Supplement to the Amphilochian Questions

ANALYTICAL INDEX

holy is called the garment of believers, see 722 a. Substance, what it is, 767 d seq. Its properties, 775 a seq. The everlastingness of punishments, as the peak of evil, is added to wicked men, 231 a. They are delivered to unquenchable fire, ibid. Symeon, who took Christ in his arms, was he a priest? 823 b seq. Symmachus, 278 d. Version of Symmachus, 302 b. A Samaritan who approaches the Jews and is circumcised again, 819 c. He interprets Holy Scripture, ibid.

T Law of retaliation, 263 c, 350 a seq., 633 a. Category of time, or the question of "when," 810 c. Darkness, what it is, 138 d seq., 1055 a, 246 d seq. Origin of the earth, 1034 c. The earth stands forever, in what sense, 127 c seq. Theodotion, 279 a. Born at Ephesus, 819 c. He embraced and later abjured the heresy of Marcion of Pontus, 819 c. He interpreted Holy Scripture, ibid. Thucydides’ grandiloquence, 558 c. Titus besieges the city of Jerusalem, 58 c. God commands that the censers of the factious be distributed around the altar, see 1107 b. The dogma of the Trinity is established, 1062 c, 720 d, 890 c, 931 c.

V Not to appear empty before God, in what sense, 139 d. Valentinus foolishly asserts that the flesh was united to the Word, not formed from the purest blood of the Virgin, but that He summoned His body down from heaven, 694 a. The veil of the temple torn when Christ was lifted onto the wood, see 966 c, 1226 c. The winnowing fan in the hand of God, in what sense, 230 c, 1191 d. The Word who was in the beginning, who was with God, is God Himself, 454 a. He acquires flesh for Himself from virginal blood, 454 b. Vespasian besieges the city of Jerusalem, 58 c. The wedding garment, what it is, 102 a seq. A white garment is a symbol of joy and a holy state, 334 c. The Old Testament is slandered by the Marcionites as the evil work of an evil spirit, 93 a. Care for necessary provisions, and for superfluous things, is wont to bring much detriment to the soul, especially for the more imperfect, 54 b. New wine, the New Testament or the grace of Christ, 1199 a. Virtues which ought to be brought into the open, 743 b. Virtues which ought to be kept in the dark, ibid. Human life is called a shadow, a dream, smoke, and vanity, 951 c. Whether there is any mention of glass in Moses, 278 a. Will, what it is, 510, 511 c.

Z The maritime dwelling of Zebulun, 1078 a. Heretical tares, whence they arise, 311 c. The commandment not to possess a belt, nor shoes, nor a wallet, 31 d. Whether this commandment is contrary to the commandment to possess a purse or a wallet, ibid. Whether by this commandment Christ prohibits wealth, 35 c.

Question XIII. If in eternal punishment it is much worse to exist than not to have life at all (for it is much better to suffer nothing than to be vexed by pains and torments), why did God create those men who were going to consume their lives in sins, choosing a worse thing over a better one? 126

Question XIV. What is that: Their eyes were opened (Gen. iii, 7), and how the transgression had the power of opening the eyes. 131

Question XV. Why did Moses, in the cosmogony, make no mention of the kingdom of heaven, although the Savior says that it was prepared for the just from the foundation of the world? (Gen. i, 1 sq.; Matth. xxv, 34.) 133

Question XVI. Why did Moses call the earth invisible? 138

Question XVII. Why does he prohibit men from eating of flesh taken from wild beasts? 139

Question XVIII. How is that saying to be understood: You shall not appear before me empty-handed. 139

Question XIX. How do these statements not oppose one another: Behold, all things were very good, and the division which follows it, when it is said that some of the animals are clean, but others unclean. 142

Question XX. Why does a man who has left heresy, if he leads an irreproachable life, accede to the priesthood; but one who is infected with bodily stains, even if he abstains from unjust things, is not elevated to the dignity of the priesthood? 146

Question XXI. What is the subject notion in our holy Scriptures for the word "responds"; and likewise for the expressions themselves and others established in the likeness of this word. 147

Question XXII. Why did the angel not stand by to prevent and remove this concern before Joseph decided to put away Mary; but only when he had moved from concern to action, he intervened to prohibit? And why does he call the Virgin the wife of Joseph? 163

Question XXIII. What does that signify: Behold, Adam has been made as one of us, knowing good and evil? 167

Question XXIV. How can the death of Christ be said to have been voluntary and involuntary for the Father? And how does it happen, conversely, that the same death was voluntary and at the same time involuntary for the devil? 174

Question XXV. Whose voice is it which says: Now all this was done, the evangelist's or the archangel's? 190

Question XXVI. Why did the infant Christ permit the slaughter of the children to happen on his account? 191

Question XXVII. How is it, since we say that God is one but the hypostases three, that we say the Father is God, and the Son by himself is God, and the Holy Spirit likewise? Why, however, do we say one Divinity and three hypostases; yet it is not permitted to call the Divinity the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit, nor all together? 198

Question XXVIII. If the Son and the Holy Spirit proceed from the same principle, how is it that they do not receive the name of brothers, nor does the Holy Spirit acquire the name of Son? 206

Question XXIX. If the Baptism of John afforded the remission of sins, as St. Luke writes, in what did it differ from the Lord's Baptism? 211

Question XXX. How, when our Savior says: Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing, and one of them will not fall without my Father who is in heaven? Paul, who has Christ speaking within him, says: Is it the care of God for oxen? Surely you, O disciples, appear to contradict the Master. 222

Question XXXI. How is that to be understood: God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham? 227

Question XXXII. What is the meaning of that: Whose winnowing fan is in his hand, and what follows? 230

Question XXXIII. How, when Core, and Dathan, and Abiron had experienced the divine wrath, and the rest of the crowd was terrified and shaken by the danger to their lives, they should have repressed the audacity and madness of their minds and repented of their sins, yet they murmured against Moses while showing nothing of the sort contrary to these things? 234

Question XXXIV. In that place in the Gospel, who are those to be understood as the children who piped to the Jews, and they did not lament? Surely…

that place of the Gospel, who are to be understood by the boys who sang to the Jews, and they did not lament? Truly, does not understanding the Forerunner and Our Lord in the name of the boys also clear the Jews of blame through the absurdity of the speech? For not obeying the boys should not be blamed in any way. 238

Question XXXV. — How does that exhortation of the prince of the apostles, "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you," not oppose the Lord's precept regarding being cautious, nor against the rule that for the sake of rendering an account of our faith, responses are to be premeditated before the kingdom and the tribunal of presidents? 247

Question XXXVI. — In what sense is it said: "Let us make man to our image." And what does "image" mean in this place? Furthermore, what is the exemplar? For every exemplar of an image must also be seen. 251

Question XXXVII. — How does the statement: "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth," not oppose this commandment: "But I say to you, not to resist evil," that is, not to return equal for equal, nor to avenge the enemy? 263

Question XXXVIII. — Some propose this doubt: If the deity is not circumscribed in the Son, is the flesh which He assumed everywhere? For where the deity is, it must also be present: or, if it is circumscribed in a place, it is separated from Him who assumed it. 263

Question XXXIX. — How, when Jacob had received two sons from Rachel, Joseph and Benjamin; does Moses, afterwards listing the sons of Jacob, say: "Now these were the sons of Balla, Gera, and Noaman, and Anchis and Bos, and Amphim, and Omphim: and Gera begat Arad; afterwards he adds: These are the sons of Rachel, whom Jacob bore?" Since therefore Rachel bore only Joseph and Benjamin, how does the book of Genesis say that others, just mentioned, were born of Rachel by Jacob? Solve the knot. 271

Question XL. — In Exodus when that commandment of the Lord was urging Moses: "Stretch forth thy hand over the waters of Egypt, and over their rivers, and streams, and marshes, and all the pools of waters..., and so it turned to blood." And when this prodigy had taken place, from whence was other water brought, which provided material for the simulation of the miracle in the tricks of the chanters? 274

Question XLI. — What meaning is underlying those words: "I will harden the heart of Pharaoh"? 282

Question XLII. — How is it to be understood, what Isaiah, inspired by the divine spirit, pronounced: "Thou art angry and we have sinned." 288

Question XLIII. — Why, when our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ taught to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, did the apostles and disciples not baptize thus, but in the name of the Lord? 302

Question XLIV. — What does it mean, that which was said: "Let thy garments be always white, and let not oil depart from thy head, and the eyes of the wise are in his head." 334

Question XLV. — That: "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" how is it to be understood? For many have placed this as an occasion of scandal. 339

Question XLVI. — How does it not imply that which is said: "It was said to those of old: An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, but I say to you not to resist evil, but whoever shall strike thee on the right cheek, turn to him also the other." 350

Question XLVII. — The Lord saying: "You are of your father the devil," we ask whom He calls the devil, and who is his father? 351

Question XLVIII. — How many are they who anointed the Lord with ointment? 358

Question XLIX. — How is it to be interpreted: "Every sin and every blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the future." 367

Question L. — Of the blessed Mark and the Evangelist who wrote: "And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him. For they said that he was become mad." In what sense, hoping for the context of the words, would we not be led far from the evangelical narration? 378

Question LI. — Why did God plant paradise, being about to expel Adam immediately? 382

Question LII. — With the divine Paul exhorting: "If thy enemy be hungry, give him to eat: if he thirst, give him drink. For doing this, thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head." How shall we understand that, "thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head"? 386

Question LIII. — How is the dictum said by God to Moses to be understood: "Behold I have appointed thee the god of Pharaoh." 390

Question LIV. — How is the apostolic dictum to be understood: "If you bite and eat one another, take heed that you be not consumed one of another," and what is annexed to this. 391

Question LV. — How is the sacred oracle, as it is ^B better than every accusation, thus also to be demonstrated as inaccessible to it; namely: "Amen, amen I say to you, wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached, it shall be told what she has done in remembrance of her." For if anyone places to the Gospel the deed of the woman itself, he does not seem to escape the charge of wisdom. But if one believes the excellence of the works and administrations of the teachers of the disciples and of the common Savior who compose the whole Scripture, and it is not thought to preserve the sequence: for these things had not yet been committed to writing. 394

Question LVI. — What is the consequent and irreprehensible sense to investigate and understand through the Davidic words saying: "To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee: that thou mayest be justified in thy words, and mayest overcome when thou art judged." 396

Question LVII. — Why, with the disciples of the Savior baptizing, was John still baptizing? 403

Question LVIII. — Why does Moses, according to Genesis, weaving the genealogy of the principalities of Esau, simply count the naked names of the others, but proceeding to Ainan, he says: "This is he who found the mules in the desert when he fed the beasts of burden of Seegon his father." What therefore is it that he found; and why is it considered worth mentioning? 403

Question LIX. — What does it mean, which is written in Deuteronomy: "If thou build a new house, thou shalt make a battlement to thy roof, and shalt not make a homicide in thy house." 406

Question LX. — Why did Christ touch the leper, notwithstanding the legal impurity, when He could have healed him with a word alone. 410

Question LXI. — What does that mean: "There is hope that a living dog is better than a dead lion." 416

Question LXII. — What does it wish to signify in Ecclesiastes, which is said: "Cast thy bread upon the running waters: for after a long time thou shalt find it." 418

Question LXIII. — What does it mean: "He that diggeth a pit, shall fall into it." 422

Question LXIV. — How is that to be understood which was written by Ecclesiastes: "He that cutteth trees, hath been endangered by them, if the iron fall off; and he himself has disturbed the figure, and strengthened the virtues, and in the superabundance of the heart [there is] wisdom." 423

Question LXV. — To what end does that look: "One generation passeth away, and another generation comforteth, but the earth standeth for ever." 426

Question LXVI. — What sense does that open: "There is a just man who perisheth in his justice, and there is a wicked man who remaineth in his wickedness." 430

Question LXVII. — How is it to be understood: "But if our iniquity commend the justice of God." 431

Question LXVIII. — That: "If a man beget a hundred children, and live many years, and the number of the days of his ^C years be not filled with good; and there be no burial for him, I say that an abortive is better than he; for he came in vanity, and goeth in darkness, and his name shall be covered with darkness, and he hath not seen the sun, nor known; a rest for this than for the other." This statement, however, what discretion and elucidation can it demonstrate. 435

Question LXIX. — What does that mean: "Live in good and see, in the day of evil, see. And God has made this consonant to him concerning speech, that man may not find anything after him." 437

Question LXX. — What hides ought one to understand, the coats which Adam and Eve put on after the transgression. 439

Question LXXI. — To what sense does that send us: "Dost thou not, if thou offerest rightly, but dost not divide rightly, sin? hold thy peace, and the rest." 442

Question LXXII. — The Lord Paul saying: "Adam was not seduced, but the woman being seduced, was in the transgression; yet she shall be saved through child-bearing, and the rest; how ought one to understand that: "The woman shall be saved through child-bearing." 446

Question LXXIII. — How are those words to be understood: "Whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord, and the rest." 451

Question LXXIV. — When the Lord says to the Samaritan woman: "Believe me, woman, that the hour cometh, when you shall neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, adore the Father: You adore that which you know not; we adore that which we know: for salvation is of the Jews, etc.," with what diligence shall we at last attain the force of these venerable expressions. 458

Question LXXV. — How is it said that God is in every thing, and how can the doubts be dissolved, which are objected by some against this. 463

Question LXXVI. — What does it mean, that which the Lord

^A says to the disciples in the Gospel: "To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest in parables, that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand." 467 Question LXXVII. — Concerning genus and species, diverse doubts in which the solution of them can be found. 478 Question LXXVIII. — Difficulties and solutions of dogmatic and anti-rhetorical questions from the second Oration of Gregory the Theologian on the Son. 490 Question LXXIX. — Why did Moses not make mention of the angels in the creation of the world? And what does that mean: "For in doing this, you shall heap coals of fire upon his head." ^B — Stewart’s note on the following question. 506 Question LXXX. — What kind of gnomical wills ought to be called in Christ, and what kind of human will should be called in the same Christ, hypostatic or other. 507 — Stewart’s little dissertation. 543 Question LXXXI. — What is that which is in Luke: "But when this voice was made, the multitude assembled and was confused in mind," etc. 547 Question LXXXII. — How it is not contrary to take the name of the Lord God in vain. 551 Question LXXXIII. — What is the spirit of Python. 554 Question LXXXIV. — Regarding that utterance of St. Paul: "In which all have sinned." 554 Question LXXXV. — What does it mean not to be yoked ^C with unbelievers. 555 Question LXXXVI. — Concerning the word *enkombōsasthai* in 1 Peter v, 5. 558 Question LXXXVII. — Why the faces of the cherubim were revealed to the divine prophets under the forms of oxen, lions, and eagles, of men. 558 Question LXXXVIII. — Concerning the holy Trinity. 559 Question LXXXIX. — How many significations of the word "God" can be found in the Scriptures. 562 Question XC. — Concerning the punishment on those who pronounce the name of God ineffably. 570 Question XCI. — What does it mean: "I often proposed to come to you." 570 Question XCII. — Concerning the Epistles of Paul and why Paul calls himself ^D an unlearned man. 575 Question XCIII. — Diverse questions from the Apostle solved in twenty-seven chapters. 591 Question XCIV. — What is: "Let your light shine before men," etc. 603 Question XCV. — What is that: "My Father is greater than I." 603 Question XCVI. — How that is not repugnant: "In my Father’s house there are many mansions," with the following: "If I go, I will prepare a place for you." 607 Question XCVII. — Why the prince of the apostles fell into denial. 607 Question XCVIII. — Concerning the antilogia between the words of Christ in John v, 31, and John vi, 14. 611 Question XCIX. — Whether the words of the disciple, John xiv, 3, conflict with the preceding words of the Master. 614 Question C. — Why the angel did not come to Joseph before he fell into doubt concerning the Virgin. 615 Question CI. — What it means: "Sell what you possess, and give to the poor," etc. 615 Question CII. — What *Ephod* signifies. 634 Question CIII. — How the following is not contrary: "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth," to that precept: "If anyone strikes you on one cheek, offer him the other also." 635 Question CIV. — Concerning Abel the just. 635 Question CV. — Concerning circumcision. 638 Question CVI. — What the redundancy of the word *eimi* (I am) signifies. 639 Question CVII. — Why poets place the horn of Amalthea in the hands of the laborious Hercules. 642 Question CVIII. — What it is for a woman to have authority over her head. 642 Question CIX. — What does that mean: "If you do not offer rightly," etc. 646 Question CX. — Concerning the appearance of Christ in Jerusalem anticipating the appearance promised in Galilee. 651 Question CXI. — Concerning sacred images. 654 Question CXII. — Concerning the love of God. 655 Question CXIII. — Concerning the tabernacle of testimony. 663 Question CXIX. — Concerning the ignorance of the day and hour of judgment. 670 Question CXV. — Concerning the wisdom of Solomon. 683 Question CXVI. — Concerning the homeland of Paul. 687 Question CXVII. — The same doubt and solution. 690 Question CXVIII. — Why Christ was circumcised. 691 Question CXIX. — Concerning this: "No one has ever seen God." 695 Question CXX. — What the saying of the Apostle signifies: "Always and now also Christ will be glorified in my body," etc. 702 Question CXXI. — What were those things which were lacking to Christ, which Paul also filled up. 706 Question CXXII. — "Our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of this world, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places." 711 Question CXXIII. — Why the book of the Acts of the Apostles is so inscribed, when it nevertheless does not contain the acts of the twelve apostles, but initially only a few miracles and doctrines of the apostles, and afterwards the whole treatment is converted to Paul. 714 Question CXXIV. — How many times Christ appeared to the apostles after his resurrection, and where, and when. 715 Question CXXV. — Why Christ commanded the apostles not to depart from Jerusalem, and when they heard the promise of the Father. 718 Question CXXVI. — When were the apostles baptized, and by whom. 719 Question CXXVII. — How those who are baptized into Christ put on Christ? 719 Question CXXVIII. — Why the angels call the apostles Galileans? 722 Question CXXIX. — Whose is this voice: "Who is this King of glory?" 722 Question CXXX. — Why the time of fasting consists of forty days. 723 Question CXXXI. — What a magnet is. 726 Question CXXXII. — Who ought to be called *technitai* (craftsmen), and who are *paidia* (children), and who are *huioi* (sons)? And in what sense Peter says: "We have a more firm prophetic word"? 727 Question CXXXIII. — What the Apostle calls *peripsema*? 721 Question CXXXIV. — How many years' beginnings ought we to consider, and which? 735 Question CXXXV. — Do these not contradict one another: "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also"; and: "But if I have spoken well, why do you strike me?" 739 Question CXXXVI. — Why the apostle Paul puts his name first in his epistles? 747 Admonition of Jos. Hergenroether concerning the eleven following questions or commentaries on the categories of Aristotle. 758 Question CXXXVII. — To the same Amphilochius, requesting a clear synopsis of the ten Categories. 759 Question CXXXVIII. — Concerning substance. 767 Question CXXXIX. — Concerning quantity. 782 Question CXL. — Concerning quality. 786 Question CXLI. — Concerning relatives. 794 Question CXLII. — Concerning the six remaining categories. 799 Question CXLIII. — Concerning action. 799 Question CXLIV. — Concerning passion. 803 Question CXLV. — Concerning place (ubi). 803 Question CXLVI. — Concerning that which is "to be situated" (situm esse). 807 Question CXLVII. — Concerning "when", or concerning the category of time. 810 Question CXLVIII. — Editor's note. 811 Question CXLIX. — Concerning the term of life. 811 Question CL. — How many sibyls were there? 812 Question CLI. — Concerning the testimonies of profane authors which are alleged in the sacred Letters. 814 Question CLII. — Why are the sacred Letters obscure? 815 Question CLIII. — On the same subject, more clearly. 815 Question CLIV. — How many editions of Scripture have been made? 819 Question CLV. — What did the shepherds signify by what they saw of the child, having been announced to them by others? 822 Question CLVI. — Was Simeon, who took our Lord Jesus Christ in his arms, a priest? 823 Question CLVII. — What does it mean: "This one lies for the fall and resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign that is contradicted"? 827 Question CLVIII. — Why did Christ choose Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons? 834 Question CLIX. — What does that mean: "I do not speak from myself"? 835 Question CLX. — How does John the Theologian indicate the saving economy through the "arm of the Lord"? 855 Question CLXI. — What does it mean: "That creation itself will be delivered from servitude"? 839 Question CLXII. — What does it mean, "The firstborn of all creation"? 847 Question CLXIII. — What is *deēsis* (petition) and *proseuchē* (prayer)? 850

^A Question CLXIV. — For I am not ashamed of the Gospel: for it is the power of God, etc. 851 Question CLXV. — Why is the high priest said to have worn a tiara on his head? 854 Question CLXVI. — How did Christ come as a legate from the Father? 858 Question CLXVII. — On the oracle: "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things have passed away, behold, all things have become new." 858 Question CLXVIII. — Why does the Apostle, speaking of Christ, call his death "death," but our death "sleep"? 862 Question CLXIX. — Why, having left the vision, does Isaiah discourse about heaven and earth? 862 Question CLXX. — What is the parable of the son who claims the paternal inheritance for himself and travels to a far country? 866 Question CLXXI. — On Matthew 1:25. 867 Question CLXXII. — On providence. 870 Question CLXXIII. — On the Trinity. 875 Question CLXXIV. — How is that which is said of Job to be understood: "Let the day perish wherein I was born"? 875 Question CLXXV. — What is that: "By myself I have sworn, says the Lord"? 878 Question CLXXVI. — What is: "And a sword shall pass through your own soul"? 878 Question CLXXVII. — What is: "Do not murmur among yourselves, so that you may not be judged"? 879 Question CLXXVIII. — What is: "Adulterers and adulteresses"? 879 Question CLXXIX. — What does this word of the Apostle signify: "Be subject to every human creature, for the Lord's sake, that you may be free"? 882 Question CLXXX. — Questions on Theology. 886 Question CLXXXI. — Why does God proceed as far as the Trinity, and is neither circumscribed within the Trinity, nor does he extend further? 890 Question CLXXXII. — How can we say that God is one and three? 898 Question CLXXXIII. — On the same. 902 Question CLXXXIV. — On the same, to the same. 903 Question CLXXXV. — How can it be at all conceived that God was incarnate? 903 Question CLXXXVI. — Why did God assume flesh? 906 Question CLXXXVII. — On the incarnation of the Son. 907 Question CLXXXVIII. — Why, although it is confessed that the Trinity is homogeneous and enjoys equal honor, is the Father yet said to create through the Son and the Holy Spirit, but not vice versa? 910 Question CLXXXIX. — Why do we speak of the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son in theological discourse, yet we do not confess the Father to be the Spirit, nor the Son, conversely? 914 Question CXC. — Why, when the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are consubstantial and equal in nature, will, and power, does the Father nonetheless hold the first place in enumeration? 915 Question CXCI. — Why was the redemption of the human race accomplished not by any genius from among the incorporeal virtues, nor by a simple man, but through the emptying of the Word? 925 Question CXCII. — Why shall only the Son sit as judge in the future age? 930 Question CXCIII. — On the Trinity and the Incarnation. 931 Question CXCIV. — On the incarnation. 931 Question CXCV. — On the incarnation. 931 Question CXCVI. — On images. 934 Question CXCVII. — On conflicting words. 935 Question CXCVIII. — On images. 936 Question CXCIX. — On the dissolution of the law and on the words of Matthew 5:13-17. 936 Question CC. — Since the Lord says: "Do not cast pearls before swine," how are the unfaithful to be taught? 939 Question CCI. — How is one to judge of those things which perish in this life? 946 Question CCII. — How did the Apostles, being unlearned, surpass all rhetoricians? 946 Question CCIII. — Why does Paul, speaking to the Athenians, take arguments from their own inscriptions? 946 Question CCIV. — Why was prophecy obscured by obscure images? 947 Question CCV. — On the effigies and character of holy images. 947 Question CCVI. — Why is human life called shadow, dream, smoke, and vanity? 951

^B Question CCVII. — On that place, "Put your hand under my thigh." 951 Question CCVIII. — On Mark 7:15, 17, 18. 955 Question CCIX. — To the same doubter, "But they did not understand." 955 Question CCX. — On these words: "God is able even from these stones to raise up children to Abraham." 958 Question CCXI. — To the interrogation, how the divine Apostle is not caught lying, who called himself both a Jew and a Roman; and at one time said he was born in Tarsus, at another in Rome? 959 Question CCXII. — Why was the veil of the temple torn? 966 Question CCXIII. — On blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. 970 Question CCXIV. — On the precept of Christ. 971 Question CCXV. — On these words: "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 971 Question CCXVI. — On these words: "I am not worthy to unloose the strap of his sandal." 979 Question CCXVII. — On the difference of images. 983 Question CCXVIII. — On these words: "Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father." 986 Question CCXIX. — On the bloody sweat of Christ. 991 Question CCXX. — On those words: "Everyone who looks at a woman to lust after her, has already committed adultery with her in his heart." 994 Question CCXXI. — Whose heresy was that of Eusebius of Pamphilus? 998 Question CCXXII. — What is that: "He who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he"? 999 Question CCXXIII. — If God is everywhere, how can the mystery by which he is present in the womb of a woman be accused? Surely, they say, because he is present in the womb of a woman, as also everywhere, there is no complaint: but how and of what nature is it that God was incarnate from her? 1011 Question CCXXIV. — Whether devils know that by doing penance for the things they have committed, they might be freed from their sins, or whether, once having fallen from divine wisdom, they are deprived of this knowledge. 1014 Question CCXXV. — A dialogue of a studious pagan with a Christian, or certain chapters by which the Trinity is asserted. 1015 Question CCXXVI. — What does it mean: "Whence have you come?" 1022 Question CCXXVII. — Whether in the words: "God sent his Son," it is necessary to say *gennōmenon* (born), or *genomenon* (made), by one *nu*. 1023 Question CCXXVIII. — On nature and person. 1023 Question CCXXIX. — On person. 1025 Question CCXXX. — On the divinity. 1026 Question CCXXXI. — Whether Christ assumed universal man, or truly particular. 1026 Question CCXXXII. — What does it mean: "We are therefore ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us: be reconciled to the Father"? 1026 Question CCXXXIII. — What is that: "Or to speak more accurately, those things which are the divinity"? 1027 Question CCXXXIV. — For what reason was he who was leprous throughout his body in the Old Testament called pure, but he who was leprous only in part, impure? 1027 Question CCXXXV. — Why is the Spirit said to be the image of the Son, and what is the Pythagorean tetractys? 1030 Question CCXXXVI. — Why does Jacob anoint the stone? 1030 Question CCXXXVII. — Why do you adore the top of the staff? 1030 Question CCXXXVIII. — Against you only have I sinned, and done evil before you, that you might be justified when you judge. 1031 Question CCXXXIX. — What is that: "That which does not dwell in me, that is in my flesh, is good"? 1031 Question CCXL. — On the end of life. 1031 Question CCXLI. — What means that: "You are of [your] father the devil": and, "Who is the father of the devil?" 1039 Question CCXLII. — What is the New Moon, what the Calends, what the Ides, and what the Nones? 1043 Question CCXLIII. — On the divine nature and person. 1043 Question CCXLIV. — What sense does that saying of the Apostle have: "He placed us at the right hand of God and the Father"? 1046 Question CCXLV. — Why is a renunciation of Satan commanded to us, but not of wicked men? 1050 Question CCXLVI. — Why are confessors called Samonas and his companions? 1051 Question CCXLVII. — Why was Christ affixed to the cross? 1051 Question CCXLVIII. — How that apostolic saying: "Signs are for the unbelieving, not for the unfaithful," can be reconciled with those oracles of the Lord: "Your faith has saved you"; and: "He could not do signs because of their unbelief"; and others asserting the same meaning? 1051

Quæstio CCLXXXI. — Why was Moses finally commanded, on account of a small sin, to see the promised land from afar, and prohibited from leading the people in? 1111

Quæstio CCLXXXII. — What is this: "In a little you persuade me to become a Christian"? 1114

Quæstio CCLXXXIII. — What might this signify: "The Son of God was manifested in power"? 1114

Quæstio CCLXXXIV. — What would this be: "I am prohibited until now from having any fruit." 1115

Quæstio CCLXXXV. — What is "For the justice of God is revealed therein"? 1118

Quæstio CCLXXXVI. — To what does this saying of the Apostle point: "Deliver him to Satan"? 1118

Quæstio CCLXXXVII. — What is the force of this: "To the end, for her who obtains the inheritance"? 1119

Quæstio CCLXXXVIII. — "O Lord, do not rebuke me in your fury, nor punish me in your anger." 1122

Quæstio CCLXXXIX. — "For my bones are troubled." 1122

Quæstio CCXC. — "I cried to you, O Lord, hear me." 1123

Quæstio CCXCI. — "With my voice I cried to the Lord, with my voice I besought the Lord." 1123

Quæstio CCXCII. — What is the value of this word: "Did Melchol rejoice over David?" 1126

Quæstio CCXCIII. — Why was David girded with an Ephod? 1126

Quæstio CCXCIV. — What was Adam doing in paradise? 1127

Quæstio CCXCV. — Why was the lamb sacrificed towards evening? 1127

Quæstio CCXCVI. — What is to be understood from these words: "I will set my bow in the clouds." 1127

Quæstio CCXCVII. — Since Noah was a just man, why does he not avoid punishment for being accused of drunkenness? 1130

Quæstio CCXCVIII. — From what place in Scripture is it evidenced that Adam was deceived by the devil? 1130

Quæstio CCXCIX. — What is the value of these: "Lord, my heart is not exalted"? 1131

Quæstio CCC. — Why did God appear to Moses in a bush and not in some other plant? 1135

Quæstio CCCI. — Concerning the division of the Judaic kingdom, which is said to be brought about by God, and yet is counted as a fault for the people. 1138

Quæstio CCCII. — Why did God permit the prophet David to succumb so greatly? 1142

Quæstio CCCIII. — Why did God call Israel his firstborn? 1143

Quæstio CCCIV. — How do the heavens declare the glory of God? 1146

Quæstio CCCV. — What is: "You have rebuked the nations and the wicked one has perished"? 1147

Quæstio CCCVI. — Why did the Magi from the East and Persia, and not from another region or nation, first approach the birth of the Lord? 1147

Quæstio CCCVII. — Why does Herod command the Magi, who were coming to adore our Savior Christ, saying: "Inquire diligently for the child; and when you have found him, report to me, so that I also may come and adore him"? 1151

Quæstio CCCVIII. — Why did the Precursor (John) rebuke Herod? 1151

Quæstio CCCIX. — How are we to understand that saying: "Among those born of women, there has not arisen a greater than John the Baptist"? 1154

Quæstio CCCX. — Why was our Lord Jesus Christ pierced with a lance in his saving suffering? 1158

Quæstio CCCXI. — What does it mean: "Lord, do not lay this sin to their charge"; and was this prayer confirmed by the event? 1158

Quæstio CCCXII. — How many Asterii were there, and what was their opinion? 1162

Quæstio CCCXIII. — Concerning Jacob and Leah. 1162

Quæstio CCCXIV. — Concerning the people numbered at David's command. 1163

Quæstio CCCXV. — Why was David called a man after God's own heart? 1166

Quæstio CCCXVI. — Why did manna fall from heaven in the desert? 1167

Quæstio CCCXVII. — Regarding these words spoken to Abraham: "I will establish my covenant between me and you." 1170

Quæstio CCCXVIII. — Why did Jesus rebuke Peter, who was taking his death badly? 1170

Quæstio CCCXIX. — Concerning the rebellion of Absalom. 1170

Quæstio CCCXX. — How does our Savior, though commanding everyone to love, still, when sending his disciples to preach, command them not to greet anyone on the road? 1170

Quæstio CCCXXI. — What does it signify to shave oneself and surround one's head with the folly of baldness? 1171

Quæstio CCCXXII. — Concerning the raven that ministered to the prophet. 1171

Quæstio CCCXXIII. — If the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, does not the Father also assume flesh in the Son's incarnation? And if the whole Deity was in the Son, how does the Father remain without flesh? 1171

Quæstio CCCXXIV. — Concerning the dragon, the devil. 1171

INDICES TO THE AMPHILOCHIAN QUESTIONS

I. — Synopsis of the Amphilochian questions, as they correspond in the three codices. 1171

II. — Synopsis of the questions edited by Wolff, as they are now arranged according to the Vatican codex. 1173

III. — Index of the epistles of Photius which are inserted into the Amphilochia. 1173

IV. — Index of numbers added to the questions by Mai, which are now corrected and changed. 1175

ORDER OF THE CONTENTS CONTAINED IN THIS VOLUME

V. — Index of the Amphilochian questions according to various editors. 1177 VI. — Index of the more important passages of Holy Scripture which Photius explains or cites in the Amphilochia. 1178 VII. — Other Fathers who are enumerated as authors cited by Photius in the Amphilochia. 1187

FRAGMENTS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT Fragments on Matthew. 1190 — on Mark. 1210 — on Luke. 1214 — on John. 1231 — on the Epistles of St. Paul. 1234 — on the Epistle to the Romans. 1234 — on the Epistle to the Corinthians. 1234 — on the Epistle to the Hebrews. 1254

THE END OF THE ONE HUNDRED AND FIRST VOLUME.

Valleguidonensi, from the presses of L. BARNÉOUD and Co.

MONITUM.

What follows are questions we had sought with much expense and great diligence for a long time in vain. At last, with the volume already finished, it was granted to us to discover them in Venice in the Greek Codices X, XI, and XII of the Marcian Library. Since they can no longer hold their proper place, we hope the reader will not find it ungrateful that they have been appended to the end of the volume. EDIT.

SUPPLEMENT TO THE AMPHILOCHIAN QUESTIONS

^A Q. CXLVIII. [Missing in the Coislin and Taurin Codices.] *“But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another.”* (Gal. v, 15).

Paul, whose tongue is an instrument of the Holy Spirit, says: *“For you, brothers, have been called to liberty”* (Gal. v, 13), and having taught that they are not subject to the servitude of circumcision, nor are they to be worn down by the yoke of the law—lest they think that liberty and all things that are not proper were granted to them, and out of the right of liberty they perpetrate injustice, being submissive to the flesh—he adds: *“but through love, serve one another.”* You are called, he says, to liberty; flee the servitude of the flesh; for the servitude of the flesh is a source of many and other passions and evils, and indeed it casts out love itself. ^B In order, then, to pass over other things for now, as regards this wound born of the flesh against us—that is, that which kills love—do not by any means permit it to become a temptation among yourselves. How will this be done? If you serve one another through love; for service through love is a pure pledge of the freedom from above, and it makes peace dwell in the hearts of men. Then, showing that the sum of the law is to *“love your neighbor as yourself”* (Gal. v, 14), and having thus set forth the height and utility of love from the accidents that accompany human life, he tightens the teaching. For since the common man is not so much willing to be made temperate by laws and [threats]—those that threaten final punishments—he counsels as much as he can regarding the temporal things and those that are approaching for punishment, and from there he brings in the exhortation: But if neither the matter of liberty moves you, nor [the fact] that it is fitting to serve one another in love, nor that the accomplishment of love is the fulfillment of the law, but esteeming all these things as naught, you bite and devour one another, yet, if nothing else, consider at least this: that such an action will turn to your ruin and destruction. Beware, therefore, lest you fall from charity; for falling from it leads you into battles and contentions, and dispo-

disposes you to arm yourselves one against another; but this also assists in bringing about your destruction and ruin. ^A Here, he timely interjects charity, even while he is primarily introducing the abolition of circumcision, and while this concern is set before him: so that, when those who make a boast of circumcision are divided from those who are led by the words of Paul to the legislation, they might not make themselves vulnerable to factions, tumults, and battles, by which it is commonly seen that they are the more quickly consumed by one another. These things we have transcribed from rough drafts as we were able; for the books, as your priestly highness knows, along with others from which it would have been possible to live, the captivity has taken as spoils. ^B

QUESTION CLXXV. Why did the Son become flesh, and not another person of the Trinity?

1. Why, I ask, did the Son, and not another person of the Holy Trinity, taking our nature, become flesh? Why, then? In order that the Son might remain the Son both on high and below, being incarnated from the most pure and virginal blood, and that the immutable nature might be proved to have undergone no change or alteration from the changing state. This, then, is one reason.

2. But there is another: it was necessary that the Creator, when the creature was broken, should restore it, not another, but he himself; for if one fashioned it, and another restores it, what the former who fashioned it once had but now does not have, that which the restorer grants, the need for another demonstrates that the fashioner did not possess. But nothing of the sort exists in the divine and omnipotent Trinity; the Son creates, while the Father and the Spirit are also present; again, the Son restores, while the Father and the Spirit also favor and participate in the restoration. The will of the three is one, the power one, there is no other energy, the kingdom is one. ^C

3. Again, since the Son is the Word of the Father, it was fitting that He should recall those who had fallen into irrationality (for irrationality is regulated by reason, and the correction of those who have fallen from grace has its reference to the Word); it is clear that the incarnation of the Son looks solely to the salvation of men. If, therefore, the Father had assumed human nature, or the all-holy Spirit, not only would our race have gained nothing, but they would have ^D shown themselves aimed at something even more difficult. For if He, clothed in flesh and present in life, had said, "I am the Father of God," or, with the density of the flesh appearing, had said, "I am the Spirit," how would the Jew have endured even to receive into his hearing the sound of the voice itself? For if, when the Savior said that He was the Son of God (which was nonetheless often said to them as well), they, inflamed in their hearts by anger, and driven to murder, shouted: "For a good work we do not stone you, but because you, being a man, make yourself God," what then would they not have committed of absurdity, what then would they not have dared, and how

would they have endured to receive instruction or legislation, if the Holy Spirit, or the Father of God, had confessed Himself to be the one who was working out the salvation of the race? But the one through whom the philanthropic and all-holy Trinity knew that we would more certainly obtain salvation, through Him it arranged our incarnation and recall. ^B Otherwise, it was more fitting for those inclined toward irrationality and those who had fallen to be delivered from their irrationality by the Word; for this reason, He who sits upon the Cherubim is ordered to be laid in a manger of irrational creatures, and the Creator of all creation, wrapped in swaddling clothes, to recline in the midst of irrational creatures. You might reasonably consider that it was necessary for the immutable and natural image of the Father—since those who were made according to the image of God and by grace, but who had corrupted and falsified that likeness—to be brought back to their ancient form and beauty through the unchangeable and natural image.

4. And consider this as well. Since the Son is the judge of the living and the dead—for, he says, "He has given all judgment to the Son"—it was necessary for the One who was to judge and pass sentence on those who have lived to be seen also as lawgiver and guide of those things to be practiced, not merely exhorting toward imitation by words (for this has been the effort and pursuit of many others, and it is otherwise difficult for the multitude to confirm words with deeds), but by examples given through which He existed as both maker and teacher, He destroys the way of error and shows to those who imitate Him the method. But it is a cup of love that He keeps for His disciples and imitators, by which He is even more revealed and demonstrated.

5. Indeed, and because the Son is the wisdom and the living and unchangeable image of the Father, it was necessary for Him to deliver from ignominy that soul which had been formed and adorned according to the image of God, but which, by spurious dyes and counterfeit colors, had been transformed into the unsightly and shapeless state of sin; therefore, it was necessary for Him to remove this deformity, and, as if applying a painter's hand to a torn and mangled character, to reshape it and repaint it to its ancient beauty, and to turn back to Himself the image which had been ^C beautifully formed but senselessly insulted and obscured, and to restore it again to its ancient nobility. But if the Spirit, or the Father, and not the Son, had become incarnate for us, nothing regarding the human infirmity that struggles against us, or the will that is carried away toward wrongdoing, would have been accomplished for those recalled toward salvation. For how would it have been tolerable to the ears of the Jews if the Savior, while present in the flesh, had said that He—who gave the oracle to Moses on Mount Sinai, and was both known to them as the Father of all and invoked by them—that He Himself was the one who was conversing as a man with men, and that He Himself was the one who long ago wrote the divine laws inscribed by His finger on tables, and who scourged Egypt with plagues for their sake, and granted them to make their way through the humid nature of the sea with dry feet, and did miraculously everything that would lead them toward piety toward God? How could such things be...

^A be believed if he had said these things? And would they not have been provoked to perform reprehensible acts? For if, even when he called himself the Son of the Savior—although the ungrateful and senseless Israel itself was often called 'son'—they nevertheless leaped upon this expression, and grumbled against the truth, and attributed a cause for blasphemy to the speaker, to what zenith of evils would they not have run, if the One who took our flesh and came to save the human race had proclaimed himself the Father? For this reason, therefore (as far as human reasoning can attain), it is not the Father who becomes man, but the Son, so that the message of salvation might be most acceptable to men, and so that the masterful and philanthropic work, exceeding every word of compassion and providence, might be brought to its conclusion.

6. Likewise, if the Holy Spirit had undergone the incarnation, it would have afforded the Jews the same pretext for ingratitude and unbelief, and a refuge for annoyance and self-willed stubbornness, ^B under the guise of averting calumny. For if they held in their minds a certain dim conception of the all-holy Spirit, it was nonetheless because, by hearing the oracles of the prophets, they learned that it was something superior to human nature, and that nothing was common to flesh and spirit, and thus they imagined a certain divinity concerning it—this, from the prophecy of Isaiah: *The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for which he has anointed me*, and that of David: *Take not thy holy Spirit from me*, and Moses describing the generation of the world: *The Spirit of God was moving over the water*, and a myriad of other things; ^C from which they reasoned that the nature of the Spirit was more divine than that of man, even if they did not attain to a purely theological understanding of Him. Rather, the Sadducees would have mocked and ridiculed the mystery, and would have torn and mangled with their hands and teeth, had one given it to them, the One who had appeared in the flesh, since they could not even endure to say or conceive that anything could come into existence at all, just as they did not for the nature of angels. Since, therefore, the incarnation of the Father and of the Spirit would have been utterly unacceptable to the Jews, and the salvation of the race—which was the goal and providence of the Divine, and for which the emptying of the Unemptiable attained its purpose, through the Incarnate Son—would have been far from being accepted, ^D it is fitting that the Son, both according to much other wisdom, ineffable and incomprehensible to human reasoning, by the good pleasure of the Father and the operation of the all-holy Spirit, taking on our flesh, accomplished the salvation common to the race.

QUESTION CCXXVIII. [Coisl. Taur. LXXVI.] De natura et persona. What was that which appeared in Christ? Was it nature or per-

QUESTION XXVIII

hypostasis? But if it is a hypostasis, and it is also that which is not apparent—namely, the hypostasis of the Word—then there are two, which is absurd. But if it is nature, the absurdities increase; for it is universal and not visible to the eyes (for it is understood also as belonging to many). Furthermore, how is a nature carried in the womb or born? And a thousand other things. It is neither nature nor hypostasis, but a part of the composite hypostasis of the Word, which is an in-hypostatic thing. ^A If someone, however, should declare in his answer that it is none other than the hypostasis of the Word, adding thereto, he might perhaps be answering the Nestorians not ill. Is the Trinity indivisible in itself, or is it divided only by properties and notions? And is there nothing existing in which the hypostasis of the Father is present while that of the Son, or that of the Spirit, is absent, but rather, as much as fills the hypostasis of the Father, so also does each of the others fill it, and vice versa? How, saying that the hypostasis of the Son has become incarnate and has been born, shall we grant that this happened without the hypostasis of the Father and the Spirit, or that those also were born and became incarnate? In the case of generated and corruptible things, it is possible to demonstrate this, so that they are indivisible in hypostasis, and while one of these is acting or suffering, none of the others acts or suffers the same thing; therefore, it is much easier to grant this in the case of the impassible and incorruptible hypostases. Let the illuminating and heating quality of fire be a ^B demonstration: for each of these acts, being inseparable from the other, and while one is acting, the other does nothing of its own in that act. Furthermore, if the begetting of the Son from the Father does not divide the inseparable existence of their hypostasis—either by place, or by time, or by operation—but only signifies the property of the hypostasis of the Son, then neither will becoming incarnate and being born of the Virgin divide Him from the Father or the Spirit, but will only manifest an idiom of the composite hypostasis of the Son; for iron, when it is struck and suffers in one of its qualities, does not suffer in its gravity. ^C

QUESTION CCXXIX. Hujus quæstionis pars prior jam exstat supra col. 1023.

2. Some of the ancients said that there is neither a composite hypostasis, just as they said there is no composite nature, but they called the hypostasis of the Word incarnate and un-incarnate, but no longer composite. But the more recent theologians, I think, took "composite" to mean "incarnate" and that alone. But some say: How then is the composite the same as the simple? For neither is the simple the same as the composite, nor the composite the same as the simple; ^D and these are absurdities. Thus, in the simple hypostasis of the Word, [there exists] the temporal and the originated, just as in the composite; and ten thousand other things. And in the composite, again, it is found that nothing originated is seen, and finally, [that it is] not even incarnate; for the simple has these. And because of these and other such arguments, the ancients rejected the term "composite." Or do we not call it composite, but always simple, positing it as both un-incarnate and incarnate? The same consequences will follow: for if the un-incarnate and the incarnate hypostasis are one and the same, either the properties of the un-incarnate will belong to the incarnate, and the incarnate [...]

^A properties to the un-incarnate. Or, if you prefer, since he who denied and he who testified and confessed with his own blood are one and the same hypostasis, will you for that reason say that denying and testifying are the same, or that the things observed and found in the one who testifies must be observed and found in the one who denies? For it is not the same thing to say that the hypostasis is one and the same, and [to say] that the things observed with differences in the hypostasis are one and the same; and there are countless examples of this. Peter clothed, for instance, and Peter naked; Socrates the philosopher and the one who is not a philosopher; Paul formerly the persecutor, and the preacher; and ^B countless other things, of which the hypostasis is one and the same, but the things pertaining to the hypostasis are not the same.

QUESTION CLXXX. [Coisl. Taur. LXXXVIII.] On divinity.

1. Whether divinity and God are the same, or different? And if they are different, what is this, and what is divinity apart from God? If they are the same, then each of the three hypostases is God, and therefore divinity. Those, then, who blame the form of the word, because "divinity" is spoken in the feminine gender, but the hypostases are not, are mistaken; for then it would not be right to call the Spirit God, since the one is of the neuter gender and the other of the masculine; nor [could we speak of] the Father, Son, and Spirit as one hypostasis, since the genders of their names are dissimilar; nor could man be called an animal or a ^C substance, and countless other things. Therefore, the distinction of genders is not the reason why we hesitate to call the Father, or the Son, or the Spirit "divinity," just as we call them "God." Or is it possible to say that these things are equivalent, just as "man" and "humanity," but that just as we call Socrates a man, but not humanity, so it is also with God and divinity? But is this not actually increasing the difficulty, rather than solving it? For if "man" and "humanity" are equivalent, why, when "man" is applied, is "humanity" not also applied? It seems to some that nothing prevents this, and that "man" and "humanity," "God" and "divinity" are the same, and that the one can be used in place of the other: for man and the nature of man, and the species of man, are the same; but yet "man" is predicated of Socrates (for Socrates is indeed a man), but nature or species is not: for we do not call Socrates the nature or species of man. But this is not similar to the aforementioned, for nature, and species, and essence, and other similar terms, since they are logical terms, cannot by any means be applied down to the furthest individuals, but stop at those ^D to which they relate; whereas divinity and humanity are not logical terms, but terms for natural things.

2. But even if this is true, nonetheless "man" and "the nature of man" are found to be the same, of which the one is said of Socrates, but the other is not. What, therefore, prevents the same from following in the case of other arguments?

^A For perhaps it is not possible to say that man and the nature of man are not the same; and further, we say that man and the mortal rational animal are the same, and indeed that the laughing animal is also the same as man. And not all things that are said of one, will also be said of the remaining ones. For the laughing animal is a property of man, but man is no longer a property of man. And the mortal rational animal is the definition of man, but man is no longer the definition of man; and yet in the highest degree, these things are the same. But if someone were to object to the logical terms in these cases, such as the property and the definition (for when these are removed, whatever the one is, the other is also), yet in these cases what would he object to? For man is a substance and an animal, while the laughing animal is neither a substance nor an animal; for there would be many substances and animals that are "man."

^B But even if these things are true, they are not similar to the things proposed from the beginning. For man and humanity, and God and divinity, if indeed these are the same, are not the same according to the similarity of the things mentioned; for neither is the one a property of the other, nor a definition, but as one might say, they are two names for one subject, like "garment" and "clothing." How then is it that where the one is, the other is not also, or whatever belongs to the one does not also belong to the other? We say, therefore, that man and humanity are the same, as they declare the same subject and thing, but they are not apprehended in the same way. But when we say "man," we conceive of the nature of man as incorporated into the hypostases; but when we say "humanity," we define the same nature of man, not in the same way, but as abstracted from the individuals and taken by itself. Thus, man and humanity are the same, but they are not apprehended in the same way. Therefore, it is not the case that where one is, the other is; or where one is, the other is not the same. Instantly, in the case of Socrates, both "man" and "humanity" are said of him, but not in the same way. For we say that Socrates is a man, but we do not say that he is humanity, but that he "has" it. And again we say that humanity is the nature of Socrates and of the other men, and that it is comprehensive of the individuals; for not one of them falls outside of it. So if not always in the same way, yet where "man" is said, "humanity" can also fit. If, therefore, the argument is true, perhaps it will provide us with clarity on the questions raised even in the case of God and divinity (as much as divine things can be imagined in human examples).

^C 3. If the hypostasis of the Father and of the Spirit was present along with the soul and body of Christ, that is, with the Lordly man (for there is nothing of existing things to which the Trinity, which oversees and provides for all, is not ^D present), and if the Son is said to have been incarnate and to have become man by being present, why would the Father and the Spirit not be said to be these things? Or is being present twofold? The one is as providing (as has been stated), according to which sense the Trinity is said to be present to the Lordly man, just as it is said to be present to all existing things. But just as nothing of existing things is said to have been born of God through the fact that He is present to them, so neither is [the Trinity] said to have been incarnate or to have become man. It is said, however,

to be present to another, as the soul is to the body, when both have come together into one hypostasis; and according to this meaning we say that only the Son is present to the Lordly man, but no longer the Father or the Spirit. And according to the first meaning ^B the hypostasis of the Word was present to all, as we have said, to men, and simply to all existing things; but according to the second meaning it is so no longer, but only to the Lordly man; just as the mind in us is indeed present to all things upon which it happens to be directed, and which it perceives and understands, yet it is also present to the brain, or, if you do not like this, to some other bodily part; and the presence is not similar; for the one is according to essence and existence, that in the defined bodily part, while the other is according to mere intellection and perception.

4. ^C Whether the hypostasis of the Word, that is to say Christ, is the same as His natures, or different? From either side, it makes the matter difficult: for if it is the same, since there are two natures, there will therefore be two hypostases; and since there is one composite hypostasis, there will therefore be one composite nature; but if it is different, these things are God and man; therefore hypostasis and nature are not the same; which would indeed be even more absurd; for from both hypotheses many other absurdities arise. We say, therefore, in conclusion, that it is not absolutely the same, nor absolutely different, but in a certain way the same, and in a certain way different; for according to the essential definitions of the natures, Christ is the same as His own natures, but according to what are atoms, and what can then be spoken of in the plural (and whatever things are similar to these), it is different. Not only for the mystery of Christ, if anyone proposes a question of this kind, will the aforementioned solution be appropriate, but also generally for all things in which the terms "nature" and "hypostasis" can be employed: just as Socrates and the horse, in their own nature, are not entirely the same, nor entirely different, but in a certain way the same, as has been said, and in a certain way different.

QUESTION CCXXXI.

1. We say neither in the universal, nor individually; for it is not necessary that one of these must hold true; for the question is not according to contradiction. For if Christ assumed man in the universal, suppose not in essence, nor to become man in sense, but in intellect and imagination only (for this is the essence of the universal elsewhere), and in another way also that he is not circumscribed in place according to the nature of humanity; for nothing of the universals is circumscribed locally. Furthermore, also, if Christ assumed man in the universal, and this universal is that which is contemplated in many hypostases, Christ will be (since He assumed man in the universal) many persons, or rather, infinite. You might also conclude that He is not consubstantial with us; for when God the Word had assumed man in the universal, we would no longer be men; for whence would this exist

in us, and in what way would we have been rendered common with Christ? Again, another absurdity underlies these statements, namely, that each of the individual men would both be a man and not be a man. For each of us, according to true reasoning, is and is called a man. But if man in the universal, according to which all were said to be men, has been assumed by God the Word, how shall we be men? Because of these things, then, and many others, we do not say that Christ assumed man in the universal. Nor, moreover, is it right to say that Christ assumed an individual man. For if this were granted, Christ would not be one ^B person, but two; for then it would be said that Christ assumes an individual man, if He were to take the nature with its properties, which is nothing other than a person. What then, someone will say, did Christ assume, if He assumed neither man in the universal nor an individual man? We reply that He did indeed assume human nature, but the Word Himself supplied the properties, and thus no absurdity will follow.

2. Does the name Christ have the force of a definition, or is it significative of essence, just as "man" or "horse"? It has neither the force of a definition nor a power to signify essence, but it has the capacity to demonstrate a certain thing. For the name Christ signifies one person, ^C but not one nature. For Christ is not spoken of in a uniform way, but to that very name, which is one, the meaning of two things is shown, of divinity and of humanity; and for this reason Christ is called both God and man, and Christ is one.

QUESTION CCCXIX [Coisl. Taur. XCIV]

QUESTION CCCXX [Coisl. Taur. XCVII]

is not to be put on, because this custom existed among the nations concerning the dead. For those mourning ^A cut off their hair and offered it to the deceased. Hair was shorn not only near the forehead but also wherever it is accustomed to grow on the back of the head; and all these things were customary and legal practices of the nations.

QUESTION CCCXXI [Coisl. Taur. CVIII]. Why did the raven, which is unclean, minister to the prophet?

THE END OF THE SUPPLEMENT.