THE ORIGINS of the
ANTHROPOMORPHITE CONTROVERSY

CASSIAN: Conference 10
( The Second Conference of Abbot Isaac: On Prayer.)

Chapter I. Introduction.

Among the sublime customs of the anchorites which by God’s help have been set forth although in plain and unadorned style, the course of our narration compels us to insert and find a place for something, which may seem so to speak to cause a blemish on a fair body: although I have no doubt that by it no small instruction on the image of Almighty God of which we read in Genesis will be conferred on some of the simpler sort, especially when the grounds are considered of a doctrine so important that men cannot be ignorant of it without terrible blasphemy and serious harm to the Catholic faith.

                I. Inter haec anachoretarum instituta sublimia, quae utcumque donante deo licet inperito digesta sunt stilo, quiddam nos interserere atque contexere, quod uelut pulchro corpori naeuum quendam uideatur adponere, narrationis ipsius ordo conpellit : quamquam non dubitem etiam ex hoc ipso non minimam instructionem super omnipotentis dei quae in Genesi legitur imagine quibusque simplicioribus conferendam, praesertim cum tanti dogmatis causa uertatur, ut ignoratio eius sine ingenti blasphemia et catholicae fidei detrimento esse non possit.

Chapter 2. (Of the custom which is kept up in the Province of Egypt for signifying the time of Easter.)

2.1. IN the country of Egypt this custom is by ancient tradition observed that—when Epiphany is past, which the priests of that province regard as the time, both of our Lord’s baptism and also of His birth in the flesh, and so celebrate the commemoration of either mystery not separately as in the Western provinces but on the single festival of this day, —letters are sent from the Bishop of Alexandria through all the Churches of Egypt, by which the beginning of Lent, and the day of Easter are pointed out not only in all the cities but also in all the monasteries

                II. Intra Aegypti regionem mos iste antiqua traditione seruatur, ut peracto Epiphaniorum die, quem prouinciae illius sacerdotes uel dominici baptismi uel secundum carnem natiuitatis esse definiunt et idcirco utriusque sacramenti sollemnitatem non bifarie ut in occiduis prouinciis, sed sub una diei huius festiuitate concelebrant, epistulae pontificis Alexandrini per uniuersas Aegypti ecclesias dirigantur, quibus et initium Quadragensimae et dies Paschae non solum per ciuitates omnes, sed etiam per uniuersa monasteria designetur.

2.2. In accordance then with this custom, a very few days after the previous conference had been held with Abbot Isaac, there arrived the festal letters of Theophilus the Bishop of the aforesaid city, in which together with the announcement of Easter he considered as well the foolish heresy of the Anthropomorphites at great length, and abundantly refuted it. And this was received by almost all the body of monks residing in the whole province of Egypt with such bitterness owing to their simplicity and error, that the greater part of the Elders decreed that on the contrary the aforesaid Bishop ought to be abhorred by the whole body of the brethren as tainted with heresy of the worst kind, because he seemed to impugn the teaching of holy Scripture by the denial that Almighty God was formed in the fashion of a human figure, though Scripture teaches with perfect clearness that Adam was created in His image.

2. Secundum hunc igitur morem post dies admodum paucos quam superior cum abbate Isaac fuerat agitata conlatio Theophili praedictae urbis episcopi sollemnes epistulae conmearunt, quibus cum denuntiatione paschali contra ineptam quoque Anthropomorphitarum haeresim longa disputatione disseruit eamque copioso sermone destruxit. Quod tanta est amaritudine ab uniuerso propemodum genere monachorum, qui per totam prouinciam Aegypti morabantur, pro simplicitatis errore susceptum, ut e contrario memoratum pontificem uelut haeresi grauissima deprauatum pars maxima seniorum ab uniuerso fraternitatis corpore decerneret detestandum, quod scilicet inpugnare scripturae sanctae sententiam uideretur, negans omnipotentem deum humanae figurae conpositione formatum, cum ad eius imaginem creatum Adam scriptura manifestissime testaretur.

2.3. Lastly this letter was rejected also by those who were living in the desert of Scete and who excelled all who were in the monasteries of Egypt, in perfection and in knowledge, so that except Abbot Paphnutius the presbyter of our congregation, not one of the other presbyters, who presided over the other three churches in the same desert, would suffer it to be even read or repeated at all in their meetings.

3. Denique et ab his, qui erant in heremo Scitii conmorantes quique perfectione ac scientia omnibus qui erant in Aegypti monasteriis praeminebant, ita est haec epistula refutata, ut praeter abbatem Pafnutim nostrae congregationis presbyterum nullus eam ceterorum presbyterorum, qui in eadem heremo aliis tribus ecclesiis praesidebant, ne legi quidem aut recitari in sui conuentibus prorsus admitteret.

