Exposition of the Faith 1

These are the contents of this book.

1. That the Divine is incomprehensible, and that we must not seek out and meddle with things not handed down to us by the holy prophets, apostles, and evangelists. 2. On things utterable and unutterable, and things knowable and unknowable. 3. A demonstration that God exists. 4. On what God is: that He is incomprehensible. 5. A demonstration that God is one and not many. 6. On the Word of God. 7. On the Holy Spirit. 8. On the Holy Trinity. 9. On the things said concerning God. 10. On the divine union and distinction. 11. On the things said of God in a bodily manner. 12. Still concerning the same. 13. On the place of God, and that the Divine alone is uncircumscribed. 14. The properties of the divine nature. 15. On the age. 16. On creation. 17. On angels. 18. On the devil and the demons. 19. On visible creation. 20. On heaven. 21. On light, fire, and the luminaries—the sun, moon, and stars. 22. On air and the winds. 23. On the waters. 24. On the earth and the things from it. 25. On Paradise. 26. On man. 27. On pleasures. 28. On grief. 29. On fear. 30. On anger. 31. On the faculty of imagination. 32. On sensation. 33. On the faculty of thought. 34. On the faculty of memory. 35. On the inner and the uttered word. 36. On passion and activity. 37. On activity. 38. On the voluntary and the involuntary. 39. On that which is in our power, that is, free will. 40. On things that come to pass. 41. For what cause we were made with free will. 42. On things not in our power. 43. On providence. 44. On foreknowledge and predestination. 45. On the divine economy, and on the care taken for our sake, and on our salvation. 46. On the manner of the conception of God the Word and of His divine incarnation. 47. On the two natures. 48. On the manner of the communication (of properties). 49. On the number of the natures. 50. That the whole divine nature in one of its hypostases was united to the whole human nature, and not part to part. 51. On the one composite hypostasis of God the Word. 52. Against those who say:

'The natures of the Lord are brought under continuous quantity or under discrete quantity.' 53. A reply to the objection: 'If there is no nature without hypostasis.' 54. On the Trisagion. 55. On the nature contemplated in the species and in the individual, and on difference, union, and incarnation; and how we are to understand 'the one incarnate nature of God the Word.' 56. That the holy Virgin is Theotokos (Mother of God). 57. On the properties of the two natures. 58. On the wills and free choices of our Lord Jesus Christ. 59. On the activities in our Lord Jesus Christ. 60. Against those who say:

'If man is of two natures and activities, it is necessary to speak of three natures in Christ and as many activities.' 61. On the deification of the nature of the Lord's flesh and of His will. 62. Still on the wills and free choices, minds, knowledges, and wisdoms. 63. On the theandric (divine-human) activity. 64. On the natural and blameless passions. 65. On ignorance and servitude. 66. On progress. 67. On cowardice (timidity). 68. On the Lord's prayer. 69. On appropriation. 70. On the suffering of the Lord's body and the impassibility of His divinity. 71. That the divinity of the Word remained inseparable from the soul and the body even in the death of the Lord, and that one hypostasis remained. 72. On corruption and dissolution. 73. On the descent into Hades. 74. On the things after the resurrection. 75. On the sitting at the right hand of the Father. 76. Against those who say:

'If Christ is of two natures, then either you serve creation by worshipping a created nature, or you say that one nature is to be worshipped and one is not.' 77. Why the Son became man and not the Father nor the Spirit, and what He accomplished by becoming man. 78. To those who ask whether the hypostasis of Christ is created or uncreated. 79. On when He was called Christ. 80. To those who ask whether the holy Theotokos gave birth to two natures.

(Did the holy Theotokos give birth to two natures, and did two natures hang upon the cross?) 81. How the only-begotten Son of God is called firstborn. 82. On faith and baptism. 83. On faith. 84. On the cross, in which there is still more about faith. 85. On worshipping toward the east. 86. On the holy and undefiled mysteries of the Lord. 87. On the genealogy of the Lord and on the holy Theotokos. 88. On the saints and the honor of their relics. 89. On icons. 90. On Scripture. 91. On the things said concerning Christ. 92. That God is not the cause of evils. 93. That there are not two principles. 94. For what reason God, foreknowing those who would sin and not repent, created them. 95. On the law of God and the law of sin. 96. Against the Jews, concerning the Sabbath. 97. On virginity. 98. On circumcision. 99. On the Antichrist. 100. On the resurrection. An accurate exposition of the Orthodox Faith by the holy Abba John, presbyter of Damascus. That the Divine is incomprehensible, and that we must not seek out and meddle with things not handed down to us by the holy prophets, apostles, and evangelists. No one has ever seen God.

