Но послушаем и то, что заповедует нам об этом блаженный Иоанн Дамаскин. Он говорит так: „Все, что преподано нам и законом, и пророками, и евангелием, будем изучать и сохранять честно, и более ни­чего не будем искать. Ибо Бог, будучи благ, и всякого блага податель,—что нужно было нам знать, то открыл, а чего мы не могли вместить, о том умолчал. Будем же любить то, что Им преподано нам, и в том будем пребывать, не прелагая пределов вечных и не преступая божественного предания. Ибо кто что нибудь малое или великое божественное отметает, тот отметает весь закон и почитается заодно с преступниками его". Вот и этот блаженный и славный просветитель вселенной, церковный соловей, сладкопесненный орган Святого Духа, говорит: все приемлем и изучаем и сохраняем честно, и боле того ничего не изследуем и не испытываем. Почему? Потому, говорит, что Бог, будучи благ, что знал для нас полезным, то открыл, потому и будем этим довольны, то есть, успокоимся в этом, как в установленном от Бога. И если не хотим оказывать сему большую честь, то хотя так будем это почитать, как почитаем повеления земных царей, и без испытания это, как и то, будем содержать. Но римляне и к этому остаются глухи, подобно аспиду глухому, затыкающему уши свои, и не хотят принять цельбы, но, раз надмившись кичением и пустым мнением,—все то, что не подходит под злохитрые диалектические доводы, отвергают с большим презрением, как негодное. Но об этом после; теперь же рассмотрим то, что относится к нашему предмету.

На этом соборе были присланы от святейшего папы Иоанна наместники его, Павел и Евгений, божественные епископы, и третий с ними Петр пресвитер и кардинал. Этот священный собор, после утверждения Седьмого Собора, латинскую ересь достаточно обличил, и защищающих ее предал анафеме, сделав такое определение против тех, которые дерзнули изменить нечто в исповедании веры. „Если кто, говорит, помимо этого священного исповедания веры осмелится написать иное, или прибавить, или убавить, и дерзнет называть это заповедью соборною, тот да будет осужден, и от всякого христианского общества отвержен" Такое отлучение божественный священный собор объявил против того беззакония. О сем блаженнейший папа Иоанн возрадовался, будучи этим доволен, и написал к святейшему патриарху Фотию пространнее и яснее, совершенно отвергая прибавление в священном символе веры. Он говорит: „Твоему братству хорошо известно, что когда пришел к нам тот, кто незадолго пред тем был послан, и расспросил нас о святом исповедании веры, то нашел нас сохраняющими оное в целости, как сначала нам было преподано, и что мы ничего не прибавляем и не убавляем, зная достоверно, что дерзающих таковое ожидает тягчайшее осуждение. Поэтому опять объясняем святости твоей, что касательно известного мудрования, по поводу которого произошли соблазны в церквах Божиих, мы не только не говорим этого, но и тех, которые прежде осмелились самовольно это делать, считаем преступниками Божиих глаголов и извратителями  богословия Господа Иисуса Христа и святых Отцев, которые, собравшись на соборах, преподали  святое  исповедание веры. Мы тех преступников считаем наравне с иудою, так как они дерзнули сделать тоже, что и он, предав на смерть не Господне Тело, но верных, которые суть члены Его Тела, разлучив и разделив их друг от друга и предав таким образом вечной смерти, и в особенности себя самих, как неправедно поступил названный ученик". Вот как ясно блаженнейший тот Отец этими краткими словами показал, что ересь эта ненавистна и отвержена, так что с Иудою сравнивает тех, которые ее изобрели и которые после них поддерживают ее. Что против этого опять могут сказать противники? Или и против этого также затыкают уши на подобие аспида глухого, и не принимают обличения? Все это не вчера и не третьего дня, и не в углу или в темном месте было сказано и сделано; этого они не смеют сказать, если рассуждают здраво и пекутся о истине.

Но и преосвященнейший папа Адриан, бывший после Иоанна, как говорит преосвященнейший Фотий, по принятому древнему обычаю, прислал Фотию соборное послание, в котором проповедует тоже благочестие, и Духа богословит исходящим от Отца.

