73

it was making; and not only one from another, but it was also showing as different what was being signified through it. But if in the definitions of things absolutely, no one includes number, number is neither substance nor quality. But if number is none of these, it is clear that it is not in its nature either to act or to be acted upon; but if number has not the capacity to act and to be acted upon, it follows that it neither unites at all, nor divides as an agent; nor indeed is it divided at all as a patient; but making a declaration only of the quantity of things, it does not touch upon their relation.

But if number is indicative only of quantity, and not of any relation whatever conceived in it, number is rather a certain voice, so to speak, and an appellation suitable to quantity. Therefore, he who speaks of a difference in Christ after the union, also certainly conceived along with the difference a quantity of the differing things. For that which is completely simple is also unsusceptible of difference; because it is in every way identical with itself and monadic, and whole and wholly unrelated, as not having the genus of quantity(7) predicated of it; and for this reason it is not counted at all; but he who conceived a quantity with the difference 0565; for it is impossible for a difference to be known that completely annuls quantity; employing number for the sole declaration, but not for the division of the quantity conceived together with the difference, (15Β_310> does not depart from the truth, signifying through number the quantity necessarily conceived with the difference; since, as I said, with every difference spoken of in any way whatsoever, a quantity is necessarily conceived; of which we were taught that number is by nature declarative, but not divisive.

But if he cares more for the truth, who signifies through number the quantity necessarily conceived with the difference for the establishment of the mystery, so that he may not advocate a confusion of the united things; how is it not right, according to some, to think that for this reason the essential quantity of the things preserved unconfusedly in Christ after the union is confessed, whenever number is by nature suited to make a declaration of difference, as the argument has shown at length, but not of division? If, then, the essential principle of one of the united things remained unaltered after the union, not changing to the definition of the substance of the other, manifestly the divinity of Christ has remained divinity in substance, not having passed over to the substance of the flesh; and the humanity of the same, in turn, has remained humanity in substance, not having undergone a change to the nature of the divinity. But if neither the divinity of Christ nor his humanity have passed over into one another on account of the hypostatic union, but the natures have remained unconfused according to the great Cyril, clearly the difference of the natures preserved in Christ after the union stands, and no argument will gainsay it. But if the difference is of the things unconfusedly preserved in Christ after the union; and it is impossible for a difference to be known that is entirely separated from quantity; let the quantity of the differing things be stated for the declaration of the difference, lest we be suspected of advocating a somehow bare and untrue difference. For reason knows every difference to be bare which does not have underlying it existentially the truth of the things of which it is a difference.

We, therefore, never saying that hypostasis and nature are the same(8) in the proper sense, according to the teaching of the Fathers, as the argument has already shown above, piously advocate in Christ (15Β_312> both the same and the different. The one, by the principle of the one hypostasis, according to which we confess God the Word to be the same with His own flesh; so that the all-praised Trinity may not receive a personal addition, becoming a tetrad. The other, by the principle of the essential otherness of the things from which He is, according to which the parts of Christ do not change into one another at all. For divinity and humanity could never become the same in substance, so that nothing created might be connatural and consubstantial with the divinity by union. Since to say that a nature is by nature consubstantial with a nature,

73

ἐποίει· καί οὐκ ἄλλον ἀπ᾿ ἄλλου μόνον, ἀλλά καί ἀλλοῖον ἐδήλου δεικνύμενον τόν δι᾿ αὐτοῦ σημαινόμενον. Εἰ δέ τοῖς ὁρισμοῖς τῶν πραγμάτων παντελῶς, οὐδείς συμπαραλαμβάνει τόν ἀριθμόν, οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ ἀριθμός, οὔτε οὐσία, οὔτε ποιότης. Εἰ δέ τούτων μηδέν ἐστιν ὁ ἀριθμός, δῆλον ὡς οὔτε ποιεῖν πέφυκεν, οὔτε πάσχειν· εἰ δέ τό ποιεῖν οὐκ ἔχει καί τό πάσχειν ὁ ἀριθμός, εἰκότως οὔτε ἑνοῖ τό παράπαν, οὔτε διαιρεῖ ὡς ποιῶν· οὔτε μήν ὡς πάσχων διαιρεῖται παντάπασιν· ἀλλά μόνης τῆς τῶν πραγμάτων ποσότητος ποιούμενος δήλωσιν, τῆς αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐφάπτεται σχέσεως.

Εἰ δέ μόνης ποσότητος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ οἱασοῦν κατ᾿ αὐτήν νοουμένης σχέσεως ὁ ἀριθμός ὑπάρχει δηλωτικός, φωνή τίς ἐστιν μᾶλλον, ἵν᾿ οὕτως εἴπω, καί προσηγορία ποσῷ προσφυής ὁ ἀριθμός. Οὐκοῦν ὁ διαφοράν ἐπί Χριστοῦ λέγων μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, καί ποσόν πάντως τῇ διαφορᾷ συνεπενόησε τῶν διαφερόντων. Τό γάρ παντελῶς ἁπλοῦ, καί διαφορᾶς ἀνεπίδεκτον· ὅτι καί πάντη ταυτόν ἑαυτῷ καί μοναδικόν, καί ὅλον καί ὅλως ἄσχετον, ὡς τό ἐν ποσῷ γένος(7) οὐκ ἔχον κατηγορούμενον· καί διά τοῦτο παντελῶς οὐκ ἀριθμούμενον· ὁ δέ τῇ διαφορᾷ ποσόν 0565 συνεπινοήσας· ἀμήχανον γάρ γνωσθῆναι διαφοράν ποσοῦ παντελῶς ἀνοιροῦσαν· πρός μόνην δήλωσιν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ διαίρεσιν τοῦ τῇ διαφορᾷ συνεπινοηθέντος ποσοῦ παραλαμβάνων τόν ἀριθμόν, (15Β_310> οὐκ ἐξίσταται τῆς ἀληθείας, τό ἐπινοούμενον ἐξ ἀνάγκης τῇ διαφορᾷ διά τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ σημαίνων ποσόν· ἐπειδή, καθώς ἔφην, πάσῃ καθ᾿ ὅντινα τρόπον λεγομένῃ διαφορᾷ πάντως συνεπινοεῖται ποσόν· οὗ φύσει δηλωτικόν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ διαιρετικόν εἶναι τόν ἀριθμόν ἐδιδάχθημεν.

