Sergius' final answer to the Gethsemane problem has been set out: the natural movement (φυσική κίνεσις) of the flesh of the Christ-man remained constantly subject to the will of the God-Word, including in the episode of the initial refusal of the cup. It is God who, in the Son, wills the Passion by his natural will, the only one that, according to monotheism, the Incarnate Word possesses. We paused to answer a question from the audience on the meaning of the expression "hypostatic union". This was followed by a historical commentary and analysis of the Maximian formulation of perichoresis in Christ. This involved explaining the meaning of the term περιχώρησις: the mutual immanence of a whole and its parts, and presenting the ousia-hypostasis relationship as a mereological counter-model to the Aristotelian model of subjectivity, based on the subject-accident relationship. We analyzed Maximus' tripartite formula for the two natures, divine and human, "of which, in which and which is Christ", and compared it with other ancient and medieval tripartite mereological formulas, particularly those concerning universals: in Proclus, Eustratus of Nicaea, Ammonius and Avicenna. The ontological foundations of Cappadocian Trinitarian theology were discussed: the Trinity as a "shared universal". We highlighted two fundamental principles of Greek onto-theo-logic, from Leonce of Byzantium to John of Damascus: the "principle of instantiation of dependent entities": "There is no uninstantiated essence or nature", and the "principle of subordination of hypostasis": every hypostasis instantiates an essence/nature. The new concepts of ἐνυπόστατον and ἐνοὐσιον, "enhypostasié" and "enousié", were explained on this basis.
17:00 - 18:00
