90

and after the incarnation, and of God the same Christ it is again properly, as being truly a man on account of the flesh, and being called one of mankind; for the properties of the parts are properly predicated of the whole composed of them, as it properly admits all things naturally belonging to the parts, from which it also subsists. "But not properly likewise of both" must be understood, of 'God' and of 'Father', as both cannot be said properly of Christ, on account of the natural difference of the natures from which and in which He is composed. For the properties belonging to the composite whole will never be properly predicated of one of its parts.

"But contrariwise to how it is with us," that is, the reverse of how it is with us. For when I consider the 1269 difference of the natures, (14∆_370> and make a distinction of them in thought, I am not able to posit 'properly' for both, of 'Father', I say, and of 'God'. For the Father is not properly the God of the Word, nor is God properly the Father of the flesh. "But contrariwise," that is, but the reverse, or but conversely, of both 'properly' clearly and 'not properly', being taken with respect to the union and the one hypostasis, and with respect to the difference of the natures and their distinction in thought, as the one hypostasis admits of God being called properly God and Father, as of one Christ, according to the reason given, but the essential difference of the natures conversely admits 'not properly', as it is with us. For of us God is properly God, just as also of the flesh of the Word, but not properly Father, just as neither of the flesh of the Word. Therefore, the things of the whole must be declared interchangeably of the parts, and the things of its own parts of the whole, and the comprehension of the matter at hand will be easy and clear.

And that what is said may become clearer, when Christ is considered as a hypostasis, the "'properly' of both," of 'God', I say, and of 'Father', must be posited, but when, on account of the unconfused existence of the natures in which and from which Christ is, the natures of Christ are considered, the "'reverse'" must be posited, which is 'not properly', as it is with us. And the teacher clearly indicates this by adding, "And this causes error for the heretics, the coupling of the names, the names being interchanged on account of the mixture." But as a sign, when the natures are separated in thought, the names also are divided with them. That is, as long as you consider Christ one hypostasis, the coupling of the names by interchange is indivisible, but when in thought you separate the natures that have come together into the one hypostasis of Christ, you have also divided the names with the natures; or again, since Christ is double in nature, both are predicated of Him, 'God' and 'Father', (14∆_372> properly when the names are spoken together suitably to the natures, but not properly when the possession according to nature of each of the things from which and in which and which He is, is given in return interchangeably to the other on account of the one hypostasis. Not knowing how to do this, or, to speak more properly, not enduring it, the heretics of then and now do not cease to blaspheme the only-begotten God the Word, some bringing Him down to a creature on account of His human attributes, others confounding the economy on account of the denial of the natures from which He is.

But another, very wise in divine things, having been asked by me about this passage, said: The 'properly,' and the 'not properly of both,' belong to the same category of relation, whether of 'Father,' or of 'God,' or even of both, as being posited of the one Christ, who is composed of two contraries, 'properly' and 'not properly'. If the Father should be called God of Christ according to the concept of the two natures, He would be called 'properly' of the creature, but 'not properly' of God the Word. And likewise from the contraries, Father 'properly' of the Word, 1272 but of the creature 'not properly', just as these things are said also with respect to us. For of us He is 'properly' God, 'not

90

καί μετά τήν σάρκωσιν, καί Θεοῦ τοῦ αὐτοῦ Χριστοῦ πάλιν κυρίως ἐστίν, ὡς ἀνθρώπου κατά ἀλήθειαν ὄντος διά τήν σάρκα, καί ἑνός τῶν ἀνθρώπων χρηματίζοντος· τά γάρ τῶν μερῶν τοῦ ἐξ αὐτῶν ὅλου κυρίως κατηγορεῖται, ὡς ἐπιδεχομένου πάντα κυρίως τά φυσικῶς προσόντα τοῖς μέρεσιν, ἐξ ὧν καί ὑφέστηκε. "Τό δέ οὐ κυρίως ὡσαύτως ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν" ληπτέον, τοῦ, Θεός, καί τοῦ, Πατήρ ὡς ἀμφοῖν ἐπί Χριστοῦ κυρίως λεχθῆναι μή δυναμένων, διά τήν φυσικήν διαφοράν τῶν ἐξ ὧν καί ἐν αἷς συνέστηκε φύσεων. Τά γάρ τῷ κατά σύνθεσιν ὅλῳ προσόντα θατέρου τῶν ἑαυτοῦ μερῶν οὐδέποτε κυρίως κατηγορηθήσεται.

