NGEL F.

SNCHEZ ESCOBAR

HISTORY AND PRAXIS OF EASTERN ORTHODOXY, A TEXTBOOK

HISTORY AND PRAXIS OF EASTERN ORTHODOXY, A TEXTBOOK

By

NGEL FRANCISCO SNCHEZ-ESCOBAR (Ph.D., Th.D.)

2008

TO THE MEMORY OF MY BELOVED MOTHER

ngel F. Snchez Escobar The St. Stephen Harding College Publishing House Winston-Salem, NC, 2008 ISBN-13-978-84-691-8173-7 Illustration: Christ Pantocrator (on wood, 1363)

SOME WORDS ABOUT THE AUTHOR The Most Rev. Angel F. Snchez Escobar: BA (University of Seville, English Philology), BA (U. of Seville, Spanish Philology), MA (Vanderbilt U., Spanish Literature and Linguistics), MA (Vanderbilt U., Education), Ph.D. (Vanderbilt U., English Education), Ph.D (U. of Seville, English Philology), Ph.D. (U. of Seville, Spanish Literature), Th.D (St.Stephen Harding Theological College and Seminary) Angel F. Snchez Escobar also received a Certificate of Orthodox Theology from the University of Joensuu (Finland) and an Interfaith Ministry Certificate from the New Seminary (New York). Moreover, he attended Universidad Pontificia de Comillas (Madrid). He is a Professor of English Language Teaching at the University of Seville (Spain) and the Director of the Seminario Ortodoxo Hispano de la Santsima Trinidad. He is Associate Dean of St. Stephen Harding Theological Seminary and College. Angel has published books and articles in the areas of theology, English language teaching, contrastive rhetoric, Spanish literature, and poetry.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to the people who helped me write this book. I would especially like to thank Archbishop ++Oscar Joseph (Abbot General of the Cistercian Order of the Holy Cross), for his continuous encouragement and guidance. I am also very grateful to Bishop +Iohannes (South Africa), for his revision of the text and valuable suggestions. Finally I would like to thank both Sr. Tracey for the proofing of the text and Fr. Esteban for having been the perfect reader of this dissertation and having provided me with useful recommendations to improve the clarity of the text. My thanks must also go to the library staff of the Escuela de Magisterio of the Facultad de Ciencias de la Educacin (Universidad de Sevilla) for their competence and dedication, and very especially to the director of this library, ngela Arvalo, for her endless patience with my inter-library loan requests.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................................... 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... 5 FOREWORD ................................................................................................................22 A NOTE ABOUT THE STYLE OF THE BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES ........................24 PREFACE: ORTHODOXY AND HISTORY......................................................................25 PART I: CHURCH HISTORY ........................................................................................32 (A STUDY OF THE HISTORY OF THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH, THE BYZANTINE CHURCH, AND THE RUSSIAN CHURCH) .....................................................................32 INTRODUCTION TO PART I........................................................................................34 CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................36 HISTORY OF THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH (I-III CENTURIES)...........................36 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................36 1. THE GENERAL SITUATION ......................................................................................38

THE ROMAN EMPIRE ..................................................................................................38

THE JEWISH BACKGROUND AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE FOR EARLY CHRISTIANITY .......42 A brief history.........................................................................................................42 Judaism under the Roman World: Connections to Christianity....................................49

SOME ISSUES OF THE SOCIAL MILIEU OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY..................................54 Three relevant social issues .....................................................................................56
2. THE APOSTOLIC AGE ..............................................................................................77

INTRODUCTION: CHURCH AND TRADITION FROM AN ORTHODOX POINT OF VIEW......77 THE INFANT CHURCH OF THE FIRST CENTURY ...........................................................80 PAUL AND GENTILE CHRISTIANITY .............................................................................88 THE GOSPELS ............................................................................................................93
3. EARLY CHRISTIANITY AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE: PERSECUTION AND SUCCESS..96 4. DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEOLOGY OF THE EARLY CHURCH.................................113

THE LATE FIRST CENTURY: THE CENTRALITY OF CHRIST.......................................... 117

A Time Framework ............................................................................................... 117 Efforts of early Christians to live by the message about Jesus.................................. 119

SECOND AND THIRD CENTURY: APOSTOLIC FATHERS, APOLOGISTS, HERESIES, NEW TESTAMENT CANON, TRADITION.............................................................................. 123
The Apostolic Fathers ........................................................................................... 124 Apologists ............................................................................................................ 126 Gnosticism ........................................................................................................... 127 Marcionism........................................................................................................... 130 Montanism ........................................................................................................... 132 Credal-confessional tradition, authority, New Testament canon ............................... 132 Tradition and Scripture ......................................................................................... 137 The Church of Rome ............................................................................................. 139 5. EARLY ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE .................................................................140 CHAPTER 2 ...............................................................................................................145 BYZANTINE CHURCH HISTORY (313-1453 AD).......................................................145 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................145 1. THE EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (324-842): THE FORMATIVE PERIOD OF THE CHURCH. COUNCILS AND LOCAL HERESIES.............................................................148

THE FIRST GOLDEN AGE OF BYZANTIUM (324-730) ................................................. 148

Political and Cultural Aspects ................................................................................. 148 Constantine the Great ....................................................................................... 148

Table of Contents

Constantines Successors................................................................................... 152 The Fall of the Roman Empire in the West ......................................................... 153 Justinian I, the Builder of Hagia Sophia .............................................................. 154 Justinian Is Successors: More Invasions ............................................................ 157 Religious Aspects.................................................................................................. 159 Heresies and the First Six Ecumenical Councils (325-681) ................................... 159 Arianism....................................................................................................... 162 Nestorianism ................................................................................................ 163 Monophysitism ............................................................................................. 164 Monoenergism. Schism and the Sixth Council ................................................. 166 Other Heretical Movements ........................................................................... 169 The Pentarchy .................................................................................................. 170

END OF EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (730-843) .......................................................... 174

Political and Cultural Aspects ................................................................................. 174 Religious Aspects.................................................................................................. 176 The Iconoclastic Controversy............................................................................. 176 Background to the Eighth-Century Crisis ........................................................ 178 First Phase: Leo III, Constantine V and Empress Irene.................................... 181 Opening conflict by Leo III........................................................................ 181 Constantine V and the Council of 754 ........................................................ 183 Restoration of the icons: The Empress Irene and the council of Nicaea (787)185 Second Phase: Final Reestablishment of Icons, the Empress Theodora ............ 187 The Byzantinization of Liturgy ........................................................................... 190 2. THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE PERIOD: THE SECOND GOLDEN AGE OF BYZANTIUM (843-1261)...............................................................................................................191

POLITICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS......................................................................... 191

Religious Aspects.................................................................................................. 195 Missions: The Conversion of the Slavs................................................................ 195 Schism between the East and West ....................................................................... 200 The Filioque and Other Sources of Separation .................................................... 202 3. THE LATE BYZANTINE PERIOD (1261-1453)........................................................205

POLITICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS......................................................................... 205 RELIGIOUS ASPECTS ................................................................................................ 207

Crusades: Making the Schism Definitive ................................................................. 207 IMPORTANCE OF THE RELIGION IN THE POLITICS OF THE BYZANTINE PEOPLE: THREE CONTROVERSIES ...................................................................................... 210 The Arsenite Schism ......................................................................................... 211 Attempts at Union with the Roman Church......................................................... 214 Relations between the Christian Church and State in Byzantium .............................. 216 Heaven on Earth: The Emperor as Gods Representative on Earth ....................... 216 Caesaropapism in Byzantium? ........................................................................... 221 Patterns of Development in the Relations between the Church and the State ....... 223 Monasticism ......................................................................................................... 229 A Quick Note on the Captive Church ...................................................................... 231 CHAPTER 3 ...............................................................................................................235 RUSSIAN CHURCH HISTORY (IX-XX CENTURIES) ..................................................235 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................235 1. KIEVAN PERIOD (IX-XIII CENTURIES): THE BAPTISM OF RUSSIA AND THE FLOWERING OF KIEVAN CHRISTIANITY..................................................................238 2. THE TARTAR-MONGOL YOKE AND THE EMERGENCE OF THE PRINCIPALITY OF MOSCOW (XIII-XV CENTURIES) ..............................................................................256

PRINCE ALEXANDER NEVSKY OF NOVGOROD ............................................................ 260 ST. SERGIUS (SERGII) AND THE CHURCH IN MOSCOVITE RUSSIA: XIV-XV CENTURIES ............................................................................................................................... 264
St. Sergius of Radonezh ........................................................................................ 266 St. Stephen, the Enlightener of Perm, a missionary................................................. 271

Table of Contents

The End of the Tartar Yoke and the Emergence of Moscow..................................... 273

A RUSSIAN RENAISSANCE ........................................................................................ 276 HERESIES ................................................................................................................ 277

3. FROM POSSESSORS AND NON-POSSESSORS TO THE GREAT SCHISM (XVI-XVII CENTURIES) .............................................................................................................278

POSSESSORS AND NON-POSSESSORS ....................................................................... 278 IVAN III THE TERRIBLE AND ST PHILIPS................................................................... 283 THE EMERGENCE OF MOSCOW AS A PATRIARCHATE ................................................. 286 A TIME OF TROUBLES (1584-1613) ........................................................................... 289 THE SCHISM OF THE OLD BELIEVERS ...................................................................... 293
4. THE CHURCH IN IMPERIAL RUSSIA: THE SYNODAL PERIOD (1700-1917)..........300

1. THE CHURCH IN IMPERIAL RUSSIA: THE XVIII CENTURY ....................................... 300 2. THE CHURCH IN IMPERIAL RUSSIA: THE XIX CENTURY ......................................... 311 3. OPENING YEARS OF THE TWENTY CENTURY: MOVEMENT FOR CHURCH RENEWAL AND THE END OF THE SYNODICAL PERIOD (1917).................................................... 321
4. A TIME OF PERSECUTION AND REBIRTH: THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE XX CENTURY (1917-) ........................................................................................328

THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH FROM THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION OF 1917 UNTIL THE SECOND WORLD WAR: SIX MAIN STAGES .......................................................... 328 The Sobor ............................................................................................................ 331 First Stage (1918-22): Communists Optimism, the Sobor and Lenins State ............. 333
Second Stage (1922-29): Communists Attempts at Splitting the Church .................. 337 Third Stage (1929-1941): Stalins Bloody Persecution of the Church ........................ 342 Fourth Stage (1941-1953): Second World War and Stalins Restoration of the Russian Church ................................................................................................................. 345 Fifth Stage (1958-1964): Nikita Khrushchev, a New Assault on the Church............... 349 Sixth Stage 1965-1991: The Church under the Decaying Socialism .......................... 352 Brezhnev.......................................................................................................... 352 Andropov ......................................................................................................... 355 Chernenko ....................................................................................................... 356 Gorbachev........................................................................................................ 357

SOME NOTES ON THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 1991 TO MODERN DAYS .......... 362
4. FINAL CONCLUSION ON CHURCH HISTORY .........................................................367 SOME NOTES ON TODAYS SITUATION OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH ......................368 PART II.....................................................................................................................370 (A STUDY OF THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS) ................................................................................370 INTRODUCTION TO PART II ....................................................................................371 1. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES PLUS SOME BASIC BACKGROUND INFORMATION .......371 2. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AND HISTORICAL THEOLOGY: DOGMA AND DOCTRINE, TRADITION, CHRISTIAN ETHICS, ORTHODOX THEOLOGY ......................................374

SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, HISTORICAL THEOLOGY, ETHICAL CONCERNS ................... 376 DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS ....................................................................................... 382
Christian Ethics..................................................................................................... 388

TWO TYPES OF THEOLOGIES IN ORTHODOXY........................................................... 389

3. FORMS OF THE SACRED OR HOLY TRADITION AND DOCTRINE ...........................396 CHAPTER 4 ...............................................................................................................402 PATRISTICS .............................................................................................................402 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................402 1. OVERVIEW OF THE CHURCH FATHERS .................................................................404

GENERAL PERIODIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION...................................................... 407

Ante-Nicene Fathers ............................................................................................. 407 a) The Apostolic Fathers (from about 90-140) .................................................... 407 b) Apologists and Anti-Heretical Fathers (130-325AD)......................................... 410

Table of Contents

c) The Desert Fathers (Third and Fourth Centuries) ............................................ 414 The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (IV-V Centuries) ............................................. 416 The Byzantine Period (VI- Centuries) ..................................................................... 418 a) Later Fathers (VI-VIII Centuries) ................................................................... 418 b) Recent Fathers (VIII-XV)............................................................................... 419

AUTHORITY AND RELEVANCE AS UNDERSTOOD BY THE THREE CHRISTIAN BRANCHES ............................................................................................................................... 420 VARIOUS SCHOOLS OR METHODS OF STUDY AND INTERPRETATIONS....................... 421
2. THE ROLE OF ASCESIS IN THE LIVES AND TEACHING OF THE FATHERS ..............423

ASKESIS: MEANING OF THE TERM, SOME FEATURES .............................................. 430 BIBLICAL BASIS OF THE MONASTIC, ASCETIC IDEAL ................................................. 434
Old Testamental Basis........................................................................................... 434 New Testamental Basis ......................................................................................... 437 Pre-Nicene Fathers and asceticism......................................................................... 447 Formulation and Development of Asceticism: The Desert Fathers and St. Basil ......... 455 3. THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH AND HESYCHASM................................................480

GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE HESYCHIA ........................................................... 480 THE WRITINGS OF THE EASTERN FATHERS AND HESYCHIA ...................................... 488 SOME CONCLUDING WORDS .................................................................................... 523
4. THE FATHERS AS DEFENDERS OF FAITH: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ON APOLOGETICS .................................................................................................................................528 5. THE FATHERS AND LITURGICAL PRACTICE: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ...................529 CHAPTER 5 ...............................................................................................................530 HISTORY OF DOCTRINE...........................................................................................530 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................530 1. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY .....................................532

BIBLICAL TEACHING ABOUT THE TRINITY ................................................................ 532

Bible, Apostles, Canon, and Apostolic Fathers......................................................... 537

ANTE-NICENE PERIOD: APOSTOLIC, APOLOGISTS, AND ANTI-HERETICAL FATHERS ... 541

a) The Apostolic Fathers (90-140).......................................................................... 545 b) Apologists and Anti-heretical Fathers (130-325AD) ............................................. 554 The Apologists (130-180) .................................................................................. 555 Old Catholic Age (170-325) ............................................................................... 562 Irenaeus ...................................................................................................... 563 Problems Raised by the Logos theology ............................................................. 568 The Third Century: Conflicting Tendencies. Tertullian and Origen ........................ 569 Tertullian ..................................................................................................... 570 Origen ......................................................................................................... 578 Arianism and the Road to the Council of Nicea ................................................... 588

AFTER NICEA: THE ROAD TO THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE ............................ 594

The Cappadocian FathersBasil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzusand the Council of Constantinople (381)....................................... 601 CONCLUSION ...........................................................................................................613 2. CHRISTOLOGY: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ...............................................................616

CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.................................................................. 617 CHRISTOLOGY OF THE PRE-NICENE FATHERS........................................................... 619 CHRISTOLOGY OF THE POST-NICENE FATHERS......................................................... 619
CHAPTER 6 ...............................................................................................................621 DOGMATICS .............................................................................................................621 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................621 1. DOGMAS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH.................................................................627

THE DIVINE PLAN OF SALVATION: THEOSIS AND UNCREATED ENERGIES .................. 632
Biblical Basis of Theosis .................................................................................... 639 Patristic Development ....................................................................................... 647 Ante-Nicene (II-IV Centuries) ........................................................................ 648

Table of Contents

The Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers (IV-V).................................................... 661 Byzantine Period (V-XV) ................................................................................ 680 Some Concluding Words and Further Theological Speculations ........................ 706

THE DOGMA OF THE TRINITY: YOUR OWN RESEARCH .............................................. 715 THE CHRISTOLOGICAL DOGMA: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ............................................ 718 YOUR OWN RESEARCH ON OTHER DOGMAS: CREATION AND ESCHATOLOGY............. 719
2. CONCLUSION........................................................................................................724 PART III ...................................................................................................................725 PRACTICAL THEOLOGY ............................................................................................725 (A STUDY OF HISTORY OF ORTHODOX LITURGICS, THE LITURGICAL ENVIRONMENT, AND CONTEMPORARY LITURGICS)...............................................725 INTRODUCTION TO PART III...................................................................................726 CHAPTER 7 ...............................................................................................................728 DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX LITURGY.................................................................728 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................728

INTRODUCTORY TERMS, LITURGICS, LITURGICAL THEOLOGY, ANAPHORA ........ 729

1. JEWISH AND NEW TESTAMENT BACKGROUND ....................................................735 EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH (I-III CENTURIES) ......................................................742

APOSTOLIC AGE....................................................................................................... 742

The Eucharist: A Separated, Ordered Celebration ................................................... 746 Significance of the Eucharist.................................................................................. 749

AGE OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS (FROM THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY TO THIRD CENTURY)................................................................................................................ 750 The Apostolic Constitutions ................................................................................... 763
2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE LITURGY IN THE BYZANTINE CHURCH (IV-XV CENTURIES) .................................................................................................................................767

EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (324-842) ....................................................................... 767

The The The The Fourth and Fifth Centuries: The Liturgies of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom .. 772 Seventh Century: Maximus the Confessor........................................................ 779 Eight and Ninth Century: The Barberini Codex ................................................. 784 Interpretation of the Liturgy ........................................................................... 790

THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE PERIOD (8431261) ............................................................. 792 THE LATE BYZANTINE PERIOD (12611453) ............................................................... 798
Interpretation of the Liturgy .................................................................................. 800

THE DIVINE OFFICE OR LITURGY OF THE HOURS AND THE LITURGY OF THE PRESANCTIFIED GIFTS ............................................................................................. 805
The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts ..................................................................... 805 The Divine Office or Liturgy of the Hours ............................................................... 806 3. SOME CONCLUDING WORDS ................................................................................810 CHAPTER 8 ...............................................................................................................812 THE LITURGICAL ENVIRONMENT: THE ORTHODOX CHURCH BUILDING AND LITURGICAL VESTMENTS.........................................................................................812 1. THE ORTHODOX CHURCH BUILDING ...................................................................812

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 812

Church Plan.......................................................................................................... 815 Some Definitions .................................................................................................. 818 JEWISH AND NEW TESTAMENT BACKGROUND ........................................................821 EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH (I-III CENTURIES) ......................................................827

APOSTOLIC AGE (FIRST CENTURY) ........................................................................... 827

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH BUILDING IN THE BYZANTINE CHURCH (IV-XV CENTURIES) .............................................................................................................844

EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (324-842) ....................................................................... 844 THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE PERIOD (8431261) ............................................................. 875

Table of Contents

THE LATE BYZANTINE PERIOD (12611453) ............................................................... 886

SYMBOLISM OF THE CHURCH BUILDING ............................................................... 896

SOME CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................... 902

2. LITURGICAL VESTMENTS .....................................................................................904

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 904 ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF LITURGICAL VESTMENTS.............................................. 905

Jewish background ............................................................................................... 905

The Dress of Jesus and His Disciples.......................................................................... 906

Beginning Church Hierarchy and Tradition.............................................................. 909

FOUR MAIN PERIODS OF DEVELOPMENT OF LITURGICAL VESTMENTS ....................... 910 LITURGICAL AND NON-LITURGICAL VESTMENTS ....................................................... 919
Readers vestment ................................................................................................ 920 Deacons Vestments.............................................................................................. 920 Priests Vestments ................................................................................................ 923 Bishops vestments ............................................................................................... 926 MEANING OF THE LITURGICAL ATTIRE IN THE CLERGYS VESTING PROCESS OF THE DIVINE LITURGY .................................................................................................................................933

SOME CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................... 940

CHAPTER 9 ...............................................................................................................942 CONTEMPORARY LITURGICS AND LITURGICAL CATECHESIS ................................942 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................942 1. CONTEMPORARY LITURGICS ...............................................................................943

THREE GLOBAL FEATURES OF ORTHODOX LITURGY.................................................. 946 MAIN EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP ............................................................................ 949 LITURGICAL BOOKS ................................................................................................. 957 ORTHODOX LAITY AND DIVINE SERVICES................................................................. 961 LITURGICAL AND PERSONAL PRAYER........................................................................ 962 BIBLE READING IN THE ORTHODOX WORSHIP.......................................................... 970
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 970

THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT....................................................................... 974

The Books of the New Testament .......................................................................... 978 2. WESTERN RITES: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ............................................................982 3. LITURGICAL CATECHESIS AS A MODEL OF HOLISTIC EDUCATION......................983

LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI AN AXIOM AT THE CENTER OF HOLISTIC LITURGICAL CATECHESIS ............................................................................................................ 983 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF ORTHODOX, HOLISTIC RELIGIOUS EDUCATION ......... 989 INTEGRATIVE, HOLISTIC RELIGIOUS EDUCATION: THE ORTHODOX TASK TODAY...... 996
4. CANON LAW: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ...................................................................999 SOME CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................1000 PART IV ..................................................................................................................1002 ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC..................................................................................1002 (A STUDY OF CHURCH MUSIC IN BYZANTIUM AND RUSSIA, AND OF THE THEOLOGY OF ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC) ...........................................................................1002 INTRODUCTION TO PART IV..................................................................................1003 CHAPTER 10 ...........................................................................................................1006 DEVELOPMENT OF BYZANTINE HYMNODY ............................................................1006 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1006 PRELIMINARY REMARKS .......................................................................................1007

THE CONCEPT OF HYMN AND HYMNODY................................................................. 1008 ORTHODOX SERVICE BOOKS CONTAINING LITURGICAL MUSIC ................................... 1010 PERIODS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BYZANTINE HYMNODY..................................... 1011
PERIODS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BYZANTINE HYMNODY .................................1012

PRE-BYZANTIUM ERA: CLASSIC, JEWISH, AND EARLY CHRISTIAN ROOTS ................ 1012

10

Table of Contents

The Terms Psalms, Hymn, and Spiritual songs.............................................. 1016 Meter of the Psalms ............................................................................................ 1019 References to Early Christian Chanting and Pagan Music ....................................... 1022

BYZANTINE ERA ..................................................................................................... 1032

Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1032 First Period: From the Fourth to the Sixth Century..................................................... 1033 From the Sixth to the Eleventh Century: Kontakia and Kanons .............................. 1044 Later Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Periods.......................................................... 1053 CHAPTER 11 ...........................................................................................................1057 CHURCH MUSIC IN RUSSIA ...................................................................................1057

INTRODUCTION: MAIN PERIODS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIAN CHURCH SINGING ............................................................................................................................. 1057 KIEVAN RUSSIA: THE ORIGINS OF RUSSIAN LITURGICAL SINGING .......................... 1060
Preparatory Period.............................................................................................. 1060 From the Baptism of the Rus (988) to the Tartar invasion .................................... 1064 Development of Znamenny and Kondakarian Singing............................................. 1068 The Period of the Tartar Yoke (Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries) and the 16th Century.............................................................................................................. 1075 CHAPTER 12 ...........................................................................................................1080 THEOLOGY OF CHURCH MUSIC: THE ROLE OF MUSIC IN THE HOLY SERVICES ...1080 PRELIMINARY REMARKS .......................................................................................1080 PRAISE SINGING IN THE SCRIPTURES ..................................................................1084 TWO CONCEPTS OF CHANTING ..............................................................................1089 A MAIN PURPOSE: PROVIDING AN EMOTIONAL COLOR TO CONCRETE LITURGICAL TEXT .......................................................................................................................1093 STYLE OF PERFORMANCE, TYPES OF HYMNS, AND SIGNIFICANCE OF HYMNS IN THE MAIN SERVICES OF THE DIVINE LITURGY, VESPERS, AND MATINS ...........................1095

STYLE OF PERFORMANCE AND TYPES OF HYMNS ........................................................ 1095

Significance of Hymns....................................................................................... 1097 CONCLUSION: ........................................................................................................1111 THE INTEGRATING FORCE OF THE HOLY TRADITION...........................................1111 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND NAMES ........................................................................1113 APPENDIXES ..........................................................................................................1144 APPENDIX A ...........................................................................................................1145 1. LETTERS OF GOVERNOR PLINY AND EMPEROR TRAJAN ................................... 1145 Trajans Reply .................................................................................................... 1146

2. 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF CANCELLING OF EX-COMMUNICATION BY ROME AND CONSTANTINOPLE ................................................................................................. 1146 3. LINK BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND STATE IN ENGLAND ....................................... 1147
APPENDIX B ...........................................................................................................1149 DEVELOPMENT AND REFUTATION OF CHRISTOLOGICAL ERRORS ........................1149 APPENDIX C ...........................................................................................................1151 BYZANTIUM ...........................................................................................................1151

1. CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BYZANTINE EMPERORS .............................................. 1151 2. A QUICK LIST OF EMPERORS OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE ................................... 1156 3. SELECTIVE BYZANTINE TIMELINE:...................................................................... 1157 HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE TURBULENT HISTORY OF THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE ... 1157 4. HIERARCHICAL SUCCESSION OF THE PATRIARCHAL SEE OF CONSTANTINOPLE UNTIL THE FALL OF THE CITY........................................................................................... 1159
APPENDIX D ...........................................................................................................1161 MAPS OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA AND ASIA MINOR ..........................................1161 APPENDIX E............................................................................................................1163 LIST OF RUSSIAN LEADERS....................................................................................1163

11

Table of Contents

1. RULERS OF THE KIEVAN RUS BEFORE THE TARTAR INVASION............................. 1163 2. RULERS OF THE TARTAR-MONGOL PERIOD ......................................................... 1164 3. PRINCES OF MOSCOW ........................................................................................ 1164 4. TSARS OF RUSSIA, 1547-1721 ............................................................................ 1164 5. EMPERORS OF RUSSIA, 1721-1917...................................................................... 1165 6. SOVIET LEADERS ............................................................................................... 1165 7. PRESIDENTS OF RUSSIA ..................................................................................... 1166
APPENDIX F............................................................................................................1167 THE FATHERS AS DEFENDERS OF FAITH ................................................................1167 APPENDIX G ...........................................................................................................1171 THE LITURGY OF THE EIGHTH BOOK OF THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS..........1171 APPENDIX H ...........................................................................................................1173 LITURGICAL CYCLES OF SERVICES ........................................................................1173 APPENDIX I ............................................................................................................1179 LITURGICAL BOOKS ...............................................................................................1179 APPENDIX J ............................................................................................................1182 WESTERN RITE ORTHODOXY .................................................................................1182 APPENDIX K ...........................................................................................................1186 THE CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF THE DIVINE LITURGY ....................................1186 APPENDIX L............................................................................................................1191 SERVICE OF PROSKOMIDE.....................................................................................1191 APPENDIX M...........................................................................................................1193 THE SACRAMENTS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH....................................................1193 APPENDIX N ...........................................................................................................1196 DIFFERENT SCHEDULES OF SERVICES ...................................................................1196 APPENDIX O ...........................................................................................................1197 NEW TESTAMENT REFERENCES TO THE EUCHARIST..............................................1197 APPENDIX P ...........................................................................................................1202 SIX DIMENSIONS IN PRACTICAL THEOLOGY ........................................................1202 APPENDIX Q ...........................................................................................................1203 THE ICONOSTASIS .................................................................................................1203 APPENDIX R ...........................................................................................................1205 THE CLERGY ...........................................................................................................1205 APPENDIX S ...........................................................................................................1207 COLORS OF THE LITURGICAL VESTMENTS.............................................................1207 APPENDIX T............................................................................................................1209 JEWISH HIGH PRIESTS VESTMENTS .....................................................................1209 APPENDIX U ...........................................................................................................1210 THE CANTICLES OF LUKE........................................................................................1210 APPENDIX V ...........................................................................................................1212 PRE-BYZANTINE AND BYZANTINE HYMNS ............................................................1212

THE PRAYER OF CLEMENT OF ROME ....................................................................... 1212 CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIAS A HYMN TO CHRIST THE SAVIOUR.......................... 1212 HYMN TO GOD BY GREGORY NAZIANZUS ............................................................. 1213 ANACREONTIC HYMN BY ST. JOHN OF DAMASCUS ................................................. 1215
APPENDIX X ...........................................................................................................1217 FIVE PERIODS IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE POST-BYZANTINE CHANT ..................1217 APPENDIX Y ...........................................................................................................1218 LITURGICAL MUSIC: THE DIVINE LITURGY OF OUR FATHER AMONG THE SAINTS JOHN CHRYSOSTOM...............................................................................................1218 WORKS CITED ........................................................................................................1219 PRIMARY SOURCES................................................................................................1219 SECONDARY SOURCES ...........................................................................................1227 OTHER WEB PAGES CITED......................................................................................1259

12

Table of Contents

TABLES Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 1: Webs for definition of terms ...................................................................................24 2: Concept of Tradition ..............................................................................................79 3: Chart with main persecutions of First Christians.......................................................97 4: First century historian and the persecution under Nero ............................................99 5: First century historian and the persecution under Domitian .................................... 100 6: Concept of Apostolic Fathers ................................................................................ 124 7: Writings of the Apostolic Fathers .......................................................................... 125 8: New Testament writers and their denouncement of heresies .................................. 128 9: Response of the Church to 2nd century Gnosticism ............................................... 129 10: Response of Early Church Fathers on heresy ....................................................... 131 11: The Formation of the New Testament canon ....................................................... 131 12: Credal-confessional Tradition.............................................................................. 135 13: Constantinople becomes the Roman capital......................................................... 149 14: Constantine as a saint in the Orthodox Church .................................................... 151 15: Construction of Constantinople triple wall (413)................................................... 153 16: Bubonic plagues first appearance in the Mediterranean (541-544) ....................... 155 17: Dates of the First Seven Ecumenical Councils ...................................................... 160 18: Kontakion (Second Tone) .................................................................................. 180 19: Triumph of Orthodox iconodule .......................................................................... 189 20: The body of John Chrysostom ............................................................................ 208 21: Feast day of Saint Gregory Palamas .................................................................... 214 22: Last Christian service before the fall of Constantinople ......................................... 216 23: Emperors and Churchs worship.......................................................................... 218 24: The Rus ........................................................................................................... 240 25: St. Andrew in Kiev ............................................................................................. 243 26: Lavra Monastery, a history ................................................................................. 247 27: In memory of Byzantium .................................................................................... 248 28: Earliest head of the Russian Church .................................................................... 248 29: Monastery of Trinity-St. Sergius Sergiev Posad .................................................... 267 30: The Russian tsarthe New Constantine. .......................................................... 284 31: The Swedish and the Polish in the Time of Troubles ............................................ 291 32: Historical data about Peter I the Great (1721-1725)............................................. 303 33: Early Romanov tsars and tsarinas ....................................................................... 308 34: Late Romanov tsars ........................................................................................... 311 35: The Philokalia .................................................................................................... 316 36: Pilgrimage in Russia........................................................................................... 317 37: Monastery of Optina Pustyn ............................................................................... 318 38: Causes of the Russian Revolution of 1917 ........................................................... 327 39: The February Revolution .................................................................................... 327 40: The October Revolution ..................................................................................... 329 41: Article 17 of the revised religious law issued by Stain (April 8th, 1929) .................. 343 42: Statistics indicating the consolidation of the Church in the post-war years............. 348 43: Period early 1960s to mid-1980s ....................................................................... 357 44: Common divisions of Theology ........................................................................... 376 45: Division within Systematic Theology................................................................... 376 46: Ecumenical Councils and later Councils along with their doctrines or documents.... 398 47: The Creed of Nicea ............................................................................................ 398 48: Apostolic Fathers ............................................................................................... 403 49: Concept of Heresy ............................................................................................. 410 50: Justins Dialogue with Trypho ............................................................................. 412 51: Apologists and Anti-Heretical Fathers .................................................................. 414 52: Apophthegmata Patrum .................................................................................... 415 53: The Evergetinos ................................................................................................ 416 54: Fathers of the Golden Age Period (1) .................................................................. 417 55: Fathers of the Golden Age Period (2): John Chrysostom....................................... 418 56: Some Later and Recent Fathers .......................................................................... 419

13

Table of Contents

Table 57: St. Symeon the New Theologian ......................................................................... 419 Table 58: Nice and Post-Nicene Fathers struggle against heresies....................................... 420 Table 59: Works of Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 265-c.340) ..................................................... 422 Table 60: Relation of Ascetics to Moral Theology and Mysticism .......................................... 428 Table 61: Troparion of St. Anthony .................................................................................... 459 Table 62: St. Basil`s prayer for a deeper sense of fellowship with all living things ................ 467 Table 63: The Apophthegmata Texts ................................................................................. 492 Table 64: Prayer by St. Thalassios ..................................................................................... 505 Table 65: The term canon .............................................................................................. 539 Table 66: The Apostles Creed ........................................................................................... 540 Table 67: The Rule of Faith ............................................................................................... 564 Table 68: Montanism ........................................................................................................ 578 Table 69: Kataphatic and apophatic theologies ................................................................... 579 Table 70: Arius doctrines about Jesus ............................................................................... 589 Table 71: The Athanasian Creed........................................................................................ 601 Table 72: The Capadoccian Fathers and the Trinity............................................................. 601 Table 73: Trinitarian perspective East-West........................................................................ 602 Table 74: The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.................................................................. 627 Table 75: Troparion and Kontakion to Athanasius ............................................................... 665 Table 76: Synodikon of Orthodoxy..................................................................................... 704 Table 77: The Proclamation of Palamas Sainthood.............................................................. 705 Table 78: Contents of the Divine Liturgy ............................................................................ 733 Table 79: The Feast of Pascha........................................................................................... 740 Table 80: Book eighth of the Apostolic Constitutions ........................................................... 764 Table 81: The Barberini Codex .......................................................................................... 772 Table 82: The Typikon ...................................................................................................... 794 Table 83: Liturgy of St. Basil ............................................................................................. 950 Table 84: The structure of the Eucharistic liturgies ............................................................. 951 Table 85: The Words of Institution in the three liturgies of Eastern Christian Churches ......... 952 Table 86: Example of Typikon ........................................................................................... 958 Table 87: The Byzantine Typicon ....................................................................................... 960 Table 88: Outline of times for the Daily Prayer Cycle........................................................... 961 Table 89: How laymen read service books.......................................................................... 962 Table 90: Prayers before and after Meals ........................................................................... 965 Table 91: Books of the Old Testament and the New Testaments accepted by the Orthodox Church ..................................................................................................................... 973 Table 92: Ekphonetic notation ......................................................................................... 1007 Table 93: Antiphonal singing ........................................................................................... 1035 Table 94: Venerable Father Auxentius, Troparion, Tone I .............................................. 1043 ILLUSTRATIONS Illustration 1: Bust of the Emperor August............................................................................39 Illustration 2: Goddess Isis and Winged Maat .......................................................................40 Illustration 3: Plutarch .......................................................................................................42 Illustration 4: Babylonian exile.............................................................................................44 Illustration 5: Ezra reads the Law ........................................................................................46 Illustration 6: Model of Jerusalem (Roman Period)................................................................48 Illustration 7: Philo of Alexandria .........................................................................................50 Illustration 8: Jesus Christ the Lifegiver................................................................................51 Illustration 9: The twelve Apostles .......................................................................................58 Illustration 10: The areas mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles............................................59 Illustration 11: St. Paul .......................................................................................................61 Illustration 12: The three hierarchs of the Church.................................................................79 Illustration 13: Pentecost ....................................................................................................81 Illustration 14: St. Peter and St. Paul ...................................................................................83 Illustration 15: Stephens martyrdom ...................................................................................84 Illustration 16: St. James, the Lords brother ........................................................................87

14

Table of Contents

Illustration 17: Peters martyrdom .......................................................................................98 Illustration 18: Saint Polycarp, martyred circa 155 AD......................................................... 101 Illustration 19: Cyprian and Justina, two African Christians.................................................. 106 Illustration 20: Diocletian coin ........................................................................................... 107 Illustration 21: A fragment of the Dichache ........................................................................ 125 Illustration 22: Justin ........................................................................................................ 127 Illustration 23: Emperor Constantine I and Helen, .............................................................. 150 Illustration 24: Constantinople, the New Rome ................................................................ 151 Illustration 25: Map of Earlier Byzantium (565)................................................................... 154 Illustration 26: Hagia Sofia (537 A.D.)................................................................................ 156 Illustration 27: Emperor Justinian I (527-565) and attendants ............................................. 156 Illustration 28: Map of the Byzantine Empire (668 A.D.)...................................................... 157 Illustration 29: Council of Ephesus, 431 ............................................................................. 166 Illustration 30: Map of the Byzantine Empire in 780 AD....................................................... 175 Illustration 31: John of Damascus...................................................................................... 178 Illustration 32: Demetrius of Thessalonica .......................................................................... 180 Illustration 33: Forerunner and Lamb................................................................................. 181 Illustration 34: Map of the Byzantine Empire (1025 A.D.) .................................................... 192 Illustration 35: Mosaic of Constantine IX Monomachus and Empress Zo ............................. 193 Illustration 36: Michael VIII Palaeologus ............................................................................ 194 Illustration 37: Cyril and Methodius.................................................................................... 196 Illustration 38: Siege of Constantinople (1453) .................................................................. 206 Illustration 39: Siege of Constantinople by crusaders .......................................................... 209 Illustration 40: Ottoman Empire (1580).............................................................................. 232 Illustration 41: Prince Vladimir........................................................................................... 242 Illustration 42: Vladimir Monomakh.................................................................................... 245 Illustration 43: St. Theodosius ........................................................................................... 246 Illustration 44: Lavra Monastery ........................................................................................ 247 Illustration 45: Kiev in the 10th century .............................................................................. 249 Illustration 46: The Kievan Rus and the world ca 1100 A.D................................................. 251 Illustration 47: Yaroslav the Wise.................................................................................... 253 Illustration 48: Medieval walls of Novgorod ........................................................................ 257 Illustration 49: Prince Alexander Nevsky receiving Popes legates ........................................ 261 Illustration 50: Moscow in the fifteenth century .................................................................. 265 Illustration 51: Monastery of St. Sergius Sergei Posad......................................................... 267 Illustration 52: St. Sergius of Radonezh ............................................................................. 268 Illustration 53: St. Stephen of Perm (1340-1396) in his way to Moscow ............................... 272 Illustration 54: Archangel Michael Cathedral ....................................................................... 275 Illustration 55: Ivan the Terrible ........................................................................................ 284 Illustration 56: Patriarch Nikon (1652-58) .......................................................................... 296 Illustration 57: Avvacum, the Holy Martyr (1620-1680) ....................................................... 298 Illustration 58: Peter I the Great........................................................................................ 302 Illustration 59: St. Tikhon of Zadonsk (1724-83)................................................................. 310 Illustration 60: St. Paissy Velichkovsky ............................................................................... 314 Illustration 61: St. Serafim of Sarov ................................................................................... 316 Illustration 62: The Monastery of Optina ............................................................................ 317 Illustration 63: Tsar Nicholas II and Family ........................................................................ 323 Illustration 64: Patriarch Tikhon......................................................................................... 335 Illustration 65: Danilov Monastery ..................................................................................... 355 Illustration 66: Council of Nicea I, 325 ............................................................................... 399 Illustration 67: The Ten Commandments ........................................................................... 436 Illustration 68: St. Anthony the Great, father of all monks................................................... 458 Illustration 69: St. Anthony Monastery (built 356)............................................................... 460 Illustration 70: Maximus the Confessor .............................................................................. 476 Illustration 71: St. John of the Ladder................................................................................ 513 IIlustration 72: St. Ignatius of Antioch ............................................................................... 551 Illustration 73: Origen....................................................................................................... 586 Illustration 74: St. Athanasius............................................................................................ 600

15

Table of Contents

Illustration 75: St. Symeon the New Theologian ................................................................. 694 Illustration 76: St. Gregory Palamas................................................................................... 704 Illustration 77: The communion of the Apostles .................................................................. 745 Illustration 78: The Divine Liturgy...................................................................................... 782 Illustration 79: Skeuophylakion of Hagia Sophia ................................................................. 783 Illustration 80: Plant of an Orthodox Church Building .......................................................... 817 Illustration 81: Narthex or vestibule ................................................................................... 817 Illustration 82: Byzantine Church with a triple apse............................................................. 818 Illustration 83: The Tabernacle of Moses............................................................................ 822 Illustration 84: Christian church-house of Dura Europos (Syria) ........................................... 831 Illustration 85: Dura Europos baptistery ............................................................................ 832 Illustration 86: Adam and Eve and the Good Shepherd ....................................................... 832 Illustration 87: The Orans, praying figure from the catacombs ............................................ 837 Illustration 88: The Good Shepherd ................................................................................... 837 Illustration 89: The cubicle of the sacraments .................................................................... 838 Illustration 90: Photo of the altar partition of a fourth century Christian church at Olympia .................................................................................................... 842 Illustration 91: Fresco Fraction Panis (Greek Chapel) .......................................................... 843 Illustration 92: Basilica Ulpiae (Rome)................................................................................ 845 Illustration 93: Drawing of the interior of the Basilica Ulpiae (Rome).................................... 845 Illustration 94: Early Christian rectangular church ............................................................... 846 Illustration 95: Byzantine adaptation of a rectangular church plan ....................................... 847 Illustration 96: Altar partition of 4th century Lochrida Basilica ............................................. 849 Illustration 97: The Church of the Holy Apostles at Constantinople ...................................... 850 Illustration 98: Plan view of the Church of the Holy Apostles ............................................... 850 Illustration 99: Church of Hagia Irene at Constantinople ..................................................... 853 Illustration 100: The monogram of Christ ........................................................................... 853 Illustration 101: Coin with Constantine I ascending into heaven .......................................... 854 Illustration 102: Christ Pantocrator (La Martorana) ............................................................. 855 Illustration 103: Christ Pantocrator .................................................................................... 856 Illustration 104: Detail of the mosaic in the apse of the Basilica........................................... 857 Illustration 105: Sant Agnese, martyr ................................................................................ 857 Illustration 106: Plan view of Hagia Sophia......................................................................... 861 Illustration 107: Hagia Sophia ................................................................................... 864 Illustration 108: The Dome of Hagia Sophia ....................................................................... 864 Illustration 109: North side of nave of San Apollinnare....................................................... 867 Illustration 110: South side of nave of San Apollinnare ...................................................... 867 Illustration 111: Sanctuary of St. Vitale in Ravenna............................................................. 868 Illustration 112: Justinian with Maximianius........................................................................ 868 Illustration 113: Empress Theodora and attendants ............................................................ 869 Illustration 114: Christ Pantocrator giving a martyrs........................................................... 869 Illustration 115: Moses receiving the Law........................................................................... 870 Illustration 116: Abraham and Sarah entertain the three angels .......................................... 870 Illustration 117: St. Sebastian martyr................................................................................. 871 Illustration 118: Drawing of an early iconostasis ................................................................. 875 Illustration 119: Enthroned Virgin and Child ....................................................................... 877 Illustration 120: Scheme of the cross-in square church ....................................................... 877 Illustration 121: Ground plan of the cross-in square church................................................. 878 Illustration 122: The New Church ...................................................................................... 879 Illustration 123: Constantine Lips Monastery Church (909) .................................................. 880 Illustration 124: Church of Myrelaion -Bodrum Camii ........................................................ 880 Illustration 125: Church of Panaghia Kapnikarea............................................................... 881 Illustration 126: Apse and Iconostasis of the Church........................................................... 882 Illustration 127: Madonna and Child between Empress Irene (right) .................................... 882 Illustration 128: Sketch of the reconstruction of the original exterior appearance ................. 883 Illustration 129: Vestibule mosaic of Hagia Sophia representing Christ ................................. 884 Illustration 130: Iconostasis of Torcello Cathedral............................................................... 885 Illustration 131: Iconostasis of the Protaton church at Mount Athos..................................... 885

16

Table of Contents

Illustration 132: Communion of the Apostles (Hagia Sophia, Kiev) ....................................... 887 Illustration 133: Sacrifices of Abel and Melchizedek (St. Vitale, Ravenna) ............................. 888 Illustration 134: Scheme of iconostasis of Ossios Lukas....................................................... 889 Illustration 135: A five-tier iconostasis (Moscow) ................................................................ 890 llustration 136: Holy Face (Novgorod School) ..................................................................... 892 Illustration 137: Holy Face (Yaroslavl School) ..................................................................... 893 Illustration 138: Rublevs Trinity ........................................................................................ 893 Illustration 139: The Church of the Dormition (Rostov) ....................................................... 894 Illustration 140: Archangel Michael Cathedral ..................................................................... 895 Illustration 141: Jewish High Priest .................................................................................... 906 Illustration 142: Current Jewish Tallith ............................................................................... 907 Illustration 143: Christ of Hagia Sophia, vestibule ............................................................... 908 Illustration 144: the Apostles Paul, Andrew and Peter ......................................................... 909 Illustration 145: Reader vestment of a short phelonion ....................................................... 920 Illustration 146: Deacons vestments ................................................................................. 923 Illustration 147: Priests vestments .................................................................................... 926 Illustration 148: Bishops vestments................................................................................... 928 Illustration 149: Other clerical garments ............................................................................ 929 Illustration 150: Orthodox clergy vestments. From left to right vestments for deacons, priests, and bishops.............................................................................................................. 930 Illustration 151: Inner cassock (Russian style).................................................................... 931 Illustration 152: Inner cassock (Greek style) ...................................................................... 931 Illustration 153: Outer cassock ......................................................................................... 932 Illustration 154: Vestments for the Orthodox Divine Liturgy................................................. 935 Illustration 155: The Baptism of Christ ............................................................................... 953 Illustration 156: Pascha .................................................................................................... 955 Illustration 157: The Divine Liturgy, Angel carrying chalice.................................................. 969 Illustration 158: St. Matthew the Evangelist ....................................................................... 972 Illustration 159: The Birth of the Theotokos ....................................................................... 981 Illustration 160: Transfiguration of Christ ........................................................................... 981 Illustration 161: Canticle ................................................................................................. 1016 Illustration 162: A Troparion .......................................................................................... 1043 Illustration 163: Saint Romanos....................................................................................... 1045 Illustration 164: A kontakion ........................................................................................... 1046 Illustration 165: A kanon ................................................................................................. 1047 Illustration 166: Twelfth-century Kondakarion notation .................................................... 1071 Illustration 167: Znamenny notation ................................................................................ 1072 Illustration 168: The Balkan Peninsula ............................................................................. 1161 Illustration 169: Asia Minor ............................................................................................. 1161 Illustration 170: High Priests Garments ........................................................................... 1209

ACTIVITIES Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity 1: Preliminary activity..............................................................................................23 2: Items in Glossary and Appendixes........................................................................24 3: Contrast the historical perspective of East-West....................................................31 4: Introduction to Chapter I on the History of Early Christian Church .........................37 5: Religious beliefs in the first century......................................................................42 6: Historical periods of Judaism and theological development of Judaism ...................49 7: Judaism and Christianity under the Roman World .................................................53 8: Social context and New Testament ......................................................................56 9: Social issues: mobility and mission .......................................................................67 10: Social issues: Wealth/poverty and class society...................................................72 11: Social issues: Attitudes of authorities and population against Christians................77 12: The Apostolic Age .............................................................................................88 13: Jewish persecutions ..........................................................................................88 14: Pauls theology..................................................................................................92

17

Table of Contents

Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity

15: 16: 17: 18: 19: 20: 21: 22: 23: 24: 25: 26: 27: 28: 29: 30: 31: 32: 33: 34: 35: 36: 37: 38: 39: 40: 41: 42: 43: 44: 45: 46: 47: 48: 49: 50: 51: 52: 53: 54: 55: 56: 57: 58: 59: 60: 61: 62: 63: 64: 65: 66: 67: 68: 69: 70: 71: 72:

Pauls relationship with the Law and with other churches.....................................93 The formation of the Gospels.............................................................................95 Roman Persecutions ........................................................................................ 112 Orthodox theology .......................................................................................... 117 Christian writings of the first century. ............................................................... 119 The Risen Jesus and his Messianic character..................................................... 120 Oneness of believers with Christ ...................................................................... 121 Christ as an Expiator ....................................................................................... 121 Interpretation of Jesus by first century Christians.............................................. 123 The Apostolic Fathers ...................................................................................... 125 Justin ............................................................................................................. 127 Paper on Gnosticism........................................................................................ 130 Marcion and New Testament canon.................................................................. 131 Formation of the New Testament ..................................................................... 132 Review of Second Century Christianity.............................................................. 138 The Church of Rome ....................................................................................... 140 Early Administrative Structure .......................................................................... 143 Final activity on Early Christianity ..................................................................... 144 Preliminary activities on Chapter 2 ................................................................... 147 Byzantium and Constantine.............................................................................. 152 Constantines successors ................................................................................. 154 List of Byzantine emperors until Justinian ......................................................... 155 Justinian Is Reign .......................................................................................... 157 List of Byzantine emperors after Justinian......................................................... 159 About the seven councils ................................................................................. 162 Heresies from the fourth to the seventh century ............................................... 170 The Pentarchy ................................................................................................ 174 The Iconoclast Crisis ....................................................................................... 190 General Aspects of the Second Golden Age of Byzantium................................... 195 The conversion of the Slavs ............................................................................. 200 Causes of the Schism between the East and the West ....................................... 205 The Photian Schism......................................................................................... 205 Crusades ........................................................................................................ 210 Three controversies in the last centuries of Byzantium....................................... 216 Relations between the State and the Church in Byzantium................................. 229 The Captive Orthodox Church .......................................................................... 234 Final activity on History of Byzantium ............................................................... 234 St. Vladimir and Eastern Christianity in Russia................................................... 255 Differences, Vladimirs measures, Monomakh, Yaroslav, missionary work ........... 255 Your own summary of Christianity in Kievan Rus .............................................. 255 The Tartar invasion ......................................................................................... 260 Location of places in a Kievan Rus map ........................................................... 264 Alexander Nevsky............................................................................................ 264 The city of Moscow ......................................................................................... 266 The concept of serfdom ................................................................................ 271 St. Sergius of Radonezh .................................................................................. 271 St. Stephen, the Enlightener of Perm................................................................ 273 The raise of the Principality of Moscow ............................................................. 276 A short biography of Rublev............................................................................. 277 A Russian renaissance ..................................................................................... 277 Heresies in Medieval Russia ............................................................................. 278 Your own summary of the Russian Church during the XIII-XV centuries ............. 278 St. Nilus and St. Joseph ................................................................................... 281 Possessors and Non-Possessors ....................................................................... 283 Ivan the Terribles period................................................................................. 286 The Patriarchate and the Third Rome ............................................................... 289 Time of Troubles............................................................................................. 293 A short biography of Avvacum ......................................................................... 298

18

Table of Contents

Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity

73: The Great Schism............................................................................................ 300 74: The Unia movement ..................................................................................... 300 75: Metropolitans and Patriarchs cited.................................................................... 300 76: Summary of the Russian Church during the XIII-XV centuries ............................ 300 77: The eighteen century (I) ................................................................................. 305 78: The eighteenth century (II) ............................................................................. 311 79: The nineteenth century ................................................................................... 313 80: The nineteenth century ................................................................................... 316 81: Men contributing to the nineteenth century revival............................................ 321 82: The nineteenth century ................................................................................... 321 83: Issues in the Russian Church at the beginning of the twentieth century.............. 325 84: Rasputin ......................................................................................................... 326 85: The Russian Revolution of 1917 and the February Revolution ............................ 327 86: The October Revolution ................................................................................... 329 87: Lenin as a politician......................................................................................... 329 88: Russian writers of the nineteenth century ......................................................... 330 89: Leaders of the Soviet Union ............................................................................. 333 90: First stage in the struggle Church-State ............................................................ 337 91: Joseph Stalin .................................................................................................. 342 92: Second stage in the struggle Church-State ....................................................... 342 93: Third stage in the struggle Church-State........................................................... 345 94: Biography of Patriarch Sergii............................................................................ 349 95: Fourth stage in the struggle Church-State......................................................... 349 96: Fifth stage in the struggle Church-State............................................................ 352 97: Sixth stage in the struggle Church-State ........................................................... 362 98: Final activity on Russian Church History............................................................ 367 99: The major Christian denominations and Orthodox Jurisdictions .......................... 369 100: Systematic Theology, history, dogma, doctrine, and Fathers of the Church ....... 389 101: Orthodox theology......................................................................................... 396 102: Forms of Holy Tradition ................................................................................. 401 103: Reading the Apostolic Fathers ........................................................................ 410 104: Reading Apologists and Anti-heretical Fathers ................................................. 414 105: Reading Fathers of the Golden Period............................................................. 418 106: Reading Later and Recent Fathers .................................................................. 419 107: Characteristics of the Fathers of the Church .................................................... 422 108: Summary of main ideas of Introduction .......................................................... 430 109: Bible quotes on fasting .................................................................................. 435 110: Old Testament basis of asceticism ................................................................. 437 111: New Testament passages on mortification, unworldliness, and detachment ..... 437 112: The redemptive activity on part of man .......................................................... 445 113: Fourth century men who opposed asceticism .................................................. 446 114: More New Testament basis of asceticism ....................................................... 447 115: Other ascetic writers...................................................................................... 479 116: Final activity on role of ascesis in the Fathers of the Church............................. 480 117: Hesychia and Hesychasm, preliminary concepts ......................................... 488 118: Hesychasm ................................................................................................... 528 119: Final activity on the Fathers of the Church and hesychasm .............................. 528 120: Three statements summarizing the biblical teaching about the Trinity............... 537 121: The Apostolic Fathers and the Triad ............................................................... 554 122: The Apologists and the Triad.......................................................................... 562 123: Comparison and contrast of Justins and Irenaeus ........................................... 564 124: Irenaeus ....................................................................................................... 568 125: Two phases of Monarchianism ....................................................................... 569 126: Three Statements Summarizing the Biblical Teaching about the Trinity............. 578 127: The Apologists and the Triad.......................................................................... 578 128: The Apologists and the Triad.......................................................................... 579 129: Alexander and Arianism ................................................................................. 590 130: The terms essence and begotten at the Nicene Council .............................. 594

19

Table of Contents

Activity 131: Comparison and contrast of the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed.......... 601 Activity 132: The Cappadocians contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity.......................... 612 Activity 133: Comparison and contrast of the Nicene Creed and the Constantinopolitan Creed ............................................................................................................................... 613 Activity 134: Final activity on the Trinity............................................................................. 616 Activity 135: The development of other doctrines ............................................................... 620 Activity 136: John of Damascus An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith ................................ 624 Activity 137: Comparing different approaches to Dogmatics ................................................ 631 Activity 138: Preliminary activity on the concept of theosis .................................................. 639 Activity 139: Some biblical bases of theosis ........................................................................ 647 Activity 140: Theosis and Ante-Nicene Fathers ................................................................... 661 Activity 141: Theosis and the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers............................................. 680 Activity 142: Theosis and the Byzantine Fathers ................................................................. 706 Activity 143: Paper on Theosis........................................................................................... 715 Activity 144: Final activity on Theosis ................................................................................. 715 Activity 145: The dogma of the Trinity ............................................................................... 718 Activity 146: The Christological Dogma .............................................................................. 719 Activity 147: The dogma of Creation .................................................................................. 722 Activity 148 : Eschatology ................................................................................................. 724 Activity 149: What is Practical Theology? ........................................................................... 727 Activity 150: Introductory terms ........................................................................................ 735 Activity 151: Jewish roots of the Liturgy ............................................................................. 742 Activity 152: New Testament quotes of the Eucharist.......................................................... 745 Activity 153: Separation and meaning of the Eucharist........................................................ 750 Activity 154: The Liturgy in the first three centuries ............................................................ 766 Activity 155: The Apostolic Constitutions ............................................................................ 766 Activity 156: The parent rites ............................................................................................ 772 Activity 157: Preliminary questions on the development of the Byzantine Liturgy .................. 772 Activity 158: The liturgies of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom .................................................. 779 Activity 159: The Liturgy in the seventh century ................................................................. 784 Activity 160: The liturgy in the eight and the ninth century ................................................. 792 Activity 161: The Typikon .................................................................................................. 795 Activity 162: Middle Byzantine Period................................................................................. 797 Activity 163: The liturgy in the Late Byzantine Period.......................................................... 804 Activity 164: The Typikon .................................................................................................. 804 Activity 165: The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts and the Liturgy of the Hours ................... 810 Activity 166: Final activity on the development of Orthodox liturgy ...................................... 811 Activity 167: Final activity on the development of the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Offices... 811 Activity 168: Preliminary activity on the Orthodox Church building ....................................... 821 Activity 169: Jewish and New Testament background of church building and church decoration ............................................................................................................................... 827 Activity 170: The Holy Face ............................................................................................... 827 Activity 171: House churches in the New Testament ........................................................... 831 Activity 172: House churches and Catacombs in the first three centuries.............................. 843 Activity 173: Church building and church decoration in Early Byzantine Period (324-842) ...... 875 Activity 174: Church building and church decoration in Middle Byzantine Period (843-1261).. 886 Activity 175: The iconostasis, tiers and functions ................................................................ 891 Activity 176: Church building and church decoration in Late Byzantine Period (1261-1453) ... 896 Activity 177: Symbolism of the Church building .................................................................. 903 Activity 178: Final activity on church building and decoration .............................................. 903 Activity 179: Jewish background, beginning church hierarchy and Tradition ......................... 910 Activity 180: Periods in eastern clergy vestments................................................................ 919 Activity 181: Clergy vestments (1) ..................................................................................... 941 Activity 182: Clergy vestments (2) ..................................................................................... 941 Activity 183: Final activity on liturgical vestments ............................................................... 941 Activity 184: Preliminary concepts of Orthodox liturgy......................................................... 945 Activity 185: Three global features of Orthodox liturgy........................................................ 949 Activity 186: Three global features of Orthodox liturgy........................................................ 956

20

Table of Contents

Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity

187: 188: 189: 190: 191: 192: 193: 194: 195: 196: 197: 198: 199: 200: 201: 202: 203: 204: 205: 206: 207: 208: 209: 210: 211: 212: 213: 214: 215: 216: 217: 218:

The structure of the Eucharistic Liturgies ........................................................ 956 Meaning and structure of the Divine Liturgy.................................................... 956 Liturgical Cycles ............................................................................................ 957 Examples of Divine Services and other blessings ............................................. 957 Liturgical Texts.............................................................................................. 961 Comparing and contrasting private and liturgical prayer................................... 970 Western rites ................................................................................................ 983 The holistic, experiential nature of Orthodox religious teaching ........................ 989 Historical background of Orthodox Catechesis ................................................. 996 Tarasars integrative, holistic catechesis.......................................................... 999 Canon Law.................................................................................................. 1000 General introduction to Part IV..................................................................... 1005 General concepts on liturgical music ............................................................. 1007 Preliminary remarks on Byzantine Hymnody.................................................. 1012 Definition of some sacred music sacred terminology ...................................... 1012 Pre-Byzantium Era....................................................................................... 1032 Byzantium Era............................................................................................. 1053 Later Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Era ........................................................ 1055 Final Activity on Byzantine liturgical music .................................................... 1055 Main periods in the development of Russian church singing ........................... 1060 Preparatory stage of Russian liturgical singing............................................... 1064 From the Baptism of the Rus to the Tartar invasion ...................................... 1074 From the Tartar invasion to the sixteenth century ......................................... 1078 Final activity on Early Russian church singing ................................................ 1078 Russian church singing ................................................................................ 1078 Preliminary remarks on the role of music in the holy services ......................... 1084 Praise singing in the Scriptures .................................................................... 1089 Two concepts of chanting ............................................................................ 1093 Main purposes in Liturgical music ................................................................. 1094 Style, type, and significance of liturgical hymns............................................. 1109 Final activity on the role of music in the holy services .................................... 1110 Your own conclusions .................................................................................. 1112

21

Foreword

FOREWORD
This text on the history and praxis of Eastern Orthodoxy1 is intended to help you understand the lengthy process followed by the Orthodox Church since its formative stage in the first century, passing through the important, and for Orthodox churches, crucial, Byzantine period, to its present day position. By tracing the history of the church in this way I will try to show that the contemporary Orthodox Church has a historical link with the original and early Christian community. The perspective of the Orthodox Church on the history and praxis of the church will be employed as a point of reference for this study. The naming of the Church as Orthodox occurred from the 4th century to the 6th century, a period marked by great and many religious disputes. It was a time when it became necessary to differentiate the true Church from a great number of different heresies (initiated by Arius, Nestorius, Marcion and others who also called themselves Christians but whose doctrines and theological positions lay outside that of the Church). The word orthodoxy is translated from the Greek words ortho (right) and doxa (glory), meaning right glory. Other names given to the Church were Catholic, which means whole or all encompassing. This idea implies that in the Church resides all the Truth and that the Church calls everyone all over the world to salvation, regardless of their nationality or social status. In the translation of the Nicene Creed (the Symbol of Faith) from Greek to Slavic, the word catholic was translated as universal. According to Hopko, an internationally recognized Orthodox theologian, in his Second Century: Persecution and Faith, Saint Ignatius was the first to use the term catholic to

From the point of view of the continuity between the Old Christian Church and the Eastern Christian Church, the terms orthodox and orthodoxy will be written in capital lettersOrthodox, Orthodoxyas they describe the name of a Church and of its believers. In occasions, though, when referring to the dominant or official doctrine at a given time and place, lower case letters will be used. As an illustration, John Meyendorff (1982), a well known Orthodox theologian, uses Orthodox when referring to the Eastern Church and orthodox when referring to the Roman Church (118-119).

22

Foreword

describe the Church. He says that it is an adjective of quality that tells how the Church is, namely, full, perfect, complete, whole, with nothing lacking in it of the fullness of the grace, truth and holiness of God. In an attempt to execute this complex task, I have analyzed the insights of many important scholars concerning the topics we will be covering as well as my own reflections whenever possible, as I tried to establish a common framework for our discussion. I have used both printed books as well as digital, online documents obtained from Internet that you will be able to explore and research for your personal study. With this aim in mind I have inserted within the text: a) tables with additional information; b) different types of activities to enable you to review your work, to develop your understanding and to assist you in the initiation and guiding of discussions of issues, topics and subject-matter; and c) illustrations such as maps, pictures, or icons, intended as visual aids to help you understand the context of the exposition and the grasping of certain relevant aspects of Orthodox art. As a further aid to you, at the end of the study, I have also added a glossary with theological terms and names as well as appendixes with different type of information. Here is an example of an activity. Do it as your first assignment.

Activity Write what you know or remember about the first Christians. Begin by making a list of the main ideas.
Activity 1: Preliminary activity

Definition of terms Although there are many definition of terms in the Glossary which can help you as you progress through this work, you can find many other terms defined in the following web sites: Litsas, Fotios K. A Dictionary of Orthodox Terminology. Greek Orthodox

23

Foreword

Archdiocese of America. article9152.asp>.

<http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/

Glossary of Liturgical Music. PSALM. <http://www.orthodoxpsalm. org/resources/glossary/k-o.html>. A Dictionary of Orthodox Liturgical Terms. <http://www.archangelsbooks.com/ articles/liturgics/OrthodoxLiturgicalTerms.asp>. Orthodox Dictionary. <http://www.monachos.net/library/Orthodox_ Dictionary>.
Table 1: Webs for definition of terms

A NOTE ABOUT REFERENCES

THE

STYLE

OF

THE

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL

In the following discussion I will follow the MLA style for bibliographical references, including those obtained from internet sourceswhich in this work appear with no page numberwith two exceptions: the quotations set off from the text will be single spaced instead of double spaced and the titles of books will be italicized instead being underlined. The first change is due to the great amount of quotes from both primary and secondary sources included in this text include. The reason for all these quotes is because this text is intended to be used for the training of seminary students. The second change is due to the fact that it is the already existing format followed in publications that are used as sources.

Activity See the last pages of this study and become familiar with the Glossary and the Appendixes. Then make an outline by listing: the terms in the Glossary the names in the Glossary the titles of each Appendix
Activity 2: Items in Glossary and Appendixes

24

Preface

PREFACE: ORTHODOXY AND HISTORY

The true Orthodox way of thought has always been historical, has always included the past, but has never been enslaved by it... [for] the strength of the Church is not the past, present, or future, but in Christ. Fr. Alexander Schmemann

Following this thought of Schmemann one feels that when beginning any work on the history and praxis of Orthodoxy a reference to Christianitys manifested sensitivity for history is necessary. Furthermore we have the well-known fact that the Scriptures were not revealed in a vacuum but in a historical context. Scriptures are a revelation of historical data; they bear testimony of Gods activity in historyoften called sacred history or salvation history. It is within this historical framework that the Word of God unfolds a message of salvation. This explains, Papadakis asserts, in his History of the Orthodox Church, why Orthodoxy has always been attracted to and values history. He adds, as an illustration of his point, that Orthodox liturgy is simply a witness to history recalling not only the eventful life of Jesus but also historical events that shaped the church (saints, ascetics, martyrs, and theologians). However, Papadakis does not reduce the liturgy to history, but states that, for him, liturgy also has an eschatological, supra-historical dimension: an anticipation of a world-to-come. As John Meyendorff, the well-known Orthodox theologian, explains, in The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church, from a Christian approach, history implies variation and change, but also presupposes that God, who transcends history, manifests himself through historical events which then acquire a normative and, therefore, suprahistorical significance. For him, the result of Christs death and resurrection was the establishment of a community which laid a living continuity, a normative continuity, between the apostolic community and the Church of the later times: the unity of Tradition, which implies consistency of belief and experience (115). The same faith,

25

Preface

teachings, doctrine, and Christian life continued to be present and prolonged themselves throughout the history of the church. Expressing an almost similar stand point, Bebis, in Tradition and the Orthodox Church, points out the universality and infinite or timeless dimensions of the Tradition of the Church, even if it is the case that it exists or lives in history. Although the Church (and its traditions) exists in history, they nevertheless at the same time have dimensions that are beyond and point beyond history itself. He adds that both Tradition and Church have eternal and infinite value as its founder, Christ, has no beginning and no end. Tradition is perceived as the gift of the Holy Spirit and what assists the Church to preserve in a pure and inviolate (orthodox) manner the Apostolic truth, the truth as seen in the Orthodox mind of the whole church, that stands in opposition to all heresies and schisms. To reassert both the timelessness and temporality of Tradition, he quotes George Florovsky in Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View: Tradition is not a principle striving to restore the past, using the past as a criterion for the present. Such a conception of tradition is rejected by history itself and by the consciousness of the Orthodox Church ... Tradition is the constant abiding of the Spirit and not only the memory of words. Tradition is a charismatic, not a historical event. (47) Bebis concludes by saying that Tradition is a gift of the Holy Spirit, a living experience, which is relived and renewed through time. It is the true faith, which is revealed by the Holy Spirit to the true people of God. This emphasis upon and interpretation of the importance of tradition also represents the standpoint of Stylianopoulos, an Orthodox theologian, in The New Testament: An Orthodox Perspective. He sees the Scripture as a testimony of Gods saving activity in history; however, he does not see history as technical history. Without denying the factual basis to the Bible, he points out that the narrative of Scripture represents the interpreted experience and religious memory of Gods people

26

Preface

over many generations (11). That is, in the Orthodox perspective, the Holy Scripture is the record of revelation rather than a direct revelation itself (13). Stylianopoulos explains that we have to distinguish between central claims pertaining to salvation and subsidiary matters of history, chronology, language, and culture. He asserts: That Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ and risen Lord is a truth of far greater magnitude than the historical question of the origin and development of Christological titles. The hope of the resurrection of the dead and of the coming kingdom is far more important than the exact nature of these events as reported in various biblical books. (13) This departs from the Protestant view of authors such as Goppelt and his historical approach to the theology of the New Testament, an approach that is more in the line of the salvation-history school of thought. Although emphasizing the historical perspective, Stylianopoulos seems to be particularly concerned with the role of Scripture in the church and in relationship to the church. This is in contrast to Goppelt, who heavily relies on the New Testament writings as the only source of tradition. Stylianopoulos, addressing the origin of both the Old and the New Testament, says that the foundational nature of biblical revelation is personal, while its written expression is by comparison secondary (4). He adds that behind the written Scriptures lies the dynamic reality of the oral traditions of the Jewish and Christian peoples (8). In addition, Stylianopoulos therefore sees an organic bond, a dynamic interplay, between Scripture, tradition, and faith community. Without disregarding the value of the western scientific approach to the Biblehistorical and literary criticism, marked by Reformation, religious wars, the rise of science, etc.he believes that it has a disruptive effect when taken to extremes. Furthermore, as Aghiorgoussis asserts, in The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church, while western Christianity, which perceives a kind of dichotomy between the Bibleconsidered to be the revealed word of Godand the tradition of the Churchconsidered to be as important as the Bible

27

Preface

(Roman Catholic Church) or secondary (Protestantism), Orthodoxy holds the position that the Tradition of the Church includes the Bible, for the Bible is an epiphenomenon, an outward form of Orthodox Christian Tradition. Eusebius (ca. 340), bishop of Caesarea and church historian, in his Ecclesiastical History, claimed that Orthodox Christian doctrine did not have a history, having been true eternally and taught primitively; only heresy (heterodoxy) had a history since it arose at particular times and through the innovation of particular teachers. But Pelikan, in The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition, states that tradition does have a history as it is the form which Christian doctrine has taken in history. Tradition, although unchanged since it was first established, is not inconsistent with history. For him it is possible to unite the variety of Christian history with tradition. He further distinguishes tradition, the living faith of the dead, from traditionalism, the dead faith of living (7-8). Papadakis also affirms that based on an uninterrupted historical and theological continuity the Orthodox Church does not distance itself from, but explores history out of a strongly held conviction that it is the true Church of Christ on earthOrthodoxy means correct belief, that is, correct interpretation of the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers of the Church. Nonetheless, although the Orthodox Church preserves organical and spiritual continuity with the Church of the Apostles, the primitive Church in Jerusalem, history most definitely has a powerful, almost magnetic force of its own that has caused the Orthodox Church to change and develop through the centuries. Additionally, Meyendorff explains that present realities in the Orthodox Church are not created by theological factors only but also shaped by historical realities of the past and by empirical, mainly socio-political, factors and circumstances of the present. Thus, it is a particular task of theologians: to distinguish permanent and absolute values from historical contingencies,

28

Preface

to help the church maintain its identity unadulterated, in spite of inevitable changes and conditions in accordance with which it must present its witness to the world, and to define what is holy tradition and what are human traditions, and clearly distinguish between them.

But, he states that, it is theology which must provide the determining factor in conciliar decisions, as, if determined by politics, councils become mere pseudo-councils (The Byzantine Legacy 236). From a similar perspective, Hussey, in The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire, says that, although it is certain that the truths of Orthodoxy are not related to any historical period, ... it is a fact that Orthodox Theology was Byzantine theology. Universal truths have to be articulated in a temporal milieu and this articulation however imperfect is that of its generation. The historian cannot therefore discard the world in which medieval eastern Orthodoxy developed, nor ignore the ecclesiastical framework of the Church, and indeed the spirituality of its people is often better understood in the light of the contemporary background. (2) Moreover, according to Timothy Ware, in the Orthodox Church, the Orthodox Church sees history from a different perspective than that of the western Churches. He further comments that from the West, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism are seen as opposite extremes, yet from an Orthodox perspective they seem to be two sides of the same coin. Western Christians, Ware adds, whether Free Churchmen, Anglican, or Roman Catholic have a common background. They have been influenced by Papal centralization and the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, by the Reformation, and the Counter-Reformation. However, members of the Orthodox Church possess a very different historical background. They have known no Middles Agesin the western definition of this period, they have experienced no Reformations or CounterReformation, and they have only indirectly been affected by the cultural and religious upheavals which changed Western Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Ware very rightly adds the following observation: Orthodoxy is not just a kind of 29

Preface

Roman Catholicism without the Pope, but something quite distinct from any religious system in the west. Yet those who look more closely at this unknown world will discover much in it, while different, is yet curiously familiar (2). It is a well known fact that for more than nine hundred years the Greek east and the Latin west have grown apart; nevertheless, they have much common ground, as we will see in the first chapter entitled History of the Early Christian Church. Until departing from Orthodox standards, the influential Roman Church was respected as orthodox and in its honorary primacy (Meyendorff, The Byzantine Legacy 118). The following chapters, nevertheless, represent this unique eastern perspective, a perspective that is often unfamiliar to most westerners, including western theologians and scholars. Though suffering the historical upheavals, the timeless roots of Orthodox Christianity managed to survive through the Church of Byzantium and acquired a re-new spiritual value with the Russian Church. Thus, the next pages are an attempt to depict the long, complex history and praxis of Orthodoxy by focusing on four different parts and eleven chapters: Part I: Church History 1. History of Early Christian Church 2. Byzantine Church History 3. Russian Church History Part II: Systematic Theology and Patristics 4. History of Doctrine 5. The Fathers of the Church 6. Dogmatics Part III: Practical Theology 7. History of Orthodox Liturgics 8. The Liturgical Environment 9. Contemporary Liturgics

30

Preface

Part IV: Orthodox Church Music 10. Music in Early Christian Period (Byzantine) 11. Development of Theology of Orthodox Church Music 12. Church Music in Russia As we do that we will be also approaching the Old Testament. There are many ways in which the Orthodox Church has consciously attempted to retain elements of Jewish Temple and synagogue worship in ritual patterns and their ecclesiastical architecture, for example. So, in this exposition, I will consider both Testaments of the Bible to get a complete picture of the Orthodox Christian religious perspective. But along all these chapters and discussions we cannot forget that Orthodoxy is a way of life, known, as Aghiorgoussis states, for its experiential approach to faith and doctrines. He adds that Rooted in the Bible, its faith and doctrine is enriched by the living commentaries of the lives of the saints of the past and the present. It is enriched by the theological speculations of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church, and by the decrees of the various councils which dealt with doctrinal aberrations (heresies) (The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church).

Activity Explain: 1. The Orthodox perspective of history. 2. Its difference with the western perspective. Give an example. 3. The two dimensions of the Tradition of the Church.
Activity 3: Contrast the historical perspective of East-West

31

PART I: CHURCH HISTORY

PART I: CHURCH HISTORY (A Study of the History of the Early Christian Church, the Byzantine Church, and the Russian Church)

32

PART I: CHURCH HISTORY

33

PART I: CHURCH HISTORY

INTRODUCTION TO PART I
Part I, the lengthiest one due to its many historical facts and events, is a composite of three chapters. It studies the history of the Early Christian Church, beginning with the first Pentecost in Jerusalem and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Christs small number of disciples to its expansion, suffering numerous trials and encountering countless problems far and wide throughout the known world and even, for its matchless missionary zeal, to remote, unknown world such as the land of the Rus. Thus, the first chapter concentrates on a period of three centuries, the pre-Nicean period, focusing on the general situation of the period to establish a context, on the apostolic age, on early Christianity and its relationship with the Roman Empire, as well as on a preliminary approach to the early development of the theology of early Christianity. The second chapter studies Byzantine Church historyByzantine is a term used to describe the Roman Empire in the east, beginning with its formative stage in the early fourth century. This marks the beginning of the medieval period and the birth of the Christian empire of Medieval Byzantium that lasted for more than a millennium. Byzantium, the second Rome, eventually became the center of Orthodox Christianity. In this second chapter, I will first describe general political and cultural aspects, and then, religious aspects. The latter will include those events and developments which exercised a major influence on the Churchs life, namely, heresies, ecumenical councils, the iconoclastic controversy, the relation between East and West and the relations between the Christian church and the state in Byzantium. The third chapter studies Russian Church History from the Baptism of Russia (9th 11th centuries) to the Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th Century, the latter an infamous time of severe persecution and eventual rebirth. It is also a long history of an

34

PART I: CHURCH HISTORY

own, creative way of perceiving Orthodoxy, of Moscow as the Third Rome, but too a history in which absolutism forced the Russian Church to give up their dream of a Byzantine theocracya futile attempt to go back to its Byzantine roots.

35

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Chapter 1 HISTORY OF THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH (I-III CENTURIES)

INTRODUCTION In this chapter I will first sketch the general situation of the first Christians with special emphasis on their political and cultural milieu. Secondly, I will pay attention to the apostolic church during the first three centuries, the first period of Christian history. This period starts with the day of Pentecost, the baptism of three thousand people and the formation of the first Christian community at Jerusalem, until the conversion of Constantine. We will see how those early Christians were scattered by the persecutions and preached wherever they went, at first to Jews and then to Gentile. The latter became such an important issue that it was discussed at Jerusalem, during the first Christian Council (51 A.D.).Some stories of the apostolic journeys are recorded in the book of Acts written by St. Luke, while others are preserved in the tradition of the Church. Within an amazing short time numerous small churches were founded in many areas of the Roman Empire, especially in its eastern parts, but even beyond its frontiers. Thirdly, I will study the development of the theology of the early church during the first three centuries before the Nicene Council (325). Finally, I will analyze the administrative structure that emerged in the primitive Churchat this time the first Christian communities were led by a bishop, who was assisted by presbyters or priests and deacons. This period, according to Ware, has a special relevance for contemporary Orthodoxy because during it the Church defined a) its distinctive administrative structure, with its emphasis on local communities, b) the wider unity of the church, and b) the new idea of Christian martyrdoman idea that has a central place in the churchs 36

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

spiritual outlook from which monasticism arose. In this period, we also witness how it came about that councils became the unique decision-making organism regarding church doctrine and we perceive the emergence of the Churchs emphasis on the value of tradition (12-15). The Orthodox faithful is convinced that it is an unquestionable fact that the Orthodox Church most definitely had its origins during the time of the apostles. The Church, although small at first, like the example of the mustard seed used by the Savior, gradually grew into a mighty tree, and eventually spread its branches over the entire world. Already in the first century, there were Christian congregations in almost all of the areas covered by the Roman empire: the Holy Land, Syria, Armenia, Asia Minor, Hellene, Macedonia, Italy, Galea, Egypt, North Africa, Spain, Britannia, as well as beyond the empire, in far away Arabia, India and Scythia. By the end of the first century, Christian congregations were most often headed by bishops, who were the Apostles successors. Bishops in rural areas had smaller congregations than those in the larger towns and cities. As early as the second century, bishops of larger and more populated regions were called metropolitans. Such metropolitans in turn were responsible for the local area-bishops in their regions. The metropolitan had the responsibility to meet regularly with the bishops to discuss religious and administrative matters.

Activity 1. What is the period covered in this first chapter? 2. According to Ware, why is this early-Christian period especially relevant for contemporary Orthodoxy?
Activity 4: Introduction to Chapter I on the History of Early Christian Church

37

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

1. THE GENERAL SITUATION Before I can begin a description of the infant church, it is necessary to study and be informed about the general situation of the first Christians in its social, cultural and political context. For this reason I will explore their relationship with the Roman Empire, as well as the Jewish background, and other social issues, such as those that are relevant to develop and understanding of the New Testament period. We also need to consider the fact that the relations of the Church Fathers to pagan thought and Judaism influenced what they had to say about various doctrinal issues before them. As Pelikan states, the development of the doctrine of the persons of Jesus Christ in relation to the Father for example, must be discussed not only on the basis of writings drafted against heresy but it must also be interpreted as a distinctive position being spelled out against the positions of paganism and Judaism. There existed many socio-cultural and -political concerns and issues, for example the conflict between Hellenistic Jews and Hellenistic Jewish Christian concerning the question of the continuity with Judaism, especially after A.D. 70. It was this particular issue that produced a controversy between Peter and Paul and continued to trouble the church for some time (11-13). THE ROMAN EMPIRE At Jesus birth, the Roman Empire controlled and governed the lands surrounding the Mediterranean Sea as well as North Africa and Egypt, while in the East it extended to the borders of Armenia and the Persian Empire. The Empire consisted of a vast territory that encompassed a great diversity of ethnic, cultural, and religious groups. It was united by a common political allegiance, economic and commercial interdependence, and a shared higher culture, namely the Hellenistic culture. In this complex world, religion had many functions and played a central part in peoples lives. In the Roman-Hellenistic world it was not only a private affair, but both a state concern,

38

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

as well as a public and a social affair. Walker, in A History of the Christian Church (1985), delineates three categories of religious beliefs and observance: 1) the traditional religion of the family and community godsthe civic religion(family, communal, social); 2) the mystery cults or oriental cults for the most part with mystical roots in local fertility (personal, family, social, communal); and 3) a (personal) way of life based on the pursuit and practice of philosophical wisdom. These three modes of religion coexisted peacefully, and some individuals were, to different degrees, involved in the three of them. Walker gives a clarifying summary of the civic religion: Traditional religion in the Roman-Hellenistic world was a public and social affair, an affair of the family and community. Since human well-being depended at every moment on the good will of the gods, the cosmic powers, religion sought their help for the common concern of life: the growing of crops, the conduct of business, the difficult enterprises of war and diplomacy. Its rites were age-old and traditional, seldom rationalized, and conducted by the normal leaders of the community: the head of the family or the elected magistrates of the city. It used divination, dream, an oracle to seek the will of the powers; it used prayer and sacrifice to gain their alliance. (7) It is in this context, he further explains, that we are to understand the phenomenon of emperor worship that arose in the Roman Empire.

Illustration 1: Bust of the Emperor August2

It appears as if this cult evoked no deep personal piety; it was merely political and signified the position that the foundation of political order was rooted in the divine
2

See: <www.insecula.com/us/oeuvre/O0023906.html>.

39

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

sphere (the divine right of kings/emperors). Thus, as it was quite indifferent to the person, the individual and peoples real longings and need, ordinary people turned to other religious cults, such as the mystery cults, to escape from such and impersonal religious view, and in search of a more personal religious world or universe. The second category or way of religious observance, namely the mystery cults, such as those which worshipped the Great Motheralso known as Isis and Serapis in Egyptoriginated in Asia Minor and were disseminated through the Mediterranean world. It was a religion of salvation which offered a sense of the transcendent in the peoples search for personal happiness. The rites, ceremonies and services of worship of these cults fulfilled many psychological functions, for example, their cathartic effects elicited deep emotions, created an attitude of wonder and amazement, inspired awe, and instilled profound feelings of gratitude and self-worth (8-9).

Illustration 2: Goddess Isis and Winged Maat3

The third way described by Walker, namely the search for personal fulfillment, the pursuit and practice of philosophical wisdom (philosophos = philos meaning love and sophos meaning wisdom or sagacity), with its roots in the teaching of Socrates in Athens (Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus or the Stoics). This third way was designed to clean the soul of passion which kept it from being its true self. Its purpose and principle can be summed up in Socrates dictum: Know thyself, because an unexamined life and self
3

See: <www.egypt.myweb.hinet.net/photo0005eng.htm>.

40

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

is not worth living.4 But, the Hellenic rational method (=way) for self-knowledge (and thus knowledge of reality, both the inner reality of the self and the external reality of the universe, or a world view) was far removed from the way of the eastern religions. While the latter was a way offered to everyone, the Hellenic rational-based method most definitely was not intended for everyone, but only for a select few, a socio-cultural, political and intellectual elite (we only need to remind ourselves that Plato, in his The Republic, assumes that the leader of the Republic will be a philosopher). This path required long education (which in turn assumed wealth and leisure so as to be able to spend ones time on studies) and strict moral discipline. Walker adds that in the era of the Roman Empire this quest had much in common with the popular religion as some aspects of it were expressed in the style of (Gnostic, knowledge, secret wisdom) mystery cults, as both sought some kind of escape, and feelings of salvation from the changes and chances of life on earth. This kind of salvation was depicted as if the human person has a transcendent destiny in a fellowship with the divine (let us remind ourselves of the highest and absolute forms described by Plato, namely goodness and beauty). As an illustration of this religious blending, Walker states that it is unsurprising that a Platonist such a Plutarch (circa 45 125 AD) tried to make philosophical sense of the myth of Isis and Osiris as an allegory of humanitys condition and destiny. Walker remarks that it is equally surprising that when another oriental religion of salvationChristianitybegan to appear in the social and cultural arena of the Hellenized cities of the Roman Empire, it should find sympathetic echoes in the philosophy and religion of that era (13). The appearance of Christianity in Hellenized areas (that is, those areas marked by these three religious and socio-cultural strands) of the Roman Empire (compared to those non-Hellenized areas
We find a similar emphasis upon this search for self-knowledge and -understanding in eastern religions, for example Hinduism and Buddhism; and their common assumption that this is the supreme value and the meaning of life.
4

41

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

of central and western Europe) would undoubtedly mark the beginning of the difference between eastern and western Christianity.

Illustration 3: Plutarch5

Activity 1. Enumerate the three categories of religious beliefs at the time of Jesus as delineated by Walker and briefly explain each of them using your own words. 2. What is surprising about Christianity regarding the philosophy and the religion of the period? A suggestion: list the functions fulfilled by religion and philosophical pursuits during this period. Then, consider if Christianity can and do fulfill these functions (as well as others)most likely better than the three existing religions (it eventually replaced). 3. Who were the Diaspora Jews?
Activity 5: Religious beliefs in the first century

THE JEWISH BACKGROUND AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE FOR EARLY CHRISTIANITY A brief history The first Christians were Jews and to understand their Jewish background we should go back several centuries before Christ and very shortly refer to three periods of Old Testament History. We find these three periods outlined by Bright in A History of Israel: The crisis and downfall of the monarchy, the exilic and postexilic periods, and

See: <www.jamesweggreview.org>.

42

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the formative period of Judaismfrom Ezras reform to the outbreak of the Maccabean Revolt. Parallel with these historical references I will present a brief delineation of Israels theological development. After the division of the kingdom in two, Israel and Judah, in 722, the northern state, Israel, already socially and religiously decayed, was eventually destroyed by Assyrians. Israels humiliation, Bright asserts, contradicted the optimistic, popular theology about the Davidic covenant and raised questions about the validity of its unconditional promises. For the national theology to be continued a reinterpretation of it was necessary. This was gradually provided, especially by Isaiah, who saw the nations humiliation as the divine chastisement of its sin. By means of this Isaiahic reinterpretation it was shown that the promise of God to his holy and unique nation was not revoked (294-309). About 630 BC, the Assyrians started to decline and eventually the Babylonians took over the Assyrian capital of Nineveh. This is narrated by the book of Kings and Chroniclers, with added information from the prophets Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Sephanian, Nahum and Habakkuk. With the Assyrians out of the way, Judah, the southern state, which had been subject to Assyrian power, felt a free country again, and underwent a thoroughgoing religious reform done by Josiah, who had found a copy of the book of the lawsaid to be some form of the book of Deuteronomy. This Josiahic religious reform consisted, according to Bright, in a purge of foreign cults and practices. Assyrian cult objects, of course, being anathema to all patriotic Judaic people, were doubtless the first to go (318). This was an attempt to re-establish the cult of Yahveh and eliminate the Assyrian idols. Egypt took this opportunity to reassert its control and, in 609 B.C., pharaoh Neco marched toward Syria and in 609 killed Josiah, who probably tried to regain some

43

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

independence in the new international panorama. His death was the beginning of the end of Judah. One of Josiahs sons, Johoiakim, was put on the Jerusalem throne by Neco. Eventually, however, the Babylonians (under Nebuchadnezzar at that time) defeated the Egyptian forces, and Neco was killed. Then the Babylonians attacked Jerusalem and killed Jehoiakim. Afterwards, they ransacked Jerusalem and carried many priests, officers, and artisans back to Babylon to work for him. Zedekiah, the third son of Josiah, became a puppet king in Jerusalem. After some time, Zedekiah rebelled, but Nebuchadnezzar retaliated with fury and Judah was burned. Jerusalem was under siege for 30 months and eventually fell. The Babylonians leveled the city, razed the temple, and killed Zedekiahs sons. They also blinded Zedekiah and dragged him off to Babylon in chains. Most of the population of Jerusalem was enslaved and carried off to Babylon. A century after the death of Hezekiah, who had accomplished the first religious reform, Jerusalem had fallen to the Babylonians (587). This was the end of the kingdom of David.

Illustration 4: Babylonian exile6

According to Bright, the fall of Jerusalem caused a crisis for the national theology, a theology which was centered on a) the affirmation of Yahwehs choice of Israel as his promise seed and b) the promises to the Davidic dynasty of eternal rule and

See: <http://www.songofazrael.org/whoisazrael.html>.

44

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

protection over its enemies. Yet Israels faith survived because some of the theological problems that now arose were already explicitly stated and appropriately dealt with by some prophets. However, none of them, Bright adds, did so more profoundly than Jeremiah and Ezekiel who announced Judahs doom as the righteous judgment of Yahweh (332-336); yet, these two demolishers of false hope, also offered positive hope, for both regarded the exile as interim, and beyond which lay Gods future (388). Regarding the exilic and postexilic periods, Bright states that in spite of the significance for Israel of the disaster of the fall of Jerusalem, namely its state being destroyed and the national cultic community broken, it did survive and was able to restore a new Jewish community in Palestine. This occurred when Cyrus, in 538 issued an edict allowing the return of the Jews to Judah. He also authorized the rebuilding of the temple. In this severe testing, Israels faith showed an astounding tenacity and vitality. Through the teaching of the prophets Israels faith continued to develop until a definite monotheism (summed up in the SHEMA, meaning listen or hear, and recited twice daily by all practicing Jews. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One...), against the continued presence of syncretistic religious practices, was reached in the message of Second-Isaiah. This prophet also gave the profoundest explanation of Israels suffering by affirming that sufferings born in obedience to the divine calling were the pathway to hope. It is plausible to think, as Bright defends, that the acceptance by the Jews of exclusive abstract monotheism in the 6th century B.C. is somehow linked to the national loss of the Kingdom of Judah and the Temple in Jerusalem and the exile to Babylonia. Furthermore, the Jewish community was reorganized by Nehemiah and Ezra, at the end of the fifth century, thus saving it from disintegration

45

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

(339-379). Under the authority of a local sartrapa, Israel was allowed to practice its own religious customs and followed the rule of its own law.

Illustration 5: Ezra reads the Law7

The time of the formative period of Judaism, near the end of the Old Testament in spite of having a considerable literature, that covers the latest portions of the Old Testament and the earliest of the non-canonical Jewish writingis poorly documented and lacks sufficient, primary historical factual information. We can summarize this period as follows: in 333 B.C., Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire and after his death in 323 B.C., the empire was divided among his generals Seleucus, and Ptolemy from Egypt who was to rule Palestine. This was another distressing time for the Jews (Bright 405, 414). Heavy taxes were imposed on them and many were taken to Egypt as prisoners of war, while many others, later, willingly emigrated there. Forced to be in the army and other trade groups, they learned Greek. The Greek translation of the Torah was even sponsored by Ptolemy II around 260 BC. As the Old Testament period ended, Bright talks about the impact of Hellenistic culture, with many Jewsincluding both the Jews of the Diaspora but also the Jews of Palestinedisrespecting their own native laws and customs. For him this was the gravest emergency of their history since
7

See: <http://www.wels.net/wmc/html/clip_art_--_volume_1__part_b.html>.

46

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the calamity of 587 (417). The centuries of Ptolemaic and Seleucid rule saw a marked dissemination of the number of Jews who lived outside of Judea, the so called diaspora. Since the conquest of Jerusalem, there already had been a substantial community in Babylonia, and even before that time small settlements in Egypt (Walker 13). The Ptolemies ruled, in spite of some small scale revolts here and there, until 198 B.C., when a descendent of Seleucus (Antiochus III) took over and united the different areas of the realm. His was more tolerant towards the Jews and re-established their rights. The Ptolemies and Seleucids discovered that Jews were useful subjects and able soldiers, so they allowed them certain rights such as settling to outside their heavily populated cities. It was as a result of this that Egypt, Asia Minor, and Syria eventually had large Jewish populations. In the first Christian century, Walker says, probably as much as a third of the population of Alexandria was Jewish and there were settlements not only in the East but in Rome and other western cities as well (14). He indicates that: Diaspora Jews did not ordinarily become citizens of the towns where they settled, for to do so they would normally have had to participate in the worship of the civil gods. They retained their national and religious identity and formed specially privileged communities of resident aliens (metoikoi), or else, as in Alexandria, a politeumathat is, a civic corporation within a larger community. Their relative isolation caused them to be objects of interest and sometimes of envy and distrust to other inhabitants of the cities where they settled. (14) Jewish identity was centered in the temple at Jerusalem and the Law of Moses the Pentateuchwhich served both as a religious and a civic code. In the Diaspora, the Jews, who had to pay an annual tax to the temple, until its destruction (70 A.D.), had as center of their religious practice the Law. Studying and keeping the Law was a main concern and this brought about two institutions, the synagogue, presided by a group of elders, and the scribes, of whom Ezra himself was counted as the first (Ibid.). Antiochus III was defeated by the Romans in 190 B.C., and after his death in 187, there were many short-lived rulers of Palestinian area who introduced Greek

47

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

culture into and who tried to hellenize Jerusalem. This was the case of Antiochus the Epiphanes (175-163) (Bright 417) who tried to destroy the local Jewish community, by persecuting them, sacrificing pigs to Zeus in the temple, and erecting altars to the Greek gods. The Mosaic Law seems to have been forgotten. These factors led to the Maccabean revolt, during which Jerusalem was conquered in 164 B.C. The temple was subsequently purified, the thrice daily sacrifice in the temple restored and the festival of Hanukkah (meaning re-dedication of the temple and lasting eight days) was celebrated. In spite of some troubles with the Seleucian rulers, the Maccabeans ruled for about 100 years (Instituto Teologa 135-147). The end of the Old Testament period, Bright comments, saw the struggle of the Jews for religious independence (427).

Illustration 6: Model of Jerusalem (Roman Period)8

For Bright, Judaism, through the obscurity of the fourth and the third centuries, by the time of the Maccabean revolt had already assume the shape of the next centuries. Monotheism among Jews had triumphed completely and there transpired in the theology of early Judaism a sense of world mission and salvation of all nationsa mission, already set out in the time of St Paul, and that resembles the universal mission of Christianity. This, in spite of the tension between Jews and gentiles caused by the Jewish idea that they alone are Gods chosen people (424, 442).

See: <www.ldolphin.orgl>.

48

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Activity 1. Enumerate the three historical periods of Judaism defined by Bright and briefly explain the theological development experienced by the Jewish people along these three periods. 2. Why is the Hellenistic period a crucial one for Israel? 3. Identify aspects of the Jewish history and theology that we also find in Christianity.
Activity 6: Historical periods of Judaism and theological development of Judaism

Judaism under the Roman World: Connections to Christianity Under the Roman empire Judaism was a religio licita (an authorized religion), not only in Palestine, but in Greek and Roman cities, and, through the whole empire, the Roman law even protected the Jewish farmers, craftsmen, and traders. Yet, the Jewish religious exclusiveness, legal privileges, and unwillingness to participate in civic life very often made them unpopular. In the Diaspora, Jews learned Greek and spoke it even in synagogues, and by the time of August, in century II B.C., the Septuagint (LXX), the Old Testament the Apostles used, was completed. In addition the Diaspora Jewish communities entered into dialogue with pagan religions, making not only many converts, but at the same time gathering around them partially Judaized Gentiles, commonly called God-fearers (Walker 18-19; Chadwick, The Early Church 11). Chadwick explains that: A Gentile might undergo circumcision and, more commonly, the baptism required of would be proselytes, but this was rare and the Hellenized Jews of the Dispersion, to the regret of the stricter Palestinian authorities, were insisting on circumcision as generally necessary to salvation. Among these Gentiles groups the Christian missionaries found their first converts outside the number of circumcised. They were indeed ripe fruit, for they had the advantage not only of high moral education, but also of instruction in the Hebrew Scriptures. (11) Thus, this dialogue also produced a remarkable fruitful and rich seedbed of ideas which proved to be a fertile model in the development of later Christian theology: the syncretism of Jewish scriptures with Stoic and Platonist philosophical ideas, for example the ideas of Philo of Alexandria (ca. 42 A.D.).

49

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Illustration 7: Philo of Alexandria9

Philo pictured the Logos as a blending of elements from different sources: from Jewish Wisdom speculation, from Platonist ideas about an intelligible realm of Forms, and from scriptural notion that God creates by his World (Logos) (Walker 18-19). It was in the influential Church of Rome, in the episcopate of Victor (189-198), Zephyrinus (198217), and Callistus (217-222) where the debate over the implications of the Logos theology began. The logos theology, developed in the first century by Justin Martyr and other Apologists, states that God used his Logos, or Word, as an instrument. This notion was a tool that enabled the logical and meaningful expression of the belief of the Apologists in Christs pre-temporal oneness with the Father. As a matter of fact, Jesus teaching has parallels in the religious thought of his age, however their total effect, as Walker further comments, was disturbing and revolutionarythe more so, apparently, by reason of the style he taught (21). In a very enlightening way, Walker summarizes Jesus revolutionary teachings: He taught them as one that had authority and not the Scribes. He could say that least of his disciples is greater than John the Baptist, and that heaven and earth should pass away before his words. He called the heavy-laden to him and offered them rest. He promised those who confessed him before men that he could confess them before his Father. He declared that none knew the Father but a Son, and he whom the Son should reveal the Father. He proclaimed himself Lord of
9

See: <www.ucalgary.ca>.

50

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the Sabbath, than which, in popular estimate, there was no more sacred part of the God-given Jewish Law. He affirmed that he had power to pronounce forgiveness of sins. (21-22)

Illustration 8: Jesus Christ the Lifegiver10

Based on the personal experience of his disciples, what Jesus taught and did was vindicated by his being resurrected from death to the life of the kingdom he had exhorted his followers to believe. This conviction gave boldness to the scattered disciples, brought them together again, and made them witnesses. This was deepened by the eschatological gift of the Holy Spirit in Pentecost, which inaugurated the new age promised by Jesus ministry. But, for first century Jewish people, accustomed to considerable diversity in religious expression, Christianity must surely have appeared only as one more sect or group within Judaism such as the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes. Yet, Christianity differed from them by its faith that in Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah of the nations expectation had now been realized. Jesus, the Messiah, did come, and in a way that illustrated, confirmed, and had a meaningful continuity with and absolute fulfillment of Gods revelation. This, Chadwick (The Early Church 13) indicates, did not mean any break either with the old covenant made with Abraham or with the Law given to Moses on Mount Sinai, but their absolute fulfillment, final realization, and
10

See: <www.monasteryicons.com>.

51

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

complete revelation. For Chadwick, the Pharisees were The party most anxious to preserve the distinctively religious and theocratic character of Jewish life in defiance of Hellenistic influences and Roman domination; they were strict in their observance, not only of the Mosaic law, but also of the scribal tradition of interpreting the law (13). It was further the case that many of the Pharisees, of whom Paul (Act 23:6) was the most famous, became Christians. In contrast to the Pharisees, the second group, the Sadducees, who came from leading aristocratic families, adhered only to the Mosaic Law. They did not believe in the resurrection of the deada doctrine presented in the book of Daniel and composed long after the time of Moses. The third religious group, the Essenes, most probably the group for whom the Dead Sea Scrolls were written, was absolute separatists. Chadwick says that they rejected the sacrifices and priesthood of the officially recognized worship in the Temple at Jerusalem and looked back to the Teacher of Righteousness, their founder-hero (13). In certain respects the Essenes resembled the early Christian churchin so far as they practiced property-sharing, passive resistance by some of their members and groups, equality of all men before their Creator, etcbut there were also important differences between Essenes and the early Christiansfor example, keeping the Sabbath, esoteric teachings, much attention to the inner meaning of Scriptures, etc. Chadwick states that the material from the Dead Sea Scrolls provides relatively little evidence for the immediate background of early Church except in the broad sense that it reveals the existence of a group fervently studying Old Testament prophecy, especially Messianic prophecy, and expecting a great divine intervention in world history (15). He adds that it is probable that some Essenes became Christians, but he does not favor any institutional continuity (14-15). Pelikan explains that the most important implications of the Dead Sea scrolls for the history of the development of Christian

52

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

doctrine after the New Testament is the fact that they clarify the connection between sectarian Judaism and the beginning of heretical Christianity (25). The Essenes were quite visible at the time of Christ, yet, Christ never pointed to them as objects of hypocrisy as he did with the Pharisees or Sadducees. This evidence helps us to understand the diverse teachings that existed within Judaism when Jesus, a Jew from Nazareth, began his ministry, a ministry later to be continued by his apostles. Christianity borrowed many aspects from Judaism such as the concept of priesthood, a concept that is related to the Levitical priesthood, temple sacrifices, and the sacrificial language, and ideas concerning the Eucharist. Some see this as re-Judaization, however it did not mean a recovery, and at most a re-discovery, of the close association between Judaism and Christian theology; on the contrary, as Pelikan maintains, it shows how independent Christian doctrine had become of its Jewish origins and how it felt free to appropriate terms and concepts from the Jewish tradition despite its earlier disparagement of them (26).

Activity 1. Define the following terms or concepts: religio licita God-fearers The Septuagint Philos Logos 2. Search the Web and write a short biography of Philo of Alexandria 3. Why was Jesus teaching revolutionary in the social and cultural Jewish milieu? 4. Which were the three most important Judaic sects? What are their main differences?
Activity 7: Judaism and Christianity under the Roman World

53

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

SOME ISSUES OF THE SOCIAL MILIEU OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY It is clear that the characteristics of the society in which the first Christians lived are reflected in the books of the New Testament. However, they are not merely superficial, objective, and abstract reflections as the society in which the first Christians lived also influenced and conditioned their activities (daily life, travels, preaching, work, and writings) and even their mindsets, world views, thought-patterns, and attitudes. Although universally true, Jesus basic spiritual message of salvation was in response to social-culturaland was modeled byconditions of first century Palestine. As an illustration, the hatred and violence between Judeans and Samaritans, caused, according to Richard A. Horsley, by their inability to fight back against the Roman order, supplied the background of Jesus parable of the Good Samaritan. In this same parable, according to Luke (10:29-37), the possibility for a traveler to encounter thieves is mentioned. Also, Jesus proclamation of the presence of the Kingdom of God is directed to certain social classesthe poor, hungry, sick, and indebted. Nevertheless, it should be understood that its message was spiritual, and that the descriptions of the social context embedded in the biblical texts were merely secondary, thus discrepancies may exist with historical research and even among biblical texts. But language, both spoken and written, is neither a neutral instrument nor used for thinking and thought in a socio-cultural vacuum, and it varies according to the requirements of socio-cultural and linguistic contexts it is used in. Two of the many factors that determine the use made of different contexts and linguistic modes are domains (public or personal) and situations (locations, institutions, persons involved, events, texts). It was not the same Jesus who spoke informally and very personally with his disciples, the Jesus who spoke publicly to the masses, or the Jesus who spoke in the synagogue, to those whom he healed, or the one who spoke to Pilate, the Sanhedrin, etc.

54

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

In addition to domains, there are other elements of context such as the external conditions that could produce some constraints, such as physical conditions, which could affect clarity of speech or writings, social conditions (number of participants, relative status of the participants, social relationship between participants, etc), time pressure, anxiety, etc. As already mentioned, the New Testament was not written in a socio-cultural vacuum. L. M. White, in Visualizing the Real World of Acts 16: Toward Construction of a Social Index, says that due to modern scholarship we are able to construct theological postulates on earliest Christianity without detaching them from social and historic reality. This perspective can help us visualize the New Testament world. Yet, he states that this is not an easy task and we must be careful to apply social description approaches to literary text using archeological data realia since they run the risk of becoming an illustrated bible and distorting rather than clarifying. Illustrating his point with Acts 16, and Pauls difficult travelogue, he says that there are points of correlation between historical events and social environment of the Pauline missions, and yet there are other points unsubstantiated from other historical sources including Paul himself. To solve this problem White proposes the construction of a social index for the correlation between archeology and text, including history, realia, cultural context, and text. In Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity, Gerd Theissen analyzes roles or typical social attitudes of the Jesus movement, factors or the effects of society on the Jesus movement, and finally the functions and effects of the Jesus movement on society. The Jesus movement, Theissen concludes, was a renewal movement within Judaism brought into being through Jesus. Therefore, it can be compared and contrasted with other renewal movements in first-century Palestine, such as the Essenes, Pharisees, and

55

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the Zealots. Its life was shaped by three principal roles. First there were the wandering charismatics, who accepted Jesus call to leave everything and travel from village to village proclaiming the kingdom of God. Second, there were the local sympathizers, without whose support the mendicant preachers could not survive. Third, there was their concept of Jesus as Son of man, whose depicted pattern of life informs, reflects, and vindicates their own.11

Activity 1. Briefly explain the importance of the social context to understand the New Testament. 2. What are the factors and influences that determine linguistic usage? Illustrate this with examples fromone or more parablesand different domains and situations in which Jesus spoke and acted.
Activity 8: Social context and New Testament

Three relevant social issues

Many relevant social issues of the First Christians in Palestine and the cities of the Roman empire studied by scholars concern characteristics of any society and its areas or spheres of daily life (food, drink, festivities, work, activities, trips), life conditions (levels of liferegional, cultural, social differences, housing, etc.), personal relationships, including relationship with authorities, between races and communities, values, beliefs and attitudes, social conventions, ritual behavior (religious practices, ceremonies, birth, death, etc.). All these, and many other, features of daily life, or structures in society, do not exist in isolation but are interrelated, and function in

According to Theissen, those roles are to be seen within the context of four environmental factors. (1) Socio-economic: Rapid changes in the Palestinian economy had brought deep tensions between rich and poor, keenly felt especially by those whose status had declined. (2) Socio-ecological: The tensions between city and rural cultures, powerful throughout the Empire, also affected the renewal movements in Palestine. (3) Socio-political: Like the other renewal movements, the Jesus movement was radically theocratic, and attraction to it was fueled by the experience of political subjugation, but unlike the others it urged love for the enemy. (4) Socio-cultural: The tensions between assimilation to the Hellenistic culture of the larger society and the intensification of norms of the Jewish community affected all the Jewish movements.

11

56

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

complex social patterns according to different social factors, for example norms, customs, traditions, etc. Among the many social issues that can be discussed, there are three that have especial relevance for this study: (1) mobility and mission which can be an aide to assist in understanding the spread of Christianity and the missionary activities of the Early Christian Church; (2) wealth/poverty and socio-economic classes in society, which will help us elucidate and clarify the nature, functions, privileges, etc. of different social classes in the early Christianity and their relationship, and (3) attitudes of authorities and different groups in the general population towards Christians. Brown, in An Introduction to New Testament, emphasizes the fact, previously mentioned, that: The first believers in Jesus were Jews; perhaps all the authors of the New Testament were Jews. The memories of Jesus and the writings of his followers are filled with references to the Jewish Scriptures, feasts, institutions, and traditions. Therefore there is not doubt about the influence of Judaism. Yet ... since the time of Alexander the Great, the Jews had been living in a Hellenistic world ... Jews bought goods with coins minted by Roman-Greek overlord and often imprinted with the images of gods. In varying degrees, through commerce, schools, and travel, Jews were influenced by a word quite different from that described in much of the OT. Thus in the social background of the NT much more than Judaism must be taken into account. (63-64) It needs to be added that the political atmosphere of the first century was one of persecution, social ostracism, and state-regulated worship. The early Christians lived and worshipped in small close-knit communities consisting of different ethnic groups and socio-cultural types as members. Yet, acting as missionaries they were held together by their faith in the message delivered by the first apostles. Thus some of the important social issues are those that are related to mobility and mission, which were based on both the example of Jesus and his disciples as well as the command Jesus gave to his Apostles and followers: And he said unto them, go ye

57

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature in which they lived (Mark 16:15).12

Illustration 9: The twelve Apostles13

Early Christians engaged in missions of preaching the Good News, first in Palestine and neighboring areas, especially among Jews and Jewish converts to Christianity (thus the origin of the Oriental Orthodox Churches, such as the Eastern and western Syrian Churches, the Syriac Christians in Mesopotamia, Assyria, Chaldea, etc.), then to the cities of the Roman Empire. Jesus himself executed many preaching tours in Palestine; Mary had made three trips between Galilee and Judea in one year. We also know of Peters tripsas Kallinikos delineates in The History of the Orthodox Churchto Samaria, Lydda, Joppa, Caesarea, and Antioch, and Philips visit to Samaria, Gaza and Caesarea, but we know best of Pauls three missionary journeys (4551; 53-55 and 56-59) preaching the Gospel, establishing and maintaining the faith of these communities and founding churches. During Pauls first journey, setting from Antioch in Syria, Paul visited Seleucia, Cyprus, Perga in Pamphylia, Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe, and returned to Jerusalem to attend an Apostolic Synod; on

12 13

In this text, all the biblical quotes will be taken from The King James Version (Rice Reference Edition). See: <www.reclaimingthemind.org>.

58

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

his second journey, his zeal drove him to Troas, from where he took a ship to Europe visiting Philippi, Amphipolis, Apollonia, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens and Corinth; on his third missionary journey, although having adopted Ephesus in Asia Minor as his headquarters, Paul visited Macedonia and Greece as well as Mitylene, Chios, Samos, Miletus, Cos, Rhodes, and Tyre in Phenice (5-6). This map shows some of the areas mentioned:

Illustration 10: The areas mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles and where Paul sent his letters14

Stambaugh, in The Social World of the First Christian, is quite right when saying that throughout the New Testament people are on the move. But this was not a feature of Christians alone. A high degree of mobility was typical of the Roman Empire in the first century. Yet, the conditions of roads, lodging, and means of transport did not assist the early Christian missions. Stambaugh asserts that the first century trips involved great discomfort and danger, and Paul knew this from his own experience as described in his epistle to the Corinthians: Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen,
14

See: <www.ccel.org>.

59

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren. In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. (2 Cor. 11: 25-27) This passage assists us to visualize the conditions of travel in the first century, but, at the same time, we hear the complaining voice of Paul. Brown says that this letter, more than any other, evokes so vividly the image of a suffering and rejected apostle, misunderstood by his fellow Christians. The text is inserted in a part of the letter in which he responds to the challenges to his apostolic authority, and whereas in the previous chapters (8-9) we hear an optimistic and enthusiastic voice, in chapters 10-13 he turns more pessimistic expressing uncertainty about his reception (547). If we read this text carefully we will also discover other social issues, for example those that mention customs in the Roman Empire: being beaten with rods was a common way Romans used to punish crimes (see also Acts 16:22-24), being stoned was a Jewish way of punishing blasphemy (see also Act. 14:19). Paul also suffered shipwreck, this is not noted in Acts, since the events in Acts (27:39-44) happened after this particular letter mentioning his shipwreck, was written. He traveled by sea, since it was often more comfortable and faster, but also on land where there were many dangers, (robbers could assault you at any moment, inconveniences, when you crossed a river with no bridge, you could die drowned). But in spite of all the difficulties associated with traveling, Paul continued his service as a minister of Christ (see also Acts 26:16-18; Rom. 15:19, 24) until he was executed in Rome some time before 64 A.D.

60

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Illustration 11: St. Paul15

Furthermore, as was the custom for humble people at this time, Paul frequently stayed at friends houses: And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us (Acts 16: 15). Chadwick says that hospitality to travelers was a very important act of charity. A Christian only had to show proof of his faith to be lodged for a period of up to three days. Later on, the bishop was responsible for the lodging of traveling Christians, especially missionaries, as part of his ministry to oversee and administer the churchs income. For Chadwick, charity work was to become one of the main reasons of Christian success (The Early Church 56). As we will see, in Byzantine society, philanthropy would become institutionalized. Paul also talks about perils by his own countrymen (also see Acts 9:23,29; 13:45,50; 14:2,5,19; 17:5,13; 18:12; 19:9; 21:27) by the heathen (also see Acts 14:5; 16:19-24; 19:23-31), in the city (also see Acts 9:23,29; 13:50; 14:5,19; 16:19; 17:5,13; 18:13; 19:23); in the wilderness, in the sea (storms, shipwreck, and pirates); among false brethren. The latter refers to false apostles, but there were also false brothers working behind peoples back; these were the people Paul always

15

See: <www.salvationhistory.com>.

61

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

opposed quite openly. Although he suffered much, as we know from statements that he saw himself in weariness and painfulness, in hunger, in thirst, in fastings, in cold and nakedness, and he went through many privations, dangers, tribulations to bring the truth to people (Acts 20:11,31; 1 Tes. 2:9; 3:10; 2 Tes. 3:8; 1 Cor. 4:11). Sometimes, Paul even thought he would die, but God sustained him (Cor.1:9 10; 6:9). Obviously, the false apostles in Corinth could not equal his list of the many troubles he suffered for the service of Christ (Reeves). Paul also says regarding those troubles: Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christs sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong (2 Cor. 12:10). His supporters and followers must have been amazed at the extraordinary faith and zeal Paul had. He obtained his energy, motivation and inspiration from his belief that it was the Spirit itself who guided and protected him, so as to continue to his mission of evangelization. We only need to consider the length of time he spent on every mission trip, namely 7, 3 and 4 years, and the time he stayed in certain cities, so as to begin to understand the energy being consumed and the mental and physical effort each trip required. These things, the harshness of his journeys, the physical and mental effort, etc must have had a serious and negative effect on his physical condition and health as well as in his preaching. Constantine Scouteris, in Europe: An Orthodox Perspective, sees this as an example of what today is called contextual theology. He points out that Paul communicated the theological word in a manner related to the particular social, cultural and religious situation he found in the places he visited. This was his primary methodology in proclaiming Christian truth: taking seriously into account the mentality and culture, the specific circumstances and background of his hearers. As an illustration, when writing to the Romans, he did not hesitate to use legal language and categories.

62

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Another issue related to mobility was letter writing.16 This of course was an easier way than personal journeys to communicate, and make and keep contact with other Christians. We find examples of these early Christian letters in the New Testament, and in fact Epistles or Letters make up the largest part of the New Testament. They are usually divided into two categories: the Pauline Letters and the other Apostolic Letters. All letters followed the format of letter writing in the ancient world. A letter usually began with a greeting and an identification of the sender and the recipients. This was followed by a prayer, usually in the form of a thanksgiving. The body of the letter was an exposition of Christian teaching, most often applications that concern the particular circumstances of the recipients. It might be followed by a discussion of the authors future travel plans and conclude with practical advice and a farewell.17 Stambaugh (39-40) states that in the New Testament letters served as a means of introduction and recommendation, Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God (3 John 1:1). of conveying news, Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia [..] (2 Cor. 8:1-7). of requesting favors, commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also (Rom. 16-1-2). of expressing thanks,
Brown says that due to the fact that letters were the dominant production of the first Christians, other works that were no letters in the ordinary sense such as homilies or a diatribe were classified as such ( 9). 17 The Pauline Letters were written by St. Paul or one of his disciples, not long after the death and resurrection of Jesus, between 54 A.D. and 80 A.D. They indicate early developments of Christian theology and practice. The Apostolic Letters are thought to be addressed not so much to a particular community or individual, but to a more universal audience. They were written by various authors between 65 A.D. and 95 A.D . See What are the Epistles?
16

63

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine for you all making request with joy [] (Phil. 1:3-7). and of offering encouragement or advice: Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father; (1 Thes. 1:3) Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. [] (1 Cor. 7) Stambaugh adds that it was the custom for upper classes to dictate letters to secretariesslaves or freedmen. This is also seen in the New Testament: By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand (1 Pet. 5:12). Yet, Paul normally added a handwritten note at the end: The salutation by the hand of me Paul. Remember my bonds. Grace be with you. Amen (Col.4:8). Since slaves were often assigned to carry letters to their masters, a runaway such as Onesimus (Phil. 10-18) would not be suspicious. Regarding migration, Stambaugh says that traveling in those days were often so as to migrate to and stay in another area, and not merely done for the sake of traveling itself. Some people traveled to migrate; such is the case of the tentmakers Priscilla and Aquilla, whose journeys are recorded in the New Testament (Acts 18: 1-3). As we know, the Apostles and Paul, the latter primarily addressing his mission to the Gentiles, made many converts during their preaching and tours of evangelization. Stambaugh (53) asserts that conversion to Christianity was not something superficial as it made a decisive impact, both in terms of the individuals self-perception and in the social context of a new fellowship. He also refers to two types of social transition experienced by the early Christian community fellowship, the first, from a Jewish

64

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

movement to a Gentile onewhich forced missionaries to travel outside the area of Palestine into the wider Greco-Roman worldand, the second, from a rural to an urban environment, in other words requiring the need and motivation to motivating preach in urban areas and evangelize the cities. The first transition, as portrayed in Acts, created social tensions between traditional Jews and those Hellenizing Jews, who minimized the importance of a strict obedience to the Law and were in favor of admitting Gentiles into the church without having to become Jewish first. Galatians 2:11-13 illustrates this fact: 11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. Chadwick (The Early Church) comments that in the ancient world everyone knew at least three things about Jews: (1) they did not associate with any pagan cult (which seemed antisocial), 2) they circumcised their infant boys (which seemed repulsive), and 3) that they had a dietary law which prohibited them to eat not only pork but all kinds of meat that had been offered in sacrifice to the gods (which seemed ridiculous) (18-19). Furthermore, they did not dine with non-Jews, which was true for some Jewish Christians but not for others (Brown 65). We find an example of the latter in the text, where Paul is criticizing Peter, who although he recognized the validity of Gentile missionGentiles accepted the Gospel quite wellrefused to eat with nonJewish Christians in Antioch. In this text another issue is mentioned, namely the matter of circumcision, and his issue had created perturbations between Judaizers and Hellenists. Although this involved him in painful controversy, it was Pauls accomplishment to defend the freedom and equal status of the Gentile Christians and to obtain from the Christian leaders based in Jerusalem the recognition of his gentiles converts as full members of the church. Chadwick adds that with this claim, Paul, who

65

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

became the first Christian apologist, was also seeking and confirming his own standing as the apostle of the Gentiles (20). The second transition in missionary activity concerns the focus away from the countryside to the city. This transition occurred without completely disregarding the rural environment as a mission field. The Twelve had preached in rural areas, as the towns contained many threats to them, their mission, and message. This transition can be seen in Acts where the previous rural image of the Gospel is substituted by the urban synagogue and city scenery. Acts 10:9 illustrates this: On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour. City houses usually had flat roofs which provided additional space for living, sleeping or praying. As a matter of fact, the earlier churches were private houses whose interiors were converted as a congregation increased. Churches did not attain a public style of architecture until the fourth century (Chadwick, The Early Church 55). It was in cities where the gospel made its most notable progress. Brown explains that most communities mentioned in the NT lived in cities. Cities had a denser population than the countryside and thus offered a better possibility to reach many more people during exhaustive, dangerous, and difficult evangelical tours. Judaic-Christian preachers used the Roman system of roads to travel from one city to another, and most cities had there own synagogue communities, thus offering potential converts to Christianity (64-65). Stambaugh explains that the larger towns and the cities on the Roman empire were situated on highways, at river crossings, and at natural harbors. A traveler on the road leading to a city passed farms, orchards, and huts where farm workers lived (107). In cities the interaction of people of different backgrounds was necessary and essential. But because of the diverse, cosmopolitan nature of the mixed

66

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

population of the urban society and the mobility of the population there existed a great need to belong. This need was fulfilled by being a member of some kind of group or association, and through membership of a group or association the individual was integrated into and formed part of the larger, complex, cosmopolitan urban society. This factor explains the good number of associations that existed in urban areas (Brown 65).

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

Activity Enumerate the three main social issues of early Christianity described here. Regarding the issue of first century mobility and mission, briefly explain the following: New Testament people are on the move. The traveling conditions Paul had to face Letter writing The two social transitions experienced by Christian fellowship Imagine that you are a missionary in todays world - choose a location where there exist difficulties to be a Christian. Compose a letter, in the New Testament style, to a community in that location. List some problems that contemporary Christian missionaries might face in urban areas in some countries. Do churches offer belonging and assistance (social, cultural, personal) in todays society and cities? Write a few lines about this. How could the pastoral ministry assist in this?
Activity 9: Social issues: mobility and mission

A second social issue is wealth/poverty and class-society present in the cities of the Roman Empire. Regarding this issue it is necessary to remember, as Stambaugh asserts, that the first leaders, the elite, of the Christian movement were Jews. This came about because some synagogue leaders were receptive to the Gospel and converted to Christianity, and then they continued to play a leadership role because of their socioeconomic or class position, their education, skills, and aptitudes. He also adds that the Christian message was often brought to the cities of the Roman Empire by ordinary Jews, for example the kind of Jews who were present at Pentecost. Another group of urban missionaries was of course apostles, including other followers of Jesus (such as

67

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Paul, and of course women) who moved about preaching and establishing Christian cells. But since the message was addressed to Gentiles in general so the early Christians also came from all socio-economic levels of Gentile society except the very highest: upper class men and women, prosperous men and women, free men and woman with an ambiguous position in societywho although frequently wealthy and influential individuals, they mostly came from lower classes, slaves, and the poor (Stambaugh 54, 63). Stambaugh asserts that by the time of the New Testament money and movable wealth had become much more important than the old agrarian emphasis on land and flock; yet, the basic social fabric of Greek, Romans and Hebrews was woven of the familiar fiber of personal contacts: of favors done, returns expected, allegiance owed (63). He further defines the term clientela to describe the relationship between superiors and their inferiors, in which the influential patron provided support and protection to the dependent clients in exchange for votes at election time. There are several stories in Luke picturing the relationship of the rich and the poor at meals. But this did not represent the Christian sense of charity to the poor and the destitute preached by early Christians since they did not expect anything in return. As a matter of fact, Charity was the most conspicuous quality of Christians. In the New Testament we see acts of charity as well as exhortation to charity (56, 64). Their generosity to the poor is shown in this text: 2 And a certain man lame from his mothers womb was carried, whom they laid daily at the gate of the temple which is called Beautiful, to ask alms of them that entered into the temple ... 6 Then Peter said, silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk. (Acts 3: 2.6) The material wealth of the Greco-Roman world was unevenly distributed since quite a small percentage of the population owned a vast proportion of the land and

68

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

resources. But Brown clarifies that the neither the designation of the poor, frequently mentioned in the NT, nor that of slave parallel the concept we hold nowadays about those terms. In the Gospel, the poor were small farmers with inadequate or barren land, or serfs on larger estates; in the cities without assistance, they were somewhat worse off (65-67); yet, they were much better off than those of our modern society. The same with slavesdoulos, also rendered as servant, which should not be seen as 19th century African slaves in America. In the Roman empire slaves had legal rights and either abusing or killing them was a punishable crime. They not only work in business, farming and households and they could also be administrators, physicians, teachers, scholars and poets, and thus accumulate wealth (67). Slaves were a part of the family unit in the Roman Empire. They might be obtained through a number of means including war, child exposure, and the sale of persons to pay debts. Many slaves were able to earn enough money to buy their own freedom, although they had to continue working for their former owners (Wade). Furthermore, the poor were seen with disgust rather than pity, thus the notion of the poor being blessed, Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (Mat. 5:3), must have shocked the aristocratic circles. Christian preachers generally made converts among the city poor and slaves, the former attracted by the promise of spiritual, if not legal emancipation, and the latter by a promise of salvation hereafter and by Christian practice of taking care of people in need. They also made converts, although in a lesser number, among the middle class and aristocracy. This is clear in I Cor.1: 26, when Paul says: For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called.

69

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

The social issue of slavery is mentioned by Paul in his letter to Philemon. In this letter, Onesimus, a slave of Philemon, who had become a Christian, had stolen something and ran away to Rome. Onesimus had returned to Philemon with an epistle written by Paul asking him to admit him as a brother: 10 I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds: 11 Which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me: ... 15 For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; 16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord? 22 But withal prepare me also a lodging: for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto you. (Phil. 10-22) The Gospel attracted slaves not only for the spiritual drawing power of the Gospel, but because many acquired legal emancipation (Stambaugh 54). Christianity, as Chadwick comments, did not offer emancipation to either slaves or women, but because its doctrine (that all are created alike in Gods image and all alike redeemed in Christ) elevated their domestic status (The Early Church 59-60). Christian conservatism regarding slavery as an institution was not indifference but respect for the present status quo, the State, and the Law: 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. (Rom 13, 1-5) Here we are concerned with social issues as far as they might assist us to understand some aspects of the New Testament. It is of interest that as far as slavery is concerned Paul mentions in this Epistle interesting ideas about Christian courtesy, brotherhood, practical justice, and the law of love (Scotfield 1243). According to Brown, manumission was a desirable process for him. He adds that: Yet, the fact that Paul,

70

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

who thought that the end of the world was coming soon, did not condemn the social structure with its massive number of slaves was tragically misinterpreted for many centuries as Christian justification for the existence of slavery, indeed, of a slavery often harsher than existed in NT times (68). To free a slave was considered good work and the Church treasury would be used to finance the manumission of slaves. Christian masters and slaves were brethren, and a master, in front of the bishop, would solemnly declare his intention of freeing a slave. In the fourth century, Constantine, confirmed this practice by giving the ceremony a legal validity equal to that of a formal manumission before a magistrate. Jesus doctrine of equality is seen in the fact that some slaves rose to become a bishop, notably Callistus of Rome in the third century. Protest against the social institution of slavery became a fact in the fourth century when Christians were in a position to influence social policies. As a result of this doctrine of equality, Christianity was especially successful with women (Chadwick, The Early Church 59-60). Regarding this social issue, in the description of Christian common life in the Acts of the Apostles, one of the practices of the primitive Christian community was the community of goods. Rowland, in Christian Origins (1985), states that there were uncertainties about the precise nature of this practice. In Acts 2:4 and 4:32, And all that believed were together, and had all things common (Acts 2:4); And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. (Acts 4:32) It seems that this pattern of behavior was voluntary. It was not a condition for entry into the Christian fold, but the normal practice of those who became Christians. But although this was a characteristic of the Palestine churches, it seemed not to be typical of the Pauline churches. Yet, for him, almsgiving was a central issue (272-274).

71

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

As already mentioned, the original Christians were Jews, and Christianity has its origins in Judaism, and Jews, due to their religion and dietary law, were alienated from many aspects of common civic life. Their zeal in keeping the Law was a source of resentment against Jews, but as Brown says (65), although anti-Judaism was frequent in sections of the Empire, through privileges granted by Julius Cesar they were legally protected. However, this was not the case for Christian Jewsor Gentile Christiansas they were viewed to be more dangerous than Jews for the stability of society, because of the vast numbers being converted to Christianity.

Activity Regarding the issue of wealth/poverty and class society, briefly explain the following: socio-economic class of the first Christians clientela slavery and Paul community of goods Social tensions among Christians (for example at meals) caused by the different socio-economic groups constituting this community.
Activity 10: Social issues: Wealth/poverty and class society

This brings us to the third issue, concerning the attitudes of authorities and the population against Christians. The first believers were considered to be a threat to the social system, the power structure, and the very moral basis of the society. Christianity was initially identified with Judaism, but very soon it was perceived by most people as a different religion. Rome considered that the best policy towards Jews were, to ignore them and leave them alone, at least in general. Christianity, however, appeared to be very strange, a new cult that grew very fast and quickly spread across many groups of people, socio-economic classes, and all geographical boundaries. This concerned the authorities and many groups of people felt threatened by this seemingly bizarre new

72

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

religion, which made very odd claims about a god-mans virgin birth, his resurrection from the dead, and personal immortality. These misconceptions led to fear, concern and caused rejection. The civic religious cults, their practices and observance were considered to be of great importance in the Hellenistic world, and people believed if they did not make those sacrifices and comply with the required observances to their gods, all the people would suffer under the wrath of the angered gods. Thus, for Christians to refuse to participate in civic or pagan cults and practices were to risk the fury of the gods, and destruction by them. The institution of emperor worship created another problem. As the Romans were the rules and the Greeks worshipped many deities, emperor worship was no problem to them. For the Christians, however, Jesus was the only Lord and God; there could be no other gods besides Him, and they could not bow before anyone or anything who claimed divine authority, including the emperor. This created the perception that Christians were enemies of the status quo and against the state, with allegiance to another lord and master than the emperor. Christians were thus considered to be against the civic and state god, in other words atheists. This type of non-civic or unreligious behavior (when seen in terms of the current religious practices and beliefs) baffled their neighbors (Wade, The World of the Apostle Paul, 1997). Acts 28:22 echoed popular opposition: But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect, we know that everywhere it is spoken against. Stambaugh (60-62) states that there existed an open hostility of the Jewish authorities towards Christians, who were subsequently forced to leave Jerusalem; and when they began to make numerous new converts in other cities there began a sustained persecution by Herod Agrippa in 41 CE, as shown in Acts 12:1 19: 1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. 2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And

73

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. ... 19 And when Herod had sought for him, and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death. And he went down from Judaea to Caesarea, and there abode. Nevertheless, in spite of the hauling of Christians before Roman authorities by Jewish leaders, Rome did not commence the persecution of Christians until several years later, in 64 A.D. by Nero, who gave as reason that they, he claimed, caused the fire that destroyed Rome. We know that Jesus had been condemned to crucifixion by a Roman procurator so as to placate the Jews and not because he believed Jesus to be guilty of any crime. Although the Gentile mission was concerned with the maintenance of public order and refraining from revealing disaffection towards the State, they were punished as incendiaries, and many were burned alive. As we will see, besides the persecutions by the Jewish authorities and Nero, there were many others persecutions, namely those of Domitian (c.90-96), Trajan (98-117), Hadrian (117-138), and Marcus Aurelius (161-181). In those times it is true to say that Christians always lived with a sense of danger, as can be seen in many passages of the New Testament. However, Paul still encouraged Christians to be loyal to the state: 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same ... 5 Wherefore ye must need be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are Gods ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Rom. 13:1-7) In the New Testament, we also find admonitions to domestic tranquility in an attempt not to offend conventional morality: 1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; (1 Tim. 2 1-3)

74

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

We do not find any enmity in Acts between followers of Christ and citizens loyal to Caesar. In Acts 18: 12-17, we see how Roman authorities deal with Paul fairly: 12 And when Gallio was the deputy of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat, 13 Saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law. 14 And when Paul was now about to open his mouth, Gallio said unto the Jews, If it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness, O ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with you: 15 But if it be a question of words and names, and of your law, look ye to it; for I will be no judge of such matters. 16 And he drave them from the judgment seat. 17 Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. And Gallio cared for none of those things. This passage also illustrates the above-mentioned hostility of the Jewish authority towards the followers of Jesus. According to Stambaugh there did exist a more militant approach to the dangers experienced by Christians. In 2 Thess. (2: 6-12), there is the promise of a judgment day in which the wickedthe Roman Empirewould be punished: 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. But, in the New Testament we see the suffering of Jesus as a model to follow. This is seen in Matt 16:24-28: 24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. 28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

75

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

This passage also contains predictions of distress for Jesus followers and the assurance of a better time: and then he shall reward every man according to his work (61-62). Having voluntarily given so much of their former community life to follow Jesus, early Christians required reassurance that their present trials and tribulations were not in vain. This is what I Peter did by addressing to those believers who have become strangers and pilgrims (2:11), evildoers (2:12) and insulted (3:9) with the assurance: But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (2: 9-10) But somehow, the suffering of some Christians spurred others to more faithful living. In Philippians (1:14), the Apostle Paul says that: And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear. In spite of these persecutions the church continued to grow steadily during the following centuries. Paradoxically, persecutions can be counted as one of the main causes of success, since it had the opposite effect than the one intended, as it lead to increased social coherence. Furthermore, instead of driving Christians underground, Chadwick comments that, in the second century, when one governor of Asia Minor started to persecute the Christians, their entire population paraded before his house as a declaration of their faith, openly manifesting and protesting against injustice (The Early Church 55). The small group of initial followers of the crucified Christ increased to incredible numbers, forming the first Christian community in Jerusalem. Under the general supervision of the Apostles, they were bound together by ties of mutual love and sharing their meals and possessions. Nevertheless, the Apostles gradually became

76

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

unable to care for the material and spiritual needs of so many thousands. Thus they decided to retain for themselves only the spiritual aspect of ministry, and appointed seven assigned deacons to organize the provisioning of the community; with Stephen, the first Christian martyr, among them.

Activity Regarding the issue of attitudes of authorities and population against Christians, briefly explain the following: the cause of rejection of Christians attitude of Christians regarding the Roman Empire
Activity 11: Social issues: Attitudes of authorities and population against Christians

2. THE APOSTOLIC AGE INTRODUCTION: CHURCH AND TRADITION FROM AN ORTHODOX POINT OF VIEW As already noted, it is claimed that there is an uninterrupted historical and theological continuity from the beginning of the Christian Church to the Orthodox Church. This grows from the conviction, as mentioned, that the Orthodox Church is the true Church of Christ. Other Christian denominations cannot claim the same continuity. Thus, before we start with our narration of the formation and theological development of the first Christian Church, it deems proper to approach the Orthodox concept of Church, clearly presented by Bebis, it is linked to that Tradition in which is incorporated the Scripture and the writings of the Fathers. For Orthodox, Tradition is an extension of the Church itself, an extension of the life of Christ, guided by the continuous presence of the Holy Spirit. For the Orthodox mind, it is only in the Church, as the abiding place of the Holy Trinity, where the teaching of Christ, the revealed truth, is received and transmitted by

77

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the Apostles. What they experienced, saw, and witnessed, and later recorded in the New Testament is called the Apostolic Tradition. This tradition was later transmitted from the Apostles themselves to their successors, the bishops, and the presbyters. In his Letter to the Corinthians, St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, (d. 95?), who worked with the Apostle Paul and is associated with the oldest known non-canonical Christian writing, clarifies this historical truth: The Apostles preached to us the Gospel received from Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ was Gods Ambassador. Christ, in other words, comes with a message from God, and the Apostles with a message from Christ. Both these orderly arrangements, therefore, originate from the will of God. And so, after receiving their instructions and being fully assured through the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, as well as confirmed in faith by the word of God, they went forth, equipped with the fullness of the Holy Spirit, to preach the good news that the Kingdom of God was close at hand. From land to land, accordingly, and from city to city they preached; and from among their earliest converts appointed men whom they had tested by the Spirit to act as bishops and deacons for the future believers. (Chap. 2) Eusebius of Caesarea, bishop of the fourth century, the first Church historian, in Ecclesiastical History, calls this process of transmission of revelation the unerring tradition of the Apostolic preaching. From this standpoint, Bebis reasons that there are no theological distinctions within the Tradition of the Church. Therefore, we can say that, as a historical event, Tradition, starts with the Apostolic preaching and is found in Scriptures, but it is kept, treasured, interpreted, and explained to the Church by the Holy Fathers or the Fathers of the Churchmen of extraordinary holiness and trusted orthodoxythe successors of the Apostles. This interpretive aspect of the Apostolic preaching is called Patristic Tradition. Consequently, Bebis points out, Apostolic Preaching or Tradition has an organic bond, continuity, with Patristic tradition and vice versa. This fact should be stressed because there are many theologians in western churches who either distinguish between Apostolic Tradition and Patristic Tradition, or completely reject Patristic Tradition. Tradition is also very appropriately defined by St.

78

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Athanasius, the Great Pillar of Orthodoxy, bishop of Alexandria, during the fourth century, in his First Letter to Serapion: Let us look at the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the Catholic Church from the very beginning, which the Logos gave (edoken), the Apostles preached (ekeryxan), and the Fathers preserved (ephylaxan). Upon this the Church is founded (tethemeliotai).

Tradition is founded upon the Holy Trinity, it constantly proclaims the Gospel of Christ, it is found within the boundaries of the Christian Church, and it is expounded by the Fathers (Bebis). Table 2: Concept of Tradition

Illustration 12: The three hierarchs of the Church18

Consequently, as we will see when we study Byzantium, the Ecumenical Councils of the Church, and more generally, the Local Councils of the Church, have great significance and relevance in terms of tradition. The first Council Synod of the Church was the Apostolic Synod, which took place in Jerusalem as early as 51 A.D. Later, bishops would meet either locally, or on the ecumenical or universal, the all-

From left to right: Saint Basile-the-Great, Saint John Chrysostom, and Saint Gregory the Theologian (Saint Gregory of Nazianzus). See: <http://benedictseraphim.wordpress.com/2007/01/30/our-fathersamong-the-saints-the-three-hierarchs-basil-gregory-and-john/>.

18

79

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

encompassing level of the universal Christian empirethe oikoumenein order to defend the faith of the Church. Bebis says: In sum, the Ecumenical Councils, together with the Scriptures and the Patristic writings, are the universal voice of the Church. The position of the Ecumenical Councils in the Church and their universal authority is enhanced by the fact that they issued not only dogmatic definitions of faith, but also formulated important canons of the Church which concern Orthodox spiritual life and help the individual in the growth of his life in Christ. Not all these canons have the same value today as they had when first written; still, they are like compasses which direct our lives toward a Christian lifestyle and orient us towards a high spiritual level. Canons which concern our moral life, fasting, and Holy Communion are indeed important for our daily life as good Orthodox Christians. The concept of the Tradition of the Church, which not only includes the Bible and the teaching of the Fathers, is what causes us repeatedly to return to written patristic sources in order to describe events that surround the first Christian community and delineate their theological development. But, as Aghiorgoussis points out, Tradition also includes the ecumenical and local councils, the Divine Liturgy, and the architecture and iconography of the Church (The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church).

THE INFANT CHURCH OF THE FIRST CENTURY As already suggested, it is commonly accepted that history of the Orthodox Church actually begins with the Descent of the Holy Spirit (33 A.D, although 29 is thought to be more accurate) as it is narrated in Acts 2: 1-4: 1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

80

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Illustration 13: Pentecost19

As we read further, on that same day, after Peter had preached to the gathered people, 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls (Acts 2:41), thus constituting the first Christian community at Jerusalem. In the earliest period, the Christian movement centered its activities on Jerusalem, where it took shape, as already mentioned, not as a new religion but as a sect within Judaism. But we need to be aware that our knowledge of this first community is limited and vague. It is entirely based on the Acts of the Apostles, which should be read with caution since it is a blending of history and prose, which is normal for Hellenistic rhetoric. It must also be born in mind that the material is organized from the point of view of the second Christian generation, a generation which perceived the events of the preceding four or five decades as a kind of golden age of the church (Walker 23). It is clear that the original communities were a composite of Palestinian Jews, who on the basis of Jesus resurrection taught his imminent return. They called themselves, from an early time, ekklesiaassembly or churchand regarded themselves as the true assembly of Israela community of the final days which will
19

See: <www.goarch.org/>.

81

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

have the Lords recognition upon his return in glory. This community had its own identity, yet they both attended church and were obedient to the Judaic Law. Therefore, they lived at peace with the religious authorities of Jerusalem. Notwithstanding their obedience to Jewish Law, they practiced baptism which was associated with the gift of the Holy Spirit and, on a regular basis, gathered for prayer, mutual exhortation, and breaking of breadthe origin of the Eucharist: And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart (Acts 2: 46). The Eleven, reduced from twelve due to Judas transgression, were the founding members of this community. Their number was restored when they appointed Matthias: And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles (Acts 1: 26). The title of apostles was given by the time the Acts were written; it was also applied to traveling missionaries such as Paul. But, excepting Peter and John, we have no records of the activities of the Twelve. They vanished from the history in Acts, and, as Walker adds, they become subject for later legend. When Paul visited Jerusalem three years after he had left, he only saw Peter and James, the Lords brother.

82

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Illustration 14: St. Peter and St. Paul20

In a second visit, fourteen years later, he writes that there were three pillars as leaders: James the Lords brother, who became the first Bishop of Jerusalem, Peter, and John. Paul says in his letter to the Galatians: Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lords brother. (1:18-19) Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also ... And when James, Cephas,21 and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. (2:1-9) Walker says that trouble came to the community of believers in Jerusalem upon the incorporation in it of the Greek-speaking Diaspora Jews resident in this city. In Acts 6.1 we are told that there was a complaint of Greek speaking Jewish believers against the local Aramaic-speaking Christians because their widows had been neglected in the daily ministration: And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. The struggle ended when the Twelve appointed

See: <www.josephpatterson.files.wordpress.com>. Cephas was Peter: And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a stone (John 1:42).
21

20

83

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

seven Hellenists, the first deacons, Stephen among them, to administer the common resources: Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business (Acts 6:3). But Stephen, seemingly the leader of the Hellenists, finds himself in dispute with members of other Greek-speaking synagogues who accused him of speaking blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. He also exposed the Jews for their deafness to the voice of Jesus. As a result Stephen was taken before the Sanhedrin and condemned to death by stoning. 9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. 11 Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. 12 And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, 13 And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: 14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. 15 And all that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel. (Acts 6:9-15)

Illustration 15: Stephens martyrdom22

22

See: <www.saltandlighttv.org>.

84

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Constantine Kallinikos, in The History of the Orthodox Church, asserts that Stephens martyrdom brought two main turning points in the history of early Christians. The first was the great outbreak of local persecution against the newly-established Church viewed as intolerable to the Jewish authorities as they were considered to be apostates from the Law of Moses. It had the effect of scattering the brethren and the Gospel from Jerusalem not only to other towns of Judea, but also outside of Judea. The second was Sauls prominence, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young mans feet, whose name was Saul (Acts 7:58). Paul was then still a fanatical Pharisee, wildly persecuting the Christian Church, until his conversion to Christianity in the year A.D. 35 outside Damascus (Acts 9:4). Thereupon he was baptized, changing his name from Saul to Paul; the Apostles received him into their brotherhood, and, assailed by dangers and persecutions, he started, as already mentioned, his missionary journeys that were to spread the Christian creed into the Gentile world (5). Regarding the first turning point mentioned by Kallinikos, Walker reasons that Stephen and his fellow believers presumably lacked the respect for the temple and the Law that the Palestinian Christian habitually made manifest. Thus, he comments they were persecuted not on the ground of their belief in Jesus as Messiah, but because they talked as though they were prepared, Jews though they were, to jettison certain demands of the Law in the light of their new faith (24). Walkers assertion is based on two reports provided by Acts 8:1: And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles. On the one hand, we are told that subsequent to the stoning of St. Stephen, the first martyr of the Christian Church, there was a great persecution; on the other, that that

85

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the apostles were not affected by persecutions. In other words, the persecutions were restricted to the Hellenic Christians who spoke blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law (Acts 6:13). But, this scattering of the Hellenist leaders, Walker continues, meant the beginning of a new period in the life and mission of the church. They carried the word to Samaria (Acts 8:5, 25), and later to Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch where there appeared the first Christian church which mixed Gentiles and Jews (Acts 11: 19-20). Then, the Hellenists carried the message of the risen Christ into the Diaspora. At the same time, following Jesus command, the Apostles went out and preached wherever they went, first to the Jews and then to the Gentiles, so that in a surprisingly short time, Christian communities came into being in all the main centers of the Roman world and beyond. Their achievements are documented in the Acts, as well as in the inner tradition of the Orthodox Church. In contrast, the Jerusalem community, having, at least for some time, no direct involvement with the new mission, enjoyed relative peace, obviously maintaining its loyalty to the temple. Yet this peace was broken in time of Emperor Claudius, under the kingship of Herod Agrippa (41-44 A.D.), son of Herod the Great, who, in his attempt to create a reputation for himself as an enthusiastic orthodox, executed James, the brother of John, and imprisoned Peter: 1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. 2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also (Acts 12:1-3). Walker adds that this brief persecution may have been the reason why Peter left Jerusalem and started his activity as a missionary apostle. The leadership of the Jerusalem community came to be in the hands of James, the Lords brother, in association with a body of elders or presbyter (23-25), until his martyrdom in 63: And

86

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present (Acts 21:18). As we will see an early administrative structure already was in progress: bishop-presbyter-deacon.

Illustration 16: St. James, the Lords brother23

It was not only James who died in martyrdom, but many other bishops also died during the persecutions. This eventually became one of the reasons for the preeminence of bishops in the Byzantine Empire.

Activity 1. On which source do we base our knowledge of the Apostolic Age? Why should we be cautious with this source? 2. Complete the following paragraphs: ... the original communities were a composite ................................. who on the basis of Jesus resurrection, taught ...................................... They called themselves, from an early time .............................. They regarded themselves as the true ..................... ... they practiced ................baptism which was associated with ................................ and, on a regular basis, gathered for .............................., ............................................, and ......................................the origin of the Eucharist.

23

See: <www.stjamesok.org>.

87

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

3. What were the two turning points brought about by Stephens martyrdom?
Activity 12: The Apostolic Age

Activity 1. When did the Jewish persecution start. How did it begin? What were its consequences? 2. Read the following verses in the Acts of the Apostles and explain the circumstances of the persecutions (who were the persecutors, who was persecuted, and the reason for the persecution): 4: 1-4 5: 17-28 6: 8-15 8: 1-3 12: 1-6
Activity 13: Jewish persecutions

PAUL AND GENTILE CHRISTIANITY Upon Stephens martyrdom and the scattering of the Hellenist Christians to the cities of the Diaspora, Antioch, the capital of the province of Syria, became the second focal center of Christian life. There the Gospel was preached to the Gentile Godfearers who were admitted into the Christian community without first becoming Jewish proselytes. It was there when the followers of Jesus were seen not only as a body distinct from paganism but also from normative Judaism that they were first called Christians. The fact of Gentiles becoming Christian converts while not subject to but free from the Law caused an immense debate, a debate in which Paul played a major role. This debate did not merely have local importance but concerned the fact that the new church have a universal (that is, for all times, all people, and all places) mission (Walker 26). Paul was a Jew among Jews, but, as Walker points out, Greek would have been his native tongue and, the city of Tarsus, at the time of his birth, was an important center of Hellenic Stoic teaching. Consequently Paul during his youth would have been 88

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

familiar with the fundamentals of Hellenistic and religious thought. But, although born in Tarsus, he was brought up in Jerusalem, I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day (Acts 22:3) and educated at the feet of Gamaliel, a famous teacher of the Law. In coherence with his pharisaic ideal of strict observance of the Law, Paul persecuted the early Christian church (Acts 8:1). Walker believes that Pauls antagonism was directed against Hellenist Jewish Christians, who had a tendency to bend the requirements of the Law, and not against Palestinian Christians (26). Yet, his famous conversion, which occurred about the year 35 in a journey to Damascus, made him a true believer in the risen Jesus, and led to the beginning of the series of his missionary trips in the Gentile world, resulting in the foundation of many churches. We have some reports of his earliest trips in Galatians (1: 13-24): 13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mothers womb, and called me by his grace, 16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: 17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. 18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. 19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lords brother. 20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. 21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; 22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: 23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. 24 And they glorified God in me. But, as Rowland claims, in Christian Origins, Paul enunciated a principle of accommodation concerning gentiles, we find in I Corinthians 9: I have become all things to all men (9:22). Thus he behaved as a Jew in the company of Jews and, to a

89

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

certain extend, as a Gentile when with Gentiles, a pattern of behavior and a seemingly dual attitude which must have created some confusion to onlookers. Paul finds an underlying logic in this seemingly contradictory position when he says I do it all for the sake of the gospel (9:23) (233). A crisis arose when Christian visitors from Jerusalem arrived in Antioch, and in accordance with their traditions and the local customs of the church in Jerusalem insisted on the need for circumcision: And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved (Acts 15:1). The debate made Paul and Titus, an uncircumcised Gentile Christian, go to Jerusalem to defend his position against this policy. Barnabas used to accompany him in many trips until he took the side of Peter on the matter of eating with Gentiles. The result was a portentous accord in which it was agreed that the Gospel belonged to both Gentiles as well as Jews (29). This is the first council of the Churchs history, described in Acts (15). It was attended by the Apostles: 2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question... . 4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. 6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. The decision is narrated in these verses: 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith ... For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; (Acts 15: 2-9).

90

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

We read that the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe ... giving them the Holy Ghost. Ware highlights the verses it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, thus claiming authority as a Church and not individually. This council will have no parallel until the Council of Nicea in 325. Ware comments that Orthodoxy has always attached a great important to the place of councils in the life of church. It believes that the council is the chief organ whereby God has chosen to guide His people, and it regards the Catholic Church as essentially a conciliar Church ... In the Church there is neither dictatorship nor individualism, but harmony and unanimity; its member remain free but isolated, for they are united in love, in faith, and in sacramental communion. In a council no single member arbitrarily imposes his will upon the rest, but each consults with the others, and in this way they all freely achieve a common mind. a council is a living embodiment of the essential nature of the Church. (14) Pauls letters, which circulated in and were collected by the churches he founded, represent the earliest body of Christian literature. Next to the four Gospels, they have exerted a major influence on Christian thought, grounded, not in his clarity or systematic character, but according to Walker, in the richness and suggestiveness of Pauls thought an occasionally in its unfinished and even ambiguous character (29). Yet, there was no ambiguity when talking about the foundation of his teaching and preaching: 11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 13-24). Paul was convinced that his gospel was given to him by revelation, although it was also a matter of tradition: I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3). Walker summarizes Pauls gospel by saying that This was the good news that in Jesus, God had acted to provide salvation for all who should believea salvation whose complete realization lay in the future but whose beginning could be experienced even in the present. This salvation had its roots in Jesus death and resurrectiontwo events which in Pauls thought stand forth as transactions of transcendent significance. (29)

91

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Activity Read the following New Testament quotes and deduct aspects of Pauls theology from them: I Cor. 15:3, 49; 6: 11, 17; 12:27-14:1 Gal. 1:4 Rom. 6:4, 6, 8, 11; 1:16. Make sure that you possess and use a Bible with textual commentary to assist you in the interpretation of these texts.
Activity 14: Pauls theology

The fact that Jesus Christ, the new covenant of Gods grace, was the one in whom Gods salvation is to be found eventually led him to view the demand that Gentiles should keep the Law as intolerable, and not in tune with the new covenant of Gods grace, as personified by Jesus Christ Himself. Paul says: For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (Rom. 1:16). For him, Christ embodied the new life of salvation. This did not mean, as Walker asserts, that for Paul the Law was evil, but that it was merely a preliminary (31). But primitive Christianity and Pauline Christianity, Walker continues, were coextensive. Paul knew of other churches founded by other missionaries: 19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. 20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another mans foundation (Rom. 15:20). Paul was not personally familiar with the Roman church, a church which eventually would become most important and of great relevance in the future Christian panorama. Thus he begins his letter to the Roman church by introducing himself. He has been called to be an apostle, and his mission is to bring about the obedience of faith among all nations (Rom. 1:15):

92

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: 5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

Activity 1. Read the following New Testament quotes and deduct Pauls thoughts about Christians relationship with the Jewish Law or Old Covenant: Gal. 5:14; 2:16, 21; 3:6, 22, 24, 19 Rom. 2:21; 3:21; 4:3, 24-25; 6;23; 7:7; 11: 32. 2. Which other Christian church was also functioning at the time of Pauls preaching tours? (When dealing with Biblical texts always remember to use a Biblical commentary, or a Study Bible.)
Activity 15: Pauls relationship with the Law and with other churches

THE GOSPELS We have seen many references to first century Christians in the Acts of the Apostles and in Pauls letters. But it needs to be remembered that at that time when the Christian Bible was the Old Testament, read in the Greek Septuagint versionthe words of the Lord were authoritatively circulating in the form of an oral tradition until the synoptic gospels, during a process of gradual formation, were completed. We all are aware that Jesus did not leave behind anything in writing. He proclaimed his message to people in vernacular Aramaic and his teachings spread by word of mouth for at least a generation before written gospels by Matthew, Mark, Lukeauthors of the Synoptic Gospelsand John appeared in the Greek language. The word synoptic means with the same eye or seeing together. The Synoptic Gospels present us with the narratives of these three evangelists concerning certain aspects of the life of Jesus. The adjective synoptic refers to the fact that they include the same

93

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

material, and present the basic story of Jesus, his sayings and events in his life in similar ways. They even used many of the same words in parallel accounts. Yet, while the Gospel of John sometimes resembles the other three Gospels, it tells the story of Jesus in significantly different ways such as a different order of events, using different perspectives and points of emphasis, and its own unique vocabulary and style. The Orthodox theologian Stylianopoulos finds a dynamic interplay and mutuality between divine word and tradition in the formation of the Gospels. He asserts that the Synoptic Gospels, which are historically closest to Jesus, are dependent on earlier Christian traditions and texts. These were texts and traditions about the deeds and words of Jesus that were used for the needs of the Christian congregations (Luke 1:1-4). For him they embody the oral and written traditions of the early Christians. In other words, the authoritative words and deeds of Jesus have been mediated through the dynamics of the Christian community and its ongoing stream of tradition (20-21). Before they attained their canonical status by the end of the second century, the Gospels themselves were highly valued and used in worship and teaching by various congregations. Furthermore, Raymond E. Brown lists three stages in the formation of the Gospels which can also assist in explaining the formation of the Synoptic ones: (1) The public ministry or activity of Jesus of Nazareth (the first third of the 1st century AD). The thing of note he did, the oral proclamation of his message, and his interaction with others were recorded selectively by his Apostles by memory. (2) The apostolic preaching about Jesus (the second third of the 1st century AD). Jesus resurrection illuminate his apostles memories of the preresurrectional period, preaching his words and deeds with enriched significance a kerigmatic proclamation intended to bring people to faith. Yet other formative elements contributed to the Gospel development, namely liturgy or worship. (3) The written Gospels (around the last third of the 1st century). Although preaching based on oral preservation and development of the Jesus material continued into the 2d century, the canonical Gospels were written between 65-100. As for the Gospel writers, two Gospels were attributed to the

94

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

apostles Mathew and John and two to two apostolic men, companions of the apostles Peter (Mark) and Paul (Luke) (106). But as Brown grants, most modern scholars think that the evangelists were not eyewitnesses of Jesus ministry. This of course is an important perspective and assist us to understand the differences among the gospels. He adds that the evangelists emerge as authors, shaping, developing, pruning the transmitted Jesus material, and as theologians, orienting that material to a particular goal (11). Brown adds a further stage of Gospel formation to describe the interrelationship of the Synoptic Gospels. This stage asserts that as they have so much in common in the third stage there must have been some form of dependence of one or two of the Synoptics on the otherMatt wrote a first Gospel and Luke used Matt, and the existence of Qor a common written source (a protogospel). This is commonly referred to as the Synoptic problem (122). The modern view is that Marks Gospel came first, and that both Matthew and Luke based their accounts on Mark, as well as other collections of material about Jesus. Johns Gospel appears to have been composed either independently, or at least in an independent way.

Activity 1. What are the Synoptic Gospels? 2. List the three stages defined by Brown in the formation of the Gospels.
Activity 16: The formation of the Gospels

Already during the stage of the formation of the Gospels, and for the next two hundred years, the Christian movement would be subjected to a long period of suffering, as a result of persecutions, first by the Jewish authorities and then by the Roman Empire. These persecutions of Christians by and under the Roman Empire constitute the focus of the next section.

