By no means; rather, through that (Son) Himself, having been manifested upon earth, we shall recognize that the procession of the Holy Spirit is immediately from the Father, and we shall reject your addition as one that ranks things supernatural together with things governed according to nature.
And this too you do not perceive, you examiner of things unsearchable: that everything which proceeds proceeds not only through something, but also ever into something?
Either, then, you will grant us into what, before the ages, the Holy Spirit proceeds—and so, instead of the sole pre-eternal and venerable Trinity, you will be shown to worship a quaternity: the 'from which,' the 'through which,' the 'into which,' and the proceeding one itself—or, if you do not grant this, neither shall we accept that.
And yet, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and rests in the Son—this is both written by the theologians and was manifested at the Jordan when the Savior was baptized; and we confess that it is thus, not (p. ...)
Where, then, is your 'through the Son' and 'from the Son' in the case of the existence of the divine Spirit, if the Spirit, proceeding from the Father, plainly comes toward the Son and is theologized as resting in Him?
And the divine Cyril in the Thesauri concludes that the Spirit exists naturally in the Son from the Father, and says the Spirit passes naturally and essentially from the Father into the Son, through whom the Son, anointing all things, sanctifies them.
From the Father, then, existing in the Son naturally and eternally, the Holy Spirit comes forth and is manifested from the Son to the worthy, in whatever way and whenever there should be need.
Nevertheless, handling the present argument more equitably—especially for the sake of those who will read with goodwill—I shall briefly make a more universal exposition of the truth, embracing the whole as in an epilogue.
Let him who has ears for discerning what is right and what is not be initiated, as far as is permitted, into the depth of the mystery; but set gates upon your own ears, all you who have not acquired a most critical mind, unless you yield yourselves obedient to those who are able to speak well—or rather, are empowered by God—lest you name what is beyond your knowledge the folly of those who know well.
The Holy Spirit, before the ages and from the ages and still, has as the most peculiar thing of its own particular mode of existence this: to proceed from the Father, the only fountainal Godhead—that is, from that supra-divine essence according to the paternal hypostasis alone—being itself supra-divine and self-essence, and (p. ...)
...according to it (the essence) in no way falling short of the one who brought it forth—or rather in no way differing or being divided—yet nonetheless of another hypostasis and self-subsistent.
Being thus from the Father, it neither is ever separated from Him, nor is it any less united to the Son essentially and inseparably, resting upon Him and being His own property and ever abiding naturally in Him; for He is the steward of the Spirit.
There is nothing new, then, if it is also said to come forth from Him and from His nature—yet according to the paternal hypostasis; and through Him and from Him it is naturally both given and sent and poured forth and comes forth, being given and manifested through Him, and, if you will, proceeding to those who are worthy.
For whenever you should hear 'procession' in such contexts, understand 'manifestation'; for 'to proceed from God' is not always indicative of self-subsistent existence; for, it is said, man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds through the mouth of God.
Do you see that the things proceeding from God are many—for the universe is comprehensive of a multitude—but the Holy Spirit is one, which also in a peculiar manner, beyond all things, proceeds from God?
For if from the belly of those who believe in Christ rivers of living water flow according to the promise (for whoever drinks, says the Lord, of the water that I shall give him, it shall become a fountain of water springing up unto eternal life, (p. ...)
...which is the same as saying 'proceeding,' according to the text 'and a fountain went forth, proceeding from Eden'); if, then, from those made like the Son it springs up river-wise—which is the same as saying the Spirit, dwelling in them according to grace, wells up and proceeds—much more from the Son, who has it according to nature, pre-eternally and eternally, resting upon Him and naturally joined to Him.
...(it is said that) from those made like the Son according to grace the Spirit proceeds; for most peculiarly it is from the Father, as having its existence—the pre-eternal and consubstantial existence—from Him alone.
For the Holy Spirit is both from the Father and of the Father, and the being-from-the-Father precedes in conception the being 'of the Father' (for the being of a thing is contemplated prior to its being 'of someone,' even if not in time); and on this account it is 'of the Father,' because it is 'from the Father,' as the great Basil also says in his chapters Against the Eunomians: 'I conceive the Spirit's kinship with the Father, since it proceeds from the Father.'
