§4. He further shows the operations of God to be expressed by human illustrations; for what hands and feet and the other parts of the body with which men work are, that, in the case of God, the will alone is, in place of these. And so also arises the divergence of generation; wherefore He is called Only-begotten, because He has no community with other generation such as is observed in creation817    This passage is clearly corrupt: the general sense as probably intended is given here., but in that He is called the “brightness of glory,” and the “savour of ointment,” He shows the close conjunction and co-eternity of His Nature with the Father818    See note 7 in the last section.

Now these modes of generation being well known to men, the loving dispensation of the Holy Spirit, in delivering to us the Divine mysteries, conveys its instruction on those matters which transcend language by means of what is within our capacity, as it does also constantly elsewhere, when it portrays the Divinity in bodily terms, making mention, in speaking concerning God, of His eye, His eyelids, His ear, His fingers, His hand, His right hand, His arm, His feet, His shoes819    The reference is probably to Ps. lx. 8, and Ps. cviii. 9., and the like,—none of which things is apprehended to belong in its primary sense to the Divine Nature,—but turning its teaching to what we can easily perceive, it describes by terms well worn in human use, facts that are beyond every name, while by each of the terms employed concerning God we are led analogically to some more exalted conception. In this way, then, it employs the numerous forms of generation to present to us, from the inspired teaching, the unspeakable existence of the Only-begotten, taking just so much from each as may be reverently admitted into our conceptions concerning God. For as its mention of “fingers,” “hand,” and “arm,” in speaking of God, does not by the phrase portray the structure of the limb out of bones and sinews and flesh and ligaments, but signifies by such an expression His effective and operative power, and as it indicates by each of the other words of this kind those conceptions concerning God which correspond to them, not admitting the corporeal senses of the words, so also it speaks indeed of the forms of these modes of coming into being as applied to the Divine Nature, yet does not speak in that sense which our customary knowledge enables us to understand. For when it speaks of the formative power, it calls that particular energy by the name of “generation,” because the word expressive of Divine power must needs descend to our lowliness, yet it does not indicate all that is associated with formative generation among ourselves,—neither place nor time nor preparation of material, nor the co-operation of instruments, nor the purpose in the things produced, but it leaves these out of sight, and greatly and loftily claims for God the generation of the things that are, where it says, “He spake and they were begotten, He commanded and they were created820    Ps. cxlviii. 5 (LXX.)