John of Damascus, Against Jacobites

iron is indeed heated by fire, but the fire is not turned into iron, and as the flesh is indeed ensouled, but the soul is not enfleshed, so the divine nature deifies the flesh, but is not itself enfleshed. For the divine nature is not receptive of any addition or subtraction, and it is imparting, but not partaking; therefore not even one composite nature has come into being. Therefore, it is the same thing to speak of the enhypostatic substance and the nature of God the Word; for as has been said, the blessed Athanasius and Cyril indicated the hypostasis by the name of nature. For hypostasis is also nature, but nature is no longer also hypostasis; for it is not reciprocal. For universals are predicated of particulars, but particulars are not affirmed of universals. And if, when some piece of iron is heated by fire, the nature of iron is said to have been fired, yet one must know that this is because the nature of iron is receptive of being fired and because being fired is an work of nature; but in the case of the incarnation of the Word, the incarnation is not a work of nature, but a mode of economic condescension. It is not possible, therefore, to say that one of the hypostases of the Godhead possesses anything which not all the hypostases possess, except for the mode of existence. And the incarnation is a mode of a second existence, suited only to the only-begotten Son and Word, so that the particular property might remain unchanged. 53 But you will perhaps say: How then do we say that the nature of the flesh has been deified and has suffered? By affirming these things of all the hypostases of humanity, and by saying that the nature of the Word has been incarnate, are we not referring the incarnation to the Father and the Spirit? Because all human nature is receptive of things according to nature and contrary to nature and above nature, not by a change of nature, whereas the divine nature is unreceptive of any alteration and addition, and not only this but also because that flesh was a first-fruit of our lump and had not become a self-subsistent hypostasis, but an enhypostatic nature, completing the composite hypostasis of Christ, and not for its own sake, but for the common salvation of the nature it was united to God the Word, we say, therefore, that the nature of the Godhead was united to the nature of humanity, but that the hypostasis of the Word was incarnate; for incarnation is the assumption of flesh and for a hypostasis to become in flesh, while union is the coming together of two things and a confluence into the same. 54 If you take the example of man with respect to species and nature, it will have no place in Christ; for even now we have not yet heard of a species of Christs. Therefore Christ is not a nature, but a hypostasis; for according to the blessed Cyril "the name Christ has neither the force of a definition nor does it signify anyone's essence"—but if you take it with respect to a particular man, and this is a hypostasis, it is not absurd. It must be known, however, that it is not necessary for examples to be entirely like the things they illustrate, but rather to have in some respect also what is unlike, since otherwise it would not be an example. Justin, therefore, the philosopher and martyr, speaks thus in his Exposition concerning the right confession: "Some indeed, having understood the union as that of soul to body, have explained it thus; and the example is fitting, if not in all respects, at least in some; for as man is one, yet he has two natures." 55 See how he did not say: Man is one out of two natures, but: "He has two natures," so that he said that man has two natures even after the union of the two natures. "For as man," he says, "is one, yet has two different natures in himself, and reasons according to one, but acts on what has been reasoned according to the other—for having reasoned, for instance, with his intelligent soul about the construction of a ship, he brings what was conceived to completion with his hands—so the Son, being one and of two natures, works the divine signs according to one, and accepts the humble things according to the other; for insofar as he is from the Father and is God he works the signs, but insofar as he is from a virgin and is man, he willingly and naturally endured the cross and the passions and similar things." To whom does it appear to you that this gives support

