36

That by saying one will, they are defending his views, the Ecthesis advocated by them also testifies, having declared that Nestorius teaches one will in the two persons fabricated by him.

MAX. Furthermore, by rejecting that the will is natural, they will say it is either hypostatic or contrary to nature. But if they say it is hypostatic, then the Son will be of a different will from the Father. For the hypostatic is characteristic of the hypostasis alone. But if contrary to nature, they are dogmatizing the falling away of his essences, since what is contrary to nature is destructive of what is according to nature.

And I would gladly ask them this also: does the God and Father of all will insofar as He is Father, or insofar as He is God? But if insofar as He is Father, his will shall be different from that of the Son; for the Son is not Father. But if insofar as He is God; and the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; then they will grant that the will belongs to the nature, that is, it is natural.

Furthermore, if according to the Fathers, those whose will is one, 0316 of these also the essence is one; but according to them, the will of the divinity of Christ and of his humanity is one; therefore they say that the essence of these is one and the same. And how, being so impious, do they say that they follow the Fathers?

And again, if according to the same Fathers the difference of nature does not appear in the one will, it is necessary for them either, by saying one will, not to speak of a natural difference in Christ, or, by speaking of a natural 15Γ_150 difference, not to say one will, if they conform themselves to the patristic canons.

And again, if according to the same teachers, the will is not common to both, that is, to the essences, it is necessary for them either not to say that both natures of the same one commonly have one will; or by saying this, to fight openly against the patristic laws and decrees.

PYR. The argument has shown very clearly and concisely the impiety of the opponents, which is interwoven with every contrivance. But what shall we say, that they also attempt to show this from the Fathers?

MAX. If they wish to call Fathers those who divide and those who confuse the supernatural economy, we concede it to them. For they all taught one will, although they were diametrically opposed in their impiety. But if they mean the Fathers of the Church, we will by no means concede this to them. Let them show but one of the eminent and universally known, so that we too, on the day of the judgment of our affairs, being accused by Christ our God, for what reason did you accept a phrase that dissolves the whole mystery of my incarnation? may have an apology, that we reverenced the Father's reputation in all things.

PYR. What then of the saying by Gregory the Theologian: "For his will is not even contrary to God, being wholly deified," is this not contrary to the two wills?

MAX. By no means. On the contrary, it is more indicative of the two wills than all the others.

PYR. How do you say this? MAX. Just as heating implies with itself that which is heated and that which heats, and the

cooling that which is cooled and that which cools, and walking that which walks and that which is walked upon, and sight that which sees and that which is seen, and thought that which thinks and that which is thought; for it is not possible 15Γ_152 to conceive or speak of the relation without the related terms; so consequently, both that which is deified and that which deifies. And besides, if the deification of the will is contrary to the two wills according to them, the deification of the nature will also be contrary to the two natures. For in both cases the Father has laid down the same principle of deification.

36

Ὅτι δέ ἕν θέλημα λέγοντες, τά ἐκείνου διεκδικοῦσι, καί ἡ παρ᾿ αὐτῶν συνηγορουμένη Ἔκθεσις μαρτυρεῖ, ἕν θέλημα ἀποφηναμένη τόν Νεστόριον πρεσβεύειν, ἐπί τῶν πλαττομένων αὐτῷ δύο προσώπων.

ΜΑΞ. Ἔτι τέ τό, φυσικόν εἶναι θέλημα διωθούμενοι, ἤ ὑποστατικόν αὐτό, ἤ παρά φύσιν λέξουσιν. Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ μέν ὑποστατικόν αὐτό φήσουσιν, ἑτερόβουλος οὕτω γε ἔσται ὁ Υἱός τῷ Πατρί. Μόνης γάρ ὑποστάσεως χαρακτηριστικόν τό ὑποστατικόν. Εἰ δέ παρά φύσιν, τήν ἔκπτωσιν τῶν αὐτοῦ δογματίζουσιν οὐσιῶν, εἴπερ φθαρτικά τῶν κατά φύσιν τά παρά φύσιν.

Ἡδέως δ᾿ ἄν αὐτούς καί τοῦτο ἐροίμην, ὅτι ὁ τῶν ὅλων Θεός καί Πατήρ, καθ᾿ ὅ Πατήρ θέλει, ἤ καθ᾿ ὅ Θεός; Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ μέν καθ᾿ ὅ ὁ Πατήρ, ἄλλο αὐτοῦ ἔσται παρά τό τοῦ Υἱοῦ θέλημα· οὐ γάρ Πατήρ ὁ Υἱός· εἰ δέ καθ᾿ ὅ Θεός· Θεός δέ Υἱός, Θεός καί τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον· ἄρα φύσεως εἶναι τό θέλημα δώσουσιν, ἤγουν φυσικόν.

Ἔτι, εἰ κατά τούς Πατέρας, ὧν τό θέλημα ἕν, 0316 τούτων καί ἡ οὐσία μία ἐστί· κατ᾿ αὐτούς δέ, ἕν τό θέλημα τῆς θεότητος τοῦ Χριστοῦ καί τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος αὐτοῦ· ἄρα μίαν καί τήν αὐτήν τούτων λέγουσι τήν οὐσίαν. Καί πῶς οὕτω ἀσεβοῦντες, φασίν, ὅτιπερ τοῖς Πατράσιν ἕπονται;

Καί πάλιν, εἰ κατά τούς αὐτούς Πατέρας ἡ τῆς φύσεως διαφορά ἐν τῷ ἐνί θελήματι οὐ διαφαίνεται, ἀνάγκη αὐτούς ἤ ἕν θέλημα λέγοντας, φυσικήν ἐν Χριστῷ μή λέγειν διαφοράν, ἤ φυσικήν 15Γ_150 λέγοντας διαφοράν, ἕν θέλημα μή λέγειν, εἴπερ τοῖς πατρικοῖς κανόσιν ἑαυτούς ἀπευθύνουσι.

Καί πάλιν, εἰ κατά τούς αὐτούς διδασκάλους, οὐκ ἔστι κοινόν ἀμφοτέρων, δηλαδή οὐσιῶν, τό θέλημα, ἀνάγκη αὐτούς ἤ ἄμφω τάς φύσεις τοῦ αὐτοῦ μή λέγειν κοινῶς ἔχειν ἕν θέλημα· ἤ τοῦτο λέγοντας, φανερῶς τοῖς πατρικοῖς ἀπομάχεσθαι νόμοις τε καί θεσπίσμασι.

ΠΥΡ. Λίαν σαφῶς, καί συντετμημένως ἔδειξεν λόγος τήν συμπεπλεγμένην πάσῃ ἐπινοίᾳ τῶν δι᾿ ἐναντίας ἀσέβειαν. Τί δέ λέγομεν, ὅτι καί ἐκ τῶν Πατέρων τοῦτο δεικνύειν ἐπιχειροῦσι;

ΜΑΞ. Εἰ μέν τούς διαιροῦντας, καί τούς συγχέοντας τήν ὑπερφυᾶ οἰκονομίαν, Πατέρας καλεῖν βούλονται, συγχωροῦμεν αὐτοῖς. Πάντες γάρ ἕν θέλημα ἐδόξασαν, καίτοι ἐκ διαμέτρου διεστηκότες τήν ἀσέβειαν. Εἰ δέ τούς τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, οὐδαμῶς τοῦτο συγχωρήσομεν αὐτοῖς. Ἐπεί δείξωσιν ἕνα μόνον τῶν ἐμφανῶν καί πᾶσι γνωρίμων, ὅπως καί ἡμεῖς ἐν ἡμέρᾳ τῆς τῶν ἡμετέρων διαγνώσεως, ἐγκαλούμενοι παρά Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὅτι τίνος χάριν ἀνεδέξασθε φωνήν, ὅλον λύουσαν τῆς ἐμῆς σαρκώσεως τό μυστήριον; ἔχομεν ἀπολογίαν, ὅτι τήν ἐν πᾶσιν αἰδεσθέντες τοῦ Πατρός ὑπόληψιν.

ΠΥΡ. Τί οὖν τό εἰρημένον τῷ Θεολόγῳ Γρηγορίῳ· "Τό γάρ ἐκείνου θέλειν οὐδέ ὑπεναντίον τῷ Θεῷ, θεωθέν ὅλον," οὐκ ἐναντίον τῶν δύο θελημάτων ἐστί;

ΜΑΞ. Οὐδαμῶς. Τοὐναντίον, τῶν δύο θελημάτων μέν οὖν, καί τῶν ἄλλων πάντων ἐκφαντικώτερον.

ΠΥΡ. Πῶς τοῦτό φης; ΜΑΞ. Ὥσπερ ἡ πύρωσις τό πυρωθέν καί τό πυρῶσαν ἑαυτῇ συνεισάγει, καί ἡ

ψύξις τό ψυχθέν καί τό ψύξαν, καί ἡ βάδισις τό βαδίζον καί βαδιζόμενον, καί ἡ ὅρασις τό ὁρῶν καί ὁρώμενον, καί νόησις τό νοοῦν καί νοούμενον· οὐ γάρ δυνατόν 15Γ_152 τήν σχέσιν ἄνευ τῶν σχετῶν νοεῖν ἤ λέγειν· οὕτω κατά τό ἀκόλουθον, καί τό θεωθέν καί τό θεῶσαν. Ἄλλως τε δέ, εἰ τοῦ θελήματος θέωσις ἐναντία ἐστί τῶν δύο θελημάτων κατ᾿ αὐτούς, καί ἡ τῆς φύσεως θέωσις ἐναντία ἔσται τῶν δύο φύσεων. Ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοτέρων γάρ τόν αὐτόν τῆς θεώσεως τέθεικεν ὁ Πατήρ λόγον.