Refutation and deposition of the wicked poetic works of John, Ignatius, Sergius and Stephen, the new opponents of Christ

The essay “Refutation and deposition of the wicked poetic works of John, Ignatius, Sergius and Stephen, the new opponents of Christ” was written by St. Theodore the Studite during his imprisonment for icon veneration in Vonita in 816-817. This work is a direct response to the efforts of iconoclasts to use not only theological reasoning, but also more accessible and influential forms of art, such as poetry, to spread their heresy. The work in its form is more like an anthology, in which the author refutes the iconoclastic verses of Patriarch John VII Grammar, Metropolitan Ignatius Deacon, and iconoclast poets Sergius and Stephen. Their epigrams are placed at the beginning and end of the work. They are followed by 10 epigrams of St. Theodore and the refutation itself (including the poem that was engraved on the Bronze Gate under Emperor Leo III). Refuting the heretical heresy, the author quotes 8 patristic passages and provides an extract from the acts of the VI Ecumenical Council. The main topics of the essay are: the Incarnation of God the Word as the main condition for the possibility of depicting Christ, the iconography of the Mother of God and the angels, the relationship between the Cross and the icon. St. Theodore shows that denying the possibility of depicting Christ is a violation of the dogma of His true Incarnation. He explains that the veneration given to an icon does not relate to the wood or paints, but to the prototype represented on it. The author shows, as iconoclastic poetry, the teaching about the nature of Christ, about His two wills and actions, and about His saving economy. He demonstrates that behind a beautiful or rhyming form there is hidden heretical content that leads to spiritual destruction. * Title of the work in Greek: ᾿Έλεγχος και ανατροπή τών ασεβών ποιημάτων. * Title of the work in Latin: Refutatio et subversio impiorum poematum. Contents of John Ignatius Sergius Stephen the Orthodox His own His own His own [On] John [On] Ignatius [On] Sergius [On] Stephen Subscription Testimony of Peter, the leader of the apostles Testimony of Saint Dionysius Testimony of Saint Athanasius Testimony of Basil the Great Testimony of Gregory the Theologian Testimony of Chrysostom Testimony of Saint Gregory of Nyssa Testimony of Saint Cyril Testimony of the Fathers of the Sixth Holy Council Subscription of the Orthodox Yamba Iconoclast John Ignatius Acrostic: Christ's suffering is the hope of John 1. God-speaking men paint Christ in gold The verb of the prophets, regardless of the earthly [phenomena of His earthly life]. For those who affirm this hope is divine faith 2. For painters of shadows, a newly emerging misconception They openly trample on what is hateful to God. Acting in accordance with them, the crowned [emperors] They joyfully raise the Cross according to a pious decision. Acrostic: Ignatian praise - think about the Cross. In order to establish worship of God in the lower 3, O Word, [Col. 437] And teach us to know You more clearly, You gave the law - to depict only the Cross, But it did not consider it worthy that through the substance of art The walls were covered with paintings, as was the case here before. And here are its [Cross] greatest lords They draw it as an image of victory. Acrostic: Sergius raised the Cross as a savior. Clearly Moses laid the foundation in the image of the [Cross], Defeating the enemy. Now the Cross is the glory of the believers, A strong flow stopped the delusions. Written here for the purpose of destroying souls in life An artificial image, like a hidden arrow, Launched by a lawless desire, it is completely destroyed. For it is common for those who know Christ to think this way. Acrostic: Stephen's praise is to think about the Cross. As a support for the faithful and a divine object of veneration, O Word, A life-giving image of suffering, You gave us the Cross for salvation. The previously drawn image is useless You destroyed it as a delusion, O Word! For this law wisely becomes everyone: What You were nailed to and [by which] You saved [us], that is to honor. On the copper gates under the Cross. So that in the form of a voiceless and breathless They depicted Christ, Emperor, who couldn’t stand it, In earthly matter, which the Scriptures despise, Leo with his son, the new Constantine 4, The Cross draws the blessed image, As the praise of the faithful, on the gates of the palace. [A poem] whose acrostic is precisely [drawn] through the middle of all the verses, but does not divide [them] into syllables. Acrostic: Placing an image of Christ is praise. Christ is glorified - together God and man, Scion of the Immaculate, the Light that enlightens the world. His inscribed image destroys delusion, Slaying the phalanxes of those who speak wickedly, That art is something that should not be revered. So let every man perish who does not wish To know Jesus in the same ways as people. Acrostic: The Mother of God deserves praise as the giver of prosperity. You give birth divinely, since you [give birth] without a seed. From You, as from a new heaven, came light, Praise of the Cherubim, a reason [that existed] before [them], [Col. 440] The diminishing night of every ancient error. You accept him into your arms and carry him completely depicted, Resplendent with divine appearance in Your image As Lord and Your true Son. Acrostic: For Theodore, it is pious to glorify Christ. God, before he [took] flesh, was in a form that cannot be depicted. Now, after [becoming] flesh, He received the mark. For the Son is Christ, Whom the venerated [Theotokos] gave birth to, Obviously, it may be in accordance with Her that we depict Who tends to see Her Son - Destroying the one who has no light in his thoughts, As an opponent of all divine men. Acrostic: The Cross will proclaim miracles to Theodore. A wonderful tree, as if connected with God, The cross of the victim [Christ] warns: “Think of me as having received the power of liberation from hell, For I abundantly shed the dew of miracles, So they will water the world with springs at once. I provide strength, and what do I not [deliver] that [pertains] to a blessed life? That their numbers are impossible to describe.” Let Christ be represented! Make no mistake, deceivers! Not according to the Divinity, but [as] one who appeared according to the flesh as a man. He must be knowable by both natures: According to the Father - indescribable, according to the Mother - we can describe. He is not deprived of any of the properties of double birth, Because He is perfect. If He is deprived of [even] just one thing, How could He be the all-perfect Word incarnate? He would be completely deprived if He were not describable, Not just something small, but the whole of nature, Since in a person, the appearance of the external image comes first 5. Whom [the image of Christ], slandering and destroying as an error, Together you slander and destroy Christ, understand [this]. When Christ is depicted, the delusion of idols disappears. The sword of it [delusion] fell as soon as The image of light dispersed the darkness, [Col. 441] Carrying a sword on his head, marked with a cross 6. For with it [the cross] the King of all destroyed the power of the ruler of darkness, Taking us out of the underworld, Setting it on high, bestowing heavenly glory. Acrostic: Praise to the Mother of God. God appeared in the flesh, therefore we can be depicted [as] flesh. He who was visible in matter also wants to appear in matter. For a song of praise is composed by everyone who [only] can see Him. Who the Savior is can be seen here. He who, like God, is far from the sight of the Cherubim, He bears the image of a servant, having humbled Himself 7. Oh, miracle! How is He present, depicted? Acrostic: Iambic outpouring. This is where Christ is depicted. [As] a man, [He] is visible; for although He is the Almighty, He is not deprived of anything [that is characteristic of] people: this is in no way Should not serve as food for the blasphemous mind. So, so that everyone may know that He is a man and not incorporeal, He is a wonderful witness for Himself, When [it is] depicted obviously, being similar to us. Christ is depicted as flesh, although He is the Word. Every godly person will say this with an all-wise mind. For He came wearing human form, Destroying with divine power Every shadow that misleads people. Doing what is right, the Scepter finally Destroyed the deceptive seductions here. Christ depicted here shines again, - Of course, not in opposition to the image of the Cross, For He always wears it [the Cross] on His head, But driving away the heresy that misleads the people, Which in a word, as if by the sword of Divine judgment, The mighty Lord destroyed, killed. 1. God-speaking men, O most noble man, portray Christ with words. Meanwhile, you, the arrogant one, understood this as the construction of the golden image (τὸ χρυσογραφεῖν). In fact, [they depicted] Him not just “according to the prophetic word,” but also perceiving Him with their own vision (α ὐ το ψ ία). [Col. 444] For, [the apostle] says, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at, and what our hands have touched, concerning the Word of life (1 John 1:1). And [they did not portray] that they did not look at earthly events, but turned the eye of the mind to the objects before them: sometimes they saw Him laid in a manger (Luke 2:7), sometimes carried in His mother’s arms, sometimes sitting at a source (John 4:6), sometimes walking on the sea (John 6:19), sometimes - going down to Capernaum (John 2:12), sometimes - going up a mountain (Matthew 5:1). And should we list the countless [events of the Savior’s earthly life], which can be seen in many ways, and not exclusively the phenomena of the heavenly world (τοῖς ἄ νω)? Thus, your assumption is false in both respects. Acting in accordance with them, the crowned [emperors]... 2. Since absurdities are usually followed by absurdities, then [with you] one series of absurdities is followed by another. So, what kind of shadow painters are you talking about (σκιογράφοι) or - obviously - about painters (ζωγράφοι)? What kind of renewed error is it about, if not about the obvious portrayal of Christ? O tongue of the enemy of Christ! So, in what form is error renewed? [Obviously], as similar [in your opinion] to the arrangement of idols. So, we returned to the former, when the Lord did not yet possess us (Rom. 15:12) and there was no appearance of the Trinity, and therefore Christ before the incarnation could be depicted [as] an idol. So, the Jews have won, but those who bear the name of Christ have gone astray, and [they] should [again] Judaize. Heaven was horrified at this and trembled greatly, says the Lord (Jer. 2:12), because John committed two evil deeds: he called Christ an idol and lied that He hated Himself. For he says: “hateful to God.” But this is not so, insulter of Christ! For truth is not error, and service to idols has not been restored from the fact that Christ is seen in an image similar to us [which, on the contrary, is] Christianity, which allows the image of Christ and the worship of [Him]. For this reason He was visible, so that He could be depicted, so that those who were accustomed to worshiping idols could worship Christ depicted in human form. And when God the Lord appeared to us (Ps. 118:27), then idolatry ceased. And [it resumes then] when we are on the eve of the coming of the Antichrist, of whom you are obviously the forerunner, convincing the people that they are in error, so that, thus, the man of sin, the son of destruction, will be revealed, opposing and exalting himself above everything that is called God or that is holy (2 Thess. 2: 3-4). For if the image had not been despised, the prototype would not have been rejected. Pay attention to yourself, dear one, because your [teaching] is a renewed error, which began from an ancient false assembly, then ceased and again began to swirl like a dirty stream. 3. But [when John] says that [the veneration of icons] is “hateful to God,” he utters a voice from the earth, from the mouth of the devil he says [this]. No, this is not hateful to God, madman, but it is very pleasant. For how could He hate the being that He became? After all, a person, among his and not properties, first of all has the ability to be depicted. [Col. 445] What cannot be depicted is not a person, but a miscarriage. 4. Do you notice that in your idle talk you agree that there is a Christ who, out of His highest goodness, deigned to become a man truly, in all respects? How then could like be purified by like, 8 as the theologian beautifully says, if He were not depicted like us? It remains [to admit] that you contradict the Theologian, [asserting] that the unlike is purified by the unlike. How can one believe that He took flesh from the Holy Virgin if He cannot be depicted in the same way as us? For it is absolutely necessary [to recognize] that as the one who gives birth is, so is the thing that is born, since every son is the image of the one who gave birth, and the one who is born is not deprived of anything that is inherent in the nature of the Mother. This is one and the most important thing that is inherent in [Mother], there is an image of a bodily form. Therefore, if [Christ] could not be depicted, then He, obviously, would have received a body not from Her, but alien; and [in this case] look for what kind of body it is - either heavenly, as Valentinus says 9, or angelic; and this body has no quantity or quality, [it] cannot be touched and [it] cannot be touched, without food and sleep. This and much more must happen in a body that does not tend to be depicted. From here [it would turn out] that the Redeemer did not give the ransom of death for us, as the divine Basil says, did not destroy the kingdom of death through Himself 10 . For if there had been another body over which death reigned, and another [body] that was accepted by the Lord (and how could it not have been different if it could not be depicted like us?), then death would not have ceased to do what is characteristic of it, the suffering of the God-bearing flesh would not have served for our benefit, 11 He would not have killed sin in the flesh, and those who died in Adam would not have come to life in Christ; what had fallen would not have been restored, what had been cast down would not have been raised up, what had been alienated from Him by the deception of the serpent would not have been appropriated to God. All this is destroyed by those who say that Christ came having an indescribable body, or a heavenly body, for [both of them] equally look upon [the appearance of Christ in the flesh] as a myth. So, please refrain from error, O man, and learn that, since Christ became truly man, He, [as] the God-speaking [men] preach, can be depicted both in words and in painting. When, says [St. Basil the Great], some glorify [Christ] in words, others inscribe [Him] on boards, and both lead to the same thing - to the truth. What the word of narration conveys through hearing, painting silently shows through imitation, [as] the same God-bearing [father] said 12. And in another place he again proclaims: “Let the leader of the competition be depicted in the picture - Christ” 13; when His image is revered, and He Himself is revered; and when it is not revered, He Himself is not revered. For the honor of the image, he says, goes back to the prototype 14; therefore, [goes back to him] and dishonor. So, look who [the holy fathers] are trampling on. [Col. 448] 5. What are you saying? Is the cross glorified when Christ is dishonored? Does not the glory of the Cross come from the veneration of Christ? How is it that when His image is trampled upon, the Cross is exalted? Is it not rather that the Cross along with Him is trampled underfoot, although it seems to you that it is being raised to a height? Why are you trying to show that the scepter opposes the King of all? Why do you show divine honor to the lesser, and humiliate the greater? Mad and blind! What is greater: gold, or the church consecrating gold? (Matthew 23:17). The same, no doubt, can be heard regarding those who apparently revere the image of the Cross, but dishonor the image of Christ. That's it 15. In order to establish the worship of God in the lower ones, O Word, You have given the law - to depict only the Cross... 