On “Not Three Gods.” To Ablabius.

 Ye that are strong with all might in the inner man ought by rights to carry on the struggle against the enemies of the truth, and not to shrink from t

 In truth, the question you propound to us is no small one, nor such that but small harm will follow if it meets with insufficient treatment. For by th

 The argument which you state is something like this:—Peter, James, and John, being in one human nature, are called three men: and there is no absurdit

 What, then, is the reason that when we count one by one those who are exhibited to us in one nature, we ordinarily name them in the plural and speak o

 We say, then, to begin with, that the practice of calling those who are not divided in nature by the very name of their common nature in the plural, a

 Most men think that the word “Godhead” is used in a peculiar degree in respect of nature: and just as the heaven, or the sun, or any other of the cons

 But some one will say that the proof of our argument does not yet regard the question. For even if it were granted that the name of “Godhead” is a com

 As we have to a certain extent shown by our statement that the word “Godhead” is not significant of nature but of operation, perhaps one might reasona

 Since, then, the character of the superintending and beholding power is one, in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as has been said in our previous argumen

 If, then, every good thing and every good name, depending on that power and purpose which is without beginning, is brought to perfection in the power

 It does not seem to me absolutely necessary, with a view to the present proof of our argument, to contend against those who oppose us with the asserti

 But if it pleases our adversaries to say that the significance of the term is not operation, but nature, we shall fall back upon our original argument

 As, then, the golden staters are many, but the gold is one, so too those who are exhibited to us severally in the nature of man, as Peter, James, and

 Indeed, it would be a lengthy task to set out in detail from the Scriptures those constructions which are inexactly expressed, in order to prove the s

 If, however, any one cavils at our argument, on the ground that by not admitting the difference of nature it leads to a mixture and confusion of the P

 But in speaking of “cause,” and “of the cause,” we do not by these words denote nature (for no one would give the same definition of “cause” and of “n

 Thus, since on the one hand the idea of cause differentiates the Persons of the Holy Trinity, declaring that one exists without a Cause, and another i

Since, then, the character of the superintending and beholding power is one, in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as has been said in our previous argument, issuing from the Father as from a spring, brought into operation by the Son, and perfecting its grace by the power of the Spirit; and since no operation is separated in respect of the Persons, being fulfilled by each individually apart from that which is joined with Him in our contemplation, but all providence, care, and superintendence of all, alike of things in the sensible creation and of those of supramundane nature, and that power which preserves the things which are, and corrects those which are amiss, and instructs those which are ordered aright, is one, and not three, being, indeed, directed by the Holy Trinity, yet not severed by a threefold division according to the number of the Persons contemplated in the Faith, so that each of the acts, contemplated by itself, should be the work of the Father alone, or of the Son peculiarly, or of the Holy Spirit19    Reading with Oehler, ἤ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος for ἢ διὰ τ. ἁγ. Πν. separately, but while, as the Apostle says, the one and the selfsame Spirit divides His good gifts to every man severally20    1 Cor. xii. 11., the motion of good proceeding from the Spirit is not without beginning;—we find that the power which we conceive as preceding this motion, which is the Only-begotten God, is the maker of all things; without Him no existent thing attains to the beginning of its being: and, again, this same source of good issues from the will of the Father.

Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ εἷς ὁ τῆς ἐποπτικῆς τε καὶ θεατικῆς δυνάμεως λόγος ἐν πατρὶ καὶ υἱῷ καὶ πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, καθὼς ἐν τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν εἴρηται, ἐκ μὲν τοῦ πατρὸς οἷον ἐκ πηγῆς τινος ἀφορμώμενος, ὑπὸ δὲ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐνεργούμενος, ἐν δὲ τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνεύματος τελειῶν τὴν χάριν, καὶ οὐ διακρίνεται πρὸς τὰς ὑποστάσεις οὐδεμία ἐνέργεια, ἰδιαζόντως παρ' ἑκάστης καὶ ἀποτεταγμένως δίχα τῆς συνθεωρουμένης ἐπιτελουμένη: ἀλλὰ πᾶσα πρόνοια καὶ κηδεμονία καὶ τοῦ παντὸς ἐπιστασία, τῶν τε κατὰ τὴν αἰσθητὴν κτίσιν καὶ τῶν κατὰ τὴν ὑπερκόσμιον φύσιν ἥτε συντηρητικὴ τῶν ὄντων καὶ διορθωτικὴ τῶν πλημμελουμένων καὶ διδακτικὴ τῶν κατορθουμένων, μία ἐστὶ καὶ οὐχὶ τρεῖς, παρὰ μὲν τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος κατορθουμένη, οὐ μὴν κατὰ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐν τῇ πίστει θεωρουμένων προσώπων τριχῆ τεμνομένη, ὡς ἕκαστον τῶν ἐνεργημάτων ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ θεωρούμενον ἢ τοῦ πατρὸς εἶναι μόνου ἢ τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἰδιαζόντως ἢ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος κεχωρισμένως: ἀλλὰ διαιρεῖ μὲν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ τὰ ἀγαθά, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος, τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα: οὐκ ἄναρχος δὲ ἡ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ κίνησις ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος: ἀλλ' εὑρίσκομεν ὅτι ἡ προεπινοουμένη ταύτης δύναμις, ἥτις ἐστὶν ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, πάντα ποιεῖ, οὗ χωρὶς οὐδὲν τῶν ὄντων εἰς γένεσιν ἔρχεται: ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὴ πάλιν τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἡ πηγὴ ἐκ τοῦ πατρικοῦ βουλήματος ἀφορμᾶται.