Fragments of the Letter to Dionysius of Rome

For there was no time when God was not Father.

Nor indeed did God beget the Son afterwards, as though he had not previously begotten him; but because the Son has his being not from himself, but from the Father.

Since he is the radiance of eternal light, he himself also is altogether eternal. For since light always exists, it is manifest that the radiance also always exists; for it is by shining that light is understood to be light, and it cannot come to pass that light does not shine. Let us again come to examples. If there is a sun, there is also radiance, and there is day: if none of these exists, it is far from the case that the sun is present. But if the sun were eternal, the day also would never fail. As things are, however (for it is not so), the day begins when the sun begins, and ceases when it ceases. But God is eternal light, which neither begins nor will ever fail. Therefore the eternal radiance shines before him and coexists with him, existing without beginning and always begotten, and shines forth before him; and this is that Wisdom which says, I was that in which he rejoiced: and I delighted daily before his face at all times.

Since therefore the Father is eternal, the Son is eternal, light from light. For where there is a begetter, there is also offspring. But if there is no offspring, how and whose begetter can there be? Yet both exist, and always exist. Since therefore God is light, Christ is the radiance. But since he is Spirit—for God, he says, is Spirit—fittingly again Christ is called vapour: for he is, it says, a vapour of the power of God.

But the Son alone, always coexisting with the Father and full of him who is, himself also is, since he is from the Father.

Moreover, when I said that certain made things and works were to be considered, I brought forward examples of such things as being less suitable, in passing, when I said: Neither is a plant the same as the farmer, nor a boat the same as the shipwright. Then I dwelt more upon fitting examples more suited to the nature of the matter, and explained at greater length what was more true, having devised various arguments, which I also set forth to you in another letter; in which I also refuted as a lie that charge which they bring against me, namely that I do not assert that Christ is consubstantial with God. For although I say that I have nowhere found or read this word in the holy Scriptures, yet the other arguments which I thereupon added, and which they passed over in silence, differ not at all from this meaning.

For I brought forward as an example human offspring, which is certainly of the same kind as the begetter; and I said that parents are truly distinguished from children in this alone, that they themselves are not children; or that otherwise it would necessarily follow that there were neither parents nor children. The letter, however, as I said before, I do not have by me on account of the present state of affairs; otherwise I would have sent you the very words I then wrote, or rather a copy of the whole letter, and I will send it whenever I have access to it. I recall moreover that I added very many comparisons drawn from things related to one another.

For I said that a plant, whether growing from seed or from a root, is different from that from which it has sprung, although it is altogether of the same nature; and likewise that a river flowing from a spring takes on a different form and name, for neither is the spring called a river, nor the river a spring, but these two are distinct; and that the spring is as it were the father, while the river is the water from the spring. But these things and the like, which are written, they pretend not to see, as though they were blind; and with two ill-composed little words, as with stones, they attempt to assail me from a distance: not perceiving that for things unknown and which need interpretation to be understood, not only foreign but even contrary examples very often shed light.

It was said above that God is the fountain of all good things, and the Son was called the river flowing from him: for the word is an emanation of the mind, and, to speak in human fashion, is sent forth from the heart through the mouth. But the mind which goes forth through the tongue is different from the word which exists in the heart. For after the mind has sent forth the latter, it remains and is as it was before; while the former, having been sent forth, flies away and is borne about in all directions; and so each is in the other, although one is different from the other, and they are one, though they are two: for so the Father and the Son are said to be one and to be in one another.

The individual names uttered by me can neither be separated from one another nor divided. I said Father, and before I made mention of the Son, I had already signified him in the Father. I added Son, and the Father, even if I had not named him first, was already wholly comprehended in the Son. I added the Holy Spirit; but at the same time I subjoined from whom and through whom he proceeded. But they do not know that the Father, as Father, cannot be alienated from the Son; for that name is a clear cause of cohesion and conjunction: nor can the Son be separated from the Father; for this word indicates communion with the father. The Spirit also is in their hands, who cannot be severed either from him who sends or from him who conveys him. How then do I, who use such names, consider them separated from one another and altogether divided?

Thus indeed we expand the indivisible unity into a Trinity, and again we contract the Trinity, which cannot be diminished, into a unity.

But if any slanderer, because I said that God is the maker and creator of all things, should think that I also called him the creator of Christ, let him observe that I first called him Father, in which word the Son is at the same time expressed. For after I said Father the maker, I added: Nor is he the father of those of whom he is the maker, if he who begat is properly understood to be father (for we shall weigh the breadth of this word, father, in what follows): nor is the maker a father, if only the craftsman is called maker. For among the Greeks who are wise, the makers of their books are called makers. The Apostle also says: A doer of the law. Those who produce internal things, such as virtue and vice, are also called makers, as God said: I waited that he should do judgment, but he did iniquity.

Nor is this saying to be blamed in such a way; for he says that he used the word maker on account of the flesh which the Word had assumed, which was certainly made. But if anyone should suspect that this was said of the Word, even that was to be heard without contentiousness. For just as I do not hold the Word to be a made thing, so I do not call God his maker, but his father. But even if, when discoursing of the Son, I should incidentally have called God maker, that expression too is not without defence. For the wise among the Greeks call themselves makers of their books, although they are also the fathers of their books. But divine Scripture calls us makers of the movements which proceed from the heart, when it calls us makers of the law and of judgment and of justice.

In the beginning was the Word: but there was no Word who produced the Word; for the Word was with God. The Lord is wisdom: therefore there was no wisdom who produced wisdom; for I was, he says, that in which he delighted. Christ is truth: but Blessed, says he, is the God of truth. Life was begotten from life, just as a river flowed from a fountain, and a bright light was kindled from an inextinguishable light.

Just as our mind pours forth from itself a word, as the Prophet says: My heart hath poured forth a good word, and each is different from the other, holding its own proper place distinct from the other, since the one abides and moves in the heart, while the other abides and moves in the tongue and mouth: and yet they are not distant from one another, nor do they deprive one another; nor is the mind without the word, nor the word without the mind: but the mind makes the word and appears in it, and the word displays the mind in which it was made. And the mind is as it were the immanent word, while the word is the mind going forth. The mind passes into the word; but the word transmits the mind to the surrounding hearers; and so the mind dwells in the souls of the hearers through the word, having entered together with the word.

And the mind is as it were the father of the word, existing in itself; while the word is as it were the son of the mind, which could not be made either before it or outside it, but coexists with it, from which it took its shoot and origin. In the same manner also the greatest Father and universal Mind has before all things the Son, the Word and interpreter and angel of himself.

If on the ground that there are three hypostases they say they are divided, they are three, even if they are unwilling; or let them utterly remove the divine Trinity from the midst.

For on this account, after the unity, there is also the most divine Trinity.

In accordance with all these things, we also, following the form and rule received from the elders who lived before us, with one voice in agreement with them, shall now also conclude both the thanksgiving and the letter which we are writing to you: to God the Father and to the Son our Lord Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.