Chapters against Monothelites

Venerable Anastasius Sinaite. Chapters against the Monothelites: Chapters 1–2 Hegumen Adrian (Pashin) Venerable Anastasius Sinaite. Chapters against the Monothelites: Chapters 3–4 Abbot Adrian (Pashin) A chapter showing with examples that one thing is natural, another is carnal and, again, another is Divine will So, through much that has been said, we have been taught that one thing is Divine, another is human, and, again, another is the devil’s will, in other words, consistent with nature, unnatural and supernatural. Namely: in accordance with human nature, to love life and resist death; It is not in vain that by nature human nature is loving life and hating death, but because it was from the beginning immortal and incorruptible. So, in justice, she loves immortality, in which she arose, and opposes death, in which she did not arise. For this reason, the godly Basil and St. Kirill did not call the human will of Christ fearing death, but loving life. Indeed, for two reasons it was fitting for man to thirst for life in Him: firstly, man was created from the beginning for life, and secondly, as one who came into existence seedlessly from the life of God the Word, who was essentially one-of-life and communicating with Life Itself and united to the Immortality and Incorruptibility of all, since all Immortality and all Life are disposed toward death with hatred and in opposition. Therefore, when you see the humanity of Christ turning away from death and saying: “Father, let this cup pass from Me; however, not My will be done” 1, in no way assume in His humanity a will that fears death, but, according to the words of Cyril and the great Basil, a will that abhors death and by nature loves life as united with the Life of all. Therefore, if to love life is the natural and irreproachable will of man, as the Word revealed, then to live carnally is a carnal and unnatural will, which not only did not exist in Christ, but it was [completely] abolished, and, again, to despise this life, as the martyrs acted, is the Divine and supernatural will, which Christ revealed in Himself when He said: “The Spirit is willing,” and when added: “The flesh is weak” 2, then His humanity was marked by aversion to death and love [to life]; You will find confirmation of this same rule throughout the life of Christ, that the natural and God-given will is impeccable, the carnal will is rightly reproachable, and the Divine will is worthy of praise. Consistent with nature, the natural will is [this is marriage, the unnatural, carnal will] 3 is fornication, and the supernatural, Divine will is virginity. And therefore Christ renewed nature, incarnate without marriage and seed from the Virgin [...] 4, for the earth had not yet been devastated by the blood of sacrifices 5. And, again, in accordance with nature, this is to desire existing goods, because they were created for the sake of man, the carnal will is to use the gifts of God for evil, and the Divine will is to neglect all goods for the sake of God. To honor father and mother 6 and love relatives is a natural and impeccable will, to despise them is a carnal and evil will, and for the sake of God to abandon them, according to the word of the Lord, who said: “If anyone does not leave father, mother, and children and does not follow Me 7, he is not worthy of Me 8,” - this is the truly Divine, good, acceptable and perfect will. In the same way, the food created by the Word is cognizable as a natural and God-given desire, according to what was said: “You will eat from every tree of the garden” 9 . Likewise, drinking is immaculate and created by God, otherwise Christ would not have given us His all-holy Body and Blood for food and drink. So, if the desire to eat and drink is God-created and immaculate, through which the nature of the body lives and is created, then when you hear Christ on the cross saying: “I thirst,” 11 do not be afraid to say that the desire to drink is the human will of Christ, because the source of life - the Divine - does not thirst or hunger forever. In the same way, when you see Him from the path sitting, working and resting, 12 do not be afraid to say that He voluntarily rested sitting, according to the desire of the tired body to rest. And when you see Him sleeping at the head, 13 do not refuse to say that He slept voluntarily, according to the energy of the body. However, you do not enter to the doors, that is, the human ones, of Christ, but enter into the interior behind the veil 14, into the Holy of Holies 15 of His Divinity, and know that He is, although limited in the womb as a man, but also the guardian of babies in the womb as God; and He, born small according to the flesh, grows everyone as God; and He, swaddled fleshly in a manger 16, swaddled the abyss with darkness 17 like God; and He, sucking the Mother's breast, as befits a baby, gives life to people, as befits God; and He, sleeping carnally in the boat 18, awakens the dead by Divine power 19; and He, weary as a man 20, calls: “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest 21 like God”; and He who cries: “I thirst” 22 is God who says: “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink, 23 for I am the fountain of life” 24 ; and He, who voluntarily hungered as a man, is the bread that came down from heaven 25 and gave [...] 26 To Him - Christ, who bowed his knees and prayed three times during the Passion 27 as befits a man, every knee in heaven, on earth and under the earth bowed 28 as to God; He, who voluntarily endures beatings like a man, 29 beats and shakes the earth and throws lightning like God Almighty; To Him, naked on the Cross as befits a man, 30 we all stand naked and open 31 as God; He is Jesus, tested by Pilate 32, testing hearts and bellies 33 at the trial, being God - a terrible Judge; He, Whom the Jews reviled as a man, is glorified by all the armies of angels as a God who loves mankind; the feet and hands of Jesus, which were pierced with nails 34, with the help of angels bind the hands and feet of the Jews and commit them to outer darkness 35; His face, which on the cross had neither appearance nor beauty 36, will flash like lightning from the sky and all the powers of heaven will be shaken 37; the holy body, which thirsted humanly on the cross 38, speaks in such a way that all the foundations of the earth are indignant, horrified, darkened and shaken. For these were the mouth of God, the hands of God, the feet of God, the side of God, the flesh of God, and everything that pertains to the flesh of God. But let the heretic not condemn these words, for I did not say “the body of the Divinity,” but “the body of God the Word,” and also “the blood of God,” and not “the blood of the Divinity”; “the speech of God,” not “the speech of the Divine”; “the mouth of God,” not “the mouth of the Divine”; “the feet of God,” and not “the feet of the Divinity,” for the Word became flesh and dwelt with us, 40 that is, by hypostasis it united with its own, holy, honest, animated and rational human flesh. Chapter in which we piously explain the antitheses of our opponents 1. “Since the Divinity of the Word,” he says, “is in the flesh and possesses it, then all the power and energy of His humanity, called a single complex energy, is transferred to Him.” To this antithesis of yours, hear what someone from outside 41 said to us: “For where,” he says, “in what place is not the unlimited Divinity of God the Word, filling heaven and earth and limiting all nations - like a drop from a bucket 42? After all, the Divinity of the Word is not limited in the flesh, for He 43 is the One who says that I fill heaven and earth, 44 Who is everywhere present and fills everything, 45 obviously because of the unlimitedness of His indefinite essence. What then? Since He fills heaven and earth, the abyss and all visible and imaginable creation, to that extent all the energy of angels, dumb, birds, fish and plants is transferred to His Divinity, located in all creation, and is called a single complex nature and divine energy? Nonsense!" Further, when we object to this and declare that not as in the rest of creation was God the Word in soul and flesh inseparably united with Him, but in essence God the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, 46 he stated in response the following, saying: “But how does He, as God, fill heaven and earth? Explaining this, the wise Clement in the Stromata says: “As the soul fills the body in essence, so God fills and gives life to everything in heaven, both heaven and earth in essence.” If, however, God the Word exists in essence only in man united with Him in essence, then please tell us, in the death of Christ the man united with Him was divided in two, since the body was located above in the tomb on earth, and the soul descended down into the underworld, into hell. So, if the essence of the Divinity of the Word was nowhere on earth except in the soul and body united with Him, then it is obvious that it was also divided in two, so that it would not be separated from the soul or from the body when they were abandoned by the Divinity and became empty. If you tell me that the Word, like tree resin, rushed and followed the soul proceeding from the body into hell, and, like a reed, embraced the body above and the soul below, then you are speaking fables and nonsense: firstly, because the unlimited Divinity neither lengthens, nor descends, nor ascends, and secondly, because if, like a reed, God the Word extended from the body into hell, then it is obvious that He filled would be the places in the middle of the earth and the underworld, through which He passed, and would no longer be in His flesh and soul alone, but in the same way He fills heaven and earth, in the same way He would fill the person united with Him. And just as the energies of heaven and earth are not transferred to Him, so the energy of a person united with Him, that is, a church destroyed in the passions 48, is not transferred to the indestructible God of the Word. After all, the apostle said about all of us that by God’s Word we live, and move, and exist, 49 but because of this, the movements and energies of none of us are transferred to Him. “But the person united with Him is governed,” he says, “by the Divinity of the Word, the image of a servant 50 is subordinate and guided by the inclination, energy and desire of the Lord.” But tell me, what does not God the Word, who holds and moves, creates and changes everything with the word of His power, rule over and do not dominate? That’s why the prophet said: everything serves You, 52 but the energies of everything in existence that serves Him, is at His foot and submits to Him are not transferred to Him. “However, voluntarily,” he says, “and not out of some necessity, like us, Christ submitted, accepted and did human things; and besides, what happens voluntarily, and not out of necessity, is not transferred to the law of nature.” Do you see that your true goal is aimed at the destruction of the entire Economy of Christ’s Incarnation? After all, He did everything voluntarily, and not out of some necessity; however, let us assume that nothing in Christ is transferred to nature and the law of reality. Indeed, the descent from heaven is voluntary, the Incarnation, pregnancy [of the Virgin Mary] are voluntary, time, birth, growth [of the body], breastfeeding, hunger, thirst, fatigue, sleep, free passions, the Cross, death, Resurrection are voluntary; Let us assume that we will not attribute any of this to the definition of essence or nature, but will classify it as appearance and imagination of our own free will. Not only this, but also all visible and conceivable creation He created voluntarily, so let us assume that we will not attribute anything to the definition, law and structure of nature. Mani was the first to invent this: after all, when he said that what happens voluntarily and economically is not transferred to the law or the definition of nature and is not fully cognizable, then he considered the entire Economy of the Incarnation to be an appearance. 2. Let us, finally, turn to another of their aporia, more precisely to the absurdity and bewilderment 53 which was conveyed to them by the one thrown down from the heights of the Lord and King, herding Egyptian pigs, who says: “The Holy Fathers say that after an indescribable union, Christ always, everywhere and in all circumstances performs a common, complex, or more divine action.” Let the beginning of their overthrow be Christ Himself, who is slandered by them, Who says: “No one ascended into heaven except the Son of Man who came down from heaven, who is in heaven” 54 . Here Christ, living on earth, Himself says that He is in heaven even before His Ascension from earth to heaven. How, tell me, does He act in heaven before He ascended in the flesh to heaven? Is it Godly or like God and only? And if he tells you that according to the divine, or general, or complex [energy], then he is convicted of saying that the doctrine of the Incarnation is an appearance, since on earth and in heaven the flesh of Christ was apparent; if [Christ] acts in heaven before the Ascension from earth only with Divine unlimited energy, then your absurd myths claiming that after the Incarnation Christ always, everywhere and in all circumstances acts with divine and complex energy are destroyed and destroyed. When the nature and energy of His holy flesh was only in Judea, and the energy of God the Word filled the universe and was everywhere, then tell me, what did He courageously produce in the eastern or western and humid countries, on islands and continents, in deserts and inland lands, in which Christ had never been in the flesh and no one saw Him there? After all, although Man is united to the unlimited God the Word, like us, He does not change in any way into His unlimitedness and omnipresence. After all, God the Word and His energy, filling heaven and earth, acts everywhere; and the limited man united with Him by hypostasis, when he was in the womb of the Virgin, did not act in any way outside the womb; and when Christ was born from the womb, then His body, finally, had no effect in the womb; being in Nazareth, Christ does not act divinely masculine in Zion; when He was in the manger, He did not act godly in Egypt; when He was in Egypt, He did not act godly in Syria; when He was on the Cross, He was not present as a godly man in Nazareth; when He was in the tomb, He did not act godly in the tomb, having active bodily senses dead; and in general, when he was on earth, he did not act godly in heaven; and now, when limited flesh is in heaven, He now acts on earth not in a godly manner, but according to His Divine, all-cosmic and unlimited energy. How will those who say that Christ acts and accomplishes with one divine energy understand [the words]: “He is risen, He is not here” 55? Where is there no Divine energy? How will they understand [the words]: “Lazarus, our friend... is dead; and I rejoice for you that I was not there” 56? By what energy was He not there: by Divine energy, by human energy, or by all of His divine energy? If you don’t say the first, then by all means say the second, and if you don’t agree with the second, then by all means say the last. Again, how do we understand [the words]: “But you don’t always have Me with you” 57? Those who say that in Christ there is one and the same energy, namely Divine, obviously do not have His Divine energy among themselves; We say that Christ is now with us not by the spatially limited nature and energy of the flesh, but by His Divine energy, Jesus Christ lives in us, comes and makes an abode with us, as he promised: “I and the Father will come and make an abode with you” 58 . 3. And tell me, what is this complex energy of yours in Christ? Is it really created, or uncreated, or certainly created-uncreated, half Divine and half human? Do you teach that it is limited, or unlimited, or necessarily limited-unlimited? Do you declare that it has a beginning or is beginningless? Obviously, it is both beginning and beginningless. […] for when [the heretic] proclaims one energy or nature, then it is absolutely necessary to say that it is either all created or all uncreated; either all limited or all unlimited; Either it is entirely beginning, or it is all beginningless. Further, thinking that none of the sensible people will object to this, they turn, as they believe, to the fathers, asserting according to custom that the human will and energy of Christ are deified and after deification one can no longer speak of two wills or two energies. To this aporia of theirs, or rather bewilderment 59, let us say the following: the divine Gregory, calling the human will of Christ deified, said in the same way that His flesh, that is, our nature, is deified. Finally, if the deification of the will reduces its quantity, then it is obvious that after the deification of nature, two natures became one. After all, he says that Christ is one of two opposites, that is, Divinity and flesh, of which One is deified, and the other is deified 60. In the same way, he says that His all-holy soul is the mediator between His Divinity and the debility of the flesh 61. So, if she does not have the will and energy, then how can she mediate? After all, what mediates mediates, of course, with desire and energy. How did the rational soul of Christ grieve and yearn? 62 After all, sorrow and melancholy do not arise if there is no deprivation of will, that is, failure [in achieving] what is close to the heart, what is desired by the soul, for the word “sorrow” comes from “forsaken” 63. Therefore, being in its own sense and truly consubstantial with our [souls], the pure soul of Christ possessed impeccable powers and properties consubstantial with us and, in accordance with appropriate circumstances, used them in true feelings - rational, desirable and effective [feelings]. So tell me, how did Christ grieve over the death of Judas 64, about the death of those who crucified Him 65 and about the destruction of Jerusalem 66, which he mourned with true sorrow and with the feeling of a thinking and compassionate heart? If this is not so, then tell me - it is said: “Do not offend the Holy Spirit with whom you are sealed” 67 - and Christ said: “My soul is grieved to death” 68. Are the sorrow of the uncreated Holy Spirit and the sorrow of Christ’s created soul similar? No. After all, impassive, since He is the uncreated God, the Holy Spirit is neither grieving, nor yearning, nor worried, nor anxious; The rational soul is characterized by sorrow for the good given to it by God, or sorrow for the sake of God, as Paul says, is an intercessor for salvation 69 . After all, grief, passion, anger and everything like that are spoken of in the Divine as alien and anagogically, but in a rational soul they are considered natural, given from God by goodness, because it is good to be angry and irritated by evil. As a result, it is said about Christ that He looked at the Jews with anger 70. But still, the anger of Christ is not like our anger, His sorrow is not like our sorrow, His melancholy is not like our melancholy, and everything else human that is in Him and that is spoken of in relation to Him. After all, we are of necessity subject to the natural needs of the body, and Christ, being God, Lord and Creator of nature, controlled everything that is characteristic of [human] nature, when he wanted and how he wanted. If some of the fathers said that Christ did not know [something] and was grieving as a human being, do not scold these artless expressions, but investigate when, to whom and for what purpose this was said. After all, everything that concerns Christ is deep and inscrutable 71 . Not only once, but also twice and thrice and four times He escaped death: firstly, he fled from Herod to Egypt 72, secondly - from Archelaus to Nazareth 73, thirdly - from those who wanted to stone Him 74, fourthly - from those who would throw Him down from the mountain 75, not because he was afraid of death, the One who gives life to every breath and who raises all people from their graves with a word, but because He voluntarily assimilates and heals everything that has crept into us due to disobedience. So do not be surprised if He, having accepted our curse and become a curse 76 , briefly allowed mortal anguish to manifest itself in His own flesh 77 , because it is even more offensive and more unworthy than to talk about mortal anguish to say that Christ was accompanied and tempted by the devil for forty days in the desert 78 . If the enemy tells me that He was tempted for our sake so that we would overcome and not be tempted 79 and became an oath 80 in order to heal our curse, I ask: follow the same rule about the human will and energy in Christ and conclude that He who for our sake accepted the oath 81 and the temptation of the devil 82 in order to heal them, accepted along with others the divinely created properties of our nature and the will instilled by God in the soul in order to heal it, so that it does not want and does not commit devilish and carnal wills, but bows to and desires the Divine will. In the same way, He assimilated our energy, created in His image, in order to teach it not to do or do anything displeasing to God. After all, an oath is not created by God, neither is sin, nor temptation from the devil, nor mortal melancholy; God did not create death, corruption, or disintegration of the currents of the human body. You say that Christ accepted all this in order to heal. So, if what is contrary to nature and what He did not create, He took, accepted and assimilated, and what He created in the soul in His image and likeness - its desired and active power, He did not accept, but rejected as evil, then what God created will turn out to be more vicious and unclean than the oath, sin and temptation of the devil, as not only rejected by God, but also abandoned by Him unhealed and unhealed. If our spiritual will and energy remain unaccepted and unhealed, then we are unforgiven and unhealed, since we desire sin and act through our unhealed will and action. Quotes from Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, clearly showing that even without humanity Christ has different energies according to the divinity of the word 1. From the Epistle to Titus, in which he speaks about God like this: “... and neither resting nor moving, but, if I may say so, providential energies in uniqueness 84 and immobility in providence inseparably and completely having” 85. Since this is what the apostolic teacher said about the Divinity, then if they say that Christ is completely perfect in the Divinity, it means that according to the perfect Divinity of the Word He has Divine energies: He has providential energies, has the rational energies of the Word, has His sacred energies, has unshakable energies, has rational energies, has infinite energies, has God-originating 86 energies, has the first, middle and last energies 87 . Therefore if he who speaks of two energies in Christ names two persons, then he who speaks of so many energies will be found to name countless persons in Him. But it is surprising that the teacher names many different energies not only in the Divine nature, but also in the angelic essence, and in the human, and, generally speaking, in all nature, because it is obvious that such an irrelevant statement: “The death of nature is weakness and lack of natural properties, energies and forces” 88 pointed to the nature of everything. And if so, and this is so, why then did we decide to think that every essence has one natural energy? If there is one, then why does Dionysius call one many energies? If there are many of them, then why can many be considered as one? So, as one is called God 89 the nature of fire and one is its comprehensive and main natural property, that is, igniting power, but in addition, in this natural property, certain branches and other properties of fire are visible, that is, to shine, strive upward, be intangible, warm, give life, purify, 90 so piously think that all natures have one most comprehensive and most important natural of each essence energy from which, as from a certain source and generative root, the particular, so to speak, energies of this comprehensive and essential energy are also seen to originate. And if you like, let us take the floor again and start researching. We ourselves have been taught by the Divine voice that the moon has one essential energy - the radiance that enlightens the night, for which it was created 91 . But in this most important, all-encompassing and most general essential energy of the moon, in addition, other contributing energies are visible, as if branches and branches from their maternal energy, for example: movement, movement in space, birth once a month, growth every day, decrease after fullness, and not only this, but also the moon’s control of sea waters, their ebb and flow, as well as the growth and decline of the bodies of fish in accordance with the body moon. Not only this, but the nature of the trees, due to the lunar energy, retreats and perceives increases and decreases. Do you see that one nature and one natural energy, moreover, this soulless, unreasonable and insensitive one, has numerous and countless private energies? Therefore, divinely inspired and wisely, the divine Dionysius says that each nature has its various natural energies: “The death of nature is weakness and lack of natural properties, energies and forces” 92. After all, examining individually, according to the model of the speculations examined above and shown regarding the moon, the prudent will find that every nature has in itself both its most comprehensive and total energy, and in it, as in the source, its energies that are born and originate from it. For the earth also received from God one essential name of energy, named by God, being called dry land by Him. 93 But look what (comes) from this most important and only energy; how many private energies we see in the dry essence of the earth: the energy of plant growth, the energy of the birth of bodies, the energy of animal nutrition, the energy of the appearance of sources; the energy of the earth is one - fertilizing, another - making infertile, this - giving salinity 94, this - delivering health, this - destructive, this - healing, and this - deadly, for example, the so-called hemlock 95 and scammonium 96 and many other good things, copper sulfate and sulfur 97. In the same way, in one essential and most comprehensive energy of water, which consists in the fact that it supplies drink and life, various partial energies are seen: the energy of water is cleansing, the energy of water is salty and bitter, another, in turn, is fertilizing, and another is the dead and barren sea; some waters are bad, as in Jericho, 98 some cause illness, others are unfit for drinking, some waters are stagnant, others are flowing and restless; some have energy that rises up from the ground, others flow like rivers, falling down. And in the nature of the air you will discover myriads of differences, mixtures and energies of the air, one way or another, in places and countries: here the life-giving, and there the destructive energy of the air. In the same way, one must think and understand about the essential will, namely: every rational spiritual nature has one unique will, desiring and desiring ability and power, but in addition, in the image of the all-encompassing energy, the all-encompassing will is divided and proceeds into many and differently named wills. What I mean is this: We know that the most general, chief, and all-embracing will of the Divine nature is to will that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth 99 . So, we know the various wills of God that came from this very all-encompassing will: God, by his own will, instructed Adam in the saving law 100, by his will he established the law of Noah 101, by his will he gave circumcision to Abraham as a sign of worship of God, 102 by his will he wrote out the law of piety for Moses 103, by his will he revealed the prophets for salvation, by his good will the Lord of all is God. The Word came to earth for the salvation of everyone and, having become incarnate, became human. And so, in the same way, think, prudent, about the many and varied wills of God, which are spoken of in the Divine Scripture, as, for example, when God says: “I have found a man after My heart, David, the son of Jesse, who will fulfill all My desires” 104, and: “I told Moses His way, the children of Israel His desires” 105, and: “...in the council of the righteous and in the assembly of the great work of the Lord, perfected in all His will” 106. If it is necessary to say, following the rule about the energies that blessed Dionysius mentioned in God, then in God the Divine wills are visible, as well as the Divine energies: the wills of providence, as well as energies, intelligent wills, as well as intelligent energies, punishing wills, commanding wills, persuasive wills, comforting wills, but all of them for the salvation and conversion of people appeared from God and were conceived by God, who wants all people to be saved and achieve knowledge truths 107. 2. If you, the adversary, ask me, saying: “If this is so, then would it not be better for you to speak of the many wills and the many energies of the Divinity and humanity of Christ, and not of two or one?” - then listen. With the help of the most comprehensive and most important essential abilities and properties, the pious word contains and always embraces everything particular and plural that is seen and thought about nature. Therefore, a host of holy fathers taught us to think about two natural properties of the Divinity and humanity of Christ, although for one who strives to think piously, there are in some way different (properties). So, if I say that Christ, according to Divinity, has the most comprehensive volitional and active omnipotent and indescribable ability of the Divine nature of essential will and energy, this contains and embraces every name and thought of God and will and together - energy. In the same way, in humanity, united with Him by hypostasis, we call our comprehensive volitional ability and the power of the rational soul created by God and purely human will in Christ. Likewise, the vital and essential energy of the soul, through which the body lives, is given life and is formed, we confess and preach it as human energy in Christ. So tell me, opponent, what is the main thing, the undoubted thing, which is necessarily included in and is a sign of any spiritual or rational nature, if not its essential will and energy? After all, the Divine nature, by will and action, embraces and contains everything, and the angelic nature, with its own desire and energy, performs worship, singing and serving God. In the same way, human nature, through rational desire, will and energy, comes to do and create God's commandments. And therefore Dionysius said that the destruction of all nature is the loss of its natural properties, energies and forces 108. But what, in turn, will the theatrical fables and funeral dances of opponents answer to this? After all, they, perhaps, ashamed of the apostolic husband Dionysius, will say: “We are talking about many energies in Christ, which the teacher has now listed, but we are not talking about two energies.” To this I announce to you a great curse, which will be upon all your people, 109 because if you speak of many and countless energies, but do not speak of two, then you are convicted of the fact that you speak of many natures in Christ, but do not speak of two, and of many natural properties. 3. “However,” they say, “Dionysius did not think about energies in the way you interpret them.” How? Give us the fatherly definition of energy - and we will follow it and accept it. We think of energy, as the godly Gregory of Nyssa defined it in his letter to Zinodorus, so we think of it and preach it, saying: “We affirm that energy is the essential and natural force and movement of every essence, in intelligent people - reason, in thinking - thinking, in sprouts - growth, in moving - movement, in floating - swimming, in flying - flight, in reptiles - crawling, and, in a word, the sign of every essence is energy, called natural, of which only non-existence is lacking. After all, something is involved in a certain essence necessarily by participation in the energy that manifests this essence. For the true word knows that the definitions of essences are their non-false energies” 110. Therefore, the father, using this rule of his, when interpreting [the words] “Blessed are those who hunger” 111 in the creation “On the Beatitudes,” says about Christ the Son of God that “Having been forty days without food, He “at last became hungry” 112: for when He wanted, He gave nature time to do what was proper to Him.” 113 If you want to know about the amount of time, then the Evangelist teaches you, testifying that for thirty years Christ gave His human nature, which is like us except for sin 114, to do what was characteristic of it 115 and that He did not show any sign to people before baptism and before marriage in Cana 116. The same thing was brought to us by our opponents in Damascus, saying: “If, according to the judgment of the majority, everything that is said by the Apostle about Christ applies to any question, then you should rather confess Christ within thirty years than within three years after baptism.” Listen, all of you, good people! But if you consider Christ perfect in Divinity and also perfect in humanity, consubstantial with the Father in Divinity and in the same way consubstantial with us in humanity, then you cannot, following the chatter of the Manichaeans and Apollinarians, reject the willful power of His rational and holy soul, [created] in the image of [God], and its essential living and life-giving energy. After all, it is precisely these rational properties and only these that distinguish our rational soul from the soul of dumb animals. And so that it does not seem to our opponents that we are building up some special teachings and opinions in accordance with their fables, as we have said in other places, so now we will say again: the divine Apostle in almost all of his epistles calls our death a sleep, but he never called the death of Christ a sleep, but death, in order to show that He truly accepted death, mortification and the false separation of the soul from the body. So, He experienced this mortification and immobility of the body in the grave, the absence of vision, breath and soul, the inactivity of the limbs and carnal senses with all His godly energy, or half, or a third of it? After all, you definitely need to say either that all of His divine energy was deadened, or that half of it, or that when separated from the energy of the life-giving soul, the body of Christ became dead and inactive. And that the life-giving energy of our rational soul gives life to the body is evidenced by the Divine Scripture, which says: “And God breathed into the inanimate dust, which blinded, the breath of life, and man became a living soul” 117 . Therefore, the divine Solomon, condemning the wicked, says: “His life is more despicable than dirt; for he did not know the One who gave them an active soul and breathed into him the spirit of life” 118; just as Christ Himself says about our life-giving spiritual energy that “The flesh does not benefit at all, but the spirit gives life” 119 . This life-giving energy of the soul, to which He testified, we confess as human energy in Him, seeing that His all-holy body, even if it received animation from the Holy Ever-Virgin in an extremely new and unusual manner in relation to the boundaries and laws of nature without a seed, is nevertheless seen to be animated according to the God-given law of nature by His soul, created along with it, and again, immediately upon separation from her on the cross, dead, motionless and inactive, like ours. Further, thanks to the return of the soul on the third day, man in the Lord is known to be life-giving, moving, resurrected, risen from the grave and a perfect man. And thanks to animation after mortification, He again publishes speech, again, as if alive, He speaks through the living and intelligent energy of His rational soul, teaches again after animate - which He did not utter in the tomb due to soulless mortification, deprivation and separation of the vital energy of the soul. After all, the Divine unchanging and immaculate energy does not die, does not remain silent, does not calm down, does not cease, does not die, does not come to life, does not give up the spirit, does not animate again, does not change from corruption to incorruption. It does not stop and does not begin again, is not limited, does not come out of the body and does not enter it again, and not in such a way that it sometimes sees and sometimes does not see, just as the dead eyes of Christ closed. On Dionysius' Dionysian Energy in Christ 1. But when I expound and tell this for a long time, the enemy often pokes me in the side with his hand, whispering, reminding and exposing Dionysius’ godly energy. So let’s briefly look at something about her, because the time has come. So, it seems to me, at least, that this Gaius Therapeus, to whom the divine Dionysius wrote about godly energy, did not very thoughtfully reveal the theological meaning of the economy of Christ, but seemed to think about Him in a somewhat down-to-earth manner; the teacher, guiding him, raises him to something more divine. Therefore, throughout the entire second and fourth epistles, he calls Christ the Most Essential 121, the Super-Good 122 and above man 123 and at the same time man and conformable to man 124. Having said that He above man does what is proper to man 125, he did not say: “everything proper to man,” but pointed to the seedless Incarnation from the Virgin, about which he said in another chapter that it was realized from the virgin blood of the nature of the Holy Virgin Mary 126; also pointed to Christ's walking on the waters to represent His Godhead 127 . Hearing this, one of the disputants answered me, saying: “So what? Since many other saints walked on the waters, are we really going to call them gods? After all, Jesus Himself said: “Not only will those who believe in Me do what I have done, but also greater things than these.” 128 To this again Dionysius speaks below about Christ: “And, let’s say briefly, He was not a man, not in the sense that He was not a man, but as one who became such a man from among men, Who is truly outside of men and above man, and, finally, not as God who accomplished divine things and not as a human man, but since God became a man, living in some new God-husband energy for us” 129. 2. This is what the divine teacher says. And how the theatrical choirs of heretics understood the proposed sayings, this needs to be said. Namely: Theodore of Antioch, Diodorus of Tarsus and their fiend, a nasty dragon, a Chaldean Assyrian pig, a mouse encroaching on the Heavenly Bread, Christ, Nestorius - the enemy of God and Divinity, a wolf, a hater of the immaculate Virgin Mary, a dirty sword that dismembers and divides Christ, a barking dog that tears apart the Good Shepherd Nestorius, truly more wicked than the Jews - for they, seeing the naked unstitched tunic of Christ, I mean the all-holy body of God the Word, took pity on this spectacle and said: “We will not tear it apart” 130, as if prophetically saying to Nestorius: “We will not tear Christ apart. Let us not tear the Word away from the body. Let us not tear the tunic of flesh from the Divinity of the Word. Let us not tear Christ into two divided natures. Let us not tear Him into two hypostases. Let us not tear Him into two faces. Let us not tear Him apart into God and separately into mere man. Let us not tear Him apart into two wills that are contrary to each other. Let us not tear Him apart into two energies opposite to each other.” But these are the spiritual Jews who duly believed in Christ, of whom was the Pharisee who says: “Christ was not divided” 131; and the tongue of the teacher - [the tongue] his sword is sharp 132 - Nestorius declares: “I share the natures of Christ”; truly separated from God by nature and truly the one who, having heard Dionysius say that “after the Incarnation, He no longer did the divine as God,” 134, seizing on this expression like a stinking dog as some kind of specious support for his heresy, asserted: “God the Word, having become incarnate, no longer performed, as before, the divine as God, He no longer acted in heaven on the throne cherubic as before, no longer held everything with the word of His power 135, no longer filled everything like God and did not act in all creation, no longer created from non-existence into being with Divine energy, no longer sent from heaven, being on earth, angels to serve as God, was no longer in the bosom of the Father, as before, a co-worker as the Son and God, accomplishing the divine 136 with the Father, but having humbled himself and united with in the flesh, as God, no longer accomplished in heaven, on earth, in the seas and in all the abysses, as God, the divine with His indescribable, universal and premium energy.” This is how the wicked, or rather godless, Nestorius raged at the words: “Not as God accomplished the divine.” Further, the second expression, which reads: “Not like a human being” 137 . Mani, a truly enraged 138 Persian, the creator of disgusting idolatry and woman-worship, the ill-fated Eutyches 139 and, finally, Sevirus and his descendants, poorly understanding this expression, which reads: “Not like a man of man,” darkened, denied the entire doctrine of the incarnation, saying that Christ has nothing of ours, nothing of the same essence with us, neither body, nor soul, nor image, no appearance, no life, no nutrition, no drink, no sleep, no growth, no change, no flow, no sorrow, no perforation, no tangibility, no wounds, no death, no change, but everything happened imaginary and ghostly. “That’s why,” they say, “the great Dionysius said that Christ did not act as a human being, but since God became a man, living for us as a kind of new godly energy” 140. 3. The new disciples of the ancient Manichaeans and Sevirians badly interpreted all this expression in a Manichaean way and said: “Everything that Christ said and did after the union turns out to be godly, being common to His Divinity and humanity and accomplished by godly energy. It is obvious that they are considered common to His Divinity and humanity, since the Divine energy of God the Word was victorious and, as a result of the victory of the stronger, changed the flesh and all things carnal into Divine energy. The beginning of the refuting comedy addressed to them must be made from here: The Divine Scriptures teach us that the Divine nature of the incarnate God the Word and His Divine energy is immutable and unchangeable, without defect and always the same, and it does not transform or change this way or that. 1) So, those who say that everything and always with Christ is godly and accomplished in a godly manner, let them tell us: when the all-holy body of Christ was alive before the passion, then it is obvious that Christ saw people in a godly manner; further, when He died on the Cross and Joseph and Nicodemus came to bury Him, then Christ looked at them godly, as before, or only divinely, since the bodily visual energy of the eyes was taken away? If Christ saw Joseph in a divine manner, then you obviously declare His death imaginary and illusory; if He saw Joseph with the Divine, vigilant and immortal energy of God the Word, and nothing more, then it is no longer possible to say that everything that Christ does is godly. 2) The Prophet Isaiah teaches us that 141 Christ was in agony when the Jews pierced His spine with wounds 142 . So, when they beat Him on the spine, as if He was alive before the cross, and when they pierced Him with a spear in the side after death, did He feel torment with the same energy or not? Obviously not. Therefore, Christ did not have the same energy, and it was not God-manly that He felt pain, and it was not God-manhood that He acquired mortal insensibility. 3) When Christ, touching his hand to the daughter of the leader of the synagogue, resurrected her, then it is obvious that He performed this miracle with the general energy of God. Further, when He, dead, buried by the hands of Nicodemus, touched these hands, then His hands had a godly touch and energy, as before? By no means, but only Divine. Therefore, in no way can everything in Christ be called godly. 4) After all, again, it was not as a godly man that the deceased Christ, wrapped in a shroud around his feet, lost his movement, but as a husband. For the ever-moving energy of God the Word in the flesh was unbound and unimpeded, spreading everywhere even when the Lord's body was dead. 5) What should we call the power of hearing of Christ in the tomb? Did He really hear human speech with godly ears? In no case, but only with Divine energy. Therefore, one cannot think of everything in Christ as godly. 6) But Christ did not have a godly voice in the tomb, but only a Divine one, ineffable, inexpressible and inaudible. 7) But His silence was not godly, but only masculine. 8) But it was not a godly life, but only a divine one, that Christ had in the tomb. For the divine is called that which exists in His two natures, is accomplished through two natures, is conceived in the fullness of Christ, and is related and expressed to His Divinity and humanity together in the two natures of Christ. 9) Christ was not contemplated by people in a godly manner - after all, no one had ever seen God 143 - even though by hypostasis, undoubtedly, both the soul in the body, and the whole God the Word was indescribably entirely one with his own soul and body at all times, in all places and in all deeds. But not entirely, so that we do not fall into the snares of Arianism, subordinating the impassive and needless God of the Word to our human natural passions and needs. Thanks to this, we do not call everything characteristic of Christ God-husband, since not everything characteristic of Him can be raised to the fullness of His two natures and thought like that. 10) We do not call the small size of the body of Christ, swaddled in the manger, and the honest conception that took place earlier, not godly. 11) Not godly - the ascending growth of the body, because the Divine is such an increase that does not accept increase. 12) The gradual growth of hair, nails and teeth was not godly. 13) Not godly - the touch of Christ 144, because the Divine is intangible and inviolable. 14) Those who are not godly - hunger, sleep and exhaustion, because Scripture says that “God will not be hungry, nor will he be weary” 145 and will not sleep. 15) Not godly - any cuttings, flows or discharges from the body of Christ, because the Divine does not accept the flow or flow of tears, saliva, sweat or blood. 16) Not godly - wounds from nails and perforation of hands, feet and ribs, because the Divine is not cut or pierced. 17) Not God-married death, because the ever-living God the Word is immortal, although the body inseparable from Him has died. 4. And let’s say briefly like the great Ambrose of Milan in his word on the Incarnation, for this divine Ambrose says exactly this: “What is said about the Incarnation of the Word in Christ cannot be said and attributed also to the Father and the All-Holy Spirit, all this is characteristic, fitting and proper for our human poverty and nature in Christ” 146 . Therefore, we do not call the human Christ divine: if it were divine, it would be inseparable in every thing; However, that which is impossible to essentially think about the Divinity, we do not call either godly or purely masculine, but signs and designations of the deified 147 body and soul. “However, God assimilated the Word,” he says, “everything corporeal, and, finally, everything relates to Him.” Did you get it? How, tell me: mentally 148 and with condescension? Or did the Word essentially undergo this in its own nature? It won't happen! After all, God the Word is impassive and immortal. So, do not teach that economic condescension is a change in the Divine essence. Although He assimilated our sins 149, He remained alien to all sin 150; in the same way, He assimilated our curse 151, but He turns out to be above every curse, as having given blessing to the whole world; Likewise, He has adopted our death, but God the Word is alien and not involved in all death and corruption. So, do not understand by assimilation a change in natures, but each thing abides and is conceived in what is inherent in it by nature 152. 5. And when I set out this and note the weak points of the heretics, the great light and the name of immortality Athanasius, approaching, exhorts me to dare, since he also adheres to the same thought and the same opinion. After all, having accepted, as the godly leader of Orthodoxy, the seeds of piety from the supreme Peter and raising it into an infallible rule that Christ suffered in the flesh 153, the father multiplies it, saying that just as “Christ suffered in the flesh,” so also “Christ hungered 154 in the flesh,” “Christ thirsted 155 in the flesh,” “Christ slept 156 in the flesh,” “Christ cried 157 in the flesh”, “Christ prayed in the flesh”, “Christ was weary 158 in the flesh” 159. But one means “flesh,” and the other means “god-fleshly,” because “flesh” indicates human nature, and “god-fleshly” is like “god-male,” which designates the two natures of Christ. But even if we say that Christ endures all human passions in the flesh, we do not say that he is simple in the flesh - let it not be! - but flesh and soul, inseparably united with the Divine in them at all times, in every place and in every matter. For it is not the mere body of man that we partake of, but the body of God and the blood of God truly. And therefore we call the Virgin the Mother of God, and we worship Her Child as the Child of God, and we confess that the manger is God, that the swaddling clothes are God, and that everything in Christ is God, the true God, since we believe in Him as the true God, because cursed is everyone who has hope in a mere man 160. And so that no one, having become enraged like a Manichaean, should think that we deny the Divinity of Christ and proclaim Him to be a simple man, we will say that what He performed and worked miracles as God in the proper sense and truly divine as the Father, did not in the least assist or touch His Lordly body. Such is the rise of the star for the Magi and leading them to Him 161, the illumination of the shepherds who were in the field 162, the praise of the angels at His birth 163, the healing of the centurion’s servant, to whom Christ did not come in the flesh 164, the healing of the Canaanite daughter whom He did not see in the flesh 165, the eclipse of the sun at the crucifixion 166, the splitting of stones 167, the tearing of the church curtain 168, the opening of the tombs 169, the resurrection of the dead, the earthquake at the crucifixion 170, another earthquake when He was in the tomb 171 - and everything like this, which He did not touch with either flesh, hand or finger. After all, when in some way He jointly performed miracles, that is, simultaneously as God and with the help of the body, this is what the divine Dionysius calls a godly action, for example, His miraculous birth from the Virgin 172 and the walk of Christ on the sea were godly, when the Divinity solidified the water, and the flesh moved from place to place 173, which two miracles as mixed and joint, that is, godly, were cited by divine Dionysius. The divine action was the granting of sight to the blind through spitting, 174 and the healing by the fingers of Christ of the deaf 175, and the resurrection of the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue through touching the hand 176 - and everything similar to this, when the Divine Word together through His holy and deified 177 flesh performs miracles. Those who say that by one divine energy Christ does, accomplishes and endures everything, are truly forced, even against their will, to say that Godly, according to His Divinity and humanity, He suffered, was exhausted, was in agony before death, grew, prospered, hungered, thirsted, was visible, tangible, perforated, died, deadened and buried, and endured everything else alien to the Divine, what is wicked and foolish and is known to be so; and if we need to use examples, we will not hesitate. Wed: Matthew 26:39; Luke 22:42. The necessary insertion was made by the editor of the critical edition, Utemann. There is a gap here in the manuscript. Compare: Isa.1:11–15; Jer.7:21-34; Ps.50:8-13. Compare: Exodus 20:12; Deut.5:16; Matthew 15:4, 19:19; Mark 7:10, 10:19; Luke 18:20; Eph.6:2. Wed: Matthew 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20; 1 Corinthians 11:23–26. Wed: Matthew 8:24; Mark 4:38; Luke 8:23. Wed: Luke 7:12–15; John 11:43–44. Wed. John 4:14, 10:28, 11:25, 14:6. There is damage here in the manuscript. Wed: Matthew 26:6–44; Mark 14:32–41. Wed: Matthew 26:67; Mark 14:65; John 18:22, 19:3. Wed: Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:23–24. Wed: Matthew 27:2–26; Mark 15:1-15; Luke 23:1–7; John 18:28–19, 16. Wed: John 20:25; Ps.21:17. Wed: Matthew 24:27; Luke 17:24. Most likely, under this “external” prp. Anastasius means the Nestorian Maron of Edessa. In the “Guide” (Anastasius Sinaita. Viae dux 13, 10, 105–106) Sinaita quotes his words: “Is there a place, foolish ones, where the unlimited Divinity is not present? After all, filling heaven and earth and being present everywhere, It was certainly present in the tomb of Jesus, as well as in all creation.” From the prayer “To the Heavenly King”: “Who is everywhere and fulfills everything.” Compare: Jesus answered and said to them: Destroy this church, and in three days I will raise it up. To this the Jews said: This church took forty-six years to build, and will You raise it up in three days? And He spoke about the church of His body (John 2:19-21). So we translated the meaning of the used word into Russian. Anastasius plays on words: ἄπορον (= ἀπορία) - aporia, difficulty, bewilderment, ψυχρόν - cold, ghostly, ἄπειρον - unlearned, boundless. Matthew 26:11; Mark 14:7; John 12:8. A play on words similar to the beginning of the second part of this chapter: ἀπορία - aporia, difficulty, bewilderment, ἀπειρία - inexperience, ignorance St. Gregory the Theologian. Homily 38, on the Epiphany, or on the Nativity of the Savior, 13 (Gregory the Theologian, St. 1912. P. 529). St. Anastasius derives the word λύπη (sorrow, sadness, grief) from the verb λείπω (to leave). Wed: Matthew 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13. Wed: Matthew 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1-13; Hebrews 2:18. Compare: Gregory the Theologian, St. 1912. P. 10. Ἐν μονότητι. So here at St. Anastasia. In the printed editions of the Areopagite Corpus: “in stillness” (ἐν μονιμότητι), although the same reading as St. Anastasia, is also attested in a number of manuscripts. Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 9, 3:10–1 (Heil, Ritter 1991. S. 201–202). Here and further Rev. Anastasius quotes the Areopagite Corpus. Dionysius Areopagita. De Divinis nominibus 2, 1 (Suchla 1990. S. 123–124). Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. De Divinis nominibus 9, 9 (Suchla 1990. S. 213). Dionysius Areopagita. De Divinis nominibus 4, 25 (Suchla 1990. S. 173). Ἀπόθου. The publisher of the Chapters against the Monothelites, Uteman, presumably derives this form from the expression: ἀπὸ Θεοῦ. Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. De coelesti hierarchia 15, 2 (Heil, Ritter 1991. S. 51–52). That is, dry. Wed. Gen.1:9–10. Ἕξαλμον. A rare word, not found in the dictionaries available to us. We assume that it comes from a combination of the words ἕξις and ἅλμη. Or hemlock. Its juice was used to poison those sentenced to death in Ancient Greece. In particular, Socrates was sentenced to such death. A type of bindweed, the juice of which was used as a laxative. St. Anastasius contrasts these two gifts of the earth (hemlock and scammonium), one of which kills a person, the other heals. And here the property of copper sulfate to protect wood from rotting and the flammability of sulfur are contrasted. Wed. Exodus 20:1–17; 34:1–28. Dionysius Areopagita. De Divinis nominibus 4, 25 (Suchla 1990. S. 173). Paraphrase of Luke. 2:10: The angel said to the shepherds, “I bring you good tidings of great joy that will be to all people.” St. Anastasius again used a play on words, using instead of the word χαρά (joy) the word ἀρά (here: curse, misfortune, misfortune, destruction). Fragments from the Epistle of St. Gregory of Nyssa to Zinodorus (or Xenodorus) are preserved in the “Guide” and “Chapters against the Monothelites” by St. Anastasia and St. Maximus the Confessor. Gregorius Nyssenus. Orationes de beatitudinibus 4 // PG 44, 1237: 6–7. Gregorius Nyssenus. Orationes de beatitudinibus 4 // PG 44, 1237:7. Lit.: "The Lord's man." Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 3, 1:3; 4, 1:5 (Heil, Ritter 1991. S. 159–160). Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 2, 1:3 (Ibid. S. 158). Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4, 1:6 (Ibid. S. 160). Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4, 1:6 (Ibid. S. 160). Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4, 1:9–10 (Ibid. S. 160). Compare: 2, 9. Dionysius Areopagita. De Divinis nominibus 2, 9 (Suchla 1990. S. 133–134). Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4 (Heil, Ritter 1991. S. 160–161). Ps.56:5. Compare: Isa.49:2; Rev.1:16; Rev.2:12. St. Anastasius ironically calls Nestorius “the language of the teacher,” obviously meaning Theodore of Mopsuestia as a teacher. The following is Nestorius’ understanding of this phrase: “After the Incarnation He did not accomplish the Divine as God.” Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4 (Heil, Ritter 1991. S. 160–161). Wed: Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4 (Ibid. S. 160–161). A play on words based on the consonance of the name Mani (Μάνης) and the participle “enraged” (μανείς). The name of the heresiarch Eutyches is also played on, meaning “happy” (Εὐτυχής) and antinomic to the cognate adjective “ill-fated” (δυστυχής). Ἐν πόνῳ εἶναι (Isa. 53:4). Wed: “to be in labor” (Elizab.); “is in distress” (Yungerov). Wed: “I gave My backbone to be wounded” (Is. 50:6, trans. Yungerov). Wed: Luke. 24:39 ; 1John 1:1. Is. 40:28 (trans. Yungerova). In the surviving works of St. Ambrose, this quote is not found. Λογιστικῶς. It is often contrasted with the adverb “in fact” (πρακτικῶς) (PGL. P. 807). St. Anastasius here, in slightly different words, makes the same distinction that the saint has. John of Damascus, who says that there are “two assimilation: one is natural and essential, and the other is personal and relative” (John of Damascus, St. 2002. P. 282). Compare: God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh [as a sacrifice] for sin and condemned sin in the flesh (Heb. 8:3); Christ died for our sins (1 Cor. 15:3); He made him who knew no sin for us [a sacrifice for] sin (2 Cor. 5:21); Christ, in order to lead us to God, once suffered for our sins (1 Pet. 3:18). Wed: We do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with us in our weaknesses, but who has been tempted in all things like [us], yet without sin (Heb. 4:15); He committed no sin (1 Peter 2:22). Wed: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, becoming a curse for us - for it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree (Gal. 3:13). Theodore (Yulaev), priest. 2010. P. 37. Wed: John 11:35; Luke 19:41. Compare: Athanasius Alexandrenus. Contra arianos 3, 34, 1:4; 2:4–5 (K. Metzler, K. Savvidis. B. - New York, 2000. Bd. 1. Lfr. 3. S. 345.) Wed: Cursed is the man who trusts in man (Jer. 17:5). Wed: Matthew 8:5–13; Luke 7:1–10. Wed: Matthew 15:21–28; Mark 7:24–30. Wed: Matthew 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44–45. Wed: Matthew 27:45; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45. Compare: Dionysius Areopagita. Epistula 4 (Heil and Ritter 1991). Wed: Matthew 14:24–33; Mark 6:47–52; John 6:16–21; Message 4. Wed: Mark 8:22–26; In. 9:1–7. Wed: Matthew 9:23–25; Mark 5:38–42; Luke 8:51–55.