113

PYRRHUS. What then, does he who holds one will of Christ seem to you to have deviated from Christian teaching?

MAXIMUS. Most certainly. For what is more impious than to say that the Same, with one and the same will, before the Incarnation, brought all things into being out of nothing, sustains and provides for them, and guides them in a saving way; and that after the Incarnation, He desired food and drink, moved from place to place, and did all other things that are free from all slander and blame; by which He also showed the economy to be pure from all phantasy.

PYRRHUS. Is Christ one, or not? MAXIMUS. Yes, manifestly one. PYRRHUS. (289) If therefore Christ is one, as one He certainly also willed, His will is certainly also one

will; and not two. MAXIMUS. To say something and not to define the significations of what is said, is nothing other

than to be eager to confuse everything and to leave in obscurity the matters under investigation; which is foreign to a learned man. Therefore tell me this: Christ, being one, is He only God, or also man?

PYRRHUS. Manifestly, God and man at the same time. MAXIMUS. Christ, therefore, being God and man by nature, as God and man did the Same

will, or as Christ only? But if Christ willed principally as God and man, it is clear that He willed dually, and not monadically, though He who willed is one and the same. For if Christ is nothing other than His natures, out of which and in which He exists, it is clear that it was in a manner appropriate to His own natures, that is, as each is by nature, that He, being one and the same, willed and acted; since neither of them is without will or without energy. But if Christ willed and acted in a manner appropriate to His natures, that is, as each is by nature, and His natures are two, then He certainly has two natural wills and essential energies equal in number to them. For just as the number of the natures of the one and the same Christ, when piously understood and spoken of, does not divide Christ, but shows the difference of the natures preserved even in the union, so also the number of the wills and energies essentially belonging to His natures (for according to both His natures, as has been said, the Same was willing and acting for our salvation) introduces no division (may it not be!), but only indicates their preservation and safeguarding even in the union.

PYRRHUS. It is impossible for the wills not to introduce the willers along with them. MAXIMUS. This absurdity is also in your own writings; not moved by reason, but

by power, you have declared, taking Heraclius as your accomplice in this, because you also consented to his impious and unlawful union, and ratified this through a blessing. For if it is granted that the wills introduce the willers, then certainly by a logical conversion the willers will also introduce the wills; and according to you, it will be found that the super-essential and supremely good and blessed Godhead, on account of its one will, is also one hypostasis, according to Sabellius; and on account of its three persons, has three wills, and for this reason three natures, according to Arius, since, according to the patristic definitions and canons, (292) a difference of wills introduces a difference of natures.

PYRRHUS. It is impossible for two wills to coexist in one person without opposition.

113

ΠΥΡ. Τί οὖν, ὁ ἕν θέλημα τοῦ Χριστοῦ δοξάζων, δοκεῖ σοι παρακεκινῆσθαι τῆς Χριστιανικῆς διδασκαλίας ;

ΜΑΞ. Πάνυ μέν οὖν. Τί γάρ ἀνοσιώτερον τοῦ λέγειν, τόν αὐτόν, ἑνί , καί τῷ αὐτῷ θελήματι, πρό ἐν τῆς σαρκώσεως τά πάντα ἐκ μή ὄντων συστήσασθαι· συνέχειν τε καί προνοεῖν, καί σωστικῶς διεξάγειν· μετά δέ τήν ἐνανθρώπησιν τροφῆς ἐφιέσθαι καί πότου· τόπους τε ἐκ τόπων ἀμείβειν, καί τά ἄλλα πάντα ποιεῖν, τά διαβολῆς ἁπάσης, καί μομφῆς ἐκτός τυγχάνοντα· δι᾿ ὧν καί πάσης, καθαράν ἔδειξε τήν οἰκονομίαν φαντασίας.

ΠΥΡ. Εἷς ὁ Χριστός, ἤ οὔ; ΜΑΞ. Ναί, εἷς προδήλως. ΠΥΡ. (289) Εἰ οὖν εἷς ὁ Χριστός, ὡς εἷς πάντως καί ἤθελεν, ἕν πάντως αὐτοῦ καί τό

θέλημα· καί οὐ δύο. ΜΑΞ. Τό λέγειν τι, καί προσιαστέλλεσθαι τοῦ λεγομένου τά σημαινόμενα, οὐδέ

ἕτερόν ἐστιν, εἰ μή πάντα συγχεῖν καί ἀσαφῆ σπεύδειν ἐᾷν τά, περί ὧν ἡ ζήτησις· ὅπερ ἀλλότριον ἀνδρός λογίου καθέστηκε. Τοῦτο οὖν εἰπέ μοι· Ὁ Χριστός εἷς ὤν, Θεός μόνον ἐστίν, ἤ καί ἄνθρωπος;

