← All books · Latin Fathers › Papal Letters

Roman Pontiffs

Papal Letters 1 part 11/50

Latin original · 41 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 1:403–1:443 (2003 verses in all)

← prev partnext part →

1:403

uerumtamen neminem terreat, quod damnatus Acacius non quiescit, elisus est satanas et tamen operatur et opera eius uicit Christus et uincit et tamen nec adhuc hostis absistit. et quia certum est nobis meminisse uos etiam propheticae lectionis nec aliquid habere contra consistentia castra formidinis, oportunissime cohortamur, ut spectantes dominum, sicut et nos, perseueretis in finem et sententiam, quam reperitis in subditis, animo constanti retineatis.

Nevertheless let no one be dismayed that the condemned Acacius does not keep quiet: Satan has been struck down and yet works; Christ has conquered his works and conquers still, and yet the enemy does not desist. And because we are sure that you too remember the prophetic reading and have no cause for dread against the encamped hosts arrayed against you, most opportunely we exhort you that, looking to the Lord as we ourselves do, you persevere unto the end and retain with steadfast mind the sentence which you find in what follows.

然而，不要有人因那被定罪的亞加修不肯安靜而驚惶：撒但已被擊倒，卻仍在活動；基督已勝過他的作為，且仍在得勝，而仇敵卻仍不罷休。我們確信你們也記得先知書的教訓，並無理由懼怕那擺陣對抗你們的營壘；因此我們正合時宜地勸勉你們：要像我們一樣仰望主，堅持到底，並以堅定的心持守你們在下文所見的那判決。

1:404

ne quid autem magne in litteris nostris mutari apud prauissimas mentes aut aliter interpretari possit, primum clementissimo principi, sicut oportuit, supplicantes has easdem litteras trinas ad dilectionem uestram, clerum plebemque et amplissimum senatum direximus, quibus singuli uniuersique subscripsimus diuinum petentes auxilium, ut uitatis insidiis haec ad uos scripta faciat peruenire. Dat. III. Nonarum Octobr. Symmacho u. c. consule. ET ALIA MANU: Deus uos incolumes custodiat, filii dilectissimi. ET SUBSCRIPTIONES EPISCOPORUI:

But lest anything of weight in our letters could be altered among the most depraved minds or interpreted otherwise, first supplicating the most clement prince, as was fitting, we have directed these same letters in triplicate to your Love, to the clergy and people, and to the most illustrious senate, to which we have subscribed both individually and all together, imploring divine aid that, with the snares avoided, it may cause these writings to reach you. Given on the third day before the Nones of October, in the consulship of Symmachus, most distinguished man. And in another hand: May God keep you unharmed, most beloved sons. And the subscriptions of the bishops:

但為免我們信中任何重要之處，在那些最墮落的人心中被更改或被曲解，我們首先照理向至仁慈的君王懇求，然後將這同樣的書信一式三份寄達你們的仁愛、聖職人員與百姓、以及至尊貴的元老院；我們一一並全體在其上簽署，祈求神的幫助，使這些文書得以避開埋伏而送達你們。書於十月諾內前第三日，辛瑪庫斯——至顯赫者——執政之年。另一手筆寫道：願神保守你們平安無恙，至親愛的眾子。以下是諸主教的簽署：

1:405

Candidus Tiburtinae ciuitatis episcopus Petro Alexandrinae ecclesiae peruasori et Acacio quondam ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae nec non etiam Petro Antiocheno ab episcopatu et Christianorum numero olim iure et merito segregatis omnibusque sequacibus eorum sequens auctoritatem sedis apostolicae secundum desiderium nostrum iuxta ecclesiae statum catholica deliberatione prolatam anathema dicens subscripsi. ET QVADRAGI.NTA DUO EPISCOPI SIMILITER SUBSCRIPSERUNT. (71.) INCIPIT EPISTOLA FELICIS PAPAE URBIS ROMAE AD PETRUM ANTIOCHENUM DEPONENS EUM QVIA PASSIONEM CORPORIS CHRISTI IN TRINITATE PRAEDICABAT DICENS \'SANCTUS DEUS SANCTUS FORTIS SANCTUS INMORTALIS QVI CRUCIFIXUS ES PROPTER NOS\'.

I, Candidus, bishop of the city of Tibur, following the authority of the apostolic see, have subscribed, pronouncing anathema — a sentence brought forth according to our desire and in keeping with the state of the church by catholic deliberation — against Peter the usurper of the Alexandrian church, against Acacius formerly of the church of Constantinople, and also against Peter of Antioch, all long since rightly and deservedly separated from the episcopate and from the number of Christians, together with all their followers. And forty-two bishops likewise subscribed. (71.) Here begins the letter of Felix, pope of the city of Rome, to Peter of Antioch, deposing him because he preached the passion of the body of Christ within the Trinity, saying: 'Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, who wast crucified for us.'

我，提布爾城的主教坎狄杜斯，依循宗座的權柄簽署此文，向以下諸人宣告詛咒——這判決乃按我們的心願、依教會的處境、以大公的商議而作成——即針對亞歷山大教會的篡奪者伯多祿、針對君士坦丁堡教會的前任亞加修、也針對安提阿的伯多祿，他們早已按公義與應得地被逐出主教職與基督徒之列，連同他們所有的追隨者。另有四十二位主教同樣簽署。（七十一）以下開始羅馬城教宗斐理斯致安提阿伯多祿的信，將他廢黜，因他在三位一體之內宣講基督身體的受難，說：「聖哉神，聖哉全能者，聖哉不朽者，你為我們被釘十字架。」

1:406

Quoniam pestiferis doctrinis inbutus es in impietate uerborum et non decreuisti sequi praeordinatos sanctos patres, qui sedem beatae memoriae Ignatii gloriosi martyris ornauerunt (quo etiam cum sis indignus, nescio quemadmodum adeptus fueris principatum et sceleribus tuis profanis impiisque dogmatibus inferre putaueris ecclesiae catholicae nouitatem, ut non propter nos Christum crucifixum dicas.

Since you are steeped in pestilent doctrines amid the impiety of your words, and have not resolved to follow the fathers pre-ordained and holy who adorned the see of Ignatius of blessed memory, the glorious martyr — a primacy which, unworthy as you are of it, I know not how you obtained, and by your profane crimes and impious dogmas you have thought to bring novelty into the catholic church, so as to say that Christ was not crucified for us —

因為你在言語的不虔中浸染了毒害的道理，並且不肯追隨那些被預定且神聖、曾裝點榮耀殉道者依納爵之教座的教父——你雖不配，卻不知如何竟取得了那首席之位，並藉你褻瀆的罪行與不虔的教條，妄想把新異之說引入大公教會，以致說基督不是為我們被釘十字架——

1:407

sed passionem impassibili deo iniquissime intulisti et immortali spiritui mortem adponere praesumpsisti nec exterritus es, quae tibi a sanctis euangeliis et apostolis et uiris beatissimis ac probatissimis patribus tradita non sunt, [sed] callidis haec commentis astruere et α̋ρξαι, ϰαι̍ μώμοις σου βεβήλοις ϰαι̍ άσεβέσι δόγμασι ϰαινοτομι̍αν τή ϰϰϑολιϰή ὲϰϰλησι̍α̩ ὲνέϰρινας του̃ μή Χριστὸν σταυρωϑέντα δι\' ήμᾱς δεῑν ει̍πεῑν ὰλλὰ πάϑος τψ̄ ὰπαϑεῑ ϑεψ̄ ὰνόμως έπ- εισάξαι ϰαι̍ τψ̄ ὰϑανάτψ πνεύματι ϑάνατον ὲπιϑεῑναι ϰαὶ obx ὲϕρι- ϰίασας , 5 co παρεδέξω lx te twv ϑείων εύαγγελίων ϰαὶ άποστόλων ϰαὶ twv ὰνδραγαϑησάντων εύϕήμων πατέρων, ϰαϰίστως επισοϕισά- Uerba graeca, quorum uetusta uersio Latina Auellanae inserta est, e codicibus edd.

but most iniquitously you brought passion upon the impassible God and presumed to attach death to the immortal Spirit, nor did you shudder; and things which were never handed down to you by the holy Gospels and the apostles and the most blessed and most approved fathers, these you sought with cunning fabrications to build up, and to begin, and by your profane and impious dogmas you judged fit to introduce innovation into the catholic church — namely that Christ ought not to be said to have been crucified for us, but rather that passion be lawlessly brought upon the impassible God and death imposed upon the immortal Spirit; and you did not tremble at these things which you did not receive from the divine Gospels and the apostles and the fathers who bore themselves valiantly, but most wickedly played the sophist upon them. (The Greek words, of which the ancient Latin version has been inserted into the Avellana collection, are given from the codices by the editors.)

