10 - Book III Chapters 6-11

SECTION TEN OF THE ORTHODOX FAITH BY JOHN OF DAMASCUS TRANSLATED BY S. D. F. SALMOND THIS LIBRIVOX RECORDING IS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN BOOK THREE CHAPTER SIX THAT IN ONE OF ITS SUBSISTANCES THE DIVINE NATURE IS UNITED IN ITS ENTIRETY TO THE HUMAN NATURE, IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND NOT ONLY PART TO PART. WHAT IS COMMON AND GENERAL IS PREDICATED OF THE INCLUDED PARTICULARS. ESSENCE, THEN, IS COMMON AS BEING A FORM, WHILE SUBSISTANCE IS PARTICULAR. IT IS PARTICULAR NOT AS THOUGH IT HAD PART OF THE NATURE AND HAD NOT THE REST, BUT PARTICULAR IN A NUMERICAL SENSE, AS BEING INDIVIDUAL, FOR IT IS IN NUMBER AND NOT IN NATURE THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBSISTANCES IS SAID TO LIE. ESSENCE, THEREFORE, IS PREDICATED OF SUBSISTANCE, BECAUSE IN EACH SUBSISTANCE OF THE SAME FORM THE ESSENCE IS PERFECT. WHEREFORE, SUBSISTANCES DO NOT DIFFER FROM EACH OTHER IN ESSENCE, BUT IN THE ACCIDENTS, WHICH INDEED ARE THE CHARACTERISTIC PROPERTIES, BUT CHARACTERISTIC OF SUBSISTANCE AND NOT OF NATURE. FOR INDEED, THEY DEFINE SUBSISTANCE AS ESSENCE ALONG WITH ACCIDENTS, SO THAT THE SUBSISTANCE CONTAINS BOTH THE GENERAL AND THE PARTICULAR, AND HAS AN INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE, WHILE ESSENCE HAS NOT AN INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE, BUT IS CONTEMPLATED IN THE SUBSISTANCES. ACCORDINGLY, WHEN ONE OF THE SUBSISTANCES SUFFERS, THE WHOLE ESSENCE, BEING CAPABLE OF SUFFERING, IS HELD TO HAVE SUFFERED IN ONE OF ITS SUBSISTANCES AS MUCH AS THE SUBSISTANCE SUFFERED. BUT IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY FOLLOW, HOWEVER, THAT ALL THE SUBSISTANCES OF THE SAME CLASS SHOULD SUFFER ALONG WITH THE SUFFERING SUBSISTANCE. THUS, THEREFORE, WE CONFESS THAT THE NATURE OF THE GODHEAD IS HOLY AND PERFECTLY IN EACH OF ITS SUBSISTANCES, HOLY IN THE FATHER, HOLY IN THE SON, AND HOLY IN THE HOLY SPIRIT. WHEREFORE, ALSO, THE FATHER IS PERFECT GOD, THE SON IS PERFECT GOD, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT IS PERFECT GOD. IN LIKE MANNER, TOO, IN THE INCARNATION OF THE TRINITY, OF THE ONE GOD, THE WORD OF THE HOLY TRINITY, WE HOLD THAT IN ONE OF ITS SUBSISTANCES THE NATURE OF THE GODHEAD IS HOLY AND PERFECTLY UNITED WITH THE WHOLE NATURE OF HUMANITY, AND NOT PART UNITED TO PART. THE DIVINE APOSTLE, IN TRUTH, SAYS THAT IN HIM DWELLETH ALL THE FULLNESS OF THE GODHEAD BODILY, THAT IS TO SAY, IN HIS FLESH. AND HIS DIVINELY INSPIRED DISCIPLE, DIONYSIUS, WHO HAD SO DEEP A KNOWLEDGE OF THINGS DIVINE, SAID THAT THE GODHEAD AS A WHOLE HAD FELLOWSHIP WITH US IN ONE OF ITS OWN SUBSISTANCES. BUT WE SHALL NOT BE DRIVEN TO HOLD THAT ALL THE SUBSISTANCES OF THE HOLY GODHEAD, TO WHIT THE THREE, ARE MADE ONE IN SUBSISTANCE WITH ALL THE SUBSISTANCES OF HUMANITY. FOR IN NO OTHER RESPECT DID THE FATHER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT TAKE PART IN THE INCARNATION OF GOD THE WORD THAN ACCORDING TO GOOD WILL AND PLEASURE. BUT WE HOLD THAT TO THE WHOLE OF HUMAN NATURE THE WHOLE ESSENCE OF THE GODHEAD WAS UNITED. FOR GOD THE WORD OMITTED NONE OF THE THINGS WHICH HE IMPLANTED IN OUR NATURE WHEN HE FORMED US IN THE BEGINNING, BUT TOOK THEM ALL UPON HIMSELF, BODY AND SOUL, BOTH INTELLIGENT AND RATIONAL, AND