300

the Father being according to nature, 3.2.142 but the Son being changed from that nature? Or does he by this word explain the perversion of virtue, separating by the name of "alteration" the evil from the better, so as to see the one substance in the good, and the other in the opposite? Or does he maintain that, according to the principle of the opposition of the elements, the divine substance is also altered, the one from the other? Or as war is to peace and life is to death, does he see in such a way a battle in the substances with respect to all such things, so that they do not come together with one another, since the mixture of opposites has a destructive power against the things being mixed, as the proverbial wisdom says concerning such a doctrine that "Water and fire will not say, 'It is enough,'" interpreting through the riddle the equally matched and equiponderant nature of opposites and their mutual destruction? Or does he say that the alteration in those substances is to be seen according to none of these 3.2.143 things? Then let him state what is understood beyond these things. But he would not be able to say, even if he says the usual things, that the Son is altered from the one who begot him; for by this the absurdity of his statements is even more refuted. For what is so naturally and fittingly implanted in and conjoined to another as the relational meaning of the Son to the Father? The proof of this is that even if these two names are not spoken, with the one the other left out is also signified; so is the one inherent in and fitted to the other, and in the one both are seen, so that neither of these could be conceived of by itself 3.2.144 without the other. But that which is altered is in every way conceived and spoken of as the opposite of that which is fitting; for instance, the cord has a fitting relation to the straight line, but the crooked placed beside the straight does not fit, and it is customary for musicians to call the symphony of tones a harmony, but that which is out of tune and discordant, inharmonious. Therefore to say "altered" is the same as "inharmonious." 3.2.145 If, then, according to the argument of the heresy, the nature of the only-begotten God is altered from the substance of the Father, it is in no way fitting; but that which is inharmonious could not be 3.2.146 in that to which it cannot be conjoined. For just as when there is one form both on the wax and on the engraving in the signet ring, whenever the wax impressed by it is placed again in the signet ring, it fits the character around it to that which contains it, finding its own impressions in the engraving, both penetrating into the hollows and receiving the projections of the engraving <τοῖς> with its own impressions; but if some strange and alien impression were placed in the engraving of the signet ring, it roughens and confuses its own form, carving the shape around with unfitting engravings. 