184

he has been revealed to have said: but rather to confess one composite hypostasis of Christ, and two natures, so that He may be known as consubstantial and of the same nature with the Father according to the Godhead, and the same one may be recognized as consubstantial and of the same nature with us according to the flesh; and one and the same in relation to both the Father and us, may be believed as being the mediator of God and men.

Concerning the composite hypostasis. But if it is shown that every composite hypostasis has its own parts co-temporal with itself and with each other;

and we do not deny that Christ is a composite hypostasis, our opponents might say of us too, that we cannot shake off the blame for this, as having been caught by our own words. We say that this is truly so, if indeed we were proposing it as being composite as having its species predicated of it. But now, not saying this, we shall in no way incur any blame, knowing clearly that not every composite hypostasis, which falls under some species, is composite through itself; but through the containing nature, whenever the predicated species, to which it is naturally referred, is also composite; as the particular, that is, the individual, has the whole universal, that is, the common and general, most completely in itself; but the individual imparts nothing of its whole definition to the general; which, in the case of Christ, no one at all, from the beginning until us (492), among the teachers of the word of piety, has proclaimed to hold; for on Him one will be able to find neither genus nor species predicated as of Christ. For the divine Logos did not sojourn among us through the flesh by reason of nature; but by a mode of economy, uniting our nature to Himself hypostatically without defect, He renewed it. So that they gained nothing from their great subtlety, so that we may take up the sequence of what was examined a little before, their clever argument turning back on them to the quantity which they have fled, being unable to say that even the difference in quality exists without quantity. For there is every necessity for there to be many; or at least two, as has been said before, qualities, whose difference they suppose to exist. For no one in his right mind would ever say that a single quality, being completely unmixed with another, differs from itself.

Therefore, then, either let them cease from this bare difference, having learned that it is indicative of a quantity of certain differing things; or let them, with us, accept the confession of the truth, who, by the principle of difference alone, for the knowledge that the things that came together have remained unconfused, piously accept number according to the Fathers. Otherwise, let them tell us, as we wish to ask lovingly, if there is in them a word of wisdom that is not base, how, while saying that the things which have run together for union are two, and not denying that these same things have remained unconfused even after the union; so that neither has departed from its natural definition and principle; even if both contribute to one person of the Son and one hypostasis; they do not confess the two things preserved even according to them, as they say, if they speak the truth; and what is their reason for the reduction, and for what cause, and how have both natures become one? Or if the union has remained free of reduction, what is the reason for not speaking of the things preserved without reduction; and we obediently accept the privation of the one; and we marvel at the vigor of their learning, as if they alone have been revealed to us as capable of the knowledge of unspeakable things. But they will never be able to produce the argument that proves this.

184

εἰρηκώς ἀναπέφανται· ὑπόστασιν δέ μᾶλλον Χριστοῦ σύνθετον μίαν ὁμολογεῖν, καί δύο φύσεις, ἵνα καί τῷ Πατρί ὁμοούσιος κάι ὁμοφυής κατά τήν θεότητα γινώσκηται, καί ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος καί ὁμοφυής κατά σάρκα ὁ αὐτός γνωρίζηται· καί εἷς καί ὁ αὐτός πρός τέ τόν Πατέρα καί ἡμᾶς, ὡς μεσίτης Θεοῦ καί ἀνθρώπων ὑπάρχων πιστεύηται.

Περί ὑποστάσεως συνθέτου. Εἰ δέ ὅτι καί πᾶσα ὑπόστασις σύνθετος ἑαυτῇ τε καί ἀλλήλοις τά ἴδια μέρη ὁμόχρονα

ἔχουσα δείκνυται· ὑπόστασιν δέ σύνθετον εἶναι λέγειν τόν Χριστόν οὐκ ἀρνούμεθα, εἴποιεν καί ἡμᾶς οἱ ἀντιλέγοντες, μή δύνασθαι τήν ἐπί τούτῳ μομφήν ἐκτινάξασθαι, ὡς τοῖς ἰδίοις ἑαλωκότας λόγοις. Φαμέν ἀληθῶς οὕτως ἔχειν, εἴπερ σύνθετον εἶναι ὡς εἶδος αὐτῆς κατηγορούμενον ἔχουσαν ὑπετιθέμεθα. Νυνί δέ τοῦτο μή λέγοντες, οὐδαμῶς τήν οἱανοῦν ἔξομεν μομφήν, σαφῶς γινώσκοντες μή δι᾿ ἐαυτήν σύνθετον εἶναι πᾶσαν σύνθετον ὑπόστασιν, τήν ὑπό τι τελοῦσαν εἶδος· ἀλλά διά τήν φύσιν τήν περιέχουσαν, ὅτ᾿ ἄν σύνθετος ᾗ καί τό κατηγορούμενον εἶδος ὑφ᾿ ὅ ἀνάγεσθαι πέφυκεν· ὡς τοῦ μερικοῦ, ἤτουν ἰδικοῦ ὅλον ἔχοντος ἐν ἑαυτῷ τό καθόλου, ἤτοι τό κοινόν καί γενικόν, πληρέστατον· τοῦ δέ ἰδίου τό σύνολον λόγου τῷ γενικῷ μεταδιδοῦντος οὐδέν· ὅπερ ἐπί Χριστοῦ οὐδείς οὐδαμῶς τῶν ἀνέκαθεν μέχρις ἡμῶν (492) γενομένων τοῦ λόγου τῆς εὐσεβείας ὑφηγητῶν φρονῶν ἀνηγόρευται· ἐφ᾿ οὗ οὔτε γένος, οὔτε εἴδος, ὡς Χριστοῦ κατηγορούμενον εὑρεῖν τις δυνήσεται. Οὐ γάρ φύσεως λόγῳ πρός ἡμᾶς διά σαρκός ὁ θεαρχικός ἐπεδήμησε Λόγος· ἀλλά τρόπῳ οἰκονομίας ἀνελλιπῶς ἑαυτῷ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἑνώσας, τήν ἡμετέραν ἀνεκαίνησε φύσιν. Ὥστε οὐδέν τῆς πολλῆς αὐτῶν περινοίας, ἵνα τῆς μικρῷ πρόσθεν τῶν ἐξητασμένων ἀκολουθίας λαβώμεθα, ἀπώναντο, πάλιν εἰς τό ποσόν ὅπερ πεφεύγασι, περιτραπέντος αὐτοῖς τοῦ σοφοῦ, μή δυναμένοις οὐδ᾿ αὐτήν τήν ἐν τῷ ποιῷ διαφοράν ἄνευ ποσοῦ εἶναι λέγειν. Ἀνάγκη γάρ πᾶσα πολλάς εἶναι· ἤ τό μέτριον δύο, ὡς προείρηται, τάς ποιότητας, ὧν τήν διαφοράν εἶναι ὑπολαμβάνουσι. Μόνην γάρ ποιότητα πρός ἄλλην παντελῶς ἀμιγῶς ἔχουσαν πρός ἑαυτήν διαφέρειν, οὐκ ἄν τις νοῦν ἔχων εἴποι ποτέ.

Λοιπόν οὖν, ἤ καί αὐτής παύσωνται τῆς ψιλῆς διαφορᾶς, ποσοῦ πάντως τινῶν διαφερόντων δηλωτικήν αὐτήν οὖσαν μαθόντες· ἤ σύν ἡμῖν τῆς ἀληθείας τήν ὁμολογίαν καταδεξάσθωσαν, τῷ λόγῳ τῆς διαφορᾶς καί μόνον, πρός γνῶσιν τοῦ ἀσύγχυτα μεμενηκέναι τά συνελθόντα, τόν ἀριθμόν εὐσεβῶς κατά τούς Πατέρας παραλαμβάνουσιν. Ἐπείτοιγε εἰπάτωσαν ἡμῖν ἀγαπητκῶς ἐρέσθαι βουλομένοι, εἴπερ ἔνεστιν αὐτοῖς λόγος σοφίας οὐκ ἐγεννής, πῶς δύο μέν τά συνδεδραμηκότα πρός ἕνωσιν λέγοντες, ταῦτα δέ αὐτά μεμενηκέναι ἀσύγχυτα καί μετά τήν ἕνωσιν οὐκ ἀρνούμενοι· ὡς μηδ᾿ ἑτέρου τοῦ κατά φύσιν ὅρου τε καί λόγου ἐκστάντος· κἄν εἰ πρός ἕν ἄμφω συντελοῦσι πρόσωπον τοῦ Υἱοῦ καί μίαν ὑπόστασιν· δύο τά καί κατ᾿ αὐτούς σωζόμενα, ὥς φασιν , εἴπερ ἀληθεύουσιν, οὐχ ὁμολογοῦσι· καί τίς αὐτοῖς τῆς μειώσεως ὁ λόγος, καί δι᾿ ἥντινα τήν αἰτίαν, καί πῶς ἄμφω αἱ φύσεις μίαν γενόνασιν; Ἤ εἴπερ μειώσεως καθαρά διέμεινεν ἡ ἕνωσις, τίς ὁ τοῦ μή λέγεσθαι τά ἀμειώτως σωζόμενα λόγος· καί στέργομεν εὐπειθῶς τῆς μιᾶς τήν στέρησιν· καί θαυμάζομεν αὐτῶν τῆς εὐπαιδείας τό εὔτονον, ὡς μόνων τῆς τῶν ἀῤῥήτων γνώσεως ἐκφανθέντων ἡμῖν χωρητικῶν. Ἀλλ᾿ οὐ δυνήσονται πώποτε τόν τοῦτο πείθοντα παραστῆσαι λόγον.