For because of this, having been both taught and enlightened, they were sent, so that they might teach as they were taught, so that they might enlighten as they were enlightened, so that they might proclaim with boldness what they heard in the ear, that is, not within the hearing of all, so that they might speak in the light, that is, openly to all, what was said to them in the darkness, as I would say, through a revelation in a super-luminous darkness, and let it also be parabolically, and like the dark saying in Solomon which is made clear to him who has partaken of wisdom. But if you wish, let the darkness signify "in private" and "secretly" and "not yet known to the many."

But to the point of our present argument, what has not been said to these who spoke the truth with boldness, what the Spirit, which announced all the truth, has not announced, what He who made known to His beloved all things He heard from the Father did not testify or make known, and who for this reason came, that He might bear witness to the truth, how do you dare to say this, introducing such an unnatural addition into the definition of the faith, which the preeminent fathers, gathered together in common, moved by the Spirit, a symbol of the true doctrine concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit and a test of sincere knowledge of God and a sure confession for all those who have chosen to rightly divide the word of truth, both composed and handed down?

For the pretext which you consider, that since some say the Son is not equal to the Father, because He Himself (p.78) does not have the power of procession, you, hastening to show Him equal, have introduced this addition, has no reasonableness from any source. For if some should say that He must also have the power of begetting, on the grounds that His equality is taken away if this is not present in Him, it is necessary to add this too, being persuaded by the foolish; and simply not to say that the Father is greater than the Son in His causality, so that we may not set aside the Son's equality with Him.

Which, then, you seem also to be deceitfully proposing in opposition to the evangelical dogmas and teachings; for he who says that the Son is also a cause of divinity sets aside the Son Himself, who clearly said in the gospel, "My Father is greater than I," not only as man, but also as God, with respect to the cause of divinity. For this reason He said not "God," but "the Father"; for not as God is He greater than the Son—away with the impiety—but as the cause of divinity, just as the God-bearing fathers have interpreted for us. To these God-bearers, therefore, as it seems, and to Christ the God of the God-bearers you speak in opposition, who say the Son is not equal to the Father with respect to causality.

But we both know the equality of the Son to the Father according to nature and we confess the superiority of the Father according to causality, which embraces both begetting and proceeding. And for those themselves who originally wrote in defense of the Son's consubstantiality with the Father, that is to say, His equal honor, which was the point of contention, the symbol of the faith was considered sufficient without your addition.

Therefore, it is neither reasonable nor pious to introduce this addition into the definition of the faith, which the preeminent fathers, gathered together in common, moved by the Spirit, both composed and handed down. To which it is not at all permitted to add or to take away (p. 80) after that holy synod which was second in time, by which he who would dare to do this is subjected to curses and is cast out of the church, and this, an addition not spoken, as has been said, by the Word, not revealed by the Spirit, not found in the written oracles of the holy apostles.

In agreement with these, those who set forth this divine definition of the faith also set it forth and those who came after them agreed with it, even if they did not jointly set it forth. For you cannot say, that it was not so that some set it forth, and others agreed with those who originally set it forth, both by the

Ἐπεί καί διά τοῦτο διδαχθέντες τε καί φωτισθέντες ἀπεστάλησαν, ἵνα διδάξωσιν ὡς ἐδιδάχθησαν, ἵνα φωτίσωσιν ὡς ἐφωτίσθησαν, ἵνα κηρύξωσιν ἐν παρρησίᾳ, ὅ εἰς τό οὖς ἀκούσειαν, τουτέστιν οὐκ ἐν ἐπηκόῳ πάντων, ἵν᾿ εἴπωσιν ἐν τῷ φωτί, δηλονότι φανερῶς τοῖς πᾶσιν, ἅ τούτοις εἴρηται ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, ὡς ἔγωγ᾿ ἄν φαίην, δι᾿ ἀποκαλύψεως ἐν ὑπερφώτῳ γνόφῳ, ἔστω δέ καί παραβολικῶς, καί οἷος ὁ παρά τῷ Σολομῶντι σκοτεινός λόγος ὁ τῷ μετειληχότι τῆς σοφίας τρανούμενος. Εἰ δέ βούλει, τό κατά μόνας ἡ σκοτία δηλούτω καί ἀποκρύφως καί μήπω τοῖς πολλοῖς ἐγνωσμένως.

Ἀλλά πρός ὅ νῦν ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος, ὅ μή τούτοις εἴρηται τοῖς παρρησιασαμένοις τήν ἀλήθειαν, ὅ μή ἀνήγγειλε τό Πνεῦμα τό πᾶσαν ἀπαγγεῖλαν τήν ἀλήθειαν, ὅ μή ἐμαρτύρησεν ἤ ἐγνώρισεν ὁ πάντα ὅσα ἤκουσε παρά τοῦ Πατρός τοῖς ἀγαπητοῖς γνωρίσας, καί διά τοῦτο ἐλθών, ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, πῶς ὑμεῖς τοῦτο τολμᾶτε λέγειν οὕτως ἔκφυλον εἰσάγοντες προσθήκην ἐν τῷ τῆς πίστεως ὅρῳ, ὅν οἱ πρόκριτοι πατέρες κοινῇ συνειλεγμένοι πνευματοκινήτως, σύμβολον ἀψευδοῦς δόξης τῆς εἰς Πατέρα καί Υἱόν καί ἅγιον Πνεῦμα καί βάσανον εἰλικρινοῦς θεογνωσίας καί ὁμολογίαν ἀσφαλῆ πᾶσι τοῖς ὀρθοτομεῖν προῃρημένοις τόν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας συνεγράψαντό τε καί παραδεδώκασιν;

