1 Christus Comprobator, p. 99, sq.
1 O twn Paterwn Pathr; o twn Nussaewn fwsthr, Council. Nic. II. Act. VI. Edition of Labbe, p. 477.-Nicephor. Callist H.E. xi.19.
3 Epist. III. (Zacagni's collection).
4 Notably Bellarmine: Gretser, the Jesuit, against the Calvinist Molino.
5 See Note I to the Introductory Letter to the Treatise.
7 In verba `faciamus hominem, 0' I. p. 140.
8 De Perf. Christiani Forma, III. p. 294, he calls the `Prince of darkness 0' the author of sin and death: In Christi Resurrect. III. p. 386, he calls Satan `the heart of the earth: 0' and p. 387 identifies him with sin. `And so the real wisdom visits that arrogant heart of the earth, so that the thought great in wickedness should vanish, and the darkness should be lightened, &c 0'.
9 As expressed by S. Thomas Aquinas Summ. I. Qu. xix. Art. 9, Deo nec nolente, nec volente, sed permittente .... Deus neque vult fieri, neque vult non fieri, sed vult permittere mala fieri.
11 On Infants' early Deaths, III. p. 336.
13 On the Making of Man, c. xiv.
16 In Sermon On the Baptism of Christ.
17 A. 1560 fol.; also Antwerp, p. 1562 (Latine).
18 His comparison of the hidden meaning of the proverb or parable (III. c. Eunom. p. 236) to the `turned up` side of the peacock's feather is beautiful in itself for language (e.g. `the varied painting of nature 0', `the half-circle shining in the midst with its dye of purple, 0' `the golden mist round the circle 0'): but it rather fails as a simile, when applied to the other or the literal side, which cannot in the case of parables be said to `lack beauty and tint 0'.
19 Cf Dallaeus, de panis et satisfactionibus, I. IV. c. 7, p. 368.
20 Cf. De An. et Resurr., 227 C.D.
21 Collected by Ceillier in his Introduction (Paris, 1860).
25 Comment. in Rom. ii. 9, P. 486.
26 De Hom. Op. c. viii.; De An. et Resurr. 205.
28 He does so De Principus I. praef. 5. C. Cels. II. 77, VIII. 49 sq.
29 De Anim. et Ressurectione, p. 198, 199, 213 sq.
32 This is an independent division to that mentioned above.
33 De la Philosophie D'Origene (Paris, 1884).
35 See De iis premature abripiuntur, p. 231, quoted above, p. 4.
36 See Dorner, Doctrine of the Person of Christ, Div. I. vol. ii. p. 314 (English Trans.).
37 It is to be noted further that the use of the terms ""Persona"" and proswpon by those who avoided the phrase treij upostaseij no doubt assisted in the formation of this suspicion. At the same time the Nicene anathema favoured the sense of upostasij as equivalent to ousia, and so appeared to condemn the Eastern use.
38 S. Athanasius, Tom. ad Antioch, 5.
39 Ad Afr. Episc. §4. S. Athanasius, however, does not shrink from the phrase treij upostaseij in contradistinction to the mia ousia: see the treatise, In illud, `Omnia mihi tradita sunt. 0'§6.
40 S. Bas. Ep. 125 (being the confession of faith drawn up by S. Basil for the subscription of Eustathius)
41 It appears on the whole more probable that the treatise is the work of S. Gregory; but it is found, n a slightly different shape, among the Letters of S. Basil. (Ep. 189 in the Benedictine Edition.)
42 In what sense this language was charged with "novelty" is not very clear. But the point of the objection appears to lie in a refusal to recognize that terms expressive of the Divine Nature, whether they indicate attributes or operations of that Nature, may be predicated of each upostasij severally, as well as of the ousia, without attaching to the terms themselves that idea of plurality which, so far as they express attributes or operations of the ousia, must be excluded from them.
44 The differentia here assigned to the Third Person is not, in S. Basil's own view, a differentia at all: for he would no doubt have been ready to acknowledge that this attribute is common to all Three Persons. S. Gregory, as it will be seen, treats the question as to the differentiation of the Persons somewhat differently, and rests his answer on a basis theologically more scientific.
45 S. Bas. Ep. 38 (Benedictine Ed.).
47 On S. Basil's language on this subject, see Dorner, Doctrine of the Person of Christ, Div. 1. vol. ii. pp. 309-11. (Eng. Trans.)
48 This statement strikes at the root of the theory held by Eunomius, as well as by the earlier Arians, that the agennhsia of the Father constituted His Essence. S. Gregory treats His agennhsia as that by which He is distinguished from the other Persons, as an attribute marking His hypostasis. This subject is treated more fully, with special reference to the Eunomian view, in the Ref. alt. libri Eunomii.
49 S. Gregory would apparently extend this argument even to the operations expressed by the names of "Redeemer," or "Comforter;" though he would admit that in regard of the mode by which these operations are applied to man, the names expressive of them are used in a special sense of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, yet he would argue that in neither case does the one Person act without the other two.
50 See Dorner, ut sup., pp. 317-18.
51 Especially in the treatise, De Anima et Resurrectione, and in that De Conditione Homisis. A notable instance is to be found in the former (p. 242 A.).
52 See Dorner, ut sup., p. 315, and p. 319, note 2.
53 for the treatise On Virginity. (The Paris Editors used Liveneius' Edition, based on (7) and (8).
54 for the treatise On Virginity. (The Paris Editors used Liveneius' Edition, based on (7) and (8).
55 for the treatise On Virginity. (The Paris Editors used Liveneius' Edition, based on (7) and (8).
1 both pamphlets. The `sheets 0' which Gregory says that he has collected are the 12 Books that follow. They are written in reply to Eunomius' pamphlet, `Apologia Apologiae, 0' itself a reply to Basil's Refutation. The other pamphlet of Eunomius seems to have come out during the composition of Gregory's 12 Books: and was afterwards answered by the latter in a second 12th Book, but not now, because of the shortness of the time in which he had a copy of the `heretical volume 0' in his hands. The two last books of the five which go under the title of Basil's Refutation are considered on good grounds to have been Gregory's, and to have formed that short reply to Eunomius which he read, at the Council of Constantinople, to Gregory of Nazianzen and Jerome (d. vir. illust. c. 128). Then he worked upon this longer reply. Thus there were in all three works of Gregory corresponding to the three attacks of Eunomius upon the Trinity.
to monimon ...epitolmwnta. This is the correction of Oehler for ton monon ...epitolmwn which the text presents. The Venetian ms. has epitolmwnti.
