56

CONCERNING COMPOSITE NATURE MORE ACCURATELY, AND OF THE PRINCIPLE ACCORDING TO IT... A more accurate account of composite nature, and of the principle according to it; and how

those who say that Christ is one composite nature are impious. For every composite nature, first 0517 has the coming together of its parts with one another in the composite union as something without choice. Then it also possesses its parts as co-temporal with one another, and with itself, in its

coming into being, co-existing, with neither part pre-existing the other in time.

Moreover, it is known to be made for the completion of the whole, which magnificently delineates the universe; none of which is contemplated at all in the case of Christ by those who wish to be pious; so that we do not make the union of the Word with the flesh involuntary and without choice; and either God the Word co-temporal with the flesh in His coming into being, or the flesh co-eternal with the Word in His beginningless existence; or define Christ as having nothing more than the other species contemplated in nature as a whole, brought forth as a part for the completion of the universe like the other species, by the power that constituted the universe (15Β_240>. For this is the definition and principle and law of every composite nature, as the power of truth and the course of logical consistency guides those to say who undertake the investigation of beings with understanding. And who will still be able to be of the portion of the pious, thinking thus about God the Word, who exists before all ages; or rather, to speak more properly, the creator of the ages, and who according to His will made His kenosis towards us men voluntary and of His own accord; and who became man for correction and renewal, but not for the completion of the universe. For in the mode of economy, but not by a law of nature, did the Word of God ineffably sojourn among men through the flesh. Therefore Christ is not a composite nature, according to the innovation of those who empty the Gospel; being completely unenslaved to the law of composite nature, according to the mode of coming into being; but a composite hypostasis, not having any composite nature predicated of it according to species; which is indeed paradoxical, to behold a composite hypostasis without the composite nature that is predicated of it according to species.

But if according to them Christ is a composite nature, that marvelous acropolis of the words of Severus, it is either entirely general, or monadic. For it is impossible to conceive of another, intermediate to these. And if Christ is a general nature, He will obviously be predicated of many individuals differing in number; and He will exist only in concept, in those in whom He has existence; and not be known in Himself in some particular hypostasis, apart from the accidents observed in the individuals under Him. For such is the definition and principle of every general nature; and a multitude of Christs has been introduced to us instead of one, having in no way any identity with God or with men, because of the excessive and unrestrained madness of Severus against the truth. But if Christ is a monadic nature—to pass over saying that the whole is in no way a nature circumscribed in a single person; even if they (15Β_242> especially propose as a final point the mythical 0520 bird, the phoenix, as some great and invincible paradigm to establish their opinion; about which I am afraid to say anything, lest I incur the laughter of the intelligent for my folly, trying to show that the myth is a myth. For if the phoenix is a bird, it is also certainly an animal. But if it is an animal, first, it is not entirely monadic insofar as it is an animal. Then, if it is an animal, it is also an ensouled, sentient body. But if the phoenix is an ensouled, sentient body, it is obviously also subject to generation and corruption. Let us ask the wise men themselves concerning beings

56

ΠΕΡΙ ΣΥΝΘΕΤΟΥ ΦΥΣΕΩΣ ΑΚΡΙΒΕΣΤΕΡΟΝ, ΚΑΙ ΤΟΥ ΚΑΤ'ΑΥΤΗΝ ΛΟΓΟΥ... Περί συνθέτου φύσεως ἀκριβέστερον, καί τοῦ κατ'αὐτήν λόγου· καί ὡς

ἀσεβοῦσιν οἱ λέγοντες τόν Χριστόν μίαν σύνθετον φύσιν. Πᾶσα γάρ σύνθετος φύσις, πρῶτον μέν 0517 ἀπροαίρετον ἔχειν τήν πρός

ἄλληλα τῶν μερῶν κατά τήν σύνθετον σύνοδον. Ἔπειτα δέ καί ἀλλήλοις ὁμόχρονα τά μέρη, καί ἑαυτῇ κέκτηται, κατά τήν εἰς

τό εἶναι γένεσιν συνυπάρχοντα, μηδετέρου μέρους θατέρου χρονικῶς προϋπάρχοντος.

