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

which the Monophysites would accept the Chalcedonian formula of the "two
natures" with the specification that they were united into one "energy" and
one will. The policy reached a measure of success both in Armenia and in
Egypt, and local unions were concluded. Monoenergism and Monotheletism met
however staunch opposition on the part of some Chalcedonians, led by
Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, and by Maximus the Confessor. In spite
of the support given to it by Heraclius and his successors, Monotheletism
was finally condemned in 680 by the Sixth Ecumenical Council, which restated
the Chalcedonian affirmation that each nature keeps in Christ the entirety
of its characteristics; and therefore, there are two "energies" or wills,
the divine and the human in Christ.
Maximus the Confessor (ca. 580-662), the architect of this decision,
dominates the period intellectually and, in many respects, may be regarded
as the real Father of Byzantine theology; for in his system, one finds a
Christian philosophical counterpart to Origen's myth of creation and, as the
real foundation of Christian spiritual life, a doctrine of "deification"
based on Cyril's soteriology and on Chalcedonian Christology.
Maximus never had or even tried to have the opportunity to compose an
ordered analysis of his system. His writings include only a large collection
of Ambigua, a most unsystematic compilation of commentaries on obscure
passages from Gregory of Nazianzus or from pseudo-Dionysius, a collection of
"Answers to Questions" by Thalassius, several series of Chapters (short
sayings on spiritual or theological matters), and a few polemical treatises
against the Monothelites. In these membra disjecta however one discovers a
most coherent view of the Christian faith as a whole formed quite
independently of the Monothelite controversy. His attitude against the
Monothelites thus acquires even greater strength precisely because its roots
go much deeper than the casual historical circumstances in which it had to
be expressed and which led Maximus himself to torture and a martyr's death.
In Origen's, system immobility is one of the essential characteristics
of true being; it belongs to God but also to creatures as long as they
remain in conformity with God's will. Diversity and movement come from the
Fall. For Maximus however "movement," or "action," is a fundamental quality
of nature. Each creature possesses its own meaning and purpose, which
reflect the eternal and divine Logos "through whom all things were made."
The Logos of every creature is given to it not only as a static element but
also as the eternal goal and purpose, which are called to achieve.
At this point, Maximus' thought uses the Aristotelian concept of each
nature's having its own "energy" or existential manifestation. The
Cappadocian Fathers had applied the same principle to their doctrine of the
three hypostaseis in God. Gregory of Nyssa, in particular, had to defend
himself against the accusation of tritheism; the three hypostaseis are not
three Gods because they have one nature, as is evident from the fact that
there is only one "energy" of God. Already then in Cappadocian view, the
concept of "energy" is linked with that of nature. Maximus could therefore
refer to tradition in opposing the Monothelite contention that "energy"
reflects the one hypostasis, person, or actor; and therefore, Christ could
have only one "energy."
In Maximian thought, man occupies quite an exceptional position among
the other creatures. He not only carries in himself a Logos; he is the image