Against Eunomius.

 Contents of Book I.

 Contents of Book II.

 Contents of Book III.

 Contents of Book IV.

 Contents of Book V.

 Contents of Book VI.

 Contents of Book VII.

 Contents of Book VIII.

 Contents of Book IX.

 Contents of Book X.

 Contents of Book XI.

 Contents of Book XII.

 §1. Preface.—It is useless to attempt to benefit those who will not accept help.

 §2. We have been justly provoked to make this Answer, being stung by Eunomius’ accusations of our brother.

 §3. We see nothing remarkable in logical force in the treatise of Eunomius, and so embark on our Answer with a just confidence.

 §4. Eunomius displays much folly and fine writing, but very little seriousness about vital points.

 §5. His peculiar caricature of the bishops, Eustathius of Armenia and Basil of Galatia, is not well drawn.

 §6. A notice of Aetius, Eunomius’ master in heresy, and of Eunomius himself, describing the origin and avocations of each.

 §7. Eunomius himself proves that the confession of faith which He made was not impeached.

 §8. Facts show that the terms of abuse which he has employed against Basil are more suitable for himself.

 §9. In charging Basil with not defending his faith at the time of the ‘Trials,’ he lays himself open to the same charge.

 §10. All his insulting epithets are shewn by facts to be false.

 §11. The sophistry which he employs to prove our acknowledgment that he had been tried, and that the confession of his faith had not been unimpeached,

 §12. His charge of cowardice is baseless: for Basil displayed the highest courage before the Emperor and his Lord-Lieutenants.

 §13. Résumé of his dogmatic teaching. Objections to it in detail.

 §14. He did wrong, when mentioning the Doctrines of Salvation, in adopting terms of his own choosing instead of the traditional terms Father, Son, and

 §15. He does wrong in making the being of the Father alone proper and supreme, implying by his omission of the Son and the Spirit that theirs is impro

 §16. Examination of the meaning of ‘subjection:’ in that he says that the nature of the Holy Spirit is subject to that of the Father and the Son. It i

 §17. Discussion as to the exact nature of the ‘energies’ which, this man declares, ‘follow’ the being of the Father and of the Son.

 §18. He has no reason for distinguishing a plurality of beings in the Trinity. He offers no demonstration that it is so.

 §19. His acknowledgment that the Divine Being is ‘single’ is only verbal.

 §20. He does wrong in assuming, to account for the existence of the Only-Begotten, an ‘energy’ that produced Christ’s Person.

 §21. The blasphemy of these heretics is worse than the Jewish unbelief.

 §22. He has no right to assert a greater and less in the Divine being. A systematic statement of the teaching of the Church.

 §23. These doctrines of our Faith witnessed to and confirmed by Scripture passages .

 §24. His elaborate account of degrees and differences in ‘works’ and ‘energies’ within the Trinity is absurd .

 §25. He who asserts that the Father is ‘prior’ to the Son with any thought of an interval must perforce allow that even the Father is not without begi

 §26. It will not do to apply this conception, as drawn out above, of the Father and Son to the Creation, as they insist on doing: but we must contempl

 §27. He falsely imagines that the same energies produce the same works, and that variation in the works indicates variation in the energies.

 §28. He falsely imagines that we can have an unalterable series of harmonious natures existing side by side.

 §29. He vainly thinks that the doubt about the energies is to be solved by the beings, and reversely.

 §30. There is no Word of God that commands such investigations: the uselessness of the philosophy which makes them is thereby proved.

 §31. The observations made by watching Providence are sufficient to give us the knowledge of sameness of Being.

 §32. His dictum that ‘the manner of the likeness must follow the manner of the generation’ is unintelligible.

 §33. He declares falsely that ‘the manner of the generation is to be known from the intrinsic worth of the generator’.

 §34. The Passage where he attacks the ‘ Ομοούσιον , and the contention in answer to it.

 §35. Proof that the Anomœan teaching tends to Manichæism.

 §36. A passing repetition of the teaching of the Church.

 §37. Defence of S. Basil’s statement, attacked by Eunomius, that the terms ‘Father’ and ‘The Ungenerate’ can have the same meaning .

 §38. Several ways of controverting his quibbling syllogisms .

 §39. Answer to the question he is always asking, “Can He who is be begotten?”

 §40. His unsuccessful attempt to be consistent with his own statements after Basil has confuted him.

 §41. The thing that follows is not the same as the thing that it follows.

 §42. Explanation of ‘Ungenerate,’ and a ‘study’ of Eternity.

 Book II

 Book II.

 §2. Gregory then makes an explanation at length touching the eternal Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 §3. Gregory proceeds to discuss the relative force of the unnameable name of the Holy Trinity and the mutual relation of the Persons, and moreover the

 §4. He next skilfully confutes the partial, empty and blasphemous statement of Eunomius on the subject of the absolutely existent.

 §5. He next marvellously overthrows the unintelligible statements of Eunomius which assert that the essence of the Father is not separated or divided,

 §6. He then shows the unity of the Son with the Father and Eunomius’ lack of understanding and knowledge in the Scriptures.

 §7. Gregory further shows that the Only-Begotten being begotten not only of the Father, but also impassibly of the Virgin by the Holy Ghost, does not

 §8. He further very appositely expounds the meaning of the term “Only-Begotten,” and of the term “First born,” four times used by the Apostle.

 §9. Gregory again discusses the generation of the Only-Begotten, and other different modes of generation, material and immaterial, and nobly demonstra

 §10. He explains the phrase “The Lord created Me,” and the argument about the origination of the Son, the deceptive character of Eunomius’ reasoning,

 §11. After expounding the high estate of the Almighty, the Eternity of the Son, and the phrase “being made obedient,” he shows the folly of Eunomius i

 §12. He thus proceeds to a magnificent discourse of the interpretation of “Mediator,” “Like,” “Ungenerate,” and “generate,” and of “The likeness and s

 §13. He expounds the passage of the Gospel, “The Father judgeth no man,” and further speaks of the assumption of man with body and soul wrought by the

 §14. He proceeds to discuss the views held by Eunomius, and by the Church, touching the Holy Spirit and to show that the Father, the Son, and the Hol

 §15. Lastly he displays at length the folly of Eunomius, who at times speaks of the Holy Spirit as created, and as the fairest work of the Son, and at

 Book III

 Book III.

