<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg2022.tlg011.opp-grc1:10-12</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg2022.tlg011.opp-grc1:10-12</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text><body><div type="edition" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg2022.tlg011.opp-grc1" xml:lang="grc"><div type="textpart" subtype="chapter" n="10"><p>Τί οὖν ; θεὸς τὸ πνεῦμα ; πάνυ γε. τί οὖν,
ὁμοούσιον ; εἴπερ θεός. δὸς οὖν μοί, φησιν, ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ
<note type="footnote">2 τὸ γεγεννησθαι] το γεγενῆσθαι a: om καὶ τὸ γεγεννῆσθαι f || 3 εκπεπορευσθαι
αἰ ’Reg. Cypr.' || 6 αξια] εξουσια e || 7 ὑίος] ο ὑίος a || 8 o
ὑίος] om ο d || om τὰ f || 9 om τῆ bed || 10 νυν] σου νυν b ’Reg.
Cypr.' : om νυν c : νυνι e</note>
<note type="footnote">4. προσηγόρευσεν] The abovementioned
facts ’proclaim Them ’
respectively Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit. The aor. takes us back to
the moment when these titles were
first assigned in Scripture.</note>
<note type="footnote">5. ποστάσεων] here used in the
recognised ’personal’ sense.</note>
<note type="footnote">7. δπερ ὁ πατήρ] He is not the
Father, but He is all that the Father
is.</note>
<note type="footnote">ib. δτι ἐκ τοῦ θ.] The fact that
He is of the Father's essence (1 Cor.
ii 12) does not make Him Son.</note>
<note type="footnote">8. ἐν τὰ τρία τῆ θ.] The Three
(Gr. again avoids the masc.) are
One — an undivided unit — in their
nature; the One is Three — a Trinity
— in the ineffaceable distinction
between the persons. The latter
observation removes the Sabellian
conception of the unity ; the former
removes the Eunomian division of
the natures. In the construction of
the last clause, τῆς π. ν. διαιρέσεως
is the predicate after ἦ understood,
like οὐκ ἐλλείψεως above.</note>
<note type="footnote">10 You are surprised at our
calling Him God, consubstantial with
the Father. He must be so if there
is only God God and one Godhead. I
am ashamed to use earthly illustrations;
but even in natural history
there are very different modes of reproduction
which it might help you
to consider.</note>
<note type="footnote">12. δὸς οὖν μοι] The word διδόναι
is not used here in its frequent
sense of a logical concession ; for it
would be no concession to the
Eunomians to ’give’ what is here
required. It means rather, ’shew
me’ ‘convince me that it is so.’ The
Eunomian offers, if convinced that
two consubstantial persons issue from
the same Divine Source, to acknow-
ledge each of them to be a God.
Gr. illustrates the illogical character
of the offer by a counter-paralogism.
‘Shew me,’ he says, ‘that there is
than one sort of God, and I
will shew you the same Trinity that
we now believe in, name and thing.’
It is as unreasonable to deduce
ditheism or tritheism from the
Catholic doctrine of the relation of
the Son and Spirit to the Father, as
it would be to deduce the Catholic
doctrine of the Trinity from a belief
in Godheads of varying quality.</note>

<pb n="157"/>
τὸ μὲν υἱόν, τὸ δὲ οὐχ υἱόν, εἶτα ὁμοούσια, καὶ δέχομαι
θεὸν καὶ θεόν. δός μοι καὶ σὺ θεὸν ἄλλον, καὶ Φύσιν
θεοῦ, καὶ δώσω σοι τὴν αὐτὴν τριάδα μετὰ τῶν αὐτῶν
ὀνομάτων τε καὶ πραγμάτων. εἰ δὲ εἰς θεὸς μία
φύσις ἡ ἀνωτάτω, πόθεν παραστήσω σοι τὴν ὁμοίωσιν; <lb n="5"/>
ἢ ζητεῖς πάλιν ἐκ τῶν κάτω καὶ τῶν περὶ σέ; λίαν μὲν
αἰσχρόν, καὶ οὐκ αἰσχρὸν μόνον, ἁλλὰ καὶ μάταιον ἐπιεικῶς,
ἐκ τῶν κάτω τῶν ἄνω τὴν εἰκασίαν λαμβάνειν, καὶ τῶν
ἀκινήτων ἐκ τῆς ῥευστῆς φύσεως, καί, ὅ Φησιν Ἠσαίας,
ἐκζητεῖσθαι τὰ ζῶντα ἐν τοῖς νεκροῖς· ὅμως δὲ πειράσομαι, <lb n="10"/>
σὴν χάριν, κἀντεῦθεν δοῦναί τινα τῷ λόγῳ βοήθειαν. τὰ
μὲν οὖν ἄλλα παρήσειν μοι δοκῶ, πολλὰ ἃν ἔχων ἐκ τῆς
περὶ ζώων ἱστορίας εἰπεῖν, τὰ μὲν ἡμῖν γνώριμα, τὰ δὲ
τοῖς ὀλίγοις, ὅσα περὶ τὰς τῶν ζώων γενέσεις ἡ Φύσις
ἐφιλοτεχνήσατο. γεννᾶσθαι γὰρ λέγεται, οὐκ ἐκ τῶν <lb n="15"/>
αὐτῶν τὰ αὐτὰ μόνον, οὐδὲ ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερα, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ
ἑτέρων τὰ αὐτά, καὶ ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν ἕτερα. εἰ δέ τῳ πιστὸς
ὁ λόγος, καὶ ἄλλος ἐστὶ τρόπος γεννήσεως, αὐτό τι ὑφ’
ἑαυτοῦ δαπανώμενον καὶ τικτόμενον. ἔστι δὲ ἃ καὶ
<note type="footnote">10. 1 δεχομαι] + καὶ c || 2 ἄλλον θέον dfg || 4 εἰς θεὸς μία φυσις] εἰς ο
θεὸς καὶ μία φύσις b ’Reg. Cypr.’: εἰς θεὸς καὶ μία φύσις f ‘ plures Reg. et
Colb.’: εἰς θεὸς τε καὶ μία Φυσις de || 6 η] εἰ ’δε ‘ Reg. Cypr.’ || το τα ζωντα]
τον ὄντα ‘Or. 1’</note>
<note type="footnote">9. ῤευστῆς] ‘changeable,’ ‘transitory’
tory’; cp. ii 22 πῶς κάτω μῶ.</note>
<note type="footnote">10. ἐκζητεῖσθαι τὰ ζ.] Is. viii 19;
cp. Luke xxiv 5.</note>
<note type="footnote">13. ἡμῖν γνώριμα] known to us	
all by direct observation; opp. to
what only few have had the opportunity
of noting. Gr.’s lore on
subject is derived from Aristotle.</note>
<note type="footnote">16. ἐξ ἑτέρων τὰ αὐτά κτλ.]
instance given by Elias is that of
frogs, some of which are the off-
spring of frogs, and others the spontaneous
product of the marsh, and
yet equally frogs. His instance of
the converse is more true to nature,
but a less exact illustration of his
subject.</note>
<note type="footnote">19.δαπανώμενον] ‘consumed,’ 	
cp. iv 6. The ref. of course is to
the phoenix (Herod, ii 73); see Lightfoot's note on Clem, ad cor.
