Part II. History of Arian Opinions.

Arius’s own sentiments; his Thalia and Letter to S. Alexander; corrections by Eusebius and others; extracts from the works of Asterius; letter of the Council of Jerusalem; first Creed of Arians at the Dedication of Antioch; second, Lucian’s on the same occasion; third, by Theophronius; fourth, sent to Constans in Gaul; fifth, the Macrostich sent into Italy; sixth, at Sirmium; seventh, at the same place; and eighth also, as given above in §8; ninth, at Seleucia; tenth, at Constantinople; eleventh, at Antioch.

15. Arius and those with him thought and professed thus: ‘God made the Son out of nothing, and called Him His Son;’ ‘The Word of God is one of the creatures;’ and ‘Once He was not;’ and ‘He is alterable; capable, when it is His Will, of altering.’ Accordingly they were expelled from the Church by the blessed Alexander. However, after his expulsion, when he was with Eusebius and his fellows, he drew up his heresy upon paper, and imitating in the Thalia no grave writer, but the Egyptian Sotades, in the dissolute tone of his metre53    Cf. Orat. i. §§2–5; de Sent. D. 6; Socr. i. 9. The Arian Philostorgius tells us that ‘Arius wrote songs for the sea and for the mill and for the road, and then set them to suitable music,’ Hist. ii. 2. It is remarkable that Athanasius should say the Egyptian Sotades, and again in Sent. D. 6. There were two Poets of the name; one a writer of the Middle Comedy, Athen. Deipn. vii. 11; but the other, who is here spoken of, was a native of Maronea in Crete, according to Suidas (in voc.), under the successors of Alexander, Athen. xiv. 4. He wrote in Ionic metre, which was of infamous name from the subjects to which he and others applied it. vid. Suid. ibid. Horace’s Ode. ‘Miserarum est neque amori, &c.’ is a specimen of this metre, and some have called it Sotadic; but Bentley shews in loc. that Sotades wrote in the Ionic a majore. Athenæus implies that all Ionic metres were called Sotadic, or that Sotades wrote in various Ionic metres. The Church adopted the Doric music, and forbade the Ionic and Lydian. The name ‘Thalia’ commonly belonged to convivial songs; Martial contrasts the ‘lasciva Thalia’ with ‘carmina sanctiora,’ Epigr. vii. 17. vid. Thaliarchus, ‘the master of the feast,’ Horat. Od. i. 9. [The metre of the fragments of the ‘Thalia’ is obscure, there are no traces of the Ionic foot, but very distinct anapæstic cadences. In fact the lines resemble ill-constructed or very corrupt anapæstic tetrameters catalectic, as in a comic Parabasis. For Sotades, the Greek text here reads corruptly Sosates.], he writes at great length, for instance as follows:—

Blasphemies of Arius.

God Himself then, in His own nature, is ineffable by all men. Equal or like Himself He alone has none, or one in glory. And Ingenerate we call Him, because of Him who is generate by nature. We praise Him as without beginning because of Him who has a beginning. And adore Him as everlasting, because of Him who in time has come to be. The Unbegun made the Son a beginning of things originated; and advanced Him as a Son to Himself by adoption. He has nothing proper to God in proper subsistence. For He is not equal, no, nor one in essence54    This passage ought to have been added supr. p. 163, note 8, as containing a more direct denial of the ὁμοούσιον with Him. Wise is God, for He is the teacher of Wisdom55    That is, Wisdom, or the Son, is but the disciple of Him who is Wise, and not the attribute by which He is Wise, which is what the Sabellians said, vid. Orat. iv. §2, and what Arius imputed to the Church.. There is full proof that God is invisible to all beings; both to things which are through the Son, and to the Son He is invisible. I will say it expressly, how by the Son is seen the Invisible; by that power by which God sees, and in His own measure, the Son endures to see the Father, as is lawful. Thus there is a Triad, not in equal glories. Not intermingling with each other56    ἀνεπιμικτοί, that is, he denied the περιχώρησις, vid. supr. Orat. iii. 3, &c. are their subsistences. One more glorious than the other in their glories unto immensity. Foreign from the Son in essence is the Father, for He is without beginning. Understand that the Monad was; but the Dyad was not, before it was in existence. It follows at once that, though the Son was not, the Father was God. Hence the Son, not being (for He existed at the will of the Father), is God Only-begotten57    [John i. 18, best mss., and cf. Hort, Two Diss. p. 26., and He is alien from either. Wisdom existed as Wisdom by the will of the Wise God. Hence He is conceived in numberless conceptions58    ἐπινοίαις, that is, our Lord’s titles are but names, or figures, not properly belonging to Him, but [cf. Bigg. B. L. p. 168 sq.]: Spirit, Power, Wisdom, God’s glory, Truth, Image, and Word. Understand that He is conceived to be Radiance and Light. One equal to the Son, the Superior is able to beget; but one more excellent, or superior, or greater, He is not able. At God’s will the Son is what and whatsoever He is. And when and since He was, from that time He has subsisted from God. He, being a strong God, praises in His degree the Superior. To speak in brief, God is ineffable to His Son. For He is to Himself what He is, that is, unspeakable. So that nothing which is called comprehensible59    κατὰ κατάληψιν, that is, there is nothing comprehensible in the Father for the Son to know and declare. On the other hand the doctrine of the Anomœans was, that all men could know Almighty God perfectly. does the Son know to speak about; for it is impossible for Him to investigate the Father, who is by Himself. For the Son does not know His own essence, For, being Son, He really existed, at the will of the Father. What argument then allows, that He who is from the Father should know His own parent by comprehension? For it is plain that for that which hath a beginning to conceive how the Unbegun is, or to grasp the idea, is not possible.

16. And what they wrote by letter to the blessed Alexander, the Bishop, runs as follows:—

To Our Blessed Pope60    [The ordinary title of eminent bishops, especially of the bishop of Alexandria.]and Bishop, Alexander, the Presbyters and Deacons send health in the Lord.

Our faith from our forefathers, which also we have learned from thee, Blessed Pope, is this:—We acknowledge One God, alone Ingenerate, alone Everlasting, alone Unbegun, alone True, alone having Immortality, alone Wise, alone Good, alone Sovereign; Judge, Governor, and Providence of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God of Law and Prophets and New Testament; who begat an Only-begotten Son before eternal times, through whom He has made both the ages and the universe; and begat Him, not in semblance, but in truth; and that He made Him subsist at His own will, unalterable and unchangeable; perfect creature of God, but not as one of the creatures; offspring, but not as one of things begotten; nor as Valentinus pronounced that the offspring of the Father was an issue61    What the Valentinian προβολὴ was is described in Epiph. Hær. 31, 13 [but see D.C.B. iv. 1086 sqq.] Origen protests against the notion of προβολή, Periarch. iv. p. 190, and Athanasius Expos. §1. The Arian Asterius too considers προβολὴ to introduce the notion of τεκνογονία, Euseb. contr. Marc. i. 4. p. 20. vid. also Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. Yet Eusebius uses the word προβάλλεσθαι. Eccl. Theol. i. 8. On the other hand Tertullian uses it with a protest against the Valentinian sense. Justin has προβληθὲν γέννημα, Tryph. 62. And Nazianzen calls the Almighty Father προβολεὺς of the Holy Spirit. Orat. 29. 2. Arius introduces the word here as an argumentum ad invidiam. Hil. de Trin. vi. 9.; nor as Manichæus taught that the offspring was a portion of the Father, one in essence62    The Manichees adopting a material notion of the divine substance, considered that it was divisible, and that a portion of it was absorbed by the power of darkness.; or as Sabellius, dividing the Monad, speaks of a Son-and-Father63    υἱοπατόρα. The term is ascribed to Sabellius, Ammon. in Caten. Joan. i. 1. p. 14: to Sabellius and [invidiously to] Marcellus, Euseb. Eccl. Theol. ii. 5: Cf., as to Marcellus, Cyr. Hier. Catech. xv. 9. also iv. 8. xi. 16; Epiph. Hær. 73. 11 fin.: to Sabellians, Athan. Expos. Fid. 2. and 7, and Greg. Nyssen. contr. Eun. xii. p. 733: to certain heretics, Cyril. Alex. in Joann. p. 243: to Praxeas and Montanus, Mar. Merc. p. 128: to Sabellius, Cæsar. Dial. i. p. 550: to Noetus, Damasc. Hær. 57.; nor as Hieracas, of one torch from another, or as a lamp divided into two64    [On Hieracas, see D.C.B. iii. 24; also Epiph. Hær. 67; Hil. Trin. vi. 12.]; nor that He who was before, was afterwards generated or new-created into a Son65    Bull considers that the doctrine of such Fathers is here spoken of as held that our Lord’s συγκατάβασις to create the world was a γέννησις, and certainly such language as that of Hippol. contr. Noet. §15. favours the supposition. But one class of [Monarchians] may more probably be intended, who held that the Word became the Son upon His incarnation, such as Marcellus, vid. Euseb. Eccles. Theol. i. 1. contr. Marc. ii. 3. vid. also Eccles. Theol. ii. 9. p. 114 b. μηδ᾽ ἄλλοτε ἄλλην κ.τ.λ. Also the Macrostich says, ‘We anathematize those who call Him the mere Word of God, not allowing Him to be Christ and Son of God before all ages, but from the time He took on Him our flesh: such are the followers of Marcellus and Photinus, &c.’ infr. §26. Again, Athanasius, Orat. iv. 15, says that, of those who divide the Word from the Son, some called our Lord’s manhood the Son, some the two Natures together, and some said ‘that the Word Himself became the Son when He was made man.’ It makes it more likely that Marcellus is meant, that Asterius seems to have written against him before the Nicene Council, and that Arius in other of his writings borrowed from Asterius. vid. de Decret. §8., as thou too thyself, Blessed Pope, in the midst of the Church and in session hast often condemned; but, as we say, at the will of God, created before times and before ages, and gaining life and being from the Father, who gave subsistence to His glories together with Him. For the Father did not, in giving to Him the inheritance of all things, deprive Himself of what He has ingenerately in Himself; for He is the Fountain of all things. Thus there are Three Subsistences. And God, being the cause of all things, is Unbegun and altogether Sole, but the Son being begotten apart from time by the Father, and being created and founded before ages, was not before His generation, but being begotten apart from time before all things, alone was made to subsist by the Father. For He is not eternal or co-eternal or co-unoriginate with the Father, nor has He His being together with the Father, as some speak of relations66    Eusebius’s letter to Euphration, which is mentioned just after, expresses this more distinctly—‘If they coexist, how shall the Father be Father and the Son Son? or how the One first, the Other second? and the One ingenerate and the other generate?’ Acta Conc. 7. p. 301. The phrase τὰ πρός τι Bull well explains to refer to the Catholic truth that the Father or Son being named; the Other is therein implied without naming. Defens. F. N. iii. 9. §4. Hence Arius, in his Letter to Eusebius, complains that Alexander says, ἀεὶ ὁ θεός, ἀεὶ ὁ υἱ& 231·ς ἅμα πατήρ, ἅμα υἱ& 231·ς. Theod. H. E. i. 4., introducing two ingenerate beginnings, but God is before all things as being Monad and Beginning of all. Wherefore also He is before the Son; as we have learned also from thy preaching in the midst of the Church. So far then as from God He has being, and glories, and life, and all things are delivered unto Him, in such sense is God His origin. For He is above Him, as being His God and before Him. But if the terms ‘from Him,’ and ‘from the womb,’ and ‘I came forth from the Father, and I am come67    ἥκω, and so Chrys. Hom. 3. Hebr. init. Epiph. Hær. 73. 31, and 36.’ (Rom. xi. 36; Ps. cx. 3; John xvi. 28), be understood by some to mean as if a part of Him, one in essence or as an issue, then the Father is according to them compounded and divisible and alterable and material, and, as far as their belief goes, has the circumstances of a body, Who is the Incorporeal God.

This is a part of what Arius and his fellows vomited from their heretical hearts.

17. And before the Nicene Council took place, similar statements were made by Eusebius and his fellows, Narcissus, Patrophilus, Maris, Paulinus, Theodotus, and Athanasius of [A]nazarba68    Most of these original Arians were attacked in a work of Marcellus’s which Eusebius answers. ‘Now he replies to Asterius,’ says Eusebius, ‘now to the great Eusebius’ [of Nicomedia], ‘and then he turns upon that man of God, that indeed thrice blessed person Paulinus [of Tyre]. Then he goes to war with Origen.…Next he marches out against Narcissus, and pursues the other Eusebius,’ [himself]. ‘In a word, he counts for nothing all the Ecclesiastical Fathers, being satisfied with no one but himself.’ contr. Marc. i. 4. [On Maris (who was not at Ariminum, and scarcely at Antioch in 363) see D.C.B. s.v. (2). On Theodotus see vol. i. of this series, p. 320, note 37. On Paulinus, ib. p. 369.]. And Eusebius of Nicomedia wrote over and above to Arius, to this effect, ‘Since your sentiments are good, pray that all may adopt them; for it is plain to any one, that what has been made was not before its origination; but what came to be has a beginning of being.’ And Eusebius of Cæsarea in Palestine, in a letter to Euphration the Bishop69    [Of Balaneæ, see Ap. Fug. 3; Hist. Ar. 5.], did not scruple to say plainly that Christ was not true God70    Quoted, among other passages from Eusebius, in the 7th General Council, Act. 6. p. 409. [Mansi. xiii. 701 D]. ‘The Son Himself is God, but not Very God.’ [But see Prolegg. ubi supr. note 5].. And Athanasius of [A]nazarba uncloked the heresy still further, saying that the Son of God was one of the hundred sheep. For writing to Alexander the Bishop, he had the extreme audacity to say: ‘Why complain of Arius and his fellows, for saying, The Son of God is made as a creature out of nothing, and one among others? For all that are made being represented in parable by the hundred sheep, the Son is one of them. If then the hundred are not created and originate, or if there be beings beside that hundred, then may the Son be not a creature nor one among others; but if those hundred are all originate, and there is nothing besides the hundred save God alone, what absurdity do Arius and his fellows utter, when, as comprehending and reckoning Christ in the hundred, they say that He is one among others?’ And George who now is in Laodicea, and then was presbyter of Alexandria, and was staying at Antioch, wrote to Alexander the Bishop; ‘Do not complain of Arius and his fellows, for saying, “Once the Son of God was not,” for Isaiah came to be son of Amos, and, whereas Amos was before Isaiah came to be, Isaiah was not before, but came to be afterwards.’ And he wrote to the Arians, ‘Why complain of Alexander the Pope, saying, that the Son is from the Father? for you too need not fear to say that the Son was from God.’ For if the Apostle wrote (1 Cor. xi. 12), ‘All things are from God,’ and it is plain that all things are made of nothing, though the Son too is a creature and one of things made, still He may be said to be from God in that sense in which all things are said to be ‘from God.’ From him then those who hold with Arius learned to simulate the phrase ‘from God,’ and to use it indeed, but not in a good meaning. And George himself was deposed by Alexander for certain reasons, and among them for manifest irreligion; for he was himself a presbyter, as has been said before.

18. On the whole then such were their statements, as if they all were in dispute and rivalry with each other, which should make the heresy more irreligious, and display it in a more naked form. And as for their letters I had them not at hand, to dispatch them to you; else I would have sent you copies; but, if the Lord will, this too I will do, when I get possession of them. And one Asterius71    Asterius has been mentioned above, p. 155, note 2, &c. Philostorgius speaks of him as adopting Semi-Arian terms; and Acacius gives an extract from him containing them, ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 6. He seems to be called many-headed with an allusion to the Hydra, and to his activity in the Arian cause and his fertility in writing. He wrote comments on Scripture. [See Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) a, sub. fin.] from Cappadocia, a many-headed Sophist, one of the fellows of Eusebius, whom they could not advance into the Clergy, as having done sacrifice in the former persecution in the time of Constantius’s grandfather, writes, with the countenance of Eusebius and his fellows, a small treatise, which was on a par with the crime of his sacrifice, yet answered their wishes; for in it, after comparing, or rather preferring, the locust and the caterpillar to Christ, and saying that Wisdom in God was other than Christ, and was the Framer as well of Christ as of the world, he went round the Churches in Syria and elsewhere, with introductions from Eusebius and his fellows, that as he once made trial of denying, so now he might boldly oppose the truth. The bold man intruded himself into forbidden places, and seating himself in the place of Clergy72    None but the clergy might enter the Chancel, i.e. in Service time. Hence Theodosius was made to retire by S. Ambrose. Theod. v. 17. The Council of Laodicea, said to be held a.d. 372, forbids any but persons in orders, ἱερατικοί, to enter the Chancel and then communicate. Can. 19. vid. also 44. Conc. t. i. pp. 788, 789. It is doubtful what orders the word ἱερατικοὶ is intended to include. vid. Bingham, Antiqu. viii. 6. §7., he used to read publicly this treatise of his, in spite of the general indignation. The treatise is written at great length, but portions of it are as follows:—

For the Blessed Paul said not that he preached Christ, His, that is, God’s, ‘own Power’ or ‘Wisdom,’ but without the article, ‘God’s Power and God’s Wisdom’ (1 Cor. i. 24), preaching that the own power of God Himself was distinct, which was con-natural and co-existent with Him unoriginately, generative indeed of Christ, creative of the whole world; concerning which he teaches in his Epistle to the Romans, thus, ‘The invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even His eternal power and divinity’ (Rom. i. 20). For as no one would say that the Deity there mentioned was Christ, but the Father Himself, so, as I think, His eternal power is also not the Only-begotten God (Joh. i. 18), but the Father who begat Him. And he tells us of another Power and Wisdom of God, namely, that which is manifested through Christ, and made known through the works themselves of His Ministry.

And again:—

Although His eternal Power and Wisdom, which truth argues to be Unbegun and Ingenerate, would appear certainly to be one and the same, yet many are those powers which are one by one created by Him, of which Christ is the First-born and Only-begotten. All however equally depend upon their Possessor, and all His powers are rightly called His, who created and uses them; for instance, the Prophet says that the locust, which became a divine punishment of human sin, was called by God Himself, not only a power of God, but a great power (Joel ii. 25). And the blessed David too in several of the Psalms, invites, not Angels alone, but Powers also to praise God. And while he invites them all to the hymn, he presents before us their multitude, and is not unwilling to call them ministers of God, and teaches them to do His will.

19. These bold words against the Saviour did not content him, but he went further in his blasphemies, as follows:

The Son is one among others; for He is first of things originate, and one among intellectual natures; and as in things visible the sun is one among phenomena, and it shines upon the whole world according to the command of its Maker, so the Son, being one of the intellectual natures, also enlightens and shines upon all that are in the intellectual world.

And again he says, Once He was not, writing thus:—‘And before the Son’s origination, the Father had pre-existing knowledge how to generate; since a physician too, before he cured, had the science of curing73    Ep. Æg. 13..’ And he says again: ‘The Son was created by God’s beneficent earnestness; and the Father made Him by the superabundance of His Power.’ And again: ‘If the will of God has pervaded all the works in succession, certainly the Son too, being a work, has at His will come to be and been made.’ Now though Asterius was the only person to write all this, Eusebius and his fellows felt the like in common with him.

20. These are the doctrines for which they are contending; for these they assail the ancient Council, because its members did not propound the like, but anathematized the Arian heresy instead, which they were so eager to recommend. This was why they put forward, as an advocate of their irreligion, Asterius who sacrificed, a sophist too, that he might not spare to speak against the Lord, or by a show of reason to mislead the simple. And they were ignorant, the shallow men, that they were doing harm to their own cause. For the ill savour of their advocate’s idolatrous sacrifice betrayed still more plainly that the heresy is Christ’s foe. And now again, the general agitations and troubles which they are exciting, are in consequence of their belief, that by their numerous murders and their monthly Councils, at length they will undo the sentence which has been passed against the Arian heresy74    Vid. infr. §32.. But here too they seem ignorant, or to pretend ignorance, that even before Nicea that heresy was held in detestation, when Artemas75    [On Artemas or Artemon and Theodotus, see Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) a.] was laying its foundations, and before him Caiaphas’s assembly and that of the Pharisees his contemporaries. And at all times is this gang of Christ’s foes detestable, and will not cease to be hateful, the Lord’s Name being full of love, and the whole creation bending the knee, and confessing ‘that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father’ (Phil. ii. 11).

21. Yet so it is, they have convened successive Councils against that Ecumenical One, and are not yet tired. After the Nicene, Eusebius and his fellows had been deposed; however, in course of time they intruded themselves without shame upon the Churches, and began to plot against the Bishops who withstood them, and to substitute in the Church men of their own heresy. Thus they thought to hold Councils at their pleasure, as having those who concurred with them, whom they had ordained on purpose for this very object. Accordingly, they assemble at Jerusalem, and there they write thus:—

The Holy Council assembled in Jerusalem76    [See Apol. Ar. 84; Hist. Ar. 1; Prolegg. ii. §5. The first part of the letter will be found supr. Apol. Ar. p. 144.] by the grace of God, &c….their orthodox teaching in writing77    This is supposed to be the same Confession which is preserved by Socr. i. 26. and Soz. ii. 27. and was presented to Constantine by Arius in 330., which we all confessed to be sound and ecclesiastical. And he reasonably recommended that they should be received and united to the Church of God, as you will know yourselves from the transcript of the same Epistle, which we have transmitted to your reverences. We believe that yourselves also, as if recovering the very members of your own body, will experience great joy and gladness, in acknowledging and recovering your own bowels, your own brethren and fathers; since not only the Presbyters, Arius and his fellows, are given back to you, but also the whole Christian people and the entire multitude, which on occasion of the aforesaid men have a long time been in dissension among you. Moreover it were fitting, now that you know for certain what has passed, and that the men have communicated with us and have been received by so great a Holy Council, that you should with all readiness hail this your coalition and peace with your own members, specially since the articles of the faith which they have published preserve indisputable the universally confessed apostolical tradition and teaching.

22. This was the beginning of their Councils, and in it they were speedy in divulging their views, and could not conceal them. For when they said that they had banished all jealousy, and, after the expulsion of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, recommended the reception of Arius and his friends, they shewed that their measures against Athanasius himself then, and before against all the other Bishops who withstood them, had for their object their receiving Arius and his fellows, and introducing the heresy into the Church. But although they had approved in this Council all Arius’s malignity, and had ordered to receive his party into communion, as they had set the example, yet feeling that even now they were short of their wishes, they assembled a Council at Antioch under colour of the so-called Dedication78    [Prolegg. ch. ii. §6 (2).] and, since they were in general and lasting odium for their heresy, they publish different letters, some of this sort, and some of that and what they wrote in one letter was as follows:—

We have not been followers of Arius,—how could Bishops, such as we, follow a Presbyter?—nor did we receive any other faith beside that which has been handed down from the beginning. But, after taking on ourselves to examine and to verify his faith, we admitted him rather than followed him; as you will understand from our present avowals.

For we have been taught from the first, to believe79    1st Confession or 1st of Antioch, a.d. 341. [See Socr. ii. 10.] in one God, the God of the Universe, the Framer and Preserver of all things both intellectual and sensible.

And in One Son of God, Only-begotten, who existed before all ages, and was with the Father who had begotten Him, by whom all things were made, both visible and invisible, who in the last days according to the good pleasure of the Father came down; and has taken flesh of the Virgin, and jointly fulfilled all His Father’s will, and suffered and risen again, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and cometh again to judge quick and dead, and remaineth King and God unto all ages.

And we believe also in the Holy Ghost; and if it be necessary to add, we believe concerning the resurrection of the flesh, and the life everlasting.

23. Here follows what they published next at the same Dedication in another Epistle, being dissatisfied with the first, and devising something newer and fuller:

We believe80    2nd Confession or 2nd of Antioch, a.d. 341. This formulary is that known as the Formulary of the Dedication. It is quoted as such by Socr. ii. 39, 40. Soz. iv. 15. and infr. §29. [On its attribution to Lucian, see Prolegg. ubi supr., and Caspari Alte. u. Neue Q. p. 42 note.], conformably to the evangelical and apostolical tradition, in One God, the Father Almighty, the Framer, and Maker, and Provider of the Universe, from whom are all things.

And in One Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, Only-begotten God (Joh. i. 18), by whom are all things, who was begotten before all ages from the Father, God from God, whole from whole, sole from sole81    Vid. 10th Confession, infr. §30., perfect from perfect, King from King, Lord from Lord, Living Word, Living Wisdom, true Light, Way, Truth, Resurrection, Shepherd, Door, both unalterable and82    These strong words and those which follow, whether Lucian’s or not, mark the great difference between this confession and the foregoing. The words ‘unalterable and unchangeable’ are formal anti-Arian symbols, as the τρεπτὸν or alterable was one of the most characteristic parts of Arius’s creed. vid. Orat. i. §35, &c. unchangeable; exact Image83    On ἀπαράλλακτος εἰκὼν κατ᾽ οὐσίαν, which was synonymous with ὁμοιούσιος, vid. infr. §38. supr. p. 163, note 9. It was in order to secure the true sense of ἀπαράλλακτον that the Council adopted the word ὁμοούσιον ᾽Απαράλλακτον is accordingly used as a familiar word by Athan. de Decr. §§20, 24. Orat. iii. §36. contr. Gent. 41. 46. fin. Philostorgius ascribing it to Asterius, and Acacius quotes a passage from his writings containing it; cf. S. Alexander τὴν κατὰ πάντα ὁμοιότητα αὐτοῦ ἐκ φύσεως ἀπομαξάμενος, in Theod. H. E. i. 4. Χαρακτήρ, Hebr. i. 3. contains the same idea. Basil. contr. Eunom. i. 18. of the Godhead, Essence, Will, Power and Glory of the Father; the first born of every creature, who was in the beginning with God, God the Word, as it is written in the Gospel, ‘and the Word was God’ (John i. 1); by whom all things were made, and in whom all things consist; who in the last days descended from above, and was born of a Virgin according to the Scriptures, and was made Man, Mediator84    This statement perhaps is the most Catholic in the Creed; not that the former are not more explicit in themselves, or that in a certain true sense our Lord may not be called a Mediator before He became incarnate, but because the Arians, even Eusebius, like Philo and the Platonists, consider Him as made in the beginning the ‘Eternal Priest of the Father,’ Demonst. v. 3. de Laud. C. 3, 11, ‘an intermediate divine power,’ §§26, 27, and notes. between God and man, and Apostle of our faith, and Prince of life, as He says, ‘I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me’ (John vi. 38); who suffered for us and rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming again with glory and power, to judge quick and dead.

And in the Holy Ghost, who is given to those who believe for comfort, and sanctification, and initiation, as also our Lord Jesus Christ enjoined His disciples, saying, ‘Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost’ (Matt. xxviii. 19); namely of a Father who is truly Father, and a Son who is truly Son, and of the Holy Ghost who is truly Holy Ghost, the names not being given without meaning or effect, but denoting accurately the peculiar subsistence, rank, and glory of each that is named, so that they are three in subsistence, and in agreement one85    On this phrase, which is justified by S. Hilary, de Syn. 32, and is protested against in the Sardican Confession, Theod. H. E. ii. 6 [see Prolegg. ubi supr.].

Holding then this faith, and holding it in the presence of God and Christ, from beginning to end, we anathematize every heretical heterodoxy86    The whole of these anathemas are [a compromise]. The Council anathematizes ‘every heretical heterodoxy;’ not, as Athanasius observes, supr., §7, the Arian.. And if any teaches, beside the sound and right faith of the Scriptures, that time, or season, or age87    Our Lord was, as they held, before time, but still created., either is or has been before the generation of the Son, be he anathema. Or if any one says, that the Son is a creature as one of the creatures, or an offspring as one of the offsprings, or a work as one of the works, and not the aforesaid articles one after another, as the divine Scriptures have delivered, or if he teaches or preaches beside what we received, be he anathema. For all that has been delivered in the divine Scriptures, whether by Prophets or Apostles, do we truly and reverentially both believe and follow88    This emphatic mention of Scripture is also virtually an Arian evasion, admitting of a silent reference to themselves as interpreters of Scripture..

24. And one Theophronius89    On this Creed see Prolegg. ubi supr., Bishop of Tyana, put forth before them all the following statement of his personal faith. And they subscribed it, accepting the faith of this man:—

God90    3rd Confession or 3rd of Antioch, a.d. 341. knows, whom I call as a witness upon my soul, that so I believe:—in God the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of the Universe, from whom are all things.

And in His Only-begotten Son, Word, Power, and Wisdom, our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things; who has been begotten from the Father before the ages, perfect God from perfect God91    It need scarcely be said, that ‘perfect from perfect’ is a symbol on which the Catholics laid stress, Athan. Orat. ii. 35. Epiph. Hær. 76. p. 945. but it admitted of an evasion. An especial reason for insisting on it in the previous centuries had been the Sabellian doctrine, which considered the title ‘Word’ when applied to our Lord to be adequately explained by the ordinary sense of the term, as a word spoken by us. In consequence they insisted on His τὸ τέλειον, perfection, which became almost synonymous with His personality. (Thus the Apollinarians, e.g. denied that our Lord was perfect man, because His person was not human. Athan. contr. Apoll. i. 2.) And Athan. condemns the notion of ‘the λόγος ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἀτελὴς, γεννηθεὶς τέλειος, Orat. iv. 11. The Arians then, as being the especial opponents of the Sabellians, insisted on nothing so much as our Lord’s being a real, living, substantial, Word. vid. Eusebius passim. ‘The Father,’ says Acacius against Marcellus, ‘begat the Only-begotten, alone alone, and perfect perfect; for there is nothing imperfect in the Father, wherefore neither is there in the Son, but the Son’s perfection is the genuine offspring of His perfection, and superperfection.’ ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. Τέλειος then was a relative word, varying with the subject matter, vid. Damasc. F. O. i. 8. p. 138. and when the Arians said that our Lord was perfect God, they meant, ‘perfect, in that sense in which He is God’—i.e. as a secondary divinity.—Nay, in one point of view, holding as they did no real condescension or assumption of a really new state, they would use the term of His divine Nature more freely than the Catholics sometimes had. ‘Nor was the Word,’ says Hippolytus, ‘before the flesh and by Himself, perfect Son, though being perfect Word, Only-begotten; nor could the flesh subsist by itself without the Word, because that in the Word it has its consistence: thus then He was manifested One perfect Son of God.’ contr. Noet. 15., and was with God in subsistence, and in the last days descended, and was born of the Virgin according to the Scriptures, and was made man, and suffered, and rose again from the dead, and ascended into the heavens, and sat down on the right hand of His Father, and cometh again with glory and power to judge quick and dead, and remaineth for ever:

And in the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth (Joh. xv. 26), which also God promised by His Prophet to pour out (Joel ii. 28) upon His servants, and the Lord promised to send to His disciples: which also He sent, as the Acts of the Apostles witness.

But if any one teaches, or holds in his mind, aught beside this faith, be he anathema; or with Marcellus of Ancyra92    [See Prolegg.] Marcellus wrote his work against Asterius in 335, the year of the Arian Council of Jerusalem, which at once took cognisance of it, and cited Marcellus to appear before them. The next year a Council held at Constantinople condemned and deposed him., or Sabellius, or Paul of Samosata, be he anathema, both himself and those who communicate with him.

25. Ninety Bishops met at the Dedication under the Consulate of Marcellinus and Probinus, in the 14th of the Indiction93    a.d. 341., Constantius the most irreligious being present. Having thus conducted matters at Antioch at the Dedication, thinking that their composition was deficient still, and fluctuating moreover in their own opinions, again they draw up afresh another formulary, after a few months, professedly concerning the faith, and despatch Narcissus, Maris, Theodorus, and Mark into Gaul94    [Cf. Prolegg. ii. §6 (3) init.]. And they, as being sent from the Council, deliver the following document to Constans Augustus of blessed memory, and to all who were there:

We believe95    4th Confession, or 4th of Antioch, a.d. 342. The fourth, fifth, and sixth Confessions are the same, and with them agree the Creed of Philippopolis [a.d. 343, see Gwatkin, Stud. p. 119, espec. note 2]. in One God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Maker of all things; from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named. (Eph. iii. 15.)

And in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who before all ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, being Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and Life, and True Light; who in the last days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin; who was crucified, and dead, and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father; and is coming at the consummation of the age, to judge quick and dead, and to render to every one according to his works; whose Kingdom endures indissolubly into the infinite ages96    These words, which answer to those [of our present ‘Nicene’ Creed], are directed against the doctrine of Marcellus [on which see Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) c, 3]. Cf. Eusebius, de Eccl. Theol. iii. 8. 17. cont. Marc. ii. 4.; for He shall be seated on the right hand of the Father, not only in this age but in that which is to come.

And in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete; which, having promised to the Apostles, He sent forth after His ascension into heaven, to teach them and to remind of all things; through whom also shall be sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.

But those who say, that the Son was from nothing, or from other subsistence and not from God, and, there was time when He was not, the Catholic Church regards as aliens97    S. Hilary, as we have seen above, p. 78, by implication calls this the Nicene Anathema; but it omits many of the Nicene clauses, and evades our Lord’s eternal existence, substituting for ‘once He was not,’ ‘there was time when He was not.’ It seems to have been considered sufficient for Gaul, as used now, for Italy as in the 5th Confession or Macrostich, and for Africa as in the creed of Philippopolis..

26. As if dissatisfied with this, they hold their meeting again after three years, and dispatch Eudoxius, Martyrius, and Macedonius of Cilicia98    Little is known of Macedonius who was Bishop of Mopsuestia, or of Martyrius; and too much of Eudoxius. This Long Confession, or Macrostich, which follows, is remarkable; [see Prolegg, ch. ii. §6 (3), Gwatkin, p. 125 sq.], and some others with them, to the parts of Italy, to carry with them a faith written at great length, with numerous additions over and above those which have gone before. They went abroad with these, as if they had devised something new.

We believe99    5th Confession or Macrostich, a.d. 344. [Published by the Council which deposed Stephen and elected Leontius bishop of Antioch.] in one God the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of all things, from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named.

And in His Only-begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ, who before all ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made, in heaven and on the earth, visible and invisible, being Word and Wisdom and Power and Life and True Light, who in the last days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin, crucified and dead and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming at the consummation of the age to judge quick and dead, and to render to every one according to his works, whose Kingdom endures unceasingly unto the infinite ages; for He sitteth on the right hand of the Father not only in this age, but also in that which is to come.

And we believe in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete, which, having promised to the Apostles, He sent forth after the ascension into heaven, to teach them and to remind of all things: through whom also shall be sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.

But those who say, (1) that the Son was from nothing, or from other subsistence and not from God; (2) and that there was a time or age when He was not, the Catholic and Holy Church regards as aliens. Likewise those who say, (3) that there are three Gods: (4) or that Christ is not God; (5) or that before the ages He was neither Christ nor Son of God; (6) or that Father and Son, or Holy Ghost, are the same; (7) or that the Son is Ingenerate; or that the Father begat the Son, not by choice or will; the Holy and Catholic Church anathematizes.

(1.) For neither is safe to say that the Son is from nothing, (since this is no where spoken of Him in divinely inspired Scripture,) nor again of any other subsistence before existing beside the Father, but from God alone do we define Him genuinely to be generated. For the divine Word teaches that the Ingenerate and Unbegun, the Father of Christ, is One100    It is observable that here and in the next paragraph the only reasons they give against using the only two Arian formulas which they condemn is that they are not found in Scripture. Here, in their explanation of the ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, or from nothing, they do but deny it with Eusebius’s evasion, supr. p. 75, note 5..

(2.) Nor may we, adopting the hazardous position, ‘There was once when He was not,’ from unscriptural sources, imagine any interval of time before Him, but only the God who has generated Him apart from time; for through Him both times and ages came to be. Yet we must not consider the Son to be co-unbegun and co-ingenerate with the Father; for no one can be properly called Father or Son of one who is co-unbegun and co-ingenerate with Him101    They argue after the usual Arian manner, that the term ‘Son’ essentially implies beginning, and excludes the title ‘co-unoriginate;’ but see supr. §16, note 1, and p. 154, note 5.. But we acknowledge102    [The four lines which follow are cited by Lightfoot, Ign. p. 91. ed. 2, as from de Syn. §3.] that the Father who alone is Unbegun and Ingenerate, hath generated inconceivably and incomprehensibly to all: and that the Son hath been generated before ages, and in no wise to be ingenerate Himself like the Father, but to have the Father who generated Him as His beginning; for ‘the Head of Christ is God.’ (1 Cor. xi. 3.)

(3.) Nor again, in confessing three realities and three Persons, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost according to the Scriptures, do we therefore make Gods three; since we acknowledge the Self-complete and Ingenerate and Unbegun and Invisible God to be one only103    Cf. §28, end., the God and Father (Joh. xx. 17) of the Only-begotten, who alone hath being from Himself, and alone vouchsafes this to all others bountifully.

(4.) Nor again, in saying that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is one only God, the only Ingenerate, do we therefore deny that Christ also is God before ages: as the disciples of Paul of Samosata, who say that after the incarnation He was by advance104    ἐκ προκοπῆς, de Decr. §10, note 10. made God, from being made by nature a mere man. For we acknowledge, that though He be subordinate to His Father and God, yet, being before ages begotten of God, He is God perfect according to nature and true105    These strong words, θεὸν κατὰ φύσιν τέλειον καὶ ἀληθῆ are of a different character from any which have occurred in the Arian Confessions. They can only be explained away by considering them used in contrast to the Samosatene doctrine; so that ‘perfect according to nature’ and ‘true,’ will not be directly connected with ‘God’ so much as opposed to, ‘by advance,’ ‘by adoption,’ &c., and not first man and then God, but first God and then becoming man for us, and never having been deprived of being.

(5.) We abhor besides, and anathematize those who make a pretence of saying that He is but the mere word of God and unexisting, having His being in another,—now as if pronounced, as some speak, now as mental106    The use of the words ἐνδιάθετος and προφορικός, mental and pronounced, to distinguish the two senses of λόγος, reason and word, came from the school of the Stoics, and is found in Philo, and was under certain limitations allowed in Catholic theology, Damasc. F. O. ii. 21. To use either absolutely and to the exclusion of the other would have involved some form of Sabellianism, or Arianism as the case might be; but each might correct the defective sense of either. S. Theophilus speaks of our Lord as at once ἐνδιάθετος and προφορικός. ad Autol. ii. 10 and 22, S. Cyril as ἐνδιάθετος, in Joann. p. 39. but see also Thesaur. p. 47. When the Fathers deny that our Lord is the προφορικὸς λόγος, they only mean that that title is not, even as far as its philosophical idea went, an adequate representative of Him, a word spoken being insubstantive, vid. Orat. ii. 35; Hil. de Syn. 46; Cyr. Catech. xi. 10; Damas. Ep. ii. p. 203; Cyril in Joann. p. 31; Iren. Hær. ii. 12. n. 5. Marcellus is said by Eusebius to have considered our Lord as first the one and then the other. Eccl. Theol. ii. 15.,—holding that He was not Christ or Son of God or mediator or image of God before ages; but that He first became Christ and Son of God, when He took our flesh from the Virgin, not quite four hundred years since. For they will have it that then Christ began His Kingdom, and that it will have an end after the consummation of all and the judgment107    This passage seems taken from Eusebius, and partly from Marcellus’s own words. S. Cyril speaks of his doctrine in like terms. Catech. xv. 27.. Such are the disciples of Marcellus and Scotinus108    i.e. Photinus. [A note illustrating the frequency of similar nicknames is omitted. On Photinus, see Prolegg. ch. ii. §3. ad fin.] of Galatian Ancyra, who, equally with Jews, negative Christ’s existence before ages, and His Godhead, and unending Kingdom, upon pretence of supporting the divine Monarchy. We, on the contrary, regard Him not as simply God’s pronounced word or mental, but as Living God and Word, existing in Himself, and Son of God and Christ; being and abiding with His Father before ages, and that not in foreknowledge only109    Cf. Euseb. contr. Marc. i. 2., and ministering to Him for the whole framing whether of things visible or invisible. For He it is, to whom the Father said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness110    Cf. §27, notes.’ (Gen. i. 26), who also was seen in His own Person111    αὐτοπροσωπῶς and so Cyril Hier. Catech. xv. 14 and 17 (It means, ‘not in personation’), and Philo contrasting divine appearances with those of Angels. Leg. Alleg. iii. 62. On the other hand, Theophilus on the text, ‘The voice of the Lord God walking in the garden,’ speaks of the Word, ‘assuming the person, πρόσωπον, of the Father,’ and ‘in the person of God,’ ad Autol. ii. 22. the word not then having its theological sense. by the patriarchs, gave the law, spoke by the prophets, and at last, became man, and manifested His own Father to all men, and reigns to never-ending ages. For Christ has taken no recent dignity, but we have believed Him to be perfect from the first, and like in all things to the Father112    ὅμοιον κατὰ πάντα. Here again we have a strong Semi-Arian or almost Catholic formula introduced by the bye. Of course it admitted of evasion, but in its fulness it included ‘essence.’ [See above §8, note 1, and Introd.].

