§5. 952    Heb. xi. 6.    The grammar of this section of the analysis is in parts very much confused; the general drift of its intention, rather than its literal meaning, is given in the translation. Grammatically speaking it appears to attribute to S. Gregory some of the opinions of Eunomius. The construction, however, is so ungrammatical that the confusion is probably in the composer’s expression rather than in his interpretation of what he is summarizing.Eunomius again speaks of the Son as Lord and God, and Maker of all creation intelligible and sensible, having received from the Father the power and the commission for creation, being entrusted with the task of creation as if He were an artizan commissioned by some one hiring Him, and receiving His power of creation as a thing adventitious, ab extra, as a result of the power allotted to Him in accordance with such and such combinations and positions of the stars, as destiny decrees their lot in life to men at their nativity. Thus, passing by most of what Eunomius had written, he confutes his blasphemy that the Maker of all things came into being in like manner with the earth and with angels, and that the subsistence of the Only-begotten differs not at all from the genesis of all things, and reproaches Him with reverencing neither the Divine mystery nor the custom of the Church, nor following in his attempt to discover godliness any teacher of pious doctrine, but Manichæus, Colluthus, Arius, Aetius, and those like to them, supposing that Christianity in general is folly, and that the customs of the Church and the venerable sacraments are a jest, wherein he differs in nothing from the pagans, who borrowed from our doctrine the idea of a great God supreme over all. So, too, this new idolater preaches in the same fashion, and in particular that baptism is “into an artificer and creator,” not fearing the curse of those who cause addition or diminution to the Holy Scriptures. And he closes his book with showing him to be Antichrist.

Afterwards, however, he gives his discourse a more moderate turn, imparting to it even a touch of gentleness, and, though he had but a little earlier partitioned off the Son from the title of Existent, he now says,—“We affirm that the Son is not only existent, and above all existent things, but we also call Him Lord and God, the Maker of every being953    Cf. S. John i. 1, 4    οὐσίας, sensible and intelligible.” What does he suppose this “being” to be? created? or uncreated? For if he confesses Jesus to be Lord, God, and Maker of all intelligible being, it necessarily follows, if he says it is uncreated, that he speaks falsely, ascribing to the Son the making of the uncreated Nature. But if he believes it to be created, he makes Him His own Maker. For if the act of creation be not separated from intelligible nature in favour of Him Who is independent and uncreated, there will no longer remain any mark of distinction, as the sensible creation and the intelligible being will be thought of under one head954    S. John xiv. 11    The passage is a little obscure: if the force of the dative τῷ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἀκτίστῳ be that assigned to it, the meaning will be that, if no exception is made in the statement that the Son is the Maker of every intelligible being, the Deity will be included among the works of the Son, Who will thus be the Maker of Himself, as of the sensible creation.. But here he brings in the assertion that “in the creation of existent things He has been entrusted by the Father with the construction of all things visible and invisible, and with the providential care over all that comes into being, inasmuch as the power allotted to Him from above is sufficient for the production of those things which have been constructed955    Cf. Ps. lxxxii. 5.    It is not quite clear how much of this is citation, and how much paraphrase of Eunomius’ words..” The vast length to which our treatise has run compels us to pass over these assertions briefly: but, in a sense, profanity surrounds the argument, containing a vast swarm of notions like venomous wasps. “He was entrusted,” he says, “with the construction of things by the Father.” But if he had been talking about some artizan executing his work at the pleasure of his employer, would he not have used the same language? For we are not wrong in saying just the same of Bezaleel, that being entrusted by Moses with the building of the tabernacle, he became the constructor of those things there956    Cf. 1 Cor. i. 20    The reference is to Exod. xxxv. 30. mentioned, and would not have taken the work in hand had he not previously acquired his knowledge by Divine inspiration, and ventured upon the undertaking on Moses’ entrusting him with its execution. Accordingly the term “entrusted” suggests that His office and power in creation came to Him as something adventitious, in the sense that before He was entrusted with that commission He had neither the will nor the power to act, but when He received authority to execute the works, and power sufficient for the works, then He became the artificer of things that are, the power allotted to Him from on high being, as Eunomius says, sufficient for the purpose. Does he then place even the generation of the Son, by some astrological juggling957    Cf. 1 Cor. viii. 6.    Reading τερατείαν for the otherwise unknown word περατείαν, which Oehler retains. If περατείαν is the true reading, it should probably be rendered by “fatalism,” or “determination.” Gulonius renders it by “determinationem.” It may be connected with the name “Peratae,” given to one of the Ophite sects, who held fatalist views., under some destiny, just as they who practise this vain deceit affirm that the appointment of their lot in life comes to men at the time of their birth, by such and such conjunctions or oppositions of the stars, as the rotation above moves on in a kind of ordered train, assigning to those who are coming into being their special faculties? It may be that something of this kind is in the mind of our sage, and he says that to Him that is above all rule, and authority, and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come, there has been allotted, as though He were pent in some hollow spaces, power from on high, measured out in accordance with the quantity of things which come into being. I will pass over this part of his treatise also summarily, letting fall from a slight commencement of investigation, for the more intelligent sort of readers, seeds to enable them to discern his profanity. Moreover, in what follows, there is ready written a kind of apology for ourselves. For we cannot any longer be thought to be missing the intention of his discourse, and misinterpreting his words to render them subject to criticism, when his own voice acknowledges the absurdity of his doctrine. His words stand as follows:—“What? did not earth and angel come into being, when before they were not?” See how our lofty theologian is not ashamed to apply the same description to earth and angels and to the Maker of all! Surely if he thinks it fit to predicate the same of earth and its Lord, he must either make a god of the one, or degrade the other to a level with it.