Но зачем много говорить, когда мы можем заградить уста противящимся истине—тем, что сделал блаженный Лев, папа Римский? Этот блаженнейший папа Лев, когда увидел, что новоявленная сия ересь растлевает врученную ему Святую Великую Церковь, то, кроме многих других мер, принятых им к истреблению этого еретического недуга, он придумал и такое средство: отправил соборные послания во все подчиненные ему области и страны, повелевая всюду святым Божиим Церквам возглашать исповедание святой веры на божественной литургии не на латинском наречии, а по-гречески, без прибавления „и от Сына",—

Также этим он показал всем, какою честью и каким уважением должна пользоваться у всех Святая Божия Великая Апостольская Константинопольская Церковь и прочие восточные святые Божии Церкви, как то: Александрийская, Антиохийская и Иерусалимская. Так эти блаженные, воистину, ученики кротчайшего Иисуса умели и любить друг друга и возвышать честью в простоте сердца и в духе кротости. И не это одно сделал блаженнйший тот Лев, как повествует святейший Фотий, но, найдя в церковной ризнице собора Св. Апостолов сохранившиеся от древних времен, когда процветало благочестие, два щита, на которых написано было на греческом языке священное исповедание непорочной веры, без прибавления „и от Сына",—эти щиты он вынес и приказал всем показывать и читать пред всем множеством римского народа, как бы другой Моисей, принявший от Бога богописанные скрижали, и показывал их непокоряющимся, чтобы хотя таким способом принудить их отложить жестокость сердца и воспринять любовь. Но в злохудожную душу, сказал премудрый Соломон, не внидет премудрость; так и те, однажды проглотив улицу кичения и самомнения, которую злобный ловец закинул на пагубу им, оста­лись неисцеленными и неисправленными.

Этим заканчиваем первую часть настоящего слова, которую твоя светлость да примет и прочтет. И если найдешь в ней что-либо сказанное хорошо, то припиши это Подателю всех благ—Богу, благодатью Которого укрепляемые, скоро пришлем и остальную часть этого слова, где сделаем, насколько Бог поможет, обличение глав Николаевых, какие составил Николай немчин против правильного догмата о Всесвятом Духе, как мы обещали тебе. Будь здоров!

XIII. Continuation of the Same Word (Part 2)

The beginning of Thy words is truth, and all the judgments of Thy righteousness endure forever (Psalm 118:160), cried the Father of God David, having been sanctified in his mind by the word of the Comforter.

And just as they are accustomed to call any proposition and teaching invented outside of Aristotle's teaching false and deceptive, so he who without fear teaches contrary to the sayings of the Lord and the decrees of the blessed fathers, especially in matters of piety and the confession of the Orthodox faith, should be considered by them and called a heretic and a flatterer. Now they have become so mad that they not only consider themselves to have the authority to change the utterances of the Lord, but they are not afraid to lie against the Evangelist John, and, being proud of their audacity to do everything, they falsely say that Blessed John, with a special intention, said that the Spirit proceeds alone from the Father, in order to assure the Apostles of the right to reason about the Father, Whom they did not yet know for certain. They do not know, accursed ones, that the holy Gospel of John was written many years after the descent of the Comforter upon the blessed Apostles, when they were all alike, to the extent of the acceptability of human nature, abundantly enriched with the knowledge of the ineffable Mysteries of God, through the revelation of the Holy Spirit, after which they all alike magnified the Most High, and throughout the whole world openly and purely preached Him, and not covertly or divinationly, not like the Jews through the prefigurations. Thus, as it should have been, the greatness of God was preached by means of shadows and divination, because of the debility of the listeners and their infantile constitution; here the Holy Trinity is preached clearly and purely, without divination. Now the Lord says: He who has seen Me has seen the Father; likewise: I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me (John 14:9, 10). Likewise, about the Holy Spirit, many words of the Lord explain and show Him to be God, equal in all things and of one essence with the Father and the Son. But the Latins, being asked by the Orthodox why they invented the addition "and from the Son," say that they do it prudently, in order to show that the Son is equal to the Father in all things and omnipotent. Such is the indifferent and senseless answer of the Latins. And they do not understand that it is possible to prudently compose any rule and teaching about this, regarding which the conciliar divine dogmas were not first established, or where this foresight does not refer to the most important subject of faith, and does not harm the divinely inspired teaching about divine dogmas and apostolic commands. A reliable witness to what has been said is Blessed Cyril, who at the third holy council confirmed the sacred exposition of the faith by the strictest legal provisions, among which he says this: "If anyone changes any of the holy and divine dogmas of the fathers, then this should not be called foresight, but a crime and deviation from dogma, and impiety against God." Blessed Chrysostom, wishing to instill in us the greatest fear of divine words, says: "As on a royal coin, if anyone destroys even a small part of the royal image, he makes the entire coin false, so it is in the true faith: whoever changes the slightest thing in it damages it all." Following this, the divine Isidore of Pelusium says: "Those who dare to take away or add anything to the divinely inspired words are afflicted by one of two things: either they do not believe that the Holy Scriptures were spoken by the Holy Spirit, and are unbelievers; or they consider themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and this means nothing else than that they are possessed by demons." Therefore, we should not say a word against these, who are called demon-possessed and unfaithful by the blessed father; for what profit can any one ever gain from such? But in order that falsehood may not boast against the truth, I have deemed it necessary, O wise Theodore, to rise up with the help of God against the destruction of the chapters of Nicholas, in which he expressed his impiety against the truth, and which I will try to expose with the help of God with the words of true love, and not by means of deceit, as he everywhere turns out to do, perverting with falsehood the outward folly, rather than the wisdom of this passing age. pure and immaculate divinely inspired teaching.

