Epistle to Jordan about the Trisagion Song

Essay by Rev. John of Damascus’s “Epistle to Jordan on the Trisagion Song” (28 chapters) is addressed to a certain Archimandrite Jordan and is dedicated to the defense of the Trisagion Song from heretical distortions. The focus is on the controversy surrounding the unlawful addition of the phrase “crucified for us” (“crucified for us”) to the song “Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us.” St. John proves that the Trisagion hymn, in its original form, is addressed to the entire Holy Trinity - the one God in three Persons. He emphasizes that in the text from the Book of the Prophet Isaiah (Is.6:3) the word “Holy” is used three times, and the word “Lord” only once, which should be understood as an indication of the three Hypostases and the single essence of the Divine. “Holy God” is sung about the Father, “Holy Mighty” - about the Son, “Holy Immortal” - about the Holy Spirit, but each of these expressions can be equally attributed to each of the Hypostases. The addition of “crucified” leads to two heretical conclusions: either it attributes suffering to the entire Trinity (patripassianism), or, referring only to Christ, it wrongfully confuses the Divine and human natures in Him, which is the key position of Monophysitism. St. John of Damascus, relying on the Chalcedonian oros, emphasizes the unfused and inseparable union of two natures in Christ. He explains that Christ suffered not from Divinity, but from human nature, although it was the Incarnate God who suffered - one Person, and not just a man. The author emphasizes that changing liturgical texts, especially such fundamental ones as the Trisagion Hymn, leads to a distortion of dogmatic truth. The work contains the expressions “the hypostatic generation [of the Father]” (γέννημα ἐνυπόστατον) in relation to the Son and “the hypostatic procession and departure (ἐνυπόστατον ἐκπόρευμα κα πρόβλημα) from the Father” in relation to the Holy Spirit. * Title of the work in Greek: ?? ὕμνου. Blessed John the monk and presbyter's message, written to Archimandrite Jordan, about the Trisagion Song From John to the God-honored and divinely jealous Archimandrite Jordan, adorned with kirk. Such a strong attraction for you, O best of fathers, stems from me not from some unstable reason, but from divine love, which tends to never cease (1 Cor. 13:8). For we know the orthodoxy of your faith, and the right teaching of the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15), and the heat of jealousy, and the sincerity of love for God, because of which and through which you are chained to your neighbor: for that [love] is, as it were, the primary source, and the second is a symbol of the first. After all, love for one's neighbor speaks of what love for God is like. We know your longing and delight in the words of God, which is sweeter than honey for you, for you, having imagined divine beauty and soared towards it as if on wings, became an immaculate mirror of God and divine phenomena. Your beauty is a virtue, and in its truest features you have appeared as a true imprint of Divine beauty, as a prototype of all good. Therefore, when we are attracted to you, it is an attraction to virtue and God, from whom you have primacy in virtue. But alas for me, father, alas. How the enemy of the Church always tries to bring confusion into it, and worst of all, when through the pets of piety! For our most pious brother Abba Sergius, fellow citizen, confidant and friend, through his own brother the Rev. Abba Job, informed us in a letter that the most sacred Cyrus Abba Anastasius, the glorious leader of the monastery of blessed Euthymius, cited some statements of the holy fathers, allegedly relating the Trisagion hymn to the Son alone (and if we allow this, nothing will prevent the misfortune the creeping fuller's damage 1 harm everyone at once). I am surprised, very surprised, if this is so, because we know the Orthodoxy of the venerable man (I am talking about Kir Abba Anastasia), and we are not ignorant of his splendor [of life] in speech and active virtue, but we also know for certain the truthfulness of the accuser. For one who is drawn to the Lord and lives for Him would not, I think, lie and slander an innocent person distinguished by the merits of virtue. This brought considerable torment to my mind. He strongly condemned him through the mouth of the most God-fearing Abba Job, his own brother, and hurried us to make known our opinion on this matter without any delay or delay. He also wrote that he claimed that we too were inclined to such a judgment, being in agreement and like-minded with him (which I was all the more amazed at - for he, I will not deceive, presented us with the sayings, and we confirmed that they belong to the holy and chosen fathers - but did not at all agree that in them the Trisagion hymn refers to the Son alone), and that John, the much-blessed patriarch of the Holy City 2 of our Lord Jesus Christ, was a man God and the most divine, thinks the same way. That is why, as [Abba Sergius] writes, he spoke out. Therefore, we considered that it was necessary to completely clarify this matter and the opinion that we hold to your godly holiness, so that you would not have any ignorance of our [thoughts]. Because this is both familiar and pleasant to us. (2) So, we affirm that definitions and designations that occur in the proper order are the most solid. After all, Divine Scripture says that God brought all the animals to Adam to see what he would call them. And as Adam called every living soul, so was its name (Gen. 2:19). So, we see names that distinguish one species from another and proper names that distinguish one hypostasis from another, that is, definitions and laws that are still in force. I affirm that this is exactly how, definitively, the one Trinitarian Deity and Dominion was revealed to Isaiah through the seraphim and the Trisagion Hymn, as if in some kind of numerical revelation. After all, why didn’t they sing “Holy” twice, or four times, or innumerable times, and why didn’t the seraphim proclaim twice, or three times, or innumerably the Lord of hosts, the heavens and earth are filled with His glory (Isa. 6:3), but “Holy” three times: “Holy, Holy, Holy,” and “Lord” – once, if not showing that the three are holy hypostases, but one in all three Dominion, and one beginning and glory, essence and Divinity, and that three hypostases are one Holy God, Holy Father, Holy Son and Holy Holy Spirit, but one Holy One, and not three saints, one Lord, and not three Lords? For the three hypostases are God, God and God, but there is one God, and not three Gods; Holy, Holy, Holy, but one Holy One, not three Holy Ones; Lord, Lord, Lord, but one Lord, not three Lords. That is why it is added: “Fill heaven and earth with His glory,” and not theirs. Therefore, the Divinity, that is, the essence, inseparably unfolds in trinity without division, cognizable in three hypostases, and the three hypostases are united and bound into one essence, that is, the Divinity. And the Divinity is sanctified and glorified threefold: “Holy, Holy, Holy,” and the three hypostases are glorified singly: Lord of hosts, fill heaven and earth with His glory, For there is one God in three hypostases and the three are one, that is, one nature, but not one hypostasis, and each of the hypostases is glorified and holy more than once. For the Godhead, being a Trinity of hypostases, is properly and appropriately sanctified in trinity: Holy the Father, Holy the Son, Holy the Holy Spirit, the Lord of Hosts. For the Three are one God and Lord. Each of the hypostases, being one hypostasis, why should it be sanctified three times, and not once, not twice, not four times, and not innumerable times? After all, each of the hypostases of the Divinity is not a Trinity - because then the Divinity will turn out to be a nine, and not a Trinity. After all, why did they sing not the two-holy, or the four-holy, or the ten-holy hymn, but the three-holy hymn, according to the number of hypostases? For just as we speak about the hypostasis of the Father, the hypostasis of the Son, and the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit, and about the Divinity, that is, the trinitarian essence, as embracing three hypostases, and just as it is impermissible to call either the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit trinitarian, so one of the hypostases cannot be called triholy, but [should be called] Holy of the Father, Holy of the Son, To the Holy One the Holy Spirit, to the Trisagion the Trinitarian Divinity. So, if the Trisagion hymn does not mean three hypostases, then let us sing “Holy” twice and add “Lord of Hosts.” But this is impermissible, and this is not how the seraphim sang. Let us not invent unnecessary things, lest we appear wiser than the seraphim. (3) If the God-bearing fathers, whose word is law, say that the seraphim said “Holy, Holy, Holy” when singing the Son, then if they said that only the Son, then one could suspect that the Trisagion also refers only to the Son. If the Son is inseparable from the Father and from the Spirit, then the song is inseparable - for we worship the Son together with the Father and the Spirit, and we sing together and glorify together. We say that the song refers only to the Son when we mention the signs of His hypostasis, such as “Son of God,” “Word,” Wisdom and Power of God, born of the Father, incarnate, crucified in the flesh, resurrected, ascended into heaven, seated at the right hand of the Father, and the like. Therefore, just as all of these are signs of one hypostasis, which in no way can be applied to another or to the community of the Divine, so the Trisagion, being an indication of three hypostases, cannot be applied to one. After all, just as we call each hypostasis of humanity a person, and we call a city that contains many people populous, but we cannot call every person populous, so in the Trisagion we call each of the hypostases holy, and trisagion the Trinitarian Deity, but we cannot call one hypostasis trisagion. And just as when enumerating we say “one, one and one,” but we cannot say “three” about each one, so in the Trisagion; and just as we say: “lantern, torch and torch,” and collectively we call it triple radiance, but do not call each trisagion, so it is in the Trisagion. Everything that is individually, simply and abstractly said about the whole Divinity, the same is said about each of the hypostases, and the number “three times” in relation to the Holy Trinity indicates three hypostases. For the God-bearing Epiphanius beautifully and very accurately said: “Why do the seraphim not say “Holy” twice or four times, but three times, if not thereby proclaiming the number of hypostases united into one Dominion and Divinity?” 3 “Holy is God,” and the Father, from whom is the Son and the Holy Spirit, the “Holy Mighty” Son, the hypostatic power of God, the “Holy Immortal” Holy Spirit, the life-giving, as the Apostle says: the law of the Spirit of life (Rom. 8:2) - not because God the Son or the Holy Spirit is not, and not because the Father or the Holy Spirit is not strong, or the Father and the Son are not immortal, but as the Apostle said, wanting to show the hypostases: But we have one God the Father, from whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and one Holy Spirit, in whom are all things (1 Cor. 8:6), and so it is here. David also proclaimed this, saying: As a deer longs for streams of water, so does my soul long for You, O God (Ps. 41:2). And so, having spoken about the Divinity in general, he adds, wanting to designate the hypostases: “My soul thirsts for the mighty, living God,” that is, for the immortal, eternally living - for the eternally living is immortal. Having said: “My soul longs for You, O God,” he designated the one Divinity. Then, saying: “My soul thirsts for the mighty, living God,” he showed the trinity of hypostases. And again he returned to the singularity of nature: When will I come and appear before the face of God? (Ps. 42:3). (4) If anyone objects that it is often said about one hypostasis “thrice happy”, “thrice desired”, “thrice blessed”, let him know that τρεῖς (three), when written through the two-vowel ει, means a ternary number, and when through a simple iota, it is put instead of “many times”, as we say: “three people”, or: three testify: water, blood and spirit (1 John 5:8), but “three times” (τρίς) with an iota - adverbially, instead of “many times”, as in the apostle: Three times I prayed to the Lord about this (2 Cor. 12:8), instead of “many times.” You should know that the ternary number, when used in the adverbial sense, is written through a simple iota, as “once”, “twice” (δίς), “thrice” (τρίς) and “four times” (τετράκις). And in complex words, whether it means trinity or plurality, it is written through an iota: “three-named” (τρισώυμος) - having three names, “thrice desired” (τριπόθητος) - very desired, “triblessed” - many times blessed, “thrice happy” - many times happy. This is also permissible in relation to one person, much-desired, much-happy and much-blessed. And the meaning of a ternary number can only be attributed to this very number itself, just as it is impossible to call something two-named that does not have two names, and does not wear three colors - three-colored. Therefore, when we say “three-named,” we mean that what is called three-named has exactly three names. If we say “trisagion,” then this is appropriate in relation