95

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

3. EARLY CHRISTIANITY AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE: PERSECUTION AND SUCCESS The encounter between early Christianity and the Roman Empire is a period in history that stretches over three centuries. This is a period in history that brought the infant Church great pain and much distress, but also a time of great satisfaction and many accomplishments, confirming that the amount of suffering had not been in vain. As already mentioned, the Gentile mission did not intend to challenge the Empires public order, and as Chadwick explains, the Empirefollowing the policies of the earlier Hellenistic monarchies of the Eastwas tolerant of any cult provided they did not weaken morality or provoke sedition (The Early Church 24). They understood that each nation under their rule had the right to worship their own deities as the Senate or the people of Rome had their right to worship theirs as long as due honor was given to Rome and her gods. Consequently, Judaism, in spite of not being viewed in a positive light by the Romans authorities, was an authorized religion (religio licita), and Jews were even dispensed from participation in the imperial cult. Nevertheless, this toleration was limited because some Jewish religious practices were considered immoral and liable to be suppressed. In general, religious cults, specifically religious societies with private rites such as those of Christians, which seemed to threaten Romeits state and public orderwere regarded illicit, even if little or no action was, in fact, taken to suppress them (Walker 50). Yet, as stated, Christianity viewed the Empire and its relationship with it positively. Even in the Acts of the Apostles it is suggested that the Empire, under Gods guidance, could be a means for the advancement of the Gospel. Christians, who admitted only one Lord and God, in terms of this mindset perceived paganism as one of the major problems of the present State. They considered it essential that something must be done concerning this religion that stands in absolute opposition to their own

96

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

monotheistic belief. Obviously the Roman government who did not share the Christian mindset and doctrines was unwilling to quit their old pagan gods, especially as the prosperity, might and many victories in battle were attributed to favors granted to the Roman Empire by their pagan gods. Moreover, the God of the Jews, with no images and generally no sacrifices, was harder to grasp than there own tangible divine images, concrete rituals and daily sacrifices. There were no one absolute reason why Christianity should not gain tolerance (Chadwick, The Early Church 24-25), but it almost was a natural candidate to be considered as an unauthorized and dangerous association, and thus leading to eventual persecution. What follows is a reference table with the main persecutions suffered by Christians:

Jewish Persecutions (described in the Book of Acts) The Persecution of Nero (64 AD) Domitian (81-96) Trajan (98-117) Hadrian (117-138) Marcus Aurelius (161-181) Septimus Severus (202-211) Maximus the Thracian (235-251) Decius (249-251) Valerian (257-260) Diocletian / Galerius (303-311) Table 3: Chart with main persecutions of First Christians

Regarding the Jewish persecution I mentioned that there was not a sustained persecution until 41, by Herod Agrippa, that is until the time when Christians began to make new converts in other cities. I also related that in spite of Christians being hauled by Jewish leaders before the Roman authorities, the conflict of Christians with the Roman Empire and the first persecution came by chance and not by any fundamental point of collision. In A.D. 64, Nero, a demented monarch, who had murdered his tutor, his brother, and his mother, had himself set fire to Rome. He executed this act as he

97

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

wished to have a realistic impression of the burning of Troy by the Greeks. But Nero, having been discovered by his people, accused the young and new Christian sect of arson so as to avoid being blamed. Furthermore, although there was not any deep ideological conflict between Christians and the State, as Chadwick states, precedent was born: Christians were condemned to death just because there were Christians and not as a result of any other charges (The Early Church 26), although one might have imagined that other mundane, social, or political reason were the cause. During this persecution, when Peter and Paul were martyred, Kallinikos narrates that: Some of the Christians were crucified, some sawn in two; other were sewn up into skins and thrown to the dogs, or cast as defenseless prey to the beasts. And some, smeared with pitch and tar, were impaled on stakes and lighted like torches to illuminate the imperial gardens.

Illustration 17: Peters martyrdom24

24

See: <www.exclassics.com/foxe/foxeills.htm>.

98

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Therefore to check this rumor, those, who were called Christians by the mob and hated for their moral enormities, were substituted in his place as culprits by Nero and afflicted with the most exquisite punishments. Christ, from whom the name was given, was put to death during the reign of Tiberius, by the procurator Pontius Pilate. Although checked for the time, this pernicious superstition broke out again not only in Judea, where the evil originated, but throughout the City, in which the atrocities and shame from all parts of the world center and flourish. Therefore those who confessed were first seized, then on their information a great multitude were convicted, not so much of the crime of incendiarism, as of hatred of the human race. The victims who perished also suffered insults, for some were covered with the skins of wild beasts and torn to pieces by dogs, while others were fixed to crosses and burnt to light the night when daylight had failed. Nero had offered his gardens for the spectacle and was giving a circus show, mingling with the people in the dress of a driver, or speeding about in a chariot. Although they were criminals who deserved the most severe punishment, yet a feeling of pity arose, since they were put to death not for the public good but to satisfy the rage of an individual. (Tacitus, Annales) Table 4: First century historian and the persecution under Nero

Under Domitian (81-96) the situation again became grave when as emperor he proclaimed himself Master of God; anyone who disapproved of his cult immediately became suspect of treason. Eminent Romans who had Jewish sympathies were accused of atheism. For Domitian, belief, in Jesus Christ was opposed to belief in the divinity of the Roman Emperor. The Domitian persecution caused the death of Domitians cousin and his wife, Flavius Clemens, the deportation of the Apostle John to Patmos, the martyrdom of Dionysius the Areopagite, and the imprisonment, exile and execution of many other Christians. Based on his literal interpretation of Christs words regarding the Kingdom of God, Domitian even brought certain followers of Jesus from Palestine to condemn them as revolutionaries. However when he saw their poverty, and realized that they were not wealthy members of an earthly, material kingdom, he dismissed them as simple madmen (Kallinikos). Chadwick believes that, in the book of the Revelation, Johns denunciation of the idolatrous, persecuting Rome as the scarlet woman who is drunk with the blood of saints, may reflect the distress in the churches of Asia Minor at this time (The Early Church 27): 6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.7

99

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. (Rev. 6-7)

At this time [95 a.d.] the road leading from Sinuessa to Puteoli was paved with stones. And in the same year Domitian put to death, besides many others, his cousin Flavius Clemens, who was then consul, and the wife of Flavius, Flavia Domitilla, who was his own relative. The crime charged against both was sacrilege. On the same charge many others who had adopted Jewish customs were condemned. Some were put to death, others had their property confiscated. Domitilla was exiled alone on Pandataria. (Cassius Dio, History of Rome) Table 5: First century historian and the persecution under Domitian

The crisis for Christians caused by the cult of the emperor finally passed with the emperor Trajan (98-117), who in contrast to Domitian, did not want his cult to be a compulsory loyalty-test. Pliny the younger,25 then Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, observed the daily increase of the Christian communities in his province, not only in towns, but also in the countryside. He describes the Christian in a manner that reflects the way in which their contemporaries viewed them: ... that on a fixed day they were accustomed to come together before daylight and to sing by turns a hymn to Christ as a god, and that they bound themselves by oath, not for some crime but that they would not commit robbery, theft, or adultery, that they would not betray a trust nor deny a deposit when called upon. After this it was their custom to disperse and to come together again to partake of food... Since Pliny was uncertain as to how best to deal with the progress of this vicious, extravagant superstition, as he called it, he wrote to the Emperor for guidance. He wondered, among many things, if merely professing Christianity automatically made the individual culpable of disloyalty to the Emperor. By the torturing of two slave-girls, Pliny had discovered that Christianity was innocuous. Trajans response suggests that Christianity was unauthorized and therefore punishable, but it was his primary concern that there should not be deliberate measures to hunt out Christians as a result of rioting mobs, or false and anonymous accusations; however, once they were summoned before

25

See letters by Pliny and Trajan in Appendix A.

100

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the magistrates, they should be forced to choose between sacrifice to the pagan gods and death. Furthermore, authorities discovered that Christians were virtuous folks, but at the same time inexplicably and obstinately hostile toward paganism; therefore, Christianity remained a capital offense. Thus, Christianity, whose fate until then depended upon the whim of successive emperors, became, from then onwards, by the explicit provisions of Roman law, open to persecution; being a Christian became a punishable offense. As a result of this new law, during the second century, many suffered martyrdom: Ignatius Bishop of Antioch, Telesphorus bishop of Rome, Polycarp bishop of Smirna, Justin The Christian philosopher at Rome (between 162 and 168) (Walker 51; Kallinikos). Walker adds that during and after the second century the emperors were not greatly interested in nor disturbed by the Christian phenomenon. Nevertheless, they considered it undesirable and punishable.

Illustration 18: Saint Polycarp, martyred circa 155 AD26

26

See: <www.stpolycarp.org>.

101

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Hadrian (117-138), who like his predecessor, discouraged governors from taking a personal initiative in the persecution of Christians, was addressed by two learned Christians, Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, and the Athenian philosopher, Aristides. In their discourse before him they offered apologies for their brethren in the faith. Impressed by their arguments, Hadrian ordered his officials henceforth only to arrest Christians when convicted of common crimes, but not to disturb and persecute them merely to satisfy popular clamor. The need to make such a statement of course shows that persecution of Christians because of public demand was in fact a reality and true. Only in circumstances of common crimes should they be punished by death. At that time, there even existed governors who tried to protect Christians. But unfortunately even under Hadrian, Christian blood was shed in Palestine, owing to a certain Jewish rebel, Bar-cochba, who instigated his fellow-countrymen to revolt against the Roman rule. Bar-cochba was killed, and the rebellion put down, with the spilling of much Jewish blood. In this same rebellion, many innocent Christians perished because Christianity was still generally identified with Judaism. Hadrian annihilated even the name Jerusalem, renaming the Jewish capital Aelia Capitolina. He also erected a temple to Venus on Golgotha and a statue of Jupiter on the Holy Sepulcher (Kallinikos 9; Chadwick, The Early Church 29). Marcus Aurelius (161-180), Caesar and philosopher, initiated a new series of persecutions against the Christians, rescinding Hadrians moderate laws. Kallinikos believes this was due to the fact that he witnessed the calm and courageous attitude of Christians in the face of death. This attitude he perceived as an insult to his own Stoic virtue. His negative attitude toward Christianity was compounded by the fact that, in those days, any kind of catastrophe was blamed on the displeasure of the gods by the toleration the Romans showed towards the godless and atheistic Christians. The

102

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

persecution of Christians merely because they were Christians again became frequent, and torture was used to force them to denounce their faith. Kallinikos illustrates this point by recounting the life of Polycarp, who with Ignatius had been a disciple of Saint John, in 166, in Asia Minor, before he was burned alive in the arena of Smyrna: Wilt thou curse Christ? the proconsul threatened him. For eighty-six years have I served Him, and never has He done me wrong, answered the saint; how then shall I now speak evil of my Lord and Savior? The pagans sought to fasten him to the stake with nails, but Polycarp protested. Your precautions are needless, for God will grant me strength to stand unbound amid the flames. In 177, persecutions broke out more violently than ever before, especially in Southern Gaul, present day France. Many more martyrs succumbed to cruel tortures, among them the nonagenarian Bishop of the town, Pothinus, a slave girl, Blandina who died in the bull-ring, and Symphorian, beheaded for refusing to adore the image of Cybele. Moreover, to mock the Christian dogma of the resurrection of the dead, the pagans burnt the bodies of the martyrs and scattered their ashes on the waters of the Rhone, saying as they did so: Now we shall see if they will arise from the dead, and if their God has power enough to save them from our hands!. Yet, in spite of these persecutions, by the end of the second century, Christianity extended to the upper classes of society, and many high-class personages might wake up at night only to discover that their wives had gone to Christian nocturnal services, vigils and prayers (Chadwick, The Early Church 29). Septimus Severus (192-211), who initially were favorably disposed toward Christians for having been cured of a chronic disease, suddenly had a change of mind. He consequently issued a decree in 202 that prohibited the Christian confession and faith under the penalty of death. Yet this did not represent a general persecution. New martyrs from this round of persecutions included Leonidas, in Egypt, who was

103

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

beheaded. His fifteen-year old son, later the famous Origen, before he died, sent his father a letter admonishing him not to weaken in the face of martyrdom. Maximin (235238), who succeeded to the throne by murdering Alexander Severus, continued the persecution of Christians. Kallinikos says that Maximin expressed his hatred more particularly toward bishops because his predecessor, the eclectic Severus, had set up a bust of Christ in his chapel by the side of his statues of Apollonius and Orpheus and had cultivated relationships with church leaders. The initial and middle decades of the third century in Rome and the Empirethe era of Tertullian, of Hippolytus, of Clement and Cyprianwas a period of crisis, not only for the empire but for the Christian communities. There were many reasons for this crisis. One of them was external pressures on the empire caused by barbarian tribes. These invasions by the so-called barbarian tribes who invaded and ravaged the outlying provinces began during the reign of Marcus Aurelius (d. 180). In 235, serious pressure from Persia complicated the already complex political scene. In this situation Rome was struggling to survive with little prospect of success in controlling all its new enemies.. The Empire also experienced social, economic and political problems. Urban wealth was too dependent on slavery; and as long as the Roman armies were winning, supplies of slaves kept agriculture going, but with the series of defeats that began in the third century, the number of available slaves decreased, thus causing a decline in agricultural production. By the fourth century, the Empire began to suffer from severe shortages of labor and food, accompanied by widespread famine, chronic urban poverty, and disease. Another cause of the instability in the Roman Empire were the struggles over succession to the throne, this began with Marcus Aurelius. He had abandoned the practice whereby each emperor chose a successor that is capable of carrying out the duties of the imperial office. Thus, emperors simply became puppets of the military and

104

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

the government, leading to a succession of weak military dictatorships, with each one becoming more conservative and fossilized. But as Walker comments, the third century crisis and instability had a religious dimension as well. Never was the assistance of gods deemed so necessary for Rome and its individual subjects as it was during this time of crisis. One consequence of this social-political instability was the revival of the imperial cult (94-95). Emperor Decius (249-251) tried to restore Romes former glory by a return to the virtues and the gods that had made Rome great. In the very same year as his ascension, due to a popular uprising against Christians in Alexandria, Decius started a persecution, both systematic as well as universal or general. This was a new departure because until then persecutions were more or less local and mainly depended on the attitudes and whims of local provincial governors. Decius decreed that all inhabitants of the empire must call upon the gods for assistance by sacrificing to them and further, must prove that they had done so by getting official certificates (libelli) to that effect. Many people were forced against their conscience, through torture, to sacrifice to the Roman gods. As Origen and Cyprian, a disciple of Tertullian and Bishop of Carthage, recorded, there were masses of Christians who rushed to sacrifice or purchased the libelli from friendly officials (96). Men such as Alexander, Bishop of Jerusalem, Babylas of Antioch, and Fabian of Rome preferred martyrdom to apostasy (Kallinikos). As a matter of fact, Cyprian, who died as a martyr in 258, reinterpreted his received understanding of the Church in the light of its response to persecution, following Tertullians premise that there was no salvation outside the Church. He insisted that salvation could not be grounded on the purity and fidelity of Christians alone since many tried, for example, to avoid imprisonment or death by purchasing fraudulent certificates. Due to the schisms caused by persecutions, Cyprian dealt with the question

105

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

of the unity and holiness of the church by placing the responsibility for their maintenance on the bishop. This teaching led directly to the system of synodal government by bishops, a system which Cyprian encouraged and to which he submitted. For him even the bishop of Rome was the equal of his brethren (Walker 77-83). The persecution was brief because Decius went off on a campaign in the Danubian provinces and was killed. Yet, his successor, Valerian (253-260), renewing the anti-Christian policy of Decius, by exiling their bishops, attempted to make the Christian communities leaderless, and, therefore, more easily dissolvable. Yet, the bishops not only guided their flocks by letters but also spread the Gospel in their places of exile. Under Valerians reign the martyrs included Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage and Sixtus of Romem, and Deacon Lawrence who died because of being roasted or grilled (Kallinikos). The persecutions, undoubtedly, had a permanent effect on the life and selfunderstanding of the Christian churches. A further issue arose regarding the situation and readmission of the apostates, which created friction among the North African and Roman churches (Walker 97).

Illustration 19: Cyprian and Justina, two African Christians who died in martyrdom27

27

See: <http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/Stjustina.htm>.

106

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Under Diocletian came the most severe persecution of Christians. Ill-advised by his fanatical son-in-law Galerius and by certain Neo-Platonic philosophers, the emperor, in A.D. 303 published at Nicea his first edict against Christianity, and followed it immediately with three others. He was hoping, by restoring uniformity of religion, to weld together the fragments of his disintegrating empire. Kallinikos describes the effects of this persecution in the following manner: The Christian churches which had been built during the previous years of peace, were razed to the ground; the holy Scriptures were burnt, and bishops and priests were put to death. Christians who held public positions were stripped of their office. The prisons groaned with prisoners and the blood of martyrs flowed like a river.

Illustration 20: Diocletian coin28

Yet, he adds, that instead of obstructing the progress of the Gospel, by this time the number of Christians increased until they formed ten percent of the entire population of the Roman Empire. Even members of the upper class were converts, these included Prisca and Valeria, Diocletians wife and daughter. In 305, Diocletian became insane and abdicated. In 311, Galerius became fatally ill, and, relating it to his unjust dealing with the Christians, he issued an edict of toleration, signed jointly with his colleagues Constantinewho would become the first Roman Emperor to embrace Christianity

28

See: <www.upenn.edu/almanac/v48/n28/AncientTaxes.html>.

107

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

and Licinius, who even invited Christians to pray for him. Christianity seems finally to have triumphed over paganism (11). Although cruel, persecutions, generally, had not been continuous or systematic. Chadwick says that The sporadic nature of persecution, which often depended on local attitudes, and the fact that before the third century the government did not take Christianity seriously, gave the Church breathing space to expand and to deal with critical internal problems(The Early Church 29). There also were some emperors, like Heliogabalus (218-222), Alexander Severus (222-235), or Philip the Arabian (244-249) who for diverse reasons and different circumstances did not bother the Christians. All those peaceful intervals enabled Christians to reorganize and increase their numbers. But even if there were long periods of toleration and the persecutions were often local in character and of limited duration, the threat of persecution was always there. Christians knew that at any time this threat could become an urgent reality and the idea of martyrdom held a central place in their spiritual lives. Chadwick believes that the conviction that martyrdom would grant immediate entrance in paradise might have lead to a tendency toward provocation on the part of over-enthusiastic believers (The Early Church 30). Kallinikos gives us a clue to that possibility when he relates the events leading to the death of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, martyred in Rome before A.D. 117. He reproduces a conversation between Ignatius and the Emperor Trajan himself who happened to pass through Antioch during a campaign against the Parthians. Ignatius had appeared before him to intercede on behalf of his flock: Who art thou, evil spirit, who despisest my decrees? asked Trajan. A God-bearer cannot be called an evil spirit, replied Ignatius. And what man is a God-bearer? He who bears Christ in his bosom. Who is this Christ? He who was crucified under Pilate? I mean Him who crucified sin, my adored Lord. And thinkest thou that those whom we worship are no gods?

108

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

O king, you call the demons gods, for there is one God alone, He who created heaven and earth. Very good, said Trajan; I command that this man, who says he bears within him the crucified Christ, be sent in chains to Rome, and be torn to pieces by wild beasts for the entertainment of the Roman people. When he heard the Emperors decision, Ignatius gave praise to God that he was to be glorified by the same end as the Apostle Paul had suffered; and, following his guards, he made the long journey to Rome, where before thousands of spectators he was thrown into the Coliseum and devoured by wild beasts. (8) Generally Christians responded to persecutions seeing it as a way of sharing the suffering of their Lord, the way by which he had overcome evil. Dying as a martyr was the glorious culmination of a struggle which led to eternal life. Thus, this struggle was directed against Satan rather than the Romans. The Roman Empire was perceived as a means to keep evil under relative control: 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are Gods ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Rom. 13:1-7) We also see this in the First Epistle of Peter: 12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you. (4:12) 13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; 14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. (2: 13-14) For them Rome was not the real source of evil but a force, which, in Gods providence, caused things to become worse (Walker 53). Yet, there also were Christians who tended to the opposite extreme of Gnosticism and argued that pagan gods were simply non-

109

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

existent; thus it did not really matter if one offered incense in honor of the emperor or ate meat that had been offered in sacrifice of idols (Chadwick, The Early Church 31). The conflicting three-century encounter of Christians with the Roman empire and with paganism, which has given so many inspiring heroes of the faith to the Church, ended when Constantine the Greathonored by the Church as Isoapostol or equal to an Apostleestablished Christianity as the official religion. In A.D. 306, he had succeeded his father, Constantius Chlorus, as Caesar ruling over Gaul, Britain and Spain. Influenced by his eclectic father and his mother Helena, a devout Christian, Constantine foresaw the new faith as the religion of the future. In addition, an episode which took place in A.D. 312 further strengthened this belief. As he was marching towards Rome on a campaign against his colleague Maxentius, Augustus of the West, saw the sign of the Cross mysteriously traced on the sky, with the words By this conquer. He then placed the Cross on the shields of his army and defeated his rival army. This victory over the pagan Maxentius was the victory of Christianity over paganism. In 313, Constantine, who had become the sole ruler of the west, and his colleague in the east, Licinius, issued the Edict of Milan, which proclaimed the official toleration of the Christian faith and favored the propagation of the Gospel in an unprecedented way. The two augusti were in Milan to celebrate the wedding of Constantines sister with Licinius. This is the text of the edict: When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I, Licinius Augustus, fortunately met near Mediolanurn (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule. And thus by this wholesome counsel and most upright provision we thought to arrange that no one whatsoever should be denied the opportunity to give his heart to the

110

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

observance of the Christian religion, of that religion which he should think best for himself, so that the Supreme Deity, to whose worship we freely yield our hearts) may show in all things His usual favor and benevolence. Therefore, your Worship should know that it has pleased us to remove all conditions whatsoever, which were in the rescripts formerly given to you officially, concerning the Christians and now any one of these who wishes to observe Christian religion may do so freely and openly, without molestation. We thought it fit to commend these things most fully to your care that you may know that we have given to those Christians free and unrestricted opportunity of religious worship. When you see that this has been granted to them by us, your Worship will know that we have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship for the sake of the peace of our times, that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases; this regulation is made we that we may not seem to detract from any dignity or any religion. Moreover, in the case of the Christians especially we esteemed it best to order that if it happens anyone heretofore has bought from our treasury from anyone whatsoever, those places where they were previously accustomed to assemble, concerning which a certain decree had been made and a letter sent to you officially, the same shall be restored to the Christians without payment or any claim of recompense and without any kind of fraud or deception, Those, moreover, who have obtained the same by gift, are likewise to return them at once to the Christians. Besides, both those who have purchased and those who have secured them by gift, are to appeal to the vicar if they seek any recompense from our bounty, that they may be cared for through our clemency. All this property ought to be delivered at once to the community of the Christians through your intercession, and without delay. And since these Christians are known to have possessed not only those places in which they were accustomed to assemble, but also other property, namely the churches, belonging to them as a corporation and not as individuals, all these things which we have included under the above law, you will order to be restored, without any hesitation or controversy at all, to these Christians, that is to say to the corporations and their conventicles: providing, of course, that the above arrangements be followed so that those who return the same without payment, as we have said, may hope for an indemnity from our bounty. In all these circumstances you ought to tender your most efficacious intervention to the community of the Christians, that our command may be carried into effect as quickly as possible, whereby, moreover, through our clemency, public order may be secured. Let this be done so that, as we have said above, Divine favor towards us, which, under the most important circumstances we have already experienced, may, for all time, preserve and prosper our successes together with the good of the state. Moreover, in order that the statement of this decree of our good will may come to the notice of all, this rescript, published by your decree, shall be announced everywhere and brought to the knowledge of all, so that the decree of this, our benevolence, cannot be concealed. (Galerius and Constantine: Edicts of Toleration 311/313)) In 323 he broke with Licinius and after defeating him and being proclaimed sole ruler, he soon proceeded to manifest his interest in Christianity by more vigorous measures. He restored to the Christian communities property that had been confiscated

111

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

from them by the civil authorities, and conferred on them the right to receive gifts and bequests. For the first time, he introduced into the army a monotheistic form of prayer; supplied churches with copies of sacred Scriptures, appointed Sunday as a holiday, and forbade crucifixion as a method of execution for criminals. In 324, Constantine moved his imperial capital from Rome to Byzantium, on the shores of the Bosporus, where he built a new capital, Constantinople (dedicated in 330). From here, in 325, as we will see when dealing with the history of Byzantium, he summoned Nicea to hold what it would be the first of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. He helped his mother to find the True Cross on Golgotha and to build the Holy Sepulcher. In 330, he built Constantinople, on the site of old Byzantium by the Bosphorus and called it New Rome, to mark it as the starting-point of his new life, cut off for ever from the abominations of Ancient Rome. But Constantine was clever enough to avoid making sudden changes which might arouse resentment and hamper his work of reform; thus, he instigated no persecutions against the pagans, and retained the title of Pontifex Maximus as an inseparable adjunct to his imperial status. Fifty years later, the Emperor Theodosius carried this policy even further when he legislated Christianity as the only accepted religion of the Empire, while outlawing paganism. When persecutions ceased to be a major concern, the idea did not disappear but took other forms, especially the monastic life, another form of so-called white martyrdom equal to bodily death (Kallinikos; St. Tikhons Monastery, These truths we hold: The Holy Orthodox Church: her life and teaching).

Activity 1. List the main Roman persecutions and add a short summary of each of them to the list. 2. How did Christians react to them?
Activity 17: Roman Persecutions

112

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

But the shift of the capital of the empire to Constantinople under Constantine meant that the huge machine of government patronage and wealth had migrated from Rome itself, leaving only the bishop of Rome to dispense and, for all practical purposes, administer the areas of land in and around Rome itself. Resulting shortages of population also left Roman armies chronically underpowered and much less able to defend the frontiers than was true two centuries earlier. The military rejuvenation of 260-300 A.D. improved Roman administration and military efficiency in the short term, but in the long term could not overcome simple disadvantages of manpower which caused the definite fall of the empire and led to Alarics sacking of Rome in 410 (Philip Gavitt, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire). As Hopko says, in Second Century: Persecution and Faith, the severe attacks on the Christian community proved to strengthen faith as well as require the church to defend the truth that was handed down to them by Christ and the Apostles. The idea of martyrdom has a prominent place in the Orthodox Churchs understanding of spirituality, a church which could be said to be founded upon bloodnot only the blood of Christ but also the blood of those other Christs, the martyrs. When the Church became established in Constantines reign, the idea of martyrdom took the form of monastic life, as the Greek writers often claimed.

4. DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEOLOGY OF THE EARLY CHURCH Archbishop Chrysostomos and Bishop Auxentios, in Introduction to Scripture and Tradition, delineate two levels of theology in the Orthodox Church, two ways at which the divine truth can be approached. The first one or essential theology springs from the spirit of the Church, from the spiritual vision of the God-bearing Fathers. This type of experience is not the domain or concern of the scholar. It cannot be separated

113

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

from the spiritual life itself. Chrysostomos and Ausentios give the example of the great luminary of Orthodoxy, St. Gregory Palamas, who is characterized by the Church as the perfection of monks, the wonder working Gregory, a preacher of Grace, and, as a consequence of this, theologian invincible among theologians. They add that: In bestowing the title theologian on so few of the Fathers (and only on several, formally), the Orthodox Church pays great homage to the truth which She embodies, which is inextricably bound to the spiritual life which She directs, guides, and imparts to the humble and Faithful: a truth which is the highest form of theology, a spiritual knowledge of God. This is a changeless, revealed theology, which we will not deal with in this section. The second form of theology, which the Orthodox Church allows us, they assert, is secondary theology. It primarily concerns the explication of the spiritual life, according to, and consistent with, the divine revelation, the revealed truth of essential theology. In this secondary theology, we focus our efforts on approaching God in a form of a mental discipline as we recognize the crucial importance of essential theology and, consequently, remaining true to Patristic tradition. Secondary theology can help us in our endeavors to understand what is incomprehensible. Thus Orthodox theologians need to be aware that the relationship between Scripture and Tradition is of great relevance in the history of Orthodox theological thought. From the time of the Apostles to understand this relationship was crucial to the Christian Church. Heretics such as Arius misused the Scripture and ruptured with Tradition, with the truth of the Fathers. Chrysostomos and Ausentios state that: It is imperative that we understand, then, the singular attitude of the Orthodox Church toward Scripture and Tradition. To do so is to understand the correct, true attitude of the Church. After all, it was out of the Orthodox Church Herself that Scripture arose. It was in the bosom of the Church that Scripture and Tradition matured. They are her domain and She alone fully and correctly understands them. If the Orthodox Church is the historical Church, then She embodies the historical Truth of Christianity. Understanding this, we can dispense with the dangerous trend, among some Orthodox, to understand Scripture and Tradition in non-Orthodox ways, to distort the image and icon of Truth contained in Holy Scripture and expressed in all Tradition. Those who

114

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

advocate current western-style Bible studies, concentrating on a spiritually dangerous dissection of Scripture (as though it were human poetry or a literary text, the truth of which is open to textual analysis), are obviously motivated by an improper understanding of Orthodoxy. George Florovsky, in St Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers, makes reference to a phrase such as Following the Holy Fathers, used normatively by the early Church to introduce its doctrinal statements. This was so, for example, in the opening of the Decree of Chalcedon. Another example is the more elaborate phrase used in the Seventh Ecumenical Councilsummoned to solve the serious iconoclastic crisisto introduce its decision: Following the Divinely inspired teaching of the Holy Fathers and the Tradition of the Catholic Church. Florovsky explains regarding this normative term of reference that: Following the Holy Fathers... This is not a reference to some abstract tradition, in formulas and propositions. It is primarily an appeal to holy witnesses. Indeed, we appeal to the Apostles, and not just to an abstract Apostolicity. In the similar manner do we refer to the Fathers. The witness of the Fathers belongs, intrinsically and integrally, to the very structure of Orthodox belief. The Church is equally committed to the kerygma of the Apostles and to the dogma of the Fathers. (St Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers) Stilianopoulos states that for the Fathers, the Bible was both a book of God and a book of the Church, and they approached it with a certain freedom and boldness. Their focus was on the spirit rather than the letter of Scripture. Stylianopoulos thinks that modern western theology is often derived neither from Scripture nor the classic Christian tradition, as is Orthodox theology, a theology which is based on both the ecclesial as well as an intense spiritual or prayer life, but primarily from Renaissance humanism and Enlightenment philosophy. Biblical scholarship has often rendered itself irrelevant to the life of both Church and society by a gravitational pull toward historical, philological, and technical preoccupations. However, Orthodox theology, he adds, holds to a personal and dynamic, rather than mechanistic and verbal, concept of inspiration. Stylianopoulos says:

115

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

God did not merely dictate words or propositions to passive authors, but rather he impacted personally their whole beings, allowing them actively to comprehend, interpret, and convey his will to others according to the limitations of their understanding and language. It is important to note that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit embraces a far deeper and broader process than the composition of single books. Inspiration involves the entire community of faith, the life of a particular author, the composition of particular books, as well as their gradual gathering into a sacred collection. Consequently, Orthodox theologians have strong ecclesial and doctrinal anchors, and this, he adds, have spared them from the western turmoil. In Orthodoxy, patristic and doctrinal interests have held their sway, avoiding repeating the errors of their western colleagues errors. Although in Part II I will return to the discussion of systematic theology as held by the Orthodox Catholic Tradition, there are four main points we should take into account before I start this analysis of the theological development of the early church in the pre-Nicean period. Firstly, in Orthodox theology, a theologian cannot neglect Tradition as it is uncovered in history. Thus, the combination of historical and systematic methods of approach are justified. Secondly, there are two levels of theology in Orthodox theology closely interrelated: essential theology, which springs from the spirit of the Church, from the spiritual vision of the God-bearing Fathers; and secondary theology, which concerns the explication of the spiritual life, according to the revealed truth of the essential theology. Thirdly, generally, the theology of this pre-Nicean period and that of the Byzantine period was not a positive one, but a negative one, based on condemning distortions from orthodox, Christian truth. And, fourthly, when specifically dealing with the following pre-Nicean period, we cant expect doctrinal homogeneity or uniformity. This is seen, for example, in the different theological conceptions between Irenaeus and Tertullian and Clement and OrigenOrigen was later regarded as a heretic.

116

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Activity 1. Explain the Orthodox concept of theology. 2. What is the difference with the western concept?
Activity 18: Orthodox theology

THE LATE FIRST CENTURY: THE CENTRALITY OF CHRIST A Time Framework In the 50s of the first century Paul produced the earliest surviving Christian documents (1 The., Gal., Phil. I and II, and Rom.). By the mid-60s death had come to him as well as to the most famous of the earlier generationthose who along with Paul had known Jesus or had seen the risen JesusPeter and James: 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. (I Cor. 15:2-8) This first generation of Christians contributed to the production of more permanent works. Letters/epistles continued to be an important means of Christian communication even if they were not written by Paul himself. This is the case of II Thess., Col., Eph., and the Pastoral letters attributed by many to the category of deutero-Pauline composed in the period of 70-100, after Pauls death. This must have been so, Brown explains, because they were composed by Pauls disciples and admirers who dealt with the same problems of the post-70 era by giving advise they thought faithfully to Pauls mind. These letters, while still dealing with the problems of false teachers or counterfeit letters, had a more permanent and universal mood. According to many scholars, to this period also belongs epistles attributed by name to Peter, James and Jude, which address the problem of later Christian generation, and also have a more universal and permanent mood (5-6).

117

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Finally, according to the common scholar perspective, somewhere in the 60s or just after the 70s, the Gospel according to Mark was written, offering an account of Jesus that was remarkably absent from the letters. Yet, logically, it was colored by experiences originated from decades that separated Jesus from the Jesus tradition. Ten or twenty years afterwards, the Gospel according to Matthew and to Luke were written. And between the year 90 and 100 the Gospel by John, which offered a Jesus tradition different from Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Yet, despite their coloring, the canonical gospels were overall important to preserve for late-first century readers a memory of Jesus that did not perish when eyewitnesses died. However none of the Gospels mentions the name of an author and it is quite possible that none was written by the authors attached to them at the end of the second century: John Mark, companion of Paul and then of Peter; Matthew, one of the Twelve; Luke, companion of Paul; and John, one of the Twelve. Notwithstanding, these names represent the assertion that Jesus was seen in a perspective faithful to the first and second generation of witnesses and preachers. Other non-epistolar writings of the post70 period are the Acts of the Apostles, by Luke, which, intended to be a second part of his Gospel, addressed the problems of the Christian movement and to the interpretation of its life; the Book of Revelation, included later in the canon as well as the Johannine letters, which is an example of apocalyptic literature with roots in Ezekiel and Zechariah. All these Christian compositionsmost likely written between the years 50 and 150were placed at the same authoritative level as the Jewish Scriptures (Brown 7-10).

118

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Activity For each of the following dates, provide information about Christian authors and writings of the first century: 50s: Paul produces: 60s 70-100 post-70 period 90-100
Activity 19: Christian writings of the first century.

Efforts of early Christians to live by the message about Jesus All these writings of the first century Christians responded to the need of the life of the churches and of a settled authoritative apostolic tradition to afford the basis for their self-understanding. The Christian community became aware that it lived by the message about Jesus as that was based on his own life and teaching and proclaimed by the witness of the leaders and founders of the earliest communities (Walker 34). According to Walker, the most important issue for the churches of this period was understanding the significance of Jesus in and through the events in his ministry, death and resurrection. Reflection on this Christological issue started with the same perspective which had inspired the preaching and faith of the primitive community: The experience of Jesus as risen, which was accompanied by the gift of the Holy Spirit: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. (Acts 2:32-33) 20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the LORD. 21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. (John 20:20-22) The significance of Jesus resurrection was soon expressed in messianic categories. God would send him to fulfill all things: 119

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3:20-21) 10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. (I Thess. 1:10) We see in these quotes how the attention is focused on the resurrection and the eschatonJesus, the bearer of salvation will be Gods representative on the last day.

Activity Read Acts 13: 48; I Cor. 15:23; Rom. 1: 3-4 and copy words, phrases, or sentences having to do with these two aspects of the risen Jesus and his messianic character.
Activity 20: The Risen Jesus and his Messianic character

The messianic character also lies behind the primitive use of the titles Son of Man and the Lord. But the resurrection of Jesus also pointed towards the future, the destiny of all believers. Thus in early Christian theology the Christ appears no only as the bearer of the kingdom but as the one in whom believers discover their own true identity because they share in his life and find their own lives transformed in him (Walker 35-36): 24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father. (I John 2: 24) 11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren. (Heb. 2:11) It is in the Pauline letters where we best find this sense of oneness expressed: 3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection ... (Rom 6: 2-5)

120

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Activity Activity Read Gal. 2:20; Col. 3:3; Rom. 12:5; I Cor. 12:12 and copy words, phrases, or sentences having to do with the oneness of the believers with Christ.
Activity 21: Oneness of believers with Christ

Paul also sees Christ as the last Adam (1 Cor. 17:47) in whom the identity of the new humanity is realized as the embodiment of the new humanity. Believers enter into his identity by means of their faith. But Paul goes beyond his portrayal of Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, Lord and as the Second Adam to interpret not only the resurrection but also the ministry and life of Jesus as springing from Gods initiative: 4 But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons (Gal. 4:4). Therefore Jesus is not only the Christ by his resurrection and his return to restore all things but as the bearer of Gods redeeming action.

Activity Read Acts 2:23; Rom. 3:25; I Cor. 15: 3, and copy words, phrases, or sentences having to do with Christ as an expiator.
Activity 22: Christ as an Expiator

In the Gospels we also see how the significance initially assigned to Jesus in the light of his resurrection is now perceived in his life and ministry as well. Mark, for example, traces back the status of Jesus as Son of God to the very beginning of his public careerto his baptism by John. Consequently, the messianic and Adamic dimension are his from the very beginning of his story. Jesus, through his career, is, therefore, the very embodiment of Gods purposes and the one in whom they are carried out. But this conviction gave rise to another, whose origins can be also found in Pauls

121

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

attempt to deal with those in the community of Corinth who claimed to possess a superior understanding of the mystery of God. They thought they had a special insight into the transcendent wisdom of God. Paul gave answer to this early strain of Gnosticism by saying that: 23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men (I Cor.1: 23.25) In order to stop these converts from looking for that wisdom everywhere, he identifies the crucified Jesus with Gods wisdom. He takes the meaning of these ideas quite serious and continues to develop them: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist (Col. 1: 15-17). This leads to the Christology formulated in Johns Gospel, where wisdom appears as Logos, 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. (John 1: 1-9) This Logos pre-exists creation itself and became flesh and dwelt among us. (John 8:58). This Christology of the incarnation became the center of Christian literature at the end of the first century and at the beginning of the second. For example, it appears in the letters of Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch (Syria), polemicizing against Docetism (the view that the fleshy, bodily side of Jesus is mere appearance) and in a document

122

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

called I Clement, written around the year 95, a letter from the Roman congregation to that of Corinth (Walker 39-40).

Activity Briefly, in your own words, summarize the interpretation of Jesus by the late first century Christians.
Activity 23: Interpretation of Jesus by first century Christians

SECOND AND THIRD CENTURY: APOSTOLIC FATHERS, APOLOGISTS, HERESIES, NEW TESTAMENT CANON, TRADITION By the year 100, Christianity had disseminated in Asia Minor, Syria, Macedonia, Greece, the city of Rome, and probably in Egypt. The unity of the scattered Christian communities relied on two things: on a common faith and on a common way of ordering their life in worship. They called each other brother; they were bound together by the focus on the person of Christ. The pattern of worshipbaptism, the sacred mealderived its meaning from its reference to him. Although it was viewed as a difficult pastoral problem, exclusion from the Christian community was used to control serious moral faults. Another thorny question concerned decisions regarding intellectual deviation from Christian doctrine that might require censure. Once the missionaries disseminated and went beyond the Jewish ambit, they were not speaking in a vacuum. They found themselves in world of pagan syncretism, magic and astrology. Even the God of the Jews was identified with Dionysus or Saturn (since they reverenced Saturday). Yet the Christians must have amazed the Gentile world, accustomed to myths of great heroes (Heracles or Asclepius), when hearing about the humble beginnings of their divine redeemer (Chadwick, The Early Church 33).

123

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

The Apostolic Fathers Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, in an above-mentioned letter (ca. 111113) to Emperor Trajan referring to Christianity talks about the infection of this superstition, testifying to the liveliness of the Christian movement. There was also a great amount of literature which indicates this liveliness not only in works such as the Johannine letters or the Revelation to John, but also in works by others traditionally called the Apostolic Fathers: Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, the author of the Didache or Epistula Apostolorum, the author of the Epistle of Barnabas, as well as Hermas and Papias.

The Apostolic Fathers were authors of non biblical church writings of the 1st and early 2nd centuries. These works are important because their authors presumably knew the Apostles or their associates. The first list of the Apostolic Fathers was made by 17th-century scholars; it comprised Clement I, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, and the author of the Epistle of Barnabas. Later, other writers such as Papias of Hierapolis and the authors of the Epistle to Diognetus and of the Didache were also considered Apostolic Fathers. Expressing pastoral concern, their writings are similar in style to the New Testament. Some of their writings, in fact, were venerated as Scripture before the official canon was decided. (Elwell) Table 6: Concept of Apostolic Fathers

The period of time covered by this literature extends from the last two decades of the first century until the middle of the second century. In a geographical sense, Clement and Hermas represent Rome; Polycarp and Ignatius, Smyrna; Papia, Phyrigia; the Didache, Egypt or Syria; and the letter of Barnabas, Alexandria. These writings are very important for the history of Early Christianity. In the Didache, for example, we find a description of the Christian Sacraments: Baptize as follows: after explaining all of these points, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in running water ... (Didache 7, 1). Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those who are baptized in the name of the Lord ... (Didache 9). On the Lords own Day, assemble in common to break bread and give thanks (i.e., the eucharist, which means thanksgiving); but first confess your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure.

124

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

However, no one quarrelling with his brother may join your assembly until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled (Didache 14).29

I Clement II Clement Writings of Ignatius Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians Martyrdom of Polycarp Didache Epistle of Barnabas Shepherd of Hermas Fragments of Papias Epistle to Diognetus Table 7: Writings of the Apostolic Fathers

Illustration 21: A fragment of the Dichache30

Activity In your own words, who where the Apostolic Fathers?

Activity 24: The Apostolic Fathers

29 30

Qtd. in Hopko (2005). See: <www.pravoslavieto.com>.

125

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Apologists Between around 130 and 180 there arose a new genre of Christian literature: the apology or a speech for the defense of Christian beliefs. In the face of persecutions, Christians were not only forced to bear witness in suffering but also to defend their faith. They were called the Apologistsoften included within the list of the Apostolic Fathers. The first of these writers was Quadratus, who wrote an apology to emperor Hadrian in 125. Others were Aristide, who sent his arguments to Antoninus Pious in about 140; Justin Martyr, the most prominent of the apologists, already mentioned, who wrote about the middle of the century; Tatian, Justins Martyr disciple; Melito of Sardis, who wrote between 169 and 180; Athenagoras, and the bishop Theophilus of Antioch. Walkers states that although there is no evidence of these writings greatly influencing heathen opinion, they were greatly valued by Christians because they provided the first reasonable explications of the Church tenets (54). As expressed in his Apology (c. 152 A.D.), Justin, a Platonist, according to Walker, believed that Christianity was the oldest, truest, and most divine of philosophies because it was the wisdom revealed by God himself through the prophets first of all, but then in his own Son (54). The idea of the divine Logos was at the center of his apologetic, a divine Logos that was born as a human being of a virgin, and given the name of Jesus, and was crucified and died and rose and ascended into heaven (I Apol. 46.5). His apology opens by arguing about the injustice and irrationality of punishing Christians for the mere reason of their names and not for proven criminal acts. He insisted that they were not atheists, but worshipped the true God; that they were not seditionist for the Kingdom of God was a human kingdom; and that they were not criminals, but inculcated a strict morality in accordance with Jesus teaching and tried to promote peace and decency (Walker 54-55).

126

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Illustration 22: Justin31

Activity 1. According to Walker, why were the Apologists writings greatly valued by Christians? 2. Search the web for Justins life and his two main worksDialogue with Trypho and Apologyand write a) a short biography, complementing that of the Glossary, and b) a brief exposition of his apologetic. If possible, quote from his works to illustrate your points.
Activity 25: Justin

For Walker, Justins theology, and his belief that Jesus was the concrete human presence of the universal and creative Reason of God and the very principle of the world-order, laid the basis for an open dialogue between Christian faith and the tradition of the Gentile religious philosophy, and in that sense marks the beginning for a scientific theology (56). Gnosticism But during the lifetime of Justin Martyr, according to Walker, a period between 130 and 160 A.D., there arose a debate which had its roots in the first century. The debate was between groups which came to be called Gnostic and the supporters of a

31

See: <www.catholic-forum.com>.

127

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

common-sense interpretation of the churchs teaching tradition. The debate dealt with difficult and fundamental issues such as the nature of evil, the meaning of God, or the character of redemption as well as how the language of the churchs catechesis was to be interpreted. It forced significant development not only in the Christian theological tradition but also in the institutions by which the tradition was shaped and transmitted (Walker 61). Chadwick places this movement between 80-150 AD, starting with the moment it broke with the early church. Some time before, as noted, among the Gentile converts, Paul had already found but at Corinth and at Colossae many doctrinal tendencies he disapproved of and tried to correct. They were types of heresies that could already be grouped under the concept Gnosticism, and which could pose a serious threat to the early church. This movement, by the early second century, produced literature as seen in the writings of the great Gnostic teachers Basilides and Valentinus.

Some New Testament writers, namely Paul, John, Peter and Jude, already repudiated Gnostic thought in their writings. Some examples are below (Robert Jones). Heresy Refuted Gnosticism? Judaizers; Gnosticism? Gnosticism (Asceticism) Gnosticism (Antinomianism) Gnosticism (Docetism) Gnosticism (Docetism) Gnosticism (Antinomianism) Denouncer Paul Paul Paul Peter John John Jude References 2 Cor.11:4 Gal 1:6-9;2:4-6 Col 2:21-23 2 Pet 2:1-22 1 John 4:1-5 2 John 1:7-11 Jude 1:4-19 Rev 2:2,6

Nicolatians (see Acts 6:5) John (Jesus) (Antinomianism?)

Table 8: New Testament writers and their denouncement of heresies

According to Chadwick, Gnosticism drew from Platonism, Hellenized Zoroastrianism, and Judaism. It was not a uniform phenomenon. It cannot be traced back to one thought, since it is a combination of many religious thoughts. Gnosticism 128

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

was eclectic and appeared to assimilate any new doctrine which seemed appealing, and when Christianity was introduced, Gnostic identified in it certain aspects they found appealing. These second century sects declared to have a special knowledge that surpassed the simple faith of the church. Many of these Gnostic sects were Christians who embraced mystical theories of the true nature of Jesus or the Christ. They were out of step with the teachings of orthodox Christian faith. For example, salvation for them consisted in the liberation of the spirit, which is enslaved because of its union with material things and was achieved through special knowledge or gnosis the word the terms gnosis is derived from. Gnostics in general also taught Docetism, the belief that Jesus did not have a physical body, but rather his apparent physical body was an illusion, and hence his crucifixion was not bodily.
The response of the established church to early Christian Gnosticism was to solidify a creed, or basic statement of beliefs, that was in marked contrast to Gnostic beliefs. The resulting Apostles Creed came out of the 2nd century church, starting out as a baptismal liturgy, and eventually became the standard statement of Christian belief. In the chart below, notice the Gnostic ideas that are refuted by the Creed: (Robert Jones) Apostles Creed I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth Born of the virgin Mary Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried I believe...in the resurrection of the body Gnostic Idea Refuted ONE God, not two; God made material as well as heavenly things Jesus was NOT just a spirit Christ was a real person, who existed in historical time Material things are not innately evil (see also Gen 1:31)

Table 9: Response of the Church to 2nd century Gnosticism

Chadwick also says that the principal idea derived by Gnosticism from Christianity was the idea of redemption, although not all Gnostic sects considered Jesus as a redeemer, and in their schemes of things he frequently occupied a very subordinate role. Their idea of redemption differed from that of Christians as they interpreted it that one is redeemed from destiny and not from the consequences of responsible action and

129

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

this redemption was bestowed on a pre-determined elect, the people of the spirit,32 in whom alone was the divine spark (The Early Church 33-38)

Your Own research Write a three-page paper on Gnosticism. Study its origin, authors, and main doctrines.
Activity 26: Paper on Gnosticism

Marcionism Gnostics also depreciated the Old Testament by contrasting the God of the Old Testament as the god of justice with the loving Father taught by Jesus. This antithesis worked well for Marcion (100-160), from Asia Minor, the most formidable of heretics. He wrote a book entitled Anthithesis in which, among other things, he delineates contradictions between the Old and the New Testament trying to prove that the God of the Jews was different from the God and Father of Jesus. Marcion was excommunicated in 144 (Chadwick, The Early Church 39). Yet, paradoxically, Marcion played a role in catalyzing the formation of the New Testament cannon. His biased selection of a particular Christian canon favorable to his ideas influenced the churchs decision not only to maintain the Old Testament, as Gods word for the Christian peopleMarcion rejected the Old Testamentto have the four Gospels instead of one and a larger portion of apostolic letters, at least thirteen letters instead of ten. Moreover, an expansion might include the Acts of the Apostles, thus favoring the twelve companions of Jesus. The same instinct for favoring the twelve must have

The Christian Gnostics of the second century recognized three classes of human persons: a) those perhaps the paganscaught hopelessly in the world of flesh and destined to destruction; b) the psychics apparently the ordinary Christian believerwho belonged to the God of Jewish Scriptures and were destined to second class salvation; and c) the spirituals the Gnostics themselves, with their destiny in the Fullness of the divine worlds (Walker 65). The three classes were determined from eternity.

32

130

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

been the rationale for including I Pet and I John, in the decades just before and after A.D. 200. The remaining seven works (Heb., Rev., Jas., II and III John, Jude, and II Pet) were not commonly accepted until the late 4th century. A fourteenth letter (Heb.) was also accepted by this time. Both the Greek East and the Latin West agreed on the canon of 27 books, this common ground and agreement also meant the possibility of increasing communion between them. Even Origen went to the West, to Rome, which struggled against Marcion, to learn about the biblical views of the church where Peter and Paul had been martyred (Brown 14-15).

Valentinus, who adapted the principles of the heresy called Gnostic to the peculiar character of his own school (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 11) Marcion expressly and openly used the knife, not the pen, since he made such an excision of the Scriptures as suited his own subject-matter. (Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics) Table 10: Response of Early Church Fathers on heresy

Activity Why was Marcion important for the formation of the New Testament canon?
Activity 27: Marcion and New Testament canon

The New Testament, which constitutes the total apostolic witness for the Church, arose out of a need for authoritative teaching on God and Jesus Christ. By the year 397 A.D., councils from Churches had agreed on the 27 books now forming the New Testament, and arrived at this decision based on the authority of the texts themselves. Basically, any text unquestioningly ascribed to an Apostle of Jesus was included in the Canon; and any text unquestioningly ascribed to a disciple of an Apostle (e.g., Mark and the Gospel of Mark) was included. There were several texts included that were not unanimously believed to have been written by such authors, but these texts received their inclusion as they: a) possessed self-evident authority; b) were not heretical (as based on Apostolic teaching); c) had been used extensively in part of the Church for some time; and d) were written within a relatively short period after Jesus death, to ensure eye-witness authority (http://www.1way2god.net/ntc). Table 11: The Formation of the New Testament canon

Your Own Research Now read The Formation of the New Testament by Stephen Voorwinde Professor 131

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

of New Testamentin http://www.pastornet.net.au/rtc/canon.htm and make a summary of these points: The New Testament Canon before 140 The New Testament Canon between 140 and 220 The Third and Fourth Centuries (220-400) Theological Reflection If you cannot find this article, look for similar ones in the Web
Activity 28: Formation of the New Testament

Montanism Marcions teaching as well as the contemporary polemic about the fusion of Christian faith with Gnosticism joined and led to a crisis of self-understanding in the churches, a crisis which worsened by a third movementthe New Prophecywhich rose and spread during the last decades of the second century. This movement was called Montanism, after its founder, Montanus, a Christian convert also from Asia Minor. Around the year 170, he began to proclaim that he was a prophet who taught a new prophecy. Along with his followers he represented a revival of the apocalyptic spirit and announced the forthcoming end of the world. Within a decade, Montanism spread through Asia Minor, Syria and Antioch and was known in Rome and the West by the end of a decade. Tertullian, a Christian writer, was converted to it. He was not attracted by its apocalypticism but by its seriousness and moral rigor (Walker 69-70). The main effect of Montanism on the Catholic church was that of reinforcing the conviction that revelation had come to an end with the apostolic age (Chadwick, The Early Church 40). Credal-confessional tradition, authority, New Testament canon A survey of the literature clearly reveals that, in the opening decades of the second century, Christianity underwent a period of conflict and debate. Walkers says that there were questions: 132

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

about the meaning and value of the churchs Scriptures, which at this time were the traditional scriptures of Judaism; about the framework of beliefs and values within which the proclamation of Jesus and the resurrection was to be understood; about the order of communities and the style of life which Christians were called upon to lead (43). Yet, there was agreement regarding the belief that the churchs teaching and

practice had to be consistent with its origins in the work of Christ and of the first generation of his disciples. This common agreement is clear from the regularity with which early Christian writings are attributed to one of the Twelve or to all of them like the Didache. There existed other indices of unity and continuity with the apostles, such as baptism, the celebration of the Lords supper, certain disciplines, and aspects of a particular lifestyle to be followed that would include things such as fasting, prayer, monogamy, almsgiving, and charity (Walker 44). Thus, at the end of the second century, neither Gnosticism, Marcionism, nor Montanism was sufficiently attractive to draw many Christians towards them. The controversies in the middle and late second century compelled the church to make decisions.It was a process during which it defined its moral and doctrinal teachings as well as issues concerning ecclesiology. As far as the latter is concerned what is probably most remarkable was that the church established and acknowledged itself as a distinctive institution, seeing itself as the definite embodiment of its catholic, apostolic tradition. This self-understanding of the Church defined itself as apostolic Christianity, a Christianity that consists of and is based upon the articulation of the credalconfessional tradition and the emerging New Testament canon. There was no conflict between these two rules of faith, in fact they complimented each other, because the credal tradition simply summarized the basic and obvious truths of the prophetic and apostolic scriptures. In this way, moreover, it provided the church with the necessary

133

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

key for the interpretation of the more obscure parts of the scriptures, which ruled out gnosticizing and other heretical exegesis (Walker 73-74). According to Meyendorff, in the East, the definition of canon of the Scripture did not receive its final form before the Synod of Trullo (692). This Synod endorsed the so-called longer canon, which included the apocryphaOld Testament books preserved in Aramaic and in Greek. Yet several earlier Fathers were in favor of the shorter or Hebrew canon. As this theologian says, even John of Damascus thought Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus as admirable, but did not include them in the canon. Additionally, the Book of Revelation was generally omitted from the canon, and is never used in the liturgy of Byzantium (The Byzantine Legacy 32). In this train of thought, Chadwick states, the basic difficulty raised by Marcion or Valentinus was to know on what authoritative ground or normative standard these and other heterodox doctrines could be refuted. Thus, authority was the central issue. What was and must be the only and true interpretation of the Old and New Testament? This question could also be phrased in other ways, for example: Who at present and it future occupy the learned chairs of the apostles and who could give clear guidance to bewildered believers? Where could one find reliable evidence concerning the teachings of the apostles? Chadwick delineates three weapons of orthodox defense: 1) Ignatius of Antioch insisted upon the local bishop as the focus of unitywithout him, the lifegiving sacraments could not be administered; in Rome, Clement, supported the idea, when he realized that members of the church of Corinth church were deposing their leaders, those of the sacred order in direct lineage and in valid succession from the apostles. The teaching given by bishops of Rome or Antioch were the same as that of the Apostles. 2) The gradual formation of the New Testament canon. 3) The rule of faith, a term used by Irenaeus and Tertullian to mean a short summary of the main revelatory events of the redemptive process. This rule, taught now by bishops, comes down from the apostles. In content it was similar to the formulas used in the questions put to candidates for baptism and is simply the credal pattern based on the New Testament. (The Early Church 45)

134

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

It was called the rule of truth, the rule of faith, ecclessiastical rule, tradition, and kerigma. These terms referred to a pattern and content of teaching. The rule was a syllabus of catechetical instruction in which neophytes learned the meaning of the churchs baptismal faith. As and illustration, in the practice of the Roman church in the last decades of the second century, it was said:

Do you believe in God the Father Almighty? I believe Do you believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was born of Holy spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate and died, and rose the third day living from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Father, and will come to judge the living and the dead? I believe. Do you believe in the Holy spirit, and the Holy Church, and the resurrection of the flesh? I believe.
In the third century, in several churches, this creed was not formulated as questions to be answered but as direct declarations of faith. (Walker 73) Table 12: Credal-confessional Tradition

As Papadakis asserts, the most significant event in the history of Christianity during this period was its transformation into a religion of two Testaments. This event occurred once the Church saw the need for and made the decision to collect all the writings of apostolic origin or inspiration into a canon. These writings were sanctioned by the Christian community because of their parallelism with that Tradition it possessed since the day of Pentecost, and which was nothing less than the bestowal of the Spirit in the midst of the community of believers. Before the contents of the New Testament were determined, the Church lived for decades solely by this tradition. Consequently, Scripture in Orthodoxy has always been interpreted within this context of Tradition since it alone, as the Churchs very memory can disclose its authentic message. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, in Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, says that Tradition is the preaching of the truth handed down by the Church in the whole world to Her children. Besides, as Walker comments, Irenaeus of Lyon, like many other thinkers involved in anti-Gnostic polemic, thought that the apostles had perfect knowledge but

135

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

they were also convinced that the churchs official teachers, the bishops, as successors of the apostles, were entrusted to that which was received from Christ. It is precisely those things, received from Christ, which was passed on in this apostolic succession, and these things were embodied in the credal-confessional tradition of churches. This public tradition was the authentic teaching, which was in consonance with the plain testimony of the apostolic Scriptures. Bishops had the responsibility and privilege of keeping this very truththe message of the Gospel. Thus, as Walker concludes, Through the struggles of the second century, the churches were strengthened as they bound themselves to their first century roots by the three-fold cord of creed, scripture, and official teaching office. At the same time, by this institutional definition of the sources of their life and teaching, they initiated a new phase in the history of the Christian movement differentiating themselves from their past in the very act of appropriating it. (75) For Hopko the result of the apologists struggle to defend the true faith was, on the one hand, the teaching of apostolic succession in the Church, the doctrine that the genuine faith and life of Christianity is passed over from church to church, from generation to generation and from place to place, through the succession of the Holy Tradition of the Church in the consecration of bishops, whose teachings and practice is identical to each other and to that of the apostles of Jesus. (Second Century: Persecution and Faith) and, on the other, the firm establishment by the Church of the biblical can, in other words knowing exactly which writings belong to the holy scripture of the Church and which do not. This decision was based on the genuine apostolic testimony contained in the writings, and their use in the Church at liturgical gatherings. As Kelly asserts, in Early Christian Doctrines, this sense of unity of the second century, of belonging to an apostolic tradition is illustrated at the death of Polycarp, when the church of Smyrna sent its report of Polycarps martyrdom not only to the church at Philomelium, but to all the communities composing the holy and Catholic Church. And as he faces death, Polycarp himself prays for the entire Catholic church

136

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

throughout the world. According to Kelly, all the Christian communities in spite of being scattered had a deeper sense of being part of a universal church. There are other testimonies of this, for example by Ignatius, Hermas, Justin, Barnabas. Thus we find the suggestion, in the latter half of the second century, that the Apostolic, Catholic Church is the true church, as distinct from heretical communities. For Kelly all this implied a distinctive ecclesiology, although still far from being explicitly formulated. These fathers envisioned the empirical, visible society and they still had little inkling concerning the later distinction between a visible and invisible church. The third century would see major advances in ecclesiology, the theology of the Church (180-191). Tradition and Scripture In the last decades of the second century and the initial years of the third, the churchs doctrinal norms underwent a certain adjustment. While the Old Testament did not decrease in its prestige as an agent of revelation, the apostolic testimony in the minds of Christians came to represent the supreme authority. According to Kelly, this was made possible, as was shown when I dealt with the struggle between Catholicism and the Gnostic texts, by: 1) The recognition of the New Testament as fully canonical and to rank alongside the Old as inspired Scripture. 2) The distinction between Scripture and the Churchs living tradition as coordinate channels of this apostolic testimony was clearly appreciated, and enhanced importance began to be attached to the latter (Early Christian Doctrines 35). As Kelly adds, this position was already pointed out, with some minor differences of emphasis, in the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian. For both of them, Christ was the ultimate source of Christian doctrine, being the truth, the Word by Whom the Father had been revealed. But He entrusted this revelation to his apostles, and only through them this knowledge could be obtained (36-37). Yet, Irenaeus was not

137

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

only a preserver and an interpreter of tradition, but a creative thinker. In his confrontation with Gnostics and Marcionites, he caught sight of a vision: that of the unity of human nature and of the continuity of salvation history. This salvific history is the work of the one God, the Father through his Son and Spirit. In addition, at the heart of Tertullian theology we find the ideas of the purity and holiness of the church, revealed in concrete authenticity of its life and teaching. The Church lives by the revelation of God (Walker 77-80). By the Third and the Fourth Centuries the attitude to Scripture and tradition which had been emerging in the previous decades became the accepted, classic position with two main differences, according to Kelly: 1) With the passing of Gnostic menace, the hesitation sometimes evinced by Irenaeus and Tertullian, about appealing directly to Scripture disappeared. 2) As a result of developments in the Churchs institutional life the basis of tradition became broader and more explicit. (Early Christian Doctrines 41) The supreme doctrinal authority remained the original revelation given by Christ and communicated to the Church by his apostles. This was the divine or apostolic tradition, in the strict sense of the word. It was in reference to this that Cyprian, could talk of the root and source of the dominical tradition or of the fountain-head and source of the divine tradition (Early Christian Doctrines 42).

Activity 1. Why was second-century Christianity a movement beset by conflict and debate? 2. What was the result of the Churchs orthodox defense against the heretical sects? 3. Explain the following concepts: credal-confessional tradition authority apostolic succession the church as a visible society. relation Tradition-Scripture
Activity 29: Review of Second Century Christianity

138

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

The Church of Rome The Roman church was of ever-increasing importancewe have to remember that both Peter and Paul had died there. Walker says that this community was probably the result of the conversion of a large body of Hellenized Jews in the earliest mission of the Jerusalem Church. The Roman community had already spoken with a weighty voice by the end of the first century, and it took on an even more prominent position and an even greater influence on the Christian Church in the second and early third century. The narrator of I Clement, when addressing the Corinth community spoke with certain authority. Since Rome was at the principal crossroads of the empire, it became the center of the Christian movement, and during the third century it attracted believers from many regions of the empire. Justin Martyr came from Asia Minor, Valentinus from Alexandria, Marcion from Pontus. The New Prophecy, from Phrygia, soon arrived at Rome and had supporters there. Everything that happened anywhere in the church was of concern to the Roman church. This churchwhich had spread to many places in Italyhad important revenues for almsgiving. This is seen in the fact that by 251, from its common purse, it was supporting not only the bishop, 46 presbyters, 7 deacons, 7 subdeacons, 43 acolytes, and 52 exorcists, readers and doorkeepers, but also more than 1500 widows and needed individuals. This church also gave shelter to Christians who had suffered under the ravages of barbarian invasions during the crisis of the third century. Also, in 250, under the persecution of Decius, the Roman Church gave refuge to a number of bishops (Chadwick, The Early Church 57-58). In addition, when a Roman bishop acted to settle a conflict, his word affected, and carried some weight in other churches as well, for Romes problems frequently had

139

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

their origins in other sectors of the Christian world. As an illustration, the quarrel about the proper date for the celebration of Easter between Rome and the community of Asia Minor was settled by Victor, Bishop of Rome (189-198), which showed that Rome acquired authority beyond its own locality and immediate sphere (Walker 77). During the next centuries, before the estrangement with the eastern Church the Roman church would be respected as orthodox.

Activity List the characteristics of the early Church of Rome.

Activity 30: The Church of Rome

5. EARLY ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE The formation of an administrative structure was crucial for the early Christian church. It is quite certain, as mentioned above, that Peter presided over the Church of Jerusalem and that he was followed by James. Yet the ministry of the Apostles was itinerant, not stationary, as Jesus had exhorted them to do. Once they founded a community, they would leave for another mission, leaving the administration of the new founded church in the hands of others who serve as leaders and preside over the Eucharist and Baptism. Consequently, in contrast to the mobile authority of the apostles, there developed a local hierarchy whose functions were stationary, administrative, and sacramental. On Sundays for the eucharistic meal, the presiding officer of each community was the bishop (episkopos), who was aided by a group of elders (presbuteroi) or presbyters and deacons (diakonoi). This was a moment in which the bishop rose to a position of superiority over his colleagues. For Chadwick, the Gnostic crisis might have forced this situation of a single man as the focus of unity (The Early Church 49). Walker and Chadwick agree that during the first century there was

140

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

ambivalence towards the use of elders or presbyters in the Christian literature (Acts of Apostles, Pauline letters, I Clement or Didache). Sometimes they were joined together as one group, having a twofold ministry of elders or bishops and deacons, sometimes a threefold ministry of bishops, elders, and deacons. The assistant status of the latter is evident since the earliest form of ordination. Originally, the diaconate was not a probationary order for the presbiterate, but an order in its own right, with the permanent diaconate have its own ministries. Progressively, the threefold pattern of bishops, presbyters, and deacons became clearer and were institutionalized. This development was not unusual. Papadakis believes that the Last Supperthe first liturgycould not have taken place without the presiding presence of the Lord. Consequently, a presiding head of sacramental and eucharistic fellowships of the Church was taken from granted. It is for this reason that, at the very center of the Orthodox sacramental life and ecclesiology, there is a local monarchical episcopate. Walker asserts that with the establishment of such a pattern of ministry, as it is evident in I Clement, there appear to be the beginnings of the idea of apostolic succession or succession from apostles. In this work, the authority of elder-bishops and deacons is made mainly dependent on the fact that there offices were established by the apostles themselves. Saint Ignatius of Antioch around the end of the first century also referred to this pattern of ministry in his epistles: I exhort you to strive to do all things in harmony with God: the bishop is to preside in the place of God, while the presbyters are to function as the council of the apostles, and the deacons, who are most dear to me, are entrusted with the ministry (i.e., good works) of Jesus Christ. (Epistle to Magnesians, Chap. 6) Take care, then, to partake of one Eucharist; for one is the Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one the cup to unite us with His Blood, and one altar, just as there is one bishop assisted by the presbytery and the deacons, my fellow servants. (Epistle to Philadelphians, Chap. 4)

141

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic Church (Epistle to Smyrneans, Chap. 8). (Hopko, Second Century: Persecution and Faith) Though this idea, which represents the idea of the Roman church, was not widespread until the beginning of the second century, during the controversies caused by Gnosticism. Thus, the second century bears witness to the formation of a body of ministry, understood to be the ekklesia, that based its authority mainly on its apostolic succession. Nevertheless, at that moment, even if churches frequently exchanged ideas and admonitions, the church was not organized above the level of the poli (Papadakis; Walker 45-50; Chadwick, The Early Church 41-53) as it would be in subsequent centuries. According to Ware, the Orthodox Church preserves, as Ignatius wrote in 107, an eucharistic structure, gathered locally as a community around a bishop, which only realizes its true nature when it celebrates the Supper of the Lord, receiving His Body and Blood in the sacrament. And at every local celebration of the Eucharist it is the whole Christ who is present, not just part of Him. For the Orthodox church the outward organization is secondary. What really matters is the inner, sacramental life. Yet, in addition to its emphasis on the local community, the Orthodox church gives importance to the wider unity of the church. This idea is developed in the writings of another martyr bishop, Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258), who saw all bishops as sharing in the one episcopate. This episcopate is a single whole as the Church is a single whole. Thus there are many episcopi but only one episcopate; many churches and one Church This one episcopate is the one that assembles together in a council to discuss the common problems of the Church. Therefore, the fundamental doctrines of the Churchthe Church of the Seven Councils as Ware calls itwere proclaimed in the seven ecumenical councils. Notwithstanding, the writings of Fathers such as Basil,

142

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Athanasius, Chrysostom, Gregory of Nazianzius, Cyril, or Gregory of Nyssa still are an inexhaustible, never-ending spiritual and theological source for the contemporary Orthodox Church (Ware 13-15). Furthermore, Meyendorff says that we need to approach the theological contentthe traditionfound in the writings of such fathers as Ignatius, Irenaeus and Cyprian to see the Orthodox perspective of the episcopate, which presupposes the inseparable unity between each bishop and his community. It also presupposes the identity and, therefore, the equality of bishops, something which would provoke frictions in the Byzantine Empire between Rome and Constantinople. In Orthodox ecclesiology, this local community, centered around the Eucharist and manifesting the reality of the Kingdom of God has remained consistent with the tradition of the abovementioned fathers (The Byzantine Legacy 237). Having reviewed the history of the first Christians, we might think that the story about Jesus had already, in these first three hundred years, substituted Jesus preaching of the kingdom. Paul, for example, transformed the gospel through his own theological views and personal experience on the Damascus road. But I believe that Jesus teaching about mans highest moral and spiritual ideals and his noble hope for the eternal life has been solidly kept in Tradition, a gift from the Holy Spirit, a living faith, a dynamic force which maintains the faith community sublimely linked to Jesus genuine teaching.

Activity Summarize this section entitled Early Administrative Structure in one paragraph of 10-12 sentences.
Activity 31: Early Administrative Structure

143

Chapter 1: History of Early Christian Church

Final Activity Having read this first chapter and done all its activities, write a five-page paper incorporating its main ideas. Follow the following diagram: a) introductory or topic paragraph, b) body or development, and c) concluding paragraph. Add your own reflection.
Activity 32: Final activity on Early Christianity

144

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Chapter 2 BYZANTINE CHURCH HISTORY (313-1453 AD)

INTRODUCTION Having seen the development of the Early Christian community during the first three centuries after Christ, let us start the study of Byzantium in its both areas of State and Church, closely connected during the one-thousand year period it lasted. During this period, the Orthodox Church very often looked back to its roots in the early Christian community, to which it was linked, to assert and defend its faith. Meyendorff explains, For our contemporary Orthodox Church, Christian Byzantium is the inevitable historical link with the original apostolic community. Since the sixth century, Constantinople has been the unquestionably center of Christian Orthodoxy in the East, and, after the schism between East and West, it acquired primacy in Orthodoxy as a whole. These were de facto historical developments which make it impossible for us to think of Orthodox continuity and consistency in history without referring to Byzantium. Other Christian traditions, Eastern and western, have also a great wealth of Christian culture, which produced rich fruits of holiness, butat least in the Orthodox viewByzantium maintained that doctrinal integrity, that authenticity which today makes our Orthodoxy Orthodox. (The Byzantine Legacy 116) This theologian points out the sixth century because it was a moment in which Constantinople eventually built up its eclectic theological and liturgical tradition, trying to preserve and synthesize elements, as I will explain, from Alexandria and Antioch. For Meyendorff, it was liturgy that played a central part in maintaining that identity of the Church (The Byzantine Legacy 117). In this chapter we are going to study the Byzantine Empire from Constantines decision to legalize the Christian Church in 313 until the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks forces in 1453. From Emperor Constantine onward, the Church and the Empire started a very close and mutually beneficial relationship. The Church received

145

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

imperial support and was truly a leaven of the society of which it was a part. The fourth through the tenth centuries represented a significant period for the Churchs internal development: the authoritative content of the New Testament was defined; the worship services attained a formal framework; the teachings of Christianity were developed by the Fathers of the church, great pastors and theologians; and missionary activity such as evangelization of the Slavs by Saints Cyril and Methodius flourished. Nevertheless, the period was full of struggle. The Byzantine Empire had to be constantly on guard against the neighboring Persians, Muslims, and Barbarians. The Church itself frequently underwent many grave schisms and heresies. As an illustration, serious schisms took place in the years 431 and 451. Among the greatest heresies was Arianism, which taught that Christ was not truly God. Although this heresy was condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325, it plagued the Church and brought great confusion to the Empire for nearly a century. The thousand-year period the Byzantine Empire lasted corresponds to the longest one in the history of the Church. It is during this period of paramount importance to the history of the Church that the citys bishop assumed the title of ecumenical patriarch (Papadakis). The Byzantine Empire was founded when the capital of the Roman Empire was transferred from Rome to Constantinople in 324. In the second half of the fourth century B.C., King Philip II of Macedon (382-336 B.C.) and his son Alexander the Great (356-323 B.C.) had dominated Byzantium as they had built an empire reaching from Greece to India. After his death, Alexanders generals carved up his conquests into powerful kingdoms that valued their Greek heritage. By the first century B.C. these nations had engrossed the empire of ancient Rome, a non-Christian Roman state, founded in 753 B.C., which lasted 1100 years, when Rome was sacked by Alaric in 410. Yet, when have talked about the fall of the Roman Empire, we should keep in mind that

146

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

in fact only the western area of that empire succumbed to the Germanic invaders. Subsequent Roman emperors considered the West not as lost but as temporarily outside their direct imperial authority. The Christianized eastern part of the Roman Empire, or Byzantium, as it came to be called, continued for another 1100 years. For clarity, and to provide a cultural, social, and historical context for the discussion on the features of the Eastern Christian Church, I will follow a common division of Byzantine history: Early Byzantine period (324-842), Middle Byzantine Period (843-1261), and Late Byzantine Period (1262?-1454).33 But not only is this context important, Haldon explains, in Byzantium, A History, that the physical world of later Rome and Medieval Byzantiumgeography, climate, peoples and languages, communications, resources (agriculture and industry)set limits or facilitated political programs of different emperors and determined the ability of East Roman state to respond to its enemies, deal with its neighbors, organize its administration and recruit, move and support its armies (74).

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Activity What are we studying in this second chapter? How long did the western part of Roman Empire last? How long did the eastern part or Byzantine Empire last? Where does Christian Byzantium have its roots? Which three periods of Byzantium are we going to discuss?

Activity 33: Preliminary activities on Chapter 2

33

The broad historical framework of this discussion in the three periods delineated here has been adapted from general articles on the topics, available on the Internet, such as A Brief History Of Byzantium, A Brief Summary of Byzantine History, A Short Byzantine History, or a website such as answer.com. The opinions of well known historian and/or theologians such as Haldon, Meyendorff, Ware, Boojamra, Nicol, or Hussey have been incorporated into the discussion.

147

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

1. THE EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (324-842): THE FORMATIVE PERIOD OF THE CHURCH. COUNCILS AND LOCAL HERESIES THE FIRST GOLDEN AGE OF BYZANTIUM (324-730) The first golden age of the empire, the Early Byzantine period, extended from the founding of the new capital in 324 when Constantine became the ruler of the entire Roman Empire. For the first time a Christian emperor had ascended the throne, although there is some dispute about the depth of his faith. Christianity replaced paganism as the official religion of the culturally and religiously diverse state in the late 300s. As already mentioned, I will first briefly describe the political and cultural aspects of the First Golden Age of Byzantium, and, then focus on the religious aspects. Political and Cultural Aspects

Constantine the Great

A crucial figure in its earliest years was the first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine (274?-337), who during his reign (324-337), established toleration of the Christian faith granting freedom of worship throughout the Roman Empire through the Edict of Milan, issued by him, along with his fellow Emperor Licinius in 313there was a tetrarchic system in that moment34, and legally transferred his capital from Rome to Constantinople, on the site of the Greek city of Byzantium. He recognized that the empire could not longer be effectively controlled from Rome (Haldon 16). Constantine expanded the city, built new walls and undertook expensive building programs. According to Ware, the reasons for this move were in part economic and
34

Given the size of the empire and the difficulties of communicating between Rome and the armies on the frontiers, it had been decided to divide the empires military command into four regional groupings, a tetrarchy or rule of four, consisting of two senior Augusti, Diocletian and Maximian, each supported by a junior Caesar. This tetrarchy worked well until Diocletians resignation in 305. Struggles among the members of the tetrarchy started to seize the power until Constantine defeated and deposed Licinius (324), in the west, with him the last of the Augusti remaining. The empire remained united until the end of the century. For Constantine this victory was a result of his appeal to the God of the Christians. Recognizing that such as vast territory could not be effectively controlled from Rome, Constantine decided to moved his capital eastwards (Haldon 16).

148

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

political, but also religious: the Old Rome was too deeply stained with pagan associations to form the center of the Christian Empire which he had in mind (19). Yet, paradoxically, Constantine himself, known as the great Christian emperor, was not baptized until shortly before he died. It was also under him that all church property which had been confiscated during the persecutions of Diocletian and Maximian, were restored. In the New Rome, things were to be different: after the solemn inauguration of the city in 330, he ruled that no pagan rites should ever be performed at Constantinople. The Church of the Catacombs became the Church of the Empire.

330 is often treated as a convenient starting point for referring to the Roman Empire in the East (the Byzantine Empire or Byzantium). Table 13: Constantinople becomes the Roman capital

Thus, the fourth century not only marks the end of the age of the martyrs, the persecutions of Christians and the beginning of the Churchs formative stage, but also the threshold of a new civilizationthe Christian Empire of medieval Byzantiumas well as the creation of the incomparable center of Orthodox Christianity. Eventually Theodosius I (379-395), within fifty years of Constantines death, carried this policy of christianization through to its conclusion: by his legislation he made Christianity not simply the most highly favored but the only recognized religion of the Empire. The Church was now established. Paganism was suppressed. Haldon says that: With the toleration of Christianity and its positive promotion under Constantine at the expense of many of the established non-Christian cults, the church began to evolve into a powerful social and political force which was, in the course of time, to dominate East Roman society and to vie with the state for authority in many aspects of civil law and justice. (17) Constantine also inaugurated a series of important reforms within both the military and civil establishments of the empire. The empire continued to be ruled by Roman law and political institutions, with the elite communicating officially in Latin, yet the population, now Christian, also spoke Greek. At school, students studied the 149

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

ancient Greek classics of literature, philosophy, science, medicine, art, and rhetoric. The church, which developed its own literature and philosophy, nonetheless looked favorably upon the intellectual tradition of classical scholarship. As we will see, besides the foundation of Byzantium and the Edict of Milan, there was another event that is of the utmost importance for the Churchs coming of age during Constantines reign, namely the Council of Nicea.

Illustration 23: Emperor Constantine I and Helen, his Mother35

One of the advantages of Constantines new capital was that it was on an easily fortified peninsula; and as it was closer to the dangerous frontiers of the empire than Rome, imperial armies could respond more rapidly to crises. Furthermore, the strategic location of the city enabled merchants there to grow rich through their control over the trade routes between Europe and the East and the shipping lanes connecting the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Cities occupied a central role in the social and economic structure as well as in the administrative machinery of the Roman Empire. They were centers of market-exchange and of regional agricultural activity (Haldon 95).
35

See: <www.goarch.org>.

150

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

The emperor Constantine is celebrated as a saint in the Orthodox Church, although not the western Church. His great merit, from a Christian point of view, was in legalizing Christianity. Table 14: Constantine as a saint in the Orthodox Church

Accordingly, Constantine built on his new capital a university, two theaters, eight public and fifty-three private baths, fifty-two covered walkways, four law courts, fourteen churches, and fourteen palaces. He imported staggering quantities of the best Greco-Roman art from throughout the empire. This infusion helped the art of the Early Byzantine period to remain close to its Greco-Roman heritage in its naturalism and classical subject matter. Moreover, the Roman Empire had an agrarian economy. It was the chief support of life, the essential element for the existence of towns and the basis for taxation. Bread was the basic food and, therefore, cereals were the dominant crop. Though important in some places, industry and commerce only played a minor role in the economic life of the people of Byzantium (Haldon 67).

Illustration 24: Constantinople, the New Rome36

36

See: <http://www.history.ox.ac.uk/byzstud/>.

151

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Activity Answer the following questions: 1. Why was the foundation of Byzantium important for the Christian Church? What was decreed in the Edict of Milan? What important step did Theodosius I took? 2. According to Ware, what were the reasons behind the construction of the Second Rome, as Byzantium was called? 3. What important reforms inaugurated Constantine? 4. According to Haldon, what was the effect on society of the toleration of Christianity? 5. Which two languages were spoken in early Byzantium?
Activity 34: Byzantium and Constantine

Constantines Successors
Although the tetrarchy was never revived, upon Constantines death in 337, his three sons inherited his position. Constantine II, the Eldest, was recognized as senior and ruled the West. Constantius (337-361) ruled in the East, and Constant, the youngest the central provinces (Africa, Italy, and Illyricum). Yet eventually Constantius, defeating Constantine and MagnetiusConstant had already been deposed in 350 following popular discontent among both population and the armyruled the empire until his death in 361. His successor Julian (361-363), a competent general and efficient administrator, was unpopular for trying to revive paganism. While being occupied with fighting wars against barbarians (Goths, Franks, Alamanni, Saxons, etc) and Persians, and other struggles to obtain power, Theodosius I (379-395) in 388 became the sole ruler. Yet, he was the last emperor to hold this position. Although during his reign Orthodoxy triumphed over Arianism violent religious controversy became chronic. At his death, his two sons Arcadius (395-408), in the East, and Honorious, in the West, ruled jointly. As minors they were greatly influenced by the chief military and other officers at court. Nevertheless, the western part of the empire began to fall apart.

152

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

The Fall of the Roman Empire in the West

Although Rome, as a capital city, had long ceased to have any real significance in practical terms, its fall, as commented, to a tribe of barbarians in 410 marks the irrevocable decline of the Roman Empire in the West. By the 430s whole provinces were under barbarian rule, although technically allies or federates of the Roman Empire, but effectively independent. Western Roman Emperors continued to be appointed for the next sixty years, but they had little real standing. When the last western emperor was deposed in 476, Germanic principalities were created in the western half of the Empire and Italy was occupied by barbarian troops. Thus, after the western Empire fell (476) to Odoacer, Italy, Gaul, and Spain were theoretically united under Zeno (474-491) but were actually dominated by, respectively, the Ostrogoths, the Franks, and the Visigoths, while Africa was under the rule of the Vandals. During this period there arose the heresies of Nestorianism and Monophysitism and the political parties of Blues and Greens to divide the Byzantines. Haldon says that the eastern half of the empire survived for a variety of reasons: a healthier economy, more diversified patterns of urban and rural relationship and market and a more solid tax-based ... In addition eastern diplomacy encouraged barbarian leaders to look westward while the walls of Constantinople ... rendered any attempt to take the city fruitless. (18)

Although commonly known as the Theodosian Walls after Theodosius II (408-450), the reigning emperor), the walls were actually built on the orders of Anthemius, the Empires Prefect of the East, to counter an immediate threat from the Huns. In conjunction with Constantinoples naturally strong location, the Theodosian walls will prove their worth against any number of attacks upon Constantinople through Byzantine history. They will fall to an attacking army only twice, once during the chaos of the Fourth Crusade (1204) and, finally, to the Ottoman Turks, who breach them in 1453 with the help of artillery and overwhelming numbers. Table 15: Construction of Constantinople triple wall (413)

153

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Activity Answer the following questions: 1. Who became the sole ruler, after Constantine? Why? 2. When did the western empire fall? What was the relationship of barbariandominated regions with the declining Roman Empire? 3. What Roman emperor theoretically ruled Italy, Gaul, and Spain? 4. According to Haldon, why did the eastern part of the empire survive? 5. Which three heresies arose in this period?
Activity 35: Constantines successors

Justinian I, the Builder of Hagia Sophia

In the East, the reigns of Arcadius, Theodosius II, Marcian, Leo I, Leo II, Zeno, Anastasius I, and Justin Ia period of more than one hundred years and a half (395537)were marked by the invasions of barbarian tribes including the Avars, the Slavs, the Bulgars, but also of Persians. Upon Justins death, in 527, he was succeeded without opposition by his nephew Justinian (527 to 565), who married the influential Theodora. Under his rule, Byzantine power grew. He greatly expanded the eastern empire reigning over most of the lands surrounding the Mediterranean Sea. Here is a map of Earlier Byzantium:

Illustration 25: Map of Earlier Byzantium (565)37

All the maps depicting the geographical possessions of Byzantium come from Explore Byzantium. <http://byzantium.seashell.net.nz>.

37

154

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

This map depicts the Empire at the death of Justinian I. Through a series of hardfought and destructive wars against Goth and Vandal successor states in the former territory of the Western Roman Empire, Justinian had re-extended the Empires boundaries to southern Spain, the Italian peninsula, and North Africa. The territorial gains, though impressive, masked an overall weakening of the Empires position. This was mainly due to a dreadful outbreak of bubonic plague, which swept the Mediterranean basin in the 540s, and severe climatic conditions which had a negative impact upon the Empires agricultural base.

Hundreds of thousands die across the Persian and Byzantine Empires. Justinian himself falls gravely ill with the disease. When he recovers he finds that his Empires financial and military strength has been gravely damaged by the plague. Table 16: Bubonic plagues first appearance in the Mediterranean (541-544)

Activity Read Appendix C and make a list of the Byzantine emperors from Constantine I to Justinian. Add the periods during which they reigned.
Activity 36: List of Byzantine emperors until Justinian

Justinian was an ambitious builder; his greatest monument was the magnificent domed church of Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom), which was built in just five years (532537). Hagia Sophia became the center of religious life in the Eastern Orthodox world. It was doubtless the largest and most splendid religious building in all of Christendom.38 According to The Russian Primary Chronicle, the envoys of the Kievan prince Vladimir, who visited it in 987, reported: We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for surely there is no such splendor or beauty anywhere upon earth. Justinian
We will find more about this church in Part III, when talking about the development of the Orthodox church building.
38

155

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

also codified Roman law. In addition, a great revival of Hellenism took place in literature, and Byzantine art and architecture entered their most glorious period.

Illustration 26: Hagia Sofia (537 A.D.)39

The reign of Justinian was to be a turning point in the evolution of Eastern Rome Byzantiumand, in many ways, it marks the beginnings of a medieval Easter Roman World (Haldon 20).

Illustration 27: Emperor Justinian I (527-565) and attendants40

39 40

See: <www.byzantines.net>. See: <http://traumwerk.stanford.edu/philolog/2006/01/>.

156

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Activity Answer the following questions: 1. What were Justinians achievements? 2. What was the result of the Bubonic plague and of severe climatic conditions on the re- extended Byzantine Empire? 3. How long did Justinian I take to build Hagia Sophia? Why did it become so important for Orthodoxy?
Activity 37: Justinian Is Reign

Justinian Is Successors: More Invasions

Much was lost again under his successors. According to Haldon, upon the death in 565 of Justinian, the empire was vastly expanded yet perilously overstretched, both financially and militarily. During the next century his successor had to cope with the reality of dealing with new enemies, lack of ready cash and internal discontent over high taxation and constant demands for soldiers and the necessities to support them (26). It was a traumatic period for Byzantium as shown by the following map dated 668 A.D.

Illustration 28: Map of the Byzantine Empire (668 A.D.)41

The Empires borders to the north, along the Alps and the River Danube, were placed under pressure in the late 6th Century, and finally breached by a succession of
41

See: <http://byzantium.seashell.net.nz>.

157

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

barbarian invasions from Lombards, which conquered most of Italy, Avars, and Slavs. Meanwhile in the east a catastrophic, though ultimately victorious struggle with the Persian Empire had been surmounted by the sudden eruption of Islam from the Arabian Peninsula. Constantinople also suffered attacked from the Persians and Avars, which was saved by the emperor Heraclius (610-641) and Constantine IV (668-685) respectively. Heracliuss attempt to reconcile Monophysitism and Orthodoxy merely led to the new heresy of Monotheletism. For a number of reasons, still debatedreligious and political alienation of local populations, economic and military exhaustion, failure of strategic oversightthe Byzantine government was unable to prevent the loss to the Muslims of Egypt, Macedonia, Palestine and Syria by the 640s. To this we need to add the defeat of the Roman forces by the Bulgars by the end of the seventh century. For Haldon Byzantiums failures were due to a combination of apathy, disaffected soldiers, poor discipline, and inadequate defenses (29-31). Culturally, the 7th century was marked by increasing Hellenization of the empire, outwardly symbolized by the adoption of the Greek title Basileus by the emperors. Furthermore, the church, or Hierosyne, under the patriarch of Constantinople, became increasingly important in public affairs. Theology, cultivated by emperors and monks alike, was pushed to extremes of subtlety. Literature and art became chiefly religious.

158

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Activity 1. See the above two maps the one on Early Byzantium and the other dated 668 ADand discuss their differences. 2. Read Appendix C and then: Make a list of the Byzantine emperors from Justinian I to Theodosius III(add the periods they reigned). Explain the Persian war. When did it begin? How did it develop? 3. Culturally speaking, what characterizes the seventh century?
Activity 38: List of Byzantine emperors after Justinian

Over the centuries, the eastern part of Byzantium varied greatly, but its core remained the Balkan Peninsula (i.e., Thrace, Macedonia, Epirus, Greece proper, the Greek isles, and Illyria) and Asia Minor (present-day Turkey) until it collapsed to the Ottoman forces.42 Religious Aspects

Heresies43 and the First Six Ecumenical Councils (325-681)

In the historical outline I briefly mentioned the problems of heresies assaulting the state in the early period of the Byzantine Empire. Let us now look at them in more detail. The fundamental doctrines of the Church were proclaimed and defended by the Seven Ecumenicalor world-wideCouncils, all of them occurring during the Early Byzantine period. The last Ecumenical Council was summoned upon to solve the problems the iconoclastic controversy had created and it will be explained when dealing with this controversy. These Synods, which are known by the names of the cities in which they were convened, included bishops from throughout the world, who came to affirm the authentic teachings on the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity. The Councils did not create new doctrines, but in a particular place and time, they proclaimed what the Church

42 43

See maps of both regions in Appendix D. See Glossary for a definition of the main heresies and their proponents as well as the Fathers of the Church involved in the defense of Orthodoxy.

159

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

always believed and taught in defense of unorthodox or heterodox doctrines. The conciliar and collegial expression of Church life and authority which was manifest at the Ecumenical Councils and other synods of the early Church continue to be an important aspect of Orthodox Christianity (Fitzgerald). In the Orthodox tradition, the magisterium of the Church is not limited by Scripture alone but has its most authoritative expression in these ecumenical councils. Imperial summoning and approval gave them authority in the empire, but for the church they represented a necessary, essential consensus or reception. There were several other councilsEphesus II (44), Hieria (753), Florence (1438-1439)which, even though receiving imperial sanction, were rejected by the Church. Other councils, namely the Photian Great Council of St. Sophia (879-880) and the councils of 1341, 1347 and 1351, held in Constantinople, though not ecumenical were highly authoritative (Meyendorff, The Byzantine Legacy 32).
1) Council of Nicea I, 325 2) Council of Constantinople I, 381 3) Council of Ephesus, 431 4) Council of Chalcedon, 451 Table 17: Dates of the First Seven Ecumenical Councils 5) Council of Constantinople II, 553 6) Council of Constantinople III, 680 7) Council of Nicea II, 787

Indeed, the first seven centuries of the Byzantium Empire were plagued by heresies. Ware summarizes the different theological positions of some heresies regarding the affirmation Christ must be fully God and fully man: Each heresy in turn undermined some part of this vital affirmation. Either Christ was made less than God (Arianism); or His manhood was so divided from His Godhead that He became two persons instead of one (Nestorianism); or He was not presented as truly man (Monophysitism, Monothelitism) (9-10). He adds that each Council defended this affirmation.

160

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

The first two, held in the fourth century, concentrated upon the earlier part (that Christ must be fully God) and formulated the doctrine of the Trinity. The next four, during the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries, turned to the second part (the fullness of Christs manhood) and also sought to explain how manhood and Godhead could be united in a single person. The seventh Council, in defense of the Holy Icons, seems at first to stand somewhat apart, but like the first six it was ultimately concerned with the Incarnation and with mans salvation. (10) The theological discussions and doctrinal formulations of the seven general councils, specifically the formulation of the Christian doctrine, have been of prime importance for Orthodoxy. As Papadakis asserts, they embody a permanent standard for the Orthodox Churchs understanding of the Trinity, the person of Christ and the incarnation, and stand as the permanent authoritative paradigm against which all later speculative theology is seen. Their decisions remained binding for the whole church and their non-acceptance exclusion, as we will see, from the body of the Church. Yet, the reception of this doctrine was due to the great theologians or Fathers of this age such as the saint Athanasius, Chrysostom (334?-407)perhaps of all the Fathers, the best loved in the Orthodox Church and the one whose books are still read Cyril (died 444), or the three Cappadocian Fathers, Saints Gregory of Nazanzius (329390?)known in the Orthodox Church as Gregory the TheologianBasil the Great (330?-379), and his younger brother, Gregory of Nyssa (died 394). For contemporary Orthodox Christians, the writings of these Fathers still comprise a permanent spiritual and theological source. Let us have a look at the emperors involved in the councils, the heresies these ecumenical councils had to face, and some of the doctrinal formulations they decried in a more details. Activity 1. List the seven councils naming their place and the year they took place. Who summoned these councils? 2. Did the council create new doctrines? 3. Why is the magisterium manifested in these councils important for the Orthodox Church? 4. In your own words, follow Wares example and explain the difference theological 161

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

positions of Arianism, Nestorianism, and Monophysitism/Monothelitism regarding the affirmation: Christ must be fully God and fully man. 5. According to Papadakis, why are the theological discussions and doctrinal formulations of the seven councils are on prime importance for the Orthodox Church?
Activity 39: About the seven councils

Arianism For Constantine, who had become the sole ruler, the Christian church was a valued political partner in his efforts to stabilize the empire and to consolidate his own power. Thus it was essential for him that the church remained united. Discord and disagreement were a threat to his political plans, but he was compelled to attend to a major split within the church due to the appearance of Arianism, a heresy about the Trinity and the status of Christ. Arius, presbyter of the Church district of Baucalis in Alexandria, trained in Greek philosophy, postulated that Jesus Christ (the Son) was inferior to God (the Father). The problem was aggravated by the fact that Constantine himself began eventually to favor the Arian position. Finally, the Council countered Arianism with the Nicene Creed, a theological formulation which included the statement that the Son and Father are of the same substance and therefore equal. Yet, although the Council apparently solved the problem of Arianism, the heresy continued to exist and gained many adherents over the next two centuries, including Constantines successor, Constantius, who after his fathers death in 337, approved it in the eastern part on the empire. While in contrast, in the West, Constant, supported the Nicean position. When Contants died in 350 the Nicenes were persecuted. In 362, after Constantius death, the Council of Alexandria restored Orthodoxy. In 381 the ecumenical Council of Constantinople reaffirmed the Nicean position (Haldon 21). As Ware asserts, behind the definitions of councils lay the works of theologians, who gave precision to the terms the Councils employed. Athanasius of Alexandria developed the full implications of the key word in the Nicene Creed: homoousios, one 162

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

in essence or substance, consubstantial. The work of the three Cappadocian Fathers complemented his work. So, while Athanasius stressed the unity of GodFather and Son are one in essence (ousia)the Cappadocians emphasized Gods threeness Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (hypostaseis). They kept a delicate balance between the threeness and the oneness in God and gave full significance to the classic summary of Trinitarian doctrine, three persons in one essence. Ware adds that the Church had never before possessed four theologians of such stature within a single generation (10). Nestorianism There was a further Christological split in the early fifth century in the form of Nestorianism, which took its name from Nestorius, a monk of Antioch, appointed in 428 bishop of Constantinople by Theodosius II. Nestorius supported the idea that Mary could not be referred to as the Theotokos (the God-Bearer), but as the Christotokos (the Christ-bearer), to avoid attributing the Divinity with too human a nature. The Nestorians developed a theology in which the divine and human aspects of Christ were seen not as unified in a single person, but operated in conjunction. After a demonstration in the city, the emperor summoned the third ecumenical council after Cyril, bishop of Alexandria (Alexandria certainly resented the rise to power of Constantinople and the increasingly decisive part which the imperial capital took in ecclesiastical as well as secular affairs), appealed to Rome, and the Roman Pope Celestine condemned Nestorius. According to Haldon, the Nestorians were accused, unfairly, of teaching two persons in Christ, God and Man, and thus two distinct sons, human and divine. Nestorianism was condemned in the Council of Ephesus (431), but proceeded to secede, formally establishing a separate Churchthe Assyrian Orthodox Church, still existing today and known as the Church of the East (21).

163

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Monophysitism Yet, although Nestorianim was condemned, the debate it started contributed, in the seventh century, to the evolution of the Monophysite movement, causing a much more significant split within Christianity. It represented a reaction to some of the Nestorian views. This movement dealt with the ways in which the divine and the human were combined in the person of Christ. There were two schools, the more extreme version was that the divine was prior to and dominated the human element, hence, the description of Monophysite (from mono, single and physis, nature). A minor council at Ephesus in 449 decreed in favor of the Monophysite position, yet the ecumenical council of Chalcedon in 451, redefined the traditional creed of Nicea to make the Christological position clear, causing some further theological problems (Haldon 22). This council had stated that Christ had two natures, the divine and the human, but one person or hypostasis. This definition that Christ had two natures offended the Alexandrians and, particularly, the followers of Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria (d. 444), and was regarded by some as having a pro-Nestorian bias in its treatment of the two natures of Christ. Its supporters were regarded as dyophysites or Chalcedonians in contrast to those who stressed a single nature, the Monophysites (Hussey 7). In Egypt and Syria in particular, Monophysitism became established in the rural populations, and led to persecutions. At court, policies regarding this movement varied. The Emperor Zeno (474-91) issued a decree of unity trying to resolve the division; Anastasius supported a Monophysite position; Justin I was Chalcedonian, and Justinian I, swung between the two (Haldon 22). Although it was the practice of the Byzantine Emperor to participate in ecclesiastical affairs, Justinian (527-65), perhaps more than any other, interpreted his

164

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

imperial mandate as including theological as well as the administrative problems of the Church. He tried to find solutions to current doctrinal controversy which would be acceptable to Rome and the West, and thus quieting the dissenting voices of Monophysites and Nestorians. As said, in Egypt and Syria the Monophysite views predominated, the Alexandrians supported Cyril of Alexandrias formula, one nature incarnate of God the Word; yet, there were also strict dyophysites, a minority, which could not accept the implications of Cyrils teaching maintaining that the human Christ and not the Logos suffered on the cross, a view that would deny the unity of the two natures forming one person. However, a majority of the Chalcedonians interpreted Cyrils word nature as the equivalent of hypostasis or person, thus preserving the unity of the Persons in whom there were two natures each retaining its own special properties or characteristics. This question of the nature of the hypostatic union with its soteriological implications was faced in the sixth century. Justinian supported by his Patriarch and by the Fifth general council (Constantinople II, 553) explored and made explicit the intentions of Chalcedon in making it clear that the human Christ and the eternal Logos had a single hypostatic identity. Thus theopaschism was acceptable in the sense that one of the Trinity, the Son of God, was crucified and buried. At the same time certain teachings of the Nestorians were condemned. In this council a censure of Origenism was also confirmed. Origenism was already condemned in a previous synod. It concerns certain heretical views on the creation and the nature of man deriving from Origen (d. c. 254) and Evagrius of Pontus (d. 399), which were current in monastic circles.

165

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Illustration 29: Council of Ephesus, 43144

The strenuous efforts of Justinian and the Fifth general council did not win over the Monophysites and, in the following century, once again their differences with the Chalcedonians came to surface. The Chalcedon position emphasized that there was a single person in two natures. But it was not clear whether it was possible to believe in two natures with a single activity and a single will. This question was vital to the controversy because to agree on one energeiaMonoenergismor one will Monotheletismwould have supported one of the principal Monophysite objections to the Chalcedonian definition, and therefore gained Monophysite support (Hussey 7-8). The disaffection brought about by the persecution of the Monophysites in particular on the part of Constantinopleunder Justin II, for examplemade a compromise with Monophysites necessary. This compromise might be possible by the incorporation of some formula acceptable to the Monophysites. This was not merely a religious matter but also political as the territories with predominantly Monophysite populations had been lost to the Persians (Haldon 27-28).
Monoenergism. Schism and the Sixth Council

44

See: <http://traumwerk.stanford.edu/philolog/2006/01/>.

166

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Ware explains that Ephesus and Chalcedon were a rock of Orthodoxy, but they were also a terrible rock of offense. The Arians had been gradually reconciled and created no lasting schism. But to this day there exist Nestorian Christians who cannot accept the decisions of Ephesus, and Monophysites who cannot accept those of Chalcedon (15). Thus, in the 7th century, Byzantine emperor Heraclius (610-641) attempted to solve the schism created by the Monophysites and Chalcedonians, and suggested the compromise of Monoenergism, whereby a single energy was postulated in which both divine and human aspects were unified. This compromise adopted the Chalcedonian belief that Christ had two natures, combined with the Monophysite view that Christ had one will. The definition of the term will was left deliberately vague. Monoenergism was accepted by the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, as well as by the Armenians, though not by the Patriarch of Jerusalem or Pope Honorius I. The lack of support from the Pope led Heraclius to abandon the belief in 638. Instead he declared the doctrine of Monothelitism, though this did not solve the schism either. The question about the human and divine natures of Christ arose in the seventh century against a particularly disturbed background. The Empire was then facing a serious and prolonged crisis. These include: Lombard invaders in Italy, the Persians in the Asian, Syrian, and Egyptian parts of the Empire with considerable success and the loss of Jerusalem and the Holy Cross (614), the Avars and Slavs in the northern frontier, and even a failed plan of the Persians with Avar aid in 626 to capture Constantinople. It seemed that the very existence of the Empire was being threatened. It was therefore essential to encourage the traditional imperial policy of unity within the polity. Unfortunately there were now two main bodies of Christian dissidents: the Monophysites whose strength lay in Egypt and Syria, and the Nestorians who had

167

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

established their non-Chalcedonian Church on Persian territory. The Persians favored these separatists (Hussey 8). Several emperors participated in this Christological controversy (namely Heraclius, Contantine II, Constans II, and Constantine IV) as well as Patriarchs (Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul or George) and Popes (John IV, Theodore, Martin I, and Agatho). In 680, was called, the Sixth general Council of Constantinople III by the Emperor Constantine IV with the attendance of delegates from the Pope and the four Patriarchs (Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem). The council attempted to bring about reconciliation between the western Church in Rome and the Orthodox Church in Constantinople. After lengthy discussions, those who had supported the heretical doctrine of the single activity and the single will of Jesus Christ were anathematized. That is, the council rejected monotheletism and monenergism and their proponentsthe majority of the Monophysite regions of the Byzantine Empirewas now controlled by the Islamic Empire. The council decreed that Jesus Christ both had a divine and human will that matched his two natures. This reaffirmed the Chalcedonian doctrine of 451. This statement summarized the Christological belief: Completely preserving that which is without confusion or division we briefly state the whole; believing that after his incarnation our Lord Jesus Christ, our true God, is one of the Trinity, we state that he has two natures shining forth in his one hypostasis. In this, throughout the whole course of his incarnate life, he made manifest his sufferings and miracles, not simply in appearance but in reality. The difference of the natures is recognized in one and the same hypostasis because each nature wills and works what is proper to it in communion with the other. Thus we proclaim two natural wills and two natural activities working together for the salvation of the human race. The minutes of the sessions of this Sixth general council were read, approved, and signed by the Emperor and those present, and were received and accepted by Pope Conon in Rome (who before he became Pope had taken part in the council as a papal legate). Thus the re-establishment of orthodoxy and the rejection of monenergism

168

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Christ had a single willand monotheletism had brought Constantinople and Rome together again. The attempt to meet a compromise with the Monophysites had failed, and, like the Nestorians, they were not reconciled to the main body of Christendom and continued to build up their separate Churches, mainly in what were by now Muslimdominated territories (Hussey 9-14). Other Heretical Movements But there were other heretical movements that affected the Church and in which the emperors were involved as well. One of them was the Donatist movement mainly in North Africa, which claimed that the consecration of bishops of Carthage was improper. It lasted until the seventh century. Another was Messialianism, a Syrian monastic heresy with a crude and materialistic view of God, which spread from Mesopotamia to Syria. It taught that each person had a personal demon to be exorcized by constant prayer. It was condemned as was Pelagianism at the Council of Ephesus in 431. Pelagianism was a largely western heresy begun by Pelagius, a British monk, during the later fourth century. As Haldon says, these were local heresies with no long term results, but the emperors involvement cemented the association between the interests of the church and those of the imperial government (22).

169

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Activity For these series of activities also see the Glossary. Similarly, search the web if you need more information. 1. Define Arianism and the following concepts:

homoousios hypostaseis
2. Who were the three Cappadocian Fathers? Find them in the Glossary and briefly write about them. 3. Define Nestorianism. 4. Define Monophysitism. Who were the dyophysites or Chaledonians? How did Justinian try to solve this theological problem? 5. Define monoenergism and explain the schism it caused. 6. What was finally agreed in the sixth ecumenical council? 7. List other heretical movements.
Activity 40: Heresies from the fourth to the seventh century

The Pentarchy
But these ecumenical councils were significant for other reasons. The threefold ministerial structure of bishop, presbyter, and deacon was a fact in many churches by the post-apostolic. Each one of them had its own independent hierarchical unit and was a self-governing unit; yet, there were no precise standards defined regarding the relationship among them. Modeled after the organization of the Roman Empire, there was, even before the fourth century, a power structureas Papadakis defines it about the way in which churches were to be grouped in provinces. It was the custom to give greater honor to the metropolitan or bishop of the capital city (metropolis). Likewise, following the importance of certain metropolis in the Roman administration, especial precedence was granted to the presiding bishops of the three largest cities in the Empire: Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. But this had been a development by common consensus, with no ecclesiastical legislation backing it (Papadakis).

170

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

As Ware asserts, this problem was eventually addressed by the ecumenical councils. The Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council (Nicea, 325) recognized the status of three great centersRome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Also, while it still remained subject to the Metropolitan of Caesarea, the see of Jerusalem, was given by them, due to its central importance to the entire movement of Christian history, the next place in honor after these three. At that moment, Constantinople, not being officially inaugurated as the new capital until five years later, was not mentioned and continued to be the Metropolitan of Heraclea. With the emergence of Constantinople as the New Rome, a rearrangement of the existing pattern was necessary. This was accomplished in the Second Ecumenical Council (Constantinople, 381). Being the capital of the Empire, Constantinople was assigned a second place after Rome and above Alexandria. Canon 3 of this Council states: The Bishop of Constantinople shall have the prerogative of honor after the Bishop of Rome, because Constantinople is the New Rome. This second canon was resented by both Rome and Alexandria. Ware says that Old Rome pondered where the claims of New Rome would end: might not Constantinople before long claim first place? Hence Rome decided to ignore the offending Canon, and the Pope did not formally recognize Constantinoples claim to second place until the Lateran Council (1215). One can understand why Rome changed its mind about the position of Constantinople as defined by the 3rd Canon if we remember that at that time Constantinople was in the hands of the Crusaders and under the rule of a Latin Patriarch. This Canon 3, Ware continues, was also offending to Alexandria, which up to that date had occupied the first place in the East. The next seventy years witnessed a sharp conflict between Constantinople and Alexandria, in which for a time the victory

171

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

went to the latter. The first major Alexandrian success was at the Synod of the Oak, when Theophilus of Alexandria secured the deposition and exile of the Bishop of Constantinople, Saint John Chrysostom. A second major success was won by Alexandria by the nephew and successor of Theophilus, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, who brought about the fall of another Bishop of Constantinople, Nestorius, at the third General Council, held in Ephesus (431). Alexandria won another victory at a second Council held in Ephesus in 449, but this meeting, unlike the one that preceded it of 431, was not accepted by the Church at large. It was felt that the Alexandrian party had this time gone too far. Dioscorus of AlexandriaCyrils successormaintained that in Christ there was not only a unity of personality but a single natureor Monophysitismthus denying, for some, the integrity of Christs humanity. Only two years later, in 451, the Emperor summoned the council of Chalcedon, regarded by the Church of Byzantium and the west as the Fourth General Council. The Council, as commented, strongly opposed Monophysitism and Alexandria defeated not only theologically but also in its claim to rule supreme in the east. Canon 28 of Chalcedon confirmed Canon 3 of Constantinople and New Rome was assigned the place next in honor after Old Rome. Additionally, the Council freed Jerusalem from the jurisdiction of Caesarea granting it the fifth place among the great sees. Thus, by the fifth century, the system later known among Orthodox as the Pentarchy (or system of five Sees, patriarchates) was now complete, whereby five great sees in the Church were held in particular honor, and a settled order of precedence was established among them: in order of rank, Rome (the patriarch there later calling himself the pope), which as the ancient center and largest city of the empire was given the primacy of honor, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. All five claimed apostolic foundation and moreover, many Orthodox theologians believe that not only

172

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

the bishop of Rome but all bishops are successors of Peter. The first four were the most important cities in the Roman Empire; the fifth, Jerusalem, was understandably added because it was the place where Christ had suffered on the Cross and risen from the dead. The bishop in each of these cities received the title patriarch. Each of the five patriarchs was totally sovereign within his sphere of jurisdiction (Ware 10-12; Papadakis) From the Orthodox perspective, as we have seen, the origin of the system of patriarchs and metropolitans was only ecclesiastical, and had no divine origin or mandate.. None of them possessed any authority by divine right. However, from the perspective of divine right, Ware asserts that ... all the bishops are essentially equal, however humble or exalted the city over which each presides. All bishops share equally in the apostolic succession, all have the same sacramental powers, all are divinely appointed teachers of the faith. If a dispute about doctrine arises, it is not enough for the Patriarchs to express their opinion: every diocesan bishop has the right to attend a General Council, to speak, and to cast his vote. The system of the Pentarchy does not impair the essential equality of all bishops, nor does it deprive each local community of the importance which Ignatius assigned to it. (12-13) Thus for the Orthodox Church, the primacy of Rome did not entail universal jurisdiction over the others, and thus, it does not accept the doctrine of Papal authority decried by the Vatican Council of 1870. However, this does not mean that Orthodoxy denies the Bishop of Rome primacy of honorthe first among equals. As Ware clarifies that primacy is not supremacy. The Orthodox Church views the Pope as the bishop who presides in love, to adapt a phrase of Saint Ignatius: Romes mistake ... has been to turn this primacy or presidency of love into a supremacy of external power and jurisdiction (13). When Islamic conquests of the seventh century absorbed Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, the patriarch of Constantinople, with the exception of the Armenians and the Christians in communities that still existed in imperial lands lost to Islam, became the leader of most eastern Christians. Eventually as the Slavs of Bulgaria, the Rus, and

173

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

the Serbs were converted to the Orthodox religion in the tenth century, the patriarch of Constantinople also became their spiritual head. He remained, however, under the authority of the emperor.

Activity 1. Neither make a summary nor more than three or four paragraphs of the events that led to the system called among Orthodox as the Pentarchy. 2. Did any of the five patriarchates have sovereign or supremacy over the others?
Activity 41: The Pentarchy

END OF EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (730-843) Political and Cultural Aspects Under Justinian II (685-695) and his successors the empire was again menaced by Arabs and Bulgars, but the Isaurian emperors Leo III (717-741) and Constantine V (741-775), the emperors who precipitated the grave issue of iconoclasm, also were the emperors who stopped the Arab advance and recovered Asia Minor. By 780 the situation along Byzantiums eastern frontier had stabilized, and the Empires dark age was coming to a close. Byzantium was now transformed from an empire of late antiquity spread along the Mediterranean into a relatively compact medieval state with its most important lands, in terms of agricultural production, tax-base, and military manpower, in Asia Minor. However reduced in territorial extent, Byzantium showed its tenacity and ability to adapt and survive under severe pressure from East, West and North. The next two and a half centuries would witness an amazing recovery in the Empires fortunes, based upon the administrative and military structures put in place during its long battle for survival. Let us look at a map of the Byzantine Empire depicting it in 780 A.D.

174

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Illustration 30: Map of the Byzantine Empire in 780 AD

45

Haldon explains that in spite of errors of the seventh century, the disastrous Roman defeats, and the loss of Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia and Egypt in the forties along with the defeat by the Bulgars, at the end of the seventh century, during the first half of the eighth century Byzantium saw the reassertion of imperial military strength, the stabilization of the frontiers along the Taurus and Anti-Taurus range, and the consolidation of the new fiscal and military administrative arrangements which had evolved out of the crisis of the 640s and, after, generally referred to collectively as the theme system (31). Furthermore, in the final years of his reign Leo issued a brief codification of Roman law, based on a combination of Justinianic law and strongly Old Testament moral-oriented, which reflected the ideological perceptions and assumptions of the times. Nevertheless, under Leo we witness an increasing alienation between Rome and Constantinople not only over ecclesiastical jurisdiction and imperial taxation but also over a violent debate caused by the imperial adoption of iconoclastic policy regarding devotional images (30-32). The onset of this debate will devastate much of the empire
45

See: <http://byzantium.seashell.net.nz>.

175

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

for more than a hundred years and meant the end of the Early Byzantine period and the first golden age of Byzantium. The victory of iconoclasm would have altered the course of Byzantine religious art, one of the most enduring legacies of the empire. Religious Aspects

The Iconoclastic Controversy46

According to Hussey, the position of Constantinople in Christendom was for a time weakened by its eighth and early ninth-century crisis due to the iconoclastic crisis, in one sense a continuation of the Christological problem regarding the character of Christs human nature and the true meaning of Christ redemption. This problem did not cease after the council of 681, but was extended in a different shape into the eighth and ninth centuries. It was a struggle between the iconoclasts who were suspicious of any religious art representing humans being of God demanding its destruction and the iconodule or venerators of icons which defended the place of them in the life of the church (18). The Byzantine Churchs unique devotion of icon was nourished by monasticism. Icons (in Greek eikon or image) were brought out for special occasions, carried in processions, and were even used to protect cities in wartime. They were bowed to, prayed to, sung to, and kissed; they were honored with candles, oil lamps, incense, precious-metal covers, and public processions. An icon could be a panel painted with a sacred subject intended for veneration, it could also be an image on a mosaic, enamel, an ivory carving, or a sculpture. What was essential was that the icons imitation of the holy figure allowed the image to share in the essence and holiness of the actual figure being depicted. The worshiper, by venerating the likeness, honored the sainted figure through the window of the icon. The Greco-Roman tradition of having painted panels of
Haldon times the iconoclastic controversy between 728 and 843, yet he agrees on the year 730 as the date of the first formal iconoclastic edict (38). Hussey marks the time span of the iconoclastic controversy between 726 and 843 (18).
46

176

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

the gods placed in homes with candles lit in front of them may have inspired the development of icons. Icons with Christian subjects were first used privately and then, gradually, entered the church. Most likely, due to their pagan roots and because they seemingly violated the second of the Ten Commandments, which forbade the making of idols, some parts of the Byzantine society rejected icons. This eventually led to the Iconoclastic controversy. Most scholars agree that there were two main phases in this controversy. The first onealso considered a pre-iconoclastic phasestarted in 726, with Leo IIIs attack on icons, which was followed by Constantine V, Leos son, and ended in 780, when Empress Irene stopped the persecution and summoned the seventh ecumenical council. The second one started in 815 with a new attack on icons, now by Leo V, and continued until 843 with the final reestablishment of icons at the time of another empress, Theodora (Hussey 18; Ware 15). During the first period, the chief champion of the icons was John of Damascus (675-749), and during the second Saint Theodore of Studium (759-826). John of Damascus worked more freely because he dwelt in Araboccupied Palestine, out of reach of the Byzantine government. He was from Damascus and had entered a Jerusalem monastery. Ware says that it was not the last time that Islam acted unintentionally as the protector of Orthodoxy (15).

177

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Illustration 31: John of Damascus47

As Meyendorff relates, in the seventh century, the Islamic wave swept the Ancient Christian and Byzantine provinces of Palestine, Syria, Egypt and North Africa, stopping at the very gates of Constantinople, although these regions had already lost their ties with the imperial Orthodox Church, Monophysitism as we saw, being the main reason. Yet, although of little influence in the universal church, some minorities in Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem headed by their patriarch remained Orthodox. Nonetheless, Meyendorff comments, during the long centuries of Islamic occupation, their main problem would be one of survival, for which they required the receipt of cultural, psychological and material help from Constantinople (The Byzantine Legacy 22). Let us analyze the iconoclast crisis in greater detail by studying the two main periods delineated above, by adding a little bit of background to obtain a better grasp of this long and complex period of Byzantine history. Background to the Eighth-Century Crisis Hussey also explains that the dispute in the Eastern Church over the use of holy icons, the pictures of Christ, the Mother of God, and the Saints, which were kept and
47

See: <www.answers.com>.

178

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

venerated both in churches and in private homes, had deep roots. The early Church had abstained visual representation of Christ because, as commented above, the second commandment (Ex. 20:4) forbade graven images, thereby trying to avoid idolatry associated with the pagan world, and both Old and New Testaments emphasized that true worship should not be concerned with material sacrifices but should be in spirit and in truth. As an illustration of the attempt to refrain from using graven images and realistic depictions, in the catacombs Jesus Christ was portrayed by means of symbols. However, by the fourth century there were special material objects, such as the Cross and other holy relics, which were being widely venerated, as recorded by Gregory of Nyssa. By the early fifth century, S. Augustin had noticed that the worship of religious images was being practiced in the Church. Yet, this practice already had an early opponent in Epiphanius of Salamis (d. 403) in Cyprus whose works were later cited by the iconoclasts. The late sixth and seventh centuries saw a marked increase in the use of images, which now were interpreted as performing miracles, and were worshipped, prayed to, set up as objects of devotion in private houses and workshops, as well as being used on public and official occasions. The image was considered to be so closely connected with its prototype as to possess supernatural (some would say magical) efficacy (Hussey 18). Hussey states that the growing cult of the icon in the late sixth and seventh centuries and the reasons for its origins and beginnings and its deep roots in the life of the Orthodox Church was a consequence of the need of individual Christians and communities of Christians for additional security in the face of so many external forces in the empire that caused great distress in national, social and daily life. For the Byzantines, holy icons in their way of thinking could offer protection against all sorts of enemies. There was no doubt in their minds that, for example an icon of St Demetrius of

179

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Thessalonica, a martyr from the second century, or of the Mother of God, had aided in the various sieges of Constantinople (19).

Illustration 32: Demetrius of Thessalonica48

God, who gave you invincible power and with care kept your city invulnerable, royally clothed the Church in purple with the streams of your blood, for you are her strength, O Demetrios. Table 18: Kontakion (Second Tone)

But the meaning and the function of the icon were much greater than these thoughts, as it was considered that it could bring the beholder into contact with God and even lead the Christian through the various hierarchical stages, e.g. of angels, to the Deity Himself . Then, in reverse, there was the relation of the icon, not to the beholder, but to its prototype. Because man was created in the image of God through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, he had in him something such as a spark of God. Thus, the portrait depicting a saint in particular reflected it, and of course to a much greater extent is this spark contained in a depiction of Christ, who, since he was not merely virtually real, but became a visible man and creature, could be portrayed in a tangible created form. By the late seventh century Christian apologetic on this theme had

48

See: <www.kosovo.net>.

180

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

reached the point of regarding it as a tenet of Orthodox teaching, as stated at The Council in Trullo (691-2), in its 82nd Rule (Hussey 19): Certain holy icons have the image of a lamb, at which is pointing the finger of the Forerunner. This lamb is taken as the image of grace, representing the True Lamb, Christ our God, Whom the law foreshadowed. Thus accepting with love the ancient images and shadows as prefigurations and symbols of truth transmitted to the Church, we prefer grace and truth, receiving it as the fulfillment of the law. Thus, in order to make plain this fulfillment for all eyes to see, if only by means of pictures, we ordain that from henceforth icons should represent, instead of the lamb of old, the human image of the Lamb, Who has taken upon Himself the sins of the world, Christ our God, so that through this we may perceive the height of the abasement of God the Word and be led to remember His life in the flesh, His Passion and death for our salvation and the ensuing redemption of the world.

Illustration 33: Forerunner and Lamb49

First Phase: Leo III, Constantine V and Empress Irene Opening conflict by Leo III Opposition to figurative portrayal or depiction existed long before the bitter controversy of the eighth century. The opponents of icons in this early stage of the iconoclastic period (726-787), alarmed by the superstitious practices associated with icons and the danger of idolatry, usually based their attacks on the Mosaic prohibition against graven images (Ex. 20:4-5) and the Christian emphasis on worship in spirit and
49

See: <www.pharos.bu.edu>.

181

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

in truth. But the Christological argument for and against icons was not fully developed until the eighth century by the North Syrian Leo II and his son Constantine. Hussey denies the fact that there is a direct link between Leos first move against icons in 726 and that he was motivated by the example of the Muslim Yazid (720-4). He believes that Byzantines attributed iconoclasm to Jewish rather than Muslim influence (Hussey 18-19). The growing use of icons, and particularly its abuse, had increasingly concerned churchmen, as has already been shown, and is reflected in the measure of support which the iconoclasts Leo III and Constantine V received. Some of the few surviving documents of this period referred to disquiet in Asia Minor. Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople (715-30) reproached certain churchmen who held iconoclastic views. Yet the authoritative lead was to come from the Emperor Leo III, issuing a formal edict in 730 for the destruction of the icons of the saints. Germanus, who had hoped to change Leos views, refused to put his signature to any decree of this kind and he therefore had to retire from office and went to live on his private estates where he died in 733. Yet his successor, the iconoclast Anastasius (730-54), fully supported Leo (Hussey 21). Both Hussey and Haldon agree in that the sources describing the mass persecutions, harassment and death of many iconophiles, as well as the destruction of icons, are not very accurate or reliable accounts. For Haldon, Leo III seems to have been a fairly mild critic of the use of the images (32). Hussey says that there is relatively little information about Leo III and his alleged iconoclast tenets (22), yet acts that infringed the second commandment such as the cult of the adoration of icons accompanied by the burning of candles and incense, worship rather than mere veneration of the saints, were

182

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

all condemned. It was also demanded that Christ was to be represented not in a human form but by a symbol such as the Cross. According to Haldon, Constantine II, a good general and administrator like his father, only adopted a strongly iconoclastic policy after around the eighth year of his reign, and like his father, he can be accused of burning images or of the persecution and torture of individuals, especially monks, who were opponents of his position and

policies, as suggested and narrated by the one-sided narratives of the iconophile tradition. Haldon also says that there is no evidence to prove the fact that the bulk of the population was committed to either view point. There were strong proponents of both sides, but imperial iconoclasm seemed to have affected primarily the higher clergy and leading military and civilian officials of the states. The greater majority of the population, if affected at all, kept their traditional practices and followed the official strain when and where it mattered. Yet, Haldon adds, there did originate a vocal monastic party who formed the opposition and engineered propaganda against Leo III and Constantine. This opposition although small at the beginning, eventually in the 840s it became a powerful element of influence within the church (34-35). Constantine V and the Council of 754 Under Constantine V (741-75) the iconoclast-iconophile struggle increased both in action and in theory. Persecution if spasmodic, could be severe and the iconoclasts, especially Constantine, built up theological support for iconoclasm. Leo D. Davis, in The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787), explains that Constantine based his position on Christology. He spoke of Christ as one person of two natures. An image of Christ would picture only his human nature and severed that nature from the divine nature. Thus, it was a false image (301). This council is considered as uncanonical and

183

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

represented the first time an Emperor inferred directly in the affairs of the church, ignoring the other patriarchs, including the Pope in Rome. Constantine, even more than his father, certainly committed himself to the removal of the image from religious life. His reign is the high watermark of the iconoclast movement. On the iconophile side, John Damascus became the defender of icons on Christological grounds, although he was in Muslim territories and it is not clear if his apologetic work was known to Constantine. But Constantine went a step further than his father and he attempted to get synodal approval for an iconoclast policy. He summoned a council in 754 which was held at Hiera. Although no patriarch was present, 338 bishops attended the council. Hussey doubts that all of them were dedicated to iconoclasm. The iconoclasts, who considered their council of 754 as the seventh ecumenical council, began with the traditional profession of belief in the apostolic and patristic traditions and in the preceding six general councils. The arguments of the iconoclasts were directed against idolatry (condemned by the Bible and the Fathers) and against the material nature of images. It was stressed that an image of Christ either circumscribed an uncircumscribable Godhead and confused the two natures (monophysite), or divided the human from the divine Person. To the iconoclasts the only true image of Christ was the Eucharistbread and wine in the holy supper . They argued that the true image of a saint was the reproduction of his virtue, that is, an ethical image within the believer and not any kind of material representation. In spite of the ruling in the council of 754 that forbade burning, looting, and misuse of sacred buildings, in the post-conciliar years these and other measures against icons and iconophiles were eventually taken. With the formal ecclesiastical condemnation of icons in 754 those refusing to abandon them could be punished as heretics, clerics could be degraded, and monks and

184

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

laity could be excommunicated. There were some spectacular instances of persecution, such as the severe one occurring in 754, that went beyond the prescribed punishment, but these were sporadic and were probably sensationally described and represented in the reports of iconodule literature. With the death of Constantine V in 755 iconoclasm died down, although traces of it may long lingered, and a ninth-century revival was merely temporary and even at times somewhat half-hearted (Hussey 28-29). At that time, in the West, the Popes, less worried about iconoclasm than about the more immediate pressure of the Lombards on the city of Rome, tried despairingly to obtain help from the schismatic East against the Lombards. Not getting the much needed and requested support the Pope made an agreement with King Pepin, father of Charlemagne, naming him protector of Rome. Pepin defeated the Lombards and granted the Pope temporal authority over the region around Romethe nucleus of the papal state which would last until 1870. Thus the Frankish Pepin not the Byzantine emperor was known as the arbiter of northern and central Italy and protector of the papacy. In 800, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the holy empire. Thus, as Davis suggests, the religious schism between East and West had incalculable political and cultural consequences. The papacy turned from its age-long relationship with the emperors at Constantinople to a new alliance with the Carolingia dynasty of the Franks and the Frankish lands (The First Seven Ecumenical Councils 301-306).

Restoration of the icons: The Empress Irene and the council of Nicea (787) Leo IV (775-80), who succeeded his father Constantine V, was much more moderate than Constantine. Also, in spite of not having been entirely repudiated, the harshness of Constantine Vs last years was greatly abated. Irene, the wife of Constantines son and heir Leo, was herself known to be a supporter of icons. On Leo

185

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

IVs death in 780 he left as successor his ten-year-old son Constantine VI and this gave Irene her opportunity to organize affairs so as to work towards the restoration of icons, though this was not attained in an instant, but, at least not all icons were being attacked and destroyed.(Hussey 44-45). Irene chose Stauracius, an eunuch, as her chief adviser. He was known for having tried to stop the decline of Byzantine power in the West by trying to arrange a marital alliance with the Franks but failed. In 784, the patriarch of Constantinople, Paul IV (780-4), filled with remorse for his earlier iconoclastic view and attempting to reconcile the Byzantine church with the rest of Christendom, advised Irene to call a general council to remedy matters. Irene agreed and sent an ambassador to Pope Hadrian to prepare for a council of reconciliation. At Constantinople, she herself began preparations for this Council. She started by electing a new patriarch, Tarasius (784806). This patriarch issued a statement of orthodox faith to the pope and three Melkite patriarchs in Muslim territory who had never embraced the iconoclasm of the bishops of the Empire. Hadrian agreed on the convocation of a general council. In his answer, he reminded the empress that popes from Gregory II (d. 731) to Stephen III (d. 722) had condemned iconoclasm and was in favor of the veneration of sacred images on the basis of the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers. Moreover, he requested the condemnation of the Council of Hieria of 754 as well as the return of the papal states in South Italy and Sicily, seized by Emperor Leo IIIa permanent claim the papacy had until the eleventh century. Pope Adrian also criticized Tarasiuss uncanonical elevation to the Patriarchate. The Melkite patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandria could not attend the projected council but sent delegates (Davis, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils 307-308).

186

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

With some disturbing events caused by a troop of iconoclast soldiers, the General Council was held at Nicea in September, 787, with the presence of between 258 and 335 bishops. After long discussion, on 13 October 787, following the usual profession of faith in the creed and in the six general councils, it went on to decree that, following the traditions of the Church, We define with all certainty and accuracy that just as the representation of the venerable and life-giving Cross, so the venerable and holy icons, in painting or mosaic or any other appropriate medium, should be set up in the holy churches of God, and on the sacred vessels and vestments, on walls and on panels, both in houses and by the way-side, and also the image of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ, our undefiled Lady, the holy Theotokos, the angels worthy of honour and all holy and devout people. For the more often they are seen in figural representation, the more readily men are lifted up to remember their prototypes and long for them, and these should be given honourable veneration, but not that true worship of our faith which belongs to the Divine Nature alone. But we should offer them incense and candles, as we do to the representation of the venerable and life-giving Cross and to the books of the Gospels and to other holy objects, according to ancient custom. For the honour which is given to the icon passes to that which the icon represents, and in venerating the icon we venerate the prototype. As Hussey concludes, iconoclast tenets were considered heretic and iconoclast writings were to be destroyed. Also, any person violating icons of relics was to be degraded if a cleric and excommunication if a layman or monk (28). A letter was sent to Pope Hadrian requesting confirmation of the Council, but had no reply from him in seven years due to his own delicate situation. Nicea had reconciled Rome and Constantinople but was met with a cold reception by the Franks (Davis, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils 315). Second Phase: Final Reestablishment of Icons, the Empress Theodora Yet the iconoclast issue did not end in 787, as seen in the conflicting tendencies that arose between Irene and her successors: Constantine VI (780-797) assumed control of the government helped by the iconoclast partyIrene returned to power (797-802) ; Nicephorus I (802-811) was an orthodox and iconophile emperor; in the reign of

187

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Michael I (811-813), afraid of the Bulgarian invasion, crowds gathered at the tomb of the iconoclast Emperor Constantine V to pray for the return of that great military commander. Leo V (813-820) restored iconoclasm summarily dealing with the leaders of the orthodox partyPatriarch Nicephorus was removed and the iconophile Theodore Studites exiled; Michael II (820-829) allowed these iconophile leaders to return, but did not allow the return of the sacred images; and Michaels son Theophilus II (829-842) unleashed iconoclasm in its full vigor, imprisoning and torturing iconophiles, especially monks. Yet after the death of Theophilus in 842, power passed into the hands of iconodule Theodora, regent of the child Michael (842-867), fortified by Patriarch Methodius (Davis, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils 314-316). In was more than a year before orthodoxy was formally restored on the first Sunday of Lent 843. Unlike the restoration of 787 no general council was held. The troubled years 787-843 finally came to an end. Hussey says that these conflicting currents were to determine the future course of East Roman fortunes. Monasticism was eventually to grow in strength. Yet as he adds: The strengthening of widespread monastic influence on the actual policy of the Byzantine state really took place rather later, after the development of the powerful houses on Mount Athos and particularly as the state weakened after 1204. Probably the guidance of Theodore Studites in the conduct of monastic life was a more important factor in the development of monasticism than in the actual iconoclast controversy (37). As Meyendorff delineates, the iconoclast crisis had both theological and cultural consequences: 1. In the Orthodox East images were forever accepted as a major means of communion with God, thus art, theology, and spirituality became inseparable. 2. The struggle on behalf of the icons enhanced the prestige of monasticism, seen now as an opposing force to the emperors arbitrary rulings. 3. The relationship between Eastern and western Christianity were further estranged. Fully involved in the struggle with Islam, the iconoclastic emperors neglected their power and influence in Italy and in retaliation to the

188

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

popes opposition to their religious policies transferred Illyricum, Sicily and southern Italy from papal jurisdiction to the patriarchate of Constantinople. 4. As a consequence of this, Pope Stephen II accepted the protection of then Frankish kingPepin the Shortand obtained his sponsorship in the creation of the papal state in Italy made up of formed Byzantine territories. (The Byzantine Legacy 24) Meyendorff further adds that the loss of the Middle East to the Arabs and the progressive separation of the East and the West made Constantinople the center of a Greek church, and thus ethnically limited. Yet immediately following the victory over iconoclasm, the Church of Byzantium started an amazing missionary expansion which resulted in the conversion of the Slavs, this occurred during the so-called the Middle Byzantine Period, which initiated the Christianization of Easter Europe (The Byzantine Legacy 24). As a Monk of St. Tikhons Monaster says, with the defeat of iconoclasm, The Orthodox Church, then, created a new art, new in form and content, which uses images and forms drawn from the material world to transmit the revelation of the divine world, making the divine accessible to human understanding and contemplation. This art developed side by side with the Divine Services and, like the Services, expresses the teaching of the Church in conformity with the word of Holy Scripture.

The final victory of the Holy Images in 843 is known as the Triumph of Orthodoxy, and is commemorated in a special service celebrated on Orthodoxy Sunday, the first Sunday in Lent. During this service the true faithOrthodoxyis proclaimed, its defenders are honored, and anathemas pronounced on all who attack the Holy Icons or the Seven General Councils: To those who reject the Councils of the Holy Fathers, and their traditions which are agreeable to divine revelation, and which the Orthodox Catholic Church piously maintains, ANATHEMA! ANATHEMA! ANATHEMA! Table 19: Triumph of Orthodox iconodule

Activity 1. What did territory occupied by the Byzantium Empire at the end of the 8th century consist of? 2. Why does Hussey say that the iconoclastic crisis was a continuation of a previous Christological problem regarding the character of Christs human nature? 3. What was the feeling of the Byzantine Church towards icons and the possible 189

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

4. 5. 6. 7.

cause of its rejection by some segments of the population? See Appendix D (2) and (4). Then, write (a) a list all the Emperors as well as (b) a list of all the Constantinople patriarchs involved in the iconoclastic crisis. Summarize the two main stages of this crisis. According to Meyendorff, which were the consequences of the iconoclastic crisis? Find and list images and symbols that depicted Jesus Christ and Christians that were abstract or not figurative (that is realistic).
Activity 42: The Iconoclast Crisis

The Byzantinization of Liturgy

If thanks to the iconophile victory Orthodox devotional art received its definitive form during the Byzantine period, so did the entire liturgical life of the Orthodox Church, as we will see in Part III dedicated to Practical Theology. In the process of Byzantinization, the Patriarchate of Constantinople played a determining role in this process of Byzantinization. Before its rise to political prominence as the New Rome, Constantinople was a minor bishopric without any liturgical tradition of its own, but, as Meyendorff asserts, Constantinople eventually built up its eclectic theological and liturgical tradition, trying to preserve and synthesize elements. It did this by using elements from older liturgical centers such Alexandria, from which it adopted the system of the computation of the date of Easter, and Antioch, by importing or transplanting their liturgical traditions to the capital. For him liturgy played a central part in maintaining the orthodox identity of the Church (The Byzantine Legacy 117). Papadakis includes Jerusalem as one of the major contributors towards this building process of the Byzantine rite, also adds another element that was involved in this process: the citys resident imperial court with its own elaborate courtly ceremonial. All facts taken into consideration, Papadakis further comments, that given Constantinoples growing importance in the church, by the ninth century, this new, liturgical synthesis became the accepted standard, eventually replacing all the other local rites within the Church. As Meyendorff explains, the Great Church of

190

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Constantinople never formally decreed any liturgical centralization or uniformity, yet its liturgy became the only acceptable standard of Byzantine and eventually all Orthodox churchmanship. Even the Roman church, accepted as it was in its honorary primacy, was criticized for departing from this standard. Meyendorff adds that, already by the seventh century, Byzantine Orthodoxy became practically identified with the Byzantine liturgy. As we will see in the chapter dedicated to Practical Theology, the liturgy and the whole cycle of divine services, such as compline, vespers, orthros, etc. as nowadays officiated in the Orthodox Church are similar to the original Byzantine rite of Constantinople. The self-sufficiency of the Great Church is clearly seen in the canons of the Synod of Trullo, held at the end of the seventh century, which condemned the practices of other churches such as the Armenian or Roman and preserved the liturgy untouchable in the spectacular expansion of the church in the mission to the Slavs (The Byzantine Legacy 118).

2. THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE PERIOD: THE SECOND GOLDEN AGE OF BYZANTIUM (843-1261) POLITICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS The resolution of the Iconoclastic controversy in favor of the use of icons was accompanied by a second flowering of the empire, the Middle Byzantine period (843 1261). The arts flourished, Greek became the dominant official language, and Christianity spread from Constantinople throughout the Slavic lands to the north. In 1204, Crusaders from western Europe captured Constantinople, thereby founding the Latin Empire, which lasted until 1261, when Byzantium re-conquered Constantinople from the crusaders.

191

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

During this period, the administrative machinery in the empire was huge, and there was an intense competition for power among the courtiers at the emperors court. The course of events is marked by complex diplomacy, intrigue, and gross violence; however, moral decay did not prevent such emperors as Basil I, founder of the Macedonian dynasty, and his successors (notably Leo VI, Romanus I, Constantine VII, Nicephorus II, John I, and Basil II) from giving the empire a period of splendor and power (867-1025). At its apogee in the late tenth and early eleventh centuries, the Byzantine Empire stretched from Italy to Mesopotamia. Let us look at a map of the empire in 1025, at the time of the death of Emperor Basil II, when the empire was once more a major political and military power in the eastern Mediterranean basin, with only Fatimid Caliphate in Egypt and Syria to challenge its power (Haldon 87):

Illustration 34: Map of the Byzantine Empire (1025 A.D.)

50

The emperor of Byzantium, considered the representative of Christ by his subjects, was an absolute ruler. According to visual and verbal portraits by Byzantine artists and orators, in physique and deportment the ideal emperor was always decorous and handsome and his costume and regalia expressed his majesty and quality. An emperors portrayal might also link him to the virtuous prototypes of Christ, such as the

50

See: <http://byzantium.seashell.net.nz>.

192

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Hebrew rulers David and Solomon, while in art the emperors halo and the gold of his background associated him with the sun. In this icon, for example, Constantine IX (1042-1054) is depicted with his wife Empress Zo on the two sides of Christ:

Illustration 35: Mosaic of Constantine IX Monomachus and Empress Zo with Christ enthroned in the middle51

With good reason, the citizens of Byzantium considered themselves to be the center of the civilized world. Their civilization had far-reaching political and cultural influences in all geographical directions during the Middle Byzantine period: Kievan Rus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Armenia, Christians in Former Imperial Territories, crusader regions, Islamic States, and the Latin West, until the Latin West and the Byzantine East mutually excommunicated each other in 1054. Yet, in the eleventh century, with the rule of Empress Zo (1028-50), anarchy and decline set in. The Seljuk Turks increased their attacks, and with the defeat (1071) of Romanus IV (1067-71) at Manzikert most of Asia Minor was permanently lost. The Normans seized Southern Italy and attacked the Balkans. Venice ruled the Adriatic and challenged Byzantine commercial dominance in the East, and the Bulgars and Serbs reasserted their independence.

51

See: <www.historyofmacedonia.org>.

193

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Alexius I (1081-1118) took advantage of the First Crusade to recover some territory in Asia Minor and to restore Byzantine prestige, but his successors, the Comnenus dynasty, were at best able to postpone the disintegration of the empire. After the death (1180) of Manuel I (1143-80) the Angelus dynasty unwittingly precipitated the cataclysm of the Fourth Crusade. In 1204 the Crusaders and the Venetians sacked Constantinople and set up a new empire in Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece. The remainder of the empire broke into independent states, notably the empires of Nicea and of Trebizond and the despotate of Epirus. In 1261 the Nicean emperor Michael VIII (1261-82) conquered most of the tottering Latin empire and reestablished the Byzantine Empire under the Palaeologus family (1261-1453). The reconstructed empire was soon attacked from all sides, notably by Charles I of Naples, by Venice, by the Ottoman Turks, by the new kingdoms of Serbia and Bulgaria, and by Catalonian adventurers under Roger de Flor. At the same time, the empire began to break down from within, the capital was at odds with the provinces; ambitious magnates were greedy for land and privileges, religious orders fought each other vigorously, and church and state were rivals for power.

Illustration 36: Michael VIII Palaeologus52

52

See: <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cousin/html/p354.htm>.

194

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Eventually the Turks encircled the empire and reduced it to Constantinople and its environs. Manuel II (1391-1425) and John VIII (1425-28) vainly asked the West for aid, and, in 1453, Constantinople fell to Sultan Muhammad II after a final desperate defense under Constantine XI (1067). This is one of the dates conventionally accepted as the beginning of the modern age. The collapse of the empire opened the way for the vast expansion of the Ottoman Empire to Vienna itself and also enabled Ivan III of Russia, son-in-law of Constantine XI, to claim a theoretical succession to the imperial title. Paradoxically, and in spite of fierce controversy and polarization such as the Palamas debate or the problem of ecclesiastical unionas we will see, the most burning issue during the entire Palaeologan period, Byzantium under the Palaeologan emperors experienced an astonishing intellectual, spiritual, and artistic renaissance that influenced the entire Eastern Christian world.

Activity Read the broad political and cultural aspects delineated under the Second Golden Age of Byzantium (843-1261). Then: a) find the emperors mentioned in the List of Emperors of the Byzantine empire (See Appendix C) b) Briefly list the main characteristics of this period. Example: During this period, the arts flourished ...
Activity 43: General Aspects of the Second Golden Age of Byzantium

Religious Aspects

Missions: The Conversion of the Slavs

For Byzantium the ninth century was a period of intensive missionary activity. Free from the long struggle against iconoclasm, the Byzantine Church, at the time of Patriarch Photius, began to convert the pagan Slavs, who lay beyond the frontiers of the empire, to the north and the north-westMoravians, Bulgarians, Russians, Serbsto 195

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Christianity. Key to these successes were the brothers Constantine (826-69) (known in the Orthodox Church by his monastic name of Cyril) and Methodius (815-85?). Constantine, the ablest among the pupils of Photius, and Methodius, were Greeks from Thessalonica, and had learned the Slavonic language in their childhood around Thessalonica. They could speak it fluently. In 863, the so called Apostles of the Slavs were sent to the Slavs of central Europe, to Moraviaa territory roughly equivalent to the modern Czechoslovakiasince Rastislav, prince of Moravians, had requested missionaries from Byzantium. They started their mission by translating the Scripture and the liturgy into the Slavonic dialect, thus creating the first Slavonic alphabet and a new vocabulary appropriate for Christian usage. We cannot overestimate the importance for the future of Orthodoxy of the Slavonic translation done by these two brothers. It was the origins of Church Slavonic, the common liturgical language still used by the Russian Orthodox Church and other Slavic Orthodox Christians.

Illustration 37: Cyril and Methodius53

53

See: <www.istrianet.org>.

196

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

They justified the translation of Christian texts into the vernacular by referring to the miracle of Pentecost (Acts 3), when the apostles were given the gift of many languages. In a prologue to the Gospel of John, Cyril quoted the words of Paul to justify the right of the Slavs to hear the Word in their own language: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue (I Cor. 14:19). But this first mission to Moravia was unsuccessful. The German missionaries at work in the same areas along with the changing political situation in Moravia forced them to flee. The two missions not only depended on different Patriarchates but worked on different principles. While Cyril and Methodius officiated their services in Slavonic, the Germans did it in Latin; while Cyril and Methodius recited the Creed in its original form, the Germans insisted on the Filioque. To free their mission from the German interference, in 868, they traveled to Rome to place their mission under the Popes protection, receiving the formal support of Pope Hadrian II (867-872), who allowed the Greek mission to use Slavonic as the liturgical language in Moravia. In addition, Hadrian consecrated Methodius as bishop of Sirmium and commended him with the mission to the Slavs. Constantine died while in Rome after entering a monastery and taking the name of Cyril (869?), but Methodius returned to Moravia. Yet, the popes authority was not enough and Methodius was tried and imprisoned by German bishops. Consequently, Moravia entered the ambit of Latin Christianity. Nevertheless, their work was not in vain. Not too long afterwards, Byzantine missionaries, including the exiled disciples of the two brothers, turned to other areas. Practically contemporary to the Moravian mission was the conversion of Bulgaria. As in Moravia and many other areas of Europe, the political leadership of the country was instrumental in this conversion, which had been planned by missionaries

197

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

and diplomats coming from Byzantium. As a consequence, in 865, Khan Boris of Bulgaria became a Christian, with Michael II (820-829) acting as his godfather. Boris attempted to join the jurisdiction of Rome (866-869), but finally joined the Byzantine religious orbit. With his son and successor, Symeon (893-927), and later the westernBulgarian Tsar Samuel (976-1014), Preslav and Ohrid, their respective capitals, became important religious centers. There the Byzantine liturgy was successfully appropriated and two independent patriarchates were created in these capitals. Because the Bulgarian tsars claimed imperial titles for themselves, Emperor Basil II (976-1025) put a temporary end to the independent existence of Bulgaria. Yet, he did not completely suppress the practice of worship in the Slavonic tongue. The Byzantine mission to the Russians also was contemporary to the Moravian and Bulgarian missions. In 867, Patriarch Photius, in an encyclical to the eastern patriarchs, announced that the Russians had been converted and had accepted a bishop from Constantinople. Yet, this was just an initial conversion embracing a small group of neighboring Byzantine cities in the Crimea. A more significant event in the conversion was that of the powerful princess of Kiev, Olga around 955, who took the Christian name of Helen, and, finally, the conversion of Russia, which actually began with the baptism of Vladimir of Kiev in 989. On this occasion he also married the Byzantine princess Anna, the sister of the Byzantine Emperor Basil II. He assumed the name of Basil and started off in earnest to Christianize his realm by introducing priests, relics, sacred vessels and icons, by holding mass baptism in the rivers, by setting up Church courts, and by instituting ecclesiastical tithes. He also emphasized the social implications of Christianity by establishing highly social services. He distributed food to the poor and sick. Under Vladimir, Byzantine Orthodoxy became the official religion of Russia, with its major centers in Kiev and Novgorod. Like Vladimir, Boris and Gleb,

198

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

and Theodosiusall of them considered saints by the Orthodox Churchwere intensely conscious of the practical consequences of the Gospel. In the same period, Byzantine missionaries were also sent to Serbia, which accepted Christianity around 867-74. A little further, under the initiative of Patriarchs Nicholas Mysticus (901-907, 911-925), Byzantine records show some missionary activities in the Caucasus, among the Alans (an Iranian nomadic group). Thus, by the beginning of the eleventh century most of the pagan Slavic world, including Russia which eventually regarded itself as the heir of Constantinople, Bulgaria and Serbia had been won for Byzantine Christianity. Bulgaria was officially recognized as a patriarchate by Constantinople in 927, Serbia in 1375 the Serbian Patriarchate was created in 1346, and Russia in 1589. Hilarion, Metropolitan of Russia (1051-1054?) said: The religion of grace spread over the earth and finally reached the Russian people The gracious God who cared for all other countries now no longer neglects us. His desire to save us and lead us to reason. In short, around the beginning of the second millenium, the Byzantine Church exercised its ministry in a territory which extended from the polar regions to the Araboccupied Middle East, and from the Adriatic to the Caucasus. Its center, Constantinople, had no rival, not only in terms of power or wealth but also in terms of intellectual, artistic, and literary achievements (Meyendorff, The Byzantine Legacy 2427; Papadakis; Ware 73-76; and Hussey 55-58). This expansion to the Slavic world also created an Orthodox Commonwealth since, as Papadakis indicates, the Slavs were not only christianized but also civilized by the Byzantines. Byzantine art, literature and culture were no longer confined to Byzantiums political frontiers. The saving message of the New Testament was accompanied by the gift of civilization.

199

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Activity Using your own words, briefly comment: 1. 2. 3. 4. Patriarch Photiuss involvement in these missions Cyril and Methodiuss mission to Moravia The conversion of Bulgaria The conversion of Russia
Activity 44: The conversion of the Slavs

Schism between the East and West As Ware relates: One summer afternoon in the year 1054, as the service was to begin in the Church of Holy Wisdomor Hagia Sophiaat Constantinople, Cardinal Humbert and two other legates of the Pope entered the building and made up their way to the sanctuary. They had not come to pray. The placed a Bull of Excommunication upon the altar and marched out once more. As he passed through the western door, the Cardinal shook the dust from his feet with the words: Let God look and judge. A deacon ran out after him in great distress and begged him to take back the Bull. Humbert refused; and it was dropped in the street. (43) Yet, as many historians recognize, the schism cannot be associated with any event of date. It happened gradually as the result of a long and complicated process. Ware states that long before there was an open and formal schism between the east and the west, had become strangers to one another (44). He also asserts that, politically, the schism was already a fact when Constantine decided to found the Second Rome, but increased by the fifth century with the barbarian invasions, in spite of Justinians serious effort to bring the empire together. During the late sixth and the seventh centuries, there was further isolation due to the Avar and Slav invasions of the Balkan Peninsula; Illyricum, which used to serve as a bridge, became instead a barrier between Byzantium and the Latin world. A further step in this estrangement was the rise of Islam, which came to control most of the Mediterranean, thus making more difficult the relations between the East and the West (45). The different political situations in the East and the West also led to the creation of other differences, for example the barbarian invasion

200

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

and the breakdown of the empire in the west greatly strengthened the autocratic structure of the western Church. In the East, in contrast with the plurality of warring chiefs in the West, there was a strong secular head, the Emperor, who was, as Nicol asserts, in Church and Society in the Last Century of Byzantium (1979), Gods regent on earth, the visible head of church and state, as the two were interdependent (3). In the West, however, Ware says, because of the barbarian invasion, it was mainly the Papacy alone which could act as a center of unity as well as providing an element of continuity and stability to both the spiritual and political life of western Europe. This was a role the Greek Patriarchs were not called to play. Consequently, Ware adds, the western Church gradually became centralized to a degree unknown anywhere in the four Patriarchates of the East (except possibly in Egypt) (47). Furthermore, Haldon comments that while the see of Constantinople was developing into an imperial church, Rome waswith a few exceptionsindependent of direct political influence from the Emperors. This would raise tensions between Rome and Constantinople (132). The Iconoclast controversy, Ware adds, added to this schism, when, as we have already noticed, when, Pope Stepheniconodule as the rest of the papacywas refused help and consequently came in 754 under Frankish protectionand influence. This led, as mentioned, to the crowning of Charlemagne as emperor of the Holy Roman Empire in 800 by Pope Leo III. Considering Charlemagne as an intruder, Byzantium regarded the Papal coronation as an act of schism within the Empire. This reorientation was not apparent until the middle of the eleventh century. In many ways, Rome continued to be part of the Byzantine world and the cultural unity lingered on but on a greatly attenuated form. Both interpreted the inherited classical tradition in increasingly divergent ways. Language worsened things. Bilingualism was over. For example, the greatest scholar in

201

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

the ninth-century Constantinople could not read Latin. The West and the East drew from different scholarly sources and read different books causing Greeks and Latins to drift intellectually even further apart. Ware adds that it is perhaps in the reign of Charlemagne that the schism of these two civilizations was first made more evident. Enclosed in their own world, the Byzantines regarded the Franks as barbarians. He says that while in the fourth century there had been one Christian civilization in Europe, in the thirteenth, there were two. These political and cultural divergences did affect the religious unity of the Church (45-46). Meyendorff traces back the process to at least the fourth century when a certain theological polarization between the Greek East and the Latin West began. He illustrates his point in regards to the Trinitarian theology by saying that while the Greek Cappadocian fathers placed a greater emphasis on the distinctiveness of the three persons, a Latin father such as St. Augustin, stressed a philosophical definition of God as one simple essence. Also, for example regarding Monophysitism, while the Latins were rigidly attached to the definition of the two natures, adopted at Chalcedon, the Greeks, especially Constantine, was more ready to accept the concept of one incarnate nature as formulated by Cyril of Alexandria. Meyendorff also mentions increasingly divergent positions in disciplinary and liturgical practices (The Byzantine Legacy 27). Yet, he further asserts, as does Ware, that the two main reasons behind the strained relations between the East and the West were ecclesiastical ones: the different perspectives on the primacy of Rome and the Byzantine Orthodox Churchs rejection of the Filioquethe affirmation that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

The Filioque and Other Sources of Separation

As we have seen when studying the seven ecumenical councils, the leadership of Rome was never denied in Byzantium, but this primacy of the Roman Church was

202

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

based on pragmatic reasons and not on divine reasons such as that of apostolicity: the fact that this primacy came from Christ, through the apostle Peter. Yet, as Meyendorff states, both refrained for centuries from pushing their different points of view to final rupture. However, in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries conflicts started to gather and both cultural and political elements intermingled with doctrinal and disciplinary issues (The Byzantine Legacy 28). The conflict over the Filioque started in the West, in Spain, at the Third Council of Toledo (589). The creed of Nicea-Constantinople was interpolated with the Filioque. Originally the creed ran: I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Live, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and together glorified. With the insertion of the Filioqueand from the Sonthe Creed read: I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Live, who proceeds from the Father and the Son who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and together glorified. This interpolation soon became popular, as Meyendorff explains, because it suited Saint Augustins explanation of the Trinity (The Byzantine Legacy 28). Ware says that the text spread to France and then to Germany, where it was welcomed by Charlemagne and adopted at the semi-Iconoclast Council of Frankfort (794) (51). Thus by the eighth century, this text was widely interpolated throughout Frankish Europe. Seen as an opportunity to accuse the competing Eastern Empire with heresy, Charlemagne and his theologians refused to accept the Acts of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) because it contained the original form of the creed and the traditional Greek formulation of the Trinitarian formula. This started a polemic that would last for centuries. Meyendorff relates that at the beginning, the popes defended the Greek position and rejected the interpolation. But in 886, Pope Nicholas I, who sponsored the

203

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

activities of German missionaries in Bulgaria, implicitly condoned the use of the interpolated creed among the Bulgarian converts. Patriarch Photius (858-867 and 877886), who considered Bulgaria as part of his jurisdiction, wrote the first complete refutation of the Filioque (and from the Son). Nicholas and Photius were also set against each other due to authority issues, the latter did not accept the irregular naming of Photius as a Patriarch by the emperor, which even caused a temporary division known as the Photian Schism. In 879-880, a council, with the attendance of legates of Pope John VIII, condemned the interpolation and sanctioned a reconciliation between Rome and Constantinople. Nevertheless, in the tenth century, the Frankish imposed their will on the weakened papacy and the Filioque became accepted in Rome, probably in 1014. This, Meyendorff adds, made the schism inevitable (The Byzantine Legacy 28-29). According to Meyendorff (The Byzantine Legacy 29) and Ware (51), other sources of separation were issues concerning discipline and liturgy, such as the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist and the enforced celibacy of priests in the West. The two churches also had different rules of fasting. As already stated, eventually, these centuries-old differences between the Roman and the Orthodox Eastern Church culminated in 1054 in a complete break. Legates from Pope Leo IX excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Cerularius when Cerularius would not agree to adopt western church practices, and in return Cerularius excommunicated the legates. This annulled Constantine XIs attempts to ally with the Pope against the Normans. For Meyendorff, this incident which opposed the legates of the pope to the patriarch is mistakenly seen as a beginning of the schism. Rather, it was a failed attempt at healing an already existing division. The separation, enhanced by the Byzantine hatred after the sack of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade (1204), was further increased by the Latin

204

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

doctrine of purgatory and the exact moment of consecration of the holy gifts in the Eucharist. Activity Using your own words, list the main causes of the schism between the East and the West. Give short explanations for each of the items you mentioned.
Activity 45: Causes of the Schism between the East and the West

Your Own Research The Photian Schism was a controversy between Eastern and western Christianity caused by the opposition of the Roman pope to the appointment by the Byzantine emperor Michael III of the lay scholar Photius to the patriarchate of Constantinople. The controversy also involved Eastern and western ecclesiastical jurisdictional rights in the Bulgarian church. (Encyclopedia Britannica) 9th-century-AD Activity: Search the web for Photian schism and write a one-page paper. List your references.
Activity 46: The Photian Schism

These issues along with that of the Filioque could have been solved if consensus were reached on the issue of authority, but after the Gregorian reform in the eleventh century, Rome would not allow its own unique authority to be questioned. In contrast, for the Byzantines a council was the only means to solve differences and the honorary primacy of Rome did not exempt the papacy from being answerable to conciliar judgment. As we will see, in the late Byzantine period there would be numerous, but unsuccessful attempts at reunion by popes and by emperors (29-30).

