Letters

³ We in accordance with the true doctrine speak of the Son as neither like, nor unlike the Father. Each of these terms is equally impossible, for like and unlike are predicated in relation to quality, and the divine is free from quality. We, on the contrary, confess identity of nature and accepting the consubstantiality, and rejecting the composition of the Father, God in substance, Who begot the Son, God in substance. From this the consubstantiality is proved. For God in essence or substance is co-essential or con-substantial with God in essence or substance.

But when even man is called “god” as in the words, “I have said you are gods,” and “dæmon” as in the words, “The gods of the nations are dæmons,” in the former case the name is given by favour, in the latter untruly. God alone is substantially and essentially God. When I say “alone” I set forth the holy and uncreated essence and substance of God. For the word “alone” is used in the case of any individual and generally of human nature. In the case of an individual, as for instance of Paul, that he alone was caught into the third heaven and “heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful for a man to utter,” and of human nature, as when David says, “as for man his days are as grass,” not meaning any particular man, but human nature generally; for every man is short-lived and mortal.

So we understand these words to be said of the nature, “who alone has immortality” and “to God only wise,” and “none is good save one, that is God,” for here “one” means the same as alone. So also, “which alone spreadest out the heavens,” and again “You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve.” “There is no God beside me.” In Scripture “one” and “only” are not predicated of God to mark distinction from the Son and the Holy Ghost, but to except the unreal gods falsely so called.

As for instance, “The Lord alone did lead them and there was no strange god with them,” and “then the children of Israel did put away Baalim and Ashtaroth, and did serve the Lord only.” And so St. Paul, “For as there be gods many and lords many, but to us there is but one god, the Father, of whom are all things; and one Lord Jesus Christ by Whom are all things.” Here we enquire why when he had said “one God” he was not content, for we have said that “one” and “only” when applied to God, indicate nature.

Why did he add the word Father and make mention of Christ? Paul, a chosen vessel, did not, I imagine, think it sufficient only to preach that the Son is God and the Holy Ghost God, which he had expressed by the phrase “one God,” without, by the further addition of “the Father,” expressing Him of Whom are all things; and, by mentioning the Lord, signifying the Word by Whom are all things; and yet further, by adding the words Jesus Christ, announcing the incarnation, setting forth the passion and publishing the resurrection.

For the word Jesus Christ suggests all these ideas to us. For this reason too before His passion our Lord deprecates the designation of “Jesus Christ,” and charges His disciples to “tell no man that He was Jesus, the Christ.” For His purpose was, after the completion of the œconomy, after His resurrection from the dead, and His assumption into heaven, to commit to them the preaching of Him as Jesus, the Christ. Such is the force of the words “That they may know You the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent,” and again “You believe in God, believe also in me.” Everywhere the Holy Ghost secures our conception of Him to save us from falling in one direction while we advance in the other, heeding the theology but neglecting the œconomy, and so by omission falling into impiety.