但你竟最不義地把受苦加於那不受苦的神，並擅敢把死亡歸給那不朽的神靈，也不戰慄；那些從未由聖福音、諸使徒、以及至福至可靠的教父傳給你的事，你卻用狡詐的臆說去建構、去開端，並藉你褻瀆不虔的教條，判定要把新異之說引入大公教會——就是主張不當說基督為我們被釘十字架，反倒不法地把受苦加於不受苦的神、把死亡加於不朽的神靈；你對這些你並未從神聖福音、諸使徒、以及那些行事英勇、聲譽美好的教父那裡領受的事，竟不戰慄，反倒最惡劣地在其上詭辯。（那些希臘文詞句，其古老的拉丁譯本已被插入《阿維拉那文集》中，由編者依諸抄本刊出。）

1:408

Fronto Ducaeus l . c. 545 et Binius Concil. gener. ed. 2 tom. II 1 p. 777; de codicibus a me adhibitis (a = Monac. gr. 186, e = Paris. Fonds grec. 418, o = Ottobon. graec. 28, g = Uindob. Hist. gr. XLV, h = Paris. Fonds grec 419) cf. Prolegomena cap. III et \'Nachrichten der k. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, philol.-histor. Klasse, 1894\' p. 119 sqq . 2 ante Φιλήϰοος (sic) add . \' Επιστολή g man. rec . ξ̉πι̍σϰοπος g 4 δυστυχω̄ς gh : δυστήνων aeo 5 πατράτι aeo: άνδράσι gh 6 xal πολυάϑλου om. a 7 otÕ\' eo 8 άρξαι gh νόμοις eo 10 δεῑ ante correctionem manus recentioris e 11 πνεύματι ag et corr. ex natpt h man. 1 ut uidetur:

(Editorial apparatus:) See Fronto Ducaeus, in the passage cited, p. 545, and Binius, General Councils, 2nd ed., vol. II.1, p. 777. Concerning the codices I have employed (a = Munich, Greek 186; e = Paris, Greek Collection 418; o = Ottoboni, Greek 28; g = Vienna, Historical Greek XLV; h = Paris, Greek Collection 419), see the Prolegomena, chapter III, and the 'Nachrichten der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, 1894,' pp. 119 and following. Line 2: before Philekoos (thus) g in a recent hand adds 'Epistole'; g reads episkopos. Line 4: dystychos g h, but dystenon a e o. Line 5: patrati a e o, but andrasi g h. Line 6: 'and of much toil' is omitted in a. Line 8: arxai g h; nomois e o. Line 10: dei before the correction of a more recent hand in e. Line 11: pneumati a g, and corrected from another reading in h by the first hand, as it seems:

（校勘附註：）參見弗龍托·杜卡烏斯所引處第545頁，及比尼烏斯《大公會議集》第二版第二卷之一第777頁。關於我所採用的抄本（a＝慕尼黑希臘文186號；e＝巴黎希臘文藏品418號；o＝奧托波尼希臘文28號；g＝維也納歷史希臘文XLV號；h＝巴黎希臘文藏品419號），參見《緒論》第三章，及《哥廷根皇家科學學會通報·語文歷史類·1894年》第119頁以下。第2行：在Philekoos（原文如此）之前，g以近代之手加「書信」一詞；g讀作「主教」。第4行：dystychos見於g、h，而dystenon見於a、e、o。第5行：patrati見於a、e、o，而andrasi見於g、h。第6行：「以及多受勞苦者」一語在a中省略。第8行：arxai見於g、h；nomois見於e、o。第10行：dei位於e中較近代之手的更正之前。第11行：pneumati見於a、g，並在h中由第一手從另一讀法更正而來，看來如此：

1:409

πατρι̍ eo 14 ταύτα bis h otxetav aeo sensum proprii languoris et huius haereseos scandalum simplicioribus inculcare, ita ut nec similia prioribus uideantur haeresibus sed multipliciter potius haec transcendant, nec ambulare in ueritate nec nostris duabus epistolis aurem uoluisti commodare):

(Apparatus: patri e o; line 14: tauta twice in h; oikeian a e o.) ... to instil into the simpler folk the sense of your own sickness and the scandal of this heresy, so that these things should not seem similar to the earlier heresies but rather manifoldly surpass them; and you have willed neither to walk in truth nor to lend an ear to our two letters):

（附註：patri見於e、o；第14行：tauta在h中出現兩次；oikeian見於a、e、o。）……把你自己病態的意念與這異端的絆腳石灌輸給較單純的人，使這些說法不像從前的異端，反倒在多方面超過它們；你既不肯行在真理中，也不肯側耳聽我們那兩封書信）：

1:410

nunc igitur sum exorsus aduersum te proferre sententiam, magis autem summus princeps pastorum Petrus, qui inter sanctorum apostolorum praeconia ueredicus est, et non solum aduersum te, qui eius nominis, non sententiae neque fidei par esse cognosceris, quoniam ultra modum ab eius intentione recta et inuiolabili fide deuiasti, sed etiam aduersum eos, qui non erubescentes euangelorum uenerabilium characteres neque horum sequacium apostolorum perfectorumque uirorum doctorumque sermones inconstanti sententia iniquis traditionibus tuis incumbunt, ita ut malae sectae delectabiliter reuera sequantur amaritudinem nec huiusmodi execrabilem auersentur impietatem. dicimus ergo tibi sicut etiam illis:

Now therefore I have begun to pronounce sentence against you — or rather it is the supreme prince of shepherds, Peter, who among the proclamations of the holy apostles speaks the truth — and not only against you, who are found to share his name but not his judgment nor his faith, since beyond all measure you have deviated from his right and inviolable faith; but also against those who, unashamed of the venerable stamp of the Gospels and of the discourses of the apostles who follow them and of the perfect and learned men, lean with wavering judgment upon your iniquitous traditions, so that they gladly pursue in truth the bitterness of the evil sect and do not turn away from such execrable impiety. We say therefore to you, as also to them:

如今我已開始向你宣告判決——更確切地說，乃是眾牧者之至高元首伯多祿，他在諸聖使徒的宣講中說出真理——不僅是針對你，你雖與他同名，卻被查明既不與他同心、也不與他同信，因為你已無度地偏離了他那正直而不可侵犯的信德；也針對那些人：他們不以福音那可敬的印記、以及跟隨福音的諸使徒和成全博學之人的言論為恥，卻以搖擺的判斷倚靠你那不義的傳統，以致他們竟樂於追隨那惡宗派的苦毒，並不厭棄如此可憎的不虔。因此我們對你、也對他們說：

1:411

quoniam dilexisti malitiam super benignitatem, iniquitatem magis quam loqui aequitatem, dilexisti omnia uerba praecipitationis, linguam dolosam, propterea destruet te deus in finem, non solum ab Antiochenae ecclesiae sede sed etiam ab omni ciuitate. etenim sit tibi haec fixa damnatio a me et ab his, qui sub me constituti episcopales sedes gubernare noscuntur, et Acacio Constantinopolitanae ecclesiae pastore et μάλλον δὲ Ó ϰορυϕαιότατος τω̃ν ποιμαντιϰω̄ν ϑρόνων, ό ev άγι̍αις εύϕημι̍αις ϰομω̄ν. ό aptato? τω̄ν άποστόλων άληϑω̄ς, ΙΙέτρος ού μόνον δὲ ϰατά σού , o; αύτοῡ τψ̄ ὸνόματι ε̋πισος ει̉ άλλ\' ού τή̜ γνώμη̗ ούδέ τή̗ πι̍στει , õtt.

Since you have loved malice above kindness, and iniquity rather than to speak equity; you have loved all words of ruin and a deceitful tongue: therefore God shall utterly destroy you, not only from the see of the Antiochene church but from every city as well. Indeed let this condemnation stand fixed against you by me and by those who under me are known to govern episcopal sees, and against Acacius, pastor of the church of Constantinople. (In Greek: rather it is the most eminent of the pastoral thrones, Peter, resplendent in holy praises, truly the leader of the apostles, and not only against you who share his name but not his mind nor his faith, in that...)

因為你愛惡毒過於仁慈，愛不義過於說出公正；你愛一切毀滅的言語和詭詐的舌頭：因此神必徹底毀滅你，不僅將你從安提阿教會的教座上除去，也將你從各城除去。誠然，這定罪要由我、並由那些在我之下、被公認治理諸主教教座的人、以及君士坦丁堡教會的牧者亞加修，堅定地立在你身上。（希臘文作：更確切地說，乃是眾牧職寶座中至為卓越者伯多祿，他在聖潔的頌讚中光耀，真是諸使徒的元首；不僅針對你——你雖與他同名，卻不與他同心、同信——因為……）

1:412

ύπεράγαν ὲϰ τούτου ὲϰϰεϰλιϰώς ει̉ τού opdoO σϰοποῡ ϰαὶ τής άμωμήτου πίστεως, άλλά μήν ϰαι̍ ϰατά τω̄ν μή ὲρυϑριασάντων τούς τω̄ν σεπτω̄ν εύαγγελιστω̄ν χαραϰτήρας ϰαι̍ τω̄ν τούτοις έπομένων άποστόλων ϰαι̍ τελείων άνδρω̄ν διδασϰάλων τούς λόγους aaxdxtp γνώμη̗ ὲπερειδομένων τη̗ ὲϰ aoo παρανομουμένη̖ ὲϰϑέσει, ώς ήδύτατα περιέπεσϑαι ὲπι̍ to τής ϰαϰοδοξι̍ας ο̋ντως πιϰρότατον, ϰαι̍ cox άποστραϕέντων τήν τοιάνδε δυσσέβειαν. λέξομεν ούν σοι̍ 00; xat xat\' ὲϰει̍νων\' ὲπειδή ή γ ά π η σ α ςϰα - ,........-.

(In Greek, paralleling the foregoing:) ...you have exceedingly deviated from the right aim and from the immaculate faith; but also against those who did not blush at the stamp of the venerable evangelists and at the words of the apostles who follow them and of the perfect men and teachers, but lean with corrupt judgment upon the exposition transgressed by you, so as most sweetly to pursue the truly most bitter fruit of false doctrine, and did not turn away from such impiety. We shall say therefore to you, as also against them: since you have loved...

（希臘文，與上文平行：）……你已極度地偏離了那正直的目標與那無瑕的信德；不僅針對那些人：他們不以可敬的福音史家的印記、以及跟隨他們的諸使徒和成全之人與導師的言論為恥，卻以敗壞的判斷倚靠你所踐越的教訓，以致最甘美地追逐那實在最苦毒的謬道之果，並不厭棄如此的不虔。因此我們要對你、也要斥責他們說：因為你愛了……

1:413

xtav ύπὲρ 〈 άγαϑωσύνην, άδιϰι̍αν ύπὲρ 〉 τὸ λαλή- σαι διϰαιοσύην, ήγάπησας πάντα ρ́ή ματα ϰατα- ποντισμού, γλω̄σσαν δολι̍αν , std τούτο ó ϑεὸς ϰαϑέλο t a e ει̍ς τέ X ος , co μόνον άπὸ τής \'Αντιοχέων έϰϰλη ata; άλλά ϰαι̍ άπὸ πάσης πόλεως. ϰαι̍ γε πεπαγιωμένη ε̆στω σου ή ϰαϑαι̍ρεσις αυ̋τη ύπ\' ὲμού ϰαι̍ τω̃ν διεπόντων μετ\' ὲμού τὸν άποστολιϰόν ϑρόνον ϰαι̍ \'Αϰαϰι̍ου τού τής Κωνσταντινουπολιτω̃ν uenerabilibus episcopis eius iuri subiectis, tamquam et ipsis minime consentientibus tuis commentis. aliquando siquidem dixisti trinitatem propter nos crucifixam et non Christum, aliquando uero inmortalem spiritum Manichaei secutus errorem.