But 'from the Son'—if anywhere it should be found, and in whatever words—(it is said) as resting naturally upon Him pre-eternally and eternally, inasmuch as, according to that ineffable and timeless generation, the Son had the Spirit perfect in Himself from the Father, the Spirit being of the same essence as He, yet according to the paternal hypostasis.
Therefore, in the case of the Son, the being of His Spirit is contemplated prior to its being from Him, even if not in time; and on this account 'from the Son,' because 'of the Son.'
1:1050
Τοιγαροῦνοὐκἔχειπαραὐτοῦτήνὕπαρξιν
所以它並非從聖子有其存在。
Therefore it does not have its existence from Him.
The Holy Spirit is said to be 'through the Son' sometimes as conceived through Him to be the Spirit of the Father and from the Father—inasmuch as it is not begotten but proceeds, and as proceeding it is conceived as immediately from that which causes it to proceed; and sometimes as accompanying Him timelessly, according to the theologians, (p. ...)
...and with Him and together with Him, but not also as existing from Him from the Father—as is clear even of itself to the intelligent; for none of the right-minded, hearing of the Word begotten pre-eternally from the Father, fails at once to come to the thought of the Spirit, which naturally and co-eternally accompanies the Word; and in this sense one need not change the 'through' into 'from.' And it is also said 'as through the Son and from the Son, bestowed upon the saints'—not however as pre-eternally sent or given or welling up thence, or, if you will, proceeding, but at the time when it was pleased to be received and manifested, and as it was pleased, being given and manifested; for the essence and hypostasis itself of the divine Spirit is never manifested.
But the Holy Spirit is theologized as coming forth thus from the Son and through the Son; for, being of one and the same essence, there is also one and the same will and giving and manifestation.
But from those made sons of God it is both given and springs up and wells up and works and appears—the innate grace and power of the Spirit being present in them and indwelling, yet according to grace and not naturally, and having come to dwell later, that is, having worked through them, but not resting upon them pre-eternally.
1:1057
Ὁρᾷςὅσηἡδιαφορά, ὡςἀπειρίαςἐπέκεινα;
你可看見這差別何等之大—彷彿超乎無限?
Do you see how great the difference is—as beyond infinity?
But the Latins, in the symbol of the faith, saying that the Son is begotten from the Father, and that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son—do they not plainly speak of the pre-eternal and hypostatic processions and of the very existence of the Son and of the Spirit?
...anything, nor after anything—away with the blasphemy!—unless you too, you all-daring one, will fabricate this, you who are rather a falsely-named theologian, placing the Word as it were nearer to the Father, but the Holy Spirit farther off.
But if, on account of the indwelling that came to us later, and these (being arguments) directed against those who alienate the Spirit from the Son, someone said it is from both, or from the Father through the Son, or that it shines forth from the Son and the like, (he said so) as (the Spirit) existing also in the Son and being His own and in no way foreign.
Moreover, no one has said the Holy Spirit is sent through the Son or from the Son without the addition of time or a cause, ever pre-signifying an energy according to which it was impossible for it to come to us before us.
Then again, do you not understand this, you who are exceedingly and boundlessly boastful: that many of the things said in the divine Scripture are, by the conjunction of the words, one, but by the meaning and the reality not one?
Which has wrought error in the heretics, as a rule, since they cannot distinguish what is one by the conjunction of words but not one in the realities—as Gregory the Theologian also agrees?
For this is clear to those wise in divine things and initiated into the divine Spirit: that whenever the Spirit is said to be from both, Father and Son, or from the Father through Him, even if it is brought together in word, yet it stands apart in reality.
(p.) And against those who alienate the Spirit from the Son we would fittingly speak thus, conjointly, dispensing our words with discernment; but to those made familiar with God through knowing that the Spirit is His own, we shall accurately reveal each point: that from the Father the Spirit has, before all the ages, its existential procession, but, existing eternally in the Son, came forth from Him into manifestation, for our sake and after us, by a manifestive and not an existential coming-forth.
