與狄奧多西辯論 第 1 章 第 9/10 段

For who could have persuaded the many to choose the better course, when those set over them — both emperors and high priests — were so disposed, decreeing impiety in place of other decrees and laws, compelling all to submit, cutting the seamless tunic of the Church into many parts, and giving cause for rejoicing to those who scrutinize and slander our affairs?

But not much time intervened before Sergius, the sower of false doctrine, the many-headed hydra, passed through this present life, having stored up for himself entirely the dregs of judgment for that place;

and Heraclius establishes Pyrrhus on that man's throne, he too being of the opposite party and opinion, and professing the same things as the departed one.

And when Heraclius himself also, shortly after, ended his life, Constantine his son was established over the scepters;

whom Pyrrhus, in accordance with the crookedness of his ways, together with that Martina, a base woman most well-suited for doing evil, removed by poison, and, contrary to expectation, transferred the kingship to her son, called by the name Heraclonas;

fine deeds indeed for a high priest to do, and worthy of his gentleness!

But the Senate, disgusted, quickly removed Heraclonas from power, at the same time also driving out the impious Pyrrhus, together with the like-minded Martina, from the imperial city;

and so for the time being that "noble fellow" paid this penalty, thrust out from both throne and city, in return for having contrived that unjust murder.

Then Constans reigns, the son of the murdered Constantine;

this man having also appointed Paul as bishop of Byzantium, who likewise — he too — fostered that irrational and monothelite doctrine.

But we must return again to the affairs of the divine Maximus, whom our discourse set forth as its subject, even though the narrative turned to other matters, which at the beginning it had also promised to mention as necessary.

When, then, this holy man chose to journey to Rome on account of the false doctrine that had spread in Constantinople, as has already been shown by me above, he first, in passing, met with the bishops in Africa;

he established them in the faith, and taught and instructed them thoroughly how they might evade the pretexts of their opponents, and elude the sophistical snares of those men.

For the man of good understanding knew that we have need of much experience and skill in disputation, if indeed we are to strike down those arrayed against us, and cast down every high thing of theirs that is raised up against the true knowledge.

He trained them, anointed them with words unto courage, and filled them with a more noble spirit;

for even if they surpassed him in throne/rank, yet in wisdom and understanding they were lesser and deficient;

not to mention his other virtue, and the man's renown in all things.

Hence they too were submitting to his words, and were being persuaded without contradiction by his other exhortations and counsels, which brought so great a benefit. For they saw in the man a life set apart and extraordinary, and speech abundant and copious, flowing not in mere drops, but in rivers;

and understanding, and the rest of his disposition of soul, comparable to no one at all.

having experienced toward the blessed man the same thing which, they say, iron filings experience toward that lodestone;

or indeed that which those held fast by the songs of the fabled Sirens experience toward them.

When these [African bishops] learned at that time that the bishop of Rome had gathered a synod of bishops, so that together with them he might subject that outlandish doctrine to curses and anathema, they too, at the exhortation and suggestion of the divine Maximus, were led to do this same thing;

not only Africa and its surrounding region, but also whatever bishops there were in the other islands there, having been drawn into the work, and having accomplished this good deed with zeal.

For indeed all these had that man as both teacher and instructor, and as accomplice in what was done.

Not much time passed thereafter, and John, the bishop of Rome, departed to the Lord;

Theodore ascends to his throne, a successor no less of orthodoxy than of the see itself;

Meanwhile Pyrrhus too, having been driven out of the imperial city, arrived in Africa, and met with the divine Maximus, putting forward his own arguments to him and receiving those of the other in return;

As both of them proceeded through questions and objections, how could I, in the present work, worthily set forth either the saint's solution—together with its plausibility and truth—in each problem, or Pyrrhus's defeat and assent to each point that was made?

For the one [Pyrrhus] put forward, as an unassailable and irrefutable argument, that the will too is one for the one Christ, and said that the true apprehension of the matter could not be otherwise;

but the other [Maximus] replied that he is indeed one according to hypostasis;

yet he distinguished the duality of the natures, along with which the wills too were correspondingly distinguished, and this he demonstrated most forcefully and irrefutably.

And the one [Pyrrhus], in turn, linked the willers together with the wills, joining absurdity to absurdity;

but the holy one turned this aside as utterly absurd by showing the logical consequence, and refuted it,

"For if it be granted," he says, "that the willers are introduced together with the wills (for I shall use the very words of that blessed tongue), then assuredly, by reasonable conversion, the wills too will be introduced together with the willers;

and it will be found, according to your view, that on account of the one will of the supra-essential, supremely good, and most sovereign Godhead, there is also one hypostasis, after the manner of Sabellius;

and on account of the three persons, there are also three wills;

and on account of this, three natures, after the manner of Arius;

if indeed, according to the definitions and canons of the Fathers, difference of wills likewise introduces difference of natures." [16]

And why should I recount each and every one of the things said at that time?

even were I to devote an entire treatise to the matter, I could scarcely manage to go through them all to the end,

so lengthy, varied, and elaborately reasoned is the exposition of these matters.

It is possible, then, for those who go through that very treatise composed with such labor by the saint, to learn from it more precisely both the saint's questioning and answering in every matter—conducted with understanding and most apt reasonings—and Pyrrhus's incoherence and self-contradiction in his propositions, or rather, one might say, his lack of logic and his foolishness;

who, having been utterly defeated, "puts an ox upon his tongue," as the saying goes, and condemns the weakness of his own argument;

which argument, although he shaped it into many and varied forms and twisted it every way, he nevertheless found nothing therein that came together to his advantage.

Accordingly he also begged forgiveness for what he had done, forthwith renouncing in writing his own monothelite doctrine, and giving as well to the bishop of Rome his written statements [of recantation];

and by him he was received, one might say, most gladly.

But the fool, exceedingly senseless, as though nothing new had befallen him, in Ravenna returned, like a dog, to his own vomit.

When this came to the ears of the divine Maximus and to that aforementioned bishop, they, in a common assembly, pronounced a verdict against him as against a rotten and wholly incurable member, entirely cutting off the wretched man and casting him away.

But he, even having suffered this, did not even then cease from shamelessness, nor from growing yet more arrogant;

but with even more self-willed impulse, he leapt again upon the throne of Constantinople, and received the high priesthood a second time, as the prize of impiety.

And since he was not unaware of who was the cause of his condemnation—for how could he be, when that man shone so brightly before all and blazed forth his teaching in the open?—he gave orders with haste that the holy one be brought to the palace,

thinking that if he should get the better of this man, he would also prevail over all the others.

Together with him also came his disciple Anastasius, along with another of the same name and like disposition, who was also called the apocrisiarius of the Church of Rome;

moreover he also swiftly brought the most divine Martin, together with several bishops of the West, and set them before him in Byzantium;

being embittered against these, as was to be expected, on account of the opposition of their conviction.

But as for the matters concerning the hierarch Martin, and however much outrage the impious man committed against him, drenching him with countless insults and abuses—O unholy hands!—

punishing the innocent man, and finally condemning him to a most distant exile (Cherson was the place of his exile), and doing the same, evidently, to his bishops as well.

But I have no leisure for the present to recount these things just as they happened, hastening as I am toward the affairs of the divine Maximus;

many, perhaps, will yet tell of those things, and others, I think, have already told them, honoring the man and extolling his manner of life;

but for us, as our present purpose requires, let the matter proper to our design go forward.

As, then, this sacred man was now seized in the hands of murderers, and all eyes were turned upon him,

let us see with what manner of reception they first greeted him, and with what kind of judgment these fine lawgivers conducted his case.

For as soon as he, having already been conveyed by ship, put in at Byzantium, there came to him those sent by the emperor, men who from their very look alone betrayed much bitterness in their souls;

who impudently seized the holy man, unshod and without any covering, and dragged him by force along the road and led him away, his disciple following as well and groaning at what was being done;

and having led him away, they shut him up in a certain dark chamber, not even allowing him this much: the companionship of his disciple's dwelling with him.

And for the time being, they entrusted his trial to the Sakellarios, a man who held the foremost rank in dignity,

a man clever at fabricating speeches,

and at committing wickedness under the guise of truth—in this, by no means the least skilled of all.

What manner of wickedness did he leave undone?

What manner of villainy had he not perpetrated?

showing no respect for his venerable old age (for he was then about eighty years old, all but a little), nor for the grace that bloomed upon his face, nor for the decorum of his character, nor for his otherwise seemly and most dignified bearing;

and though he had all this before him, this most unjust man had nothing just or reasonable to charge him with for what he had done, but displayed, so to speak, only his own perversity, and the impudence and utter depravity of his own character;

who, even though he was seen behaving with such shamelessness, was nonetheless shown to be stirring up everything in vain;

proven to be nothing but malicious, and most notorious for his villainy.

But indeed, the good disciple of the holy man himself relates in detail the particulars of what was said and done at that time, and what manner of slanders those who thought to shelter themselves behind falsehood attached to the guiltless man, having set it forth in his own memoir;

from which anyone who wishes may examine everything word for word, and learn it more precisely.

Nevertheless, it is not beside our purpose for us too to relate a few things from that account, and to insert them into the present discourse, so that we should not be found altogether without mention of any such matters;

and being about to do this, I intend to go through the events not by way of full narration, but, as one might say, summarily and in passing.

So when that ill-famed Sakellarios had brought the saint before him, he immediately began to intimidate him beforehand with rather harsh words and threats,

calling him unjust and a traitor and an enemy to the emperors, and the most shameful of all men. And when Maximus asked for what reason he was saying these things against him, and what treason he had committed,

then that man fabricated slanders—of a kind only he was likely to fabricate—producing witnesses even for what was an admitted falsehood.

And indeed he prattled slanderously against the holy man, saying that he had handed over great cities—Alexandria, I mean, and Egypt, and the Pentapolis—tearing them away, as he said, from our own borders, and already attaching them to those of the Saracens;

and he called him their most well-disposed friend, and most intimate with them.

But when the saint repelled this malicious scheme of his with an irrefutable argument, showing it to be plain slander and nothing else (for what had he to do with the capture of those cities, for which he rather wished what was advantageous?)—

the shameless man turned to another accusation, fabricating certain dreams and shadows and phantasms;

among which were echoes of voices both greater and lesser, and imperial titles, and [an accusation] that a clearer voice resounded, addressed rather to the ruler of the West than to the ruler of the East;

here too producing and putting forward accusers and false witnesses.

At this the holy man groaned all the more, and said, "I give thanks to my God that I have been delivered into your hands, and am assailed with such accusations;

so that through these unmerited charges, the sins I have voluntarily incurred might be wiped away, and I might cleanse myself of the stains of my life."

Yet, that I may briefly answer these charges as well: I am neither a dream-interpreter, nor one versed in the knowledge of dreams;

for indeed I have no leisure to fill my mind with fantasies of such things."

"But since you have chosen to accuse me in such a manner as even to produce witnesses—

and these not the ones who themselves had knowledge, but those who had heard it from others who knew—since those [original witnesses], as you say, have departed this life—

Why did you not, from the beginning, while the first accusers were still alive, demand a reckoning concerning the dreams?

For thus you yourselves would have been rid of the whole business, and I too would have obtained a verdict on matters that were mutually acknowledged.

But, as it seems, the truth does not stand thus, nor did those who accused us set before their eyes him who searches the heart.

May I be reckoned no Christian — for I have no worse curse to invoke upon myself — if I either saw the fabricated dream, or devised it, or recounted it to others, as though rejoicing in the affair as in an unlooked-for windfall.

Then, when they saw the second charge refuted, they brought against him also a third accusation:

which I did not think it even necessary to include in this account, since, besides being implausible, it is both childish and laughable.

But since these fine judges did not refrain even from a fourth round of accusations and falsehoods, they brought forward a certain Gregory, alleging that the saint's disciple had said, in Rome, that it was neither pious nor reasonable for the emperor to be called a priest —

as though he had learned this from his teacher.

But the holy man was not at a loss for a defense even against this; he confronted Gregory face to face, and showed that what had been discussed on that occasion was one thing, and what was now being alleged was quite another.

“And,” he says, “when that man arrived in Rome, the discussion concerned union, and our accepting the Typos, by which the notorious doctrine was formulated and put in writing.”

“To this indeed our words and our reply were given, as we set forth to them what would be to their own advantage, and what we deemed profitable.”

“To him I never at any time communicated any such thing, with God as my witness.”

“Only this do I know myself to have said — not to the disciple, but to Gregory himself, surely —”

“(which he himself could hardly deny outright, unless he should also entirely deny himself): that to define and to inquire concerning doctrines belongs to priests rather than to emperors.”

“since to priests alone it is granted to anoint, and to lay on hands, and to offer the bread, and to stand at the altar, and to perform whatever other acts are more divine and more mystical.”

“These things I spoke then, and I speak them now.”

“On these grounds let whoever wishes either acquit or condemn;”

“for a man could not be wronged by other men, even should he suffer the most terrible of all things.”

Then, having nothing further to do, those who had placed their hope in falsehood led the just man out of the tribunal, and brought in his disciple Anastasius;

whom they terrified with words and threats, compelling him to testify against his teacher;

forcing him to say that he [Maximus] had grieved Pyrrhus, when he had once had a conversation with him;

I do not know for what reason these liars fabricated such a thing.

But when Anastasius said the very opposite of what they had expected — that he would by no means have grieved him at all, but would have honored him with every honor, and would have received him most affectionately as one thought to be well-disposed toward him — they battered him with fists and blows upon his head and cheeks, and having thus exacted this payment for the truth, they ordered him to be shut up again in prison.

And again they bring the holy man before themselves, as though not satisfied with what had gone before, and they apply yet another trial to one who was innocent [of any wrongdoing].

And it was this: that he was in agreement with the doctrines of Origen, and shared his opinion in everything.

But when he had quickly dissolved this rotten and easily-refuted accusation, declaring openly that whoever holds Origen's views, and accepts his nonsensical doctrines, is separated from God and from the company of Christians —

they inquired a second time concerning Pyrrhus and what had been said on that occasion, putting on a mask of kindness, whether knowingly or in earnest sincerity.

Then next, [they asked] in what manner he had broken off communion with the patriarch.

In addition to this, having also in the meantime posed other inquiries and questions, and having insisted that the Typos put forward by them ought to be honored — that very Typos which he so vehemently abhorred and dishonored —

they did not even refrain from insults against him;

finally, when they saw themselves defeated in every respect, and, as the saying goes, caught by their own feathers —

having dissolved the council, they themselves went in haste to the emperor, reporting the man's steadfastness and his invincibility in argument, and that no one could persuade Maximus to agree with our position, even should someone attempt to punish him.

A short time after this, others arrived to see him, who was by now held in confinement;

thinking, perhaps, that by attacking him repeatedly, and by intimidating him with words, they would find him grown more yielding.

And those who had arrived claimed to have been sent by the patriarch;

and they, just as they had been instructed, put these questions to the saint:

‘Of what Church are you, sir?’ they said — for I shall use their very words:

‘Of Byzantium, of Rome, of Antioch, of Alexandria, of Jerusalem?’

‘Behold, all of these, together with the provinces subject to them, have been united.’

‘If, then, you too belong to the Catholic Church, be united; lest, by innovating a strange path for your life, you should suffer what you do not expect.’ To them the blessed man replied — fittingly, one might say, and as befits the wise:

The Lord, having said that the Catholic Church is the right and saving confession of the faith, on this account also called Peter blessed, when he had made a good confession;

upon which [confession] the God of all also declared that He would build such a Church.

‘But I wish to learn the confession upon which this union of all the Churches has been founded;’

‘and if this has been rightly done, neither do I hold myself estranged [from it].’

To him the envoys said, ‘Even though we have no instruction concerning this, nevertheless we will tell you, since you leave absolutely no room for evasion.’

‘Do you say that the two have become one on account of the union, or is there some other, apart from these two?’

‘No,’ they said, ‘but the two have become one through the union.’

‘We are rid of this business,’ he said, ‘having fabricated for ourselves a faith without hypostasis, and a God that does not exist.’

‘For if we conflate the two into one on account of the union, and again divide the one into two on account of the difference, there will be neither a monad nor a dyad of energies;’

‘since they perpetually cancel one another out, and render inoperative the one to whom they naturally belong, indeed altogether non-existent.’

‘For that which does not have even a single motion from nature that is inalienable, and that is not altered or displaced by any manner of change, is deprived of all essence, according to the Fathers;’

‘not having an energy that essentially characterizes it.’

‘This, then, I am not able to say, nor was I taught by the holy Fathers to confess it;’

‘do, therefore, as seems good to you, since you are the ones who hold authority.’

But they, having nothing to say in reply to this, reported to him the decision made by those in power;

declaring that, since he would not be persuaded, he would be subjected to anathema, and that the death sentence determined against him would also be carried out.

But he, so gently and humbly, said: ‘Let that which has been determined by God concerning me now come to its fulfillment, bringing Him glory that was known before every age.’ But for the time being, the sentence pronounced was postponed;

And having taken counsel together, the emperor and the patriarch alike — no less than Pilate and the Jews did against my Jesus — condemned the just man to exile;

he being swiftly led away to a certain small town called Bizya —

having done, that is, the very same things also to his namesake — I mean the apocrisiarius of Rome.

And indeed, when many days had passed, they sent to him in exile that Theodosius, the bishop of Caesarea, and Paul, and another Theodosius, both of the latter clothed with the rank of consul;

who themselves also put forward to the blessed man many and various arguments;

now flattering him, now threatening him;

and now also questioning him closely so as to find out [his views].

The detailed, part-by-part account of these matters is set forth in the record composed by the good Anastasius, as I have also stated above.

But it will perhaps not be untimely for us also to relate a few things drawn from these, giving here too our account in summary form.

For thus we might all the more clearly learn the man's invincibility in every respect: that, though there were many who assailed him and attempted in manifold ways to shake him, he himself none the less remained unbending, wholly firm, and unchangeable in resolve.

But let us see what sort of things these men just mentioned brought before the saint.

First they inquired closely how matters stood with him;

putting this question to him as though in friendship — or rather, one should say, in flattery.

As the end of my life has been foreknown and predetermined by God's providential [wisdom], so indeed may it be for me.

(Again they question him in turn:

'What does foreknowing mean, and what does being predetermined signify, and what is the difference between the two?' And when he answered, [he said] that foreknowing pertains to the things within our power—I mean thoughts, words, and deeds—

from which virtues and vices come upon us;

whereas being predetermined pertains to things not in our power, but which befall us from without, involuntarily—

namely, all manner of afflictions, and other chastising means.

And simply put, this most God-inspired man having gone through each of these in detail—

and having explained which afflictions come on account of the expiation of sins,

and which are brought upon us for testing, or for [divine] dispensation, justly and, as one could not otherwise say, beneficially—

they, for their part, having for the moment set these matters aside, turned their discourse back to the things concerning which they had come,

calling him to communion, and to assent to what they had done.

But as he set in opposition to this the innovation that had come upon the Church, and the confusion of the faith [that had resulted],

then Theodosius of Caesarea also engaged him in dialogue, and asserted most insistently that nothing contrary to right reason, nor anything foreign or alien to it, was professed by these men—

upholding [the doctrine of] the [one] energy and that monothelite will, and contending fiercely on its behalf.

But the holy man, having refuted the absurdity involved in such [teaching], said that if one energy, as he put it, were posited to be spoken of both divinity and humanity, then assuredly both the doctrine of theology and that of the economy would be thrown into confusion;

and the absurd result would be that there would be a Tetrad instead of a Triad, since the flesh would thereby become of the same nature as the Word—

if indeed, according to the Fathers, 'those things whose essence is one, their energy also will be one.' But moreover, the distinguishing and constitutive [properties] of both the divinity and the humanity would be removed, or else each would proceed to complete non-existence,

since, according to these arguments of yours and this new dogma-making, it would be possible neither to conceive nor to speak of the energies or the wills as either one or two—

he further added that this could not be agreed to, and that such [teaching] belongs to false teachers and deceivers, whom one must not obey, but must rather turn away from, so far as possible, and separate oneself from them, lest we too should seem to derive some evil benefit from association with them. These men, as if struck speechless at what had been said, remained silent for a considerable while, bowing their heads down.

But Theodosius, having again recovered himself, and having at leisure gathered together other inquiries, which he supposed would remain for him like certain impregnable citadels—

having then put forward these statements, along with [a claim of] the acceptance of certain simple expressions,

asserting that Maximus accepted these—

and besides, having also raised other inquiries concerning hypostatic energy, and a certain natural and relational willing—matters which require a lengthier discourse, and are not suited to the present narrative account.

Since, then, he [proposed] these things, but the holy man very easily managed to overturn every proposition in his arguments and reasonings—

this man, finally worn out, and having nothing further to say in reply to the matters at hand, tried another way to draw the saint over [to his side]:

conversing with him now in a friendlier manner, [saying] that he too would wish that the obstacles and stumbling-blocks between them be removed, and that the former peace be restored to the Church.

'Which,' he said, 'could not come about otherwise, unless we now go to those in Rome, and summon them to terms of agreement and reconciliation—'

that is, breathing and being of one mind together with them.

At this the holy man became all the more cheerful—how could one describe how he was disposed toward what had been said!

And with what gracious words did he not respond to the one who had spoken it!

For he, though in so poor a bodily condition, worn out both by ascetic labor and by old age, was nevertheless eager to visit Rome once again, and together with them to accomplish what would be profitable.

'Only let this become deed,' he said, 'and let it not be a word spoken in vain.' 31.

And when Theodosius had confirmed what had been said even with an oath, and had touched the immaculate Gospels with his hands—although this senseless man kept none of these [promises], being dragged along, as it were, by the wills of those in power—

the holy man was all the more cheerful, bracing his whole self for the journey, and considering what would be beneficial both to them and to those in Rome.

Then, when Theodosius was about to depart from there, in order to communicate concerning these matters with those in the imperial city, having once again greeted the holy man with an embrace—

and having also given him a tunic and a gray cloak, he thus entered Byzantium, together with the two consuls who accompanied him.

Eight days passed from that time, and Paul, who had himself also been honored with the rank of consul, went out to the saint—

having been commanded by the emperor to take up the holy man from Bizya with reverence and respect, as being a friend and acquaintance, and one belonging to his own forebears, and to transfer him to one of the monasteries at Rhegium, the one named after St. Theodore.

And on the following day Epiphanius and Troilus, both bearing the rank of patrician, went to him, together also with Theodosius of Caesarea—

and the saint continued to expect that this man would make good on what had been said, not having detected his treachery, for he himself was utterly guileless in mind.

These men, having conversed at great length with the holy man, announced the emperor's promises—that he would make him his own father and show him to be superior to all, only if he would consent to be united and come together with him, and jointly with them choose what had been decreed.

Having said to him what seemed to favor their cause, and putting it forward, they repeatedly brought up in everything they said that unformed Typos, again and again—