29

Therefore, of this, I mean the union, which does not corrupt the realities, nor their difference, but only unifies things according to it in a manner appropriate to the name, the things that are different by nature are always and in every way undiminished in it and are perfectly preserved, having suffered no alteration or confusion whatsoever; not in the essences themselves, not in wills, not in energies, not in any other natural thing. How then do some use this as a pretext for their own—I know not how to say it euphemistically—fine-mindedness; and say that the incarnate Word is by nature without will, and without energy in what is according to us, that is, in His humanity; since the substance taken from us is in Him as being properly without a soul and irrational. For that which is without energy is manifestly motionless and soulless; and that which has no rational will is clearly irrational and mindless. And 15Α_130 if the incarnate Word existed by nature without these things in what is according to us, how will it be believed that He even became man? And how, rather, will He not be shown to have changed His divine nature and to have fallen involuntarily under the passions of the flesh in it? For by the abolition of the natural things, both Arius and Apollinaris have made such an assault against Him. For the one, by dogmatizing that He was soulless, and the other, irrational—which is without energy and without will—blasphemed Him as a creature and a product in Himself. For each said the Only-begotten was passible by nature of His divinity, but not by nature of His flesh; and Apollinaris, being even more lavish in his impiety, also declared a complete change into flesh through a falling away and alteration of His divinity.

Therefore it is necessary for us, being pious, to reject such a confession, and to uphold the teaching of the holy Fathers; and according to them to confess two natural wills 0100 and essential energies in the same and one. For if we should say one will and one energy in Him, we would clearly dogmatize either that He is not by nature also man, but only God; or only by nature man, and not God; or neither man nor God. For example, if we should say the will is perchance natural, it is either entirely divine, or human; and if divine, the Word will naturally will divine things according to it; showing Himself to be only God by nature and willing with His own begetter, and not man; for it is not the nature of the human to be characterized by what is by nature divine; just as it is not the nature of the divine to be known by what is essentially human. And this, if we should say the will is by nature human, will be concluded as a consequence. But if it is hypostatic, it will be characteristic of His hypostasis alone; and He would never share in it with the Father and with us; for by hypostasis He is distinguished and separated from the extremes. The same things can be said again also about the energies.

15Α_132 But not for this reason, may it not be, do we deny the single expressions of the God-bearing Fathers concerning them, I mean the energies, both the "theandric energy" of the aforementioned revealer of God, the holy Dionysius, and the "one and cognate energy shown forth through both" of Cyril the wise. For these were piously proclaimed by them on account of the union, and the complete coalescence of the natural energies with one another; just as the dual expressions were, on account of their essential and natural difference. For the theandric is a summary of the divine and the human energy together. For the teacher, having devised a suitable term, which, as I said, comprehends both in its utterance, and having spoken this as a single term, periphrastically signified the dual energy of Him Who is dual in nature. For since he said before, "Not as God did He do divine things, because He was not God alone; but doing divine things by nature, for He was God by nature, yet through the flesh which was united to Him hypostatically; nor human things as a man, because He was not a mere man; but

29

Ταύτης τοιγαροῦν, λέγω δέ τῆς ἑνώσεως, οὐ λυμαινομένης τοῖς πράγμασιν, οὐδέ τῇ τούτων διαφορᾷ, ἀλλά μόνον τῇ κλήσει προσφυῶς ἑνοποιούσης τά κατ᾿ αὐτήν, εἰσί πάντοτε καί πάντως ἀμειώτως ἐν αὐτῇ καί τελείως σωζόμενα, τά κατά φύσιν διάφορα, τήν οἱανοῦν παρατροπήν οὐ παθόντα καί σύγχυσιν· οὐκ ἐν οὐσίαις αὐταῖς, οὐ θελήμασιν, οὐκ ἐνεργείαις, οὐκ ἄλλῳ τινί φυσικῷ. Πῶς οὖν ἐπικάλυμμα τῆς ἰδίας, οὐκ οἶδ᾿ ὅπως εὐφήμως εἰπεῖν, καλοφροσύνης, ταύτην τινές προφασίζονται· καί τόν σαρκωθέντα Λόγον ἀθέλητον φύσει, καί ἀνενέργητον τῷ καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς, ἤγουν τῷ ἀνθρωπίνῳ, φασί· ἅτε κυρίως ἀψύχου καί ἀλόγου τῆς ἐξ ἡμῶν προσληφθείσης οὐσίας ἐν αὐτῷ τυγχανούσης. Τό γάρ ἀνενέργητον, ἀκίνητόν τε καί ἄψυχον προδήλως ἐστί· καί τό μηδεμίαν λογικήν θέλησιν ἔχον, ἄλογον σαφῶς καί ἀνόητον. Καί 15Α_130 εἰ τούτων χωρίς κατά φύσιν ὑπῆρχεν ὁ σαρκωθείς Λόγος τό καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς, πῶς ὅτι καί ἄνθρωπος γέγονε πιστευθήσεται; πῶς δέ μᾶλλον οὐχί τραπείς τήν θείαν φύσιν, καί σαρκός πάθεσιν ἀκουσίως ὑποπεσών δειχθήσεται κατ᾿ αὐτήν; Τῇ γάρ τῶν φυσικῶν ἀναιρέσει, τήν τῶν τοιούτων καταδρομήν, Ἄρειός τε καί Ἀπολινάριος κατ᾿ αὐτοῦ πεποιήκασιν. Ὁ μέν γάρ, ἄψυχον, ὁ δέ ἄλογον, ὅπερ ἀνενέργητόν ἐστι καί ἀθέλητον, αὐτόν δογματίσαντες, κτίσμα τοῦτον καί ποίημα καθ᾿ ἑαυτόν ἐβλασφήμησαν. Ἑκάτερος γάρ παθητόν φύσει θεότητος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ φύσει σαρκός εἶπον τόν Μονογενῆ· κἄν Ἀπολινάριος ἔτι κατ᾿ ἀσέβειαν δαψιλευόμενος, καί τελείαν τήν εἰς σάρκα μεταβολήν κατ᾿ ἔκπτωσιν καί τροπήν τῆς αὐτοῦ θεότητος ἀπεφήνατο.

