NPNF2-08. Basil: Letters and Select Works - Holy Bible Institute

To his Brother Gregory, concerning the difference between and .the distinction unconfounded, we shall not take into consideration, in order to estimatethat which differentiates, what is contemplated in common, as the uncreate, or what isbeyond all comprehension, or any quality of this nature; we shall only direct our attentionto the enquiry by what means each particular conception will be lucidly and distinctly separatedfrom that which is conceived of in common.4. Now the proper way to direct our investigation seems to me to be as follows. Wesay that every good thing, which by God’s providence befalls us, is an operation, of the Gracewhich worketh in us all things, as the apostle says, “But all these worketh that one and theself same Spirit dividing to every man severally as he will.” 2028 If we ask, if the supply ofgood things which thus comes to the saints has its origin in the Holy Ghost alone, we areon the other hand guided by Scripture to the belief that of the supply of the good thingswhich are wrought in us through the Holy Ghost, the Originator and Cause is the OnlybegottenGod; 2029 for we are taught by Holy Scripture that “All things were made byHim,” 2030 and “by Him consist.” 2031 When we are exalted to this conception, again, led byGod-inspired guidance, we are taught that by that power all things are brought from nonbeinginto being, but yet not by that power to the exclusion of origination. 2032 On theother hand there is a certain power subsisting without generation and without origination, 2033which is the cause of the cause of all things. For the Son, by whom are all things, and withwhom the Holy Ghost is inseparably conceived of, is of the Father. 2034 For it is not possiblefor any one to conceive of the Son if he be not previously enlightened by the Spirit. Since,then, the Holy Ghost, from Whom all the supply of good things for creation has its source,is attached to the Son, and with Him is inseparably apprehended, and has Its 2035 being attachedto the Father, as cause, from Whom also It proceeds; It has this note of Its peculiarhypostatic nature, that It is known after the Son 2036 and together with the Son, and that It2028 1 Cor. xii. 11.2029 ὁ μονογενὴς θεός is the reading of the Sinaitic and Vatican mss. in John i. 18. The insertion of the wordsοὐδὲ ὁ υιἰος, adopted by R.V. in Matt. xxiv. 36, but of which St. Basil knows nothing, as appears from his argumenton the difference between the statements of St. Matthew and St. Mark on this subject in Letter ccxxxvi., is supportedby these same two mss.2030 John i. 3.2031 Col. i. 17.2032 ἀνάρχως.2033 ἀγεννήτως καὶ ἀνάρχως ὑφεστῶσα.2034 For similar statements by St. Basil, cf. De Sp. S. p. cf. also Cont. Eunom. i: ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρὸςἡ ἀρχὴ τῷ υἱ& 254·, κατὰ τοῦτο μείζων ὁ πατὴρ ὡς αἴτιος καὶ ἀρχή.2035 cf. notes, pp. 15, 24.2036 μετὰ τὸν υἱ& 231·ν. So the Benedictine text with four mss. in the Paris Library, and the note. “μετὰ τοῦυἱοῦ” is a reading which is inadmissible, repeating as it does the sense of the following clause καὶ σὺν αὐτῷ.428