75

I mean nature and hypostasis, the flesh has no difference with respect to the Word, as Severus thinks, let it be clearly the same with the same, both consubstantial and co-hypostatic according to the nonsense of Apollinarius. And if the flesh is consubstantial with the Word, it will also be consubstantial with the Father and the Spirit, and the Trinity will appear to have become a tetrad; since consubstantial things do not admit of union with one another according to hypostasis. But if the flesh is co-hypostatic with the Word, it will be of a different substance. For co-hypostatic things have in every way and in all respects a different principle of substance with respect to one another. But if the flesh is of a different substance with respect to the Word, as co-hypostatic after the union, Christ will be found cut into two natures according to Severus after the union; since according to him, number certainly possesses the power of division. Thus everything that fights against the truth is easily overturned and easily defeated by itself.

But if, when speaking of one composite nature of Christ after the union, he seems to impute to it a difference as in a natural quality; first, inasmuch as He is a composite nature, Christ will be in no way consubstantial with any of the beings; since according to substance and nature Christ is one and alone. For one nature, as has been said, could never be entirely consubstantial with another nature. And not being consubstantial with any of the beings, He will be neither entirely God, nor indeed man; or if indeed God, the one who advocates this will be a polytheist, by saying that God the Father and the Holy Spirit are of an uncompounded, simple nature; but that Christ is God of a composite, non-simple nature, and he will be shown to be proclaiming two divinities: one simple, and one composite.

Then, speaking of the difference as in a natural quality, if he says that the natures to which the qualities belong underlie the different qualities, he himself will be shown to be making a declaration of two natures after the union; becoming an advocate, and not (15Β_318> willingly, for those things he contended against. But if he says that the difference belongs to bare qualities without the things themselves, let him also speak of their union. For of what things there is a difference after the union, of these manifestly is the union; and in a few syllables he has introduced the atomism of Epicurus, 0572 and the deceptive fantasy of Manes, since for him Christ does not exist in reality in things, but in empty qualities; and Christ will be God by quality alone, and not in reality. For immortality and mortality, of which he says there is a difference after the union, belong to natures, but are not natures. For where is mortality, if there is not a mortal being, or immortality, if there is not a nature that death does not touch? But truly wickedness is irrational, and the appearance of being wise is naturally constituted the creator of great folly. And for the prudent it is more profitable to embrace silence toward such men, than by refuting them to be thought to be playing games themselves with the mystery. Severus, therefore, holding such views concerning Christ, has died along with his own dogmas.

A BRIEF EXPOSITION WITH THE ORTHODOX DEFENSE OF THE TRUE OF THE

CONFESSION OF THE FATHERS A brief exposition with the orthodox defense of the true of the Fathers

confession. But we do not think thus, we do not believe thus, nor is this the portion

of Jacob, says the one who spoke; but confessing that the one Christ (that is, His one hypostasis) was composed from two natures, perfect according to their own principle of being—I mean of divinity and humanity—we believe that the natures remained unconfused and without any division whatsoever after the union. For believing that He is Christ, we have confessed that the natures from which He was composed are preserved after the union. And for this reason a natural one in Him, that is, considering the parts from which He was composed,

75

λέγω δέ τήν φύσιν καί τήν ὑπόστασιν, οὐκ ἔχει διαφοράν, ὡς Σευήρῳ δοκεῖ, πρός τόν Λόγον ἡ σάρξ, ἔστω σαφῶς ἡ αὐτή τῷ αὐτῷ ὁμοούσιός τε καί ὁμοϋπόστατος κατά τήν Ἀπολιναρίου ληρῳδίαν. Καί εἰ μέν ὁμοούσιός ἐστι τῷ Λόγῳ ἡ σάρξ, ἔσται καί τῷ Πατρί καί τῷ Πνεύματι ὁμοούσιος, καί ἡ Τριάς φανήσεται γενομένη τετράς· ἐπειδή τά ὁμοούσια τήν καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν οὐκ ἐπιδέχονται πρός ἄλληλα σύμβασιν. Εἰ δέ ὁμοϋπόστατός ἐστι τῷ Λόγῳ ἡ σάρξ, ἔσται πρός τόν ἑτροούσιον. Τά γάρ ὁμοϋπόστατα, τόν πρός ἄλληλα τῆς οὐσίας λόγον πάντη τε καί πάντως διάφορον ἔχουσιν. Εἰ δέ πρός τόν Λόγον ὡς ὁμοϋπόστατος μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, ἑτεροούσιός ἐστιν ἡ σάρξ, εἰς δύο φύσεις ὁ Χριστός τεμνόμενος εὑρεθήσεται κατά Σευήρον μετά τήν ἕνωσιν· εἴπερ πάντως κατ᾿ αὐτόν διαιρέσεως ὁ ἀριθμός κέκτηται δύναμιν. Οὕτω πᾶν τό τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μαχόμενον, εὐπερίτρεπτόν ἐστιν ἑαυτῷ καί εὐπερίπτωτον.

