1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22

 23

 24

 25

 26

 27

 28

 29

 30

 31

 32

 33

 34

 35

 36

 37

 38

 39

 40

 41

 42

 43

 44

 45

 46

 47

 48

 49

 50

 51

 52

 53

 54

 55

 56

 57

 58

 59

 60

 61

 62

 63

 64

 65

 66

 67

 68

 69

 70

 71

 72

 73

 74

 75

 76

 77

 78

 79

 80

 81

 82

 83

 84

 85

 86

 87

 88

 89

 90

 91

 92

 93

 94

 95

 96

 97

 98

 99

 100

 101

 102

 103

 104

71

substance of homogeneous things by its properties, so much with the composite according to hypostasis, is it unified and identified. For not by those properties by which it is distinguished from homogeneous things, is it also separated from that which is composite by union and co-subsistent; but by those distinguishing properties by which it differs from consubstantial things, by these it preserves towards the composite thing the identity of the hypostasis according to the union, being conserved in the altogether unique character of the person; which is what the true doctrine proclaims concerning the divine economy, that is, the incarnation. For by those properties by which the flesh, being distinguished, differed from us, by these it had identity with the Logos according to hypostasis; and by those properties by which the Logos differed from the Father and the Spirit, being distinguished as Son, by these he preserved toward the flesh the unique character according to hypostasis, which was saved, being in no way whatsoever divided.

Therefore, the flesh did not become the hypostasis of God the Logos. (15B_302> For never, not even for as long as the speed of a mere thought can comprehend, did it subsist at all in itself, defined by its distinguishing properties from homogeneous things, or towards the Logos who is composite according to hypostasis, having its own particularity separated from what is common; but enhypostatic, as having received its coming-to-be in him and through him; and having become his flesh by union, and being united to him according to hypostasis, by the principle of the property which distinguishes it from other human beings. And to speak more clearly, making its own particularity that of the Logos himself according to hypostasis; just as also the commonality according to substance, of which he also truly became flesh by union.

THAT CHRIST, BEING PERFECT GOD, AND THE SAME PERFECT MAN ...

That Christ, being perfect God, and the same perfect man, of the things which he was, possessed the common and the particular, by which he effected toward himself the union and distinction of the extremes; on the one hand, by the union of the extremes to himself, confirming the two natures from which he was composed as being preserved in himself; on the other hand, by the distinction of the extremes from himself, demonstrating the unique character of his own hypostasis.

For if the Logos, being God by nature, by the assumption of flesh intellectually ensouled became man without

change, it is clear that being one from both, and through one confirming himself truly as both, the same one possessed both the common and the particular of both; by which he effected the union and distinction with respect to the extremes; on the one hand, by the natural difference of his own parts with respect to one another, being united to the extremes according to substance; on the other hand, by the identity of the same, that is, of the parts, according to hypostasis, being distinguished from the extremes. But if the same one had difference and identity, it is clear that the same one was one and two. One, by the principle of his own indivisible 0561 monad according to hypostasis; and two, by the principle of the otherness of his own parts with respect to one another according to substance, even after the union(5). For difference is a principle (15B_304> according to which the otherness of the things signified is naturally preserved, and is indicative of their mode of being.(6) But identity is an unchangeableness according to which the principle of the thing signified possesses what is altogether unique, being known by no mode of difference.

A BRIEF DISCOURSE ON DIFFERENCE, THROUGH WHICH IS SHOWN THE SUBSTANTIAL ...

A brief discourse on difference, through which is shown the substantial quantity of the united things being preserved.

If, therefore, the difference according to substance of the parts from which he was composed with respect to one another is preserved in Christ after the union,

there exists for the pious a clear proof that the substantial quantity of the united things has remained undiminished after the union, the

71

οὐσίαν ὁμογενῶν ἰδιώμασι, τοσοῦτον τῷ συγκειμένῳ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν, ἑνίζεται ταυτιζόμενον. Οὐ γάρ οἷς ἀφορίζεται τῶν ὁμογενῶν ἰδιώμασι, τούτοις διακρίνεται καί τοῦ συγκειμένου καθ᾿ ἕνωσιν καί συνυφεστῶτος· ἀλλ᾿ οἷς διενήνοχε τῶν ὁμοουσίων ἀφοριστικοῖς ἰδιώμασι, τούτοις πρός τό συγκείμενον τήν καθ᾿ ἕνωσιν φυλάττει ταυτότητα τῆς ὑποστάσεως, ἐν τῷ πάντη μοναδικῷ τοῦ προσώπου συντηρουμένην· ὅπερ ἐπί τῆς θείας οἰκονομίας ἤγουν σαρκώσεως ὁ ἀληθής πρεσβεύει λόγος. Οἷς γάρ ἡμῶν ἀφοριζομένη διέφερεν ἡ σάρξ ἰδιώμασι, τούτοις τήν πρός τόν Λόγον καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν εἶχε ταυτότητα· καί οἷς ὁ Λόγος Πατρός τε καί Πνεύματος διέφερεν ἰδιώμασιν, ὡς Υἱός ἀφοριζόμενος, τούτοις τό καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν πρός τήν σάρκα, μοναδικόν διετήρει σωζόμενον, μηδενί λόγῳ παντελῶς διαιρούμενον.

Οὐκοῦν οὐχ ὑπόστασις ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου καθέστηκε σάρξ. (15Β_302> Οὐδέποτε γάρ, οὐδόσον ἐπινοίας ψιλῆς πέφυκε τάχος χωρεῖν, καθ᾿ ἑαυτήν τό παράπαν ὑπέστη τοῖς ἀφορίζουσιν αὐτήν ἰδιώμασι διωρισμένη τῶν ὁμογενῶν, ἤ πρός τόν συγκείμενον καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν Λόγον, τοῦ κοινοῦ τό ἴδιον ἔχουσα κεχωρισμένον· ἀλλ᾿ ἐνυπόστατος ὡς ἐν αὐτῷ καί δι᾿ αὐτόν λαβοῦσα τοῦ εἶναι τήν γένεσιν· καί αὐτοῦ γενομένη καθ᾿ ἕνωσιν σάρξ, καί πρός αὐτόν καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἐνιζομένη, τῷ λόγῳ τῆς τῶν λοιπῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀφοριζούσης αὐτήν ἰδιότητος. Καί σαφέστερον εἰπεῖν, αὐτοῦ τοῦ Λόγου καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ποιουμένη τό ἴδιον· ὥς που καί τό κατ᾿ οὐσίαν κοινόν, οὗ καί σάρξ ἀληθῶς καθ᾿ ἕνωσιν γέγονεν.

ΟΤΙ ΘΕΟΣ ΥΠΑΡΧΩΝ ΤΕΛΕΙΟΣ Ο ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ, ΚΑΙ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΟΣ ΤΕΛΕΙΟΣ Ο ΑΥΤΟΣ ...

Ὅτι Θεός ὑπάρχων τέλειος ὁ Χριστός, καί ἄνθρωπος τέλειος ὁ αὐτός, τῶν ἅπερ ἦν, εἶχε τό κοινόν καί τό ἴδιον, οἷς πρός ἑαυτόν ἐποιεῖτο τήν τῶν ἄκρων ἕνωσιν καί διάκρισιν· τῇ μέν πρός ἑαυτόν ἑνώσει τῶν ἄκρων, ἐν ἑαυτῷ σωζομένας τάς ἐξ ὦν συνετέθη δύο φύσεις πιστούμενος· τῇ δέ πρός ἑαυτόν διακρίσει τῶν ἄκρων, τό μοναδικόν τῆς οἰκείας παριστάς ὑποστάσεως.

Εἰ γάρ φύσει Θεός ὤν ὁ Λόγος προσλήψει σαρκός νοερῶς ἐψυχωμένης δίχα

τροπῆς γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, δῆλον ὡς ἐξ ἀμφοῖν εἷς, καί δι᾿ ἑνός ἑαυτόν κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν ἄμφω πιστούμενος, ἀμφοτέρων εἶχεν ὁ αὐτός τό τε κοινόν, καί τό ἴδιον· οἷς τήν πρός τά ἄκρα ἐποιεῖτο ἕνωσιν καί διάκρισιν· τῇ μέν πρός ἄλληλα φυσικῇ διαφορᾷ τῶν οἰκείων μερῶν, κατ᾿ οὐσίαν τοῖς ἄκροις ἑνούμενος· τῇ δέ τῶν αὐτῶν, δηλονότι μερῶν, ταυτότητι, καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν, τῶν ἄκρων διακρινόμενος. Εἰ δέ διαφοράν εἶχεν ὁ αὐτός καί ταυτότητα, δῆλον ὡς ἕν καί δύο ἦν ὁ αὐτός. Ἕν μέν, τῷ λόγῳ τῆς οἰκείας κατά τήν ὑπόστασιν ἀδιαιρέτου 0561 μονάδος· δύο δέ, τῷ λόγῳ τῆς κατ᾿ οὐσίαν πρός ἄλληλα τῶν οἰκείων μερῶν καί μετά τήν ἕνωσιν ἑτερότητος(5). ∆ιαφορά γάρ ἐστιν, λόγος (15Β_304> καθ᾿ ὅν ἡ πρός ἄλληλα τῶν σημαινομένων ἑτερότης σώζεσθαι πέφυκεν, καί τοῦ πῶς εἶναι δηλωτικός.(6) Ταυτότης δέ ἐστιν, ἀπαραλλαξία καθ᾿ ἥν ὁ τοῦ σημαινομένου λόγος τό πάντη κέκτηται μοναδικόν, μηδενί τρόπῳ διαφορᾶς γνωριζόμενον.

ΠΕΡΙ ∆ΙΑΦΟΡΑΣ ∆ΙΑΛΗΨΙΣ ΣΥΝΤΟΜΟΣ, ∆Ι' ΗΣ ∆ΕΙΚΝΥΤΑΙ ΤΟ ΚΑΤ' ΟΥΣΙΑΝ ...

Περί διαφορᾶς διάληψις σύντομος, δι᾿ ἧς δείκνυται τό κατ᾿ οὐσίαν ποσόν τῶν ἡνωμένων σωζόμενον.

Εἰ τοίνυν σώζεται μετά τήν ἕνωσιν ἐν Χριστῷ τῶν ἐξ ὧν συνετέθη μερῶν ἡ

πρός ἄλληλα κατά τήν οὐσίαν διαφορά, σαφής ὑπάρχει τοῖς εὐσεβοῦσιν ἀπόδειξις, ὡς τό κατ᾿ οὐσίαν ποσόν μεμένηκε τῶν ἡνωμένων ἀμείωτον μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, τόν