Πρός ἔτι γε μήν καί εἰς συμπλήρωσιν τῆς τό πᾶν μεγαλοφυῶς ὑπογραφούσης ὁλότητος γινώσκεται πεποιημένη· ὧν οὐδέν ἐπί Χριστοῦ παντελῶς θεωρεῖται τοῖς εὐσεβεῖν βουλομένοις· ἵνα μή τήν πρός τήν σάρκα τοῦ Λόγου σύνοδον ἀκούσιον ποιώμεθα, καί ἀπροαίρετον· καί ἤ τῇ σαρκί τόν Θεόν Λόγον κατά τήν πρός τό εἶναι γένεσιν ὁμόχρονον, ἤ τήν σάρκα τῷ Λόγῳ κατά τήν ἄναρχον ὕπαρξιν συναΐδιον· ἤ καί μηδέν ἔχειν πλέον τῶν λοιπῶν κατά τήν καθ᾿ ὅλου φύσιν θεωρουμένων εἰδῶν, ὡς μέρος εἰς συμπλήρωσιν τοῦ παντός κατά τά λοιπά εἴδη, παρά τῆς τό πᾶν (15Β_240> συστησαμένης δυνάμεως παρηγμένον τόν Χριστόν διοριζόμεθα. Οὗτος γάρ πάσης συνθέτου φύσεως ὅρος τε καί λόγος καί νόμος, καθώς ἡ τῆς ἀληθείας δύναμις, καί ὁ τῆς λογικῆς ἀκολουθίας δρόμος ποδηγεῖ λέγειν τούς μετά συνέσεως τήν τῶν ὄντων ποιουμένους διάσκεψιν. Καί τίς ἔτι τῆς τῶν εὐσεβῶν εἶναι δυνήσεται μοίρας, οὕτω φρονῶν περί τοῦ Θεοῦ καί Λόγου, τοῦ πρό πάντων ὑπάρχοντος τῶν αἰώνων· μᾶλλον δέ κυριώτερον εἰπεῖν, ποιητοῦ τῶν αἰώνων, καί κατά θέλησιν ἑκούσιον ποιησαμένου πρός ἡμᾶς τούς ἀνθρώπους καί αὐθαίρετον τήν κένωσιν· καί εἰς διόρθωσιν καί ἀνακαινισμόν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ εἰς συμπλήρωσιν τοῦ παντός, ἐνανθρωπήσαντος. Τρόπῳ γάρ οἰκονομίας, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ νόμῳ φύσεως, ἀῤῥήτως ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ πρός ἀνθρώπους διά σαρκός ἐπεδήμησε Λόγος. Οὐκοῦν οὐκ ἔστι σύνθετος φύσις ὁ Χριστός, κατά τήν καινοτομίαν τῶν κενούντων τό Εὐαγγέλιον· τῷ νόμῳ τῆς συνθέτου φύσεως, κατά τόν εἰς τό εἶναι τρόπον, παντάπασιν ὑπάρχων ἀδούλωτος· ἀλλ᾿ ὑπόστασινς σύνθετος, τήν οἱανοῦν κατ᾿ εἶδος σύνθετον φύσιν αὐτῆς κατηγορουμένην οὐκ ἔχουσα· ὅ καί παράδοξον, ὑπόστασιν σύνθετον θεᾶσθαι, χωρίς τῆς κατ᾿ εἶδος αὐτῆς κατηγορουμένης συνθέτου φύσεως.

Εἰ δέ κατ᾿ αὐτούς ἐκείνους ὁ Χριστός σύνθετός ἐστι φύσις, ἡ θαυμαστή τῶν Σευήρου λόγων ἀκρόπολις, ἤ γενική πάντως ἐστί, ἤ μοναδική. Τούτων γάρ ἄλλην ἐπινοῆσαι μέσην ἀμήχανον. Καί εἰ μέν γενική φύσις ἐστίν ὁ Χριστός, κατά πολλῶν ἔσται δηλονότι καί διαφερόντων τῷ ἀριθμῷ κατηγορούμενος· καί κατ᾿ ἐπίνοιαν ἔσται μόνην, ἐν οἷς τήν ὕπαρξιν ἔχει· καί οὐ καθ᾿ ἑαυτόν ἐν ἰδίᾳ τινί ὑποστάσει γνωριζόμενος· χωρίς τῶν ἐπιθεωρουμένων τοῖς ὑπ᾿ αὐτόν ἀτόμοις συμβεβηκότων. Τοιοῦτος γάρ ὁ πάσης γενικῆς φύσεως ὅρος τε καί λόγος· καί εἰσήχθη πλῆθος ἡμῖν Χριστῶν ἀνθ᾿ ἑνός, κατά μηδένα τρόπον τήν οἱανοῦν ἐχόντων πρός τόν Θεόν, ἤ τούς ἀνθρώπους ταυτότητα, διά τήν Σευήρου κατά τῆς ἀληθείας περιττήν καί ἀκάθεκτον μανίαν. Εἰ δέ μοναδική φύσις ἐστίν ὁ Χριστός, ἵνα παρῶμεν λέγειν ὡς οὐδαμῶς ἐστι τό σύνολον φύσις ἑνί προσώπῳ περιγεγραμμένη· κἄν εἰ τά (15Β_242> μάλιστα τόν μυθευόμενον 0520 ὄρνιθα τόν φοίνικα, καθάπερ τι μέγα καί ἄμαχον παράδειγμα τῆς ἑαυτῆς δόξης συστατικόν, τελευταῖον προβάλλωνται· πρός ὅ καί λέγειν τι δέδοικα, μήπως καί ἀνοίας παρά τοῖς συνετοῖς ὀφλήσω γέλωτα, τόν μῦθον δεῖξαι μῦθον πειρώμενος. Εἰ γάρ ὄρνις ἐστίν ὁ φοίνιξ, καί ζῶον πάντως ἐστίν. Εἰ δέ ζῶον, πρῶτον μέν οὐ πάντη μοναδικόν καθό ζῶον. Ἔπειτα δέ, εἴπερ ζῶον, καί σῶμα ἔμψυχον αἰσθητικόν. Εἰ δέ σῶμα ἔμψυχον αἰσθητικόν ἐστιν ὁ φοίνιξ, καί ὑπό γένεσίν ἐστι δηλονότι καί φθοράν. Αὐτούς ἐρωτήσωμεν τούς σοφούς τῶν ὄντων