6. Where did you, eternal idle talker, [get] that the Word, in order to establish the worship of God in people and teach a clearer knowledge of Himself, gave the law to depict only the Cross? We have not heard this before today; but [they heard] that the grace of God had appeared, bringing salvation to all men, teaching us that, having rejected ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live chastely, righteously and godly in this present age, looking forward to the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us, to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify for Himself a special people, zealous of good works ( Titus 2:11–14). So, the Word gave Himself, by the good pleasure of the Father and with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, not to judge the world, but to save the world, as He Himself said (John 12:47). And He also gave His own body, as [He Himself] again says: The bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world (John 6:51). Communion of the Divine Mysteries is worship of God in its first meaning, the clearest knowledge and law, since we are commanded by the Divine commandment to do this in His remembrance (Luke 22:19). If [we honor] the Cross, then we [act] well and completely naturally, but we honor it differently and differently. In the same way, we honor the spear, and nails, and something else, if it was related to life-giving suffering. And one is the victim, and the other is the instrument of suffering; one is sacred and divine (τὸ ἅγιον καὶ θεῖον), and the other is sanctified and deified (τὰ ἁγιασθέντα καὶ θεωθέντα). Look what a difference (διαφορότης). So, how do you, having left what is written, affirm what is not written? How did you, in asserting [this], leave the main thing unattended and bring the lesser things forward? How, then, did you, insisting that only this one [cross] can be depicted, prove [that this is committed] by divine law? This is ignorance, this is willful unreason! Such is a lie that has neither light nor evidence of truth. But consideration must be taken again. [Col. 449] 7. So, do you see how [this] noble by birth again reveals [his thought] with importance and illogically, as if composing a speech for those who do not listen with ears? Why then does that which the Word considers unworthy in Himself 16 consider worthy so that on the Cross it could serve for His own veneration and greater knowledge - as if He had not become a man? His [Word] actually became flesh (John 1:14), which, like all human flesh, is conveniently depicted, obviously through a substance artificially processed 17. Such an image is called artificial, whether it is visible on a wall, or on a board, or on any substance at all, like the image of the Cross. And why do you speak of painting on the walls as strong [evidence] when it is not suitable for defending [your opinion]? But maybe because painting is not revered. How then in the Cross can it serve to honor Him [Christ] and to know Him? For what is such (that is, very honorable and decent), is rather pleasing to Him, and not hateful. After all, the artist would prefer to receive fame rather for himself than for his own tool; Likewise, every lover of spectacle would rather see a skillful image than an instrument through which a good work of art is [achieved]. If something is incorporeal, then it is therefore indescribable; if it has a body, then how is it at the same time indescribable - this is impossible for anyone who understands to understand 18 . Do you not hear God saying to the prophet: take yourself a new great scroll and write in it with the writing of men (Is. 8:1)? For what reason? Because when the Only Begotten Son of God became incarnate, then, precisely then, the need for Him in human writing (γραφὶς) appeared, and [He is portrayed] like us, so that we would know that He, being indescribable together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, for our sake and like us becomes visible and described, as the choir of the holy [fathers] proclaims. Every time you have to take an instrument with which to write, this is evidence 19 of describability (περιγραφῆς), and describability is evidence of depictability (ἐξεικονίσεως). What does the image of the Cross mean? Isn't it the Life-Giving Tree? What [means] this [last], if not that the Word was put to death in him according to the flesh? So, how is it that the instrument of death is describable, but the thing killed is indescribable? [This] is completely incongruous and inconsistent with the reason of nature. Or in the same way the opposite may be true: the indescribable could kill the describable, or the incorporeal - having a body; for everything that has a body is describable. Even those who draw [fabulous] half-goats, half-deer (τοὺς τραγέλαφους) could not do this. Did not [Christ], pierced by a spear, shed blood and water (John 19:34)? Did He not betray the spirit by bowing His head (John 19:30)? Was He not buried wrapped in a shroud of spices (John 19:40)? Isn't this subject to feelings? Isn't everything that can be sensed describable? Is He who endured this, just as we endure, indescribable? So, the One who recognized it as worthy to endure this (I am already omitting what happened at birth, what [happened] later, about dishonor and insults, about censures, betrayals, about binding and ridicule, about scourgings, about blows on the cheeks, about spitting on for the salvation of the world) 20 , does not consider it worthy to be depicted, whereas He clearly does this very thing before our eyes - [Col. 452] more clearly than could be shown in words? For what reason, my dear, [was] the recognition [of the images] unworthy? [You] should also add that He suffered involuntarily. For anyone who has suffered in this way considers it an insult when someone talks about the event and [depicts] it. But He suffered, of course, voluntarily; therefore, He would, on the contrary, consider it an insult to Himself if [the event] were not spoken about and [it] was not depicted, since there is no one who would not want his own suffering, [committed] for the sake of love for his neighbor, not to be reminded in word and image - may he have the most unfading glory possible. 8. Do you see, most foolish and foolish one, that you find yourself accusing God? By what Christ is glorified, you declared Him unworthy and, therefore, [recognized] that He suffered involuntarily. What have you swallowed and from what filthy swamp of wickedness have you vomited these effluents? Oh, [what] a stench! I ask again: how is the Indescribable visible? Or how does the Word, made man, have such a nature that it cannot be represented by bodily appearance? The matter is similar to a riddle, just as if someone were to assume that there is a certain person who is in every way similar to all people in nature and reality, but that neither the possession of a body, nor visibility, nor tangibility are characteristic of him? [It is also unusual for him] to neither eat, nor drink, nor sleep, nor walk, nor talk, nor was He actually crucified, died, or buried; only, as a man, he had a natural [human] image. What then? Isn't this funny and fabulous? And even more so, or equally, it is ridiculous and fabulous in relation to the Word incarnate and recognized in everything as similar to us, to say everything previously said in a negative sense and only insist that He cannot be depicted. Just as there the indescribability introduces an affirmative [meaning] into everything that was denied, so in Christ the indescribability destroys by negation everything that was affirmed in relation to Him; and thus [are] docetism and imagination, and from here again Marcion, and Manes, and Valentinus 21 and Ignatius 22 who belongs to the same group rise. Defeating the enemy. Now the Cross is the glory of believers, 1. It seems to me, noble man, that you, having begun [to walk] on an even path, have deviated [then] into the abyss of destruction (cf. Is. 14:23). So, what does Moses seem to you, if not the image of Christ (τύπος τοῦ Χριστοῦ), when in the form of a cross (ἐν τύπῳ τοῦ σταυροῦ), represented by stretching out his hands, he destroyed Amalek ( Ex.17:11–13)? So, how, having accepted images there, here in relation to the prototypes you slyly separated one from the other, putting forward only the cross, but keeping silent about the Crucified One? Is food glorified by the ax without cutting it? ( Is.10:15 ) – [one can] say along with the prophet; or will the instrument act by itself, without a master to act? So, it was not the cross itself that destroyed error, but the crucified Christ, as it is written: [Col. 453] having taken away the power of the principalities and powers, he powerfully subjected them to shame, having triumphed over them with himself (Col. 2:15). Do you understand what the words [of Scripture] say? And why did you show madness in your saying? What cross are you talking about or what error? I see clearly that you are talking about the image of the Cross and the icon of Christ; then you called the image by the name of the prototype (τύπον τοῦ πρωτοτύπου) - a cross, as it is usually called, just like any image (παράγωγον) [is called by the name of its prototype]; about Christ, for His image is called by the same name, you said that He is a strong stream of error, stopped by the Cross. (Oh, madness, worse than Jewish insolence! If they said that He had a demon and called Him a Samaritan (John 8:48), then they turned out to be less insolent. So, the weapon [turned out] to be murderous for [the] warrior himself; Christ was divided with Himself (cf. 1 Cor. 1:13), killed by his own weapon. Oh, who can endure such blasphemy? [Will you say] that the Christian people were carried away towards Hellenic polytheism, abandoning the service of the Trinity? 23 Why did they deny Christ, who became man? Tell us, dear one, who are lost and who are renounced, so that, having learned what destruction [lies in], we may be convinced by your speech. If no one has experienced any of this, looking at the depicted Christ, but, on the contrary, has become even more confirmed in faith in Him together with the Father the Holy Spirit, knowing the dogma of theology, confessing the sacrament of the Economy 24, since the confession of this [sacrament] consists in nothing other than contemplating the depicted Christ, for this strengthens [in the faith] that He truly became a man, then explore and see that you are a strong source of error, not stopped, but, on the contrary, again recently flowing abundantly from the sea of ​​ancient wickedness, as a result of which the coming of Christ [becomes] doubtful and the people find themselves in the confusion of unbelief. What can't you believe from here? Will not sacred churches be recognized as idolatrous churches? Will not the divine belongings of the church [be considered] profaned? Will not the God-bearing [fathers] be considered as having fallen into error? And what generally could not be said that is impious and full of godlessness, from where [comes] the collapse of many in faith and the death of the soul? However, let's move on to what follows in order. 10. What are you saying, impudent one, [calling] the saving likeness (ὁ μοίωμα) of Christ destructive for souls in life? [You call] the arrow of a lawless attack that which destroys error, since from the [time] when he began to look at it [that is, at the likeness of Christ] with faith, he who is bitten by spiritual serpents, the image visible in ancient times (Num. 21:9), drives away the deadly poison of the serpent. When the Word had no flesh, It saved and did not destroy. And now, when It has taken on flesh in an image that is unchanged in comparison with us, 25 does His image not only not save, but also destroy the world? Hear, O heaven, and teach, O earth, that the Lord said: Sons have begotten and exalted, but they have rejected Me. The ox knew the man who had acquired it, and the donkey knew his master's manger (Is. 1:2-3), but Sergius did not know Me; one might add: “And he cruelly insulted Me.” The most pernicious, lawless and Christ-hating man! Are you against Christ, are you against the image of Christ, which even the angels reverence, which even the demons tremble? For whose name is written on it? Is it Kronos or Zeus, Ares 26 or Aphrodite 27, whose invocation is deception and whose image (ἀπ αγωγ ὴ) is atheism? If Jesus Christ [is depicted], and no one can call Jesus Lord except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3), as the words of Scripture say, then look that you blasphemed, like the Jews, not only against Christ, but also against the Holy Spirit, calling the name of Jesus Christ depicted and spoken in the Holy Spirit destroying souls in life. O tongue that speaketh wickedness! Oh, lips that speak lies against the height (cf. Ps. 72:8) of God! Does the apostle say that an idol is something, or does something sacrificed to idols mean something? No, but that the pagans, when they sacrifice, offer to demons, and not to God (1 Cor. 10:19-20). We have one God, revered and worshiped in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. We know that the Son of God, having truly become man, acted in everything like us. And since every person can be depicted, then Christ also has this [property], and we have a pictorial image, a sacred light, a saving memory, when we see Him born, baptized, performing miracles, crucified, buried, resurrected, ascending into heaven, in which we cannot be deceived as if this is not so, since vision coincides with the contemplation of the mind and through both we are confirmed in faith in the sacrament House-building with all benefit and with the deepest tenderness. But you, by destroying all this and contrasting the image of the Cross for the sake of contradiction, introduced the greatest error. I ask [you]: for what reason do you depict the cross, but the Crucified One is not depicted with it? In any case, you will answer: [not depicted] as having no nature that could be depicted. But I will ask: so, if He does not have a nature that could be depicted, much less did He [have the opportunity] to suffer, and everyone who has a mind will agree [with me]. How? [It is known] that the Angel, being incorporeal and impassive, could be depicted in our likeness, depicted by Moses by Divine command (Ex. 25:18–20). He who could not be depicted obviously did not suffer. From what you say and do, it turns out that the true sacrament of the Economy is a fantasy, 28 and this is a delusion. You, deceiver, call yourself a delusion, a teaching that destroys souls in life, and a lawless arrow shot from the bow of atheism. [Col. 457] 11. Does the blinded by the mind understand what he is saying? For, as far as [can be seen] from what was said before, the insult that he invented in relation to the image of Christ, he naturally directed against Christ Himself, although he did not think about it. Having said nothing about Christ in the previous one, but having insulted His image, he immediately adds: “... it is common for those who know Christ to think this way.” How else can [anyone] listening understand [this] if not as was said before? If he says that the Cross stopped error, then this is not only untrue, but also ungodly, for Christ is not the cross. 12. Everyone knows that the Word gave us the cross for salvation, as a support for believers and a divine object of veneration; but he is not a life-giving image (τύπος) of suffering, idle talker! For how can Christ be depicted in the form of a cross (ἐν τῷ σταυρικῷ σχήματι) [at that moment] when He is seized, bound, struck, spat on, crucified, pierced by a spear, or [when] He suffers something else? Never, in any way! The cross symbolizes (σημαίνει) Christ, and does not depict (οὐ τυποῖ). Therefore, in Divine Scripture it is also called a sign (σημεῖον). For, says Scripture, Moses placed the serpent on the banner (Num. 21:9), that is, on the cross. So, one is a sign, and the other is an image (τύπος), as, for example, the eastern [or morning] star foretells the day, while the sun itself forms, or shows, the day. Just as Christ is signified in the Cross, so He is depicted in the icon 29 . For in the image the prototype appears, as the divine Dionysius says 30; both he and other fathers use image (ἡ εἰκών) and image (ὁ τύπος) in parallel [synonymously]. This is a life-giving image of suffering, precisely the image (εἰκών) of Christ, which you, wanting to hide, opened against your will. The image of the cross is their sign [or symbol] (ἡ σημασία); So, if a symbol (ἡ σημασία) is the support of believers and an object of veneration, then even more so is figurative iconography (ἐκτυπωτικὴ εἰκονουργία) 31 . This is the right word of truth, and not as your false speech has determined. 