PG 65 · cols. 885–888

Proclus of Constantinople, Mai's series: Sermon on the Ascension, Treatise on the Mass, Letters, Fragments

Letter XVII

ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΙΔʹ.

LETTER XIV.

Τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις Πατρὸς ἡμῶν Κυρίλλου ἐπισκόπου τῆς Ἀλεξανδρείας Γενναδίῳ πρεσβυτέρῳ καὶ ἀρχιμανδρίτῃ περὶ τοῦ, Δεῖ παρορᾷν τι τῆς ἀκριβείας μείζονος ἕνεκα κατορθώματος.

Of our Father among the saints Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, to Gennadius, presbyter and archimandrite, on [the principle], One must overlook something of strictness for the sake of a greater achievement.

ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΙΕʹ.

LETTER XV.

Θεοδώρητος Πρόκλῳ ἐπισκόπῳ Κωνσταντινουπόλεως.

Theodoret to Proclus, bishop of Constantinople.

ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΙϚʹ.

LETTER XVI.

Θεοδώρητος Φλαβιανῷ ἐπισκόπῳ Κωνσταντινουπόλεως.

Theodoret to Flavian, bishop of Constantinople.

EPISTOLA XVII.

LETTER XVII.

PROCLI SYNODICA.

SYNODICAL LETTER OF PROCLUS.

Initium Synodicae Ecclesiae de Proclo factae.

Beginning of the Synodical [letter] of the Church, made concerning Proclus.

Non minus, quam quandolibet, etiam nunc opportune ostendit gratia Dei suam manifestissime bonitatem, contra malitiae magnitudinem Ecclesiaeque aegritudinem virtute clementi resistens; et dum grave profundum metueretur, veloci efficacique medicamine curans, et futurum periculum admirabili et insperato quodam salvationis modo praeveniens. Quoniam quidem multa medio tempore tempestas tenuit seditiosorum, qui ex corruptificis seminibus doctrinae Nestorii surrexerunt, et insistebant;

No less than at any other time, now too the grace of God has opportunely shown its goodness most manifestly, resisting with clement power the greatness of the malice and the sickness of the Church; and, while a grievous abyss was feared, curing it with a swift and effective remedy, and forestalling the coming danger by a certain wonderful and unhoped-for manner of deliverance. For indeed in the meantime a great storm of seditious men prevailed, who had sprung up from the corrupting seeds of the doctrine of Nestorius, and were pressing on;

FRAGMENTA OPERUM S. PROCLI.

FRAGMENTS OF THE WORKS OF ST PROCLUS.

I. Ἐν τῇ Τεσσαρακοστῇ.

I. In [the homily] on Lent.

Ἡ θεία φύσις ἄκτιστος, ἡ ἐξ ἐμοῦ πρόσληψις ἀνόθευτος· καὶ ἔστιν εἷς Υἱὸς, οὐ τῶν φύσεων εἰς δύο ὑποστάσεις διαιρουμένων, ἀλλὰ τῆς φρικτῆς οἰκονομίας τὰς δύο φύσεις εἰς μίαν ὑπόστασιν ἑνωσάσης.

The divine nature is uncreated; the assumption [of what is] from me is unadulterated; and there is one Son, the natures not being divided into two hypostases, but the awe-inspiring dispensation having united the two natures into one hypostasis.

II. Ἐξ ὁμιλίας, τῆς εἰς τὸ, Παιδίον ἐγεννήθη ἡμῖν, υἱὸς καὶ ἐδόθη ἡμῖν.

II. From the homily on [the words], A child has been born to us, and a son has been given to us.

Καὶ τὰς φύσεις τῷ λόγῳ δίελε, καὶ τὴν ἕνωσιν τοῦ μυστηρίου θεολόγησον.

Both divide the natures in thought, and proclaim the union of the mystery as befits God.

III.

Ἔστι γὰρ εἷς καὶ μόνος μονογενὴς Υἱὸς καὶ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐ τῶν φύσεων αὐτοῦ εἰς δυάδα ὑποστάσεων τεμνομένων, ἀλλὰ τοῦ ἀῤῥήτου λόγου εἰς μίαν ὑπόστασιν ἑνώσαντος· ἔνδοθεν κοσμουμένου τοῦ

For there is one and only only-begotten Son and Word of God, His natures not being cut into a pair of hypostases, but the ineffable Word having united [them] into one hypostasis; while from within there was being adorned the

Editors' notes and page, col. 885

Footnotes

(*) ‹anchor: EPISTOLA XVII. (heading of the Synodica)› · call in col 885 Hujusmodi Synodicae Procli fragmentum Riccardo incompertum primus edidit Christianus Lupus inter Epistolas Ephesinas, cap. 150, ejus opp. tom. VII, pag. 313, et post ipsum Joannes Garnerius in Auctario Theodoreti, pag. 653.

This fragment of Proclus's synodical letter, unknown to Riccardi, was first published by Christianus Lupus among the Ephesine Letters, ch. 150, in his works, vol. VII, p. 313, and after him by Jean Garnier in the Auctarium to Theodoret, p. 653.

(printed under page 451)

Editors' prose

‹after Fragment I; printed across both columns 885–886› Haec refert Ephraemius in Oratione III, ad Domnum, apud Photium in Biblioth., cod. CCXXIX; et Anastasius Sinaita lib. Ὁδηγοῦ cap. 7, fol. 110; et cap. 10, fol. 166; Leont. Byzant. lib. I contr. Nestor. et Eutych. in tom. IV Antiq. lect. Canis. Sed inscriptio est: Proclus in illud, Puer natus est nobis. Ipse vere Deus et vere homo, Patri quatenus erat consubstantialis; et mihi quatenus factus est sine peccato, ejusdem naturae. Divina natura increata, etc. Ex quibus constat superiorem Orationem unam eamdemque cum proxima sequenti esse.

Ephraemius quotes these words in his Oration III, To Domnus, in Photius, Bibliotheca, cod. CCXXIX; so does Anastasius Sinaita, Hodegos, ch. 7, fol. 110, and ch. 10, fol. 166; and Leontius of Byzantium, Against Nestorius and Eutyches, book I, in Canisius, Antiquae lectiones, vol. IV. But there the heading is: "Proclus on the text, A child is born to us. He is truly God and truly man: consubstantial with the Father in what He was, and of the same nature as I am, without sin, in what He became. The divine nature uncreated", etc. From this it is clear that the preceding Oration is one and the same as the one immediately following.

‹after Fragment II; printed across both columns 885–886› Habentur haec verba in concilio Chalcedon. in testimoniis sanctorum Patrum, et apud Anastasium Sinaitam lib. Ὁδηγοῦ cap. 7, et cap. 10, et Leontium apud Canisium tom. IV Antiq. lect. fol. 33.

These words are found in the Council of Chalcedon among the testimonies of the holy Fathers, and in Anastasius Sinaita, Hodegos, ch. 7 and ch. 10, and in Leontius, in Canisius, Antiquae lectiones, vol. IV, fol. 33.

Page

running head: FRAGMENTA.
marginal letters: A ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΙΔʹ. / Τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις; B EPISTOLA XVII.; C eardo incompertum (footnote); D (beside the last line of fragment I, μίας τὰς δύο φύσεις)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: cross-reference lines printed across both columns after Letters XIV, XV and XVI: "(Vide inter S. Cyrilli Alex. Epis[tolas …])", "(Exstat inter Opera Theodor[eti …])", "(Exstat ibid.)"; the ends of the first two lie beyond the image edge (UNSURE, Q2b). 'insistebant;' set whole at the end of col. 885 (the page breaks 'insiste-' / 'bant;').

PG 65:886

dum pro sanctissima Ecclesia in medium staret sanctae memoriae Maximianus, qui omni quidem diligentia usus est ad hujus mali peremptionem; nec tamen suffecit hanc malam plantationem eradicare. Igitur dum subito idem beatissimus a praesenti vita migrasset; tanquam facultatem praesumptionis susciperent qui hanc parturiebant seditionem; neque in occulto habere, neque absconditam nequitiam suam continere dignati sunt, sed coarcervatae multitudines in multis partibus civitatis Nestorium publico clamore reposcebant, et urbi pericula Ecclesiaeque minabantur incendium. Et certe ista etiam sub illo beatae memoriae, huic repugnante languori.

while Maximianus of holy memory stood forth on behalf of the most holy Church, who used every diligence for the destruction of this evil; yet he did not suffice to root out this evil planting. So when the same most blessed man had suddenly departed from the present life, as though they had received licence for their presumption, those who were in labour with this sedition did not deign either to keep it hidden or to contain their concealed wickedness; but crowds gathered in many parts of the city demanded Nestorius back with public clamour, and threatened the city with dangers and the Church with burning. And certainly these things [happened] even under that man of blessed memory, while he fought against this sickness.

Editors' notes and page, col. 886

Page

running head: [FR]AGMENTA.
marginal letters: A EPISTOLA XIV.; B bant; dum pro sanctissima; C rius in Auctario (footnote); D gente.
old-edition numerals: (none)

PG 65:887

FRAGMENTA EPISTOLAE SANCTI PROCLI AD ARMENIOS.

FRAGMENTS OF THE LETTER OF ST PROCLUS TO THE ARMENIANS.

I. Ex Joannis Maxentii De Christo professione. In tom. IV, part. I, Bibliothecae Patrum Paris. ann. 1644, pag. 437 C.

I. From John Maxentius, On the Profession of Christ. In vol. IV, part I, of the Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris, 1644, p. 437 C.

Sed sciscitaris me fortassis illum novitium vanumque sensum seu vaniloquium, dicens: Quia qui confitetur eum qui crucifixus est, Christum Deum, et Patrem et Spiritum sanctum crucifixum confitetur, si una est Trinitatis natura. Ego autem e contrario objicio tibi, et quaero: Unus ex Trinitate est qui crucifixus est, an aliquis alius extra Trinitatem? Et si quidem Unus, solutum est jurgium; si autem alius aliquis praeter Trinitatem, Quartus est sine dubio gloriae Dominus, et ab illa glorificatione qua seraphim glorificant, exsistit extraneus. Illa autem animalia Trinitatem laudant, et unitatem confitentur. Hoc autem si non mendaciter docet vox illa, quomodo Quartus quos non plasmavit, salvavit? aut chirographum peccatorum destruxit in cruce, qui non habet potestatem peccata dimittere, si non est secundum te Deus?

But perhaps you put to me that novel and empty notion, or empty talk, saying: He who confesses that the one who was crucified is Christ God confesses that the Father and the Holy Spirit too were crucified, if the nature of the Trinity is one. But I on the contrary put it to you, and ask: Is the one who was crucified One of the Trinity, or someone else outside the Trinity? And if indeed One [of the Trinity], the quarrel is settled; but if someone else besides the Trinity, he is without doubt a fourth Lord of glory, and stands a stranger to that glorification with which the seraphim glorify. But those living creatures praise the Trinity and confess the unity. Now if that voice does not teach falsely, how did a fourth save those whom he did not fashion? Or how did he destroy the bond of sins on the cross, who has not the power to forgive sins, if, according to you, he is not God?

Et iterum post pauca: Si autem proferas mihi, dicens: Quia qui confitetur crucifixum Deum Filium, et Patrem et Spiritum sanctum confitetur; super aquam scribis, et super arenam aedificas. Attende igitur catholicae fidei nervos, et ablue imprudentiam tuam. Quid enim est quod nos sapimus atque sentimus? Quia in hac ipsa essentia et divina natura, qua constat et qua conjunctus et unitus est

And again, after a little: But if you put it to me, saying: He who confesses the crucified God the Son confesses the Father and the Holy Spirit too, you are writing on water and building on sand. Attend, then, to the sinews of the catholic faith, and wash away your imprudence. For what is it that we hold and think? That in this very essence and divine nature in which there subsists, and in which there is conjoined and united,

Editors' notes and page, col. 887

Footnotes

(ref. 54) ‹anchor: seraphim glorificant› · call in col 887 Isa. vi, 3; Apoc. IV, 8.

Isaiah 6:3; Revelation 4:8.

(ref. 55) ‹anchor: destruxit in cruce› · call in col 887 Coloss. II, 14.

Colossians 2:14.

(printed under page 452)

Editors' prose

Testimonium hoc profert Flavianus episcopus Constantinopolitanus, successor sancti Procli, in suo tomo, quod etiam recenset Anastasius Sinaita in lib. Ὁδηγοῦ cap. 10, fol. 196.