Chapter 3. Of Abbot Sarapion and the heresy of the Anthropomorphites into which he fell in the error of simplicity.

3.1. Among those then who were caught by this mistaken notion was one named Sarapion, a man of long-standing strictness of life, and one who was altogether perfect in actual discipline, whose ignorance with regard to the view of the doctrine first mentioned was so far a stumbling block to all who held the true faith, as he himself outstripped almost all the monks both in the merits of his life and in the length of time (he had been there).

                III. Inter hos ergo qui hoc detinebantur errore fuit antiquissimae districtionis atque in actuali disciplina per omnia consummatus nomine Sarapion, cuius inperitia super praedicti dogmatis opinione tantum praeiudicabat cunctis ueram tenentibus fidem, quantum ipse uel uitae merito uel antiquitate temporis omnes fere monachos anteibat.

3.2. And when this man could not be brought back to the way of the right faith by many exhortations of the holy presbyter Paphnutius, because this view seemed to him a novelty, and one that was not ever known to or handed down by his predecessors, it chanced that a certain deacon, a man of very great learning, named Photinus, arrived from the region of Cappadocia with the desire of visiting the brethren living in the same desert: whom the blessed Paphnutius received with the warmest welcome, and in order to confirm the faith which had been stated in the letters of the aforesaid Bishop, placed him in the midst and asked him before all the brethren how the Catholic Churches throughout the East interpreted the passage in Genesis where it says “Let us make man after our image and likeness.”

2. Cumque hic sancti presbyteri Pafnutii multis adhortationibus ad tramitem rectae fidei non posset adduci, eo quod nouella ei haec persuasio nec ab anterioribus aliquando conperta uel tradita uideretur, accidit ut quidam diaconus summae scientiae uir nomine Photinus desiderio uidendi fratres, qui in eadem heremo conmanebant, de Cappadociae partibus adueniret. Quem beatus Pafnutius summa gratulatione suscipiens ad confirmationem fidei, quae fuerat praedicti pontificis litteris conprehensa, producens in medium coram cunctis fratribus sciscitatur, quemadmodum illud quod in Genesi dicitur : faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram , catholicae totius Orientis interpretarentur ecclesiae.

3.3. And when he explained that the image and likeness of God was taken by all the leaders of the churches not according to the base sound of the letters, but spiritually, and supported this very fully and by many passages of Scripture, and showed that nothing of this sort could happen to that infinite and incomprehensible and invisible glory, so that it could be comprised in a human form and likeness, since its nature is incorporeal and uncompounded and simple, and what can neither be apprehended by the eyes nor conceived by the mind, at length the old man was shaken by the numerous and very weighty assertions of this most learned man, and was drawn to the faith of the Catholic tradition.

3. Cumque ille non secundum humilem litterae sonum, sed spiritaliter imaginem dei ac similitudinem tradi ab uniuersis ecclesiarum principibus explanaret idque copioso sermone ac plurimis scripturarum testimoniis adprobasset, nec posse in illam inmensam et inconprehensibilem atque inuisibilem maiestatem aliquid huiusmodi cadere quod humanus conpositione ualeat ac similitudine circumscribi, quippe quae incorporea et inconposita simplexque natura sit quaeque sicut oculis deprehendi, ita mente non ualeat aestimari, tandem senex multis ac ualidissimis doctissimi uiri adsertionibus motus ad fidem catholicae traditionis adtractus est.

3.4. And when both Abbot Paphnutius and all of us were filled with intense delight at his adhesion, for this reason; viz., that the Lord had not permitted a man of such age and crowned with such virtues, and one who erred only from ignorance and rustic simplicity, to wander from the path of the right faith up to the very last, and when we arose to give thanks, and were all together offering up our prayers to the Lord, the old man was so bewildered in mind during his prayer because he felt that the Anthropomorphic image of the Godhead which he used to set before himself in prayer, was banished from his heart, that on a sudden he burst into a flood of bitter tears and continual sobs, and cast himself down on the ground and exclaimed with strong groanings: “Alas! wretched man that I am!

4. Cumque super hoc eius adsensu infinita uel abbatem Pafnutium uel nos omnes laetitia repleuisset, quod scilicet uirum tantae antiquitatis tantisque uirtutibus consummatum, inperitia sola et simplicitate rusticitatis errantem, nequaquam usque ad finem deuiare dominus a tramite rectae fidei permisisset, et pro gratiarum actione surgentes preces domino pariter funderemus, ita est in oratione senex mente confusus, eo quod illam anthropomorphon imaginem deitatis, quam proponere sibi in oratione consueuerat, aboleri de suo corde sentiret, ut in amarissimos fletus crebrosque signultus repente prorumpens in terramque prostratus cum heiulatu ualidissimo proclamaret : heu me miserum!

