124

another, transferring it from the same expression to the body, leads them into the utmost error.

PYRRHUS. You have very concisely presented the blasphemy of such an interpretation. But what do we say also about the citations they adduce from the great Athanasius? Of which, one is this: "The mind of the Lord is not yet the Lord, but either a willing, or a volition, or an energy towards something."

MAXIMUS. They put this forward against themselves. Therefore, true reason uses their own arguments in all things for their own refutation. For may truth never be so impoverished as to need its own weapons against its opponents. For if, according to the Father, "The mind of the Lord is not yet the Lord," his mind will be something altogether other than the Lord; that is, the mind of the Lord is not Lord, that is, God, by nature; for it is believed to have become his hypostatically; and this is clear from his adding that it is either a willing, or a volition, or an energy towards something; using for this the rule of Clement, the true philosopher of philosophers, in the sixth book of the Stromata, who defined willing as an appetitive mind; and volition as a rational appetite, or the willing of something. And this divine teacher [says] an energy towards something (320) because for all things divinely done by him, he used the intelligent and rational soul hypostatically united to him.

PYRRHUS. Truly, by the very means through which they think to war against piety, they have unwittingly endured refutation. But it is necessary to work through the other citation, which they adduce from the Father, so as to leave them no pretext against the truth.

MAXIMUS. Which one is this? for I do not know it. PYRRHUS. The one in which that wonderful man says: "He was born of a woman, from the first

formation having raised up for himself the form of man, in a manifestation of flesh, but without carnal wills and human thoughts, in an image of commonality. For the will is of the Godhead alone."

MAXIMUS. Being self-interpreting, it has no need at all for help from reasonings. PYRRHUS. And how does it happen to be ambiguous to these people? MAXIMUS. From much ignorance. Since, to whom is it not manifest, unless the [eye] of the soul is entirely

maimed in its vision, that the Father expounded these things not concerning the natural principle, but concerning the mode of his existence in the flesh, wishing to show that the incarnation is the work of the divine and sole will, with the Father well-pleased, the Son himself acting, and the Holy Spirit cooperating, but not of carnal motion, and human thoughts, that is to say of the sequence of marriage? For God of all, having become man, did not innovate the principle of nature; since he would no longer be man, not having the complete and unalterable principle of nature in all things, but [he innovated] the mode, that is, the conception through seed, and the birth through corruption. Therefore, the God-minded teachers of the Church in no way denied the natural principles of the things united; but in harmony with the evangelists, and apostles, and prophets, they said our Lord and God Jesus Christ possessed will and energy for our salvation according to both his natures.

PYRRHUS. And is it possible to show this from the Scriptures of the Old and New [Testaments]? MAXIMUS. Most certainly; for the Fathers, not moved from their own resources, but from them

having learned, also taught this out of love for mankind. For it was not they who were speaking, but the grace of the Spirit that had wholly pervaded them.

124

ἕτερος ἐκ τῆς ἴσης ἐκφωνήσεως μετάγων περί τό σῶμα, εἰς ἐσχάτην αὐτούς ἀπάγει πλάνην.

ΠΥΡ. Πάνυ συνοπτικῶς τό βλάσφημον τῆς τοιαύτης ἐκδοχῆς παρέστησας. Τί δέ φαμεν καί περί τῶν παραγομένων αὐτοῖς ἀπό τοῦ μεγάλου Ἀθανασίου χρήσεων; Ὧν μία ἐστίν αὕτη· "Νοῦς Κυρίου οὔπω Κύριος, ἀλλ᾿ ἤ θέλησις, ἤ βούλησις, ἤ ἐνέργεια πρός τι."

ΜΑΞ. Καθ᾿ ἑαυτῶν καί ταύτην προβάλλονται. ∆ιό καί ὁ ἀληθής λόγος τοῖς αὐτῶν πρός ἀναίρεσιν τῶν αὐτῶν ἐν πᾶσι κέχρηται προβλήμασι. Μηδέ γάρ οὕτω ποτέ πτωχεύσειεν ἡ ἀλήθεια, ὥστε τῶν ἰδίων κατά τῶν ἀντιπάλων δεηθῆναι ὅπλων. Εἰ γάρ, κατά τόν Πατέρα, "Νοῦς Κυρίου, οὔπω Κύριος" ἄλλο πάντως παρά τόν Κύριον ἔσται ὁ νοῦς αὐτοῦ· τουτέστιν, οὐ φύσει Κύριος, ἤγουν Θεός, ὁ νοῦς τοῦ Κυρίου· καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν γάρ, αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι πιστεύεται· καί τοῦτο δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐπαγαγεῖν, ἤ θέλησιν, ἤ βούλησιν, ἤ ἐνέργειαν πρός τι, αὐτόν εἶναι· κανόνι χρώμενος πρός τοῦτο, τῷ ὄντι φιλοσόφῳ τῶν φιλοσόφων Κλήμεντι, ἐν τῷ ἕκτῳ τῶν Στρωματέων λόγῳ, τήν μέν θέλησιν, νοῦν εἶναι ὀρεκτικόν ὁρισαμένῳ· τήν δέ βούλησιν, εὔλογον ὄρεξιν, ἤ τήν περί τινος θέλησιν. Πρός τι δέ (320) ἐνέργειαν ὁ θεῖος οὗτος διδάσκαλος διότι πρός πάντα θεοπρεπῶς παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ γενόμενα, τῇ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἑνωθείσῃ αὐτῷ νοερᾷ καί λογικῇ ἐχρήσατο ψυχῇ.

ΠΥΡ. Τῷ ὄντι, δι᾿ ὧν ἀντιστρατεύεσθαι δοκοῦσι τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ, δι᾿ αὐτῶν τόν ἔλεγχον ὑπομείναντες ἠγνόησαν. Χρή δέ καί τήν ἑτέραν, ἥν ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός παράγουσιν, ἐπεξεργάσασθαι χρῆσιν, πρός τό μηδεμίαν αὐτοῖς ὑπολιπεῖν πρόφασιν κατά τῆς ἀληθείας.

ΜΑΞ. Τίς αὕτη; ἀγνοῶ γάρ. ΠΥΡ. Ἧ φησιν ὁ θαυμαστός ἐκεῖνος ἀνήρ· " Ἐγεννήθη ἐκ γυναικός, ἐκ τῆς πρώτης

πλάσεως τήν ἀνθρώπου μορφήν ἑαυτῷ ἀναστησάμενος, ἐν ἐπιδείξει σαρκός, δίχα δέ σαρκικῶν θελημάτων, καί λογισμῶν ἀνθρωπίνων, ἐν εἰκόνι κοινότητος. Ἡ γάρ θέλησις, θεότητος μόνης."

ΜΑΞ. Αὐθερμήνευτος οὖσα, οὐ δεῖται ὅλως τῆς ἐκ λογισμῶν βοηθείας. ΠΥΡ. Καί πῶς τούτοις ἀμφίβολος τυγχάνει; ΜΑΞ. Ἐκ πολλῆς ἀμαθίας. Ἐπεί, τίνι οὐκ ἔστι καταφανές, εἰ μή πάντη τό τῆς ψυχῆς

πεπήρωται ὀπτικόν, ὅτι οὐ περί τοῦ φυσικοῦ λόγου, ἀλλά περί τοῦ τρόπου τῆς κατά σάρκα αὐτοῦ ὑπάρξεως, ταῦτα ὁ Πατήρ διεξῆλθεν, δεῖξαι βουλόμενος τήν σάρκωσιν ἔργον οὖσαν τῆς θείας καί μόνης θελήσεως, εὐδοκοῦντος μέν τοῦ Πατρός, αὐτουργοῦντος δέ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καί συνεργοῦντος τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ σαρκικῆς κινήσεως, καί λογισμῶν ἀνθρωπίνων, εἴτου γαμικής ἀκολουθίας; Οὐ γάρ τόν τῆς φύσεως λόγον ἐκαινοτόμησε γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος τῶν ὅλων ὁ Θεός· ἐπεί οὐδέ ἄνθρωπος ἔτι ἦν, ἀνελλιπῆ καί ἀναλλοίωτον τόν ἐν πᾶσι τῆς φύσεως οὐκ ἔχων λόγον, ἀλλά τόν τρόπον, ἤγουυν τήν διά σπορᾶς σύλληψιν, καί τήν διά φθορᾶς γέννησιν. Οὐκοῦν τούς φυσικούς τῶν ἑνωθέντων λόγους οὐδαμῶς ἠρνήσαντο οἱ θεόφρονες τῆς Ἐκκλησίας διδάσκαλοι· ἀλλά συμφώνως τοῖς εὐαγγελισταῖς, καί ἀποστόλοις, καί προφήταις, τόν Κύριον ἡμῶν καί Θεόν Ἰησοῦ Χριστόν, κατ' ἄμφω τάς αὐτοῦ φύσεις θελητικόν καί ἐνεργητικόν τῆς ἡμῶν ἔφησαν σωτηρίας.

ΠΥΡ. Καί δυνατόν τοῦτο ἐκ τῶν τῆς Παλαιᾶς καί Νέας δεῖξαι Γραμμάτων; ΜΑΞ. Καί μάλιστα· καί γάρ οἱ Πατέρες οὐκ οἴκοθεν κινούμενοι, ἀλλ᾿ ἐξ αὐτῶν

μαθόντες, τοῦτο φιλανθρώπως καί ἐδίδαξαν. Οὐ γάρ αὐτοί ἦσαν οἱ λαλοῦντες, ἀλλ᾿ ἡ δι᾿ ὅλου περιχωρήσασα αὐτοῖς χάρις τοῦ Πνεύματος.