..” Again, when it expounds that unspeakable and transcendent existence which the Only-begotten has from the Father, because human poverty is incapable of the truths that are too high for speech or thought, it uses our language here also, and calls Him by the name of “Son,”—a name which our ordinary use applies to those who are produced by matter and nature. But just as the word, which tells us in reference to God of the “generation” of the creation, did not add the statement that it was generated by the aid of any material, declaring that its material substance, its place, its time, and all the like, had their existence in the power of His will, so here too, in speaking of the “Son,” it leaves out of sight both all other things which human nature sees in earthly generation (passions, I mean, and dispositions, and the co-operation of time and the need of place, and especially matter), without all which earthly generation as a result of nature does not occur. Now every such conception of matter and interval being excluded from the sense of the word “Son,” nature alone remains, and hereby in the word “Son” is declared concerning the Only-begotten the close and true character of His manifestation from the Father. And since this particular species of generation did not suffice to produce in us an adequate idea of the unspeakable existence of the Only-begotten, it employs also another species of generation, that which is the result of efflux, to express the Divine Nature of the Son, and calls Him “the brightness of glory821    Heb. i. 3.,” the “savour of ointment822    Perhaps Cant. i. 3.,” the “breath of God823    Wisd. vii. 25.,” which our accustomed use, in the scientific discussion we have already made, calls material efflux. But just as in the previous cases neither the making of creation nor the significance of the word “Son” admitted time, or matter, or place, or passion, so here also the phrase, purifying the sense of “brightness” and the other terms from every material conception, and employing only that element in this particular species of generation which is suitable to the Divinity, points by the force of this mode of expression to the truth that He is conceived as being both from Him and with Him. For neither does the word “breath” present to us dispersion into the air from the underlying matter, nor “savour” the transference that takes place from the quality of the ointment to the air, nor “brightness” the efflux by means of rays from the body of the sun; but this only, as we have said, is manifested by this particular mode of generation, that He is conceived to be of Him and also with Him, no intermediate interval existing between the Father and that Son Who is of Him. And since, in its abundant loving-kindness, the grace of the Holy Spirit has ordered that our conceptions concerning the Only-begotten Son should arise in us from many sources, it has added also the remaining species of things contemplated in generation,—that, I mean, which is the result of mind and word. But the lofty John uses especial foresight that the hearer may not by any means by inattention or feebleness of thought fall into the common understanding of “Word,” so that the Son should be supposed to be the voice of the Father. For this reason he prepares us at his first proclamation to regard the Word as in essence, and not in any essence foreign to or dissevered from that essence whence It has Its being, but in that first and blessed Nature. For this is what he teaches us when he says the Word “was in the beginning824    Cf. S. John i. 1,” and “was with God825    Cf. S. John i. 1,” being Himself also both God and all else that the “Beginning” is. For thus it is that he makes his discourse on the Godhead, touching the eternity of the Only-begotten. Seeing then that these modes of generation (those, I mean, which are the result of cause) are ordinarily known among us, and are employed by Holy Scripture for our instruction on the subjects before us, in such a way as it might be expected that each of them would be applied to the presentation of Divine conceptions, let the reader of our argument “judge righteous judgement826    S. John vii. 24,” whether any of the assertions that heresy makes have any force against the truth.

