44

saving, and through all things at the same time, and in the same thing, showing these? For neither is its burning separate from cutting after the union, nor is the cutting from the burning; and neither on account of the duality of the natural energy, does it introduce two incandescent knives; nor on account of the singularity of the incandescent knife, does it make a mixture or confusion of their essential difference.

PYRRHUS. Was not the one who acted one? MAXIMUS. Yes, one. PYRRHUS. If therefore the one who acted is one, the energy is also one, as of one. MAXIMUS. This one is Christ; for again I will ask you the same things as above, since you have returned to the same points;

is he one in hypostasis, or in nature? PYRRHUS. In hypostasis; for in nature he happens to be double. MAXIMUS. Therefore, did the same one act dually on account of the doubleness of his nature, or singularly on account of the singularity of his hypostasis? But if dually, being one, the same one acted, then the number of persons is not introduced along with the number of energies. But if singularly, on account of the singularity of the person, the argument about this will admit the same absurdities on the same points. For if the energy is hypostatic, 15Γ_182 a difference of energies will be observed along with the multitude of hypostases.

PYRRHUS. Not in every case, because he acted dually, were his energies two; but because the one who acted was one, one.

MAXIMUS. Another says this to you also concerning the natures, that not because his nature is dyadic, should there now be two natures, and be called two natures; but because his hypostasis was one, his nature is one, and is called so. But, to omit everything that can be said about this, when you speak of one energy, what kind do you deem it to be? divine, or human, or neither? But if divine, you say Christ is God only; if human, not God at all, but only a mere man; but if neither of these, you dogmatize that Christ is neither God, nor man, but non-existent.

PYRRHUS. Saying one energy of the divinity of Christ, and of his humanity, we do not say that this belongs to him by reason of nature, but in the manner of union.

MAXIMUS. If from the union, according to your argument, the energy accrued to him, then before the union he was without energy; and he acted tyrannically, according to you, when he created. And again, if the power to act accrued to him from the union; but the Father and the Holy Spirit were not united hypostatically to flesh, then they are not active. And if they are not active, they are not creators either; not to mention, that they do not exist at all.

And again, since union is a relation, and not 0341 a thing, the energy of Christ is therefore a relation and not a thing.

Furthermore, you will be forced to call it either created, or uncreated; since there is absolutely no middle ground between created and uncreated. And if you say it is created, it will indicate a created nature only; but if uncreated, it will characterize an uncreated nature only; for it is necessary in every way that natural things be suitable to their natures; and how would it be possible, for a created and begun nature, for the energy to be uncreated, and without beginning, and infinite, and creative, 15Γ_184 and cohesive? or how for an uncreated and beginningless, for it to be created, and begun, and finite, and held together by another so as to be indissoluble?

PYRRHUS. Do you not even accept and agree with those who say that the result of the works done by Christ is one energy?

44

σωζούσης, καί διά πάντων ἅμα, καί ἐν ταυτῷ, ταύτας ἐνδεικνυμένης; Οὔτε γάρ ἡ καῦσις αὐτῆς, τῆς τομῆς ἄφετός ἐστι μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, οὔτε ἡ τομή τῆς καύσεως· καί οὔτε διά τό διττόν τῆς φυσικῆς ἐνεργείας, δύο εἰσάγει τάς πεπυρακτωμένας μαχαίρας· οὔτε διά τό μοναδικόν τῆς πεπυρακτωμένης μαχαίρας, τῆς αὐτῶν οὐσιώδους διαφορᾶς φύρσιν ἤ σύγχυσιν ποιεῖται.

ΠΥΡ. Οὐχ εἷς ἦν ὁ ἐνεργῶν; ΜΑΞ. Ναί εἷς. ΠΥΡ. Εἰ οὖν εἷς ὁ ἐνεργῶν, καί μία, ὡς ἑνός, ἡ ἐνέργεια. ΜΑΞ. Ὁ εἷς οὗτος Χριστός· πάλιν γάρ τά αὐτά τοῖς ἀνωτέρω εἰς τά αὐτά ὑμᾶς

ὑποστρέψαντας ἐρήσομαι· εἷς τῇ ὑποστάσει, ἤ τῇ φύσει ἐστίν; ΠΥΡ. Τῇ ὑποστάσει· τῇ γάρ φύσει διπλοῦς τυγχάνει. ΜΑΞ. ∆υϊκῶς οὖν διά τό διπλοῦν τῆς φύσεως ὁ αὐτός ἐνήργει, ἤ ἑνικῶς διά

τό μοναδικόν τῆς ὑποστάσεως; Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ μέν δυϊκῶς, εἷς ὤν ὁ αὐτός ἐνήργει, οὐκ ἄρα τῷ ἀριθμῷ τῶν ἐνεργειῶν ὁ τῶν προσώπων συνεισάγεται ἀριθμός. Εἰ δέ ἑνικῶς, διά τό μοναδικόν τοῦ προσώπου, τάς αὐτάς ἐπί τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἀτοπίας ὁ περί τούτου δέξεται λόγος. Εἰ γάρ ὑποστατική ἡ ἐνέργεια, 15Γ_182 τῷ πλήθει τῶν ὑποστάσεων, καί τῶν ἐνεγειῶν διαφορά συνθεωρηθήσεται.

ΠΥΡ. Οὐ πάντως, ἐπειδή δυϊκῶς ἐνήργει, δύο ἦσαν αὐτοῦ αἱ ἐνέργειαι· ἀλλ᾿ ἐπειδή εἷς ἦν ὁ ἐνεργῶν, μία.

ΜΑΞ. Τοῦτο καί περί τῶν φύσεων ἕτερος λέγει πρός σέ, ὅτι οὐκ ἐπειδή δυαδική αὐτοῦ ἡ φύσις, ἤδη καί δύο εἴησαν, καί λεχθείησαν αἱ φύσεις· ἀλλ᾿ ἐπειδή μία ἦν αὐτοῦ ἡ ὑπόστασις, μία ἐστίν αὐτοῦ ἡ φύσις, καί λέγεται. Πλήν ἵνα πάντα παραλίπω, ὅσα περί τούτου ῥηθῆναι δύναται, μίαν ἐνέργειαν λέγοντες, ὁποίαν ταύτην λέγειν ἀξιοῦτε; θείαν, ἤ ἀνθρωπίνην, ἤ οὐδετέραν; Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ μέν θείαν, Θεόν μόνον τόν Χριστόν λέγετε· εἰ δέ ἀνθρωπίνην, οὐδέ ὅλως Θεόν, ἀλλ᾿ ἄνθρωπον μόνον ψιλόν· εἰ δέ οὐδετέραν τοῦτων, οὐδέ Θεόν, οὐδέ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλ᾿ ἀνύπαρκτον δογματίζετε τόν Χριστόν.

ΠΥΡ. Μίαν λέγοντες ἐνέργειαν τῆς θεότητος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καί τῆς κατ᾿ αὐτόν ἀνθρωπότητος, οὐ λόγῳ φύσεως ταύτην προσεῖναι αὐτῷ φαμεν, ἀλλ ἑνώσεως τρόπῳ.

ΜΑΞ. Εἰ ἐκ τῆς ἑνώσεως αὐτῷ, κατά τόν ὑμέτερον λόγον, προσγέγονεν ἡ ἐνέργεια, πρό τῆς ἑνώσεως ἄρα ἀνενέργητος ἦν· καί τετυράννηται, καθ᾿ ὑμᾶς, δημιουργήσας. Καιί αὖθις, εἰ ἐκ τῆς ἑνώσεως αὐτῷ προσγέγονε τό ἐνεργεῖν· ὁ Πατήρ δέ καί τό ἅγιον Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἡνώθησαν καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν σαρκί, οὐκ ἄρα ἐνεργητικοί. Εἰ δέ μή ἐνεργητικοί, οὐδέ δημιουργοί· ἵνα μή λέγω, ὅτι οὐδέ ὅλως εἰσίν.

Καί πάλιν, ἐπειδή ἡ ἕνωσις σχέσις ἐστί, καί οὐ 0341 πρᾶγμα, σχέσις ἄρα καί οὐ πρᾶγμα ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐνέργεια.

Ἔτι τε, ἤ κτιστήν, ἤ ἄκτιστον λέγειν ταύτην ἀναγκασθήσεσθε· ἐπειδή μέσον κτιστῆς καί ἀκτίστου οὐδεμία ὑπάρχει τό σύνολον. Καί εἰ μέν κτιστήν αὐτήν φήσετε, κτιστήν καί μόνην δηλώσει φύσιν· εἰ δέ ἄκτιστον, ἄκτιστον καί μόνην χαρακτηρίσει φύσιν· δεῖ γάρ πάντως κατάλληλα ταῖς φύσεσι τά φυσικά εἶναι· καί πῶς ἄν δυνατόν, τῆς κτιστῆς φύσεως καί ἠργμένης, ἄκτιστον εἶναι τήν ἐνέργειαν, ἄναρχόν τε, καί ἄπειρον, καί δημιουργόν, 15Γ_184 καί συνεκτικήν; ἤ πῶς ἀκτίστου καί ἀνάρχου, κτιστήν, καί ἠργμένην, καί πεπερασμένην, καί ὑφ᾿ ἑτέρας πρός τό ἀδιάλυτον εἶναι συνεχομένην;

ΠΥΡ. Οὐδέ τό ἀποτέλεσμα τῶν ὑπό Χριστοῦ γενομένων ἔργων λέγοντας μίαν ἐνέργεια, ἀποδέχῃ καί ὁμονοεῖς;