3. THE LATE BYZANTINE PERIOD (1261-1453) POLITICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS The period known as the Late Byzantine lasted from 1261 until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the Ottoman Turks. The looting of Constantinople in 1204 was an irretrievable disaster for the Byzantines. With its territory and resources continually shrinking, Byzantium was never again able to fully suppress internal

205

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

disorders or to exercise independence from outside powers. The state became so impoverished that in 1369 Emperor John V was arrested for debt in Venice as he tried to obtain financial help from the West. Meanwhile, the Byzantine church increased in prestige and authority as the emperors weakened. Byzantine culture enjoyed a last flowering in literature, scholarship, theology, and art, which still followed the artistic traditions of the Middle Byzantine era. Byzantium also helped to transform the West intellectually, as Italian Renaissance scholars, intent on translating Greek pagan and Christian writings, received the urgent help from Byzantine scholars, especially after many fled to Italy from Constantinople following the citys conquest in 1453.

Illustration 38: Siege of Constantinople (1453)54

On the eve of its final battle for survival, Byzantium was reduced to a few isolated territories surrounded by the Ottoman Empire, which had experienced a rapid expansion in power and territorial extent. Constantinople, still under Byzantine control, but situated in the heart of Ottoman territories, had become an anomaly and irritant, which the Sultan Mehmet II finally removed on 29 May 1453 after an epic siege and heroic last-ditch defense. The long story of the Roman-Byzantine Empire was over. But

54

See: <www.ucalgary.ca>.

206

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

even in its final centuries, the Empire generated a cultural life of great vitality and influence which belied its lack of temporal power. RELIGIOUS ASPECTS Crusades: Making the Schism Definitive Ware says that even after the schism of 1054 the friendly relations between East and West continued, not yet being conscious of the great gulf that separated them. Byzantine Christians did not consider the break with the West as a final schism. The prevailing opinion was that the break of communion with the West was due to a temporary take-over of the venerable Roman see by misinformed and uneducated German barbarians, and that eventually the former unity of the Christian world under the one legitimate emperorthat of Constantinopleand the five patriarchates would be restored. It was the crusades that brought to an end this utopian scheme and made the schism definite because they introduced, Ware says a new spirit of hatred and bitterness and they brought the whole issue down to popular level (59). Lawrence Miller, in The Crusades (1095-1291), lists three causes for the crusades, which he describes as the culminating act of the medieval drama in which two great faiths resorted to the supreme court of war. The first cause was the advance of the Seljuq Turks, which took control of Jerusalem in 1070 from the Fatimids. There already was a history of tension between the Christian world and the Muslim world going back in time for centuries. Until now it had been fought mainly in Spain and Sicily, but with the change in rulers over Jerusalem in 1070, pilgrims were prevented from visiting Jerusalem. Since the time of Constantine, Christians had gone on pilgrimages to the Holy Land. Even though Moslems had ruled Jerusalem since 638, Christians were still allowed to visit the city. It was the pilgrims accounts of oppression

207

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

and desecration that made Europe react. Yet it still took a couple of decades before the reaction came in the form of the crusades. The second cause was the dangerous weakening of the Byzantine Empire due to internal discords, disruptive heresies and its isolation from the West by the schism of 1054 itself. While the Bulgars, Patzinaks, Cumans, and Russians assaulted its European gates, the Turks were dismembering its Asiatic provinces. Besides, should Constantinople fall, all Eastern Europe would lie open to the Turks. And the third cause was the ambition of the Italian citiesPisa, Genoa, Venice, Amalfito extend their rising commercial power. The final decision came from Urban II, who made one of the most influential speeches in the Middle Ages, calling on Christian princes in Europe to go on a crusade to rescue the Holy Land from the Turks. Urban II envisioned papal rule over the Eastern Church (1).
The crusaders took the body of John Chrysostom, which had been returned to Constantinople in 438, and took it to Rome. It was placed in St. Peters basilica. Table 20: The body of John Chrysostom

The seven major crusades proved to be a disaster. The first crusade (1095-1099) was the most successful from a military point of view. Antioch was captured from the Turks in 1098 and Jerusalem in 1099 and the Crusaders replaced the Greek patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem with Latin prelates. This created local schisms at the popular level. Thus, instead of reestablishing Christian unity in the common struggle against Islam, the Crusades demonstrated how far apart Latins and Greeks really were from each other. Additionally, during the fourth crusade (1202-1204), as

commented, Constantinople was shamefully sacked bringing about the enthronement of a Latin emperor on the Bosporus, and the installation of a Latin patriarch, the Venetian Thomas Morosini, in Hagia Sophia, confirmed as such by Pope Innocent III. The Greeks realized the full seriousness of papal claims over the universal church:

208

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

theological polemics and national hatreds were combined to tear the two churches further apart.

Illustration 39: Siege of Constantinople by crusaders55

Eastern Christendom has never forgotten the pillage the city suffered. Nicetas Choniates protested, Even the Saracens are merciful and kind compared with these men who bear the cross of Christ on their shoulders. Ware says that the doctrinal disagreement between the two churches were now on the Greek side filled with intense feeling of national hatred, resentment, and indignation against western aggression and sacrilege (60). Meanwhile, the Balkan countries of Bulgaria and Serbia secured national emancipation with western help, the Mongols sacked Kiev (1240), and Russia became a part of the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan. After the capture of the city, the Orthodox patriarch John Camaterus (11981206) fled to Bulgaria and died there in 1206. A successor, Michael IV Autorianus, was elected in Nicea (1207-13), where he enjoyed the support of a restored Greek empire. Although he lived in exile, this patriarch was recognized as legitimate by the entire

55

See: <crusades.boisestate.edu>.

209

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Orthodox world. The patriarchate at Nicea continued to administer the immense Russian metropolitanate and granted the Bulgarian Church its right for ecclesiastical independence with a restored patriarchate in Trnovo (1235). The church in Bulgaria was apparently under at least nominal control from Rome from 1204 to 1230. In addition, the Orthodox Serbs negotiated the establishment of their own national church; their spiritual leader, St. Sava, was installed as autocephalous archbishop of Serbia in 1219 (Monks at Decany Monastery). What was the legacy of the Crusades? Walker notes: Viewed in the light of their original purpose, the Crusades were failures. They made no permanent conquests of the Holy Land. They did not retard the advance of Islam. Far from aiding the Eastern Empire, they hastened its disintegration. They also revealed the continuing inability of Latin Christians to understand Greek Christians, and they hardened the schism between them. They fostered a harsh intolerance between Muslims and Christians, where before there had been a measure of mutual respect. They were marked, and marred, by a recrudescence of anti-Semitism. (284) Eastern Christianity can never forget the behavior of those European barbarians who by their looting and plundering and their sixty years of tyrannical misrule in Constantinople (1204-1261) prepared the way for the destruction of the Byzantine Empire and hastened on its downfall.

Activity 1. List Millers three causes of the Crusades 2. Explain the circumstances of the Fourth Crusade 3. What were the effects and legacy of the Crusades?
Activity 47: Crusades

IMPORTANCE OF THE RELIGION IN THE POLITICS OF THE BYZANTINE PEOPLE: THREE CONTROVERSIES Nicol also says that in the last centuries of Byzantium there were three great controversies which demonstrate the extent to which religion was the politics of the Byzantine people: the Arsenite schism, in the thirteen century, the hesychast or Palamas

210

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

controversy, and the question of union with the Roman Church. Although basically theological, these issues divided families, society and the Empire.

The Arsenite Schism

The first controversy, the Arsenite schism, began with Michael VIII Palaiologoss blinding of the boy Emperor John IV Laskaris, considered by many to be the legitimate hair to the throne of Nicea. John IV was the last of the line of Laskaris, which had ruled the Empire in exile at Nicea for over fifty years. Many people believed that the boy emperor had a prescriptive right to reign over an empire his father had saved from extinction after the Fourth Crusade. This made Arsenios Autoreianos, patriarch of Constantinople, in 1265, condemn Michael VIII as a criminal and excommunicate him. The emperor, in return, deposed him and sent him in exile to Prokonessos in Propontis. Arsenioss removal from office was the beginning of the Arsenite Schism, which did not end until 1310, sixteen years after his death. Many in Anatolia, loyal to the memory of the Lascarid emperors who had enriched and protected them, condemned Michael VIII as a usurper (7-8). Furthermore, soon the deposed Patriarch Arsenios become a martyr, a faction of bishops, priests, monks, and laymen broke away from the rest of the Church, refusing to recognize the authority of any subsequent patriarchs. Nicol adds that not all of them were motivated for such lofty principles. As so often in Byzantium, the trouble was partly about the extent to which emperors had the right to interfere in the affairs of the Church. This ... was a perennial problem and one to which no Byzantine canonist had ever provided a definitive answer, merely a series of interpretations and recommendations. Here again, the Empire could perhaps have done with a written constitution; the Church perhaps could have done with an army of canon lawyers. But in either eventuality the Empire, and the Church, would have ceased to have specific quality which we call Byzantine. (8) The second controversy which divided Church and society in the middle of the fourteenth century was the hesychast controversy, which, according to Timothy Ware,

211

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

also contributed to the process of separation between the theologies of East and West, where the tradition of the Fathers was replaced by scholasticism. This dispute involved the doctrine of Gods nature and the method of prayer used by certain monks called hesychasts (The name derives from the Greek word hesychia, meaning inner stillness). The hesychast is the one who devotes himself to the prayer of silence, a prayer devoid from images, words, and discursive writing. The prayer of the heartor the Jesus prayer56involving the whole body and assisted by certain physical exercisesbreathing and a particular bodily posturewas the technique through which the hesychast accomplished the mystical state culminating in the vision of the Divine and Uncreated Light. This light was the same envisioned by Jesus disciples in his Transfiguration on Mount Tabor. Although hesychasm can be traced back to St Clement of Alexandria (died 215), the first phase of this controversy came to a head in the middle of the fourteenth century, within the years c.1330 to 1341, when Barlaam the Calabrian, one of the representatives of Byzantine Humanism, attacked the spiritual practices of the hesychasts. He postulated the doctrine of Gods otherness and unknowability in an extreme form. For him, hesychasts held a grossly materialistic conception of prayer. He was also shocked by their claim to attain a vision of the Divine and Uncreated light (65-66). It was Gregory of Palamas (1296-1359), a monk with great following on Mount Athos, who defended the hesychasts in the midst of this controversy, affecting the Church and dividing society into Palamites and antiPalamites: hesychasts and anti-hesychasts. The second phase of this controversy coincided with the outbreak of a civil warwaged primarily between 1341 and 1347, although we can extend this phase in the history of the Palamite controversy to the death of Gregory of Palamas on 14
56

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me. In modern Orthodox practice, the Prayer sometimes ends .... have mercy on me a sinner.

212

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

November, 1359between John V Palealogus and Patriarch Calecas on the one hand, and the Great Domestic, John Cantacuzene on the other. After his death in 1341, Andronikos II left his infant son, John V as his successor. Consequently, the empire needed a regency, but there were two candidates. John Cantazune, the lates emperor chief minister, on the one side, and the Patriarch of Constantinople, John Kalekas. Finally, because of pressure by John Vs mother, the Empress Anne of Savoy, the Patriarch was chosen. But this Patriarch was convinced that Gregory of Palamas and his monks were guilty of heresy and imprisoned and excommunicated Palamas. This was not the case of John Cantacuzene, who took the side of Palamas. A civil war then started between supporters of the two sides. Cantacuzene, who counted on an overwhelming and invaluable support of the monks, especially on Mount Athos, won the war, and in a council held in 1351, which recognized the full Orthodoxy of Palamas and his teachings, vindicated Gregory Palamas and the theology and practice of hesychasm. After a brief reign as emperor, Cantacuzene (1347-54), became a monk but continued to exercise great influence on all ecclesiastical and political events. His close friend, Nicholas Cabasilas, in his spiritual writings on the Divine Liturgy and the sacraments, clearly perceived the universal Christian significance of Palamite theology. The hesychast movement led to a great revival of spirituality in Byzantine society of the middle fourteenth century (Nicol 10). Along with the Hesychast revival, a significant opening to the West was taking place among some Byzantine ecclesiastics. The brothers Prochorus and Demetrius Cydones, under the sponsorship of Cantacuzenus, for example, were systematically translating the works of Latin theologians into Greek. Thus, major writings of Augustine, Anselm of Canterbury, and Thomas Aquinas were made accessible to the East for the first time. Most of the Latin-minded Greek theologians

213

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

eventually supported the union policy of the emperors, but there were somelike Gennadios II Scholarios, the first patriarch under the Turkish occupationwho reconciled their love for western thought with total faithfulness to the Orthodox Church (Monks at Decany Monastery).

On the Second Sunday of Lent the Orthodox Church commemorates our Holy Father Gregory Palamas, Archbishop of Thessalonica, the Wonderworker. The feast day of Saint Gregory Palamas is November 14, however, he is commemorated on this Sunday as the condemnation of his enemies and the vindication of his teachings by the Church in the 14th century.(Sunday of Saint Gregory Palamas) Table 21: Feast day of Saint Gregory Palamas

Attempts at Union with the Roman Church

The third controversy that divided the Byzantine society was the question of the right and wrong of union with the Roman Church. This union was proclaimed on two occasions: the Council of Lyons in 1274 and the Council of Florence in 1439. These attempts were started by the government and not by the church, for an obvious political reason; i.e., the hope for western help against the Turks. But the attempts brought no results either on the ecclesiastical or on the political levels. The majority of Byzantine Orthodox churchmen were not opposed to the idea of union but considered that it could only be brought about through a formal ecumenical council at which East and West would meet on equal footing, as they had done in the early centuries of the church. The first attempt was made by Michael VIII (1259-82), the emperor who recovered Constantinople after the Fourth Crusade, yet his reasons seemed more political than religious: he needed the support and protection of the papacy as he was threatened by attacks from Charles de Anjou, sovereign of Sicily. In the Council of Lyon the Orthodox delegates agreed to recognize the Papal claim of supremacy of unlimited power over the Church. Yet this union was an absolute failure due to the

214

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

fierce rejection by the overwhelming majority of clergy and laity in the Byzantine church as well as by Bulgaria and the other Orthodox countries. The successor of Michel VIII formally repudiated the agreement and Michael himself for his apostasy, who was deprived of a Christian burial (Nicol 15; Ware 60-61). Yet, in 1369 Emperor John V Palaeologus was personally converted to the Roman faith in Rome. The Union of Florence in the fifteen century was a different matter because the danger did not come from the Christian West but from the Muslim East. The only hope for the Byzantines to defeat the Turks was with help from the West. The West also shared the same fear since the Turks were the masters of a large part of eastern Europe. This common fear prompted, after months of wrangling, this second reunion, attended in person by John VIII (1425-48) and a large delegation from the Orthodox Church. At this council a formula of union was drawn up covering the Filioque, Purgatory, azyumes, and the Papal claim. Except Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus, who was later canonized, all the Orthodox present at the council signed it. Yet, the agreement again encountered the fierce opposition of Byzantium. John VIII and his successor, Constantine XI, the last emperor of Byzantium, remained loyal to the agreement but could not impose it on many of their subjects, of either clergy or lay people. Yet the Byzantines received a small help, not enough to defeat the Ottoman Turks and, as already mentioned, the city was conquered, not without a brilliant but hopeless defense in May 29, 1453 (Nicol 16-17; Ware 70-72) Sultan Mehmed II transformed Hagia Sophia into an Islamic mosque, and the few partisans of the union fled to Italy.

In the early hours of 29 May, the last Christian service was held in the great Church of the Holy Wisdom. It was a united service of Orthodox and Roman Catholics, for at this moment of crisis the supporters and opponents of the Florentine Union forgot their differences. The Emperor went out after receiving communion, and died fighting on the walls. Later, the same day the city fell to the Turks, and the most glorious church in Christendom became a mosque. It was the end of the Byzantine Empire. But it was not the end of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, far less the end of Orthodoxy. (Timothy Ware 71-72)

215

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Table 22: Last Christian service before the fall of Constantinople

Activity 1. Using your own words, explain the three controversies presented above. 2. Complete the complete sentence and explain it: ... also contributed to the process of separation between ____ ___________of _____ and ________, where the ____________of ____________was replaced by __________________. 3. Search for hesychasm on The web or books, and write a 5 page essay on it.
Activity 48: Three controversies in the last centuries of Byzantium

Relations between the Christian Church and State in Byzantium The Church-State relationship in Byzantium was a complex one. In this section we are going to analyze it as it existed in the millennium spanning from the reign of the emperor Constantine, in the fourth century, to the fall of Constantinople to Ottoman power in 1453. Byzantium society was theoretically supposed to be Heaven on earth; however, such idyllic relationships were not always realized in practice. Relationships were often redefined by strong emperors, who went beyond their jurisdiction and by strong patriarchates who were always ready to justify their acts as being in defense of Orthodoxy.

Heaven on Earth: The Emperor as Gods Representative on Earth

Nothing could have symbolized more clearly the harmonic relationship between Church and State, between the hierosyne and the basileia, in the beginning years of the Byzantine Empire, than the outward circumstances of the meeting at the First General of Ecumenical Council of the Christian Church at Nicea in 325. As Eusebius, Bishop of

216

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

CaesareaConstantines panegyrist, biographer, and historianpresent at the council, tells us in Vita Constantine:57 Then as if to bring a divine array against this enemy, he [Constantine] convoked a general council, and invited the speedy attendance of bishops from all quarters, in letters expressive of the honorable estimation in which he held them.58 Also underscoring the celestial character of the emperor, Eusebius adds that Emperor Constantine, who had called the Council, made his entrance like some heavenly messenger of God: And now, all rising at the signal which indicated the emperors entrance, at last he himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones. He continues by saying, One might have thought that a picture of Christs kingdom was thus shadowed forth, and a dream rather than reality. From the reign of Constantine (4th century) to Justinian I (6th century) and later to other Byzantine emperors, the prevailing ideology held that there was only one universal Christian society, the oikoumene,59 jointly guided by the empire and the church. At the core of the Christian polity of Byzantium was the Emperor, the basileus, head of the oecumenical Empire, of the Byzantine Christian society, who, ruled as Gods representative on earth. His earthly monarchy was an image of the monarchy of God in Heaven just as Byzantium was an image of the heavenly Jerusalem. In the palace people prostrated themselves before the emperor as Gods living icon as they prostrated

According to Paul Steepheson, Eusebius met the emperor for the first time in person at the Council of Nicea, and subsequently delivered speeches to the emperor in 335 (in praise of the construction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre), and 335-6 (for Constantines tricennalia, or thirty-year celebrations). He believes that Eusebius began collecting documents for a narrative shortly after Constantine's victory over Licinius. 58 See Internet reference in Bibliography. The next quotations by Eusebius also come from this source (Medieval Sourcebook). Also see Kallistos Ware 19. 59 Nicol says that there was no Byzantine equivalent for the Latin term christianitas. Oikoumene or basilea would have been the word springing to a Byzantine mind (4).

57

217

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

themselves before the icon of Christ in church. The emperor was the God-protected ruler, the defender of the faith and the order of Church. Many things in the palace were designed to make clear the emperors status as vicegerent of God: the labyrinthine palace, the elaborate ceremonies of the court, and even the throne room where mechanical lions roared and musical birds sang (Monks at Decany Monastery).
The Emperor had a special place in the Churchs worship: he could not, of course, celebrate the Eucharist, but he received communion within the sanctuary as priests do taking the consecrated bread in his hands and drinking from the chalice, instead of being given the sacrament in a spoon. He also preached sermons and on certain feasts incensed the altar. The vestments that Orthodox bishops now wear are the vestments once worn by the Emperor in church (Monks at Decani Monastery. Table 23: Emperors and Churchs worship

The imperial panegyrists, successors of Eusebius, continued extolling the terrestrial basilea of Constantine and his successors as the only representation of the celestial kingdom. According to Eusebius, Boojamra asserts, in The Church and Social Reform, the emperor rules for the Logos and the Logos rules for the Father. This Christomimesis assumption, heightened by the Patriarchal coronation of emperors beginning with the crowning of Leo I in 475, was to become the foundation of Byzantine political ecclesiology. In addition, imperial legitimacy included patriarchal coronation as a constituent element. Byzantine political ecclesiology also elevated the role of the emperor, demanding the highest virtues and dogmatic orthodoxy from him. In the East, more than in the West, he was seen as a minister of God (24). Florovsky, in Christianity and Culture, says that originally the rite of Imperial Coronation was definitely a strictly secular ceremony, in which even the Patriarch acted as a civil servant, yet gradually it developed into a sacred rite, a sacramentale, if not a regular sacrament, especially since it was combined with the rite of anointment, a distinctively ecclesiastical rite, conferred by the Church (19).

218

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

Eusebiuss theories were developed in March 16, 535, by Justinians preface to his Sixth Novel, which defined the relationship between imperium and sacerdotium more clearly: There are two major gifts which God has given unto men of His supernal clemency, the priesthood and the imperial authorityhierosyne and basileia; sacerdotium and imperium. Of these, the former is concerned with things divine; the latter presides over the human affairs and takes care of them. Proceeding from the same source, both adorn human life. Nothing is of greater concern for the emperors as the dignity of the priesthood, so that priests may in their turn pray to God for them. Now, if one is in every respect blameless and filled with confidence toward God, and the other does rightly and properly maintain in order the commonwealth entrusted to it, there will be a certain fair harmony established, which will furnish whatsoever may be needful for mankind. We therefore are highly concerned for the true doctrines inspired by God and for the dignity of priests. We are convinced that, if they maintain their dignity, great benefits will be bestowed by God on us, and we shall firmly hold whatever we now possess, and in addition shall acquire those things which we have not yet secured. A happy ending always crowns those things which were undertaken in a proper manner, acceptable to God. This is the case, when sacred canons are carefully observed, which the glorious Apostles, the venerable eye-witnesses and ministers of the Divine World, have handed down to us, and the holy Fathers have kept and explained.60 Here, Justinian clearly states the basic principle of the Byzantine political system. Florovsky, in Christianity and Culture, asserts that this document was both a summary and a program. Justinian did not speak of State or of Church, but of two ministries established in the Christian Commonwealth, and appointed by the same Divine authority and for the same ultimate purpose. Florovsky adds that As a Divine gift, the Imperial power, imperium, was independent from the Priesthood, sacerdotium. Yet it was dependent upon, and subordinate to, that purpose for which it had been Divinely established. This purpose was the faithful maintenance and promotion of the Christian truth. Thus, if the Empire as such was not subordinate to the Hierarchy, it was nevertheless subordinate to the Church, which was a divinely appointed custodian of the Christian truth. In other words, the Imperial power was legitimate only within the Church. In any case, it was essentially subordinate to the Christian Faith, was bound by the precepts of the Apostles and Fathers, and in this respect limited by them. The legal status of the Emperor in the Commonwealth depended upon his good standing in the Church, under her doctrinal and canonical discipline. Imperium was at once an authority, and a service. And the terms of this service were set in rules and regulations of the Church. In his coronation oath, the Emperor had to
60

Qtd. by George Florovsky, Christianity and Culture (18).

219

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

profess the Orthodox faith and to take a vow of obedience to the decrees of the ecclesiastical Councils. (18) Orthodoxy, Florovsky continues in agreement with Sokolov, was a kind of supernationality of Byzantium; it was the basic element of the life of the State and of the people. Yet, although emperors held an exalted place in the Byzantine system, Florovsky comments, they were nothing more than laymen in spite of being high dignitaries of the Church. They did not belong to the regular hierarchy of the Church, and were in no way ministers of Word and sacraments. Thus, the royal priesthood was clearly distinguishable from the ministerial priesthood of the clergy (Christianity and Culture 19). From this perspective of the emperors divine calling and following Jesus command (Luke 6:26), emperors were supposed to have philanthropia and eusebia (beneficence and piety), two essential charitable qualities which patriarchs frequently had to remind wayward emperors to exercise. Demetrios J. Constantelos,61 in Byzantine Philanthropy and Social Welfare (1991), makes the following observation about Byzantines expectation regarding these qualities: The Byzantines expected their rulers to practice philanthropia and charity, to apply humane policies, to restrain force, and to show love to their subjects. The emperor should imitate God in beneficent works, for as God governs the world so the king rules the States, and the earthly king should reflect the philanthropic attributes of the heavenly king. (89) Constantelos asserts that Constantine the Great, the founder of the Christian Roman Empire, set the example of charitable works. Regarding Constantines Liberality to the Poor (Chapter xliii), Eusebius of Caesarea writes: He likewise distributed money largely to those who were in need, and besides these showing himself philanthropist and benefactor even to the heathen, who had no claim on him; and even for the beggars in the forum, miserable and shiftless, he provided, not with money only, or necessary food, but also decent clothing. But in the case of those who had once been prosperous, and had
Constantelos also traces philanthropia in the thought-world of Byzantium analyzing its Hellenic and Christian background (1-13).
61

220

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

experienced a reverse of circumstances, his aid was still more lavishly bestowed. On such persons, in a truly royal spirit, he conferred magnificent benefactions; giving grants of land to some, and honoring others with various dignities. Orphans of the unfortunate he cared for as a father, while he relieved the destitution of widows, and cared for them with special solicitude. Nay, he even gave virgins, left unprotected by their parents death, in marriage to wealthy men with whom he was personally acquainted. But this he did after first bestowing on the brides such portions as it was fitting they should bring to the communion of marriage. In short, as the sun, when he rises upon the earth, liberally imparts his rays of light to all, so did Constantine, proceeding at early dawn from the imperial palace, and rising as it were with the heavenly luminary, impart the rays of his own beneficence to all who came into his presence. It was scarcely possible to be near him without receiving some benefit, nor did it ever happen that any who had expected to obtain his assistance were disappointed in their hope. Also, of Helena, Constantines mother, Eusebius offers the following comment about her Generosity and Beneficent Acts (Chapter xliv): For on the occasion of a circuit which she made of the eastern provinces, in the splendor of imperial authority, she bestowed abundant proofs of her liberality as well on the inhabitants of the several cities collectively, as on individuals who approached her, at the same time that she scattered largesses among the soldiery with a liberal hand. But especially abundant were the gifts she bestowed on the naked and unprotected poor. To some she gave money, to others an ample supply of clothing: she liberated some from imprisonment, or from the bitter servitude of the mines; others she delivered from unjust oppression, and others again, she restored from exile. Furthermore, as Nicol asserts, the ideology of the Church on earthand thus the empire on earthas a reflection of the Church in heaven led Byzantines to live in constant communication with the other world and with the constant expectation of miracles. The sacraments as well as icons or relics and monks or holy men were the regular means of communication to the celestial world. They believed that the Christian society within the empire was under the special protection of God, a protection that would be removed if they drifted into sin or lapsed into heresy (6). For Athanasios, the prevalence of philanthropy and righteousness, demanded by the covenant relationship with God, was the way to save the empire from collapse (Boojamra 34).

Caesaropapism in Byzantium?

221

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

The relations between Church and State in Byzantium are often described in the West by the term caesaropapism, which implies that the emperors acted as the head of the Church. Yet, Boojamra states that we should use this term with caution because there were no rigid patterns to define the church-state relationship. Emperors could use their power (potestas) to enforce religious convictions which they might, honestly believe to be Orthodox, with objectionable methods, and on many occasions there were flagrant abuses by Byzantine emperors interfering with ecclesiastical matters. There were patriarchs who did capitulate but others such as Germanos (715-730) who opposed iconoclasm or Nicholas Mystikos (901-907 and 911-925) and Poliectus (956-970) who excommunicated emperors for non-canonical acts. Iconoclasm, for example, although vigorously championed by a whole series of emperors, was successfully rejected by the Church. Emperors also failed to impose upon the Church a compromise with Arians or a premature reconciliation with the Monophysites. Very often, both patriarchs and monks together defended the freedom of the church and showed that they had a will of their own. In not a single case were emperors successful when they attempted to go against the Faith of the Church or to reform the Church. The Church in Byzantium was strong enough to resist Imperial pressure. Nicol asserts that Caesaropapism is now rightly a somewhat discredited word. But it should be remembered that Byzantine emperors who overstepped the invisible line between the preserves of the imperium and the preserves of the sacerdotium were frequently given hell by the bishops in this world, whatever happened to them in the next. (8) In the area of faith and doctrine, an emperor could never impose his will when it contradicted the conscience of the church. In Byzantine history, Church and State were closely interdependent, but neither was subordinate to the other (Boojamra 19-20). An emperors task was to summon councils and to put their decrees into effect, but it lay beyond his powers to dictate the content of those decrees: it was for the bishops

222

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

gathered in council to decide what the true faith was. Bishops were appointed by God to teach the faith, whereas the Emperor, it was said, was the protector of Orthodoxy, but not its exponent (Monks at Decany Monastery). Emperors had to observe the legal or canonical form and had to act with the consent and concurrence of the Priesthood (1922). It is necessary to add that some Patriarchs also often overstepped the limits of their jurisdiction (Nicol 3). By the fourteenth century, as the empire declined, the church, aided by the political ecclesiology and reform of Patriarch Athanasios of Constantinople (1289-1293 and 1303-1309) increased its autonomy and influence.

Patterns of Development in the Relations between the Church and the State
Boojamra, who has done an historical review of the relations between the Church and the Byzantine Empire, asserts that the roots of the reform undertaken by Athanasios of Constantinople lie in the ideas of Eusebius of Caesarea himself who identified the kingdom of God with the Roman Empire and established an intimate link, even an identity between them (23-24). Furthermore, Nicol comments that the distinction between things spiritual and things temporal in the Byzantine world became very blurred. He uses the image of the soul and the body to express the two elements of the Byzantine society, the Church and empire, adding that: Just as there was only one God in heaven there could be only one ruler on earth, and that was the Emperor of the Romans. The Emperor was Gods regent on earth, the visible head of church and state, because the two were interdependent (3). In agreement with Boojamra, he says that this theory sometimes left room for doubt as to where imperium ended and sacerdotium began (3). Based upon this lack of delimitation between the Church and the State, Boojamra delineates a pattern of historical development of the relations between these two spheres of the Byzantine society from the fourth to the fourteenth century. As 223

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

suggested above, he asserts that by the sixth century, with some exceptions, the political ecclesiology was firmly established. The term Symphonia (symphony or harmony) defines the relationship between the Church and the State. As a unified whole, there was no rigid separation between them. They were parts of a single organism. Commenting on this relationship, Haldon, in Byzantium, a History (2000), states that: A fundamental feature of the East Roman Church was the close politicalideological relationship it held with the secular power, a power embodied by the emperor. The development in the fourth century of an imperial Christian ideological system, rooted in both Romano-Hellenistic political concepts and Christian theology, established an unbreakable association. Thereafter it continued to set limits toonly to legitimizethe actions of emperor and patriarch. In its most abstract form it was understood as a relationship of mutual dependence, but the onus was on the secular ruler both to defend correct belief as well as to protect the interests of the Church in the form of the honor and respect accorded the priestly office. The Church it was assumed should cater for the spiritual needs of the Christian flock. (132) Thus, it was inevitable that the Emperor played an active part in the affairs of the Church and would use the states coercive power to support the defined dogmas of the Christian faith in return for the support of an honorable priesthood. In theory, if the emperor confronted that faith, then the priesthood was liberated from its duties to the imperium. Boojamra further explains that in the ninth century, the ecclesiastical authority moved from the passivity of Justinians schema to the more parallel postulation Epanogoge, as a consequence of the iconoclastic fiasco of the Isaurian emperors in the eight century. Although there was still harmony, it sprang from a parallelism, a parity, of the patriarch in ecclesiastical matters and of the emperor in secular affairs. Patriarch Photiusperhaps best known for his leading role in the conversion of the Slavic peopleswas responsible for a new legal code, the Epanagoge (about 880). The Epanagoge spelled out anew the importance of the patriarch with respect to the Emperor, by saying that both worked in harmony, the former having care

224

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

of the bodies and the other of the souls of the people (Nicol 26). According to Haldon, Photius had started to elaborate the theory of the patriarchal position in the direction of raising his status in the hierarchical relationship God-emperor-patriarch at the expense of that of the emperor; a direct challenge to one aspect of the imperial authority (142). Fearing Photius, Leo VI exiled him. Nevertheless, Photius attempt marked a shift in the nature of the relationship between emperor and patriarch after the end of iconoclasm, at least regarding issues of morality (142). Consequently, and due to the increase in the influence of the patriarchate, the church, and the monasteries, during the tenth century, there was a confrontation between Patriarch Polyeuktos (956-970) and Emperor John Tzimisces (969-976), when this patriarch refused communion to the Emperor for a year because of his marriage to his mistress Theaphano. As retaliation, the emperor opposed the churchs accumulation of land and in 964 issued an edict that prohibited any increase in church real estate. Yet, to be crowned emperor, John Tzimisces had to expel his mistress and marry Theodora, the daughter of Constantine VII. He also had to revoke the laws restricting monastic and church possessions. Hussey believes that these were politic concessions and did not necessarily mean that John I would grant a free hand to property owners, ecclesiastical or otherwise. It was in a way a reassertion of the Byzantine principle that church and state must work together in unity, though in matters affecting the temporal well-being of the state, the Emperor usually got his way (113). Hussey adds that is probably what was implied in Tzimisces often-quoted statement on the priesthood and Empire rather than any implication that the priesthood had overruling control: I acknowledge two powers in this life: the priesthood and the empire. The Creator of the world has entrusted to the former the care of souls and to the latter the care of bodies. If neither part is damaged, the well-being of the world is

225

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

secure. For this historian, what is being emphasized in this passage is interdependence (114). Following this chronological thread, Boojamra, quoting Theodore Balsamon, the most significant of Byzantine canon writers, observes the following: the service of the emperors includes the enlightening and strengthening of both the soul and the body; the dignity of the patriarchs is limited to the benefit of souls and to that only (Balsamon, PG138, 1014-34).62 In the twelfth century, the relationship of the Church to the State returned to fifth century terms due to an increase in imperial power. Yet, Balsamon comments on Antioch, c.4, saying, But the appeal is not to be submitted to the ears of the emperor on account of this annoyance. If then someone abandons going to a higher synod, and disputes the proper form of pleas of justification in the rules of appeal, and troubles the emperor about this, not only shall he derive no benefit by as one not being worthy of pardon, but all doors of justification will be fastened against him and he will have no hope of restoration Such statements reflect his belief that decisions of ecclesiastical courts must not appeal to the emperor because such appeals granted the emperor opportunities to interfere in church affairs. Yet, Boojamra is right when he relates the fact that the lack of a written constitution paralleled the lack of a formal delimitation of the powers of the patriarch and the emperor and, consequently, the Byzantines faced the problem of how far the emperor could act in ecclesiastical matters. Thus, in the thirteenth century, the canonist Demetrios Chomatianos, the archbishop of Ochrid in Bulgaria from 1217-35, wrote that the emperor has all the prerogatives of a priest except the right of administering the sacrament.63 This was rightly said, because the emperor was the God-crowned ruler

62
63

Translation taken from Ernest Baker (101). Qtd. in Boojamra, 27. Also see Nicol, 3.

226

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

and protector of the Christian world (3). Yet, at the end of the century, Athanasios shows that he favors mutuality and tells Emperor Andronikos (1282-1328): Will not each of us have to render an account to the Creator of the world for that which has been entrusted to us? Athanasios, although deeply rooted in the tradition of a united political ecclesiology represented, Boojamra adds, a turning point in the actual power of the church, resulting from Andronikoss weak leadership, a declining empire, and the compromised imperial power after the enforced Union of Lyons (1274) (27). Boojamra points out that Athanasioss ecclesiastical reform was rooted in the clear distinction between the Christian empire and the Church (24). For him the emperor, the protector of faith, is established by God for the purpose of being a new David and to support the hierosyne (30). For Boojamra, Athanasios represents the transfer of power to the church. After Athanasios, in the mid-fourteen century, we can detect bi-directionalism due to the enforced Union of Lyons; the Church was emotionally liberated from the State. Each of these spheres would go its own way. The Turkish occupation of Gallipoli in 1354, marked the beginning of a century-long process of Turkish occupation that culminated in the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in May 29, 1453. However, the idea of an ecumenical empire whose visible head was the emperor persisted to the very last days of Byzantium. Nicol tells how Basil I, the Grand Duke of Moscow, in 1393, with the Turks hammering at the gates of the city, suggested that although the Church survived, there was no emperor to lead society. Yet, he also narrates how the Patriarch of Constantinople, Antonios IV answered that there was a still an emperor on the throne and that a Church without an emperor was an absurdity (4). Nevertheless, Meyendorff thinks that, in the fourteenth century, as the empire was reduced to a shadow of itself, the Church, as an institution, had never exercised so

227

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

much influenced both inside and outside of the imperial frontiers (The Byzantine Legacy 129). Also, Mount Athos, formerly under the emperors, became a patriarchal jurisdiction. This, Meyendorff adds, might have helped the alliance between monastic circles and the church hierarchy, rather uncommon in previous centuries, and to the monastic take-over after 1347 of the high church administration (The Byzantine Legacy 129-130). The process of independence of the basileia and the hierosyne, started by Athanasios, finished with the conquest of Constantinople, thus putting an end to the myth of the eternal empire. Finally, the church was freed from imperial control and became the universal arbiter, conditioned by Muslim rule, for all Orthodox Christians within the Ottoman Empire (33). In a world where the distinction between things spiritual and things temporal was often blurred, the church had triumphed. It is true that some Orthodox theologians of today have criticized and considered a tragedy the Byzantine identification of Church and society the idea of Christian society for which it standsand the absolute, supreme value that the empire had become for the church. The monks at Decany Monastery wonder if the Byzantines were entirely wrong: They believed that Christ, who lived on earth as a man, has redeemed every aspect of human existence, and they held that it was therefore possible to baptize not human individuals only but the whole spirit and organization of society. So they strove to create a polity entirely Christian in its principles of government and in its daily life. Byzantium in fact was nothing less than an attempt to accept and to apply the full implications of the Incarnation. Yet, they added, the attempt had a danger into which they fell: the identification of the earthly kingdom of Byzantium with the Kingdom of God. It fell short of the high ideal it set itself, but behind all the shortcomings of Byzantium, they assert it can always be discerned the great vision by which the Byzantines were inspired: to establish here on earth a living image of Gods government in heaven. Perhaps, as Nicol says, it was a

228

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

tragedy, because not only administratively but also psychologically and in its own selfawareness the church merged itself within the empire. Nevertheless, until 1453, this union of the Church and the State was a fact of Byzantium life (5). Activity 1. Explain a) the original relations between the State and the Church, and b) the patterns of development in these relations. 2. Your own research: Write a short biography Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople.
Activity 49: Relations between the State and the Church in Byzantium

Monasticism Monasticism played a decisive part in the religious life and public life of Byzantium. Indeed, the impact of monasticism on Orthodox Christianity was all encompassing and far-reaching. It influenced the changing of the traditional relationship between church and state, already mentioned. It is not surprising, then, that paralleling monasticisms growth in both strength and influence, there was a more general growth in the power, authority, and prestige of the Byzantine Orthodox Church as the empire faced a progressive degeneration. The monastic life had first emerged as a definite institution in Egypt and Syria during the fourth century, and from there it spread rapidly across Christendom. As we have seen, as a result of the iconodule victories in ninth century, monasticism dominated the ecclesiastical life. The development in the area of iconographyas well as that of liturgywould be inconceivable without the contribution of Byzantine monasticism. The victory of the Church against iconoclasm was by and large the work of Byzantine monks, as are liturgical regulations governing the cycle of Orthodox services today. In the iconoclast crisis, monasticism certainly had outspoken leadership and both Theodore Studites and John of Damascus protested

229

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

against imperial interference in ecclesiastical affairs (Hussey 37). Monasticism flourished and greatly influenced and guided the course of theology, the veneration of icons, and the piety and religious practices of Byzantium. In the cities monasteries administered orphanages, craft schools, poor houses, rest homes, and hospitals. In the countryside, monasteries functioned as agricultural communes. Also, a great number of monks, often with no formal education, served the church in an administrative and spiritual capacity churchmost patriarchs were chosen from this group. Hussey says that the strengthening of widespread monastic influence on the actual policy of the Byzantine state really took place rather later, by the eleventh century, after the development of the powerful houses on Mount Athos, in Greece, and particularly as the state weakened after 1204. Mount Athos became the international center of Orthodox monasticism (36). In the thirteenth century, this tendency was accelerated when the Palaiologan emperor lost the allegiance of the people after the usurpation of the Lascarid throne by Michael VIII (1261-82) in 1261 and the violence it employed, especially against conservative monastics, to enforce the hated Union of Lyons. The power of monasticism further increased with the triumph of hesychasm, during the time of Patriarch Athanasios (1282-1328 and 1303-1309). Boojamra (7-8) records a complaint of the so-called secular or parochial clergy about Patriarch Athanasios and his refusal to allow their advancement as bishops and patriarchs, because they are not monastics; and, this had been a common complaint earlier in the period after the victory over iconoclasm (843). As Papadakis asserts, the Church often recruited its episcopate from the countless monastic communities dotting the Byzantine countryside. Indeed, one monastery on Mt. Athos, besides producing 144 bishops, provided the Church with 26

230

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

patriarchs. Furthermore, virtually two thirds of the patriarchs of Constantinople between the ninth and the thirteenth centuries were monastics. Later, in the fourteenth century, after the triumph of hesychasm, the monastic element began to dominate the life of the church. Patriarchs Kallistos I (1350-1354, 1355-1363) and Philotheos Kokkinos (1354-1355, 1364-1376) often promoted the growth of the monastic power, Boojamra adds, enabling the church to pursue policies at odds with those of the empire (8). Papadakis believes that monasticisms charismatic and eschatological witness was crucial to establish the relationship between the Byzantine Empire and the Church when the latter was in danger of identifying itself with the state and becoming worldly, and thereby losing its eschatological dimension. The monastic presence always was a reminder of the Churchs true nature and identification with another Kingdom. Monasticisms fierce opposition to any compromise of the Christian vision was crucial in the Churchs survival and independence. The foundation of monasticism, which did not exist as a permanent institution before the fourth century, lay not in any particular passage of the Gospel but in its totality. Monasticism called for the renunciation of the world and the personal search for holiness. It was due to its essentially Christian goals, Papadakis adds, that asceticism spread and influenced Orthodox spirituality, prayer, piety, and general Church life. A Quick Note on the Captive Church For the Orthodox Church the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 was a great misfortune, an unqualified disaster. The vast lands of Asia Minor, as well as numerous other ancient Christian centers and great ecclesiastical cities such as Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch all now fell and were under the absolute, social, political and

231

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

religious control of Islam previously. Let us look at a map depicting the Ottoman Empire in 1580:

Illustration 40: Ottoman Empire (1580)64

Yet these Christians centers were once united by Constantinople. With Russian being the exception, during the next four hundred years, Eastern Christendom would be isolated from the west and confined within a hostile Islamic world. This was a time of struggle for Christians, in spite of the alleged, but very restricted tolerationas an Abrahamic religionthat Islam exerted. The Church was not extinguished and even its administration continued to function. Besides, surprisingly enough, patriarchs gained civil as well as ecclesiastical power over all Christianity in Ottoman territory. All Orthodox churches under Ottoman territory were under the Patriarch of Constantinople, including the ancient sees of the Near East (Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria) and the Slavic churches. Yet, in the final analysis, the life of the Orthodox in the Balkan and Asia Minor continued, but under great Muslim persecution and oppression. Christians were treated as second-class citizen or infidels. Thousands of them suffered martyrdom. Patriarchs were deposed or murdered. Churches, monasteries, and schools were closed and destroyed. Christians
64

See: <www.countryturkmenistan.tripod.com>.

232

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

could not openly bear witness to Christ. Missionary work among Muslims was quite dangerous while conversion to Islam was legal, and frequently enforced and obligatory. It was impossible to build new churches buildings or worship openly. The Church was also affected by the Turkish system of corruption since the patriarchal throne was bestowed upon the highest bidder and the new patriarchal investiture was accompanied by payments to the government. Along with these conditions we should mention Romes proselytizing of the Orthodox at the end of the sixteenth centuries. Missionaries were formed in special schools such as the College of St. Athanasius in Rome (open in 1577) and sent to the East, especially to the Slavic world. Confined as it was, the Orthodox Church could do nothing to stop the pressure. The Uniat Ukrainian Church in 1596 is partly the result of this pressure. Such confinement, which was geographical as well as intellectual, also explains Orthodoxys silence during the Reformation in the sixteenth century Europe. Some of the brutality suffered by the Orthodox Church in Ottoman lands came to an end with the liberation of Greece from the Turkish yoke in 1821. Shortly afterwards a synod of bishops declared the Greek Church autocephalous. Finally, after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, many other churches, both the Slavic and those belonging to the ancient sees of the Near East, also achieved greater freedom. Nevertheless, at the beginning of the 20th century, there were a series of vicious massacres under militant communist atheism (as well as under Muslims, for example the genocide of several million Armenian Christians by the Turks), as we will see in our next chapter. Nowadays, there are still vast numbers of Christians in Asia Minor deprived by Muslim governments of their basic human rights. The pride and glory of the first centuries of Byzantium in which the imperium and the sacerdotium were the image of heaven on earth gave way to a painful ordeal first for the imperium,

233

Chapter 2: Byzantine Church History

succumbing to the Ottoman power and, then, for the Orthodox Church constraint by the Islam. From them, until the twentieth century the Eastern Christendom has struggled amidst great obstacles and persecution. There have been more martyrs during this period than during the great persecutions of the early Church. Yet, in spite of indignities, injustices and outrages, the Faith survives (Fitzgerald; Papadakis). Situated at the cross-roads of East and West, that brought so many difficulties to Constantinople, the City, as it was justifiably called, acted as the disseminator of culture for all peoples who came in contact with the empire. Constantinople was to the early Middle Ages what Athens and Rome had been to classical times. By the time the empire collapsed in 1453, its religious mission and political concepts had borne fruit among the Slavic peoples of eastern Europe and especially among the Russians, who were to lay claim to the Byzantine tradition and called Moscow the Third Rome. Activity Describe the Orthodox Church under the Ottoman Empire.
Activity 50: The Captive Orthodox Church

Final Activity Having read this second chapter and done all its activities, write a five-page paper incorporating its main ideas. Follow the following diagram: a) introductory or topic paragraph, b) body or development, and c) concluding paragraph. Add your own reflection.
Activity 51: Final activity on History of Byzantium

234

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Chapter 3 RUSSIAN CHURCH HISTORY (IX-XX CENTURIES)65

INTRODUCTION After having seen the development of the Early Christian community (Chapter 1) and the Byzantine Church (Chapter 2), we approach the last section of the Church History of the Orthodox Church. We concentrate on the History of the Russian Church (Chapter 3). For clarity, in Chapter 2 I dealt extensively with the political and cultural aspects of the Byzantine Empire and, separately, in greater detail with religious aspects. The reason for this separation was both the length, as well as the complexity of this period which covered a thousand years. In this chapter dealing with the History of the Russian Church we will focus mainly on the development of the Russian Church across another period of thousand years, a period from the end of the tenth century to the beginning of the twentieth-first. It will be noticed that there undoubtedly existed a link between political and cultural events, as we deal with the unique religious outlook of Russians. Alexander Schmemann, in The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy says that in all three basic stages he distinguishes in his evaluation of Russias historical development, namely the Kievan, Muscovite, and the Petersburg period: The history of the Russian Church cannot be separated from the history of Russia, as it cannot be separated from its Byzantine origins. Just as Orthodoxy is one of the major factors in Russian history, so the destiny of Russia defined the fate of Russian Orthodoxy. Even the simplest delineation of the development of the Church inevitably includes a definite attitude toward Russias past. This is especially true regarding the struggles between Church and State. The Russian Church and the Early Christian Church have in common this struggle between Church and State in commona struggle in which the Church has always been triumphant.

65

See list of Russian rulers in Appendix E.

235

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

The Church of Russia, regardless of the place where it had its center or the time when it initially had its seat at Kiev, subsequently at Vladimir in 1229 or eventually at Moscow in 1328, it never ceased to be considered as its spiritual head the Patriarchate of Constantinople from whom it had received Christianity. It is true that in 1588, the Patriarch of Constantinople granted it, as a grown-up daughter its own patriarchate, the fifth Patriarchate of the Eastern Church. However after the fall of Constantinople to the Turks the Church of Russia proclaimed itself the Third Rome. This occurred late in the sixteenth century, during the time of Ivan the Terrible. However, being afraid of the power of the Church, in 1721 Peter the Great suppressed the creation of a permanent administrative Synod, which had its seat at Petrograde, while he accepted the Patriarchs of the East. Although, trying to compel the Church to be silenced, Peter the Great worked toward the betterment of the clergy by founding clerical schools and reforming the monasteries. In this way he set an example for Catherine II and the tsars who succeeded her. In this period, four theological seminaries were created and missions among the Israelites, Tartars and Japanese flourished as in former times. But the persecutions which had accompanied the Orthodox Church since its formative stages resumed in Russia with an unusual strength during the rule of the atheist Bolshevists in 1917. During the years 1918, 1919 and 1920 alone, twenty-six bishops and six thousand seven hundred and fifty-five priests were martyred by the Bolshevists, as well as thousands and millions of faithful and other victims. With short periods of relief for the Church from persecution, the confrontation between the Church and the Communist state continued, and during seven decades it was on the verge of complete destruction (Kallinikos). It was in the Byzantine Church, in which Russians searched for spirituality and the mirror in which the Russians saw spirituality reflected, But certain factors, such

236

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

as historical calamities, the Byzantine Churchs temporal surrender to the Papacy and its final fall to the Islam, the distinctive character and complex history of Russia, made the Russian Church a unique center of Easter Orthodoxy. We will begin with the Kievan period (IX-XII centuries). This period began, as already mentioned in the context of discussing the Byzantine Churchs mission to the Slavs at the end of the tenth century with Prince Vladimir of Kievs baptism (9721015) in 988 and his continued and further change of the nature of religion among his people. Secondly, we will focus on the Tartar yoke and the emergence of the Principality of Moscow (XIII-XV centuries). Thirdly, we will study the period of two centuries that covers the struggles between the Possessors and the Non-Possessors and the eventual great schism. It was during this important period when Russia broke its ecclesiastical dependence on Constantinople, and when the spiritual and political views of the country were changed. Fourthly, we will concentrate on the Church in Imperial Russia (XVIII-XX Centuries), a period in which we witness the abolition of the Russian patriarchate by Peter the Great and the subordination of the Church to the Holy Synod, to the secular state bureaucracy. This period also covers the first years of the twentieth century up to 1917, in which I will describe the renewal movement of the church, the assault on the stardom, and the end of the Holy Synod. Fifthly I will focus on the twentieth century from 1917, the year of the restoration of the Russian Patriarchate, and a period of almost seven decades under Communist dictatorship (1917-1991), a time in which both persecution and some success existed side by side. A crucial date and event the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, as this event caused the temporary decay of Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy was confronted with the beliefs and political policies of militant atheists who

237

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

tried to eliminate Christianity from Russian. To summarize, I will divide the discussion into five periods: 1. The Kievan period of the Christian conversion of the Rus (IX-XII centuries) 2. The Tartar-Mongol Yoke and the Emergence of the Principality of Moscow (XIII-XV Centuries) 3. The period from the Possessors and Non-Possessors to the Great Schism (XVIXVII Centuries) 4. The Church in Imperial Russia: The Synodical Period (1700-1917) 5. A Time of Persecution and Rebirth: The Russian Orthodox Church in the XX Century (1917-) For Pospielovsky, the Kievan or pre-Mongol period corresponds to Russian Antiquity and the thirteenth-seventeenth centuries correspond to the Medieval Age. The last century and a half of the Medieval period can be considered a transitional period from the Medieval to the Modern Agea pale reflection of the European Renaissance (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 37).

1. KIEVAN PERIOD (IX-XIII CENTURIES): THE BAPTISM OF RUSSIA AND THE FLOWERING OF KIEVAN CHRISTIANITY As already noted, historically although perhaps merely indirectly, the evangelizing mission undertaken by the two Greek brothers from the Balkans, Cyril and Methodius, had a great significance and importance for Christianity taking root in Russia. In the first place, the teaching of the faith in the language of the local people elevated the vernacular to a sacred language of worship. It also heralded the advent of a new language, Church Slavonic. It was a language which became the ecclesiastical lingua franca of the Slavs, most especially the Serbs and Bulgarians, from whom the Russians would import the texts of worship. In the second place, once the evangelizing process had started, it infiltrated into Russia, in spite Photius failure to convert the Slavs. Around 864, Photius had sent a bishop to Russia with the intention to evangelize Russia, but, some years later, Oleg, who assumed power at Kiev (the main Russian city

238

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

at this time) in 878 exterminated this first Christian foundation (Ware 78). Oleg, like his immediate successorsIgor, Olga, Sviatoslav, and Vladimirwas pagan. In their pagan background, the Slavs had a well-developed pantheon of pagan gods akin to those of the Vikings, and Vladimir even actively cultivated the cult of Perun, the god of fire and lightning. In 955, Olga, Prince Igors widow, converted to the Byzantine form of Christianity. However, she failed to covert her son, Saviatoslaw, who justified this rejection by saying that his warriors would laugh at him. This meant, Pospielovsky asserts, in The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia, that in the minds of the Russians Christianity was associated with pacifism. It was also a clear sign, he says, that the Church the Russians were familiar with came from Byzantium, where military exploits were seen as barbarism, and not from the West with it Frankish Teutonic tradition of knighthood and military honor (19). But despite this infiltration and the influence of Byzantium, the conversion of Rus to Christianity was also the outcome of the significant affinity of Russian character with Orthodox Christianity. A relevant fact that predicates on this harmony was, as Zernov comments in The Russians and their Church (1978), their choice of Orthodoxy once they had already become familiar with the great religions of the worldIslam, Judaism, Eastern Christianity, and western Christianitydue to their vital link they formed between Europe and Asia though their rivers Dnieper and Volga which facilitated international trade. Also, the ancient Russian country, centered around the city of Kiev, displayed a measure of religious tolerance towards its inhabitants. Paralleled with this was the fact of the Kievan Prince Vladimirs consulting the wisest men before deciding to be baptized and the end of the tenth century and join the Eastern Orthodox Church. In contrast to the western tradition, Eastern Christianity was less

239

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

institutionalized and more oriented to the beauty of worship and divine mercy and forgiveness (5).
THE RUS66 The first mention of the Rus or Ros people occurs in seventh century Arab chronicles, describing them as a warlike nation with an eye for trade. Archaeological finds in ancient Russian cities such as Staraya Ladoga and Gorodische (later to become Novgorod) indicate that the Rus were Viking raiders from Scandinavia (mostly likely from Birka in Sweden) who set up trading posts along the rivers running along a north-south axis across the plains of present-day European Russia to the capital of the Byzantine Empire, Constantinople. The Viking Rus ruled over a number of Eastern Slav tribesthe Drevlians, the Radomichi, the Severians and the Vyatichi introducing Scandinavian customs and military retainers and organizing the occasional raid on Byzantium. By the time of the earliest Russian literature in the eleventh century it had become clear that these erstwhile Viking rulers had adopted the medieval Slav language, while Scandinavian names now became recognizably Slav: Vladimir (the Viking Valdamar), Olga (Helga), and Igor (Ingvar). The Russians had now appeared on the scene as a nation (A History of the Russian Church). Table 24: The Rus

Zernov also points out that there were some features of the Russian pagan background, congenial with Eastern Orthodoxy, which helped the transition without causing much upheaval or any great struggle. Further, Fedotov, in The Russian Religious Mind, says that pre-Christian Rus worship of the mother earth may preclude Russian veneration of the Mother of God and the fact that motherhood has been stressed by the Russians to a greater degree than the fact of Marys virginity, which resulted in an ethical characteristic of the Russian male as well. This is the source, according to Fedotov, of the difference between the Russians and the West Europeans. While the former saw society as an extended family, as a social organism, the latter developed their unique traditions of knighthood. Also in contrast with the pride and honor of the West, the female values of humility, fidelity, and a degree of fatalism existed in Russian mass culture.67 Another factor favoring the rapid advance of Christianity among Russians was, as already suggested, that they heard the Gospel preached and the services celebrated in
It should be noted that contemporary Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus all claim Kievan Rus as their cultural and political ancestor. 67 Quoted in Pospielvsky (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 23-24).
66

240

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

their native tongue. They were also profoundly influenced by the beauty and artistic perfection of the Byzantine rite. If we remember the following words cited from the twelfth-century Tale of Bygone Years: We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for surely there is no such splendor or beauty anywhere upon earth. We cannot describe it to you: only this we know, that God dwells there among men, and that their worship surpasses the worship of all other places. For we cannot forget that beauty. These words were retold to the pagan ruler of Kievan Rus68 Prince Vladimir, Sviatoslav, bastard son, around the year 98869 by envoys sent to the Greeks to query as to the appropriateness of a faith for the emerging Russian state. We see that these envoys focused on the core that the divine, mystery and beauty occupied in worship. This aesthetics of divine beauty and holiness laid the foundation of the Russian culture for the next thousand-years, a culture that emerged from the adoption of Byzantine Orthodox Christianity by Vladimir. He was later canonized a saint by the Orthodox Church. Not too many Russian rulers after him were granted this honor. We are told that he also sent envoys to the German assumed to be representatives of western Christianity, but they returned with reports of the gloominess, boredom and lack of mystery of the Latin mass.70 Paradoxically, in Vladimirs reign, human sacrifices were made to pagan gods and Christians were actively persecuted. Yet, when converted, he placed a heavy emphasis on the social implications of Christianity. Pospielovsky says that, before Vladimirs option for Christianity, there had existed among the Russians Christian communities and rulers. For example, there already existed at least since the fourth century Greek colonies with numerous Christian

See Kievan Rus in the Glossary. Conventionally, A.D. 988 is regarded as the year that Christianity came to the Russian people as the religion of the realm.
69 70

68

Mass is the term used to describe celebration of the Eucharist in Western liturgical rites.

241

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

churches in several places along the Black Sea coast. It was also in the fourth century that St John Chrysostom, the archbishop of Constantinople, mentioned a Gothic Church on the Black Sea litoral who worshipped in their own language and even made quite extraordinary missionary progress (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 1617). Pospielovsky asserts that the fact that Vladimir chose Christianity over Islam another option he had, along with Judaismhasnt been acknowledged by the west, which instead responded with hostility and invasions. This historian says had this occurred, there would probably not have developed the European Christian civilization as we know it (21).

Illustration 41: Prince Vladimir71

However, it is perhaps not only religious but also political reasons that were behind Vladimirs conversion to Christianity. By becoming Christian, Russia would be the youngest nation to join a powerful Byzantine commonwealth on equal terms. This political element in the adoption of Christianity was symbolized by Vladimirs marriage to the Byzantine Princess Anna (A History of the Russian Church). Pospielovsky also
71

See: <www.calpha.redeemer.ca>.

242

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

states that Vladimir needed some common faith to unify the people (Slavonic, Finnic, and Lithuanian tribes) of the vast territories he ruled. He had gained controlled over he whole of Rus and annexed what are today Galicia and Carpathian Ruthena from Poland and the land of the Lithuanian tribe of Yatviags. The tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church has it that the hilltop upon which the city of Kiev would later arise was visited by the Lords disciple St. Andrew as early as the first century and who prophesied that the Gospel would be preached in these lands. The story of St. Andrew as the first evangelizer of Russia most likely belongs to the realm of pious legend, a legend which, however, had an effect in the popular choice of the name Andrei (Andrew) among Kievan princes and notables (A History of the Russian Church).

The tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church has it that the hilltop upon which the city of Kiev would later arise was visited by the Lords disciple St. Andrew as early as the first century and who prophesied that the Gospel would be preached in these lands. The story of St. Andrew as the first evangelizer of Russia most likely belongs to the realm of pious legend, a legend which, however, had an effect in the popular choice of the name Andrei (Andrew) among Kievan princes and notables. (A History of the Russian Church) Table 25: St. Andrew in Kiev

The Russians had in common with other Christians, the Bible, the Creed, the threefold ministry and parish organization, but as Zernov adds But having in common with others the fundamental elements of their newly acquired religion, the Russians found their own approach to it. The majority of Christians saw the Church in the light of the Greek and Latin theological writings. The Russians were the only people in Europe who remained outside this influence; and this made it possible for them to understand Christianity in their own way. Their attitude to religion was much less philosophical than the Byzantine, and much less institutional than the Latin. It might perhaps appear too direct and too spontaneous to other more learned and sophisticated Christians, but it contained new and deep insight into Christian truth and stressed a side of Church life which was neglected by other traditions. (6-7) Prince Vladimirs death in 1015 was followed by a violent period caused by the subject of succession to the throne of Kiev. The first Christian ruler of Russia had left no system by which his kin would become rulers. However, Vladimirs emphasis on the

243

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

social implications of Christianity was inherited by his immediate successors, who also displayed the typical Russian interpretation of Eastern Christianity. Vladimir, for example was in favor of relaxing the laws against evil-doers, based on his conviction that torture and capital punishment were nor in accordance with Christianity. His two youngest sons, Princes Boris and Gleb, chose serenely to sacrifice their lives and follow Christs example instead of defending themselves against their half brother Svyatopolk, the Cursed, in his attempt to become the sole ruler of the country. The two brothers died as passion-bearers of Christ. They were venerated for their humility when confronted by an evil destiny and their example has been upheld as an image of a peculiar kenotic type of Russian Christian spirituality whereby evil is conquered not through pragmatism or forced response but by a self-emptying to the point of death (A History of the Russian Church). Vladimirs great grandson, Vladimir Monomakh (10531125) continued this thread of Christianity. He was married to a daughter of the Byzantine emperor Constantine Monomachos. It was under his father, Yaroslav the Wise (c. 978-1054), that the Greek Orthodox religion really began to take hold in Russia. Religion played a big part in Monomakhs early life as well as later on in his rule. He was a man of many gifts and the most outstanding ruler of the Kiev period of Russian history. In A Charge to my Children, he wrote: My children, praise God, and love men. For it is not fasting, nor solitude, nor monastic life that will procure you eternal life, but only doing good. Forget not the poor, but feed them. Remember that riches come from God and are given you only for a short time. Do not bury your wealth in the ground; this is against the precepts of Christianity. Be fathers to orphans, be judges in the cause of widows and do not let the powerful oppress the weak. Put to death neither the innocent nor the guilty, for nothing is so sacred as the life and the soul of a Christian. Do not desert the sick; do not let the sight of corpses terrify you, for 72 we must all die. Drive out of your heart all suggestions of pride and remember that we are all mortal, to-day full of hope, to-morrow in the coffin. Abhor lying,
72

In English this is more commonly referred to as The Primary Chronicle.

244

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

drunkenness and debauchery. Endeavor constantly to obtain knowledge. Without having quitted his country, my father learned five foreign languages, a thing which won for him the admiration of foreigners.73 As Zernov states, in A charge to my Children Vladimir Monomakh, one of the best educated Princes of that time in Europe, expressed ideals universally shared by Russian Christians. His words were received as from a high authority because he behaved in accordance with his teaching (9-10). His emphasis on divine mercy was to be at the very heart of many of Russias most prominent personalities, both political and religious.

Illustration 42: Vladimir Monomakh74

Ware asserts that in Kievan Russia, as in Byzantium and the medieval west, monasteries played an important role in the Christianization of Kievan Rus. The most influential of them was the Monastery of the CavesPetchersky Lavrafounded as a semi-eremitic brotherhood by St. Anthony. St. Anthony, a Russian, had lived on Mount Athos in northern Greece, from which he developed his own spirituality, subsequently given to the Monastery of the Caves. His successor, St Theodosius (died 1074)

73 74

Qtd. in Zernov (25). See: <www.vladimir-russia.info>.

245

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

reorganized the brotherhood and introduced a full community into the structure of the Monastery.

Illustration 43: St. Theodosius75

Moreover, despite the occasional anti-Latin rhetoric in the writings of St. Theodosius, the Roman Church was rarely viewed with antagonism, even after the schism between the Churches of Rome and Constantinople in 1056. The dynastic marriages between the princes of Kiev and the royal houses of Europe, most notably between Prince Vladimir Monomakh and Princess Ghita, daughter of the English King Harold, would seem to indicate a continuing Christian fellowship between the western and Russian Churches that would be extinguished only with the Mongol invasion in the early thirteenth century (A History of the Russian Church). Furthermore, like Vladimir, St. Theodosius was conscious of the social consequences of Christianity, and applied it radically, identifying himself closely with the poor, not unlike the way as St. Francis of Assisi did in the West (79-80).Ware adds that: Vladimir, Boris and Gleb, and Theodosius were all intensely concerned with the practical implications of the Gospel: Vladimir in his concern for social justice
75

See: <www.in2greece.com>.

246

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

and his desire to treat criminals with mercy; Boris and Gleb in their resolution to follow Christ in His voluntary suffering and death; Theodosius in his selfidentification with the humble. These four saints embody some of the most attractive features in Kievan Christianity. (80)

The Pechesrk76 Lavra Monastery came into being in the eleventh century and for nine centuries its territory was expanding with new buildings being added to it through the centuries. The architectural complex of the Monastery the way it looks today is truly grandiose. On a sunny day one is almost dazzled by the reflections from the innumerable golden domes above churches and belfries. Most of the buildings in the Monastery date from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and are excellent examples of Ukrainian Baroque style in architecture and there is only one church in the Monastery that has been preserved from the twelfth century with very few architectural changes introduced since then. The church sits above the main entrance gate of the Monastery and is consequently called Nadvratna - the one above the gate. The full name of the church is Troitska Nadvratna Tserkva - The Holy Trinity Church above the Gate. It is almost a miracle it has survived as the Monastery itself was throughout its history the object of so many enemy attacks, of devastating fires and of other crippling misfortunes. (The Pechersk Lavra Monastery) Table 26: Lavra Monastery, a history

Illustration 44: Lavra Monastery77

During the Kievan period, the Russian Church was subject to Constantinople, and until 1237, even after the Mongol invasion, the Metropolitans of Russia were usually Greek. From 1237 during the Kievan period, as for the origin of the bishops,

76

Pechersk stands for pechery, that is caves which are to be found in its territory and which early monks used to live in, and Lavra is an honorific title given to a monastery of extra-size and religious importance (The Pechersk Lavra Monastery). 77 See: <www.allrussiatours.com>.

247

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

about half were native Russians; one was even a converted Jew, and another a Syrian (Ware 80).
In memory of the days when the Metropolitan came from Byzantium, the Russian Church continues to sing in Greek the solemn greeting to a bishop, eis polla eti, despota (unto many years, O master) (Ware 80). Table 27: In memory of Byzantium

The earliest mentioned head of the Russian Church was the Greek Metropolitan Michael (988992). Further Greek prelates (Leontius, John I, Theopemtus) headed the largest of the ecclesiastical provinces of the Church of Constantinople, which nominated and elected them to their position. Dioceses numbered approximately half a dozen and would be centred around such princely realms as Novgorod and Turov. There are no formally organized monasteries during the reign of Vladimir, although chronicles do indicate the existence of small groups of monks (Mouravieff). Table 28: Earliest head of the Russian Church

With the decision by St. Vladimir Russia was transformed from a pagan country with Christian communities to a Christian state. But, as Pospielovsky explains, it was quite different from that of Byzantium, which with its concept of symphony had known no division between secular and the ecclesiastical spheres, even at the level of legal courts. In Russia the Metropolitan was either a citizen of the illustrious East Roman Empire, or even if he was a native of Russia, he was nevertheless ordained by the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople and approved by the Roman Emperor himself! Thus, apart from the Russian Church remaining a subordinate branch of the great Church of Constantinople, her chief hierarchs status was considered to be much superior compared to that of the local prince. This special position of the Church was reflected in the first Russian Statute by Vladimir. It made it clear that royal power was derivative from and circumscribed by the superior norms of Christian moral teaching; and it stressed that the limitation on secular rulers would be forever binding (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 25).

248

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Thus, Vladimir established an ecclesial court structure as distinct from the secular one with jurisdiction over all moral transgressions of the laity (25). Although there is not a clear picture of how worship was organized in the Church in Russia, we know that they held regular celebrations of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, most likely in Greek, although texts in Church Slavonic were available from the earlier converted Bulgarians and Serbs. We also know that Vladimir constructed adjacent to the imperial palace in Kiev a Tithe (Desyatnnaya) Church. It was thus named because Vladimir promised to dedicate a tenth of the income from his lands and newly built churches to the Mother of God; it was in honor of the Mother of God that this church was built. The church was destroyed during the Mongol invasion. Moreover, Vladimirs conscious choice of Byzantine Christianity did not necessarily imply the exclusive existence of the Eastern Christian religion. During his reign, there are no indications of hostility between Latin and Eastern Christians. Under Vladimir Russia entered the family of Christian nations (A History of the Russian Church).

Illustration 45: Kiev in the 10th century78

78

Kiev. The main area of the upper city of King Vladimir with the Desyatina Church, bottom right, built before the year 1000 A.D. See: <http://www.infoukes.com/history/origin_of_kyiv/>.

249

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

All these advances of Christianity in Russia did not mean that paganism was suddenly exterminated. The dual faith of paganismwhich posed a strong resistance to Christianitywould continue to plague the Churchs mission in centuries to come: later chronicles would relate uprisings of pagan sorcerers against the Christian Church, while Kievan Christian priests inveighed regularly in their sermons against pagan practices (A History of the Russian Church). Kallinikos says that: It must not, however, be supposed that the vast Russian territories were suddenly transformed as if by magic, nor yet that Christianity was able to establish its supremacy without a struggle. In the north-eastern regions of Russia, idolatry, backed by a divination of the black arts, presented an impenetrable front to the new ideas. Therefore, as Ernst Benz, in The Eastern Orthodox Church: Its Thought and Life (1963) asserts that by the end of the eleventh century the territory of the East Slavs had been Christianized, though not completely so, from Novgorod in the north to beyond Kiev in the south. Let us here look at a map of Kievan Rus:

250

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 46: The Kievan Rus and the world ca 1100 A.D.79

Benz adds that the direction of future Christian expansion was decided by political conditions; therefore it had to be toward the northeast. The division of the land under the sons of Yaroslav (1019-54) led to a waning of the power of Kiev as the center of power shifted towards the north. The Polovtsians, pressing against the southern border of the steppes, were more than a match for the Russian princes, even when the latter met them with their combined forces. The second half of the eleventh and almost the entire twelfth centuries were filled with these struggles. The population of the southern parts of Rus left their homes in despair and sought a new and more peaceful life farther to the north, beyond the forests. This displacement of the center of power toward the north was decisively influenced by the Crusades, which changed the whole nature of trade and economic life in the Orient. Kiev, up to that moment the center of European commerce between North and South and West and East, became irrelevant.
79

See: <www.shsu.edu>.

251

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

However, Novgorod, on the other hand, developed into an important trans-shipment site and the link between the West and the Russian East. The hinterland of Novgorod was more densely populate and increasingly became more thickly settled. In Vladimironthe-Klyazma a new political center arose, whose heritage was later taken over by Moscow. Russian missionary work went hand in hand with Russian colonization. The early colonization was by no means a military conquest. It was a matter of peaceful but continuous infiltration which resulted in a fraternal mingling of new settlers and the native population rather than suppression of the latter by the former. The history of the colonization of northern Russia as far as Arkhangelsk to the north and along the Volga and Kama to the Urals in the east is a story of slow, peaceful expansion, with hunters, traders and monks leading the way, penetrating ever deeper into the northeastern forests, and gradually followed by peasant settlers who cleared the land. Religious penetration of these areas accompanied the colonization. Before the Tartar invasion, Russian monks on missions had partly followed, partly preceded the peaceful progress of Russian colonizers in the northeast, until the Tartar hordes swept across the steppes. The Orthodox religion of the Russian settlers became established not only as a system of religious ideas, but also as a way of everyday life. The calendar and the customs of the Orthodox Church operated as a cultural and civilizing force, and served to structure the daily life and holidays (holydays) of the population. Throughout this period, missionary activity was exclusively in the hands of individual monks. By the twelfth century, Christianity had penetrated into the region of Vyatka, west of Perm; from 1159 on, the monk Avraamy spread the gospel among the Votyaks and Cheremisses there. The Mongol invasions of eastern Europe in 1237 interrupted this development, but on the other hand, the menace

252

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

of the Mongols gave greater urgency to the need to colonize and carry on missionary work (58). During the reign of Yaroslav, there was the first rapid flowering of Christian culture in Russia. The best masters of church architecture were invited from Byzantium; iconography developed and produced the first native Russian genius in this field, the art of letters reached its first apogee with the promotion of the copying and translation of the Bible and other ecclesiastical writings such as the works of the holy fathers of the Eastern Church; hymnography also grew with the development of the so called Znamenny chant, a refinement of the chants inherited from Byzantium. The greatest example of early Russian literature is with no doubt the Sermon on Law and Grace by the first native head of the Russian Church, Metropolitan Hilarion (1051-1055). This verbal icon combined a panegyric to Vladimir with a discourse on Russias place in sacred history (A History of the Russian Church).

Illustration 47: Yaroslav the Wise80

80

See: <http://fixedreference.org/>.

253

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

But it is commonly said that, in spite of the amazing intellectual and cultural progress that the Rus had within a mere century and a half, Russia did not have time to assimilate the full spiritual inheritance it has received from Byzantium. It did not have time either to be inspired by it for further creativity. Disintegration came from internal and external forces in the thirteen century which delayed the process for some four centuries, by which time, Pospielovsky says, alas, Russia was much more interested in imitating western Europe than in a creative re-adaptation and revival of her true and essential legacy (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 35). Nevertheless, in medieval Russia Christianity had flourished in different ways from the way it had spread, developed, and functioned in the West. Parish priests of the Eastern Church were married men and not a separate, elite, caste of men. In an emerging culture where worshipping was done in the vernacular, Latin, and Greek were superfluous. However, just as the West transformed Latin (until Vatican II) into the exclusive, sacred tongue to be used for ecclesiastical life, and the Greek Orthodox Church did with Byzantine Greek, so Russian and all Slav Orthodoxy eventually treated church Slavonic, until today, as the exclusive sacred tongue to be used for the Liturgy. Kievan Christianity did not inherit any of the classical learning that was an integral part of western Christian culture. In Russia, there was nothing comparable to the great universities of Oxford, Cambridge and the Sorbonne founded under the direct guidance of Latin monastic orders. Kiev did not look to Paris or Rome, but to the Christian East of Constantinople, Athos, Syria, and Cappadocia. From a young nation, Russia has changed into a Christian civilization, but great misfortunes were in the way that did not allow it to continue to grow and develop (A History of the Russian Church).

254

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Activity What were the reasons for Vladimir Is choice of Eastern Christianity? What other religions were available at that time. What was Vladimirs religious background? What was the effect on Russia of St. Vladimirs conversion to Christianity? Why did the West not acknowledge Vladimirs decision of converting to Eastern Christianity? Date the Kievan period.
Activity 52: St. Vladimir and Eastern Christianity in Russia

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Activity Find differences between a) Russian Christianity and western Christianity and b) the Russian Church and the Byzantine Church. Comment some of Vladimirs his measures. Who was Vladimir Monomakh? What was his point of view of Christianity? Describe Christian progress done by missionary work in Russia. Who was Yarovslav The Wise? How did he contribute to Russias flowering age?
Activity 53: Differences, Vladimirs measures, Monomakh, Yaroslav, missionary work

Activity Pospielovsky summarizes the pre-Mongolia Kievan period of the Christian conversion as follows: This period was marked by a particular high status of the church, her bishops, priests, and especially monastic holy fathers. Their moral status and authority were undoubtedly higher than those of the secular rulers. Monks built their monasteries mostly in cities or their vicinity, with the neophytic belief in the possibility of truly Christianizing the state and spiritually influencing the behavior of the ruling princes and their adviser (15). Write your own summary.
Activity 54: Your own summary of Christianity in Kievan Rus

255

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

2. THE TARTAR-MONGOL YOKE AND THE EMERGENCE OF THE PRINCIPALITY OF MOSCOW (XIII-XV CENTURIES) Pospielovsky makes the following summary regarding the Tartar-Mongol yoke Russia suffered from 1238 to 1480:81 This period of over two centuries was marked by mutually feuding appanages and the division of the Rus lands into domains under the control of Mongols, Lithuania, and Poles, with the gradual rise of Moscow as the new Russian core and its ecclesiastical and political center. A large part of that period could be considered as Russias Dark Age. (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 15) The Tartars were a branch of the Mongols who inhabited the Altai region of Siberia. These eastern people appeared in 1237 at the frontiers of the vast realm of Kievan and Russia. With 400.000 horsemen, the Tartars had an army much larger than the military forces at the disposal of the Russians, who were split into many independent principalities at that time, and brought devastation upon the Russians. By establishing their headquarters at Saray, the Golden Horde would subject Russian cities to considerable destruction. Princes were obliged to pay tribute to the Khan, and complete political obedience was expected to be paid to the new overlords of Russia. In 1240 Kievan Rus ceased to exist as an independent State. Kiev was sacked and the whole Russian land overrun, excepting the far north around Novgorod including Pskov, Vladimir, Rostol, Iarovslavl, and Susdal, and the south-western provinces of Galicia and Volhynia. These regions were sheltered geographically from the fury of the Tartar forces either by the Carpathians, in the case of the south western areas, or by marshes or immense forests in the case of the northern areas. Yet many of these cities also had to suffer as the prey of their western neighbors. .

For Pospielovsky, rather than 1480, a more accurately date is 1447, when the last major royal succession dispute was settled not by appeals to the Mongol rulers, but by decision of a council of five Russian bishops in favor of direct succession from father to the eldest son.

81

256

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 48: Medieval walls of Novgorod82

A visitor to the Mongol Court in 1246 wrote that he saw neither town nor village, but only ruins and countless human skulls in Russian territory. Yet, Fedotov asserts that even if Kiev was destroyed, the Christianity of Kiev remained a living memory: Kievan Russia, like the golden days of childhood, was never dimmed in the memory of the Russian nation. In the pure fountain of her literary works anyone who wills can quench his religious thirst; in her venerable authors he can find his guide through the complexities of the modern world. Kievan Christianity has the same value for the Russian religious mind as Pushkin for the Russian artistic sense: that of a standard, a golden measure, a royal way. (The Russian Religious Mind 412) Having collapsed Kiev, which was the single undisputed center of Rus, and having proliferated so many practically independent appanages who were occupied with fighting each other, the concept of a common heritage of Rus or of a single Russia state relatively vanished from the memory of politicians and the general populace. It was the Church that remained as the only institution and its chief bishop kept the title of Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus, which was retained even after they moved to the northeast (Pospielovsky, The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 37).

82

See: <www.weblio.jp/>.

257

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

As mentioned, the suzerainty of the Mongol Tartars over Russia lasted from 1238 until 1480. However, after the great battle of Kulikovo (1380), when the Russians finally took courage to face them openly and actually defeated them, the Tartar overlordship was considerably weakened. It was the Grand Dukes of Moscow Dimitry who inspired the resistance to the Mongols and who led Russia at Kulikovo (Ware 82). Most of what is now European and Asian Russia was under direct Mongol rule, while the remaining Russian appanage principalities retained some degree of separate existence as vassals to the Mongols. The most significant of these principalities included Kiev, Chernigov, Ryazan, Vladimir, Suzdal, Smolensk, Polotsk, and Novgorod. Eventually, out of the territory of Vladimir-Suzdal, Moscow began to gain in influence. Yet the consequences of the so called Mongol-Tartar yoke for the Church were not necessarily the same as those for the state. In 1279, the Mongol rulers issued their own edict of tolerance for religious faiths, allowing the Orthodox Church in Russia to enjoy equality with the paganism (and later Islam) of their masters. The Mongols interfered comparatively little with the canonical structure of the Church; many of them were quite open to the message of salvation to be found in Christianity and became converted. One can even say that, in a sense, the Mongol invasion could even have contributed to the preservation of the Byzantine character of Orthodox Christianity in Russia (A History of the Russian Church). As a consequence, Ware says that more than anything else, it was the Church which kept alive Russian national consciousness in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, as the Church was later to preserve a sense of unity among the Greeks under Turkish rule (82). Also, since the Tartar felt great respect for the Church, Pospielovsky asserts, one of the functions of the metropolitan and other bishops was to mediate between the khan

258

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

and the Russian Prince, mainly trying to protect the latter from the Tartar revenge. They also had a similar mediation role between the feuding Russian princes exhorting them to national unity hoping to achieve freedom from foreign domination. Pospielovsky adds that in the performance of these mediatory functions, double dealing, hypocrisy, cunning, flattery, and deception were inevitable (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 38). Very often at the center of this dealing was the fact that while the tartars respected the Church, the westerners sought to destroy the Orthodox Church. As an illustration, Metropolitan Kiril I (or II, according to some sources) had to flatter militantly the Tartars assuring them of eternal loyalty while trying to talk the GalicianVolinian Prince Daniel Romanovich out of a negotiation with the Pope to attack the Tartars. At the same time, he tried to convince Daniel to support the Duke Alexander Newsky in his decision, as we will see, to acquiesce the Mongol authority and attack the Teutonic Knight, who had been blessed by the pope to conquer Russia for the Latin Church (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 38). Kirill, who died in 1281, was the last all-Russia Metropolitan to be buried in Kiev. His successor, the Greek Metropolitan Maxim, aware of the devastation of Kiev, transferred his seat to the city of Vladimir, less than 150 kilometers east of Moscow. Volynian Metropolitan Peter also established his seat in Vladimir, yet he very often visited Moscow, a city where he died in 1326 and apparently requested to be buried. His successor the Greek Theognostos also spent much time in Moscow. Finally, the canonization of the Russian Metropolitan Alexis (1354-78), who like Metropolitan Peter was canonized, solidified Moscows status of the ecclesiastical capital of Russia (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 39). Activity Answer the following questions: 1. Why were some cities kept from Tartar destruction? Which ones were?

259

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

2. What were the consequences of the Tartar yoke for the Church? 3. What was one of the functions of the Metropolita and other bishops?
Activity 55: The Tartar invasion

PRINCE ALEXANDER NEVSKY OF NOVGOROD In the thirteen century Russia witnessed the most violent Crusades organized by Latin Christendom against the Greek Orthodox in the Levant. Taking the opportunity that the Russiansthe most numerous of the Orthodox peopleswere under the rule of the Mongol khans, the Pope of Rome decided to organize Swedish and Teutonic knights into a crusade against the already weakened Russian Orthodox. Yet, it was Alexander Nevsky (1220-1263), the young prince of Novgorod, one of the great warrior saints of Russia, who organized the defense of the Russian lands against the western invaders. Yaroslav IIs son was prince of Novgorod from 1236-1251 and later was named grand prince of Kiev and of Vladimir by the Mongols. He secured the western part of the region. He secured the west frontiers of Rus in the result of victorious battles with Sweden (Battle on Neva 1240) and Teutonic Knights (battle of Ice of Lake Chudskoe called Ledovoe Poboishche, 1242), the most spectacular battle being fought and won by Alexander Nevsky. When the attempts to convert Russia by force proved fruitless, the pope, Innocent IV, began to employ other means. Mouravieff tells us, in The History of the Russian Church (1842), that wishing to take advantage of the distressed condition of the Eastern Churchthe patriarchs of Constantinople living as exiles at Nice and Russia having already been now ten years without a metropolitanand seeking the union of the churches along with a proposition of a crusade against the Mongols, the papal legates visited the court of Alexander and addressed him with flattering speeches; however, he refused either to receive their letters or listen to their solicitations. Fedotov records these words Nevsky had replied to the messengers of the Pope: Our doctrines

260

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

are those preached by the Apostles. The tradition of the Holy Fathers of the Seven Councils we scrupulously keep. As for your words, we do not listen to them and we do not want your doctrine (The Russian Religious Mind 383). The Roman pontiff sent envoys to David of Galich too, offering him also a regal crown. Acting more cautiously, Daniel accepted the crown, and the title of King of Galich, but put off the proposition for a union of the Churches till there should be an ecumenical council (22). Seen logically, it was the period of the Mongol domination that finally split Russian Christians from western Christianity, not only by the isolation imposed upon them by the Golden Horde, but also by the way the Latin Church sought to take advantage of the Russian Churchs weak political position.

Illustration 49: Prince Alexander Nevsky receiving Popes legates83

Alexander Nevsky is popularly credited with having saved the Russian Church during these turbulent years and was numbered among the saints of the Church in Russia in 1380. Pospielovsky states that in the thirteenth and early fourteenth century almost all canonizations were princes, with no pretense of their piety or spiritual value. In the case of Prince Alexander Nevsky, his only claim to sainthood was his having defeated the
83

See: <www.abcgallery.com>.

261

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Swedes and the Germans, this his contemporaries perceived as a miracle because of his enemies greater numbers and better armaments. This historian thinks that there was a concept of just and unjust wars, the former being wars of defense, understood as sacrificial service to fellow-men, similar to the monastic vocation. This tradition, however, was broken by St.Sergius with whom the era of canonizing warrior-princes ends (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 40-41). Furthermore, due to his clever policy, Alexander reduced the Tartar-Mongol occupation, even acting as a mediator between his people and the invaders. Ware believes that his reasons for treating with the Tartars rather than with the West was primarily religious, the Tartars, he adds, took tribute but refrained from interfering in the life of the Church, whereas the Teutonic Knights had as their avowed aim the reduction of the Russian schismatics (83). In this period, as already seen when earlier on we discussed the Church of Byzantium, a Latin Patriarch ruled in Constantinople. Zernov says regarding him: His line of conduct was prophetic. He was in tune with the new Russia which was slowly and painfully rising from the ruins of the Tartar invasiona Russia with profound experience of suffering and humiliation, a nation which eventually learned the lesson of unity, patience, and endurance. Alexander had the moral strength to accept the grim truth that neither he nor his children would see their native land set free. He was not crushed by the knowledge that unconditional surrender to the Asiatic invaders was, for the time being, the only policy open to his people. His firm faith in God, the Ruler over all nations, gave him confidence in the remote yet certain victory of the Christians over their heathen oppressors. He stood far above his generation, and his gaze could penetrate into that distant future when once more Orthodox Russia would be master of the great Eurasian plain. But few of his contemporaries were able to share his vision. (25) Two centuries later the Byzantine Church, after the Council of Florence made the same choice: they would rather submit themselves politically to the Turks than spiritually capitulate to the Roman Church (Ware 83).

262

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

In his endeavors, Nevsky was supported by the above-mentioned Cyril, the Metropolitan of Kiev (1242-81). Cyril was a Russian because the Patriarch of Constantinople could not find a Greek bishop willing to go to devastated Russia. For thirty years this man traveled of over the country indefatigably consolidating and instructing the scattered believers. The Tartars offered the clergy and the Metropolitan privilegesthey were exempted from taxation and any act of violence inflicted upon them was punishable with deathtreating them with the same respect they gave to all ministers of religion. Using these privileges, Cyril inaugurated a new type of service for the Metropolitans of Russia. If before the invasion Metropolitans were only concerned with ecclesiastical matters, after the invasion they become equally concerned with the national revival of the country (Zernov 25) As a ruler of Vladimir, Kiev (Kyyiv), and Novgorod, Alexander Nevsky did much to unify the principalities of northern Russia. Yet, as Zenov explains, the end of the thirteenth century and the beginning of the fourteenth century were particularly dark in the history of Russia. After Nevskys death, his brothers and sons, with the exception of his younger son, Daniel, fought unscrupulously for the title of Grand Prince in the North-eastern provinces (with their main cities, Vladimir, Iarovslavl, Rostov, and Susdal). In the North-western provinces (Novgorod and Pskov) the citizens were split into hostile factions and constantly quarreled among themselves. The Tartars took this opportunity for the further plunder and massacre of the Russian people. Also, large slices of territory around the Baltic Sea were lost to the Germans and the Swedes. Bishops were the only authority that could restore peace, but they very often failed. In the South-western, the provinces of Galicia and Volhynia fell to western rule, subjugating their Orthodox population for many centuries to the Roman Catholics (Zernov 27-28).

263

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

During the years of the Tartars rule, the Church was obliged to look inwards. The literature of the period tends to concentrate on the tragedy of the destruction of Kievan Russia. There are few if any innovations in the nascent Russian school of iconography and hymnography. Yet the invaders revered any form of worship to a god and thus the Russian Church remained unmolested; but her saints of this period are known mainly to God.

Activity In the above Kievan Rus map, try to find as many places as you can from those quoted in the preceding section.
Activity 56: Location of places in a Kievan Rus map

Activity In your own words, write a summary of Alexander Nevskys achievement.

Activity 57: Alexander Nevsky

ST. SERGIUS (SERGII) AND THE CHURCH IN MOSCOVITE RUSSIA: XIVXV CENTURIES After the two centuries of Mongol domination, a completely different Russia emerged, yet it had left an indelible imprint on the Russian psyche. Kiev never recovered from the sack of 1237 and many of the political and legal advances of the Kievan period were effectively eclipsed. Even ecclesiastical life was affected, as the metropolitan see of the Orthodox Church was moved from Kiev to Vladimir in 1300 and then to Moscow in 1321. The rise of Moscow was closely bound up with the moving of the Church to that city. When the town was still small and comparatively unimportant, Peter, Metropolitan of Russia from 1308 to 1326, decided to settle there; and henceforward it remained the city of the chief hierarch of Russia. This eventually led to the division of the Russian Church between two metropolitans, one at Moscow

264

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

and the other at Kiev, yet this arrangement did not become permanent until de middle of the fifteen century (Ware 82), when Moscow had become the most powerful of the Russian principalities and began to expand its territory, consolidating its primacy over its neighbors.

Illustration 50: Moscow in the fifteenth century84

Zernov says regarding Moscow: There are cities which, like people, are marked by destiny. Such a town is Moscow. Both the dark and the bright sides of Russias life are revealed in her history. The bizarre colors of her red, blue and green cupolas, and the unusual contours of her buildings, reflect the sensuousness of the Orient and the serenity of the North, two elements present in the mentality of her inhabitants. Cruelty and mercy, oppression and tolerance, holiness and lust made in turn a strong appeal both to the rulers and to the people of Moscow. Her Kremlin and her streets are associated with the most heroic and the most shameful deeds of her national history. All that Russia possesses, good and bad, finds its expression in the life of that city, which appeared on the scene of Russian history in its gloomiest hour, and which has since governed the fortunes of her people (31). He adds that little is known about the origin of Moscow. The name is mentioned for the first time in the Chronicle of the year 1147. During the Tartar invasion, Moscow was destroyed, but it was soon rebuilt, and allotted to Daniel, Alexanders son, at the time of his fathers death, when he was still a child (1263). During the twenty-seven
84

<www.tspace.library.utoronto.ca>.

265

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

years of his rule, he transformed the insignificant little town into an important center of national revival. Daniel, a deeply religious man, achieved this by refusing to take part in the quarrels which absorbed the energy of his brothers and relatives, and by concentrating on the improvement of his small principality (31).

Activity 1. What was the aftermath of the Tartar domination? 2. Summarize in one or two sentences Zernovs quotation about the city of Moscow.
Activity 58: The city of Moscow

St. Sergius of Radonezh The central figure in this period of the Russian Churchs history and one of the most remarkable men Russia has ever produced is St. Sergius of Radonezh, considered as one of the great fathers of Russian monasticism. He was born in 1314 in the northern city of Rostov but due to the civil wars his parents had to move to Radonez, some fifty miles north of Moscow. There he lived as an ordinary peasant. This is why he is called the peasant saint of Russia. At an early age he sought the life of a solitary and wished to spend his life in prayer and meditation. He retired as a monk to the vast forests north of Moscow living completely alone for several years. Eventually he was discovered by some peasants and soon he gathered around himself a community of like-minded zealots by whom he was elected abbot (hegumen). The community built a small monastery dedicated to the Holy Trinity.

The grand monastic complex and church of Sergiev Posad, located 45 miles north of Moscow, is the center of Russian Orthodoxy and one of the most important places of pilgrimage in the entire country. (The center of Russian Orthodoxy was originally in Kiev, Ukraine but following the 13th century Mongol invasion, the patriarch moved to the town of Moscow in 1308). The first religious structures at Sergiev Posad were founded by the Russian nobleman Sergius (1319-92), also called Sergiev, who retired to the forest of Radonezh with his brother Stephen to lead a life of prayer. In 1340 (some sources say 1337) the two brothers built a small wooden church and the site

266

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

began to attract other monks and a growing number of pilgrims. Rapidly developing into a monastic complex, the site was given the name Trinity Monastery. Because of his religious and political achievements, Sergius was canonized in 1422. His relics were placed in a silver reliquary in Trinity Cathedral, constructed between 1422-27, upon the site of the earlier wooden church (destroyed during a Tartar raid). The Cathedral was decorated by the most famous Russian icon painters, Daniil Chernyi and Andrei Rublev. The main object of worship in the cathedral are the relics of St. Sergius. (From Sacred Sites of Russia) Table 29: Monastery of Trinity-St. Sergius Sergiev Posad

Illustration 51: Monastery of St. Sergius Sergei Posad85

In his biography one can read the following passage: St. Sergius built the Church of the Holy Trinity as a mirror for his community, that through gazing at the divine Unity they might overcome the hateful divisions of this world. Zernov says that The sense of peace which emanated from him, his loving kindness and, above all, his complete confidence in God, which made him singularly free from any fear and hesitation, were the sources of his influence and attraction (37).

85

See: <www.rustoys.com>.

267

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 52: St. Sergius of Radonezh86

This is why St. Sergius attracted the attention of the Metropolitan of Moscow Alexis (the primatial see by this time having been transferred to Moscow from Kiev via Vladimir). Alexis was deeply impressed by him and several times Sergius went at his request to see the princes who endangered the national efforts toward unity and freedom by their quarrels. Sergius was the broker for peace between quarreling princes. Alexis tried to persuade him to become his successor, but Sergius declined. Zernov adds that he was not called to govern but to serve and he never used any authority except moral persuasion (37). However, his influence on the Russian politic was idiosyncratically strong for a humble monk. He became a recognized spiritual leader of the nation. It was Sergius who gave his blessing to the Grand Prince of Moscow Dmitry Donskoi who had turned to him for advice in the critical hour of Russias struggle for liberation: to go into battle with the Mongol khan Mamai at Kulikovo Field in 1380. Sergius words were Go forward and fear not. God will help thee. This battle was fierce and the losses on both sides were enormous, but it was won, and meant a turning point in Russian history as it shattered

86

See: <www.holydormition.com>.

268

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

the legend of the invincibility of the Mongol army; however, it was only the beginning of the Russians liberation from their Oriental rulers. Zernov says that: St. Sergius performed a miracle with the Russians: he changed a defeated people into the builders of a great Empire. He did not, however, employ any of the methods which are usually associated with the work of great leaders and reformers. He never preached a single sermon; he did not write a single book; all his life he behaved like the humblest, the least distinguished of menand yet it was he who was selected by the unanimous voice of the nation as its teacher and liberator. The secret of St. Sergius influence lies in the singular integrity of his life: his sole activity was in the service of the Holy Trinity, and he became in himself such a faithful reflection of divine harmony and love that all who came in contact with him grew aware of the Heavenly Vision. The Christian faith that God is the Holy Trinity implies that the Creator of this world is the perfect community of Three Persons whose relation is that of mutual love. St. Sergius was not a theologian in the accepted sense of the word. He never wrote or spoke about the Trinitarian doctrine, but he was himself a living example of that divine Unity in Freedom which is the essence of the Christian revelation of the nature of God. (40) Ware compares and contrasts Sergius and Theodosius. He says that both displayed the same kenosis and deliberate self-humiliationSergius lived as a peasant in spite of his noble birthand actively played a role in politics. Yet while Theodosius monastery of the Holy Trinity was situated in the wilderness, at a distance from the civilized worldSergius was more an explorer and a colonist, the Kievan monastery of the Caves lay on the outskirts of the city. Also, while there is nothing in the religious experience of Theodosius that one can label mystical, there was an evident dimension of spirituality in Sergius. Ware adds that Sergius was a contemporary to Gregory Palamas, one of the last great Fathers of the Church, and it is not impossible that he was familiar with the Hesychast movement in Byzantium (85). Pospielovsky, however, believes that after Palamas successfully defended hesychasm at the 1341, 1347, and 1351 councils of Constantinople, the movement spread to all Orthodox countries, including Russia (42). Indeed Sergius showed to be an exponent of an interior, ascetic style of monastic life, similar to what Byzantine spiritual masters termed hesychasm, the silent prayer of the heart of the reclusehesychia in Greek means silence,

269

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

quietude. As we noticed in the previous chapter, a controversy concerning hesychasm had raged in thirteenth-century Byzantium over whether God could be contemplated and whether the human person was capable of being united with Him. The hesychasts claimed conditionally since God can be contemplated not in His essence but in His energies and the human person can become united, or deified in Him, but only through the way of the Cross and only by grace. Thus man cannot become a god by nature. This teaching was embodied by Sergius upon combining a reclusive life with compassion for those whom he encountered in the northern forests. Under Sergius tutelage the hesychastic monastic movement took root in the far north of Russia. It, furthermore, laid the foundations for the great monasteries of St. Cyril of Beloozero and Solovki and the skete of St. Nilus of Sora, who introduced this particular form of monasticism from Mt. Athos (A History of the Russian Church). Pospielovsky believes that: It was precisely this hesychast Orthodox concentration on man as a wholesome reflection of the Divine and as a channel for inner contact with the Divine that led to the achievement of the greatest artistic spiritual heights in iconography as a physical representation of the Spiritual (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 42). St. Sergius did a very important thing not only by helping Russians to embrace the ideals of Christian society based on unity and freedom, but also by convincing them that there was a way that enabled its practical application. Thus, beside the political rise of the Moscow principality, the first part of the fifteenth century was also a period in which the New Russia of Moscow emerged spiritually. This time was the foundation on which the Moscow tsardom was to be based during the next two centuries. The extensive powers given to the tsars and their preventive measure for national security and independence took form in the serfdom of the peasants, which obliged the Russians

270

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

to give up their national freedom, so cherished by their ancestors (Zernov 36-41, 44; Ware 84-86; A History of the Russian Church).

Your Own Research Search the web and write a paragraph (between ten and twelve sentences) explaining the concept of serfdom in Medieval Russia.
Activity 59: The concept of serfdom

Activity In your own words, write a summary of St. Sergius of Radonezh.

Activity 60: St. Sergius of Radonezh

St. Stephen, the Enlightener of Perm, a missionary St. Stephen, the Enlightener of Perm, a missionary St. Stephen (1340-1396) another saint and relevant figure, leads us to consider another aspect of Church life under the Mongol yoke: missionary work. This is an activity the Russian Church actively pursued from its early days. It was also undertaken by the followers of Sergius of Radonezh as they found more and more monasteries. Stephen was a contemporary of St. Sergius of Radonezh. The spiritual affinity of the two saints is illustrated by the following incident, as recorded in St. Sergius Life: Once, when St. Stephen was passing near St. Sergius monastery on his way to Moscow, he stopped and turned in the direction of the monastery with the words: Peace to thee, my spiritual brother! Seeing this with his spiritual eyes, St. Sergius, who at that moment was sitting in the refectory with his monks, arose, said a prayer and bowed in St. Stephens direction, saying as he did: Rejoice also, thou pastor of Christs flock, and may the blessing of the Lord be with thee ! (St. Stephen of Perm) He entered the monastery of St. Gregory the Theologian in Rostov quite young and soon he became a student of the Holy Scriptures and the Greek language. He became inspired with the idea of bringing the light of Christianity to the pagan Ziryans

271

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

who inhabited the distant land of Perm on the western edge of the Ural Mountains. In preparation for this missionary work, the Saint studied the Ziryan language and, after composing an alphabet based on Ziryan monetary symbols, following the examples of Cyril and Methodius, he translated into that language from Greek the sacred texts. The head of the Moscow diocese at that time, Bishop Gerasim, blessed the young missionary and gave him the necessary church utensils, while the tsar provided him with a letter of safe conduct. Although grieved by the Ziryans hostile attitude towards the Faith, this young missionary patiently went on with his missionary work and eventually the pagans began arriving first in small groups and later in crowds, asking for Holy Baptism.

Illustration 53: St. Stephen of Perm (1340-1396) in his way to Moscow87

In 1383 Stephen was made the first bishop of Perm. He provided a strong foundation for the fledgling Church. He erected many temples and monasteries, established schools for future clergy, taught them himself, and showed an example of active charity in caring for the poor and unfortunate. When there was a famine in the area he freely distributed bread to the people. He sought the reduction of taxes and protected his flock from oppression by secular authorities. St. Stephen died in 1396
87

See: <http://www.answers.com/topic/stephen-of-perm>.

272

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

while in Moscow on church business. He was buried in one of the Kremlin churches, something which greatly saddened his flock. The monk Epiphanius described their grief in his prose epic The Lamentation of the Land of Perm which forms the basis of this biographical data: Had we lost but gold and silver, these we could regain. But we shall never find another like you ... What right does [Moscow] have? She has her own metropolitans and hierarchs; we had but one, and she has taken him for herself. And now we dont even have a bishops grave. We had only one bishop; he was our lawmaker, our baptizer, our apostle, our preacher, our confessor... (St. Stephen of Perm)

Activity In your own words, write a summary of St. Stephen.

Activity 61: St. Stephen, the Enlightener of Perm

The End of the Tartar Yoke and the Emergence of Moscow In 1448, the Tartar yoke finally ended under Ivan III, a Grand Prince of Moscow. The end of Tartar domination was coincident with the absorption by Moscow of the remaining principalities. By the end of the fifteen century, the Moscow Grand Duchy was an empire (or stardom). Ivan III became sole ruler of a vast country, but there remained the problem of defining his position in the life of the nation, and an ideology to justify Russia expansion. Zernov says that the answer that was found was the belief that Moscow was the successor of Constantinople and that its tsars were the legitimate hairs of the Byzantine Emperors (47). In 1472, Ivan III married Sophia Paleologos, the niece of the last emperorConstantinople had fallen in 1453. He took as his coat-of-arms the two-headed Byzantine Eagle and also zealously fostered the concept of Moscow as the third Rome, which implied that it should inherit the prerogatives of the first and second Rome. Some years later under, in 1551, Ivan IV the Terrible submitted a series of questions to the Church Council. The answers were in one

273

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

hundred numbered chapters and were given the name Hundred Chapters (Stoglav). One of its purposes was the strengthening of true orthodoxy, based on the belief that the divine scriptures forbade believers to follow foreign customs. Consequently, after the fall of the Byzantine Empire in 1453, the church and state worked together to make Russia the stronghold of Orthodoxy. Theologians put forth the idea of Moscow as the third Rome. Their idea of the third Rome did not however resemble the Byzantine theory of the Basilea of the symphony between the State and the Church as the tsar was considered to be supreme in both state and church. As we will see, this eventually led to the development of two factions in the church: the first was led by Abbot Joseph of Volokolamsk in favor of the tsars intervention in church affairs with a strong emphasis on the rituals and outward practice of religion, and the second led by Nilus Sorsky, who held that the tsar should not have power over religious affairs. Ivan III had advanced very rapidly to the position of leader of the nation because he had the backing of the Russian Church. Besides, he was a great church builder. In 1505-1508, he erected in Moscow its first cathedral, dedicated to the Archangel Michael, which later became the burial place of all Grand Princes and tsars. During Ivans reign, the political and ecclesiastical supremacy of Moscow was firmly established (Zernov 33).

274

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 54: Archangel Michael Cathedral88

Soon the Grand Principality of Moscow consolidated its suzerainty over most of the northern forests of what is now European Russia. There were three elements which caused the rise of Moscow: first, the liberation from the Mongol yoke; second, the gathering of the lands of the old Kievan state; and third, the centralization of political power in the hands of the princes of Moscow. The rise of Moscow required the gradual building of a central state apparatus to govern the growing state of Muscovy. An important step towards the centralization of Moscows authority was the Sudebnik (Law Code) produced by Ivan III (1462-1505) in 1497, by codifying existing laws into a second legal code. The Sudenik, which came to characterize much of Russian history, attempted to standardize legal procedures and punishment for crimes. Yet this Law Code was merely a start toward government centralization of justice. In 1550 Ivan IV The Terrible (1533-1584), who proclaimed himself tsar or autocrat, put a new law code into effect. The title of tsar, a corruption of the Latin Caesar, had previously been in use among the Grand Princes of Moscow and became an official designation with the

88

See: <www.answers.com/topic/stephen-of-perm>.

275

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

blessing of the Church for the ruler of Muscovy with the advent of the reign of Ivan the Terrible in the sixteenth century. In 1453, sixty-one years after Sergius death, the Byzantine Empire fell to the Turks. After Kulikovo a new Russia emerged which would inherit Byzantiums place as protector of the Orthodox world. Ware says that it proved both worthy and unworthy of this vocation (86).

Activity With telegraphic sentences, explain the raise of the Principality of Moscow.
Activity 62: The raise of the Principality of Moscow

A RUSSIAN RENAISSANCE The disciples of St. Sergius founded fifty new monasteries during his lifetime, and another forty during the next generation, all under the influence of Sergius and his followers. This is an example of the fact that from 1350 to 1550 their existed in Russia a golden age of spirituality, an extraordinary renaissance in both the inner and outward life of the Church. The early fifteenth century saw the emergence of the characteristic onion domes of Russian church buildings as well as masterpieces of iconography by Andrei Rublev, Theophanes the Greek, and Daniel Chorny, which adorned cathedrals and churches in dioceses that grew across the length and breadth of Muscovite Russia. Furthermore, the Churchs mission reached as far as the Ural Mountains with the evangelization of Finno-Ugric peoples, especially the Zyrians, as already shown, a people into whose language St. Stephen of Perm had translated the Gospels and Divine Liturgy. The inner life of the church was enriched by Sergius spirituality, in spite of him not having left any writings. We know this through his biography or Vita, written by Epiphanius the Wise. His spirituality was centered on prayer and contemplation, thus revealing the roots the Russian Church had in Byzantium. This renewal of the Churchs

276

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

life of prayer was reflected in the revival of iconography. Rublevs Trinity, painted in honor of Sergius vision of the Trinity, represents the most perfect example of it. We will see an image of this painting a later chapter.

Your Own Research Search the web and write a short biography of Rublev.
Activity 63: A short biography of Rublev

Activity List some of the elements of the Russian renaissance in the inner and outward life of the Church
Activity 64: A Russian renaissance

HERESIES But at the same time when the Muscovite Russian Church began to speak with its own voice and Russia witnessed a renaissance, there emerged a number of heresies. They began mostly in Novgorod, a city culturally more advanced than Moscow and with considerable western contacts, through trade and European merchants. This was at a time when heresies and Protestantism were rapidly spreading in the West. For example, in 1311, a Russian Church Council condemned a Novgorod archpriest for rejecting monasticism. Toward the end of the fourteenth century another heresy appeared in this same city: the Strigolniki (meaning cutting or shearing). Its followers protested against the fees bishops would charge clerical candidates for their ordination, a practice that contradicted the canon. Based on this assumption the Strigolniki concluded that all of the Russian clergy were canonically invalid. Another sect came to be known as the Judaizers. Among other things, they argued that the New Testamental concept of the Trinity contradicted the Old Testament Teaching of one God (1989, 53).

277

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Your Own Research Search the web and write a five-paragraph paper about heresies in Medieval Russia.
Activity 65: Heresies in Medieval Russia

Activity Write a summary of this section 2, entitled The Tartar-Mongol Yoke and the Emergence of the Principality of Moscow (XIII-XV) Centuries.
Activity 66: Your own summary of the Russian Church during the XIII-XV centuries

3. FROM POSSESSORS AND NON-POSSESSORS TO THE GREAT SCHISM (XVI-XVII CENTURIES) POSSESSORS AND NON-POSSESSORS St Sergius brought a spiritual renaissance to the Russians in his attempt to unite the socia life with the mystical side of monasticism. But his followers were not always able to follow his path and they began to split into opposite schools, each one emphasizing one aspect of their common inheritance. The two schools became known as the Possessors (or Acquisitors) and the Non-Possessors (or Non-Acquisitors.) Fedotov describes the Possessors as active, practical, social; good farmers and administrators, social leaders in the surrounding countryside, political advisers of the Muscovite princes in the building of a unified, autocratic state. Their religious life was founded upon the fear of God and the meticulous observance of ritual, mitigated by their aesthetic appreciation of liturgical worship (The Russian Religious Mind 6). He said of the Non-Possessorsthe mystics of the northern forests, that they cultivated absolute poverty, silence, and spiritual prayer, preserving a great moral independence of secular powers, which they even held it their obligation to teach and reprove (6). Fedotov adds that This kind of spirituality undoubtedly inspired the highest manifestations of the Russian art in icon painting, which reached its peak in the fifteenth century: this was the golden age of Russian saints and artists (6). Zernov also says that 278

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

while the Possessors centered on unity, greatly appreciating the beauty and dignity of ritual both in conduct of worship and in daily life, the Non-Possessors focused on the importance of freedom and taught that nothing was more pleasing to God than a humble and contrite heart lovingly and freely obeying the Creator (51). Furthermore, the Possessors, whose religious houses possessed large estates and even controlled the serfs who inhabited them, were good administrators and autocrats and were ready to allow the tsar to take a leading role in the Church. For them the sovereign should be loved and obeyed as fathers were obeyed by their children. However, the Non-Possessors were scholars and mystics and men of learning and independent minds. They were not reluctant to criticize either the leaders of the State or the Church. They also insisted that the monks should depend only on their own labor and thereby maintain their spiritual independence. Moreover, they were against persecuting heretics and taught that one cannot be put to death for holding erroneous doctrine. Zernov says that: In a century when, in the West, Roman Catholics and Protestants held, with equal vigor, that it was the duty of Christian Governors to execute heretics, the Russian Church alone contained an influential party which considered this practice as incompatible with the spirit of the Gospel (52). Thus, while Nilus was prone to the spiritual re-education of heretics, and in extreme cases isolating them under arrest in monasteries, Joseph was harsh, severe, and merciless towards heretics, even in favor of applying the death penaltyas the Spanish Inquisition was doing; while for Nilus a repentant heretic should be welcomed like the prodigal son in the Bible, for Joseph they deserve a milder form of punishment but not forgiveness (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 59). Undoubtedly, Nilus was following the Christian thread of St. Vladimir or St. Vladimir Monomakh. Josephs harshness was atypical for the Russian Church.

279

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Outstanding men in the sixteenth century took one of these two different paths. On the one hand, St. Joseph, the famous Abbot of Volotsk (1439-1515), Genadi, Archbishop of Novgorod (d. 1505), and Daniel, Metropolitan of Moscow (d. 1539) were the spokesmen of the Possessors; on the other hand, St. Nilus of Sorsk (14331508)a monk in the forest beyond the Volga, Prince Vassian Patrikeev (d. 1531) and St. Maxim the Greek (d. 1556) were the exponents of the Non-Possessors perspective (51). This division functioned well as long as both parties had their full share in the shaping of the countrys destiny. But at a Church council in 1503 this division turned into a crisis when St. Nilus launched an attacked on the ownership of land by monasteries (about a third of the land in Russia belonged to the monasteries at this time). This attack was answered by St Joseph who was in favor of monastic landholding, and being supported by the majority of the council. For Joseph and his followers: The riches of the Church are the riches of the poor. This contrasts with the words of the monk Vassian, a disciple of Nilus: Where in the tradition of the Gospels, Apostles, and Fathers are monks ordered to acquire populous villages and enslave peasants to the brotherhood? We look into the hand of the rich, fawn slavishly, flatter them to get out of them some little village We wrong and rob and sell Christians our brothers. We torture them with scourges like wild beasts. (Pares 93) The monastic Statute of Nilus of Sorka and Josephs tracks against the Judaizers (The Enlightener) are considered as Russias first theological works. Pospielovsky asserts that Josephs ideas prevailed after 1504 and remained the ideology of Russia establishment, while those of Nilus survived among many monastics as well as many humble priest and laymen (Pospielovsky, The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 57). Your Own Research Search the web and write a short biography of St. Nilus and St. Joseph, two leaders of the fifteen-sixteenth century Russian monasticism. Also try to find his

280

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

statutesthe first Russian theological worksand analyze their differences. Finally, search for Josephs The Enlightener and write a paragraph about it. What side would you take?
Activity 67: St. Nilus and St. Joseph

During the next twenty years there was a considerable tension between these two groups until 1525-1526 when the Non-Possessors through the Metropolitan Varlaam (1511-21), a Non-Possessor, openly criticized Basil III for unjustly divorcing his wife. Basil had no children and decided, therefore, to divorce his wife and marry another woman. Yet, the Possessors supported the tsars desire declaring that the future of the monarchy was of greater importance than the fate of a woman, and their spokesman, Daniel, expressed his willingness to re-marry the Sovereign. Basil gladly availed himself of this offer, secured Daniels election to the Metropolitan seat in 1522, and was remarried by him in the next year. Daniel pursued a Josephite line concerning collaboration, a line that implies close collaboration with the ruler. The fruit of this wedlock was Ivan the Terrible (1533-84). The tsar then imprisoned the leading Non-Possessors and closed the Transvolga hermitages (Ware, 104). Outstanding disciples of St. Nilus were themselves condemned as heretics. Pospielovsky believes that this accusation was not completely groundless for at a heresy trial in 1531, monk Vassian Patrikeev advocated monophysite heresy by rejecting Jesus full humanity. After the victory of the Possessors, Pospielovsky continues, many heretics found refuge in the compassionate, trans-Volga sketes. Two centuries later, this area housed a major concentration of the most persistent Old Believers (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 60 This action condemned the movement to go underground and the whole mystical movement disappeared from the surface of Russian history for about two centuries, and thereby restricting their influence. This was the period during which the Possessors reigned supreme (Fedotov, A Treasury of Russian Spirituality). This victory for the

281

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Possessors, undoubtedly attained because of their close connection with the princes of Moscow, is shown by the canonization of Joseph within a generation of his death; while Nilus was canonized only in the twentieth century. Fedotov points out The age of the Muscovite tsardom (the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries), so favorable to the growth of Russias political power, was very unfruitful with regard to the spiritual life. Josephitism degenerated into static ritualism with the gradual suppression of the caritative elements in Russian traditional piety. But in spite of the general barbarization of morality during this period, it is impossible to deny the strengthening of social discipline, the training of the will in public service, which shaped the Great Russian character as it is known through modern Russian literature and history. Pospielovsky thinks that Joseph was the pioneer (61) in Russia of the theory of the theocratic character of royal prerogatives by which tsars and princes were Gods representatives on earth. However, knowing well that a centralized autocracy could lead to the liquidation of monastic property, Joseph formulated a theory of disobedience to tyrants using the following terms: Should a tsarfall pray to ugly passions and sins, greediness and rage, cunningness and lies, pride and violence or, what is even worse, want of faith and slandersuch a tsar is not Gods but devils servant; he is not a tsar but a tyrant and thou shouldst not fulfill such tsars orders even if tortured and threatened with murder.89 Yet, I believe that Joseph, in spite of his defense of the theocratic character of the tsars, he could not forget the all the tradition of martyrdom in the name of faith and his Russian roots. This Josephite position will be seen some years later with St. Philips when confronting Ivan the Terrible. Pospielovsky adds that Josephs teaching on resistance to heretical kings, also allowed the Old Ritualists in the seventeenth century to proclaim the ruling tsar to be a servant of Satan, and thus to refuse his orders (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 62). The victory of the Possessors, Pospielovsky asserts, had also direct consequences on the Great Schism of the seventeenth, on the secularization of the
89

Qtd. in Pospielovsky (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 61).

282

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Church and its complete subordination to state bureaucracy by Peter the Great, and even on the Bolshevik victory of militant atheism in the twentieth century (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 57).

Activity 1. What were the differences in spiritual outlook between the Possessors and the non-Possessors? On a sheet of paper, draw two columns and place their differences on either side. 2. Explain why Possessors triumphed over Non-Possessors 3. What was Josephs theory of disobedience?
Activity 68: Possessors and Non-Possessors

IVAN III THE TERRIBLE AND ST PHILIPS The victory of the Possessors meant a close and friendly collaboration between the State and the Church, which resulted in the initial success of the Moscow Principality. Ivan was deeply influenced by the teaching of the Possessors about the supreme power of the tsar and firmly believed that he was divinely appointed. Ivan was a deeply unstable man whose long rule could be called despotic at best. Though intellectually brilliant, his change of moods and increasing paranoia made for erratic policies and outright savagery, particularly in the later years of his reign. He brought the Moscow tsardom great successes but also its most serious reverses. Ivan even took an active interest in Church affairs, composing hymns and strictly executing all of the prescribed ritual. Zernov makes a clear picture of him: Ivan was the first Russian revolutionary. He inspired and carried through that special type of revolution directed by the head of the State which has since become a characteristic feature of Russian history. He used his high authority as a divine sanction for the brutal treatment of all those who stood for the traditional order. By doing so he undermined the organic growth of Russian culture and prepared the ground for the violence of Peter the Greats reforms in the eighteenth century and for the Red Terror of the Communist experiment of the twentieth. He was, however, not solely responsible for this tragic turn in the history of Russia, for his whole outlook was shaped by the teaching of the

283

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Possessors. Their theory of the tsars illimitable power contributed much to Ivans abuse of the authority entrusted to him by the Russian people. (63) Both Ivan, who considered himself the successor of the Byzantine emperors, and his victims firmly believed that God was the Ruler of the world and it was to Him that they one day would have to give an account of their conduct. Thus, Russians perceived Ivan as a punishment from above which was visited upon them because of their sins, and they hoped that by Gods mercy their sufferings would not last long. This aided them to face their trials (63).

Illustration 55: Ivan the Terrible90

Precisely at this time the Church became convinced that it stood at the beginning of a new age. According to its computations, the year 1492 marked the end of the seventh and last millennium of the worlds history. The Last Days which had been promised in the Apocalypse were approaching. The Moscow Church counted on the end with such conviction that it did not continue its calendar beyond 1492. The world should and must come to an end at the end of the seventh millennium. Had there not been only seven councils? Were there not only seven days to the week, seven sacraments, and seven pillars of wisdom? But the world did not end, and Metropolitan Zosimus had to have new Easter tables made. In the preface accompanying their publication he heralded the dawn of a new Christian era. He further ordained that God had now chosen, after St. Vladimir, the devout Ivan Vasilievich as tsar and Autocrat of all Russia to be a new Emperor Constantine for a new Constantinople, namely Moscow. At the beginning of the worlds eighth millennium the Grand Duke of Moscow stood proclaimed by the highest dignitary of the Russian Church as the protector of Orthodoxy, and the direct descendant of the devout Emperor Constantine (Benz 88). Table 30: The Russian tsarthe New Constantine
90

See: <www.cgi.ebay.com>.

284

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

However, the church, as noted, did not yield all independence, and never allowed itself to be enslaved to this tyrant. Ivan had created a special terror police called oprichna whose alleged purpose was to sniff out treason. After Makarius death he tried to look for obedient metropolitans of Moscow such as Athanasius (Afanasii) and German (Herman), who turned out to be in opposition to the terror police and died mysteriously. He then appointed a third, St. Philip (died 1569), who dared to protest openly against Ivan the Terribles bloodshed and injustice and bravely rebuked him at his face during the public celebration of the Divine Liturgy. Very eloquently, in a sermon preached in the Kremlin cathedral, he said to the Sovereign the following words, witnessing to Christian justice: We are offering here the pure, bloodless sacrifice for the salvation of men, but outside this holy temple the blood of Christians is being shed and innocent people are being killed. Hast thou, Sire, forgotten that thou, too, art dust and needest forgiveness of thy sins? Forgive, and thou shalt be forgiven, for only if we forgive our subordinates shall we escape divine condemnation. Thou hast deeply studied the Holy Scriptures, and why hast thou not followed their counsel? He who does not love his neighbor is not of God. The voice of the Church was heard in Philips intercessions for all of those who had suffered from Ivans cruelty. Ivan then imprisoned him and later had him strangled (Ware 108). Zernov explains that Philip was a martyr who died not in defense of the faith, as many martyrs did, but in defense of Christian mercy so flagrantly violated by the tsar (61). During the reign of Feodor (Theodore)Ivans successora significant event happened in Russia: the elevation of the status of the Russian Church to a Patriarchate.91 Yet, unfortunately, after his death, leaving no heir, a period of serious trouble of almost thirty years began for Russia. Ivan IV the Terrible had been the most successful of the Muscovite Grand Princes in regard to expansionand also the most
91

See Primates of Russia, Metropolitans and Patriarchs of Kiev and Moscow for a list of these relevant Church positions in Kiev and Moscow.

285

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

ruthless. His son Feodor (1584-1598) was not of the same stock. Russia changed from being a threat to its neighbors to becoming a target. But, as Fedotov asserts, the spiritual energies latent during this age were unleashed in the great explosion known as the Raskol (schism) in the Russian Church (The Russian Religious Mind 7), which has not been healed even until today. Let us view these three events.

Activity 1. In your own words summarize Ivan the Terribles concept of State and his relationship with the Church. 2. Who was St. Philips? What did he do that enraged the tsar so much?
Activity 69: Ivan the Terribles period

THE EMERGENCE OF MOSCOW AS A PATRIARCHATE In 1589, under the reign of Theodor, Ivans son and last tsar of the House of Rurika dynasty begun by Alexander Nevskys son Daniel, the metropolitan see at Moscow was elevated to patriarchal status and its autocephaly from Constantinople, the Mother Church, was recognized (autocephaly meaning ecclesiastical independence). However, the ancient metropolitanate of Kiev was to remain under Constantinople for a century more. The Patriarch of Moscow attained the same status as that held by the historic patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria within the Orthodox Church. Ecumenical Patriarch Jeremiah II came to Moscow in 1588 to beg for alms for his Church, which, as already noticed, has been devastated by the Turks. The Russian government, occupied by Godunov, received him with great honor, settled him and his attendance in luxurious conditions at the Kremlin, though in fact, as Pospielovsky narrates, the Patriarch was kept under arrest. He could not return to Constantinople until he recognized the autocephaly of the Russian Church and, in 1589, Job became the first Russian Patriarch. When Jeremiah returned to Constantinople, he

286

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

informed the other patriarchal sees, yet this fact did not make the church stronger, as we will see in the Time of Troubles. The granting of a patriarchate to the Russian Church supposedly allowed the latter to adopt the Byzantine model of symphony between Emperor and Bishop, though it was not the case. To start with, for Pospielovsky, Job was the creation of Godunov (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 66-67). With these patriarchal sees now in Muslim-dominated lands, some began calling Moscow the Third Rome, and destined to assume the leadership of world Christianity. Thus began the popular conception of Holy Russia possessing a divine mission to hold forth the light of faith to the rest of the world. The Russians took upon themselves the cultural mission of Byzantium, becoming a link between the East and the West and the defenders and exponents of the order built on the foundation of Orthodox Christianity. Yet, as Zernov asserts, the Russians could not reproduce that unique combination of the Christian, Hellenistic and Oriental civilization, which was the great achievement of the Byzantine Empire ... the temptation which crippled the development of the southern Slavs (49). Instead, he said: The Russians followed their own path, and they created a new order, quite distinct from that of the Eastern Empire but inspired by the same ultimate vision of life. Moscow was little indebted to Constantinople in politics, economics and social organization, but it was conspicuously the heir of Byzantium in the realm of the spirit, in art, religion and, especially, worship. Here, the Russians followed the true tradition of the Second Rome, and were able to enrich it along their own lines. It was through the wealth of the Byzantine liturgy that they entered so fully into the cultural inheritance of the ancient world. (50) Zernov continues saying that: The Russian interpretation of Christianity was more artistic than intellectual, being based on the vision of the Church as a living organism rather than an institution. Salvation was conceived not so much in terms of the forgiveness of the sins of the individual, as in terms of a healing and sanctifying process which aimed at the transfiguration of men, of beasts and plants, and of the whole cosmos. St. Sergius was the first to give harmonious expression to this typically Russian approach to religion. He was able to fulfill the highest aspiration of the nation and he became the living example of unity in freedom (Sobornost). (51)

287

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Since the adoption of the title of tsar by the Grand Princes of Moscow, the Russians had procured the establishment in Russia of the Patriarchate. Also the fall of Constantinoplethe new Rome on the Bosporusto the Turks in 1453 had forced the Russian Church to pursue a new identity for herself. The end of the Byzantine Empire did not extinguish the Byzantine tradition. Rather, its ideas and its claims were taken over by the Russian rulers of Moscow. Benz asserts that the Russian historical and ecclesiastical mentality sprang out of the conception of Moscow as the third Rome. He adds that The conquest of Constantinople affected Muscovys conception of her historical and ecclesiastical mission in much the same way as the conquest of Rome by the Germanic tribes had affected Byzantiums view of herself. Russian national and ecclesiastical pride received an enormous impetus from the notion that Moscow had become the third Rome. After the collapse of the Byzantine Empire and Church, the political claims of the Roman Imperium and the spiritual claims of the Byzantine Church were assumed by Muscovy and the Church of Moscow. (87) The monk Philotheos had prophesied that the first Rome fell because of heresy, the second Rome fell because of infidelity to the true Church doctrine ... Moscow will be the third Rome and a fourth there shall not be.92 Furthermore, after the Council of Florence in 1439, which the Russians perceived as apostasy, the Russian Church now eventually perceived itself as the primary, if not sole guardian of the purity of the Orthodox Christian faith. Moreover, tradition dictated that emperors should be anointed by the Patriarchate, and his absence was a challenge to the claims of the tsars to be the successors of the Byzantine emperor. Yet, as events turned out, the Moscow Patriarchate did not last more than a century.

Filofei, a monk from the Eleazar Monastery in Pskov, sketched this theory in a letter to tsar Vasilii III in 1510/1511. See Florovsky, Ways of Russian Theology.

92

288

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Activity 1. In your own words, explain the circumstances of the recognition of the Russian Church as a patriarchate. 2. Explain the concept of The Third Rome and Russias particular vision of its Byzantine inheritance.
Activity 70: The Patriarchate and the Third Rome

A TIME OF TROUBLES (1584-1613) Pospielovsky affirms that with Philips the Church leaders opposition to Ivans terror ended and the silence of the Church once again left the nation without visible moral leadership (66). He adds that this fact undoubtedly contributed to the instability of power and absence of authority once Ivan died (1584); and the violence of the state translated itself into violence of society (66). This a period called the Time of Troubles, period in which was brought to the verge of collapse, as various princes and boyars fought to gain power and war and famine spread throughout Russia. It was a dynastic crisis after the death of Ivan childless heir, Theodore, in 1598. With his death, Russia was, for its first time, left without any legitimate heir to the throne. The country went through many rulers until the beginning of the Romanov dynasty. The first was Boris Godunov, a boyar who had gained much power during Theodors reign. Godunov had been elected by a Zemsky Sobor, or Assembly of the Land, at the Patriarch Jobs suggestion. However his reign was short, lasting only from 1598 to his death in 1605. His eight years of his rule was an absolute disaster and not a peaceful one: a terrible famine (1601-3), Church and boyar opposition, peasants fleeing from the estates, and Cossack rebellions occurred. At Boris Godunovs death, a man claiming to be Dmitrii, a young son of Ivan IVs who had died mysteriouslyeither accidentally or murdered, allegedly by Godunovs agents, organized a group of rebels and took the throne in 1605.He soon

289

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

deposed Patriarch Job for refusing to recognize him as the true son of Ivan IV. The first bishop to recognize the Impostor was Ignatius, whom the Pretender had elected as Patriarch. His reign lasted less than a year because he was murdered by dissatisfied boyars. Next, Prince Basil Shuiskii reigned from 1606-1610 as Basil IV, who deposed Ignatius and replaced him with Hermogen. Yet, civil strife broke as the nation refused to obey the new tsar and foreign intervention continued to be a problem: Poles and Swedes invaded Russia. His reign too was full of problems. Moscow suffered from a Cossack rebellion which was put down. Another pretender, also calling himself Dmitrii, appeared. The climax of calamity and general anarchy was reached in 1610 when Basil IV was forced to abdicate. The problem was that at his fall there was nobody responsible for the order and unity of the land. It was a time of complete moral collapse. Finally, another Zemsky Sobor elected Mikhail Romanov to be tsar in 1613. Mikhail Romanov was the grand-nephew of Ivan IVs beloved late wife, Anastasia. His father Philaret (d.1633) became the patriarch of the church and the countrys actual ruler in 1619.This was the beginning of the Romanov dynasty. Zernov considers the Time of Troubles as the last phase of the social revolution started by Ivan the Terrible. By his indiscriminate use of violence, he had weakened the moral solidarity of the nation and let loose class rivalries and the dark passions always lurking in human souls. After 1613, Russian made a sudden recovery and the next forty years was a period of reconstruction and reform, in which the Church played a main role. It was the force which helped the Russians to overcome these temptations and to restore their unity and vigor. Zernov mentions names such as such as St. Germogen, the Patriarch of Moscow (1606-12); St. Dionisi, the Archimandrite, and Avraami (Abraham) , the bursar, both of the Monastery of the Holy Trinity of Radonezh; Kusma Minin-Sukhoruk and St. Juliania Ossorgina of Lazorevsk (76, 79). As an illustration,

290

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

during Germonens (German) patriarchate, which coincided with the peak of the time of troubles, he disseminated appeals to the Russian people to drive out the Poles and the Swedes from Russia. The Poles, who had occupied Moscow imprisoned him in a Kremlin dungeon, trying unsuccessfully to stop him. He died of starvation in the dungeon in 1612 as a national rebellions army approached Moscow. Patriarch German was later canonized as a martyr for the faith. In these trying years, the prestige of the Church as the defender of the faith and nation increased as others besides German such as Dionisius, Abraham or the monks of the Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery defended the nation from the invaders (Pospielovsky, The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 68). Saint Juliana Ossorgine (d.1604) was canonized for her compassionate love and care of the suffering people of her time.
This confusion [The dynasty gap] provided both Sweden and Poland with the opportunity to gain respectively regain territory and influence. The Poles conquered Smolensk, the Swedes Novgorod (1611). A faction of Boyars offered the crown to Vassily, son of King Sigismund III. of Poland. A Polish army entered Russia and defeated the Swedes (1610), marching triumphantly into Moscow. Yet Sigismund wanted to be crowned Czar himself, and establish a Dynastic Union of PolandLithuania-Russia. Russias Boyars, together with the Metropolit of Moscow, demanded that he converted to Orthodox christianity and resided in Moscow. Sigismund, a devoted Catholic, was not prepared to do so. A Russian revolt forced the Poles to leave Moscow in 1612, ending the prospects of a peaceful union of Eastern Europe under one dynasty. In 1613, Mikhail Romanov was crowned Czar, a date which is regarded the end of the time of troubles. The war with Sweden was ended in the PEACE OF STOLBOVO (1617); Russia ceded INGRIA and KEXHOLM LAND to Sweden, but regained Swedish-occupied Novgorod. In 1619, Russia and Poland signed the TRUCE OF DEULINO. Russia ceded SMOLENSK, CHERNIGOV and SEVERIA to Lithuania. In 1634, the truce was turned into a peace, and Vassily renounced his claim to the Russian throne, acknowledging Mikhail I. as the legitimate Czar of Russia. (Russias Time of Troubles) Table 31: The Swedish and the Polish in the Time of Troubles

For Pospielovsky, the Swedish invasion in the north and the Polish one from the west meant the first large scale encounters between Muscovite-Russia and western Europe. This left scars which had two opposing effects, on the one side, Russia became very defensive and isolationist, searching for protection from western influences; on the other, some Russians became pro-westerners, becoming admirers of Catholicism and/or

291

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Protestantism. Between these two opposite trends of society lay the zealots, a movement founded by the above-mentioned Dionisius. They sought to restore Orthodoxy to its original purity and spiritual beauty, with the purpose of morally uplifting and enlightening the nation. They used the sermon as a main moral weapon by preaching not only in churches, but in the streets (68). This reforming movement was led at the beginning by Dionisius and Patriarch of Moscow Filaret (1619-1633) and from 1633 by a group of married parish clergy. According to Ware, this reforming group represented much of what was best in the tradition of St Joseph of Volokalamsk (110). Yet in 1652-3 there started a quarrel between this reforming group and the new Patriarch Nikon (1605-81) which would lead Russia into another crisis. While in the Byzantine Empire, Church and state had disputed with one another for many centuries, and a curious harmony had emerged, the two powers adapting to one another and creating a certain tradition of respect for each others limits and rights. There was no time for anything of the sort in Muscovy as Russia was a young nation, created by the dukes. From the beginning, the secular rulers had taken over significant powers over ecclesiastical affairs. As we have seen Ivan the Terrible made it clear that the Church could not exercise even the last remnant of spiritual freedom: the right to reprove the tsar if he openly violated ecclesiastical morals and discipline. Yosifinism had so promoted the hegemony of the tsar that the Church became weakened by this. Consequently, the Byzantine harmony between the Basilea and the Hierosyne, was shattered, and as Benz asserts, a form of national Russian Caesaropapism came into being, in what might be called a rightist deviation from the original status of the Orthodox Church (84). From 1650 to 1667, Patriarch Nikon attempted reforms seeking the restoration of original Byzantine relationship. Yet, as Benz states, Nikon was departing from the Byzantine model too because in opposing

292

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

tsarisms excessive authority over the Church, he requested a number of secular rights in addition to his spiritual powers. For Benz, Nikons claim to complete independence of the Church as against the state represented, so to speak, the leftist deviation from the Byzantine tradition (84).

1. 2. 3.

4.

Activity In your own words, summarize the period called Time of Troubles. In the above list of patriarchs, check the Patriarchs involved in this conflicting period and make list adding their date in office. Zernov says that this time of complete moral collapse was once saved by churchmen such as St. Germogen, St. Dionisi and Avraami, Kusma MininSukhoruk, and St. Juliania Ossorgina of Lazorevsk. Search the web and write a short biography of them. Also search the web and briefly write about the reforming group the zealots.
Activity 71: Time of Troubles

THE SCHISM OF THE OLD BELIEVERS As we have seen, in northern Russia, at the beginning of the seventeenth century we witness the end of the Time of Troubles with the election of a new tsar, Mikhail Romanov (1613-1645). With him, the three-century reign of the Romanov dynasty began. It would see Russia grow from a minor eastern principality to a European great power. But the Time of Troubles was followed, during the reign of Aleksey (16451676), by the Old Believer (also called Old Ritualists) Schism. In 1652 Aleksey (Alexis) chose metropolitan of Novgorod, Nikon, to be patriarch of the Russian Church. Nikon was extremely popular and gifted, but according to Ware, he suffered from an overbearing and authoritative character (110). Furthermore, Pospielovsky says that Nikon was the very embodiment of action: imperious, short tempered, impatient (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 71). Nikon refused the position at first; however, he accepted when he received the formal pledge of the leaders of church and

293

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

state that they would give unwavering obedience to the gospels, the canons, the fathers of the Church, and to him personally as the chief pastor and supreme father of the Russian Church. During Great Lent in 1653 Nikon began his reform of church practices which were to separate church and nation. Nikon greatly admired the Greeks as it is seen by these words I am a Russian and the son of a Russia, but my faith and my religion are Greek.93 His first Pastoral Epistle, as the Patriarch of Moscow, caused great consternation because he solemnly declared in it that the Greeks were right and the Russians wrong in all points on which they differed from one another (Zernov 99). Thus in his reforms, he demanded the adjustment of the Russian liturgical practices to conform to those of the four ancient Patriarchates and the corrections in the wording and spelling of liturgical texts according to Greek usage. His impatient character impeded his scholarly analysis, he used as models for his reforms the seventeenth-century Greek and Kievan printed books, the former been published in Venice and containing a few Latin insertions. This, Pospielovsky says, already shocked the zealots members of the above mentioned reforming movement. These were priests, who firmly believed in Russias mission to reveal to the world the truth of Orthodoxy. They did not only reject the latinization of the Kievan academy but also doubted, as Russians generally did, the orthodoxy of the Greeks after the Council of Venice (71, Zernov 93). Zealots such as the Archpriests Avvakum and Ivan Neronov, hairs of the Josephite tradition and avatars of the Old Belief, tapped into a deep vein of nationalism and reacted against the perceived slight to Russian customs. Pospielovsky reasons that both Tihkon and the young Patriarch Alexis: were dreaming of liberating the Balkan Christians from the Turkish Yoke, restoring the Byzantine Empire, with the Russian tsar and the Moskow Patriarch
93

Qtd. in Ware (110) from Laura Ridding (Ed., 37).

294

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

in Constantinople Imagining himself in a church celebration with the Ecumenical Patriarch, Nikon foresaw the difficulties that would arise from the differences of ritual between the Greeks and the Russians, and he was eager to remove them by aligning Russian Church ritual with Greek practiceespecially since the visiting Greek clergy constantly criticized Russian practice and assured the Russians that they were wrong. (72) Furthermore, Nikon wanted to bring the Ukrainian Church to the Moscow Patriarchate; however, this church followed Greek practices and their service books differed from those of the Muscovy (73). Nikons reforms, which included a modification of the sign of the cross to conform to Greek usagewith three fingers instead of twosparked the schism of the Old Believersor followers of traditional religious ritualslead by Avakum. Hopko, in Bible and Church History (1972-1976) asserts that in Nikons time such reforms which appear of minor importance todaywere explosive since they meant a direct denial of the third Rome theory and practice of the Russian church and state and seemed to place Russian Orthodoxy in subjugation to the Eastern patriarchates, presently suffering under the Turks because of their sins (according to Russian mentality). Ware also explains that the question of the sign of the Cross was not a trivial thing due to the great importance Orthodox Russiansand Orthodox in generalhave always attached to ritual actions, that is to the symbolic gestures as an expression of the inner belief of Christians. He thinks that in the eye of many a change in the symbol constituted a change in the faith (111). Other reforms consisted in spelling of the name Jesus and the singing of the alleluia three times during psalmody instead of twice. In addition to establishing Greek practices in Russia, Nikon also sought a second aim, to make the church supreme over the State. Pospielovsky asserts that the confrontation between the established Church and the Old Ritualists was exacerbated by the fact that both sides were Josephites, and the struggle was not merely for the right to coexist but to be the state religion (62).

295

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 56: Patriarch Nikon (1652-58)94

In 1657 on his return from the fighting on the Polish front, tsar Alexis found his church and nation in chaos. Nikon, who acted as the tsars regent in his absence, had proceeded with no tact and continued with his reforming program, in spite of the opposition led by parish priests such as Avvakum or Neroonov, who themselves were considered reformers, as well as monks and laity people. As mentioned above, they had been calling for a return among the people of strict obedience to the traditional rites and customs of the Russian Church. But the opponents to the Nikonian reforms were severely persecuted and punished, suffering exile, imprisonment, and even death in same cases. Nikon had acted confident that Alexis would support his actions by punishing those who were disobedient to him as chief pastor and supreme father of the Russian Church; however, the tsar was not pleased with his actions and his open statement of displeasure caused the patriarch to resign in 1658 after publicly rebuking him. From that time until 1666 Russia had no acting patriarch. Nikon withdrew into semi-retirement, but without resigning the office of Patriarch. Alexis tried to make up with Nikon, but to no avail.
94

See: <www.russia.nypl.org>.

296

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

In 1666, the tsar Alexis requested a great council, which was held in Moscow (1666-67). He invited the Eastern Patriarchs to join the Council, which was presided over by the bishops of Alexandria and Antioch. It was engineered by the unscrupulous Metropolitan of Gaza, Paisios Ligarides. The council decided in favor of Nikons reforms, but against his person. Then, on the basis of minor differences in rituals, the council excommunicated and anathematized the opponents of Nikons reformsseveral million believersfrom the Church. Then they condemned and deposed Nikon, his deposition following a still more rigorous repression and reduction of the spiritual freedom of the Church, and the complete success of Yosifinism. The Old Believers were violently persecuted, and sent into exile and harsh labor. The Greek prelates not only condemned the old rituals, but also officially refuted the Council of a Hundred Chaptersthe most venerated of Russian Church councilswhich was held, as mentioned, in 1551, in the reign of Ivan the Terrible, thus formally renouncing to the third Rome theory and the assumed supremacy of Russian Orthodoxy over all other churches. Although he never changed his position and never yielded his opposition to the council of 1666-1667, Nikon was buried in the church with full patriarchal dignity. In 1682, Archpriest Avvacum (1620-1680), who openly opposed the Councils decision, went into the schism with the Russian Orthodox Church and was burned alive with three of his supporters for the great blasphemies ... uttered against the tsar and his household (Ware 110-114). For Fedotov, the Old Ritualists, or Old Believers stood entirely upon traditional ecclesiastical grounds, and represented the strongest moral force in Muscovite society. He considers the belligerent Archpriest Avvakuum, the leading figure of the movement, a writer of genius, as the exponent of Muscovite spirituality (The Russian Religious Mind 7).

297

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 57: Avvacum, the Holy Martyr (1620-1680)95

Your Own Research Search the web and write a short biography of Avvacum. Try to find and read his autobiography Vita.
Activity 72: A short biography of Avvacum

For Ware, the Old Believers, in spite of embodying the finest elements in the tradition of medieval Russian piety, does not embrace all the richness of Russian thought because it represents but a single aspect of Russian Christianitythe tradition of the Possessors. The defects of the Old Believers are the Josephite defects writ large: too narrow a nationalism, too great an emphasis on the externals of worship. Nikon too, despite his Hellenism, is in the end a Josephite: he demanded an absolute uniformity in the externals of worship, and like the Possessors he freely invoked the help of the civil arm in order to suppress all religious opponents. More than anything else, it was his readiness to resort to persecution which made the schism definitive. Had the development of Church life in Russia between 1550 and 1650 been less one-sided, perhaps a lasting separation would have been avoided. If men had thought more (as Nilus did) of tolerance and freedom instead of using persecution, then a reconciliation might have been effected; and if they had attended more to mystical prayer, they might have argued less bitterly about ritual. Behind the division of the seventeenth century lie the disputes of the sixteenth. (112-113) This group, the remote descendants of St. Joseph, who, having identified religion with ritual, and had chosen to die rather than accept a corrected version of the service books, became the first of a long series of sectarian movements characteristic of modern
95

See: <www.cus.cam.ac.uk>.

298

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

developments in Russian religion. This group remains separate to this day from the main body of Orthodoxy. Before 1917, their numbers were officially assessed at two million, today there are approximately five million Old Believers of various denominations in Russia, some of whom, known as coreligionists, are in Eucharistic communion with the Russian Orthodox Church. After the schism of 1666, the Old Believers thought that the reign of Antichrist had begun in the official Church and, seeking to die as martyrs for Jesus, about 20.000 burned themselves to death in mass immolation. This idea was confirmed in their beliefs with the accession to the Russian throne of Peter the Great, who tried violently to westernize Russia and presented fierce opposition to traditional Russian ways, and with the transfer of the capital of the Russian empire to St. Petersburg in the eighteenth century. The Old Believers, in their desire to preserve the pure Orthodox faith and rituals of Russia, succeeded in preserving ancient Russian forms of iconography and liturgical chant which otherwise would likely have been lost in history (Pospielovsky 73). But in the seventeenth century, another problem beset the Church in Russia, that of the so called Unia or Uniates. The Ukraine, or Little Russia as it was known, witnessed the development on its soil of a Church which while worshipping according to the Byzantine rites, it owed allegiance to the Pope of Rome. Hierarchs in the Orthodox Church in the Ukraine had decided to a union with the Roman Church under the influence of Polish Latin-rite Jesuits, taking with them a large number of their flock. These Greek Catholics, at times proscribed and at times granted freedom under the emperors dispensation, have undergone a precarious existence within the boundaries of the Russian Empire (A History of the Russian Church).

299

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Activity In your own words, write a short summary of the Great Schism.
Activity 73: The Great Schism

Your Own Research Search the web and write a five-paragraph paper about the Unia or Uniate (Byzantine Catholic) movement.
Activity 74: The Unia movement

Activity In the above list of Moscows Metropolitans and Patriarchs write a check on the ones mentioned in this section three.
Activity 75: Metropolitans and Patriarchs cited

Activity Write a three-page summary of this section 3, entitled From Possessors and NonPossessors to the Great Schism (XVI-XVII Centuries). You can combine your previous summaries adding a topic paragraph presenting the ideas to be developed.
Activity 76: Summary of the Russian Church during the XIII-XV centuries

4. THE CHURCH IN IMPERIAL RUSSIA: THE SYNODAL PERIOD (1700-1917)96 1. THE CHURCH IN IMPERIAL RUSSIA: THE XVIII CENTURY By the eighteenth century the Muscovite period of Russian history had declined and had been overshadowed by the spectacular, cruel reign of Peter I the Great (16821725), a westernizer and secularizer of Russia representing the reign of western state in Russia Yet, he was also man who brought Russia into the twentieth century. As we have seen from the nature of the development of tsarism in the previous pages, it must have been an easy matter for Peter I the Great to follow with the principles of absolutism

As in previous sections, to give a deeper contextual perspective, some of the historical data pertinent to the period will be shown in different tables, which have been adapted from general articles on the history of Russia.

96

300

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

regarding the Church. Peter was the first Russian ruler to assume the title imperator, which was passed on to his successors. Like his predecessor, Ivan the Terrible, Peter gained a reputation for arbitrariness and cruelty, and many of his subjects, traditional Orthodox Christians, were opposed to his reforms and thought him to be in reality the devil incarnate. From the beginning of his reign, Peter persecuted independent minded clergy. In 1691, for example, he executed Sylvester Medvedev, one of Russias best educated clerics and a founder of the Moscow Academyallegedly for Latin heresy, though ten years later he elected Yavorskii, a latinizer, as patriarchal locum tenens. Nevertheless, there were also reflective churchmen who, in spite of being wholly aware of the flaws of Peters reforms, submitted to them without necessarily agreeing with them. As other tsars have done, he regarded himself as a sovereign ruler who could re-structure the Russian Church to befit him as a secularizing statesman. In this sense, as Florovsky states in Ways of Russian Theology: Peter scarcely resembles those who came before him. The dissimilarity is not confined to temperament or to the fact that Peter turned to the West. He was neither the first nor the only westerner in Muscovy at the end of the seventeenth century. Muscovite Russia stirred and turned toward the West much earlier. In Moscow Peter encountered an entire generation reared and educated in thoughts about the West, if not in western thinking. He also found a firmly settled colony of Kievan and Lithuanian emigrants and scholars, and in this milieu he discovered an initial sympathy toward his cultural enterprises. What is innovative in this Petrine reform is not westernization but secularization. (78) Peter was also quite aware of the Churchs potential political influence, thus he abolished the Russian long-cherished Institution of Patriarchate after the death of Adrian in 1700, the last of the seventeenth century patriarchs. The Patriarch was an arch-conservative man, a position that was imposed on him by his arch-conservative mother and his brother. Peter had been particularly irritated by Adrians enthronement encyclical in which he had repeated Nikons formula of the priority of patriarchates

301

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

power over the royalty. After the patriarchs death Peter prevented the immediate convocation of a council to elect a new patriarch and reestablished the government of the Church on a synodal basis by replacing it with an Ecclesiastical College (later called the Holy Synod). This Synod remained responsible for church affairs until 1918, when the Moscow Patriarchate was restored. It meant that for the first time, the fate of the Church was decided by the tsar with no clergy participation. He had to wait until the death of the Patriarch, Pospielovsky explains, because although the patriarchal system was weakened by Peters centralized autocracy, with the patriarchate still remaining, he could not attain his purpose of total secularization and command over the population (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 107).

Illustration 58: Peter I the Great97

In an effort to bring that country in line with what he saw to be a more advanced western Europe, Peter I the Great had embarked on the most ambitious reform effort yet seen in Russia. In the Great Northern War against Charles XIIs Sweden, Peter conquered the territory along the Neva River that would be home to his new capital city, St. Petersburg, founded in 1803. Having spent several years traveling in western Europe, he modeled Sankt Pieterburg (which he gave an explicitly Dutch name) after Amsterdam and Venice, with their canals, and Bourbon Paris, with its grand palatial buildings. Among other things, he forced men to shave their beards and to don western clothing in place of the traditional caftan. He also established an order of rankings for the nobility, which he centralized under his own control. Among the casualties of his reforms were the old Boyar Duma and the Zemsky Sobor, which were

97

See: <www.nndb.com>.

302

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

replaced by a Ruling Senate under supervision of a procurator responsible directly to the tsar. Thus Peter moved Russia in a decisively absolutist direction (Adapted from A Capsule History of Russia). Table 32: Historical data about Peter I the Great (1721-1725)

After the death of Adrian, Peter chose Stephen (Stefan) Yavoskii, a professor of the Kiev Academy to be consecrated as metropolitan of the Russian churchthe youngest ever electedwith the unprecedented title of Exarch, Keeper and Administrator of the Patriarch Throne. However, since the exarch was a representative, typically of a patriarch, the absence of the patriarch made Stephen a representative of the tsar. Pospielovsky states that he chose Ukrainians instead of men from the Russian tradition, who would have approved of his reforms, because he did not seek reforms but a whole revolution within the church and no Great Russians would have never agreed on that. This historian says that Ukrainians, as strangers to the Great Russian Traditions, had to rely on the emperors authority and support and would therefore support any of his actions. In addition, he felt that they, as westerners, would in general be more sympathetic to his imitation of things western (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 106). For the design of this Synod he followed the Lutheran model suggested by Samuel von Pufendorf, the German Lutheran and placed Moscow at the head of the Synod, which was composed of the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, Moscow, which was the see of the patriarchate, and Kiev, the mother city of Russian Christianity. The administration of the Church was overseen by the procurator of the Synod, a lay man, who was answerable to the emperor alone and had the power to appoint and transfer bishops at will. Therefore, in its outward administration at least, the Russian Orthodox Church, had been transformed into an imperial ministry of religion and its voice in society could be heard but faintly. It is possible, as Pospielovsky puts is, that his prolonged trip to Europe in 1698 had influenced this decision. On this trip, Peter had

303

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

become acquainted with the situation in Lutheran Prussia and Anglican England, where the king was the head of the church and Defender of the Faith. The tsar had had long conversations with Anglican theologians and with members of the royal family and this led him to conclude that the Church should be subordinated to the head of the state (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 105).98 Peters reforms were in the making since 1700 in his attempt to weaken the church and to use it as his own tool. One of his measures had been the granting of special powers to the Senate over the Church. As a consequence, in 1721, Theofan Prokopovich, a young theologian from the Kievan academy consecrated bishop at the tsars request, drafted a Spiritual Regulation (also translated as Spiritual Rule) from which a College for Spiritual Affairs was set up. As Schmemann asserts in The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy (1977), Prokopovich, who became the chief assistant of Peter in his ecclesiastical reforms, brought into Russia all the basic principles of the Protestant territorial Church, its concept of the relations between Church and state, according to which the visible or earthly Church was conceived as also a religious projection of the state itself (169). In the era of Prokopovich many clerics were executed, tortured, and imprisoned, as Pospielovsky asserts, not because they were guilty of crimes, but because they had independent thought, therefore trying to force them to give up their dreams of some Byzantine symphony or dualism of power (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 115). Through the institution of the synod the Church became a governmental department. All bishops were forced to pledge their acceptance of the new system and to all members of the dynasty. Also, until 1901 its members in their oath had to call the emperor the high judge of this Sacred College, and all its decisions were adopted by
98

Read in Appendix A an article entitled Face to Faith (The Guardian, December 3, 2005) very critical to the current relationship between Church and State in England.

304

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

its authority, granted by His Imperial Majesty. Because the bishops protested that college was not an ecclesiastical term, it was changed to Holy Synod. Pospielovsky reasons that the Spiritual Regulation was neither a regulation nor spiritual, but rather an ideological manifesto of sorts, venomous and contemptuous of Church traditions, the Russian clergy, and the canon law (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 111). Later, eastern patriarchs canonically recognized the Holy Synod. As we will see these radical reforms would not be repudiated until the revolution of 1917.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

Activity Write a short biography of Peter I According to Florovsky, what is Peters dissimilarity with previous rulers? Why did he abolish the patriarchate? What is a patriarchal locum tenens? Find its definition on the web. What model did Peter I follow for his design of the Holy Synod? Why? Write a short biography of Feofan Prokovich.
Activity 77: The eighteen century (I)

Schmemann explains that there was a basic ambiguity in the relations between Church and state which infected the thinking of both state and Church alike: The Russian Church in essence and in good conscience did not accept Peters reform. For it the emperor remained Gods Anointed, and it continued to accept this anointment in the terms of Byzantine or Muscovite theocracy. Therefore state and Church interpreted the imperial authority in different ways, proceeding from almost contradictory presuppositions. The Russian Church was now anointing western absolutism with the Byzantine anointment to the throne, meaning the consecration of the earthly emperor to serve as Christian basileus. From this point of view, Byzantine anointing with oil is theocratically a limitation, not the absolutizing of imperial authority. (The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy) This historian further comments that Peters reforms, which caused a sharp break in a theocratic tradition, and the whole Petersburg period can be accused of depriving the Church of its freedom and independence. Yet he adds: But the Church had not been free, in the modern sense of the term, since the time of Constantine the Greatneither in Byzantium nor in Moscow. Yet without

305

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

being free, it was still distinct from the state and had not been dependent on it for its very existence, structure, and life. However far the departures from symphony, they were always departures and sooner or later recognized as suchas, for example, when the state itself venerated its own victims. This occurred because the state recognized a law higher than itself, Christian truth, of which the Church was the preserver. Western absolutism, born out of struggle against the Church, denied that it had any right to be the conscience of the state and squeezed it within the narrow framework of ministering to spiritual needs, which the state itself defined, as it defined how they should be ministered to. Pospielovsky says that as a secular statesman and a pragmatic, Peter favored secular education with an applied and professional education; however, he was not successful as the ecclesiastical schools continued to grow and became Russias best educational establishments, lasting even until the fourth decade of the nineteenth century. Yet, although with Peter ecclesiastical education underwent an unprecedented quantitative growth, he also gave a deadly blow to the Moscow Academy, by preferring teachers from the Ukraine and the Belorussia because of their western links via the Polish schools. This also brought a completely latinization of the Moscow academy. As mentioned, Peter himself, in his ecclesiastical transformations, had relied on the Kievans and had used them to replace the native Russian bishops. Consequently, the Russian divinity school (twenty-six seminaries were opened before 1750) was a Latin school in language and in the spirit of its teaching, evolved in complete disengagement from the true tradition of Orthodoxy. Kiev emerged victorious. Peter also closed Novgorod College, which was just starting to develop a purer Greek-Russian educational system and to revive the study of Patristics. Similarly, as Pospielovsky comments, Peters closing of this school cause a delay of the revival of Orthodox patristic theology by at least a century (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 113). Schmemann believes that this latinization of Russian theology also produced a dichotomy between theological learning and ecclesiastical experience as people

306

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

prayed in Slavic but clerics theologized in Latin (171). Similarly, Pospielovsky says that: the west-Russian pedagogues latinized the fledging Russian seminary education to such an extent that the language was not even taught as a subject until the last decades of the eighteenth century. Slavonic and Greek were taught superficially The tragedy for the Russian clergy was that the education they received was mostly irrelevant to the Russian reality, as well as to their future pastorate (113) He further explains that this clergy lacked the knowledge of Church Slavonic in which the services were officiated and had only a vague idea of Orthodox patristic theology on which their pastorate and sermons were supposed to be based (114). Ware says that those who rejected the dry scholasticism of the theological academies, instead of turning to the teachings of Byzantium and ancient Russia, were influenced by religious or pseudo-religious movements in the west, namely Protestant mysticism, German pietism, or Freemasonry (116).99 By the beginning of the nineteenth century, all teaching was conducted in Latin. Protestant theology was learned by rote to combat Catholic propaganda and Latin theology was learned in the same manner to combat the Protestants (A History of the Russian Church). Yet, Ware consents that in spite of the latinization, the standards of scholarship were high (116). Schmemann also says that: In the ecclesiastical and theological experience of the Russian Church, this theological westernizing of course played a fateful role which must not be underestimated. Yet still, after centuries of Muscovite darkness, after the break with all scholarly and cultural traditions, mental discipline returned for the first time to the Church, and education and the inspiration of creative work returned as well (171). Most of Peters 18th-century successors, who followed each other in quick succession, were mainly Germans by birth. Zernov says that: They appeared strange, shadowy figures to the nation. Dressed in comic, pompous French costumes or Prussian uniforms, often speaking only broken Russian, having the mentality and horizon of the petty princelings of the small
99

On pain of excommunication, Orthodox are strictly forbidden to become Freemasons.

