In Christology, Didymus, first of all, is struck by the persistence with which he speaks about the reality and fullness of the human nature of the Saviour, which is explained again by historical circumstances, by the necessity of polemics against Manichean docetism and the Arian denial of the human soul in Christ, and, finally, by the struggle against Apollinarianism. At the same time, Didymus emphasizes the complete inseparability of natures, united forever in the incarnation or, better, the incarnation of the Word. Didymus does not define the image of the union of natures precisely, he only emphasizes that the union is unmerged and unchangeable — it is curious that for some reason he does not use any of the terms: μίξις, κράσις, συνάφεια. He confines himself to the indefinite: "One Christ" – two things are said about the same thing, God-worthy and human, – about one person... And this determines the unity of the worship of Christ in the two natures. It should be added that Didymus constantly speaks of the Virgin Mary as the Mother of God (the term Θεοτόκος, apparently already in Origen and Arius) and emphasizes Her ever-virginity (αεί παρθένος already in Athanasius). The second birth of the Word according to humanity from the Virgin is a mystery which, in Didymus's opinion, can only be compared with His pre-eternal birth from the Father. — Most often, Didymus calls Christ the Savior. In salvation, he emphasizes, first of all, liberation from sin and victory over the devil as having the power of death — apparently, this is Origen's motif. On the other hand, Didymus contrasts Adam's disobedience with the obedience of the Second Adam, and obedience even to death on the cross, to the sacrifice of the cross, in which he sees the central moment of redemption. The first gift of redemption is victory over death, eternal life. Didymus does not speak of deification, he speaks only of the return or restoration of image and likeness. The moment of redemption prevails in Didymos' mind. It remains unclear whether Didymus taught, and in what sense, about apocatastasis. He says ο "universal salvation," but this is a rather vague expression. On the question of the salvation of the fallen angels, he seemed to hesitate, limiting redemption through the incarnation and incarnation to the human race. The fragmentary nature of the surviving data does not allow us to resolve the question, but it is most likely that Jerome was right in accusing Didymus of teaching the restoration of the devil. Apparently, Didymus admitted the pre-existence of souls, and saw a process of purification in the afterlife. He insists that everything that has a beginning is therefore changeable and must have an end. And from this he concludes the final destruction of the sensible world. Metempsychosis and metasomatosis are strongly denied by Didymus. He teaches about the resurrected bodies quite clearly, as about the heavenly bodies... Didymus believed that there would be no wicked in the world to come, not in the sense that their being would be annihilated, but in the sense that evil "quality" would be destroyed. He understands the Day of the Lord as the inner illumination of souls... All these are indisputable Origenistic features. It should be added that Didymus had a sense of the nearness of the end times and an expectation of the Antichrist.

Didymus with great force emphasizes the necessity of podvig. Sinlessness is not enough, virtue is needed, and at the same time, the state or habit of life... The Christian life begins with the baptismal mystery, which frees from sins and restores freedom — believers come out of baptismal regeneration sinless and free... Then the path of good deeds is opened. In the first place among the virtues, Didymus calls wisdom or knowledge, gnosis... This is not abstract and rational knowledge, but precisely virtue, the asceticism of the soul. An example of a philosopher for Didymus is Job, Job Didymus somewhat stylizes as a Stoic. In order to acquire wisdom, it is necessary to renounce the flesh, to mortify the flesh. Didymus represents the entire life of a true Christian under the image of marriage with Christ, a favorite image of Egyptian asceticism. And in the process of purification, holy souls become partakers of the Word, and on the heights they are so closely united with Christ that it is possible to speak of them as of Christs and of gods. Didymus's expressions resemble Methodius more than Origen's. Didymus places a high value on virginity, but as a path for a few, and emphasizes that marriage is sanctified and honored by the birth of Christ... — Of Didymus's private opinions, the clarity of his angelology should be noted first of all. Angels are incorporeal, "intelligent beings"... However, Didymus ascribes to them "heavenly bodies", similar to the bodies of the righteous who have reached perfection. These are created forces created for service. And Didymus emphasizes the participation of angels in the fate of the visible world. This is the basis for invoking them in prayers, for dedicating churches to them. Following Origen, Didymus contrasts the Gnostics with the simpletons, who do not understand the spiritual meaning of the Scriptures and are powerless to give an account of their faith in repelling heretics. The Gnostics have a Divine philosophy. However, this division in Didymus is very softened in comparison with the former Alexandrians.