ALL THEIR PROPERTIES. FOR THE CREATURE THAT IS DEVOID OF ONE OF THESE IS NOT MAN, BUT HE IN HIS FULLNESS TOOK UPON HIMSELF ME IN ALL MY FULLNESS, AND WAS UNITED WHOLE TO WHOLE THAT HE MIGHT IN HIS GRACE BESTOW SALVATION ON THE WHOLE MAN. FOR WHAT HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN CANNOT BE HEALED. THE WORD OF GOD THAN WAS UNITED TO FLESH THROUGH THE MEDIUM OF MIND WHICH IS INTERMEDIATE BETWEEN THE PURITY OF GOD AND THE GROSSNESS OF FLESH. FOR THE MIND HOLDS SWAY OVER SOUL AND BODY. BUT WHILE THE MIND IS THE PUREST PART OF THE SOUL, GOD IS THAT OF THE MIND. AND WHEN IT IS ALLOWED BY THAT WHICH IS MORE EXCELLENT, THE MIND OF CHRIST GIVES PROOF OF ITS OWN AUTHORITY. BUT IT IS UNDER THE DOMINION OF AND OBEDIENT TO THAT WHICH IS MORE EXCELLENT, AND DOES THOSE THINGS WHICH THE DIVINE WILL PURPOSES. FURTHER, THE MIND HAS BECOME THE SEAT OF THE DIVINITY UNITED WITH IT IN SUBSISTENCE, JUST AS IS EVIDENTLY THE CASE WITH THE BODY TOO, NOT AS AN INMATE, WHICH IS THE IMPIOUS ERROR INTO WHICH THE HERETICS FALL WHEN THEY SAY THAT ONE BUSHEL CANNOT CONTAIN TWO BUSHELS. BUT THEY ARE JUDGING WHAT IS IMMATERIAL BY MATERIAL STANDARDS. HOW INDEED COULD CHRIST BE CALLED PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN, AND BE SAID TO BE OF LIKE ESSENCE WITH THE FATHER AND WITH US, IF ONLY PART OF THE DIVINE NATURE IS JOINED IN HIM TO PART OF THE HUMAN NATURE? WE HOLD, MOREOVER, THAT OUR NATURE HAS BEEN RAISED FROM THE DEAD AND HAS ASCENDED TO THE HEAVENS AND TAKEN ITS SEAT AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER, NOT THAT ALL THE PERSONS OF MEN HAVE RISEN FROM THE DEAD AND TAKEN THEIR SEAT AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER, BUT THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO THE WHOLE OF OUR NATURE IN THE SUBSISTENCE OF CHRIST. VERILY, THE DIVINE APOSTLE SAYS, GOD HATH RAISED US UP TOGETHER AND MADE US SIT TOGETHER IN CHRIST. AND THIS FURTHER WE HOLD, THAT THE UNION TOOK PLACE THROUGH COMMON ESSENCES, FOR EVERY ESSENCE IS COMMON TO THE SUBSISTENCES CONTAINED IN IT, AND THERE CANNOT BE FOUND A PARTIAL AND PARTICULAR NATURE, THAT IS TO SAY ESSENCE, FOR OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE TO HOLD THAT THE SAME SUBSISTENCES ARE AT ONCE THE SAME AND DIFFERENT IN ESSENCE, AND THAT THE HOLY TRINITY IN RESPECT OF THE DIVINITY IS AT ONCE THE SAME AND DIFFERENT IN ESSENCE. SO THEN, THE SAME NATURE IS TO BE OBSERVED IN EACH OF THE SUBSISTENCES, AND WHEN WE SAID THAT THE NATURE OF THE WORD BECAME FLESH, AS DID THE BLESSED ATHANASIUS AND CERILUS, WE MEAN THAT THE DIVINITY WAS JOINED TO THE FLESH, HENCE WE CANNOT SAY THE NATURE OF THE WORD SUFFERED, FOR THE DIVINITY IN IT DID NOT SUFFER, BUT WE SAY THAT THE HUMAN NATURE, NOT BY ANY MEANS HOWEVER MEANING ALL THE SUBSISTENCES OF MEN, SUFFERED IN CHRIST, AND WE CONFESS FURTHER THAT CHRIST SUFFERED IN HIS HUMAN NATURE, SO THAT WHEN WE SPEAK OF THE NATURE OF THE WORD, WE MEAN THE WORD HIMSELF, AND THE WORD HAS BOTH THE GENERAL ELEMENT OF ESSENCE AND THE PARTICULAR ELEMENT OF SUBSISTENCE. CHAPTER VII. CONCERNING THE ONE COMPOUND SUBSISTENCE OF GOD THE WORD. WE HOLD THEN THAT THE DIVINE SUBSISTENCE OF GOD THE WORD EXISTED BEFORE ALL ELSE AND IS WITHOUT TIME AND ETERNAL, SIMPLE AND UNCOMPOUND, UNCREATED, INCORPOREAL, INVISIBLE, INTANGIBLE, UNCIRCUMSCRIBED, POSSESSING ALL THE FATHER POSSESSES, SINCE HE IS OF THE SAME ESSENCE WITH HIM, DIFFERING FROM THE FATHER'S SUBSISTENCE IN THE MANNER OF HIS GENERATION AND THE RELATION OF THE FATHER'S SUBSISTENCE, BEING PERFECT ALSO, AND AT NO TIME SEPARATED FROM THE FATHER'S SUBSISTENCE. AND IN THESE LAST DAYS, WITHOUT LEAVING THE FATHER'S BOSOM, TOOK UP HIS ABODE IN AN UNCIRCUMSCRIBED MANNER IN THE WOMB OF THE HOLY VIRGIN, WITHOUT THE INSTRUMENTALITY OF SEED, AND IN AN INCOMPREHENSIBLE MANNER KNOWN ONLY TO HIMSELF, AND CAUSING THE FLESH DERIVED FROM THE HOLY VIRGIN TO SUBSIST IN THE VERY SUBSISTENCE THAT WAS BEFORE ALL THE AGES. SO THEN HE WAS BOTH IN ALL THINGS AND ABOVE ALL THINGS, AND ALSO DWELT IN THE WOMB OF THE HOLY MOTHER OF GOD, BUT IN IT BY THE ENERGY OF THE INCARNATION. HE THEREFORE BECAME FLESH, AND HE TOOK UPON HIMSELF THEREBY THE FIRST FRUITS OF OUR COMPOUND NATURE, NAMELY, THE FLESH ANIMATED WITH THE INTELLIGENT AND RATIONAL SOUL, SO THAT THE VERY SUBSISTENCE OF GOD THE WORD WAS CHANGED INTO THE SUBSISTENCE OF THE FLESH, AND THE SUBSISTENCE OF THE WORD WHICH WAS FORMERLY SIMPLE BECAME COMPOUND, YEA COMPOUNDED OF TWO PERFECT NATURES, DIVINITY AND HUMANITY, AND BEARING THE CHARACTERISTIC AND DISTINCTIVE PROPERTY OF THE DIVINE SONSHIP OF GOD THE WORD, IN VIRTUE OF WHICH IT IS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE FATHER AND THE SPIRIT, AND ALSO THE CHARACTERISTIC AND DISTINCTIVE PROPERTIES OF THE FLESH, IN VIRTUE OF WHICH IT DIFFERS FROM THE MOTHER AND THE REST OF MANKIND, BEARING FURTHER THE PROPERTIES OF THE DIVINE NATURE, IN VIRTUE OF WHICH IT IS UNITED TO THE FATHER AND THE SPIRIT, AND THE MARKS OF THE HUMAN NATURE, IN VIRTUE OF WHICH IT IS UNITED TO THE MOTHER AND TO US, AND FURTHER IT DIFFERS FROM THE FATHER AND THE SPIRIT AND THE MOTHER AND US IN BEING AT ONCE GOD AND MAN, FOR THIS WE KNOW TO BE THE MOST SPECIAL PROPERTY OF THE SUBSISTANCE OF CHRIST. WHEREFORE WE CONFESS HIM EVEN AFTER THE INCARNATION THE ONE SON OF GOD, AND LIKEWISE SON OF MAN, ONE CHRIST, ONE LORD, THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON AND WORD OF GOD, ONE LORD JESUS, WE REVERENCE HIS TWO GENERATIONS, ONE FROM THE FATHER BEFORE TIME AND BEYOND CAUSE AND REASON AND TIME AND NATURE, AND ONE IN THE END FOR OUR SAKE AND LIKE TO US AND ABOVE US, FOR OUR SAKE BECAUSE IT WAS FOR OUR SALVATION, LIKE TO US AND THAT HE WAS MAN BORN OF WOMAN AT FULL TITHE AND ABOVE US BECAUSE IT WAS NOT BY SEED BUT BY THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE HOLY VIRGIN MARY TRANSCENDING THE LAWS OF PARTURITION. WE PROCLAIM HIM NOT AS GOD ONLY DEVOID OF OUR HUMANITY NOR YET AS MAN ONLY STRIPPING HIM OF HIS DIVINITY NOR AS TWO DISTINCT PERSONS BUT AS ONE AND THE SAME AT ONCE GOD AND MAN PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN HOLY GOD AND HOLY MAN THE SAME BEING HOLY GOD EVEN THOUGH HE WAS ALSO FLESH AND HOLY MAN EVEN THOUGH HE WAS ALSO MOST HIGH GOD AND BY PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN WE MEAN TO EMPHASIZE THE FULLNESS AND UNFAILINGNESS OF THE NATURES WHILE BY HOLY GOD AND HOLY MAN WE MEAN TO LAY STRESS ON THE SINGULARITY AND INDIVIDUALITY OF THE SUBSISTENCE AND WE CONFESS ALSO THAT THERE IS ONE INCARNATE NATURE OF GOD THE WORD EXPRESSING BY THE WORD INCARNATE THE ESSENCE OF THE FLESH ACCORDING TO THE BLESSED CYRIL AND SO THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH AND YET DID NOT ABANDON HIS OWN PROPER IMMATERIALITY HE BECAME HOLY FLESH AND YET REMAINED HOLY UNCIRCUMSCRIBED SO FAR AS HE IS BODY HE IS DIMINISHED AND CONTRACTED INTO NARROW LIMITS BUT IN AS MUCH AS HE IS GOD HE IS UNCIRCUMSCRIBED HIS FLESH NOT BEING COEXTENSIVE WITH HIS UNCIRCUMSCRIBED DIVINITY HE IS THEN HOLY PERFECT GOD BUT YET IS NOT SIMPLY GOD FOR HE IS NOT ONLY GOD BUT ALSO MAN AND HE IS ALSO HOLY PERFECT MAN BUT NOT SIMPLY MAN FOR HE IS NOT ONLY MAN BUT ALSO GOD FOR SIMPLY HERE HAS REFERENCE TO HIS NATURE AND HOLY TO HIS SUBSISTENCE JUST AS ANOTHER THING WOULD REFER TO NATURE WHILE ANOTHER WOULD REFER TO SUBSISTENCE BUT OBSERVE THAT ALTHOUGH WE HOLD THAT THE NATURES OF THE LORD PERMEATE ONE ANOTHER YET WE KNOW THAT THE PERMEATION SPRINGS FROM THE DIVINE NATURE FOR IT IS THAT THAT PENETRATES AND PERMEATES ALL THINGS AS IT WILLS WHILE NOTHING PENETRATES IT AND IT IS IT TOO THAT IMPARTS TO THE FLESH ITS OWN PECULIAR GLORIES WHILE ABIDING ITSELF IMPASSIBLE AND WITHOUT PARTICIPATION IN THE AFFECTIONS OF THE FLESH FOR IF THE SUN IMPARTS TO US HIS ENERGIES AND YET DOES NOT PARTICIPATE IN OURS HOW MUCH THE RATHER MUST THIS BE TRUE OF THE CREATOR AND LORD OF THE SUN CHAPTER VIII IN REPLY TO THOSE WHO ASK WHETHER THE NATURES OF THE LORD ARE BROUGHT UNDER A CONTINUOUS OR A DISCONTINUOUS QUANTITY IF ANYONE ASKS CONCERNING THE NATURES OF THE LORD IF THEY ARE BROUGHT UNDER A CONTINUOUS OR DISCONTINUOUS QUANTITY WE WILL SAY THAT THE NATURES OF THE LORD ARE NEITHER ONE BODY NOR ONE SUPERFICIASE NOR ONE LINE NOR TIME NOR PLACE SO AS TO BE REDUCED TO A CONTINUOUS QUANTITY FOR THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE RECKONED CONTINUOUSLY FURTHER NOTE THAT NUMBER DEALS WITH THINGS THAT DIFFER AND IT IS QUITE IMPOSSIBLE TO ENUMERATE THINGS THAT DIFFER FROM ONE ANOTHER IN NO RESPECT AND JUST SO FAR AS THEY DIFFER ARE THEY ENUMERATED FOR INSTANCE PETER AND PAUL ARE NOT COUNTED SEPARATELY INSOFAR AS THEY ARE ONE FOR SINCE THEY ARE ONE IN RESPECT OF THEIR ESSENCE THEY CANNOT BE SPOKEN OF AS TWO NATURES BUT AS THEY DIFFER IN RESPECT OF SUBSISTANCE THEY ARE SPOKEN OF AS TWO SUBSISTANCES SO THAT NUMBER DEALS WITH DIFFERENCES AND JUST AS THE DIFFERING OBJECTS DIFFER FROM ONE ANOTHER SO FAR ARE THEY ENUMERATED THE NATURES OF THE LORD THEN ARE UNITED WITHOUT CONFUSION SO FAR AS REGARDS SUBSISTANCE AND THEY ARE DIVIDED WITHOUT SEPARATION ACCORDING TO THE METHOD AND MANNER OF DIFFERENCE AND IT IS NOT ACCORDING TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ARE UNITED THAT THEY ARE ENUMERATED FOR IT IS NOT IN RESPECT OF SUBSISTANCE THAT WE HOLD THAT THERE ARE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST BUT ACCORDING TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ARE DIVIDED WITHOUT SEPARATION THEY ARE ENUMERATED FOR IT IS IN RESPECT OF THE METHOD AND MANNER OF DIFFERENCE THAT THERE ARE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST FOR BEING UNITED IN SUBSISTANCE AND PERMEATING ONE ANOTHER THEY ARE UNITED WITHOUT CONFUSION EACH PRESERVING THROUGHOUT ITS OWN PECULIAR AND NATURAL DIFFERENCE HENCE SINCE THEY ARE ENUMERATED ACCORDING TO THE MANNER OF DIFFERENCE AND THAT ALONE THEY MUST BE BROUGHT UNDER A DISCONTINUOUS QUANTITY CHRIST THEREFORE IS ONE PERFECT GOD AND PERFECT MAN AND HIM WE WORSHIP ALONG WITH THE FATHER AND THE SPIRIT WITH ONE OBEISANCE ADORING EVEN HIS IMMACULATE FLESH AND NOT HOLDING THAT THE FLESH IS NOT MEAT FOR WORSHIP FOR IN FACT IT IS WORSHIPED IN THE ONE SUBSISTANCE OF THE WORD WHICH INDEED BECAME SUBSISTANCE FOR IT BUT IN THIS WE DO NOT DO HOMAGE TO THAT WHICH IS CREATED FOR WE WORSHIP HIM NOT AS MERE FLESH BUT AS FLESH UNITED WITH DIVINITY AND BECAUSE HIS TWO NATURES ARE BROUGHT UNDER THE ONE PERSON AND ONE SUBSISTANCE OF GOD THE WORD I FEAR TO TOUCH COAL BECAUSE OF THE FIRE BOUND UP WITH THE WOOD I WORSHIP THE TWO-FOLD NATURE OF CHRIST BECAUSE OF THE DIVINITY THAT IS IN HIM BOUND UP WITH FLESH FOR I DO NOT INTRODUCE A FOURTH PERSON INTO THE TRINITY GOD FORBID BUT I CONFESS ONE PERSON OF GOD THE WORD AND OF HIS FLESH AND THE TRINITY REMAINS TRINITY EVEN AFTER THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD IN REPLY TO THOSE WHO ASK WHETHER THE TWO NATURES ARE BROUGHT UNDER A CONTINUOUS OR A DISCONTINUOUS QUANTITY THE NATURES OF THE LORD ARE NEITHER ONE BODY NOR ONE SUPERFICIES NOR ONE LINE NOR PLACE NOR TIME SO AS TO BE BROUGHT UNDER A CONTINUOUS QUANTITY FOR THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE RECKONED CONTINUOUSLY BUT THE NATURES OF THE LORD ARE UNITED WITHOUT CONFUSION IN RESPECT OF SUBSISTENCE AND ARE DIVIDED WITHOUT SEPARATION ACCORDING TO THE METHOD AND MANNER OF DIFFERENCE AND ACCORDING TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ARE UNITED THEY ARE NOT ENUMERATED FOR WE DO NOT SAY THAT THE NATURES OF CHRIST ARE TWO SUBSISTANCES OR TWO IN RESPECT OF SUBSISTANCE BUT ACCORDING TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ARE DIVIDED WITHOUT DIVISION ARE THEY ENUMERATED FOR THERE ARE TWO NATURES ACCORDING TO THE METHOD AND MANNER OF DIFFERENCE FOR BEING UNITED IN SUBSISTANCE AND PERMEATING ONE ANOTHER THEY ARE UNITED WITHOUT CONFUSION NEITHER HAVING BEEN CHANGED INTO THE OTHER BUT EACH PRESERVING ITS OWN NATURAL DIFFERENCE EVEN AFTER THE UNION FOR THAT WHICH IS CREATED REMAINED CREATED AND THAT WHICH IS UNCREATED UNCREATED BY THE MANNER OF DIFFERENCE THEN AND IN THAT ALONE THEY ARE ENUMERATED AND THUS ARE BROUGHT UNDER DISCONTINUOUS QUANTITY THE THINGS WHICH DIFFER FROM EACH OTHER IN NO RESPECT CANNOT BE ENUMERATED BUT JUST SO FAR AS THEY DIFFER ARE THEY ENUMERATED FOR INSTANCE PETER AND PAUL ARE NOT ENUMERATED IN THOSE RESPECTS IN WHICH THEY ARE ONE FOR BEING ONE IN RESPECT OF THEIR ESSENCE THEY ARE NOT TWO NATURES NOR ARE THEY SO SPOKEN OF BUT IN AS MUCH AS THEY DIFFER IN SUBSISTANCE THEY ARE SPOKEN OF AS TWO SUBSISTANCES SO THAT DIFFERENCE IS THE CAUSE OF NUMBER CHAPTER NINE IN REPLY TO THE QUESTION WHETHER THERE IS NATURE THAT HAS NO SUBSISTANCE FOR ALTHOUGH THERE IS NO NATURE WITHOUT SUBSISTANCE NOR ESSENCE APART FROM PERSON SINCE IN TRUTH IT IS IN PERSONS AND SUBSISTANCES THAT ESSENCE AND NATURE ARE TO BE CONTEMPLATED YET IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY FOLLOW THAT THE NATURES THAT ARE UNITED TO ONE ANOTHER IN SUBSISTANCE SHOULD HAVE EACH ITS OWN PROPER SUBSISTANCE FOR AFTER THEY HAVE COME TOGETHER INTO ONE SUBSISTANCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT NEITHER SHOULD THEY BE WITHOUT SUBSISTANCE NOR SHOULD EACH HAVE ITS OWN PECULIAR SUBSISTANCE BUT THAT BOTH SHOULD