{"slug":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-duabus-in-christo-voluntatibus","id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-duabus-in-christo-voluntatibus","title":"De duabus in Christo voluntatibus","title_source":"De duabus in Christo voluntatibus","author":"John of Damascus","genre":"other","date":null,"tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor","provider":"Baidu","generated":"2026-11-15T18:20:06Z","cost_usd":0.007233},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-duabus-in-christo-voluntatibus","work_id":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-duabus-in-christo-voluntatibus","edition":"khazarzar","language":"","license":null,"url":null},"stats":{"passages":64,"english_words":17282,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":67592,"commentary_units":0,"commentary_kinds":0,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":0,"work_notes":0,"external_links":0,"timeline":0},"summary":{},"links":[],"checks":{"work":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-duabus-in-christo-voluntatibus","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":64,"translated":64,"commentary_passages":0,"commentary_units":0,"english_words":17282,"source_letters":67592,"commentary_kinds":0},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Greek; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: other in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 64 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: khazarzar."}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":64},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"Τοῦ μακαρίου Ἰωάννου μοναχοῦ Δαμασκηνοῦ περὶ τῶν ἰδιωμάτων τῶν ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ Χριστῷ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν δύο φύσεων, ἐξ ἐπιδρομῆς δὲ καὶ περὶ δύο θελημάτων καὶ ἐνεργειῶν καὶ μιᾶς ὑποστάσεως. Οἱ δύο φύσεις καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁμολογοῦντες διπλᾶ μὲν καὶ διάφορα τὰ τῶν φύσεων φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα συνομολογεῖν ὀφείλουσιν, ἁπλᾶ δὲ τὰ τῆς ὑποστάσεως· ἀμήχανον γὰρ φύσιν συστῆναι ἐκτὸς τῶν κατ' αὐτὴν φυσικῶν ἰδιωμάτων τῶν συνιστώντων αὐτὴν καὶ ἀποδιαιρούντων ἐκ τῶν λοιπῶν φύσεων, ὧν τὸ ἄθροισμα ἐν ἑτέρῳ οὐ θεωρηθήσεται εἴδει. Ἀδύνατον δ' αὖ πάλιν τὴν μίαν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ὑπόστασιν διαφέρειν ἑαυτῆς τοῖς συστατικοῖς καὶ χαρακτηριστικοῖς αὐτῆς καὶ ἀφοριστικοῖς ἐκ τῶν λοιπῶν ὁμοειδῶν ὑποστάσεων, τοῖς ὑποστατικοῖς, φημί, ἰδιώμασιν, ὧν τὸ ἄθροισμα ἐφ' ἑτέρας ὑποστάσεως θεωρηθῆναι ἀμήχανον. Συμβεβηκότα δὲ ταῦτα καὶ ἐπουσιώδη καλεῖν ἔθος τοῖς περὶ ταῦτα δεινοῖς. Φύσις μὲν γὰρ φύσει συγκρίνεται καὶ φύσεως διαφέρειν λέγεται ἤτοι εἶδος εἴδους ταῖς οὐσιώδεσι καὶ φυσικαῖς διαφοραῖς. Ὡσαύτως καὶ ὑπόστασις ὑποστάσει συγκρίνεται ὁμοειδεῖ καὶ διαφέρειν τῶν ὁμοειδῶν ὑποστάσεων λέγεται τοῖς τῶν ὑποστάσεων χαρακτηριστικοῖς ἰδιώμασιν· οὐ μὴν ὑπόστασις ἑτεροειδεῖ ὑποστάσει συγκρίνεται ὡς ὑπόστασις. Τὰ γὰρ ὑποστατικὰ τοῦ Πέτρου τυχὸν ἰδιώματα πρὸς τόνδε τὸν βοῦν συγκρινόμενα φύσιν μᾶλλον ἀφορίζει καὶ οὐχ ὑπόστασιν·","english":"Of the blessed John the monk of Damascus, concerning the properties of the two natures in the one Christ our Lord, and by way of summary also concerning the two wills and energies and the one hypostasis. Those who confess two natures and one hypostasis in our Lord Jesus Christ ought also to confess the natural properties of the natures as twofold and distinct, but those of the hypostasis as simple; for it is impossible for a nature to subsist apart from the natural properties that belong to it, which constitute it and distinguish it from the remaining natures, the sum of which will not be contemplated in another species. And again, it is impossible for the one and the same hypostasis to differ from itself by its constitutive and characteristic and distinguishing properties from the remaining hypostases of the same species—by the hypostatic properties, I mean—the sum of which it is impossible to contemplate in another hypostasis. It is the custom of those skilled in these matters to call these accidents and non-essential. For a nature is compared with a nature and is said to differ from a nature, that is, a species from a species, by essential and natural differences. Likewise also a hypostasis is compared with a hypostasis of the same species and is said to differ from hypostases of the same species by the characteristic properties of hypostases; yet a hypostasis is not compared with a hypostasis of a different species as a hypostasis. For the hypostatic properties of Peter, say, when compared with this ox here, distinguish a nature rather than a hypostasis.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"οὐ γὰρ λέγομεν διαφέρειν τόνδε τὸν ἄνθρωπον τοῦδε τοῦ ἵππου, ὅτι ὁ μὲν φαλακρός, ὁ δὲ εὐχαίτης, οὐδ' ὅτι ὁ μὲν μακρός, ὁ δὲ κολοβός, ἀλλ' ὅτι ὁ μὲν λογικός, ὁ δὲ ἄλογος, οὐδ' ὅτι ὁ μὲν υἱὸς τοῦδε, ὁ δὲ υἱὸς τοῦδε.\n\nΕἰ δὲ καὶ εἴπωμεν, ὅτι ὁ μὲν υἱὸς Νέστορός ἐστιν, ὁ δὲ υἱὸς τοῦδε τοῦ ἵππου, καὶ ὁ μὲν σοφός, ὁ δὲ ἄσοφος, φυσικαὶ διαφοραὶ τάττονται· αἱ γὰρ ὑποστατικαὶ διαφοραὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων πρὸς ὑποστατικὰς διαφορὰς ἵππων φυσικαὶ λογίζονται. Διὸ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸ τοῦ σώματος σχῆμα καὶ ὁ τῆς ὄψεως χαρακτὴρ καὶ τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν υἱὸν τῆς παρθένου πρὸς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν υἱὸν θεοῦ ἀσχημάτιστον οὐχ ὑποστάσεών εἰσιν διαφόρων ἀφοριστικά, ἀλλὰ διαφόρων φύσεων, μιᾶς δὲ ὑποστάσεως ἀφορίζοντα αὐτὴν ἐκ τῶν ὁμοουσίων αὐτῇ κατὰ τὴν αὐτῆς θεότητα, ὑποστάσεων τοῦ πατρός φημι καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, καὶ τῶν ὁμοουσίων αὐτῇ κατὰ τὴν αὐτῆς ἀνθρωπότητα ὑποστάσεων, τῆς μητρός φημι καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν κατὰ μέρος ἀνθρώπων· ὅτε γὰρ ἐκ δύο φύσεων μία ὑπόστασις σύνθετος γένηται, ταῦτά τε κἀκεῖνα, τά τε τῆς θείας τυχὸν φύσεως φυσικά τε καὶ ὑποστατικὰ ἰδιώματα καὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποστάσεως συστατικὰ γίνεται. Ὅθεν ὁ Χριστὸς θεός τε καὶ ἄνθρωπος, ἄναρχος καὶ ἠργμένος ἡ αὐτὴ μία ὑπόστασις, ὁρατὴ καὶ ἀόρατος, κτιστὴ καὶ ἄκτιστος, περιγραπτὴ καὶ ἀπερίγραπτος, παθητὴ καὶ ἀπαθής, υἱὸς θεοῦ καὶ υἱὸς παρθένου εἴτουν ἀνθρώπου, ἀμήτωρ ἐκ πατρός, ἀπάτωρ ἐκ μητρός, προαιώνιος καὶ πρόσφατος, ἀσχημάτιστος καὶ ἐν μορφῇ δούλου καὶ ἐν σχήματι ἀνθρώπου, «ὡραῖος κάλλει παρὰ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῶν ἀνθρώπων».","english":"For we do not say that this man differs from this horse because the one is bald and the other long-haired, nor because the one is tall and the other short, but because the one is rational and the other irrational; nor because the one is the son of this man and the other the son of that man.\n\nBut if we also say that the one is the son of Nestor and the other the son of this horse, and that the one is wise and the other unwise, natural differences are being posited; for the hypostatic differences of men compared with the hypostatic differences of horses are reckoned as natural. Therefore also in the case of our Lord Jesus Christ, the shape of the body and the character of the countenance and his being the son of the virgin, in contrast to his being the son of God, are not distinctions of different hypostases but of different natures, distinguishing it as one hypostasis from the hypostases consubstantial with it according to its divinity—I mean the Father and the Holy Spirit—and from the hypostases consubstantial with it according to its humanity—I mean the mother and the rest of men individually. For when from two natures one composite hypostasis comes to be, these and those properties—both the natural and hypostatic idioms of the divine nature, say, and those of the human nature—become constitutive of the same hypostasis. Hence Christ is God and man, without beginning and begun, the same one hypostasis, visible and invisible, created and uncreated, circumscribed and uncircumscribed, passible and impassible, Son of God and Son of the virgin, that is, of man; without mother from the Father, without father from the mother; before the ages and recent; without form and in the form of a slave and in the shape of a man, \"fair in beauty beyond the sons of men.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Ταῦτα πάντα συστατικὰ καὶ χαρακτηριστικὰ τῆς Χριστοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑποστάσεως καὶ ἐκ πάντων ὁμοῦ καὶ ἐξ ἑνὸς ἑκάστου κατονομάζεται. Σοφῶς οὖν ὁ δημιουργὸς φύσεών τε, τουτέστιν εἰδῶν, πλείστην διαφορὰν ἐποιήσατο πρὸς ἔνδειξιν τοῦ πλούτου τῆς αὐτοῦ σοφίας τε καὶ δυνάμεως, ὡς ἂν θαυμαζόμενος ποθοῖτο πλέον,\n\nποθούμενος δὲ νοοῖτο, νοούμενος δὲ θεοειδὲς ἀπεργάζοιτο τὸ νοερὸν ζῷον καὶ λογικόν, δι' ὃ καὶ τὰ πλήθη τῶν εἰδῶν ἐτεκτήνατο. «Τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου τοῖς ποιήμασι νοούμενα καθορᾶται», καὶ «ἐκ καλλονῆς κτισμάτων ἀναλόγως ὁ γενεσιουργὸς καταλαμβάνεται.» Ὑποστάσεων δὲ πάλιν καθ' ἕκαστον εἶδος διαφοράν τε πρὸς ἀλλήλας καὶ συνάφειαν ἐποιήσατο, συνάφειαν μὲν φυσικήν–πᾶσαι γὰρ αἱ ὑπὸ τὸ αὐτὸ εἶδος ὑποστάσεις τῷ λόγῳ τῆς φύσεως ἥνωνται–, διαφορὰν δὲ ὑποστατικήν· διακέκρινται γὰρ ἀλλήλων χαρακτηριστικοῖς τισιν ἰδιώμασιν, τουτέστι συμβεβηκόσι. Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τὸ μοναδικὸν ἀκοινώνητον καὶ ἀμείλικτον, ἡ δὲ πρὸς τὰ ὁμοειδῆ κοινωνία ἡδὺ καὶ μειλίχιον–πᾶν γὰρ ζῷον τὸ ὅμοιον ἀγαπᾷ καὶ τῷ ὁμοίῳ τέρπεται–, καὶ αὐτὴ πρώτη ἡ μόνη μακαρία καὶ ἄναρχος καὶ ἀνώλεθρος φύσις τρισὶν ἐνθεωρεῖται ὑποστάσεσιν, πατρὶ καὶ υἱῷ καὶ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι. Φησὶ γοῦν ἡ ἐνυπόστατος σοφία· «Ἐγώ εἰμι, ᾗ προσέχαιρεν», ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ δηλαδή.","english":"All these things are constitutive and characteristic of the hypostasis of Christ God, and He is named from all of them together and from each one individually. Wisely, then, the Creator made the greatest possible difference among natures, that is, among species, to display the riches of His own wisdom and power, so that being admired He might be desired more,\n\nand being desired might be contemplated, and being contemplated might make the intelligent and rational living creature godlike—for which reason He also fashioned the multitudes of species. \"For His invisible attributes, understood from the creation of the world, are seen in the things He has made,\" and \"from the beauty of created things the Creator is proportionally apprehended.\" Again, within each species He made a difference among hypostases in relation to one another, and also a connection—a natural connection, for all the hypostases under the same species are united by the principle of nature—but a hypostatic difference; for they are distinguished from one another by certain characteristic properties, that is, by accidents. For since the singular is unshared and ungentle, while fellowship with things of the same kind is sweet and gentle—for every living creature loves what is like itself and delights in what is like itself—so also that first, only blessed, unoriginate, and imperishable nature is contemplated in three hypostases: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. For the subsistent Wisdom says: \"I was she in whom He delighted,\" namely God and Father.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Διὰ τοῦτο καθ' ἕκαστον τάγμα τῶν ἀγγελικῶν δυνάμεων διαφόρους ὑποστάσεις ἐδημιούργησεν, ὁμοίως καὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως, οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ καθ' ἕκαστον εἶδος, ὡς ἂν κοινωνοῦντες ἀλλήλοις τῆς φύσεως χαίροιεν ἐν ἀλλήλοις καὶ φυσικῇ σχέσει συναπτόμενοι φιλικῶς πρὸς ἀλλήλους διάκοιντο. Ἡ δὲ τῶν ὑποστάσεων διαφορὰ τὸ οἰκεῖον διακρίνει τοῦ ἀλλοτρίου ὡς ἂν κατὰ γένος καὶ κτῆμα ἕκαστος τὸ οἰκεῖον ἐπιγινώσκων φροντίζοι καὶ μὴ ἐπιβαίνοι ὡς οἰκείῳ τῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ καὶ ὡς ἂν ἡ ἑκάστου ὕπαρξις γνωρίζοιτο. Χρὴ τοιγαροῦν τὸν περί τινος ποιούμενον ζήτησιν εἰδέναι πρότερον, τί ἐστιν, εἶθ' οὕτως, εἰ ἓν ἢ δύο εἰσὶν ἀποφαίνεσθαι. Τοῦτο δέ φημι περὶ τῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ζητουμένων, φύσεων λέγω καὶ ὑποστάσεως, θελημάτων καὶ ἐνεργειῶν καὶ λοιπῶν ἰδιωμάτων. Ἀλλ' ἵνα τοῦτο σαφέστερον γένηται, εἴπωμεν πρότερον, τί διαφέρει φύσις ὑποστάσεως, καὶ τότε ἀριδήλως γνωσόμεθα τά τε συστατικὰ τῆς φύσεως καὶ τὰ τῆς ὑποστάσεως ἰδιώματα. Καὶ οὕτω σκεψώμεθα περὶ τῶν ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, εἴτε διπλᾶ εἴη εἴτε ἁπλᾶ.","english":"For this reason, in each order of the angelic powers He created different hypostases, and likewise of human nature, and indeed also in each species, so that, sharing a common nature with one another, they might rejoice in one another and, joined by natural relationship, might be disposed toward one another in friendship. And the difference of hypostases distinguishes what is one's own from what belongs to another, so that each, recognizing what is his own by kind and possession, might take care of it and not trespass upon another's as if it were his own, and so that the existence of each might be known. It is necessary, therefore, that one who makes inquiry about anything should first know what it is, and then declare whether it is one or two. This I say concerning the things inquired about in our Lord Jesus Christ—I mean natures and hypostasis, wills and energies and the remaining properties. But so that this may become clearer, let us first state in what nature differs from hypostasis, and then we shall clearly know both the constituents of nature and the properties of hypostasis. And so let us consider the things in our Lord Jesus Christ, whether they are twofold or simple.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"4,ξολ Φύσις μὲν οὖν ἐστι κατὰ τοὺς ἁγίους πατέρας τὸ κοινὸν καὶ ἀόριστον ἤτοι τὸ εἰδικώτατον εἶδος, οἷον ἄνθρωπος, ἵππος, βοῦς, ὑπόστασις δὲ τὸ μερικὸν τὸ καθ' αὑτὸ ὑφεστώς, οὐσία τις μετὰ συμβεβηκότων, τὴν καθ' αὑτὸ ὕπαρξιν ἰδιαιρέτως καὶ ἀποτετμημένως τῶν λοιπῶν ὑποστάσεων ἐνεργείᾳ καὶ πράγματι κληρωσαμένη, τὸ κοινωνοῦν μὲν τοῖς ὁμοειδέσιν ἀτόμοις τῷ λόγῳ τῆς φύσεως, συμβεβηκόσι δέ τισι, χαρακτηριστικοῖς ἰδιώμασι τὴν πρὸς τὸ ὁμοφυές τε καὶ ὁμοειδὲς ἄτομον ἔχον διαφοράν. Καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν· Φύσις ἐστὶ τὸ κοινόν, οἷον ἀνθρωπότης–καὶ ὁ Πέτρος γὰρ ἄνθρωπός ἐστι καὶ ὁ Παῦλος καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ κατὰ μέρος ἄνθρωποι–, ὑπόστασις δὲ τὸ μερικόν, ὁ δεῖνα καὶ ὁ δεῖνα. Ὁ Πέτρος ὑπόστασίς ἐστι καὶ ὁ Παῦλος ἄλλη ὑπόστασις, οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ὁ Πέτρος φύσις καὶ ὁ Παῦλος ἄλλη φύσις, ἀλλ' ὁ Πέτρος ὑπόστασις ἔχων τελείαν τὴν φύσιν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος· διὸ καὶ τέλειός ἐστιν ἄνθρωπος. Καὶ ὁ Παῦλος ἄλλη ὑπόστασίς ἐστιν ἔχων τελείαν τὴν αὐτὴν φύσιν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος. Καὶ τὴν μὲν φύσιν τὴν αὐτὴν τελείαν ἔχει ἑκάστη ἀνθρώπων ὑπόστασις, οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν δὲ ὑπόστασιν. Οὐδὲ μίαν ἔχουσι πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι· ἄλλος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ Πέτρος καὶ ἄλλος ὁ Παῦλος, ἄλλη ὑπόστασις καὶ ἄλλη, οὐκ ἄλλη δὲ φύσις ὁ Πέτρος καὶ ἄλλη ὁ Παῦλος. Πάντες γὰρ οἱ ἄνθρωποι μιᾶς εἰσιν φύσεως. Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν περὶ φύσεως καὶ ὑποστάσεως πρὸς τὸ παρόν. Εἴπωμεν δὲ καί, τί ἐστι φυσικὸν ἰδίωμα καὶ τί ἐστιν ὑποστατικὸν ἰδίωμα, καὶ τὴν τούτων διαφοράν.","english":"Nature, then, according to the holy fathers, is the common and undefined, that is, the most specific species, such as man, horse, ox; while a hypostasis is the particular, subsisting in itself, a certain substance with accidents, having obtained its existence in itself individually and separately from the other hypostases in actuality and in fact, sharing with the individuals of the same species by the principle of nature, but having a difference from the individual of the same kind and species by certain accidents and characteristic properties. And to speak simply: nature is the common, such as humanity—for Peter is a man and Paul and the rest of men individually—while a hypostasis is the particular, this one and this one. Peter is a hypostasis and Paul another hypostasis, but Peter is not a nature and Paul another nature, but Peter is a hypostasis having the complete nature of humanity; therefore he is also a complete man. And Paul is another hypostasis having the same complete nature of humanity. And each hypostasis of men has the same complete nature, but not the same hypostasis. Nor do all men have one; for Peter is one and Paul another, one hypostasis and another, but Peter is not one nature and Paul another. For all men are of one nature. And these things concerning nature and hypostasis for the present. But let us also say what is a natural property and what is a hypostatic property, and the difference between them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"Φύσις μὲν οὖν ἐστι κατὰ τοὺς ἁγίους πατέρας τὸ κοινὸν καὶ ἀόριστον ἤτοι τὸ εἰδικώτατον εἶδος, οἷον ἄνθρωπος, ἵππος, βοῦς, ὑπόστασις δὲ τὸ μερικὸν τὸ καθ' αὑτὸ ὑφεστώς, οἷον Πέτρος, Παῦλος, Ἰωάννης. Ἡ μὲν γὰρ φύσιςκοινόν ἐστι συνάγον καὶ\n\nπεριέχον πολλούς· ἕκαστον γὰρ εἶδος φύσις ἐστί. Καὶ πρῶτον μέν, εἰ καὶ ὑπερούσιός ἐστιν, ἡ μακαρία φύσις τῆς θεότητος· μία γάρ ἐστι καὶ κοινή, περιέχουσα τὰς τρεῖς ἀπεριγράπτους ὑποστάσεις, πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν καὶ πνεῦμα ἅγιον. Ὁμοίως καὶ ἡ τῶν ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων καὶ ἕκαστον εἶδος ζῴων ἢ φυτῶν ἢ ἀψύχων σωμάτων. Εἰδέναι δὲ δεῖ, ὅτι ταυτόν ἐστι κατὰ τοὺς ἁγίους πατέρας φύσις καὶ οὐσία καὶ μορφή. Ἡ δὲ ὑπόστασις οὐσία τίς ἐστι μετὰ συμβεβηκότων, τὴν καθ' αὑτὸ ὕπαρξιν ἰδιαιρέτως καὶ ἀποτετμημένως τῶν λοιπῶν ὑποστάσεων ἐνεργείᾳ καὶ πράγματι κληρωσαμένη, τὸ κοινωνοῦν μὲν τοῖς ὁμοειδέσιν ἀτόμοις τῷ λόγῳ τῆς φύσεως, συμβεβηκόσι δέ τισι καὶ χαρακτηριστικοῖς αὐτῆς ἰδιώμασι τὴν πρὸς τὸ ὁμοειδές τε καὶ ὁμοφυὲς ἄτομον ἔχον διαφοράν. Ὁ γὰρ Πέτρος καὶ ἕκαστος ἄνθρωπος οὐσία ἐστίν–ἄνθρωπος γάρ ἐστιν–, ἀλλὰ μετὰ συμβεβηκότων–ἢ γὰρ μακρός ἐστιν ἢ κολοβὸς ἢ σιμὸς ἢ γρυπός· ταῦτα δὲ συμβεβηκότα εἰσί–, καὶ ἕκαστος καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἔσχε τὴν ὕπαρξιν. Καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν· Φύσις μέν ἐστι τὸ κοινὸν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, τὸ κοινὸν τῶν ἵππων, οἷον ἀνθρωπότης–καὶ ὁ Πέτρος γὰρ ἄνθρωπός ἐστι καὶ ὁ Παῦλος καὶ οἱ λοιποί, ἕκαστος ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν–, ὑπόστασις δὲ τὸ μερικόν, ὁ δεῖνα καὶ ὁ δεῖνα.","english":"Nature, then, according to the holy fathers, is the common and undefined, that is, the most specific species, such as man, horse, ox; while a hypostasis is the particular, subsisting in itself, such as Peter, Paul, John. For nature is a common thing that gathers and contains many; for each species is a nature. And first, even if it is beyond being, the blessed nature of the Godhead; for it is one and common, containing the three uncircumscribable hypostases, Father and Son and Holy Spirit. Likewise also the nature of angels and men, and each species of animals or plants or inanimate bodies. But one must know that, according to the holy fathers, nature and substance and form are the same. And a hypostasis is a certain substance with accidents, having obtained its existence in itself individually and separatedly from the other hypostases in actuality and in fact, sharing with the individuals of the same species by the principle of nature, but by certain accidents and characteristic properties of its own having a difference from the individual of the same species and same nature. For Peter and each man is a substance—for he is a man—but with accidents—for he is either tall or short or snub-nosed or hook-nosed; and these are accidents—and each had his existence by himself. And to speak simply: nature is the common thing of men, the common thing of horses, such as humanity—for Peter also is a man and Paul and the rest, each is a man—while a hypostasis is the particular, this one and this one.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Ὁ Πέτρος ὑπόστασίς ἐστι καὶ ὁ Παῦλος ἄλλη ὑπόστασις, οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ὁ Πέτρος ἄλλη φύσις καὶ ὁ Παῦλος ἄλλη φύσις. Καὶ ὁ Πέτρος γὰρ καὶ ὁ Παῦλος ἑκάτερος αὐτῶν ἄνθρωπός ἐστι τέλειος· οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ὁ Πέτρος Παῦλος οὐδὲ ὁ Παῦλος Πέτρος. Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν περὶ φύσεως καὶ ὑποστάσεως πρὸς τὸ παρόν· ὑπόστασις δὲ καὶ πρόσωπον καὶ ἄτομον τὸ αὐτό ἐστιν. Εἴπωμεν οὖν, τί ἐστι φυσικὸν ἰδίωμα καὶ τί ἐστιν ὑποστατικὸν ἰδίωμα, καὶ τὴν τούτων διαφοράν. 5,ξολ Φυσικὸν μὲν οὖν ἰδίωμά ἐστι τὸ τὴν φύσιν συνιστῶν, οὗ χωρὶς οὐ δύναται συστῆναι ἡ φύσις, ἧς ὑπάρχει ἰδίωμα, οἷον τὸ ζωτικόν, τὸ λογικόν, τὸ θελητικόν, τὸ αἰσθητικόν, τὸ βαδιστικόν, τὸ ἀναπνευστικὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα. Ὁ γὰρ μὴ λογιζόμενος οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος· οὐκ ἐγένετο γὰρ ἄνθρωπος μὴ λογιζόμενος, εἴτε καλῶς, εἴτε κακῶς, ὁμοίως οὐδὲ ὁ μὴ αἰσθανόμενος μηδὲ βαδίζων μηδὲ ἀναπνέων. Φυσικὸν οὖν ἰδίωμά ἐστι τὸ συνιστῶν τὴν φύσιν καὶ χωρίζον εἶδος ἀπὸ εἴδους, τουτέστι φύσιν ἀπὸ ἄλλης φύσεως, καὶ ἐν ἑκάστῃ ὑποστάσει τοῦ αὐτοῦ εἴδους θεωρούμενον, οἷον τὸ λογικόν. Συνιστᾷ γὰρ τὴν φύσιν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὡς ἐν τῷ ὅρῳ αὐτοῦ λαμβανόμενον– ἄνθρωπος γάρ ἐστι ζῷον λογικὸν θνητόν–, καὶ χωρίζει τὸ λογικὸν τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκ πάντων τῶν ἀλόγων. Καὶ γὰρ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λογικός ἐστιν· ὁ γὰρ μὴ ὢν λογικὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος. Ἀδύνατον γὰρ ἄνθρωπον μὴ εἶναι ζῷον λογικὸν θνητόν.","english":"Peter is a hypostasis and Paul is another hypostasis, but Peter is not another nature and Paul is not another nature. For both Peter and Paul, each of them, is a perfect man; yet Peter is not Paul, nor is Paul Peter. And these things concerning nature and hypostasis are sufficient for the present; but hypostasis and person and individual are the same. Let us say, then, what a natural property is and what a hypostatic property is, and the difference between them. A natural property, then, is that which constitutes the nature, without which the nature whose property it is cannot subsist, such as the living, the rational, the volitive, the perceptive, the walking, the breathing in the case of man, and the like. For he who does not reason is not a man; for a man who does not reason, whether well or badly, has not come to be, nor likewise he who does not perceive or walk or breathe. A natural property, then, is that which constitutes the nature and separates species from species, that is, nature from another nature, and is contemplated in each hypostasis of the same species, such as the rational. For it constitutes the nature of man as taken in its definition—for man is a mortal rational animal—and the rational separates man from all irrational beings. For every man is rational; for he who is not rational is not a man. For it is impossible for a man not to be a mortal rational animal.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"Φυσικὸν μὲν οὖν ἰδίωμά ἐστι τὸ τὴν φύσιν συνιστῶν, οὗ χωρὶς οὐ δύναται συστῆναι ἡ φύσις, ἧς ὑπάρχει ἰδίωμα, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ζωτικόν, τὸ λογικόν, τὸ αἰσθητικόν, τὸ βαδιστικόν, τὸ ἀναπνευστικόν, τὸ θελητικόν, τὸ ἐνεργητικόν, τὸ θνητὸν καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα. Ὁ γὰρ μὴ ζῶν ἢ μὴ λογιζόμενος οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος· οὐ γὰρ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος μὴ ζῶν ἢ μὴ λογιζόμενος, εἴτε καλῶς, εἴτε κακῶς. Καὶ ὁ μὴ θέλων οὐκ ἔστι τέλειος ἄνθρωπος· οὐκ ἐγένετο γὰρ ἄνθρωπος μὴ θέλων, εἴτε καλῶς, εἴτε κακῶς.\n\nὉμοίως οὐδὲ ὁ μὴ αἰσθανόμενος μηδὲ ἀναπνέων μηδὲ βαδίζων οὐκ ἔστι τέλειος ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ' ἐλλιπής. Φυσικὸν οὖν ἰδίωμά ἐστι τὸ συνιστῶν τὴν φύσιν καὶ χωρίζον εἶδος ἀπὸ εἴδους, τουτέστι φύσιν ἀπὸ ἄλλης φύσεως, καὶ ἐν ἑκάστῃ ὑποστάσει τοῦ αὐτοῦ εἴδους θεωρούμενον, οἷον τὸ λογικὸν καὶ τὸ θνητόν. Συνιστῶσι γὰρ τὴν φύσιν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὡς ἐν τῷ ὅρῳ αὐτοῦ λαμβανόμενα– ἄνθρωπος γάρ ἐστι ζῷον λογικὸν θνητόν–, καὶ χωρίζουσι τὸν ἄνθρωπον, τὸ μὲν λογικὸν ἐκ πάντων τῶν ἀλόγων, τὸ δὲ θνητὸν ἐκ τῶν ἀθανάτων, θεοῦ τε καὶ ἀγγέλων. Καὶ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λογικός ἐστι καὶ","english":"A natural property, then, is that which constitutes the nature, without which the nature of which it is a property cannot subsist, as in the case of man: the living, the rational, the perceptive, the walking, the breathing, the willing, the active, the mortal, and the like. For he who does not live or does not reason is not a man; for a man has not come to be who does not live or does not reason, whether well or badly. And he who does not will is not a perfect man; for a man has not come to be who does not will, whether well or badly.\n\nLikewise, neither is he who does not perceive nor breathe nor walk a perfect man, but is defective. A natural property, then, is that which constitutes the nature and separates species from species, that is, nature from another nature, and is contemplated in each hypostasis of the same species, such as the rational and the mortal. For they constitute the nature of man as being taken in his definition—for man is a rational mortal animal—and they separate man, the rational from all irrational beings, and the mortal from the immortal, both God and angels. And every man is rational and","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"θνητός· ὁ γὰρ μὴ ὢν λογικὸς καὶ θνητὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος. Ἀδύνατον γὰρ ἄνθρωπον μὴ εἶναι ζῷον λογικὸν θνητόν.