ETI PERI TOU hAGIAS8HTW TO ONOMA SOU, KAI TWN hEKsHS PROSTAKTIKWi
XARAKTHRI EIRHMENWN, LEKTEON, hOTI SUNEXWS PROSTAKTIKOIS ANTI EUKTIKWN
EXRHSANTO KAI hOI hERMHNEUSANTES...
He goes on to cite a variety of OT parallels and to criticize the methods
of Tatian in the latter's exposition of Genesis 1.3.
Cyril of Jerusalem,in his Fifth Mystagogical Catachesis also seems to
understand these imperatives as optatives or wishes, although he doesn't
comment from the point of view of a grammarian:
...EUXOME8A EN hHMIN hAGIAS8HNAITO ONOMA TOU 8EOU... (MYST. CAT. 5.12)
To go back to an old item, namely PEIRASMOS, Origen also deals with this
issue extensively in this little treatise.
There is also an interesting treatment in Maximos the Confessor's
hERMHNEIA SUNTOMOS EIS TO PATER hHMWN (FILOKALIA 2.202, EKDOTIKOS OIKOS
"ASTHR):
DITTOS GAR , KATA THN GRAFHN, TWN PEIRASMWN hO TROPOS. hO MEN hHDONIKOS,
hO DE ODUNHROS; KAI hO MEN PROAIRETIKOS, hO DE APROAIRETOS...
If anyone is interested in the rest of the quote (about 1/2 page), let me
know.
Cyril also deals with PEIRASMOS in his little treatise, but not with the
depth and beauty found in Origen and Maximos.
Sorry to mix the old with the new.