3.2.147 But indeed, he who subsists in the form of God is not formed by any other character than the Father, being the character of the Father’s hypostasis; and the form of God is in every way the same as the substance. For just as, having come to be in the form of a slave, he was formed in the substance of a slave, not taking upon himself a mere form separated from the substance, but the substance is signified along with the form, so in every way also he who said that he is in the form of God indicated the substance through the form. 3.2.148 If then he is in the form of God, and being in the Father is sealed with the paternal glory, as the voice of the gospel says, which states, "On him God the Father has set his seal," for which reason also "he who has seen the Son sees the Father," the image of goodness and the radiance of glory and all such things testify that the substance of the Son is not inharmoniously related to the Father, then clearly the groundlessness of the blasphemy of the opponents is refuted by what has been said. 3.2.149 For if things that are altered do not fit together, but he who was sealed by the Father and shows the Father in himself and is in the Father and has him in himself shows through all things that which is connate and harmonious, then through these things the absurdity of the opponents is powerfully refuted. For as it has been shown, that which is altered

300

τοῦ πατρὸς μὲν ὄντος κατὰ φύσιν, 3.2.142 τοῦ δὲ υἱοῦ παρηλλαγμένου τῆς φύσεως; ἢ τὴν τῆς ἀρετῆς παρατροπὴν τῷ ῥήματι τούτῳ διερμηνεύει, χωρίζων τῷ τῆς παραλλαγῆς ὀνόματι τὸ κακὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος, ὡς ταύτην μὲν ἐν τῷ καλῷ τὴν οὐσίαν βλέπειν, ἐν δὲ τῷ ἐναντίῳ τὴν ἄλλην; ἢ κατὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς τῶν στοιχείων ἐναντιώσεως καὶ τὴν θείαν οὐσίαν παρηλλάχθαι τὴν ἑτέραν ἐκ τῆς ἑτέρας διϊσχυρίζεται; ἢ ὡς ἔχει πρὸς εἰρήνην ὁ πόλεμος καὶ πρὸς θάνατον ἡ ζωὴ καὶ τὴν πρὸς τὰ τοι αῦτα πάντα τῷ τοιούτῳ τρόπῳ μάχην ἐνορᾷ ταῖς οὐσίαις, ὡς μὴ αὐτὰς μετ' ἀλλήλων συμβῆναι, τῷ τὴν μίξιν τῶν ἐναντίων δαπανητικὴν κατὰ τῶν μιγνυμένων ἔχειν τὴν δύ ναμιν, καθώς φησι περὶ τοῦ τοιούτου δόγματος ἡ παροι μιώδης σοφία ὅτι Ὕδωρ καὶ πῦρ οὐ μὴ εἴπωσιν Ἀρκεῖ, τὴν ἰσοπαλῆ τε καὶ ἰσοστάσιον τῶν ἐναντίων φύσιν καὶ τὴν κατ' ἀλλήλων φθορὰν διὰ τοῦ αἰνίγματος ἑρμηνεύουσα; ἢ κατ' οὐδὲν τούτων εἶναι λέγει τὴν ἐν ταῖς οὐσίαις ἐκείναις παρ 3.2.143 αλλαγὴν καθορᾶν; οὐκοῦν εἰπάτω τὸ παρὰ ταῦτα νοού μενον. ἀλλ' οὐκ ἂν εἰπεῖν ἔχοι, κἂν τὰ συνήθη λέγῃ, ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς πρὸς τὸν γεγεννηκότα παρήλλακται· τούτῳ γὰρ καὶ μᾶλλον ἡ ἀτοπία τῶν παρ' αὐτοῦ λεγομένων ἐλέγχεται. τί γὰρ οὕτω προσφυῶς τε καὶ ἁρμοδίως ἄλλο ἄλλῳ ἐμφύεταί τε καὶ ἐναρμόζεται ὡς ἡ σχετικὴ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα τοῦ υἱοῦ σημασία; ἀπόδειξις δὲ τούτου ὅτι κἂν μὴ τὰ δύο ῥηθῇ ταῦτα ὀνόματα, τῷ ἑνὶ καὶ τὸ παρεθὲν συσσημαίνεται· οὕτως ἔγκειται καὶ ἐνήρμοσται τῷ ἑτέρῳ τὸ ἕτερον καὶ ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ καθορᾶται ἀμφότερα, ὡς μὴ ἂν ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ νοη 3.2.144 θῆναι τούτων τι χωρὶς τοῦ ἄλλου. τὸ δὲ παρηλλαγμένον ἐξ ἐναντίου τῷ ἁρμόζοντι πάντως καὶ νοεῖται καὶ λέγεται, οἷον ἡ σπάρτος πρὸς τὴν εὐθεῖαν ἁρμοδίως ἔχει, τὸ δὲ σκολιὸν τῷ εὐθεῖ παρατιθέμενον οὐχ ἁρμόζεται, καὶ τοῖς μουσικοῖς σύνηθες τὴν συμφωνίαν τῶν τόνων ἁρμονίαν προσαγορεύειν, ἀνάρμοστον δὲ τὸ ἔκτροπόν τε καὶ ἀπρόσ χορδον. οὐκοῦν ταὐτόν ἐστι παρηλλαγμένον τε εἰπεῖν καὶ ἀνάρμοστον. 3.2.145 Εἰ οὖν παρήλλακται κατὰ τὸν τῆς αἱρέσεως λόγον πρὸς τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς οὐσίαν ἡ τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεοῦ φύσις, οὐδὲ ἁρμόζεται πάντως· τὸ δὲ ἀνάρμοστον οὐκ ἂν γένοιτο 3.2.146 ἐν ἐκείνῳ ᾧ ἐναρμοσθῆναι οὐ δύναται. ὥσπερ γὰρ μιᾶς οὔσης μορφῆς ἐπί τε τοῦ κηροῦ καὶ τῆς ἐν τῇ σφενδόνῃ γλυφίδος, ὅταν ἐντεθῇ πάλιν τῇ σφενδόνῃ ὁ ἐκτυπωθεὶς παρὰ ταύτης κηρός, ἐναρμόζει τὸν περὶ ἑαυτὸν χαρακτῆρα τῷ περιέχοντι, τοὺς ἰδίους καταλαμβάνων τύπους ἐν τῷ χαράγματι, πρός τε τὰ κοῖλα διαδυόμενος καὶ τὰς ἐξοχὰς τῆς γλυφῆς <τοῖς> ἰδίοις ἀναδεχόμενος τύποις, εἰ δὲ ξένος τις καὶ ἀλλότριος τύπος ἐντεθείη τῇ γλυφῇ τῆς σφενδόνης, τραχύνει καὶ συγχεῖ τὴν ἰδίαν μορφὴν τοῖς ἀνοικείοις 3.2.147 χαράγμασι περιγλύφων τὸ εἶδος. ἀλλὰ μὴν ὁ ἐν τῇ μορφῇ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐκ ἄλλῳ τινὶ χαρακτῆρι παρὰ τὸν πατέρα μεμόρφωται, χαρακτὴρ ὢν τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς ὑπο στάσεως· ἡ δὲ μορφὴ τοῦ θεοῦ ταὐτὸν τῇ οὐσίᾳ πάντως ἐστίν. ὡς γὰρ ἐν τῇ μορφῇ τοῦ δούλου γενόμενος τῇ οὐσίᾳ τοῦ δούλου ἐνεμορφώθη, οὐ ψιλὴν ἀναλαβὼν ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ τὴν μορφὴν οὐδὲ τῆς οὐσίας διεζευγμένην, ἀλλ' ἡ οὐσία τῇ μορφῇ συσσημαίνεται, οὕτως πάντως καὶ ὁ εἰπὼν αὐτὸν ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ εἶναι τὴν οὐσίαν διὰ τῆς μορφῆς 3.2.148 ἐνεδείξατο. εἰ οὖν ἐν τῇ μορφῇ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστι, καὶ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ ὢν ἐσφράγισται τῇ πατρῴᾳ δόξῃ, καθώς φησιν ἡ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου φωνὴ ἡ λέγουσα Τοῦτον ὁ πατὴρ ἐσφράγισεν ὁ θεός, διὸ καὶ ὁ ἑωρακὼς τὸν υἱὸν ὁρᾷ τὸν πατέρα, ἡ τῆς ἀγαθότητος εἰκὼν καὶ τὸ τῆς δόξης ἀπαύγασμα καὶ πάντα ὅσα τοιαῦτα τὸ μὴ ἀναρμόστως ἔχειν τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν οὐσίαν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα μαρτύρεται, ἄρα προδήλως τὸ τῆς βλα σφημίας τῶν ἀντικειμένων ἀσύστατον διὰ τῶν εἰρημένων 3.2.149 ἐλέγχεται. εἰ γὰρ τὰ παρηλλαγμένα οὐ συναρμόζεται, ὁ δὲ σφραγισθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ δεικνὺς τὸν πατέρα καὶ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ ὢν καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἔχων ἐκεῖνον διὰ πάντων δείκνυσι τὸ συμφυὲς καὶ εὐάρμοστον, ἄρα διὰ τούτων ἡ ἀτοπία τῶν ἐναντίων κατὰ κράτος ἐλέγχεται. ὡς γὰρ ἐδείχθη τὸ παρηλλαγμένον