III. St. Amphilochius of Iconium.

St. Amphilochius is closely connected with the great Cappadocians, apparently he was even related to Gregory the Theologian. He was born around 339-345 in Caesarea in Cappadocia, the son of a rhetorician. He studied under Livanius in Antioch. Then he was a rhetorician and lawyer in Constantinople. In the early seventies, he returned to his homeland and lived in his parents' house for several years. He was attracted to the monastic ideal. At the end of 373, against his will, Amphilochius was elected bishop of Iconium, probably under the influence of Basil the Great. Amphilochius had to govern a vast area. In his pastoral work, he always resorted to the advice and help of St. Basil. In a dispute with the Spirit-fighters, he turned to him and in response received the famous book: On the Holy Spirit, which he offered for the admonition of those who disagreed. In a similar way, he received from Basil the Canonical Rules. For his part, Basil held Amphilochius in high esteem and in high esteem. Already in the episcopal rank, Amphilochius began to systematically study theology. He started with the Bible. It is unlikely that he dealt much with the problems of speculative theology. He had neither philosophical interests nor philosophical training. This is reflected in his theological writings. He theologizes simply, not without naivety, and always on a biblical basis. In 381, Amphilochius was in Constantinople at the Ecumenical Council. Here he was recognized as a "witness of the faith" for Asia... In the following years, Amphilochius visited Constantinople more than once. This was a time of intense struggle against heretics: in addition to the Arians and Apollinarians, Amphilochius had to fight against the Messalians (or Euchites), against whom he convened a council in Side. In general, Amphilochius had the gift and calling of an ecclesiastical and public figure. Perhaps it was not without his influence that the state took severe measures against encratic sects in these years. - In the last years of his life, Amphilochius was close to the circle of the Olympics in Constantinople. He died, apparently, shortly after 384.

Of the works of Amphilochius, not much has survived. First of all, 8 homiles, including on the day of the Meeting of the Lord, is the oldest word for this day. It is also interesting to note the homily on Mid-Midnight or on the Sunday of the paralytic. This is due to the liturgical work of the Cappadocians on the organization of the annual liturgical cycle. In the words of Amphilochius one can feel an experienced rhetorician who knows how to speak expressively, vividly and picturesquely. In style, Amphilochius resembles Gregory the Theologian. Characteristically, Amphilochius strives for historical realism in the explanation of the Gospel texts. First of all, he tries to revive before the eyes of his ministers the historical image of Christ. With good reason, they emphasize the prominent place of Amphilochius in the history of preaching and see in him a predecessor of Chrysostom, on whom he may have had a direct influence. In addition to the homilies, the epistle of the Council of Iconium in 376 to the Holy Spirit and the "Iamba to Sedevok" written by Amphilochius have been preserved, with didactic content. Of the other writings of Amphilochius, only fragments have survived, 22 in number. Apparently he wrote a great deal: among other things, against the Arians, the Holy Spirit, about the apocrypha used by heretics. Of particular note is the commentary on Proverbs. (see 8:22) and a number of interpretations of Christological texts. In recent years, a large passage from the book against the Encratites has been discovered.

Amphilochius was not a thinker. He theologized as a pastor and teacher, opposing the teaching of the Church to the false teaching of the heretics. This does not deprive his theology of originality. In him one can feel the clarity of ardent and calm faith. In Trinitarian theology, he is closest to Gregory the Theologian. Following him, he defines the hypostatic properties of the Son and the Spirit, as birth and procession. He always sharply emphasizes the Trinitarian unity. Related to this is this terminological innovation: he defines hypostases as "images of being", τρόποι της ύπάρξεως. This expression does not yet have the meaning of a term among the great Cappadocians. It acquires such a meaning for the first time in Amphilochius. For Amphilochius, the Trinitarian names are not the names of essence, but the names of relations or "images of being"... Through this concept, the concept of hypostasis also receives symmetrical definiteness. At the beginning of the 5th century, the term Amphilochius became generally accepted. This testifies, in any case, to his theological and philological sensitivity. And it is also reflected in his Christology. Here he succeeds in the clarity of formulas. "Two natures in one Person" is for him the starting point. From this he concludes the "double essence" of Christ and the double consubstantiality. He is ahead of the theological language of his time and introduces the term hypostasis into Christology. With all decisiveness he speaks about the fullness of human nature in Christ. And from the fullness he encloses the two wills... Amphilochius firmly says about the inseparable and unmerged unity of natures: "I say that the one Son of two natures, unmerged, unchanging, indivisible"... This is determined for him by soteriological motives: man suffered for man, and therefore suffering is salvific as co-suffering. Man is freed from death not by power, but precisely by compassion... And how much, only God could remove the curse... And Amphilochius sees the hypostatic focus of the Divine-human face in the Divine nature, which "dwells" in the human, as in a temple.

IV. St. Epiphanius of Cyprus.

Epiphanius was a native of Palestine, born about the year 315. We do not know where he studied. But it is clear from his works that he was a well-read man – he knew five languages: Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Coptic, and a little Latin. From an early age, his ascetic vocation was determined. He was close to St. Hilarion. Then he visited the Egyptian deserts and monasteries. Upon his return, he founded a monastery near his native city, Eleutheropolis, which he ruled for many years. He became known far beyond the borders of Palestine, and in 367 he was elected bishop of Constantia (ancient Salamis), in Cyprus. Here he became famous as an ascetic and wonderworker, and also as a zealot of righteousness. In the seventies, he fought against Apollinarianism. Then he approached Blzh. Jerome, on the basis of common ascetic hobbies. Through Jerome he became involved in the Palestinian Origenistic controversies. In 394, he went to Jerusalem to worship and there he encountered John of Jerusalem, because of Origen. The heated disputes dragged on. Epiphanius behaved defiantly and haughtily. Soon he left Palestine. But the dispute about Origen flared up again in Egypt. Theophilus of Alexandria again attracted Epiphanius to him and convinced him that his struggle with Chrysostom was in essence a struggle against Origen. Epiphanius went to Constantinople. He met Chrysostom with suspicion and avoided communicating with him. But it seems that here they were able to explain to Epiphanius the true state of affairs. Epiphanius decided to return home, his last words are reported as leaving: "I leave you the capital, the court and hypocrisy"... On the way on the ship, he died. This was in the year 403. Epiphanius had a tough and domineering temperament, not softened by sensitivity and benevolence, and for all his piety he did not know how to serve the affairs of the world. He was not a theologian, but he loved to judge by faith. He enters the history of theology precisely as a suspicious critic and denunciator. And in this capacity it deserves attention, most of all for its participation in Origenistic disputes.

St. Epiphanius had a special taste and zeal for the persecution and denunciation of heresies. He set the disclosure of false teachings as his main task, he considered it his calling. The main works of St. Epiphanius are devoted to hereseology. First of all, this is the "Panarius", the "Book of Antidotes" (literally "box of antidotes"), compiled in 375-377. This is a review of all heresies, accompanied not so much by analysis as by denunciation. In his work, Epiphanius collected everything about heresies from previous accusatory literature (in Justin, Hippolytus, especially in Irenaeus), and to this he added much from personal experience. Unfortunately, St. Epiphanius used his rich material without verification and analysis, and too often succumbed to suspicion and passion. He was poorly versed in Greek philosophy, and mixed, for example, the Pythagoreans and the Peripatetics, Zeno of Eleus and Zeno Stoic... He was too trusting of bad rumors. His dogmatic narrow-mindedness made him wary of any disagreement, even on minor questions. He was suspicious of the great theologians of the fourth century, and he was especially hostile to the Alexandrians. Epiphanius treated Origen with horror and disgust, and in his teaching he saw an error "worse than all heresies"... He writes a lot from memory and from rumors. Hence the constant inaccuracies, especially in chronology. The accusatory part of the works of St. Epiphanius is weakest of all. He is completely devoid of historical flair. In the most ancient times there were no heresies, no paganism, no Judaism, from which he concludes that "the faith of the first people had the image of Christianity, was the same as it was later revealed." To Adam and all the righteous before Abraham he ascribes the knowledge of the Holy Trinity. And therefore, even before the flood, Epiphanius begins to count the Christian false teachings, turning all the impious into heretics. There must be exactly eighty heresies, for it is said in the Song of Songs: "I have sixty queens and eighty concubines and virgins without number" (see 6:8). The first heresy is barbarism, the coarsening of morals before the flood. The second is Scythianism, before the Tower of Babel. Then came Hellenism (with its philosophical sects) and Judaism... The theoretical views of the heretics are not clearly set forth in Epiphanius, the main attention is paid to the moral side, and usually the way of life of the heretics is presented gloomy and hardly without partiality. The Panarius is very important as a collection of heresies; but the reports of St. Epiphanius must be used with great caution. Even before Panarius, Epiphanius had compiled the book Anchoratus, Άνκυρωτός (374), the title of which he wanted to express the idea of the true faith as a reliable anchor when navigating the sea of life in the midst of demonic and heretical temptations. The exposition of the rule of faith is directed here against modern false teachings, but often the views of ancient heretics are also touched upon. Epiphanius speaks in detail about the Trinitarian dogma, especially about the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Spirit. In conclusion, two statements or creeds are given, one of which, designated as "the faith taught in the church in the holy city" (i.e., in Jerusalem), coincides almost literally with the Constantinopolitan Creed. The history of this last symbol is still unclear.

The last years of Epiphanius' life include his biblical works. First of all, the book "on weights and measures" (of the ancient Hebrews). In reality, this is an experience of a biblical introduction—Epiphanius speaks here of the Old Testament canon and translations, of the geography of Palestine, of "weights and measures" he speaks, among other things. In Greek, only part of the book has been preserved, the rest is known only in the Syriac translation. Secondly, the allegorical discourse "on the twelve stones" (in the chest of the Old Testament high priest), dedicated to Diodorus of Tyre (not of Tarsus). The Greek text is shorter than the surviving Latin translation, and Epiphanius may have written on Biblical themes, but these works have not come down to us. These works of Epiphanius are of some interest to the archaeologist and biblical scholar. As a biblical scholar, Epiphanius was not a supporter of a literal interpretation; He was more inclined to symbolism, if not allegorism, in his explanation of the Old Testament texts.

Special mention is made of the works attributed to Epiphanius against the veneration of icons. They were referred to by the iconoclasts, in particular at the Council of 754, and the defenders of the veneration of icons considered them forgery. Thus judged the Seventh Ecumenical Council. "We reject the Scriptures, but we consider the Holy Father to be a teacher of the universal Church," said the fathers of the council. Patriarch Nicephorus wrote specifically against these books of Epiphanius. We can judge about these books on the basis of a few fragments, preserved mainly by Nicephorus. It can be said with almost complete certainty that they do not belong to Epiphanius, that this is an iconoclastic forgery. Apparently, a later insertion is also represented by a well-known episode, allegedly told by Epiphanius himself in his letter to John of Jerusalem (long known in Jerome's translation, Nicephorus has a Greek text). In Palestine, in the city of Anablat, Epiphanius, it is said here, saw in the temple a human image on a veil — either Christ, or some saint — in irritation he tore off the veil and gave it to the burial covers for the poor, and in return gave a clean cloth to the temple... However, it is no accident that forged books against the veneration of icons were attributed to Epiphanius. He was not a supporter of the veneration of icons and even the use of icons. And in his "Testament" he commands "not to bring" icons either in churches or in tombs, the Memory must be kept in the heart, and not fixed in sensual images. In this Epiphanius was not alone. He agreed, for example, with Eusebius of Caesarea, who also denied both the possibility and the admissibility of depicting Christ. This was a negation of historical and pictorial iconography. In Epiphanius' reasoning about idols, which we encounter in his original works, there is a hidden rejection of all images. Images are always anthropomorphic, act on feeling, divert thought from God to creation. Epiphanius rebukes the Gnostics for having images in their possession, all the more so because they depicted Christ, since by this they represented Him as a simple man. Epiphanius was not a realist, he rather gravitated towards symbolism. And the rejection of sensory images was quite consistent with his psychological attitude. Of course, this was bad theology. Such a "theological opinion" in no way discredits the ecclesiastical authority of St. Epiphanius. It is to a certain extent understandable from the historical conditions of the fourth century, in the epoch of the struggle against paganism, in the epoch of the struggle for the "consubstantial" Words. The transition from symbolism to realism in iconography could easily seem seductive.

8. John Chrysostom.

I. Life and creations.

Chrysostom's life was difficult and stormy. This is the life of an ascetic and martyr. But Chrysostom asceticized not in seclusion or in the wilderness, but in the vanity of life, in the midst of the world, on the episcopal throne, on the pulpit of a preacher. And he was a bloodless martyr. He was persecuted not from outsiders, but from false brethren, and ended his life in chains, in exile, under excommunication, persecuted by Christians for Christ and for the Gospel, which he preached as Revelation and as the law of life. Chrysostom was first of all an evangelist, a preacher of the Gospel. And at the same time, he was always a very modern and even topical teacher. The latter meaning of his teaching is clear only from a living historical context. It was the Gospel judgment on modernity, on that imaginary churching of life, in which, according to Chrysostom, too many found premature comfort in the Christian society of the fourth century. This is the explanation of the harshness and severity with which this universal preacher of love taught. It seemed to him that he was preaching and witnessing before the dead. The untruth and dislike of the Christian world was revealed to him in catastrophic, almost apocalyptic features... "We extinguished jealousy, and the body of Christ became dead." And the light yoke of love turned out to be an unbearable burden for the unloving world. This also explains the sorrowful fate of Chrysostom, who was exiled for the sake of truth... "For this reason the world hates you."