De Spiritu Sancto (Orat. 31)

Τί δέ, οὐχὶ καὶ παρ’ Ἕλλησι, φαῖεν ἄν, μία θεότης, ὡς οἱ τὰ τελεώτερα παρ’ ἐκείνοις φιλοσοφοῦντες, καὶ παρ’ ἡμῖν ἀνθρωπότης μία, τὸ γένος ἅπαν ; ἀλλ’ ὅμως πολλοὶ θεοί, καὶ οὐχ εἷς, ὡς δὲ καὶ ἄνθρωποι; ἀλλ’ ἐκεῖ μὲν ἡ κοινότης τὸ ἓν ἔχει μόνον ἐπινοίᾳ θεωρητόν· τὰ δὲ [*](I μεριστοις] μερισταῖς b 15. 12 θέοι πολλοὶ df || δε] δὴ df) [*](1. οὐδέ τι τῶν ὅσα] ‘nor are any of the distinguishing marks of separate individualities to be found there,’ in the Godhead.) [*](2. ἀμέριστος ἐν μεμ.] ‘ but as the Persons are, the entire and undivided Godhead is in each. ’ The passage is incorporated without comment by Jo. Damasc. de Fide Orth. viii.) [*](3. ἐν ἡλίοις τρίσιν] The illustration tration only shews the impossibility of illustration. ‘There suns joined to each other’ might appear to us one, but their relation to each other would be very different from that of the Three Divine Persons.) [*](6. τὸ φανταζόμενον] The word does not imply that our observation is untrue, but only that it is (necessarily) inadequate. Cp. e.g. ii 6 18, 19.) [*](ib. πρὸς τὰ ἐν οἷς ἢ θ.] ‘ at the Persons in which the Divine nature resides, and which issue from the First Cause, deriving from it Their existence above all time and with an equality of glory, there are Three objects for our adoration.’ avoids saying τρεῖς οἱ προσκ., not only, as so freq., for the sake of reverence, but because it sounds at first as if the three were ‘separate individualities’ like ourselves. also has its dangers, as possibly suggesting differences of nature ; but in the context this danger is removed. It is possible that Gr. here means to speak of the Father Himself as ἐκ τῆς πρώτης αἰτίας; but. if so, that πρώτη αἰτία is within Himself. He is the source of His own being.) [*](15. The Greeks, it is true, spoke of α single Divine nature, compatible with plurality ; ἃς is the case also with human nature. But in these cases, each individual has but a fragment of the whole nature, varies, not only from all other partakers of it, but from himself also, by change. This holds true even of angels.) [*](13. μόνον ἐπινοίᾳ θ.] In the case of the heathen polytheism, the common Godhead exists only as a conception or generalisation of the philosopher; it has no existence in fact. Each individual deity differs greatly from the other in history, and character, and capacities. The same holds true of the specimen man in relation to the human genus.)