 §2. He then once more excellently, appropriately, and clearly examines and expounds the passage, “The Lord Created Me.”

 §3. He then shows, from the instance of Adam and Abel, and other examples, the absence of alienation of essence in the case of the “generate” and “ung

 §4. He thus shows the oneness of the Eternal Son with the Father the identity of essence and the community of nature (wherein is a natural inquiry int

 §5. He discusses the incomprehensibility of the Divine essence, and the saying to the woman of Samaria, “Ye worship ye know not what.”

 §6. Thereafter he expounds the appellation of “Son,” and of “product of generation,” and very many varieties of “sons,” of God, of men, of rams, of pe

 §7. Then he ends the book with an exposition of the Divine and Human names of the Only-Begotten, and a discussion of the terms “generate” and “ungener

 Book IV

 Book IV.

 §2. He convicts Eunomius of having used of the Only-begotten terms applicable to the existence of the earth, and thus shows that his intention is to p

 §3. He then again admirably discusses the term πρωτότοκος as it is four times employed by the Apostle.

 §4. He proceeds again to discuss the impassibility of the Lord’s generation and the folly of Eunomius, who says that the generated essence involves t

 §5. He again shows Eunomius, constrained by truth, in the character of an advocate of the orthodox doctrine, confessing as most proper and primary, no

 §6. He then exposes argument about the “Generate,” and the “product of making,” and “product of creation,” and shows the impious nature of the languag

 §7. He then clearly and skilfully criticises the doctrine of the impossibility of comparison with the things made after the Son, and exposes the idola

 §8. He proceeds to show that there is no “variance” in the essence of the Father and the Son: wherein he expounds many forms of variation and harmony,

 §9. Then, distinguishing between essence and generation, he declares the empty and frivolous language of Eunomius to be like a rattle. He proceeds to

 Book V

 Book V.

 §2. He then explains the phrase of S. Peter, “Him God made Lord and Christ.” And herein he sets forth the opposing statement of Eunomius, which he mad

 §3. A remarkable and original reply to these utterances, and a demonstration of the power of the Crucified, and of the fact that this subjection was o

 §4. He shows the falsehood of Eunomius’ calumnious charge that the great Basil had said that “man was emptied to become man,” and demonstrates that th

 §5. Thereafter he shows that there are not two Christs or two Lords, but one Christ and one Lord, and that the Divine nature, after mingling with the

 Book VI

 Book VI.

 §2. Then he again mentions S. Peter’s word, “made,” and the passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews, which says that Jesus was made by God “an Apostle a

 §3. He then gives a notable explanation of the saying of the Lord to Philip, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father ” and herein he excellently di

 §4. Then returning to the words of Peter, “God made Him Lord and Christ,” he skilfully explains it by many arguments, and herein shows Eunomius as an

 Book VII

 Book VII.

 §2. He then declares that the close relation between names and things is immutable, and thereafter proceeds accordingly, in the most excellent manner,

 §3. Thereafter he discusses the divergence of names and of things, speaking, of that which is ungenerate as without a cause, and of that which is non-

 §4. He says that all things that are in creation have been named by man, if, as is the case, they are called differently by every nation, as also the

 §5. After much discourse concerning the actually existent, and ungenerate and good, and upon the consubstantiality of the heavenly powers, showing the

 Book VIII

 Book VIII.

 §2. He then discusses the “willing” of the Father concerning the generation of the Son, and shows that the object of that good will is from eternity,

 §3. Then, thus passing over what relates to the essence of the Son as having been already discussed, he treats of the sense involved in “generation,”

 §4. He further shows the operations of God to be expressed by human illustrations for what hands and feet and the other parts of the body with which

 §5. Then, after showing that the Person of the Only-begotten and Maker of things has no beginning, as have the things that were made by Him, as Eunomi

 Book IX

 Book IX.

 §2. He then ingeniously shows that the generation of the Son is not according to the phrase of Eunomius, “The Father begat Him at that time when He ch

 §3. He further shows that the pretemporal generation of the Son is not the subject of influences drawn from ordinary and carnal generation, but is wit

 §4. Then, having shown that Eunomius’ calumny against the great Basil, that he called the Only-begotten “Ungenerate,” is false, and having again with

 Book X

 Book X.

 §2. He then wonderfully displays the Eternal Life, which is Christ, to those who confess Him not, and applies to them the mournful lamentation of Jere

 §3. He then shows the eternity of the Son’s generation, and the inseparable identity of His essence with Him that begat Him, and likens the folly of E

 §4. After this he shows that the Son, who truly is, and is in the bosom of the Father, is simple and uncompounded, and that, He Who redeemed us from b

 Book XI

 Book XI.

 §2. He also ingeniously shows from the passage of the Gospel which speaks of “Good Master,” from the parable of the Vineyard, from Isaiah and from Pau

 §3. He then exposes the ignorance of Eunomius, and the incoherence and absurdity of his arguments, in speaking of the Son as “the Angel of the Existen

 §4. After this, fearing to extend his reply to great length, he passes by most of his adversary’s statements as already refuted. But the remainder, fo

 §5. Eunomius again speaks of the Son as Lord and God, and Maker of all creation intelligible and sensible, having received from the Father the power a

 Book XII

 Book XII.