" Ἐναντίως" δέ " ἤ ἐφ᾿ ἡμῶν ἔχει», τουτέστιν ἔμπαλιν καθώς ἐφ᾿ ἡμῶν ἔχει. Ἡνίκα γάρ τήν 1269 διαφοράν θεωρῶ τῶν φύσεων, (14∆_370> καί τήν αὐτῶν κατ᾿ ἐπίνοιαν ποιοῦμαι διάκρισιν, οὐ δύναμαι τό ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν κυρίως τιθέναι, τοῦ, Πατήρ, φημί καί τοῦ, Θεός. Οὐ γάρ κυρίως τοῦ Λόγου Θεός ἐστιν ὁ Πατήρ, οὐ δέ κυρίως Πατήρ τῆς σαρκός ἐστιν ὁ Θεός. " Ἐναντίως δέ», τουτέστιν ἔμπαλιν δέ, ἤ ἀντιστρόφως δέ, τοῦ τε "κυρίως" δηλονότι καί "οὐ κυρίως», ἐπί τε τῆς ἑνώσεως καί τῆς μίας ὑποστάσεως, ἐπί τε τῆς διαφορᾶς τῶν φύσεων καί τῆς κατ᾿ ἐπίνοιαν αὐτῶν διακρίσεως λαμβανομένων, ὡς τῆς μέν μίαν ὑποστάσεως κυρίως Θεόν καί Πατέρα λεγόμενον, ὡς ἑνός Χριστοῦ, τόν Θεόν ἐπιδεχομένης, κατά τήν ἀποδοθεῖσαν αἰτίαν, τῆς δέ κατ᾿ οὐσίαν διαφορᾶς τῶν φύσεων ἔμπαλιν τό μή κυρίως ἐπιδεχομένης, καθώς ἐφ᾿ ἡμῶν ἔχει. Ἡμῶν γάρ κυρίως μέν Θεός ὁ Θεός, ὥσπερ καί τῆς τοῦ Λόγου σαρκός, οὐ κυρίως δέ Πατήρ, ὥσπερ οὐδέ τῆς τοῦ Λόγου σαρκός. Ἐνηλλαγμένως οὖν τά τοῦ ὅλου τοῖς μέρεσι, καί τῷ ὅλῳ τά τῶν οἰκείων μερῶν ἐκφωτητέον, καί ἔσται ῥᾳδία καί σαφή ἡ τοῦ προκειμένου κατάληψις.

Καί ἵνα σαφέστερον γένηται τό λεγόμενον, ἡνίκα μέν ὡς ὑπόσταστις ὁ Χριστός θεωρεῖται, τό " κυρίως ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν», τοῦ, Θεός, λέγω καί τοῦ, Πατήρ, θετέον, ἡνίκα δέ διά τήν ἀσύγχυτον ὕπαρξιν τῶν ἐν οἷς καί ἐξ ὧν ἐστιν αἱ τοῦ Χριστοῦ φύσεις θεωροῦνται, τό " ἔμπαλιν" θετέον, ὅπερ ἐστί τό μή κυρίως, καθώς ἐφ᾿ ἡμῶν ἔχει. Καί δηλοῖ τοῦτο σαφῶς λέγων ὁ διδάσκαλος διά τοῦ ἐπαγαγεῖν, " Καί τοῦτο ποιεῖ τοῖς αἱρετικοῖς τήν πλάνην, ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐπίζευξις, ἐπαλλατομένων τῶν ὀνομάτων διά τήν σύγκρασιν». Σημεῖον δέ, ἡνίκα αἱ φύσεις διίστανται ταῖς ἐπινοίαις, συνδιῄρηνται καί τά ὀνόματα. Τουτέστιν, ἕως ὑπόστασιν μίαν σκοπεῖς τόν Χριστόν, ἡ κατ᾿ ἐπαλλαγήν τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐπίζευξίς ἐστιν ἀδιαίρετος, ἐπειδάν δέ ταῖς ἐπινοίαις διαστήσης τάς συμπλούσας τήν μίαν ὑπόστασιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ φύσεις, συνδιεῖλε ταῖς φύσεσι καί τά ὀνόματα· ἤ πάλιν, ἐπείπερ τήν φύσιν διπλοῦς ὁ Χριστός, ἄμφω κατηγορεῖται αὐτοῦ, τό Θεός καί Πατήρ, (14∆_372> κυρίως μέν ἡνίκα συνεκφωνεῖται καταλλήλως ταῖς φύσεσι τά ὀνόματα, οὐ κυρίως δέ ὅταν ἡ κατά φύσιν ἑκατέρου τῶν ἐξ ὧν ἐν οἷς τε καί ἅπερ ἐστί θατέρῳ διά τήν μίαν ὑπόστασιν ἐπηλλαγμένως ἀντιδίδοται κτῆσις. Ὅπερ ποιεῖν μή γινώσκοντες, ἤ κυρίωτερος εἰπεῖν μή ἀνεχόμενοι, οἱ τότε καί οἱ νῦν αἱρετικοί τόν μονογενῆ Θεόν Λόγον βλασφημεῖν οὐ παραιτοῦνται, οἱ μέν εἰς κτίσμα κατάγοντες διά τά ἀνθρώπινα, οἱ δέ τήν οἰκονομίαν συγχέοντες διά τήν ἄρνησιν τῶν ἐξ ὧν ἐστι φύσεων.

Ἄλλος δέ πάνυ τά θεῖα σοφός τοῦτον ἐρωτηθείς παρ᾿ ἐμοῦ τόν τόπον ἔφη· Τό μέν "κυρίως», τό δέ "οὐ κυρίως ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν», τῆς αὐτῆς ἐστι κατηγορίας τῆς σχετικῆς, εἴτε τῆς Πατήρ, εἴτε τῆς Θεός, ἤ καί ἑκατέρας, ὡς ἐφ᾿ ἑνός Χριστοῦ τιθεμένης, τοῦ συνεστῶτος ἐκ δυοῖν τῶν ἐναντίων, "κυρίως" καί "οὐ κυρίως". Εἰ μέν Θεός ὁ Πατήρ τοῦ Χριστοῦ λεχθείη κατά τήν ἐπίνοιαν τῶν δύο φύσεων, "κυρίως" μέν τοῦ κτίσματος ἄν λέγοιτο, "οὐ κυρίως" δέ τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου. Ὁμοίως δέ καί ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων Πατήρ " κυρίως" τοῦ Λόγου, 1272 τοῦ δέ κτίσματος "οὐ κυρίως», καθά καί ἐφ᾿ ἡμῶν ἔχει ταῦτα λεγόμενα. Ἡμῶν γάρ " κυρίως " μέν Θεός, "οὐ