374

your God. Now, the pious meaning of these words, according to which we have believed these things were said to Mary, I think is manifest to those who have accepted the faith in truth. Nevertheless, our own discourse on this will be added in its proper place; but for now, it is worthwhile to learn from those who put forward to us such sayings whether that which ascends and is seen and is known through touch, and in addition to these, that which is related to men through brotherhood, they consider to be proper 3.10.3 to the divine or to the human nature. For if they see what is tangible and visible and sustained by food and drink and of the same kind as men and a brother, and whatever is observed concerning the bodily nature, all these things in the divinity as well, let them say these things concerning the only-begotten God and let them testify to him whatever they wish, both the activity of walking and local movement, which is proper to things circumscribed in a body 3.10.4. But if the one through Mary speaks to brothers, but the only-begotten has no brothers (for how could the only-begotten be preserved among brothers?) and He who said, God is Spirit, the same says to the disciples, Handle me, to show that the human nature is tangible, but the divine is intangible, and He who said, I go, signifies local movement, but He who has encompassed all things, in whom, as the apostle says, all things were created and in whom all things consist, has nothing among existing things outside of Himself into which a movement of transition may occur (for it is not possible for movement to operate otherwise, unless that which is moving leaves the place where it was, and takes in exchange another place; but that which passes through all things and is in all things and holds all things together and is not circumscribed by any of the things that are, has no place to which it might move, because there is nothing 3.10.5 empty of the divine fullness), how do these people, having abandoned that these utterances arise from what is visible, apply them to the divine nature that surpasses all understanding, when the apostle in his address to the Athenians clearly forbids thinking such a thing concerning God, since the divine power is not found through touch, but through intellectual contemplation 3.10.6 and faith? Or again, he who ate in the sight of the disciples and he who promised to go before them into Galilee and be seen, whom does he reveal as the one to be seen by them? Is it God, whom no one has ever seen or can see, or the bodily form, that is, the form of a servant, in which God was? If, therefore, through what has been said, the meaning of the words clearly refers to that which is seen and tangible and moving and of the same nature as the disciples, and nothing of the sort is observed concerning the invisible and incorporeal and intangible and formless, how do they bring down the only-begotten God himself, who was in the beginning and is in the Father, to the same rank as Peter and Andrew and John and the rest of the apostles, by saying they are brothers of the only-begotten and fellow servants? 3.10.7 And all their effort looks to this goal, to show that the Son is as far removed in the greatness of his nature from the dignity and power and substance of the Father, as he is exalted above human substance. And for this thought they make this argument their advocate, which applies equally the title of Father and God to both the Lord and the Lord's disciples, as if no difference in natural dignity is understood between them, in that he is similarly considered to be Father and God of this one and of those. 3.10.8 And such is the construction of their blasphemy in sequence, 20that either the community of substance with the Father is testified also for the disciples through this relational significance, or that not even the Lord is brought into communion with the Father's nature through this utterance, and that just as the one over all being named their God indicates the servitude of the disciples, by the same reasoning it is confessed through these words that the Son also serves God20. That therefore not by the