(6.) And those who say that the Father and Son and Holy Ghost are the same, and irreligiously take the Three Names of one and the same Reality and Person, we justly proscribe from the Church, because they suppose the illimitable and impassible Father to be limitable withal and passible through His becoming man: for such are they whom Romans call Patripassians, and we Sabellians113    See vol. i. of this series, p. 295, note 1. In the reason which the Confession alleges against that heretical doctrine it is almost implied that the divine nature of the Son suffered on the Cross. They would naturally fall into this notion directly they gave up our Lord’s absolute divinity. It would naturally follow that our Lord had no human soul, but that His pre-existent nature stood in the place of it:—also that His Mediatorship was no peculiarity of His Incarnation. vid. §23, note 2. §27, Anath. 12, note.. For we acknowledge that the Father who sent, remained in the peculiar state of His unchangeable Godhead, and that Christ who was sent fulfilled the economy of the Incarnation.

(7.) And at the same time those who irreverently say that the Son has been generated not by choice or will, thus encompassing God with a necessity which excludes choice and purpose, so that He begat the Son unwillingly, we account as most irreligious and alien to the Church; in that they have dared to define such things concerning God, beside the common notions concerning Him, nay, beside the purport of divinely inspired Scripture. For we, knowing that God is absolute and sovereign over Himself, have a religious judgment that He generated the Son voluntarily and freely; yet, as we have a reverent belief in the Son’s words concerning Himself (Prov. viii. 22), ‘The Lord created me a beginning of His ways for His works,’ we do not understand Him to have been originated like the creatures or works which through Him came to be. For it is irreligious and alien to the ecclesiastical faith, to compare the Creator with handiworks created by Him, and to think that He has the same manner of origination with the rest. For divine Scripture teaches us really and truly that the Only-begotten Son was generated sole and solely114    The Confession still insists upon the unscripturalness of the Catholic positions. On the main subject of this paragraph the θελήσει γεννηθὲν, cf. Orat. iii. 59, &c. The doctrine of the μονογενὲς has already partially come before us in de Decr. §§7–9. pp. 154 sq. Μόνως, not as the creatures. vid. p. 75, note 6.. Yet115    The following passage is in its very form an interpolation or appendix, while its doctrine bears distinctive characters of something higher than the old absolute separation between the Father and the Son. [Eusebius of Cæs. had] considered Them as two οὐσίαι, ὅμοιαι like, but not as ὁμοούσιοι; his very explanation of the word τέλειος was ‘independent’ and ‘distinct.’ Language then, such as that in the text, was the nearest assignable approach to the reception of the ὁμοούσιον; [and in fact, to] the doctrine of the περιχώρησις, of which supr. Orat. iii., in saying that the Son is in Himself, and both lives and exists like the Father, we do not on that account separate Him from the Father, imagining place and interval between their union in the way of bodies. For we believe that they are united with each other without mediation or distance116    De Decr. §8., and that they exist inseparable; all the Father embosoming the Son, and all the Son hanging and adhering to the Father, and alone resting on the Father’s breast continually117    De Decr. §26.. Believing then in the All-perfect Triad, the most Holy, that is, in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and calling the Father God, and the Son God, yet we confess in them, not two Gods, but one dignity of Godhead, and one exact harmony of dominion, the Father alone being Head over the whole universe wholly, and over the Son Himself, and the Son subordinated to the Father; but, excepting Him, ruling over all things after Him which through Himself have come to be, and granting the grace of the Holy Ghost unsparingly to the saints at the Father’s will. For that such is the account of the Divine Monarchy towards Christ, the sacred oracles have delivered to us.

Thus much, in addition to the faith before published in epitome, we have been compelled to draw forth at length, not in any officious display, but to clear away all unjust suspicion concerning our opinions, among those who are ignorant of our affairs: and that all in the West may know, both the audacity of the slanders of the heterodox, and as to the Orientals, their ecclesiastical mind in the Lord, to which the divinely inspired Scriptures bear witness without violence, where men are not perverse.

27. However they did not stand even to this; for again at Sirmium118    Sirmium [Mitrowitz on the Save] was a city of lower Pannonia, not far from the Danube, and was the great bulwark of the Illyrian provinces of the Empire. There Vetranio assumed the purple; and there Constantius was born. The frontier war caused it to be from time to time the Imperial residence. We hear of Constantius at Sirmium in the summer of 357. Ammian. xvi. 10. He also passed there the ensuing winter. ibid. xvii. 12. In October, 358, after the Sarmatian war, he entered Sirmium in triumph, and passed the winter there. xvii. 13 fin. and with a short absence in the spring, remained there till the end of May, 359. they met together119    [Cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. §7]. The leading person in this Council was Basil of Ancyra. Basil held a disputation with Photinus. Silvanus too of Tarsus now appears for the first time: while, according to Socrates, Mark of Arethusa drew up the Anathemas; the Confession used was the same as that sent to Constans, of the Council of Philippopolis, and the Macrostich. against Photinus120    S. Hilary treats their creed as a Catholic composition. de Syn. 39–63. Philastrius and Vigilius call the Council a meeting of ‘holy bishops’ and a ‘Catholic Council,’ de Hær. 65. in Eutych. v. init. What gave a character and weight to this Council was, that it met to set right a real evil, and was not a mere pretence with Arian objects. and there composed a faith again, not drawn out into such length, not so full in words; but subtracting the greater part and adding in its place, as if they had listened to the suggestions of others, they wrote as follows:—

We believe121    6th Confession, or 1st Sirmian, a.d. 351. in One God, the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of all things, ‘from whom all fatherhood in heaven and earth is named122    Eph. iii. 15.’

And in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, who before all the ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made, in heaven and on the earth, visible and invisible, being Word and Wisdom and True Light and Life, who in the last of days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin, and crucified and dead and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming at the consummation of the age, to judge quick and dead, and to render to every one according to his works; whose Kingdom being unceasing endures unto the infinite ages; for He shall sit on the right hand of the Father, not only in this age, but also in that which is to come.

And in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete; which, having promised to the Apostles to send forth after His ascension into heaven, to teach and to remind them of all things, He did send; through whom also are sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.

(1.) But those who say that the Son was from nothing or from other subsistence123    Vid. p. 77, sqq. and not from God, and that there was time or age when He was not, the Holy and Catholic Church regards as aliens.

(2.) Again we say, Whosoever says that the Father and the Son are two Gods, be he anathema124    This Anathema which has occurred in substance in the Macrostich, and again infr. Anath. 18 and 23. is a disclaimer of their in fact holding a supreme and a secondary God. In the Macrostich it is disclaimed upon a simple Arian basis. The Semi-Arians were more open to this imputation; Eusebius, as we have seen above, distinctly calling our Lord a second and another God. vid. p. 75, note 7. It will be observed that this Anathema contradicts the one which immediately follows, and the 11th, in which Christ is called God; except, on the one hand the Father and Son are One God, which was the Catholic doctrine, or, on the other, the Son is God in name only, which was the pure Arian or Anomœan..

(3.) And whosoever, saying that Christ is God, before ages Son of God, does not confess that He has subserved the Father for the framing of the universe, be he anathema125    The language of Catholics and heretics is very much the same on this point of the Son’s ministration, with this essential difference of sense, that Catholic writers mean a ministration internal to the divine substance and an instrument connatural with the Father, and Arius meant an external and created medium of operation. Thus S. Clement calls our Lord ‘the All-harmonious Instrument (ὄργανον) of God.’ Protrept. p. 6; Eusebius ‘an animated and living instrument (ὄργανον ἔμψυχον), nay, rather divine and vivific of every substance and nature.’ Demonstr. iv. 4. S. Basil, on the other hand, insists that the Arians reduced our Lord to ‘an inanimate instrument,’ ὀργανον ἄψυχον, though they called Him ὑπουργὸν τελειότατον, most perfect minister or underworker. adv. Eunom. ii. 21. Elsewhere he makes them say, ‘the nature of a cause is one, and the nature of an instrument, ὀργάνου, another;….foreign then in nature is the Son from the Father, since such is an instrument from a workman.’ De Sp. S. n. 6 fin. vid. also n. 4 fin. 19, and 20. And so S. Gregory, ‘The Father signifies, the Word accomplishes, not servilely, nor ignorantly, but with knowledge and sovereignty, and to speak more suitably, in a father’s way, πατρικῶς. Orat. 30. 11. Cf. S. Cyril, in Joann. p. 48. Explanations such as these secure for the Catholic writers some freedom in their modes of speaking, e.g. Athan. speaks of the Son, as ‘enjoined and ministering,’ προσταττόμενος, καὶ ὑπουργῶν, Orat. ii. §22. Thus S. Irenæus speaks of the Father being well-pleased and commanding, κελεύοντος, and the Son doing and framing. Hær. iv. 75. S. Basil too, in the same treatise in which are some of the foregoing protests, speaks of ‘the Lord ordering,’ προστάσσοντα, and the word framing.’ de Sp. S. n. 38, S. Cyril of Jerusalem, of ‘Him who bids, ἐντελλεται, bidding to one who is present with Him,’ Cat. xi. 16. vid. also ὑπηρετῶν τῇ βουλῇ, Justin. Tryph. 126, and ὑπουργόν, Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 10. ἑξυπηρετῶν θελήματι, Clem. Strom. vii. p. 832..

(4.) Whosoever presumes to say that the Ingenerate, or a part of Him, was born of Mary, be he anathema.

(5.) Whosoever says that according to foreknowledge126    §26, n. 7. the Son is before Mary and not that, generated from the Father before ages, He was with God, and that through Him all things were originated, be he anathema.

(6.) Whosoever shall pretend that the essence of God is dilated or contracted127    Orat. iv. §13., be he anathema.

(7.) Whosoever shall say that the essence of God being dilated made the Son, or shall name the dilation of His essence Son, be he anathema.

(8.) Whosoever calls the Son of God the mental or pronounced Word128    §26, n. 4., be he anathema.

(9.) Whosoever says that the Son from Mary is man only, be he anathema.

(10.) Whosoever, speaking of Him who is from Mary God and man, thereby means God the Ingenerate129    §26 (2) n. (2)., be he anathema.

(11.) Whosoever shall explain ‘I God the First and I the Last, and besides Me there is no God,’ (Is. xliv. 6), which is said for the denial of idols and of gods that are not, to the denial of the Only-begotten, before ages God, as Jews do, be he anathema.

(12.) Whosoever hearing ‘The Word was made flesh,’ (John i. 14), shall consider that the Word has changed into flesh, or shall say that He has undergone alteration by taking flesh, be he anathema130    The 12th and 13th Anathemas are intended to meet the charge which is alluded to §26 (6), note 2, that Arianism involved the doctrine that our Lord’s divine nature suffered. [But see Gwatkin, p. 147.] Athanasius brings this accusation against them distinctly in his work against Apollinaris. contr. Apoll. i. 15. vid. also Ambros. de Fide, iii. 31. Salig in his de Eutychianismo ant. Eutychen takes notice of none of the passages in the text..

(13.) Whosoever hearing the Only-begotten Son of God to have been crucified, shall say that His Godhead has undergone corruption, or passion. or alteration, or diminution, or destruction, be he anathema.

(14.) Whosoever shall say that ‘Let Us make man’ (Gen. i. 26), was not said by the Father to the Son, but by God to Himself, be he anathema131    This Anathema is directed against Marcellus, who held the very opinion which it denounces, that the Almighty spake with Himself. Euseb. Eccles. Theol. ii. 15. The Jews said that Almighty God spoke to the Angels. Basil. Hexaem. fin. Others that the plural was used as authorities on earth use it in way of dignity. Theod. in Gen. 19. As to the Catholic Fathers, as is well known, they interpreted the text in the sense here given. See Petav..

(15.) Whosoever shall say that Abraham saw, not the Son, but the Ingenerate God or part of Him, be he anathema132    This again, in spite of the wording. which is directed against the Catholic doctrine [or Marcellus?] is a Catholic interpretation. vid. [besides Philo de Somniis. i. 12.) Justin. Tryph. 56. and 126. Iren. Hær. iv. 10. n. 1. Tertull. de carn. Christ. 6. adv. Marc. iii. 9. adv. Prax. 16. Novat. de Trin. 18. Origen. in Gen. Hom. iv. 5. Cyprian. adv. Jud. ii. 5. Antioch. Syn. contr. Paul. apud Routh. Rell. t. 2. p. 469. Athan. Orat. ii. 13. Epiph. Ancor. 29 and 39. Hær. 71. 5. Chrysost. in Gen. Hom. 41. 7. These references are principally from Petavius; also from Dorscheus, who has written an elaborate commentary on this Council, &c. The Catholic doctrine is that the Son has condescended to become visible by means of material appearances. Augustine seems to have been the first who changed the mode of viewing the texts in question, and considered the divine appearance, not God the Son, but a created Angel. Vid. de Trin. ii. passim. Jansenius considers that he did so from a suggestion of S. Ambrose, that the hitherto received view had been the origo hæresis Arianæ, vid. his Augustinus, lib. proœm. c. 12. t. 2. p. 12..

(16.) Whosoever shall say that with Jacob, not the Son as man, but the Ingenerate God or part of Him, has wrestled, be he anathema133    This and the following Canon are Catholic in their main doctrine, and might be illustrated, if necessary, as the foregoing..

(17.) Whosoever shall explain, ‘The Lord rained fire from the Lord’ (Gen. xix. 24), not of the Father and the Son, and says that He rained from Himself, be he anathema. For the Son, being Lord, rained from the Father Who is Lord.

(18.) Whosoever, hearing that the Father is Lord and the Son Lord and the Father and Son Lord, for there is Lord from Lord, says there are two Gods, be he anathema. For we do not place the Son in the Father’s Order, but as subordinate to the Father; for He did not descend upon Sodom without the Father’s will, nor did He rain from Himself, but from the Lord, that is, the Father authorising it. Nor is He of Himself set down on the right hand, but He hears the Father saying, ‘Sit Thou on My right hand’ (Ps. cx. 1).

(19.) Whosoever says that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are one Person, be he anathema.

(20.) Whosoever, speaking of the Holy Ghost as Paraclete, shall mean the Ingenerate God, be he anathema134    It was an expedient of the later Macedonians to deny that the Holy Spirit was God because it was not usual to call Him Ingenerate. They asked the Catholics whether the Holy Spirit was Ingenerate, generate, or created, for into these three they divided all things. vid. Basil in Sabell. et Ar. Hom. xxiv. 6. But, as the Arians had first made the alternative only between Ingenerate and created, and Athan. de Decr. §28. shews that generate is a third idea really distinct from one and the other, so S. Greg. Naz. adds. processive, ἐκπορευτὸν, as an intermediate idea, contrasted with Ingenerate, yet distinct from generate. Orat. xxxi. 8. In other words, Ingenerate means, not only not generate, but not from any origin. vid. August. de Trin. xv. 26..

(21.) Whosoever shall deny, what the Lord taught us, that the Paraclete is other than the Son, for He hath said, ‘And another Paraclete shall the Father send to you, whom I will ask,’ (John xiv. 16) be he anathema.

(22.) Whosoever shall say that the Holy Ghost is part of the Father or of the Son135    Supra (16). be he anathema.

(23.) Whosoever shall say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are three Gods, be he anathema.

(24.) Whosoever shall say that the Son of God at the will of God has come to be, as one of the works, be he anathema.

(25.) Whosoever shall say that the Son has been generated, the Father not wishing it136    §26 (7)., be he anathema. For not by compulsion, led by physical necessity, did the Father, as He wished not, generate the Son, but He at once willed, and, after generating Him from Himself apart from time and passion, manifested Him.

(26.) Whosoever shall say that the Son is without beginning and ingenerate, as if speaking of two unbegun and two ingenerate, and making two Gods, be he anathema. For the Son is the Head, namely the beginning of all: and God is the Head, namely the beginning of Christ; for thus to one unbegun beginning of the universe do we religiously refer all things through the Son.

(27.) And in accurate delineation of the idea of Christianity we say this again; Whosoever shall not say that Christ is God, Son of God, as being before ages, and having subserved the Father in the framing of the Universe, but that from the time that He was born of Mary, from thence He was called Christ and Son, and took an origin of being God, be he anathema.

28. Casting aside the whole of this, as if they had discovered something better, they propound another faith, and write at Sirmium in Latin what is here translated into Greek137    [The ‘blasphemia’ of Potamius, bishop of Lisbon; see Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2), Hil. de Syn. 11; Socr. ii. 30]..

Whereas138    7th Confession, or 2nd Sirmian, a.d. 357. it seemed good that there should be some discussion concerning faith, all points were carefully investigated and discussed at Sirmium in the presence of Valens, and Ursacius, and Germinius, and the rest.

It is held for certain that there is one God, the Father Almighty, as also is preached in all the world.

And His One Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, generated from Him before the ages; and that we may not speak of two Gods, since the Lord Himself has said, ‘I go to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God’ (John xx. 17). On this account He is God of all, as also the Apostle taught: ‘Is He God of the Jews only, is He not also of the Gentiles? yea of the Gentiles also: since there is one God who shall justify the circumcision from faith, and the uncircumcision through faith’ (Rom. iii. 29, 30); and every thing else agrees, and has no ambiguity.

But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning what is called in Latin ‘Substantia,’ but in Greek ‘Usia,’ that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to ‘Coessential,’ or what is called, ‘Like-in-Essence,’ there ought to be no mention of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture nothing is written about them, and that they are above men’s knowledge and above men’s understanding; and because no one can declare the Son’s generation, as it is written, ‘Who shall declare His generation’ (Is. liii. 8)? for it is plain that the Father only knows how He generated the Son, and again the Son how He has been generated by the Father. And to none can it be a question that the Father is greater: for no one can doubt that the Father is greater in honour and dignity and Godhead, and in the very name of Father, the Son Himself testifying, ‘The Father that sent Me is greater than I’ (John x. 29; xiv. 28). And no one is ignorant, that it is Catholic doctrine, that there are two Persons of Father and Son, and that the Father is greater, and the Son subordinated to the Father together with all things which the Father has subordinated to Him, and that the Father has no beginning, and is invisible, and immortal, and impassible; but that the Son has been generated from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, and that His origin, as aforesaid, no one knows, but the Father only. And that the Son Himself and our Lord and God, took flesh, that is, a body, that is, man, from Mary the Virgin, as the Angel preached beforehand; and as all the Scriptures teach, and especially the Apostle himself, the doctor of the Gentiles, Christ took man of Mary the Virgin, through which He has suffered. And the whole faith is summed up139    κεφάλαιον. vid. de Decr. §31. p. 56; Orat. i. §34; Epiph. Hær. 73. 11., and secured in this, that a Trinity should ever be preserved, as we read in the Gospel, ‘Go ye and baptize all the nations in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost’ (Matt. xxviii. 19). And entire and perfect is the number of the Trinity; but the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, sent forth through the Son, came according to the promise, that He might teach and sanctify the Apostles and all believers140    It will be observed that this Confession; 1. by denying ‘two Gods,’ and declaring that the One God is the God of Christ, implies that our Lord is not God. 2. It says that the word ‘substance,’ and its compounds, ought not to be used as being unscriptural, mysterious, and leading to disturbance; 3. it holds that the Father is greater than the Son ‘in honour, dignity, and godhead;’ 4. that the Son is subordinate to the Father with all other things; 5. that it is the Father’s characteristic to be invisible and impassible. They also say that our Lord, hominem suscepisse per quem compassus est, a word which Phœbadius condemns in his remarks on this Confession; where, by the way, he uses the word ‘spiritus’ in the sense of Hilary and the Ante-Nicene Fathers, in a connection which at once explains the obscure words of the supposititious Sardican Confession (vid. above, §9, note 3), and turns them into another evidence of this additional heresy involved in Arianism. ‘Impassibilis Deus,’says Phœbadius, ‘quia Deus Spiritus…non ergo passibilis Dei Spiritus, licet in homine suo passus.’ Now the Sardican Confession is thought ignorant, as well as unauthoritative, e.g. by Natalis Alex. Sæc. 4. Diss. 29, because it imputes to Valens and Ursacius the following belief, which he supposes to be Patripassianism, but which exactly answers to this aspect and representation of Arianism: ὅτι ὁ λόγος καὶ ὅτι τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐσταυρώθη καὶ ἐσφάγη καὶ ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη. Theod. H. E. ii. 6. p. 844..