to the Holy Trinity - for She, having precisely three hypostases, each of which is holy and glorified, could quite accurately be called “trisagion.” If this is said about one hypostasis, then one might suspect that it has three holy essences or three holy hypostases - but both of these are impermissible and impious to speak about one of the hypostases of the Divine. Let us also say that the Trisagion Hymn, which reveals the three hypostases of the Divine, is absurd to attribute to one of these hypostases. After all, if it pointed to the community of essence, it could apply to each of the hypostases, but since this song indicates the number of three hypostases, it would not be appropriate to pronounce it in relation to one, so that the Holy Trinity would not turn out to be nine saints among us. For the number three, when multiplied by itself, naturally produces nine. (5) We said that he who has two names is called two-named, and three - three-named, no more and no less. So, is only the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit thrice Holy, or is only the Father, or only the Son, or only the Holy Spirit Trinitarian, so that everyone can be called thrice-holy? It won't happen! But the infinite number of times is infinite [They are holy]. The Holy Deity, as having three holy hypostases, should naturally be called the Trisagion. So it is not about one of the hypostases that the Trisagion must be sung, which points to the three hypostases of the Divine, for, speaking of the infinite Divinity, it is impossible to use a specific number, except as one in relation to the essence and trinity in relation to the hypostases. If someone asked us why during baptism we perform three immersions, what else can we say in response, except that for each of the hypostases of the Divine there is one immersion and three for the sake of the three number of hypostases, but not three immersions for each hypostasis (after all, in this way we would perform nine immersions, which is not allowed)? Therefore, at each immersion we pronounce the name of one of the hypostases. In the same way, if we are asked why “Holy” is said three times, and not twice or four times, we will answer that because of the Trinitarian nature of the Divinity. So how can we attribute the Trisagion hymn to one hypostasis? After all, we will present ourselves as liars and apostates from our own words: “Each of the hypostases of the Divine,” as the divine Basil says, “is proclaimed individually” 4 . One Father and one Holy, for there is one hypostasis, one triholy essence of the Divinity, for there are three hypostases. The Father is not thrice holy, for there is one hypostasis, the Son is not thrice holy, for there is one hypostasis, and the Holy Spirit is not thrice holy, for there is one hypostasis. The entire host of divine and divinely inspired fathers proclaimed with every breath the Holy and All-Holy Spirit. We have not yet found Him as the Trisagion in any patristic writing. This is the stupidity of the fuller, who, out of complete madness, dared, baring, as they say, his head (which serves as a sign of the shamelessness of depraved women), as if he were above the seraphim in wisdom and occult knowledge, to felt the Trisagion hymn, like some kind of unfinished canvas. For if we attribute the Trisagion hymn only to the Son, every doubt has been resolved unconditionally, and let us then, like the Maronites 5, add the crucifixion to the Trisagion. But may the merciful God not cause my lips to say this - death is better! Remove this destruction from me! Death in this cauldron! (2 Kings 4:40). (6) If someone says, as I have heard from many: “Why, when we say “glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,” do we often add “to him crucified by will and risen from the dead,” or something else of that kind, but when we say the trisagion, we do not add: “crucified for us?” - we will answer him that we must observe the customs and traditions of the church. For it is said: Do not move the old boundary that your fathers set (Prov. 22:28). And the great Basil said that “everything distinguished by antiquity is venerable” 6. So, the Church has a custom, inherited from ancient times, to say as a saying “Glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” Therefore, just as, having pronounced the utterance 7 of, say, a psalm or song, we often add the hymn of the troparion, which does not depend on the meaning of the utterance, so when we say as a utterance “glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” we add a troparion that is suitable only for the Son and is not related in meaning and content to “glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” After all, “Glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit...” has a dative case, and the chant is often genitive, accusative, nominative or vocative, and from here it is clear that the chant is not connected in meaning with “glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” And when we say only “Glory to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit” not as a saying, then in no way do we add the Cross or anything else that defines only the hypostasis of the Father, Son or Holy Spirit. “Holy God” Father, “Holy Mighty” Son, incarnate and crucified in the flesh, and risen, “Holy Immortal” – the Holy Spirit. Having named the three hypostases and wanting to show that they are one God, I, connecting, add: “Have mercy on us,” as God says, giving Moses the law: The Lord God, there is one Lord (Deut. 6:4), and the seraphim: “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts.” God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, but one God, said the God-speaking fathers, and Holy the Father, Holy the Son, Holy the Holy Spirit, but all three are one Holy; Lord, Lord and Lord, but one Lord. And what is God, God and God the Father, or God, God and God the Son, or God, God and God the Holy Spirit, or Holy, Holy, Holy, or Lord. Lord, Lord about one of the hypostases - none of our chosen fathers expressed this. For just as it is impossible to call the Trinity one hypostasis, it is not appropriate to call any of the hypostases Trinity. So, under the triblessed Proclus, according to the revelation of God, they sang the Trisagion hymn: “Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us,” when, as they say, a child was caught up into the air from the crowd of worshipers and taught this song by some angelic power, and the end of the misfortune became evidence of the divinity of the hymn 8 . Thus the divine fias of the six hundred and thirty fathers sang, leaping with the divine spirit 9 . And what is this new and empty teaching that is now confusing and disorderly shaking the people of God? (7) But someone, perhaps, will