47

And even if at last we take refuge in that rotten and empty invention of Severus, which is everywhere carried about and sung by him as something very wise, claiming that it is ridiculous to say that from two natures two natures are again shown forth from the union; as if they are drawing the logical conclusions from a premise granted by us. For from whom of those educated in the divine dogmas of the Church have they heard that the union from two natures produced two natures? But in no way will they be able to say they have heard this, if they care for the truth. But we say that the union has come to be from two natures; and that one composite hypostasis of Christ is constituted from them, 0493 which preserves and saves those very natures from which it was composed, as a whole its own parts, without deficiency and unchangeably, along with their natural properties; and is preserved and saved in them as a whole in its parts. From two natures, therefore, we say Christ is not two natures, but one composite hypostasis; containing these natures as its own parts, and containing them as its own and complementary parts; and both being and being known in them as in parts. For as long as 15Β_204 the things that have come together have remained and are believed to be unconfused—and they do always remain unconfused—it is impossible for them not to be two according to their natural being, which each is by nature according to its essence; just as, therefore, it is also impossible for them to be one by the principle of the hypostasis, as long as the union exists—and it always does exist according to the pious confession of the faithful.

Therefore, saying that he is one and two, we do not say both of the same one thing in the same respect, but in one respect and another. For instance, according to the principle of nature, of those things from which the union is, we say "two." For we do not know the God Logos to be the same in nature as his own flesh; but according to the principle of the hypostasis, we say "one"; for we know the God Logos to be the same as his own flesh according to the hypostasis. Therefore, we neither foolishly smear the natures into one nature, by saying that the natural difference in Christ has been abolished, lest we should introduce a change of the Logos and of the flesh; nor do we again madly divide him into two separately subsisting things, by positing a difference also according to the principle of the hypostasis, lest we should deny our own salvation; as did those who divided the impiety between themselves from opposite ends, Apollinarius together with Eutyches, and Nestorius; the former not acknowledging a natural difference in Christ, the latter, in addition to this, also introducing a personal one, have fallen away from the truth. But knowing that even in the hypostatic union the natural property is unchangeable, we equally turn away from both confusion and division; making neither the union a confusion, as if ignorant of the things united; nor the difference a division, as if knowing the differing things to subsist separately by themselves.

This, then, it seems, the great Theologian Gregory also appears to teach in his great Apology, saying, "One from both, and through the one, both;" as if he were saying, For just as there is one from both, that is, the one from two natures, as a whole from parts 15Β_206 according to the principle of the hypostasis; so also through the one according to the hypostasis, as through a whole, are both the parts, that is the two, according to the principle of nature. Which, when explaining more clearly in the second Oration on the Son, he says, "For if the combination of both is one, it is not so by 0496 nature, but by conjunction." And the blessed Cyril is also shown to hold this very same thing in his letters to Succensus, in which he says, concerning the example of the human being: "So that the two are no longer two, but through both the one living being is constituted;" in these words all but explicitly crying out, That for the things from which the composition consists—both in the case of the human being among us, who is from soul and body, and in the case of the mystery of Christ, which is from divinity and humanity—the fact that they are two according to the essential principle is not abolished; since, they would no longer remain of different essence. But to be by themselves in

47

Κἄν εἰ τά μάλιστα ἐπ᾿ ἐκεῖνο καταφεύγομεν τελευταῖον, τό σαθρόν καί διάκενον Σευήρου εὕρημα, τό πάνυ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ ὥσπερ τι σοφόν πανταχοῦ φερόμενον καί ᾀδόμενον, φάσκοντες γελοῖον εἶναι, ἐκ δύο φύσεων δύο φύσεις ἐκ τῆς ἑνώσεως πάλιν ἀναδειχθῆναι λέγειν· ὥσπερ λήμματι παρ᾿ ἡμῶν δοθέντι τά εἰκότα ἐπισυνάγοντες. Τίνος γάρ ἤκουσαν τῶν τά θεῖα τῆς Ἐκκλησίας πεπαιδευμένων δόγματα, ὡς ἡ ἕνωσις ἐκ δύο φύσεων δύο ἀπετέλεσε φύσεις; Ἀλλ᾿ οὐδαμῶς ἀκηκοέναι εἰπεῖν δυνήσονται ἀληθείας φροντίζοντες. Λέγομεν δέ ἐκ δύο φύσεως τήν ἕνωσιν γεγενῆσθαι· μίαν δέ τήν ἐξ αὐτῶν 0493 ὑπόστασιν ἀποτελέσθαι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σύνθετον ἐκεῖνας αὐτάς τάς ἐξ ὧν συνετέθη φύσεις, ὡς ὅλον ἴδια μέρη ἀνελλιπῶς μετά τῶν φυσικῶν ἰδιωμάτων, καί ἀτρέπτως φυλάττουσάν τε καί διασώζουσαν· καί ἐν αὐταῖς φυλαττομένην καί σωζομένην ὡς ὅλον ἐν μέρεσιν. Ἐκ δύο οὖν φύσεων, οὐ δύο φύσεις, ἀλλά μίαν ὑπόστασιν λέγομεν Χριστόν σύνθετον· τούτων ὡς ἰδίων μερῶν περιεκτικήν τῶν φύσεων, καί ταύτας ὡς ἴδια καί συμπληρωτικά μέρη περιέχουσαν· καί ἐν αὐταῖς ὡς ἐν μέρεσι καί οὖσαν καί γνωριζομένην. Ἕως γάρ ἄν 15Β_204 ἀσύγχυτα τά συνελθόντα μεμένηκαι πιστεύηται, ἀεί δέ μένει ἀσύγχυτα, τοῦ μή δύο εἶναι κατά τό πεφυκέναι εἶναι, ὅπερ ἑκάτερον κατ᾿ οὐσίαν εἶναι πέφυκεν· ὥσπερ οὖν καί τοῦ ἕν εἶναι ταῦτα τῷ κατά τήν ὑπόστασιν λόγῳ, ἕως ἄν ἡ ἕνωσις ᾖ· ἀεί δέ ἐστι κατά τήν εὐσεβῆ τῶν πιστῶν ὁμολογίαν, ἀδύνατον.

∆ιό ἕν καί δύο αὐτό λέγοντες, οὐ κατά τό αὐτό φαμεν, ἐπί τοῦ αὐτοῦ καί ἑνός ἀμφότερα· κατ᾿ ἄλλο δέ καί ἄλλο. Οἷον κατά μέν τόν τῆς φύσεως λόγον, τῶν ἐξ ὧν ἡ ἕνωσις, τό δύο. Οὐ γάρ ταὐτόν κατά τήν φύσιν τῇ ἰδίᾳ σαρκί τόν Θεόν Λόγον γινώσκομεν· κατά δέ τόν τῆς ὑποστάσεως λόγον τό ἕν· ταὐτόν γάρ τόν Θεόν Λόγον τῇ ἰδίᾳ σαρκί κατά τήν ὑπόστασιν ἐπιστάμεθα. Οὔτε οὖν τάς φύσεις ἀφρόνως εἰς μίαν συναλείφομεν φύσιν, τῷ ἀνῃρῆσθαι λέγειν ἐπί Χριστοῦ τήν φυσικήν διαφοράν, ἵνα μή τροπήν τοῦ Λόγου καί τῆς σαρκός εἰσαγάγωμεν· οὔτε εἰς δύο πάλιν ἰδιοσυστάτους μανικῶς διαιροῦμεν, τῷ καί κατά τόν τῆς ὑποστάσεως λόγον τιθέναι διαφοράν, ἵνα μή τήν ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἀρνώμεθα σωτηρίαν· ὥσπερ οἱ ἐκ διαμέτρου πρός ἀλλήλους μερισάμενοι τήν ἀσέβειαν, Ἀπολινάριος ἅμα Εὐτυχεῖ, καί Νεστόριος ποιήσαντες· οἱ μέν φυσικήν διαφοράν ἐπί Χριστοῦ οὐκ εἰδότες· ὁ δέ πρός ταύτῃ καί προσωπικήν προσεπάγων, τῆς ἀληθείας ἐξέπεσαν. Ἀλλ᾿ εἰδότες καί ἐν τῇ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἑνώσει τήν φυσικήν ἰδιότητα ἄτρεπτον, καί τήν σύγχυσιν ὁμοίως καί τήν διαίρεσιν ἀποστρεφόμεθα· μήτε τήν ἕνωσιν σύγχυσιν, ὡς ἀγνοοῦντες τά ἑνωθέντα· μήτε διαίρεσιν τήν διαφοράν, ὡς καθ᾿ αὑτά ὑφεστάναι μεμερισμένως εἰδότες τά διαφέροντα, ἐργαζόμενοι.

Τοῦτο μέν οὖν, ὡς οἶναι, καί ὁ μέγας Θεολόγος Γρηγόριος διδάσκων φαίνεται ἐν τῷ μεγάλῳ ἀπολογητικῷ, " Ἕν ἐξ ἀμφοῖν λέγων, καί δι᾿ ἑνός ἀμφότερα·" ὡσανεί ἔλεγεν, Ὥσπερ γάρ ἕν ἐξ ἀμφοῖν, τουτέστιν ἐκ δύο φύσεων τό ἕν, ὡς ὅλον ἐκ μερῶν 15Β_206 κατά τόν τῆς ὑποστάσεως λόγον· οὕτω καί διά τοῦ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἑνός, ὡς ὅλου, ἀμφότερα τῷ κατά φύσιν λόγῳ τά μέρη, τουτέστι τά δύο. Ὅπερ ἐν τῷ δευτέρῳ περί Υἱοῦ λόγῳ τρανώτερον διεξιών, φησίν, "Εἰ γάρ καί τό συναμφότερον ἕν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ τῇ 0496 φύσει, τῇ δέ συνόδῳ." Τοῦτο δέ αὐτό καί ὁ κακάριος Κύριλλος ἐν τοῖς πρός Σούκενσον γράμμασι δείκνυται φρονῶν, ἐν οἷς ἐπί τοῦ κατά τόν ἄνθρωπον παραδείγματός φησιν· " Ὥστε τά δύο μηκέτι μέν εἶναι δύο, δι' ἀμφοῖν δέ τό ἕν ἀποτελεῖσθαι ζῶον·" μονονουχί ἐν τούτοις διαῤῥήδην βοῶν, Ὅτι τά ἐξ ὧν ἡ σύνθεσις ἐπί τε τοῦ καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς ἀνθρώπου τοῦ ἐκ ψυχῆς καί σώματος· ἐπί τε τοῦ κατά Χριστόν μυστηρίου, τοῦ ἐκ θεότητος καί ἀνθρωπότητος, τό εἶναι μέν δύο κατά τόν οὐσιώδη λόγον οὐκ ἀνῄρηται· ἐπεί, οὐδέ ἑτερούσια ἔτι μένει. Τό δέ καθ᾿ αὐτά ἐν