Беседа 24. Против савеллиан, Ария и аномеев

Judaism is at enmity with paganism, and both are at enmity with Christianity, just as the Egyptians and Assyrians were enemies of each other and of Israel, just as in vice we find that cowardice and insolence are opposite to each other and to courage. Some kind of similar warfare will befall the right confession on both sides, namely, on the one hand from Sabellius, on the other from those who preach those who are not of the same essence. But we, just as the pagans fled, fled from evil idolatry, and their polytheism was recognized as atheism, so the blasphemies of the Jews who deny the Son of God fled, fearing this threat: “Whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 10:33). Therefore, we flee, as we must, from those who invent something akin to paganism and Judaism, contrary to the word of truth. Since the devil, wise in evil deeds, saw that Christians are alienated from Jews and pagans, and that their very names dispose us to be at enmity with them, then, having given our name to both, he thus tries to reintroduce Jewish renunciation and pagan polytheism. For some, asserting that the Only Begotten is God’s work and work, and then worshiping Him and theology about Him, serving their creatures and not the Creator, openly introduce pagan teachings; and others, denying God from God and recognizing the Son by name, but in reality and in truth denying His existence, again resume Judaism. When they confess Him by the Word, they liken it to the inner word, and, calling it Wisdom, they claim that it is similar to the habit that is formed in the soul of scientists; and therefore they say that the face of the Father and the Son is one, just as it is said of man that he is one, and not separated from the word, from the wisdom that is in him. However, the evangelist exclaims right at the beginning: “and God is the Word” (John 1:1), assimilating the Son’s own existence. For, if the Word was in the heart, then how to call Him by God? And how was the Word with God? The Word in man is not man, and it is said that it is not with man, but in man; because it is not a living being, not something independent. But the Word of God is life and truth. Our word is barely spoken before it is no longer there: what does the psalm say about the Word of God? “For ever, O Lord, Thy Word abides in heaven” (Ps. 119:89). Such is the abuse from this side. What and what kind of struggle with the truth is on the other side? They admit the existence, agree that there is a special Person of the Son, a special Person of the Father, but they introduce non-consubstantial natures. They allow the name of the Son in words, but in the truth itself they reduce Him to the level of a creature, not respecting the words of the Lord, Who, to the one who wanted to see the Father, pointing to Himself, said: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). This saying for those who argue the right silences the blasphemy of both. For He who clearly distinguishes Persons does not call Himself Father when He says: “seeing Me (which indicates His own Face) in the form of the Father” (referring to the Father’s Person and clearly distinguishing Him from Himself). And again, when they say: “If they knew Me, they knew My Father quickly” (John 14:7); These words do not mean the unity of Persons, but prove the indifference of the Divine. Let the opponents hear the same word, namely, that he who is worthy of communion with the Son is not deprived of the Father; for the Parent did not give birth to one who is different, but one who is the same as himself. Listen, Anomeus: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). Listen too, Sabellius: “I have departed from the Father and am going to Him” (John 16:28). And let each of you heal your ulcer with the gospel teaching. You understand the unity of the indifference of nature; and you, the sayings: “I breathed out from Him,” and I go to Him, understand the difference in Persons. So, let us come together and be reconciled in this, let us stop the long war with piety, throwing away these sophisticated weapons of wickedness and beating spears into plowshares and swords into pruning hooks. And do not call him one, but follow Him who says: “I am not one,” because the Father who sent Me is with Me (John 8:16). Therefore there is another who sent the Father, and another who sent the Son. And he also says: “I... testify of Me, and the Father who sent Me testifies of Me” (John 8:18); “And in your law,” he says, “it is written, that the testimony of two men is true” (John 8:17). Count, if you like, the Faces. It is said: “I am the one who testifies—here is one. And he who sent Me testifies of Me” - here are two. And I don’t think so boldly, but the Lord Himself taught this, saying: “It is written in your law, that two people have a true testimony.” But you, who fight against God with your wickedness of a different kind, saying that the Son is not like God by nature, you, who do not concede equality, cause separation of life, be ashamed of Paul, who says: “Who is the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15), and yield to the living image inseparability from the original life. Confess the Father to the Son, and not the creator of creation. And in true confession of the Father, concede to the Begotten equality of honor with the Father, remembering the testimony of the evangelist that “Whoever says God is His Father, He is equal in His creation to God” (John 5:18). Equality with the One who gave birth is understood here by nature, and not by the measurement of bodily size. How can one “not be equal with God through admiration” (Phil. 2:6), if, as you blaspheme, one is never equal? How was he “in the image of God” who, according to you, is not even similar? But such is the battle raised against us from both sides; What is the truth? Do not be afraid of the confession of Persons, but call the Father, call two names, but