Then he adds to this something by which his profanity is yet more completely stripped of all disguise, so that its absurdity is obvious even to a child. For he says,—“It would be a long task to detail all the modes of generation of intelligible objects, or the essences which do not all possess the nature of the Existent in common, but display variations according to the operations of Him Who constructed them.” Without any words of ours, the blasphemy against the Son which is here contained is glaring and conspicuous, when he acknowledges that that which is predicated of every mode of generation and essence in nowise differs from the description of the Divine subsistence958    Cf. S. John xiii. 13.    ὑποστασέως of the Only-begotten. But it seems to me best to pass over the intermediate passages in which he seeks to maintain his profanity, and to hasten to the head and front of the accusation which we have to bring against his doctrines. For he will be found to exhibit the sacrament of regeneration as an idle thing, the mystic oblation as profitless, and the participation in them as of no advantage to those who are partakers therein. For after those high-wrought æons959    Cf. S. Matt. xxiii. 8–10.    The word seems to be used, as “octads” in Book IX. seems to be used, of sections of Eunomius’ production. in which, by way of disparagement of our doctrine, he names as its supporters a Valentinus, a Cerinthus, a Basilides, a Montanus, and a Marcion, and after laying it down that those who affirm that the Divine nature is unknowable, and the mode of His generation unknowable, have no right or title whatever to the name of Christians, and after reckoning us among those whom he thus disparages, he proceeds to develop his own view in these terms:—“But we, in agreement with holy and blessed men; affirm that the mystery of godliness does not consist in venerable names, nor in the distinctive character of customs and sacramental tokens, but in exactness of doctrine.” That when he wrote this, he did so not under the guidance of evangelists, apostles, or any of the authors of the Old Testament, is plain to every one who has any acquaintance with the sacred and Divine Scripture. We should naturally be led to suppose that by “holy and blessed men” he meant Manichæus, Nicolaus, Colluthus, Aetius, Arius, and the rest of the same band, with whom he is in strict accord in laying down this principle, that neither the confession of sacred names, nor the customs of the Church, nor her sacramental tokens, are a ratification of godliness. But we, having learnt from the holy voice of Christ that “except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit he shall not enter into the kingdom of God960    Cf. 2 Cor. xiii. 3.    Cf. S. John iii. 3 and 6.” and that “He that eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood, shall live for ever961    S. John xv. 22    Cf. S. John vi. 51 and 54.,” are persuaded that the mystery of godliness is ratified by the confession of the Divine Names—the Names of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and that our salvation is confirmed by participation in the sacramental customs and tokens. But doctrines have often been carefully investigated by those who have had no part or lot in that mystery, and one may hear many such putting forward the faith we hold as a subject for themselves in the rivalry of debate, and some of them often even succeeding in hitting the truth, and for all that none the less estranged from the faith. Since, then, he despises the revered Names, by which the power of the more Divine birth distributes grace to them who come for it in faith, and slights the fellowship of the sacramental customs and tokens from which the Christian profession draws its vigour, let us, with a slight variation, utter to those who listen to his deceit the word of the prophet:—“How long will ye be slow of heart? Why do ye love destruction and seek after leasing962    Oehler’s punctuation seems here to require alteration.    Cf. Ps. iv. 2 (LXX.). The alteration made is the substitution of ἀπώλειαν for ματαιότητα?” How is it that ye do not see the persecutor of the faith inviting those who consent unto him to violate their Christian profession? For if the confession of the revered and precious Names of the Holy Trinity is useless, and the customs of the Church unprofitable, and if among these customs is the sign of the cross963    Rom. viii. 15.    ῾Η σφραγίς. The term is used elsewhere by Gregory in this sense, in the Life of S. Gregory Thaumaturgus, and in the Life of S. Macrina., prayer, baptism, confession of sins, a ready zeal to keep the commandment, right ordering of character, sobriety of life, regard to justice, the effort not to be excited by passion, or enslaved by pleasure, or to fall short in moral excellence,—if he says that none of such habits as these is cultivated to any good purpose, and that the sacramental tokens do not, as we have believed, secure spiritual blessings, and avert from believers the assaults directed against them by the wiles of the evil one, what else does he do but openly proclaim aloud to men that he deems the mystery which Christians cherish a fable, laughs at the majesty of the Divine Names, considers the customs of the Church a jest, and all sacramental operations idle prattle and folly? What beyond this do they who remain attached to paganism bring forward in disparagement of our creed? Do not they too make the majesty of the sacred Names, in which the faith is ratified, an occasion of laughter? Do not they deride the sacramental tokens and the customs which are observed by the initiated? And of whom is it so much a distinguishing peculiarity as of the pagans, to think that piety should consist in doctrines only? since they also say that according to their view, there is something more persuasive than the Gospel which we preach, and some of them hold that there is some one great God preeminent above the rest, and acknowledge some subject powers, differing among themselves in the way of superiority or inferiority, in some regular order and sequence, but all alike subject to the Supreme. This, then, is what the teachers of the new idolatry preach, and they who follow them have no dread of the condemnation that abideth on transgressors, as though they did not understand that actually to do some improper thing is far more grievous than to err in word alone. They, then, who in act deny the faith, and slight the confession of the sacred Names, and judge the sanctification effected by the sacramental tokens to be worthless, and have been persuaded to have regard to cunningly devised fables, and to fancy that their salvation consists in quibbles about the generate and the ungenerate,—what else are they than transgressors of the doctrines of salvation?

But if any one thinks that these charges are brought against them by us ungenerously and unfairly, let him consider independently our author’s writings, both what we have previously alleged, and what is inferred in logical connection with our citations. For in direct contravention of the law of the Lord—(for the deliverance to us of the means of initiation constitutes a law),—he says that baptism is not into the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as Christ commanded His disciples when He delivered to them the mystery, but into an artificer and creator, and “not only Father,” he says, “of the Only-begotten, but also His God964    Cf. Gal. v. 13    These last words are apparently a verbal quotation, those preceding more probably a paraphrase of Eunomius statement..” Woe unto him who gives his neighbour to drink turbid mischief965    Cf. S. John xv. 15    Cf. Hab. ii. 15 (LXX.). It is possible that the reading θολεράν for δολεράν, which appears both in Oehler’s text and in the Paris edition, was a various reading of the passage in the LXX., and that S. Gregory intended to quote exactly.! How does he trouble and befoul the truth by flinging his mud into it! How is it that he feels no fear of the curse that rests upon those who add aught to the Divine utterance, or dare to take aught away? Let us read the declaration of the Lord in His very words—“Go,” He says, “teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Where did He call the Son a creature? Where did the Word teach that the Father is creator and artificer of the Only-begotten? Where in the words cited is it taught that the Son is a servant of God? Where in the delivery of the mystery is the God of the Son proclaimed? Do ye not perceive and understand, ye who are dragged by guile to perdition, what sort of guide ye have put in charge of your souls,—one who interpolates the Holy Scriptures, who garbles the Divine utterances, who with his own mud befouls the purity of the doctrines of godliness, who not only arms his own tongue against us, but also attempts to tamper with the sacred voices of truth, who is eager to invest his own perversion with more authority than the teaching of the Lord? Do ye not perceive that he stirs himself up against the Name at which all must bow, so that in time the Name of the Lord shall be heard no more, and instead of Christ Eunomius shall be brought into the Churches? Do ye not yet consider that this preaching of godlessness has been set on foot by the devil as a rehearsal, preparation, and prelude of the coming of Antichrist? For he who is ambitious of showing that his own words are more authoritative than those of Christ, and of transforming the faith from the Divine Names and the sacramental customs and tokens to his own deceit,—what else, I say, could he properly be called, but only Antichrist?

Ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ μετριώτερον μετάγει τὸν λόγον, νέμων τι καὶ φιλανθρωπίας αὐτῷ, καί φησιν « οὐ μόνον ὄντα καὶ ὑπὲρ πάντα τὰ ὄντα φαμὲν εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν » ὁ μικρὸν ἐν τοῖς κατόπιν τῆς τοῦ ὄντος ἐπωνυμίας αὐτὸν ἀποσχοινίζων, « ἀλλὰ καὶ κύριον αὐτόν », φησί, « καὶ δημιουργὸν καὶ θεὸν πάσης αἰσθητῆς τε καὶ νοητῆς οὐσίας λέγομεν ». ἣν τί οἴεται, κτιστὴν εἶναι ἢ ἄκτιστον; εἰ γὰρ πάσης νοητῆς οὐσίας ὁμολογεῖ κύριον καὶ θεὸν καὶ δημιουργὸν εἶναι τὸν υἱόν, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα, εἰ μὲν ἄκτιστον εἶναι λέγοι ταύτην, ψεύδεσθαι τῆς ἀκτίστου φύσεως τὴν δημιουργίαν τῷ υἱῷ προσμαρτυροῦντα, εἰ δὲ κτιστὴν πιστεύοι, αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ κτίστην εἶναι κατασκευάζει. εἰ γὰρ μὴ τῷ καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἀκτίστῳ τῆς νοητῆς οὐσίας ἀφορίζοιτο ἡ δημιουργία, οὐδὲν ἔτι τὸ διακρῖνον ὑπολειφθήσεται, τῆς τε αἰσθητῆς κτίσεως καὶ τῆς νοερᾶς οὐσίας ἐπικοίνου νοουμένης. ἀλλ' ἐπάγει τούτοις « ὅτι ἐν τῇ τῶν ὄντων κτίσει παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐπιτέτραπται τὴν τῶν ἁπάντων, ὁρατῶν τε καὶ ἀοράτων, δημιουργίαν καὶ τῶν γενομένων τὴν πρόνοιαν, ἀρκούσης αὐτῷ τῆς ἄνωθεν ἀποκληρωθείσης δυνάμεως πρὸς τὰς γενέσεις τῶν δημιουργηθέντων ». ταῦτα βιάζεται μὲν τὸ πλῆθος τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν συντόμῳ παραδραμεῖν, παρακατέχει δέ πως ἡ βλασφημία τὸν λόγον, πολὺν ἑσμὸν νοημάτων οἷόν τινων ἰοβόλων σφηκῶν περιέχουσα. ἐπετράπη, φησί, παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τὴν δημιουργίαν. εἰ δὲ περὶ χειροτέχνου τινὸς ὁ λόγος ἐγίνετο κατὰ γνώμην τοῦ μισθουμένου μεταχειριζομένου τὴν ἐργασίαν, ἆρ' οὐκ ἂν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐχρήσατο λόγοις; καὶ γὰρ περὶ τοῦ Βεσελεὴλ τὸ ἴσον οὐχ ἁμαρτάνομεν λέγοντες ὅτι ἐπιτραπεὶς παρὰ τοῦ Μωϋσέως τὴν σκηνοποιΐαν δημιουργὸς τῶν ἐκεῖ μνημονευθέντων ἐγένετο, οὐκ ἂν ἐπὶ τὴν πρᾶξιν ἐλθὼν μὴ πρότερον θείᾳ τε δυνάμει τὴν ἐπιστήμην κτησάμενος καὶ τῇ τοῦ Μωϋσέως ἐπιτροπῇ τῆς ἐνεργείας κατατολμήσας. οὐκοῦν ἡ τοῦ « ἐπιτετράφθαι » λέξις ἐπίκτητον αὐτῷ γεγενῆσθαι τὴν δημιουργικὴν ἐνδείκνυται δύναμίν τε καὶ ἐξουσίαν, ὡς πρὶν ἐπιτραπῆναι μήτε θαρσοῦντα μήτε δυνάμενον, ἐπεὶ δὲ τὴν τῶν ἔργων ἐξουσίαν ἔλαβε καὶ ἀποχρῶσαν πρὸς τὰ ἔργα τὴν δύναμιν, οὕτω γεγενῆσθαι δημιουργὸν τῶν ὄντων, « ἀρκούσης αὐτῷ », καθώς φησιν ὁ Εὐνόμιος, « τῆς ἄνωθεν ἀποκληρωθείσης δυνάμεως ». ἆρα μὴ κατά τινα τερατείαν τῶν γενεθλιακῶν λόγων καὶ ἐν εἱμαρμένῃ τινὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν γέννησιν