being refuted by those who have recorded the details of all the holy councils, and by the very agreement, from them until now and indeed forever, of the four patriarchal thrones, and of those of many and different races and tongues, who bear the exposition from the beginning unchanged and unaltered.

And so, the clear, common voices of the God-bearing theologians, evangelists, apostles, and of the prophets from of old before them, thus admittedly hold concerning the Spirit and thus in agreement with the God-man Word; and furthermore, also all the councils convened for various reasons and at various times for the sake of piety, and nearly the same, one might say, every God-bearing tongue; for in none of these councils was the Holy Spirit theologized as being also from the Son. And I would have just now shown this very thing, and that all the divinely-inspired speakers again, each in part, love it unalterably, through the words brought forth in succession which were proper to each of them.

But the Latin's contentiousness will not to such an extent endure us extending long arguments, but will respond, saying: How then do you, and from where having found this addition, understand the Holy Spirit to proceed from the Father alone, (p. 82) for which reason you also consider us heterodox, when Christ did not say this, nor any of his disciples?

To which we shall now straightway respond, saying thus. The whole body of the pious, having become one lip for good, built a tower of piety, altogether superior to the intelligible flood of impiety. For upon them, as they attempted to build, came the Trinity, the perfecter of good things, not confounding, but connecting both the doctrines and the tongues into a most pious and orthodox unanimity. Therefore, we, standing there upon a safe fortress, will first from here strike those who are borne against the right doctrines most accurately and most bravely, and at the same time also profitably for them, if they should wish. And after this, we shall bring forth to them some of the proofs of the truth that appear from many places, or rather from all places, stirring them also to a desire for it, so that I may say according to what is written: ‘if perhaps they might feel after it and find it, though it is not far from them.’ But now, rather, it is not we, but what is like the rational rampart of piety itself that will both strike and smite and rout them, and, if you will, will also heal them.

For such is this divine definition of divine things: it not only surrounds those who abide in it and establishes them in safety, but it also fights on their behalf and irresistibly opposes those who rise up against them. And as to how, listen.

“I believe in one God, Father, Almighty,” “and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages.” Is not then “alone” understood or implied, that he is begotten from the Father alone, even if “alone” is not added? And it is indeed certainly implied, and no less than if it were added, (p. 84) if you wish to be pious at all, you would say. From this, therefore, be taught also concerning the Spirit. And whenever you hear in the same creed, “the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father,” immediately of necessity consider “alone” to be implied and do not otherwise consider it an addition of ours, when you hear us adding it for the sake of truth on account of your rejection in our discussions with you. But if not, you will not allow “alone” to be implied even for the generation of the Son from the Father; and thus you will multiply your impiety.

And take this also to mind, that in the symbol of faith the Son from the

ἀναγραψάντων τά καθέκαστα τῶν ἁγίων ἁπασῶν συνόδων ἐξελεγχόμενοι, καί αὐτῆς τῆς ἐξ ἐκείνων μέχρι καί νῦν, μᾶλλον δέ καί ἐσαεί συμφωνίας τῶν τεσσάρων πατριαρχικῶν θρόνων, καί αὐτῶν τῶν πολλῶν καί διαφόρων καί γενῶν καί γλωσσῶν ἀδίαφορον φερουσῶν τήν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἔκθεσιν καί ἀμεταποίητον.

Καί τοίνυν αἱ μέν ἐκφαντορικαί κοιναί φωναί τῶν θεοφόρων θεολόγων, εὐαγγελιστῶν, ἀποστόλων, καί τῶν πρό αὐτῶν ἐξ αἰῶνος προφητῶν οὕτως ὁμολογουμένως ἔχουσι περί τοῦ Πνεύματος καί οὕτως ὁμολόγως τῷ Θεανθρώπῳ λόγῳ˙ πρός δέ καί αἱ κατά διαφόρους αἰτίας καί καιρούς ὑπέρ εὐσεβείας συγκροτηθεῖσαι πᾶσαι σύνοδοι, ταὐτό δέ σχεδόν εἰπεῖν πᾶσα γλῶσσα θεοφόρος˙ ἐν οὐδεμιᾷ γάρ τῶν συνόδων τούτων καί ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τεθεολόγηται τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον. Ἔδειξα δ᾿ ἄν ἀρτίως τοῦτ᾿ αὐτό καί τούς θεηγόρους πάντας αὖθις ἕκαστον ἐν μέρει στέργοντας ἀπαραλλάκτως διά τῶν ἰδίως ἑκάστῳ τούτων ἐξενηνεγμένων λόγων ἐφεξῆς.

Ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἐπί τοσοῦτον ἀνέξεται τό φίλερι τοῦ λατίνου μακρούς ἡμῶν ἀποτεινόντων λόγους, ἀλλ᾿ ἀπαντήσει λέγον˙ πῶς οὖν καί ὑμεῖς καί πόθεν εὑρόντες τήν προσθήκην ταύτην, παρά μόνου τοῦ Πατρός ἐννοεῖτε τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον ἐκπορεύεσθαι, (σελ. 82) διό καί ἡμᾶς ἑτεροδόξους οἴεσθε, τοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦτο μή εἰπόντος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐδέ τῶν ἐκείνου μαθητῶν τινος;

Πρός ὅ νῦν ἡμεῖς εὐθύς ἀναντήσομεν, οὕτω λέγοντες. Τό τῶν εὐσεβούντων πλήρωμα χεῖλος γεγονότες ἕν ἐπ᾿ ἀγαθῷ, πύργον εὐσεβείας ὠκοδόμησαν, δυσσεβείας νοητοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ παντάπασιν ἀνώτερον. Ἐπεδήμησε γάρ καί αὐτοῖς οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειροῦσιν ἡ τελεσιουργός τῶν ἀγαθῶν τριάς οὐ συγχέουσα, ἀλλά συνδέουσα καί τάς δόξας καί τάς γλώσσας εἰς εὐσεβεστάτην καί ὀρθόδοξον ὁμοφροσύνην. Αὐτοῦ τοίνυν ἡμεῖς ἐπ᾿ ἀσφαλοῦς ὀχυρώματος ἱστάμενοι τούς ἀπεναντίας τῶν ὀρθῶν δογμάτων φερομένους πρῶτον μέν ἐντεῦθεν εὐστοχώτατα καί γενναιότατα βαλοῦμεν, ἅμα δέ καί λυσιτελῶς αὐτοῖς, εἰ βούλοιντο. Μετά τοῦτο δέ τάς πολλαχόθεν, μᾶλλον δέ τῶν πανταχόθεν ἀναφαινομένων ἀποδείξεων τῆς ἀληθείας, ἔστιν ἅς προκομίσομεν αὐτοῖς πρός πόθον ταύτης καί αὐτούς ἐπαίροντες, ἵν᾿ εἴπω κατά τό γεγραμμένον˙ «εἰ ἄραγε ψηλαφήσειαν αὐτήν καί εὕροιεν, καί γε οὐ μακράν ὑπάρχουσαν αὐτῶν». Νῦν δέ μᾶλλον τούτους οὐχ ἡμεῖς, ἀλλ᾿ αὐτό τό οἷον λογικόν τῆς εὐσεβείας περιτείχισμα καί βαλεῖ καί πατάξει καί τροπώσεται, εἰ δέ βούλει, καί ἰάσεται.

Τοιοῦτος γάρ ὁ τῶν θείων θεῖος ὅρος οὗτος˙ οὐ περιβάλλει μόνον τούς ἐμμένοντας καί καθίστησιν ἐν ἀσφαλείᾳ, ἀλλά καί προπολεμεῖ καί ἀνυποστάτως ἀντιτάττεται τοῖς ἐπανισταμένοις˙ τό δ᾿ ὅπως, ἄκουε.

«Πιστεύω εἰς ἕνα Θεόν, πατέρα, παντοκράτορα», «καί εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τόν Υἱόν τοῦ Θεοῦ, τόν μονογενῆ, τόν ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός γεννηθέντα πρό πάντων τῶν αἰώνων». Ἆρ᾿ οὖν οὐ συννοεῖται οὐδέ συνυπακούεται τό μόνου, οὐδ᾿ ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Πατρός γεγέννηται, εἰ καί μή προστέθειται τό μόνου; Καί πάνυ μέν οὖν συνυπακούεται, καί οὐχ ἦττον προσκείμενον, (σελ. 84) εἰ ὅλως εὐσεβεῖν ἐθέλεις, εἴποις ἄν. Ἐντεῦθεν τοίνυν καί περί τοῦ Πνεύματος διδάσκου. Καί ἡνίκ᾿ ἄν ἀκούοις ἐπί τοῦ αὐτοῦ συμβόλου, «τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον τό ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκπορευόμενον», εὐθύς ἐξ ἀνάγκης συνυπακουόμενον νόμιζε τό «μόνου» καί μή προσθήκην ἄλλως νόμιζε ἡμῶν, ὑπέρ ἀληθείας διά τήν σήν ἀθέτησιν ἐν ταῖς πρός ὑμᾶς διαλέξεσι προστιθέντων ἀκροώμενος. Εἰ δέ μή, οὐδ᾿ ἐπί τῆς ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός τοῦ Υἱοῦ γεννήσεως ἐάσεις συνυπακούεσθαι τό «μόνου»˙ καί οὕτω σου πολυπλασιάσεις τό δυσσέβημα.

Καί τοῦτο δέ μοι λάβε κατά νοῦν, ὡς ἐπί τοῦ τῆς πίστεως συμβόλου τόν Υἱόν ἐκ τοῦ