483

and as cause, impassibly receiving all things predicated of those of which it is the cause. The revealer of God and great Areopagite, Saint Dionysius, investigated and refuted this in what he says: "Why indeed do the theologians sometimes call the Divine Eros, sometimes Agape, and sometimes the Desired and the Beloved? " He concludes the argument, saying thus: "Because by the one it is moved, and by the other it moves;" and to speak more clearly, as being Eros and Agape, the Divine is moved, but as the Desired and the Beloved, it moves toward itself all things receptive of eros and agape; and to speak again more plainly: It is moved as creating an inner disposition of eros and agape in those receptive of them, and it moves as naturally attracting the desire of those who are moved toward it; and again: It moves and is moved, as thirsting to be thirsted for, and desiring to be desired, and loving to be loved. In this manner also the divinely-minded Gregory says: "The Monad from the beginning, having been moved to a Dyad, came to a stand at the Triad." For it is moved in the mind receptive of it, whether angelic or human, which through it and in it makes examinations concerning it, to speak more clearly, it teaches him indivisibly in the first approach the principle of the monad, so that division may not be introduced into the first cause, and it leads him on to receive also its divine and ineffable fruitfulness, saying to him mystically and secretly that one must never think this Good to be barren of Word and Wisdom, or of sanctifying power, which are consubstantial and hypostatic, so that the Divine might not be supposed to be a composite from these as from accidents, and it not be believed that it is always these things. Therefore, the Godhead is said to be moved as the cause of the examination according to the manner in which it exists. For without illumination (1261) to attain to the Godhead is among the impossible things. And again it is said to be moved on account of the partial revelation of the more perfect teaching concerning it according to the Holy Scripture, beginning from confessing the Father, and proceeding to confessing the Son with the Father, and leading those who are taught to receive along with the Father and the Son the Holy Spirit, and to worship them together, a perfect triad in a perfect monad, that is, one essence and godhead and power and energy in three hypostases.

From the same discourse, on the text: " But different, I think, are the one willing and the will, the one begetting and the begetting, the one speaking and the speech, unless we are drunk; the former are the one moved, the latter are, as it were, the movement. Therefore, the thing willed is not of the will, nor the thing begotten of the begetting (for it does not necessarily follow), nor the thing heard of the utterance, but of the one willing and of the one begetting and of the one speaking. But the things of God are even beyond all these, for whom begetting is perhaps the will to beget."

Against the Arians who employ every means to make their blasphemy against the Only-Begotten easily accessible, and who say that the Only-Begotten Son is the Son of the will, but not of the Father, the wise teacher says these things, showing that from this every device of theirs against the truth is easily dismantled. For if the powers of the soul, which one might perhaps say are complementary to its essence, we say that these can be active in the essence with which they coexist, yet they cannot in any way be moved according to an effective activity without the consent of the one who wills. And if it were granted hypothetically that they wish to act on their own from their natural motion, without the inclination of the one possessing them, so to speak, they have no power at all to act effectively from their own impulse. For the work does not necessarily follow the power, if it does not have the inclination of that of which it is the power, contributing to it that which is according to

483

καί ὡς αἴτιον πάντα τά κατηγορούμενα κατά τῶν ὧν ἐστιν αἴτιον ἀπαθῶς ἀναδεχόμενον. Ἀνελεῖται τοῦτο ζητήσας ὁ θεοφάντωρ καί μέγας Ἀρεοπαγίτης ἅγιος ∆ιονύσιος ἐν οἷς φησι· "Τί δήποτε τό Θεῖον οἱ θεολόγοι ποτέ μέν ἔρωτα, ποτέ δέ ἀγάπην, ποτέ δέ ἐραστόν καί ἀγαπητόν ἀποκαλοῦσι; " Συμπεραίνει τόν λόγον οὐτωσί φάσκων· " Ὅτιπερ τῷ μέν κινεῖται, τῷ δέ κινεῖ·" καί σαφέστερον εἰπεῖν, Ὥς μέν ἔρως ὑπάρχον τό Θεῖον καί ἀγάπη κινεῖται, ὡς δέ ἐραστόν καί ἀγαπητόν κινεῖ πρός ἑαυτό πάντα τά ἔρωτος καί ἀγάπης δεκτικά· καί τρανότερον αὖθις φάναι· Κινεῖται μέν ὡς σχέσιν ἐμποιοῦν ἐνδιάθετον ἔρωτος καί ἀγάπης τοῖς τούτων δεκτικοῖς, κινεῖ δέ ὡς ἑλκτικόν φύσει τῆς τῶν ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ κινουμένων ἐφέσεως· καί πάλιν· Κινεῖ καί κινεῖται, ὡς διψῶν τό διψᾶσθαι, καί ἐρῶν τό ἐρᾶσθαι, καί ἀγαπῶν τό ἀγαπᾶσθαι. Κατά τοῦτον τρόπον καί ὁ θεόφρων Γρηγόριός φησι· "Μονάς ἀπ' ἀρχῆς εἰς δυάδα κινηθεῖσα μέχρι Τριάδος ἔστη." Κινεῖται γάρ ἐν τῷ ταύτης δεκτικῷ νῷ, εἴτε ἀγγελικῷ, εἴτε ἀνθρωπίνῳ, δι᾿ αὐτῆς καί ἐν αὐτῇ τάς περί αὐτῆς ἐξετάσεις ποιουμένῳ, σαφέστερον εἰπεῖν, διδάσκει αὐτόν ἀμερίστως ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ προσβολῇ τόν περί μονάδος λόγον, ἵνα μή διαίρεσις τῷ πρώτῳ αἰτίῳ ἐπεισαχθῇ, προβιβάζει δέ αὐτόν καί τήν θείαν καί ἀπόῤῥητον τούτου γονιμότητα δέξασθαι, λέγουσα μυστικῶς τε καί κρυφίως αὐτῷ μή δεῖν ἄγονον εἶναι πώποτε φρονεῖν τοῦτο τό ἀγαθόν λόγου καί σοφίας, ἤ ἁγιαστικῆς δυνάμεως, ὁμοουσίων τε καί ἐνυποστάτων, ἵνα μή σύνθετον ἐκ τούτων ὑποληφθῇ τό Θεῖον ὡς συμβεβηκότων, καί οὐχί ταῦτα ὑπάρχον ἀεί πιστευθῇ. Κινεῖσθαι οὖν ἡ Θεότης λέγεται ὡς αἰτία τῆς καθ᾿ ὅν ὑπάρχει τρόπον ἐξετάσεως. Ἄνευ γάρ ἐλλάμψεως (1261) ἐπιβάλλειν θεότητι τῶν ἀμηχάνων ἐστί. Λέγεται δέ κινεῖσθαι πάλιν καί διά τήν κατά μέρος φανέρωσιν τοῦ περί αὐτῆς τελεωτέρου λόγου κατά τήν ἁγίαν Γραφήν, ἀπό τοῦ Πατέρα ὁμολογεῖν ἀρχομένου, καί εἰς Υἱόν συνομολογεῖν Πατρί προβαίνοντος, καί Πατρί καί Υἱῷ συμπαραδέχεσθαι τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, καί συμπροσκυνεῖν τούς διδασκομένους ἐνάγοντος τριάδα τελείαν μονάδι τελείᾳ, ἤγουν μίαν οὐσίαν καί θεότητα καί δύναμιν καί ἐνέργειαν ἐν τρισίν ὑποστάσεσιν.

Ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ λόγου, εἰς τό· " Ἀλλ᾿ ἕτερον, οἶμαι, θέλων καί θέλησις, γεννῶν καί γέννησις, λέγων καί λόγος, εἰ μή μεθύομεν· τά μέν ὁ κινούμενος, τά δέ οἷον ἡ κίνησις. Οὔκουν θελήσεως τό θεληθέν, οὐδέ τό γεννηθέν γεννήσεως ( οὐδέ γάρ ἕπεται πάντως ), οὐ δέ τό ἀκουσθέν ἐκφωνήσεως, ἀλλά τοῦ θέλοντος καί τοῦ γεννῶντος καί τοῦ λέγοντος. Τά τοῦ Θεοῦ δέ καί ὑπέρ πάντα ταῦτα, ᾧ γέννησίς ἐστιν ἴσως ἡ τοῦ γεννᾷν θέλησις."

Πρός τούς Ἀρειανούς πάντα κινοῦντας τρόπον πρός τό εὐεπίβατον αὐτοῖς εἶναι τήν κατά τοῦ Μονογενοῦς βλασφημίαν, καί λέγοντος θελήσεως, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ Πατρός Υἱόν εἶναι τόν μονογενῇ Υἱόν, ταῦτα φησιν ὁ σοφός διδάσκαλος, εὐδιάλυτον οὖσαν δεικνύς πᾶσαν αὐτῶν ἐντεῦθεν τήν κατά τῆς ἀληθείας μηχανήν. Εἰ γάρ τάς τῆς ψυχῆς δυνάμεις, ἄς ἴσως φαίη τις εἶναι συμπληρωτικάς τῆς οὐσίας αὐτῆς, δύνασθαι μέν ταύτας ἐνεργεῖν λέγομεν ἐν ᾗ σύνεισιν οὐσίᾳ, μή μέντοι καί κινεῖσθαι πάντως κατ᾿ ἐνέργειαν ἀποτελεσματικήν χωρίς τῆς τοῦ θέλοντος ἐπινεύσεως δύνασθαι. Εἰ δέ καί δοθείη καθ᾿ ὑπόθεσιν το ἴδιον ἐθέλειν αὐτάς ἐνεργεῖν ἐκ τῆς φυσικῆς κινήσεως, χωρίς τῆς τοῦ ταύτας, ἵν᾿ οὕτως εἴπω, κεκτημένου ῥοπῆς μηδέν ἰσχεῖν αὐτάς καθάπαξ ἀποτελεσματικῶς ἐνεργεῖν τῆς ἰδίας ὁρμῆς. Οὐ γάρ ἀκολουθεῖ πάντως τῇ δυνάμει το ἔργον, μή ἐχούσῃ τήν τοῦ οὗ ἐστι δύναμις ῥοπήν, σηνεισφέρουσαν αὐτῇ τό κατ᾿