(In Greek, continuing:) ...malice above goodness, and iniquity above speaking righteousness; you have loved all words of ruin and a deceitful tongue: therefore God shall utterly destroy you, not only from the church of the Antiochenes but from every city; and indeed let this your deposition stand fixed by me and by those who govern the apostolic throne together with me, and by Acacius of the church of Constantinople — (in Latin:) and the venerable bishops subject to his jurisdiction, since they too in no way consent to your fabrications. For at one time you said the Trinity was crucified for us and not Christ; but at another time, following the error of Manichaeus, you said it was the immortal Spirit.

（希臘文，續：）……惡毒過於良善，不義過於說公義；你愛了一切毀滅的言語與詭詐的舌頭：因此神必徹底毀滅你，不僅從安提阿人的教會，也從各城除去；誠然，這廢黜要由我、並由那些與我一同治理宗座之位的人、以及君士坦丁堡教會的亞加修，堅定地立在你身上——（拉丁文：）連同那些歸屬他管轄、可敬的諸主教，因為他們也絕不贊同你的虛構。因為你有時說三位一體為我們被釘十字架而非基督，有時卻追隨摩尼的謬誤，說那是不朽的神靈。

1:414

aliquando autem haec fugiens nostrorum sermonum pignoribus increpatus Christum post immortalem spiritum passionem sustinuisse dixisti sicut Samosatenus et Nestorius unum filium diuidentes in dualitatem filiorum;

But at yet another time, fleeing from these positions and rebuked by the pledges of our discourses, you said that Christ endured the passion after the immortal Spirit, like the Samosatene and Nestorius, dividing the one Son into a duality of sons;

但又有一次，你逃避這些立場，被我們話語的憑據所責備，便說基督是在那不朽的神靈之後承受受難，就像撒摩撒他人和聶斯多留，把獨一之子分割成雙重的眾子；

1:415

et quia in hoc putasti non immorandum, ad peiora uenisti, ut hymni, quos cherubim cum tremore trinitatis incessanter emittunt, ad trinitatem glorificandam non referantur sed ut totus hymnus ad filium deducatur, confirmare uolens sententiam uelut cancer serpentem, quam aduersus simplices extulisti, et hinc omnium haereseum laqueis praecipitatus es a ueritate declinando nec praedicando propter nos Christum crucifixum unigenitum dei filium, qui in medio patris et sancti spiritus pie glorificatur. quid enim hoc erit damnabilius, quam cum a uobis pater et spiritus sanctus fiat inglorius et calumnia seraphim inferatur, quando non trinitatem glorificare credantur cum dicunt:

and because you thought you must not linger here either, you came to worse things: that the hymns which the cherubim with trembling send forth unceasingly to the Trinity should not be referred to the glorifying of the Trinity, but that the whole hymn be drawn down to the Son alone — wishing to confirm the opinion, creeping like a cancer, which you have raised against the simple; and hence, cast headlong from the truth into the snares of all heresies, you deviate and do not preach Christ crucified for us, the only-begotten Son of God, who is piously glorified in the midst of the Father and the Holy Spirit. For what could be more damnable than this, that through you the Father and the Holy Spirit are made inglorious and calumny is laid upon the seraphim, since they are believed not to glorify the Trinity when they say:

又因你認為連在此也不可停留，便走向更壞的地步：你主張基路伯戰兢不息地向三位一體所發的頌歌，不應歸於榮耀三位一體，反倒要把整篇頌歌單單引向聖子——你想藉此確立那如毒瘤蔓延的謬見，就是你針對單純之人所提出的；由此你被拋入一切異端的網羅、跌離真理，你偏行己路，不宣講那為我們被釘十字架的基督、神的獨生子，就是那在父與聖靈之間被虔敬地榮耀的一位。還有什麼比這更該定罪的呢？藉著你，父與聖靈竟被剝奪榮耀，撒拉弗竟被誣蔑，彷彿他們在說以下話語時並不榮耀三位一體：

1:416

sanctus sanctus sanctus sed solam filii personam? quae infernalis haeresis ita crudeliter ut uos inuerecunda fuit? uerum tamen adhuc in ista discurrentes nouiter usque ad fundamenta blasphemiorum dei pertingitis filium patrem et spiritum sanctum dicentes, Sabellium sectamini et confusionem inducitis et trinitatis confessionem pariter abnegatis, in qua baptizati sumus et credimus et fatemur.

'Holy, holy, holy' — but only the person of the Son? What hellish heresy was ever so cruelly shameless as you? Yet still running about in these matters, you newly reach even to the very foundations of blasphemies against God, saying the Son to be the Father and the Holy Spirit; you follow Sabellius and introduce confusion, and you likewise deny the confession of the Trinity, in which we were baptized and believe and confess.

「聖哉、聖哉、聖哉」——卻只指聖子這一位格嗎？有哪一個地獄般的異端曾像你這樣殘忍無恥？然而你在這些事上仍舊四處奔竄，如今甚至觸及那褻瀆神的根基，說聖子就是父、就是聖靈；你追隨撒伯流，引入混淆，並同樣否認三位一體的信認——就是我們受洗歸入、所信、所認的那三位一體。

1:417

quis ergo non ότὲ δὲ to άϑάνατον πνεῡμα μανιχαι̐ζων, ότὲ δὲ ex τούτων ϕυγών διαϰατελεγχόμενος ύπὸ twv ὲμω̄ν ύποϑηϰω̄ν ϰαι̍ λόγων Χριστὸν μετά τὸ άϑάνϰτον πνεύμϰ έλεξας ύπομεμενηϰέναιτὸ πάϑος ώς Ó ∑ αμοσατεύς ϰϰι̍ Νεστόριος τὸν ε̋να υι̍ὸν διχάζοντες ει̉ς SuaSa otwv, ότὲ 5s xat £ 7ct touttj) εῐξϰς μή διασύρεσϑαι ήϰες ὲπι̍ τὸ xaxtov τὸ τὸν χερουβιϰὸν υ̃μνον εύπαρέδρψ τρόμψ ὰνενδοιάστως ώσαύτως rfjV τριάδα μή δοξολογεῑν άλλά τὸν πάντα υ̋μνον ει̍ς τὸν υι̍ὸν α̋γειν, έϑέλων ένστήσαϑαι ήν ϰατά τω̄ν άϰάϰων ὲξήνεγϰας νομής γάγ - Ypatvav ϰαι̍ παντοι̍αις ὲντεύϑεν άγχόναις αι̍ρέσεων μεγι̍στως περι- ϰρημνιζόμενος, ὲϰνεύων τής άληϑει̍ας τού tdv Xptatdv μή ϰηρύτ tstv st5 ήμάς σταυρωϑέντα τὸν μονογενή τού ϑεού υι̍ὸν τὸν ὲν μέσψ πατρὸς ϰαι̍ άγι̍ου πνεύματος εύσεβω̄ς δοξολογούμενον.

Who then would not (lament)? (In Greek:) at one time Manichaeanizing about the immortal Spirit; at another, fleeing from these and refuted by my admonitions and words, you said that Christ endured the passion after the immortal Spirit, like the Samosatene and Nestorius who divide the one Son into two sons; and at another time, yielding on this point that you might not be torn apart, you came to worse: that the cherubic hymn, sent forth with reverent trembling, should likewise not glorify the Trinity, but that the whole hymn be led to the Son — wishing to establish the pasture of error which you brought forth against the innocent; and being thereby dashed down into every noose of the heresies, you deviate from the truth by not proclaiming Christ crucified for us, the only-begotten Son of God who is piously glorified in the midst of the Father and the Holy Spirit.

那麼有誰不（哀悼）呢？（希臘文：）你有時就那不朽的神靈行摩尼之說；有時又逃避這些、被我的告誡與話語所駁倒，便說基督在那不朽的神靈之後承受受難，就像撒摩撒他人和聶斯多留，把獨一之子分割成兩個子；又有時，你在這點上退讓，免得被撕裂，便走向更壞：主張那以虔敬戰兢所發的基路伯頌歌，同樣不榮耀三位一體，反要把整篇頌歌引向聖子——你想藉此確立你針對無辜者所提出的謬誤牧場；於是你被拋入諸異端的一切繩索之中，偏離真理，不宣揚那為我們被釘十字架的基督、神的獨生子，就是那在父與聖靈之間被虔敬地榮耀的一位。

1:418

τι̍ γάρ τούτου άπαγορευτιϰώτερον, πατρὸς παρ\'ύμω̄ν ϰαι̍ άγι̍ου πνεύματος άδοξουμένου ϰαι̍ συϰοϕαντι̍αν τοῑς σεραϕι̍μ ύμω̄ν παρεισϕερόντων, ο̋τι 06 τήν τριάδα ϕάσϰουσι δοξολογει̍ν ,,α̋γιος α̋γιος α̋γιος άλλά μονοπροσώπως τὸν υι̍όν ; xat Ttota ϕαραγγώδης αι̍ρέσεων ου̋τως άπηναισχύντηϰεν ώς ύμεῑς ;πλήν ϰαι̍ ὲν τούτψ διατρέχοντες ε̋τι ϰαινοτέρως ὲπέβητε ται̍ς στραγγαλιώδεσι τω̄ν ύπὸ ϑεου άπειπαμένων δυσϕηιω̄ν τὸν υι̍ὸν πατέρα ϰαι̍ α̋γιον πνεύμα λέγοντες σαβελλιανι̍ - Covts; ϰαι̍ συναλει̍ϕειν ϰρι̍νοντες τήν τράδα όμολόγως άπηρνή- σασϑε , sl; i ὲβαπτι̍σϑημεν ϰαι̍ πιστεύομεν ϰαι̍ όμολογούμεν.

(In Greek:) For what is more to be forbidden than this — that the Father and the Holy Spirit are stripped of glory by you, and that you bring in calumny against your seraphim, in that they are said not to glorify the Trinity when they say 'holy, holy, holy,' but the Son in a single person? And what abyss of heresies has been so shameless as you? Moreover, running about in this, you have newly trodden upon the strangling snares of the blasphemies renounced by God, saying the Son to be the Father and the Holy Spirit, playing the Sabellian and resolving to confound the Trinity; you have avowedly denied the Trinity into which we were baptized and believe and confess.