Since Nicholas posites, as it were, two foundations of his theology—the twofold giving of the Holy Spirit, which took place before the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles on the day of Holy Pentecost, and thus strengthens to convince those who hear the simply divine scriptures that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally in hypostasis from the Son, then from here we should begin, and then expose the other grounds which the Latins falsely invented on their own behalf against the apostolic truth. In none of the ancient theologians and teachers, whose teaching has swept from end to end of the universe, will you find this teaching, no matter how much you search, but on the contrary, you will find that everyone contradicts this and, as alien, rejects it. I am very surprised that Nicholas, being intelligent, as I have heard, and skilled in the verbal sciences, does not understand that he is building his house on such small and manageable foundations. I call them small not in essence and not in dignity — no, but in the mind of him who planned to erect on them a huge tower, equal in importance to the Babylonian one. Whoever, having read even once the commentary of the Holy Fathers on the Gospel, does not clearly understand that just as before the salvific sufferings the gifts and authority given by the Saviour to His holy disciples, so also after the resurrection the grace of the Spirit inspired by them (John 20:22), were private gifts, together with the blessings of the most perfect grace of the Comforter that was to descend upon them, as well as the providential providence foreseen from afar foreseen by God, to the rejection and destruction of the heresy that will subsequently arise, recognizing the Holy Spirit as created and alien to the Divinity of the Father and the Son. Thus, the gifts granted to them at that time were private gifts, and this is evident from what the Lord said in one place: "Behold, I give unto you power to tread upon the serpent, and upon the scorpion, and over all the power of the enemy" (Luke 10:19); and again: heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons (Matt. 10:8); and in another place: "Receive ye the Holy Spirit: whom ye shall forgive sins, they shall be forgiven" (John 20:22, 23), and so on. These are spiritual gifts, which contain power, now to forgive sins, now to cast out demons and heal infirmities. And that these were private gifts flowing from the fullness of the Saviour and acting at a certain time, and not a significant outpouring of the Spirit from the Son, as the Latins would like to prove, is evident from many circumstances, and especially from the fact that it does not appear that they (before the final inspiration of the Holy Spirit) forgave anyone of their sins, but on the contrary, they fled and hid themselves, for the sake of Jewish fear, for they were not yet fully clothed with power from above, wherefore some turned to fishing, forgetting for a short time the commandments of the Saviour. After the descent of the Paraclete, nothing of the kind happened to them, but, clothed with His absolutely irresistible power, they boldly rushed into the whole universe, like lions convinced of power, or like winged eagles. How can one say, or at least think once, that the gift of the Spirit given or breathed in at that time serves as proof that the Holy Spirit proceeds essentially from the Son, that is, hypostatically? Those who philosophize in this way, of necessity, must admit one of two things: either that then the disciples received the Spirit halfway, or completely and perfectly. Both are equally impious, not only to speak, but also to think, for the Holy Spirit, both in essence and in power, is always undivided in Himself and equal in power, as true God and equal in all things to the Father and the Son, except in attribute. To this they will turn out to be philosophizing and something even more inappropriate. If they believe that the essence of the Spirit was then bestowed upon the disciples by a sensual breath, and not the power to work miracles, then they, without realizing it, recognize the Spirit as subject to outline, since He poured out through the sensual bodily lips of the incarnate God, the Word, as through a trumpet. What will be more wicked than this wisdom, Lord Theodore? For it is clear that everything that is subject to outline has a beginning and is subject to time, and is in no way, or very little, different from the ministering spirits. And will not the heresy of Macedonius arise again, if we accept that the Spirit then breathed upon the disciples was not some spiritual gift, spiritually communicated from the fullness of Jesus, but a hypostatic procession to be delineated, as the Latins philosophize? About this the divine John Chrysostom, in his 87th discourse, commenting on the holy Gospel of John, says as follows: "Some say that by a breath Christ did not impart the Spirit to the disciples, but only made them capable of receiving Him. For if Daniel was horrified when he saw the angel, what would not the disciples have experienced if they had received this ineffable grace without having been prepared for it beforehand? Therefore, he says, Christ did not say, "You have received the Holy Spirit," but—receive. He will not sin in the least if he says that they then received a certain power and spiritual grace, but not in such a way as to raise the dead and create powers, but only to forgive sins, for the gifts of the Spirit are different; wherefore He added, "Whosoever ye shall forgive their sins, they shall be forgiven," showing by this what kind of gift He gives them. After that, after forty days, they received the power to work miracles; and therefore He says, "Ye shall receive the power which the Holy Spirit hath come upon you, and ye shall be witnesses unto Me." And they became witnesses after they had received the grace of the fiery Spirit and the manifold gift." Thus speaks the divine Chrysostom about the power then given by the breath, following in this the divine Paul, who says: "The division of gifts is the essence, and that is the Spirit; and the division of the ministries is the essence, and this is the Lord (1 Cor. 12:4, 5), and so on.

Nicholas further says that if the Son had the Spirit in Himself, He would not have given Him; but if, as having Him essentially, He bestows Him on the worthy, it means that He also emits Him everlastingly. Against this we answer thus: the Son has in Himself the whole Spirit, but in the sense of the unity of essence and nature, and not as the cause of the hypostatic procession. For this attribute belongs to the Father alone. According to all theologians in general, the whole Father is the Son in everything, and the Son is all in the Father; but it does not follow that the Father is born of the Son, since He is wholly in Him. Likewise, the Son is essentially in the Spirit; but it does not follow from this that He is born of the Spirit, which we will never allow ourselves to say as long as we have right wisdom. If it is impious to admit such notions of the Father and the Son only because they are essentially in each other, then it is also impious and blasphemous to speculate about the Spirit, that He proceeds also from the Son, because the Son has all of Him in Himself.

It remains, therefore, to say that the gift of spiritual gifts was poured out by the Son, with the permission of the Father, upon the sacred disciples through the autocratic coming of the Holy Spirit. Proof of this is the appearance of tongues, which denoted the division not of essence, but of gift. But the Son does not receive from Himself, but from the Father, as Blessed Peter says in the Acts: "And the promise of the Holy Spirit is received from the Father, which is poured out, as ye now see" (Acts 2:33). You hear the difference in expressions: having received, he says, he pours out, and does not let him out. The concept of "pouring out" is very different from the concept of "emitting". The word to emit shows the origin of a being according to hypostasis, just as to be born in relation to the hypostasis of the Son; and to pour out, and to be sent, and to flow out, and so on, serves as an indication of the actions of the Paraclete and the gifts. An irrefutable witness to this is the author of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, our Lord Jesus Christ, Who established a distinction between all this, and He ascribed the outpouring of the Spirit to the Father alone, especially, as the only source of the Godhead for Those who are from Him, as St. Dionysius says. The Spirit of truth, saith the Lord, proceedeth from the Father (John 15:26); but that he might give and send, he appropriated both to himself and to the Father: "I will pray the Father," he says, "and he will give you another Comforter" (John 14:16). And again: "And the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father shall send in My name" (John 14:26). He does not say here of Himself that He will send Him out, just as He says where He says: "When the Comforter comes, I will send Him also" (15:26). Notice, then, the difference between "emit" and "send," and how criminal it is to confuse the two. For when it was necessary to teach theology about the hypostatic procession of the Holy Spirit, then the Saviour was pleased to reveal it to us with the words: Who proceeds from the Father, speaking in the present tense, and thereby showing that He proceeds from the Father eternally; and where he shows the giving of gifts, which is the good will of the Father and the Son, he no longer uses the expression "to give," and says not in the present tense, but in the future: "He will send and give," since the epistle occurs at certain times, for the confirmation and sanctification of those who are worthy of such grace. And while the Saviour knows and establishes the difference between the procession and the epistle, Nicholas and his like-minded people are not ashamed to say that there is no difference between the procession and the epistle, and that these expressions are identical. Just as the hypostasis of the Spirit is not sent by the Son, so His Divinity is not poured out and given by Him, as the Latins wish, but He descends by Himself in a sovereign and autocratic manner, by the grace of the Father and the Son, and fulfills with His gifts those who are worthy of His coming.