93

we guard indivisibly the things that have run together, and we recognize unconfusedly the properties of the one nature as belonging to the other because of the union, and of both natures because of the existence of the whole which is from them, neither confusing according to this, nor separating according to those, but holding the difference as the boundary of the essences, while strengthening the union in the definitions of one and the same hypostasis. Thus, therefore, and for these reasons, this one, and any other approved and divine Father, as I have already shown I have written, [spoke of] one energy in Christ and two, the one with a view to the union of the natural energies, just as also of the natures; the other, with a view to their essential difference. And so much for this here.

But concerning the interpretation for use of the theologian and great herald of the Church (of truth), Gregory, which says, "The word being formed by the man, is not to be understood of that which is according to the Savior. For his will, being wholly deified, is not contrary to God," I define to depend on a very pious thought, for which and from which it was zealously written by the diligent author, but as being slightly lacking in verbal precision, on which account those who are facile and gross in everything contrive to make attacks, or rather, it is more truthful to say, hostile incursions, and nothing is so earnestly sought by them as to scrutinize and find fault even with things that are extremely secure from every side and which open up no ground for them against the Word, to say nothing of if they have somehow seized upon a bare expression, and this proceeding from a simple and pure mind, with a view to ratifying and establishing the essential and natural will of the ensouled flesh assumed from us, (that is, of the human element according to the Savior) by this God-inspired Father’s saying: “For his will is wise and circumspect,” from which its essential difference from his divine and paternal nature is shown, allowing no confusion to be introduced into the mystery of Christ. But to pronounce "the whole deified" paroxytonically, as from certain manuscripts, and not rather oxytonically, for fear that one will should be introduced by the adversaries, gives a handle against us, as though we were implying a relative and hypostatic union, and one of grace and worth, as it were, since the saints are also (236) primarily moved and energized by God, on account of their total inclination and disposition towards both God and divine things. For the oxytone phrasing of *theothen* (deified), neither leads to the identity of the essential and natural will, with respect to the will as man according to the Savior (for who could show this?), and it represents the supreme union and connaturality. For "the deified," being one of the relatives, just like "the ignited" and "the enlightened," and whatever such things there are, necessarily introduces along with itself that to which it refers, which is "the deifying," "the igniting," and "the enlightening," it has the relation, so that the argument for the difference and for the supreme union is not strengthened from there rather than from here. For not being contrary is not sufficient for union; for anything that is natural and blameless is not contrary, but it is not in every case also united to God. But "the deified" is in every way and entirely united, and in no way does it abolish the essential difference, inasmuch as it exists unconfused according to the union.

But if someone should say: And if nothing natural is contrary, how did the Father, when speaking of our innate will, if it was indeed of this and not perhaps of another, not say that it in every case follows God, but rather that it "resists for the most part and struggles against"? For either it is not natural, as being an opponent, or it is not an opponent, as being natural. And so it is established as something else in its natural quality with respect to the will of the human element according to the Savior; since this is in no way [contrary], but that one is contrary. We say that insofar as it is natural, it is not contrary; but insofar as it is not moved naturally by us, it is clearly contrary, and as

93

προσδεδραμηκυιῶν ἀδιαιρέτως φυλάττομεν, καί τά θατέρας ἴδια τῆς θατέρας ἀσυγχύτως γνωρίζομεν διά τήν ἕνωσιν, καί ἀμφοτέρων τοῦ ἐξ αὐτῶν ὅλου διά τήν ὕπαρξιν, οὔτε κατά τοῦτο συμφύροντες, οὔτε μήν κατ᾿ ἐκείνας χωρίζοντες, ἀλλ᾿ οὐσιῶν μέν ὅρους κρατοῦντες τήν διαφοράν, λόγοις δέ μιᾶς καί τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποστάσεως τήν ἕνωσιν διασφίγγοντες. Οὕτω γοῦν, καί διά ταῦτα οὗτος, καί πᾶς ἄλλος εἴ τις ἔγκριτος καί θεῖος Πατήρ, ὡς ἤδη φαίνομαι γεγραφώς, μίαν ἐπί Χριστοῦ τήν ἐνέργειαν καί δύο, τό μέν τήν ἕνωσιν ἀποσκοπῶν τῆν κατά φύσιν ἐνεργειῶν, ὥσπερ οὖν καί τῶν φύσεων· τό δέ, τήν οὐσιώδη τούτων διαφοράν. Καί ὧδε μέν ταῦτα.

Περί δέ τῆς εἰς τήν χρῆσιν ἑρμηνείας τοῦ θεολόγου καί μεγάλου τῆς Ἐκκλησίας (ἀληθείας) κήρυκος Γρηγορίου, τήν "Παρά τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τυποῦσθαι τόν λόγον φάσκουσαν οὐ τοῦ κατά τόν Σωτῆρα νοουμένου. Τό γάρ ἐκείνου θέλειν, οὐδέ ὑπεναντίον Θεῷ θεωθέν ὅλον," λίαν μέν εὐσεβοῦς ἠρτημένης ὁρίζομαι διανοίας, ὑπέρ ἧς καί ἐξ ἧς ἐσπουδάσθη τῷ φιλοπόνῳ, μικρόν δέ περί τό τῆς λέξεως ἀκριβές ἐνδεοῦς, ᾧ καί μᾶλλον ἐπιδρομάς, ἤ καταδρομάς εἰπεῖν ἀληθέστερον, οἱ πάντα εὔκολοι καί παχεῖς μηχανῶνται ποιεῖν, καί οὐδέν οὕτως αὐτοῖς περισπούδαστον, ὡς τό καί τά λίαν πάντοθεν ἠσφαλισμένα, καί μηδεμίαν αὐτοῖς ὑπανοίγοντα χώραν κατά τοῦ λόγου, διερευνᾶσθαι καί μωμοσκοπεῖν, μήτοιγε ψιλῆς πόθεν δραξάμενοι φωνῆς, καί ταύτης ἐξ ἀπλάστου προαγομένης καί καθαρᾶς διανοίας, ἐπί τό μέν ἐπικυροῦν καί συνιστᾷν τῆς ἐξ ἡμῶν προληφθείσης ἐψυχωμένης σαρκός, (ἤγουν τοῦ κατά τόν Σωτῆρα ἀνθρωπίνου) τό οὐσιῶδες θέλημα καί φυσικόν, ἐκ τοῦδε τοῦ θεολήπτου Πατρός τό λέγειν· "Τό γάρ ἐκείνου θέλειν σοφόν καί περιεσκεμμένον," ἐξ οὗ τῆς πρός τό φύσει Θεῖον αὐτοῦ καί Πατρικόν ἡ οὐσιώδης δείκνυται διαφορά, μηδαμῶς ἐπιφυῆναι σύγχυσιν παραχωροῦσα τῷ κατά Χριστόν μυστήριῳ. Τό δέ γε παροξυτόνως ὡς ἐξ ἀντιγράφων τινῶν ἐκφωνεῖν τό θεωθέν ὅλον, καί μή μᾶλλον ὀξυτόνως, δέοι τοῦ μή τό ἕν εἰσαχθῆναι θέλημα πρός τῶν ἐναντίων, λαβήν δίδωσι καθ᾿ ἡμῶν, ὡς σχετικήν καί ὑποστατικήν ὑποφαινόντων, καί οἷον χάριτι καί ἀξίᾳ τήν ἕνωσιν, τῷ καί τούς ἁγίου ἐκ Θεοῦ (236) προηγουμένως κινεῖσθαί τε καί ἐνεργεῖσθαι, διά τήν ὁλικήν αὐτῶν πρός τε Θεόν καί τά θεῖα σύννευσιν καί διάθεσιν. Ἡ γάρ ὀξύτονος τοῦ θεωθέν φράσις, οὔτε εἰς ταυτόν οὐσιώδους καί φυσικοῦ θελήματος ἄγει τό, ὡς ἀνθρώπου κατά τόν Σωτῆρα θέλειν, (τίς γάρ ὁ δεῖξαι δυνάμενος;) καί τήν ἄκραν ἕνωσίν τε καί συμφυΐαν παρίστησι. Τῶν γάρ πρός τι τυγχάνον τό θεωθέν, ὥσπερ οὖν καί τό πυρωθέν καί φωτισθέν, καί ὅσα τοιαῦτα, συνεισάγει πάντως ἑαυτῷ καί τό πρός ὅ τήν ἀναφοράν, ὅπερ ἐστί τό θεοῦν, τό πυροῦν καί τό φωτίζον, τῆς σχέσεως ἔχει, ὡς μή μᾶλλον ἐκεῖθεν ἤ ἔνθεν τόν τε λόγον κρατύνεσθαι τῆς διαφορᾶς καί τῆς ἄκρας ἑνώσεως. Οὐδέ γάρ τό μή ὑπεναντίον εἶναι πρός ἕνωσιν αὔταρκες· πᾶν γάρ εἴ τι φυσικον , καί ἀδιάβλητον, οὐκ ἐναντίον μέν, οὐ πάντως δέ καί ἡνωμένον Θεῷ. Τό δέ θεωθέν πάντη τε καί πάντως ἡνωμένον, καί τήν οὐσιώδη διαφοράν οὐδαμῶς ἐξιστοῦν, ὅσῳ καί ἀσύγχυτον ὑπάρχει κατά τήν ἕνωσιν.

Εἰ δέ τις ἐρεῖ· Καί εἰ μηδέν φυσικόν ὑπεναντίον, πῶς περί τοῦ καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς ἐμφύτου θελήματος, εἴπερ αὐτοῦ, καί οὐκ ἄλλου τυχόν, ἐμνημόνευσεν ὁ Πατήρ, καί οὐ πάντως εἴρηκεν ἑπομένου Θεῷ, ἀλλ᾿ "Ἀντιπίπτοντος ὡς τά πολλά καί ἀντιπαλαίοντος;" Ἤ γάρ οὐ φυσικόν ὡς ἀντίπαλον, ἤ οὐκ ἀντίπαλον ὡς ὄν φυσικόν. Καί ἄλλο λοιπόν ὡς ἐν ποιότητι φυσικῇ πρός τό θέλειν τοῦ κατά τόν Σωτῆρα ἀνθρωπίνου καθέστηκεν· εἴπερ τοῦτο μέν, οὐδαμῶς· ἐκεῖνο δέ, ὑπεναντίον. Φαμέν, ὅτιπερ καθό μέν φυσικόν, οὐχ ὑπεναντίον· καθό δέ μή φυσικῶς πρός ἡμῶν κινεῖται, σαφῶς ὑπεναντίον, καί ὡς τά