1

Epistula ad Caesarium

Of John Chrysostom from the letter to Caesarius after his second exile

1.1 And you would surely say that you have come from error to what is better and confess gratitude to those who brought that marvelous book, which your most excellent letters call the best, as it clearly proclaims that an essential concourse and a divine mixture of divinity and flesh has occurred, and that from this one nature has been produced. This, O admirable one, is the absurdity of the insane Apollinarius, this is the most impious heresy of those who introduce a mingling and a blending. 1.2 From the same letter But when you say Christ, you have joined both. Therefore the same one could be said to be both passible and impassible: passible in the flesh, but impassible in the divinity. And these things are predicated of Son and Jesus and Lord; for these names are common and indicative of the two substances. 1.3 From the same letter So also here, the divine nature being established in the body, the two together produced one Son, one person, known however by an unconfused, indivisible principle, not in one nature only, but in two perfect ones; For in one, how can there be the unconfused? How the indivisible? How could the union ever be spoken of? For it is impossible for the one to be united to itself, or to be confused, or to be divided. What hades then has belched forth to say one nature in Christ? 1.4 And towards the end of the same letter Avoiding their empty talk, beloved, let us return to the matter at hand. It is pious, and very pious, to confess Christ who was clothed in death to be perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, one only-begotten Son, not divided into a dyad of sons, but bearing nevertheless in himself the unconfused properties of the two inseparable natures, not one and another, far from it, but one and the same Lord Jesus Christ, God the Word, clothed in flesh, and that not soulless and mindless, as the impious Apollinarius said. Let us therefore attend to these things. Let us flee from those who divide; for even if the nature is twofold, yet the union is indivisible and inseparable, confessed in one person and one hypostasis of the sonship. Let us flee from those who fabricate one nature after the union; for by the concept of one, they hasten to attribute passion to the impassible God, denying the economy.

2.t Of Chrysostom from the letter to Caesarius the monk 2.1 What

hades has belched forth to say one nature in Christ after the union? For either, holding to the divine, they deny the human, I mean our salvation; or, holding to the human, they make a denial of the divine nature. Let them choose which one has lost its own property. For if the union is still strong, it is entirely necessary that the properties of the union also be preserved. Since this is not union, but confusion and annihilation of the natures. Christ, then, is not in one nature only, but in two perfect ones. For in one, where is the unconfused? Where the indivisible? Where the union? For it is impossible for it to be united to or divided from itself. 2.2 Of the same But the saints, interpreting, speak of both the division and the difference; division is that which does not completely, that is, entirely, cut the subjects, and set them privately and in part, subsisting by themselves and separated from one another, but difference is the principle, according to which the subjects differ from one another, that is, for the flesh to be in nature and in substance that which it is, and again for God the Word to be in nature and in substance that which He is. 3.t Of Chrysostom to Caesarius 3.1 And it is pious to confess Christ who was clothed in death to be perfect in divinity, one Son

1

Epistula ad Caesarium

Ἰωάννου τοῦ Χρυσοστόμου ἐκ τῆς πρὸς Καισάριον ἐπιστολῆς μετὰ τὴν δευτέραν αὐτοῦ ἐξορίαν

