Athanasius: Synodal Letter to the People of Antioch
| Latin Title: | Tomus ad Antiochenos |
| Reference: | CPG 2134 |
| Recipient: | Πεπείσμεθα μέν ὅτι λειτουργοί |
| Date: | 362 |
| Text: | PG 26, 796-809 |
| English Translation: | H. Ellershaw, trans., “Synodal Letter (Tomus ad Antiochenos)” in NPNF2, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids, 1980), pp. 483-486; adapted for FCC by AGC. |
| Notes: | Not written by Athanasius, but by a Synod over which he presided |
| Greek | English |
| 4. Ὅτι μὲν οὖν ταύτην ἔχομεν τὴν πίστιν ἡμεῖς τε καὶ οἱ ἀεὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν τὴν κοινωνίαν ἐσχηκότες, οὐδένα οὔτε ὑμῶν οὔτε ἕτερόν τινα ἀγνοεῖν ἡγούμεθα. ἐπειδὴ δὲ συγχαίρομεν τοῖς βουλομένοις συνάπτεσθαι πᾶσι μέν, ἐξαιρέτως δὲ τοῖς ἐν τῇ Παλαιᾷ συναγομένοις, καὶ ἤδη τὸν κύριον ἐδοξάσαμεν, ὡς ἐπὶ πᾶσι καὶ ἐπὶ τῇ ἀγαθῇ προθέσει τούτων, παρακαλοῦμεν ὑμᾶς ἐπὶ τούτοις γίνεσθαι τούτων τὴν ὁμόνοιαν καὶ μηδὲν πλέον τούτων, καθὰ προείπομεν, μήτε τοὺς ἐν τῇ Παλαιᾷ συναγομένους ἀπαιτεῖσθαι παρ᾽ ὑμῶν μήτε τοὺς περὶ Παυλῖνον ἕτερόν τι μηδὲ πλέον τῶν ἐν Νικαίᾳ προβάλλεσθαι. | 4. But that we, and they who have ever remained in communion with us, hold this faith, we think no one of yourselves nor any one else is ignorant. But since we rejoice with all those who desire re-union, but especially with those that assemble in the Old [church], and as we glorify the Lord exceedingly, as for all things so especially for the good purpose of these men, we exhort you that concord be established with them on these terms, and, as we said above, without further conditions, without namely any further demand upon yourselves on the part of those who assemble in the Old [church], or Paulinus and his fellows propounding anything else, or aught beyond the Nicene definition. |
| 5.1 Καὶ τὸ θρυληθὲν γοῦν παρά τινων πιττάκιον ὡς ἐν τῇ κατὰ Σαρδικὴν συνόδῳ συνταχθὲν περὶ πίστεως κωλύετε κἂν ὅλως ἀναγινώσκεσθαι ἢ προφέρεσθαι· οὐδὲν γὰρ τοιοῦτον ὥρισεν ἡ σύνοδος. ἠξίωσαν μὲν γάρ τινες, ὡς ἐνδεοῦς οὔσης τῆς κατὰ Νίκαιαν συνόδου, γράψαι περὶ πίστεως καὶ ἐπεχείρησάν γε προπετῶς· ἡ δὲ ἁγία σύνοδος ἡ ἐν Σαρδικῇ συναχθεῖσα ἠγανάκτησε καὶ ὥρισε μηδὲν ἔτι περὶ πίστεως γράφεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀρκεῖσθαι τῇ ἐν Νικαίᾳ παρὰ τῶν πατέρων ὁμολογηθείσῃ πίστει διὰ τὸ μηδὲν αὐτῇ λείπειν, ἀλλὰ πλήρη εὐσεβείας εἶναι καὶ ὅτι μὴ δεῖ δευτέραν ἐκτίθεσθαι πίστιν, ἵνα μὴ ἡ ἐν Νικαίᾳ γραφεῖσα ὡς ἀτελὴς οὖσα νομισθῇ καὶ πρόφασις δοθῇ τοῖς ἐθέλουσι πολλάκις γράφειν καὶ ὁρίζειν περὶ πίστεως. | And prohibit even the reading or publication of the paper, much talked of by some, as having been drawn up concerning the Faith at the synod of Sardica. For the synod made no definition of the kind. For whereas some demanded, on the ground that the Nicene synod was defective, the drafting of a creed, and in their haste even attempted it, the holy synod assembled in Sardica was indignant, and decreed that no statement of faith should be drafted, but that they should be content with the Faith confessed by the fathers at Nicæa, inasmuch as it lacked nothing but was full of piety, and that it was undesirable for a second creed to be promulged, lest that drafted at Nicæa should be deemed imperfect, and a pretext be given to those who were often wishing to draft and define a creed. |
| 5.2 ὅθεν κἂν τοῦτό τις ἢ ἕτερον προβάλληται, παύετε τοὺς τοιούτους καὶ μᾶλλον εἰρηνεύειν αὐτοὺς πείθετε· καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲν πλέον συνείδομεν ἐν τούτοις ἢ φιλονεικίαν μόνην. | So that if a man propound the above or any other paper, stop them, and persuade them rather to keep the peace. For in such men we perceive no motive save only contentiousness. |
| 5.3 οὺς γὰρ ἐμέμφοντό τινες ὡς τρεῖς λέγοντας ὑποστάσεις διὰ τὸ ἀγράφους καὶ ὑπόπτους αὐτόθεν εἶναι τὰς λέξεις, ἠξιώσαμεν μὲν μηδὲν πλέον ἐπιζητεῖν πλὴν τῆς κατὰ Νίκαιαν ὁμολογίας, ἀνεκρίναμεν δὲ ὅμως τούτους διὰ τὴν φιλονεικίαν, μὴ ἄρα, ὡς οἱ Ἀρειομανῖται λέγουσιν, ἀπηλλοτριωμένας καὶ ἀπεξενωμένας, ἀλλοτριοουσίους τε ἀλλήλων καὶ ἑκάστην καθ᾽ ἑαυτὴν ὑπόστασιν διηρημένην, ὡς ἔστι τά τε ἄλλα κτίσματα καὶ οἱ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων γεννώμενοι, ἢ ὥσπερ διαφόρους οὐσίας, ὥσπερ ἐστὶ χρυσὸς καὶ ἄργυρος καὶ χαλκός, οὕτω καὶ αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν, ἢ ὡς ἄλλοι αἱρετικοὶ τρεῖς ἀρχὰς καὶ τρεῖς θεοὺς λέγουσιν, οὕτω φρονοῦντες τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις λέγουσι καὶ διεβεβαιώσαντο μήτε λέγειν μήτε πεφρονηκέναι ποτὲ οὕτως. | For as to those whom some were blaming for speaking of three Subsistences, on the ground that the phrase is unscriptural and therefore suspicious, we thought it right indeed to require nothing beyond the confession of Nicæa, but on account of the contention we made enquiry of them, whether they meant, like the Arian madmen, subsistences foreign and strange, and alien in essence from one another, and that each Subsistence was divided apart by itself, as is the case with creatures in general and in particular with those begotten of men, or like different substances, such as gold, silver, or brass;—or whether, like other heretics, they meant three Beginnings and three Gods, by speaking of three Subsistences. They assured us in reply that they neither meant this nor had ever held it. |
| 5.4 ἐρωτώντων δὲ ἡμῶν αὐτούς > πῶς οὖν ταῦτα λέγετε ἢ διὰ τί δὲ ὅλως τοιαύταις χρῆσθε λέξεσιν < ἀπεκρίναντο > διὰ τὸ εἰς ἁγίαν τριάδα πιστεύειν οὐκ ὀνόματι τριάδα μόνον, ἀλλ’ ἀληθῶς οὖσαν καὶ ὑφεστῶσαν πατέρα τε ἀληθῶς ὄντα καὶ ὑφεστῶτα καὶ υἱὸν ἀληθῶς ἐνούσιον ὄντα καὶ ὑφεστῶτα καὶ πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἀληθῶς ὑφεστηκὸς καὶ ὑπάρχον, οἴδαμεν μήτε δὲ εἰρηκέναι τρεῖς θεοὺς ἢ τρεῖς ἀρχὰς μήτε ὅλως ἀνέχεσθαι τῶν τοῦτο λεγόντων ἢ φρονούντων, ἀλλ’ εἰδέναι ἁγίαν μὲν τριάδα μίαν δὲ θεότητα καὶ μίαν ἀρχὴν καὶ υἱὸν μὲν ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρί, ὡς εἶπον οἱ πατέρες, τὸ δὲ ἅγιον πνεῦμα οὐ κτίσμα οὐδὲ ξένον, ἀλλ’ ἴδιον καὶ ἀδιαίρετον τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πατρός.< | But upon our asking them ‘what then do you mean by it, or why do you use such expressions?’ they replied, Because they believed in a Holy Trinity, not a trinity in name only, but existing and subsisting in truth, ‘both a Father truly existing and subsisting, and a Son truly substantial and subsisting, and a Holy Spirit subsisting and really existing do we acknowledge,’ and that neither had they said there were three Gods or three beginnings, nor would they at all tolerate such as said or held so, but that they acknowledged a Holy Trinity but One Godhead, and one Beginning, and that the Son is coessential with the Father, as the fathers said; while the Holy Spirit is not a creature, nor external, but proper to and inseparable from the Essence of the Father and the Son. |
This work is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Created by MS
Last updated 2/20/2025 by JSW
No Responses yet