ΠΥΡ. Προδήλως, Θεός ὁμοῦ καί ἄνθρωπος. ΜΑΞ. Θεός οὖν φύσει καί ἄνθρωπος ὑπάρχων ὁ Χριστός, ὡς Θεός καί ἄνθρωπος ὁ

αὐτός ἤθελεν, ἤ ὡς Χριστός μόνον; Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ μέν προηγουμένως ὡς Θεός καί ἄνθρωπος ἤθελεν ὁ Χριστός, δηλονότι δυϊκῶς, καί οὐ μοναδικῶς, εἷς ὤν ὁ αὐτός, ἤθελεν. Εἰ γάρ οὐδέ ἕτερόν ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός παρά τάς αὐτοῦ φύσεις, ἐξ ὧν, καί ἐν αἷς ὑπάρχει· προδήλως, ὡς καταλλήλως ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ φύσεσιν· ἤγουν, ὡς ἑκάστῃ πέφυκεν, εἷς ὤν καί αὐτός, ἤθελέ τε καί ἐνήργει· εἴπερ οὐδετέρα αὐτῶν ἀθέλητός ἐστιν, ἤ ἀνενέργητος. Εἰ δέ καταλλήλως ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ φύσεσιν ὁ Χριστός, ἤγουν, ὡς ἑκάστη πέφυκεν, ἤθελέν τε καί ἐνήργει· δύο δέ αὐτοῦ αἱ φύσεις· δύο αὐτοῦ πάντως καί τά φυσικά θελήματα· καί αἱ τούτων ἰσάριθμοι, καί οὐσιώδεις ἐνέργειαι. Ὥσπερ γάρ ὁ τῶν τοῦ αὐτοῦ καί ἑνός Χριστοῦ φύσεων ἀριθμός, εὐσεβῶς νοούμενός τε καί λεγόμενος, οὐ διαιρεῖ τόν Χριστόν, ἀλλά σωζομένην κἀν τῇ ἑνώσει παρίστησι τῶν φύσεων τήν διαφοράν· οὕτω καί ὁ ἀριθμός τῶν οὐσιωδῶς προσόντων ταῖς αὐτοῦ φύσεσι θελημάτων καί ἐνεργειῶν· κατ᾿ ἄμφω γάρ, ὡς εἴρηται, τάς αὐτοῦ φύσεις θελητικός ἦν ὁ αὐτός καί ἐνεργητικός τῆς ἡμῶν σωτηρίας· οὐ διαίρεσιν εἰσάγει· μή γένοιτο· ἀλλά τήν αὐτῶν δηλοῖ καί μόνον, κἀν τῇ ἑνώσει φυλακήν καί σωτηρίαν.

ΠΥΡ. Ἀδύνατον τοῖς θελήμασι, μή συνεισάγεσθαι τούς θέλοντας. ΜΑΞ. Τοῦτο μέν καί ἐν τοῖς ὑμετέροις γράμμασι τό παράλογον· οὐ λόγῳ, ἀλλ᾿

ἐξουσία κινούμενοι, ἀπεφήνασθε, συναιρόμενον ὑμῖν εἰς τοῦτο λαβόντες τόν Ἡράκλειον, διά τό καί ὑμᾶς συνελθεῖν τῇ αὐτοῦ ἀθεμίτῳ καί παρανόμῳ μίξει, καί ταύτην δι' εὐλογίας κυρῶσαι. Εἰ γάρ δοθῇ τοῖς θελήμασι συνεισάγεσθαι τούς θέλοντας, πάντως καί τοῖς θέλουσι τά θελήματα κατά τήν εὔλογον ἀντιστροφήν συνεισαχθήσεται· καί εὑρεθήσεται καθ᾿ ὑμᾶς, τῆς ὑπερουσίου καί ὑπεραγάθου καί μακαρίας θεότητος· διά μέν τό ἕν αὐτῆς θέλημα, μία καί ἡ ὑπόστασις κατά Σαβέλλιον· διά δέ τά τρία πρόσωπα, τρία καί τά θελήματα· καί διά τοῦτο τρεῖς φύσεις, κατά τόν Ἄρειον, εἴπερ, κατά τούς πατρικούς ὅρους καί κανόνας, (292) ἡ διαφορά τῶν θελημάτων και φύσεων εἰσάγει διαφοράν.

ΠΥΡ. Ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν ἐν ἑνί προσώπῳ δύο ἀλλήλοις συνυπάρξαι θελήματα ἄνευ ἐναντιώσεως.