（希臘文：）還有什麼比這更當禁止的呢？就是父與聖靈被你剝奪榮耀，你又對你的撒拉弗施加誣蔑，說他們在念「聖哉、聖哉、聖哉」時並不榮耀三位一體，反倒只指單一位格的聖子？有哪個異端的深淵曾像你這樣無恥？此外，你在此奔竄之際，又新近踏上了神所棄絕之褻瀆的絞索，說聖子就是父、就是聖靈，行撒伯流之事，決意混淆三位一體；你竟公然否認那我們受洗歸入、所信、所認的三位一體。

1:419

τι̍ς ούν ούϰ άποδύρεται τούς ου̋τω ϕάσϰοντας περι̍ τού τρισαγι̍ου lugeat talia dicentes de sancta et inuiolabili trinitate? hoc mihi ualde conuenit abnegare [consolari] et planctum sufficienter effundere, cum in hoc simplicum animae fuerint captiuatae. \'quae tunc rem impiam uelut piam diuulgauerunt. quos etiam iudicamus extraneos ab orthodoxa fide ecclesiaque catholica\' et communione gloriosi nostri principis Petri, qui claues regni caelorum a nostro saluatore percepit.

(In Greek: Who then does not bewail those who thus speak concerning the Trisagion —) let him mourn those who say such things about the holy and inviolable Trinity? It greatly befits me to reject this and to pour out lamentation in full measure, since by it the souls of the simple have been taken captive, who then divulged an impious thing as though pious. And these too we judge to be strangers to the orthodox faith and to the catholic church, and to the communion of our glorious prince Peter, who received the keys of the kingdom of heaven from our Savior.

（希臘文：那麼有誰不為那些如此論及三聖頌的人哀哭——）願他為那些論及神聖不可侵犯之三位一體如此妄言者哀悼。我實在應當棄絕此事，並充分地傾倒哀慟，因為那些單純者的靈魂已藉此被擄去，他們竟把不虔之事當作虔誠加以散布。我們也判定這些人是正統信仰、大公教會的局外人，並與我們榮耀的元首伯多祿的共融隔絕——他就是那從我們的救主領受天國鑰匙的人。

1:420

qui ergo uoluerint esse communicatores apostoli, eius quoque doctrinam sequantur dicendo et credendo Christum propter nos crucifixum neque eum negando sicut Petrus, qui nuper damnatus est, eo quod praue et nefande in hymno trisagio nouiter introduxit \'qui crucifixus es propter nos\\ scientes, quia non trinitatem crucifixam ab apostolis accepistis neque patrem neque spiritum sanctum, nisi carne filium dei unigenitum solum. igitur fugite ab huius communione sacrilega, et ero uester socius atque communicator et uos quoque mei, peste dolosa a uestra rectitudine procul expulsa. custodite Christi discipuli, mei autem filii, traditiones, quas a sacris uoluminibus accepistis.

Those, therefore, who wish to be in communion with the apostle, let them also follow his doctrine by saying and believing that Christ was crucified for us, and not denying him like Peter, who was lately condemned because he depravedly and wickedly introduced anew into the Trisagion hymn the words 'who wast crucified for us' — knowing that you did not receive from the apostles a crucified Trinity, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit, but only the only-begotten Son of God in the flesh. Therefore flee from his sacrilegious communion, and I shall be your associate and fellow-communicant, and you likewise mine, once the deceitful plague has been driven far from your rectitude. Keep, O disciples of Christ, my sons, the traditions which you have received from the sacred volumes.

因此，凡願與使徒共融的人，也當追隨他的道理，宣認並相信基督為我們被釘十字架，而不像那新近被定罪的伯多祿那樣否認祂——他因敗壞邪惡地在三聖頌中新添「你為我們被釘十字架」之語而被定罪——你們既知道你們並未從諸使徒領受一個被釘十字架的三位一體，父沒有、聖靈也沒有，唯有神的獨生子按肉身被釘。所以你們要逃離他那褻瀆的共融，我便要作你們的同伴與共融者，你們也照樣作我的；只要那詭詐的瘟疫已從你們的正直中被逐離。基督的門徒、我的眾子啊，你們要持守那從神聖經卷所領受的傳統。

1:421

EXPLICIT EPISTOLA PAPAE FELICIS AD PETRUM AXTIOCHENUM DAM- NANS EUM. QV AE EPISTOLA ANTE DAMNATIONEM ACACII [QVONLAM] QVANTUM EIUS TEXTUS INDICAT CONPERITUR SCRIPTA. SED QVIA CUM ALIORUM LITTERIS AD EUNDEM PETRUM DIRECTIS IX GRAECO UOLUMINE INUENIMUS DE LATINO TRANSLATAS, QVAS NUNC ITERUM DE GRAECO IN LATINUM NECESSITATE COMPULSI TRANSFERENTES DESCRIPSIMUS PROPTER HAERETICORUM INSIDIAS ET SUPRA SCRIPTIS EPISTOLIS EIUSDEM PAPAE CONECTIMUS. του̃ ὰποστόλου ϑέλοντες ειναι ϰοινωοὶ ἄγονται xat tr διδαχἠ̩ αὐτοῡ του̃ tov Xptatov ϕάσϰειν xx; πιστεύειν δι\' ἡμα̃ς σταρωϑέντα ϰαὶ μὴ tootov ἀπϰρνήσασϑαι , w;

Here ends the letter of Pope Felix to Peter of Antioch condemning him — which letter, so far as its text indicates, is found to have been written before the condemnation of Acacius. But because we found it, translated from Latin, in a Greek volume together with the letters of others directed to the same Peter, we have now once more, compelled by necessity, translated it back from Greek into Latin and transcribed it, on account of the snares of heretics, and joined it to the above-written letters of the same pope. (In Greek: those wishing to be in communion with the apostle are led also by his teaching, namely to say and believe that Christ was crucified for us and not to deny him, as...)

教宗斐理斯致安提阿伯多祿、將他定罪的信到此結束——就其文本所示，這封信是在亞加修被定罪之前寫成的。但因我們發現它——是從拉丁文譯出的——與其他致同一伯多祿的信件一同存於一部希臘文卷冊中，我們如今出於必要，被迫再度將它從希臘文譯回拉丁文並謄錄下來，為防範異端者的埋伏，並將它接於同一教宗上述諸信之後。（希臘文：那些願與使徒共融的人，也被他的教導所引導，即宣認並相信基督為我們被釘十字架、而不否認祂，正如……）

1:422

xat h ἀρτίως ϰαϑη̩̩ρημένος Πέτρος sta to ἀλλοϰότως ϰαὶ δυσμενω̃ς ev t(p τρισαγίω̩ προσϰεϰαι- νοτομηϰέναι to 0 σταυρωϑεὶς st\' ήμᾱς, εὶδότες ο̃τι 00 tptaSa πϰρὰ toov ἀποστόλων σταυρωϑει̃σαν παρεδέξασϑε , 06 πατέρα , 00 πνεῡμα ἄγιον , el μὴ σαρϰἰ τὀν υίὸν too ϑεοῡ tov μονογενη̃ μονώτα- τον. ϕεύγετε τοίνον u ̓πὸ τη̃ς δυσμενοῡς τούτου ϰοινωνίας ϰαὶ ἔσομαι ὑμω̃ν ϰοινωνὸς, ϰαϑότι ϰαὶ ὑμεῑς ἐμοὶ, του̃ δολερου̃ rrda- ματος πόῤῥω ὑμω̃ν τη̄ς ὀρϑοδοξίας ἐϰεπηδηϰότος ϕυλάξατε Χριστοῡ μαϑηταὶ, ἐμου̃ se otol, τὰς παραδόσεις , d; παρελάβετε ἀπὸ trov ϑείων γραϕω̃ν . (72.) INCIPIT EPISTOLA QVINTIANI EPISCOPI ASCULANI AD EUNDEM PETRUM ANTIOCHENUM SCRIPTA.

(In Greek:) ...and Peter, lately deposed because he strangely and malignantly introduced anew into the Trisagion the words 'crucified for us,' knowing that you did not receive from the apostles a crucified Trinity, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit, but only the only-begotten Son of God alone in the flesh. Flee therefore from his malignant communion, and I shall be your fellow-communicant, as you also are mine, the deceitful plague having leapt far from your orthodoxy; keep, O disciples of Christ, my sons, the traditions which you have received from the divine Scriptures. (72.) Here begins the letter of Quintianus, bishop of Asculum, written to the same Peter of Antioch.

（希臘文：）……以及那新近被廢黜的伯多祿，因他古怪惡意地在三聖頌中新添「為我們被釘十字架」之語；你們既知道你們並未從諸使徒領受一個被釘十字架的三位一體，父沒有、聖靈也沒有，唯有神獨一的獨生子按肉身被釘。所以你們要逃離他那惡意的共融，我便要作你們的共融者，你們也照樣作我的；只要那詭詐的瘟疫已從你們的正統中遠遠躍離。基督的門徒、我的眾子啊，你們要持守那從神聖經卷所領受的傳統。（七十二）以下開始阿斯庫倫主教昆提亞努斯致同一安提阿伯多祿的信。

1:423

Multifarie multisque modis a ueritate declinasti, karissime. agendo quae sunt dominico sacramento contraria, non sequendo euangelia aut apostolos seu sanctos patres. grauiter enim fert, quando aduersus eos introduxisti ecclesiae catholicae nouitatem: uerum tamen noluisti ab hac multis tibi episcopis denuntiantibus abstinere, maxime sanctissimo papa Felice, quatenus ab hac recederes et rectus atque orthodoxus in praedicatione saluberrima permaneres. sed inlaqueatus haeresibus scripturae diuinae talentum in terra celasti nec eum potius in mensam proponere decreuisti, hoc est sanam in hominum corde doctrinam. sed e diuerso seminasti zizaniam.