The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known.

The Divine, therefore, is unutterable and incomprehensible.

For no one knows the Father except the Son, nor the Son except the Father.

And the Holy Spirit likewise knows the things of God, as the spirit of man knows the things within him.

After the first and blessed nature, no one ever knew God except the one to whom He Himself revealed it—and that not only among men, but not even among the supramundane powers, I mean the Cherubim and Seraphim themselves.

Yet God did not leave us in utter ignorance;

for the knowledge that God exists has been sown by Him naturally in all.

And creation itself, together with its maintenance and governance, proclaims the majesty of the divine nature.

And first through the law and the prophets, and afterwards also through His only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ, He revealed the knowledge of Himself to us according to our capacity.

All things, therefore, that have been handed down to us through the law and the prophets and the apostles and the evangelists we receive and acknowledge and revere, seeking nothing beyond these;

for God, being good, is the giver of every good, subject to no envy nor to any passion;

for envy is far from the divine nature, which is impassible and alone good.

So then, knowing all things and providing what is beneficial for each, He revealed what it was profitable for us to know, but kept silent about what we could not bear.

Let us be content with these things and remain in them, neither removing the everlasting boundaries nor overstepping the divine tradition.

On things utterable and unutterable, and things knowable and unknowable. He, then, who wishes to speak or to hear about God must clearly understand that not all things are unutterable nor all things utterable—whether the things of theology or of the economy—nor again are all things unknowable nor all knowable;

for the knowable is one thing and the utterable another, just as to speak is one thing and to know another.

Many things, therefore, among those dimly conceived concerning God cannot be fittingly expressed; rather we are compelled to speak of what is above us in terms drawn from ourselves, as when concerning God we speak of sleep and anger and negligence, and hands and feet and the like.

That God exists, then—without beginning, without end, eternal and everlasting, uncreated, unchangeable, immutable, simple, uncompounded, incorporeal, invisible, intangible, uncircumscribed, infinite, unbounded, incomprehensible, inconceivable, good, just, almighty, the Creator of all created things, the Ruler of all, the Beholder of all—

the Provider, Sovereign, and Judge of all—this we both know and confess.

And that there is one God, that is, one essence (ousia); and that He is known and exists in three hypostases—I mean the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one in all things except in being unbegotten, being begotten, and proceeding; and that the only-begotten Son and Word of God and God, through the bowels of His mercy, for our salvation, by the good pleasure of the Father and the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, was conceived without seed and was born without corruption of the holy Virgin and Theotokos Mary through the Holy Spirit, and became from her a perfect man; and that the same is at once perfect God and perfect man, of two natures, divinity and humanity, and in two natures—intellectual, possessed of will and activity and free choice, and, to speak simply, perfect in accordance with the definition and principle proper to each, namely divinity and humanity—yet in one composite hypostasis; and that He hungered and thirsted and grew weary and was crucified, and underwent the experience of death and burial, and rose on the third day, and ascended into the heavens, whence He came to us and will come again hereafter—of all this the divine Scripture is witness, as is the whole choir of the saints.

But what the essence of God is, or how He is in all things, or how God was begotten of God or proceeded, or how the only-begotten Son and God, having emptied Himself, became man of virginal blood, fashioned by another law contrary to nature, or how He walked upon the waters with unwetted feet—this we do not know and cannot tell.

It is not possible, then, to say or even to conceive anything at all about God beyond what has been divinely declared, that is, spoken and manifested to us by the divine oracles of the Old and New Testaments.

A demonstration that God exists. That God exists, then, is not doubted by those who accept the holy Scriptures—I mean the Old and New Testaments—nor indeed by most of the Greeks (pagans);

for, as we have said, the knowledge that God exists has been sown in us naturally.

But since the wickedness of the evil one so prevailed against the nature of men that it dragged some down into the most irrational and worst of all evils—the abyss of perdition—namely, into saying that there is no God, it was their folly that David the hierophant exposed when he said:

The fool has said in his heart:

'There is no God.' Now the disciples and apostles of the Lord, made wise by the all-holy Spirit and working signs of God by His power and grace, by the net of miracles drew them up out of the depth of ignorance and led them to the light of the knowledge of God, catching them alive.

Likewise also those who succeeded to their grace and worth, the shepherds and teachers, having received the illuminating grace of the Spirit, by the power of miracles and by the word of grace enlightened those darkened and turned back those who had gone astray.