\n\n6,ξολ Ὑποστατικὸν δὲ ἰδίωμα τὸ χωρίζον ὑπόστασιν ἀπ' ἄλλης ὑποστάσεως, οἷον τὸ σιμόν, τὸ λευκόν, τὸ μέλαν, τὸ φαλακρὸν καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα· οὐ γὰρ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος σιμός, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν σιμός, ὁ δὲ γρυπός, ὁ δὲ εὔρινος, οὔτε πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν λευκός, ὁ δὲ μέλας, ὁ δὲ σιτόχρους, οὐδὲ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος φαλακρός, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν φαλακρός, ὁ δὲ κομήτης, τουτέστι δασύθριξ. Καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος· Ὅσα πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἔχουσιν ἐκ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ δοθέντα, φυσικά εἰσιν ἰδιώματα κατὰ τοὺς ἁγίους πατέρας καὶ τὸν ἀληθῆ λόγον, τά τε τῆς πλάσεως καὶ τῆς κατακρίσεως. Φύσις γάρ ἐστι δύναμις ἐκ θείου προστάγματος δοθεῖσα ἑκάστῳ εἴδει, καθ' ἣν ἐνεργεῖν καὶ πάσχειν πέφυκεν. ῃ. φινεμ ξαπ. Ὥστε τὸ μὲν ἔχειν ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ ῥῖνας καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν μελῶν φυσικόν ἐστιν– ὁ γὰρ ἑνὸς τούτων ἐστερημένος οὐκ ἔστι τέλειος ἄνθρωπος–ἡ δὲ τούτων διαφορὰ ὑποστατική· Ἡ ὅρασις καὶ τὸ ὁρᾶν φυσικόν, ἡ δὲ διάφορος ὅρασις, τουτέστιν ἡ καλὴ καὶ ἡ κακή, ὑποστατική ἐστιν· ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῆς βρώσεως καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ βρῶσις φυσική, ἡ δὲ τῶν διαφόρων βρωμάτων ἐπιθυμία καὶ ἡ διάφορος ἐπιθυμία ἐπιτεταμένη καὶ ἀνειμένη ὑποστατική· ἡ θέλησις καὶ τὸ θέλειν φυσικόν, ἡ διάφορος θέλησις καὶ τὸ διαφόρως θέλειν ὑποστατικόν. Ὅσα δὲ τινὲς μὲν ἔχουσι τῶν ὁμοειδῶν ὑποστάσεων, τινὲς δὲ οὐκ ἔχουσιν, ὑποστατικά εἰσιν ἰδιώματα. Ὑποστατικὸν δὲ ἰδίωμα τὸ χωρίζον ὑπόστασιν ἀπὸ ἄλλης ὑποστάσεως, οἷον τὸ σιμόν, τὸ μέλαν καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα·","english":"Mortal; for he who is not rational and mortal is not a man. For it is impossible for a man not to be a mortal rational animal.\n\nA hypostatic property is that which separates one hypostasis from another hypostasis, such as the snub nose, the white, the black, the bald, and the like; for not every man is snub-nosed, but one is snub-nosed, another hook-nosed, another straight-nosed; nor is every man white, but one is white, another black, another wheat-colored; nor is every man bald, but one is bald, another long-haired, that is, shaggy-haired. And to speak simply concerning humanity: whatever all men have as given by the Creator are natural properties according to the holy fathers and the true account, both those of formation and those of condemnation. For nature is a power given to each species by divine command, according to which it is naturally disposed to act and to be acted upon. So that to have eyes and nose and the rest of the members is natural—for he who is deprived of one of these is not a perfect man—but the difference among these is hypostatic. Sight and the act of seeing are natural, but the different sight, that is, the good and the bad, is hypostatic. The desire for food and the eating itself are natural, but the desire for different foods and the different desire, whether intensified or relaxed, is hypostatic. The will and the act of willing are natural, but the different will and the willing in different ways are hypostatic. But whatever some of the same-species hypostases have and others do not have are hypostatic properties. A hypostatic property is that which separates one hypostasis from another hypostasis, such as the snub nose, the black, and the like.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"οὐ γὰρ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος σιμός, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν σιμός, ὁ δὲ γρυπός, ὁ δὲ εὔρινος, οὔτε πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν λευκός, ὁ δὲ μέλας, ὁ δὲ σιτόχρους. Καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν· Ὅσα πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἔχουσιν ἐκ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ δοθέντα, φυσικὰ αὐτῶν εἰσιν ἰδιώματα, τά τε τῆς πλάσεως καὶ τὰ τῆς κατακρίσεως. Ἡ δὲ ἁμαρτία οὐ φυσική· οὐ γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ δέδοται. Φύσις γάρ ἐστι δύναμις ἐκ θεοῦ προστάγματος δοθεῖσα ἑκάστῳ εἴδει, καθ' ἣν ἐνεργεῖν καὶ πάσχειν πέφυκεν. Ὅσα δὲ τινὲς μὲν ἔχουσι τῶν ὁμοειδῶν ὑποστάσεων, τινὲς δὲ οὐκ ἔχουσιν, ὑποστατικά εἰσιν ἰδιώματα. Οὔτε οὖν τὸ ἄθροισμα τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ εἴδους ἰδιωμάτων δυνατὸν θεωρηθῆναι ἐν ἑτέρῳ εἴδει, οὐδὲ τὸ ἄθροισμα τῶν τῆσδε τῆς ὑποστάσεως ἰδιωμάτων δυνατὸν θεωρηθῆναι ἐν ἑτέρᾳ ὑποστάσει. Θεωρεῖται μὲν γὰρ τὸ αὐτὸ φυσικὸν ἰδίωμα ἐν διαφόροις εἴδεσιν, ὡς τὸ λογικὸν ἐν ἀγγέλῳ καὶ ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ τὸ θνητὸν ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ἀλόγοις ζῴοις, καὶ θεωρεῖται τὸ αὐτὸ συμβεβηκός, τουτέστιν ὑποστατικὸν ἰδίωμα, ἐν διαφόροις ὑποστάσεσιν, ὡς τὸ λευκὸν ἐν διαφόροις ὑποστάσεσι θεωρεῖται– πολλοὶ γάρ εἰσιν ἄνθρωποι λευκοί–, ἀλλ' οὔτε πάντα τὰ φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου θεωροῦνται ἐν ἑτέρῳ εἴδει, οὔτε πάντα τὰ ὑποστατικὰ ἰδιώματα τοῦδε τοῦ ἀνθρώπου θεωροῦνται ἐν ἑτέρᾳ ὑποστάσει. Τὸ δὲ ἐν ἑνὶ εἴδει καὶ μόνον θεωρούμενον καὶ ἐν πάσαις αὐτοῦ ταῖς ὑποστάσεσιν οὐκ ἰδίωμα λέγεται, ἀλλ' ἴδιον.","english":"For not every man is snub-nosed, but one is snub-nosed, another hook-nosed, and another straight-nosed; nor is every man white, but one is white, another dark, and another wheat-colored. And to speak simply: whatever all men have, given by the Creator, are their natural properties, both those of formation and those of condemnation. But sin is not natural; for it is not given by the Creator. For nature is a power given by God's command to each species, according to which it is naturally disposed to act and to be acted upon. But whatever some of the hypostases of the same species have and others do not have are hypostatic properties. Neither, therefore, can the aggregate of the properties of this species be contemplated in another species, nor can the aggregate of the properties of this hypostasis be contemplated in another hypostasis. For the same natural property is contemplated in different species, as the rational in angel and man, and the mortal in man and all irrational animals; and the same accident, that is, hypostatic property, is contemplated in different hypostases, as white is contemplated in different hypostases—for many men are white—but neither are all the natural properties of man contemplated in another species, nor are all the hypostatic properties of this man contemplated in another hypostasis. But that which is contemplated in one species only and in all its hypostases is not called a property but a peculiarity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Ὥστε τὸ μὲν ἔχειν ὀφθαλμούς, ῥῖνας καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν μελῶν φυσικόν ἐστι τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ– ὁ γὰρ ἑνὸς τούτων ἐστερημένος οὐκ ἔστι τέλειος ἄνθρωπος–, ἡ δὲ τούτων διαφορὰ ὑποστατικὴ ἀφορίζουσα ὑπόστασιν ἐξ ὁμοειδοῦς καὶ ὁμοουσίου ὑποστάσεως καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἀλλοειδοῦς καὶ ἑτεροουσίου· ὡς γὰρ ἤδη φθάσαντες εἴπομεν, οὐ συγκρίνεται ὑπόστασις πρὸς ἑτεροειδῆ ὑπόστασιν ὡς ὑπόστασις, ἀλλ' ὡς φύσις πρὸς φύσιν. Ἡ ὅρασις καὶ τὸ ὁρᾶν φυσικόν, ἡ δὲ διάφορος ὅρασις, τουτέστιν ἡ καλὴ καὶ ἡ κακή, ὑποστατική ἐστιν· ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῆς βρώσεως καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ βρῶσις φυσική, ἡ δὲ τῶν διαφόρων βρωμάτων ἐπιθυμία καὶ ἡ διάφορος ἐπιθυμία ἡ ἐπιτεταμένη καὶ ἀνειμένη, τουτέστι πολλὴ καὶ ὀλίγη, ὑποστατική· ἡ θέλησις καὶ ἡ ἐνέργεια καὶ τὸ θέλειν καὶ ἐνεργεῖν φυσικόν, ἡ\n\nδιάφορος θέλησις καὶ ἐνέργεια καὶ τὸ διαφόρως θέλειν καὶ ἐνεργεῖν, καλῶς ἢ κακῶς, ὑποστατικόν. Καλὸν μὲν οὖν τὸ κατὰ φύσιν πρὸς ὑπακοὴν τοῦ κτίσαντος, κακὸν δὲ τὸ παρὰ φύσιν καθ' ἡδονὴν καὶ οἰκείαν γνώμην παρὰ τὸν νόμον τοῦ θεοῦ. 7,ξολ Εἰδέναι τοίνυν χρή, ὅτι πᾶσα ἀνθρώπων ὑπόστασις ἔχει τό τε εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἐκ μὴ ὄντων εἰς τὸ εἶναι ὑπὸ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ παρῆχθαι, τουτέστι τὸ κτιστὸν τό τε ζωτικὸν καὶ ἐνεργητικὸν καὶ αἰσθητικὸν καὶ νοερὸν καὶ λογιστικὸν καὶ ὀρεκτικόν, τουτέστι θελητικόν, καὶ τὸ ἐξ οὐσίας καὶ συμβεβηκότων ὑφίστασθαι. Ταῦτα οὖν οὐσιώδη εἰσὶ καὶ φυσικά, ἡ δὲ τούτων ἰδιότροπος καὶ ἰδιαίρετος κίνησις ὑποστατικὴ διαφορά.","english":"So that having eyes, a nose, and the rest of the members is natural to man—for the one deprived of any of these is not a perfect man—but the difference among these is hypostatic, marking off a hypostasis from one of the same species and same essence, and not from one of a different species and different essence. For, as we have already said before, a hypostasis is not compared to a hypostasis of a different species as a hypostasis, but as nature to nature. Sight and seeing are natural, but the different seeing, that is, the good and the bad, is hypostatic. The desire for food and the eating itself are natural, but the desire for different foods and the different desire, the intensified and the relaxed, that is, the much and the little, is hypostatic. The will and the operation and the willing and the operating are natural, but the different will and operation and the willing and operating differently, well or badly, is hypostatic. Good, then, is what is according to nature, unto obedience to the Creator; but evil is what is contrary to nature, according to pleasure and one's own judgment, contrary to the law of God. It must be known, therefore, that every hypostasis of men has both its being and its having been brought by the Creator from non-being into being, that is, the created, and the vital and active and perceptive and intellectual and rational and appetitive, that is, volitive, and its subsisting from essence and accidents. These things, then, are essential and natural, but their distinctive and individually distinct motion is a hypostatic difference.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"Τὸ μὲν γὰρ μετέχειν τούτων τὸ ταυτὸν τῆς φύσεως παρίστησιν, ὁ δὲ τρόπος τῆς ὑπάρξεως καὶ ἡ ἀποτετμημένη καὶ ἰδιοσύστατος ὑπόστασις καὶ σύμπηξις ἑκάστου καὶ ἡ ἰδιότροπος καὶ ἰδιοκίνητος καὶ ἡ διάφορος τῶν φυσικῶν χρῆσις ἀποτετμημένας τὰς ὑποστάσεις δείκνυσι καὶ πολλοὺς λέγεσθαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ποιεῖ. Ὥστε ἐπὶ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος, ἐπειδὴ μὲν διάφορος ἡ ἑκάστου ὕπαρξις, τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις εἰσίν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ οὐκ ἰδιοτρόπως οὐδὲ ἰδιαιρέτως καὶ ἀποτετμημένως ἑκάστη θέλει καὶ ἐνεργεῖ, ἀλλ' ἑνιαίως, οὐ τρεῖς θεοί, ἀλλ' εἷς θεός. Τούτων οὕτως εἰρημένων, ἴδωμεν, εἰ δύο φύσεις εἰσὶν ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ, καὶ οὕτως γνωσόμεθα, εἰ διπλᾶ ἔχει τὰ φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα· ἀδύνατον γὰρ φύσιν συστῆναι ἐκτὸς τῶν φυσικῶν καὶ συστατικῶν αὐτῆς ἰδιωμάτων. Εἰδέναι δὲ χρή, ὅτι πᾶσα ἀνθρώπων ὑπόστασις ἔχει τό τε εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἐκ μὴ ὄντων εἰς τὸ εἶναι ἐκ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ παρῆχθαι, τουτέστι τὸ κτιστὸν τό τε ζωτικὸν καὶ ἐνεργητικόν, αἰσθητικόν τε καὶ νοερὸν καὶ λογικὸν καὶ ὀρεκτικὸν τὸ κατ' αἴσθησιν καὶ λόγον, τουτέστι τὸ αὐτεξουσίως θελητικόν, καὶ τὸ ἐξ οὐσίας καὶ συμβεβηκότων ὑφίστασθαι. Ταῦτα πάντα οὐσιώδη εἰσὶ καὶ φυσικά, ἡ δὲ τούτων ἰδιότροπος καὶ ἰδιαίρετος κίνησις ὑποστατικὴ διαφορά. Τὸ μὲν γὰρ μετέχειν τούτων τὸ ταυτὸν τῆς φύσεως παρίστησιν, ὁ δὲ τρόπος τῆς ὑπάρξεως τὴν τῶν ὑποστάσεων εἰσάγει διαφοράν, καὶ ἡ ἀποτετμημένη ἑκάστου ὕπαρξίς τε καὶ σύμπηξις καὶ ἡ ἰδιότροπος καὶ ἰδιοκίνητος καὶ διάφορος τῶν φυσικῶν χρῆσις ἀποτετμημένας τὰς ὑποστάσεις ποιεῖ καὶ πολλοὺς λέγεσθαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους.","english":"For sharing in these things demonstrates the sameness of nature, but the mode of existence and the distinct and individually constituted hypostasis and the composition of each, and the peculiar and self-moving and different use of natural properties, show the hypostases to be distinct and cause many to be called men. So in the case of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, since the existence of each is different, there are three hypostases; but since each does not will and act in a peculiar way nor separately and distinctly, but in a unified way, there are not three Gods, but one God. Having said these things, let us see whether there are two natures in Christ, and thus we shall know whether he has double the natural properties; for it is impossible for a nature to subsist apart from its natural and constitutive properties. But it must be known that every human hypostasis has both the fact of being and the fact of having been brought by the Creator from non-being into being, that is, the created, and the vital and active, the perceptive and intellectual and rational and appetitive according to sense and reason, that is, the self-determining volitional, and the fact of subsisting from essence and accidents. All these are essential and natural, but their peculiar and separate movement is a hypostatic difference. For sharing in these things demonstrates the sameness of nature, but the mode of existence introduces the difference of hypostases, and the distinct existence and composition of each, and the peculiar and self-moving and different use of natural properties, make the hypostases distinct and cause many to be called men.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"Ὥστε ἐπὶ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος, ἐπειδὴ μὲν διάφορος ἡ ἑκάστου ὕπαρξις, τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις εἰσίν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐπίσης θεωρεῖται ἡ φύσις καὶ τὰ ταύτης ἰδιώματα ἐν ἑκάστῃ τῶν ὑποστάσεων, μιᾶς εἰσιν οὐσίας καὶ φύσεως· καὶ ἐπειδὴ οὐκ ἀποτετμημένως εἰσὶν οὐδὲ ἰδιοτρόπως οὐδὲ ἰδιαιρέτως ἑκάστη θέλει καὶ ἐνεργεῖ, ἀλλ' ἑνιαίως, οὐ τρεῖς τὰ τρία θεοί, ἀλλ' εἷς θεὸς σὺν ἀλλήλοις καὶ ἐν ἀλλήλοις εἰσί τε καὶ λέγονται. Τούτων οὕτως εἰρημένων, ἴδωμεν, εἰ δύο φύσεις εἰσὶν ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ, καὶ οὕτω γνωσόμεθα, εἰ διπλᾶ ἔχει τὰ φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα· ἀδύνατον γὰρ φύσιν συστῆναι ἐκτὸς τῶν φυσικῶν καὶ συστατικῶν αὐτῆς ἰδιωμάτων. Οὕτως οὖν λεκτέον· 8,ξολ Τέλειος θεὸς ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ τέλειος ἄνθρωπος καὶ μετὰ τὴν τῶν φύσεων ἕνωσιν, τέλειος ἐν θεότητι καὶ τέλειος ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι; Ναὶ πάντως. Θεότης δὲ καὶ ἀνθρωπότης μία φύσις ἢ δύο; Δύο, ὡς ἀληθῶς· ἄλλη γὰρ φύσις θεότητος καὶ ἄλλη φύσις ἀνθρωπότητος. Οὐκοῦν δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ, καὶ ἐν δύο φύσεσιν ὁ Χριστός, εἴπερ θεός ἐστι τέλειος καὶ ἄνθρωπος τέλειος. Καὶ πάλιν· Ἐκ δύο φύσεων τὸν Χριστὸν ὁμολογοῦμεν; Πάντως. Διὰ τί ἐκ δύο; Ὅτι ἐκ θεότητός ἐστι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος. Τί γὰρ τὸ εἰπεῖν θεότητα καὶ ἀνθρωπό τητα; Δύο φύσεις παριστᾷ; Πάντως· οὐ γὰρ μία φύσις θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος. Εἶτα· Ὁμολογοῦμεν τὸν Χριστὸν μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν ἐν θεότητι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι; Πάντως. Οὐκοῦν, εἰ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν ἐν θεότητι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι ὁμολογοῦμεν αὐτόν, θεότης δὲ καὶ ἀνθρωπότης δύο φύσεις καὶ οὐ μία, ἐν δυσὶ φύσεσιν αὐτὸν ὁμολογοῦμεν. Καὶ πάλιν·","english":"So then, in the case of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, since the existence of each is distinct, there are three hypostases; but since the nature and its properties are contemplated equally in each of the hypostases, they are of one substance and nature; and since they do not will and act in a divided manner, nor in a peculiar manner, nor separately, each on its own, but in a unified manner, the three are not three gods, but they are and are called one God, with one another and in one another. These things having been said thus, let us see whether there are two natures in Christ, and so we shall know whether he has twofold natural properties; for it is impossible for a nature to subsist apart from its natural and constitutive properties. So then we must say: Is Christ perfect God and perfect man even after the union of the natures, perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity? Yes, certainly. But are divinity and humanity one nature or two? Two, truly; for one is the nature of divinity and another the nature of humanity. Therefore there are two natures in Christ, and Christ is in two natures, if indeed he is perfect God and perfect man. And again: Do we confess Christ from two natures? Certainly. Why from two? Because he is from divinity and humanity. For what does it mean to say divinity and humanity? It presents two natures, certainly; for divinity and humanity are not one nature. Then: Do we confess Christ after the union in divinity and humanity? Certainly. Therefore, if after the union we confess him in divinity and humanity, and divinity and humanity are two natures and not one, we confess him in two natures. And again:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"Εἰ ἔχει ὁ Χριστὸς τὴν φύσιν τοῦ πατρὸς\n\nκαὶ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν τελείαν καὶ ἀνελλιπῆ, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀσύγχυτον; Παντὶ τρόπῳ. Ἔχει καὶ τὴν φύσιν τῆς μητρός, τουτέστιν τὴν φύσιν τοῦ Ἀδάμ, τελείαν, ἀνελλιπῆ, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀσύγχυτον; Ἐκ παντός. Ἡ φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς καὶ ἡ φύσις τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου μία ἢ δύο; Δύο πάντως. Οὐκοῦν δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν. Πρὸ γὰρ τῆς ἑνώσεως οὐ δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ, ἀλλὰ μία, ἡ τοῦ πατρός. Ἀδύνατον τὴν μίαν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν φύσιν κτιστὴν εἶναι καὶ ἄκτιστον, ἠργμένην καὶ ἄναρχον καὶ παθητὴν καὶ ἀπαθῆ. Εἰ γὰρ ἤρξατο, οὐκ ἄναρχος, καὶ εἰ ἄκτιστος, οὐκ ἐκτίσθη. Ὥστε οὐ μία φύσις ὁ Χριστός, ἀλλὰ μία ὑπόστασις δύο φύσεις ἔχουσα, μίαν ἄκτιστον καὶ κτιστὴν μίαν, μίαν ἄναρχον καὶ ἄλλην ἠργμένην. Τέλειος θεὸς ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ τέλειος ἄνθρωπος καὶ μετὰ τὴν καθ' ὑπόστασιν τῶν φύσεων ἕνωσιν; Ναὶ πάντως. Τέλειος ἐν θεότητι καὶ τέλειος ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι; Ἀληθῶς. Θεότης δὲ καὶ ἀνθρωπότης μία φύσις ἢ δύο; Δύο, ὡς ἀληθῶς· ἄλλη γὰρ φύσις θεότητος καὶ ἄλλη ἀνθρωπότητος. Ἄλλη δὲ καὶ ἄλλη οὐ μία, ἀλλὰ δύο. Οὐκοῦν δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ, καὶ ἐν δύο φύσεσιν ὁ Χριστὸς μετὰ τὴν καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἕνωσιν, εἴπερ θεός ἐστι τέλειος καὶ ἄνθρωπος τέλειος μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν καὶ τέλειος ἐν θεότητι καὶ τέλειος ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι. Καὶ πάλιν· Ἐκ δύο φύσεων ὁμολογοῦμεν τὸν Χριστόν; Πάντως. Διὰ τί ἐκ δύο; Ὅτι ἐκ θεότητός ἐστι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος. Τί γάρ; Τὸ εἰπεῖν θεότητα καὶ ἀνθρωπότητα δύο φύσεις πάντως παριστᾷ; Πάντως· οὐ γὰρ μία φύσις θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος. Εἶτα·","english":"Does Christ have the nature of the Father, even after the union, perfect and complete, immutable and unconfused? In every way. Does he also have the nature of the mother, that is, the nature of Adam, perfect, complete, immutable and unconfused? Entirely so. Is the nature of God the Father and the nature of the holy Virgin one or two? Two, certainly. Therefore there are two natures in Christ after the union. For before the union there were not two natures in God the Word, but one, that of the Father. It is impossible for the one and the same nature to be created and uncreated, begun and without beginning, passible and impassible. For if it began, it is not without beginning; and if it is uncreated, it was not created. So then Christ is not one nature, but one hypostasis having two natures, one uncreated and one created, one without beginning and the other begun. Is Christ perfect God and perfect man even after the hypostatic union of the natures? Yes, certainly. Perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity? Truly. And are divinity and humanity one nature or two? Two, truly; for one is the nature of divinity and another that of humanity. And one and another are not one, but two. Therefore there are two natures in Christ, and Christ is in two natures after the hypostatic union, if indeed he is perfect God and perfect man after the union, and perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity. And again: Do we confess Christ from two natures? Certainly. Why from two? Because he is from divinity and humanity. What then? Does saying divinity and humanity certainly establish two natures? Certainly; for the nature of divinity and of humanity is not one. Then:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"Ὁμολογοῦμεν τὸν Χριστὸν μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν ἐν θεότητι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι; Πάντως. Οὐκοῦν, εἰ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν ἐν θεότητι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι ὁμολογοῦμεν αὐτόν, θεότης δὲ καὶ ἀνθρωπότης δύο φύσεις καὶ οὐ μία, ἐν δύο φύσεσιν ἀνάγκη λέγειν αὐτὸν μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν ὥσπερ καὶ ἐκ δύο φύσεων. Καὶ αὖθις· Ἔχει ὁ Χριστὸς τὴν φύσιν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν τελείαν, ἀνελλιπῆ, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀσύγχυτον; Παντὶ τρόπῳ. Ἔχει δὲ καὶ τὴν φύσιν τῆς μητρός, τουτέστιν τοῦ Ἀδάμ, τελείαν, ἀνελλιπῆ, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀσύγχυτον; Ἀναμφιβόλως. Ἡ φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς καὶ ἡ φύσις τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου μία ἢ δύο; Δύο πάντως καὶ οὐ μία. Οὐκοῦν δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν. Πρὸ γὰρ τῆς ἑνώσεως οὐ δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ, ἀλλὰ μία, ἡ τοῦ πατρός. Καὶ πάλιν· Ἡ ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ θεότης παθητὴ φύσις ἢ ἀπαθής; Ἀπαθὴς πάντως. Καὶ ἡ ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ ἀνθρωπότης παθητὴ ἢ ἀπαθής; Παθητὴ δηλονότι. Παθητὴ οὖν φύσις καὶ ἀπαθὴς μία φύσις οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλὰ δύο, καὶ δύο φύσεις ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ. Ἡ θεότης τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτή ἐστι τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ἢ οὔ; Αὐτὴ καὶ οὐκ ἄλλη. Τελεία φύσις αὕτη ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ ἢ μέρος φύσεως; Τελεία. Ἡ ἀνθρωπότης αὐτοῦ τελεία φύσις ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῷ; Τελεία. Οὐκοῦν δύο φύσεις τέλειαι ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ. Εἰ δὲ μίαν φύσιν σύνθετον εἴπῃς τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἡ θεότης καὶ ἡ ἀνθρωπότης μέρη εἰσὶ τῆς συνθέτου φύσεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἔσται ὁ πατὴρ καὶ θεὸς καὶ ὁ Ἀδὰμ μέρη τῆς μιᾶς φύσεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἔσται ὁ μὲν Χριστὸς τελεία φύσις, ὁ πατὴρ δὲ μερικὴ καὶ ἀτελὴς φύσις συγκρινόμενος πρὸς Χριστόν. Καὶ αὖθις·","english":"Do we confess Christ after the union in divinity and humanity? In every way. Therefore, if after the union we confess him in divinity and humanity, and divinity and humanity are two natures and not one, we must say that he is after the union in two natures, just as he is also from two natures. And again: Does Christ have the nature of the Father even after the union, perfect, complete, immutable, and unconfused? In every way. Does he also have the nature of the mother, that is, of Adam, perfect, complete, immutable, and unconfused? Undoubtedly. Is the nature of God the Father and the nature of the holy Virgin one or two? Two, certainly, and not one. Therefore there are two natures in Christ after the union. For before the union there were not two natures in God the Word, but one, that of the Father. And again: Is the divinity in Christ a passible nature or impassible? Impassible, certainly. And is the humanity in Christ passible or impassible? Passible, obviously. Therefore a passible nature and an impassible nature are not one nature, but two, and there are two natures in Christ. Is the divinity of Christ the same as that of the Father and the Spirit, or not? The same, and not another. Is this a perfect nature in Christ, or a part of a nature? Perfect. Is his humanity a perfect nature in him? Perfect. Therefore there are two perfect natures in Christ. But if you call the one nature of Christ composite, then the divinity and the humanity are parts of the composite nature of Christ, and the Father and God and Adam will be parts of the one nature of Christ, and Christ will be a perfect nature, while the Father, compared to Christ, is a partial and imperfect nature. And again:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Διὰ τί οὐ λέγετε δύο φύσεις ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ; Ὅτι ὁ ἀριθμὸς διαίρεσιν παρεισάγει. Οὐκοῦν καὶ τὸ λέγειν τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις τῆς θεότητος διαιρεῖ τὴν θεότητα. Ἀλλ' οὐκ ἔστι τοῦτο· ὁ γὰρ ἀριθμὸς τὴν διαφορὰν καὶ τὴν ποσότητα τῶν ἀριθμουμένων δηλοῖ καὶ μόνον, εἴτε ἡνωμένα εἰσὶ τὰ ἀριθμούμενα, εἴτε διῃρημένα. Τρεῖς γὰρ ὑποστάσεις λέγοντες τῆς θεότητος οὐ διαιροῦμεν αὐτὰς ἀπ' ἀλλήλων–ἥνωνται γὰρ κατ' οὐσίαν–, ἀλλὰ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν ὑποστάσεων σημαίνομεν καὶ τὸ μὴ συγχεῖ σθαι αὐτὰς καὶ συναλείφεσθαι εἰς μίαν ὑπόστασιν. Ὁμοίως δύο φύσεις τοῦ Χριστοῦ λέγοντες οὐ διαιροῦμεν αὐτάς– ἥνωνται γὰρ καθ' ὑπόστασιν–, ἀλλὰ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν φύσεων σημαίνομεν καὶ τὸ μὴ τετράφθαι καὶ συγκεχύσθαι αὐτάς. Ὑμεῖς γὰρ μιᾶς συνθέτου φύσεως τὸν Χριστὸν\n\nλέγοντες ἐκ θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος οὔτε τῷ πατρὶ αὐτὸν λέγετε ὁμοούσιον οὔτε ἡμῖν· οὔτε γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ συνθέτου φύσεως οὔτε ἡμεῖς ἐκ θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος σύνθετοι.