34

the Word, having been incarnate hypostatically in that which was animated with a mind and reason, has fulfilled, while according to Severus, not having a natural will as man; for if in truth He was lacking a natural will as man, He did not in truth become a perfect man, nor did He become man at all. For what is the existence of an imperfect nature, of which there is no account?

The purpose, therefore, for Severus and those with him, is by some natural lack to thrust out the nature ineffably assumed in the union; and to ratify the abomination of the fantasy of Manes, the confusion of Apollinarius, and the consubstantiation of Eutyches. For I remember when staying on the island of Crete, some false bishops of the party of Severus disputed with me, hearing that 'for this reason, according to the Tome of Leo, we do not confess two energies in Christ, on account of the wills that follow them, by which a dyad of persons is necessarily introduced; but neither again one, as it cannot be considered simple; but we say one will, and every divine and human energy proceeds from one and the same God the Word incarnate, (52) according to Severus.' To whom one might indignantly bring that part of the prophecy: 'Ho, ho, flee from the north; be saved in Zion, you who inhabit the daughter of Babylon.' For the mind of Severus is truly the north, having become a gloomy place, and a dwelling deprived of the divine light. And the daughter of Babylon is the confused teaching of false dogmas, badly born from the worst disposition that came to him, which they inhabit, not willing to be saved in Zion, I mean the Church, through repentance. For the tortured argument of Severus fights against both theology and the economy at the same time. For if according to him, it is natural for the wills to follow the energies, and for persons to be introduced by the wills, as effects by their causes; so that I might not say what the proof is; and to every person, clearly, according to him, there is a will; and with this a suitable energy will certainly be co-introduced. For the principle of relation, having an indissoluble connection, makes the inversion of the related terms equal and consequent.

Therefore, since what is said simply is ambiguous, if the wills co-introduced to the persons by inversion were natural, the blessed Monad, according to Severus, will also be a Triad of natures. But if they are gnomic, it will certainly be in rebellion with itself, not agreeing in the wills, as a Triad of persons; or, certainly, if there is one will of the super-essential Trinity, the three-named Godhead will be of one person.

And again, if according to the proposal of Severus a will certainly follows the energy, and with this a person is co-introduced, then of necessity when the energy is abolished, the will that follows it and the person co-introduced by it are also abolished. But if the will is abolished with the energy, and the person with the will, Christ will be without hypostasis according to Severus; because the will which is abolished with the energy, and the person who is co-introduced by the will, are abolished together.

And again, if according to him wills certainly follow energies, and persons are co-introduced with the wills; and he says that every divine and human energy proceeds from one and the same God the Word (53) incarnate; then every will according to him (that is, both divine and human), as following the energies along with the persons co-introduced with them in equal number, will certainly be co-produced from one and the same Word incarnate; and no argument will contradict it.

Therefore, by the abolition of the natural energies, Christ according to Severus will be without substance; by the delineation of the one, again without will and without hypostasis; and by the production of every divine and human energy, of many wills and of many persons;

34

νοερῶς τε καί λογικῶς ἐψυχωμένης καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν σαρκωθείς ὁ Λόγος πεπλήρωκε, θέλημα φυσικόν κατά Σευῆρον οὐκ ἔχων ὡς ἄνθρωπος· εἰ γάρ φυσικῷ θελήματι κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἦν ἐλλιπής, τέλειος κατ' ἀλήθειαν οὐ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, οὐδ᾿ ὅλως ἄνθρωπος γέγονεν. Τίς γάρ ἀτελοῦς φύσεως ὕπαρξις, ἧς οὐδέ λόγος ἐστί;

Σκοπός οὖν Σευήρῳ, καί τοῖς ἀμφ᾿ αὐτόν, διά τινος πάντως ἐλλείψεως φυσικῆς, τήν προσληφθεῖσαν καθ᾿ ἕνωσιν ἄῤῥητον ἐξώσασθαι φύσιν· τῆς τε Μάνεντος φαντασίας, καί τῆς Ἀπολιναρίου συγχύσεως, καί τῆς Εὐτυχοῦς συνουσιώσεως ἐπικυρῶσαι τό μῦσος. Μέμνημαι γάρ κατά τήν Κρητῶν νῆσον διάγων, τινῶν ψευδεπισκόπων πρός ἐμέ διενεχθέντων τῆς Σευήρου μερίδος· ἀκούσας, ὡς διά τοῦτο δύο κατά τόν Λέοντος τόμον ἐνεργείας οὐχ ὁμολογοῦμεν ἐπί Χριστοῦ, διά τά ἑπόμενα ταύταις θελήματα, οἷς ἐξ ἀνάγκης προσώπων συνεισάγεται δυάς· ἀλλ᾿ οὐδέ μίαν πάλιν, ἁπλῆν θεωρεῖσθαι μή δυναμένην· ἕν δέ θέλημα, καί πᾶσαν θείαν τε καί ἀνθρωπίνην ἐνέργειαν ἐξ ἑνός καί τοῦ αὐτοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου σεσαρκωμένου, (52) κατά Σευῆρον προϊέναι φαμέν. Πρός οὕς ἄν τις σχετλιαστικῶς ἐκεῖνο τῆς προφητείας ἐποίσει τό μέρος· Ὤ, ὤ, φεύγετε ἀπό Βοῤῥᾶ· εἰς Σιών ἀνασώζεσθε, οἱ κατοικοῦντες θυγατέρα Βαβυλῶνος. Βοῤῥᾶς γάρ ὡς ἀληθῶς Σευήρου διάνοια, τόπος γενομένη ζοφερός, καί τῆς τοῦ θείου φωτός ἐστερημένη διατριβῆς· Θυγάτηρ δέ Βαβυλῶνος, ἡ κακῶς ἐκ τῆς προσγενομένης αὐτῷ χειρίστης ἕξεως γεννηθεῖσα συγκεχυμένη τῶν ψευδῶν διδασκαλία δογμάτων, ἥν κατοικοῦσι τήν Σιών, λέγω τήν Ἐκκλησίαν, ἀνασωθῆναι δι᾿ ἐπιστροφἠς οὐκ ἐθέλοντες. Ὁμοῦ γάρ τῆς τε θεολογίας καί τῆς οἰκονομίας, ὁ Σευήρου βασανιζόμενος καταγωνίζεται λόγος. Εἰ γάρ κατ᾿ αὐτόν, ταῖς ἐνεργείαις ἕπεσθαι τά θελήματα πέφυκε τοῖς δέ θελήμασιν εἰσάγεσθαι πρόσωπα, καθάπερ αἰτίοις αἰτιατά· ἵνα μή λέγω τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις· καί παντί προσώπῳ δηλονότι, κατ' αὐτόν, θέλημα· καί τούτῳ πάντως ἐνέργεια συνεισαχθήσεται πρόσφορος. Ὁ γάρ τόν πρός τι, λόγος, ἄλυτον ἔχων τήν σχέσιν, ἴσην ποιεῖται τήν τῶν σχετῶν ἀκολούθως ἀντιστροφήν.

Οὐκοῦν ἐπειδή πολύσημόν ἐστι τό ἁπλῶς λεγόμενον, εἰ μέν φυσικά τά κατά ἀντιστροφήν συνεισαγόμενα τοῖς προσώποις εἶεν θελήματα, ἡ μακαρία Μονάς, κατά Σευῆρον, καί φύσεων ἔσται Τριάς. Εἰ δέ γνωμικά, στασιάσει πάντως πρός ἑαυτήν μή συμβαίνουσα τοῖς θελήμασιν, ὡς προσώπων Τριάς· ἤ πάντως, εἴπερ ἕν θέλημα τῆς ὑπερουσίου Τριάδος ἐστί, μονοπρόσωπος ἔσται Θεότης τριώνυμος.

Καί πάλιν, εἰ τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ πάντως κατά τήν Σευήρου πρότασιν ἕπεται θέλημα· τούτῳ δέ συνεισάγεται πρόσωπον, ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἀναιρεθείσῃ τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ, καί τό ἑπόμενον αὐτῇ συνανῄρηται θέλημα, καί τό τούτῳ συνεισαγόμενον πρόσωπον. Εἰ δέ τῇ μέν ἐνεργείᾳ, τό θέλημα· τῷ δέ θελήματι, συναιρεῖται τό πρόσωπον, ἀνυπόστατος ἔσται κατά Σευῆρον ὁ Χριστός· τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ, διά τό συναιρούμενον αὐτῇ θέλημα τοῦ συνεισαγομένου τῷ θελήματι προσώπου συναναιρεθέντος.

Καί πάλιν, εἰ ταῖς ἐνεργείαις κατ᾿ αὐτόν ἕπεται πάντως θελήματα, τοῖς δέ θελήμασι συνεισάγεται πρόσωπα· ἐξ ἑνός δέ καί τοῦ αὐτοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου (53) σεσαρκωμένου προϊέναι φησί πᾶσαν θείαν καί ἀνθρωπίνην ἐνέργειαν· καί πᾶν θέλημα κατ᾿ αὐτόν (δηλονότι θεῖόν τε καί ἀνθρώπινον), ὡς ταῖς ἐνεργείαις ἑπόμενον μετά τῶν ἰσαρίθμως συνεισαγομένον αὐτοῖς προσώπων, ἐξ ἑνός καί τοῦ αὐτοῦ Λόγου σεσαρκωμένου πάντως συμπροαχθήσεται· καί οὐδείς ἀντερεῖ λόγος.

Ἔσται τοιγαροῦν τῇ μέν ἀναιρέσει τῶν φυσικῶν ἐνεργειῶν ὁ Χριστός κατά Σευῆρον, ἀνούσιος· τῇ δέ παραγραφῇ τῆς μιᾶς , πάλιν ἄβουλος καί ἀνυπόστατος· καί τῇ πάσῃ προαγωγῇ θείας τε καί ἀνθρωπίνης ἐνεργείας, πολύβουλός τε καί πολυπρόσωπος·