 §2. Then referring to the blasphemy of Eunomius, which had been refuted by the great Basil, where he banished the Only-begotten God to the realm of da

 §3. He further proceeds notably to interpret the language of the Gospel, “In the beginning was the Word,” and “Life” and “Light,” and “The Word was ma

 §4. He then again charges Eunomius with having learnt his term ἀγεννησία from the hieroglyphic writings, and from the Egyptian mythology and idolatry,

 §5. Then, again discussing the true Light and unapproachable Light of the Father and of the Son, special attributes, community and essence, and showin

§12. His charge of cowardice is baseless: for Basil displayed the highest courage before the Emperor and his Lord-Lieutenants.

He treats our words so; and in the rest of his presumptuous statements can there be shown to be a particle of truth? In these he calls him ‘cowardly,’ ‘spiritless,’ ‘a shirker of severer labours,’ exhausting the list of such terms, and giving with laboured circumstantiality every symptom of this cowardice: ‘the retired cabin, the door firmly closed, the anxious fear of intruders, the voice, the look, the tell-tale change of countenance,’ everything of that sort, whereby the passion of fear is shown. If he were detected in no other lie but this, it alone would be sufficient to reveal his bent. For who does not know how, during the time when the Emperor Valens was roused against the churches of the Lord, that mighty champion of ours rose by his lofty spirit superior to those overwhelming circumstances and the terrors of the foe, and showed a mind which soared above every means devised to daunt him? Who of the dwellers in the East, and of the furthest regions of our civilized world did not hear of his combat with the throne itself for the truth? Who, looking to his antagonist, was not in dismay? For his was no common antagonist, possessed only of the power of winning in sophistic juggles, where victory is no glory and defeat is harmless; but he had the power of bending the whole Roman government to his will; and, added to this pride of empire, he had prejudices against our faith, cunningly instilled into his mind by Eudoxius42    Afterwards of Antioch, and then 8th Bishop of Constantinople (360–370), one of the most influential of all the Arians. He it was who procured for Eunomius the bishopric of Cyzicus (359). (The latter must indeed have concealed his views on that occasion, for Constantius hated the Anomœans). of Germanicia43    A town of Commagene., who had won him to his side; and he found in all those who were then at the head of affairs allies in carrying out his designs, some being already inclined to them from mental sympathies, while others, and they were the majority, were ready from fear to indulge the imperial pleasure, and seeing the severity employed against those who held to the Faith were ostentatious in their zeal for him. It was a time of exile, confiscation, banishment, threats of fines, danger of life, arrests, imprisonment, scourging; nothing was too dreadful to put in force against those who would not yield to this sudden caprice of the Emperor; it was worse for the faithful to be caught in God’s house than if they had been detected in the most heinous of crimes.

But a detailed history of that time would be too long; and would require a separate treatment; besides, as the sufferings at that sad season are known to all, nothing would be gained for our present purpose by carefully setting them forth in writing. A second drawback to such an attempt would be found to be that amidst the details of that melancholy history we should be forced to make mention of ourselves; and if we did anything in those struggles for our religion that redounds to our honour in the telling, Wisdom commands us to leave it to others to tell. “Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth44    Proverbs xxvii. 2.;” and it is this very thing that our omniscient friend has not been conscious of in devoting the larger half of his book to self-glorification.

Omitting, then, all that kind of detail, I will be careful only in setting forth the achievement of our Master. The adversary whom he had to combat was no less a person than the Emperor himself; that adversary’s second was the man who stood next him in the government; his assistants to work out his will were the court. Let us take into consideration also the point of time, in order to test and to illustrate the fortitude of our own noble champion. When was it? The Emperor was proceeding from Constantinople to the East elated by his recent successes against the barbarians, and not in a spirit to brook any obstruction to his will; and his lord-lieutenant directed his route, postponing all administration of the necessary affairs of state as long as a home remained to one adherent of the Faith, and until every one, no matter where, was ejected, and others, chosen by himself to outrage our godly hierarchy, were introduced instead. The Powers then of the Propontis were moving in such a fury, like some dark cloud, upon the churches; Bithynia was completely devastated; Galatia was very quickly carried away by their stream; all in the intervening districts had succeeded with them; and now our fold lay the next to be attacked. What did our mighty Basil show like then, ‘that spiritless coward,’ as Eunomius calls him, ‘shrinking from danger, and trusting to a retired cabin to save him?’ Did he quail at this evil onset? Did he allow the sufferings of previous victims to suggest to him that he should secure his own safety? Did he listen to any who advised a slight yielding to this rush of evils45    ‘The metropolitan remained unshaken. The rough threats of Modestus succeeded no better than the fatherly counsel of Enippius.’ Gwatkins Arians., so as not to throw himself openly in the path of men who were now veterans in slaughter? Rather we find that all excess of language, all height of thought and word, falls short of the truth about him. None could describe his contempt of danger, so as to bring before the reader’s eyes this new combat, which one might justly say was waged not between man and man, but between a Christian’s firmness and courage on the one side, and a bloodstained power on the other.

The lord-lieutenant kept appealing to the commands of the Emperor, and rendering a power, which from its enormous strength was terrible enough, more terrible still by the unsparing cruelty of its vengeance. After the tragedies which he had enacted in Bithynia, and after Galatia with characteristic fickleness had yielded without a struggle, he thought that our country would fall a ready prey to his designs. Cruel deeds were preluded by words proposing, with mingled threats and promises, royal favours and ecclesiastical power to obedience, but to resistance all that a cruel spirit which has got the power to work its will can devise. Such was the enemy.

So far was our champion from being daunted by what he saw and heard, that he acted rather like a physician or prudent councillor called in to correct something that was wrong, bidding them repent of their rashness and cease to commit murders amongst the servants of the Lord; ‘their plans,’ he said, ‘could not succeed with men who cared only for the empire of Christ, and for the Powers that never die; with all their wish to maltreat him, they could discover nothing, whether word or act, that could pain the Christian; confiscation could not touch him whose only possession was his Faith; exile had no terrors for one who walked in every land with the same feelings, and looked on every city as strange because of the shortness of his sojourn in it, yet as home, because all human creatures are in equal bondage with himself; the endurance of blows, or tortures, or death, if it might be for the Truth, was an object of fear not even to women, but to every Christian it was the supremest bliss to suffer the worst for this their hope, and they were only grieved that nature allowed them but one death, and that they could devise no means of dying many times in this battle for the Truth46    Other words of Basil, before Modestus at Cæsarea, are also recorded; “I cannot worship any created thing, being as I am God’s creation, and having been bidden to be a God.”.’

