142

is of God, neither is uncreated goodness, nor the beginningless and eternal life; for all such things are not from what is in Him, but from what is around Him.

(p. 666) Furthermore, all the holy fathers in common say concerning the uncreated Trinity that it is not possible to find a name indicative of the nature, but the names are of the energies. For "divinity" is indicative of an energy, signifying to run, or to see, or to kindle, or self-deification. But the one beyond name is not the same as that which is named; therefore, the essence and energy of God are not the same. But if the divinity of God properly signifies the energy of God, and these [energies] are created according to you, then according to you the divinity of God is also created. But it is not only uncreated but also without beginning; for He who knows all things before their coming into being never began to see beings. And yet, transcendent even to this energy is the essence of God which is beyond name, inasmuch as that which so energizes is transcendent to what is energized, and that which is beyond name is transcendent to what is named in this way. But such things in no way oppose the worship of one God and one divinity, just as considering the sun one and its light one is not opposed by the fact that its ray is also called sun. You see how we accurately agree with the saints.

But you, who say that participated things are created, and that not only all the works, but also all the powers and energies of God have a beginning in time and an end—O, the madness and the folly that dares all things fearlessly!—declaring impious and subjecting to excommunication and anathema the saints who glorify God as being in essence even beyond the uncreated energies, since in His essence He is beyond all affirmation and negation—therefore, saying and thinking such things, do you have any way to show that you are not numbered among the heretics of old, and this while declaring not only all the energies and all the works of God, but also the powers of that self-same superessential nature to be created? And yet this name, "the essence," is in the case of God significant of one of such powers. For Dionysius the Areopagite says, (p. 668) "if we shall name the superessential hiddenness God or life or essence or light or reason, we understand nothing other than the powers brought forth from it to us, whether deifying or essence-creating or life-giving or wisdom-bestowing." Therefore, when you yourself say that there is only one thing without beginning, the essence of God, you grant us to understand only one power of God to be without beginning, the essence-creating one, but those apart from this to be under time. How then is the essence-creating power of God without beginning, but the life-making power will have a beginning in time, and the life-giving and the wisdom-bestowing? For either every divine power is without beginning or none is. But you, by saying and establishing that only one is uncreated, exclude the others from being uncreated; and by declaring them all to be created, you also exclude the one. For such is falsehood: it is both inconsistent with itself and self-destructive, reasonably so, that it may be both false and ruinous to itself, proceeding against itself and refuting itself through itself.

But will he say that by "essence" he means that which in a solitary and unified way has in itself all these powers? But in the first place, he should have named this "God"; for this is the word that we have received from the Church for Him. And when God gave the oracle to Moses, He did not say, "I am the essence," but, "I am He Who is"; for "He Who is" is not from the essence, but the essence is from "He Who is"; for "He Who is" Himself has comprehended all of being in Himself. Secondly, even if instead of "essence" he had used the word "God," he ought to have added "by nature," and this especially since the subject of the discussion was grace and the gods by grace, whom the saints also call without beginning and uncreated by grace. Therefore, he should have said, "one God without beginning by nature." But this man, having exchanged "God" and omitted "by nature," brought forth his argument in order to deceive the listeners as much as he could, not saying that that alone is without beginning which in a unified way contains and (p. 670) precedes all things; for if he were saying this, how could he have been eager to show that the natural powers in Him are created?

142

Θεοῦ ἐστιν, οὔτε ἄκτιστος ἀγαθότης, οὔτε ἡ ἄναρχος καί ἀΐδιος ζωή˙ οὐ γάρ ἐκ τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτόν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ τῶν περί αὐτόν τοιαῦτα πάντ᾿ ἔστιν.

(σελ. 666) Ἔτι κοινῇ πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι πατέρες ἐπί τῆς ἀκτίστου φασί Τριάδος οὐκ ἔστιν εὑρεῖν ὄνομα τῆς φύσεως δηλωτικόν, τῶν δέ ἐνεργειῶν ἐστι τά ὀνόματα. Καί γάρ ἡ θεότης ἐνεργείας ἐστί δηλωτικόν, τό θέειν ἤ τό θεᾶσθαι ἤ τό αἴθειν ἤ τήν αὐτοθέωσιν δηλοῦν. Ταὐτό δέ τῷ ὀνομαζομένῳ τό ὑπερώνυμον οὐκ ἔστιν˙ οὐ ταὐτό ἄρα οὐσία καί ἐνέργεια Θεοῦ. Εἰ δέ ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ θεότης κυρίως τήν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐνέργειαν δηλοῖ, κτισταί δέ εἰσιν αὗται κατά σέ, κτιστή ἐστι κατά σέ καί ἡ θεότης τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἀλλ᾿ οὐ μόνον ἄκτιστος ἀλλά καί ἄναρχος˙ οὐ γάρ ἤρξατό ποτε τοῦ θεᾶσθαι τά ὄντα ὁ εἰδώς τά πάντα πρίν γενέσεως αὐτῶν ὑπέρκειται δ᾿ ὅμως καί τῆς ἐνεργείας ταύτης ἡ ὑπερώνυμος οὐσία τοῦ Θεοῦ, καθ᾿ ὅσον τό οὕτως ἐνεργοῦν, τοῦ ἐνεργουμένου, καί τό ὑπερώνυμον, τοῦ κατά τοῦτον τόν τρόπον ὀνομαζομένου. Ἀλλά τά τοιαῦτα Θεόν ἕνα σέβειν καί θεότητα μίαν οὐδαμῶς προσίσταται, ἐπεί μηδ᾿ ἥλιον ἕνα καί φῶς ἕν αὐτοῦ νομίζειν, τό καί τήν ἀκτῖνα ἥλιον καλεῖσθαι. Ὁρᾷς ὅπως ἡμεῖς ἀκριβῶς ὁμολογοῦμεν τοῖς ἁγίοις.

Σύ δέ ὁ τά μεθεκτά λέγων κτιστά καί οὐχί τά ἔργα πάντα μόνον, ἀλλά καί τάς δυνάμεις καί ἐνεργείας πάσας τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀρχήν ἔχειν χρονικήν καί τέλος, ὤ τῆς παραπληξίας καί τῆς πάντα τολμώσῃς ἀδεῶς ἀπονοίας, ἀσεβεῖς ἀποφαινούμενος καί ἀφορισμῷ καί ἀναθέματι καθυποβάλλων τούς καί τῶν ἀκτίστων ἐνεργειῶν ἐπέκεινα κατ᾿ οὐσίαν τόν Θεόν δοξάζοντας ἁγίους, ἐπεί κατ᾿ αὐτήν πάσης ὑπέρκειται θέσεώς τε καί ἀφαιρέσεως, οὐ τοίνυν τοιαῦτα λέγων καί φρονῶν ἔχεις ὅπως δείξῃς μή τοῖς ἀπ᾿ αἰῶνος κακοδόξοις ἐναρίθμιος ὤν, καί ταῦτ᾿ οὐχί τάς ἐνεργείας μόνον πάσας καί πάντα τά ἔργα τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλά καί τάς δυνάμεις τῆς αὐθυπερουσίου φύσεως ἐκείνης κτιστάς ἀποφαινόμενος; Καίτοι τοὔνομα τοῦτο, "ἡ οὐσία", μιᾶς τῶν τοιούτων δυνάμεων σημαντικόν ἐστι ἐπί Θεοῦ. Φησί γάρ ὁ ἐξ Ἀρείου Πάγου ∆ιονύσιος, (σελ. 668) «εἰ τήν ὑπερούσιον κρυφιότητα Θεόν ἤ ζωήν ἤ οὐσίαν ἤ φῶς ἤ λόγον ὀνομάσομεν, οὐδέν ἕτερον νοοῦμεν ἤ τάς εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐξ αὐτῆς προαγομένας δυνάμεις ἐκθεωτικάς ἤ οὐσιοποιούς ἤ ζωογόνους ἤ σοφοδώρους». Ὅταν οὖν αὐτός λέγῃς ἕν εἶναι μόνον ἄναρχον, τήν οὐσίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, μίαν μόνην δίδως ἡμῖν νοεῖν Θεοῦ δύναμιν ἄναρχον, τήν οὐσιοποιόν, τάς δέ παρά ταύτην ὑπό χρόνον. Πῶς οὖν ἡ μέν οὐσιοποιός τοῦ Θεοῦ δύναμις ἄναρχος, ἡ δέ ζωοποιός ἕξει χρονικήν ἀρχήν, ἥ τε ζωογόνος καί ἡ σοφοδότις; Ἤ γάρ πᾶσα ἄναρχος θεία δύναμις ἐστιν ἤ οὐδεμία. Σύ δέ τήν μίαν μόνην λέγων καί κατασκευάζων ἄκτιστον, τάς ἄλλας ἐκβάλλεις τοῦ ἀκτίστου πάσας δέ κτιστάς ἀποφαινόμενος, συνεκβάλλεις καί τήν μίαν. Τοιοῦτον γάρ τό ψεῦδος καί ἑαυτῷ ἀνακόλουθόν ἐστι καί αὐτεπίβουλον, εἰκότως, ἵνα ᾗ καί πρός αὐτό ψευδές τε καί λυμαντικόν, αὐτό ἐφ᾿ ἑαυτό χωροῦν καί αὐτό ἑαυτοῦ δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ καταψευδόμενον.

Ἀλλ᾿ ἐρεῖ διά τῆς οὐσίας ἐκεῖνο λέγειν, τό μοναχῶς καί ἑνιαίως ἔχον ἐν ἑαυτῷ πάσας τάς δυνάμεις ταύτας; Ἀλλά πρῶτον μέν Θεόν ἔδει τοῦτο ὀνομάσαι˙ ταύτην γάρ τήν φωνήν ὑπό τῆς Ἐκκλησίας ἐπ᾿ ἐκείνου παρελάβομεν. Καί τῷ Μωϋσῇ δέ χρηματίζων ὁ Θεός, οὐκ εἶπεν «ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ οὐσία», ἀλλ᾿ «ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν»˙ οὐ γάρ ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας ὁ ὤν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ τοῦ ὄντος ἡ οὐσία˙ αὐτός γάρ ὁ ὤν ὅλον ἐν ἑαυτῷ συνείληφε τό εἶναι. Ἔπειτα, εἰ καί ἀντί τῆς "οὐσίας" τῇ "Θεός" ἐχρήσατο φωνῇ, ἔδει προσχρήσασθαι τῷ "φύσει", καί ταῦτα περί τῆς χάριτος καί τῶν χάριτι θεῶν, οὕς καί χάριτι ἀνάρχους καί ἀκτίστους οἱ ἅγιοί φασι, τῆς ὑποθέσεως τῶν λόγων οὔσης. Ἔδει τοίνυν λέγειν, «εἷς ὁ φύσει ἄναρχος Θεός». Οὗτος δέ καί τό Θεός ἀμείψας καί τό φύσει καταλιπών, ὡς ἐνῆν κλέψαι τούς ἀκούοντας προήνεγκε τόν λόγον, οὐκ ἐκεῖνο λέγων μόνον ἄναρχον, τό ἑνιαίως τά πάντα συνέχον καί (σελ. 670) προέχον˙ εἰ γάρ τοῦτο ἔλεγε, πῶς ἀν τάς ἐν αὐτῷ δυνάμεις φυσικάς δεικνύειν ἐσπούδαζε κτιστάς;