64

of the mode of existence introducing change into the nature, but it has been agreed by the common consent of the sober that it is the same, and no one would contradict this unless he were greatly in need of hellebore, what is the necessity for this absurd concept to be constructed against the divine nature? 1.1.498 Having heard 'Father' and 'Son' from the truth, we were taught the unity of nature in two subjects, with the natural relationship to each other being signified both by the names and again by the very 1.1.499 voice of the Lord. For he who said, *I and the Father are one*, what else does he do but both present himself as not without a beginning through the confession of the Father, and signify the community of nature through the unity with the Father? So that, I think, through what has been said, the word of faith may be purified from the perversion of either heresy, neither Sabellius having room to lead the property of the hypostases into confusion, since the only-begotten clearly distinguished himself from the Father by saying *I and the Father*, nor Arius having strength to construct an alien nature, since the unity of both does not admit a division according to nature. 1.1.500 For what is signified in this saying through the unity concerning the Father and the Son is nothing other than what pertains to the substance itself; for if someone were to say that the rest of the good things, as many as are contemplated in nature, are set forth as common to all, even to those who came to be through creation, he will not be in error. For example, *Merciful and compassionate is the Lord*, is said by the prophet. 1.1.501 These things in turn the Lord wills that we too should become and be called; for *Be merciful* and *Blessed are the merciful* and such like. Therefore, if someone, through attention and care, having conformed himself to the divine will, became good or merciful and compassionate, or meek and humble in heart, as many of the saints are testified to have been in these excellent qualities, are they for this reason one with God, or joined to him through any of these things? These things are not so. For that which is not the same in all things cannot be one with that which 1.1.502 is different by nature. For this reason a man becomes one with a man when, through choice of will, as the Lord said, they are perfected into one, since their natural affinity has acquired unity according to choice of will. And the Father and the Son are one, since the communion according to nature and choice of will concurs into the one. But if he were united in will alone but divided by nature, how could he testify to his unity with the Father, being divided in the most essential respect? 1.1.503 Therefore, having heard that *I and the Father are one*, we were taught from this utterance both that the Lord is from a cause and the unalterable nature of the Son and of the Father, not confounding our conception of them into one hypostasis, but preserving the distinct property of the hypostases, yet not dividing with the persons the unity of the substance, so that two heterogeneous things might not be supposed in the concept of the principle, and through this the dogma of the Manichees might find an 1.1.504 entrance. For the created and the uncreated are diametrically opposed to each other in what they signify. If, therefore, the two were ranked as principles, Manichaeism will be secretly corrupted into the church of God for us. But I say these things, examining the word more carefully, out of zeal against 1.1.505 our opponents. And perhaps no one would deny that the theory is advanced close to what is probable, that since the created is capable of opposing the uncreated on equal terms, that which is of a different nature will in some way oppose that which is not the same in substance, and as long as power does not fail either of them, the two will be carried into some discordant stance towards each other; for it is absolutely necessary to confess that the choice of will is also suitable and proper to the nature, and if they were dissimilar in nature, their wills are also 1.1.506 dissimilar. And since the power in each is sufficient, neither will grow weak in fulfilling its own will; and if each were able as much as it also willed, the principle for each into a disputed

64

τοῦ τρόπου τῆς ὑπάρξεως τῇ φύσει τὴν παραλλαγὴν ἐμποιούντων, ἀλλ' ὡσαύτως ἔχειν τῇ κοινῇ τῶν νηφόντων συγκαταθέσει διω μολόγηται καὶ οὐδεὶς <ἂν> ἀντείποι τούτῳ μὴ σφόδρα τοῦ ἑλλεβόρου δεόμενος, τίς ἡ ἀνάγκη κατὰ τῆς θείας φύσεως τὸ παράλογον τοῦτο τῆς ἐννοίας κατασκευάζεσθαι; 1.1.498 Πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν παρὰ τῆς ἀληθείας ἀκούσαντες ἐν δύο τοῖς ὑποκειμένοις τὴν ἑνότητα τῆς φύσεως ἐδιδάχθημεν, ὑπό τε τῶν ὀνομάτων φυσικῶς [διὰ] τῆς πρὸς ἄλληλα σχέ σεως σημαινομένης καὶ ὑπ' αὐτῆς πάλιν τῆς τοῦ κυρίου 1.1.499 φωνῆς. ὁ γὰρ εἰπὼν Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, τί ἄλλο ἢ τό τε μὴ ἄναρχον ἑαυτοῦ διὰ τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς ὁμολογίας παρίστησιν καὶ τὸ κοινὸν σημαίνει τῆς φύσεως διὰ τῆς πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ἑνότητος; ὡς ἄν, οἶμαι, διὰ τῶν εἰρη μένων τῆς ἐφ' ἑκάτερα τῶν αἱρέσεων παρατροπῆς ὁ τῆς πίστεως καθαρεύοι λόγος, μήτε τοῦ Σαβελλίου χώραν ἔχοντος εἰς σύγχυσιν ἄγειν τὴν τῶν ὑποστάσεων ἰδιότητα, φανερῶς τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς διακρί ναντος ἐν τῷ εἰπεῖν Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατήρ, μήτε τοῦ Ἀρείου τὸ ξένον τῆς φύσεως κατασκευάζειν ἰσχύοντος, τῆς ἀμφοτέ ρων ἑνότητος οὐ προσιεμένης τὴν κατὰ φύσιν διαίρεσιν. 1.1.500 οὐδὲν γὰρ ἄλλο τί ἐστιν ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τούτῳ τὸ διὰ τῆς ἑνότητος ἐπὶ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ σημαινόμενον πλὴν κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν αὐτήν· τὰ γὰρ λοιπὰ τῶν ἀγαθῶν, ὅσα ἐπιθεωρεῖται τῇ φύσει, κοινὰ προκεῖσθαι πᾶσιν εἰπών τις καὶ τοῖς διὰ κτίσεως γεγενημένοις οὐχ ἁμαρτήσεται. οἷον Οἰκτίρμων καὶ ἐλεήμων ὁ κύριος, παρὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγεται. ταῦτα βού 1.1.501 λεται πάλιν ὁ κύριος καὶ ἡμᾶς γίνεσθαί τε καὶ ὀνομά ζεσθαι· Γίνεσθε γὰρ οἰκτίρμονες καὶ Μακάριοι οἱ ἐλεή μονες καὶ ὅσα τοιαῦτα. ἆρ' οὖν, εἴ τις διὰ προσοχῆς καὶ ἐπιμελείας τῷ θείῳ βουλήματι ἑαυτὸν ὁμοιώσας ἀγαθὸς ἢ οἰκτίρμων καὶ ἐλεήμων ἐγένετο ἢ πρᾶος καὶ ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, καθὼς μεμαρτύρηνται πολλοὶ τῶν ἁγίων ἐν τοῖς προτερήμασι τούτοις γενόμενοι, παρὰ τοῦτο ἕν εἰσι πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἢ διά τινος τούτων πρὸς αὐτὸν συναπτόμενοι; οὐκ ἔστι ταῦτα. τὸ γὰρ μὴ ἐν πᾶσι ταὐτὸν ἓν εἶναι πρὸς τὸν 1.1.502 τῇ φύσει διηλλαγμένον οὐ δύναται. διὰ τοῦτο ἄνθρωπος πρὸς ἄνθρωπον ἓν γίνεται, ὅταν διὰ προαιρέσεως, καθὼς εἶπεν ὁ κύριος, τελειωθῶσιν εἰς τὸ ἕν, τῆς φυσικῆς συνα φείας τὴν κατὰ προαίρεσιν ἑνότητα προσλαβούσης. καὶ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς ἕν εἰσι, τῆς κατὰ τὴν φύσιν καὶ τὴν προαίρεσιν κοινωνίας εἰς τὸ ἓν συνδραμούσης. εἰ δὲ τῷ θελήματι μόνῳ συνηρμοσμένος κατὰ τὴν φύσιν διῄρητο, πῶς ἐμαρτύρει ἑαυτῷ τὴν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ἑνότητα, τῷ κυριωτάτῳ διεσχισμένος; 1.1.503 Ἀκούσαντες τοίνυν ὅτι Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, τό τε ἐξ αἰτίου τὸν κύριον καὶ τὸ κατὰ τὴν φύσιν ἀπαράλ λακτον τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκ τῆς φωνῆς ἐπαιδεύ θημεν, οὐκ εἰς μίαν ὑπόστασιν τὴν περὶ αὐτῶν ἔννοιαν συναλείφοντες, ἀλλὰ φυλάσσοντες μὲν διῃρημένην τὴν τῶν ὑποστάσεων ἰδιότητα, οὐ συνδιαιροῦντες δὲ τοῖς προσώποις τὴν τῆς οὐσίας ἑνότητα, ὡς ἂν μὴ δύο ἑτερογενῆ πράγματα ἐν τῷ τῆς ἀρχῆς λόγῳ ὑπολαμβάνοιτο καὶ διὰ τούτου πάρ 1.1.504 οδον λάβοι τῶν Μανιχαίων τὸ δόγμα. τὸ γὰρ κτιστὸν καὶ τὸ ἄκτιστον ἐκ διαμέτρου πρὸς ἄλληλα τὴν κατὰ τὸ σημαινόμενον ἐναντίωσιν ἔχει. εἰ οὖν τὰ δύο <ἐν> ταῖς ἀρχαῖς ταχθείη, κατὰ τὸ λεληθὸς ἡμῖν ὁ μανιχαϊσμὸς εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσφθαρήσεται. λέγω δὲ ταῦτα ζήλῳ 1.1.505 τῶν ἐναντίων περιεργότερον κατεξετάζων τὸν λόγον. καὶ οὐδεὶς ἂν ἴσως ἀντείποι μὴ ἐγγὺς τοῦ εἰκότος τὴν θεωρίαν προάγεσθαι, ὅτι δυνατοῦ ὄντος τοῦ κτιστοῦ κατὰ τὸ ἴσον τῷ ἀκτίστῳ ἀντιστήσεταί πως τὸ ἑτερογενὲς τῇ φύσει τῷ μὴ ὡσαύτως κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν ἔχοντι, καὶ ἕως ἂν μηθετέρῳ αὐτῶν ἐπιλίπῃ ἡ δύναμις, εἰς ἀσύμφωνόν τινα στάσιν πρὸς ἄλληλα τὰ δύο διενεχθήσεται· πᾶσα γὰρ ἀνάγκη κατάλ ληλον εἶναι καὶ οἰκείαν ὁμολογεῖν τῇ φύσει καὶ τὴν προ αίρεσιν, καὶ εἰ ἀνομοίως ἔχοιεν κατὰ τὴν φύσιν, ἀνόμοια 1.1.506 εἶναι καὶ τὰ θελήματα. τῆς δὲ δυνάμεως ἐφ' ἑκατέρων ἱκανῶς ἐχούσης, οὐθέτερον ἀτονήσει πρὸς τὴν ἐκπλήρωσιν τοῦ ἰδίου θελήματος· καὶ εἰ τοσοῦτον ἑκάτερον δύναιτο, ὅσον καὶ βούλεται, εἰς ἀμφήριστον ἑκατέροις ἡ ἀρχὴ