from each naming recognize a special thought. For it is terrible ingratitude to not accept the instructions of the Lord, Who separately presents to us the difference of Persons. He says: “I will ask the Father, and he will send you another Comforter” (John 14:16). Therefore, the Son is suppliant, the Father is supplicated, and the Comforter is sent. Isn’t your shamelessness clear when you hear about the Son: “Az”; about the Father "He"; about the Holy Spirit - “Other”, and you mix everything up, merge everything, attach all the names to one? However, do not turn the division of Persons into a reason for wickedness. For although two in number, they are inseparable by nature; and whoever says “two” does not introduce alienation. One God, He is also the Father, One God and Son. And not two Gods, because the Son has identity with the Father. For I do not contemplate another Divinity in the Father, but another in the Son; not another nature is the Father’s, but another is the Son’s. Therefore, in order to make clear to you the distinctiveness of the Persons, consider the Father especially and the Son especially, but in order not to fall into polytheism, confess a single essence in both. So Sabellius will fall, and Anomeus will be crushed! But when I name one essence, do not imagine that one is divided into two, but that the Son is from the Father as from the beginning, and not the Father and the Son from one supreme beginning. For we do not call brothers, but we confess the Father and the Son. And the identity of essence is that the Son is from the Father, not produced by command, but begotten from nature; He was not separated from the Father, but the perfect one shone forth from the one who remained perfect. And you, who either did not fully comprehend what was said, or came with the intention of ridiculing us, not looking to borrow something useful from us, but looking to see if it is possible to become attached to any of what was said, do not rush to say: “He preaches two Gods, proclaims polytheism!” There are not two Gods, because there are not two Fathers. Whoever introduces two principles preaches two Gods. Such is Marcion and everyone who is like him in wickedness. And again, if someone says that the Begotten is of another essence with the Begotten, then he also names two Gods, introducing polytheism as a similarity of essence. For if there is one Godhead unbegotten and one begotten, then you preach polytheism, claiming that the unbegotten is contrary to the begotten, and clearly believing that the essences are also contrary, if only the essence of the Father is ungeneracy, and the essence of the Son is generation. Therefore, you name not only two Gods, but two hostile to each other, and, what is most terrible, you attribute to them enmity, not out of their free will, but out of natural discord, which can never turn into a peace agreement. But the teaching of truth avoided contradictions on both sides. For where there is one beginning and one that from the beginning - one prototype and one image, there the concept of unity is not violated. Therefore, the Son, being born of the Father, and naturally imprinting in Himself the Father as an image, is indifferent to the Father; and how birth preserves in itself those who are one in essence with Him. Whoever looks at the royal image in the marketplace and says that what is depicted in the picture is a king, recognizes not two kings, that is, the image and the one whose image; and if, pointing to the person written in the picture, he says: “This is the king,” he will not deprive the prototype of the royal name; or rather, by recognizing the image it confirms the honor given to the king. For if the image is a king, then all the more should the one who served as the cause of the image be a king. But here wood and wax, and the art of the painter produce a corruptible image - an imitation of the corruptible, and an artificial one - an imitation of the created. But there, when you hear the word: “image,” understand: “the radiance of glory.” What kind of radiance is this? And what kind of glory? The Apostle himself soon interpreted this, adding: “and the image of the Hypostasis” (Heb. 1:3). Therefore, the Hypostasis is identical with glory, and the image is identical with radiance. Therefore, just as glory remains perfect and does not diminish, so the radiance emanates perfect. And in this case, the concept of the image, taken divinely, leads us to the unity of the Divine. For the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father; why the Son is the same as the Father and the Father is the same as the Son. Thus the two remain in unity; because they do not differ, and the Son is understood not in another form, nor in a new image. So, again I say: “One and One, but the nature is indivisible, perfection without flaws. There is one God, because in the Father and the Son a single form is contemplated, which is entirely revealed in One and the other.” But I have long noticed that you are not satisfied with the word, and it seems that I can almost hear the reproach why, dwelling on what everyone professes, I do not touch upon questions that arouse a lot of speculation; because now everyone’s ears are directed toward hearing the teaching about the Holy Spirit. And I would like everything most of all, as I simply accepted it, as I myself believed ingenuously, and passed it on to those listening, without demanding - which is why it is always about the same thing, but having such disciples who were convinced by one confession. Since you surround me more as judges than as students, and want to put me to the test, and are not yourself looking to borrow something, then it is necessary for me that, as in a court of law, the investigation continues, and as they constantly gave me questions, so I could say that I have accepted. And I advise you by all means to seek to hear from me, not what pleases you, but what is pleasing to God, in