307

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

German States, they were in most cases the pathetic victims of their abysmal ignorance, moral corruption and complete isolation from the rest of the country. They led an artificial existence in an artificial city, created by the dynamic will of Peter the Great. They and the society which surrounded them had no personality, no style of their own; they were crude imitations of the West, always trying to reproduce the last word in European fashion and manners. (123) They were mainly empresses beginning with his widow, Catherine I. In the following table, there is a list of early Romanov tsars and tsarinas to help you follow the historical discourse:
Mikhail, 161345 Alexei, 164576 Feodor III, 167682 Ivan V, co-tsar with Peter I, 168296 Peter I the Great, 1682 1725 Catherine I, 172527 Table 33: Early Romanov tsars and tsarinas Peter II, 172730 Anna, 173040 Ivan VI, 174041 Elizabeth, 174162 Peter III, 1762 Catherine II, the Great, 176296

The terror initiated by Peter reached its peak under Empress Anna (Peters niece: 1730-40), and did not calm down even under Catherine II (1762-96). In the time of Catherine I (1725-27) and Peter II (1723-30), a Supreme Privy Council reigned and the ruling Synod was made subject to the Senate. This aroused Prokospovichs ire who plotted against it, given an opportunity e with the reign of Anna, a niece of Peter the Great. As indicated, with Anna a decade of mismanagement and terror began. She executed several thousand people, including the supremists, the members of the Supreme Privy Council, and sent over twenty thousand people to Siberia. In his effort to root out all traces of Catholicism, so hated by Prokopovich, he had hundreds of monks and priests tortured and imprisoned. After Anna, an infant, Ivan (1740-1741), was named tsar. His regent was his mother brought up in Germany and surrounded by Germans. But this was more than Russians could tolerate and in 1741 a coup attempt by the imperial guard placed the very Russian Elizabeth, Peter the Greats younger daughter, on the throne. With Elizabeth, a pious and good-hearted woman, the church 308

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

and the clergy had a respite. She released all of Annas political prisoners and restored the Synod to its original status. She also took measures to improve clergys education. Under her other procurators were placed in charge of the Holy Synod. Her successor, Peter III, a Lutheran, born and raised in Germany, was overthrown within a year and killed in another coup attempt by the imperial guard. In 1762, they enthroned his brilliant widow, Catherine II the Great, the most formidable of these empresses (Pospielovsky, The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 116-120). Catherine IIs long reign coincided with a number of significant events, including the French Revolution. Catherine was a German princess brought to Russia to marry the young heir to the Russian throne, Peter III, Elizabeths nephew, who was equally German in origin (The Empress Elizabeth had no children of her own.). An aficionado of the French Enlightenment, she corresponded with a number of philosophers, particularly Voltaire and Diderot. However, the outbreak of the Revolution in 1789 moved her in a more conservative direction and during her reign Russia witnessed one of the most disastrous consequences of the Holy Synod: the confiscation of monastic land-holdings. Severe restrictions were also placed upon those wishing to pursue a monastic vocation. Notwithstanding, this Synodal period that existed until the 1917 Revolution did not mean a period of total decline, and stagnation for the Church, for even if it existed under non-canonical dispensation, it continued being recognized by the other eastern Orthodox Churches. Also, the spiritual life continued interrupted in spite of its faade of westernization, decline and complete compliance or subservience. There was also an obvious rebirth of monasticism in Russia and a new, unforgettable emergence of holiness, and the true life of Orthodoxy continued without interruption with true monks

309

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

and pastors. The eighteenth century was illumined by St. Tikhon of Zadonsk (1724-83), Bishop of Voronezh, a great preacher and a fluent writer.

Illustration 59: St. Tikhon of Zadonsk (1724-83)100

He was a good example of one who borrowed from the West as many of his contemporaries did, but who, at the same time, remained firmly rooted in the classic tradition of Orthodox spirituality. Ware describes him in a very enlightening way which can give us a clue about this eclectic westernization of Orthodox spirituality: He drew upon German and Anglican books of devotion; his detailed meditations upon the physical sufferings of Jesus are more typical of Roman Catholicism than of Orthodoxy; in his own life of prayer he underwent an experience similar to the Dark Night of the Soul, as described by western mystics such as Saint John of the Cross. But Tikhon was also close in outlook to Theodosius and Sergius, to Nilus and the Non-Possessors. Like so many Russian saints, both lay and monastic, he took a special delight in helping the poor, and he was happiest when talking with simple peoplepeasants, beggars, and even criminals. (116117) Notwithstanding, in this period of ill-advised westernization, as Ware calls it, not only Church theology was transformed, but also Church art and Church music: iconography became naturalized religious portrait painting and hymnography betrayed the influence of European baroque music or even secular opera (116).

100

See: <www.serfes.org>.

310

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Activity Why does Scheme man talk about ambiguity in the relation Church-State Briefly explain the latinization process of ecclesiastical teaching. In the Table with the tsars and tsarinas, mark with a check the ones mentioned in this eighteenth century section. Explain the development of the Holy Synod during the eighteenth century. Search The web and briefly define the following concepts: Protestant mysticism, German pietism, or Freemasonry
Activity 78: The eighteenth century (II)

2. THE CHURCH IN IMPERIAL RUSSIA: THE XIX CENTURY By the beginning of the 19th century, Russia was by far the largest country in the world. Not only had it reached the Pacific, but it had established colonies in Russian America, or Alaska. The outward appearance was not different from the previous centuries: the Romanov continued reigning, the Holy Synod continued silencing the Church, and conflict with other nations kept emerging. For Zernov: The nineteenth century opened a new page in the history of the Empire. The dynasty was at last stabilized, a fusion of Russian and western cultures seemed to have been achieved, and Russia took a prominent place in the life of the western nations. But the impression of power produced by the Empire was an illusion; deep-rooted contradictions sapped its vitality, and the State founded by Peter failed to become the home of the Russian people. (74) Let us view a list of the last tsars of the Romanov dynasty for a better understanding of the historical context of this period:

Paul I, 17961801 l Alexander I, 180125 Nicholas I, 182555

Alexander II, 185581 Alexander III, 188194 Nicholas II, 18941917

Table 34: Late Romanov tsars

The nineteenth century really began with Catherines grandson, Alexander I. His son Pauls reign was merely a transitional one. Paul treated the clergy with great reverence. In his time, the extent of the procurators power had not yet been fully

311

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

established. When Alexander I became emperor, Napoleon was on the march to conquer Russia, but his forces dealt a decisive blow to the French. Like his grandmother, Alexander began his reign as a reforming tsar but became increasingly conservative with time. In 1817, Alexander amalgamated the Synod and the Department of Education into the Ministry of Spiritual Affairs, better known as the Dual Ministry. Yet at this time arrived the first translation into Russian of Scripture, from Hebrew and Greek, undertaken by the Bible Society, an affiliate of the British Bible Society. The amalgamation of Synod and Department of education was later abolished and the Synod was separated from the Minister of Education, but it had its consequences as Shishkov, a Minister of Education, continued illegally to give orders to the Synod. He, for example, led a campaign against the Bible in Russian (Pospielovsky, The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 136-139). With Alexander Is successor, Nicholas I, there came a succession of Ministers of Education, procurators, and other events that were fatal to the Church. The Church had to endure the rule of Prince Alexander Golitsyn (1773-1844), who, according to the fashion of the time, exchanged his rationalism for pietism, which he tried to impose upon the Russian hierarchy. As an illustration, the bishops were surrounded with police informers whose duty was to report every move they made, and every word or sermon they preached. Under this tsar, as Pospielovsky states, the process of converting the Church into a state bureaucracy totally subordinated to the government, which had begun under Peter the Great, was completed (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 144). Nicholas was succeeded in 1855 by his son, Alexander II, whose reign was comparatively liberal and tolerant. Alexander is best known for having freed the serfs in 1861. He introduced this and many other reforms but, as Zernov asserts, The changes came too late to save the Empire, for they were not radical enough to be acceptable either to the peasants or to the educated classes. The rift

312

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

between the bureaucracy of St. Petersburg and the rest of the country was rapidly widening, and Alexander was murdered by the group of extremists who, in their passion to imitate Europe, could not be satisfied with anything less than a republic with a radical social programme. (75) A more liberal atmosphere was introduced into the administration of the Church during the reign of Alexander II, but this freedom was suppressed by the all-powerful Procurator Pobedonostsev (1827-1907) (Zernov 75), as we will see, the advocate of extreme reaction, also influencing the relation between the Church and the State during the last stages of the Empires decay during the reigns of Alexander III (1881-94) and Nicholas II (1894-1917).

Activity 1. In the Table with the tsars of the late Romanov period, mark with a check the ones mentioned in this eighteenth century section. 2. Explain the development of the Holy Synod or the relation between the Church and the state during the nineteenth century. 3. Write a short biography of Pobedonostsev.
Activity 79: The nineteenth century

Although the outward life of the Russian Orthodox Church in the nineteenth century differed little from that of the previous century, under its tribulation, the Russian Church overcame these tribulations from within as it grew in holiness and flourished in different ways. Schmemann is right when he says that: One cannot reduce the history of Russia to the history of her culture, political struggle, social movements, or economic development, and forget this dimension of holiness, which drew so many to it (and not only the common people by any means)this gradual but inspiring inward liberation of Orthodoxy from its bureaucratic destiny. To ignore this process would mean to overlook something most essential in the spiritual progress of Russia and of all Orthodoxy, in that crucial nineteenth century when the curtain was already rising on the accomplishments of the twentieth. (171) Ware, like many other historians, affirms that the second part of the Synodal period, the nineteenth century, was a time of great revival in the Russian Church as

313

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Russia turned away from the contemporary religious and pseudo-religious movements of the west, and relied once again upon the true spiritual forces of Orthodoxy. Along with this revival in spiritual life there emerged a new enthusiasm for missionary work and an own theology which freed Orthodoxy from a slavish imitation of the west. For Ware this religious renewal sprang from Mount Athos. He illustrates his point with Paissy Velichkovsky (1722-1794), who fled to Mount Athos and became a monk. Paissy was horrified by the secular tone of the teaching. Ware comments that He was deeply influenced by Nilus and the Non-Possessors, but he did not overlook the good elements in the Josephite form of monasticism: he allowed more place than Nilus had done to liturgical prayer and to social work, and in this way he attempted, like Sergius, to combine the mystical with the corporate and social aspect of the monastic life. (117)

Illustration 60: St. Paissy Velichkovsky101

Paissy, who translated the Philokalia102 into Slavonic, emphasized the practice of continuous prayerabove all the Jesus Prayerand the need to obey an elder or starets. Although he never returned to Russia, under the inspiration of his disciples, a monastic revival disseminated across Russia. They reinvigorated existing houses and made many new foundations. Consequently while there were 452 monasteries in Russia

See: <www.mega.km.ru>. During the years 1815-94, St, Theophan the Recluse issued a greatly expanded translation of the Philokalia in five volumes in Russia.
102

101

314

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

in 1810, in 1914 the number grew to 1,025. This monastic movement, Ware explains, restored the tradition of the Non-Possessors, largely suppressed since the sixteenth century (118). Schmemann asserts that with these and other spiritual centers the ancient but eternally youthful traditions of Orthodoxy were very clearly restored, and the full force of the never-silent summons to do honor to the heavenly calling (171). Thus nineteenth-century Russia was particularly marked by a high development of the practice of spiritual direction. Although the elder had been a characteristic figure in many periods of Orthodox history, this century in Russia was par excellence the age of the starets (also spelt staretz) The first and greatest of these elders of the nineteenth century was Seraphim of Sarov (1759-1833), a true believer in the Orthodox doctrine of deification. For the Russians, the greatest saint of this age, Seraphim of Sarovs spirituality, like that of Sergius six centuries earlier, focused on internal prayer and compassion for the poor, combined with spiritual insight and guidance. St. Seraphim was at the fount of monastic spirituality of eldership, whereby a monk with charismatic gifts of insight and compassion would become spiritual confessor to thousands of people, occasionally acquiring a reputation as a healer. The elders, although never formally institutionalized by the Church, enjoyed great authority with Orthodox believers, both educated and simple. It is, however, an indication of the divorce between Church and culture that had occurred in Russia by this time that her greatest holy man, Seraphim of Sarov, and her greatest poet, Alexander Pushkin, were unaware of each others existence.

315

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Illustration 61: St. Serafim of Sarov103

Your Own Research 1. Write, first, a short biography about St. Paissy and St. Seraphim of Sarov and, second, with telegraphic sentences, summarize their lives and achievements. 2. On The web, read up about the Philokalia and write a five-page paper.
Activity 80: The nineteenth century

The Philokalia (Gk. The Love of Good Things) is a collection of texts by masters of the eastern
Orthodox, hesychast tradition, writing from the fourth to the fifteenth centuries on the disciplines of Christian prayer and a life dedicated to God. Most of the authors were monks (Philokalia). Table 35: The Philokalia

But Seraphim left no successor in the art of spiritual direction, and after his death, another community took up his work, the hermitage of Optina. From 1829 until 1923, when the monastery was closed by the Bolsheviks, a succession of startsy or elders ministered there, their influence extending, as did that of Seraphim, over the

103

See: <www.fatheralexander.org>.

316

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

whole of Russia. These elders of the ancient monastery of Optina Pustyn in south-west Moscow also gradually helped to overcome the gap between culture and faith.

Illustration 62: The Monastery of Optina104

From its very beginning, Russian Orthodoxy was characterized by a thriving pilgrimage tradition. Strongly influenced by similar notions in Byzantine Christianity, Russian Orthodoxy believed that icons functioned as suitable imitations of Christ and the saints, and that relics had miraculous powers. While Protestantism would later abolish the practice of pilgrimage in many parts of Europe, Russian Orthodoxy encouraged the worship of icons and the tradition of pilgrimage as a way of life. In the 17th through 19th centuries tens of thousands of Russians, both peasants and educated city dwellers, went upon long walking pilgrimages to the great monastic centers in order to worship and behold the sacred icons and relics. The famous 19th century spiritual diary The Way of a Pilgrim provides a fascinating view into the lifestyle of a wandering pilgrim. The anonymous author writes: I made up my mind to go to Siberia to the tomb of St. Innocent of Irkutsk. My idea was that in the forests and steppes of Siberia I should travel in greater silence and therefore in a way that was better for prayer and healing. And this journey I undertook, all the while saying my oral prayer without stopping. (Sacred Sites of Russia) Table 36: Pilgrimage in Russia

In the 19th century many elders came from different parts of Russia to live and teach at Optina Pustyn. These elders shared their spiritual experience with both lay practitioners and the community of monks, they wrote and translated books, and ministered to the poor and sick. Optina Pustyn became a place of pilgrimage and the center for those seeking to renew the spiritual life of Russia, not only for the vast multitude of Russias peasant wanderers but also for the leading cultural figures of the

104

See: <http://answers.com>.

317

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

time. Then best known of Optino elders or startsy are Leonid (1768-841), Macarius (1788-1860), and Ambrose (?). Furthermore, Optina influenced writers such as Lev Tolstoy, Nikolai Gogol and Feodor Dostoevsky, and the philosopher Vladimir Solovyov. Dostoevsky, for example, was consoled by St. Ambrose after his three-year old son died. In his The Brothers Karamazov the reader can find an accurate rendering of the monastery and its holy men. The anonymous The Way of a Pilgrim vividly reflects the religious atmosphere of the time (Ware 120-121).

The monastery of Optina Pustyn is located on the right bank of the Zhizdra River two kilometers from the city of Kozelsk and about 70 kilometers south of Kaluga. According to legend, the monastery was founded in the 15th century by a former outlaw whose name was Opta. Repenting of his sins, he took monastic vows with the name of Makarii. The first historical evidence of the monastery comes from the 17th century, during the reign of Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich. At this time the monastery was only a small establishment, with one wooden church, several monastic cells and less than twenty monks. During the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th, the Monasterys income significantly increased and several new buildings were erected. This growth of the monastery was both stimulated by and contributed to the development of a tradition called Starchestvo, which means a lineage of wisdom of prayer maintained by Staretz, these being Russian Orthodox monks or Elders of deep wisdom. The roots of this movement are found in the Byzantine hesychia, the art of silent prayer (14th 15th c.), which was introduced to Russia by St. Sergius of Radonezh and his successors. In the 16th-18th centuries the ecclesiastical life in Russia had increasingly become secular and political, and as a reaction against this worldliness the starchestvo tradition became widely popular among the Russian people. (From Sacred Sites of Russia) Table 37: Monastery of Optina Pustyn

In this century, there also was a marked revival of missionary work not seen since the days of Stephen Perm. It was initiated by the Academy of Kazan, opened in 1842, whose main concern was the training of missionaries. As a consequence, Russian Orthodoxy experienced a vast expansion with the foundation of dioceses in Siberia and the Far East and flourishing missions as far a field as China, Japan, Alaska, and the American continent. During the seventeenth century missionary efforts have dimmed, and particularly in the eighteenth century after the closing of monasteries by Catherine II. The greatest of the nineteenth-century missionaries was Metropolitan Innocent of

318

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Moscow (John Veniaminov, 1797-1879), bishop in Alaska, who, like St. Stephen of Perm before him, emphasized the necessity for the Church of acknowledging native languages and cultures if it was to carry out her mission successfully. Part of Metropolitan Innocents achievement in bringing Orthodoxy to America was the translation of the liturgical texts and Bible into the Eskimo languages. St. Innocent is honored by millions of American Orthodox today as the chief apostle (A History of the Russian Church; Ware 122-23). Moreover, in the nineteenth century, in the field of theology, Russia broke away from its excessive dependence on the West. This was mainly achieved by the lay theologian Alexis Khomiakov (1804-60), leader of the Slavophil circle. For Ware, he is perhaps the first original theologian in the history of the Russian Church. He said regarding him that: Khomiakov argued that all western Christianity, whether Roman or Protestant, shares the same assumptions and betrays the same fundamental point of view, while Orthodoxy is something entirely distinct. Since this is so, it is not enough for Orthodox to borrow their theology from the west, as they had been doing since the seventeenth century; instead of using Protestant arguments against Rome, and Roman arguments against the Protestants, they must return to their own authentic sources, and rediscover the true Orthodox tradition, which in its basic presuppositions is neither Roman nor Reformed, but unique. (123) Khomiakov was the first who looked at Latinism and Protestantism from the point of the Orthodoxy. This theologians contribution to Orthodoxy was in the ambit of the unity and authority of the Orthodox Church. Khomiakov exercised little or no influence during his lifetime on the theology taught in academies and seminaries, which nevertheless started to grow independently from the West. By 1900 Russian academic theology was at its height with a number of theologians, historians, and liturgists. They were trained in western academies but did not allow western influences to distort Orthodoxy. Educational standards in the Church rose as the seminaries produced some of Russias greatest historians such as Vasilii Klyuchevsky and Sergei Solovyov. A

319

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

monumental History of the Russian Church was written by Metropolitan Makary (Bulgakov) of Moscow. Moreover, earlier hierarchs such as Metropolitan Philaret (Drozdov), Bishop Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) and Bishop Theophanes the Recluse (all later canonized) epitomized the return to the patristic tradition of the Church in his sermons. It was due to the Churchs cooperation that the commented liberation of the serfs was proclaimed under Tsar Alexander II in 1862. Outside of the Churchs official institutions, too, theology enjoyed a renewal with the works of Alexei Khomyakov and Ivan Kireyevsky, who oversaw the publication of the works of the holy fathers in modern Russian translations at Optina Pustyn. Church censorship did, however, take a dim view of this innovative return to tradition and hindered the publication of Khomyakov in Russia. Also, former Communists such as Sergius Bulgakov (1871-1944) or Nicolas Berdyaev (1874-1948) found their way back to Church and played an important role in the life of the Russian emigration in Paris (Ware 124-125; A History of the Russian Church). Schmemann rightly says that Even though it came through the West, from Latin or German books, the great forgotten tradition of thought, that of disinterested search for truth and ascetic service to it, were revived again in OrthodoxyAt the beginning of the twentieth century Russian theology was on the threshold of a genuine cultural flowering, a renaissance in all strength of the universal tradition of Orthodoxy. But the Revolution came. (171)

1. 2. 3. 4.

Your Own Research Search the web and write short biographies of these Optino elders and writers, trying, as best as you can, to describe the religious thoughts of these men as well as their relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church or Orthodoxy: Leonid, Macarius, and Ambrose Gogo, Khomiakov, Dostoyevsky, Soloviev, and Tolstoy Read The Way of the Pilgrim and make a short summary. What book did he carry with him? You can find The Way of the Pilgrim on the Web. Find information about the missionary activities of the Academy of Kazan. Make a list of all the other names which contributed to the Russian Churchs

320

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

spiritual renewal in the 19th century and add some more information about them.
Activity 81: Men contributing to the nineteenth century revival

Activity 1. Briefly write about Russias religious renewal of the 19th century: starets, missionary work, theology, academies and seminaries, intellectuals. 2. Can we say that the Synodal Period was a time of decline? Why?
Activity 82: The nineteenth century

3. OPENING YEARS OF THE TWENTY CENTURY: MOVEMENT FOR CHURCH RENEWAL AND THE END OF THE SYNODICAL PERIOD (1917) In spite of this revival of the nineteenth century, N James W. Cunningham in a Vanquished Hope: The Movement for Church Renewal in Russia, 1905-1906 (1981) points out the precarious situation of the Russian Church, the largest single national church in the world, at the beginning of the twentieth century. Orthodox religious doctrine was taught in various state school systems and the church operated its own, rapidly expanding, elementary system. Parish schools were the means through which students made their way to higher education as well as the way by which the loyalty of the church was strengthened. Yet, the Church continued to be subordinated to the State through the Holy Synod, imposed by Peter the Great. As commented, Peter the Great saw in it a hindrance to his efforts to centralize control. The Church was the traditional channel for the expression of the moral opinion of the people and he could not tolerate any interference with his supreme power. As a consequence, the churchs moral authority declined in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Pospielovsky, in The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 1917-1982 (vol. 1), says that: Externally, the pre-revolutionary Church appeared to be very powerful. She was the official state Church, and until 1905 other religious were legally tolerated only as faiths of national minorities. Orthodox religion was an obligatory discipline in all general schools for all pupils born of members of the Orthodox faith and children born of mixed marriages in which one of the parents was

321

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Orthodox had to be baptized Orthodox. Yet the philosopher Vladimir Soloviev said that the Orthodox priests were the least free subject of the Empire, because no one was legally allowed to enter into religious disputes with themin other words, priests were deprived of the right of dialogue. (20) Zernov asserts that during those two hundred years of repression by the empire, no council was ever held and dioceses and parishes had been wholly deprived of their previous self-government. But the policy of rigid control and suppression, imposed by the government through the above-mentioned heavy-handed administrator Procurator, Pobedonostev, suffered a temporary change, due to the governments realization of the existence of the increased alienation of the people and their newfound interest in Christianity (142). Cunningham says that the Church was feeling the strain of social ferment, with priests, bishops, and articulate groups of laymen struggling against the straitjacket of the Procurator and the state bureaucracy. Arguments that questioned the very validity of the governing apparatus set up by Peter the Great had mushroom into demands for the renewal of the Procurator personally and the dismantling of the procuracy. (52) Zernov thinks that this was a part a movement of awakening on the part of the laity intellectual and artistic elitewho pressured for reforms to recover the Church freedom. Therefore, forced by the demand of religious freedom, the State was obliged to make concessions to it, and, on April 30, 1905, a Manifesto on Toleration, followed by the ukaz of October 30, 1906, granting the status of legal persons to non-Orthodox minorities, was issued. According to Pospielovsky, this Manifesto instilled hopes among the Orthodox that their Church would at last be allowed to regain a canonical conciliar structure (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 22). Cunningham believes that the disappointing result of the Japanese War, which had began in January 1904, was a heavy load to be born and weighed on the Committees deliberation on the issue of the religious minorities, since a continuing repression of them would exacerbate a non convenient civil violence (81).

322

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Following the October Manifesto, Constantine Pobedonostev (1828-1907), after twenty years of unchallenged power were forced to resign. During his long tenure in office (1880-1905), he had produced his own counter-pressure within the church. Pobedonostev was opposed to these liberating measures. He even thought that the Petrine synodal structure of the administration embodied the very principle of sobornostthe sense of spiritual communality; one of the distinctive features of Russian Orthodoxy(Zernov 142; Cunningham 80-81, 100-101). Pospielovsky explains that as early as February 1905, the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg along with Sergei Witte, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, and his Extraordinary Commission instructed the scholars of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy to draft a proposal on church reforms and for granting the Orthodox Church more freedom in administer its internal affairs. At the end of March, the Synod presented a report to Nicholas II (1868 1918), among other things, proposing the election of a patriarch and the summoning of a national council (a sobor) made up of all bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Illustration 63: Tsar Nicholas II and Family at Lavadia105

105

See: <www.byzantines.net>.

323

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

On March 31, the tsar responded favorably but suggested the postponement of the sobor due to the current revolutionary turmoil (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 22). In the meantime, the tsar also allowed pre-sobor commissions, whose deliberations established the foundations of the sobor. Finally, the sobor had to await until the tsar was deposed. Cunningham complains of the western perspective of Russia as hopelessly anachronistic in matters ecclesiastical, cultural, and political in the beginning years of the twentieth century. In fact, he says, the opposite was true: Numerous signs of renewal and reform were visible as the church sought to burst out the cocoon spun around it since the eighteenth century reforms. The Russian clergy was not a grey mass of indistinguishable nonentities, as was so commonly imagined by a significant proportion of the pre-Revolutionary Russian intelligentsia and the majority of western students of Russia. (327) The Russian clergy, he states, was generally a group of men of God, profoundly concerned with revitalizing their church and made it attune with the spiritual, social, and political demands of the century. Furthermore, connecting the Russian Church with the Byzantine Church and with Tradition, Cunningham says: They [The Russian clergy] were conscious that the Russian Church was rooted in the Byzantine heritage and that they would have find the wellspring for renewal in that heritage. As demonstrated in their writings in their often turbulent debates in the Pre-Sobor Commission, Russian religious intellectuals were aware that the canons and regulations of the Byzantine era had been hammered out in times equally as turbulent as they were facing and that distance in time and place was not as insurmountable as might it at first appear. (328) For Cunningham canons dont provide ready solutions for the pressing problems, but they could not be ignored nor regarded lightly. The canons are the touchstone upon which every serious-minded priest, prelate or professor base their thinking. He adds: The authenticity of the Orthodox Church depended upon its adhering to an established tradition that had been handed down from the time of the apostles and the church fathers. The problem was to maintain authenticity and yet bring tradition into focus with the times ... all remained conscious of the canons and

324

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

the need not to emasculate or violate them. Violent arguments ensued as to how canons were to be interpreted or how they had gained authority, but few suggested simply scraping them. (328) Cunningham concludes that Nicholas IIs failure to summon the sobor in 1907 caused the devastating swath of reaction and political opportunism cutting so deeply into the church. For him the reason was that the state was afraid of antagonism from the Church as well as from other spheres of political and social activities (329).

Activity In your own words describe the situation of the Russian Orthodox Church at the beginning of the twentieth century. 1. Why was the Empire forced to change his policy? What was the Manifesto of Toleration? 2. What was the reason the tsar gave to postpone the sobor. Which was the real reason, according to Cunningham? 3. What were the Synod proposals to the Emperor? 4. Following Cunningham, explain the reference to the Church of Byzantium regarding the Pre-Sobor Commission.
Activity 83: Issues in the Russian Church at the beginning of the twentieth century

Furthermore, the negative influence of Rasputin weakened the tsars autocracy and led to the downfall of Nicholas II. Regarding the figure of Rasputin (1873-1916), who overshadowed the last years of the empire, Zernov complains that Owing to the lack of knowledge about the Russian Church, he is usually described, by western writers, as a monk. Some even quote him as an example of the supposedly corrupt clericalism of the Orthodox Church. Whatever were the moral faults of Rasputins character, his case has no bearing upon the alleged deficiency of the Russian clergy, for Rasputin was neither priest, nor monk, but an ordinary married peasant. Besides, his spiritual background had more in common with the mystical sect of Khlysty than with the tradition of the Church. The source of his influence and power lay in facts precisely opposite to those which are usually put forward in popular literature on Russia. (150) He adds that, In no sense did Rasputin represent Russian clericalism; he was listened to by the Empress because she believed him to be the genuine spokesman of the millions of Russian peasantsit was with them that the rulers of the Empire were anxious to restore the contact which had been lost since the time of Peter the Great. It was too late, however. The peasant who came to St. Petersburg and 325

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

took a place of honor near the throne was not the sound, Orthodox Christian that some of his admirers believed him to be. He was a man endowed with a striking personality and with gifts of healing, but he was possessed by lust and dark passions, and his fall dragged down those who had received him as an inspired prophet. (150)

Activity Who was Rasputin? Answer the question by reading the references to him in the text and the Glossary, and by using any other material you might need. Dont write more that a couple of pages.
Activity 84: Rasputin

Besides Rasputins influence there were other series of events leading to the deposition of Nicholas II, namely the Russo-Japanese war in which Japan defeated Russia at Manchuria, strikes caused by bloody Sunday where 1,000 people petitioning for reform were killed, and finally the entering of World War I. The February Revolution, the first phase of the 1917 Revolution, occurred largely as a result of dissatisfaction with the way the tsar was running the country, in particular Russias ongoing involvement in the First World War This Revolution resulted in Nicholas abdication in March 2nd, 1917he had reigned since 1894, and the formation of a Provisional Government, initially led by a liberal aristocrat, Prince Georgy Yevgenyevich Lvov, and then, after this governments failure, by a socialist, Alexander Kerensky. He also met failure for maintaining the involvement of the country in the First World War and being unable to deal with the problems Russia faced. Pressure from the right and from the left (mainly the Bolsheviks) put the government under increasing strain. Ultimately the regime instigated by the February Revolution was forcibly replaced in the October Revolution.

The underlying causes of the Russian Revolution are rooted deep in Russias history. For centuries, autocratic and repressive czarist regimes ruled the country and most of the population lived under severe economic and social conditions. During the 19th century and early 20th century various movements aimed at overthrowing the oppressive government were staged at different times by students, workers, peasants, and members of the nobility. Two of

326

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

these unsuccessful movements were the 1825 revolt against Nicholas I and the revolution of 1905, both of which were attempts to establish a constitutional monarchy. Russias badly organized and unsuccessful involvement in World War I (1914-1918) added to popular discontent with the governments corruption and inefficiency. In 1917 these events resulted in the fall of the czarist government and the establishment of the Bolshevik Party, a radical offshoot of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, as the ruling power. (Russian Revolution of 1917) Table 38: Causes of the Russian Revolution of 1917

(March 812 [Feb. 2428, old style], 1917), the first stage of the Russian Revolution of 1917, in which the monarchy was overthrown and replaced by the Provisional Government. This government, intended as an interim stage in the creation of a permanent democraticparliamentary polity for Russia, was in turn overthrown by the Bolsheviks in October (November, new style) of the same year. (February Revolution). Table 39: The February Revolution

Activity 1. Name the two phases or periods of the 1917 Revolution. 2. In your own words, write a summary of a) the causes of the Revolution of 1917 and b) the February Revolution. 3. Why did Nicholas II have to abdicate?
Activity 85: The Russian Revolution of 1917 and the February Revolution

On 15 August 1917, six months after the abdication of Nicholas II, an AllRussian Church Council was summoned at Moscow which was to elect St. Tikhon the Patriarch. In these earlier sessions one could hear of the Bolshevik artillery. But although tsarism vanished, the Church not only survived the disaster, but also revealed an amazing vitality during the years of storm and persecution which were to follow. To grasp the quality of such strength we need just to contemplate the invincible inner spiritual life of Orthodoxy during those two hundred years when immobility and silence were imposed upon it by the State.

327

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

4. A TIME OF PERSECUTION AND REBIRTH: THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE XX CENTURY (1917-) THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH FROM THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION OF 1917 UNTIL THE SECOND WORLD WAR: SIX MAIN STAGES After two hundred years of immobility, silence, and persecution imposed by the St. Petersburg Empire, the Orthodox Church suffered a new wave of oppression and persecution starting with the October Revolution of 1917 when the Bolsheviks seized power to around 1988, the year when Russian Christianity celebrated its millennium. Yet, paradoxically the Church could finally summon a Council, which was stopped by Lenins nationalization of the Churchs properties, and attained canonical structure. The first phase of the Russian Revolution, the February Revolution had ended, with the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II and the tsarist regime and the installation of a Provisional Government. The October Revolution, the second phase of the Russian. Lenin revolution, culminated in the creation of the first Communist state swiftly followed by systematic efforts to curtail and eventually eliminate the influence of the Church. Stalin says: The Party cannot be neutral towards religion. It conducts an anti-religious struggle against all and any religious prejudices (1953, 132). Ware points out that from 1917 onwards Orthodox and other Christians faced a situation for which there was no exact precedent in early Christian history. It is true that the Roman Empire persecuted Christian from time to time. Even the Muslim Ottoman Turks, while non-Christians, were still monotheistic, and allowed a large measure of toleration. However, the atheist government tried systematically and militantly to suppress religion. A neutral separation between Church and State was not satisfactory for them. They sought directly and indirectly to destroy all organized life and eliminate all religious belief (146)

328

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

The October Revolution The October Revolution was led by Lenin and was based upon the ideas of Karl Marx. It marked the beginning of the spread of communism in the twentieth century. It was far less sporadic than the revolution of February and came about as the result of deliberate planning and coordinated activity to that end. The financial and logistical assistance of German intelligence via their key agent, Alexander Parvus was a key component as well. On November 7, 1917, Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin led his leftist revolutionaries in a nearly bloodless revolt against the ineffective Provisional Government (Russia was still using the Julian Calendar at the time, so period references show an October 25 date). The October Revolution ended the phase of the revolution instigated in February, replacing Russias short-lived provisional government with a Soviet one. Although many Bolsheviks (such as Leon Trotsky) supported a soviet democracy, the reform from above model gained definitive power when Lenin died and Stalin gained control of the USSR. Trotsky and his supporters, as well as a number of other democratically-minded communists, were persecuted and eventually imprisoned or killed. (Russian Revolution of 1917) Table 40: The October Revolution

Activity In your own words, write telegraphic sentences summarizing the October Revolution. The first one is given to you: It was led by Lenin
Activity 86: The October Revolution

Activity To understand the struggle between the Russian Church and the Soviet Government during the October Revolution and its following years, read about Lenin in the Glossary and list his main features as a politician. The first feature is given to you: established Communism

Activity 87: Lenin as a politician

Zernov connects the October revolution with this previous period of the eighteenth and nineteenth century, beginning with Peter the Greats unfortunate abolition of the Patriarchate, a period in which the Church could never recover its freedom from the State. He says: Of the two partners, the one who lost more was not the Church, but the Empire, for, by refusing to Christian freedom of speech and action, the rulers of Russia

329

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

deprived themselves of the benefit of friendly but independent criticism. They became morally isolated from the best elements of the nation, and they created around themselves that vacuum which caused the inglorious collapse of the whole State edifice in 1917. The Empire of St. Petersburg vanished, but the Church survived the disaster and displayed an astonishing vitality during the years of storm and persecution. In order to understand the source of its strength, one needs to study the inner spiritual life of Orthodoxy during those two hundred years when immobility and silence were imposed upon it by the State. (130-131) Zernov also comments that these two centuries of submission of the Church to the state as well as the Great Schism of the seventeenth century caused the weakening of the grip of the Possessors on the Russian Church and the consequent revival of the Non-possessors tradition. This brought a renewed missionary zeal, healing, and prophetic gifts, and remarkable examples of holiness and moral perfection (132). He explains how some outstanding men of the nineteenth centuryKhomiakov (1804-60), Dostoevsky (1821-81), Soloviev (1853-1900), and Feodorov (1828-1903)foresaw the future development of their nation. These prophetsas Zernov calls themwere sure that Europe was heading to one of its greatest crisis: a confrontation between those who believed in the self-sufficiency of man and those who professed the sovereignty of God as revealed by Jesus Christ (139). They, this church historian asserts, were prepared to see victorious those leaders who would promise bread and a life of ease at the price of apostasy from Christ; they were sure that they were living on the eve of one of the fiercest religious conflicts ever known in human history. They expected the clash to take place at the beginning of the twentieth century, and it actually occurred in 1917, when the Empire of St. Petersburg collapsed and the control of Russia fell into the hands of Lenin and his followers. (140)

Your Own Research Write a short biography of Khomiakov, Dostoevsky, Soloviev, and Feodorov.

Activity 88: Russian writers of the nineteenth century

330

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

They were not wrong. After the collapse of the Empire, in March 1917, Russia was involved in a period of disintegration, first by the successive governments of westernized liberals and then by the seizure of power by Lenin and Trotsky, which started a ruthless period of dictatorship. Zernov further explains that, The end of the St. Petersburg Empire therefore meant for the nation not the return to their traditional order, but a further compulsory westernization on an unprecedented scale and with unprecedented speed (151). The Sobor Ironically, the Church met the Marxist revolution as a free, self-governing body. After the Sobor was postponed by Nicholas II, in August 1917, while the country was in the grip of revolutionary turmoil, the Provisional Government, which followed Nicholas abdication, had granted permission to convoke an all Russian sobor of bishops, lower clergy, and laity, in Moscow. It consisted of 563 members, including 278 lay representatives. Pospielovsky states that the sobor started with internal divisions well represented. On the one hand, there were those, consisting of theology professors, both lay and clerical, as well as many urban married priests who were opposed to the idea of a patriarchate and in favor of popularly elected synod of bishops, the lower clergy and laymen with equal voting right. On the other hand, there were those, whose number supposedly exceeding that of its opponents, who were in favor of the restoration of a patriarchate (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 27-28). In spite of the differences that existed regarding the ways of restoring the full autonomy to the churchsome in favor a Patriarch some of a collegiate body objecting to the rule of a single man, Zernov says that: It was a proof of the maturity and ability of the Christians that they were able, after an interval of 200 years, during which no Councils

331

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

had been held, to proceed in good order to elect new organs of Church administration and to restore the self-government that the Germanized Empire had taken away (152). Yet, these differences were silenced by the Communist uprising in October 1917. A month later, in November, Tikhon was elected Patriarchhe was elected Metropolitan of Moscow on 15 August of the same year. Many of the reforms proposed by the Council could not be put into practice. Now the Church, once liberated from the constraints of imperial patronage, had to survive the greatest onslaught on Christianity since the persecution by the pagan Roman emperors (A History of the Russian Church). Zernov asserts that the Russian Church had to face an enemy who was resolute in its determination to suppress Christianity as well as any other form of religion, something inconceivable before the outbreak of the Russian revolution (154). This historian also complains about western Christian prejudice against the eastern Church and Russia toward this revolution: The origin of the struggle between Christians and atheists in Russia, with its world-wide significance, lies not so much in peculiarly Russian social conditions, but mainly in the fact that the belief of modern man in his selfsufficiency and supremacy is irreconcilable with the Christian doctrine of man as a servant of the Living God. (154) Instead, he believes that: The Communist experiment in Russia was the last and most radical stage in the process of imitation of the West inaugurated by Peter the Great. For more than 200 years, the upper section of Russian society had blindly followed the lead of Europe, convinced that all available wisdom and truth were contained in the theories and methods of civilized western nations. Lenin was one of the most ardent exponents of this point of view. He treated Karl Marxs doctrines as the final revelation of truththey were not only a political theory to him, but a new, scientific religion, capable of solving all the problems of life and, therefore, intolerant of any rival teachings. (154-5) The Russian Christians, in 1917, had to confront a vigorous force, not created in their own country or in their own tradition, but in the secularized West. Its leader was Karl Marx, a German Jew, who had become an atheist. Zernov talks about his proposed

332

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

new world order in terms of his Judaism: the coming of the promised Messiah meant the victory of the proletariat. He asserts that Russian communism was not only an economic and social experiment, but one of the greatest religious revolutions in the history of mankind carried out by a group of men knowing no other truth than dialectic materialism and recognizing no other prophet than Karl Marx (156). Zernov delineates five main stages of soviet anti-religious policy spanning from Lenins coup attempt in 1917 to Krushchevs new assault on the Church in late fifties. Pospielovsky delineates only four phases (1918though he does not specifyto Khrushchev) (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 260-266), roughly coinciding with some of the stages defined by Zernov. These were stages in which Russian Christians experienced a well-planned and scientifically conducted campaign against them. In the following pages I will mainly follow Zernovs principal stages, but will add a sixth, from 1965 to 1991 to describe the Russian Church under the Decaying Socialism.

Activity See Appendix E which contains a list of the leaders of the Soviet Union. Write a similar one with the periods in office of each of the leaders. In this list, mark with a check the ones mentioned in the following sections.
Activity 89: Leaders of the Soviet Union

First Stage (1918-22): Communists Optimism, the Sobor and Lenins State106 In the first stage, the communistsZernov calls them the godlesswere optimistic. Blinded by their materialism, they mistakenly thought that by destroying the economic foundations of the Church and the exile of individual Christians they could bring about its collapse. Thus in 1918, Lenin allowed both religious and anti-religious
106

See a list of leaders of the Soviet Union in Appendix E.

333

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

propaganda. Yet, at the same time he confiscated all the Church property and then denied the Church the right of acquiring it again. Pospielovsky states that in so doing, Lenin made an attempt to follow Marxs ideological precepts in the most orthodox way. He says that Lenin hoped to kill the Church by depriving her of a material and legal base, according to Marxs doctrine that religion as a superstructure would simply wither away if deprived of its material basis (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 260). The Department in charge of nationalizing all former church properties (houses of prayer, schools, seminaries, monasteries, candle factories, charity institutions, etc) was referred to as the Liquidation Department (260). Many charitable members of the Church deserted, but the Church, as Zernov defends, gained a new vitality and power, mainly due to the activity of the laity. The popular character of Russian Christianity caused it never to be dependent on the clergy, but rather on the laity. In spite of the destruction of the ecclesiastical administration and the cessation of all organized instruction, at this time the church was relatively free and still suffered little systematic persecution (157). When the Bolsheviks seized power in 1917, the Russian Orthodox Church was electing its first patriarch since the time of Peter the Great. Eleven days after the assault on the Winter Palace, Metropolitan Tikhon (Belavin) of Moscow was chosen by lot from among three elected candidates. As Nathaniel Davis narrates, in A Long Walk to Church: A Contemporary History of Russian Orthodoxy, in spite of the above mentioned nationalization of all the church lands, most of the church leaders believed that the communist government was a temporary affliction. After electing Patriarch Tikhon, the sobor unrealistically passed a number of resolutions decreeing that the Russian Orthodox Church was the national church of Russia, noting the states need of church approval to legislate on matters relating to the church, the illegality of

334

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

blasphemy, the recognition of the church schools, and the required Orthodoxy of the head of the Russian state and the top appointees in education and religious affairs. Soon however, as already suggested, Davis continues, the Soviet regime would issue a decree separating church and state, canceling the churchs status as a juridical entity, banning state subsidies to clergy and religious bodies, seizing church bank accounts, denying legal standing to church marriages, divorces, and baptisms, and prohibiting organized religious education of the young (9).

Illustration 64: Patriarch Tikhon

In January of 1918, the sobor backed Patriarch Tikhons encyclical criticizing the Soviet regime for its anti-Church actions and for the persecutions and terror. Trying to protect the Church, in the encyclical the patriarch also excommunicated those open and secret enemies of [Christs] Truth who bring about persecutions and sow the seeds of hatred and ... fratricide. The believers reacted with an enthusiastic support for their patriarch. It was of no use. The stage was set for confrontation (9). Zernov says that the threat of divine punishment only excited anti-religious fervor (158).

335

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

As Pospielovsky asserts, the sobor continued its sessions periodically up to September 1918 when it had to end for lack of funds caused by the nationalization of church property. It could not complete all legislative plans, yet it passed the necessary legislation to give the Church the canonical conciliar structure, all the way from the local parish to the office of the patriarch (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 33). He adds that: Although the conciliar system proved to be an impossibility under the new regime at the top, at the parish level the new responsibility granted to the parish councils and the security of priests tenure, in the opinion of many church historians, saved the Church from disintegration in the years of the practically total collapse of the central church administration caused by the city state legislation, by periodical arrests of bishops and by the proliferation of schismatic groups. (37-38) Thus, as noted above, the stage was set for confrontation between the Church and the State. It came during the period between 1918 and 1920 when the civil war engulfed the nation. The civil war erupted when the White Army supported by anti-Lenin Russians and many western countries fought Lenins Red Army. In the three years the war lasted, 15 million people were killed before Trotsky led the Reds to victory. Lenin created a New Economic Policy in order to restore the economy, moved the capital to Moscow, renamed the country the Soviet Union, and named his party the Communist Party. Pospielovsky tells us that during this period 1918-1920, despite the patriarchs refusal to support the Bolsheviks enemies, the state retaliated against the church; consequently, at least twenty-eight bishops were murdered and thousands of clerics were imprisoned or killed only because of their religious activity (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 38). On the International scene, Russia was losing World War I, having suffered over 9 million casualtiesmore than any other belligerent. At the front conditions were appalling. Sometimes Russian soldiers were forced to wait in backup trenches, lacking

336

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

even rifles, until the deaths of comrades allowed them to scavenge arms. In the peace treaty with Germany signed in March 1918, the Communist GovernmentThe Soviet Union was established four years laterlost a third of its population and a third of its arable lands. Davis described the distressful situation of Russia in this period of 19181922 the following way: In the countryside, the Bolsheviks organized Committees of the Village Poor and sent out workers and soldiers from the cities to seize grain. Peasant revolts swept the countryside, and the civil war became a peasant war. Industrial output plummeted to one-seventh of its prewar level. Citizens fled Moscow and Petrograd seeking food and safety in the countryside; more than half the people in those cities abandoned them. The ruble stood at one two-hundred-thousandth of its prewar value. Over 7 million people died from hunger and epidemics; cannibalism spread. (A Long Walk to Church 10) Between 1920 and 1922, several millions of Orthodox Russians were forced to leave their country and try to find a refuge in Europe and America. This emigration meant the appearance of the Russian Church in exile. Zernov asserts that it was of a particular significance for the mutual re-discovery of Russian Orthodoxy and the Christian West (168).

Activity With telegraphic sentences, summarize the first stage in the Russian Church struggle with the Soviet government.
Activity 90: First stage in the struggle Church-State

Second Stage (1922-29): Communists Attempts at Splitting the Church For Zernov, this campaign of divide and conquer had started in February, 1922 with the Government demanding the churchs valuables for famine relief. The Civil War had resulted in an unprecedented famine. To help the famine-stricken, on February 19, the Patriarch had urged believers to be generous in their help and asked parishes to

337

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

give all precious articles except those used in sacraments and worship. However, as Davis relates, a few days later the government began a propaganda and terror campaign against a heartless church and ordered the confiscation of all church valuables, including even the consecrated vessels. This blatant disregard for anything considered holy caused priests and parishioners alike to rally in an attempt to guard their churches and defend their sacramental treasures. This defiance resulted in some 1,400 bloody fights as reported by the Russian Press (Davis, A Long Walk to Church 10). Yet, it was later discovered, as Pospielovsky explains, that the government deliberately misrepresented the church as a heartless institution indifferent to human suffering. This was a part of an exceptionally beneficial campaign to break the power of the clergy and not simply to obtain resources with which to buy food: It is precisely now and only now, when there is cannibalism ... and corpses are lying along the roads that we can (and therefore must) carry out the confiscation of valuables with fanatical and merciless energy. ... No other opportunity but the current terrible famine will give us a mood of the wide masses such as would provide us with their sympathies or at least neutrality.... Now our victory over the reactionary clergy is guaranteed. ... The trial of the Shuya rioters for resisting aid to the hungry [should] be conducted in as short a time as possible, concluding in the maximum possible number of executions. ... If possible, similar executions should be carried out in Moscow and other spiritual centers of the country.107 (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 94) The fight over church treasure had the expected consequences. The Patriarch Tikhon was placed under house arrest accused of resisting the confiscation of his Churchs properties. Pospielovsky states that: The general state of the Church as an institution was not promising. The patriarch had been put under arrest since May 10. 1922. Purges and imprisonments were rampant across the country, mostly under the pretext of the Churchs resistance to the confiscation of valuables, in connection with which 2,691 married priests, 1.962 monks, 3,447 nuns and an unknown number of laymen loyal to the patriarch were physically liquidated in the course of 19211923. (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 99)

Lenins secret memorandum to his Politburo colleagues, March 19, 1922. See the complete internal order in Pospielovsky, The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime , 95.

107

338

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Taking advantage of Tikhons confinement to seize control of the patriarchal chancery and church administration, a few days later, a group of priests, members of the so called Renovationistsone of their factions was the Living Church, visited him in prison and obtained from the Patriarch permission to take over temporarily ecclesiastical administration until his deputy, the Metropolitan Agathangel arrived in Moscow. However, this temporary transfer of power was part of a carefully arranged plan since theses clerics had no intention of handing over the government of the Church to the Patriarchs nominee. The Renovationists had Bolshevik support, clearly motivated by the authoritys desire to split and thereby rule the church. They, instead, convoked a Council (August 1922), announcing various reforms such as the introduction of a married Episcopate. The new leaders, who called themselves members of the Living Church, declared that they were ready to support Communism, because it put into practice the social message of the Gospel. Thus the government turned over the majority of the functioning Orthodox churches in the country to the collaborating Renovationists, a group disdained by most of the Orthodox laity for moral, traditional, and political reasons. However, ironically for the new Communist Government, the Living Church was no better than the Church of the Patriarch. The members of the Party abhorred the idea of a compromise between belief in God and dialectical materialism (Zernov 158; Davis, A Long Walk to Church 10). Davis comments that the church schism was a blow to the institutional integrity of the patriarchal church. Nevertheless, it influenced Tikhon in his decision to confess anti-Soviet acts, renounce them, and declare that he was no longer an enemy of the Soviet Government (A Long Walk to Church 11). The authorities unexpectedly freed him on June 26, 1923, and he was able to reassert his authority and counteract the Renovationists. Zernov says that he also declared his loyalty to the Soviet government

339

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

and publicly expressed his regret for his opposition to the confiscation of the sacred vessels in 1922. This act of repentance shocked some Christians, but the majority believed that the Patriarch had degraded himself for the sake of his flock and approved his action. Till his death, Tikhon was surrounded by the warm affection of all the faithful (159). Pospielovsky says that When the patriarch died in April 1925 the church was just recovering from the terror. But the physical persecutions could not stop the internal spiritual recovery of the Church, freed from all secular-governmental obligations for the first time in several hundred years (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 99). With only a small segment remaining with the Living Church and other dissenting voices, the unity of the Church was spontaneously restored. By late 1924 the Renovationists had lost their control over a third to a half of the churches the authorities had given them. In the same year, Lenin died and Stalin slowly consolidated his power. There was an economic recovery due to the New Economic Policy. During this time, the strength of the patriarchal church grew (Davis, A Long Walk to Church 11). The attempt to undermine the solidarity of the church had failed. The members of the Living Church were allowed to have a last Council in 1926. Zernov asserts that: The lesson of this second stage of the conflict was learned by both parties. The godless realized that neither material hardships nor artificially created divisions were strong enough to destroy Christianity. The leaders of the Church understood at last that the Soviet Government was firmly established and that the Christians would have to find a new way of life under the rule of the resolute enemies of their religion. (159) Zernov also quotes a clarifying statement written in 1926 by a group of Russian Churchmen, exiled in the concentration camp on the Solovetski Island, in the face of suffering and death: The Church recognizes the existence of the spiritual principle; communism denies it. The Church believes in the Living God, Creator of the world, Guide of its life; communism does not admit His existence The Church believes in the

340

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

steadfast principles of morality, justice and law; communism looks upon them as the conditional results of class struggle, and values moral questions only from the standpoint of their usefulness. The Church instills the feeling that humility elevates mans soul; communism abases man through pride. (160) They were proposing the total separation between Church and State. However, there was another thread of thought, one of whose spokesman was Metropolitan Sergii as well as two young bishops Aleksiithe future Patriarchand Nicolai. For them, instead of separation between Church and State, they were in favor of compromise and accommodation with even a hostile government. As a consequence, in 1927, Metropolitan Sergii issued a Concordat, a declaration pledging loyalty to the Soviet State and even proclaiming that the aspiration of the Church and the Government were identical and that the Church had been neither oppressed nor persecuted. As a consequence the Orthodox Church was registered and restored its proper organization, something denied it since 1922. Sergiis action created several conflicting groups under different Russian hierarchs, the majority accepting Sergiis leadership while other rejecting it (Zernov 158-60). Pospielovsky says that Sergii was accused of exerting pressure on the believers and the clergy to identify the interests of the Church with those of the atheist state, which was impossible (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 155). This was a very controversial issue because this 1927 Declaration obliged Orthodox clergy to proclaim loyalty to the Soviet regime, creating a schism involving large numbers of clergy and believers. Because many refused to comply, especially bishops and priests who were forced into emigration, a synod of Russian bishops was convoked in Karlovtsi (Yugoslavia) to set up a Russian Orthodox Church in Exile disavowing all links with the Mother Church in Soviet Russia.

Activity To understand the following period of the struggle between the Russian Church and

341

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

the Soviet Government, see Stalin in the Glossary and list his main features as a politician. The first feature is given to you: became general secretary of the Soviet Communist Party in 1922
Activity 91: Joseph Stalin

Activity With telegraphic sentences, summarize the second stage in the Russian Church struggle with the Soviet government.
Activity 92: Second stage in the struggle Church-State

Third Stage (1929-1941): Stalins Bloody Persecution of the Church As we have seen, in Lenins period, the Communist Party tried unsuccessfully to tear the masses away from their church and clergy. Pospielovsky says that instead of dying deprived of property and legal rights, the Church grew not only in the 1920s when it had experienced a revival but even in the 1930s, prior to its physical destruction, in its third stage of its struggle with the Soviet State (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 161). This was the period of Stalinthe most tragic period in the history of the Russian Church. It began on April 8th, 1929, when a revised law on religion was published by the dictator. Pospielovsky asserts that Metropolitan Sergei, in return for his 1927 Declaration of Loyalty had hoped to gain the right to expand the socio-cultural and private educational activities of the Church, but the new legislation dealt a heavy blow to these hopes (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 164).108 Every form of religious propaganda was made a legal offense. This meant a radical departure from the religious freedom of the first stage in 1918. Besides, Article
For Pospielovsky, the third stage begins in 1928 with the liquidation of the NEP and continued, with some minor respite, in 1939 (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 261). In that year, the Soviet Union annexed western Ukraine and western Belorussia, with populations predominantly Orthodox but with large minorities of Byzantyne-Rite Ukrainian Catholics, Jews, and pockets of Polish Roman Catholics. This, Pospielovsky says, forced the Soviets to moderate their physical attack on religion, at least in the western areas (261-262).
108

342

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

17 also prohibited any form of philanthropic and educational activity, consequently strictly constraining the life of the Church to the officiating of divine worship.
Article 17 Religious unions (parishes) are forbidden, (a) to establish mutual aid funds, co-operative and productive unions, and in general, to use the property at their disposal for any other purpose than the satisfying of religious needs; (b) to give material aid to their members; to organize either special meetings for children, youth, women, for prayer and other purposes, or general meetings, groups, circles, departments, Biblical or literary, handwork for labor, religious study, etc., and also to organize excursions and childrens playgrounds; to open libraries, reading rooms, to organize sanatoria and medical aid. Only such books as are necessary for the performance of services are permitted in the Church buildings and houses of prayer. Table 41: Article 17 of the revised religious law issued by Stain (April 8th, 1929)

In this new attempt to suffocate the Church slowly by forbidding its members to spread their teaching, the State also conducted anti-religious propaganda with vigor and determination. The schools especially, were all made strongholds of godless teaching. Police measures were not neglected. Davis states that the wave of violence in 1929 and 1930 and the famine that came afterwards produced a reversion. By 1932, the League of the Militant Godless (LMG) grew from half a million to its largest membership, up to 5.5 million by 1932. Mocking plays, songs, and carnivals reappeared. The school curriculum, previously essentially secular, became sharply anti-religious (A Long Walk to Church 14). By the 1930s the Russian Orthodox Church had been brought to its knees. A handful of bishops survived in the administrative structure of the Church, but a vast number of priests and ordinary believers met their death in Stalins extermination camps. Church buildings as well as monasteries and schools were targets for wholesale closure and destruction. The monumental Christ the Saviour Cathedral in Moscow (built to commemorate the defeat of Napoleon in 1812), the monasteries of the Kremlin, and the numerous parish churches of the Russian capital (said to number forty times forty) fell victim to the communists enthusiasm for the use of dynamite on objects of beauty

343

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

(161; A History of the Russian Church). Davis believes that: The atheists used these tactics to remove the sight and sound of religion from the streets of cities and the byways of the countryside. These measures were also designed to foster a perception of the church as a place where rituals were mechanically performed, and nothing more (A Long Walk to Church 14). By 1936, a new wave of church closings and religious persecution brought the number of people condemned to slave labor in camps to the overwhelming figure of between fifteen and twenty million people. In those years the Russian episcopate was almost exterminated more than seventy bishops were deported and perished in camps, only four remaining free. This stage remained relatively unchanged until the beginning of the Second World War, but, as Zernovadds, met again with failure. In 1936, Stalin had conducted a census adding a question about religious allegiance hoping it would reveal the overwhelming atheism of the population. He was apparently disappointed and thus, suppressed the result of the census. The Church once again had survived in Russia (162). Moreover, as Pospielovsky asserts, the LMG, instead of growing to an expected 22 million members, had dropped to two million by 1938 (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 178). Yet, as the 1930s progressed, godless propaganda evolved into the form it retained until the late 1980s (Davis, A Long Walk to Church 14). A 1937 census revealed that 50 percent of the population was still believers (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 263). Pospielovsky also observes that, according to official Soviet estimates, by the late 1930s, Orthodox were split into different groups: 75 to 80 percent of Orthodox were Sergiiite, 15 to 20 percent Renovationists, and a 5 percent of Buitess and the less radical Non-commemoratorsthose who did not commemorate Sergiis name at the liturgy. The latter, known as catacomb Christians,

344

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

possessed no registration and, since they were less controlled than the official part of the Church, they led a more intensive spiritual live even engaging in the spiritual upbringing and education of children (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 179). In 1939, the Soviet Union and Germany signed a pact known as the Treaty of Nonaggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. In spite of the harm this pact might have brought for Europe and the world, Davis sees benefits for the church. He says that: ... it rescued the institution of the Russian Orthodox Church. Hitlers deal with Stalin allowed the Soviets to occupy eastern Poland, and 1,200 Orthodox parishes were incorporated into the Soviet Union as a result. Then, in mid-June of 1940, the Soviets occupied Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, among whose 6 million people were almost a half million traditionally Orthodox persons who worshiped in about 300 Orthodox churches. Later in the same month the Soviets compelled the Romanians to cede Bessarabia and northern Bukovina with their 4 million people, 3 million of them traditionally Orthodox. There were between 2,000 and 2,500 parishes in these formerly Romanian lands. These annexations brought the Russian Orthodox Church more than 6 million traditionally Orthodox people and 3,500-4,000 churches with active priests, as well as many monasteries and nunneries, some bishops and seminaries, and other resources. The institutional strength of the church must have increased fifteen fold. The communists soon started closing churches and arresting priests and lay Christians in the newly acquired lands, but they also understood that the Russian Orthodox Church could be an instrument of assimilation and of Soviet control. (A Long Walk to Church 19) This treaty of mutual non-aggression lasted until June 22, 1941, when Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union.

Activity With telegraphic sentences, summarize the third stage in the Russian Church struggle with the Soviet government.
Activity 93: Third stage in the struggle Church-State

Fourth Stage (1941-1953): Second World War and Stalins Restoration of the Russian Church

345

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

A fourth and new stage of this conflict between the Russian Government and the Church (delineated by Zernov) started during the Second World War, on June, 21, 1941, the same day the German armies invaded Russia. The entry of the Soviet Union into the Second World War changed the Churchs fortunes dramatically. Stalin, a former seminarian who had trained to be a priest, made a drastic reversal to his religious policy, restoring the Russian Church as an organized body (163). For Pospielovsky, phase four began with the German attack and continued until Stalins death in 1953, and, more accurately, until Khrushchevs new assault on religion beginning in 1957 (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 265). Pospielovsky believes that Stalin, in order not to antagonize the masses of Orthodox Christians living in the newly occupied territory along with those living in the USSR, felt constrained to tone down his persecutions (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 194). Zernov says that for Russian believers, this new religious policy taking place on the Sunday commemorating all Russian saints meant that Russian saints were with them in this war which cost Russia over twenty million lives. In their gigantic struggle, people needed religion (163). Eventually, the victory of the anti-Hitler alliance gave Stalin an ominous power over central and eastern Europe (163). In September 1941, anti-religious propaganda came to an end. In 1942, the government published The Truth about Religion in Russia to demonstrate Stalins benevolent attitude towards believers (163). Yet in the face of the German invasion in 1941, Stalin made the decision to evacuate most of the leaders of the religious communities, including Metropolitan Sergii, who was not allowed to return until late August 1943, long after the Germans had retreated. Davis explains that Stalin was afraid that they might defect, or that the Hitlers troops could use the Soviet churchmen for their own political purposes if they were captured. David says that the decision to

346

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

evacuate these men rather than kill them may have been sheer luck, as the Soviets in retreat had frequently executed people in such circumstances. Reportedly Sergii drew up a will on October 12, two days before he was sent east from Moscow (A Long Walk to Church 18). But from the very first sign of German hostilities, the aging Metropolitan Sergii had wholeheartedly supported the war effort appealing to the patriotism of believers, and a very modest material revival of the Church (the opening of some monasteries and seminaries, the recruitment of priests and the publishing of a church journal) was permitted in exchange for the Churchs putting to use her gifts for rallying the Russian people in a time of national crisis (Zernov 163). Pospielovsky says that Stalin was very slow and cautious in changing his policy toward the Church and there is no available evidence of church openings on the Soviet side until 1943 (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 196). Also, after 1943, the Church was permitted to have some institutions for training priests and to undertake a limited publishing program; however, it was not allow to do anything beyond this. For example, the bishops and clerics were not allowed to engage in charitable or social work nor could they hold catechism classes or Sunday schools for children. The worst thing was that every member of the clergy had to require permission from the State to exercise their ministry (Ware 146). There also were many forms of anti-religious propaganda. An atheistic instruction was given in schools. Teachers received instruction such as: A Soviet teacher must be guided by the principle of the Party of science; he is obliged not only to be an unbeliever himself, but also to be an active propagandist of godlessness among others, to be the bearer of the ideas of militant proletarian atheism. Skillfully and calmly, tactfully and persistently, the Soviet teacher must expose and overcome religion prejudices in the course of his activity in school and out of school, day in and day out. (Oleschuk109, 1949)

109

Formerly Secretary of the League of Militant Atheists.

347

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

On September 4th, 1943, the Kremlin received a delegation of the Russian Church, consisting of Metropolitan Sergii, Aleksii, and Nicolai, the three authors of the Concordat of 1927 and sanctioned the restoration of the Patriarchate of Moscow. Three days later, Sergii was elected as Patriarch by nineteen bishops who had returned from concentration camps. Upon Sergiis election, the Church reappeared in public life. Aided by several outstanding leaders, Patriarch Sergii started to rebuild the ecclesiastical organization. He made appointments to vacant Sees, ordained new priests, and reopened churches. After his death in May 1944, his successor, Patriarch Aleksii, elected in 1945, continued this movement, and began the training of the clergy in the Theological Institute in Moscow and in provincial Seminaries. He was also allowed to print the books necessary for church services (Zernov 161-64). During the German invasion, the nation experienced a new sense of unity through their suffering. Also, in these years of trial, the clergy and laity of the Orthodox Church often showed outstanding personal courage and devotion to duty which impressed the Government, thereby securing for the Church a greater freedom of action in the sphere of religious activities as assigned to it by the Soviet constitution. Zernov provides enlightening statistics that prove the consolidation of the Church in 1953, the year of Stalins dead (165):
1914 1939 ? ? some 100s 0 0 1953 73 74 about 20,000 67 10

Dioceses
Bishops Parish clergy Monasteries Theological schools

73 163 51,000 1,025 61

Table 42: Statistics indicating the consolidation of the Church in the post-war years

348

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Your Own Research Write a short biography of Patriarch Sergii.

Activity 94: Biography of Patriarch Sergii

Davis asserts that, during Stalins last five years of life, between 1948 and 1953, the aging dictators policies changed back to those of repression. By January, 1954, the Russian Orthodox Church had lost about 1,000 of the slightly more than 14,400 registered parishes it had had in January of 1949. He reasons that the shift to repression might have been a consequence of Hitlers defeat and the end of the war. Thus, the Orthodox Churchs support was no longer needed (A Long Walk to Church 27-28). Activity With telegraphic sentences, summarize the fourth stage in the Russian Church struggle with the Soviet government.
Activity 95: Fourth stage in the struggle Church-State

Fifth Stage (1958-1964): Nikita Khrushchev, a New Assault on the Church During the period which followed Stalins death in 1953 the Church survived relatively unmolested. Pospielovsky says that between 1954 and 1958 there is evidence of the construction and reopening of churches. Yet, between 1959-1964, under Nikita Khrushchev, the Russian Church did, however, face renewed persecution in the form of mass closures of monasteries (most notably the famous eleventh-century Monastery of the Caves in Kiev), churches and theological schools, although there was no return to the mass executions and imprisonment of priests and believers as there had been under Lenin and Stalin (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime, vol. II, 327; Zernov 165). In 1958, Nikita Khrushchev, who had become leader that same year replacing Georgy Malenkov as prime minister, had pursued a policy of de-Stalinisation by

349

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

releasing millions of prisoners in concentration camps and posthumously rehabilitating thousands of Stalins victims. However, unexpectedly, in 1959 he launched an attack on the Church, thus beginning, a fifth stage. Pospielovsky thinks that this sudden attack did not come out of the blue. In 1950, articles had begun to appear in the Soviet press admitting that religion would not die away on its own, and consequently anti-religious propaganda itself would be insufficient. In 1954, a Central Committee resolution acknowledged that the Orthodox Church and the sectarians were attracting young people. Yet for lack of unity in the Soviet leadership after Stalins death, the attacked slowed down. Pospielovsky thinks that this period from 1955 to 1957 was the most liberal since 1947 (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 329-330). Zernov blames Catherine Furzeva, the great favorite of the dictator, for this attach. Khrushchev had entrusted her the culture of the Soviet Union and led an anti-religious campaign which slowed down the process of religious recovery begun during the war. Furzeva managed to destroy more than ten thousand churches. Yet this persecution was not accompanied by arrest and deportation as under Stalin; the clergy was simply forced to retire. The most prominent victim of the campaign was Metropolitan Nicolai who was released from his duties, later dying in mysterious circumstances (165). Pospielovsky asserts that The Church did not reign herself without resistance. Her strategy was to remind the Soviet public and the Soviet authorities of the Churchs important historical contribution to Russian culture as well as to the forging of Russian statehood and Russian national consciousness, and to the patriotic cause of resisting foreign invasions, from the earliest pages of Russian History to World War. (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 333) Pospielovsky adds that the most outstanding of this self-defense actions was Patriarch Aleksiis speech, on February 16, 1960, at a Kremlin peace and disarmament conference (333). In early January 1960, the Central Committee of the Communist Party had called for still more intensive anti-religious propaganda (Russian Church

350

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

under the Soviet Regime 333; Davis, A Long Walk to Church 35). Davis explains that in the text, apparently drafted by Metropolitan Nikolai (Yarushevich), Aleksii claimed credit on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church for Russias heroic past, its glorious culture, and its leadership for peace. He decried the insults and attacks to which the church was being subjected and quoted Jesus statement that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church (35). Aleksiis speech further enraged senior Soviet leaders and was followed by violent attacks on the patriarch from the floor. Pospielovsky records one of these verbal attacks from representatives of the Soviet public: You want to assure us that the whole Russian culture has been created by the Church... this is not true! Pospielovsky adds that this was probably the main reason why Metropolitan Nikolaiwho had stated that he had authored that speechwas enforced to retire from the chairmanship of the Churchs Department of External Ecclesiastical Relations. The other reason, Pospielovsky adds, was his sermons counterattacking the atheists. The consequent pogrom against the church and the retirement of Nicolai seemed to have caused Patriarch Aleksiis complete submission to the Soviet pressure and restructure the Church according to Soviet law. Pospielovsky asserts that the most tragic manifestation of this submission was the amending of the Church statute issue in July 18, 1961, which deprived the parish priests of all the powers, subordinating the parish to a parish community, in fact depending of the local city o county soviets (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 335-6). Pospielovsky also gives some details of the persecutions during Khrushchevs administration aimed at the restoration of Leninist socialist legality after Stalins abuses. Among other measures, he says, in the beginning years of the sixties, churches and monasteries were closed, parishes were banned to organize any form of charity,

351

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

religious instruction to minors was also banned, even keeping children and young people from frequenting churches, and monastic institutions were most cruelly hit when tax exemptions were lifted (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 343). At Khrushchevs fall in 1964, the wave of persecution came to an end. Once again, the Church had survived. The beginning of the religious revival can be traced back to 1964 at the failure of Khrushchev campaign. Khrushchev died in 1971, the same year a new council took place.

Activity With telegraphic sentences, summarize the fifth stage in the Russian Church struggle with the Soviet government.
Activity 96: Fifth stage in the struggle Church-State

Sixth Stage 1965-1991: The Church under the Decaying Socialism

Brezhnev
Khrushchev was replaced by the more conservative Leonid Brezhnev, who was effective ruler of the Soviet Union from 1964 to 1982, though at first in partnership with others. With Brezhnev, the Soviet Union became corrupted from within and without and the church stagnated. Pospielovsky says that Brezhnevs regime had no intention of discontinuing Khrushchevs harsh oppression of the Church; it only took more civilized forms (The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 397). Pospielovsky explains that: The status of the Church did not, however, advance in a straight line during the two post-Khrushchev decades. There were changes of direction even in the Brezhnev era: from an oblique critique of Khrushchevs persecutions in 1964-66 and an attempt to revive the god-building imitations of the Church, to the toughening of anti-religious policies in the early to mid-seventies, and the somewhat more relaxed, although unpredictable, situation of the last two to three Brezhnev years. (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 340)

352

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

For Davis, after Khrushchevs headlong assault on the Orthodox Church in the early 1960s, Brezhnevs period of stagnation, although less dramatic, slowly eroded Orthodox institutional strength bringing the possibility of the church facing its ultimate extinction. On August 14, 1967, The Central Committee of the Communist Party passed a resolution calling for intensified atheistic propaganda. Efforts to enhance the effectiveness of education in scientific materialism continued through the remaining years of the Brezhnev era and into the Andropov and Chernenko periods (A Long Walk to Church 43). However, the situation of the Russian Orthodox Church in the late 1960s was better than it had been under Khrushchev. Early in 1968, a Posev reporter noted that forcible church closings had stopped, that the authorities no longer persecuted priests indiscriminately, and had ceased canceling their registrations. If needed in a diocese and he wished to go, a priest could be registered yet this situation changed for the worst in the following years. Besides, the practice of keeping children from attending church had eased off, yet priests were still banned to baptize children outside church premises and still had to record both parents internal passport data, thus exposing them to harassment and reprisal. The commentator further says that, though afraid, priests kept going to peoples homes to perform baptisms. Between 1971 and 1975 churches continued to be closed and there were just a small number of newly opened churches (43-44). The Patriarch Aleksii died in 1970, at the age of 93, and in 1971, and an allRussian National Sobor chose Pimen (Isvekov, b. 1910) as his successor (Zernov 166). Although the Soviet authorities chose the candidate for political convenience, Pospielovsky asserts that It was the first time since the revolution that the deceased patriarch had not named a preferred heir in his will. In this sense, Pimens election was the first formally canonical one since the election of Tikhonin 1917 (The Russian

353

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Church under the Soviet Regime 387). In spite of having subsided direct persecutions after Khrushchev was ousted from power, there is no evidence, during the last years of Patriarch Alexii of having won back the positions, parishes, seminaries and monasteries lost in the preceding five years (387). Yet he did a last act of granting autocephaly to the Orthodox Church in America (OCA), formed in the last decades of the nineteenth century after the sale of Alaska to the United States. Tikhon, then Archbishop, had ruled the American diocese from 1898 to 1907 (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 331). Canonical links were reestablished with Orthodox Christians in America with the granting in 1970 of the Tome of Autocephaly to the former metropolia of the Russian Orthodox Church in America. In July of 1973 the USSR Supreme Soviet passed an educational law that placed an obligation on parents to bring up their children in a spirit of high Communist morality. In theory, this law would have forced believing parents to raise their children as atheists, although this interpretation seems never to have been enforced (44). In the five years between 1976 and 1981, the number of registered Orthodox societies stabilized. This did not mean that church closings in the western lands stopped, but closings there were partially counterbalanced by the registration of new communities in the rest of the country. Overall, about sixty church societies were deregistered in those years and thirty new societies were inscribed. The 1978-1980 period was the best time during the 1970s and early to mid 1980s for the authorization of new Orthodox communities. They were also more responsive to believers desires in remote areas of Asia, probably, Davis asserts, to accommodate Russian settlers and to promote Russification in politically and strategically sensitive non-Russian areas (A Long Walk to Church 46). In 1982, Brezhnev on his death bed authorized the Council for Religious Affairs (CRA)which has arbitrarily been ruling during the Communist

354

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

erato return Danilov Monastery in Moscow to the Church to mark the Millenium of Russias Christianity (1988), so that the historic monastery complex could be rehabilitated to become the central headquarters of the patriarchate during the celebration of the Millennium. This did not mean, however, that the repression of dissidents stopped. If anything it intensified in the early 1980s (A Long Walk to Church 47). In Soviet society as a whole, the Brezhnev period was characterized by corruption, cronyism, slowing economic growth, ideological rigidity, a creeping return to Stalinist attitudes, an atmosphere of cynicism, and recurring cycles of dissident activity and repression (43).

Illustration 65: Danilov Monastery110

Andropov
During the year and three months he was in power (November 1982-February 1883) Yuri Andropov, Brezhnevs successor, there were some stirring of changes. A former head of the KGB, Andropov was much better informed of the real situation in the country than his predecessor, and he knew the only way of solving the countrys problems namely repression. So he tried by force to put and end to corruption and loafing. However, as Pospielovsky asserts, he acknowledged that believers were more

110

See: <www.moscow.info>.

355

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

honest, responsible and conscientious, drank less and worked more than the atheists, had a more respectful attitude towards the established religion and their clergy, yet he fomented the use of terror against religious initiatives such as study circles, seminars, and religious activities. Furthermore, he imprisoned religious activists, both in concentration camps and in psycho-prisons in a number reaching its post-Khrushchev peak. Nevertheless, during Andropovs reign some churches were reopened (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 340).

Chernenko
Chernenkos government was characterized by a less tolerant religious. Chernenko, Andropovs successor, returned to most of the policies of Brezhnev, and stagnation again settled across the land, lasting until his death in March 1985. There was even an attempt to take St Daniels Monastery back from the Church. To reverse this decision, the church had to pay millions of rubles in bribes to high party officials and ha to decide to call it a religious administrative center with the Department of External Church Relations as its focal point instead of a monastery. Pospielovsky reminds that the ideological head of the Party under Chernenko was Gorbachev. Also, being Chernenko ill for almost a half of his short tenure in power, Gorbachev was the real leader and the maker of the aggressively anti-religious turn (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 340-1). Chernenko presided the Supreme Soviet from April 11, 1984 until his death in 1985. His successor, Gorbachev, was the leader of the Soviet Union from 1985 until 1991. His attempts at reform led to the end of the Cold War, but also caused the end of the political supremacy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
The period from the early 1960s to the beginning of Soviet reforms in the mid-1980s saw the Church enter the ecumenical movement and the World Council of Churches. Enormous restrictions were placed upon the functioning of the Church in Russia, reducing her to little more than a cultic institution. Religious education in Russia had been wiped out to be replaced

356

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

with compulsory study of scientific atheism. The Church found herself alienated from society with no voice in the communist-controlled media; priests were not even permitted to make pastoral visits to parishioners homes. Yet to characterize this particular period of the Churchs history as one of stagnation would be mistaken. The spiritual life did continue in hidden forms. There were pastors and preachers such as Fr. Vsevolod Schpiller and Fr. Alexander Men who disseminated the Word of God to the intelligentsia, often with the risk of imminent arrest by the KGB. The tradition of spiritual eldership was continued in the remarkable figure of Fr. Tavrion (Batozsky, d.1979), who had spent seventeen years of his life in the labour camps. In the 1980s there was a rediscovery of traditional iconography and a renewal of the theology of the icon through the labors of Archimandrite Zenon (Teodor), whose numerous iconostases and icons have now become known beyond the confines of Russia. Sermons preached by Metropolitan Antony (Bloom) of Sourozh, the head of the Russian Orthodox diocese in London, were read (in samizdat form) and listened to by crowds of believers on his occasional visits (A History of the Russian Church). Table 43: Period early 1960s to mid-1980s

Gorbachev
Being the deviser of Chernenkos anti-religious hard line, Gorbachevs ascent to power promised not relaxation in soviet religious policy, yet as Davis states, during the Gorbachev era a turnabout occurred in the fortunes of the Russian Orthodox Church: By the close of 1988, the millennial year, over 800 newly opened parishes had been registered; new monasteries and nunneries had been established; seminaries, theological training institutes, and schools for psalmists, choir directors, and church administrators had opened. After six decades of suppression, Sunday schools, church-run charitable activities, and overt Christian study groups had reappeared. Bishops, priests, and faithful could once again march down to the rivers on Epiphany Day to bless the waters and hail the baptism of Christ (A Long Walk to Church 52). Gorbachev himself was a pragmatist, never the ideological fighter Khrushchev had been. Personally, Gorbachev confirmed publicly in 1989 that both he and his wife had been baptized as infants. It was also public that his mother was a believer. For whatever reasons, Gorbachev was never confined to atheistic militancy and had a relatively benevolent attitude toward the church (53). Davis tells that early in his mandate, Gorbachev was already searching for allies to make perestroika work. He understood that his country needed a moral reawakening from the corruption and cronyism that had prevailed during the Brezhnev era. A population sodden with alcohol and devoid of a work ethic could not implement

357

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

perestroika (A Long Walk to Church 73). According to Riasanovsky, in A History of Russia (1999), he began a campaign against the consumption of alcohol. Alcoholism has always been widespread in Russian society, but the people resented the new changes. Restrictions could not stem the tide of the demanding market. As a result, illegal manufacture and trafficking of vodka and other spirits prospered, encouraging the development and rapid growth of the infamous Russian Mafia (701). For Gorbachev, glasnost in its original conception was less freedom of speech than it was the license to speak up and to denounce the wrongdoer and the evil done. For him, Davis adds, all these goals would require higher ethical standards, and the church could help (A Long Walk to Church 53). As Davis continues, yet, Gorbachev, who took office in March of 1985, did not implement changes in religious policy right away nor did he have a clear line of action. New Orthodox parish registrations that year totaled exactly three, as compared to two new registrations the previous year. Deregistration outnumbered new parishes in both years, and the total number of Orthodox communities in the country continued to sink. But in the late 1980s, the Millennium of the baptism of Rus in 988, glasnost and democratization, Gorbachevs felt need for new sources of support, his desire for international acceptance, and his pragmatism led to a new Soviet religious policy. In April of 1985, the party directed members not to permit the violation of believers feelings. But the government policy on religion did not begin to change significantly until the end of the year. In the 1985-1986 period some pro-Christian literary works were successfully published; in June 1986, several pro-church speeches were given at the Eighth Writers Union Congress. Also, the church was praised publicly for its generous response to the Chernobyl tragedy. In 1987 reformist publications began writing sympathetically about believers rights and publicizing their struggles to have

358

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

churches returned to them. Permission to publish scriptures and liturgical books in the USSR was becoming easier to obtain. Publicly expressed Soviet governmental attitudes were sounding more tolerant (54). Davis also says that on April 29, 1988, Gorbachev received Patriarch Pimen and five metropolitans who were members of the Holy Synod in the Kremlin. He thanked the church leaders for the Russian Orthodox Churchs patriotism and material contributions during World War II and for the leaders participation in the fight for peace and against nuclear destruction. He also acknowledged that both Stalin and Khrushchev had mistreated the church and believers, and that they, like other Soviet citizens, deserved the benefits of democratization and glasnost. He also took credit on behalf of the Soviet government for the return of the Danilov, Tolga, and Optina convents and for government assistance in planning the millennial celebration. In his reply, Pimen somewhat pointedly added to the list of benefits that he hoped might be extended by the Soviet government, mentioning, among others, restoration of the church societies closed in the 1960s, the registration of new church societies, the opening of church edifices closed down, and the building of new churches. Pimen blessed Gorbachev and his labors for the welfare of the motherland. Moreover, Gorbachev promised to refer the patriarchs specific requests and concerns to his colleagues for resolution. In truth, Gorbachevs government responded to the churchs appeals in all of these areas. After the Millennium celebrations, the pace of beneficent change quickened. The authorities relaxed their ban on ringing church bells, which had been in effect since 1961. Some years later, on Easter of 1994 even the bells of the Kremlins churches and towers pealed out over Moscow (56, 59). After the collapse of the communist institution, aggressive Marxist ideological materialism in Russia is a

359

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

whispered memory. Once again the church is rising like a phoenix from the ashes of misfortune (3). Riasanovsky states that on the foreign relations front, the situation was not good. Financial shortfalls resulted in the Soviet army being removed from eastern Europe and the Soviet Republics. Once the armies were gone, republics began falling away and demanding political autonomy. Gorbachev could only stand and watch, as there was no money to fight another war. Even Russia itself demanded freedom from the Soviet Union. By 1991 Gorbachev found himself president of a non-existent nation, and the Soviet Union collapsed (722), yet he had brought the Church back from its communist darkness. Peter Scorer, in The Russian Orthodox Church 1991-1994, asserts that the end of the Soviet Union took place on December 31, 1991, following shortly after the failed coup in August 1991. It closely coincided with the death of Patriarch Pimen, who survived just long enough to see the first fruits of Gorbachevs glasnost affect the Church by permitting the millennium celebrations to take place. This was a celebration, fruit of the fresh air brought by Gorbachev to the Soviet Union, who permitted a full local council of the Russian Church to be held for the first time since the October Revolution. The council took important decisions returning to the principles proclaimed at the famous council of the Russian Church in 1917-18. Scorer adds that it stipulated: the regular convening of both Bishops Councils and of Local Councils, as well as the establishment of local diocesan councils, to which members would be elected. In parishes, the priest was restored to his rightful position as head of the parish council, which would also be elected. The following year, 1989, was another jubilee year when the Church celebrated 400 years since the establishment of the Patriarchate in Russia (1589). A Bishops

360

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

council was held that year deciding on the canonization of two patriarchs, the first Patriarch of Russia, Job, and Patriarch Tikhon. These two canonizations were regarded as a real advance in the freedom and independence of the Church. On May 3, 1990, the old and sick Patriarch Pimen diedhe had been elected Patriarch at the Sobor of 1971. At the June 1990 Sobor, following the death of the Patriarch Pimen, Patriarch Aleksii II, a relatively young and energetic leader, was elected. Pospielovsky asserts that This was the first council since 1917 at which a genuine secret ballot, with multiple candidates, occurred (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 336). He also asserts that the new Patriarchs assignment from the Sobor was his complaint to Gorbachev of the Soviet bureaucrats revision of the first version of the draft on religion freedom, a revision in which the Church was not consulted. Consequently, Church representatives were invited to collaborate in the preparation of a final text and law Russian Republic law on religion was finally issued in October 1990. Fourteen months later, the URSS ceased to exist and, once Pospielovsky adds: The Russian Law abolished the CRA, recognized the Church as a social organization and as a person-in-law, with then right to own property, including churches and other buildings. La law recognized not only actual religious society, i.e., parishes, but also the whole hierarchical structure of the Church, by stating that it recognized such form of religious organization as required by that religions canons. The law confirmed that Russia was a secular state, in which neither atheistic nor religious organizations are subsided by the state; they must finance themselves through private donations or other private sources. The registration of religious community became an act of certification instead of authorization (The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia, 367-366). Scorer continues by saying that the last two years before the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, had already seen a quick increase in the number of parishes. If in 1986 there were 6794, a year later, by 1988, the figure had increase by only 100. Yet in the following two years there were nearly 10,000: some 29 new monasteries had been opened along with seven theological schools. Furthermore, the whole population was

361

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

extremely supportive of the church and the clergy had to baptize a great number of people.

Activity With telegraphic sentences, summarize the sixth stage in the Russian Church struggle with the Soviet government.
Activity 97: Sixth stage in the struggle Church-State

SOME NOTES ON THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 1991 TO MODERN DAYS After the Soviet Union collapsed, in 1991, Yeltsin came to power eager to speed up reforms. He opposed the policies of Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, yet was instrumental in defeating a coup against Gorbachev in 1991. Yeltsin remained in power, and despite political setbacks, rumors of heavy drinking, and at least two heart attacks, was reelected to office in 1996 and retired abruptly on 31 December 1999. Scorer asserts that the period 1991-1994 were years of changes which totally transformed Russian society; changes which neither the state, nor the people, and certainly not the Church, were ready to confront. In these years forces of inertia and of change become so polarized that the country was nearly thrown into civil war in October 1993. In addition, the tragic inheritance of the years of socialist totalitarian control has become apparent in the last four years: the absence of any real moral foundations, endemic corruption, a total lack of civic responsibility and bankruptcy in the economic sphere. The initial euphoria during the extraordinary summer of 1991 following the putsch, was soon to be followed by discontent, hunger, poverty, mass unemployment, an escalation of crime and corruption, coming to a climax in the confrontation between the president and his parliament in October 1993. Apathy has tended to dominate the mood of the people, together with a general feeling of resentment. Yet during Yeltsins years in

362

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

power there was a positive alliance with the church. His appearance at a Moscow Easter service in 1991 was considered a major factor in his success in the presidential election held two months later. Having supported Yeltsin during the presidential campaign, Patriarch Aleksiiy officiated at his inauguration that year (The Russian Orthodox Church) and he spoke out spoke out in a crucial moment during the August putsch. Scorer wonders how the Church was to behave in this new situation. In a sense, he says, the Holy Synod did little. He asserts: The ensuing process was taken out of its hands, by those who had already begun to open new parishes, those demanding the return of churches, and restoring buildings which for so many years had been used for other purposes. The Church began to blossom even more; the rush to be baptized gathered pace, while Bibles, books and religious pamphlets began to appear in every kiosk and book shop, together with icons, calendars. The church became involved in charitable works, Sunday schools began to flourish, more new theological schools were opened to cope with the sudden demand for new priests. By the beginning of 1993, the number of parishes in Russia had grown to 14,000. There were 213 monasteries and 35 theological schools of various sorts. There were 127 bishops (including suffragan bishops), and just over 12,000 priests. Furthermore, according to the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Aleksii II, between 1990 and 1995 more than 8,000 Russian Orthodox churches were opened, doubling the number of active parishes and adding thirty-two eparchies (dioceses). In the first half of the 1990s, the Russian government returned numerous religious facilities that had been confiscated by its communist predecessors, providing some assistance in the repair and reconstruction of damaged structures. The most visible such project was the building of the completely new Christ the Savior Cathedral, erected in Moscow at an expense of about US$ 300 million to replace the showplace cathedral demolished in 1931 as part of the Stalinist campaign against religion. Financed mainly by private donations, the new church is considered a visible acknowledgment of the mistakes of the Soviet past. (The Russian Orthodox Church) Yet, not everything went as smoothly as could be hoped. Some representatives of the church, including senior bishops, metropolitans and even Aleksii II were accused of having been collaborators of the KGB. Yet, polls said that in the first half of the 1990s the church inspired greater trust among the Russian population than most other

363

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

social and political institutions. Also, Aleksii II was found to elicit greater grassroots confidence than most other public figures in Russia. In Russian, as in most eastern countries, political leaders regularly seek the approval of the church as moral authority for virtually all types of government policy. During the last fifteen or more years, Russia has experienced nearly fifteen years of wild west capitalism. The arrival of President Vladimir Putin in 2000 and his economic and political reforms have brought some stability to the Russian society and economy. There remains, however, a great deal of adjustment and continued dedication to the building of a democratic system. Today, the Russian Orthodox Church is the largest of the eastern Orthodox churches in the world. There are over 90% of ethnic Russians who identify themselves as Russian Orthodox. Nowadays, the Church has over 23,000 parishes, 154 bishops, 635 monasteries, and 102 clerical schools in the territory of former Soviet Union. It also has a well-established presence in many other countries all over the World. Recently, some of the church buildings were officially returned to the Church, most of these being in a deteriorated condition (Russian Orthodox Church after the Revolution of 1917) Furthermore, since 2002, there has been a difficult relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church111 and the Vatican. Not a new situation if we review the History of Byzantium and that of the Russian Church itself. Patriarch Aleksii had condemned the Vaticans creation of a Catholic diocesan structure for Russian territory, and saw it as a throwback to prior attempts by the Vatican to proselytize the Russian Orthodox faithful to become Roman Catholic. This perspective is based upon the fact that for the Russian Orthodox Church (and the eastern Orthodox Church) the Church of

We should not confuse the Russian Orthodox Church with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia. The latter was formed by some Russian communities outside of Russia, which refused to recognize the authority of the Russian Orthodox Church in Communist Russia.

111

364

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

Rome is but one of many equal Christian organizations, and that as such it is straying into the territory, which was already christianized by the Christian Orthodox Church. A particularly sensitive issue for members of the Russian Orthodox Church is the encroachment by other Christian denominations into Russia. Having just come out of 70 years of Communist oppression, proselytizing by mostly foreign-based Catholics, Protestant denominations, and by many destructive sects can be seen as taking unfair advantage of the still-recovering condition of the Russian Church. Furthermore, smaller religious movements (particularly, Baptists and members of other Protestant denominations, brought into Russia by western missionaries in the past decade) claim that the state provides unfair support to one religion and suppresses others. They refer to the 1997 Russian law, under which, those religious organizations that could not provide official proof of their existence for the preceding 15 years were significantly restricted in their rights and abilities to proselytize. The law was formally intended to combat the destructive cults. Nevertheless, it was worded in such a manner that any organization, no matter how ancient, that could not document its presence in the Soviet Union before the fall of Communism was automatically affected by this law. Consequently, this law gave full rights only to a small number of first-rank religions, such as Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism. The situation is expected to normalize as the 15-year window starts to slide over the post-Communist period (Russian Orthodox Church). CONCLUSION TO THE CHAPTER Religion, an area of the individuals private life, was the target of communism. For seventy years communism pledged to structurally and systematically eliminate religion, not merely control and rechannel, but to eliminate it. The leaders of the godless movement did what was humanly possible to secure victory. But they were unable to

365

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

achieve their end. They could not foresee that they were challenging a Power superior to mans intelligence. Zernov112 states that Church could not be destroyed in Russia, for it is the Church of the Living God, of God who does exist, who acts, who loves and protects His people. For the Communists, however, truth was on Karl Marxs side, and Christ was a pitiful deceiver. For them, mankind was the master of its destiny, and science and human planning could solve all the problems of human life (93). Zernov is right when saying that: The Church in Russia was purged as by fire, and the sufferings of its members were great. Many of them perished, but the truth of the Christian Revelation triumphed, and those who assaulted it were unable to find a substitute for the unique power and beauty which belong to the Church of Christ (94). No one can deny that the history of the Russian Church has been a tragedy in itself and in its encounter within itself and with the West, but a tragedy that makes it creatively unique in its Christian experience, but not different from the roots from which its sprang, namely Orthodoxy. Undoubtedly, the inevitable, painful encounter with the West was essential for its full growth and its true calling. Geographically, the Church of Russia seemed to develop apart from the Christian world since the Middle Ages, but it did not lack unity with Christianity, whose spiritual history goes back to the miracle of Pentecost. It preserved a longing for the eternal truth that sprang from Byzantium and, through it, from the primitive Christians, with whom it shares an agonizing awareness of cruel persecution, and, at the same time, of spiritual revival. Separation from other Christians and internal problems of Orthodoxy in Russia and the world, and the sad differences and divisions between Christians, could be solved if we were able to contemplate with the aid and the sound vision of the Spirit, Russias primitive Christian Orthodox inspiration and grasp its untamable, unconquerable soul,

112

See excerpts edited by Bishop Alexander Mileant.

366

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

with its deep spiritual understanding and illumination, which also were the inspirational source of so many Russian writers, monks and saints. Russias primitive Christianity irradiates a spiritual light which incited its own spiritual resurgence because it addressed in its own consciousness the vital and eternal sources of Jesus faith and his message of the Fatherhood and the brotherhood of all believers.

Final Activity Having read this their chapter on the Russian Church, and done all its activities, write a five-page paper incorporating its main ideas. As with the Byzantine Church, follow the following diagram: a) introductory or topic paragraph, b) body or development, and c) concluding paragraph. Add your own reflection.
Activity 98: Final activity on Russian Church History

4. FINAL CONCLUSION ON CHURCH HISTORY With all what has been said, as we end these two millenniums of Church history, it is not easy to draw conclusions as the history of the true Church, the one inhabited, guided, developed and endlessly recreated by the Spirit, continues, in spite of many social, cultural and political obstacles and rejections or the ecstatic embracement of its truth. This Church history was presented as an intellectual, almost cerebral and pedagogical history which, at the same time, has a spiritual dimension. I tried to reveal this spiritual dimension through the socio-cultural situations and events, so that it can serve as an aid to better understand and grasp the spiritual dimension of Orthodoxy. A spiritual dimension of true belief, the truth way of believe, namely Orthodoxy, which is not alien to the understanding and experience of anyone who is aware of the inner Spirit, the indwelling Spirit, who indwells in everyones mind and heartthe truth of the genuine tradition of the Church.

367

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

SOME NOTES ON TODAYS SITUATION OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH As we have seen, in the first thousand years of its history the Church was essentially one. Five historic Patriarchal centersJerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria, and Constantinopleformed a cohesive whole and were in full communion with each other. There were occasional heretical or schismatic groups disturbing this communion; but the Church was unified until the 11th century. Then, in events culminating in A.D. 1054, the Roman Patriarch pulled away from the other four, pursuing its long-dormant wish and claim to be the universal ruler and major leader of the Church. Today, nearly a thousand years later, the other four Patriarchates remain intact, in full fellowship, maintaining that Orthodox apostolic faith of the inspired New Testament canon. The Orthodox Church believes that its has maintained a direct and unbroken continuity of love, faith, and order with the Church of Christ born in the Pentecost experience, yet, as noted, it was not until the seventh century, in the postJustinian period, that one of the main branches of Orthodox Christianity developed and was able to give its precious and unchanged Orthodox faith and timeless religion to the neighboring Slav people. Nowadays, the organization of the Orthodox Church consists of churches centered in Constantinople (with a great number of believers in Europe, North and South America headed by the patriarchal clergy in Istanbul, Turkey), Alexandria (Egypt), Antioch (with its capital in Damascus, Syria), Jerusalem, Russia, Georgia, Serbia, Rumania, Bulgaria, Greece, Albania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Latvia; and the Orthodox Church in America. The Finnish and Japanese Orthodox Churches are autonomous or autocephalous. After World War I, a great number of Orthodox Greek and Russian congregations (of the Russian Church Abroad) developed in many parts of

368

Chapter 3: Russian Church History

the world. The total number of eastern Orthodox Christians in the world is now estimated at about 225 million (http://www.adherents.com) and continues growing as converts increase in the western world.

Your Own Research 1. In <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/index_s.php> find excerpts of Wares The Orthodox Church. Read and summarize the section called The Twenty Century, Greeks and Arabs, which deals with the different situations of todays Orthodox Church outside the former communist spheres. Also check Kallinikoss The History of the Orthodox Church at holitrinitymission.org. 2. Use http://www.adherents.com and other sources to obtain information for the following activity: a) List the three major Christian denominations; and their total membership. b) List the different eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox jurisdictions. c) Where possible, list the official website for each Orthodox Jurisdiction, and d) Indicate the Country and city where each jurisdiction has its centre. [An example of c) http://www.kievpatr.org.ua and d) Kiev, Ukraine.] 3. The Relations of Orthodoxy with Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. You can also see Kallinikoss The History of the Orthodox Church at holitrinitymission.org too.
Activity 99: The major Christian denominations and Orthodox Jurisdictions

369

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

PART II

(A Study of the Fathers of the Church, the History and Development of Doctrine, and Dogmatics)

370

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

INTRODUCTION TO PART II
Part II, a composite of chapters 4, 5, and 6, deals with three main topics of Systematic theology, namely: Chapter 4. Patristics Chapter 5. History of Doctrine Chapter 6. Dogmatics In these three chapters I discuss crucial issues in Orthodoxy. In Chapter 4, the longest chapter for the relevance of the Fathers for the Orthodox Church, after an overview of the Church Fathers, I focus on the role of ascesis in the lives and teachings of the Fathers and on hesychasm. In this chapter, students will have to do their own research on two more issues, namely the Fathers as defenders of faith and the Fathers and Liturgical Practice. In Chapter 5, I study in detail the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. The students will do their own research in Christology and Ecclessiology. In Chapter 6, I deal with theosis and uncreated or divine energies as a part of the divine plan of salvation, according to the classification Aghiorgoussis makes in The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church. For its clarity, mainly based on this article, the student will do his or her own research on other dogmas of this plan of salvation including the Christological and the ecclesiological, and also on the dogmas regarding the Trinity, creation, and eschatology. But before starting the discussion of these complex topics it is necessary to deal with some preliminary concepts.

1. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES PLUS SOME BASIC BACKGROUND INFORMATION Church history is of vital importance for historical theology and even for systematic theology because it gives theology a context, explaining the milieu which produced and defined it. This is especially true in Orthodoxy, where historical and

371

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

timeless dimensions intersect in the Sacred Tradition. In Part I, we studied history of the Orthodox Church from the first Pentecost in first century Jerusalem and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Christs small number of disciples to the twenty-first century, and suggested areas in which theology and theologians went their separate ways. In Part II, roughly spanning the same time period as Part I, we will (1) study the Fathers of the Church both collectively as they established doctrines and decrees and dogmas, and individually, trying to grasp their experience as men of God; (2) examine the history and development of the principal Christian doctrines; and (3) analyze Orthodox dogmas. Thus, we will approach Patristics, Historical Theology, and Systematic Theology from an Orthodox perspective. We will also point out, when needed, the differences in theological temperament between East and West as a complement to the theological or historical discourse. The main divisions of this Part II are the following: Classical period (II-V centuries). Formative stage of theology. o Ante-Nicene: II-IV centuries: Apostolic, Apologists and Anti-heretical Fathers. o Post-Nicene: IV-V centuries: end of Churchs first doctrinally creative period, though discussionas with the Christological issuecontinued to be under controversy for generations. Golden age of the Fathers. Byzantine period: V-XV: No more fresh ideas. o Later Fathers (V-VIII) o Recent Fathers (VIII-XV) Modern period: not treated thoroughly here because the development of doctrine stopped with the last ecumenical council. Yet, the modern debate on theological issues shows that Byzantine theology is at the center of theological thinking today. Thus, with the discussion of the Ante-Nicean period, we will start with the literature outside the New Testament. The choice of this frontier is not arbitrary, since a distinct, highly specialized field of study started with the post-apostolic age, when the Sacred Tradition of the church, Post-apostolic writers went from kerygma to dogma. During the first hundred years of Church history, the literature consisted exclusively of

372

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

the Old Testament. For the church as a whole, it was a book which spoke of the Savior on every page. The books which would later comprise the New Testament already existed since practically all of them were written before the end of the first century; however, they had not yet been elevated to the category of canonized books. Christian writers of the second century were familiar with them and often used them. The reverence for the Old Testament did not diminish when most of the New Testament writings were recognized as inspired Scripture in the final decades of the second centuries. In Part I, we saw how paradoxically, a heretic such as Marcion contributed to this canonization. Throughout the whole patristic as well as in all subsequent Christian centuries, the Old Testament was accepted as the word of God, the unimpeachable source book of saving doctrine (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 52-53). As Kelly points out in Early Christian doctrines, being still at the formative stage, the theology of the early centuries exhibits the extreme of immaturity and sophistication (3). He gives the example of the extraordinary contrast between the versions of the Churchs teaching given by the second-century Apostolic Fathers and by an accomplished fifth-century theologian such as Cyril of Alexandria. He explains that this does not mean that the Early Church was indifferent to a distinction between orthodoxy and heresy, but rather it is that, while from the beginning the broad outline of the revealed truth was respected as a sacrosanct inheritance from the apostles, its theological explication was to a large extent left unfettered. Only gradually, and even then in regard to comparative few doctrines which became subjects of debate, did the tendency to insist upon precise definition and rigid uniformity assert itself (4). During this period the Church had to struggle with persecutions and heresies such as Gnosticism. The post-Nicene period, starting in 325 after the reconciliation between the Church and the Empire achieved by Constantine, was an era of acute ecclesiastical

373

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

controversy with councils of bishops becoming the accepted instrument for defining the dogmatic or doctrinal tradition of the Church. Normally the period of the Fathers of the Church coincides with the above division, because the writings of the Fathers of the Church start with the first post-apostolic writing, not included in the biblical canon, until generally the IV Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (451). By the sixth century, both in East and West, the reign of formalism and scholasticism was well under way. However, as we will see in the next chapter, following the Orthodox Church, the patristic period lasts not just until the eighth century (the Later Fathers), but also included the Recent Fathers of the fifteenth century. But before we start this Part IV, we need to define several key terms and make important distinctions among these terms. Thus I will provide the following: Definition of Systematic Theology and Historical Theology and other relevant concepts: distinction between dogma and doctrine, ethics, definition of Orthodox theology, and the Old Testament and the Orthodox Church. Forms of the Holy or Sacred Tradition The Orthodox Church and the books of the Old Testament

2. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AND HISTORICAL THEOLOGY: DOGMA AND DOCTRINE, TRADITION, CHRISTIAN ETHICS, ORTHODOX THEOLOGY In this Part II, we will deal with the Church Fathers, the development of doctrine, and Dogmatics113the study of religious dogmas, which correspond with three common academic divisions of Patristics or Patrology, Historical Theology, and Systematic Theology. Systematic Theology and Dogmatics will be used

interchangeably. Dogmatic Theology normally discusses the same doctrines and often uses the same outline and structure as systematic theology, but does so from a particular

113

This term is thought to have first appeared in 1659 in the title of a book by L. Reihhardt (Dogmatic Theology)

374

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

theological stance, affiliated with a specific denomination or church, in this case, the Orthodox Church. As a matter of fact, dogmatic theology is really doctrinal in itself, since analyses of dogmas are doctrinal. Also, in the next section, as we deal with Historical Theology and study the development of specific doctrines, we approach Dogmatics since our goal is to define certain Orthodox dogmas. For clarity, we are also equating Historical Theology with the history of doctrine, but making some conceptual delimitation as Pelikan, in The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, asserts: The private beliefs of theologians do belong to the history of doctrine, but not simply in their own terms.... His personal opinions must be set into the context of what the church has believed, taught, and confessed on the basis of the word of God (3). Clearly, the doctrines of the Orthodox Church today are not founded on the rational conceptions of certain individuals, even though these might be the Fathers and Teachers of the Church. Rather, church doctrine derives from the teaching of the Sacred Scripture and on Sacred Tradition, which Orthodoxy considers as one entity. The Bible is born within the Tradition and at the same time bears witness to it. Before we continue with our discussion, let us view some academic subdisciplines within the field of Theology:
Systematic Theology (or doctrinal theology, or dogmatic theology) is an attempt to arrange and interpret ideas current in the religion. Dogmatic Theologyoften used interchangeably with Systematic Theologyis a study of the doctrines of certain Christian groups that have systematized doctrine, for example the Orthodox dogma of the Trinity. Historical Theology is the study of doctrines and how they have developed over the centuries within the Christian church Patrology or Patristics studies the teaching of Church Fathers. Biblical Theology focuses on the investigation and interpretation of the Scriptures. It is studying a certain book (or books) of the Bible and emphasizing the different aspects of theology on which it focuses. For example, the Gospel of John is very Christological since it focuses heavily on the deity of Christ (John 1:1, 14; 8:58; 10:30;

375

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

20:28). Comparative religion focuses on the comparison of common themes among different religious traditions Moral Theology explores the moral dimensions of the religious life Practical Theology is dedicated to the practical application of theological insights. Generally includes the sub disciplines of pastoral theology, homiletics, and Christian education, among others. Contemporary theology is the study of doctrines that have developed or come into focus in recent times (Adapted from What is systematic theology?) Table 44: Common divisions of Theology

Theologians also make divisions within the field of Systematic Theology:

Theology Proper or Paterology is the study of God the Father. Christology is the study of God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Pneumatology is the study of God the Holy Spirit. Bibliology is the study of the Bible. Soteriology is the study of salvation. Ecclesiology is the study of the church. Eschatology is the study of the end times. Angelology is the study of angels. Christian Demonology is the study of demons from a Christian perspective. Christian Anthropology is the study of humanity. Hamartiology is the study of sin. Table 45: Division within Systematic Theology

SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, HISTORICAL THEOLOGY, ETHICAL CONCERNS As seen above, a major characteristic of Dogmatics is its systematic character. Dogmatics approaches the beliefs of the Church thematically, systematically expounding it. In fact, all theologyliterary defined as discourse concerning God, the study of God, or the science which treats of Godis systematic. Systematic refers to something being put into a system.114 Systematic Theology is, therefore the division of theology into systems that explain its various areas. For example, many
114

A system shows the relations of its details to one another; it is an organization that is directly opposed to a list. The most common way of organizing the details is in terms of nodes on a treelike a family tree with no divorces, intermarriages, step-children, etc. It is even more explanatory if things are derived from basic axioms/premises. A true system has no inconsistencies. It may have mysteries, as theology does, but not contradictions.

376

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

books of the Bible give information about the angels. No single book gives all the information about the angels. Systematic theology takes all the information about angels from all the books of the Bible, and organizes it into a systemangelology (What is systematic theology?). In short, Systematic Theology is generally defined as the study of Christian theology organized thematically as opposed to historically as in Historical Theology. It represents an attempt to expound the various ideas of the Christian religionas seen in the Scriptures and the Holy Traditioninto a single, coherent, and well-ordered presentation. Systematic Theology is any study that answers the question, What does the Holy Tradition as portrayed by the Fathers of the Church, who continued the apostolic teaching, and as seen in the seven ecumenical councils, teach us about a given topic? But while Systematic Theology attempts to create a statement of faith with the leading doctrines of the Holy Tradition, Historical Theology embodies both of these concepts as a way of informing theologians about what beliefs the church has held, and what corrections, improvements or adherence need to be made in the present, based on that information. The systematic theologian knows that, critically, it is nearly impossible to do theology as if it has never been done before. Historical Theology then, serves as both as pedagogic tool (for systematic theology) and as a critical tool (highlighting various important topics as key elements of the Christian faith) (Historical Theology). This definition suggests that Systematic Theology, in contrast with Historical Theology is synchronic. A diachronic reading of the Bible would treat it as a book with a history, as revealed and written over time rather than all at once. The historical context is of supreme importance in the interpretation of a text. A synchronic reading however, treats the Holy Tradition as a finished product, as a coherent, logical, unified whole. In a

377

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

sense, it becomes the irradiation core of timeless truths. Moreover, whereas a diachronic reading is concerned with what a text meant in its original historical context (human author and audience), synchronic reading is concerned with what a text means in the light of the Biblical canon as a whole. This definition indicates that systematic theology involves collecting and understanding all the relevant passages by biblical authors and the Fathers on various topics and then summarizing and systematically categorizing their teachings clearly so that we know what the Orthodox church believes about each topic. During the first two hundred years of Christianity there was little attempt to expound the doctrinal truth coming from the Word of God, but it was not long until the human mind, seeking to understand its isolated truths, began to systematize them, to classify them, by grasping their interrelatedness or internal relationships. This effort of the early Christian increased from the beginning of the third century onward. Origen (c. 185-253), was the first to attempt this heightened systematization. We have the results in his work De Principiis (or Peri Archon), which is a dogmatic treatise on God and the world. In Orthodoxy, an early illustration is offered by John of Damascus 8th century Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, in which he attempts to order and demonstrate the coherence of the theology of the classic texts of the eastern theological tradition. In this standard manual of doctrine in Greek Christianity, he not only discusses doctrinal themes regarding Christology and the Trinity, but also ethical concerns such as matters of fear, anger, and imagination. In the West a Latin counterpart Peter Lombard, in his 12th century Sentences, organized thematically a large collection of quotations from the Church Fathers, which became the basis of a medieval scholastic tradition of thematic commentary and explanationbest exemplified in Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologiae. Peter Lombard also includes ethical concerns in his writings on the virtues

378

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

created by grace. A Protestant tradition of the thematic, ordered exposition of the whole of Christian theology (Protestant Orthodoxy) emerged in the 16th century, with Philip Melanchthons Loci Communes and John Calvins Institutes of the Christian Religion. The work of the seventeenth century protestant theologian, George Callixtus, effected a division between doctrine and life. Both historical and systematic methods can shed light on important aspects of the revelation; yet, neither of these approaches is fully satisfactory from an Orthodox perspective. The historical approach limits itself to establishing the facts of the past, leaving open the issue for objective criticism, while the systematic approach neglects the rigorous demands of historical criticism and uses the past merely as a source of proof-text, often chosen to support an arbitrary interpretation of the truth. Meyendorff, in his Foreword to Zizioulas Being as Communion, says that This dichotomy is particularly dangerous for Orthodox theology, which simply ceases to be Orthodox if it neglects Tradition uncovered in history, or forgets the truth, which is its raison detre (11). The permanent goal for a theologian trying to express the Christian faith, as held by the Orthodox Catholic Tradition, is to be able to do justice to history as well as to systematic thought addressed to contemporaries. In his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes, and in reference to the Byzantium period, Meyendorff justifies the combination of historical and systematic methods: Theological orthodoxy itself cannot be fully defined and conceptually expressed without careful and critical historical research, which serves to overthrow idols and to avoid misconceptions. On the other hand, this same research, if it is really objective, shows the existence of a remarkable and theological consistent tradition, which includes the Greek Fathers of the fourth century, the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria, and the synthesis of Maximus the confessor and Gregory of Palamas... this consistent tradition represents the mainstream of theological thought in Byzantium and coincides with the content of Orthodox religious experience. (viii)

379

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

In this text we can also see an important feature of Orthodoxy, namely the coincidence of both theological thought and religious experience. Pelikan further remarks that the development of doctrine must be studied by the criteria of both Christian theology and history. He adds: If it is read only as a branch of theology, as it usually has been, both as a continuation of pre-Christian lines of development and as a persistent object of intellectual curiosity, may well be subordinated to the interests of a confessional, dogmatic authority or of a speculative, individual system of Christian divinity. If it is read only in the context of the history of ideas, its indispensable setting within the worship, devotion, and exegesis of the Christian community will be sacrificed to a historical treatment analogous to than employed by the history of philosophical systems. (9) Consequently, in my exposition, I will try to give a combined emphasis on both the systematicalso experientialand historical levels of theology. I will approach history to see how prominent Christians in different periods have understood various theological topics and apologetics in ways that provided a defense of the truthfulness of the Christian faith both for the purpose of convincing unbelievers and for developing doctrine. Paradoxically, from history, emerges the timeless Tradition that produces the fruits of Orthodox faith, namely Dogmatics. These fruits seen on the two levels of theology described in the next sections will also be depicted as they are understood by present-day Orthodox Christians. This will involve the use of terms and concepts that were not used by any individual biblical author, but instead is the result of combining the teachings of two or more biblical authors on a particular subject. For example the terms Incarnationthe point of departure for theologyand Trinity, are not specifically mentioned in the Bible, but they usefully summarize biblical concepts. Both terms are also inseparable in Orthodox theology. As Lossky tells us in Orthodox Theology the chief source of our knowledge of the Trinity is the Prologue of St. Johnthe Theologian as he is called in the Orthodox traditionand the first epistle of the same author. From the first verse of

380

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

the Prologue, the Father is called God; Christ is called the Wordwho is at once God and other than the Father: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God (John 1:1-2). But defining systematic theology as what the Church teaches us implies that application to life is a necessary part of the proper pursuit of systematic theology. Thus any doctrine being considered is seen in terms of its practical value for living the Christian life. Nowhere in Scripture do we find doctrine studied for its own sake or in isolation from life. Both biblical and patristic writers consistently apply their teaching to life. Therefore, any Christian reading this text should find his or her life enriched and deepened during this study. Furthermore, seen from the perspective of what the church teaches us today, many Christians actually do systematic theology (or at least make systematictheological statements) many times a week. For example: The Fathers teach us that Christ has two natures or the Creed speaks of God the Father All-Governing. These are all summaries of what patristic texts say, and as such, they are systematictheological statements. In fact, every time a Christian says something about what the Church teaches, he or she is, in a sense, doing systematic theology. He or she is thinking about various topics and answering the question, What do the sacred texts teach us today? In short, the adjective systematic in systematic theology should be understood, as mentioned above, to mean something like carefully organized by topics, with the understanding that the topics studied will be seen to fit together in a consistent way, and will include all the major Orthodox doctrinal topics. Thus systematic should be thought of as the opposite of randomly arranged or disorganized. In systematic theology topics are treated in an orderly or systematic way, while simultaneously guarding against misunderstandings and false teachings.

381

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS As noted, in this Part II we deal with Dogmatics and as well as with the history and development of doctrine. Let us analyze both the concepts of dogma (Greek do/gma meaning decree) and doctrine (Latin doctrina meaning a body of teachings or instructions) from different perspectives in order to grasp the meaning of these two terms. In the Scriptures doctrine means a teaching as well as that which is taught. Most often in the Church, it refers to the teachings or doctrine of Jesus Christ, understood in a rather specific sense. Scripturally, then, the term doctrine means the core message of Jesus Christ. Didaskalia, didachein the Vulgate, doctrinaare often used in the New Testament, especially in the Pastoral Epistles. The apostles, following the death and resurrection of the Savior, continued to teach this essential message: Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord. (Acts 13:12) Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. (1 Tim. 6:1) They used the word doctrine most often in reference to what a person must believe and do in order to be saved, thus adding an ethical component: 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart. 47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:41-47) 16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. (1Tim. 4:16)

382

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this will we do, if God permit. (Heb. 6:1-3) Paul also insists upon teaching or explaining doctrine as one of the most important duties of a bishop: Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine... Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. (1 Tim 13, 16) Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. (1 Tim 5:17) Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. (2 Tim 4:2) Dictionaries define doctrine as a set of principles or beliefs, especially religious, or political, ones, and dogma as a belief or set of beliefs that people are expected to accept without asking questions (political/religious dogma). Often doctrine specifically connotes a corpus of religious dogma as it is promulgated by a church. Along with this definition goes the fundamental Catholic view of dogmatic faith. The expression is as old as Cyril of Jerusalem (died 386), if not older, who taught that dogmatic faith consists of obedient assent to the voice of authority. A dogma can thus be seen as a doctrine of a practice or a body of doctrines formally and authoritatively affirmed. As a Christian, one is expected to accept certain things (beliefs, a set of beliefs) as dogma and a set of doctrines, as essential for salvation. Furthermore, while dogmas are essential in a way that doctrines are not, it is not surprisingly, a (true or false) doctrine makes clear what a dogma means in a given framework and therefore gives life (or death, in the case of a faulty doctrine) as well as meaning to the dogma in question. A doctrine can be necessary to maintain the integrity of the dogma it interprets. Thus, a dogma can be seen as a field of discourse or even a

383

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

dynamis, using Aristotelian terminology.115 It is a potential that gets energized (actualized, realized) with the doctrines that tell us what the given dogma means (How Are Certain Terms to Be Used?). In a sense, what dogmas do is deconstruct doctrinal meanings and reconstruct new ones, giving them an authoritative shape. Yet, dogmas, in this process of actualization, are not static, but dynamic entities. This process is not wholly finished because context and exegesis ceaselessly transform dogma or rather give them a new understanding. Moreover, according to Litsas A Dictionary of Orthodox Terminology, dogma is the basic beliefs and truths contained in the Bible and the Holy Tradition of the Church as defined by the Ecumenical Councils and the Fathers of the Church. A dogma116 is in some ways more like an essential question, while doctrines are ways of answering the question posed. By essential question, one means a matter that must be examined or resolved in order to be Orthodox; failure to be involved in it is heterodox, or, more usually, heretical. That God is both three (in one sense) and one (in another sense) is a dogma, as is the teaching that Jesus Christ is both completely God and completely human. Obviously, different groups can accept the same dogma while differing on doctrines intended to explain what the dogma means. In addition, Kelly specifies that what it means by Christian doctrine is the teaching of the Catholic Church from the end of the first century onwards (Early Christian Doctrines 29). Pelikan adds belief and confession to his definition, thus giving the term doctrine a broader, more complete definition: What the church of

115

According to Aristotle, every sensible and intelligible thing in the universe is constituted by this triple principle which manifests on distinct levels as ousia (existence, being), dynamis (power, potentiality) and energeia (action, actuality). Thus for Aristotle the term for actuality is energeia, meaning vividness, a way of representing things inanimate as animate, a process of actualization. The concept of dynamis, as opposed to that of energeia, means potentiality, faculty, natural capacity and virtual existence of action. 116 Greek dgma has often been used for a doctrine as well as a dogma; paidevma is a more accurate word for doctrine.

384

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Jesus Christ believes, teaches, and confesses on the basis of the word of God is doctrine. For him, What is believed is: the form of Christian doctrine present in the modalities of devotion, spirituality, and worship What is taught is: the content of the word of God extracted by exegesis from the witness of the Bible and communicated to the people of the church trough proclamation, instruction and church theology. What is confessed is: the testimony of the church, both against false teaching from within and against attacks from without, articulated in polemics and in apologetics, in creed and dogmacreeds and decrees are important in the histories of dogmas. He adds that Doctrine is not only, not even the primary, activity of the Church. The Church worships God and serves mankind; it works for the transformations of this world and awaits the consummation of its hope in the next (1). For Pelikan the church is always more than a school, but cannot be less than a school. It expresses its faith, hope, and love in teaching and confession. He thinks that the church would not be the church as we know it without Christian doctrine (1). The term doctrine as Pelikan says, did not always have the same meaning, not even in the technical sense. As noted above, when the New Testament talked about doctrinesand the Old Testament talked about instructions, they included teaching about confession and conduct, both theology and ethics. These terms, then distinguishes between the knowledge of God and the service of God. Christian writers began to distinguish between teachings concerning Christ and those intended to the correct behavior, between pious doctrines and virtuous practices. Thus, as Pelikan notes, doctrine may be defined as the content of that saving knowledge, derived from the word of God (2). I have already mentioned that John of Damascus discusses not only doctrines such as those regarding Trinity and Christology but also matters of fear or anger (Pelikan 2-3).

385

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Since its emergence as a distinct field of investigation in the eighteen century, the history of doctrine, notes Pelikan, has concentrated on what is confessed, on dogmas, which he defines as as the normative statements of Christian beliefs adopted by various ecclesiastical authorities and enforced as the official teaching of the Church. Yet, the history of dogma, he comments further, has paid attention supposedly to doctrinal development, both before or after the formulation of such normative statements, only for the sake of its relationship to the development of dogma (3-4). Pelikan also reasons that what the church confesses is what the church has believed and taught or at least part of what the church has believed and taught. To some extent then, as he explains, in Chapter 6, when centered on the history and development of doctrines, we will have to look backwards, moving from what the church confessed to what it taught to what it believed. This also means that both the subject matter and the source material for the history of the development of doctrine will have to shift, gradually but steadily as we trace it back through the history of the church. Before we examine the dogma of the Trinity, for example, we will have to analyze the divine triad as seen by the Apostolic Fathers and the Apologists and also the conflicting tendencies in Trinitarian thought in the third century. The study of a doctrine does not mean, as Pelikan points out, as already suggested, that when a doctrine is formulated it stops developing and becomes fixed; not even the dogma of the Trinity has remained unchanged still since its adoption and clarification. He adds that It does mean that having developed from what is taught, and perhaps even to what was confessed, a doctrine gradually became part of the authorized deposit of faith. To trace its further development we shall have to look, increasingly though by no means exclusively, to its professional expositors, the theologians, as they speculated on it both in their philosophy and mystagogy, as they studied it and criticizes, as they used it to interpret the very Scriptures on which it was supposed to be based, and as they expanded and revised it. (5)

386

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Thus, the history of doctrine becomes the history of philosophy. He illustrates his point by saying that from 100 to 600 A.D. most theologians were bishops; from 600 to 1500, in the West, they were monks; and since 1500, they have been university professors. Gregory I, he says, who died in 604 was a bishop who had become a monk; Martin Luther, who died in 1546, was a monk who had become a university professor. Each of these life styles has left its marks not only on the job description of the theologian, but also on the way doctrine has continued to developed, moving back and fourth among believing, teaching and confessing (5). Furthermore, since Christian doctrines are based on the Word of God, we will see the work of theologians not only as refuters or formulators of dogmas or defenders of faith, but as Bible exegetes trying to draw certain doctrinal implications from their proof texts. But, as already said, we will not deal with the doctrinal content of Old Testament and the New Testament, because for our purpose is not what the apostles might have taught, but what the church has understood them to have taught. This is an ongoing process rather than a static product (6). Logically, every dogma is a doctrine but not every doctrine is a dogma. A doctrine may apply to a specific community within the Church. Besides, Pelikan very clearly relates doctrine with tradition, which, as we know, is not incompatible with history: The form which Christian doctrine, so defined, has taken in history is tradition. Like the term doctrine, the word tradition refers simultaneously to the process of communication and to its content. Thus tradition means the handing down of Christian teaching during the course of the history of the church, but it also means that which was handed down. (7) He believes that, tradition without history has homogenized all the stages of development into one statistical truth; history without tradition has produced had relativized the development of Christian doctrine in such a way as to make the distinction

387

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

between authentic growth and cancerous aberration seemed completely arbitrary (9). Pelikan concludes that the history of Christian doctrine is The most effective means to expose the artificial theories of continuity that have assumed normative status in the churches, and at the same time it is an avenue into the authentic continuity of Christian believing, teaching, and confessing. Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living (9) Thus, both the variety of Christian teachings through history and their possible unity within tradition are integral to this Part II, as well as to our theological position: from an Orthodox perspective. This fact is seen in the acceptance of sincere novelty and change through Christian history, as both early and later theologians sought to follow the way of Tradition in a true development and growth from kerigma to dogma. Thus, following Pelikans discussion, an understanding of history and tradition will help us trace the historical development of a doctrine and the way in which ones place at some point in that historical development affects ones understanding and application of that particular doctrine. Prof. Pekka Metso, from the Orthodox University of Joensuu in Finland, in an e-mail to the author dated 13/1/2006, makes the following key observation: Evolving of the Doctrine bears a tremendous importance in Orthodoxy. Theology has always been reactive, and it cannot be fully understood without a diachronic approach. Theology has not been expressed and come to existence ex-nihilo. Saying all this one should also notice that the content of Theology is timeless truth - or at least theology claims to express eternal revelation. This puts the historical factors in line with the synchronic element - hopefully giving birth to a fruitful dialogue between the time-bound and timeless elements of the one and same theology. Christian Ethics Firth of all, we need to make a distinction between systematic theology and Christian ethics. Theology focuses on what God wants His children to know and believe about Him and His nature; ethics takes these beliefs and applies them to everyday life.

388

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Although certainly theology and ethics overlaps some, the fundamental difference is that theology focuses on ideas, whereas ethics focuses on the application of these ideas. Theology gives us the theoretical basis of our Christian faith. Ethics guides us in the application of these theories to the situations we face daily. Theology can explain the nature of God and how He works in our world. Thus, we recognize that God is truth and love; however, ethics helps us to apply these concepts to the problematic situations in which we find ourselves. Ethics, therefore, will help guide us as Christians in areas of our lives such as friendships, marriage, child rearing, possession of property, abortion, our relationship to our government and our responsibilities to the poor and the dispossessed. Obviously theology and ethics overlaps at certain points. If we have only knowledge about God but do not understand how to live out His commandments in our lives and actions, then our knowledge remains theoretical and incomplete. As James says in his letter, Faith without works is dead. Thus, in this section we will offer a discussion both of systematic theology and its application in the realm of Christian ethics. Activity 1. What is Systematic Theology? 2. Explain the difference between a diachronic and a synchronic approach to theology. How does it apply to the history of doctrine and to Dogmatics? 3. Were the Fathers of the Church developers of doctrine individually or collectively? 4. What is Christian Ethics? What is the difference between it and Systematic Theology? Why do they frequently overlap?
Activity 100: Systematic Theology, history, dogma, doctrine, and Fathers of the Church

TWO TYPES OF THEOLOGIES IN ORTHODOXY Evagrius (34599), a monk and influential theologian, said The one who has purity in prayer is a true theologian, and the one who is a true theologian has purity in

389

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

prayer. Already in the fourth century, believers saw theology as intertwined with prayer, suggesting two levels of theology. For Evagrius prayer was an assent of the mind to God (On Prayer 35), a simple statement which is at the very core of Evagrius thoughts. As a strict ascetic, he stressed a solitary, monastic life, control of passionate thoughts, and the development of virtues. These techniques were intended to separate men from the material world, to allow the mind to perform its proper activity: the contemplation of God (Prayer in Evagrius Ponticus and St. Nil Sorski). Purity of prayer, Lossky says, in Orthodox Theology: An Introduction, implies a state of silence (the hesychasts are the silents) and demands the surmounting and arrest the thought. In this sense, purity of prayer implies gnosis. Thus, gnosis is an illumination by grace which transforms our intelligence and connotes contemplation, encounter, reciprocity, faith and a personal adherence to the personal presence of God who reveals Himself (13). But Lossky, trying to relate gnosis to theological teaching continues by saying that the notion of silent gnosis117 as true theology differs from theological teaching, from a theology that can be expressed through language. He reasons that the theological foundation of any theological teaching is the Incarnation of the Word and the Word can be thought and taught. However, he says, the incarnation of the Word has no other aim than leading us to the Father. For Orthodoxy, faith in Christ, as the Son of God, is not a mere doctrine, but life itself. This means, as Lossky adds that Theology as a word and thought must necessarily conceal a Gnostic dimension, in the sense of the theology of contemplation and silence. It is a matter of opening our thought to a reality which goes beyond it. It is matter of a new mode of thought where thought does not include, does not seize, but finds itself included and seized, mortified and vivified by contemplative faith. So
In Christianity, it is the acquisition of knowledge in a mystic condition, statically, without the mediation of intelligence or teaching system. It implies faith in the personal presence of God. It is different from gnosis as seen by Gnostics. They believed in salvation through gnosis, or knowledge, not through faith.
117

390

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

theological teaching locates itself with difficulty between gnosischarisma and silence, contemplative and existential knowledgeand epistemescience and knowledge. (3) While episteme implies space and time, gnosis implies eschatology. Therefore, from this Orthodox position, a theologian cannot reduce himself to a mere epistemological process, but must set the spirit on the path to contemplation, to pure prayer where thought stops, to the ineffable. Consequently Lossky sees two conjoined levels of theology, which he calls sophia: Theology as sophia would therefore be the capacity, the skill to adapt ones thought to revelation, to find the skillful and inspired words which would bear witness in the languagebut nor in the limitsof human thought, in replying to the needs of the moment. It is a matter of the internal reconstruction of our faculties of knowing, conditioned by the presence of in us of the Holy Spirit. (17) A contemporary to Evagrius, St Gregory of Nazianzus, in Oratio XL, in sanctum baptisma 41, said regarding the Tri-Unity: As soon as I begin to contemplate the Unity, the Trinity bathes me in its splendor. As soon as I begin to think of the Trinity, I am seized by the Unity. When one of the Three appears to me, I think that it is the whole, so fully my eye is filled, so fully the abundance escapes me. For in my mind, which is so limited to comprehend a single One, there is no room for any more. When I join the Three in a single thought, I behold the frame, and I am able neither to divide nor to analyze the unified Light. In his theological perspective, St. Gregory places himself between gnosis and episteme, between contemplation and speculative reflection, to embrace theology as sophia, in terms used by Lossky. Regarding prayer and doctrine, Bobrinskoy asserts that the doctrine of the Church is a synthesis made by the Fathers and the councils over centuries, when the ecclesial awareness of God in human history was being formulated. The primacy of prayer therefore protects theology from the ever present danger of closing in upon itself, of viewing itself as a science sufficient unto itself, thereby losing any link to living ecclesial reality (2). Additionally, he relates theology and liturgy, stating that their common link prevents the liturgy from closing in upon itself, also, in

391

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

a rootless subjectivism, only translating, then, the particular preoccupation of the moment, and cut off from the great catholic, universal vision of the Church of all ages (2). Similarly, Archbishop Chrysostom and Bishop Auxentios, in Introduction to Scripture and Tradition, delineate two levels of theology in the Orthodox Church, two ways from which the divine truth can be approached. The first one or essential theology springs from the spirit of the Church, from the spiritual vision of the Godbearing Fathers. This type of experience is not the domain or concern of the scholar. It cannot be separated from the spiritual life itself. Chrysostom and Ausentios give the example of the great luminary of Orthodoxy, St. Gregory Palamas, whom the Church characterized as the perfection of monks, the wonder working Gregory, a preacher of Grace, and, as a consequence of this, a theologian invincible among theologians. They add that: In bestowing the title theologian on so few of the Fathers (and only on several, formally), the Orthodox Church pays great homage to the truth which She embodies, which is inextricably bound to the spiritual life which She directs, guides, and imparts to the humble and Faithful: a truth which is the highest form of theology, a spiritual knowledge of God. This is a changeless, revealed theology. The second form of theology, which the Orthodox Church allows, they assert, is secondary theology. It primarily concerns the explanation of the spiritual life, according to, and consistent with, the divine revelation, the revealed truth of essential theology. In secondary theology, we focus our efforts on approaching God in a form of a mental discipline as we recognize the crucial importance of essential theology and, consequently, of remaining true to Patristic tradition. Secondary theology can help us in our endeavors to understand what is fundamentally incomprehensible.

392

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Thus, Orthodox theologians need to be aware that the relationship between Scripture and Tradition is of great relevance in the history of Orthodox theological thought. From the time of the Apostles, understanding this relationship was crucial to the Christian Church. Heretics such as Arius misused the Scripture and broke with Tradition, with the truth of the Fathers. Chrysostom and Ausentios state that: It is imperative that we understand, then, the singular attitude of the Orthodox Church toward Scripture and Tradition. To do so is to understand the correct, true attitude of the Church. After all, it was out of the Orthodox Church Herself that Scripture arose. It was in the bosom of the Church that Scripture and Tradition matured. They are her domain and She alone fully and correctly understands them. If the Orthodox Church is the historical Church, then She embodies the historical Truth of Christianity. Understanding this, we can dispense with the dangerous trend, among some Orthodox, to understand Scripture and Tradition in non-Orthodox ways, to distort the image and icon of Truth contained in Holy Scripture and expressed in all Tradition. Those who advocate current western-style Bible studies, concentrating on a spiritually dangerous dissection of Scripture (as though it were human poetry or a literary text, the truth of which is open to textual analysis), are obviously motivated by an improper understanding of Orthodoxy. George Florovsky, in St Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers, cites phrases such as Following the Holy Fathers that the early church used normatively to introduce its doctrinal statements. This was so, for example, in the opening of the Decree of Chalcedon. Another example is the more elaborate phrase used in the Seventh Ecumenical Councilsummoned to solve the serious iconoclastic crisisto introduce its decision: Following the Divinely inspired teaching of the Holy Fathers and the Tradition of the Catholic Church. Florovsky explains regarding this normative term of reference that: Following the Holy Fathers... This is not a reference to some abstract tradition, in formulas and propositions. It is primarily an appeal to holy witnesses. Indeed, we appeal to the Apostles, and not just to an abstract Apostolicity. In the similar manner do we refer to the Fathers. The witness of the Fathers belongs, intrinsically and integrally, to the very structure of Orthodox belief. The Church is equally committed to the kerygma of the Apostles and to the dogma of the Fathers.

393

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Stylianopoulos states that for the Fathers, the Bible was both a book of God and a book of the Church, and they approached it with a certain freedom and boldness. They focused on the spirit rather than the letter of Scripture (50). He thinks that modern western theology is often derived neither from Scripture nor the classic Christian tradition, as is Orthodox theology, a theology which is based on both the ecclesial as well as an intense spiritual or prayer life. He concludes, but primarily from Renaissance humanism and Enlightenment philosophy. Biblical scholarship has often rendered itself irrelevant to the life of both Church and society by a gravitational pull toward historical, philological, and technical preoccupations (29). However, Orthodox theology, he adds, holds to a personal and dynamic, rather than mechanistic and verbal, concept of inspiration. Stylianopoulos says: God did not merely dictate words or propositions to passive authors, but rather he impacted personally their whole beings, allowing them actively to comprehend, interpret, and convey his will to others according to the limitations of their understanding and language. It is important to note that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit embraces a far deeper and broader process than the composition of single books. Inspiration involves the entire community of faith, the life of a particular author, the composition of particular books, as well as their gradual gathering into a sacred collection. (14) Consequently, Orthodox theologians have strong ecclesial and doctrinal anchors, and which, he adds, have spared them from turmoil experienced in the west. In Orthodoxy, patristic and doctrinal interests have held sway (30), helping it to avoid repeating the errors of western colleagues. Meyendorff, in Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal themes, also refers to this concept of revelation, albeit in a substantially different way from the West, which he says should be taken into account when approaching Byzantine theology. Meyendorff asserts that: The concept of theologia in Byzantium, as with the Cappadocian Fathers, was inseparable from theoria (contemplation), theology could not beas it was in the Westa rational deduction from revealed premises, i.e., from Scripture or

394

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

from the statements of an ecclesiastical magisterium; rather, it was a vision experienced by the saints, whose authenticity was, of course, to be checked against the witness of Scripture and Tradition. Nor that a rational deductive process was completely eliminated from theological thought; but it represented for the Byzantine the lowest and least reliable level of theology. (8-9) He further comments that the True theologian was the one who saw and experienced the content of his theology; and this experience was considered to belong not to the intellect alone (although the intellect was not excluded from its perception), but to the eyes of the Spirit, which place the whole manintellect, emotions, and even senses in contact with the divine existence. (9) Meyendorff also states that this difference in approach constituted the contents of the initial debate between Gregory of Palamasan advocate of hesychasmand Balaam the Calabrian, a debate which started the theological controversies of the fourteenth century (1337-1340). If Orthodoxy does not separate theology and mysticism (or mystical theology) in the western mannerwhose thinking is not framed in the ontological worldview of Orthodoxy, it also does not divide up the topics in the western manner (9). Orthodoxy tends to be look at things more holistically. Eastern theology is more compact and holistic, less chopped up into different subtopics than western theology. The western church, for example, divides monastic life into active and contemplative types, and considers reasoned theology the opposite of mysticism; atonement in the western church refer only to the Crucifixion, whereas Orthodoxy gives at least equal weight to the Incarnation and the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in considering this term; the west splits Salvation into a negative side (Redemptionwith Atonement, Satisfaction, Justification, Adoption, etc.) and a positive side (Sanctification), whereas the eastern Church typically considers good works as a part of the whole thingwhich is Grace. Orthodoxy cites Philip. 2:13 or Gal. 2:20: For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. (Philp. 2:13)

395

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Gal. 2:20) as a basis for this comprehensive view. Christ shares His uncreated Energies with each member of His Body, energizing them to do works to please him and not lose Grace, so as to arrive at the true Glory and Divinization in the Vision of uncreated Light. This concept derives from a view of the ontological unity of divine and human natures in Jesus Christ (Orlapubs).

Activity 1. Explain the Orthodox concept of theology. Why is it important to understand Orthodox theologians? 2. How does Orthodox theology differ from western theology?
Activity 101: Orthodox theology

3. FORMS OF THE SACRED OR HOLY TRADITION AND DOCTRINE Aghiorgoussis, in The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church asserts that, regarding faith and doctrine, the Sacred Tradition has attained various forms: the Bible, the doctrine of the Fathers, the doctrine of the ecumenical and local councils, the Divine Liturgy, and the architectural and iconography of the Church. He explains that the Bible, the most authoritative part of the Sacred Tradition, is the product and epiphenomenon of the life of the Church, but also the work of the Holy Spirit of God, working in this life of the Church. Therefore, the church is subordinated to the authority of the Bible. Nevertheless, the Bible does not contain all the doctrines and teachings of Christ. Important parts of these doctrines and teachings continued to evolve through the Holy Fathers of the Churchthe Orthodox Church is intrinsically the Church of the Fathers, and were established most authoritatively through the ecumenical councils.

396

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

The Orthodox Church, which considers itself to be the Church of Christ and is both apostolic and Patristics, has not given the name ecumenical to Councils which do not represent the undivided Church of the Byzantine Empire, separated in 1054. However, after the separation, Councils, such as the ones held in 1341 and 1351, established the Orthodox Christian doctrine regarding grace, the divine energies of God, and the uncreated light, according to St. Gregory Palamas. Other Councils, convened during the seventeenth century to counteract Protestant infiltrations in the East, such as the Councils of Jassy (1662) and Jerusalem (1672), also affirmed Orthodox truths promulgated by the Ecumenical Councils and the ancient Fathers of the Church. Let us briefly delineate the doctrines and truths of the Church established by both early and later ecumenical councils:
1) Nicea I (325) Established faith in the Holy Trinity 2) Constantinople I (381) Established the divinity of Christ, the incarnate Word (Logos) of God Established the divinity of the Holy Spirit, against the Spirit fighters (Pneumatomachs) Established the Christological dogma: Christ as true God and true man. Christ is a divine person who assumed a perfect humanity, thus saving and deifying it. Against Nestorianism

3) Council of Ephesus (431)

4) Council of Chalcedon (451)

Against Eutyches and Monophysitism

6) Council of Constantinople III (680)

Against Monothelitism

5) Council of Constantinople II (553)

Also Christological issues 7) Council of Nicea II (787)

Condemned the writings of exponents of the school of Antioch, who gave an Alexandrian interpretation of the decrees of Chalcedon Defended the doctrine of icons. It is considered a Christological Council, insofar as the doctrine of icons is a consequence of the Christological dogma: the Son of God became human;

397

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

therefore, he can be depicted in His humanity. Council of 1341 Council of 1351 Council of Jassy (1662) Council of Jerusalem (1672) Symbolic Books: witnesses of Orthodox faith once handed down to the Fathers and perpetuated in the Orthodox Church. Yet their authority is subjected to the authority of the Ecumenical Councils and the Fathers of the Church [Later councils] Doctrine regarding grace, the divine energies of God, and the uncreated light. To counteract Protestant infiltrations in the East and establish the Orthodox doctrine vis--vis the Protestant teachings. Documents from these councils plus other documents received the name of Symbolic Books of the Orthodox Church. (Aghiorgoussis, The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church)

Table 46: Ecumenical Councils and later Councils along with their doctrines or documents

Furthermore, western Christianity recognizes a series of creeds as ecumenical or universal: the Apostolic Creed, the creed of the Church of Rome; the Athanasian Creed, created in the West around the end of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century; and the Creed of Nicean/Constantinople: For eastern Christianity, only the Creed of Nicea/Constantinople is ecumenical. Let us cite it here to have a reference for further discussion:
We believe in one God, the Father All-sovereign, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, and the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all the ages, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from the heavens, and was made flesh of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures, and ascended into the heavens, and sits on the right hand of the Father, and comes again with glory to judge living and dead, of whose kingdom there shall be no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and the Life-giver, that proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and Son is worshiped together and glorified together, who spoke through the prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church. We acknowledge one baptism unto remission of sins. We look for a resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. Table 47: The Creed of Nicea

398

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

This creed was first promulgated by the Council of Nicea (325) and edited and completed by the first Council of Constantinople in 381. The Orthodox Church accepts this Creed as the summary of all the important Christian doctrines and uses it for catechism and for the worship of the Church. Another form of the Sacred Tradition is the rich liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church, which has the Divine Liturgy as its core. It is characterized by its poetry, which adds an extra dimension to the faith, a heart one, by its use of direct and indirect quotations of both Old and New Testament, and by dogmatic accuracy: doctrinal and dogmatic statements, either from the doctrine of the Councils or from that of the Fathers of the Church. Bobinskroy, in The Mystery of the Trinity, asserts that liturgy and theology lead into one another, given the fact that ontologically they are not differentiated from one another (2). He comments, that any valid attempt to deepen our understanding of the Trinitarian Revelation, any endeavor to bear witness to he unutterable reality of experiencing the presence of the Trinitarian communion in our life, must, by necessity, includeor even be based onthe liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church. It is there we discern the theological awareness of the Church to the most intimate, and the truest, degree. (2)

Illustration 66: Council of Nicea I, 325118

118

See: <www.osl.cc>.

399

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

Moreover, the canons of the Church are parts of Practical Theology. The word canon comes from Greek and means literally a straight rod, a rudder, a measure of precise direction. Thus canons serve as an important witness of the faith of the Church and offer information concerning the doctrine of the Church. In ecclesiastical terminology if dogmas are the truths of Christian teaching, the truths of faith, canons are the prescriptions, relating to church order, church government, the obligations of the church hierarchy and clergy and of every Christian, which flow from the moral foundations of the evangelical and Apostolic teaching (OrthodoxPhotos.com). The canons represent the Churchs attempt to re-express its teaching and readjust its strategies to contemporary needs. Many of the canons, especially the dogmatic ones, Aghiorgoussis asserts, express the doctrine of the Church in a clear, indisputable way, equal to that of the decrees of faith promulgated by the same Ecumenical Councils that also produced the canons (The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church). In addition, Christian articonography and architectureprovides a way of expressing the doctrinal tradition of the Church. For example, elements of the Byzantine church such as the sanctuary (the Holy of Holies) and the altar in its center represent the holy dwelling place of God and Gods throne. Byzantine iconography also provides a means of expressing the faith. To the one who knows how to read them, icons teach most of Orthodox faith; because theologically the fundamental center of iconography is the Incarnation of the Word. All these expressions of Tradition are interwoven and help to establish the context and the very meaning of the Christian faith and doctrine. From what we have said about Tradition, we can agree with Aghiorgoussis when he points out that: Beliefs, doctrine, and dogma of the Orthodox Church are in direct continuity with the doctrine of the Bible and the uninterrupted tradition of the Church of which the Bible is the authoritative exponent. The Orthodox Church may rightly glory in its history, as being a historical Church, of which the history has no

400

PART II: PATRISTIC, HISTORY OF DOCTRINE, AND DOGMATICS

innovations to present, but rather an absolute faithfulness to the basic Christian message as preserved in the Bible. Activity Enumerate the forms of the Holy Tradition and give a short explanation of each of them regarding doctrine.
Activity 102: Forms of Holy Tradition

After these preliminary concepts and before we discuss the history of development of Doctrine and Dogmatics, in which the opinions and experiences of the Fathers of the Church are crucial, let us examine Patristics. We need to see them as both theologians and men of faith.

401

Chapter 4: Patristics

Chapter 4 PATRISTICS
INTRODUCTION As we will see the Church Fathers are frequently cited and studied in the development of the doctrine and in the definition of dogmas. Such an approach provides a valid perspective from which to understand the Fathers. However, if we limit ourselves to this viewpoint we would confine Patristic to ecclesiastical literature parallel to the history of doctrines and dogmas, defining it and complementing it. Such stance would somehow demean the faith and the individual theological contributions of these Fathers. This chapter, limited to the eastern Fathers, attempts to portray the Fathers of the Church as they saw themselves and how they perceived their own faith vocation. It discusses the Patristics as men who had their own peculiar character and spiritual goals within their own historical and cultural milieu and the particular roles they had in the Church. Hans von Campenhausen, in Los Padres de la Iglesia I: Los Padres griegos,119 states that the Fathers of the Church, in contrast with the Apostolic Fathers or the immediate post-Apostolic Fathers, did not consider themselves direct witnesses of Christs revelation, but recognize it as perfect and based on it their own doctrinal reflection upon it. These Fathers did not write gospels or apostolic epistles, but rather comments and dissertations, apologetic and polemic tracts on enriching, systematic, and even historic content. They offered their own gifts and capabilities to the service of the Church, while simultaneously retaining complete freedom. Campenhausen says that it is more difficult to determine the end of the era of the Church Fathers than the beginning. He adds that thanks to their secular efforts, the Fathers created a solid tradition, but the

119

Spanish translation of The Fathers of the Greek Church (London, 1959).

402

Chapter 4: Patristics

moment in which believing in the tradition became definitive and obligatory, it limited freedom regarding systematic biblical research. For this theologian that moment of requiring belief in the tradition marks the end of the patristic era. This transition occurred, according to him, after the fifth century when the authority of the old Fathers started to prevail in the Church over the personal influence of the spiritual teachers (1213). I will try to quote the Fathers as much as possible to offer a better idea of their individuality. In the next chapter, I will address doctrinal issues.
Christian writers of the first and second centuries who are known, or are considered, to have had personal relations with some of the Apostles, or to have been so influenced by them that their writings may be held as echoes of genuine Apostolic teaching. Though restricted by some to those who were actually disciples of the Apostles, the term applies by extension to certain writers who were previously believed to have been such, and virtually embraces all the remains of primitive Christian literature antedating the great apologies of the second century, and forming the link of tradition that binds these latter writings to those of the New Testament. The list of Fathers included under this title has varied, literary criticism having removed some who were formerly considered as second-century writers, while the publication (Constantinople, 1883) of the Didache has added one to the list. Chief in importance are the three first-century Bishops: St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St. Polycarp of Smyrna, of whose intimate personal relations with the Apostles there is no doubt. Clement, Bishop of Rome and third successor of St. Peter in the Papacy, had seen the blessed Apostles [Peter and Paul] and had been conversant with them (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer., III, iii, 3). Ignatius was the second successor of St. Peter in the See of Antioch (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., III, 36) and during his life in that centre of Christian activity may have met with others of the Apostolic band. An accepted tradition, substantiated by the similarity of Ignatius thought with the ideas of the Johannine writings, declares him a disciple of St. John. Polycarp was instructed by Apostles (Irenaeus, op. cit., III, iii, 4) and had been a disciple of St. John (Eusebius, op. cit., III, 36; V, 20) whose contemporary he was for nearly twenty years. Besides these, whose rank as Apostolic Fathers in the strictest sense is undisputed, there are two first-century writers whose place with them is generally conceded: the author of the Didache and the author of the Epistle of Barnabas. The former affirms that his teaching is that of the Apostles, and his work, perhaps the earliest extant piece of uninspired Christian literature, gives colour to his claim; the latter, even if he be not the Apostle and companion of St. Paul, is held by many to have written during the last decade of the first century, and may have come under direct Apostolic influence, though his Epistle does not clearly suggest it. (The Apostolic Fathers) Table 48: Apostolic Fathers

This chapter will also serve as a reference to which we can look back as I proceed with history and development of doctrine and dogma in the next two chapters. In Chapter 4, as previously noted, I will be dealing with a) the role of ascesis in the lives and teaching of the Fathers, b) the Fathers and Hesychasm, c) the Fathers as

403

Chapter 4: Patristics

defenders of faith, and d) the Fathers and liturgical practice. Because of the limits of this work, Parts C and D will have to be part of your own research. But to grasp the following discussions better, I offer a general outline of the lives and works of many of these exceptional men, whose matchless learning and morality give splendor to the Church both in their lifetime and afterwards. In this overview, I will include both the eastern and western fathers. 1. OVERVIEW OF THE CHURCH FATHERS120 To put it briefly, great Christian writers passed on and clarified Christian doctrine from approximately the end of the first century A.D. to the middle of the eighth century. The Church depends on these Fathers and the insights they had regarding the living faith of the Church. Their teachings have proved useful continuously useful from the days of the early Church until today in the current Church. The title of Father of the Church gradually came to be applied to certain Christian leaders distinguished by four characteristics: antiquity, holiness, orthodoxy, and Church approval. These men combined profound learning with a saintly life and perfect purity of faith. They strengthened others in the Christian life by their written and spoken word. However these fourfold qualification can be misleading since some who can also be regarded as Fathers of the Church produced teaching marred by some doctrinal errors and/or who lived lives that were far from exemplary. Tertullian (c. 155225), who died a Montanist, and Origen, who showed a marked leaning towards Hellenism, both strayed far from the path of orthodoxy. Although they had every kind of knowledge and contributed all that was humanly possible, they are not entitled to equal honor with the Fathers; thus, they are called ecclesiastical teachers. Even some of the Fathers, e.g. St. Cyprian (d. 258) and St. Gregory of Nyssa (d. 379), went astray
120

See brief biographies of most Fathers in Glossary.

404

Chapter 4: Patristics

on individual points of doctrine; the former in regard to the baptism of heretics, the latter in the matter of apocatastasis. Without questioning the fairness of these distinctions, I will make no differences in my discourse among these men as these distinctions developed later mainly the canon and do not aid in our understanding of these men and their contributions. St. Clement of Alexandria gives us a clue to understand the title Church Father, explaining, But words are the progeny of the soul. Hence we call those who have instructed us, fathers. Wisdom is a communicative and philanthropic thing (The Stromata, Chap. 1). Therefore, since the principal teacher of any Christian community was its bishops, the title was first applied to them. In fact, the bishops who gathered in church councils were from early times referred to as council fathers. Additionally, because many of the most important early Christian teachers were laymen (e.g., St. Justin), deacons (e.g., St. Ephrem), and priests (e.g., St. Jerome), it became a custom by the fourth century to recognize them also among the Fathers. Marcellino DAmbrosio asserts, in Early Church Fathers Overview: A Snapshot of the Fathers of the Church, that in the doctrinal disputes that made the Ecumenical Councils needed, all parties recognized the inspired Scriptures as the first court of appeal; yet, when there was conflict about the truly Catholic interpretation of the Scriptures, all sought backing for their position in the writings of the Fathers. They showed how the apostles themselves and those who followed them understood and applied scriptures. While all early Christian pastors and catechists fathered their own group of the faithful during their lifetime, only those who expressed their teaching in writing could continue to serve as a guide to the whole Church in every age. Thus, the term Father of the Church finally came to refer to important Christian writers after the New Testament era who, because of closeness to that era,

405

Chapter 4: Patristics

witnessed the authentic apostolic way of interpreting the Scriptures handed down to them by the Tradition. These writers played an indisputably crucial role in transmitting Christian doctrine and bringing it to mature expression, at least in its most fundamental features. While the Churchs understanding of revelation will continue to deepen until the Lord returns, the dogmas of the Trinity and the Incarnation, which stand at the center of the Hierarchy of Truths, were defined once and for all during the period of the Fathersthe patristic era. Significantly the age of the Church Fathers, commonly regarded as closing with St. John Damascene (d. 749), roughly spans the period of the first seven great Ecumenical Councils which defined these two central mysteries of the faith and drew out their most important implications. In their writings, the Church Fathers from all parts of the World used Greek, the language of the New Testament, until about 200, when Tertullian, a North African theologian, wrote a treatise in Latin. From that moment on, Latin gradually became the language of the western Fathers of the Church. Nevertheless, in the eastern half of the Mediterranean world, especially in the urban areas controlled by the Byzantine Empire, many continued to write in Greek. Also, in rural localities and territory outside the empire, some Christian authors (e.g., St. Ephrem) began to write in local vernaculars such as Syriac-Aramaica dialect of the language spoken by Christ. As DAmbrosio states, this wonderful diversity of culture and location makes it that much clearer that, whenever the Fathers teach the same doctrine or describe the same liturgical practice, they are witnessing to something that came not from them, but to themthe apostolic Tradition.

406

Chapter 4: Patristics

GENERAL PERIODIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION Ante-Nicene Fathers The first Ecumenical Council, held in the city of Nicea, (325) marked a momentous event for the Church. For this reason, the writers working before this meeting are known as the Ante-Nicene Fathers. Schools commonly divided them into two groups:

a) The Apostolic Fathers (from about 90-140)121

Though I have already talked about the Apostolic Fathers in Part I, let us note some of their characteristics and writings relevant for further use such as quoting them in the development of doctrines. They are the ones who wrote during a generation or two after the close of the New Testament era. They receive this name because they are believed to have had living contact with the Apostles and thus witnessed first hand primitive apostolic Christianity. They were fellow-workers or contemporaries of the Apostles. The few writings from this period that have survived, chiefly in the form of occasional epistles to various Christian communities, are pastoral and practical rather than speculative. They include the anonymous Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, otherwise known as the Didache, which is the earliest work describing Christian sacramental life; epistles from Barnabas the Cypriot, who also preached the Gospel with Paul; from St. Ignatius (b. ca.50, d. between 98-117), bishop of Antioch in Syria martyred in Rome by beasts; St. Polycarp (d. ca. 155? 167?), bishop of Smyrna, Asia Minor, who reportedly sat at the feet of the apostle John; and St. Clement, the first bishop of Rome (d. ca. 100), who worked with the Apostle Paul and wrote to the Church in Corinth around 95 AD. Clements epistle, probably written around the same time as Johns Gospel, was regarded as so authoritative in the early church that it was

121

The dates of the periods slightly vary according to different authors.

