Gregory of Nazianzus De Spiritu Sancto (Orat. 31) 20

Arthur James Mason (Translator)

Table of Contents

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

De Spiritu Sancto (Orat. 31). Gregory of Nazianzus. Arthur James Mason (Translator). Germany. 2014.

Sponsored by University of Leipzig.

Funding provided by European Social Fund Saxony.

Current edition First1KGreek

De Spiritu Sancto (Orat. 31) (Greek) (Gregory of Nazianzus. The Five Theological Orations. Mason, Arthur James, translator. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899.)

Notes on the current edition

De Spiritu Sancto (Orat. 31)

1. 20. 16 om τε f
2. 3. τό τε ὄργανον] a pair of tongs.
3. 8. ἐληλεγμένος] from ἐλέγχω.
4. 10. ἢ τε τῶν ὁ. συνεκφ.] ‘and the nouns are expressed in both cases, along with the numeral,’ i.e. not merely ‘understood.’ Or. means both in the case of ὁμοούσια which are not numbered together, and in that of οὐχ ὁμοούσια which are.
5. 20. It will not bear the simplest test of addition or division. Your rules about the order of enumeration, and about the use of prepositions, are just as ridiculous. We will now proceed to give you the coup de grace.
6. 13. οὐκ εἰς δύο συντ.] ‘one and one make two,’ although ace. to the heretic’s logic ‘one and one’ would only be said of things of different nature, such as could never be united under a common numeral. Conversely ‘two is divided into one and οne,’ although ‘two’ can only be said of things of the same nature, which it would be unnatural to describe in that single fashion. The upshot is that the same things proved to be of the same nature and of different natures. Of course the argument is more or less of a piece of banter.
7. 17. προαριθμ. κ. ὑπαριθμ.] Elias says, probably without historical grounds, that this system of numbering (δεύτερος θεός, τρίτος θεός) was derived from the way in which the Neoplatonic writers arranged existences according to a scale, from the First Cause to the lowest. The phraseology is fully discussed by Basil l. c. (de Sp. S. 17.)῾Υπαριθμεῖν’, as distinguished from συναριθμ., is to reckon in a secondary position.
8. 4 τῆ] + θεια bdf || 14 ἔπει] ἐπειδὴ dt || 18 ὑπολάβοις c
9. 1. ὥσπερ...πραγμάτων] ‘as as if the realities themselves (i.e. the Persons of the Trinity) depended upon the order in which they are named.’
10. 3. καὶ προαριθμ. καὶ ὑπαριθμ.] ‘are sometimes enumerated in one order and sometimes in another’; e.g. 2 Cor. xiii 14.
11. 6. π. τῆς θεὸς φ. καὶ κύριος] ‘The same observation holds good’ of these, not in regard to the order in which they are placed, but to the way in which they are applied to the Divine Persons as it were indiscriminately.
12. 7. τῶν προθέσεων] ‘the prepositions.’
13. 8. κατατεχνολογεῖς ἤμ’. τὸ θ.] ‘tie down the Godhead with your canons.’ Basil de Sp. S. 2 ascribes the canon to Aetius.
14. 9. τί γὰρ ἂγ ἐποίησας] Α very ironical argument. If, when these prepositions are used interchangeably, you contrive to get such inequality out of them, what would you not have done if the use of them had been constant and able? Ὁπότε is used here like ὅστις with an inferential shade of meaning.
15. 13. καὶ ταῦτα] ‘even even these things,’ i.e. without going further.
16. 14. τῶν χαλεπῶν ἐστίν] ‘is a difficulty.’
17. 15. τῆς φορᾶς σχεθῆναι] ‘to stop short in your impetus.’
18. 21. You speak of the silence of Scripture on the Godhead of the Ghost. Scholars have often shown hoto false this is; but I too will do my best to help you out of your difficulty.