2 his refutation of titis heresy. This is Basil's 'Anatreptikoj tou apologhtikou tou duosebouj Eunomiou. `Basil, 0' says Photius, `with difficulty got hold of Eunomius' book, 0' perhaps because it was written originally for a small circle of readers, and wasin a highly scientific form. What happened next may be told in the words of Claudius Morellius (Prolegomena to Paris Edition of 1615): `When Basil's first essay against the foetus of Eunomius had been published, he raised his bruised head like a trodden worm, seized his pen, and began to rave more poisonously still as well against Basil as the orthodox faith. 0' This was Eunomius' `Apologia Apologiae: 0' of it Photius says, `His reply to Bash was composed for many Olympiads while shut up in his cell. This, like another Saturn, he concealed from the eyes of Basil till it had grown up, i.e. he concealed its by devouring its as long as Basil lived. 0' He then goes on to say that after Basil's death, Theodore (of Mopsuestia), Gregory of Nyssa, and Sophronius found it and dealt with it, though even then Eunomius had only ventured to show it to some of his friends. Philostorgius, the ardent admirer of Eunomius, makes the amazing statement that Basil died of despair after reading it.
4 `He asks for the intercession of Saint Paul 0' (Paris Edit. in marg.).
5 apoklhrwqeisan. This is probably the meaning, after the analogy of apoklhrwsij, in the sense (most frequent in Origen), of `favour, 0' `partiality, 0' passing into that of `caprice, 0' `arbitrariness, 0' cf. below, cap. 9, tij h apoklhrwsij,k.t.l. `How arbitrarily he praises himself. 0'
6 Photius reports very much the same as to his style, i.e. he shows a `prodigious ostentation: 0' uses `words difficult to pronounce, and abounding in many consonants, and that in a poetic, or rather a dithyrambic style: 0' he has `periods inordinately long: 0' he is `obscure, 0' and seeks `to hide by this very obscurity whatever is weak in his perceptions and conceptions, which indeed is often. 0' He `attacks others for their logic, and is very fond of using logic himself: 0' but `as he had taken up this science late in life, and had not gone very deeply into it, he is often found making mistakes. 0'
The book of Eunomius which Photius had read is still extant: it is his `Apologeticus 0' in 28 sections, and has been published by Canisius (Lectiones Antiquoe, I. 172 ff.). His ekqeoij thj tistewj, presented to the emperor Theodosius in the year 383, is also extant. This last is found in the Codex Theodosius and in the mss. which Livineius of Ghent used for his Greek and Latin edition of Gregory, 1574: it follows the Books against Eunomius. His `Apologia Apologiae, 0' which he wrote in answer to Basil's 5 (or 3) books against him, is not extant: nor the deuteroj logoj which Gregory answered in his second 12th Book.
Most of the quotations, then, from Eunomius, in these books of Gregory cannot be verified, in the case of a doubtful reading, &c.
8 that heretical book, i.e. the first `Apology 0' of Etmomius in 28 parts: a translation of it is given in Whistoh's Eunomianismus Redivivus.
10 tacin. We have no context to explain these allusions, the treatise of Eunomins being lost, which Gregory is now answering, i.e. the Apologia Apologiae.
12 This must be the `caricature 0' of the (Greek) Summary above. Eustathius of Sebasteia, the capital of Armenia, and the Galatian Basil, of Ancyra (Angora), are certainly mentioned, e. 6 (end). Twice did these two, once Semi-Arians, oppose Aetius and Eunomius, before Constantius, at Byzantium. On the second occasion, however (Sozomen, H.E. iv. 23, Ursacius and Valens arrived with the proscription of the Homoousion from Ariminum: it was then that "the world groaned to find itself Arian" (Jerome). The `accursed saint 0' `pale with fast, 0' i.e. Eustathius, in his Armenian monastery, gave Basil the Great a model for his own.
14 Oltiseris was probably the district, as Corniaspa was the village, in which Eunomius was born. It is a Celtic word: and probably suggests his half-Galatian extraction.
15 This can be no other than the district Chammanene, on the east bank of the Halys, where Galatia and Cappadocia join.
16 Probably the `Indian 0' Theophilus, who afterwards helped to organize the Anomoean schism in the reign of Jovian.
17 Gallus, Caesar 350-354, brother of Julian, not a little influenced by Aetius, executed by Constantius at Flanon in Dalmatia. During his short reign at Antioch, Domitian, who was sent to bring him to Italy, and his questor Montius were dragged to death through the streets by the guards of the young Caesar.
18 The same phrase occurs again: Refutation of Eunomius' Second Essay, p. 844: oi th prounikou sofia eggumnasqentej: ec ekeinhj gap dokei moi thj paraskeuhj ta eirhmena proenhnocenai: In the last word there is evidently a pun on prounikou; proferhj, in the secondary sense of `precocious, 0' is used by Iamblichus and Porphyry, and prounikoj; appears to have had the same meaning. We might venture, therefore, to translate `that knowing trick 0' of short-hand: but why Prunicus is personified, if it is personified, as in the Gnostic Prunicos Sophia, does not appear. See Epiphanius Haeres. 253 for the feminine Proper name.
The other possible explanation is that given in the margin of the Paris Edition, and is based on Suidas, i.e. Prunici sunt cursores celeres; hic pro celer scriba. Hesychius also says of the word; oi misqou komizontej ta wnia apo thj agoraj, ouj tinej paidariwnaj kalousin, dromeij, traxeij, oceij, eukinhtoi, gorgoi, misqwtoi. Here such `porter's 0' skill, easy going and superficial, is opposed to the more laborious task of tilling the soil.
19 For the baptisms of Eunomius, compare Ephiphanius Haer. 765. Even Arians who were not Anomoeans he rebaptized. The `helps of nature 0' may possibly refer to the `miracles 0' which Philostorgius ascribes both to Aetius and Eunomius.
Sozomen (vi. 26) says, "Eunomius introduced, it is said, a mode of discipline contrary to that of the Church, and endeavoured to disguise the innovation under the cloak of a grave and severe deportment." ...His followers "do not applaud a virtuous course of life ...so much as skill in disputation and the power of triumphing in debates."
21 The mh is redundant and owing to ouk.
22 Eisfrhsantwn. A word used in Aristophanes of `letting into court, 0' probably a technical word: it is a manifest derivation from eisforein. What the solecism is, is not clear; Gretser thinks that Eunomius meant it for eisphdan.