407

Chapter 4: Patristics

copied and passed around to churches all over the known world. Many consider it as part of the New Testament Scriptures. A second epistle is also attributed to him. Other apostolic writings include The Shepherd, written by Hermas, who is believed to be brother of Pius, Bishop of Rome; fragments of Papias, said to have been bishop of Hieropolis and a friend of St. Polycarp; and The Martyrdom of Polycarp. The Epistle to Diognetus is also frequently considered an apostolic writing, though it is more an apologetical work. Coming from so disparate geographical locals, these writings together form a slender but precious volume of the works of the Apostolic Fathers written immediately after the holy books of the New Testament, and inspired by a supreme love of and devotion to the Savior. The following list summarizes some of the main features of these writings: Didache (Teaching of the Lord through the Apostles)

It is an eleventh century manuscript discovered by Philotheus Bryennios. Consisting of various parts, it starts with the Two Ways a body of ethical instruction and includes community rules for liturgical practices and leadership conduct, ending with a short apocalyptic section. While some of the material may date before the year 100, the current form of the document is probably midsecond century at the earliest. First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (ca 96)

A formal letter written on behalf of the Roman Christian community, it urges Christians who had been rebelling against Church authority to be submissive and obedient to their Church officers and to harmonize their differences. The letter does not name its writer. Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (ca 150)

A sermon thought not to be the writing of Clement himself, this epistle advocates a sound view of Christ, the resurrection, and holiness unto God. It enters into battle against the ways of this world and works out salvation through strength in Christ. The Epistle of Barnabas (ca 130)

This letter, probably not authored by Barnabas, repudiates the claims of Jewish Christians of the same time who advocated observance of the Mosaic Law. It

408

Chapter 4: Patristics

also argues that Christ provides salvation and man is no longer bound by the Law, and contrasts holy life with unrighteousness. The writings of Ignatius (ca. 1-2 century)

On his way to Rome, he visits and then writes to various churches, exhorting them. He also writes ahead to Rome and to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna. He warns the church against heresies that threatened peace and unity, and opposes Gnosticism and Docetism. In the Epistle to Smyrna, Ignatius insists that Christ came in the flesh, not just in spirit. Ignatius writings are difficult to interpret because of interpolations in the texts by later copyists. Scholars believe that the original versions of his works appear in a Syriac translation. The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians (ca 130?) Polycarp exhorts the Philippians to holy living, good works and steadfast faith. The epistle also describes ministry and practical aspects of Christians daily life. Polycarp possessed Ignatius writings, and endorsed his theology. The Shepherd of Hermas (ca. 150)

The Shepherd of Hermas is an apocalyptic document (in the sense that it claims to be revealed), modeled after the Book of Revelation. It deals with practical matters of church purity and discipline in second century Rome. Although Hermas was not a bishop and did not hold an official position in the Church, his Shepherd became very popular in orthodox circles and was even included in some copies of the New Testament. (It is found in the Sinaitic Codex.) The Martyrdom of Polycarp

It is the earliest preserved document on Christian martyrology, probably from the latter part of the second century (not too long after the event). It records the tradition of the trial and execution (burning at the stake) of Polycarp. Papias (130) Papias five-volume work, Oracles or Explanations of the Sayings of the Lord, survives only in fragments quoted by Eusebius of Caesarea, who was biased against him, and by St. Irenaeus. These fragments are valuable sources for the history of the church. Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus (130? 200?) It is an apology for Christians addressed to a certain Diognetus about whom nothing else is known. Yet the term Jesus or Christ is found nowhere in it, as the author seems to prefer the use of the term the Word. Diognetus was a tutor of the emperor Marcus Aurelius, who admired him for his freedom from superstition and sound educational advice. However, he is likely not the recipient, or even the assumed recipient (Adapted from Guide to Early Church Documents). Activity Read Chapter 16 of the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians and summarize it. What does the word scepter of the majesty of God suggest to you? What does he say 409

Chapter 4: Patristics

about the Holy Ghost? Find this epistle in New Advent (http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/).
Activity 103: Reading the Apostolic Fathers

b) Apologists and Anti-Heretical Fathers (130-325AD)

These writers, who succeeded the Apostolic Fathers, represent, as it were, the adolescent phase of Church Literature. Unlike the Apostolic Fathers who were generally simple, uncultivated men, the Apologist and Anti-Heretical Fathers were the first great Christian intellectuals who sought a synthesis between biblical truth and the best of classical wisdom. Employing the rigorous intellectual tools of Greek philosophy in their reflection on the mysteries of the faith, these writers contributed to the clarification and development of Catholic doctrine as well as to its faithful transmission. They are generally known as Apologists and Anti-heretical writers because virtually all of them wrote either treatises combating various Christian heresies or written defenses of Christianity addressed to the Roman government known as apologies.
Heresy, a term derived from the Greek word hairesis, originally meant an opinion or way of thinking. It was used as a designation of a sect, party, or philosophical school. It is used in this sense when referring to the Sadducees and Pharisees in Acts 5:17 and 15:5. Later Christian usage (from the late second century A.D.) understood heresy to indicate deviation from the accepted teaching or practice of the dominant Christian community. Something of this sense may be found in the treatment of Christians as a sect of the Nazarenes in Acts 24:5, 14 and 28:22, where Christianity is opposed by Jewish religious authorities. Paul used the word for an internal faction within the Christian community (Gal. 5:20; 1 Cor. 11:19) (Heresies, Cults, and Church Social Cliques). Table 49: Concept of Heresy

The Apologists, who were teachers and philosophers, wrote their works for pagan readers with the intention of defending and explaining the Christian faith to unbelievers and of demonstrating that Christianity was a good philosophy, so that their pagan contemporary might accepted it. They were ardent monotheists who were determined not to compromise this fundamental truth. Although Justin (100165) was the most important author, there were others who also played important roles in

410

Chapter 4: Patristics

defending the Christian faith, namely Quadratus, Aristides, Tatian, Aristides, Athenagoras, and Theophilus of Antioch. Andreyev, in Orthodox Apologetic Theology, states that: Appearing in a Judeo-pagan world, Christianity, in defending itself from attack, was forced to disclose the delusions of the pagans and Hebrews. It was necessary to prove to the pagans that the Christian God is the true God; and to the Hebrews that Christ is the Messiah promised by the prophets. In answer to the persecutions of the governing powers, the Christians had to refute defamation and prove that they not only were not injurious to the government, but on the contrary, were very useful, in consequence of the high moral basis of the new teaching. This explains the character of early Christian Apologetics. (2) He further comments that: In the struggle between the young Christian idea and the age old pagan philosophy, an urgent need became apparent: to show forth Christianity as a coherent system of thought or philosophy with a reasonable argumentation which could be contrasted to and could respond to pagan philosophical systems (3). Dulle tells that the Apologists adopted this philosophy, tailoring it where necessary, in order to make the gospel acceptable to the general population, who saw Christianity as foolishness. For example, an apologist such as Justin takes the concept of the Logos, to depict a pre-existing Jesus. To the Greeks, the Logos, however, was an impersonal entity, existing in the realms of ideasan intermediary between the Ineffable One and the physical realmand a controlling principle of the universe. As Edward Hardy, in Early Christian Fathers122, asserts, The idea of Gods Logos could be found in a variety of sources. It was floating in the air of popular Greek philosophy and Hellenistic Judaism ... Justins use of it is partly Biblical and partly apologetic. The Logos being divine, and yet not the Father himself, accounts both for the divinity which Christians have found in Jesus, and by retrospect for the divine appearances in the Old Testament. (233) Among the Apologists we find Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, and the Athenian philosopher, Aristides, both of whom presented apologies to the Emperor Hadrian on behalf of their unjustly persecuted fellow-Christians. Another, the philosopher Justin,

122

See Richardson et al.

411

Chapter 4: Patristics

the pagan philosopher who turned Christian apologist, addressed two apologies to the emperor Marcus Aurelius, under whom he was martyred in 166. Yet another, the Athenian, Athenagoras, who flourished between the years 170-180, addressed an Intercession on behalf of the Christians to the Emperors Marcus Aurelius and Commodus. Other apologists include Tatian, a disciple of Justin, born in Assyria and trained in Greek philosophy; and Theophilus of Antioch (d. 182), who submitted an exposition of the Christian faith to his pagan friend Autolycus. Many of them presented a sincere and detailed account of the beliefs of the Christians and of their manner of life. Justin especially was an excellent apologist, and defended Christianity not only against the pagans, but also, in another work entitled A dialogue with Trypho, against the Jews. His life was a tireless search for truth; one after another, he went through every system of philosophy, and sat under every learned man of his age, without finding satisfaction for his spiritual search, until finally he attained peace in Christianity. To the end of his days, he continued to wear the philosophers gown, convinced that Christianity was the only infallible philosophy of life.
Justins Dialogue with Trypho was probably the longest Christian book written up to that point. It describes the discussion, begun on one day and continued on the next, between Justin, speaking in the first person, and a Jew named Trypho, a name perhaps suggested by a wellknown Jewish rabbi named Tarphon. Justin makes a great deal of the argument from prophecy. His contention that the Jewish prophecies are fulfilled in Christ is so contrary to the position taken by Marcion in his Antitheses, or Contradictions, that the Dialogue may be regarded as a counterattack against Marcions book. Justin naturally allegorizes the Jewish scriptures in the manner of interpretation customary among Jews, Greeks, and Christians in antiquity. In the end, while Trypho is not converted, they part with courtesy and good feeling. This irenic note is characteristic of Justin, whether he deals with Jewish prophecy or Greek philosophy. (Goodspeed 64) Table 50: Justins Dialogue with Trypho

Some Christian writers tried to stop heresies, while others also fought paganism. St. Irenaeus (c.130-200) became the implacable foe of Gnosticism and one of the most important early Fathers, known almost entirely for one work, the Against Heresies. 412

Chapter 4: Patristics

Clement of Alexandria denounced the idolatry of the pagans. Origen, pupil of Clement, became the greatest Scripture scholar of the Ante-Nicene period; Hippolytus, and Tertullian, the first writer to use the term Trinity, stand more or less directly in the line of the Apologists and Irenaeus. Bellow appears a list with of some of the works123 of Apologists and Antiheretical Fathers. In many cases, the title can give the reader an idea of both the teachings and the heresies the writers struggled to counteract.
Aristides the Philosopher - The Apology Athenagoras - A Plea for the Christians - The Resurrection of the Dead Justin Martyr [SAINT] - First Apology - Second Apology - Dialogue with Trypho - Hortatory Address to the Greeks - On the Sole Government of God - Fragments of the Lost Work on the Resurrection - Miscellaneous Fragments from Lost Writings - Discourse to the Greeks - Martyrdom of Justin, Chariton, and other Roman Martyrs Hippolytus [SAINT] - The Refutation of All Heresies - The Extant Works and Fragments of - Hippolytus: Exegetical - Expository Treatise Against the Jews - Against Plato, On the Cause of the Universe - Against the Heresy of Noetus - Discourse on the Holy Theophany - The Antichrist - Appendix Irenaeus of Lyons [SAINT] - Adversus Haereses - Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus Tertullian - The Apology - On Idolatry - De Spectaculis (The Shows) - De Corona (The Chaplet) - To Scapula - Ad Nationes - (A Fragment) - An Answer to the Jews - The Souls Testimony - A Treatise on the Soul - The Prescription Against Heretics - Against Marcion - Against Hermogenes - Against the Valentinians - On the Flesh of Christ - On the Resurrection of the Flesh - Against Praxeas - Scorpiace - Appendix (Against All Heresies) - On Repentance - On Baptism - On Prayer - Ad Martyras - The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicity Origen to Gregory - Origen Against Celsus - Letter of Origen to Gregory - Commentary on the Gospel of John - Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Sometimes attributed to Tertullian) - Of Patience - On the Pallium - On the Apparel of Women - On the Veiling of Virgins - To His Wife - On Exhortation to Chastity - On Monogamy

You can find information about their lives and work of these and the remaining Fathers cited in this chapter in New Advent (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/).

123

413

Chapter 4: Patristics

Clement of Alexandria - Who is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? - Exhortation to the Heathen - The Instructor - The Stromata, or Miscellanies - Fragments Origen - De Principiis - Africanus to Origen - Origen to Africanus

- On Modesty - On Fasting - De Fuga in Persecutione Tatian - Address to the Greeks - Fragments - The Diatessaron Theophilus Theophilus to Autolycus

Table 51: Apologists and Anti-Heretical Fathers

Activity 1. Read Chapter 32 of Justins First Apology and summarize what he says about the Logos. 2. Read Book 2 (Chap. 30, 9) of Irenaeus Against Heresies. What does he say about the relationship between the Father and His Son? 3. Read Chapter 1 of Tertullians Against Praxeas and describe Praxeass heresy. 4. Read Book 1 (Chap.2, 4) of Origens De Principiis. How does he apply the terms unbegotten, and begotten? Find these passages at New Advent (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/).
Activity 104: Reading Apologists and Anti-heretical Fathers

c) The Desert Fathers (Third and Fourth Centuries)

Among the Pre-Nicene Fathers, I have included the Desert Fathers, especially the Egyptians St. Anthony (251- 356) and St. Pachomius (292-346), the fathers of monasticism. These early monastics (from monos meaning alone)124 who lived in the Egyptian desert did not leave much writing, yet their influence was also great. Of St. Anthonys writings, only seven letters addressed to Egyptian monasteries concerning moral perfection, and the monastic life as a spiritual struggle, some sermons on the

This etymology describes just one aspect of later monasticism as many monastics lived and live in community. Max Weber, in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1958) distinguishes between worldly and otherworldly asceticism, the former referring to people who live ascetic lives but do not withdraw from the world, and, the latter, to people who withdraw from the world in order to live an ascetic life (this includes monks who live communally in monasteries, as well as hermits who live alone).

124

414

Chapter 4: Patristics

virtues, and a Rule for monastics, not regarded as an authentic work of St Anthony, have come down to us. Though none of Pachomius manuscripts has survived, his famous Rule for monks and eleven letters are preserved in Latin translations by St. Jerome. Some admonitions and a small section of catechetical instructions are also extant. Also, his life and bibliography have been preserved by the 5th-century historian Palladius125 in his Lausiac History. Many of the sayings of the Desert Fathers are collected in the Apophthegmata Patrum and the Evergetinos, the standard Byzantine recession of the Apophthegmata. For centuries, these two collections have provided spiritual inspiration and guidance. Let us read the following explanation about the Apophthegmata:
The Apophthegmata Patrum are various collections of aphorisms and anecdotes, illustrative of the spiritual life, of ascetic and monastic principle, and of Christian ethics, attributed to the more prominent hermits and monks who peopled the Egyptian deserts in the fourth century... The stages in the growth of the extant collections of apophthegmata may be traced with some certainty. In the course of the fourth century this or that saying of the more famous ascetics was repeated by their disciples, and thus circulated. There is no reason to doubt that these sayings and anecdotes were in large measure authentic, but no doubt many were attributed to wrong persons, and many more were apocryphal inventions. These single sayings tended to coalesce into groups, sometimes as the apophthegmata of one Father, sometimes as those dealing with the same subject. Out of these groups were formed the great collections which we have. They are arranged alphabetically or according to the subject-matter. (Adapted from Apophthegmata Patrum) Table 52: Apophthegmata Patrum

The Evergetinos, first published in Greek in Venice in 1783 by Saint Makarios of Corinth and Saint Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, contains narratives from the lives and teachings of the fathers of the Egyptian deserts. Bishop Chrysostom, translator

Palladius (c. 365-425) was bishop of Helenopolis in Bithynia. This historian took monastic vows in Jerusalem in the 380s. It is claimed that St. John Chrysostom consecrated him bishop (Florovsky 69).

125

415

Chapter 4: Patristics

of the Evergetinos to English, in The Ancient Fathers of the Desert: Introduction and Commentary, compares it with the Philokalia:126 If the Philokalia teaches pure prayer and the path to deification and union with God, the Evergetinos provides us with anecdotal evidence that the practice of Christian virtues, such as humility, chastity, love for our neighbor, and submission to the will of God, can bring us to the brink of the ultimate encounter with the divine by which we are elevated to the philosophical and higher struggle for perfection. If from the Philokalia we are instructed in the philosophical way to perfection, in the Evergetinos we are guided to the pragmatic life of humility and self-control (composure), the indispensable requisites for the more advanced endeavor of the former. In the Evergetinos we see the virtuous lives of the desert monks who, during the first few centuries of Christianity, fled to the barren deserts around the Mediterranean and lived the most extreme and awe-inspiring lives of asceticism in a search for God. Now let us read this explanation of the Evergetinos:
The Evergetinos is a massive ascetic florilegium authored by Paul Evergetinos, an early monastic reformer of the eleventh century. It constitutes his legacy to Byzantine monasticism. The Evergetinos enjoyed a wide circulation in the Byzantine world, surviving in no less than forty manuscripts today. The work is divided into four volumes, each of which is subdivided into fifty hypotheses. The first volume concerns itself with the general principles of monastic asceticism, the second with monastic usages and the requirements of cenobitic life, the third with personal morality, and the fourth with progress in the spiritual life. The authors emphasis is on the practical aspects of monastic life. He relies on a fairly short list of sources, using the Apophthegmata Patrum most of all, for which the Evergetinon is one of the most important textual witnesses. (Adapted from Byzantine Monastic Foundation Documents) Table 53: The Evergetinos

The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (IV-V Centuries) The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (those who lived after 325) comprise what is called the Golden Age Period of Patristics. The fourth and fifth centuries are the era of the first four ecumenical councils which defined the dogmas of the Trinity and Christs divinity and full humanity. Under the influence of the Fathers of this period, the biblical canon and the Nicene Creed, previously cited, assumed their final shape and the various liturgical rites of the Christian Church (e.g., Roman and Byzantine) took on many of their distinctive characteristics. For these reasons, scholars often refer to this
126

St Nikodimos and St Makarios also compiled and published the Philokalia (Venice, 1782) a collection of writings by some thirty Fathers living between 300 and 1400 approximately. This book has exercised a great influence in the history of the Greek Orthodox Church.

416

Chapter 4: Patristics

era as the Golden Age of the Fathers of the Church, covering the period between the councils of Nicea (325) and Chalcedon (451). Notable among the eastern Fathers of this period are Athanasius, tireless defender of Christs divinity; Ephrem, the most poetic of all the Fathers; the three Cappadocian Fathers, Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil the Great, and Gregory of Nyssa; and John Chrysostom, whose name is associated with the principal Byzantine liturgy. The western Church Fathers of this period include Ambrose, the fearless bishop of Milan; Jerome, the great but irascible Scriptural scholar; and the incomparable Augustine, whose corpus of over five million words came to serve as the second bible of the western church. The first major church historian, Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, is also included in this division.
Alexander of Alexandria [SAINT] - Epistles on the Arian Heresy and the Deposition of Arius Athanasius [SAINT] - Against the Heathen - On the Incarnation of the Word - Deposition of Arius - On Luke 10:22 (Matthew 11:27) - Circular Letter - Apologia Contra Arianos - De Decretis - De Sententia Dionysii - Vita S. Antoni (Life of St. Anthony) - Ad Episcopus Aegypti et Libyae - Apologia ad Constantium - Apologia de Fuga - Historia Arianorum - Four Discourses Against the Arians - De Synodis Basil the Great [SAINT] - De Spiritu Sancto - Nine Homilies of Hexaemeron - Letters Gregory Nazianzus [SAINT] - Orations - Letters Gregory of Nyssa [SAINT] - Against Eunomius - Answer to Eunomius Second Book - On the Holy Spirit (Against the Followers of Macedonius) - On the Holy Trinity, and of the Godhead of the Holy Spirit (To Eustathius) - On Not Three Gods (To Ablabius) - On the Faith (To Simplicius) - On Virginity - On Infants Early Deaths - On Pilgrimages - On the Making of Man - On the Soul and the Resurrection - The Great Catechism - Funeral Oration on Meletius - On the Baptism of Christ (Sermon for the Day of Lights) - Letters

Table 54: Fathers of the Golden Age Period (1)

417

Chapter 4: Patristics

John Chrysostom [SAINT] - Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew - Homilies on Acts - Homilies on Romans - Homilies on First Corinthians - Homilies on Second Corinthians - Homilies on Ephesians - Homilies on Philippians - Homilies on Colossians - Homilies on First Thessalonians - Homilies on Second Thessalonians - Homilies on First Timothy - Homilies on Second Timothy - Homilies on Titus - Homilies on Philemon - Commentary on Galatians - Homilies on the Gospel of John - Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews - Homilies on the Statues - No One Can Harm the Man Who Does Not Injure Himself

- Two Letters to Theodore After His Fall - Letter to a Young Widow - Homily on St. Ignatius - Homily on St. Babylas - Homily Concerning Lowliness of Mind - Instructions to Catechumens - Three Homilies on the Power of Satan - Homily on the Passage Father, if it be possible ... - Homily on the Paralytic Lowered Through the Roof - Homily on the Passage If your enemy hunger, feed him. - Homily Against Publishing the Errors of the Brethren - First Homily on Eutropius - Second Homily on Eutropius (After His Captivity) - Four Letters to Olympias - Letter to Some Priests of Antioch - Correspondence with Pope Innocent I - On the Priesthood

Table 55: Fathers of the Golden Age Period (2): John Chrysostom

Activity 1. Read Discourse 5 (Introductory paragraph) of Athanasius Against the Arians. How does he use the term substantiality? 2. Read passage 6 of Basils Letter 214. What difference does he make between ousia (substance) and hypostasis (person)? 3. Read Gregory of Nyssas On Virginity and explain his position on the ascetic technique of chastity. 4. Read John Chrysostoms homily on the Corinthians and find quotes referring to Christians gathering for a common meal. Find these passages at New Advent (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/).
Activity 105: Reading Fathers of the Golden Period

The Byzantine Period (VI- Centuries) This period is divided into two groups: Later Fathers and Recent Fathers:

a) Later Fathers (VI-VIII Centuries)

The fathers of the sixth through the eighth centuries, often referred to as the Later Fathers, did not have the same decisive impact on Tradition. Their role, and the role of the three ecumenical councils that took place in this period, was mainly to

418

Chapter 4: Patristics

defend and draw out important implications of the Trinitarian and christological teaching of the first four councils. In the east, the most outstanding figures are Maximus the Confessor, who suffered torture in defense of Christs full humanity, and John Damascene who defended the veneration of icons against those who attacked them. Gregory the Great, monk turned Pope, is the greatest figure in the West during this time.

b) Recent Fathers (VIII-XV)

Besides acknowledging the Old Fathers of the patristic tradition (up to the end of the eighth century), the Orthodox Church also acknowledges the Recent Fathers of the Byzantine Era, among whom St Gregory of Palamas, in the fourteen century, occupies a preeminent place (Aghiorgoussis, The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church).
John of Damascus [SAINT] - Exposition of the Faith Maximus the Confessor -Quaestiones ad Thalassium -Ambigua -Paraphrases of the works of Dionysius the Areopagite -Several dogmatic treatises against the Monothelites -Liber Asceticus -Capita de Caritate -Mystagogiaa mystical interpretation of the Divine Liturgy Symeon the New Theologian -The Discourses Gregory of Palamas [SAINT] -Triads in defense of the Holy Hesychasts -One Hundred and Fifty Chapters -Numerous homilies

Table 56: Some Later and Recent Fathers

One of the most beloved Holy Fathers is St. Symeon the New Theologian, who was the abbot of St. Mamas in Constantinople. He is one of three great Fathers whom the Orthodox Church has granted the title of Theologian, because he is one of a few, in the history of Christianity, to know God. The other two Theologians are St. John the Evangelist and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. (St Symeon the New Theologian) Table 57: St. Symeon the New Theologian

Activity On the internet, find passages by Damascus, Maximus the Confessor, Symeon the Theologian and offer a brief comment on them. If possible identify the work from which they are taken.
Activity 106: Reading Later and Recent Fathers

419

Chapter 4: Patristics

I have based this classification on more or less an academic agreement. Since patristics is equivalent to early Christian studies, we must mark the limits of early Christianity somewhere, because as otherwise the scope of the field becomes too vast to handle. Within Orthodoxy, some however claim that the patristic era has never stopped. Yet, those who hold this view emphasize or maintain a more spiritual than historical perspective on its contents. The following list offers a quick review of the heresies the Church Fathers had to face:
Against Arianism Against Nestorianism Against Monophysitism and Monotheletism Against Iconoclasm St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian, St Gregory of Nyssa St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Maximus the Confessor St. Theodore of Studion, St. John of Damascus

Table 58: Nice and Post-Nicene Fathers struggle against heresies

AUTHORITY AND RELEVANCE AS UNDERSTOOD BY THE THREE CHRISTIAN BRANCHES It is important to remember that the western Church does not regard the Fathers as personally infallible in all that they teach. Rather in their common teaching, or consensus, the Fathers infallibly witness to the authentic Catholic tradition. Also, the eastern Church considers the Fathers as authoritative as does the western Church, though it tends to be somewhat critical of Augustine. Anglicans and many other Protestants revere the Fathers as well, though some are more suspicious of writings produced after the Church became entangled with the Roman state. In fact Patristics or Patrology (the study of the Church Fathers) underwent a renaissance following the Protestant Reformation as Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars alike sought patristic support for their respective doctrines. However, many of the most important texts of the Ante-Nicene Fathers were not generally available at the time of the Reformation. Some,

420

Chapter 4: Patristics

like the Didache and the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, which provide invaluable information regarding disputed points, have been recovered only in the last 150 years (DAmbrosio; Kallinikos 21-24).

VARIOUS SCHOOLS OR METHODS OF STUDY AND INTERPRETATIONS As suggested by the diverse origin of the Fathers mentioned, Christian learning, which had had such small beginnings, broadened out into various schools, or methods of study and interpretation such as the Schools of Asia Minor, of Africa, of Alexandria, and of Antioch. Kallinikos highlights the chief characteristics of each of these schools: The School of Asia Minor: devotion to a primitive and un-corrupted orthodoxy of faith. Representative: Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons. The African School: the practical and austere nature of their moral code. Representative: Tertullian, a presbyter of Carthage, and Cyprian (d. 258), Bishop of Carthage. The Alexandrian School: a speculative, philosophical, and allegorical spirit. Representatives: Clement the Alexandrian, Origen, Saint Athanasius, and the three CappadociansBasil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus. The Antiochian School: the sober and literal interpretation of the Scriptures. Representative: John Chrysostom (ca. 347407).

. Apart from the above-mentioned Fathers, Kallinikos identifies other Fathers including historians like Eusebius of Caesarea and Socrates, catechists like Cyril of Jerusalem, commentators like Theodoret of Cyrus, and controversialists like Cyril of Alexandria. He also adds the previously mentioned eminent Latin Fathers of the West, among whom Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine are the most relevant (Kallinikos 21-24). The following chart lists the works of the historian Eusebius, an important author for this text:

421

Chapter 4: Patristics

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 265-c. 340) - Church History or Ecclesiastical History - Life of Constantine

- Oration of Constantine to the Assembly of the Saints - Oration in Praise of Constantine - Letter on the Council of Nicea

Table 59: Works of Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 265-c.340)

Activity 1. Who were the Fathers of the Church? Which languages did they use in their writings? What authority did they have for the eastern Church? 2. Explain the main divisions of church Fathers discussed above. 3. What are the four main schools of the Fathers of the Church that can be found? List their main characteristics.
Activity 107: Characteristics of the Fathers of the Church

Florovsky, in St. Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers, establishes an interrelationship between two inherent features of the Orthodox Church: Apostolicity and Patristics: The Church is Apostolic indeed. But the Church is also Patristic. She is intrinsically the Church of the Fathers. These two notes cannot be separated. Only by being Patristic is the Church truly Apostolic. The witness of the Fathers is much more than simply a historic feature, a voice from the past... . There was an inner urge, an inner logic, an internal necessity, in this transition from kerygma to dogma. Indeed, the teaching of the Fathers and the dogma of the Church, are still the same simple message which has been once delivered and deposited, once for ever, by the Apostles. But now it is, as it were, properly and fully articulated. The apostolic preaching is kept alive in the Church, not only merely preserved. He further comments: In this sense, the teaching of the Fathers is a permanent category of Christian existence, a constant and ultimate measure and criterion of right faith. The Fathers are not only witnesses of the old faith, testes antiquitatis. They are rather witnesses of the true faith, testes veritatis. The mind of the Fathers is an intrinsic term of reference in Orthodox theology, no less than the word of Holy Scripture, and indeed never separated from it. As it has been well said, the Catholic Church of all ages is not merely a daughter of the Church of the Fathersshe is and remains the Church of the Fathers. The immense faith of the Fathers of the Church must always stand as an example for the Orthodox believer. Their faith was able to resist doubt and withstand fear. Theirs was a faith that always triumphed over doubt, a faith both positive and 422

Chapter 4: Patristics

living. Let us now move to examine the role of ascesis in the lives and teaching of the Fathers, especially of the oriental Fathers.

2. THE ROLE OF ASCESIS IN THE LIVES AND TEACHING OF THE FATHERS INTRODUCTION Having allegiance to the teachings of the Scriptures, many Fathers of the Church tried ardently to pursue Gods injunction Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect (Matt. 5:48). In a spirit of prayer, struggle against worldly things, and self-denial, they embarked on an eternal adventure in search of God, in search of perfection, and, as God created man in his own image (Gen. 1:27), in the hope of experiencing the mystical event of deification. It was a life-long adventure. Although they realized that they could never be perfect in an absolute sense it was entirely possible for men to attain the supernal and divine goal that the Infinite God set for human beings by the model of Jesus as the incarnation of Himself. Thus, they became imitators of Christ. The Fathers struggled ascetically to approach divine perfection, to achieve a kind of mystical self-realization and attainment of mind in their own sphere just as God is perfect in His sphere of eternity and infinity. Yet, they felt that their aspiration for perfection and deification was a supernal reality which remained forever hidden. Luc Brsard, in A History of Monastic Spirituality, explains that Real union with God through belonging to Christ, the God-Man, is a supernatural reality which remains mysterious and hidden.127 Theirs was a mystical aspiration, a strong desire for communion with this hidden reality. It is true that their effort for attaining divine perfection on earth was not to be final in their experience; however, it was indeed final
127

As noted in Part I, no page number appear in all material taken from the internet.

423

Chapter 4: Patristics

and complete regarding finite aspects of perfection of personality motivation, divinity of will, and God-consciousness. Furthermore, the eastern Fathers had the certitude that God could only be demonstrated through their experience by means of the indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit. They realized that it was only in the realms of human experience, and by their cultivation of the consciousness of the presence of God that led them to this state of mysticism, of a vision of God. But since many became hermits they continued their search of perfection in social isolation, and thus exposed themselves to the threat of fanatical practices. It is true that devotion to meditation and contemplation favor the mystical experience, but it is more frequently facilitated, as St. Basil a fierce anti-hermit envisioned, by wholehearted and loving service in unselfish ministry to ones fellow creatures. True spirituality should not reject the living of a religious life in the open field of human society. True religion must not exclude action, as we saw in the first Christian communities as they strove for perfection in the imitation of Christ and wrestled for the ascetic ideal. Even the Apostolic Fathers and many pre-Nicene Fathers did not have to withdraw from the world to live their ascetic ideal. They remained in society, many of them facing martyrdom. Others, however, fled to isolated areas afraid of persecutions. But when Constantine institutionalized Christianity as the official religion of the state, many sought the solitude and harshness of the desert to find self-martyrdom and extreme self-denial as a renewed way of reaching perfection. These Desert Fathers did not leave many writings. Although they lived the imitation of Christ in monastic solitude and withdrawal, their experience of Gods presence in the shining starry nights of the desert in the midst of a voluntary life of renunciation left a heritage of beautiful chords for the spirituality of Orthodoxy: the ascetic, monastic ideal. As we will see in

424

Chapter 4: Patristics

their search for Christian perfection in union with God through continual prayer, the monks also developed Hesychasm, which was to achieve its peak in the fourteen century with Palamas. This ideal developed by the Desert Fathers mainly in the fourth century was continued by many other Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, but, as suggested above, before them many other Fathers had been imbued by this ascetic ideal in their attempt to follow Jesus teachings and in their search for perfection and deification, their ideal of salvation. They laid the foundations of asceticism. As Florovsky asserts, in The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers, the Desert Fathers, who started in a non-Greek milieu, developed this ascetic ideal, motivated by and through the experience of withdrawal: An ascetic ideal was elaborated and developed in the novitiate and in the experience of the life of withdrawal. This was primarily an ideal of spiritual birth and perfection, an ideal of a spiritual life and life in the Spirit. This is not so much a moral ideal as a precisely religious one. In Eastern Christian asceticism in general there is more mysticism and metaphysics than ethics. The ideal of salvation is an ideal of deification, of theosis and the path to it is courting the Spirita path of spiritual struggle and spiritual grasping, a charismatic path. In their attempts to accomplish Christian perfection and deification, the ascetic Fathers had to face four main dangers which could frustrate these attempts: The first danger to be noticed is evil concupiscence. A second danger lies in the allurements of the visible creation, which occupy mans heart to the exclusion of the highest good; to the same class belong the enticements of the sinful, corrupt world (1 John 5:19), that is, those men who promulgate vicious and ungodly doctrines and thereby dim or deny mans sublime destiny, or who by perverting ethical concepts and by setting a bad example give a false tendency to mans sensuality. Thirdly, ascetics acquaint us not only with the malice of the devil, lest we should fall a prey to his cunning wiles, but also with his weakness, lest we should lose heart. Finally, not satisfied with indicating the general means to be used for waging a victorious combat, ascetics offers us particular remedies for special temptations (Ascetic Theology). The means for realizing the Christian ideal was prayer, self-denial in the constant combat between spirit and flesh, labor, suffering, and virtue (Ascetic Theology).

425

Chapter 4: Patristics

These means also involved other ascetic practices, namely poverty, celibacy, obedience to a spiritual leader, detachment from family, and others such as fasting or silence. The goal of these and many other ascetic practices to be mentioned later was a more intense relationship with God, some type of personal enlightenment or the service of God not only through prayer, meditations and the interior life in a cloister or hermitage, but also through meditation or good works such as teaching or nursing. Of great importance too was the spiritual warfare against evil spirits. Thus, when approaching the Fathers and their ascetic way of living and teaching, we need to understand that for them asceticism was not an end in itself. Their renunciation of the world was a way of removing all the obstacles to loving God and reaching Christian perfection. Jesus as God incarnate on earth was the model to follow and imitate. Thus quite logically for them, they very often refer to themselves as imitators of Christ and for them the word Christianity was equivalent to an ascetic way of life, a philosophy of life. It was through the practice of ascesis, of a complete renunciation of the life of this present world, that the monastic life carried its essential aim of union with God. Christian asceticism was not a battle against the body, but for it. The entire person repentssoul and bodyseeking purity of mind and soul. Ascetics are counted among the most fruitful spiritual and theological writers, and in some periods, notably during the Middle Ages, the story of monastic spirituality is almost identical with that of theology in general. Many individuals who spent part of their lives in the desert or in monasteries became important figures in the Church and society of the fourth and fifth century, among them St. Athanasius of Alexandria, St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory Nazianzus, San Gregory Nyssa (also the father of eastern mysticism), John Chrysostom, John Cassian, Augustine of Hippo, and Gregory Palamas. In the Orthodox Church monks were and are regarded as a privileged

426

Chapter 4: Patristics

theological elite and the ascetic experience is advocated as the highest form of theology, even superior to the academic discipline of theology. It is necessary to add that in Orthodoxy, asceticism and mysticism often went together. As Lossky puts it, in Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, the eastern tradition has never made a sharp distinction between mysticism or personal experience of the divine mysteries and theology and dogmas affirmed by the Church. He continues: Far from being mutually opposed, theology and mysticism support and complete each other. One is impossible without the other. If the mystical experience is a personal working out of the content of the common faith, theology is an expression, for the profit of all, of that which can be experienced by everyone. Outside the truth kept by the whole Church personal experience would be deprived of all certainty, of all objectivity. (8-9) Eastern monks practiced periods of purgation and contemplation and illumination as a way to ascend to the divine presence of God and obtain unity with the Divine. But contemplation also entailed being active. In fact, the ascetic rule and the school of interior prayer received the name of spiritual activity. Lossky says: If the monks occupy themselves from time to time with physical labors, it is above all with an ascetic end in view: the sooner to overcome their rebel nature, as well as to avoid idleness, enemy of the spiritual life. To attain to union with God, in the measure in which it is realizable here on earth, requires continual effort or, more precisely, an unceasing vigil that the integrity of the inward man, the union of heart and spirit (to use an expression of Orthodox asceticism), withstand all the assaults of the enemy: every irrational movement of our fallen nature. Human nature must undergo a change; it must be more and more transfigured by grace in the way of sanctification, which has a range which is not only spiritual but also bodilyand hence cosmic. The spiritual work of a monk living in community or a hermit withdrawn from the world retains all its worth for the entire universe even though it remain hidden from the sight of all. This is why monastic institutions have always enjoyed great veneration in every country of the Orthodox world. (18) The mystical union is always a secret between man and God, but the Fathers would integrate their practice of the ascetic rule and its inward and personal aspect of the mystic experience with their advice for edification as reflected in their writings.

427

Chapter 4: Patristics

Although in Orthodoxy, asceticism was closely associated with mysticism, it made a few key differences distinctions between them as regarding moral theology:
All these disciplinesascetics, moral theology, and mysticismare concerned with the Christian life and its last end in the next world; but they differ, though not totally, in their mode of treatment. Ascetical theology, which has been separated from moral theology and mysticism, has for its subject-matter the striving after Christian perfection; it shows how Christian perfection may be attained by earnestly exercising and schooling the will, using the specified means both to avoid the dangers and allurements of sin and to practice virtue with greater intensity. Moral theology, on the other hand, is the doctrine of the duties, and in discussing the virtues is satisfied with a scientific exposition. Mysticism treats essentially of union with God and of the extraordinary, so-called mystic prayer (Adapted from Ascetical Theology). Table 60: Relation of Ascetics to Moral Theology and Mysticism

An allegorical interpretation of the Bible was also important for asceticism. Special emphasis was given to the Song of Solomon, the life of Moses as well as the Genesis account of the earlier patriarchs. With an emphasis on desert life, Christian authors such as Origen, Jerome, John Chrysostom, and Augustine interpreted Biblical texts within a highly asceticized religious environment. Through their commentaries, they created a new asceticized Scripture, and, in the process, an asceticized version of Christianity (Monasticism and Asceticism, Asceticism and Christian Monasticism, Desert Fathers). It is also necessary to add that when the monastic Fathers talk, they do not address only monks. They do not make any distinction between monks and lay people. Paul Evdokimov, in The Universal Character of Monastic Spirituality, states that there is a universal character to eastern monastic spirituality. The Fathers addressed themselves to all the members of the Church, the mystical Body. They spoke to the universal priesthood. Saint John Chrysostom says, in Homily 7 on Hebrews: What then are these things to us (one says) who are not monastics? Sayest thou this to me? Say it to Paul, when he says, Watching with all perseverance and supplication (Eph. vi. 18), when he says, Make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof. (Rom. xiii. 14.) For surely he wrote not these things to solitaries only, but to all that are in cities. For ought the man who lives in the world to have any advantage over the solitary, save only the living with a wife? In this point he has allowance, but in others none, but it is his duty to do all things equally with the solitary. 428

Chapter 4: Patristics

St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite,128 (1748-1809), editor of the Philokalia, in The Life of St. Gregory Palamas, tell us about Gregory Palamas regarding unceasing prayer as being the duty of Christians: Let no one think, my dear brothers in Christ, that the duty of praying unceasingly and always belongs only to those of priestly rank and monastics and not to laymen. No, no; all of us Christians have the duty of being always in the state of prayer. Just see what the holy Patriarch of Constantinople, Philotheus writes in the life of St. Gregory of Thessalonika: This hierarch had a beloved friend whose name was Job, a simple man but full of good deeds. Once they were conversing and the bishop said concerning prayer that all Christians must struggle in prayer always and must pray constantly just as the Apostle Paul exhorts: pray without ceasing (I Thess.5:l7); and as the prophet David says of himself [in spite of the fact that he was king and had to take care of his entire kingdom]: I beheld the Lord ever before me (Ps. 15:8), i.e. in my minds eye I always see the Lord before me in my prayer. And St. Gregory the Theologian teaches all Christians and tells them that they should remember the name of God more often than they breathe. Then Nicodemus says: So, my Christian brethren, I too implore you, together also with St. Chrysostom, for the sake of saving your souls, do not neglect the practice of this prayer. Imitate those I have mentioned and follow in their footsteps as far as you can. But, to understand what asceticism is and describe some personal ascetic experiences and teachings of the Fathers, let us approach asceticism first through its etymology and biblical origin; secondly, through its roots and influence from some Pre-Nicene Fathers such as Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and the like; thirdly with the Desert Fathers such as St. Anthony, St. Pachomius and St. Basil, a Cappadocian Father, who delineated the basis for the ascetic, monastic ideal with rules regarding charity, mindfulness of God with prayer, common life, and obedience (Brsard); and fourthly through the continuation of this ascetic, monastic ideal in other Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers.

128

Also called St. Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain.

429

Chapter 4: Patristics

Activity Briefly summarize the main ideas of this introduction on the topic of asceticism.
Activity 108: Summary of main ideas of Introduction

ASKESIS: MEANING OF THE TERM, SOME FEATURES The term ascesis (adj. ascetic or ascetical) derives from the ancient Greek term askesis meaning practice, training, bodily exercise, trial, or to contend with the dedication of an athlete. For early Christians, who adopted this Greek term, askesis connoted spiritual discipline, spiritual striving, or spiritual training. When referring to his own spiritual self-discipline, St. Paul uses these images: I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway (1 Cor. 9:26-27). Florovsky sees this passage as very monastic and ascetic in content. For this theologian, the race St. Paul mentions is a spiritual struggle, an indication that St. Paul believes that he can participate in his own salvation (vol. 10, 1987, 14). In this same line, two centuries later, St. Basil of Caesarea, in his Letter to the Alexandrians (Letter 139), refers to these Alexandrians as athletes of Christ: But if the temptation is for a season, bear it, ye noble athletes of Christ. If the world is being delivered to complete, and final destruction, let us not lose heart for the present, but let us await the revelation from heaven, and the manifestation of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Basil, the Father of Greek monasticism, was writing to them to give them courage in the face of the cruel persecution ordered by Valens in the 370s in all the eastern Empire against the Nicene Christians and pagan philosophers. With the Fathers, the term askesis acquired a Christian meaning. For them Christian asceticism implied, as commented above, among other things, selfdenial, a disciplined practice, a renunciation of worldly pursuits as part of the great 430

Chapter 4: Patristics

struggle against the devil for a spiritual purpose, for the purpose of earning the habits of virtue and of personal enlightenment of attaining higher spiritual goals. Interestingly, Clement refers to the self-discipline of the ascetic as being a gift of God about which one cannot boast: Let our whole body be preserved in Christ Jesus, and let each man be subject to his neighbour, as he has had his place assigned by his spiritual gift. Let the strong not neglect the weak; let the weak respect the strong... . Let the pure in flesh [sc. the ascetic] refrain from boasting of it, knowing that it is Another who supplies his self-discipline. (Letter to the Corinthians, xxxviii). Spidlik, in El monacato en el oriente cristiano, says that Christian askesis more than a mere exercise of self-will, was a search for life with God and a manifestation of love, of charity, using charity a substitute for martyrdom (143). Although, as we have seen, asceticism has taken different forms, it consists mainly of three principles: poverty or abandonment of the worlds goods, chastity the refusal of the pleasure of the flesh, and obedience or spiritual submission to a leader or to a set of rules governing life, broadly corresponding to the same three evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Both a state of penance and Christian perfection are intrinsic to the ascetic, monastic ideal. As stated above, the monks highest ideal, a continuous search for Christian perfection, meant the supernatural or highest spiritual union with God he could attain in this life. In Asceticism (1) we find a short, clear definition of this concept: [Asceticism] is prompted by the desire to do the will of God, any personal element of self-satisfaction which enters the motive vitiating it more or less. Its object is the subordination of the lower appetites to the dictates of right reason and the law of God, with the continued and necessary cultivation of the virtues which the Creator intended man to possess. As St. Makarios of Egypt states most correctly: The soul that really loves God and Christ, though it may do ten thousand righteousnesses, esteems itself as having wrought nothing, by reason of its insatiable aspiration after God. Though it should exhaust the

431

Chapter 4: Patristics

body with fastings, with watchings, its attitude towards the virtues is as if it had not yet even begun to labour for them (Homily 26, 25-26).129 Yet the Church Fathers regarded with suspicion extreme external penances. St. Jerome (345-420), one of the doctors of the Latin says in his Letter 148, to Matron Celantia: Be on your guard when you begin to mortify your body by abstinence and fasting, lest you imagine yourself to be perfect and a saint; for perfection does not consist in this virtue. It is only a help; a disposition; a means though a fitting one, for the attainment of true perfection. In this letter, Jerome addresses the principles and methods of a holy life. Being prone to austerity himself makes Jerome an especially valuable authority on this point. Moreover, in his letter to Demetria (Letter 130:11), he also warns of the effect of extreme fasting or abstinence: I do not, however, lay on you as an obligation any extreme fasting or abnormal abstinence from food. Such practices soon break down weak constitutions and cause bodily sickness before they lay the foundations of a holy life. It is a maxim of the philosophers that virtues are means, and that all extremes are of the nature of vice; and it is in this sense that one of the seven wise men propounds the famous saw quoted in the comedy, In nothing too much. You must not go on fasting until your heart begins to throb and your breath to fail and you have to be supported or carried by others. No; while curbing the desires of the flesh, you must keep sufficient strength to read scripture, to sing psalms, and to observe vigils. For fasting is not a complete virtue in itself but only a foundation on which other virtues may be built. According to Jerome, asceticism is an effort to attain true perfection. Penance by means of abstinence or fasting130 is only an auxiliary virtue thereto. Among the many ascetic practices, the ascetic Fathers gave obedience great importance. Elder Siluan, a nineteen-century schema-monk of Mt. Athos, gives several reasons for this fact: Because asceticism without obedience leads to vanity; if a novice merely does what he is told, he has no reason to be proud. Moreover, the obedient has cut off
Qtd in Balamand Monastery: One Hundred & Twenty Wise Sayings from The Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church. 130 It should be noted also that the expression fasting and abstinence is commonly used in Scripture and by ascetic writers as a generic term for all sorts of penance (Asceticism).
129

432

Chapter 4: Patristics

his will in everything and listens to his spiritual father, and for this reason his mind is clear of any concern and his prayer is pure. The obedient has in mind only God and the word of his elder, while the disobedients mind is full of various business and condemnation for his elder, and for that reason he cannot see God. The model and basis for obedience was that of Jesus to the Fathers will and the humbleness, stated in the following Bible passage: 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. (Philippians 2: 5-8) Rev. Chrysostom, in The Ancient Fathers of the Desert: Introduction and Commentary, refers to other features of these Fathers, also explaining how they can help the modern world: The desert Fathers speak of sexual desire, envy, greed, jealousy, hate, and the most complex human foibles. They expose to us what is all too familiar and obvious. They let us see with alarming clarity the depth of our depravity and the labyrinths of our sinful inner chasms. And though we probably cannot attain to the fullest extent the virtues by which these holy hermits overcame human depravity, we can see clearly the folly of a modern world seeking goodness, truth, purity, and virtue without first humbling itself before its Creator and the subtle inward world of spiritual truth. Hearing today of virtues, the ancient Fathers show them, by their examples, to be plastic virtues. Seeing today monuments of faith built with stone and mortar, the desert dwellers show us monuments of faith built on flesh and blood. The eastern Fathers did live these ascetic, monastic ideals. Chrysostom adds, For, ultimately Orthodoxy is not expressed only in correct beliefs, doctrines, or dogmas. It is lived and felt and experienced. Beliefs, doctrines, and dogmas reflect a theology of facts, as one great Church Father expressed it, and the locus of these facts is personal spiritual experience and practice. Until we know what we believe as it is expressed in lives lived and transformed by real individuals, rather than from logical dicta rising out of rigorous philosophical systems, we cannot adequately express to the Westerner the truth of the Orthodox Faith. And to know these real individuals, these incarnate pillars of philosophical truth, we must turn to the largely unknown spiritual treasures of Orthodoxy, the ascetic parables and writings of those who struggled with the passions for perfection in Christ. In contrast with western monasticism, which quickly took an important social and evangelistic dimension, eastern monasticism remained highly individualistic and 433

Chapter 4: Patristics

contemplative in its emphasis. Thus, the ascesis and contemplative movements became linked together. As already mentioned, contemplation in the eastern Church did not imply merely negation and renunciationthe emphasis in the western Churchbut rather the achievement of perfection, of theosis, of a deifying union with Gods Spirit in an experience of spiritual illumination after all intellectual activity ceased. With this process of deification we should not only envision a hesychast praying in silence or St. Seraphim of Sarovs transfiguration, but also St. Basil looking after the sick in the hospital at Caesarea or St. John the Almsgiver caring for the poor of Alexandria. The search for deification fully changed the lives of those involved in it. In Apophthegmata or Sayings of the Father of the Desert (Patrologia Graeca 65, Agatho 26), one of these Fathers says: If it were possible for me to find a leper, and to give him my body and to take his, I would gladly do it. For this is perfect love.131 The ascetic Fathers knew that God was love and that their nearest and dearest approach to God was by and through love.

BIBLICAL BASIS OF THE MONASTIC, ASCETIC IDEAL Old Testamental Basis The ancient models of the modern Christian ascetic, monastic ideal are the Nazarites and the prophets of Israel. A Nazarite was a person voluntarily separated to the Lord, under a special vow: 1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the LORD: 3 He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried. 4 All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from the kernels even to the husk. 5 All the days of the vow of his separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto the LORD, he shall be holy, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow. 6 All the days that he
131

Quoted in Orthodox Mysticism: Teachings of the Desert Fathers.

434

Chapter 4: Patristics

separateth himself unto the LORD he shall come at no dead body. 7 He shall not make himself unclean for his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his sister, when they die: because the consecration of his God is upon his head. 8 All the days of his separation he is holy unto the LORD. (Number 6: 1-8) The pre-Abrahamic prophets, Enoch and Melchizedek, and especially the Jewish prophets Elijah and his disciple Elisha are also important to Christian monastic tradition. The Dead Sea Scrolls revealed ascetic practices of the ancient Jewish sect of Essenes too. In the Old Testament, for example, we can find many passages regarding fasting, often 40 days and nights, as we will see in the case of Jesus, namely, Elijah (1 King 19:8) and Moses before delivering the Ten Commandments (Exodus 34:28). There are also other citations in the Old Testament about the number forty. Forty was a common number in the Bible to describe a period of hardship, difficulty, testing, or suffering. One can think of the Israelites` wandering for forty years in the wilderness. Let us do the following activity:

Activity Read the following Bible passages about 40 days fasting and find out who is in the process of fasting. The first is given to you. Exodus 34:27,28: 2 Corinthians Ezra 8:21-23 Moses 11:27 Esther 4 1 Samuel 8:5,6 Jonah 3:5-10 Matthew 4:1,2 Acts 13:1-3; 14:23 2 Corinthians 6:4,5 1 King 2 Chronicles 20:1-3 Judges 20:26 Especially read and Mark 2:18 2 Samuel 12:16 study Isaiah 58 to discover the many Nehemiah 1:4; 9:1 Daniel 6:9,18 benefits of fasting 3 Luke 2:36, 37 when done Gods way. (Source: 40 Days Fast)
Activity 109: Bible quotes on fasting

The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue, also provide a complete code of ethical conduct and virtues practiced by the mass of the people of God under the Old Law,

435

Chapter 4: Patristics

which may be considered as the first step in true asceticism. The following is an illustration of the Decalogue:

Illustration 67: The Ten Commandments132

The negative commandments, the final five, do not connote only the repression of the lower appetites, and, consequently, the call for penance and mortification, but also the cultivation of the virtues opposed to the things forbidden. Thus they incite to meekness, gentleness, self-control, patience, continence, chastity, justice, honesty, brotherly love, magnanimity, liberality, etc. The first three, which are positive in their character, incite the constant exercise of the virtues of faith, hope, charity, religion, reverence and prayer. Finally the fourth insists on obedience, respect for authority, observance of law, filial piety, and the like. In the New Dispensation with the teaching and example of Christ, the binding force of the Commandments continued, but the practice of virtue took on another aspect: the dominant motive presented to man for the service of God was not fear, but love, transforming love. This was a kind love not

132

See: <www.caverun.org>.

436

Chapter 4: Patristics

limited to the chosen people, but extended to the schismatic, the pagan, the outcast, even to the enemy. This supernal feature of love and ministry to all nations of the world became the distinctive characteristic of asceticism with the first Christians (Monasticism). Activity With your own words, briefly summarize the Old Testament basis of asceticism. First quote the passage and then describe its reference to asceticism.
Activity 110: Old Testament basis of asceticism

New Testamental Basis Ascetics imitated Christ by searching the Holy Scripture for instruction and following Him along three main lines: mortification of the senses, unworldliness, and detachment from family (Asceticism). Let us do the following exercise:

Activity Read the following New Testament passages and discover which one refers to these three main lines taken by asceticsmortification, unworldliness, detachment from family: 1 Corinthians 9:7: John 18:36: Luke 14:26: Matthew 10:38:
Activity 111: New Testament passages on mortification, unworldliness, and detachment

In this line, Florovsky, when reflecting on the critique on the theology of the Reformation and its opposition of the monastic, ascetic ideal as a distortion of authentic Christianity, formulates enlightening questions and answers and arguments to defend the biblical basis of monasticism. It is true that the Orthodox Church did not have to face Luthers Reformation, but Florovskys justification and delineation of his defense

437

Chapter 4: Patristics

points against the Reformation can give us insight into the New Testamental basis of this ideal. He starts this defense by saying: If the monastic ideal is to attain a creative spiritual freedom, if the monastic ideal realizes that freedom is attainable only in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, and if the monastic ideal asserts that to become a slave to God is ontologically and existentially the path to becoming free, the path in which humanity fully becomes human precisely because the created existence of humanity is contingent upon God, is by itself bordered on both sides by nonexistence, then is such an ideal Christian? Is such an ideal BiblicalNew Testamental? (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers)133 For Florovsky, the monastic ideal was foreshadowed in the asceticism of the Gospel. This is illustrated in an ascetic passage such as I John 2: 15-17: 5 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. Renunciation of things worldlyproperty and marriageand to devote ones life to the poor and the needy was a common goal in earlier Christian asceticism, yet at that moment the idea of living apart from the congregation of the faithful was out of the question. This style of life wouldnt take a definite shape until the fourth century (Monasticism). Florovsky says: Monasticism in its developed form from the fourth century is primarily a social movement, an experimental answer to a social question. Ascetic renunciation is not only abstention or a refusal of everyday advantages or excesses; it is not some ordeal undertaken above and beyond the call of duty. It is a renunciation of the world in general and of everything in it, and first of all a renunciation of the world system, of social contactsnot so much a renunciation of the Cosmos as a renunciation of the Empire or of any political system, a renunciation not of Gods creation but of mans worldly city. (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) The passages alluding to ascetic ideals found in the New Testament are many. Florovsky asserts that the Lord, besides His redemptive work, taught and set meaningful examples: One of His actions, which was followed by the first monks, was His retreat to

133

Being a book taken from the Internet, page numbers are not included.

438

Chapter 4: Patristics

the desert, as He did when preparing for His public work: This is seen in the following passage: 1 Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 2 And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterward and hungred (Matt. 4:1-2). Although there is no reason to doubt that Jesus fasted during forty days and forty nights, as we have seen, the expression forty days and forty nights was normally used to connote a period of hardship. As Florovsky states, St. Anthony goes to the desert following the example of Jesus. The desertor other symbolic places in regions with no desertsis a place where men can find solitude, but at the same time, paradoxically, a place of spiritual struggle: It is that type of place which allows the human heart solace, isolation. It is the type of place which puts the human heart in a state of aloneness, a state in which to meditate, to pray, to fast, to reflect upon ones inner existence and ones relationship to ultimate realityGod. And more. It is a place where spiritual reality is intensified, a place where spiritual life can intensify and simultaneously where the opposing forces to spiritual life can become more dominant. It is the terrain of a battlefield but a spiritual one. (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) Based on Matthew 5:16,Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.Florovsky focuses on the expression good works to describe the ascetic, monastic ideal, adding that it is defined in the preceding texts of the Beatitudes. Thus He asks: Is it not an integral part of the monastic goal to become meek, to hunger and thirst for righteousness, and to become pure in heart? This, of course, must be the goal of all Christians but monasticism, which makes it an integral part of its ascetical life, can in no way be excluded. Are not the Beatitudes more than just rhetorical expressions? Are not the Beatitudes a part of the commandments of our Lord? (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) Furthermore, also quoting Matthew 22: 34-40, 34 But when the Pharisees had heard that He had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. 35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked

439

Chapter 4: Patristics

him a question, tempting him, and saying, 36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. he explains, as I have already noted, that To be filled by the love of and for God is the monastic ideal ... The monastic and ascetic ideal is to cultivate the love of heart, the soul, and the mind for God ( 6). Moreover, Florovsky finds a New Testamental basis for the traditional monastic and ascetical life regarding its activities of perfection, almsgiving, prayer, fasting, chastity, poverty, humility, and the active participation of men in their redemptive process (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). Referring to the already quoted Matthew 5:48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.he emphasizes the monks searching of perfection. Regarding almsgiving, He cites Matthew 6: 2-4, 2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. regarding prayer, this theologian cites the Lords prayer, which He commanded, adding that Jesus did not restrict the frequency of prayer. Regarding fasting, Florovsky quotes Matthew 9:15, which suggests the fasting of Jesus disciples when He is taken away: And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bride chamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast (9:15). Florovsky also quotes The Gospel of Mark (9:29) which explains the reason why they were unable to cast out the devil: And he said unto them, this kind can come forth

440

Chapter 4: Patristics

by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. Regarding chastity, he asserts that rather than being imposed on Christianity by a Hellenistic type of thinking, it is contained within the original deposit of apostolic and Biblical Christianity. He quotes Matthew 19:10-12: 10 His disciples say unto him, if the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11 But he said unto them, all men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mothers womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heavens sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. From this quote, celibacy seems to be a special gift from God bestowed on a few. The Latin Father, Tertullian, is clear on what he believes concerning celibacy and virginity: To us continence has been pointed out by the Lord of salvation as an instrument for attaining eternity, and as a testimony of (our) faith; as a commendation of this flesh of ours, which is to be sustained for the garment of immortality, which is one day to supervene; for enduring, in fine, the will of God. (To His Wife 7, 2) Yet, it is well known that in the history of the Orthodox Church and in its theology, marriage and celibacy are both seen in positive terms. The Orthodox Church does not link priesthood with celibacy, although the practice of appointing only celibates as bishops dates back to the fifth century. Angelo Nicolaides, in The State of Celibacy and the Monastic Calling: An Orthodox Perspective, quoting Matthew 22:30in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.asserts that in the Orthodox Church today, monastic life is defended, protected and promoted in witness to life in Gods coming kingdom where all holy men and women will be as the angels of God. In this eschatological sense he also quotes an interesting biblical passage to justify celibacy, For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels who are in heaven (Mark 12:25). Nicolaides interprets this passage as a New Testament praise of

441

Chapter 4: Patristics

celibacy as an anticipation of the ultimate angelic existence. But in a sense, it seems more to connote the difficulty and conflicts at the earthly levels of the decision. In this respect, it is also a well known fact that Paul, although commanding marriage in 1 Corinthians 7: 1-3: 1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.endorses the celibate state for those who feel they are capable of such a state. Yet he clarifies: 7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. Furthermore, Florovsky says that it is Jesus who established the spiritual value of poverty in Matthew 19:21: Jesus said unto him, if thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. It is Jesus, he states, who sets up the goal which St. Anthony followed. Moreover, to justify humility, another ascetic, monastic goal, Florovsky refers to Matthew 18:24Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.and 23:12and whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted. He adds: The humility of God cannot, of course, be considered in the same light as ascetical humility, or any human form of humility. However, the human forms of humility are derived from the very nature of God, just as the commandment to love is rooted in Gods love for mankind. Gods humility is precisely that being God he desires, he wills to be in communion with everything and everything is inferior to God. This has great theological significance, for it reveals the value of all created things, a value willed by God. (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) Regarding the ascetic, monastic goal of mens participation in their own salvation, Florovsky explains that the rejection of monasticism by the Reformation was a result of the emphasis placed upon salvation as a free gift of God. He remarks that Luthers doctrine was based on Pauls Epistle to the Romans and to the Galatians, and

442

Chapter 4: Patristics

that Luther was in one sense right because he protected one aspect of salvation, neglecting, however, the aspect of mens participation in this free gift. He comments that the very idea of access to grace in the Epistle to the Romans 5:2By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.is dynamic and implies spiritual activity. Also the use of the word weapons134instruments in King James Biblein this same Epistle 6:12-13, reminds of the idea of battle, of spiritual warfare, the very nature of the monastic ordeal: 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. 13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. Florovsky also argues that in the Epistle to the Romans 12:1, St. Paul expresses himself in a way which would seem meaningless if men were simply a passive object in the redemptive process: I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. Florovsky additionally quotes other passages by St. Paul indicating this active participation in his redemptive process with self-examination, prayers, love, warfare, and obedience. In II Corinthians 13:5, constant self-examination of spiritual life is stressedExamine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?; in I Corinthians 14:15, praying with both spirit and mind is important: What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also ... Moreover, loveloving God, mankind, all created things, to be penetrated by Gods
134

Florovsky does not say which Bible edition he is using for his Bible quotes. In The Weymouth New Testament (WEY) the word weapons is used in this quote rather than instruments.

443

Chapter 4: Patristics

love, to participate in love, which is God and flows from God and to enter a union with God, with love, the goal of the monastic and ascetic spirituality is underlined in I Corinthians 14:1: Follow after charity,135 and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. In addition, in II Corinthians 10: 3-6, Paul continues with his reference to warfare and stresses obedience: 3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: 4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) 5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; In other Epistles there are expressions that also lead to an active, dynamic spiritual life seen in the ascetic life. This is also true of I and II Peter, the Epistles of St. John and the Epistle of St. James. Similarly, the life of the early Church, as depicted in the Acts of the Apostles, is essentially a form of spirituality akin to that of the monastic, ascetical Christianity. As an illustration, the Acts shows the transforming power of love effected on the devout Jews who formed the first community of Christians. This elevated form of virtue would become a mark of Christian ascetics. Luke depicts the primitive Christian community this way: And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common (Acts 4:32). The first Christian communities lived in common, sharing everything. In both Christian writings and practices emphasis on an ascetic religious life was evident. A desert ascetic like St. Anthony the Great (251-356 CE) followed the tradition of ascetics in communities and sects of the previous centuries.

135

In other Bible versions such as WEY or The New International Version (NIV) this word is rendered as love.

444

Chapter 4: Patristics

Florovsky quotes the words of the great French historian Dom Germain Morin, which can serve as a concluding idea to this part: ...The monks actually did nothing but preserve intact, in the midst of altered circumstances, the ideal of the Christian life of early days ... And there is another continuous chain from the apostles to the solitaries and then to the cenobites, whose ideal, less novel than it seems, spread so quickly from the Egyptian deserts at the end of the third century. This chain is constituted by the men and women who lived in continence, ascetics and virgins, who never ceased to be held in honor in the ancient Church. (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) Now do the following activity: Activity Read the following New Testament passages and comment on the monastic, ascetic ideal of salvation and redemption as a dynamic activity or spiritual struggle on the part of man. Also comment references to the redemptive aspect based on the work of God. Galatians 4: 19 I Peter 1: 22 Ephesians 1:14 II Peter 1-4, 10 Philippians 1:25 I John 3:3 Colossians 1: 22-23 James 2:24 I Thessalonians 3:10 Find in Acts of Apostles some texts II Thessalonians 1:11 reflecting the ascetic ideal. I Timothy 1:5-6 II Timothy 2:1-3 Hebrews 12:1
Activity 112: The redemptive activity on part of man

Florovsky does not refer to St. John the Baptist, the most frequently cited rolemodel for the life of a hermit separated to the Lord. John, a Nazarite from his birth (Luke 1:15), also had his own disciples who stayed with him and supposedly learned to live in a way similar to his own: 1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, 2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 4 And the same John had his raiment of camels hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. (Matt.3: 1-6)

445

Chapter 4: Patristics

Jesus Christ is the consummate prototype of Christian asceticism and monasticism, communal and solitary, but it is necessary to add that Jesus did not retire for the purpose of afflicting his body or fasting or illumination/mysticism. He was the Son of God and Creator of this world and was quite aware of His relationship to this world or the universe and the Father. He never taught any form of self-denial. Jesus retired to meditate upon His next step: His public life. This, however, does not mean that men who followed the interpretation of various sayings of Christ as ringing exhortation to a life of asceticism did not yield spiritual fruits that changed their lives. The monastic and ascetic Fathers of the Church left precious pearls that illuminated and still illuminate the path of many to spiritualization. Florovsky also studies three opponents to the ascetic and monasticism ideals of fourth-century men such as Jovinian, Helvidius, Vigilantius, and Aerius of Sebaste seen by the Reformation as the representatives of pure Christianity in the Nicene Council and the following age. Their teachings against fasting, monasticism, Marys virginity, or chastity caused the apostasy of many monks and nuns (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). The study of these three mens ideas can also shed some light on the Fathers of the Churchs perception of asceticism. Fathers of the Church such as St. Ambrose or St. Jerome refuted the ideas of these men. Your Own Research Read Florovskys The Byzantine Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers (see internet reference in Bibliography) and summarize the key ideas of these fourth-century men who opposed some of the features of asceticism: Jovinian, Helvidius, Vigilantius, and Aerius of Sebaste.
Activity 113: Fourth century men who opposed asceticism

Activity In the last section we have seen many New Testament passages as bases to asceticism. List the passages and write its particular reference to asceticism. The first

446

Chapter 4: Patristics

is already done for you: I John 2:15-17: Do not love worldly things.

Activity 114: More New Testament basis of asceticism

Pre-Nicene Fathers and asceticism As we have seen asceticism was practiced in biblical times and many events depicted in the Scriptures were later perceived as models for Christians. We have also seen the search for perfection ascetics pursued in the midst of difficulties and dangers and the means for realizing the Christian ideal such as prayer, self-denial and selfcontrol, labor or suffering which were turned into channels of heavenly grace, and virtues. Ascetics, trying to counteract their human nature inclined towards evil, painfully struggled to attain the Kingdom of Heaven overcoming, with Gods grace, many serious obstacles. As seen, it was a combat between the spirit and the flesh aiming at Christian perfection, which led to an ultimate end: their union with God. It was a moral struggle with consisted in attacking and removing the obstacles, that is, the evil concupiscences (concupiscence of the flesh, concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life) (Ascetical Theology). The asceticism of the fourth century is connected with previous ascetic Fathers from the pre-Nicene period (Roots of Asceticism). In their writings we can read how they taught and gave advice about perfection and attaining the kingdom of God through the mastering of passions and the world, humility, rejection of property, labor, obedience or unceasing prayer. For some holy Fathers, the world meant an attachment to the things of the senses. St. Isaac the Syrian teaches in his Ascetic Homilies (Homily 2): The world is the general name for all the passions. When we call the passions by a common name, we call them the world. But when we wish to distinguish 447

Chapter 4: Patristics

them by their special names, we call them passions. The passions are the following: love of riches, desire for possessions, bodily pleasure from which comes sexual passion, love of honor which gives rise to envy, lust for power, arrogance and pride of position, the craving to adorn oneself with luxurious clothes and vain ornaments, the itch for human glory which is a source of anger and resentment, and physical fear. Where these passions cease to be active, there the world is dead... . Someone has said of the saints that while alive they were dead; for though living in the flesh, they did not live for the flesh. See for which of these passions you are alive. Then you will know how far you are alive to the world, and how far you are dead to it.136 These are teachings which became part of their own lives. For the Fathers the essence of Christian perfection was love. Love as a way of attaining this perfection has been the topic of many writers before St. Anthony who lived the ascetical impulse vigorously. Praising love, Clement of Rome, in his Letter to the Corinthians, says: There is nothing base, nothing arrogant in love. Love admits of no schisms: love gives rise to no seditions: love does all things in harmony. By love have all the elect of God been made perfect; without love nothing is well-pleasing to God. In love has the Lord taken us to Himself. On account of the Love He bore us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave His blood for us by the will of God; His flesh for our flesh, and His soul for our souls. (Chap. 49) In the Epistle of Barnabas, the way of life, the way of perfection, is described as follows: The way of light, then, is as follows. If any one desires to travel to the appointed place, he must be zealous in his works. The knowledge, therefore, which is given to us for the purpose of walking in this way, is the following. Thou shalt love Him that created thee: thou shalt glorify Him that redeemed thee from death. Thou shalt be simple in heart, and rich in spirit... Pursuing this way of light, loving Him that created us one should be simple in heart and rich in spirit. The author of the epistle goes on with a series of precepts exactly applicable to the goals of perfection and rules of the ascetic, monastic ideals of the Desert Fathers. He says, for example: ... Thou shalt not join thyself to those who walk in the way of death. Thou shalt hate doing what is unpleasing to God: thou shalt hate all hypocrisy. Thou shalt not forsake the commandments of the Lord. Thou shalt not exalt thyself, but shalt be of a lowly mind. Thou shalt not take glory to thyself. Thou shalt not take
136

Qtd in Hieromonk Damascene.

448

Chapter 4: Patristics

evil counsel against thy neighbour. Thou shalt not allow over-boldness to enter into thy soul. Thou shalt not commit fornication: thou shalt not commit adultery: thou shalt not be a corrupter of youth. In his Epistle to the Ephesians, St. Ignatius proposes not only love but also faith as the way to perfection: ... prepared for the building of God the Father, and drawn up on high by the instrument of Jesus Christ, which is the cross, making use of the Holy Spirit as a rope, while your faith was the means by which you ascended, and your love the way which led up to God (Chap. IX). In addition, his chapter XIV is an exhortation to faith and love: None of these things is hid from you, if ye perfectly possess that faith and love towards Christ Jesus which are the beginning and the end of life. The Didache talks about the love of God of ones neighbour as the way of life, as the way to perfection, which is accompanied by abstaining from freshly and worldly lusts: There are two ways, one of life and one of death, but a great difference between the two ways. The way of life, then, is this: First, you shall love God who made you; second, love your neighbor as yourself, and do not do to another what you would not want done to you. And of these sayings the teaching is this: Bless those who curse you, and pray for your enemies, and fast for those who persecute you. For what reward is there for loving those who love you? Do not the Gentiles do the same? But love those who hate you, and you shall not have an enemy. Abstain from fleshly and worldly lusts. If someone strikes your right cheek, turn to him the other also, and you shall be perfect. (Chap. 1) Furthermore, the Epistle to Diognetus talks about the love for God as necessary to be an imitator of Him: And if you love Him, you will be an imitator of His kindness. And do not wonder that a man may become an imitator of God. He can, if he is willing he who takes upon himself the burden of his neighbour; he who, in whatsoever respect he may be superior, is ready to benefit another who is deficient; he who, whatsoever things he has received from God, by distributing these to the needy, becomes a god to those who receive [his benefits]: he is an imitator of God. (Chap. 10) The epistle refers to a dynamic, active kind of love (Ascetical Theology). It was a dynamic kind of love whose goal was the union with God.

449

Chapter 4: Patristics

These and other pre-Nicene Fathers also dealt with other ascetic topics. Clement of Rome, for example, in his Letter to the Corinthians, exhorts to humility: Let us therefore brethren, be of humble mind, laying aside all haughtiness, and pride, and foolishness, and angry feelings; and let us act according to that which is written (for the Holy Spirit says, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, neither let the rich man Story in his riches. ... (Chap. 13) In the Epistle to Diognetus, its author envisions the relation of the Christian with the world as a fight against soul and flesh: The invisible soul is guarded by the visible body, and Christians are known indeed to be in the world, but their godliness remains invisible. The flesh hates the soul, and wars against it, though itself suffering no injury, because it is prevented from enjoying pleasures; the world also hates the Christians, though in nowise injured, because they abjure pleasures. (Chap. 6) In the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, ascetic virtue and doctrinal purity are emphasized. In Chapter 2 we find an exhortation to virtue: But He who raised Him up from the dead will raise up us also, if we do His will, and walk in His commandments, and love what He loved, keeping ourselves from all unrighteousness, covetousness, love of money, evil speaking, false witness; not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing, or blow for blow, or cursing for cursing, but being mindful of what the Lord said in His teaching... In chapter VII, the author of this epistle exhorts to persevere in fasting and prayer. Wherefore, forsaking the vanity of many, and their false doctrines, let us return to the word which has been handed down to us from the beginning; watching unto prayer, and persevering in fasting; beseeching in our supplications the allseeing God not to lead us into temptation, as the Lord has said: The spirit truly is willing, but the flesh is weak. In the Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp we find unceasing prayer. This epistle also sees the Christian as an athlete: Maintain thy position with all care, both in the flesh and spirit. Have a regard to preserve unity, than which nothing is better. Bear with all, even as the Lord does with thee. Support all in love, as also thou doest. Give thyself to prayer without ceasing. Implore additional understanding to what thou already hast. Be watchful, possessing a sleepless spirit. Speak to every man separately, as God enables thee. Bear the infirmities of all, as being a perfect athlete [in the Christian life]: where the labour is great, the gain is all the more. (Chap 1)

450

Chapter 4: Patristics

In Chapter V, which makes reference to the duties of husband and wives, purity is emphasized: In like manner also, exhort my brethren, in the name of Jesus Christ, that they love their wives, even as the Lord the Church. If any one can continue in a state of purity, to the honour of Him who is Lord of the flesh, let him so remain without boasting. Justin Martyr, in his First Apology, talks about chastity in reference to what Jesus Himself taught: So that all who, by human law, are twice married, are in the eye of our Master sinners, and those who look upon a woman to lust after her. For not only he who in act commits adultery is rejected by Him, but also he who desires to commit adultery: since not only our works, but also our thoughts, are open before God. And many, both men and women, who have been Christs disciples from childhood, remain pure at the age of sixty or seventy years; and I boast that I could produce such from every race of men. For what shall I say, too, of the countless multitude of those who have reformed intemperate habits, and learned these things? For Christ called not the just nor the chaste to repentance, but the ungodly, and the licentious, and the unjust ... (Chap. 15) In his Dialogue with Trypho, when teaching what true fast means, Justin says Learn, therefore, to keep the true fast of God, as Isaiah says, that you may please God (Chapter 15). St. Irenaeus, in Against Heresies, also addresses many topics seen in later ascetic practice, especially those treating with the battle against the soul and the flesh. As an illustration, he writes about passion and the flesh, But how did it come to pass that the Aeon was both dissolved [into her component parts], and became subject to passion? ... And, in like manner, if there had been a production of light, it would not suffer passion, or recur any danger in light like itself, but would rather glow with the greater brightness, and increase, as the day does from [the increasing brilliance of] the sun ... (Book II, Chap. 18, 5) about sin and humility, the meaning of Adams girdlewithout leaving the topic of lust: ...but, in a state of confusion at having transgressed His command, he (Adam) feels unworthy to appear before and to hold converse with God. Now, the fear

451

Chapter 4: Patristics

of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; the sense of sin leads to repentance ... however, adopted a dress conformable to his disobedience, being awed by the fear of God; and resisting the erring, the lustful propensity of his flesh (since he had lost his natural disposition and child-like mind, and had come to the knowledge of evil things), he girded a bridle of continence upon himself and his wife, fearing God ... thus humbling himself, if God, who is merciful, had not clothed them with tunics of skins instead of fig-leaves. (Book III, Chap. 23, 5) about spirituality and the body, But if the Spirit be wanting to the soul, he who is such is indeed of an animal nature, and being left carnal, shall be an imperfect being, possessing indeed the image [of God] in his formation (in plasmate), but not receiving the similitude through the Spirit; and thus is this being imperfect (Book V, Chap. 6, 12). He also talks about the salvation of the flesh, Now the final result of the work of the Spirit is the salvation of the flesh (Book V, Chap. 12, 4-5). He also deals with good works and lack of possessions (Book IV, Chap. 12, 5) or the gifts of the Holy Spirit which separate spiritual from carnal men (Book V, Chap. 8). Hermas, in The Shepherd, writes about the renunciation of riches as necessary for a man to be useful to God, I answered and said to her ... When the riches that now seduce them have been circumscribed, then will they be of use to God (I, Third Vision, Chap. 6). He also deals with real fasting (III, Fifth Similitude, Chap.3), purity of body and soul (III, Fifth Similitude, Chap.7), and alms-giving (III, Tenth Similitude, Chap. 4). A Latin father such as Tertullian also writes about ascetic practices. In To the Martyrs, he sees the world as a prison and the martyrs as athletes (Chapters II and III), in On Patience, he sees patience as Gods nature (Chapter III); in On Fasting, he sees fasting as a prerequisite of the remembrance of God (Chapter VI). Tertullian also describes the power of prayer (On Prayer). But along with the views of the Apostolic Fathers of the first and second century, asceticism is also organically bound with the tradition of the Alexandria School

452

Chapter 4: Patristics

and the teaching of Clement of Alexandria (c.150-215) and Origen, whose works many monks read (Florovsky, The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). Clement of Alexandria in The Stromata (Book 3)137 refers to the ascetic in this way The person who drifts into pleasures is gratifying his body; the ascetic is freeing his soul from passions, and the soul has authority over the body. In Who is the Rich Man that shall be saved? Clement talks about the renunciation of riches as renunciation of the passions of the soul: So that, becoming virtuous and good, he may be able to make a good use of these riches. The renunciation, then, and selling of all possessions, is to be understood as spoken of the passions of the soul (Chapter XIV). With Clement of Alexandria (c. 150215), asceticism became more systematic. For him, as we can see in the The Stromata, Christianity is the true philosophyat that time it was common to call philosophy to the ascetic wayand the perfect Christian the true Gnostic138which is grounded on faith: But that knowledge, which is the scientific demonstration of what is delivered according to the true philosophy, is rounded on faith. Now, we may say that it is that process of reason which, from what is admitted, procures faith in what is disputed (The Stromata, Book II, Chap. XI). For him the life of a Christian should be ruled in all things by temperance, as the ascetic way of viewing Christianity: It is not, then, the aspect of the outward man, but the soul that is to be decorated with the ornament of goodness; we may say also the flesh with the adornment of temperance (The Paedagogus, Book III, Chap. 2) (Ascetical Theology). Clement, according to Quasten, in Patrology (vol. ii, 19501986, 35), defended marriage against heretical Gnostics, who rejected it and defended complete abstinence. However, he was not married out of love for the Lord: So we

The English translation of this work has not been taken from New Advent but from Christian Churches of God. See: <http://www.logon.org/english/s/b3.html>. 138 As he says, a Gnostic according to the rule of the Church (The Stromata, Book VII, Chap. VII).

137

453

Chapter 4: Patristics

embrace self-control out of the love we bear the Lord and out of its honorable status, consecrating the temple of the Spirit (The Stromata 3, 59). He also said: He is acquiring heavenly glory for himself, if he remains single and keeps immaculate the union which has been broken by death and cheerfully obeys what God has in store for him, becoming undistracted from the Lords service (The Stromata 3, 12, 82). According to Florovsky, Clements influence on asceticism can be seen in the fact that the ideal of ascetic struggle is often defined as impassivity (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). This, he adds, is especially evident in the works of Cassian, Evagrius, and Palladius Lausiac History, and also in the first experiment of ascetic synthesis seen in St. Athanasius Vita S. Antoni. For Origen, a stern ascetic who even castrated himself out of purity, bodily discipline was also important. According to Eusebius he seems to have literally interpreted Matthew 19:12, There are those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Eusebius, in Ecclesiastical History (Chap. 8), comments that drastic measure evidenced an immature and youthful mind, but at the same time gave the highest proof of faith and continence. Spidlik tells us that Origen embraced a very ascetic Christianity, teaching all day, spending most of the night studying the Bible and sleeping very little. For him asceticism meant the perfect life (142). For Origen, the imitator of Christ should fight against sin, which prevents us from reaching perfection. For him, as Quasten tells us This presupposes the battle against the passions and the world as the causes of sin. The goal is the complete freedom from passions, the total destruction of passions. In order to reach it, there must be a perpetual mortification of the flesh (96). Like Clement, Origen does not reject marriage, but recommends the celibate life for the imitator of Christ (96). In Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, Origen says,

454

Chapter 4: Patristics

echoing Jesus: And to this the Saviour said, teaching us that absolute chastity is a gift given by God, and not merely the fruit of training, but given by God with prayer, All men cannot receive the saying, but they to whom it is given (Book XIV). Origen proposes a complete detachment from the world to avoid sin. He also recommends frequent vigils, severe fasting, and continual study day and night of Holy Scriptures to concentrate on divine things. As we seen in Clement of Rome, Origen also emphasizes humility. Quasten asserts that Origen appears as a forerunner of monasticism. This holds true also for his emphasis on the virtue of humility (96). Formulation and Development of Asceticism: The Desert Fathers and St. Basil Although by 250 A.D. there already were Christians, who had fled the secular world, living in caves in Egypt, institutional Christian monasticism seems to have begun in the deserts in A.D. 4th century Egypt, at the time of Constantines institutionalizing of Christianity in the Roman Empire. It was a kind of living martyrdom that begun with the end of persecution of Christians, as an option to prove ones piety. Thus a kind of long-term martyrdom of the ascetic became common. At the beginning, hermits, many of whom developed a reputation for holiness and wisdom, had more or less their own spiritual program, perhaps learning some basic practices from other monks. By fourth-century Egypt there were two basic forms of monasticism. On the one hand, there was the severe eremitic form (from eremos meaning desert), which was based on Antonys life in the desert. Hermits were also called anchorites (from anachoresis meaning departure). In the Collationes or Conferences with the Fathers,139 the desert father and ascetic writer of Southern Gaul, Cassian (360-433) talks about these anchorites tracing this form of monasticism back to St. Paul in Latin:

139

This work contains a record of the conversations of Cassian and Germanus with the Egyptian solitaries.

455

Chapter 4: Patristics

Out of this number of the perfect, and, if I may use the expression, this most fruitful root of saints, were produced afterwards the flowers and fruits of the anchorites as well. And of this order we have heard that the originators were those whom we mentioned just now; viz., Saint Paul (2) and Antony, men who frequented the recesses of the desert, not as some from faintheartedness, and the evil of impatience, but from a desire for loftier heights of perfection and divine contemplation ... (Conf. 18, chap. 6) On the second hand, there was cenobitic monasticismwhich did not extinguish the eremitic life, as developed by Pachomius, which existed among hermits. Cassian searches the beginning of cenobitic monasticism with the first preaching of the Apostles: And so the system of coenobites took its rise in the days of the preaching of the Apostles. For such was all that multitude of believers in Jerusalem, which is thus described in the Acts of the Apostles: But the multitude of believers was of one heart and one soul, neither said any of them that any of the things which he possessed was his own, but they had all things common. They sold their possessions and property and divided them to all, as any man had need. (Conf. 18, Chap. 5) From Egypt, monasticism, within a few years, spread across the Mediterranean world over the whole Christian world. As already suggested, Antony was not the first Christian ascetic, but he was for all intents and purposes the first Christian monk. For him and many other Christians the desert was the chosen place for the ascetic life. St Anthony the Great, as he was called, was born near Heraclea in Upper Egypt in 251, and is regarded as the Father of Orthodox monasticism. He was one of the first Egyptian hermits. He fled the world in 285, beginning his ascetic life at the age of 20. Eventually he withdrew into total solitude on a desert mountain in Middle Egypt, near the Nile River. His biographer, St. Athanasius of Alexandria, in Vita S. Antoni, tells us how he withstood extreme temptations of the devil there. In his first temptation, the devil, as the spirit of lust, incites Anthony to break with his chastity: When Antony asked, Who art thou who speakest thus with me? he answered with a lamentable voice, I am the friend of whoredom, and have taken upon me

456

Chapter 4: Patristics

incitements which lead to it against the young. I am called the spirit of lust. How many have I deceived who wished to live soberly, how many are the chaste whom by my incitements I have over-persuaded! I am he on account of whom also the prophet reproves those who have fallen, saying, Ye have been caused to err by the spirit of whoredom. For by me they have been tripped up. I am he who have so often troubled thee and have so often been overthrown by thee. But Antony having given thanks to the Lord, with good courage said to him, Thou art very despicable then, for thou art black-hearted and weak as a child. Henceforth I shall have no trouble from thee, for the Lord is my helper, and I shall look down on mine enemies. Having heard this, the black one straightway fled, shuddering at the words and dreading any longer even to come near the man. 7. This was Antonys first struggle against the devil, or rather this victory was the Saviours work in Antony By 305 St. Anthony started to instruct nearby hermits in the ways of monasticism. This Discourse on Demons, attributed to him, can give us an idea of these instructions. He begins this discourse by giving weight not only to the Scriptures, but also to shared faith and words: The Scriptures are enough for instruction, but it is a good thing to encourage one another in the faith, and to stir up with words. Then he says: Wherefore, children, let us hold fast our discipline, and let us not be careless. For in it the Lord is our fellow-worker, as it is written, to all that choose the good, God worketh with them for good. But to avoid being heedless, it is good to consider the word of the Apostle, I die daily. For if we too live as though dying daily, we shall not sin. And the meaning of that saying is, that as we rise day by day we should think that we shall not abide till evening; and again, when about to lie down to sleep, we should think that we shall not rise up. For our life is naturally uncertain, and Providence allots it to us daily. But thus ordering our daily life, we shall neither fall into sin, nor have a lust for anything, nor cherish wrath against any, nor shall we heap up treasure upon earth. But, as though under the daily expectation of death, we shall be without wealth, and shall forgive all things to all men, nor shall we retain at all the desire of women or of any other foul pleasure. But we shall turn from it as past and gone, ever striving and looking forward to the day of Judgment. For the greater dread and danger of torment ever destroys the ease of pleasure, and sets up the soul if it is like to fall. In this passage, Anthony charges against sin, lust, wrath, or wealth, the dangers of the ascetics to reach perfection. In other passages he admonishes hermits to be set in the way of virtue, in rectitude of soul. For him prayer and discipline are necessary to achieve this:

457

Chapter 4: Patristics

...Thus there is need of much prayer and of discipline, that when a man has received through the Spirit the gift of discerning spirits, he may have power to recognise their characteristics: which of them are less and which more evil; of what nature is the special pursuit of each, and how each of them is overthrown and cast out. For their villainies and the changes in their plots are many. The blessed Apostle and his followers knew such things when they said, for we are not ignorant of his devices; and we, from the temptations we have suffered at their hands, ought to correct one another under them. Wherefore I, having had proof of them, speak as to children. (N. 7)

Illustration 68: St. Anthony the Great, father of all monks140

In the Apothegmata Patrum we find more instructions given by Anthony: He also said, Always have the fear of God before your eyes. Remember Him who grants death and life. Hate the world and all that is in it. Hate all peace that comes from the flesh. Renounce this life, that you may be alive to God. Remember that which you have promised God, for it will be required of you on the day of judgment. Suffer hunger, thirst, nakedness; be watchful and sorrowful; weep, and moan in your heart; test yourselves, to see if you are worthy of God; despise the flesh, so that you may preserve your souls. For many years, Anthony worked in seclusion, but progressively many came to him to learn his way of life and, giving in to their insistence, he allowed them to settle nearby and to build a monastery or individual cells141 similar to the tents of the

140 141

See: <www.theotokos.org>. Here monastery denoted a hermits cell or a group of cells.

458

Chapter 4: Patristics

nomadic tribes. This gave origin to the first colony of anchorites, (Florovsky, The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). These anchorites populated the desert and lived in small huts and clay houses in small villages called lavra (Nicolaides). Maximos E. Aghiorgoussis, in Monasticism in the Orthodox Church, describes these lavras as well as the type of life they carried on: St. Anthonys lavra was a village of anchorites who lived by themselves in their own huts and had a life in common, practiced common daily prayer evening and morning, worked in common, had common revenues and expenditures, and common meals, and wore the same identical monastic garb. This garb consisted of a linen tunic or robe and belt, a white goat skin or sheep skin coat and belt, a cone-shaped head-cover or hood (koukoulion) and a linen scarf (maforion or pallium). At this stage, monks were identified with lay people seeking Christian perfection. No religious ceremony was required, and no monastic vows.

Thou didst follow the ways of zealous Elijah, and the straight path of the Baptist, O Father Anthony. Thou didst become a desert dweller and support the world by thy prayers. Intercede with Christ our God that our souls may be saved. Table 61: Troparion of St. Anthony

Anthonys fame spread so much that Constantine and his son wrote to him. This is what Athanasius of Alexandria tells us: And the fame of Antony came even unto kings. For Constantine Augustus, and his sons Constantius and Constans the Augusti wrote letters to him, as to a father, and begged an answer from him. But he made nothing very much of the letters, nor did he rejoice at the messages, but was the same as he had been before the Emperors wrote to him. But when they brought him the letters he called the monks and said, Do not be astonished if an emperor writes to us, for he is a man; but rather wonder that God wrote the Law for men and has spoken to us through His own Son. And so he was unwilling to receive the letters, saying that he did not know how to write an answer to such things. But being urged by the monks because the emperors were Christians, and lest they should take offence on the ground that they had been spurned, he consented that they should be read, and wrote an answer approving them because they worshiped Christ, and giving them counsel on things pertaining to salvation: not to think much of the present, but rather to remember the judgment that is coming, and to know that Christ alone was the true and Eternal King. He begged them to be merciful and to give heed to justice and the poor. And they having received the answer rejoiced. Thus he was dear to all, and all desired to consider him as a father. (Vita S. Antoni, No. 81)

459

Chapter 4: Patristics

In The Ancient Fathers of the Desert (Section 1),142 there is a nave reference to this letter: Once Abba Antonios received a letter from Emperor Constantine the Great which requested him to go to Constantinople. He wondered about what to do. So he said to his disciple, Abba Paul: What do you say? Should I go? And the Abba answered him: If you go, you will be called Antonios; however, if you do not go, Abba Antonios. Because of the great respect that the entire Church had for him, Anthony was invited to attend the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea summoned, as mentioned, by Constantine in 325 A.D. He was called upon to give a defense of the Orthodox faith against the Arian heresy which denied Christ divinity. One of the delegates to this council, St. Paphnutios was an Egyptian who had been a disciple of St. Anthony. He prevented outright celibacy in the Orthodox Church. Paphnutios body was mutilated due to the cruel persecution of Emperor Maximin. In the year 356, just after his death, St. Anthonys Monastery was founded. The cave, in which the saint spent most of his life, is located beside it. This same monastery exists today:

Illustration 69: St. Anthony Monastery (built 356)143

142

These are passages from the Evergetinos selected by Chrysostom, translator of this books of sayings by the Desert Fathers. 143 See: <www.redsea.gov.eg>.

460

Chapter 4: Patristics

St. Anthony became the outstanding leader among the Desert Fathers. His particular style of living alone with God as his only companion remained the most respected monastic idea for the monks of the eastern Orthodox Church throughout the ages. Through Athanasius, Egyptian monasticism spread to the Latin West. Saint Pachomius of Egypt (280-346), also considered a founder of Christian monasticism, set out to lead the life of a hermit near Anthony, whose practices he imitated. Later Pachomius formally organized some proto-monasteriescells or larvescreated by an earlier ascetic named Marcarius of Egypt (300-390), a disciple of St. Anthony, where holy men, who were physically or mentally unable to stand the rigors of Anthonys solitary life, would live in a community. Before Pachomius, Christian asceticism had been solitary or eremitic. Monastics, either males or females, would live in individual huts or caves and met only for occasional worship services. Pachomius first lived seven years an anchoristic life under the training of old hermit Palemon, one of the most austere disciples of St Anthony. Palemon told him in these beginnings of his anchoristic life: Many have come here from disgust with the world, and they have had no perseverance. Remember, my son, my food consists only of bread and salt. I drink no wine, take no oil, spend half the night awake, singing Psalms and meditating on the Scriptures, and sometimes I pass the entire night without sleep.144 This hermit also used to tell him: Labor and watch, my dear Pachomius, lest the enemy overthrow you and ruin all your endeavors.145 Afterwards he left Palemon and founded another distinct monastic order: the Cenobitic order (from koinos bios meaning communal life) of monasticism. Pachomius created the first departure from the individualistic, exclusively contemplative nature that had previously characterized religious life. In this cenobitic organization male or female monastics lived together and

144 145

Qtd in Florovsky, The Byzantine Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers. Quoted in St. Pachomius, Abbot.

461

Chapter 4: Patristics

had their possessions in common under the leadership of an abbot or abbess. Pachomius himself was called Abba (father).146 This first cenobitic monastery (coenobium, common life) was in Tabennisi, Egypt, near the Nile. Pachomius soon devised a monastic Rule to regulate cloistered life. There were common prayer, common table, common work, and common use of the products of labor. According to monastic legend and tradition, an angel dictated these rules to Pachomius. Palladius describes Pachomius getting his rules from the hand of an angel: Tabennisi is a place, so called, in the Thebaid, in which there lived a certain Pachomius, one of those who have lived in the straight way, so that he was counted worthy both of prophecies and angelic visions. He was exceedingly devoted both to his fellowmen and his brethren. Accordingly, to him as he sat in his cave an angel appeared and said: You have successfully ordered your own life. So it is superfluous to remain sitting in your cave. Up! go out and collect all the young monks and dwell with them, and according to the model which I now give you, so legislate for them; and lie gave him a brass tablet on which this was inscribed. (Lausiac History, Chap. XXXII, 1) These are some of the rules the angel supposedly gave him: Thou shalt allow each man to eat and drink according to his strength; and proportionately to the strength of the eaters appoint to them their labors. And prevent no man either from fasting or eating. However, appoint the tasks that need strength to those who are stronger and eat, and to the weaker and more ascetic such as the weak can manage. Make a number of cells within the enclosure and let three dwell in each cell. But let them all go to one building for their food. Let them sleep not lying down full length, but let them make sloping chairs easily constructed and put their rugs on them and thus sleep in a sitting posture. And let them wear at night linen lebitons and a girdle. Let each of them have a worked goatskin cloak, without which they are not to eat. When they go to Communion on Saturday and Sunday, let them loosen their girdles and lay aside the skin cloak and go in with the cowls only. (Chap. XXXII, 2) Thus, regarded as equal to scripture, obedience to them was considered a great virtue. Pachomius explicitly forbade monks to become priests in order to avoid potential ambition for power. By the time of his death in 345, Pachomius had founded nine monasteries for men and two for women, amounting, as Palladius asserts to more than 7,000 brethren. Within a generation after his death, cenobitic monasticism moved out of
146

This is where the word Abbot comes from.

462

Chapter 4: Patristics

Egypt into Palestine and the Judea Desert, Syria, North Africa and eventually western Europe (Pachomius, Pachomius Biography). A generation afterwards, St. Basil (ca. 330-379),147 also a reformer of monasticism became the great lawgiver of the Greek monks. It seems that Basil had visited Pachomius once. According to Spidlik (240), in spite of the admiration Basil felt towards the hermits austerity he preferred, from experience and profound reflection about the essence of monastic life, the common life. Before forming his community, Basil, in 357, visited the main monastic colonies in Egypt, Palestine, Coelesyria, and Mesopotamia in order to see for himself the manner of life led by monks in these countries. When he comes back from this trip, he rejects the solitary life, criticizing, at the same time, Pachomian cenobitic monasticism, reworking his rules and establishing his Rule between 358 and 364. Florovsky says that: ... it is not an exaggeration that St. Basil radically changed monasticism. St. Basil viewed the cenobitic life as a microcosm of the Church, as a social organism, as a kind of special politia. St. Basils Rule rendered a decisive influence on the entire subsequent history of monastic life in Byzantium and in the West. (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) Florovsky adds that although the Rule was strict it avoided encouraging the more extreme forms of asceticism practice by the hermits. The Rule conceived of asceticism as a means to the perfect service of God and this was to be actualized in community life under obedience. In a letter addressed to Eustathius of Sebaste (Letter 233:2),148 originally also a monk and said to have been the first who made the Armenians acquainted with an ascetic life, Basil explains his view on the subject. It is a

Basil was ordained a presbyter in 364 and elected bishop of Caesarea in 370. The Eastern Orthodox Church considers Basil a saint and one of the Three Holy Hierarchs, together with Gregory Nazianzus and John Chrysostom. Basil, Gregory Nazianzus, and Basil's brother Gregory of Nyssa are called the Cappadocian Fathers. The Roman Catholic Church considers him a saint and a Doctor of the Church (Basil). 148 He was one of the chief founders of monasticism in Asia Minor, and for a long time was an intimate friend of St. Basil. He spread the Macedonian heresy (Pneumatomachi or Combators against the Spirit). This sect which flourished during the latter half of the fourth, and the beginning of the fifth century denied the divinity of the Holy Ghost.

147

463

Chapter 4: Patristics

long paragraph, but it deserves to be read to understand Basils concept of asceticism and his search of perfection: Much time had I spent in vanity, and had wasted nearly all my youth in the vain labour which I underwent in acquiring the wisdom made foolish by God. Then once upon a time, like a man roused from deep sleep, I turned my eyes to the marvellous light of the truth of the Gospel, and I perceived the uselessness of the wisdom of the princes of this world, that comes to naught. I wept many tears over my miserable life and I prayed that guidance might be vouchsafed me to admit me to the doctrines of true religion. First of all was I minded to make some mending of my ways, long perverted as they were by my intimacy with wicked men. Then I read the Gospel, and I saw there that a great means of reaching perfection was the selling of ones goods, the sharing them with the poor, the giving up of all care for this life, and the refusal to allow the soul to be turned by any sympathy to things of earth. And I prayed that I might find some one of the brethren who had chosen this way of life, that with him I might cross lifes short and troubled strait. And many did I find in Alexandria, and many in the rest of Egypt, and others in Palestine, and in Coele Syria, and in Mesopotamia. I admired their continence in living, and their endurance in toil; I was amazed at their persistency in prayer, and at their triumphing over sleep; subdued by no natural necessity, ever keeping their souls purpose high and free, in hunger, in thirst, in cold, in nakedness, they never yielded to the body; they were never willing to waste attention on it; always, as though living in a flesh that was not theirs, they shewed in very deed what it is to sojourn for a while in this life, and what to have ones citizenship and home in heaven. All this moved my admiration. I called these mens lives blessed, in that they did in deed shew that they bear about in their body the dying of Jesus. And I prayed that I, too, as far as in me lay, might imitate them. Although Basil is not opposed to solitude and did not reject contemplation, he expressed a definite preference for the communal life of the monastery over the solitary life of the hermit, arguing that the Christian life of mutual love and service was communal by its nature. In Regula brevius tractae (74),149 Basil delineates the disadvantages of a solitary life. Among the dangers, the first and greatest is that of selfsatisfaction which drives anchorites to forget God. Forgetting God was for Basil the root of all sin (Spidlik 240). Thus, as Florovsky states: St. Basil took the monasticism existing in his time, the anchoritic monasticism and the strict Pachomian cenobitic monasticism, and altered their structure. From an ordeal which was in essence solitary, he brought the ordeal under the direct wings of the social obligations of the Church. The ordeal now becomes inseparable from the service to man. The monks now are to take part in
149

Quoted by Florovsky (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers).

464

Chapter 4: Patristics

the education of children, in the comforting of the sick, and in the care for orphans. (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) Basil established his Rule for the members of the monastery he founded in the wild mountains of Pontus separated from Annesi by the River Iris. In The Father Speaks (16), we find a letter, dated around 360, he writes from Pontus to his friend Gregory of Nazianzus. In this letter he praises the solitude he experiences in Pontus: I departed into Pontus in quest of a place to live in. There God has opened on me a spot exactly answering to my taste, so that I actually see before my eyes what I have often pictured to my mind in idle fancy. There is a lofty mountain covered with thick woods, watered towards the north with cool and transparent streams. A plain lies beneath, enriched by the waters which are ever draining off from it; and skirted by a spontaneous profusion of trees almost thick enough to be a fence; so as even to surpass Calypsos Island, which Homer seems to have considered the most beautiful spot on the earth. Indeed it is like an island, enclosed as it is on all sides; for deep hollows cut off two sides of it; the river, which has lately fallen down a precipice, runs all along the front and is impassable as a wall; while the mountain extending itself behind, and meeting the hollows in a crescent, stops up the path at its roots. There is but one pass, and I am master of it. Behind my abode there is another gorge, rising into a ledge up above, so as to command the extent of the plains and the stream which bounds it, which is not less beautiful, to my taste, than the Strymon as seen from Amphipolis. For while the latter flows leisurely, and swells into a lake almost, and is too still to be a river, the former is the most rapid stream I know, and somewhat turbid, too, from the rocks just above; from which, shooting down, and eddying in a deep pool, it forms a most pleasant scene for myself or any one else; and is an inexhaustible resource to the country people, in the countless fish which its depths contain. What need to tell of the exhalations from the earth, or the breezes from the river? (Letter 14) Yet, Gregory shows little appreciation for the charms of the solitude in Pontus, as we can see in the letter he sent to his friend about 361: You may mock and pull to pieces my affairs, whether in jest or in earnest. This is a matter of no consequence; only laugh, and take your fill of culture, and enjoy my friendship. Everything that comes from you is pleasant to me, no matter what it may be, and how it may look. For I think you are chaffing about things here, not for the sake of chaffing, but that you may draw me to yourself, if I understand you at all; just like people who block up streams in order to draw them into another channel. That is how your sayings always seem to me... . No one visits it, you say, except for hunting; you might add, and except to look upon your dead bodies. This is perhaps too long for a letter, but it is too short for a comedy. If you can take my jokes kindly you will do well, but if not, I will send you some more. (Ep. I, Division II)

465

Chapter 4: Patristics

This monastery, to which his friend Gregory later joined, became the foundation for all eastern monasticism, which practically has not suffered any development. Gregory sojourned there for two or three years. The months that followed were later remembered by both men as a happy period. They lived the ascetic life, basing themselves on Scriptural texts they gathered together. They also reviewed some of the great writers of the past. Both Basil and Gregory were deeply influenced by Origen. They compiled an anthology of uncondemned writings of Origen known as the Philokalia (Greek for love of the beautiful/holy/exalted).150 Gregory also helped his friend in the compilation of his famous rules. In his Letter 22 On the Perfection of the Life of Solitaries, Basil delineates some written precepts which he would expand, rewrite and clarify during the later years of his life (Barrois, The Father Speaks 56). At the beginning of this letter he remarks the life of the monk following Jesus and Gods plan: The Christian ought to be so minded as becomes his heavenly calling, and his life and conversation ought to be worthy of the Gospel of Christ. The Christian ought not to be of doubtful mind, nor by anything drawn away from the recollection of God and of His purposes and judgments. Basils monastic rules were to inspire St. Benedicts rules which were followed by western monastics. After that, Gregory returned to Nazianzus, leaving with regret the peaceful hermitage where he and his friend had had such a pleasant time in the labour both of hands and of heads (St. Gregory of Nazianzus). Later on Basil left the monastery and was ordained a priest by Bishop Eusebius. Basil at this time was thirtyfour or thirty-five, not unusually old for ordination as thirty was the normal age required. But as Eusebius turned against him, and, to avoid a schism, Basil had to return to Pontus to rejoin the monks he had left at Annesi (Hanrahan).
This is not to be confused with the later compilation of the same name: The Philokalia, first assembled at Mount Athos by St. Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain and Makarios of Corinth. The Philokalia is a collection of writings, mainly focusing on practicing the virtues and spiritual living in a monastery.
150

466

Chapter 4: Patristics

O God, grant us a deeper sense of fellowship with all living this, our little brothers and sisters to whom in common with us you have given this earth as home. We recall with regret that in the past we have acted high-handedly and cruelly in exercising our domain over them. Thus, the voice of the earth which should have risen to you in song has turned into a groan of travail. May we realize that all these creatures also live for themselves and for younot for us alone? They too love the goodness of life, as we do, and serve you better in their way than we do in ours. Amen. Table 62: St. Basils prayer for a deeper sense of fellowship with all living things

In his Rule, Basil followed a catechetical method: the disciple asks a question to which the master replies (Rule of St. Basil). In Religious Life we find a good description of Basils thoughts and deeds: Comparing the solitary and the cenobitic life, he (St. Basil) points out one great advantage in the latter, namely the opportunity which it offers for practising charity to ones neighbour; and while deprecating excessive mortifications into which vanity and even pride may enter, he exhorts the superior to moderate the exterior life reasonably. St. Basil also permitted his monks to undertake the education of children; although he was glad to find some of these children embracing the monastic life, he wished them to do so of their own accord and with full knowledge, and he did not permit the liberty of a son or daughter to be restrained by an offering made by the parents. It is necessary to make clear that Basil tried to temper the excesses without destroying monasticisms spirit. Yet, as we have seen, Basil saw dangers in eremitic life. However, Cassian, the first to introduce the rules of eastern monasticism to the West some years later, sees advantages in both the eremitic and cenobitic life. In fact, Cassian voiced the common opinion about the discussion regarding the merits of these two ways of life. In the cited work, Collationes or Conferences with the Fathers, he believed that the cenobitic life offered more advantages and less inconveniences than the eremitic life (Hermits), yet he regarded the life of the solitary hermit as more desirable, as a stage beyond the life in community: The first is that of the coenobites, who live together in a congregation and are governed by the direction of a single Elder: and of this kind there is the largest number of monks dwelling throughout the whole of Egypt. The second is that of the anchorites, who were first trained in the coenobium and then being made perfect in practical life chose the recesses of the desert: and in this order we also hope to gain a place. The third is the reprehensible one of the Sarabaites. (Conf. 18, Chap. IV)

467

Chapter 4: Patristics

As he explains, some anchorites were first trained in the coenobium and left for the desert. But Cassian also shows how anchorites also left the desert for the coenobium. It is enlightening in this respect the answer Cassian and Germanus get from Abba John when he is asked as to the reasons of leaving the desert to start the cenobitic life: The system of the anchorites, which you are surprised at my leaving, I not only neither reject nor refuse, but rather embrace and regard with the utmost veneration: in which system, and after I had passed thirty years living in a coenobium, I rejoice that I have also spent twenty more, so that I can never be accused of sloth among those who tried it in a half-hearted way. But because its purity, of which I had had some slight experience, was sometimes soiled by the presence of anxiety about carnal matters, it seemed better to return to the coenobium to secure a readier attainment of an easier aim undertaken, and less danger from venturing on the higher life of the humble solitary. For it is better to seem earnest with smaller promises than careless in larger ones. (Conf. 19, Chap. III) Abba John also talks about the excellences of the anchorite system: IF then anyone else delights in the recesses of the desert and would forget all human intercourse and say with Jeremiah: I have not desired the day of man: Thou knowest, I confess that by the blessing of Gods grace, I also secured or at any rate tried to secure this. And so by the kind gift of the Lord I remember that I was often caught up into such an ecstasy as to forget that I was clothed with the burden of a weak body, and my soul on a sudden forgot all external notions and entirely cut itself off from all material objects, so that neither my eyes nor ears performed their proper functions. And my soul was so filled with divine meditations and spiritual contemplations that often in the evening I did not know whether I had taken any food and on the next day was very doubtful whether I had broken my fast yesterday. (Conf. 19, Chap. 4) In a further chapter, Cassian summarizes well the spiritual advantages of the cenobitic life and the hermit life: The aim indeed of the coenobite is to mortify and crucify all his desires and, according to that salutary command of evangelic perfection, to take no thought for the morrow. And it is perfectly clear that this perfection cannot be attained by any except a coenobite ... But the perfection for a hermit is to have his mind freed from all earthly things, and to unite it, as far as human frailty allows, with Christ ... To this aim then, which we have described as that of either life, unless each of them attains, in vain does the one adopt the system of the coenobium, and the other of the hermitage: for neither of them will get the good of his method of life. (Conf. 19, Chap. VIII)

468

Chapter 4: Patristics

For Cassian, the true purpose of monks and nuns to withdrawal from society was not to perform dramatic feats of self-renunciation but to find God. Comparing Basil to Cassian, Brsard says: Cassian was a Desert Father who wrote for a purpose: to show inexperienced cenobites how to live the monastic life. St Basil too wrote for a purpose. But, apart from that, the situation is very different. Far from being a desert dweller, an anchorite, Basil is frankly anti-eremitical. Though he made a tour of Egypt, he noticed what should not have been done rather than what should be done! Another Cappadocian Father, Gregory of Nyssa (330-394), brother of Basil, eventually joined Basil in his monastery at Pontus too where his sense of devotion quickened. In his youth he did not show any kind of aspiration, holy or otherwise. Like his brother and Gregory of Nazianzus, he studied the Scriptures and the works of Origen. His love of nature, most unusual for the times, was one trait of his character. He left descriptions of the natural beauties of the surrounding country. Gregory of Nyssa did not continue a secluded life of contemplation because, as mentioned above, his brother Basil had become the Bishop of Caesarea and left the monastery in order to protect his jurisdiction against the Arian Emperor and Patriarch of Constantinople. Later, Basil appointed Gregory as bishop of the insignificant town of Nyssa (Scheske). Gregory of Nyssa wrote some ascetic writings on Christian life and conduct. In his book On Virginity, written about 370, he tries to strengthen in all who read it the desire for a life of perfect virtue. He writes: The holy look of virginity is precious indeed in the judgment of all who make purity the test of beauty; but it belongs to those alone whose struggles to gain this object of a noble love are favoured and helped by the grace of God. Its praise is heard at once in the very name which goes with it; Uncorrupted is the word commonly said of it, and this shows the kind of purity that is in it; thus we can measure by its equivalent term the height of this gift, seeing that amongst the many results of virtuous endeavour this alone has been honoured with the title of the thing that is uncorrupted. And if we must extol with laudations this gift from the great God, the words of His Apostle are sufficient in its praise; they are few, but they throw into the background all extravagant laudations; he only styles as holy and without blemish her who has this grace for her ornament. Now if the achievement of this saintly virtue consists in making one without blemish and

469

Chapter 4: Patristics

holy, and these epithets are adopted in their first and fullest force to glorify the incorruptible Deity, what greater praise of virginity can there be than thus to be shown in a manner deifying those who share in her pure mysteries, so that they become partakers of His glory Who is in actual truth the only Holy and Blameless One ... (Chap. 1) Other ascetic writings include On the meaning of the Christian name or profession, addressed to Harmonius, and On Perfection and what manner of man the Christian should be, dedicated to the monk Olympius. For the monks, he wrote a work on the Divine purpose in creation (Gregory of Nyssa). For Florovsky, Gregory of Nyssa built up a whole system of Christian thought which would be the justification of the monastic life and provide it with a mysticism made expressly for its needs151 (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). Gregory of Nyssa is considered the Father of mysticism. According to Scheske, Gregorys spiritual insights have contributed greatly to the mystical tradition of the Church. Gregory emphasized that each person possesses the image of Godimage is a term extensively used by the Fathersand to know God, he must undertake a spiritual journey,152 which Gregory simply called the three stages of light, cloud, and darkness. These three ways can be seen most clearly in a passage from the Commentary on the Canticle of Canticles: Moses vision of God began with light; afterwards God spoke to him in a cloud. But when Moses rose higher and became more perfect, he saw God in the darkness.153 Florovsky, in The Eastern Fathers of the Fourth Century, states that: Gregory sees an example of the mystical ascent to God in the figure of Moses the Lawgiver and in the appearance of God on Mount Sinai. The

Florovsky does not give the name of the source of this quote (The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). 152 Many spiritual writers have described this spiritual journey as a three-fold trip, though the stages are not exclusive of one another (all three stages are present in each part of the journey). In the West, the stages are often referred to as purification, illumination, and union. In the East, the stages are usually called praktiki (repentance, practice of the virtues), physiki (contemplation of nature), and theologia (the contemplation of God) (Scheske). 153 Qtd in The Divine Darkness in Gregory of Nyssa.

151

470

Chapter 4: Patristics

people were ordered to purify themselves, and the mountain was covered with a cloud and illuminated by fire. For Nyssa, after a progressive process of detachment of sensual passions and earthly things even of earthly thoughts, the main demand of the ascetic, monastic ideal, man enters a watchful sleep. And after the soul attains a state of purification, the soul enters the second stage, the cloud, and begins to obtain knowledge of God as He works within the person. It is a stage of spiritual illumination. Eventually, the spiritual seeker reaches stage three, darkness, finally a darkness of the mind in contemplation of the God who cannot be comprehended. In describing this phenomenon, Gregory refers to Moses entrance into Gods thick darkness at the summit of Mount Sinai: Since Moses was alone, by having been stripped as it were of the peoples fear, he boldly approached the very darkness itself and entered the invisible things where he was no longer seen by those watching. After he entered the inner sanctuary of the divine mystical doctrine, there, while not being seen, he was in company with the Invisible. He teaches, I think, by the things he did that the one who is going to associate intimately with God must go beyond all that is visible andlifting up his own mind, as to a mountaintop, to the invisible and incomprehensiblebelieve that the divine is there where the understanding does not reach. (Life of Moses, Chap. 46)154 This image of divine darkness expresses his concept of mystical knowing, a symbol which is one of his greatest gifts to the realm of Christian thought (The Divine Darkness in Gregory of Nyssa). Another ascetic writer from the fourth century was Evagrius Ponticus (345-399), considered the Father of monastic mysticism. He was also called Evagrius the Solitary. Evagrius was close to the Cappadocians in his youth, from whom he studied or learned from Origen. Basil appointed him a lector and Gregory of Nazianzus a deacon, not long after Basils death in 379. Evagrius lived in Egypt for seventeen years, where he cultivated his soul with a group of monks, first on the Nitrian mountains and then on the
154

Qtd in The Divine Darkness in Gregory of Nyssa.

471

Chapter 4: Patristics

Cells. Palladius writes that Evagrius of whom he says that he was indeed a soul pleasing to God moved to Cells where he remained for fourteen years in a life of prayer and strict asceticism: After fourteen years in the region known as the Cells he was eating only a pound of bread a day and a pint of oil very three monthsand he was a man who had been brought up in the lap of luxury. He composed a hundred essays (Orationes), marking them down each year as the only price he could afford in exchange for what he ate. He was a most elegant and speedy writer. A month into his fifteenth year, he was found worthy of being granted the gifts of knowledge, wisdom and discernment of spirits. He wrote three books for monks called Antiheretica, that is, Refutations, outlining the means of fighting against the demons. (Lausiac History, Chapter LXXXVI: A Famous Deacon) As a theologian he closely followed the Gnosticism of Origen on the preexistence of souls and the final union of all things in God, views condemned by the early church authorities, though not for a century and a half after Evagrius death. Evagrius closely observed the Desert Fathers and spent his last years as one of them. Palladius says of him at the time of his death: This wholehearted athlete of Christ also told us when on his death bed that it was only for the last three years that he had not been bothered by the desires of the flesh. So even towards the end of a life rooted in virtue, after immense labours, unwavering purpose and sober unceasing prayer the malicious demon, the enemy of everything good, could still attack this immortal soul. If that is the case what must the lazy ones suffer from that wicked demon through their own negligence? (Lausiac History, Chapter LXXXVI: A Famous Deacon) On Asceticism and Stillness in the Solitary Life, included in the Philokalia, Evagrius gives some recommendations to promote stillness, which are a systematization of the teaching of the Desert Fathers: Keep to a sparse and plain diet. With regards to clothes, be content with what is sufficient for the needs of the body. Do not have a servant. Do not develop a habit of associating with people who are materially minded and involved in worldly affairs. If you find yourself growing strongly attached to you cell, leave it, do not cling to it, be ruthless.

472

Chapter 4: Patristics

Do not let restless desire overcome your resolution. Do not hanker after fine foods and deceitful pleasures. Provide yourself with such work for your hands as can be done, if possible, both during the day and at night, so that you are not a burden to anyone. ... Without so much elaboration he delineates other ascetic practices promoting

stillness, namely meditative techniques including visualization, fasting, and prayer. Although never glorified as a saint, Evagrius teachings on asceticism, prayer, and the spiritual life had a profound impact upon both Christian East and West. His influence on the more popular John Cassian is significant, for it was through Cassian, as suggested, that the West learned about desert spirituality (Evagrius Ponticus: On Asceticism and Stillness in the Solitary Life). In the Philokalia,155 there is a quote by Evagrius that says: The purification of the soul, by means of the fullness of the virtues, makes the attitude of the Intelligence unshakable, and makes it suitable to attain the condition one searches for (60). Undoubtedly, Evagrius lived his own teaching. As a result of his asceticism and purity of heart he became well known for knowledge, wisdom, and discernment, and began giving spiritual direction to many who flocked to him. Tsirpanlis, in Introduction to Eastern Patristic Thought and Orthodox Theology, says that through his writing and his disciples, like John Cassian, a more intellectual type of monastic mysticism began to flourish in Egypt. Evagrius is credited as the founder of Christian monastic mysticism (153) and is considered one the most important eastern writers on the spiritual life. It was via Syriac translations, that Evagrius teachings came to us today, especially through the works of the Nestorian bishop Isaac the Syrian156 (d. c. 700), who was profoundly indebted to him for his teachings on the mystical life. Furthermore, through Isaacs translations of Evagrius into Greek, Evagrian theology profoundly influenced
Taken from a Spanish edition of this text: La Filocalia: de la Oracin de Jess. What follows is my own translation. 156 Also remembered as Isaac of Nineveh and Isaac Cyrus.
155

473

Chapter 4: Patristics

the monks Maximus the Confessor (580-662), St. John Climacus157 (570/579-649), and Simeon the New Theologian (9491022).158 Moreover, Evagrian theology became important in hesychast spirituality by being incorporated in the teachings of Gregory of Palamas159 (1296-1359) (Prayer in Evagrius Ponticus and St. Nil Sorski). As noted above, it was very common from the fourth century on to call an ascetic mode of life philosophical life, or the life of a philosopher. Gregory of Nazianzus in a letter to Eugenius (Letter 111), written in 382 (Barrois) says fasting without measure is your philosophy. Mine is the discipline of silence. John Chrysostom, also an ascetic, in Instructions to Catechumens (First Instruction), uses these expressions when praising many of the characteristics of ascetic life (poverty, meekness, kindliness, charity or almsgiving): Do not thou therefore say, How can I, being a handicraftsman and a poor man, be a philosopher? This is indeed the very reason why thou mayest be a philosopher. For poverty is far more conducive to piety for us than wealth, and work than idleness; since wealth is even a hindrance to those who do not take heed. For when it is needful to dismiss anger, to extinguish envy, to curb passion, to offer prayer, to exhibit forbearance and meekness, kindliness and charity, when would poverty be a bar? For it is not possible by spending money to accomplish these things, but by exhibiting a fight disposition; almsgiving especially needs money, but even it shines forth in greater degree through poverty. For she who spent the two mites was poorer than all men, and yet surpassed all. Let us not then consider wealth to be anything great, nor gold to be better than clay. Chrysostom lived a life of strict asceticism and made enemies among the clergy because of his constant denunciation of vice and folly and criticism for not being ascetic enough. His health was undermined by his extreme asceticism, what made him obstinate and irritable. He even sold the furniture and plate belonging to the episcopal palacehe had become Archbishop of Constantinople in 397and used the money to

Also known as St. John of the Ladder or John Scholasticus. He is called Symeon the New Theologian to distinguish him from John the Evangelist (called John the Theologian in Greek) and Gregory of Nyzanius (also called Gregory the Theologian in the Eastern Orthodox tradition). 159 Also known as Gregory of Sinai.
158

157

474

Chapter 4: Patristics

help the poor and to build hospitals. Instead of entertaining lavishly and attending banquets, he ate by himself in solitary simplicity (Heroes of the Fourth Century (Part III): St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. John Chrysostom). As Nyssa did, other ascetic writers such as the monks St. Maximus de Confessor and Isaac of Syria, from the seventh century, took asceticism as the basis for mysticism. St. Maximus the Confessor (580-682), a Christ centered thinker, shared with Gregory of Nyssa the idea of incarnation as absolutely essential to the very possibility of mystical union itself. Joyce, in Maximus the Confessors Christological epistemology, states that Maximus focuses on the importance of the incarnation in the deification of the human and the divinization of the cosmos. The incarnation is an event that facilitates the ascetics gradual recognition that objects in the world have a divine source and finality. For Maximus, attaining purity of mind is essential in this mystical process of deification and divinization: Namely: a man who has purified his mind of all sensory fantasies receives wisdom; a man who has established his reason as master of passions inherent in us, that is, or anger and lust, receives knowledge; a man who by his mind and reason becomes firmly convinced of Divine things receives all-powerful faith; a man who has progressed in natural love of men, when completely freed from self-love, receives the gift of healing ...160

160

Qtd in Orthodox Mysticism: Teachings of the Desert Fathers.

475

Chapter 4: Patristics

Illustration 70: Maximus the Confessor161

For Maximus, purity is dependent on control of passions, anger or lust. Isaac of Syria, known by his strict asceticism, also talks about this purity of soul, although as attained by prayer: As out of many thousands barely one can be found who has fulfilled the commandments and all that is lawful and has attained to purity of soul; so among thousands one can hardly be found who through great efforts of pure persevering prayer, has been given to achieve it, to break the bounds of this life and to gain possession of that mystery, for many have failed to achieve pure prayer, and only few have reached it. But a man who has reached the mystery which comes after it and is beyond it, through the grace of Christ, can hardly be found in many generations.162 According to Steenberg, in the seventh century, Maximus embraces the three stages of spiritual growth, yet rid them of the immateriality of Evagrios: When the mind is [1] completely freed from the passions, it journeys straight ahead to the [2] contemplation of created things and makes its way to the [3] knowledge of the Holy Trinity.163 For Maximus, asceticism and contemplation is the key to find Christ within: The one who through asceticism and contemplation has known how to dig in himself the wells of virtue and knowledge as did the patriarchs will find Christ within as the spring of life. Wisdom bids us to drink from it, saying, Drink
161 162

See: <www.dlibrary.acu.edu.au>. Qtd in Orthodox Mysticism: Teachings of the Desert Fathers. 163 Qtd. in Steenberg,

476

Chapter 4: Patristics

waters from your own vessels and from your own springs (2 Ki. 18.31). If we do this we shall discover that His treasures are present within us. (On Knowledge, Chap. 40)164 Maximus insists that through the abandonment of natural activities, the meaning of the Scriptures will reveals the Word and will granted the great vision Elijah the Horeb: The meaning of holy writings reveals itself gradually to the more discerning mind in loftier senses when it has put off the complex whole of the words formed in it bodily, as in the sound of a gentle breeze. Through a supreme abandonment of natural activities, such a mind has been able to perceive sense only in a simplicity which reveals the Word, the way that the great Elijah was granted the vision in the cave at Horeb (cp. 1 Ki. 19). For Horeb means newness, which is the virtuous condition in the new spirit of grace. The cave is the hiddenness of spiritual wisdom in which one who enters will mystically experience the knowledge which goes beyond the senses and in which God is found. therefore, anyone who truly seeks God as did the great Elijah will come upon Him not only on Horeb, that is, as an ascetic in the practice of the virtues, but also in the cave of Horeb, that is, as a contemplative in the hidden place of wisdom which can exist only in the habit of the virtues. (On Knowledge, chap. 74)165 According to Steenberg, for Maximus, Asceticism enables the Christian to overcome the enslaving grip of the passions, providing a physical and mental stillness which allows the intellect to function more freely. When it is so freed, the intellect proceeds to contemplate the nature of created things: the world, manifest beings, and eventually itself (the human person). It is in this latter arenawhen the intellect contemplates its own human naturethat it is enlightened, through the grace of God, to its own divine nature; it was created by God in the image of God, it is held together by God, and it is indwelt by God. It comes to the realization that the very stuff of humanity is the stuff of God; and when this is understood, it is able to reach union with God. This full union, explains Steenberg, transfigures the person, illuminating him or her with the uncreated light of Tabor. This uncreated light takes hold when the ascetic eventually reaches the stage of inner illumination and union with the Trinity, and it does happens, his life is radically transformed from earthly to divine: For the mind of the one who is continually with God even his concupiscence abounds beyond measure into a divine desire and his entire irascible element is transformed into divine love. For by an enduring participation in the divine illumination it becomes altogether shining bright, and having bound its passable

164 165

Qtd in Selections On Knowledge from St Maximus the Confessor. Qtd. in Selections On Knowledge from St Maximus the Confessor.

477

Chapter 4: Patristics

element to itself, as I said, turned it around to a never-ending divine desire and unceasing love, completely changed over from earthly things to divine..166 For Steenberg, This is the essential theology behind the doctrine of deification: ascetic contemplation leads to an awareness of the indwelling energies of God in His wholeness, which in turn leads to a unification with the divine energies by participation, and thus a deification of the human nature. During the fourth, fifth, sixth, and 7th centuries there were other ascetic writers such as Nilus, Mark the Hermit, Diadochus of Photice, or St. John Climacus all of them following the path of purification with the goal of deification. As ascetics, for them to reach this goal it was necessary to overcome this world of passion, of human appetites through renunciation, fasting, obedience, prayer technique, and engaged in a monastic path following the path of perfection. In the tenth century, Symeon (9491022), in the Discourses, refers to overcoming the world: Unless we become dead to the world and the things in the world (1 John 2:15), how shall we live the life that is hid in Christ (Col. 3:3) when we have not died for the sake of God? How, as holy Symeon {the Studite} said, shall we contemplate God dwelling is us as light? (127)167 He therefore who has died to the worldfor this is the crossand lives no longer himself, but it is Christ Who lives in him (Gal. 2:20); who has mortified his earthly members (Col. 3:5), that is, the passionate sensations of the body, such that he has become no longer a participant in any passion or evil lust: how, tell me, can he take in any kind of passionate sensation, or surrender to any movement of pleasure, or ever be troubled in his heart? (76)168 Blessed is that monk who is present before God in prayer and who sees Him and is seen by Him (John 14:21, Mt 5:8), and perceives himself as having gone beyond the world and as being in God alone, and is unable to know whether he happens to be in the body or outside the body {2 Cor.12:2-3}, for he will hear ineffable speech which it is not lawful for a man to utter (2 Cor.12:4), and shall see what no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived. (1 Cor.2:9)169

Qtd. in Steenberg. Trans. C.J. de Cantazaro. Qtd. in Quotations. 168 Trans. Alexander Golitzin. Qtd. in Quotations. 169 Trans. Alexander Golitzin. Qtd. in Quotations. In these quotations the page number given are 166169, which cover other passages too.
167

166

478

Chapter 4: Patristics

Do not be alone by yourself, lest you be seen carried off by the world who destroys souls, or succumb to one disease after the other and so die spiritually, or, as you succumb, you attain to that woe (cf. Eccles. 4:10). He who gives himself in the hand of a good teacher will have no such worries, but will live without anxiety and be saved in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be glory forever. Amen.170 (237) In Catechetical Discourses (XVI), he adds: So I entered the place where I usually prayed and mindful of the words of the holy man I began to say, Holy God.. At once I was so greatly moved to tears and loving desire for God that I would be unable to describe in words the joy and the delight I then felt. I fell prostrate on the ground, and at once I saw, and behold, a great light was immaterially shining on me and seized hold of my whole mind and soul, so that I was struck with amazement at the unexpected marvel and I was, as it were, in ecstasy. Moreover I forgot the place where I stood, who I was, and where and could only cry out, Lord, have mercy, so that when I came to myself I discovered I was reciting this. But who it was that was speaking, and who moved my tongue, I do not knowonly God knows. 171 Some centuries later, in the fourteenth century, Gregory Palamas (1296-1359), an Anthonite monk of Mount Athos, carried Nyssas apophatic mysticism further. A strong defender of asceticism, Palamas, saw in continual prayer the core of purification and deification. His hesychasm was a fruit of his ascetic and mystical orientation.

Activity Read Florovskys The Byzantine Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers (see internet reference in Bibliography) and summarize the key ideas of these ascetic writers: Nilus, Mark the Hermit, Diadochus of Photice, St. Isaac the Syrian, and St. John Climacus.
Activity 115: Other ascetic writers

But in this long period delineated here, as we search the root of asceticism in the Scriptures as well as in the Pre-Nicene Fathers, we should not forget the spiritual heritage of the Desert Fathers in Orthodoxy. Bishop Chrysostom tells us, in the cited work The Ancient Fathers of the Desert: Introduction and Commentary, The Fathers

170 171

Trans. C.J. de Cantazaro. Qtd. in Quotations. Qtd. in Quotations.

479

Chapter 4: Patristics

of the desert draw us into the sphere of their spiritual power and force us deep into the recesses of our consciences and allow us to look on the almostlost spiritual powers dwelling unheeded within ourselves. He says that although their asceticism cannot beperhaps should not beimitated by many, they remain as they are simply a standard to which we should strive, a flame so bright as to kindle within us the spark of spiritual desire. As imitators of Christ, all those fathers who journeyed to the desert in a spirit of withdrawal of worldly things and solitude also took a spiritual journey into the heart. They started a finite career of perfection and arrived at the shores of an infinite path to deification. Prayer, quiet prayer of the heart, was one of their main means to divinization. Final Activity After having read this part and done its exercises, write a five-page paper summarizing what has been said. Use your own words and provide your own conclusion.
Activity 116: Final activity on role of ascesis in the Fathers of the Church

3. THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH AND HESYCHASM GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE HESYCHIA As we will see in the chapter dedicated to dogmatic, theosis or divinization was not a theological abstraction within the Orthodox Church. It was and is a doctrinal expression brought forth by the mystics of the early church, embracing specific worshipful practices, such as that of Hesychasm or hesychia (from Greek hesychos, quietness, stillness, silence). Hesychia was used to refer to the hermits way of life, as John Meyendorff asserts in The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church: The Greek hesychia (quietude) is found in the monastic literature since the fourth century to designate the mode of life chosen by hermits, dedicated to

480

Chapter 4: Patristics

contemplation and constant prayer. Such monks were also known for centuries as Hesychasts... The term Hesychast was used to designate a hermit or anchorite from the very beginning of monastic history... It appears in the writings of Evagrius (fourth century), of St. Gregory of Nyssa and in imperial legislation referring to monastic status. (167-168) This term was therefore linked to both asceticism and prayer with the goal, as John Breck states in Scripture in Tradition: The Bible in its interpretation in the Orthodox Church, of communion with the Trinity in the depths of the heart: Hesychasm (hesychia) may be described as a tradition of prayer, based on inner discipline (askesis) that leads to contemplation of the divine Presence. Although certain streams of that tradition are associated with a vision of the Uncreated Light, its true aims is to establish communion in the depths of the heart, with the Persons of the Holy Trinity (221). Yet, as we will see, the vision of God, the Uncreated Lightthe Thaboric Light described by Palamasalso remained as the precious goal of the Hesychasts. In fact Hesychasm was part of an eremitic tradition of prayer in Eastern Orthodox Christianity, which integrated the Biblical exhortation of unceasing prayer (I Thessalonians 5:17), especially the Jesus Prayer, into the practice of mental ascesis used by hermits. Its roots can consequently be traced to Christian monasticism in the deserts of Egypt, Syria, Palestine, and Sinai in the third and the fourth centuries, as the monk searched for perfection and union with God through continual prayer. Together with prayer the monks stressed hesychia (silence, inner concentration) as well as the watching of the mind as a means to arrive to pure prayer and union with God. While outward ascetic exercises were seen as being beneficial in purifying oneself for communion with God, in the fourth century increasing emphasis was placed on the necessity of inner ceaseless prayer, achieved through diligence and concentration, as a means of experiencing the divine. It was out of this emphasis that the spirituality of Hesychasm developed and flourished (Hillis, A Survey on the Influence of the Existential Spirituality of Hesychasm on Eastern Orthodox History). It was also

481

Chapter 4: Patristics

in this century that the term hesychia appeared in such Fathers as St John Chrysostom and the Cappadocians as well as in Evagrius Pontikos and in the Sayings of the Desert Fathers. Indeed the eastern Tradition does not separate the monks from the Hesychasts. In the sixth century, the laws of the Emperor Justinian dealt with Hesychast and anchorite as synonyms, making them interchangeable terms. In Orthodox Christian MonasticismHesychasm, Stefan Crisbasan points out that one of the most remarkable traits of the Eastern monasticism is its inner unity over time and space, and monasticism, and whence Hesychasm, is part of the Tradition of the Church: This unity is explained through the fact that monasticism before all is a tradition that is a transmission of living reality and the persons that are linked organically with the integral Tradition of the Church. Thus the Hesychasm is part of the Tradition of the Church and not as a separate tradition, as the heart is the most inner body of the body. The Hesychast dimension with the experience of seeing the Thaboric Light and the prayer of the heart must be integrated in the spiritual Catholic tradition of Orthodoxy. Outside of it the Hesychasm becomes sterile and dry out. Through the development of Hesychasm from the monastic institution of the East, the concept of theosis especially was emphasized. Continual, inner prayer was as means of experiencing the divine, an experience which came to be associated, as noticed, with the Thaboric vision of uncreated light which shone from Jesus at the Transfiguration and was experienced by the Apostles. According to the Fathers, quietness of soul and body and unceasing prayer led to deification, to theosis and to the attainment of communion with God. As its history shows, Hesychasm was a movement of spiritual and theological renewal starting with the desert Fathers, who disciplined themselves to the continual invocation of the name of Jesus, the prayer of the heart, based on the words of Jesus from Luke (17:21)Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you, and on the recommendation of Paul to the Colossians

482

Chapter 4: Patristics

(4:2)Continue in prayerand to the Thessalonians (I Thess. 5:17)Pray without ceasing. In Saying the Jesus Prayer, Rossi defines what the term heart means for Orthodoxy: Heart means the physical muscle pumping blood, and emotions/feelings, and the innermost core of the person, the spirit. Heart is associated with the physical organ, but not identical with it. Heart means our innermost chamber, our secret dwelling place where God lives. Though it has an evolution, as Breck (213) tells us, from jaculatory petitions Our Lord, come!to the more or less fixed expressions we find in the fourteenth century, the prayer of the heart is a kind of prayer which imbues our heart, and, thus, our own mind and soul with the Divine Namethe Name of Jesus: Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Breck explains that the name reveals ones authentic identity, the innermost reality or truth of ones being (218). Commenting on the focus of the prayer of the heart, he adds [the italics are his]: Prayer of the heart focuses upon the divine Name because that Name itself is a personal theophany, a manifestation of God in Trinity. By invoking the Name of Jesus, with faith and love, the worshiper ascends to Mount Sinai in the grace and power of the Holy Spirit, to stand in awe before the divine Presence. Byzantine theologians developed this image of ascent, the passage of the soul through divine darkness to the uncreated light, on the basis of the primal experience of God as personal. (218) The Russian saint, Bishop Theophan the Recluse (18151894), in Prayer of the Heart: the duty of those living in the world, refers to the heart as the closet in which we should enter and unceasingly pray: The Saviour commanded: Enter thy closet and pray there to God your Father Which is in secret. This closet, according to the interpretation of St. Dimitri of Restoy, signifies the heart. Consequently, the Lords command obliges us to pray to God secretly, with the mind in the heart. This command extends to all Christians. What does Apostle Paul command, when he says that we should pray always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18)? He is exhorting us to prayer of the heartspiritual prayerand he directs his exhortations to all Christians without distinction. After all, he exhorts all Christians to pray without ceasing (I Thess. 5:17) But to pray without ceasing is possible only through prayer of the heart. This means that prayer of the heart is necessary for all

483

Chapter 4: Patristics

Christians, and if it is necessary then one cannot say that it is impossible, because God docs not ask what is impossible. Its true, it is difficult, but to say it is impossible is wrong. After all, everything good is difficult, and all the more can this be said of prayer which is the source for us of all good and its firm support. In The Path to Salvation, Theofan talks about the development of the heart which entails a taste for things holy, divine and spiritual: Developing the heart means developing within it a taste for things holy, divine, and spiritual, so that when it finds itself amidst such things it would feel as though it were in its element. Finding them sweet and blessed, it would be indifferent to all else, with no taste for anything else; and even moreit would find anything else revolting. All of mans spiritual activity centers in the heart. The truths are impressed in it, and good dispositions are rooted into it. But its main work is developing a taste for the spiritual, as we have shown. When the mind sees the whole spiritual world and its different components, various good beginnings ripen in the will. The heart, under their influence, should taste sweetness in all of this and radiate warmth. This delight in the spiritual is the first sign of the regeneration of a soul deadened by sin. Therefore the hearts development is a very important point even in the early stages. As we will see the Hesychast prayer is rooted in a theology of the heart (Breck 222). In The Art of Prayer, Theophan touches the very essence of Hesychasm: The heart is the innermost person. Here are located self-awareness, the conscience, the idea of God and of ones complete dependence on Him; and all the eternal treasures of the spiritual life. (190)172 [True prayer] is to stand with the mind in the heart before God, and to go on standing before Him ceaselessly, day and night, until the end of life. (63)173 The prayer of the heart was not a prayer uttered with words, a prayer of praise and glorification of God with a personal supplication as well as intersession on behalf of others, but rather a prayer that springs from an innate, intense longing for God, as Breck asserts, and that leads to union with the Divine; a prayer that requires silence, a silence of the heart, through which God reveals Himself (218). It in the next pages we will see how the Eastern Fathers deals with this practice, which was rejected by the Catholic Church, after the split, as it did with theosis,
172

Qtd. In Breck. Qtd. In Breck.

173

484

Chapter 4: Patristics

qualifying it as a subjective state. As the whole mystical theology of the Orthodox Church embraces, Hesychasm encourages an individual experience of the divine. It was due to the Orthodox Church that this tradition of quiet meditation which opens the path to divinization was kept alive. But this complex concept, as it is with the concept of theosis, is in need of clarification so as to be able to understand the experiential vision the Fathers had of this prayer-meditation that guides the faithful progressively toward the deification of their souls. Mitchell B. Liester, for example, in Hesychasm: A Christian Path of Transcendence, delineates three steps in the ultimate goal of the Hesychast to achieve theosis: The first is dispassion (Greek apatheia), which involves detachment from the senses and the emotions. The second is stillness (Greek hesychia), which requires detachment from the discursive intellect and the imagination. The final step is an abiding state of illumination called deification or perfect union with God (Greek theosis). Liester adds that there are both physical and mental practices, which the Hesychast sees as interwoven and inseparable, to attain this state. While through the physical or outer practices, as Liester calls them, the Hesychast detaches from the senses and the passionsor diseases of the soul as the Fathers, especially Chrysostom, considered them, through the mental or inner practices of meditation and prayer, the Hesychast detaches from their thoughts. As we saw in the case of the ascetics, the outer practices include withdrawing from the world (social isolation and detachment from the passions), fasting, vigilsprolonged periods of prayer in conjunction with sleep deprivation, prostration, and silence as a means of awakening the mind to God. Isaac the Syrian, as we will see, places a heavy emphasis on silence. Regarding prayer, Liester explains that Hesychasts experience four levels of prayer: verbal prayer (or physical prayer), mental prayer, prayer of the heart, and

485

Chapter 4: Patristics

contemplation. Yet Hesychasts, he says, do not experience these types of prayers as distinct, but as unfolding levels of prayer that occur during the spiritual journey. Verbal prayer (reading, chanting, or reciting psalms) is sometimes used by Hesychasts when they have difficulty sustaining mental prayer; mental prayer, whose most common form is the Jesus Prayer, includes speaking words inwardly with the mind, rather that outwardly with the voice. But the Jesus Prayer is not exclusively a mental prayer as it can be spoken aloud or inwardly with the mind and can also emanate from the heart. Liester adds that there are various psycho-physiological techniques associated with the Jesus Prayer: some monks use a prayer-rope to count recitations of the prayer; others, link this prayer to the breath, heartbeat, prostrations, or thoughts of death. The third level of prayer, known as pure prayer or prayer of the heart evolves out of mental prayer. On this level the mind is in the heart from which it offers up prayers to God. The fourth and final level or step in this journey towards deification is called theoria or contemplation: The Hesychast envisions God in everything. However, we cannot define contemplation as prayer but as the final consequence of it. Breck, basing himself on the great spiritual masters, only defines three stages of the actual internalization of the Jesus Prayer: oral or verbal, mental, and prayer of the heart (224). Verbal prayer includes the frequent, unhurried repetition of the Jesus Prayer, adopting a regular rhythm which may or may not be associated with breathing and posture. Breck warns that any attempt to use the Prayer as a mantra or to exploit it as a psychological tool for relaxation or for any other proximate goal will inevitably lead to spiritual shipwreck (223). When the Prayer is repeated, Breck continues, it gradually begins to transcend the verbal level and root itself in the mind. One continues to pray with the lips. But the Prayer seems to take on a life of its own, whether one is awake or asleep Once the Prayer is imprinted on the mind, it appears to pray itself spontaneously...The Prayer ... embraces the entire being, suffusing

486

Chapter 4: Patristics

mind, heart and body with a sense of peace and joy. (225) The third stage or prayer of the heartalso called pure prayeroccurs when the prayer descends from the mind into the heart, where it makes its dwelling place. Then, Breck continues: The Prayer is no longer prayed as a conscious, deliberate act. It is received, welcomed and embraced as a manifestation of divine Presence and Life. The Prayer now associates itself with the rhythm of the heart, producing without conscious effort a ceaseless outpouring of adoration and thanksgiving. From prayer of the lips to prayer of the mind, it has become prayer of the heart. (225) However, this prayer is a gift from God which leads to the divine vision or knowledge of God, known as theoria. This gift comes jointly with a beatified light or fire. However, in spite of being a gift, the faithful should not quit his praying efforts. Breck adds: there is virtue in seeking the gift, whether or not it is accorded, as long as it is sought out of love for God and longing for union with him, and not for the sake of the experience of it. Similarly, the Russian saint of the nineteenth century, Theophan the Recluse, author of The Art of Prayer, says: I wont conceal the fact that, though once you prayed from the heart, it is hardly possible to pray that way constantly. Such prayer is given by God or is inspired by your Guardian Angel. It comes and goes. It does not follow, though, that we should give up the labor of prayer. Prayer of the heart comes when one makes an effort; to those who do not strive, it will not come. We see that the Holy Fathers made extraordinary efforts in prayer, and by their struggles they kindled the warm spirit of prayer. How they came to this prayerful state is illustrated in the writings they have left us. Everything they say about striving in prayer makes up the science of prayer, which is the science of sciences. (Letter 15)174 The Jesus Prayer, which has played a profound role in the spread of Hesychast spirituality up to the present day, is said to have originated in fourteenth century in the context of the controversy between Palamas and Barlaam. However, as Breck points out, the Jesus Prayer was: ... the culmination of a long tradition which begins with the Holy Scriptures and
174

Qtd. in St. Theophan the Recluse on Prayer.

487

Chapter 4: Patristics

the frequent invocation of the Name of Jesus they contain (Mk 10:47). In one form or another, the Jesus Prayer was practiced by anchorites of Syria, Palestine and Egypt during the 4th and 5th centuries. It flourished on Mt Sinai under the spiritual direction of St John of the Ladder from the 6th century, then on Mt. Athos from the 10th century. Only four hundred years later did the Prayer become the focus of the controversy between Palamas and Barlaam of Calabrian. By the 15th century the Jesus Prayer had become the cornerstone of much Russian Orthodox piety finally inspiring the nineteenth century classic known as The Way of a Pilgrim. (215) Let us see how some of the eastern Fathers in their religious experience perceive their own spiritual path to spiritualization through continuous, silent prayer as it evolved and the showing forth the fruits of the spirit in their daily lives. This goal attained, by quietness of the soul, lessened their strain of existence and gave them faith which reinforced their spiritual vitality and righteousness. Activity What does hesychia literally mean? What is the origin of this term? What is the relationship between Hesychasm and monasticism? Why is prayer important in Hesychasm? What is the Jesus Prayer? Are there any techniques associated with its practice? What is the final goal of Hesychasts? What are, according to Liester, the three steps a Hesychast should follow to attain this goal? Briefly summarize the three stages of prayer delineated by Breck. What is contemplation or theoria? With your eyes closed, with each breath you take, mentally repeat the Jesus Prayer ten times concentrating on each word, but especially on the name of Jesus. What do you feel?
Activity 117: Hesychia and Hesychasm, preliminary concepts

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

THE WRITINGS OF THE EASTERN FATHERS AND HESYCHIA During centuries, the Eastern Church Fathers emphasized hesychia in their writings. Hesychasm was at the heart of the spiritual teaching of the Apophthegmata or Sayings of the Desert Fathers as it was very relevant for the spirituality of the Desert Fathers. For them, Hesychasm, as Brsard explains, in A History of Monastic Spirituality, was a way of life centered on the search for continual prayer and hesychia

488

Chapter 4: Patristics

or tranquility, both exterior and interior, with a goalCharity. He says: For the Desert Fathers, human perfection is found in the love which unfolds in a prayer which must seek to become continual. To arrive at this goal, they hold hesychia to be necessary, the tranquility arising from complete withdrawal from the world. This tranquility cannot be found without effort. On the contrary it supposes asceticism and derives from it. Hesychia is not an end in itself: the goal is charity. Hesychia is a means to arrive at this end, a disposition favoring the growth of charity. The exterior and interior Hesychasm were attained by separating themselves from society, silence of the lips and the heart, and by divesting themselves from passionate thoughts. The goal was the realization of the Kingdom of God. A heart or mind in possession of hesychia was then able to contemplate God unceasingly (Maloney, Russian Hesychasm: The Spirituality of Nil Sorskij 103-104). Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, in Orthodox Psychotherapy, writes about these two types of hesychia: of the body and of the soul, It is well known to those engaged in studying the works of the Fathers and to those trying to live this life of quiet, that there is hesychia of the body and hesychia of the soul. The former refers to outward things and the latter to the inward. Hesychia of the body usually refers to the Hesychastic posture and the effort to minimise external representations, the images received and brought to the soul by the senses. Hesychia of the soul means that the nous attains the capacity and the power not to accept any temptation to delusion. In this state mans nous, possessed of watchfulness and compunction, is centred in the heart. The nous (energy) is concentrated in the place of the heart (essence), uniting with it, thus attaining a partial or greater knowledge of God. the former referring to posture and minimization of outer images and the latter to the nous or mind as it concentrates itself in the place of the heart. Brsard points out that we might be surprised, when reading the Apophthegmata, the importance the Fathers gave to exterior Hesychasm to the detriment of charity. The Fathers confused quietness with total solitude as if there were no tranquility in the company of other people and as if solitude could produce tranquility. The terms hesychia, anachoresis, and withdrawal into the desert were used interchangeably. Only later there developed a distinction between exterior and interior Hesychasm.

489

Chapter 4: Patristics

Brsard mentions the ascetic Arsenius (350c. 450), a model of the austere hermit, and his words Flee, be silent, stay quite, which became the motto for many Hesychasts. Arsenius was greatly influential on the development of asceticism and the contemplative life. He was the first to put it into practice. He lived in a cell deep in the desert of Scetis which he rarely left, fiercely defending his solitude. The abbot Mark asked him one day why he so much shunned their company. The saint answered, God knows how dearly I love you all; but I find I cannot be both with God and with men at the same time; nor can I think of leaving God to converse with men. However, this disposition did not hinder him from providing spiritual instruction to his brethren, as several of his sayings are recorded. He often said, I have always something to repent for after having talked, but have never been sorry for having been silent. In the Sayings of the Desert Fathers, we can read about Arsenius emphasis on the silence of the mind undisturbed by outer noise, One day Abba Arsenius came to a place where there were some reeds waving in the wind. He said to the brethren: What can I hear moving? They said: It is the reeds. So the abba said to them: If a brother is recollected and he hears the song of a little bird, that is the end of it; his heart does not feel the same peace. And you! You hear the sound of those reeds, your hearts cannot be at peace. About his unceasing prayer we read: It was also said of him (Abba Arsenius) that on Saturday evenings, preparing for the glory of Sunday, he would turn his back on the sun and stretch out his hands in prayer towards the heavens, till once again the sun shone on his face. Then he would sit down. For Brsard there are three characteristics which led the Desert Fathers to find Hesychasm and unceasing prayer: amerimna, or freedom from care (fleeing from the noise and bustle of the city of men); nepsis or vigilance (inner watchfulness, an attitude of the soul); and crupte melete which is the practice of prayer. He states that Amerimna and nepsis tend to be negative attitudes, with the aim of protecting the soul. Here is something more positive, melete, which will prepare the soul

490

Chapter 4: Patristics

more directly for continuous prayer. This word melete, translated into Latin as meditari, means more than to meditate. It also has the sense of exercise. In melete meditation is made aloud with the aim of preparing the soul for prayer; it is an exercise for prayer: short phrases are repeated so that they penetrate the soul and bring about spontaneous prayer... in general the Fathers hid their melete out of humility: crupte melete means a hidden exercise of prayer. In The Apophthegmata there is a text that deserves to be read, although long, to understand these early Fathers feelings about unceasing prayer: Several monks called praying monks came to Enaton to see Abba Lucius. The abba asked them: Where is your handiwork? They said: We do not work with our hands but we pray without ceasing as the Apostle commanded. Abba Lucius asked them: Do you not eat? They replied: Oh yes! So he said to them: When you are eating, who takes your place praying? But they had nothing to say in reply. Then Abba Lucius said to the monks: Pardon me, but you do not do as you say. Let me show you how I pray without ceasing while working with my hands. I sit with God. I moisten my reeds and I twist them into ropes. At the same time I say: God, have pity on me in your great kindness; in your abundant mercy blot out my offence. (Ps.50:1) Abba Lucius asked the monks: Is that not a prayer? They replied: Oh yes. Then he said to them: When I have spent the whole day working and praying I have earned about sixteen pieces of silver. I put two at my door and I buy food with the rest. Whoever it is who receives those two pieces of silver prays for me while I eat or when I sleep. So with Gods help I obey the commandment to pray without ceasing. (Brsard) Also in this passage, we find an enlightening saying: so an abba said: If a monk only prays when he stands for prayer, he does not pray at all. There is another illuminating saying, which takes us to deification: Abba Lot came to visit Abba Joseph and said: Abba, when I am able, I recite a short office, I fast a little, I pray, I meditate, I stay recollected. As far as I can I try to keep my though pure. What else should I do? Then Abba Joseph got up. He stretched out his hands to heaven and his fingers became like burning lamps. He said to Abba Lot: If you will, become all fire. (Brsard) For any further reference, let us see a table with the authors referred to in The Apophthegmata:

491

Chapter 4: Patristics

1. Abba Poemen 2. Abba Arsenius 3. Abba Pambo 4. An unknown Abba 5. Abba Ares 6. Abba Poemen 7. An unknown Abba 8. Abba Antony 9. An unknown Abba 10.Abba Poemen 11. Abba Antony 12. Abba Felix 13. An unknown Abba 14. Abba Poemen 15. An unknown Abba 16. Abba John the Little 17. Abba Poemen 18. Abba Sylvanus 19. Abba Abraham 20. Abba Zeno 21 An unknown Abba 22. Abba Poemen 23. Abba Pambo

24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46.

Abba Joseph of Thebes Abba Mios Abba Serapion Abba Sisoes Abba Antony An unknown Abba Abba Poemen Abba Hypericus Abba Pambo An unknown Abba. An unknown Abba Abba Longinus Abba Evagrius Abba Paul the Great Abba Poemen Amma Syncletica Abba Arsenius Abba Arsenius Abba Arsenius Abba Arsenius Abba Arsenius Abba Antony Abba Kronios

47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69.

Abba Poemen Abba Poemen Abba Achilles Abba Sisoes Abba Macarius Abba Agathon Abba Sylvanus Abba John the Little Abba Lucius An unknown Abba An unknown Abba An unknown Abba Abba Arsenius Abba Theodore of Enaton An unknown Abba An unknown Abba Abba Agathon Abba Poemen An unknown Abba Abba Pambo Abba Arsenius Abba Joseph Abba Sisoes (Brsard)

Table 63: The Apophthegmata Texts

In Life of St. Anthony (Chap. 3), Athanasius comments on Anthonys unceasing prayer: He worked, however, with his hands, having heard, he who is idle let him not eat, and part he spent on bread and part he gave to the needy. And he was constant in prayer, knowing that a man ought to pray in secret unceasingly. Prayer was Anthonys shield against the devils temptation: The one would suggest foul thoughts and the other counter them with prayers: the one fire him with lush the other, as one who seemed to blush, fortify his body with faith, prayers, and fasting. And the devil, unhappy wight, one night even took upon him the shape of a woman and imitated all her acts simply to beguile Anthony. But he, his mind filled with Christ and the nobility inspired by Him, and considering the spirituality of the soul, quenched the coal of the others deceit... . For the Lord was working with Anthonythe Lord who for our sake took flesh [16] and gave the body victory over the devil, so that all who truly fight can say [17], not I but the grace of God which was with me. (Chap. 5) According to Athanasius, an advocate of deification, Anthony (251-356) whose mind was filled with Christ, had his victory against the devil through the grace of God. But Anthony also has a vision of God: Nor was the Lord then forgetful of Anthonys wrestling, but was at hand to help

492

Chapter 4: Patristics

him. So looking up he saw the roof as it were opened, and a ray of light descending to him. The demons suddenly vanished, the pain of his body straightway ceased, and the building was again whole. But Anthony feeling the help, and getting his breath again, and being freed from pain, besought the vision which had appeared to him, saying, Where wert thou ? Why didst thou not appear at the beginning to make my pains to cease? And a voice came to him, Anthony, I was here, but I waited to see thy fight; wherefore since thou hast endured, and hast not been worsted, I will ever be a succour to thee, and will make thy name known everywhere. Having heard this, Anthony arose and prayed, and received such strength that he perceived that he had more power in his body than formerly. And he was then about thirty-five years old. (Chap. 10) Upon the vision of the Lord as a ray of light, Anthony does not have any more physical pain, the building was restored and he had more power in his body. There is a transformation in him. Anthonys life illustrates an important feature of Orthodox spirituality: through diligent effort and unceasing prayer in association with the grace of God one can be granted a direct experience of God and start a transforming process of theosis, or deification. Many followed Anthony by laboring, spending their days in prayer and reading the Scriptures. They were in search of theosis through Hesychasm. Basil the Great (330-379) is an example of hesychia. In his Letter 2 (To Gregory), he says: We must strive after a quiet mind. As well might the eye ascertain an object put before it while it is wandering restless up and down and sideways, without fixing a steady gaze upon it, as a mind, distracted by a thousand worldly cares, be able clearly to apprehend the truth... . As the day brightens, to betake ourselves, with prayer attending on it throughout, to our labours, and to sweeten our work with hymns, as if with salt? Soothing hymns compose the mind to a cheerful and calm state. Quiet, then, as I have said, is the first step in our sanctification; the tongue purified from the gossip of the world; the eyes unexcited by fair colour or comely shape; the ear not relaxing the tone or mind by voluptuous songs, nor by that especial mischief, the talk of light men and jesters. Thus the mind, saved from dissipation from without, and not through the senses thrown upon the world, falls back upon itself, and thereby ascends to the contemplation of God. Now solitude is of the greatest use for this purpose, inasmuch as it stills our passions, and gives room for principle to cut them out of the soul. (2) Basil teaches about hesychia, quietness, tranquility, accompanied by throughout prayer as the first step to sanctification. In this calm state, the body must also be in stillness by purifying the senses (tongue, ear). So, the mind ascends to the contemplation of God.

493

Chapter 4: Patristics

He teaches both types of hesychia, that of the body and that of the soul. The hesychia of the body helps the hesychia of the soul. It is in the contemplation of God, that man sees a light, the highest end of man on earth, and it is through this contemplation that man unites most intimately with God. The light the Hesychasts sees is the Thaboric light, the same that appeared at Christs Transfiguration. As other Fathers, Basil mentions this light: For after saying that the Son was light of light, and begotten of tile substance of tile Fat her, but was not made, they went on to add the homoousion, thereby showing that whatever proportion of light any one would attribute in the case of the Father will obtain also in that of the Son. For very light in relation to very light, according to the actual sense of light, will have no variation. Since then the Father is light without beginning, and the Son begotten light, but each of Them light and light; they rightly said of one substance, in order to set forth the equal dignity of the nature. (Letter 52) St. Gregory of Nyssa, another of the Cappadocian Fathers, also wrote about the essence of prayer and its effect of union with God: The effect of prayer is union with God, and if someone is with God, he is separated from the enemy (The Lords Prayer, Sermon 1). In this work, Nyssa continues also describing also the physical effects of prayer, not without emphasizing the sense of theosis, of intimacy with God, and of contemplation of the invisible: Through prayer we guard our chastity, control our temper and rid ourselves of conceit. It makes us forget injuries, overcomes envy, defeats injustice and makes atonement for sin. Through prayer we obtain physical well-being, a happy home, and a strong, well-ordered society... . Prayer is the seal of virginity and a pledge of faithfulness in marriage. It shields the traveler, protects the sleeper, and gives courage to those who keep vigil... . It will refresh you when you are weary and comfort you when you are sorrowful. Prayer is the delight of the joyous as well as the consolation of the afflicted... . Prayer is intimacy with God and contemplation of the invisible... . Prayer is the enjoyment of things present and the essence of things to come. (The Lords Prayer, Sermon 1) In On Virginity, he specifies that that the man who longs for union with God must, like those saints, detach his mind from all worldly business (Chap. VI) and become himself as beautiful as the Beauty which he has touched and entered, and to be

494

Chapter 4: Patristics

made bright and luminous himself in the communion of the real Light (Chap. X). Gregory continues very beautifully: so the mind of man leaves this murky miry world, and under the stress of the spirit becomes pure and luminous in contact with the true and supernal Purity; in such an atmosphere it even itself emits light, and is so filled with radiance, that it becomes itself a Light, according to the promise of our Lord that the righteous should shine forth as the sun. (Chap. X) This sense of prayer as providing intimacy, union with God, and as a means to defeat the enemy, is echoed in Evagrius Pontus (born ca. 345), a disciple of the Cappadocian Fathers. Meyendorff says of him: Among the early teachers of monastic spirituality, Evagrius Pontus formulated better than any other that fundamental doctrine on prayer which will inspire the Hesychast in the later centuries (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 168). Meyendorff also says, in St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality, that Evagrius is the first great codifier of the monastic doctrine of prayer (21). Thus Evagrius teaches that prayer is communion of the intellect with God. What state, then, does the intellect [mind or nous] need so that it can reach out to its Lord without deflection and commune with Him without intermediary? (On Prayer 3). For Evagrius the stability of the nous depends on the purification of the soul through the virtues: When the soul has been purified through the keeping of all the commandments, it makes the intellect steadfast and able to receive the state needed of prayer (On Prayer 2). For Evagrius prayer is the ascent of the intellect to God (On Prayer 36). Evagrius, as an ascetic writer, also lays down conditions for the conversation, the vision of God with regard to impassioned mental concepts: When Moses tried to draw near to the burning bush he was forbidden to approach until he had loosed his sandals from his feet (Exod. 3:5). If, then, you wish to behold and commune with Him who is beyond sense-perception and beyond concept, you must free yourself from every impassioned thought. (On Prayer 4) He explains: When the demons see you truly eager pray, they insinuate an imaginary

495

Chapter 4: Patristics

need for various things, and then stir up your remembrance of these things, inciting the intellect to go after them (On Prayer 10). Evagrius teaches how prayer excels all the other virtues: As sight is superior to all the other senses, so prayer is more divine than all the other virtues (On Prayer 150). Finally, Evagrius emphasizes prayer as the most relevant event in the life of a Christian: Do not be distressed if you do not at once receive from God what you ask. He wishes to give you something betterto make you persevere in your prayer. For what is better than to enjoy the love of God and to be in communion with him? (On Prayer 34). The author of Prayer in Evagrius Ponticus and St. Nil Sorski175 says that: But more important for Evagrius is not quantity of prayer, but the quality of prayer. For Evagrius, pure prayer is to pray without distraction. One must purify his heart and clear his mind of all other things except for God. He distinguishes between two types of prayer. He uses unceasing prayer to purify his heart and mind, to control thoughts, to subject the body to the workings of the soul. The other type of prayer is the contemplative kind. According to Meyendorff, In the main stream of the Eastern spiritual tradition, the mental prayer of Evagrius began to be understood and practiced in the context of christocentric spirituality. The mind ceased to be opposed to the matter, because Christian monasticism fully accepted the implications of the Incarnation. Thus the mental prayer addressed by Evagrius to the Deity, which he understood in a Neoplatonic and spiritualized sense, became the prayer of Jesus. (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 169) Meyendorff (169) states that the evolution of Hesychast spirituality in the direction of christocentrism was greatly influenced by the writings of an ascetic unknown author who used the pseudonym of the priest-monk St. Macarius the Great (c.300-390), a disciple of St. Anthony. Very often quoted by Palamas, Macarius writingsthere are about fifty homilies ascribed to himdepart from Evagrius Neoplatonic intellectualism. For Macarius, as he explains in his Homily 21, the heart not the intellect is the center of human consciousness and divine presence:

175

No name is given in this Internet article.

496

Chapter 4: Patristics

To them was given the law written upon tables of stone; but to us, that written upon the tables of the heart. For, says he, I will put my laws into their heart, and in their mind will I write them. And in deed all those things were abolishable and temporary. But they are now accomplished in the inward man. In his Homily 18, Macarius defines the heart as a little vessel which contains wickedness but also God: As the eye is little beyond all the members, and yet contains the heaven, the stars, the sun, the moon, cities, and other creatures; for all these are seen under one, are formed and imagined in the pupil of the eye. Thus also the heart is a little vessel. And yet there are dragons, and there are lions, the poisonous beasts, and all the treasures of wickedness, and there are rugged ways, and precipices. In like manner there is GOD, there are the angels; there is the life and the kingdom; there is the light, there are the treasures of grace: there are all things. Furthermore, Macarius, who also stresses perseverance in prayer, states that everything the Christian does, including prayer, must be seen by him as if he had done nothing: This is the mark of Christianityhowever much a man toils, and however many righteousnesses he performs, to feel that he has done nothing, and in fasting to say, This is not fasting, and in praying, This is not prayer, and in perseverance at prayer, I have shown no perseverance; I am only just beginning to practice and to take pains; and even if he is righteous before God, he should say, I am not righteous, not I; I do not take pains, but only make a beginning every day.176 Macarius also teaches about true prayer, the true-prayer of the Spirit, But first he ought thus to force himself to that which is good; and though his heart be ever so much against it, to wait continually for mercy; to force himself to show compassion, to endure contempt with a courageous patience; and though he is set at nought, not to be moved with indignation, as it is written, Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves; to force himself to prayer, if he have not the spiritual prayer. And thus does GOD, beholding him in these conflicts, grant unto him the true prayer of the Spirit, the true love, the meekness of truth, the bowels of mercies, yea, all the fruits of the Spirit. (Homily 11) which for him leads to be made partakers of the Divine nature, We ought therefore to believe faith our whole heart his unspeakable promises, to love the Lord, and to be industrious in all virtues, and to beg continually, that we may receive the promise of his Spirit entirely and perfectly; that so our souls might be quickened whilst we are yet in the flesh. For unless the soul shall in this world receive the sanctification of the Spirit through much faith and prayer, and be made partaker of the Divine nature, (through which it will be able
176

Qtd. in Balamand Monastery.

497

Chapter 4: Patristics

without blame and in purity to per form every commandment it is unfit for the kingdom of heaven. For whatever good a man has possessed in this world, the same shall in that day be his life, through the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost for ever! Amen. (Homily 19) and godlike, As therefore Rahab received no harm by dwelling among the aliens, but her faith made her at home in the portion of the Israelites, so sin shall not harm those who in hope and faith wait for the Redeemer, who at His coming changes the thoughts of the soul, and makes them godlike, heavenly, good and teaches the soul prayer-prayer true, undistracted, unwandering. (Fifty Spiritual Homilies) But this true-prayer is also true charity, And when He sees thy diligence to seek Him, then He manifests Himself and appears to thee, and imparts to thee of His own succour, and makes the victory thine, delivering thee from thine enemies. Having first contemplated thy seeking unto Him, and how thy whole expectation is without ceasing fixed on Him, He then teaches and gives thee true prayer, true charity, which is Himself in thee made all things-paradise, tree of life, pearl, crown, builder, husbandman, sufferer, incapable of suffering, man, God, wine and living water, lamb, bridegroom, warrior, armor, Christ all in all. (Fifty Spiritual Homilies) Macarius beautifully describes a light, the sun, the true light of Christ radiating in those souls worthy to partake of this divine nature: For the soul that is thought worthy to partake of the spirit of his light, and is irradiated by the beauty of his ineffable glory, (he having by that spirit prepared her for his own seat and habitation) becomes all light, all face, and all eye: neither is there any one part in her but what is full of these spiritual eyes of light; that is, there is no part in her darkened: but she is all entirely wrought into light and spirit, and is all over full of eyes, having no hinder part, or any thing behind; but appears to be altogether face, by reason of the inexpressible beauty of the glory of the light of CHRIST, that rides and sits upon her. And as the sun is altogether of one likeness, without any hinder part or defect, but is all throughout bedecked with light, without the least variety of part; or as the light is all over of an exact likeness with itself, and admits of no distinction of first or last: so the soul that is thoroughly illuminated by the inexpressible beauty of the glory of the light of the face of CHRIST, and partakes of the Holy Spirit in perfection, and is thought worthy to become the mansion and the throne of GOD, becomes all eye, all light, and all face, and all glory, and all spirit; CHRIST himself who governs and drives, and carries and supports her, thus preparing her, and thus gracing and adorning her with spiritual beauty. For the hand (says the text,) of a man was under the cherub; because he it is that rideth in her, and directs her way. (Homily 1) With the image of this light Macarius is describing deificationmans eternal longingthe final goal of the spiritual life of the Hesychast, which is attained through

498

Chapter 4: Patristics

the divine grace of the Spirit. Though it has been thought worthy of the several gifts of the Spirit, or favored with revelations and heavenly mysteries; yet, by reason of its immense love for the Lord, does it seem to itself as if it had just nothing in possession: but hungering and thirsting through faith and love, it is carried on insatiably in the persevering spirit of prayer to the mysteries of grace, and to every degree of virtue. And being wounded by the heavenly Spirit, continually exciting an inflamed desire after the heavenly Bridegroom, and longing to be completely admitted to the mystical and inexpressible communion with him in the sanctification of the Spirit; having the face of the soul unveiled, and looking with a steady eye upon the heavenly Bridegroom, face to face, in the light which is spiritual, and not to be expressed; it mixes with him in all the fullness of assurance; becomes conformable to his death, ever waiting in the abundance of desire to die for the sake of CHRIST, and expecting to obtain, under the conduct of the Spirit, an entire redemption from sin, and the darkness of the affections that being purified by the Spirit, sanctified in soul and body, it may be made a vessel clean prepared for the susception of the heavenly ointment, and the residence of CHRIST, the true and heavenly King. And then is the soul filled with the heavenly life, and becomes the pure habitation of the Holy Spirit. (Homily 6) Interestingly, Macarius also depicts the grace as engraving the Laws of the Spirit in mens hearts, Grace itself engraves the laws of the Spirit on their hearts...In fact, the heart is master and king of the whole bodily organism, and when grace takes possession of the pasture-land of the heart, it rules over all its members and all its thoughts; for it is in the heart that the mind dwells, and there dwell all the souls thoughts; it finds all its goods in the heart. That is why grace penetrates all the members of the body. (Homily 15, 20) envisioning the mind as to intervening between the spirit and matter, and the soul as an experiential entity. Since the soul indwells the mind, which itself indwells the heart, the grace of the Spirit controls all the thoughts of the mind, apparently only the worthy thoughts, the spiritual ones, go to the soul, to the soul of the spiritual man. It is on this man, in contrast to the man of the flesh, upon whom the grace or deifying energy of the Spirit is bestowed. Thus, for Macarius, the soul, which inhabits the mind of man, has an experiential basis and it grows with our spiritual thoughts, including pure prayer, as Jesus says, as we choose to do the will of the Father in Heaven (Matt. 12:50). Pure prayer has a transforming power of the soul and leads men to the contemplation of the

499

Chapter 4: Patristics

divine light. It seems as though the Spirit, aided by the mind (mother), became the father of a new emerging reality: the immortal soul, destined to ascent to the Father. It is this same Spirit given through His grace who guides us in the attaining of spiritual values. For St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, when we pray we bring the light of Christ into our soul. He states in On Prayer: What the sun is for the body, prayer is for the soul... While it is a misfortune for the blind not to see the sun, then what a great misfortune it would be for the Christian not to pray and not to bring the light of Christ into the soul through prayer?... When I see that someone zealously cares about serving God and considers it a great misfortune, not to be able to pray ceaselessly, then I conclude, that he is a trustworthy performer of every virtue and is a temple of God.177 This Father, endeared as one of the four great doctors of the Church, often emphasizes earnest, continual prayer in his homilies. In his Homily 6 from this same work, On Prayer, he says, prayer unites us with God and aids us in the contemplation of God. It is then when our soul is illuminated: There is nothing more worthwhile than to pray to God and to converse with him, for prayer unites us with God as his companions. As our bodily eyes are illuminated by seeing the light, so in contemplating God our soul is illuminated by him. Of course the prayer I have in mind is no matter of routine, it is deliberate and earnest. It is not tied down to a fixed timetable; rather it is a state which endures by night and day. It is a state, he adds, which is not subject to routine, but endures by night and day. In the next passage, he continues associating prayer and light: Prayer is the light of the soul, giving us true knowledge of God. It is a link mediating between God and man. By prayer the soul is borne up to heaven and in a marvellous way embraces the Lord. This meeting is like that of an infant crying on its mother, and seeking the best of milk. The soul longs for its own needs and what it receives is better than anything to be seen in the world. Prayer also grants us a true knowledge of God. In this same homily, Chrysostom goes on describing prayer, always connecting it with the soul, and effecting our

177

Qtd in Sisters of the Order of St. Basil.

500

Chapter 4: Patristics

communication with God: Prayer is a precious way of communicating with God, it gladdens the soul and gives repose to its affections. You should not think of prayer as being a matter of words. It is a desire for God, an indescribable devotion, not of human origin, but the gift of Gods grace. As Saint Paul says: we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words. Again, prayer incites to an eternal craving for the Lord, which illuminates the soul with the fiercest of the fires: Anyone who receives from the Lord the gift of this type of prayer possesses a richness that is not to be taken from him, a heavenly food filling up the soul. Once he has tasted this food, he is set alight by an eternal desire for the Lord, the fiercest of fires lighting up his soul. With this illuminating prayer, by grace, the Lords image will already settled in [our] soul: To set about this prayer, paint the house of your soul with modesty and lowliness and make it splendid with the light of justice. Adorn it with the beaten gold of good works and, for walls and stones, embellish it assiduously with faith and generosity. Above all, place prayer on top of this house as its roof so that the complete building may be ready for the Lord. Thus he will be received in a splendid royal house and by grace his image will already be settled in your soul. Chrysostom also says that a person who prays sincerely and constantly cannot sin: It is impossible, actually impossible, that a person, who prays sincerely and calls upon God constantly, would ever fall into sin.178 Chrysostom knew by experience what prayer was. He also had been a monk for six years in the solitude of the mountains south of Antioch, where he spent his time on theological study and meditation and prayer. In the fifth century, with St. Saint Diadochos (400-486), bishop of Photiki in Epirus (North Greece) we find the earliest known mention of the Jesus Prayer. In his On Spiritual Knowledge179 and Discrimination: One Hundred Texts, he attaches great emphasis on the constant remembrance and invocation of the name of the Lord Jesus to avoid Satans deception,

178 179

Qtd in Sisters of the Order of St. Basil. According to the editor of The PhiloKalia (Palmer et al.), knowledge for Diadochos meant to lose awareness of oneself through going out to God in ecstasy (252).

501

Chapter 4: Patristics

If the intellect at that time cleaves fervently to the remembrance of the glorious and holy name of the Lord and uses it as a weapon against Satans deception, he gives up his trick and for the future will attack the soul directly and personally. As a result the intellect clearly discern the deception of the evil one and advances even further in the art of discrimination (text 31, 261-262) or to restore the soul when it begins to wander losing its appetite for earthly beauties, studying and teaching or spiritual knowledge. He says that we should give our intellect nothing but the prayer Lord Jesus, which cannot be said but in the Holy Sirit (text 59, 270). He adds: Let the intellect continually concentrate of these words within its inner shrine with such intensity that it is not turned aside to any mental images. Those who meditate unceasingly upon this glorious and holy name in the depth of their heart can sometimes see the light of their own intellect. For when the mind is closely concentrated upon this name, then we grow fully conscious that the name is burning up all the filth which covers the surface of the soul; for it is written: Our God is a consuming fire (Deut. 4:24). Then the Lord awakes in the soul a great love for His glory; for when the intellect with fervour of heart maintains persistently its remembrance of the precious name, then that name implants in as a constant love for its goodness, since their nothing now that stands in the way. This is the pearl of great price which a man can acquire by selling all that he has, and so experience the inexpressible joy of making it his own. (cf. Matt. 13:46) In this passage, Diadochus is describing the last stage of prayer mentioned above, the prayer of the heart, as he outlines the final gift of grace: the contemplation of the divine fire as we have seen in above-mentioned writers. He also says, if then, a man begins to make progress in keeping the commandments and calls ceaselessly upon the Lord Jesus, the fire of Gods grace spreads even to the hearts more outward organs of perception consciously burning up the tares in the field of the soul (text 85, 285). In such a case, grace will consume our thoughts with its flames, sweetening our hearts in the peace of uninterrupted love, an enabling us to think spiritual thoughts and no longer worldly thoughts (text 88, 287). It is the perfecting man who receives peace and grace upon the repetition of the holy name. As seen above, Diadochos also relates prayer to a consuming fire. He additionally calls prayer of the heart, the memory or

502

Chapter 4: Patristics

remembrance of the Lord.180 Florovsky explains that with it he already explicitly centers all this on the constant invocation of the name of Jesus, and expects from this practice to gain the vision of the interior light (The Byzantine and Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers). As Hillis says, Diadochos tried to provide a synthesis of Evagrius prayer of the mind and Macarius prayer of the heart, it is then when the Jesus Prayer appears. Diadochos stresses the importance of the intellect: You should not doubt that the intellect, when it begins to be strongly energized by the divine light, becomes so completely translucent that it sees its own light vividly. This takes place when the power of the soul gains control over the passions... (text 40, 265). Yet he warns of a light with a shape: But when St. Paul says that Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), he definitely teaches us that everything which appears to the intellect, whether as light or as fire, if it has a shape, is the product of the evil artifice of the enemy. So we should not embark on the ascetic life in the hope of seeing visions clothed with form or shape; for if we do, Satan will find it easy to lead our soul astray. Our one purpose must be to reach the point when we perceive the love of God fully and consciously in our heart . (text 40, 265) He also emphasizes continual prayer: A man who merely practises the remembrance of God from time to time, loses through lack of continuity what he hopes to gain through his prayer. It is a mark of one who truly loves holiness that he continually burns up what is worldly in his heart through practising the remembrance of God, so that little by little evil is consumed in the fire of this remembrance and his soul completely recovers its natural brilliance with still greater glory. (text 97, 294) Diadochos, while holding to the importance of intellectual prayerwhich embraces an affective elementas a means of attaining union with God, likewise stressed the importance of the body in prayer while the mind remains concentrated. Hillis says: In Diadochos eyes, one of the chief difficulties in attaining hesychia is the restlessness of the intellect, which is constantly active. He therefore suggested
180

Qtd. in Florovsky, The Byzantine and Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers.

503

Chapter 4: Patristics

that the intellect should continually invoke the name of Jesus so as to be fully concentrated on ceaseless prayer, and that it is through this intellectual prayer that one achieves union with God. However, this union with God is not purely intellectualistic, as it was for Evagrius. Rather, Diadochos incorporated the affective element of Macarius spirituality through his suggestion that the experience of God is to be had by the totality of ones being. Vladimir Lossky, in The Vision of God, summarizes Diadochus ideas and states their consequences: the mysticism of the intellect and the mysticism of the heart are united, opening the way for a spirituality which will engage the whole nature of man (35). Florovsky gives some reasons to consider Diadochus as the precursor of Hsychasm: Diadochus, through the association of these different themes: of the formless beauty of the divinity, limiting itself in order to communicate itself to us while remaining itself unlimited, and of the union of the body with the divine vision, appears as one of the clearest precursors of Palamism. He is also the precursor of Hesychasm, which St. Gregory Palamas merely wished to justify in its ascetic practice and mystical orientation... (The Byzantine and Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers) St. Thalassios the Libyan, abbot of a monastery in Libya in the late sixth and early seventh century, attests to what a living of inward stillness entails. He declares in the Philokalia:181 The greatest weapons of someone striving to lead a life of inward stillness are self-control, love, prayer, and spiritual reading. He left a beautiful prayer with Christ at its center:
Christ, Master of all, free us from all these destructive passions and the thoughts born of them. For Thy sake we came into being, so that we might delight in the paradise which Thou hast planted and in which Thou hast placed us. We brought our present disgrace upon ourselves, preferring destruction to the delights of blessedness. We have paid for this, for we have exchanged eternal life for death. O Master, as once Thou hast looked on us, look on us now; as Thou becamest man, save all of us. For Thou camest to save us who were lost. Do not exclude us from the company of those who are being saved. Raise up our souls and save our bodies, cleansing us from all impurity. Break the fetters of the passions that constrain us, as once Thou hast broken the ranks of the impure demons. Free us from their tyranny, so that we may worship Thee alone, the eternal light, Having risen from the dead and dancing with the angels in the

181

Qtd. in Four Centuries on the Spiritual Life.

504

Chapter 4: Patristics

blessed, eternal and indissoluble dance. Amen. (Pray without Ceasing) Table 64: Prayer by St. Thalassios

The 7th century saint known for his strict asceticism and ascetic writings, St. Isaac the Syrian (dc 700), also remembered as Isaac Cyrus or Isaac of Nineveh, placed great emphasis on silence, apparently meaning much more than just abstinence from speech, but rather a deep tranquillity of the mind resulting in a detachment from earthly things. He says: First of all let us force ourselves to abstain from speech; then from this abstinence will be born in us something which leads to silence itself. May God grant you the experience of this something, born of this abstinence. But if you embrace this life, I cannot tell you how much light it will bring you. When you put on one side of the scales all the works of this life (life of a monk, or a Hesychast), and on the other silence, you will find that the latter outweighs the former.... He who forbids his lips to gossip (to speak much), preserves his heart from passions. He who preserves his heart from passions, sees God every hour...182 In some instances Isaac equates luminous meditation on God with pure prayer, which is culmination of every kind of collectedness of mind and of excellence of prayer. He also describes what prayer beyond purity is: Prayer which is beyond purity, is steadiness of the intellect, quite of the heart, rest of the mind, quietness of the thoughts, contemplation of the new world, hidden consolation, intercourse with God and the intelligence in communion with God through the revelation of his mysteries. When the spirit of the Son dwells in the perfect, it speaks through him, as through the Son of God, to the Father. And here is no human weakness nor prayers, nor beseeching, nor recollection of things of this world or of things to come. But the Son of God knows himself in a divine way, and as the son with his father, so he speaks freely with God. And then he becomes as the one receiving all prayers, and not as the one who prays; and as the one answering all questions, and not as the one who asks, because the rich one, his Father has given him power over his riches and he has become the same as the person who dwells within him.183 For Isaac, in his Ascetical Homilies, this prayer beyond purity is spiritual prayer, which, as Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev says, in Prayer in St Isaac of Nineveh, begins

182
183

Qtd. in Orthodox Mysticism: Teachings of the Desert Fathers. Qtd. in Chirathilattu.

505

Chapter 4: Patristics

beyond the borders of pure prayer, is the descent of mind to a state of peace and stillness: it is synonymous with teoryia-contemplation. This spiritual prayer, Alfeyev adds does not involve any movement of the mind: it is the very prayer with which the saints of the age to come pray, when their intellects have been swallowed up by the Spirit.184 For Alfeyev, The term teorya (from Greek theoria) is borrowed by Isaac from the language of Evagrius and Dionysius the Areopagite. Isaac uses this term as a synonym for the vision of God. He speaks of the supernatural state of the soul, which is her movement in the contemplation of the transubstantial Deity.185 In this state, the soul rushes forward and becomes as one drunken in awestruck wonder of her continual solicitude for God.186 Alfeyev remarks that The most characteristic idea of Isaac concerning the highest stages of prayer is that at these stages prayer in fact ceases, giving birth to mystical states of spiritual prayer, contemplation-theoria, and inebriation by the divine love. This description of spiritual inebriation, Alfeyev explains, illustrates in a very striking manner that the mystical experience which is described by Isaac is of a very active and dynamic nature. As a matter of fact, for Isaac the Hesychasts life was not a life of idleness as it would conceal certain death: Beware of idleness, well beloved, for it conceals certain death; and it is idleness alone that delivers a monk into the hands of enemies striving to capture him. On that day God will condemn us not for psalms nor for omitting prayers, but for the fact that by omitting them we opened the door to the demons. When those latter find a way in, they enter and close the doors of our eyes. Then they fill us tyrannically with all manner of filth which will bring Divine condemnation and most severe punishment. 187 He likewise refers to the effects of perseverance in prayer, Perseverance in prayer cleanses the intellect, illumines it, and fills it with the light of truth. The virtues, led by compassion, give the intellect peace and light. The cleansing of the intellect is not a dialectical, discursive and theoretical activity, but an act of grace through experience and is ethical in every respect. The intellect is purified by fasting, vigils, silence, prayer, and other ascetic
184 185

Qtd. in Alfeyev from Isaacs Ascetical homilies (23 , 119). Ascetical homilies (3, 18). 186 Ascetical homilies (52, 263). 187 Qtd. in Orthodox Mysticism: Teachings of the Desert Fathers.

506

Chapter 4: Patristics

practices.188 Around the eight or ninth century, St. Hesychios of Synai, called the Priest, in his On Watchfulness and Holiness, also refers to stillness of mid, to absence of thought, as well as the invocation of the name of Jesus, and even to breathing. This abbot of the Monastery of the Mother of God of the Burning Bush (Vatos)189 defines watchfulness or attentiveness as the heart stillness, unbroken by any thought. In this stillness the heart breathes and involves, endlessly and without ceasing, only Jesus Christ who is the son of God and Himself God. It confesses Him who alone has power to forgive our sins, and with His aid it courageously faces its enemies. Through this invocation enfolded continually in Christ, who secretly divines all hearts, the soul does everything it can to keep its sweetness and its inner struggle hidden from men, so that the devil, coming upon it surreptitiously, does not lead into evil and destroy its precious work. (text 5, 163) It is enlightening to notice that the invocation of Jesus Christ secretly divines all hearts. He continues praising the invocation of the name of Jesus: Truly blessed is the man whose mind and heart are as closely attached to the Jesus prayer and to the ceaseless invocation of His name as air to the body or flame to the wax. The sun rising over the earth creates the daylight; and the venerable and holy name of the Lord Jesus, shining continually in the mind, gives birth to countless intellections radiant as the sun. (196, 197) As already seen in other Fathers, ceaseless invocation of Jesus name in prayer leads men to countless intellections radiant as the sun, to contemplation. But blessing is also achieved by combining watchfulness and the name of Jesus with breathing: With your breathing combine watchfulness and the name of Jesus, or humility and the unremitting study of death. Both may confer great blessing (text 189, 196). A monk of the monastery of St. Mamas near Constantinople, St. Symeon the New Theologian (942-1022), in his Homily on Faith, describes the posture the Jesus Prayer may follow as he tells us the daily evening prayers of the blessed youth George.
Qtd. in Quotes from the Church Fathers. This information is provided by the editors of The Philokalia (Palmer et all). For them Hesychios of Synays date is uncertain. He is probably later than St. John Climacus (sixth or seventh century) with whose work the Ladder of Divine Ascent he seems to be familiar (160).
189 188

507

Chapter 4: Patristics

He says: He imagined that he was standing before the Lord Himself and prostrating himself before His holy feet, and he tearfully implored the Lord to have mercy upon him. While praying, he stood motionless like a pillar and bade his feet and the other parts of his body to stay still, especially the eyes, which were restrained from moving curiously in all directions. He stood with great fear and trepidation and denied himself sleep, despondency and laziness.190 Furthermore, Symeon, in The Three Ways of Attention and Prayer, links attention to prayer, There are three ways of attention and prayer, by which the soul can be lifted and become spiritually exhaulted, or crumble and perish. If these three ways are used appropriately and at the right time, the soul will be lifted, whilst if they are used unreasonably and at the wrong time, the soul will perish. Attention therefore should be tied and inseparable to prayer, in the way that the body is tied and inseparable to the soul. Attention should have the lead and mind for enemies as a guard, and fight sin, and resist evil thoughts of the soul. It should be then succeeded by prayer, which will destroy all those evil thoughts which attention fought against earlier, since attention alone is not able to do this... . It is this war of attention and prayer on which both life and death of the soul depend. By attention that we keep our prayer safe and therefore we progress: if we do not have attention to keep it clear and we leave it unguarded, then it is inflected by evil thoughts and we become wicked and hopeless. listing three ways of doing that. In the first way of attention in prayer, one stands to pray by raising his hands towards the sky together with his eyes and mind. He imagines divine concepts, the good things of Heaven, the armies of the holy angels, the residences of the saints and, in short, he gathers in his mind all that he has heard from the Holy Scriptures. In the second one, one concentrates his mind in himself, detaching it from all that is earthly, guarding his senses, and gathering his thoughts so that they are not scattered to the vain things of the world. Sometimes he examines his thoughts and sometimes he pays attention to the words of the prayer he recites. In the third way, ... the mind should guard the heart in the time of prayer and always stay inside it. From there, from the depths of the heart, it should then lift up the prayers to God. For once it tries inside the heart and tastes and is soothedas the Lord is
190

Qtd, in St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, On Practicing the Jesus Prayer.

508

Chapter 4: Patristics

good!then the mind will never want to leave the place of the heart. It will there repeat the words of Peter the apostle: It is wonderful for us to be here! (Mt 17:4, Mk 9:5, Lk 9:33) Then it will always wish to look inside the heart, remaining there and pushing aside and expelling all the concepts which are planted by the Devil. To those who have not realised this work of salvation and remain unaware of it, this will most of the times seem very hard and unpleasant. But those who have tasted its sweetness and enjoyed the pleasure inside the depths of their hearts, they all cry together with Paul: What could ever come between us and the love of God? (Rm 8:38-39) Yet, he additionally warns of the lack of attentiveness: In short, he who is not attentive to guard his mind cannot be cleansed in his heart and be therefore worthy to see God. He who is not attentive can never be poor in spirit nor can he ever mourn and cry, or become gentle and peaceful, or hunger and thirst for justice, or become merciful, peacemaker, or persecuted in the cause of right. [Mt 5:3-10] It is quite impossible to acquire any virtue by any means other than attention. St. Symeon also gives some pieces of advice including posture until the mind reaches the place of the heart: ... find a place quiet, seat alone in a corner, shut the door [Mt 6:6] and cease your mind from anything ephemeral and vain. Press your chin on to your chest so that you can have your attention in yourself, with both eyes and mind. Hold your breath slightly to concentrate your mind and then, having all your mind there, try to find the place of your heart. In the beginning, what you will discover is darkness, much callousness and evil. But then, after having practised this method of attention a lot, night and day, you will findgreat wonder!an incessant happiness! The mind, through struggle, will have finally reached the place of the heart, where you will see the things you have never seen or known. There you will see the heaven which is within you, inside the heart, and you will find yourself enlightened, full of all grace and virtue. The repetition of the Jesus Prayer can help us to focus the attention of our mind: He From there on, if any kind of evil thought ever appears from any direction, before even being considered or take shape, you will immediately push it aside and dissolve it by the name of Jesus with his prayer: Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me. Hence forth the mind will begin to bear grudge and animosity against the demons, being in an incessant war. It will raise its justified wrath and hunt them, attack them, dissolve them. As for the things following beyond that, those you may find out yourself, with Gods help, through your effort and the attention of your mind, keeping Jesus in your heart with His prayer: Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me. That is why a Church-father used to say: Stay in your cell and that will teach you everything! Symeon, referring to inner stillness and picturing its holy atmosphere, says: Hesychia is an undisturbed state of the nous, calmness of a free and rejoicing 509

Chapter 4: Patristics

soul, a hearts untroubled and unwavering foundation, vision of light, knowledge of the mysteries of God, a word of wisdom, depth of conceptual images of God, rapture of the nous, pure converse with God, a vigilant eye, inner prayer, union with God and contact and complete deification, and painless repose in great ascetic labours.191 For Symeon, prayer and the eye of the intellect ever open are conditions to see the divine light: Blessed are they who have the eye of their intellect ever open and with prayer see the light and converse with it mouth to mouth, for they are of equal honor with the angels and, dare I say it, have and shall become higher than the angels, for the latter sing praises while the former intercede. And, if they have become and are ever becoming such while still living in the body and impeded by the corruption of the flesh, what shall they be after the Resurrection and after they have received that spiritual and incorruptible body? Certainly, they shall not be merely the equals of angels, but indeed like the angels Master, as it is written: But we know, he says, that when He appears we shall be like Him [1 John 3:2].192 Furthermore, addressing the monks, he continues: Blessed is that monk who is present before God in prayer and who sees Him and is seen by Him (cf John 14:21, Mt 5:8), and perceives himself as having gone beyond the world and as being in God alone, and is unable to know whether he happens to be in the body or outside the body (2 Cor.12:2-3), for he will hear ineffable speech which it is not lawful for a man to utter (2 Cor.12:4), and shall see what no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived. (1 Cor.2:9) (On the Mystical Life: The Ethical Discourses, Vol. 1, 166-169). With his overtly existential spirituality, and his emphasis on the vision of God as light, Symeon, Hillis sates, greatly influenced the development of Hesychastic spirituality, which came to associate this divine light with the light that shone from Jesus at the Transfiguration. Hillis also asserts that Symeon stresses, more than any previous writer, the necessity of experiencing union with God through a vision of divine light. This is illustrated by his own mystical experiences, the experience of God, which was not purely intellectualistic, but one that embraced the whole of his being. His was a spirituality encompassing the whole man (Hillis). In The Discourses, Symeon says: As

191 192

Qtd. in Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, Orthodox Psychotherapy. Qtd. in St. Symeon The New Theologian. Study Archive.

510

Chapter 4: Patristics

I ascended I was given other ascents, at the end of the ascent I was given light, and by the light an even clearer light. In the midst thereof a sun shone brightly and from it a ray shone forth that filled all things (205).193 Symeons goal was a prayer from the heart with no need to devise well-written prayers. The only thing that was required was the desire to open up ones heart to God. Symeon said this, Your mind should guard your heart in time of prayer; the mind should constantly descend into the heart and from the depths of the heart offer up prayer to God.194 His experiential method of spirituality influenced later Hesychasts, specifically those who participated in the Hesychast controversy of the fourteenth century. Simeon by believing that one could achieve an inner illumination and directly experience a vision of Divine light, prepared the way for the later blossoming of Hesychastic mysticism. As we have already seen, many eastern Fathers placed the accent on hesychia (silence, inner concentration, attentiveness), and the guarding of the mind as means to arrive at pure prayer and union with God. The way of union with God trough hesychia is especially delineated by Saint John Climacus or John of Sinai (ca. 579649) in The Ladder of Divine Ascent or Ladder of Paradise. In this work of thirty parts, written specifically for a monastic audience, the terms hesychia and Hesychast are used quite systematically. John defines Hesychasm as the enclosing of the bodiless mind (nous) in the bodily house of the body (Step 27, 6), and Hesychast practice as follows: Take up your seat on a high place and watch, if only you know how, and then you will see in what manner, when, whence, how many and what kind of thieves come to enter and steal your clusters of grapes. When the watchman grows weary, he stands up and prays; and then he sits down again and courageously
193

Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. Qtd. in Quotations. In Quotations there are two different translations of Symeons Discourses: Golitzins translation and C.J. de Catanzaros translation. [See Bibliography]. The translators will be noted in the footnote for each of the quotations of this work. 194 Qtd. in Logue.

511

Chapter 4: Patristics

takes up his former task. (Step 27, 22-23) The monastic has to reject all tempting thoughts (the thieves) and engage in mental ascesis (Hesychasm). In Step 11, On Talkativeness and Silence, John refers to intelligent silence as the mother of prayer: Intelligent silence is the mother of prayer, freedom from bondage, custodian of zeal, a guard on our thoughts, a watch on our enemies, a prison of mourning, a friend of tears, a sure recollection of death, a painter of punishment, a concern with judgment, servant of anguish (), foe () of license (), a companion of stillness (), the opponent of dogmatism (), a growth of knowledge, a hand to shape contemplation (), hidden progress, the secret journey upward. He also teaches that The Hesychast is the one who says My heart is firm (Ps 57:8); the Hesychast is the one who says I sleep, but my heart is awake (Sg. 5:2). The Hesychast is the one who aspires to circumscribe the Incorporeal in a fleshy dwelling (Step 27).195 Furthermore, for him stillness of the soul is accurate knowledge and management of ones thoughts. Stillness of the soul is a science of thoughts and an inviolable mind. Brave and determined thinking is a friend of stillness. It keeps constant vigil at the doors of the heart, and kills or repels the thoughts that come.196

195 196

Qtd. in Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology, 71. Qtd. in Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, Orthodox Psychotherapy.

512

Chapter 4: Patristics

Illustration 71: St. John of the Ladder197

Meyendorff says that In John, the terms hesychia and Hesychast designate quite specifically the eremitic, contemplative life of the solitary monk practicing the Jesus prayer Like Macarius and Diadochus, he adds, Johns positive teaching about prayer is centered on the person and name of Jesus: is thus denotes a purely Christian incarnational foundation, and involves the whole man, no just the mind (Byzantine Theology 70-71). Climacus recommends the monologic prayer, that is, the prayer reduced to a single word, Jesus, accompanied by breath: Let the name of Jesus adhere to your breath, and then you will know the blessings of stillness.198 He also says Let the memory of Jesus stick to your breathing, and you will know how useful it is to be alone.199 The nineteenth century Russian Bishop St. Ignatius Brianchaninov explains that John of the Ladder councils that the mind should be locked into the words of the prayer and should be forced back each time it departs from it.200 Such a mechanism of prayer is remarkably helpful and suitable. When the mind, in its own manner, acquires attentiveness, then the heart will join it with its own offeringcompunction. The heart will empathize with the mind by means of compunction, and the prayer will be said by the mind and heart together. The words of the prayer ought to be said without the feast hurry, even lingering, so that the mind can lock itself into each word. St. John of the Ladder consoles and
197 198

See: <www.orthodox-christian-comment.co.uk>. Qtd. in Saint John of the Ladder. 199 Qtd. in Saint John of the Ladder. 200 Step 28, Chap. 17.

513

Chapter 4: Patristics

instructs the coenobitic brethren who busy themselves about monastic obedience and encourages them thus to persevere in prayerful asceticism. To illustrate his point, Brianchaninov quotes the following passages from The Ladder: From those monks who are engaged in performing obediences, God does not expect a pure and undistracted prayer. Despair not should inattention come over you! Be of cheerful spirit and constantly compel your mind to return to itself! For the angels alone are not subject to any distraction (Step 4, Chap. 93). Being enslaved by passions, let us persevere in praying to the Lord: for all those who have reached the state of passionlessness did so with the help of such indomitable prayer. If, therefore, you tirelessly train your mind never to stray from the words of the prayer, it will be there even at mealtime. A great champion of perfect prayer has said: I had rather speak five words with my understanding ... than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue (I Cor. 14:19)... The Lord gives pure prayer to him who, eschewing laziness, prays much and regularly in his own manner, even if it is marred by inattention. (The Ladder, Step 28, Chap. 21) For John this pure prayer of the mind in the heart is grace given. Maximus the Confessor, in his On Knowledge (Chap.18), also talks about this movement of ascent toward through prayer: The one who prays ought never to halt his movement of sublime ascent toward God. Fur just as we should understand the ascent from strength to strength as the progress in the practice of the virtues, from glory to glory (2 Cor.3.18) as the advance in the spiritual knowledge of contemplation, and the transfer from the letter of sacred writing to its spirit, so in the same way the one who is settled in the place of prayer should lift his mind from human matters and the attention of the soul to more divine realities. This will enable him to follow the one who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God (Heb 1.14), who is everywhere and who in His incarnation passes through all things on our account. If we follow Him, we also pass through all things with Him and come beside Him if we know Him not in the limited condition of His descent in the incarnation, but in the majestic spleandour of his natural infinitude. Maximus sees the purpose of prayer to ask for natural discernment and the illuminating grace of the Spirit, at the same time distinguishing between asceticism and illumination: The one who engages in a pursuit of wisdom out of devotion and stands prepared against the invisible forces should pray that both the natural discernment (with its proportionate light) and the illuminating grace of the Spirit remain with him. The former trains the flesh in the acquisition of virtue through asceticism while the latter illuminates the mind to select the companionship of

514

Chapter 4: Patristics

wisdom before all others, according to the Scripture, He works the destruction of the strongholds of evil and of every pretension which raises itself up against the knowledge of God (2 Cor.10.5). Joshua the son of Nun clearly shows this by asking in prayer, Stand still, O sun, at Gibeon (Josh 10.12), that is, that the light of the knowledge of God be kept secure for him in the mountain of spiritual contemplation, and the moon in the valley, that is, that the natural discernment which lies in the frailty of the flesh remain steadfast through virtue. (On Knowledge, chap. 33) While asceticism trains the flesh, illumination trains the mind. For Maximus. contemplative prayer delivers the mind from ignorance, Gibeon is the higher mind, and the valley is the flesh which is weighed down by death. And the sun is the Word who illuminates the mind and inspires it with the power of contemplative experience and delivers it from every ignorance. The moon is the law of nature which persuades the flesh to subject itself lawfully to the spirit by accepting the yoke of the commandments. The moon is symbolic of nature in that it is changeable; but in the saints it remains unchanging through the unchangeable habit of virtue. (On Knowledge, chap. 34) and leads to a restoration of the Word within humanity: In the active person the Word grows fat by the practice of virtue and becomes flesh. In the contemplative it grows lean by spiritual understanding and becomes as it was in the beginning, God the Word (On Knowledge, chap. 37). St. John Damascene (675-749), a Syrian monk and presbyter, also emphasizes silence and prayer, the Hesychasts focus: For silence is the mother of prayer and prayer is the manifestation of the divine glory. For, when we shall have closed the door of our senses and have found ourselves with ourselves and with God, and are liberated from what transpires in the exterior world, we shall have entered into ourselves and we will see the kingdom of God clearly in ourselves. ( PG 96: 561 A, B) As Meyendorff explains, in the late 13th century, some methods of the Jesus prayer also proposed a breathing technique aimed at attaching prayer to a constant physiological element of human life: the act of inhaling air (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church, 172). We have and illustration of this in the monk of Constantinople and Mount Athos, Nicephorous the Solitary, who lived in second half of the thirteenth century. Nicephorous teaches Jesus prayer, the prayer of the heart, in

515

Chapter 4: Patristics

conjunction with breathing. He explains his concept of breathing as closely linked to the heart: You know that our breathing is the inhaling and exhaling of air. The organ which serves for this is the lungs which lie round the heart, so that the air passing through them thereby envelopes the heart. Thus breathing is a natural way to the heart, and so, having collected your wind withinlead it into the channel of breathing through which air reaches the heart and together with this inhaled air, force your mind to descend into the heart and to remain there, accustom it, brother, not to come out of the heart too soon, for at first it feels very lonely in that inner seclusion and imprisonment. But when it gets accustomed to it, it begins on the contrary to dislike its aimless circling outside, for it is no longer unpleasant and wearisome for it to be within. Just as a man who has been away from home, when he returns, is beside himself with joy at seeing again his children and wife, embraces them and cannot talk to them enough, so the mind, when it unites with the heart, is filled with unspeakable joy and delight. Then a man sees that the kingdom of heaven is truly within us; and seeing it now in himself, he strives with pure prayer to keep it and strengthen it there.201 Breathing aids the mind to enter the heart. It is then, Nicephorous adds, when the Jesus prayer should constantly be repeated: When you thus enter into the place of the heart, as I have shown you, give thanks to God and, praising his mercy, keep always to this doing, and it will teach you things that in no other way you will ever learn. Moreover you should know that when your mind becomes firmly established in the heart, it must not remain there silent and idle, but it should constantly repeat the Jesus prayer: Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon me! and never cease. For this practice, keeping the mind from dreams renders it elusive and impenetrable to enemy suggestions and every day leads it more and more to love and longing for God.202 For Nicephorous, the words of the simple prayer in association with breathing give the mind something on which to focus its attention while the heart prays beyond words to God. Meyendorff states that it was the exact meaning of the technique of attaching prayer to a breathing technique that was often misunderstood by some unsophisticated practitioners, especially, in the fourteenth century, by the westerneducated Barlaam, a Calabrian monk, who attacked it violently. Meyendorff, adds, that this explains one of the major themes of the Triads of Palamas (1296-1359), which
201 202

Qtd. in Hasselbach. Qtd. in Hasselbach.

516

Chapter 4: Patristics

aimed at defining the role of the human body in prayer and, consequently, in a christocentric conception of human life in its wholeness (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 172). But in the middle of the fourteen century not only the role of the body in prayer, but also the question of the transcendence of God and the Divine light came to head. In fact, Gregory Palamas Triads for the Defense of the Holy Hesychasts was a successful attempt to defend the highest goal of the Hesychastan experiential knowledge of Godagainst the challenge posed by Barlaam, who defended the position that our knowledge of God can only be propositional rather than experiential (Hesychasm). For him it was impossible for the material eyes to physically behold the immaterial God. Attacking the Hesychasts spiritual practices, Barlaam postulated the doctrine of Gods otherness and unknowability in an extreme form and harshly criticized monks for their holding a grossly materialistic conception of the Hesychast method of prayer. However, vividly expressing the Hesychastic life of the Holy Mountain (Mount Athos), Palamas advocated the divinization aimed entailed by Hesychasts. For Palamas, the Hesychasts did indeed experience the Divine and Uncreated Light of Thabor. Following Evagrius, Palamas emphasizes stillness as a way to attain communion with God: It is necessary to be still in order to have clear converse with God and gradually bring the nous back from its wanderings.203 For Palamas, with stillness, as Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos explains, a man purifies his senses and his heart. So he knows God, and this knowledge of God is his salvation (Orthodox Psychotherapy). Palamas envisions a natural knowledge about God, a consequence of the powers of the soul and the body, which is a means to something greater: There is a knowledge about God and His doctrines. The use and activity of the natural powers of the soul and of the body do shape the rational image of
203

Qtd. in Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, Orthodox Psychotherapy.

517

Chapter 4: Patristics

man, but that is not the same as the perfect beauty of the noble state which comes from above; that is by no means the supernatural union with the more than resplendent light, which is the sole source of sure theology. (Triads, I, 3, 15)204 Connecting the soul and the body, Palamas says that soul and body have in common blessed activities which instead of attaching the spirit to the flesh draw up the flesh to a dignity near to the spirit: There are blessed passions, activities common to soul and body, which do not attach the spirit to the flesh, but draw up the flesh to a dignity near to that of the spirit, and make it to turn towards the heights. In the same way as the Divinity of the Word Incarnate is common to soul and body so, in spiritual men, is the grace of the Spirit transmitted to the body by the soul as intermediary, and this gives it to experience of divine things, and allows it to feel the same passion as the soul. (Triads, II, 2, 12)205 The grace of the Spirit is the intermediary, and that allows to experience the divine things. In Pray without Ceasing, Palamas exhorts not only priests and monks, but all Christians to prayer more often than to breathe. It is the constant invocation of the sweet name of Jesus Christ which will help overcome all difficulties: At first it may appear very difficult to you, but be assured, as it were from Almighty God, that this very name of our Lord Jesus Christ, constantly invoked by you, will help you to overcome all difficulties, and in the course of time you will become used to this practice and will taste how sweet is the name of the Lord. Then you will learn by experience that this practice is not impossible and not difficult, but both possible and easy. This is why St. Paul, who knew better than we the great good which such prayer would bring, commanded us to pray without ceasing. Palamas explains that it is by praying in the mind while performing daily tasks that we can pray without ceasing: Moreover, bear in mind the method of prayerhow it is possible to pray without ceasing, namely by praying in the mind. And this we can always do if we so wish. For when we sit down to work with our hands, when we walk, when we eat, when we drink we can always pray mentally and practice this mental prayer
Qtd. in Knowledge, Prayer, Vision:Three foundational aspects of the Theology of St Gregory Palamas. 205 Qtd. in Knowledge, Prayer, Vision:Three foundational aspects of the Theology of St Gregory Palamas.
204

518

Chapter 4: Patristics

the true prayer pleasing to God. Let us work with the body and pray with the soul. Let our outer man perform his bodily tasks, and let the inner man be entirely dedicated to the service of God, never abandoning this spiritual practice of mental prayer, as Jesus, God and Man, commanded us, saying: But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret. (Matthew 6:6) While the outer man is performing his bodily tasks, the inner man prays mentally to God in the closet with the door shut. Moreover, Palamas explains what this closet is: The closet of the soul is the body; our doors are the five bodily senses. The soul enters its closet when the mind does not wander hither and thither, roaming among things and affairs of the world, but stays within, in our heart. Our senses become closed and remain closed when we do not let them be attached to external sensory things, and in this way our mind remains free from every worldly attachment, and by secret mental prayer unites with God its Father. And thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly, adds the Lord. God who knows all secret things sees mental prayer and rewards it openly with great gifts. For that prayer is true and perfect which fills the soul with Divine grace and spiritual gifts. As chrism perfumes the jar the more strongly the tighter it is closed, so prayer, the more fast it is imprisoned in the heart, abounds the more in Divine grace. It is the soul that enters the closet when the mind in prayer is still and had ceased wandering. It is then when the praying mind unites with God and the soul is filled with Divine grace and great spiritual gifts. This union indicates theosis. Palamas describes this mental prayer as light and as the chain linking God with man and man with God: This mental prayer is the light which illumines mans soul and inflames his heart with the fire of love of God. It is the chain linking God with man and man with God. Oh the incomparable blessing of mental prayer! It allows a man constantly to converse with God. Oh truly wonderful and more than wonderful to be with ones body among men while in ones mind conversing with God. Angels have no physical voice, but mentally never cease to sing glory to God. This is their sole occupation and all their life is dedicated to this. But what other and greater rewards can you wish from this when, as I said, you are mentally always before the face of God and are constantly conversing with Him conversing with God, without Whom no man can ever be blessed either here or in another life? He finally counsels the reader to put it into practice and gain profit from what mental prayer brings to the soul, doing so with one invocation, Lord have mercy.

519

Chapter 4: Patristics

The presupposition behind this simple text on unceasing prayer is that man, through mental prayer, is capable of transcending his own nature and attain contemplation of the Divine Reality. Through it, we converse with God and He fills the soul with the free gift of His Divine Grace or Energies. As I will explain in more detail when dealing with theosis in the next chapter, Palamas, in his defense of the Hesychasts, makes a distinction between the energies of God and the essence of God. These energies are uncreated, yet, in contrast with the essence of God which can never be known by creatures, they can be known, and can provide the Hesychast a true spiritual knowledge of God. It is a type of knowledge which entails the transformation of man by the Spirit of God. Palamas says that the uncreated energies of God illumine the Hesychast who has been granted the experience of the Uncreated Light. (Hesychasm). After a civil war and two councils held at Constantinople in 1341 and 1351, with a doctrinal authority in orthodox theology in spite of being local and not EcumenicalGregory Palamas and the theology and practice of Hesychasm were recognized as Orthodox. Therefore Hesychastic spirituality came to the foremost part, and from that time to the present, it has played a key role as a renewal movement within Eastern Christianity. Although rooted in the tradition of the Easter Fathers, Palamas expanded the theological framework of Hesychasm (Hillis). As we have seen, many eastern Fathers combine the Jesus prayer with breathing. Hierodeacon Cleopa Paraschiv, in Humble-Mindedness: The Doorway to Pure Prayer, conducted an interview with Elder Dionysius (1909-1979) of the St. George Kellion, Kolitsou Skete, Mount Athos, which can shed some light on combining breathing and the Jesus prayer. It is a long quote but it uses in its discourse interesting thoughts on the topic by Fathers such as St. John Climacus and St. Arsenius.

520

Chapter 4: Patristics

Elder Dionysius starts by combining breathing with the Jesus prayer: I believe its easier to learn the Jesus Prayer with the breathing. St. John Climacus says that your prayer should be united with your breathing. Just as you breathe in order to be able to live, so should you pray in order to feed your soul with the Grace of the Holy Spirit. When you breathe in, say, Lord Jesus Christ Son of God, and when you breathe out, say, have mercy on me, a sinner! Since youre a sinner, you should cast the passions and sins out of your heart and introduce our Lord Jesus Christ into your heart. Because you direct all the passions and sins into your heart with your thinking. Through the Jesus Prayer we aim at drawing Jesus Christ into our heart when we say, Lord Jesus Christ Son of God; and when we say, have mercy on me, a sinner! we drive out the passions and sins which are there in our heart. Calling upon the name of Jesus Christ ceaselessly, a Christian becomes deified. Then, he gives some advice and summarizes the reasons why the Fathers left for the desert: But care, perseverance, and quietness of mind are needed. Thats why the Fathers left for the desert, for remote places, in order to have quietness and to be able to concentrate their mind. With much speaking, even if its beneficial, you can fail. St. Arsenius the Great said, I have regretted speaking, but I have never regretted being silent. But we who talk all the time and waste our time uselesslyhow can we say, Lord Jesus Christ? Elder Dionysius concludes by exhorting Christians to use the technique which they considered useful for them: Regarding the learning of the Jesus Prayer, whether based on breathing or on the heartbeat, every Christian should conclude, from his own experience, which method is more useful. The practice of the Jesus prayer dominated eastern monasticism until today. As an illustration, in the nineteenth century the Jesus prayer inspired the classic known as The Way of a Pilgrim, a man involved in a journey across the country devoutly practicing the Jesus Prayer, with the help of a prayer rope, and studying the Philokalia: He took my request kindly and asked me into his cell. Come in, said he; ... We went into his cell and he began to speak as follows. The continuous interior Prayer of Jesus is a constant uninterrupted calling upon the divine Name of Jesus with the lips, in the spirit, in the heart; while forming a mental picture of His constant presence, and imploring His grace, during every occupation, at all times, in all places, even during sleep. The appeal is couched in these terms, Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me. One who accustoms himself to this appeal experiences as a result so deep a consolation and so great a need to offer the

521

Chapter 4: Patristics

prayer always, that he can no longer live without it, and it will continue to voice itself within him of its own accord. Now do you understand what prayer without ceasing is? Yes indeed, Father, and in Gods name teach me how to gain the habit of it, I cried, filled with joy. He opened the book [The Philokalia], found the instruction by St. Simeon the New Theologian, and read: Sit down alone and in silence. Lower your head, shut your eyes, breathe out gently and imagine yourself looking into your own heart. Carry your mind, i.e., your thoughts, from your head to your heart. As you breathe put, say Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me. Say it moving your lips gently, or simply say it in your mind. Try to put all other thoughts aside. Be calm, be patient, and repeat the process very frequently.206 Today, when the great monastic centers in Egypt, Palestine, Asia Minor, Constantinople, Russia and the Balkans no longer exist, as Archimandrite Georgios, in The Neptic and Hesychastic Character of Orthodox Athonite Monasticism, explains, the neptic207 and hesychastic character of Orthodox monasticism of Anthonite monasticism survives in Agion Oros (Mount Athos), under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. This Abbott of the Holy Monastery of St. Gregorios at Agion Oros, states that Mount Athos has an unbroken dogmatic and spiritual union with the Church. This union assures and guards its neptic and hesychastic character, and it allows it to offer to Gods people the fruits of neptic and hesychastic life. In contrast to western monasticism, the goal of eastern monasticism was not the external reform of the world, as Archimandrite Georgios says, but its transformation by means of repentance, cleansing from the passions and theosis. Abbot Joseph of Mt. Tabor Monastery, in Monks also says regarding Orthodox Monasticism: The goal of monastic life is nothing less than the transfiguration of all humanity and the whole universe unto the image of the crucified and glorified Christ. Every deified soul contributes immensely to the radical renewal and salvation of the world. Its not that monks think they can accomplish this on their own. They just know that this goal is Gods will, and they want to sacrifice their lives for
206 207

Prayer without Ceasing (from The Way of the Pilgrim). Nepsis, neptic: vigilance of the nous (mind) and watchfulness at the gates of the heart, so that every thought that moves in it can be controlled. Neptic is an adjective pertaining to the method used for nepsis (The Neptic and Hesychastic Character of Orthodox Athonite Monasticism).

522

Chapter 4: Patristics

the fulfillment of Gods purpose in creating us in the first place.

SOME CONCLUDING WORDS As we read the varied literature by the Fathers, we discover that hesychia was more than common prayer, which embraces an element of the creatures self-interest and stillness of soul, it was an enlightened, true prayer, where the Hesychast, while both intellectually alert and spiritually progressing, accomplished more or less contact with the uncreated energies or grace of God arriving at the resulting gift of deification. True, spiritual prayer, as Macarius the Great calls it in his Homilies, makes the soul of men receptive to the spiritual forces of the Trinity. The Hesychast firmly believed that through a silent mind and a ceaseless, enlightened prayer the grace or deifying energies of the Holy Spirita consequence of the redemptive work of Christ which opened the path to deificationpenetrated the soul of man thus enabling it to be divinized. For these men of a living faith, hesychia meant an immediate, personal, and experiential method of approaching the threshold of the domain where they could communicate with their Maker and Creator and contact a divine reality. Yet, the same Fathers held that other human accomplishments went together with this deification process: becoming living sacrifices to Christ through baptism, renewal of our mind or nous, and watchfulness (Hieromonk Damascene). But hesychia was also worship as its goal was the comprehension of God without expecting anything. The seventh century Christian monk, St. John Climacus, in The Ladder of Paradise (XXVII) says: Hesychia is an interrupted cult and service to God. May the memory of Jesus be one with your breathing and you shall understand the usefulness of Hesychia. For the eastern Fathers, whose life was one of unceasing practice of God, through His Son, Jesus Christ, hesychia was a natural recognition of the Fathers lovable nature and personality and adorable attributes. In the practice of 523

Chapter 4: Patristics

hesychia, these God-knowing men had a supreme ambition, a consuming desire, to be in their earthly context perfect as the Father was in His eternal abodeto be imitator of Christ as a manifestation of God on earthfollowing the divine exhortation Be thou perfect, even as I am perfect. The Fathers craved the concept of the Infinite as they were hoping to have the eternal light of the vision of God, of the contemplation of God, of the knowledge of God, of the communion with God, of the ascent to God through the light of His uncreated energies. For them this light was a luminous emanation of the Persons of the Deity that has nothing to do with intellectual insight. Fr. Biji Chirathilattu, in The Relevance of Prayers and Fasts, writes The ultimate purpose of prayer is the union with God and actually, the true prayer itself is union with God. Prayer is the means to be near to God and to get immense joy out of it. It is the commingling of the intellect with God and through prayer it beholds His glory and abides in the light of His greatness within the place of the spiritual beings, stupefied, silent, motionless, in ecstasy and in wonder. It is the experience of the apostles at Mount Tabor, who have seen the immense Glory of God and longed just to be there (Math. 17:4). The highest form of prayer is the pure prayer, where, the mind being unified with God comes to a stage where it identifies itself with God as the receiver of all prayers. The Hesychasts worshiped the experience-idea of God trying to grasp the highest concept of God and the mystery of incarnation of Jesus. For them it was not difficult to worship a loving Father as Trinity devoted to the uplifting ministry of His creatures, a Person so powerful in creation and, at the same time, so perfect in goodness and mercy. In Christ in Eastern Christian Thought, Meyendorff makes reference to the central focus of Christ, the Son of God, in collaboration with the Holy Spirit (The italics are his): The Hesychast tradition took different forms down the centuries, but it remained unified in its fundamental inspiration: in Christ man recovers His original destiny, re-adapts His existence to the divine model, rediscovers the true freedom that slavery to Satan made him lose, and made use of that freedom, with the collaboration of the Holy Spirit, in order to love and know God. He can then, by anticipation, participate in the kingdom that Christ said was within us, and know by experience is the true light. (128)

524

Chapter 4: Patristics

Christ is this true light the Fathers of the Church envisioned in their experience of God and their prayers also bear witness to it. In their imitation of Christ, the Fathers did not hide this light but through it they made known the love and mercy of God to the humankind. Their favorite prayer was, as we have seen, the prayer of the heart or the Jesus prayer, a prayer of silence, a prayer devoid from images, words, and discursive thoughts, which involved the whole body. It was through it that they hoped to accomplish the mystical state culminating in the vision of this Divine, Uncreated Light. For these spirit-led men, prayer and its associated worship meant a detachment from passions, as well as the monotonous material existence. Prayer was a path to approach self-realization in the Spirit as well as a mental and spiritual achievement. The ultimate goal of any prayer is in fact this spiritual state, when prayer ceases and gives place to what Isaac calls pure prayer, meditation, wonder or inebriation. In this state, a persons intellect is ravished, and he remains silent before the Mystery that surpasses all human understanding (Alfeyev). But the Hesychasts effort to achieve stillness of mind, the absolute cessation of intellectual activity prior to the gift of Grace and contemplation of God, is not, as Alfeyev declares, a sort of Buddhist Nirvana, a migration beyond the borders of every personal existence, a full loss of personal self-consciousness, a synonym or unconscious and insensible oblivion, but rather as a means to capture the mind by God, a personal God, I would add. It is, as he explains, Unlike Nirvana, stillness of mind is an extremely intense state of the mind, which finds itself entirely under the power of God and is drawn into undiscovered depths of the Spirit. The question concerns, therefore, the absence of the movements and desires of the intellect, but not the loss of personal existence: on the contrary, in the stillness of mind there is an intense personal communion of a human person with personal God. It is in this personal level that Hesychia takes man to a selfless, dispassionate kind of love, as Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos maintains:

525

Chapter 4: Patristics

Hesychia offers the indispensable conditions for loving ones brothers dispassionately, for acquiring selfless and dispassionate love. He who is not attracted by worldly things cherishes stillness. He who loves nothing merely human loves all men (St. Maximus the Confessor) (32). How can one have selfless love, which is one of the aims of the spiritual life, when one is possessed by passions? (Orthodox Psychotherapy) Kallistos of Diokleia, in Person and Personality in Orthodox Teaching, explains that it is primarily the human person to which the therapeutic and salvific methods of Hesychasm, as the spiritual teachings of Palamas are called, are directed. He goes on to describe the Hesychastic way of life and how it affects the restoration of the human person: The cleaning and enlightenment of the individual human mind, the purification of the human heart, and the restoration of the passions (which have been misdirected and perverted, as a result of the Fall) constitute the Hesychastic way of life. And the way of life that effects these things leads to the restoration of the individual, the human person, who freely turns from a life of sin to one of synergy with God. It is a restoration in Christ, Kallistos adds, that centers on the person, on the restoration of the person, and on the cure of the process of disease which separates the individual from the full realization of His potential in Christ. For Rev. George Mastrantonis, prayer, whom he considers as the soul of faith, has the power of spiritualize man: Prayer is considered the soul of the faith not because faith cannot express itself, but because it depends on prayer in order to express faith with vividness. In this respect, faith and prayer are so correlated that it is difficult to discern between the two. Prayer, for a sincere and devoted member of the Church, has the power to modify him for a sound spiritual life. Prayers also prevent man from sin. The Russian monk St. Silouanos the Athonite (18661938) says in On Prayer: We eat and drink every day, yet on the morrow our bodies need drink and food again. In like manner the recollection of Gods bounties never wearies the soul but disposes her still more to think of God. Or again: the more wood you pile on a fire the more heat you get, and thus it is with God-the more you think on him the more are you fired with love and fervour towards Him. He who loves the Lord is always mindful of Him, and remembrance of God begets prayer.

526

Chapter 4: Patristics

(Unceasing Prayer)

Hesychasts knew that they could not search out God, have the vision of God, by mere knowledge. They realized that to know God they had to enter the hearts by personal experience, and prayer, the prayer of the heart, the precious name of Jesus made fragrant, a defying sea breeze sweetly indwelling the soul and the whole man, was, reiterating the same idea, their most idoneous means. As Palamas somehow suggested, it is not necessary to see God with the eyes of the flesh in order to discern Him by the faith-vision of a spiritualized mind through constant prayer and hesychia, as one distances oneself from unnecessary worldly distractions and reject all those thoughts which are not according to God. St. Theofan remarked that The essence of prayer lies in lifting the mind and heart to God. Prayer rules are only aids to this end. We weak ones cannot do without them (Letter 47.)208 The vision of God, as a grace freely bestowed by the Father, was not always attained by Hesychasts, but God did grant them a progressing revelation of truth, an increased sense of goodness, and an enhanced treasuring of beauty. Through prayer, the Hesychast entered in contact with objective realities on the spiritual level of human experience. Hesychasm was a strong stimulus to grow spiritually in the eternal longing of man to see the spiritual luminosity of the face of God in heaven and inside himself.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
208

Activity Why was hesychia so important to the desert Fathers? Explain the two types of Hesychasm as defined by Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos in Orthodox Phsychotherapy. Briefly Define amerimna, nepsis, and crupte melete. Briefly comment the vision on hesycha of the Fathers mentioned in this section starting with Arsenius and finishing with St. Gregory of Palamas. Write a five-page paper about Hesychasm. Try to reach your own conclusions

Qtd. in St. Theophan the Recluse On Prayer

527

Chapter 4: Patristics

by rereading the quoted passages or by adding some new ones. 6. How can you make the Jesus Prayer or the Prayer of the heart part of your daily life?
Activity 118: Hesychasm

Final Activity After having read this part and done its exercises, write a five-page paper summarizing what has been said. Use your own words and provide your own conclusion.
Activity 119: Final activity on the Fathers of the Church and hesychasm

4. THE FATHERS AS DEFENDERS OF FAITH: YOUR OWN RESEARCH ON APOLOGETICS The term apologetics comes from the Greek word apologia meaning defense. In the First Epistle of the Apostle Peter, he teaches: But and if ye suffer for righteousness sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer (apologian) to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear (1 Peter 3:14-15). The Fathers of the Church were tireless defenders of the orthodox faith against, atheists, pagans, Jews, and heretics, many dying martyrs for their boldness. We have already made mentions of the Fathers as apologists and will do so again in our discussion of the History of Doctrine, but to have a better grasp of this activity of the Fathers read the following articles you will find in Appendix F, Ivan M. Andreyev, A Short Historical Review of Apologetic Works In Connection With the General History of Theology [http://www. orthodoxfaith.com/ apologetics_andreyev.html] Sal Ciresi, Church History: The Early Apologists.

Then make a summary of them and try to find quotations from the main eastern Fathers cited here that confirm what the authors of these articles say. You will only find a portion of the first article in the Appendix chronologically corresponding to the period

528

Chapter 4: Patristics

of the seven ecumenical councils. Its internet address is included in case you want to continue reading it since it covers the study of apologetics until the twentieth century. 5. THE FATHERS AND LITURGICAL PRACTICE: YOUR OWN RESEARCH As Meyendorff says, It is clear that the liturgy played a central part in maintaining the identity of the church. (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 116), and the eastern Fathers were quite aware of it. Read the following work that you will find on the Internet: Thomas K.Carroll and Thomas Halton. Liturgical Practice in the Fathers. (Message of the Fathers of the Church). Excerpts. [http://www.holytrinity mission.org/books/english/liturgical_practice_thomas_carroll.htm] Then make summaries of these sections, focusing on what the Fathers say: Introduction 1. The Lords Day and Week. 2. The Lords Night and Season. 3. New Days of the Lord. 4. New Weeks of the Lord. 5. New Seasons of the Lord.

529

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Chapter 5 HISTORY OF DOCTRINE

We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance.The Athanasian Creed

INTRODUCTION In this chapter I will approach the development of the main Orthodox doctrine of Trinitarianism, covering a period of seven centuries from the Apostolic Fathers to the Council of Nicea II (787), the seventh and last ecumenical council. I will further provide some quick notes on Christology and Ecclessiology so that the students could do their own research. It is important to remind us we do so that, as suggested, that doctrine must be studied by both the criteria of Christian theology and history, and that as we study the development of doctrine, we need to establish a connection between what is confessed, or dogmas, and what is believed and taught, and go back diachronically from what is confessed to what was taught and to what was believed. It is well known that Christian theology was not born in a vacuum and to understand the development of the thought of the Church we need to be aware of the complex cultural environment in which the Fathers, the main source of this development, began to teach. There are some features of this environment, dealt with in Part I, such as Judaism, the religious beliefs and observance of the Romans, or Gnosticism which either made the Fathers react with violence or had a conscious or an unconscious influence upon them. To illustrate this point, Kelly talks about Palestinian Judaism already creating an atmosphere of thought favorable for the Christian conception of God as three-personal (Early Christian Doctrines 7). For pedagogical purposes, since this text is mainly addressed to seminary students, I will provide primary quotes from the Fathers and Councils, including ethical

530

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

concerns, especially in the case of the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, who were not yet conscious theologians. These ethical concerns or instructions will be cited with no comment as commentary might hinder the linear development of the discourse. One of the problems we will encounter with theologians of the first centuries, as with current theologians, is the logical problem to conceptualize, grasp and express eternal, space-time transcendent concepts in human space-time concepts or language without distorting them. As space-time creatures we cannot, in our circumscribed language, express eternal truths without misrendering at least some aspects of their intended meanings. The Fathers of the Church often complained about this: how can concepts of divinity and eternity be verbalized in the language of the finite concepts of the human mind? Although the problem still remains nowadays, and always will, it was worse in the first centuries of Christianity because no available concepts and no frame of reference were yet available. The Fathers of the Church progressively had to develop such a frame of reference, or theological discourse, and a terminology to express their theological concepts. But in spite of these linguistic and mental constraints, we Christians believe that there indwells in human mind and heart the Spirit of Truth, who helped the God-bearing Fathers in their endeavors in the past and illuminates our human minds now. Let us start with the history and development of the doctrine of the Trinity. This development will be traced throughout the Classical period, which roughly spans from the second to the fourth century. As noted, this period is divided into a) the Ante-Nicene period, from the second to the fourth century, with the Apostolic, Apologists, and Antiheretical Fathers as the main protagonists and b) the Post-Nicene period, from the fourth to the fifth century, that is, from the Council of Nicea (325) to the Council of Chalcedon (451), the Golden age of the Fathers.

531

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

1. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY Simply stated, The Trinity is three persons (hypostases) in one substance (ousia). To reach this human formulation of eternal realities, many centuries in Christian theology first had to pass. It is true that the disciples, not only the eleven but the larger group of 120, empowered by the baptism of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, had both a grasp of the doctrine of the triune God and an enriching, profound experience of Him, through Jesus Christ. They had seen the Creator of their world come in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and were convinced that the same power at work in Jesus was within them and that God was found through the person of the Holy Spirit. As Jews, these first century Christians continued to believe in one God, as many pre-Christian Jews had done, and were nurtured on the affirmation that God is one, but were not surprised to think of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Three in One. For the New Testament Church, the Triune God was an indispensable precept, an essential truth, and for them it required universal acceptance. The experience of the first century disciples was uniquethey had seen Christ in the flesh, but not all questions about the Trinity could be answered in terms of first century writings, symbols and doctrines. It was not until the second century that the doctrine of the Trinity became the core of intellectual debate as the Fathers of the Church tried to understand the nature of the Godhead and provide different explanations for it. Trinitarianism would eventually become a distinguishing characteristic of Orthodox Christianity (Jay Rogers). BIBLICAL TEACHING ABOUT THE TRINITY Although we begin our study of the development of doctrine with the postapostolic age, with the so-called Fathers of the Church, to understand the ideas about the Trinity they held it is necessary to have some background information about what

532

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

the Bible partially reveals about the Trinity. We need to remember, first of all, that the word trinity is never found in the Bible, though the idea represented by the word is taught in many places. Today, the Trinity can be conceptualized as: God eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and each person is fully God, and there is one God. In the Old Testament, there are several passages suggesting or even implying that God exists as more than one person. Notice us and our: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness (Gen. 1:26). Behold, the man has become like one of us, to know good and evil (Gen. 3:22). Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one anothers speech (Gen. 11:7). Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me (Is. 6:8). Note the combination of singular and plural in the same sentence in the last passage. We can find passages where one person is called God or the Lord and is distinguished from another person who is also said to be God: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows (Ps. 45:6-7). David says: The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool (Ps. 10:1). And Jesus understands that David is referring to two separate persons as Lord: 41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. 43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, 44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he His son? 46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. (Matt. 22:41-46) We may ask who is Davids Lord if not God Himself ? Also, Isaiah says: But they

533

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

rebelled, and vexed His Holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them (63:10). Furthermore, in Malachi, the Lord says, 1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. 2 But who may abide the day of His coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiners fire, and like fullers soap (Mal. 3:1-2) Again, there are two separate persons called Lord, the Lord of hosts and the Lord whom ye seek. In the New Testament, we can find more complete revelation of the Trinity. In this passage narrating Jesus baptism, the three persons are mentioned separately: 16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matt. 3:16-17) At the end of His earthly ministry, Jesus tells the disciples: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19). We also see a Trinitarian expression in these passages: 4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. (1 Cor. 12:4-6) The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. (2 Cor. 13:14) Now he who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, is God; who also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a deposit. (2 Cor.1:2122) And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts. (Gal 4:6) Now may the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the patience of Christ. (2 Thes. 3:5) 4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

534

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

(Eph.4:4-6) Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. (1 Peter 1:2). 20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, 21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. (Jude 20-21) There are some other passages which show that Jesus Christ is of the same essence as the Father and He is true God. In the Old Testament: You are my Son; Today I have begotten you. (Ps 2:7) The Lord said to my Lord; Sit at my right hand. (Ps. 109:1) In the New Testament, some passages specify that a) Christ is equal with the Father: ... but also said that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. (John 5:18) and because you, being a man, make yourself God. (John 10:33) Believest thou not that I am the Father, and the Father in me? (John 14:10) Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God. (Phil. 2:5-6) and b) The Son is eternal: Jesus said to them, Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am. (John 8:58) Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. (Rom. 9:5) Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Heb. 13:8) I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty. (Revel. 1:8) I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last. (Revel. 22:13). Some of the above passages and some othersincluded in the following table indicate that the Apostles already saw a Triad, as three distinct and co-equal persons, in the Oneness and unity of Godhead. In some case, we can even perceive some feature of a relation between the Father and the Son, between the first and the second person. In John 17:24, Jesus speaks to God the Father: Father, I will that they also, whom thou

535

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. These passages show distinctions of persons, sharing of glory, but also a relationship of love between the Father and the Son before the world was created. Yet as the doctrine of the Trinity develops through the first centuries of Christianity, we will see the relationship not only between God and His Son, but also between them and the Spirit, more clearly delineated. To summarize this period: in the New Testament we find that the early Church preached nothing about a Trinity of three eternal persons. The Old Testament was based upon the Oneness of the Godhead and the Apostles believed in the fullness of Godhead as dwelling in Jesus Christ body. G. H. Joyce, in the encyclopedic article The Blessed Trinity, asserts that the various elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are already specifically taught in the New Testament: The Divinity of the Three Persons is asserted or implied in passages too numerous to count. The unity of essence is not merely postulated by the strict monotheism of men nurtured in the religion of Israel, to whom subordinate deities would have been unthinkable; but it is, as we have seen, involved in the baptismal commission of Matthew 28:19, and, in regard to the Father and the Son, expressly asserted in John 10:38. That the Persons are co-eternal and coequal is a mere corollary from this. In regard to the Divine processions, the doctrine of the first procession is contained in the very terms Father and Son: the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and Son is taught in the discourse of the Lord reported by St. John. (14-17) Your Own Research The doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery, which men we will never be able to fully grasp. Yet, we can understand it partially by summarizing the teaching of Scripture by approaching three statements and by reading the passages related to them: (1) God Is Three Persons: John 1:1-2, 17:24, 14:26; Rom. 8:27; Matt. 28:19; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; Acts 10:38. (2) Each Person Is Fully God: John 1:1-4, 20:28; Heb 1; Col. 2:9; Matt. 28:19; Acts 5:3-4; 1 Cor. 3:16, 2:10-11; Ps. 139:7-8. (3) There Is One God: Deut. 6:4-5; 1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19.

536

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Read these passages on the three statements and write a five-page paper entitled: Three Statements Summarizing the Biblical Teaching about the Trinity.
Activity 120: Three statements summarizing the biblical teaching about the Trinity

Bible, Apostles, Canon, and Apostolic Fathers As mentioned above, the Apostolic Fathers (who wrote from around the year 90 to 140), were alive when some of the Apostles were still ministering abroad, thus their teachings were very closely related to the common understanding of the Godhead, as taught by the apostles. Bobrinskoy sees the Christological perspective of these Fathers and their experience about the Spirit as a source of reflection: (The italics are his) As much as the New Testament, the patristic writings reflect the fundamental profession of faith of the Church in Jesus Christ, dead and risen. It is from the core of a Christological approach that a Trinitarian vision of the Apostolic Fathers and their successors unfold. Likewise, at the origin of the pneumatology of early Christianity, there is the Pentecostal advent of the Spirit, His permanent indwelling in the Church, according to the polyvalence of the experiences of the Spirit in the early Church. Thus more than a reflection about the Spirit, the Fathers share with us their expression of an experience of the Spirit in the Church. In the early Church we find a polyvalence of language concerning the Spirit, which helps us understand its apparent binitarism In the ecclesial experience and in the theology of the Fathers, the domains of revelation and of Trinitarian mystery are linked inextricably. (198) But we may ask if they had access to the New Testament books as its canonization was still in process as they were writing their own works. As commented in Part I, the canonical Gospels were written between 65 and100. In the 50s of the first century Paul had already produced the earliest surviving Christian documents (1 The, Gal, Phil, I and II, and Rom). Yet, the preaching based on oral preservation and development of the Jesus material continued into the second century. Also, according to Bruce, in The Spreading Flame (226), in the early years of the second century two collections of authoritative Christian documents were current. One was called The Gospel (with sub-headings According to Matthew, etc.), and the other, The Apostle, i.e. the Pauline corpus (with sub-headings To the Romans, etc.). Soon these two parts were to be connected by the Book of Acts which brought the two collections

537

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

together. By the end of the second century the canon was taking shape throughout Christendom, and twenty-three of the twenty-seven books at this time part of the authoritative collection. The remaining seven works (Heb, Rev, Jas, II and III John, Jude and II Pet) were not commonly accepted until the late fourth century. Works such as the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, and 1 Clement which had had a doubtful position were not included. The canonization process was hastened during the second century because of the catalytic activity of heretical groups. We have some evidence that many of the Apostolic Fathers knew either the Gospels or other New Testament books, which, as Voorwinde explains in The Formation of the New Testament Canon, were often considered to be authoritative. Clement of Rome writing in about the year 96 mentions the Gospel without reference to a written textClement also makes reference to the Three: The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. (1 Clement, Chap. 42) Voorwinde says he only makes specific references to the New Testament1 Corinthians and Hebrews, but asserts that there is evidence of his familiarity with a wider range of the canonical materials. Goodspeed also explains, in A History of Early Christian Literature, that Clement cannot be said to show acquaintance with any written gospel. He reasons that Clements quotations of Jesus words in chapters 13 and 46 are highly stylized and they are more plausible if we explain them as being derived from catechetical teaching. In these two chapters they are introduced with the words remembering or remember the words of the Lord Jesusthe way of introducing a quotation from oral tradition, as in Acts 20:35 (8).

538

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

The English word canon is a loan-word from the Latin canon, which in turn was derived from the Greek kanon. While the Greek word kanon does occur in the New Testament it cannot be translated by canon in English. In each case it is more suitably translated rule or standard (2 Cor.10:13, 15, 16; Gal.6:16; Phil.3:16). It will be noted that all the occurrences of the word are in Pauls writings, and in none of these instances is he referring to the canon of Scripture. That was to be a much later development. Movement in this direction occurred when in the second century in the Christian church kanon came to stand for revealed truth, rule of faith. It was not until the fourth century that the church began to refer to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as ho kanon (the canon). A parallel development took place in the history of the Latin term. In ecclesiastical Latin canon came to mean a catalogue of sacred writings. The term canon as we use it when referring to the canon of Scripture is therefore not a use of the term in its biblical sense, but conforms to ecclesiastical usage from the fourth century onwards (Adapted from Voorwinde). Table 65: The term canon

Another Apostolic Father, Ignatius of Antioch (98?-110?) believed that the teachings of the apostles were known through their writings. Polycarp (d.ca.155), like Clement and Ignatius, saw an integral unity between the Old Testament and the apostolic writing, but points out the increased value given to the latter, particularly those by Paul. The Epistle of Barnabas (ca.130), as he wrestled with the problem of continuity/discontinuity between the Old and New Covenants, also showed his knowledge of the New Testament. Barnabas indicated that as the problems of Old Testament interpretation grew, the Church would become more conscious of its literature as forming a complementary Scripture (the New Testament). He cites Matthew 22:14 with the formula it is written. The still uncanonized New Testament contained an outline of a dyadic and a triadic pattern. There was a general conviction that God had made Himself known in the Person of Jesus, the Messiah, raising Him from death and offering salvation to men through Him and that He had bestowed His Holy Spirit upon the Church (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 83-95). In short, although the term Trinity does not appear in the New Testament, the terms Father, Son and Holy Spirit, appear repeatedly. It was not until the end of the first century when there emerged the urge to define the Godhead. It was due to the division caused by the Gnostics through their pagan-influenced teaching that the Christ or Logos (John 1:1) was a lesser god. The Gnostics believed that the orthodox

539

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Christians were wrong in supposing that God had taken human nature or a human body. Other Gnostics were also teaching that Jesus and the Logos, or the Christ, were separate gods. By the end of the first century, the schisms caused by the Gnostics became such a threat that the early Church had to adopt a comprehensive creed called the Apostles Creed consisting of twelve apostolic statements of faith. The creed was derived both from written scripture and oral teaching passed down from the first century Apostles, and arose, as Kelly says in Early Christian Creeds, in connection with the rite of Baptism (30, 398).
1. I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, 2. And in Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son, our Lord, 3. Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, 4. Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried; He descended into hell. 5. The third day he rose again from the dead; 6. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. 7. From there he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. 8. I believe in the Holy Spirit, 9. I believe in the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, 10. The forgiveness of sins, 11. The resurrection of the body,

12. And the life everlasting. Amen.209

Table 66: The Apostles Creed

The Apostles Creed, or a profession close to the one we have today, appeared at the end of the first century or the beginning of the second century. With this creed, firmly based on New Testament scriptures written by the Apostles, and alluded to by the more extensive writings of the Apostolic Fathers in the first century and early second century, a more elaborate explanation of the Trinity began to be formed (Rogers, The Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). There are many theologians who were satisfied with the above quoted scriptures
The Apostles Creed has often been divided into 12 sections for catechesis and instruction for new converts or children. Many protestant groups follow this Creed. Orthodox, however, follow the Nicean Creed.
209

540

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

as evidence for the Trinity, but others were not. Not having other writings by the Apostles which make this claim, except the Scriptures themselves, the Orthodox Church, being a Patristic Church, rely on the Fathers of the Church for a more elaborate formulation of the Trinity. Thus we will study the development of doctrine, beginning with the ante-Nicene theology, which centers on the theological reflections of the Apostolic Fathers and those of the Apologists and Anti-heretical Fathers. It is necessary to say that in spite of the incoherencies and mistakes, they had the assistance of their reliance on the Holy Scripture.

ANTE-NICENE PERIOD: HERETICAL FATHERS

APOSTOLIC,

APOLOGISTS,

AND

ANTI-

Kelly explains that before the third century, the prevailing concern of Christian theism was the unity of God. The struggle with paganism and Gnosticism had placed Trinitarism well in the foreground. As the Apostolic creed declares and reveals, they were concerned with the idea of conveying their belief in one God, the Father Allsovereign, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. This classical creed of Christianity was truth for the pre-Nicean fathers. For Clement, God was the Father and creator of the whole, for Barnabas and the Didache, our maker. As we will see in their writings, the doctrine of one God and creator was the background and premise of the Churchs faith during the first and second century. It was its instrument of defense against pagan polytheism, Gnostic emanationism, and Marcionite dualism. The problem, as Kelly points out, was to integrate it with the data of Christian revelation (Early Christian Doctrines 3). While they were partially aware of the distinction between one indivisible Godhead and the Triad, they did not seem to be concerned about investigating the eternal relation among them. As noted, the conception of a plurality of the divine Persons was imprinted on the apostolic tradition and the popular faith, and the earliest

541

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

writers, the Apostolic Fathers, appeared as witnesses to the traditional faith rather than interpreters striving to understand it. Moreover, they also lacked a conceptual framework and linguistic means to express it. Notwithstanding, as Kelly adds, they were somehow successful in their attempt to conceptualize a) the Triad as manifested in creation and redemption and b) to show how the Son and the Spirit were revealed in the economy.210 It appeared logical to think that the Father divests Himself of certain functions to two other personsi.e. the Son and the Spirit. The Father divests Himself in an act of profound love. Economic Trinitarianism211 continued to find exponents in the late second and early third centuries. The end of this third century, which saw the emergence of conflicting tendencies in the West and the East, would mark the close of the first great phase of doctrinal development (Early Christian Doctrines 109, 223). I believe that the source of the conflicting tendencies, confusions, and incoherence we see in the development of the doctrine of the Trinity has its root in the fact that the Fathers of the Church a) had to describe sequentially the eternal relationship between coordinate, infinite beings Father, Son, and Spiritand b) then they had to explain how the Son, the Word, born in eternity, became flesh in our Lord Jesus Christ, in time and space. This logically caused the unsound, unorthodox idea of subordinationism, or generationism. The Eternal Son was, is and will ever be the first thought of the Father, the living and divine Word. First is a sequential way of expressing an impossible time origin. The Father has always expressed and will always express Himself through the Son, through the Logos. As Bobrinskoy tells us, the theology of the Logos in the Apologists, and particularly in Hippolytus of Rome and Tertullian, simultaneously in the Johannine line and in the Alexandrian tradition, made
210

From the Greek oikonomia (economy), literally, management of a household or stewardship. It is also called the divine economy. Thus, the economy of salvation, is Gods creation and management of the world, particularly his plan for salvation accomplished through the Church. 211 The term economy of the Trinity can be seen as an answer to the question What are the distinctions between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? Thus, the Persons of the Trinity have different primary functions in relating to the world. This has been called the economy of the Trinity, using economy in an old sense meaning ordering of activities.

542

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

a praiseworthy effort to distinguish between the Inner Logos and the uttered Logos. They wished to know whether the creative Logos exhausted the reality of the Logos, and if it did not, what did the beyond the Logos consists of? The apologists said that the Word was uttered in creation itselfas stated in Genesis. It is a creative Word, seed and essence of the creatures. In Against Praxeas (Chap. 7), Tertullian said: Then, therefore, does the Word also Himself assume His own form and glorious garb, His own sound and vocal utterance, when God says, Let there be light. This is the perfect nativity of the Word, when He proceeds forth from God formed by Him first to devise and think out all thinks under the name of WisdomThe Lord created or formed me as the beginning of His ways. This, as Bobrinskoy asserts, was a dangerous error, which arises from the philosophic difficulty of showing a Word prior to the world. Aware of this doctrine, Irenaeus rejected this distinction between the two Words (202). Consequently, the apologists, against Modalism, made an effort to develop their distinction between the Father and the Word, without falling into the trap of the opposite danger of tritheism (202). The difficulty the Fathers had and we still have is not only trying to prove with a spatio-temporal language eternal realities but to explain the experiential character of the existential Beings of the unoriginated, uncreated Trinity: a coordinate, personal association of beings of eternal existence. A further problem for the Fathers was to show how the Deity, who is at the same time, unqualifiedly Onehad a quality of absolute unitybut at the same time has unifying and coordinating qualities. They did not realize that the Deity as a personality is self-willed and therefore had the possibility of self-revelation. They could not grasp that without the explanation of a pre-existent Jesus, one cannot explain how a potential, existential reality such as that of the Deity could become actualized. But even today, many centuries afterwards, how can we explain, in view of the unifying nature of divinity, that eternal, infinite, existential realities can be subject to time, finite, experiential realities? This remains a mystery. Yet, as the Fathers taught us, intellectualism is not enough to comprehend eternal, divine relations. We need to trust our personal, spiritual experience as the Deity is

543

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

manifested in truth, beauty, and goodness. This is the answer the Orthodox Church gives. Aware of their limitations in language and conceptualization, as well as the contextual pressure of Judaism and Paganism, the early Fathers had to stick to their monotheistic concept of Gods absolute unity and indivisibility as Oneness. Although involved in ethical concerns, they were not ready to leap into the absolute adventure of episteme and gnosis of the Trinity. They had to understand that indivisibility did not prevent being distinct and plural, and having singular and plural capacitiesas seen in the concept of economy. They also did not understand how God, maker of heaven, of the heavens of heavens, who stretches out heavens as a curtain, who calls the created things by names could bestow Himself upon creatures, Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee. (Neh. 9:6) It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. (Is. 40:22) Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth. (Is. 40:26) But it was also true that: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse (Rom. 1:20). This economic approach almost logically became the starting point of the Apostolic Fathers, some of whom knew and heard the Apostles themselves, who had transmitted their energized ideas to their theologian successors. As Bobrinskoy asserts, The general tonality of the ante-Nicene theology is of an economic nature. It deals with the action of the Trinity in creation. A great effort would have to be made to bring out a Trinitarian theology as such. The point of view of the Fathers is soteriological most of

544

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

the time (198-199). There were however problems created by the notion of the economic nature for the Apostolic Fathers (who were more concerned with practical teaching matters in the difficult times they lived in) and their theologian successors, as they struggled with the idea that the Logos and the Spirit were not created in time but in eternity, while not implying subordinationism but co-equality, coordination. Certainly, the Son sprang from the Father but is unqualifiedly eternal like Him as is the Holy Spirit. Thus, many of the points inconsistent with the post-Nicene belief of the Church, as delineated by G. H. Joyce are: That the Son even as regards His Divine Nature is inferior and not equal to the Father; that the Son alone appeared in the theophanies of the Old Testament, while the Father is essentially invisible, the Son, however, not so; that the Son is a created being; that the generation of the Son is not eternal, but took place in time.

a) The Apostolic Fathers (90-140)212 The Apostolic Fathers authored a series of documents, not many of them extant, relevant to understand the development of doctrine, and especially that of the Trinity. Yet, we need to understand that their concerns were more with practical and moral issues, as reflected in some texts, than with theological reflection. Without trying to be exhaustive, let us analyze some of the writings of the Apostolic Fathers in relation to the Triad of Father, Son and Spirit. Let us remember that three of the Apostolic Fathers, Clement of Rome, Polycarp of Smyrna, and Ignatius were bishops who had been ordained by one of the Apostles. We know that Polycarp was a disciple of John and that Clement was ordained by Peter. We know little about Ignatius except that seven of his

Quotations from the writings of the Fathers are taken from The Fathers of the Church (New Advent) and Early Christian Writings.

212

545

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

letters exist, that he was a personal acquaintance of Polycarp, and had apostolic authority. The writings these men had transmitted have great authority as they were instructed by the Apostles themselves. We can assume that the writings of these and other Apostolic Fathers contain Trinitarian and other teachings handed down from the Apostles of Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul to the Apostolic Fathers and then to the Apologists and anti-heretical Fathers until a more complete formulation of the Trinity emerge with the Nicene Council. From the Apostles, the Trinitarian doctrine was handed down orally from the time of the first century in the form of creeds, apostolic catechisms, or written documents. Let us approach the Apostolic Fathers, who in spite of their endowment of Apostolic tradition, had their own creativity. It is important to underline that they still represented the Holy Spirit in a very poorly, confusing mannerwe will have to wait until the Council of Constantinople (381) to see it more justly formulated. Very often they centered their teachings on the divinity and pre-existence of the Logos, the Son: Jesus Christ. Yet, as Bobrinskoy tells us, the Christocentrism of the Fathers does not contradict their fundamental theocentrism: it is always the Father who is the Principle of the divine activity in the world, and who manifests Himself in His Incarnate Son and His life-giving spirit (198). In the Didache, which is probably the earliest of the Churchs non-Scriptural writings, the threefold Name appears once: But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (7:5). The Spirit is not otherwise discussed. In his First Epistle to the Corinthians, Clement of Rome, when talking about Christ as an example of humility, he mentions God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, at the same time confessing Christs pre-existence and divinityhe is the scepter of Godbefore His incarnation: Christ is with those of humble mind, not with those who exalt themselves over 546

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

his flock. The sceptre of the majesty of God, that is, our Lord Jesus Christ, did not come with the pride of pretension and arrogancethough he had the powerbut in humility of mind, just as the Holy Spirit said of him: Lord, who has believed our report? ...213 You see, beloved brothers, what is the pattern given to us; for if the Lord was thus humble in mind, how are we to behave, when we through him have come under the yoke of grace? (Chap. 16) We also see the Holy Spirit as distinct from Christ. Moreover, exhorting to cleave to the righteous and repentance, Clement also says, Why are there strifes, and tumults, and divisions, and schisms, and wars among you? Have we not [all] one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ? (Chap. 46). Yet he does not seem to equate Christ with the Son: By Him (Christ) the Lord (the Master) has willed that we should taste of immortal knowledge, who, being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.214 For it is thus written, Who makes His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire.215 But concerning His Son the Lord (the Master)216 spoke thus: You are my Son, today have I begotten You. Ask of Me, and I will give You the heathen for Your inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Your possession. (Chap. 36)217 However, in First Epistle of the Blessed Clement, the Disciple of Peter The Apostle, when referring to the divinity of virginity, he says: The womb of a holy virgin carried our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God; and the body which our Lord wore, and in which He carried on the conflict in this world, He put on from a holy virgin. From this, therefore, understand the greatness and dignity of virginity (Chap. 6). He also describes the Holy Spirit as inspiring Gods prophets of the Old Testament: The ministers of the grace [sc. the . . prophets] of God have, by the Holy Spirit, spoken of repentance; and the Lord (God) of all things has himself declared with an oath regarding it, As I live, says the Lord, I desire not the death of the sinner, but rather his repentance (Chap. 8).218 This Apostolic Father is, therefore, also

213 214

Isa. liii. I-I2 and Ps. 21 (22) 5-8. Heb. 1:4 215 Heb. 1:7 216 Lightfoot renders master in these two cases. See Early Christian Writings. 217 Ps. 2: 7-8. 218 Ezek. 33:11.

547

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

incipiently describing the function of the Holy Spirit in Gods self-revelationthe term economy would appear with Irenaeus. It is true as Kelly (Early Christian Doctrines 109) recognizes that in the first two centuries the Fathers do not approach the eternal relationship among the Triad. Yet, it is also true that, unconsciously, these Fathers, when describing individual functions or attributes, they were also pointing out back to the Tree, as one can say that these functions emerge from their own association. The Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, attributed to Clement, admonishes the readers to think of Jesus Christ as of God, not like God, with an eschatological function, Brethren, it is fitting that you should think of Jesus Christ as of God,as the Judge of the living and the dead. And it does not become us to think lightly of our salvation; for if we think little of Him, we shall also hope but to obtain little [from Him] (Chap.1). And also with a mediating functionThrough Him we know the true Father: Since, then, He has displayed so great mercy towards us, and especially in this respect, that we who are living should not offer sacrifices to gods that are dead, or pay them worship, but should attain through Him to the knowledge of the true Father, whereby shall we show that we do indeed know Him, but by not denying Him through whom this knowledge has been attained? For He himself declares, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess before my Father.219 (Chap. 3) Clement also talks about the father-son relationship between Christ and the Father. Also, in this second epistle, as suggested in his first one, Christs pre-existence is mentioned: ... He was first a Spirit became flesh, and thus called us, so shall we also receive the reward in this flesh. Let us therefore love one another, that we may all attain to the kingdom of God (Chap. 9). Clement distinguishes the members of the Triad: the Father, ChristSpirit who became fleshand the Holy Spirit. He seems to give two meanings to the SpiritChrist Himselfand the Holy Spiritthe pre-existing spiritual Church. When he talks about the Church Spiritual, he says:

219

Matt. 10:32.

548

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

So, then, brethren, if we do the will of our Father God, we shall be members of the first church, the spiritual,that which was created before sun and moon ... The church being spiritual was made manifest in the flesh of Christ, signifying to us that if any one of us shall preserve it in the flesh and corrupt it not, he shall receive it in the Holy Spirit. (Chap.14) It is understandable that at this phase of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, the Spirit and Christ/the Son might be confused. From the current concept of the Trinity, we can easily deduct that its undivided, coordinate nature is shown associatively in creation. Something difficult to comprehend by Clement, still more concerned with providing the faithful not a theological letter but a practical, moral one. The author of The Epistle of Barnabas, acknowledging the Triad, also asserts Jesus pre-existence as the Son of God: Behold again: Jesus who was manifested, both by type and in the flesh, is not the Son of man, but the Son of God. Since, therefore, they were to say that Christ was the son of David, fearing and understanding the error of the wicked ... (Chap. 12: 12). Jesus, the Son of God, is described in His preexistence and in His collaboration with God in creation, from the foundation of the world, also seemingly confusing the Spirit with the Son: Since, therefore, having renewed us by the remission of our sins, He (God) hath made us after another pattern, [it is His purpose] that we should possess the soul of children, inasmuch as He has created us anew by His Spirit. For the Scripture says concerning us, while He speaks to the Son: Let Us make man after Our image, and after Our likeness; and let them have dominion over the beasts of the earth, and the fowls of heaven, and the fishes of the sea.220 (Chap. 6) And further, my brethren: if the Lord endured to suffer for our soul, He being Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness, understand how it was that He endured to suffer at the hand of men. (Chap. 5) In his Epistle, Barnabas sees the Spirit as indwelling men and creating them anew. In Ignatius epistles the triadic formula appears thrice. It is interesting in the first quote how Ignatius compares the faithful to stones, God as a building, Jesus as an instrument, and the Holy Spirit as a rope, thus approaching, metaphorically to the

220

Gen. 1:26

549

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

economy of the Trinity: ... as being stones of the temple of the Father, prepared for the building of God the Father, and drawn up on high by the instrument of Jesus Christ, which is the cross, making use of the Holy Spirit as a rope, while your faith was the means by which you ascended, and your love the way which led up to God. (Eph., Chap.9) Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles, that so all things, whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit; in the beginning and in the end; with your most admirable bishop, and the well-compacted spiritual crown of your presbytery, and the deacons who are according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that so there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual. (Mag., Chap. 13) Ignatius also confesses the deity of Christ and His pre-existence in a profound manner. Although he assigns a proper place to the Holy Spirit, Christ is at the center of Ignatius theology. For him the knowledge of God is Jesus Christ (Bobrinskoy 199). In his Epistle to the Ephesians, Ignatius says: For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water (Chap. 18). We further see how Jesus Christ is also qualified as God. In the Epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius asserts the pre-existence of Christ, at the same time as he talks about the administrative pattern of the early Church: I exhort you to study to do all things with a divine harmony, while your bishop presides in the place of God, and your presbyters in the place of the assembly of the apostles, along with your deacons, who are most dear to me, and are entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed. (Chap. 6) For Ignatius, Christ is no other than the eternal God made manifest in the flesh, as he presents it in his Epistle to Polycarp: Look for Him (God) who is above all time, eternal and invisible, yet who became visible for our sakes; impalpable and impassible, yet who became passible on our account; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes (Chap.3). He as did many other Fathers from this period, when the concept of co-substantiality and hypostasis was still unknown, Ignatius confuses the three members 550

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

of the Triad, though he goes beyond, following the thread of his thoughts. In his Epistle to the Romans, he even suggests that God suffers: Pardon me, brethren: do not hinder me from living, do not wish to keep me in a state of death; and while I desire to belong to God, do not ye give me over to the world. Suffer me to obtain pure light: when I have gone thither, I shall indeed be a man of God. Permit me to be an imitator of the passion of my God. (Chap. 6)

IIlustration 72: St. Ignatius of Antioch

Polycarps theology resembles that of Ignatius. In his Epistle to the Philippians, the only statement he made that would lend itself to Trinitarism was regarding the Father and the Son: But may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ Himself, who is the Son of God, and our everlasting High Priest, build you up in faith and truth, and in all meekness, gentleness, patience, long-suffering, forbearance, and purity (Chap. 12). In this epistle there is no reference to the Holy Ghost. Yet we find the triadic formula in the Martyrdom of Polycarp, described in a letter the Church of Smyrna sent to the Church of Philomelium. This letter reports that Polycarp used the Triune Name in a doxology: And I again, Pionius, wrote them from the previously written copy, having carefully searched into them, and the blessed Polycarp having manifested them to me through a revelation, even as I shall show in what follows. I have collected these things, when they had almost faded away through the lapse of time, that 551

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

the Lord Jesus Christ may also gather me along with His elect into His heavenly kingdom, to whom, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory for ever and ever. Amen. The author of this letter also mentions the Triad: We wish you, brethren, all happiness, while you walk according to the doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; with whom be glory to God the Father and the Holy Spirit, for the salvation of His holy elect, after whose example the blessed Polycarp suffered, following in whose steins may we too be found in the kingdom of Jesus Christ! (Chap.22) The Antiochene Acts speak of Polycarp as the fellow-student of Ignatius, and add, for in old time they had been disciples of John (Chap. 3), and many authors think so; yet, if we read the following passage, we see that Ignatius was a disciple of Polycarp: These things Caius transcribed from the copy of Irenaeus (who was a disciple of Polycarp), having himself been intimate with Irenaeus. And I Socrates transcribed them at Corinth from the copy of Caius. Grace be with you all (Chap. 22). The theology of the The Shepherd of Hermas, a supposedly revealed book, is quite confusing and seems to have little to do with the Christology of the New Testament. He also mentions the Triad, but in a very peculiar, odd way. Hermas suggests the pre-existence of the Son as a separate person from the Father but from the moment of the incarnation. For him, the Son is a fellow-counselor with the Father in creation. This seems to place the Son at the same rank as the Father. In Book III, Similitud 9 (Chap. 12), he says: First of all, sir, I said, explain this to me: What is the meaning of the rock and the gate? This rock, he answered, and this gate are the Son of God. How, sir? I said; the rock is old, and the gate is new. Listen, he said, and understand, O ignorant man. The Son of God is older than all His creatures, so that He was a fellow-councillor with the Father in His work of creation: for this reason is He old. But the Son also seems to be distinguished from Jesus, since He is, as we will see defined as an angel. Also, the Holy Spirit, who it is a pre-existent Spirit and a divine substance, was sent to dwell in the fleshin Jesus. In Similitud 5 (Chap. 6), Hermas says:

552

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

The holy, pre-existent Spirit, that created every creature, God made to dwell in flesh, which He chose... . He assumed it as a partner with it. For this conduct of the flesh pleased Him, because it was not defiled on the earth while having the Holy Spirit... . He therefore took the Son as adviser and the glorious angels also, that this flesh too, having served the Spirit unblamably, might have some place of sojourn, and might not seem to hare lost the reward for its service; for all flesh, which is found undefiled and unspotted, wherein the Holy Spirit dwelt, shall receive a reward. The flesh is Jesus. The Spirit and Jesus were partners. Howell-Smith, in Jesus Not a Myth (120), asserts that this passage appears to make the tabernacling of the Holy Spirit in Jesus a reward for the purity of his life. Jesus then becomes divine through the power of God, after consultation with the Son of God, who elsewhere in The Shepherd is identified with the Holy Spirit, as we saw in the Second Epistle of Clement: After I had written down the commandments and similitudes of the Shepherd, the angel of repentance, he came to me and said, I wish to explain to you what the Holy Spirit that spake with you in the form of the Church showed you, for that Spirit is the Son of God. For, as you were somewhat weak in the flesh, it was not explained to you by the angel. (Similitud 9, Chap. 1) Kelly interprets this paragraph by saying that before the incarnation there would seem to have been only two divine persons, the Father and the Spirit. The third was elevated to their rank as a partner (see above quotation) as a reward for His merits, having cooperated nobly with then pre-existent Spirit, which indwelt him (Early Christian Doctrines 94). As explained above, it can also be that the confusion of Son and Spirit is an indication of Hermas distinction of only two persons in the Godhead. I am inclined to believe, on the one handas happened with other Fathersthat Hermas could not grasp the coordinating, undivided nature of the Trinity and, on the other, that he distinguished between a pre-existent Son in eternity and a second-begotten Son with a previous existence not as God but as the most venerable angelthe archangel Michael, who had to win His right to divinity. Howell-Smith says that: The most venerable angel, the glorious angel, the holy angel are titles that Hermas gives to Jesus in his allegory; but it is understood that the angelic status of Jesus is not his by nature. His labors on earth to save and to cleanse have gained him a co-inheritance with the Holy Spirit, Gods primary Son, so that Jesus now is the second Son of God. (122)

553

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

In Similitud 8 (Chap. 3), he says: By this, now, I am perplexed. Listen, he said: This great tree that casts its shadow over plains, and mountains, and all the earth, is the law of God that was given to the whole world; and this law is the Son of God, proclaimed to the ends of the earth; and the people who are under its shadow are they who have heard the proclamation, and have believed upon Him. And the great and glorious angel Michael is he who has authority over this people, and governs them; for this is he who gave them the law into the hearts of believers... As we have seen, in a scriptural language, the Apostolic Fathers generally confessed the divinity and pre-existence of Jesus Christ along with the Father and pointed to the Triad, Father, Son, and Spirit. The Spirit was not granted too much attention and was confused with the Son or Jesus. It is not surprising that they said nothing about a Trinity of three eternal persons. During the first century their main concern was to promote monotheism. Nevertheless, their theology of the Triad, even if it was not the major objective in their writings, served as the foreground for the further conceptual development of the Trinity (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 95). Activity With telegraphic sentences, list the ideas about the Triad of the above-mentioned Apostolic Fathers. When you have done so, write a short, general statement about this period. Dont forget to reread the quoted passages.
Activity 121: The Apostolic Fathers and the Triad

b) Apologists and Anti-heretical Fathers (130-325AD) For clarity in the exposition, I have divided this important period in the development of the doctrine of the Trinity into two, commonly called: the Apologists (130-180) and the Old Catholic Period (170-325). Bobrinskoy explains that with the Apologists there were two areas where the distinction between theology and economy was clearly stated, namely, the theology of the Logos, and the question of the relation between Christ and the Spirit (201).

554

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

The Apologists (130-180)

As we have seen, the Apostolic Fathers did not provide a satisfactory formulation of the relationship of Christ to God the Father. We will have to search thoroughly search the writings of the Apologists to see it better delineated, although the role of the Holy Spirit is still poorly explained by them. As Kelly summarizes, the solution the Apologists gave to explain the nature of the relation of Christ to God the Father was by means of the idea of a divine Logos or Word: ... as pre-existent, Christ was the Fathers thought or mind, and that, as manifested in creation and revelation, He was its extrapolation or expression. In expounding this doctrine, they had recoursed to the image of the divine Logos, or Word, which had been familiar to later Judaism as well as to Stoicism, and which had a fashionable clich through the influence of Philo. (Early Christian Doctrines 96) Kelly also says regarding their treatment of the Holy Spirit that: The Spirit was for them the Spirit of God; like the Word, He shared the divine nature, being (in Athenagoras words) an effluence from the Deity (Early Christian Doctrines 103). Let us start our study of the Apologists writings with Justin (ca. 100-165) the most relevant author of this period. Justin employed both the early forms of apologetic, the dialogue and apology in defense of Christianity. Justin was the first to clearly teach a plurality within the Godhead and even numbered them, as we see in his First Apology: ...and that we reasonably worship Him, having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third, we will prove (Chap. 13). And in Dialogue with Trypho (Chap. 56): Trypho: Assuredly, for up to this moment this has been our belief. Justin: Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavour to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things,numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will. Thus the Son in number, not in will is distinct from the Father. With this ordering of the Deity, rather than subordinating them is trying to explain eternity in sequential

555

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

terminology. Also in his First Apology (Chap. 32), he postulates that the Logos or Word which was for him Jesus Christhas taken shape and has become a man: For what is called by the Divine Spirit through the prophet His robe, are those men who believe in Him in whom abideth the seed of God, the Word. And what is spoken of as the blood of the grape, signifies that He who should appear would have blood, though not of the seed of man, but of the power of God. And the first power after God the Father and Lord of all is the Word, who is also the Son; and of Him we will, in what follows, relate how He took flesh and became man. He also says following his ordering terminology: And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. (Chap. 21) In his Second apology (Chap. 6), we see how this preexisting, begotten Logos has the function of being the Fathers agent in creating and ordering the universe: And His Son, who alone is properly called Son, the Word, who also was with Him and was begotten before the works, when at first He created and arranged all things by Him, is called Christ, in reference to His being anointed and Gods ordering all things through Him. It is the Logosalso called Angel and Apostle, though whom God reveals Himself, who talked in the theophanies,221 thus giving them a Christological interpretation: Now the Word of God is His Son, as we have before said. And He is called Angel and Apostle; for He declares whatever we ought to know, and is sent forth to declare whatever is revealed; as our Lord Himself says, He that heareth Me, heareth Him that sent Me. From the writings of Moses also this will be manifest; for thus it is written in them, And the Angel of God spake to Moses, in a flame of fire out of the bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, the God of thy fathers; go down into Egypt, and bring forth My people. ... But so much is written for the sake of proving that Jesus the Christ is the Son of God and His Apostle, being of old the Word, and appearing sometimes in the form of fire, and sometimes in the likeness of
Theofanies: Divine interventions (e.g. God speaks to Adam and Eve; God tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac; God appears to Jacob, etc.).
221

556

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

angels; but now, by the will of God, having become man for the human race. (Second Apology, Chap.63) Christ, the Son of God, being of old the Word, has been functioning as a messenger of God during the period of the Old Testament. Justin does not mention the Holy Spirit much, and when he does, as other preNicene fathers, he has problems describing relations in eternity, and he equates the Holy Spirit to the Logos, whom he pictured as entering the womb of the blessed Virgin and acting as the agent of His own incarnation (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 103): And the angel of God who was sent to the same virgin at that time brought her good news, saying, Behold, thou shalt conceive of the Holy Ghost, and shalt bear a Son, and He shall be called the Son of the Highest, and thou shalt call His name Jesus; for He shall save people from their sins,as they who have recorded all that concerns our Saviour Jesus Christ have taught, whom we believed, since by Isaiah also, whom we have now adduced, the Spirit of prophecy declared that He should be born as we intimated before. It is wrong, therefore, to understand the Spirit and the power of God as anything else than the Word, who is also the first-born of God, as the foresaid prophet Moses declared; (First Apology, Chap. 33) Kelly asserts that there is no a clear theology of the Spirit as Justins centers on the relationship between Jesus and the Father. He sees in Justin a sub-personal note when dealing with the Spirit, influence from Platonic philosophy. Justins conceptualization of the Spirit, he adds, becomes more personalized when he speaks of the prophetic Spirit (Early Christian Doctrines 104), as does Clement in his First Epistle: But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and truth, and declaring without grudging to every one who wishes to learn, as we have been taught. (Chap. 6) In contrast with the preceding passage, in this one, mentioning the three members of the Triad, the Spirit is presented as a distinct from the other two. According to Kelly, Justins First Apology and his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew are precious sources for liturgical practice in the middle of the second century, as well as for the apologetic

557

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

theology of this period (Early Christian Creeds 71). In them we can find fragments that can summarize his thoughts about the Triad: But we revered and worship Him (i.e. the true God) and the Son, who came from Him and taught us these things ... and the prophetic Spirit. (First Apology, Chap.6) To the Father of the Universe, Through the name of His Son And of the Holy Spirit; (First Apology, Chap. 65) The Maker of all things through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit. (First Apology, Chap. 67) Tatian, a disciple of Justin, in Address to the Greeks, also speaks of the Logos as being different from the Father, but also as existing in the Father: God was in the beginning; but the beginning, we have been taught, is the power of the Logos. For the Lord of the universe, who is Himself the necessary ground (npostasis) of all being, inasmuch as no creature was yet in existence, was alone; but inasmuch as He was all power, Himself the necessary ground of things visible and invisible, with Him were all things; with Him, by Logos-power (dia lpgikhs dunameps), the Logos Himself also, who was in Him, subsists. And by His simple will the Logos springs forth; and the Logos, not coming forth in vain, becomes the first-begotten work of the Father. Him (the Logos) we know to be the beginning of the world. (Chap. 5) By the exercise of His own will, the Logos is generated or springs forth. He does not use the numerical order Justin does to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son; however, he uses a term that I believe comes closer to describing eternity with time concepts: springs forthas the translation renders. But he also says that the Logos exercised His own will, which seems to be an advance on Justin, who affirms that the Logos was not distinct in will. Only distinct persons can have distinct wills. Tatian uses Neoplatonic terminologyemanationto explain how the Logos that existed in Godit is understood in eternitytakes human shapein the person of Christin time. Like Justin, Tatian does pay much attention to the Spirit much, and when he does, he also seems to equate Him with the Logos: For the heavenly Logos, a spirit emanating from the Father and a Logos from the Logos-power, in imitation of the Father who begat Him made man an image of immortality, so that, as incorruption is with God, in like manner, man, sharing in a part of God, might have the immortal principle also. The Logos, too, before the

558

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

creation of men, was the Framer of angels. (Chap. 7) Although confusing, this passage is enlightening in spite of the Neo-Platonic language used to explain the origin of the Spirit. Through the Spiritwho is also the Logos, man has a part, a fragment of God and that we can also be immortal as we share it. Is this not close to the deification process? He also says: But further, it becomes us now to seek for what we once had, but have lost, to unite the soul with the Holy Spirit, and to strive after union with God (Chap. 15). This Holy Spirit seems to be the Spirit of God who indwells men: The perfect God is without flesh; but man is flesh. The bond of the flesh is the soul; that which encloses the soul is the flesh. Such is the nature of mans constitution; and, if it be like a temple, God is pleased to dwell in it by the spirit, His representative; ... (Chap. 15). The Spirit is the agent, the representative of God in this unification, the fusion between man and God. But this paragraph is also thought provoking for what it implies: An infinite Spirit inhabits a time, finite creature. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, followed a similar line. He mentions the Triad of God, the Word, and the Holy Spiritwhom he also seems to confuse. In To Autolycus (Book II, Chap.10), he once again describes the Word as internal within God: God made all things out of nothing; for nothing was coeval with God: but He being His own place, and wanting nothing, and existing before the ages, willed to make man by whom He might be known; for him, therefore, He prepared the world. For he that is created is also needy; but he that is uncreated stands in need of nothing. God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begat Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by Him He made all things. (Chap. 10) The Word was eternally immanent in Gods bowels. But it seems that the Word was not a personality but an effluence from God made for the purpose of helping the needed, the humankind. He begotten in the beginning, begat in turn our world, having first created for Himself the necessary matter (Book 1, Chap. 3). This may have a second reading. God created the Word, who existed in Him from eternity as a deed of Love. Theophilus, as well as Justin and Tatian, does not conceive of a coequal personal

559

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

relationship in absolute eternity between the Father and the Son. His relation seems to be dated upon the creation of time and space. Furthermore, Theophilus mentions the Spirit, but equates Him with the Word. He, however, seems to distinguish between the Holy Word and the wisdom of God which was in Him: He (The Word), then, being Spirit of God, and governing principle, and wisdom, and power of the highest, came down upon the prophets, and through them spoke of the creation of the world and of all other things. For the prophets were not when the world came into existence, but the wisdom of God which was in Him, and His holy Word which was always present with Him. (Book II, Chap. 10) Through the Spirit of God, the prophets were able to foretell things: At the same time, I met with the sacred Scriptures of the holy prophets, who also by the Spirit of God foretold the things that have already happened, just as they came to pass, and the things now occurring as they are now happening, and things future in the order in which they shall be accomplished (Book 1, Chap. 14). Theophilus, like Justin and later the Cappadocians, viewed the Old Testament theophanies as manifestations of the Logos, as God cannot be contained in space and time (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 99): The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam (Book 1, Chap. 22) Theophilus delineates a Triad but uses the form of God, the Father, with His Word and Wisdom. He gives the impression, though, that the Spirit of God was different from His Wisdom. Theophilus attempts to go beyond place and time to describe eternal relations. Moreover, Athenagoras (133-190), an Athenian philosopher and a convert to Christianity, also distinguishes the Triad: God, Son, and Holy Spirit. He says in Plea for the Christians: For, as we acknowledge a God, and a Son his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence, the Father, the Son, the Spirit, because the Son is the Intelligence,

560

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Reason, Wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire; ... (Chap. 24). He already somehow implies co-substantiality, yet he does not perceive three people, since as other Apostolic Fathers and Apologists as the Spirit is an effluence. Thus, providing somehow an internal explanation of how the Spirit came to be. This logic, although not stated clearly, can be thought in terms of a doctrine which would arise a generation later, that of the essence of the Spirit as proceeding from the Father. Yet, both the Logos and the Spirit have distinct functions; the later, the framer of all things, the former, the holder: If, therefore, Plato is not an atheist for conceiving of one uncreated God, the Framer of the universe, neither are we atheists who acknowledge and firmly hold that He is God who has framed all things by the Logos, and holds them in being by His Spirit (Chap. 6). As noted above, with the Apologists we are not in the presence of a conceptualization of the Trinity but of a Triad in which the Spirit is not clearly delineated. Sometimes it is equated with the Logos and even with the Father, or seen as a pre-personal force. When the Spirit is clearly differentiate from the Father and the Logos, He is a divine being of even lesser rank than the Logos. Kelly stresses two farreaching features of the Apologists teaching, already seen in some Apostolic teaching: (a) that for all of them the description God the Father connoted not the first Person of the Trinity but the one Godhead considered as author of whatever exists; and (b) that they all... dated the generation of the Logos, and so His eligibility for the title Son, not from His origination within the being of the Godhead, but from His emission or putting forth the purpose of creation, revelation, and redemption. (Early Christian Doctrines 100) The Apologists created a major changeover from biblical Oneness towards the Trinitarian concept. Notwithstanding, in their attempt to explain eternal relations, they conceived of the Logos as a second divine person, somehow subservient to the Father. Nowadays, Trinitarians do not believe so, as they feel the Son and the Father are equal, even though the origin of the idea of two persons comes from these Apologists (Blume, The Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity). With them, as Blume

561

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

asserts, there was a definite modification of the baptismal formula and Christians began baptizing in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, rather than invoking the name Jesus as we find in Acts 2:38; 8:16 and 19:5. Blume delineates de points these men held in agreement with modern-day Trinitarism: 1. the LOGOS was a second divine person 2. the idea that the LOGOS was begotten before creation at a certain point of time 3. the LOGOS is the Son of God 4. a baptismal formula that consisted of a three-fold invocation 5. and the idea that the Spirit somehow linked the Father and the Son together. The Apologists tried to deal with the issue of God as a plurality, but the Trinitarian doctrine was still not perceived as a solution. They started the process towards a threesome of persons comprising One God which was continued in the next stage of development, in the so-called Old Catholic Age (170-325). But it would not be until the later half of the fourth century when an orthodox Trinitarian doctrine was finally established.

Activity With telegraphic sentences, list the ideas about the Triad of the above-mentioned Apologists. When you have done so, write a short, general statement about this period. Dont forget to reread the quoted passages.
Activity 122: The Apologists and the Triad

Old Catholic Age (170-325)

After the period of the Apologists (130-180), there were Fathers, who although still continuing the apologetical thread, wrote anti-heretical works. With these works the rhetorical and theological emphasis shifted from the purpose of convincing unbelievers to that of defending the Christian doctrine from deviations. This period, roughly spanning from 170 to 325, enjoyed the largest amount of theological growth. Much of

562

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

the terminology and theological concepts of this period were adopted at the Nicene and Constantinople Councils, when they were used to define orthodox Trinitarism. This growth was spawned by great theologians such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Cyprian. In this text I will only study Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen because of their important contributions and, as I will explain, their decisive roles in the development of eastern and western theologies of the Trinity. Irenaeus Bobrinskoy makes a major statement about Irenaeus which can illuminate this attempt to approach his writings and to focus on eastern theology: St Ireneaus is one of the last and greatest representatives of a theological synthesis that has no yet unraveled. He occupies a very distinctive, even unique, place in the history of Christian tradition East and West. The first reason for this is that he is a witness of the apostolic tradition in the literal sense of the term. Secondly, he is a representative neither the East nor the West, but of a still unified Christian tradition. Thirdly, we find in him a remarkable theological balance and, consequently, fourthly, he is of a special ecclesial actually today. (202) Likewise, Kelly refers to Irenaeus (130-200), as the theologian who summed up the thought of the second century, and dominated Christian orthodoxy before Origen (Early Christian Doctrines 104). He adds that: He for his part was deeply indebted to the Apologists; although he was more of a self-conscious church-man than they, more openly attached to and more ready to parade the Churchs threefold rule of faith, the framework of his thinking remained substantially the same as theirs (104). As indicated in Part I, the rule of faith was a term a term used by both Irenaeus and Tertullian to mean a short summary of the main revelatory events of the redemptive process. In Adversus Haereses (Chap. 10:1), when talking about Unity of the Faith of the Church throughout the Whole World, he formulated his Rule of Faith: The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the

563

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father to gather all things in one, and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race. Like Justin, Irenaeus also contributed to the evolution of creeds (Kelly, Early Christian Creeds 78). Activity Read the above-mentioned rule of faith by Justin and compare and contrast it with that of Irenaeus.
Activity 123: Comparison and contrast of Justins and Irenaeus

Through the rule of faith, the neophyte learned the meaning of the Churchs baptismal faith. This was the rule of faith used in baptisms: Do you believe in God the Father Almighty? I believe Do you believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was born of Holy spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate and died, and rose the third day living from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Father, and will come to judge the living and the dead? I believe. Do you believe in the Holy spirit, and the Holy Church, and the resurrection of the flesh? I believe. Table 67: The Rule of Faith

However, Irenaeus, intending to refute the teachings of various Gnostic groups, was not only a preserver and an interpreter of tradition, but also an original thinker, thereby showing his great talent as a theologian. Kelly (Early Christian Doctrines 104105) asserts that Irenaeus approached God from two directions a) envisaging Him both as He exists in his intrinsic being, and b) as He manifests in the economythe ordered process of His self-disclosure to man. Thus, on one hand, God is the Father of all things, ineffably one, and yet containing in Himself His Word and Wisdom/Spirit from all eternity, and, on the other hand, in making Himself known. He uses the Son and the Spirit as His instruments. In Against Heresy, Irenaeus coined the concept of the

564

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

economy of salvation: It was necessary, therefore, that the Lord, coming to the lost sheep, and making recapitulation of so comprehensive a dispensation, and seeking after His own handiwork, should save that very man who had been created after His image and likeness ... [This was necessary, ] too, inasmuch as the whole economy of salvation regarding man came to pass according to the good pleasure of the Father, in order that God might not be conquered, nor His wisdom lessened in the estimation of His creatures. (Book 3, Chap. 23: 1) The following passage, also from Adversus Haereses, can help us to see these two aspects delineated by Kelly above, aspects that are permeating all of Irenaeus theology and work. He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed and manifested to all to whom He is revealed; for those [only] know Him to whom the Son has revealed Him. But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues, and all to whom He wills that God should be revealed. (Book 2, Chap. 30, 9) The Father is revealed and manifested through His SonJesus Christ, who is eternally coexisting with Him. In many of his writings, Irenaeus tries to formulate an understanding of the divinity of Jesus Christ. The term co-existing represents an important development in the Trinitarian doctrine. This contrasts with the Apologists who describe the Logos precedence from the Father sequentially. He also applies this idea to the Wisdom: For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also. (Book 4, Chap. 20) The concept of co-existence will be also used by Tertullian, Athanasius, and the Cappadocian Fathers. Though we need to analyze the Greek term Irenaeus uses to define co-existence, it is true that it seems to be applied only to eternal relations, to existential realities in no time dimension. We also see that God is transcendent. He contains everything, but cannot be contained. Is he not also implying God infinity? He has fitted and arranged all things by His Wisdom, while He contains all

565

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

things, but He Himself can be contained by no one: He is the Former, He the Builder, He the Discoverer, He the Creator, He the Lord of all; and there is no one besides Him, or above Him, neither has He any mother, as they falsely ascribe to Him ... He is Father, He is God, He the Founder, He the Maker, He the Creator, who made those things by Himself, that is, through His Word and His Wisdomheaven and earth, and the seas, and all things that are in them: He is just; He is good. (Book 2, Chap. 30: 9) In Adversus Haereses, Irenaeus emphasizes the idea of Gods Word and Wisdom as His Agents in His creation of all things. But as we have also seen in one of the preceding passages, the Son reveals the Father, but in His co-existence, He even reveals Him even before the creation of the world to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues, and all to whom He wills that God should be revealed. The Son is a willed being. Irenaeus teaches that the Word was the agent of the Fathers revelation even before He incarnated. He was the one who guided and preached in the prophets, and who conversed with them: He (Jesus Christ) is Himself termed the Perfect Intellect, the Word of God. He is the First-begotten, after a transcendent manner, the Creator of man ... Son in the Father; God in God; King to all eternity. He was sold with Joseph, and He guided Abraham; was bound along with Isaac, and wandered with Jacob; with Moses He was Leader, and, respecting the people, Legislator. He preached in the prophets; was incarnate of a virgin; born in Bethlehem. (Fragments 54) And the Word of God Himself used to converse with the ante-Mosaic patriarchs, in accordance with His divinity and glory; but for those under the law he instituted a sacerdotal and liturgical service. (Adversus Haereses, Book 2, Chap. 11:8) Irenaeus along with Theophilus, Justin and Tertullian are accused of teaching that the theophanies were incompatible with the essential nature of the Father, yet not incompatible with that of the Son. But this difficulty is largely removed, as G. H. Joyce explains: ... if it be remembered that these writers regarded all the Divine operations as proceeding from the Three Persons as such, and not from the Godhead viewed as one. Now Revelation teaches us that in the work of the creation and redemption of the world the Father effects His purpose through the Son. Through Him He made the world; through Him He redeemed it; through Him He will judge it. Hence it was believed by these writers that, having regard to the present disposition of Providence, the theophanies could only have been the work of the 566

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Son. Moreover, in Colossians 1:15, the Son is expressly termed the image of the invisible God (eikon tou Theou rou aoratou). This expression they seem to have taken with strict literalness. The function of an eikon is to manifest what is itself hidden (cf. St. John Damascene, De imagin., III, n. 17). Hence they held that the work of revealing the Father belongs by nature to the Second Person of the Trinity, and concluded that the theophanies were His work. Regarding the Spirit, Irenaeus shows, in his Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching (Chap. 5), that He also has an eternal, essential role in beholding the Word: The Holy Spirit, through whom the prophets prophesied, and the fathers learned the things of God, and the righteous were led forth into the way of righteousness; and who in the end of the times was poured out in a new way a upon mankind in all the earth, renewing man unto God... . without the Spirit it is not possible to behold the Word of God, nor without the Son can any draw near to the Father for the knowledge of the Father is the Son, and the knowledge of the Son of God is through the Holy Spirit; and, according to the good pleasure of the Father, the Son ministers and dispenses the Spirit to whomsoever the Father wills and as He wills. The Spirit and the Son are manifested in the economy of salvation. They have separate, distinct activities to aid the progress of man to perfection, to attain the uncreated One. In Adversus Haereses (Book 4, Chap. 38: 3), Irenaeus says: By this arrangement, therefore, and these harmonies, and a sequence of this nature, man, a created and organized being, is rendered after the image and likeness of the uncreated God,the Father planning everything well and giving His commands, the Son carrying these into execution and performing the work of creating, and the Spirit nourishing and increasing [what is made], but man making progress day by day, and ascending towards the perfect, that is, approximating to the uncreated One Yet, the Son and the Spirit are Gods handiwork: Now God shall be glorified in His handiwork, fitting it so as to be conformable to, and modeled after, His own Son. For by the hands of the Father, that is, by the Son and the Holy Spirit, man, and not [merely] a part of man, was made in the likeness of God (Book 5, Chap. 6: 1). As Kelly explains, Irenaeus went beyond the Apologists in (a) his firmer grasp and more explicit statement of the notion of the economy and (b) in the fuller recognition which he gave to the place of the Spirit in the triadic scheme (Early Christian Doctrines 105). But he was closer to Theophilus rather than Justin when positing that Gods Word and His Wisdom, His Son and His Spirit, are always with

567

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Him, and giving more recognition to the Spirit who acts, as Bobrinskoy points out, primordially in the Church. There is, as this theologian adds, a strong pneumatological reference in the work of Irenaeus. The Holy Spirit acts primordially in the Church (199). We have seen that although Irenaeus he did not use the term Trinity directly in his theology, the logic of his discourse on the Spirit and of Christ, as well as his praises, leads one to the conclusion that he was decisively Trinitarian. Furthermore, even if he did not fully teach a trinity of persons, because he posited the co-existence of the Son and the Spirit in the Godhead and their further willed functions as agents of the Father he was also implying distinct personae (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 104-108).

Activity With telegraphic sentences, list Irenaeus ideas about the Triad. When you have done so, write a short, general statement about his findings in the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. Do not forget to reread the quoted passages.
Activity 124: Irenaeus

Problems Raised by the Logos theology

As Walker asserts, the Logos theology raised many serious questions. Rooted in the Wisdom Christologies of the first Century, it used the expressions Son of God and Christ to denote a mediatorial figure who, in Justins perspective was another God alongside the only unbegotten God, the Father (First Apology, Chap. 14). The distinction between Father and the Son was of mere number and not of will. In Justin and later the Roman anti-Pope and martyr Hyppolitus (died 235) and the North African Tertullianwho stood more or less directly in the line of the Apologiststhe generation of the Logos takes place only with the perspective of the worlds creation. Thus, the Son is not co-eternal with God. The Logos theology appeared to introduce a second God, which was inconsistent with the principle of monotheism. It also

568

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

represented a second grade or kind of divinity since it subordinated the Son to the Father. It was against the implications of the Logos doctrine (duality or ditheism) that a small movement called monarchianism (from monarchia or uniqueness of first principle)222 emerged. This movement arrived at Rome, from Asia Minor in two successive waves (ca. 190 and ca. 200) and with different perspectives. Both were repudiated because of the way in which their strict monotheism led to understand the person of Jesus either a mere man, adopted as the Son in the divine sphere by His resurrectioncalled dynamic Monarchianism or Adoptionismor, without denying the doctrine of incarnation, that Christ was the Father Himself, tending to blur the distinction between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Modalism).

Your Own Research 1. Monarchism thought that the growing emphasis on the Triad imperiled the divine unity. See the Glossary for a definition of Monarchianism and then, searching the web, briefly describe the two stages of this heretical movement arriving at Rome. Focus on Theodotus, Notus, and Sabellius. 2. Explain the difference between Adoptionism and Modalism.
Activity 125: Two phases of Monarchianism

The Third Century: Conflicting Tendencies. Tertullian and Origen

The late second and early third century was one of conflicting tendencies in Trinitarian thought and the progressive theological separation of the West, where Monarchian thought was more evident, and the East. Enloe, in Eastern and Western Trinitarianism Briefly Contrasted, explains these two diametrically opposed movements: The basic difference between the eastern and western approaches to Trinity is that the East generally focus on the diversity in the Godhead (with unity preserved by seeing the Father as ultimate source of the Son and the Spirit)
The axiom that there was one divine source and principle of all things (Kelley, Early Christian Doctrines 110).
222

569

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

while the West focused on the unity of the Godhead (with diversity being preserved by expositing the internal relationships of the Persons). Kelly further says: The East took the form of a frankly pluralistic conception of the Deity which tried, without sacrificing the basic tenet of monotheism, to do justice to the reality and distinction of the Tree within Gods eternal beingin other words, to Their subsistence as Persons. Though associated in the first instance with Alexandria, this new approach was destined to leave a permanent impress on Greek Trinitarianism, as a whole, and indeed on Christian thinking generally. (Early Christian Doctrines 110) Two relevant theologians, Tertullian and Origen, made contributions to the development of the doctrine of the Trinity in these theologies. What the former did to western theology, the latter did eastern theology. Tertullian, a brilliant mind and the first in coining the term Trinity, was from Carthage and Origen, from Alexandria. Origen was the pupil and successor of Clement of Alexandria as director of this school and the most influential Christian thinker of his age. The differences of these two approaches make sense when we think that Tertullians Carthageas it was Rome in that period of timewas a city very different from the Hellenistic metropolis of Alexandria, Egypt, in history, ethos, and culture. Both thinkers brought new developments to the concept of Trinitarianism, but we have to wait until the post-Nicene period in the fourth century to see many of the issues emerge with Monarchism (Walker 84-86). Tertullian In Against Praxeas,223 a book which taught against Modalism or Oneness, Tertullian states the form the Praxean heresy took: In various ways has the devil rivaled and resisted the truth. Sometimes his aim has been to destroy the truth by defending it. He maintains that there is one only Lord, the Almighty Creator of the world, in order that out of this doctrine of the unity he may fabricate a heresy. He says that the Father Himself came down into the Virgin, was Himself born of her, Himself suffered, indeed was Himself Jesus Christ... . By this Praxeas did a twofold service for the devil at Rome: he drove away prophecy, and he brought in heresy; he put to flight the Paraclete, and he
Praxeas came to Carthage before Tertullian had renounced the Catholic communion (c. 206-8). He taught Monarchian doctrine there, or at least doctrine which Tertullian regarded as Monarchian.
223

570

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

crucified the Father. (Chap. 1) According to Tertullian, Praxeas assertion tended to blur the distinction between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is against this idea that Tertullian defended the unity of the Godhead, but at the same exploring the diversity within by examining the internal relationships of the Persons. Kelly asserts that Tertullianas well as Hippolytus, who shared many ideas and aspects with Tertullian, like his predecessors, was an advocate of monotheistic concept of God as Oneness, but, paradoxically, in modalistic circles, he was considered a polytheist. Tertullian defended that: We, however, as we indeed always have done and more especially since we have been better instructed by the Paraclete, who leads men indeed into all truth, believe that there is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or oikonomia, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of herbeing both Man and God, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 2) Kelly asserts that Tertullians teachings, as those of Irenaeus, can be simultaneously approached from two opposite directions considering God (a) as He exists in His eternal being, and (b) as He reveals Himself in the process of creation and redemption. He borrowed the term economy224 from Irenaeus. That is considering God in His existential beingthe I AMand in His self-revelation as Maker of His diverse creation and through the revelation and ministration of His Son (Early Christian Doctrines 110-111). First, he had the conception of God existing alone from all eternity, yet having immanent, on the analogy of the mental functions in a man, His reason or Word: For before all things God was alonebeing in Himself and for Himself universe, and space, and all things. Moreover, He was alone, because there was
224

Kelly explains that from meaning the divine plan, or Gods secret purpose, the word came to be applied to the incarnation, the goal of divine purpose. Yet, among its original meanings, there were that of distribution, organization, the arrangement of number of factors in a regular order. Thus it was extended to connote the distinction of Son and Spirit from the one Father as disclosed in the working out of Gods redemptive plan (111).

571

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed in Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. For God is rational, and Reason was first in Him; and so all things were from Himself. This Reason is His own Yought (or Consciousness) which the Greeks call logos, by which term we also designate Word or Discourse and therefore it is now usual with our people, owing to the mere simple interpretation of the term, to say that the Word was in the beginning with God ... (Against Praxeas, Chap. 5) For Tertullian, the Wisdom of God is constituted in the character of a Second Person. He seems to equate the Word of God, qualified as a Person, with the Wisdom: This power and disposition of the Divine Intelligence is set forth also in the Scriptures under the name of Sofia, Wisdom; for what can be better entitled to the name of Wisdom than the Reason or the Word of God? Listen therefore to Wisdom herself, constituted in the character of a Second Person: At the first the Lord created me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works, before He made the earth, before the mountains were settled; moreover, before all the hills did He beget me; that is to say, He created and generated me in His own. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 6) The Wisdom was created at the beginning of Gods waysin eternitywith a functional purpose: to create the universe according to the divine plan. He also says: For just as the Word of God is not actually He whose Word He is, so also the Spirit (although He is called God) is not actually He whose Spirit He is said to be (Against Praxeas, Chap. 26). Yet in a previous passage (Chap. 2), he also mentions the Paraclete. In Against Hermogenes, Tertullian explains that as God was originally alone, He was not yet, therefore, a Father. The Son was created at a certain point, making God into a Father. He writes: Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge; but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son; the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father. In this way He was not Lord previous to those things of which He was to be the Lord. But He was only to become Lord at some future time: just as He became the Father by the Son, and a Judge by sin, so also did He become Lord by means of those things which He had made, in order that they might serve Him. (Chap. 3) Tertullian is confusing an eternal deedthe Fatherhood of Godwith a creature deedsins. Once again we see the difficulty of the Fathers to express eternal relations. 572

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Probably, with a time, sequential language, it is logical to think of a moment when God was not a Father; yet, in the continuum of eternityand infinityusing time terminology again, the Father has ALWAYS been a Father as the Son is co-existent with Him. In Against Praxeas, he uses different metaphors to describe the generation of the Son in eternity: But the Word was formed by the Spirit, and (if I may so express myself) the Spirit is the body of the Word. The Word, therefore, is both always in the Father, as He says, I am in the Father; and is always with God, according to what is written, And the Word was with God; and never separate from the Father, or other than the Father, since I and the Father are one. ... This will be the prolation, taught by the truth, the guardian of the Unity, wherein we declare that the Son is a prolation from the Father, without being separated from Him. For God sent forth the Word, as the Paraclete also declares, just as the root puts forth the tree, and the fountain the river, and the sun the ray. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 8) The light rays and the Sun are one, but yet they are two different things. Furthermore, as he develops his Trinitarian concepts, Tertullian also gave Trinitarianism its distinctive vocabularypersona, or hypostasis, and substantia. He was also the first who described the TrinityFather, Son, and Holy Spiritas three persons in one substance, by unity of substance: As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Personsthe Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 2) These three Persons, Tertullian adds, are at the same time, inseparable, distinct from each other: Bear always in mind that this is the rule of faith which I profess; by it I testify that the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit are inseparable from each other, and so will you know in what sense this is said. Now, observe, my assertion is that the Father is one, and the Son one, and the Spirit one, and that They are distinct from Each Other. This statement is taken in a wrong sense by every uneducated as well as every perversely disposed person, as if it predicated a diversity, in such a sense as to imply a separation among the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit (Against Praxeas, Chap. 8) 573

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

We can also tell here why Tertullian was accused of predicating pluralism, a diversity of Gods. He insists that God is one substance in three coherent and inseparable persons: I have already explained, on the ground of Personality, not of Substancein the way of distinction, not of division. But although I must everywhere hold one only substance in three coherent and inseparable (Persons) (Against Praxeas, Chap. 17). Yet, for him the Father and the Son are also two separate Persons, two different beings, distinct, yet not separate: We thus see that the Son is no obstacle to the Monarchy, although it is now administered by the Son; because with the Son it is still in its own state, and with its own state will be restored to the Father by the Son... . Now, from this one passage of the epistle of the inspired apostle, we have been already able to show that the Father and the Son are two separate Persons, not only by the mention of their separate names as Father and the Son, but also by the fact that He who delivered up the kingdom, and He to whom it is delivered upand in like manner, He who subjected (all things), and He to whom they were subjected must necessarily be two different Beings. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 4) We see that he continually, as the Apologists do, rejects the idea that the three persons are separate, but he also continuously talks of them as being separate. However, he did so on the ground of separateness of personality not of substance: Now if He too is God, according to John, (who says.) The Word was God, then you have two BeingsOne that commands that the thing be made and the Other that executes the order and creates. In what sense, however, you ought to understand Him to be another. I have already explained, on the ground of Personality, not of Substancein the way of distinction, not of division. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 12) It was a distinction or disposition (distribution), not a separation (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 113), Tertullian continues: Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person, as it is said, I and my Father are One, in respect of] unity of substance not singularity of number. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 25) Nevertheless, as already suggested, although distinct, the Father is greater that the Son. He is the whole substance, and the Son a derivation, a portion of this whole: I am, moreover, obliged to say this, when (extolling the Monarchy at the

574

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

expense of the Economy) they contend for the identity of the Father and Son and Spirit, that it is not by way of diversity that the Son differs from the Father, but by distribution: it is not by division that He is different, but by distinction; because the Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being. For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: My Father is greater than I. In the Psalm His inferiority is described as being a little lower than the angels. Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and He who is begotten is another; He, too, who sends is one, and He who is sent is another; and He, again, who makes is one, and He through whom the thing is made is another. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 9) Regarding the biblical passage My Father is greater than I used by Tertullian to explain his position, G. H. Joyce, in the The Blessed Trinity, says in regard to passages like this: ... it must be borne in mind that there are two ways of considering the Trinity. We may view the Three Persons insofar as they are equally possessed of the Divine Nature or we may consider the Son and the Spirit as deriving from the Father, Who is the sole source of Godhead, and from Whom They receive all They have and are. The former mode of considering them has been the more common since the Arian heresy. The latter, however, was more frequent previously to that period. Under this aspect, the Father, as being: the sole source of all, may be termed greater than the Son. Thus Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Fathers of the Council of Sardica, in their synodical letter, all treat our Lords words, teaches The Father is greater than I as having reference to His Godhead. Joyce also says that the biblical passage The Father is greater than I (John 14:28) is used by rationalistic critics to established that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist view. He also quotes certain texts in which the Son declares His independence from the Father (John 5:19; 8:28). This article goes on to explain that: In point of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father. No argument against Catholic doctrine can, therefore, be drawn from this text. So too, the passages referring to the dependence of the Son upon the Father do but express what is essential to Trinitarian dogma, namely, that the Father is the supreme source from Whom the Divine Nature and perfections flow to the Son. Notwithstanding, the concept of the Fathers distributionof self-distribution is quite sound to explain the eternal begetting of the divine Personalities without having to employ a time language. The Deity is not self-centered. Thus as the Father shares His

575

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

divine personality and will with two other divine beings, He also distributesnot dividesHimself to the Son. He shares His substance. As He does in the economy of salvation when divesting Himself of functions other beings can do, He does it as an act of love: But you must not suppose that only the works which relate to the (creation of the) world were made by the Son, but also whatsoever since that time has been done by God. For the Father who loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand, loves Him indeed from the beginning, and from the very first has handed all things over to Him (Against Praxeas, Chap. 16) On the Trinity (Book VIII: 31), Hilary of Poitiers also refers to the idea of distribution. For him God is the source of all distribution of workings: But if any one shall dare to say that it is the same Person which is indicated, the Apostle will refute so faulty an opinion, for he says above, And there are diversities of workings, but the same God Who worketh all things in all. So there is one Who distributes and another in Whom the distribution is vouchsafed. Yet know that it is always God Who worketh all these things, but in such a way that Christ works, and the Son in His working performs the Fathers work. As Tertullian asserts, in His distribution, God does not suffer division and severance in the Son and the Holy Ghost, who are second and third place in an order. Nor does it mean a division of the Unity, as he was accused of: The simple, indeed, (I will not call them unwise and unlearned,) who always constitute the majority of believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them from the worlds plurality of gods to the one only true God; not understanding that, although He is the one only God, He must yet be believed in with His own oikonomia. The numerical order and distribution of the Trinity they assume to be a division of the Unity; whereas the Unity which derives the Trinity out of its own self is so far from being destroyed, that it is actually supported by it ... God should be thought to suffer division and severance in the Son and in the Holy Ghost, who have the second and the third places assigned to them. (Against Praxeas, Chap. 3) Tertullian further mentions the Spirit in this numerical order, as being the Third Degree of Majesty: Meanwhile He has received from the Father the promised gift, and has shed it forth, even the Holy Spiritthe Third Name in the Godhead, and the Third Degree of the Divine Majesty; the Declarer of the One Monarchy of God, but at the same time the Interpreter of the Economy ... Against Praxeas, Chap. 30)

576

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

This concept is not foreign to his concept of distribution if we see it as levels. Kelly also says that, as a sovereign, Gods economy is not incompatible with Gods essential unity, as the same sovereignty can be exercised by coordinate agencies (Kelley, Early Christian Doctrines 113). Judged by post-Nicene standard, Tertullians ideas seemingly had an echo of subordinationism when speaking of the Godhead. However, in his numerical ordering of the Persons of the Trinity, he is not saying that they are not part of the Trinity when he talks about the same essence nor that they are superior or inferior in that essence of their nature. The Trinity is not in the one God, it is the one God. Yet, positionally they are different since there is an ontological order in the Godhead (the Father sent the Son, the Son sends the Holy Spirit, the Spirit points back to the Son, and the Son glorifies the Father). There is, as Tertullian suggests, a distribution of three personas expressed throughout eternity. Tertullian was a true pioneer in the development of important concepts as substantia, persona, distribution, and even levels through which the existential Deity bestows Himself in both eternity and in time or experiential levels. As commented above, Tertullian paid more attention to the Spirit than the preceding Fathers. His deep concern for matters regarding the Holy Spirit and holiness might have led him into the Montanist movement, whose essential principle was that the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth, whom Jesus had promised in the Gospel according to John, was manifesting Himself to the world through Montanus. The Montanists supposedly sought a renewal of the church from within through a rebirth of the religious enthusiasm of the Early Christians. They even founded separate communities in which women and men were admitted to presbiteracy and episcopacy. Tertullian became an advocate of this movement and was excommunicated along with the rest of the Montanists.

577

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Montanism, also known as the Cataphrygian Heresy and the New Prophecy, was a heretical movement founded by the prophet Montanus that arose in the Christian Church in Phrygia, Asia Minor, in the 2nd century. Subsequently it flourished in the West, principally in Carthage under the leadership of Tertullian in the 3rd century. It had almost died out in the 5th and 6th centuries, although some evidence indicates that it survived into the 9th century. In the West, its most illustrious convert was Tertullian in Carthage; but it declined in importance early in the 5th century. It continued in the East until severe legislation against Montanism by Emperor Justinian I (527-565) essentially destroyed it, but some remnants evidently survived into the 9th century.(Montanism and Montanus) Table 68: Montanism

Your Own Research Research Search the web and write a three-page paper on Montanism. Especially comment the role of the Spirit in this movement and the reasons Tertullian mighty have had to join it.
Activity 126: Three Statements Summarizing the Biblical Teaching about the Trinity

Activity With telegraphic sentences, list Tertullians contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity.

Activity 127: The Apologists and the Triad

Origen Another great mind, who brought new developments to the concept of Trinitarianism and influenced eastern theology, was Origen. As it was Clement of Alexandria (fl. 200), Origen, in his attempt to understand and expound the triune Godhead, was influenced by the revived, or Middle, Platonism,225 fashionable at that moment in Alexandria, especially from Philo of Alexandria, Plutarch, and Albinus (Middle Platonism). He also received influence from Plotinus (205-270), on the view of the Trinity. Plotinus, also from Egypt (Lycopolis), is considered the founder of Neoplatonism and inaugurator of the apophatic or negative philosophy, a feature of Orthodox theology. Both Plotinus and Origen were students of Ammonius Saccas of
225

See Middle Platonism in the Glossary.

578

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Alexandria.

Your Own Research Briefly write about Plotinus and his concept of emanation. Write no more than two or three paragraphs. Can you tell how Plotinus influenced Origens ideas?

