On the Holy Trinity, and of the Godhead of the Holy Spirit.

 All you who study medicine have, one may say, humanity for your profession: and I think that one who preferred your science to all the serious pursuit

 I may say that those who conceived this causeless hatred for us seemed to be acting very much on the principle of Æsop’s fable. For just as he makes h

 Well, what is their charge? There are two brought forward together in the accusation against us one, that we divide the Persons the other, that we d

 But our argument in reply to this is ready and clear. For any one who condemns those who say that the Godhead is one, must necessarily support either

 What, then, is our doctrine? The Lord, in delivering the saving Faith to those who become disciples of the word, joins with the Father and the Son the

 But they say that this appellation is indicative of nature, and that, as the nature of the Spirit is not common to the Father and the Son, for this re

 But the order of things which is above us, alike in the region of intelligence and in that of sense (if by what we know we may form conjectures about

 But I know not how these makers-up of all sorts of arguments bring the appellation of Godhead to be an indication of nature, as though they had not he

 But if any one were to call this appellation indicative of dignity, I cannot tell by what reasoning he drags the word to this significance. Since howe

Well, what is their charge? There are two brought forward together in the accusation against us; one, that we divide the Persons; the other, that we do not employ any of the names which belong to God in the plural number, but (as I said already) speak of the goodness as one, and of the power, and the Godhead, and all such attributes in the singular. With regard to the dividing of the Persons, those cannot well object who hold the doctrine of the diversity of substances in the Divine nature. For it is not to be supposed that those who say that there are three substances do not also say that there are three Persons. So this point only is called in question: that those attributes which are ascribed to the Divine nature we employ in the singular.

Τί οὖν; ἆρα μετὰ τοσαύτας ἐγχειρήσεις ἀποκαμόντες ἡσύχασαν; οὐκ ἔστι ταῦτα: ἀλλὰ καινοτομίαν ἡμῖν προφέρουσιν, οὕτως τὸ ἔγκλημα καθ' ἡμῶν συντιθέντες: τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις ὁμολογοῦντας μίαν ἀγαθότητα, μίαν δύναμιν καὶ μίαν θεότητα λέγειν ἡμᾶς αἰτιῶνται. καὶ οὐκ ἔξω τοῦτο τῆς ἀληθείας φασί: λέγομεν γάρ. ἀλλ' ἐγκαλοῦντες τοῦτο προφέρουσιν, ὅτι ἡ συνήθεια αὐτῶν τοῦτο οὐκ ἔχει καὶ ἡ γραφὴ οὐ συντίθεται. τί οὖν καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο ἡμεῖς; οὐ νομίζομεν δίκαιον εἶναι τὴν παρ' αὐτοῖς ἐπικρατοῦσαν συνήθειαν νόμον καὶ κανόνα τοῦ ὀρθοῦ ποιεῖσθαι λόγου. εἰ γὰρ ἰσχυρόν ἐστιν εἰς ὀρθότητος ἀπόδειξιν ἡ συνήθεια, ἐξέσται καὶ ἡμῖν πάντως ἀντιπροβάλλεσθαι τὴν παρ' ἡμῖν ἐπικρατοῦσαν συνήθειαν: εἰ δὲ παραγράφονται ταύτην ἐκεῖνοι, οὐδὲ ἡμῖν πάντως ἐπακολουθητέον ἐκείνοις. οὐκοῦν ἡ θεόπνευστος ἡμῖν διαιτησάτω γραφή, καὶ παρ' οἷς ἂν εὑρεθῇ τὰ δόγματα συνῳδὰ τοῖς θείοις λόγοις, ἐπὶ τούτους ἥξει πάντως τῆς ἀληθείας ἡ ψῆφος. τί οὖν ἐστι τὸ ἔγκλημα; δύο γὰρ κατὰ ταὐτὸν ἐν τῇ κατηγορίᾳ τῇ καθ' ἡμῶν προενήνεκται: ἓν μὲν τὸ διαιρεῖν τὰς ὑποστάσεις, ἕτερον δὲ τὸ μηδέν τι τῶν θεοπρεπῶν ὀνομάτων πληθυντικῶς ἀριθμεῖν, ἀλλὰ μίαν (καθὼς εἴρηται) τὴν ἀγαθότητα καὶ τὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὴν θεότητα καὶ πάντα ταῦτα μοναδικῶς ἐξαγγέλλειν. πρὸς μὲν οὖν τὴν διαίρεσιν τῶν ὑποστάσεων οὐκ ἂν ἔχοιεν ἀλλοτρίως οἱ τὴν ἑτερότητα τῶν οὐσιῶν ἐπὶ τῆς θείας δογματίζοντες φύσεως: οὐ γὰρ εἰκός ἐστι τοὺς τρεῖς λέγοντας οὐσίας μὴ καὶ τρεῖς πάντως ὑποστάσεις λέγειν. οὐκοῦν τοῦτο μόνον ἐστὶν ἐν ἐγκλήματι, τὸ τὰ ἐπιλεγόμενα τῇ θείᾳ φύσει ὀνόματα μοναδικῶς καταγγέλλειν.