29. After drawing up this, and then becoming dissatisfied, they composed the faith which to their shame they paraded with ‘the Consulate.’ And, as is their wont, condemning this also, they caused Martinian the notary to seize it from the parties who had the copies of it141    Socrates [wrongly] connects this with the ‘blasphemia.’ Hist. ii. 30.. And having got the Emperor Constantius to put forth an edict against it, they form another dogma afresh, and with the addition of certain expressions, according to their wont, they write thus in Isauria.

We decline142    9th Confession, at Seleucia a.d. 359. not to bring forward the authentic faith published at the Dedication at Antioch143    The Semi-Arian majority in the Council had just before been confirming the Creed of the Dedication; hence this beginning. vid. supr. §11. The present creed, as if to propitiate the Semi-Arian majority, adds an anathema upon the Anomœan as well as on the Homoüsion and Homœusion.; though certainly our fathers at the time met together for a particular subject under investigation. But since ‘Coessential’ and ‘Like-in-essence,’ have troubled many persons in times past and up to this day, and since moreover some are said recently to have devised the Son’s ‘Unlikeness’ to the Father, on their account we reject ‘Coessential’ and ‘Like-in-essence,’ as alien to the Scriptures, but ‘Unlike’ we anathematize, and account all who profess it as aliens from the Church. And we distinctly confess the ‘Likeness’ of the Son to the Father, according to the Apostle, who says of the Son, ‘Who is the Image of the Invisible God’ (Col. i. 15).

And we confess and believe in one God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.

And we believe also in our Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, generated from Him impassibly before all the ages, God the Word, God from God, Only-begotten, light, life, truth, wisdom, power, through whom all things were made, in the heavens and on the earth, whether visible or invisible. He, as we believe, at the end of the world, for the abolishment of sin, took flesh of the Holy Virgin, and was made man, and suffered for our sins, and rose again, and was taken up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming again in glory, to judge quick and dead.

We believe also in the Holy Ghost, which our Saviour and Lord named Paraclete, having promised to send Him to the disciples after His own departure, as He did send; through whom He sanctifieth those in the Church who believe, and are baptized in the Name of Father and Son and Holy Ghost.

But those who preach aught beside this faith the Catholic Church regards as aliens. And that to this faith that is equivalent which was published lately at Sirmium, under sanction of his religiousness the Emperor, is plain to all who read it.

30. Having written thus in Isauria, they went up to Constantinople144    These two sections seem to have been inserted by Athan. after his Letter was finished, and contain later occurrences in the history of Ariminum, than were contemplated when he wrote supr. §11. vid. note 7 in loc. It should be added that at this Council Ulfilas the Apostle of the Goths, who had hitherto followed the Council of Nicæa, conformed, and thus became the means of spreading through his countrymen the Creed of Ariminum., and there, as if dissatisfied, they changed it, as is their wont, and with some small additions against using even ‘Subsistence’ of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, they transmitted it to those at Ariminum, and compelled even those in the said parts to subscribe, and those who contradicted them they got banished by Constantius. And it runs thus:—

We believe145    10th Confession at Niké and Constantinople, a.d. 359, 360. in One God, Father Almighty, from whom are all things;

And in the Only-begotten Son of God, begotten from God before all ages and before every beginning, by whom all things were made, visible and invisible, and begotten as only-begotten, only from the Father only146    μόνος ἐκ μόνου. This phrase may be considered a symptom of Anomœan influence; μόνος παρά, or ὑπό, μόνον being one special formula adopted by Eunomius, explanatory of μονογενὴς, in accordance with the original Arian theory, mentioned de Decr. §7. supr. p. 154, that the Son was the one instrument of creation. Eunomius said that He alone was created by the Father alone; all other things being created by the Father, not alone, but through Him whom alone He had first created. vid. Cyril. Thesaur. 25. Basil contr. Eunom. ii. 21. Acacius ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. p. 839., God from God, like to the Father that begat Him according to the Scriptures; whose origin no one knows, except the Father alone who begat Him. He as we acknowledge, the Only-begotten Son of God, the Father sending Him, came hither from the heavens, as it is written, for the undoing of sin and death, and was born of the Holy Ghost, of Mary the Virgin according to the flesh, as it is written, and convened with the disciples, and having fulfilled the whole Economy according to the Father’s will, was crucified and dead and buried and descended to the parts below the earth; at whom hades itself shuddered: who also rose from the dead on the third day, and abode with the disciples, and, forty days being fulfilled, was taken up into the heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, to come in the last day of the resurrection in the Father’s glory, that He may render to every man according to his works.

And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten Son of God Himself, Christ, our Lord and God, promised to send to the race of man, as Paraclete, as it is written, ‘the Spirit of truth’ (Joh. xvi. 13), which He sent unto them when He had ascended into the heavens.

But the name of ‘Essence,’ which was set down by the Fathers in simplicity, and, being unknown by the people, caused offence, because the Scriptures contain it not, it has seemed good to abolish, and for the future to make no mention of it at all; since the divine Scriptures have made no mention of the Essence of Father and Son. For neither ought Subsistence to be named concerning Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But, we say that the Son is Like the Father, as the divine Scriptures say and teach; and all the heresies, both those which have been afore condemned already, and whatever are of modern date, being contrary to this published statement, be they anathema147    Here as before, instead of speaking of Arianism, the Confession anathematizes all heresies, vid. supr. §23, n. 4..

31. However, they did not stand even to this: for coming down from Constantinople to Antioch, they were dissatisfied that they had written at all that the Son was ‘Like the Father, as the Scriptures say;’ and putting their ideas upon paper148    11th Confession at Antioch, a.d. 361. [Socr. ii. 45. The occasion was the installation of Euzoius in place of Meletius.], they began reverting to their first doctrines, and said that ‘the Son is altogether unlike the Father,’ and that the ‘Son is in no manner like the Father,’ and so much did they change, as to admit those who spoke the Arian doctrine nakedly and to deliver to them the Churches with licence to bring forward the words of blasphemy with impunity149    Acacius, Eudoxius, and the rest, after ratifying at Constantinople the Creed framed at Niké and subscribed at Ariminum, appear next at Antioch a year and a half later, when they throw off the mask, and, avowing the Anomœan Creed, ‘revert,’ as S. Athanasius says, ‘to their first doctrines,’ i.e. those with which Arius started.. Because then of the extreme shamelessness of their blasphemy they were called by all Anomœans, having also the name of Exucontian150    From ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, ‘out of nothing,’ one of the original Arian positions concerning the Son. Theodoret says that they were also called Hexakionitæ, from the nature of their place of meeting, Hær. iv. 3. and Du Cange confirms it so far as to show that there was a place or quarter of Constantinople Hexakionium. [Cf. Soph. Lex. s.v.], and the heretical Constantius for the patron of their irreligion, who persisting up to the end in irreligion, and on the point of death, thought good to be baptized151    This passage shews that Athanasius did not insert these sections till two years after the composition of the work itself; for Constantine died a.d. 361.; not however by religious men, but by Euzoius152    Euzoius, now Arian Bishop of Antioch, was excommunicated with Arius in Egypt and at Nicæa, and was restored with him to the Church at the Council of Jerusalem., who for his Arianism had been deposed, not once, but often, both when he was a deacon, and when he was in the see of Antioch.

32. The forementioned parties then had proceeded thus far, when they were stopped and deposed. But well I know, not even under these circumstances will they stop, as many as have now dissembled,153    ὑπεκρίναντο. Hypocrites is almost a title of the Arians (with an apparent allusion to 1 Tim. iv. 2. vid. Socr. i. p. 5, Orat. i. §8). but they will always be making parties against the truth, until they return to themselves and say, ‘Let us rise and go to our fathers, and we will say unto them, We anathematize the Arian heresy, and we acknowledge the Nicene Council;’ for against this is their quarrel. Who then, with ever so little understanding, will bear them any longer? who, on hearing in every Council some things taken away and others added, but perceives that their mind is shifty and treacherous against Christ? who on seeing them embodying to so great a length both their professions of faith, and their own exculpation, but sees that they are giving sentence against themselves, and studiously writing much which may be likely by their officious display and abundance of words to seduce the simple and hide what they are in point of heresy? But as the heathen, as the Lord said, using vain words in their prayers (Mat. vi. 7), are nothing profited; so they too, after all this outpouring, were not able to quench the judgment pronounced against the Arian heresy, but were convicted and deposed instead; and rightly; for which of their formularies is to be accepted by the hearer? or with what confidence shall they be catechists to those who come to them? for if they all have one and the same meaning, what is the need of many? But if need has arisen of so many, it follows that each by itself is deficient, not complete; and they establish this point better than we can, by their innovating on them all and remaking them. And the number of their Councils, and the difference of their statements is a proof that those who were present at them, while at variance with the Nicene, are yet too feeble to harm the Truth.

15 Ἄρειος καὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ φρονήσαντες καὶ λέγοντες «ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων πεποίηκε τὸν υἱὸν ὁ θεὸς καὶ κέκληκεν ἑαυτῷ υἱόν, καὶ ἓν τῶν κτισμάτων ἐστὶν ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, καὶ ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν, τρεπτὸς δέ ἐστι δυνάμενος, ὅτε βούλεται, τραπῆναι» ἐξεβλήθησαν τῆς ἐκκλησίας παρὰ τοῦ μακαρίτου Ἀλεξάνδρου. ἀλλ' ἐκβληθεὶς καὶ ἐπιτριβεὶς Ἄρειος παρὰ τῶν περὶ Εὐσέβιον συνέθηκεν ἑαυτοῦ τὴν αἵρεσιν ἐν χάρτῃ καὶ ὡς ἐν «Θαλίᾳ» ζηλώσας οὐδένα τῶν φρονίμων, ἀλλὰ τὸν Αἰγύπτιον Σωσάτην ἐν τῷ ἤθει καὶ τῇ ἐκλύσει τοῦ μέλους γράφει μὲν πολλά, ἀπὸ μέρους δέ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ ταῦτα· Βλασφημίαι Ἀρείου Αὐτὸς γοῦν ὁ θεὸς καθό ἐστιν ἄρρητος ἅπασιν ὑπάρχει. ἴσον οὐδὲ ὅμοιον, οὐχ ὁμόδοξον ἔχει μόνος οὗτος. ἀγέννητον δὲ αὐτόν φαμεν διὰ τὸν τὴν φύσιν γεννητόν· τοῦτον ἄναρχον ἀνυμνοῦμεν διὰ τὸν ἀρχὴν ἔχοντα, ἀίδιον δὲ αὐτὸν σέβομεν διὰ τὸν ἐν χρόνοις γεγαότα. ἀρχὴν τὸν υἱὸν ἔθηκε τῶν γενητῶν ὁ ἄναρχος καὶ ἤνεγκεν εἰς υἱὸν ἑαυτῷ τόνδε τεκνοποιήσας, ἴδιον οὐδὲν ἔχει τοῦ θεοῦ καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἰδιότητος, οὐδὲ γάρ ἐστιν ἴσος, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ ὁμοούσιος αὐτῷ. σοφὸς δέ ἐστιν ὁ θεός, ὅτι τῆς σοφίας διδάσκαλος αὐτός. ἱκανὴ δὲ ἀπόδειξις ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀόρατος ἅπασι, τοῖς τε διὰ υἱοῦ καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ υἱῷ ἀόρατος ὁ αὐτός. ῥητῶς δὲ λέξω, πῶς τῷ υἱῷ ὁρᾶται ὁ ἀόρατος· τῇ δυνάμει ᾗ δύναται ὁ θεὸς ἰδεῖν· ἰδίοις τε μέτροις ὑπομένει ὁ υἱὸς ἰδεῖν τὸν πατέρα, ὡς θέμις ἐστίν. ἤγουν τριάς ἐστι δόξαις οὐχ ὁμοίαις, ἀνεπίμικτοι ἑαυταῖς εἰσιν αἱ ὑποστάσεις αὐτῶν, μία τῆς μιᾶς ἐνδοξοτέρα δόξαις ἐπ' ἄπειρον. ξένος τοῦ υἱοῦ κατ' οὐσίαν ὁ πατήρ, ὅτι ἄναρχος ὑπάρχει. σύνες ὅτι ἡ μονὰς ἦν, ἡ δυὰς δὲ οὐκ ἦν, πρὶν ὑπάρξῃ. αὐτίκα γοῦν υἱοῦ μὴ ὄντος ὁ πατὴρ θεός ἐστι. λοιπὸν ὁ υἱὸς οὐκ ὢν (ὑπῆρξε δὲ θελήσει πατρῴᾳ) μονογενὴς θεός ἐστι καὶ ἑκατέρων ἀλλότριος οὗτος. ἡ σοφία σοφία ὑπῆρξε σοφοῦ θεοῦ θελήσει. ἐπινοεῖται γοῦν μυρίαις ὅσαις ἐπινοίαις πνεῦμα, δύναμις, σοφία, δόξα θεοῦ, ἀλήθειά τε καὶ εἰκὼν καὶ λόγος οὗτος. σύνες ὅτι καὶ ἀπαύγασμα καὶ φῶς ἐπινοεῖται. ἴσον μὲν τοῦ υἱοῦ γεννᾶν δυνατός ἐστιν ὁ κρείττων, διαφορώτερον δὲ ἢ κρείττονα ἢ μείζονα οὐχί. θεοῦ θελήσει ὁ υἱὸς ἡλίκος καὶ ὅσος ἐστίν, ἐξ ὅτε καὶ ἀφ' οὗ καὶ ἀπὸ τότε ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπέστη, ἰσχυρὸς θεὸς ὢν τὸν κρείττονα ἐκ μέρους ὑμνεῖ. συνελόντι εἰπεῖν τῷ υἱῷ ὁ θεὸς ἄρρητος ὑπάρχει· ἔστι γὰρ ἑαυτῷ ὅ ἐστι τοῦτ' ἔστιν ἄλεκτος, ὥστε οὐδὲν τῶν λεγομένων κατά τε κατάληψιν συνίει ἐξειπεῖν ὁ υἱός. ἀδύνατα γὰρ αὐτῷ τὸν πατέρα τε ἐξιχνιάσει, ὅς ἐστιν ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ. αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ υἱὸς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ οὐσίαν οὐκ οἶδεν, υἱὸς γὰρ ὢν θελήσει πατρὸς ὑπῆρξεν ἀληθῶς. τίς γοῦν λόγος συγχωρεῖ τὸν ἐκ πατρὸς ὄντα αὐτὸν τὸν γεννήσαντα γνῶναι ἐν καταλήψει; δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τὸ ἀρχὴν ἔχον, τὸν ἄναρχον, ὡς ἔστιν, ἐμπερινοῆσαι ἢ ἐμπεριδράξασθαι οὐχ οἷόν τέ ἐστιν.

16 Ἃ δὲ καὶ δι' ἐπιστολῆς ἔγραψαν πρὸς τὸν μακαρίτην Ἀλέξανδρον τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ἔστι ταῦτα· Μακαρίῳ πάπᾳ καὶ ἐπισκόπῳ ἡμῶν Ἀλεξάνδρῳ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι καὶ οἱ διάκονοι ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν. Ἡ πίστις ἡμῶν ἡ ἐκ προγόνων, ἣν καὶ ἀπὸ σοῦ μεμαθήκαμεν, μακάριε πάπα, ἔστιν αὕτη· οἴδαμεν ἕνα θεόν, μόνον ἀγέννητον, μόνον ἀίδιον, μόνον ἄναρχον, μόνον ἀληθινόν, μόνον ἀθανασίαν ἔχοντα, μόνον σοφόν, μόνον ἀγαθόν, μόνον δυνάστην, πάντων κριτήν, διοικητήν, οἰκονόμον, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον, δίκαιον καὶ ἀγαθόν, νόμου καὶ προφητῶν καὶ καινῆς διαθήκης τοῦτον θεὸν γεννήσαντα υἱὸν μονογενῆ πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, «δι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας καὶ τὰ ὅλα πεποίηκε», γεννήσαντα δὲ οὐ δοκήσει, ἀλλὰ ἀληθείᾳ· ὑποστήσαντα ἰδίῳ θελήματι ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον κτίσμα τοῦ θεοῦ τέλειον, ἀλλ' οὐχ ὡς ἓν τῶν κτισμάτων· γέννημα, ἀλλ' οὐχ ὡς ἓν τῶν γεγεννημένων, οὐδ' ὡς Οὐαλεντῖνος προβολὴν τὸ γέννημα τοῦ πατρὸς ἐδογμάτισεν, οὐδ' ὡς Μανιχαῖος μέρος ὁμοούσιον τοῦ πατρὸς τὸ γέννημα εἰσηγήσατο, οὐδ' ὡς Σαβέλλιος τὴν μονάδα διαιρῶν υἱοπάτορα εἶπεν, οὐδ' ὡς Ἱέρακας λύχνον ἀπὸ λύχνου ἢ ὡς λαμπάδα εἰς δύο, οὐδὲ τὸν ὄντα πρότερον ὕστερον γεννηθέντα ἢ ἐπικτισθέντα εἰς υἱόν, ὡς καὶ σὺ αὐτός, μακάριε πάπα, κατὰ μέσην τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ ἐν συνεδρίῳ πλειστάκις τοὺς ταῦτα εἰσ ηγησαμένους ἀπηγόρευσας, ἀλλ' ὥς φαμεν θελήματι τοῦ θεοῦ πρὸ χρόνων καὶ πρὸ αἰώνων κτισθέντα καὶ τὸ ζῆν καὶ τὸ εἶναι παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς εἰληφότα καὶ τὰς δόξας, συνυποστήσαντος αὐτῷ τοῦ πατρός. οὐ γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ δοὺς αὐτῷ πάντων τὴν κληρονομίαν ἐστέρησεν ἑαυτὸν ὧν ἀγεννήτως ἔχει ἐν ἑαυτῷ· πηγὴ γάρ ἐστι πάντων. ὥστε τρεῖς εἰσιν ὑποστάσεις. καὶ ὁ μὲν θεὸς αἴτιος τῶν πάντων τυγχάνων ἔστιν ἄναρχος μονώτατος, ὁ δὲ υἱὸς ἀχρόνως γεννηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ πρὸ αἰώνων κτισθεὶς καὶ θεμελιωθεὶς οὐκ ἦν πρὸ τοῦ γεννηθῆναι, ἀλλὰ ἀχρόνως πρὸ πάντων γεννηθεὶς μόνος ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑπέστη. οὐδὲ γάρ ἐστιν ἀίδιος ἢ συναίδιος ἢ συναγέννητος τῷ πατρί, οὐδὲ ἅμα τῷ πατρὶ τὸ εἶναι ἔχει, ὥς τινες λέγουσι τὰ πρός τι δύο ἀγεννήτους ἀρχὰς εἰσηγούμενοι, ἀλλ' ὡς μονὰς καὶ ἀρχὴ πάντων, οὕτως ὁ θεὸς πρὸ πάντων ἐστί. διὸ καὶ πρὸ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἔστιν, ὡς καὶ παρὰ σοῦ μεμαθήκαμεν κατὰ μέσην τὴν ἐκκλησίαν κηρύξαντος. καθὸ οὖν παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ εἶναι ἔχει καὶ τὰς δόξας καὶ τὸ ζῆν καὶ τὰ πάντα αὐτῷ παρεδόθη, κατὰ τοῦτο ἀρχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐστιν ὁ θεός. ἄρχει γὰρ αὐτοῦ ὡς θεὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ πρὸ αὐτοῦ ὤν. εἰ δὲ τὸ «ἐξ αὐτοῦ» καὶ τὸ «ἐκ γαστρὸς» καὶ τὸ «ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἥκω» ὡς μέρος αὐτοῦ ὁμοουσίου καὶ ὡς προβολὴ ὑπό τινων νοεῖται, σύν θετος ἔσται ὁ πατὴρ καὶ διαιρετὸς καὶ τρεπτὸς καὶ σῶμα κατ' αὐτοὺς καὶ τὸ ὅσον ἐπ' αὐτοῖς τὰ ἀκόλουθα σώματι πάσχων ὁ ἀσώματος θεός.