Activity 128: The Apologists and the Triad

Within Christian thought two large theological traditions exist: kataphatic and apophatic theologies. Kataphatic theology characterizes the Western Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions where theology is constructed along the lines of propositional affirmative statements about who God is and what Gods being and nature are like. In elementary terms, we discover God is love, God is truth, the Lord is my shepherd and so forth. Apophatic theology characterizes the Eastern Orthodox traditions where theology is constructed with less emphasis on cognitive affirmations (though they are not negated), and more on the wonder, awe, ineffability of God. It is not the case that apophaticism simply means negative theology, that God is spoken of by what he is not (God is not sinful, God is not man etc). Apophaticism has its roots in different theophanies or encounters mentioned in Scripture. If King David received a cognitive revelation in Psalm 23 The Lord is my Shepherd, then Moses at the burning bush is left with ineffability I am that I am. The raw holiness of God glimpsed by Isaiah in the Temple, Johns apocalyptic journey to heaven in the spirit while on Patmos, Ezekiels vision of the wheels within wheels take us into the mysterious, the ineffable and the apophatic. (Phil Johnson) Table 69: Kataphatic and apophatic theologies

However, Walker says that Origen was much less influenced by the Hellenic tradition than Clement and Justin, as ... he was certain that the only way to wisdom was through prayerful and exacting study of the divine revelation in the Scriptures. It was this task to which he dedicated his life. The vast majority of his writing took the form of commentary on Scripture, and even his occasional systematic writing proceeded by a method which was largely exegetical... . Perhaps Origens most significant gift to the churches was the principle, by which he himself lived, of sola scripture. (90) Walkers words are enlightening as they allow us to come closer to the Orthodox concept of theology as both gnosis and epistemy, and define Origens approach to revelation and to Trinitarianism. While Tertullian introduced the terminology of Trinitarianism and became its first great proponent in the West, Origen became its first great proponent in the East. 579

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Origen taught that the Son or Logos was a person separate from the Father from all eternity, but added a unique feature not proposed until his time: the doctrine of the eternal Son. Walker says that for Origen the beginning mentioned in Genesis and the Fourth Gospel is not the worlds temporal start but its eternal ground, Gods Wisdom. Consequently, Gods Wisdomthat is Gods Son and Logosis also eternal or timeless, coeval with God as Gods first self-expression and perfect image (Walker 93). Origen was the first to teach a Trinity of persons in eternity. In Commentary on John, Book 2, he explains how the Word is co-eternal with the Father: The Word was always with the Father; and so it is said, And the Word was with God. He did not come to God, and this same word was is used of the Word because He was in the beginning at the same time when He was with God, neither being separated from the beginning nor being bereft of His Father. And again, neither did He come to be in the beginning after He had not been in it, nor did He come to be with God after not having been with Him. For before all time and the remotest age the Word was in the beginning, and the Word was with God. (Chap. 1:1) In De Principiis, Book 1, he adds the important concept that the Son, being consubstantial, was begotten from all eternity: But it is monstrous and unlawful to compare God the Father, in the generation of His only-begotten Son, and in the substance of the same, to any man or other living thing engaged in such an act; for we must of necessity hold that there is something exceptional and worthy of God which does not admit of any comparison at all, not merely in things, but which cannot even be conceived by thought or discovered by perception, so that a human mind should be able to apprehend how the unbegotten God is made the Father of the only-begotten Son. Because His generation is as eternal and everlasting as the brilliancy which is produced from the sun. For it is not by receiving the breath of life that He is made a Son, by any outward act, but by His own nature. (Chap.2, 4) The Son is then the only-begotten Son of the Father. These eternal relations cannot be apprehended and he tries to explain it with a metaphor: The generation of the Son is the brilliancy than comes from the sun. Thus the Son proceeds in eternity from Gods nature. They are co-natural, if I might use this expression. Furthermore, being the Father unbegotten and the Son generated in eternity, he says, in contrast with Tertullian, that

580

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

God has always been a father. John, however, with more sublimity and propriety, says in the beginning of his Gospel, when defining God by a special definition to be the Word, And God was the Word? and this was in the beginning with God. Let him, then, who assigns a beginning to the Word or Wisdom of God, take care that he be not guilty of impiety against the unbegotten Father Himself, seeing he denies that He had always been a Father, and had generated the Word, and had possessed wisdom in all preceding periods, whether they be called times or ages, or anything else that can be so entitled. (De Principiis, Chap. 2: 3) Again we see how he tries to overcome difficulties of having to use time concepts to express eternal ones: whether they be called times or ages, or anything else that can be so entitled. The Holy Spirit, as He forms part of the Unity of the Trinity, also seems to be co-eternal with the Father and the Son, though he does not specifically says so: For if this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the Unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit (De Principiis, Chap.3: 4). Once again, Origen expresses his concern with the constraint of time expressions in eternity: When we use, indeed, such terms as always or was, or any other designation of time, they are not to be taken absolutely, but with due allowance; for while the significations of these words relate to time, and those subjects of which we speak are spoken of by a stretch of language as existing in time, they nevertheless surpass in their real nature all conception of the finite understanding. (De Principiis, Chap.3: 4) He even mentions infinity a term very little used by the preceding Church Fathers to underline it incomprehensibility, Now if this were the case, then certainly created things could neither be restrained nor administered by God. For, naturally, whatever is infinite will also be incomprehensible. Moreover, as Scripture says, God has arranged all things in number and measure; and therefore number will be correctly applied to rational creatures or understandings, that they may be so numerous as to admit of being arranged, governed, and controlled by God. (De Principiis, Book 2, Chap. 9) and thus the viability of using number to explain relations in infinity. Unlike Tertullian, Origen clearly asserts the equality of the Trinitarian persons

581

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

and the functionality of His Word and Spirit with a sanctification objective: Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification, as it is written in the Psalm (De Principiis, Chap. 3: 7). Yet there is a special working of the Holy Spirit, and of the Father and the Son (De Principiis, Chap. 3: 5). Also, as he explained in Commentary to John (Book 1: 23), God the Word is a separate being and has an essence of His own: For no one can understand how that which is said to be Word can be a Son. And such an animated Word, not being a separate entity from the Father, and accordingly as it, having no subsistence. is not a Son, or if he is a Son, let them say that God the Word is a separate being and has an essence of His own. Furthermore, God the Word has become God because He has a share of divinity: Now it is possible that some may dislike what we have said representing the Father as the one true God, but admitting other beings besides the true God, who have become gods by having a share of God... . To this we must add, in order to obviate objections, that the reason which is in every reasonable creature occupied the same relation to the reason who was in the beginning with God, and is God the Word, as God the Word occupies to God. Each fills the place of a fountainthe Father is the fountain of divinity, the Son of reason (De Principiis, Book 2, 3) The Father is the fountain or source of divinity, and the Son of reason. Both are then eternal sources. Although he asserts that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three hypostases, Origen says that the Holy Spirit is the first in order of all that was made by the Father: We consider, therefore, that there are three hypostases, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and at the same thee we believe nothing to be uncreated but the Father. We therefore, as the more pious and the truer course, admit that all things were made by the Logos, and that the Holy Spirit is the most excellent and the first in order of all that was made by the Father through Christ. And this, perhaps, is the reason why the Spirit is not said to be Gods own Son. The Onlybegotten only is by nature and from the beginning a Son, and the Holy Spirit seems to have need of the Son, to minister to Him His essence, so as to enable Him not only to exist, but to be wise and reasonable and just, and all that we must think of Him as being. (De Principiis, Book 2, 6) Although we need to read this ordering as occurring in eternity, it does have a 582

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

subordinationist ring, far from what later would become the Orthodox view of the Trinity. Orthodoxy does not conceptualize the Holy Spirit as proceeding from Father through the Son. There does not seem to be in Origen equality, but codependency in order and rank. Kelly believes that Platonism reveals itself in the thoroughgoing subordinationism which is integral to Origens Trinitarian scheme (Early Christian Doctrines 132). But not only the Spirit, the Son in relation to the Father (who is according to him the only uncreated One) has a secondary degree of honor. In his learned apologetic work Contra Celsus, (Book V, Chap. 39), Origen called Jesus a second God, but explains that it has not a demeaning sense: And although we may call Him a second God, let men know that by the term second God we mean nothing else than a virtue capable of including all other virtues, and a reason capable of containing all reason whatsoever which exists in all things, which have arisen naturally, directly, and for the general advantage, and which reason, we say, dwelt in the soul of Jesus, and was united to Him in a degree far above all other souls, seeing He alone was enabled completely to receive the highest share in the absolute reason, and the absolute wisdom, and the absolute righteousness. He adds: For we who say that the visible world is under the government to Him who created all things, do thereby declare that the Son is not mightier than the Father, but inferior to Him. And this belief we ground on the saying of Jesus Himself, The Father who sent Me is greater than I. And none of us is so insane as to affirm that the Son of man is Lord over God. But when we regard the Saviour as God the Word, and Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Truth, we certainly do say that He has dominion over all things which have been subjected to Him in this capacity, but not that His dominion extends over the God and Father who is Ruler over all. (Contra Celsus, Book 8, Chap. 15) Origen was teaching this trying to counteract Celsius, who asserted that the Saviour was the Most High God: Grant that there may be some individuals among the multitudes of believers who are not in entire agreement with us, and who incautiously assert that the Saviour is the Most High God; however, we do not hold with them, but rather believe Him when He says, The Father who sent Me is greater than I. We would not therefore make Him whom we call Father inferioras Celsus accuses us of doingto the Son of God. (Contra Celsus, Book 8, Chap. 14)

583

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

He even comments that the Sons goodness is not absolute goodness and truth, but a reflection and image of the Fathers: It remains that we inquire what is the image of His goodness; and here, I think, we must understand the same thing which we expressed a little ago, in speaking of the image formed by the mirror. For He is the primal goodness, doubtless, out of which the Son is born, who, being in all respects the image of the Father, may certainly also be called with propriety the image of His goodness. For there is no other second goodness existing in the Son, save that which is in the Father. (Contra Celsus, Book 8, Chap.13) Basing himself on Paul, Origen even teaches that we should only worship God: Wherefore, he says, in honoring and worshipping all belonging to God, we will not displease Him to whom they all belong (Contra Celsus, Book 8, Chap. 2). He further comments: In what follows, some may imagine that he says something plausible against us. If, says he, these people worshiped one God alone, and no other, they would perhaps have some valid argument against the worship of others. But they pay excessive reverence to one who has but lately appeared among men, and they think it no offence against God if they worship also His servant. To this we reply, that if Celsus had known that saying, I and My Father are one, and the words used in prayer by the Son of God, As Thou and I are one, he would not have supposed that we worship any other besides Him who is the Supreme God. (Contra Celsus, Book 8, Chap. 12) In this work, he explains the mediatory role of the Son: Accordingly, we worship with all our power the one God, and His only Son, the Word and the Image of God, by prayers and supplications; and we offer our petitions to the God of the universe through His only-begotten Son. To the Son we first present them, and beseech Him, as the propitiation for our sins, and our High Priest, to offer our desires, and sacrifices, and prayers, to the Most High. (Contra Celsus, Book 8, Chap. 13) But we should do it through Jesus Christ. In Commentary to John, in a prayer, he also asserts the mediatorial role of the Holy Spirit: And now let us ask God to assist us through Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit, so that we may be able to unfold the mystical sense which is treasured up in the words before us (Book 1, Chap. 15). It is in these two books, Against Census and Commentary on John, both texts of his youth, that we find these subordinationist tendencies. Bobrinskoy says that: Origen makes a bow to the Plotinian scheme, by showing a hierarchical view of the divine persons. In this view, the Father is the locus of a double 584

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

transcendence, with respect to the Son and to the Spirit. The Father bestows existence upon all beings. Their participation of Christ as Logos renders them rational beings; that of the Spirit makes them holy. (214) He adds that in Origen, the theology of the monarchy controls Christology, the economy of salvation, mysticism, worship, and it is in this concept that his Christocentrism unfolds (213). Bobrinskoy differentiates his lived Christocentrism, which is a testimony to the ecclesial faith, even to martyrdom, from the more speculative doctrine of the Logos, the work of a bold and energetic theologian scrutinizing the inaccessible heights of the divine, eternal Being (211). Bobrinskoy also says that His texts on spirituality and biblical exegesis are noteworthy for the love that wells up for the Jesus of the Scriptures, the object of his love, of his most personal prayer (213). All things considered, as Walker asserts, the eternal begetting of the Logos does not connote that the Logos is coequal with God. Since being generated or begotten implied being secondary or subordinate. But adds: On the other hand, this subordination of the Logos to God, as of radiance to source, did not rank the Son among creatures, since he was not, like them, generated out of nothing as a mutable and so a temporal being (93). But, as he himself said, God did not create in time, but in eternity. Kelly thinks that Origens Trinitarianism was a brilliant reinterpretation of the traditional triadic rule of faith to which he as a churchman was devoted (Early Christian Doctrines 128). He also asserts that It not altogether fair to conclude, as many have done, that Origen teaches a triad of disparate beings rather than a Trinity; but the strongly pluralistic is its salient feature. The Three, on his analysis, are eternally and really distinct; They are separate hypostases or even, in his crude-sounding language, things (131).

585

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Illustration 73: Origen226

Crouzel, in Origen, calls on the still poor conceptual vocabulary of Trinitarism to clarify Origens supposedly Arianism: Origen, whose trinitarian vocabulary was not yet sufficiently precise, might seem opposed to the unity of nature defined at Nicea, although he held its equivalent in a dynamic rather than ontological mode. Some expressions could draw his subordinationism, which is in terms of origin and economy, towards the Arian subordinationism of inequality using texts which assert nothing more than a hierarchy of Origin. Besides, he is constantly accused, for reasons of vocabulary ... of making the Son and the Holy Spirit creatures of the Father. In this detractors take no account of his speculations on the eternal generation of the Word in the Treatise on First Principles itself and of the celebrated formula attested as being in Origen by Athanasius himself: ouk en hote ouk enthere was not a moment when He (the Word) was not. (171-172) Although he was affected by earlier subordinationism and unaware of the finer distinction that would later be made at Nicea and Chalcedon, Origen paved the way for Niceas statement that Christ is homoousios to patri (Enloe, Eastern and Western Trinitarianism Briefly Contrasted). Paradoxically, Origen seemed on the one hand to spouse subordinationism, which became all too apparent in the Arian controversy, but on the other he had the idea of the eternal generation of the Logos. One wonders how a being generated in eternityand been infinitecan be secondary or subordinated to another eternal being. He draws temporal conclusions from an eternal fact. Finally, Dulle makes a very clear statement on the contributions to the
226

See: <www.touregypt.net>.

586

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

development of the doctrine of the Trinity by the both Tertullian and Origen: The major contributions to the theology of the Trinity from this time were the ideas of one God in three persons, the coinage of the word trinity, and the idea of personalities in the Godhead, coming from Tertullian; the eternal generation of the Son, coming from Origen. Both men saw the Logos and the Spirit as being subordinate to the Father ontologically, and not functionally as it pertained to the incarnation. The doctrine of coequality, although spoken of by Origen, was limited to the Son and the Father. The Spirit was the first creation of the Father through the Son. Up to this point, we still do not have a definitive doctrine of the coequality, or coeternal nature of the three Persons. Instead we have very tritheistic language being used to explain the relationship between the one God and the three Persons of which He consists. What was agreed upon was that the Persons of the trinity were consubstantial. Kelly also summarizes the status of western and eastern formulations at this time: Western Trinitarianism ... had long been marked by a monarchian bias. What was luminously clear to the theologian representing it was the divine unity; so mysterious did they find the distinction within that unity that though fully convinced of their reality, they were only beginning, halting and timidly, to think of them as Persons. In the East, however, where the intellectual climate was impregnated with Neo-Platonic ideas about the hierarchy of being, an altogether different, confessed pluralistic approach had established itself. The disagreement was thus theological at bottom, and was destined to manifest again in the following century. (Early Christian Doctrines 136) Origen subordinationism and his idea of the eternal generation of the Logos became the points of controversy of Arianism, at the end of the third century and the beginning of the fourth. One side espoused Origens subordinationism, and the other his ideas of the eternal generation of the Logos, as Walker said, while neither seems to have understood what these notions meant in Origens system (93). The first official recognition of Trinitarian doctrines would not come until the Council of Nicea in 325, whose theological formulation as mentioned in Part I included the statement that the Son and the Father were of the same substancehomoousios or consubstantialand coequal in eternity. Yet, even this formulation was still incomplete, and will have to wait until the Council of Constantinople to see it in its complete form. Let us see us see what happened in the years preceding and following Nicea to understand this final formulation. I will focus on the Greek-speaking section of the

587

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Church not only because we are discussing eastern theology but, as Kelly asserts, little or no evidence survives from the thought of western theologians (Early Christian Doctrines 223).

Arianism and the Road to the Council of Nicea

During the early part of the fourth century, a great controversy about the Godhead came to a climax when, in 318, Arius, a presbyter of the Church of Alexandria, trained in Greek philosophy, started a conflict with Alexander, bishop of Alexandria. In his attempt to postulate a clear nature of the Trinity, Arius asserted that Jesus Christ (the Son) was inferior to God (the Father), that is, that Jesus was not eternal neither co-equal or consubstantial with the Fatherhe was created out of nothing before the beginning of the world. For Arius, the Son was not God, but not human either, rather a kind of demi-God. Arius wished to preserve the oneness of God and yet proclaim the independent personality of the Logos. Like the Trinitarians, he equated the Logos with the Son and with Christ. In other words, to him Christ is a demigod. In a Letter to Eusebius, bishop of Nicodemus, dated 319, Arius while asking his support, confesses such beliefs: Eusebius, your brother bishop of Caesarea, Theodotus, Paulinus, Athanasius, Gregorius, Aetius, and all the bishops of the East, have been condemned because they say that God had an existence prior to that of his Son. But we say and believe, and have taught, and do teach, that the Son is not unbegotten; and that He does not derive his subsistence from any matter; but that by His own will and counsel He has subsisted before time, and before ages, as perfect God, only begotten and unchangeable, and that before He was begotten, or created, or purposed, or established, He was not. For He was not unbegotten. We are persecuted, because we say that the Son has a beginning, but that God is without beginning. From Arius conception of God we can also deduct that if the Son has a beginning, He is finite and cannot comprehend the infinite God.
Such is the genuine doctrine of Arius. Using Greek terms, it denies that the Son is of one essence, nature, or substance with God; He is not consubstantial (homoousios) with the Father, and therefore not like Him, or equal in dignity, or co-eternal, or within the real sphere of Deity. The Logos which St. John exalts is an attribute, Reason, belonging to the Divine nature, not a person distinct from another, and therefore is a Son merely in figure of speech.

588

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

These consequences follow upon the principle which Arius maintains in his letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia, that the Son is no part of the Ingenerate. Hence the Arian sectaries who reasoned logically were styled Anomoeans: they said that the Son was unlike the Father. And they defined God as simply the Unoriginate. They are also termed the Exucontians (ex ouk onton), because they held the creation of the Son to be out of nothing. (William Barry) Table 70: Arius doctrines about Jesus

Against Arius, Alexander defended the idea of the Sons divinity and co-eternity with the Father, thus reproducing Origens teaching about the idea of the eternal generation of the Son (Early Christian Doctrines 225). The issue at debate was the eternality of the Son of God. Alexander allowed the controversy to go on until he realized that it had gone too far and had become a danger to the peace of the church. Then, to resolve such a difficult doctrinal conflict, he summoned a local synod in 320, deposed Arius from his office, and excommunicated both him and his supporters. In his Epistles on Arianism and the Deposition of Arius, there is an Epistle to Alexander, Bishop of the City of Constantinople, in which he harshly denounces the error in which Arius and his followers had fallen, calling them wicked men: For since they call in question all pious and apostolical doctrine, after the manner of the Jews, they have constructed a workshop for contending against Christ, denying the Godhead of our Saviour, and preaching that He is only the equal of all others. And having collected all the passages which speak of His plan of salvation and His humiliation for our sakes, they endeavour from these to collect the preaching of their impiety, ignoring altogether the passages in which His eternal Godhead and unutterable glory with the Father is set forth. (1) In this same letter Alexander also expresses his ideas, which had an echo from those of Origen: That He is equally with the Father unchangeable and immutable, wanting in nothing, and the perfect Son, and like to the Father, we have learnt; in this alone is He inferior to the Father, that He is not unbegotten. For He is the very exact image of the Father, and in nothing differing from Him. For it is clear that He is the image fully containing all things by which the greatest similitude is declared, as the Lord Himself hath taught us, when He says, My Father is greater than I. And according to this we believe that the Son is of the Father, always existing. (2) In his Epistle Catholic sent to the most reverend fellow-ministers of the Catholic Church in every place, he continues with the heretical ideas of Arius and his

589

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

followers. It is a long quote but it explains Arius position quite clearly: And the words invented by them, and spoken contrary to the mind of Scripture, are as follows: God was not always the Father; but there was a time when God was not the Father. The Word of God was not always, but was made from things that are not; for He who is God fashioned the non-existing from the nonexisting; wherefore there was a time when He was not. For the Son is a thing created, and a thing made: nor is He like to the Father in substance; nor is He the true and natural Word of the Father; nor is He His true Wisdom; but He is one of the things fashioned and made. And He is called, by a misapplication of the terms, the Word and Wisdom, since He is Himself made by the proper Word of God, and by that wisdom which is in God, in which, as God made all other things, so also did He make Him. Wherefore, I He is by His very nature changeable and mutable, equally with other rational beings. The Word, too, is alien and separate from the substance of God. The father also is ineffable to the Son; for neither does the Word perfectly and accurately know the Father, neither can He perfectly see Him. For neither does the Son indeed know His own substance as it is. Since He for our sakes was made, that by Him as by an instrument God might create us; nor would He have existed had not God wished to make us. Some one asked of them whether the Son of God could change even as the devil changed; and they feared not to answer that He can; for since He was made and created, He is of mutable nature. (2) Among Arius followers he also included Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia: But since Eusebius, the present bishop of Nicomedia, imagining that with him rest all ecclesiastical matters, because, having left Berytus and cast his eyes upon the church of the Nicomedians, and no punishment has been inflicted upon him, he is set over these apostates, and has undertaken to write everywhere, commending them, if by any means he may draw aside some who are ignorant to this most disgraceful and Antichristian heresy; it became necessary for me, as knowing what is written in the law, no longer to remain silent, but to announce to you all, that you may know both those who have become apostates, and also the wretched words of their heresy; and if Eusebius write, not to give heed to him. Eusebius of Nicomedia, being a bishop, was the spokesman for the Arian doctrine in the 325 Council of NiceaArius was a presbyter and could not act as such. Activity Using telegraphic sentences, explain Alexanders point of view of Arius ideas and his own ones. Write two columns: A(Arius) and B (Alexander)
Activity 129: Alexander and Arianism

The Council of Nicea, summoned by Constantine as already explained, faced the Trinitarian problem, gathered around 300 bishops, the majority from the eastern, Greek

590

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

speaking part of the Empire. For Prestige, in God in Patristic Thought (1936), the problem was how within the monotheistic system which the Church inherited from the Jews, preserved in the Bible, and pertinaciously defended against the heathen, it was still possible to maintain the unity of God while insisting on the deity of one who is distinct from God the Father.227 The council rejected Arianism and sought to define its faith, as the Scriptures alone were no adequate. Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine and the first church historianwho as Kelly asserts, reflected Origen in his most subordinationist mood (Early Christian Doctrines 225)suggested a compromise which he used for the church in his city. In his Letter on the Council of Nicea, he reports to his flock what had transpired at the council and how the formula of faith he presented, was changed: What was transacted concerning ecclesiastical faith at the Great Council assembled at Nicea, you have probably learned, Beloved, from other sources, rumour being wont to precede the accurate account of what is doing. But lest in such reports the circumstances of the case have been misrepresented, we have been obliged to transmit to you, first, the formula of faith presented by ourselves, and next, the second, which [the Fathers] put forth with some additions to our words. (1) Before including this creed, most certainly written by himself (Kelly, Early Christian Creeds),228 clarifies Our own paper, then, which was read in the presence of our most pious Emperor [Constantine I], and declared to be good and unexceptionable (1). Eusebius explains the precedence of the creed, as coming from Tradition: As we have received from the Bishops who preceded us, and in our first catechizings, and when we received the Holy Layer, and as we have learned from the divine Scriptures, and as we believed and taught in the presbytery, and in the Episcopate itself, so believing also at the time present, we report to you our faith, and it is this. (2) The creed reads: We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and
Qtd. in Davis. According to Kelly, some critics are skeptics as to Eusebius impertinence to foist a formulary of his own on the grand ecumenical council. Yet, Kelly argues, he might have done so as a vindication of his own orthodoxy (Early Christian Creeds 182).
228 227

591

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

invisible. And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, Son Only-begotten, first-born of every creature, before all the ages, begotten from the Father, by Whom also all things were made; Who for our salvation was made flesh, and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended to the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the quick and dead. And we believe also in One Holy Ghost: believing each of these to be and to exist, the Father truly Father, and the Son truly Son, and the Holy Ghost truly Holy Ghost, as also our Lord, sending forth His disciples for the preaching, said, Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. (3) It specified the belief in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, who was God from God. Dulle says that most of the bishops were satisfy with it and even the Arians agreed to adopt it. However, Alexanders party strongly opposed it. Then, as Eusebius himself explains, the Emperor, although testifying to the most orthodox statements, advised all present to agree to it, and to subscribe its articles and to assent to them, with the insertion of the single word, One-in-essence ... (4). This word, Eusebius continues, was interpreted by the Emperor, as not in the sense of the affections of bodies, nor as if the Son subsisted from the Father in the way of division, or any severance; for that the immaterial, and intellectual, and incorporeal nature could not be the subject of any corporeal affection, but that it became us to conceive of such things in a divine and ineffable manner. (4) Thus adding One in essence, the Council drew up and dictated the following formula of faith: We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible: And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, Only-begotten, that is, from the essence of the Father; God from God, Light from Light, Very God from Very God, begotten not made, One in essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things in earth; Who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, was made man, suffered, and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven, and cometh to judge quick and dead. And in the Holy Ghost. And those who say, Once He was not, and Before His generation He was not, and He came to be from nothing, or those who pretend that the Son of God is Of other subsistence or essence, or created or alterable, or mutable, the Catholic Church anathematizes. Eusebius explained what the term essence meant, On their dictating this formula, we did not let it pass without inquiry in what 592

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

sense they introduced of the essence of the Father, and one in essence with the Father. Accordingly questions and explanations took place, and the meaning of the words underwent the scrutiny of reason. And they professed, that the phrase of the essence was indicative of the Sons being indeed from the Father, yet without being as if a part of Him. And with this understanding we thought good to assent to the sense of such religious doctrine, teaching, as it did, that the Son was from the Father, not however a part of His essence. On this account we assented to the sense ourselves, without declining even the term One in essence, peace being the object which we set before us, and steadfastness in the orthodox view. (5) As well as that of begotten, not made: In the same way we also admitted begotten, not made; since the Council alleged that made was an appellative common to the other creatures which came to be through the Son, to whom the Son had no likeness. Wherefore, say they, He was not a work resembling the things which through Him came to be (6), but was of an essence which is too high for the level of any work; and which the Divine oracles teach to have been generated from the Father 7, the mode of generation being inscrutable and incalculable to every originated nature. (6) Origen had confused both terms. With the terms Of the essence of the Father and of one substance with the Father, the Council clearly refuted the idea that the Logos was less than full Deity. The term begotten, not made also refuted Arius denial of the coeternal existence of the Logos with the Father. The last paragraph was a condemnatory clause, which Eusebius of Nicomedia refused to sign. In 381, the Council of Constantinople completed the creed, which was officially adopted by the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451. As we see, there is no clear statement of the Trinity in the creed, yet it does affirm that Jesus is of one substance with the Father in opposition to Arianism. Also, there is no reference to the Holy Ghost as a separate person in the Godhead. The creed merely expresses a belief in the Holy Ghost. We also see that it describes a personal distinction between Father and Son and asserts the Sons immutability and unchangeability. This last phrase is a departure from the biblical doctrine of the Son and supports modern Trinitarianism since it teaches an eternal Son. This first official Church declaration did not alone reject Arianism, but was also incompatible with modalism (Oneness) and supported Trinitarianism.

593

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Activity Using your own words, explain the terms essence and begotten as defined at the Council of Nicea.
Activity 130: The terms essence and begotten at the Nicene Council

AFTER NICEA: THE ROAD TO THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE However, although the Nicene Council was necessary, it seems that it was premature, and Arianism brought great confusion to the Empire for nearly a century, gaining many adherents. The political milieu had much to do with it. Although this concerns Part I, in which I narrated the history of Church, it is important to quote Kellys words in this sense: The Churchs new relation to the State, which meant that the success or failure of a doctrine might hinge upon the favor of the reigning emperor, tended to sharpen these divisions. In fact, the dispersal of the council marked the commencement of a protracted period of controversy lasting at least until Constantius death in 361. (Early Christian Creeds 237) The controversy recommenced as soon as the decrees were promulgated. But after Alexanders death in 326, Athanasius (296-373) was elected in his place. He was a strong defender of the Nicene position against Arianism and became the champion of Trinitarian orthodoxy. In opposition to Arius, Athanasius took the position that the Son was co-equal, co-eternal, and of co-substantial with the Father, which it is the view of modern Trinitarianism. Eusebius of Nicomedia had been reinstated in his see, and Arius, who had taken refuge in Palestine, was also soon permitted to return in 328, after having made a somewhat disingenuous recantation. Constantine, sympathetic to Eusebius of Nicomedia, also fearing the empires division, even requested Athanasius to readmit Arius to communion. Arius had also sent a conciliatory letter to Constantine, which caused him to reopen the issue. However, Athanasius, naturally, pleaded reasons of conscience against doing so, but was accused of treason against the emperor. A council held in Tyre in 335 actually reversed the Nicene doctrine in favor of Arianism.

594

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Athanasius went into exile, and Arius would have been reinstated as a bishop had he not died the previous night. Athanasius was deposed from his bishopric in Alexandria several times, but went on with his theological struggle even in exile. Eusebius of Nicomedia even baptized the emperor on his deathbed. Moreover, Constantius, Constantines successor, after his fathers death in 337, authorized Arianism in the eastern part on the empire. In contrast, in the West, Constant, supported the Nicean position. When Constant died in 350 the Nicenes were persecuted, yet the Arians split in three factions: those who argued that the Father and the Son was unlike; those who believed that the Father and the Son were alike, but not consubstantial; and those who thought that the Father and the Son were of almost one substance, a group which eventually accepted the Nicean position. Kelly says that the theology of Athanasius represents the classic exposition of the Nicene viewpoint. He stood not only against Arius, but even against Eusebius of Caesarea. Athanasius was aware of the hesitancy the term homoousios caused because it lent itself toward Modalism, so he came to accept the use of the term homoousios with the meaning of similar substance, to speak of the relationship of the Son to the Father. In The Deposition of Arius (chap. 3), he argues against his view of unlikeness of substance between the Son and the Father: Or again, how is He unlike in substance to the Father, seeing He is the perfect image and brightness [19] of the Father, and that He saith, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father [20]? And if the Son is the Word and Wisdom of God, how was there a time when He was not? Bobrinskoy says that Athanasius differentiates between to be image and being in the image. He uses the expression to be image only in connection to Christ. Only Christ is the Unchanging Image of the Father; man is created in the Image, according to the Image, he partakes of the Image. The Image of God lies at the very heart of the Mystery of Man: it is the essential Christic presence in man since birth. (224) In Discourses Against the Arians (Discourse IV, introductory paragraph), Athanasius says: 595

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

The substantiality of the Word proved from Scripture. If the One Origin be substantial, Its Word is substantial. Unless the Word and Son be a second Origin, or a work, or an attribute (and so God be compounded), or at the same time Father, or involve a second nature in God, He is from the Fathers Essence and distinct from Him. In De Synodis, Part II (Chap. 28), he defines the term usia: And His One Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, generated from Him before the ages; and that we may not speak of two Gods, since the Lord Himself has said, I go to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God (John xx. 17). But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning what is called in Latin Substantia, but in Greek Usia, that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to Coessential, or what is called, Like-in-Essence, there ought to be no mention of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture nothing is written about them, and that they are above mens knowledge and above mens understanding; and because no one can declare the Sons generation, as it is written, Who shall declare His generation (Is. till. 8)? for it is plain that the Father only knows how He generated the Son, and again the Son how He has been generated by the Father. In this work he insisted on the fact that like in essence is synonym of coessential: But since they say that He is of the essence and Like-in-essence, what do they signify by these but Coessential? For, while to say only Like-in-essence, does not necessarily convey of the essence, on the contrary, to say Coessential, is to signify the meaning of both terms, Like-in-essence, and of the essences And accordingly they themselves in controversy with those who say that the Word is a creature, instead of allowing Him to be genuine Son ... (41) This consubstantiality is not a biblical term but, he says, It breathes the spirit of scripture (Ad Afros Epistola Synodica 4). What it is really important, then, is not the actual words of scripture but the meanings which they convey and the realities to which they point. Athanasius, against Arian subordinationist theology, insisted that the Logos was homoousios (same substance) with the Father; i.e., fully and eternally divine. In De Decretis (27), he says that both the Father and the Son share the same substance or ousia: And concerning the everlasting co-existence of the Word with the Father, and that He is not of another essence or subsistence, but proper to the Fathers, as the Bishops in the Council said, you may hear again from the labour-loving Origen also. In the Synodis, Part III, 41, he also states that the Son is from the essence of the Father: For, confessing that the Son is from the essence of the Father, and not from other

596

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

subsistence, and that He is not a creature nor work, but His genuine and natural offspring, and that He is eternally with the Father as being His Word and Wisdom they are not far from accepting even the phrase, Coessential. Bobrinskoy asserts this was latter revised by the Cappadocians, who asserted the birth of the Word from the hypostasis of the Father, because the ousia is common to the three (221). As it was common at the time of Athanasius ousia and hypostasis were still synonyms, signifying nothing other than being itself. The Cappadocians gave a new meaning to the words. They attributed hypostasis the unique specificity of a the person, and to the ousia what is common to the three (223-224). Moreover, Bobrinskoy thinks that: For Athanasius, the question of homoousios is above all a Christological question: what is at stake is mans salvation. If the Son is not consubstantial to the Father, our salvation is an illusion, for this salvation means that created human nature is reunited to God ... And thus, the theology of the Incarnate Word lies at the heart of the Unitarian vision of St. Athanasius. The creature lives through participation in the Word of God. (223) Athanasius therefore believed that only God could effect the salvation of humanity. He approached the concept of deificationtheosis or theopoiesis. The fact of the Incarnation of the Deity allows man to share in the very life and glory of the Godhead. He became the spokesman of the classical doctrine of Christian divinization: God became man in order that man might become God. As Bobrinskoy states, although the term homoousios was originally Trinitarian, at the Council of Chalcedon, held in 451, its meaning will be transferred to a Christological usage to refer to the double consubstantiality of Christ, both as to the humanity and to the divinity (222). Bobrinskoy also explains that the pneumatology of Athanasius developed mainly after 359. Facing the denials of the pneumatomachi (assailants of the Spirit), he says, Athanasius had to extend his vindication of the Son to the Spirit. If we remember, the Nicene creed merely affirmed belief in the Holy Spirit. His theology of the Holy Spirit is found in his Letters to Serapion written in the 360sAthanasius corresponded with Serapion about the divinity of the Holy Spirit and sent him as an emissary to the

597

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

emperor Constantius. In these letters, he defends the place of the Holy Spirit in the sphere of divinity along with the other two members of the Trinity: [The Trinity] is a Trinity not merely in name or in a figurative manner of speaking; rather, it is a Trinity in truth and in actual existence. Just as the Father is he that is, so also his Word is one that is and is God over all. And neither is the Holy Spirit nonexistent but actually exists and has true being. Less than these the Catholic Church does not hold, lest she sink to the level of the Jews of the present time, imitators of Caiaphas, or to the level of Sabellius. (Letters to Serapion 1:28) The Holy Ghost is united to the Son by relations just like those existing between the Son and the Father. Also, as the Holy Spirit is a member of the Trinity, He must be consubstantial with Father and Son (Letters to Serapion I, 2). Supported by what is written in Matthew 28:19, he asserts the divinity and co-substantiality of the Holy Spirit: The Lord founded the Faith of the Church on the Trinity, when He said to His Apostles: Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. If the Holy Ghost were a creature, Christ would not have associated Him with the Father; He would have avoided making a heterogeneous Trinity, composed of unlike elements. What did God stand in need of? Did He need to join to Himself a being of different nature? ... No, the Trinity is not composed of the Creator and the creature. (I, 3, 6, 26) In this sense, he also says: We are all said to be partakers of God through the Holy Spirit. Do you not know, it says, that you are a temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone ruins the temple of God, him will God ruin; for it is holy, this temple of God, which is just what you are. If the Holy Spirit were a creature, there could be no communion of God with us through Him. On the contrary, we would be joined to a creature, and we would be foreign to the divine nature, as having nothing in common with it ... But if by participation in the Spirit we are made partakers in the divine nature, it is insanity for anyone to say that the Spirit has a created nature and not the nature of God. (I, 24) Like the Son, the Holy Ghost, being of a divine nature, is also a means towards the deification of man as the partakers of God. In Against the Arians (Book 2, 59), he refers to mans being capable of divinity, of Godhead: And these are they who, having received the Word, gained power from Him to become sons of God; for they could not become sons, being by nature creatures, otherwise than by receiving the Spirit of the natural and true Son. Wherefore, that this might be, The Word became flesh, that He might make man capable

598

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

of Godhead. Bobrinskoy says that with his defense of the Holy Ghost against the pneumatomachi, Athanasius gains a greater vision on the Trinitarian perspective of salvation: One is the salvation that is made from the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit.229 Thus, says Bobrinskoy, the entire divine economy in the world is Trinitarian (225). In contrast with current Orthodox belief, Athanasius taught that the Holy Spirit was sent by the Son: Just as the Son says: All that the Father has is mine,230 so shall we find that, through the Son, it is all also in the Spirit (Letters to Serapion 3, 1, 33). Yet, he never calls the Holy Spirit explicitly God. This will have to wait for Gregory of Nazianzus. The Letters to Serapion reaffirms the position of the Council of Nicea. Regarding the relationship among the three persons of the Trinity, Kelly asserts that: What Athanasius says about the Spirit, we should observe, rounds off his teaching about the Trinity. The Godhead, according to this conception, exists eternally as a Triad of Persons (we recall that he had no term of his own for this) sharing one identical and indivisible substance or essence. All three Persons, moreover, are possessed of one or the same activity, so that the Father accomplishes all things through the Word and the Holy Spirit.231 (Letters to Serapion 258) He adds that If Athanasius took the lead in defending the homoousion of the Spirit, the task was completed, cautiously and circumspectly, by the Cappadocian Fathers (Letters to Serapion 258). In 362 the Council of Alexandria restored Orthodoxy, and in 381, eight years after Athanasius death, the ecumenical Council of Constantinople reaffirmed Nicea, establishing the doctrine fully. Thus Trinitarianism did not achieve its present form until the end of the fourth century, and its definitive creeds did not take its final form until the fifth century (Haldon 20-21).

229 230

Letters to Serapion 1,20 John 16:15. 231 Letters to Serapion 1, 28.

599

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Illustration 74: St. Athanasius232

In the following table, you will find a fragment of the Athanasian Creed, which may or not be the actual words of Athanasius, as it was codified in the early fifth century:
Whoever will be saved: before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone does keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he will perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons: nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: The Glory co-equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost: The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals: but one Eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated: but one Uncreated and one Incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three almighties: but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three gods: but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three lords: but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord: So are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say, there be three gods, or three lords. The Father is made of none: neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers, one Son, not three Sons, and one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after another: none is the greater or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal together, and co-equal. So that in all things, as is afore said, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved: must thus think of the Trinity

232

See: <www.saintathanasius.org>.

600

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Table 71: The Athanasian Creed

Activity 1. Explain a) Athanasius theology of the Spirit and b) Athanasius definition of ousia and how the Cappadocian Fathers redefined it. 2. Read the above mentioned Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed and compare and contrast their formulations.
Activity 131: Comparison and contrast of the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed

St. Basil of Caesarea, his brother, St. Gregory of Nyssa, and his friend St. Gregory Nazianzen can be truly called the triad that glorified the Tried. Through his ecclesiastical and monastic activity, Basil the Great was the leader of neo-Nicaenism. His activity was immense, despite the short time of his episcopate, less than ten years at Caesarea... . The friend of his youth, St. Gregory Nazianzen, a poet, writer, and the most Platonizing of the three, was the preeminent minstrel of the Trinity. Gregory of Nizza was both a philosophical and mystical spirit. All three complemented one another in a common search and a shared defense of the Trinitarian faith. (Adapted from Bobrinskoy 233) Table 72: The Cappadocian Fathers and the Trinity

The Cappadocian FathersBasil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzusand the Council of Constantinople (381) As already mentioned in Part I, Athanasius of Alexandria to counteract Arianism developed the full implications of the key word in the Nicene Creed: homoousios, one in essence or substance, consubstantial, yet he did not differentiate between ousia and hypostasis. At the 362 synod, Athanasius accepted three hypostasis as orthodox language, but still defended the older Nicene language. To explain how one substance can be simultaneously in three Persons, the Cappadocians appealed to the analogy of a universal and it particulars and to the analogy of the Triad likening it with three men regarding their common ousia and yet being three persons. Nevertheless these analogies were not too fortunate. The work of the three Cappadocian Fathers elaborated on and complemented Athanasius work, and while Athanasius stressed the unity of God Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are one in essence (ousia)the Cappadocian Fathers stressed Gods threenessFather, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (hypostases)

601

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

though this fact made them be suspect of tri-theism (Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines 265; Enloe). Meanwhile, in the West, building upon the earlier work of theologians such as Tertullian and Hilary of Poitiers, Augustine produced a different model of Trinity, issuing forth the idea of the filioque, a notion that the Cappadocians and all subsequent eastern theologians abominated. It is interesting to notice, however, as Enloe comments, that Augustines perspective was highly influenced by Hilarys Latin translation of the Cappadocian work.
By the 4th century a polarity developed between the Eastern and Western Christians in their respective understandings of the Trinity. In the West God was understood primarily in terms of one essence (the Trinity of Persons being conceived as an irrational truth found in revelation); in the East the tri-personality of God was understood as the primary fact of Christian experience. For most of the Greek Fathers, it was not the Trinity that needed theological proof but rather Gods essential unity. The Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Basil of Caesarea) were even accused of being tri-theists because of the personalistic emphasis of their conception of God as one essence in three hypostases ... For Greek theologians, this terminology was intended to designate the concrete New Testamental revelation of the Son and the Spirit, as distinct from the Father. Modern Orthodox theologians tend to emphasize this personalistic approach to God; they claim that they discover in it the original biblical personalism, unadulterated in its content by later philosophical speculation. (Filioque Controversy) Table 73: Trinitarian perspective East-West

One of the Cappadocian Fathers, Basil of Caesarea (329?-379), defined the difference between ousia and hypostasisthe great theological innovation of this theologian, as well as the unique characteristics of each of them. Thus, in his Letter n 38, sent to his Brother Gregory, he first complains about the failure of many people to distinguish between ousia and hypostasis, The result is that some of those who accept statements on these subjects without any enquiry, are pleased to speak of one hypostasis, just as they do of one essence or substance; while on the other hand those who accept three hypostases are under the idea that they are bound in accordance with this confession, to assert also, by numerical analogy, three essences or substances. (1) and then attempted to clean the term hypostasis of ambiguities. In this letter Basil, to clarify the meaning, compared the members of the Trinity with three men. Thus as they

602

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

share the same ousia of manhood and were homoousios, yet three persons, so the Father, Son and Holy Ghost were homoousios with one another, yet Three Persons. Thus, he illustrates his point on the difference between ousia and hypostasis by making a difference between a man, which has an indefinite, general or universal meaning, and Paul, which has his own peculiarities as a Person. My statement, then, is this. That which is spoken of in a special and peculiar manner is indicated by the name of the hypostasis. Suppose we say a man. The indefinite meaning of the word strikes a certain vague sense upon the ears. The nature is indicated, but what subsists and is specially and peculiarly indicated by the name is not made plain. Suppose we say Paul. We set forth, by what is indicated by the name, the nature subsisting. This then is the hypostasis, or understanding; not the indefinite conception of the essence or substance, which, because what is signified is general, finds no standing, but the conception which by means of the expressed peculiarities gives standing and circumscription to the general and uncircumscribed. (Letter n 38, 2) For him, therefore, each of the divine hypostasis is the ousia determined by particularizing characteristics. He then defines the unique attributes of the divine hypostasis in spite of the indissoluble, continuous communion of the substancehe also used community of essence (Letter n 38, 5): The Son, Who declares the Spirit proceeding from the Father through Himself and with Himself, shining forth alone and by only-begetting from the unbegotten light, so far as the peculiar notes are concerned, has nothing in common either with the Father or with the Holy Ghost. He alone is known by the stated signs. But God, Who is over all, alone has, as one special mark of His own hypostasis, His being Father, and His deriving His hypostasis from no cause; and through this mark He is peculiarly known. Wherefore in the communion of the substance we maintain that there is no mutual approach or intercommunion of those notes of indication perceived in the Trinity, whereby is set forth the proper peculiarity of the Persons delivered in the faith, each of these being distinctively apprehended by His own notes. Hence, in accordance with the stated signs of indication, discovery is made of the separation of the hypostases; while so far as relates to the infinite, the incomprehensible, the uncreate, the uncircumscribed, and similar attributes, there is no variableness in the life-giving nature; in that, I mean, of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but in Them is seen a certain communion indissoluble and continuous. (Letter n 38, 4) For Basil it is a communion of substance born in infinity, thus implying an Infinite Trinity of three consubstantial Persons. In this passage, there also seems to be a ring of subordinationism when he says The Son, Who declares the Spirit proceeding from the Father through Himself and with Himself. This, however, makes one reflect once again

603

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

on the difficulty of employing the human language to express personal, absolute relations in infinity. In De Spiritu Sancto, Basil contemplates the Spirit as eternally co-existing with the Father, In relation to the originate, then, the Spirit is said to be in them in divers portions and in divers manners, while in relation to the Father and the Son it is more consistent with true religion to assert Him not to be in but to be with. For the grace flowing from Him when He dwells in those that are worthy, and carries out His own operations, is well described as existing in those that are able to receive Him. On the other hand His essential existence before the ages, and His ceaseless abiding with Son and Father, cannot be contemplated without requiring titles expressive of eternal conjunction. For absolute and real co-existence is predicated in the case of things which are mutually inseparable. (63) a Father who is infinite and absolute: However, to the well-disposed bearer, even these are not insignificant, unless the terms right hand and bosom be accepted in a physical and derogatory sense, so as at once to circumscribe God in local limits, and invent form, mould, and bodily position, all of which are totally distinct from the idea of the absolute, the infinite, and the incorporeal. (De Spiritu Sancto 15) Since the Father is eternal, infinite and absolute, the Son and the Spirit, as they are consubstantial, they are also eternal, infinite, and absolute. From this standpoint, it is plausible to think that the idea of Fatherhood sprang in infinity when He bestowed His personality upon the Son and the Spirit to explain the begetting of the Father and the Son. In his Letter 214, Basil expresses a similar point of what is unique and distinctive in the Persons of the Trinity, yet giving it a biblical, authoritative criterion: What better calculated to disturb the faith of the majority than that some of us could be shewn to assert that there is one hypostasis of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? We distinctly lay down that there is a difference of Persons; but this statement was anticipated by Sabellius, who affirms that God is one by hypostasis, but is described by Scripture in different Persons, according to the requirements of each individual case; sometimes under the name of Father, when there is occasion for this Person; sometimes under the name of Son when there is a descent to human interests or any of the operations of the oeconomy; and sometimes under the Person of Spirit when the occasion demands such phraseology. If, then, any among us are shewn to assert that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one in substance, while we maintain the three perfect Persons, how shall we escape giving clear and incontrovertible proof of the truth of what is being asserted about us? (3) Basil also focuses once again on the difference between ousia and hypostasis, In the

604

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

same manner, on the matter in question, the term ousia is common, like goodness, or Godhead, or any similar attribute; while hypostasis is contemplated in the special property of Fatherhood, Sonship, or the power to sanctify (4). He distinguishes between common and special properties (Fatherhood, Sonship, and power to sanctify). Regarding them, Bobrinskoy points out (234) that he does not make a sharp distinction between theology and economy, since the power to sanctify, attributed to the Spirit relates to creatures. In his Letter 235 he also says: The distinction between onsia and npostasid is the same as that between the general and the particular; as, for instance, between the animal and the particular man. Wherefore, in the case of the Godhead, we confess one essence or substance so as not to give a variant definition of existence but we confess a particular hypostasis, in order that our conception of Father, Son and Holy Spirit may be without confusion and clear. If we have no distinct perception of the separate characteristics, namely, fatherhood, sonship, and sanctification, but form our conception of God from the general idea of existence, we cannot possibly give a sound account of our faith. (6) In the comparison, Basil deals with ousia as an object of intellection, yet he also states explicit and unambiguously that the divine ousia cannot be for us an object of intellection: ... we know our God from His operations, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence (ousia). His operations come down to us; but His essence remains beyond our reach (Letter 234). Eugene Webb states that there are examples in Patristic usage of ousia in the sense of generic, material, or existent, but on the whole the divine ousia was identified primarily with that which is expressed not in a definition but in the divine I Am, i.e., in a statement expressing the existential presence of the divine subject. Analyzing Basil, Bobrinskoy sees the unique character of each divine Person not only in the work of creation and salvation, but also in the eternal relations in the Trinitarian Persons (233). Regarding Basils theological reflection, he further says, something important in Orthodox theology is added, namely its mystical level. For St. Basil, it is not a question of an exercise in speculative and abstract philosophy, but of an existential effort of a theological formulation of the most authentic spiritual experience, of the vision of faith and of knowledge about the 605

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

specificity of the divine hypostases, simultaneously irreducible and in mutual communion in the infinite fullness of the divine life. (234) Bobrinskoy also says that Basils distinction between substance or essence and hypostasis constituted from then on a definite asset for Orthodox Trinitarian doctrine, an asset which his companion in arms would faithfully take over (234). The cosubstantiality or common substantiality of the Godhead is the base of the Orthodox argument against the Filioque (234). But he also adds that the differentiation between hypostasis and ousia does, however, not suffice to determine the distinction between the Persons and the common nature. What is common does not suffice to define the Mystery of the divine Unity (235). In On Not Three Gods, Gregory of Nyssa (d. 394), in contrast with Basil, says: I say, the fact that men, even if several are engaged in the same form of action, work separately each by himself at the task he has undertaken, having no participation in his individual action with others who are engaged in the same occupation. Thus, for him, unlike three men, in the Trinity, each member participates of each others work: But in the case of the Divine nature we do not similarly learn that the Father does anything by Himself in which the Son does not work conjointly, or again that the Son has any special operation apart from the Holy Spirit; but every operation which extends from God to the Creation, and is named according to our variable conceptions of it, has its origin from the Father, and proceeds through the Son, and is perfected in the Holy Spirit. In Againt Eunomius (Book 2), Gregory of Nyssa emphasizes unity as the object of the community of essence. Accordingly, from the identity of operations it results assuredly that the Spirit is not alien from the nature of the Father and the Son. And to the statement that the Spirit accomplishes the operation and teaching of the Father according to the good pleasure of the Son we assent. For the community of nature gives us warrant that the will of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is one, and thus, if the Holy Spirit wills that which seems good to the Son, the community of will clearly points to unity of essence. Furthermore, as Bobrinsky adds, Gregory of Nazianzus (d. 390) uses Basils approach to common and particular properties very rarely. For Gregory of Nazianzus the particular is a qualification too elementary and not sufficiently distinct from the

606

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

individual, and it is not enough to speak of communion, like Gregory of Nyssa did, but of the essential Unity of Persons (235). In Oration 40 (41), Gregory Nazianzus formulates a beautiful declaration of Unity: This I give you to share, and to defend all your life, the One Godhead and Power, found in the Three in Unity, and comprising the Three separately, not unequal, in substances or natures, neither increased nor diminished by superiorities or inferiorities; in every respect equal, in every respect the same; just as the beauty and the greatness of the heavens is one; the infinite conjunction of Three Infinite Ones, Each God when considered in Himself; as the Father so the Son, as the Son so the Holy Ghost; the Three One God when contemplated together; Each God because Consubstantial; One God because of the Monarchia. Gregory of Nazianzus also mentions the Monarchy, which, as Bobrinskoy explains, is the common Trinitarian doctrine of the Cappadocians: The Father is the one Principle, the One source in the Divinity, the one Cause of the begotten Son and the Spirit and of the Spirit who proceeds from Him (235). Yet, Bobrinskoy explains that The philosophic concept of causality must be used with caution, so as to avoid subordinationism between the Cause (the Father) and the One who is cause (The Son and the Spirit) (235). Both unity and causality are very important to define the Cappadocians theology. Yet, on the one hand, the three hypostases discerned by the Cappadocian were viewedas many still view itas tri-theism. Hebrew 1:3 was often quoted: Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ... This passage taught that Jesus was the express image of Gods hypostasis, and not a secondary or subordinated one. In spite of this supposed tritheism, we have seen their emphasis on unity. As Kelly states, although there were certain features that seem to lend the Cappadocians to this idea like their unfortunate comparison of the ousia of the Godhead to a universal manifesting itself in the particulars, they were aware of the

607

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

deficiencies of the analogy (Early Christian Doctrines 267). Kelly adds that Gregory of Nyssa draws attention to the unity of operation between the Father, Son, and Spirit; and Gregory of Nazianzus emphasizes that the unity of the Divine Persons is real as opposed to the purely notional unity of several man (267). On the other hand, the concept of cause justifies the use of the subordinationistic language of the third century when speaking of the Son and the Spirit. This is seen in Basil, It results that in Himself He shows the glory of the Only begotten, and on true worshippers He in Himself bestows the knowledge of God. Thus the way of the knowledge of God lies from One Spirit through the One Son to the One Father, and conversely the natural Goodness and the inherent Holiness and the royal Dignity extend from the Father through the Only-begotten to the Spirit (De Spiritu Sancto) in Gregory of Nazianzus, who even says: I should like to call the Father the greater, because from him flows both the Equality and the Being of the Equals (this will be granted on all hands), but I am afraid to use the word Origin, lest I should make Him the Origin of Inferiors, and thus insult Him by precedencies of honor. For the lowering of those Who are from Him is no glory to the Source. (De Oration 40, Chap. 43) and also in Gregory of Nyssa, For like as the grace flows down in an unbroken stream from the Father, through the Son and the Spirit, upon the persons worthy of it, so does this profanity return backward, and is transmitted from the Son to the God of all the world, passing from one to the other (On the Holy Spirit). Regarding this language, Kelly asserts that while all subordinationism is excluded, the Father remains in the eyes of the Cappadocians the source, the fountainhead or principle of the Godhead. The thought ... that He imparts His being to the other two persons, and so can be said to cause them (Early Christian Doctrines 265). Basil, for example, says in his Letter (38): Holy Ghost alone, we are on the other hand guided by Scripture to the belief that of the supply of the good things which are wrought in us through the Holy Ghost, the Originator and Cause is the Only-begotten God; for we are taught by Holy Scripture that All things were made by Him, and by Him consist. ...

608

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Since, then, the Holy Ghost, from Whom all the supply of good things for creation has its source, is attached to the Son, and with Him is inseparably apprehended, and has Its being attached to the Father, as cause, from Whom also It proceeds. In this passage Basil reveals how the Spirit is caused by the Son, but also by the Father, which is a First Source. The idea of a First Cause is clear in Gregory of Nyssas On Infants Early Deaths: For every one agrees that the Universe is linked to one First Cause; that nothing in it owes its existence to itself, so as to be its own origin and cause; but that there is on the other hand a single uncreate eternal Essence, the same for ever, which transcends all our ideas of distance, conceived of as without increase or decrease, and beyond the scope of any definition; and that time and space with all their consequences, and anything previous to these that thought can grasp in the intelligible supramundane world, are all the productions of this Essence. Nazianzus, in Oration 29 (3), tries to explain the concept of cause as applied to eternity: How then are They not alike unoriginate, if They are coeternal? Because They are from Him, though not after Him. For that which is unoriginate is eternal, but that which is eternal is not necessarily unoriginate, so long as it may be referred to the Father as its origin. Therefore in respect of Cause They are not unoriginate; but it is evident that the Cause is not necessarily prior to its effects, for the sun is not prior to its light. And yet They are in some sense unoriginate, in respect of time, even though you would scare simple minds with your quibbles, for the Sources of Time are not subject to time. Therefore, with this theological thought, God becomes, again in time language, the ONE UNCAUSED, the primeval cause of causes. This can be conceptualized as the I AM. Thus the Cappadocian Fathers seem to be teaching that the eternal, infinite Son and Holy Spirit are coeternal with the I AM; that is, as suggested, there never was a time when the I AM was not the Father of the Son and, with him, of the Spirit. With this conceptual background me might grasp better the particularizing characteristics of the Deity defined by Basilas Fatherhood, Sonship, and power to sanctifyand those of the remaining two Cappadocian Fathers and understand how they insist on the incomprehensibility of these concepts as they were trying to describe with a time or temporally restricted language, personality relations occurring in the infinity. Both Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa defined more precisely the

609

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

particularizing characteristics of the three Persons as ingenerateness, generateness, mission/procession. The two, essence and ingenerateness are related, as summed up by Gregory of Nyssa in Against Eunomium (Book 2): But to the best of my ability I will raise my voice to rebut our enemies argument. They say that God is declared to be without generation, that the Godhead is by nature simple, and that which is simple admits of no composition. If, then, God Who is declared to be without generation is by His nature without composition, His title of Ungenerate must belong to His very nature, and that nature is identical with ungeneracy. Yet he expresses that even if we can know God through His activities, we cannot find suitable words to describe His essence, which is infinite by nature. In his Book 3 (5) he discusses: Now if any one should ask for some interpretation, and description, and explanation of the Divine essence, we are not going to deny that this kind of wisdom we are unlearned, acknowledging only so much as this, that it is not possible that which is by nature infinite should be comprehended in any conception expressed by words. In On Not Three Gods, he also says: It does not seem to me absolutely necessary, with a view to the present proof of our argument, to contend against those who oppose us with the assertion that we are not to conceive Godhead as an operation. For we, believing the Divine nature to be unlimited and incomprehensible, conceive no comprehension of it, but declare that the nature is to be conceived in all respects as infinite: and that which is absolutely infinite is not limited in one respect while it is left unlimited in another, but infinity is free from limitation altogether. That therefore which is without limit is surely not limited even by name. In order then to mark the constancy of our conception of infinity in the case of the Divine nature, we say that the Deity, is above every name: and Godhead is a name. Now it cannot be that the same thing should at once be a name and be accounted as above every name. Gregory of Nazianzus also talks about ingeneracy in Oration 31 (8): You explain the ingeneracy of the Father and I will give you a biological account of the Sons begetting and the Spirits proceeding and let us go mad, the pair of us, for prying into Gods secrets! If this specific language is given to us, it is because generation and procession speak of certain relationships within the Trinity, both personal and hierarchical. Like Gregory of Nyssa he talks of this term from the point of view of an unapproachable infinite. In Oration 38 (8), Gregory of Nazianzus says: And when Infinity is considered from two points of view, beginning and end (for

610

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

that which is beyond these and not limited by them is Infinity), when the mind looks to the depth above, not having where to stand, and leans upon phenomena to form an idea of God, it calls the Infinite and Unapproachable which it finds there by the name of Unoriginate. And when it looks into the depths below, and at the future, it calls Him Undying and Imperishable. And when it draws a conclusion from the whole it calls Him Eternal (aiwnios). As we have seen, by analyzing the conception of hypostasis much more thoroughly than Athanasius, the Cappadocians were able to keep a delicate balance between the threeness and the oneness in God and gave full significance to the classic summary of the Trinitarian doctrine, three persons in one essence. Bernard, in Oneness and Trinity A.D. 100-300: The Doctrine of God in Ancient Christian Writings, summarizes the teaching of the Three Cappadocians as follows: The one God-head subsists in three coequal, coeternal, coessential persons, and this truth is an incomprehensible mystery. There is communion of substance but distinction of personhood. This trinity is a perfect, inseparable, indivisible union, and the persons work together in all things. The unique distinguishing characteristics of the persons are as follows: the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten (generated), and the Holy Spirit is proceeding (spirated). The generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit are mysteries, however. While the persons are coequal and coeternal, the Father is in some sense the head and the origin. (40) In the Orthodox tradition, the three Cappadocian Fathers were justly called the triad that celebrated the Triad. Bobrinskoy gives us a final remark about the work of the Cappadocians which will assist us later with the development of the related doctrine of Christology. He focuses on the individual characteristics of Basil and the two Gregorieswho completed the terminological and doctrinal elaboration began by Basil. Firstly Bobrinskoy underlines the pastoral and pedagogical dimensions of the works of Basil, who was close to the St. Ephrem and Syrian tradition, as marked by his doctrinal economy. The main lines of force of his theological research was the significance he attached to the proper role of the divine hypostases and his pedagogy of the Holy Spirit. Secondly, Bobrinskoy calls Gregory Nazianzus, who was closer to the Alexandrian tradition, minstrel and herald of the Divinity of the Trinity. He adds that for fear of

611

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

diminishing the personal role of the Word of God in incarnation, Gregory of Nazianzus was more reluctant than Basil to investigate the mysterious manner of the presence of the Spirit in the mystery of the humanity of Christ (present but not active, he remarked). Thirdly, Bobrinskoy says that in Gregory of Nyssa, we find a Christology and pneumatology of the divine energies, and, thus, of the divine gifts to the world (249). He adds that in the youngest of the Cappadocians we find a well-developed foundation of the theology of energies ... on the one hand, in St. Cyril of Alexandria in a Christological context, and on the other, in St. Gregory Palamas, in his defense of the doctrine of sanctification and deification of the creature (249).

Activity With telegraphic sentences, list the contributions of the Cappadocian Fathers to the doctrine of the Trinity. You can add any other contribution you may think they had upon reading and reflecting on quoted passages.
Activity 132: The Cappadocians contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity

Under the rule of Theodosius, a staunch supporter of the Nicene doctrine, a new ecumenical council was summoned in 381 to meet in Constantinople. The emperor intended to provide for a Catholic succession in the patriarchal See of Constantinople, to confirm the Nicene Faith, to reconcile the semi-Arians with the Church, and to put an end to the Macedonian heresy (First Council of Constantinople). None of the roughly 150 bishops present were from the West. As Basil died a few months before, Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzus were the primary spokesmen. The Council completed the short , third article of the Council of Nicea: We believe in the Holy Spirit, in the Holy Church. Thus the creed reads:233 We believe (I believe) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God)
233

This is a literal translation of the Greek text of the Constantinopolitan Creed, the brackets indicating the words altered or added in the Western liturgical form in present use.

612

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets. And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for (I look for) the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen. (Nicene Creed) The 381 Constantinopolitan Creed, which completed the 325 Nicene Creed, is the only creed accepted by the Orthodox Church. Later, the Council of Chalcedon (451) confirmed the ecumenical character of the Council of Constantinople even though most of its participants were Oriental bishops.

Activity Compare and contrast the Nicene Creed and the Constantinopolitan Creed. Give an explanation of their similarities and changes using as a background the development of the Trinitarian doctrine.
Activity 133: Comparison and contrast of the Nicene Creed and the Constantinopolitan Creed

Other Fathers of this period such as John Chrysostom or Cyril of Alexandria were not innovators of the Trinitarian theology. The former can better be seen as the most reliable spokesman of the exegetical and Christological tradition of the School of Antioch, the latter, as a the preeminent guardian of the spiritual and theological heritage of Athanasius (Bobrinskoy 251).

CONCLUSION The development of the doctrine of the Trinity was a lengthy struggle for ideas that could establish unity against polytheism, orthodoxy against heretical deviation, equality of rank and substance of the Three Infinite Persons of the Trinity against subordinationism, deliberated or not. It was also a period marked by an intellectual 613

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

search of the Bible to find the appropriate concepts while spiritually contemplating the Sacred Tradition so as to grasp the meaning of the personal, salvific experience within the operations of the Godhead. This struggle, search, and experience finally yielded their fruits in Orthodoxy and Truth. The Apostolic Fathers, emphasizing monotheism and generally closely following the Bible, delineated the Triad, without yet focusing on the role of the Spirit. Their moral concern hindered a theological development of the doctrine of the Trinity; however, they laid the foundations for the further development of this doctrine. The Apologists, again had no real focus on the Spirit, while they tried to explain the relationship of God, the Father, with the Logos or Wordthe Sonnot only in eternity but in time as the Logos created the World and incarnated in Jesus Christ. They saw how the Son and the Spirit had certain functions in the process of human salvationthe term economy was still not coined. With the Apologists the first root of Trinitarian doctrine is discernible; yet, we find a denial of the absolute deity of Jesus Christ and a confusion of Jesus Christ with the Spirit, which remains very poorly depicted. Also, the relation within the Godhead is scarcely described, and, when it is, sequential relationships among them well expressed. However, with the Apologists we can see a major change from biblical Oneness towards the Trinitarian concept. Writing after the period of the Apologists, the anti-heretical Father, Irenaeus, thought to be the last theologian before the theological separation of East and West, coined the term economy of salvation and described the coexistence in eternity of the Son/WordJesus Christand the Wisdom/Spirit with the Father. Irenaeus gave more relevance to the Holy Spirit than the preceding Fathers. This talented Father did not mention the term trinity but was definitely Trinitarian. Another anti-heretical Father, Tertullian, who influenced the West, coined this word. He also provided Trinitarianism with the important terms of personahipostasis in Greekand substantia. Nevertheless, he used a subordinationist language to derive the Son from the Father. He 614

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

also confused the Spirit and the Son, but paid more attention to the Spirit than his predecessors. His contemporary, Origen, in the East, was the first to teach a Trinity of persons in eternity. Trying to express linguistically ineffable notions of eternity in concepts, Origen formulates the eternal generation of the Son, but saw the Logos, as did Tertullian as ontologically subordinated to the Father. Borrowing Origens subordinationism, Arius asserted that the Son was created, not begotten. This caused a violent debate with important developments for the doctrine of the Trinity. With the council of Nicea in 325, orthodoxy was clarified with the credal formula stating Jesus consubstantiality with the Father. The divinity and consubstantiality of the Holy Spirit was later asserted. The terms ousia and hypostasis were commonly confused. But, by attributing hypostasis to the unique specificity of the person, and ousia as what is common to the three, the Cappadocians gave a new meaning to the words. They also formulated the coequality, coeternity, and consubstantiality of the Three. They retained a delicate balance between the threeness and the oneness in God and gave full significance to the classic summary of Trinitarian doctrine, three persons in one essence. With the theological concept of causality they explained eternal, infinite, and absolute personal relations in the Godhead. Their ideas were finally added to the Nicene Creed to conform the Constantinopolitan Creed. The Spirit was thus given his rightful rank in eternity along with the Father and the Son. The Fathers joined epistemic and gnosis to give to the Christian world one of its most fascinating mysteries.

615

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Final Activity After having read this part and done its exercises, write a five-page paper summarizing what has been said. Use your own words and provide your own conclusion.
Activity 134: Final activity on the Trinity

2. CHRISTOLOGY: YOUR OWN RESEARCH In the previous section I dealt extensively with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. In this section, as a guideline for your own research, I am going to approach the development of Christology, which has been fundamental for the life of the early Church during its first five centuries and beyond. Both fields of study are obviously related, but while Trinitarianism is concerned particularly with how the divine persons relate to one another, Christology is concerned with the nature of Christ, particularly with how the divine and human are related in his person, and with the meeting of the human and divine in the person of Jesus. Christology therefore tries to explain how the human and the divine coexist in one person. As the Nicean Constantinopolitan Creed formulates, Jesus Christ is the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father... . By the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. This mystery, foretold in the Old Testament, was fully expressed in the New Testament and developed through the Patristic period and its ecumenical councils along with the struggles with heresies and controversies. In opposition to these heretical trends which held that Jesus was either divine or human or part one and part the other, these ecumenical councils defended an orthodox approach to Christology, formulating their discussion into creeds. These creeds emphasized a full communion of Christs divine and human natures insisting that Christ is God and that both shared the same substance (homousios).

616

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Already in the first century, after the death of the apostles, Christology started to develop to guide a proper understanding of Christs nature and counteract the emerging heretical teachings. Following the Biblical Christology, the early apostolic Fathers emphasized both the deity and the humanity of Christ. For them Christ was truly Man and Truly God, but various Christologies competed in the early Christian church and its heretical tenets forced their adherents to insist more on either of these attributes. The Docetists denied the true humanity of Jesus while the Ebonists mainly the divinity of Christ. Moreover, the Gnostics usually had the Docetic view that Christ was a spirit being having only an apparent body while the Monarchianists held that Jesus was a mere man with the highest moral virtue. For the Arians, Christ was neither God nor man, but something in between or a lesser god while for the Apollinarians Jesus was a human body inhabited by a divine soul. In your own research you will study the development of Christology in the New Testament writers as well as in the writers of the Ante-Nicene Period and After-Nicene Period. CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Kelly says that New Testament writers generally regarded Christ as preexistent; they tended to attribute to Him a twofold order of being according to the flesh, i.e. as man, and according to the spirit, i.e. as God (Early Christian Doctrines 138). Let us view the Christology of St. Paul, St. John and that of the Synoptics. Regarding Pauline Christology, A. J. Maas, in Christology, states that St. Paul insists on the truth of Christs real humanity and Divinity, in spite of the fact that at first sight the reader is confronted with three objects in the Apostles writings: God, the human world, and the Mediator. But then the latter is both Divine and human, both God and man. In the following passages from the Pauline epistles find expressions related

617

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

to Christs humanity and/or Christs divinity. On completion draw your own conclusions:
Hebrews 1:1 Hebrews 1:2-3 Hebrews 1:14 Hebrews 5:4 Hebrews 5:8 Romans 1:3 Romans 7:3 Romans 8:3 Romans 9:5 1 Corinthians 11:7 2 Corinthians 13:4 2 Corinthians 5:21; Colossians 1:12 Colossians 1:15 Colossians 1:16 Colossians 1:22 Colossians 1:24 1 Timothy 3:16 Ephesians 1:20-21 Ephesians 4:13; Galatians 4:4 Galatians 2:17 Galatians 4:14 Philippians 2:6; Philippians 2:7 Philippians 3:10

The core of the Johannean Christology is found in the first fourteen verses of the Fourth Gospel. The doctrine of the prologue, as Mass explains, is the fundamental idea of the whole Johannean theology. As he adds the teaching of the Fourth Gospel is also found in St. Johns Epistles. Read the following passages and make conclusions about the Johannean Christology. Does he emphasize the humanity or the divinity of Christ?
First fourteen verses of the Gospel by John 1 John 2:23 1 John 4: 5 1 John 5: 20 Rev. Rev. Rev. Rev. 1: 8; 21: 6; 22: 13 12: 10; 13: 8 19: 16 17: 14

There is a difference between the Christology of the Synoptists and that of St. John in their respective representation of Jesus Christ. Mass says: The three Synoptists set forth the humanity of Christ in its obedience to the law, in its power over nature, and in its tenderness for the weak and afflicted; the fourth Gospel sets forth the life of Christ not in any of the aspects which belong to it as human, but as being the adequate expression of the glory of the Divine Person, manifested to men under a visible form. But in spite of this difference, the Synoptists by their suggestive implication practically anticipate the teaching of the Fourth Gospel. Read the following passages and find expressions about the human and/or divine representation the Evangelists provide of Jesus Christ. Draw your own conclusions:
Luke 1: 35 Luke 1:48 Luke 1:42-43 Matthew 9:2-6; Luke 5:20, 24 Matthew 16:16, 17 Matthew 11:27

618

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Luke 1:28, 32 Luke 2:30-32 Matthew 3:17, 17:5; 22:41 Matthew 11:27; 28:20 Matthew 18:10, 19, 35 Matthew 21:34

Matthew 22:19 Matthew 18:33 Matthew Matthew

26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 20:19; Mark 10:34; Luke 28:19 28:20

Now let us view the Christologies of some of the Church Fathers. As commented above, they emphasized different aspects of Christs divinity-humanity to counteract the contemporary heretical trends. CHRISTOLOGY OF THE PRE-NICENE FATHERS In the New Advent webpage [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/] find the following passages by Ignatius, Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Justin, and Irenaeus. Then read them and analyze them from a Christological perspective. On completion write a five-paragraph essay with your own conclusions. Try to relate these conclusions to the main heresies of the period. Ignatius: The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians Chap. 7 Barnabas: The Epistle of Barnabas, Chap. 5 Clement of Rome: The Second Epistle, Chap. 9 Justin: The First Apology, Chap. 63; Dialogue with Trypho, Chap. 87 Irenaeus: Adversus haereses, Book 3, Chap. 16 Clement of Alexandria: The Stromata, Book VII, Chap. 2.

CHRISTOLOGY OF THE POST-NICENE FATHERS In the New Advent webpage [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/] find the following passages by Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Theodoret. Then read them and analyze them from a Christological perspective. On completion write a five paragraph essay with your own conclusions. Try to relate these conclusions to the main heresies of the period. Athanasius: On the Incarnation of the Word, Chap. 4 and 8 Gregory of Nazianzus: Third Theological Oration (Oration 29), chap. 19 619

Chapter 5: History of Doctrine

Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius, Book III, Chap. 3 Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 12, Chap. 1 Theodoret, Counter-statements to Cyrils 12 Anathemas, Against 1

To help you reach the conclusions, read the following internet article: Jidian, Developments in Christology in the Early Church History [http://godoor. net/jidianlinks/jidulun.doc]. Your Own Research Kelly, in Early Christian Doctrines, discusses the development of other doctrinal issues such as ecclesiology, fallen man and Gods grace, Christ saving work, and early and later doctrine of the sacraments. Find these issues either in Kellys book or on the Internet and write a paragraph or two about them.
Activity 135: The development of other doctrines

620

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Chapter 6 DOGMATICS
INTRODUCTION In the Introduction to this Part II, I addressed the topic of Dogmaticsor the study of religious dogmas. One of the conclusions I reached was that Dogmatics was really doctrinal in itself as the analyses of dogmas are doctrinal. Dogmas can be envisioned as a doctrine or body of doctrines formally and authoritatively affirmed. Basically, dogmatic theology refers to the official or dogmatic theology as recognized by an organized Church body, such as the Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church. In the Introduction I also mentioned the biblical origin of doctrines and dogmas. The words of Aghiorgoussis, in The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church, regarding the Orthodox Church offer a good summary of what I intend to convey. He says that all the dogmas of the church are biblical, i.e. based on the Bible. The dogmas of the Church are nothing else but an authoritative presentation of the revealed doctrine, both for didactic and also apologetical purposes. Moreover, for the Orthodox Church, a dogma is not just a philosophical truth. It is a reality which is described by all the Saint and Glorified/Deified Church members. It is the experience of Pentecost through the passing of the years, which is the same with the experience of the Apostles (Christian Dogmatics). Meyendorff says that the East was less prone to conceptualize or to dogmatize than the West, thus, any systematic presentation of Byzantine theology, there is ... a danger of forcing it into the mold of rational categories foreign to its very nature (Byzantine Theology 128). We can find good examples of dogmatic theology in the doctrinal creeds, statements, or dogmas formulated by the early church councils attempting to resolve theological problems and taking a stance against heretical teachings. In these councils

621

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the church formulated doctrine considered essential to Christianity and which if denied will constitute heresy. Yet it is true, as Aghiorgoussis also asserts, that although heresy was one of the reasons why the Church formulated and established its doctrine in a very clear and unequivocal manner, these dogmas decreed by the councils opposing heresy were not the only ones promulgated and taught by the Church. He adds that the doctrinal system of the Church contains both these dogmas and all the other doctrines that the Church always proclaimed as being part of the message of salvation that she addressed to the world. In the same thread, I also explained that I took Systematic Theology and Dogmatics as interchangeable; yet it is necessary to clarify that although both normally discuss the same doctrines and often have the same outline and structure, as already suggested, Dogmatics does so from a particular theological perspective, in affiliation with a specific church, in this case the Orthodox Church. Dogmatics approaches this faith by theme, and systematically expounds it. This process of doctrinal systematization became more serious in the patristic period. However, to the Greek Fathers all doctrines were dogmas and not simply the central teachings of their system. An illustration can be seen in Cyril of Jerusalems fourth Catechetical Discourse concerning the Ten Dogmas (which might be rendered as Ten Great Doctrine). These ten dogmas might have been taken from the Commandments or Decalogue although Cyril divides his creed in more than ten articles, namely Of God, Of Christ, Concerning His Birth of the Virgin, Of the Cross, Of his Burial, Of the Resurrection, Concerning the Ascension, Of Judgment to Come, Of the Holy Ghost, Of the Soul, Of the Body, and the like. Regarding God, he says: 4. First then let there be laid as a foundation in your soul the doctrine concerning God that God is One, alone unbegotten, without beginning, change, or variation;

622

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

neither begotten of another, nor having another to succeed Him in His life; who neither began to live in time, nor endeth ever: and that He is both good and just; that if ever thou hear a heretic say, that there is one God who is just, and another who is good, thou mayest immediately remember, and discern the poisoned arrow of heresy. For some have impiously dared to divide the One God in their teaching: and some have said that one is the Creator and Lord of the soul, and another of the body; a doctrine at once absurd and impious. For how can a man become the one servant of two masters, when our Lord says in the Gospels, No man can serve two masters? There is then One Only God, the Maker both of souls and bodies: One the Creator of heaven and earth, the Maker of Angels anti Archangels: of many the Creator, but of One only the Father before all ages,of One only, His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom He made all things visible and invisible. At that moment the word dogma was not yet used in a technical manner for what was Christian or churchly. It meant to be of authority. The word which emerged in Greek for that purpose was orthodox or orthodoxy, as used in John of Damascus, to signify the true doctrine of Christ (Dogma). As already commented, with Origenwho would not refer to his speculations as dogmasat the beginning of the third century, we find an early doctrinal systematization. His De Principiis, composed in Alexandria, is a dogmatic treatise on God and the world. In this work, Origen treats (a) God and the Trinity, (b) the world and its relation to God, (c) man and his free will, and (d) Scripture, its inspiration and interpretation. To illustrate, Book I, Chap. 1, is entitled On God, and Origen starts this chapter saying: I know that some will attempt to say that, even according to the declarations of our own Scriptures, God is a body, because in the writings of Moses they find it said, that our God is a consuming fire; and in the Gospel according to John, that God is a Spirit, and they who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. Fire and spirit, according to them, are to be regarded as nothing else than a body. Now, I should like to ask these persons what they have to say respecting that passage where it is declared that God is light; as John writes in his Epistle, God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. Truly He is that light which illuminates the whole understanding of those who are capable of receiving truth, as is said in the thirty-sixth Psalm, In Thy light we shall see light. In Orthodoxy we will have to wait for insights of the Syrian theologian and Melkite monk John of Damascus (676-749) and his work An Exposition of the 623

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Orthodox Faith. This work is a formal exposition of the dogmatic or orthodox teachings of the early Church Fathers. As an illustration, Chapter IV (Book I), entitled Concerning the nature of Deity: that it is incomprehensible, says: It is plain, then, that there is a God. But what He is in His essence anti nature is absolutely incomprehensible and unknowable. For it is evident that He is incorporeal. For how could that possess body which is infinite, and boundless, and formless, and intangible and invisible, in short, simple and not compound? John of Damascus Exposition was extensively used by the scholastics and is still a prime source for the dogmatic opinions of the principal Eastern Church Fathers (Dogmatic Theology).

Your Own Research Access <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/> or any other web which has John of Damascus An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith and copy the headings of the chapters of each of its four books: Book I (14 chapters), Book II (30 chapters), Book III (29 chapters), and Book IV (27 chapters).
Activity 136: John of Damascus An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith

Regarding the use of the word dogma, Pomazansky, in Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, says: So as to guard the right path of faith, the Church has had to forge strict forms for the expression of the truths of faith: it has had to build up the fortresses of truth for the repulsion of influences foreign to the Church. The definitions of truth declared by the Church have been called, since the days of the Apostles, dogmas. To justify this perspective he quotes the Acts of the Apostles, when we read that the Apostles Paul and Timothy as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees (dogmata) for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem (Acts 16:4). Pomazansky explains that these decrees make reference to the ones given in the Apostolic Council described in the fifteenth chapter of Acts. This

624

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Orthodox theologian considers the Apostolic Sacred Tradition as the foundation of dogmas: It is clear that dogmas are not founded on the rational conceptions of separate individuals, even though these might be Fathers and Teachers of the Church, but, rather, on the teaching of Sacred Scripture and on the Apostolic Sacred Tradition. The truths of faith which are contained in the Sacred Scripture and the Apostolic Sacred Tradition give the fullness of the teaching of faith which was called by the ancient Fathers of the Church the catholic faith, the catholic teaching of the Church. Pomazansky also distinguishes between dogmas and canons: In ecclesiastical terminology dogmas are the truths of Christian teaching, the truths of faith, and canons are the prescriptions. As we have also seen, a major characteristic of Dogmatics as compared with other branches of theology is its systematic character. However, systematic preoccupation is not its only function. From the perspective of the Orthodox Church, Ernst Benz, in The Eastern Orthodox Church: Its Thought and Life, sees a practical side to the dogma: The dogma is a component of the living worship. Intellectual definition of the truths of the Christian faith is necessary, of course, and certainly that is one of the functions of dogma. But in the Orthodox Church dogma is not limited to differentiating Christian principles from false doctrines. It governs the Christians religious and moral life; that is, it has a practical side. It promotes growth in the Christians spiritual life by keeping the facts of redemption ever present in his mind. He continues by saying that Because dogma has this practical function within the spiritual organism of the Orthodox Church, it has not undergone so much theoretical elaboration as the dogma of Roman Catholicism or Protestantism. The various elements of the Creed have not been defined with precision. Hence there is much greater freedom in the interpretation of the dogma. Even the formulation of a dogma by an ecumenical council is not eo ipso necessarily binding under canon law. To be binding, a dogma must also be accepted by the general consensus of the Church, what the theologians call the ecumenical conscience. It is obvious from all this that the development and content of Orthodox dogma cannot be simply equated with analogous phenomena in the Roman Catholic Church.

625

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Bulgakov, in The Orthodox Church, clarifies the concept of dogma in the Orthodox Church: In general the tendency of Orthodox doctrine is not to increase the number of dogmas beyond the limits of the purely indispensable. In the realm of dogma, Orthodoxy rather makes her own the rule, not to govern or dogmatize too much. The plenitude of life contained in the life of the Church is not completely expressed by the obligatory dogmas it professes; these are rather bounds or indications, beyond which Orthodox doctrine ought not to go, they are negative definitions more than positive. He claims that from an Orthodox point of view a dogma does not exhaust all doctrine: It is false to think that established dogma, dogma explicita, exhausts all doctrine, i.e. dogma implicita. On the contrary, the domain of doctrine is much more vast than that of existing definition. It can even be said that definitions can never exhaust doctrine, because dogmas have a discursive, rational character, while the truth of the Church forms an indissoluble whole. This does not mean that the truth cannot be expressed by concepts; on the contrary, the fullness of truth opens to us an inexhaustible theological source. These theological thoughts, which, in the case of mystics and ascetics, have an intuitive character, receive an expression more rational and more philosophical from theologians. It is the legitimate domain of individual creative work, which should not be bound by doctrine. In contrast with Roman Catholicism which tends to canonical formulation of new dogmas, Bulgakov argues that: The Orthodox Church has only a small number of dogmatic definitions, forming the profession of faith obligatory for all its members. Strictly speaking, this minimum consists of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which is read during the baptismal service and the liturgy, and the definitions of the seven ecumenical councils. This does not mean that these documents exhaust all the doctrine of the Church; but the rest has not been so formulated as to become obligatory dogma for all. This remainder consists in theological teaching, treating particularly important questions, such as the veneration of the Holy Virgin and the saints, the sacraments, salvation, eschatology, etc. This is, in general, the Orthodox method of approach; it contents itself with the indispensable minimum of obligatory dogmas. Let us view a table with the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed:
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven. By the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures. He

626

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

ascended in heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. Table 74: The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed234

Yet Bulgakov holds that: This is not to say that new dogmatic formulas are impossible in Orthodoxy, formulas which might be fixed by new ecumenical councils. But, strictly speaking, the minimum already existing constitutes a sufficient base for the development of doctrine, without the disclosure of new dogmatic forms. This development manifests itself in the life of the Church, forming new lines of theological teaching (theologoumena). The predominance of theologoumena over dogmas is the special advantage of the Orthodox Church, which is a stranger to the legalistic spirit. Orthodoxy has felt no disadvantage resulting from some diversity of theological opinions.

1. DOGMAS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH As we have seen, John of Damascus work summed up the whole of the theological thought of the Eastern Fathers and teachers of the Church up to the eighth century. We can further say that the seven ecumenical councils formulated the basic dogmas of the Orthodox Church. Emphasizing the ecumenical character of the Orthodox Church, George Mastrantonis, in The Fundamental Teachings of the Eastern Orthodox Church, asserts that: The Orthodox Church maintains undefiled the dogmas of teaching and the rules of administration formulated and taught by the Synods of the One Undivided Ecumenical Church of the first millennium of the Christian era. The Orthodox Church continuously and without interruption is the true keeper of the truths of the Undivided Church, without omissions or additions. This Church has never created or added officially any new teaching after the Great Schism of the One Undivided Church. For Pomazansky, in Dogmas and Opinions, among Russian theologians, the most complete works of dogmatic theology were written in the nineteenth century by
As commented, it came to us in its final form from the great Council of Constantinople in 381. The Roman Catholic Church added the words and the Son (the filioque clause) to the description of the Holy Spirit. The Eastern Church considered it a violation of the Canons of the Third Ecumenical Council.
234

627

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Metropolitan Macarius of Moscow, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, in two volumes; by Philaret, Archbishop of Chernigov, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, in two parts; by Bishop Sylvester, rector of the Kiev Theological Academy, Essay in Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, with an Historical Exposition of the Dogmas, in five volumes; by Archpriest N. Malinovsky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, in four volumes, and A Sketch of Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, in two parts; and by Archpriest P. Svietlov, The Christian Teaching of Faith, an Apologetic Exposition. There are many contemporary Orthodox theologians who have tried to classify the dogmas of the Orthodox Church. Pomazanzy presents one of the most comprehensive classifications of Orthodox dogmas. For him there are two basic parts in dogmatic theology (1) the teaching about God in Himself and 2) teaching about God in His manifestation of Himself in the world, both with the following subdivisions: (1) God in Himself Our knowledge of God235 The dogma of the Holy Trinity236

(2) God Manifest in the World

235

God and the Creation237 The Providence of God Concerning Evil and Sin238 God and the salvation of mankind239

Among other themes, here Pomazansky deals with the dogma of faith, the nature of our knowledge of God, the essence of God, the attributes of God, Sacred Scripture concerning the attributes of GodGod is Spirit, Eternal, All-Good, Omniscient, All Righteous, Almighty, Omnipresent, Unchangeable, Self Sufficing and All-Blessed, and the unity of God. 236 Among other themes, he deals with the dogma of the Holy Trinity in the Ancient Church, the personal attributes of the Divine Persons, the name of the Second Personthe Word, the procession of the Holy Spirit, and the equality of Divinity of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. 237 He deals with the manner of the world's creation focusing on the motive for the creation and the perfection of the creation; on the angelic world, angels in Sacred Scripture, the creation of angels, the nature of angels, the degree of angelic perfection, the number and ranks of angels, and the ministry of the angels; manthe crown of creation, the soul as an independent substance, the origin of the souls, the immortality of the soul, soul and spirit, the image of God in man, and the purpose of man. 238 He deals with evil and sin in the world, the fall in the angelic world, evil spirits, man's fall into sin the physical consequences of the fall, misfortunes and death as chastisements of God, the loss of the Kingdom of God, and God's mercy to fallen man. 239 Among other things, he discusses: 1) The economy of our salvation, the preparation to receive the Saviour; 2) the incarnation of the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ: true God, the human nature of the

628

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

The Church of Christ240 The Holy Mysteries or Sacraments241 Prayeras expression of the life of the Church242 Christian Eschatology243 (Orthodox Dogmatic Theology)

Vladimir Lossky, in The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, discusses some fundamental themes of the Orthodox dogmatic tradition, which constitute the foundation of mysticism. Lossky deals with the Divine Darkness, related to the problem of the knowledge of God and apophaticism,244 which is the fundamental characteristic of the whole theological tradition of the Eastern Church; God in Trinity; uncreated energies, linked with the revelation of God the Holy Trinity and the thus the attainment of deification of the human creature; created being; image and likeness; the economy of the Son; the economy of the Holy Spirit, the Church, the way of union, and the divine light. For this theologian, the term mystical theology denotes no more than a spirituality which expresses a doctrinal attitude. (7)

Lord Jesus Christ, the two natures in Jesus Christ, the unity of the hypostasis of Christ, and the one worship of Christ; 3) dogmas concerning the Most Holy Virgin Mary; 4) The dogma of redemption, the Lamb of God; the general economy of salvationthe condition of the world before the coming of the Saviour and the salvation of the world in Christ, the personal rebirth and new life in Christ; 5) The triple ministry of the LordChrist the High Priest; Christ the Evangelizer (His prophetic ministry) and the deification of humanity in Christ; 6) the Resurrection of Christ and the saving fruits of the Resurrection of Christthe victory over hell and death, the Kingdom of Christ and the triumphant Church, and the establishment of the Church. 240 He deals with the beginning and purpose of the Church, the Head of the Church; the close bond between the Church on earth and the Church in Heaven; attributes of the Church, its unity, its sanctity, its catholicity; the Apostolic Church; and the Church hierarchyApostles, Bishops, Presbyters, deacons, the three degrees of the hierarchy, the councils of the Church, the uninterruptedness of the episcopate, the pastorship in the Church. 241 He deals with the life of the Church in the Holy Spirit, the new life, the Divine grace, the providence of God and grace, and the Mysteries or Sacraments. 242 He deals with the spiritual bond of the members of the Church, prayers for the dead, communion with the Saints, the outward side of prayer, the veneration of icons, the veneration of holy relics, the path of the Christian, the cross of Christthe path and power of the Church. 243 He deals with the future of the world and mankind, the fate of man after death, the question of the Toll Houses; the signs of the Second Coming of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, the error of chiliasm. the end of the world, the universal judgment, and the Kingdom of Glory. 244 In this regard, Lossky mentions an anonymous work of the fifth century Mystical Theology, attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite, a disciple of St. Paul. Lossky argues against this adscription that there is a complete silence of almost five century regarding the so-called Arepagitic writings. This anonymous author has been called the Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. In any case, Dionysius sees two possible theological ways: a) the cataphatic or positive theology, which proceeds by affirmation; and 2) the apophatic or negative theology, which proceeds by negation (25).

629

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Bulgakov distinguishes two fundamental Christian dogmas, the Christological dogma, which is understood by Orthodoxy in all the power of the elaborate realism which it received in the time of the ecumenical councils and that of the Holy Trinity, implied in faith in Christ as the Son of God. Very importantly, for Orthodoxy, faith in Christ, as a Son of God, is not a Christological doctrine, but life itself. Similarly, Benz focuses on the dogmas concerning the Trinity and the Christology or dogma of the incarnation of the divine Logos. He adds a dogma closely linked with that of the incarnation, that of the Virgin Mary as Mother of God and God-bearer. According to Benz, rather than being derived from theory, these dogmas developed out of the spontaneous religious experiences of the primitive Church. As this theologian illustrates, in the case of the dogma of the Virgin Mary, the doctrine itself reflects only the extraordinary importance that veneration of the Mother of God early acquired in the liturgy, in the devotions of the Christian communities, and in the personal worship of Orthodox believers. Furthermore, Aghiorgoussis focuses on four parts of the dogmatic tradition of the Orthodox Church: 1) Triune God; 2) creation (creation of the world, angels, mans creation, mans fall and his consequences, the Mother of God, 3) The divine plan of Salvation (Christ Incarnation and the Mystery of Salvation; Jesus Christ, the God-Man; Jesus the Prophet, the Priest, and the King; the mission of the Holy Spirit; Divine Grace; the Church of Christ; and the communion of saints); and 4) Orthodox Eschatology (partial judgment or the hour of our death and general judgment, the coming again of Christ). Moreover, Meyendorff presents a systematic plan of exposition which conforms to the content of Christian experience itself: man, created and fallen, meets Christ, accepts the action of the Spirit, and is thus introduced into communion within the Triune God (Byzantine Theology 130). He distinguishes four categories: Creation,

630

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Man, Jesus Christ, The Holy Spirit, Triune God, Sacramental Theology, the Eucharist, and the Church in the World (Byzantine Theology 129-223). Timothy Ware, in The Orthodox Church makes the following classification: God in Trinity, The human person: our creation, our vocation, our failure, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and partakers of the Divine Nature or deification. Hopko in volume 1, of The Orthodox Faith, entitled Doctrine, talks about the sources of Christian DoctrineRevelation, Tradition, the Bible, the Liturgy, the Councils, the Fathers, the Saints, the Canons, and Church Artand presents the main doctrines of the Orthodox Church by way of commentary on the Nicene Creed, as well as adding an explanation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. He calls the doctrines the symbols of faith, which delineates in the following way: Nicene Creed, Faith, God, Creation, Angels and Evil Spirits, Man, Sin, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Incarnation, Redemption, Resurrection, Ascension, Judgment, Kingdom of God, Holy Spirit, Church, Sacraments, and Eternal Life. Your Own Research As seen, Pomazansky makes a very comprehensive classification of the fundamental Orthodox dogmas. Read the above classification or find his book on the internetsee reference in Bibliographyand check how the other authors mentioned in this sectionBulgakov, Lossky, Benz, Aghiorgoussis, and Meyendorffreflect one or more than one items of the ones delineated by Pomazansky. If there are items for which you cannot find a parallelism try to discover in which part it might be included.
Activity 137: Comparing different approaches to Dogmatics

In this chapter, I will mainly discuss the topic of the deification of man or theosis. Lossky remarks that all the history of Christian dogmas unfolds around this mystical center: the possibility, the manner or the means of our union with God (The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 10). In fact the goal of theosis indeed articulates the whole Dogmatics of the Orthodox Church. All of the above theologians 631

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

deal with the deification of man. Pomazansky, for example, discusses it under God and the Salvation of Mankind, Lossky under uncreated energies, Meyendorff under Jesus Christ, as through deification the whole man participates in the whole God (Byzantine Theology 164). Ware sees men as partakers of the Divine Nature. Bulgakov relates deification with the Christological dogma and the dogma of the Trinity as it is means life in Christ and it is accomplished under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Aghiorgoussis deals with theosis under the divine plan of salvation, when he analyzes the mission of the Holy Spirit and the Divine Grace. According to Maximus the Confessor, the saints are men who have attained theosis. They have avoided the unnatural development of the soul and have turned to God achieving total unity with God through the Holy Spirit (On Theology 7.73). As stated above, mainly based on Aghiorgoussis The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church, the student will do his or her own research on the dogmas regarding the Trinity, Jesus Christ, creation the Church, and eschatology. THE DIVINE PLAN OF SALVATION: THEOSIS AND UNCREATED ENERGIES Theosis or deification of man is considered part of the dogma of the Trinity, the reason being that the mystery of man accesses the Inaccessible through the energies of the Deity. However it also is included under the Christological dogma because it is through the incarnate Logos that this divinization process is made possible, and thereby forms part of the divine plan of salvation. The word theosis ( or ) is the transliteration of the Greek word meaning deificationbeing made of God. For Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia, Christianity signifies not merely an exterior imitation of Christ through moral effort, but direct union with the living God, the total

632

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

transformation of the human person by divine grace and glorywhat the fathers termed deification or divinization (theosis, theopoiesis). (Mantzaridis, Foreword 7) Meyendorff, in Christ in Eastern Christian Thought, asserts that the patristic tradition of the Christian East considers deification at the final aim of the spiritual life, and which gives its mystical character to Byzantine spirituality (128). He contrasts this concept of mysticism with its meaning in that of the modern western languages, where the word mysticism evokes a subjectivist and emotional religious context which is in consequence unstable and indemonstrable. He continues by saying that: This is not at all what is implied in patristic literature. In fact, the union with God and the vision of light of which the Fathers speak is a reality at the same time fully objective, fully conscious, and fully personal: the dilemma between grace and free will, between divine action and human effort to which it corresponds and which it causes, does not exist for them. (128) Meyendorff is correct because through their subjective experience of knowing the Farher, the individual becomes one with the highest objective reality, namely God. This is brought about by an act of free will on the side of believers, by worshipping Him, effecting sonship with Him, and knowing God, through His Spirit. The right moral decision of men is an act of free will endowed by God to all creatures, and such a decision is in itself a religious experience. Meyendorff also explains (the italics are his): All things exists by participation in the Only Existing One, but man as a particular way in which he participates in God, different from that of all other beings. When mind chooses a right moral judgement by an act of the free will, such a decision constitutes a religious experience. He communicates with him freely, because he carries in himself the image of the Creator. Deification is precisely this free and conscious participation in the divine life, which is proper to man only. Because of that, the union with God mentioned by the Fathers never amounts to a disintegration of the human person into the divine infinite; but, on the contrary, it is the fulfilment of his free and personal destiny. Thence also springs the insistence on the necessity of a personal encounter with Christ, the consequence of which is the deification of the whole man by the anticipation of the general resurrection of the bodies. (129) The last phrase, which I have underlined, is provoking because it points out to a deification of the whole man, previous to the general resurrection of bodies. The

633

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Orthodox Church teaches that there are two judgements, one partial and the other general. In the partial one the souls of the righteous go to a place to rest (Rev. 14:3) in partial blessedness; the souls of the unrighteous ones go to the Hades in partial suffering. Both groups await the General Judgement that will decide on the final survival of certain souls that will be united with a restored, spiritualized body. As examples we know of saints like Elijah and Enoch who survived mortal death. Meyendorff does not seem to mention that in mans deification, our will progressively becomes the Fathers Will. By this process, occurring as a true, personal experience in us we are made subjects to and servants of the true kingdom. When Gods will becomes ours, when His Law is our law, there is a complete transformation of mankind as they are elevated to the utmost position of being free children of God. St. Paul says: But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life (Romans 6:22). He also says, For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), and For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant is the Lords freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christs servant. (I Corinthians 7:22) The process of divinization thus entails mens liberation from sin and the gift of free sonship with God. This complex concept was one of the most important of early Christian doctrines, and it is at the core of Orthodox mystical theology. As already mentioned, it means participating in Gods Divinity. In the process of deification, man, in his innate craving for perfection, seeks a transforming union with God, the attainment of God, and to be a partaker of the spiritual, divine nature. God has bestowed man with a divine potential to be perfect and attain godhood. According to the Fathers of the Church deification is a transformation process involving the individual, Christ, and the Holy

634

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Spirit. This process starts on earth and may continue eternally after earthly death as God is eternal and infinite. Hieromonk Damascene addresses this salvific transformation brought about through Gods grace and uncreated energies: In Orthodox salvation means not only simply changing Gods attitude, but changing ourselves and being changed by God. Salvation ultimately means deification ...entails transformation. It is being united with God ever more fully through His Grace, His Uncreated Energies, in which he is fully present. As we participate ever more fully in Gods life through His Grace, we become ever more deified, ever more in the likeness of Christ. With his Incarnation, death, and Resurrection, Christ redeemed human nature, opening the path to deification and even to the redemption of the body that will occur at the General Resurrection. According to the Orthodox Church, it is through the uncreated energies of God245 by means of the Grace of the Holy Spirit, that man is able to be deified as he ascends to the knowledge of God and become a partaker of the divine nature. It is though these energies that God communicates with man. But what does Orthodoxy understand by grace, divine grace? What is the task of the Holy Spirit in this process? Aghiorgoussis defines grace as follows: By divine grace we understand the saving and deifying energy of God, made available through Christs work, and distributed by the Holy Spirit, the source of grace and sanctification. Divine grace, the work of the Holy Spirit, is a free gift necessary for our salvation, non-coercive, which requires our cooperation (synergy). Our response to the grace of God is our works of love, which are the fruits of Gods grace working in us. We are justified by Gods grace. However, this justification is not real, unless it produces the works of righteousness. Regarding the Holy Spirit, the source of graceor defying energyand sanctification, he states: The last part of the plan of salvation (divine economy) is fulfilled by the Holy Spirit of God (economy of the Holy Spirit). The Spirit of God prepares for the coming of Christ in the Old Testament period, becomes the ointment of Christs flesh the day of the Annunciation, accompanies Christ throughout His mission on earth, and applied Christs work, both saving and deifying, to each Christian individually, through the sacramental life of the Church. Christ has achieved our salvation in an objective way, in our nature. The Spirit applies salvation and
This is a concept developed by the Fathers and systematized by St. Gregory Palamas in his defence of hesychasm (the practice of the conscious resting in God), when the Christological issue was already settled.
245

635

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

deification in a subjective way, to our persons. Divine grace, the Church, and the sacraments are the working of the Holy Spirit. As Aghiorgoussis explains, while through Christ men attain objectively the deification of their human nature as such or in general, through the Spirit men attain individually and subjectively, the deification of their persons as the Holy Spirit appropriates each person in a distinctive manner and a personal way. Christ, being the Logos, assumed human nature so we may be deified, St. Athanasius writes. As Lossky states, in the Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, for our defying union, the transformation of our corruptible and depraved nature, must produce the necessary subjective conditions: for it is in this synergy, in this cooperation of man with God, that the union is fulfilled. This subjective aspect of our union with God constitutes the way of union which is the Christian life (196). Lossky understands as objective conditions what God has given to the Church: all the means that we need for the attainment of this end (196). As noticed in Chapter 5, both the Son and the Holy Spirit, the hands of the Father for Irenaeus (Book V, Chapter 6, 1), are the main agents in mans divinization. Thus, from an Orthodox point of view, according to the teachings of the Holy Bible and the Fathers of the Church, man is able to achieve theosis because the grace of God is uncreated. Therefore, God is not only essence, as theologians in the West think. God is also energy. If He were only essence men could never approach Him and much less unite or commune with Him. In Exodus 33:20 we read: And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. In John 1:18 we read: No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. But we can also read in 2 Peter 81:34) how we may be partakers of the divine nature. According to Mantzaridis, in The Deification of Man: St Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition, the Fathers of the Church based their teachings on the

636

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

deification of man on the following premises: 1) the creation of man in the image and after the likeness of God; 2) the incarnation of the Logos of God; and 3) the strength of mans communion with God in the Holy Spirit (15). Mantzaridis gives a good summary of this key term for Orthodoxy: The Trinitarian God is the creator and restorer of mankind. Man, although fashioned in the image and after the likeness of his Creator, did not sustain his communion with him; he estranged himself and fell. This obscured the image and rendered unattainable mans supreme destiny. However, the deification of human nature through the Logos of God made flesh rendered it possible for him once more to achieve likeness with God and to be deified. (15) Man partakes of this gift through the Holy Spirit, who gives man access to the regenerative and divine work of Christ that has been accomplished once for all (Mantzaridis 15). Meyendorff explains both this divine work of Jesus and the difference between us and Him in this process of deification: The humanity assumed by the Logos, hypostatized in him, deified by his energies becomes itself the source of the divine life, because it is deified not simply by grace but because it is the Words own flesh. Here is the difference between hypostatic possession of divine life and deification by grace and participation. (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 78) Meyendorff quotes this passage by Leontius of Jerusalem, a theologian of the seventh century, in which he expresses the dynamism of salvation: Because of the organic union with God, effected in an immediate way by an intimate union on the level of the hypostasis, the wealth of deification entered the man who was the Lord in his particular [human] nature; as for the rest of mankind, the other brethren who originated from Abrahams seed, the Body of the Church, ...they only partake by way of meditation in the natural union with the man who was the Lord, and who, the first from among us, received the benefit, as the leaven of the dough, as the only Son (John 1:18), but also first born (Rom 8:29), as member of the Body, but also head (Eph 1:22) ... the only mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ our Lord. (Against the Nestorians, I, 18, col. 1768 d, bd) (78-79) Discussing the meaning of salvation, of healing and forgiveness, brought by Christthe Logos, Pelikan explains, in The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100600), that for the Greek patristic tradition, especially in its mystical form, the

637

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

final goal and result of this saving knowledge, this forgiveness, and this rescue from death was deification [] (155). He adds: The full clarification of the term deification ha to wait the resolution of the conflict over the deity of Christ; the Church could not specified what it meant to promise that man would become divine until it had specified what it meant to confess that Christ has always been divine. But even from the writings of Irenaeus, Clement, and Origen, for all the differences between them, we can conclude that the church could not regard salvation as simply a restoration of what has been lost in the first Adam, the original creation; it has to be an incorporation into what has been vouchsafed in the second Adam, a new creation. (155) For him, only if Christ was the Logos of God could this deification take place. Yet deification is no a simple restoration of what man lost in the Fall, but an incorporation in Christ, the Second Adam. In Orthodox Psychotherapy, Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos comments on this saving knowledge of God, and how we attain it with a pure heart: When a person rises from bodily knowledge to the souls knowledge and from that to spiritual knowledge, then he sees God and possesses knowledge of God, which is his salvation. Knowledge of God ... not intellectual, but existential. That is, ones whole being is filled with this knowledge of God. But in order to attain it, ones heart must have been purified, that is, the soul, nous (intellect) and heart must have been healed. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matt.5, 8) It is not an intellectual, but an existential knowledge, an experiential knowledge of God that leads man to salvation. Let us see some of the Scriptural bases of theosis that clearly speak about the possibility of man to become a partaker of the divine nature as he is indwelt by God Himself, and, then, develop how the Fathers saw it. Russell, in Partakers of the Divine Nature (2 Peter 1:4) in the Byzantine Tradition, can help us approach this complex concept through the Greek and the Byzantine Fathers: The deification of man is the characteristic Byzantine way of expressing the goal of human life. Far from implying a heretical notion of mans absorption into God, as Western writers sometimes assume, the term encapsulates a number of widely differing approaches to the doctrine of salvation. Among the Greek Fathers deification is expressed variously as filial adoption through baptism, as 638

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the attaining of likeness to God through gnosis and dispassion, as the ascent of the soul to God, as the participation of the soul in the divine attributes of immortality and incorruption, as the transformation of human nature by divine action, as the eschatological glorification of both soul and body, and as union with God through participation in the divine energies. In Byzantine writers the emphasis falls on the Pauline aspect of filial adoption and incorporation into Christ, the sacraments becoming all-important as the means by which divine life is communicated to the believer. With Palamas the chief focus of deification settles on participation in uncreated grace, which enables the human person to transcend himself and live with the life of Christ, so that he becomes uncreated through grace.(2) According to Orthodoxy, theosis is an eternal process, a continual deepening of communion between God and man. It is also a unification without fusion of the human person with the divine persons. Yet, perhaps, at times, some Church Fathers seem to suggest an ontological transformation of the whole human person as the created soul made immortal fuses with the Spirit of the Father through the personal, uncreated energies of the Trinity. Now do this preliminary activity on the concept of theosis: Activity From this introduction to the concept of theosis, with your own words, write 5 sentences that describe it for you:
Activity 138: Preliminary activity on the concept of theosis

Biblical Basis of Theosis

The mystical theology of Orthodoxy with its central theme of theosis has been profoundly imprinted by the words of the Lord in John 10: 34: Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? This verse is echoed in Psalm 82:6 Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But there are many biblical

639

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

quotes, which can also be taken as bases for theosis, that have marked the Orthodox vision on Christianity and salvation. There are threeGen. 1:26; 2 Peter 1:4, already quoted; and I John 3:2that are extensively used by deification authors: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Gen. 1:26) His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. (2 Peter 1:3-4) Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. (I John 3:2) In the Genesis passage, we can see how men were created in the image and likeness of God, but also that they are charged with ruling creation. In this passage, there is already the implication that men are like little gods, by the grace of God. Yet, in Genesis 3, the Fall of man is also narrated causing man, as the eastern Fathers teach, to lose the likeness, only retaining the image. According to G. L. Bray, in Deification, from the Fathers perspective, Christian life is best conceived as the restoration of the lost likeness to those who have been redeemed in Christ. This is a work of the Holy Spirit, who communicates to us the energies of God himself, so that we may become partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). The energies of God radiate from his essence and share its nature; but it must be understood that the deified person retains his personal identity and is not absorbed into the essence of God, which remains for ever [sic] hidden from his eyes.246 Rakestraw, in Becoming Like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis, asserts that Whether the focus is placed on the image or the likeness of God being restored, or whether one sees these terms as synonymous, the concept of the Christians

G. L. Bray, Deification, New Dictionary of Theology, ed. Sinclair B. Ferguson, David F. Wright, J. I. Packer (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1988, 189). Qtd in Rakestraw.

246

640

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

reintegration into the life of God remains central in all understandings of theosis. As commented, this reintegration is only possible thanks to the incarnation of the Logos. In the Peter text we are given the promise to participateliterally to become sharers (koinonoi)of the divine nature and escape the corruption of the world. Thus deification implies a participation in God. Moreover, according to Norman, in Deification: the Content of Athanasian Serology, for the Fathers, another clear reference to deification is I John 3:2, that exhorts to purity and echoes the theme of Christs imitation delineated in Johns Gospel (John 5:19 ff.), after having healed a man at the pool of Betsaida: Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. Jesus also says: Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works (John 14:10). The Father does not only indwelt Jesus but also men who keep the Fathers commandments: And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us (I John 3:23-24). It is love who binds men to God: And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them (John 17:26). Indeed, we do not only dwell in God, but God also dwells in His creatures and has given them a part of or share in His Spirit: Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit (1 John 4:13). Ye are of God, little

641

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. (1 John 4:4).The Father has bestowed upon us the gift of His Spirit, who is mans companion. In the painful words of Job we hear: For I am full of matter, the spirit within me constraineth me (32:21). It is also clear, as previously noted, that it is love that makes possible this dwelling: And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him (1 John 4:16). Thus, He is not far from us: Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off? (Jer 23:23). We, that do not lie in wickeness, are of God: And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness (1 John 5:19). St. Paul says Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? (I Corinthians 3:16). He also talks about the saving qualities of the indwelling Spirit: But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he that raised up Christ the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you (Romans 8:11). Referring to this Spirit, at the time of His death, Jesus says: And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost (Luke 23:46). The Latin Father, Ambrose (340-397), in On the Holy Spirit (Book II, 55), interprets this spirit as the soul: Therefore he referred the thunders to the words of the Lord, the sound of which went out into all the earth, and we understand the word spirit in this place of the soul, which He took endowed with reason and perfect; for Scripture often designates the soul of man by the word spirit, as you read: Who creates the spirit of man within him. So, too, the Lord signified His Soul by the word Spirit, when He said: Into Thy hands I commend My Spirit. The implications of this expression is intriguing. It seems clear that His body saw no corruption. But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption (Acts 1.3:37) He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption (2: 31). Jesus says to His disciples: Behold my

642

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have (Luke 24:39). But when is this Spirit bestowed upon Christ? Whose model will we follow to reply to this question? If we read John, we find that the same Jesus says the following, with Johns comments, He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified (John 7:38-39). Christ did not receive the Holy Spirit before His Baptism. Yet He was full of the Spirit upon His Baptism: And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: (Matthew 3:16) And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness. (Luke 4:1) Mysteriously, the Spirit of God is eternally (spatio-temporally transcendent) born in the divine essence, but He acts in time and space. For the Orthodox Church: Creation is the work in time of the Blessed Trinity. The world is not self-created, neither has it existed from eternity, but it is the product of the wisdom, the power, and the will of the One God in Trinity. God the Father is the prime cause of creation and God the Son and God the Holy Spirit took part in creation, God the Son perfecting creation and God the Holy Spirit vivifying creation. (The Orthodox Faith) Indeed, the Holy Spirit is the breath of life. All the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils (Job 27:3). The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life (Job 33:4). And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (Gen 2:7). God is also all-encompassing: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: all things were created by

643

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

him, and for him. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (Col 1:16-17) In the Book of Isaiah we hear: For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones (57:15). As we have seen in the Scriptures, the eternal God the Father, being all pervading, out of love, lives in us as we live in Him. He has granted us His Spirit, interpreted in Orthodoxy as the Holy Spirit, who acts upon the circuit of uncreated energies, deifying humanity. The term circuit appears in Job (22:14),thick clouds are a covering to him, that he seeth not; and he walketh in the circuit of heavenand Psalm (19:6). His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof. In these uncreated energies, the existential Father is personally and experientally present in time and space in the Spirit, that proceeds from Him and rests on the Son. For Orthodoxy, the Father is the eternal source of the Godhead, from Whom is begotten the Son eternally and also from Whom the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally. For Orthodoxy, through the Sons incarnation and His restoration and final glorification of humanity, and His spiritual power, the Spirit adopts us as sons of God. We do not unite with God as an existential being, as a divine essence, but with His divine energies. We do not partake of the essence of divinity but of His energies, though the unifying characteristic of the Deity does not distinguish between essence and energy. Knowledge of God also entails participation in the Divine and the attaining of Grace, as these bible quotes suggest: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgements, and his ways past finding out! (Roman 11: 33)

644

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:8) But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 2 (Peter 3:18) Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord. (2 Peter 1:2) For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:6) He hath said, which heard the words of God, and knew the knowledge of the most High, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open. (Numbers 24:26) There are also certain quotes related to the concept of God as a personality, the idea of God as a person/ality appears necessary as the union between man and God in His grace must be a personal communion. On this point Palamas remarks that it is an encounter of two persons, the former the humblest one; the latter the highest, a divine one. Our potential as perfecting persons is centered on the Fathers divine personality. In the book of Job, for example, we read that God is a personWill ye accept his person? will ye contend for God? (Job 13:7-8). Job also says: When men are cast down, then thou shalt say, there is lifting up; and he shall save the humble person (Job 13:7-8). God is a personality, a personal being. When we say that God is a personal being we mean that He is intelligent and free and distinct from the created universe. Personality as such expresses perfection (The Nature and Attributes of God). In contrast, mans personality expresses imperfection. In Proverb, there is a similar reference to person in this sense: It is not good to accept the person of the wicked, to overthrow the righteous in judgement (18:15). Thus a personality would be evil, with no possibility for salvation, as the divinization process also entails the progressive spiritualization of humankind, or a righteous, moral personality. Kallistos of Diokleia in Person and Personality in Orthodox Teaching, explains what the human person is The human person is the hypostatic manifestation of the human essence, the realization

645

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

of who a human being is as an individual: being, again, common in his essence but individual in his hypostasis or person, as St. Gregory Palamas affirms. Yet, in the same way as divinization must be personalas it is the deification of the individual human person, our progression also depends on our relationship and socializing with other persons: Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren (1 John 3:16). The Fathers were of the opinion that we must be imitators of Christ. In this way we are unified as persons with Christ. Jesus says: But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant (Matthew 23:11). He also states: But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve (Luke 22:26). Indeed salvation is the realization of personhood in Christ (Person and Personality in Orthodox Teaching). Furthermore, in the New Testament, Christ is referred to as a personality, as being a personal being: To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; (II Corinthians 2:10) As in the case of God the Father, Jesus personality is not of the humble type like that of man but the express image of His [Gods] person: [God] Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high: (To the Hebrews 1:3) Yet, being the primal, infinite source of everything, God is also the center of all other types of material, impersonal energies. And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven. (Deut. 4:19) And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord GOD, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day: (Amos 8:9)

646

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (Rev. 21:23) There are however other scriptural texts which provided Church Fathers and current Orthodox theologians with a basis for the doctrine of theosis. Some of them stressed Christ as the image of God and Christians as being renewed and restored in the likeness of God, while others viewed baptism as a carrier and the container of our union with Christ, Christs followers as partakers of His passion and, thus, as sharers of His glory; still others perceived our inheriting of eternal life as perpetual fellowship, a glorious body, and divine sonship with God (Rakestraw; Norman). Let us do this activity: Activity 1. Read and comment these biblical texts on the basis of what has been said on theosis: Gospels: Matthew 19:29; 13:43 (and Daniel 12:3); 8:11 (and Isaiah 25:6), 5:69 Mark 10:30 John 17: 11, 21-23 St. Pauls epistles Romans 3: 16-18; 6:35; 8:18 Philippians 3:10, 2021 I Corinthians 2:9; 15:4244, 49 II Corinthians 1:7; 4:1618; I Thessalonians 4:17,; Col. 1:15-18; 1:1820, 2:910 Eph. 3:16-19; 4:11-15. 2. Use your own words write a definition of theosis.
Activity 139: Some biblical bases of theosis

Patristic Development
As stated, the eastern Fathers of the Church interpreted the doctrine of salvation as deification. The Christians ultimate destiny and reward is to become like God. For them salvation was the acquisition of the grace of the Holy Spirit. To be saved was to be sanctified and to participate in the life of God, even to become partakers of the Divine

647

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Nature (2 Peter 1:4). The doctrine of deification, which as we will see also has a ecclesiastic and sacramental basis, was prominent in the doctrinal systems of most Eastern Fathersand also some western onesfrom Irenaeus to Palamas. Ante-Nicene (II-IV Centuries) The ante-Nicene period, which covers the Apostolic, Apologists and Antiheretical Fathers from the second to the fourth centuries can be considered as the formative period of this concept. These Fathers tend more to speak of salvation in terms of immortality and incorruption (Norman), yet they paved the way to the deification as they seem to trace this immortality and incorruption not only after death, but already on earth, a potential immortality, through imitation of God. For Clement of Rome, in his Letter to the Corinthians, there is a reward for our work of righteousness in the name of God, in whose image we were created and who must be followed with no delay, Above all, with His holy and undefiled hands He formed man, the most excellent [of His creatures], and truly great through the understanding given himthe express likeness of His own image ... We see, then, how all righteous men have been adorned with good works, and how the Lord Himself, adorning Himself with His works, rejoiced. Having therefore such an example, let us without delay accede to His will, and let us work the work of righteousness with our whole strength. (33) as we join with Him in harmony and implore, And let us therefore, conscientiously gathering together in harmony, cry to Him earnestly, as with one mouth, that we may be made partakers of His great and glorious promises. For [the Scripture] says, ye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, the things which He has prepared for those who wait for Him. (34) These glorious promises include, among other things, the immense reward of immortality: How blessed and wonderful, beloved, are the gifts of God! Life in immortality, splendour in righteousness, truth in perfect confidence, faith in assurance, self-control in holiness! (35). It is through Christ that we receive all the blessings (36).

648

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Furthermore, Clement of Rome sees, in Recognitions (Book VI, chap. VIII247), the need of baptism to attain incorruptibility: For he who is regenerated by water, having filled up the measure of good works, is made heir of Him by whom he has been regenerated in incorruption. The Syrian Ignatius of Antioch had the aim of attaining God and be of God as he escapes from the flesh. In The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans (Chap. II, entitled Do not Save Me from Martyrdom), he says: For it is not my desire to act towards you as a man-pleaser, but as pleasing God, even as also ye please Him. For neither shall I ever have such [another] opportunity of attaining to God; nor will ye, if ye shall now be silent, ever be entitled to the honour of a better work. For if ye are silent concerning me, I shall become Gods; but if you show your love to my flesh, I shall again have to run my race. In his Epistle to the Ephesians (Chap. XVII), he talks about potential immortalityor incorruptibility as rendered in different translations: For this end did the Lord suffer the ointment to be poured upon His head, that He might breathe immortality248 into His Church. Be not ye anointed with the bad odour of the doctrine of the prince of this world; let him not lead you away captive from the life which is set before you. And why are we not all prudent, since we have received the knowledge of God, which is Jesus Christ? Why do we foolishly perish, not recognising the gift which the Lord has of a truth sent to us? It is the Lord who has sent the precious gift of immortality to His Church. Ignatius also uses this term in his Epistle to the Magnesians (Chap. VI): Let nothing exist among you that may divide you; but be ye united with your bishop, and those that preside over you, as a type and evidence of your immortality.249 Although we cannot talk about theosis yetand the word is not explicitly mentioned, men are evidence of immortality or incorruptibility, one of the effects of deification.

Following the sources from which I am taking the quoted passages, the chapter numbers will appear either in Roman numbers or in regular ones. 248 Rendered as incorruption in Church History On-Line. 249 Rendered as incorruptibility in Lightfoot Lightfoot & Harmer, 1891 translation.

247

649

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

We have the first mention of and the beginning of the notion of theosis in the earlier Christian apologetic Epistle of Mathetes250 to Diognetus (Chap. X), probably written between 130-200:251 On the contrary he who takes upon himself the burden of his neighbour; he who, in whatsoever respect he may be superior, is ready to benefit another who is deficient; he who, whatsoever things he has received from God, by distributing these to the needy, becomes a god to those who receive [his benefits]: he is an imitator of God. Then thou shalt see, while still on earth, that God in the heavens rules over [the universe]; then thou shall begin to speak the mysteries of God ... As we have already seen in Clement of Rome, there are immense benefits for those who do good works for their neighbours: becoming a god to those who receive his (benefits). The author of this epistle does not exactly deal with theosis as such in the sense as understood by later Fathers, but of great importance is the fact that he says that this person is an imitator of God and as such one can see that God rules over [the universe]. In his Dialogue with Trypho (Chap. III), the apologist Justin answers Tryphos following question: What affinity, then, replied he, is there between us and God? Is the soul also divine and immortal, and a part of that very regal mind? And even as that sees God, so also is it attainable by us to conceive of the Deity in our mind, and thence to become happy? assuredly,I said. For Justin, the soul is divine and immortal, but it is not like that in its own nature, contrary to what Greek philosophers thought, and the soul of itself cannot see God. Yet it attains immortality with mans good work. In his First Apology (Chap. XHow God Is To Be Served252), he states that men by their works can be made worthy and be

Mathetes is not a proper name. It means a disciple. See Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus. Other authors give later dates of composition of this epistle. The author's name is unknown, and the date is anywhere between the Apostles and the age of Constantine (Epistle to Diognetus ). 252 In same cases, when I deem it relevant for the ongoing discourse, I have included the titles of the chapters.
251

250

650

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

delivered from corruption and suffering, and become worthy of incorruption and fellowship with Him: And we have been taught that He in the beginning did of His goodness, for mans sake, create all things out of unformed matter; and if men by their works show themselves worthy of this His design, they are deemed worthy, and so we have receivedof reigning in company with Him, being delivered from corruption and suffering. For as in the beginning He created us when we were not, so do we consider that, in like manner, those who choose what is pleasing to Him are, on account of their choice, deemed worthy of incorruption and of fellowship with Him. In a later chapter, Justin justifies the attaining of incorruption through faith in Him. and with gratitude to Him to offer thanks by invocations and hymns for our creation, and for all the means of health, and for the various qualities of the different kinds of things, and for the changes of the seasons; and to present before Him petitions for our existing again in incorruption through faith in Him. Our teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose... (Chap. XIIL) Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is the source of our knowledge of these things. Also in his Dialogue with Trypho (Chap. 124, entitled Christians are the Sons of Gods), Justin expresses our likeness with God and our being worthy of becoming gods and sons of the Highest if we follow His commandments: But as my discourse is not intended to touch on this point, but to prove to you that the Holy Ghost reproaches men because they were made like God, free from suffering and death, provided that they kept His commandments, and were deemed deserving of the name of His sons, and yet they, becoming like Adam and Eve, work out death for themselves; let the interpretation of the Psalm be held just as you wish, yet thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming gods, and of having power to become sons of the Highest; and shall be each by himself judged and condemned like Adam and Eve. The second century apologist Tatian, born in Syrian and trained in Greek Philosophy, rejects, like Justin, the Greek idea of the natural immortality of the soul in his apology for Christianity, Address to the Greeks (Oratio ad Graecos). In this work Tatian shows, in a bitter and denunciatory tone, the superiority of the Christian Faith over Greek philosophy and his deepest contempt for Greek philosophy and Greek manners (Tatian). In Oratio (Chap. XIII, entitled Theory of the Souls 651

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Immortality), Tatian argues that the soul is not immortal in itself; but it does not die if it acquires the knowledge of God: The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal. Yet it is possible for it not to die. If, indeed, it knows not the truth, it dies, and is dissolved with the body, but rises again at last at the end of the world with the body, receiving death by punishment in immortality. But, again, if it acquires the knowledge of God, it dies not, although for a time it be dissolved. In itself it is darkness, and there is nothing luminous in it. And this is the meaning of the saying, The darkness comprehendeth not the light. For the soul does not preserve the spirit, but is preserved by it, and the light comprehends the darkness. The Logos, in truth, is the light of God, but the ignorant soul is darkness. According to Tatian, after a period of darkness, the soul might enter into union with the Divine Spirit, On this account, if it continues solitary, it tends downward towards matter, and dies with the flesh; but, if it enters into union with the Divine Spirit, it is no longer helpless, but ascends to the regions whither the Spirit guides it: for the dwellingplace of the spirit is above, but the origin of the soul is from beneath. It is insightful to notice, according to Tatian, the nature of the way of ascension of the soul to the regions above as guided by the Spirit, the Holy Spirit. In Chapter XV, he talks about the seeking of the union of the soul with the Spirit once we have what we lost through the Fall: But further, it becomes us now to seek for what we once had, but have lost, to unite the soul with the Holy Spirit, and to strive after union with God... . But man alone is the image and likeness of God; and I mean by man, not one who performs actions similar to those of animals, but one who has advanced far beyond mere humanityto God Himself... . Such is the nature of mans constitution; and, if it be like a temple, God is pleased to dwell in it by the spirit, His representative ... but men, after the loss of immortality, have conquered death by submitting to death in faith; and by repentance a call has been given to them, according to the word which says, Since they were made a little lower than the angels. Tatian sees a further step: to strive after union with God. This other second-century apologist, Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, made a significant advance. In his only extant writing, Ad Autolychum, an apology for Christianity, he states that man was made of a middle nature, like Paradise itself, and

652

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

capable of maturing, perfecting his nature and even being declared a god and ascend to the possession of immortality: And God transferred him from the earth, out of which he had been produced, into Paradise, giving him means of advancement, in order that, maturing and becoming perfect, and being even declared a god, he might thus ascend into heaven in possession of immortality. For man had been made a middle nature, neither wholly mortal, nor altogether immortal, but capable of either; so also the place, Paradise, was made in respect of beauty intermediate between earth and heaven. (Chap. XXIV) He remarks that man was not made immortal; otherwise He would have made him God: But some one will say to us, Was man made by nature mortal? Certainly not. Was he, then, immortal? Neither do we affirm this. But one will say, Was he, then, nothing? Not even this hits the mark. He was by nature neither mortal nor immortal. For if He had made Him immortal from the beginning, He would have made Him God. (XXVII) But man was bestowed a free will and his disobeying of Gods commandment will bring death upon himself while, on the contrary, his obeying Gods commandments will procure him life everlasting and incorruption: For God made man free, and with power over himself. That, then, which man brought upon himself through carelessness and disobedience, this God now vouchsafes to him as a gift through His own philanthropy and pity, when men obey Him. For as man, disobeying, drew death upon himself; so, obeying the will of God, he who desires is able to procure for himself life everlasting. For God has given us a law and holy commandments; and every one who keeps these can be saved, and, obtaining the resurrection, can inherit incorruption. (XXVII) In Against Heresies (Book V, Chap. 5, 3), written in the last decades of the second century, Irenaeus (ca. 130-202 ) also talks about incorruptibility and eternity: Now these words shall be appropriately said at the time when this mortal and corruptible flesh, which is subject to death, which also is pressed down by a certain dominion of death, rising up into life, shall put on incorruption and immortality. For then, indeed, shall death be truly vanquished, when that flesh which is held down by it shall go forth from under its dominion. It is again through the work of the Lord that man becomes immortal and uncorrupted: Now its transformation [takes place thus], that while it is mortal and corruptible, it becomes immortal and incorruptible, not after its own proper substance, but 653

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

after the mighty working of the Lord, who is able to invest the mortal with immortality, and the corruptible with incorruption. And therefore he says, that mortality may be swallowed up of life. He who has perfected us for this very thing is God, who also has given unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Irenaeus also writes: Since the Lord thus has redeemed us through His own blood, giving His soul for our souls, and His flesh for our flesh, and has also poured out the Spirit of the Father for the union and communion of God and man, imparting indeed God to men by means of the Spirit, and, on the other hand, attaching man to God by His own incarnation, and bestowing upon us at His coming immortality durably and truly, by means of communion with Godall the doctrines of the heretics fall to ruin. (Book V, Chap. I, 1) This first systematic theologian of the Christian Church already closely relates Christs incarnation with human redemption, the Holy Spirit, immortality, and communion with God. According to Irenaeus, it is through Jesus Christ and His bestowal of the Spirit of the Father that we can achieve this union and communion with God. Irenaeus clarifies this fact: For who else is there who can reign uninterruptedly over the house of Jacob for ever, except Jesus Christ our Lord, the Son of the Most High God, who promised by the law and the prophets that He would make His salvation visible to all flesh; so that He would become the Son of man for this purpose, that man also might become the son of God?(Book III, Chap. X, 2). Jesus Christ, the Son of the Most High God, would become the Son of man with the purpose that man might become the son of God. Additionally, Irenaeus, in Adversus Heresies emphasizes the conjoint work of the Word and the Holy Spirit on mans salvation by modelling the whole man, soul and body, in Gods likeness (Book V, Chap. 6). He also asserts, as Tatian does, which it is the soul which receives the Spirit of the Father: Now God shall be glorified in His handiwork, fitting it so as to be conformable to, and modelled after, His own Son. For by the hands of the Father, that is, by the Son and the Holy Spirit, man, and not [merely] a part of man, was made in the likeness of God. Now the soul and the spirit are certainly a part of the man, but certainly not the man; for the perfect man consists in the commingling and the union of the soul receiving the spirit of the Father, and the admixture of that fleshly nature which was moulded after the image of God. (Book V, Chapter 6, 1) 654

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

It is rather puzzlingly that Irenaeus seems to differentiate between the Spirit of the Father and the Holy Spirit. He also says that man without flesh is (only) spirit, the Spirit of God: For if any one take away the substance of flesh, that is, of the handiwork [of God], and understand that which is purely spiritual, such then would not be a spiritual man but would be the spirit of a man, or the Spirit of God. (Book V, Chapter 6, 1) For Irenaeus, the three main constituents of the perfected, complete manspirit, soul, and bodywill be reintegrated and united in the future coming of Jesus: And for this cause does the apostle, explaining himself, make it clear that the saved man is a complete man as well as a spiritual man; saying thus in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, Now the God of peace sanctify you perfect (perfectos); and may your spirit, and soul, and body be preserved whole without complaint to the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now what was his object in praying that these threethat is, soul, body, and spiritmight be preserved to the coming of the Lord, unless he was aware of the [future] reintegration and union of the three, and [that they should be heirs of] one and the same salvation? For this cause also he declares that those are the perfect who present unto the Lord the three [component parts] without offence. Those, then, are the perfect who have had the Spirit of God remaining in them, and have preserved their souls and bodies blameless, holding fast the faith of God, that is, that faith which is [directed] towards God, and maintaining righteous dealings with respect to their neighbours. (Book V, Chap. 6, 1) For him, the saved man is a complete man as well as a spiritual man. The blameless, faithful man is saved in his own nature, thus entailing incorruptibility of body. One wonders how it is possible that the Infinite Holy Spirit can be one of these thee elements which could be reintegratedperhaps indicating the birth of a renewed inward man (II Corinthians 4:16), a man renewed in the spirit of his mind (Ephesians 4:23)in the coming of the Lord? Upon reading this chapter 6 of Book V, one is left with the impression that the spirit indwelling in man is the Spirit of the Fathera part of him sent to indwell in all of us, and that His union with the nature of man, is implemented by the incarnated Word and the Holy Spirit, Gods handiwork. As Norman states, Irenaeus doctrine on the Incarnation was a means of raising man to the level of

655

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

divinity, yet he remained cautious in his vocabulary and never actually used the word . It seems to have been Clement of Alexandria (died about 215), head of the catechetical school of Alexandria, the first to use the verb theopeeos () literally meaning, as already suggested, to make God, to be made divine, and his theology has been described as a theology of deification. Clement has an unreservedly use of this term in his three great works: The Miscellanies or Stromata, The Instructor or Paedagogus, and the Exhortation to the Heathen. In The Stromata (Chap. 7, 10), that emphasizes the superiority of revelation over philosophy, Clement sees in men a possibility of perfection that, through Christs redemption, can make them sit on thrones with the other gods: After which redemption the reward and the honours are assigned to those who have become perfect; when they have got done with purification, and ceased from all service, though it be holy service, and among saints. Then become pure in heart, and near to the Lord, there awaits them restoration to everlasting contemplation; and they are called by the appellation of gods, being destined to sit on thrones with the other gods that have been first put in their places by the Saviour. In Paedogogus (Chap. XII), the aim of which is to make of ordinary Christians instructed Christians by following a disciplined life, Clement talks about humanity, in contrast to Christ, as being a mere image of God: And, in truth, Christ became the perfect realization of what God spake; and the rest of humanity is conceived as being created merely in His image. And, as children of the good Father, we have been deified and can attain eternity of beatitude. But let us, O children of the good Fathernurslings of the good Instructor fulfil the Fathers will, listen to the Word, and take on the impress of the truly saving life of our Saviour; and meditating on the heavenly mode of life according to which we have been deified, let us anoint ourselves with the perennial immortal bloom of gladnessthat ointment of sweet fragrance having a clear example of immortality in the walk and conversation of the Lord; and following the footsteps of God, to whom alone it belongs to consider, and whose care it is to see to, the way and manner in which the life of men may be

656

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

made more healthy. Besides, He makes preparation for a self-sufficing mode of life, for simplicity, and for girding up our loins, and for free and unimpeded readiness of our journey; in order to the attainment of an eternity of beatitude, teaching each one of us to be his own storehouse. In Exhortation to the Heathen (Chapter 1), the object of which is to win pagans to the Christian faith, Clement clearly states: yea, I say, the Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God. He also talks about the energies of the Lord, our Teacher, through which the whole world has become the domain of the Word: For if we have as our teacher Him that filled the universe with His holy energies in creation, salvation, beneficence, legislation, prophecy, teaching, we have the Teacher from whom all instruction comes; and the whole world, with Athens and Greece, has already become the domain of the Word (Chap. 11). He emphasizes, as many Church Fathers do, the divine love of God for His creatures, through which the Divine Word, bursts forth the soul into flame, The heavenly and truly divine love comes to men thus, when in the soul itself the spark of true goodness, kindled in the soul by the Divine Word, is able to burst forth into flame; and, what is of the highest importance, salvation runs parallel with sincere willingnesschoice and life being, so to speak, yoked together. Wherefore this exhortation of the truth alone, like the most faithful of our friends, abides with us till our last breath, and is to the whole and perfect spirit of the soul the kind attendant on our ascent to heaven. (Chap. 11) and attends mans ascent to heaven. For Clement of Alexandria, it is Christ, the Word of Truth who regenerates man, who builds up the temple of God in men, that He may cause God to take up His abode in men (Chap.11). Paraphrasing Gross, Norman summarizes Clements view of deification: Although Clement is one of the most Hellenized of all the Christian Fathers, his view of deification retains basic differences from that of paganism. He never loses sight of the metaphysical distance between God and man, and differentiates between our sonship by adoption and that of the Logos by nature. Despite his description of the perfected souls immediate ascent to God at the death of the body, full deification required a bodily resurrection.

657

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

On the one hand, man attains sonship by adaptation while the Logos has sonship by nature; on the other hand, full deification requires the resurrection of the body, which as mentioned above, occurs at the General Judgment. Hippolytus of Rome (d. about 236), in Refutation of All Heresies (Book X, Chap. XXIX), teaches that man mayest dwell in expectation of also receiving what the Father has granted unto this Son and holds that to be worthy of deification he must obey the Logos who has created him: Thou hast the example of the Logos. His will, however, was, that you should be a man, and He has made thee a man. But if thou art desirous of also becoming a god, obey Him that has created thee, and resist not now, in order that, being found faithful in that which is small, you may be enabled to have entrusted to you also that which is great. (Chap. XXIX) Origen was more reticent to use the deification concept than Clement of Alexandria, but was strongly influenced by Athanasius. Yet, he was the first Father to quote 2 Peter 1:4. (Russell). In De Principiis (31), he states that by imitating Christ we are made partakers of the divine nature: For on this account is Christ proposed as an example to all believers, because as He always, even before he knew evil at all, selected the good, and loved righteousness, and hated iniquity, and therefore God anointed Him with the oil of gladness; so also ought each one, after a lapse or sin, to cleanse himself from his stains, making Him his example, and, taking Him as the guide of his journey, enter upon the steep way of virtue, that so perchance by this means, as far as possible we may, by imitating Him, be made partakers of the divine nature. according to the words of Scripture: He that saith that he believeth in Christ, ought so to walk, as He also walked. In On Prayer (Chap. 27, 13) Origen takes the petition of the Lords prayer for daily bread to mean that those nourished by God the Logos would thereby be made divine (Pelikan 155). For Origen, it is this bread from heaven that makes us become in the Creators likeness and causes us to live unto eternity. He says: And my Father, He says, gives you the true bread from heaven, for the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world. It is true bread that nourishes the true man who is made in Gods image, and he that has been nourished by it also becomes in the Creators likeness... . He says: I am the bread of life: he that comes unto me shall not hunger, and he that believes on me 658

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

shall not thirst; and shortly after: I am the living bread that is come down from heaven: if anyone eat of this bread he shall live unto eternity ... But while that is indeed so and while there is such diversity among foods, the needful bread, for which we ought to pray in order to be counted worthy of it, and, being nourished by the Word that was God with God in the beginning to be made divine God, is one and transcends all the foods mentioned. (27,13) According to Origen, who believed in the pre-existence of the souls and the eternal generation of the subordinate Logos, full likeness to God requires the attaining of perfection. In De Principiis (Book III, Chap.6, 1), he says: Now the expression, In the image of God created He him, without any mention of the word likeness, conveys no other meaning than this, that man received the dignity of Gods image at his first creation; but that the perfection of his likeness has been reserved for the consummation,namely, that he might acquire it for himself by the exercise of his own diligence in the imitation of God, the possibility of attaining to perfection being granted him at the beginning through the dignity of the divine image, and the perfect realization of the divine likeness being reached in the end by the fulfilment of the (necessary) works. It is this image that incites man to crave for perfection. It is through Christ, whose divine and human nature joined for that purpose, that we might rise to be divine through Christ. This is expressed in Contra Celsius (Book 3, Chap. XVIII): But both Jesus Himself and His disciples desired that His followers should believe not merely in His Godhead and miracles, as if He had not also been a partaker of human nature, and had assumed the human flesh which lusteth against the Spirit; but they saw also that the power which had descended into human nature, and into the midst of human miseries, and which had assumed a human soul and body, contributed through faith, along with its divine elements, to the salvation of believers, when they see that from Him there began the union of the divine with the human nature, in order that the human, by communion with the divine, might rise to be divine, not in Jesus alone, but in all those who not only believe, but enter upon the life which Jesus taught, and which elevates to friendship with God and communion with Him every one who lives according to the precepts of Jesus. He continues by saying in the same work: And yet let those who make this charge understand that He whom we regard and believe to have been from the beginning God, and the Son of God, is the very Logos, and the very Wisdom, and the very Truth; and with respect to His mortal body, and the human soul which it contained, we assert that not by their communion merely with Him, but by their unity and intermixture, they received

659

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the highest powers, and after participating in His divinity, were changed into God. (Contra Celsius, Book 3, Chap. XLI) By participating in the Sons divinity they were changed into God. Like Athanasius, Origen believes that it was the human nature of Jesus which was thus deified; the Logos was not affected (Norman). The nature of man is corrupted but by reason of him we are delivered from corruption: For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope; because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God (Contra Celsius, Book 5, Chap. XIII). Deification thus transcends the corruptibility of human nature: Therefore things which are done by God, although they may be, or may appear to some to be incredible, are not contrary to nature. And if we must press the force of words, we would say that, in comparison with what is generally understood as nature, there are certain things which are beyond its power, which God could at any time do; as, e.g., in raising man above the level of human nature, and causing him to pass into a better and more divine condition, and preserving him in the same, so long as he who is the object of His care shows by his actions that he desires (the continuance of His help). (Book 5, Chap. 23) It is through the imitation of Christ and the contemplation of God that the Spirit takes abode in the soulas Irenaeus and Tatian also teach: And every one who imitates Him according to his ability, does by this very endeavour raise a statue according to the image of the Creator for in the contemplation of God with a pure heart they become imitators of Him. And, in general, we see that all Christians strive to raise altars and statues as we have described them and these not of a lifeless and senseless kind and not to receive greedy spirits intent upon lifeless things, but to be filled with the Spirit of God who dwells in the images of virtue of which we have spoken, and takes His abode in the soul which is conformed to the image of the Creator. (Book VIII, Chap. XVIII) Yet, as we read in De Principiis (Book 2, Chap. 2, entitled On the Perpetuity of Bodily Nature), Origen does not formulate a mere revivification of the flesh preserved from further corruption, but a new, purer spiritual body which had little in common with

660

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the earthly corpse, and seems to become progressively more ethereal (Norman). He says: As we have remarked above, therefore, that material substance of this world, possessing a nature admitting of all possible transformations, is, when dragged down to beings of a lower order, moulded into the crasser and more solid condition of a body, so as to distinguish those visible and varying forms of the world; but when it becomes the servant of more perfect and more blessed beings, it shines in the splendour of celestial bodies, and adorns either the angels of God or the sons of the resurrection with the clothing of a spiritual body, out of all which will be filled up the diverse and varying state of the one world. Also in this work, in a chapter entitled On the end of the World, Origen describes this spiritual bodyrefined, glorious: And now, as we find the apostle making mention of a spiritual body, let us inquire, to the best of our ability, what idea we are to form of such a thing. So far, then, as our understanding can grasp it, we consider a spiritual body to be of such a nature as ought to be inhabited not only by all holy and perfect souls, but also by all those creatures which will be liberated from the slavery of corruption. Respecting the body also, the apostle has said, We have a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens, i.e., in the mansions of the blessed. And from this statement we may form a conjecture, how pure, how refined, and how glorious are the qualities of that body, if we compare it with those which, although they are celestial bodies, and of most brilliant splendour, were nevertheless made with hands, and are visible to our sight. But of that body it is said, that it is a house not made with hands, but eternal in the heavens. (Book 3, Chap. VI, 4) It was Origens focus on contemplationas noticed abovewhat made him so influential for generations of later mystics, including Nyssa and Pseudo-Dionysius, whose concept of deification shows its Origenistic ancestry. Activity Read the comments and the quoted passages, and, briefly in your own words, summarize the ideas of the Ante-Nice Fathers studied above: Clement of Rome:
Activity 140: Theosis and Ante-Nicene Fathers

The Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers (IV-V) 661

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

The Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers further developed the concept of theosis. As noted, within the fourth and fifth centuries the first four ecumenical councilsNicea (325), Constantinople I (381), Ephesus (431), and Chalcedon (451)the dogmas of the Trinity and Christs divinity and full humanity were defined. This period, called the Golden Age of the Fathers, was crucial for the development of this concept. Norman says that, the concept of deification is closely tied to two classic problems of the Patristic period of doctrinal developmentthe theology of Nicea, developed by Athanasius, and the Christology leading to Chalcedon, contained especially in the writings of the Cappadocians and Cyril of Alexandria. Between the Councils of Nicea and Ephesus there was a series of Fathers of the Church whose writings shaped Christology more than any other factor in the history of the Church. The Council of Nicea, against Arius, clarified, in a manner greatly influenced by Athanasius, the divine nature of the Saviour. This concept is central in Athanasius soteriology or study of salvation. Furthermore, the Council of Ephesus defined Christs divine personality against the position of the Nestorians who emphasized the human nature of Jesus at the expense of the divine. Moreover, the Council of Chalcedon asserted the Orthodox Catholic doctrine regarding the nature and person of Jesus against the heresy of Eutyches253 and the Monophysites, who rejected the orthodox idea of the two natures of Christ. This Council declared that, contrary to the view taken by Eutychianism and Monophysitism, the second Person of the Trinity has two distinct naturesone divine and one human. It was also proclaimed that these

Eutyches tenet was one nature. This heresy was the opposite error to the one committed by Nestorius, who taught a double personality or a twofold being in Christ and was condemned in the Council of Ephesus, held in 431. Eutyches, in contrast, emphasized the unity in Christ and to exhibit the God-man, not as two beings but as one. The resulted Christ had only one personality but one nature. The Monophysitic error claimed the authority of St. Cyril, but only through a misinterpretation of some expressions of the great Alexandrine teacher (Council of Chalcedon).

253

662

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

two natures exist inseparably in one person. This difference was a major factor in the Monophysite schism that divided the East for centuries. The fourth-century bishop defender of the divinity of Jesus Christ against the Arian Heresy, Athanasius of Alexandria (ca. 298373), like many of his pre-Nicean predecessors, especially Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen, dealt with deification. Norman says regarding him: To understand the roots of the doctrine of deification for Athanasius, it is necessary to examine both Hellenistic and Hebrew thought, as well as the development of the concept in early Christianity. By the fourth century the interrelationship between Christian doctrine and classical culture had become quite complex, and there is no clear-cut line of ancestry connecting - in the writings of the Bishop of Alexandria to Homer or Plato on the one hand, or to Moses and Jesus on the other. He also states: The doctrine that mans ultimate destiny and fulfilment is to become like God forms the heart of Christianity for Athanasius. Deification is the focus of both his anthropology and theology, which he sums up in the famous catch-phrase , : He (God) became man in order that we might be made God. As noticed, the development of this idea was sharpened by the Arian conflict, since as Rusch asserts, in The Trinitarian Controversy. Sources of Early Christian Thought, For Arius, Jesus ... becomes God only in the way that every saint may be deified (17).254 In his Letter 60, to Adelphius, Athanasius makes his famous statement that the Son of God became man that we might deify us in Himself: For the Flesh did not diminish the glory of the Word; far be the thought: on the contrary, it was glorified by Him. Nor, because the Son that was in the form of God took upon Him the form of a servant was He deprived of His Godhead. On the contrary, He is thus become the Deliverer of all flesh and of all creation. And if God sent His Son brought forth from a woman, the fact causes us no shame but contrariwise glory and great grace. For He has become Man, that He might deify us in Himself.
254

Qtd. in Norman.

663

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Similarly, in his apologetic work, On the Incarnation of the Word (54, 3), Athanasius writes: The Word Incarnate, as is the case with the Invisible God, is known to us by His works. By them we recognise His deifying mission ... For He was made man that we might be made God; and He manifested Himself by a body that we might receive the idea of the unseen Father; and He endured the insolence of men that we might inherit immortality. In Against the Heathen (Part II, 30), entitled The soul of man, being intellectual, can know God of itself, if it be true to its own nature, Athanasius proclaims the way of truth, which is in us, to reach the real and true God. He bases himself in Luke 17:21 The kingdom of God is within you: The tenets we have been speaking of have been proved to be nothing more than a false guide for life; but the way of truth will aim at reaching the real and true God. But for its knowledge and accurate comprehension, there is need of none other save of ourselves. Neither as God Himself is above all, is the road to Him afar off or outside ourselves, but it is in us and it is possible to find it from ourselves, in the first instance, as Moses also taught, when he said: The word of faith is within thy heart. Which very thing the Saviour declared and confirmed, when He said: The kingdom of God is within you. For having in ourselves faith, and the kingdom of God, we shall be able quickly to see and perceive the King of the Universe, the saving Word of the Father. Athanasius touches a key point. God, being Truth, desires men to know Himto truly know the Truth. Truth is the foundation of the Kingdom of God inside us. It indeed sustains the whole creation. He quotes a passage from Luke in Vita Antonii or Life of Anthony (20), where he states: But fear not to hear of virtue, nor be astonished at the name. For it is not far from us, nor is it without ourselves, but it is within us, and is easy if only we are willing. That they may get knowledge, the Greeks live abroad and cross the sea, but we have no need to depart from home for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, nor to cross the sea for the sake of virtue. For the Lord aforetime hath said, The kingdom of heaven is within you. Virtue is not far, but within us, as the kingdom of heaven is. The words of Athanasius are extraordinary because he is referring to an indwelling Father who guides men. He, the Father, is not so far away. He knows us as we crave to know him.

664

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Moreover, in De Decretiis (Chap. 5, 11), Athanasius distinguishes between essence and power. The Lord is of the essence of the Father and yet he says: Again, when they called God, Lord of the powers, they said not this as if the Word was one of those powers, but because while He is Father of the Son, He is Lord of the powers which through the Son have come to be. Athanasius also clarifies another important idea. As we were formed as the image of the image of God, which is the Logos, and thus we partake of God, there is a difference between the Son and ourselves. In De Synodis (Part III, 51, entitled On the Symbols of the Essence and Coessential), he further says: And again, if, as we have said before, the Son is not such by participation, but, while all things originated have by participation in the grace of God, He is the Fathers Wisdom and Word of which all things partake, it follows that He, being the deifying and enlightening power of the Father, in which all things are deified and quickened, is not alien in essence from the Father, but coessential. For by partaking of Him, we partake of the Father; because that the Word is the Fathers own. While we cannot participate in the essence of God and have to search for Him by means of His uncreated energies, the Son is able to do so as He is coessential.

Troparion Tone 3
O Hierarch Athanasius, thou wast a pillar of Orthodoxy/ supporting the Church with divine doctrines;/ for thou didst proclaim the Son to be of one essence with the Father,/ and didst put Arius to shame./ O righteous Father, entreat Christ our God to grant us His great mercy.

Kontakion Tone 2
Thou didst plant the dogmas of Orthodoxy/ and cut out the thorns of false doctrine;/ thou didst water the seeds of Faith with the rain of the Spirit, O righteous Father./ Therefore we call thee blessed. (St. Athanasius Byzantine Catholic Mission) Table 75: Troparion and Kontakion to Athanasius

Athanasius is known as the Father of orthodoxy and the theological center of the Nicene age. His teaching that the Incarnation of the Word divinized human flesh, and thereby making it possible for men to become gods, is central to Orthodoxy.

665

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Although not a Greek Father, it is relevant to quote the opinion about deification of the Latin theologian Hilary of Poitiers (ca. 315-367), a contemporary of Athanasius and a leader in the West in the fight against Arianism. Hilary of Poitiers, called the Athanasius of the West, while dealing with Incarnation and defending the double nature of Christ, writes On the Trinity (Book IX, 4-5) that: The assumption of our nature was no advancement for God, but His willingness to lower Himself is our promotion, for He did not resign His divinity but conferred divinity on man. The Only-begotten God, therefore, when He was born man of the Virgin, and in the fullness of time was about in His own person to raise humanity to divinity, always maintained this form of the Gospel teaching. He taught, namely, to believe Him the Son of God, and exhorted to preach Him the Son of Man; man saying and doing all that belongs to God; God saying and doing all that belongs to man. Yet never did He speak without signifying by the twofold aspect of these very utterances both His manhood and His divinity. Without resigning His divinity, but lowering Himself, the Son conferred divinity on man. Hilary of Poitiers words have an echo of Athanasius concept of divinization: man becoming God through the Sons incarnation: But the Incarnation is summed up in this, that the whole Son, that is, His manhood as well as His divinity, was permitted by the Fathers gracious favour to continue in the unity of the Fathers nature, and retained not only the powers of the divine nature, but also that natures self. For the object to be gained was that man might become God. But the assumed manhood could not in any wise abide in the unity of God, unless, through unity with God, it attained to unity with the nature of God. (Book IX, 38) The Cappadocians also addressed the doctrine of the deification, Russell, in Partakers of the Divine Nature talks, however, about the difficulties they had with 2 Peter 1:4: The Cappadocians all make use of the doctrine of deification but clearly find 2 Peter 1:4 difficult to accommodate, for they avoid quoting it. The reason for this is to be sought largely in the apophatic nature of their theology. In Basils view, when men contemplate God, they look up into an incomprehensible beauty. They merely become like God through imitating his moral excellence, the term gods being used either metaphorically or with reference to mans eschatological state.

666

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Furthermore, for Norman, the Cappadocian Fathers continued many of the insights and ideas of Athanasius. St. Basil of Caesarea (330-379), although he did not elaborate on the concept of deification, defended mans likeness to God, a heavenly citizenship, an abiding in God: Hence comes foreknowledge of the future, understanding of mysteries, apprehension of what is hidden, distribution of good gifts, the heavenly citizenship, a place in the chorus of angels, joy without end, abiding in God, the being made like to God, and, highest of all, the being made God. Such, then, to instance a few out of many, are the conceptions concerning the Holy Spirit, which we have been taught to hold concerning His greatness, His dignity, and His operations, by the oracles of the Spirit themselves. (De Spiritu Sancto, Chap. IX) The term operations is equivalent to energies. In his Letter 234, Basil clearly distinguishes between essence, which we cannot approach, and operations or power, The operations are various, and tile essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His operations, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His operations come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach... . What of the Father did the Only-begotten Son declare? His essence or His power? If His power, we know so much as He declared to us. If His essence, tell me where He said that His essence was the being unbegotten? ...We know God from His power. We, therefore, believe in Him who is known, and we worship Him who is believed in. and considers faith sufficient to know that God exists. With faith, it is possible to comprehend that the essence exists: We say that we know the greatness of God, His power, His wisdom, His goodness, His providence over us, and the justness of His judgment; but not His very essence... . I do know that He exists; what His essence is, I look at as beyond intelligence. How then am I saved? Through faith. It is faith sufficient to know that God exists, without knowing what He is; and He is a rewarder of them that seek Him. So knowledge of the divine essence involves perception of His incomprehensibility, and the object of our worship is not that of which we comprehend the essence, but of which we comprehend that the essence exists. (Letter 234) Basil the Great also comments on the type of union existing between the soul and the Spirit, and answers a question I formulated regarding the union of an infinite Spirit with the soul, where He dwells: by mans withdrawal of the passions and his further purification: 667

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Now the Spirit is not brought into intimate association with the soul by local approximation. How indeed could there be a corporeal approach to the incorporeal? This association results from the withdrawal of the passions which, coming afterwards gradually on the soul from its friendship to the flesh, have alienated it from its close relationship with God. Only then after a man is purified from the shame whose stain he took through his wickedness, and has come back again to his natural beauty, and as it were cleaning the Royal Image and restoring its ancient form, only thus is it possible for him to draw near to the Paraclete. And He, like the sun, will by the aid of thy purified eye show thee in Himself the image of the invisible, and in the blessed spectacle of the image thou shalt behold the unspeakable beauty of the archetype. (On the Spirit, Chap. IX, 23) It is the same Spirit, like the sun, who aids in the perfecting of man in the image of God: And He, like the sun, will by the aid of thy purified eye show thee in Himself the image of the invisible, and in the blessed spectacle of the image thou shalt behold the unspeakable beauty of the archetype. Through His aid hearts are lifted up, the weak are held by the hand, and they who are advancing are brought to perfection. Shining upon those that are cleansed from every spot, He makes them spiritual by fellowship with Himself. Just as when a sunbeam falls on bright and transparent bodies, they themselves become brilliant too, and shed forth a fresh brightness from themselves, so souls wherein the Spirit dwells, illuminated by the Spirit, themselves become spiritual, and send forth their grace to others. (On the Spirit, Chap. IX, 23) And it is through baptism that we are made partakers of the grace of Christ and made children of light: Through the Holy Spirit comes our restoration to paradise, our ascension into the kingdom of heaven, our return to the adoption of sons, our liberty to call God our Father, our being made partakers of the grace of Christ, our being called children of light, our sharing in eternal glory, and, in a word, our being brought into a state of all fulness of blessing, both in this world and in the world to come, of all the good gifts that are in store for us, by promise hereof, through faith, beholding the reflection of their grace as though they were already present, we await the full enjoyment. (On the Spirit, Chap. XV, 36) Furthermore, Basil, in his Letter 52, defines the source of this light: For after saying that the Son was light of light, and begotten of tile substance of tile Fat her, but was not made, they went on to add the homoousion, thereby showing that whatever proportion of light any one would attribute in the case of the Father will obtain also in that of the Son. For very light in relation to very light, according to the actual sense of light, will have no variation. Since then the Father is light without beginning, and the Son begotten light, but each of Them light and light; they rightly said of one substance, in order to set forth the equal dignity of the nature. (Letter 52)

668

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

It is a light that comes from the Lord, and the energies usually associated with it. Gregory of Nyssa, in Against Praxeas (Chap. 13), also uses the expression children of light: For it was only right that Christians should shine in the world as children of light, adoring and invoking Him who is the One God and Lord as the light of the world. And like Basil, he refers to the operations or energies of God. In De Beatitudinibus (Chap. VI), Nyssa says: He who is invisible by nature becomes visible in the energies.255 What we know of God is His energies or movement. Energies are the divine operations of Trinitarian origin. With Gregory of Nyssa, one of the fathers of mysticism, mysticism and deification join hands. He holds that each person possesses the image of God, and thus each person is able to know God. We read in Against Eunomius (Book I, 30): like things are to be known by like signs. But in order to know God, each person must undertake a never-ending spiritual journey in search of Him. The travellers search never ends because God is always transcendent and this person must ascent to newer and newer levels of perfection, on each of them acquiring more grace. In Life of Moses, he writes: The soul that looks up towards God, and conceives that good desire for His eternal beauty, constantly experiences an ever new yearning for that which lies ahead, and her desire is never given its full satisfaction. Hence she never ceases to stretch herself forth to those things that are before, ever passing from her present stage to enter more deeply into the interior, into the stage which lies ahead. And so at each point she judges each great marvelous grace to be inferior to what is yet to come, because each newly won grace always seems to be more beautiful than those she has previously enjoyed. (44, 404)256 There is a perpetual ascent towards the immovable God that is motivated by mans desire, a craving for Gods eternal beauty. Therefore, according to Gregory, we can never achieve ultimate unity with the Divinity, but simply continually stretch towards it.

255

256

Qtd. in Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Christian Thought, 144. Qtd. in Luminous Darkness.

669

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Referring to participation in the Good, in On the Soul and the Resurrection, Nyssa talks about a stage of enjoyment that takes the place of desire: Whoever passes his time in darkness, he it is who will be under the influence of a desire for the light; but whenever he comes into the light, then enjoyment takes the place of desire, and the power to enjoy renders desire useless and out of date. It will therefore be no detriment to our participation in the Good, that the soul should be free from such emotions, and turning back upon herself should know herself accurately what her actual nature is, and should behold the Original Beauty reflected in the mirror and in the figure of her own beauty. For truly herein consists the real assimilation to the Divine; viz. in making our own life in some degree a copy of the Supreme Being. But the soul will only see her true nature The Original Beautyreflected in a mirror. Likewise, in Infants Early Deaths, Nyssa holds that man being made in the image of God can partake of God. He understands by partaking the contemplation of God. The vision of God is the life of the soul, thus ignorance of the soul of the true good entails her ceasing of life, a not partaking of God: The eye enjoys the light by virtue of having light within itself to seize its kindred light, and the finger or any other limb cannot effect the act of vision because none of this natural light is organized in any of them. The same necessity requires that in our partaking of God there should be some kinship in the constitution of the partaker with that which is partaken of. Therefore, as the Scripture says, man was made in the image of God; that like, I take it, might be able to see like; and to see God is, as was said above, the life of the soul. But seeing that ignorance of the true good is like a mist that obscures the visual keenness of the soul, and that when that mist grows denser a cloud is formed so thick that Truths ray cannot pierce through these depths of ignorance, it follows further that with the total deprivation of the light the souls life ceases altogether; for we have said that the real life of the soul is acted out in partaking of the Good; but when ignorance hinders this apprehension of God, the soul which thus ceases to partake of God, ceases also to live. Gregory of Nyssa, in spite of the Platonizing tendencies of his thought, stands otherwise for the same view of the Eucharist as: a mystery of mans participation in the body of Christ, the seed of immortality, through His grace. In Catechetical Oration 37,257 we read:

257

Qtd. in Meyenderoff, Byzantine Theology, 201.