\n\nἈλλὰ καὶ παθητὴν τὴν θεότητα ὁμολογεῖτε· εἰ γὰρ μιᾶς φύσεως ὁ Χριστὸς συνθέτου ἐκ θεότητός τε καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος, ἔπαθε δὲ ὁ Χριστός, δηλονότι ἡ μία φύσις αὐτοῦ ἡ σύνθετος, ἡ θεανθρωπότης, ἔπαθεν. Ἀλλὰ δῆλον, ὅτι ἀρειανίζετε· ὡς γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι, καὶ ὑμεῖς ταυτὸν λέγετε φύσιν καὶ ὑπόστασιν καὶ παθητὴν τὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ θεότητα καὶ τὴν φύσιν αὐτοῦ σύνθετον λέγετε, ἵνα ἑτεροούσιον αὐτὸν τοῦ πατρὸς βλασφημήσητε. Ἡμᾶς δὲ μὴ γένοιτο οὕτω φρονεῖν· οἴδαμεν γὰρ διαφορὰν φύσεώς τε καὶ ὑποστάσεως κατὰ τοὺς ἁγίους πατέρας.","english":"Why do you not say two natures in Christ? Because number introduces division. Then saying three hypostases of the Godhead divides the Godhead. But this is not so; for number makes known the difference and the quantity of the things numbered, and only that, whether the things numbered are united or divided. For when we say three hypostases of the Godhead, we do not divide them from one another—for they are united in essence—but we signify the difference of the hypostases and that they are not confounded and merged into one hypostasis. Likewise, when we say two natures of Christ, we do not divide them—for they are united in hypostasis—but we signify the difference of the natures and that they are not corrupted and confused. For you, saying that Christ is of one composite nature from divinity and humanity, say that he is neither consubstantial with the Father nor with us; for neither is the Father of a composite nature, nor are we composite from divinity and humanity.\n\nBut you also confess the Godhead as passible; for if Christ is of one composite nature from divinity and humanity, and Christ suffered, then clearly his one composite nature, the God-manhood, suffered. But it is clear that you are Arianizing; for as they did, so also you say that nature and hypostasis are the same, and you say that the Godhead of Christ is passible and his nature composite, so that you may blaspheme him as of a different essence from the Father. But may it not be that we think so; for we know the difference of nature and hypostasis according to the holy fathers.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"Διὸ καὶ τὸ τριαδικὸν τῶν ὑποστάσεων καὶ τὸ μοναδικὸν τῆς φύσεως ἐπὶ τῆς θεότητος ὁμολογοῦμεν καὶ ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ κατὰ τὸν θεολόγον Γρηγόριον «ἔμπαλιν ἢ ἐπὶ τῆς τριάδος» τὸ μοναδικὸν τῆς ὑποστάσεως καὶ τὸ διττὸν καὶ διάφορον τῶν φύσεων κηρύττομεν καὶ σύνθετον μίαν ὑπόστασιν αὐτὸν ὁμολογοῦμεν, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ καὶ ἀπαθῆ κατὰ τὴν τῆς θεότητος φύσιν, ὁμοούσιον ἡμῖν καὶ παθητὸν κατὰ τὴν φύσιν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος τὸν αὐτόν. Ἀδύνατον γὰρ τὴν μίαν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν φύσιν κτιστὴν εἶναι καὶ ἄκτιστον, ἠργμένην καὶ ἄναρχον. Εἰ γὰρ ἤρξατο, οὐκ ἄναρχος, καὶ εἰ ἄκτιστός ἐστιν, οὐκ ἐκτίσθη. Ὥστε οὐ μία φύσις ὁ Χριστός, ἀλλὰ μία ὑπόστασις δύο ἔχουσα φύσεις, μίαν ἄκτιστον καὶ μίαν κτιστήν, μίαν ἄναρχον καὶ μίαν ἠργμένην, μίαν ἀπαθῆ καὶ μίαν παθητήν. Καὶ πάλιν· Εἰ ἐκ διαφόρων φύσεων συντεθειμένη ἡ φύσις, οὐδὲ μία αὐτῶν ἐστιν ὁμοούσιος. Ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἑκάστη τὸν ἑαυτῆς ὅρον ἔχει μόνον, ἡ δὲ σύνθετος ἄλλον ὅρον ἔχει σύνθετον. Ἀδύνατον δὲ τὰ ἕτερον καὶ ἕτερον ὅρον δεχόμενα ὁμοούσια εἶναι. Εἰ οὖν μία φύσις ὁ Χριστός, πῶς τῷ πατρὶ ἔσται ὁμοούσιος καὶ τῇ μητρί; Ὁ μὲν γὰρ θεός, ἡ δὲ ἄνθρωπος. Θεὸς δὲ καὶ ἄνθρωπος οὐ μία φύσις· οὐ γὰρ εἷς ὅρος θεότητος καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος. Ὁ μὲν γὰρ κτίστης, ὁ δὲ κτίσμα. Καὶ πάλιν· Μία καὶ ἡ αὐτὴ φύσις ἑτεροουσίοις ὁμοούσιος εἶναι οὐ δύναται. Καὶ πάλιν· Φύσις φύσει ὁμοούσιος οὐ λέγεται οὐδὲ ὑπόστασις μονοφυὴς ἑτεροουσίοις ὑποστάσεσιν ὁμοούσιος. Εἰ οὖν μία φύσις ὁ Χριστὸς μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, πῶς τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῇ μητρὶ ἑτεροουσίοις οὖσιν ἔσται ὁμοούσιος;","english":"Therefore we confess both the triadic character of the hypostases and the singular character of the nature in the Godhead, and in our Lord Jesus Christ, according to Gregory the Theologian, \"in the opposite way from the Trinity,\" we proclaim the singular character of the hypostasis and the twofold and different character of the natures, and we confess him to be one composite hypostasis, consubstantial with the Father and impassible according to the nature of the Godhead, and the same one consubstantial with us and passible according to the nature of the humanity. For it is impossible for the one and the same nature to be created and uncreated, begun and without beginning. For if it began, it is not without beginning, and if it is uncreated, it was not created. So Christ is not one nature, but one hypostasis having two natures, one uncreated and one created, one without beginning and one begun, one impassible and one passible. And again: If the nature is composed of different natures, it is consubstantial with none of them. For each of them has only its own definition, while the composite has another, composite definition. But it is impossible for things that receive a different and different definition to be consubstantial. If, then, Christ is one nature, how will he be consubstantial with the Father and with the mother? For the one is God, and the other is man. But God and man are not one nature; for there is not one definition of Godhead and humanity. For the one is Creator, the other is creature. And again: One and the same nature cannot be consubstantial with things of different substance. And again: A nature is not said to be consubstantial with a nature, nor is a single-natured hypostasis consubstantial with hypostases of different substance. If, then, Christ is one nature after the union, how will he be consubstantial with the Father and the mother, who are of different substance?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"Ὅτι δὲ καὶ μία ὑπόστασις τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐ δύο, ἐντεῦθεν γνωσόμεθα· Εἷς υἱὸς ὁ Χριστὸς ἢ δύο; Εἷς πάντως. Καὶ πῶς δύο ὑποστάσεις, εἰ εἷς ὁ υἱός; Εἰ δύο ὑποστάσεις, ἄλλος καὶ ἄλλος, καὶ ἢ ἔσονται δύο Χριστοὶ ἢ ἄλλος ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ ἄλλος ὁ θεὸς λόγος καὶ οὐκέτι εἷς υἱός. Καὶ πάλιν· Εἰ δύο ὑποστάσεις τοῦ Χριστοῦ, κάθηται δὲ ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐπὶ τοῦ χερουβικοῦ θρόνου καὶ λατρεύεται ὑπὸ πάσης κτίσεως σὺν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι· οὐκοῦν τετράδι καὶ οὐ τριάδι λατρεύομεν. Καὶ πάλιν· Εἰ μία φύσις τοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, πῶς ὀνομάζεται; Χριστότης δηλαδὴ ἡ θεανθρωπότης. Ποίᾳ φύσει; Εἰ μία, δηλονότι τῇ μιᾷ αὐτοῦ φύσει. Οὐκοῦν ἡ θεανθρωπότης αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔσται ἡ ἐν Χριστῷ θεότης παθητή. Καὶ πάλιν· Ἔπαθεν ὁ Χριστός; Πάντως. Ἡ θεότης αὐτοῦ ἔπαθεν ἢ ἡ ἀνθρωπότης αὐτοῦ, ποία φύσις; Ἡ ἀνθρωπότης. Ἡ δὲ θεία αὐτοῦ φύσις ἀπαθὴς ἔμεινεν; Ναί. Ἡ παθοῦσα αὐτοῦ φύσις καὶ ἡ μὴ παθοῦσα ἡ αὐτή ἐστιν ἢ ἄλλη καὶ ἄλλη; Ἄλλη πάντως καὶ ἄλλη. Καὶ εἰ ἄλλη καὶ ἄλλη, πῶς μία αἱ δύο; Ἀλλ' αἱ μὲν δύο φύσεις ἢ ἄλλη καὶ ἄλλη μία φύσις οὔκ εἰσιν, ἀλλὰ μία ὑπόστασις, δύο δὲ φύσεις, μία ἀπαθὴς καὶ μία παθητή. Καὶ ἔσται ὁ λόγος εὔδρομος.","english":"That Christ has one hypostasis and not two, we shall know from this: Is Christ one Son or two? One, certainly. And how can there be two hypostases if the Son is one? If there are two hypostases, then there is one and another, and either there will be two Christs, or the Christ will be one and the God Word another, and no longer one Son. And again: If there are two hypostases of Christ, but he sits at the right hand of the Father on the cherubic throne and is worshiped by all creation together with the Father and the Spirit, then we worship a Tetrad and not a Triad. And again: If there is one nature of Christ after the union, how is it named? God-manhood, clearly, that is, Christhood. By which nature? If one, then clearly by his one nature. Therefore his God-manhood, and the Godhead in Christ will be passible. And again: Did Christ suffer? Certainly. Did his Godhead suffer or his manhood, which nature? His manhood. And did his divine nature remain impassible? Yes. Is the nature in him that suffered and the one that did not suffer the same, or one and another? One and another, certainly. And if one and another, how are the two one? But the two natures, being one and another, are not one nature, but one hypostasis, and two natures, one impassible and one passible. And the argument will be well-run.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"9 Ὑπόστασιν δὲ μίαν σύνθετον τὸν Χριστὸν λέγομεν· μία γὰρ οὖσα τῶν τῆς θεότητος ὑποστάσεων εὐδοκίᾳ πατρὸς ἐσαρκώθη ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς ἀειπαρθένου καὶ θεοτόκου καὶ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος τέλειος οὐ κατὰ τροπὴν ἢ σύγχυσιν ἢ\n\nἀλλοίωσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πρόσληψιν σαρκὸς ἐψυχωμένης ψυχῇ λογικῇ τε καὶ νοερᾷ, μείνας, ὃ ἦν, θεὸς τέλειος, καὶ γενόμενος, ὃ οὐκ ἦν, ἄνθρωπος τέλειος, φύσιν προσλαβών, οὐχ ὑπόστασιν, φύσιν οὐκ ἀνυπόστατον, ἀλλ' ἐν αὐτῷ ὑποστᾶσαν καὶ αὐτὸν ἐσχηκυῖαν ὑπόστασιν· οὐ γὰρ γέγονε τοῦδε ἢ τοῦδε, ἀλλὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου. Πᾶσα γὰρ σὰρξ καὶ πᾶσα ψυχὴ τινὸς λέγεται καὶ τινός ἐστι καὶ αὐτὸν ἔχει ὑπόστασιν· ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ τοῦ Πέτρου τὸν Πέτρον ἔχει ὑπόστασιν, καὶ οὐκ ἄλλην ἔχει ὑπόστασιν ἡ ψυχὴ τοῦ Πέτρου καὶ ἄλλην ἡ σὰρξ αὐτοῦ. Ἄλλην μὲν γὰρ φύσιν ἔχει ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ ἄλλην ἡ σάρξ, ἡ ψυχὴ ἀσώματον καὶ ἄυλον, τὸ σῶμα ὑλικήν, ἀλλ', ἐπειδὴ ἑνός εἰσι, μίαν ἔχουσιν ὑπόστασιν. Τίνος οὖν ἐγένετο ἡ ἐκ παρθένου ἐψυχωμένη σάρξ; Εἰ μὲν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου, αὐτὸν ἔχει ὑπόστασιν. Εἰ δὲ ἄλλου παρ' αὐτόν, οὐ προσκυνητέον αὐτῷ οὔτε λατρευτέον· οὐ γὰρ κτίσει οὐδὲ ἑτέρῳ παρὰ τὴν ἁγίαν τριάδα λατρεύομεν. Ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐγένετο ἑτέρου· οὐκ ἄγγελος γάρ, οὐ πρέσβυς, ἀλλ' αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος ἦλθε καὶ ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς. Καὶ «ὁ πρῶτος Ἀδὰμ ἐκ γῆς χοϊκός· ὁ δεύτερος Ἀδάμ, ὁ κύριος, ἐξ οὐρανοῦ.» Τριὰς λέγεται, διότι τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις εἰσὶν τῆς θεότητος, πατὴρ καὶ ὁ μονογενὴς υἱὸς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον.","english":"We say that Christ is one composite hypostasis. For one of the hypostases of the Godhead, being one, by the good pleasure of the Father was made flesh of the Holy Spirit and of Mary the ever-virgin and Theotokos, and became perfect man, not by turning or confusion or alteration, but by the assumption of flesh animated with a rational and intelligent soul, remaining what he was, perfect God, and becoming what he was not, perfect man, assuming a nature, not a hypostasis—a nature not without hypostasis, but subsisting in him and having him as its hypostasis. For it did not become the hypostasis of this one or that one, but of God the Word. For all flesh and all soul is said to be someone's and is someone's and has him as its hypostasis. For the flesh and the soul of Peter have Peter as their hypostasis, and the soul of Peter does not have one hypostasis and his flesh another. For the soul has one nature and the flesh another—the soul incorporeal and immaterial, the body material—but since they are of one person, they have one hypostasis. Of whom, then, did the flesh animated from the virgin become? If it is of God the Word, it has him as its hypostasis. But if of another besides him, it must not be worshiped or served; for we do not serve a creature or another besides the holy Trinity. But it did not become another's; for not an angel, not a mediator, but the Lord himself came and saved us. And \"the first Adam is of the earth, earthy; the second Adam, the Lord, is from heaven.\" Trinity is spoken of because there are three hypostases of the Godhead: the Father, and the only-begotten Son, and the Holy Spirit.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"Εἰ οὖν ἑτέρα ὑπόστασίς ἐστι τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἑτέρα ὑπόστασις τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς παρθένου, ἢ ἐξεβλήθη ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μονογενὴς καὶ ἀντεισήχθη ὁ τῆς παρθένου ἢ οὐ προσκυνεῖται ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παρθένου ἢ τέσσαρες κάθηνται ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου καὶ τετράδι λατρεύομεν. Ἀλλ' ἡμᾶς μὴ γένοιτο τετράδι λατρεύειν, ἀλλὰ τριάδι ἁγίᾳ καὶ προσκυνητῇ, ἑνὶ πατρί, μιᾷ ὑποστάσει, ἑνὶ υἱῷ καὶ λόγῳ τοῦ θεοῦ σεσαρκωμένῳ, μιᾷ ὑποστάσει μετὰ τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, ἑνὶ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι, μιᾷ ὑποστάσει, τριάδι παναγίᾳ καὶ δεδοξασμένῃ. Καὶ πάλιν· Ὅτι μία τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὑπόστασις, ἐντεῦθεν γνωσόμεθα. Ἀρχὴ τῆς ἑκάστου βρέφους ὑπάρξεως καὶ ὑπόστασίς ἐστιν ἡ ἐκ πατρὸς καταβαλλομένη σπορὰ ἐν τῇ μήτρᾳ τῆς γυναικός, ἣν συλλαμβάνουσα ἡ γυνὴ χορηγεῖ τὰ οἰκεῖα αἵματα, καὶ οὕτως συνίσταται τὸ βρέφος. Μία ὑπόστασις τῆς σπορᾶς καὶ τῶν ἐκ τῆς μητρὸς ἐν αὐτῇ ὑφισταμένων εἰς σάρκα αἱμάτων, καὶ ἡ σύλληψις τῆς σπορᾶς ἐστι. Συλλαμβάνει δὲ ἡ γυνὴ ἐκ τῆς τοῦ ἀνδρὸς μίξεως τὸν ἐξ αὐτοῦ καταβαλλόμενον σπόρον, καὶ αὐτός ἐστι τοῦ βρέφους ὑπόστασις. Τί οὖν συνέλαβεν ἡ ἁγία παρθένος; Σάρκα; Οὐκοῦν οὐκ ἐξ αὐτῆς ἡ σάρξ· οὐ γὰρ ἐξ ἑαυτῆς συλλαμβάνει γυνή. Τί οὖν συνέλαβεν; Τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον; Πνεῦμα γὰρ ἅγιον ἐμεσίτευσεν ἀντὶ συναφείας καὶ ἐνῴκησεν ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ συνελήφθη ὁ υἱὸς καὶ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐγένετο σὰρξ ἐψυχωμένη ψυχῇ λογικῇ καὶ νοερᾷ, καὶ αὐτὸς οἱονεὶ θεῖος σπόρος γέγονε τῇ σαρκὶ ὑπόστασις, μία ὑπόστασις δύο φύσεων, θεότητός τε καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος.","english":"If, then, the hypostasis of the only-begotten Son of God is one thing and the hypostasis of the son of the virgin another, either the only-begotten Son of God was cast out and the son of the virgin was brought in instead, or the son of the virgin is not worshipped, or four sit upon the throne and we worship a quaternity. But may it not be that we worship a quaternity, but a holy and worshipped Trinity: one Father, one hypostasis; one Son and Word of God made flesh, one hypostasis with his flesh; one Holy Spirit, one hypostasis; a Trinity all-holy and glorified. And again: that the hypostasis of Christ is one, we shall know from this. The beginning of each infant's existence and its hypostasis is the seed deposited by the father in the mother's womb, which the woman, conceiving, supplies with her own blood, and thus the infant is constituted. There is one hypostasis of the seed and of the blood from the mother which is formed in her into flesh, and it is the conception of the seed. The woman conceives from intercourse with the man the seed deposited by him, and this is the hypostasis of the infant. What, then, did the holy virgin conceive? Flesh? Then the flesh is not from herself; for a woman does not conceive from herself. What, then, did she conceive? The Word of God? For the Holy Spirit mediated in place of union and dwelt in her, and the Son and Word of God was conceived, and he himself became flesh animated with a rational and intelligent soul, and he himself, as it were a divine seed, became the hypostasis to the flesh, one hypostasis of two natures, both Godhead and manhood.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"Ὢν γὰρ θεὸς τέλειος γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος τέλειος, καὶ ἔστιν εἷς υἱὸς θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπου, ἀμήτωρ ἐκ πατρὸς ὡς θεός, ἀπάτωρ ἐκ μητρὸς ὡς ἄνθρωπος, ὁ αὐτὸς δύο φύσεις, μία ὑπόστασις· εἷς γὰρ ὁ Χριστὸς υἱὸς καὶ οὐ δύο. Εἰ δὲ εἷς υἱός, πῶς δύο ὑποστάσεις; Ἡ γὰρ ὑπόστασις ἄλλον ποιεῖ καὶ ἄλλον ἐξ ἄλλου ἀφορίζει· εἰ γὰρ δύο ὑποστάσεις ἐξ ἑνὸς πατρὸς καὶ μιᾶς μητρὸς δίδυμοι γενόμενοι οὐχ εἷς υἱός, ἀλλὰ δύο, πῶς ἡ ἐξ ἑτεροουσίου πατρὸς γεγεννημένη καὶ ἐξ ἑτεροουσίου μητρὸς γεγεννημένη ὑπόστασις εἷς υἱὸς ἔσονται; Οὐ γὰρ τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας ὁ πατὴρ καὶ θεὸς καὶ ἡ παρθένος. Καὶ εἰ δύο ἀνθρώπων ὑποστάσεις ὁμοούσιοι τυγχάνουσαι οὐκ ἔσονται εἷς υἱός, πῶς δύο ὑποστάσεις ἑτεροούσιοι εἷς υἱὸς ἔσονται; Ἀνάγκη οὖν ἢ δύο υἱοὺς λέγειν τὸν Χριστὸν καὶ τὸν θεὸν λόγον ἢ μίαν ὑπόστασιν καὶ ἕνα υἱόν. Πῶς δὲ καὶ δύο φύσεων λέγετε τὸν Χριστόν, εἰ ἄλλος ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ ἄλλος ὁ θεὸς λόγος· ἔσται γὰρ καθ' ὑμᾶς μιᾶς φύσεως καὶ μιᾶς ὑποστάσεως ὁ θεὸς λόγος καὶ μιᾶς φύσεως καὶ μιᾶς ὑποστάσεως ὁ Χριστός. Εἰ δὲ τοῦτο δοθείη, ψευδεῖς ἔσονται πάντως αἱ διαγορεύουσαι γραφαὶ τὸν ἐν ἀρχῇ λόγον","english":"For since God perfect has become man perfect, and there is one Son of God and of man, without mother from the Father as God, without father from the mother as man, the same one of two natures, one hypostasis; for Christ is one Son and not two. But if he is one Son, how are there two hypostases? For the hypostasis makes one thing and another, and separates one from another; for if two hypostases from one father and one mother, having become twins, are not one son but two, how shall the hypostasis begotten from a father of a different essence and begotten from a mother of a different essence be one son? For the Father and God and the virgin are not of the same essence. And if the hypostases of two men, being of the same essence, shall not be one son, how shall two hypostases of different essences be one son? It is necessary, then, either to speak of two sons, Christ and the God Word, or of one hypostasis and one Son. But how do you also say that Christ is of two natures, if Christ is one and the God Word another? For according to you, the God Word will be of one nature and one hypostasis, and Christ of one nature and one hypostasis. But if this be granted, the scriptures that declare the Word in the beginning will be altogether false","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"καὶ θεὸν σάρκα γεγονέναι καί, ὥσπερ ἕνα θεὸν πατέρα, οὕτω καὶ κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἕνα καὶ τὸν ἴδιον καὶ μονογενῆ τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑπὲρ τοῦ κόσμου δεδόσθαι καὶ πεπονθέναι καὶ τὸν ἐξ Ἰσραηλιτῶν ὁρμώμενον κατὰ σάρκα Χριστὸν ἐπὶ πάντων εἶναι θεὸν εὐλογητὸν εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας καὶ θεοῦ δύναμιν καὶ θεοῦ σοφίαν καὶ κληρονόμον πάντων καὶ τῶν αἰώνων ποιητὴν καὶ τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς δόξης ἀπαύγασμα καὶ χαρακτῆρα τῆς ὑποστάσεως καὶ μέγαν θεὸν ἐν μορφῇ τε θεοῦ ὄντα μορφὴν εἰληφέναι δούλου καὶ τὰ τούτοις συγγενῆ· ταῦτα γὰρ καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα περὶ ἑνὸς καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ λέγεται Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐ περὶ ἄλλου καὶ ἄλλου προσώπου ἢ περὶ ἄλλης καὶ ἄλλης ὑποστάσεως ἤγουν ἄλλου καὶ ἄλλου υἱοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ. Πῶς δὲ καὶ Χριστὸς αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἀληθεύσοι φάσκων ἑαυτὸν τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ προγενέστερον καὶ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου καταβολῆς ἀρχαιότερον καὶ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ καταβεβηκέναι καὶ φῶς καὶ ζωὴν καὶ ἀνάστασιν πεφυκέναι καὶ βοῶν·","english":"and that God has become flesh, and that just as there is one God the Father, so also there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the own and only-begotten Son of God, given by the Father for the sake of the world, and that he suffered; and that the Christ who according to the flesh comes from the Israelites is God over all, blessed forever, and the power of God and the wisdom of God and heir of all things and maker of the ages and the radiance of the Father's glory and the express image of his hypostasis, and being great God in the form of God he took the form of a servant and things akin to these. For these things and the like are said of one and the same Christ, and not of one person and another, or of one hypostasis and another, that is, of one son and another and one Christ and another. But how also would Christ himself, our God, be speaking truth when he declares himself to be earlier than Abraham and older than the foundation of the world, and that he has come down from heaven, and that he is by nature light and life and resurrection, and crying out:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":23,"ref":"p23","source":"«Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν» καὶ «ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα» καὶ τὰ τούτοις παραπλήσια, δι' ὧν οὐκ ἄνθρωπος ψιλὸς καὶ προσφάτως ὑποστὰς δείκνυται, ἀλλὰ θεὸς σεσαρκωμένος καὶ εἷς Χριστὸς υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν δύο φύσεσι, θεότητί φημι, καθ' ἣν ἓν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα καὶ θεὸν ἐγινώσκετο, καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι, καθ' ἣν ἑτεροούσιος πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, ἡμῖν δὲ τοῖς γηίνοις ὁμοούσιος καὶ κατ' οὐδὲν ἡμῶν παρηλλαγμένος κατὰ τὴν φύσιν καὶ οὐκ ἄλλη καὶ ἄλλη, ἀλλὰ μία καὶ ἡ αὐτὴ ὑπόστασις, ἄλλην καὶ ἄλλην ἐν ἑαυτῇ φύσιν συγχύσεως δίχα καὶ τροπῆς φέρουσα, τὴν μὲν ἄκτιστον καὶ προαιώνιον καὶ δημιουργικὴν τῶν κτισμάτων, τὴν δὲ κτιστὴν καὶ πρόσφατον. Οὐ γὰρ ἡ ἀνθρωπότης συνάναρχος καθέστηκεν ὁμοειδής τε καὶ ὁμοούσιος τῇ θεότητι οὐδὲ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ κατελήλυθεν, ἀλλ', ἐπείπερ εἷς καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς ὑπῆρχε θεὸς λόγος ἑνώσας ἑαυτῷ καθ' ὑπόστασιν τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, διὰ τοῦτο ποτὲ μὲν ὑψηλὰ καὶ θεοπρεπῆ, ποτὲ δὲ ταπεινὰ καὶ ἀνθρωποπρεπῆ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ ἐφθέγγετο. Ὅθεν καὶ κύριος τοῦ Δαυὶδ καὶ υἱὸς ἤθελε νοεῖσθαι καὶ τοὺς υἱὸν θεοῦ καλοῦντας αὐτὸν καὶ υἱὸν Δαυὶδ ὀνομάζοντας ὡς εὐσεβεῖς ἀπεδέχετο, τοὺς μὲν ὡς τὴν ἀόρατον αὐτοῦ θεότητα καὶ προαιώνιον ἐκ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς γέννησιν σημαίνοντας, τοὺς δὲ τὴν ὁρωμένην αὐτοῦ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος οὐσίαν καὶ φύσιν ἀληθῆ κηρύττοντας. Τούτων ἁπάντων ἀθετουμένων δύο μονογενεῖς ἀναγκασθησόμεθα λέγειν, ἕνα μὲν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρός, ἕνα δὲ τῆς παρθένου καὶ μητρός.","english":"I and the Father are one,\" and \"he who has seen me has seen the Father,\" and the like, by which he is shown to be not a mere man recently subsisting, but God made flesh and one Christ, the Son of God, in two natures—in divinity, I mean, according to which he was known as one with the Father and God, and in humanity, according to which he is of a different essence from the Father, but of the same essence as we earthly beings, and in no way different from us according to nature—and not one and another, but one and the same hypostasis, bearing in itself one nature and another without confusion or change: the one uncreated and eternal and creative of created things, the other created and recent. For humanity is not co-eternal, nor of the same form and same essence as the divinity, nor has it come down from heaven; but since one and the same God the Word existed, having united humanity to himself in hypostasis, for this reason he sometimes spoke lofty and God-befitting things about himself, and sometimes lowly and man-befitting things. Hence he wished to be understood both as Lord of David and as his Son, and he received as pious those who called him Son of God and named him Son of David—the former signifying his invisible divinity and eternal generation from God the Father, the latter proclaiming the visible substance and true nature of his humanity. If all these things are set aside, we shall be compelled to speak of two only-begotten ones: one of God the Father, and one of the virgin and mother.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":24,"ref":"p24","source":"Καὶ μονογενὴς ὁ μονογενὴς οὐκέτι ῥηθήσεται ἑτέρου καθ' υἱοθεσίαν ἐπεισαχθέντος αὐτῷ, καὶ ὁ μὲν πρεσβύτερος ἔσται, ὁ δὲ νεώτερος, ὁ μὲν φυσικὸς καὶ γνήσιος, ὁ δὲ θετὸς καὶ νόθος. Ἔπειτα δέ, εἰ καὶ τετάρτην ἐπεισάγειν ὑπόστασιν καὶ συμπροσκυνεῖν τῇ τρισυποστάτῳ θεότητι τολμήσαιμεν τὴν ἐκ τῆς παρθένου Μαρίας τεχθεῖσαν, εὑρεθησόμεθα θεὸν σέβοντες ἀλλότριον καινόν τε καὶ πρόσφατον, ὅπερ πράττειν παντελῶς ἀπηγόρευται, καὶ τῷ τῆς ἀνθρωπολατρείας ἑλληνικῶς ὑποβληθησόμεθα ἐγκλήματι καὶ τῇ τοῖς ἀνθρωπολάτραις ἐπιφερομένῃ κατάρᾳ καταδικασθησόμεθα· «ἐπικατάρατος» γάρ, γέγραπται, «πᾶς ἄνθρωπος, ὃς ἔχει τὴν ἐλπίδα αὐτοῦ ἐπ' ἄνθρωπον». Ἀλλ' ἡμεῖς οὔτε ταῖς τρισὶ τῆς θεότητος ὑποστάσεσι μόναις προσκυνηταῖς καὶ σεπταῖς ὑπαρχούσαις ἑτέραν ἀσεβῶς ἐπεισκομίζομεν ὑπόστασιν, ἐπεὶ μήτε δύο υἱοὺς καὶ Χριστοὺς τὸν ἕνα υἱὸν καὶ Χριστὸν ἐκ τῶν θεοπνεύστων λέγειν πεπαιδεύμεθα λογίων οὔτε λατρεύειν ἀνθρώπῳ ψιλῷ θεοστυγῶς ἀνεχόμεθα, ἀλλ' ἕνα Χριστὸν σύνθετον ἐκ θεότητός τε καὶ ἀνθρωπότητος καὶ τέλειον ἐν ἀμφοτέραις ταῖς οὐσίαις, ἐξ ὧν καὶ ἐν αἷς συνετέθη, τὸν συμπροσκυνούμενον ἀεὶ τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ παναγίῳ πνεύματι λατρεύομέν τε καὶ προσκυνοῦμεν μιᾷ τιμῶντες προσκυνήσει τὴν αὐτοῦ θεότητα καὶ ἀνθρωπότητα, ὡς ἀχωρίστως καὶ δίχα παντὸς μερισμοῦ καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἡνωμένας καὶ ἓν ἀποτελεσάσας πρόσωπον. Ἀλλ' ἡμᾶς μὴ","english":"And the Only-begotten will no longer be called Only-begotten if another is introduced alongside him by adoption, one being the elder and the other the younger, one natural and genuine, the other adopted and bastard. Then, if we should dare to introduce a fourth hypostasis and to worship together with the three-hypostatic Godhead the one born of the virgin Mary, we would be found to be worshipping a foreign god, new and recent, which is altogether forbidden to do, and we would be subjected in a Hellenic manner to the charge of anthropolatry and condemned to the curse brought upon anthropolaters; for \"cursed,\" it is written, \"is every man who has his hope in man.\" But we neither impiously bring in another hypostasis alongside the three hypostases of the Godhead alone, which are adorable and venerable, since we have been taught by the divinely inspired oracles neither to speak of two sons and Christs instead of the one Son and Christ, nor do we godlessly endure to worship a mere man; but we worship and adore one Christ, composite of divinity and humanity and perfect in both essences, from which and in which he was composed, who is always worshipped together with the Father and the all-holy Spirit, honoring with one worship his divinity and humanity, as inseparably and without any division united in hypostasis and having constituted one person. But us, do not","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":25,"ref":"p25","source":"γένοιτο τετράδι λατρεύειν, ἀλλὰ τριάδι ἁγίᾳ· ἑνὶ πατρί, μιᾷ ὑποστάσει, ἑνὶ υἱῷ καὶ λόγῳ τοῦ θεοῦ σεσαρκωμένῳ, μιᾷ ὑποστάσει μετὰ τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, ἑνὶ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι, μιᾷ ὑποστάσει, τριάδι παναγίᾳ καὶ δεδοξασμένῃ. Ὥσπερ γὰρ μάχαιρα πυρακτωθεῖσα μία ἐστὶ καὶ μετὰ τὴν πύρωσιν, οὕτω καὶ ὑπὲρ τοῦτο ὁ Χριστὸς εἷς ἐστι καὶ μία ὑπόστασις καὶ μετὰ τὴν σάρκωσιν. Καὶ ὥσπερ φοβοῦμαι ἅψασθαι τῆς πεπυρωμένης μαχαίρας, οὐ διὰ τὴν τοῦ σιδήρου φύσιν, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὴν τοῦ ἑνωθέντος αὐτῷ πυρὸς φύσιν, οὕτω προσκυνῶ τῷ σαρκωθέντι θεῷ λόγῳ καὶ συμπροσκυνῶ τῇ σαρκί, οὐ διὰ τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς φύσιν, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ἑνωθέντα αὐτῇ θεὸν λόγον. Προσκυνῶ τῷ βασιλεῖ μετὰ τῆς ἁλουργίδος καὶ τιμῶ τὴν ἁλουργίδα διὰ τὸν βασιλέα. Καὶ μὴν ὅτι ἐπὶ μὲν τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ τῆς ἐσθῆτος οὐ καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἡ ἕνωσις οὐδὲ ἀδιάσπαστος οὐδὲ διαιωνίζουσα, ἐπὶ δὲ Χριστοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἀδιάσπαστος καὶ διαιωνίζουσα ἡ ἕνωσις. Διὸ ὡς ἑνὶ τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος συμπροσκυνῶ τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι Χριστῷ τῷ σαρκωθέντι υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ θεῷ.","english":"Far be it from me to worship a fourfold godhead, but rather the holy Trinity: one Father, one hypostasis; one Son and Word of God incarnate, one hypostasis with his flesh; one Holy Spirit, one hypostasis; a Trinity all-holy and glorified. For just as a sword heated in fire is one even after the heating, so too, beyond this, Christ is one and one hypostasis even after the incarnation. And just as I fear to touch the heated sword, not because of the nature of the iron, but because of the nature of the fire united to it, so I worship the incarnate God the Word and together worship the flesh, not because of the nature of the flesh, but because of the God the Word united to it. I worship the king together with the purple robe, and I honor the purple robe because of the king. And indeed, in the case of the king and his garment the union is not according to hypostasis, nor inseparable, nor everlasting; but in the case of Christ our God the union is according to hypostasis, inseparable and everlasting. Therefore, as to one of the holy Trinity, I together worship with the Father and the Holy Spirit Christ the incarnate Son of God and God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":26,"ref":"p26","source":"10 Δέδεικται τοίνυν, ὅτι δύο φύσεις τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ μία ὑπόστασις. Εἰ οὖν δύο φύσεις ἔχει, ἀνάγκη ὁμολογεῖν ἐν αὐτῷ τὰ τῶν δύο φύσεων φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα τελείως καὶ ἀνελλιπῶς, εἴπερ γινώσκομεν αὐτὸν θεὸν τέλειον καὶ ἄνθρωπον τέλειον. Ἔχει μὲν ἐκ τῆς θείας καὶ πατρικῆς φύσεως τὸ ἄκτιστον, τὸ ἄχρονον, τὸ ἄναρχον· οὐ γὰρ πρότερον οὐκ ὢν ἤρξατο τοῦ εἶναι, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ ἦν γεννητῶς τὸ θεὸς εἶναι, τὸ θελητικόν, τὸ ἐνεργητικόν, τὸ παντοδύναμον, τὸ ἀπειροδύναμον, τὸ δημιουργικόν, τὸ παντουργικόν, τὸ ἄπειρον, τὸ ἀπερίγραπτον, τὸ ἀκατάληπτον, τὸ ἀνεξερεύνητον, τὸ ἀθάνατον, τὸ παντοκρατορικόν, τὸ συνεκτικόν, τὸ ἀγαθόν, τὸ σοφόν, τὸ δίκαιον, τὸ σωστικόν, τὸ ἁπλοῦν κατὰ φύσιν καὶ ἀσύνθετον, τὸ ἄτρεπτον, τὸ ἀναλλοίωτον, τὸ παντεποπτικόν, τὸ τῶν μελλόντων προγνωστικόν, τὸ περιεκτικὸν τῶν πάντων ἤτοι περιληπτικόν, τὸ ἀμέτοχον, μεθεκτὸν δὲ τῆς ἐνεργείας, οὐ φύσεως· τὸ αὐτεξούσιον καὶ παντεξούσιον, τὸ εὐεργετικόν, τὸ μεταδοτικὸν, τὸ φωτιστικόν, τὸ ἀόρατον, τὸ ἀναφές, τὸ ὑπέρθεον, τὸ ὑπερούσιον, καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν, πάντα, ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατήρ, τοῦ υἱοῦ εἰσιν πλὴν τῆς ἀγεννησίας. Καὶ μάρτυς τούτου ἀληθὴς αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν καὶ θεὸς εἰπών· «Πάντα, ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατήρ, ἐμά ἐστι.» Καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν τὸν πατέρα λέγει· «Πάντα τὰ ἐμὰ σά ἐστι καὶ τὰ σὰ ἐμά.»","english":"It has therefore been shown that Christ has two natures and one hypostasis. If, then, he has two natures, it is necessary to confess in him the natural properties of the two natures perfectly and without deficiency, since we know him to be perfect God and perfect man. He has from the divine and paternal nature the uncreated, the timeless, the without-beginning—for he did not begin to be when he previously was not, but the being God was always his by generation—the volitive, the operative, the all-powerful, the infinitely powerful, the creative, the all-working, the infinite, the uncircumscribed, the incomprehensible, the unsearchable, the immortal, the all-ruling, the sustaining, the good, the wise, the just, the saving, the simple by nature and incomposite, the immutable, the unchangeable, the all-seeing, the foreknowing of things to come, the containing of all things, that is, the comprehensive, the unparticipated but participated in by energy, not by nature; the self-determining and all-determining, the beneficent, the communicative, the illuminating, the invisible, the intangible, the supra-divine, the supra-essential, and simply to speak, all things that the Father has are the Son's except unbegottenness. And a true witness of this is our Lord and God himself, who said: \"All things that the Father has are mine.\" And to the Father himself he says: \"All things that are mine are yours, and yours are mine.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":27,"ref":"p27","source":"12 Τῆς δὲ ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ ἴδιον τὸ υἱὸν εἶναι γεννητὸν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ οὐ πατέρα ἀγέννητον οὐδὲ γεννήτορα. Ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γὰρ γεγέννηται ἀπαθῶς, ἀσυνδυάστως, τουτέστιν ἄνευ μίξεως, ὡς φῶς ἐκ πυρός, μᾶλλον δὲ ὡς φῶς τέλειον ἐκ τελείου φωτός. Ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς οὖν ἔχει τὸ εἶναι καὶ πάντα, ὅσα ἔχει. Διὸ καὶ λέγει· «Ὁ πατήρ μου μείζων μού ἐστιν·» ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐξ αὐτοῦ, εἰ καὶ μὴ μετ' αὐτόν, οὐκ αὐτὸς ἐξ ἐμοῦ. Διὸ καὶ τιμᾷ τὸν πατέρα.\n\n13 Εἰπόντες τοίνυν τὰ τῆς θείας φύσεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἰδιώματα, ἃ ἔσχεν ἐκ τοῦ πατρός, εἴπωμεν καὶ τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης αὐτοῦ φύσεως φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα, ἅπερ ἐκ τῆς ἐξ ἡμῶν ἔσχε προσλήψεως. Εἰ γὰρ θεὸς ὢν τέλειος γέγονε δι' ἡμᾶς καθ' ἡμᾶς ἄνθρωπος τέλειος, δῆλον, ὡς πάντα ἔχων τὰ φυσικὰ τῆς θεότητος ἰδιώματα καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο θεὸς ὢν τέλειος καὶ πάντα ἕξει τὰ φυσικὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος ἰδιώματα, τουτέστι πάσας τὰς φυσικὰς δυνάμεις τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, τὰς ἐνεργητικάς τε καὶ παθητικάς, ἵνα τέλειος ᾖ ἄνθρωπος· εἰ γάρ τι τῶν φυσικῶν οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν, οὐ τέλειος, ἀλλ' ἐλλιπής ἐστιν ἄνθρωπος.","english":"It is proper to his hypostasis to be a Son begotten of the Father, and not an unbegotten Father nor a begetter. For he has been begotten of the Father impassibly, without conjunction, that is, without mixture, as light from fire, or rather as perfect light from perfect light. From the Father, then, he has his being and all that he has. Therefore he also says, \"My Father is greater than I\"; for I am from him, even if not after him, not he from me. Therefore he also honors the Father.\n\nHaving then stated the properties of Christ's divine nature, which he had from the Father, let us also state the natural properties of his human nature, which he had from his assumption from us. For if, being perfect God, he became for our sake a perfect man according to us, it is clear that, having all the natural properties of divinity and being perfect God in this respect, he will also have all the natural properties of humanity, that is, all the natural powers of humanity, both active and passive, so that he may be a perfect man; for if he did not assume any one of the natural properties, he is not perfect, but is an incomplete man.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":28,"ref":"p28","source":"14 Ἔστω δὲ προδιωρισμένον, ὅτι πάσης ἐνεργείας καὶ χρήσεως καὶ πράξεως καὶ πάθους τὴν δύναμιν φυσικῶς παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ εἰλήφαμεν καὶ ταῦτα φυσικά ἐστιν·\n\nἀδύνατον γὰρ οἱανοῦν φύσιν χρήσασθαι πράξει ἢ ἐνεργῆσαι ἐνέργειαν ἢ παθεῖν πάθος, ὧν τὴν δύναμιν οὐ κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβεν. Οἷον οὐ δύναται ἡ γῆ βλαστῆσαι μὴ κατὰ φύσιν λαβοῦσα παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ τὴν βλαστικὴν δύναμιν, οὐδὲ τὸ ὕδωρ ζωοβλαστεῖν, ἵν' οὕτως εἴπω, τὴν τῶν ἰχθύων γέννησιν καὶ πρὸς βλάστησιν τῶν τῆς γῆς συντελεῖν ἐκφορίων, εἰ μὴ παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ τὴν τοιαύτην εἴληφε δύναμιν, οὐδὲ φυτὸν αὐξῆσαι δύναται, εἰ μὴ τὴν αὐξητικὴν ἔλαβε δύναμιν, οὐ τὸ πτηνὸν πέτασθαι μὴ τὴν τοῦ πέτασθαι λαβὸν δύναμιν, οὐ χερσαῖον βαδίζειν, οὐχ ἑρπετὸν ἕρπειν, εἰ μὴ ἕκαστον τὴν τοιαύτην ἔλαβε δύναμιν. Οὕτω δὴ καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὐ δύναται ὁρᾶν ἢ νοεῖν ἢ αὐτεξουσίως θέλειν ἢ ἐνεργεῖν, εἰ μὴ ἑκάστου τὴν δύναμιν ἔλαβε φυσικῶς παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ. Ὁ ἄνθρωπος τοίνυν μικρὸς κόσμος ἐστίν. Ἔχει γὰρ ψυχὴν καὶ σῶμα καὶ μέσος ἕστηκε νοῦ καὶ ὕλης· σύνδεσμος γάρ ἐστιν ὁρατῆς καὶ ἀοράτου ἤτοι αἰσθητῆς καὶ νοητῆς κτίσεως. Ὀφθαλμὸς γὰρ καὶ τὸ καθαρώτατον τῆς ψυχῆς ἐστιν ὁ νοῦς.","english":"Let it be predetermined that we have received the power of every activity and use and action and passion naturally from the Creator, and that these things are natural. For it is impossible for any nature whatsoever to use an action or exercise an activity or undergo a passion whose power it did not receive according to nature. For example, the earth cannot sprout unless it has received from the Creator the power of sprouting according to nature, nor can water give birth to living things—so to speak—the generation of fish, and contribute to the sprouting of the earth's produce, unless it has received such power from the Creator; nor can a plant grow unless it has received the power of growth; nor can a bird fly unless it has received the power to fly; nor can a land animal walk, nor a creeping thing crawl, unless each has received such power. So indeed man also cannot see or think or will with free will or act, unless he has received the power of each thing naturally from the Creator. Man, then, is a small world. For he has a soul and a body and stands midway between mind and matter; for he is a bond of the visible and invisible, that is, of the sensible and intelligible creation. For the eye, even the purest part of the soul, is the mind.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":29,"ref":"p29","source":"Κοινωνεῖ οὖν τοῖς μὲν ἀψύχοις σώμασι κατὰ τὴν ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων στοιχείων κρᾶσιν καὶ σύνθεσιν, τοῖς δὲ φυτοῖς κατά τε ταῦτα καὶ κατὰ τὴν θρεπτικὴν καὶ αὐξητικὴν δύναμιν, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν σπερματικήν, τοῖς δὲ ἀλόγοις ζῴοις καὶ ἐν τούτοις μέν, ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τὸ ζωτικὸν καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἄλογον ὄρεξιν ἤγουν θυμὸν καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν, κατά τε τὸ φανταστικὸν καὶ μνημονευτικὸν καὶ κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν καὶ τὴν καθ' ὁρμὴν κίνησιν– καθ' ὁρμὴν δὲ κίνησίς ἐστιν ἡ κίνησις ὅλου τοῦ σώματος–καὶ τὸ φωνητικὸν καὶ ἀναπνευστικὸν καὶ ἐκ τόπου εἰς τόπον μεταβατικόν. Συνάπτεται δὲ ταῖς ἀσωμάτοις καὶ νοεραῖς δυνάμεσι διὰ τοῦ λογικοῦ καὶ τῆς λογικῆς τοῦ νοῦ ὀρέξεως, ἥτις ἐστὶ θέλησις, ἡ πρώτη τοῦ νοῦ κίνησις· ὀρεγόμενος γὰρ κινεῖται πρὸς νόησιν καὶ ὀρεγόμενος λογίζεται καὶ ὀρεγόμενος κρίνει. Αὕτη δὲ ἡ ὄρεξις αὐτεξούσιός ἐστιν· αὐτεξουσίως γὰρ ὀρεγόμενος νοεῖ καὶ λογίζεται καὶ κρίνει. Ἴδια μὲν τοῦ σώματος τομὴ καὶ ῥεῦσις καὶ μεταβολὴ ἡ κατὰ ποιότητα ἤτοι ψύξιν, θέρμανσιν, ὑγρότητα καὶ ξηρότητα, καὶ ἡ τῶν μελῶν διοργάνωσις. Ἴδια δὲ ψυχῆς λογικῆς μόνης αὐτῆς καθ' αὑτὴν ζωή, νόησις καὶ ἡ λογικὴ ὄρεξις, ἥτις κυρίως ἐστὶ θέλησις. Καὶ πρὸ τούτων ἰδικώτατον ψυχῆς χωρίζον αὐτὴν ἐκ τῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων οὐσίας τὸ ἐν σώματι πολιτεύεσθαι καὶ τούτῳ μεταδιδόναι ζωῆς καὶ κινήσεως καὶ τὸ αὐτεξουσίως κατ' οἰκείαν ὄρεξιν ἤτοι θέλησιν ἄγειν τὸ σῶμα καὶ τὴν ἄλογον ὄρεξιν, ἐπιθυμίαν καὶ θυμὸν καὶ τὴν καθ' ὁρμὴν κίνησιν, καὶ φυσικῶς ἄρχειν ὡς ἰδίου φυσικοῦ δούλου τοῦ οἰκείου σώματος. Διὸ καὶ πλέον τῶν ἀγγέλων κατ' εἰκόνα ὁ ἄνθρωπος·","english":"It therefore shares with inanimate bodies in the blending and composition of the four elements, and with plants in these same respects and in the nutritive and growth-giving power, and further also in the seminal power; and with irrational animals in these respects indeed, but also in the vital principle and in the irrational appetite—that is, in spiritedness and desire—and in the imaginative and memory powers and in sensation and in movement according to impulse (and movement according to impulse is the movement of the whole body), and in the vocal and respiratory power and in the power of moving from place to place. It is joined to the incorporeal and intelligible powers through the rational faculty and the rational appetite of the mind, which is will, the first movement of the mind. For desiring, it is moved toward understanding; desiring, it reasons; desiring, it judges. And this appetite is self-determining; for desiring in a self-determining way, it understands and reasons and judges. The body's own properties are cutting and flux and change in respect of quality—that is, cooling, heating, moisture and dryness—and the organization of the members. The soul's own properties, of the rational soul alone by itself, are life, understanding, and the rational appetite, which is properly will. And before these, the most distinctive property of the soul, separating it from the substance of the angels, is to conduct itself in a body and to impart to it life and movement, and to guide the body by self-determining choice according to its own appetite—that is, will—and also the irrational appetite, desire and spiritedness and movement according to impulse, and by nature to rule as over its own natural slave, its own body. Wherefore man is also more than the angels in respect of the image.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":30,"ref":"p30","source":"ὁ γὰρ ἄγγελος οὐκ ἔχει φυσικὸν δοῦλον οὐδὲ φυσικῶς ἐστι δεσπότης.\n\n17 Κοινὰ δὲ ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, ὧν ἡ ψυχὴ τῷ σώματι μεταδίδωσι, τὸ ζωτικόν, τὸ φανταστικόν, τουτέστι τὸ τῶν αἰσθητῶν ἀντιληπτικὸν ἢ διαγνωστικόν, αὐτὸ τὸ αἰσθητικὸν ἤγουν αἱ πέντε αἰσθήσεις· ὅρασις, ἀκοή, ὄσφρησις, γεῦσις, ἁφή, ἔτι καὶ τὸ μνημονευτικὸν καὶ ἡ καθ' ὁρμὴν κίνησις τό τε θρεπτικὸν καὶ αὐξητικὸν καὶ ἡ ἄλογος ὄρεξις, θυμὸς λέγω καὶ ἐπιθυμία, πεῖνά τε καὶ δίψα καὶ κόπος καὶ πτύελος, ἡδονὴ καὶ λύπη καὶ ἀηδία, φόβος, δειλία καὶ ἀγωνία, ἀδημονία, ταραχή, ἱδρὼς καὶ θάνατος– θάνατος γάρ ἐστι χωρισμὸς ψυχῆς ἐκ τοῦ σώματος–καὶ πᾶσα ἡ τῆς τροφῆς καὶ αὐξήσεως οἰκονομία. Ταῦτα πάντα ἄλογα πάθη εἰσὶ καὶ ἐνέργειαι, ἐνέργειαι μὲν καὶ δυνάμεις τῆς φύσεως–διὸ καὶ πάντα τὰ φυσικὰ παρὰ θεοῦ δεδωρημένα τῇ φύσει–, πάθη δέ, ὅτι πᾶσα κτίσις κτιστὴ παθητικῶς κινεῖται καὶ ἐνεργεῖ· μόνη δὲ ἡ θεία φύσις ἐστὶν ἀπαθής, ἀπαθῶς κινουμένη καὶ ἀκινήτως ἐνεργοῦσα. Ἔτι δὲ τινὲς μὲν αὐτῶν δοκοῦσι μᾶλλον εἶναι ἐνέργειαι, τινὲς δὲ πάθη· πρεπωδέστερον γὰρ εἰπεῖν τὴν ζωὴν μᾶλλον ἐνέργειαν, τὸν δὲ θάνατον καὶ τὴν τομὴν καὶ τὴν ῥεῦσιν πάθος. Ἡ μὲν οὖν τομὴ καὶ ἡ ῥεῦσις καὶ ἡ","english":"For the angel does not have a natural servant, nor is he naturally a master.\n\n17 Common to soul and body are those things which the soul imparts to the body: the vital power, the imaginative, that is, the perceptive or discerning power of sensible things, the sensitive power itself, namely the five senses—sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch—and further the memorative power and movement according to impulse, and the nutritive and augmentative power, and the irrational appetite, I mean anger and desire, hunger and thirst and fatigue and spittle, pleasure and pain and disgust, fear, cowardice and agony, distress, turmoil, sweat and death—for death is the separation of the soul from the body—and the whole economy of nourishment and growth. All these are irrational passions and energies: energies and powers of nature—wherefore all natural things were given by God to nature—but passions, because every created thing is moved and acts in a passible manner; only the divine nature is impassible, being moved impassibly and acting immovably. Further, some of these seem rather to be energies, others passions; for it is more fitting to call life an energy, but death and division and flux a passion. Division therefore and flux and the","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":31,"ref":"p31","source":"κατὰ ποιότητα μεταβολή, τουτέστι λεύκανσις, μέλανσις, ψύξις, θέρμανσις, νόσος καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα, πάθη εἰσίν, ὁμοίως καὶ ἡ τῶν μελῶν διοργάνωσις ἤτοι διάπλασις· ἡ μὲν γὰρ φύσις ἐνεργεῖ διοργανοῦσα καὶ διαπλάττουσα, πάσχει δὲ τὸ σῶμα διοργανούμενον. Φύσιν δὲ λέγω τὸν ἐξ ἀρχῆς παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ δοθέντα ἑκάστῳ εἴδει νόμον καὶ δύναμιν, καθ' ἣν κινεῖται ἢ ἠρεμεῖ. Κινεῖται μέν, πρὸς ἃς ἔχει δύναμιν ἐνεργείας νοῶν, λογιζόμενος, θέλων, αἰσθανόμενος, τόπους ἐκ τόπων ἀμείβων· τούτων γὰρ τὴν δύναμιν ἔχει παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ. Ἠρεμεῖ δὲ μὴ κινούμενος, πρὸς ἃς οὐκ ἔλαβε δύναμιν ἐνεργείας μὴ ἱστάμενος. Κινήσεις δέ εἰσι γένεσις καὶ φθορὰ καὶ ἀλλοίωσις, αὔξησις, μείωσις καὶ ἡ τοπικὴ κίνησις. Ἑξάτροπος δὲ αὕτη ἐστίν, ἔμπροσθεν, ὀπίσω, δεξιά, ἀριστερά, ἄνω, κάτω· καὶ πάντα δὲ τὰ λοιπὰ τὰ εἰρημένα κινήσεις εἰσίν· ἡ δὲ νόησις καὶ ἡ λογικὴ ὄρεξις ὅ τε διαλογισμὸς καὶ ἡ ζήτησις καὶ σκέψις καὶ βουλὴ καὶ κρίσις καὶ διάθεσις καὶ προαίρεσις γνώμη τε καὶ ἡ πρὸς τὴν χρῆσιν ὁρμὴ ἐνέργειαί εἰσιν. Δοκεῖ δὲ μᾶλλον ἡ νόησις εἶναι ἐνέργεια, ἡ δὲ ὄρεξις πάθος· πᾶν γὰρ ὀρεγόμενον πάσχει. Λέγομεν δὲ αὐτὴν λογικὴν ὄρεξιν τὴν ἐνέργειαν, διότι αὐτεξούσιός ἐστιν, ἐξουσιάζουσα τῶν ἀλόγων παθῶν καὶ κρίνουσα καὶ κυβερνῶσα καὶ χαλιναγωγοῦσα ταῦτα, θυμὸν καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν καὶ αἴσθησιν καὶ τὴν καθ' ὁρμὴν κίνησιν. Ταῦτα γὰρ ὑπήκοα καὶ ἐπιπειθῆ τῷ λόγῳ εἰσὶν ἄλογα πάθη· πέφυκε γὰρ πείθεσθαι τῷ λόγῳ καὶ ὑποτάσσεσθαι καὶ κινεῖσθαι, ὡς ἂν ὁ λόγος κελεύῃ ἐπὶ τῶν κατὰ φύσιν ἀνθρώπων.","english":"Change according to quality—that is, whitening, blackening, cooling, heating, disease, and the like—are passions; likewise the organization or formation of the members. For nature acts, organizing and forming, while the body is acted upon as it is organized. By nature I mean the law and power given from the beginning by the Creator to each species, according to which it is moved or at rest. It is moved toward the activities for which it has power: thinking, reasoning, willing, perceiving, changing from place to place; for it has the power for these from the Creator. It is at rest when it is not moved, not exerting itself toward activities for which it has not received power. Movements are generation and corruption and alteration, increase, decrease, and local motion. This is sixfold: forward, backward, right, left, up, down; and all the other things mentioned are movements. But thought and rational appetite, and deliberation and inquiry and consideration and counsel and judgment and disposition and choice and opinion, and the impulse toward use, are activities. Thought seems rather to be an activity, while appetite is a passion; for everything that desires is acted upon. We call it rational appetite—the activity—because it is self-determining, having authority over the irrational passions and judging and governing and bridling them: anger and desire and perception and the movement according to impulse. For these are obedient and subject to reason—irrational passions; for it is their nature to obey reason and be subordinated and moved as reason may command, in the case of natural human beings.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":32,"ref":"p32","source":"Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ταῦτα πάθη συστατικὰ τῆς ζῳώδους οὐσίας· ἄνευ γὰρ τούτων οὐκ ἔστι συστῆναι τὴν ζωήν. Ταῦτα δὲ εἰς ὑπηρεσίαν ἐδόθησαν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ, ἡ μὲν ἐπιθυμία πρὸς θεὸν καὶ τὰ αὐτοῦ θελήματα, ὁ δὲ θυμὸς κατὰ τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ πρὸς τὸ ἀνδρειοῦν τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν. Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἄλογος ὄρεξις πρὸς σύστασιν τῆς ζῳώδους οὐσίας δέδοται, ἡ δὲ λογικὴ καὶ αὐτεξούσιος, ὅπως αὐτεξουσίως χαλιναγωγήσῃ πᾶσαν φυσικὴν κίνησιν καὶ ὑποταγῇ καὶ ὑποτάξῃ τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ κτίσαντος. Συνέζευκται τοίνυν ἡ νόησις καὶ ἡ ὄρεξις ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, ὅπως μὴ ἀκουσίως πάσχωμεν τὰ τῶν ἀλόγων λογικοὶ ὄντες. Καὶ γὰρ ὁ νοῦς αὐτεξουσίως ὀρεγόμενος καὶ λογικῶς καὶ νοητικῶς ὀρεκτικῶς νοεῖ καὶ σκέπτεται καὶ ζητεῖ καὶ βουλεύεται καὶ διακρίνει καὶ διατίθεται πρὸς τὸ κριθὲν καὶ προαιρεῖται καὶ ὁρμᾷ πρὸς τὴν πρᾶξιν· φύσει γὰρ κατάρχει τοῦ ἀλόγου τὸ λογικόν. Εἰ οὖν ὡς λογικὸς πάσης ἀλόγου κτίσεως βασιλεὺς ἐδημιουργήθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος, πῶς οὐκ ἔσται τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ ἀλόγων παθῶν αὐτεξούσιος; Ὀρεκτικὸς οὖν καὶ λογικὸς καὶ νοητικὸς ὢν ὀρεκτικῶς νοεῖ καὶ λογίζεται καὶ λογικῶς καὶ νοητικῶς αὐτεξουσίως ὀρέγεται. Τῶν δὲ κοινῶν ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος τὸ μὲν ζωτικὸν ἐνέργεια μᾶλλόν ἐστι καὶ τὸ φανταστικὸν δὲ καὶ αἰσθητικὸν καὶ μνημονευτικὸν καὶ ἡ καθ' ὁρμὴν κίνησις παθητικαί εἰσιν ἐνέργειαι ἢ ἐνεργητικὰ πάθη, ὁ δὲ θυμὸς καὶ ἡ ἐπιθυμία πεῖνά τε καὶ δίψα, κόπος, φόβος, δειλία καὶ ἀγωνία, ἡδονή, λύπη, πτύελος καὶ ἱδρὼς τό τε θρεπτικὸν καὶ αὐξητικὸν καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσιν ὁ θάνατος πάθη εἰσίν.","english":"These things are also passions that are constitutive of the living being; for without these, life cannot be constituted. These were given to man for service by the Creator: desire, for God and His wills, and anger, against the devil and sin and for the strengthening of desire. The irrational appetite, then, has been given for the constitution of the living being, while the rational and self-determining appetite has been given so that, in a self-determining way, it may bridle every natural motion and be subject to and subject it to the law of the Creator. Therefore, understanding and appetite have been joined together in man, so that we, being rational, might not suffer the things of irrational animals involuntarily. For the mind, desiring in a self-determining way and rationally and intellectually, thinks and considers and seeks and deliberates and distinguishes and disposes itself toward what has been judged and chooses and sets out toward action in a desiring way; for by nature the rational begins before the irrational. If, then, man was created as rational, king of all irrational creation, how will he not be self-determining over the irrational passions within him? Being desiring and rational and intellectual, he thinks and reasons in a desiring way, and rationally and intellectually he desires in a self-determining way. Of the things common to soul and body, the vital faculty is rather an activity, while the imaginative and sensitive and memorative faculties and motion according to impulse are passive activities or active passions; and anger and desire, hunger and thirst, toil, fear, cowardice and agony, pleasure, grief, spittle and sweat, and the nutritive and augmentative faculties, and above all death, are passions.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":33,"ref":"p33","source":"Ταῦτα πάντα φυσικά εἰσι καὶ ἀδιάβλητα παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ τῇ φύσει τῶν ἀνθρώπων δεδωρημένα. Αὐτὸς γὰρ καὶ τὸ εἶναι καὶ τὸ οὕτως εἶναι ἐδωρήσατο, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἀνθρώπων οὐδείς, ὃς τούτων ἀμέτοχος γέγονε. Τὸ δὲ ἔχειν ταῦτα τὴν μὲν τοῦ δημιουργοῦ σοφίαν καὶ ἀρετὴν παρίστησιν, ἡμῖν δὲ οὔτε ἀρετὴ οὔτε κακία λογίζεται· καλὰ μὲν γάρ εἰσι καὶ ἐπ' ἀγαθῷ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ δεδωρημένα, ὁ δὲ τρόπος τῆς χρήσεως αὐτῶν ἀρετὴν καὶ κακίαν συνίστησιν. Ἂν μὲν γὰρ ὑποταγῇ τὸ θέλημα τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ κατὰ τὸν νόμον αὐτοῦ ὁ νοῦς κυβερνήσῃ τὰ ὑπήκοα αὐτῷ, πάσας φημὶ τὰς ψυχικὰς κινήσεις, κατ' ἐξαίρετον δὲ θυμὸν καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν–ταῦτα γὰρ ὑπήκοα τῷ λόγῳ–, ἀρετὴν εἰργασάμεθα καὶ δικαιοσύνην ἐπληρώσαμεν. Ἐπὶ τούτῳ γὰρ ἐλάβομεν τὴν τούτων ἐξουσίαν καὶ ὡς\n\nἐξουσίαν λαβόντες καὶ νόμον ἐδεξάμεθα καὶ ὑπὸ νόμον γεγόναμεν· τὰ γὰρ ἄλογα μὴ ἔχοντα τὸν ἡγεμόνα νοῦν τὸν αὐτεξούσιον θυμοῦ καὶ ἐπιθυμίας οὐκ ἔλαβε νόμον. Φύσει τοιγαροῦν τοῦ δημιουργοῦ δοῦλοι ὑπάρχοντες καὶ τὸ αὐτεξούσιον ἔχοντες, τὸ τῆς ἀρετῆς συστατικόν, –οὐ γὰρ ἀρετὴ οὐδὲ τερπνὸν τὸ βίᾳ γινόμενον–νόμον ἐλάβομεν, ὅπως ἐπιγνῶμεν, ὅτι δεσπότην ἔχομεν, –ἵνα μὴ ἐν σκότει διαπορευόμενοι βόθροις περιπέσωμεν· «λύχνος γὰρ τοῖς ποσί μου ὁ νόμος σου καὶ φῶς ταῖς τρίβοις μου», ἔφη Δαυὶδ ὁ προφήτης· –ὅπως γνωσθῇ ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς τὸν δεσπότην πόθος καὶ εὔνοια, –ὅπως τε τῷ θεῷ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ κοινωνήσωμεν, «ἵν' ᾖ τοῦ ἑλομένου τὸ ἀγαθὸν οὐχ ἧττον ἢ τοῦ παρασχόντος τὰ σπέρματα»· αὐτὸς γὰρ ἡμῖν τὴν δύναμιν τῆς ἀγαθοεργίας ἐδωρήσατο.","english":"All these things are natural and beyond reproach, given by the Creator to the nature of men. For He granted both being and being thus, and there is no man who has come to be without a share in these. That we have these things displays the wisdom and virtue of the Creator, but for us it is reckoned neither virtue nor vice; for they are good and were given for good by the Good, but the manner of their use constitutes virtue and vice. For if the will is subjected to the law of God, and the mind, according to His law, steers the things subject to it—I mean all the movements of the soul, and especially anger and desire (for these are subject to reason)—then we have wrought virtue and fulfilled righteousness. For it was for this that we received authority over these things, and\n\nhaving received authority, we also received a law and came under the law; for irrational creatures, not having the ruling mind that is self-determining, did not receive a law of anger and desire. Therefore, being by nature slaves of the Creator and having self-determination, which is what constitutes virtue (for nothing done by force is virtue or pleasant), we received a law, so that we might recognize that we have a Master—lest, walking in darkness, we fall into pits; \"for Your law is a lamp to my feet and a light to my paths,\" said David the prophet—so that our longing and good will toward the Master might be known, and so that we might share in the good things of God, \"that the good might be no less the choice of him who chooses than of Him who supplies the seeds\"; for He Himself has granted us the power of doing good.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":34,"ref":"p34","source":"Αὐτεξουσίους δὲ ἡμᾶς ἐποίησεν, ἵνα ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐξ ἡμῶν τὸ ἀγαθὸν γένοιτο· παντὶ γὰρ τῷ προαιρουμένῳ τὸ ἀγαθὸν ὁ θεὸς συνεργεῖ εἰς τὸ ἀγαθόν. –ὅπως τὸ κατὰ φύσιν φυλάξαντες τῶν ὑπὲρ φύσιν τύχωμεν, τῆς ἀφθαρσίας καὶ τῆς θεώσεως ἐκ τῆς πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἑνώσεως διὰ τῆς κατὰ δύναμιν τοῦ θελήματος πρὸς αὐτὸ ὁμοιώσεως· –ὅπως μὴ ταῖς φυσικαῖς δυνάμεσιν ἀλόγως χρώμενοι παρασυμβληθῶμεν τοῖς ἀνοήτοις κτήνεσι καὶ ὁμοιωθῶμεν αὐτοῖς. Εἰ γὰρ μὴ ὑποταγῇ ἡ θέλησις ἡμῶν τῷ θείῳ θελήματι, ἀλλὰ κατ' οἰκείαν γνώμην καὶ αἵρεσιν χρήσηται ὁ αὐτεξούσιος νοῦς θυμῷ καὶ ἐπιθυμίᾳ κακίαν εἰργάσατο· κακία γὰρ οὐδὲν ἕτερόν ἐστιν εἰ μὴ ἁμαρτία καὶ ἀποτυχία καὶ παρακοὴ τοῦ δεσποτικοῦ νόμου. Ὥστε τὸ αὐτεξούσιον πρῶτον ἀγαθὸν τῇ λογικῇ φύσει πρέπον, καὶ τὸ κεχρῆσθαι τῷ αὐτεξουσίῳ καὶ κατεξουσιάζειν καὶ κρατεῖν τῶν ἀλόγων παθῶν, θυμοῦ λέγω καὶ ἐπιθυμίας, ἀρετή, τὸ δὲ προδιδόναι τὸ αὐτεξούσιον καὶ ἡττᾶσθαι τοῖς ἀλόγοις πάθεσι καὶ ἀλόγως καὶ κτηνωδῶς βιοῦν, τοῦτο κακία, τοῦτο ἁμαρτία. –ἵνα μὴ ἀσχημονῶμεν τὰ τῶν ἀλόγων πράσσοντες, ἀλλ' ἐπέχωμεν λόγῳ τὰς ὁρμὰς τῆς φύσεως. Οὐ γὰρ πρέπει τῷ λογικῷ ἡ τῶν ἀλόγων πολιτεία, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον καὶ τοῖς ἀλόγοις πάθεσι λογικῶς κεχρῆσθαι καὶ λόγῳ ταῦτα ῥυθμίζειν καὶ κατ' ἐξουσίαν ἄγειν καὶ ἡνιοχεῖν καὶ ἄγεσθαι καὶ ὑπείκειν τῷ θείῳ νόμῳ καὶ τούτοις κεχρῆσθαι, καθὼς ὁ κύριος διετάξατο.","english":"He made us free in will, so that the good might come about both from Him and from us; for God works together with everyone who chooses the good, toward the good — so that, having kept what is according to nature, we might attain what is above nature: incorruption and deification, from our union with the divine, through the likeness to it of our will, as far as is possible — so that, not using our natural powers irrationally, we might not be compared to the senseless beasts and become like them. For if our will is not subjected to the divine will, but the free mind, by its own judgment and choice, uses anger and desire, it has wrought evil; for evil is nothing other than sin and failure and disobedience of the master's law. So that free will is the first good, fitting the rational nature, and to use free will and to have mastery over and to rule the irrational passions — I mean anger and desire — is virtue; but to betray free will and to be defeated by the irrational passions and to live irrationally and in a beastly manner, this is evil, this is sin — so that we may not be shameful, doing the things of the irrational beasts, but may check the impulses of nature by reason. For the conduct of the irrational beasts does not befit the rational being, but rather to use the irrational passions rationally and to regulate them by reason and to lead and drive them at will, and to be led and to yield to the divine law and to use them, just as the Lord ordained.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":35,"ref":"p35","source":"20 Εἰδέναι τοίνυν χρεών, ὡς ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων σύγχυσις ποιεῖ τοῖς αἱρετικοῖς τὴν πλάνην. Καθὼς οὖν τοῖς μονοφυσίταις, τοῖς ἀκεφάλοις φημί, τὸ ταυτὸν λέγειν φύσιν καὶ ὑπόστασιν αἴτιον γέγονε λέγειν ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ μίαν φύσιν, ἵνα μὴ εἰς δύο ὑποστάσεις τὸν Χριστὸν διέλωσιν, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοῖς Νεστορίου ὁμόφροσι τοῦ λέγειν δύο ὑποστάσεις, ἵνα μὴ τὰς δύο Χριστοῦ φύσεις εἰς μίαν συγχέωσιν, οὕτω καὶ τοῖς μονοθελήταις τὸ μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν διαφορὰν τοῦ φυσικοῦ καὶ τοῦ ὑποστατικοῦ θελήματος, τουτέστι τοῦ γνωμικοῦ, αἴτιον γέγονε τοῦ ἓν λέγειν ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ θέλημα. Ἵνα οὖν τὴν ἐκ τῆς ὁμωνυμίας διαφύγωμεν πλάνην, οὕτω τὸν περὶ τοῦ θελήματος ἀναπτύξωμεν λόγον. Τὸ θέλημα ὁμώνυμόν ἐστι. Ποτὲ μὲν γὰρ σημαίνει τὴν θέλησιν, τουτέστι τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν, ποτὲ δὲ αὐτὸ τὸ θελητόν, τὸ τῇ θελήσει ὑποκείμενον, τουτέστιν αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὅπερ τις θέλει. Ἄλλο δέ ἐστι θέλησις καὶ ἄλλο τὸ θελητόν, ὥσπερ ἄλλο ὅρασις καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ὁρατόν· ὅρασις μὲν γάρ ἐστιν αὐτὴ ἡ ὁρατικὴ δύναμις, καθ' ἣν ὁρῶμεν, ἡ ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ ἐνεργοῦσα, ὁρατὸν δὲ αὐτὸ τὸ ὁρώμενον πρᾶγμα, ἢ λίθος ἢ ξύλον ἤ τι τοιοῦτον. Οὕτω καὶ θέλησίς ἐστιν αὐτὴ ἡ θελητικὴ τῆς ψυχῆς δύναμις, καθ' ἣν θέλομεν, θελητὸν δὲ αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὅπερ τις θέλει. Οἷον θέλω πλεῦσαι, τὸ πλεῦσαι θελητόν ἐστι· θέλω γῆμαι, τὸ γῆμαι θελητόν ἐστιν. Πάντως δὲ τὸ θελητὸν ἢ ἐνέργειά ἐστι, τουτέστι πρᾶξις, ἢ πάθος. Ἴδωμεν τοίνυν, εἰ φυσική ἐστιν ἡ θέλησις ἢ ὑποστατική. Ἆρα πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὴν δύναμιν τὴν θελητικὴν ἢ οὔ;","english":"One must know, then, that the confusion of terms produces error in the heretics. Just as, therefore, for the Monophysites — I mean the Acephali — saying that nature and hypostasis are the same has been the cause of saying one nature in Christ, so that they might not divide Christ into two hypostases, and further also for those of like mind with Nestorius, saying two hypostases, so that they might not confuse the two natures of Christ into one, so also for the Monothelites, not knowing the difference between natural and hypostatic will — that is, the gnomic will — has been the cause of saying one will in Christ. In order, then, that we may escape the error that comes from equivocation, let us thus unfold the account concerning the will. The term \"will\" is equivocal. For sometimes it signifies the volition, that is, the volitive power, and sometimes the thing willed itself, that which is subject to the volition, that is, the very thing that someone wills. And volition is one thing and the thing willed another, just as sight is one thing and the visible another; for sight is the very visual power itself, according to which we see, the one operating in the eye, while the visible is the very thing seen, either a stone or wood or something of the sort. So also volition is the very volitive power of the soul itself, according to which we will, while the thing willed is the very thing that someone wills. For example, I will to sail — the sailing is the thing willed; I will to marry — the marrying is the thing willed. And the thing willed is altogether either an activity, that is, an action, or a passion. Let us see, then, whether the volition is natural or hypostatic. Does every human being have the volitive power, or not?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":36,"ref":"p36","source":"Δῆλον, ὡς πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὸ δύνασθαι θέλειν καὶ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὸ θέλειν· τίς γὰρ ἄνθρωπος\n\nγέγονεν, ὃς οὐκ ἠθέλησεν οὐδέν; Οὐ πᾶς δὲ ἄνθρωπος τὸ αὐτὸ θέλει, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν τόδε, ὁ δὲ τόδε, οὐδὲ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὡσαύτως θέλει, ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν καλῶς, ὁ δὲ κακῶς, ἕκαστος κατὰ τὴν οἰκείαν γνώμην. Ὥστε ἡ μὲν θέλησις, τουτέστιν ἡ θελητικὴ δύναμις καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ ἁπλῶς θέλειν, φυσικόν, τὸ δὲ θελητόν, τουτέστι τὸ τὶ θέλειν, γνωμικὸν καὶ ὑποστατικόν.\n\n23 Καὶ πάλιν· Τῶν ὁμωνύμων, ὡς εἴπομεν, ὂν τὸ θέλημα ποτὲ μὲν σημαίνει τὴν θέλησιν, ποτὲ δὲ τὸ θελητόν. Δεῖ γὰρ εἰδέναι, ὅτι ἄλλο ἐστὶ θέλησις καὶ ἄλλο τὸ θέλειν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ τὶ καὶ πῶς θέλειν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ θελητὸν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ θελητικὸν καὶ ἄλλο ὁ θέλων, ὥσπερ ἄλλο ὅρασις καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ὁρᾶν καὶ ἕτερον τὸ τὶ καὶ πῶς ὁρᾶν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ὁρατὸν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ὁρατικὸν καὶ ἕτερον ὁ ὁρῶν. Ὅρασις μὲν γάρ ἐστιν αὐτὴ ἡ ὁρατικὴ δύναμις τῆς ψυχῆς ἡ ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ ἐνεργοῦσα, καθ' ἣν ὁρῶμεν. Ὁρᾶν δέ ἐστι τὸ κεχρῆσθαι τῇ ὁρατικῇ δυνάμει καὶ ἐνεργεῖν καὶ βλέπειν· οὐδεὶς δὲ ὁρᾷ μὴ ἔχων ὅρασιν, τουτέστι δύναμιν τοῦ ὁρᾶν. Τὶ δὲ ὁρᾶν ἐστιν οὐρανὸν ὁρᾶν ἢ γῆν ἢ ἕτερόν τι. Ὅπως ὁρᾶν ἐστι καλῶς ἢ κακῶς. Ὁρατὸν δέ ἐστι τὸ ὑποκείμενον τῇ ὁράσει, τουτέστι τὸ ὁρώμενον σῶμα ἢ χρῶμα ἢ σχῆμα. Ὁρατικὸν δέ ἐστι τὸ ἔχον ἐκ φύσεως τὴν ὁρατικὴν δύναμιν, οἷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ φύσεως ἔχει τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ ὁρᾶν, κἂν κοιμᾶται, κἂν ἐτυφλώθη· ὁρατικὸν γὰρ ζῷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Ὁρῶν δέ ἐστιν ὁ κεχρημένος τῇ ὁράσει, τουτέστι τῇ ὁρατικῇ δυνάμει, καὶ ἐνεργῶν καὶ βλέπων.","english":"It is clear that every human being has the capacity to will, and every human being has the act of willing. For what human being has ever existed who willed nothing? But not every human being wills the same thing, but one this and another that; nor does every human being will in the same way, but one well and another badly, each according to his own judgment. So that the willing, that is, the volitive capacity and the simple act of willing itself, is natural; but the thing willed, that is, the willing of something specific, is a matter of judgment and hypostasis.\n\n23 And again: since \"will\" is, as we said, among homonyms, it sometimes signifies the willing and sometimes the thing willed. For one must know that one thing is the willing, another the act of willing, another the willing of something specific and how one wills, another the thing willed, another the volitive faculty, and another the one who wills — just as one thing is sight, another the act of seeing, another the seeing of something specific and how one sees, another the visible object, another the faculty of sight, and another the one who sees. For sight is the very volitive power of the soul — that is, the visual power — operating in the eye, by which we see. And to see is to use the visual power and to be active and to look; but no one sees without having sight, that is, the power of seeing. And to see something specific is to see heaven or earth or something else. To see how is to see well or badly. And the visible object is that which underlies sight, that is, the body or color or shape that is seen. And the faculty of sight is that which has the visual power by nature, as a human being has by nature the power of seeing, whether he is asleep or has been blinded; for the human being is an animal capable of sight. And the one who sees is he who uses sight, that is, the visual power, and is active and looks.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":37,"ref":"p37","source":"Οὕτω θέλησις μέν ἐστιν αὐτὴ ἡ θελητικὴ δύναμις ἡ τῇ ψυχῇ φυσικῶς δεδομένη παρὰ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ, τουτέστι τὸ δύνασθαι θέλειν. Θέλειν δέ ἐστι τὸ κεχρῆσθαι κατ' ἐνέργειαν τῇ θελητικῇ δυνάμει καὶ ὀρέγεσθαι· οὐδεὶς δὲ θέλει μὴ ἔχων θέλησιν, τουτέστι δύναμιν τοῦ θέλειν. Θελητὸν δέ ἐστι τὸ ὑποκείμενον τῇ θελήσει, αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὅπερ θέλομεν· οἷον θέλω πλεῦσαι, τὸ πλεῦσαι θελητόν ἐστιν, θέλω σωφρονῆσαι, τὸ σωφρονῆσαι θελητόν ἐστιν. Ἀθέλητον δέ ἐστιν, ὅπερ τις οὐ θέλει, ὥσπερ ἀόρατον, ὅπερ τις οὐχ ὁρᾷ. Τὶ δὲ θέλειν ἐστὶν ἑνωθῆναι θεῷ θέλειν, θέλειν φαγεῖν, θέλειν πιεῖν, θέλειν πλεῦσαι, θέλειν συναφθῆναι γυναικί. Πῶς δὲ θέλειν ἐστὶ καλῶς θελῆσαι, ἤγουν θελῆσαι καλῶς καὶ κατὰ νόμον θεοῦ τῇ ἰδίᾳ γυναικὶ μιγῆναι ἢ κακῶς καὶ παρὰ τὸν νόμον τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλοτρίᾳ. Θελητικὸν δέ ἐστι τὸ ἔχον ἐκ φύσεως τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν, οἷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ὁ ἄγγελος, ὁ θεός. Ἕκαστος γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐκ φύσεως ἔχει τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν· καὶ γὰρ ἑκάστη τῶν τῆς θεότητος ὑποστάσεων θέλει καὶ ἑκάστη ὑπόστασις ἀγγέλων θέλει καὶ ἑκάστη ὑπόστασις ἀνθρώπων θέλει. Ὅπερ δὲ ἑκάστη ὑπόστασις ἔχει, φυσικόν ἐστι· φυσικὸν γάρ ἐστι τὸ ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ὁμοειδέσι καὶ ὁμοουσίοις ὑποστάσεσι θεωρούμενον. Θέλων δέ ἐστιν ὁ κεχρημένος τῇ θελήσει, τουτέστι τῇ θελητικῇ δυνάμει, καὶ ὀρεγόμενος ἤγουν ὑπόστασις.","english":"Thus will is the very faculty of willing, naturally given to the soul by the Creator, that is, the power to will. And willing is the actual exercise of the faculty of willing and the desiring; but no one wills without having a will, that is, the power of willing. And a thing willed is the subject of the will, the very thing itself which we will; for example, I will to sail—the sailing is a thing willed; I will to be chaste—the being chaste is a thing willed. And a thing not willed is what someone does not will, just as a thing unseen is what someone does not see. And to will is in one case to will to be united to God, to will to eat, to will to drink, to will to sail, to will to be joined to a woman. And to will is in one way to will well, that is, to will to have intercourse with one's own wife well and according to the law of God, or badly and contrary to the law of God with another's. And that which is capable of willing is what has the faculty of willing by nature, such as man, the angel, God. For each of these has the faculty of willing by nature; for each of the hypostases of the Godhead wills, and each hypostasis of angels wills, and each hypostasis of human beings wills. And what each hypostasis has is natural; for that is natural which is observed in all hypostases of the same kind and the same essence. And one who wills is the one who exercises the will, that is, the faculty of willing, and desires—that is, a hypostasis.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":38,"ref":"p38","source":"24 Τὸ οὖν θέλημα ποτὲ μὲν σημαίνει τὴν θέλησιν, τουτέστι τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν, ποτὲ δὲ τὸ θελητόν, τουτέστιν αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὅπερ θέλομεν· ἡ μὲν οὖν θέλησις φυσικὴ καὶ τὸ ἁπλῶς θέλειν φυσικόν. Πᾶς γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θέλειν καὶ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος θέλει, τουτέστι κέχρηται τῇ θελήσει· θελητικὸν γὰρ ζῷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Τὸ δὲ θελητὸν οὐ φυσικὸν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ γνωμικὸν καὶ ὑποστατικόν. Ἀλλ' οὐ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὡσαύτως θέλει οὐδὲ τὸ αὐτό· ὥστε τὸ πῶς θέλειν, καλῶς ἢ κακῶς, ἢ τὸ τὶ θέλειν, τόδε ἢ ἐκεῖνο, οὐ φυσικόν, ἀλλὰ γνωμικὸν καὶ ὑποστατικὸν ἐπί τε ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων. Ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς ἁγίας καὶ ἀδιαιρέτου τριάδος μία τῶν τριῶν ὑποστάσεων φυσικὴ θέλησις καὶ ἓν φυσικὸν τὸ ἀγαθόν, καὶ οὐχ ἑκάστη ὑπόστασις ἴδιον ἔχει θελητὸν οὐδὲ ἰδίαν κίνησιν, ἀλλὰ μία κίνησις καὶ ἓν θελητὸν τῶν τριῶν ὑποστάσεων· διὸ οὐ τρεῖς θεοί, ἀλλὰ εἷς θεὸς αἱ τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις, εἷς θεὸς μετὰ τῶν\n\nἑαυτοῦ δυνάμεων, ἀλλ' οὐ σύνθετος. Ἑκάστη γὰρ αὐτῶν θεὸς τέλειος καὶ τελεία ὑπόστασις· σύνθεσις δὲ φύσεως ἐξ ὑποστάσεως οὐ γίνεται, καὶ ξένον τοῦτο παντελῶς καὶ μόνον πρέπον θεῷ. Ἐπὶ δὲ ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων οὐχ οὕτως· μία μὲν γάρ ἐστιν ἡ θέλησις τῶν ἀγγέλων, ἡ παρὰ θεοῦ δοθεῖσα αὐτοῖς φυσικὴ τοῦ θέλειν δύναμις. Ἕκαστος γὰρ ἄγγελος θέλει καὶ ἕκαστος ἄνθρωπος θέλει, οὐ μία δὲ κίνησις πάντων τῶν ἀγγέλων οὔτε μὴν πάντων τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ' ἑκάστη ὑπόστασις ἰδίαν ἔχει κίνησιν καὶ ἴδιον θελητόν·","english":"The term \"will\" (thelēma) sometimes signifies the faculty of willing, that is, the power of willing, and sometimes the object willed, that is, the very thing that we will. The faculty of willing, then, is natural, and simple willing is natural. For every human being has the power of willing, and every human being wills, that is, exercises the will; for man is a willing creature. But the object willed is not only natural, but also a matter of judgment (gnōmikon) and hypostatic. Yet not every human being wills in the same way, nor the same thing; so that the \"how\" of willing—well or badly—or the \"what\" of willing—this or that—is not natural, but a matter of judgment and hypostatic, both in angels and in human beings. For in the holy and undivided Trinity there is one natural will of the three hypostases, and one natural good, and each hypostasis does not have its own object willed nor its own motion, but there is one motion and one object willed of the three hypostases; therefore there are not three Gods, but one God, the three hypostases, one God with his own powers, but not composite. For each of them is perfect God and a perfect hypostasis; and a composition of nature out of a hypostasis does not occur, and this is altogether foreign and alone fitting to God. But in the case of angels and human beings it is not so; for the faculty of willing is one for the angels, the natural power of willing given to them by God. For each angel wills and each human being wills, but there is not one motion of all the angels, nor indeed of all human beings, but each hypostasis has its own motion and its own object willed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":39,"ref":"p39","source":"οὐχ ὁμοίως γὰρ θέλουσι πᾶσαι αἱ ὑποστάσεις τῶν ἀγγέλων οὐδὲ τὸ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ αἱ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ' ἡ μὲν καλῶς, ἡ δὲ κακῶς, καὶ ἡ μὲν τόδε, ἡ δὲ τόδε, καὶ τοῦδε κινουμένου καὶ θέλοντος οὐ συγκινεῖται καὶ συνθέλει ὁ ἕτερος. Ὥστε ἐπὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων ἡ μὲν θέλησις φυσική ἐστιν, ὁμοίως καὶ τὸ θέλειν φυσικόν. Πᾶς γὰρ ἄνθρωπος θελητικός ἐστιν καὶ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος θέλει, οὐ πᾶς δὲ ἄνθρωπος τοῦ αὐτοῦ πράγματός ἐστι θελητικὸς οὐδὲ τὸ αὐτὸ θέλει. Ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος αἱ τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις ἐν ἀλλήλαις εἰσί, καὶ ὁ λόγος καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα δυνάμεις εἰσὶ τοῦ πατρός, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο μία κίνησις καὶ ὡσαύτως καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ θελητόν. Οἱ δὲ ἄγγελοι καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἕκαστος ἀποτετμημένην καὶ ἰδιαίρετον ἔχει τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ὑπόστασιν, εἰ καὶ μιᾶς εἰσι φύσεως· διὰ τοῦτο ἡ μὲν δύναμις τοῦ θέλειν καὶ τὸ θέλειν ἓν καὶ φυσικόν, τὸ δὲ πῶς καὶ τὸ τὶ θέλειν ὑποστατικὸν καὶ γνωμικόν. Καὶ μία μὲν αὐτῶν θελητικὴ φύσις, πολλοὶ δὲ θέλοντες, διαφόρως καὶ ἄλλο καὶ ἄλλο θέλοντες. Θέλησις τοίνυν ἐστὶν ὄρεξις ζωτική τε καὶ λογική· ἡ δὲ ζωτική, πάντως καὶ αἰσθητική. Τὰ μὲν οὖν ἄλογα αἰσθητικῶς ὀρέγεται, ἀλλ' οὐ λογικῶς οὐδὲ αὐτεξουσίως· ὁ δὲ ἄνθρωπος ζῷον ὑπάρχων λογικὸν ὡς μὲν ζῷον ζωτικῶς καὶ αἰσθητικῶς ὀρέγεται, ὡς δὲ λογικὸς λογικῶς καὶ αὐτεξουσίως. Θέλησις οὖν ἐστι φυσικὴ ὄρεξις λογική τε καὶ ζωτική, μόνων ἠρτημένη τῶν φυσικῶν. Φυσικὰ δὲ θελήματά εἰσι πρῶτον τὸ ὑποτάσσεσθαι τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ θεοῦ–φύσει γὰρ δοῦλος θεοῦ καὶ ὑποχείριος ὁ ἄνθρωπος–, ἔπειτα καὶ τὰ τῆς φύσεως συστατικά, οἷον πεῖνα, δίψα, ὕπνος καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα·","english":"For the hypostases of the angels do not all will in the same way, nor do they will the same thing, nor do those of men; but one wills well and another badly, and one this and another that, and when one is moved and wills, the other is not moved together with him nor wills together with him. So in the case of angels and men, the willing (thelēsis) is natural, and likewise the act of willing is natural. For every man is capable of willing, and every man wills, but not every man is capable of willing the same thing, nor does he will the same thing. For in the case of the Holy Trinity, the three hypostases are in one another, and the Word and the Spirit are powers of the Father, and for this reason there is one motion and likewise one and the same object willed. But angels and men each have their own hypostasis separated and individually distinct, even if they are of one nature; for this reason the faculty of willing and the act of willing are one and natural, but the how and the what one wills are hypostatic and a matter of judgment (gnōmikon). And their nature is one capable of willing, but there are many who will, willing differently and different things. Willing, then, is a living and rational appetite; and the living appetite is certainly also sensitive. Irrational creatures, then, desire sensitively, but not rationally nor by self-determination; but man, being a rational living being, as a living being desires in a living and sensitive way, and as rational, rationally and by self-determination. Willing, then, is a natural appetite, rational and living, dependent only on natural things. And the natural acts of will are, first, to be subject to the law of God—for by nature man is a slave of God and subject to him—and then also the constituents of nature, such as hunger, thirst, sleep, and the like.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":40,"ref":"p40","source":"ὑποστατικὴ δὲ καὶ γνωμικὴ θέλησις ὄρεξις καθ' ἡδονὴν καὶ κατ' οἰκείαν γνώμην τῆς κεχρημένης ὑποστάσεως καὶ οὐ κατὰ νόμον θεοῦ καὶ τρόπος χρήσεως τῆς φυσικῆς θελήσεως κατὰ γνώμην τῆς κεχρημένης ὑποστάσεως. Τὸ οὖν ἀποτετμημένον τῶν ὑποστάσεων διάφορον τὴν γνώμην ἐργάζεται. Ἀλλά φασιν, ὡς ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἔχει φυσικὸν θέλημα. Λέγουσι δὲ δύο μόνα εἶναι θελήματα, τὸ ἓν τὸ θεῖον, τὸ ἀγαθόν, τὸ δὲ ἕτερον τὸ πονηρόν, τὸ διαβολικόν· καὶ πηνίκα μὲν τὸ ἀγαθὸν θελήσει ὁ ἄνθρωπος, τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἔσχε θέλημα, ἡνίκα δὲ τὸ πονηρόν, τὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. Ἀλλ' ἀγνοοῦσιν, ὡς ἀδύνατον οἱανοῦν φύσιν χρήσασθαι πράξει, ἧς τὴν δύναμιν οὐ κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβεν. Οἷον οὐ δύναται τὸ πτηνὸν μὴ κατὰ φύσιν λαβὸν τὴν τοῦ πέτασθαι δύναμιν πτῆναι, ὁμοίως οὐδὲ τὸ χερσαῖον βαδίζειν, εἰ μὴ τὴν βαδιστικὴν κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβε δύναμιν. Οὕτω δὴ καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὐ δύναται νοεῖν, εἰ μὴ τὴν νόησιν κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβεν, οὐδὲ λαλεῖν, εἰ μὴ τὴν λαλητικὴν κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβε δύναμιν, ὁμοίως οὐδὲ ὁρᾶν οὐδὲ θέλειν, εἰ μὴ φυσικῶς τὴν θελητικὴν ἔλαβε δύναμιν. Δεῖ οὖν πρῶτον φύσει ἔχειν τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θέλειν, ὅπερ ἐστὶ θέλησις, καὶ οὕτω θέλειν.","english":"But a hypostatic and gnomic will is a desire according to pleasure and according to the personal judgment of the hypostasis that uses it, and not according to the law of God, and a mode of using the natural will according to the judgment of the hypostasis that uses it. Therefore that which is cut off from the hypostases produces a difference of judgment. But they say that man does not have a natural will. And they say that there are only two wills, the one divine, the good, and the other evil, the diabolical; and whenever man wills the good, he has the will of God, and whenever he wills the evil, the will of the devil. But they are ignorant that it is impossible for any nature whatsoever to use an action whose power it did not receive according to nature. For example, a winged creature cannot fly if it did not receive the power of flying according to nature, nor likewise can a land animal walk unless it received the power of walking according to nature. So indeed man also cannot think unless he received thought according to nature, nor speak unless he received the power of speaking according to nature, nor likewise see or will unless he received the power of willing naturally. It is necessary, then, first to have by nature the power of willing, which is will, and thus to will.