τίθεται, καθάπερ φασὶν οἱ τὴν ματαίαν ταύτην ἐξησκηκότες ἀπάτην κατὰ τὰς ποιὰς τῶν ἀστέρων ἐπιπλοκάς τε καὶ ἀποστάσεις τὰς ἀποκληρώσεις τῶν βίων τοῖς τικτομένοις συμβαίνειν, τῆς ἄνωθεν εἱρμῷ τινι φερομένης δινήσεως τὰς περί τι δυνάμεις τοῖς γινομένοις ἐπικλωθούσης; τάχα τι τοιοῦτον ὁ σοφὸς ἐννοεῖ καί φησι τῷ ὑπεράνω πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας καὶ κυριότητος καὶ παντὸς ὀνόματος ὀνομαζομένου οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι καθάπερ ἐν κοίλοις τισὶ καθειργμένῳ χωρίοις ἄνωθεν ἀποκεκληρῶσθαι διαμεμετρημένην πρὸς τὴν ποσότητα τῶν γινομένων τὴν δύναμιν. παραδραμοῦμαι καὶ τοῦτον διὰ συντομίας τὸν λόγον, ἐξ ὀλίγης τῆς τῶν ἐξετασθέντων ἀρχῆς σπέρματα πρὸς τὴν κατανόησιν τῆς βλασφημίας τοῖς συνετωτέροις τῶν ἐντυγχανόντων καταβαλλόμενος. εἶτα διὰ τῶν ἐφεξῆς ἀπολογία τις ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν αὐτῷ γέγραπται. οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἔτι δοκοίημεν τοῖς ἐντυγχάνουσι παραστοχάζεσθαι τῆς διανοίας τοῦ λόγου καὶ πρὸς τὸ ὑπεύθυνον μεθερμηνεύειν τὰ ῥήματα, αὐτῆς τῆς ἐκείνου φωνῆς ὁμολογούσης τὴν ἀτοπίαν. ἔχει γὰρ οὕτω τὰ γεγραμμένα: « ἦ γὰρ οὐχὶ γῆ μὲν καὶ ἄγγελος οὐκ ὄντα γέγονεν »; ὁρᾶτε τὸν ὑψηλὸν θεολόγον ὡς οὐκ αἰσχύνεται τὸν αὐτὸν γῇ τε καὶ ἀγγέλοις καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ ποιητῇ τοῦ παντὸς ἐφαρμόζων λόγον; οὐκοῦν εἰ τὰ αὐτὰ πρέπειν οἴεται περί τε τῆς γῆς καὶ τοῦ κυρίου λέγειν, ἢ καὶ ταύτην πάντως θεοποιήσει ἢ καὶ ἐκεῖνον ταύτῃ συνατιμάσει.
Εἶτα προστίθησι τούτοις δι' ὧν ἀπογνυμνοῦται πλέον ἡ βλασφημία, ὡς μηδὲ παιδὶ δυσκατανόητον εἶναι τὸ ἄτοπον. φησὶ γὰρ ὅτι « μακρὸν ἂν εἴη πάσας ἐπεξιέναι τῶν νοητῶν τὰς γενέσεις ἢ τὰς οὐσίας, αἷς ἁπάσαις οὐχὶ κοινή τις ἡ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος φύσις, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὰς τοῦ δημιουργήσαντος ἐνεργείας ἡ παραλλαγή ». ταῦτα γὰρ καὶ σιωπώντων ἡμῶν ἀρίδηλον ἔχει καὶ περιφανῆ τὴν κατὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ βλασφημίαν, ὅταν ὁμολογῇ τὸ κατὰ πάσης γενέσεως καὶ οὐσίας λεγόμενον μηδὲν ἀπᾴδειν τοῦ περὶ τῆς θείας τοῦ μονογενοῦς ὑποστάσεως λόγου. ἀλλά μοι δοκεῖ καλῶς ἔχειν ὑπερβάντα τὴν διὰ μέσου τῆς βλασφημίας κατασκευὴν τρόπον τινὰ προδιελεγχθεῖσαν ἐν τοῖς ἐξητασμένοις ἐπὶ τὰ κεφάλαια τῆς τοῦ δόγματος αὐτῶν κατηγορίας ἐλθεῖν. εὑρεθήσεται γὰρ μάταιον μὲν ἀποδεικνὺς τὸ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας μυστήριον, ἀνόνητον δὲ τὴν μυστικὴν δωροφορίαν, τήν τε μετουσίαν τούτων εἰς οὐδὲν πλέον τοῖς μετέχουσι γινομένην. φησὶ γὰρ μετὰ τοὺς συντόνους ἐκείνους ἀγῶνας, ἐν οἷς