In manifold ways and by many manners you have deviated from the truth, most dear one, doing things contrary to the Lord's sacrament, not following the Gospels or the apostles or the holy fathers. For it grieves us gravely that against them you have introduced novelty into the catholic church; yet you have not willed to abstain from it, though many bishops denounced it to you — above all the most holy pope Felix — that you might withdraw from it and remain upright and orthodox in the most wholesome preaching. But ensnared by heresies, you have hidden the talent of divine Scripture in the earth, and did not rather resolve to set it upon the table — that is, sound doctrine in the heart of men — but on the contrary you have sown tares.

至親愛的，你已以多種方式、循多樣途徑偏離了真理，行主的聖事所禁之事，不追隨福音、諸使徒、或聖教父。我們深為憂傷，因你竟違背他們，把新異之說引入大公教會；然而你不肯止息，儘管許多主教向你申斥——尤其是至聖的教宗斐理斯——盼你從中退出，在那至為有益的宣講上保持正直與正統。你反倒被異端纏住，把神聖經卷的「他連得」埋在地裡，不肯把它擺在桌上——就是把純正的道理放在人心裡——反倒撒下了稗子。

1:424

quis ergo te amplius sustinebit subuertentem euangelium Christi? non ex utrisque unum filium, ex duabus naturis et in duabus, dominum nostrum legum Christum, et hunc propter nos crucifixum praedicantem sed peruersa nouitate ad hoc cessantem dicere crucifixum deum fortem inmortalem, tamquam unam trinitatis essentiam crucifixam. et non solum hoc sed etiam unam naturam dei uerbi carnisque dixisti.

Who then will bear with you any longer, as you subvert the Gospel of Christ — not preaching one Son from both natures, from two natures and in two, our Lord Christ, and this one crucified for us, but by a perverse novelty ceasing to say this, and instead calling the strong and immortal God crucified, as though one essence of the Trinity had been crucified? And not only this, but you have also said that there is one nature of God the Word and of the flesh.

那麼還有誰能繼續容忍你這樣顛覆基督的福音呢？你不宣講由兩性、出於兩性且存於兩性之內的獨一之子，就是我們的主基督，也不宣講這一位為我們被釘十字架，反倒以悖謬的新說停止如此宣認，竟稱那強壯不朽的神被釘十字架，彷彿三位一體的一個本質被釘一般。而且不只如此，你還說神之道與肉身只有一性。

1:425

quod si una natura est οὐ τόν sv δύο ϕύσεσιν ἕνα υἱὸν, τὸν ϰύριον ήμω̄ν \'Ιησου̃ν Χρισὸν, τοῡτον ϰηρύσσων ἐσταυρωμένον ἀλλὰ τὸν ϑεὸν τὸν ὶσχυρὸν τὸν ἀϑάνατον οίον τὴν μίαν τη̃ς τριάδος οὐσίν ϕάσϰων ἐσταυρωμνον xat οὐ μόνονἀλλά FS xat μίαν ϕύσιντου̃ ϑεου̃ λόγου ϰαὶ τη̃ς σαρϰὸς ϕή̩ς . xat sl μία ϕύσις του̃ ϑεου̃ λόγου xat τη̃ς σαρϰὸς, μία dei uerbi et carnis, una uero natura est dei uerbi et patris. quodammodo eadem natura est patris et corporis et uerbi. si autem non una natura dei patris et carnis humanae et uerbi, expone, quomodo una natura [patris et uerbi et carnis. quomodo enim creata et increata una natura est?

But if there is one nature (in Greek: — not the one Son in two natures, our Lord Jesus Christ, whom you preach as crucified, but 'the strong God, the immortal,' as if you called the one essence of the Trinity crucified; and not only so, but you affirm one nature of God the Word and of the flesh. And if there is one nature of God the Word and of the flesh, then one) of God the Word and of the flesh, then there is likewise one nature of God the Word and of the Father. In a certain way the same nature belongs to the Father, to the body, and to the Word. But if there is not one nature of God the Father and of human flesh and of the Word, explain how there can be one nature (of the Father and of the Word and of the flesh). For how are the created and the uncreated one nature?

但若只有一性（希臘文：——你所宣講被釘十字架的，並非那在兩性中的獨一之子、我們的主耶穌基督，而是「強壯的神、不朽者」，彷彿你稱三位一體的一個本質被釘；而且不只如此，你還斷言神之道與肉身只有一性。而若神之道與肉身只有一性，那麼便有一）——即神之道與肉身之一性，那麼神之道與父也就有一性。如此，則同一性便屬於父、屬於身體、屬於道。但若神——父與人之肉身與道並非一性，那就請你解釋：怎能有一性（屬於父、道與肉身）？因為受造者與非受造者怎能是一性呢？

1:426

si autem hoc impossibile est, quomodo creata caro et, qui creatus non est. una natura est et non duae diuersae? si autem unius naturae est filius et non duarum, quid dicis? Christum factum sicut Arrius aut non factum sicut Manichaeus? ubi est autem et temporalis natiuitatis Christi natura et diuinitatis eius ante saecula generatio naturalis? ubi enim: hodie genui te et illud: ex utero ante luciferum genui te et illud: Iesus Christus heri et hodie, ipse et in saecula? quomodo autem dicis \'ex duabus naturis ante unitionem dei uerbi et carnis\', si non praeextitit, qui ex Maria secundum substantiam?

But if this is impossible, how can created flesh and he who is not created be one nature and not two distinct ones? And if the Son is of one nature and not of two, what do you say? That Christ was made, as Arius holds, or not made, as Manichaeus? Where, then, is both the nature of Christ's temporal nativity and the natural generation of his divinity before the ages? For where is: 'Today have I begotten thee'; and: 'From the womb before the morning star have I begotten thee'; and: 'Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and today, and unto the ages'? And how do you say 'from two natures before the union of God the Word and the flesh,' if he who is from Mary according to substance did not pre-exist?

但若這是不可能的，那麼受造的肉身與那非受造者，怎能是一性而非兩個不同之性呢？若聖子是一性而非二性，你又怎麼說呢？是說基督如亞流所主張的乃被造，還是如摩尼所說的乃非受造？那麼，基督在時間中降生之性、與祂神性在萬世之前的自然受生，究竟在哪裡呢？「我今日生了你」在哪裡？「在晨星之前、從腹中我生了你」在哪裡？「耶穌基督昨日、今日、直到永遠是一樣的」又在哪裡？你若說「在神之道與肉身聯合之前有兩性」，那麼，那按本質出於瑪利亞者若未曾預先存在，你這話又怎麼講得通呢？

1:427

etenim si non praeextitit Christi caro ante Mariam secundum impii Ualentini sermonem, quomodo duae praeextitere naturae? cuius autem est haec elocutio? nonne Eutychis, potius nimis infelicissimi, dicere ex duabus naturis unam factam esse naturam ? si autem quae sunt illius sapis, quomodo hunc respuis et eius suscipis pessimas uanitates? nam si uere apud te hoc ageretur, susciperes sanctos patres aduersus eum Calchedone collectos.

For indeed, if according to the saying of the impious Valentinus the flesh of Christ did not pre-exist before Mary, how did the two natures pre-exist? And whose expression is this? Is it not that of Eutyches — rather, the exceedingly wretched one — to say that from two natures one nature was made? But if you savor the things that are his, how do you spit this out and take up his most wicked vanities? For if this were truly your concern, you would embrace the holy fathers gathered against him at Chalcedon.

因為，若按不虔的瓦倫提努斯之說，基督的肉身在瑪利亞之前並未預先存在，那麼兩性又怎能預先存在呢？而這種說法出自誰呢？豈不是出自歐迪克——更該說是那極其不幸者——他說由兩性成了一性？但你若領會他的那套，怎麼又把這一點吐出、卻接受他那最惡劣的虛妄呢？因為你若真在意此事，就會接納那些在加采東為抵擋他而聚集的聖教父。

1:428

uemm tamen expone Χριστου̃γεννήσεωςϕύσις xat ή τη̃̃ς ϑεδητςπροαιὠνιος γέννησις που̃ το σήμερονγεγέννηϰά σε xat to ex γαστρδς πρόέωσϕο poo γεγέννηάσε ϰαἰτο \'Ιησου̃ςΧριστδς χϑεςϰαὶ σήμερον , 6 αύτδς ϰαἰ εἰςτουςαἰω̃νας;πω̃ς se xat λέγεις „ πρδτη̃ςένὠσεως too ϑεου̃ λδγου xat τη̃ς σαρϰδς δύο "; r προϋπη̃ρχενή ϰατ\' οὐσἰαν ex παρϑένου ένωσις ; xat γαρ 6t 〈 όυ 〉 πρϋπάρχειή του̃ Χριστου̃̃σαρξ πρδΜαρὶ̀ας ϰατα ττδν Ούαλεντἰνουάσεβη̃λόγον, πω̃ς 860 προϋπη̃ονϕύσεις npo Μαρἰϰς; τὶνος se ϰαἰ̓ αϋτη ήέϰϕρσις; ούχὶ Εύτυχου̃ςτου̃ μαλλονάτυχου̃ς to ex 860 λέγεινϕύσεωνμὶανγεγενησϑαι ϕύιν ;

But nevertheless explain (in Greek, paralleling the above:) the nature of Christ's generation and the pre-eternal generation of the Godhead — where is the 'Today have I begotten thee,' and the 'From the womb before the morning star have I begotten thee,' and the 'Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and today, and unto the ages'? And how do you say 'two before the union of God the Word and the flesh'? Did the union from the Virgin according to substance pre-exist? For if, according to the impious word of Valentinus, the flesh of Christ did not pre-exist before Mary, how did two natures pre-exist before Mary? And whose expression is this? Is it not that of Eutyches, the rather more wretched one, to say that from two natures one nature was made?