§ 25. Gr. himself evidently does not
quite believe the fable.</note>

<pb n="158"/>
ἐξίσταταί πὼς ἑαυτῶν, ἐξ ἄλλων ζώων εἰς ἄλλα μεθιστάμενά
τε καὶ μεταποιούμενα, Φιλοτιμίᾳ Φιλοτιμίᾳ ἤδη δὲ
καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ, τὸ μὲν οὐ γέννημα, τὸ δὲ γέννημα, πλὴν
ὁμοούσια· ὃ καὶ τῷ παρόντι πὼς μᾶλλον προσέοικεν. ἓν
<lb n="5"/> δέ τι τῶν ἡμετέρων εἰπών, ὃ καὶ πᾶσι γνώριμον, ἐφ’
ἕτερον μεταβήσομαι λόγον.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="chapter" n="11"><p>Ὁ Ἀδὰμ τί ποτε ἦν ; πλάσμα θεοῦ. τί δὲ ἡ
Εὖα; τμῆμα τοῦ πλάσματος. τί δὲ ὁ Σήθ;
γέννημα. ἆρ’ οὖν ταὐτόν σοι φαίνεται πλάσμα, καὶ τμῆμα,
<lb n="10"/> καὶ γέννημα; πῶς οὔ; ὁμοούσια δὲ ταῦτα, ἢ τί; πῶς δ’ οὔ;
ὡμολόγηται οὖν καὶ τὰ διαφόρως ὑποστάντα τῆς αὐτῆς
εἶναι οὐσίας ἐνδέχεσθαι. λέγω δὲ ταῦτα, οὐκ ἐπὶ τὴν
θεότητα φέρων τὴν πλάσιν, ἢ τὴν τομήν, ἤ τι τῶν ὅσα
σώματος, μή μοί τις ἐπιφυέσθω πάλιν τῶν λογομάχων,
<lb n="15"/> ἐπὶ δὲ τούτων θεωρῶν, ὡς ἐπὶ σκηνῆς, τὰ νοούμενα. οὐδὲ
γὰρ οἷόν τε τῶν εἰκαζομένων οὐδὲν πρὸς πᾶσαν ἐξικνεῖσθαι
καθαρῶς τὴν ἀλήθειαν. καὶ τί ταῦτά, φασιν; οὐ γὰρ τοῦ
ἑνὸς τὸ μὲν γέννημα, τὸ δὲ ἄλλο τι. τί οὖν; ἡ Eὖα καὶ
Σήθ, οὐχὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἀδάμ; τίνος γὰρ ἄλλου; ἢ καὶ
<note type="footnote">11. 9 ταὐτὸν] ταύτα acg || ΙΙ τὰ] τὸ e || 1 7 φασιν] φησιν c</note>
<note type="footnote">1. εἰς ἄλλα μεθιστάμενα] Elias
very properly instances gnats, as
out of larvae. It was
prob. not known that such larvae
invariably developed into gnats, or
that all gnats had been such larvae.</note>
<note type="footnote">2. φιλοτιμίᾳ φ] ‘in nature's
eagerness to excel’; cp. ἢ φ. ἐφιλοτεχνήσατο
above.</note>
<note type="footnote">ib. ἤδη δὲ καὶ τοῦ αὖ] The same
creature produces offspring in more
than one way, by generation and
otherwise; and both kinds of off-
spring have the same nature as the
parent. Gr. is prob. thinking of
the way in which some low forms of
animal life appear (like plants) to
be propagated by ‘cuttings’ as well
as by ‘seed.’</note>
<note type="footnote">4. τῷ παρόντι] ‘the case in point,’
i.e. of the Holy Spirit.</note>
<note type="footnote">11. Human history, however,
presents a better, if still an incomplete,
illustration. Adam, Eve, and
Seth came into being in very different
ways; yet they are consubstantial.</note>
<note type="footnote">9. ταὐτόν σοι φ.] ‘to have the
same nature.’</note>
<note type="footnote">14. ἐπιφυέσθω] Cp. i 4.</note>
<note type="footnote">15. θεωρῶν ὡς ἐπὶ σκ] These
earthly illustrations form a kind of
stage upon which the higher things
are represented for our study.</note>
<note type="footnote">17. οὐ γὰρ τοῦ ἑνός] This is part
of the objection, not of Gr.’s reply.