accordance with Scripture and does not contradict the fathers. Therefore, what I said about the Son, namely, that the special Person of the Son must be confessed, I must say the same about the Holy Spirit. For the Spirit is not the same as the Father, although it is written: “The Spirit is God” (John 4:24); and again, not one Person of the Son and the Spirit, although it is said: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. ...Christ is in you” (Rom. 8:9-10). For from this some have falsely concluded that the Spirit and Christ are one and the same Person. But what can we say to this? The fact that from this the affinity of nature is revealed, and not the unity of Persons. For there is a Father who has a perfect and inexhaustible existence, the root and source of the Son and the Holy Spirit. But there is also the Son, the living Word in full Divinity and the in no way scanty Birth of the Father. But the Spirit is also full; He is not a part of anything else, but is perfect and complete, contemplated in Himself. And just as the Son is inseparably united with the Father, so the Spirit is united with the Son. For there is nothing that demarcates or dissects the eternal union. No age lies between Them; and our soul does not allow even the thought of separation, so that either the Only Begotten would not always be with the Father or the Holy Spirit would not exist together with the Son. Therefore, when we unite the Trinity, do not imagine as if there were three parts of one inseparable one (such reasoning is evil), but understand the inseparable coexistence of the Three incorporeal perfect ones. For where the presence of the Holy Spirit is, there is the coming of Christ, and where Christ is, there the Father is undoubtedly present. “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit living in you?” (1 Cor. 6:19). And: “If anyone corrupts God’s church, God will corrupt him” (1 Cor. 3:17). Therefore, we who are sanctified by the Spirit accept Christ, who dwells in our inner man, and with Christ the Father, who makes a common habitation among the worthy. This connection is proved both by the tradition of baptism and the confession of faith. If the Spirit were alien by nature, then why would it be listed together? And if in time he was subsequently joined to the Father and the Son, then why were we placed on a par with the eternal nature? But those who separate the Spirit from the Father and the Son and classify Him among the creation make both baptism imperfect and confession of faith insufficient; because the Trinity no longer remains the Trinity after the Spirit is taken away. And again, if one thing from creation is added, then the whole creation will rise into oneness with the Father and the Son. In this case, what prevents us from saying: we believe in the Father and the Son and all creation? If it is pious to believe in a part of creation, then it is much more honest to include the whole of creation in the confession. And believing in all creation, you will believe not only in Angels and ministering spirits, but also in all the opposing forces that exist; because they too form part of the creation. You will add your faith to them. Thus, blasphemy against the Spirit leads you to evil and unlawful concepts. As soon as you spoke about the Spirit, which you should not say, it became clear to you that you had been abandoned by the Spirit. Just as one who closes his eyes has darkness within himself, so one who is separated from the Spirit, having become outside the Enlightener, is overcome by spiritual blindness. But so as not to separate you from the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, let tradition put you to shame. Thus the Lord taught, the Apostles preached, the fathers observed, the martyrs established. It is enough for you to tell me how learned you are; do not present to me these wisdoms: “He is not begotten or begotten; if not begotten, then the Father; if begotten, then a Son; and if neither one nor the other, then a creature.” But I know the Spirit with the Father, but the Spirit is not the Father; I received the Spirit with the Son, but not called the Son. But I understand His property with the Father, because it comes from the Father, and His property with the Son, because I hear: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.” If the Spirit is not Christ’s own, then how does it make us Christ’s own? But I also hear about the “Spirit of truth” (John 14:17), and truth is the Lord. When I hear about the “Spirit of sonhood” (Rom. 8:15), I come to the thought of His unity with the Father and the Son by nature. For how does a stranger adopt? How does one make someone else’s His own? Thus, I do not invent new sayings, and do not reject dignity; for those who dare to call the Spirit a creature, I weep and lament; because they, with unimportant invention and counterfeit false thinking, cast themselves into the abyss. For they say: “Because our mind comprehends these three, and there is nothing in existence that does not fit into this division of beings, that is, everything is either unborn, or born, or created; Spirit is neither the first nor the second; then, of course, He is the third.” This “of course” of yours will make you guilty of an eternal oath. Have you researched everything? Have you brought everything under this division with your reason? Did he really leave nothing untested? embraced everything with your mind? did he include everything in his concept? Do you know what's underground? Do you know what's in the depths? Here is the demonic boast: “I know the number of the sand and the measure of the sea” 83. If you don’t know much, and the unknown is a thousand times greater than the known, then, on top of everything else, don’t you admit without shame to your comfortable ignorance of how the Holy Spirit exists? I do not have time to expose the vanity of your reasoning and show how many beings have not risen to the comprehension