For we heard a little above from the one named for theology, who said that the Father is the source and origin of eternal light, but the Son is in no way without origin, but is the origin of all things. Therefore, "the Father is the sole source of the super-essential Godhead," said the great Dionysius the Areopagite; and again, "the Father is the fontal Godhead, but the Son and the Spirit are, if one must say so, God-planted shoots of the God-begetting Godhead, and as it were flowers and super-essential lights"; and again, "But the super-essential name and reality of the Father and of the Son and of the Spirit are distinct, with no reversal or community whatsoever being introduced among them." And in the third book of *On Mystical Theology*, he says, "from the immaterial and indivisible Good, the inmost lights of goodness have sprung forth, and have remained unproceeding from their co-eternal abiding in it and in themselves and in each other by their sprouting forth (p. 140)"; and again, "the properties of the super-essential divine generation are not reversed with one another."

If, therefore, you were to say the Son is the one who causes procession, the Father could never be the one who causes procession; for He would share in the God-begetting property with the Son; but this is forbidden. But if you should say the Father is, as indeed He is, the Son would not be the one who causes procession, therefore the Spirit is not from Him; for the only God-begetting Godhead is the only begetter and cause of procession; for in these respects He is God-begetting. Forbidding this community, the great Basil, writing to his own brother, says, "The Holy Spirit is dependent on the Son, with whom He is inseparably apprehended; but He has His being from being attached to the cause of the Father, whence He also proceeds, having this as a sign characteristic of His hypostatic property, to be known after the Son and with Him and to subsist from the Father. But the Son, who makes known the Spirit who proceeds from the Father through Himself and with Himself, having alone shone forth uniquely begotten from the unbegotten light, has no community according to the particularity of characteristics with the Father or the Holy Spirit."

Do you see how the Holy Spirit is related to both the Father and the Son, and what are the characteristic properties of the Son and the Spirit? "The only-begotten Son of God therefore makes known to us," he says, "and manifests the Holy Spirit, through Himself and with Himself, but He does not also cause Him to proceed, lest He have community in that particular property with the Father. For the Holy Spirit, he says, has His being from being attached to the cause of the Father, which is a property of the Father alone; "For all things," says the theologian, "that the Father has, belong to the Son, except for causality." Who then from all eternity of the divinely inspired theologians has been heard to assign the properties of each of the three persons of the one Godhead to two, and not to have kept them unconfused? That causing procession is a property of the Father is clear; For the Spirit is attached, (p. 142) he says, to His cause, whence He also proceeds, from whom He also subsists; even if He is known after the Son and with Him.

Since the common properties in the most high and adorable Trinity exist equally in those to whom they are common, but to be from the Father, according to the Latins, does not apply equally to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, for the one is immediately begotten from Him and from the Father alone, but the other proceeds mediately and not immediately and not from the Father alone, as they at least think - if therefore according to them it does not apply equally, then to be from the Father is not common to the Son and the Spirit; and if this is not common to them, then neither of them is from the Father at all. For if either one of them exists from the Father, the other, not sharing in this, is excluded, and through each other, both are. Thus you who think in the Latin way can escape none of the absurdities, just as those who say the Son is from the Spirit cannot, but whatever arguments you attempt to use to escape, they too will use the same arguments and will show you through themselves that the swarm of absurdities is inescapable.

Ἠκούσαμεν γάρ μικρόν ἀνωτέρω τοῦ τῆς θεολογίας ἐπωνύμου, τόν μέν Πατέρα πηγήν καί ἀρχήν εἰπόντος ἀϊδίου φωτός, τόν δέ Υἱόν ἄναρχον μέν οὐδαμῶς ἀρχήν δέ τῶν ὅλων. ∆ιό καί «μόνη πηγή τῆς ὑπερουσίου θεότητος ὁ Πατήρ», ὁ μέγας εἶπε ∆ιονύσιος ὁ Ἀρεοπαγίτης˙ καί αὖθις «ἔστι πηγαία θεότης ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ δέ Υἱός καί τό Πνεῦμα τῆς θεογόνου θεότητος, εἰ οὕτω χρή φάναι, βλαστοί θεόφυτοι καί οἷον ἄνθη καί ὑπερούσια φῶτα»˙ καί πάλιν˙ «διακεκριμένα δέ ἐστι τό Πατρός ὑπερούσιον ὄνομα καί χρῆμα καί Υἱοῦ καί Πνεύματος, οὐδεμιᾶς ἐν τούτοις ἀντιστροφῆς ἤ ὅλως κοινότητος ἐπεισαγομένης». Κἀν τῷ Περί μυστικῆς θεολογίας τρίτῳ, «ἐκ τοῦ ἀΰλου», φησί, «καί ἀμεροῦς ἀγαθοῦ τά ἐγκάρδια τῆς ἀγαθότητος ἐξέφυ φῶτα, καί τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ καί ἐν ἑαυτοῖς καί ἐν ἀλλήλοις συναϊδίου τῇ ἀναβλαστήσει (σελ. 140) μονῆς ἀπομεμένηκε ἀνεκφοίτητα»˙ καί αὖθις˙ «τά τῆς ὑπερουσίου θεογονίας οὐκ ἀντιστρέφει πρός ἄλληλα».

Εἰ τοίνυν εἴποις προβολέα τόν Υἱόν ὁ Πατήρ οὐδέποτ᾿ ἄν εἴη προβολεύς˙ κοινωνήσει γάρ κατά τό θεογόνον τῷ Υἱῷ˙ ἀλλά τοῦτ᾿ ἀπείρηται. Εἰ δέ τόν Πατέρα φαίης, ὥσπερ οὖν ἐστιν, ὁ Υἱός οὐκ ἄν εἴη προβολεύς, οὐκ ἄρα ἐξ αὐτοῦ τό Πνεῦμα˙ μόνος γάρ θεότης θεογόνος ὁ μόνος γεννήτωρ καί προβολεύς˙ κατά ταῦτα γάρ καί θεογόνος. Ταύτην δή τήν κοινωνίαν καί ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος ἀπαγορεύων πρός τόν ἑαυτοῦ γράφων ἀδελφόν, «τό Πνεῦμα», φησί, «τό ἅγιον τοῦ Υἱοῦ μέν ἤρτηται, ᾧ ἀδιαστάτως συγκαταλαμβάνεται˙ τῆς δέ τοῦ Πατρός αἰτίας ἐξημμένον ἔχει τό εἶναι, ὅθεν καί ἐκπορεύεται, τοῦτο γνωριστικόν τῆς κατά τήν ὑπόστασιν ἰδιότητος σημεῖον ἔχον, τό μετά τόν Υἱόν καί σύν αὐτῷ γνωρίζεσθαι καί ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ὑφεστάναι. Ὁ δέ Υἱός τό ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ἐκπορευόμενον Πνεῦμα δι᾿ ἑαυτόῦ καί μεθ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ γνωρίζων, μόνος μονογενῶς ἐκ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου φωτός ἐκλάμψας, οὐδεμίαν κατά τό ἰδιάζον τῶν γνωρισμάτων τήν κοινωνίαν ἔχει πρός τόν Πατέρα ἤ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον».

Ὁρᾷς ὅπως ἔχει πρός τε τόν Πατέρα καί τόν Υἱόν τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον καί τίνα Υἱοῦ καί Πνεύματος τά γνωρίσματα; «Γνωρίζει τοίνυν ἡμῖν», φησί, «καί φανεροῖ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ καί μεθ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ μονογενής Υἱός, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχί καί ἐκπορεύει, ἵνα μή κοινωνίαν ἔχῃ κατά τό ἰδιάζον τῷ Πατρί. Τῆς γάρ τοῦ Πατρός, φησίν, αἰτίας ἐξημμένον ἔχει τό εἶναι τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον, ἥτις ἰδιότης μόνου τοῦ Πατρός ἐστι˙ «Πάντα γάρ», φησίν ὁ θεολόγος, «ὅσα ἔχει ὁ Πατήρ, τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐστιν, ἄνευ τῆς αἰτίας». Τίς οὖν ἐκ τοῦ παντός αἰῶνος τῶν ἐνθέων θεολόγων τά ἴδια ἑκάστου τῶν τριῶν τῆς μιᾶς θεότητος προσώπων τοῖς δυσίν ἤκουσται προσνείμας, ἀλλά μή ἀσύγχυτα φυλάξας; Ὅτι δέ τοῦ Πατρός ἴδιον τό ἐκπορεύειν δῆλον˙ Τῆς γάρ αὐτοῦ, (σελ. 142) φησίν, αἰτίας ἐξῆπται τό Πνεῦμα, ὅθεν καί ἐκπορεύεται, παρ᾿ οὗ καί ὑφέστηκεν˙ εἰ καί μετά τόν Υἱόν καί σύν αὐτῷ γνωρίζεται.

Ἐπεί δέ τά κοινά ἐπί τῆς ἀνωτάτω καί προσκυνητῆς Τριάδος ἐπίστης ἔνεστιν, οἷς ἐστι κοινά, τό δέ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός εἶναι κατά τούς Λατίνους οὐκ ἐπίσης πρόσεστι τῷ Υἱῷ καί τῷ ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι, ὁ μέν γάρ προσεχῶς ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγέννηται καί ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Πατρός, τό δέ ἐμμέσως καί οὐ προσεχῶς ἐκπορεύεται καί οὐκ ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Πατρός ὥς γε αὐτοί φρονοῦσιν - εἰ οὖν κατ᾿ αὐτούς οὐκ ἐπίσης πρόσεστιν, οὐδέ κοινόν Υἱῷ καί Πνεύματι τό εἶναι ἐκ Πατρός˙ εἰ δέ μή κοινόν τοῦτ᾿ἔστιν αὐτοῖς, οὐδ᾿ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ὅλως οὐδέτερον αὐτῶν. Θάτερον γάρ ὁποιονοῦν ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ὑπάρχον, θάτερον ἐκβάλλεται μή κοινωνοῦν, καί δι᾿ ἀλλήλων ἀμφότερα. Οὕτως οὐδέν ἄν διαφύγοις τῶν ἀτόπων ὁ λατινικῶς φρονῶν, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾿ οἱ ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος εἰπόντες τόν Υἱόν, ἀλλ᾿ οἷς ἄν ἐπιχειρήσῃς διαφεύγειν, τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐπιχειρήμασι κἀκεῖνοι χρήσονται καί σοι δι᾿ ἑαυτῶν ἄφυκτον ἀποδείξουσι τόν τῶν ἀτόπων ἑσμόν.