Οἵ τε παρ’ Ἑλλήνων σεβόμενοι θεοί τε καὶ δαίμονες, ὡς αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν, οὐδὲν ἡμῶν δέονται κατηγόρων, ἀλλὰ τοῖς σφῶν αὐτῶν ἁλίσκονται θεολόγοις, ὡς μὲν ἐμπαθεῖς, ὡς δὲ στασιώδεις, ὅσων δὲ κακῶν γέμοντες καὶ μεταβολῶν, καὶ οὐ πρὸς ἀλλήλους μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὰς πρώτας αἰτίας ἀντιθέτως ἔχοντες, οὓς δὴ ᾿Ωκεανούς, καὶ Τηθύας, καὶ Φάνητας, καὶ οὐκ οἶδα οὕς [*](4 καθαρῶς μένοντες οἱ αὐτοὶ df || 7 ἄνω) + καὶ bdf 16. 15 ovs] + καὶ e || 16 ὠκεανοὺς] + τε b) [*](2, οὐ σύνθετοι μόνον] We are not only composite beings, made up of body and soul, and each of these factors again resoluble into different component parts ; we are beings of opposite characteristics, — not only as compared with each other, but as compared with our own fluctuating and inconstant selves.) [*](5. μὴ ὅτι] Cp. i 4.) [*](6. ῥέοντες] Cp. § 10 ῥευστῆς.) [*](ib. καὶ ἄγγελοι] They, though comparatively ἁπλοῖ, not σύνθετοι, and though less liable than we are to change and inconsistency, are yet not one, like the Persons of the Godhead. They are independent of each other, and vary in powers and in character.) [*](7. φύσις ἢ ἄνω μετὰ τ. τ.] Cp. ii 31 ταῖς πρώταις μετὰ θεὸν φύσεσι. The whole section should be compared with this passage.) [*](16. The divisions among the many ‘Gods’ of the Greeks are notorious. They are at shameful variance. Their empire is partitioned out. Not so with our God. Each of the three Persons is absolutely one with Himself and no less absolutely one with the others.) [*](12. ἁλίσκονται] Cp. ἑ 13 ἁλῶναι, ‘to be convicted. ’) [*](ib. θεολόγοις] Cp. ii 4. The ref. is, no doubt, esp. to Plato’s denuntiation of the poets in Rep. ii, iii.) [*](15. οὓς δὴ ᾿Ωκ.] The ‘First Cayses,’ i.e. the original against which the others turn, are called Oceanus, and Tethys, and so on. See Horn. Il. xiv 201.) [*](16. φάνητας] “A mystic in the Orphic rites, representing the first principle of the world, cf. Orph. Arg. 15 ” (Lidd. and Sc).)

Τοὺς δὲ σοὺς λόγους οὐκ οἶδα πότερον παίζοντος εἶναι φήσομεν, ἢ σπουδάζοντος, οἷς ἀναιρεῖς ἡμῶν τὴν ἕνωσιν. τίς γὰρ δὴ καὶ ὁ λόγος ; τὰ ὁμοούσια συναριθμεῖταl, φησι· συναρίθμησιν λέγων τὴν εἰς ἀριθμὸν ἕνα [*](4 υπονοια (sic) και μυθοι τινες df || 13 εφ οις] εν οις d || ισχυρος ουτος df 17. 17 φησομεν] φησαιμεν b || 19 φησι] φης f) [*](1. θεὸν μισότεκνον] Saturn.) [*](5. ὑπόνοιαί τινες] ‘a sort of allegoriest.’) [*](6. τριχθὰ δὲ πάντα δ.] Hom. II. xv 189.) [*](8. ταῖς ὕλαις κ. τ. ἀξ.] ‘having separate elements under them, and holding different ranks.’) [*](ib. τὸ ἡμέτερον] ‘what we believe.’) [*](9. μερὶς τῷ Ἰακώβ] Jer. x 16.) [*](10. τὸ ἓν ἕκαστον κτλ] ‘but each of the Three Persons is as entirely one with Those with whom He is connected, as He is with Himself, because of the identity of essence and of power that is between Them.’) [*](14. χάρις τῆς θεωρίας] ‘thanks be to God for the line of thought.’) [*](17. It is said that things of the same nature are numbered together, so that if the three Persons are consubstantial they must be three Gods. For fear of saying this, you deny the Godhead of two of them, which is like cutting your throat for fear of dying.) [*](18. τὰ ὀμ. συναριθμεῖται] Things of the same nature, like men, trees, or horses, come under a number which sums them up, as three trees, four horses, five men ; you cannot, acc. to the disputant, apply them to heterogeneous things, and class a tree, a horse, and a man together as being three. Cp. Bas. de Sp. S. 17.)