When he thus confronted their threats, and looked beyond that imposing power, as if it were all nothing, then their exasperation, just like those rapid changes on the stage when one mask after another is put on, turned with all its threats into flattery; and the very man whose spirit up to then had been so determined and formidable adopted the most gentle and submissive of language; ‘Do not, I beg you, think it a small thing for our mighty emperor to have communion with your people, but be willing to be called his master too: nor thwart his wish; he wishes for this peace, if only one little word in the written Creed is erased, that of Homoousios.’ Our master answers that it is of the greatest importance that the emperor should be a member of the Church; that is, that he should save his soul, not as an emperor, but as a mere man; but a diminution of or addition to the Faith was so far from his (Basil’s) thoughts, that he would not change even the order of the written words. That was what this ‘spiritless coward, who trembles at the creaking of a door,’ said to this great ruler, and he confirmed his words by what he did; for he stemmed in his own person this imperial torrent of ruin that was rushing on the churches, and turned it aside; he in himself was a match for this attack, like a grand immoveable rock in the sea, breaking the huge and surging billow of that terrible onset.

Nor did his wrestling stop there; the emperor himself succeeds to the attack, exasperated because he did not get effected in the first attempt all that he wished. Just, accordingly, as the Assyrian effected the destruction of the temple of the Israelites at Jerusalem by means of the cook Nabuzardan, so did this monarch of ours entrust his business to one Demosthenes, comptroller of his kitchen, and chief of his cooks47    This cook is compared to Nabuzardan by Gregory Naz. also (Orat. xliii. 47). Cf. also Theodoret, iv. 19, where most of these events are recorded. The former says that ‘Nabuzardan threatened Basil when summoned before him with the μαχαίρα of his trade, but was sent back to his kitchen fire.’, as to one more pushing than the rest, thinking thereby to succeed entirely in his design. With this man stirring the pot, and with one of the blasphemers from Illyricum, letters in hand, assembling the authorities with this end in view, and with Modestus48    Modestus, the Lord Lieutenant or Count of the East, had sacrificed to the images under Julian, and had been re-baptized as an Arian. kindling passion to a greater heat than in the previous excitement, every one joined the movement of the Emperor’s anger, making his fury their own, and yielding to the temper of authority; and on the other hand all felt their hopes sink at the prospect of what might happen. That same lord-lieutenant re-enters on the scene; intimidations worse than the former are begun; their threats are thrown out; their anger rises to a still higher pitch; there is the tragic pomp of trial over again, the criers, the apparitors, the lictors, the curtained bar, things which naturally daunt even a mind which is thoroughly prepared; and again we see God’s champion amidst this combat surpassing even his former glory. If you want proofs, look at the facts. What spot, where there are churches, did not that disaster reach? What nation remained unreached by these heretical commands? Who of the illustrious in any Church was not driven from the scene of his labours? What people escaped their despiteful treatment? It reached all Syria, and Mesopotamia up to the frontier, Phœnicia, Palestine, Arabia, Egypt, the Libyan tribes to the boundaries of the civilized world; and all nearer home, Pontus, Cilicia, Lycia, Lydia, Pisidia, Pamphylia, Caria, the Hellespont, the islands up to the Propontis itself; the coasts of Thrace, as far as Thrace extends, and the bordering nations as far as the Danube. Which of these countries retained its former look, unless any were already possessed with the evil? The people of Cappadocia alone felt not these afflictions of the Church, because our mighty champion saved them in their trial.

Such was the achievement of this ‘coward’ master of ours; such was the success of one who ‘shirks all sterner toil.’ Surely it is not that of one who ‘wins renown amongst poor old women, and practises to deceive the sex which naturally falls into every snare,’ and ‘thinks it a great thing to be admired by the criminal and abandoned;’ it is that of one who has proved by deeds his soul’s fortitude, and the unflinching and noble manliness of his spirit. His success has resulted in the salvation of the whole country, the peace of our Church, the pattern given to the virtuous of every excellence, the overthrow of the foe, the upholding of the Faith, the confirmation of the weaker brethren, the encouragement of the zealous, everything that is believed to belong to the victorious side; and in the commemoration of no other events but these do hearing and seeing unite in accomplished facts; for here it is one and the same thing to relate in words his noble deeds and to show in facts the attestation of our words, and to confirm each by the other—the record from what is before our eyes, and the facts from what is being said.