然而請你解釋（希臘文，與上文平行：）基督受生之性、與神性在萬世之前的受生——「我今日生了你」在哪裡？「在晨星之前、從腹中我生了你」在哪裡？「耶穌基督昨日、今日、直到永遠是一樣的」又在哪裡？你又怎能說「在神之道與肉身聯合之前有二」？那按本質出於童貞女的聯合，難道曾預先存在嗎？因為，若按不虔的瓦倫提努斯之說，基督的肉身在瑪利亞之前並未預先存在，那麼兩性又怎能在瑪利亞之前預先存在呢？而這種說法出自誰呢？豈不是出自歐迪克——那更加不幸者——他說由兩性成了一性？

1:429

et se TaOTa btetvtp ϕρονει̃ς πω̃ς του̃τον άπβοάλλη Ó Ta αύτου̃ παραδεχόμενος ϰάϰιστσ ϰαισματα ei iàp έπ\' έληϑεἰαςοο t tooto πέέπρραϰτο , tcoc xaT\' αύτου̃ artoo; πατέρας tooc ev Χαλϰηδόνιεἰχες av δεϰτούς.πλην «ppaaov μοι, πω̃ςήνωωμένος 0 πατήρϰαἰ 0 υἰδς xat mihi, quomodo unitus pater et filius et spiritus sanctus dicatur trinitas, cum unus sit deus, si non suscipis in uno filio dicendum duas naturas. et si trinitas unus est deus, quomodo deus uerbum et nostrum corpus ei unitum non debet dici unus filius in duabus naturis? si autem una natura deus uerbum et caro, certum est, quia conuersum uerbum iam non est uerbum sed caro et, (si> caro conuersa facta est uerbum, etiam non erit caro;

(In Greek:) And if you think these things like him, how do you reject the very one whose most wicked opinions you receive? For if in truth this were the case, you would hold as acceptable the fathers against him at Chalcedon. But tell me, how are the Father and the Son (and the Holy Spirit) — (in Latin:) tell me, how are the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, though united, said to be a Trinity, since God is one, if you do not admit that in the one Son two natures must be spoken of? And if the Trinity is one God, how ought not God the Word, and our body united to it, to be called one Son in two natures? But if God the Word and the flesh are one nature, it is certain that the Word, once converted, is no longer Word but flesh; and if the flesh, once converted, has become Word, then neither will it be flesh;

（希臘文：）你若像他那樣思想這些事，怎麼又棄絕那位你所領受其最惡劣主張的人呢？因為此事若真如此，你就會接納那些在加采東抵擋他的教父為可接納的。但請告訴我，父與子（與聖靈）怎能——（拉丁文：）請告訴我，父與子與聖靈雖然聯合，卻怎能被稱為三位一體呢？既然神只有一位，你若不承認在獨一之子裡當說有兩性，這又怎麼成立？若三位一體是獨一之神，那麼神之道、與聯合於它的我們的身體，怎能不被稱為在兩性中的獨一之子呢？但若神之道與肉身是一性，那麼可以確定：道一經轉化，便不再是道而是肉身；而肉身若一經轉化而成了道，那它也就不再是肉身；

1:430

si autem in his non est facta conuersio. quomodo non sunt in Christo duae naturae? caro enim caro est, licet dei sit caro, et uerbum uerbum est, licet adsumpserit nostram carnem. si uero conuersa est, quomodo caro non est consubstantialis et coaeterna patri sicut uerbum? si autem alterius essentiae est caro quam pater, secundum quod haec quidem recens, pater autem sine tempore est, quomodo non est recens et uerbum, secundum quod unam naturam esse carnis et dei uerbi confirmas et a patre alterius eum dicis essentiae ? si autem non est eadem natura dei uerbi et carnis, quomodo non sunt duae naturae caro et uerbum? si quidem omnis diuinitas caro facta est, quomodo permansit uerbum quod erat?

But if in these no conversion has taken place, how are there not in Christ two natures? For flesh is flesh, even though it be God's flesh, and Word is Word, even though it has assumed our flesh. But if it has been converted, how is the flesh not consubstantial and coeternal with the Father, like the Word? And if the flesh is of another essence than the Father — inasmuch as this is recent, but the Father is without time — how is the Word not also recent, seeing that you affirm one nature of the flesh and of God the Word, and yet say that he is of another essence than the Father? But if the nature of God the Word and of the flesh is not the same, how are the flesh and the Word not two natures? For if all the divinity became flesh, how did the Word remain what it was?

但若在這些之中並未發生轉化，那麼基督裡怎能沒有兩性呢？因為肉身是肉身，雖是神的肉身；道是道，雖已取了我們的肉身。但若已發生轉化，那麼肉身怎能不像道一樣與父同質、同永呢？而若肉身與父的本質不同——因它是新近的，父卻是無時間的——那麼道怎能不也是新近的呢？既然你斷言肉身與神之道只有一性，卻又說祂與父本質不同。但若神之道與肉身之性並非同一，那麼肉身與道怎能不是兩性呢？因為若全部的神性都成了肉身，那麼道又怎能仍是它原來所是的呢？

1:431

si uero pars caro facta est, diuisa est uerbi diuinitas. si autem incarnatum uerbum permansit quod erat, quomodo non est inconuertibile etiam incarnatum? et si non est Christus in duabus naturis, quomodo incarnatus deus uerbum mansit quod erat? et si est deus uerbum passibilis, impassibilis autem pater, quomodo unus et solus est deus? quomodo autem et horum una natura est? si uero impassibilis trinitas est, quomodo deus uerbum pro nobis est passum, si in altera natura carnis non est passum?

But if a part became flesh, then the divinity of the Word is divided. But if the incarnate Word remained what it was, how is it not unchangeable even when incarnate? And if Christ is not in two natures, how did God the Word, being incarnate, remain what it was? And if God the Word is passible, but the Father impassible, how is God one and only? And how is there one nature of these? But if the Trinity is impassible, how did God the Word suffer for us, if it did not suffer in the other nature of the flesh?

但若只有一部分成了肉身，那麼道的神性就被分割了。但若道成肉身仍是它原來所是的，那麼道成了肉身怎能不是不可轉變的呢？而若基督不是在兩性之中，那麼神之道既成了肉身，怎能仍是它原來所是的呢？若神之道是可受苦的，父卻是不受苦的，那麼神怎能是獨一無二的呢？這兩者又怎能是一性呢？但若三位一體是不受苦的，那麼神之道若不是在肉身這另一性中受苦，又怎能為我們受苦呢？

1:432

et si omne, quod patitur, etiam creatura est, quomodo deus uerbum non est συαὶδιος τψ̃ πατρὶ xado ϰαὶ 6 λόγος ;el δέέτεροούσιόςέστιν fj σάρξτψ̃πατρι ϰαϑότ ι αύτημένπρόσϕατος , 0 se πατήράχρονος, πωςούχι πρόσϕατος xat 6 λόγοςϰϰαϑόμιαν etvat ϕύσιντής σαρϰδς xat του̃ dsoo λόγου λέγεις ϰα ι τψ̃πατρὶέτερούσιον αύτδν λέγειςεὶ se ούχή αύτή ϕύσιςτου̃ ϑεούλόγου xat τήςσαρϰδς πω̃οὺϰ alor. δύοή σαρξΧ lXt Ó λόγοςει ss πασα r; ϑεότηςς σάρξ γεγένηται, πως έμεινεν 0 λόγος B ijv; * * * * * * * * * * f * * * * * πω̃ς se ϰαι άτρεπτος σαρϰωϑεὶςϰαὶεἰ ούϰ eatt Χριστόςέν δύο ϕύσεσι, πω̃ςσαρϰωὶς 0 deo; λόγοςέμεινεν 0 ήν ; x αὶ̀ d έστιν 0 ϑεός λόγος παϑητδς έπαϑής se 0 ϰατήρ, πω̃ς st;

And if everything that suffers is also a creature, how is God the Word not (in Greek, paralleling the foregoing: coeternal with the Father, inasmuch as he is also the Word? And if the flesh is of another essence than the Father — inasmuch as it is recent, but the Father is timeless — how is the Word not also recent, seeing that you say there is one nature of the flesh and of God the Word, and you call him of another essence than the Father? But if the nature of God the Word and of the flesh is not the same, how are the flesh and the Word not two? If all the divinity became flesh, how did the Word remain what it was? ... how is he unchangeable when incarnate? And if Christ is not in two natures, how did God the Word, being incarnate, remain what it was? And if God the Word is passible but the Father impassible, how...) a creature by suffering in the flesh? But if God suffers in the flesh, how does he not suffer in the deity? And if he does not suffer in the deity, by what does he suffer in the flesh? And if he suffers in the flesh, how does not God himself also suffer? But if it is the same to say 'God having suffered in the flesh' as to say 'Christ having suffered in the flesh,' how will it not be the same to say 'the Holy Spirit suffers in the flesh,' since God is Spirit?

而若凡受苦者都是受造物，那麼神之道怎能不是（希臘文，與上文平行：與父同永的，因祂也是道？而若肉身與父本質不同——因它是新近的，父卻是無時間的——那麼道怎能不也是新近的呢？既然你說肉身與神之道只有一性，又說祂與父本質不同。但若神之道與肉身之性並非同一，那麼肉身與道怎能不是二呢？若全部神性都成了肉身，道怎能仍是它原來所是的？……祂成了肉身怎能是不可轉變的？而若基督不是在兩性中，神之道既成肉身，怎能仍是它原來所是的？若神之道可受苦而父不受苦，怎能……）——藉在肉身中受苦而成的受造物呢？但若神在肉身中受苦，祂怎能不在神性中受苦？而若祂不在神性中受苦，祂又藉何在肉身中受苦？若祂在肉身中受苦，那麼神自己怎能不也受苦？但若說「神在肉身中受了苦」與說「基督在肉身中受了苦」是一樣的，那麼說「聖靈在肉身中受苦」怎能不也是一樣的呢？既然神是靈。

1:433

ϰαὶ μόνος εστίν 0 ϑεός; πω̃ς ss xat τοούτωνμία έστὶν fj ϕύσις ; et 85 ϰαὶ απαϑής ή τριάς, πω̃ς 0 ϑεδςλόγοςέπαϑεν υπὲρ ήμων ; 51 81 oux έπαϑε, πω̃ς fj έτέραϕύσιςτη̃ς aapxd; oux έπαϑε; ϰαὶ sl πα̃ν td πάσχον xttatdv, πω̃ς Ó ϑεδςλόγοςού xttatd; πάσχων aapxt; el creatura patiendo carne ? si autem patitur carne deus, quomodo non patitur deitate? si uero non patitur deitate, qua patitur carne? si autem carne patitur, quomodo non patitur etiam ipse deus? si autem idem est dicere ldeo passo carne\' quod dicere \'Christo passo carne\', quomodo non erit <idem> dicere \'spiritus sanctus patitur carne\', quoniam deus spiritus est?

