{"collection":"chr","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/chr/ecf/205/2050053.htm","path":"chr/ecf/205/2050053.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/205/2050053.htm","text":"\u00a737. Defence of S. Basil\u2019s statement, attacked by Eunomius, that the terms \u2018Father\u2019 and \u2018The Ungenerate\u2019 can have the same meaning.\nThe stream of his abuse is very strong; insolence is at the bottom of every principle he lays down; and vilification is put by him in the place of any demonstration of doubtful points so let us briefly discuss the many misrepresentations about the word Ungenerate with which he insults our Teacher himself and his treatise. He has quoted the following words of our Teacher: \u201cFor my part I should be inclined to say that this title of the Ungenerate, however fitting it may seem to express our ideas, yet, as nowhere found in Scripture and as forming the alphabet of Eunomius\u2019 blasphemy, may very well be suppressed, when we have the word Father meaning the same thing; for One who essentially and alone is Father comes from none else; and that which comes from none else is equivalent to the Ungenerate.\u201d Now let us hear what proof he brings of the \u2018folly\u2019 of these words: \u201cOverhastiness and shameless dishonesty prompt him to put this dose of words 191 anomalously used into his attempts; he turns completely round, because his judgment is wavering and his powers of reasoning are feeble.\u201d Notice how well-directed that blow is; how skilfully, with all his mastery of logic, he takes Basil\u2019s words to pieces and puts a conception more consistent with piety in their place! \u201cAnomalous in phrase,\u201d \u201chasty and dishonest in judgment,\u201d \u201cwavering and turning round from feebleness of reasoning.\u201d Why this? what has exasperated this man, whose own judgment is so firm and reasoning so sound? What is it that he most condemns in Basil\u2019s words? Is it, that he accepts the idea of the Ungenerate, but says that the actual word, as misused by those who pervert it, should be suppressed? Well; is the Faith in jeopardy only as regards words and outward expressions, and need we take no account of the correctness of the thought beneath? Or does not the Word of Truth rather exhort us first to have a heart pure from evil thoughts, and then, for the manifestation of the soul\u2019s emotions, to use any words that can express these secrets of the mind, without any minute care about this or that particular sound? For the speaking in this way or in that is not the cause of the thought within us; but the hidden conception of the heart supplies the motive for such and such words; \u201cfor from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.\u201d We make the words interpret the thought; we do not by a reverse process gather 192 the thought from the words. Should both be at hand, a man may certainly be ready in both, in clever thinking and clever expression; but if the one should be wanting, the loss to the illiterate is slight, if the knowledge in his soul is perfect in the direction of moral goodness. \u201cThis people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me 193 .\u201d What is the meaning of that? That the right attitude of the soul towards the truth is more precious than the propriety of phrases in the sight of God, who hears the \u201cgroanings that cannot be uttered.\u201d Phrases can be used in opposite senses; the tongue readily serving, at his will, the intention of the speaker; but the disposition of the soul, as it is, so is it seen by Him Who sees all secrets. Why, then, does he deserve to be called \u201canomalous,\u201d and \u201chasty,\u201d and \u201cdishonest,\u201d for bidding us suppress all in the term Ungenerate which can aid in their blasphemy those who transgress the Faith, while minding and welcoming all the meaning in the word which can be reverently held. If indeed he had said that we ought not to think of the Deity as Ungenerate, there might have been some occasion for these and even worse terms of abuse to be used against him. But if he falls in with the general belief of the faithful and admits this, and then pronounces an opinion well worthy of the Master\u2019s mind 194 , viz., \u201cRefrain from the use of the word, for into it, and from it, the subverting heresy is fetched,\u201d and bids us cherish the idea of an ungenerate Deity by means of other names,\u2014therein he does not p. LXXXVI deserve their abuse. Are we not taught by the Truth Himself to act so, and not to cling even to things exceeding precious, if any of them tend to mischief? When He thus bids us to cut away the right eye or foot or hand, if so be that one of them offends, what else does He imply by this figure, than that He would have anything, however fair-seeming, if it leads a man by an inconsiderate use to evil, remain inoperative and out of use, assuring us that it is better for us to be saved by amputation of the parts which led to sin, than to perish by retaining them?\nWhat, too, does Paul, the follower of Christ, say? He, too, in his deep wisdom teaches the same. He, who declares that \u201ceverything is good, and nothing to be rejected, if it be received with thanks 195 ,\u201d on some occasions, because of the \u2018conscience of the weak brother,\u2019 puts some things back from the number which he has accepted, and commands us to decline them. \u201cIf,\u201d he says, \u201cmeat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth 196 .\u201d Now this is just what our follower of Paul did. He saw that the deceiving power of those who try to teach the inequality of the Persons was increased by this word Ungenerate, taken in their mischievous, heretical sense, and so he advised that, while we cherish in our souls a devout consciousness of this ungenerate Deity, we should not show any particular love for the actual word, which was the occasion of sin to the reprobate; for that the title of Father, if we follow out all that it implies, will suggest to us this meaning of not having been generated. For when we hear the word Father, we think at once of the Author of all beings; for if He had some further cause transcending Himself, He would not have been called thus of proper right Father; for that title would have had to be transferred higher, to this pre-supposed Cause. But if He Himself is that Cause from which all comes, as the Apostle says, it is plain that nothing can be thought of beyond His existence. But this is to believe in that existence not having been generated. But this man, who claims that even the Truth shall not be considered more persuasive than himself, will not acquiesce in this; he loudly dogmatizes against it; he jeers at the argument.\nPutting a full stop at \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. Oehler otherwise.\nLXXXV:193 LXXXV:194\nthe Master\u2019s mind. \u201cBut whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.\u201d Matth. xviii. 6; Mark ix. 42.\nLXXXVI:195\n1 Tim. iv. 4 (R.V.)\nLXXXVI:196","title":"Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Ser. II, Vol. V: Dogmatic Treatises.: Defence of S. Basil's statement, attacked by Eunomius, that the terms 'Father' and 'The Ungenerate' can have the same meaning.","type":"page"}