374

θεὸν ὑμῶν. τὴν μὲν οὖν εὐσεβῆ τῶν εἰρημένων διάνοιαν, καθ' ἣν πεπιστεύκαμεν εἰρῆσθαι ταῦτα πρὸς τὴν Μαρίαν, πρόδηλον οἶμαι τοῖς παραδεξαμένοις ἐν ἀληθείᾳ τὴν πίστιν. προστεθήσεται δὲ ὅμως καὶ παρ' ἡμῶν ὁ περὶ τούτου λόγος ἐν τῷ καθήκοντι τόπῳ· τέως δὲ μαθεῖν ἄξιον παρὰ τῶν προφερόντων ἡμῖν τὰς τοιαύτας φωνὰς ὅ τι τὸ ἀναβαῖνον καὶ τὸ ὁρώμενον καὶ τὸ διὰ τῆς ἁφῆς γνωριζόμενον καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις τὸ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις διὰ τῆς ἀδελφότητος οἰκειούμενον, ἆρα τῆς θείας ἢ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως ἴδιον 3.10.3 εἶναι νομίζουσιν. εἰ μὲν γὰρ τὸ ψηλαφητὸν καὶ ὁρατὸν καὶ βρώσει καὶ πόσει διοικούμενον καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ὁμογενὲς καὶ ἀδελφὸν καὶ ὅσα περὶ τὴν σωματικὴν καθορᾶται φύσιν, πάντα ταῦτα καὶ ἐν θεότητι βλέπουσι, λεγέτωσαν περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεοῦ καὶ ταῦτα καὶ ὅσα βούλονται μαρτυρεί τωσαν αὐτῷ, καὶ τὴν πορευτικὴν ἐνέργειαν καὶ τὴν τοπικὴν μετάστασιν, ὅπερ ἴδιον τῶν ἐν σώματι περιγεγραμμένων 3.10.4 ἐστίν. εἰ δὲ ὁ μὲν διὰ τῆς Μαρίας ἀδελφοῖς διαλέγεται, ὁ δὲ μονογενὴς ἀδελφοὺς οὐκ ἔχει (πῶς γὰρ ἂν ἐν ἀδελ φοῖς τὸ μονογενὲς διασῴζοιτο;) καὶ ὁ εἰπὼν Πνεῦμα ὁ θεός, φησὶ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς ὁ αὐτὸς ὅτι Ψηλαφήσατέ με, ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι ψηλαφητὴ μὲν ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη φύσις, ἀναφὲς δὲ τὸ θεῖον, καὶ ὁ εἰπὼν Πορεύομαι, τὴν τοπικὴν διαση μαίνει μετάστασιν, ὁ δὲ τὰ πάντα ἐμπεριειληφώς, ἐν ᾧ, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος, ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα καὶ ἐν ᾧ τὰ πάντα συνέστηκεν, οὐδὲν ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἔξω ἑαυτοῦ ἔχει εἰς ὃ κατά τινα κίνησιν ἡ μεταχώρησις γίνεται (οὐδὲ γὰρ ἔστιν ἑτέρως ἐνεργῆσαι τὴν κίνησιν, μὴ τοῦ μεθ ισταμένου τὸν μὲν ἐν ᾧ ἦν ἀπολείποντος, ἕτερον δὲ ἀντι μεταλαμβάνοντος τόπον τὸ δὲ διὰ πάντων ἧκον καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν ὂν καὶ πάντα περικρατοῦν καὶ ὑπ' οὐδενὸς τῶν ὄντων περιειργόμενον οὐκ ἔχει ὅπου μεταχωρήσει τῷ μηδὲν εἶναι 3.10.5 κενὸν τοῦ θείου πληρώματος), πῶς καταλιπόντες οὗτοι τὸ ἐκ τοῦ φαινομένου τὰς φωνὰς γίνεσθαι ταύτας τῇ θείᾳ τε καὶ ὑπερεχούσῃ πάντα νοῦν ἐφαρμόζουσι φύσει, σαφῶς τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἀθηναίους δημηγορίᾳ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀπαγορεύοντος ἐπὶ θεοῦ νομίζειν, ὡς οὐχὶ διὰ ψηλαφήσεως εὑρισκομένης τῆς θείας δυνάμεως, ἀλλὰ διὰ νοητῆς θεω 3.10.6 ρίας καὶ πίστεως; ἢ πάλιν ὁ βεβρωκὼς ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς τῶν μαθητῶν καὶ ὁ ἐπαγγειλάμενος ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ προάξειν τε καὶ ὀφθήσεσθαι, τίνα τὸν ὀφθησόμενον αὐτοῖς μηνύει; ἆρα τὸν θεόν, ὃν οὔτε ἑώρακέ τις οὔτε ἰδεῖν δύναται, ἢ τὸν σωματικὸν χαρακτῆρα τουτέστι τὴν τοῦ δούλου μορφήν, ἐν ᾗ ἦν ὁ θεός; εἰ τοίνυν φανερῶς διὰ τῶν εἰρημένων πρὸς τὸ βλεπόμενον καὶ ἀντιτυποῦν καὶ κινούμενον καὶ ὁμογενὲς τῇ φύσει τῶν μαθητῶν ἡ διάνοια τῶν εἰρημένων φέρεται, τῶν δὲ τοιούτων οὐδὲν περὶ τὸν ἀόρατόν τε καὶ ἀσώματον καὶ ἀναφῆ καὶ ἀνείδεον καθορᾶται, πῶς αὐτὸν τὸν μονογενῆ θεὸν τὸν ἐν ἀρχῇ ὄντα καὶ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ ὄντα εἰς τὸ ὁμότιμον Πέτρῳ καὶ Ἀνδρέᾳ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς τῶν ἀποστόλων κατάγουσιν ἐν τῷ καὶ ἀδελ φοὺς αὐτοὺς λέγειν εἶναι τοῦ μονογενοῦς καὶ ὁμοδούλους; 3.10.7 καὶ πᾶσα πρὸς τοῦτον αὐτοῖς τὸν σκοπὸν ἡ σπουδὴ βλέπει, τὸ δεῖξαι τοσοῦτον ἀφεστῶτα κατὰ τὸ μεγαλεῖον τῆς φύ σεως τὸν υἱὸν τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς ἀξίας τε καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ οὐσίας, ὅσον καὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης οὐσίας ὑπερανέστηκε. καὶ τῆς διανοίας ταύτης τοῦτον τὸν λόγον ποιοῦνται συνή γορον τὸν ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου τήν τε τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ φωνὴν ἐπί τε τοῦ κυρίου καὶ τῶν μαθητῶν τοῦ κυρίου κοινοποιοῦντα, ὡς μηδεμιᾶς μεταξὺ νοουμένης κατὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἀξίαν διαφορᾶς ἐν τῷ παραπλησίως αὐτὸν καὶ τούτου κἀκείνων πατέρα τε καὶ θεὸν εἶναι νομίζεσθαι. 3.10.8 Καὶ τοιαύτη τίς ἐστιν ἡ κατὰ τὸ ἀκόλουθον τῆς βλασφημίας κατασκευή, 20ὡς ἢ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς διὰ τῆς σχετικῆς σημασίας τὸ κοινὸν τῆς οὐσίας πρὸς τὸν πατέρα συμμαρτυρεῖσθαι, ἢ μηδὲ τὸν κύριον διὰ τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης εἰς κοινωνίαν τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς ἄγειν φύσεως, καὶ ὡς τὴν δουλείαν τῶν μαθητῶν τὸ θεὸν αὐτῶν ὀνομασθῆναι τὸν ἐπὶ πάντων παρίστησι, κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον καὶ τὸν υἱὸν δουλεύειν τῷ θεῷ διὰ τῶν εἰρημένων ὁμολογεῖσθαι20. ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐ τῇ