In addition to the dogmatic and ascetic works of the Holy Fathers, the liturgical books served as a rich source of true concepts about the subjects of higher knowledge. All Russian theologians of the sixteenth century, by their outward position, must have known the divine service, and that they knew it in reality is testified to by the life of St. Joseph, where it is said that some time after the fire, which destroyed all the monastery books, St. Joseph performed the service by heart. But in order to accurately and punctually indicate all the borrowings from the liturgical books, it is necessary to carry out a special study, hardly important in the essence of the matter, since what we have said is quite sufficient for the recognition of the liturgical books (mainly the Octoechos) as an important source of Russian theology of the sixteenth century. Thus composed exclusively on the basis of the works of the Holy Fathers, Russian theology was patristic in its form. This does not require special proof, and it is hardly important, at least at first glance. But in addition to this, it was patristic in spirit, which is undoubtedly a subject of exceptional importance.

II. The Churchliness of Old Russian Theology

Which works should be considered patristic and to what extent the authority of patristic opinions extends is a very important question. Prep. St. Maximus the Greek sets forth the following signs for the recognition of any work as patristic: "It is fitting to know," he writes, "that any scripture has three qualities that are fairly reliable and firmly possessed: if from the faithful and catholic Church we know and the famous scribe was formed; secondly, if in all things he agrees, as foretold, with the apostolic dogmas and tradition; third: if anyone agrees with himself in all things, but nowhere distinguishes" (III, 127). Prep. Joseph of Volotsk, as we have had occasion to see above, sees the main sign of the dignity of the works of the Holy Fathers in their agreement with the Apostolic and Prophetic writings. For all the importance of these features, they cannot be called unconditionally essential: they determine the external properties of the works of the Holy Fathers, which distinguish them from works that do not have patristic authority, but by no means express their inner spirit, which is inherent in them alone. The personality of the author, of course, is also of no small importance here: the works of heretics or representatives of an understanding of life alien to piety, external philosophers, can never be considered the works of the Holy Fathers, even if they do not clearly contradict the word of God, but here only Orthodoxy is important, and not the celebrity of the author, for the decrees of Archbishop. Theophilus of Alexandria, famous in the negative sense, are considered canonical writings on a par with the decrees of the adopted Councils. Agreement with the apostolic and prophetic writings is rather a sign of already accepted creations, and not at all a criterion, since historical experience testifies that there has not yet been a single false teaching on the soil of Christianity that did not try to base its reasoning on the word of God. As for the third feature, it is extremely important when works that are completely alien to meaning and full of internal contradictions are presented as patristic works; but in general there is no need to emphasize it, for it is a feature common to all the works of sound human reason. It seems to us that the most important and essential feature of the works of the Holy Fathers is their internal, as it were, organic connection with the teaching of the Church. Only those works can be considered patristic in the strict sense, where the personality of the author disappears, as it were, where he merges with the whole Church and speaks on her behalf, not by virtue of his position in the Church, but by a deep and irresistible attraction of the spirit. Only that church writer can be called a Church Father who sees in his life exclusively the life of the Church and who considers and evaluates all life and events from the point of view of Church life. It seems to us that these qualities largely determine the personal holiness of the authors. Yet the individual, written even by a famous and undoubtedly holy author, although of extreme interest to the psychology of the pious soul, has no general ecclesiastical significance. And works bearing traces of personal misunderstandings and darkened by the spirit of enmity can be attributed to the category of ordinary literary monuments, but in relation to the personality of the authors they are simply proof of human weakness.

Russian theologians of the sixteenth century looked at earthly life from the point of view of its high purpose. For them, there were no national interests, political enmity, patriotic vanity; first of all, they saw the Universal Church, illuminating the whole world with the rays of its grace. Prep. Joseph is inclined to love his homeland insofar as it serves the goals of universal Orthodoxy and represents the beloved daughter of the Eastern Church. Speaking about the fate of his fatherland, he says with bitterness: "In all the countries of salvation the preaching of the Gospel has gone out, and all have been delivered from the darkness of idols and have been illumined by the light of the understanding of God, while the Russian land has been darkened by the darkness of idolatry, and has been thoroughly defiled by filthy deeds. And for many times passed after the ascension into heaven of the Only-begotten Son" (29). Then he continues with joy about the baptism of Rus', as a special extraordinary mercy of the Life-Giving and Venerable Trinity. And, finally, he enthusiastically affirms the great piety and faithfulness to universal Orthodoxy of the young Local Church. "From that time," he writes (i.e., from the baptism of Rus'), "the sun of the Gospel has shone our land and the apostolic thunder has proclaimed us and the divine churches and monasteries have been formed, and there have been many hierarchs and venerable wonderworkers and standard-bearers, and as the golden wings have flown to heaven, and as the Russian land has surpassed all in impiety of old, so now in piety we have overcome all. In other countries, if there are many pious and reverent, but many are impious and unbelief, living with them and heretical philosophies; and in the Rust of the land there are not only many villages and ignorance, but also many cities, who are the one Shepherd of Christ, and all are of one mind and all glorify the Holy Trinity, but no one has seen a heretic or a wicked person anywhere" (31). Then begins the sorrowful narration about the beginning of the "heresy" of the Judaizers, as a violation of church peace and a grave blasphemy against church teaching. Prep. Joseph looks upon the Moscow Cathedral of the Dormition as an earthly heaven, because of its significance for the Russian Church, and from the time of the desecration of the temple of Wisdom - God the Word - for the Universal Church. Grieving over the sad indifference of Metropolitan Gerontius and the desecration of the episcopal throne by the heretic Zosima, he remembers Saints Peter and Alexis, in whom he sees not adherents of Moscow and supporters of autocracy, but first of all - teachers of the Church, interpreters of divine truth. "Having flown away from us," writes St. Joseph, as the Schurov of good songs, as the glory of great voices, as the swallows of sweet-talking, the divine hierarchs and great wonderworkers, Peter and Alexis, and the other Orthodox hierarchs, who in the midst of the garden of the church announce the ears of those who hear the teaching of Orthodoxy. Flying away like the eagles of the crystals, whose claws torment the eyes of those who do not see the right sight of Christ, having flown away to Christ, who have winged over the faithful in multitudes, and having left us sirs" (43). Such a disastrous situation of the Russian Church, as a result of the unworthiness that distinguished the successor of the great hierarchs, forced St. Joseph, as it were, to speak on behalf of the Church with his "Enlightener".

The same mood in the spirit of the deepest ecclesiastical understanding of all life distinguishes the works of Blessed Maximus. The fate of southern Europe, southwestern Asia, and northeastern Africa, in a word, of the ancient "universe," interested him solely because in these places, more than anywhere else, there was the splendor of the full development of church life. What genuine sorrow and heartfelt bitterness sound all his arguments about the decline of church life. "Where, then, in piety and honesty, is the beauty that shone forth together with the glory of the former faithful in Jerusalem, and Alexandria, and Egypt, and Libya, and Antioch? Where is the warmth and divine zeal of those who shone forth in fasting, in the skete and in the heavenly Thebaid, and in various countries and mountains, our God-bearing and angelic fathers? Where, in piety, is the most glorious height and the praise of all Western tongues, the holy, I say, catholic and apostolic Church of the Old Rome?.. What do I not say more than all the most glorious hearings and visions that have been on earth? Where is the loftiness and unapplied glory in the realm of wisdom and all virtue and good law and the Orthodox faith of the kingdom of Orthodox Christian kings, who reigned in the all-glorious and pious city of Constantine the Great? Where is he the universal light of piety, which like the sun illuminates the entire universe by the hierarchs equal to the angels in him... Where is it now, more than the mind and the word that was accomplished in him from the Most-Pure Mother of God Jesus, which delivers him more than the hope of frequent barbarian findings? Blessed Maximus sees the reason for such a sad situation of the apostolic thrones not in the natural political circumstances of the epoch, but in the fulfillment of the special plans for the economy of Christ, caused by the sins of the children of the Church. To all the above questions he gives one answer: "Formerly dared in him for the sake of our ancestors incurable iniquities." The above excerpts testify to the depth of the ecclesiastical worldview and worldview of the authors we are considering. But this is not enough: all the existing foundations of social life are discussed from a strictly ecclesiastical point of view. By virtue of the strictly ecclesiastical system of life, seeing no need to separate church life from state life, for the Church was everything, and the state was only a tribute to human limitations, St. John. Joseph also reveres the governmental power, since it is the servant of the Church, but "if there is a king reigning over men, he has over himself the filthy passions and sins, but the love of money and wrath, deceit and unrighteousness, pride and rage, and the worst of all, unbelief and blasphemy, such a king is not God's servant, but the devil, and not a king, but a tormentor. Such a king, for his wickedness, do not call our Lord Jesus Christ a king, but a fox... (I,133-135). Do not listen to such a king or prince, who leads you to impiety and deceit, if you torture or give you up to death" (287). In the face of zeal for the glory of the Church, kinship ties must also recede: "Behold, there are enemies, who, when father and mother, or son, or daughter turn away from the true faith, it is fitting to hate them, and to turn away, and flee from them, lest we perish with them" (474). Moreover, the most precious thing for the feeling of St. The hierarchical principle of church discipline is preserved as long as the hierarchy corresponds to its high purpose. In spite of his abbot's rank, the Volotsk abbot did not hesitate to denounce the All-Russian metropolitan when he turned out to be a heretic, and, as the main principle of the canonical worldview, St. Joseph, we should consider his idea that hierarchical privileges are effective only on the condition of faithfulness to the Church. With regard to the priests and bishops who have violated this faithfulness, he repeats the words of St. Athanasius the Great: "Without them it is not possible to gather in the temple of prayer, unless we are plunged with them, as with Anna and Caiaphas, into the fiery Gehenna" (272).

III. The source of understanding of divinely revealed truths is contemplation

The penetration of the spirit of the Church, which leads man into the realm of divine manifestations, gave the Holy Fathers a special power of knowledge, almost unknown to the rest of humanity. This power is contemplation. In the realm of the world, it is partly approached by the inspiration of poets, which, however, is far inferior to contemplation in purity, and, consequently, in power. The first condition of contemplative knowledge is piety, and the main power of piety is prayer and the reading of the Divine Scriptures. It should be noted that the leaders of the contemplative life do not distinguish between these two activities, which are really impossible without the other. "In relation to the Divine Scriptures, it is in our power to read them, and to understand what is read depends on us and not on us. It depends on us to be careful and attentive when reading; the same, in order to understand what is read, is the work of God's grace... Reading teaches a person what guides him to God and makes him God's; prayer causes God to have mercy on man and enlighten his mind so that he understands and remembers what he has read. What is written about other worldly matters, readers can understand for themselves, but it is impossible for anyone to understand or remember things divine and salvific without enlightenment from the Holy Spirit" (43 ff. of Symeon the New Theologian). This precious testimony belongs to St. Simeon, who received the name of the New Theologian for the contemplative power of his works. In comparison with the usual method of human research, contemplation is a very special path, standing outside ordinary conditions. St. Isaac puts it this way: "When the mind is renewed and the heart is sanctified, then all the concepts that arise in it are aroused in accordance with the nature of the world into which it enters. First the love of the divine is aroused in him, and he longs for communion with the angels and the revelation of the mysteries of the spiritual knowledge of creatures, and the contemplation of the mysteries of the Holy Trinity, as well as the mysteries of the economy venerated for our sake, shines forth in him, and then he enters wholly into unity with the knowledge of the hope of the future" (Homily 55 of the Epistle to St. Simeon). Contemplative knowledge was always considered a special gift of Divine grace, and by no means an ordinary development of psychic powers. That this opinion is true is evidenced by the following words of Anthony the Great: "I have prayed for you, that you also may be vouchsafed to receive that great and fiery Spirit which I have received. If you wish to receive Him so that He may abide in you, bring first bodily labors and humility of heart, and enrapturing your thoughts into heaven day and night, seek with righteousness of heart this fiery Spirit, and He shall be given unto you. In this way Elijah the Tishbite and Elisha with the rest of the prophets received Him. Whoever cultivates himself by this cultivation is given this Spirit forever and forever. Abide in prayer with a painful search from all your hearts, and it will be given to you, for that Spirit dwells in upright hearts. And He, when He is received, will reveal to you the highest mysteries, and you will be in this body, as those who are already in the Kingdom" (Philokalia, I, 34). We have the right to consider patristic theology to be contemplative, since the Fathers themselves looked upon contemplation as the main condition for the true knowledge of divine phenomena. "About him (i.e., about God)," writes St. Gregory the Theologian, "only those who have succeeded in contemplation, and first of all, those who are pure in soul and body, or at least purify themselves, can reason" (On Theology, Homily 1). If we look at the works of the Russian Fathers of the sixteenth century from the point of view of their method, we will see that they are all imprinted with the spirit of high contemplation. We have already seen above that the blessed monk Zinovii prepared himself by fasting and prayer for a conversation with the followers of Theodosius the Oblique. Prep. Joseph of Volotsk with particular persistence pursues the idea of the necessity of spiritual feats for those who try to investigate the content of Christian teaching. "Since the Divine Scriptures instruct us and establish the law known and unconcealed, it is fitting to receive and preserve them into the law. And if they proclaim in secret, both in parables and in cases, or in wisdom, it behooves them to pray to God with humility and much labor, and with the advice of the skilful, in deed, and not in word: but there is no secret to seek the Scriptures, for there is no such thing as this. As the great Apostle said: "Wherefore, O man, who is this, declaring to God: But rather deny this, as unworthy beings.

And thus shaking the darkness of passionate thought, let us approach the true Teacher of truth immaterially; And the Teacher is Christ, the composite wisdom of God, and in Him all the treasures of understanding are hidden, as He Himself said: "To Him the Son wills, He reveals, but without Him speak understanding, lie: for He speaks by divination, and not truly, from immeasurable opinion He boasts. To him the Theologian Gregory says: "Do not exalt yourself to the understanding of God, reproaching the story, for you speak brutally and crookedly, if you do not heed the power of reason, but the ink of writing. And it is foolish for him who hopes to be wise, but what he thinks he has, it will be taken from him, because he does not want to decide: we do not know, for all holiness lead, we say, "Nothing knows." And if the essence of the words in the Divine Scriptures is hidden and hidden from us, and behold, God has done for the greatest benefit: for we shall not be condemned many times, transgressing in understanding; For he who has been vouchsafed to eat reason and does not asceticize, as our former holy fathers did, in fasting, and in prayer, and in chastity, and in humility, such as he is not worthy is expelled from the grace of the Holy Spirit with rebuke, as Saul is expelled from the kingdom, as St. Maximus said" (Homily 8). The above excerpt clearly testifies that the only source of theological understanding of St. Joseph considers ascetic contemplation, but he had the lowest opinion of the rationalistic study of the Bible.

The undoubted dominance of the contemplative patristic method and the recognition of all the depths of divine knowledge accessible to man made the representatives of Russian theology very cautious in their attitude towards other sources of theological knowledge. Even Blessed Maximus, who himself listened to the sciences in Italy for some time, advises us to beware of the works of Latin authors, as infected with concepts alien to the truth. "Latins," he writes, "have been much seduced by external teachers, and it is not fitting for you to listen to their teaching, to translate them into the Russian language; guard yourselves from them as from gangrene and the worst scab, if you want pure wheat, and not tares to be found in the day of harvest" (III, 232). By "external teaching" Blessed Maximus did not mean any knowledge from the field of positive sciences, which in its applied purpose has nothing to do with piety, and therefore cannot be either harmful or useful in this respect, but the scholastic method of theology, which burdens Christianity with a multitude of rationalistic concepts, alien to the spirit of divine truth. That our conjecture is not only plausible, but also quite just, can be seen from the description of the Latin theological schools, which are blissful. Maxim saw it while living in Italy. Having mentioned the Apostle's commandment (Col. 2:8) to beware of external philosophy in the matter of knowing the truth, he continues: "Do not the Latin sons go about today and turn the apostolic truth? Go with your mind to the Italian school, and there you will see in the likeness of the streams flowing, especially drowning Aristotle and Plato and those around them. And there is no strong dogma in them, neither human nor divine, even if the Aristotelian syllogisms confirm this dogma. And if he does not agree with the artistic, - either as the worst rejection, or, if it seems to be contrary to art, this is cut off to please the Aristotelian art of the premenish, and as the truest, they intercede. And what shall I say to thee, that the Latin sons are wicked today, deceived by the philosophy of vain deception according to the Apostle, about the immortality of the soul, and about the enjoyment of the righteous in the future, and about the structure of the faithful who depart from the present life, who suffer all, and who will follow more than external dialectical knowledge, and not the inner ecclesiastical and God-given philosophy" (I, 247). In the predilection for external philosophy, in theological rationalism, in the betrayal of the general church tradition, acceptable and assimilated through obedience and prayer, he sees Bl. Maximus the main cause of the death of Western Christians. His definition of church dogmas "as an internal God-given philosophy" is very characteristic. In fact, the content of Christian dogmas given by God through the teaching of the Apostles is assimilated by the inner struggle of prayer and contemplation, and therefore can in no way be taught by means of external scholastic proofs, for, as we said above, divine knowledge is the realm of a special world, of special phenomena, and consequently of special concepts. - Thus, Russian theology in the sixteenth century was strictly contemplative in nature. Piety was recognized as the main condition for a correct understanding of Christ's truth. When studying the Holy Scriptures, prayer was considered the best way to know it. Any teaching alien to the Church was rejected without any reflection, even if it did not contradict the writings of the previous Fathers, quite rightly believing that there can be no truth outside the Church, which the Lord created as the pillar and foundation of truth... The appearance of theological systems of St. Joseph and Bl. Zinovy was caused by the emergence of the heresies of the Judaizers and Theodosius the Oblique, and was primarily a polemical movement against the enemies of the Church. In order to see more clearly how closely the Russian theologians adhered to the Holy Fathers in this respect, it is necessary to briefly expound the most famous systems of the latter.

IV. Patristic Systems of Christian Teaching

The fullness of divine truth, accessible to the human mind, is revealed in the life of the Universal Church. The assimilation of this truth by individuals is possible only in living, sincere unity with the body of the Church. Inasmuch as each individual lives the life of the Church, inasmuch as he partakes of the spirit of the great universal truth proclaimed to mankind by the incarnate Word, this truth is the Lord Christ Himself, the truth in the life He founded. Insofar as the individual person bases his individual existence at least on strictly biblical principles, he becomes alien to the Church, and then to the Bible itself, and the divine truth becomes unclear to him. Having lost the light, a person begins to look for it, but not where he is. When does a person assert his individuality with a special force? When love is scarce in him, and love is impoverished by the increase of iniquities. Following the impoverishment of love comes the pride of the mind, which strives to give answers to all possible questions, even if in essence having nothing to do with piety. Such is the origin of heresy. The Church has never remained an indifferent spectator of human destruction and, condescending to the weakness of the passions, has not refused to give a correct solution to questions that are often incorrectly posed and by their very meaning constitute more an object of curiosity than a real demand for the interpretation of a pious life. The most zealous teachers of the Church, grieving over the tearing of the "seamless tunic" of Vladyka, set forth in detail the decision of the Church regarding the issues raised. Such is the origin of polemical theology. Its main difference from the contemplative conduct we have examined, which has a completely independent beginning from any external events, lies in its external similarity with the works of external philosophers, for the ancient heretics built their doctrines on the basis of Hellenic philosophy. Fighting against heretics on their soil and their tools, the Holy Fathers showed an example of extreme condescension, but they never forgot that the main strength of the Church is piety and the only knowledge is contemplation. All the questions raised by the heretics were resolved by the Holy Fathers from a purely ecclesiastical point of view and on the basis of the experience of reverent contemplation. St. Gregory of Nyssa writes about this: "For Severus has in mind only bare expressions and places piety in words and sounds alone, contrary to the words of the Apostle: 'For the Kingdom of God is not in words, but in power and truth' (1 Corinthians 4:20), because in this Severus he is considered to be the most excellent theologian, who has studied well the Aristotelian categories and other intricacies of pagan philosophers: then we need to explain in advance the meaning of each expression, usually accepted in the teaching of Severus, according to the reason of the church teachers" (Glas. l. 192). From the time when the number of heresies multiplied, and in the inquisitiveness of the human mind, which strives to comprehend the mysteries of Christianity without going through the path of the activity of wisdom, there appeared a constant source of new false teachings, it became necessary to present the teaching of the Church in a correspondingly harmonious form of system. This was first accomplished in the fourth century by the efforts of St. Gregory of Nyssa, for the previous experience of the Christian system, the famous work of Origen, is rather an exposition of Christian principles in comparison with the principles of the pagans. St. Gregory of Nyssa expounded in his "Great Catechetical Discourse" the teaching of the Church as the true interpretation of Christ's teaching, in contrast to the false and erroneous systems of heretics. Establishing a correct, strictly ecclesiastical understanding of those questions that were touched upon by the heretics, St. Gregory makes an explanation of the very essence of Christianity, devoting a large part of his system to the exposition of the true concept of the descent to earth and the incarnation of the Word of God and of the rebirth of man in church life, which is manifested with particular force in the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist. The Holy Father, in spite of his exceptional gifts in the systematization of Christian truths, nevertheless acknowledges the difficulty of presenting a system that fully satisfies all the spiritual needs of the age... "Not all those who are approaching enlightenment will be suitable for the same way of teaching, but according to the difference in beliefs, the catechesis should be changed, having in mind the same purpose of instruction, but not using proofs in the same way. For the Judaizer is led by other concepts, and he who lives in Hellenism is led by other concepts. And the Anomaeus, and the Manichaeans, and the Marcionites, and the followers of Valentinus and Basilides, and other hosts of erring heretics, led by special notions, force us to separately enter into a struggle with their opinions. Therefore, according to the nature of the disease, the method of healing should also be used. Let us not heal the polytheism of the Greeks and the unbelief of the Jew in the Only-begotten Son of God by the same thing, and let us not overthrow the seductive, fictitious fables of erring heretics regarding dogmas by one and the same thing. For what anyone could correct Sabellius, the same thing will not benefit the anomoean, and the struggle with the Manichaean is useless against the Jew" (Og. l. 3). Thus, the system was intended mainly for the struggle against the enemies of the truth, who had to be converted, or for those children of the Church who, through frivolity, through the decline of piety, or deceived by the intricacies of heretics, were inclined to fall away. In itself, Christianity was presented to St. Gregory as a life full of spirit and power, and by no means as a doctrine, even if it was irreproachable in accordance with the teaching of the Gospel. Speaking of the origin of the Church, he exclaims: "A lofty wisdom has been established, accomplished more by deed than by word" (92), and in the development of Christian life the Holy Father sees the main support of the divine origin of the Church. Speaking of the exploits of the martyrs, who were more willing to lose this temporal life than to renounce Christ, he rightly believes that they would not have been subjected to this without having a clear, indubitable proof of the Divine coming. What proofs did the martyrs have? Of course, these are not philosophically grounded systems, but contemplative revelations given by God for their purity and zeal. The Protomartyr Stephen, as the book of the Acts of the Apostles testifies, saw Christ, and that this was not the only event in the lives of the martyrs is evidenced by the story of the passion-bearers full of miracles. The freedom of the regenerated spirit, which has always been inherent in the Church, was also reflected in the first system of Orthodox theology. In the "Great Catechetical Discourse" of St. Gregory there is no predilection for words and literalism, which serves as the best indicator of the poverty of the spirit and the slavish attitude to the teaching of Christ. The degree of loftiness and real freedom attained by St. Gregory is best seen from his attitude to the precision of the name of the Godhead, which was especially important in view of the development of the Arian troubles. "If, therefore, you reflect on the nature of beings, whether they be celestial, or subterranean, or located in each of the above-mentioned ends of the universe, then everywhere your mind encounters the Divinity, everywhere appearing to be one in beings and containing all things in being. Wherefore whether this nature be called by the Godhead, or by the word, or by power, by wisdom, or by any other exalted attribute and name which is more capable of expressing the supreme being, our word does not in the least dispute about the sound, or the name, or the manner of expression" (143). But, having complete freedom regarding the expression of the general church beliefs and reasoning about concepts, and not about words, St. Gregory is extremely reluctant to resolve questions in which human curiosity is at least somewhat affected. We have noted above that he developed with extraordinary and unique completeness the teaching about the salvation of man through the incarnation of God. But as for the question of the cause of incarnation, a question so natural from the point of view of human thought, St. Gregory does not consider it necessary to resolve it. To the supposed question of why exactly the Son of God appeared as a man among men, St. Gregory gives an answer in the spirit of the Church of Christ, which has always shunned curiosity, which is useless for piety. "If love for mankind is a sign inherent in the divine nature, then we have the cause of the manifestation of God among people, for our nature, subjected to weakness, had need of a physician; fallen man had need of a restorer, he who deviated from life needed a life-giving; he who was cut off from communion with the good needed a guide for the good; the prisoner in darkness had need of the presence of light, the prisoner demanded a redeemer, the prisoner a helper, possessed by the yoke of slavery a liberator" (76). But when this inspired confession of the supreme truth of piety proved to be unsatisfactory for the inquisitiveness of human thinking, which very often lacks a guiding force, and the former question was raised with greater urgency, St. Gregory says: "It would suffice it to say that the afflicted do not prescribe to their physicians a mode of action and do not argue with their benefactors about the method of healing, i.e. for what purpose the physician touched the sick part and thought of this very thing for the destruction of the disease. and not another decent means; on the contrary, looking at the beneficial consequences, they gratefully accept the allowance. But since, as the prophet says, the abundance of God's goodness has a hidden benefit (Isaiah 30:20), which is still not clearly seen in the present life (for, of course, all contradiction on the part of unbelievers would cease if what was expected were before their eyes), and since it (the grace of God) awaits the succeeding ages, so that in them the blessings now contemplated by faith alone may be revealed, it will be necessary to find by means of certain inferences, if possible, the solution of these questions as well, in accordance with the previous answers" (89). These words of the Holy Father show that the inferences by means of which he wishes to give the questioners an answer that is quite intelligible to them, appear to him to be nothing more than a matter of condescension to the infirmities of the human mind, which often needs analogies and pictorial images and is not always capable of understanding the truth in all its abstract grandeur and simplicity.

After St. Gregory of Nyssa, the systematist of Christian theology was Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus. His system, the "Summary of Divine Dogmas," to a greater extent than the "Great Catechetical Discourse" of St. Gregory of Nyssa, bears traces of the epoch in which it was written. St. Gregory of Nyssa only pointed out the polemical purpose of his system, but as an outstanding thinker, he gave a unique exposition of the very essence of Christian teaching in its depth and integrity. The great work of redemption and the assimilation of this mystery extends its significance to all ages, and if circumstances made it necessary to explain it in the language of human concepts in the sixth century, then, of course, it is even more necessary in the centuries to come. The questions that occupied the universe at the time of writing the "Homily" are solved by St. Gregory as if in passing. Blessed Theodoret did not have the philosophical perspicacity of Gregory of Nyssa, and for this reason his exposition of divine dogmas is a more modern creation, i.e. answering mainly those questions that were of burning interest in his time. A detailed exposition of the dogma of the Most Holy Trinity was necessary in view of the fresh memories of the numerous dialectical doctrines of the sophistic disciples of the rebellious presbyter. The chapters on creation, on matter, on aeons, on the devil were written in denunciation of the Gnostics of various shades and the Manichaeans. The same can be said about the chapter on man and providence, in which the question of the origin of evil is resolved. The exposition of the dogmas about the union of the two natures in the one Hypostasis of the Son of God reminds us that Blessed Theodoret was a zealous denunciator of Eutyches. The chapters that One and the same is good and just, that One and the same gave the Old and New Testaments, are wholly directed against Marcion. In the Church of Christ, which has received its teaching from Jesus Christ, such questions are positively irrelevant. The chapters on marriage, celibacy, and fornication were introduced into the system of exposition of divine dogmas precisely because in Syria there were strong sects that combined the confession of Christ with an extremely dissolute life. The following feature of the dogmatic work of Blessed Theodoret should also be noted: the divine dogmas are expounded to the extent necessary for the resolution of controversial questions; the same idea that we saw in the "Great Catechetical Discourse" can be seen: namely, that Christianity is wisdom more in life than in the feeble human word, which is not always able to express lofty and divine concepts. If attempts are made to formulate the content of the Church's consciousness, it is because of pity for those who are perishing and for those who may perish in the abyss of heretical impiety. With the expression of the last thought, Blessed Theodoret concludes his work: "And so I ask all who will have the opportunity to read this work, to compare the divine dogmas with the false teaching of those impious ones, and from this comparison to learn what is the difference between truth and falsehood. For what is righteousness to have to do with iniquity? Or what fellowship is there between light and darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14). And truly, heretical fables are the invention of the devil's wickedness, while the divine dogmas are the teaching of the Holy Spirit, which must always be contained, invariably preserved, and to which one must direct one's heart in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Ed. of God, Dog. 137).

The third exposition of universal theology belongs to St. Father John of Damascus. Since in the eighth century the intensity of theological disputes on metaphysical grounds weakened, the form of the "Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith" is less polemical than the works of Blazh. But in its content this system is purely polemical and first of all intends to give a correct answer to those questions which were of most interest in the eighth century. In addition to the essence of the Christian teaching, i.e. the dogmas of the Trinity and redemption, the teaching on the Christian cult is expounded in great detail, as a result of the iconoclastic troubles that began at that time. There was even a point of denunciation of the Jews, who, under the rule of the Arab caliphs, raised their heads and began to pose a clear danger to the Church. The desire to give the fullness of all knowledge prompted St. John of Damascus to introduce into his system a detailed course of contemporary cosmology. This last attempt cannot be called particularly successful, for the teaching on the properties of created nature has nothing to do with the life of the Church of Christ and can be the subject of other sciences without any damage to piety. The exposition of dogmas in St. John is the most detailed; The system is common to all three Holy Fathers-systematists. First, the teaching on the Trinity is expounded, to which St. John prefaces general discourses on the Divinity, then on our salvation through the descent of God the Word from heaven, then on our assimilation of Divine grace, i.e. on prayer, on the Scriptures, on the most important sacred rites, and, finally, as far as necessary, on the final fate of the Church and humanity. Such is the content of the patristic system worked out by history. More is said about those issues that in this era posed the greatest danger to the integrity and unity of the Church of Christ. All the significance and all the power of the patristic system is not in the external arrangement of the component parts, which is very simple and natural, but in the inner and deep power of contemplation and in the bold vitality.

Having examined the three patristic systems that have come down to us from a time of greater development of church life than today, we come to the conclusion that all the efficacy of patristic theology came from its profoundly ecclesiastical spirit and from its contemplative method. It would be extremely wrong and contrary to the actual state of affairs to look for anything particularly strong in the very structure of the system, which was entirely determined by the content and in secondary points, as we have seen above, completely depended on causes of an accidental character. And the author of the most detailed system of Orthodox theology himself does not see in it an important acquisition for the Church, but reverently recalls the first centuries of Christianity, the era of miracles and pure revelations: "The disciples and apostles, being made wise by the All-Holy Spirit and working by His power and grace divine signs, catching them (i.e., the pagans) in a network of miracles, led them out of the abyss of ignorance upwards into the light of the knowledge of God. In the same way, the heirs of the grace and virtues of these, both pastors and teachers, having received the sanctifying grace of the Spirit, and by the power of miracles and the word of grace, enlightened the darkened and turned to the true path those who had gone astray. But we, who have received neither the gift of miracles nor the gift of teaching, because we have made ourselves unworthy by the passion for pleasure, wish to tell about this a little of the grace handed down to us by the heralds, calling upon the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit to help us" (Chapter III). But the fact is that the work of John of Damascus himself is nothing other than the highest manifestation of divine truth, revealed in the Church's teaching, a manifestation, by its own will and grace, fully worthy of the successor of the great Fathers of the faith and the disciples of the Apostles.