188

He did not simply form man, but formed him for Himself; then He created, after these things He was created; then the Word made flesh, after these things the Word became flesh, that He might refashion our flesh to spirit by sharing with us in flesh and blood. Therefore of this new creation in Christ, which He Himself initiated, He was named firstborn, having become the firstfruits of all, both of those being born into life and of the dead being made alive through resurrection, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living and might sanctify the whole 3.2.55 lump through the firstfruits in Himself. For that "firstborn" is not applied to the Son according to His pre-eternal existence, the title of "only-begotten" bears witness. For the truly only-begotten has no brothers. How <for> could one be only-begotten who is numbered among brothers? But as He is called God and man, Son of God and son of man, form [for] of God and form of a servant, being the one according to His transcendent nature, but becoming the other according to the loving economy, so also being only-begotten God, He becomes firstborn of all creation, only-begotten as the One who is in the Father's bosom, but among those being saved through the new creation He is both made and called firstborn 3.2.56 of the creation. But if, as the heresy wishes, He is called firstborn because He was created before the rest of creation, the name does not agree with what is constructed by them concerning the only-begotten God. For they do not say this, that from the Father both the Son and all things came to be in like manner, but they call the 3.2.57 only-begotten God a 20work20 of the Father, and all other things of this one. By what 3.2.57 reasoning, therefore, do they who dogmatize that the Son was created call God the Father of the creature, by the same reasoning, surely, saying that all things were created by the only-begotten God, they will call Him not firstborn of the things that have come to be through Him, but more properly Father, since the same relationship to the creatures in both cases produces, as a consequence, the same title. For if the God over all is properly called not firstborn, but Father of His own creation, by the same reasoning, surely, the only-begotten God will also be properly called Father of His own creatures, not firstborn, so that the title of firstborn is in every way invalid and superfluous, having no place in the heretical concept. 3.2.58 But we must return to those who connect suffering with the divine generation and for this reason deny that the Lord was truly begotten, lest they should conceive of suffering. For to say, that 20suffering20 is certainly 20conjoined20 20with generation20, and for this reason to think that the Son must be held as alien to the concept of generation, so that the divine might remain purely outside of suffering, might seem to have some reason to the easily deceived, but for those educated in the divine 3.2.59 mysteries the refutation from what is acknowledged is at hand. For who does not know that the generation leads us up into the true and blessed life, not being the same as that which consists of blood and the will of the flesh, in which there is also defilement and change and the gradual growth toward perfection and whatever else is observed concerning this generation; but the other is from God and heavenly and, as the Gospel says somewhere, is believed to be from above, which does not admit the sufferings of flesh and blood? Or let our opponents dare to declare one of two things, either 3.2.60 that the generation from above does not exist or that it is through suffering. But indeed they agree that it exists and they do not find suffering in it. Therefore not every generation is naturally conjoined with suffering, but the material one is subject to passion, while the immaterial one is pure from passion. What then is the necessity of attributing the properties of the flesh to the pure generation of the Son and, by mocking the lower generation with unseemly natural philosophy, to exclude the Son from the paternal relationship 3.2.61? For if even in our case generation is the beginning of each life, but the one through flesh is with suffering, while the spiritual one is pure, and no one who is in any way numbered among Christians would gainsay the argument, how is it upon the pure

