41

And after a little. Indeed, then, of the synodical letters of the now most holy Pope, in as many chapters as 0136 you have written, those of the queen of cities have taken exception; but to only two, of which one concerns theology, because he says that he said, “The Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son”; and the other, concerning the divine incarnation; because he wrote: "The Lord as man is without the ancestral sin.” And for the first, they brought forward consonant testimonies of the Roman Fathers; and moreover also of Cyril of Alexandria, from the sacred treatise composed by him on the holy evangelist John; from which, they showed themselves not to be making the Son the cause of the Spirit; for they know the Father to be the one cause of the Son and of the Spirit; of the one by generation; of the other, by procession; but so that they might declare the proceeding through Him; and thereby demonstrate the connature and unchangeableness of the essence.

But for the second, they need no apology at all. For what dispute is there in this, even if it is thought so by those making excuses, on account of their perversity. Nevertheless, they did beseech them, saying, “To have neither the sin in the mind, by which Adam seems to have first suffered, nor the action and operation of evil proceeding from it through the body.”

These, then, said these things, for which they were not reasonably censured; but those, concerning what they were very justly, have made no apology even until now, because they have not cast out what was introduced by them. But to translate their own writings, in order to escape the misrepresentations 15Α_182 of those who fall under your command, I have urged the Romans; but as custom has cried out to do and to send thus, I do not know if they would be trusted. Besides, there is the fact that they are not able to express their own meaning with such precision in another word and tongue as in their own native one, just as we also in ours with our own. But in any case, having learned the insolence by experience, they will also have a care for this.

And concerning essence and nature, and indeed hypostasis and person, and the successive chapters, I have come across a draft by Theodore of Pharan; and as it is in the manner of an introduction, they are perhaps not unhelpful; but in the discourse on person and hypostasis, he seems to have adhered not so much to the canons concerning these things as to himself, speaking of a hypostatic energy; whom those of the opposite party put forward as the teacher and advocate of their own opinion, having fashioned and dictated almost the entire Exposition from him and his sayings. For in these matters he has somehow overshadowed and obscured reason, having given to the person as person the energy that characterizes the nature; not the mode of how and of what kind its 0137 outcome is; according to which the difference of those who act and of the things done is known, being according to nature or contrary to nature. For each of us acts as being something primarily, but not as being someone; that is, as a human being; but as someone, for example Paul or Peter, one shapes the mode of the energy, perhaps by remission or intention, being formed thus or otherwise by it according to will. Whence, in the mode, the difference of the persons according to the action is known; but in the principle, the unchangeableness of the natural energy. For one is not more and another less active or rational; but equally we all have both reason and its energy according to nature. 15Α_184 But more and less; and thus or otherwise just or unjust, by one following more what is according to nature, and another departing from these. But those accused of something must be observed with exactness. Since they somehow force and drag both the definitions of things and the canons towards the

41

Καί μετά βραχέα. Ἀμέλει τοι γοῦν τῶν τοῦ νῦν ἁγιοτάτου, Πάπα συνοδικῶν, ἐν τοσούτοις, ὅσοις 0136 γεγράφατε, κεφαλαίοις, οἱ τῆς βασιλίδος τῶν πόλεων ἐπελάβοντο· δυσί δέ μόνοις, ὤν, τό μέν ὑπάρχει περί θεολογίας, ὅτι τε φησίν εἶπεν, " Ἐκπορεύσθαι κἀκ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον»· τό δέ ἄλλο, περί τῆς θείας σαρκώσεως· ὅτιπερ γέγραφε· "∆ίχα τόν Κύριον εἶναι τῆς προπατορικῆς ἁμαρτίας ὡς ἄνθρωπον». Καί τό μέν πρῶτος, συμφώνους παρήγαγον χρήσεις τῶνῬωμαίων Πατέρων· ἔτι γε μήν καί Κυρίλλου Ἀλεξανδρείας, ἐκ τῆς πονηθείσης αὐτῷ εἰς τόν εὐαγγελιστήν ἅγιον Ἰωάννην ἱερᾶς πραγματείας· ἐξ ὧν, οὐκ αἰτίαν τόν Υἱόν ποιοῦντας τοῦ Πνεύματος, σφᾶς αὐτούς ἀπέδειξαν· μίαν γάρ ἴσασιν Υἱοῦ καί Πνεύματος τόν Πατέρα αἰτίαν· τοῦ μέν κατά τήν γέννησιν· τοῦ δέ, κατά τήν ἐκπόρευσιν· ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα τό δι᾿ αὐτοῦ προϊέναι δηλώσωσι· καί ταύτῃ τό συναφές τῆς οὐσίας καί ἀπαράλλακτον παραστήσωσι.

Τῷ δέ δευτέρῳ, μηδεμιᾶς χρήζουσι τό παράπαν ἀπολογίας. Ποίᾳ γάρ ἐν τούτῳ ἀμφισβήτησις· εἰ καί τοῖς προφασιζομένοις νομίζεται διά τό δύστροπον. Ὅμως δ᾿ οὖν ἐξεδυσώπησαν, εἰπόντες «Μήτε τήν κατά νοῦν ἔχειν ἁμαρτίαν, καθ᾿ ἥν πρωτοπαθήσας φαίνεταί πως ὁ Ἀδάμ, μήτε τήν ἐξ αὐτῆς προϊοῦσαν διά σώματος πρᾶξιν τοῦ κακοῦ καί ἐνέργειαν».

Οὕτοι μέν οὖν ταῦτα, περί ὧν οὐκ εὐλόγως ἀνεκλήθησαν· ἐκεῖνοι δέ περί ὧν καί μάλα δικαίως, οὐδεμίαν μέχρι καί νῦν πεποίηνται τήν ἀπολογίαν, ὅτι μηδέ τήν παρεισαχθέντων τῶν ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν ἐκβολήν. Μεθερμηνεύειν δέ τά οἰκεῖα, τοῦ τάς ὑποκλοπάς 15Α_182 χάριν διαφυγεῖν τῶν ὑποπιπτόντων κατά τήν ὑμετέραν κέλευσιν, παρεκάλεσα τούςῬωμαίους· πλήν ἔθους κεκρακηκότος οὕτω ποιεῖν καί στέλλειν, οὐκ οἶδα τυχόν εἰ πιστεῖεν. Ἄλλως τε καί τό μή οὕτως δύνασθαι διακριβοῦν ἐν ἄλλῃ λέξει σέ καί φωνῇ τόν ἑαυτῶν νοῦν ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ καί θρεψαμένῃ, καθάπερ οὖν καί ἡμεῖς ἐν τῇ καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς τόν ἡμέτερον. Γενήσεται δέ πάντως αὐτοῖς, πείρᾳ τήν ἐπήρειαν μαθοῦσι, καί ἡ περί τούτου φροντίς.

Τῷ δέ περί οὐσίας καί φύσεως, ὑποστάσεώς τε δή καί προσώπου, καί τῶν καθεξῆς κεφαλαίων, ἐνέτυχον σχέδει Θεοδώρου τοῦ τῆς Φαράν· καί ὡς ἐν εἰσαγωγῆς τρόπῳ τυχόν οὐκ ἀσυντελοῦσιν· ἐν δέ τῷ περί προσώπου καί τῆς ὑποστάσεως λόγῳ, οὐ τοῖς περί τούτων κανόσι μᾶλλον, ἤ ἑαυτῷ φαίνεται στοιχήσας πως, ὑποστατικήν λέγοντι τήν ἐνέργειαν· ὅν καί τῆς οἰκείας δόξης καθηγητήν καί συνήγορον, οἱ τῆς ἐναντίας προβάλλονται· τήν πᾶσαν ἐξ αὐτοῦ καί τῶν αὐτοῦ ῥημάτων σχεδόν τυπώσαντές τε καί ὑπαγορεύσαντες Ἔκθεσιν. Καί γάρ κατά ταῦτα λόγον συνεσκίασέ πως καί ἡμαύρωσε, τῷ προσώπῳ δεδωκώς ὡς προσώπῳ τήν χαρακτηρίζουσαν τήν φύσιν ἐνέργειαν· οὐχί τόν πῶς καί ὁποῖον τῆς 0137 κατ᾿ αὐτήν ἐκβάσεως τρόπον· καθ᾿ ἥν ἡ διαφορότης τῶν τε πραττόντων καί τῶν πραττομένων γνωρίζεται, κατά φύσιν, ἤ παρά φύσιν ἐχόντων. Ὡς γάρ τι ὤν προηγουμένως, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχ ὥς τις ἕκαστος ἡμῶν ἐνεργεῖ· τουτέστιν, ὡς ἄνθρωπος· ὡς δέ τις, οἷον Παῦλος ἤ Πέτρος, τόν τῆς ἐνεργείας σχηματίζει τρόπον, ἐνδόσει τυχόν ἤ ἐπιδόσει, οὕτως ἤ ἐκείνως ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ κατά γνώμην τυπούμενος. Ὅθεν ἐν μέν τῷ τρόπῳ τό παρηλλαγμένον τῶν προσώπων κατά τήν πρᾶξιν γνωρίζεται· ἐν δέ τῷ λόγῳ, τό τῆς φυσικῆς ἀπαράλλακτον ἐνεργείας. Οὐ γάρ ὁ μέν μᾶλλον, ὁ δέ ἧττόν ἐστιν ἐνεργής ἤ λογικός· ἀλλ᾿ ἐπίσης ἅπαντες τόν τε λόγον ἔχομεν καί τήν τούτου κατά φύσιν ἐνέργειαν. 15Α_184 Μᾶλλον δέ καί ἧττον· καί οὕτως ἤ ἐκείνως δίκαιος ἤ ἄδικος, τῷ τόν μέν τοῖς κατά φύσιν ἕψεσθαι πλέον· τόν δέ τούτων ἀφέψεσθαι. Τηρητέον δέ δι᾿ ἀκριβείας τούς περί τι παρεγκληθέντας. Ἐπειδή βιάζονταί πως καί ἕλκουσι τούς τε τῶν πραγμάτων ὅρους, καί τούς κανόνας πρός τό