13. Worthless is what is counterfeit, not what is true; that which exists contrary to nature, and not that which is in accordance with nature. Therefore, if the image of the Word had existed before the Incarnation, it would have been not only bad, but also very absurd, to presuppose flesh in the unincarnate Word and represent the image of a man similar to no one, similar to all [people]. In relation to this, the Lord said: to whose likeness shall you liken Me (Is. 40:18). And this is idolatry, and by Him [that is, the Word], it is obvious that it is destroyed. But since [this takes place] after the Incarnation, then you, a fighter against God, are both worthless and a deceiver, [Col. 460] and a man who destroys His image drawn for the salvation of the world, although you draw a cross. [Directing your speech] against this [that is, the image], you are trying to show as the opposite something that [in fact] agrees with each other, since on the icon of Christ you can see the cross depicted. For otherwise he would not “truly exist and be called the Super-Divine Man” 32, being visible in an image similar to ours. He would not have a body subject to touch and color, which is characterized by quality and quantity, from which position in space and extension in time follow. Is it not these properties of describability that even those who can only think a little understand? So, how is it that one gifted with these [properties] is indescribable? How can one who was in the likeness of men not be depicted in the likeness of men? How could one who became like a man in appearance (cf. Phil. 2:7) be without form? What foolishness and dispute about clear [subjects] is this! [This is similar] to someone who, when the sun has risen, insists that [it is] night. Doesn't the line [originate] from a point? Isn’t it a figure made of lines, first a triangular one, and then other figures of a different shape? Is it not that a face is formed from various figures, and what is depicted is recognized as a person, just as it appears in the inspired Scripture? Doesn't Christ have an image? The Apostle exclaims that He took the form of a servant (Phil. 2:7), and you point out that He has no image. [The Apostle says] that [Christ] became in appearance as a man (Phil. 2:7), but you [represent Him] as having no form. [According to the apostle], Christ was in human likeness (Phil. 2:7), but you [consider Him] unlike [other people]. O, full of all deceit and all evil, son of the devil, enemy of all truth! will you stop turning aside from the straight paths of the Lord? (Acts 13:10). And this is not from me. Paul will proclaim this to you, the new Elymas. And especially understand, you who are mistaken, 33 that the properties of the same nature have the same meaning and are connected with each other; and when one exists, the rest are necessarily present together, just as if [one] is destroyed, all are destroyed along with it. These are also the properties of the Divine nature, for example, incorporeality, invisibility, immensity, indescribability, immutability, dispassion and all others. So, if one of these [properties] were to accidentally be accidentally eliminated or changed, for example, immensity, and would say that the Divinity can be embraced, then list all the [properties] that belong to it [the Divine nature], then immediately, with a change in one [property], all [properties] belonging to the same category would also change. And successively we will have to call it [that is, the Divine nature] both comprehendible and having a body, and visible, and describable, and changeable, and subject to suffering; and it is impossible, as previously said, that with the change or elimination of one [property], all [the others] should not also change or be destroyed. The same talk [should be] about the humanity of Christ. So, the properties of it [that is, humanity] are corporeality, visibility, describability, changeability, the ability to suffer, and all the others along with them, which are found in every person. Consequently, you have changed or completely destroyed one [property] of those named, namely describability. And then Christ would be, according to humanity, both indescribable and incorporeal, and invisible, and immense, and unchangeable, and not subject to suffering; and, of necessity, nothing of what has been said will remain due to the destruction of one [property] for the sake of your pitiful, wicked words and your buildings of sand. 14. Here again the empty talker turns out to be mad. [This] is the same as if we said: “The king saved the city by plunging a spear into such and such,” and the idle talker [added to this] that [we should] honor the spear, leaving the king aside. One should say: “[The cross] to which You were nailed, after You [should] be venerated first as the Savior, and then the cross through which salvation [was accomplished." Out of extreme blindness, he deified one thing, but kept silent about the other and insulted [thus] the Supreme Being by blaspheming His image. Oh, a terrible sight and cruel - the news and Stephen is fighting against Christ. On earthly matter, which the Scriptures despise, - Leo with his son, the new Konstantin, The Cross draws the blessed image 15. Fool, says the Scripture, the fool will speak, and his heart will understand in vain (Is. 32:6). However, it should be asked: for what reason, the author of lies, does the emperor not tolerate Christ to be depicted in a voiceless and breathless form? Is it not because after the destruction of this type [of Christ], the image of the Cross drawn on him has a voice and breath? Of course, no way. Or is it because someone's image has a voice and breath, but the image of Christ does not? But it is quite obvious that every artificial image (πᾶσα τεχνητὴ εἰκὼν) is devoid of voice and breath; otherwise it would not be a likeness (παράγωγον), but a prototype (πρωτότυπος) and a natural likeness (εἰκών φυσική), as everyone has a likeness in relation to his father. So, how is it that what is in every image of a person, [the emperor] does not tolerate seeing in the image of Christ, who is similar to all people in everything and likewise took part with us in flesh and blood, as it is written (Heb. 2:14)? If he does not believe what is written, then he will want to contemplate Christ who lived [on earth], bloodless and incorporeal, obviously in accordance with the way of thinking of the Manichaeans 34 . If he believes what he confesses, then he must also endure the fact that Christ is portrayed like all people, to whom He was likened in everything except sin (Heb. 4:15), so that the denial of [Christ’s] describability does not expose in him the denial of the true incarnation. In any case, the image of Christ is not [an image] of an invisible soul, much less [not an image] of a deity, but an outline (χαρακτ ὴ ρ) of the Ero body, like that of every person. His holy body became lifeless and voiceless on the cross, which is why the divine Gregory of Armenia called it a dead image (νεκρ ὰ είκών). Therefore, naturally, Christ is depicted as silent and devoid of breath: like [is depicted] like. And you, of course, acted absurdly, [so] idle talk. But let's return to consideration again. [Col. 464] On earthly matter, which the Scriptures despise... 16. With pleasure I would inquire of him: is not the image of the cross inscribed on earthly matter, rejected by the Scriptures? How does the Lord suffer dishonor in this [image]? For instead of [the image of] Christ, a cross was inscribed on Him. Consequently, He contradicts Himself and, while enduring [in one case], does not endure [in another]. Do you see, reasonable man, that these empty speeches are [directed] against Christ? What then? Isn’t it from the mixture of Adam that the God-bearing flesh and together the earthly Adam are formed, and isn’t all human flesh an earthly substance? And is there not something earthly in you? And not in general every substance is rejected by the Scriptures, an empty person, but [only] the one who has accepted this [rejection] 35. For many of the divine accessories of the church are images (γραφίδες) on the substance, and yet they are in no case rejected [by Scripture]. But, obviously, your whole goal [is] to call the image of Christ an idol, thinking to follow [in this case] these words of the apostle: You know that when you were pagans, you went to silent idols, as if they were leading you (1 Cor. 12:2) and from here to show that Christians perish like pagans, after there is no longer an idol in the world, according to the word of the apostle; after the blessed name [Christ] has been named throughout the entire earth; after one Lord is confessed, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5); after [performing] a pure sacrifice, the opposite of the sacrifices of idols; after the image of Christ has been imprinted in all almost sacred churches from east to west; after so many sacred Councils, which had before their eyes the depicted Christ; after we are on the eve of the coming of Christ. You see that [your] error is worse than all the heresies that occurred after Christ, since not one of them tried to openly reject Christ, but here it is. Doesn't he who rejects the image of the cross reject [the cross itself]? Yes, sure. And he who rejects the image of Christ, in any case, rejected Christ [Himself]. For if you agree that the first is true, then how can the second be [not true]? Why do you confuse what cannot be mixed, demonically attributing what was said about idols to the image of Christ? Does what the law says, does it say to those who are not in the law? Doesn’t he express what the apostle accuses of those who once lived like pagans? Don’t you hear Saint Athanasius, who says: “Believers do not worship icons like gods, like pagans (οἱ Ἕ λληνες) - let it not be! But [they worship] only the image, revealing [this] the feeling of their love for the image of the face of the icon” 36. Hence, often, when the image (χαρακτ ὴ ρ) has been erased, we burn the icon like a tree, henceforth useless. The pagans recognize wood itself by nature, and gold and silver with inscribed human figures as their gods. These are the idols for which the prophet and apostle reproach; and they do not see, although they have eyes; [Col. 465] and are voiceless and dumb, although they have mouths; and if anything else can be seen in them, it is ineffective. Stop blaspheming like Jews from now on, friend! 17. “Following the apostolic and paternal teaching and obeying the legitimation of the Church, accepting the six holy and Ecumenical Councils and the Council solemnly assembled in the Blachernae Church, [and the council] assembled for the establishment of it [that is, the Blachernae Council], and following the Orthodox dogmas set forth by them and remaining [in them], rejecting those [dogmas] that they rejected, the same ones that they taught, accepting, and rejecting all arrangement of icons and worship [of them], rejecting the meeting chaired by Tarasius 37, and anathematizing those who do not hold such an opinion - [all this] I signed with my own hand” 38 . 18. Every newly emerging heresy thinks that it rejects the heresies that existed before it, but accepts the apostolic and patristic teachings and follows the former holy Councils. Tested by the word of truth, she is exposed [as] being in the opposite state. The real [heresy] is the same thing, as the following speech will show, with God’s help. But first we should ask about this: how, noble man, rejecting all construction of images and worship [of them], do you say that you follow [in this] apostolic and paternal teaching? The Apostle says this way: The Law, having a shadow of future goods, and not the very image of things (Heb. 10:1), explaining that the shadow is the Old Testament, the image is the New Testament, and the “things” are future goods. Gregory the Theologian, in agreement with the Apostle, said that the Law is an image of the image (τύπον τύπου) of Grace 39 . And often these names are used in parallel 40. It is obvious that both the image (εἰκών) is called the image (τύπος), and the shadow (σκιὰ) [is called] the image (τύπος). Look, it says, do everything according to the image shown to you on the mountain (Heb. 8:5). Then, according to the image of the true (Heb. 9:24) 41, the same apostle calls that which pertains to the Law, so that the shadow, and the image, and the likeness (ἀντίτυπος) are one and the same. And the wise Dionysius, in turn, in one place says this: “He called everything sacredly performed in accordance with the Law by the image of the image shown to him on Mount Sinai.” And together with David [one can] say: “[As] in the image, we pass through in this life” 43 (Ps. 39:7). And again, together with Dionysius, [one can] say: “By sensory images we are raised, as far as possible, to divine contemplations” 44. He calls the holy altar an image (ε ἰ κών); image [called] (ε ἰ κών) divine ointment. The image is also an image of the cross 45. He also calls [image] those who live in such a way that in the quality of their life they are similar to the One [Col. 467] Who imprints [them] with the cross-shaped image of His sinlessness; He also calls priestly decorations images. Images [also calls] everything that is visible in a mysterious sacred rite. What then? Isn’t all this arranging images and honoring them? That's right. In what you reject, you have obviously rejected not just the apostolic and patristic teaching, but also the New Testament. If [you rejected] the First Testament, then, obviously, you also [rejected] the Old Testament. I see that you have rejected both yourself and the Angels. Man is the image of God by possible imitation of the Inimitable 46, since Scripture says: in the image of God I created man (Gen. 9:6). And the Angel is the image of God, [as] the divine Dionysius says 47. Therefore, you must allow the creation of images and the worship of [them] in relation to both, even if you did not want to. And indeed, worship is given to both the Angel and the person. Therefore, it seems that you have rejected both earthly and heavenly things. For you did not separate this [image] from that, the picturesque from the natural, rejecting, as you said earlier, all general creation of images and worship [of them], not allowing anything in particular [to be worshiped] except the Holy Trinity. For She alone is not the creation of images, because She is not a creation, but not created; and otherwise, undoubtedly, your proposal cannot be understood. But let's move on to the present again. “Following the apostolic and paternal teaching, rejecting all construction of icons and worship [of them] ...” Testimony of Peter, the leader of the apostles 19. “Bring an icon of our Lord Jesus Christ and imprint it on a small eminence, so that the nations can see what form the Son of God took on” 48. Testimony of Saint Dionysius 20. “The Humane Perfection, with 49 sensual images, inscribed higher heavenly thoughts in the composition of the words [of the Holy Scriptures] depicting sacred objects” 50. Testimony of Saint Athanasius 21. “Believers do not worship icons like gods, like pagans - let it not be! But they [worship] only the image, revealing [this] the feeling of their love for the image of the face of the icon” 51. Testimony of Basil the Great 22. “Now rise before me, you glorious painters of ascetic merits! Enhance this incomplete image of a military leader with your art! And - after a few - let the hero in struggles, Christ, be depicted in the picture" 52 . [Col. 469] Testimony of Gregory the Theologian 23. “Rising above her, there was Polemon on the icon. Seeing the icon, which inspired awe, she immediately left, defeated by the spectacle, ashamed of the depicted Polemon, as if he were alive” 53 . 24. “I also loved the image cast from wax, as full of piety. For I saw on the icon an Angel driving away crowds of barbarians. I saw the tribes of the barbarians trampled under foot, and David speaks the truth: Lord, in Your city you will humble their image (Ps. 73:20)” 54. Testimony of Saint Gregory of Nyssa 12. “I have often seen a picturesque depiction of the suffering [of Isaac being sacrificed] and never passed by [this] spectacle without tears: so vividly does art present this story to the eye. Isaac lies...", etc. 55 Testimony of St. Cyril 26. “I saw a valuable painting of a girl fighting in the arena, and I could not look at this spectacle without tears” 56. Testimony of the Fathers of the Sixth Holy Council 27. “On some images of honest icons, the Lamb is depicted, indicated by the finger of the Forerunner. And after a few: therefore, so that through works of painting what has already happened is depicted before the eyes of everyone, we determine: from now on, the image of the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29), Christ our God, should also be represented on icons in human form, instead of the ancient lamb” 57 . 28. This is a little out of a lot, so as not to produce satiety. Here again the apostolic and patristic teaching is [proposed] - the pinnacle of the apostles, the foundation of the fathers, the keys of dogmas, the definition of Orthodoxy; anyone who contradicts them, even if he is an angel, is excommunicated and anathematized. For he is not one of the apostles and fathers, but a false man, falsely bearing the name [of Christian]; So, you rejected it [that is, the right faith], although you do not say that you reject it, since you reject all the construction of icons and the worship of [them], as in ancient times Moab. “And in obedience to the law of the Church.” 29. This is the all-sacred law, namely, ancient customs, which the great Basil especially commands us to preserve. So, by church tradition it has been introduced into the custom from time immemorial and from the beginning of divine preaching, as the earthly [Church] proclaims in its very deeds in its sacred churches and its accessories, that revered icons should be inscribed, which you now humiliate. So, here is the church legislation, as far as it concerns this subject. And this [legalization] and its part [concerning the veneration of icons] you rejected with all your might. [Col. 472] “Having accepted the six saints and the Ecumenical Councils...” 30. There are as many Orthodox Councils, both Ecumenical and Local, as there actually were. But all of them, if considered in their main meaning, are one in the divine way of thinking, just as the Creed is one. Namely, from time to time entering into battle with rebellious heresies and differing depending on the attack [on the truth] of wicked opinion, they remain in the same Orthodox teaching. [This] is similar to how (to use an example) the grain of grain, when sown, is one; but it has the power, at the appropriate time, through the offering of fruit, to produce in abundance the grains formed by its energy. From here we note that if you accept the First Council, you will find yourself accepting all [other Councils] together. So, [the First Council] says (although I left aside what preceded 58 as not the most necessary in relation to the present question): “...and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, through whom all things were made. For the sake of us, people, and for the sake of our salvation, who came down from heaven, and became incarnate from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man.” So, born of the Father before all ages, incarnate from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and made Man - one in hypostasis, dual in nature; perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity 59 . [According to what he has] from the Father, He is indescribable, just as the Father is [indescribable; according to the same thing that it has] from the Mother, we describe it, just as the Mother [is describable]. As is the Father, so are those who are born of Him in every way. And as the Mother is, so is that which is born [from Her] in all respects, so that, in the absence of anything, the perfection [of human nature] is not destroyed and everything does not perish. Therefore, since it is by nature characteristic of the Mother that She, as being described, should be depicted in bodily form, this is also characteristic of Christ, as Her described Son, by [human] nature. If He does not [can be depicted], then He is not Her birth by nature and truth. But He is in reality her true Son, just as He Himself is the true Son of the Father. Consequently, He, in accordance with His Mother, can be depicted in bodily form (σώματος χαρακτῆρι), being indescribable in divinity, in accordance with the Father, so that one can confirm by its testimony the other with all natural necessity. So, the First Holy Ecumenical Council, as if with special power, announced that Christ can be depicted, since it confesses Him as incarnate and made man. For everything that has flesh [cannot] not [be] described: and every person who can be visible cannot but be depicted. Then, although he did not call Mary by the proper name of the Theotokos, but when he confirmed that the Son of God from Her was incarnate and became man, he potentially 60 proclaimed Her the Theotokos, for if the Begotten is God, then, consequently, the one who gave birth is the Theotokos, leaving it with all the power and especially to announce this to the Third [Ecumenical] Council, having previously expressed censure to Nestorius. Likewise, he did not clearly express that in Christ there are two natures and as many wills; but since He acknowledged Him to be both God and man, [Col. 473] having glorified 61 His two births, then he [by this very thing] taught that [in Christ] there are two actions 62 and two natures, and according to two natures - two wills, leaving this in fact and fully to announce this to the Fourth and Sixth Councils and refuting those who recognized in Him one nature and one will 63 . And it would take a long time to show how he refutes every heresy, opposing [it] potentially (δυνάμει) the Orthodox dogma, which in fact was proclaimed at [another] Council at the corresponding [himself] time 64. So, it has been sufficiently shown and proven that you do not accept the First Council, rejecting all the creation of images and the worship of [them], while that [Council], as it is said, potentially 65 announced that Christ can be depicted in human form. It is shown that you do not accept the other Councils. For all [Councils] have one pious way of thinking. 31. “Accepting both the Council of Blachernae and the council convened to approve it.” This, of course, is true, for you are their follower and like-minded opponents of the truth and those who disagree with all the apostolic and paternal teaching, as shown above. For they reject all construction of icons and worship [of them]. “Those [dogmas] which they rejected, rejecting; the same ones they taught by accepting.” 32. Yes, sure; but - like the Sanhedrin of Caiaphas, which accepted Barabbas, but rejected Christ (Matthew 27:20-22). “Rejecting the meeting chaired by Tarasius.” 33. Good and completely natural; but [you reject it], of course, insofar as it agrees with the First Holy Council in what the latter proclaimed regarding the image of Christ in human form and regarding the worship of the image of Him, and the Life-giving Cross, and the Mother of God, and, in addition, every saint in honor of the archetypes, from which you were separated, as Judas was from Christ. 33. “And those who do not hold this opinion are anathematized.” Without a doubt, but together [anathematizing] all the saints, as an opponent of Christ. “Signed with my own hand.” Of course; but [signed] like Pilate, having dipped the reed to condemn Christ. 35. Following all the evangelical and apostolic commandments and instructions and establishing ourselves in the prophetic and paternal broadcasts and teachings; accepting six holy and Ecumenical Councils together with other Local Councils who agree with these [that is, the Ecumenical Councils] on the observance of dogmas and canons; together with them, accepting the Council, which reasoned and determined in a godly manner regarding the sacred icons; and lovingly accepting the Holy Second Council of Nicea, Orthodox, like the first, and in accordance with the [Council], [Col. 476] who preceded him 66, who defined the dogma regarding the same sacred icons; those who were excommunicated by all [these Councils] rejecting; with those who are approved by them, being in communication; adhering to every sacred law and church custom, coming from Christ to the present time, and also subsequently [established] worthy of the holiness of the [Church]; with all my heart, hugging and kissing every icon that exists and is drawn according to the decree that saves people, [images of] Christ and our God, the Life-giving Cross, the Mother of God, Angels and every saint and saint; but rejecting the crowd that was first gathered in the Blachernae church and the Sanhedrin, which [later] approved it, 67, since both of them are contrary to Christ and everything holy, and those who do not think like that, condemning them to eternal anathemas, - with the help of God, signed with his own hand. Acrostic: Christ's suffering is John's hope. Christ cast down the cross by divine power Attack of the demonic horde. For all living He is strength and hope for great victory And he clearly teaches us to trust only in Him. So, it is unlawful to depict the Lord on the wall. For [He] is the whole 68 God, not subject to error, Elevating pious kings in crowning the kingdom. Acrostic: The cross is praise for Ignatius. The cross, having united what was previously scattered, Piety truly outlines. For He, destroying every spectacle of icons, Clearly exalted Your glory, O Word, And it is evidence of the powerful power of faith. Worshipfully worshiping Him, lords They put to flight enemies enslaved by [his] force. 1. In Greek, the letters are arranged so that they form the regular shape of a four-pointed cross. Receiving power from God alone, Leo and Constantine crowned, They put up for contemplation the image of the Lord [that is, the Cross], Having a heartfelt attraction to Him. Previously, it was spread in vain and without reason, They then destroyed the construction of the icons of the spectacle. The acrostic in this case is obtained in such a way that the word “Christ” is made up of the first letters (read from top to bottom) of each line, and “John” is the last letters of the lines, read from top to bottom. The word “hope” is present in the entire text, and “passion” is made up of letters in a “zigzag” in the middle of the last four lines. – Ed. In TFS: “in people”, which is correct, but not entirely accurate, but can serve as an explanation. – Ed. Leo III the Isaurian (reigned 717–741) and his son Constantine V Copronymus (reigned 741–775) were Byzantine iconoclast emperors. – Ed. Greek: μορφῆς ἰδέα. – Ed. On some coins of Orthodox emperors, the image of Christ had a face facing backwards, and an image of a cross was placed on His head. See: St. Gregory the Theologian. Sermon 38, 13 // St. Gregory the Theologian. Creations. T.I.S.SH. – Ed. Valentine is a gnostic heretic of the 2nd century, who thinks docetically about Christ and believes that Christ was not truly incarnate, but came to earth from heaven in a special spiritual, immaterial body. – Ed. See: St. Basil the Great. Letter 261, 2 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T. 2. P. 869. Ed. The expression “God-bearing flesh” about Christ was used by St. Vasily. See: St. Basil the Great. About the Holy Spirit 5, 12 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T.I.S. 102. – Ed. See: St. Basil the Great. Conversation 19. On the Day of the Holy Forty Martyrs, 1 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T. 1. P. 1029. See: St. Basil the Great. Conversation 17. On St. Martyr Varlaam, 3 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T. 1. P. 1020. In PG and TSO an erroneous attribution is given: “On St. Day. Martyr Gordius." – Ed. See: St. Basil the Great. About the Holy Spirit 18, 45 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T. 1. P. 135. – Ed. In TFS: “Let it be!” – Ed. That is, in relation to the image of Himself. Lit.: substances of art. – Ed. In TFS: “meaningful.” – Ed. See: Mk. 3:22, Matt. 26:49, John. 19:3, 18:12, 22; Mk. 15:19. Ed. Marcion is a Gnostic who, like most other Gnostics, believed that the flesh of Christ was illusory. About Valentine, see p. 331 of this edition. Mani (Manes) – founder of Manichaeism; held the same views on this issue. – Ed. Rev. Theodore repeatedly in polemics compares the iconoclasts with the Gnostics and Manichaeans, who denied the truth of the Incarnation and the human flesh of Christ. – Ed. In TFS: “veneration of the Trinity.” In the Greek text here there is “latria” (λατρεία) - “service”, and since the difference between the concepts of “veneration”, “worship” and “service” was given great importance in the polemics with the iconoclasts, we consider it best to reflect this difference in the Russian text. In addition, this and the next sentence in the TFS, just like in the Latin translation of Min, have a question mark at the end, but in the Greek there is no question mark. – Ed. The TFS adds: “[that is, Trinity].” On the difference between theology and economics as sections of Christian teaching in the Ancient Eastern Church, see: St. Basil the Great. Against Eunomius II, 3 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T. 1.C.214 .-Ed. In one of the codes: “unchanging.” About the Son as the unchanging Image of the Father according to the Divinity, see note. us. 302 of this edition. However, Rev. Theodore goes further and calls the Incarnate Son - Christ the unchanging Image and according to humanity. – Ed. The main pagan gods of the Greek pantheon are listed. – Ed. In TFS: “object of imagination.” This is a gross mistake, since it turns out that from the above words of the iconoclast the Orthodox thesis is deduced: “the true sacrament of the Economy is the subject of the image.” In fact, we are talking about fantasy or illusion. – Ed. In TFS: “Just as the sign of Christ appears in the cross, so His image appears on the icon.” – Ed. St. Dionysius the Areopagite. About the Divine Names 4, 4. – Ed. In TFS: “arrangement of relief images.” – Ed. In TFS: “a Divine man.” St. Dionysius Areopasht. About the Divine Names 2, 10. – Ed. In TFS: “a deceptive person.” – Ed. The Manichaeans and Gnostics taught about the illusory nature of Christ’s humanity (Docetism). – Ed. That is, the substance is condemned in the Holy Scriptures not in general, but in very specific cases and in a specific sense - when it appears in the form and meaning of a pagan idol. St. Athanasius the Great. Questions to Antiochus, 39 (PG. T. 28. Col. 621A). – Ed. We are talking here about the Second Nicene (VII Ecumenical) Council of 787, which approved the dogma of icon veneration. – Ed. This passage is the text of the second Iconoclastic Council of Constantinople (815), convened on the initiative of Emperor Leo V. - Ed. See: St. Gregory the Theologian. Word 45.23 // St. Gregory the Theologian. Creations. T.2. P.571 .–Ed. That is, they use these names one instead of the other. Russian translation: built in the image of the true. St. Dionysius the Areopagite. About the Church hierarchy 5.1.– Ed. Slavic translation: This is how a person walks. In the Synodal Translation: Truly, a man walks like a ghost. – Ed. St. Dionysius the Areopagite. About the Church hierarchy 1, 2. – Ed. This phrase was absent in the TFS. – Ed. That is, the One Whom man is not able to completely imitate. St. Dionysius the Areopagite. About the Divine Names 4, 22. – Ed. Life of St. Pankratia. Acta Sanctorum – Ed. Bollandists, month of April, 3rd day. P. 237. In TFS: “the initial revelation of the sacraments.” – Ed. St. Dionysius the Areopagite. About the Heavenly Hierarchy 1, 3. – Ed. St. Athanasius the Great. Questions to Antiochus, 39 (PG. T. 28. Soi. 621A). – Ed. Wed: St. Basil the Great. St. Basil the Great. Conversation 17, 3 // St. Basil the Great. Creations. T. 1. P. 1020. – Ed. See: St. Gregory the Theologian. Theological poems, 10. On virtue, 800 // St. Gregory the Theologian. Creations. T. 2. P. 109. – Ed. St. John Chrysostom. Discourse on the Lawgiver, 6 (PG. T. 56. Col. 407; the work is considered doubtful regarding authorship). Wed: Rev. Theodore the Studite. Letters 221; 380 // Rev. Theodore the Studite. Creations. T. 3. – Ed. St. Gregory of Nyssa. The Word on the Divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit (PG. T. 46. Col. 572). Ed. The original source is unknown. Wed: Rev. Theodore the Studite. Letter 380 // Rev. Theodore the Studite. Creations. T. 3. – Ed. Canon 82 of the Trullo Council of 692 – Ed. That is, the first member of the Creed, which speaks of God the Father. – Ed. Wed. Oros of the IV Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon 451 - Ed. In TFS: “according to the meaning.” Also in the TFS note: “Greek. δυνάμει, lat. potentia – “in meaning”, “in potency”. – Ed. In TFS: “having proclaimed.” – Ed. In the TFS the expression “two actions” was absent. – Ed. That is, heretics-monophysites and monothelites. – Ed. In TFS: “from time to time.” – Ed. In TFS: “the meaning of its definition.” – Ed. Council of Trullo in Constantinople in 692 - Ed. Iconoclastic Council of 815 – Ed. In TFS: “perfect.” – Ed.