Discourse III.

Chapter XXIII.—Texts Explained; Seventhly, John xiv. 10Introduction. The doctrine of the coinherence. The Father and the Son Each whole and perfect God. They are in Each Other, because their Essence is One and the Same. They are Each Perfect and have One Essence, because the Second Person is the Son of the First. Asterius’s evasive explanation of the text under review; refuted. Since the Son has all that the Father has, He is His Image; and the Father is the One God, because the Son is in the Father.

1. The Ario-maniacs, as it appears, having once made up their minds to transgress and revolt from the Truth, are strenuous in appropriating the words of Scripture, ‘When the impious cometh into a depth of evils, he despiseth965;’ for refutation does not stop them, nor perplexity abash them; but, as having ‘a whore’s forehead,’ they ‘refuse to be ashamed966’ before all men in their irreligion. For whereas the passages which they alleged, ‘The Lord created me967,’ and ‘Made better than the Angels968,’ and ‘First-born969,’ and ‘Faithful to Him that made Him970’ have a right sense971, and inculcate religiousness towards Christ, so it is that these men still, as if bedewed with the serpent’s poison, not seeing what they ought to see, nor understanding what they read, as if in vomit from the depth of their irreligious heart, have next proceeded to disparage our Lord’s words, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me972;’ saying, ‘How can the One be contained in the Other and the Other in the One?’ or ‘How at all can the Father who is the greater be contained in the Son who is the less?’ or ‘What wonder, if the Son is in the Father,’ considering it is written even of us, ‘In Him we live and move and have our being973?’ And this state of mind is consistent with their perverseness, who think God to be material, and understand not what is ‘True Father’ and ‘True Son,’ nor ‘Light Invisible’ and ‘Eternal,’ and Its ‘Radiance Invisible,’ nor ‘Invisible Subsistence,’ and ‘Immaterial Expression’ and ‘Immaterial Image.’ For did they know, they would not dishonour and ridicule the Lord of glory, nor interpreting things immaterial after a material manner, pervert good words. It were sufficient indeed, on hearing only words which are the Lord’s, at once to believe, since the faith of simplicity is better than an elaborate process of persuasion; but since they have endeavoured to profane even this passage to their own heresy, it becomes necessary to expose their perverseness and to shew the mind of the truth, at least for the security of the faithful. For when it is said, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ They are not therefore, as these suppose, discharged into Each Other, filling the One the Other, as in the case of empty vessels, so that the Son fills the emptiness of the Father and the Father that of the Son974, and Each of Them by Himself is not complete and perfect (for this is proper to bodies, and therefore the mere assertion of it is full of irreligion), for the Father is full and perfect, and the Son is the Fulness of Godhead. Nor again, as God, by coming into the Saints, strengthens them, thus is He also in the Son. For He is Himself the Father’s Power and Wisdom, and by partaking of Him things originate are sanctified in the Spirit; but the Son Himself is not Son by participation, but is the Father’s own Offspring975. Nor again is the Son in the Father, in the sense of the passage, ‘In Him we live and move and have our being;’ for, He as being from the Fount976 of the Father is the Life, in which all things are both quickened and consist; for the Life does not live in life977, else it would not be Life, but rather He gives life to all things.

2. But now let us see what Asterius the Sophist says, the retained pleader978 for the heresy. In imitation then of the Jews so far, he writes as follows; ‘It is very plain that He has said, that He is in the Father and the Father again in Him, for this reason, that neither the word on which He was discoursing is, as He says, His own, but the Father’s, nor the works belong to Him, but to the Father who gave Him the power.’ Now this, if uttered at random by a little child, had been excused from his age; but when one who bears the title of Sophist, and professes universal knowledge979, is the writer, what a serious condemnation does he deserve! And does he not shew himself a stranger to the Apostle980, as being puffed up with persuasive words of wisdom, and thinking thereby to succeed in deceiving, not understanding himself what he says nor whereof he affirms981? For what the Son has said as proper and suitable to a Son only, who is Word and Wisdom and Image of the Father’s Essence, that he levels to all the creatures, and makes common to the Son and to them; and he says, lawless982 man, that the Power of the Father receives power, that from this his irreligion it may follow to say that in a son983 the Son was made a son, and the Word received a word’s authority; and, far from granting that He spoke this as a Son, He ranks Him with all things made as having learned it as they have. For if the Son said, ‘I am in the Father and the Father in Me,’ because His discourses were not His own words but the Father’s, and so of His works, then,—since David says, ‘I will hear what the Lord God shall say in me984,’ and again Solomon985, ‘My words are spoken by God,’ and since Moses was minister of words which were from God, and each of the Prophets spoke not what was his own but what was from God, ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ and since the works of the Saints, as they professed, were not their own but God’s who gave the power, Elijah for instance and Elisha invoking God that He Himself would raise the dead, and Elisha saying to Naaman, on cleansing him from the leprosy, ‘that thou mayest know that there is a God in Israel986,’ and Samuel too in the days of the harvest praying to God to grant rain, and the Apostles saying that not in their own power they did miracles but in the Lord’s grace—it is plain that, according to Asterius such a statement must be common to all, so that each of them is able to say, ‘I in the Father and the Father in me;’ and as a consequence that He is no longer one Son of God and Word and Wisdom, but, as others, is only one out of many.

3. But if the Lord said this, His words would not rightly have been, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ but rather, ‘I too am in the Father, and the Father is in Me too,’ that He may have nothing of His own and by prerogative987, relatively to the Father, as a Son, but the same grace in common with all. But it is not so, as they think; for not understanding that He is genuine Son from the Father, they belie Him who is such, whom alone it befits to say, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me.’ For the Son is in the Father, as it is allowed us to know, because the whole Being of the Son is proper to the Father’s essence988, as radiance from light, and stream from fountain; so that whoso sees the Son, sees what is proper to the Father, and knows that the Son’s Being, because from the Father, is therefore in the Father. For the Father is in the Son, since the Son is what is from the Father and proper to Him, as in the radiance the sun, and in the word the thought, and in the stream the fountain: for whoso thus contemplates the Son, contemplates what is proper to the Father’s Essence, and knows that the Father is in the Son. For whereas the Form989 and Godhead of the Father is the Being of the Son, it follows that the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son990.

4. On this account and reasonably, having said before, ‘I and the Father are One,’ He added, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,991’ by way of shewing the identity992 of Godhead and the unity of Essence. For they are one, not993 as one thing divided into two parts, and these nothing but one, nor as one thing twice named, so that the Same becomes at one time Father, at another His own Son, for this Sabellius holding was judged an heretic. But They are two, because the Father is Father and is not also Son, and the Son is Son and not also Father994; but the nature is one; (for the offspring is not unlike995 its parent, for it is his image), and all that is the Father’s, is the Son’s996. Wherefore neither is the Son another God, for He was not procured from without, else were there many, if a godhead be procured foreign from the Father’s997; for if the Son be other, as an Offspring, still He is the Same as God; and He and the Father are one in propriety and peculiarity of nature, and in the identity of the one Godhead, as has been said. For the radiance also is light, not second to the sun, nor a different light, nor from participation of it, but a whole and proper offspring of it. And such an offspring is necessarily one light; and no one would say that they are two lights998, but sun and radiance two, yet one the light from the sun enlightening in its radiance all things. So also the Godhead of the Son is the Father’s; whence also it is indivisible; and thus there is one God and none other but He. And so, since they are one, and the Godhead itself one, the same things are said of the Son, which are said of the Father, except His being said to be Father999:—for instance1000, that He is God, ‘And the Word was God1001;’ Almighty, ‘Thus saith He which was and is and is to come, the Almighty1002;’ Lord, ‘One Lord Jesus Christ1003;’ that He is Light, ‘I am the Light1004;’ that He wipes out sins, ‘that ye may know,’ He says, ‘that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins1005;’ and so with other attributes. For ‘all things,’ says the Son Himself, ‘whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine1006;’ and again, ‘And Mine are Thine.’

5. And on hearing the attributes of the Father spoken of a Son, we shall thereby see the Father in the Son; and we shall contemplate the Son in the Father, when what is said of the Son is said of the Father also. And why are the attributes of the Father ascribed to the Son, except that the Son is an Offspring from Him? and why are the Son’s attributes proper to the Father, except again because the Son is the proper Offspring of His Essence? And the Son, being the proper Offspring of the Father’s Essence, reasonably says that the Father’s attributes are His own also; whence suitably and consistently with saying, ‘I and the Father are One,’ He adds, ‘that ye may know that I am in the Father and the Father in Me1007.’ Moreover, He has added this again, ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father1008;’ and there is one and the same sense in these three1009 passages. For he who in this sense understands that the Son and the Father are one, knows that He is in the Father and the Father in the Son; for the Godhead of the Son is the Father’s, and it is in the Son; and whoso enters into this, is convinced that ‘He that hath seen the Son, hath seen the Father;’ for in the Son is contemplated the Father’s Godhead. And we may perceive this at once from the illustration of the Emperor’s image. For in the image is the shape and form of the Emperor, and in the Emperor is that shape which is in the image. For the likeness of the Emperor in the image is exact1010; so that a person who looks at the image, sees in it the Emperor; and he again who sees the Emperor, recognises that it is he who is in the image1011. And from the likeness not differing, to one who after the image wished to view the Emperor, the image might say, ‘I and the Emperor are one; for I am in him, and he in me; and what thou seest in me, that thou beholdest in him, and what thou hast seen in him, that thou holdest in me1012.’ Accordingly he who worships the image, in it worships the Emperor also; for the image is his form and appearance. Since then the Son too is the Father’s Image, it must necessarily be understood that the Godhead and propriety of the Father is the Being of the Son.

6. And this is what is said, ‘Who being in the form of God1013,’ and ‘the Father in Me.’ Nor is this Form1014 of the Godhead partial merely, but the fulness of the Father’s Godhead is the Being of the Son, and the Son is whole God. Therefore also, being equal to God, He ‘thought it not a prize to be equal to God;’ and again since the Godhead and the Form of the Son is none other’s than the Father’s1015, this is what He says, ‘I in the Father.’ Thus ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself1016;’ for the propriety of the Father’s Essence is that Son, in whom the creation was then reconciled with God. Thus what things the Son then wrought are the Father’s works, for the Son is the Form of that Godhead of the Father, which wrought the works. And thus he who looks at the Son, sees the Father; for in the Father’s Godhead is and is contemplated the Son; and the Father’s Form which is in Him shews in Him the Father; and thus the Father is in the Son. And that propriety and Godhead which is from the Father in the Son, shews the Son in the Father, and His inseparability from Him; and whoso hears and beholds that what is said of the Father is also said of the Son, not as accruing to His Essence by grace or participation, but because the very Being of the Son is the proper Offspring of the Father’s Essence, will fitly understand the words, as I said before, ‘I in the Father, and the Father in Me;’ and ‘I and the Father are One1017.’ For the Son is such as the Father is, because He has all that is the Father’s. Wherefore also is He implied together with the Father. For, a son not being, one cannot say father; whereas when we call God a Maker, we do not of necessity intimate the things which have come to be; for a maker is before his works1018. But when we call God Father, at once with the Father we signify the Son’s existence. Therefore also he who believes in the Son, believes also in the Father: for he believes in what is proper to the Father’s Essence; and thus the faith is one in one God. And he who worships and honours the Son, in the Son worships and honours the Father; for one is the Godhead; and therefore one1019 the honour and one the worship which is paid to the Father in and through the Son. And he who thus worships, worships one God; for there is one God and none other than He. Accordingly when the Father is called the only God, and we read that there is one God1020, and ‘I am,’ and ‘beside Me there is no God,’ and ‘I the first and I the last1021,’ this has a fit meaning. For God is One and Only and First; but this is not said to the denial of the Son1022, perish the thought; for He is in that One, and First and Only, as being of that One and Only and First the Only Word and Wisdom and Radiance. And He too is the First, as the Fulness of the Godhead of the First and Only, being whole and full God1023. This then is not said on His account, but to deny that there is other such as the Father and His Word.

ΤΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΥ ΚΑΤΑ ΑΡΕΙΑΝΩΝ ΛΟΓΟΣ ΤΡΙΤΟΣ. Οἱ Ἀρειομανῖται, ὡς ἔοικε, κρίναντες ἅπαξ ἀποστάται γενέσθαι καὶ παραβάται τῆς ἀληθείας, φιλονεικοῦσιν εἰς ἑαυτοὺς ἑλκῦσαι τὸ γεγραμμένον· Ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἀσεβὴς εἰς βάθος κακῶν, καταφρονεῖ· οὔτε γὰρ ἐλεγχόμενοι παύονται, οὔτε ἀποροῦντες ἐντρέπονται· ἀλλ' ὡς πόρνης ὄψις, ἀπηναισχύν θησαν πρὸς πάντας ἐν ταῖς ἀσεβείαις. Καὶ γὰρ ὧν προεφασίζοντο ῥητῶν, τοῦ, Κύριος ἔκτισέ με, καὶ τοῦ, Κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων, καὶ τοῦ, Πρωτότοκος, καὶ τοῦ, Πιστὸν ὄντα τῷ ποιή σαντι αὐτὸν, ὀρθὴν ἐχόντων τὴν διάνοιαν, καὶ δει κνύντων τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβειαν, οὐκ οἶδ' ὅπως πάλιν αὐτοὶ ὡς περιχυθέντες τὸν τοῦ ὄφεως ἰὸν, καὶ μὴ βλέποντες ἃ δεῖ βλέπειν, μηδὲ νοοῦντες ἃ ἀναγινώσκουσιν, ὥσπερ ἐκ βάθους τῆς ἀσεβοῦς αὐ τῶν καρδίας ἐρευγόμενοι, ἤρξαντο λοιπὸν καὶ διασύρειν τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου λεγόμενον, Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· λέγοντες· Πῶς δύναται οὗτος ἐν ἐκείνῳ, κἀκεῖνος ἐν τούτῳ χωρεῖν; Ἢ πῶς ὅλως δύναται ὁ Πατὴρ, μείζων ὢν, ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ ἐλάτ τονι ὄντι χωρεῖν; Ἢ τί θαυμαστὸν, εἰ ὁ Υἱὸς ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, ὅπουγε καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν γέγραπται· Ἐν αὐτῷ γὰρ ζῶμεν, καὶ κινούμεθα, καί ἐσμεν; Πά σχουσι δὲ τοῦτο ἀκολούθως τῇ κακονοίᾳ ἑαυτῶν, σῶμα νομίζοντες εἶναι τὸν Θεὸν, καὶ μὴ νοοῦντες μήτε τί ἐστιν ἀληθινὸς Πατὴρ, καὶ ἀληθινὸς Υἱὸς, μήτε τί ἐστι φῶς ἀόρατον, καὶ ἀΐδιον, καὶ ἀπαύγασμα αὐτοῦ ἀόρατον, μήτε τί ἐστιν ἀόρατος ὑπόστα σις, καὶ χαρακτὴρ ἀσώματος, καὶ εἰκὼν ἀσώματος. Εἰ γὰρ ἐγίνωσκον, οὐκ ἂν τὸν Κύριον τῆς δόξης μετὰ γέλωτος ἐδυσφήμουν, οὔτε τὰ ἀσώματα σωματι κῶς ἐκλαμβάνοντες, τὰ καλῶς λεγόμενα παρεξη γοῦντο. Ἤρκει μὲν οὖν καὶ μόνον ἀκούοντας ταῦτα, λέγοντος τοῦ Κυρίου, πιστεύειν· ἐπεὶ καὶ ἡ τῆς ἁπλότητος πίστις βελτίων ἐστὶ τῆς ἐκ περιεργίας πιθανολογίας· ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ τοῦτο βεβηλοῦν ἐπεχεί ρησαν πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν αἵρεσιν, ἀναγκαῖον τὴν μὲν ἐκείνων κακόνοιαν διελέγξαι, τὴν δὲ τῆς ἀληθείας διάνοιαν δεῖξαι ἕνεκά γε τῆς τῶν πιστῶν ἀσφαλείας. Οὐ γὰρ, ὡς ἐκεῖνοι νομίζουσιν, ἀντεμβιβαζόμενοι εἰς ἀλλήλους εἰσὶν, ἐν τῷ λέγεσθαι, Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοὶ, ὥσπερ ἐν ἀγγείοις κενοῖς ἐξ ἀλλήλων πληρούμενοι· ὥστε τὸν μὲν Υἱὸν πλη ροῦν τὸ κενὸν τοῦ Πατρὸς, τὸν δὲ Πατέρα πληροῦν τὸ κενὸν τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ ἑκάτερον αὐτῶν μὴ εἶναι πλήρη καὶ τέλειον· σωμάτων μὲν ἴδιον τοῦτό γε· διὸ καὶ τὸ μόνον εἰπεῖν τοῦτο πλέον ἐστὶν ἀσεβείας· πλήρης γὰρ καὶ τέλειός ἐστιν ὁ Πατὴρ, καὶ πλήρωμα θεότητός ἐστιν ὁ Υἱός. Οὐδ' αὖ πάλιν, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις γινόμενος ὁ Θεὸς, ἐνδυναμοῖ αὐτοὺς, οὕ τως ἐστὶ καὶ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ· αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ τοῦ Πα τρὸς δύναμις καὶ σοφία· καὶ τὰ μὲν γενητὰ μετοχῇ τούτου ἐν Πνεύματι ἁγιάζεται· αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Υἱὸς οὐ μετουσίᾳ υἱός ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ γέννημα τοῦ Πατρὸς ἴδιόν ἐστιν. Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ πάλιν οὕτως ὁ Υἱὸς ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, ὡς τὸ, Ἐν αὐτῷ ζῶμεν, καὶ κινούμεθα, καί ἐσμεν· αὐτὸς γὰρ ὡς ἐκ πηγῆς τοῦ Πατρός ἐστιν ἡ ζωὴ, ἐν ᾗ τὰ πάντα ζωογονεῖταί τε καὶ συνέστηκεν· οὐ γὰρ ἡ ζωὴ ἐν ζωῇ ζῇ· ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἂν εἴη ζωή· ἀλλ' αὐτὸς μᾶλλον ζωογονεῖ τὰ πάντα. Ἴδωμεν δὲ καὶ τὰ τοῦ συνηγόρου τῆς αἱρέσεως Ἀστερίου τοῦ σοφιστοῦ· γέγραφε γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς, εἰς τοῦτο ζηλώσας τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, ταῦτα· «Εὔδηλον γὰρ, ὅτι διὰ τοῦτο εἴρηκεν ἑαυτὸν μὲν ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, ἐν ἑαυτῷ δὲ πάλιν τὸν Πατέρα, ἐπεὶ μήτε τὸν λόγον, ὃν διεξήρχετο, ἑαυτοῦ φησιν εἶναι, ἀλλὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς, μήτε οἰκεῖα τὰ ἔργα, ἀλλὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς δεδωκότος τὴν δύναμιν.» Τοῦτο δὲ εἰ καὶ παιδάριον ἦν ἁπλῶς εἰρηκὸς, συγγνώμην εἶχεν ἐκ τῆς ἡλικίας· ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὁ καλούμενος σοφιστὴς, καὶ πάντα γινώσκειν ἐπαγγελλόμενος, ἔστιν ὁ γράψας, πόσης ἄξιος καταγνώσεως ὁ τοιοῦτος; Πῶς δὲ καὶ οὐκ ἀλ λότριον ἑαυτὸν τοῦ Ἀποστόλου δείκνυσιν, ἐπαιρόμε νος ἐν πειθοῖς σοφίας λόγοις καὶ νομίζων ἐν τούτοις ἐξαπατᾷν δύνασθαι, μὴ νοῶν αὐτὸς ἃ λέγει, μήτε περὶ τίνων διαβεβαιοῦται. Ἃ γὰρ ὁ Υἱὸς ἴδια καὶ ἁρμόζοντα μόνῳ Υἱῷ, Λόγῳ καὶ Σοφίᾳ ὄντι, καὶ εἰκόνι τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας εἴρηκε, ταῦτα οὗ τος εἰς πάντα τὰ κτίσματα καταφέρει, καὶ κοινὰ τῷ τε Υἱῷ καὶ τούτοις ταῦτα ποιεῖ· τὴν δὲ δύναμιν τοῦ Πατρὸς λέγει λαμβάνειν δύναμιν ὁ παράνομος, ἵνα ἀκολουθήσῃ τῇ δυσσεβείᾳ αὐτοῦ εἰπεῖν ὅτι καὶ ὁ Υἱὸς ἐν Υἱῷ υἱοποιήθη, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἔλαβε Λό γου ἐξουσίαν· καὶ οὐκ ἔτι μὲν αὐτὸν, ὡς Υἱὸν, θέλει εἰρηκέναι ταῦτα, ὡς δὲ μαθόντα καὶ αὐτὸν ὁμοίως συντάσσει πᾶσι τοῖς ποιήμασιν. Εἰ γὰρ διὰ τὸ μὴ εἶναι τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ἃ διεξήρχετο, ἀλλ' ὅτι τοῦ Πατρὸς ἦν, καὶ τὰ ἔργα, ἔλεγεν· Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· καὶ ὁ μὲν ∆αβὶδ λέγει· Ἀκούσομαι τί λαλήσει ἐν ἐμοὶ Κύριος ὁ Θεός· ὁ δὲ Σολομών· Οἱ ἐμοὶ λόγοι εἴρηνται ὑπὸ Θεοῦ· καὶ ὁ μὲν Μωσῆς τοὺς παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ διηκόνει λόγους, ἕκαστος δὲ τῶν προφητῶν οὐ τὰ ἴδια, ἀλλὰ τὰ παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἔλεγε, Τάδε λέγει Κύριος· καὶ τὰ ἔργα, ἃ ἐποίουν οἱ ἅγιοι, οὐκ ἴδια, ἀλλὰ τοῦ δεδωκότος τὴν δύναμιν Θεοῦ ἔλεγον εἶναι· ὡς ὁ μὲν Ἠλίας καὶ Ἐλισσαῖος ἐπικαλούμενοι τὸν Θεὸν, ἵνα τοὺς νεκροὺς αὐτὸς ἐγείρῃ· ὅτε καὶ τῷ Ναιεμὰν λέγει ὁ Ἐλισσαῖος, καθαρίσας αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῆς λέπρας· Ἵνα γνῷς, ὅτι ἐστὶ Θεὸς ἐν Ἰσραήλ· ὁ δὲ Σαμουὴλ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν ἡμέραις θερισμοῦ ηὔχετο τὸν Θεὸν δοῦναι ὑετόν· οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι ἔλεγον, οὐκ ἰδίᾳ δυνάμει ποιεῖν τὰ σημεῖα, ἀλλὰ τῇ τοῦ Κυρίου χάριτι· δῆλον, ὅτι κατ' αὐτὸν κοινὴ ἂν εἴη πάντων καὶ ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ, ὥστε καὶ ἕκαστον λέγειν δύνα σθαι· Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· καὶ λοιπὸν μηκέτι ἕνα εἶναι τοῦτον Υἱὸν Θεοῦ καὶ Λόγον καὶ Σοφίαν, ἀλλ' ἐκ πολλῶν ἕνα καὶ τοῦ τον τυγχάνειν. Ἀλλ' εἴπερ ἦν οὕτως ὁ Κύριος εἰρηκὼς, ἔδει μὴ εἰπεῖν αὐτόν· Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον· Κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ δὲ καὶ ἐν ἐμοί ἐστιν, ἵνα μηδὲ ἴδιον καὶ ἐξαίρετον ἔχῃ πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα ὡς Υἱὸς, κοινὴν δὲ μετὰ πάντων ἔχῃ τὴν αὐτὴν χάριν. Ἀλλ' οὐκ ἔστιν, ὡς νομίζουσιν ἐκεῖνοι· μὴ φρονοῦντες γὰρ Υἱὸν εἶναι γνήσιον ἐκ Πατρὸς, καταψεύδονται τοῦ γνησίου, ᾧ μόνῳ ἁρμόζει λέγειν· Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πα τρὶ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί. Ἔστι γὰρ ὁ Υἱὸς ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, ὥς γε νοεῖν ἔξεστιν, ἐπειδὴ σύμπαν τὸ εἶναι τοῦ Υἱοῦ, τοῦτο τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας ἴδιόν ἐστιν, ὡς ἐκ φωτὸς ἀπαύγασμα, καὶ ἐκ πηγῆς ποτα μὸς, ὥστε τὸν ὁρῶντα τὸν Υἱὸν ὁρᾷν τὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἴδιον, καὶ νοεῖν, ὅτι τοῦ Υἱοῦ τὸ εἶναι, ἐκ τοῦ Πα τρὸς ὂν, οὕτως ἐν τῷ Πατρί ἐστιν. Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ, ἐπειδὴ τὸ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἴδιον, τοῦτο ὁ Υἱὸς τυγχάνει ὢν, ὡς ἐν τῷ ἀπαυγάσματι ὁ ἥλιος, καὶ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ ὁ νοῦς, καὶ ἐν τῷ ποταμῷ ἡ πηγή· οὕτω γὰρ ὁ θεωρῶν τὸν Υἱὸν, θεωρεῖ τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας τὸ ἴδιον, καὶ νοεῖ, ὅτι ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ ἐστι. Τοῦ γὰρ εἴδους καὶ τῆς θεότητος τοῦ Πατρὸς οὔσης τὸ εἶναι τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἀκολούθως ὁ Υἱὸς ἐν τῷ Πατρί ἐστι, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ. ∆ιὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ εἰκότως εἰρηκὼς πρότερον· Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἔν ἐσμεν, ἐπήγαγε τό· Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πα τρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· ἵνα τὴν μὲν ταὐτότητα τῆς θεότητος, τὴν δὲ ἑνότητα τῆς οὐσίας δείξῃ. Ἓν γάρ εἰσιν, οὐχ ὡς ἑνὸς πάλιν εἰς δύο μέρη διαιρεθέντος, καὶ μηδὲν ὄντων πλὴν ἑνός· οὐδὲ ὡς τοῦ ἑνὸς δὶς ὀνομαζομένου, ὥστε τὸν αὐτὸν ἄλ λοτε μὲν Πατέρα, ἄλλοτε δὲ Υἱὸν ἑαυτοῦ γίνεσθαι· τοῦτο γὰρ Σαβέλλιος φρονήσας, αἱρετικὸς ἐκρίθη. Ἀλλὰ δύο μέν εἰσιν, ὅτι ὁ Πατὴρ Πατήρ ἐστι, καὶ οὐχ ὁ αὐτὸς Υἱός ἐστι· καὶ ὁ Υἱὸς Υἱός ἐστι, καὶ οὐχ ὁ αὐτὸς Πατήρ ἐστι. Μία δὲ ἡ φύσις· οὐ γὰρ ἀν όμοιον τὸ γέννημα τοῦ γεννήσαντος· εἰκὼν γάρ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ πάντα τὰ Πατρὸς τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐστι. ∆ιὸ οὐδὲ ἄλλος Θεὸς ὁ Υἱός· οὐ γὰρ ἔξωθεν ἐπενοήθη· ἐπεὶ πάντως καὶ πολλοὶ, ξένης παρὰ τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐπινοουμένης θεότητος· εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἕτερόν ἐστιν ὡς γέννημα ὁ Υἱὸς, ἀλλὰ ταὐτόν ἐστιν ὡς Θεός· καὶ ἕν εἰσιν αὐτὸς καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ τῇ ἰδιότητι καὶ οἰκειότητι τῆς φύσεως, καὶ τῇ ταὐτότητι τῆς μιᾶς θεότητος, ὥσπερ εἴρηται. Καὶ γὰρ καὶ τὸ ἀπαύγασμα φῶς ἐστιν, οὐ δεύτερον τοῦ ἡλίου, οὐδὲ ἕτερον φῶς, οὐδὲ κατὰ μετουσίαν αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ' ὅλον ἴδιον αὐτοῦ γέννη μα. Τὸ δὲ τοιοῦτον γέννημα ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἕν ἐστι φῶς· καὶ οὐκ ἄν τις εἴποι δύο φῶτα εἶναι ταῦτα, ἀλλὰ δύο μὲν ἥλιον καὶ ἀπαύγασμα, ἓν δὲ τὸ ἐξ ἡλίου φῶς ἐν τῷ ἀπαυγάσματι φωτίζον τὰ πανταχοῦ. Οὕτω καὶ ἡ τοῦ Υἱοῦ θεότης τοῦ Πατρός ἐστιν· ὅθεν καὶ ἀδιαίρετός ἐστι· καὶ οὕτως εἷς Θεὸς, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ. Οὕτω γοῦν ἓν αὐτῶν ὄντων, καὶ μιᾶς αὐτῆς οὔσης τῆς θεότητος, τὰ αὐτὰ λέγεται περὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, ὅσα λέγεται καὶ περὶ τοῦ Πατρὸς, χωρὶς τοῦ λέγεσθαι Πατήρ· οἷον τὸ Θεός· Καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος· τὸ Παντοκράτωρ· Τάδε λέγει ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ὁ Παντοκρά τωρ· τὸ Κύριος· Εἷς Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός· τὸ εἶναι φῶς· Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς· τὸ ἐξαλείφειν ἁμαρ τίας· Ἵνα δὲ, φησὶν, εἰδῆτε, ὅτι ἔχει ἐξουσίαν ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀφιέναι ἁμαρ τίας· καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα ἂν εὕροις. Πάντα γὰρ, φη σὶν αὐτὸς ὁ Υἱὸς, ὅσα ἔχει ὁ Πατὴρ, ἐμά ἐστι· καὶ πάλιν, Τὰ ἐμὰ σά ἐστιν. Ὁ δὲ ἀκούων τὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς λεγόμενα ἐφ' Υἱοῦ ὄψεται καὶ οὕτω τὸν Πατέρα ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ· θεωρήσει δὲ καὶ τὸν Υἱὸν ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, ὅταν τὰ λεγόμενα ἐφ' Υἱοῦ ταῦτα λέγηται καὶ ἐπὶ Πατρός. ∆ιὰ τί δὲ τὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐφ' Υἱοῦ λέγεται, ἢ ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ γέννημά ἐστιν ὁ Υἱός; ∆ιὰ τί δὲ καὶ τὰ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἴδιά ἐστι τοῦ Πατρὸς, ἢ ὅτι πάλιν τῆς οὐσίας αὐτοῦ ἴδιόν ἐστι γέννημα ὁ Υἱός; Τῆς δὲ οὐσίας τοῦ Πατρὸς ἴδιον ὢν γέννημα ὁ Υἱὸς, εἰκότως καὶ τὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς λέγει ἑαυ τοῦ εἶναι· ὅθεν πρεπόντως καὶ ἀκολούθως τῷ μὲν λέ γειν, Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, ἐπήγαγεν· Ἵνα γνῶτε, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· τούτῳ δὲ πάλιν προσείρηκεν· Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν Πατέρα· καὶ ἔστιν εἷς καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς νοῦς ἐν τοῖς τρισὶ τούτοις ῥητοῖς. Ὁ γὰρ οὕτως ἐγνωκὼς, ὅτι ἕν εἰσιν ὁ Υἱὸς καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ, οἶδεν, ὅτι αὐτὸς ἐν τῷ Πατρί ἐστι, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ· ἡ γὰρ τοῦ Υἱοῦ θεότης τοῦ Πατρός ἐστι, καὶ αὐτὴ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ ἐστι· καὶ ὁ τοῦτο δὲ καταλαβὼν πέπεισται, ὅτι ὁ ἑωρακὼς τὸν Υἱὸν ἑώρακε τὸν Πατέρα· ἐν γὰρ τῷ Υἱῷ ἡ τοῦ Πατρὸς θεότης θεωρεῖται. Τοῦτο δὲ καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ παραδείγματος τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ βασιλέως προσεχέστερόν τις κατανοεῖν δυνήσεται. Ἐν γὰρ τῇ εἰκόνι τὸ εἶδος καὶ ἡ μορφὴ τοῦ βασιλέως ἐστὶ, καὶ ἐν τῷ βασιλεῖ δὲ τὸ ἐν τῇ εἰκόνι εἶδός ἐστιν. Ἀπα ράλλακτος γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἐν τῇ εἰκόνι τοῦ βασιλέως ὁμοιότης· ὥστε τὸν ἐνορῶντα τῇ εἰκόνι ὁρᾷν ἐν αὐτῇ τὸν βασιλέα, καὶ τὸν πάλιν ὁρῶντα τὸν βασιλέα ἐπιγινώσκειν, ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐν τῇ εἰκόνι. Ἐκ δὲ τοῦ μὴ διαλλάττειν τὴν ὁμοιότητα, τῷ θέλοντι μετὰ τὴν εἰκόνα θεωρῆσαι τὸν βασιλέα εἴποι ἂν ἡ εἰκών· Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἕν ἐσμεν· ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐν ἐκείνῳ εἰμὶ, κἀκεῖνος ἐν ἐμοί· καὶ ὃ ὁρᾷς ἐν ἐμοὶ, τοῦτο ἐν ἐκείνῳ βλέπεις· καὶ ὃ ἑώρακας ἐν ἐκείνῳ, τοῦτο βλέπεις ἐν ἐμοί. Ὁ γοῦν προσκυνῶν τὴν εἰ κόνα, ἐν αὐτῇ προσκυνεῖ καὶ τὸν βασιλέα· ἡ γὰρ ἐκείνου μορφὴ καὶ τὸ εἶδός ἐστιν ἡ εἰκών. Ἐπεὶ τοίνυν καὶ ὁ Υἱὸς εἰκών ἐστι τοῦ Πατρὸς, ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἐστὶ νοεῖν, ὅτι ἡ θεότης καὶ ἡ ἰδιότης τοῦ Πατρὸς τὸ εἶναι τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐστι. Καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν, Ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, καὶ, Ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί. Οὐκ ἐκ μέρους δὲ ἡ τῆς θεότητος μορφὴ, ἀλλὰ τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς θεότητός ἐστι τὸ εἶναι τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ ὅλος Θεός ἐστιν ὁ Υἱός. ∆ιὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἴσα Θεῷ ὢν, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ· καὶ πάλιν ἐπειδὴ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἡ θεότης καὶ τὸ εἶδος οὐδενὸς ἄλλου, ἢ τοῦ Πατρός ἐστι, τοῦτό ἐστιν, ὅπερ εἶπε τὸ, Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρί· Οὕτω Θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ κόσμον ἑαυτῷ καταλλάσσων· τὸ γὰρ ἴδιον τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας ἐστὶν ὁ Υἱὸς, ἐν ᾧ ἡ κτίσις πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν κατηλλάσσετο. Οὕτως ἃ εἰργά ζετο ὁ Υἱὸς, τοῦ Πατρός ἐστιν ἔργα· τὸ γὰρ εἶδος τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς θεότητός ἐστιν ὁ Υἱὸς, ἥτις εἰργάζετο τὰ ἔργα· οὕτω δὲ ὁ βλέπων τὸν Υἱὸν ὁρᾷ τὸν Πα τέρα· ἐν γὰρ τῇ πατρῴᾳ θεότητί ἐστι καὶ θεωρεῖται ὁ Υἱός· καὶ τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ πατρικὸν εἶδος δείκνυσιν ἐν αὐτῷ τὸν Πατέρα· καὶ οὕτως ἐστὶν ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ. Καὶ ἡ ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς δὲ ἐν Υἱῷ ἰδιότης καὶ θεότης δείκνυσι τὸν Υἱὸν ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ τὸ ἀεὶ ἀδιαίρετον αὐτοῦ· καὶ ὁ ἀκούων δὲ καὶ βλέπων τὰ λεγόμενα περὶ τοῦ Πατρὸς, ταῦτα λεγόμενα περὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, οὐ κατὰ χάριν ἢ μετοχὴν ἐπιγενόμενα τῇ οὐσίᾳ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ' ὅτι αὐτὸ τὸ εἶναι τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἴδιον τῆς πατρικῆς οὐσίας ἐστὶ γέννημα, νοήσει καλῶς τὸ εἰρημένον, καθὰ προεῖπον, Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί· καὶ, Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν. Ἔστι γὰρ ὁ Υἱὸς, οἷος ὁ Πατὴρ, τῷ πάντα τὰ τοῦ Πα τρὸς ἔχειν· διὸ καὶ μετὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς σημαίνεται. Πατέρα γὰρ οὐκ ἄν τις εἴποι, μὴ ὑπάρχοντος Υἱοῦ. Ὁ μέντοι ποιητὴν λέγων τὸν Θεὸν, οὐ πάντως καὶ τὰ γενόμενα δηλοῖ· ἔστι γὰρ καὶ πρὸ τῶν ποιημά των ποιητής· ὁ δὲ Πατέρα λέγων εὐθὺς μετὰ τοῦ Πα τρὸς σημαίνει καὶ τὴν τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὕπαρξιν. ∆ιὰ τοῦτο καὶ ὁ πιστεύων εἰς τὸν Υἱὸν εἰς τὸν Πατέρα πι στεύει· εἰς γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας πι στεύει· καὶ οὕτω μία ἐστὶν ἡ πίστις εἰς ἕνα Θεόν· καὶ ὁ προσκυνῶν δὲ καὶ τιμῶν τὸν Υἱὸν ἐν Υἱῷ προσκυνεῖ καὶ τιμᾷ τὸν Πατέρα. Μία γάρ ἐστιν ἡ θεό της· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο μία τιμὴ καὶ μία ἐστὶ προσκύνησις ἡ ἐν Υἱῷ καὶ δι' αὐτοῦ γινομένη τῷ Πατρί· καὶ ὁ οὕτω προσκυνῶν ἕνα Θεὸν προσκυνεῖ· εἷς γὰρ Θεός ἐστι, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ. Ὅτε γοῦν μόνος λέγεται ὁ Πατὴρ Θεός· καὶ ὅτι εἷς Θεός ἐστι, καὶ τὸ, Ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ, Πλὴν ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστι Θεός· καὶ τὸ, Ἐγὼ πρῶτος, καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα, καλῶς λέγεται· εἷς γὰρ Θεὸς καὶ μόνος καὶ πρῶτός ἐστιν. Οὐκ εἰς ἀναίρεσιν δὲ τοῦ Υἱοῦ λέγεται. Μὴ γένοιτο ἔστι γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ, καὶ πρώτῳ, καὶ μόνῳ, ὡς τοῦ ἑνὸς καὶ μόνου καὶ πρώτου καὶ μόνος Λόγος, καὶ σοφία, καὶ ἀπαύγασμα ὤν. Ἔστι δὲ καὶ πρῶτος καὶ αὐτὸς, πλήρωμα τῆς τοῦ πρώτου καὶ μόνου θεότητος, ὅλος καὶ πλήρης ὢν Θεός. Οὐκοῦν οὐ δι' αὐτὸν εἴρηται, ἀλλ' εἰς ἀναίρεσιν τοῦ μὴ εἶναι ἕτερον, οἷός ἐστιν ὁ Πατὴρ, καὶ ὁ τούτου Λόγος·