Ἀλλ' ἐν μὲν τοῖς ἡμετέροις τοιοῦτος: ἐν δὲ τοῖς λοιποῖς τῶν ἐφ' ὕβρει ῥηθέντων ἆρά τι ἀληθεύων ἐπιδειχθήσεται; ἐν οἷς « δειλόν τε καὶ ἄτολμον καὶ τοὺς τραχυτέρους τῶν πόνων ἀποδιδράσκοντα » καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα κατ' αὐτοῦ διεξέρχεται, φιλοπόνως διασκευάζων τῆς δειλίας τὰ πάθη, « οἰκίσκον λανθάνοντα » καὶ « θύραν ἀσφαλῶς ἐπικειμένην » καὶ « πτόησιν πρὸς τὸν φόβον τῶν εἰσιόντων » καὶ « φωνὴν » καὶ « βλέμμα » καὶ « τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ προσώπου γνωρίσματα » καὶ πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα, δι' ὧν τῆς δειλίας τὸ πάθος διασημαίνεται. ἀλλ' εἰ καὶ μηδὲν ἕτερον κατεψευσμένος ἠλέγχετο, ἱκανὸν ἂν ἦν τοῦτο μόνον αὐτοῦ διελέγξαι τὸν τρόπον. τίς γὰρ οὐκ οἶδε τὸν μέγαν ἐκεῖνον ἀγωνιστὴν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς τοῦ βασιλέως Οὐάλεντος κατὰ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ κυρίου φιλονεικίας ὅπως ὑπερανέστη τῇ μεγαλοφυΐᾳ τῆς γνώμης τοῦ τοσούτου τῶν πραγμάτων ὄγκου καὶ τῶν φοβούντων ὑψηλότερος ἦν, πάσης τῆς ἐπιμηχανηθείσης αὐτῷ καταπλήξεως ὑπεραρθεὶς τῷ φρονήματι; τίς τῶν κατὰ τὴν ἑῴαν ἀνθρώπων, τίς τῶν κατὰ τὰ τελευταῖα τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς οἰκουμένης οἰκούντων τὴν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας αὐτοῦ μάχην πρὸς τοὺς κρατοῦντας ἠγνόησε; τίς οὐ κατεπλάγη πρὸς τὸν ἀντίπαλον ἀπιδών; οὐδὲ γὰρ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων εἷς ἦν οὐδὲ ἐν σοφισματίοις κιβδήλοις τὴν τοῦ νικᾶν ἐκέκτητο δύναμιν, οὗ καὶ τὸ ὑπερέχειν ἄδοξον καὶ τὸ ἡττηθῆναι ἀζήμιον, ἀλλὰ πᾶσαν μὲν ὑφ' ἑαυτὸν εἶχεν εὐθηνουμένην τότε τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχήν: καὶ τῇ τοσαύτῃ βασιλείᾳ κομῶν προείληπτο τῇ κατὰ τοῦ δόγματος ἡμῶν διαβολῇ, Εὐδοξίου τοῦ Γερμανικείας δι' ἀπάτης αὐτὸν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν μεταστήσαντος: πάντας δὲ τοὺς ἐν τέλει καὶ τοὺς περὶ αὐτὸν θεραπευτὰς καὶ τοὺς ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων παραδυναστεύοντας συναγωνιστὰς εἶχε τῆς ἰδίας ὁρμῆς, τοὺς μὲν ἑκουσίως διὰ τὴν ὁμοιοτροπίαν τῆς γνώμης προσκεκλικότας, τοὺς δὲ πολλοὺς τῷ φόβῳ τῆς δυναστείας τὰ πρὸς ἡδονὴν ἑτοίμως χαριζομένους, καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀποτομίας τῆς κατὰ τῶν ἀντεχομένων τῆς πίστεως τῆς ὑγιαινούσης τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐνδεικνυμένους σπουδήν. ὅτε φυγαὶ καὶ δημεύσεις καὶ ἐξορίαι ἀπειλαί τε καὶ προστιμήματα κίνδυνοι φυλακαὶ δεσμωτήρια μάστιγες καὶ τί γὰρ οὐχὶ τῶν δεινοτάτων ἐνηργεῖτο κατὰ τῶν μὴ συντεθειμένων τῇ τοῦ βασιλέως ὁρμῇ: ὅτε χαλεπώτερον ἦν ἐν οἴκῳ θεοῦ καταληφθῆναι τοὺς εὐσεβοῦντας ἢ ἐπὶ τοῖς πονηροτάτοις τῶν ἐγκλημάτων ἁλῶναι. ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν τούτοις πᾶσι καθ' ἕκαστον ἐπεξιέναι μεγάλης τινὸς ἂν δέοιτο συγγραφῆς καὶ χρόνου πολλοῦ καὶ πραγματείας ἰδίας, ἄλλως τε καὶ φανερῶν ἅπασιν ὄντων τῶν τηνικαῦτα κακῶν οὐδὲν ἂν γένοιτο πλέον πρὸς τὸν παρόντα λόγον ἐκ τοῦ μετὰ ἀκριβείας τὰς συμφορὰς ἐκείνας ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων ἐκτίθεσθαι. ὕπεστι δὲ καὶ φορτικὸν ἕτερον ἐν τῷ περὶ αὐτῶν διηγήματι, τὸ καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων τινὰ μνήμην ἐξ ἀνάγκης ποιήσασθαι καθεξῆς διεξιόντα τὴν τῶν σκυθρωπῶν ἱστορίαν. εἰ γάρ τι καὶ πέπρακται τοιοῦτον ἡμῖν διὰ τοὺς ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐσεβείας ἀγῶνας οἷον φιλοτιμίαν φέρειν τῷ διηγήματι, τοῖς πλησίον καταλιπεῖν ἡ σοφία κελεύει: Ἐγκωμιαζέτω σε γάρ, φησίν, ὁ πέλας καὶ μὴ τὰ σὰ χείλη. ὅπερ ὁ τὰ πάντα περιεσκεμμένος μὴ συνειδὼς τὸ πλεῖστον τῆς συγγραφῆς ἐν ταῖς περὶ ἑαυτοῦ μεγαληγορίαις ἠσχόλησε.