of your reason. But I would gladly ask your people about this, and I confidently believe that you, who call the Holy Spirit a creature, will one day repent of this godless wisdom. Are you really not afraid of the unforgivable sin? Or do you think that even more evil blasphemy is possible? For from this one word come all the terrible consequences: alienation from God by nature itself, the humiliation of slavery, official positions, deprivation of shrines; because it does not belong by nature, and the Spirit must partake of the holy thing in the same way by grace-filled distribution as everything that is sanctified partakes of it. And just as we are given “the manifestation of the Spirit for our benefit” (1 Cor. 12:7), given to each according to the measure of faith, so the Holy Spirit will be a partaker of the holy thing, if in fact He is a creature, as the Doukhoborists think. But we will not allow the foolishness of people who think of themselves to have embraced everything with their reason to remain uncondemned. So, let them answer us: what constitutes the essence of the sensual sun? Is it one of the four elements or something complex of these four? But this essence is neither earth, nor air, nor water, nor fire. For all this moves in a straight direction; and one tends upward, and the other downward. Earth and water, due to gravity, are inclined downward, and air and fire, due to lightness, move upward. But the movement of the sun is circular. Therefore, its essence is not any one of the four elements. But it is not anything complex from these four elements, because the complex, consisting of opposite elements, is subject to fatigue from the fact that the elements opposite in movement pull each other in opposite directions. The movement of the sun is tireless, which is why it does not stop; therefore, the sun is not difficult. Every body is something either simple or complex; but the sun is not a simple body, because it does not move in a straight direction; and not difficult, because it does not get tired in motion. That's why there is no sun. These are your wise divisions; they are worthy of ridicule for those who have eyes. Also: how do we, humans, see? Is it taking images of visible objects into oneself or emitting power from oneself? But we also do not accept images of the visible into ourselves (for how does the hemisphere of the sky become visible in the small passage of the pupil?), and we do not emit anything from ourselves (for how will it again reach what comes out of the eye to unfold throughout the entire celestial space?). And if we do not accept images of the visible into ourselves and do not emit any force from ourselves, then it follows that we do not see. After this, should I challenge your conclusions? Or wish that your conclusions were true? How do your subtleties about the Holy Spirit, which you show before pitiful women or eunuchs close to them, differ from such reasoning? Listen without hostility. If the Spirit is from God, then how do you bring Him down into creation? For, of course, you don’t mean to say that everything is from God. Just as Christ is called “God’s,” but He is not a creature like us; for we are “Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (1 Cor. 3:23); but in another sense we are called Christ’s as servants of the Master, and in another sense Christ is called God’s as the Son of the Father; so the Spirit is not because everything is from God, and He is from God, like everyone else. For, because there are ministering spirits, the Holy Spirit is no longer similar to them, due to the name. He alone is truly Spirit. Just as there are many sons, but one true Son, so, although everything is said to be from God, yet, in fact, the Son is from God. And the Spirit is from God; because the Son came from the Father and the Spirit proceeds from the Father; but the Son is from the Father through generation, and the Spirit is from God inexpressibly. See, then, how great the danger is in diminishing the glory of the Comforter. The Son also does not accept the honor given to Him when the Spirit is removed. For, he says, “He will glorify Me” (John 16:14); not as a slave along with the creature, for if he glorified along with everyone else, it would not have been said: “He.” Now this attitude towards one shows that glory is given according to superiority over others. Not like those who say: “Glory to God in the highest” (Luke 2:14), but like the One who said: “Father!.. I have glorified You... I have completed the work that You gave” (John 17:1, 4); and just as the Father glorifies the Son, saying: “I have glorified You, and I will glorify you again” (John 12:28), so the Son receives the Spirit into communion with Himself and with the Father. Or let someone show me a glory greater than this, and then I will completely agree that my opponents are telling the truth. “Be swept away from you, I am swept away” (Luke 10:16). Why? Apparently because of the indwelling Spirit. Therefore, whoever does not honor the Spirit does not honor the Son; and “whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father” (John 5:23). Thus, it is clear that an error in one of the objects of faith is a denial of the entire Divinity. If the Spirit is a creature, then it is not God’s. But it is said: “The Spirit of God created me” (Job 33:4); and again: “God fill Blessed with the Spirit of God, wisdom and understanding” (Ex. 35, 31). To whom do you find God is closer? To the creature or to the Divine? If to a creature, then you call the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ a creature, for it is written about Him: “His ever-present power and Divinity” (Rom. 1:20). And if to the Divine, then leaving blasphemy, recognize the dignity of the Spirit. How unreasonable are you if this very word does not lead you to worthy concepts about the Spirit! Reply of the Delphic Pythia to Croesus. See: Herodotus, book. 1; Ch. 47. You might be interested in: