4

enhypostaton is that which is not itself an accident, which has its existence in another. For if that which is in something and that in which it is are the same, it is time for you to say that virtue and the virtuous are the same, and by logical inversion, vice and that in which vice is, and according to you the devil himself will be vice and his creator the creator of vice, and, since the accident is in the substance, the accident will be substance and the substance an accident, or since the body, I mean the human body, is ensouled, according to you the body will be soul. And who will bear the madness of this confusion? 12 That, then, there is no unsubstantialized substance, we know clearly, but we do not say that enhypostaton and hypostasis are the same, nor indeed substance and enousion; but the hypostasis is enousion, and the substance is enhypostaton. For we know the substance of the holy divinity to be enhypostaton (for it is in the three hypostases) and each of the hypostases likewise to be enousion (for these subsist in the substance of the holy divinity). And in the case of the ineffable economy of the Lord, which surpasses all intellect, we say that the hypostasis is enousion, as subsisting in the substances from which it is also composed, and each of his substances is enhypostaton; for they have his one hypostasis in common: his divinity eternally, just as it has that of the Father and of the Spirit, and his ensouled and rational flesh, which is to say his humanity, having recently subsisted in it and having it as its own hypostasis. Thus neither of Christ’s natures is unsubstantialized or other, nor is each a hypostasis in itself or possesses a hypostasis of its own and separately, but both have the one and same. 13 With these things thus predefined, let us come to the question. And this is, whether Christ is two natures and in two natures, or one, as you monstrously claim. Therefore, one who is reasoning about something must make his principles or propositions from common and true concepts—and by common I mean those acknowledged by both sides; for thus what is constructed would be a syllogism and not a paralogism, and the conclusion true and not absurd. 14 It is acknowledged, then, by all the holy fathers that the union came to be from divinity and humanity and that Christ is perfect in divinity and the same is perfect and without defect in humanity. Tell us then: Does this seem so to you as well? You will agree, as it seems to me. But what is divinity and what is humanity, substance or accident, nature or hypostasis? I think you will say substance and nature. For that it is not an accident is surely clear to everyone; and that it is not a hypostasis has been sufficiently demonstrated in what preceded. For if the name of divinity and that of humanity signify a hypostasis, it is time for you to speak of three divinities because of the trinity of hypostases and of infinite humanities because of the infinity of hypostases or a hypostasis in hypostases, which no one who is not wise, but very dull in mind, has ever dared to say. Therefore, each name, that is, of divinity and of humanity, is significant of nature. Therefore, are divinity and humanity one nature, I do not say in the Lord, but absolutely? No, anyone not mad will say; for the created is not the same in substance as the uncreated and creator, nor the bodily as the bodiless, nor that which has begun as that which is without beginning. Therefore, the nature of the divinity is one thing and that of the humanity another, and they are two natures. Therefore Christ, being from divinity and humanity, is from two natures. If, then, you say that Christ is from divinity and humanity and from two natures, tell us: Are these two, that is, divinity and humanity, in Christ or not? You will affirm, if you do not choose to be completely impious. How then are there not two natures in Christ

