Глава 3-я

Scholia. We ask everyone who turns to this book to be sure to read the scholia attached to the corresponding places. If the book contains, naturally, minor incorrect expressions, then we ask [the readers] for an apology. For it was written hastily, its purpose was to present the very meaning of speculation and sought to indicate it, and therefore it often contains linguistic errors and negligence in punctuation. Anastasius, the most insignificant monk, a work on the Orthodox faith, collected from the Holy Scriptures and teachers [of the Church] The beginning of Your words, Christ, is truth, and You Yourself, God the Word, are the true Truth, since You are truly the Generation of the supertrue Fatherly Truth and the Truth [that came] from It 113. And You proclaim to the zealots of Your Truth that You are sending the Spirit of Truth, saying: “The Comforter whom I will send to you in the name of My Father, the Spirit of Truth, He will guide you into all truth, so that not you speak, but the Spirit of Truth speaks the Truth in you” (John 14:26, 15:26, 16:13; Matt. 10:20). For those who extract luminous and precious pearls from invisible depths for people and want to show [them to people] strip themselves of all clothing, fill their mouths with oil and, taking a powerful breath, rush into the terrible and dark abyss 114. Thus, I think, they set an example that every person who explores the depths of spiritual waters and dogmas and wants to fish out divine and pure pearls from them should be naked from all the clothing of passionate [thoughts], breathe in the nostrils of the soul of the Holy Spirit and be [internally] corresponding to the words of the saint who says: “The Spirit of God is in my nostrils” (Job. 27:3), “Breath Almighty, teaching me” (Job.33:4) and “My mouth was opened and the Spirit was drawn” (Ps.119:131). This [Spirit] is the “oil of joy” (Ps. 44:8), so that the divine saying may be fulfilled regarding such people, which says: “A good man brings forth good things from the good treasure of his heart,” just as a passionate man “brings forth evil things from the passionate treasure of his heart” (Luke 6:45). And danger awaits not so much those who dare to [rush] into the depths of [spiritual] waters, as those who [risk] exploring the abyss of the Holy Scriptures without first getting rid of passions 115. For only the Holy Spirit, as God, has the power to “search into the depths of God” (1 Cor. 2:10). Therefore, a certain sage says: “First you should purify yourself, and then communicate with the pure” 116. After all, if he who has the speaking Christ within himself, was caught up to the third heaven, recognized in paradise the unspeakable words (2 Cor. 12:2-4) and said: “It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me” (Gal. 2:20), nevertheless, turning to the Corinthians, declares: “We speak in part and we know in part” (1 Cor. 13:9-11), then who can, [being filled self-confidence] to say: “I speak perfectly and know perfectly, especially what pertains to the incomprehensible God”? Again, a certain Theologian, guided by the Holy Spirit, said: “When I talk about God, I tremble in tongue, and in hearing, and in thought” 117 . For it is not safe to talk about God. But some who do not understand and do not study this (being ignorant, they seem to dwell inside their womb, falling into the passions of dishonor and [plunging] into the mud of pleasures; they slander me, and also create without fear the desires of the flesh and sweets, not knowing that the Holy Spirit dwells in people) ridicule the sacraments of Christ and make them the subject of mockery in taverns, brothels, baths and bazaars. And [all] they do is such that unbelievers spew out blasphemies [against the faith of Christ]; Having stolen two or three random phrases from the [holy] fathers and uttered them, they immediately put forward, [as if false witnesses], their own teachers, not God-ordained, but driven by passions 118 . For those, prompted by [their] vain and voluptuous will and driven by shameful greed, often, in the Jewish manner, sell the divine pearls of the Word to the unworthy or throw them to pigs. After all, as you can learn this from the church chroniclers of your time, most heresies arose from vainglorious love of power, love of money, man-pleasing and arrogance. The heretics would [never] have fallen into such blindness [of passions] if, through the study of [the Holy Scripture, spiritual] exercise and dispassion, [were] worthy of the indwelling of the All-Holy Spirit in them. After all, if, without acquiring the Divine Spirit, “we do not