Yeah. Gimme a sec

"We have also examined the synodal letter of Sophronius of holy memory, some time Patriarch of the Holy City of Christ our God, Jerusalem, and have found it in accordance with the true faith and with the Apostolic teachings, and with those of the holy approved Fathers. Therefore we have received it as orthodox and as salutary to the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and have decreed that it is right that his name be inserted in the diptychs of the Holy Churches."

Session XIII - Extracts from the Acts

And what is the relevant content of the letter?

The whole letter pretty much, but I'll give some highlights. Gimme another sec

Just for reference:

Oof, couldn't upload PDF

Here's a link:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://afkimel.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/synodal-letter-of-sophronius.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiy39Lqp7jhAhWHn4MKHcu8DhUQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1m8mZJ5OmPkWudeKuhKmRH

Chapter 2.10-11

Tbh though, I wish I had a text PDF of this. The energy-essence distinction is everywhere--all over the letter

I have another spot in the council though too

And now, what is the fragment there that is supposedly rejected by catholicism?

That is just talking about how Christ is fully God and fully human

The energy-essence distinction is right in there

"activities" is "energeias"

you can call it however you want

?

I can call it what it is

And nothing else

I will only call it the energy-essence distinction because that is what it is

No more, no less.

It says that Christ does things according to divine nature, and according to huan nature

Did you not read the parts about energy and activities and their distinction?

That is the context, that all activities, no matter form what nature, come form Christ

It's an opposition to nestorians

Nestorians?

Do you know anything about the sixth council?

he even cites "the foul effluence of Nestorius" right in the text you gave me

Because itis a christological profession

Yeah, but he overall section is against Monothelitists. That's the point of the chapter

Sure, it's against Nestorians too, but generally speaking against Monothelitists

Give 11 a thorough read. He's so clear about the energy-essence distinction

I don't really see anything special in that text, and truly nothing that goes against anything in catholicism. God has two natures , and even though Christ's activities may belong to one or other nature, they are both of Christ

"The difference of the essence is always understood from the difference of the activities."

That is what I already have summarised

That's literally the energy-essence distinction

Which you so firmly argue against