← All books · Greek Fathers › Hagioritic Tome

Gregory Palamas

Hagioritic Tome 1 part 6/17

Greek original · 136 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 1:634–1:769 (2009 verses in all)

← prev partnext part →

1:634

Ἐπεί γοῦν Θεός ὄν ἀπεστάλη τοῦτο παρά τοῦ Πατρός, εὐδοκίαν δέ χρή τήν ἀποστολήν ἡγεῖσθαι ταύτην κατά τούς θεολόγους, εὐδοκία δέ ἡ ἀγαθή θέλησίς ἐστι, Λατῖνοι δέ τῇ ἐκπορεύσει ταὐτόν ἡγοῦνται τήν ἀποστολήν, θέλησις οὐκοῦν ἐστι κατ αὐτούς ἡ ἐκπόρευσις˙ κἀπειδήπερ ἐκπορεύσει τήν ὕπαρξιν ἔχει τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, θελήσει τοῦτο λοιπόν ἔχει κατ αὐτούς τήν ὕπαρξιν

Since, then, being God, He was sent by the Father, and since one must regard this mission as good pleasure according to the theologians, and good pleasure is good will, while the Latins regard the mission as identical with the procession, it follows that, according to them, the procession is an act of will; and since the Holy Spirit has His existence by procession, He would, according to them, consequently have His existence by will.

因此，既然聖靈本是神而被父差遣，又既然按神學家們所說，這差遣必須視為美意，而美意就是善的意願；然而拉丁人卻把差遣等同於發出，那麼按他們的說法，發出便成了意願的行動；既然聖靈是藉發出而得存在，那麼按他們的看法，祂便是藉意願而得存在了。

1:635

Ὤ τῆς δυσσεβείας οὐκέτι γάρ ἄκτιστον˙ τῷ γάρ θέλειν, ἀλλ οὐ τῷ πεφυκέναι τοῦτο προήγαγεν ὁ Θεός καί Πατήρ, καθά καί τήν κτίσιν, εἴπερ ἡ ἐκπόρευσίς ἐστιν εὐδοκία καί θέλησις˙ τά κτίσματα γάρ κατά τούς θεολόγους ἐν τῷ πεφυκέναι, ἀλλά τῷ θέλειν ὁ Θεός προήγαγεν

Oh, the impiety! For then He is no longer uncreated; for it is by willing, and not by nature, that God the Father brought Him forth—just as He brought forth creation—if indeed the procession is good pleasure and will. For according to the theologians, God brought forth the creatures not by nature but by willing.

唉，何等的不敬虔！如此一來，祂便不再是非受造的了；因為若發出真是美意與意願，那麼神父乃是藉意願、而非藉本性將祂帶出——正如祂帶出受造之物一般。因為按神學家們所說，神帶出諸受造之物，不是憑本性，而是憑意願。

1:636

Ἔργον μέν γάρ φύσεως κατ αὐτούς ἡ προαίωνιος καί ἀΐδιος γέννησις˙ ἔργον δέ θείας θελήσεως ἡ κτίσις

For according to them, the pre-eternal and everlasting begetting is a work of nature, whereas creation is a work of the divine will.

因為按他們所說，那先於萬世而永恆的受生乃是本性的工作，而創造則是神聖意願的工作。

1:637

Ἀρειανοί μέν οὖν τόν Υἱόν ἔλεγον θελήσει τοῦ Πατρός εἰς τό εἶναι προελθεῖν ἐκ τοῦ μή ἀθελήτως ἐκ Πατρός τό εἶναι λαβεῖν τοῦτο δῆθεν κατασκευάζοντες

Now the Arians used to say that the Son came into being by the will of the Father, thus contriving the notion that He did not receive His being from the Father involuntarily—as it were, against the Father's will.

如今亞流派曾主張，子是憑父的意願而進入存在的，以此炮製出一種說法：彷彿子並非不由父意願（即違背父意）地從父領受其存在。

1:638

Λατῖνοι δέ θελήσει τοῦ Πατρόςἤ καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ προελθεῖν εἰς τό εἶναι δεικνύουσι τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον τοῦ τήν ἐκπόρευσιν εἶναι νομίζειν ἀποστολήν κατ εὐδοκίαν καί θέλησιν

And the Latins likewise show the Holy Spirit to come into being by the will of the Father, or even of the Son, since they regard the procession as a mission by good pleasure and will.

拉丁人也同樣地表明聖靈是憑父、甚或子的意願而進入存在的，因為他們把發出視為一種出於美意與意願的差遣。

1:639

Ἐροῦμεν οὖν καί ἡμεῖς πρός αὐτούς, ὅπερ καί ὁ μέγας Ἀθανάσιος πρός τούς Ἀρειανούς, ὅτι τοῦ βούλεσθαι τό κατά φύσιν ( σελ.) ὑπέρκειται˙ καί ἡ φύσις οὐχ ὑπόκειται βουλήσει

We too, then, shall say to them what the great Athanasius said to the Arians: that what is according to nature transcends willing, and that nature is not subject to will.

因此我們也要對他們說那偉大的亞他那修對亞流派所說的話：凡按本性而有的，超越意願（頁）；而本性並不受意願支配。

1:640

Ὡς οὖν ἡ γέννησις εὐδοκία καί θέλησις οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλ ὑπέρ εὐδοκίαν καί θέλησιν (φύσει γάρ δείκνυσιν ἐκ Πατρός ὄντα τόν Υἱόν ὡς αὐτῷ γνήσιον καί ὁμοούσιον, ἀλλ οὐ θελήσει καθά τά κτίσματα) οὕτως οὐδέ τοῦ Πνεύματος ἡ ἐκπόρευσις ἀποστολή καί εὐδοκία καί θέλησίς ἐστι˙ φύσει γάρ ἡ ἐκπόρευσις δείκνυσι τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός, ὡς αὐτῷ γνήσιον καί ὁμοούσιον, ἀλλ οὐ θελήσει κατά τά κτίσματα

As, therefore, the begetting is not good pleasure and will, but is above good pleasure and will (for it shows the Son to be from the Father by nature, as genuine to Him and consubstantial, and not by will as the creatures are), so neither is the procession of the Spirit a mission, or good pleasure, or will; for the procession shows by nature that the Holy Spirit is from the Father, as genuine to Him and consubstantial, and not by will as the creatures are.

因此，正如受生並非美意與意願，乃是超乎美意與意願的（因為它顯明子是按本性出於父、與父為真子而同質，並非如受造之物那樣憑意願而有），照樣，聖靈的發出也不是差遣、不是美意、不是意願；因為發出按本性顯明聖靈是出於父、與父為真而同質，並非如受造之物那樣憑意願而有。

1:641

Λατῖνοι γοῦν λέγοντες ταὐτόν εἶναι τῇ ἀποστολῇ τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος τήν ἐκπόρευσιν κατά πᾶσαν ἀνάγκην κτιστόν εἶναι τό Πνεῦμα κατασκευάζουσι

The Latins, then, in saying that the procession is identical with the mission of the divine Spirit, by every necessity establish the Spirit to be a creature.

因此拉丁人既說發出與神聖之靈的差遣相同，便由各種必然性確立了聖靈是受造之物。

1:642

Καί μήν ἐπειδήπερ εὐδοκία τοῦ Πατρός ἐστιν, ὡς ἐδιδάχθημεν,ἤ τε τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὡς Θεοῦ παρά Πατρός τε καί Πνεύματος ἀποστολή καί ἡ τοῦ Πνεύματος παρά Πατρός τε καί Υἱοῦ (θελήσαντος γάρ ἑκατέρου τούτων κατά καιρόν ἀφικέσθαι πρός ἡμᾶς καί ὁ Πατήρ εὐδόκησε) δι οὐδέν ἄλλο πάντωςἤ διά φιλανθρωπίαν ἡ εὐδοκία γέγονεν αὕτη

Moreover, since—as we have been taught—the mission of the Son as God by the Father and the Spirit, and the mission of the Spirit by the Father and the Son, are the good pleasure of the Father (for when each of these two willed to come to us at the appointed time, the Father too was well pleased), this good pleasure came about for no other reason whatsoever than love for mankind.

再者，既然——正如我們所受的教導——子作為神被父與聖靈差遣，以及聖靈被父與子差遣，都是父的美意（因為當這二者各自願意在所定的時候來到我們這裡時，父也喜悅了），那麼這美意之所以發生，純然只是出於對人類的慈愛，別無其他緣故。

1:643

Τοιγαροῦν, εἰ κατά Λατίνους τῇ ἀποστολῇ τοῦ Πνεύματος ταὐτόν ἡ ἐκπόρευσις, ἡ δέ ἀποστολή διά φιλανθρωπίαν, κατ αὐτούς οὐκοῦν καί ἡ πρό αἰώνων ἐκ Πατρός ἐκπόρευσίς τε καί ὕπαρξις τοῦ Πνεύματος οὐχ ὑπέρ αἰτίαν, ἀλλά διά φιλανθρωπίαν

Consequently, if, according to the Latins, the procession is identical with the mission of the Spirit, and the mission is for the sake of love for mankind, then, according to them, the pre-eternal procession and existence of the Spirit from the Father is likewise not above causality, but is for the sake of love for mankind.

於是，倘若按拉丁人所說，發出與聖靈的差遣相同，而差遣是為著對人類的慈愛，那麼按他們的說法，聖靈那先於萬世、從父而有的發出與存在，也同樣不是超越因果的，而是為著對人類的慈愛了。

1:644

Πρός δέ τούτοις, εἰ ταὐτόν ἀποστολή καί ἐκπόρευσις, δι ἐμέ λοιπόν τό Πνεῦμα (βαβαί τῆς κακοδοξίας˙ οὐ γάρ ἔχω ταῦτα λέγειν ἄνευ φρίκης καί θαύματος) ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκπορεύεται˙ δι ἐμέ γάρ ἀπέσταλται˙ εἰ δέ δι ἐμέ, καί μετ ἐμέ πάντωςἤ οὐ πολύ πρό ἐμοῦ, ἀλλ ὑπό χρόνον ὥσπερ ἐγώ, καί οὐχί τῷ Πατρί καί τῷ Υἱῷ συναΐδιον

Besides this, if mission and procession are identical, then the Spirit (alas, what blasphemy! for I cannot say these things without shuddering and amazement) proceeds from the Father for my sake; for He has been sent for my sake. And if for my sake, then surely also after me—or at any rate not long before me, but subject to time as I am, and not co-eternal with the Father and the Son.

除此以外，倘若差遣與發出相同，那麼聖靈（唉，何等褻瀆！我若不戰慄驚駭，便說不出這些話）就是為我的緣故才從父發出的；因為祂是為我的緣故被差遣的。而若是為我的緣故，那麼祂也必然是在我之後——或至多不過稍早於我，卻仍像我一樣受制於時間，而非與父和子同永。

1:645

Καί οὐ τοῦτο μόνον, ἀλλά καί ὑπείκει τῇ δεσποτείᾳ

And not only this, but He would also be subordinate to lordship.

不僅如此，祂還會淪為受主權支配的了。

1:646

Φεῦ, ποῦ κατάγεται παρά τῶν ἀγνωμόνων δούλων τό τῇ φύσει τήν δεσποτείαν ἔχον ἁπάσης τῆς κτίσεως˙ τό γάρ Σάββατον, (σελ

Alas! to what depths is He dragged down by these graceless servants—He who by nature holds the lordship over all creation! For "the Sabbath," (page

唉！那位按本性掌管一切受造之物之主權者，竟被這些忘恩的奴僕貶抑到何等地步！因為經上說：「安息日」（頁

1:647

) φησί, διά τόν ἄνθρωπον, οὐχί ὁ ἄνθρωπος διά τό Σάββατον˙ ὥστε Κύριός ἐστι τοῦ Σαββάτου ὁ Υἱός τοῦ ἀνθρώπου

) it says, "was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; so that the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

（接前）「是為人設立的，人不是為安息日設立的；所以人子也是安息日的主。」

1:648

Ὁρᾷς πόσον ἀπέχει ἀποστολή ἐκπορεύσεως;

Do you see how far the mission is removed from procession?