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":41,"ref":"p41","source":"Διὸ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐπειδὴ δύο φύσεις, δύο φυσικαὶ θελήσεις, ἵνα ᾖ θεὸς τέλειος καὶ ἄνθρωπος τέλειος μηδὲν λείπων τῶν τῆς θεότητος ἰδιωμάτων μήτε μὴν τῶν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, καὶ δύο θέλειν καὶ διαφόρως θέλειν κατὰ τὴν φυσικὴν διαφοράν, θείως καὶ παντοδυνάμως–παντοδύναμον γὰρ τὸ θεῖον θέλημα– καὶ οὐ παντοδυνάμως, ἀλλ' ἀσθενῶς καὶ παθητικῶς–παθητικὸν γὰρ καὶ ἀσθενὲς τὸ ἀνθρώπινον θέλημα–καὶ ἄλλο μὲν καὶ ἄλλο φυσικὸν θελητόν. Οὐ γὰρ τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος θελήματα καὶ τῆς θεότητός εἰσι θελητά· φύσει γὰρ θελητικὴ καὶ\n\nὀρεκτικὴ ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη φύσις βρώσεως καὶ πόσεως καὶ ὕπνου καὶ τῶν τοιούτων, ἀλλ' οὐχ ἡ θεότης τούτων ὀρεκτική. Οὐκ αὐτὴ γὰρ τούτων ὀρέγεται, εἰ καὶ θέλει τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην φύσιν τούτων ὀρέγεσθαι φυσικῶς καὶ ὡς ὤφειλε καὶ ὅτε. Κατὰ μὲν οὖν τὴν φυσικὴν διαφορὰν δύο θελήματα ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἐναντία. Οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐναντίον τῷ θείῳ θελήματι τὸ φυσικὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου θέλημα οὔτε ἡ φυσικὴ θελητικὴ δύναμις οὔτε τὰ φυσικῶς αὐτῇ ὑποκείμενα οὔτε ἡ φυσικὴ χρῆσις τῆς θελήσεως· πάντων γὰρ τῶν φυσικῶν τὸ θεῖον θέλημα δημιουργόν. Τὰ δὲ παρὰ φύσιν μόνα ἐστὶν ἐναντία τῷ θείῳ θελήματι, ὅπερ ἐστὶν ἡ κατ' οἰκείαν γνώμην καὶ ἁμαρτητικῶν ἡδονῶν ὄρεξις, τουτέστιν ἡ ἁμαρτία. Ταύτην ὁ κύριος οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν·","english":"Therefore in our Lord Jesus Christ, since there are two natures, there are two natural wills, so that he may be perfect God and perfect man, lacking nothing of the properties of divinity nor indeed of those of humanity, and so that he wills two things and wills them differently according to the natural difference—divinely and with all power (for the divine will is all-powerful)—and not with all power, but weakly and passively (for the human will is passive and weak)—and one natural object of will is one thing and another is another. For the objects of will of humanity are not the same as those of divinity; for the human nature is by nature willing and desiring food and drink and sleep and such things, but the divinity is not desirous of these. For it does not itself desire these, even if it wills that the human nature desire them naturally and as it ought and when. According to the natural difference, then, the two wills in our Lord Jesus Christ are not contrary. For neither the natural will of man nor the natural faculty of willing nor the things naturally subject to it nor the natural use of the will is contrary to the divine will; for the divine will is the creator of all natural things. Only the things contrary to nature are contrary to the divine will, which is the desire according to one's own judgment and of sinful pleasures, that is, sin. This the Lord did not assume.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":42,"ref":"p42","source":"«Ἁμαρτίαν γὰρ οὐκ ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ.» Ἐπειδὴ δὲ μία τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὑπόστασις καὶ εἷς ὁ Χριστός, εἷς ὁ θέλων κατ' ἄμφω τὰς φύσεις, ὡς θεὸς εὐδοκῶν καὶ ὡς ἄνθρωπος ὑπήκοος γενόμενος, εὐδοκῶν ὡς θεὸς σὺν πατρὶ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ πατρικῷ καὶ θείῳ θελήματι, ὡς ἄνθρωπος δὲ ὑπήκοος γενόμενος τοῦ θείου καὶ πατρικοῦ αὐτοῦ θελήματος τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θελήματι. Οὐ γὰρ κατὰ τὸ θεῖον αὐτοῦ θέλημα γέγονεν ὑπήκοος τῷ πατρί· τὸ γὰρ θεῖον θέλημα οὔτε ὑπήκοον οὔτε παρήκοον. «Ταῦτα γὰρ τῶν ὑπὸ χεῖρα», ὥς φησιν ὁ θεολόγος Γρηγόριος, καὶ τῆς τοῦ δούλου μορφῆς τοῦ ἐξ ἡμῶν προσλήμματος. Γέγονε δὲ ὑπήκοος φυσικῶς κατὰ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα· ὑπακοὴ γὰρ αὐτεξούσιος καὶ ἀβίαστος ὑποταγὴ θελήματός ἐστιν ἑτέρῳ θελήματι. Ἤθελε τοίνυν καὶ θέλει ὡς θεὸς τὰ θεῖα καὶ ἤθελε καὶ θέλει ὡς ἄνθρωπος τὰ ἀνθρώπινα οὐκ ἐναντιότητι γνώμης, ἀλλ' ἰδιότητι τῶν φύσεων. Ἤθελε γὰρ καὶ θέλει τὰ ἀνθρώπινα, ὡς ηὐδόκει ἡ θεία αὐτοῦ θέλησις καὶ ὅτε καὶ ὅπερ, αὐτεξουσίως ὑποτασσομένης τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης αὐτοῦ θελήσεως τῇ θείᾳ αὐτοῦ θελήσει. «Θέλησις μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἐνέργεια θεοῦ ἐστι» κατὰ τὸν μακάριον Εἰρηναῖον «παντὸς χρόνου καὶ τόπου καὶ αἰῶνος καὶ πάσης φύσεως ποιητική τε καὶ προνοητικὴ αἰτία», «θέλησις δὲ ἀνθρωπίνη ἐστὶ φυσικὴ δύναμις τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν ὄντος ὀρεκτικὴ καὶ τῶν οὐσιωδῶς τῇ φύσει προσόντων συνεκτική· ἡ μὲν γὰρ οὐσία τοῦ τε εἶναι καὶ ζῆν καὶ κινεῖσθαι κατ' αἴσθησίν τε καὶ νοῦν ὀρέγεται τῆς οἰκείας ἐφιεμένη φυσικῆς καὶ πλήρους ὀντότητος.","english":"For he committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. But since there is one hypostasis of Christ and one Christ, there is one who wills in accordance with both natures, as God being well-pleased and as man having become obedient—being well-pleased as God together with the Father and the Father's Spirit and divine will, but as man having become obedient to his own divine and paternal will by our will. For it was not according to his divine will that he became obedient to the Father; for the divine will is neither obedient nor subject to another. For these things belong to what is under the hand, as Gregory the Theologian says, and to the form of the servant which was taken from us. But he became obedient naturally according to his human will; for obedience is a self-determined and unforced subjection of one will to another will. He willed therefore and wills as God the divine things, and he willed and wills as man the human things, not by opposition of judgment, but by the distinctness of the natures. For he willed and wills the human things as his divine will was well-pleased, both when and what, his human will being self-determinedly subjected to his divine will. For will and energy are of God, according to the blessed Irenaeus, the creative and providential cause of every time and place and age and every nature; and human will is the natural power of that which exists according to nature, desiring and holding together the things that essentially belong to nature; for the essence desires both to be and to live and to be moved according to sense and mind, striving after its own natural and full reality.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":43,"ref":"p43","source":"Θελητικὴ γὰρ ἑαυτῆς ἐστιν ἡ φύσις καὶ πάντων τῶν συστατικῶν αὐτῆς τῷ τοῦ εἶναι λόγῳ, καθ' ὃν ἔστι τε καὶ γέγονεν ὀρεκτικῶς ἐπηρτημένη. Διόπερ ἕτεροι τοῦτο τὸ φυσικὸν ὁριζόμενοι θέλημά φασι· Θέλημά ἐστι φυσικόν, ὄρεξις λογική τε καὶ ζωτική», μόνων ἠρτημένη τῶν φυσικῶν. «Θέλησις τοίνυν ἐστὶ» κατὰ τὸν μακάριον Κλήμεντα «δύναμις τοῦ κυρίως ὄντος ὀρεκτική», καὶ πάλιν «ὄρεξις τῇ τοῦ λογικοῦ φύσει κατάλληλος», καὶ πάλιν «αὐτοκράτορος νοῦ κίνησις αὐτεξούσιος.» Ἐν ἀρχῇ γὰρ πλάσας ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον «ἐποίησεν αὐτὸν φύσιν ἀναμάρτητον, καὶ θέλησιν αὐτεξούσιον», καθώς φησιν ὁ ἱερὸς Ἀθανάσιος. Καὶ φύσις μὲν ἀναμάρτητος πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις λογική τε καὶ ἄλογος, αἰσθητὴ καὶ ἀναίσθητος καὶ ἄζωος, ἀλλ' οὐ πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις θέλησις αὐτεξούσιος. Καὶ ἡ θεία φύσις ἀναμάρτητος καὶ αὐτεξούσιος θέλησις, ἀλλ' οὐ τρεπτή, ἀλλ' ἄτρεπτος. Ἡ μὲν οὖν θεία φύσις θελητικὴ καὶ αὐτεξούσιος καὶ ἀναμάρτητος καὶ ἄτρεπτος. Πᾶσα δὲ ἡ κτίσις ἀναμάρτητος παρὰ θεοῦ ἐγένετο– «πάντα γάρ, ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ θεός, καλὰ λίαν»–, ἀλλὰ τρεπτή. Ὧν γὰρ ἡ γένεσις ἀπὸ τροπῆς ἤρξατο, τρεπτὰ κατὰ φύσιν ἐστί· τροπὴ δέ ἐστιν ἡ ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ εἶναι παραγωγή. Εἰ οὖν τὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλημα, ποίῳ θελήματι γέγονεν τῷ πατρὶ ὑπήκοος; Εἰ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλημα, ποίῳ θελήματι ὑπὸ νόμον γέγονεν; Εἰ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλημα, ποίῳ θελήματι ἐπλήρωσε πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην; Ὅτι μὲν γὰρ πᾶσαν ἀρετὴν μετῆλθε καὶ πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην, ἄκουε αὐτοῦ","english":"For nature is volitive of itself and of all its constituent parts by the principle of its being, according to which it both is and has come to be, being appetitively attached. Therefore others, defining this natural will, say: Natural will is a rational and living appetite, attached to natural things alone. \"Will, then,\" according to the blessed Clement, \"is a power appetitive of that which properly is,\" and again \"an appetite suited to the nature of the rational,\" and again \"a self-determining motion of a sovereign mind.\" For in the beginning, when God formed man, \"he made him a nature without sin, and a will self-determining,\" as the holy Athanasius says. And every nature without sin is the whole creation, both rational and irrational, sensible and insensible and lifeless, but not the whole creation is a self-determining will. And the divine nature is a will without sin and self-determining, but not changeable, but unchangeable. The divine nature, then, is volitive and self-determining and without sin and unchangeable. But all creation was made without sin by God—\"for all things, whatsoever God made, are very good\"—but it is changeable. For those things whose generation began from change are changeable by nature; and change is the production from non-being into being. If, then, he did not assume the human will, by what will did he become obedient to the Father? If he did not assume the human will, by what will did he become under the law? If he did not assume the human will, by what will did he fulfill all righteousness? For that he pursued every virtue and all righteousness, hear him","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":44,"ref":"p44","source":"πρὸς Ἰωάννην τὸν βαπτιστὴν λέγοντος· «Ἄφες ἄρτι· οὕτω γὰρ πρέπον ἡμῖν ἐστι πληρῶσαι πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην.» Ἀρετὴν μὲν γὰρ πᾶσαν καὶ δικαιοσύνην ἐπλήρωσεν, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀρετῆς προέκοπτεν, ἀλλ' ἐξ ἄκρας ἑνώσεως τέλειος ἦν· οὐ γὰρ ὢν ἄνθρωπος γέγονε θεός, ἀλλὰ θεὸς ὢν τέλειος γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος τέλειος. Εἰ ἀνθρώπινον οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλημα, οὐ γέγονεν τέλειος ἄνθρωπος. Εἰ ἀνθρώπινον οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλημα, τὸ πρωτοπαθῆσαν ἐν ἡμῖν οὐκ ἰάσατο. «Τὸ γὰρ ἀπρόσληπτον ἀθεράπευτον», ὡς ὁ θεολόγος ἔφη Γρηγόριος. Τί γὰρ τὸ πταῖσαν εἰ μὴ τὸ θέλημα; Τί τὸ ἁμαρτῆσαν εἰ μὴ τὸ θέλημα; Ὅπερ οὖν ἔπταισεν, ὅπερ ἥμαρτεν, αὐτὸ μᾶλλον ἐδεῖτο τῆς θεραπείας. Εἰ δὲ λέγεις, ὅτι τὸ ἁμαρτῆσαν οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν, οὐδὲ τὴν ἁμαρτήσασαν καὶ νοσήσασαν φύσιν ἀνέλαβεν. Εἰ δὲ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν, οὐδὲ τὴν φύσιν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος· αὕτη γὰρ ἥμαρτεν. Εἰ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλημα, πῶς «πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι καλὸν καὶ πονηρόν, ἀπειθεῖ πονηρίᾳ τοῦ ἐκλέξασθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν»; Οὐ γὰρ τὸ θεῖον θέλημα ἀπειθεῖ ἢ πείθεται ἢ ἐκλέγεται. Ἀπειθεῖ τοίνυν πονηρίᾳ καὶ ἐκλέγεται τὸ ἀγαθὸν ὑπακούων αὐτεξουσίως ὡς ἄνθρωπος τῷ πατρικῷ θελήματι· ἡ γὰρ ἐκλογὴ αὐτεξουσίου θελήματος, ἀλλ' οὐ καθ' ἡμᾶς βουλευόμενος καὶ κρίνων καὶ ἀμφότερα τὰ ἐναντία, ἀρετήν φημι καὶ κακίαν, λογιζόμενος καὶ ἐν γνώσει τούτων γινόμενος, ἀλλὰ μόνου τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, ὅπερ ἐστὶν ἡ τοῦ θείου θελήματος εὐδοκία, καὶ οὕτω τὸ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ ἀπέτισεν ὄφλημα. Διὰ τοῦτο εἶπε·","english":"saying to John the Baptist: \"Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becomes us to fulfill all righteousness.\" For he fulfilled all virtue and righteousness, but he did not advance from works nor from virtue, but was perfect from the very union; for he did not become God by being man, but being perfect God he became perfect man. If he did not assume a human will, he did not become perfect man. If he did not assume a human will, he did not heal that which first suffered in us. \"For that which is not assumed is not healed,\" as Gregory the Theologian said. For what is it that stumbled if not the will? What is it that sinned if not the will? Therefore that very thing which stumbled, which sinned, stood in greater need of healing. But if you say that he did not assume that which sinned, neither did he assume the nature that sinned and was sick. And if he did not assume this, neither did he assume the nature of humanity; for this is what sinned. If he did not assume a human will, how is it that \"before he knew good and evil, he disobeys evil by choosing the good\"? For the divine will does not disobey nor obey nor choose. Therefore he disobeys evil and chooses the good, obeying of his own free will as a man the Father's will; for the choice belongs to a free will, but not deliberating and judging as we do, and reckoning both of the opposites—I mean virtue and vice—and coming to the knowledge of them, but of the good alone, which is the good pleasure of the divine will, and thus he paid the debt of Adam. Therefore he said:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":45,"ref":"p45","source":"«Πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι καλὸν καὶ πονηρόν·» οὐ γὰρ ἔγνω ἢ ἐλογίσατο πονηρὸν ὁ ἐνανθρωπήσας θεὸς λόγος διὰ τὴν καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἕνωσιν· οὐκ ἐπαμφοτερίζοντα ἢ διστάζοντα εἶχε τὸν λογισμόν, ἀλλ' αὐτὸς ὢν ὁ εἷς Χριστὸς τοῦτο κἀκεῖνο, τουτέστι θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος, ἐκέχρητο τοῖς ἀνθρωπίνοις αὐτοῦ, τουτέστι πᾶσι τοῖς φυσικοῖς τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, πρὸς ὑπακοὴν τοῦ πατρικοῦ καὶ θείου αὐτοῦ θελήματος. Εἰ τὴν δι' ἀγγέλων βοήθειαν κατεδέξατο–φησὶ γάρ· «Καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος ἐνίσχυσεν αὐτόν», ὅς ἐστι νόμος τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως–, τὸ θέλημα οὐκ ἀνέλαβε; Φησὶ γάρ, ὅτι «τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ ἐντελεῖται περὶ σοῦ, καὶ ἐπὶ χειρῶν ἀροῦσί σε.» Εἰ τὴν ἐγκατάλειψιν κατεδέξατο, τὸ θέλημα οὐκ ἀνέλαβε; Φησὶ γάρ· «Ἐλωΐ, ἐλωΐ, λιμᾶς ἀβαχθανή; τουτέστι· Θέε μου, θέε μου, ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες;» Παρέδωκε γὰρ ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τὸν μονογενῆ αὐτοῦ υἱὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν εἰς θάνατον γενόμενον ἄνθρωπον· οὐκ ἐγκατελείφθη μὲν γὰρ ἡ σὰρξ αὐτοῦ οὐδὲ ἐχωρίσθη τῆς θεότητος αὐτοῦ οὐδὲ εἶδε διαφθορὰν οὐδὲ ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐγκατελείφθη εἰς ᾅδου, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐφείσατο ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ ἰδίου υἱοῦ, ἀλλ' ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν εἰς ὕβρεις καὶ ἀτιμίας καὶ πάθη ἀδιάβλητα καὶ ἀναμάρτητα καὶ εἰς θάνατον. Διὸ τῇ πατρικῇ εὐδοκίᾳ ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου γενόμενος καὶ αἰσχύνης καταφρονήσας δόξῃ καὶ ἀφθαρσίας τιμῇ τὴν φύσιν ἡμῶν ἐστεφάνωσεν. Εἰ οἱ μίαν φύσιν ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ ὁμολογοῦντες σύνθετον καὶ τὰς δύο ἀπαρνούμενοι τὴν τῶν φύσεων διαφορὰν καταδέχονται, πῶς οἱ δύο φύσεις ἐπὶ Χριστοῦ καταγγέλλοντες μίαν ἐπ' αὐτοῦ θέλησιν τερατεύεσθε; Ἀλλά φασιν·","english":"Before he knew good and evil\" — for the God the Word who became man did not know or reckon evil because of the union according to hypostasis; he did not have a reasoning that wavered or doubted, but being himself the one Christ, this and that, that is God and man, he used his human faculties, that is all the natural faculties of humanity, for obedience to his paternal and divine will. If he accepted the help that comes through angels — for it says, \"And behold, an angel strengthened him,\" which is a law of human nature — did he not assume the will? For it says, \"He will command his angels concerning you, and they will bear you up in their hands.\" If he accepted abandonment, did he not assume the will? For it says, \"Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?\" that is, \"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?\" For God and the Father handed over his only-begotten Son for us, who became man unto death; for his flesh was not forsaken nor separated from his divinity nor did it see corruption, nor was his soul forsaken in Hades, but God and the Father did not spare his own Son, but for us handed him over to insults and dishonors and to sufferings that are blameless and sinless and to death. Therefore, having become obedient to the paternal good pleasure unto death and having despised shame, he crowned our nature with glory and incorruption in honor. If those who confess one composite nature in Christ and deny the two accept the difference of the natures, how do you who proclaim two natures in Christ marvelously invent one will in him? But they say —","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":46,"ref":"p46","source":"Οὐ φυσικόν ἐστι τὸ θέλημα, ἀλλ' ὑποστατικόν. Ποῖον οὖν θέλημα λέγετε; Τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὸ ἁπλῶς θέλειν καὶ τὸ φυσικὸν θελητὸν ἢ τὸν τρόπον τῆς τοῦ θέλειν χρήσεως, τουτέστι καὶ τὸ πῶς θέλειν καὶ τὸ κατ' οἰκείαν γνώμην καὶ ἡδονὴν θελητόν; Ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν ὑποστατικήν φατε καὶ τὸ ἁπλῶς θέλειν, οὐκ ἀληθῶς ἀποφαίνεσθε. Πᾶς γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὸ ἁπλῶς θέλειν· τὰ δὲ ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ὑπὸ τὸ αὐτὸ εἶδος θεωρούμενα ὑποστάσεσι φυσικὰ καὶ οὐχ ὑποστατικά. Οὐ πᾶς δὲ ἄνθρωπος τὸ αὐτὸ θέλει οὐδὲ ὡσαύτως.\n\nὭστε ἡ μὲν θελητικὴ δύναμις καὶ τὸ ἁπλῶς θέλειν φυσικόν, τὸ δὲ τὶ θέλειν καὶ\n\nτὸ πῶς θέλειν διάφορον καθ' ἑκάστην ὑπόστασιν καὶ ὡς συμβεβηκὸς ὑποστατικόν. Καὶ μάρτυς Ἰωάννης ὁ ἅγιος καὶ ὄντως Χρυσόστομος οὕτωσι λέγων ἐν βιβλίῳ πρώτῳ, λόγῳ τεσσαρεσκαιδεκάτῳ τῆς ἑρμηνείας τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους ἐπιστολῆς· «Ἡ μὲν γὰρ βούλησις ἔμφυτον καὶ παρὰ θεοῦ, ἡ δὲ τοιάδε βούλησις ἡμέτερον καὶ τῆς γνώμης ἡμῶν.» Ἔτι, εἰ ὑποστατικὴ ἡ θελητικὴ δύναμις, καθὰ ἑτεροϋπόστατός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ πατρός, ἔσται καὶ ἑτερόβουλος. Τὰ φυσικὰ ἀδίδακτα· οὐδεὶς γὰρ διδάσκεται πεινῆν ἢ διψῆν, κοιμᾶσθαι ἢ ἀναπνεῖν, οὕτως οὐδὲ θέλειν διδάσκεταί τις. Πῶς δὲ θέλειν ἤτοι καλῶς ἢ κακῶς καὶ τὶ θέλειν διδάσκεται· οὐ γὰρ τὸ θέλειν διδάσκει ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ νόμος–τοῦτο γὰρ φυσικῶς ἡμῖν παρ' αὐτοῦ δέδοται–, ἀλλὰ τὸ καλῶς θέλειν καὶ τὶ θέλειν. Ὥστε τὸ μὲν θέλειν φυσικόν, τὸ δὲ τὶ καὶ πῶς θέλειν ὑποστατικὸν καὶ διάφορον, πλὴν τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος·","english":"The will is not natural, but hypostatic. What will, then, do you mean? The faculty of willing and willing simply, and the natural object of will, or the mode of the use of willing—that is, both how one wills and what is willed according to one's own judgment and pleasure? But if you say that the faculty of willing and willing simply are hypostatic, you do not speak truly. For every man has the faculty of willing and willing simply; but the things observed in all the hypostases under the same species are natural and not hypostatic. Yet not every man wills the same thing, nor in the same way.\n\nSo that the faculty of willing and willing simply are natural, but willing a particular thing and\n\nhow one wills differ according to each hypostasis and are hypostatic as an accident. And Saint John, truly Chrysostom, is a witness, speaking thus in the first book, in the fourteenth homily of his commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews: \"For the wish is innate and from God, but the wish of such a kind is ours and of our judgment.\" Further, if the faculty of willing is hypostatic, just as the Son is of a different hypostasis from the Father, he will also be of a different will. Natural things are untaught; for no one is taught to hunger or thirst, to sleep or breathe, so neither is anyone taught to will. But how to will—that is, well or badly—and what to will, one is taught; for the law of God does not teach willing—for this has been given to us by him naturally—but to will well and to will a particular thing. So that willing is natural, but willing a particular thing and how one wills are hypostatic and different, except for the Holy Trinity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":47,"ref":"p47","source":"ἐκεῖ γὰρ ὡσαύτως καὶ τὰ αὐτὰ θέλουσιν αἱ ἅγιαι τῆς θεότητος τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις κατὰ τὴν τῆς θεότητος οὐσίαν. Ὁ γὰρ εἷς τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος, ὁ σεσαρκωμένος υἱὸς καὶ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ θεός, ὥσπερ φύσιν ἀνθρώπου ἔσχε παρὰ τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ κατὰ τὸ γενέσθαι ἄνθρωπος διακέκριται πατρὸς καὶ πνεύματος, οὕτω καὶ ἐν τοῖς τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος φυσικοῖς ἰδιώμασι διακέκριται τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος δύο φύσεις ἔχων καὶ δύο φυσικὰς ἰδιότητας. Ἔτι οὐσιῶδές ἐστι καὶ φυσικόν, ὃ παρὸν σῴζει καὶ ἀπὸν φθείρει τὸν ὅρον τῆς φύσεως. Ἆρα οὖν ζῷον ἀθέλητον ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἔσται; Οὐδαμῶς. Οὐ γὰρ γέγονέ ποτε ἄνθρωπος ἀνεθέλητος. Ἄρα φυσικὴ ἡ θέλησις. Εἰ ἡ πεῖνα καὶ ἡ δίψα καὶ ἡ τοῦ ὕπνου ἔφεσις ὀρέξεις οὖσαι ἄλογοι φυσικαί εἰσιν, ἡ τοῦ νοῦ λογικὴ ὄρεξις ἡ αὐτεξούσιος οὐκ ἔσται φυσική; Κατ' εἰκόνα θεοῦ γεγόναμεν κατὰ τὸ νοερὸν καὶ αὐτεξούσιον. Εἰ οὖν νοῦν καὶ θέλησιν αὐτεξούσιον οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν, οὐκ ἀνέλαβε τὸ κατ' εἰκόνα· μετ' ὀλίγα δὲ μικρὰ καὶ περὶ τοῦ κατ' εἰκόνα διαληψόμεθα. Εἰ ἀνθρωπίνην οὐκ ἀνέλαβε θέλησιν, πάντα, ὅσα ἠθέλησεν ὁ Χριστός, θείῳ ἠθέλησε θελήματι. Καὶ πῶς εἰσελθὼν εἰς οἰκίαν καὶ θελήσας λαθεῖν οὐκ ἠδυνήθη; Οὐκοῦν οὐ παντοδύναμον τὸ θεῖον θέλημα, ἀλλὰ ἀδύνατον. Παῦσαι, ὦ ἄνθρωπε, ταῦτα ληρῶν. Οὐκ ἔστι θείας θελήσεως τὸ ἐφίεσθαι βρώσεως, πόσεως καὶ τόπους ἐκ τόπων ἀμείβειν καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα, ἀλλ' ἀνθρωπίνης, εἰ καὶ ἀνθρωπίνῃ θελήσει κατ' εὐδοκίαν πατρικὴν ταῦτα ὁ Χριστὸς ἠθέλησεν. Ἀλλά φασιν·","english":"For there likewise the three holy hypostases of the Godhead will the same things in the same way, according to the essence of the Godhead. For the one of the Holy Trinity, the incarnate Son and Word of God and God, just as he had a human nature besides the Father and the Holy Spirit and, in that he became man, is distinguished from the Father and the Spirit, so also in the natural properties of humanity he is distinguished from the Father and the Spirit, having two natures and two natural properties. Further, that is essential and natural which, when present, preserves, and when absent, destroys the definition of the nature. Will man, then, be a will-less living being? By no means. For never has a man been will-less. Therefore the will is natural. If hunger and thirst and the desire for sleep, being irrational appetites, are natural, will the rational appetite of the mind, which is self-determining, not be natural? We have been made in the image of God according to the intelligent and self-determining. If, then, he did not assume a mind and a self-determining will, he did not assume the image; but a little later we shall discuss the image. If he did not assume a human will, then all things that Christ willed, he willed with a divine will. And how is it that, having entered a house, he willed to escape notice and could not? Therefore the divine will is not almighty, but powerless. Cease, O man, babbling these things. It is not the property of a divine will to desire food, drink, and to move from place to place and such things, but of a human will, even if Christ willed these things with a human will according to the Father's good pleasure. But they say:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":48,"ref":"p48","source":"Οὐ κατὰ φύσιν ἐδόθη τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ αὐτεξούσιον, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τιμὴν ἐν τῷ φάναι τὸν θεολόγον Γρηγόριον· «Τῷ αὐτεξουσίῳ τιμήσας αὐτόν. «Ἀλλ' ἄκουε πάλιν τοῦ πατρός· «Τοῦτον λόγῳ καὶ εἰκόνι θεοῦ τετιμημένον». Οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ τὸ λογικὸν ἕξει κατὰ φύσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τιμήν, καὶ ὥρα σοι λέγειν, ὡς οὐ λογικὴν ψυχήν, ἀλλ' ἄλογον ὁ κύριος προσήκατο.\n\n30 Κατὰ πόσους τρόπους λέγεται τὸ «κατ' εἰκόνα»; Κατὰ τὸ λογικὸν καὶ νοερὸν καὶ αὐτεξούσιον, κατὰ τὸ γεννᾶν τὸν νοῦν λόγον καὶ προβάλλειν πνεῦμα, κατὰ τὸ ἀρχικόν. Κατὰ ταῦτα καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι κατ' εἰκόνα. Ἔτι δὲ καὶ ἐκ περιουσίας οἱ ἄνθρωποι κατὰ τὸ ἀγέννητον τὴν ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἀδάμ, καὶ γεννητὸν τὴν ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἄβελ, καὶ ἐκπορευτὸν τὴν ὑπὸ τῆς Εὔας, κατὰ τὸ φύσει ἀρχικόν–φύσει γὰρ ἔχει δοῦλον ἡ ψυχὴ τὸ σῶμα καὶ ἐξουσιάζει αὐτοῦ– καὶ κατὰ τὸ συνάγειν πᾶσαν τὴν κτίσιν– ἔν τε γὰρ τῷ θεῷ ἑνοῦται πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις καὶ ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ· σύνδεσμος γάρ ἐστι νοητῆς καὶ αἰσθητῆς κτίσεως–καὶ ὅτι κατ' εἰκόνα, οὗ ἔμελλε γίνεσθαι ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ· οὐ γὰρ ἄγγελος γέγονεν, ἀλλ' ἄνθρωπος.","english":"It was not given to man to be self-determining by nature, but by honor, as the theologian Gregory says: \"Honoring him with self-determination.\" But hear the Father again: \"This one honored by word and image of God.\" Therefore he will not have the rational by nature either, but by honor, and it is time for you to say that the Lord did not assume a rational soul, but an irrational one.\n\nIn how many ways is \"according to the image\" said? According to the rational and intellectual and self-determining, according to begetting the mind as word and projecting spirit, according to the ruling principle. In these respects both angels and men are according to the image. And further, by way of abundance, men are according to the image in respect of the unbegotten—that which is from Adam—and the begotten—that which is from Abel—and the proceeding—that which is from Eve—according to the naturally ruling principle (for the soul naturally has the body as servant and exercises authority over it), and according to gathering all creation (for all creation is united in God and in man; for he is a bond of intelligible and sensible creation), and because he is according to the image of him whom the Son of God was going to become; for he did not become an angel, but a man.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":49,"ref":"p49","source":"31 Πᾶσα ὑπόστασις σύνθετος ἐκ διαφόρων φύσεων συντεθειμένη τὰ φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα τῶν δύο φύσεων ἔχει κατ' ἀνάγκην, κἂν σύγχυσις θεωροῖτο ἐν τῇ ἑνώσει. Τὸ γὰρ πῦρ καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ ἐναντία εἰσὶ παντελῶς– τὸ μὲν γὰρ πῦρ θερμὸν καὶ ξηρόν, τὸ δὲ ὕδωρ ψυχρὸν καὶ ὑγρόν–, ἀλλ' ἡνίκα συντεθῇ σῶμα ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων στοιχείων, τὰς\n\nτέσσαρας ἔχει ποιότητας, θερμότητα καὶ ψυχρότητα, ὑγρότητα καὶ ξηρότητα. Εἰ οὖν, ἔνθα σύγχυσις θεωρεῖται, ἀνάγκη θεωρεῖσθαι τὰ φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα τῶν συντεθέντων, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ τῆς ἀσυγχύτου ἑνώσεως.\n\n32 Ἀλλά φασιν, ὡς ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἔχει φυσικὸν θέλημα· λέγουσι δὲ Μανιχαϊκῶς δύο μόνα εἶναι θελήματα, τὸ ἓν τὸ θεῖον, τὸ ἀγαθόν, τὸ ἕτερον τὸ διαβολικόν, τὸ πονηρόν. Καὶ πηνίκα μὲν τὸ ἀγαθὸν θελήσει ὁ ἄνθρωπος, τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἔσχε θέλημα· ἡνίκα δὲ τὸ πονηρόν, τὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. Ὢ μανίας ὑπερβολή. Ὢ σκότος ἀγνοίας. Τὸ θεῖον θέλημα παντουργὸν ἢ οὔ; Ναί, φασίν. Εἰ οὖν τὸ θεῖον θέλημα ἔχει ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἀγαθὸν θέλων, ἔσται κατ' αὐτοὺς παντουργός. Ἀλλ' ἀγνοοῦσιν, ὡς ἀδύνατον οἱανοῦν φύσιν χρήσασθαι πράξει ἢ ἐνεργῆσαι ἐνέργειαν, ἧς τὴν δύναμιν οὐ κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβεν· οἷον οὐ δύναται τὸ πτηνὸν μὴ κατὰ φύσιν λαβὸν τὴν τοῦ πέτασθαι δύναμιν πτῆναι οὐδὲ τὸ χερσαῖον βαδίζειν, εἰ μὴ τὴν βαδιστικὴν κατὰ φύσιν ἔλαβε δύναμιν. Οὕτω δὴ καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὐ δύναται ἐνεργεῖν καὶ θέλειν, εἰ μὴ κατὰ φύσιν τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν καὶ ἐνεργητικὴν ἔλαβεν· οὐδὲ γὰρ νοεῖν δύναται, εἰ μὴ φύσει τὴν νοητικὴν ἔλαβεν δύναμιν, οὐδὲ ὁρᾶν οὐδέ τι ἕτερον ἐνεργεῖν·","english":"Every composite hypostasis, being composed of different natures, necessarily possesses the natural properties of the two natures, even if a fusion is observed in the union. For fire and water are completely opposed—fire is hot and dry, while water is cold and wet—but when a body is composed of the four elements, it possesses the four qualities: heat and cold, wetness and dryness. If, then, where a fusion is observed, the natural properties of the things composed must necessarily be observed, how much more in the case of the union without fusion.\n\nBut they say that man does not have a natural will; and they claim, in Manichaean fashion, that there are only two wills: one the divine, the good, and the other the diabolical, the evil. And whenever man wills the good, he has the will of God; but whenever he wills the evil, the will of the devil. O excess of madness! O darkness of ignorance! Is the divine will all-working, or not? Yes, they say. If, then, man has the divine will when he wills the good, according to them he will be all-working. But they do not know that it is impossible for any nature whatsoever to perform an action or exercise an activity whose power it did not receive by nature—for example, a winged creature that did not receive the power of flying by nature cannot fly, nor can a land creature walk unless it received the power of walking by nature. So too, man cannot act and will unless he received the volitive and operative power by nature; for he cannot think unless he received the thinking power by nature, nor can he see or do anything else—","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":50,"ref":"p50","source":"ὥστε ἡ θελητικὴ καὶ ἐνεργητικὴ δύναμις φυσικῶς ἔνεστι τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ τὸ θέλειν καὶ ἐνεργεῖν. Διὸ καὶ πάσῃ φύσει αἱ φυσικαὶ ἐνέργειαι ἀεὶ ἐνυπάρχουσι καὶ συνυπάρχουσι, τὰ δὲ θελητὰ καὶ ἐνεργητὰ οὐ συνυπάρχουσι. Καὶ ἡ μὲν φυσικὴ θέλησις, τουτέστιν ἡ θελητικὴ δύναμις, μία, τὰ δὲ θελητὰ πολλὰ καὶ διάφορα· φησὶ γὰρ ἡ γραφή· «Πάντα τὰ θελήματα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτοῖς». Οὐκ εἶπεν· Ἡ θεία θέλησις ἐν αὐτοῖς, ἀλλὰ «πάντα τὰ θελήματα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτοῖς», τουτέστι τὰ θελητά.\n\n33 Ἰστέον δέ, ὅτι τὰ θελητὰ τῆς θεότητος φυσικά εἰσιν· ἄτρεπτος γὰρ οὖσα οὐ πέφυκεν ἄλλως καὶ ἄλλως θέλειν, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ ὡσαύτως θέλει. Διὸ καὶ τὰ αὐτά εἰσι θελητὰ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος· πάντα γὰρ τὰ φυσικὰ τὰ αὐτά εἰσι πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος, ὡς ἡ αὐτὴ αὐτῶν φύσις. Οὐδὲν δὲ ὑποστατικὸν ἐν τῇ ὑπερουσίῳ θεότητι, εἰ μὴ τὸ ἀγέννητον καὶ τὸ γεννητικὸν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τὸ γεννητὸν τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τὸ ἐκπορευτὸν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. Ὡς εἴπομεν περὶ θελήματος, οὕτω καὶ περὶ ἐνεργείας φαμέν, ὅτι τὸ τῆς ἐνεργείας ὄνομα διάφορα σημαίνει. Ἐνεργείας μὲν θεοῦ ἴδιόν ἐστι τὸ μὴ μόνον ἐπ' ἄπειρον αἰσθήσεως ἐπέκεινα πάσης εἶναι νοῦ τε καὶ παντὸς αἰῶνος, ἀλλὰ καὶ πάσης οὐσίας τε καὶ κλήσεως. Ἐνέργεια γάρ ἐστιν ἡ φυσικὴ ἑκάστης οὐσίας δύναμίς τε καὶ κίνησις. Καὶ πάλιν· Ἐνέργειά ἐστι φυσικὴ ἡ πάσης οὐσίας ἔμφυτος κίνησις. Καὶ πάλιν· Ἐνέργειά ἐστιν φυσικὴ ἡ δηλωτικὴ ἑκάστης οὐσίας δύναμις. Καὶ πάλιν·","english":"So that the faculty of will and operation is naturally present in man, and so is willing and operating. Therefore the natural operations are always inherent in and coexist with every nature, but the objects of will and operation do not coexist. And the natural will, that is, the faculty of will, is one, but the objects of will are many and various; for the Scripture says: \"All his wills are in them.\" It did not say: \"The divine will is in them,\" but \"all his wills are in them,\" that is, the objects of will.\n\n33 But it must be known that the objects of will of the Godhead are natural; for being immutable, it is not naturally disposed to will now one way and now another, but always wills in the same way. Therefore the same objects of will belong to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; for all natural things are the same of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, since their nature is the same. But there is nothing hypostatic in the supersubstantial Godhead, except the unbegotten and the generative of the Father, and the begotten of the Son, and the proceeding of the Holy Spirit. As we have spoken about will, so we also say about operation, that the name of operation signifies different things. It is proper to the operation of God to be not only beyond all sense, beyond every mind and every age, but also beyond every essence and name. For operation is the natural power and motion of each essence. And again: Operation is the natural innate motion of every essence. And again: Operation is the natural power that makes each essence manifest. And again:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":51,"ref":"p51","source":"Ἐνέργειά ἐστι φυσικὴ καὶ πρώτη ἡ ἀεικίνητος δύναμις τῆς νοερᾶς ψυχῆς, τουτέστιν ὁ ἀεικίνητος αὐτῆς λόγος φυσικῶς ἐξ αὐτῆς ἀεὶ πηγαζόμενος. Λέγονται δὲ ἐνέργειαι αἱ πράξεις, ὡς τὸ ὁρᾶν, τὸ λαλεῖν, τὸ ἀναπνεῖν, τὸ περιπατεῖν, τὸ ἐσθίειν, τὸ πίνειν, τουτέστιν ἡ χρῆσις πάσης φυσικῆς δυνάμεως. Καὶ τὰ πάθη δὲ τὰ φυσικὰ πολλάκις ἐνέργειαι λέγονται, οἷον πεῖνα, δίψα καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα. Καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν· Ἐνέργειά ἐστι φυσικὴ ἡ ἑκάστης οὐσίας δύναμίς τε καὶ κίνησις, ἧς χωρὶς μόνον τὸ μὴ ὄν. Πῶς οὖν οὐχ ἕξει τὴν φυσικὴν ἐνέργειαν τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως ὁ κύριος; Ἡ γὰρ ἀνυπαρξία τῆς φυσικῆς ἑκάστου ἐνεργείας ἀνυπαρξία ὑπάρχει τῆς φύσεως. Εἰ οὖν οὐκ ἔσχεν ἀνθρωπίνην φυσικὴν ἐνέργειαν, οὐδὲ φύσιν ἔσχεν ἀνθρωπίνην· ὧν γὰρ ἡ φύσις διάφορος, τούτων καὶ ἡ θέλησις καὶ ἡ ἐνέργεια διάφορος. Ἕτερον οὖν ἐστιν ἐνέργεια καὶ ἕτερον ἐνεργεῖν καὶ ἕτερον τὸ τὶ καὶ πῶς ἐνεργεῖν καὶ ἕτερον τὸ ἐνεργητόν, τουτέστι τὸ ἐνέργημα, καὶ ἕτερον τὸ ἐνεργητικὸν καὶ ἕτερον ὁ ἐνεργῶν. Ἐνέργεια μὲν οὖν ἐστιν αὐτὴ ἡ ἐνεργητικὴ δύναμις,","english":"Natural operation is the first and ever-moving power of the rational soul, that is, its ever-moving principle, always naturally welling forth from it. And operations are also called actions, such as seeing, speaking, breathing, walking, eating, drinking—that is, the use of every natural power. And natural passions are often called operations, such as hunger, thirst, and the like. And to speak simply: natural operation is the power and motion of each essence, without which only non-being exists. How then will the Lord not have the natural operation of human nature? For the non-existence of each one's natural operation is the non-existence of the nature. If, then, he did not have a human natural operation, neither did he have a human nature; for those whose nature is different, their will and operation are also different. Therefore operation is one thing, and to operate another; and to operate in a certain way and manner is one thing, and the thing operated, that is, the effect, is another; and the operative faculty is one thing, and the one operating another. Operation, then, is the operative power itself,","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":52,"ref":"p52","source":"τουτέστι τὸ δύνασθαι ἐνεργεῖν, ἐνεργεῖν δὲ τὸ κεχρῆσθαι τῇ ἐνεργητικῇ δυνάμει. Τὶ δὲ ἐνεργεῖν ἐστιν ὁρᾶν, νοεῖν, ἀκούειν, περιπατεῖν, ἐσθίειν, πίνειν. Πῶς δὲ ἐνεργεῖν ἐστι καλῶς ἢ κακῶς. Ἐνεργητικὸν δέ ἐστι τὸ ἔχον δύναμιν τοῦ ἐνεργεῖν, οἷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ὁ ἄγγελος. Ἐνεργῶν δὲ ὁ κεχρημένος τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ ἤγουν ἡ ὑπόστασις. Ἡ οὖν ἐνέργεια ποτὲ μὲν σημαίνει τὴν ἐνεργητικὴν δύναμιν, ποτὲ δὲ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν, ποτὲ δὲ τὸ ἐνέργημα· ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐνέργεια, τουτέστιν ἡ δύναμις ἡ ἐνεργητική, καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν φυσικόν. Πᾶς γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ ἐνεργεῖν καὶ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ἔχει τὸ ἐνεργεῖν· ἐνεργητικὸν γὰρ ζῷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Τὸ δὲ ἐνέργημα οὐ μόνον φυσικόν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑποστατικὸν ἐπί τε ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων. Ἐπὶ γὰρ τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος φυσικὰ πάντα τὰ θελητὰ καὶ ἐνεργητά, διὸ καὶ τὰ αὐτὰ τῶν τριῶν ὑποστάσεων. Ἐπὶ δὲ ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων οὐ τὸ αὐτὸ θελητὸν οὐδὲ τὸ αὐτὸ ἐνεργητὸν οὐδὲ ὁ αὐτὸς τρόπος τῆς χρήσεως· ἑκάστη γὰρ ἀγγέλων καὶ ἀνθρώπων ὑπόστασις ἰδίαν ἔχει κίνησιν καὶ ἰδιαιρέτως θέλει καὶ ἐνεργεῖ. Διὸ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐπειδὴ δύο φύσεις, δύο φυσικαὶ ἐνέργειαι, ἵνα ᾖ θεὸς τέλειος καὶ ἄνθρωπος τέλειος, καὶ δύο θέλειν καὶ διαφόρως θέλειν κατὰ τὴν φυσικὴν τῶν δύο φύσεων διαφοράν, θείως καὶ ἀνθρωπίνως, παντοδυνάμως καὶ ἀπαθῶς κατὰ τὴν θείαν φύσιν καὶ ἀσθενῶς καὶ παθητικῶς κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην φύσιν. Καὶ ἄλλο μὲν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ φυσικὸν ἐνέργημα· ἄλλο γὰρ ἐνέργημα τῆς θείας φύσεως καὶ ἄλλο τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης.","english":"That is, to be able to operate, and to operate is to make use of the operative power. And to operate is to see, to think, to hear, to walk, to eat, to drink. And how is it to operate well or badly? And an operative thing is that which has the power of operating, such as a human being, an angel. And one who operates is the one making use of the operation, that is, the hypostasis. Therefore, operation sometimes signifies the operative power, sometimes the act of operating, and sometimes the effect of operation. The operation, that is, the operative power, and the act of operating are natural. For every human being has the power of operating, and every human being has the act of operating; for a human being is an operative living being. But the effect of operation is not only natural but also hypostatic, both in the case of angels and of human beings. For in the case of the Holy Trinity, all things willed and operated are natural, and therefore they are the same for the three hypostases. But in the case of angels and human beings, the thing willed is not the same, nor the thing operated, nor the same manner of use; for each hypostasis of angels and human beings has its own movement and wills and operates in a distinct way. Therefore in the case of our Lord Jesus Christ, since there are two natures, there are two natural operations, so that he may be perfect God and perfect man, and two willings and two distinct willings according to the natural difference of the two natures, divinely and humanly, all-powerfully and impassibly according to the divine nature, and weakly and passibly according to the human nature. And the natural effect of operation is one thing and another; for the effect of operation of the divine nature is one thing and that of the human nature is another.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":53,"ref":"p53","source":"Οὐ γὰρ τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως ἐνεργητὰ καὶ τῆς θείας φύσεώς εἰσιν ἐνεργητὰ οὐδὲ τὰ τῆς θείας φύσεως καὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης τὰ αὐτά· οὐ γὰρ δημιουργεῖ ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη φύσις οὐδὲ τρώγει ἡ θεία φύσις οὐδὲ μεταβαίνει ἐκ τόπων εἰς τόπους, εἰ καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ἐνεργείας ἡ θεία ἐνεργεῖ ἐνέργεια. Εἷς δὲ ὁ ἐνεργῶν ταῦτα κἀκεῖνα, ὅτι μία ὑπόστασις. Εἰ γὰρ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν ἐνέργειαν, οὔτε ἔζησεν ὡς ἄνθρωπος, οὐκ ἐνόησεν, οὐκ ἐλογίσατο, οὐκ ἔφαγεν, οὐκ ἔπιεν, οὐκ ᾔσθετο βρώσεως, οὐ περιεπάτησεν, οὐκ εἶδεν, οὐκ ἤκουσεν, οὐκ ἀνέπνευσεν οὐδέ τι τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων διεπράξατο οὐδ' ὅλως ἄνθρωπος γέγονε. Φησὶ γὰρ ὁ Νυσαεὺς Γρηγόριος· Τούτων οὕτω διηρθρωμένων καὶ διεσμιλευμένων ἴδωμεν, εἰ λέγει τὰ ἅγια εὐαγγέλια καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ οἱ ἅγιοι πατέρες, ταῦτα πάντα ἔχειν τὸν κύριον ἢ οὔ. Ὅτι μὲν οὖν εἶχε ψυχὴν ἀνθρωπίνην, φησὶν αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος ἐν τῷ κατὰ Ἰωάννην εὐαγγελίῳ· «Ἐξουσίαν ἔχω θεῖναι τὴν ψυχήν μου καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἔχω λαβεῖν αὐτήν», καὶ πάλιν «καὶ τὴν ψυχήν μου τίθημι ὑπὲρ τῶν προβάτων». Ὅτι δὲ καὶ σῶμα εἶχε, μάρτυς ὁ Ἰωσὴφ καὶ ὁ αἰτήσας τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ κηδεύσας καὶ θεὶς ἐν τῷ τάφῳ. Ὅτι δὲ καὶ τὴν τῶν μελῶν εἶχε διοργάνωσιν, μάρτυς ἡ τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀλείψασα μύρῳ καὶ τοὺς πόδας βρέξασα τοῖς δάκρυσι, καὶ οἱ ἧλοι οἱ ἐμπαρέντες ἐν ταῖς παλάμαις καὶ τοῖς ταρσοῖς τῶν ποδῶν, ἡ λόγχη ἡ νύξασα τὴν πλευράν, καὶ ὁ ἀναπεσὼν ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος μαθητής, ἡ γλῶσσα ἡ εἰποῦσα·","english":"For the things that are operative of human nature are not operative of the divine nature, nor are the things of the divine nature and of the human nature the same; for human nature does not create, nor does the divine nature eat, nor does it pass from place to place, even if through the human operation the divine operation operates. But one is the one who operates these things and those, because one hypostasis. For if he had not assumed the human operation, neither did he live as a man, nor did he think, nor did he reason, nor did he eat, nor did he drink, nor did he perceive food, nor did he walk, nor did he see, nor did he hear, nor did he breathe, nor did he do any of the human things, nor did he become a man at all. For Gregory of Nyssa says: Since these things have been thus articulated and thus carved out, let us see whether the holy Gospels and the apostles and the holy fathers say that the Lord has all these things or not. That he had a human soul, the Lord himself says in the Gospel according to John: \"I have authority to lay down my soul, and I have authority to take it again,\" and again, \"and I lay down my soul for the sheep.\" That he also had a body, the witness is Joseph, and the one who asked for his body and buried it and placed it in the tomb. That he also had the organization of members, the witness is she who anointed the head with myrrh and wet the feet with tears, and the nails that were driven into the palms and the soles of the feet, the spear that pierced the side, and the disciple who reclined on his breast, the tongue that said:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":54,"ref":"p54","source":"«Ἐάν τις διψᾷ, ἐρχέσθω πρός με καὶ πινέτω», τὸ στόμα τὸ μεταδοτικὸν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, οἱ ὀδόντες καὶ ἡ φάρυγξ, οἱ τεμόντες τὸ πάσχα, καὶ ἡ τῷ στομάχῳ παραπέμψασα τοῦτο, τό τε ἧπαρ τὸ ἐξαιματῶσαν, ὅ τε κόπος ὁ ἐκ τῆς ὁδοιπορίας γενόμενος ὑπερταθέντων τῶν μυῶν καὶ τῶν νεύρων, ὥς φησιν ὁ θεῖος Βασίλειος, ἥ τε περιτομὴ τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καὶ οἱ γλουτοὶ οἱ ἐπὶ τὸν ὄνον κεκαθικότες, αἵ τε κατὰ τὸν νῶτον μάστιγες, τὰ ῥαπίσματά τε τῶν παρειῶν σὺν τοῖς ἐμπτύσμασι τοῦ προσώπου. Ὅτι δὲ καὶ τομὴν καὶ ῥεῦσιν ἐδέξατο τὴν ἐμήν, μάρτυς ἡ περιτομή, οἱ ἧλοι, ἡ λόγχη, τὸ πτύσμα, ὁ ἱδρώς, τὸ ῥεῦσαν ἐκ τῆς πλευρᾶς αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ. Ὅτι δὲ καὶ τὰς ψυχικὰς ἐνεργείας καὶ τὰ πάθη ἀνέλαβε, μάρτυρες αἱ διὰ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ ἀκηράτου τῆς","english":"If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink,\" the mouth that imparts the Holy Spirit, the teeth and the throat, which divided the Passover, and the stomach that conveyed it, and the liver that produced blood, and the weariness that came from the journey when the muscles and sinews were stretched out, as the divine Basil says, and the circumcision of the foreskin, and the buttocks that sat upon the donkey, and the scourges on the back, and the blows on the cheeks together with the spittings on the face. And that he received my circumcision and my flow, the circumcision is witness, the nails, the spear, the spittle, the sweat, the blood and water that flowed from his side. And that he also took up the activities and passions of the soul, the witnesses are the things through the undefiled body of the","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":55,"ref":"p55","source":"παναγίας αὐτοῦ ψυχῆς ἐνέργειαι– εἶδε γάρ, φησί, τὴν πόλιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἔκλαυσεν, ἤκουσέ τε, ὅτι Ἰωάννης ἐβλήθη ἐν τῇ φυλακῇ–, ἥ τε τοῦ μύρου ὀσφραντικὴ αἴσθησις καὶ ἡ φωνὴ ἡ ἐγείρασα Λάζαρον καὶ ἡ γεῦσις ἡ τῆς χολῆς καὶ τοῦ ὄξους ἀποστραφεῖσα φυσικῶς τὴν ἀηδίαν–οὐ γὰρ δήπου ταῦτα θείας ἐνέργειαι φύσεως–καὶ ἡ ἁφὴ τοῦ λεπροῦ ἥ τε βάδισις καὶ ἡ τῶν χειρῶν ἐπὶ σταυροῦ ἔκτασις, ἐκ μὲν τῆς φυσικῆς δυνάμεως ἡ θρέψις τοῦ σώματος καὶ ἡ αὔξησις–»μακαρία γὰρ ἡ κοιλία ἡ βαστάσασά σε καὶ μαστοί, οὓς ἐθήλασας», καὶ «τὸ παιδίον ηὔξανεν ἡλικίᾳ», φησίν–, ἐκ δὲ τῆς αἰσθητικῆς ὡς ἐμψύχου, ἀλόγου δὲ φύσεως ἡ αἴσθησις, ἡ καθ' ὁρμὴν κίνησις, ἡ πεῖνα, ἡ δίψα–»ὕστερον» γάρ, φησίν, «ἐπείνασε», καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ «διψῶ»–, ἡ τῆς βρώσεως ἐπιθυμία–»ἐπιθυμίᾳ» γάρ, φησίν, «ἐπεθύμησα φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο μεθ' ὑμῶν»–, ὁ θυμός–»ἐταράχθη» γάρ, φησί, «τῷ πνεύματι καὶ ἐμαρτύρησε καὶ εἶπεν· Εἷς ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει με»–, ἡ πέψις τῶν βρωμάτων καὶ τοῦ ποτοῦ καὶ ἡ ἐξαιμάτωσις· πόθεν γὰρ ὁ ἱδρώς, ὁ πτύελος, τὸ σωτήριον αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ ἢ οὐκ ἐκ πέψεως; Ἠισθάνετο μὲν γὰρ καὶ πᾶσιν ἐκέχρητο, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐμπαθῶς, ἀλλὰ φυσικῶς, καὶ ἐτρέφετο οὐ καθ' ἡδονὴν ἐμπαθῆ, ἀλλὰ πρὸς ἀναπλήρωσιν τοῦ ὑπεκρεύσαντος. Εἰ γὰρ καὶ μὴ εἶδε τὸ πανάγιον αὐτοῦ σῶμα διαφθοράν, ἀλλὰ τομὴν καὶ ῥεῦσιν φυσικῶς ὑπέμεινε· διαφθορὰ γάρ ἐστιν ἡ εἰς τά, ἐξ ὧν συνετέθη τὸ σῶμα, ἀνάλυσις. Καὶ πρὸ πάντων αὐτὴ ἡ ζωή, ἥτις ἐστὶ πρώτη τοῦ ζῴου ἐνέργεια ἐκ τῆς ψυχῆς μεταδιδομένη τῷ σώματι. Τὸ δὲ σπερματικὸν καὶ γεννητικὸν οὐκ ἔσχεν·","english":"the activities of his all-holy soul—for he saw, it says, the city of Jerusalem and wept, and he heard that John had been cast into prison—and the olfactory sense of the myrrh, and the voice that raised Lazarus, and the taste that naturally turned away from the foulness of the gall and the vinegar—for surely these are not activities of the divine nature—and the touch of the leper, and the walking, and the stretching out of the hands on the cross; from the natural power came the nourishment of the body and its growth—\"blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts which you sucked,\" and \"the child grew in stature,\" it says—and from the sensitive [power], as of an ensouled but irrational nature, came sensation, movement according to impulse, hunger, thirst—for \"afterwards,\" it says, \"he hungered,\" and on the cross \"I thirst\"—the desire for food—for \"with desire,\" it says, \"I have desired to eat this Passover with you\"—anger—for \"he was troubled,\" it says, \"in spirit and testified and said: One of you will betray me\"—the digestion of foods and drink and the turning into blood; for whence come the sweat, the spittle, the saving blood and water, if not from digestion? For he did feel and used all these things, but not passionately, rather naturally, and he was nourished not for passionate pleasure, but for the replenishment of what had flowed away. For even if his all-holy body did not see corruption, it nevertheless naturally underwent division and flux; for corruption is the dissolution into the things from which the body was composed. And before all these, life itself, which is the first activity of the living creature, imparted from the soul to the body. But the seminal and generative [power] he did not have.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":56,"ref":"p56","source":"ἀμετάπτωτα γὰρ τῶν θείων ὑποστάσεων τὰ ἰδιώματα, καὶ ἀδύνατον τὸν πατέρα ἢ τὸ πνεῦμα γενέσθαι υἱόν. Διὸ οὐδὲ γέγονεν υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα μείνῃ ἀμετάβλητον τὸ ἰδίωμα. Ἔπειτα ὑπόστασις ὁμοφυεῖ ὑποστάσει μίγνυται. Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἄλλη τοιαύτη ὑπόστασις υἱὸς θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπου· εἷς γὰρ μονογενὴς υἱός, μόνος ἐκ μόνου πατρὸς καὶ μόνος ἐκ μόνης μητρός, υἱὸς θεοῦ καὶ υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου, θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος, Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. Ἔτι δὲ εἰ καὶ φυσικὴ ἡ μίξις διὰ τὸν πληθυσμὸν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἀναγκαία· δυνατὸν γὰρ ἄνθρωπον ζῆν καὶ εἶναι ἄνθρωπον μὴ μιγνύμενον, καὶ πολλοὶ γεγόνασι τούτου τοῦ πάθους ἀπηλλαγμένοι.\n\n38 Αὐτὸ μὲν γὰρ τὸ σῶμα ἰδίαν οὐκ ἔσχεν ἐνέργειαν εἰ μὴ τομὴν καὶ ῥεῦσιν, ἅτινα πάθη εἰσίν, οὐκ ἐνέργειαι· τὰ δὲ λοιπὰ πάντα ψυχῆς σώματι κεχρημένης εἰσὶν ἀριδήλως ἐνέργειαι, οὐ θεότητος· ἡ ταραχή· «Νῦν» γάρ, φησίν, «ἡ ψυχή μου τετάρακται·» –ἡ λύπη καὶ ἡ ἀδημονία· «Ἤρξατο γὰρ λυπεῖσθαι καὶ ἀδημονεῖν», καὶ «περίλυπός ἐστιν ἡ ψυχή μου ἕως θανάτου·» –ἡ δειλία τοῦ θανάτου· «Πάτερ» γάρ, φησίν, «εἰ δυνατόν, παρελθέτω ἀπ' ἐμοῦ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο·» –ὁ θάνατος. Ταῦτα πάντα οὐ θεότητος–ἀπαθὲς γὰρ τὸ θεῖον καὶ ἀείζωον καὶ ἀθάνατον–, ἀλλὰ ζῴου, τουτέστιν οὐσίας ἐμψύχου καὶ αἰσθητικῆς. Ἐκ δὲ τῆς λογικῆς ψυχῆς καὶ νοερᾶς τὴν σοφίαν. «Προέκοπτε γὰρ σοφίᾳ καὶ ἡλικίᾳ». Οὐ γὰρ τῇ θείᾳ σοφίᾳ προέκοπτεν· ἐξ ἄκρας γὰρ συλλήψεως τελεία γέγονεν ἕνωσις καὶ ἄκρα συνάφεια καὶ οὐ προσθήκην θείας τινὸς δυνάμεως ἔσχεν, ἀλλ' ἀνθρωπίνῃ σοφίᾳ προέκοπτε.","english":"For the properties of the divine hypostases are unchangeable, and it is impossible for the Father or the Spirit to become the Son. Therefore no one has become a son of man except the Son of God, so that the property might remain unchangeable. Then a hypostasis is mingled with a hypostasis of the same nature. But there is no other such hypostasis—son of God and of man; for there is one only-begotten Son, alone from the only Father and alone from the only mother, Son of God and Son of man, God and man, Jesus Christ the Son of God. Moreover, even if the mingling were natural because of the multitude of human beings, it is not necessary; for it is possible for a human being to live and to be a human being without being mingled, and many have come to be free of this passion.\n\nFor the body itself did not have its own activity except division and flux, which are passions, not activities; but all the rest are clearly activities of a soul using a body, not of the Godhead: the disturbance—for he says, \"Now my soul is troubled\"—the grief and the distress: \"For he began to be grieved and distressed,\" and \"my soul is deeply grieved even to death\"; the fear of death—for he says, \"Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me\"—death. All these things are not of the Godhead—for the divine is impassible and ever-living and immortal—but of a living being, that is, of a substance ensouled and perceptive. And from the rational and intelligent soul, wisdom. \"For he advanced in wisdom and stature.\" For he did not advance in divine wisdom; from the very moment of conception the union became perfect and the conjunction complete, and he did not receive any addition of divine power, but he advanced in human wisdom.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":57,"ref":"p57","source":"Κατὰ γὰρ τὸ μέτρον τῆς σωματικῆς ἡλικίας ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη ἐν αὐτῷ σοφία ἐδείκνυτο· ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐξ ἄκρας συλλήψεως τέλειον βρέφος ἐγένετο, οὐ κατὰ μικρὸν διαρθρουμένου καὶ διοργανουμένου τοῦ σώματος, καθώς φησιν ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος ἐν τῷ εἰς τὸ γενέθλιον λόγῳ, οὕτως καὶ τέλειος ἐν ἀνθρωπίνῃ καὶ θείᾳ σοφίᾳ ἐξ ἄκρας συλλήψεως γέγονεν, ὡς ἄνθρωπος δηλονότι· ὡς γὰρ θεὸς οὐ γέγονε τέλειος ἐν θείᾳ σοφίᾳ, ἀλλ' ἦν ἀιδίως, κατὰ δὲ τὴν τῆς ἡλικίας τοῦ σώματος προκοπὴν ἡ τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ τελείας ἀνθρωπίνης σοφίας ἔκφανσις προκοπὴ ἐλογίζετο. Εἰ δὲ σοφίαν ἔσχεν ἀνθρωπίνην, πάντως καὶ νοῦν· σοφία γὰρ νοῦ γέννημά τε\n\nκαὶ δύναμις. Καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος δέ φησιν· «Ἡμεῖς δὲ νοῦν Χριστοῦ ἔχομεν.» Καὶ τὸ κατ' εἰκόνα δὲ οἱ ἅγιοι πατέρες κατὰ τὸ νοερὸν ἐκλαμβάνουσιν, ὧν τὰς μαρτυρίας ὑπετάξαμεν. Εἰ οὖν τὸν κατ' εἰκόνα αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἀνέλαβεν ἄνθρωπον ἤτοι φύσιν ἀνθρωπότητος, πάντως νοερὰν καὶ λογικὴν φύσιν ἀνέλαβεν. Ἀνέλαβε δὲ καὶ θέλησιν αὐτεξούσιον. Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὴν ἄλογον ἀνέλαβεν ὄρεξιν τὴν ἐπιπειθῆ λόγῳ, οὕτω καὶ τὴν λογικήν· οὐ γὰρ ἄνουν καὶ ἄλογον φύσιν ἀνέλαβεν. Εἰ γὰρ ἄνουν καὶ ἄλογον φύσιν ἀνέλαβεν, οὐκ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλ' ἄλογον ἀνέλαβε. Νοερὰ γὰρ καὶ λογικὴ φύσις ὁ ἄνθρωπος.","english":"For the human wisdom in him was shown in proportion to the measure of his bodily age; for just as from the very moment of conception he became a perfect infant, not with the body being gradually articulated and organized, as the great Basil says in his homily on the Nativity, so too he became perfect in human and divine wisdom from the very moment of conception, evidently as a man; for as God he did not become perfect in divine wisdom, but possessed it eternally, while according to the advance of the body's age the manifestation of the perfect human wisdom in him was reckoned as an advance. But if he had human wisdom, he certainly also had a mind; for wisdom is the offspring and power of the mind. And the apostle also says: \"But we have the mind of Christ.\" And the holy fathers understand the \"according to the image\" as pertaining to the intellectual faculty, whose testimonies we have set out below. If, then, he assumed the man who came to be according to his image, that is, the nature of humanity, he certainly assumed an intellectual and rational nature. And he also assumed a self-determining will. For just as he assumed the irrational appetite that is obedient to reason, so also the rational one; for he did not assume a mindless and irrational nature. For if he had assumed a mindless and irrational nature, he would have assumed not a man but an irrational being. For man is an intellectual and rational nature.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":58,"ref":"p58","source":"39 Ἄρ' οὖν πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι πατέρες, ὥσπερ δύο τὰς φύσεις εἶπον ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὕτω καὶ πάντα τὰ φυσικὰ ἰδιώματα διπλᾶ· ἀδύνατον γὰρ φύσιν συστῆναι δίχα τῶν συστατικῶν αὐτῆς ἰδιωμάτων. Ἐξ ἀνάγκης τοιγαροῦν δύο φύσεις αὐτοῦ λέγοντας δύο λέγειν δεῖ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰ φυσικὰ θελήματα, τουτέστι τὰς θελητικὰς δυνάμεις· εἶχε γὰρ ὡς φύσει θεὸς θέλησιν θείαν παντοδύναμον, καὶ ὡς φύσει γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος εἶχε τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην θέλησιν, καθ' ἣν ἠθέλησε λαθεῖν εἰς οἶκον εἰσελθὼν καὶ οὐκ ἐδυνήθη. Οὐ γὰρ δήπου, ὡς οἶμαι, τῇ θείᾳ θελήσει τὸ ἀδύνατον ἐπιγράψουσιν. Εἶχεν μὲν οὖν τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης αὐτοῦ ψυχῆς τὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν καὶ κατὰ ταύτην ἤθελε τὰ ἀνθρώπινα καὶ κατὰ τὴν ψυχικὴν αὐτοῦ θέλησιν ἐκινεῖτο πρὸς τὰ ἀνθρώπινα, ὥσπερ τῇ θείᾳ θελήσει τὰ θεῖα ἤθελεν ὁ εἷς καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ Χριστός, ὁ θεὸς τέλειος καὶ τέλειος ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐναντιότητι γνώμης· ὑπετάσσετο γὰρ αὐτεξουσίως ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη αὐτοῦ θέλησις τῷ θείῳ αὐτοῦ καὶ πατρικῷ θελήματι καὶ ταῦτα ἤθελεν, ἃ ἤθελεν ἡ θεία αὐτοῦ θέλησις θέλειν αὐτήν. Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐχ ὑπετάγη ἡ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ θέλησις τῷ θείῳ θελήματι, ἀλλ' ἡ γνώμη αὐτοῦ τὰ ἐναντία ἠθέλησε τοῦ θείου θελήματος–καὶ τοῦτο ἦν ἡ παράβασις, καὶ οὐδεὶς τῶν ἐξ Ἀδὰμ κατὰ πάντα ὑπήκοος γέγονε τῷ θείῳ θελήματι, ἑκάστη δὲ ὑπόστασις κατ' οἰκείαν γνώμην παρήκοος γέγονε τοῦ θείου θελήματος·","english":"Are all the holy fathers, then, saying that just as there are two natures in our Lord Jesus Christ, so also all the natural properties are twofold? For it is impossible for a nature to subsist apart from its constitutive properties. Of necessity, therefore, when we say that he has two natures, we must say that he also has two natural wills, that is, the volitive powers. For as God by nature he had a divine will, all-powerful; and as one who became man by nature he had the human will, according to which he willed to escape notice when he entered a house and was not able. For surely, I think, they will not ascribe inability to the divine will. He had, then, the volitive power of his human soul, and according to this he willed human things, and according to his soul's will he was moved toward human things, just as by his divine will the one and the same Son of God, Christ, perfect God and perfect man, willed divine things—but not by opposition of judgment; for his human will was freely subject to his divine and paternal will, and it willed those things which his divine will willed it to will. For since Adam's will was not subject to the divine will, but his judgment willed things contrary to the divine will—and this was the transgression—and none of Adam's descendants has become obedient to the divine will in all things, but each hypostasis has become disobedient to the divine will according to its own judgment—","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":59,"ref":"p59","source":"«πάντες γὰρ ἥμαρτον καὶ ὑστεροῦνται τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ» κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον–, διὰ τοῦτο ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ πατρὸς εὐδοκίᾳ γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος φύσιν μὲν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνέλαβε καὶ φυσικὴν ἀνθρωπίνην θέλησιν, ὑπόστασιν δὲ ἀνθρωπίνην οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν, ἵν' ἡ φυσικὴ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος θέλησις μὴ κατὰ οἰκεῖον ὑποστατικὸν καὶ γνωμικὸν θέλημα πολιτεύσηται ἐναντίως τοῦ θείου θελήματος, ἀλλ' αὐτεξουσίως κατὰ πάντα ὑπήκοος γένηται καὶ οὕτως λυθῇ ἡ ἀρχαία παράβασις.\n\n41 Καὶ πάλιν· Εἶχε μὲν οὖν ἀνθρωπίνην θέλησιν κατὰ Μάρκον τὸν εὐαγγελιστήν, ὅτι «εἰσελθὼν εἰς οἶκον ἠθέλησε λαθεῖν καὶ οὐκ ἐδυνήθη». Παντοδύναμος ἄρα ἡ θεία θέλησις καὶ οὐκ ἀδύναμος, ἀδύναμος δὲ ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη. Ἀνθρωπίνῃ οὖν θελήσει ἠθέλησε, τῆς θείας αὐτοῦ θελήσεως εὐδοκησά σης καὶ καιρὸν δεδωκυίας τῇ ἀνθρωπίνῃ αὐτοῦ φύσει χρήσασθαι τοῖς ἰδίοις, θελῆσαι λέγω καὶ μὴ δυνηθῆναι. Καὶ πάλιν· «Πάτερ, εἰ δυνατόν, παρελθέτω ἀπ' ἐμοῦ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο», τουτέστι τὸ τοῦ θανάτου. Ἰδοὺ ἡ φυσικὴ τῆς ζωῆς ὄρεξις καὶ ἐπιθυμία, ἣν φυσικῶς λογικά τε καὶ ἄλογα ζῷα κέκτηνται. «Πλὴν μὴ τὸ ἐμὸν γενέσθω θέλημα, ἀλλὰ τὸ σόν.» Ἰδοὺ ἡ φυσικὴ καὶ λογικὴ τοῦ νοῦ ὄρεξις ἡ αὐτεξούσιος καὶ κριτικὴ καὶ χαλιναγωγὸς τῆς ἀλόγου ὀρέξεως. «Μὴ τὸ ἐμὸν γενέσθω θέλημα, ἀλλὰ τὸ σόν.» «Τὸ ἐμόν», τὸ ἀνθρώπινον, καθ' ὃ οὐ κοινωνός σού εἰμι· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος σὺ καθὼς ἐγὼ γέγονας, τουτέστιν ἐφάμιλλος, οὐδὲ πάθη ἀνθρώπινα ἀνεδέξω. «Ἀλλὰ τὸ σόν», τὸ κοινὸν ἐμοῦ τε καὶ σοῦ, οὗ κοινωνός εἰμι ὡς καὶ τῆς φύσεως τῆς θεότητος.","english":"For \"all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,\" according to the apostle—for this reason the Son of God, having become man by the good pleasure of the Father, took up a human nature and a natural human will, but did not take up a human hypostasis, so that the natural will of humanity might not conduct itself according to its own hypostatic and gnomic will in opposition to the divine will, but might become obedient in all things by its own free choice, and thus the ancient transgression might be undone.\n\nAnd again: He had a human will, according to Mark the evangelist, because \"entering into a house he wished to escape notice and could not.\" The divine will, then, is almighty and not weak, but the human will is weak. By his human will, then, he willed, while his divine will gave its good pleasure and granted time to his human nature to use its own properties—I mean to will and not to be able. And again: \"Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me,\" that is, the cup of death. Behold the natural appetite and desire for life, which rational and irrational animals possess by nature. \"Nevertheless, not my will but yours be done.\" Behold the natural and rational appetite of the mind, the free, discerning, and bridling power over the irrational appetite. \"Not my will be done, but yours.\" \"Mine,\" the human—insofar as I am not a partaker of you; for you did not become man as I did, that is, equal to me, nor did you take on human passions. \"But yours,\" the will common to me and to you, of which I am a partaker, as also of the nature of the Godhead.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":60,"ref":"p60","source":"«Οὐ γὰρ καταβέβηκα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, ἵνα ποιῶ τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμόν, ἀλλὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με», οὐχ ἵνα ἰδίᾳ\n\nγνώμῃ ἐναντίᾳ τῷ σῷ θελήματι ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη μου πολιτεύσηται θέλησις, ἀλλ' ὑπήκοος τῷ σῷ θελήματι γένηται καὶ τὸ θελητὸν τῆς σῆς θελήσεως καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς ἀνθρωπίνης θελήσεως γένηται. Θέλημα γὰρ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ εὐδοκία τὸ παθεῖν αὐτὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου σωτηρίας, ἐφ' ᾧ καὶ σεσάρκωται. Ἐνταῦθα γὰρ τὸ θέλημα οὐ τὴν θέλησιν, ἀλλὰ τὸ θελητὸν ὑποφαίνει· οὐ γὰρ τὴν θείαν θέλησιν ποιῆσαι αὐτῷ πρόκειται–αὕτη γὰρ ἄκτιστός τε καὶ ἄναρχος–, ἀλλὰ τὸ θελητόν, ὅπερ ἡ θεία θέλησις, καθὼς καὶ τὸ «πάντα τὰ θελήματα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτοῖς» ἐκληπτέον. Οὐ γὰρ πολλαὶ θελητικαὶ δυνάμεις εἰσὶ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ μία, οὔτε ἡ θελητικὴ δύναμις τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις, ἐπεὶ καὶ ἡ φύσις– ὧν γὰρ ἡ θέλησις μία, τούτων καὶ ἡ φύσις μία–, ἀλλὰ τὰ θελήματα τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσιν ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις, τουτέστιν αἱ ἐντολαὶ αὐτοῦ. Δέδεικται τοίνυν, ὡς εἶχεν ὁ Χριστὸς ὥσπερ δύο φύσεις, οὕτω καὶ δύο θελήσεις φυσικὰς καὶ δύο ἐνεργείας φυσικάς, ἵνα ᾖ θεὸς τέλειος καὶ ἄνθρωπος τέλειος· οὐ γὰρ θεὸς τέλειος ὁ μὴ ἔχων πάντα τὰ τῆς θεότητος ἰδιώματα καὶ πρὸ τούτων τὴν θείαν φύσιν οὐδὲ ἄνθρωπος τέλειος ὁ μὴ ἔχων τελείαν τὴν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου φύσιν καὶ πάντα τὰ φυσικὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος ἰδιώματα. Εἶχε μὲν οὖν τὴν θείαν θέλησιν, καθ' ἣν ὡς θεὸς τὰ θεῖα ἤθελε σὺν πατρὶ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι· ὧν ὡς μία φύσις, οὕτως καὶ ἡ κατ' αὐτὴν θέλησις.","english":"For I have not come down from heaven to do my own will, but the will of the one who sent me\"—not so that my human will might conduct itself by its own judgment in opposition to your will, but so that it might become obedient to your will and so that the thing willed by your will might become the thing willed by my human will as well. For the will and good pleasure of the Father was that he should suffer for the salvation of the world, for which cause he was also made flesh. Here, then, \"will\" indicates not the faculty of will but the thing willed; for it is not the divine will that is set before him to do—for that is uncreated and without beginning—but the thing willed, which is what the divine will is, just as \"all his wills are in them\" must also be understood. For there are not many faculties of will in God, but one; nor is the faculty of will of God in the saints, since neither is the nature—for those whose will is one, their nature is also one—but the wills of God are in the saints, that is, his commandments. It has been shown, therefore, that just as Christ had two natures, so also he had two natural wills and two natural energies, so that he might be perfect God and perfect man; for he is not perfect God who does not have all the properties of divinity and, before these, the divine nature, nor is he perfect man who does not have the perfect nature of man and all the natural properties of humanity. He had, then, the divine will, according to which, as God, he willed the divine things together with the Father and the Spirit; of whom, as their nature is one, so also is the will according to it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":61,"ref":"p61","source":"Εἶχε δὲ καὶ ἀνθρωπίνην φυσικὴν θέλησιν, τουτέστι φυσικὴν θελητικὴν δύναμιν, ὡς γενόμενος τέλειος ἄνθρωπος, ὡς ἡ μήτηρ· ὧν ὡς μία φύσις, οὕτω μία καὶ ἡ θέλησις. Εἶχε καὶ τὴν θείαν ἐνέργειαν, καθ' ἣν αὐτεξουσίως θέλων ἐνήργει τὰ θεῖα σὺν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι· εἶχε καὶ ἀνθρωπίνην ἐνέργειαν, καθ' ἣν αὐτεξουσίως θέλων ἐνήργει τὰ ἀνθρώπινα. Οὐ γὰρ θείᾳ θελήσει ἤθελε λαθεῖν, καὶ οὐκ ἠδύνατο, οὐδὲ φαγεῖν καὶ πιεῖν–ταῦτα γὰρ ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως θελητὰ καὶ οὐ θείας–, οὐδὲ θείᾳ ἐνεργείᾳ περιεπάτει ἢ τὰς χεῖρας ἐξέτεινεν· οὐ γὰρ θείας φύσεως ἢ ἐνεργείας περιπατεῖν καὶ ἐκτείνειν χεῖρας. Ὅμως ἑκατέρα τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ φύσεων μετὰ τῆς θατέρου κοινωνίας ἤθελε καὶ ἐνήργει τοῦθ', ὅπερ ἴδιον ἔσχηκεν, ἐξυπηρετουμένης τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης θελήσεως καὶ ἐνεργείας αὐτοῦ τῇ θείᾳ αὐτοῦ θελήσει καὶ ἐνεργείᾳ. Ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τῆς σωματικῆς ἐνεργείας αὐτοῦ ἡ θεία αὐτοῦ ἐνήργει ἐνέργεια– ἐκράτησε γὰρ τῇ χειρὶ τῆς χειρὸς τῆς παιδὸς καὶ εἶπε τὸ «κοράσιον, ἔγειραι», καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁφῆς καὶ τοῦ λόγου ἡ θεία ἐνέργεια τὴν κόρην ἐζωοποίησεν–, οὕτω καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης αὐτοῦ θελήσεως ἡ θεία ἐνήργει αὐτοῦ θέλησις. Θελήσας γὰρ θεϊκῶς τὴν θαυματουργίαν εἰργάσατο καὶ θελήσας ἀνθρωπίνως τὴν χεῖρα ἐξέτεινε καὶ εἶπεν· «Ἔγειραι». Καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν· Ὅσα ἠθέλησέ τε καὶ ἐνήργησεν ἀνθρωπίνως, σωτηρία τοῦ κόσμου γέγονεν·","english":"He also had a natural human will—that is, a natural faculty of willing—since he became a perfect human being, as his mother was; and as they are one nature, so also is the will one. He also had the divine activity, according to which, willing by his own free choice, he performed divine things together with the Father and the Spirit; and he had a human activity, according to which, willing by his own free choice, he performed human things. For it was not by divine will that he wished to escape notice and could not, nor to eat and drink—for these are objects of will belonging to human nature and not to the divine—nor did he walk or stretch out his hands by divine activity; for walking and stretching out hands are not of the divine nature or activity. Nevertheless, each of the two natures in Christ, in communion with the other, willed and acted in that which was proper to it, his human will and activity serving his divine will and activity. For just as through his bodily activity his divine activity was at work—for he took the girl's hand with his hand and said, \"Girl, arise,\" and through the touch and the word the divine activity gave the girl life—so also through his human will his divine will was at work. For willing divinely, he accomplished the miracle, and willing humanly, he stretched out his hand and said, \"Arise.\" And to speak simply: whatever he willed and accomplished in a human way became the salvation of the world.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":62,"ref":"p62","source":"οὐ γὰρ κατὰ θεὸν τὰ θεῖα ἔδρασεν–οὐ γὰρ θεοῦ γυμνοῦ δι' ἁφῆς καὶ ἐκτάσεως χειρῶν τὰς θαυματουργίας ἐποίει–οὐδὲ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον τὰ ἀνθρώπινα ἔπραξεν–οὐ γὰρ ἀνθρώπου ψιλοῦ τὰ πάθη τὰ τοῦ κόσμου σωτήρια–, ἀλλὰ θεὸς ὢν καὶ γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος καινήν τινα καὶ ξένην θεανδρικὴν ἐνέργειαν ἐπεδείξατο, θείαν, ἀλλὰ δι' ἀνθρωπίνης ἐνεργοῦσαν, ἀνθρωπίνην, ἀλλὰ τῇ θείᾳ ἐξυπηρετουμένην καὶ τὰ τῆς συνυφεστηκυίας αὐτῇ θεότητος ἐμφαίνουσαν σύμβολα. Ὥσπερ γὰρ ἑτέρας φύσεως ὁ σίδηρος καὶ ἑτέρας τὸ πῦρ καὶ ἑτέρας καὶ ἑτέρας ἐνεργείας τούτων ἑκάτερον· οὔτε γὰρ τέμνει τὸ πῦρ, ἀλλὰ καίει καὶ φωτίζει, οὔτε καίει ὁ σίδηρος οὔτε φωτίζει κατὰ τὴν ἰδίαν φυσι κὴν ἐνέργειαν, ἀλλὰ τέμνει καὶ μέλας ἐστίν· ὁπηνίκα δὲ ἕνωσις ἀμφοτέρων γένηται, ἡνωμένως καὶ οὐ διῃρημένως ἕκαστον τὴν οἰκείαν ἐνεργεῖ ἐνέργειαν–ἅμα γὰρ τῇ τομῇ καὶ ἡ καῦσις γίνεται καὶ διὰ τοῦ σιδήρου καίει τὸ πῦρ καὶ φωτίζει–, οὐ μία δὲ φυσικὴ ἐνέργεια, ἀλλὰ δύο, μία μὲν φυσικὴ τοῦ πυρὸς ἡ καυστική, ἑτέρα δὲ φυσικὴ τοῦ σιδήρου ἡ τομή, καὶ ἑκάστης ἴδιον ἀποτέλεσμα, τῆς μὲν τοῦ πυρὸς ἡ καῦσις, τῆς δὲ τοῦ σιδήρου ἡ τομή, εἰ καὶ καυστικὴ τομή ἐστι καὶ τμητικὴ καῦσις· –οὕτω","english":"For he did not perform the divine things as God—for he did not work his miracles as a bare God by touch and stretching out of hands—nor did he do the human things as a human being—for the sufferings that are the salvation of the world were not those of a mere human being—but being God and having become human being, he displayed a certain new and strange theandric activity, divine, but operating through the human, human, but ministering to the divine and showing forth the symbols of the divinity that subsists together with it. For just as iron is of one nature and fire of another, and each of these has its own distinct activity; for fire does not cut, but burns and gives light, nor does iron burn or give light according to its own natural activity, but it cuts and is black; but whenever a union of both comes about, each performs its own activity in a united and not a divided way—for at the same time as the cut, the burning also takes place, and through the iron the fire burns and gives light—and there are not one natural activity but two, one natural activity of fire, the burning, and another natural activity of iron, the cutting, and each has its own proper result, of fire the burning, of iron the cutting, even if it is a burning cut and a cutting burning—so","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":63,"ref":"p63","source":"καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἑκατέρα φύσις ἐνεργεῖ τὰ ἴδια μετὰ τῆς θατέρου κοινωνίας, καὶ οὐ μία αἱ δύο οὐδὲ τῶν δύο ἓν ἀποτέλεσμα, ἀλλὰ τῆς μὲν ἀνθρωπίνης αὐτοῦ φύσεως τὸ αὐτεξουσίως ὑπακούειν καὶ ἐξυπηρετεῖσθαι τῷ θείῳ θελήματι καὶ θελήματι οἰκείῳ ἐκτείνειν τὴν χεῖρα καὶ ἅπτεσθαι τῆς παιδὸς καθ' ὑπακοὴν τοῦ θείου θελήματος καὶ ὑπηρεσίαν, τῆς δὲ θεότητος τὴν τῆς παιδὸς ἔγερσιν ἐνεργούσης διὰ τῆς ἁφῆς. Ὥστε τῆς μὲν ἀνθρωπίνης ἐνεργείας πέρας ἡ ἑκούσιος τῆς χειρὸς ἔκτασις καὶ ἁφή, τῆς δὲ θείας ἡ τῆς παιδὸς ἔγερσις.\n\n44 Ὅθεν οὐδὲ εἶπεν ὁ μέγας Διονύσιος μίαν «θεανδρικὴν ἐνέργειαν», ἀλλ' ἀπολύτως «καινὴν» ἤτοι ξένην. Ἑκάστη γὰρ αὐτῶν ξένη ἦν καὶ θεανδρική· οὐ γὰρ ἀριθμὸν ἐμφαίνων εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ τὸν ξένον τρόπον. Καὶ γὰρ ὁ κύριος οἰκτείρας τὸ ἴδιον πλάσμα τὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας πάθος ἑκουσίως παραδεξάμενον ὥσπερ ἐπισπορὰν τοῦ ἐχθροῦ ὅλον ἀνέλαβε τὸ νοσῆσαν, ἵν' ὅλον θεραπεύσῃ· «τὸ γὰρ ἀπρόσληπτον ἀθεράπευτον.» Ὃ δὲ προσελήφθη, τοῦτο καὶ σῴζεται. Τί δὲ τὸ πταῖσαν καὶ πρωτοπαθῆσαν εἰ μὴ ὁ νοῦς καὶ ἡ τούτου λογικὴ ὄρεξις, τουτέστιν ἡ θέλησις; Τοῦτο οὖν ἔχρῃζε τῆς θεραπείας· θελήματος γὰρ νόσος ἡ ἁμαρτία. Εἰ οὐκ ἀνέλαβε λογικὴν καὶ νοερὰν ψυχὴν καὶ τὴν ταύτης θέλησιν, οὐκ ἰάσατο τὸ πάθος τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεως· διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ θέλησιν ἀνέλαβεν. Ἁμαρτίαν δὲ οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν· οὐ γὰρ ποίημα αὐτοῦ ἡ ἁμαρτία.","english":"And in our Lord Jesus Christ each nature performs its own proper works with the communion of the other, and the two are not one, nor is there one result of the two, but it belongs to his human nature to obey freely and to serve the divine will, and by its own will to stretch out the hand and touch the girl in obedience to the divine will and service, while the Godhead performs the raising of the girl through the touch. So that the end of the human operation is the voluntary stretching out and touch of the hand, and the end of the divine operation is the raising of the girl.\n\nTherefore the great Dionysius did not say one “theandric operation,” but absolutely “new,” that is, strange. For each of them was strange and theandric; for he did not speak to indicate a number, but the strange manner. For the Lord, having compassion on his own handiwork, which voluntarily received the passion of sin as a sowing of the enemy, took up the whole that was sick, in order that he might heal the whole; “for what is not assumed is not healed.” And what was assumed, this is also saved. But what was it that stumbled and suffered first, if not the mind and its rational appetite, that is, the will? This, then, needed healing; for the sickness of the will is sin. If he had not assumed a rational and intelligent soul and its will, he would not have healed the passion of human nature; for this reason he also assumed a will. But he did not assume sin; for sin is not his workmanship.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":64,"ref":"p64","source":"Ἵν' οὖν ἐξορίσῃ τὴν ἐπισπαρεῖσαν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐχθροῦ νόσον τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἐκ τῆς ψυχῆς, διὰ τοῦτο ψυχὴν μὲν καὶ τὴν ταύτης θέλησιν ἀνέλαβεν, ἁμαρτίαν δὲ οὐκ ἐποίησε, καὶ ἵνα ἐλευθερώσῃ τὸ σῶμα ἐκ τῆς φθορᾶς καὶ τῆς ὑπουργίας τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ σῶμα ἀνέλαβεν. Ἀνέλαβε δὲ καὶ τὰς ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ παραβάσει τιμωρίας, ἵνα τὸ καθ' ἡμῶν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀποτίσας ὄφλημα ἐλευθερώσῃ ἡμᾶς τῆς κατακρίσεως· δοῦλος γὰρ ἐλευθερῶσαι δοῦλον οὐ δύναται. Διὰ τοῦτο αὐτὸς ὡς ἀναμάρτητος ἐλεύθερος ὢν καὶ μήτε θανάτῳ μήτε τινὶ ἑτέρῳ ὑποκείμενος ἐπιτιμίῳ τὰ ἡμῶν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀνεδέξατο ἐπιτίμια καὶ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀπέθανεν, ἵνα δῷ «ἐξουσίαν» τοῖς λαμβάνουσιν αὐτὸν «τέκνα θεοῦ γενέσθαι» καὶ τὴν ἀφθαρσίαν αὐτοῖς χαρίσηται καὶ τὸν ἰσάγγελον καὶ ἄλυπον καὶ ἄμοχθον βίον ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι δωρήσεται· δεῖ γὰρ πρῶτον ὑπομεῖναι τὰ τοῦ πρώτου Ἀδάμ, ἐξ οὗ καὶ τὴν γένεσιν ἐσχήκαμεν, καὶ οὕτω τυχεῖν τοῦ δευτέρου Ἀδὰμ τῶν δωρεῶν. Ἐὰν ἐπακολουθήσωμεν τοῖς αὐτοῦ ἴχνεσι καὶ τὸν νόμον τῆς ἐλευθερίας φυλάξωμεν καὶ μὴ πάλιν τῷ ζυγῷ τῆς ἁμαρτίας δουλεύσωμεν–ἐλευθερώσας γὰρ ἡμῶν τὴν φύσιν πάλιν ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν ἐντολὴν καὶ ἔδειξεν ἡμῖν ὁδόν, καθ' ἣν περιπατοῦντες συμβασιλεύσομεν αὐτῷ, ἀπερχόμενοι, ἔνθα αὐτὸς πρόδρομος ἡμῶν ἀπῆλθεν, ἄλλην δὲ ὁδὸν ὁδεύοντες ἔξω μενοῦμεν–, γένοιτο δὲ ἡμᾶς τοῖς αὐτοῦ ἐπακολουθοῦντας ἴχνεσι πάντοτε σὺν αὐτῷ εἶναι καὶ ἀπολαύειν τῆς αὐτοῦ δόξης καὶ βασιλείας νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. Ἀμήν.","english":"Therefore, in order to banish from the soul the disease of sin that had been sown into it by the enemy, for this reason he assumed a soul and its will, yet committed no sin; and in order to free the body from corruption and from the service of sin, he also assumed a body. And he assumed also the penalties that followed upon the first transgression, so that, having paid on our behalf the debt owed against us, he might free us from condemnation; for a slave cannot set a slave free. For this reason he himself, being free as one without sin and subject neither to death nor to any other penalty, took upon himself our penalties on our behalf and died for us, so that he might give \"authority\" to those who receive him \"to become children of God\" and bestow incorruptibility upon them, and grant them the angel-like, sorrowless, and toilless life in the regeneration in the age to come; for it is necessary first to endure the things of the first Adam, from whom we also have our origin, and thus to obtain the gifts of the second Adam. If we follow in his footsteps and keep the law of freedom and do not again become slaves to the yoke of sin—for having freed our nature he again gave us a commandment and showed us the way, walking in which we shall reign with him, departing to where he himself went before us as our forerunner, while walking another way we shall remain outside—and may it come to pass that we, following in his footsteps, may always be with him and enjoy his glory and kingdom, now and always and unto the ages of ages. Amen.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]}]}