190

shows to the one begotten, while the artificial fabrication, being accomplished through energy and passivity, according to his argument, brings the maker and the thing made into a communion of essence. Since the 3.2.71 logographer argues in many places in his own writings that the Lord was begotten, therefore by the very means through which he alienates the Lord from the essence of the Father, by these he testifies to His connection. For if, according to his argument, the separation of essence is seen neither through begetting nor through fabrication, whatever he may grant the Lord to be, whether created or begotten, through both he testified to the essential kinship, he who artfully explained the communion of nature in the one who makes and the one who undergoes, in the one who begets and the one who is begotten. 3.2.72 But let us turn to what follows in the argument. I ask those who read not to be annoyed by the precision of the examination, which unintentionally extends the argument to great length. For the danger is not about ordinary things, so that by skipping over something of those things that require more diligent consideration we might suffer a small loss, but we are in danger with regard to the very chief point of our hope. For the choice is either to be Christians, not being carried away by the heretical destruction, or to be dragged down completely to Jewish and Greek suppositions. 3.2.73 So that, therefore, we may suffer neither of the forbidden things, neither through the denial of the truly begotten Son being carried along with Jewish doctrines, nor through the worship of the creature falling down together in the ruin of the idolaters, let us of necessity spend more time on the argument concerning these things, setting forth the very saying of Eunomius, which runs as follows: 20With these things so distinguished, one might reasonably say that the most proper and first and only essence, which subsisted by the energy of the Father, admits to itself the appellations of 'begotten,' 'made,' and 'created'20; and a little later: 20But the Son alone20, he says, 20having been constituted by the energy of the Father, has a nature that has no communion 3.2.74 and a relation to the one who begot Him that has no communion.20 Such, then, are the things that have been said. But let us first observe the battle of our enemies against themselves, as if we were spectators of foes in sedition against one another, and then in contrast let us show the truth of piety. The Son alone, he says, having been constituted by the energy of the Father, has a relation to the one who begot Him that has no communion. But in the passages before this, he says he does not shrink from calling the begotten a 'begotten thing,' since the begotten essence itself and the appellation of Son appropriate such a relation of names. 3.2.75 With the contradiction in what has been said being so manifest, it comes to me to marvel at the sagacity of the praisers of this doctrine. For it would be impossible, to whichever of his statements they might turn, not to sin against the remaining one. His former argument established that the begotten essence and the appellation of Son appropriate such a relation of names. The present artful exposition says the contrary, that the Son has a relation to the one who begot Him that has no communion. If they believe the first, they will by no means accept the second; if toward this 3.2.76 they incline, they will stand against the former supposition. Who will break up the battle for them, who will mediate in the civil war, who will bring the sedition to harmony, when the very soul is divided against itself by what is said and is torn apart toward the contradiction of the doctrines? Or perhaps this is the riddle of the prophecy, which David says concerning the Jews, that 'They were rent asunder, and were not pricked in the heart.' For behold, not even being torn apart by the opposition of the doctrines do they have a sense of their error, but they are carried by their ears, being turned about like amphorae toward what 3.2.77 seems good to the one who changes his position. It pleased him to say that the begotten essence aptly has the appellation of Son; immediately, just like those who are nodding off, they assented to what was said. He changed his argument again to the contrary and denies the Son's relation to the one who begot Him; again his dearest friends and to this