你看見差遣與發出相距何等遙遠嗎？

1:649

σημαινόμενον, ἀλλ οὐκ αὐτό ὑπάρχον ἐμφύσημα, ὡς ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἔχειν τήν ὕπαρξιν ἐξ οὗ τό ἐμφύσημα˙ ἄν δέ καί πεμπόμενον, φανερούμενον˙ ἄν δέ καί διδόμενον, καί τό συνημμένον ἐπιγινώσκει τοῦ πεμπομένου τε καί τοῦ πέμποντος˙ ἄν δέ παρ ἡμῶν λαμβανόμενον, οἶδε μέν ᾗ Θεόν, ἄληπτον, ληπτά δέ ἡμῖν τά παρ ἐκείνου χαρίσματα˙ ἄν δέ καί παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἀκούσῃ πεμπόμενον, διδόμενον, ἐμφυσώμενον, εὐθύς καί τοῦτο πρός τοῖς ἄλλοις συνίησιν, ὡς ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκπορεύεται, καθά καί Γρηγόριος ἐκλαμβάνειν ἀξιοῖ σοφῶς ὁ ἐν θεολογίᾳ πολύς˙ ὅσα γάρ, φησί, περί τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ταπεινότερα λέγεται, τό δίδοσθαι, τό στέλλεσθαι, τό μερίζεσθαι, τό χάρισμα, τό δώρημα, τό ἐμφύσημα, εἴτε τι ἄλλο τοιοῦτον, ἐπί τήν πρώτην αἰτίαν ἀνακτέον, ἵνα τό ἐξ οὗ δειχθῇ, (δηλαδή τοῦ Πατρός˙ αὐτός γάρ ἡ πρώτη αἰτία) καί μή τρεῖς, φησίν, ἀρχαί μεμερισμέναι πολυθέως παραδεχθῶσιν, ὅπερ αὐτός ἔπαθες, μή πρός τήν πρώτην αἰτίαν διά τούτων τῶν φωνῶν ἀναγόμενος

…signified, but is not itself the inbreathing as such, so as necessarily to have its existence from that whence the inbreathing comes. And if it is sent, it is manifested; and if it is given, it also makes known what is conjoined to the One sent and to the One sending; and if it is received by us, it is known, insofar as it is God, to be incomprehensible, while the gifts that come from Him are comprehensible to us. And if you hear that it is also sent, given, and breathed forth by the Son, then forthwith you understand this too, alongside the rest: that it proceeds from the Father—just as Gregory, who is great in theology, deems it right to interpret wisely. For he says: "Whatever lowlier things are said concerning the Holy Spirit—His being given, sent, divided, the gift, the bestowal, the inbreathing, or anything else of the sort—are to be referred back to the first cause, that the One "from whom" may be shown (namely the Father, for He is the first cause), and that not three principles, divided in polytheistic fashion, be admitted—which is what you yourself have suffered, by not being led back through these expressions to the first cause."

……（接前）所表徵的，本身卻並非那吹氣本身，以致必然要從那發出吹氣者得其存在。它若被差遣，便是被彰顯；它若被賜下，也就使人認出那與被差遣者和差遣者相連的；它若被我們領受，就其為神而言，被認為是不可測度的，然而那從祂而來的諸般恩賜，於我們卻是可領受的。你若聽見它也被子差遣、賜下、吹出，便要立刻連同其餘的一併明白：它乃是從父發出的——正如那在神學上博大的貴格利所認為當以智慧領會的。因為他說：「凡論到聖靈所說的較卑微之事——被賜下、被差遣、被分賜、恩賜、贈與、吹氣，或其他諸如此類者——都當追溯回那第一因，使那『所從出者』得以顯明（即是父，因父乃是第一因），免得有三個按多神方式而分裂的本源被接納進來；而這正是你自己所遭受的，因你沒有藉這些說法被引回那第一因。」

1:650

Καί δύο μέν σαφῶς κηρύττων οὐκ αἰσχύνῃ ἀρχάς ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα δογματίζων ἔχειν τήν ὕπαρξιν, τήν δέ τρίτην ἀφ ὧν λέγεις διδούς συνάγεσθαι

And while plainly proclaiming two principles, you are not ashamed to dogmatize that the Spirit has His existence from the Father and the Son, and to grant that a third may be gathered from the very things you say.

你既明明宣講有兩個本源，竟不以為恥地武斷主張聖靈是從父和子得其存在，又讓人從你自己所說的話中推出第三個本源來。

1:651

Εἰ γάρ διά τό πέμπεσθαι παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ καί ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἐκπορεύεται, πέμπει δέ καί τό Πνεῦμα τόν Υἱόν, οὐχ ὡς ἄνθρωπον μόνον ἀλλά καί ὡς Θεόν, καθάπερ ἀνωτέρω δέδεικται, ἀλλά καί τόν Πατέρα ὁ Υἱός τε καί τό Πνεῦμα, ( σελ

For if the Spirit proceeds from the Son and out of Him by reason of being sent by the Son, then since the Spirit also sends the Son—not merely as man but also as God, as has been shown above—and since the Son and the Spirit likewise send the Father,

因為，如果聖靈是藉著被子所差遣而從子發出，那麼既然聖靈也差遣子（並非僅將他作為人來差遣，而是作為神，如上文所已證明），而且子與聖靈也差遣父，

1:652

) ὡς ὁ χρυσοῦς θεολόγος Ἰωάννης ἐξηγούμενος τό προφητικόν ἐκεῖνο, Κύριος ἀπέσταλκέ με καί τό Πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ, ἐξεδέξατο, ἰδού σοι καί τό Πνεῦμα ἀρχή, καί ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός καί τοῦ Πνεύματος ὁ Υἱόςἤ γεννᾶταιἤ ἐκπορεύεται

as John the golden-mouthed theologian declared when expounding that prophetic saying, “The Lord has sent me, and His Spirit”—behold, the Spirit too is a principle for you, and from the Father and the Spirit the Son would either be begotten or proceed.

正如金口約翰這位神學家在釋明那句先知的話「主差遣了我，並他的靈」時所陣述的。看哪，這樣來聖靈也成了你所謂的本原，造成子也要從父與聖靈或被生、或發出了。

1:653

Παρίημι γάρ τόν Πατέρα λέγειν, κἄν ἐκ τῆς λατινικῆς καινοφωνίας καί τοῦτ ἐκβαίνῃ, τό περιόν τῆς ὑπερβολῆς εὐλαβούμενος

For I forbear to say “the Father”—even though this too follows from the Latin novelty—out of reverent dread of so excessive an absurdity.

至於說「父」也被生或發出，這點我就忽略不談了——雖然這也是拉丁人的新奇說法所必然推出的結論——我是出於對這種跨大荒謬的敬畏而不願多說。

1:654

Ἴδοιδ ἄν τις οὐδέτ ἄλλα τῶν ἐκβαινόντων ἀτόπων τήν ἐπί τό χεῖρον ὑπερβολήν ἀπολείπονται˙ καί γάρ δι ἀλλήλων ἀναιρούμενα δείκνυται, εἰ διά τῆς ἀποστολῆς νοήσαιμεν τήν ἐκπόρευσινἤ τήν γέννησιν

One may see that none of the absurd consequences fall short of the others in reaching the very depths of error; for they are shown to cancel one another out, if we were to understand procession or generation in terms of mission.

人可以看出，這些推出的荒謬結論，沒有一個不是豬極荐邪、彼此不相上下；因為如果我們把發出或被生理解為差遣，它們便顕示出彼此互相抵消。

1:655

Εἰ γάρ ταῦτα κατά τήν ἀποστολήν, ἑκάτερον λοιπόν τούτων οὐχ ὑπάρξεώς ἐστι τρόπος, κἄν προαιώνια ᾖ˙ εἰ δέ κατά τήν πρό αἰώνων ἐκπόρευσίν τε καί γέννησιν τήν πρός ἡμᾶς ἀποστολήν νοήσαιμεν, ἀποστολή τις πρός ἡμᾶς ἄχρονος καί ἀΐδιοςἤ χρονική τις ὕπαρξιν ἔσται τοῦ Υἱοῦ καί τοῦ Πνεύματος

For if these are reckoned according to mission, then neither of them is any longer a mode of existence, even if they be before the ages; but if we understand the mission to us according to the pre-eternal procession and generation, then there would be either a timeless and everlasting mission to us, or else some temporal existence of the Son and of the Spirit.

因為，如果這些是按差遣來說的，那麼其中任一者便不再是存在的方式，即使它們是先於萬世的；但如果我們把向我們的差遣理解為那先於萬世的發出與被生，那麼就會有一個向我們的無時且永恆的差遣，或者子與聖靈有某種有時間性的存在。

1:656

Εἰ γάρ μέγα τῷ Πατρί τό μηδαμόθεν ὁρμᾶσθαι, οὐκ ἔλαττον τῷ Πνεύματι τό ἐκ τοιούτου Πατρός ἐκπορεύεσθαι

For if it is a great thing for the Father that He springs from no source, it is no less a great thing for the Spirit that He proceeds from such a Father.

因為，如果「不出於任何源頭」對父是偼大的，那麼「從這樣一位父發出」對聖靈也同樣偼大。

1:657

Οὐκ ἄρα τἀυτόν ἀποστολή καί ἐκπόρευσις

Mission, therefore, is not the same as procession.

所以，差遣與發出並非同一回事。

1:658

Ἡ μέν γάρ ἀποστολή τῆς πρός ἡμᾶς συγκαταβάσεως ἐκφαίνει τήν πρόθεσιν˙ ἡ δέ ἐκπόρευσις τῆς καθ ἑαυτό παρά Πατρός ὑπάρξεως τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐστιν ὄνομα

For the mission manifests the purpose of God's condescension toward us; but procession is the name for the Spirit's own existence in Himself, from the Father.

因為差遣顯明的是神屈尊降卑、就近我們的意旨；而發出則是聖靈本身、從父而有的那個自存的名稱。

1:659

Καί ἡ μέν ἔστι, καθ ἥν ἡμεῖς τοῦ εὖ εἶναι μετέσχομεν˙ ἡ δέ παρίστησι τό φύσει συνημμένον ὁμοτίμως πρός τόν Πατέρα, τό κατά μόνην ὑπόστασιν διαφέρον αὐτοῦ καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ Πνεῦμα ἅγιον

And the one is that whereby we have come to share in well-being; but the other sets forth the Holy Spirit as by nature conjoined in equal honour with the Father, the Spirit who differs from Him and from the Son in hypostasis alone.

前者（差遣）是我們藉以得以分享「善存」的途徑；後者（發出）則顯明聖靈本性上與父同尊相聯，這位聖靈僅僅在位格上與父及子有別。

1:660

) ἵν οὖν ὅ κατασκευάζεις αὖθις ἐκφύγῃς, πολύ τό μέσον ἐντίκτεις ταῖς θεολογίαις ταῖς σαῖς

Thus, in order again to escape what you yourself are constructing, you introduce a wide gulf into these theologies of yours.

這樣，你為了再次逃避你自己所構築的結論，便在你那些神學論述中劣裂出一道幽深的鴻溝。

1:661

Ἡμεῖς δέ καί ἑωράκαμεν ἐν τοῖς Πνεύματι γράφουσι Θεοῦ μυστήρια καί πιστεύομεν καί κηρύττομεν ἐν ἀλλήλοις τε ὄντα δι ἀλλήλων ἀμιγῶς χωροῦντα καί οὐ μᾶλλον πρός ἑαυτό ἕκαστονἤ πρός ἄλληλα ἔχοντα

But we have beheld, in those who write the mysteries of God by the Spirit, and we believe and we proclaim, that the divine Persons are in one another, passing through one another without confusion, and that each is no more related to itself than to the others.

但我們在那些藉聖靈書寫神之奧秘的人身上看見了，並且我們相信並宣告：三位彼此內住，互相不混雜地貫通互含，每一位與自己的關係並不多於與其他位格的關係。

1:662

Εἰ δέ πρός ἑαυτό ἕκαστον ἔχει ἀδιαστάτως τε καί ἀμέσως – πῶς γάρ οὔ;

And if each is related to itself without separation and without intermediary—for how could it be otherwise?—

而如果每一位與自己的關係是不分離、且無中介的——怎能不是如此呢？——

1:663

πῶς ἐμμέσως ἕξει πρός ἄλληλα;

how then could they be related to one another through any intermediary?

那麼他們彼此之間又怎能是透過中介而相關聯的呢？

1:664

Παρ ὅτουδ ἄν αὐτῶν, Υἱοῦ λέγω καί Πνεύματος, οἰκονομικῶς ἡμῖν ἴδωμεν τόν ἕτερον παράκλητον φανερούμενον, αὐτίκα διά τούτου πρός τήν πρώτην καί μόνην ἀρχήν ἀναγόμεθα˙ πέμπων γάρἤ διδούς τό Πνεῦμα ὁ Υἱός, πόθεν τοῦτἔχει, ὅτι μή παρά τῆς πρώτης καί μόνης ἀρχῆς;

From whichever of them—I mean the Son or the Spirit—we behold the other Paraclete being manifested to us in the economy of salvation, by that very one we are at once led up to the first and sole Principle; for when the Son sends or gives the Spirit, whence does He have this, save from the first and sole Principle?

無論我們是從他們二位中的哪一位——我是說子或聖靈——看見那另一位保惠師在救恩經維中向我們顯現，我們都立刻藉著這位被顯現者被提升到那唯一的首原；因為子在差遣或賜下聖靈時，他是從哪裡得著聖靈的呢？不正是從那唯一的首原嗎？

1:665

Οὐκοῦν οὕτω πέμπει τε καί δίδωσιν, ὡς ἔχων ὑφιστάμενον ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός, ἀλλ οὐκ αὐτός συνεκπορεύων καί συνυφιστῶν˙ καί πέμπων καί διδούς, τοῦτ αὐτό δείκνυσιν ἡμῖν, ὡς ἐμοῦ μέν ἔστιν, ἀλλ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός, οὐκ ἐξ ἐμοῦ

Accordingly the Son sends and gives the Spirit as one who possesses Him already subsisting from the Father, not as Himself co-causing the Spirit's procession or co-establishing His subsistence; and in sending and giving Him, He shows us this very thing: that the Spirit is indeed Mine, yet from the Father, not from Me.

因此子是以這樣的方式差遣並賜下聖靈：他作為拥有那已從父自存的聖靈者而差遣，而不是他自己參與聖靈的發出、參與使其自存；他藉著差遣並賜下聖靈，正向我們顯示這事：聖靈雖是「我的」，卻是從父而來，並非從我而來。

1:666

Τοῦτο δέ καί ὁ πολύς ἐν θεολογίᾳ καί ὄντως μέγας Ἀθανάσιος ἐννοήσας, μᾶλλον δέ φωτισθείς, καί ἡμῖν τῷ λόγῳ διαπορθμεύσας τό φῶς, ἐν μιᾷ τῶν Πρός Σεραπίωνα ἐπιστολῶν˙ ἑνός ὄντος, φησί, τοῦ Υἱοῦ, τοῦ ζῶντος Λόγου, μίαν εἶναι δεῖ καί πλήρη τήν ἁγιαστικήν καί φωτιστικήν ζωήν, οὖσαν ἐνέργειαν καί δωρεάν αὐτοῦ˙ ἥτις γε ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός λέγεται ἐκπορεύεσθαι, ἐπειδή παρά τοῦ Λόγου τοῦ ἐκ Πατρός ἐκλάμπει καί ἀποστέλλεται

This too Athanasius—a man great in theology and truly mighty—perceived, or rather was illumined to see, and conveyed the light to us by his words, in one of his Letters to Serapion: “Since the Son, the living Word, is one, there must be one and complete sanctifying and illuminating life, which is His own energy and gift; and this life is said to proceed from the Father, because it shines forth and is sent forth from the Word who is from the Father.”

這點也是那位在神學上偼大、真正偉大的亞他那修所領悟的，或者說是被光照而明白的，並藉言語將這光傳送給我們。他在《致塞拉皮翁書信》之一中說：「既然子、那活聖言是唯一的，那麼那成聖並光照的生命也必是唯一且完全的，這生命乃是他的能力與恩賜；這生命被說是從父發出，因為它從那出於父的聖言那裡照射發出並被差遣出來。」

1:667

) γάρ ὁ Θεός ἠγάπησε τόν κόσμον, ὥστε τόν Υἱόν αὐτοῦ τόν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ὁ δέ Υἱός τό Πνεῦμα ἀποστέλλει

For “God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son,” and the Son sends forth the Spirit.

因為「神愛世人，甚至將他的獨生子賜給他們」，而子則差遣聖靈。

1:668

Τοῦτο γάρ αὐτό ἐστιν ἐκεῖνο, τό παρά τοῦ τῆς θεολογίας ἐπωνύμου Γρηγορίου μικρόν καί ἀνωτέρω εἰρημένον, ὡς ὅ τι ἄν περί τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος ταπεινότερον λέγηται, τό χάρισμα, τό δώρημα, καί εἴ τι ἄλλο τοιοῦτον, ἐπί τήν πρώτην αἰτίαν ἀνακτέον, ἵνα τό ἐξ οὗ δειχθῇ

For this is the very same thing that was said by Gregory, the one surnamed “the Theologian,” a little above: that whatever is said of the divine Spirit in a lowlier manner—the grace, the gift, and anything else of the kind—must be referred back to the first Cause, so that the source “from whom” may be made plain.

因為這正是那位素有「神學家」之稱的貴格利在稍前所說的同一件事：凡是以較低微的方式論及聖靈的——如「恩賜」、「礼物」及諸如此類的名稱——都應追源到那首要的原因，好叫那「所從來之處」得以顯明。

1:669

Εἰπών γάρ ὁ μέγας ἐνταυθοῖ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον ταπεινότερον δωρεάν καί ἐνέργειαν τοῦ Λόγου, καί δείξας ὡς οὐχί περί τῆς ὑπάρξεως οὐδέ περί τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτῷ τοῦ Πνεύματος ὁ Λόγος (ἡ γάρ ἐνέργεια ἐνεργεῖται μᾶλλονἤ ἐνεργεῖ, τό δέ Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον παρεκτικόν καί μεταδοτικόν ὑπάρχει τῶν αὐτοῦ δωρεῶν) σαφῶς οὖν ἐμφήνας ὡς οὐχί περί τῆς προαιωνίου λέγει ἐκπορεύσεως, ἐπήγαγεν, ὅτι παρά τοῦ Λόγου τοῦ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκλάμπει καί ἀποστέλλεται

For when the great Gregory here called the Holy Spirit, in a lowlier sense, the gift and energy of the Word, and showed that the Word's statement was not about the Spirit's existence nor about His hypostasis (for an energy is acted upon rather than acts, whereas the Holy Spirit is the bestower and imparter of His own gifts), thus clearly making plain that he was not speaking of the pre-eternal procession, he added that the Spirit “shines forth and is sent from the Word who is from the Father.”

因為那位偼大的貴格利在此處以較低微的意思稱聖靈為聖言的「恩賜」與「能力」，並顯明聖言這話並非論及聖靈的存在、也非論及他的位格（因為能力是被動運作而非主動運作，而聖靈則是他自己恩賜的賦與者與分賜者），他既清楚明示他不是在說那先於萬世的發出，便接著說：聖靈「從那出於父的聖言照射發出並被差遣」。

1:670

Τί δή, διά τοῦ ἐκλάμπειν καί ἀποστέλλεσθαι παρά τοῦ Λόγου νοοῦμεν ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἐκπορεύεται;

What then? Do we understand from the phrase “shines forth and is sent from the Word” that the Spirit proceeds out of Him?

那麼怎樣呢？我們該從「從聖言照射發出並被差遣」這句話理解為聖靈是從他（子）發出的嗎？

1:671

Ἄπαγε, φησίν, ὡς πορρωτάτω βάλλεις τοῦ σκοποῦ˙ ἀλλ ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκπορεύεται νοοῦμεν καί λέγομεν, ἐπεί παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ δίδοταί τε καί ἀποστέλλεται

Away with such a notion! he says; you cast wide of the mark. Rather, we understand and declare that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, while He is given and sent from the Son.

他說：謝不敏！你完全偏離了靶的；我們所理解並宣告的是：聖靈是從父發出，而是藉著子被賜下並被差遣。

1:672

Ἔχων γάρ ἐκεῖθεν πρό αἰώνων συνυφεστώς ὁ Υἱός τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, νῦν πρός ἡμᾶς καί ἀποστέλλει καί δίδωσιν

For the Son, having the Holy Spirit co-subsisting with Him from the Father before the ages, now both sends and gives Him to us.

因為子既在萬世之前就擁有那從父而來、與他同存的聖靈，如今便將他差遣並賜給我們。

1:673

Ἐπεί δέ ἡ δόσις ἔλλαμψις (καί τοῦτ ἴσασιν οἱ μεμυημένοι, ὅσοι λαμπρότητα Θεοῦ καί εἶδον καί ἔπαθον, ὅσοι τήν δόξαν τοῦ Κυρίου εἶδον ὡς μονογενοῦς παρά Πατρός, ὅσοι τῷ φωτί τῆς θεότητος ἐπί τοῦ ὄρους περιηυγάσθησαν, πρός δέ τούτοις καί οἱ τούτοις ἀσφαλῶς πιστεύσαντες) ἐπεί οὖν ἡ δόσις ἔλλαμψις, ἀντί τοῦ παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ δίδοσθαί τε καί ἀποστέλλεσθαι, παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐκλάμπειν ἔφη καί ἀποστέλλεσθαι

And since the giving is an illumination (and this those initiated know—all who have both seen and experienced the radiance of God, all who beheld the glory of the Lord as of the only-begotten from the Father, all who were illumined round about by the light of the Godhead upon the mountain, and besides these, those who have firmly believed in them)—since, then, the giving is an illumination, instead of “being given and sent from the Son” he said “shining forth and being sent from the Son.”

而既然這賜與乃是一種照明（這事那些受過奧秘化導的人都知道——那些既看見又親身體驗神之光耀的人，那些看見主的榮耀、正如父獨生子之榮耀的人，那些在山上被神性之光四面環照的人，以及除此之外那些穩妥相信他們的人）——既然這賜與乃是照明，他便以「從子照射發出並被差遣」來代替「從子被賜下並被差遣」。

1:674

Καί τοῦτ ἔτι σαφέστερον δείκνυσιν ἐκ τῆς κατασκευῆς τοῦ λόγου˙ ὁ μέν γάρ Θεός καί Πατήρ, φησί, τόν Υἱόν ἔδωκεν ὑπέρ ἡμῶν˙ ὁ δέ Υἱός, τό Πνεῦμα

And he shows this still more clearly from the construction of his statement: “For God the Father,” he says, “gave the Son for us; and the Son gave the Spirit.”

他又從話語的結構上更清楚地顯明這點，他說：「因為神、即父，為我們賜下了子；而子則賜下了聖靈。」

1:675

) Ἀλλά γάρ ὥσπερ ἡ τοῦ Υἱοῦ παρά τοῦ Πατρός ὑπέρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου σωτηρίας δόσιςἤ ἀποστολή γέννησις οὐκ ἔστι, πολλοῦ γε ἄν δή που δέοι καί ἀπείρου εἶναι ἡ προαιώνιος, οὕτως οὐδ ἡ παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ δόσις τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματοςἤ ἀποστολή ἐκπόρευσίς ἐστι, πόσῳ γε μᾶλλον καί ὑπέρ τό πόσῳ ἡ πρό τῶν αἰώνων παρά τοῦ Πατρός οὐ γενομένη, ἄπαγε, ἀλλά καί πρό τούτων οὖσα καί τῷ Πατρί συνάναρχος

But just as the Father's giving or sending of the Son for the salvation of the world is not a generation—for the pre-eternal generation would surely have to be far other than this, indeed infinitely so—so neither is the Son's giving or sending of the Holy Spirit a procession; how much more, and beyond all measure of “how much more,” is this true of that procession from the Father before the ages, which did not come into being—away with the thought!—but exists even before these things and is co-unoriginate with the Father.

但正如父為世人得救而賜下或差遣子，並不是被生——那先於萬世的被生必須與此迮然不同，甚至是無限地不同——同樣，子賜下或差遣聖靈也不是發出；那麼，那先於萬世、從父而來、並非被造成（謝不敏！）、反而先於這一切、並與父同無起始的發出，豈不更是、且超乎一切「更是」地迮非被生嗎？

1:676

Οὐκ ἔγωγε οἶμαι, εἰ μή σαφῶς ἐθέλει θεομαχεῖν

I for one do not think so—unless he is plainly resolved to wage war against God.

我認為絕非如此——除非他是決心公然與神為敵。

1:677

Ἀλλά καί αὐτοῦ, φησί, τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα καί ἴδιον αὐτοῦ λέγεται

“But,” he says, “the Spirit is also called the Spirit of the Son Himself, and His own.”

他又說：「但聖靈也被稱為子本身的靈、為屬他自己的靈。」

1:678

Ἐξαπέστειλε γάρ ὁ Θεός, φησίν, ὁ ἀπόστολος, τό Πνεῦμα τοῦ Υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν, κρᾶζον˙ ἀββά, ὁ Πατήρ

“For God,” says the Apostle, “has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying: Abba, Father.”

因為使徒說：「神差遣了他兒子的靈進入我們的心，呼叫：阿爹，父啊。」

1:679

Ὑπέρευγε˙ τήν ἐξ γάρ ἀφείς, σύγε ὅς τίς ποτ εἶ ὁ πρόσφατος ἀντικείμενος, τό αὐτοῦ νῦν ἡμῖν προβάλλῃ ταύτης χωρίς˙ἤ σοι κἀκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ τό ἐξ αὐτοῦ νεοεῖταί τε καί κατασκευάζεται, τῷ διαλεκτικῷ τῶν ἀπερινοήτων;

Bravo! For having dropped the word “from,” you—whoever you are, this newfangled adversary—now put forward to us “His own” apart from that “from”; or does the “from Him” get newly devised and constructed for you out of the “His own,” by your dialectic concerning things incomprehensible?

好極了！你這不知何許人也、這新冲出來的對門，你抹去了「從」字，現在卻擇開「從」字不談，只向我們提出「屬他自己」；還是說，你靠著你那処理不可思議之事的辩證法，就能從「屬他」裡新造並構築出「從他而出」嗎？

1:680

Εἰπέ δή μοι, καί σύ αὐτός οὐ σαυτοῦ;

Tell me then: are you yourself not your own as well?

那麼請告訴我：你自己不也是「屬於你自己」的嗎？

1:681

Τοῦτό γε, οἶμαι, ἀποδράσεις ἡμῶν

This point, I think, you will dodge from us.

我想，這一點你是會向我們閃躲了。

1:682

Οὐ γάρ ἔοικάς μοι ἀκοῦσαι τοῦ λέγοντος, γενοῦ σεαυτοῦ ἄνθρωπε

For you do not seem to me to have heard him who says: “Come to your senses, O man” (literally, “become your own self, O man”).

因為你在我看來並未聽進那位說「人啊，要回復你自己」者的話。

1:683

Εἰ γάρ ἤκουσας καί ὑπήκουσας, ἔστεργες ἄν τά παραδεδομένα περί Θεοῦ καί τοῖς ὑπέρ ἄνθρωπον καί λόγοις καί πράγμασι, καί ταῦτα καινοτομῶν, ἥκιστα ἐπεχείρησας

For if you had heard and obeyed, you would have cherished the things handed down concerning God—and that by means both surpassing man, in words and in deeds—and you would never have attempted these innovations.

因為你若聽進並順從了，便會珍愛那些關於神的、並以超乎人的言語與事跡所傳下的教導，而絕不會試圖這些新奇的革新。

1:684

Ἀλλ εἰ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἑαυτοῦ, οὐκοῦν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ κατά σέ

But if man belongs to himself, then, according to you, man is also out of himself.

但如果人是「屬於自己」的，那麼按你的說法，人也是「出於自己」的了。

1:685

Τόν Υἱόν δέ τοῦ Πνεύματος πῶς οὐ λέγομεν, φησίν, εἰκότως˙ δόξαι γάρ ἄν Πατήρ τό Πνεῦμα, τοῦ Υἱοῦ συνεισάγοντος τῇ διανοίᾳ τόν Πατέρα˙ διά τοῦτο τοίνυν Υἱόν μέν Πνεύματος οὐ λέγομεν, ἵνα μή δόξῃ ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος, Υἱοῦ δέ Πνεῦμα λέγομεν, ἀλλ οὐ παρά τοῦτο καί ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ˙ Πνεῦμα γάρ αὐτοῦ λέγεται, οὐχ ὡς ἐξ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ ὡς ἐν αὐτῷ ὄν

“But why,” he says, “do we not, fittingly, call the Son the Son of the Spirit? For the Spirit might seem to be Father, since the Son brings the Father into our conception along with Him; for this reason, then, we do not call the Son the Son of the Spirit, lest He seem to be from the Spirit, yet we do call the Spirit the Spirit of the Son—but not on that account also from the Son; for He is called His Spirit not as being from Him, but as being in Him.”

他又說：「但我們為何不適當地稱子為聖靈的子呢？因為若那樣，聖靈便似乎成了父，因為子會連同父一併帶入我們的思維；所以，正為此故，我們不稱子為聖靈的子，免得他似乎是從聖靈而來；但我們卻稱聖靈為子的靈，只是並不因此便說他是從子而來；因為他被稱為他的靈，不是作為從他而出，而是作為在他之內。」

1:686

) Καί τοῦτο διδάσκου παρά τοῦ ἀποστόλου, οὐδείς οἶδε, λέγοντος, τά τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, εἰ μή τό Πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τό ἐν αὐτῷ˙ ὡς οὖν Πνεῦμα μέν ἀνθρώπου λέγεται, ἀλλ οὐχ ὡς ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ἀλλ ὡς ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ὄν, οὕτω καί τό θεῖον Πνεῦμα καλεῖται τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ἀλλ οὐχ ὡς ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ἀλλ ὡς ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ φυσικῶς ἐξ ἀϊδίου ὄν καί τάς ἀφύκτους δοκούσας σοι τῶν συλλογισμῶν ἀνάγκας διαφεῦγον

And learn this too from the Apostle, who says: “No one knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him.” As, then, it is called the spirit of a man, yet not as being from the man, but as being in the man, so also the divine Spirit is called the Spirit of the Son, yet not as being from the Son, but as being in the Son by nature from all eternity, and thereby escaping those constraints of your syllogisms which seem to you inescapable.

你也該從使徒那裡學這點，他說：「除了在人裡頭的靈，誰知道人的事呢？」那麼，正如這被稱為人的靈，卻不是作為從人而出，而是作為在人之內；同樣，那聖的靈也被稱為子的靈，卻不是作為從子而出，而是作為本性上從永恆就在子之內，並藉此逃脱了那些你以為無可逃避的三段論證束縛。

1:687

Ἐκ διαιρέσεως γάρ ὁ λατινικῶς φρονῶν συλλογιζόμενος φησι˙ ἐπεί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐστι τό Πνεῦμα,ἤ ὡς δι αὐτοῦ χορηγούμενόν ἐστινἤ ὡς ὁμοούσιονἤ ὡς ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἐκπορευόμενον

For the one who thinks in the Latin manner, reasoning by way of division, says: Since the Spirit is the Son's, He is so either as being supplied through Him, or as being consubstantial, or as proceeding out of Him.

因為那按拉丁人方式思考的人，以分類法推論說：既然聖靈是子的，那麼他或是作為藉著子而被供應的，或是作為同質的，或是作為從子發出的。

1:688

Καί ὡς μέν χορηγούμενον οὐκ ἔστι˙ προαιωνίως μέν γάρ ὑπάρχει τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα, τό δέ χορηγεῖσθαι ὑστερογενές

Now He is not the Son's as one supplied; for the Spirit is the Son's from before the ages, whereas being supplied is something that comes about later.

現在，他並非作為被供應者而是子的；因為聖靈自萬世之前就是子的，而「被供應」則是後來才發生的。

1:689

Οὐδ ὡς ὁμοούσιον˙ λέγοιτο γάρ ἄν καί ὁ Υἱός τοῦ Πνεύματος

Nor is He the Son's as being consubstantial; for in that case the Son too would be called the Spirit's.

他也不是作為同質者而是子的；因為若如此，子也可被稱為聖靈的了。

1:690

Λείπεται τοίνυν τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα εἶναί τε καί λέγεσθαι ὡς ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἐκπορευόμενον

It remains, therefore, that the Spirit is and is called the Son's as proceeding out of Him.

因此剩下的唯一可能便是：聖靈是、並被稱為子的，乃是作為從子發出的。

1:691

Τί οὖν, ἐάνπερ ἀναφανῇ τι ταύτης τῆς διαιρέσεως ἐκτός, καθ ὅ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα λέγοιτ ἄν, οὐχ ὁ ἐκ διαιρέσεως οὗτός σοι καθ ὑπόθεσιν συλλογισμός ἀσυλλόγιστος τό παράπαν γένοιτ ἄν;

What then, if there should appear some other sense, outside this division, according to which the Spirit might be called the Son's—would not this hypothetical syllogism of yours, drawn from division, become utterly invalid as a piece of reasoning?

那麼，如果出現了某種在這分類之外的意義，按那意義聖靈也可被稱為子的，那麼你這個從分類法推出的、出於假設的三段論證不就彻底成了不能成立的謬論了嗎？

1:692

Ἔστι γάρ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα ὡς ἐξ αἰώνων καί εἰς αἰῶνας ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκπορευόμενον καί ἐν Υἱῷ φυσικῶς ὑπάρχον καί ἀναπαυόμενον˙ καί διά τοῦτο Πνεῦμα μέν Υἱοῦ λέγεται, ἐκ δέ τοῦ Υἱοῦ οὐ λέγεται

For the Spirit is the Son's as proceeding from the Father from ages unto ages, and as existing and resting in the Son by nature; and on this account He is indeed called the Spirit of the Son, but is not said to be from the Son.

因為聖靈是子的，乃是作為從萬世直到萬世、從父發出者，並作為本性上存於子之內、安息於子者；正因此故，他雖被稱為子的靈，卻不被說是從子而來。

1:693

Καί ὁ νοῦς γάρ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐστι γενόμενος καί ἐν αὐτῷ ὑπάρχων, δηλονότι τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ˙ καί νοῦς μέν ἀνθρώπου λέγεται, ἄνθρωπος δέ τοῦ νοῦ οὐ λέγεται˙ ἀλλ οὐδ ἐξ ἀνθρώπου λέγεται ὁ νοῦς, ὅ γε κατ οὐσίαν˙ οὐ γάρ δή περί ἐνεργείας νῦν ὁ λόγος

For the mind of man too has come into being from God and exists in him, that is, in the man; and it is called the mind of the man, yet the man is not called the man of the mind; nor is the mind—at least in respect of essence—said to be out of the man; for the discussion now is not about energy.

因為人的心智也是從神而來、並存於他之內的，即存於那人之內；它被稱為人的心智，卻不能說人是心智的；而且就本質而言，心智也不被說是出於人的；因為現在所論並非關於能力。

1:694

Οὐκ ἄρα ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐστι τό Πνεῦμα, εἰ μή τήν χάριν εἴπῃς Πνεῦμα καί τήν ἐνέργειαν˙ καί τόν νοῦν γάρ, ὅταν τήν ἐνέργειαν σημαίνῃ τοὔνομα, φαίῃς ἄν ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ὡς ἐκφαινόμενός τε καί μεταδιδόμενον

Therefore the Spirit is not out of the Son—unless by “Spirit” you mean the grace and the energy; for the mind too, when the word signifies its energy, you might say is out of the man, as being manifested and imparted.

所以聖靈並非出於子——除非你所謂的「靈」是指恩典與能力；因為心智也是如此，當「心智」這詞指的是它的能力時，你也可說它是出於人的，因為它是被顯明並被分賜出來的。

1:695

Ἴδοιδ ἄν τις τούς θεολόγους καί νοῦν λέγοντας εἶναι Χριστοῦ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον˙ ὁ γάρ θεῖος Κύριλλος (σελ

One may also see the theologians calling the Holy Spirit the mind of Christ; for the divine Cyril,

人也可看見神學家們稱聖靈為基督的心智；因為那位偼大的區利羅（西里爾），

1:696

) ἐν τετάρτῳ κεφαλαίῳ τῶν Θησαυρῶν φησιν, ὅτι νοῦς ὑπάρχον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, πάντα τά ἐν αὐτῷ διαλέγεται τοῖς μαθηταῖς

in the fourth chapter of the Thesauri, says that, being the mind of Christ, He expounds to the disciples all the things that are in Him.

在《寶藏》一書第四章中說：聖靈既是基督的心智，便將一切在他之內的事講解給門徒。

1:697

Καθάπερ οὖν ἐφ ἡμῶν ὁ νοῦς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐστί καί κατ οὐσίαν καί κατ ἐνέργειαν, καί κατ οὐσίαν μέν αὐτοῦ ἐστιν ὁ νοῦς, ἀλλ οὐκ ἐξ αὐτοῦ, κατ ἐνέργειαν δέ καί αὐτοῦ ἐστι καί ἐξ αὐτοῦ, οὕτω καί τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐστιν ὡς Θεοῦ καί κατ οὐσίαν καί κατ ἐνέργειαν

Just as, then, in our case the mind of man belongs to him both in respect of essence and in respect of energy—and in respect of essence the mind is his, yet not out of him, while in respect of energy it is both his and out of him—so also the Holy Spirit is Christ's, as God's, both in respect of essence and in respect of energy.

那麼，正如在我們身上，人的心智無論就本質還是就能力而言都是他的——就本質而言，心智是他的，卻不是出於他；就能力而言，它既是他的也是出於他的——同樣，聖靈作為神，也無論就本質還是就能力而言是基督的。

1:698

Ἀλλά κατά μέν τήν οὐσίαν καί τήν ὑπόστασιν αὐτοῦ ἐστιν, ἀλλ οὐκ ἐξ αὐτοῦ˙ κατά δέ τήν ἐνέργειαν καί αὐτοῦ ἐστιν καί ἐξ αὐτοῦ

But in respect of essence and of His hypostasis He is the Son's, yet not out of Him; whereas in respect of energy He is both His and out of Him.

但就他（聖靈）的本質與位格而言，他是子的，卻不是出於子；而就能力而言，他既是子的也是出於子的。

1:699

καί ἀθετοῦσι τήν οὐσίαν καί τήν ὑπόστασιν τοῦ παναγίου Πνεύματος

…and they set at naught the essence and the hypostasis of the all-holy Spirit.

……並且他們藐視了至聖聖靈的本質與位格。

1:700

Τό μέν οὖν ἐκ διαιρέσεως συμπέρασμα τοῦ λατινικοῦ καθ ὑπόθεσιν συλλογισμοῦ διαλέλυται τελέως καί πρός τό μή ὄν κεχώρηκε˙ μᾶλλον δέ πρός ἅπαν τοὐναντίον

Thus the conclusion drawn by division in the Latins' hypothetical syllogism has been completely dissolved and has come to nothing; or rather, it has issued in the very opposite of what they intended.

因此，拉丁人那出於假設、以分類法推出的三段論證結論已被彻底瓦解、歸於虛無；或者說得更貼切些，它反而導向了與他們初衷完全相反的結論。

1:701

Ἄν δέ τις ἴδῃ καί τά παρ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Λατίνου ἀναιρούμενα, ἵνα ἐξ ἀνάγκης τό ἕν ἀπερίτρεπτον δειχθῇ, τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῦτον ὄψεται φανερῶς ἀντίθετον˙ τοῦ γάρ Υἱοῦ, φησίν, ἔστι τε καί λέγεται τό Πνεῦμα, οὐχ ὡς δι αὐτοῦ χορηγούμενονἤ φαινόμενον (ἐπειδήπερ ἀνάρχως μέν τό Πνεῦμα τοῦ Υἱοῦ, τό δέ χορηγεῖν οὐκ ἄναρχον) οὐδ ὡς ὁμοούσιον˙ λέγοιτο γάρ ἄν καί ὁ Υἱός τοῦ Πνεύματος

But if one also considers the things that the Latin himself sets aside in order to demonstrate of necessity that the one [cause] is unalterable, he will see this man manifestly opposed to the saints. For the Spirit, he says, is and is called the Spirit of the Son—not as being supplied or made manifest through Him (since the Spirit is of the Son without beginning, whereas the supplying is not without beginning), nor as being consubstantial; for then the Son too could be called [the Son] of the Spirit.

但若有人也考察那拉丁人自己為了必然證明那唯一〔因〕是不可變更的而排除的種種，他必看見此人顯然與眾聖徒相對立。因為他說，聖靈是、也被稱為子的靈──卻不是作為藉著子被供應或被彰顯（因為聖靈無始地屬於子，而那「供應」卻不是無始的），也不是作為同質的；因為若是這樣，子也就可被稱為聖靈的〔子〕了。

1:702

Ἀλλ ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος, οὗ καί ἀκατάσκευος ἡ ρῆσις διαφερόντως ἐστίν ἰσχυροτέρα τῶν λατινικῶν συλλογισμῶν τε καί διαιρέσεων, οὗτος οὖν ἐν τῷ Περί τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος λόγῳ, τό δι Υἱοῦ, φησί, πεφηνέναι τό Πνεῦμα σαφές πεποίηκεν ὁ ἀπόστολος, Υἱοῦ Πνεῦμα ὀνομάσας αὐτόν

But the great Basil—whose plain utterance is markedly stronger than the syllogisms and distinctions of the Latins—he, then, in his treatise On the Holy Spirit, made it clear that the Spirit shone forth through the Son when the Apostle named Him the Spirit of the Son.

然而偉大的巴西流──他那樸實無華的話語遠比拉丁人的三段論與分辨更為有力──他在《論聖靈》一書中，便闡明了使徒既稱聖靈為子的靈，就清楚顯明聖靈是藉著子而顯現出來的。

1:703

Ὁρᾷς ὅτι Χριστοῦ τό Πνεῦμα λέγεται ὡς παρ αὐτοῦ χορηγούμενόν τε καί φαινόμενον;

Do you see that the Spirit is called the Spirit of Christ as being supplied and made manifest by Him?

你看，聖靈被稱為基督的靈，乃是因祂由基督被供應、被彰顯出來，豈不是嗎？

1:704

Πνεῦμα μέν οὖν Υἱοῦ ἀνάρχως ἐστί τε καί λέγεται˙ ἀλλά καί αὐτό τό χορηγεῖν ἔχειν ἀνάρχως ἔχει ὁ Υἱός˙ οὐδεμία γάρ πρόσληψιςἤ ἀφαίρεσις (σελ

The Spirit, then, is and is called the Spirit of the Son without beginning; but the Son also possesses without beginning this very [power] of supplying. For there is no addition or subtraction (p. ...)

如此，聖靈無始地是、也被稱為子的靈；而子也無始地具有這「供應」本身〔的能力〕。因為那裏並無任何增添或減損（頁……）

1:705

) ἐκεῖ, ὡςδ ὑπό χρόνον ὄντα τά λαμβάνοντα, χρονικῶς ἔλαβον τήν χορηγίαν

...there, as the things that receive, being under time, received the supply temporally.

……那裏，正如那些領受者既處於時間之下，便是在時間中領受那供應的。

1:706

Ἀλλά καί ὡς ὁμοφυές καί ὁμοούσιον λέγοιτ ἄν τό Πνεῦμα τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ὡς ὁ αὐτός μέγας Βασίλειος ἐν τῷ Πρός Ἀμφιλόχιον ὀκτωκαιδεκάτῳ κεφαλαίῳ Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ, φησί, λέγεται, ὡς κατά φύσιν ᾠκειωμένον αὐτῷ

But also as being of the same nature and consubstantial may the Spirit be called the Spirit of the Son, as the same great Basil [says] in the eighteenth chapter of his work To Amphilochius: "It is called the Spirit of Christ," he says, "as being by nature appropriated to Him."

聖靈也可因與子同性、同質而被稱為子的靈，正如這同一位偉大的巴西流在《致安非羅基》第十八章中所說：「祂被稱為基督的靈，」他說，「乃是因按本性與祂相親屬。」

1:707

Καί ὁ θεῖος Κύριλλος ἐν τῷ Περί τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἀγωνιστικῷ φησί λόγῳ˙ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, ὥσπερ κατ οὐσίαν ὑπάρχει τοῦ Θεοῦ καί Πατρός, οὕτω καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ κατ οὐσίαν ἐστίν, ὡς μετά τοῦ Υἱοῦ οὐσιωδῶς γεννηθέντος, ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἀφράστως ἐκπορευόμενον˙ κἀν τῇ τοῦ Κατά Λουκᾶν εὐαγγελίου ἐξηγήσει, ὥσπερ, φησίν, ὁ δάκτυλος ἀπήρτηται τῆς χειρός, οὐκ ἀλλότριος ὤν αὐτῆς, ἀλλ ἐν αὐτῇ φυσικῶς, οὕτω καί τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον τῷ τῆς ὁμοουσιότητος λόγῳ συνῆπται μέν πρός ἕνωσιν τῷ Υἱῷ, ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ δέ καί Πατρός ἐκπορεύεται

And the divine Cyril, in his polemical treatise On the Holy Spirit, says: "The Holy Spirit, just as He exists according to essence from God the Father, so too He is of the Son according to essence, as proceeding ineffably from the Father together with the Son who is essentially begotten." And in his commentary on the Gospel According to Luke he says: "Just as the finger is joined to the hand, not being foreign to it but naturally in it, so too the Holy Spirit, by reason of consubstantiality, is conjoined in union with the Son, yet proceeds from God the Father."

神聖的區利羅在其護教性的《論聖靈》一文中說：「聖靈，正如祂按本質出於父神，照樣也按本質屬於子，因祂與那按本質受生的子一同，從父不可言喻地發出。」他在《路加福音註釋》中又說：「正如手指連於手，並非與手相異，乃按本性在手之中，照樣聖靈也因同質之理而與子相聯合為一，卻是從父神發出的。」

1:708

Πνεῦμα μέν οὖν Υἱοῦ καί ὡς ὁμοφυές λέγοιτ ἄν˙ οὐ λέγεται δέ καί ὁ Υἱός τοῦ Πνεύματος, ὡς ἄν μή Πατήρ τό Πνεῦμα δόξῃ

The Spirit, then, may be called the Spirit of the Son also as being of the same nature; but the Son is not also called [the Son] of the Spirit, lest the Spirit should seem to be Father.

如此，聖靈可因同性而被稱為子的靈；但子卻不被稱為聖靈的〔子〕，免得聖靈被視為父。

1:709

Ἔπεισί μοι τοιγαροῦν θαυμάζειν τό τῆς λατινικῆς παρουσίας ὑπερβάλλον, ἀναλογιζομένῳ ὅτι τοῦ Πνεύματος κατά τούς εἰρημένους πάντας τρόπους λεγομένου τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καθ ἕνα δέ μόνον οὐδαμῶς, αὐτοί πάντας μέν ἐκείνους δυσσεβῶς ἠγνόησάν τε καί ἠθέτησαν, τῷ δέ μηδαμῶς εἰρημένῳ προσχόντες καί τοῦτο δυσσεβῶς, ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τήν ὕπαρξιν ἔχειν τό Πνεῦμα ἐδογμάτησάν τε καί ἠθέτησαν, τῷ δέ μηδαμῶς εἰρημένῳ προσχόντες καί τοῦτο δυσσεβῶς, ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐστί τε καί λέγεται

It therefore comes upon me to marvel at the excess of the Latin presumption, when I consider that, although the Spirit is called of the Son in all the aforesaid ways, but in one way alone not at all, they impiously ignored and rejected all those [valid] ways, and—attending impiously to the one that is in no way said—they decreed and dogmatized that the Spirit has its existence from the Son, that it is and is called from the Son.

因此我不禁驚異於拉丁人那過分的僭妄；當我細想：聖靈雖按上述一切方式被稱為子的靈，惟獨按一種方式絕不可如此說，他們竟不敬虔地全然忽視、棄絕了那一切〔合宜的〕方式，反倒緊抓住那絕不可說的一種，並照樣不敬虔地立為教義，斷定聖靈是從子取得其存有，是、且被稱為出於子。

1:710

Ἀλλ ἵν ἐπί βεβαίαν ἕδραν στηρίξωμεν τούς περί τούτου λογισμούς, σαφεστάτῳ τε καί θεοπνεύστῳ λόγῳ τούτους ἐπισημηνάμενοι, Ἰωάννην οἶσθα τόν ἐκ Δαμασκοῦ πυρσεύσαντα καί τήν οἰκουμένην ὅλην φωτί περιαυγάσαντα θεογνωσίας

But that we may establish our reasonings on this matter upon a sure foundation, marking them out by a most lucid and God-inspired word—you know John of Damascus, who blazed like a torch and illumined the whole inhabited world with the light of the knowledge of God.

但為使我們在此事上的論證立於穩固的根基之上，並以最明晰、受神默示的話語為其印證──你認得大馬士革的約翰，他如火炬般燃燒，以認識神的光照亮了整個普世。

1:711

Οὐχ οὗτος ἀριδηλότατά φησιν, ὡς Πνεῦμα μέν Υἱοῦ λέγομεν, ἐκ δέ τοῦ Υἱοῦ οὐ λέγομεν;

Does not this man say most clearly that we say the Spirit is of the Son, but we do not say [it is] from the Son?

這人豈不是極清楚地說：我們說聖靈是子的靈，卻不說〔聖靈〕出於子嗎？

1:712

Ναί, φησί, καί οὐκ ἔχω λέγειν ὡς οὐχ οὗτος οὕτως εἴρηκεν, ἀλλ ἔχω λέγειν ὡς πρός τό πρῶτον αἴτιον ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ οὐ λέγεται

"Yes," he says, "and I cannot say that he did not so speak; but I can say that, with respect to the first cause, it is not said to be from the Son."

他說：「是的，我不能說他沒有這樣講；但我能說：就第一因而言，並不說聖靈出於子。」

1:713

) Βαβαί˙ ἔστι δέ σοι καί ἄλλο αἴτιον ἐπί τῆς θεότητος, εἰ μή τό πρῶτον;

) Astonishing! Is there then for you some other cause in the Godhead besides the first?

) 奇哉！難道在神性中，除了那第一〔因〕之外，你還有別的因嗎？

1:714

Τοῦτο γάρ ἐφ ἡμῶν τῶν δεδημιουργημένων τοῖς πατράσιν εἴρηται καί οὕτως ἔχει λόγον τό πρῶτον ἐπί τοῦ αἰτίου, ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ τοῦ Πνεύματος ὄντων συναιτίων

For this [language] is used of us creatures with regard to our fathers, and thus the term "first" has meaning in respect of the cause, since both the Son and the Spirit are co-causes [of offspring among us].

因為這〔說法〕是就我們受造者、關乎我們的父輩而言的；如此「第一」一詞乃是就因而言才有意義，因在我們中間，子與〔靈〕都是共同的因。

1:715

κἀκεῖ παρά τῶν θεολόγων, ὡς δεικτικόν τῆς τοῦ Πατρός ὑποστάσεως, ἀλλ οὐχ ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ συναιτίου ὄντος ἐπί τῆς θεότητος

...and there [it is used] by the theologians as indicative of the hypostasis of the Father, but not as though the Son too were a co-cause in the Godhead.

……在那裏，眾神學家用此詞乃是為要指明父的位格，並非好像在神性中子也是共同的因。

1:716

Οὐκ ἐπί τοῦ ἀνάρχου τοίνυν Πνεύματος τό προκαταρκτικόν καί πρῶτον αἴτιον, ἄπαγε τῆς βλασφημίας, ἀλλ ἐπί τῶν ἐσχηκότων τήν χρονικήν ἀρχήν, ἐφ ὧν καί ὁ Υἱός τῷ Πατρί συναίτιός ἐστιν

Therefore the originating and first cause does not pertain to the Spirit who is without beginning—away with the blasphemy!—but to the things that have a temporal beginning, in respect of which the Son too is co-cause with the Father.

所以那原初的、第一的因，並不適用於那無始的聖靈──願這褻瀆遠離！──乃是適用於那些具有時間起始的事物，就那些事物而言，子也與父同為共因。

1:717

Ἀλλά μήν ἐφ ὧν πρῶτον κυρίως αἴτιόν ἐστιν ὁ Πατήρ, τῶν κτισμάτων δηλαδή, οὐκ εὐσεβές εἰπεῖν, ὡς τοῦ Υἱοῦ μέν τήν κτίσιν λέγομεν, ἐκ δέ τοῦ Υἱοῦ οὐ λέγομεν

But indeed, concerning those things of which the Father is properly the first cause—namely, the creatures—it is not pious to say that we call the creation the Son's, yet do not say [it is] from the Son.

但確實地，論到那些以父為其本然第一因的事物──即受造之物──若說我們稱受造界為子的，卻不說〔受造界〕出於子，這便不是敬虔的話。

1:718

Εἰ τοίνυν καί ἐπί τοῦ ἀκτίστου Πνεύματος πρῶτον αἴτιον ὑπῆρχεν ὁ Πατήρ, ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος συναιτίου, δυσσεβοῦς ἄν ἦν λέγειν, ὡς ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ οὐ λέγομεν

If, then, the Father were the first cause also of the uncreated Spirit, as though the Son too were a co-cause, it would be impious to say that we do not say [the Spirit is] from the Son.

那麼，倘若父也是那非受造之聖靈的第一因，彷彿子也是共同的因，那麼說「我們不說〔聖靈〕出於子」便會是不敬虔的了。

1:719

Ἐπεί δέ ὁ τοῦτο λέγων οὐκ εὐσεβής μόνον, ἀλλά καί τοῖς ἁγίοις ἐναρίθμιος, δυσσεβής ἄρ ὁ λέγων συναίτιον τῷ Πατρί τόν Υἱόν ἐπί τοῦ Πνεύματος καί διά τοῦτο πρῶτον αἴτιον ἐπί τῆς ἀνωτάτω Τριάδος τόν Πατέρα

But since he who says this [that we do not say the Spirit is from the Son] is not only pious but also numbered among the saints, then impious is he who calls the Son co-cause with the Father with respect to the Spirit, and on this account [calls] the Father the first cause in the supreme Trinity.

但既然那說此話〔即「我們不說聖靈出於子」〕的人，不僅敬虔，更是列在眾聖徒之中，那麼凡稱子在聖靈之事上為父的共因，並因此〔稱〕父為至高三一中的第一因的人，就是不敬虔的了。

1:720

Τοῦτο γάρ δι ἡμᾶς τούς διά τοῦ Υἱοῦ γεγονότας ἀκούει ὁ Πατήρ, διό καί ποιητής ἡμῶν ἑκάτερος, μενοῦνγε καί Πατήρ˙ κἄν εἷς καί ἐφ ἡμῶν λέγηται ποιητής τε καί Πατήρ ὁ Πατήρ σύν τῷ Υἱῷ, ἀλλ ὡς μίαν καί τήν αὐτήν δημιουργικήν δύναμιν πλουτοῦντες

For the Father is called [first cause] on our account—we who came into being through the Son; wherefore each of them is our maker, indeed also our father. And even if, in respect of us, the Father together with the Son is called one maker and father, yet it is because they possess one and the same creative power.

因為父被稱為〔第一因〕乃是為著我們──我們是藉子受造的；故此，他們二者各為我們的創造者，實在也是我們的父。縱然就我們而論，父與子被稱為一位創造者、一位父，那卻是因他們富有同一個、同一的創造能力。

1:721

Ἐκεῖ δέ πάντῃ τε καί πάντως εἷς Πατήρ, εἷς αἴτιος˙ οὐ γάρ ἐστι τό γόνιμον ἀμφοῖν, ἀλλά μία πηγαία θεότης, ὁ Πατήρ

But there [in the Godhead] in every way and altogether there is one Father, one cause; for the generative [power] does not belong to both, but there is one fountainhead-Godhead, the Father.

但在那裏〔在神性中〕，無論從何處看、無論如何，都只有一位父、一個因；因為那生育的〔能力〕並不屬於二者，乃是只有一個作為源頭的神性，就是父。

1:722

Ποῦ γοῦν ὅλως χώραν ἔχει τό πρῶτον αἴτιον;

Where, then, can the [notion of a second] first cause find any place at all?

那麼，那〔第二個〕第一因究竟在何處能有立足之地呢？

1:723

) αἰτιατοῦ ὄντος συναιτίου;

) seeing that what is caused [cannot be] a co-cause?

) 既然那被致使者〔豈能〕成為共同的因呢？

1:724

Ἀσεβής ὁ λόγος˙ ἐς κάρακας ριπτέσθω, μή τοῖς νοητοῖς σε κόραξι σύννομον καταστήσῃ

Impious is the argument; let it be cast to the ravens, lest it set you to dwell among the spiritual ravens.

這論調是不敬虔的；讓它被丟給烏鴉罷，免得它使你與那屬靈的烏鴉同居。

1:725

Πῶς δέ ἄρα ὁ σοφός οὗτος εἴπερ τις τά θεῖα Ἰωάννης, καί ταῦτα τήν ἀσφαλῆ δόξαν περί Θεοῦ ἠκριβωμένως ἐκτιθείς, ἀπροσδιορίστως ἄν προέθετο τό προσδιορισμοῦ δεόμενον;

And how, then, would this wise John—if anyone was wise in divine things—who set forth most precisely the sure doctrine concerning God, have proposed without qualification that which needs qualification?

那麼，這位智慧的約翰──若論神聖之事曾有智者，他便是了──他既極其精確地陳明了關乎神的可靠教義，又怎會把那需要限定的事毫無限定地提出來呢？

1:726

Ποῖον δέ οὐχ ἕξει χώραν τῶν ἀφρόνως παρά τῶν κακοδόξων εἰρημένων, εἰ προσδιορίζειν δοίημεν τά ἀπροσδιορίστως περί τῆς τρισυποστάτου θεότητος ἐκπεφασμένα;

And what [absurdity] of the foolish things uttered by the heterodox would not find a place, if we were to grant the qualifying of those things that have been declared without qualification concerning the tri-hypostatic Godhead?

倘若我們容許去限定那些關乎三位格神性、原是毫無限定地宣告出來的事，那麼異端者所說那些愚妄之言中，哪一樣不會得著立足之地呢？

1:727

Ἐπεί γάρ Πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός, καί τῶν τριῶν ἕκαστον ἐν μέρει Πνεῦμα λέγεται

For since God is Spirit, each of the Three is also called, in its own part, Spirit.

因為神既是靈，三者中每一位也都各自被稱為靈。

1:728

Εἴ τις οὖν καινοτομῶν ἔλεγεν ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματός ἐστιν ὁ Υἱός, ἐπεί Θεός ὁ Υἱός καί ἐκ Θεοῦ, Πνεῦμα δέ ὑπάρχει ὁ Θεός, εἶθ ἡμεῖς ἀντεπεφέρωμεν ὅτι Θεός μέν Πνεῦμα καί Θεοῦ Πνεῦμα λέγεται, Θεός δέ ἐκ Πνεύματος οὐ λέγεται, ἆρα ἄν εἶχε λέγειν, ὡς πρός τό πρῶτον αἴτιον οὐ λέγεται;

If, then, someone innovating were to say that the Son is from the Spirit—since the Son is God and from God, and God is Spirit—and we in turn were to object that, although God is called Spirit and the Spirit of God, yet God is not said to be from the Spirit, could he then say, "with respect to the first cause it is not so said"?

那麼，倘若有人標新立異，說子是出於靈──因為子是神、是出於神，而神又是靈──我們便反駁說：神固然被稱為靈、也稱為神的靈，神卻不被說成出於靈；那時他豈能說：「就第一因而言並非如此說」嗎？

1:729

Τολμήσαντος δέ τινος μή δημιουργόν εἶναι φάναι τόν Υἱόν, ἆρ ἄν ἡμεῖς ἐδικαιώσαμεν αὐτόν εἰπόντες, ὡς πρός τόν πρῶτον αἴτιον οὐκ εἶναι φάσκει τόν Υἱόν δημιουργόν;

And if someone dared to assert that the Son is not the Creator, would we acquit him by saying that he merely affirms the Son not to be Creator "with respect to the first cause"?

又倘若有人膽敢斷言子不是創造主，我們豈能為他辯護，說他不過是主張「就第一因而言」子不是創造主嗎？

1:730

Ἡμῶνδ αὖ λεγόντων εὐσεβῶς, ὡς οὐκ ἦν ὅτε οὐκ ἦν ὁ Υἱός, εἴ τις προσδιορίζων ἔλεγε μή αἰωνίως ἀλλά χρονικῶς, ὡς τόν χρόνον μόνον, ἀλλ οὐχί καί τόν αἰῶνα συμπεριβαλλούσης τῆς φωνῆς, οὐκ εὐθύς ἄν παρ ἡμῶν ἀκούσειεν ὡς τοῦθ ὅ λέγεις, ἄνθρωπε, σαφής ἀθέτησίς ἐστι τῶν ὁμολογουμένων καί διαστροφή τῶν εὐσεβῶς κειμένων;

Again, when we say piously that there was not [a time] when the Son was not, if someone qualifying it were to say "not eternally, but temporally," as though the expression embraced only time and not eternity also, would he not at once hear from us: "What you say, O man, is a plain rejection of what is confessed and a perversion of what has been piously laid down"?

再者，當我們敬虔地說：「沒有〔一時〕子是不存在的」，若有人加以限定說：「不是按永恆，乃是按時間」，彷彿這話只包含時間而不也包含永恆，他豈不立刻從我們聽見：「人哪，你所說的，乃是明明棄絕所公認的，並歪曲那敬虔所立定的」嗎？

1:731

Τοσούτῳ δέ οἱ Λατῖνοι τούτῳ καταχρῶνται, ὡς καί τῶν ἁγίων ἀκούοντες θεολογούντων ἀπροσδιορίστως ὅτι ( σελ

But to such an extent do the Latins abuse this [device of qualification], that even when they hear the saints theologizing without qualification that (p. ...)

然而拉丁人竟如此濫用這〔限定的手法〕，以致連當他們聽見眾聖徒毫無限定地論神說……（頁……）

1:732

Οἱ δέ συνείροντεςἤ προφασιζόμενοι τό πρῶτον ἀνασκευάζουσιν ἑκάτερον, φάσκοντες, ὅτι καθάπερ μόνος Θεός ἀληθινός ὁ Πατήρ ἔστιν ὅτε λέγεται, καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος ἀληθινοῦ Θεοῦ καί ἀγαθοῦ, οὕτω καί μόνος ὁ Πατήρ πηγή καί αἴτιος θεότητος ὡς πρῶτος˙ καί οὐδέν ἐμπόδιον εἶναι καί τόν Υἱόν αἴτιον θεότητος

But they, stringing together [pretexts] or making excuses, overturn the first [principle], asserting that, just as the Father is sometimes called the only true God—even though the Son too is true God and good—so also the Father alone is the fount and cause of Godhead as being first; and that there is no obstacle to the Son also being a cause of Godhead.

但他們連綴〔藉口〕或托詞，把那首要〔原則〕推翻，聲稱說：正如父有時被稱為獨一真神──縱然子也是真神、是善的──照樣父也作為第一位而獨為神性的源頭與因；並說子也作神性之因並無任何妨礙。

1:733

Οὐ συνορῶσι γάρ, ὡς ἐντεῦθεν καί τόν Υἱόν, μάλιστα δέ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον εἰς κτίσμα κατασπῶσιν

For they do not perceive that thereby they drag down the Son also—and most of all the Holy Spirit—into [the rank of] a creature.

因為他們未曾看出，他們如此一來，竟把子──尤其是把聖靈──貶降到受造之物〔的地位〕去了。

1:734

Ὅταν γάρ λέγωμεν ὅτι μόνος ὁ Πατήρ Θεός ἐστιν ἀληθινός, οὐ τῶν ἀκτίστων πρός ἄλληλα τήν ἀντιδιαστολήν ποιοῦμεν, οὐδ ἁπλῶς τότε τόν Πατέρα, ἀλλά τήν μόνην ἐν τρισίν ὑποστάσεσι θεωρουμένην φύσιν τῶν κτισμάτων ἀποδιαστέλλομεν

For when we say that the Father alone is true God, we are not making a contrast of the uncreated [persons] with one another, nor [contrasting] the Father simply [as a person] at that point, but we are distinguishing the one nature—contemplated in three hypostases—from the creatures.

因為當我們說「惟獨父是真神」時，我們並非把非受造的〔位格〕彼此相對比，也不是單把父〔作為一位格〕分別出來，乃是把那在三位格中被觀照的唯一本性，與受造之物分別開來。

1:735

Εἰ τοίνυν οὕτω λέγομεν καί μόνος αἴτιος θεότητος ὁ Πατήρ, ὡς ἐπ αὐτοῦ λέγομεν ὅτι μόνος ἀγαθός, τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον καί κατ αὐτούς οὐκ ὄν αἴτιον θεότητος ἐναρίθμιον ἔσται τοῖς κτιστοῖς

If, then, we say also that the Father is the only cause of Godhead in the same sense as we say of Him that He is the only good one, then the Holy Spirit—being, even by their own [account], not a cause of Godhead—will be numbered among created things.

那麼，倘若我們說「惟獨父是神性之因」，其意義一如我們論祂說「惟獨祂是善的」一樣，那麼聖靈──連按他們自己〔的說法〕也不是神性之因──就要被列入受造之物中了。

1:736

Καί μήν ἐφ ὧν ὡς πρῶτος καί ὡς προκαταρκτικόν αἴτιον ἔσθ ὅτε λέγεται μόνος ὁ Πατήρ, ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος συναιτίου καί κοινωνοῦντος κατ ἐκεῖνα τῷ Πατρί οὐ μόνον ὁ Πατήρ ἔσθ ὅτε μόνος λέγεται Θεός ἀληθινός καί μόνος δημιουργός καί μόνος ἀγαθός καί τά τοιαῦτα, ἀλλ ἔσθ ὅτε καί ὁ Υἱός μόνος ἄν ρηθείη˙ καί οὐχ ὁ Υἱός μόνος, ἀλλά καί τό Πνεῦμα

And indeed, in those cases where the Father alone is sometimes called first and originating cause, as though the Son too were co-cause and shared with the Father in those respects, not only is the Father sometimes called alone true God and alone Creator and alone good and the like, but sometimes the Son too could be called alone [such]; and not the Son alone, but also the Spirit.

再者，在那些父有時被稱為第一因、原初之因的事上──彷彿子也是共因、並在那些方面與父相通──不單父有時被稱為獨一真神、獨一創造主、獨一善者及諸如此類，子有時也可被稱為「獨一〔如此者〕」；不單子可，靈也可。

1:737

Ἐπεί γάρ τό μόνος τοῦτο τήν ἄκτιστον φύσιν ἀντιδιαστέλλει τῶν κτιστῶν, ἡδ ἄκτιστος φύσις τρισυπόστατός ἐστι καί ἀμερῶς ἐφ ἑκάστης τῶν (σελ

For since this word "alone" distinguishes the uncreated nature from created things, and this uncreated nature is tri-hypostatic and is contemplated whole and undivided in each of the (p. ...)

因為這「獨一」一詞既是把非受造的本性與受造之物分別開來，而這非受造的本性又是三位格的，並且是完整無分地在每一個（頁……）

1:738

) ὑποστάσεων ὅλη θεωρεῖται, ἀφ ἧς ἄν αὐτήν τῶν τριῶν ἐμφύτων ὑποστάσεων καλέσῃς, ὅλην λέγεις τήν τρισυπόστατον φύσιν

) ...hypostases [it] is contemplated as whole; so that by whichever of the three innate hypostases you name it, you are speaking of the whole tri-hypostatic nature.

) ……位格中被觀照為完整的；以致無論你藉那三個內具的位格中哪一個來稱呼它，你所說的都是那整個三位格的本性。

1:739

Ἆρ οὖν, ὥσπερ λέγομεν εὐσεβῶς ὅτι μόνος ἐστί Χριστός ὁ ἐπί πάντων Θεός, ἔχοι τις ἄν εἰπεῖν, μᾶλλον δέ ἤκουσταί ποτέ τις καί τοῦτο εἰρηκώς, ὡς μόνος ὁ Υἱός αἴτιός τε καί πηγή τῆς θεότητος τοῦ Πνεύματος;

Just as, then, we say piously that Christ alone is the God over all, could anyone say—or rather, has anyone ever been heard to say this also—that the Son alone is the cause and fountain of the Godhead of the Spirit?

那麼，正如我們敬虔地說「惟獨基督是超乎萬有之上的神」，難道有人能說──或不如說，有誰曾聽聞有人這樣說過──惟獨子是聖靈之神性的因與源頭嗎？

1:740

Ἤ καί αὐτό τό Πνεῦμα μόνον αἴτιόν τε καί πηγή θεότητος, ὅ καί κατά Λατίνους οὐδαμῶς αἴτιόν ἐστι θεότητος;

Or that the Spirit itself is the only cause and fountain of Godhead—the very [Spirit] which, even according to the Latins, is in no way a cause of Godhead?

又或是說，那聖靈自身乃是神性的唯一因與源頭──而這聖靈連按拉丁人〔的說法〕也絕非神性之因？

1:741

Καίτοι καί τοῦτο τῶν εἰκότων ἦν, εἶπερ οὕτως ὁ Πατήρ αἴτιος μόνος θεότητος ἐλέγετο, ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος συναιτίου

And yet even this would have been among the likely [conclusions], if the Father were so called the only cause of Godhead as though the Son too were a co-cause.

然而，倘若父被稱為神性的唯一因，竟是彷彿子也是共因的話，那麼連這〔結論〕也會成為合理推論之一了。

1:742

Δῆλον τοίνυν, μᾶλλον δέ κατάδηλον, ὅτι τό μόνος ἐπί τῶν ὑποστατικῶν λεγόμενον οὐ τά κτιστά τῶν ἀκτίστων, ἀλλά μίαν τινά τῶν ἀκτίστων ὑποστάσεων πρός τάς ἄλλας διαστέλλει

It is therefore clear—rather, most clear—that the word "alone," when used of the hypostatic [properties], does not distinguish the created from the uncreated, but distinguishes some one of the uncreated hypostases from the others.

因此顯然──不如說極其顯然──「獨一」一詞用於位格性的〔屬性〕時，並不是把受造者與非受造者分別開來，乃是把非受造諸位格中的某一位與其餘各位分別開來。

1:743

Τίςδ οὐκ οἶδεν, ὡς ὑποστατικόν ἐπί τῆς θεότητος τό αἴτιόν ἐστιν;

And who does not know that in respect of the Godhead the [property of being] cause is a hypostatic [property]?

並且誰不知道，就神性而言，那「作因」〔的特性〕乃是位格性的〔特性〕呢？

1:744

Οὐκοῦν, εἰ μόνος ὁ Πατήρ αἴτιος καί μόνος ἀρχή καί πηγή θεότητος, οὐδεμία ἄρα τῶν θείων ὑποστάσεων ἑτέρα αἰτία κάι ἀρχή καί πηγή θεότητός ἐστιν

Therefore, if the Father alone is cause and alone principle and fountain of Godhead, then none other of the divine hypostases is cause and principle and fountain of Godhead.

所以，倘若惟獨父是因、惟獨是神性的根源與泉源，那麼眾神聖位格中便再無別的位格是神性的因、根源與泉源了。

1:745

Οὐ μήν ἀλλ εἰ τοῦ αἰτίου ἐν δυσί προσώποις ἐπί τῆς θεότητος θεωρουμένου κατά τούς Λατίνους, οὐδέν κωλύει λέγειν μόνον τόν Πατέρα αἴτιον θεότητος˙ καί τοῦ αἰτιατοῦ θεωρουμένου ἐν δυσί προσώποις, οὐδέν κωλύσει λέγειν μόνον τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον αἰτιατόν ὑπάρχεινἤ μόνον τόν Υἱόν, ὅ μηδείς ποτε οὐδέν τῶν αἱρετικῶν ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν

Nevertheless, if—according to the Latins—the cause in the Godhead is contemplated in two persons, nothing prevents one from saying that the Father alone is cause of Godhead; and if the caused also be contemplated in two persons, nothing will prevent one from saying that the Holy Spirit alone is the caused, or the Son alone—which no one of the heretics ever dared to say.

縱然如此，倘若──按拉丁人〔的說法〕──神性中的「因」是在兩個位格中被觀照的，那就沒有甚麼能阻止人說「惟獨父是神性之因」；同樣，倘若那「被致使者」也在兩個位格中被觀照，那就沒有甚麼能阻止人說「惟獨聖靈是被致使者」，或「惟獨子是」──而這是異端者中從未有人膽敢說過的。

1:746

Καίτοι, εἰ προσδιορίζειν δοίημεν τά τεθεολογημένα τοῖς ἁγίοις ἀπροσδιορίστως, καί τοῦτ ἄν εὐχερῶς κατασκευασθείη παντί τῷ βουλομένῳ˙ ἀλλ εὐθύς οὗτος, εἰ μή μεταμεληθείη, καθυποβληθήσεται τῷ άναθέματι˙ εἰ γάρ τις, φησίν, εὐαγγελίζεται παρ ὅ εὐηγγελισάμεθα, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω

And yet, if we were to grant the qualifying of those things that have been theologized by the saints without qualification, then this too could easily be contrived by anyone who wished; but such a one, unless he repents, will at once be subjected to the anathema. For "if anyone," he says, "preaches a gospel other than what we preached, let him be anathema."

然而，倘若我們容許去限定那些由眾聖徒毫無限定地論神所立的事，那麼任何想這樣作的人也都能輕易地羅織出來；但這樣的人，若不悔改，立刻就要被置於咒詛之下。因為〔保羅〕說：「若有人傳福音給你們，與我們所傳給你們的不同，他就應當被咒詛。」

1:747

Τί δέ οὐ φῄς ὁ καί ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα λέγων καί διά τοῦτο ( σελ

But why do you not say so, you who both say the Spirit is also from the Son and on this account (p. ...)

但你既說聖靈也出於子，並因此（頁……）你為何不這樣說呢──

1:748

) προσδιορίζων τά ἀπροσδιορίστως τεθεολογημένα τοῖς ἁγίοις καί τῷ θεολογοῦντι μή καί ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα λέγεσθαι τῷ προσδιορισμῷ δολίως ἀντιλέγων;

) ...qualify those things theologized by the saints without qualification, and craftily contradict by means of [your] qualification the one who theologizes that the Spirit is not also said to be from the Son?

) ……限定那些由眾聖徒毫無限定所立的神學之事，並藉著〔你的〕限定，狡詐地反駁那論神說「聖靈不也被說成出於子」的人呢？

1:749

Ἆρ ἔχεις δεῖξαι, ὡς οὐ σχεδόν πάνθ ὅμοιος τυγχάνεις ὤν τῷ ὑπευθύνῳ τούτῳ;

Are you able to show that you are not almost entirely like this man held to account [for heresy]?

你能否證明，你並非幾乎全然與這個被追究〔異端之責〕的人一個樣呢？

1:750

Ἔχω σοι, φησί, δεῖξαι πολλούς τῶν θεολόγων ἐναντιουμένους τῇ τοῦ Δαμασκηνοῦ θεολογίᾳ ταύτῃ καί τό ἐκπορεύειν νοεῖν διδόντας εἶναι τοῦ Υἱοῦ

"I can," he says, "show you many of the theologians opposing this theology of the Damascene, and granting that the procession is to be understood as being also of the Son."

他說：「我能向你指出許多神學家反對大馬士革的約翰這套神學，並承認那『發出』也當被理解為屬於子的。」

1:751

Βαβαί˙ καί ὅλως, ἔστιν ἐν τοῖς θεολόγοις, καί ταῦτ ἐπί τῶν ἀναγκαιοτάτων καί ὧν ἡ πίστις ἡμῶν ἅπασα ἐξήρτηται, ἐναντιότης;

Strange! Can there really be, among the theologians, a contradiction—and that concerning the most essential matters, the very things on which our whole faith depends?

奇怪啊！難道在眾神學家之間，竟會存在矛盾，而且還是在那些最為緊要、我們全部信仰所繫的事情上嗎？

1:752

ἐναντιουμέναςἤ τούς κατ αὐτάς θεολόγους ἀμφοτέρους;

Are the sayings themselves contradictory, or are both the theologians who utter them in conflict with one another?

究竟是那些話語彼此矛盾，還是宣講這些話語的兩方神學家彼此衝突呢？

1:753

Οὐκοῦν τοῦτονἤ ἐκείνους διαγράψομεν τοῦ χοροῦ τῶν ὀρθοδόξων κατά σέ

Shall we then, according to you, strike out either the one or the other from the chorus of the Orthodox?

那麼按照你的說法，我們豈不是要將這一方或那一方從正統教父的行列中除名嗎？

1:754

Τί δέ, τῶν εὐαγγελικῶν καί ἀποστολικῶν ρημάτων οὕτως ἐχόντων καί οὕτω διευκρινούντων τά τοῦ Πνεύματος, καθά προαπεδείξαμεν, οὐ τῇ δι αὐτῶν πεφανερωμένῃ τῆς εὐσεβείας ἐννοίᾳ παντί τρόπῳ συμβιβάσομεν τό δοκοῦν διαφωνεῖν;

But seeing that the words of the Gospels and of the Apostles are such as they are, and so clearly define the things concerning the Spirit, as we have already shown, shall we not by every means reconcile what seems to be in disagreement with the meaning of true piety that has been made manifest through them?

然而，既然福音書與使徒的話語本是如此，並且如我們先前所證明的，如此清楚地闡明了關於聖靈的事，難道我們不該竭盡所能，使那些看似不一致之處，與藉這些話語所彰顯的虔敬之真義相和諧嗎？

1:755

Ἄν δέ τι καί μή δυνηθῶμεν τῶν πατερικῶν ρημάτων πρός ἐκείνην ἀποκαταστῆσαι τήν διάνοιαν, οὐκ αὐτό μέν ἀφῶμεν, ὡς μή συνεῖναι δυνηθέντες, τῆς δέ ἀνωμολογημένης εὐσεβείας οὐδέν ἧττον ἀντεχόμενοι διατελέσωμεν;

And if there be any of the patristic sayings which we are unable to restore to that meaning, shall we not, instead of casting it aside as something we have failed to understand, nonetheless persist in holding fast to the confessed piety no less firmly?

倘若有些教父的話語，我們無法還原到那個正解，難道我們不該如此行嗎——不因未能理解就將它丟棄，反而依舊毫不鬆懈地持守那已被公認的虔敬？

1:756

Παντί που δῆλον, ὡς πᾶσι τρόποις ταῖς ἀνακεκηρυγμέναις ὑπό τῶν εὐαγγελικῶν καί ἀποστολικῶν ρημάτων τῆς εὐσεβείας προσέξομεν ἐννοίαις

It is surely clear to everyone that by all means we shall give heed to the meanings of piety proclaimed by the words of the Gospels and of the Apostles.

這對所有人都顯而易見：我們無論如何都要留意那由福音書與使徒的話語所宣告的虔敬之真義。

1:757

Φέρεδ ὅμως ὀρθοδόξους ἀναδεῖξαι πρός αὐτάς ἐπιχειρήσωμεν τάς ὑπό Λατίνων ὑπέρ τῶν δοκούντων σφίσι προτεινομένας πατερικάς φωνάς

Come then, let us nonetheless attempt to show as orthodox those patristic utterances which the Latins put forward in support of what they suppose to be their own position.

那麼，讓我們仍舊嘗試證明：拉丁人為支持他們自以為是的立場所援引的那些教父言論，其實是合乎正統的。

1:758

Κἄν μέν διαρκῶς διαλῦσαι σχῶμεν τήν πρός τό φαινόμενον ἀντίθεσιν, τῷ Θεῷ χάρις τῷ καί τοῖς ἐν ἐσχατιαῖς ἡμῖν κειμένοις τῆς ἀγνοίας καί τῆς ἀπαθοῦς ζωῆς ἀπῳκισμένοις γνῶσιν συνήγορον τῆς ἐν (σελ

And if we should be able adequately to dissolve the apparent opposition, thanks be to God, who even to us who lie in the uttermost regions of ignorance and are estranged from the dispassionate life has granted knowledge as an advocate of the truth that is in [Him]…

倘若我們能充分化解那表面上的對立，則當感謝神——祂甚至賜給了我們這些躺臥在無知之極處、遠離無欲之生命的人以知識，作為那在祂裡面之真理的辯護者……

1:759

Εἰδ ἄρα μή τοιοῦτον ἀποδοῦναι κατά πάντα σχοίημεν τόν λόγον, εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ τέλειος καί σοφός τά θεῖα καί πνευματικά, τῆς προαιρέσεως ἡμᾶς ἀποδεξάμενος, αὐτός παρ ἑαυτοῦ τόν κρείττω λόγον διδασκέτω, ποθοῦντας καί μαθητιῶντας ὅτι μάλιστα καί τό ἐνδέον ἡμῶν ἀναπληρῶν ἐντρεπέτω λεγεώτερον τούς τἀναντία τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ συνάγειν ἐκ τούτων πειρωμένους

But if we should not in every respect be able to render such an account, then let anyone who is perfect in Christ and wise in things divine and spiritual, accepting our good intention, himself teach from his own resources the better account; and as we long and yearn to learn it above all, let him supply what is lacking in us, and the more sharply rebuke those who attempt from these very texts to gather conclusions contrary to piety.

可是，倘若我們不能在一切方面給出這樣的解釋，那麼凡在基督裡完全、在屬神與屬靈之事上有智慧的人，接納了我們的善意，就讓他憑自己提供更好的解釋；既然我們極其渴慕並樂於學習它，就讓他補足我們的不足，並更嚴厲地斥責那些試圖從這些經文中匯集出違背虔敬之結論的人。

1:760

Εἰπέ δη, τίνες καί τί τά παρ ἐκείνων εἰρημένα˙ τῶν γάρ ἀδυνάτων ἐστί μή ὁμολογεῖν ἀλλήλοις ἅπαντας τούς θεοφόρους καί Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ τῶν θεοφόρων, μιᾶς αὐτοῖς ἐκ τοῦ ἑνός Πνεύματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς ἐπιπνοίας οὔσης˙ πρός δέ τούτῳ καί μετ ἐκείνους σχεδόν ἅπαντας οὗτος ὁ Δαμασκηνός ἐστι καί ὑπ ἐκείνων ἁπάντων ἐδιδάχθη καί αὐτός ἑαυτῷ μαρτυρεῖ τήν πρός ἐκείνους συμφωνίαν, οὐ λέγω λέγων, ἀλλά λέγομεν, καί δι ἑαυτοῦ κἀκείνους παρίστησιν ἡμῖν οὐδαμοῦ ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα λέγοντας καθ ὕπαρξιν

Tell me now: who are they, and what are the things said by them? For it is impossible that all the God-bearing Fathers should not be in agreement with one another and with Christ the God of the God-bearing Fathers, since the inspiration that is in them comes from the one Spirit of Christ. Moreover, after almost all of them comes this John of Damascus, who was taught by them all and himself bears witness to his agreement with them—I do not say "I say," but "we say"—and through himself he presents them too to us as nowhere saying that the Spirit is from the Son in respect of existence.

那麼請告訴我：他們是誰，他們所說的又是什麼？因為這是不可能的——眾承載神的教父竟不彼此相合，也不與那承載神之教父們的神基督相合，既然在他們裡面的感動乃出於基督獨一的聖靈。此外，幾乎在他們眾人之後出現的這位大馬士革的約翰，受教於他們眾人，他自己也見證了與他們的一致——我說的不是「我說」，而是「我們說」——並且藉著自己，他也向我們呈明那些教父，他們從未在「存在」的意義上說聖靈是從子而出。

1:761

Ὑμεῖςδ ἐοίκατέ μοι τοῦ τῆς αὐτῶν μεγαλονοίας ὕφους μή ἐφικνούμενοι τοιαῦτ εἴεσθαι περί αὐτῶν

But you seem to me, since you do not attain to the loftiness of their great-mindedness, to hold such opinions about them.

可是依我看，你既達不到他們崇高心智的高度，才會對他們抱持這樣的看法。

1:762

Καί γάρ καί πρῶτον αἴτιον λέγεται παρά πάντων ὁ Πατήρ, ἀλλ ἤκουσας ὡς λέγεται˙ καί ὁ μέγας Ἀθανάσιος παρά τοῦ Λόγου τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον ἐκλάμπειν εἶπεν, ἀλλ ἤκουσας ὡς εἶπε˙ καί εἰκόνα Πατρός μέν Υἱόν, Υἱοῦ δέ τό Πνεῦμα λέγομεν, ἀλλ ἤκουσας ὡς λέγομεν˙ καί πλεῖσθ ἕτερα, δοκοῦντα πρός ὑμῶν, ἡμῖν ἀλλ οὐχ ὑμῖν συμβαίνοντα καθαρῶς ἀναπεφήνασι

For indeed the Father is called by all the first cause—but you have heard in what sense He is so called; and great Athanasius said that the Holy Spirit shines forth from the Word—but you have heard in what sense he said it; and we call the Son the image of the Father, and the Spirit the image of the Son—but you have heard in what sense we say it; and a great many other things which, though they seem to favor you, have clearly turned out to accord with us and not with you.

因為父確實被眾人稱為第一因——但你已聽見祂是在何種意義上如此被稱的；偉大的亞他那修說聖靈從聖言發出光輝——但你已聽見他是在何種意義上這樣說的；我們也稱子為父的像，稱聖靈為子的像——但你已聽見我們是在何種意義上這樣說的；還有許許多多其他的話，雖看似對你有利，卻已清楚地顯明是與我們相合，而非與你相合。

1:763

Δώσει δέ τό Πνεῦμα κἀν τοῖς ἑξῆς λόγον ἐν ἀνοίξει τοῦ στόματος ἡμῶν

And the Spirit will also grant us a word in what follows, in the opening of our mouth.

在下文中，當我們開口時，聖靈也必賜給我們話語。

1:764

Ἀλλά τίς ὁ λέγων ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό ἐκπορεύειν ἔνι;

But who is it that says that the power of causing procession belongs also to the Son?

可是，是誰說「使之發出」的能力也屬於子呢？

1:765

Αὐτός, φασί, Γρηγόριος ὁ τό θεολογεῖν ἐπωνυμίαν ἔχων˙ πάντα γάρ, φησίν, ἔχει ὁ Υἱός τά τοῦ Πατρός, πλήν τῆς ἀγεννησίας

It is, they say, Gregory himself, the one who bears the surname "the Theologian"; for he says, "The Son has all that the Father has, except unbegottenness."

他們說，正是那位享有「神學家」稱號的貴格利本人；因為他說：「子擁有父所有的一切，唯獨除了非受生（不被生）這一點。」

1:766

Ἐπεί τοίνυν χωρίς μόνης τῆς ἀγεννησίας ἔχει ἅπαντα τά τοῦ Πατρός, πῶς οὐκ ἄν ἔχοι καί τό ἐκπορεύειν;

Since, then, apart from unbegottenness alone the Son has all that belongs to the Father, how should He not also have the power of causing procession?

那麼，既然子除了非受生這一點之外，擁有父所有的一切，祂豈不也該擁有「使之發出」的能力嗎？

1:767

Ὄντως οὐκ εἰσι τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ (σελ

In truth, these are not the words of the Spirit who speaks in him…

其實，這些話並非那在他裡面說話之聖靈的話語……

1:768

) λαλοῦντος˙ εἰ γάρ ἦσαν, οὐκ ἄν τοῦ ἁγίου τοιαῦτα κατεψεύδοντο, ὅς καί ὅσα περί τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος, φησί, ταπεινότερα παρά τοῦ Υἱοῦ λέγεται ἐπί τήν πρώτην αἰτίαν ἀνακτέον, ἵνα τό ἐξ οὗ δειχθῇ

…[the Spirit] who speaks; for if they were, they would not thus falsely ascribe such things to the saint, who says that whatever is said of the Holy Spirit in a more lowly manner than of the Son is to be referred back to the first cause, so that the "from whom" may be made manifest.

……那說話的聖靈；因為若這些真是聖靈的話，他們就不會如此謊稱這位聖徒說過這等話。這位聖徒說：凡論到聖靈而比論到子更為卑微的說法，都當追溯到第一因，好叫那「出於誰」得以彰顯。

1:769

Ἀλλά καί πάντα ἔχειν τόν Υἱόν τά τοῦ Πατρός φησίν ἄνευ τῆς αἰτίας, τοῦ αἴτιον εἶναι δηλονότι καί αὐτόν θεότητος

But he also says that the Son has all that belongs to the Father except the being a cause—that is, except being Himself a cause of divinity.

但他也說，子擁有父所有的一切，唯獨除了「作為因」這一點——也就是說，除了祂自己作為神性之因這一點。

← prev partnext part →