Οὐαλεντίνους τε καὶ Κηρίνθους καὶ Βασιλίδας καὶ Μοντανοὺς καὶ Μαρκίωνας εἰς διαβολὴν τοῦ καθ' ἡμᾶς προεστήσατο δόγματος, καὶ κατασκευάσας τὸ μηδὲ πρὸς τὴν τῶν Χριστιανῶν προσηγορίαν οἰκείως ἔχειν τοὺς ἄγνωστον ἀποφαινομένους τὴν θείαν φύσιν, ἄγνωστον δὲ καὶ τὸν τῆς γεννήσεως τρόπον, καὶ συναριθμήσας τοῖς διαβεβλημένοις ἡμᾶς, οὕτως ἐπάγει τὸν παρ' ἑαυτοῦ λόγον ἐν τούτοις τοῖς ῥήμασιν: « ἡμεῖς δὲ πειθόμενοι τοῖς ἁγίοις καὶ μακαρίοις ἀνδράσιν οὔτε τῇ σεμνότητι τῶν ὀνομάτων οὔτε ἐθῶν καὶ μυστικῶν συμβόλων ἰδιότητι κυροῦσθαί φαμεν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον, τῇ δὲ τῶν δογμάτων ἀκριβείᾳ ». ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐδὲ τότε τοῖς εὐαγγελισταῖς οὔτε τοῖς ἀποστόλοις οὔτε τινὶ τῶν τῆς ἀρχαιοτέρας γραφῆς καθηγησαμένων πεισθεὶς ταῦτα γράφει, παντὶ δῆλον τῷ τὴν ἱεράν τε καὶ θείαν οὐκ ἀγνοοῦντι γραφήν. ἀκόλουθον δ' ἂν εἴη ἁγίους αὐτὸν καὶ μακαρίους ἄνδρας οἴεσθαι λέγειν Μανιχαῖον Νικόλαον Κόλουθον Ἀέτιον Ἄρειον καὶ πάντας τοὺς τοῦ αὐτοῦ χοροῦ, οἷς ἀκολουθῶν ταῦτα νομοθετεῖ, ὅτι οὔτε τῶν ὀνομάτων ἡ ὁμολογία οὔτε τὰ ἔθη τῆς ἐκκλησίας οὔτε τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα κυροῖ τὴν εὐσέβειαν. ἡμεῖς δὲ μεμαθηκότες παρὰ τῆς ἁγίας φωνῆς ὅτι ἂν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν δι' ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος, οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ ὅτι Ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἐκεῖνος ζήσεται εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, πεπείσμεθα τῇ ὁμολογίᾳ τῶν θείων ὀνομάτων, πατρὸς λέγω καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου, κυροῦσθαι τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον καὶ τῇ τῶν μυστικῶν ἐθῶν τε καὶ συμβόλων κοινωνίᾳ τὴν σωτηρίαν κρατύνεσθαι: δόγματα δὲ δι' ἐπιμελείας καὶ τοῖς ἔξω τοῦ μυστηρίου πολλάκις ἐξήτασται, καὶ πολλῶν ἔστιν ἀκούειν ὑπόθεσιν ἑαυτοῖς εἰς λόγων ἅμιλλαν τὸ ἡμέτερον δόγμα προβαλλομένων, καί τινας αὐτῶν « ὁρῶμεν » καὶ κατεπιτυγχάνοντας τῆς ἀληθείας πολλάκις καὶ οὐδὲν ἧττον ἠλλοτριωμένους τῆς πίστεως. ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν καταφρονεῖ μὲν τῶν σεμνῶν ὀνομάτων, δι' ὧν τῆς θειοτέρας γεννήσεως ἡ δύναμις τοῖς διὰ πίστεως μετιοῦσι τὴν χάριν νέμει, περιορᾷ δὲ τὴν τῶν μυστικῶν συμβόλων τε καὶ ἐθῶν κοινωνίαν, ἐν οἷς ὁ Χριστιανισμὸς τὴν ἰσχὺν ἔχει, εἴπωμεν τὸ τοῦ προφήτου μικρὸν παρῳδήσαντες πρὸς τοὺς ἀκροατὰς τῆς ἀπάτης ὅτι Ἕως πότε βαρυκάρδιοι; ἵνα τί ἀγαπᾶτε τὴν ἀπώλειαν καὶ ζητεῖτε ψεῦδος; πῶς οὐχ ὁρᾶτε τὸν διώκτην τῆς πίστεως εἰς παράβασιν τοῦ Χριστιανισμοῦ τοὺς πειθομένους αὐτῷ προκαλούμενον; εἰ γὰρ ἄχρηστος μὲν ἡ τῶν σεμνῶν τε καὶ τιμίων τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος ὀνομάτων ὁμολογία, ἀνόνητα δὲ τὰ ἔθη τῆς ἐκκλησίας, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἔθεσι τούτοις ἐστὶν ἡ σφραγίς, ἡ προσευχή, τὸ βάπτισμα, ἡ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἐξαγόρευσις, ἡ περὶ τὰς ἐντολὰς προθυμία, ἡ περὶ τὸ ἦθος κατόρθωσις, τὸ κατὰ σωφροσύνην βιοῦν, τὸ πρὸς τὸ δίκαιον βλέπειν, τὸ μὴ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις ἐρεθίζεσθαι μήτε ἡδονῆς ἡττᾶσθαι μήτε ἀρετῆς ἀπολείπεσθαι, εἰ οὖν μηδὲν τῶν τοιούτων ἐθῶν ἐπ' ἀγαθῷ κατορθοῦσθαι λέγει μηδὲ τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα φυλακτήρια μὲν τῶν περὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ἀγαθῶν, καθὼς πεπιστεύκαμεν, γίνεσθαι, ἀποτρόπαια δὲ τῶν κατ' ἐπιβουλὴν τοῦ πονηροῦ τοῖς πεπιστευκόσιν ἐπαγομένων, τί ἄλλο καὶ οὐχὶ φανερῶς ἐμβοᾷ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις λῆρον ἡγεῖσθαι τῶν Χριστιανῶν τὸ μυστήριον, καταγελᾶν τῆς σεμνότητος τῶν θείων ὀνομάτων, παίγνιον οἴεσθαι τὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἔθη, φλυαρίαν τινὰ καὶ μωρίαν τὰ κατὰ τὸ μυστήριον ἐνεργούμενα πάντα; τί πλέον οἱ τῷ Ἑλληνισμῷ παραμένοντες εἰς διαβολὴν τοῦ καθ' ἡμᾶς προφέρουσι δόγματος; οὐχὶ κἀκεῖνοι γέλωτος ἀφορμὴν τὸ σεμνὸν ποιοῦνται τῶν ὀνομάτων, ἐν οἷς ἡ πίστις κρατύνεται, καὶ διαχλευάζουσι τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα καὶ τὰ διατηρούμενα παρὰ τῶν μεμυημένων ἔθη; τὸ δὲ ἐν δόγμασι δεῖν μόνοις οἴεσθαι τὴν εὐσέβειαν εἶναι, τίνος οὕτως ἴδιον ὡς τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐστίν; ἐπεὶ κἀκεῖνοί φασιν εἶναί τι κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτῶν ὑπόληψιν τοῦ κηρύγματος ἡμῶν πιθανώτερον καί τινα μέγαν ἐξ αὐτῶν τινες ὑποτίθενται θεὸν ὑπερανεστηκότα τῶν ἄλλων καὶ ὑποχειρίους τινὰς δυνάμεις ὁμολογοῦσι, διά τινος τάξεως καὶ ἀκολουθίας ἀλλήλων μὲν πρὸς τὸ μεῖζον ἢ καταδεέστερον διαφερούσας, ὑπεζευγμένας δὲ πάσας ἐπίσης τῷ ὑπερέχοντι. ταῦτα τοίνυν καὶ οἱ καθηγηταὶ τῆς νέας εἰδωλολατρίας κηρύσσουσι, καὶ οὐ δεδοίκασιν οἱ ἑπόμενοι τὴν ἐπικειμένην τοῖς παραβεβηκόσι κατάκρισιν, ὥσπερ οὐ συνιέντες ὅτι τὸ ἔργῳ τι ποιῆσαι τῶν ἀτόπων τοῦ διὰ ῥήματος ἐξαμαρτεῖν μόνου παρὰ πολὺ χαλεπώτερον. οἱ τοίνυν ἔργῳ μὲν τὴν πίστιν ἀρνούμενοι καὶ τὰ ἔθη φαυλίζοντες καὶ τὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων ὁμολογίαν περιορῶντες καὶ τὸν ἐκ τῶν μυστικῶν συμβόλων ἁγιασμὸν ἀντ' οὐδενὸς εἶναι κρίνοντες, πρὸς δὲ τὰ σεσοφισμένα ῥήματα βλέπειν ἀναπεισθέντες καὶ ἐν τῇ τοῦ « γεννητοῦ » καὶ « ἀγεννήτου » τεχνολογίᾳ τὴν σωτηρίαν εἶναι νομίζοντες τί ἄλλο καὶ οὐχὶ παραβάται τῶν τῆς σωτηρίας δογμάτων εἰσίν;