σίδηρος μὲν πυροῦται, τὸ δὲ πῦρ οὐ σιδηροῦται, καὶ ὡς ἡ σὰρξ μὲν ψυχοῦται, ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ οὐ σαρκοῦται, οὕτως ἡ θεία φύσις θεοῖ μὲν τὴν σάρκα, αὐτὴ δὲ οὐ σαρκοῦται. Οὐ γὰρ δεκτικὴ ἡ θεία φύσις τῆς οἱασοῦν προσθήκης ἢ ὑφαιρέσεως, καὶ μεταδοτικὴ μέν, οὐ μεταληπτικὴ δέ· διὸ οὐδὲ μία φύσις σύνθετος γέγονε. Ταὐτὸν οὖν ἐστιν εἰπεῖν ἐνούσιον ὑπόστασιν καὶ φύσιν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου· ὡς γὰρ εἴρηται, τὴν ὑπόστασιν τῷ τῆς φύσεως ὀνόματι ὑπεσήμαναν οἱ μακάριοι Ἀθανάσιός τε καὶ Κύριλλος. Ἡ μὲν γὰρ ὑπόστασις καὶ φύσις, οὐκέτι δὲ καὶ ἡ φύσις ὑπόστασις· οὐ γὰρ ἀντιστρέφει. Κατηγοροῦνται μὲν γὰρ τῶν μερικῶν τὰ καθόλου, τὰ δὲ μερικὰ τῶν καθόλου οὐ καταφάσκεται. Εἰ δὲ καί τινος σιδήρου πυρουμένου ἡ φύσις τοῦ σιδήρου πεπυρῶσθαι λέγεται, ἀλλ' εἰδέναι χρή, ὡς διὰ τὸ δεκτικὴν εἶναι τὴν φύσιν τοῦ σιδήρου πυρώσεως καὶ διὰ τὸ φύσεως ἔργον εἶναι τὴν πύρωσιν· ἐπὶ δὲ τῆς τοῦ λόγου σαρκώσεως οὐ φύσεως ἔργον ἡ σάρκωσις, ἀλλὰ τρόπος οἰκονομικῆς συγκαταβάσεως. Οὐκ ἔστιν οὖν εἰπεῖν μίαν τῶν τῆς θεότητος ὑποστάσεων ἔχειν τι, ὅπερ οὐχὶ πᾶσαι αἱ ὑποστάσεις κέκτηνται, πλὴν τοῦ τρόπου τῆς ὑπάρξεως. Καὶ ἡ σάρκωσις δὲ τρόπος δευτέρας ὑπάρξεως πέφυκε μόνῳ τῷ μονογενεῖ υἱῷ καὶ λόγῳ ἁρμόζουσα, ὡς ἂν ἡ ἰδιότης μείνῃ ἀκίνητος. 53 Ἀλλ' ἐρεῖτε τυχόν· Πῶς οὖν φαμεν τὴν φύσιν τῆς σαρκὸς τεθεῶσθαι καὶ πεπονθέναι; Μὴ ταῦτα πασῶν τῶν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος ὑποστάσεων καταφάσκοντες, τὴν δὲ φύσιν τοῦ λόγου σεσαρκῶσθαι λέγοντες ἐπὶ τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὴν σάρκωσιν ἀναφέρομεν; Ὅτι πᾶσα ἡ τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσις δεκτική ἐστι τῶν κατὰ φύσιν καὶ παρὰ φύσιν καὶ ὑπὲρ φύσιν οὐ μεταβολῇ φύσεως, ἡ δὲ θεία φύσις πάσης ἀλλοιώσεως καὶ προσθήκης ἐστὶν ἀνεπίδεκτος, οὐ μόνον δὲ ἀλλ' ὅτι καὶ ἀπαρχὴ ὑπῆρχεν ἡ σὰρξ ἐκείνη τοῦ ἡμετέρου φυράματος καὶ οὐχ ὑπόστασις ἰδιοσύστατος ἐγεγόνει, ἀλλὰ φύσις ἐνυπόστατος, συμπληρωτικὴ τῆς συνθέτου τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὑποστάσεως, καὶ οὐχ ἑαυτῆς ἕνεκα, ἀλλὰ τῆς κοινῆς σωτηρίας τῆς φύσεως ἡνώθη τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ, φαμὲν τοίνυν τὴν φύσιν τῆς θεότητος ἡνῶσθαι τῇ φύσει τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, σεσαρκῶσθαι δὲ τὴν τοῦ λόγου ὑπόστασιν· σάρκωσις μὲν γὰρ σαρκὸς πρόσληψις καὶ τὸ σαρκὶ γενέσθαι ὑπόστασις, ἕνωσις δὲ δύο τινῶν σύνοδος καὶ εἰς ταὐτὸν συνέλευσις. 54 Τὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παράδειγμα ἂν μὲν ἐπὶ τοῦ εἴδους καὶ τῆς φύσεως λάβητε, εἰς Χριστὸν χώραν οὐχ ἕξει· εἶδος γὰρ Χριστῶν οὐδέπω καὶ νῦν ἀκηκόαμεν. ∆ιὸ οὔτε φύσις ὁ Χριστός, ἀλλ' ὑπόστασις· κατὰ γὰρ τὸν μακάριον Κύριλλον «τὸ Χριστὸς ὄνομα οὔτε ὅρου δύναμιν ἔχει οὔτε τήν τινος οὐσίαν δηλοῖ»-ἂν δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ τινὸς ἀνθρώπου, ὑπόστασις δὲ οὗτος, οὐκ ἄτοπον. Ἰστέον δέ, ὡς οὐκ ἀνάγκη τὰ παραδείγματα καθόλου τοῖς παραδεικνυμένοις ἐοικέναι, ἔχειν δὲ μᾶλλον κατὰ τὶ καὶ τὸ ἀπεοικός, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἂν εἴη παράδειγμα. Ἰουστῖνος τοίνυν ὁ φιλόσοφος καὶ μάρτυς οὕτω φησὶν ἐν τῇ Ἐκθέσει τῇ περὶ τῆς ὀρθῆς ὁμολογίας· «Τινὲς μὲν τὴν ἕνωσιν ὡς ψυχῆς πρὸς σῶμα νοήσαντες οὕτως ἐκδεδώκασι· καὶ ἁρμόδιον γὰρ τὸ παράδειγμα, εἰ καὶ μὴ κατὰ πάντα, κατὰ τὶ γοῦν· ὡς γὰρ εἷς μέν ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ἔχει δὲ φύσεις δύο.» 55 Σκοπεῖτε, ὡς οὐκ εἶπεν· Εἷς ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ δύο φύσεων, ἀλλ'· «Ἔχει φύσεις δύο», ὥστε καὶ μετὰ τὴν τῶν δύο φύσεων ἕνωσιν δύο φύσεις ἔχειν τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἔφησεν. «Ὡς γὰρ εἷς μέν ἐστιν», φησίν, «ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ἔχει δὲ φύσεις δύο ἐν αὑτῷ διαφόρους, καὶ κατ' ἄλλο μὲν λογίζεται, κατ' ἄλλο δὲ τὸ λογισθὲν ἐνεργεῖ-ψυχῇ μὲν γὰρ νοερᾷ λογισάμενος, εἰ τύχοι, τοῦ πλοίου τὴν σύμπηξιν χερσὶ τὸ νοηθὲν εἰς πέρας ἄγει-, οὕτως ὁ υἱὸς εἷς ὢν καὶ δύο φύσεις κατ' ἄλλην μὲν τὰς θεοσημείας ἐργάζεται, κατ' ἄλλην δὲ τὰ ταπεινὰ παραδέχεται· ᾗ μὲν γὰρ ἐκ πατρὸς καὶ θεὸς ἐνεργεῖ τὰ σημεῖα, ᾗ δὲ ἐκ παρθένου καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τὸν σταυρὸν καὶ τὰ πάθη καὶ τὰ παραπλήσια φυσικῶς ἐθέλων ὑπέμεινε.» Τίνι καταφαίνεταί σοι συνηγορεῖν τὸ