4

ἐνυπόστατον τὸ μὴ εἶναι αὐτὸ συμβεβηκός, ὃ ἐν ἑτέρῳ ἔχει τὴν ὕπαρξιν. Εἰ γὰρ ταὐτὸ τὸ ἔν τινι καὶ τὸ ἐν ᾧ, ὥρα σοι λέγειν ταὐτὸν ἀρετὴν καὶ ἐνάρετον καὶ κατὰ τὴν εὔλογον ἀντιστροφὴν κακίαν καὶ τὸ ἐν ᾧ ἡ κακία, καὶ ἔσται κατὰ σὲ αὐτὸς ὁ διάβολος κακία καὶ ὁ τούτου δημιουργὸς κακίας δημιουργός, καί, ἐπειδὴ ἐν τῇ οὐσίᾳ τὸ συμβεβηκός, ἔσται τὸ συμβεβηκὸς οὐσία καὶ συμβεβηκὸς ἡ οὐσία, ἢ ἐπειδὴ ἔμψυχον τὸ σῶμα, φημὶ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον, ἔσται κατὰ σὲ τὸ σῶμα ψυχή. Καὶ τίς ταύτης τῆς συγχύσεως τὴν μανίαν ὑποίσει; 12 Ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἔστιν οὐσία ἀνυπόστατος, ἴσμεν σαφῶς, ἀλλ' οὐ ταὐτόν φαμεν ἐνυπόστατον καὶ ὑπόστασιν, οὔτε μὴν οὐσίαν τε καὶ ἐνούσιον· ἀλλ' ἐνούσιον μὲν τὴν ὑπόστασιν, ἐνυπόστατον δὲ τὴν οὐσίαν. Τήν τε γὰρ οὐσίαν τῆς ἁγίας θεότητος ἐνυπόστατον ἴσμεν (ἐν ταῖς τρισὶ γάρ ἐστιν ὑποστάσεσι) καὶ ἑκάστην τῶν ὑποστάσεων ὡσαύτως ἐνούσιον (ἐν τῇ οὐσίᾳ γὰρ αὗται τελοῦσι τῆς ἁγίας θεότητος). Καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς ἀρρήτου καὶ πάντα νοῦν ὑπερκειμένης τοῦ κυρίου οἰκονομίας ἐνούσιον μέν φαμεν τὴν ὑπόστασιν ὡς ἐν ταῖς οὐσίαις τελοῦσαν, ἐξ ὧν καὶ συντέθειται, ἐνυπόστατον δὲ ἑκάστην τῶν οὐσιῶν αὐτοῦ· ἔχουσι γὰρ κοινὴν τὴν μίαν αὐτοῦ ὑπόστασιν ἡ μὲν θεότης αὐτοῦ ἀϊδίως, καθὰ καὶ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος, ἡ δὲ ἔμψυχος καὶ λογικὴ αὐτοῦ σάρξ, ταὐτὸν δ' εἰπεῖν ἡ ἀνθρωπότης αὐτοῦ, προσφάτως ἐν αὐτῇ ὑποστᾶσα καὶ αὐτὴν κληρωσαμένη ὑπόστασιν. Οὕτως οὔτε ἀνυπόστατος οὐθ' ἑτέρα τῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ φύσεών ἐστιν οὔτε ἑκάστη καθ' αὑτὴν ὑπόστασίς ἐστιν ἢ ἰδίᾳ καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος ὑπόστασιν κέκτηται, ἀλλὰ τὴν αὐτὴν καὶ μίαν ἀμφότερα. 13 Τούτων οὕτω προδιωρισμένων ἐπὶ τὸ ζητούμενον ἔλθωμεν. Τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν, εἰ δύο φύσεις ἐστὶν ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ ἐν δυσὶ φύσεσιν ἢ μία, καθὰ τερατεύεσθε. Χρὴ τοιγαροῦν τὸν περί τινος συλλογιζόμενον ἐκ κοινῶν καὶ ἀληθῶν ἐννοιῶν-κοινῶν δέ φημι τῶν παρ' ἀμφοτέροις ὁμολογουμένων-τὰς ἀρχὰς ἤτοι τὰς προτάσεις ποιεῖσθαι· οὕτω γὰρ συλλογισμὸς καὶ οὐ παραλογισμὸς τὸ πλεκόμενον εἴη, τό τε συμπέρασμα ἀληθὲς καὶ οὐκ ἄτοπον. 14 Ὡμολόγηται τοίνυν παρ' ἅπασι τοῖς ἁγίοις πατράσιν ἐκ θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος γεγενῆσθαι τὴν ἕνωσιν καὶ τὸν Χριστὸν ἐν θεότητι τέλειον καὶ τέλειον καὶ ἀνελλιπῆ τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι. Εἴπατε τοίνυν ἡμῖν· Καὶ ὑμῖν ταῦτα δοκεῖ; Συνομολογήσετε, ὥς γέ μοι δοκεῖ. Τί δὲ θεότης καὶ τί ἀνθρωπότης ἐστίν, οὐσία ἢ συμβεβηκός, φύσις ἢ ὑπόστασις; Οἶμαι οὐσίαν καὶ φύσιν ὑμᾶς ἐρεῖν. Ὅτι μὲν γὰρ οὐ συμβεβηκός, παντί που δῆλον· ὅτι δὲ οὐδ' ὑπόστασις ἱκανῶς ἐν τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν ἀποδέδεικται. Εἰ γὰρ ὑπόστασιν τὸ τῆς θεότητος καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος σημαίνουσιν ὄνομα, ὥρα σοι λέγειν καὶ τρεῖς θεότητας διὰ τὸ τριαδικὸν τῶν ὑποστάσεων καὶ ἀπείρους τὰς ἀνθρωπότητας διὰ τὸ τῶν ὑποστάσεων ἄπειρον ἢ ὑπόστασιν ἐν ὑποστάσεσιν, ὅ τις οὐχὶ σοφός, ἀλλὰ καὶ λίαν σκαιὸς τὴν διάνοιαν ἐρεῖν τετόλμηκε πώποτε. Ἔστι τοίνυν φύσεως σημαντικὸν ἕκαστον, τό τε τῆς θεότητος δηλαδὴ καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, ὄνομα. Θεότης τοίνυν καὶ ἀνθρωπότης μία φύσις ἐστίν, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου φημί, ἀλλ' ἀπολύτως; Οὔκ, ἐρεῖ τις μὴ μαινόμενος· οὐ γὰρ τὸ κτιστὸν τῷ ἀκτίστῳ καὶ κτίστῃ κατ' οὐσίαν ταὐτὸν οὐδὲ τὸ σῶμα τῷ ἀσωμάτῳ οὐδὲ τὸ ἠργμένον τῷ ἀνάρχῳ. Ἄλλη φύσις οὖν ἐστι τῆς θεότητος καὶ ἑτέρα τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, καὶ δύο φύσεις εἰσίν. Ἐκ θεότητος τοίνυν καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος ὢν ὁ Χριστὸς ἐκ δύο φύσεών ἐστιν. Εἰ οὖν ἐκ θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος καὶ ἐκ δύο φύσεων τὸν Χριστὸν λέγετε, εἴπατε ἡμῖν· Τὰ δύο ταῦτα, ἤτοι θεότης καὶ ἀνθρωπότης, ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ εἰσιν ἢ οὔ; Καταφήσοιτε, εἴπερ μὴ τέλεον ἀσεβεῖν αἱρήσοισθε. Πῶς οὖν οὐ δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