24 sunekrotei. The word has this meaning in Origen. In Philo (de Vita Mosis, p. 476, 1. 48, quoted by Viger.), it has another meaning, sunekrotoun alloj allon, mh apokamnein, i.e. `cheered. 0'
25 kaqufhsousin. This is the reading of the Venetian ms. The word hears the same forensic sense as the Latin praevaricari. The common reading is kaqubrisousin.
27 pareggrapton: for the vox nihili paragrapton. Oehler again has adopted the reading of the Ven. ms.
29 Sozomen (vi. 26): "After his (Eunomius) elevation to the bishopric of Cyzicus he was accused by his own clergy of introducing innovations. Eudoxius obliged him to undergo a public trial and give an account of his doctrines to the people: finding, however, no fault in him, Eudoxius exhorted him to return to Cyzicus. He replied he could not remain with people who regarded him with suspicion, and it is said seized this opportunity to secede from communion."
30 upografh; or else `on the subject of Basil's charge. 0'
31 tij h apoklhrwsij: this is a favourite word with Origen and Gregory.
34 eti tw=| en klhrw twn presbuterwn ierateuwn.
36 According to Ruffinus (Hist. Eccl.), his constitution was poisoned with jaundice within and without
37 en anwnumw tini Korniaspinhj esxatia. Cf. mega crhma uoj (Herod.) for the use of this genitive. In the next sentence ei anti, though it gives the sense translated in the text, is not so good as h anti (i.e. escatia), which Oehler suggests, but does not adopt.
With regard to Eunomius' birthplace, Sozomen and Philostorgius give Dacora (which the former describes as on the slopes of Mt Argaeus: but that it must have been on the borders of Galatia and Cappadocia is certain from what Gregory says here): `Probably Dacora was his paternal estate: Oltiseris the village to which it belonged 0' (Dict. Christ. Biog.; unless indeed Corniaspa, marked on the maps as a town where Cappadocia, Galatia and Pontus join, was the spot, and Oltiseris the district. Eunomius died at Dacora.
41 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 Anomoens).
44 `The metropolitan remained unshaken. The rough threats of Modestus succeeded no better than the fatherly counsel of Enippius. 0' Gwatkins Arians.
45 Other words of Basil, before Modestus at Caesarea, are also recorded; "I cannot worship any created thing, being as I am God's creation, and having been bidden to be a God."
46 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 maxaira of his trade, but was sent back to his kitchen fire. 0'
47 Modestus, the Lord Lieutenant or Count of the East, had sacrificed to the images under Julian, and had been re-baptized as an Arian.
48 there is the Supreme and Absolute Being, and another Being existing through the First, but after It. The language of this exposition of Eunomius is Aristotelian: but the contents nevertheless are nothing more nor less than Gnosticism, as Rupp well points out (Gregors v. Nyssa Leben und Meinungen, p. 132 sq.). Arianism, he says, is nothing but the last attempt of Gnosticism to force the doctrine of emanations into Christian theology, clothing that doctrine on this occasion in a Greek dress. It was still an oriental heresy, not a Greek heresy like Pelagianism in the next century.
Rupp gives two reasons why Arianism may be identified with Gnosticism.
1. Arianism holds the Logoj as the highest being after the Godhead, i.e. as the prwtotokoj thj ktisewj, and as merely the mediator between God and Man: just as it was the peculiar aim of Gnosticism to bridge over the gulf between the Creator and the Created by means of intermediate beings (the emanations).
2. Eunomius and his master adopted that very system of Greek philosophy which had always been the natural ally of Gnosticism: i.e. Aristotle is strong in divisions and differences, weak in `identifications: 0' he had marked with a clearness never attained before the various stages upwards of existencies in the physical world: and this is just what Gnosticism, in its wish to exhibit all things according to their relative distances from the 'Agennhtoj, wanted.
Eunomius has in fact in this formula of his translated all the terms of Scripture straight into those of Aristotle: he has changed the ethical-physical of Christianity into the purely physical; pneuma e.g. becomes ousia: and by thus banishing the spiritual and the moral he has made his 'Agennhtoj as completely `single 0' and incommunicable as the to prwton kinoun akinhton (Arist. Metaph. Xll. 7).
49 i.e. of the equality of Persons.
54 John x. 30; 2 Cor. xiii. 13.
55 he declares Him to be a work of both Persons. With regard to Gregory's own belief as to the procession of tile Holy Spirit, it may be said once for all that there is hardly anything (but see.p. 99, note 5) clear about it to be found in his writings. The question, in fact, remained undecided until the 9th century, the time of the schism of the East and West. But here, as in other points, Origen had approached the nearest to the teaching of the West: for he represents the procession as from Father and Son, just as often as from one Person or the other. Athanasius dues certainly say that the Spirit `unites the creation to the Son, and through the Son to the Father, 0' but with him this expression is not followed up: while in the Roman Church it led to doctrine. For why does the Holy Spirit unite the creation with God continuously and perfectly? Because, to use Bossuet's words, "proceeding from the Father and the Son He is their love and eternal union." Neither Basil, nor Gregory Nazianzen, nor Chrysostom, have anything definite about the procession of the Third Person.
56 kataghptikhj efodou-h kataghymj. These words are taken from the Stoic logic, and refer to the Stoic view of the standard of truth. To the question, How are true perceptions distinguished from false ones, the Stoics answered, that a true perception is one which represents a real object as it really is. To the further question, How may it be known that a perception faithfully represents a reality, they replied by pointing to a relative nor an absolute test-the degree of strength with which certain perceptions force themselves upon our notice. Some of our perceptions are of such a kind that they at once oblige us to bestow on them assent. Such perceptions produce in us that strength of conviction which the Stoics call a conception. Whenever a perception forces itself upon us in this irresistible form, we are no longer dealing with a fiction of the imagination but with something real. The test of irresistibility (kataghyij) was, in the first place, understood to apply to sensations from without, such sensations, according to the Stoic view, alone supplying the material for knowledge. An equal degree of certainty was, however, attached to terms deduced from originally true data, either by the universal and natural exercise of thought, or by scientific processes of proof. It is katagehyeij obtained in this last way that Gregory refers to, and Eunomius was endeavouring to create in the supra-natural world.
58 There is of course reference here to John i. 3: and Eunomius is called just below the `new theologian, 0' with an allusion of S. John, who was called by virtue of this passage essentially o qeologoj.