Εἰ δέ τις οἴεται ταῦτα κατά τινα συκοφαντίαν παρ' ἡμῶν αὐτοῖς ἐπιφέρεσθαι, καθ' ἑαυτὸν διασκεψάσθω τὰ παρ' αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένα, τά τε προτεθέντα ἡμῖν εἰς ἐξέτασιν καὶ ὅσα κατὰ τὸ ἀκόλουθον τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἐπάγεται. φησὶ γὰρ τὸν τοῦ κυρίου νόμον παραγραφόμενος (νόμος γάρ ἐστιν ἡ τῆς θείας μυσταγωγίας παράδοσις) μὴ εἰς πατέρα τε καὶ υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα τὸ βάπτισμα γίνεσθαι, καθὼς ἐνετείλατο τοῖς μαθηταῖς παραδιδοὺς τὸ μυστήριον, ἀλλ' « εἰς δημιουργὸν καὶ κτίστην καὶ οὐ μόνον πατέρα », φησί, « τοῦ μονογενοῦς, ἀλλὰ καὶ θεόν ». Ὢ ὁ ποτίζων τὸν πλησίον αὐτοῦ ἀνατροπὴν θολερὰν πῶς ἀναταράσσει τῇ ἰλυώδει προσθήκῃ καὶ ἀναθολοῖ τὴν ἀλήθειαν, πῶς οὐ δέδοικε τὴν ἐπικειμένην ἀρὰν κατὰ τῶν προστιθέντων τι ταῖς θείαις φωναῖς ἢ ὑφαιρεῖν τολμώντων; ἀναγνῶμεν ἐπ' αὐτῶν τῶν ῥημάτων τὴν τοῦ κυρίου φωνήν. Πορευθέντες, φησί, μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. ποῦ κτίσμα τὸν υἱὸν προσηγόρευσε; ποῦ κτίστην καὶ δημιουργὸν τοῦ μονογενοῦς τὸν πατέρα ὁ λόγος ἐδίδαξε; ποῦ δοῦλος θεοῦ ἐν τοῖς εἰρημένοις ὁ υἱὸς εἶναι διδάσκεται; ποῦ θεὸς τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐν τῇ παραδόσει τοῦ μυστηρίου κηρύσσεται; ἆρα νοεῖτε καὶ συνίετε οἱ δι' ἀπάτης κατασυρέντες πρὸς τὴν ἀπώλειαν, τίνα τῶν ἰδίων ψυχῶν καθηγητὴν προεστήσασθε τὸν νοθεύοντα τὰς ἁγίας γραφάς, τὸν μεταποιοῦντα τὰς θείας φωνάς, τὸν ἀναθολοῦντα τῷ ἰδίῳ βορβόρῳ τὸ καθαρὸν τῶν τῆς εὐσεβείας δογμάτων, τὸν μὴ μόνον καθ' ἡμῶν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γλῶσσαν ὁπλίζοντα, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὰς μετασκευάζειν ἐπιχειροῦντα τὰς ἁγίας φωνάς, τὸν κυριωτέραν τὴν ἰδίαν διαστροφὴν τῆς τοῦ κυρίου διδασκαλίας ἀποδεῖξαι φιλονεικοῦντα; οὔπω καθορᾶτε ὅτι ἀντεγείρει ἑαυτὸν τῷ προσκυνουμένῳ ὀνόματι, ὥστε σιωπηθῆναι μὲν τῷ χρόνῳ τὸ τοῦ κυρίου ὄνομα, ἀντεισαχθῆναι δὲ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἀντὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸν Εὐνόμιον; οὔπω λογίζεσθε ὅτι μελέτη καὶ παρασκευὴ καὶ προοίμιον τῆς τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου παρουσίας τὸ ἄθεον τοῦτο παρὰ τοῦ διαβόλου προκαταβέβληται κήρυγμα; ὁ γὰρ τῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ λόγων κυριωτέρας τὰς ἰδίας φωνὰς ἀποδεῖξαι φιλονεικῶν καὶ μεταλλάξαι τὴν πίστιν ἀπὸ τῶν θείων ὀνομάτων καὶ τῶν μυστικῶν ἐθῶν καὶ συμβόλων εἰς τὴν ἰδίαν ἀπάτην, τί ἂν ἄλλο κυρίως καὶ οὐχὶ ἀντίχριστος λέγοιτο;