Ἥν γάρ ὑπολογίζεσθε πρόφασιν, ὡς ἔστιν ὧν λεγόντων οὐκ ἴσον εἶναι τῷ Πατρί τόν Υἱόν, ὅτι μή καί αὐτός (σελ.78) ἔχει τό ἐκπορεύειν, ὑμεῖς ἴσον δεικνύναι σπεύδοντες τήν προσθήκην εἰσηνέγκατε ταύτην, οὐδαμόθεν ἔχει τό εὔλογον. Εἰ γάρ τινες φαῖεν χρῆν εἶναι καί τό γεννᾶν ἔχειν τοῦτον, ὡς μή τούτου προσόντος τό ἴσον ἀφαιρουμένου, ἀνάγκη προστιθέναι καί τοῦτο πειθομένους τοῖς ἀσυνέτοις˙ καί ἁπλῶς μή μείζω λέγειν τῷ αἰτίῳ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τόν Πατέρα, ἵνα μή τό πρός αὐτόν ἴσον τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἀθετήσωμεν.

Ὅπερ ἄρα δοκεῖτε καί ὑποβάλλειν δολίως πρός ἀντίθεσιν τῶν εὐαγγελικῶν δογμάτων καί διδαγμάτων˙ ὁ γάρ καί τόν Υἱόν αἴτιον θεότητος λέγων αὐτόν ἀθετεῖ τόν Υἱόν ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ σαφῶς εἰπόντα «ὁ πατήρ μου μείζων μού ἐστιν», οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώπου μόνον, ἀλλά καί ὡς Θεοῦ, τῷ τῆς θεότητος αἰτίῳ. ∆ιό καί οὐχ ὁ Θεός εἶπεν, ἀλλ᾿ ὁ Πατήρ˙ οὐ γάρ ὡς Θεός μείζων τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ἄπαγε τῆς ἀσεβείας, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς αἴτος θεότητος, καθάπερ καί οἱ θεοφόροι πατέρες ἡμῖν ἡρμήνευσαν. Τούτοις οὖν ὡς ἔοικε τοῖς θεοφόροις καί Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ τῶν θεοφόρων ἀντιλέγετε, τῷ Πατρί τόν Υἱόν οὐκ ἴσον κατά τό αἴτιον λέγουσιν.

Ἀλλ᾿ ἡμεῖς καί τό ἴσον ἴσμεν τοῦ Υἱοῦ πρός τόν Πατέρα κατά τήν φύσιν καί τό μεῖζον τοῦ Πατρός ὁμολογοῦμεν κατά τό αἴτιον, ὅπερ ἄμφω, τό τε γεννᾶν καί ἐκπορεύειν, συμπεριβάλλει. Καί αὐτοῖς δέ τοῖς συγγραψαμένοις τήν ἀρχήν ὑπέρ τῆς πρός τόν Πατέρα τοῦ Υἱοῦ συμφυΐας, ταὐτό δ᾿ εἰπεῖν ὁμοτιμίας, οὔσης τῆς ἀγωνίας, χωρίς τῆς παρ᾿ ὑμῶν προσθήκης ἀποχρῶν ἐνομίσθη τό τῆς πίστεως σύμβολον.

Οὐκοῦν εὐλόγως οὐδέ εὐσεβῶς ταύτην εἰσάγειν τήν προσθήκην ἐν τῷ τῆς πίστεως ὅρῳ, ὅν οἱ πρόκριτοι πατέρες κοινῇ συνειλεγμένοι, πνευματικινήτως συνεγράψαντό τε καί παραδεδώκασιν. Ὧ καί προσθῆναι ἤ ἀφελεῖν ὅλως οὐκ ἐφεῖται (σελ. 80) μετά τήν τῷ χρόνῳ δευτερεύουσαν ἐκείνης τῶν ἁγίων σύνοδον, δι᾿ ἧς καί ὁ τοῦτο τολμήσων ἀραῖς ὑποβάλλεται καί τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλεται, καί ταῦτα προσθήκην οὐκ εἰρημένην ὡς εἴρηται τῷ λόγῳ, οὐκ ἀποκεκαλυμμένην τῷ Πνεύματι, οὐχ εὑρημένην ἐν τοῖς τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων ἀναγράπτοις λογίοις.

Οἷς συμφώνως καί οἱ ἐκθέμενοι τόν τῆς πίστεως τοῦτον θεῖον ὅρον ἐξέθεντο καί οἱ μετ᾿ αὐτούς γεγονότες συνέθεντο, εἰ καί μή συνεξέθεντο. Οὐ γάρ ἔχετε λέγειν, ὡς οὐχί οὕτως οἱ μέν ἐξέθεντο, οἱ δέ τοῖς τήν ἀρχήν ἐκθεμένοις συνέθεντο, ὑπό τε τῶν