406

using senses for the perception of sensible things, hungering, thirsting, eating, sleeping, wearying, weeping, agonizing, although being a self-subsistent power, and all the other things by which, acting of himself like a soul naturally moving the connatural body, moving the assumed nature as being his own and having truly become and been called so, or, to speak properly, he himself, without change, having become in reality what that nature is, has fulfilled the economy for us in a way beyond imagination. He did not, therefore, abolish the constitutive (1049) energy of the assumed essence, just as the teacher did not abolish the essence itself, when he said: "He was substantiated beyond substance, and he worked the things of man beyond man." but he showed in both the newness of the modes preserved in the permanence of the natural principles, without which nothing that exists is what it is. But if we say that the negation by transcendence is an affirmation of the assumed substance, but a removal of its constitutive energy, by what reason will we show that the same [negation] applied equally to both signifies the existence of the one but the complete annihilation of the other? Or again, since the assumed nature is not self-moved, being truly moved by the divinity hypostatically united to it, do we also remove its constitutive motion, and not confess the substance itself, which did not appear as self-subsistent, that is, on its own, but received its being in the very God the Word who in truth was substantiated in it, having an equal reason for rejecting both, or will we also confess the motion along with the nature, without which it is not even a nature, knowing that the principle of being is one thing, and the mode of how it is is another, the one confirming the nature, the other the economy. The union of these, having made the great mystery of the supernatural physiology of Jesus, showed the difference of the energies and the union preserved at the same time, the one being seen indivisibly in the natural principle of the united [natures], the other being known unconfusedly in the single mode of the things that came to be. For what and who, where and how will a nature be, having become bereft of constitutive power? For that which has absolutely no power at all neither is, nor what it is, nor is there any affirmation of it whatsoever, says this great teacher. But if these things are of no account, it is necessary to confess piously both the natures of Christ, of which he himself was the hypostasis, and his natural energies, of which he himself was the true union, according to both natures; since he acted in a way fitting to himself, singularly, that is, in a unitary manner, and through all things inseparably manifested together with the divine power the energy of his own flesh. For how will the same one be God by nature, and again man by nature, not possessing unfailingly what is natural according to both? And what and who will he be known as being, if he is not confirmed by what he worked naturally as what he is without being changed? And how will he be confirmed in each of the things from which, in which, and which he is, while remaining motionless and inoperative? He was therefore substantiated beyond substance, creating for nature another beginning of coming-to-be and of birth, conceived indeed by the seed of his own flesh, but born, having become a seal of virginity for her who bore him, and showing the contradiction of the unmixed things co-existing truthfully in her. For she is the same, both virgin and mother, innovating nature by the concurrence of (1053) opposites, since virginity and birth are opposites, for which no agreement can naturally be conceived. Therefore the Virgin is also truly Theotokos, supernaturally conceiving like a seed and giving birth to the supersubstantial Word; since the one who gives birth is properly the mother of the one sown and conceived.

And he worked the things of man beyond man, showing the human energy conjoined with the divine power by a complete union without change; since also the nature unconfusedly united to the nature has wholly interpenetrated it, nothing at all being separate