17 Ταῦτα ἀπὸ μέρους ὧν ἤμεσαν ἐκ τῆς ἑαυτῶν αἱρετικῆς καρδίας οἱ περὶ Ἄρειον ἐστί· πρὸ δὲ τοῦ γενέσθαι τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ σύνοδον ἔγραψαν καὶ οἱ περὶ Εὐσέβιον Νάρ κισσόν τε καὶ Πατρόφιλον καὶ Μάριν Παυλῖνόν τε καὶ Θεόδοτον καὶ Ἀθανάσιον τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρβῶν τὰ ὅμοια αὐτοῖς. καὶ ὁ μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς Νικομηδείας Εὐσέβιος κατὰ περιττὸν ἔγραψεν Ἀρείῳ ὅτι «καλῶς φρονῶν εὔχου πάντας οὕτως φρονεῖν· παντὶ γὰρ» δῆλόν ἐστιν ὅτι τὸ πεποιημένον οὐκ ἦν πρὶν γενέσθαι. τὸ γενόμενον δὲ ἀρχὴν ἔχει τοῦ «εἶναι»· ὁ δὲ ἀπὸ Καισαρείας τῆς Παλαιστίνης Εὐσέβιος γράφων πρὸς Εὐφρατίωνα τὸν ἐπίσκοπον οὐκ ἐφοβήθη φανερῶς εἰπεῖν ὅτι «ὁ Χριστὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθινὸς θεός». καὶ Ἀθανάσιος δὲ ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρβῶν ἔτι γυμνότερον ἀπεκάλυπτε τὴν αἵρεσιν ἕνα τῶν ἑκατὸν προβάτων λέγων εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ. γράφων γὰρ πρὸς Ἀλέξανδρον τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ἀπετόλμησεν οὕτως εἰπεῖν· «τί μέμφῃ τοῖς περὶ Ἄρειον, εἰ λέγουσιν· ἐξ οὐκ»ὄντων κτίσμα πεποίηται ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἓν τῶν πάντων ἐστίν; ἐν ἑκατὸν γὰρ προ «βάτοις παραβαλλομένων πάντων τῶν πεποιημένων εἷς ἐστι καὶ ὁ υἱὸς ἐξ αὐτῶν. εἰ μὲν»οὖν τὰ ἑκατὸν οὐκ ἔστι κτίσματα καὶ γενητὰ ἢ ἔνι πλέον τι τῶν ἑκατόν, δηλονότι μηδὲ «ὁ υἱὸς ἔστω κτίσμα καὶ εἷς τῶν πάντων. εἰ δὲ τὰ ἑκατὸν πάντα γενητὰ καὶ οὐδέν ἐστιν ἐκτὸς» τῶν ἑκατὸν πλὴν μόνου τοῦ θεοῦ, τί ἄτοπον λέγουσιν οἱ περὶ Ἄρειον, εἰ ἓν ἐν τοῖς ἑκατὸν «περιλαβόντες καὶ ἀριθμοῦντες τὸν Χριστὸν ἕνα τῶν πάντων αὐτὸν εἰρήκασι»; Γεώργιος δὲ ὁ νῦν ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ, πρεσβύτερος ὢν τότε τῆς Ἀλεξανδρείας καὶ ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ διατρίβων, πρὸς μὲν Ἀλέξανδρον τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ἔγραφεν ὅτι· «μὴ μέμφου τοῖς περὶ Ἄρειον,» εἰ λέγουσιν· ἦν ποτε, ὅτε οὐκ ἦν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. καὶ γὰρ ὁ Ἡσαίας υἱὸς γέγονεν Ἀμώς, «καὶ ὅμως ὁ μὲν Ἀμὼς ἦν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι τὸν Ἡσαίαν, ὁ δὲ Ἡσαίας οὐκ ἦν πρότερον, » ἀλλὰ μετὰ ταῦτα γέγονε. πρὸς δὲ τοὺς Ἀρειανοὺς ἔγραφε· «τί μέμφεσθε Ἀλεξάνδρῳ» τῷ πάπᾳ λέγοντι ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς τὸν υἱόν; καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὑμεῖς μὴ φοβηθῆτε εἰπεῖν καὶ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν υἱόν. εἰ γὰρ ὁ ἀπόστολος ἔγραψε· «τὰ δὲ πάντα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ», καὶ ἔστι δῆλον «ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων πεποιῆσθαι τὰ πάντα, ἔστι δὲ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς κτίσμα καὶ τῶν πεποιημένων εἷς. λεχ » θείη ἂν καὶ ὁ υἱὸς ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὕτως, ὥσπερ καὶ τὰ πάντα λέγεται ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ. ἐξ ἐκείνου γοῦν ἔμαθον οἱ τὰ Ἀρείου φρονοῦντες ὑποκρίνεσθαι τὴν λέξιν τὴν «ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ», καὶ λέγειν μὲν τὴν λέξιν, μὴ φρονεῖν δὲ καλῶς. αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Γεώργιος καθῃρέθη ὑπὸ Ἀλεξάν δρου καὶ δι' ἄλλα μέν, ὅτι δὲ καὶ ἀσεβὴς ἐφάνη· πρεσβύτερος γὰρ ἦν αὐτός, καθὰ προ είρηται.

18 Καὶ ὅλως ἔγραφον οὗτοι τοιαῦτα ὡς ἕκαστον ἐρίζειν καὶ φιλοτιμεῖσθαι, τίς πλέον αὐξήσει τὴν ἀσέβειαν τῆς αἱρέσεως καὶ μᾶλλον αὐτὴν δείξει γυμνότερον. καὶ τὰς μὲν ἐπιστολὰς αὐτῶν οὐκ ἔσχον ἐν ἑτοίμῳ, ὥστε καὶ ἀποστεῖλαι, εἰ δ' οὖν, καὶ ἀντίγραφα καὶ αὐτῶν ὑμῖν ἔπεμψα ἄν, τοῦ δὲ κυρίου θέλοντος, ἐὰν εὐπορήσω καὶ τοῦτο ποιήσω. καὶ Ἀστέριος δέ τις ἀπὸ Καππαδοκίας, πολυκέφαλος σοφιστής, εἷς ὢν τῶν περὶ Εὐσέβιον, ἐπειδὴ θύσας ἐν τῷ προτέρῳ διωγμῷ τῷ κατὰ τὸν πάππον Κωνσταντίου οὐκ ἠδύνατο παρ' αὐτῶν εἰς κλῆρον προαχθῆναι, ποιεῖ μετὰ γνώμης τῶν περὶ Εὐσέβιον συνταγμάτιον, ὁποῖον μὲν ἤθελον αὐτοί, ἴσον δὲ τῷ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ τολμήματι. ἐν γὰρ τούτῳ τὴν ἀκρίδα καὶ τὴν κάμπην τῷ Χριστῷ συγκρίνας, μᾶλλον δὲ προτιμήσας αὐτοῦ, καὶ λέγων ἄλλην εἶναι παρὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ἐν τῷ θεῷ σοφίαν τὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τοῦ κόσμου δημι ουργικὴν περιήρχετο τὰς ἐν τῇ Συρίᾳ καὶ τὰς ἄλλας ἐκκλησίας κατὰ σύστασιν τῶν περὶ Εὐσέβιον, ἵνα ἅπαξ ἀρνεῖσθαι μελετήσας οὕτω καὶ νῦν θρασύνηται κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας. ἐπέβαινεν οὖν εἰς τοὺς μὴ ἐξὸν αὐτῷ τόπους ὁ πάντα τολμηρός, καὶ εἰς τὸν τῶν κληρικῶν τόπον καθεζόμενος ἀνεγίνωσκε δημοσίᾳ τὸ συνταγμάτιον, καίτοι τῶν ἄλλων δυσανασχε τούντων ἐπ' αὐτῷ. καὶ τὸ μὲν συνταγμάτιον διὰ πολλῶν ἐστι γεγραμμένον, μέρη δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐστι ταῦτα· «οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος Χριστὸν κηρύσσειν τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτοῦ» δύναμιν ἢ τὴν σοφίαν αὐτοῦ, τουτέστι τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ δίχα τῆς προσθήκης «δύναμιν» θεοῦ καὶ θεοῦ σοφίαν, ἄλλην μὲν εἶναι τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ δύναμιν, τὴν ἔμφυτον «αὐτῷ καὶ συνυπάρχουσαν αὐτῷ ἀγενήτως κηρύσσων, γεννητικὴν μὲν οὖσαν, δηλονότι «τοῦ Χριστοῦ, δημιουργικὴν δὲ τοῦ παντὸς κόσμου. περὶ ἧς ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους » ἐπιστολῇ διδάσκων ἔλεγε· «τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου τοῖς ποιήμασι νοούμενα καθορᾶται ἥ τε ἀίδιος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ θειότης». ὥσπερ γὰρ τὴν εἰρημένην ἐν «ταυθοῖ θεότητα οὐκ ἄν τις φαίη Χριστὸν εἶναι, ἀλλ' αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν τὸν πατέρα, οὕτως, οἶμαι, καὶ ἡ ἀίδιος αὐτοῦ δύναμις οὐχ ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, ἀλλ' ὁ γεννήσας ὑπάρχει πατήρ. ἄλλην δὲ δύναμιν καὶ σοφίαν διδάσκει θεοῦ τὴν διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ δεικνυμένην δηλονότι καὶ διὰ τῶν ἔργων αὐτῶν τῆς διακονίας αὐτοῦ γνωριζομένην. καὶ πάλιν· καίτοιγε ἡ μὲν ἀίδιος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ σοφία, ἣν ἄναρχόν τε καὶ ἀγέννητον οἱ τῆς ἀληθείας ἀποφαίνονται λογισμοί, μία ἂν εἴη δήπουθεν καὶ ἡ αὐτή, πολλαὶ δὲ αἱ καθ' ἕκαστον ὑπ' αὐτοῦ κτισθεῖσαι, ὧν πρωτότοκος καὶ μονογενὴς ὁ Χριστός· πᾶσαί γε μὴν ὁμοίως εἰς τὸν κεκτημένον ἀνήρτηνται καὶ πᾶσαι αἱ δυνάμεις αὐτοῦ τοῦ κτίσαντος καὶ χρωμένου καλοῦνται δικαίως. οἷον ὁ μὲν προφήτης «τὴν ἀκρίδα» δίκην τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἁμαρτημάτων θεήλατον γινομένην οὐ «δύναμιν» μόνον θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ καὶ «μεγάλην» φησὶν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ προσαγορεύεσθαι τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ δέ γε μακάριος ∆αυὶδ ἐν πλείοσι τῶν ψαλμῶν οὐκ ἀγγέλοις μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ «δυνάμεσιν» αἰνεῖν παρακελεύεται τὸν θεόν· καὶ πάσας γε ἐπὶ τὸν ὕμνον παρακαλῶν καὶ τὸ πλῆθος παρίστησι καὶ «λειτουργοὺς θεοῦ» καλεῖν οὐ παραιτεῖται καὶ ποιεῖν «αὐτοῦ τὸ θέλημα» διδάσκει.

19 Τοιαῦτα τολμήσας κατὰ τοῦ σωτῆρος οὐκ ἠρκέσθη, ἀλλὰ καὶ πλέον ἐπεκτείνει τὰς βλασφημίας αὐτοῦ λέγων ὅτι εἷς τῶν πάντων ἐστὶν ὁ υἱός· «πρῶτον γάρ ἐστι τῶν γενη τῶν καὶ εἷς τῶν νοητῶν φύσεών ἐστι, καὶ ὥσπερ ἥλιος ἐν τοῖς βλεπομένοις εἷς μὲν ἔστι τῶν φαινομένων, λάμπει δὲ παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ κατὰ πρόσταξιν τοῦ πεποιηκότος, οὕτως ὁ υἱὸς εἷς ὢν τῶν νοητῶν φύσεων φωτίζει καὶ λάμπει καὶ αὐτὸς πᾶσι τοῖς ἐν τῷ νοητῷ κόσμῳ». πάλιν τέ φησιν· «ἦν ποτε, ὅτε οὐκ ἦν» οὕτω γράφων· «καὶ πρὶν τῆς γενέσεως τοῦ υἱοῦ ὁ πατὴρ προυπάρχουσαν εἶχε τὴν τοῦ γεννᾶν ἐπιστήμην, ἐπεὶ καὶ ἰατρὸς πρὸ τοῦ ἰατρεύειν εἶχε τὴν τοῦ ἰατρεύειν ἐπιστήμην». καὶ πάλιν φησίν· «εὐεργετικῇ φιλοτιμίᾳ ἐκτίσθη ὁ υἱός, καὶ περιουσίᾳ δυνάμεως ἐποίησεν αὐτὸν ὁ πατήρ» καὶ πάλιν· «εἰ τὸ θέλειν τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ πάντων ἐφεξῆς τῶν ποιημάτων διελήλυθε, δηλονότι καὶ ὁ υἱὸς ποίημα ὢν βουλήσει γέγονε καὶ πεποίηται.» ταῦτα δὲ Ἀστέριος ἔγραφε μόνος, οἱ δὲ περὶ Εὐσέβιον ἐφρόνουν αὐτὰ κοινῇ μετ' αὐτοῦ.

20 Ταῦτά ἐστιν ὑπὲρ ὧν ἀγωνίζονται, διὰ ταῦτα μάχονται πρὸς τὴν ἀρχαίαν σύνοδον, ὅτι μὴ τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῶν ἔγραψαν οἱ συνελθόντες ἐν αὐτῇ, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἀνεθεμάτισαν τὴν ἀρειανὴν αἵρεσιν, ἣν ἐσπούδαζον οὗτοι συστῆσαι. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ Ἀστέριον τὸν θύσαντα, σοφιστὴν ὄντα, συνήγορον τῆς ἀσεβείας ἑαυτῶν προὐβάλλοντο, ἵνα μὴ φείδηται μήτε κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου φθέγγεσθαι μήτε τοὺς ἀκεραίους τῇ πιθανολογίᾳ πλανᾶν. καὶ ἠγνόησάν γε οἱ ἀμαθεῖς ὅτι καθ' ἑαυτῶν εἰργάζοντο τοῦτο. ἡ γὰρ δυσωδία τῆς εἰς τὰ εἴδωλα θυσίας τοῦ συνηγόρου ἔτι πλέον τὴν αἵρεσιν Χριστομάχον ἐδείκνυε. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ νῦν πάντα κινοῦσι καὶ θορυβοῦσι νομίζοντες ὅτι, κἂν πλείονας ἀποκτείνωσι καὶ συνόδους κατὰ μῆνα συγκροτήσωσι, παύσεταί ποτε ἡ κατὰ τῆς ἀρειανῆς αἱρέσεως ἀπόφασις. ἐοίκασι δὲ πάλιν ἀγνοεῖν ἢ εἰδέναι μέν, ἀποπροσποιεῖσθαι δέ, ὅτι καὶ πρὸ τῆς Νικαίας ἡ αἵρεσις ἦν βδελυκτή, ὅτε ταύτην Ἀρτεμᾶς κατεβάλλετο καὶ πρὸ αὐτοῦ τὸ τοῦ Καιάφα καὶ τὸ τῶν τότε Φαρισαίων συνέδριον. καὶ ἀεὶ δὲ τὸ χριστομάχον ἐργαστήριον βδελυκτόν ἐστι, καὶ οὐ παύ σεται τοῦ εἶναι μισητὸν ἐρασμίου ὄντος τοῦ κυριακοῦ ὀνόματος καὶ καμπτούσης πάσης τῆς κτίσεως τὰ γόνατα καὶ ἐξομολογουμένης «ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός.

21 Πλὴν ὅτι συνόδους συνεχεῖς κατὰ τῆς οἰκουμενικῆς ποιοῦντες οὐδέπω κεκμήκασι. μετὰ γὰρ τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ σύνοδον οἱ περὶ Εὐσέβιον καθῃρέθησαν. ἀλλὰ μετὰ χρόνον ἐπι βάντες ἀναισχύντως ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἤρξαντο τοῖς μὲν ἀντιλέγουσιν αὐτοῖς ἐπισκόποις ἐπιβουλεύειν, ἀντὶ δὲ τούτων τοὺς τῆς αἱρέσεως ἑαυτῶν καθιστάνειν εἰς τὰς ἐκκλησίας, ἵν' ὅτε βούλονται ποιήσωσι τὰς συνόδους ἔχοντες τοὺς συντρέχοντας αὐτοῖς, οὓς ἐπίτηδες εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο προεχειρίσαντο. συνέρχονται τοίνυν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ γράφουσι ταῦτα· Ἡ ἁγία σύνοδος ἡ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις θεοῦ χάριτι συναχθεῖσα τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ καὶ τοῖς κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν Αἴγυπτον καὶ Θηβαίδα καὶ Λιβύην καὶ Πεντάπολιν καὶ τοῖς κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐπισκόποις καὶ πρεσβυτέροις καὶ διακόνοις ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν. Πᾶσι μὲν ἡμῖν τοῖς ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ συνελθοῦσιν ἐξ ἐπαρχιῶν διαφόρων πρὸς τῇ μεγάλῃ πανηγύρει, ἣν ἐπὶ τῇ ἀφιερώσει τοῦ σωτηρίου μαρτυρίου σπουδῇ τοῦ θεοφιλεστάτου βασι λέως Κωνσταντίνου τῷ πάντων βασιλεῖ θεῷ καὶ τῷ Χριστῷ αὐτοῦ κατασκευασθέντος ἐπετελέσαμεν, πλείονα θυμηδίαν ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ χάρις παρέσχεν, ἣν ἐποίησεν αὐτός τε ὁ θεοφιλέστατος βασιλεὺς διὰ γραμμάτων οἰκείων τοῦθ', ὅπερ ἐχρῆν, παρορμήσας πάντα μὲν ἐξορίσαι τῆς ἐκκλησίας τοῦ θεοῦ φθόνον καὶ πᾶσαν μακρὰν ἀπελάσαι βασκανίαν, δι' ἧς τὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μέλη πάλαι πρότερον διειστήκει, ἡπλωμένῃ δὲ καὶ εἰρηναίᾳ ψυχῇ δέξασθαι τοὺς περὶ Ἄρειον, οὓς πρός τινα καιρὸν ὁ μισόκαλος φθόνος ἔξω γενέσθαι τῆς ἐκκλησίας εἰργάσατο. ἐμαρτύρει δὲ τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ὁ θεοφιλέστατος βασιλεὺς διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς πί στεως ὀρθοτομίαν, ἣν παρ' αὐτῶν πυθόμενος αὐτός τε δι' ἑαυτοῦ παρὰ ζώσης φωνῆς αὐτῶν ἀκούσας ἀπεδέξατο ἡμῖν τε φανερὰν κατεστήσατο, ὑποτάξας τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ γράμμασιν ἔγγραφον τὴν τῶν ἀνδρῶν ὀρθοδοξίαν, ἣν ἐπέγνωμεν οἱ πάντες ὑγιῆ τε οὖσαν καὶ ἐκκλησιαστικήν. καὶ εἰκότως παρεκάλει τοὺς ἄνδρας ὑποδεχθῆναι καὶ ἑνωθῆναι τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐκ τῶν ἰσοτύπων εἴσεσθε τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπιστολῆς, ἧς πρὸς τὴν ὑμετέραν εὐλάβειαν διεπεμψάμεθα. πιστεύομεν ὅτι καὶ ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς, ὡς ἂν τὰ οἰκεῖα μέλη τοῦ ὑμετέρου σώματος ἀπολαμβάνουσι, μεγάλη χαρὰ καὶ εὐφροσύνη γενήσεται τὰ ἑαυτῶν σπλάγχνα καὶ τοὺς ἑαυτῶν ἀδελφούς τε καὶ πατέρας γνωρίζουσί τε καὶ ἀπολαμβάνουσιν, οὐ μόνον τῶν πρεσβυτέρων τῶν περὶ Ἄρειον ἀποδοθέντων ὑμῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ τῆς πληθύος ἁπάσης, ἣ προφάσει τῶν εἰρημένων ἀνδρῶν μακρῷ χρόνῳ παρ' ὑμῖν διειστήκει. καὶ πρέπει γε ἀληθῶς γνόντας ὑμᾶς τὰ πεπραγμένα, καὶ ὡς ἐκοινώνησαν οἱ ἄνδρες παρεδέχθησάν τε ὑπὸ τῆς τοσαύτης ἁγίας συνόδου, προθυμότατα καὶ αὐτοὺς ἀσπάσασθαι τὴν πρὸς τὰ οἰκεῖα μέλη συνάφειάν τε καὶ εἰρήνην, ὅτι μάλιστα τὰ τῆς ἐκτεθείσης ὑπ' αὐτῶν πίστεως ἀναμφήριστον σώζει τὴν παρὰ τοῖς πᾶσιν ὁμολογουμένην ἀποστολικὴν παράδοσίν τε καὶ διδασκαλίαν.