Πάντα τοίνυν ἐγὼ τὰ τοιαῦτα παραδραμὼν τὰ τῆς δειλίας τοῦ διδασκάλου ἡμῶν ἔργα μετὰ ἀκριβείας ἐκθήσομαι. ἦν τοίνυν ὁ ἀντιτεταγμένος αὐτῷ πρὸς ἀντίπαλον τάξιν βασιλεὺς αὐτός, ὁ δὲ ὑπηρετῶν αὐτοῦ ταῖς ὁρμαῖς ὁ πάσης ἄρχων μετ' ἐκεῖνον τῆς βασιλείας, οἱ συνεργοῦντες δὲ πρὸς τὴν τοιαύτην ἐπιθυμίαν οἱ περὶ αὐτὸν πάντες. προσκείσθω τούτοις καὶ ὁ καιρὸς εἰς ἀκριβεστέραν βάσανον καὶ ἐπίδειξιν τῆς γενναίας τοῦ ἀθλητοῦ πεποιθήσεως. τίς οὖν ἦν ὁ καιρός; ἐξήλαυνε μὲν τῆς Κωνσταντινουπόλεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἑῴαν ὁ βασιλεύς, ἄρτι τοῖς κατὰ τῶν βαρβάρων αὐτῷ κατορθωθεῖσιν ἐπῃρμένος τὸ φρόνημα καὶ οὐδὲν ἀντιβαίνειν αὐτοῦ ταῖς ὁρμαῖς ἀξιῶν: προηγεῖτο δὲ αὐτοῦ τῆς πορείας ὁ ὕπαρχος ἀντ' ἄλλου τινὸς τῶν εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀναγκαίων τοῦτο προδιοικούμενος, τὸ μή τινα τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς πίστεως ὄντων μένειν ἐφέστιον, ἀλλὰ τούτους μὲν ἀπελαύνεσθαι πάντας πανταχόθεν, ἑτέρους δὲ ἀντ' ἐκείνων πάλιν αὐτοχειροτονήτους τινὰς ἐπὶ ὕβρει τῆς θείας οἰκονομίας εἰσάγεσθαι. μετὰ τοιαύτης οὖν γνώμης καθάπερ νέφους τινὸς χαλεποῦ τῆς δυναστείας ἐκ τῆς Προποντίδος κατὰ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν κινηθείσης καὶ τῆς μὲν Βιθυνίας ἀθρόως ἐρημωθείσης, Γαλατίας δὲ σὺν πολλῇ τῇ ῥᾳστώνῃ παρασυρείσης καὶ πάντων αὐτοῖς κατὰ νοῦν διὰ μέσου κεχωρηκότων, προὔκειτο ἤδη τῇ ἀκολουθίᾳ τοῦ κακοῦ τὸ ἡμέτερον. τί οὖν ὁ μέγας τότε Βασίλειος « ὁ δειλός », ὥς φησιν οὗτος, « καὶ ἄτολμος καὶ ὑποπτήσσων τὰ φοβερὰ καὶ οἰκίσκῳ λανθάνοντι τὴν σωτηρίαν πιστεύων »; ἆρα κατεπλάγη τὴν τοῦ κακοῦ προσβολήν; ἆρα τὸ πάθος τῶν προεαλωκότων σύμβολον πρὸς τὴν ἀσφάλειαν τῶν καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἐποιήσατο; ἆρα κατεδέξατο τοὺς εἶξαι πρὸς ὀλίγον τῇ ῥύμῃ τοῦ κακοῦ συμβουλεύοντας μηδὲ εἰς προὖπτον κίνδυνον ἑαυτὸν ἐμβαλεῖν ἐπὶ ἀνθρώπων καταγυμνασθέντων τοῖς αἵμασιν; ἢ πᾶσα λόγων ὑπερβολὴ καὶ πᾶν ὕψος νοημάτων τε καὶ ῥημάτων κάτω που τῆς ἀληθείας ἐλέγχεται; πῶς γὰρ ἄν τις διεξέλθοι τῷ λόγῳ τὴν τοσαύτην τῶν φοβερῶν καταφρόνησιν; πῶς ἄν τις ὑπ' ὄψιν ἀγάγοι τὸν καινὸν ἐκεῖνον ἀγῶνα, ὃν οὔτε παρὰ ἀνθρώπων οὔτε πρὸς ἀνθρώπους εἰκότως ἄν τις συστῆναι φήσειεν, ἀλλ' ἀρετὴν καὶ παρρησίαν Χριστιανοῦ πρὸς δυναστείαν φονῶσαν ἀνταγωνίζεσθαι;
Ἐκάλει μὲν γὰρ πρὸς ἑαυτὸν προλαβὼν τὴν τοῦ βασιλέως ἐπιστασίαν ὁ ὕπαρχος ὁ καὶ ἄλλως οὖσαν φοβερὰν διὰ τὸ μέγεθος τὴν ἀρχὴν φοβερωτέραν τῇ ἀφειδίᾳ τῶν τιμωριῶν καταστήσας, καὶ μετὰ τὰς τραγῳδίας ἐκείνας, ἃς κατὰ Βιθυνῶν ἐξειργάσατο, Γαλατῶν ὑπὸ τῆς συνήθους εὐκολίας ἀκονιτὶ παραστάντων, ἕτοιμον ᾤετο καὶ τὸ καθ' ἡμᾶς αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸ δοκοῦν ἀπαντήσεσθαι. τῆς δὲ τῶν ἔργων ἀποτομίας προοίμιον ὁ λόγος ἐγίνετο ἀπειλαῖς ὁμοῦ μεμιγμένος καὶ ὑποσχέσεσι, πεισθέντι μὲν τὴν ἐκ βασιλέως τιμὴν καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας προτείνων, ἐνισταμένῳ δὲ πάντα ὅσα πικρία ψυχῆς προσλαβοῦσα τὸ δύνασθαι κατ' ἐξουσίαν βουλεύεται. τὰ μὲν οὖν παρ' ἐκείνων τοιαῦτα. ὁ δὲ ἡμέτερος τοσοῦτον ἀπέσχεν εἰς κατάπληξίν τινα διὰ τῶν ὁρωμένων ἢ λεγομένων ἐλθεῖν, ὥστε καθάπερ τις ἰατρὸς ἢ σύμβουλος ἀγαθὸς εἰς διόρθωσιν πλημμελημάτων παρακληθεὶς καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν προτετολμημένων αὐτοῖς μεταγινώσκειν ἐνεκελεύετο καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν παύσασθαι κατὰ τῶν δούλων τοῦ κυρίου φονῶντας: εἶναι γὰρ αὐτοῖς τῆς ἐπινοίας πλέον οὐδὲν ἐπὶ τῶν μόνην τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ βασιλείαν καὶ τὸ ἀθάνατον κράτος θεραπευόντων. μηδὲ γὰρ δύνασθαι τοὺς κακοποιεῖν βουλομένους εὑρεῖν τι τοιοῦτον ὃ λυπήσει τὸν Χριστιανὸν ἢ ῥηθὲν ἢ γινόμενον. δήμευσις οὐχ ἅψεται, φησί, τοῦ μόνην κεκτημένου τὴν πίστιν: ὑπερορισμὸς οὐ φοβήσει τὸν πάσης τῆς γῆς μετὰ τῆς αὐτῆς γνώμης ἐπιβατεύοντα καὶ πᾶσαν μὲν ὡς ἀλλοτρίαν διὰ τὸ πρόσκαιρον τῆς ἐνοικήσεως, πᾶσαν δὲ πάλιν ὡς οἰκείαν διὰ τὸ ὁμόδουλον τῆς κτίσεως βλέποντα. τὸ δὲ πληγὰς ἢ πόνους ἢ θάνατον ὑποστῆναι, ὅταν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐξῇ, μηδὲ γυναιξὶ τοῦτο φόβον παρέχειν, ἀλλ' εἶναι πᾶσι Χριστιανοῖς τὸν ἀνωτάτω τῆς εὐκληρίας ὅρον τὸ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐλπίδος τι ταύτης τῶν ἀνηκέστων παθεῖν: λυπεῖσθαι δὲ μόνον ἔλεγεν ὅτι εἷς ἐστιν ἐν τῇ φύσει ὁ θάνατος καὶ οὐδεμίαν μηχανὴν ἐξευρίσκει πολλοῖς δυνηθῆναι θανάτοις τῆς ἀληθείας προαγωνίσασθαι.
Οὕτω δὲ αὐτοῦ πρὸς τὰς ἀπειλὰς ἐκείνας ἑαυτὸν ἀντεπαίροντος καὶ πάντα τὸν ὄγκον τῆς δυναστείας ἐκείνης ἀντ' οὐδενὸς παραβλέποντος, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ σκηνῆς ἀθρόως ἐν ταῖς τῶν προσώπων ὑπαλλαγαῖς ἀνθ' ἑτέρων ἕτερα δείκνυται, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον καὶ ἡ πικρία τῶν ἀπειλῶν ἐξαίφνης εἰς κολακείαν μετεσκευάζετο καὶ μεταβαλὼν ὁ τέως βαρὺς καὶ καταπληκτικὸς τῷ φρονήματι τοὺς ἐπιεικεῖς τε καὶ ὑφειμένους τῶν λόγων Σὺ δέ, φησί, μὴ μικρὸν ποιοῦ βασιλέα τὸν μέγαν τῷ σῷ καταμιχθῆναι λαῷ, ἀλλὰ δέξαι κἀκείνου κληθῆναι διδάσκαλος μηδὲ ἀντιβῇς τῷ βουλήματι: βούλεται δὲ μικροῦ τινος τῶν ἐν τῇ πίστει γεγραμμένων ὑφαιρεθέντος, τῆς τοῦ ὁμοουσίου λέξεως, τοῦτο γενέσθαι. ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν μετασχεῖν τῆς ἐκκλησίας τὸν βασιλέα τῶν μεγίστων εἶναι πάλιν ὁ διδάσκαλος ἀποκρίνεται. μέγα γάρ, φησί, τὸ ψυχὴν περισώσασθαι, οὐχ ὅτι βασιλέως, ἀλλ' ὅτι ὅλως ἀνθρώπου: τῆς δὲ πίστεως τοσοῦτον ἀπέχειν ὑφαίρεσιν ἢ προσθήκην ποιήσασθαι, ὡς μηδὲ τὴν τάξιν ἂν ὑπαλλάξαι τῶν γεγραμμένων. ταῦτα « ὁ δειλός τε καὶ ἄνανδρος. ὁ πρὸς τὸν ψόφον τῆς θύρας ἐπτοημένος », πρὸς τὸν τοσοῦτον τῷ ἀξιώματι καὶ εἶπε τῷ λόγῳ καὶ διὰ τῶν ἔργων τὸ ῥηθὲν ἐπιστώσατο: ὃς τὴν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τότε καταστροφὴν οἷόν τινα χειμάρρουν διὰ τῶν δυναστειῶν ῥέουσαν ἔστησεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ ἀπέστρεψε, μόνος ἀρκέσας τῇ τοῦ κακοῦ προσβολῇ, καθάπερ τις ἐν θαλάσσῃ πέτρα μεγάλη καὶ ἄσειστος ἀντὶ κύματος πολλοῦ καὶ μεγάλου τὴν τῶν δεινῶν προσβολὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ περιθρύψας.
Καὶ οὐ μέχρι τούτων ἔστη τὰ τῆς ἀγωνίας αὐτῷ, ἀλλ' ἐκδέχεται πάλιν ὁ βασιλεὺς τὴν πεῖραν αὐτός, ἀγανακτῶν ὅτι μὴ κατὰ τὴν πρώτην προσβολὴν τὰ καθ' ἡδονὴν κατειργάσατο. ὥσπερ τοίνυν διὰ τοῦ μαγείρου Ναβουζαρδὰν ἐπὶ τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ποτὲ ὁ Ἀσσύριος τὴν τοῦ ναοῦ καθαίρεσιν τῶν Ἰσραηλιτῶν κατειργάσατο, οὕτω καὶ οὗτος Δημοσθένει τινὶ τῷ ἐπὶ τῶν ὄψων τεταγμένῳ καὶ τῶν μαγείρων ἄρχοντι ὡς ἰταμωτέρῳ τῶν ἄλλων τὴν τοιαύτην ὑπηρεσίαν προστάξας κρατήσειν ᾤετο τοῦ παντὸς ἐγχειρήματος. πάντα τοίνυν ἐκείνου διακυκῶντος καί τινος τῶν ἐκ τοῦ Ἰλλυρικοῦ θεομάχων πυκτίον ἔχοντος ἐν χερσὶ καὶ τοὺς ἐν τέλει πρὸς τοῦτο πάντας ἀθροίζοντος καὶ χαλεπώτερον τῆς προλαβούσης ὁρμῆς τοῦ Μοδέστου πάλιν τὴν ὀργὴν ἀναφλέξαντος, πάντες μὲν συνεκινοῦντο πρὸς τὴν τοῦ βασιλέως ὀργὴν συναγανακτοῦντες αὐτῷ χαλεπαίνοντι καὶ τῷ τῆς ἐξουσίας θυμῷ χαριζόμενοι, πάντες δὲ τῷ φόβῳ τῶν προσδοκωμένων προκατεβέβληντο. πάλιν γὰρ ἐκεῖνος ὁ ὕπαρχος, πάλιν [φόβων] ἐπαναστάσεις τῶν προτέρων σφοδρότεραι καὶ τῶν ἀπειλῶν προσθῆκαι καὶ ὁ θυμὸς ἀκμαιότερος καὶ ἡ περὶ τὸ δικαστήριον τραγῳδία, κήρυκες εἰσαγωγεῖς ῥαβδοῦχοι κιγκλίδες παραπετάσματα, δι' ὧν εὐκόλως καὶ τὰ τῶν σφόδρα παρεσκευασμένων καταπτοεῖται φρονήματα: καὶ πάλιν ὁ ἀθλητὴς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῖς δευτέροις τῶν ἀγώνων καὶ τὴν ἐπὶ τοῖς προλαβοῦσι δόξαν ὑπερβαλλόμενος. εἰ δὲ ζητεῖς τούτων τὰς ἀποδείξεις, εἰς αὐτὰ βλέπε τὰ πράγματα. ποῖον γὰρ οὐκ ἐπενείματο τόπον τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἡ τηνικαῦτα καταστροφή; ποῖον ἔμεινεν ἔθνος τῆς τῶν αἱρετικῶν ἐπιστασίας ἀπείρατον; τίς τῶν κατὰ τὰς ἐκκλησίας εὐδοκιμούντων οὐκ ἀπεσείσθη τῶν πόνων; ποῖος διέφυγε λαὸς τὴν τοιαύτην ἐπήρειαν; οὐ Συρία πᾶσα καὶ τῶν ποταμῶν ἡ μέση μέχρι τῶν πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους ὅρων, οὐ Φοινίκη καὶ Παλαιστίνη καὶ Ἀραβία καὶ Αἴγυπτος καὶ τὰ ἔθνη τῆς Λιβύης ἕως τοῦ τέρματος τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς οἰκουμένης, οὐ τὰ ἐπὶ τάδε πάντα, Ποντικοὶ καὶ Κίλικες Λύκιοι Λυδοὶ Πισίδαι Πάμφυλοι Κᾶρες Ἑλλησπόντιοι νησιῶται μέχρι τῆς Προποντίδος αὐτῆς, οὐ τὰ ἐπὶ Θρᾴκης πάντα ἕως ἦν ἡ Θρᾴκη καὶ τὰ περὶ αὐτὴν ἔθνη ἕως πρὸς τὸν Ἴστρον αὐτόν: τί τῶν πάντων ἐπὶ σχήματος ἔμεινε, πλὴν εἰ μή τι προκατείχετο τῷ τοιούτῳ κακῷ; ἀλλὰ μόνος ἐκ πάντων ὁ Καππαδόκειος λαὸς τῆς κοινῆς τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν συμφορᾶς οὐκ ἐπῄσθετο, ὃν ὁ μέγας πρόμαχος ἡμῶν ἐπὶ τῶν πειρασμῶν διεσώσατο.
Ταῦτα τὰ « τῆς δειλίας » τοῦ διδασκάλου ἡμῶν ἀποτελέσματα: ταῦτα τοῦ « κατεπτηχότος τοὺς τραχυτέρους τῶν πόνων » τὰ κατορθώματα, οὐκ ἐν γραϊδίοις δυστήνοις εὐδοκιμοῦντος οὐδὲ ἀπατᾶν γυναικάρια πρὸς πᾶσαν ἀπάτην εὐκόλως ἔχοντα μελετῶντος οὐδὲ ὑπὸ τῶν κατεγνωσμένων καὶ κατεφθαρμένων θαυμάζεσθαι μέγα κρίνοντος, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῶν ἔργων δείξαντος τὴν ἰσχὺν τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τὸ ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀνδρεῖον καὶ γεννικὸν τοῦ φρονήματος. οὗ τὸ κατόρθωμα σωτηρία μὲν τῆς πατρίδος ἁπάσης, εἰρήνη δὲ τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς ἐκκλησίας, ὑπόδειγμα δὲ παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ τοῖς κατ' ἀρετὴν ζῶσιν, ἀνατροπὴ τῶν ἐναντίων, συνηγορία τῆς πίστεως, ἀσφάλεια τῶν ἀσθενεστέρων, βεβαίωσις τῶν προθυμοτέρων, πάντα ὅσα τῆς κρείττονος μοίρας εἶναι πεπίστευται. ἐπὶ τούτων μόνων τῶν διηγημάτων ἀκοή τε καὶ ὄψις [ἐπὶ] τῶν πραγμάτων συμβαίνουσι: ταὐτὸν γάρ ἐστι λόγῳ τε τὰ καλὰ διηγήσασθαι καὶ ἔργῳ δεῖξαι τὴν μαρτυρίαν τῶν λόγων καὶ ἀμφότερα δι' ἀλλήλων πιστώσασθαι, τήν τε μνήμην ἀπὸ τῶν φαινομένων καὶ τὰ πράγματα διὰ τῶν λεγομένων.