477

truly a genuine son from the Father, let him be anathema. And if anyone, while saying the Father is Father of the Son in authority and essence, says the Son is homoousios or tautousios with the Father, let him be anathema. And those who signed are Basileios, Eustathios, Hyperechios, Letoios, Heortikos, Gymnasios, Memnonios, Eutyches, Severinos, Eutychios, Alkimides, Alexandros; and thus I believe as it is written above and I confess by signature. The memorandum of those around Basileios and Georgios was completed. Letter of Georgios 12. The name of ‘essence’ is not found plainly in the old and new Scripture, but its meaning is conveyed everywhere; and first from what God said when sending Moses, «thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, I AM», as concerning the Father who is primarily understood, «from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named», it is shown that He is not from anyone and is the cause for those who exist. But since the Son is also He who is, and he took from the Gospel according to John which says «in the beginning was the Word», Paul of Samosata and Marcellus found an occasion, 3.285 no longer wishing to call the Son of God truly Son, but taking the name ‘Word’ as a pretext, I say, they wanted to call the Son of God a word from the mouth and an utterance, the fathers who judged Paul of Samosata for such a heresy were compelled, in order to show that the Son has hypostasis and is pre-existent and is being, and is not a word, to also call the Son essence, demonstrating by the name of ‘essence’ the difference between what is non-existent in itself and what is pre-existent. For a word in itself is non-existent and cannot be the Son of God, since in that case there would be many sons of God. For the Father is acknowledged to speak many things to the Son, as when he says «let there be a firmament», «let there be lights», «let the earth bring forth» and «let us make man». So the Father speaks to the Son, and the words of God which he speaks to the Son are not sons, but the Son to whom the Father speaks, along with the other things, is piously called bread and life and resurrection, and is also named Word, because he is the interpreter of God's counsels. Therefore, lest the heretics, deceiving the more simple, say the Son is the same as the words spoken by God, the fathers, indicating the difference of the Son of God with respect to the words of God, called the Son, I say, essence; thus representing the difference, that God is being, and the words which he speaks are beings, but they are not essences of God, but verbal activities. But the Son, being Word, is not a verbal activity of God, but being Son he is essence. For if the Father is being and the Son is being, the Son being so as having his being genuinely from God, the Son will be understood as Word not as the words spoken by God. For those have their being in the one who speaks, but he has his being in having been begotten from the Father and hearing the Father and serving the Father. Therefore the fathers called this hypostasis essence. 13. Therefore we understand the Son to be like the Father in all things, fighting also against the heresy now growing against the church. For the current 3.286 heresy declares that the Son is like the Father in will and in activity, but in being the Son is unlike the Father; so that it is constructed by the new heretics of today, that the will of the Son and the activity of the Son is like the will of the Father and the activity of the Father, but the Son himself is unlike the Father. And because of this they wish the will of the Son and the activity to be like the will of the Father and the activity, but they do not wish the Son to be like the Father, since they affirm that the Son has not been begotten from God, but is only a creature and in this differs from the other creatures, that he surpasses them in greatness and that he was the first of all to subsist and that God used him as a minister for the creation of the rest. Since, say the heretics, the other things through the Son