Εἰ δέ μᾶλλον φροντίζει τῆς ἀληθείας, ὁ τό συνεπινοούμενον ἐξ ἀνάγκης τῇ διαφορᾷ διά τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ σημαίνων ποσόν εἰς τήν τοῦ μυστηρίου σύστασιν, ἵνα μή τῶν ἑνωθέντων πρεσβεύσῃ σύγχυσιν· πῶς οὐ δίκαιον κατά τινας οἴεσθαι χρή διά ταύτην ὁμολογεῖσθαι τήν αἰτίαν τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ σωζομένων ἀσυγχύτως μετά τήν ἕνωσιν τό κατ' οὐσίαν ποσόν, ὁπότ᾿ ἄν ὁ ἀριθμός διαφορᾶς, ὡς ἔδειξε διά πλάτους ὁ λόγος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ διαιρέσεως ποιεῖσθαι δήλωσιν πέφυκεν; Εἰ μέν οὖν ἀναλλοίωτος ὁ κατ᾿ οὐσίαν θατέρου τῶν ἑνωθέντων διέμεινε λόγος μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, πρός τόν θατέρου τῆς οὐσίας ὅρον μή μεταπίπτων, προδήλως ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ θεότης μεμένηκε κατ᾿ οὐσίαν θεότης, πρός τήν σαρκός οὐσίαν οὐ μεταφοιτήσασα· καί ἡ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πάλιν ἀνθρωπότης μεμένηκε κατ᾿ οὐσίαν ἀνθρωπότης , πρός τήν τῆς θεότητος φύσιν μή παθοῦσα μεταβολήν. Εἰ δέ οὐδέ ἡ θεότης τοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὔτε ἡ ἀνθρωπότης εἰς ἀλλήλας διαπεφοιτήκασιν διά τήν καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἕνωσιν, ἀλλ᾿ ἀσύγχυτοι κατά τόν μέγαν Κύριλλον μεμενήκασι αἱ φύσεις, σαφῶς ἡ μετά τήν ἕνωσιν διαφοράν τῶν σωζομένων ἐν Χριστῷ καθέστηκε φύσεων, καί οὐδείς ἀντερεῖ λόγος. Εἰ δέ τῶν ἀσυγχύτως ἐν Χριστῷ σωζομένων ἐστίν, ἡ διαφορά μετά τήν ἕνωσιν· διαφοράν δέ γνωσθῆναι ποσοῦ παντελῶς κεχωρισμένην ἀμήχανον· λεγέσθω πρός δήλωσιν τῆς διαφορᾶς τό ποσόν τῶν διαφερόντων, ἵνα μή ψιλήν πως καί οὐκ ἀληθῆ τήν διαφοράν ὑποπτευθῶμεν πρεσβεύοντες. Ψιλήν γάρ πᾶσαν διαφοράν οἶδεν ὁ λόγος, τήν οὐκ ἔχουσαν ὑπαρκτικῶς ὑποκειμένην τήν, ὧν ἐστι διαφορά, πραγμάτων ἀλήθειαν.

Ἡμεῖς μέν οὖν ταυτόν ὑπόστασίν τε καί φύσιν,(8) κυρίως μηδέποτε λέγοντες, κατά τήν τῶν Πατέρων διδασκαλίαν, ὡς ἀνωτέρω προλαβών ἀπέδειξεν ὁ λόγος, εὐσεβῶς ἐπί Χριστοῦ τό (15Β_312> ταυτόν πρεσβεύομεν καί τό διάφορον. Τό μέν, τῷ λόγῳ τῆς μιᾶς ὑποστάσεως, καθ᾿ ὅν ταυτόν τῇ οἰκείᾳ σαρκί τόν Θεόν Λόγον ὁμολογοῦμεν· ἵνα μή προσθήκην προσωπικήν ἡ πανεύφημος λάβῃ Τριάς, γινομένη τετράς. Τό δέ, τῷ λόγῳ τῆς κατ᾿ οὐσίαν τῶν ἐξ ὧν ἐστιν ἑτερότητος, καθ᾿ ἥν εἰς ἄλληλα τά μέρη τοῦ Χριστοῦ παντελῶς οὐ μεταπίπτουσιν. Οὐ γάρ ταυτόν ποτε κατ᾿ οὐσίαν γένοιτ᾿ ἄν θεότης καί ἀνθρωπότης, ἵνα μηδέν ᾗ κτιστόν τῇ θεότητι καθ᾿ ἕνωσιν ὁμοφυές καί ὁμοούσιον. Ἐπειδή φύσει φύσιν ὁμοούσιον εἶναι λέγειν,