43

the blessed Cyril does not appear to forbid such a phrase, but only when it is used according to the malice of Nestorius, who asserted that the union was relational, as the blessed Cyril himself is shown to testify for himself at the end of the same letter, making his own purpose clear to those who are excessively contentious, saying thus: "But the word ‘indivisibly’ added, seems to us somehow to be indicative of right doctrine. They, however, do not understand it so. For with them 'indivisible,' according to the empty talk of Nestorius, is taken in another way. For 15Β_188 they say that the man in whom the Word of God dwelt is indivisible from Him by equality of honor, by identity of will, by authority. So they do not utter the words simply, but with a certain deceit and malice." Behold, this wonderful teacher clearly supposed that the way of 'indivisibly' is twofold: the one, signifying the union according to hypostasis, which he embraces, and says is indicative of right doctrine; the other, declarative only of a conjunction according to relation, which he rejects; and he exhorts the faithful to do this very thing, since from the similar pronunciation of the word, it can often secretly instill the poison of heretical impiety into the more simple. Whence, for himself, he considers saying 'two indivisibly' to be orthodox, since he himself said the union was according to hypostasis; but when used by the followers of Nestorius 0484, he makes the word 'indivisibly' suspect, because they held that the union had come about only by a relational conjunction.

A union according to hypostasis, therefore, according to the Fathers, is the coming together of different substances into one hypostasis, with one of the things composing it having its natural property unadulterated and unchanged and indivisible with respect to the other. But a relational union is the equal movement of will and the immutability of identical mind of those things which subsist specifically in personal monads of their own. He therefore who confesses the union according to hypostasis, even if he speaks of two natures in Christ after the union, united indivisibly, that is, by the union according to hypostasis, does not in any way err from the truth. For he confesses, according to the Fathers, that the things of which Christ is composed have remained unconfused on account of the preserved difference; being in no way able to know the things which differ from each other by the principle of nature to be outside of, and separate in any way from, the one according to hypostasis. But he who holds to the relational union, even if he should say 'indivisible' ten thousand times, possesses what is reprehensible; saying that the things signified are united by a certain loving disposition, 15Β_190 and have 'indivisibility'; being in no way able to say that the God Word is one hypostasis with his own ensouled and intelligent flesh from us. For it is impossible for one hypostasis to come to be from two particular hypostases which are divided from individuals of the same kind by a particular principle. So our holy Father Cyril does not simply slander and reject the saying of 'two natures united indivisibly after the union,' but the meaning signified by such a phrase by those who used it wrongly.

If, therefore, it has been demonstrated, even if moderately, yet to my mind, sufficiently, as was possible to signify through a letter, both from the holy Fathers and from the consequence of common notions, that number is able neither to effect, nor suffer, nor introduce any division whatsoever, but simply signifies quantity, and does not touch upon relation, however things may happen to be; what suspicion, then, of severance or division is left for those who are in sedition against the holy Church of God, and rashly cut themselves off from the common body; not so much acting, as suffering, being pitiably put to death and destroyed by the separation; and preparing for themselves a penalty in proportion to the unseemliness done to the body of Christ; so as to renounce, for this reason at least, the right and pious confession of the faith; unless perhaps in pretense

43

φαίνεται τήν τοιαύτην ἀπαγορεύων φωνήν ὁ μακάριος Κύριλλος, ἀλλά κατά τήν Νεστορίου κακόνοιαν προσφερομένην, σχετικήν φάσκοντος γεγενῆσθαι τήν ἕνωσιν, ὡς αὐτός ἑαυτῷ Κύριλλος ὁ μακάριος μαρτυρῶν δείκνυται ἐπί τέλει τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπιστολῆς καί τοῖς ἄγαν φιλονείκοις τόν ἑαυτοῦ σκοπόν ποιούμενος φανερόν, οὕτω λέγων· "Τό δέ ἀδιαιρέτως προστεθέν, δοκεῖ πως παρ᾿ ἡμῖν ὀρθῆς δόξης εἶναι σημαντικόν. Αὐτοί δέ οὐχ οὕτω νοοῦσι. Τό γάρ ἀδιαίρετον παρ᾿ αὐτοῖς, κατά τάς Νεστορίου κενοφωνίας, καθ᾿ ἕτερον λαμβάνεται τρόπον. Φασί 15Β_188 γάρ, ὅτι τῇ ἰσοτιμίᾳ, τῇ ταυτοβουλίᾳ, τῇ αὐθεντείᾳ ἀδιαίρετός ἐστι τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου ὁ ἐν ᾧ κατῴκησεν ἄνθρωπος. Ὥστε οὐχ ἁπλῶς τάς λέξεις προφέρουσιν, ἀλλά μετά τινος δόλου καί κακουργίας." Ἰδού σαφῶς διττόν ὑπάρχειν τόν τοῦ ἀδιαιρέτου τρόπον ὑπέθετο ὁ θαυμαστός οὗτος διδάσκαλος· τόν μέν, τήν καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν σημαίνοντα ἕνωσιν· ὅν καί ἀσπαζόμενος, ὀρθῆς δόξης εἶναί φησι σημαντικόν· τόν δέ, μόνης τῆς κατά σχέσιν συναφείας δηλωτικόν, ὅν καί ἀποστρέφεται· καί τοῖς πιστοῖς τοῦτο αὐτό ποιεῖν παραινεῖ, ἐκ τῆς κατά τήν λέξιν ὁμοίας προφορᾶς, πολλάκις τόν τῆς αἱρετικῆς δεσσεβείας ἰόν τοῖς ἀκεραιοτέροις λεληθότως ἐμβάλλειν δυνάμενον. Ὅθεν παρ᾿ ἑαυτῷ μέν, τό δύο λέγειν ἀδιαιρέτως, ὀρθόδοξον τίθεται· ἐπειδή αὐτός καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν εἶναι τήν ἕνωσιν ἔλεγε· παρά δέ τῶν κατά Νεστόριον 0484 προσφερομένην, ὕποπτον ποιεῖται τήν φωνήν τοῦ ἀδιαιρέτου, ἐπειδή κατά μόνην τήν σχετικήν συνάφειαν τήν ἕνωσιν γεγενῆσθαι ἐδόξαζον.

Καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν μέν οὖν ἕνωσίς ἐστι κατά τούς Πατέρας, ἡ τῶν ἑτερουσιῶν εἰς μίαν ὑπόστασιν σύνοδος, θατέρου τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτήν συγκειμένων, πρός τό ἕτερον τήν φυσικήν ἰδιότητα ἀνόθευτόν τε καί ἀμετάβλητον ἔχουσα καί ἀδιαίρετον. Σχετική δέ ἕνωσίς ἐστιν, ἡ τῶν καθ᾿ αὐτούς ἰδικῶς ἐν μονάσι προσωπικαῖς ὑφεστώτων ἴση θελήματος κίνησις καί γνωμικῆς ταυτότητος ἀπαραλλαξία. Ὁ τοίνυν ὁμολογῶν τήν καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἕνωσιν, κἄν λέγῃ δύο φύσεις ἐπί Χριστοῦ μετά τήν ἕνωσιν ἡνωμένας ἀδιαιρέτως, ἑνώσει δηλονότι τῇ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν, τῆς ἀληθείας καθοτιοῦν οὐ διαμαρτάνει. Τά γάρ ἐξ ὧν σύγκειται ὁ Χριστός ἀσύγχυτα μεμενηκέναι διά τήν σωζομένην διαφοράν κατά τούς Πατέρας ὁμολογεῖ· τοῦ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἑνός οὐδαμῶς τά τῷ φυσικῷ λόγῳ ἀλλήλων διαφέροντα ἐκτός εἶναι, καί χωρίς καθ᾿ οἱονδήποτε τρόπον γινώσκειν δυνάμενος. Ὁ δέ τήν κατά σχέσιν πρεσβεύων ἕνωσιν, κἄν εἰ μυριάκις λέγοι τό ἀδιαίρετον, τό ἐπίψογον κέκτηται· κατά τινα ἀγαπητικήν συνδιάθεσιν ἡνῶσθαι, 15Β_190 καί τό ἀδιαίρετον ἔχειν λέγειν τά σημαινόμενα· οὐδαμῶς μίαν ὑπόστασιν εἶναι τόν Θεόν Λόγον μετά τῆς ἐξ ἡμῶν ἰδίας αὐτοῦ ἐμψύχου τε καί ἔννου σαρκός εἰπεῖν οἷός τε ὤν. Ἐκ δύο γάρ ὑποστάσεων ἰδικῶν τῶν πρός τά ὁμοειδῆ ἄτομα ἰδικῷ λόγῳ μεμερισμένων, μίαν γενέσθαι ὑπόστασιν, ἀμήχανον. Ὥστε οὐχ ἁπλῶς διαβάλλει καί ἀποπέμπεται ὁ ἅγιος Πατήρ ἡμῶν Κύριλλος, τό λέγειν δύο φύσεις ἡνωμένας ἀδιαιρέτως μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, ἀλλά τήν σημαινομένην διά τῆς τοιαύτης φωνῆς τῶν κακῶς χρησαμένων ἔννοιαν.

Εἰ τοίνυν δέδεικται, κἄν εἰ μετρίως, πλήν ὅτι γε κατ᾿ ἐμέ εἰπεῖν, ἀρκούντως, ὡς δι᾿ ἐπιστολῆς σημᾶναι ἦν δυνατόν, ἔκ τε τῶν ἁγίων Πατέρων, καί τῆς τῶν κοινῶν ἐννοιῶν ἀκολουθίας, ὡς τήν οἱανοῦν διαίρεσιν, οὔτε ποιεῖν, οὔτε πάσχειν, οὔτε εἰσάγειν ὁ ἀριθμός δύναται, ἀλλ᾿ ἁπλῶς μέν δηλοῖ τά πόσα· τῆς δέ σχέσεως, ὡς δ᾿ ἄν ἔχοντα τύχωσιν, οὐ προσάπτεται· ποία λοιπόν ὑπολέλειπται τομῆς ὑπόνοια, ἤ διαιρέσεως, τοῖς πρός τήν ἁγίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ στασιάζουσιν Ἐκκλησίαν, καί εἰκῆ τοῦ κοινοῦ σώματος αὐτούς ἀποτέμνουσιν· οὐ μᾶλλον δρῶντες, ἤ πάσχοντες τῷ χωρισμῷ ἐλεεινῶς νεκρούμενοι καί φθειρόμενοι· καί τήν ὅσον ἐπί τῇ ἀπρεπείᾳ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, δίκην ἑαυτοῖς ἑτοιμάζοντες· ὥστε παραιτεῖσθαι τούτου γε ἕνεκεν τήν ὀρθήν καί εὐσεβῆς τῆς πίστεως ὁμολογίαν· εἰ μή ἄρα ἐν προσχήματι