Χρή τοιγαροῦν εὐσεβοῦντας ἡμᾶς, τήν τοιαύτην ὁμολογίαν διώσασθαι, καί τήν τῶν ἁγίων Πατέρων κρατύνειν διδασκαλίαν· καί δύο φυσικά θελήματα 0100 κατ᾿ αὐτούς, καί οὐσιώδεις ἐνεργείας, ἐπί τοῦ αὐτοῦ καί ἑνός ὁμολογεῖν. Εἰ γάρ ἕν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῦ θέλημα καί μίαν ἐνέργειαν εἴποιμεν, ἤ τοῦτον οὐκ ὄντα φύσει καί ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλά μόνον Θεόν· ἤ φύσει μόνον ἄνθρωπον, καί οὐ Θεόν· ἤ οὔτε ἄνθρωπον οὔτε Θεόν σαφῶς δογματίσομεν. Οἷον, εἰ μέν φυσικόν τό θέλημα τυχόν εἴποιμεν, ἤ θεῖον πάντως, ἤ ἀνθρώπινον τοῦτό ἐστι· καί εἰ θεῖον, τά θεῖα κατ᾿ αὐτό θελήσει φυσικῶς ὁ Λόγος· Θεόν φύσει μόνον καί συνθελητήν τῷ ἰδίῳ γεννήτορι δεικνύς ἑαυτόν, καί οὐκ ἄνθρωπον· οὐ γάρ πέφυκε διά τοῦ φύσει θείου, τό ἀνθρώπινον φύσει χαρακτηρίζεσθαι· ὥσπερ οὐδέ διά τοῦ κατ᾿ οὐσίαν ἀνθρωπίνου, τό κατ᾿ οὐσίαν θεῖον γνωρίζεσθαι. Τοῦτο δε, καί εἰ ἀνθρώπινον φῶμεν τό θέλημα φύσει, κατά τό ἀκόλουθον συναχθήσεται. Εἰ δέ ὑποστατικόν, τῆς αὐτοῦ μόνης ὑποστάσεως ἔσται χαρακτηριστικόν· καί οὔποτ᾿ ἄν κατ᾿ αὐτό κοινωνήσῃ Πατρί καί ἡμῖν· τῶν γάρ ἄκρων ὑποστάσει διαστέλλεται καί χωρίζεται. Τά αὐτά δέ πάλιν καί περί ἐνεργειῶν ἔστιν εἰπεῖν.

15Α_132 Ἀλλ᾿ οὐ διά τοῦτο, μή γένοιτο, τάς τῶν θεοφόρων Πατέρων περί αὐτῶν, φημί τῶν ἐνεργειῶν, μοναδικάς ἐξαρνούμεθα, τήν τε τοῦ λεχθέντος θεοφάντορος ἁγίου ∆ιονυσίου "Θεανδρικήν ἐνέργειαν», καί τήν Κυρίλλου τοῦ σοφοῦ "μίαν τε καί συγγενῆ δι᾿ ἀμφοῖν ἐπιδεδειγμένην ἐνέργειαν». Αὗται μέν γάρ διά τήν ἕνωσιν, καί τήν πρός ἀλλήλας διόλου τῶν φυσικῶν ἐνεργειῶν συμφυΐαν, εὐσεβῶς αὐτοῖς ἐκηρύχθησαν· ὥσπερ καί αἱ δυϊκαί, διά τήν οὐσιώδη καί φυσικήν τούτων διαφοράν. Ἡ γάρ Θεανδρική τῆς θείας ὁμοῦ καί ἀνδρικῆς ἐνεργείας ὑπάρχει περίληψις. Κατάλληλον γάρ ὁ διδάσκαλος ἐπινοήσας φωνήν, ἑκατέραν, ὡς ἔφην, τῇ προφορᾷ συλλαμβάνουσαν, καί ταύτην μοναδικῶς ἐκφωνήσας, τήν διπλῆν, τοῦ διπλοῦ τήν φύσιν, ἐνέργειαν περιφραστικῶς παρεδήλωσεν. Ἐπειδή γάρ πρότερον ἔφησεν, "Οὐ κατά Θεόν τά θεῖα δράσας, ὅτι μή γυμνός ὑπῆρχε Θεός· ἀλλά δράσας μέν φύσει τά θεῖα· Θεός γάρ ἦν κατά φύσιν· διά σαρκός δέ, τῆς αὐτῷ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἡνωμένης· οὐ τά ἀνθρώπινα κατά ἄνθρωπον, ὅτι μή ἄνθρωπος ὑπῆρχε ψιλός· ἀλλά