3.5. they have taken away my God from me, and I have now none to lay hold of; and whom to worship and address I know not.” By which scene we were terribly disturbed, and moreover with the effect of the former Conference still remaining in our hearts, we returned to Abbot Isaac, whom when we saw close at hand, we addressed with these words.

5. tulerunt a me deum meum, et quem nunc teneam non habeo uel quem adorem aut interpellem iam nescio. Super qua re ualde permoti nec non etiam praeteritae conlationis uirtute adhuc in nostris cordibus insidente ad abbatem Isaac rediuimus, quem comminus intuentes his sermonibus adorsi sumus.

FROM THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of SOCRATES [Book 6]

(ch 6) … for during this time the ecclesiastics incited tumults against each other. The source of the mischief originated in Egypt in the following manner.

Καὶ γὰρ ἐν τούτῳ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐπαναστάσεις ἐμελέτων κατ' ἀλλήλων οἱ ἱερεῖς· ἀρχὴν δὲ τὸ κακὸν ἐκ τῆς Αἰγύπτου ἐλάμβανε δι' αἰτίαν τοιαύτην.

(Ch. 7) Dissension between Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria and the Monks of the Desert. Condemnation of Origen’s Books.

Περὶ τοῦ γενομένου σχίσματος μεταξὺ τοῦἈλεξανδρείας Θεοφίλου καὶ τῶν μοναζόντων τῆς ἐρήμου· καὶ ὡς τὰὨριγένους ὁ Θεόφιλος βιβλία ἀνεθεμάτισε.}

The question had been started a little before,³⁵ whether God is a corporeal existence, and has the form of man; or whether he is incorporeal, and without human or, generally speaking, any other bodily shape? From this question arose strifes and contentions among a very great number of persons, some favoring one opinion on the subject, and others patronizing the opposite.

Ἦν μικρὸν ἔμπροσθεν ζήτησις κινηθεῖσα, πότερον ὁ Θεὸς σῶμα ἐστὶ καὶ ἀνθρώπου ἔχει σχῆμα, ἢ ἀσώματός ἐστιν καὶ ἀπήλλακται ἀνθρωπίνου τε καὶ παντὸς, ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν, σωματικοῦ σχήματος.Ἐκ δὲ τούτου τοῦ ζητήματος ἔριδες καὶ φιλονεικίαι παρὰ τοῖς πολλοῖς ἐγίνοντο· τῶν μὲν τούτῳ προστιθεμένων τῷ λόγῳ, τῶν δὲ τῷ ἑτέρῳ συνηγορούντων.

Very many of the more simple ascetics asserted that God is corporeal, and has a human figure: but most others condemn their judgment, and contended that God is incorporeal, and free of all form whatever.

Καὶ μάλιστα μὲν πολλοὶ τῶν ἁπλοϊκῶν ἀσκητῶν σωματικὸν καὶ ἀνθρωπόμορφον τὸν Θεὸν εἶναι ἐβούλοντο· πλεῖστοι δὲ τούτων καταγινώσκοντες ἀσώματον εἶναι τὸν Θεὸν ἔλεγον, καὶ πάσης ἐκτὸς εἶναι σωματικῆς μορφῆς ἀπεφῄναντο.

        With these latter Theophilus bishop of Alexandria agreed so thoroughly that in the church before all the people he inveighed against those who attributed to God a human form, expressly teaching that the Divine Being is wholly incorporeal. When the Egyptian ascetics were apprised of this, they left their monasteries and came to Alexandria; where they excited a tumult against the bishop, accusing him of impiety, and threatening to put him to death.

Οἷς καὶ Θεόφιλος συνεφώνει ὁ τῆςἈλεξανδρείας ἐπίσκοπος, ὡς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐπὶ τοῦ λαοῦ καταδραμεῖν μὲν τῶν ἀνθρωπόμορφον λεγόντων τὸ Θεῖον, ἀσώματον δὲ αὐτὸν δογματίσαι τὸν Θεόν. Ταῦτα μαθόντες οἱ Αἰγυπτίων ἀσκηταὶ καταλιπόντες τὰ μοναστήρια ἐπὶ τὴνἈλεξάνδρειαν ἔρχονται· καὶ κατεστασίαζον τοῦ Θεοφίλου, κρίναντες ὡς ἀσεβοῦντα, καὶ ἀνελεῖν βουλόμενοι.

Theophilus becoming aware of his danger, after some consideration had recourse to this expedient to extricate himself from the threatened death. Going to the monks, he in a conciliatory tone thus addressed them: ‘In seeing you, I behold the face of God.’

Τοῦτο γνοὺς ὁ Θεόφιλος εἰς ἀγῶνα καθίσταται, καὶ ἐπενόει τέχνην, ὅπως ἂν διαφύγῃ τὸν ἀπειλούμενον θάνατον. Καὶ ὀφθεὶς αὐτοῖς κολακείᾳ μετῆλθε τοὺς ἄνδρας, οὕτως εἰπὼν πρὸς αὐτούς· "Οὕτως ὑμᾶς εἶδον, ὡς Θεοῦ πρόσωπον."

        The utterance of this saying moderated the fury of these men and they replied: ‘If you really admit that God’s countenance is such as ours, anathematize Origen’s book; for some drawing arguments from them oppose themselves to our opinion. If you will not do this, expect to be treated by us as an impious person, and the enemy of God.’  

Τοῦτο λεχθὲν ἐχαύνωσε τοὺς μοναχοὺς τῆς ὁρμῆς. "Ἀλλ' εἰ ἀληθεύεις," ἔφα σαν, "ὅτι τὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ πρόσωπόν ἐστιν ὡς καὶ τὸ ἡμέτερον, ἀναθεμάτισον τὰὨριγένους βιβλία· ἐξ αὐτῶν γάρ τινες διαλεγόμενοι ἐναντιοῦνται τῇ δόξῃ ἡμῶν· εἰ δὲ μὴ τοῦτο ποιήσεις, τὰ τῶν ἀσεβούντων καὶ θεομάχων ἐκδέχου παρ' ἡμῶν."

 Over the monasteries in Egypt there were four devout persons as superintendents named Dioscorus, Ammonius, Eusebius, and Euthymius: these men were brothers, and had the appellation of ‘the Tall [brothers]’ given them on account of their stature. They were moreover distinguished both for the sanctity of their lives, and the extent of their erudition, and for these reasons their reputation was very high at Alexandria.

ῶν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ ἀσκητηρίων προεστήκεισαν τέσσαρες ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς, Διόσκορος,Ἀμμώνιος, Εὐσέβιος, Εὐθύμιος. Οὗτοι αὐτάδελφοι μὲν ἦσαν· "οἱ Μακροὶ" δὲ ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ὠνομάζοντο· ἦσαν δὲ καὶ βίῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἐκπρέποντες· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολὺς ἦν ἐν τῇἈλεξανδρείᾳ περὶ αὐτῶν λόγος.

Theophilus in particular, the prelate of that city, loved and honored them exceedingly: insomuch that he constituted one of them, Dioscorus, bishop of Hermopolis³⁷ against his will, having forcibly drawn him from his retreat. Two of the others he entreated to continue with him, and with difficulty prevailed upon them to do so; still by the exercise of his authority as bishop he accomplished his purpose: when therefore he had invested them with the clerical office, he committed to their charge the management of ecclesiastical affairs.

Θεόφιλός τε ὁἈλεξανδρείας ἐπίσκοπος πάνυ ἠγάπα καὶ ἐτίμα τοὺς ἄνδρας· διὸ καὶ ἕνα μὲν αὐτῶν τὸν Διόσκορον ἐπίσκοπον καθιστᾷ Ἑρμουπόλεως, βίᾳ ἑλκύσας· δύο δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρεκάλεσε συνεῖναι αὐτῷ, καὶ μόλις μὲν ἔπεισεν· ὡς ἐπίσκοπος δὲ ὅμως καὶ προσηνάγκασεν, καὶ τῇ τῶν κληρικῶν ἀξίᾳ τιμήσας, τὴν οἰκονομίαν τῆς ἐκκλησίας αὐτοῖς ἐνεχείρισεν. Οἱ δὲ τῇ ἀνάγκῃ μὲν ἔμενον, καλῶς τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ προσέχοντες·

As long as he was ignorant of the true motive for their departure, he earnestly begged them to abide with him; but when he perceived that they were dissatisfied with his conduct, he became excessively irritated, and threatened to do them all kinds of mischief.

Ὁ δὲ, ἕως μὲν μὴ ἐγίνωσκε τὴν ἀληθῆ πρόφασιν, παρεκάλει προσμένειν· ἐπεὶ δὲ ἔγνω καταγινωσκόμενος ὑπ' αὐτῶν, ὀργῆς ὑποπίμπλαται, καὶ πᾶν αὐτοῖς κακὸν ἠπείλει ποιεῖν.

He well knew that these men in their frequent theological discussions with him, had maintained that the Deity was incorporeal, and by no means had a human form; because [they argued] such a constitution would involve the necessary accompaniment of human passions. Now this has been demonstrated by the ancient writers and especially Origen.

Εὖ ἠπίστατο τοὺς ἄνδρας πολλάκις ἅμα αὐτῷ περὶ Θεοῦ λόγους κεκινηκότας, ὡς εἴη ὁ Θεὸς ἀσώματος, καὶ οὐδαμῶς ἀνθρωπόμορφος· ἀκολουθεῖ γὰρ ἐξανάγκης τῷ ἀνθρωπομόρφῳ τὸ ἀνθρωποπαθές· καὶ τοῦτο γεγύμνασται παρά τε τῶν παλαιοτέρων, καὶ μάλιστα παρὰὨριγένους.

Sending letters to the monasteries in the desert, he advised them not to give heed either to Dioscorus or to his brothers, inasmuch as they affirmed that God had not a body. ‘Whereas,’ said he, ‘according to the sacred Scripture God has eyes, ears, hands, and feet, as men have; but the partisans of Dioscorus, being followers of Origen, introduce the blasphemous dogma that God has neither eyes, ears, feet, nor hands.’

 Καὶ διαπέμπεται τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἀσκητηρίοις, "μὴ δεῖν πείθεσθαι Διοσκόρῳ μήτε τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς αὐτοῦ, λέγουσιν ἀσώματον τὸν Θεόν.Ὁ γὰρ Θεὸς, φησὶν, κατὰ τὴν θείαν γραφὴν καὶ ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχει, καὶ ὦτα, καὶ χεῖρας, καὶ πόδας, καθὰ καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι· οἱ δὲ περὶ ΔιόσκορονὨριγένει ἀκολουθοῦντες βλάσφημον δόγμα εἰσάγουσιν, ὡς ἄρα ὁ Θεὸς οὔτε ὀφθαλμοὺς, οὔτε ὦτα, οὔτε πόδας, οὔτε χεῖρας ἔχει."

By this sophism he took advantage of the simplicity of these monks and thus a hot dissension was stirred up among them. Such as had a cultivated mind indeed were not beguiled by this plausibility, and therefore still adhere to Dioscorus and Origen; but the more ignorant who greatly exceeded the others in number, inflamed by an ardent zeal without knowledge, immediately raised an outcry against their brethren.

Τούτῳ τῷ σοφίσματι συναρπάζει τοὺς πλείστους τῶν μοναχῶν· καὶ γίνεται διάπυρος στάσις ἐν αὐτοῖς.Ὅσοι μὲν οὖν γεγυμνασμένον εἶχον τὸν νοῦν οὐ συνηρπάγησαν ὑπὸ τοῦ σοφίσματος· ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς περὶ Διόσκορον καὶὨριγένην ἐπείθοντο. Οἱ δὲ ἁπλούστεροι, πλείους τε ὄντες καὶ ζῆλον ἔχοντες θερμὸν, κατὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν εὐθέως ἐχώρουν.

        On this account violent altercation arose, and an inextinguishable war between the monks. Theophilus on receiving intimation of the success of his device, went to Nitria where the monasteries are, accompanied by a multitude of persons, and armed the monks against Dioscorus and his brethren; who being in danger of losing their lives, made their escape with great difficulty.

̓Εκ τούτου παρατριβὴ γίνεται οὐ μικρὰ, καὶ ἦν μεταξὺ τῶν μοναχῶν πόλεμος ἄσπονδος. Θεόφιλος δὲ ὡς ἔγνω προβάντα τὸν σκοπὸν, ἅμα πλήθει καταλαβὼν τὴν Νιτρίαν, Νιτρίαν, ἔνθα εἰσὶ τὰ ἀσκητήρια, ἐξοπλίζει τοὺς μοναχοὺς κατά τε Διοσκόρου καὶ τῶν αὐτοῦ ἀδελφῶν· οἱ δὲ κινδυνεύσαντες ἀπολέσθαι μόλις διέφυγον.

While these things were in progress in Egypt John bishop of Constantinople was ignorant of, them, but flourished in eloquence and became increasingly celebrated for his discourses. Moreover he first enlarged the prayers contained in the nocturnal hymns, for the reason I am about to assign.

Ταῦτα κατὰ τὴν Αἴγυπτον γινόμενα ὁ Κωνσταντινουπόλεως ἐπίσκοποςἸωάννης τέως ἠγνόει· ταῖς διδασκαλίαις τε ἤνθει, καὶ διαβόητος ἐπὶ ταύταις ἦν. Ηὔξησε δὲ πρῶτος καὶ τὰς περὶ τοὺς νυκτερινοὺς ὕμνους εὐχὰς ἐξ αἰτίας τοιάσδε.

FROM THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
of SOZOMEN [Book 8]

Downfall of John Chrysostom

  Chapter XIII.   — Four Monks Appeal to John on Account of his Interest:For This Reason, Theophilus Was Enraged, and Prepares Himself to Fight Against John.

        Dioscorus, Ammonius, and the other monks, having discovered the machinations of Theophilus, retired to Jerusalem, and thence proceeded to Scythopolis; for they thought that it would be an advantageous residence there for them on account of the many palms, whose leaves are used by the monks for their customary work. Dioscorus and Ammonius were accompanied hither by about eighty other monks. In the meantime, Theophilus sent messengers to Constantinople, to prefer complaints against them, and to oppose any petitions that they might lay before the emperor.

^8.13.1 Αἰσθόμενοι δὲ τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς οἱ ἀμφὶ Διόσκορον καὶἈμμώνιον ἀνεχώρησαν εἰςἹεροσόλυμα· κἀκεῖθεν εἰς Σκυθόπολιν ἧκον, ἐπιτηδείαν ἡγησάμενοι τὴν ἐνθάδε οἴκησιν διὰ τοὺς πολλοὺς φοίνικας, ὧν τοῖς φύλλοις ἐχρῶντο πρὸς τὰ εἰωθότα μοναχοῖς ἔργα. εἵποντο γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἀμφὶ ἄνδρες ^8.13.2 ὀγδοήκοντα. ἐν τούτῳ δὲ Θεόφιλος πέμπει τινὰς εἰς Κωνσταντινούπολιν ἅμα τε διαβολὰς κατ' αὐτῶν προπαρασκευάσοντας καί, εἰ βασιλέως περί του δέοιντο, ἀντιπράξοντας.

        On being informed of this fact, Ammonius and the monks embarked for Constantinople, and took Isidore with them; and they requested that their cause might be tried in the presence of the emperor and of the bishop; for they thought that, by reason of his boldness, John, who was careful to do right, would be able to help them in their rights. John, although he received them with kindness, and treated them with honor, and did not forbid them to pray in the church, refused to admit them to participation in the mysteries, for it was not lawful to do this before the investigation.

μαθόντες δὲ τάδε οἱ ἀμφὶἈμμώνιον ἀπέπλευσαν ^8.13.3 εἰς Κωνσταντινούπολιν, σὺν αὐτοῖς δὲ καὶἸσίδωρος. κοινῇ τε ἐσπούδαζον παρὰ βασιλεῖ κριτῇ καὶἸωάννῃ τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἐλέγχεσθαι τὰς κατ' αὐτῶν ἐπιβουλάς. ᾤοντο γὰρ ἐνδίκου παρρησίας αὐτὸν ἐπιμελούμενον δύνασθαι τὰ δίκαια βοηθεῖν αὐτοῖς. ὁ δὲ προσελθόντας αὐτῷ τοὺς ἄνδρας φιλοφρόνως ἐδέξατο καὶ ἐν τιμῇ εἶχε καὶ εὔχεσθαι ἐπ' ἐκκλησίας οὐ διεκώλυε, κοινωνεῖν δὲ μυστηρίων αὐτοῖς οὐχ ἡγήσατο, ὡς οὐ θεμιτὸν πρὸ διαγνώσεως ^8.13.4 τοῦτο ποιεῖν.

        He wrote to Theophilus, desiring him to receive them back into communion, as their sentiments concerning the Divine nature were orthodox; requesting him, if he regarded their orthodoxy as doubtful, to send some one to act as their accuser. Theophilus returned no reply to this epistle. Some time subsequently, Ammonius and his companions presented themselves before the wife of the emperor, as she was riding out, and complained of the machinations of Theophilus against them.

ἔγραψε δὲ Θεοφίλῳ τὴν κοινωνίαν αὐτοῖς ἀποδοῦναι ὡς ὀρθῶς περὶ θεοῦ δοξάζουσιν· εἰ δὲ δίκῃ δέοι κρίνεσθαι τὰ κατ' αὐτούς, ἀποστέλλειν ὃν αὐτῷ δοκεῖ δικασόμενον. ὁ δὲ οὐδὲν ἀντεδήλωσεν· χρόνου δὲ πολλοῦ διαγενομένου προϊούσῃ τῇ βασιλέως γαμετῇ προσῆλθον οἱ περὶ ^8.13.5Ἀμμώνιον τὰ κατ' αὐτῶν βεβουλευμένα Θεοφίλῳ μεμφόμενοι.

She knew what had been plotted against them; and she stood up in honor of them; and, leaning forward from her royal chariot, she nodded, and said to them, “Pray for the emperor, for me, for our children, and for the empire. For my part, I shall shortly cause a council to be convened, to which Theophilus shall be summoned.”

ἡ δὲ ἐπιβουλευθέντας αὐτοὺς ᾔσθετο καὶ τιμῶσα ἔστη· καὶ προκύψασα τοῦ βασιλικοῦ ὀχήματος ἐπένευσε τῇ κεφαλῇ καί "εὐλογεῖτε", ἔφη, "καὶ εὔχεσθε ὑπὲρ τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων παίδων καὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς· ἐμοὶ ^8.13.6 δὲ ἐν τάχει μελήσει συνόδου καὶ τῆς Θεοφίλου ἀφίξεως."

        A false report having prevailed in Alexandria, that John had received Dioscorus and his companions into communion, and had afforded them every aid and encouragement in his power, Theophilus began to reflect upon what measures it would be possible to adopt in order to eject John from his episcopate.

καὶ ἡ μὲν τοιάδε ἐσπούδαζε. ψευδοῦς δὲ φήμης ἐνἈλεξανδρείᾳ κρατούσης, ὡς ἐκοινώνησενἸωάννης τοῖς ἀμφὶ Διόσκορον καὶ προθυμεῖται πάντα βοηθεῖν αὐτοῖς, διενοεῖτο Θεόφιλος, εἴ πῃ δύναιτο, καὶ αὐτὸνἸωάννην τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς καθελεῖν.

Clement of Alexandria
on Radical Apophaticism

 (apophatic “execises”)
Stromateis  Bk 5, Ch.11 & Ch. 12

        11. […]It is not then without reason that in the mysteries that obtain among the Greeks, lustrations (ritual washings) hold the first place; as also the laver (ceremonial washbasin) among the Barbarians. After these are the minor¹³⁰ mysteries, which have some foundation of instruction and of preliminary preparation for what is to come after; and the great mysteries, in which nothing remains to be learned of the universe, but only to contemplate and comprehend nature and things.

^5.11.70.7 οὐκ ἀπεικότως ἄρα καὶ τῶν μυστηρίων τῶν παρ'Ἕλλησιν ἄρχει ^5.11.71.1 μὲν τὰ καθάρσια, καθάπερ καὶ τοῖς βαρβάροις τὸ λουτρόν. μετὰ ταῦτα δ' ἐστὶ τὰ μικρὰ μυστήρια διδασκαλίας τινὰ ὑπόθεσιν ἔχοντα καὶ προπαρασκευῆς τῶν μελλόντων, τὰ δὲ μεγάλα περὶ τῶν συμπάντων, οὗ μανθάνειν <οὐκ>έτι ὑπολείπεται, ἐποπτεύειν δὲ καὶ περινοεῖν ^5.11.71.2 τήν τε φύσιν καὶ τὰ πράγματα.

        We shall understand the mode of purification by confession, and that of contemplation by analysis, advancing by analysis to the first notion, beginning with the properties underlying it; abstracting from the body its physical properties, taking away the dimension of depth, then that of breadth, and then that of length. For the point which remains is a unit, so to speak, having position; from which if we abstract position, there is the conception of unity.

λάβοιμεν δ' ἂν τὸν μὲν καθαρτικὸν τρόπον ὁμολογίᾳ, τὸν δὲ ἐποπτικὸν ἀναλύσει ἐπὶ τὴν πρώτην νόησιν προχωροῦντες, δι' ἀναλύσεως ἐκ τῶν ὑποκειμένων αὐτῷ τὴν ἀρχὴν ποιούμενοι, ἀφελόντες μὲν τοῦ σώματος τὰς φυσικὰς ποιότητας, περιελόντες δὲ τὴν εἰς τὸ βάθος διάστασιν, εἶτα τὴν εἰς τὸ πλάτος, καὶ ἐπὶ τούτοις τὴν εἰς τὸ μῆκος· τὸ γὰρ ὑπολειφθὲν σημεῖόν ἐστι μονὰς ὡς εἰπεῖν θέσιν ἔχουσα, ἧς ἐὰν περιέλωμεν τὴν ^5.11.71.3 θέσιν, νοεῖται μονάς.

        If, then, abstracting all that belongs to bodies and things called incorporeal, we cast ourselves into the greatness of Christ, and thence advance into immensity by holiness, we may reach somehow to the conception of the Almighty, knowing not what He is, but what He is not. And form and motion, or standing, or a throne, or place, or right hand or left, are not at all to be conceived as belonging to the Father of the universe, although it is so written. But what each of these means will be shown in its proper place. The First Cause is not then in space, but above both space, and time, and name, and conception.

εἰ τοίνυν, ἀφελόντες πάντα ὅσα πρόσεστι τοῖς σώμασιν καὶ τοῖς λεγομένοις ἀσωμάτοις, ἐπιρρίψαιμεν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὸ μέγεθος τοῦ Χριστοῦ κἀκεῖθεν εἰς τὸ ἀχανὲς ἁγιότητι προΐοιμεν, τῇ νοήσει τοῦ παντοκράτορος ἁμῇ γέ πῃ προσάγοιμεν <ἄν>, οὐχ ὅ ἐστιν, ^5.11.71.4 ὃ δὲ μή ἐστι γνωρίσαντες· σχῆμα δὲ καὶ κίνησιν ἢ στάσιν ἢ θρόνον ἢ τόπον ἢ δεξιὰ ἢ ἀριστερὰ τοῦ τῶν ὅλων πατρὸς οὐδ' ὅλως ἐννοητέον, καίτοι καὶ ταῦτα γέγραπται· ἀλλ' ὃ βούλεται δηλοῦν αὐτῶν ^5.11.71.5 ἕκαστον, κατὰ τὸν οἰκεῖον ἐπιδειχθήσεται τόπον. οὔκουν ἐν τόπῳ τὸ πρῶτον αἴτιον, ἀλλ' ὑπεράνω καὶ τόπου καὶ χρόνου καὶ ὀνόματος καὶ νοήσεως.

Evagrius Ponticus on Imageless Prayer (De Oratione)
[Praktikos and] Chapters on Prayer, translated by Simon Tugwell, O.P   Faculty of Theology, Oxford, 1987
LOGOS PNG` KEFALIA DIEILHMMENOS PG 79,1165-1200; CPG 2452; Περι προσευχῆς.

textual emendations from Hausherr, Le Traité de l’Oraison d’Evagre le Pontique in Rev.d’Asc.et Mys.v.15 ‘34; pp. 34-93, 113-170.

On Prayer

        3. Prayer is a conversation of the nous [mind] with God So what kind of mental state is needed, if the mind is to be capable of reaching out unwaveringly towards its own Lord, to converse with him without any intermediary?

                Γ´. Ἡ προσευχὴ, ὁμιλία ἐστι νοῦ πρὸς Θεόν· ποίας οὖν δεῖται καταστάσεως ὁ νοῦς, ἵνα ἰσχυσῃ[1][3] ἀμεταστρόφως ἐκταθῆναι[2][4] πρὸς τὸν οἰκεῖον Δεσπότην, καὶ συνομιλεῖν αὐτῷ μηδενὸς μεσιτεύοντος;

        4. If Moses was stopped, when he tried to approach the bush which was burning on earth, until he had taken off his shoes from his feet (Exod. 3 2-5), do you think that you need not put off every passioned thought (νόημα) from yourself if you want to see him who is above all perception and all concepts and converse with him?

                Δ´.  Εἰ τῇ ἐπὶ γῆς βάτῳ φλεγομένῃ προσεγγίσαι πειράσας Μωϋσῆς κωλύεται ἄχρις οὗ λύσει τὸ ὑπόδημα τῶν ποδῶν, πῶς αὐτὸς τὸν ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν ἔννοιαν καὶ αἴσθησιν ἰδεῖν βουλόμενος, καὶ συνόμιλος αὐτῷ γενέσθαι, οὐ λύεις ἐκ σοῦ πὰν νόημα ἐμπαθές;

        55. Anyone who loves God converses with him always as a Father, turning aside every thought (νόημα) that is attended by passion.

                ΝΔ´. Ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὸν Θεὸν, τούτῳ ὡς Πατρὶ ἀεὶ συνομιλεῖ, ἀποστρεφόμενος πᾶν νόημα ἐμπαθές.

        64. The others implant schemes or thoughts or contemplations in the mind by affecting the body, but God does the opposite.  He mounts the nous [mind] directly and places in it whatever he wills; and by means of the nous [mind] he calms the imbalance that there is in the body.

                64. [Τ13 ] Οἱ μὲν λοιποὶ διὰ τῆς ἀλλοιώσεως τοῦ σώματος ἐμποιοῦσι τῷ νῷ λογισμοὺς ἢ νοήματα ἢ θεωρήματα. Ὁ δὲ γε θεὸς τοὺναντίον δρᾳ· αὐτῷ τῷ νῷ ἐπιβαίνων, ἐντίθησιν αὐτῷ γνῶσιν ὧν βούλεται, καὶ διὰ τοῦ νοῦ τὴν ἀκρασίαν τοῦ σώματος κατευνάζει.

        67. Do not try to shape the divine in yourself when you pray, do not allow any particular form to be impressed on your nous [mind]; rather approach the Immaterial immaterially and then you will understand.

                Ξϟ´.  Μὴ σχημτίζῃς τὸ Θεῖον ἐν ἑαυτῷ προσευχόμενος, μηδὲ προς μορφήν τινα συγχωρήσῃς τυπωθῆναι σου τὸν νοῦν· αλλ' ἄϋλος τῷ ἀΰλῳ πρόσιθι καὶ συνή́σεις.[3][5]