Quite so; and therefore the Spirit is manifestive of Him, and is sent also from Him not only as man but also as God, according to Gregory the Theologian, and is formed in the hearts of the faithful and indwells and is seen through Him.
But it is not said to be 'begotten,' since the begotten is and is ever called Son of the begetter, and the begetter is ever Father; whereas 'that which proceeds,' in the case of God, as we said before, belongs not simply nor only to the Holy Spirit; but on the one hand, what signifies the pre-eternal and existential coming-forth, being of a different mode from the Son's generation from the Father, belongs to the Holy Spirit alone; on the other hand, the coming-forth from the hidden into the manifest, and the making bold, and the publishing of its own power through the wonders wrought, belongs not only to the Holy Spirit, but is also of Him (the Son); for, says the most prophetic among kings, 'O God, when you went forth in the midst of your people, when you passed through the wilderness, the earth was shaken.'
But in the case of the Son and the Holy Spirit there came to be the second shaking, when the Jews were transformed from the law to the gospel, and every nation was called to the fellowship of deification that was being proclaimed as good news.
1:1077
τῆςἐκτῶνοὐρανῶνθεοσημίαςκαίαἰσθητῶςἡγῆἐσείσθη
……藉著從諸天而來的神蹟,地也可感地震動了。
...by the divine sign from the heavens, the earth was also sensibly shaken.
Rightly, then, did we say that 'that which proceeds,' in the case of the Holy Spirit, does not always signify the pre-eternal existence from the Father, but sometimes also the later manifestation, in which the Son too shares in common with the Father—which the divine Cyril also clearly shows, saying: 'The Son causes the Spirit to well up to us out of His own nature.'
And that what is welled up to us from the Father and Son is an energy and gift of the divine Spirit, Joel foretells—or rather, God through him: 'I will not pour out my Spirit,' He says, 'but I will pour out from my Spirit.'
Therefore we glorify it as proceeding from the Father alone, in a peculiar manner and pre-eternally, just as the Son too is begotten; and glorifying it thus, we glorify it together with, and worship it together with, the Son and the Father.
And the God-wise Fathers, making this clear, in the symbol of orthodoxy brought together into one the Spirit's procession from the Father and its being glorified together with the Father and the Son, declaring and handing them down conjointly—since those who do not glorify the Holy Spirit as proceeding from the Father alone, just as indeed the Son is begotten, are unable to worship the Spirit together (with them), contemplated in its own hypostasis.
For if the procession of the Spirit were ever common to them (Father and Son) as from them, the Spirit would be a mere energy and not in a hypostasis; for only an energy is common to them.
It is, then, common to them as consubstantial, but not ever common to them as from both—even if now, at the last of the ages, it has been poured out from both; and I will add, also from itself; for it is poured out to us in self-determined freedom.
And what then—did not the Spirit also co-work this begetting, by which the assumed lump of our nature, taken by the Son, was anointed at the baptism, and being anointed was manifested—since even before the baptism it had become equally divine (with God), seeing that at the very beginning the Son of God was incarnate from the Holy Spirit and Mary the Virgin, according to what is written?
Will you then say that the Son was begotten before the ages from the Father and from the Spirit, on account of this begetting which is subject to time?
1:1095
Σύδέἴσωςὁλογικαῖςἐφόδοιςτήνπερί (σελ
但你或許—你這藉邏輯途徑取得關於(頁……)
But you perhaps, who procure knowledge concerning (p. ...)
...God by means of logical approaches, and who, as you yourself say, conjecture from things that came to be later about things that are pre-eternal—you might even bring forward to us a most weighty witness, the Son Himself, saying through the prophet: 'The Lord has sent me, and His Spirit'; for this too is in your manner—to suppose sending and mode of existence to be the same.
And besides this, you will also misuse and misinterpret the word of the great Paul—and this willingly and maliciously, or in ignorance and without confessing it.
But Christ too indwells the hearts of those not disqualified, assuredly through the Spirit, and is intellectually seen and is formed and is made manifest—and these things through the Spirit.
