46

And the root and source is to define what was theologized indefinitely by our God-bearing fathers; and this almost alone of all things mixes what is unmixable and weaves together—I mean what is unweavable and things most hostile to each other, piety and impiety—and it shows those who hold to either side as not being opposed at all, for deception. And the Latins make such misuse of this, that even when hearing the saints theologize indefinitely that (p. 248) the Father alone is the principle and root and source of divinity, they themselves define all these things (or rather, through this defining, they cunningly dogmatize against these things), and yet they ought to have followed all the statements of the God-wise theologians together, both where they say the Spirit is from the Father alone—which is why the Father is the sole cause and source of the Godhead—and where, on the other hand, [they seem to say] the Spirit is from the Son, so as to bring them into a unified and correct understanding that the Holy Spirit is from the Father alone, but not also from the Son.

But they, by stringing things together or offering pretexts, subvert each point, claiming that just as the Father is sometimes called the only true God, even though the Son is true God and good, so also the Father is the sole source and cause of divinity as being first; and that there is no impediment to the Son also being a cause of divinity. For they do not perceive that from this they drag down the Son, and especially the Holy Spirit, to the level of a creature. For when we say that the Father alone is true God, we are not making a distinction between the uncreated persons, nor are we speaking of the Father in isolation, but we are distinguishing the one nature, which is contemplated in three hypostases, from created things. If, therefore, we say 'the Father is the sole cause of divinity' in the same way we say of Him 'He alone is good,' then the Holy Spirit, not being a cause of divinity even according to them, will be numbered among created things.

And indeed, in those cases where the Father is sometimes called 'alone' as the first and as the primary cause—with the Son also being a co-cause and sharing in those things with the Father—not only is the Father sometimes called 'alone true God' and 'alone creator' and 'alone good' and such things, but sometimes the Son also could be called 'alone'; and not only the Son, but also the Spirit. For since this word 'alone' distinguishes the uncreated nature from created things, and the uncreated nature is three-hypostatic and is contemplated whole and without division in each of the (p. 250) hypostases, by whichever of the three innate hypostases you name it, you speak of the whole three-hypostatic nature.

Therefore, just as we piously say that Christ alone is God over all, could anyone say—or rather, has anyone ever been heard to say this—that the Son alone is the cause and source of the divinity of the Spirit? Or that the Spirit Itself is the sole cause and source of divinity, who even according to the Latins is in no way a cause of divinity? And yet this too would have been plausible, if the Father were called the sole cause of divinity in such a way that the Son was also a co-cause.

It is clear, therefore, or rather perfectly clear, that the word "alone" when said of hypostatic properties does not distinguish the created from the uncreated, but separates one of the uncreated hypostases from the others. And who does not know that to be the cause is a hypostatic property in the Godhead? Therefore, if the Father alone is cause and alone is the principle and source of divinity, then no other of the divine hypostases is a cause and principle and source of divinity. However, if according to the Latins the cause in the Godhead is contemplated in two persons, nothing prevents one from saying the Father alone is the cause of divinity; and with that which is caused being contemplated in two persons, nothing will prevent one from saying the Spirit alone

46

καί ρίζα καί πηγή τό προσδιορίζειν τά τεθεολογημένα τοῖς θεοφόροις ἡμῶν πατράσιν ἀπροσδιορίστως˙ καί σχεδόν τοῦτο μόνον τῶν ἁπάντων μιγνύει τά ἄμικτα καί συγκλώθει, τό τοῦ λόγου, τά ἀσύγκλωστα καί τά πολεμιώτατα πρός ἄλληλα, εὐσέβειάν τε καί ἀσέβειαν, καί τούς ἀντεχομένους ἑκατέρας ὠς μηδέν ἀντικειμένους πρός ἀπάτην δείκνυσι. Τοσούτῳ δέ οἱ Λατῖνοι τούτῳ καταχρῶνται, ὡς καί τῶν ἁγίων ἀκούοντες θεολογούντων ἀπροσδιορίστως ὅτι (σελ. 248) μόνος ὁ Πατήρ ἀρχή καί ρίζα καί πηγή θεότητος, αὐτοί πάντα ταῦτα προσδιορίζουσι (μᾶλλον δέ διά τοῦ προσδιορισμοῦ δολίως τούτοις ἀντιδογματίζουσι) καίτοι πάσαις ἐχρῆν αὐτούς ὁμοῦ στοιχεῖν ταῖς τῶν θεοσόφων θεολόγων φωναῖς, καί ποῦ μέν λεγούσαις ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Πατρός τό Πνεῦμα, διό καί μόνον αἴτιον τόν Πατέρα καί πηγήν θεότητος, ποῦ δ᾿ αὖ, ὡς ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα συνάγειν εἰς ἕν καί φρονεῖν εὖ ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Πατρός, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχί καί ἐκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον.