59 this school of the new circumcision. This accusation is somewhat discounted by Gregory's comparison of Eunomius elsewhere to Bardesanes and Marcion, to the Manichees, to Nicholaus, to Philo (see Book XI. 691, 704, VI. 607, and especially VII. 645), and by his putting him down a scholar of Plato. But a momentary advantage, calculated in accordance with the character and capacities of the great mass of Gregory's audience, could not be lost. The lessons of Libanius, the rhetorician, had not been thrown away on Gregory.
61 i.e. according as each inclines more or less to the First Good.
62 uncreate intelligible nature is far renewed from such distinctions. This was the impregnable position that Athanasius had taken up. To admit that the Son is less than the Father, and the Spirit less than the Son, is to admit the law of emanation such as hitherto conceived, that is, the gradual and successive degradation of God's substance; which had conducted oriental heretics as well as the Neoplatonists to a sort of pantheistic polytheism. Arius had indeed tried to resist this tendency so far as to bring back divinity to the Supreme Being; but it was at the expense of the divinity of the Son, Who was with him just as much a created Intermediate between God and man, as one of the Aeons: and Aetius and Eunomius treated the Holy Ghost also as their master had treated the Son. But Arianism tended at once to Judaism and, in making creatures adorable. to Greek polytheism. There was only one way of cutting short the phantasmagoria of divine emanations, without having recourse to the contradictory hypothesis of Arius: and that was to reject the law of emanation, as hitherto accepted, altogether. Far from admitting that the Supreme Being is always weakening and degrading Himself in that which emanates from Him, Athanasius lays down the principle that He produces within Himself nothing but what is perfect, and first, and divine: and all that is not perfect is a work of the Divine Will, which draws it out of nothing (i.e. creates it), and not out of the Divine Substance. This was the crowning result of the teaching of Alexandria and Origen. See Denys (De la Philosophic d'Origene, p. 432, Paris, 1884).
63 But He is not begotten. Athanasian Creed.
66 tou pantoj. It is worth while to mention,once for all, the distinction in the names used by the Stoics for the world, which had long since passed from them into the common parlance. Including the Empty, the world is called to pan, without it, olon (to olon, ta ola frequently occurs with the Stoics). The pan, it was said, is neither material nor immaterial, since it consists of both.
67 Ti gar baptizontai eij Xriston. This throws some light on the much discussed passage, `Why are these baptized for the dead? 0' Gregory at all events seems here to take it to mean, `Why are they baptized in the name of a dead Christ? 0' as he is adopting partially S. Paul's words, 1 Cor. xv. 29; as well as Heb. xi. 1 above.
69 Cf. Gregory's theory of human perfection; De anima et Resurrectione, p. 229, 230. `The All-creating Wisdom fashioned these souls, these receptacles with free wills, as vessels as it were, for this very purpose, that there should be some capacities able to receive His blessings, and become continually larger with the inpouring of the stream. Such are the wonders that the participation in the Divine blessings works; it makes him into whom they come larger and more capacious. ...The fountain of blessings wells up unceasingly, and the partaker's nature, finding nothing superfluous and without a use in that which it receives, makes the whole influx an enlargement of its own proportions. ...It is likely, therefore, that this bulk will mount to a magnitude wherein no limit checks the growth.
70 Proverbs viii. 22 (LXX). For another discussion of this passage, see Book II. ch. 10 (beginning) with note.
72 in the Canon. (Oehler's stopping is here at fault, i.e. he begins a new paragraph with 'Ekdexetai ton logon touton o Pauloj). We need not speculate whether Gregory was aware that the Epistle to the Colossians (quoted below) is an earlier `Gospel 0' than S. John's.
75 taciarxaj kai loxagouj, ekatontarxouj te kai xiliarxouj. The difference between the two pairs seems to be the difference between `non-commissioned 0' and `commissioned 0' officers.
77 Isaiah vi. 6, Isaiah vi. 7.
80 taj men, i.e. Ousioj. Eunomius' Arianism here degenerates into mere Emanationism: but even in this system the Substances were living; it is beat on the whole to translate ousia `beeing, 0' and this, as a rule, is adhered to throughout.
81 kakeinai ai energeiai autai.
82 tw parhllacqai, k.t.l. This is Oehler's emendation for the faulty reading to of the editions
86 1 Cor. i. 24. "Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God."
87 John v. 23. The Gospel enjoins honour and means love: the Law enjoins love and means honour.
88 a prelude. See Psalm vii. 1 and Psalm xviii. 1, "fortress," krataiwma; sterewma, LXX.
89 The meaning is that, if the Son is later (in time) than the Father, then time must have already existed for this comparison to be made; i.e. the Son is later than time as well as the Father. This involves a contradiction.
90 step by step upwards. si analusewj. This does not seem to be used in the Platonic (dialectic) sense, but in the N.T. sense of "return" or "retrogression," cf. Luke xii. 36. Gregory elsewhere Hom. Opif. xxv.), uses analuein in this sense: speaking of the three examples of Christ's power of raising from the dead, he says, `you see ...all these equally at the command of one and the same voice returning ('analuontaj) to life. 0' thus also came to mean "death," as a `return. 0' Cf. Ecclesiast. xi. 7.
91 brightness. Heb. i. 3, apaugasma thj dochj.
92 Compare Eccles. iii. 1-11; and Eccles. viii. 5, "and a wise man's heart discerneth both time and judgment."
94 kai ton tou kuriwtatou logon epexei:
95 The generation of the Son does not fall within time. On this "eternal generation" Denys (De la Philosophie d'Origéne, p. 452) has the following remarks, illustrating the probable way that Athanasians would have dealt with Eunomius: "If we do not see how God's indivisibility remains in the co-existence of the three Persons, we can throw the blame of this difficulty upon the feebleness of our reason: while it is a manifest contradiction to admit at one and the same time the simplicity of the Uncreated, and some change or inequality within His Being. I know that the defenders of the orthodox belief might be troubled with their adversaries' argument. (Eunom. Apol. 22.) `If we admit that the Son, the energy creative of the world, is equal to the Father, it amounts to admitting that He is the actual energy of the Father in Creation, and that this energy is equal to His essence. But that is to return to the mistake of the Greeks who identified His essence and His energy, and consequently made the world coexist with God. 0' A serious difficulty, certainly, and one that has never yet solved, nor will be; as all the questions likewise which refer to the Uncreated and Created, to eternity and time. It is true we cannot explain how God's eternally active energy does prolong itself eternally. But what is this difficulty compared with those which, with the hypothesis of Eunomius, must be swallowed? We must suppose, so that the 'Agennhtoj, since His energy is not eternal, because in a given place and moment, and that He was at the point the Gennhtoj. We must suppose that this activity communicated to a creature that privilege of the Uncreated which is most incommunicable, viz. the power of creating other creatures. We must suppose that these creatures, unconnected as they are with the 'Agennhtoj (since He has not made them), nevertheless conceive of and see beyond their own creator a Being, who cannot be anything to them. [This direct intuition on our part of the Deity was a special tenet of Eunomius.] Finally we must suppose that these creatures, seeing that Eunomius agrees with orthodox believers that the end of this world will be but a commencement, will enter into new relations with this 'Agennhtoj, when the Son shall have submitted all things to the Father."
98 is presented alive; cwogoneitai. This is the LXX., not the classical use, of the word. Cf. Exod. i. 17; Judges viii. 19, &c. It is reproduced in the speech of S. Stephen, Acts vii. 19: cf. Luke xvii. 33, "shall preserve (his life).'
99 apokritikouj, active, so, the Medical writers. The Latin is `in meatus destinato descendit 0' takes it passive (apokritikouj).
100 neura. So since Galen's time: not `tendon. 0'
101 Punctuating paraskeuazetai, epeidh, epeidh, k.t.l. instead of a full stop, as Oehler.
102 Gregory replaces `sameness 0' (in the case of the energies in Eunomius argument) by `likeness 0' since the Father and the Son could not be said to be the same, and their energies, therefore, are not identical but similar.
106 Reading autoj; instead of Oehler's autoj.
107 only one thing amongst the things which follow, &c. The Latin translation is manifestly wrong here, "si recte a te assertum est, iis etiam quae ad primam substantian sequuntur aliquam operationem inesse." The Greek is eiper h energeia twn parepomenwn tij einai tu powth ousia memaotuohtai.
108 kata analuoin. So Plutarch, ii. 76 E. and see above (cap. 25, note 6.).
111 'Epinoia is the opposite of ennoia, `the intuitive idea. 0' It means an "alterthought," and, with the notion of unnecessary addition, a `conceit. 0' Here it is applied to conventional, or not purely natural difference. See Introduction to Book XIII. for the fuller meaning of 'Epinoia.
112 mh dexoito. This use of the optative, where the subjunctive with ean might have been expected, is one of the few instances in Gregory's Greek of declension from Classic usage; in the latter, when ei with the optative does denote subjective possibility, it is only when the condition is conceived of as of frequent repetition, e.g. 1 Peter iii. 14. The optative often in this Greek of the fourth century invades the province of the subjunctive.
114 See Note on 'Agennhtoj, p. 100.
116 Reading ousan for ousian of Oehler and Migne.
118 presbeuein. So Lucian. Diog. Laert., and Origen passim.
119 your own words, i.e. not ours, as you say. The Codex of Turin has toij hmeteroij, and hmin above: but Oehler has wisely followed that of Venice. Eunomius had said of Basil's party (§34) `justice records in your own words a verdict against yourselves. 0' `No, 0' Gregory answers; `your words (interpreting our doctrine) alone lend themselves to that. 0' But to change kaq' hmwn of the Codd. also to kaq' umwn would supply a still better sense.
121 osa epiqewreitai th fusei.
125 John xvii. 23. "I in them, and thou in Me, that they may be perfected into one." (R.V.)
126 upenantiwj, i.e. as logical "contraries" differ from each other. This is not an Aristotelian, but a Neo-Platonic use of the word (i.e. Ammonius, a.d. 390, &c.). It occurs so again in this Book frequently.
129 plhn all' epeidh esti kai en qhrioij krioij.
130 arbitrary distribution, apoklhrwsewj: kat' apoklhrwsin "at random," is also used by Sextus Empiric. (a.d. 200), Clem. Alex., and Greg Naz.
131 One First Cause, monarxiaj. In a notable passage on the Greeks who came up to the Feast (John xii. 20), Cyril (Catena, p. 307), uses the same word. "Such, seeing that some of the Jews' customs did not greatly differ from their own, as far as related to the manner of sacrifice, and the belief in a One first Cause ...came up with them to worship," &c. Philo had already used the word so (De Charit.). Athanasius opposes it to poluqeia (Quoest. ad Antioch. I.).
133 enohsamen: aorist of instantaneous action.
135 Putting a full stop at sunageiromen. Oehler otherwise.
136 Isaiah xxix. 13; Matthew xv. 8.
137 the Master's mind. "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." Matth. xviii. 6; Mark ix. 42.
140 Transpositions of the terms in his own false premises; twn sofismatwn antistrofaj. The same as "the professional twisting of premisses," and "the hooking backward and forward and twisting of premisses" below. The terms Father and 'Agennhtoj are transposed or twisted into each other's place in this `irrefragable syllogism. 0' It is `a reductio ad absurdum 0' thus:-
Father means 'Agennhtoj (Basil's premiss),
\ 'Agennhtoj means Father.
The fallacy of Eunomius consists in making `Father 0' universal in his own premiss, when it was only particular in Basil's. "'Agennhtoj means the whole contents of the word Father," which therefore cannot mean having generated a son. It is a False Conversion.
This Conversion or antiotrofh is illustrated in Aristotle's Analytics, Prior. I. iii. 3. It is legitimate thus:-
Some B is A
\ Some A is (some) B.
141 kata thn twn antikeimeiwn fnsin. If 'Agennhtoj means not having a son, then to affirm `God is always 'Agennhtoj 0' is even to deny (its logical contradictory) `God once had a Son. 0'
143 proj tw. Cod. Ven., surely better than the common proj to, which Oehler has in his text.
144 eleuqeria; late Greek, for eleuqeriothj.
145 "the living whole,' swmatoj: this is the radical meaning of swma, and also the classical. Viger. (Idiom. p. 143 note) distinguishes four meanings under this. 1. Safety. 2. Individuality. 3. Living presence. 4. Life: and adduces instances of each from the Attic orators.
146 to kathgkulwmenon thj twn sufismatwn plokhj. See c. 38, note 7. The false premisses in the syllogisms have been-
1. Father (partly) means 'Agennhtoj.
Things which mean the same in part, mean the same in all (false premiss).
\ Father means 'Agennhtoj (false).
2. Father means 'Agennhtoj (false).
Agennhtoj does not mean `having a Son. 0'
\ Father does not mean `having a Son 0' (false).
147 enedeicato, ou to epekeina. This is the reading of the Turin Cod., and preferable to that of the Paris edition.
