades, and sons of perdition, and such things they call those who have, by disposition, substantiated for themselves that which is not, and in their ways have become through all things similar to it. I think, therefore, that this holy and great teacher, taking into mind the aforementioned things, has explained the rapture of the holy Apostle in these terms, aptly assigning to each the appropriate word. Wherefore I suppose he calls "procession" that which placed the holy Apostle outside of natural necessity, the dispassion of virtue according to habit, by which he chose to have no relation of will toward nature, so as to be outside even of natural activity according to sense perception, or rather, even transforming this into a spiritual disposition; and "ascent," both the abandonment of all sensible things, which were no longer active or being activated in him according to sense, and the transcendence of the natural gnostic contemplation of them in spirit; and "assumption," the abiding and establishment in God that came to him after these things, which the teacher suitably called "assumption," showing that the Apostle experienced rather than performed the assumption. For assumption is a passion of the one being assumed, but an activity of the one assuming. Of those natural and relational names of which the Apostle was master, he transcended the calling both according to nature and relation, becoming beyond human nature and virtue and knowledge. (14∆_324> 1240 But that divine name of which he was shown to be infinitely destitute, of this he partook of the calling by grace, becoming and being called God by the assumption, instead of every other existing name, both natural and relational.

Or again, thus: "Procession" is the complete denial of nature according to virtue, "ascent" is the transcendence of those things in which nature exists, I mean, place and time, in which is the subsistence of beings, "assumption" is the restoration by grace to the one from whom and through whom and to whom are all things, as to the end of all things. And

78

ΟΘ (79). ..».... ΠΑΥΛΩ ∆Ε ΕΙ ΜΕΝ ΕΚΦΟΡΑ ΗΝ Α ΠΑΡΕΣΧΕΝ Ο ΤΡΙΤΟΣ ΟΥΡΑΝΟΣ..».

Ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ λόγου, εἰς τό, «Παύλῳ δέ εἰ μέν ἐκφορά ἦν ἅ παρέσχεν ὁ τρίτος οὐρανός, καί ἡ μέχρις ἐκείνου πρόοδος, ἤ ἀνάβασις, ἤ ἀνάληψις».

Φασίν οἱ τοῖς θείοις σοφῶς ἐμμελετήσαντες λόγοις 1237 τῶν ὀνομάτων

κατά περίληψιν τά μέν οὐσίας εἶναι, τά δέ σχέσεως, τά δέ χάριτος ἤ ἀπωλείας. Οἷον οὐσίας μέν, ὡς ὅταν λέγωσιν " ἄνθρωπος»· σχέσεως δέ, ὡς ὅταν λέγωσιν "ἀγαθός, " ἤ ἅγιος, " ἤ σοφός ἄνθρωπος», ἤ τό ἐναντίον " πονηρός ἄνθρωπος», ἤ "ἄφρων, " ἤ " ἀκάθαρτος· " (τό γάρ πρός τί πως ἔχειν τῶν ἐκ διαμέτρου τοῖς ἐναντίοις διειλημμένων ἕκαστον ἡ σχέσις παριστῶσα δικαίως ἐξ ὧν ἔχει τήν προαιρετικήν ἕξιν ἐνδιάθετον προσαγορεύει) χάριτος δέ, ὅταν Θεός ὁ ἄνθρωπος τοῖς λόγοις ὀνομάζηται, ὁ διά πάντων ὑπήκοος Θεῷ γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος, κατά τό, Ἐγώ εἶπα, Θεοί ἐστε, οὔτε κατά φύσιν οὔτε κατά σχέσιν ἔχων τό εἶναι καλεῖσθαι Θεός, ἀλλά κατά θέσιν καί χάριν γενόμενός τε καί ὀνομαζόμενος· ἡ γάρ χάρις τῆς θέσεως ἄσχετός ἐστι παντάπασιν, οὐκ ἔχουσα τήν οἱανοῦν δεκτικήν ἑαυτῆς ἐν τῇ φύσει (14∆_322> δύναμιν, ἐπεί οὐκ ἔτι χάρις ἐστίν, ἀλλά τῆς κατά τήν φυσικήν δύναμιν ἐνεργείας φανέρωσις. Καί οὕτω γε πάλιν οὐκ ἔσται παράδοξον τό γινόμενον, εἰ κατά δεκτικήν φύσεως δύναμιν ἡ θέωσις ἦν. Φύσεως γάρ ἄν εἰκότως ἔργον, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ Θεοῦ δῶρον ἡ θέωσις ἔσται, καί δυνήσεται καί φύσει Θεός ὁ τοιοῦτος εἶναι καί κυρίως προσαγορεύεσθαι. Οὐδέν γάρ ἄλλο καθέστηκεν ἡ κατά φύσιν τῶν ὄντων ἑκάστου δύναμις ἤ φύσεως πρός ἐνέργειαν ἀπαράβατος κίνησις. Πῶς δέ καί ἐξίστησιν ἑαυτοῦ τόν θεούμενον ἡ θέωσις, εἰ τοῖς ὅροις τῆς φύσεως αὐτή περιείληπτο, συνιδεῖν οὐκ ἔχω.