know what to pray for as we ought” (Rom. 8:26), then how much more can we [in such a state] explore the mysteries of God? But, of course, the new theologians tell me: “We do not express anything from ourselves, but we speak from the Holy Scriptures and the pious fathers of the Catholic Church” 119. To this I answer: “And all heretics claim the same thing, which is why they seem to object to us on the basis of the Holy Scriptures and the teachers [of the Church].” After all, as it seems to me, a person is not able to infallibly and correctly comprehend either the [Holy] Scripture or the words of the fathers [of the Church], if he does not acquire the Holy Spirit, Who will dwell in him and become his Guide; for this Spirit speaks both in the Holy Scriptures and in the works of the fathers 120. After all, the words of Christ: “The Spirit of truth will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13), clearly pointed to the Scriptures and the [holy] fathers. Chapters of anathematization and rejection, which an Orthodox Christian must pronounce before a debate, when he is about to begin a discussion about faith, addressing Theodosians or Gainites 121 First of all, Nestorius and his faith must be anathematized, and then in order the following: anathematize [everyone] who does not confess the Holy and Ever-Virgin Mary as the Mother of God by nature and above nature 122; [everyone] speaking of two persons, or two hypostases, or two divided natures in Christ; [everyone] who does not accept hypostatic unity in Christ; [anyone] who does not recognize the expression “the one incarnate nature of God the Word,” as Saint Cyril interpreted it; [everyone] who imagines two natures in Christ - male and female, or speaks of them; [anyone] who claims that the Divinity of Christ was separated from His holy flesh on the Cross, in the tomb or in another place; [anyone] who does not confess the Body of God and the Blood of God, with which we partake. But first of all and mainly one should anathematize [anyone] who preaches a new faith and a new teaching or adheres to them, [if this faith and this teaching] differs from the faith of the 318 fathers of the Council of Nicaea, the 150 fathers of the Council of Constantinople and the 200 fathers of the first Council of Ephesus. One should also anathematize the one who from the Council of Chalcedon invents and extracts a new faith, in addition to the way of thinking of the holy fathers: Dionysius, Irenaeus, Clement, Ambrose, Julia, Eustathius, Athanasius, Basil, both Gregori, Amphilochius, John, Epiphanius, Theophilus, Proclus, Ephraim, Isidore, the blessed father and teacher [our] Kirill and the rest of the fathers, unanimous with them. We consider those who do not follow these holy teachers to be condemned by the Church and alien to Her 123. Similar designations for God in general and Christ in particular are very abundant in ancient church writing. Thus, Antiochus the Monk, a contemporary of St. Anastasia, says that “God is truly Truth” (ἡ ὄντως ἀλήϑεια ὁ Θεός ἐστιν). He further notes that just as he who speaks a lie defiles his lips and heart, since [he involuntarily comes into contact] with the devil, who is the father of lies, so he who speaks the truth illuminates his soul, body and all his bodily members, for [he joins] Christ, Who is the Truth. See: PG 89, 1628. This usage goes back to the New Testament, especially to St. Apostle John the Theologian. For him, truth is a general concept, “which contains both religious and ethical elements: truth can be “known” and “done” and at the same time has such an important meaning that this term could designate the entire work of the Savior. Based on this, the content of ἀλήϑεια can be determined as follows. ἀλήϑεια is the designation of everything that is revealed and accomplished by the Son of God, the Word incarnate, this includes the fact that the Only Begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, revealed to the world the unknown being of God, and that God loved the world and sent His Son as the propitiation for our sins, so that whoever believes in Him would not perish, but have eternal life, and that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and in general the whole matter of human salvation, with all the details of the teaching about it, with all the requirements and conclusions regarding the spiritual life of man. Consequently, ἀλήϑεια is the entire sum of Divine Revelation.” Sagarda N. AND . The first conciliar Epistle of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian. Isagogical-exegetical study. Poltava, 1903, p. 314. This phrase