part of the Father. To this interpretation of the sacred doctrine which declares that the Son
is of the Father, but is not a part of his substance, it seemed right to us to assent. We ourselves
therefore concurred in this exposition; nor do we cavil at the word “homoousios” having
regard to peace, and fearing to lose a right understanding of the matter. On the same grounds
we admitted also the expression “begotten, not made”: “for made,” said they, “is a term ap-
plicable in common to all the creatures which were made by the Son, to whom the Son has
no resemblance. Consequently he is no creature like those which were made by him, but is
of a substance far excelling any creature; which substance the Divine Oracles teach was be-
gotten of the Father by such a mode of generation as cannot be explained nor even conceived
by any creature.” Thus also the declaration that “the Son is consubstantial with the Father”
having been discussed, it was agreed that this must not be understood in a corporeal sense,
or in any way analogous to mortal creatures; inasmuch as it is neither by division of substance,
nor by abscission nor by any change of the Father’s substance and power, since the underived
nature of the Father is inconsistent with all these things. That he is consubstantial with the
Father then simply implies, that the Son of God has no resemblance to created things, but
12
is in every respect like the Father only who begat him; and that he is of no other substance
or essence but of the Father. To which doctrine, explained in this way, it appeared right to
assent, especially since we knew that some eminent bishops and learned writers among the
ancients have used the term “homoousios” in their theological discourses concerning the
nature of the Father and the Son. Such is what I have to state to you in reference to the articles
of faith which have been promulgated; and in which we have all concurred, not without due
examination, but according to the senses assigned, which were investigated in the presence
of our most highly favored emperor, and for the reasons mentioned approved. We have
also considered the anathema pronounced by them after the declaration of faith inoffensive;
because it prohibits the use of illegitimate176 terms, from which almost all the distraction
and commotion of the churches have arisen. Accordingly, since no divinely inspired Scripture
contains the expressions, “of things which do not exist,” and “there was a time when he was
not,” and such other phrases as are therein subjoined, it seemed unwarrantable to utter and
teach them: and moreover this decision received our sanction the rather from the consider-
ation that we have never heretofore been accustomed to employ these terms. We deemed
it incumbent on us, beloved, to acquaint you with the caution which has characterized both
our examination of and concurrence in these things: and that on justifiable grounds we
resisted to the last moment the introduction of certain objectionable expressions as long as
these were not acceptable; and received them without dispute, when on mature deliberation
as we examined the sense of the words, they appeared to agree with what we had originally
proposed as a sound confession of faith.’
176 ἀγράφοις: lit. ‘unwritten,’ but defined by Hesychius as above.
46
Of the Synod which was held at Nicæa in Bithynia, and the Creed there put…