188

οὐχ ἁπλῶς τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἔπλασεν, ἀλλ' ἑαυτῷ περιέπλασε· τότε ἔκτισε, μετὰ ταῦτα ἐκτίσθη· τότε ὁ λόγος σάρκα ἐποίησε, μετὰ ταῦτα ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο, ἵνα μετασκευάσῃ πρὸς πνεῦμα τὴν ἡμετέραν σάρκα διὰ τοῦ συμμετασχεῖν ἡμῖν σαρκός τε καὶ αἵματος. ταύτης τοίνυν τῆς καινῆς ἐν Χριστῷ κτίσεως, ἧς αὐτὸς καθηγήσατο, πρωτότοκος ὠνομάσθη, πάντων ἀπαρχὴ γενόμενος καὶ τῶν εἰς ζωὴν γεννωμένων καὶ τῶν δι' ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν ζωο ποιουμένων, ἵνα καὶ νεκρῶν καὶ ζώντων κυριεύσῃ καὶ ὅλον 3.2.55 διὰ τῆς ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἀπαρχῆς συναγιάσῃ τὸ φύραμα. ὅτι γὰρ οὐ κατὰ τὴν προαιώνιον ὕπαρξιν ἐφαρμόζεται τῷ υἱῷ τὸ πρωτότοκον, ἡ τοῦ μονογενοῦς προσηγορία διαμαρτύρεται. ὁ γὰρ ἀληθῶς μονογενὴς ἀδελφοὺς οὐκ ἔχει. πῶς <γὰρ> ἄν τις εἴη μονογενὴς ἐν ἀδελφοῖς ἀριθμούμενος; ἀλλ' ὡς λέγεται θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος, υἱὸς θεοῦ καὶ υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου, μορφὴ [γὰρ] θεοῦ καὶ μορφὴ δούλου, τὰ μὲν κατὰ τὴν ὑπερέ χουσαν φύσιν ὤν, τὰ δὲ κατὰ τὴν φιλάνθρωπον οἰκονομίαν γενόμενος, οὕτω καὶ μονογενὴς θεὸς ὢν πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως γίνεται, μονογενὴς μὲν ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ πατρῴῳ κόλπῳ, ἐν δὲ τοῖς διὰ τῆς καινῆς κτίσεως σῳζομένοις πρωτότοκος 3.2.56 τῆς κτίσεως καὶ γενόμενος καὶ λεγόμενος. εἰ δέ, καθὼς ἡ αἵρεσις βούλεται, διὰ τὸ προκατεσκευάσθαι τῆς λοιπῆς κτίσεως πρωτότοκος λέγεται, οὐ συμφωνεῖ τοῖς παρ' αὐτῶν περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεοῦ κατασκευαζομένοις τὸ ὄνομα. οὐ γὰρ τοῦτό φασιν, ὅτι παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ὁμοίως ὅ τε υἱὸς καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο, ἀλλὰ 20ποίημα20 μὲν τοῦ πατρὸς τὸν 3.2.57 μονογενῆ θεὸν λέγουσιν, τούτου δὲ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα. ᾧ 3.2.57 τοίνυν λόγῳ κτισθῆναι τὸν υἱὸν δογματίζοντες πατέρα τοῦ κτίσματος τὸν θεὸν ὀνομάζουσι, τῷ αὐτῷ λόγῳ πάντως παρὰ τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεοῦ τὰ πάντα κατεσκευάσθαι λέ γοντες οὐ πρωτότοκον τῶν δι' αὐτοῦ γεγενημένων, ἀλλὰ πατέρα κυριώτερον αὐτὸν ὀνομάσουσι, τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπ' ἀμφο τέρων πρὸς τὰ κτίσματα σχέσεως τὴν αὐτὴν κατὰ τὸ ἀκό λουθον προσηγορίαν ποιούσης. εἰ γὰρ κυρίως τοῦ ἰδίου κτίσματος ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς οὐ πρωτότοκος, ἀλλὰ πατὴρ ὀνομάζεται, τῷ αὐτῷ λόγῳ πάντως καὶ τῶν ἰδίων κτισμά των πατὴρ ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, οὐ πρωτότοκος κυρίως ὀνο μασθήσεται, ὡς ἄκυρον κατὰ πάντα καὶ παρέλκουσαν εἶναι τοῦ πρωτοτόκου τὴν προσηγορίαν, ἐπὶ τῆς αἱρετικῆς ἐννοίας χώραν οὐκ ἔχουσαν. 3.2.58 Ἀλλ' ἐπανιτέον πρὸς τοὺς τῇ θείᾳ γεννήσει τὸ πάθος συνάπτοντας καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀπαρνουμένους τὸ ἀληθῶς γεν νηθῆναι τὸν κύριον, ἵνα μὴ πάθος νοήσωσι. τὸ γὰρ λέγειν, ὅτι 20συνέζευκται20 πάντως 20τῇ γεννήσει20 τὸ 20πάθος20, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο χρῆναι τῆς κατὰ τὴν γέννησιν ὑπολήψεως ἀλλοτρίως ἔχειν τὸν υἱὸν οἴεσθαι, ὡς ἂν καθαρῶς ἔξω πά θους διαμένοι τὸ θεῖον, τοῖς μὲν εὐεξαπατήτοις ἴσως ἄν τινα λόγον ἔχειν δοκοίη, τοῖς δὲ πεπαιδευμένοις τὰ θεῖα 3.2.59 μυστήρια πρόχειρος ἐκ τῶν ὁμολογουμένων ὁ ἔλεγχος. τίς γὰρ οὐκ οἶδεν, ὅτι ἡ γέννησις ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν ἀλη θινήν τε καὶ μακαρίαν ἀνάγει ζωήν, οὐχ ἡ αὐτὴ οὖσα τῇ ἐξ αἱμάτων καὶ θελήματος σαρκὸς συνισταμένῃ, ἐν ᾗ καὶ ῥύσις καὶ μεταβολὴ καὶ ἡ κατ' ὀλίγον πρὸς τε λείωσιν αὔξησις καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα περὶ ταύτην θεωρεῖται τὴν γέννησιν· ἡ δὲ ἑτέρα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ οὐράνιος καί, καθώς φησί που τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ἄνωθεν εἶναι πεπιστευμένη, ἥτις τὰ σαρκὸς καὶ τὰ αἵματος οὐ παραδέχεται πάθη; ἢ τολ μησάτωσαν οἱ ἐναντίοι τῶν δύο τὸ ἕτερον ἀποφήνασθαι, ἢ 3.2.60 μὴ εἶναι τὴν ἄνωθεν γέννησιν ἢ διὰ πάθους εἶναι. ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ εἶναι συντίθενται καὶ τὸ πάθος ἐπ' αὐτῆς οὐχ εὑρίσκουσιν. οὐκοῦν οὐ πᾶσα γέννησις τῷ πάθει συμπέ φυκεν, ἀλλ' ἐμπαθὴς μὲν ἡ ὑλική, καθαρὰ δὲ πάθους ἡ ἄϋλος. τίς οὖν ἡ ἀνάγκη τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς ἴδια τῇ ἀκηράτῳ τοῦ υἱοῦ γεννήσει προστρίβεσθαι καὶ διὰ τοῦ κωμῳδεῖν τὴν κάτω γέννησιν τῇ ἀσχήμονι φυσιολογίᾳ τῆς πατρικῆς οἰκειό 3.2.61 τητος τὸν υἱὸν ἀποκλείειν; εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἐφ' ἡμῶν γέννησις μὲν ἑκατέρας καθηγεῖται ζωῆς, ἀλλ' ἡ μὲν διὰ σαρκὸς ἐμπαθῶς, ἡ δὲ πνευματικὴ καθαρῶς, καὶ οὐκ ἄν τις ἀντ είποι τῷ λόγῳ τῶν καὶ ὁπωσοῦν ἐν Χριστιανοῖς ἀριθμου μένων, πῶς ἔστιν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀκηράτου