122

the title of saint, brought forward a certain Theodore of Trebizond, who is head of the Blachernae, but was found to be sick with the disease of the Massalians; this man, therefore, he brought forward, supposedly making a defense on his own behalf and saying clearly that he does not now glorify as visible the superessential hiddenness of God, as he did before, but asserting the glory of God to be an enhypostatic and uncreated light, called both divinity and thearchy, and in short, everything that the saints wrote about the deifying gift of the Spirit.

For the great Dionysius, in many places in his writings, called this thearchy and principality of goodness and divinity, as being the principle of those who are deified, beyond which, he says, is God, as being super-divine and super-principal. But the divine Maximus called this divinity deification; and defining deification, he said it is an "enhypostatic illumination, not having a beginning, but an inconceivable manifestation in the worthy," adding also the other things that we have already set forth a little above. And we have heard Basil the Great saying that that which is poured out upon us through the Son is uncreated. And John, the golden-tongued, joined with the power of Basil's words, both puts the Latins to shame and will destroy the deceitful machinations of this empty-minded man, saying, "not God, but the grace is poured out"; and before the golden-mouthed father, the prophet Joel, or rather God speaking through the prophet, did not say, "I will pour out my spirit", but "I will pour out from my Spirit". If, therefore, the Spirit is not divided into pieces, what is the Spirit from the (p. 582) Spirit of God poured out upon us by God according to promise? Is it not the grace and energy of the Spirit, being an energy of the essence of the Spirit? But the Spirit poured out upon us from God is not created, according to the great Basil. The grace, therefore, is uncreated, and this is what is given and sent and bestowed by the Son to the disciples, but not the Spirit Himself, and this is the deifying gift, being an energy not only uncreated but also inseparable from the all-holy Spirit. Hear again, then, the great Basil: "For," he says, "the life which the Spirit sends forth into the hypostasis of another, is not separated from Him"; and lest it should seem to anyone that he is speaking of our natural life, although he says "sends forth" and not "creates"—or rather "projects," which is somehow more indicative of being uncreated and without beginning—nevertheless, lest he seem to say something natural, he added: "and those who partake of it live in a manner befitting God, possessing a divine and heavenly life."

And so such a divine and heavenly life of those who live in a manner befitting God by partaking of the inseparable life of the Spirit (just as Paul also lived "the divine and eternal life of Him who dwelt within," according to the divine Maximus), such a life, therefore, always is, existing naturally in the Spirit who is by nature able from eternity to deify, and is justly called Spirit and divinity by the saints, since it is a deifying gift in no way separated from the Spirit who gives it, and it is a light, bestowed through an ineffable illumination and known only to those who have been deemed worthy, and it is indeed enhypostatic, not as being self-subsistent, but because the Spirit sends it forth into the hypostasis of another, in which it is also beheld. For such is that which is properly enhypostatic: beheld not in itself nor in the essence, but in the hypostasis. But if there is yet another way for which it is called enhypostatic (p. 584) by the saints, we shall speak of it as we proceed. But the Holy Spirit transcends the deifying life that is in Him and from Him, as He does His own innate energy, which is also similar to Him, even if not exactly; "For," he says, "we see no deification or life which is exactly similar to the cause that transcends all things in every preeminence"; so that it is similar, but not exactly. But the Holy Spirit transcends not only as cause, but also because the reception is always a small part of the gift, not the whole of the divine energy

122

ἁγίου ἐπωνυμίαν, τραπεζούντιόν τινα Θεόδωρον εἰς μέσον προήγαγεν, ὅς προέστι μέν τῶν Βλαχερνῶν, τά Μασσαλιανῶν δ᾿ ἐφωράθη νοσῶν˙ τοῦτον τοίνυν προήνεγκεν ὑπέρ ἑαυτοῦ δῆθεν ἀπολογούμενον καί λέγοντα σαφῶς μή τήν ὑπερούσιον κρυφιότητα νῦν καθάπερ πρότερον ὁρατήν δοξάζειν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλά τήν δόξαν δ᾿ εἶναι φάσκοντα Θεοῦ φῶς ἐνυπόστατον καί ἀγένητον καί θεότητα καί θεαρχίαν ὀνομαζόμενον, καί ἁπλῶς ὅσα περί τῆς θεοποιοῦ δωρεᾶς τοῦ Πνεύματος οἱ ἅγιοι συνεγράψαντο.

Θεαρχίαν γάρ ταύτην καί ἀγαθαρχίαν καί θεότητα, ὡς ἀρχήν τῶν θεουμένων οὖσαν, πολλαχοῦ τῶν λόγων ὁ μέγας ∆ιονύσιος προσεῖπεν, ἧς ἐπέκεινα, φησίν, εἶναι τόν Θεόν ὡς ὑπέρθεον ὄντα καί ὑπεράρχιον. Μάξιμος δέ ὁ θεῖος θέωσιν τήν θεότητα προσηγόρευσεν ταύτην˙ τήν δέ θέωσιν ὁριζόμενος, «ἐνυπόστατον» εἶπεν «ἔλλαμψιν, μή ἔχουσαν γένεσιν, ἀλλ᾿ ἀνεπινόητον ἐν τοῖς ἀξίοις φανέρωσιν», προσθείς καί τἄλ᾿ ὅσα μικρόν ἀνωτέρω προθέντες ἔφθημεν. Βασιλείου δέ τοῦ μεγάλου ἀκηκόαμεν εἰπόντος ἄκτιστον τό διά τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐφ᾿ ἡμᾶς ἐκχεόμενον. Ἰωάννης δέ ὁ τήν γλῶτταν χρυσοῦς, τῷ Βασιλείου κράτει τῶν λόγων συναφθείς, τούς τε Λατίνους αἰσχυνεῖ καί τά δολερά τοῦ κενόφρονος τούτου καταλύσει μηχανήματα, «μή τόν Θεόν», λέγων, «ἀλλά τήν χάριν ἐκχεῖσθαι»˙ καί πρό τοῦ Χρυσορρήμονος πατρός ὁ προφήτης Ἰωήλ, μᾶλλον δέ διά τοῦ προφήτου ὁ Θεός εἰπών, οὐκ "ἐκχεῶ τό πνεῦμα μου", ἀλλ᾿ «ἐκχεῶ ἀπό τοῦ Πνεύματός μου». Εἰ τοίνυν τό Πνεῦμα μή κατακερματίζεται, τί τό ἐκ τοῦ (σελ. 582) Πνεύματος τοῦ Θεοῦ ὑπό Θεοῦ κατ᾿ ἐπαγγελίαν ἐφ᾿ ἡμᾶς ἐκχεόμενον Πνεῦμα; Ἆρ᾿ οὐχ ἡ τοῦ Πνεύματος χάρις τε καί ἐνέργεια, ἐνέργεια οὖσα τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ Πνεύματος; Ἀλλά τό παρά τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐφ᾿ ἡμᾶς ἐκχεόμενον Πνεῦμα οὐκ ἔκτισται κατά τόν μέγαν Βασίλειον. Ἄκτιστος ἡ χάρις ἄρα, καί τοῦτ᾿ ἐστιν ὅ καί δίδοται καί πέμπεται καί χαρίζεται παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ τοῖς μαθηταῖς, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ αὐτό τό Πνεῦμα, καί τοῦτ᾿ ἔστι τό δῶρον τό θεοποιόν, ἐνέργεια ὄν οὐκ ἄκτιστος μόνον ἀλλά καί ἀχώριστος τοῦ παναγίου Πνεύματος. Ἄκουσον δή πάλιν τοῦ μεγάλου Βασιλείου˙ «ἥν» γάρ, φησί, «προΐεται ζωήν εἰς ἄλλου ὑπόστασιν τό Πνεῦμα, οὐ χωρίζεται αὐτοῦ»˙ καί ἵνα μή τινι δόξῃ τήν καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς φυσικήν τοῦτον λέγειν ζωήν, καίτοι προέσθαι φάμενον, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχί κτίσαι, μᾶλλον δέ προΐεσθαι, ὅ μετά τοῦ ἀκτίστου καί τοῦ ἀνάρχου πως ἐμφαντικώτερόν ἐστιν, ὅμως ἵνα μή δόξῃ φυσικόν τι λέγειν, ἐπήνεγκε˙ καί οἱ μετέχοντες αὐτοῦ ζῶσι θεοπρεπῶς, ζωήν θείαν καί οὐράνιον κεκτημένοι».

Καί τοίνυν ἡ τοιαύτη θεία καί οὐράνιος ζωή τῶν θεοπρεπῶς ζώντων ἐν τῷ μετέχειν τῆς ἀχωρίστου τοῦ Πνεύματος ζωῆς (ὥσπερ καί ὁ Παῦλος ἔζη «τήν τοῦ ἐνοικήσαντος θείαν καί ἀΐδιον» κατά τόν θεῖον Μάξιμον «ζωήν»), ἡ τοιαύτη τοιγαροῦν ζωή ἀεί μέν ἐστι, φυσικῶς ἐνυπάρχουσα τῷ Πνεύματι θεοποιεῖν ἐξ ἀϊδίου πεφυκότι, Πνεῦμα τε καί θεότης προσαγορεύεται δικαίως παρά τῶν ἁγίων, ἅτε δωρεά θεοποιός τοῦ δίδοντος Πνεύματος ἥκιστα χωριζομένη, φῶς δέ ἐστι, δι᾿ ἀπορρήτου ἐλλάμψεως χορηγουμένη καί τοῖς ἠξιωμένοις ἐγνωσμένη μόνοις, ἐνυπόστατός τε μήν, οὐχ ὡς αὐθυπόστατος, ἀλλ᾿ ἐπεί εἰς ἄλλου ὑπόστασιν τό Πνεῦμα προΐεται αὐτήν, ἐν ᾗ καί θεωρεῖται˙ τοιοῦτον γάρ τό κυρίως ἐνυπόστατον, οὐ καθ᾿ ἑαυτό οὐδ᾿ ἐν τῇ οὐσίᾳ, ἀλλ᾿ ἐν τῇ ὑποστάσει θεωρούμενον. Εἰ δέ καί ἕτερός ἐτι τρόπος, δι᾿ ὅν ἐνυπόστατος (σελ. 584) καλεῖται παρά τῶν ἁγίων, ἐροῦμεν προϊόντες. Ὑπέρκειται δέ τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ καί ἐξ αὐτοῦ θεουργοῦ ζωῆς τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, ὡς οἰκείας ἐμφύτου ἐνεργείας, ἤτις καί ἐμφερής ἐστιν ἐκείνῳ, εἰ καί μή ἀκριβῶς˙ «οὐδεμίαν» γάρ, φησίν, ὁρῶμεν θέωσιν ἤ ζωήν, ἥτις ἀκριβῶς ἐμφερής ἐστι τῇ πάντων ὑπερκειμένῃ κατά πᾶσαν ὑπεροχήν αἰτίᾳ»˙ ὥστε ἐμφερής μέν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἀκριβῶς. Οὐχ ὡς αἴτιον δέ μόνον ὑπέρκειται τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, ἀλλά καί διά τό πολλοστόν τοῦ δόματος ἀεί τό λῆμμα εἶναι, μή τό πᾶν τῆς θείας ἐνεργείας