477

ἀληθῶς ἐκ πατρὸς γνήσιον υἱόν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Καὶ εἴ τις ἐξουσίᾳ καὶ οὐσίᾳ λέγων τὸν πατέρα πατέρα τοῦ υἱοῦ, ὁμοούσιον δὲ ἢ ταὐτοούσιον λέγοι τὸν υἱὸν τῷ πατρί, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Καί εἰσιν οἱ ὑπογράψαντες Βασίλειος, Εὐστάθιος, Ὑπερέχιος, Λητόϊος, Ἑορτικός, Γυμνάσιος, Μεμνόνιος, Εὐτυχής, Σευηρῖνος, Εὐτύχιος, Ἀλκιμίδης, Ἀλέξανδρος· καὶ οὕτω πιστεύω ὡς προγέγραπται καὶ δι' ὑπογραφῆς ὁμολογῶ. Ἐπληρώθη τῶν περὶ Βασίλειον καὶ Γεώργιον ὁ ὑπομνηματισμός. Ἐπιστολὴ Γεωργίου 12. Τὸ τῆς οὐσίας ὄνομα γυμνῶς μὲν ἐν παλαιᾷ καὶ καινῇ οὐ κεῖται γραφῇ, ὁ νοῦς δὲ πανταχοῦ φέρεται· καὶ πρῶτον ἀφ' ὧν ὁ θεὸς πέμπων Μωυσέα εἴρηκεν «οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ, ὁ ὤν», ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ πρώτως νοουμένου πατρός, «ἐξ οὗ πᾶσα πατριὰ ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς ὀνομάζεται», ἐμφαίνεται ὁ μήτε ἔκ τινος ὢν καὶ τοῖς οὖσιν αἴτιος ὤν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ υἱός ἐστιν ὁ ὤν, ἔλαβε δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ κατὰ Ἰωάννην εὐαγγελίου λέγοντος «ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος», ἀφορμὴν εὕρατο 3.285 Παῦλος ὁ Σαμοσατεὺς καὶ Μάρκελλος, οὐκέτι θέλοντες λέγειν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸν ἀληθῶς, ἀλλὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ λόγος ὀνόματος ἀφορμὴν λαβόντες, φημί, ἐκ στόματος ῥῆμα καὶ φθέγμα ἠβουλήθησαν εἰπεῖν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἠναγκάσθησαν οἱ πατέρες, οἱ κρίναντες Παῦλον τὸν Σαμοσατέα ἐπὶ τῷ τοιούτῳ αἱρετισμῷ, ἵνα δείξωσιν ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς ὑπόστασιν ἔχει καὶ ὑπάρχων ἐστὶ καὶ ὤν ἐστιν, οὐχὶ δὲ ῥῆμά ἐστιν, οὐσίαν εἰπεῖν καὶ τὸν υἱόν, τὴν διαφορὰν τοῦ τε καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἀνυπάρκτου καὶ τοῦ ὑπάρχοντος τῷ τῆς οὐσίας ὀνόματι ἐπιδεικνύντες. τὸ μὲν γὰρ ῥῆμα καθ' ἑαυτὸ ἀνύπαρκτόν ἐστι καὶ οὐ δύναται εἶναι υἱὸς θεοῦ, ἐπεὶ πολλοί γε οὕτως ἔσονται υἱοὶ θεοῦ. πολλὰ γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ ὁμολογεῖται λαλῶν τῷ υἱῷ, ὡς ὅταν λέγῃ «γενηθήτω στερέωμα», «γενηθήτωσαν φωστῆρες», «ἐξαγαγέτω ἡ γῆ» καὶ «ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον». ὥστε ὁ πατὴρ τῷ υἱῷ λαλεῖ καὶ οἱ μὲν λόγοι τοῦ θεοῦ οὓς λαλεῖ τῷ υἱῷ, οὐκ εἰσὶν υἱοί, ὁ δὲ υἱὸς πρὸς ὃν λαλεῖ ὁ πατὴρ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων εὐσεβῶς καλεῖται ἄρτος καὶ ζωὴ καὶ ἀνάστασις, ἔτι καὶ λόγος ὀνομάζεται, ἐπειδὴ ἑρμηνεύς ἐστι τῶν τοῦ θεοῦ βουλημάτων. ἵνα μὴ οὖν ἀπατῶντες τοὺς ἁπλουστέρους τὸν υἱὸν ταὐτὸν λέγωσιν οἱ αἱρετικοὶ τοῖς λόγοις τοῖς παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λαλουμένοις, τὸ διάφορον τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ὡς πρὸς τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ θεοῦ ὑποδεικνύντες οἱ πατέρες τὸν υἱόν, φημί, οὐσίαν ἐκάλεσαν· οὕτως τὴν διαφορὰν παριστῶντες, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ὤν ἐστιν, καὶ οἱ λόγοι, οὓς λαλεῖ, ὄντες εἰσίν, ἀλλ' οὐκ οὐσίαι τοῦ θεοῦ, λεκτικαὶ δὲ ἐνέργειαι. ὁ δὲ υἱός, λόγος ὤν, οὐχὶ ἐνέργεια λεκτική ἐστι τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλ' υἱὸς ὢν οὐσία ἐστίν. εἰ γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ ὢν καὶ υἱὸς ὤν ἐστιν, ὢν δὲ οὕτως ὁ υἱός, ὡς ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἔχων γνησίως τὸ εἶναι, λόγος νοηθήσεται ὁ υἱὸς οὐχ ὡς οἱ λόγοι οἱ παρὰ θεοῦ λαλούμενοι. ἐκεῖνοι γὰρ τὸ εἶναι ἐν τῷ λαλοῦντι ἔχουσιν, ὁ δὲ τὸ εἶναι τῷ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεγεννῆσθαι καὶ ἀκούειν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ὑπουργεῖν τῷ πατρὶ ἔχει. ταύτην οὖν τὴν ὑπόστασιν οὐσίαν ἐκάλεσαν οἱ πατέρες. 13. Ὅμοιον οὖν νοοῦμεν τὸν υἱὸν τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ πάντα, μαχόμενοι καὶ πρὸς τὴν νῦν ἐπιφυομένην αἵρεσιν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ. ἡ γὰρ νῦν 3.286 αἵρεσις κατὰ μὲν τὴν βούλησιν καὶ τὴν ἐνέργειαν ἀποφαίνεται εἶναι ὅμοιον τὸν υἱὸν τῷ πατρί, κατὰ δὲ τὸ εἶναι ἀνόμοιον εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τῷ πατρί· ὡς κατασκευάζεσθαι παρὰ τῶν νῦν καινῶν αἱρετικῶν, ὅτι ἡ μὲν βούλησις τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ ἡ ἐνέργεια τοῦ υἱοῦ ὁμοία τῇ βουλήσει τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ τοῦ πατρός, αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ υἱὸς ἀνόμοιος τῷ πατρί. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τὴν μὲν βούλησιν τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τὴν ἐνέργειαν βούλονται εἶναι ὁμοίαν τῇ βουλήσει τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ, τὸν δὲ υἱὸν οὐ βούλονται ὅμοιον εἶναι τῷ πατρί, ἐπειδὴ διαβεβαιοῦνται μὴ εἶναι ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγεννημένον τὸν υἱόν, ἀλλὰ μόνον κτίσμα εἶναι αὐτὸν καὶ ἐν τούτῳ διαφέρειν τῶν λοιπῶν κτισμάτων, ὅτι τε ὑπερέχει μεγέθει καὶ ὅτι πρῶτος τῶν ἁπάντων ὑπέστη καὶ ὅτι ὑπουργῷ αὐτῷ ἐχρήσατο εἰς τὴν τῶν λοιπῶν δημιουργίαν ὁ θεός. ἐπειδή, φασὶν οἱ αἱρετικοί, τὰ μὲν ἄλλα δι' υἱοῦ