most likely indicates that Rev. Anastasius was quite familiar with the craft of pearl catchers, having probably lived for some time on the seashore, where this fishery flourished. A similar requirement for anyone who undertakes to explain the Holy Scripture can be found very often among the holy fathers, and it is, as it were, a self-evident prerequisite for Orthodox exegesis. Compare, for example, the teaching of Rev. Isidore Pelusiota: “The most important thing in Scripture, according to Isidore, is its meaning, and whoever seeks meaning in Scripture is like a merchant looking for expensive beads.” At the same time, Isidore demands special moral qualities from the exegete. The height of the Holy Scriptures, Isidore argues, its divine dignity and soul-saving benefits require that those who proceed to explain its moral purity. He who interprets the Word of God without due moral height and purity is likened to a man throwing pearls before swine, or to those madmen who, having once left heresy and turned to the true teaching, again indulge in their former madness and thus become like dogs returning to their vomit (2 Pet. 2:22). Therefore, he who begins to explain the Holy Scriptures must prepare for this by purifying his heart and expelling passions and vices from oneself. Just as “the weak eye cannot gaze intently at the circle of the sun,” so also “the wicked mind is unable to grasp anything to benefit itself” from the Words of God. The interpreter of the Holy Scriptures must have “a sedate and clear tongue, and a pious and reverent heart.” Hieromonk Joasaph. Reverend Isidore Pelusiot as an interpreter of the Holy Scriptures Sergiev Posad, 1915, p. 29–30. By this “sage” is meant St. Gregory the Theologian, who, explaining Proverbs 4:7, says: “It is necessary, not having begun with speculation, to end in fear (speculation is unbridled and can very well lead to rapids), but having learned the first fruits from fear, having been purified by it and, so to speak, refined, ascend to heights. Where there is fear, there is observance of the commandments; where there is observance of the commandments, there is cleansing of the flesh - this cloud that darkens the soul and prevents it from clearly seeing the Divine ray, but where there is cleansing, there is illumination; illumination is the fulfillment of desire for those striving for the highest objects, or for the Highest Object, or for That which is higher than the highest. Therefore, one must first purify oneself and then converse with the pure.” Saint Gregory the Theologian, Archbishop of Constantinople. Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 536. Wed. “If the present word contains something that has already been said before, no one should be surprised. For I will begin to speak not only the same thing, but also about the same thing, having a trembling tongue, and mind, and heart, each time speaking about God and wanting you the same praiseworthy and blessed fear” Ibid., p. 537. So, it seems, it is better to translate this not entirely usual designation of monophysitizing false teachers οὐ ϑεοχειροτονήτους, ἀλλὰ παϑοκινήτους. Statements and formulations of this kind were characteristic of both Monophysitists and Nestorian heretics. Therefore, Orthodox polemicists were forced to constantly emphasize the correct understanding of the patristic Tradition. About this Rev. Anastasy speaks a little lower. Fidelity to the patristic Tradition as a necessary condition for theology is also emphasized by his contemporary, Rev. Maximus the Confessor He, in particular, emphasizes the fact that the Fathers of the Church did not allow any “gag” (οὐκ οἴκοϑεν κινοὐμενοι), but, being themselves taught in the Holy Scriptures, they philanthropically taught us this too (τοῦτο φιλάνϑρώπως καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐδίδαξαν) And about himself he also notes that in the teaching about the Incarnation of God the Word he does not deviate at all from what the fathers taught (ὁ δὲ παρὰ τῶν Πατέρων ἐδιδάχϑεν, φημὶ, μηδὲν παραμείβων τῆς αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τούτοις διδασκαλίας). See: RS 91, 544. The contrast between the Orthodox and heretical approaches to the Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition probably lies in the fact that if heretics (Monophysites, Nestorians) perceived Tradition as something similar to Scripture and only complementing it, without grasping their differences, then Orthodox theologians saw their difference, which, naturally, was not the opposite. This difference V.N. Lossky defines it quite clearly: “If Scripture