74

a most glorious confession, to be impious, and declares it foreign to Christian dogma. For the argument confirms this for us by saying these things. Likewise also that the saying of the two energies scandalizes many, as having been said by none of the holy and approved mystagogues of the Church, but also that there follows from it the professing of two wills opposed to one another; and from this, that two are introduced who will opposite things; which is impious and foreign to Christian dogma." Behold, clearly, and with bare head, as the saying goes, it is determined that to profess two wills, and the energies corresponding to them in equal number, is not of the saints, nor indeed of the approved mystagogues of the Church; but rather of the impious, as being impious, and foreign, as it says, to Christian dogma; and introducing two who will opposite things to those who preach these things. That is, the two wills and the energies equal in number to them to the Spirit-moved Fathers, whom he has not deigned to follow, or to call them holy, or to profess these things at all according to them and with them, for the confirmation of the mystery of Christ our God according to the flesh. But to whom and which persons he said the expression of one energy was spoken, and to follow in this, as also in all things, to confess the one will of Christ our God, both they who are manifestly so have been shown, both the champions of confusion and the leaders of division. For example, for it is not unreasonable to run through it again briefly for confirmation, Apollinarius the impious, God-fighting, says these things: "For Christ is one, moved by a divine will alone, inasmuch as we also know His energy to be one, and having no difference in willing." Polemon, the enemy of truth. "He has done all things by an immutable divine will; but not that one thing is divine, and another deified, according to Gregory the Cappadocian." And, "He who says there are two wills of Christ, according to those puffed up of old and now, either introduces two Christs from the one, or teaches that He is at war with Himself." Themistius the lawless, "But let us see the one will of Emmanuel as of one, how it is moved in a human way, and how in a divine way;" and, "I say that the knowledge and the energy of Emmanuel is one, just as also the will." Theodore the God-smitten, "He showed the will to be one, the energy one, brought forth according to one and the same authority." Nestorius the all-smitten, "Wherefore we also see their will, energy, and dominion to be one." Paul, the Persian also in opinion, "The union is according to good pleasure, maintained by an identity of counsel and opinion;" and, "The mystery of good pleasure is shown to be of a single volition." These indeed, the accursed and wicked, he defines as holy Fathers. These he knows as approved mystagogues of the Church, whom she, following in all things, even in this, and defining one will and energy of Christ our God, similarly confuses and divides the doctrine of the economy.

(180) How then, thinking the things of the adversaries, has she supposed that she thinks otherwise, setting down her votes without change; and choosing and preferring that which is not over that which is? For when truth, not injustice, is judging, it is clear to everyone, that he is in agreement and accord with them, not who says what they do not say, but who professes what they dogmatize. If indeed disagreement is known to characterize heterodoxy, but agreement, orthodoxy. And yet she herself somehow bears witness, crying out that the abominable Nestorius would never have dared to say two wills; but to confess self-will, that is, one will, of the two persons fabricated by him. If therefore, even according to her, Nestorius professes not two, but one will; and this also Apollinarius, and all the impious from them, and indeed also one energy, as the argument has shown, without a doubt then us who say two according to the divine Fathers, are in every way of a different opinion; but she herself who says one

74

περίδοξον ὁμολογίαν, δυσσεβῆ τυγχάνειν, καί ἀλλοτρίαν τοῦ Χριστιανικοῦ δόγματος ἀποφαίνεται. Πιστοῦται γάρ τάδε φάσκουσα τόν λόγον ἡμῖν. Ὡσαύτως δέ καί τήν τῶν δύο ἐνεργειῶν ῥῆσιν πολλούς σκανδαλίζειν, ὡς μήτε τινί τῶν ἁγίων καί ἐγκρίτων τῆς Ἐκκλησίας μυσταγωγῶν εἰρημένην, ἀλλά γάρ καί ἕπεσθαι αὐτῇ τό δύο πρεσβεύειν θελήματα ἐναντίως πρός ἄλληλα ἔχοντα· καί ἐντεῦθεν δύο, τούς τἀναντία θέλοντας εἰσάγεσθαι· ὅπερ δυσσεβές ὑπάρχει καί ἀλλότριον τοῦ Χριστιανικοῦ δόγματος" Ἰδού σαφῶς, καί γυμνῇ τῇ κεφαλῇ, τό δή λεγόμενον, οὐχ ἁγίων ὑπάρχειν, οὔτε μήν ἐγκρίτων ὁρίζεται τῆς Ἐκκλησίας μυσταγωγῶν, τό δύο πρεσβεύειν θελήματα, καί τάς κατ᾿ αὐτήν ἡγουμένας ἰσαρίθμους αὐτοῖς ἐνεργείας· δυσσεβῶν δέ μᾶλλον, ὡς δυσσεβές, καί ἀλλότριον, ᾗ φησι, τοῦ Χριστιανικοῦ δόγματος· καί δύο τούς τἀναντία θέλοντας ἐπεισάγον τοῖς ταῦτα κηρύττουσιν. Ἤγουν τά δύο θελήματα, καί τάς ἰσαρίθμους αὐτοῖς ἐνεργείας πνευματοκινήτοις Πατράσιν, οἷς οὐδέ ἥλατο κατακολουθεῖν, ἤ ἁγίους τούτους ἀποκαλεῖν, ἤ ὅλως κατ' ἐκείνους σύν ἐκείνοις ταῦτα πρεσβεύειν, εἰς τήν τοῦ κατά σάρκα Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ μυστηρίου βεβαίωσιν. Ἀλλά τίσι καί τίνας τούς περί ὧνκαί οἷς ἔφησεν τήν τῆς μιᾶς ἐνεργείας εἰρῆσθαι φωνήν, καί ἀκολουθεῖν ἐν τούτῳ καθά καί ἐν πᾶσι πρός τό ἕν θέλημα Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁμολογεῖν, οἵ τε περιφανῶς ὄντες διεδείχθησαν, οἵ τε τῆς συγχύσεως πρόμαχοι καί τῆς διαιρέσεως ἡγεμόνες. Οἷον, οὐκ ἀπεικῶς γάρ εἰς πίστωσιν καί αὖθις ἐπιτόμως ἐπιδραμεῖν, Ἀπολινάριος ὁ δυσσεβής τάδε θεομαχῶν· Εἷς γάρ ὁ Χριστός, θεϊκῷ θελήματι μόνῳ κινούμενος, καθό καί μίαν οἴδαμεν αὐτοῦ τήν ἐνέργειαν, καί μηδεμίαν ἔχων ἐν τῷ θέλειν διαφοράν. Πολέμων ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας πολέμιος. "Ἀτρέπτῳ θελήματι θεϊκῷ πάντα πεποίηκεν· ἀλλ᾿ οὐ τό μέν, θεῖον· τό δέ, θεωθέν, κατά τόν Καππαδόκην Γρηγόριον." Καί, " Ὁ δύο θελήματα λέγων Χριστοῦ, κατά τούς πάλαι καί νῦν φυσωμένους, ἤ τόν ἕνα δύο τινάς εἰσάγει Χριστούς, ἤ τόν ἑαυτῷ διδάσκει μαχόμενον. Θεμίστιος ὁ ἀθέμιτος, Ἀλλ᾿ ἰσώμεθα τήν ὡς ἑνός μίαν θέλησιν τοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, πῆ μέν, ἀνθρωπικῶς κινεῖσθαι, πῆ δέ, θεοπρεπῶς· καί, Μίαν φημί τοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, τήν γνῶσιν καί τήν ἐνέργειαν, καθά καί τήν θέλησιν. Θεόδωρος ὁ θεόπληξ, Ἔδειξε μίαν εἶναι τήν θελησιν, μίαν τήν ἐνέργειαν, κατά μίαν καί τήν αὐτήν ἐξουσίαν προαγομένην. Νεστόριος ὁ πάμπληξ, ∆ιό καί μίαν αὐτῶν τήν θέλησιν, ἐνέργειάν τε καί δεσποτείαν ὁρῶμεν. Παῦλος ὁ καί τήν γνώμην Πέρσης, Κατ᾿ εὐδοκίαν ἡ ἕνωσις, βουλῆς καί γνώμης ταυτότητι κρατουμένη· καί, Τό τῆς εὐδοκίας μυστήριον μοναδικῆς βουλήσεως διαδείκνυται. Τούτους δή τούς ἐναγεῖς καί ἀλάστορας, Πατέρας ἁγίους ὁρίζεται. Τούτοις ἐγκρίτους οἶδε τῆς Ἐκκλησίας μυσταγωγούς, οἶς ἐν πᾶσι, κἄν τούτῳ κατακολουθήσασα, καί μίαν Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ συνοριζομένη θέλησιν καί ἐνέργειαν, τόν τῆς οἰκονομίας ὁμοίως αὐτοῖς συγχεῖ τε καί διατέμνει λόγον.

(180) Πῶς οὖν, τά τῶν ἐναντίων φρονοῦσα, φρονεῖν ἑτέρως ὑπείληφεν, ἀναλλάξ τιθεμένη τάς ψήφους· καί τοῦ ὄντος τό μή ὅν αἱρουμένη τε καί προκρίνουσα. Καί γάρ ἀληθείας οὐκ ἀδικίας κρινούσης, παντί που σαφές, ὡς ἐκεῖνος ἐκείνοις ὑπάρχων σύμφωνος καί ὁμόλογος, οὐχ ὁ λέγων ἅ μή λέγουσιν, ἀλλ᾿ πρεσβεύων ἅ δογματίζουσιν. Εἴπερ ἀσυμφωνία μέν τό ἑτερόδοξον, συμφωνία δέ, τό ὁμόδοξον οἶδε χαρακτηρίζειν. Καίτοι μαρτύρεταί πως καί αὐτή, βοῶσα, μή δύο τετολμηκέναι θελήματα φάναι ποτ᾿ ἄν τόν μιαρόν Νεστόριον· ἀλλά αὐτοβουλίαν, τουτέστιν, ἕν θέλημα, τῶν πλαττομένων αὐτῷ δύο προσώπων ὁμολογεῖν. Εἰ τοίνυν καί κατά ταύτην, οὐ δύο μέν, ἕν δέ θέλημα πρεσβεύει Νεστόριος· τοῦτο δέ καί Ἀπολινάριος, καί οἱ ἀπ᾿ ἐκείνων δυσσεβεῖς ἅπαντες, καί μέντοι καί μίαν ἐνέργειαν, ὡς ὁ λόγος ἀπέδειξεν, ἀναμφηρίστως ἄρα δύο μέν ἡμᾶς λέγοντας κατά τούς θείους Πατέρας, ἑτερόφρονας πάντη· μίαν δέ λέγουσαν ἑαυτήν