From the one person of the Father,
they say, there cannot issue two
others, one by generation, the other
in some other way.</note>

<pb n="159"/>
ἀμφότεροι γεννήματα ; οὐδαμῶς. ἀλλὰ τί; τὸ μὲν τμῆμα,
τὸ δὲ γέννημα. καἰ μὴν ἀμφότεροι ταὐτὸν ἀλλήλοις·
ἄνθρωποι γάρ· οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ. παύσῃ οὖν ἀπομαχόμενος
πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα, ὡς ἢ γέννημα πάντως, ἢ μὴ ὁμοούσιον,
μηδὲ θεόν, καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων τὸ δυνατὸν λαβὼν τῆς <lb n="5"/>
ἡμετέρας ὑπολήψεως; ἐγὼ μὲν οἶ μαί σοι καλῶς ἔχειν, εἰ
μὴ λίαν ἔγνωκας φιλονεικεῖν, καὶ πρὸς τὰ δῆλα μάχεσθαι.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="chapter" n="12"><p>Ἀλλὰ τίς προσεκύνησε τῷ πνεύματί, φησιν ; τίς
ἢ τῶν παλαιῶν, ἢ τῶν νέων ; τίς δὲ προσηύξατο ; ποῦ δὲ
τὸ χρῆναι προσκυνεῖν ἢ προσεύχεσθαι γέγραπται ; καὶ <lb n="10"/>
πόθεν τοῦτο ἔχεις λαβών ; τὴν μὲν τελεωτέραν αἰτίαν
ἀποδώσομεν ὕστερον, ἡνίκα ἂν περὶ τοῦ ἀγράφου διαλεγώμεθα.
νῦν δὲ τοσοῦτον εἰπεῖν ἐξαρκέσει· τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν,
ἐν ᾧ προσκυνοῦμεν, καὶ δι’ οὗ προσευχόμεθα. Πνεῦμα
γάρ, φησιν, ὁ θεός, καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτὸν ἐν <lb n="15"/>
πνεύματι καἰ ἀληθείᾳ προσκυνεῖν δεῖ. καὶ πάλιν· Τὸ γὰρ
τί προσευξώμεθα, καθ’ ὃ δεῖ, οὐκ οἴδαμεν, ἁλλ’ αὐτὸ τὸ
πνεῦμα ὑπερεντυγχάνει ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν στεναγμοῖς ἀλαλήτοις.
καί, Προσεύξομαι τῷ πνεύματι, προσεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοί,
<note type="footnote">3 παύση] παύσαι b ‘Or. I’ || 6 σοι] σε ace ‘quinque Reg.’ || 7 τὰ δηλα]
ἄδηλα e1. 12. II λαβὼν ἔχεις df || 16 ’δει προσκυνεῖν bdf || 17 προσευξόμεθα
acdefg || 18 υπερεντυγχανει] εντυγχ. c || 19 προσεύξομαι primo loco] + δε b:
-ξωμαι (et in secundo) a</note>
<note type="footnote">5. καἰ ἐκ τῶν ἄνθρωπ’] ‘even
human experience has shewn you the
possibility of what we hold.’</note>
<note type="footnote">6. καλώς ἔχειν] ‘that that you had
better,’ i.e. leave off contending.</note>
<note type="footnote">7. ἔγνωκας] ‘have made up your
mind.’</note>
<note type="footnote">12. You say that the Spirit is
not, in Scripture, an object of
worship. It is at least ‘in in the
spirit’ that we worship, and that
which we worship ‘is Spirit.’ He
is so entirely one with the object of
worship, that worship addressed to
the Father is equally addressed to the
Holy Ghost. Again, you object that
‘all things were made through the
Son,’ and therefore the Holy Ghost
among them. No more, I answer,
than the Father was. He was
made at all. Accept humbly the docmind.’
trine of the unity of the Divine persons.</note>
<note type="footnote">12. ἀποδώσομεν ὕστερον] in the
whole argument, beginning with
§ 21 and culminating in § 28.</note>
<note type="footnote">14. πνεῦμα γάρ, φησιν] John iv 24.</note>
<note type="footnote">16. τὸ γὰρ τί προσευξ.] Kom. viii
26.</note>
<note type="footnote">19. προσεύξ. τῷ πν.] I Cor. xiv 15.</note>

<pb n="160"/>
τοῦτ’ ἐστίν, ἐν νοὶ καὶ πνεύματι. τὸ οὖν προσκυνεῖν τῷ
πνεύματι, ἢ προσεύχεσθαι, οὐδὲν ἄλλο εἶναί μοι φαίνεται,
ἢ αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ τὴν εὐχὴν προσάγειν καὶ τὴν προσκύνησιν.
ὃ τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐπαινέσειε τῶν ἐνθέων, καὶ τῶν εὖ εἰδότων
<lb n="5"/> ὅτι καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἑνὸς προσκύνησις τῶν τριῶν ἐστὶ προσκύνησις,
διὰ τὸ ἐν τοῖς τρισὶν ὁμότιμον τῆς ἀξίας καὶ τῆς θεότητος ;
καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ ἐκεῖνο φοβηθήσομαι τὸ πάντα διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ
γεγονέναι λέγεσθαι, ὡς ἑνὸς τῶν πάντων ὄντος καὶ τοῦ
ἁγίου πνεύματος. πάντα γὰρ ὅσα γέγονεν, εἴρηται, οὐχ
<lb n="10"/> ἁπλῶς ἅπαντα· οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ πατήρ, οὐδ’ ὅσα μὴ γέγονεν.
δείξας οὖν ὅτι γέγονε, τότε τῷ υἱῷ δός, καὶ τοῖς κτίσμασι
συναρίθμησον. ἕως δ’ ἂν μὴ τοῦτο δεικνύῃς, οὐδὲν τῷ
περιληπτικῷ βοηθῇ πρὸς ἀσέβειαν. εἰ μὲν γὰρ γέγονε,
διὰ χριστοῦ πάντως· οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀρνήσομαι. εἰ δὲ οὐ
<lb n="15"/> γέγονε, πῶς ἢ τῶν πάντων ἕν, ἢ διὰ χριστοῦ ; παῦσαι οὖν
καὶ τὸν πατέρα κακῶς τιμῶν κατὰ τοῦ μονογενοῦς, — κακὴ δὲ
τιμὴ κτίσμα διδόντα τὸ τιμιώτερον υἱὸν ἀποστερεῖν, — καὶ
τὸν υἱὸν κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος. οὐ γὰρ ὁμοδούλου δημιουργός,
ἀλλ’ ὁμοτίμῳ συνδοξαζόμενος. μηδὲν μετὰ σεαυτοῦ
<lb n="20"/> θῇς τῆς τριάδος, μὴ τῆς τριάδος ἐκπέσῃς. μηδενὶ περικόψῃς
τὴν μίαν φύσιν καὶ ὁμοίως σεβάσμιον, ὡς ὅ τι ἂν
<note type="footnote">6 om τοῖς c || 7 φοβήσομαι a || II δείξας] δεῖξον df || τότε] καὶ τότε
cdf || 14 ἀρνήσωμαι d || 17 ἀποστερεῖν υἱὸν de2f</note>
<note type="footnote">1. τὸ προσκ. τῷ πν] Gr. thinks
that ‘worshipping or praying in or
by the Spirit,’ which are clearly
commanded, are in fact the bringing
of prayer and worship by the Spirit
to Himself. This is based upon the
text first quoted, in which the object
of the worship πνεῦμά ἐστιν. Not
that Gr. definitely takes the first
πνεῦμα in that text to be the Holy
Ghost ; but on the principle that
worship offered to one person of the
Trinity is offered to all, his reasoning
is correct, if his premisses are
accepted. It must be owned, however,
that he somewhat begs the
question.</note>
<note type="footnote">7. πάντα διὰ τοῦ υἱ.] John i 3.</note>
<note type="footnote">11. τῳ υἱῷ δός] ‘assign assign Him to the
Son’ as one of the things which were
made through Him.</note>
<note type="footnote">12. τῷ περιληπτικῷ] ‘your comprehensive
phrase will not help you.’</note>
<note type="footnote">16. κακῶς τιμῶν κατὰ] ‘wrongly
honouring the Father at the expense
of the Only-begotten.’</note>
<note type="footnote">18. οὐ γὰρ ὁμ. δῆμ’.] sc. τοῦ
πνεύματος ὁ υἱός.</note>
<note type="footnote">19. μετὰ σεαυτοῦ] Cp. § 4 μετ’
ἐμοῦ.</note>

<pb n="161"/>
τῶν τριῶν καθέλῃς, τὸ πᾶν ἔσῃ καθῃρηκώς, μᾶλλον δὲ τοῦ
παντὸς ἐκπεπτωκώς. βέλτιον μικρὰν τῆς ἑνώσεως φαντασίαν
λαβεῖν, ἢ παντελῆ τολμῆσαι δυσσέβειαν.</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>