What do you mean? I was speaking entirely of things upon which we agree

People don't come to the same conclusions

We agree in real presence, baptismal regeneration, and apostasy

And you'd be hard pressed to find a single father that disagrees

Tertullian is the only one you could take to believe in "spiritual presence" in communion, but even that is questionable

I don't see how that is related at all to what I ahve said

I am only speaking of reading the fathers honestly

And none more

aaah ok

The fathers agree on those three points.

Lest you twist them horribly

And the energy-essence distinction is affirmed at the sixth council

Again, I'm just trying to be honest with the fathers here

The council is very clear on this matter. The doctrine is affirmed on two separate occasions at the council

Can you quote what part of the council is supposed to be somehow rejected by cahtolics?

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