1.1 Καὶ φήσειας πάντως ἐκ πλάνης πρὸς τὸ κρεῖττον ἐληλυθέναι καὶ χάριν

ὁμολογεῖν τοῖς τὴν θαυμαστὴν ἐκείνην προσκομίσασι βίβλον, ἣν ἀρίστην τὰ κάλλιστά σου ἀποκαλοῦσι γράμματα, ὡς τηλαυγῶς διαγορεύουσαν συνδρομὴν οὐσιώδη καὶ μεῖξιν θεσπεσίαν γεγενῆσθαι θεότητός τε καὶ σαρκὸς μίαν τε ἐντεῦθεν ἀποτελεσθῆναι φύσιν. Τοῦτο, θαυμάσιε, τοῦ παράφρονος Ἀπολλιναρίου τὸ ἀτόπημα, αὕτη τῶν εἰσαγόντων κρᾶσιν καὶ συναλοιφὴν ἡ δυσσεβεστάτη αἵρεσις. 1.2 Ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπιστολῆσ Χριστὸν δὲ ὅταν εἴπῃς, συνῆψας ἑκάτερα. Ὅθεν καὶ παθητὸς λέγοιτο ἂν ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ ἀπαθής· παθητὸς μὲν σαρκί, ἀπαθὴς δὲ θεότητι. Ταῦτα δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ υἱοῦ καὶ Ἰησοῦ καὶ Κυρίου κατηγορεῖται· κοινὰ γὰρ ταῦτα καὶ δεικτικὰ τῶν δύο οὐσιῶν τὰ ὀνόματα. 1.3 Ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπιστολῆσ Οὕτω κἀνταῦθα τῆς θείας ἐνιδρυμένης τῷ σώματι φύσεως ἕνα υἱόν, ἓν πρόσωπον τὰ συναμφότερα ἀπετέλεσε, γνωριζόμενον μέντοι ἀσυγχύτῳ ἀδιαιρέτῳ λόγῳ, οὐκ ἐν μιᾷ μόνῃ φύσει, ἀλλ' ἐν δυσὶ τελείαις· Ἐπὶ γὰρ μιᾶς πῶς τὸ ἀσύγχυτον; πῶς τὸ ἀδιαίρετον; πῶς ἡ ἕνωσις λεχθείη ποτέ; Ἑαυτῇ γὰρ τὴν μίαν ἑνοῦσθαι ἢ συγχεῖσθαι ἢ διαιρεῖσθαι ἀδύνατον. Ποῖος οὖν ᾅδης ἐξηρεύξατο μίαν ἐπὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ λέγειν φύσιν; 1.4 Καὶ πρὸς τῷ τέλει τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπιστολῆσ Τούτων τὰς κενοφωνίας ἐκκλίνοντες, ἀγαπητέ, εἰς τὸ προκείμενον ἐπανέλθωμεν. Εὐσεβὲς καὶ λίαν εὐσεβὲς τὸν θανάτῳ περιβληθέντα Χριστὸν ὁμολογεῖν ἐν θεότητι τέλειον καὶ ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι τέλειον, ἕνα υἱὸν μονογενῆ, οὐ διαιρούμενον εἰς υἱῶν δυάδα, φέροντα δὲ ὅμως ἐν ἑαυτῷ τῶν ἀχωρίστων δύο φύσεων ἀσυγχύτους τὰς ἰδιότητας, οὐκ ἄλλον καὶ ἄλλον, μὴ γένοιτο, ἀλλ' ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, Θεὸν Λόγον, σάρκα ἠμφιεσμένον καὶ αὐτὴν οὐκ ἄψυχον καὶ ἄνουν, ὡς ὁ δυσσεβὴς Ἀπολλινάριος εἶπεν. Τούτοις τοίνυν προσχῶμεν. Φύγωμεν τοὺς διαιροῦντας· εἰ γὰρ καὶ διττὴ ἡ φύσις, ἀλλ' οὖν ἀδιαίρετος καὶ ἀπαράσπαστος ἡ ἕνωσις ἐν ἑνὶ τῆς υἱότητος ὁμολογουμένη προσώπῳ καὶ μιᾷ ὑποστάσει. Φύγωμεν τοὺς μίαν φύσιν μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν τερατευομένους· τῇ γὰρ τῆς μιᾶς ἐπινοίᾳ τῷ ἀπαθεῖ Θεῷ πάθος προσάπτειν ἐπείγονται τὴν οἰκονομίαν ἀρνούμενοι.

2.t Τοῦ Χρυσοστόμου ἐκ τῆς πρὸς Καισάριον μονάζοντα ἐπιστολῆς 2.1 Ποῖος

ᾅδης ἠρεύξατο μίαν ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ φύσιν λέγειν μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν; Ἢ γὰρ τὴν θείαν κρατοῦντες τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀρνοῦνται, φημὶ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν· ἢ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην κατέχοντες τῆς θείας φύσεως ποιοῦνται τὴν ἄρνησιν. Ἐπιλεγέτωσαν ποία ἀπώλεσε τὸ ἴδιον. Εἰ γὰρ ἔτι ἔρρωται ἡ ἕνωσις, πάντως καὶ τὰ τῆς ἑνώσεως ἰδιώματα σῴζεσθαι ἀνάγκη. Ἐπεὶ οὐχ ἕνωσις τοῦτο, ἀλλὰ σύγχυσις καὶ ἀφανισμὸς τῶν φύσεων. Οὐκ ἐν μιᾷ γοῦν μόνῃ τῇ φύσει ὁ Χ(ριστός), ἀλλ' ἐν δυσὶ τελείαις. Ἐπὶ γὰρ μιᾶς ποῦ τὸ ἀσύγχυτον; Ποῦ τὸ ἀδιαίρετον; Ποῦ ἡ ἕνωσις; Ἑαυτῇ γὰρ ἑνοῦσθαι ἢ διαιρεῖσθαι ἀδύνατον. 2.2 Τοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἑρμηνεύοντες δὲ οἱ ἅγιοι τήν τε διαίρεσιν καὶ τὴν διαφορὰν λέγουσι· διαίρεσίς ἐστι τὸ μὴ διαμπάξ, ἤτοι διόλου, τὰ ὑποκείμενα τέμνουσα καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος καθ' ἑαυτὰ ὑφεστῶτα καὶ ἀλλήλων κεχωρισμένα τιθεῖσα, διαφορὰ δὲ λόγος, καθ' ὃν ἀλλήλων διαφέρει τὰ ὑποκείμενα, τουτέστι τὸ εἶναι τὴν σάρκα τῇ φύσει καὶ τῇ οὐσίᾳ, ὅπερ ἐστὶ καὶ τὸ εἶναι πάλιν τὸν Θεὸν λόγον τῇ φύσει καὶ τῇ οὐσίᾳ, ὅπερ ἐστί. 3.t Τοῦ Χρυσοστόμου πρὸς Καισάριον 3.1 Καί ἐστιν εὐσεβὲς τὸν θανάτῳ περιβληθέντα Χριστὸν ὁμολογεῖν ἐν θεότητι τέλειον, ἕνα υἱὸν