Συναριθμεῖται, φής, τὰ ὁμοούσια· τὰ δὲ μὴ οὕτως ἔχοντα μοναδικὴν ἔχει τὴν δήλωσιν. πόθεν σοι τοῦτο, καὶ παρὰ τίνων δουματιστῶν καὶ μυθολόγων ; ἢ ἀγνοεῖς, ὅτι πᾶς ἀριθμὸς τῆς ποσότητος τῶν ὕπο κε ὑποκειμένων μέν ὢν ἐστὶ δηλωτικός, οὐ τῆς φύσεως τῶν πραγμάτων ; ἐγὼ δὲ οὕτως ἀρχαίως ἔχω, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀμαθῶς, ὥστε τρία μὲν ὀνομάζω τὰ τοσαῦτα τῷ ἀριθμῷ, κἂν διέστηκε τὴν φύσιν· ἓν δέ, καὶ ἕν, καὶ ἕν, ἄλλως τὰς τοσαύτας μονάδας, κἂν τῇ οὐσία [*](1 λεγειν τρεῖς df. 18. 11 μὴ] οὐχ bdf || 13 καὶ] η b) [*](1. ὥστε ὑμεῖς μέν] These are still the words of the opponent, down to λέγομεν. On the principle just laid down, he says, if the Father, the Son, and the Spirit can be called three at all, it can only be as three Gods ; that is, your doctrine is incurably tritheistic Ours is not, he adds ; for we deny the identity of essence, and make no at bringing those beings together under a number.) [*](4. πραγμάτων] ‘of trouble’; not τῶν πρ., ‘the facts.’) [*](7. τῆ μ. συνιστάμενος] ‘to save yourself labour in maintaining monotheism you have denied the Godhead, and abandoned to the enemy the very thing which you are seeking to establish.’) [*](18. I do not know zvhere you get your rule from. To To me, a number only says how many things there are, and tells anothing about their nature. Certainly in the Bible, things of different natures are summed up under a common number.) [*](12. μοναδικὴν ἔχει τ. δ.] ‘can only be designated singly’; e.g. a and a man, and a tree.) [*](13. δόγμ’. καὶ μυθ.] a kind of hendiadys, ‘makers of fabidous deattempt crees.’) [*](14. τῆς πόσ’. τῶν ὑποκ.] ‘denotes the quantity, or sum, of the and not their nature.’) [*](15. οὕτως ἀρχ’. ἔχω] ‘am am old- fashioned enough ’ to say ‘three’ when there are three things, even when they are not of the same kind, and to name them singly, if I choose, even when they thinking only of their number and not of their nature.) [*](18. ἄλλως] carries on the irony of ἀρχαίως, ἀμαθῶς. It is used in the idiomatic sense of ‘idlt,’ ‘vainly.’)

Ἀλλ’ ἐμοί, φησιν, ἐκεῖνα συναριθμούμενα λέγεται, καὶ τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας, οἷς συνεκφωνεῖται καταλλήλως καὶ [*](3 γραμματι] πράγματι b || 5 λέων και] om καὶ g || 6 ενδημηγορων e || 7 τῆ ’δε φύσει bdf) [*](3. περιέχῃ τοῦ γρ.] ‘you are so attached to the letter of Scripture.’ The emendation τῷ πράγματι in the next clause is ingenious and tempting; but τῷ γράμματι will mean that in this instance they have the very letter of Scripture against them, — as he proceeds to shew.) [*](4. λάβε] seems to be an ironical invitation to prove the point, not= δέξαι i.e. ‘listen to my proofs.’) [*](5. εὐόδως πορεύεται] Pro v. xxx 29.) [*](8. δύο Χερουβὶμ] Ex. xxv 18, 19. If τῷ M. = ‘ by Moses,’ perh. the ref. is rather to Ex. xxxvii 7 ; but it may be the strict dat., ‘reckoned up singly to Moses.’) [*](10. ἀπερρηγμένα] ’so completely severed.’) [*](14. καἰ μᾶλλον γελ.] The same irony continued ; ‘I should be still more laughed at for my mode of numbering things together. ’ Matt. vi 24. Gr. does not observe that God and Mammon are not actually described as two masters, and that if they were, it would be ἃς masters that they would be numbered together, in which respect they are alike.) [*](19. If you tell me that numbers denote things of one nature and those only, then I will deny that you can say ‘three men,’ unless each three is an exact repetition of the others. St John was certainly not bound by your rule when he spoke of the three witnesses nor will it when you come to speak of things of different natures but bearing the same name.) [*](16. οἷς συνεκφ. καταλλ. κ. τ. ὀ.] The opponent explains that things ranged under a number, because they are of the same nature. he means cases where the noun is expressed and the numeral agrees with it (oἷς i.e. συναριθμουμένοις practically = ‘ the numeral’), like ‘three men,’ ‘three God.’ He does not mean that you can never lump together under a neuter numeral heterogeneous objects as so many ‘things.’ This, he says, is not a connumeration.)