406

αἰσθήσεσι χρώμενος εἰς ἀντίληψιν τῶν αἰσθητῶν, πεινῶν, διψῶν, ἐσθίων, ὑπνῶν, κοπιῶν, δακρύων, ἀγωνιῶν, καίτοι δύναμις ὤν αὐθυπόστατος, καί τά λοιπά πάντα οἷς αὐτουργικῶς ψυχῆς δίκην φυσικῶς τό συμφυές σῶμα κινούσης, τήν προσληφθεῖσαν φύσιν κινῶν ὡς αὐτοῦ καί γενομένην ἀληθῶς καί λεγομένην, ἤ κυρίως εἰπεῖν, αὐτός δίχα τροπῆς τοῦθ᾿ ὅπερ ἐστί πραγματικῶς ἡ φύσις γενόμενος ἀφαντάστως τήν ὑπέρ ἡμῶν οἰκονομίαν πεπλήρωκεν. Οὐκ ἀνεῖλεν οὖν τήν συστατικήν (1049) τῆς προσληφθείσης οὐσίας ἐνέργειαν, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾿ αὐτήν τήν οὐσίαν ὁ διδάσκαλος, εἰπών· " Ὑπέρ οὐσίαν οὐσιώθη, καί ὑπέρ ἄνθρωπον ἐνήργει τά ἀνθρώπου· " ἀλλ᾿ ἔδειξεν ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν τήν καινότητα τῶν τρόπων ἐν τῇ μονιμότητι τῶν φυσικῶν σωζομένην λόγων, ὧν χωρίς οὐδέν τῶν ὄντων ἐστίν ὅπερ ἐστίν. Εἰ δέ φῶμεν, ὡς τῆς μέν προσληφθείσης οὐσίας θέσις, τῆς δέ συστατικῆς αὐτῆς ἐνεργείας ἀφαίρεσις, ἡ καθ᾿ ὑπεροχήν ἐστιν ἀπόφασις, τίνι λόγῳ τήν αὐτήν ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν ἴσως τεθεῖσαν, τῆς μέν ὕπαρξιν, τῆς δέ πάντως ἀναίρεσιν σημαίνουσαν δείξομεν; Ἤ πάλιν ἐπείπερ οὐκ αὐτοκίνητος ἡ προσληφθεῖσα φύσις ἐστίν, ὑπό τῆς ἡνωμένης αὐτῇ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἀληθῶς κινουμένῃ θεότητος, καί τήν συστατικήν αὐτῆς ἀφαιρούμεθα κίνησιν, μηδ᾿ αὐτήν τήν οὐσίαν ὁμολογήσομεν, οὐκ αὐθυπόστατον φανεῖσαν, τουτέστι καθ᾿ ἑαυτήν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν αὐτήν οὐσιωθέντι Θεῷ Λόγῳ τό εἶναι λαβοῦσαν, ἴσην ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοῖν τήν αἰτίαν ἔχοντες τῆς παραιτήσεως, ἤ καί τήν κίνησιν τῇ φύσει συνομολογήσομεν, ἧς χωρίς οὐδέ φύσις ἐστί, γινώσκοντες ὡς ἕτερος μέν ὁ τοῦ εἶναι λόγος ἐστίν, ἕτερος δέ ὁ τοῦ πῶς εἶναι τρόπος, ὁ μέν τήν φύσιν, ὁ δέ τήν οἰκονομίαν πιστούμενος. Ὧν ἡ σύνοδος τό μέγα τῆς ὑπερφυοῦς Ἰησοῦ φυσιολογίας ποιησαμένη μυστήριον σωζομένην ἔδειξεν ἐν ταυτῷ τήν διαφοράν τῶν ἐνεργειῶν καί τήν ἕνωσιν, τήν μέν ἀδιαιρέτως ἐν τῷ φυσικῷ θεωρουμένην λόγῳ τῶν ἡνωμένων, τήν δέ ἀσυγχύτως ἐν τῷ μοναδικῷ γνωριζομένην τρόπῳ τῶν γινομένων. Τί γάρ καί τίς, ποῦ τε καί πῶς φύσις ἔσται συστατικῆς ἔρημος γενομένη δυνάμεως; Τό γάρ καθόλου μηδέ μίαν ἔχον δύναμιν οὔτε ἔστιν, οὔτε τί ἐστίν, οὔτε ἔστι τις αὐτοῦ παντελῶς θέσις, φησίν ὁ πολύς οὗτος διδάσκαλος. Εἰ δέ τούτων λόγος οὐδείς, εὐσεβῶς ὁμολογεῖσθαι χρή τάς τε τοῦ Χριστοῦ φύσεις ὧν αὐτός ὑπόστασις ἦν, καί τάς αὐτοῦ φυσικάς ἐνεργείας, ὧν αὐτός ἕνωσις ἦν ἀληθής, κατ᾿ ἄμφω τάς φύσεις· εἴπερ ἑαυτῷ προσφυῶς, μοναδικῶς, ἤγουν ἑνοδειδῶς, ἐνεργῶν, καί διά πάντων ἀχωρίστως τῇ θεϊκῇ δυνάμει συνεκφαίνων τῆς οἰκείας σαρκός τήν ἐνέργειαν. Πῶς γάρ ἔσται φύσει Θεός, καί φύσει πάλιν ἄνθρωπος ὁ αὐτός, οὐκ ἔχων ἀνελλιπῶς τό φύσει κατ᾿ ἄμφω πεφυκός; Τί τε καί τίς ὑπάρχων γνωσθήσεται, μή πιστούμενος οἷς ἐνήργει φυσικῶς ὅπερ ἐστί μή τρεπόμενον; πῶς δέ πιστώσεται καθ᾿ ἕν τῶν ἐξ ὧν , ἐν οἷς τε καί ἅπερ ἐστίν ἀκίνητος μένων καί ἀνενέργητος; Ὑπέρ οὐσίαν οὖν οὐσιώθη, γενέσεως ἀρχήν καί γεννήσεως ἑτέραν τῇ φύσει δημιουργήσας, συλληφθείς μέν σπορᾷ τῆς οἰκείας σαρκός, τεχθείς δέ σφραγίς τῆς παρθενίας τῇ τεκούσῃ γενόμενος, καί τῶν ἀμίκτων ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς τήν ἀντίφασιν δείξας συναληθεύουσαν. Ἡ γάρ αὐτή καί παρθένος καί μήτηρ, καινοτομοῦσα τήν φύσιν τῇ συνόδῳ τῶν (1053) ἀντικειμένων, εἴπερ τῶν ἀντικειμένων παρθενία καί γέννησις, ὧν ἐκ φύσεως οὐκ ἄν τις ἐπινοηθήσεται σύμβασις. ∆ιό καί θεοτόκος ἀληθῶς ἡ Παρθένος, ὑπερφυῶς δίκην σπορᾶς συλλαβοῦσά τε καί τεκοῦσα τόν ὑπερούσιον Λόγον· ἐπείπερ τοῦ σπαρέντος τε καί συλληφθέντος κυρίως ἡ τίκτουσα μήτηρ.

Καί ὑπέρ ἄνθρωπον ἐνήργει τά ἀνθρώπου, κατ᾿ ἄκραν ἕνωσιν δίχα τροπῆς συμφυεῖσαν δεικνύς τῇ θεϊκῇ δυνάμει τήν ἀνθρωπίνην ἐνέργειαν· ἐπειδή καί ἡ φύσις ἀσυγχύτως ἐνωθεῖσα τῇ φύσει δι᾿ ὅλου περικεχώρηκε, μηδέν ἀπόλυτον παντάπασιν