`Father 0' means the `coming from nothing; 0'
(`Coming from nothing 0' does not mean `begetting a Son 0')
\ Father does not mean begetting a Son.
He "pulls to pieces" this conclusion by taking its logical `contrary 0' as the first premiss of his second syllogism; thus-
Father means begetting a Son;
(Father means 'Agennhtoj)
\ 'Agennhtoj means begetting a Son.
From which it follows that before that begetting the Almighty was not 'Agennhtoj.
The conclusion of the last syllogism also involves the contrary of the 2nd premiss of the first.
It is to be noticed that both syllogisms are aimed at Basil's doctrine, `Father 0' means `coming from nothing. 0' Eunomius strives to show that, in both, such a premiss leads to an absurdity. But Gregory ridicules both for contradicting each other.
149 to men mh dunasqai. The negative, absent in Oehler, is recovered from the Turin Cod.
150 John xvi. 15. Oehler conjectures these words (!Exei o pathr) are to be repeated; and thus obtains a good sense, which the common reading, o pathr eipon, does not give.
152 en th periodw kai anastrofh twn omoiwn rhmatwn.
153 auto to peplasmenon thj uponoiaj.
154 the parable, i.e. of the Tares. Matthew xiii. 27: cf. v. 52.
156 Heb. vii. 9, Heb. vii. 10; Genesis xiv. 18.
159 Heb i. 3. (wn, not genomenoj).
162 cenizei, intrans. N.T. Polyb. Lucian.
163 eqeloqrhskeiaj, "will worship."
164 conjunctive particles, sundesmoi. In Aristotle's Poetics (xx. 6), these are reckoned as one of the 8 `parts of speech. 0' The term sundesmoj is illustrated by the examples men, htoi, dh, which leaves no doubt that it includes at all events conjunctions and particles. Its general character is defined in his Rhetoric iii. 12, 4: "It makes many (sentences) one." Harris (Hermes ii. c. 2), thus defines a conjunction, "A part of speech devoid of signification itself, but so formed as to help signification by making two or more significant sentences to be one significant sentence," a definition which manifestly comes from Aristotle.
The comparison here seems to be between these constantly recurring particles, themselves `devoid of significant, 0' in an `elegant 0' discourse, and the perpetually used epithets, "fools," &c., which, though utterly meaningless, serve to connect his dislocated paragraphs. The `assembly 0' (sunacij, always of the synagogue or the Communion. See Suicer) of his words is brought, it is ironically implied, into some sort of harmony by these means.
165 A hit at the Anomooeans. `Your subtle distinctions, in the invinsible world of your own mind, between the meanings of "following" are like the unlikenesses which you see between the Three Persons. 0'
166 wj einai men ton Qeon kata tauton wj einai pote (infinitive by attraction to preceding) kai einai pepisteutai.
167 euariqmhtwn rhmatwn. But it is possible that the true reading may be eurufmwn, alluding to the `rhythm 0' in the form of abuse with which Eunomius connected his arguments (preceding section).
168 ouk eij to einai suairountej.
169 He gives to it the whole contents of godhead. It was the central point in Eunomius' system that by the 'Agennhsia we can comprehend the Divine Nature; he trusts entirely to the Aristotelian divisions (logical) and sub-divisions. A mere word (gennhtoj) was thus allowed to destroy the equality of the Son. It was almost inevitable, therefore, that his opponent, as a defender of the Homoousion, should occasionally fall back so far upon Plato, as to maintain that opposites are joined and are identical with each other, i.e. that gennhsij and agennhsia are not truly opposes to each other. Another method of combating this excessive insistence on the physical and logical was, to bring forward the ethical realities; and this Gregory does constantly throughout this treatise. We are to know God by Wisdom, and Truth, and Righteousness. Only occasionally (as in the next section) does he speak of the `eternity 0' of God: and here only because Eunomius has obliged him, and in order to show that the idea is made up of two negations, and nothing more.
170 from prophecy. Psalm x. 16. Basileusei Kurioj eij ton aiwna, kai eij ton aiwna tou aiwnoj: Psalm xxix. 10. kaqieitai Kurioj Basileuj eij ton aiwna: Psalm lxxiv. 12. 'O de qeoj basileuj hmwn pro aiwnoj.
173 ou peri to aidion qewreisqai.
174 Cf. Heb. xi. 1, of faith, elpizomenwn upostasisj pragmatwn.
176 kata diametron allhloij antikeimenwn, i.e. Contradictories in Logic.
177 As in A or E, both of which have the Particular below them (I or O) as a half-way to the contrary Universal. Thus-
A
All men are mortal.
E
I
Some men are mortal.
O
E
No men are mortal.
A
No men are mortal. Some men are not mortal. All men are mortal. But between A and O, E and I, there is no half-way.
178 Beginning (Contraries) Beginningless.
Endless (Contraries) Ending.
179 upenantiwj diakeimenwn. The same term has been used to express the opposition between Ungenerate and Generated: so that it means both Oppositions, i.e. Contraries and Contradictories.
180 Philip. ii. 9. onoma to uper pan onoma.
182 Adopting o logoj from the Venice Cod. (e/i pantwj o logoj sunenexqhsetai). The verb cannot be impersonal: and tij above, the only available nominative, does not suit the sense very well.
Gregory constructs this scheme of Opposition after the analogy of Logical Opposition. Beginning is not so opposed to Beginning-less, as it is to Ending, because with the latter there is no half-way, i.e. no word of definition in common.
184 ton thj aitiaj logon. This is much more probably the meaning, because of before above, than "on the score of the different kind of causation" (Non omne quod procedat nascitur, quamvis omne procedat quod nascitur. S. August.). It is a direct testimony to the `Filioque 0' belief. "The Spirit comes forth with the Word, not begotten with Him, but being with and accompanying and proceeding from Him." Theodoret. Serra. II.
4 This is perhaps the force of twn olwn: "the Lord of the Old Covenant as well as of the New." But twn olwn may mean simply "the Universe."
8 Or, somewhat more literally, "He admits of distinction into belie, in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, being divided," &c.
10 That nature which transcends our conceptions (uperkeiment).
11 Or "be conjoined with such attribute:" autw probably refers, like peri auton kai en autw just above, to Qeoj or to Qeion, but it may conceivably refer to ei ti makarion, k.t.l.
12 hgemonikon. Cf. Ps. li. 12 in [LXX]. (Spiritus principalis in Vulg., "free spirit" in the "Authorised" Version, and in the Prayer-book Version).
