A Word on Faith Against the Nestorians

Treatise of St. John of Damascus's "Tale of Faith Against the Nestorians" consists of 54 chapters in which the Orthodox teaching about Christ is presented. Particular attention is paid to: - interpretation of the concepts “hypostasis”, “person”, “nature” and “essence”; - explanation of individual passages of Holy Scripture and dogmatic formulations; - presentation of the teachings about the flesh of Jesus Christ and about the Mother of God; - the question of the suffering of the Son of God. The purpose of the treatise is to refute Nestorian errors, showing their inconsistency from the point of view of Holy Scripture and patristic tradition. St. John of Damascus, based on the teachings of St. Cyril of Alexandria and the resolutions of the III and IV Ecumenical Councils, develops the following basic ideas: 1) the hypostatic union of two natures in Christ does not mean their merging or changing one into the other (as the Monophysites taught), but it is not a simple external contact or moral union (as the Nestorians taught). St. John of Damascus argues that each nature retains its properties, but acts through the single Hypostasis of Christ; 2) Communication of properties (communicatio idiomatum). Since both natures are united in one Hypostasis, the properties of one nature can be attributed to the entire Hypostasis, and vice versa; 3) The Mother of God gave birth not just to a man into whom God then moved, but to God Himself, who became incarnate from Her. Refusal to call the Virgin Mary the Mother of God is tantamount to the destruction of the dogma of the Incarnation and salvation. 4) we worship the single Hypostasis of Christ, without dividing Him into “God” and “man,” as if into two different subjects. Our veneration is for Him as God Incarnate. “The Word of Faith against the Nestorians” contributed to the further strengthening of the Orthodox teaching about Christ and the terminology developed at the Ecumenical Councils. The treatise also confirmed the key place of the Virgin Mary in the economy of salvation. * Title of the work in Greek: Λόγος περ πίστεως κατὰ Νεστοριανῶν. * Title of the work in Latin: De fide contra Nestorianos. 1. We should, having been saved from God through His only begotten Son, whom He gave as a ransom for us, according to the word of the Lord, believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, one God and one essence of the Divinity in three hypostases, and in the fact that the Word of God for the sake of our salvation without transformation became flesh and dwelt in us (John 1:14), to believe, obeying the sacred Gospels - but since the tare-grazer, using tools worthy of him, confused and shocked the people of God, raised up the Holy Spirit to protect the truth, shepherds and teachers, as lights in the world containing the word of life (Phil. 2:15-16), and through them guided us to the royal path. They taught us to follow the middle path, not deviating either to what seems right or to what is obviously left, and by following them with all our might, we will not fall into error. 2. So, we believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the Trinity consubstantial, one Divinity, Whom in three hypostases, that is, persons, all creation worships and serves, and in the fact that the only begotten Son and Word of God, born of the Father before all ages, Himself by the good will of the Father, without transformation, became flesh from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, so that the Divinity was not transformed into the nature of flesh (for the Godhead is immutable and unchangeable), and the flesh has not changed into the nature of the Godhead (for the Godhead cannot receive any addition). 3. That is why we confess in our Lord Jesus Christ, one of the Holy Trinity, two natures, each perfect in its own definition and essence, so as not to introduce transformations or fusions, but one hypostasis, so as not to introduce a duality of Sons or a fourth person into the Trinity - after all, nature creates the “other,” and the hypostasis delimits the “other” and the person. For if in the Holy Trinity, speaking about the three hypostases of the Divinity, we preach three persons, then those who confess two persons in our Lord Jesus Christ should at the same time confess two persons. 4. So, nature, essence and image mean species, that is, community, like Divinity, humanity, while hypostasis and person are particularity and something existing in itself, for example, such and such, in Divinity - Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and in humanity Peter, Paul, John. 5. Just as it is impossible for nature and nature to be one nature in Christ, so it is impossible for hypostasis and hypostasis to be one hypostasis. If it is possible for hypostasis and hypostasis to be one hypostasis, and person and person to be one person, then it is also possible for nature and nature in Christ to be one nature. 6. Just as there is no hypostasis without essence, but each hypostasis does not necessarily have its own essence, so there is no essence without hypostasis, and it is not necessary for those who unite to have their own private hypostasis. 7. Just as in the Holy Trinity, speaking of three hypostases, we do not have to give each nature its own nature, but the three have one nature and common essence of the Divinity, and not one of them is without essence, but each does not have its own special essence, so in Christ, speaking of two natures, there is no need to give each nature its own hypostasis, but the two natures have one common hypostasis of Sonship, that is, [hypostasis] of the Son of God - for this hypostasis is the Son of God according to Divinity and the Son of the Virgin according to humanity, and each of the natures is neither devoid of hypostasis, nor has a special hypostasis; and just as there we call three hypostases one nature, so here we say that two natures are one hypostasis. 8. Question: “Is there a hypostasis without essence?” You will say: “No way.” Then they endowed each hypostasis of the Holy Trinity with its own special essence. But you don't. If you say that the three hypostases have one and the same nature, I will also say that although there is no nature without hypostasis, the two natures of Christ have the same hypostasis. 9 . Question: “If there is no hypostasis without a face, but in Christ there are two hypostases, is it necessary to talk about two persons?” 10. Just as Peter is one hypostasis, but two natures, soul and body, and in accordance with one nature, that is, the spiritual essence, he thinks, and in accordance with the other, that is, the bodily essence, he is dissected, but there is one Peter and one hypostasis, both accomplishing the first and undergoing the second, and neither the soul is dissected, although Peter is dissected, nor the body thinks, although Peter thinks, but Peter thinks insofar as he has a soul, and is dissected because he is corporeal - so Christ, being one hypostasis, but having two natures, Divinity and incarnations, worked miracles according to His Divinity, and suffered according to His humanity, and neither His Divinity suffered nor the body gave life, but one Christ, one hypostasis, one person, did one thing as God, and endured another as a man. And just as in Peter the soul imparts life, feeling, movement to the body, and the body receives them, but there is one hypostasis of the giving and receiving humanity, so in Christ the Divinity gives, humanity receives, but there is one hypostasis of the giving Divinity and the receiving humanity. 11. So, if the Son of the Virgin became the Son of God by grace, that is, two sonships, one by nature and the other by grace, and not one Son, but two: for the Son by nature and the Son by grace can be called brothers, but never one Son, because then all of us, adopted by God by grace through baptism, will be one Son and one person with the natural Son of God. 12. We do not say that the Son of the Virgin became the Son of God, nor that the hypostasis of man became God, but that the Son of God became the Son of the Virgin, and the hypostasis of the Son of God appeared as Man. 13. “God” is a name, and “man” is a name, likewise the soul and body describe not a hypostasis, but a nature, and even if applied to a hypostasis, it does not mean the definition of a hypostasis, but what nature this hypostasis is. God the Father: “God” does not mean the property of a hypostasis, but what nature it is, and “Father” means a hypostatic property. Peter is a man: “man” indicates what nature he is, and “Peter” denotes his own hypostasis. 14. Hypostasis is contemplated in nature, nature in hypostasis, and therefore we speak of two natures in Christ, Divinity and humanity, and of Christ in two natures, Divinity and humanity—after all, the whole in its components, and the components as a whole. 15. Soul and body are the components of Peter, while the components of Christ are Divinity and humanity. 16. It is common for Scripture to sometimes name the whole by both components, as the Lord says: Fear Him more than He who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna (Matthew 10:28). Here He names the whole, that is, a person, by both components. And sometimes - one of the components, as David says: Let all flesh bless His holy name (Ps. 145:21), meaning “every man” - after all, flesh without a soul does not bless God - and: Jacob went over to Egypt with [the number of] seventy souls ( Acts 7:14), and: his soul entered into iron ( Ps. 104:18) - after all, a soul without a body is not bound. 17. So, sometimes Scripture calls Christ sometimes God, sometimes Man, and sometimes [at the same time] God and Man, and sometimes it speaks of His Divinity, sometimes of His humanity, and sometimes of both. So, the high should be attributed to His Divinity, the low - to His humanity, but both of them - to one hypostasis. 18. The words “perfect God and perfect Man” indicate the perfection of natures, and do not denote hypostases. “God” is an indicator of nature, just like “man”. We know the Son and the Word of God, that He is a perfect hypostasis, and that He is timeless, and invisible, and incomprehensible, and intangible, and indescribable, and impassive, and that neither passion nor reproach concerns Him. So, since He is a perfect hypostasis, He is different in relation to the Father - after all, there is one Father, another Son and a third Holy Spirit, that is, one and another hypostasis, as Gregory the Theologian says: “For there is one and another, so as not to merge the hypostases, but not one and the other, for the three are one and identical in Divinity,” that is, in nature. For Divinity is the name of nature, and not of hypostasis. Eternal existence, and invisibility, and dispassion, creativity, the Divine and omnipotent will, omnipotent action, all this belongs not to hypostasis, but to nature - for they are equally seen in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Spirit. And that which is equally seen in all consubstantial hypostases is natural, [and hypostatic] that which separates a hypostasis from the consubstantial hypostasis, such as the ungeneracy of the Father and the birth of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit. 19. Again, we know that the flesh of the Lord has a temporary existence, and bringing from non-existence into being, and outlines, and size, and appearance, and members, and boundaries, and tangibility, and human life, and movement, and feeling, and movement from place to place, and human volition, and human action, and hunger, and thirst, and sleep, and thought, and fear, and melancholy, and choking, and spitting, and help from angels, and suffering, and dying, and everything human. But all this relates to nature, and not to hypostasis, for all this is seen in each hypostasis. After all, it is not the fact that someone has a nose that shows hypostasis, but the fact that his nose is upturned or hooked separates him from consubstantial hypostases - after all, having a nose is natural for all people, and an upturned or hooked nose determines hypostasis and personality. So, neither the human is elevated to the Divine, nor the Divine is brought down to humanity, although the flesh participates in the Divine - after all, the Divine gives, but is not involved, gives Himself, but does not participate in the [sufferings] of the flesh. So, both the Divine and the human do not define hypostasis, but mean one and the other nature. 20. We know, again, that the flesh of the Lord never existed in itself, and had no beginning or cause of existence, except the Son and the Word of God, and this holy body or immaculate soul did not belong to anyone else except the Son of God, and all their properties are His and are considered His [properties], not His Divine nature, but since the flesh is His and no one else, then all the properties of His flesh are and are considered to belong to Him. Therefore, we are talking about one hypostasis of the Word and the flesh, and not about two, because not one and the other, but one. After all, if there are two hypostases, then one and the other, because hypostasis means another person - and if one and the other, then there is not one, but two sons. 21. So there is one Christ, not two. For the flesh was realized, and it cannot be accepted that it was not realized, but it was not realized on its own, and was not someone’s apart from God the Word - after all, existence does not mean hypostasis and hypostasis, but the private, separate and isolated existence of each one in himself, and that he is such and such and has his own personality. 22. We do not say that the flesh of the Lord does not have a hypostasis or face - after all, this is impossible - but we affirm that it has no other hypostasis or person besides God the Word - for whose soul and body are their hypostasis and face. Therefore, if that flesh was someone else's, and not God's Word, like the one Son? After all, we noted that hypostasis means such and such a person, for example, Peter and Paul, and that Peter and Paul are not one son, and neither Peter is Paul, nor Paul is Peter. Therefore, if we say, as you do, that there are two hypostases, one of the Son of God and the other of the son of the Virgin, then neither the Son of God is the son of the Virgin, nor the son of the Virgin is the Son of God, unless, like us, by grace. And it is impossible for the Son by nature and the son by grace to be one Son - for a son and a son are called brothers if they are sons of the same father or the same mother, but in no way one son, because we, who have become sons of God by grace, will then be one son together with the Son of God, and let those in heaven, earth and hell worship us - but this is not so. And that son and son are many sons, the apostle says: For it was fitting that He, for whom are all things, and from whom are all things, should bring many sons to glory (Heb. 2:10). Behold, there are many sons by grace, and not one. 23. We do not say that the Word was transformed and became flesh, but that the Word Himself dwelt in the womb of the Virgin, like a Divine seed, and took from the Virgin from Her immaculate blood and in Himself realized flesh, animated by a rational and thinking soul, and that truly the flesh was realized and arose not on its own, but in God the Word, and did not have a seed or anything else as a hypostasis, but only God - for the hypostasis of every embryo is the seed, and its hypostasis is God the Word. And any flesh is someone else’s, but this one is none other than God the Word. Therefore, one hypostasis. This is how we understand the Word became flesh (Jn. 1:14), and became incarnate and became man, not that He was transformed (for Divinity is immutable and unchangeable), and not that flesh was transformed into Divinity (for each remained completely within the limits of its own nature), but that this holy flesh had no other beginning or cause of existence except the Son Himself and the Word of God, and did not become anyone else’s besides Him, and that in Him it was realized, and that in Him the union of natures, Divine and Divine, took place. human, without any merging, transformation or change. 24. About the sense in which the suffering of the Word is spoken of. We do not say that the Word was mocked or suffered in His nature, but since He Himself became a hypostasis of the flesh, and the flesh belongs to Him and no one else, and there is not one and the other, but one and the same Son, and Christ, and the Lord, then the passions of His flesh belong to Him - for they are His and no one else’s. 25. Just as my soul belongs to me, and not to another, and my body is mine, and not to another, and all the properties of my soul and body are mine, and not to another, but the properties of my soul are not the properties of my body, nor the properties of the body - my soul, but dissection and flow are inherent in the body, and not the soul, reason and piety are inherent in the soul, and not in the body, but both are mine, because it is I who reason with the soul, but we are dissected with the body - so God the Word suffers through the flesh and works miracles with the Divine, and neither the Divinity suffers, nor the nature of the flesh works miracles, although the Divine action appeared through the human. 26. So, it is impossible to say or think anything about God other than what He Himself has revealed to us through Holy Scripture, and it is impossible to say to God: Why did you... do that? (Rom. 9:20). For the Lord does whatever He wants (Ps. 134:6), and there is no need to say with human thoughts: how is this possible? God is faithful, but every man is a liar (Rom. 3:4). Because tell me: how do we know that God created everything? How did the Father beget the Son? Or how the Holy Spirit is not born, but proceeds? Or how did the Word become flesh (John 1:14)? And we learned from Holy Scripture that the Son is born and the Holy Spirit proceeds, and that “the Word became flesh,” and how, no one knows except the Father Himself, and the begotten Son who became flesh, and the outgoing Holy Spirit. 27. What is this extraordinary mystery, hidden from generation to generation (Col. 1:26), which the wise men and rulers of this age did not know, if not the word about the Cross, the madness of preaching that God became man and was crucified? After all, Abraham was a friend of God, but died, Moses the legislator, but died, Isaiah the prophet, but was sawn to pieces, Jeremiah was sanctified from his mother’s womb, but was thrown into a dirty pit (Jer. 38:6) and died, and John from his mother’s womb was filled with the Holy Spirit, but his head was cut off, and none of this was considered madness, but only the word about the Cross, because God became man and the Lord of glory was crucified. This is what is incredible, crazy and impossible for people, that God was visible and mocked. This is the power of God for the faithful, that He can do whatever He wants. This is an extraordinary and untold secret. For if they had known that the Son of the Virgin is God and Lord of glory, they would not have crucified Him. So the invisible one is seen, and the impassive one suffers, and yet remains dispassionate. For He suffers from the nature of the flesh and remains dispassionate by the Divine - for the Divine is dispassionate, although it is hypostatically united with the suffering body. It is necessary, therefore, to keep the Scriptures consistent, and that the Word became flesh and dwelt in us (John 1:14), and that He is the Son of David and the Lord of David, and the Son of Abraham, and that He took flesh, and took on the seed of Abraham (Heb. 2:16), what was before Abraham, and what man is, and who knows Him? (Jer. 17:9), and that He is the Man who comes after John and was before him (John 1:15), and that His flesh is the bread of life that comes down from heaven (John 6:48–51), and that no one ascended into heaven except the one who came down from heaven (John 3:13), and the second Adam is the Lord from heaven (1 Cor. 15:47), and that the Son of Man, the nature of which it is said: Dust you will return to dust (Gen. 3:19), sits on the throne, and creation serves Him, and the Trinity has not received addition, and cursed is everyone who trusts in man (Jer. 17:5). 28. How can all this be in agreement with each other, if the Son and the Word of God and God by nature did not become the Son of the Virgin, Man, two natures, one hypostasis, He is pre-eternal, before Abraham and John and the Lord of David, invisible, impassive, intangible like God - and He, who recently became Man, and He as Man is visible, tangible, passionate, given over to reproach, although His Divine nature is not any of this susceptible. 29. For the Scripture says that He received the seed of Abraham (Heb. 2:16), and that from the seed of David according to the flesh (Rom. 1:3), both the son of David and the son of Abraham (Matthew 1:1), because from Abraham's line and the seed of David was the Virgin and the flesh taken from Her by the Word, and because the flesh was of our nature, and not of the same essence with the Father, and did not descend from heaven, and the Word became flesh, because He Himself became a hypostasis of the flesh, and is one hypostasis; but dwelt in us to show the difference and immutability of natures - after all, one nature is the inhabitant and the other is the dwelling place. For the seed also receives a body from the blood of a woman, and one hypostasis of the seed, and another hypostasis of the woman, and the blood are related to the hypostasis of the woman, but not two bodies and not two hypostases of the seed and the body it received from the woman, but one body and one hypostasis in the two natures of soul and body. So the Son of God was a perfect hypostasis, and, although he received animate flesh from the Holy Virgin, there are not two hypostases, but one hypostasis in two natures: for what is natural there is here beyond nature and thought. 30. This is how Christ is God. Therefore, the Virgin who gave birth to Him is the Mother of God. For the one who gave birth to God could rightly be called the Mother of God, not because She gave birth to a pure God, or that the Divinity of the Only Begotten had its beginning from Her, but because She carried in her womb the God incarnate from Her - after all, if the Mother of God is not the Mother of God, then the One who was born is not God. After all, He did not become God after He was born of Her, but, being God, He became incarnate from Her and was born God incarnate. 31. After all, there are other mothers of Christ. For Jeremiah was anointed and sanctified from his mother’s womb, and John from his mother’s womb was filled with the Holy Spirit, and all prophets, priests, and kings are the Lord’s anointed, and all Christians are anointed. You came out to save Your people, to save Your anointed (Hab. 3:13). For there was no other Mother of God, there is no other Mother of God, and there never will be. Therefore, it is just and worthy that the only one who gave birth to the truly existing God and the incarnate Son of God should be called the Mother of God. 32. There is no hypostasis without a face. So, if there are two hypostases, then there are certainly two persons, even if they assimilate each other’s actions and sufferings. 33. If we say that there is one nature of Christ, His Divinity and His humanity, we introduce the fusion and transformation of His natures, and attribute suffering to the Divine nature. If we say that there are two natures of Christ, then we keep the union unfused, and the Divinity impassive and untransformed. And if we talk about two hypostases, we will introduce two sons and worship the quaternity of hypostases, and the Trinity will be a quaternary, whether we like it or not - after all, if you add three and one, it is impossible not to say four, and existing and named things cannot but be counted. If we say that Christ has one hypostasis and two natures, everything will be correct - as they say that the soul exists and lives in the body, and the body is called the vestment of the soul, but there are not two hypostases, but two natures, and one hypostasis, say, Peter or Paul. 34. For if two hypostases of the same essence, twins from one father and one mother, similar in everything, were not called one son, how would two hypostases of different essence, born from one and the other nature, become one Son? 35. Why is the creation worshiped together with the Creator, if they are not of the same nature, not of the same hypostasis? After all, if, in your opinion, the Son of God and the Son of the Virgin are not of the same nature and not of the same hypostasis, then how are they one and not two? After all, Peter and Paul, although they have the same nature, and grace, and apostolic dignity, are not one person or one apostle. 36. Just as in the Holy Trinity the three hypostases, because of their natural identity and their transformation into each other, are and are called one God, so in our Lord Jesus Christ the two natures, because of their hypostatic identity and their transformation into each other, are one Son - for the name “Son” refers to the hypostasis, and not to the nature. And just as there is one worship of all Three, then there is one worship here, because if there is not one nature and not one hypostasis, why is there one Son, one dignity and worship? 37. Just as one cannot touch a flaming sword not because of the own nature of iron, but because of the nature of fire hypostatically united with iron, so the flesh of the Lord is worshiped not because of its own nature, but because it is hypostatically united with God the Word. 38. If God the Word is the lord of Christ, how are the two of them one? After all, master and slave could not become one son. 39. If God the Word is the Lord of Christ, they are not of the same dignity - after all, domination and slavery are not the same dignity. 40. If it was not the face of the Eternal and the Only Begotten that was insulted, then it was another face; but if it was one and the other face, then they were not united even in the face. 41. If the suffering body belonged to the only begotten Son of God, then the suffering also belonged to Him: and if to another son, then what if not two sons? 42. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have everything in common, except hypostasis. Therefore, if you talk about non-hypostatic union and incarnation, you will recognize the incarnation of both the Father and the Holy Spirit. After all, if we recognize that the incarnation occurred by grace, by the identity of will, in relation and love, we will affirm the incarnation of both the Father and the Spirit - for the will, grace and love of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one. If by the same name, then He is no more than us: after all, He gave them the power to be children of God (John 1:12) and I said: you are gods, and you are all sons of the Most High (Ps. 81:6). God is both the Father and the Holy Spirit. 43. If there are two hypostases, one only from the Father and the other only from the Mother, then there will not be one and the same without father and without mother. 44. If incarnation is considered a union by grace, then God became man many times, albeit to a greater or lesser extent - after all, He lives in us, and we are His church. 45. I will not give My glory to another (Isaiah 42:8), says God. Then how will the son of the Virgin be glorified with God if he is of a different nature and a different hypostasis? 46. Those who are of the same essence are not compared with each other in essence - after all, no one compares Peter with Paul in essence, because the essence is one - but those of another essence are compared in essence, and not according to hypostasis - after all, no one says that John is higher than this horse. The soul and body are different in essence, but one-hypostatic. So, to have members is characteristic of the body, and sense organs belong to the body, and the sensory ability belongs to the soul, and because of this they do not differ from each other in hypostasis, because it is natural for the body to have members and sensory organs, and it is also natural for the soul to have the sensory ability and act through the body - for the body is the instrument of the soul. So this difference is natural and defines nature. And the fact that Paul is bald, and Peter has thick hair, that one with a snub nose, and this one with a hook nose, [is a hypostatic difference and defines hypostases]. Whether or not to receive spitting and choking does not determine the hypostasis - for all human nature is subject to spitting and choking, but the nature of the Divine is not susceptible. So when Christ was spat upon, the flesh was spat upon, but the Divinity was impervious to the spitting - similarly, when He was buffeted and suffered, the fleshly nature accepted it, but the Divinity did not. After all, even when a simple person is spat upon, the body accepts it, but the soul in no way, and despite this, the soul does not have a different hypostasis, or a different face, other than that of the body. For to have members and a face that is visible and spitable, or not to have members and a face that is visible or spitable, belongs to nature. For the visible and the invisible, the material and the immaterial, the imageable and the indescribable, are the differences of nature. 47. What is hypostasis and face? Hypostasis means to exist on its own and be different, and the person means to act separately and separately. [The flesh] of the Lord never existed in itself and was not someone other than God the Word, and it did not act separately from Him, just like the soul and the body - for the body and the soul are not one and the other, and the body does not belong to one, and the soul to the other, and they do not act separately, but the soul acts through the body, and the Divine will and action acted through the soul and body, through the union and will of the soul and the movement of the body. 48. Each hypostasis desires, acts and moves separately and separately: this is the property of a hypostasis, and therefore the hypostasis and the person are identical. And only in the Divine each hypostasis does not desire separately and does not act separately, but there is one will, one action, one movement of the three hypostases, and only ungeneracy is the property of the Father’s hypostasis, only begetting is the Son’s, and only procession is the property of the Holy Spirit. If you believe that our Lord Jesus Christ has two hypostases, then it is necessary that each of them desires and acts separately and separately, and they are not united either in action or in any other way. If they are united in action and will, then they are one hypostasis and one person. 49. We can say that the Virgin gave birth to God the Word, and that the Son and Word of God was not born of a woman. For we know two births of the only begotten Son and the Word of God: one pre-eternal incorporeal and according to Divinity from the Father alone, by which birth He was not born of a woman and has no mother, and another birth - in the last times from the Mother alone for the sake of our salvation, by which birth He has no father. According to the first birth, He was not born from a wife, but according to the second birth, He was born from a wife - for He did not have the beginning and cause of Divine existence from a wife, but only from the Father, and the beginning of incarnation and becoming a Man - from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary. For many things are said in different ways and seem contradictory to those who look inattentively - after all, about the Transfiguration of God, one evangelist says: after six days (Matthew 17:1), another: after eight days (Luke 9:28), and they disagree if you look inattentively - but for those who are attentive this is not disagreement, but agreement. After all, the one who said six days did not count either the day when the Lord said this or the day of the Transfiguration, but the one who said eight days later counted both. 50. Nature is a community of species, like Divinity, humanity; the name “God” is sometimes used for the Divine nature, as we say “one God,” that is, one Divinity, and sometimes for hypostasis, as we say: “God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit,” and we transfer this name from the designation of nature, just like “God.” Therefore we say: one is God and the other is man, that is, one is the nature of Divinity and the other is humanity. And Saint Gregory the Theologian writes to Clidonius: “For there are two natures, God and man, because both are soul and body.” And again we say: “God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, and the man Peter and the man Paul.” 51. Hypostasis is such and such, Peter and Paul, and Peter is not Paul, and Paul is not Peter, but one and another, and two, and not one, although they have a common nature, and Peter and Andrew are not one, but two, although they have a common nature, and one father, and one mother, and the same grace and dignity - for nothing can create one son except the identity of hypostasis. 52. Just as with the holy fathers essence and nature are one, so hypostasis and person are one. 53. Is the only begotten and eternal Son of God and the Son of the Virgin of one nature, or two? One person or two? One will of Divinity and humanity, or two, one and the other? One action of Divinity and humanity or two, one and the other? Are natural sonship and sonship by grace one thing, or are they both? Is the Son of the Virgin a servant of God? Is slavery and domination one virtue or one and the other? They spat in the face of the only begotten and eternal Son, but in what face? When Gabriel was sent and spoke to the Virgin on behalf of God, was his face and that of God the same? If there is one and another nature, and one and another will, and one and another action, and one and another hypostasis, and one and another sonship, and one and another dignity, and one and another person, how not two sons? 54. It is imperative to observe this: the Divinity is impassive and unchanging, God has three worshipable hypostases, and one believes in the Holy Trinity and is baptized, and does not serve the creation, and maintains agreement in the Holy Scriptures, the Old and New Testaments.