(In Greek, paralleling the foregoing: ...and God is one and only? How, then, is there one nature of these? And if the Trinity is impassible, how did God the Word suffer for us? But if he did not suffer, how did the other nature of the flesh not suffer? And if everything that suffers is created, how is God the Word not created, suffering in the flesh? If...) — a creature by suffering in the flesh? But if God suffers in the flesh, how does he not suffer in the deity? And if he does not suffer in the deity, by what does he suffer in the flesh? And if he suffers in the flesh, how does not God himself also suffer? But if it is the same to say 'God having suffered in the flesh' as to say 'Christ having suffered in the flesh,' how will it not be the same to say 'the Holy Spirit suffers in the flesh,' since God is Spirit?

（希臘文，與上文平行：……神豈是獨一無二的嗎？那麼這些怎能是一性呢？若三位一體是不受苦的，神之道怎能為我們受苦？但若祂未受苦，肉身這另一性又怎能不受苦？而若凡受苦者都是受造的，神之道在肉身中受苦，怎能不是受造的？若……）——藉在肉身中受苦而成的受造物呢？但若神在肉身中受苦，祂怎能不在神性中受苦？而若祂不在神性中受苦，祂又藉何在肉身中受苦？若祂在肉身中受苦，那麼神自己怎能不也受苦？但若說「神在肉身中受了苦」與說「基督在肉身中受了苦」是一樣的，那麼說「聖靈在肉身中受苦」怎能不也是一樣的呢？既然神是靈。

1:434

si uero non est simile dicere \'deo passo carne\' quod dicere \'Christo passo carne\', quomodo possibile est amplius propria efficere deum uerbum ea, quae carnis sunt, quam patrem ea, quae uerbi sunt? quomodo autem, si proprie patitur deus uerbum carne, quomodo non erit etiam pater proprie deo uerbo patiens? et si mortuus est deus uerbum carne, quomodo erit consubstantialis patri per inmortalitatem? qui enim pro nobis mortuus est, non est immortalis; mortuus est enim secundum quod scriptum est. et si unus trinitatis mortuus est, quomodo non est facta dualitas trinitas?

But if to say 'God having suffered in the flesh' is not the same as to say 'Christ having suffered in the flesh,' how is it any more possible to make the things of the flesh proper to God the Word, than to make the things of the Word proper to the Father? And how, if God the Word properly suffers in the flesh, will the Father not also be properly suffering in God the Word? And if God the Word died in the flesh, how will he be consubstantial with the Father through immortality? For he who died for us is not immortal; for he died, according to what is written. And if one of the Trinity died, how has the Trinity not become a duality?

但若說「神在肉身中受了苦」與說「基督在肉身中受了苦」並不相同，那麼把肉身之事歸屬於神之道，怎能比把道之事歸屬於父更為可行呢？而若神之道確實在肉身中受苦，那麼父怎能不也在神之道中確實受苦呢？若神之道在肉身中死了，祂怎能藉不朽而與父同質呢？因為那為我們死的並非不朽的；按經上所記，祂確實死了。而若三位一體中有一位死了，那麼三位一體怎能沒有變成二位呢？

1:435

et si dualitas trinitas non est umquam facta, quomodo unus trinitatis mortuus est, si altera natura dei uerbi, hoc est hominum natura, non est mortua? si autem ter sancta uox trinitas non subsistit, palam est, quia unius subsistentiae esse asseris trinitatem: et quomodo non monstraris esse Sabellianus? si autem in tribus subsistentiis una natura est uocis ter sanctae, quomodo non trinitatem crucifixam dicis et temet ipsum sine deo sicut Marcionistae esse non dicis in mundo? I Omnis itaque, qui dicit unam naturam dei uerbi et carnis et non duas unitas indiuisasque, damnetur.

And if the Trinity never became a duality, how did one of the Trinity die, if the other nature of God the Word — that is, the nature of men — did not die? But if the thrice-holy voice, the Trinity, does not subsist in three, it is plain that you assert the Trinity to be of a single subsistence: and how are you not shown to be a Sabellian? But if in three subsistences there is one nature of the thrice-holy voice, how do you not thereby say the Trinity was crucified, and not confess yourself to be without God in the world, like the Marcionites? (Canon) I: Everyone, therefore, who says there is one nature of God the Word and of the flesh, and not two natures united and undivided, let him be condemned.

而若三位一體從未變成二位，那麼三位一體中怎能有一位死了呢？除非神之道的另一性——就是人的性——並未死。但若那三聖之聲、即三位一體，並非存於三個位格之中，那顯然你就是斷言三位一體只有單一的實存：這樣你怎能不被證明是撒伯流派呢？但若在三個實存中三聖之聲只有一性，那麼你怎能不因此說三位一體被釘十字架，並像馬吉安派那樣、不承認自己在世上是無神的呢？（法規）一：因此，凡說神之道與肉身只有一性、而非聯合且不可分割的兩性者，當受定罪。

1:436

tii- εὶ̀πεῑν ,,Χριστοῡ παϑόντος σαρϰί\'\', πω̃ςοὐϰ ἔσται taotov to εὶπεῑν ,,πνεῡμα ϑει̃ον πάσχει σϰρϰι\'\', ἐπειδὴ πνεμα ὁ ϑεός ; el 2e οὐχο̃μοιον to ,, ϑεου̃ παϑόντος σαρϰί\'\' τῳ̃ εἰπεῑν ,,Χριστου̃ παϑόντοςσαρϰί", πω̃ςδυνατν πλέον οἰϰειοῡϑαι tov ϑεὸν λόγον 〈 τὰ 〉 τη̄ςσαρϰὸςἢοὶϰειοῡται ta too ϑεοῡ λόγου 6 πατήρ; πω̃ς is ϰαὶ , el οὶϰειώσει 0 ϑεὸς λόγοςπάσχεισαρϰὶ, οὐϰ latat οἰ̕̕ϰι- ώσει ϰαὶ 0 πατὴρ τῳ̄ ϑεῳ̄ λόγῳ πάσχων; ϰαὶ et ἀπέϑανεν 0 (hd; λόγος σαρϰὶ, πω̄ς eattv όμοούσιος t(j) παρτὶ τὴ ὰϑανασία ; o fap ϑανὼν ύπὲρήμω̄ν οὐϰ ἔστιν ὰϑάνατος ὰπέϑανε yap ϰατὰ tas ϒραϕάςϰαὶ sl et;

(In Greek, paralleling the foregoing: ...to say 'Christ having suffered in the flesh,' how will it not be the same to say 'the divine Spirit suffers in the flesh,' since God is Spirit? But if 'God having suffered in the flesh' is not like saying 'Christ having suffered in the flesh,' how is it more possible for God the Word to make proper to himself the things of the flesh than the Father makes proper the things of God the Word? And how, if by appropriation God the Word suffers in the flesh, will not the Father also by appropriation suffer in God the Word? And if God the Word died in the flesh, how is he consubstantial with the Father in immortality? For he who died for us is not immortal; for he died according to the Scriptures. And if one...)

（希臘文，與上文平行：……說「基督在肉身中受了苦」，那麼說「神的靈在肉身中受苦」怎能不也是一樣的呢？既然神是靈。但若說「神在肉身中受了苦」不同於說「基督在肉身中受了苦」，那麼神之道把肉身之事歸屬於自己，怎能比父把神之道之事歸屬於自己更為可行呢？而若神之道藉「歸屬」在肉身中受苦，那麼父怎能不也藉「歸屬」在神之道中受苦呢？若神之道在肉身中死了，祂怎能在不朽上與父同質呢？因為那為我們死的並非不朽的；按經上所記，祂確實死了。而若有一位……）

1:437

τη̄ς τριάδος ὰπέϑανέ ποτε, δυὰς 7j tptac wxt et δυὰς ή τριὰς 06 ϒέϒονέ ποτε, πω̄ς είς τη̄ς τριάδος ὰπέϑανεν , st ϒε rt έτέρα ϕύσις του̃ ϑεου̃ λόγου οίον ἡ trov ὰνϑρώπων ϕύσις οὐϰ ἔϑανεν ; et 81 rj τρισαγία ϕωνὴ tpta? οὺχ ὑϕίσταται, δη̄λον ott μια̃σ ύποστάσεως εἱναι λέγεις τὴν τριάδα, ϰαὶ πω̄ς 00 δείϰνυσαι ει̇ v αι Σαβελλια v ός ; et ss ev tptatv ύποστάσεσιμία ϕύσις ύϕίσταται τὴςτρισαγίας ϕω v η̄ς, πω̄ς οὐχὶ τὴ v tptaSa σταυρωϑεὶσα v λέγεις ϰαὶ ἄϑεο v έαυτ v ώς οί Μαρϰιω v ισταὶ εὶ v αι 06 λέγεις ; Πᾱς γοῡ v, ố στις λέγει μία v ϕύσι v ϑεου̃ λόγου ϰαὶ σαρϰὸς *at 00 δύο ή v ωμέ v ας ϰαὶ ὰδιαιρέτους, ϰαϑαιρείσϑω .

(In Greek, paralleling the foregoing: ...of the Trinity died at some time, the Trinity is a duality; and if the Trinity never became a duality, how did one of the Trinity die, if indeed the other nature of God the Word — such as the nature of men — did not die? And if the thrice-holy voice, the Trinity, does not subsist in three, it is clear that you say the Trinity to be of a single subsistence, and how are you not shown to be a Sabellian? And if in three subsistences one nature of the thrice-holy voice subsists, how do you not say the Trinity was crucified, and not confess yourself to be godless, like the Marcionites? Everyone, then, who says there is one nature of God the Word and of the flesh, and not two united and undivided, let him be deposed.)

（希臘文，與上文平行：……三位一體中若曾有一位死了，那麼三位一體就是二位；而若三位一體從未變成二位，那麼三位一體中怎能有一位死了呢？除非神之道的另一性——如人的性——並未死。而若那三聖之聲、即三位一體，並非存於三個位格中，那顯然你就是說三位一體只有單一的實存，這樣你怎能不被證明是撒伯流派呢？而若在三個實存中三聖之聲只有一性存在，那麼你怎能不說三位一體被釘十字架，並像馬吉安派那樣、不承認自己是無神的呢？因此，凡說神之道與肉身只有一性、而非聯合且不可分割的兩性者，當被廢黜。）

1:438

II Si quis confundit duas Christi naturas dicens deum passum carne et non passum Christum carne secundum apostolum, damnetur. III Si quis impassibilem et immortalem deum uerbum dicit conuersum in passionem ac mortem et non haec reddit eius carni, damnetur. IV Si quis uocem trisagiam id est ter sanctam dicit propter nos crucifixam et non dominum nostrum Iesum Christum filium dei unigenitum, damnetur. V Si quis post uocem ter sanctam deum dicit crucifixum propter nos et non potius unum filium, cui in medio ter sanctae uocis hymnus dicitur, damnetur. VI Si quis hominem dicit, qui pro nobis crucifixus est, siue deum diuidendo naturas et non eas copulando in crucifixione eius, damnetur.

II: If anyone confounds the two natures of Christ, saying that God suffered in the flesh and not that Christ suffered in the flesh according to the apostle, let him be condemned. III: If anyone says that the impassible and immortal God the Word was converted into passion and death, and does not refer these to his flesh, let him be condemned. IV: If anyone says that the Trisagion voice — that is, the thrice-holy — was crucified for us, and not our Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, let him be condemned. V: If anyone, after the thrice-holy voice, says that God was crucified for us, and not rather the one Son, to whom in the midst of the thrice-holy voice the hymn is addressed, let him be condemned. VI: If anyone says it was a man that was crucified for us, or God — dividing the natures and not conjoining them in his crucifixion — let him be condemned.

二：若有人混淆基督的兩性，說神在肉身中受了苦，而非按使徒之言說基督在肉身中受了苦，當受定罪。三：若有人說那不受苦、不朽的神之道被轉化為受苦與死亡，而不把這些歸於祂的肉身，當受定罪。四：若有人說那三聖之聲——即三聖頌——為我們被釘十字架，而非我們的主耶穌基督、神的獨生子被釘十字架，當受定罪。五：若有人在三聖之聲之後說神為我們被釘十字架，而不寧說是那獨一之子（頌歌在三聖之聲的中間乃是向祂而唱），當受定罪。六：若有人說那為我們被釘十字架的是一個人，或說是神——藉此分割二性、而不在祂被釘之事上將二性聯合——當受定罪。

1:439

VII Si quis dicit duas personas seu duas subsistentias et non potius duas naturas in unam personam et unam subsistentiam concurrentes, damnetur. VIII Si quis alterius essentiae dicit carnem domini a carne nostra et non potius nobis consubstantialem absque peccato, damnetur. VIIII Si quis deum hominem et non magis deum et hominem dicit, damnetur. X Si quis dicit creatum patris uerbum et nou magis eius carnem, damnetur. ϰαὶ οὐχὶ τὸ v ϰόριο v ἡμω̄ v \' Ιησοῡ v Xptatov tdv υίὸ v τοῡ ϑεοῡ, ϰαϑαιρείσϑω .

VII. If anyone says that there are two persons or two subsistences, and not rather two natures concurring into one person and one subsistence, let him be condemned. VIII. If anyone says that the flesh of the Lord is of another essence than our flesh, and not rather that it is consubstantial with us apart from sin, let him be condemned. VIIII. If anyone says 'a God-man,' and not rather 'God and man,' let him be condemned. X. If anyone says that the Word of the Father is created, and not rather his flesh, let him be condemned. And whoever does not confess our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, let him be deposed.

第七條：凡說有兩個位格或兩個實存，而不說有兩個本性交會於一個位格、一個實存者，當受譴責。第八條：凡說主的肉體與我們的肉體屬於另一種本質，而不說祂的肉體與我們同質而無罪者，當受譴責。第九條：凡說「一位神人」，而不說「是神又是人」者，當受譴責。第十條：凡說父的道是受造的，而不說祂的肉體是受造的者，當受譴責。凡不承認我們的主耶穌基督是神的兒子者，當被罷黜。

1:440

ϰαὶ ει̌ ttc μετὰ τὴ v τρισαγία v ϕω v ὴ v Xptatov λέγει Otrxupco- ϑέ v τα xai coyi μᾱλλο v tdv έ̔ v α υἱὸ v τὸ v ev μέσϕ τη̄ςτρισαγίας ϕω v η̄ς ἀ v υμ v ού vov, ϰαϑαιρείσϑω . ϰαὶ et τιςά̆ v ϑρωπο v λέγει tdv 5t\' ήμᾱς σταυρωϑέ v τα ἤτοιϑε- ό v χωρίω v τὰς ϕύσεις xai 00 συ v άπτω v ἐ v tip σταυροῡσϑαι αὺτό v, ϰαϑαιρείσϑω . ****** [xai e? τις ѱ ιλὸ v ά̓ v ϑρωπο v λέγειὡς Παυ̃λος 0 Σαμοσατεὺς vj ὤσπερΦωτει v ός, ὰ v αϑεματιζέσϑω .

And if anyone, after the Trisagion hymn, says that Christ was crucified, and not rather that it is the one Son who is hymned in the midst of the Trisagion, let him be deposed. And if anyone says that a man was crucified for us, thereby dividing the natures and not joining him in the being crucified, let him be deposed. [And if anyone says that he was a mere man, as Paul of Samosata or as Photinus, let him be anathematized.]

凡在唱三聖頌之後，說是基督被釘十字架，而不說在三聖頌中所頌讚的乃是那一位聖子者，當被罷黜。凡說有一個人為我們被釘十字架，因而分割了兩性、不承認被釘者與祂合一者，當被罷黜。〔凡說祂只是一個純然的人，如撒摩撒他的保羅或如弗提努者，當受絕罰。〕

1:441

ϰαὶ st ttç ϑεαϑρωπὶα v λέγει ϰαὶ οὺχὶ ϑεό v ϰαὶ ά̓ v ϑρωπο v μᾱλλο v λέγει, ὰ v αϑεματιζέσω .] ϰαὶ et ttç ἑτροούσιο v λέγει τη̄ς ήμετέρας σαρϰός τὴ v σάρϰα too Χριστοῡ ϰαὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾱλλο v ἡμῑ v όμοούσιο v χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας, ϰαϑαιρείσϑω . ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ****** ****** XI Si quis dicit consubstantialem carnem domini deo et patri et non potius deum uerbum, damnetur. XII Si quis dicit sine mente et sine anima dominum nostrum legum Christum et pro ea habuisse diuinitatem et quia ex hoc dicendum passum carne deum uerbum et non magis mente cum anima rationabili inhumanatum deum uerbum et impassibilem dicendum eundem diuinitate, humanitate uero passibilem, damnetur.

And if anyone says 'God-manhood,' and not rather says 'God and man,' let him be anathematized.] And if anyone says that the flesh of Christ is of another essence than our flesh, and not rather consubstantial with us apart from sin, let him be deposed. XI. If anyone says that the flesh of the Lord is consubstantial with God and the Father, and not rather God the Word, let him be condemned. XII. If anyone says that our Lord Jesus Christ was without mind and without soul, and that he had the divinity in place of these, and that from this it must be said that God the Word suffered in the flesh, and not rather that God the Word became man with mind and rational soul, and that the same one must be called impassible in his divinity but passible in his humanity, let him be condemned.

凡說「神人性」，而不說「是神又是人」者，當受絕罰。〕凡說基督的肉體與我們的肉體屬於另一種本質，而不說祂與我們同質而無罪者，當被罷黜。第十一條：凡說主的肉體與神、與父同質，而不說祂是神的道者，當受譴責。第十二條：凡說我們的主耶穌基督沒有心智、沒有靈魂，而以神性取代之，並因此說神的道是在肉體中受苦，而不說神的道乃是以心智與理性的靈魂成為人，且不說同一位在神性上不受苦、在人性上卻受苦者，當受譴責。

1:442

Has duodecim damnationes direxi tibi, ut metuens harum iudicia recedas a tua callidissima nouitate sciens, quia oportet nos sequi reuelationem sanctissimi Constantinopolitanae ecclesiae episcopi Procli: quomodo dum in Campo concurreret cum omni populo suo undante per terrae motum eadem ciuitate et luctu ab omnibus emisso repente puer in aera a quadam uirtute eleuatus est eique praeceptum est, ut in litania diceretur trisagion hoc est \'sanctus deus, sanctus fortis, sanctus inmortalis, miserere nobis\' et haec denuntiare episcopo iussus est. qui post tres horas stetit in tribunali circa pedes eiusdem episcopi et haec enarrauit [puer] et ita litaniam facientibus steterunt illi terrores.

These twelve condemnations I have directed to you, that fearing their judgments you may withdraw from your most crafty novelty, knowing that we ought to follow the revelation of Proclus, the most holy bishop of the church of Constantinople: how, while he was gathered in the Campus with all his people, that same city surging with an earthquake and lamentation being sent up by all, suddenly a boy was lifted into the air by a certain power, and it was commanded to him that in the litany the Trisagion should be said, that is, 'Holy God, holy Mighty, holy Immortal, have mercy on us,' and he was ordered to announce these things to the bishop. And after three hours he stood in the tribunal at the feet of that same bishop and related these things; and when they thus made the litany, those terrors ceased.

這十二條譴責我已寄給你，好叫你懼怕它們的審判，而離棄你那最狡詐的新說，並知道我們應當跟隨君士坦丁堡教會至聖的主教普洛克羅所得的啟示：當他與全體百姓聚集在校場之時，那城因地震而震盪、眾人發出哀哭，忽然有一個孩童被某種大能舉到空中，並得了命令，說在連禱中要唱三聖頌，就是「聖哉神，聖哉大能者，聖哉永生者，求你憐憫我們」，並奉命把這些話告知主教。三小時後，他站在審判台上、在那主教腳前，述說了這一切；當眾人如此舉行連禱時，那些震動便止息了。

1:443

sic itaque et tu litaniam facito et cessabit aduersum te ira prolata; alioquin ueniet super te Felicis papae nostri damnatio.

So therefore do you also make the litany, and the wrath pronounced against you will cease; otherwise the condemnation of our pope Felix will come upon you.

所以你也當如此舉行連禱，那對你所發的忿怒便必止息；不然，我們教宗斐理斯的譴責必臨到你身上。

← prev partnext part →