22 Αὕτη τῶν συνόδων αὐτῶν ἡ ἀρχὴ γέγονεν, ἐν ᾗ καὶ τὴν προαίρεσιν ἑαυτῶν ταχέως ἐξήγγειλαν καὶ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν κρύψαι. εἰρηκότες γὰρ ἐξηλᾶσθαι πάντα φθόνον καὶ μετὰ τὸ ἐξορισθῆναι τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τῆς Ἀλεξανδρείας Ἀθανάσιον γράφοντες δεῖν δεχθῆναι Ἄρειον καὶ τοὺς σὺν αὐτῷ ἔδειξαν ὅτι διὰ τοῦτο αὐτῷ τε τῷ Ἀθανασίῳ ἐπεβούλευον καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις πᾶσιν ἐπισκόποις τοῖς ἀντιλέγουσιν αὐτοῖς ἐπεβούλευσαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ τοὺς περὶ Ἄρειον δέξασθαι καὶ τὴν αἵρεσιν εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν εἰσαγαγεῖν. καὶ εἰ καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν Ἀρείου κακοφροσύνην ἐπῄνεσαν ἐν ταύτῃ καὶ εἰς κοινωνίαν προσέταξαν αὐτοὺς δεχθῆναι, αὐτοὶ πρότερον τοῦτο ποιήσαντες, ὅμως ἡγούμενοι λείπειν αὐτοῖς ἔτι πρὸς ὃ βούλονται συγκροτοῦσιν ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ σύνοδον προφάσει τῶν λεγομένων Ἐγκαινίων. καὶ ἐπειδὴ ἀεὶ ὑπὸ πάντων κατηγοροῦντο περὶ τῆς αἱρέσεως γράφουσι διαφόρως τὰ μὲν οὕτως, τὰ δὲ ἐκείνως. καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐν μιᾷ ἐπιστολῇ γραφέντα παρ' αὐτῶν ἐστι ταῦτα· Ἡμεῖς οὔτε ἀκόλουθοι Ἀρείου γεγόναμεν· πῶς γὰρ ἐπίσκοποι ὄντες ἀκολουθοῦμεν πρεσβυτέρῳ; οὔτε ἄλλην τινὰ πίστιν παρὰ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς παραδοθεῖσαν ἐδεξάμεθα. ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐξετασταὶ καὶ δοκιμασταὶ τῆς πίστεως αὐτοῦ γενόμενοι μᾶλλον αὐτὸν προσηκάμεθα ἤπερ ἠκολουθήσαμεν· γνώσεσθε δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν λεγομένων. μεμαθήκαμεν γὰρ ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἰς ἕνα θεὸν τὸν τῶν ὅλων θεὸν πιστεύειν, τὸν πάντων νοητῶν τε καὶ αἰσθητῶν δημιουργόν τε καὶ προνοητήν, καὶ εἰς ἕνα υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ μονογενῆ, πρὸ πάντων αἰώνων ὑπάρχοντα καὶ συνόντα τῷ γεγεννηκότι αὐτὸν πατρί, δι' οὗ καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο, τά τε ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, τὸν καὶ ἐπ' ἐσχάτων ἡμερῶν κατ' εὐδοκίαν τοῦ πατρὸς κατελ θόντα καὶ σάρκα ἐκ τῆς παρθένου ἀνειληφότα καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν πατρικὴν αὐτοῦ βούλησιν συνεκπεπληρωκότα, πεπονθέναι καὶ ἐγηγέρθαι καὶ εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνεληλυθέναι καὶ ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς καθέζεσθαι καὶ πάλιν ἐρχόμενον κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, καὶ διαμένοντα βασιλέα καὶ θεὸν εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. πιστεύομεν δὲ καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· εἰ δὲ δεῖ προσθεῖναι πιστεύομεν καὶ περὶ σαρκὸς ἀναστάσεως καὶ ζωῆς αἰωνίου.

23 Ἃ δὲ καὶ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ ἐπιστολῇ δεύτερον ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῖς Ἐγκαινίοις ἐκτίθενται μεταγνόντες μὲν ἐπὶ τοῖς προτέροις, ἐπινοήσαντες δὲ καινότερά τινα καὶ πλείονα ἔστι ταῦτα· Πιστεύομεν ἀκολούθως τῇ εὐαγγελικῇ καὶ ἀποστολικῇ παραδόσει εἰς ἕνα θεὸν πατέρα παντοκράτορα, τὸν τῶν ὅλων δημιουργόν τε καὶ ποιητὴν καὶ προνοητήν, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα· καὶ εἰς ἕνα κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, τὸν μονογενῆ θεόν, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα, τὸν γεννηθέντα πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐκ τοῦ πατρός, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, ὅλον ἐξ ὅλου, μόνον ἐκ μόνου, τέλειον ἐκ τελείου, βασιλέα ἐκ βασιλέως, κύριον ἀπὸ κυρίου, λόγον ζῶντα, σοφίαν ζῶσαν, φῶς ἀληθινόν, ὁδόν, ἀλήθειαν, ἀνάστασιν, ποιμένα, θύραν, ἄτρεπτόν τε καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον, τῆς θεότητος οὐσίας τε καὶ βουλῆς καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ δόξης τοῦ πατρὸς ἀπαράλλακτον εἰκόνα, τὸν πρωτότοκον πάσης κτίσεως, τὸν ὄντα ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, λόγον θεὸν κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ· «καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος», δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο, καὶ ἐν ᾧ τὰ πάντα συνέστηκε, τὸν ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν κατελθόντα ἄνωθεν καὶ γεννηθέντα ἐκ παρθένου κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς καὶ ἄνθρωπον γενόμενον, μεσίτην θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων ἀπόστολόν τε τῆς πίστεως ἡμῶν καὶ ἀρχηγὸν τῆς ζωῆς, ὥς φησιν ὅτι «καταβέβηκα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, οὐχ ἵνα ποιῶ τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμόν, ἀλλὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με», τὸν παθόντα ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἀνελθόντα εἰς οὐρανούς, καὶ καθεσθέντα ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ πάλιν ἐρχόμενον μετὰ δόξης καὶ δυνάμεως κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς. καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τὸ εἰς παράκλησιν καὶ ἁγιασμὸν καὶ τελείωσιν τοῖς πιστεύουσι διδόμενον, καθὼς καὶ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς διετάξατο τοῖς μαθηταῖς λέγων «πορευθέντες μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος», δηλονότι πατρός, ἀληθῶς πατρὸς ὄντος, υἱοῦ δὲ ἀληθῶς υἱοῦ ὄντος, τοῦ δὲ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἀληθῶς ἁγίου πνεύματος ὄντος, τῶν ὀνομάτων οὐχ ἁπλῶς οὐδὲ ἀργῶς κειμένων, ἀλλὰ σημαινόν των ἀκριβῶς τὴν οἰκείαν ἑκάστου τῶν ὀνομαζομένων ὑπόστασίν τε καὶ τάξιν καὶ δόξαν, ὡς εἶναι τῇ μὲν ὑποστάσει τρία, τῇ δὲ συμφωνίᾳ ἕν. ταύτην οὖν ἔχοντες τὴν πίστιν καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς καὶ μέχρι τέλους ἔχοντες ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ πᾶσαν αἱρετικὴν κακοδοξίαν ἀναθεματίζομεν. καὶ εἴ τις παρὰ τὴν ὑγιῆ τῶν γραφῶν ὀρθὴν πίστιν διδάσκει λέγων ἢ χρόνον ἢ καιρὸν ἢ αἰῶνα ἢ εἶναι ἢ γεγονέναι πρὸ τοῦ γεννηθῆναι τὸν υἱόν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. καὶ εἴ τις λέγει τὸν υἱὸν κτίσμα ὡς ἓν τῶν κτισμάτων ἢ γέννημα ὡς ἓν τῶν γεννημάτων ἢ ποίημα ὡς ἓν τῶν ποιημάτων καὶ μὴ ὡς αἱ θεῖαι γραφαὶ παραδέ δωκαν τῶν προειρημένων ἕκαστον ἀφ' ἑκάστου, ἢ εἴ τι ἄλλο διδάσκει ἢ εὐαγγελίζεται, παρ' ὃ παρελάβομεν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. ἡμεῖς γὰρ πᾶσι τοῖς ἐκ τῶν θείων γραφῶν παραδεδομένοις ὑπό τε προφητῶν καὶ ἀποστόλων ἀληθινῶς τε καὶ ἐμφόβως καὶ πιστεύομεν καὶ ἀκολουθοῦμεν.

24 Καὶ Θεοφρόνιος δέ τις ἐπίσκοπος Τυάνων συνθεὶς καὶ αὐτὸς ἐξέθετο τὴν πίστιν ταύτην ἔμπροσθεν τῶν πάντων, ᾗ καὶ πάντες ὑπέγραψαν ἀποδεξάμενοι τὴν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πίστιν· Οἶδεν ὁ θεός, ὃν μάρτυρα καλῶ ἐπὶ τὴν ἐμὴν ψυχήν, ὅτι οὕτως πιστεύω· εἰς θεὸν πατέρα παντοκράτορα, τὸν τῶν ὅλων κτίστην καὶ ποιητήν, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἰς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ, θεόν, λόγον, δύναμιν καὶ σοφίαν, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα, τὸν γεννηθέντα ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων, θεὸν τέλειον ἐκ θεοῦ τελείου καὶ ὄντα πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐν ὑποστάσει, ἐπ' ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν κατελ θόντα καὶ γεννηθέντα ἐκ τῆς παρθένου κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, ἐνανθρωπήσαντα, παθόντα καὶ ἀναστάντα ἀπὸ τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ἀνελθόντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ καθεσθέντα ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ πάλιν ἐρχόμενον μετὰ δόξης καὶ δυνάμεως κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς καὶ μένοντα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τὸν παράκλητον, «τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας», ὃ καὶ διὰ τοῦ προφήτου ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ θεὸς ἐκχέειν ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ δούλους καὶ ὁ κύριος ἐπηγγείλατο πέμψαι τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ μαθηταῖς, ὃ καὶ ἔπεμψεν, ὡς αἱ Πράξεις τῶν Ἀποστόλων μαρτυροῦσιν. εἰ δέ τις παρὰ ταύτην τὴν πίστιν διδάσκει ἢ ἔχει ἐν ἑαυτῷ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. καὶ κατὰ Μαρκέλλου τοῦ Ἀγκύρας ἢ Σαβελλίου ἢ Παύλου τοῦ Σαμοσατέως· ἀνάθεμα ἔστω καὶ αὐτὸς καὶ πάντες οἱ κοινωνοῦντες αὐτῷ.

25 Ἦσαν δὲ οἱ συνελθόντες ἐν τοῖς Ἐγκαινίοις ἐπίσκοποι ἐνενήκοντα, ὑπατείᾳ Μαρκελλίνου καὶ Προβίνου, ἰνδικτιῶνος ιδʹ, ἐκεῖ ὄντος Κωνσταντίου τοῦ ἀσεβεστάτου. ταῦτα πράξαντες ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ τοῖς Ἐγκαινίοις, νομίσαντες δὲ μὴ τελείως γεγραφέναι, ῥεμβομένην δὲ τὴν διάνοιαν ἔχοντες αὖθις πάλιν συντιθέασιν ἄλλο γράμμα δῆθεν περὶ πίστεως μετὰ μῆνας ὀλίγους, καὶ ἀποστέλλουσιν εἰς τὰς Γαλλίας Νάρκισσον, Μάριν, Θεόδωρον καὶ Μάρκον. κἀκεῖνοι ὡς ἀπὸ συνόδου πεμφθέντες ἐπιδεδώκασι τῷ τῆς μακαρίας μνήμης Κώνσταντι τῷ Αὐγούστῳ καὶ τοῖς ἐκεῖ πᾶσι ταῦτα· Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα θεόν, πατέρα παντοκράτορα, κτίστην καὶ ποιητὴν τῶν πάντων, «ἐξ οὗ πᾶσα πατριὰ ἐν οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς ὀνομάζεται». καὶ εἰς τὸν μονογενῆ αὐτοῦ υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννη θέντα, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, φῶς ἐκ φωτός, δι' οὗ ἐγένετο τὰ πάντα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, λόγον ὄντα καὶ σοφίαν καὶ δύναμιν καὶ ζωὴν καὶ φῶς ἀλη θινόν, τὸν ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν δι' ἡμᾶς ἐνανθρωπήσαντα καὶ γεννηθέντα ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου, τὸν σταυρωθέντα καὶ ἀποθανόντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ ἀναστάντα ἐκ νεκρῶν τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἀναληφθέντα εἰς οὐρανὸν καὶ καθεσθέντα ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἐρχόμενον ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς καὶ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, οὗ ἡ βασιλεία ἀκατάλυτος οὖσα διαμένει εἰς τοὺς ἀπείρους αἰῶνας· ἔσται γὰρ καθεζόμενος ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι. καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, τουτέστι τὸν παράκλητον, ὅπερ ἐπαγγειλάμενος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις μετὰ τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς αὐτοῦ ἄνοδον ἀπέστειλε διδάξαι αὐτοὺς καὶ ὑπομνῆσαι πάντα, δι' οὗ καὶ ἁγιασθήσονται αἱ τῶν εἰλικρινῶς εἰς αὐτὸν πεπιστευκότων ψυχαί. τοὺς δὲ λέγοντας ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων τὸν υἱὸν ἢ ἐξ ἑτέρας ὑποστάσεως καὶ μὴ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ «ἦν ποτε χρόνος ὅτε οὐκ ἦν» ἀλλοτρίους οἶδεν ἡ καθολικὴ ἐκκλησία.

26 Ἐπὶ τούτοις ὥσπερ μεταγνόντες συλλέγουσι πάλιν τὸ συνέδριον ἑαυτῶν μετὰ ἔτη τρία, καὶ ἀποστέλλουσιν Εὐδόξιον, Μαρτύριον καὶ Μακεδόνιον τὸν ἀπὸ Κιλικίας καὶ σὺν αὐτοῖς ἑτέρους τινὰς εἰς τὰ μέρη τῆς Ἰταλίας ἀποφέροντας πίστιν διὰ πολλῶν γραφεῖσαν προσθήκας τε ἔχουσαν πλείστας παρὰ τὰς προτέρας, ὡς γὰρ καινότερά τινα ἐπινοήσαντες ἀπεδήμησαν ἔχοντες ταῦτα· Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα θεόν, πατέρα παντοκράτορα, κτίστην καὶ ποιητὴν τῶν πάντων, «ἐξ οὗ πᾶσα πατριὰ ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς ὀνομάζεται»· καὶ εἰς τὸν μονογενῆ αὐτοῦ υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν πρὸ πάντων αἰώνων ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, φῶς ἐκ φωτός, δι' οὗ ἐγένετο τὰ πάντα τὰ ἐν οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, λόγον ὄντα καὶ σοφίαν καὶ δύναμιν καὶ ζωὴν καὶ φῶς ἀληθι νόν, τὸν ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν δι' ἡμᾶς ἐνανθρωπήσαντα καὶ γεννηθέντα ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου καὶ σταυρωθέντα καὶ ἀποθανόντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ ἀναστάντα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἀναληφθέντα εἰς οὐρανὸν καὶ καθεσθέντα ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἐρχόμε νον ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς καὶ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, οὗ ἡ βασιλεία ἀκατάπαυστος οὖσα διαμένει εἰς τοὺς ἀπείρους αἰῶνας· καθέζεται γὰρ ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι. πιστεύ ομεν καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τουτέστι τὸν παράκλητον, ὅπερ ἐπαγγειλάμενος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις μετὰ τὴν εἰς οὐρανὸν ἄνοδον ἀπέστειλε διδάξαι αὐτοὺς καὶ ὑπομνῆσαι πάντα, δι' οὗ καὶ ἁγιασθήσονται αἱ τῶν εἰλικρινῶς εἰς αὐτὸν πεπιστευκότων ψυχαί. Τοὺς δὲ λέγοντας ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων τὸν υἱὸν ἢ ἐξ ἑτέρας ὑποστάσεως καὶ μὴ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ὅτι ἦν χρόνος ποτὲ ἢ αἰών, ὅτε μὴ ἦν, ἀλλοτρίους οἶδεν ἡ καθολικὴ καὶ ἁγία ἐκ κλησία. ὁμοίως καὶ τοὺς λέγοντας τρεῖς εἶναι θεοὺς ἢ τὸν Χριστὸν μὴ εἶναι θεὸν ἢ πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων μήτε Χριστὸν μήτε υἱὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι θεοῦ ἢ τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν ἢ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἢ ἀγέννητον υἱὸν ἢ ὅτι οὐ βουλήσει οὐδὲ θελήσει ἐγέννησεν ὁ πατὴρ τὸν υἱὸν ἀναθεματίζει ἡ ἁγία καὶ καθολικὴ ἐκκλησία. Οὔτε γὰρ ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων τὸν υἱὸν λέγειν ἀσφαλές, ἐπεὶ μηδαμοῦ τοῦτο τῶν θεο πνεύστων γραφῶν φέρεται περὶ αὐτοῦ, οὔτε μὴν ἐξ ἑτέρας τινὸς ὑποστάσεως παρὰ τὸν πατέρα προυποκειμένης, ἀλλ' ἐκ μόνου τοῦ θεοῦ γνησίως αὐτὸν γεγεννῆσθαι διοριζόμεθα. ἓν γὰρ τὸ ἀγέννητον καὶ ἄναρχον τὸν Χριστοῦ πατέρα ὁ θεῖος διδάσκει λόγος. ἀλλ' οὐδὲ τὸ «ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν» ἐξ ἀγράφων ἐπισφαλῶς λέγοντας χρονικόν τι διάστημα προενθυμητέον αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ' ἢ μόνον τὸν ἀχρόνως αὐτὸν γεγεννηκότα θεόν· καὶ χρόνοι γὰρ καὶ αἰῶνες γεγόνασι δι' αὐτοῦ. οὔτε μὴν συνάναρχον καὶ συναγέννητον τῷ πατρὶ τὸν υἱὸν εἶναι νομιστέον· συνανάρχου γὰρ καὶ συναγεννήτου οὐδεὶς κυρίως πατὴρ ἢ υἱὸς λεχθή σεται. ἀλλὰ τὸν μὲν πατέρα μόνον ἄναρχον ὄντα καὶ ἀγέννητον γεγεννηκέναι ἀνεφίκτως καὶ πᾶσιν ἀκαταλήπτως οἴδαμεν, τὸν δὲ υἱὸν γεγεννῆσθαι πρὸ αἰώνων καὶ μηκέτι ὁμοίως τῷ πατρὶ ἀγέννητον εἶναι καὶ αὐτόν, ἀλλ' ἀρχὴν ἔχειν τὸν γεννήσαντα πατέρα· «κεφαλὴ γὰρ Χριστοῦ ὁ θεός». Οὔτε μὴν τρία ὁμολογοῦντες πράγματα καὶ τρία πρόσωπα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς τρεῖς διὰ τοῦτο τοὺς θεοὺς ποιοῦμεν, ἐπειδὴ τὸν αὐτοτελῆ καὶ ἀγέννητον ἄναρχόν τε καὶ ἀόρατον θεὸν ἕνα μόνον οἴδαμεν, τὸν θεὸν καὶ πατέρα τοῦ μονογενοῦς, τὸν μόνον μὲν ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ τὸ εἶναι ἔχοντα, μόνον δὲ τοῖς ἄλλοις πᾶσιν ἀφθόνως τοῦτο χαριζόμενον. οὔτε μὴν ἕνα θεὸν μόνον λέγοντες εἶναι τὸν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ πατέρα, τὸν μόνον ἀγέννητον, διὰ τοῦτο ἀρνούμεθα καὶ τὸν Χριστὸν θεὸν εἶναι πρὸ αἰώνων, ὁποῖοί εἰσιν οἱ ἀπὸ Παύλου τοῦ Σαμοσατέως ὕστερον αὐτὸν μετὰ τὴν ἐνανθρώπησιν ἐκ προκοπῆς τεθεοποιῆσθαι λέγοντες τῷ τὴν φύσιν ψιλὸν ἄνθρωπον γεγονέναι. οἴδαμεν γὰρ καὶ αὐτόν, εἰ καὶ ὑποτέτακται τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ θεῷ, ἀλλ' ὅμως πρὸ αἰώνων γεννηθέντα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ θεὸν κατὰ φύσιν τέλειον εἶναι καὶ ἀληθῆ καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων μετὰ ταῦτα θεόν, ἀλλ' ἐκ θεοῦ ἐνανθρωπῆσαι δι' ἡμᾶς, καὶ μηδέποτε ἀπολωλεκότα τὸ εἶναι. Βδελυσσόμεθα δὲ πρὸς τούτοις καὶ ἀναθεματίζομεν καὶ τοὺς λόγον μὲν μόνον αὐτὸν ψιλὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀνύπαρκτον ἐπιπλάστως καλοῦντας, ἐν ἑτέρῳ τὸ εἶναι ἔχοντα, νῦν μὲν ὡς τὸν προφορικὸν λεγόμενον ὑπό τινων, νῦν δὲ ὡς τὸν ἐνδιάθετον, Χριστὸν δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ μεσίτην καὶ εἰκόνα τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ εἶναι πρὸ αἰώνων θέλοντας, ἀλλ' ἐκ τότε Χριστὸν αὐτὸν γεγονέναι καὶ υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐξ οὗ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἐκ τῆς παρθένου σάρκα ἀνείληφε πρὸ τετρακοσίων οὐχ ὅλων ἐτῶν. ἐκ τότε γὰρ τὸν Χριστὸν ἀρχὴν βασι λείας ἐσχηκέναι ἐθέλουσι καὶ τέλος ἕξειν αὐτὴν μετὰ τὴν συντέλειαν καὶ τὴν κρίσιν. Τοιοῦτοι δέ εἰσιν οἱ ἀπὸ Μαρκέλλου καὶ Σκοτεινοῦ τῶν Ἀγκυρογαλατῶν, οἳ τὴν προαιώνιον ὕπαρξιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τὴν θεότητα καὶ τὴν ἀτελεύτητον αὐτοῦ βασι λείαν ὁμοίως Ἰουδαίοις ἀθετοῦσιν ἐπὶ προφάσει τοῦ συνίστασθαι δοκεῖν τῇ μοναρχίᾳ. ἴσμεν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἡμεῖς οὐχ ἁπλῶς λόγον προφορικὸν ἢ ἐνδιάθετον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ ζῶντα θεὸν λόγον καθ' ἑαυτὸν ὑπάρχοντα καὶ υἱὸν θεοῦ καὶ Χριστὸν καὶ οὐ προγνωστικῶς συν όντα καὶ συνδιατρίβοντα πρὸ αἰώνων τῷ ἑαυτοῦ πατρὶ καὶ πρὸς πᾶσαν διακονησάμενον αὐτῷ τὴν δημιουργίαν εἴτε τῶν ὁρατῶν εἴτε τῶν ἀοράτων. οὗτος γάρ ἐστι πρὸς ὃν εἶπεν ὁ πατὴρ ὅτι «ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον κατ' εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ καθ' ὁμοίωσιν», ὁ καὶ τοῖς πατριάρχαις αὐτοπροσώπως ὀφθείς, δεδωκὼς τὸν νόμον καὶ λαλήσας διὰ τῶν προ φητῶν καὶ τὰ τελευταῖα ἐνανθρωπήσας καὶ τὸν ἑαυτοῦ πατέρα πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις φανε ρώσας καὶ βασιλεύων εἰς τοὺς ἀτελευτήτους αἰῶνας. οὐδὲν γὰρ πρόσφατον ὁ Χριστὸς προσείληφεν ἀξίωμα, ἀλλ' ἄνωθεν τέλειον αὐτὸν καὶ τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον εἶναι πεπιστεύκαμεν. Καὶ τοὺς λέγοντας δὲ τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καθ' ἑνὸς καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πράγματός τε καὶ προσώπου τὰ τρία ὀνόματα ἀσεβῶς ἐκλαμ βάνοντας εἰκότως ἀποκηρύσσομεν τῆς ἐκκλησίας, ὅτι τὸν ἀχώρητον καὶ ἀπαθῆ πατέρα χωρητὸν ἅμα καὶ παθητὸν διὰ τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως ὑποτίθενται. τοιοῦτοι γάρ εἰσιν οἱ Πατροπασσιανοὶ μὲν παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις, Σαβελλιανοὶ δὲ καλούμενοι παρ' ἡμῖν. οἴδαμεν γὰρ ἡμεῖς τὸν μὲν ἀποστείλαντα πατέρα ἐν τῷ οἰκείῳ τῆς ἀναλλοιώτου θεότητος ἤθει μεμενηκέναι, τὸν δὲ ἀποσταλέντα Χριστὸν τὴν τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως οἰκονομίαν πεπλη ρωκέναι. Ὅμως δὲ καὶ τοὺς οὐ βουλήσει οὐδὲ θελήσει γεγεννῆσθαι τὸν υἱὸν εἰρηκότας ἀνευλαβῶς, ἀνάγκην δὲ δηλονότι ἀβούλητον καὶ ἀπροαίρετον περιτεθεικότας τῷ θεῷ, ἵνα ἄκων γεννήσῃ τὸν υἱόν, δυσσεβεστάτους καὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ξένους ἐπιγινώσκομεν, ὅτι τε παρὰ τὰς κοινὰς περὶ θεοῦ ἐννοίας καὶ δὴ καὶ παρὰ τὸ βούλημα τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς τοιαῦτα τετολμήκασι περὶ αὐτοῦ διορίσασθαι. αὐτοκράτορα γὰρ ἡμεῖς τὸν θεὸν καὶ κύριον αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ εἰδότες ἑκουσίως αὐτὸν καὶ ἐθελοντὴν τὸν υἱὸν γεγεννηκέναι εὐ σεβῶς ὑπειλήφαμεν. πιστεύοντες δὲ ἐμφόβως καὶ τῷ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ λέγοντι· «κύριος ἔκτι σέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ», οὐχ ὁμοίως αὐτὸν τοῖς δι' αὐτοῦ γενομένοις κτίσμασιν ἢ ποιήμασι γεγενῆσθαι νοοῦμεν. ἀσεβὲς γὰρ καὶ τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πίστεως ἀλλότριον τὸ τὸν κτίστην τοῖς δι' αὐτοῦ κεκτισμένοις δημιουργήμασι παραβάλλειν καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν τῆς γενέσεως τοῖς ἄλλοις τρόπον ἔχειν καὶ αὐτὸν νομίζειν. μόνον γὰρ καὶ μόνως τὸν μονογενῆ υἱὸν γεγεννῆσθαι γνησίως τε καὶ ἀληθῶς διδάσκουσιν ἡμᾶς αἱ θεῖαι γραφαί. Ἀλλ' οὐδὲ τὸν υἱὸν καθ' ἑαυτὸν εἶναι ζῆν τε καὶ ὑπάρχειν ὁμοίως τῷ πατρὶ λέγοντες διὰ τοῦτο χωρίζομεν αὐτὸν τοῦ πατρὸς τόπους καὶ διαστήματά τινα μεταξὺ τῆς συναφείας αὐτῶν σωματικῶς ἐπινοοῦντες. πεπιστεύκαμεν γὰρ ἀμεσιτεύτως αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀδιαστάτως ἀλλήλοις ἐπισυνῆφθαι καὶ ἀχωρίστους ὑπάρχειν ἑαυτῶν, ὅλου μὲν τοῦ πατρὸς ἐνστερνισμένου τὸν υἱόν, ὅλου δὲ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐξηρτημένου καὶ προσπεφυκότος τῷ πατρὶ καὶ μόνου τοῖς πατρῴοις κόλποις ἐπαναπαυομένου διηνεκῶς. πιστεύοντες οὖν εἰς τὴν παντέλειον τριάδα τὴν ἁγιωτάτην, τουτέστιν εἰς τὸν πατέρα καὶ εἰς τὸν υἱὸν καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ θεὸν μὲν τὸν πατέρα λέγοντες, θεὸν δὲ καὶ τὸν υἱόν, οὐ δύο τού τους θεούς, ἀλλ' ἓν ὁμολογοῦμεν τῆς θεότητος ἀξίωμα καὶ μίαν ἀκριβῆ τῆς βασιλείας τὴν συμφωνίαν, πανταρχοῦντος μὲν καθόλου πάντων καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ μόνου τοῦ πατρός, τοῦ δὲ υἱοῦ ὑποτεταγμένου τῷ πατρί, ἐκτὸς δὲ αὐτοῦ πάντων μετ' αὐτὸν βασιλεύοντος τῶν δι' αὐτοῦ γενομένων καὶ τὴν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος χάριν ἀφθόνως τοῖς ἁγίοις δωρουμένου πατρικῷ βουλήματι. οὕτω γὰρ τὸν περὶ τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν μοναρχίας συνίστασθαι λόγον παρέδοσαν ἡμῖν οἱ ἱεροὶ λόγοι. Ταῦτα ἠναγκάσθημεν μετὰ τὴν ἐν ἐπιτομῇ προεκτεθεῖσαν πίστιν πλατύτερον ἐπεξεργάσασθαι οὐ κατὰ περιττὴν φιλοτιμίαν, ἀλλ' ἵνα πᾶσαν τὴν τῆς ἡμετέρας ὑπο λήψεως ἀλλοτρίαν ἀνακαθάρωμεν ὑποψίαν παρὰ τοῖς τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς ἀγνοοῦσι καὶ γνῶσιν οἱ κατὰ τὴν δύσιν πάντες ὁμοῦ μὲν τῆς συκοφαντίας τῶν ἑτεροδόξων τὴν ἀναίδειαν, ὁμοῦ δὲ τῶν ἀνατολικῶν τὸ ἐκκλησιαστικὸν ἐν κυρίῳ φρόνημα, μαρτυρούμενον ἀβιάστως ὑπὸ τῶν θεοπνεύστων γραφῶν παρὰ τοῖς ἀδιαστρόφοις.

27 Ἀλλ' οὐδὲ τούτοις ἐνέμειναν· πάλιν γὰρ ἐν Σιρμίῳ συνελθόντες κατὰ Φωτεινοῦ τότε συνέθηκαν αὖθις πίστιν οὐκέτι μὲν οὕτω σχοινοτενῆ οὐδὲ τοσαύτην τοῖς ῥήμασιν, ἀφελόντες δὲ τὰ πλεῖστα καὶ προσθέντες ἄλλα, ὥσπερ ἐξ ὑποβολῆς παρά τινων ἀκού σαντες, ἔγραψαν ταῦτα· Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα θεόν, πατέρα παντοκράτορα, τὸν κτίστην καὶ ποιητὴν τῶν πάντων, «ἐξ οὗ πᾶσα πατριὰ ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς ὀνομάζεται»· καὶ εἰς τὸν μονο γενῆ αὐτοῦ υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν τὸν Χριστόν, τὸν πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, φῶς ἐκ φωτός, δι' οὗ ἐγένετο τὰ πάντα τά τε ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, λόγον ὄντα καὶ σοφίαν καὶ φῶς ἀληθινὸν καὶ ζωήν, τὸν ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν δι' ἡμᾶς ἐνανθρωπήσαντα καὶ γεννηθέντα ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου καὶ σταυρωθέντα καὶ ἀποθανόντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ ἀναστάντα ἐκ νεκρῶν τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἀναληφθέντα εἰς οὐρανὸν καὶ καθεσθέντα ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἐρχόμενον ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς καὶ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, οὗ ἡ βασιλεία ἀκατάπαυστος οὖσα δια μένει εἰς τοὺς ἀπείρους αἰῶνας· ἔσται γὰρ καθεζόμενος ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρός, οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι. καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τουτέστι τὸν παράκλητον, ὅπερ ἐπαγγειλάμενος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις μετὰ τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς αὐτοῦ ἄνοδον ἀποστεῖλαι, διδάξαι καὶ ὑπομνῆσαι αὐτοὺς πάντα ἔπεμψε, δι' οὗ καὶ ἁγιάζονται αἱ τῶν εἰλικρινῶς εἰς αὐτὸν πεπιστευκότων ψυχαί. ,1 Τοὺς δὲ λέγοντας ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων τὸν υἱὸν ἢ ἐξ ἑτέρας ὑποστάσεως καὶ μὴ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ὅτι ἦν χρόνος ἢ αἰών, ὅτε οὐκ ἦν, ἀλλοτρίους οἶδεν ἡ ἁγία καὶ καθολικὴ ἐκκλησία. Πάλιν οὖν ἐροῦμεν· εἴ τις τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν δύο λέγει θεούς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Καὶ εἴ τις λέγων θεὸν τὸν Χριστὸν πρὸ αἰώνων υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπουργηκότα τῷ πατρὶ εἰς τὴν τῶν ὅλων δημιουργίαν μὴ ὁμολογοίη, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸν ἀγέννητον ἢ μέρος αὐτοῦ ἐκ Μαρίας λέγειν γεγενῆσθαι τολμῷ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις κατὰ πρόγνωσιν πρὸ Μαρίας λέγοι τὸν υἱὸν εἶναι καὶ μὴ πρὸ αἰώνων ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεγεννημένον πρὸς τὸν θεὸν εἶναι καὶ δι' αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι τὰ πάντα, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὴν οὐσίαν τοῦ θεοῦ πλατύνεσθαι ἢ συστέλλεσθαι φάσκοι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις πλατυνομένην τὴν οὐσίαν τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν υἱὸν λέγοι ποιεῖν ἢ τὸν πλατυσμὸν τῆς οὐσίας αὐτοῦ υἱὸν ὀνομάζοι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις ἐνδιάθετον ἢ προφορικὸν λόγον λέγοι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις ἄνθρωπον μόνον λέγοι τὸν ἐκ Μαρίας υἱόν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις θεὸν καὶ ἄνθρωπον τὸν ἐκ Μαρίας λέγων θεὸν τὸν ἀγέννητον οὕτω νοοῖ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸ «ἐγὼ θεὸς πρῶτος καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα καὶ πλὴν ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστι θεὸς ἐπ' ἀναιρέσει εἰδώλων καὶ τῶν μὴ ὄντων θεῶν εἰρημένον ἐπ' ἀναιρέσει τοῦ μονογενοῦς πρὸ αἰώνων θεοῦ Ἰουδαικῶς ἐκλαμβάνοι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸ «ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο» ἀκούων τὸν λόγον εἰς σάρκα μεταβεβλῆσθαι νομίζοι ἢ τροπὴν ὑπομεμενηκότα ἀνειληφέναι τὴν σάρκα λέγοι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸν μονογενῆ υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐσταυρωμένον ἀκούων τὴν θεότητα αὐτοῦ φθορὰν ἢ πάθος ἢ τροπὴν ἢ μείωσιν ἢ ἀναίρεσιν ὑπομεμενηκέναι λέγοι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸ «ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον» μὴ τὸν πατέρα πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν λέγειν, ἀλλ' αὐτὸν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν λέγοι τὸν θεὸν εἰρηκέναι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις μὴ τὸν υἱὸν λέγοι τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ἑωρᾶσθαι, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀγέννητον θεὸν ἢ μέρος αὐτοῦ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τῷ Ἰακὼβ μὴ τὸν υἱὸν ὡς ἄνθρωπον πεπαλαικέναι, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀγέννητον θεὸν ἢ μέρος αὐτοῦ λέγοι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸ «ἔβρεξε κύριος πῦρ παρὰ κυρίου» μὴ ἐπὶ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐκλαμβάνοι, ἀλλ' αὐτὸν παρ' ἑαυτοῦ λέγοι βεβρεχέναι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω· ἔβρεξε γὰρ κύριος ὁ υἱὸς παρὰ κυρίου τοῦ πατρός. Εἴ τις ἀκούων κύριον τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν κύριον καὶ κύριον τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν, ἐπεὶ κύριος ἐκ κυρίου, δύο λέγοι θεούς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. οὐ γὰρ συντάσσομεν υἱὸν τῷ πατρί, ἀλλ' ὑποτεταγμένον τῷ πατρί. οὔτε γὰρ κατῆλθεν ἐπὶ Σόδομα ἄνευ βουλῆς τοῦ πατρὸς οὔτε ἔβρεξεν ἀφ' ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλὰ παρὰ κυρίου αὐθεντοῦντος δηλαδὴ τοῦ πατρός, οὔτε κάθηται ἐκ δεξιῶν ἀφ' ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλ' ἀκούει λέγοντος τοῦ πατρός· «κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου». Εἴ τις τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἓν πρόσωπον λέγει, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον παράκλητον λέγων τὸν ἀγέννητον λέγοι θεόν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις, ὡς ἐδίδαξεν ἡμᾶς ὁ κύριος, μὴ ἄλλον λέγοι τὸν παράκλητον παρὰ τὸν υἱόν· εἴρηκε γὰρ «καὶ ἄλλον παράκλητον πέμψει ὑμῖν ὁ πατὴρ ὃν ἐρωτήσω ἐγώ», ἀνά θεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον μέρος λέγοι τοῦ πατρὸς ἢ τοῦ υἱοῦ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα τρεῖς λέγοι θεούς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις βουλήσει τοῦ θεοῦ ὡς ἓν τῶν ποιημάτων γεγονέναι λέγοι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. Εἴ τις μὴ θελήσαντος τοῦ πατρὸς γεγεννῆσθαι λέγοι τὸν υἱόν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. οὐ γὰρ βιασθεὶς ὁ πατὴρ ὑπὸ ἀνάγκης φυσικῆς ἀχθείς, ὡς οὐκ ἤθελεν, ἐγέννησε τὸν υἱόν, ἀλλ' ἅμα τε ἠβουλήθη καὶ ἀχρόνως καὶ ἀπαθῶς ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ αὐτὸν γεννήσας ἐπέδειξεν. Εἴ τις ἀγέννητον καὶ ἄναρχον λέγοι τὸν υἱόν, ὡς δύο ἄναρχα καὶ δύο ἀγέννητα λέγων καὶ δύο ποιῶν θεούς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. κεφαλὴ γάρ, ὅ ἐστιν ἀρχὴ πάντων, ὁ υἱός. «κεφαλὴ δέ», ὅ ἐστιν ἀρχή, «τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁ θεός», οὕτω γὰρ εἰς μίαν ἄναρχον τῶν ὅλων ἀρχὴν δι' υἱοῦ εὐσεβῶς τὰ πάντα ἀνάγομεν. Καὶ πάλιν συνδιακριβοῦντες τοῦ Χριστιανισμοῦ τὴν ἔννοιαν λέγομεν, ὅτι εἴ τις Χριστὸν θεὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ προαιώνιον ὄντα καὶ ὑπουργηκότα τῷ πατρὶ εἰς τὴν τῶν ὅλων δημιουργίαν μὴ λέγοι, ἀλλ' ἐξ οὗ ἐκ Μαρίας ἐγεννήθη, ἐκ τότε καὶ Χριστὸν καὶ υἱὸν κεκλῆσθαι καὶ ἀρχὴν εἰληφέναι τοῦ θεὸν εἶναι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