21 Or, "in which we were held by sin, being sold." The reference is to Rom. vii. 7 and Rom. vii. 14, but with the variation of upo thj amartiaj, for upo thn amartian, and a change in the order of the words.
22 A similar phrase is to be found in Book V. With both may be compared the language of the Eucharistic Prayer in the Liturgy of S. Basil (where the context corresponds to some extent with that of either passage in S. Gregory):-kai anastaj th trith hmera, kai odopoihsaj pash sarki thn ek nekrwn anastasin k.t.l.
26 Or, possibly, "and the contrast he makes between the one and the many, &c. is irrelevant" (allwj antidiairei): the quotation is from Ps. xcvi. 6 [LXX.].
27 Cf. S. John i. 18, reading (as S. Gregory seems to have done) qeoj for uioj.
28 kai en proj ton patera ontoj. It may be questioned whether the text is sound: the phrase seems unusual; perhaps en has been inserted in error from the preceding clause kai en tw patri ontoj, and we should read "is in the Father and is with the Father" (cf. the 2nd verse of the 1st Epistle, and verses 1 and 2 of the Gospel of S. John).
34 parallagh (Cf. S. James i. 17).
35 Or "I am He that is," Ex. iii. 14.
36 The reference seems to be to Gal. iv. 8.
38 There is perhaps a reference here to Col. iii. 24.
41 Cf. Phil. ii. 10, Phil. ii. 11.
42 Cf. Phil. ii. 10, Phil. ii. 11.
43 Prov. viii. 5 (Septuagint).
48 uyiston, whence the name of the sect.
49 Cf. 2 Cor. vi. 15, 2 Cor vi. 16.
57 Cf. S. John xix. 23, John xix. 24.
59 Cf. 1 Cor. xii. 6 and 1 Cor. xii. 11.
65 Ps. cxlviii. 5, or Ps. xxxiii. 9 in [LXX.]
66 Cf. Col. i. 16 and Col. i. 17.
67 "If this is so:" i.e. if Eunomius means his words in a Christian sense.
71 This, or something like this, appears to be the force of olon.
72 The quotation does not verbally correspond with Eunomius' words as cited above.
76 Ps. cxlviii. 5, or Ps. xxxiii. 9 in [LXX.]
80 Reading en atonoush th lecei for enatonoush th lecei (the reading of the Paris edition, which Oehler follows).
81 Cf. Heb. i. 3. The quotation is not verbally exact.
83 Ps. lxxxi. 10, [LXX.] The words prosfatoj ("new") and allotrioj ("alien") are both represented in the A.V. by "strange," and so in R.V. The Prayer-book version expresses them by "strange" and "any other." Both words are subsequently employed by Gregory in his argument.
84 Hereby, i.e. by the use of the term prwtotokoj as applicable to the Divinity of the Son.
87 Cf. Heb. viii. 13, whence the phrase is apparently adapted.
90 Col. i. 18 (cf. Rev. i. 5).
95 Cf. Acts ii. 24. See note 2 p. 104, supra.
96 The phrase is not verbally the same as in Tit. iii. 5.
99 Cf. S. John xx. 17: the quotation is not verbal.
102 The Humanity of Christ being regarded as this "first-fruits:" unless this phrase is to be understood of the Resurrection, rather than of the Incarnation, in which case the first-fruits will be His Body, and analabwn should be rendered by "having resumed."
103 Rom. ix. 16. The reference next following may be to S. John xii. 26, or John xiv. 3; or to Col. iii. 3.
105 Phil. ii. 10, Phil. ii. 11.
109 Reading oikonomei or oikodomei.
110 Or "were generated." The reference is to Ps. cxlviii. 5.
111 diasthmatikhj seems to include the idea of extension in time as well as in space.
113 The reference may be to the Song of Solomon i. 3.
116 That is, by using as the terms of his antithesis, not "Son" and "Father," but "Son" and "Ungenerate," he avoids suggesting relationship between the two Persons, and does suggest that the Second Person stands in the same opposition to the First Person in which all created objects stand as contrasted with Him.
118 tomh genesqaiti toutwn epishj omologeitai. This may possibly mean "it is acknowledged that each of those alternatives" (viz. that that which comes into being is uncreate, and that that which creates should itself be created) "is equally untrue." But this view would not be confined to those who held the Catholic doctrine: the impossibility of the former alternative, indeed, was insisted upon by the Arians as an argument in their own favour.
121 Ps. cxiv. 4, in Septuagint.
124 Rom. i. 25, where para ton ktisanta may be better translated "besides the Creator," or "rather than the Creator," than as in the A.V.
126 Prov. viii. 22 (LXX.). The versions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus (to one or more of which perhaps §9 refers), all render the Hebrew by ekthsato ("possessed"), not by ektise ("created"). But Gregory may be referring to mss. of the LXX. version which read ekthsato. It is clear from what follows that Mr. Gwatkin is hardly justified in his remark (Studies of Arianism, p. 69), that "the whole discussion on Prov. viii. 22 (LXX.), Kurioj ektise me k.t.l., might have been avoided by a glance at the original." The point of the controversy might have been changed, but that would have been all. Gregory seems to feel that ekthsato requires an explanation, though he has one ready.
134 Prov. viii. 23-25 (not quite verbal, from the LXX.).
135 Or "to be brought into harmony with Christian doctrine" (efarmosqhnai tw logw)
151 Cf. S. Matt. ix. 12, and parallel passages.
152 Cf. Is. xl. 12 and Is. xl. 24. The quotation is not verbally from the LXX.
157 Reading authj, with Oehler. The general sense is the same, if autw be read; "does yet more strongly attest His existence from all eternity."
165 If this phrase is a direct quotation from Eunomius, it is probably from some other context: its grammatical structure does not connect it with what has gone before, nor is it quite clear where the quotation ends, or whether the illustration of the instrument is Eunomius' own, or is Gregory's exposition of the statement of Eunomius.