τούτων τοίνυν τῶν τῆς γεννήσεως τρόπων φανερῶν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ὄντων ἡ φιλάνθρωπος τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος οἰκονομία παραδιδοῦσα ἡμῖν τὰ θεῖα μυστήρια διὰ τῶν ἡμῖν χωρητῶν τὴν διδασκαλίαν ποιεῖται τῶν ὑπὲρ λόγον, ὡς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασι τοῦτο ποιεῖ, ὅταν σωματικῶς διαγράφῃ τὸ θεῖον, ὀφθαλμὸν καὶ βλέφαρα καὶ οὖς καὶ δακτύλους καὶ χεῖρα καὶ δεξιὰν καὶ βραχίονα καὶ πόδας καὶ ὑποδήματα καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα περὶ θεοῦ διεξιοῦσα, ὧν οὐδὲν κατὰ τὴν πρόχειρον ἔννοιαν ἐν τῇ θείᾳ καταλαμβάνεται φύσει, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἡμῖν εὐσύνοπτον τὴν διδασκαλίαν ἀνάγουσα ταῖς τετριμμέναις ἐν τῇ συνηθείᾳ τῶν ἀνθρώπων φωναῖς τὰ ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν σημασίαν πράγματα διορίζει, ἀναλογικῶς ἡμῶν δι' ἑκάστου τῶν περὶ θεοῦ λεγομένων πρός τινα ἀναγομένων ὑψηλοτέραν ὑπόνοιαν. οὕτως οὖν καὶ τὰ πολλὰ τῆς γεννήσεως εἴδη [παρὰ τῆς θεοπνεύστου διδασκαλίας] εἰς παράστασιν τῆς ἀρρήτου τοῦ μονογενοῦς ὑποστάσεως παραλαμβάνει, τοσοῦτον ἀφ' ἑκάστου λαμβάνουσα ὅσον εὐαγές ἐστιν εἰς τὰς περὶ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπολήψεις παραληφθῆναι. ὡς γὰρ ἡ τῶν δακτύλων μνήμη ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τῆς χειρὸς καὶ τοῦ βραχίονος οὐ τὴν ἐξ ὀστῶν νεύρων καὶ σαρκῶν καὶ συνδέσμων τοῦ μέλους κατασκευὴν ὑπογράφει τῷ λόγῳ, ἀλλὰ τὴν πρακτικὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνεργητικὴν δύναμιν τῷ τοιούτῳ διασημαίνει ὀνόματι καὶ δι' ἑκάστου τῶν ἄλλων τὰ κατάλληλα τῶν περὶ θεοῦ νοουμένων ἐνδείκνυται, οὐ συμπαραδεχομένη τὰς σωματικὰς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐμφάσεις, οὕτως καὶ τὰ τῶν γεννήσεων τούτων εἴδη λέγει μὲν ἐπὶ τῆς θείας φύσεως, οὐ μὴν οὕτω λέγει ὡς νοεῖν οἶδεν ἡ καθ' ἡμᾶς συνήθεια. ὅταν μὲν γὰρ περὶ τῆς κατασκευαστικῆς λέγῃ δυνάμεως, γέννησιν μὲν ὀνομάζει τὴν τοιαύτην ἐνέργειαν διὰ τὸ δεῖν πρὸς τὸ ταπεινὸν τῆς ἡμετέρας δυνάμεως καταβῆναι τὸν λόγον, οὐ μὴν ἐνδείκνυται τὰ ὅσα παρ' ἡμῖν τῇ κατασκευαστικῇ γενέσει συνθεωρεῖται, οὐ τόπον, οὐ χρόνον, οὐχ ὕλης παρασκευήν, οὐκ ὀργάνων συνεργίαν, οὐ τὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς γινομένοις κόπον, ἀλλὰ ταῦτα ἡμῖν καταλιποῦσα μεγαλοφυῶς καὶ ὑψηλῶς τῷ θεῷ προσμαρτυρεῖ τῶν ὄντων τὴν γένεσιν ἐν οἷς φησιν ὅτι Αὐτὸς εἶπεν καὶ ἐγενήθησαν, αὐτὸς ἐνετείλατο καὶ ἐκτίσθησαν. πάλιν ὅταν τὴν ἀπόρρητόν τε καὶ ὑπὲρ λόγον τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑπόστασιν ἑρμηνεύῃ, διὰ τὸ ἀχώρητον εἶναι τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην πτωχείαν τῶν ὑπὲρ λόγον τε καὶ ἔννοιαν διδαγμάτων κἀκεῖ τοῖς ἡμετέροις συγκέχρηται καὶ υἱὸν ὀνομάζει, ὅπερ ἡ παρ' ἡμῖν συνήθεια τοῖς ἀπὸ ὕλης καὶ φύσεως ἀποτικτομένοις ὄνομα τίθεται. ἀλλ' ὥσπερ τὴν τῆς κτίσεως γένεσιν ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ λόγος εἰπὼν τὸ διά τινος ὕλης γίνεσθαι αὐτὴν οὐ προσέθηκεν, οὐσίαν ὕλης καὶ τόπον καὶ χρόνον καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα τὴν τοῦ θελήματος δύναμιν εἶναι ἀποφηνάμενος, οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα υἱὸν εἰπὼν ἀφῆκε πάντα τά τε ἄλλα ὅσα περὶ τὴν κάτω γέννησιν ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη φύσις ὁρᾷ, πάθη λέγω καὶ διαθέσεις καὶ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ χρόνου συνεργίαν καὶ τὴν τοῦ τόπου χρείαν καὶ πρὸ πάντων τὴν ὕλην, ὧν ἄνευ ἁπάντων ἡ κάτω γέννησις ἐκ τῆς φύσεως οὐ συνίσταται. πάσης δὲ τοιαύτης ἐννοίας ὑλικῆς τε καὶ διαστηματικῆς μὴ συμπαραληφθείσης ἐν τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ σημασίᾳ, μόνη ὑπελείφθη ἡ φύσις, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ φωνῇ τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ γνήσιον τῆς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀναδείξεως ἐπὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἑρμηνεύεται. καὶ ἐπειδὴ οὐχ ἱκανὸν ἦν τὸ τοιοῦτο τῆς γεννήσεως εἶδος ἀρκοῦσαν ἡμῖν ἐμποιῆσαι περὶ τῆς ἀρρήτου τοῦ μονογενοῦς ὑπάρξεως τὴν φαντασίαν, συμπαραλαμβάνει καὶ ἕτερον τῆς γεννήσεως εἶδος πρὸς σημασίαν τῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ θεολογίας τὸ ἐκ τῆς ὑλικῆς ἀπορροίας, καί φησιν ἀπαύγασμα δόξης καὶ ὀσμὴν μύρου καὶ ἀτμίδα θεοῦ, ἅπερ ἐν τῇ προεκτεθείσῃ παρ' ἡμῶν τεχνολογίᾳ ἡ καθ' ἡμᾶς συνήθεια ὑλικὴν ἀπόρροιαν ὀνομάζει. ἀλλ' ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς προειρημένοις οὔτε ἡ τῆς κτίσεως ποίησις οὔτε ἡ τοῦ υἱοῦ σημασία χρόνον ἢ ὕλην ἢ τόπον ἢ πάθος συμπαρεδέξατο, οὕτως καὶ ἐνταῦθα πάσης τῆς ὑλικῆς ἐννοίας ἐκκαθάρας τὴν τοῦ ἀπαυγάσματος καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν τῶν μνημονευθέντων σημασίαν, μόνον τὸ θεοπρεπὲς τοῦ τοιούτου τῆς γεννήσεως εἴδους ὁ λόγος παραλαβὼν ἐνδείκνυται τὸ ἐξ αὐτοῦ τε καὶ μετ' αὐτοῦ νοεῖσθαι διὰ τῆς κατὰ τὴν λέξιν ταύτην ἐμφάσεως. οὔτε γὰρ ἡ ἀτμὶς τὴν εἰς ἀέρα διάχυσιν ἐκ τῆς ὑποκειμένης ὕλης παρίστησιν οὔτε ἡ ὀσμὴ τὴν ἐκ τῆς ποιότητος τοῦ μύρου γινομένην πρὸς τὸν ἀέρα μετάστασιν οὔτε τὸ ἀπαύγασμα τὴν ἐκ τοῦ ἡλιακοῦ σώματος διὰ τῶν ἀκτίνων ἀπόρροιαν, ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μόνον ἐκ πάντων, καθὼς εἴρηται, διὰ τοῦ τοιούτου τῆς γεννήσεως τρόπου δηλοῦται, τὸ ἐξ ἐκείνου τε εἶναι καὶ μετ' ἐκείνου νοεῖσθαι, μηδενὸς διαστήματος μεταξὺ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ ἐξ αὐτοῦ μεσιτεύοντος. ἐπεὶ δὲ διὰ πλείονα φιλανθρωπίαν ἡ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος χάρις πολλαχόθεν ἡμῖν ἐγγενέσθαι τὰς θείας περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς ὑπολήψεις ᾠκονομήσατο, προσέθηκεν καὶ τὸ λειπόμενον τῶν ἐν γεννήσει θεωρουμένων εἶδος, τὸ ἐκ τοῦ νοῦ φημι καὶ τοῦ λόγου. ἀλλὰ πλείονι χρῆται τῇ προμηθείᾳ ὁ ὑψηλὸς Ἰωάννης, ὡς μήποτε ὑπὸ ἀτονίας τε καὶ μικροψυχίας καταπεσεῖν τὸν ἀκούοντα πρὸς κοινὴν ἔννοιαν λόγου, ὡς φθόγγον τοῦ πατρὸς τὸν υἱὸν νομισθῆναι. διὰ τοῦτο ἐν οὐσίᾳ βλέπειν τὸν λόγον παρασκευάζει τῷ πρώτῳ κηρύγματι καὶ ἐν οὐσίᾳ οὐκ ἀπεξενωμένῃ τινὶ καὶ ἀπερρωγυίᾳ τῆς ὅθεν ἐστίν, ἀλλ' ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ πρώτῃ καὶ μακαρίᾳ φύσει. ταῦτα γὰρ διδάσκει λέγων ὅτι ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν καὶ θεός, [καὶ] πάντα ὅσα ἐστὶν ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ αὐτὸς ὤν. οὕτως γὰρ περὶ τῆς ἀϊδιότητος τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεολογῶν διεξέρχεται. τούτων τοίνυν τῶν τῆς γεννήσεως τρόπων ἤτοι τῶν ἐξ αἰτίας ὑφεστηκότων ἐν τῇ καθ' ἡμᾶς συνηθείᾳ γινωσκομένων, παραληφθέντων δὲ καὶ παρὰ τῆς ἁγίας γραφῆς πρὸς τὴν τῶν ὑπερκειμένων διδασκαλίαν οὕτως ὡς εἰκός ἐστι πρὸς παράστασιν τῶν θείων ὑπολήψεων ἕκαστον τούτων μεταληφθῆναι, κρινάτω δικαίαν κρίσιν ὁ ἐντυγχάνων τῷ λόγῳ, εἴ τι τῶν παρὰ τῆς αἱρέσεως φερομένων ἰσχύν τινα κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας ἔχει.