28 Ταῦτα πάντα παρωσάμενοι, καὶ ὥσπερ βελτίονα ἐπινοήσαντες δογματίζουσιν ἄλλην πίστιν καὶ γράφουσι ταῦτα ἐν Σιρμίῳ Ῥωμαιστὶ μέν, ἑρμηνευθέντα δὲ Ἑλληνιστί· Ἐπειδὴ περὶ πίστεως ἔδοξέ τινα διάσκεψιν γενέσθαι, πάντα ἀσφαλῶς ἐζητήθη καὶ διηρευνήθη ἐν τῷ Σιρμίῳ ἐπὶ παρουσίᾳ Οὐάλεντος καὶ Οὐρσακίου καὶ Γερμινίου καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν. συνέστηκεν ἕνα θεὸν εἶναι πατέρα παντοκράτορα, καθὼς καὶ ἐν πάσῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ καταγγέλλεται, καὶ ἕνα μονογενῆ υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, ἐξ αὐτοῦ πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων γεννηθέντα. δύο θεοὺς μὴ χρῆναι λέγειν, ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος εἴρηκε· «πορεύομαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα μου καὶ πατέρα ὑμῶν καὶ θεόν μου καὶ θεὸν ὑμῶν». διὰ τοῦτο καὶ πάντων θεός ἐστι, καθὼς καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐδίδαξεν· «ἢ Ἰουδαίων μόνων ὁ θεός, οὐχὶ καὶ ἐθνῶν; ναὶ καὶ ἐθνῶν· ἐπείπερ εἷς ὁ θεός, ὃς δικαιώσει περιτομὴν ἐκ πίστεως καὶ ἀκροβυστίαν διὰ πίστεως». καὶ τὰ μὲν λοιπὰ πάντα συμφωνεῖ καὶ οὐδεμίαν ἔχει ἀμφιβολίαν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ πολλούς τινας κινεῖ περὶ τῆς λεγομένης Ῥωμαιστὶ μὲν «σουβσταντίας», Ἑλληνιστὶ δὲ λεγομένης «οὐσίας», τουτέστιν ἵνα ἀκριβέστερον γνωσθῇ τὸ ὁμοούσιον ἢ τὸ λεγόμενον ὁμοιοούσιον, οὐ χρή τινα τούτων παντελῶς μνήμην γίνεσθαι οὐδὲ περὶ τούτων ἐξηγεῖσθαι ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ διὰ ταύτην τὴν αἰτίαν καὶ διὰ τοῦτον τὸν λογισμόν, ὅτι ἐν ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς οὐ γέγραπται περὶ τούτων, καὶ ὅτι ταῦτα ὑπὲρ τὴν ἀνθρώπων γνῶσιν καὶ τὸν ἀνθρώπων νοῦν ἐστι, καὶ ὅτι οὐδεὶς δύναται τὴν γενεὰν τοῦ υἱοῦ διηγήσασθαι, καθὼς γέγραπται· «τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται»; μόνον γὰρ εἰδέναι τὸν πατέρα φανερόν ἐστι, πῶς τὸν υἱὸν ἐγέννησε, καὶ πάλιν τὸν υἱόν, πῶς αὐτὸς γεγέννηται παρὰ τοῦ πατρός. οὐδενὶ δὲ ἀμφίβολόν ἐστι μείζονα εἶναι τὸν πατέρα. οὐδὲ γὰρ διστάσειεν ἄν τις τὸν πατέρα τιμῇ καὶ ἀξίᾳ καὶ θειότητι καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ ὀνόματι τῷ πατρικῷ μείζονα εἶναι, διαμαρτυρουμένου αὐτοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ· «ὁ ἐμὲ πέμψας πατὴρ μείζων μού ἐστι». καὶ τοῦτο δὲ καθολικὸν εἶναι οὐδεὶς ἀγνοεῖ δύο πρόσωπα εἶναι πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ, καὶ τὸν μὲν πατέρα μείζονα, τὸν δὲ υἱὸν ὑποτεταγμένον τῷ πατρὶ μετὰ πάντων, ὧν αὐτῷ ὁ πατὴρ ὑπέταξε, τὸν δὲ πατέρα ἀρχὴν μὴ ἔχειν καὶ ἀόρατον εἶναι καὶ ἀθάνατον εἶναι καὶ ἀπαθῆ εἶναι, τὸν δὲ υἱὸν γε γεννῆσθαι ἐκ τοῦ πατρός, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, φῶς ἐκ φωτός, καὶ τούτου τὴν γένεσιν, καθὼς προείρηται, μηδένα γινώσκειν, εἰ μὴ μόνον τὸν πατέρα, αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν υἱὸν καὶ κύριον καὶ θεὸν ἡμῶν σάρκα ἤτοι σῶμα, τουτέστιν ἄνθρωπον, ἀνειληφέναι ἀπὸ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου, καθάπερ καὶ ὁ ἄγγελος προευηγγελίσατο, καθὼς δὲ πᾶσαι αἱ γραφαὶ διδάσ κουσι καὶ μάλιστα αὐτὸς ὁ ἀπόστολος ὁ διδάσκαλος τῶν ἐθνῶν· ἄνθρωπον ἀνέλαβεν ὁ Χριστὸς ἀπὸ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου, δι' οὗ πέπονθε. τὸ δὲ κεφάλαιον πάσης τῆς πίστεως καὶ ἡ βεβαιότης ἐστίν, ἵνα τριὰς ἀεὶ φυλάττηται, καθὼς ἀνέγνωμεν ἐν τῷ εὐαγ γελίῳ· «πορευθέντες βαπτίζετε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος». ἀκέραιος δὲ καὶ τέλειός ἐστιν ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῆς τριάδος. ὁ δὲ παράκλητος τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον δι' υἱοῦ ἀποσταλὲν ἦλθε κατὰ τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν, ἵνα τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ πάντας τοὺς πιστεύοντας ἀναδιδάξῃ καὶ ἁγιάσῃ.

29 Ταῦτα γράψαντες καὶ μεταγνόντες συνέθηκαν μὲν ἐκείνην, ἣν μετὰ τῆς ὑπατείας ἐπιδείξαντες ἠρυθρίασαν. συνήθως δὲ ὥσπερ καταγνόντες καὶ ταύτης ἐποίησαν μὲν αὐτὴν ἁρπασθῆναι ἀπὸ τῶν ἐχόντων ἀντίγραφα διὰ Μαρτινιανοῦ νοταρίου. καὶ ποιή σαντες τὸν βασιλέα Κωνστάντιον κατ' αὐτῆς προθεῖναι διάταγμα δογματίζουσι πάλιν ἄλλην καὶ προσθέντες, ὡς εἰώθασι, λέξεις τινάς, γράφουσι ταῦτα ἐν τῇ Ἰσαυρίᾳ· Οὐ φεύγομεν τὴν ἐκτεθεῖσαν αὐθεντικὴν πίστιν ἐν τοῖς Ἐγκαινίοις τοῖς κατὰ Ἀντιόχειαν προκομίζοντες αὐτήν, εἰ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν κατ' ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ πρὸς τὸ ὑποκείμενον τῆς ζητήσεως συνέδραμον. ἐπειδὴ δὲ πολλοὺς ἐθορύβησε τὸ ὁμοούσιον καὶ τὸ ὁμοιοούσιον ἐν τοῖς παρεληλυθόσι χρόνοις καὶ μέχρι νῦν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀρτίως λέγεται καινοτομεῖσθαι ὑπό τινων τὸ ἀνόμοιον υἱοῦ πρὸς πατέρα, τούτου χάριν τὸ μὲν ὁμοούσιον καὶ τὸ ὁμοιοούσιον ἐκβάλλομεν ὡς ἀλλότριον τῶν γραφῶν, τὸ δὲ ἀνόμοιον ἀναθεματίζομεν καὶ πάντας, ὅσοι τοιοῦτοι τυγχάνουσιν, ἀλλοτρίους ἡγούμεθα τῆς ἐκκλησίας. τὸ δὲ ὅμοιον τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα σαφῶς ὁμολογοῦμεν κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον τὸν λέγοντα περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ· «ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου». ὁμολογοῦμεν δὲ καὶ πιστεύο μεν εἰς ἕνα θεόν, πατέρα, παντοκράτορα, τὸν ποιητὴν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς, ὁρατῶν πάντων καὶ ἀοράτων. πιστεύομεν δὲ καὶ εἰς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, τὸν ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεννηθέντα ἀπαθῶς πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων, θεὸν λόγον, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ μονογενῆ, φῶς, ζωήν, ἀλήθειαν, σοφίαν, δύναμιν, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο, τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς εἴτε ὁρατὰ εἴτε ἀόρατα. τοῦτον πιστεύομεν ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων εἰς ἀθέτησιν τῆς ἁμαρτίας σάρκα ἀνειληφέναι ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα, παθόντα ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν καὶ ἀναστάντα καὶ ἀναληφθέντα εἰς οὐρανοὺς καθέζεσθαι ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρός, πάλιν ἐρχόμενον ἐν δόξῃ κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς. πιστεύομεν καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, ὃ καὶ παράκλητον ὠνόμασεν ὁ σωτὴρ καὶ κύριος ἡμῶν ἐπαγγειλάμενος μετὰ τὸ ἀπελθεῖν αὐτὸν πέμψαι τοῖς μαθηταῖς τοῦτο, ὃ καὶ ἀπέστειλε, δι' οὗ καὶ ἁγιάζει τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ πιστεύοντας καὶ βαπτιζομένους ἐν ὀνόματι πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος. τοὺς δὲ παρὰ ταύτην τὴν πίστιν ἄλλο τι κηρύττοντας ἀλλοτρίους οἶδεν ἡ καθολικὴ ἐκκλησία. ὅτι δὲ ταύτῃ τῇ πίστει ἰσοδυναμεῖ καὶ ἡ ἐν Σιρμίῳ πρώην ἐκτεθεῖσα πίστις ἐπὶ τῆς εὐσεβείας τοῦ βασιλέως ἡμῶν γνωρίζουσιν οἱ ἐντυγχάνοντες.

30 Ταῦτα γράψαντες ἐν τῇ Ἰσαυρίᾳ ἀνελθόντες εἰς τὴν Κωνσταντινούπολιν ὥσπερ μεταγνόντες ἤλλαξαν συνήθως ταῦτα καὶ προσθέντες λεξείδιά τινα, ὥστε μηδὲ «ὑπόστασιν» λέγειν ἐπὶ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος, διεπέμψαντο αὐτὰ τοῖς ἐν Ἀριμήνῳ καὶ ἠνάγκαζον καὶ τοὺς ἐν τοῖς μέρεσι τούτοις ὑπογράφειν, τοὺς δὲ ἀντιλέγοντας αὐτοῖς ἐποίουν ἐξορίζεσθαι παρὰ Κωνσταντίου. ἔστιν οὖν ταῦτα· Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα θεόν, πατέρα παντοκράτορα, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἰς τὸν μονογενῆ υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸν πρὸ πάντων αἰώνων καὶ πρὸ πάσης ἀρχῆς γεννηθέντα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο, τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, γεννηθέντα δὲ μονογενῆ, μόνον ἐκ μόνου τοῦ πατρὸς, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, ὅμοιον τῷ γεννήσαντι αὐτὸν πατρὶ κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, οὗ τὴν γένεσιν οὐδεὶς γινώσκει εἰ μὴ μόνος ὁ γεννήσας αὐτὸν πατήρ. τοῦτον οἴδαμεν μονογενῆ θεοῦ υἱὸν πέμποντος τοῦ πατρὸς παραγεγενῆσθαι ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, ὡς γέγραπται, ἐπὶ καταλύσει τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τοῦ θανάτου καὶ γεννηθέντα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου, ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὡς γέγραπται, καὶ ἀνα στραφέντα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν καὶ πάσης τῆς οἰκονομίας πληρωθείσης κατὰ τὴν πατρικὴν βούλησιν σταυρωθέντα καὶ ἀποθανόντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ εἰς τὰ καταχθόνια κατεληλυθέναι, ὅντινα καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ ᾅδης ἔπτηξεν, ὅστις καὶ ἀνέστη ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ διέτριψε μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν, καὶ πληρωθεισῶν τεσσαράκοντα ἡμερῶν ἀνελήφθη εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ καθέζεται ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐλευσόμενος ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῆς ἀναστάσεως ἐν τῇ πατρικῇ δόξῃ, ἵνα ἀποδῷ ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ. καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, ὅπερ αὐτὸς ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸς ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ κύριος καὶ ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἐπηγγείλατο πέμπειν τῷ γένει τῶν ἀνθρώπων παράκλητον, καθάπερ γέγραπται· «τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας», ὅπερ αὐτοῖς ἔπεμψεν, ὅτε ἀνῆλθεν εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς. τὸ δὲ ὄνομα τῆς οὐσίας, ὅπερ ἁπλούστερον ὑπὸ τῶν πατέρων ἐτέθη, ἀγνοούμενον δὲ τοῖς λαοῖς σκάνδαλον ἔφερε, διότι μηδὲ αἱ γραφαὶ τοῦτο περιέχουσιν, ἤρεσε περιαιρεθῆναι καὶ παντελῶς μηδεμίαν μνήμην τοῦ λοιποῦ γίνεσθαι, ἐπειδήπερ καὶ αἱ θεῖαι γραφαὶ οὐδαμῶς ἐμνημόνευσαν περὶ οὐσίας πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ. καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲ ὀφείλει ὑπόστασις περὶ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος ὀνομάζεσθαι. ὅμοιον δὲ λέγομεν τῷ πατρὶ τὸν υἱόν, ὡς λέγουσιν αἱ θεῖαι γραφαὶ καὶ διδάσκουσι. πᾶσαι δὲ αἱ αἱρέσεις, αἵ τε ἤδη πρότερον κατεκρίθησαν, καὶ αἵτινες ἐὰν καινότεραι γένωνται, ἐναντίαι τυγχάνουσαι τῆς ἐκτεθείσης ταύτης γραφῆς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστωσαν.

31 Ἀλλ' οὐδὲ τούτοις ἐνέμειναν. κατελθόντες γὰρ ἀπὸ Κωνσταντινουπόλεως εἰς τὴν Ἀντιόχειαν μετέγνωσαν, ὅτι ὅλως ἔγραψαν «ὅμοιον τῷ πατρὶ τὸν υἱὸν ὡς λέγουσιν αἱ γραφαί.» καὶ συνθέντες ἅπερ ἐπενόησαν ἤρξαντο πάλιν ἀνατρέχειν εἰς τὰ πρῶτα ἑαυτῶν καὶ λέγειν ὅτι «παντελῶς ἀνόμοιός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τῷ πατρὶ καὶ κατ' οὐδένα τρόπον ὅμοιός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τῷ πατρί.» τοσοῦτον μετεβάλοντο ὡς καὶ τοὺς τὰ Ἀρείου γυμνότερον λέγοντας προσδέχεσθαι καὶ τὰς ἐκκλησίας αὐτοῖς παραδιδόναι, ἵνα ἐπ' ἀδείας τὰ τῆς βλασφημίας προσφέρωσι. διὰ γοῦν τὴν πολλὴν ἀναίδειαν τῆς ἀσεβείας αὐτῶν Ἀνόμοιοι παρὰ πᾶσιν ἐκλήθησαν ἔχοντες καὶ τὴν «ἐξουκόντιον» ἐπωνυμίαν καὶ τὸν αἱρετικὸν Κωνστάντιον προστάτην τῆς ἀσεβείας αὐτῶν, ὃς μέχρι τέλους διαμείνας ἐν ἀσεβείᾳ καὶ λοιπὸν ἀποθνήσκων ἔδοξε βαπτίζεσθαι, οὐ παρὰ εὐσεβῶν ἀνδρῶν, ἀλλ' ὑπὸ Εὐζωίου τοῦ διὰ τὴν ἀρειανὴν αἵρεσιν οὐχ ἅπαξ, ἀλλὰ καὶ πολλάκις καθαιρεθέντος, καὶ ὅτε διάκονος ἦν, καὶ ὅτε ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ ἐκαθέσθη.

32 Τέως μὲν οὖν ἄχρι τούτου φθάσαντες ἔστησαν καὶ καθῃρέθησαν οἱ προειρημένοι. ἀλλ' οὐδὲ οὕτως εὖ οἶδα ὅτι στήσονται, ὅσοι καὶ νῦν ὑπεκρίναντο, ἀεὶ δὲ συστάσεις ποιήσουσι κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας, ἕως ἂν εἰς ἑαυτοὺς ἐλθόντες εἴπωσι καὶ οὗτοι· «ἀναστάντες πορευσώμεθα πρὸς τοὺς πατέρας ἑαυτῶν καὶ ἐροῦμεν αὐτοῖς· ἀναθεματίζομεν μὲν τὴν ἀρειανὴν αἵρεσιν, ἐπιγινώσκομεν δὲ τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ σύνοδον». πρὸς ταύτην γὰρ ἔχουσι τὴν ἔριν. τίς οὖν ἔτι κἂν ὀλίγην αἴσθησιν ἔχων ἀνέξεται τούτων; τίς βλέπων καθ' ἑκάστην σύνοδον τὰ μὲν ἀφαιρούμενα, τὰ δὲ προστιθέμενα οὐ συνορᾷ τούτους ὕποπτον καὶ ὕπουλον ἔχοντας κατὰ Χριστοῦ τὴν διάνοιαν; τίς ὁρῶν αὐτοὺς διὰ μακρῶν ἐκτείνοντας ἑαυτῶν τήν τε τῆς πίστεως σύνθεσιν καὶ τὴν ἀπολογίαν περὶ ὧν ἐγκαλοῦνται οὐχ ὁρᾷ τούτους καταγινώσκοντας ἑαυτῶν καὶ πολλὰ γράφοντας ἐπίτηδες, ἵνα δόξωσι διὰ τῆς ἀκαίρου φιλοτιμίας καὶ τῆς τοσαύτης πολυλογίας ὑφαρπάζειν τοὺς ἀκεραίους καὶ λανθάνειν οἷοι τὴν αἵρεσιν τυγχάνουσιν ὄντες; ἀλλ' ὥσπερ οἱ ἐθνικοί, ὡς εἶπεν ὁ κύριος, βαττολογοῦντες ἐν ταῖς εὐχαῖς οὐδὲν ὠφελοῦσιν, οὕτως οὗτοι τοσαῦτα καταντλήσαντες οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν σβέσαι τὴν κατὰ τῆς ἀρειανῆς αἱρέσεως κρίσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ μᾶλλον ἐλεγχθέντες καθῃρέθησαν, καὶ εἰκότως γε. ποίαν γὰρ αὐτῶν ὁ ἀκούων ἀποδέξεται συγγραφήν; ἢ ποῖα θαρρήσαντες αὐτοὶ κατηχήσουσι τοὺς ἐρχομένους πρὸς αὐτούς; εἰ μὲν γὰρ αἱ πᾶσαι μίαν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχουσι συμφωνίαν, τίς ἡ χρεία τῶν πολλῶν; εἰ δὲ τοσούτων χρεία γέγονε, δῆλόν ἐστιν ἑκάστην ἐνδεῆ καὶ μὴ πλήρη τυγχάνειν. καὶ τοῦτο μᾶλλον ἡμῶν αὐτοὶ διελέγχουσιν ἐν τῷ πάσας ἐναλλάττειν καὶ μεταποιεῖν. τὸ δὲ πλῆθος τῶν συνόδων καὶ ἡ διαφορὰ τῶν γραφομένων δείκνυσι τοὺς ἐν αὐταῖς συνελθόντας μαχομένους μὲν πρὸς τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ σύνοδον, ἀσθενοῦντας δὲ πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν.