Andrew Louth - Syriac Christian Church

TEXTS 189
also he has defined the union itself: the one in his speaking of
‘almighty command and touch’, the other in his speaking of
‘the one having kinship’. Through these, he has splendidly
driven away every reduction and division from the mystery of
Christ. Those who will not accept this, and think of one energy
having kinship with both the Word and the flesh, are affirming
a Eutychian or Apollinarian confusion of essences. It is
necessary in everything to keep the logos undamaged and the
mode of the economy inviolate, lest there be introduced
contrary to the truth the wicked coupling, I mean division and
confusion.
We are to accept the reverent meaning of dogma drawn from
the expressions of the holy Fathers—and any other
expressions we may find—that indicate unity as in no way
contradictory of other statements of the holy Fathers that
indicate duality. We know that the latter are mighty for the
difference and against confusion, and the former are steadfast
for the union and against division, but both, the former and
the latter, we welcome exceeding gladly with soul and voice, as
we confess the orthodox faith. And we wisely turn away those
expressions that seem somehow contrary, the meanings of
which are equally opposed to themselves and to one another
and to the truth, and we boldly expel them from our home,
that is from the Catholic and Apostolic Church of God. And
lest any of them contrive to bypass the orthodox faith by
thievishly altering the boundaries set down by the Fathers, 28
we beseech that they be shot down with the weapons and
dogmas of reverent faith and visited with disaster and
destruction.
But it is necessary to know that in the case of natures and
natural energies we have found expressions in these Fathers
that signify unity rather than duality, such expressions as ‘one
Incarnate nature of God the Word’, 29 ‘the theandric energy’, 30
‘shown to have kinship with both’. 31 B
C
D
But in the case of natural
wills, I do not know of any expressions that express unity, but
89Aonly
ones that designate different names and dual number.
How then and for what reason should it ever be necessary to
ask whether there is one will or two wills in Christ the God,
however thoroughly we examine the question, since
encouraged by the teaching and legislation of the Fathers we
confess and maintain two natural wills in the same person,
just as the natures themselves with their natural energies,
since we know the difference between them?