But we, who have received neither the gift of miracles nor that of teaching—for we have made ourselves unworthy through our attachment to pleasures—come, let us discuss a little, concerning this matter, of the things handed down to us by the interpreters of grace, having first called upon the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

All existing things are either created or uncreated.

If, then, they are created, they are altogether also mutable;

for things whose being began from change will certainly be subject to change, either perishing or being altered by choice.

But if they are uncreated, then by the principle of consistency they are also altogether immutable;

for of things whose being is opposite, the principle of how they exist—that is, their properties—is also opposite.

Who, then, will not agree that all existing things that fall under our perception, and indeed even the angels, change and are altered and move and are transformed in many ways? The intelligible beings—I mean angels, souls, and demons—change according to choice, by advance in the good and departure from the good, intensifying and slackening; while the rest change according to generation and corruption, increase and decrease, change in quality, and local motion.

things that exist are therefore altogether also created.

And being created, they were certainly fashioned by someone.

And the Creator must be uncreated;

for if He too were created, He was certainly created by someone, until we come to something uncreated.

Being uncreated, then, the Creator is also altogether unchangeable.

And what else could this be but God? And the very maintenance, preservation, and governance of creation teach us that there is a God who has set up this universe and holds it together and preserves it and ever provides for it;

for how could the opposing natures—I mean of fire and water, of air and earth—have come together with one another to complete a single world and remain undissolved, unless some almighty power both joined them and ever keeps them undissolved? What ordered the heavenly things and the earthly, and all that is in the air and all that is in the water—or rather, what existed before these: heaven and earth and air and the nature of fire and water? Who mingled and distributed these? What set them in motion and drives them in their unceasing and unhindered course? Is it not the Artificer of these things, who has implanted in all a principle by which the universe is borne along and governed? And who is the Artificer of these things? Is it not the One who made them and brought them into being? For we shall not grant such power to chance.

For grant that their coming into being were by chance;

whose work is the ordering? And let us grant this too, if it seems good;

whose work is it to preserve and guard them according to the principles by which they first came to subsist? Clearly of another besides chance.

And what else is this but God? On what God is: that He is incomprehensible. That God exists, then, is clear;

but what He is in His essence and nature is altogether incomprehensible and unknowable.

For that He is incorporeal is clear.

For how could that which is infinite and unbounded and shapeless and intangible and invisible and simple and uncompounded be a body? How could it be venerable if it were circumscribed and passible? And how could that which is composed of elements and is again dissolved into them be impassible? For composition is the beginning of conflict, conflict of division, division of dissolution;

but dissolution is altogether foreign to God.

And how would the truth be preserved that God pervades all things and fills all things, as the Scripture says:

'Do I not fill heaven and earth?' says the Lord. For it is impossible for a body to pass through bodies without cutting and being cut, intertwining and being set against them, as do those liquids that mix and are blended together.

And even if some say there is an immaterial body, such as the so-called 'fifth body' among the Greek sages—which is impossible—it would certainly be in motion, like the heaven;

for they call this the fifth body.

Who, then, moves this? For everything that is moved is moved by another.

And who moves that? And so on to infinity, until we arrive at something unmoved;

for the first mover is unmoved, and this is the Divine.

And how is that which is moved not circumscribed in place? Only the Divine, then, is unmoved, moving all things by its unmovedness.

We must therefore suppose the Divine to be incorporeal.

But neither does this express the essence, just as neither do 'unbegotten' and 'without beginning' and 'unchangeable' and 'incorruptible' and whatever else is said concerning God or about God;

for these do not signify what He is, but what He is not.

He who wishes to state the essence of anything must say what it is, not what it is not;

yet in the case of God it is impossible to say what He is, in respect of essence.

It is more fitting, rather, to frame our discourse by the removal of all things;

for He is none of the things that exist—not as not existing, but as existing above all the things that exist and above being itself.

For if knowledge is of things that exist, then what is above knowledge will certainly also be above being; and conversely, what is above being will also be above knowledge.

The Divine, then, is infinite and incomprehensible, and this alone is comprehensible of it: its infinity and incomprehensibility.

But whatever we say of God affirmatively signifies not the nature, but the things about the nature.

Whether you say good, or just, or wise, or whatever you may say, you are not stating the nature of God, but the things about the nature.

There are also some things said of God affirmatively that have the force of an eminent negation, as when, in saying 'darkness' of God, we do not mean darkness, but that He is not light but above light.

A demonstration that God is one and not many. That God exists has been sufficiently demonstrated, and that His essence is incomprehensible.

But that He is one and not many is not doubted by those who are persuaded by the divine Scripture.

For the Lord says at the beginning of the giving of the law:

'I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.

You shall have no other gods besides Me.' And again:

'The Lord your God is one Lord.' And through Isaiah the prophet:

'For I,' He says, 'am the first God, and I am after these things, and besides Me there is no God.'

'Before Me there was no other god, and after Me there will be none, and besides Me there is none.' And the Lord too, in the holy Gospels, says thus to the Father:

'This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God.'

But with those not persuaded by the divine Scripture we shall reason thus.

The Divine is perfect and lacking in nothing, in goodness, in wisdom, and in power—without beginning, without end, everlasting, uncircumscribed, and, to put it simply, perfect in all respects.

If, then, we say there are many gods, it is necessary that a difference be observed among the many.

For if there is no difference among them, there is rather one and not many.

But if there is a difference among them, where is the perfection? For whether He falls short of the perfect in goodness, or in power, or in wisdom, or in time, or in place, He would not be God.

But identity through all things shows rather one and not many.

And how, if there are many, will uncircumscribedness be preserved? For where the one is, there the other could not be.

And how would the world be governed by many and not be dissolved and destroyed, when conflict is observed among the governors? For difference introduces opposition.

And if someone should say that each rules a part, what is it that ordered and made the distribution to them? For that would rather be God.

There is, therefore, one God: perfect, uncircumscribed, the Maker of the universe, its Sustainer and Governor, transcendently perfect and perfect before all.

Moreover, there is also a natural necessity that the monad be the beginning of the dyad.

On the Word of God. This one and only God, then, is not without Word (reason).

And having a Word, He will have one not without hypostasis, not having begun to be nor destined to cease;

for there never was a time when God was without Word.

But He always has His own Word, begotten of Him—not like our word, which is without hypostasis and is poured out into the air, but enhypostatic (having its own subsistence), living, perfect, not going outside Him but ever being in Him;

for where could He be, if He came to be outside Him? Since our nature is perishable and easily dissolved, for this reason our word too is without hypostasis.

But God, being ever-existent and perfect, will have His own Word perfect and enhypostatic, ever-existent and living and possessing all that the Begetter possesses.

For just as our word, proceeding from the mind, is neither wholly the same as the mind nor altogether other—for being from the mind it is other than it, yet bringing the mind itself into manifestation, it is no longer altogether other than the mind, but being one according to nature it is other in respect of the subject—so also the Word of God, by subsisting in Himself, is distinct from Him from whom He has His hypostasis; yet by displaying in Himself the very things that are contemplated concerning God, He is the same as He according to nature;

for just as the perfection in all things is contemplated in the Father, so also it will be contemplated in the Word begotten of Him.

On the Holy Spirit. The Word must also have Spirit;

for indeed our word too is not devoid of breath (spirit).

But with us the breath is foreign to our essence;

for it is a drawing in and discharge of the air, inhaled and poured forth for the constitution of the body, which at the moment of utterance becomes the voice of the word, manifesting in itself the power of the word.

But in the case of the divine nature, which is simple and uncompounded, we must reverently confess that there is a Spirit of God, because the Word of God is not more deficient than our word; yet it is not reverent to reckon the Spirit as something alien entering into God from outside, as it is also with us, who are composite.

But just as, on hearing of the Word of God, we did not think it to be without hypostasis, nor

acquired by instruction, nor brought forth through the voice, nor poured out into the air and dissolved, but subsisting essentially, possessed of free choice, active and almighty—so also, having been taught of the Spirit of God that accompanies the Word and manifests its activity, we do not conceive of an impersonal breath—for thus the majesty of the divine nature would be brought low to baseness, if the Spirit in God were supposed to be after the likeness of our own spirit—but a substantial power, contemplated in itself in its own particular hypostasis, proceeding from the Father and resting in the Word and being its manifester; a power that can neither be separated from God, in whom it is, nor from the Word, which it accompanies, nor be poured out into nonexistence, but exists after the likeness of the Word according to hypostasis, living, possessed of free choice, self-moved, active, ever willing the good, and having in everything its power running together with its will, having neither beginning nor end;

for the Father was never without the Word, nor the Word without the Spirit.

Thus, through the natural unity, the polytheistic error of the Greeks is done away, while through the acceptance of the Word and the Spirit, the dogma of the Jews is overthrown; and from each heresy what is useful remains: from the Jewish supposition, the unity of nature; from Hellenism, the distinction according to hypostases alone.

But if the Jew should contradict the acceptance of the Word and the Spirit, let him be refuted and silenced by the divine Scripture.

For concerning the Word David says:

'Forever, O Lord, Your word abides in heaven.' And again:

'He sent forth His word and healed them.'

But an uttered word is not sent forth, nor does it abide forever.

And concerning the Spirit, the same David says:

'You will send forth Your Spirit, and they shall be created.' And again:

'By the word of the Lord the heavens were established, and by the breath of His mouth all their host.' And Job also says:

'The divine Spirit it is that made me, and the breath of the Almighty that sustains me.' But a Spirit that is sent forth and makes and establishes and sustains is not a breath that dissolves, just as the mouth of God is not a bodily member;

for both are to be understood in a manner befitting God.

On the Holy Trinity. We believe, therefore, in one God: one principle, without beginning, uncreated, unbegotten, indestructible and immortal, eternal, infinite, uncircumscribed, unbounded, of infinite power, simple, uncompounded, incorporeal, without flux, impassible, unchangeable, immutable, invisible, the fountain of goodness and justice, intellectual light, unapproachable; a power known by no measure but measured only by its own will—for it can do all that it wills—the maker of all created things visible and invisible, holding all together and preserving all, providing for all, ruling and governing and reigning over all with an endless and immortal kingdom, having nothing opposed to it, filling all things, contained by nothing, but rather itself containing and holding together and surpassing all things; undefiledly pervading all essences, beyond all and removed from all essence as superessential and being above the things that exist, more than God, more than good, more than full; defining all principalities and orders and itself set above all principality and order, above essence and life and word and thought; itself light, itself goodness, itself life, itself essence, as having its being from no other, nor anything of what it is, but being itself the fountain of being to those that are, of life to the living, of word to those that partake of word, the cause of all good things to all; knowing all things before their generation; one essence, one Godhead, one power, one will, one activity, one principle, one authority, one lordship, one kingdom, known and worshipped in three perfect hypostases with one worship, believed in and adored by every rational creature, united without confusion and divided without separation—

divided—which is indeed paradoxical.

(We believe) in Father and Son and Holy Spirit, into whom also we have been baptized;

for so the Lord commanded the apostles to baptize, saying:

'Baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.'

(We believe) in one Father, the principle and cause of all, begotten of none, alone existing as uncaused and unbegotten, the Maker of all, but by nature Father of one only, His only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ, and the Producer of the all-holy Spirit.

And (we believe) in one Son of God, the only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, begotten of the Father before all ages, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one essence (homoousios) with the Father, through whom all things came to be.

By saying 'before all ages' we show that His begetting is timeless and without beginning;

for the Son of God was not brought into being from nonbeing—He who is the brightness of the glory, the impress of the Father's hypostasis, the living wisdom and power, the enhypostatic Word, the essential and perfect and living image of the invisible God—but He always was with the Father and in Him, eternally and without beginning begotten of Him;

for there never was a time when the Father was and the Son was not, but together the Father, together the Son begotten of Him;

for the Father could not be called Father apart from the Son.

And if He existed without having a Son, He was not a Father; and if afterwards He acquired a Son, then afterwards He became a Father, not being a Father before this, and He changed from not being a Father to becoming a Father—which is more grievous than all blasphemy.

For it is impossible to say that God is destitute of natural generative power;

and generative power is the begetting from oneself—that is, from one's own essence—of one like in nature.

In the case of the begetting of the Son, then, it is impious to say that time intervened, or that the existence of the Son came to be after the Father;

for we say that the begetting of the Son is from Him—that is, from the nature of the Father.

And if we do not grant that the Son coexisted with the Father from the beginning, begotten of Him, we introduce a change in the hypostasis of the Father—namely, that not being a Father, He afterwards became a Father;

for creation, even though it came to be afterwards, did not come from the essence of God, but was brought from nonbeing into being by His will and power, and no change touches the nature of God.

For begetting is the bringing forth, from the essence of the begetter, of that which is begotten, like in essence; whereas creation and making is the coming into being, from without and not from the essence of the one who creates and makes, of that which is created and made, wholly unlike.

In the case of God alone, then—the only One impassible and immutable and unchangeable and ever in the same state—both begetting and creating are impassible;

for being by nature impassible and without flux, as simple and uncompounded, He is not such as to undergo passion or flux either in begetting or in creating, nor does He need any cooperation; rather, the begetting is without beginning and eternal, being a work of nature and proceeding from His essence, so that the Begetter may not undergo change, and so that there may not be a first God and a later God, and that He may receive no addition.

But creation, being a work of God's will, is not coeternal with God, since that which is brought from nonbeing into being is not of such a nature as to be coeternal with the One who is without beginning and ever-existent.

Just as, then, man and God do not make in the same way—for man brings nothing from nonbeing into being, but whatever he makes he makes from preexisting matter, not merely by willing but also by previously planning it, and by forming in his mind that which is to come to be, then also working with his hands and undergoing toil and labor, and often failing when the work does not turn out as he wills—

but God, merely by willing, brought all things from nonbeing into being—so neither do God and man beget in the same way.

For God, being timeless and without beginning and impassible and without flux and incorporeal and alone and without end, begets timelessly and without beginning and impassibly and without flux and apart from intercourse, and His incomprehensible begetting has neither beginning nor end.

And without beginning, because of His immutability; without flux, because of His impassibility

and incorporeality; and apart from intercourse, again because of His incorporeality and because He is one only God needing no other; and without end and unceasingly, because He is without beginning and timeless and without end and ever in the same state;

for that which is without beginning is without end, but that which is endless by grace is not necessarily without beginning, as the angels.

The ever-existent God, then, begets His own Word, which is perfect, without beginning and without end, lest God—who has His nature and existence above time—should beget in time.

But man, clearly, begets in the opposite way, being subject to generation and corruption and flux and increase, clothed in a body and possessing in his nature both male and female;

for the male is in need of the help of the female.

But may He be gracious, who is beyond all things and surpasses all thought and comprehension.

The holy catholic and apostolic Church, then, teaches that the Father is at once, and at once His only-begotten Son begotten of Him, timelessly and without flux and impassibly and incomprehensibly, as only the God of all knows.

Just as fire and the light from it exist together—and not first the fire and afterwards the light, but together—and just as the light, ever begotten of the fire, is ever in it, in no way separated from it, so too the Son is begotten of the Father, in no way separated from Him, but ever in Him.

But the light begotten of the fire inseparably, and ever abiding in it, has no hypostasis of its own apart from the fire, for it is a natural quality of the fire; whereas the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father inseparably and without distance and ever abiding in Him, has His own hypostasis apart from that of the Father.

He is called 'Word' and 'brightness' because He is begotten of the Father apart from intercourse and impassibly and timelessly and without flux and inseparably; and 'Son' and 'impress of the Father's hypostasis' because He is perfect and enhypostatic and in all respects like the Father except in being unbegotten; and 'only-begotten' because He alone was begotten alone of the Father alone in a unique way.

For no other begetting is like the begetting of the Son of God, since there is no other son of God;

for even though the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, yet not by way of begetting but by way of procession.

This is another mode of existence, incomprehensible and unknowable, just as is the begetting of the Son.

Wherefore also all that the Father has belongs to Him (the Son), except being unbegotten, which signifies no difference of essence nor of dignity, but the mode of existence—just as Adam, who is unbegotten (for he is a creature of God), and Seth, who is begotten (for he is a son of Adam), and Eve, who proceeded from Adam's side (for she was not begotten), do not differ from one another in nature (for they are men), but in the mode of existence.

For one must know that 'agenēton' written with a single nu signifies the uncreated, that is, that which has not come to be; whereas 'agennēton' written with two nu's denotes that which has not been begotten.

According to the first signification, then, essence differs from essence;

for the uncreated, that is, ungenerated essence (with a single nu) is one, and the generated, that is, created essence is another.

But according to the second signification, essence does not differ from essence;

for the first hypostasis of every species of living beings is unbegotten, but not uncreated;

for they were created by the Creator, brought into being by His Word, yet they were not begotten, since there was no other of the same species preexisting from which they might be begotten.

According to the first signification, then, the three supra-divine hypostases of the holy Godhead have in common (that they are uncreated)—for they are of one essence and uncreated—but according to the second signification, by no means; for the Father alone is unbegotten

(for His being is not from another hypostasis); and the Son alone is begotten (for from the essence of the Father He was begotten without beginning and timelessly); and the Holy Spirit alone is processive, proceeding from the essence of the Father, not begotten but proceeding.

Thus does the divine Scripture teach, while the mode of the begetting and of the procession remains incomprehensible.

And this also must be known: that the name of fatherhood and sonship and procession was not transferred from us to the blessed Godhead; on the contrary,

it has been imparted to us from there, as the divine apostle says:

'For this reason I bow my knees to the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named.'

And if we say that the Father is the principle of the Son and greater than He, we do not imply that He precedes the Son in time or in nature—for through Him He made the ages—nor in any other respect except in respect of causation; that is, that the Son was begotten of the Father and not the Father of the Son, and that the Father is by nature the cause of the Son, just as we say that the fire does not come from the light but rather the light from the fire.

When, therefore, we hear that the Father is the principle of and greater than the Son, let us understand it in respect of causation.

And just as we do not say that the fire is of one essence and the light of another, so it is not possible to say that the Father is of one essence and the Son of another, but of one and the same.

And just as we say that the fire shines through the light that proceeds from it, and do not regard the light from it as a ministering instrument of the fire, but rather as a natural power, so we say that the Father does all that He does through His only-begotten Son—not as through a ministering instrument, but as through a natural and enhypostatic power.

And just as we say that the fire illuminates, and again say that the light of the fire illuminates, so all that the Father does, the Son likewise does.

But the light possesses no hypostasis of its own apart from the fire, whereas the Son is a perfect hypostasis, inseparable from the Father's hypostasis, as we set forth above.

For it is impossible to find in creation an image setting forth in itself, without variation, the mode of the Holy Trinity.

For how shall that which is created and composite and fluid and mutable and circumscribed and having shape and corruptible clearly show forth the superessential divine essence that is free from all these things? And it is clear that all creation is held by most of these, and all of it by its own nature is subject to corruption.

We likewise believe in one Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and rests in the Son; who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified as being of one essence and coeternal; the Spirit of God, upright, sovereign, the fountain of life and of sanctification; being God and addressed as God together with the Father and the Son; uncreated, full, creative, all-ruling, all-working, almighty, of infinite power, ruling over all creation and not ruled, filling and not filled, partaken of and not partaking, sanctifying and not sanctified; the Paraclete (Comforter) as receiving the supplications of all; in all respects like the Father and the Son; proceeding from the Father and imparted through the Son and partaken of by all creation; through Himself creating and giving being to all things and sanctifying and holding them together; enhypostatic, that is, existing in His own hypostasis, inseparable and not departing from the Father and the Son, and having all that the Father and the Son have, except being unbegotten and being begotten.

For the Father is uncaused and unbegotten (for He is not from anything;

His being is not from Himself, nor any of the things He has), but He Himself is rather the principle and cause of being and of the mode of being, by nature, to all things.

But the Son is from the Father by way of begetting;

and the Holy Spirit is also from the Father, yet not by way of begetting but by way of procession.

And that there is a difference between begetting and procession, we have learned;

but what the mode of the difference is, by no means.

And the begetting of the Son from the Father and the procession of the Holy Spirit are simultaneous.

All that the Son has, then, the Spirit too has from the Father, even its very being.

And if the Father is not, neither is the Son, nor the Spirit.

And if the Father has not something, neither does the Son have it, nor the Spirit.

And because of the Father—that is, because the Father is—the Son is and the Spirit is.

And because of the Father, the Son and the Spirit have all that they have—that is, because the Father has them—except being unbegotten, being begotten, and proceeding;

for in these alone, the personal (hypostatic) properties, do the three holy hypostases differ from one another—not in essence, but in the distinctive character of each one's own

hypostasis, being divided indivisibly.

And we say that each of the three has a perfect hypostasis, lest we conceive one composite perfect nature out of three imperfect ones, but rather one simple essence in three perfect hypostases, transcendently perfect and perfect before all;

for everything compounded of imperfect things is altogether composite, but from perfect hypostases it is impossible for composition to come about.

Wherefore neither do we say that the species (form) is from hypostases, but in hypostases.

And by 'imperfect' we meant those things which do not preserve the species of the thing produced from them.

For stone and wood and iron—each by itself is perfect according to its own nature, but in relation to the house produced from them, each of them is imperfect;

for none of them by itself is a house.

We say, then, that the hypostases are perfect, lest we conceive composition in the divine nature;

for composition is the beginning of division.

And again, we say that the three hypostases are in one another, lest we introduce a multitude and crowd of gods.

Through the three hypostases we recognize the absence of composition and confusion; while through the consubstantiality and the hypostases being in one another, and through the identity of will and activity and power and authority and movement, so to speak, we recognize the indivisibility and the fact that there is one God.

For truly one God is God and His Word and His Spirit.

One must know that it is one thing to be contemplated in actuality (in fact) and another in reason and conception.

In the case of all creatures, then, the division of the hypostases is contemplated in actuality;

for Peter is contemplated as actually separated from Paul.

But the commonness and conjunction and the oneness are contemplated in reason and conception.

For we understand by the mind that Peter and Paul are of the same nature and have one common nature;

for each of them is a rational mortal animal, and each is flesh animated by a rational and intellectual soul.

This common nature, then, is contemplated by reason.

For the hypostases are not in one another;

but each is separately and apart, that is, by itself, having many things that divide it from the other;

for indeed they are distant in place and differ in time and are divided in judgment and in strength and in form (or shape) and in disposition and in temperament and in dignity and in pursuit and in all the distinctive properties—but more than all, by not being in one another but being separate.

Hence men are spoken of as two and three and many.

And this may be seen also in the whole of creation.

But in the case of the holy and superessential and beyond-all and incomprehensible Trinity, it is the reverse.

For there the common and the one is contemplated in actuality, on account of the coeternity and the identity of essence and activity and will, and on account of the concord of judgment and the identity of authority and power and goodness—I did not say similarity, but identity—and the one leap of motion;

for there is one essence, one goodness, one power, one will, one activity, one authority—one and the same, not three similar to one another, but one and the same motion of the three hypostases.

For each one of them has unity with the other no less than with itself; that is, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one in all things except in being unbegotten, being begotten, and proceeding;

for we know one God, but we conceive the difference only in the properties of fatherhood and sonship and procession, in respect of cause and effect and the perfection of the hypostasis—that is, the mode of existence.

For we cannot speak of local distance in the case of the uncircumscribed Godhead, as we can with ourselves—for the hypostases are in one another, not so as to be confused, but so as to be held together, according to the word of the Lord, who said:

'I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me'—nor of difference of will or judgment or activity or power or anything else, which in us produce actual and complete division.

Wherefore we do not call the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit three gods, but rather one God, the holy Trinity, the Son and the Spirit being referred to one cause,

not compounded nor commingled according to the contraction of Sabellius—for they are united, as we have said, not so as to be confused, but so as to be held by one another;

and they have mutual indwelling (perichoresis) in one another without any commingling or mixture—nor being set apart or divided in essence according to the division of Arius.

For the Godhead is undivided in the divided, if one must speak briefly, and is like three suns held together with one another and without any interval, in which there is one blending and conjunction of light.

When, then, we look to the Godhead and the first cause and the monarchy and the one and same, so to speak, movement and will of the Godhead, and the identity of essence and power and activity and lordship, then one is what is presented to our imagination.

But when we look to those in whom the Godhead is, or, to speak more precisely, those which the Godhead is—and which are from the first cause timelessly and with equal glory and without interval, that is, the hypostases—then there are three that are worshipped.

One is the Father, the Father, and without beginning, that is, uncaused;

One is the Son, the Son, and not without beginning, that is, not uncaused;

but if you take the beginning to be from time, then He is also without beginning;

for He is the maker of times and not under time.

One is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit, proceeding from the Father, yet not in the manner of a son but by way of procession; the Father neither departing from His unbegottenness because He has begotten, nor the Son from His begottenness because He is from the unbegotten (for how could it be?), nor the Spirit changing either into Father or into Son, because it has proceeded and because it is God;

or how would a property remain, if it were moved and changed? For if the Father is a Son, He is not properly a Father;

and if the Son is a Father, He is not properly a Son;

for there is one Son properly so called, and one Holy Spirit.

One must know that we do not say that the Father is from anything;

but we do say that He is the Father of the Son.

And we do not say that the Son is cause or Father;

but we do say that He is both from the Father and Son of the Father.

And the Holy Spirit we say is from the Father, and we name it Spirit of the Father; but we do not say that the Spirit is from the Son, though we name it Spirit of the Son (for if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, says the divine apostle, he is none of His), and we confess that it has been manifested and imparted to us through the Son (for He breathed on His disciples and said:

'Receive the Holy Spirit')—just as from the sun come both the ray and the radiance (for the sun itself is the fount of both the ray and the radiance), but it is through the ray that the radiance is imparted to us, and this is what enlightens us and is partaken of by us.

But the Son we say is neither of the Spirit nor from the Spirit.

On the things said concerning God. The Divine is simple and uncompounded.

But that which is composed of many and different things is composite.

If, then, we should say that the uncreated and without-beginning and incorporeal and immortal and eternal and good and creative and the like are essential differences in God, He would, being composed of so many, be not simple but composite—which is the height of impiety.