and everything that can be said in written or spoken words, liturgical images or other symbols, if all these are different ways of expressing the Truth, then Sacred Tradition is the only way to perceive the Truth. We say “single”, and not uniform, because in Tradition, in the purified concept of it, there is nothing formal. It does not impose formal guarantees of the truths of faith on the human conscience, but reveals their internal reliability. It is not the content of Revelation, but the light that penetrates it. It is not a word, but a living breath that gives the hearing of words simultaneously with the hearing of silence from which the word comes. It is not the Truth, but the message of the Spirit of Truth, without Which the Truth cannot be known. “No one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:3). So, we can give a precise definition of Tradition, saying that it is the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church - a life that imparts to each member of the Body of Christ the ability to hear, accept, and know the Truth in its inherent radiance, and not in the natural light of the human mind. This is the true gnosis that is given by the action of the Divine Light in order to enlighten us with the knowledge of the glory of God (2 Cor. 4:6: Θεοῦ), this is the only “Tradition” that does not depend on any “philosophy”, on everything that lives “according to human tradition, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:8).” Lossky V. N. Theology and God-vision M., 2000, p. 525. Heretics (Monophysites, etc.) saw in Tradition a way of expressing the Truth, complementing the same way of expressing It in Scripture, without seeing in Tradition a way of perceiving the Truth. Rev. speaks about this method of perception in a specific case. Anastasy. Currents in Monophysitism in the 6th–7th centuries. The first, which received its name from the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria Theodosius († 566), was a moderate-conservative movement and was identical to “Severianism.” As for the second, it was named after Guyana, who was a supporter of Julian of Halicarnassus and acted as an opponent of Theodosius when he was elected to the see of Alexandria (536). The "Gainites" (i.e., "Aphtartodocetes") managed to prevail for some time among the Alexandrian and Egyptian Monophysites, but their triumph lasted 103 or 104 days, after which Gayan was overthrown from the Alexandrian see by military force and sent into exile, and Theodosius took this see. See: Kulakovsky Yu. A . History of Byzantium, vol. II. St. Petersburg, 1996, p. 199, Frend W. N. WITH . The Rise of the Monophysite Movement Cambridge, 1972, p. 283–293. Testimony from Rev. Anastasia shows that the “Gainites” still enjoyed a certain influence in Egypt in the 7th century. This phrase by Rev. Anastasia (φύσει καὶ ὑπὲρ φύσιν Θεοτόκον), perhaps explained by the teachings of St. John of Damascus, according to which “in this hypostatic union with the Divine, human nature is elevated to deification. And therefore the Holy Virgin is also called the Mother of God, not only for the sake of the Divine nature of the Word, but also for the sake of the deification of man... For in the womb of the Mother of God, human nature, through the hypostatic union with the Divine, received deification, became “logos” and “deified” and became God and monotheistic (ὁμόϑεος) to the Logos” Hieromonk Afanasy (Ievtich). Teaching about the Most Holy Theotokos by St. John of Damascus // All Holy. Orthodox dogmatic teaching on the veneration of the Mother of God. Collection of works by M., p. 2001, p. 202. This list of selected fathers could reflect both the general church custom of the 7th century and the personal sympathies of the Venerable himself. Anastasia. A number of these fathers are constantly found in the Rev. Maximus the Confessor, who, in particular, highly valued Dionysius the Areopagite (“truly speaking in God, the great and holy Dionysius”), St. Athanasius the Great (“God-bearing teacher”), Clement of Alexandria (“the most wise of all wise”), the three great Cappadocian saints, and among the Western fathers – St. Ambrose of Milan and Pope St. Leo the Great See: Pelikan J. The Christian Tradition. A History of the Development of Doctrine, v. 2 Chicago-London, 1974, p. 19–20. In the list of rev. Anastasia attracts attention when mentioned along with St. John Chrysostom and his enemy – Theophilus of Alexandria; In addition, it is noteworthy that this list also includes St. Isidore (most likely Pelusiot) and St. Ephraim (Sirin or Antioch?). You might be interested in: