71

of the union and of the conclusion, which he defined above as work and action, having given no kind of entrance whatsoever either to those who wish to confuse or to those who wish to separate; but having driven away the one group, by making known what is principally and by nature proper to his humanity, and what to his superessential divinity; and having rejected the other, by not distinguishing or separating any activity in the same and one [Christ]. For the name of activity, being taken in common both for a simple 0233 movement equally and for one considered in relation, or for the result itself, does not bring confusion to the matters, as long as there is a clear clarification of the things understood, according to which we guard undividedly the things of the one of the natures that have essentially concurred, and we recognize unconfusedly the properties of the other as belonging to the other because of the union, and [the properties] of both as belonging to the whole that is from them because of the existence, neither confusing them in this regard, nor indeed separating them in that regard, but maintaining the difference as the boundaries of the essences, and binding fast the union by the principles of one and the same hypostasis. Thus, indeed, and for these reasons, this Father, and any other approved and divine Father, as I appear to have already written, [spoke of] one activity in Christ and two, the one, having in view the union of the natural activities, just as indeed also (15Α_310> of the natures; the other, their essential difference. And so much for that here.

But concerning the interpretation for use of the theologian and great herald of the Church (of truth), Gregory, which says, “The word is to be formed by the man, not the one understood in the Savior. For his willing is not at all opposed to God, having been wholly deified,” I determine [it] to be derived from a very pious mind, for which and from which the diligent one has labored, but a little wanting concerning the precision of the language, by which those who are rash and crude in all things devise to make—to speak more truly—incursions rather than attacks, and nothing is so earnestly sought by them as that even things exceedingly secured on all sides, and opening up no ground for them against the doctrine, be scrutinized and carped at, especially if they can somehow seize upon a mere word, and this brought forth from an unfeigned and pure mind, for the purpose of confirming and establishing the essential and natural will of the ensouled flesh assumed from us (that is, of what is human in the Savior), the saying from this God-inspired Father: "For his willing is wise and circumspect," from which is shown the essential difference from his divine and paternal [will] by nature, in no way allowing confusion to arise in the mystery of Christ. But to pronounce "wholly deified" with a paroxytone accent, as from certain manuscripts, and not rather with an oxytone, for fear that one will might be introduced by our opponents, gives a handle against us, as implying a relative and hypostatic [union], and a union, as it were, by grace and worth, because the saints too are 0236 principally moved and energized by God, on account of their total inclination and disposition toward God and divine things. For the (15Α_312> oxytone phrasing of "deified" neither brings the willing as a man in the Savior to an identity of essential and natural will (for who can show this?) and it represents the supreme union and natural unity. For "deified" happens to be one of those things spoken of in relation, just as indeed also "ignited" and "illuminated," and all such things, it always introduces along with itself that to which it has reference, which is that which deifies, that which ignites, and that which illuminates, it has [the character] of relation, so that the principle both of the difference and of the supreme union is strengthened not more from that side than from this. For not being opposed is not sufficient for union; for whatever is natural and blameless is not opposed, but not in every case also united to God. But that which is deified is in all ways and entirely united, and in no way does it abolish the essential difference, inasmuch as it exists unconfused in the union.

71

ἑνώσεως καί τοῦ συμπεράσματος, ὅπερ ἔργον καί πρᾶξιν ἐνωτέρω διώρισε, μήτε τοῖς φύρειν ἐθέλουσι, μήτε μήν τοῖς χωρίζειν παρείσδυσιν τήν οἱανοῦν δεδωκώς· ἀλλά τούς μέν ἀπελάσας, τῷ γνωρίζειν, τί μέν προηγουμένως καί κατά φύσιν ἴδιον τῆς κατ' αὐτόν ἀνθρωπότητος· τί δέ τῆς ὑπερουσίου θεότητος· τούς δέ προπωσάμενος, τῷ μηδεμίαν ἐπί τοῦ αὐτοῦ καί ἑνός διϊστᾷν ἤ χωρίζειν ἐνέργειαν. Τό γάρ ὄνομα τῆς ἐνεργείας κοινῶς ἐπί τε ἁπλῆς 0233 ὁμοίως καί τῆς ἐν σχέσει θεωρουμένης κινήσεως, ἤ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἀποτελέσματος λαμβανόμενον, φυρμόν οὐκ ἐπάγει τοῖς πράγμασιν, ἕως ἄν εὐκρινής ἡ τῶν νοουμένων διασάφησις γένηται, καθ᾿ ἥν τά τε θατέρα φύσεων οὐσιωδῶς προσδεδραμηκυιῶν ἀδιαιρέτως φυλάττομεν, καί τά θατέρας ἴδια τῆς θατέρας ἀσυγχύτως γνωρίζομεν διά τήν ἕνωσιν, καί ἀμφοτέρων τοῦ ἐξ αὐτῶν ὅλου διά τήν ὕπαρξιν, οὔτε κατά τοῦτο συμφύροντες, οὔτε μήν κατ᾿ ἐκείνας χωρίζοντες, ἀλλ᾿ οὐσιῶν μέν ὅρους κρατοῦντες τήν διαφοράν, λόγοις δέ μιᾶς καί τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποστάσεως τήν ἕνωσιν διασφίγγοντες. Οὕτω γοῦν, καί διά ταῦτα οὗτος, καί πᾶς ἄλλος εἴ τις ἔγκριτος καί θεῖος Πατήρ, ὡς ἤδη φαίνομαι γεγραφώς, μίαν ἐπί Χριστοῦ τήν ἐνέργειαν καί δύο, τό μέν τήν ἕνωσιν ἀποσκοπῶν τῆν κατά φύσιν ἐνεργειῶν, ὥσπερ οὖν καί (15Α_310> τῶν φύσεων· τό δέ, τήν οὐσιώδη τούτων διαφοράν. Καί ὧδε μέν ταῦτα.

Περί δέ τῆς εἰς τήν χρῆσιν ἑρμηνείας τοῦ θεολόγου καί μεγάλου τῆς Ἐκκλησίας (ἀληθείας) κήρυκος Γρηγορίου, τήν «Παρά τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τυποῦσθαι τόν λόγον φάσκουσαν οὐ τοῦ κατά τόν Σωτῆρα νοουμένου. Τό γάρ ἐκείνου θέλειν, οὐδέ ὑπεναντίον Θεῷ θεωθέν ὅλον», λίαν μέν εὐσεβοῦς ἠρτημένης ὁρίζομαι διανοίας, ὑπέρ ἧς καί ἐξ ἧς ἐσπουδάσθη τῷ φιλοπόνῳ, μικρόν δέ περί τό τῆς λέξεως ἀκριβές ἐνδεοῦς, ᾧ καί μᾶλλον ἐπιδρομάς, ἤ καταδρομάς εἰπεῖν ἀληθέστερον, οἱ πάντα εὔκολοι καί παχεῖς μηχανῶνται ποιεῖν, καί οὐδέν οὕτως αὐτοῖς περισπούδαστον, ὡς τό καί τά λίαν πάντοθεν ἠσφαλισμένα, καί μηδεμίαν αὐτοῖς ὑπανοίγοντα χώραν κατά τοῦ λόγου, διερευνᾶσθαι καί μωμοσκοπεῖν, μήτοιγε ψιλῆς πόθεν δραξάμενοι φωνῆς, καί ταύτης ἐξ ἀπλάστου προαγομένης καί καθαρᾶς διανοίας, ἐπί τό μέν ἐπικυροῦν καί συνιστᾷν τῆς ἐξ ἡμῶν προληφθείσης ἐψυχωμένης σαρκός, (ἤγουν τοῦ κατά τόν Σωτῆρα ἀνθρωπίνου) τό οὐσιῶδες θέλημα καί φυσικόν, ἐκ τοῦδε τοῦ θεολήπτου Πατρός τό λέγειν· "Τό γάρ ἐκείνου θέλειν σοφόν καί περιεσκεμμένον», ἐξ οὗ τῆς πρός τό φύσει Θεῖον αὐτοῦ καί Πατρικόν ἡ οὐσιώδης δείκνυται διαφορά, μηδαμῶς ἐπιφυῆναι σύγχυσιν παραχωροῦσα τῷ κατά Χριστόν μυστήριῳ. Τό δέ γε παροξυτόνως ὡς ἐξ ἀντιγράφων τινῶν ἐκφωνεῖν τό θεωθέν ὅλον, καί μή μᾶλλον ὀξυτόνως, δέοι τοῦ μή τό ἕν εἰσαχθῆναι θέλημα πρός τῶν ἐναντίων, λαβήν δίδωσι καθ᾿ ἡμῶν, ὡς σχετικήν καί ὑποστατικήν ὑποφαινόντων, καί οἷον χάριτι καί ἀξίᾳ τήν ἕνωσιν, τῷ καί τούς ἁγίου ἐκ Θεοῦ 0236 προηγουμένως κινεῖσθαί τε καί ἐνεργεῖσθαι, διά τήν ὁλικήν αὐτῶν πρός τε Θεόν καί τά θεῖα σύννευσιν καί διάθεσιν. Ἡ γάρ (15Α_312> ὀξύτονος τοῦ θεωθέν φράσις, οὔτε εἰς ταυτόν οὐσιώδους καί φυσικοῦ θελήματος ἄγει τό, ὡς ἀνθρώπου κατά τόν Σωτῆρα θέλειν, (τίς γάρ ὁ δεῖξαι δυνάμενος;) καί τήν ἄκραν ἕνωσίν τε καί συμφυΐαν παρίστησι. Τῶν γάρ πρός τι τυγχάνον τό θεωθέν, ὥσπερ οὖν καί τό πυρωθέν καί φωτισθέν, καί ὅσα τοιαῦτα, συνεισάγει πάντως ἑαυτῷ καί τό πρός ὅ τήν ἀναφοράν, ὅπερ ἐστί τό θεοῦν, τό πυροῦν καί τό φωτίζον, τῆς σχέσεως ἔχει, ὡς μή μᾶλλον ἐκεῖθεν ἤ ἔνθεν τόν τε λόγον κρατύνεσθαι τῆς διαφορᾶς καί τῆς ἄκρας ἑνώσεως. Οὐδέ γάρ τό μή ὑπεναντίον εἶναι πρός ἕνωσιν αὔταρκες· πᾶν γάρ εἴ τι φυσικον , καί ἀδιάβλητον, οὐκ ἐναντίον μέν, οὐ πάντως δέ καί ἡνωμένον Θεῷ. Τό δέ θεωθέν πάντη τε καί πάντως ἡνωμένον, καί τήν οὐσιώδη διαφοράν οὐδαμῶς ἐξιστοῦν, ὅσῳ καί ἀσύγχυτον ὑπάρχει κατά τήν ἕνωσιν.