Εἰ δέ μίαν φύσιν λέγων Χριστοῦ μετά τήν ἕνωσιν σύνθετον, τήν ὡς ἐν ποιότητι φυσικῇ δοκεῖ προσρίπτειν αὐτῇ διαφοράν· πρῶτον μέν καθό φύσις σύνθετος, οὐδενί τῶν ὄντων ἔσται παντελῶς ὁ Χριστός ὁμοούσιος· εἴπερ κατ᾿ οὐσίαν καί φύσιν εἷς καί μόνος ἐστίν ὁ Χριστός. Φύσις γάρ φύσει, καθώς εἴρηται, οὐκ ἄν εἴη ποτ᾿ ἄν παντελῶς ὁμοούσιος. Τινί δέ τῶν ὄντων οὐκ ὤν ὁμοούσιος, οὔτε Θεός ἔσται παντελῶς ὁ αὐτός, οὔτε μήν ἄνθρωπος· ἤ εἴπερ Θεός, ἔσται πολύθεος ὁ τοῦτο πρεσβεύων, ὡς ἀσυνθέτου μέν φύσεως ὡς ἁπλῆς λέγων Θεόν τόν Πατέρα καί τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον· συνθέτου δέ φύσεως ὡς οὐχ ἁπλῆς λέγων Θεόν τόν Χριστόν, καί δύο θεότητας καταγγέλλων δειχθήσεται· μίαν ἁπλῆν, καί μίαν σύνθετον.

Ἔπειτα δέ τήν ὡς ἐν ποιότητι φυσικῇ λέγων διαφοράν, εἰ μέν ὑποκεῖσθαι λέγῃ ταῖς διαφόροις ποιότησι τάς φύσεις ὧν εἰσίν αἱ ποιότητες, δύο φύσεων καὐτός δειχθήσεται μετά τήν ἕνωσιν ποιούμενος δήλωσιν· ὧν κατηγωνίσατο, συνήγορος καί μή (15Β_318> θέλων γινόμενος. Εἰ δέ ψιλῶν ποιοτήτων χωρίς τῶν πραγμάτων εἶναι λέγῃ τήν διαφοράν, τούτων λεγέτω καί τήν ἕνωσιν. Ὧν γάρ ἡ διαφορά μετά τήν ἕνωσιν, τούτων προδήλως ἡ ἕνωσις· καί δι᾿ ὀλίγων συλλαβῶν Ἐπικούρου τόν αὐτοματισμόν, 0572 καί Μάνεντος τήν ἀπατηλήν φαντασίαν εἰσήγαγε, οὐκ ὄντος αὐτῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν τοῖς πράγμασιν, ἀλλά ταῖς διακένοις ποιότησι· καί ἔσται ποιότητι μόνῃ Θεός ὁ Χριστός, καί οὐ πράγματι. Ἀθανασία γάρ καί θνητότης, ὧν εἶναι λέγει μετά τήν ἕνωσιν δαφοράν, φύσεων μέν ὑπάρχουσιν, οὐ φύσεις δέ. Ποῦ γάρ θνητότης, οὐκ ὄντος τοῦ θνήσκοντος, ἤ ἀθανασία, οὐκ οὔσης τῆς φύσεως ἧς οὐχ ἅπτεται θάνατος; Ἀλλ᾿ ὄντως ἀσυλλόγιστον ἡ πονηρία, καί τό δοκεῖν εἶναι σοφόν, μεγάλης καθίστασθαι πέφυκεν ἀνοίας δημιουργόν. Καί σιωπήν ἀσπάζεσθαι πρός τούς τοιούτους μᾶλλον λυσιτελέστερον τοῖς συνετοῖς, ἤ τῷ κατ᾿ αὐτῶν ἐλέγχῳ παίζειν νομίζεσθαι καί αὐτούς τό μυστήριον. Ὁ μέν οὖν Σεύηρος οὕτως ἔχων περί Χριστοῦ τοῖς οἰκείοις συντέθνηκε δόγμασι.

ΕΚΘΕΣΙΣ ΣΥΝΤΟΜΟΣ ΜΕΤΑ ΤΗΣ ΟΡΘΗΣ ΣΥΝΗΓΟΡΙΑΣ ΤΗΣ ΑΛΗΘΟΥΣ ΤΩΝ

ΠΑΤΕΡΩΝ ΟΜΟΛΟΓΙΑΣ Ἔκθεσις σύντομος μετά τῆς ὀρθῆς συνηγορίας τῆς ἀληθοῦς τῶν Πατέρων

ὁμολογίας. Ἡμεῖς δέ οὐχ οὕτω φρονοῦμεν, οὐχ οὕτω πιστεύομεν, οὐδ᾿ αὕτη ἐστίν ἡ μερίς

τοῦ Ἰακώβ, φησίν ὁ εἰπών· ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ δύο φύσεων τελείως ἐχουσῶν κατά τόν ἴδιον τοῦ εἶναι λόγον, θεότητός τέ φημι καί ἀνθρωπότητος, συντεθεῖσθαι τόν ἕνα Χριστόν, ἤγουν τήν αὐτοῦ μίαν ὑπόστασιν ὁμολογοῦντες, ἀσυγχύτους μεμενηκέναι, καί τῆς οἱασοῦν δίχα τομῆς τάς φύσεις πιστεύομεν μετά τήν ἕνωσιν. Τόν Χριστόν γάρ εἶναι πιστεύοντες, τάς ἐξ ὧν συνετέθη σώζεσθαι φύσεις ὁμολογήσαμεν μετά τήν ἕνωσιν. Καί διά τοῦτο φυσικήν μέν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, τά μέρη δηλονότι σκοποῦντες ἐξ ὧν συνετέθη,