The Orthodox Church teaches that both propositions are equally remote from truth. Which, then, is nearer to the truth? Nothing is said about that. Two opposite opinions are put forth, and nothing is said for their solution. I carefully searched in all five pages, and there is not a word in them about how it is to be understood. Not a word. The conclusion of the article is as follows:
“Remarkable are also the words of St. Augustine that refer to the present case: ‘It is one thing to be God, another to be Father. Though paternity and essence (in God) are one, it is impossible to say that the Father by his paternity is God, by his paternity all-wise. Such has always been the firm conviction of our fathers, and they rejected the Anomoans as having erred far beyond the limits of the faith, because these heretics destroyed all distinction between the essence and the divine properties.’” (p. 150.)
The end of the chapter. But are the Anomœans right, or why are the words of the blessed St. Augustine remarkable? that makes no difference. But how are we to understand it all? The words of St. John Damascene are true, as the author himself says. How are they to be made to agree with the contradictory words of St. Augustine? And are they true or not? The author does not even regard it as necessary to answer this, and concludes the chapter.
In the preceding article about the essence and the four-teen divine properties I was struck by the trait of the complete disassociation of ideas and the manifest play with mere contradictory or synonymous words in complete darkness; but here is another feature of an extraordinary neglect, offensive not only to my reason, but also to my feelings, which is shown to me and to the whole congregation which is listening to the teachings of the church.
In this article is directly expressed a contradiction, and it says: “This is white, and this black,” and you can-
