"Протоиерей Иоанн Мейендорф. Byzantine Theology " - читать интересную книгу автора

(attributed respectively to Basil and to John Chrysostom): "For it is Thou
who offerest and art offered, who receivest and art Thyself received."
Nicholas, whose views were endorsed by the Council of 1156-1157, shows that
neither the Eucharist nor the work of Christ in general can be reduced to a
juridical notion of sacrifice conceived as an exchange. God does not have to
receive anything from us: "We did not go to Him [to make an offering];
rather He condescended toward us and assumed our nature, not as a condition
of reconciliation, but in order to meet us openly in the flesh."4
This "open meeting in the flesh" received further emphasis in 1170 in
connection with the condemnation of Constantine of Kerkyra and his
supporter, John Eirenikos, as crypto-Monophysites. Their point was to refuse
to apply John 14:18 ("My Father is greater than I") to the distinction
between the divinity and the humanity of Christ. The text, they said,
concerned the hypostatic characteristics in the Holy Trinity, fatherhood
being by definition "greater" than sonship while the humanity of Christ,
which according to the Council of 553 is distinguishable from the divinity
only "in our mind," is deified and wholly "one" with the divinity. It cannot
therefore be "smaller" than the divinity in any sense. By rejecting this
view, the Council of 1170 reaffirmed once again the decisions of Chalcedon
and Constantinople II about the divinity of Christ hypostatically united to
a real and active humanity, "created, depictable, and mortal." Than such
humanity, divinity is certainly "greater."
The very technical Christological discussions of the twelfth century,
in fact, reconsidered all the major issues, which had been debated in the
fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries. The Byzantine Church remained
fundamentally faithful to the notion of what George Florovsky once called an
"asymmetrical union" of God and man in Christ: while the hypostatic source
of life - the goal and pattern - remains divine, man is not diminished or
swallowed by the union; he becomes again fully human. This notion is also
expressed in the Eucharistic sacrifice, a unique act in which no single
action of Christ's is represented in isolation or reduced to purely human
concepts, such as an "exchange," or a "satisfaction." Christ as the
Synodikon proclaims every year on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, "reconciled us to
Himself by means of the whole mystery of the economy, by Himself, and in
Himself and reconciled us also to His God and Father and of course to the
most holy and life-giving Spirit."5

Notes

1. Quoted by J. Lebon, Le Monophysitisme severien, etude historique,
litter are et theologique sur la resistance monophysite au Concile de
Chalcedoine jusqu'a la constitution de I'Uglisc Jacobite (Louvain
dissertation, 1909), pp. 445-446.
2. Anna Comnena, Alexiad, X, 1; ed. B. Leib (Paris, 1943), II, 187-188;
Synodikpn, ed. J. Gouillard, Travaux et memoires 2 (Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France, 1967), pp. 202-206. On possible connections
between several Byzantine theological trends and Paulician dualism, see N.
G. Gersoyan, "Byzantine Heresy: A Reinterpretation," Dumbarton Oaks Papers
25 (1971), 87-113.
3. See P. Joannou, "Der Nominalismus und die menschliche Psychologic