HAVE ONE AND THE SAME SUBSISTANCE FOR SINCE ONE AND THE SAME SUBSISTANCE OF THE WORD HAS BECOME THE SUBSISTANCE OF THE NATURES NEITHER OF THEM IS PERMITTED TO BE WITHOUT SUBSISTANCE NOR ARE THEY ALLOWED TO HAVE SUBSISTANCES THAT DIFFER FROM EACH OTHER OR TO HAVE SOMETIMES THE SUBSISTANCE OF THIS NATURE AND SOMETIMES OF THAT BUT ALWAYS WITHOUT DIVISION OR SEPARATION THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME SUBSISTANCE A SUBSISTANCE WHICH IS NOT BROKEN UP INTO PARTS OR DIVIDED SO THAT ONE PART SHOULD BELONG TO THIS AND ONE TO THAT BUT WHICH BELONGS WHOLLY TO THIS AND WHOLLY TO THAT IN ITS ABSOLUTE ENTIRETY CONCERNING THE TRESILLION THE THRICE HOLY This being so, we declare that the addition which the vain-minded Peter the Fuller made to the Tresillion, the Thrice Holy Hymn, is blasphemous, for it introduces a fourth person into the Trinity, giving a separate place to the Son of God, who is the truly subsisting power of the Father, and a separate place to Him who was crucified, as though He were different from the Mighty One, or as though the Holy Trinity was considered passable, and the Father and the Holy Spirit suffered on the cross along with the Son, have done with this blasphemous and nonsensical interpolation. For we hold the words HOLY GOD to refer to the Father without limiting the title of divinity to Him alone, but acknowledging also as God the Son and the Holy Spirit, and the words HOLY and MIGHTY we ascribe to the Son without stripping the Father and the Holy Spirit of might, and the words HOLY and IMMORTAL we attribute to the Holy Spirit without depriving the Father and the Son of immortality. For indeed, we apply all the divine names simply and unconditionally to each of the subsistences, in imitation of the divine Apostles' words, but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we in Him. And nevertheless, we follow Gregory the theologian when he says, but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and one Holy Spirit, in whom are all things. For the words OF WHOM and THROUGH WHOM and IN WHOM do not divide the natures, for neither the prepositions nor the order of the names could ever be changed, but they characterize the properties of one unconfused nature, and this becomes clear from the fact that they are once more gathered into one if only one reads with care these words of the same Apostle. OF HIM and THROUGH HIM and IN HIM are all things. To Him be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. For that the Triscion refers not to the Son alone, but to the Holy Trinity, the divine and saintly Athanasius and Basil and Gregory and all the band of divinely inspired Fathers bear witness, because, as a matter of fact, by the threefold holiness, the Holy Seraphim suggest to us the three subsistences of the superessential Godhead, but by the one Lordship they denote the one essence and dominion of the supremely divine Trinity. Gregory the theologian, of a truth, says, Thus then, the Holy of Holies, which is completely veiled by the Seraphim, and is glorified with three consecrations, meet together in one Lordship and one Divinity. This was the most beautiful and sublime philosophy of still another of our predecessors. Ecclesiastical historians, then, say that once, when the people of Constantinople were offering prayers to God to avert a threatened calamity, during Proclus's tenure of the office of Archbishop, it happened that a boy was snatched up from among the people and was taught by angelic teachers the thrice holy hymn, Thou holy God, holy and mighty one, holy and immortal one, have mercy upon us. And when once more he was restored to earth, he told what he had learned, and all the people sang the hymn. And so the threatened calamity was averted. And in the fourth holy and great ecumenical council, I mean the one at Chalcedon, we are told that it was in this form that the hymn was sung, for the minutes of this holy assembly so recorded. It is therefore a matter for laughter and ridicule that this thrice holy hymn, taught us by the angels and confirmed by the averting of calamity, ratified and established by so great an assembly of the holy fathers, and sung first by the seraphim as a declaration of the three subsistences of the Godhead, should be mangled and forsooth amended to suit the view of a stupid fuller, as though he were higher than the seraphim. But, oh, the arrogance, not to say folly! But we say it thus though demons should rend us in pieces. Do thou, holy God, holy and mighty one, holy and immortal one, have mercy upon us. CHAPTER XI. CONCERNING THE NATURE AS VIEWED IN SPECIES AND IN INDIVIDUAL, AND CONCERNING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNION AND INCARNATION, AND HOW THIS IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD, THE ONE NATURE OF GOD THE WORD INCARNATE. Nature is regarded either abstractly as a matter of pure thought, for it has no independent existence, or commonly in all subsistences of the same species, as their bond of union, and is then spoken of as nature viewed in species, or universally as the same, but with the addition of accidents, in one subsistence, and is spoken of as nature viewed in the individual, this being identical with nature viewed in species. God the Word incarnate, therefore, did not assume the nature that is regarded as an abstraction in pure thought, for this is not incarnation, but only an imposture and a figment of incarnation. Nor the nature viewed in species, for he did not assume all the subsistences, but the nature viewed in the individual, which is identical with that viewed in species. For he took on himself the elements of our compound nature, and these not as having an independent existence, or as being originally an individual, and in this way assumed by him, but as existing in his own subsistence, for the subsistence of God the Word in itself became the subsistence of the flesh, and accordingly the Word became flesh clearly without any change, and likewise the flesh became Word without alteration, and God became man. For the Word is God, and man is God through having one and the same subsistence. And so it is possible to speak of the same thing as being the nature of the Word and the nature of the individual, for it signifies strictly and exclusively neither the individual, that is, the subsistence, nor the common nature of the subsistences, but the common nature as viewed and presented in one of the subsistences. Union, then, is one thing, and incarnation is something quite different, for union signifies only the conjunction, but not at all that with which union is affected. But incarnation, which is just the same as if one said the putting on of man's nature, signifies that the conjunction is with flesh, that is to say, with man, just as the heating of iron implies its union with fire. Indeed, the blessed Cyril himself, when he is interpreting the phrase one nature of God the Word incarnate, says in the second epistle to Sucensus, For if we simply said the one nature of the Word, and then were silent and did not add the word incarnate, but so to speak quite excluded the dispensation, there would be some plausibility to the question they feign to ask, if one nature is the whole, what becomes of the perfection in humanity, or how has the essence like us come to exist? But inasmuch as the perfection in humanity and the disclosure of the essence like us are conveyed in the word incarnate, they must cease from relying on a mere straw. Here, then, he placed the nature of the Word over nature itself, for if he had received nature instead of subsistence, it would not have been absurd to have omitted the incarnate. For when we say simply one subsistence of God the Word, we do not err. In like manner, also, Leontius the Byzantine considered this phrase to refer to nature and not to subsistence. But in the defense which he wrote in reply to the attacks that Theodoric made on the second anathema, the blessed Cyril says this, The nature of the Word, that is, the subsistence which is the Word itself, so that the nature of the Word means neither the subsistence alone nor the common nature of the subsistence, but the common nature viewed as a whole in the subsistence of the Word. It has been said, then, that the nature of the Word became flesh, that is, was united to flesh. But that the nature of the Word suffered in the flesh we have never heard up till now, though we have been taught that Christ suffered in the flesh. So that the nature of the Word does not mean the subsistence. It remains, therefore, to say that to become flesh is to be united with the flesh, while the Word having become flesh means that the very subsistence of the Word became without change the subsistence of the flesh. It has also been said that God became man and man God. For the Word which is God became without alteration man. But that the Godhead became man, or became flesh, or put on the nature of man, this we have never heard. This, indeed, we have learned, that the Godhead was united to humanity in one of its subsistences. And it has been stated that God took on a different form or essence to wit our own. For the name God is applicable to each of the subsistences. But we cannot use the term Godhead in reference to subsistence. For we are never told that the Godhead is the Father alone, or the Son alone, or the Holy Spirit alone. For Godhead implies nature, while Father implies subsistence, just as humanity implies nature and Peter subsistence. But God indicates the common element of the nature and is applicable derivatively to each of the subsistences, just as man is. For he who has divine nature is God, and he who has human nature is man. Besides all this, notice that the Father and the Holy Spirit take no part at all in the incarnation of the Word except in connection with the miracles, and in respect of good will and purpose.