Ὡσαύτως δέ καί ἐκ τοῦ ἐναντίου ἀπώλειαν καί ᾅδην, καί υἱούς ἀπωλείας, καί τά τοιαῦτα προσαγορεύουσι τούς τό μή ὄν κατά διάθεσιν ἑαυτοῖς ὑποστήσαντας, καί τοῖς τρόποις αὐτῷ διά πάντων γενομένους παρεμφερεῖς. Οἶμαι τοίνυν τόν ἅγιον τοῦτον καί μέγα διδάσκαλον ἐπί νοῦν τά προειρημένα λαβόντα τήν ἐν τούτοις ἁρπαγήν τοῦ ἁγίου Ἀποστόλου διασκευάσαι, προσφυῶς ἑκάστῳ τήν ἁρμόζουσαν φωνήν ἀπονείμαντα. ∆ιό " πρόοδον" μέν αὐτόν ὑπονοῶ λέγειν τήν ἔξω τῆς φυσικῆς ἀνάγκης τόν ἅγιον Ἀπόστολον καταστήσασαν τῆς ἀρετῆς κατά τήν ἕξιν ἀπάθειαν, καθ᾿ ἥν οὐδεμίαν εἵλετο πρός τήν φύσιν ἔχειν προαιρέσεως σχέσιν, ὡς καί αὐτῆς τῆς κατ᾿ αἴσθησιν φυσικῆς ἐνεργείας ἔξω γενόμενον μᾶλλον δέ καί ταύτην πρός πνευματικήν ἕξιν μεταβαλόντα· "ἀνάβασιν" δέ τήν τε τῶν αἰσθητῶν πάντων ἀπόλειψιν, οὐκ ἔτι ἐνεργούντων ἤ ἐνεργουμένων παρ᾿ αὐτῷ κατά τήν αἴσθησιν, καί τῆς περί αὐτά κατά φύσιν ἐν πνεύματι γνωστικῆς θεωρίας ὑπέρβασιν· "ἀνάληψις" δέ τήν ἐν τῷ Θεῷ γενομένην αὐτῷ μετά ταῦτα μονήν τε καί ἵδρυσιν, ἥν προσφόρως "ἀνάληψιν" ὁ διδάσκαλος εἶπεν, ὡς παθόντα μᾶλλον ἤ δράσαντα τόν Ἀπόστολον τήν ἀνάληψιν ἐνδεικνύμενος. Ἡ ἀνάληψις γάρ πάθος ἐστί τοῦ ἀναλαμβανομένου, ἐνέργεια δέ τοῦ ἀναλαμβάνοντος. Ὧν τοιγαροῦν φυσικῶν τε καί σχετικῶν ὀνομάτων ὑπῆρχε Κύριος ὁ Ἀπόστολος, κατά τε φύσιν καί σχέσιν ὑπερέβη τήν κλῆσιν, ὑπέρ φύσιν καί ἀρετήν καί γνῶσιν ἀνθρωπίνην γενόμενος. (14∆_324> 1240 Οὗ δέ μᾶλλον ἀπείρως ἀπέδει θείου ὀνόματος, τούτου κατά χάριν μετέσχε τῆς κλήσεως, Θεός ἀντί παντός ἄλλου προσόντος ὀνόματος φυσικοῦ τε καί σχετικοῦ τῇ ἀναλήψει καί γενόμενος καί καλούμενος.

Ἤ καί πάλιν οὕτω· "Πρόοδος" μέν ἐστιν ἡ παντελής κατ᾿ ἀρετήν τῆς φύσεως ἄρνησις, "ἀνάβασις" δέ ἡ τῶν ἐν οἷς ἐστιν ἡ φύσις ὑπέρβασις, λέγω δέ τόπον καί χρόνον, ἐν οἷς ἡ τῶν ὄντων ἐστίν ὑπόστασις, "ἀνάληψις" δέ ἡ πρός τόν ἐξ οὗ τά πάντα καί δι᾿ οὗ καί εἰς ὅν, ὡς πρός πέρας τῶν ὅλων κατά χάριν ἀποκατάστασις. Καί