MONOLOGIUM

 PREFACE.

 CHAPTER I.

 CHAPTER II.

 CHAPTER III.

 CHAPTER IV.

 CHAPTER V.

 CHAPTER VI.

 CHAPTER VII.

 CHAPTER VIII.

 CHAPTER IX.

 CHAPTER X.

 CHAPTER XI.

 CHAPTER XII.

 CHAPTER XIII.

 CHAPTER XIV.

 CHAPTER XV.

 CHAPTER XVI.

 CHAPTER XVII.

 CHAPTER XVIII.

 CHAPTER XIX.

 CHAPTER XX.

 CHAPTER XXI.

 CHAPTER XXII.

 CHAPTER XXIII.

 CHAPTER XXIV.

 CHAPTER XXV.

 CHAPTER XXVI.

 CHAPTER XXVII.

 CHAPTER XXVIII.

 CHAPTER XXIX.

 CHAPTER XXX.

 CHAPTER XXXI.

 CHAPTER XXXII.

 CHAPTER XXXIII.

 CHAPTER XXXIV.

 CHAPTER XXXV.

 CHAPTER XXXVI.

 CHAPTER XXXVII.

 CHAPTER XXXVIII.

 CHAPTER XXXIX.

 CHAPTER XL.

 CHAPTER XLI.

 CHAPTER XLII.

 CHAPTER XLIII.

 CHAPTER XLIV.

 CHAPTER XLV.

 CHAPTER XLVI.

 CHAPTER XLVII.

 CHAPTER XLVIII.

 CHAPTER XLIX.

 CHAPTER L.

 CHAPTER LI.

 CHAPTER LII.

 CHAPTER LIII.

 CHAPTER LIV.

 CHAPTER LV.

 CHAPTER LVI.

 CHAPTER LVII.

 CHAPTER LVIII.

 CHAPTER LIX.

 CHAPTER LX.

 CHAPTER LXI.

 CHAPTER LXII.

 CHAPTER LXIII.

 CHAPTER LXIV.

 CHAPTER LXV.

 CHAPTER LXVI.

 CHAPTER LXVII.

 CHAPTER LXVIII.

 CHAPTER LXIX.

 CHAPTER LXX.

 CHAPTER LXXI.

 CHAPTER LXXII.

 CHAPTER LXXIII.

 CHAPTER LXXIV.

 CHAPTER LXXV.

 CHAPTER LXXVI.

 CHAPTER LXXVII.

 CHAPTER LXXVIII.

 CHAPTER LXXIX.

CHAPTER XLV.

The Son may more appropriately be called the essence of the Father, than the Father the essence of the Son: and in like manner the Son is the virtue, wisdom, etc., of the Father.

AND although, for reasons we have noted, this is true, it is much more proper to call the Son the essence of the Father than the Father the essence of the Son. For, since the Father has his being from none other than himself, it is not wholly appropriate to say that he has the being of another than himself; while, since the Son has his being from the Father, and has the same essence with his Father, he may most appropriately be said to have the essence of his Father.

Hence, seeing that neither has an essence, except by being an essence; as the Son is more appropriately conceived to have the essence of the Father than the Father to have the essence of the Son, so the Son may more fitly be called the essence of the Father than the Father the essence of the son. For this single explanation proves, with sufficiently emphatic brevity, that the Son not only has the same essence with the Father, but has this very essence from the Father; so that, to assert that the Son is the essence of the Father is the same as to assert that the Son is not a different essence from the essence of the Father nay, from the Father essence.

In like manner, therefore, the Son is the virtue of the Father, and his wisdom, and justice, and whatever is consistently attributed to the essence of the supreme Spirit.