Seventeen chapters against the monophysites

OF JOHN THE GRAMMARIAN AND PRESBYTER, TO THE ACEPHALI, 17 CHAPTERS

1. If the one saying Christ is God only is a Manichaean, and the one saying Christ is man only is a Paulianist, and the one saying Christ is perfect God, but not perfect man, is an Apollinarian, and the one saying perfect God and perfect man, with the man being considered as self-subsistent and in part, and being activated by the Word, is a Nestorian, but the one saying the same Christ is perfect God and man, as the God Word united to himself our leaven, that is our humanity, thinks orthodoxly, then those who devised for us to say "God-man" perhaps say that Christ is something other and beyond these things, just as someone might say the goat-stag is neither goat nor stag, but something other in genus. Confessing one incarnate nature of the Word, you are an Apollinarian by not saying that the perfect human nature was assumed and saved; but by adding "flesh animated with a rational soul," you are orthodox, if indeed you preserve the meaning of the confession. Say then: do you confess one nature of the Word incarnate | with flesh animated with a rational soul; do you confess one and only one nature in Christ or two? But if you confess one nature in Christ, you are either a Manichaean or a Paulianist. But if you say two perfect [natures], but divided and separated in part, you are a Nestorian. But if you confess two perfect [natures] and preserved in one characterizing hypostasis, you are orthodox. But if you confess neither one only, nor two divided, nor indeed united hypostatically, say how many natures in Christ <do you say> while confessing one incarnate nature of the God Word in the assumption of flesh having a rational soul? 2. If according to you there is one nature of the God Word and of the flesh, but not one nature of the Father and of the flesh, how is the nature of the God Word and of the Father one and the same? And how will there be one nature of uncreated divinity and created flesh, or of timeless divinity and of the flesh of the Word which is under time, with neither the divinity having been changed into the nature of flesh, nor the flesh having been altered into the nature of divinity, but with each nature being preserved unchangeably and indivisibly in Emmanuel? 3. Saying Christ is from two natures, but anathematizing those who say that in Christ the two natures exist indivisibly united in one hypostasis, how will you understand "from two natures"? For you would either say two before the union, or in the union. But if you should say [two] before the union, | you grant that each pre-existed before the union, which is impious. But if you say the two natures are in the union, and the union is preserved for ages, therefore the two natures are also preserved for ages in Emmanuel. 4. If the God Word, while remaining what he was, became what he was not, and he was not what he became, but he remained what he was, how did he not remain not being what he became? But if these things are true, the evangelist, <by saying,> "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us," teaches us the indivisible and unconfused union of the natures in Christ. 5. If the Word, having become incarnate, remained what he was, and he was without flesh, how will he not be without flesh according to the nature of divinity, even if he was incarnate, having assumed the leaven of our nature? But if this is true, how should I not say that the one Christ, who is the incarnate God Word, has the two natures, that is, substances, <that> I mean of the Father and that from the

Capitula xvii contra monophysitas

ΙΩΑΝΝΟΥ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΙΚΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΕΣΒΥΤΕΡΟΥ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΥΣ ΑΚΕΦΑΛΟΥΣ ΚΕΦΑΛΑΙΑ ΙΖʹ

1. Εἰ ὁ λέγων θεὸν μόνον τὸν Χριστὸν μανιχαΐζει καὶ ὁ λέγων μόνον ἄνθρωπον τὸν Χριστὸν παυλιανίζει καὶ ὁ λέγων θεὸν τέλειον τὸν Χριστόν, ἄνθρωπον δὲ οὐ τέλειον, ἀπολιναρίζει καὶ ὁ λέγων θεὸν τέλειον καὶ ἄνθρωπον τέλειον, ἰδιοσυστάτως καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος θεωρουμένου τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ λόγου ἐνεργουμένου, νεστοριανίζει, ὁ δὲ λέγων θεὸν τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν καὶ ἄνθρωπον, ὡς ἑνώσαντος ἑαυτῷ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου τὸ ἡμέτερον φύραμα, ὅ ἐστι τὴν καθ' ἡμᾶς ἀνθρωπότητα, ὀρθο- δόξως φρονεῖ, οἱ τὸ θεάνθρωπον ἡμῖν ἐπινοήσαντες λέγειν ἴσως ἕτερόν τι καὶ παρὰ ταῦτά φασι τὸν Χριστόν, ὡς καὶ τὸν τραγέλαφον οὔτε τράγον, οὔτε ἔλαφον εἴποι τις ἄν, ἀλλ' ἕτερόν τι τῷ γένει. Μίαν φύσιν τοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένην ὁμολογῶν, ἀπολινα- ρίζεις μὴ λέγων τελείαν τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην φύσιν ἀνειλῆφθαι καὶ σεσῶσθαι· προσθεὶς δὲ σάρκα ἐψυχωμένην ψυχῇ νοερᾷ, ὀρθόδο- ξος ὑπάρχεις, εἰ ἄρα τὸν νοῦν φυλάξεις τῆς ὁμολογίας. Εἰπὲ οὖν· μίαν φύσιν ὁμολογεῖς τοῦ λόγου σεσαρκω|μένην σαρκὶ ἐψυχω- μένῃ ψυχῇ λογικῇ· μίαν φύσιν καὶ μόνον ὁμολογεῖς ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ ἢ δύο; Ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν μίαν φύσιν ὁμολογεῖς ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ, ἢ μανιχαΐζεις ἢ παυλιανίζεις. Εἰ δὲ δύο τελείας λέγεις, διῃρημένας μέντοι καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος κεχωρισμένας, νεστοριανίζεις. Εἰ δὲ δύο τελείας καὶ ἐν μιᾷ χαρακτηριστικῇ ὑποστάσει σῳζομένας ὁμολο- γεῖς, ὀρθόδοξος ὑπάρχεις. Εἰ δὲ οὔτε μίαν μόνον, οὔτε δύο διῃρημένας, οὔτε μὴν ἡνωμένας ἐνυποστάτως ὁμολογεῖς, εἰπὲ πόσας τὰς φύσεις ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ <λέγεις> ὁμολογῶν μίαν φύσιν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένην ἐν προσλήψει σαρκὸς ψυχὴν ἐχούσης νοεράν; 2. Εἰ μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου καὶ τῆς σαρκὸς καθ' ὑμᾶς, οὐ μία δὲ φύσις τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τῆς σαρκός, πῶς μία καὶ ἡ αὐτὴ φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου καὶ τοῦ πατρός; Πῶς δὲ ἀκτίστου θεότητος καὶ κτιστῆς σαρκὸς ἢ τῆς ἀχρόνου θεότητος καὶ τῆς ὑπὸ χρόνον τοῦ λόγου σαρκὸς μία ἔσται φύσις, μὴ τῆς θεότητος τραπείσης εἰς σαρκὸς φύσιν, μήτε τῆς σαρκὸς ἀλλοιωθείσης εἰς θεότητος φύσιν, ἀλλ' ἑκατέρας φύσεως σῳζομένης ἀτρέπτως καὶ ἀδιαι- ρέτως ἐν τῷ Ἐμμανουήλ; 3. Ἐκ δύο φύσεων λέγων τὸν Χριστόν, ἀναθεματίζων δὲ τοὺς λέγοντας ἐν Χριστῷ τὰς δύο φύσεις ὑπάρχειν ἀδιαιρέτως ἐν μιᾷ ὑποστάσει ἡνωμένας, πῶς νοήσεις τὸ ἐκ δύο φύσεων; Ἢ γὰρ πρὸ τῆς ἑνώσεως εἴποις δύο, ἢ ἐν τῇ ἑνώσει. Ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν πρὸ τῆς ἑνώσεως | εἴποις, προϋπάρχειν δίδως ἑκάτερον πρὸ τῆς ἐνώ- σεως, ὅπερ ἀσεβές. Εἰ δ' ἐν τῇ ἑνώσει τὰς δύο φύσεις λέγεις, σῴζεται δὲ ἡ ἕνωσις εἰς αἰῶνας, ἄρα σῴζονται εἰς αἰῶνας καὶ αἱ δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Ἐμμανουήλ. 4. Εἰ μένων ὁ θεὸς λόγος ὃ ἦν γέγονεν ὃ οὐκ ἦν, καὶ οὐκ ἦν μὲν ὃ γέγονεν, ἔμεινε δὲ ὃ ἦν, πῶς οὐκ ἔμεινε μὴ ὢν ὃ γέγονεν; Εἰ δὲ ταῦτ' ἀληθῆ, ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν <εἰπών, τὴν> τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ φύσεων ἀδιαίρετον καὶ ἀσύγχυτον ἕνωσιν ἡμᾶς ἐκδιδάσκει ὁ εὐαγγελιστής. 5. Εἰ σαρκωθεὶς ὁ λόγος ἔμεινεν ὃ ἦν, ἦν δ' ἄσαρκος, πῶς οὐκ ἔσται ἄσαρκος κατὰ τὴν τῆς θεότητος φύσιν, εἰ καὶ ἐσαρκώθη, τῆς ἡμετέρας φύσεως προσλαβὼν τὸ φύραμα; Εἰ δὲ τοῦτ' ἀληθές, πῶς τὸν ἕνα Χριστόν, ὅ ἐστι θεὸν λόγον σαρκωθέντα, οὐκ εἴποιμι τὰς δύο ἔχειν φύσεις, ὅ ἐστιν οὐσίας, <τὴν> τοῦ πατρὸς λέγω καὶ τὴν ἐκ τῆς