Οἱ δέ συνείροντες ἤ προφασιζόμενοι τό πρῶτον ἀνασκευάζουσιν ἑκάτερον, φάσκοντες, ὅτι καθάπερ μόνος Θεός ἀληθινός ὁ Πατήρ ἔστιν ὅτε λέγεται, καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος ἀληθινοῦ Θεοῦ καί ἀγαθοῦ, οὕτω καί μόνος ὁ Πατήρ πηγή καί αἴτιος θεότητος ὡς πρῶτος˙ καί οὐδέν ἐμπόδιον εἶναι καί τόν Υἱόν αἴτιον θεότητος. Οὐ συνορῶσι γάρ, ὡς ἐντεῦθεν καί τόν Υἱόν, μάλιστα δέ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον εἰς κτίσμα κατασπῶσιν. Ὅταν γάρ λέγωμεν ὅτι μόνος ὁ Πατήρ Θεός ἐστιν ἀληθινός, οὐ τῶν ἀκτίστων πρός ἄλληλα τήν ἀντιδιαστολήν ποιοῦμεν, οὐδ᾿ ἁπλῶς τότε τόν Πατέρα, ἀλλά τήν μόνην ἐν τρισίν ὑποστάσεσι θεωρουμένην φύσιν τῶν κτισμάτων ἀποδιαστέλλομεν. Εἰ τοίνυν οὕτω λέγομεν καί μόνος αἴτιος θεότητος ὁ Πατήρ, ὡς ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῦ λέγομεν ὅτι μόνος ἀγαθός, τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον καί κατ᾿ αὐτούς οὐκ ὄν αἴτιον θεότητος ἐναρίθμιον ἔσται τοῖς κτιστοῖς.

Καί μήν ἐφ᾿ ὧν ὡς πρῶτος καί ὡς προκαταρκτικόν αἴτιον ἔσθ᾿ ὅτε λέγεται μόνος ὁ Πατήρ, ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος συναιτίου καί κοινωνοῦντος κατ᾿ ἐκεῖνα τῷ Πατρί οὐ μόνον ὁ Πατήρ ἔσθ᾿ ὅτε μόνος λέγεται Θεός ἀληθινός καί μόνος δημιουργός καί μόνος ἀγαθός καί τά τοιαῦτα, ἀλλ᾿ ἔσθ᾿ ὅτε καί ὁ Υἱός μόνος ἄν ρηθείη˙ καί οὐχ ὁ Υἱός μόνος, ἀλλά καί τό Πνεῦμα. Ἐπεί γάρ τό "μόνος" τοῦτο τήν ἄκτιστον φύσιν ἀντιδιαστέλλει τῶν κτιστῶν, ἡ δ᾿ ἄκτιστος φύσις τρισυπόστατός ἐστι καί ἀμερῶς ἐφ᾿ ἑκάστης τῶν (σελ. 250) ὑποστάσεων ὅλη θεωρεῖται, ἀφ᾿ ἧς ἄν αὐτήν τῶν τριῶν ἐμφύτων ὑποστάσεων καλέσῃς, ὅλην λέγεις τήν τρισυπόστατον φύσιν.

Ἆρ᾿ οὖν, ὥσπερ λέγομεν εὐσεβῶς ὅτι μόνος ἐστί Χριστός ὁ ἐπί πάντων Θεός, ἔχοι τις ἄν εἰπεῖν, μᾶλλον δέ ἤκουσταί ποτέ τις καί τοῦτο εἰρηκώς, ὡς μόνος ὁ Υἱός αἴτιός τε καί πηγή τῆς θεότητος τοῦ Πνεύματος; Ἤ καί αὐτό τό Πνεῦμα μόνον αἴτιόν τε καί πηγή θεότητος, ὅ καί κατά Λατίνους οὐδαμῶς αἴτιόν ἐστι θεότητος; Καίτοι καί τοῦτο τῶν εἰκότων ἦν, εἶπερ οὕτως ὁ Πατήρ αἴτιος μόνος θεότητος ἐλέγετο, ὡς καί τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὄντος συναιτίου.

∆ῆλον τοίνυν, μᾶλλον δέ κατάδηλον, ὅτι τό «μόνος» ἐπί τῶν ὑποστατικῶν λεγόμενον οὐ τά κτιστά τῶν ἀκτίστων, ἀλλά μίαν τινά τῶν ἀκτίστων ὑποστάσεων πρός τάς ἄλλας διαστέλλει. Τίς δ᾿ οὐκ οἶδεν, ὡς ὑποστατικόν ἐπί τῆς θεότητος τό αἴτιόν ἐστιν; Οὐκοῦν, εἰ μόνος ὁ Πατήρ αἴτιος καί μόνος ἀρχή καί πηγή θεότητος, οὐδεμία ἄρα τῶν θείων ὑποστάσεων ἑτέρα αἰτία κάι ἀρχή καί πηγή θεότητός ἐστιν. Οὐ μήν ἀλλ᾿ εἰ τοῦ αἰτίου ἐν δυσί προσώποις ἐπί τῆς θεότητος θεωρουμένου κατά τούς Λατίνους, οὐδέν κωλύει λέγειν μόνον τόν Πατέρα αἴτιον θεότητος˙ καί τοῦ αἰτιατοῦ θεωρουμένου ἐν δυσί προσώποις, οὐδέν κωλύσει λέγειν μόνον τό Πνεῦμα