Letter 495: Theodore Studite, Letter 495; Greek heading: Τῷ αὐτῷ.

The grief of our soul concerning you, most honored ones, has been somewhat consoled, if indeed matters stand as you have written and you are withdrawing from your hold upon the abbacy. For there is no fellowship, O dear one, between those who are persecuted and those who go unpersecuted (and not only unpersecuted, but who are even subject as tributaries to the persecutors, while presiding as superiors over the very monasteries that those men control), unless indeed some fellowship be agreed upon between light and darkness. But this cannot be, as the sacred word [Scripture; cf. 2 Corinthians 6:14] has declared. For the fact that up to the present we gave ourselves over among those who had been taken captive, by way of a medicinal submission [oikonomia, a temporary concession made as a remedy], came about in this manner: that we received pledges that neither in word nor in deed should we in any way whatsoever be brought once more under subjection to those of heterodox belief; and so they stand, as it were, in a middle ground [no-man's-land] between holding and not holding the monasteries, and, to put it wholly, so that the confession [homologia, the orthodox confession of faith] should become lawful through the drawing back of our opponents and through the counter-resistance of those who stand firm. But when the time came for what was sought, and what had been agreed upon was not carried through before God and men toward a more exact departure from the former submission, but rather there was once more a leading-away and once more a submission both in words and in deeds (as the very facts bear witness and as we have heard from those who know), and once more men were made superiors, unshakable, through the recent acceptance and commission they received from the [imperial] power: now the argument bears upon all who have acted in this way, and it is even ridiculous now to administer rebuke; rather it is madness in those who rebuke, and a stumbling-block to the godly, and confusion and blindness regarding the confession of Christ. We must hearken to the Apostle, who says that you are to withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which they received from us [cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:6], or rather from God himself, who cries out through the prophet: Come out from among them and be separate, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you [cf. 2 Corinthians 6:17] - you, that is to say, who thus separate yourselves and do not confound the confession of Christ. For what, O most honored one, will the abbot of Komai say, and the abbot of Goulaion, together with those who likewise have just now been persecuted in the resistance, if they see you holding the monasteries by betrayal of the truth, and us being led away along with you? And what of those who suffer hardship in the mountains amid the straits of the persecution? Will they not groan? Will they not lament? Will they not consider the confession of Christ to be a mere plaything? And what of those who have served as superiors of the monasteries from the beginning and have been persecuted for Christ along with us? Will they not seal themselves [cross themselves in dismay], as though what we suffer were something laughable? Be not deceived, says the Apostle, God is not mocked [Galatians 6:7]; the confession of Christ has not been made common, even though some suppose they think and speak otherwise. And so, if you wish, beloved brother, to be ranked with us the lowly, withdraw from the holding of the monastery, just as you also promised; for this is what we exhort, and to this end we also pray, that, as you are within, so also without you may be orthodox, saving your honored soul, than which nothing among visible things is of equal worth. The lord archbishop, together with us, sends you very many greetings, loving your salvation exceedingly, as do also the rest of the brethren. {Theodore, on behalf of Eustratios the abbot} The problem of the right opinion that you suppose yourself to hold, my good man - to pass over the rest of your foregoing and following petty phrases as both senseless and full of solecisms - is of the following kind, word for word: Christ, our true God, having two natures, two wills, two operations, but one person of the two natures - of which shall I depict the face? Since, then, you have asked what sort of face, sing tunefully along: the face that has been given form, since the formless character of the hypostasis of the Father was given form in our likeness; the face subject to time, since the eternal one took on a temporal duration; the face that has eyes, ears, nose, mouth, cheeks, since the figureless one was found in figure as a man; the face that was kissed, since the uncontainable one, having been contained, was kissed by the betrayer; the face that was struck, since the untouchable one, having become touchable, was struck by the servant; the face seen stretched crosswise upon the cross, since the immortal one, having bowed his head, gave up the spirit. And this is indicative not of two persons (away with such impiety!), but is demonstrative of one person, the person who is from two and in two natures indivisibly and without confusion. Therefore the sacred Apostle says: concerning his Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness [Romans 1:3-4]. Thus he has shown you, by saying according to the flesh, that the same Jesus Christ is circumscribable [capable of being depicted/delimited], that is, capable of being represented in an image; and by saying according to the spirit of holiness, that he is uncircumscribable [beyond delimitation]. From which all the God-bearing Fathers, taking their lead, proclaim most clearly that he is both circumscribable and uncircumscribable, both visible and invisible, both subject to time and eternal. But if you do not admit this, the supposition is Judaizing; and how, while calling Christ one of two natures, do you say that he is uncircumscribable alone? For this is significative of one nature of his, whereas the mark of the two is to call him circumscribable and, consequently, uncircumscribable as well. Therefore you contradict yourself; for if he seems to you uncircumscribable alone, this is also the view of the Manichaean [follower of Mani, who denied Christ's true humanity], who strips away the principle of the humanity. For the one bare of this humanity is uncircumscribable and incapable of being represented in an image; for both amount to the same thing. Or again, how do you partake of the body and blood of Christ, when he, according to you, is uncircumscribable, but the things you partake of are circumscribed? Either do not partake, my excellent fellow, or, partaking, confess that you partake of the circumscribed body and blood of the circumscribed Christ, lest you play the Paulianist [follower of Paul of Samosata, who held Christ to be a mere man], partaking as of a mere man and not of God made flesh. It has therefore been concluded firmly out of truth that the one who circumscribes Christ is not a man-worshipper after the manner of Nestorius nor a creature-worshipper after the manner of Arius - as you babbled in your ignorance - but a most true, staunchly orthodox Christian; just as the one who, according to you, does not circumscribe him plays the Manichaean and the Paulianist together at once: on the one hand, by the term uncircumscribable, introducing a bare God who became man in mere appearance [phantasy]; and on the other hand, by the same term of the uncircumscribable, partaking of body and blood as of a mere man, after the manner of Paul [of Samosata], and not of God who truly became man.

Βραχύ τι παρεμυθήθη τὸ περὶ ὑμᾶς τοὺς τιμιωτάτους λυπηρὸν τῆς ψυχῆς ἡμῶν, εἴ γε ὡς γεγράφατε ἔχει καὶ ὑποχωρεῖτε τῆς ἡγουμενικῆς διακρατήσεως· οὐδεμία γὰρ κοινωνία, ὦ φιλότης, δεδιωγμένοις καὶ ἀδιώκτοις (καὶ οὐ μόνον ἀδιώκτοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑποτελοῦσι τοῖς διώκταις, καθηγεμονιώντων ὧνπερ ἐξουσιάζουσι μοναστηρίων), εἰ μὴ ἄρα τις κοινωνία ὡμολόγηται φωτὶ πρὸς σκότος. ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐνδέχεται, ὡς ὁ ἱερὸς λόγος ἀπεφήνατο· τὸ γὰρ ἕως τοῦ παρόντος ἐπιδοῦναι ἑαυτοὺς ἐν τοῖς ἁλοῦσι δι' ὑποπτώσεως ἰατρικῆς κατὰ τόνδε τὸν τρόπον γέγονε, τῷ λαβεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐγγύας μήτε λόγῳ μήτε ἔργῳ καθ' οἱονδήποτε τρόπον ὑπαχθῆναι πάλιν τοῖς ἑτεροδόξοις· καὶ οἷον ἐν μεταιχμίῳ ἑστᾶσι κρατήσεως καὶ οὐ κρατήσεως τῶν μονῶν καί, τὸ ὅλον εἰπεῖν, ὡς νόμιμον γενέσθαι τὴν ὁμολογίαν διὰ τῆς τῶν ἐναν τίων ὑφελκύσεως καὶ τῶν ἐνισταμένων ἀντιπράξεως. ἐπὰν δὲ καιρὸς ἧκε τοῦ ζητουμένου, καὶ τὸ ὁμολογηθὲν οὐκ ἐξηνύσθη ἐνώπιον θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων πρὸς ἀκριβεστέραν τῆς προτέρας ὑποπτώσεως ἐξίασιν, ἀλλὰ πάλιν ἀπαγωγὴ καὶ πάλιν ὑπόπτωσις ἔν τε λόγοις καὶ ἔργοις, ὡς αὐτὰ τὰ πράγματα μαρτυρεῖ κἀκ τῶν εἰδότων ἀκηκόαμεν, καὶ πάλιν καθηγεμόνες ἀπαρασάλευτοι διὰ τῆς ἄρτι ὑπὸ τοῦ κράτους ὑποδοχῆς καὶ ἀποστολῆς. ὁ λόγος δὲ ἐπὶ πάντων τῶν οὕτως πεπραχότων καὶ γελοῖόν ἐστιν ἄρτι τὸ ἐπιτιμᾶν, μᾶλλον δὲ φρενοβλάβεια τῶν ἐπιτιμώντων καὶ σκινδαλμὸς τῶν εὐσεβούντων, σύγχυσίς τε καὶ ἀβλεψία ἐπὶ τῇ Χριστοῦ ὁμολογίᾳ. δεῖν τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἀκοῦσαι, λέγοντος στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ, ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντος καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν, ἣν παρέλαβον παρ' ἡμῶν, μᾶλλον δὲ αὐτοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ, διὰ τοῦ προφήτου βοῶντος· ἐξέλθετε ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν καὶ ἀφορίσθητε καὶ ἀκαθάρτου μὴ ἅπτεσθε· κἀγὼ εἰσδέξομαι ὑμᾶς, τοὺς οὕτως διαστελλομένους δηλονότι καὶ μὴ συγχέοντας τὴν Χριστοῦ ὁμολογίαν. Τί γὰρ φήσουσιν, ὦ τιμιώτατε, ὅ τε τῶν Κωμῶν ἡγούμενος καὶ ὁ τοῦ Γουλαίου σὺν τοῖς ὁμοίως ἄρτι διωχθεῖσιν ἐν τῇ ἐνστάσει, εἴπερ ὁρῶσιν ὑμᾶς, τοὺς προδοσίᾳ τῆς ἀληθείας κατέχοντας τὰ μοναστήρια, καὶ ἡμᾶς ὑμῖν συναπαγομένους; τί δὲ οἱ ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσι τληπαθοῦντες κατὰ τὸ τοῦ διωγμοῦ στενοχωρητικόν; οὐ στενάξουσιν; οὐκ οἰμώξουσιν; οὐχ ἡγήσονται παιδιὰν τὴν ὁμολογίαν τοῦ Χριστοῦ; τί δὲ οἱ ἡγουμενεύσαντες τῶν μοναστηρίων ἀπ' ἀρχῆς καὶ διὰ Χριστὸν δεδιωγμένοι σὺν ἡμῖν; οὐ κατασφραγίσονται, ὡς παιγνιῶδές τι πασχόντων ἡμῶν; μὴ πλανᾶσθε, φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος, θεὸς οὐ μυκτηρίζεται· ἡ ὁμολογία Χριστοῦ οὐ κεκοίνωται, κἄν τινες οἴωνται ἄλλως φρονεῖν καὶ λέγειν. Ὥστε, εἰ βούλει, ἀδελφὲ ἠγαπημένε, μεθ' ἡμῶν τῶν ταπεινῶν τετάχθαι, ὑποχώρησον τῆς κατοχῆς τοῦ μοναστηρίου, καθὼς καὶ ὑπέσχου· τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν, εἰς τοῦτο καὶ προσευχόμεθα, ἵνα, ὡς τὸ ἐντός, οὕτως καὶ τὸ ἐκτὸς ὀρθόδοξος ὑπάρχῃς, τὴν τιμίαν σου ψυχὴν σῴζων, ἧς οὐδὲν ἀντάξιον τῶν ὁρωμένων. ὁ κύριος ἀρχιεπίσκοπος σὺν ἡμῖν πλεῖστα προσαγορεύει σε, φιλῶν τὴν σωτηρίαν σου ἄγαν, ἐπεὶ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀδελφοί. {1Θεόδωρος ὑπὲρ Εὐστρατίου ἡγουμένου}1 Τὸ πρόβλημα τῆς δοκούσης σοι εὐδοξίας, ὦ τᾶν, ἵνα τἆλλά σου προηγούμενα καὶ ἑπόμενα λεξείδια ὡς ἀσύφιλά τε καὶ σεσολοικισμένα παρῶ, τοιοῦτόν ἐστιν ἐπὶ λέξεως· Χριστὸς ὁ ἀληθινὸς θεὸς ἡμῶν, δύο φύσεις, δύο θελήσεις, δύο ἐνεργείας, ἓν δὲ πρόσωπον ἔχων τῶν δύο φύσεων, τίνος εἰκονίσω πρόσωπον; ἐπειδὴ οὖν ἠρώτησας ποῖον πρόσωπον, ἄισον ἐμμελῶς· τὸ εἰδοποιηθέν, ἐπειδὴ ὁ ἀνείδεος χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ πατρὸς εἰδοποιήθη τῷ καθ' ἡμᾶς· τὸ ἔγχρονον, ἐπειδὴ ὁ ἀίδιος παράτασιν εἴληφε χρονικήν· τὸ ἔχον ὀφθαλμούς, ὦτα, ῥῖνα, στόμα, παρειάς, ἐπειδὴ ὁ ἀσχημάτιστος ἐν σχήματι εὑρέθη ὡς ἄνθρωπος· τὸ φιληθέν, ἐπειδὴ ὁ ἀπερίληπτος περιληφθεὶς ἐφιλήθη ὑπὸ τοῦ προδότου· τὸ ῥαπισθέν, ἐπειδὴ ὁ ἀναφής, ἔπαφος γεγονώς, ἐρραπίσθη ὑπὸ τοῦ ὑπηρέτου· τὸ ἐν σταυρῷ ὀφθὲν ἐγκάρσιον, ἐπειδὴ ὁ ἀθάνατος, κλίνας τὴν κεφαλήν, παρέδωκε τὸ πνεῦμα. καὶ οὐ δυοῖν προσώπων τοῦτο ἐμφαντικὸν (ἄπαγε τῆς ἀσεβείας), ἀλλ' ἑνὸς προσώπου τοῦ ἐκ δύο καὶ ἐν δυσὶ φύσεσιν ὄντος ἀδιαιρέτως καὶ ἀσυγχύτως ἀποδεικτικόν. διό φησιν ὁ ἱερὸς ἀπόστολος· περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα, τοῦ ὁρισθέντος υἱοῦ θεοῦ ἐν δυνάμει κατὰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης. τοίνυν δέδειχέ σοι διὰ τοῦ εἰπεῖν κατὰ σάρκα περιγραπτὸν εἶναι, ἤτοι ἐξεικονισμένον, διὰ δὲ τοῦ φάναι κατὰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης ἀπερίγραπτον τὸν αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν· ἀφ' οὗ ἐξειληφότες πάντες οἱ θεοφόροι πατέρες βοῶσι τρανότατα περιγραπτὸν αὐτὸν καὶ ἀπερίγραπτον, ὁρατόν τε καὶ ἀόρατον, ἔγχρονόν τε καὶ ἀίδιον. Εἰ δὲ οὐ χωρεῖς, Ἰουδαϊκὸν τὸ λῆμμα· πῶς δὲ καὶ δύο φύσεων τὸν Χριστὸν λέγων φῆς ἀπερίγραπτον μόνον; τοῦτο γὰρ μιᾶς φύσεως αὐτοῦ ἐστι σημαντικόν, τὸ δὲ τῶν δύο, τὸ περιγραπτὸν εἰπεῖν ἀκολούθως καὶ ἀπερίγραπτον. οὐκοῦν σεαυτῷ ἐναντιολογεῖς· εἰ γὰρ ἀπερίγραπτος μόνον δοκεῖ σοι, τοῦτο καὶ Μανιχαίῳ, ἀπαμφιεννύντι τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος. ὁ γὰρ τῆσδε γυμνὸς ἀπερίγραπτος καὶ ἀνεξεικόνιστος· ταὐτὸν γὰρ ἀμφότερα. ἢ πῶς πάλιν μετέχεις τοῦ σώματος καὶ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, αὐτοῦ ὄντος κατὰ σὲ ἀπεριγράπτου, ὧν δὲ μετέχεις περιγεγραμμένων; ἢ μὴ μέτεχε, ὦ βέλτιστε, ἢ μετέχων ὁμολόγει τοῦ περιγεγραμμένου Χριστοῦ μετέχειν τὸ περιγεγραμμένον σῶμα καὶ αἷμα, ἵνα μὴ παυλιανίζῃς, ὡς ψιλοῦ ἀνθρώπου μετέχων, ἀλλ' οὐ θεοῦ σεσαρκωμένου. Συνῆκται οὖν ἐξ ἀληθείας ἀραρότως ὡς ὁ περιγράφων τὸν Χριστὸν οὐκ ἀνθρωπολάτρης κατὰ Νεστόριον ἢ κτισματολάτρης κατὰ Ἄρειον, ὡς ἐφληνάφησας ἀμαθαίνων, ἀλλ' ἀπρὶξ ὀρθόδοξος χριστιανὸς ἀληθέστατος, ὡς καὶ ὁ μὴ περιγράφων κατὰ σὲ μανιχαΐζων ὁμοῦ τε καὶ παυλιανίζων, τὸ μὲν τῇ τοῦ ἀπεριγράπτου φωνῇ γυμνὸν θεὸν εἰσάγων, φαντασιωδῶς ἐνανθρωπήσαντα, τὸ δὲ τῇ αὐτῇ φωνῇ τοῦ ἀπεριγράπτου ὡς ψιλοῦ ἀνθρώπου μετέχων σῶμα καὶ αἷμα κατὰ Παῦλον καὶ οὐ θεοῦ ἀληθῶς ἐνανθρωπήσαντος.