And if the Son is plainly sent from the Father and from the Spirit and receives baptism (according to which everyone baptized is born of the Spirit), and shines in hearts—and this through the Spirit—and you string together many other similar things, then, drawing your common conclusion according to your sciences, you will both glorify and demonstrate that the Son is begotten from the Spirit as well.
But not we, O wisest of earth-dwellers—we who are altogether without part in this theology of yours—rather, we shall rightly both set forth and divide the confession of the faith, saying that from the Father alone, from the beginning, immediately, are both the Son and the Spirit, yet each of them in a peculiar manner.
And indeed, declaring the property of each mode, we call the existence of the Son from the Father 'generation,' and that of the Holy Spirit 'procession.'
But those things later wrought in time and after creation, upon it and by these (Persons), we ever distinguish in our concepts from those pre-eternal and beginningless existences; and in words, even if sometimes—and this most rarely—we conjoin them, or hear them conjoined by some, (p. ...)
1:1104
) τήνἐντοῖςνοήμασιδιαίρεσινοὐκἀποβάλλομεν
……我們也不丟棄概念中的那區分。
...we do not cast away the distinction in our concepts.
For here too 'I came forth,' being one, is not indicative of one ministry only; for it indicates both the sending to us, for our sake, in our midst, from the Father, and the pre-eternal coming-forth from the essence and from the hypostasis of the Father.
Or, because 'I came forth' indicates also the sending, and the sending of the Son had come about from the Father and the Spirit—according to 'the Lord has sent me, and His Spirit'—to repeat what has often been said, shall we dogmatize that the Son and Word of God came forth from the Father and from the Spirit?
Therefore neither, on account of the Holy Spirit's sending or manifestation or coming-forth from the Father and Son—I mean the manifestive and time-bound one—even if it is sometimes brought together into one with the pre-eternal one in expression, shall we dogmatize that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son, so long as we know it to be God from God, equally pre-eternal with the Father who brought it forth.
But you who alone open the eyes of the blind, and through whom those who see do see—even if not absolutely to all, yet to all who seek you in truth—grant, by invisible contemplation, through your teachings inaudible to the senses, that those in mind may recognize the truth.
And if not so, then those who have believed by hearing—lead them up through faith to the unity of the knowledge of you; and having shown them firm in faith through good works, manifest yourself to them at a fitting time, that we all may know your glory in truth and may enjoy, in spiritual and ineffable vision, the splendor of the tri-sunned and most monarchic radiance, and may glorify you according to our power unceasingly, now and ever and unto the unending ages of ages.
) First Heading. Various scriptural citations collected to prove that the Holy Spirit is also from the Son; after which others are set down to prove that the Spirit is from the Father through the Son.
And since some (citations) prove this to be 'from the Son' and others 'through the Son,' for the demonstration of the equivalence of 'through' and 'from,' there follow next, in due order, other scriptural citations, by which the equivalence of these prepositions is proved.
First Counter-heading. When, in theology, 'from' and 'through' are equivalent to one another, they do not present the division or difference of the Holy Trinity, but the union and unalterableness, which is according to nature and to oneness of will.
For it is thereby shown that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are of one and the same nature and power and energy and will; but this man, having here recorded the sayings of the saints and entitled them thus, attempts badly and impiously to demonstrate the difference of the divine hypostases through the equivalence of such prepositions, and (to show) that from the two hypostases, and from each of them differently, the one of the three adorable hypostases—that is, the Holy Spirit—has its existence.
That this 'through' shows in all things the union and unalterableness—namely whenever it is equivalent to 'from'—the divine Maximus clearly establishes, concerning certain ones who said the Spirit is 'through the Son,' writing to Marinus: 'They did not show themselves to make the Son a cause; for they know the Father to be the one cause of the Son and of the Spirit—of the one by generation, of the other by procession—but (they said so) that they might show it to come forth through Him, and thereby present the conjunction and unalterableness of the essence.'
Clear from this, then, is that this Beccus impiously takes such sayings; for it is not the conjunction and unalterableness—which is according to nature—but the difference of the hypostases that he attempts to gather from them, neither obeying the great Basil; for he too says, in the eighth chapter of his work To Amphilochius: 'The Father's creating through the Son neither establishes the Father's creative act as incomplete nor implies the Son's energy as feeble, but presents the oneness of will.'
He, then, who says the Spirit comes forth through the Son and from the Son in respect of the bestowal, well presents the concord of will of the Father and the Son.
But these Latin-minded ones, gathering out of misunderstanding that the Spirit has its existence 'through the Son and from the Son,' present the Holy Spirit impiously as a work of good pleasure and will, and of necessity a creature, and not a fruit of the divine nature.
) Since there are some who contradict the scriptural citations that show the Spirit to be 'through the Son' from the Father, there have also been collected the present scriptural citations, which show that the Son is from the Father proximately and immediately, in support of those citations that show the Spirit to be 'through the Son.'
Second Counter-heading. And yet the divine Spirit too was said to be immediately from the Father, and your whole pretext and presentation of impiety has been demolished.
And the (Gregory) of Nyssa, with many others, says that each of the two has its being in like manner with reference to one Person, the paternal one—apart from the mode of existence.
'But in the case of the Holy Trinity it is not so; for there is one and the same Person, that of the Father, from whom the Son is begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds.'
And what of those who say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and abides in the Son, and passes from the Father into the Son, and is from the Father, and accompanies the Word?
1:1131
Ἔτιδέοἱκοινωνίανκαίἀγάπηνεἶναι (σελ
更進一步,那些說聖靈是(頁……)
And still further, those who say the Holy Spirit is the communion and love (p. ...)
The present scriptural citations have also been set down in support of the notion of those citations which show the Spirit to be from the Father not immediately but through the Son.
For if the Spirit were immediately from the Father, it would not have been said that the Son is the image of the Father, but the Spirit the image of the Son; and the Son the energy of the Father, but the Spirit the energy of the Son; and the Son the person (face) of the Father, but the Spirit the person (face) of the Son.
Most stupid one, who impiously here entitle the things piously said by the saints, how do you not perceive that the common and natural things, in the case of the most exalted and adorable Trinity, have no difference whatever?
Therefore, among other things, whenever one of these is called the 'person (face)' of another, it is natural, and not (a matter) of the mode of existence—away with that!
Fourth Heading. Since some, not accepting the mediation of the Son in the Trinity—which is plainly theologized by the saints—deny it, and (deny) speaking at all of the name of 'order' in the Trinity, the present scriptural citations have been collected for showing both that the Spirit is conjoined to the Father through the Son, and for establishing that an 'order' in the Trinity is most plainly spoken of.
1:1146
ἈντεπιγραφήτετάρτηΚαταψεύδῃτῶνεὐσεβῶν, ταλαίπωρε
第四反題。你這可憐人,竟對敬虔者撒謊。
Fourth Counter-heading. You lie against the pious, wretched one.
For we know an 'order' in the Holy Trinity, but the pious one; but that order which shows the Holy Spirit to be necessarily third from the Father, as being impious—which you cherish along with Eunomius—we do not accept.
And you lie against the scriptural citations too; for not the Son alone, but sometimes also the Father, they call the union of the Son and the Spirit; and at other times (they call) the Spirit the mean and common (bond) of the Son and the Father; and the 'order' which you say is most plain, it is clear, is not concerning the Son and the Holy Spirit.
And the mediation of the Son is cherished too, but, for those wise in divine things, not according to the existence of the Spirit, rather according to the confession—who do not place the Holy Spirit proximate to the Father, lest this too should seem to be begotten.
Fifth Heading. Since there are some who do not accept that the gospel saying which calls the Holy Spirit 'the Spirit of truth' can (mean) the same as the saying which says it proceeds from the Father, and moreover insist that 'to proceed from the Father' and 'the Holy Spirit's receiving from the Son' are not said in an equivalent sense, the present scriptural citations have been set down to prove the equivalence of such gospel citations.
O the insensibility! For the sayings of the saints are equivalent in showing the kinship with the Father and the Son—which is the same as saying the consubstantiality of the divine Spirit—but they differ in not showing it to have its existence from both, Father and Son.
And this is quite clear from these very scriptural citations; but this man, who has collected them, has as it were been struck deaf toward the difference of these sayings.