190

νηθέντι δείκνυσιν, ἡ δὲ τεχνικὴ κατασκευὴ δι' ἐνεργείας τε καὶ πάθους ἀποτελουμένη κατὰ τὸν τούτου λόγον εἰς κοινωνίαν οὐσίας ἄγει τὸ ποιοῦν τε καὶ τὸ γινόμενον, γε γεννῆσθαι τὸν κύριον πολλαχῇ τῶν ἰδίων συγγραμμάτων ὁ 3.2.71 λογογράφος κατασκευάζων, ἄρα δι' ὧν ἀλλοτριοῖ τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς οὐσίας τὸν κύριον, διὰ τούτων αὐτῷ προσμαρτυρεῖ τὴν συνάφειαν. εἰ γὰρ μήτε διὰ γεννήσεως μήτε διὰ κατα σκευῆς κατὰ τὸν τούτου λόγον ὁ τῆς οὐσίας χωρισμὸς καθορᾶται, ὅπερ ἂν δῷ εἶναι τὸν κύριον, εἴτε κτιστὸν εἴτε γέννημα, δι' ἀμφοῖν τὸ κατ' οὐσίαν οἰκεῖον προσεμαρτύ ρησεν ὁ ἐν τῷ ποιοῦντι καὶ πάσχοντι, γεννῶντι καὶ γεννω μένῳ τὴν τῆς φύσεως κοινωνίαν τεχνολογήσας. 3.2.72 Ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἐφεξῆς τοῦ λόγου τραπώμεθα. παραι τοῦμαι δὲ τοὺς ἐντυγχάνοντας μὴ δυσχεραίνειν τῇ ἀκριβείᾳ τῆς ἐξετάσεως εἰς πλῆθος ἀκούσιον προαγούσῃ τὸν λόγον. οὐ γὰρ περὶ τῶν τυχόντων ὁ κίνδυνος, ὥστε τι παραδρα μόντας τῶν φιλοπονωτέρας δεομένων τῆς θεωρίας ἐν ὀλίγῳ τὴν ζημίαν παθεῖν, ἀλλ' αὐτῷ τῷ κεφαλαίῳ τῆς ἐλπίδος ἐγκινδυνεύομεν. πρόκειται γὰρ ἢ Χριστιανοὺς εἶναι, μὴ συμπαρενεχθέντας ὑπὸ τῆς αἱρετικῆς ἀπωλείας, ἢ πάντως πρὸς Ἰουδαϊκάς τε καὶ Ἑλληνικὰς ὑπολήψεις κατασυρῆναι. 3.2.73 ὡς ἂν οὖν μηθέτερον πάθοιμεν τῶν ἀπειρημένων, μήτε διὰ τῆς ἀρνήσεως τοῦ ἀληθῶς γεννηθέντος υἱοῦ τοῖς Ἰουδαϊκοῖς δόγμασι συμφερόμενοι, μήτε διὰ τῆς τοῦ κτίσματος προσ κυνήσεως τῷ πτώματι τῶν εἰδωλολατρούντων συγκαταπί πτοντες, ἀναγκαίως προσδιατρίψωμεν τῷ περὶ τούτων λόγῳ, θέντες αὐτὴν τοῦ Εὐνομίου τὴν ῥῆσιν ἔχουσαν οὕτως· 20οὕτω δὲ τούτων διῃρημένων, εἰκότως φαίη τις ἂν τὴν κυριωτάτην καὶ πρώτην καὶ μόνην ἐν εργείᾳ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑποστᾶσαν οὐσίαν εἰς ἑαυ τὴν δέχεσθαι τὰς τοῦ γεννήματος καὶ ποιή ματος καὶ κτίσματος προσηγορίας20· καὶ μετ' ὀλίγα· 20μόνος δὲ ὁ υἱός20, φησί, 20τῇ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐν εργείᾳ συστὰς ἀκοινώνητον ἔχει τήν τε φύσιν 3.2.74 καὶ τὴν πρὸς τὸν γεγεννηκότα σχέσιν20. τὰ μὲν οὖν εἰρημένα τοιαῦτα. ἡμεῖς δὲ πρῶτον μὲν τῶν ἐχθρῶν τὴν πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς μάχην κατανοήσωμεν, οἷόν τινες θεαταὶ πολεμίων γενόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους στασιαζόντων, εἶθ' οὕτως ἀντιπαραδείξωμεν τὴν τῆς εὐσεβείας ἀλήθειαν. μόνος, φησίν, ὁ υἱὸς τῇ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐνεργείᾳ συστὰς ἀκοινώνητον ἔχει τὴν πρὸς τὸν γεγεννηκότα σχέσιν. ἐν δὲ τοῖς πρὸ τούτου τὸν γεννητὸν γέννημα λέγειν μὴ παραιτεῖσθαί φησι, τῆς γεννηθείσης αὐτῆς οὐσίας καὶ τῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ προσηγορίας τὴν τοιαύτην τῶν ὀνομάτων οἰκειουμένης σχέσιν. 3.2.75 Οὕτω τοίνυν προδήλου τῆς ἐν τοῖς εἰρημένοις οὔσης ἐναντιότητος, θαυμάζειν ἔπεισί μοι τῆς ἀγχινοίας τοὺς ἐπαινέτας τούτου τοῦ δόγματος. ἄπορον γὰρ ἂν εἴη πρὸς ὅ τι τῶν εἰρημένων παρ' αὐτοῦ τραπέντες οὐκ ἂν πλημμε λοῖεν εἰς τὸ λειπόμενον. ὁ πρότερος κατεσκεύαζε λόγος αὐτῷ τὴν γεννηθεῖσαν οὐσίαν καὶ τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ προσηγορίαν τὴν τοιαύτην τῶν ὀνομάτων οἰκειοῦσθαι σχέσιν. ἡ νῦν τεχνολογία τὸ ἐναντίον φησίν, ἀκοινώνητον ἔχειν τὸν υἱὸν τὴν πρὸς τὸν γεγεννηκότα σχέσιν. ἐὰν τῷ πρώτῳ πιστεύ σωσι, οὐ παραδέξονται πάντως τὸ δεύτερον· ἐὰν πρὸς τοῦτο 3.2.76 ῥέψωσι, κατὰ τῆς προτέρας ὑπολήψεως στήσονται. τίς αὐτοῖς διαλύσει τὴν μάχην, τίς μεσιτεύσει τῷ ἐμφυλίῳ πολέμῳ, τίς συμβιβάσει πρὸς συμφωνίαν τὴν στάσιν, αὐτῆς τῆς ψυχῆς πρὸς ἑαυτὴν ἐκ τῶν λεγομένων μεριζομένης καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἐναντιότητα τῶν δογμάτων διελκομένης; ἢ τοῦτο τῆς προφητείας ἐστὶ τάχα τὸ αἴνιγμα, ὃ περὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων φησὶν ὁ ∆αβὶδ ὅτι ∆ιεσχίσθησαν καὶ οὐ κατε νύγησαν. ἰδοὺ γὰρ οὐδὲ πρὸς τὴν ἐναντίωσιν τῶν δογμάτων διασχιζόμενοι τὴν τοῦ πλημμελήματος αἴσθησιν ἔχουσιν, ἀλλὰ φέρονται διὰ τῶν ὤτων, ἀμφορέων δίκην πρὸς τὸ 3.2.77 δοκοῦν τῷ μετατιθέντι περιαγόμενοι. ἤρεσεν αὐτῷ τὴν γεννηθεῖσαν οὐσίαν προσφυῶς τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ προσηγορίαν ἔχειν εἰπεῖν· εὐθὺς καθάπερ οἱ νυστάζοντες τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἐπένευσαν. μετέθετο πάλιν πρὸς τοὐναντίον τὸν λόγον καὶ ἀρνεῖται τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν πρὸς τὸν γεγεννηκότα σχέσιν· πάλιν οἱ φίλτατοι καὶ τούτῳ