to speak of demonstrations, to this I would have ascribed the demonstration, not to those things from which I syllogistically deduced it.

There, therefore, not even desiring to attack you, although you have now challenged me to this by many provocations, I have intended to lead you up to the school of the fathers. There, therefore, you will know both how and what are the things concerning God and in what way you will not be forced to say that all things are of the divine essence, which you have now suffered, choosing to say that one escapes accident in God and not knowing the way of escape. There you will also find faith differing from knowledge, and knowledge of faith in another way. There you will also know that which is knowable of God is least of all understood by faith, as great Paul also says has been made manifest even to those outside the faith, "that which is known of God," which, when we say it, you thought we meant knowing by believing. Therefore, to the voices of the ancients collected there I will not cease both to think and to speak in harmony. And these speak very effectively in their titles, as we have said, unless perhaps with some further definition, not calling the assertion a self-evident demonstration, but the argument produced syllogistically, as if the syllogism has something more akin to demonstration. For if this were not so, they would have entitled every assertion a demonstration, for we who follow the fathers hold unpersuadedly also to them.

The divine, then, O admirable one, being better than every mind and reason, is also beyond dialectic, for it is transcendently removed from both imagination and opinion, and beyond the demonstrative. For there is no contact with it nor knowledge of it, and it is altogether beyond every syllogistic approach. But we have been taught by the fathers in practice to reason syllogistically about divine things (p. 484). How, then, shall we address these syllogisms? As those who taught us, certainly, if not in the persuasive words of human wisdom. But we pursue divine things in a divine manner, from the Spirit-moved power of the theologians. And they called them demonstrative, as has been shown above. What, therefore, am I doing that is out of place, friend, if, choosing to do the things dear to the fathers, I collect from every source the argument that helps as much as possible, not being ignorant that it is not pleasing to Aristotle and the student of Ariston, but preferring the opinions of the fathers to their prattling, and knowing that their knowledge concerning divine things is not safe, even if, know well, this wrongly does not seem so to you, although you are arrayed with us and hold to the same faith?

For in these words of yours to us, it came to you to discourse on these things concerning them. For having admired them as "having forbidden demonstration concerning divine things" and as "having understood the divine transcendence," and having elevated them "above all divisible and discursive knowledge and all that is reasoned by the soul" and of the things constituted by it, which is the same as to say, every kind of discourse and all philosophy, and having placed them somewhere high up in the things beyond all sensation and mind and reason, you then strung together their words, which are as follows: "but concerning the things above us, it is necessary for a vision to come from above and for an intelligible light to shine forth, through which it is possible to be yoked with the divine, and, better than by demonstration, to have those condensed and simple and indivisible contemplations." And that those who have heard from such men and have believed are not knowledgeable men, but are admirable and enviable for their choice and ready obedience and reverence toward divine things and these divine men. And in addition to these things, you teach your own opinion (p. 486) concerning them, saying: "whenever I hear them saying these things, I cannot but suppose that they too have been enlightened by God and are above the many

λέγειν ἀποδείξεις, τούτῳ ἄν τήν ἀπόδειξιν ἐπέγραφον, οὐ τοῖς ἐξ ὧν αὐτό συλλογιστικῶς συνήγαγον.

Ἐκεῖ τοίνυν μηδέ γάρ ἐπιτίθεσθαί σοι προθυμούμενος, καίτοι πολλαῖς ἀνάγκαις ἐκκαλεσαμένῳ νῦν εἰς τοῦτο πρός τό παιδαγωγεῖον τῶν πατέρων ἀναβιβάσαι σε διενοήθην˙ ἐκεῖ τοιγαροῦν εἴσῃ καί πῶς καί τίνα τά περί Θεόν καί τίνι τρόπῳ μή πάντα λέγειν θείας οὐσίας βιασθήσῃ, ὅ νῦν ἔπαθες, συβεβηκός ἐπί Θεοῦ ἐκφεύγειν λέγειν προαιρούμενος καί τήν τῆς ἀποφυγῆς ὁδόν μή ἐπιστάμενος˙ ἐκεῖ καί πίστιν εὑρήσεις διαφέρουσαν ἐπιστήμης καί γνῶσιν πίστεως ἕτερον τρόπον˙ ἐκεῖ καί γνωστόν γνώσῃ Θεοῦ ἥκιστ᾿ ἐπί πίστεως ἐκλαμβανόμενον, ὡς καί Παῦλος ὁ μέγας καί τοῖς ἐκτός πίστεως πεφανερῶσθαι λέγει «τό γνωστόν τοῦ Θεοῦ», ὅ λεγόντων ἡμῶν, σύ τό πιστεύειν λέγειν ᾠήθης ἐπίστασθαι. Ταῖς οὖν ἐκεῖ συνειλεγμέναις τῶν προτέρων φωναῖς οὐκ ἀνήσω καί φρονῶν καί λέγων συνῳδά˙ λέγουσι δ᾿ αὗται λίαν ἐνεργῶς ἐν τοῖς ἐπιγράμμασιν, ὡς ἔφημεν, εἰ μή ἄρα μετά προσδιορισμοῦ τινος οὐ τήν ἀπόφανσιν ὡς αὐτόπιστον ἀπόδειξιν, ἀλλά τόν συλλελογισμένως προαγόμενον λόγον, ὡς ἔχοντός τι τοῦ συλλογισμοῦ καί πρός τήν ἀπόδειξιν οἰκειότερον˙ εἰ γάρ μή τοῦτ᾿ ἦν, καί πᾶσαν ἀπόφανσιν ἀπόδειξιν ἄν ἐπέγραφον˙ ἀμεταπείστως γάρ καί πρός αὐτάς ἔχομεν οἱ τοῖς πατράσιν ἑπόμενοι.

Τό γοῦν θεῖον, ὦ θαυμάσιε, κρεῖττον παντός ὑπάρχον νοῦ καί λόγου, καί ὑπέρ τήν διαλεκτικήν ἐστιν, ὑπεροχικῶς γάρ ἐξῄρηται φαντασίας τε καί δόξης, κάι ὑπέρ τήν ἀποδεικτικήν˙ ἐπαφή γάρ αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν οὔτε ἐπιστήμη, καί ὅλως ὑπέρ τήν συλλογιστικήν πᾶσαν ἔφοδόν ἐστιν˙ ἀλλά συλλογίζεσθαι περί τῶν θείων ἔργῳ ὑπό τῶν πατέρων (σελ. 484) ἐδιδάχθημεν. Πῶς οὖν τούτους τούς συλλογισμούς προσαγορεύσωμεν; Ὡς οἱ διδάξαντες πάντως, εἰ μή ἐν πειθοῖς ἀνθρωπίνης σοφίας λόγοις˙ ἀλλά θειωδῶς τά θεῖα μέτιμεν ἐκ τῆς πνευματοκινήτου τῶν θεολόγων δυνάμεως˙ ἀποδεικτικούς δ᾿ ὠνόμασαν ἐκεῖνοι, καθάπερ ἀνωτέρω δέδεικται. Τί τοιγαροῦν ἔκτοπον ἐργάζομαι, φίλος, εἰ τά φίλα τοῖς πατράσι προαιρούμενος πράττειν τόν βοηθοῦντα πανταχόθεν ὡς ἐνόν ἐρανίζομαι λόγον, οὐκ ἀγνοῶν ὡς Ἀριστοτέλει καί τῷ τοῦ Ἀρίστωνος οὐ συνδοκεῖ, ἀλλά προτιθείς τά τοῖς πατράσι δόξαντα τῆς ἐκείνων λογολεσχίας καί εἰδώς ὡς ἡ ἐν ἐκείνοις γνῶσις περί τῶν θείων οὐκ ἀσφαλής, εἰ καί σοί κακῶς εὖ ἴσθι μή τοῦτο συνδοκεῖ, καίτοι μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν τεταγμένῳ καί τῆς αὐτῆς ἀντεχομένῳ πίστεως;

Ἐν γάρ τοῖς πρός ἡμᾶς σου τουτοισί λόγοις ταῦτά σοι περί αὐτῶν διεξελθεῖν ἐπῆλθε˙ θαυμάσας γάρ αὐτούς ὡς «ἀπαγορεύσαντας τήν ἀπόδειξιν ἐπί τῶν θείων» καί ὡς «τήν θείαν ὑπεροχήν κατανενοηκότας» καί ὑπεραναβιβάσας αὐτγούς «τῆς μεριστῆς καί μεταβατικῆς πάσης ἐπιστήμης καί παντός τοῦ λογιζομένου τῆς ψυχῆς» καί τῶν κατ᾿ ἐκεῖνο συνεστώτων, ταὐτόν δ᾿ εἰπεῖν παντοίου λόγων εἴδους καί φιλοσοφίας πάσης, καί ὑψοῦ που θέμενος αὐτούς ἐν τοῖς ὑπέρ πᾶσαν αἴσθησιν καί νοῦν καί λόγον, ἐφεξῆς συνείρεις τούς ἐκείνων λόγους ἔχοντας οὕτως˙ «ἐπί δέ τῶν ὑπέρ ἡμᾶς θέαν δεῖν ἄνωθεν παραγενέσθαι καί φῶς ἀναλάμψαι νοερόν, δι᾿ οὗ ἔστι τοῖς θείοις συζυγεῖν, καί κρεῖττον ἤ κατά ἀπόδειξιν τάς συνεπτυγμένας καί ἁπλᾶς κάι ἀμερεῖς ἐκείνας ἔχειν θεωρίας»˙ τούς δέ παρά τοιούτων ἀκηκοότας καί πιστεύσαντας, ἐπιστήμονας μέν οὐκ εἶναι, θαυμαστούς δέ καί ζηλωτούς ὑπάρχειν τῆς τε προαιρέσεως καί εὐπειθείας καί αἰδοῦς τῆς πρός τά θεῖα καί τούς θείους ἄνδρας τούτους˙ κἀπί τούτοις τήνσήν περί αὐτῶν ἔχεις (σελ. 486) γνώμην ἐκδιδάσκεις λέγων˙ «ὅταν τοῦτα ἀκούσω αὐτῶν λεγόντων, οὐ δύναμαι ὑπολαβεῖν μή καί αὐτούς ὑπό Θεοῦ πεφωτίσθαι καί ὑπέρ τούς πολλούς