Σκοπῶ δὲ κἀκεῖνο, καὶ ἴσως οὐκ ἔξω λόγου. τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ ἓν οὐκ εἰς δύο συντίθεται ; τὰ δύο δὲ οὐκ εἰς ἓν καὶ ἓν ἀναλύεται ; δῆλον ὅτι. εἰ οὖν ὁμοούσια μὲν τὰ συντιθέμενα κατὰ τὸν σὸν λόγον, ἑτεροούσια δὲ τὰ τεμνόμενα, τί συμβαίνει ; τὰ αὐτὰ ὁμοούσιά τε εἶναι καὶ ἑτεροούσια. γελῶ σου καὶ τὰς προαριθμήσεις, καὶ τὰς ὑπαριθμήσεις, [*](20. 16 om τε f) [*](3. τό τε ὄργανον] a pair of tongs.) [*](8. ἐληλεγμένος] from ἐλέγχω.) [*](10. ἢ τε τῶν ὁ. συνεκφ.] ‘and the nouns are expressed in both cases, along with the numeral,’ i.e. not merely ‘understood.’ Or. means both in the case of ὁμοούσια which are not numbered together, and in that of οὐχ ὁμοούσια which are.) [*](20. It will not bear the simplest test of addition or division. Your rules about the order of enumeration, and about the use of prepositions, are just as ridiculous. We will now proceed to give you the coup de grace.) [*](13. οὐκ εἰς δύο συντ.] ‘one and one make two,’ although ace. to the heretic’s logic ‘one and one’ would only be said of things of different nature, such as could never be united under a common numeral. Conversely ‘two is divided into one and οne,’ although ‘two’ can only be said of things of the same nature, which it would be unnatural to describe in that single fashion. The upshot is that the same things proved to be of the same nature and of different natures. Of course the argument is more or less of a piece of banter.) [*](17. προαριθμ. κ. ὑπαριθμ.] Elias says, probably without historical grounds, that this system of numbering (δεύτερος θεός, τρίτος θεός) was derived from the way in which the Neoplatonic writers arranged existences according to a scale, from the First Cause to the lowest. The phraseology is fully discussed by Basil l. c. (de Sp. S. 17.)῾Υπαριθμεῖν’, as distinguished from συναριθμ., is to reckon in a secondary position.)

Πάλιν καὶ πολλάκις ἀνακυκλεῖς ἡμῖν τὸ ἄγραφον. ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐ ξένον τοῦτο, οὐδὲ παρείσακτον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς πάλαι καὶ τοῖς νῦν γνωριζόμενον καὶ παραγυμνούμενον, δέδεικται μὲν ἤδη πολλοῖς τῶν περὶ τούτου διειληφότων, ὅσοι μὴ ῥᾳθύμως μηδὲ παρέργως ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς ἐντυχόντες, ἀλλὰ διασχόντες τὸ γράμμα καὶ εἴσω παρακύψαντες, τὸ ἀπόθετον κάλλος ἰδεῖν ἠξιώθησαν, καὶ τῷ φωτισμῷ τῆς γνώσεως κατηυγάσθησαν. δηλώσομεν δὲ καἰ ἡμεῖς ἐξ ἐπιδρομῆς, ὅσον ἐνδέχεται, τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν εἶναι περιττοί τινες, μηδὲ φιλοτιμότεροι τοῦ δέοντος, ἐποικοδομοῦντες ἐπὶ θεμέλιον ἀλλότριον. εἰ δὲ τὸ μὴ λίαν σαφῶς γεγράφθαι θεὸν μηδὲ πολλάκις ὀνομαστί, ὥσπερ τὸν πατέρα πρότερον καὶ τὸν υἱὸν ὕστερον, αἴτιόν σοι γίνεται βλασφημίας, καὶ τῆς περιττῆς ταύτης γλωσσαλγίας καὶ ἀσεβείας, ἡμεῖς σοι λύσομεν ταύτην τὴν βλάβην, μικρὰ περὶ πραγμάτων καὶ ὀνομάτων καὶ μάλιστα παρὰ τῆ τῆς γραφῆς συνηθείᾳ φιλοσοφήσαντες.