say again: why, when we say “hypostasis, hypostasis, hypostasis,” are we talking about three hypostases, but “God, God, God” – not about three Gods? To this we answer that particular properties are not generalized, but general ones, even if they are inherent in each of the particulars, are considered in a single and general way, and each hypostasis is considered separately, and they do not have one common hypostasis. Divinity, and sanctification, and Dominion, although each hypostasis participates in it, is common to the three hypostases, being one. After all, there is not one deity for the Father, another for the Son, a third for the Holy Spirit, and sanctification and dominion - but one and the same, wholly and inseparably existing in each of the hypostases, wholly Fatherly, wholly Sonular, wholly Spiritual, one of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The hypostases are not like this, but one is the Father’s, another is the Son’s, and another is the Holy Spirit. Therefore, each hypostasis in itself is called God, and the Holy One, and the Lord, and the like - and when they are counted together, then there are not three Gods, or Saints, or Lords, but three - one God, one Lord, one Holy One, because God and His Powers, the Word and the Spirit, one God, one Holy One, one Lord, and not three. But God, God and God because of the hypostatic perfection of each: the Holy One, the Holy One and the Holy One, and the Lord, the Lord and the Lord, but not three Gods, Saints or Lords. Because the Word and the Spirit are powers of the Father, but they are hypostatic powers and inseparable from Him, from Whom and in Whom They are, and to Whom They relate as a cause - for They are not separated from Him by place, nor by desire, nor by action, nor by force or authority, nor by anything that is said about God, but only by the hypostases and distinctive properties of each hypostasis. For when we are born, we are immediately rejected and separated from our fathers: this is what Gregory the Theologian means when he says: “having left, we are abandoned” 10. After all, with us the son is not the power of [his] father, or reason [logos], or wisdom, but with God both coincide - the Son and the Spirit are the Powers of the Father, just as the word and spirit are the powers of the mind, and [at the same time] perfect hypostases, as befits only the all-essential God. We are cut off by will, and by force, and by place. That is why it is said about us: such and such are people, and not “man” - but with God it is not so, but according to the above. But let us consider the sayings they cite and carry out an accurate study of them. Yes, they belong to the fathers, and we in no way deny this - but it must be proven that the holy fathers and teachers agree and do not contradict each other, much less refute or disagree 11. After all, the single power and illumination of the Spirit revealed their thoughts about faith as one and unchanging. (8) So, this is what the indwelling divine Athanasius says in his Word on the Incarnation and the Trinity: “Therefore he who was born and became man is God, and we say that he who became man for our sake is God. But not God, God and God is one of the Trinity, the Son of God and the Holy God - but not the Holy One, the Holy One and the Holy One. And not only three times Holy, but infinitely and infinitely Holy and Most Holy.” And also in another place: “We saw Him, and He had neither form nor beauty. For before he beheld Him in a Divine and glorious form, seated on a high and exalted throne, when the cherubim praised Him: Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts. And then he sees Him taking the form of a servant and becoming like men” 12. This is what they bring, and we welcome it - but let them say: did he see the Son alone sitting on the throne, or together with the Father? Alone, the one being praised, or together with the Father and the Spirit? Now, if there is only one, then let them sing the Trisagion hymn to the Son alone. If it is with the Father and the Spirit, let them understand that it is inseparable from the Trinity, the praise of one essence and Lordship, revealing three hypostases. For the seraphim sang “Holy, Holy, Holy,” and, bringing the song to the Trinity, they sing the Son, because the Son is one of the Trinity. And whoever attributes the Trisagion hymn only to the Son makes the Father and the Spirit not part of the praise, because the general embraces the particular, but the particular does not embrace the whole. For the one who said “man” designated all individual [people], and the one who said “Peter” indicated only him alone, excluding the other hypostases of humanity. (9) Again they present the words of St. Epiphany from the word about the Holy Mother of God: “Blessed One among women, who gave birth to the Word, from You incarnate, the Word - the Son of the Father, the Word - the eternal God, the Word without beginning and eternal, the Word, consubstantial with the indivisible Trinity, the Word, worshiped by the Father and the Holy Spirit, the Word, co-throne with the Father, the Word, seated on the cherubim, the Word, Whom the four-shaped animals glorify: Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord Hosts, fill heaven and earth with Your glory" 13. If His glory is different from that of the Father, then we recognize that the song belongs only to Him. If the doxology is one and common for the entire Holy Trinity, then the song is one and common. For by saying “Holy, Holy, Holy,” they glorify the Son, but not only the Son, but one of the Holy Trinity, among the Father and the Spirit. (10) Then Chrysostom, on the Blessed One 14, whose beginning: “From miracles to miracles”: “Today the King of glory is prophetically glorified on earth, and proclaims its inhabitants to be partners in the heavenly feast, in order to show that He is Lord of both earth and heaven, for both are sung accordingly. Therefore, those on high, proclaiming salvation on earth, sang: “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is filled with His glory,” while those below, celebrating the heavenly rejoicing, exclaimed: Hosanna in the highest, Hosanna to the Son of David (Matthew 21:9).” Who, being in their right mind, will say that the Son of David is excommunicated from the thrice-holy praise? For He, one of the Trinity, is glorified together with the Father and the Spirit, but the Trisagion does not refer only to Him. For the seraphim, saying “Holy, Holy, Holy,” signify not only the Father, or only the Son, or the Holy Spirit, but the Trinitarian Divinity as one triholy Lordship. This means that One and the Same One was praised in heaven with the Father and the Spirit, and the seraphim sang Him not alone, but together with the Father and the Spirit, crying: Holy, Holy, Holy. And He was sung on earth: Hosanna in the highest, Hosanna to the Son of David, almost proving with the song that He was one of the highest hypostases of the Divine, although He was called the Son of David. (11) And if the God-bearing father says that “those on high sang, proclaiming salvation on earth,” then he said it beautifully and by inspiration. After all, we know that heaven and earth are always full of Divine glory. For all the works of the Lord bless the Lord (Ps. 103:22) and proclaim His glory (Ps. 19:2). But since in heaven the angels knew the glory of the existing God, human nature, having received the earth as its inheritance, fell into error and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image similar to corruptible man, and birds, and four-footed animals (Rom. 1:23), the God-bearing father says that the earth was filled with Divine glory when the inhabitants of the earth knew it, and this - and nothing else - became their salvation. The Divine glory, of course, is the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For in this way the unfaithful Lord spoke to the Father: Father, I have finished the work that You gave Me to do... I have revealed Your name (John 17:4-6), and also: This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus, whom You have sent (John 17:3). Thus, both nature and glory are common to the three hypostases of the Godhead. (12) Also Cyril of Alexandria from the sixth word on the Holy Trinity, of which the beginning: “So, equalities”: “And the divine Isaiah says that he beheld the Son in no less glory, for he said: “I saw the Lord of hosts sitting on a throne, high and exalted, and His glory filled the whole church. The Seraphim stood around Him; each of them had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And they called to each other, and spoke of sanctification, which at the beginning is threefold, but ends in unity and one Dominion” 15. Now, he clearly says that, chanting the Lord of hosts, Who is one God, glorified in three hypostases, they sang a hymn with a trinitarian beginning, that is, first a triple hymn to the three hypostases - sanctification, ending in unity and one Dominion, that is, [according to him], the trinity of hypostases is one in essence and one Dominion expressed by the threefold sanctification. So “Holy, Holy, Holy” indicates three hypostases, and not one, and “Lord of Hosts” reveals one Deity and Dominion. (13) And also Cyril of Alexandria from the ninth word “On Worship in the Spirit”: “And the fact that the cherubim thus eternally look at the propitiation obviously shows the intense concentration and insatiability of the higher powers in contemplation of God. And the prophet Isaiah writes: “I saw the Lord of hosts sitting on a throne, high and exalted, and around Him stood the Seraphim,” and says that each had six wings: with two they covered their legs, with two they covered their head, and on two they flew.” 16 “The propitiation, therefore, is Christ, who, even having appeared in the flesh, is nevertheless God and Lord by nature and truth, and around Him the highest powers also servilely stand.” Whoever has intact powers of reason should know that the word “also” means that it was not only He who had the singing powers, and it was not He who was offered the Trisagion. For the expression, because of the conjunction “also,” refers to both the Father and the Spirit. After all, “also,” being a connecting conjunction, denotes addition. Therefore, while the singing forces undoubtedly stood around the Father, he said that the same forces also stood around Christ, Who is with the Father. If the forces singing “Holy, Holy, Holy” stand around the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then the Trisagion, which reveals three hypostases, should not be offered only to the Son. For if they had sung “Holy” once, twice or four times, while there are three hypostases, we would say that the song refers to each hypostasis separately - after all, the general applies to each of the particulars. But since the Trisagion Hymn has a proper [number] and points to three hypostases, it is not appropriate that what signifies three hypostases should be spoken of one. After all, if this were said about one, then it would no longer be an indication of three, and since this is, of course, an indicator of three hypostases, then they will not say that about one. (14) Also from the same Cyril from the fourth word to Hermias, whose beginning: “God from God”: “And even being, for whatever reason, equated with the angels, He shines on the Throne of the Father and is seated with the Father, and they stand around, not despising the measure of His slavery, and He is and is called the Lord of hosts, they magnify Him with praises of the Lordship and say that heaven and earth are full of His glory. So, to say that this One, Whom even those who possess the highest glory are so amazed at, was created—isn’t this a disease of a dull and rotten mind?” 17 Who will object that the Son is preceded by Seraphim, or that He is co-praised with the Father and the Spirit and together with Them accepts the song that He is the Holy Lord of Hosts, and that heaven and earth are full of His glory? But the one who says this does not relate the Trisagion hymn to the Son alone - as if someone sings the Twelve of the Divine Apostles, calling it the twelve-stringed lyre of the Spirit, none of the apostles will be left without honor - for each is called the string of the Spirit, but the song does not refer only to each one individually - after all, not only Peter is the twelve-stringed lyre of the Spirit, and not only Andrew, but the whole Twelver, and at least one uttered [this] song, chanting, say, Peter, it would still mean not only Peter, but would sing with him the whole host of the apostles. If anyone says: “The twelve-string lyre of the apostles, the son of Jonah of Bethsaida, who suffered martyrdom in Rome under Nero,” he will show himself to be a liar. In the same way, whoever says: “Holy, Holy, Holy, He was crucified for us,” will turn out to be a blasphemer, just as he who says: “Thrice Holy, Crucified for us.” (15) Also from the same Cyril from the fifth Word to Hermias, whose beginning: “Let it be with us”: “And around the supernatural and exalted throne stand the seraphim, praising Him and calling Him Holy and Lord of hosts, and saying that heaven and earth are full of His glory. And the One who rules everything equally is equal and equal in power to the Father, and no less glorious - for everything is full of His glory” 18. We affirm, and this is true, that the meaning of these words is the same as the previous ones. (16) Also from the above Word: “But if he were dishonored and far from worship, why do the seraphim stand around the Son seated on the throne of the Godhead, honoring Him with songs and hymns, and calling Him Lord of hosts, and saying that heaven and earth are full of His glory?” We also know this saying and agree with it, but it does not prescribe that the Son be considered thrice-holy. (17) Blessed Proclus of Constantinople from the “Sermon on the Holy Theotokos”: “He is crucified on the cross, and His throne in heaven is not empty, He is enshrined in a tomb and He stretches out the sky like a skin, He is numbered among the dead and He casts down Hell, He is slandered down as a deceiver and the mountain “Holy, Holy, Holy” is praised” 19 . In one, and two, and many old books, I saw that the most holy Proclus says “Holy” here once. But even if we admit that he wrote “Holy” three times, this has the same meaning as the previous statements, that is, that He, as one of the Holy Trinity, is glorified with the Father and the Spirit when the seraphim cry: “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts.” (18) The same Saint Proclus from the “Praise to the Holy Mother of God”, which begins: “All testimonies and celebrations”: “There is nothing in life like the Mother of God Mary. O man, mentally go around all creation, and see if there is anything greater or equal to the Holy Mother of God. Search the earth, survey the sea, explore the air, study the heavens with your mind, think about all the invisible forces and see if there is such a miracle in all creation? For the heavens preach the glory of God (Ps. 18:1), the angels serve with fear, the archangels worship trembling, the cherubim, not carried away, are terrified, the seraphim do not approach, flying around and crying out in trepidation; “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord, the earth is full of His praise” 20. It is clear that here the meaning is the same as in the previous passages - but let those who quote this saying heed and understand - and I am convinced that they will understand and be enlightened by the fullness of knowledge about this, if only the Spirit of God lives in them. (19) St. Athanasius from the “Sermon on the Incarnation and the Trinity,” whose beginning: “Those who are evil”: “And when the seraphim glorify, saying three times, “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of Hosts,” they glorify the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” 21 . (20) Saint Basil from the “Word to Amphilochius on the Holy Spirit”: “As the seraphim would say, “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord,” if they had not learned from the Spirit, how many times would it be pious to offer this praise?” 22. The Father saved us from long conversations by telling us more clearly how many times it is pious to offer this praise. For it is not pious twice or four times, but three times and once: three times “Holy” for the sake of the trinity of hypostases, but once “Lord” for the sake of the uniqueness and unity of the essence. For if only the Son, then why not “Holy” once and “Lord” once, why not twice and not four times? After all, the number “three” is not dedicated to one of the hypostases, and is no more characteristic of it than other numbers. (21) Him, Saint Basil, from the “Fourth Word against Eunomius”, which begins: “If the Son is by nature God”: “That in vision and in prophecy the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are inseparable, said the prophet Isaiah: I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and exalted, and His glory filled the whole church. Seraphim stood around Him; each of them has six wings. And a little later he says: And the Lord said to me: Tell this people: You will hear with your ears and will not understand, and with your eyes you will see and will not see. For the heart of this people has become hardened (Isa. 6:9-10) and so on. So, according to this statement and the sequence of the prophetic book, the Lord of all, the Father, appeared and spoke to the prophet. The Son of Thunder, however, whose speech is more amazing and terrible than thunder, whose own speech was the Word (John 1:1), and not “There was no Word,” 23 says that the Son appeared and spoke to the prophet. For in his essay he writes: Therefore the Jews could not believe in Jesus, because, as Isaiah also said, this people had blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so that they would not see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor should they be converted, so that I would heal them. Isaiah said this when he saw His glory (John 12:39–41). Paul declared the vision and prophecy [coming from] the Spirit, saying: Well did the Holy Spirit say to our fathers through Isaiah: You will hear with your ears and not understand, and with your eyes you will see and not see. For the heart of these people has become hardened (Acts 28:25–27). The prophet speaks on behalf of the Father, in whom the Jews believed, the evangelist speaks about the Son, and Paul speaks about the Spirit, together calling him the Lord of hosts. Their word about the hypostases is separate, but their judgment about the one God is indivisible. For the image [of existence] 24 and the expression of hypostasis are inseparably divided, which is why “Holy, Holy, Holy” is threefold, because of the trinity of hypostases, but “Lord” is once, because of the uniqueness of the Divinity.” (22) St. Gregory the Theologian from the “Word for Christmas”: “When I say “God,” I mean the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, because the Divinity [with us] does not spread beyond this number, so as not to introduce a crowd of gods, and is not limited to less, so that we are not condemned for the lack of Divinity, as Judaizers because of unity of command - or Hellenizers because of excess: for evil both there and there are the same, although they are opposites. So the Holy of Holies, hidden by the seraphim and glorified by three consecrations, converge into one Dominion and Divinity, about which someone else before us philosophized in the most beautiful and sublime way" 25 . (23) And Saint Cyril of Alexandria in the “Herald to Euthymius on the Spirit”, of which the beginning: “Good Works”: “Well, doesn’t Scripture call the words of God Himself the words of the Spirit? After all, the prophetic Isaiah, telling us about this extraordinary and most terrible vision, says: I saw the Lord sitting on a high and exalted throne. And, adding something else, he continues: And I heard the voice of the Lord of hosts, saying: Whom shall I send? and who will go for Us? And I said: here I am, send me. And He said: Go and tell this people: You will hear with your ears and not understand, and with your eyes you will see and will not see (Isa. 6:8-9). But the divine John speaks of the Only Begotten: This was said by Isaiah, who saw His glory and spoke of Him (John 12:41). The wisest Stephen said, addressing the Jews: Stiff-necked ones! people of uncircumcised heart, you always resist the Holy Spirit, just as your fathers did, so do you (Acts 7:51). Isn’t it still clear that by the otherness of its special hypostasis it is fully recognizable what is the Father, what is the Son, and what is the Spirit, and by the coincidence in natural unity of all Their presence, and speech, and participation, and action, and glory, and everything that adorns the Divine nature? 26 Well, doesn’t anyone who is at least a little familiar with dogma see clearly that the Trisagion hymn “by the otherness of its special hypostasis,” as the divine father said, shows the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and with the word “Lord” - unity of command and “coincidence in natural unity.” For the numeral “three times” is the designation of three, and one is one. Therefore, “Holy, Holy, Holy” and thrice-holy, for there are three hypostases, “Lord”, because three hypostases are one God. Three are one God, because there is one Divinity, and that which is from Him belongs to Him, and the hypostases do not go beyond His boundaries, are not composed and do not merge. (24) Saint Gregory of Nyssa from the First Discourse against Eunomius: “The same is true of the seraphim in Isaiah, by whom the mystery of the Trinity was clearly preached, when they, delighted with the beauty of each of the Holy Trinity, proclaimed in amazement the word “Holy” 27. Here the God-speaking father clearly says that with the Trisagion hymn “the mystery of the Trinity was clearly preached”: with the threefold exclamation “Holy” - the trinity of persons, with the single invocation “Lord” - the unity of nature and Dominion. (25) And the holy and wondrous Epiphanius says approximately this in the book entitled “The Anchor”: “Through the triple witness they will receive the Holy Spirit and will be clearly filled with the voice of the cherubim and seraphim, crying three times “Holy, Holy, Holy” - for the doxology in heaven is not accomplished with two exclamations. And for the fourth time these same holy, invisible and spiritual beings do not call and make a fourth proclamation. And not just one, but three exclamations in the singular: “Holy, Holy, Holy,” and not “holy, holy, holy,” so as not to represent the one with many names, but also not to hide the three-number of three. They pronounce the consecration three times, but they pronounce the word in the same way and in the singular, so as not to name polytheism” 28. This theophanized father delivered us by speaking more clearly than anyone about this matter, that the doxology in heaven is accomplished not by two or one exclamation, and not by four, but by three, and, moreover, in the singular. Why? Because the song points to three hypostases, and not to one. Therefore, just as the hymn is performed not with two or four exclamations, but with three due to the trinity of hypostases, so the Trisagion hymn, indicating three hypostases, cannot be attributed to one. So, it is impossible, as I said above, to apply a specific number to God, except one because of the unity of nature and three because of the trinity of hypostases. And the singular number is said about the three hypostases: God, God and God, but one God, and not three Gods, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, so that unity of command would not be considered polytheism, and the one and indivisible God would not be separated from His hypostatic powers. For God, and His Word, and the Holy Spirit are one God, although each is a perfect hypostasis according to the supernaturality of the Divinity: the Trinity number does not refer to one hypostasis. For each hypostasis is not trinitarian, so that the triple number shows the trinity of each hypostasis. Away, away - this is not from a pious thought, but beyond the bounds of sound mind. (26) This, O divine father, pillar and affirmation of the truth, we beg you to read to all the fathers and brethren and the entirety of the Church, and with meek words to exhort our father Cyrus Abba Anastasius, the glorious leader of the gracious monastery of our God-bearing father Euthymius, so that he ceases to insist on his own, but, together with us, following in the footsteps of the God-inspired fathers, says: “Holy God and Father, Holy Mighty Son, incarnate and crucified in the flesh for our sake, Holy Immortal Holy Spirit: only Lord of hosts, have mercy on us.” And let him not accuse either us or the Triblessed Patriarch John, as if, in our opinion, the Trisagion hymn is spoken about one of the Divine hypostases. After all, anyone who thinks or speaks like this is an accomplice of the thoughtlessness of a low fuller. Because who knows better than me the way of thinking of His Beatitude Patriarch John? Nobody. To tell the truth, he never took a single breath of faith that he did not tell me, his student, about. Why, while the sacred man was alive and could speak out, was this not said about him? At best, this is nothing more than some speculation that has no solid basis. Let them not slander the zealot who breathed the fire of Orthodoxy, the calf 29 of the glorified John, all the idle talk of a persecutor and destroyer who joined the holiest fathers of theology. But let his zeal be welcomed, and let him be praised as a most holy and illustrious [husband]. May the God of peace, the Father of Christ our God (for He is our peace), fill our hearts with the Holy Spirit to test controversial opinions, and drive away from us all evil stubbornness, pacifying the Holy Church, which His beloved Son, the Divine Jesus, acquired for Him with His honest blood. Pray for us, God-honored one, for you are honored by God. (27) We must add the following to our reasoning: at the sacred offering, during the performance of the Divine Mysteries, after the people have uttered the Trisagion hymn, the priest, as if explaining it, says: “Holy art thou, the eternal King and Lord of all holiness and Giver. Holy and only begotten is Thy Son, by whom Thou hast created all things, Holy is Thy Most Holy Spirit, who testeth all things and the depths of Thy God.” Why does he not say: “Holy, Holy, Holy to the King of the ages, Holy, Holy, Holy is Your only begotten Son,” but together with the Trinity: “Holy, Holy, Holy,” and to each of the hypostases – once “Holy”? And at the exaltation of the Eucharistic Bread we do not say “thrice Holy” or “thrice Lord,” but “One Holy, One Lord, Jesus Christ to the glory of God the Father with the Holy Spirit, to Him be glory.” (28) Since in ordinary prayers we recite the Trisagion hymn three times, it is worth considering this - that not once to the Father and not once to the Son and not once to the Holy Spirit do we offer the Trisagion hymn, but three times we present it to the whole Holy Trinity. For the seraphim always stand before God, constantly bringing the trisagion of praise, and we, since we send up the established hymn to God at certain hours, appropriately and fittingly give the trisagion three times in general to the Holy Trinity. And because of this, we prefer the triple number to others in everything, as pointing to the Holy Trinity and having received completeness and perfection from Her. For one has no quantity, two is the beginning of calculation, and three is a perfect number. The Divinity is not in the Trinity because of the number, but the number three is perfect, because the Divinity is threefold. For one, having moved from the beginning into two, stopped when it reached the trinity - for God is the beginning and cause of existence. Therefore, from the Beginning and Cause of existence, number received this power, because, just as the Father is the Parent of the Son and the Producer of the Spirit, so number, passing through the two and reaching the trinity, stops. Therefore, the singular number denotes one, the dual signifies two, and the plural signifies three, and none more exists. After all, we talk about one person “man”, about two - “[two] people”, and about three “people” 30 - and about God that there is “one hypostasis” of the Father, “two hypostases” of the Father and the Son, “three hypostases” of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, because the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinguished by hypostasis, and likewise there are three hypostatic features. Where hypostasis does not differ from hypostasis, that is, in the properties of nature, it is impossible to count God in the plural, but each hypostasis should be spoken of individually when it comes to natural properties, and, connecting, again speaking individually about these properties in general for three hypostases: God, God and God, but one God, and not three, because God and His hypostatic powers are one God. Each, since He has His own special hypostasis, is called perfect God in Himself, and since They are counted together, there are not three Gods, but one, because the Word and the Spirit are the powers of the Father. The Father is the Father, and not the Son, for He comes from no one. The Son is the Son, for He is from the Father and not the Father, so that the Father may be one. The Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit, for He comes from the Father through the Son and the Word, but not in a filial manner. For if the Son is the Son of the Father and the Spirit is the son, then He will have other sons, and so on ad infinitum. If the Spirit is the son of the Son, then He will also have a son, and he will have another, and so on ad infinitum, and there will be many gods and many lords, and a crowd of gods, and not just one God. We have one God the Father, and His Word, and His Spirit. The Word is an enhypostatic generation, therefore He is the Son, and the Spirit is an enhypostatic procession and issuance from the Father, the Son, but not from the Son, as the Spirit of the mouth of God proclaiming the word. And of course, the mouth is not a bodily organ, and the spirit is not a dissolving and spreading breath. But this requires another study. Now, having explained our subject as far as possible, let us conclude our discussion. But I know that you, filled with the Spirit, will yourselves, in a friendly manner, fill in what is lacking, praying for us unceasingly. Felting's corruption - the words “crucified for us” added to the Trisagion, introduced by the Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch Peter Knatheus (i.e., the Felting) in the middle of the 5th century. See also note. 287. This refers to John V († 735). No exact match to the quote was found. Wed. Ankorat (“Anchor”), I, 34, 21–30. Maronites are a sect named after the elder Maron (5th century). During the time of St. John of Damascus professed Monotheliteism, i.e. the doctrine of one will in Christ, condemned by the VI Ecumenical Council. Nowadays the Maronites, who make up a significant part of the Lebanese population, are in a union with Rome. Homilies on Psalms, 165 C 14 ff. What St. John calls it “speech” here, now it is customary to call it “verse.” The practice described is still widely used in worship. According to legend, under Patriarch Proclus of Constantinople (434–446), a strong earthquake occurred, during which the Trisagion was sung for the first time, and the earthquake immediately stopped. Fias - pagans have a festive procession in honor of the god Dionysus. Here in the meaning of “solemn sacred assembly.” This refers to the IV Ecumenical (Chalcedonian) Council of 451, which condemned Monophysitism. Homily 29 (“First Word of the Son”), 5. St. John implies that, along with the sayings that his opponents cite, he will put forward others in favor of his opinion. However, the task of the Orthodox theologian is to show how both can be interpreted in a consistent way. On the Incarnation and Against the Arians (PG 26, 1024 AB). PG 43, 496 C (authenticity disputed). That is, from the Word for the Week of Vai (according to the words “blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord”): PG 59, 705, the authenticity is doubtful. Conversations on the Trinity (PG 75, 1036 C). On Worship in Spirit and Truth (PG 68, 601 A and 601 D). A word on the praises of Mary (Sermo de laudibus Mariae) (РG 65, 680 sq.). An allusion to the well-known Aryan formula “it was when He (the Son) was not.” The work from which the quotation is taken belongs to Didymus the Blind (Against Eunomius, book V (PG 29, 721 B-724 A). According to the teaching of the Cappadocian Fathers, the persons of the Holy Trinity are distinguished by “the mode (or mode) of existence (τρόπος ὐπάρξεως)”, therefore with τρόπος we restore “existences”. Word 38 (PG 36, 320 BC). Conversations on the Trinity, 1093 C-1096 A. Against Eunomius I, 118 (PG 45). Ankorat, I, 17–18 (PG 43). “Taurus” is not a completely clear word, which can also be understood as a proper name. In this case, this John would have to be considered John Moschus († 619), and the author of the treatise would be Sophronius of Jerusalem, which is extremely unlikely. Therefore, apparently, it should be understood as a “sacrificial calf.” This refers to three grammatical numbers that existed in both ancient Greek and Church Slavonic: singular, plural and dual. The Russian form “(two, three, four) tables,” as opposed to “(five, etc.) tables,” etymologically goes back to the ending of the dual number.