This testimony is adduced by Flavian, bishop of Constantinople, the successor of Saint Proclus, in his tome; Anastasius of Sinai also records it in the book of the Hodegos [Guide], ch. 10, fol. 196.

Egit etiam S. Proclus aliam Orationem post victoriam de barbaris a Theodosio imperatore relatam, explicans verba illa Ezech. XXXVIII, 2: Et tu fili hominis, vaticinare contra Gog, etc. De qua Socrates lib. VII Histor. cap. 43. Quae non absimilis est illi, quae de eadem re eodem fere tempore scribit S. Ambrosius lib. II De fide cap. ult. in fine tom. IV, et videntur assuta ex alia quadam Oratione: nam inquit: Neque vero te, imperator, pluribus tenere debeo bello intentum, etc. Et tamen tres alios scribit deinde libros ad eumdem de eadem re, licet non eodem anno, ut apud Baronium tom. IV. Et ea fortasse ex Procli Oratione illa desumpta sunt. Fragmenta haec sic tradidi, cum integras Orationes habere non licuit. RICCARD.

Saint Proclus also delivered another Oration after the victory over the barbarians won by the emperor Theodosius, expounding those words of Ezek. 38:2: And you, son of man, prophesy against Gog, etc. Of this Socrates speaks, History book VII, ch. 43. It is not unlike that which Saint Ambrose writes on the same matter at almost the same time, On the Faith book II, last chapter, at the end of vol. IV; and those words seem to be stitched on from some other Oration, for he says: Nor ought I, O emperor, to detain you longer, intent as you are upon war, etc. And yet he afterwards writes three further books to the same man on the same matter, though not in the same year, as in Baronius, vol. IV. And these perhaps were taken from that Oration of Proclus. I have handed on these fragments thus, since it was not possible to have the Orations entire. RICCARD.

Ex Joannis Maxentii De Christo professione. In tom. IV, part. I, Bibliothecae Patrum Paris. ann. 1644, pag. 437 C.

From John Maxentius, Profession concerning Christ. In vol. IV, part I, of the Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris, 1644, p. 437 C.

Fragmentum ejusdem epistolae ex epistola 3 B. Joannis papae II, tom. V Epist. decretalium. Ex evistola ad Occidentales.

A fragment of the same letter, from the third letter of Blessed Pope John II, vol. V of the Decretal Letters. From the letter to the Westerners.

Fragmentum ex S. Cyrillo in Symbol. apud concil. Ephesinum part. III, cap. 43.

A fragment from Saint Cyril on the Creed, in the Council of Ephesus, part III, ch. 43.

Page

running head: S. PROCLI CP. FRAGMENTA.
marginal letters: A Verbum exornato; B numque sensum seu vaniloquium; C peccata dimittere; D Scripsit enim et ipse Proclus
old-edition numerals: (none)

PG 65:888

παναγίου σώματος, διὰ τοῦ θείου Λόγου· ἔξωθεν δὲ τῷ Πνεύματι φρουρουμένου· ἵνα ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων τὸ περιφανὲς τῶν φύσεων δειχθῇ. Οὕτω γὰρ καὶ ἐσθίειν αὐτὸν φαμὲν, οὐ πρὸ τοῦ πάθους μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν, τὴν φύσιν τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ πιστούμενος.

all-holy body by the divine Word, and while it was guarded from without by the Spirit, so that from both the manifestness of the natures might be shown. For thus we say also that He ate, not only before the Passion but also after the Resurrection, giving assurance of the nature of His body.

Filius Patri sanctoque Spiritui, non dicimus eum deitate passum fuisse, sed carne quam pro nobis assumpsit, et quae ex nobis et pro nobis est factus. Non autem alius est factus, nisi unus de Trinitate, et crucifixus est carne qua factus est; et non est passus divinitate qua unitus est Patri et Spiritui sancto, ne et ipsos crucifixos pariter dicamus. Si autem diceremus eum divinitate crucifixum, revera in Trinitatem passionem induceremus. Si autem dicimus quod in carne sua passiones Verbum suscepit, confitemur, quia et unus est de Trinitate qui passus est, et Trinitatis natura impassibilis mansit.

the Son with the Father and the Holy Spirit, we do not say that He suffered in the Godhead, but in the flesh which He assumed for us, and which, from us and for us, He became. Yet He did not become another, but [remained] one of the Trinity, and He was crucified in the flesh which He became; and He did not suffer in the divinity by which He is united to the Father and the Holy Spirit, lest we should say that They too were crucified alike. But if we were to say that He was crucified in the divinity, we would truly bring suffering into the Trinity. But if we say that the Word took sufferings upon Himself in His own flesh, we confess both that it is One of the Trinity who suffered, and that the nature of the Trinity remained impassible.

Et iterum: Si autem incarnatus non esset passus, haberet fortassis rationem versutissima objectio. Si autem incarnatus passus est; evidenter, quoniam causa incarnationis est crux, hoc crucifixum est quod incarnatum est. Si autem quod incarnatum est, crucifixum est; Pater autem et Spiritus non est crucifixus: unus ergo de Trinitate est crucifixus. Divinitatem vero qua communicat Patri et Spiritui servavit impassibilem. Carne autem, quia ipse solus est factus; ipsa, et solus idem ipse est passus.

And again: If the incarnate one had not suffered, the most cunning objection would perhaps have some ground. But if the incarnate one suffered, then evidently, since the cross is the cause of the incarnation, that which was crucified is that which became incarnate. But if what became incarnate was crucified, and the Father and the Spirit were not crucified, then One of the Trinity was crucified. But the divinity which He shares with the Father and the Spirit He kept impassible. In the flesh, however, since He alone became [flesh], in that very [flesh] He alone, the same, suffered.

II. Fragmentum ejusdem epistolae ex epistola 3 B. Joannis papae II, tom. V Epist. decretalium.

II. Fragment of the same letter, from Letter 3 of Blessed John II, Pope, in vol. V of the Decretal Letters.

Ex epistola ad Occidentales. Super haec etiam confitemur unum ex Trinitate increata atque ineffabili Deum Verbum factum hominem.

From the letter to the Westerners. Beyond this, we also confess that God the Word, one of the uncreated and ineffable Trinity, became man.

III. Fragmentum ex S. Cyrillo in Symbol. apud concil. Ephesinum part. III, cap. 43.

III. Fragment from St Cyril on the Creed, in the Council of Ephesus, part III, ch. 43.

Γέγραφε γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς πρὸς τοὺς τῆς ἑῴας θεοφιλεστάτους ἐπισκόπους αὐταῖς λέξεσιν ὧδε· Καὶ σαρκοῦται μὲν ἀτρέπτως ὁ ἀνείδεος· τίκτεται δὲ καὶ κατὰ σάρκα ὁ ἄναρχος· προκόπτει δὲ τῇ κατὰ τὸ σῶμα ἡλικίᾳ ὁ φύσει παντέλειος· καὶ παθῶν ἀνέχεται ὁ παθῶν ἀνώτερος, οὐχ ᾧ ἦν ὑπομείνας τὰς ὕβρεις, ἀλλ' ᾧ γέγονε καταδεξάμενος τὰ τοῦ σώματος πάθη.

For he himself also wrote to the most God-beloved bishops of the East, in these very words: And He who is without form is made flesh without change; and He who is without beginning is born also according to the flesh; and He who by nature is all-perfect advances in the stature of the body; and He who is above sufferings endures sufferings, not having undergone the outrages in that which He was, but having accepted the sufferings of the body in that which He became.

Editors' notes and page, col. 888

Page

running head: [PR]OCLI CP. FRAGMENTA.
marginal letters: A παναγίου σώματος; B deitate passum fuisse; C Si autem incarnatus passus est; D Γέγραφε γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Mixed column: the Greek end of homily fragment III (its Latin is in col. 887, not set); the continuation of fragment I of the letter to the Armenians, printed in Latin only and so set; the full-width captions and Latin text of fragments II and III, set here in reading order (their left halves stand on col. 887's page); and the Greek of fragment III (Cyril quoting Proclus), whose Latin in col. 887 is not set. "πιστούμενος" (nominative) and "quae ... est factus" are kept as printed. Editors' prose not set: the right half of the full-width note "Testimonium hoc profert ... RICCARD.". END OF UNIT: the work (S. Procli CP. Fragmenta) ends here with "πάθη."; col. 889 begins S. Flavianus, another author.