170 Here again the exact connexion of the quotation from Eunomius with the extracts preceding is uncertain.
176 This is apparently a quotation from Eunomius in continuation of what has gone before.
177 The word employed is energeia; which might be translated by "active force," or "operation," as elsewhere.
180 Cf. the use of eggastrimuqoj in LXX. (e.g. Lev. xix. 31, Is. xliv. 25.
190 Eph. iv. 6. The application of the words to the Son is remarkable.
196 S. Matt. ii. 20. The word yuxhn may be rendered by either "life" or "soul."
197 S. John viii. 40. This is the only passage in which our Lord speaks of Himself by this term.
199 Cf. S. Luke v. 20, Luke v. 23, and the parallel passages in S. Matt. ix. and S. Mark ii.
202 Cf. S. John x. 17, John x. 18. Here again the word yuxhn is rendered in the A. V. by "life."
203 Ps. xvi. 8. Acts ii. 27, Acts ii. 31.
204 Acts ii. 36. A further exposition of Gregory's views on this passage will be found in Book V.
209 Acts vii. 14. Cf. Gen. xlvi. 27, and Deut. x. 22.
213 Cf. the response to the words of the Priest at the elevation the Gifts in the Greek Liturgies.
217 1 S. John ii. 1. The word is in the A. V. rendered "advocate.")
218 From which is derived the name Paraclete, i.e. Comforter or Advocate.
221 The text reads, "that God is called righteousness," but the argument seems to require the genitive case. The reference may be to Ps. iv. I.
223 With this passage cf. S. John i. 12, S. John iii. 6; Rom. viii. 14; S. 1 John iii. 3.
224 S. John xx. 21, and S. John i. 16.
227 S. John xii. 41. The "older tradition" means presumably the ancient interpretation of the Jews.
228 Cf. Acts xxviii. 25, Acts xxviii. 26. The quotation is not verbal.
233 Cf. Col. i. 16; but the enumeration varies considerably.
234 The last of these epithets is from Ps. li. 14 (pneuma hgemonikon, the "Spiritus principalis" of the Vulgate, the "free spirit" of the English version); the "right spirit" of ver.12 being also applied by S. Gregory to the Holy Spirit, while the epithet "good" is from Ps cxlii. 10.
241 Cf. Phil. ii. 10, Phil. ii. 11, a passage which is apparently considered as explanatory of 1 Cor. xv. 28.
243 See above, §8 of this book.
244 Or, "not the first-born of beings of a different race, but of those of his own stock."
245 omogenh, "of the same stock": the word being the same which (when coupled with adelfon) has been translated, in the passages preceding, by "begotten with."
246 anabebhke: the word apparently is intended by Eunomius to have the force of "transcended"; Gregory, later on, criticizes its employment in this sense.
250 If we read kathxhsewj for the kaqhghsewj of Oehler's text we have a clearer sense, "the Apostle plants by his instruction."
271 Ps. lxvi. 10, Ps. lxvi. 11.
2 The earlier editions here omit a long passage, which Oehler restores.
4 Inserting kai, which does not appear here in Oehler's text, but is found in later quotations of the same passsage: authj is also found in the later citations.
6 Oehler's punctuation here seems to admit of alteration.
7 Reading th xrhsei twn agiwn for th krisei twn agiwn. the reading of Oehler: the words are apparently a quotation from Eunomius, from whom the phrase xrhsij twn agiwn has already been cited.
11 Substituting pasan for the pasin of Oehler's text.
13 Prov. viii. 22 (LXX.). On this passage see also Book II. §10.
17 The hiatus in the Paris editions ends here.
22 Compare with what follows Prov. viii. 12, sqq. (LXX.).
26 Prov. viii. 22 sqq. (LXX.).
29 Cf. Prov. viii. 27-8 (LXX.).
30 Or "according to the apparent sense."
31 Prov. xxx. 3 (LXX. ch. xxiv.).
32 Prov. xxxi. 1 (LXX. ch. xxiv.). The ordinary reading in the LXX. seems to be upo qeou, while Oehler retains in his text of Greg. Nyss. the apo qeou of the Paris editions.
33 Prov. ix. 1, which seems to be spoken of as "earlier" in contrast, not with the main passage under examination, but with those just cited.
34 If prostiqhsi be the right reading, it would almost seem that Gregory had forgotten the order of the passages, and supposed Prov. viii. 22 to have been written after Prov. ix. 1. To read protiqhsi, ("presents to us") would get rid of this difficulty, but it may be that Gregory only intends to point on that the idea of the union of the two natures, from which the "communicatio idiomatum" results, is distinct from that of the preparation for the Nativity, not to insist upon the order in which, as he conceives, they are set forth in the book of Proverbs.
37 perilhpth appears to be used as equivalent to perilhptikh.
41 The quotation is an inexact reproduction of Prov. viii. 22 (LXX.).
47 Is. ix. 6 (LXX.). "The Everlasting Father" of the English Version.
52 Prov. viii. 32 (not verbally agreeing with the LXX.).
53 gennhma. This word, in what follows, is sometimes translated simply by the word "product," where it is not contrasted with poihma (the "product of making"), or where the argument depends especially upon its grammatical form (which indicates that the thing denoted is the result of a process), rather than upon the idea of the particular process.
55 If, that is, they speak of the "generated essence" in contra-distinction to "ungenerate essence" they are precluded from saying that the essence of the Son is that He is begotten, and that the essence of the Father is that He is ungenerate: that which constitutes the essence cannot be made an epithet of the essence.
58 Oehler's punctuation is here slightly altered.
63 gennhma. E. g. S. Matt. xxvi. 29.
64 gegennhkota: which, as answering to gennhma, is here translated "produced" rather than "begotten."
65 gennhmata exidnwn. E. g. S. Matt. iii. 7.
75 Reading kata to nooumenon, for kata ton nooumenon as the words stand in the text of Oehler, who cites no mss. in favour of the change which he has made.
80 1 Sam. ii. 12. The phrase is uioi loimoi, or "pestilent sons," as in the LXX. Gregory's argument would seem to require the reading uioi loimou.
81 The meaning of this seems to be that the Anomoean party make the same charge of "inconsistency" against the orthodox, which Gregory makes against Eunomius, basing that charge on the fact that the title "Son" is not interpreted in the same figurative way as the other titles recited. Gregory accordingly proceeds to show why the name of "Son" stands on a different level from those titles, and is to be treated in a different way.
82 ep autwn: perhaps "with reference to man." the plural being employed here to denote the race of men, spoken of in the preceding clause collectively as to to euergetoumenon.
83 Oehler's punctuation here seems faulty, and is accordingly not followed.
1 Reading, with the older editions, th qewria. Oehler substitutes thn qewpian (a variation which seems to give no good sense, unless qewria be translated as "subject of contemplation"), but alleges no ms. authority for the change.
2 Oehler's punctuation seems less clear than that of the older editions, which is here followed.
5 The reference is to S. Basil's treatise against Eunomius (ii. 7-8; p. 242-4 in the Benedictine ed.). Oehler's punctuation is apparently wrong, for Gregory paraphrases not only the rule, but the r