670

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

By dispensation of His grace, He disseminates Himself in every believer through that flesh, whose existence comes from bread and wine, blending Himself with the bodies of believers to secure that by this union with the Immortal man, too, may be a sharer in incorruption. He gives these gifts by virtue of the benediction through which He trans-elements [metastoi-cheisis] the natural quality of these visible things to that immortal thing. As for Basil, Nyssa emphasizes the restoration of humanity through resurrection and immortality. Russell rightly holds that Nyssa, Makes frequent use of the language of participation, while avoiding that of deification. But the Christian does not participate in the nature of God. It is the attributes or operations of God in which he participates. The most Gregory will say is that the Christian imitates the nature of God. Russell quotes a passage from Nyssas On What it is to Call Oneself a Christian on that respect: if man was originally a likeness of God, perhaps we have not gone beyond the limit in declaring that Christianity is an imitation of the divine nature.258 Russell adds that This imitation restores the divine likeness in man, but does not allow him to become what God is. Nothing in Gregory is allowed to compromise Gods uncreated transcendence. Another Cappadocian, St. Gregory Nazianzus, with Origenist overtones, says in Oration 14 (7) we are a part of God and we come from above.259 Nazianzus, in Oration 38 (13), as the other Cappadocians, focuses on the Incarnation as the keystone of salvation, of immortality: He came forth then as God with that which He had assumed, One Person in two Natures, Flesh and Spirit, of which the latter deified the former. O new commingling; O strange conjunction; the Self-Existent comes into being, the Uncreate is created, That which cannot be contained is contained, by the intervention of an intellectual soul, mediating between the Deity and the corporeity of the flesh. And He Who gives riches becomes poor, for He assumes the poverty of my flesh, that I may assume the richness of His Godhead. He that is full empties Himself, for He empties Himself of His glory for a short while, that I may have a share in His Fullness. What is the riches of His Goodness? What is this mystery that is around me? I had a share in the image; I did not keep it; He partakes of my flesh that He may both save the image and make the flesh
258 259

In On What it is to Call Oneself a Christian (Patrologia Graeca 46, col. 244D). Qtd. in Meyendorff (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 232).

671

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

immortal. He communicates a second Communion far more marvellous than the first, inasmuch as then He imparted the better Nature, whereas now Himself partakes of the worse. This is more godlike than the former action, this is loftier in the eyes of all men of understanding. Norman says that: Nazianzus equation of the paradox of incarnation with that of deification imbues his writings with a distinctive stamp, a leit-motif of wonder and thanksgiving for Gods gracious condescension. However much we may attribute this to rhetorical hyperbole, Gregorys assertion of the supreme exaltation of the deified Christian is perhaps the strongest and least qualified of all the Fathers. For Gregory the union of God and humanity in Christ means that I may become God as far as he became man. According to Norman, Nazianzus envisions a gradual ascent, through the development of virtues, which culminates in bridging the gap between God and man. ` In Oration 38 (11), we see that it is through the Light of TruthGod is Light and Truththat we can see and experience the splendour of God and be remade: For to this, I think, tends that Light of Truth which we here possess but in measure, that we should both see and experience the Splendour of God, which is worthy of Him Who made us, and will remake us again after a loftier fashion. Also in Oration 38 (18), Nazianzus emphasizes our whole imitation of Jesus Christ to be glorified with him: Taste gall for the tastes sake; drink vinegar; seek for spittings; accept blows, be crowned with thorns, that is, with the hardness of the godly life; put on the purple robe, take the reed in hand, and receive mock worship from those who mock at the truth; lastly, be crucified with Him, and share His Death and Burial gladly, that thou mayest rise with Him, and be glorified with Him and reign with Him. Look at and be looked at by the Great God, Who in Trinity is worshipped and glorified, and Whom we declare to be now set forth as clearly before you as the chains of our flesh allow, in Jesus Christ our Lord, to Whom be the glory for ever. As we saw in the case of Basil, for Nazianzus, baptism is necessary to be transformedto participate in the light, among other gifts. In Oration 40The Oration on Holy Baptism, Preached at Constantinople Jan. 6, 381, being the day following the delivery of that on the Holy Lights. Nazianzus writes: My Lord Jesus Christ has showed that He honoured all these births in His own Person; the first, by that first and quickening Inbreathing; the second by His 672

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Incarnation and the Baptism wherewith He Himself was baptized; and the third by the Resurrection of which He was the Firstfruits; condescending, as He became the Firstborn among many brethren, so also to become the Firstborn from the dead. Concerning two of these births, the first and the last, we have not to speak on the present occasion. Let us discourse upon the second, which is now necessary for us, and which gives its name to the Feast of the Lights. Illumination is the splendour of souls, the conversion of the life, the question put to the Godward conscience. It is the aid to our weakness, the renunciation of the flesh, the following of the Spirit, the fellowship of the Word, the improvement of the creature, the overwhelming of sin, the participation of light, the dissolution of darkness. It is the carriage to God, the dying with Christ, the perfecting of the mind, the bulwark of Faith, the key of the Kingdom of heaven, the change of life, the removal of slavery, the loosing of chains, the remodelling of the whole man. (II-III) And he adds what the faithful should tell the sophist about the transformation he underwent by Baptism: Say to him relying on the Seal, I am myself the Image of God; I have not yet been east down from the heavenly Glory, as thou wast through thy pride; I have put on Christ; I have been transformed into Christ by Baptism; worship thou me. Well do I know that he will depart, defeated and put to shame by this; as he did from Christ the first Light, so he will from those who are illumined by Christ. Such blessings does the layer bestow on those who apprehend it; such is the rich feast which it provides for those who hunger aright. (X) Nazianzus speaks of the deification of the flesh by the Spirit, through the intervention of an intellectual soul. He also says that we share in Gods Fullness as He partakes of our flesh making us immortal: He came forth then as God with that which He had assumed, One Person in two Natures, Flesh and Spirit, of which the latter deified the former. O new commingling; O strange conjunction; the Self-Existent comes into being, the Uncreate is created, That which cannot be contained is contained, by the intervention of an intellectual soul, mediating between the Deity and the corporeity of the flesh. And He Who gives riches becomes poor, for He assumes the poverty of my flesh, that I may assume the richness of His Godhead. He that is full empties Himself, for He empties Himself of His glory for a short while, that I may have a share in His Fulness. What is the riches of His Goodness? What is this mystery that is around me? I had a share in the image; I did not keep it; He partakes of my flesh that He may both save the image and make the flesh immortal. (Oration 38, 13) By analogy we are also deified in the same way through the mediation of the soul, intermingling rather than participating. We are led to imitate rather than be incorporated in Christ. The emphasis is on moral progress and the ascent of the soul (Russell). In 673

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Oration 2 (22), the soul should be provided with wings to rescue it from the world and give it to God: But the scope of our art is to provide the soul with wings, to rescue it from the world and give it to God, and to watch over that which is in His image, if it abides, to take it by the hand, if it is in danger, or restore it, if ruined, to make Christ to dwell in the heart by the Spirit: and, in short, to deify, and bestow heavenly bliss upon, one who belongs to the heavenly host. Russell says that in contrast to Nyssa: Gregory of Nazianzus, the inventor of the term theosis, makes frequent use of the doctrine of deification as a means of expressing a dynamic relationship between God and mana relationship in which man gradually grows into his fulfilment as a creaturebut he avoids the language of participation. Each writers concept of deification is correlative to his Christology. Those who refer to participation in the divine nature all worked within a Logos-sarx framework, in which the flesh is deified by participation in the divinity of the Logos. Gregory, however, presupposes a Logos-anthropos framework. Another fourth century Father, Macarius (ca. 300-390) also addresses the doctrine of deification. For Russell, the Macarian Homilies are curious in speaking, like Gregory of Nazianzus, of a mingling with Christ and the Holy Spirit, rather than participation in them, and yet at the same time also appealing to 2 Peter 1:4 in support of a doctrine of participation in the divine nature. In his Homily 13: He therefore that is desirous to be made partaker of the Divine glory, ought, with an insatiable affection, with his whole heart and strength, night and day to seek help from God. Wherefore endeavour all you can to become the child of GOD, without blame, and to enter into that rest, whither the forerunner CHRIST is entered for us. Do your utmost that your name be written in the church in heaven with the first-born; that you may be found at the right hand of the Majesty on high. The condition is to be without blame and become a child of God. In Homily 19, Macarius refers to the reception in the soul, through faith and prayer, of the sanctification of the Spirit, and the participation in the Divine nature: For unless the soul shall in this world receive the sanctification of the Spirit through much faith and prayer, and be made partaker of the Divine nature, (through which it will be able without blame and in purity to perform every commandment it is unfit for the kingdom of heaven. For whatever good a man has possessed in this world, the same shall in that day be his life, through the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost for ever! Amen. 674

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Like the Cappadocians and many other Fathers, Macarius refers to a light, the Kingdom of light and Jesus Christ that illuminate the soul. This light, present in the soul, will restore our bodies the day of the resurrection: The Kingdom of light and Jesus Christ, the heavenly image, illuminate the soul already today in secret, and reign in the souls of the saints: however, Christ is hidden from the eyes of men and is manifested truly only to the eyes of the soul, until the day of the resurrection, when the body itself shall be restored and glorify by the light of the Lord which is already present in the soul. (Homily 2(5)260 Macarius, when talking about the union of the soul with God, envisions the immense distance and difference of natures between God and man. In Homily 49, he says: The one is God, the other is not God; the one is Lord, the other is servant; the one is Creator the other is creature ... and their natures have nothing in common.261 Yet, in his Homily 44, he refers to the changing of the soul into the divine nature.262 As suggested above, for Macarius, a defender of true prayer as the means to lead man to be partakers of the Divine nature and become godlike, it is the light of the Lord in the soul which restores and glorifies the whole body. For Chrysostom, through the resurrection of Jesus, death does not control mans existence, yet it remains a physical phenomenon (Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology 162). Chrysostom, in On Hebrews (Homily XVII), says: He died once, for all. (What then? Do we no longer die that death? We do indeed die, but we do not continue in it: which is not to die at all. For the tyranny of death, and death indeed, is when he who dies is never more allowed to return to life. But when after dying is living, and that a better life, this is not death, but sleep.) Since then death was to have possession of all, therefore He died that He might deliver us. It is the Spirit who guides man to heaven. In On the Gospel of John (Homily 1, 4), he says:

260 261

Patrologiae Graeca, 34, col. 468ab. Qtd. in Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Christian Thought, 129. Qtd. in Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, 68. 262 Qtd. in Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, 68.

675

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

He hath speaking within him the Comforter, the Omnipresent, who knoweth the things of God as exactly as the soul of man knoweth what belongs to herself, the Spirit of holiness, the righteous Spirit, the guiding Spirit, which leads men by the hand to heaven, which gives them other eyes, fitting them to see things to come as though present, and giving them even in the flesh to look into things heavenly. Like Macarius, he believes that the Spirit will give men other eyes to look into things heavenly, although he specifies, even in the flesh. Besides, like the preceding Fathers, he realizes the infinite distance of God from us, and yet the closeness of His love: For after saying that the first commandment is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, He added a second; and He did not stay, but added, like unto it; Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself. What can be equal to this love to man, or this gentleness? That when we were at infinite distance from Him, He brings the love to us into comparison with that toward Himself, and says that is like unto this. (On Romans, Homily 23) As it is emphasized by the Fathers, no created intellect can see the uncreated essence of God. Chrysostom says On the Gospel of John (Homily XV): No man hath seen God at any time, says: How can any created nature even see the Uncreated? If we are absolutely unable clearly to discern any incorporeal power whatsoever, even though created, as has been often proved in the case of angels, much less can we discern the Essence which is incorporeal and uncreated. In this same homily, he insists that we can perceive His condescension (or energies), but not His essence, His very Nature: And others have seen him. How then saith John, No man hath seen God at any time? It is to declare, that all these were instances of (His) condescension, not the vision of the Essence itself unveiled. For had they seen the very Nature, they would not have beheld It under different forms, since that is simple, without form, or parts, or bounding lines. It sits not, nor stands, nor walks: these things belong all to bodies. He does not doubt to clarify in his commentaries on this same Gospel of John (Homily 5) that the Son is the same essence as the Father: But the Son is not inferior to, nor falls short of, the Essence of the Father; and therefore Paul has not only dared to use these expressions concerning Him, but also others like them. For the expression from Whom, which you decide to belong properly to the Father alone, he uses also concerning the Son, when he 676

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

says, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. (Col. ii. 19) Thus, being the Son of the same essence, he continues saying in this homily, He also imparts energy, a light, which never diminishes: For as with the fountain which is the mother of the great deeps, however much you take away you nothing lessen the fountain; so with the energy of the OnlyBegotten, however much you believe has been produced and made by it, it has become no whir the less. Or, to use a more familiar example, I will instance that of light, which the Apostle himself added immediately, saying, And the Life was the Light. As then light, however many myriads it may enlighten, suffers no diminution of its own brightness; so also God, before commencing His work and after completing it, remains alike indefectible, nothing diminished, nor wearied by the greatness of the creation. Therefore, the energy comes from an inexhaustible fountain. Chrysostom is correct as it springs forth from the Father of the True Light, the First Source, and His infinity of will. In His homily On the Holy Spirit, as do the Cappadocians, Chrysostom stresses the importance of the imitation of Christ and baptism to attain perfection: The dispensation of our God and Saviour concerning man is a recall from the fall, and a return from the alienation caused by disobedience to close communion with God. This is the reason for the sojourn of Christ in the flesh, the pattern of life described in the Gospels, the sufferings, the cross, the tomb, the resurrection; so that the man who is being saved through imitation of Christ receives the old adoption. For perfection of life the imitation of Christ is necessary, not only in the example of gentleness, lowliness, and long suffering set us in His life, but also of His actual death. So Paul, the imitator of Christ, says, `being made conformable unto His death; if by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. How then are we made in the likeness of His death? In that we were buried with Him by baptism.263 Although closer in time to the Cappadocians, another Church Father, Cyril of Alexandria (376-444), is more influenced by Athanasius. He quoted 2 Peter 1:4 more frequently than any other Father and makes frequent use of the technical terminology of deification and in the Athanasian way (Russell). Yet, as Russell says, he later modifies the strongly physicalist anthropology he has inherited from Athanasius, dropping the vocabulary of deification in favour of a more spiritualized

263

Qtd. in Gleanings from Orthodox Christian Authors and the Holy Fathers.

677

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

account of how human nature is transformed by God. As for Athanasius, as Norman holds, for Cyril the means of this restoration is the Incarnation, and like Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril bases his exposition of the Incarnation on a generic realism which allows the divinization of mankind. In Commentary on John (Book 12, Chap. 1), Cyril explains that the Son, becoming one of as Man, takes in our likeness to God, and makes us like HimGods and Sons: For He humbled Himself that He might exalt that which was by nature lowly to His own high station; and wore the form of a servant, though He was by Nature Lord and Son of God, that He might uplift that which was by nature enslaved to the dignity of Sonship, in conformity with His own Likeness, and in His Image. How, and in what sense, then, He, becoming one of us as Man, in order that we also might be like Him, that is, Gods and Sons, receives our attributes into Himself, and gives back unto us His own, you may well be anxious to inquire. I will explain, then, as far as I am able: In the first place, then, though we are servants by rank and nature (for creatures are subject to their Creator), He calls us His brethren, and designates God the common Father of Himself and us; and, making humanity His own, by taking our likeness upon Him, He calls our God His God, though He is His Son by Nature. In Book IX (Chap. 11) of this same work, Cyril comments on the participation of the Spirit in the likening process: He humbled Himself therefore willingly for our sakes, for we should never have been called His sons and Gods, if the Only-begotten had not undergone humiliation for us and on our account; to Whose Likeness we are conformed by participation in the Spirit, and so become children of God, and Gods. Also in Book XI (Chap. 2), he describes this participation of the Spirit. It is by the abiding of the Spirit in us that we can be partakers of the divine nature, For if the fragrance of sweet herbs imparts some of its power to garments with which it comes in contact, and in some sort transforms its surroundings into likeness with itself, surely the Holy Ghost has power, since He [is by nature of God, to make those in whom He abides partakers in the Divine Nature through Himself. (Book XI, Chap. 11) A participation that Cyril does not only perceive in a spiritual sense by the effectual working and grace of His own Spirit, but also in a corporeal sense, through the Eucharist:

678

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

For we are made one with each other after the manner already indicated, and we are also made one with God. And in what sense we are made one with Him, the Lord very clearly explained, and to make the benefit of His teaching plain, added the words: I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfected into one. For the Son dwells in us in a corporeal sense as Man, commingled and united with us by the mystery of the Eucharist; and also in a spiritual sense as God, by the effectual working and grace of His own Spirit, building up our spirit into newness of life, and making us partakers of His Divine Nature. Christ, then, is seen to be the bond of union between us and God the Father; as Man making us, as it were, His branches, and as God by Nature inherent in His own Father. For no otherwise could that nature which is subject to corruption be uplifted into incorruption, but by the coming down to it of That Nature Which is high above all corruption and variableness ...(Book, XI, Chap. XII) Through this participation we are uplifted into incorruption. As I have mentioned, deification played an important role in the Christological debates of the fourth, fifth and sixth century, from the Council of Nicea (325) on since it was discussed that Christ must be God in order to impart divine life to us. It was also necessary to distinguish carefully between Christs natural sonship and our incorporation into it by will and grace (Rakestraw). Moreover, Meyendorff believed that the Christological problems of the fifth and sixth century shaped the Byzantine theological mentality and provided its main theme until about the ninth century He adds [the italics are his] that Ephesus, Chalcedon, and the two Byzantine councils (553 and 681) together represent the great Byzantine Christological synthesis; the later developments of Orthodoxy theology must be approached in the light of synthesis (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 14). Let us see the development of the doctrine of theosis in the Byzantine period, from the fifth to the fourteen century. Activity Read the comments and the quoted passages and, briefly in your own words, summarize the ideas of the Nicene and Post-Nicene studied above: Athanasius of Alexandria:

679

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Activity 141: Theosis and the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers

Byzantine Period (V-XV) The Byzantine period embraces what is called the Later Fathers (V-VIII) and the Recent Fathers (VIII-XV), the former including important theologians such St. Maximus the Confessor (ca. 580-662) in the seventh century, frequently termed the spiritual theologian, and St. John of Damascus (675-749), and the latter, St. Symeon the New Theologian (949-1022) and St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359). The role of the Later Fathers was mainly to defend and draw out some important implications of the Trinitarian and Christological teachings of the first four councils. From then, Maximus, who according to Meyendorff can be called the real father of Byzantine theology, developed a Christological system very relevant to understand Byzantine theology: Only through his system, in which the valid traditions of the past found their legitimate place, were the ideas of Origen, Evagrius, the Capadoccians, Cyril and Pseudo-Dionisius preserved within Eastern Christianity... . It remains impossible ... to understand the whole of Byzantine theology without becoming aware of Maximus synthesis. (Christ in Eastern Thought 131-132) Regarding John of Damascus, Meyendorff explains that like Origen, Pseudo-Dionysius, and Maximus, he also produced a system of theological thought, but his system, as delineated in an Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, was of a different type. There was no creation in it as it was essentially a school manual used as such throughout the Byzantine Middle ages. Yet Meyendorff adds that: By putting side by side the Cappadocians Trinitarian terminology, the Chalcedonian Christology, the clarifications brought to it in the sixth century, and the ideas and terminology of Dionysius and Maximus, John of Damascus discovers the inner coherence, and with the help of supplementary sources such as the writings of pseudo-Cyril on the Trinityarrives at his final synthesis. (Christ in Eastern Thought 153) Within the period of the so called recent Fathers, from the ninth to the fifteen century, Byzantine theology was never divorced from Christology. Meyendorff says

680

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

that the triumph of Orthodoxy in 843 was interpreted by many as the final fixation of dogma; thus, discussions of the formulas adopted by the seven councils could no longer take place. Yet, in monastic circles the great current of the Fathers spirituality continued not only to bring forth fruits of holiness but also to evoke theological problems dealing with salvation, which were at the roots of the great theological debates of the preceding century. This monastic tradition was dominated by the monumental figure of Symeon the New Theologian (Christ in Eastern Thought 193-194). In this period there were later Councils in 1341, 1347, and 1351considered the Ninth Ecumenical Councilmainly formulating the doctrine regarding grace, the divine energies of God, and the uncreated light. Palamas, a fourteenth century theologian played a major role in this period with his debate with Barlaam. His theology received official recognition from the Orthodox Church at these councils; notwithstanding, Palamas claims were soon forgotten and Orthodox theology for almost five centuries suffered a strong scholastic influence. Palamas, along with Maximus, Damascus and Symeon the Theologian, and Palamas, will be the focus of my attention in the remaining part of this section on deification. In the seventh century, once the Christological debate was over, the Byzantine theologian Maximus the Confessor became one of the most helpful formulators of the doctrine of theosis. In his works, he focuses on the importance of the incarnation in the deification of the human and the divinization of the cosmos (Wood-Joyce). Likewise, Meyendorff believes that Maximus addresses the cosmic dimension of salvation (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 131). For Maximus, as for Gregory of Nyssa and Palamas, knowledge of God entailed participation in God, and it was closely related to deification. As already suggested when studying the biblical basis of deification,

681

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

grace came on man through the knowledge of God and Jesus (2 Peter 1:2). In Byzantine Theology, Meyendorff says: For the entire patristic and Byzantine tradition, knowledge of God implies participation in Godi.e., not only intellectual knowledge but a state of the entire human being transformed by grace and freely cooperating with it by the efforts of both will and mind. In the monastic tradition of Macarius, reflected, for example, in the writings of Symeon the New Theologian, this idea of participation is inseparable from the idea of freedom and of consciousness. A true Christian knows God through a free and conscious experience; this is precisely the friendship with God, which was mans state before the Fall, the state in which God wanted man to live, and which was restored in Jesus Christ. (144) As expressed in this passage, Maximus Christocentrism is at the core of his concept of deification: A sure warrant for looking forward with hope to deification of human nature is provided by the incarnation of God, which makes man god to the same degree as God Himself became man. For it is clear that He who became man without sin (cf. Heb. 4:15) will divinize human nature without changing it into the divine nature, and will raise it up for His own sake to the same degree as He lowered Himself for mans sake. This is what St. Paul teaches mystically when he says, ...that in the ages to come He might display the overflowing richness of His grace. (Eph. 2:7)264 Maximus says that through the incarnation man is made god to the same degree as God Himself became man, but without changing the nature of man into the divine nature. Moreover, men, in their likeness with Him, can only have knowledge, vision of Him though his grace, through his activitiesthrough His energieswhich He bestows on us, although we receive this in proportion to our progress. This is possible because in His incarnation the Word becomes consubstantial with us. Yet, His essence and personhood remains inaccessible, as we read in On Knowledge: The divine Apostle Paul said that he knew in part the knowledge of the Word (cp. 1 Cor.13.9). But the great Evangelist John said that he saw His glory: We have seen His glory, the glory as the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth (John 1.14). And why did St Paul say that he knew in part the knowledge of the divine Word? For He is known only to a certain extent through His activities. The knowledge of Himself in His essence and personhood remains inaccessible to all angels and men alike, and He can in no way be
264

Philokalia, vol. II, 178.

682

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

known by anyone. Bt St John, initiated as perfectly as humanly possible into the meaning of the Words incarnation, claims that he has seen the glory of the Word as flesh, that is, he saw the reason or the plan for which God became man, full of grace and truth. For it was not as God by essence, consubstantial to God the Father, that the Only Begotten Son gave this grace, but as having in the incarnation become man by nature, and consubstantial to us, that He bestows grace on all who have need of it. This grace we receive from His fullness always in proportion to our progress. Therefore, the one who keeps sacred the whole meaning of the Word of Gods become incarnate for our sake will acquire the glory full of grace and truth of the One who for our sake glorifies and consecrates Himself in us by His coming: When He appears we shall be like Him (1 John 3.2). (Chap. 76)265 Again, for Maximus, while the Word of the Father dwells in Christ by essence, the deity dwells in us by adoption: In Christ who is God and the Word of the Father there dwells in bodily form the complete fullness of deity by essence; in us the fullness of deity dwells by grace whenever we have formed in ourselves every virtue and wisdom, lacking in no way which is possible to man in the faithful reproduction of the archetype. For it is not unnatural thereby that the fullness of deity dwell also in us by adoption (cp. Eph 1.5, Rom 8.15) expressed in the various spiritual ideas. (On Knowledge, Chap. 21)266 Meyendorff believes that Maximus concept of deification is based on his definition of immobility. He reverses the triad of the Origenist systemimmobile state, movement, and genesisin genesis, movement, and the immobile state (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 132). Maximus applies the idea of immobility to God, which is, as Meyendorff says, the Initiator and the end of all natural movement. He is also, in an absolute way, the Creator, the Transcendent (133). Also for him, Meyendorff adds, movement does not consist of Fall as in Origen, but as a movement upward to God, that he expresses as Pseudo-Dionysius, by a new triad: essence, power, energy. Maximus also reasserts the teaching of freedom (133). Furthermore, since God is self-existent, he is absolutely independent. Maximus was well aware of Gods immutabilityor I am the LORD, I change not; or I am the LORD, I change not (Malachi 3:6)and immobility, inherent to His Divine Essence, but he also envisions how the self-existing,
265 266

In Selections On Knowledge from St Maximus the Confessor. In Selections On Knowledge from St Maximus the Confessor.

683

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

absolute God, though creation and the incarnation of His Word or Logos could pass from immobility to movement or energy, from infinity to finitude, from the divine to the human. But God can modify His absoluteness because He has a will: He is will. Thus immutability does not entail immobility. In Capitula gnostica (I, 10)or Gnostic Centuries, Maximus says: God is the principle, the center and the end, insofar as he acts without being passive ... he is the principle, as Creator; he is the centre, as Providence; and he is the end as a conclusion, for All things come from him, by him, and towards him (Rom 11:15).267 Also, for Maximus, as Meyendorff asserts, natural movement requires participation in God which flows from the Logos: Natural movement requires participation in God. This participation flows from the very notion of the Logos... . created existence as such, in all the stages of its movement, requires Gods collaboration and participation, although its movement always remains fully his own: such is his nature, which, far from being opposed to the notion of Gods grace, presupposes it. This becomes even clearer when Maximus anthropology and his conception of freedom is taken into account. (136) In Centuries on Charities (III, 25), Maximus distinguishes between the divine properties attributed to Gods essence, such us being and ever-being, from those, such as goodness and wisdom, belonging to free choice. He adds that in his [Gods] resemblance are only those who are good and wise.268 Meyendorff states that God not only grants beings their existence; but he also assigns to them a goal to reach, and in the case of man this goal implies a free movement toward God (137). As we saw when dealing with asceticism and hesychasm, the practice of virtues along with prayer is an important means to attain this goal. Let me quote again part of a passage by Maximus already quoted: The one who prays ought never to halt his movement of sublime ascent toward God. Fur just as we should understand the ascent from strength to strength as
267 268

Qtd. in Meyendorff, Christ in Christian Eastern Thought, 136. Qtd. in Meyendorff, Christ in Christian Eastern Thought, 136-137.

684

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the progress in the practice of the virtues, from glory to glory (2 Cor.3.18) ... the one who is settled in the place of prayer should lift his mind from human matters and the attention of the soul to more divine realities. This will enable him to follow the one who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God (Heb 1.14), who is everywhere and who in His incarnation passes through all things on our account. If we follow Him, we also pass through all things with Him and come beside Him if we know Him not in the limited condition of His descent in the incarnation, but in the majestic splendour of his natural infinitude. (On Knowledge, Chap 18)269 With the exercise of virtue and prayer, Maximus holds, those who follow Jesus will know Him not in the limited condition of His descent in the incarnation, but in the majestic splendour of His natural infinitude. Logically to experience this majestic splendour, man has to attain a higher level of spiritualization, of divinization. Meyendorff says that in Maximus, The fall of man, who had been placed by God at the centre of creation and called to re-unify it, was a cosmic catastrophe that only the incarnation of the Word could repair (142). By His ascension, Meyendorff adds, he unites heaven and earth through the exaltation of the human body ... as man, he accomplishes in all truth the true human destiny that he himself had predetermined as God, and from which man had turned: He unites man to God (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 143). Thus the ultimate goal of the divine plan is mans deification. Maximus, in Ambigus (1088 c), an exegetical work on St. Gregory the Theologian, describes the process of deification resembling Irenaeus in the transformation of the whole man, soul and body: That whole people might participate in the whole God ..., and that in the same way in which the soul and the body are united, God should become partakable of by the soul, and, by the souls intermediary, by the body, in order that the soul might receive an unchanging character ... and the body, immortality; and finally, that the whole man, soul and body, by nature, and becoming whole God, soul, body, by grace.270 This doctrine of salvation for Maximus has a double movement, one of God toward man, and the other, from man toward God. Meyendorff says that the hypostatic
269 270

In Selections On Knowledge from St Maximus the Confessor. Qtd. in Meyendorff, Christ in Christian Eastern Thought, 143.

685

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

union of these two movements in the incarnate Word constitutes the essence of Maximus Christology: two natures imply two energies or wills271 meeting one another (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 144). Thus the hypostatic unity of Christs both human and divine nature is the basis for Maximus concept of deification. It is through this movement as a flow of gracethe divine energy coming from the divine essence that man can share of the divine nature. Meyendorff adds that for Maximus, our deification in Christ implies the transformation of our hypostasis or human person (roughly gnome); however, it does not entailas it does in the case of asceticismthe attainment of supernatural virtues, but the reintegration of those virtues that were ours from the time of creation. Maximus believes in a natural deification (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 150). Russell remarks that, for Maximus, On the dynamic level Gods movement toward man in the Incarnation is met by mans movement towards God in the imitative process of deification. Yet the goal of deification lies beyond mere imitation. That which God is by essence, the creature can become by participation. Williams, in Deification, explains that: ... for Maximus, as for early writers like Gregory of Nyssa in the fourth century, deification meant taking on Gods modes of activity, such as compassion and self-surrender, rather than simply sharing a set of abstract and static attributes, such as incorruptibility. Shared attributes are only significant as a dimension of shared activities, or else deification means fusion directly with the transcendent divine nature.272 Finally, Russell refers to two statements by Maximus that sum up his doctrine of deificationFor this is why he made us, that we might become partakers of the divine nature and sharers in His eternity, and that we might appear to be like him through deification by grace: The tradition that Maximus the Confessor (580-662) inherited was not at ease with 2 Peter 1:4, and this is reflected in his own usage. In all his writings
271 272

Will is used as a synonym for energy. Qtd. in Rakestraw.

686

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Maximus only refers to 2 Peter 1:4 twice, in both cases in his letters. In Epistle 12, perhaps deliberately glossing Ps.-Macarius, he says that Christ has made us partakers of the divine nature not through identity of substance, but through the ineffable power of his Incarnation. Since Christ is equally God and man, the flesh he took from us represents the firstfruit of our own participation in divinity. In Epistle 24 this divine intention is referred back to the creation of man: For this is why he made us, that we might become partakers of the divine nature and sharers in his eternity, and that we might appear to be like him through deification by grace. Although the expression partakers of the divine nature is not used elsewhere by Maximus, these two statements sum up his doctrine of deification. Russell adds: Deification is Maximus preferred expression for the goal of human life... . A person fits himself by the moral life for union with God through the divine energy in a way which looks forward to Gregory Palamas. This is a union without annihilation and without confusion an interpenetration of created and uncreated, an . If we re-read some of the passages above, Maximus talks about virtue, prayer, wisdom, and goodness. Reflecting on what he might mean, we can see that virtue, associated with prayer, entails for him the progressive, living experience in attainment of ascending levels in search of God. Man exercise everyday virtue by consistent choosing of good rather than evil, which gives him a moral nature and the possibility of reaching divinization as a whole man by grace, by deifying energy. He also distinguishes goodness and wisdom as the deed on the Deity, which is effected in time and space through Gods energies. This is enlightening as when the wise man chooses between right and wrong, it can show his spirit leading. Goodness, associated with truth and beauty, takes man to his ascent to God. For Norman, John of Damascus, often considered the last of the Fathers, is a clear witness to the vitality of in the Greek Church of the eighth century as he sees divinization as the summit of salvation. In a more decisive way than his predecessors, Norman states that Damascus distinguished between the deification of human nature by virtue of the Incarnation and participation of the individual through moral effort. It is the Saviour along with the sacraments of the Church and the 687

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

sanctification of the Holy Spirit who guide this ethical process. Meyendorff states that for Damascus, in order to save man, God did not have to recourse only to His omnipotence. He willed that man should participate himself in his salvation. By assuming human existence itself, by hypostatizing it in himself, the Word became the Saviour (Christ in Eastern Thought 164). Damascus, as does Maximus, emphasizes virtue. For him virtue leads away from corruption to the life eternal. This we read in An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (Book 3, chap. 1): But it behoved the Redeemer to be without sin, and not made liable through sin to death, and further, that His nature should be strengthened and renewed, and trained by labour and taught the way of virtue which leads away from corruption to the life eternal and, in the end, is revealed the mighty ocean of love to man that is about Him. It is further the case that obedience to the Father is a condition to obtain salvation. The incarnated Word is our model: For what greater thing is there, than that God should become Man? And the Word became flesh without being changed, of the Holy Spirit, and Mary the holy and ever-virgin one, the mother of God. And He acts as mediator between God and man, He the only lover of man conceived in the Virgins chaste womb without will or desire, or any connection with man or pleasurable generation, but through the Holy Spirit and the first offspring of Adam. And He becomes obedient to the Father Who is like unto us, and finds a remedy for our disobedience in what He had assumed from us, and became a pattern of obedience to us without which it is not possible to obtain salvation. Additionally, in this work, Damascus, by making an apophatic definition of the attributes of the divine natureuncreated, and the like, distinguishes between subsistences (or hypostases) and energies. In spite of these subsistences, the Deity imparts good on creation: The subsistences dwell and are established firmly in one another. For they are inseparable and cannot part from one another, but keep to their separate courses within one another, without coalescing or mingling, but cleaving to each other. Uncreate, without beginning, immortal, infinite, eternal, immaterial, good, creative, just, enlightening, immutable, passionless, uncircumscribed, immeasurable, unlimited, undefined, unseen, unthinkable, wanting in nothing, being His own rule and authority, all-ruling, life-giving, omnipotent, of infinite 688

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

power, con-raining and maintaining the universe and making provision for all: all these and such like attributes the Deity possesses by nature, not having received them from elsewhere, but Himself imparting all good to His own creations according to the capacity of each. (Book I, Chap. XIV) It is through the divine effulgence and energy that this goodness is imparted remaining without division among the divided: Further the divine effulgence and energy, being one anti simple and indivisible, assuming many varied forms in its goodness among what is divisible and allotting to each the component parts of its own nature, still remains simple and is multiplied without division among the divided, and gathers and converts the divided into its own simplicity. (Book I, Chap. XIV) Another Church Father, Symeon the New Theologian (949-1022), called the prophet of Christian experience, continued, along with Palamas, Maximus theological work. Symeon, a Byzantine abbot, dominates the monastic tradition of this period. Meyendorff explains what experience means for him and what it implies: This experience is, for him, that of Christ, the incarnate Word, and implies the possibility here on earth for each Christian to be consciously in communion with the divine life. The very foundation of Christian experience is thus found in the person of Christ. As a prophet of experience, Symeon stands within the tradition of the spiritual homilies attributed to Macarius, and as the interpreter of the idea of deification, he merely continues the tradition of St. Maximus the Confessor. (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 194) The feelings of Symeon are well expressed in this passage taken from his Ethical Discourses, which comprise Symeons most extensive treatment of the experience of God. God has made His abode in mortal man as a treasured light and this can only bring good things: O grandeur of ineffable glory! O excess of love! He Who embraces all things makes His home within a mortal corruptible man, He by Whose indwelling might all things are governed, and the man becomes as a woman heavy with child. O astonishing miracle and incomprehensible deeds and mysteries of the incomprehensible God! A man carries God consciously within himself as light, carries Him Who has brought all things into being and created them, including the one who carries Him now. He carries Him within as a treasure inexpressible, unspeakable, without quality, quantity, or form, immaterial, shapeless, yet with form in beauty inexplicable, altogether simple, like light, Him Who transcends all light. And, clenching his hands at his sides, this man walks in our midst and is ignored by everyone who surrounds him. Who can then adequately explain the joy of such a man? Will he not be more blessed and more glorious than any 689

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

emperor? Than whom, or than how many visible worlds, will he not be more wealthy? And in what shall such a man ever be lacking? Truly, in no way shall he lack any of Gods good things. (135)273 In this work, he even narrates a mystical conversation with the Master: Thou Thyself becamest visible... [Thou] didst grant me to see the outline of Thy form beyond shape. At that time Thou tookest me out of the worldI might even say, out of the body, but Thou didst not grant me to know this exactly. Thou didst shine yet more brightly and it seemed that I saw Thee clearly in Thy entirety. When I said, O Master, who art Thou? then, for the first time Thou didst grant me, the prodigal, to hear Thy voice. How gently didst Thou speak to me, who was beside myself, in awe and trembling Thou saidest, I am God who have become man for your sake. Because you have sought me with all your soul, behold, from now on you will be My brother, My fellow heir, and My friend. (Ethical Discourses 375-376)274 It is through the Son of man that man is made son of God. In Practical and Theological Precepts (No. 120), Symeon says in a more expository way: The Son of God has become Son of Man in order to make us... sons of God, raising our race by grace to what He is Himself by nature, granting us birth from above through the grace of the Holy Spirit and leading us straightway to the kingdom of heaven, or rather, granting us this kingdom within us (Luke 17:21), in order that we should not merely be fed by the hope of entering it, but entering into full possession thereof should cry: our life is hid with Christ in God. (Col. 3:3). (Writings from the Philokalia on Prayer of the Heart 26)275 Also in the Discourses, in a quote previously mentioned, we read how by grace he has received grace, which takes man over corruption: How good it is thankfully to proclaim the blessings of God, who loves men! By grace I have received grace (cf. John 1:16), by doing well I have received [His] kindness, by fire I have been requited with fire, by flame with flame. As I ascended I was given other ascents, at the end of the ascent I was given light, and by the light an even clearer light. In the midst thereof a sun shone brightly and from it a ray shone forth that filled all things. The object of my thought remained beyond understanding, and in this state I remained while I wept most sweetly and marveled at the ineffable. The divine mind conversed with my own mind and taught me, saying, Do you realize what My power has done to you out of love for men because of but a little faith and patience that strengthens your love? Behold, though you are subject to death, you have become immortal, and though you are ruled by corruption you find yourself above it. You live in
273

Trans. Alexander Golitzin. Qtd. in Quotations. In Quotations there are two different translations of Symeons Discourses: Golitzins translation and C.J. de Catanzaros translation. [See Bibliography]. The translators will be noted in the footnote for each of the quotations of this work. 274 Trans. C.J., de Cantazaro Qtd. in Quotations. 275 Qtd. in Gleanings from Orthodox Christian Authors and the Holy Fathers.

690

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the world and yet you are with Me; you are clothed with a body and yet you are not weighed down by any of the pleasures of the body. You are puny in appearance, yet you see intellectually. It is in very deed I who have brought you into being out of nothing. (205)276 It is through grace that the continuous ascent to the Ineffable takes place. For Symeon, the grace of the Holy Spirit through Christ redeeming death is the aim of Christian life. This is seen in The First-Created Man: The souls of those who believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, in His great and fearful Sacrifice [on the Cross] are resurrected by God in this present life; and a sign of this resurrection is the Grace of the Holy Spirit which He gives to the soul of every Christian, as if giving a new soul (48).277 This renewed soul, describes Symeon, is united to God ineffably and without confusion: The soul cannot live unless it is ineffably and without confusion united to God, who is truly the life eternal (cf. 1 John 5:20). Before this union in knowledge, vision, and perception it is dead, even though it is endowed with intellect and is by nature immortal ... (Ethical Discourses)278 For Symeon, when one crucifies oneself to the world, our soul dies before death but rises again, in worship and glorification of God, before the resurrection of the body: By crucifying oneself to the world, and the world to oneself (Gal. 6:14)}, brethren, our souls therefore die before death and rise again before the resurrection of the body in deed, in power, in experience, and in truth. When the mortal attitude has been eliminated by the immortal mind and mortality has been driven out by life, then, as though it had risen from the dead, the soul manifestly sees itself, just as those who rise from sleep see themselves. It recognizes God who has raised it; as it perceives Him it gives Him thanks and worships Him and glorifies His infinite goodness. On the other hand, the body is entirely without breath, motion, and memory in relation to its own desires, but in these respects becomes altogether dead and lifeless. (Ethical Discourses 297) 279 Like other Fathers, Symeon is describing the resurrection after the General Judgment of the sleeping survivors, and adds an enlightening element worthy of being studied by

276 277

Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. Qtd. in Quotations. Qtd. in Hieromonk Damascene, What Christ Accomplished on the Cross. 278 Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. No page given. Qtd. in Quotations. 279 Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. Qtd. in Quotations.

691

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

itself: the immortal mind. Symeon also explains that crucifying oneself entails mortification of self-will: Christ exhorts us to take up our cross and follow him (Luke 9:23). I have learned from Scripture and from experience itself that the cross comes at the end for no other reason than that we must endure trials and tribulations and, finally, voluntary death itself ... we learn for sure that cross and death consist in nothing else than the complete mortification of self-will. He who pursues his own will, however, slightly, will never be able to observe the precept of Christ the Savior. (232)280 This is what Meyendorff says about Symeons concept of deification: The reality of deification, which is neither a subjective state nor a purely intellectual experience, but the content of the Christian faith, such as Symeons own message, which is in fact sent the pattern for all the original developments of Byzantine theology. For the position taken by the Church in the eleventh to the thirteenth century, especially the definitions of the councils of the fourteenth century, only expressed and protected what Symeon had proclaimed as religious experience. (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 195) Like many other Greek and Byzantine Fathers, Symeon has a sacramental view of Christian salvation. He focuses mainly on the Eucharist and Baptism. In his Moral Speeches, he addresses the Eucharist in which the body of the Word is united with the worthy to receive Him: He inaccessible Word, the bread that comes down from heaven, is not contained sensually, but rather He contains and touches and without commixture is united with the worthy and well prepared to receive Him (14).281 Yet he explains that when we are not worthy of it, it is just bread: But if we wont sense anything more inside us than the visible food, and some other life wont come to our knowledge, then it is just bread and only, not God, that we partook of. ... The living water passed by your soul like through a channel, because it did not find a reception worthy of it (10 and 14). Using the image of the light as many mystics do, Symeon says of those who receive the Holy Communion: Everyones soul becomes brighter, the visible and material body is altered and changed to immaterial and spiritual above all
280
281

Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. Qtd. in Quotations. Qtd. in Symeon the New Theologian: Holy Communion.

692

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

senses. And how great would become in us the pleasure and joy of our meeting each other, it is certainly ineffable and inaccessible to the thought (Homily 1). Symeon is categorical when stressing the salving qualities of baptism: Just as it is impossible for one to be saved who has not been baptized by water and the Spirit (John 3:5), neither is it for him who has sinned after Baptism, unless he be baptized from on high and be born again . If one is ignorant of the Baptism wherewith he was baptized as a child and does not even realize that he was baptized, but only accepts it by faith and then wipes it away with thousands upon thousands of sins, and if he denies the second BaptismI mean, that which is through the Spirit, given from above by the loving-kindness of God to those who seek it by penitenceby what other means can he ever obtain salvation? By no means! (The Discourses 336-337)282 Gene Mills, in The Baptism of Tears: The Two Baptisms of St. Symeon the New Theologian, gives us some clues to this passage: This is clearly a statement as to the validity of baptismal regeneration which has been passed to Symeon by tradition, but it is also an understanding that is based on his interpretation of both scripture and experience. Symeon sees in the Nicodemus story of the Fourth Gospel a statement regarding a personal accountability in ones salvation. Without the birth ones baptismal faith is lost. Without the living out of the salvation that is birthed and predestined in the baptismal rite, such salvation is lost through the rejection of the individual. It is difficult to express in expository language what Symeon experienced in his own deification, but as one reads his description we perceive that deification was for him an actual participation in the life of God Himself.

282

Trans. C. J. de Catanzaro. Qtd. in Mills

693

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Illustration 75: St. Symeon the New Theologian283

In the fourteenth century, about three hundred years after the unfortunate split between the East and the West and the philosophical trends it brought forth, the hesychast St. Gregory Palamas, wholeheartedly had to defend this rich spiritual tradition of the Eastern Fathers who had been in search of an experiential union with the deity: theosis. Fathers such as Athanasius, Basil, Chrysostom, Maximus, Symeon, had accepted the possibility of accessing the Inaccessible through His energies or operations. Palamas defended this traditional Orthodox spirituality as many of his predecessors had done, but his teachings were condemned by the Western papacy in 1333. Palamas opponent was a westernized Greek: Barlaam (d. 1350), whose arguments, as Hillis says, in To Be Transformed by a Vision of Uncreated Light: A Survey on the Influence of the Existential Spirituality of Hesychasm on Eastern Orthodox History, undermined the very purpose of hesychastic spiritualitytheosis, a doctrine which was the primary religious focus and centrepiece of the Orthodox faith.

283

See: <www.home.it.net.au>.

694

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Because of his strict apophaticism and his neo-platonic dualism, Barlaam explicitly denied any possibility of direct knowledge and experience of God, and relegated knowledge of God to being indirect and purely intellectual. Meyendorff argues that Barlaam put himself in opposition not only to one of the most deeply rooted traditions of monasticism, that of which Symeon the New Theologian had become the spokesman, but also to the concept of participation in God (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 202). But this philosophic orientation, as Steenberg holds, which was prominent in the Christian world, also caused a division between spiritualists and the Church. It took many conciliar decisionsthe so called Ninth Ecumenical Council (1341, 1349, 1351)to restore this spiritual tradition. Gregory of Palamas, the spokesman at the councils of this great period of Byzantine Theology, addressed this theme of Gods being both accessible and inaccessible in a dialogue entitled Theophanes (Lossky, Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 69). In Theophanes (69, 941C and 937 D), he maintains that there was a divine power and energy common to the nature in three; thus, to say that the divine nature is communicable not in itself but through its energy, is to remain within the bounds of right devotion (70). In another work, in Capita physyca, theological, moralia et practica (69, 1169C), Palamas explains that The divine and deifying illumination and grace is not the essence but the energy of God.284 For Danut Manastireanu, in The Place of Scripture in Orthodox Tradition, the real question that Palamas had to face was how the deification or mystical union could be achieved and be compatible with the divine transcendence. Palamas, Manasstireanu adds, starts his theological investigation positing the question: What is the essence of the Christian experience? And his answer, which was theosis, was not new, as we have seen in many

284

Qtd. in Lossky, Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, 70.

695

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Church Fathers. Furthermore, claiming to follow these Fathers, Palamas made an ontological distinction between Gods ousia - the unknowable, imparticipable essence of God, and His energeiaithe uncreated divine energiesthrough which God can be known and participated into. Seeing the futility of his verbal admonitions, Palamas wrote his theological arguments in Triads in Defense of the Holy Hesychasts, in the year 1338, eight years later that Barlaam had arrived at Constantinople. It was done at the request of the Anthonite monks, who had realized that Barlaams arguments clashed with their living faith, which they considered much more than mere rational or intellectual knowledge. We have to remember that what the eastern ascetic called knowledge was an awareness in the ways of the spiritual life or gnosis (Lossky 217). Bassam A. Nassi, in Light for the World: the Life of St. Gregory Palamas (12961359) summarizes the content of the Triads: In his Triads, Palamas interpreted the experience of the Church by presenting logical arguments, based on the Scripture and the writings of the Fathers. Addressing the question of how it is possible for humans to have knowledge of a transcendent and unknowable God, he drew a distinction between knowing God in His essence, or nature, and knowing God in His energies, actions, or the means by which He acts. He adds: To elaborate more, he made a comparison between God and the sun. The sun has its rays, God has His energies (among them, grace and light). By His energies, God creates, sustains, and governs the universe. By His energies, He transforms creation and deifies it, that is, He fills the new creation with His energies as water fills a sponge. These actions or energies of God are the true revelation of God Himself to humanity. So God is incomprehensible and unknowable in His nature or essence, but knowable in His energies. It is through His actions out of His love to the whole creation that God enters into a direct and immediate relationship with mankind, a personal confrontation between creature and Creator.

696

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

In the Triads (III.ii.7), Palamas says: God is entirely present in each of the divine energies... although it is clear that he transcends all of them (95-6).285 Thus for him, God is utterly inaccessible and transcendent in His essence, but through His uncreated energies He manifests Himself to enable mans union with Him. In his Topics of Natural and Theological Science on the Moral and Ascetic Life: One Hundred and Fifty Texts, Palamas, relying on St. Basil and St. Maximus, explains how man participates in the divine energy: That which participates in something according to the essence must necessarily possess a common essence with that in which it participates and be identical to it in some respect. But who has ever heard that God and we possess in some respect the same essence? St. Basil the Great says, The energies of God come down to us, but the essence remains inaccessible. And St. Maximos also says, He who is deified through grace will be everything that God is, without possessing identity of essence. Thus it is impossible to participate in Gods essence, even for those who are deified by divine grace. It is, however, possible to participate in the divine energy. (397)286 For Palamas, the Thaboric light which surrounded Christ was a vision of Gods energies, a light that continues to be manifested to the worthy. In The Declaration of the Holy Mountain in Defence of Those who Devoutly Practise a Life of Stillness, he talks about this light which transforms and sanctifies the soul and the body: For the saints both in hymns and in their writings call this light ineffable, uncreated, eternal, timeless, unapproachable, boundless, infinite, limitless, invisible to angels and men, archetypal and unchanging beauty, the glory of God, the glory of Christ, the glory of the Spirit, the ray of Divinity and so forth ... For once the souls passible aspect is transformed and sanctified - but not reduced to a deathlike condition - through it the dispositions and activities of the body are also sanctified, since body and soul share a conjoint existence...When saintly people become the happy possessors of spiritual and supranatural grace and power, they see [the uncreated light] both with the sense of sight and with the intellect that which surpasses both sense and intellect. (422-424)287 In the Triads (Book 3, Chap. 1), Palamas, also referring to this light, defines deification as an enhypostatic and direct illumination, which is beyond intellect and reason:

285 286

Qtd. in Hillis. Qtd. in Hillis. 287 Qtd. in Hillis.

697

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Deification is an enhypostatic and direct illumination which has no beginning, but appears in those worthy as something exceeding their comprehension. It is indeed mystical union with God, beyond intellect and reason, in the age when creatures will no longer know corruption.288 Thus, it is illumination embracing the worthys personality. Palamas has both a Christocentric and a sacramental perspective of the deification. For him mans deification cannot take place without the enhumanization of the Logos of God. Mantzaridis, in the Deification of Man: St. Gregoory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition, says that according to Palamas: When the Logos of God took on human nature, He bestowed on it the fullness of His grace and delivered it from the bonds of corruption and death. The consequences of this hypostatic union in Christ of the two natures was the deification of the human nature (29). Furthermore, Mantzaridis (29) quotes Palamas Tomos Synodicos (1, 9) in which Palamas says: For the Logos became flesh, and the flesh became Logos, even though neither abandoned its own proper nature. Thus, Mantzaridis adds, was brought about in Christ the regeneration of the image and its elevation towards the archetype (29). Panayiotis Christou, in The Teaching of Gregory Palamas on Man, explains that this image is not only of God, but of the whole Trinity as well: He finds image in the whole existence of man and refers it to the Trinity. Man is a creature according to the image not vaguely of God, but concretely of the Triune God, since he has been created by the energy of the whole Trinity and may receive the divine light emitted from the whole Trinity, His intellect, reason and spirit constitute an inherent unity, corresponding to the unity of the persons of the divine Trinity, i.e. Nous, Logos, and pneuma. (Intellect, Reason, and Spirit) Moreover, for Palamas, it is the Lord who restores us from the Fall of Adam. In his Homilies (vol. 1), he says: Through his single spiritual death (at the Fall), Adam brought a twofold death into the worldspiritual death and bodily death. ... The good Lord healed this twofold death of ours through His single bodily death, and through the one
288

Qtd. in Quotations

698

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Resurrection of His body He gave us a twofold resurrection. By means of His bodily death He destroyed him who had the power over our souls and bodies in death, and rescued us from his tyranny over both. (197)289 It was in the Fall that our nature was deprived of the divine illumination, but it is through the Logos transfiguration that we have potential restoration: Through the fall our nature was stripped of divine illumination and resplendence. But the Logos of God had pity upon our disfigurement and in His compassion He took our nature upon Himself, and on Tabor He manifested it to His elect disciples clothed once again most brilliantly. He shows what we once were and what we shall become through Him in the age to come, if we choose to live our present life as far as possible in accordance with His ways.290 Palamas teaches that we are restored when choosing to live according to the Lords ways and by keeping His commandments. This did not happen with Adam: ... If Adam had been sufficiently strong to keep the divine commandment, then he would have shown himself the vanquisher of his enemy, and withstood his deathly attack. But since he voluntarily gave in to sin, he was defeated and was made a sinner. Since he is the root of our race, he has produced us as deathbearing shoots. So, it was necessary for us, if he were to fight back against his defeat and to claim victory, to rid himself of the death-bearing venomous poison in his soul and body, and to absorb life, eternal and indestructible life. (Sermon on the Entry of the Mother of God into the Temple) Meyendorff sees Palamas christocentrism as directly dependent on St. Maximus. Also in connection with the Confessor, Palamas distinguishes three modes of existence: the essence or nature, the hypostasis and the energy, which Meyendorff describes very clearly: To each of these modes of existence corresponds a mode of union. The union according to the essence is proper of the three Persons of the Trinity; it is inaccessible to creatures, for if God could be communicated by essence, he would become multi-hypostatic; but created human nature can never enter in essential or natural union with God. The union according to the hypostis was realized in Christ. The human nature of Jesus is therefore one hypostatically with the Logos, and in it the divine energies that have the Logos as their source penetrate created nature and deify it. This union according to the energy becomes in this way accessible to all those who are in Christ. (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 203-4)

289 290

Qtd. in Hieromonk Damascene. Qtd. in Quotes from the Church Fathers.

699

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Manastireanu also describes Palamas these three aspects of Gods being, which are associated with three types of union with God, The first aspect is Gods essence, to which corresponds union according to essence. This takes place only between the divine persons, since the created order cannot be united with the divine essence. The second aspect is the divine hypostases, to which corresponds hypostatic union, possible only in the person of the incarnated Son of God, between His two natures. Finally, there are the divine energies, to which corresponds union according to energy, the only type of union accessible to a creature, in order for the union to be real and for Gods transcendence to remain absolute. and makes an interesting statement: St. Gregory avoids the risk of talking about an impersonal type of union between man and the divine energies stating that the energies are enhypostatic, that is, they are personal, in other words they cannot exist apart from the divine hypostases. The nature of the union between man and the divine energies is personal, not impersonal. This can only be true as God, as a personality, is both the source and destiny of all human persons. Florovsky, in St Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers, talks about what the whole teaching of Palamas presupposes: the action of the Personal God. God moves toward man and embraces him by His own grace and action, without leaving that , in which He eternally abides. He adds something enlightening, from an Orthodox Christian perspective: The ultimate purpose of S. Gregorys theological teaching was to defend the reality of Christian experience. Salvation is more than forgiveness. It is a genuine renewal of man. And this renewal is effected not by the discharge, or release of certain natural energies implied in mans own creaturely being, but by the energies of God Himself, who thereby encounters and encompasses man, and admits him into communion with Himself. In fact; the teaching of S. Gregory affects the whole system theology; the whole body of Christian doctrine. With Palamas, the fact of the experience of God triumphed over philosophic speculations. Mantzaridis, also giving a general summary of Palamas concept of deification, asserts: We have seen how the regeneration of human nature in Christ not only released it from the bonds of corruption and death, but raised above its pre-fallen 700

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

condition through deification and orientation towards God the Father (41). He adds, commenting on the sacramental view of Palamas, that for him, The regeneration and deification of human nature achieved in Christ is rendered accessible to all through the sacraments of the Church. By this means and through the grace of the Holy Spirit, man is made in Christ a victor over sin, transcends the dominion of corruption and death, and enters into the life of the body of Christ, that is the life of the Church. The chiefs sacraments, or those in which Christs economy is summed up in its entirely, are baptism and the Holy Eucharist. By virtue of its nature and its aim, the Church constitutes a veritable communion of deification.(41) Palamas in Homily 60, as Mantzaridis quotes (43), says regarding the Holy Eucharistic and baptism: on these two sacraments depends our whole salvation, for in them is recapitulated the complete theandric dispensation. For Palamas the notion of whole salvation is nothing other but deification. Steenberg, also referring to this sacramental perspective, mentions its community dimension: Palamas did much to tear down the false distinction between Church and spirituality. In his eyes, the Church was the divinely-instituted path toward theosis. Through the mysteries of the sacraments, human beings participate in divine Truth among community; for Palamas saw communal life as a perfectly validindeed necessaryavenue for mystical existence. Through this communal encounter with truth, the individual grows in his or her own personal spirituality, fostering the deific aspect of his or her life. The movements of the individual and those of the community are different sides of the same coin; both unique, yet each impossible without the other. Referring to the whole anthropology of Palamas, Panayiotis Christou asserts: The anthropology of Saint Gregory Palamas is the nerve centre of his theology. His entire system aims at nothing else than the description and definition of the relations among men and of each individual mans relation with God. He follows man in his striving between the worldly and the divine, the created and the uncreated, and shows the way by which he may reach the state of the uncreated. And it is just this state that becomes man since he is not only a recapitulation and an ornament of the whole creation; but also image of the Triune God for whom the uncreated kingdom was prepared since the foundation of the world. All physical life and existence is a created result of the divine energy. But the fact that even man is likewise such a created result does not equate him with the other animals. In man, elements of the ultramundane were added and finally the divine uncreated breath was given.

701

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

For Christou, Palamas shows us the way by which he may reach the state of the uncreated. The whole Church, in three great Synods at Constantinople, backed Palamas efforts formulating that life in Christ, more than simply moral edification of man, was deificationtheosisthe participation in Gods glory, a vision of God, of His Grace and His uncreated light. For Meyendorff, The defeat of the anti-Palamites in Byzantium in the fourteenth century was thus the triumph of a theology of the incarnation which was already that of the Church in the fifth, sixth, and eleventh century. Gregory Palamas may have used, here and there, new technical expressions (Christ in Eastern Christian Thought 205). Thanks to this hesychasts efforts, in 1351 the Council of Constantinople formally accepted Palamas patristic formulations rather than the rationalistic theology propounded by the humanists, by this decision, the Council made the existential hesychastic theology official Church dogma. Hillis concludes: While the ascetic and patristic Fathers of the past consistently advocated an experiential participation in God, the victory of the hesychasts in the fourteenth century solidified the elevation in the East of an existential, patristic theology over a theological scholasticism marked by the influence of Hellenistic philosophy. In other words, the councils decision essentially amounted to an official rejection of Western scholasticism, and a declaration of Eastern Christian theological distinctiveness. This decision would prove to shape Eastern Christianity up to the present day. The Ninth Ecumenical Councilthe Fifth Ecumenical Council of

Constantinople, had, according to Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, in The Mind of the Orthodox Church all the elements and hallmarks ... to qualify it as an Ecumenical Council As mentioned, this Council was really a series of councils held in Constantinople in 1341, 1347 and 1351. These so called Palamite Councils were convoked by order and in the presence of the emperors dealing with the doctrinal topic which concerned the Church at that time. In spite of some reticence, Orthodox

702

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

theologians agree that these Palamite Councils should be deemed ecumenical, as their results are accepted by all Orthodox Christians. Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos believes that the subject of the uncreated energy of God, as well as what was called hesychasm, were serious theological questions as they were major dogmatic themes that refer to mans salvation. If the energy of God was created, we cannot attain communion with God. It would be more like some form of agnosticism or pantheism. Also, if hesychasm, the means of the orthodox tradition to restore men and achieve deification, is considered a philosophy, the true preconditions for mans salvation are destroyed. Another supporter of the view that this series of councils comprises the Ninth Ecumenical Council, George Metallinos, in The Theological Question of our Day: An Interview with Protopresbyter, asserts (all parentheses and brackets in original): Blessed John Popovich, a confessor of our Faith, has written an important critical treatise on the upcoming Synod. The cause that leads to an Ecumenical Synod is always a specific problem, and the question is, what is the key problem today? If we look at the agenda of the Synod, it seems [as if] we want to formulate a new dogmatic [theology]. Traditionally, the holy Fathers brought three main problems to the council: issues concerning the Trinity, issues concerning Christology, or issues concerning the grace of God and mans salvation. (Of the nine Ecumenical Synods of the Orthodox Church, the Eighth (879-880) and the Ninth (1341) dealt with these problems. The Trinitarian problem expresses Orthodox sociology, which is ecclesiology, and the Christological problem expresses Orthodox anthropology.) We do not need anything new today; we only need to live and experience our Orthodox Tradition. (59-60)291 Additionally, Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos quotes the opinion of Father Athanasios Gievtits: But we think that the Council of Constantinople at the time of St. Gregory Palamas in 1351, judging at least from its great theological work, can be, and deserves to be counted among the Ecumenical Councils of the Orthodox Church, lacking in nothing as to the soteriological significance of its theology. This Council constitutes the proof of the conciliarity of the Orthodox Church and of the living experience and theology concerning salvation in Christ.
291

Qtd. in <http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/8-9synods. html>.

703

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

He adds that Finally, the hesychastic teaching entered into the Synodikon of Orthodoxy for the first time, on the Sunday of Orthodoxy in 1352 A.D. in order for the heretics to be anathematised and all who expressed the orthodox teaching to be acclaimed. After the death of St. Gregory Palamas acclaim for him was added.
The Synodikon of Orthodoxy is a text contained in the Triodion and read on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, the first Sunday of Lent. It is well known that through the ages various heresies have appeared which deny the experience of revelation and in fact make use of philosophy and conjecture, doubting the Churchs truth on various dogmatic topics. The Fathers who formed the Synods opposed these errors. The decisions of the Synods on dogmatic topics are called provisions. More generally speaking, each decision of the Synods is called a Synodikon Thus we have the synodical tome and the synodical provision, and moreover, each synod has its own synodikon. (Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, The Mind of the Orthodox) Table 76: Synodikon of Orthodoxy

Illustration 76: St. Gregory Palamas292

St. Gregory was a living Gospel. God gave him the gift of healing, especially in the last three years before his death. On the eve of his repose, St. John Chrysostom appeared to him in a vision. St. Gregory Palamas fell asleep in the Lord on November 14, 1359. The Virgin Mary, the Apostle John, St. Dimitrios, St. Antony the Great, St. John Chrysostom, and angels of God all appeared to him at different times. Nine years after his repose, a council in Constantinople headed by Patriarch Philotheos (13541355, 13621376) proclaimed the sainthood of Gregory Palamas. Patriarch Philotheos himself compiled the life and services for the saint. When we hear in the Lenten Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, The Light of Christ illumines all, may we remember the call of the illumined Gregory for unceasing prayer and ascetic labor, that
292

See: <www.michaeltangen.com>.

704

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

we be truly illumined by the light of the Resurrection. (Fr. Bassam A. Nassif) Table 77: The Proclamation of Palamas Sainthood

Nowadays, as Lossky holds, The theology of the Eastern Church distinguishes in God the three hypostases, the nature or essence, and the energies. The Son and the Holy Spirit are, so to say, personal processions, the energies natural processions. The energies are inseparable from the nature, and the nature is inseparable from the three Persons. He also provides three distinctions, which are of great importance for the Eastern Churchs conception of mystical life: 1) The doctrine of the energies, ineffably distinct from the essence, is the dogmatic basis of the real character of all mystical experience; 2) This doctrine makes it possible to understand how the Trinity can remain incommunicable in essence and at the same time come and dwell within us, according to the promise of Christ (John xiv, 23); and 3) The distinction between the essences and the energies, which is fundamental for the Orthodox doctrine of grace, makes it possible to preserve the real meaning of St. Peters words partakers of the divine nature (8687). Lossky adds something enlightening: The union to which we are called is neither hypostaticas in the case of the human nature of Christnor substantial, as in that of the three divine Persons: it is union with God in His energies, or union by grace making us participate in the divine nature, without our essence becoming thereby the essence of God. In deification we are by grace (that is to say, in the divine energies) all that God is by nature, save only identity of nature ... according to the teaching of St. Maximus (De ambiguis). We remain creatures while becoming God by grace, as Christ remained God in becoming man by the Incarnation. (76) As already suggested in the preceding pages, being God the Father a divine personal being, as well as God the Son and God the Spirit, and the source of all personalities, the circuit of uncreated energieswe may add the term circuit as suggested in the mentioned Scriptural bases of theosis293through which man is able to be divinized,

293

Psa 19:6: His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof. The term circuit indicates that the energy comes from the Source and returns to Him as the deification process takes place.

705

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

must also be personal or a least pre-personal as man acquires a new, transformed personality at his unification with God. For Kallistos of Dioclea salvation is the realization of personhood in Christ (Person and Personality in Orthodox Teaching). Palamas even calls these created energies lesser divinity in contradistinction to the essence, the greater divinity (Lossky, Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 81). Thus, there can only be relationmystical experiencebetween men and God because both are personal beings, the former a human personal being, the latter a divine personal being. And this uncreated energy circuitthis personality circuitcoming from the Trinity, aided by the love of the Father, the action of the Spirit, and the ministry of the Son conspire to deify man. As the Fathers of the Church claim, the Father loves men; the Son serves men, and the Spirit lifts men to the ever-ascending career of finding the Father by the ways ordained by the Son and through the ministry of the grace of the spirit. The Divine love embraces the uncreated energies as a whole as it is the dominating force that moves the universe. It is when man pursues divine goodness through grace that he certainly will survive after death and attain deification. We achieve goodness when we are good, and being good is Godlike. Activity Read the comments and the quoted passages, and, briefly in your own words, summarize the ideas of the Byzantine Fathers: Maximus the Confessor:
Activity 142: Theosis and the Byzantine Fathers

Some Concluding Words and Further Theological Speculations

706

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

As we have seen, there are two main ideas to the complex Orthodox concept of theosis or deification as the salvation of man: on the one hand, that God, as a deed of His Infinite, ecstatic love, comes out of Himself, bestows Himself on man, inhabits man, and seeks to unite with him; on the other, that man is given the command to be perfect in the Fathers likeness, literally to become god. Deification, the restoration of man as a true son of God, occurs by means of Gods grace or uncreated Energies through His Spirit and in Christ, and through the sacraments. In contrast with the Western Church, God is not only essence, He is also energy. If God was only essence man could not unite or commune with Him. In the deification process, both our soul residing in the mind according to Macarius the Great (Homily 15,20) and the abode of the indwelling Spiritand our body experience a transformation (Irenaeus, Book V, Chapter 6, 1). It is the whole man who glorifies in Christ as he acquires the grace of the Holy Spirit. Harry Boosalis of St. Tikhons seminary, in Orthodox Spiritual Life according to St. Silouan the Athonite, says: For the Orthodox Church salvation is more than pardon of sin and transgression. It is more than being justified or acquitted for offenses committed against God. According to Orthodox teaching, salvation certainly includes forgiveness and justification, but it is by no means limited to them. For the Fathers of Church, salvation is the acquisition of the Grace of the Holy Spirit. To be saved is to be sanctified and to participate in the life of Godindeed to become partakers of the Divine Nature. (2 Peter 1:4) (19)294 For the Church Fathers, Jesus incarnation is the key to salvation and deification. The Logos of God having taken a human body makes mankind partakers of the divine nature. Palamas says that in the in the process of deification there is a hypostatic union of human nature with the incarnate Logos of God (Rakestraw). Archbishop Basil Krivocheine, in St. Symeon the New Theologian, echoing St. Symeon, refers to this action of the Holy Spirit, when transforming the whole man, and

294

Qtd in Hieromonk Damascene.

707

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

uniting with him, body and soul. Krivocheine adds that man does not receive a new soul: Divinization is the state of mans total transformation, effected by the Holy Spirit, when man observes the commandments of God, acquires the evangelical virtues and shares in the sufferings of Christ. The Holy Spirit then gives man a divine intelligence and incorruptibility. Man does not receive a new soul, but the Holy Spirit unites essentially with the whole man, body and soul. He makes of him a son of God, a god by adoption, though man does not cease being a man, a simple creature, even when he clearly sees the Father. He may be called man and god at the same time. (389)295 But is there an ontological transformation of the soul of man, and, thus, of the whole person as he is deified? Is there a real participation of the Christian who observes the commandments in intra-divine relationship, a real fusion with the Spirit, granting the body even on earth incorruptibility and glorification or just a moral development, a communication of the divine attributes to the perfecting human being, a vision of God when the person approaches the knowledge of the Truth? What is true, as already suggested, is that it must be a personal union not an impersonal one. The Uncreated Energies, coming directly from God, are of personal origin as He is a Divine Person and the center and author and source of personality. I have mentioned that God being the Father a divine personal being, as well as God the Son and God the Spirit, and the source of all personalities, the uncreated energies, through which man is able to divinize, must also be personal or at least pre-personal as man acquires a new, transformed soul-personality at his unification with God. For Palamas, as Manastireanu explains in The Place Of Scripture in the Orthodox Tradition, the union between man and the Divine Energies are enhypostatic, that is, personal: they cannot exist apart from the divine hypostases. Thus, one wonders if the Spirit of God, the Divine presence, as Florovsky calls it, indwelling in man, is the infinite God the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, the Infinite Third
295

Qtd. in Rakestraw.

708

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Person of the Trinity, acting in time. The Fathers must have had difficulties contemplating a union of the soul with this Third Person as this divine Person is absolute and in essence similar to the Father, in spite of the uncreated energies. A personal union with this Infinite being would be close to either pantheism and/or man could lose his identity, instead of becoming individuated, as he might become embedded in His Divine Personality. Perhaps the great problem of the Fathers was considering the Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity and its relationship to man. Instead of man just being a part of God, but still not a personal part, man is being embraced in the personality circuit of energy coming from and going to the Father through the action of the Holy Spirit. This part would personalize as the soul of the man fuses with it, thus becoming or being a new, transformed being without losing its identity. As we will see, the Bible refers many times to the Spirit of God, without reference to the Third Person of the Trinity, the latter idea being a later theological development. This Spirit, according to Paul, is the same that raised Christ from the dead (Roman 8:11). However, we can also see deification as the Holy Spirit acting on mans mind, and soul, until he is transformed, deified, made god. St. Paul says that we are transformed by the renewing of our mind (Roman 12:2). But when does this process of transformation begin and when does it end? I believe that deification may start in this world and can, very exceptionally end in this world as in the case of Jesus or John the Baptist, who according to Palamas would not have died if he did not die by martyrdom, as Mantzaridis explains commenting on Palamas Homily 40 (PG 151, 513C): But Christ, John the Baptist and the saints, because of their obedience to Gods will and because they are the enemies of sin and of the devil, are nor obliged to undergo natural death. Palamas says of them that what is more appropriate in their case is a violent death in the cause of goodness, that they

709

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

undergo through martyrdom (25). Mantzaridis clarifies saying it is not because Palamas adopts any aphthartodocetic notions296 but because he sees death as being related to sin (30). Bray maintains that deification is no pantheism as the deified person retains his personal identity and is not absorbed into the essence of God.297 Not being pantheistic does not mean that it does not entail an eternal process, as Lossky suggests: The deification or theosis of the creature will be realized in its fullness only in the age to come, after the resurrection of the dead. This deifying union has, nevertheless, to be fulfilled ever more and more even in this present life, through the transformation of our corruptible and depraved nature and by its adaptation to eternal life. (Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 196) For him, as Orthodoxy also holds, this deification will come after the resurrection of the dead, but he leaves the door open to the fulfilment of it in the present life. In The Way of Spiritual Transformation, Hieromonk Damascene, says regarding this unending transformation: As I said, the theme of transformation points to the purpose of our life. That purpose is unending union with Goddeification, theosis. But deification is not a static condition: it is a never-ending growth, a process, an ascent toward God. We do not reach the end in this life, nor even in the life to come. St. Symeon the New Theologian, who attained what might be called the highest possible degree of union with God in this life, said: Over the ages the progress will be endless, for a cessation of this growing toward the end without ending would be nothing but a grasping at the ungraspable. Our union with God is a continual transformation into the likeness of God, which is the likeness of Christ. For Damascene, Symeon reached the highest grade of deification of earth. Perhaps we should remember Enoch and Elijah whose lack of sin and dedication to God caused them not to taste death in life, as the Scriptures say and the Orthodox tradition confirms: By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. (Hebrews 11:5)

296 297

Aphthartodocetic is the view of human body of Christ as incorruptible. Bray. Qtd in Rakestraw.

710

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. (II King 2: 12 We see that this fire mentioned in the Book of King about Elijah is reflected in

Symeons work, in which he compares our soul with a lamp kindled by divine fire: God is fire and He is so called by all the inspired Scripture (cf. Heb. 12:29). The soul of each of us is a lamp. Now a lamp is wholly in darkness, even though it be filled with oil or tow or other combustible matter, until it receives fire and is kindled ... The man whose souls lamp is still in darkness, that is, untorched by the divine fire, stands the more in need of a guide with a shining torch who will discern his actions. (Ethical Discourses 339)298 earth. Kallistos, Bishop of Diokleia, in The unity of the human person: The body-soul relationship in Orthodox Theology, says the interpenetration of spirit and matterand likewise the transfiguration of our physical bodies and of all material things by the uncreated energies of Godare clearly affirmed not only in Scripture but in the continuing experience of the Church. Moreover, Steenberg gives a good summary of the Orthodox position on this spiritual Christian tradition of theosis: The position of the Orthodox Church is somewhat unique among Christian bodies of the present day, in that its mystical spirituality makes quite a different claim. Not only is closeness the goal of Orthodox mysticism, but in fact a direct union of the believer with the God in whom he believes. This union is seen as the end, of human existencethe very fulfilment of the nature of man. It is a transformative part of life; or, as many an Orthodox monastic has said, the sole transformation of a worldly sub-existence into true Life. Yet this notion of union goes beyond the simple analogy of two beings coming closer to one another. In its fullest and purest sense, this spiritual unionthis transformation from life into Lifeaffects a genuine participation of the human nature with the energies of God. What has become unholy through misuse and passion-driven enslavement is restored to its true nature, and thus once more able to participate in the divine mysteries. In this sense, the profane is made holy; the lost and solitary human person is united and joined to the Holy God and partakes of Gods divinity, which shines forth like rays from the sun; or, to use Palamas fond metaphor, a wellspring of light. It is plausible to think that both prophets might have attained deification on

298

Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. Qtd. in Quotations.

711

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

A current theologian like C. S. Lewis, in God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics (Chap.12, Part I), states: Morality is indispensable: but the Divine Life, which gives itself to us and which calls us to be gods, intends for us something in which morality will be swallowed up. We are to be re-made. All the rabbit in us is to disappearthe worried, conscientious, ethical rabbit as well as the cowardly and sensual rabbit. We shall bleed and squeal as the handfuls of fur come out; and then, surprisingly, we shall find underneath it all a thing we have never yet imagined: a real Man, an ageless god, a son of God, strong, radiant, wise, beautiful, and drenched in joy. Interestingly, Robert Stroud says of C. S. Lewis that He was a devout Anglican, but proclaimed a message which resonates in deep harmony with Orthodox believers. In spite of so much literature about it, the process of deification of man, the focus and center of Orthodox theology, is and will always be a mystery, uniquely belonging to God and mans experience of His Presence. Krivocheine, giving again Symeons thoughts, says: While remaining a spiritually conscious state and clearly felt by the one who receives it, divinization will always remain an awesome mystery, surpassing all human understanding and unobserved by most people. Indeed, the ones who are granted it are rare, although all the baptized are called to it. It is their fault if they deprive themselves of it. (389-390) 299 Perhaps light, as we have seen, is the image we can retain in our still earthly eyes to grasp this mystery of the Grace of God being bestowed upon us. Symeon, the great teacher on the human experience of theosis, describes this mystical light-fire: How good it is thankfully to proclaim the blessings of God, who loves men! ... By grace I have received grace (cf. John 1:16), by doing well I have received [His] kindness, by fire I have been requited with fire, by flame with flame. As I ascended I was given other ascents, at the end of the ascent I was given light, and by the light an even clearer light. In the midst thereof a sun shone brightly and from it a ray shone forth that filled all things. The object of my thought remained beyond understanding, and in this state I remained while I wept most sweetly and marvelled at the ineffable. (The Discourses 205)300

299 300

Qtd. in Rakestraw. Qtd. in Quotations.

712

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

He also says: That human being who is inwardly illumined by the light of the Holy Spirit cannot endure the vision of it, but falls face down on the ground and cries out in great fear and wonder, because he has seen and experienced something that is beyond nature, thought, or conception.301 How can we experience something beyond nature and not be wholly transformed by it? The Russian holy staretz (or elder) of the eighteenth century, St. Seraphim of Sarov also addresses this light the grace of the Holy Spirit. In Conversation with Nicholas Motovilov (III), he says: I will tell you something else, so that you may understand still more clearly what is meant by the grace of God, how to recognize it and how its action is manifested particularly in those who are enlightened by it. The grace of the Holy Spirit is the light which enlightens man. The whole of Sacred Scripture speaks about this. Thus our holy Father David said: Thy word is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my path (Ps. 118:105), and: Unless Thy law had been my meditation I should have died in my humiliation (Ps. 118:92). In other words, the grace of the Holy Spirit which is expressed in the Law by the words of the Lords commandments is my lamp and light. And if this grace of the Holy Spirit (which I try to acquire so carefully and zealously that I meditate on Thy righteous judgements seven times a day) did not enlighten me amidst the darkness of the cares which are inseparable from the high calling of my royal rank, whence should I get a spark of light to illumine my way on the path of life which is darkened by the ill-will of my enemies? Seraphim of Sarov, well known for his experience of and teachings on the Holy Spirit, teaches us how to recognize the grace of God and its action. He goes on describing his deification in terms of this light: Then Father Seraphim took me very firmly by the shoulders and said: My son, we are both at this moment in the Spirit of God. Why dont you look at me? I cannot look, Father, I replied, because your eyes are flashing like lightning. Your face has become brighter than the sun, and it hurts my eyes to look at you. Dont be afraid, he said. At this very moment you yourself have become as bright as I am. You yourself are now in the fullness of the Spirit of God; otherwise you would not be able to see me as you do. Then bending his head towards me, he whispered softly in my ear: Thank the Lord God for His infinite goodness towards usBut why, my son, do you not look me in the eyes? Just look, and dont be afraid; the Lord is with us. (Conversation with Nicholas Motovilov III)
301

The Philokalia (vol 4). Qtd. in Quotations.

713

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Light, spiritual lightning, the image of deification when what is attained is the contemplation of the Truth, when one becomes like God and acquires His Spirit, is the goal of the Orthodox Christian. This saint also points out to this cosmic salvation of humanity: Learn to be peaceful, and thousands around you will find salvation.302 He also says Prayer, fasting, works of mercy-all this is very good, but it represents only the means, not the end of the Christian life. The true end is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit.303 Indeed, the deification process, in which Spirit indwells mans soul and mysteriously unites with him leads man to unceasing prayer, to hesychasm (conscious resting in God). This is what Isaac the Syrian, Bishop of Nineveh, in the seven century, writes in Treatises: When the Spirit establishes his indwelling in man, the latter can no longer stop praying, for the Spirit never ceases praying in him. Whether he sleeps or stays awake, prayer is not separated from his soul. While he eats, while he drinks, while he lies in bed or in working, while he is plunged into sleep, the perfume of prayer spontaneously exhales from his soul. Henceforth he masters prayers not during determined periods of time, but at all times.304 Unceasing, perfumed prayer naturally flowing from our soul as it breathes its union with the Spirit and worship the Father in heaven. Deification continues to be the watchword of soteriology in Eastern Christianity even up to modern times. For Orthodox Christians spiritualization, the survival of the soul, the union of the soul with the Spirit and the restoration of personhood, is a reality for humankind, and for the entire cosmos. The non-spiritualized soul would be as though it would have never existed, no reality; perhaps it might enter a pantheistic state. Activity Write a ten-page paper on Theosis. Although you can be creative, try to use the main ideas of the preceding pages as a framework of it.
302 303

Qtd. in Aaron. Qtd. in Aaron. 304 Qtd. in Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Thought, 127. According to Meyendorff, Isaacs mystical treatises, written in Syriac, translated into Greek in the ninth century, were widely circulated in the Byzantine world (Christ in Eastern Thought 230).

714

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Activity 143: Paper on Theosis

When dealing with deification, I have also commented on other dogmas such as that of the Trinity, Christology, very closely related, and even on that of creation and eschatology. It is now the students turn to deepen their knowledge of these Orthodox dogmas by doing their own research. As can be seen all of the points to be researched are introduced by some preliminary words.

Final Activity After having read this part and done its exercises, write a five-page paper summarizing what has been said. Use your own words and provide your own conclusion.
Activity 144: Final activity on Theosis

THE DOGMA OF THE TRINITY: YOUR OWN RESEARCH Before you approach this important Orthodox dogma of the Trinity, it is necessary to assert that its understanding, as that of theosis closely linked with it, is beyond the intellectual grasp of the human mind. It is enlightening in this sense to quote how the anonymous theologian and philosopher of the 5th century, Dionysius Areopagite invokes the Holy Trinity at the beginning of his Mystical Theology: Supernal Triad, Deity above all essence, knowledge and goodness; Guide of Christians to Divine Wisdom; direct our path to the ultimate summit of your mystical knowledge, most incomprehensible, most luminous and most exalted, where the pure, absolute and immutable mysteries of theology are veiled in the dazzling obscurity of the secret Silence, outshining all brilliance with the intensity of their Darkness, and surcharging our blinded intellects with the utterly impalpable and invisible fairness of glories surpassing all beauty. (Chap. 1) Dionysius describes the apophatic characteristic of the Trinity which surpasses all essence, knowledge and goodness, but prays to be guided to the ultimate path of your

715

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

mystical knowledge, a knowledge which derives from our living this revealed truth. Maximus the Confessor refers to this kind of knowledge: The one who speaks of God in positive affirmations is making the Word flesh. Making use only of what can be seen and felt he knows God as their cause. But the one who speaks of God negatively through negations is making the Word spirit, as in the beginning He was God and with God. Using absolutely nothing which can be known, he knows in a better way the utterly Unknowable. (On Knowledge, Chap. 39) Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow remarks that we can have access to Gods transcendence when we apply in all humility our spiritnot our intellectto the contemplation of the divine things: None of the mysteries of the most secret wisdom of God ought to appear alien or altogether transcendent to us, but in all humility we must apply our spirit to the contemplation of Divine things. And this is what Dionysius does after this initial prayer: to exhort Timothy, to whom this treatise is dedicated, to leave behind intellect and things of the world and to engage in mystical contemplation: Let this be my prayer; but do, dear Timothy, in the diligent exercise of mystical contemplation, leave behind the senses and the operations of the intellect, and all things sensible and intellectual, and all things in the world of being and nonbeing, that you may arise by unknowing towards the union, as far as is attainable, with it that transcends all being and all knowledge.(1) For by the unceasing and absolute renunciation of yourself and of all things you may be borne on high, through pure and entire self-abnegation, into the superessential Radiance of the Divine Darkness. (Mystical Theology, Chap. 2) Lossky states that unlike Gnosticism whose aims is knowledge for its own sake, Christian knowledge is always in the last resort a means: a unity of knowledge a subserving an end which transcends all knowledge. This ultimate end is union with God or deification, the Theosis of the Greek Fathers (The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 9). Thus, in Orthodoxy, theoretically approaching the dogma of the Trinity has paradoxically an eminently practical significance, as already noticed, the exhortation to live it, to aspire to the supreme union with God (Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 10). In the article The Holy Trinity, we can also see this experiential approach to the doctrine of the Trinity: 716

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not merely an article of faith which men are called to believe. It is not simply a dogma which the Church requires its good members to accept on faith. Neither is the doctrine of the Holy Trinity the invention of scholars and academicians, the result of intellectual speculation and philosophical thinking. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity arises from mans deepest experiences with God. It comes from the genuine living knowledge of those who have come to know God in faith. God is one in Essence and Triple in Persons: this is the essence of the dogma of the Trinity. Because of its special importance, Pomazansky, explains, the doctrine of the All Holy Trinity constitutes the content of all the Symbols of Faith which have been and are now used in the Orthodox Church, as well as all the private confessions of faith written on various occasions by the shepherds of the Church. He adds: Holy Trinity includes in itself two fundamental truths: a) God is one in Essence, but triple in Personin other words, God is a Tri-unity, is Tri hypostatical, is a Trinity One in Essenceand b) the Hypostases have personal or hypostatic attributes: God is unbegotten; the Son is be-gotten from the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. (Orthodox Dogmatic Theology)

YOUR OWN RESEARCH Read the section Triune God in Aghiorgoussis The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church [http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/ article8038. asp]. Then, with your own words, summarize what this author says about: o Gods immanence and transcendence o the three persons or hyposthases of the Holy Trinity Read The Holy Trinity [http://www.stspyridon.org.au/ourFaith.php? articleId=85&submenu=Orthodoxy#c0]. Then, with your own words, summarize what the article says about: o One God o The three Divine Persons o The Holy Trinity in creation o The Holy Trinity in salvation o The Holy Trinity in the Church o The Holy Trinity in the sacraments o The Holy Trinity in eternal life You can complement the above two articles with Pomazanskys Orthodox Dogmatic Theology [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/index.php] and Meyendorffs Byzantine Theology [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/ books/english/byzantine_theology_j_ meyendorf.htm]

717

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Activity 145: The dogma of the Trinity

THE CHRISTOLOGICAL DOGMA: YOUR OWN RESEARCH Three ecumenical councilsat Ephesus (431), at Chalcedon (451), and at Constantinople (681)established the so-called Christological dogma, the doctrine concerned with Christ being true God and true man. Christ, as Aghiorgoussis asserts is a divine person who assumed a perfect humanity, thus saving and deifying it (uniting it with the divine). Lossky points out the presence of the Trinity in the Christological dogma: The Trinity is present in the very intellectual structure of the Christological dogma, that is, in the distinction between person and nature. The Trinity is one nature in three persons; Christ is a single person in two natures. Divinity and humanity, however separated they may appear by that infinite chasm which yarns between created and uncreated, are reconciled in the unity of one person. (Orthodox Theology 95) Moreover, Meyendorff sees the Incarnation as a cosmic event:

718

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

To affirm that God became man, and this His humanity possesses all the characteristics proper to human nature, implies that the Incarnation is a cosmic event. Man was created as the master of the cosmos and called by the creator to draw all creation to God. His failure to do so was a cosmic catastrophe, which could be repaired only by the creator Himself. (Byzantine Theology 151) He adds: The cosmic dimension of the Incarnation is implied in the Chalcedonian definition of 451, to which Byzantine theology remains faithful: Christ of one substance with us in his humanity, like unto us in all things save sin. He is God and man for the distinction of natures is in no way abolished because of the union; rather, the characteristic properties of each nature are preserved. (Byzantine Theology 153) YOUR OWN RESEARCH Read the section The Divine Plan of Salvation in Aghiorgoussis The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church [http://www.goarch. org/en/ourfaith/articles/ article8038.asp]. Then, with your own words, summarize what this author says about: o Christs Incarnation and the mystery of Salvation o Jesus the Christ, the God-Man o Jesus the Prophet, the Priest, and the King You can complement Aghiorgoussis article with Pomazanskys Orthodox Dogmatic Theology [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/index.php] and Meyendorffs Byzantine Theology. [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/ books/english/byzantine_theologyj_meyendorf.htm]
Activity 146: The Christological Dogma

YOUR OWN RESEARCH ESCHATOLOGY

ON

OTHER

DOGMAS:

CREATION

AND

In the Scriptures and in the writings of the Church Fathers there are many references to God as creator of heaven and earth. In Colossians 1:16, for example, we read: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. St. Irenaeus asserts that even persons who speak against God accept His creative powers: That God is the Creator of

719

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

the world is accepted even by those very persons who in many ways speak against Him, and yet acknowledge Him, styling Him the Creator, and an angel, not to mention that all the Scriptures call out [to the same effect]... (Adversus Haereses, Book 2, ix, 1). He also tells us that God created the world by His Son and His Spirit, His two hands (Adversus Haereses, Book 4, xx, 1). For Basil, God is the primary and principal cause: Let there be a firmament. It is the voice of the primary and principal Cause. And God made the firmament Here is a witness to the active and creative power of God! (Hexameron, Homily 3, Chap. 4). Gods power is active, creative, and it is an act of His divine will. Referring to Athanasius, Meyendorff says: For Athanasius, creation is an act of the will of God, and a will is ontologically distinct from nature. By nature, the Father generates the Sonand this generation is indeed beyond time but creation occurs through the will of God, which means that God remains absolutely free to create or not to create and transcendent to the world after creating it. The absence of a distinction between the nature of God and the will of God was common to Origen and to Arius. (Byzantine Theology 130) He also quotes Maximus the Confessor regarding the creation of man and the purpose of his nature: 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 of the divine Logos, and the purpose of his nature is to acquire similitude with God. In creation as a whole, mans role is to unify all things in God and thus to overcome the evil powers of separation, division, disintegration, and death. The natural, God-established movement, energy, or will of man is therefore directed toward communion with God, deification, not in isolation from the entire creation, but leading it back to its original state. (Byzantine Theology 38) Meyendorff finally remarks on the very important Orthodox notion of mans participation in God, a crucial concept to understand theosis: The view of man prevailing in the Christian East is based upon the notion of participation in God. Man has not been created as an autonomous or selfsufficient being; his very nature is truly itself only inasmuch as it exists in God or in grace. Grace therefore gives man his natural development. This basic presupposition explains why the terms nature and grace when used by Byzantine authors have a meaning quite different from the Western usage; rather 720

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

than being in direct opposition, the terms nature and grace express a dynamic, living, and necessary relationship between God and man, different by their natures but in communion with each other through Gods energy, or grace. Yet man is the centre of creation a microcosm, and his free selfdetermination defines the ultimate destiny of the universe. (138) God created not only visible things but invisible things, such us the angels. Pomazansky asserts regarding the creation of angels: In the Symbol of Faith we read, I believe in one God ... Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. The invisible, angelic world was created by God and created before the visible world. When the stars were made, all My angels praised Me with a loud voice, said the Lord to Job (Job 38:7, Septuagint). The Apostle Paul writes, By Him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers (Col. 1:16). The Fathers of the Church understand the word heaven, in the first words of the book of Genesis (In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth), as being not the physical heaven, which was formed later, but the invisible heaven, the dwelling place of the powers on high. They expressed the idea that God created the angels long before He created the visible world (Sts. Ambrose, Jerome, Gregory the Great, Anastasius of Sinai), and that at the creation of the visible world the angels already stood before the Face of the Creator and served Him. Orthodox. (Dogmatic Theology) Furthermore, Meyendorff tells us about the function of angels in Byzantine theology: Involved in the struggle against the demonic powers of the cosmos, the angels represent, in a way, the ideal side of creation. According to Byzantine theologians, they were created before the visible world, and their essential function is to serve God and His image, man. The scriptural idea that the angels perpetually praise God (Is. 6:3; Luke 2:13) is a frequent theme of the Byzantine liturgy, especially of the Eucharistic canons, which call the faithful to join the choir of angelsi.e., to recover their original fellowship with God. This reunion of heaven and earth, anticipated in the Eucharist, is the eschatological goal of the whole of creation. The angels contribute to its preparation by participating invisibly in the life of the cosmos. (Byzantine Theology 136) YOUR OWN RESEARCH Read the section Creation in Aghiorgoussis The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church [http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/ article8038. asp]. Then, with your own words, summarize what this author says about: o The Creation of the world o Angelss creation and purpose

721

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

o Mans creation o Mans fall and its consequence You can complement Aghiorgoussis article with Pomazanskys Orthodox Dogmatic Theology [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/index.php] and Meyendorffs Byzantine Theology. [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/ books/english/byzantine_theologyj_meyendorf.htm]
Activity 147: The dogma of Creation

As Meyendorff notes, the reunion of heaven and earth, anticipated in the Eucharist, is the eschatological goal of the whole of creation. Yet, he says that: The eschatological state however is not only a reality of the future but a present experience, accessible in Christ through the gifts of the Spirit. The Eucharistic canon of the liturgy of John Chrysostom commemorates the second coming of Christ together with events of the past the cross, the grave, the Resurrection, and the Ascension. In the Eucharistic presence of the Lord, His forthcoming advent is already realized, and time is being transcended. Similarly, the entire tradition of Eastern monastic spirituality is based upon the premise that now, in this life, Christians can experience the vision of God and the reality of deification. (Byzantine Theology 219) He finally adds that Existing in history, the Church expects the second coming of Christ in power as the visible triumph of God in the world and the final transfiguration of the whole of creation. Man, as centre and lord of creation, will then be restored to his original stature, which has been corrupted by sin and death; this restoration will imply the resurrection of the flesh, because man is not only a soul, but a psychosomatic whole, necessarily incomplete without his body. Finally, the second coming will also be a judgment, because the criterion of all righteousness Christ Himselfill be present not in faith only, appealing for mans free response, but in full evidence and power. These three essential meanings of the parousiacosmic transfiguration, resurrection, and judgmentare not subjects of detailed speculation by Byzantine theologians; yet they stand at the very centre of Byzantine liturgical experience. (219-220) This is suggested in the Nicean Constantinopolitan Symbol of Faith or Creed. It contains the Orthodox Christian confession of faith in the future coming of the Son of God to earth, the General or Last Judgment, and the future eternal life: And He is coming again with glory to judge the living and the dead; and His Kingdom will have

722

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

no end. I look for the resurrection of the dead. ... And the life of the age to come. Amen. In the Scriptures we find many references to the early Christian expectations about the second coming of Christ. Aghiorgoussis lists some of them: The Gospel will be preached everywhere in the world (Matt. 24: 14; Luke 18:8; John 10: 16); The Jews will be converted to Christ (Rom. 11:25-26; cf. Hosea 3:5); Elijah, or even Enoch, will return (Mark 9:11); The Antichrist will appear with numerous false prophets accompanying him (1 John 2:10; 2 Thes. 2:3; Matt. 24:5); Physical phenomena, upheavals, wars, sufferings will occur (Matt. 24:6; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:25); and, The world will be destroyed by fire (ekpyrosis; see 2 Peter 3:5). As Pomazansky states, based on the Scriptures, the Church Fathers develop their concepts of the fate of the soul after death,

Based on these indications of Sacred Scripture, from antiquity the Holy Fathers of the Church have depicted the path of the soul after its separation from the body as a path through such spiritual expanses, where the dark powers seek to devour those who are weak spiritually, and where therefore one is in special need of being defended by the heavenly angels and supported by prayer on the part of the living members of the Church.

listing some of them: Among the ancient Fathers the following speak of this Sts. Ephraim the Syrian, Athanasius the Great, Macarius the Great, Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, and others... The most detailed development of these ideas is made by St Cyril of Alexandria in his Homily on the Departure of the Soul, which is usually printed in the Sequential Psalter (the Psalter with additions from the Divine services). A pictorial depiction of this path is presented in the life of St Basil the New (March 26), where the departed blessed Theodora, in a vision during sleep communicated to the disciple of Basil, tells what she has seen and experienced after the separation of her soul from the body and during the ascent of the soul into the heavenly mansions.

723

Chapter 6: Dogmatics

Your Own Research 1. Read the section Orthodox Eschatology in Aghiorgoussis The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church [http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/ articles/article8038.asp]. Then, with your own words, summarize what this author says about: a) Partial judgment b) general judgment 2. You can complement Aghiorgoussis article with Pomazanskys Orthodox Dogmatic Theology [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/index.php] and Meyendorffs Byzantine Theology. [http://www.holytrinitymission.org/ books/english/byzantine_theologyj_ meyendorf.htm]

Activity 148 : Eschatology

2. CONCLUSION The words of Ernst Benz, in the The Eastern Orthodox Church: Its Thought and Life, can help us conclude this chapter on Dogmatics. For him the dogma, although founded on direct transcendental experience, is not the expression of the individual mind, but the expression of the mind of the Church: This conception of dogma is in keeping with the nature of belief itself. All genuine faith is ultimately founded upon direct transcendental experience. But genuine faith is also impelled to clarify intellectually its underlying ideas. The dogma of the Church, however, represents not the expression of an individual mind, but the expression of the mind of the Church as a whole meditating upon the facts of redemption; not the experience of isolated individuals, but the experience of the Church in its totality as a divine and human organism. (24) Let us now approach Part III, Practical Theology.

724

PART III: PRACTICAL THEOLOGY

PART III PRACTICAL THEOLOGY

(A Study of History of Orthodox Liturgics, the Liturgical Environment, and Contemporary Liturgics)

725

PART III: PRACTICAL THEOLOGY

INTRODUCTION TO PART III

In this Part III, a composite of chapters 7, 8, and 9, I will deal with the liturgical dimension of Practical Theology, including aspects of religious education, namely: Chapter 7. Development of Orthodox Liturgy Chapter 8. Liturgical Environment: the Church Building and Vestments Chapter 9. Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Catechesis Practical Theology is the practical application of theological insights, and, as Systematic Theology or Mystical Theology, it is a fundamental part of the changeless Holy Tradition, as it is understood by the Orthodox Church. It is from Tradition and within Tradition that all the different aspects of Practical Theology developed in harmony both with the infant, Apostolic Church and with all the doctrinal and dogmatic elements of Orthodoxy. All aspects and subdivisions of Practical Theology are embedded and attain their meaning and significance within the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church, within the life of the Church, and thus also from the Scriptures and the Church Fathers. In the University of Ioensuus Curriculum on The Basic Study Unit of Orthodox Theology we read a very clear delineation of these subdivisions or sub disciplines: Liturgical Theology, Religious Education, Canon Law, Homiletics and Pastoral Theology are aspects of the so called practical theology. Liturgical Theology deals with worship and sacraments. Part of it is liturgics, which deals basically with the structure and content of the services; Liturgical Theology, however, is trying to answer the question why, why everything is done in a certain way; Research is done on the theological nature and the historical development of the services and sacraments. Religious Education is not only school didactics; rather it is a holistic way of understanding the role of home, school and parish in the wide field of Orthodox religious education. Canon Law makes us familiar with the church administration and ecclesiastical law based on the canons of the seven ecumenical councils, local synods, church fathers and on their interpretation. Church administration emphasizes the administrational structure of the local church, diocese and the parish and the State-Church relations. Homiletics is about composing a religious speech; it deals also with the elements and the historical development of religious speech and sermon. Pastoral Theology deals with Sacraments of Priesthood and Confession and with the priest as pastor and father confessor. 726

PART III: PRACTICAL THEOLOGY

John H. Perkins, in Practical Theology: What Will It Become, also presents a clear definition of Practical Theology, with six dimensions, which suits our goals for these pages: [] Practical theology, emerging out of life in a faith community, is a doxological mode of reflection that, by placing itself within the context of the churchs service to God, attempts to facilitate the goal of a faithful life in the present on behalf of Gods future. As such, practical theology is composed of six dimensions. Although each is distinguishable, none is separate from the others. Indeed, they are necessarily integrated, for, properly understood, each is simply one doorway into and expression of a single whole. These six interrelated dimensions are the liturgical, the moral, the spiritual, the pastoral, the ecclesial and the catechetical.305 These dimensions, as he adds, are interrelated: Each dimension of practical theology is expressed in each of the others. For example within the cultic-life foci of the liturgical dimension, the first half of the ritual (the service of the Word) is intended to be catechetical. Each dimension also contributes to each of the others. For example, the character is fundamentally shaped through participation in the communitys rituals. In addition, through the formational, educational process takes place the acquisition of the tradition. For the scope of these pages and the limits created by it, I will focus on the above mentioned topics. Yet, within Chapter 9, the student will do their own research on western rites and a sub-discipline such as Canon Law. Activity What is Practical Theology? Enumerate its main divisions with a brief explanation of each one. You can search the internet for other definitions or divisions.
Activity 149: What is Practical Theology?

305

In Appendix P, see a description of these six dimensions.

727

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Chapter 7 DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX LITURGY

INTRODUCTION At the heart of the Orthodox Church life is the Liturgy, and, from earliest times, Christian devotees gathered together to pray, to proclaim the Scriptures, and to celebrate the Lords Supper. In fact, the Greek word for church, ekklesia, literally means the gathering. Although we can say that the Orthodox liturgy was practically completed by the time of the Barberini Codex, which appeared by the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century, according to Wybrew, the full term of its development and the process of consolidation did not take place until the fourteenth century (145). In it is final shape, as acted out in an Orthodox Cathedral, the almost heavenly spectacle, the Divine Liturgy calls to mind what Philip said to Nathanael: Come and see (John 1:46). But an explanation of this development entails a great difficulty as Adrian Fortescue points out in Liturgy: At the outset of this discussion we are confronted by three of the most difficult questions of Christian archaeology, namely: From what date was there a fixed and regulated service such as we can describe as a formal Liturgy? How far was this service uniform in various Churches? How far are we able to reconstruct its forms and arrangement? To provide a historical framework for the development of the liturgy, I have divided this discussion into three main parts (1) Jewish and New Testament Background, (2) Early Christian Church (I-III centuries),306 including the Apostolic Age

The term Early Christianity here refers to Christianity of the period after the Death of Jesus in the early 30s and before the First Council of Nicea in 325.

306

728

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

(first century)307 and the age of

the apostolic Fathers (second and third century,

although some Fathers seemingly wrote at the end of the first; (3) Byzantine Church (IV-XV centuries), including Early Byzantine period (324-842),308 covering the first seven ecumenical councils and the long iconoclastic crisis (of 725 to 842); Middle Byzantine Period (843-1261); and Late Byzantine Period (1262-1454). This division, similar to the one made in Part I, is merely a time framework for the clarity of the exposition. The development of the Liturgy is not conditioned by historical periods. It is a living organism in the hands of the winds of the Holy Tradition. But before starting this discussion let us discuss some preliminary terminology. INTRODUCTORY ANAPHORA TERMS, LITURGICS, LITURGICAL THEOLOGY,

As Archbishop Averky notices in Liturgics, Liturgics is the science of Christian worship as a whole. The term liturgy comes from the Greek words leito (public, social, common) and ergon (work). For the ancient Greeks, it therefore meant public duty, common work, or public worship, that is, a common service performed for the sake of people and with their participation. A litourgeia in ancient Greece or Rome referred to a civil or religious feast often sponsored by eminent patrons. Its main feature is that it was in the public and not the private sphere. Averky comments that in the Old Testament this word meant common service in the tabernacle in honour of God and for the benefit of the people. The meaning of the word liturgy is then extended to embrace any general service of a public kind. The Greek-speaking translators of the version of the Hebrew Bible known as the Septuagint used this termalso the verb leiturgeoto name the public services or sacrificial rites
The Apostolic Age here refers to the period in early church history during which some of Jesus first apostles were still alive. This period ended at about the close of the first century A.D., perhaps with the death of John the Apostle. 308 As commented in Part I, the Byzantine Empire was founded when the capital of the Roman Empire was transferred from Rome to Constantinople in 324.
307

729

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

of the Temple in Jerusalem. In the English version of the Septuagint309 it was translated as service, serve, or minister: And he made the laver, that at it Moses and Aaron and his sons might wash their hands and their feet when they went into the tabernacle of witness, or whenever they should advance to the altar to do service, they washed at it, as the Lord commanded Moses. (Ex. 38:27) 12 And of the gold that remained of the offering they made vessels to minister with before the Lord. (Ex. 39:12) 9 The meat offering and drink offering are removed from the house of the Lord: mourn, you priests that serve at the altar of the Lord. (Joel 1: 9) 17 Between the porch and the altar let the priests that minister to the Lord weep, and say, Spare Your people, O Lord, and give not Your heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them, lest they should say among the heathen, Where is their God? (Joel 2: 17) Consequently, the term attained a religious connotation to describe the function of the priest in the ritual service of the temple. In Second Chronicles 35:3, we read: 3 And he told the Levites that were able to act in all Israel, that they should consecrate themselves to the Lord. And they put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David king of Israel built. And the king said, You must not carry anything on your shoulders; now then minister to the Lord your God, and to His people Israel. In the New Testament, the word liturgy is associated with the services of Zacharias in the temple of Jerusalem: And it came to pass, that, as soon as the days of his ministration were accomplished, he departed to his own house (Luke 1:23). Zacharias left for his house when the days of his ministration or liturgy (leitourgias) are over. The term is also associated with the service in the Tabernacle in which the vessels have been sprinkled with the blood of Christ: 19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, 20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. 21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. (Heb. 9: 19-21)

309

All the passages from the Septuagint in English are taken from The Apostles' Bible. A Modern English Translation of the Greek Septuagint.

730

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Therefore, in Christian use, liturgy meant the public official service of the Church, which corresponded to the official service of the Temple in the Old Law. However, as St. Paul says, Jesus Christ, considered the leitourgos of the New Law, has obtained for us a more excellent ministry or liturgy: But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant which was established upon better promises (Heb. 8:6). Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant and to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel (Heb. 12:24). Paul also writes: Am I not an apostle? am I not free have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord are not ye my work (ergon) in the Lord (I Cor. 9:1). The word is hence related with the service of Christ. Already near the end of the first century Christians gave the name of liturgy to that church service during which the Sacrament of the Eucharist (i.e. Thanksgiving) is performed. The first to do that is Clement of Rome. In his First Epistle to the Corinthians (probably written between 90 and 100), Clement calls the service leitourgia. With it he describes the services of the clergy: 2. He has enjoined offerings [to be presented] and service to be performed [to Him], and that not thoughtlessly or irregularly, but at the appointed times and hours. 5 For his own peculiar services are assigned to the high priest, and their own proper place is prescribed to the priests, and their own special ministrations devolve on the Levites. The layman is bound by the laws that pertain to laymen. (Chap. 40) 1. Let every one of you, brethren, give thanks to God in his own order, living in all good conscience, with becoming gravity, and not going beyond the rule of the ministry prescribed to him. (Chap. 41) For Clement, the service was done as a thanksgiving to God. He uses the term eucharistic in the general sense of giving thanks (eukaristien) in this same epistle (Chap. 38, 4): Since, therefore, we receive all these things from Him, we ought for everything to give Him thanks; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. This is also true for Justin. In his First Apology, he uses this term in the same sense:

731

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to genoito [so be it]. And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion. (Chap. I, 65) From this, the term leitorgia came to signify, in more specific sense, the Eucharistic divine service or the Divine Liturgy (Mass in the Roman Church), and, in a broader sense, any service established by the Holy Church to the glory of the Trihypostatic God (Averky). Besides the term liturgy, there is another term that should be defined: Liturgical Theology. Alexander Schmemann, in Introduction to Liturgical Theology, describes it as the elucidation of the meaning of worship. For him, The task of liturgical theology consists in giving a theological basis to the explanation of worship and the whole liturgical tradition of the Church. This means, first, to find and define the concepts and categories which is capable of expressing as fully as possible the essential nature of the liturgical experience of the Church; second, to connect these ideas with that system of concepts which theology uses to expound the faith and doctrine of the Church; and third, to present the separate data of liturgical experience as a connected whole, as, in the last analysis, the rule of prayer dwelling within the Church and determining her rule of faith. If liturgical theology stems from an understanding of worship as the public act of the Church, then its final goal will be to clarify and explain the connection between this act and the Church, i.e. to explain how the church expresses and fulfils herself in this act. (17) Schmemann asserts that without liturgical theology our understanding of the Churchs faith and doctrine is bound to be incomplete (19). He further distinguishes between historical liturgics and liturgical theology. For him, Historical liturgics establishes the structures and their development, liturgical theology discovers their meaning: such is the general methodological principle of the task. The significance of these basic structures is that only in them is there any full expression of the general design of worship, both as a whole, and taken in its separate elements... . Historical liturgics establishes the structures and their development, liturgical theology discovers their meaning: such is the general methodological principle of the task. The significance of these basic structures is that only in them is there any full expression of the general design of worship, both as a whole, and taken in its separate elements. (22, 23)

732

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

This theologian defends a holistic approach to liturgics in which the structures of the liturgical rites are not only seen in their isolated development but within the broader dimension of the significance of the Church. Schmemann gives an example of the chanting of the first prayer (O Heavenly King), whose omission during Pentecost could be seen as nothing more than a rubric, but when taken in connection with other exceptions to the rule, this omission reveals the exact meaning of these fifty days in the Churchs year, and this in turn clarifies one of the marks of that eschatology which is inseparable from the Orthodox doctrine of the Church (23). There is also a term very relevant to the present discussion, eucharistic prayer or anaphora, the most solemn part of the Liturgy, meaning offering. It is used pertaining to the offering of sacrifice to God. In the West, the term eucharistic prayer is most commonly used. Let us see a diagram of the Divine Liturgy, showing the place of the anaphora within it:
1 Preparation (Rite of Prothesis or Proskomide) 2 Liturgy of the Catechumens 2.1 Enarxis or Rites of Entrance 2.2 Rites of Proclamation of the Scriptures 3 Liturgy of the Faithful 3.1 The Great Entrance 3.2 The Anaphora ( Eucharistic Prayer) 3.3 The Communion and Dismissal Table 78: Contents of the Divine Liturgy310

I agree with Averky when he utters the need to an approach to liturgics to explain the origins of the ceremonies or liturgical rites of the Orthodox Church, as it is

The parts of the Divine Liturgy can also be seen in the following five schematic steps: (1) The Prothesispreparation of the Gifts for the Eucharist; (2) Enarxisbeginning of the Liturgy proper, which includes petitions, antiphons and preparatory prayers; (3) Liturgy of the Wordthe reading of New Testament excerpts, instructive prayers for the catechumens, sermon; (4) Liturgy of the Eucharist invocation, Communion, thanksgiving; and (5) Apolysisdismissal. Steps 2 and 3 correspond to the Liturgy of the Catechumens or Liturgy of the Word, also called Synaxis (gathering of people).

310

733

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

important for the Orthodox person to be acquainted with the origins of the church rites, its authors, the ways they were performed in the ancient Church, how they came to us, and even the reasons behind the changes as the rites developed. This will help him or her understand and interpret them better. Averky remarks that liturgics must show that all the rites have their origins in their essential parts in the very depths of ancient Christian times. They have remained the same as they were in the ancient Church. Hence, it is understandable that liturgy represents the main vehicle and experience of true Orthodox Christian belief. This might be one of the reasons for the conservatism of the Orthodox Church in liturgical matters as any reform of the liturgy is often considered as equivalent to a reform of the faith itself. Another is its administrative structure and the absence of a central ecclesiastical authority that could enforce reforms. It is due to this conservatism that many essential Christian values have been transmitted directly from the experience of the early church. Nevertheless, the Orthodox Church realizes that liturgical forms are changeable and, in parallel to the early church which admitted a variety of liturgical traditions; variety is still possible today. As an illustration, Orthodox communities with western rites exist in Western Europe and in the Americas (The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship and Sacraments). In the following pages of all the chapters constituting this Part III, I will try to present this holistic view of the development and meaning of Orthodox liturgy. Activity Define the terms: Liturgy Eucharist Liturgical theology Anaphora. List its main elements too. [See the Glossary.] When discussing Liturgical Theology, Schmemann relates the rule of

734

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

prayer with the rule of faith. What does he mean by that?

Activity 150: Introductory terms

1. JEWISH AND NEW TESTAMENT BACKGROUND One of the questions which has exercised the minds of liturgical scholars is that of the pre-Christian origins of the two aspects of the worship service in the early church: the Liturgy of the Word and the celebration on the Lords Supper. Concerning them, Robert E. Webber, in Common Roots: Hebrew Foundations of Christian Worship, asserts that most scholars agree that the liturgy of the Word is derived from the synagogue service and the earliest form of the liturgy of the Eucharist from the Jewish meal prayers. Benjamin D. Williams and Harold B. Anstall, in Orthodox Worship: a Living Continuity with the Synagogue, the Temple and the Early Church, when talking about the three main focuses of Jewish worship, offer us some clues about these origins. For the Jews, the first and most prominent focus was the worship of God in the temple of Jerusalem, which included the form and frequency of prayer and sacrifice (10); the second was a constant cycle of prayer, blessings, and meals, which included the breaking of the bread and the blessing of the cup: For Judaism there had always been a constant cycle of prayers, blessings and meals; daily, weekly, monthly. These constituted the second focus of worship for the Jew. In its most regular form it was practiced in the daily hours of prayers and the annual High Feast Days. The High Feast Days included the sacrificial offerings of the Temple and contained Jewish messianic expectation. These meals included the breaking of the bread and the blessing of the cup, and contained parallels with both the temple sacrifice and the messianic feasts. (10) The third focus of Jewish worship was that of the Synagogue, comparable to a local church or parish. Williams and Anstall assert that the synagogue developed a particular form of worship that was patterned on temple worship, but without the sacrificial element which took place only in the Temple (11). For them these two elements of Jewish worshipsynagogue and templetogether formed the very basic 735

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

components of the form or order of the liturgy for the early Christian Church (11). Williams and Anstall also list the six basic components in synagogue worship: the Litany, the Confession, Intercessory Prayer, Scripture Readings, Preaching, and Benediction (22). C. W. Dugmore, in The Influence of the Synagogue on the Divine Office, sees in the Jewish Scripture reading an antecedent of the Early Christian liturgy: The reading and exposition of Scripture were among the pre-Christian elements of the liturgy of the Synagogue which were taken over by the Jewish and Gentile Christians (70) To support his point he quotes Acts 17: 2, where the synagogue of the Jews of Beroa is mentioned: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures. In the same sense, Oesterley, in The Jewish Background of the Christian Liturgy, comments: The early Christian communities continued and preserved the traditional forms of synagogue worship to which the people who made up these communities were accustomed ... So that when the time came for the creation of an independent Christian worship it was only natural that it should be influenced both in form and spirit by that traditional worship which was so close to the first Christians. (90)311 Additionally, Frank Gavin, in The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments,312 believes that the Jewish antecedent of the Liturgy of the Eucharist is the blessing of the table, the Jewish grace at meals, which consisted of the invocation of the divine name, the expression of thanks, and the act of blessing God for the food. These elements of thanksgiving, as Webber asserts, were part of the Last Supper. Jesus broke the bread speaking over it the typical prayer of blessing while distributing it: And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body (Matthew 26:26). Webber continues:

311
312

Qtd. in The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: Orthodox Liturgical Worship. Qtd. in Webber.

736

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

During this same ritual, the cups were filled four times and drunk. The third cup, the cup of blessing, held particular significance for the Jews, for the prayer connected with it not only thanked God for meat and drink but also for His benefits, particularly redemption from Egypt, for the land, the covenants, and the law. It was probably after this cup that Jesus said, Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matthew 26:28). In this act, Jesus had taken a Jewish custom filled with religious meaning and had given it new meaning in relationship to Himself, His death, and the new covenant. Also commenting on the Jewish meal, Bouyer, in Liturgy and Architecture, asserts that the synagogal worship, already before Christ, had its necessary complement in the ritual of the meal, and better still, at least at the time of Christ, the meals of those communities of the faithful brought together by a common messianic expectation (23).313 In Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic Prayer,314 Bouyer refers specifically to the Jewish meal liturgy,315 celebrated on a holyday such as Pascha, which included prayers. He further mentions that the thanksgiving prayer done at the end of the meal was considered quite venerable (91). All the above mentioned authors, Oesterley, Dugmore, and Bouyer see a relationship between the worship of the synagogue and Christian worship, showing that the four essential elements of the Liturgy of the Word, namely readings from the Holy Scripture, a sermon, prayers, and the singing of psalms, were all adapted from the Jewish synagogue worship. Based on these authors, Webber comments: References to the reading of Scripture in Christian worship is common in the liturgy of the third century. The Reader, as in the synagogue, usually went up to the reading desk (pulpitum) and read from the Old Testament, the gospels, and the epistles. Likewise the custom of expounding from the Scripture is derived directly from the synagogue. Even the custom of inviting a visitor or a member of the congregation (as in the case of Jesus at Nazareth) to read and speak was not uncommon among early Christian congregations.
Qtd. in Williams and Anstall, 10. I am using the Spanish translation of this book: Eucarista: teologa y espiritualidad de la oracin eucarstica. See Bibliography. 315 Although its discussion is out of the scope of this chapter, it is insightful to notice that there is evidence of the use of bread and wine in favour of the Eucharistic Prayer already in Genesis: And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the Most High God (Gen. 14:18).
314 313

737

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Regarding Christian prayer he says: The earliest recorded Christian prayers are also reminiscent of the synagogue, especially in the general content and sometimes in language. Prayers calling on God for help, for healing the sick, for forgiveness, and for peace show similarity in wording. But an even greater parallel is found in the subjects of prayer. Christians prayed for faith, peace, forbearance, self-control, purity, and temperance. In the New Testament we also find texts that are witness to the influence of the Jewish temple on early Christians. If we read the Acts, And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart ... (2: 46) And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. (5:42) The Lord himself called the Temple of Jerusalem my Fathers house: And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Fathers house a house of merchandise (John 2:12). Also, Paul gave the following instruction to his followers: If any man defiles the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are (I Cor. 3:17). And even though there was in him the idea of a temple in a spiritual sense, this does not blur his realization of the sanctity of the material temple. In addition, the psalms were very often present in the teachings of the first Christians: And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand (Luke 20:42) For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. (Acts 1:20) God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. (Acts 13:33) How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. (Cor. 14:26)

738

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

The Psalter, so important in Orthodox divine services, must have evoked in Christians a reverence for the Jewish places of worship (Pomazansky). It also shows that the Jewish liturgical use of psalms was continued in the early Christian church. Logically, as Oesterley points out above, with the coming of Christ, the Messiah, who fulfilled all the prophesies of the Old Testament, a new Covenant took place between God and his people, and a renewed worship started to take shape apart from Jewish ritual and the Synagogue and Temple worship. Two liturgical acts were then emphasized: baptism and Eucharist. They modelled the new life of salvation in Christ, the Son of God, and served as identifying acts of the early Christian community, a community perpetuated until today by the action of the Holy Spirit. With persecutions and missionary impulse to the Gentiles, these liturgical acts spread from Judea across the Mediterranean basin and beyond. Until it became written, the elements of this early liturgy belonged to the oral tradition of Eucharistic prayers. Webber quotes some clarifying words by Oesterley: The earliest Christian communities continued the traditional mode of worship to which they had become accustomed in the synagogue ... so that when the time came for these communities to construct a liturgy of their own, it would be the most natural thing in the world for them to be influenced by the form and thought of their traditional liturgy with which they were so familiar. During the first few decades, the early Christians went on frequenting both the temple and the synagogue, but they also met for the Eucharist, a distinctive community act, which began to take form at the Last Supper, as Wybrew explains, a full, formal Jewish meal (13). In his narration of the Last Supper, Luke mirrors the structure of Jewish meal liturgy of the breaking of the bread and the blessing of the cup practised at that time: 15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: 16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. 17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: 18 For I say unto you, I will

739

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. 19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. (Luke 22:15-20) Jesus Last Supper occurred at Passover, as Luke commentswhich foreshadows Christian Paschathe biblical feast of the Jewish, as this passage shows: That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Lords Passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped (Ex. 12:27).316

The prototype of Pascha is the Jewish Passover, the festival of Israels deliverance from bondage. Like the Old Testament Passover, Pascha is a festival of deliverance. But its nature is wholly other and unique, of which the Passover is only a prefigurement. Pascha involves the ultimate redemption, i.e., the deliverance and liberation of all humanity from the malignant power of Satan and death, through the death and resurrection of Christ. Pascha is the feast of universal redemption. Our earliest sources for the annual celebration of the Christian Pascha come to us from the second century. The feast, however, must have originated in the apostolic period. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine otherwise. The first Christians were Jews and obviously conscious of the Jewish festal calendar. They scarcely could have forgotten that the remarkable and compelling events of Christs death, burial and resurrection had occurred at a time in which the annual Passover was being observed. These Christians could not have failed to project the events of the passion and the resurrection of Christ on the Jewish festal calendar, nor would they have failed to connect and impose their faith on the annual observance of the Jewish Passover. ( Calivas, The Origins of Pascha and Great Week) Table 79: The Feast of Pascha

Wellesz, in A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnnography, writes a good summary of the Jewish roots of worship in early Christianity: The principal part of Early Christian worship consisted in the celebration of the Mass. Its liturgical origin can be traced back to the moment when two distinct elements of the worship of the Primitive Church were combined into a single, henceforth inseparable, liturgical action: they were (1) the service of the Temple or the Synagogue on Saturday morning, in which the Jewish Christians of the Apostolic age use to participate, and (2) the common meal, the Agape or lovefeast, which was held in the private houses of some wealthier members of the Christian community in order to commemorate the Lords Supper. (123)
316

As it is well known, in Pascha, Christians commemorate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. For the Orthodox Church, Pascha is the oldest, most venerable, and sublime feast of the Orthodox Church. It is the very center and heart of the liturgical year.

740

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Summarizing, Jesus breaking of the bread in the beginning of the meal followed by the thanksgiving prayer over the cup of wine mixed with water at the end were originally modelled after the Jewish meal prayer. Likewise, the Christian Liturgy of the Word was modelled after the Jewish synagogal liturgy. The Lords giving thanks just before He spoke the words of institution caused each later celebrant to begin the prayer of consecrationthe Eucharistic prayerby thanking God for his favors and graces. So we find what we still have in our modern prefacesa prayer thanking God for certain favours and graces, which are called by that name, just where that preface comes, shortly before the consecration (Justin, Apology I, xiii, lxv). An intercession for all kinds of people also occurs very early, as we see from references to it (e.g., Justin, Apology I, xiv, lxv). In this prayer the various classes of people would naturally be named in more or less the same order. A profession of faith would almost inevitably open that part of the service in which only the faithful were allowed to take part (Justin, Apology I, xiii, lxi). It could not have been long before the archetype of all Christian prayerthe Our Fatherwas said publicly in the Liturgy. The moments at which these various prayers were said would very soon become fixed. The people expected them at certain points, and there was no reason for changing their order; on the contrary to do so would disturb the faithfuls expectations. In spite of the changes made to the Liturgy over the years, there was a strong conservative instinct in Orthodox Christianity rooted in the Byzantine Church. We have to consider that the liturgy reflected and reflects a theological and an ecclesiological position. Meyendorff says that through the liturgy a Byzantine recognized and experienced his membership in the body of Christ (Byzantine Theology 114). He also points out the creative response the Byzantine liturgy gave to these changes: This conservatism does not mean, however, that the liturgical structures of the Byzantine Church did not undergo substantial evolution. Since neither theology

741

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

nor liturgical piety could remain completely aloof from the issues arising from history, by studying them together we can follow the religious mind of Byzantium. In spite of its conservatism as a living Christian tradition, Byzantine liturgy responded creatively to the changes of history. The interplay of continuity and change, unity and diversity, faithfulness to a central prototype and local initiative, is unavoidable in the lex orandi of the Church. (115) Moreover, as Fortescue comments, in spite of changes, the Orthodox believer knows how the Orthodox Church has always looked back with unbounded reverence to the golden age of the first Fathers (Liturgy), from whom we have the written testimonies of the early liturgy. Activity 1. Briefly explain the Jewish roots of the Liturgy of the Word and the Lords supper. 2. In Orthodoxy, what does the liturgy reflect?
Activity 151: Jewish roots of the Liturgy

EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH (I-III CENTURIES) In this section, as noted, I will deal with the development of Christian liturgy from the apostolic age and comment on the references the apostolic Fathers made to it. I will also address the first extant orders, including the Apostolic Constitution, which although written in the last quarter of fourth century, dates partially from the second half of the third century. It is in the light of this document that we can judge the development of the ritual and ceremonial side of worship (Schmemann, Introduction to Liturgical Theology 93). APOSTOLIC AGE In spite of the many changes and additions made to early Christian Liturgy, as it is well known, the core of the Byzantine Divine Liturgyand all other western Eucharistic liturgiesis to be found in the New Testament, particularly in the scene of Christs blessing of the bread and wine at the Last Supper, celebrated at the season of 742

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

the biblical Passover. This is seen in the three synoptic Gospels: Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, and Luke 22:156-20). Jesus performed this act with a prophetic symbolism by enacting his death in advance with human elements of the human diet. Wybrew says: By giving his disciples a share in the bread and the cup, Jesus was giving them a share in all that his death would achieve. From that meal comes the Christian Eucharist. Obedient to the command of Jesus, the Church has done this in order to recall Jesus and proclaim his death until he comes (13). As noted, in Luke, Christ mentions the Passover, the Jewish feast from which Pascha is calculated and symbolically based. Paul also refers to it in his first Epistle to the Corinthians: 7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (1 Cor.5.7-8). In this same first Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul also refers to this early instauration of the Eucharist: 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lords death till he come. (11:23-26) As Paul states, the religious meetings of the first Christians for the breaking of the bread and the blessing of the wine constituted a remembrance and a re-enactment of Christs passion and an act of expectancy of his second coming. Additionally, Paul also writes in this same Epistle: 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all

743

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

partakers of that one bread. It seems that for Paul the presence of Christ was not only in the sacrament, but also in the community. There are many references to the Eucharistic meal in the New Testament. As an illustration, after an inspired sermon by Peter, Luke writes in Acts 2: 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. ... 46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, ... The community perseveres in the doctrine of the Apostles, at this moment, not only with the breaking of the bread at homes, but also with visits to the temple. In chapter 20:7, we see how they met on Sunday, the first day of the week for the breaking of the bread: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. This custom continued as we see in an already mentioned letter317 Pliny the Younger sent to Trajan. Pliny was a distinguished Senator and literary man appointed by the Emperor in 112 A.D. as governor of the province of Bithynia. We read how Christians would gather before daylight and to sing by turns a hymn to Christ as a god, and how they would come together again to partake of food: They [the Christians] continued to maintain that this was the amount of their fault or error, that on a fixed day they were accustomed to come together before daylight and to sing by turns a hymn to Christ as a god, and that they bound themselves by oath, not for some crime but that they would not commit robbery, theft, or adultery, that they would not betray a trust nor deny a deposit when called upon. After this it was their custom to disperse and to come together again to partake of food, of an ordinary and harmless kind, however; even this they had ceased to do after the publication of my edict in which according to your command I had forbidden associations. Pliny was trying to investigate the Christians as the possible cause for this provinces maladmistration.

317

See Appendix A.

744

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Illustration 77: The communion of the Apostles318

There are other elements in Christian present liturgies that may also come from the apostolic period. Vitaliotis thinks that, although attested in later sources, the kiss of love before the blessing of the Holy Gifts was probably already part of the formal ritual of the Eucharist as celebrated among the primitive Christian community. There are passages in the epistles of Pau which witness to it: Salute one another with a holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you. (Romans 16:16) All the brethren greet you. Greet ye one another with a holy kiss. (I Corinthians 16:20) Greet one another with a holy kiss. (II Corinthians 13:12, Greet all the brethren with a holy kiss. (I Thessalonians 5:26) We read in them how Christians are called upon to greet each other with a holy kiss. Peter, however, refers to a kiss of charity: Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity. Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen (I Peter 5:14). Activity 1. Write the New Testament references to the Eucharist mentioned in this section. 2. What is the prophetic symbolism of Jesus enactment of the Last Supper? 3. Read Appendix N (New Testament References to the Eucharist) and analyze the different elements or features of the Eucharistic meal of the first Christian communities.
Activity 152: New Testament quotes of the Eucharist

318

See: <www.icon-art.info>.

745

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

The Eucharist: A Separated, Ordered Celebration There was a moment when the remembrance supper was separated from the common meal and eventually became to be celebrated on Sundaythe Day of the Lord, in a progressively established structure of fellowship. The separation from the common meal might have been due to the impracticability of having regular meals as the members of the early church grew in number. There might have been other problems due to the fact that early Christians came from all walks of life. Brown, in An Introduction to the New Testament, points out that gathering in a same place for an Eucharistic meal might have caused some social tensions. Normally Christian gathered at the house of better-off believers and although lower-class ones were also invited, this situation caused socio-cultural embarrassment and tensions. Proprietors of these houses might have seen themselves in socially awkward situations and would invite only friends from their own socio-economic class to the communal banquet or meal, to be eaten before the larger, socially mixed, and undesirable group arrive (68). But Paul sees that as unchristian: 20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lords supper. 21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. 22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. [...] 33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. 34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come. (I Cor.11:20-22, 33-34) In his homily XXVII on the Corinthians, St. John Chrysostom refers to this fact, first describing this common meal nostalgically, As in the case of the three thousand who believed in the beginning, all had eaten their meals in common and had all things common; such also was the practice at the time when the Apostle wrote this: not such indeed exactly; but as it were a certain outflowing of that communion which abode among them descended also to them that came after. And because of course some were poor, but others rich,

746

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

they laid not down all their goods in the midst, but made the tables open on stated days, as it should seem; and when the solemn service was completed, after the communion of the Mysteries, they all went to a common entertainment, the rich bringing their provisions with them, and the poor and destitute being invited by them, and all feasting in common. and then regretfully: But afterward this custom also became corrupt. And the reason was, their being divided and addicting themselves, some to this party, and others to that, and saying, I am of such a one, and I of such a one; which thing also to correct he said in the beginning of the Epistle, For it hath been signified unto me concerning you, my brethren, by them which are of the household of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas. Not that Paul was the person to whom they were attaching themselves; for he would not have borne it: but wishing by concession to tear up this custom from the root, he introduced himself, indicating that if any one had inscribed upon himself even his name when breaking off from the common body, even so the thing done was profane and extreme wickedness. And if in his case it were wickedness, much more in the case of those who were inferior to him. Notwithstanding, Chrysostom presents an idealized picture of this infant church that must have been in the collective consciousness of the Church in the late fourth-earlyfifth century: Since therefore this custom was broken through, a custom most excellent and most useful; (for it was a foundation of love, and a comfort to poverty, and a corrective of riches, and an occasion of the highest philosophy, and an instruction of humility)... As we can see by the words of Chrysostom, there was a distinction between the communion of the mysteries and the communal dinner (agape), the former coming first. As Josef A. Jungman, in The Early Liturgy, states: The great change which occurred in liturgical practice, the greatest perhaps in the whole course of the history of the Mass, was the abandonment of the meal as a setting for the Mass. With the gradual enrichment of the prayer of thanksgiving and, at the same time, the continual growth of the convert community which became too large for a domestic table-gathering, the supper character of the Christian assembly could and did disappear, and the celebration became in truth a Eucharistic celebration. This change had occurred already by the end of the first century. (38)

747

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

The abandonment of the meal as setting of the Mass, as Jung explains, also brought changes in the outward shape of the celebration, as all the tables except the one for the consecrationthe Lords Tabledisappeared and the dining room broadened into a large hall capable of holding the whole congregation. Jung remarks that The participants no longer reclined or sat at supper; they became the circumstantes, standing in worship before God. And the idealalready mentioned by St. Ignatius at the beginning of the second centurywas for all to gather for one common Eucharist. Thus the Eucharist became the basic form and shape of the Mass-liturgy. Discarded were the terms breaking of bread and the Lords meal. The prayer of thanksgiving, into which the solemn words of consecration were inserted, gave its name not only to the celebration but to the gift offered therein. Both are simple called The Eucharist. The two parts of the Eucharistic meal corresponded to what it is today called Liturgy of the Catechumens and the Liturgy of the Faithfulthe Ministry of the Word and the Ministry of the Sacrament in western usage, and although it continued to be held in private houses, the service was an ordered one, as already noted. Already in I Timothy, a pastoral attributed to Paul, we find the description of the rank of bishop and deacon, at a moment in which there was ambivalence in the use of bishops and presbyters and a twofold ministry instead of a threefold one appears: 1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus. 14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: (3:1-14)

748

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Timothy (died about 80 AD) was a first-century Christian bishop, companion of Paul in many of his trips. He was ordained bishop of Ephesus by the Apostle. Significance of the Eucharist Undoubtedly, the apostles, at the Last Supper, must have felt that something not ordinary was taking place as they drank of the cup and partook of the bread of remembrance. Although the evangelists do not narrate it, there must have been a sacred silence when the Master instituted the remembrance supper. If the old Passover commemorated the individual freedom, this supper instituted a new dispensation signalling the spiritual joy of the brotherhood and fellowship of man (ecclesia). This rite, the only one Jesus commanded, would continue throughout the coming next centuries. With it, the infant church was also awaiting the Lords coming and this sense of expectancy arose at each Eucharistic meal. The early Christians considered the early meal as a direct reflection of the heavenly banquet. Though this expectancy declined with time, even in the fourth century, when the first complete text of the Eucharist appeared, the Eucharist was celebrated by devotees not only mindful of Christs passion and resurrection but also of the second coming. Wybrew says: The early Eucharist was no memorial service for the dead founder of the community. When the community ate and drank, the crucified and risen Christ was invisibly among them, he was present no longer in the flesh but in the Spirit ... Nor was the second coming a remote future event. Christ was not absent from them, and where he was, there was the Kingdom of God. The Eucharist was a foretaste of that Kingdom. (16) Wybrew adds that St. John the Divines vision of worship of heaven, explained in terms of the Sunday worship of the congregation of Patmos, can be considered as the forerunner of the splendorous Byzantine Liturgy. This Liturgy is seen and experienced as a cosmic, spiritual event: as an image of the expression of men and angels together praising their creator and redeemer (17). Wybrew also says that Paul might have been

749

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

the first in perceiving or attaching a symbolic meaning to the liturgy that surpassed the mere remembrance of Christs passion and resurrection: the Eucharist was a communion with the living God and an expression of the unity of his body, his church (17). The remembrance supper was an anticipation of the messianic banquet of the Kingdom of God.

Activity Briefly explain: 1. The separation of the Eucharist from the community meal. 2. The significance of the Eucharist in the apostolic age.
Activity 153: Separation and meaning of the Eucharist

AGE OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS (FROM THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY TO THIRD CENTURY) During these centuries we have to reconstruct the earlier development of the Liturgy, including aspects of its switch from Saturday to Sunday and church officials, from allusions by the Apostolic Fathers, such as St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, or the author of the Didache, still close to the Jewish forms for blessing bread and wine on the Sabbath; and an apologist such Justin who provides us with a very complete outline of the rite as he knew it. As Fortescue says, during these centuries, we cannot find a fully developed liturgy in the sense we have today: An Apostolic Liturgy in the sense of an arrangement of prayers and ceremonies, like our present ritual of the Mass, did not exist. For some time the Eucharistic Service was in many details fluid and variable. It was not all written down and read from fixed forms, but in part composed by the officiating bishop. As for ceremonies, at first they were not elaborated as now. All ceremonial evolves gradually out of certain obvious actions done at first with no idea of ritual, but simply because they had to be done for convenience. The bread and wine were brought to the altar when they were wanted, the lessons were read from a place where they could best be heard, hands were washed because they were soiled. Out of these obvious actions ceremony developed, just as our vestments developed out of the dress of the first Christians. It follows then of course that,

750

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

when there was no fixed Liturgy at all, there could be no question of absolute uniformity among the different Churches. (Liturgy) Yet, as this writer adds, there were some fixed elements which gave uniformity to the services performed in different areas, especially the structure already commanded by the Lord in the Last Supper: And yet the whole series of actions and prayers did not depend solely on the improvisation of the celebrating bishop. Whereas at one time scholars were inclined to conceive the services of the first Christians as vague and undefined, recent research shows us a very striking uniformity in certain salient elements of the service at a very early date. The tendency among students now is to admit something very like a regulated Liturgy, apparently to a great extent uniform in the chief cities, back even to the first or early second century. In the first place the fundamental outline of the rite of the Holy Eucharist was given by the account of the Last Supper. What our Lord had done then, that same thing He told His followers to do in memory of Him. It would not have been a Eucharist at all if the celebrant had not at least done as our Lord did the night before He died. So we have everywhere from the very beginning at least this uniform nucleus of a Liturgy: bread and wine are brought to the celebrant in vessels (a plate and a cup); he puts them on a tablethe altar; standing before it in the natural attitude of prayer he takes them in his hands, gives thanks, as our Lord had done, says again the words of institution, breaks the Bread and gives the consecrated Bread and Wine to the people in communion. (Liturgy) In the Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, perhaps the earliest extant piece of uninspired Christian literature, we find an Eucharistic prayer in its chapter 9, containing a thanksgiving prayer, and chapter 10, containing a post-communion prayer: 1. Now concerning the Thanksgiving (Eucharist), thus give thanks. 2. First, concerning the cup: We thank you, our Father, for the holy vine of David Your servant, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. 3. And concerning the broken bread: We thank You, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. 4. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Your kingdom; for Yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever. 5. But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving (Eucharist), but they who have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, Give not that which is holy to the dogs. (Chap. 9) 1. But after you are filled, thus give thanks: 2. We thank You, holy Father, for Your holy name which You caused to tabernacle in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. 3. You, Master almighty, created all things for Your names sake; You gave food and drink to men for 751

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

enjoyment, that they might give thanks to You; but to us Thou freely gave spiritual food and drink and life eternal through Your Servant. 4. Before all things we thank You that You are mighty; to You be the glory for ever. 5. Remember, Lord, Your Church, to deliver it from all evil and to make it perfect in Your love, and gather it from the four winds, sanctified for Your kingdom which You have prepared for it; for Yours is the power and the glory for ever. 6. Let grace come, and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the God (Son) of David! If any one is holy, let him come; if any one is not so, let him repent. Maran atha. Amen. 7. But permit the prophets to make Thanksgiving as much as they desire. (Chap. 10) According to Fortescue, in these two chapters and in other chapters, although the Eucharist prayer described here is somehow apart from the general development, it depicts a real Eucharist, of a very archaic nature, with some recognized liturgical elements. We read that, only the baptized are admitted to it (9:5): But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving (Eucharist), but they who have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, Give not that which is holy to the dogs (Matthew 7:6). Also in chapter 9, both the wine, which is mentioned first, and the broken bread have a formula of giving thanks to God for His revelation in Chris, 2. First, concerning the cup: We thank you, our Father, for the holy vine of David Your servant, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. 3. And concerning the broken bread: We thank You, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. with the conclusion (9:4) for Yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever. In chapter 10 we see a thanksgiving for various benefits: But after you are filled, thus give thanks: 2. We thank You, holy Father, for Your holy name which You caused to tabernacle in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever... (10: 14). Then comes a prayer for the Church ending with the form: Maran atha. Amen and the form: Hosanna to the God of David (10:5-6) (Fortescue, Liturgy) Moreover, in other chapters such as 8 or 14, we see the Our Father as a recognized formula to be said three times every day:

752

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

2. Neither pray as the hypocrites; but as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, thus pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done, as in heaven, so on earth. Give us today our daily (needful) bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (or, evil); for Yours is the power and the glory for ever. 3. Thrice in the day thus pray. (8:2-3) The Liturgy is celebrated by breaking bread and giving thanks on the Lords Day by the faithful who have confessed their transgressions (14:1): But every Lords day do ye gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure (Fortescue, Liturgy). Another source for origin of the Liturgy is Clements First Epistle to the Corinthians, chapters 59-61: If, however, any shall disobey the words spoken by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger; but we shall be innocent of this sin, and, instant in prayer and supplication, shall desire that the Creator of all preserve unbroken the computed number of His elect in the whole world through His beloved Son Jesus Christ, through whom He called us from darkness to light, from ignorance to knowledge of the glory of His name, our hope resting on Your name which is primal cause of every creature,having opened the eyes of our heart to the knowledge of You, who alone dost rest highest among the highest, holy among the holy, Isaiah 57:15 who layest low the insolence of the haughty, Isaiah 13:11 who destroyest the calculations of the heathen, who settest the low on high and bringest low the exalted; who makest rich and makest poor, 1 Samuel 2:7 who killest and makest to live, Deuteronomy 32:39 only Benefactor of spirits and God of all flesh, who beholdest the depths, the eye-witness of human works, the help of those in danger, the Saviour of those in despair, the Creator and Guardian of every spirit, who multipliest nations upon earth, and from all made choice of those who love You through Jesus Christ, Your beloved Son, through whom You instructed, sanctify, honour us. We would have You, Lord, to prove our help and succour. Those of us in affliction save, on the lowly take pity; the fallen raise; upon those in need arise; the sick heal; the wandering ones of Your people turn; fill the hungry; redeem those of us in bonds; raise up those that are weak; comfort the faint-hearted; let all the nations know that You are God alone and Jesus Christ Your Son, and we are Your people and the sheep of Your pasture. (Chap. 59) Thou made to appear the enduring fabric of the world by the works of Your hand; Thou, Lord, created the earth on which we dwell,Thou, who art faithful in all generations, just in judgments, wonderful in strength and majesty, with wisdom creating and with understanding fixing the things which were made, who art good among them that are being saved and faithful among them whose trust is in You; O merciful and Compassionate One, forgive us our iniquities and offences and transgressions and trespasses. Reckon not every sin of Your 753

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

servants and handmaids, but You will purify us with the purification of Your truth; and direct our steps that we may walk in holiness of heart and do what is good and well-pleasing in Your sight and in the sight of our rulers. Yea, Lord, make Your face to shine upon us for good in peace, that we may be shielded by Your mighty hand and delivered from every sin by Thine uplifted arm, and deliver us from those who hate us wrongfully. Give concord and peace to us and all who dwell upon the earth, even as You gave to our fathers, when they called upon You in faith and truth, submissive as we are to Thine almighty and allexcellent Name. (Chap. 60) To our rulers and governors on the earthto them Thou, Lord, gavest the power of the kingdom by Your glorious and ineffable might, to the end that we may know the glory and honour given to them by You and be subject to them, in nought resisting Your will; to them, Lord, give health, peace, concord, stability, that they may exercise the authority given to them without offence. For Thou, O heavenly Lord and King eternal, givest to the sons of men glory and honour and power over the things that are on the earth; do Thou, Lord, direct their counsel according to that which is good and well-pleasing in Your sight, that, devoutly in peace and meekness exercising the power given them by You, they may find You propitious. O Thou, who only hast power to do these things and more abundant good with us, we praise You through the High Priest and Guardian of our souls Jesus Christ, through whom be glory and majesty to You both now and from generation to generation and for evermore. Amen. (Chapter 61) As Fortescue comments, these long prayers, without making any direct reference to the Eucharist, have some liturgical references which constitute an example of prayer said at the liturgy of the first century. We have noticed that Clement quotes the Sanctus from Isaiah 6:3 (Holy, holy, holy, [is] the Lord of Sabaoth; the whole creation is full of His glory). Moreover, at the end of the long prayer there is a doxology invoking Christ and ending with the liturgical formula: O Thou, who only hast power to do these things and more abundant good with us, we praise You through the High Priest and Guardian of our souls Jesus Christ, through whom be glory and majesty to You both now and from generation to generation and for evermore. Amen (Chap. 61). Fortescue also sees a likeness between Clements First Epistle and the Eight Book of the Apostolic Constitutions: We can find more in I Clement than merely a promiscuous selection of formulae. A comparison of the text with the first known Liturgy actually written down, that of the Eighth Book of the Apostolic Constitutions ... reveals a most startling likeness. Not only do the same ideas occur in the same order, but there are whole passagesjust those that in I Clement have most the appearance of

754

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

liturgical formulaethat recur word for word in the Apostolic Constitutions. (Liturgy) It is interesting also to note that Clement, in this same epistle, as we have previously seen, besides referring to the regulated services of the different orders of churchs officials, exhorts to preserve the order appointed by God to the Church: These things therefore being manifest to us, and since we look into the depths of the divine knowledge, it behoves us to do all things in [their proper] order, which the Lord has commanded us to perform at stated times. He has enjoined offerings [to be presented] and service to be performed [to Him], and that not thoughtlessly or irregularly, but at the appointed times and hours. Where and by whom He desires these things to be done, He Himself has fixed by His own supreme will, in order that all things being piously done according to His good pleasure, may be acceptable to Him. Those, therefore, who present their offerings at the appointed times, are accepted and blessed; for inasmuch as they follow the laws of the Lord, they sin not. For his own peculiar services are assigned to the high priest, and their own proper place is prescribed to the priests, and their own special ministrations devolve on the Levites. The layman is bound by the laws that pertain to laymen. (Chapter 40) Clement uses the language of the old covenant: high priest or bishops, priests or presbyter, and Levites or deacons. The Jewish high priest was the leader of the priests and the people, the priests served at the altar in their turn, and the Levites were servants in the tabernacle (or temple). Ignatius of Antioch, who died in Rome, in his Epistle to the Philadelphians, also uses these terms, clearly distinguishing between priest and high priest, giving the latter a great dignity: The priests indeed are good, but the High Priest is better; to whom the holy of holies has been committed, and who alone has been trusted with the secrets of God. He is the door of the Father, by which enter in Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the prophets, and the apostles, and the Church. All these have for their object the attaining to the unity of God. But the Gospel possesses something transcendent [above the former dispensation], viz., the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, His passion and resurrection. For the beloved prophets announced Him, but the Gospel is the perfection of immortality. All these things are good together, if ye believe in love. (Chap. IX) This is a change from what it is depicted in the New Testament where Christ is the high priest, as Matthew says: But Jesus held his peace, And the high priest

755

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God (26:63); and the whole church is a royal priesthood, as we read in 1 Peter: But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light ... (2:9). In his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Ignatius refers to the important task of the bishop at this early stage: See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid. (VIII) In the same epistle, when describing the custom of the heretics, he also refers to the Eucharist and to the meaning it was taking: They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils. (Chap. VII) In his Epistle to the Philadelphians, in which he also praises the bishops ministry, he exhorts Christians to have just one Eucharist: Take ye heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to [show forth] the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever ye do, ye may do it according to [the will of] God (Chap. IV). Ignatius, in his Epistle to the Magnesians, additionally 756

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

refers to the observance of the Lords Day in neglect of the Sabbath,319 the day of observance of the Jewish people: If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lords Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His deathwhom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Masterhow shall we be able to live apart from Him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did wait for Him as their Teacher? And therefore He whom they rightly waited for, being come, raised them from the dead. (Chap. IX) In Acts 20:7, we read how the disciples met on the first day of the week: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. Yet it is likely that the practice of the Sabbath might have continued for a longer time span. It seems that even Gentile Christians observed the Biblical Sabbath, many centuries into the Christian Era until progressively the observance of the Sabbath was substituted by that of the Sunday worship. As we have seen, in the Didache or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, probably written in the latter decades of the first century or perhaps in one of the early decades of the second, there is a reference to the Lords Day as the weekday assigned for the Christian assembly (Chap. 14: 1-3). However, The Apostolic Constitutions, written at the end of the fourth century, the observing of the Sabbath was still required: Have before thine eyes the fear of God, and always remember the ten commandments of God,to love the one and only Lord God with all thy strength; to give no heed to idols, or any other beings, as being lifeless gods, or irrational beings or dmons. Consider the manifold workmanship of God, which received its beginning through Christ. Thou shalt observe the Sabbath, on account of Him who ceased from His work of creation, but ceased not from His work of providence: it is a rest for meditation of the law, not for idleness of the hands. (Chap. 36)

319

The Sabbath was kept from Fridays sunset to Saturdays sunset.

757

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

The Council of Laodicea, which took place around 363-364 A.D. put an end to this practice. In its canon 29, this regional synod of approximately thirty clerics from Anatolia320 prescribed no more resting on the Sabbath, restricting Christians to honoring the Lord on Sunday. Yet, canon 16 says that the Gospels are to be read on the Sabbath. In 451, the Council of Chalcedon approved the canon of this council, making it ecumenical (The Council of Laodicea in Phrygia Pacatiana). But the most complete and ancient description of the order and time of the Eucharistic Service preserved is described in Justin the Martyrs First Apology (chapters 65-66), written in 138 A.D. He describes it as he saw it in Rome where he lived part of his life and died (c. 167). Let us read these two chapters: But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. 2 Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to genoito [so be it]. And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion. (Chap. 65) And this food is called among us Eukaristia, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made
320

Now modern Turkey.

758

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, This is My blood; and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (Chap. 66) If we also read chapter 67, we realize that what is described in it precedes the rite of 65. That is, in Chapter 67 Justin begins his account of the Liturgy and repeats in its place what he had previously said: And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. 2 And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration. (Chap. 67) From Justins account we have the following scheme of service: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lessons or Reading of the (Chap. 67). Sermon or exhortation by the Notable or bishop (Chap. 67). The offering of prayers for all people (Chap. 67 and 65). Kiss of peace (Chap. 65). The offering of bread and wine, and water brought up by the deacons (Chap. 67 and 65). 6. Thanksgiving, Eucharistic prayer of sanctification by the Notable or bishop (Chap. 67 and Chap. 65). 759

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

7. Consecration by the words of institution (Chap. 65 and 66). 8. Intercession for the people (Chap. 67 and 65). 9. The people end this prayer with Amen. (Chap. 67 and 65). 10. Communion and the collection of charity (Chap. 67 and 65). (Fortescue, Liturgy) This is the same order St. Chrysostom follows in his Liturgy. We notice also how at the end of Chapter 67, Justin alludes to the Lords Day, which he calls the day of the sun, the day of Kyrios, that is Kyriake, Sunday, in memory of the Resurrection of the Lord. On this day the Christians gathered together to participate in the Divine Liturgy. Regarding the liturgy of the first two centuries, Fortescue states: So we must conceive the Liturgy of the first two centuries as made up of somewhat free improvisations on fixed themes in a definite order; and we realize too how naturally under these circumstances the very words used would be repeatedat first no doubt only the salient clausestill they became fixed forms. The ritual, certainly of the simplest kind, would become stereotyped even more easily. The things that had to be done, the bringing up of the bread and wine, the collection of alms and so on, even more than the prayers, would be done always at the same point. A change here would be even more disturbing than a change in the order of the prayers. (Liturgy) In addition, Fortescue realizes the resemblance the liturgical description of Justin has to that of Clement, as described in the eight book of the Apostolic Constitutions: We have, then, in Clement and Justin the picture of a Liturgy at least remarkably like that of the Apostolic Constitutions(Liturgy). In Canon of the Mass, Fortescue comments the similarity at that time between the Roman liturgy and the Eastern Liturgy, and the similarity of the order described by Hippolytus of Rome (d. ca. 236) with that of Justin: Perhaps a likeness may be seen between the Roman use and those of the Eastern Churches in the fact that when St. Polycarp came to Rome in 155, Pope Anicetus allowed him to celebrate, just like one of his own bishops ... The canons of Hippolytus of Rome (in the beginning of the third century,) if they are genuine ... allude to a Eucharistic celebration that follows the order of St. Justin, and they add the universal introduction to the Preface, Sursum corda, etc. However, Justin provides us only with an outline of the liturgy, not the actual prayers and words. At that time, although the meaning and significance of the Divine Liturgy had been determined as to the change of the Species into the Precious Body and

760

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Blood of Christ, the prayers were recited freely by the Notable (Prophets). Referring to the second century, Gregory Dom Dix, in The Shape of the Liturgy, states: What was fixed and immutable everywhere in the second century was the outline or Shape of the Liturgy, what was done. What our Lord instituted was not a service, something said, but an action, something done or rather the continuance of a traditional Jewish action, but with a new meaning, to which he attached a consequence. The new meaning was that henceforward this action was to be done for the anamnesis of Me; the consequence was that This is My Body and This cup is the New Covenant in My Blood. Apart from these statements, the formulae which Jesus had used at the last supper, the Jewish grace before and after meals, had referred exclusively to the old meaning. Beyond these brief statements, both the new meaning of the action and the words in which to express it were left to the church to find for itself, and there was nothing to suggest that this was a process to be completed by the first Christian generation. When one read Hippolytus order of the Eucharistic prayer from his Apostolic Tradition (composed about 215), we can see similarities with that of Catholic, Anglican or Reformed Churches. Dix says: We begin once more with the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, the most important source of information we possess on the liturgy of the pre-Nicene church. This invaluable document contains the only pre-Nicene text of a eucharistic prayer which has reached us without undergoing extensive later revision. We have to be on our guard, however, against interpreting all the other evidence exclusively in the light of this single document (which raises almost as many fresh problems as it solves, from one point of view), just because it is in this way of such unique interest and importance. In itself it represents only the local tradition of Rome, though at an early stage, before developments had become complicated. Indeed Hippolytus of Rome, a disciple of Irenaeus, offers one of the oldest known complete Eucharistic prayers or anaphoras, here performed in connection with the episcopal consecration: 4 When he has been made bishop, everyone shall give him the kiss of peace, and salute him respectfully, for he has been made worthy of this. 2 Then the deacons shall present the oblation to him, and he shall lay his hand upon it, and give thanks, with the entire council of elders, saying: 3 The Lord be with you. And all reply: And with your spirit. The bishop says: Lift up your hearts. The people respond: We have them with the Lord. The bishop says: Let us give thanks to the Lord. The people respond: It is proper and just. The bishop then continues: 4 We give thanks to you God, through your beloved son Jesus Christ, whom you sent to us in former times a as Savior, Redeemer, and Messenger of your Will, 5 who is your inseparable Word, through whom you made all, and in whom you were 761

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

well-pleased, 6 whom you sent from heaven into the womb of a virgin, who, being conceived within her, was made flesh, and appeared as your Son, born of the Holy Spirit and the virgin. 7 It is he who, fulfilling your will and acquiring for you a holy people, extended his hands in suffering, in order to liberate from sufferings those who believe in you. 8 Who, when he was delivered to voluntary suffering, in order to dissolve death, and break the chains of the devil, and tread down hell, and bring the just to the light, and set the limit, and manifest the resurrection, 9 taking the bread, and giving thanks to you, said, Take, eat, for this is my body which is broken for you. Likewise the chalice, saying, This is my blood which is shed for you. 10 Whenever you do this, do this (in) memory of me. 11 Therefore, remembering his death and resurrection, we offer to you the bread and the chalice, giving thanks to you, who has made us worthy to stand before you and to serve as your priests. 12 And we pray that you would send your Holy Spirit to the oblation of your Holy Church. In their gathering together, give to all those who partake of your holy mysteries the fullness of the Holy Spirit, toward the strengthening of the faith in truth, 13 that we may praise you and glorify you, through your son Jesus Christ, through whom to you be glory and honor, Father and Son, with the Holy Spirit, in your Holy Church, now and throughout the ages of the ages. Amen. Regarding this anaphora, Jungman states: Having read this prayer, we can now begin to understand more clearly why, in the second and this century, the Mass was called Eucharistia. This is the only prayer in the Mass properwhat we would call the canon. In fact it is the only prayer said at the service, for no Fore-Mass ordinarily precedes. But this prayer contains some further elements which evolve organically from the prayer of thanksgiving but go beyond a simple prayer of thanks, in the direction of sacrifice. This development is towards that form of the Mass which is now familiar to us. We see, first of all, the account of the institution, built right into the prayer of thanksgiving. It does not tally with the wording of any of the accounts of the New Testament; it still has a very simple form without ornamentation; it therefore represents a tradition all of its own. It is, of course, extremely important that the oldest text of the Mass, as we know it, possess as its innermost core the words of the institution. (68) Jungman also refers to the anamnesis, as similar to the one used at the Mass today, and to the epiclesis, a main point of controversy between the Oriental and Latin churches even today. He says that Hyppolitus epiclesis does not ask for the transformation of the gift, but for a fruitful communion; its sense is the same as in the present cannon of the Roman Mass (69-70).321

See Hyppolitus anaphora or communion liturgy in The Anaphora attributed to Antipope Hyppolitus.

321

762

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Jungman asserts that Hippolytus Eucharistic prayer is not only the oldest extant text of such a prayer, a venerable monument of the past, but also a vivid and brilliant exposition of Eucharistic thought at the start of the third century, a record of the theological thinking of the pre-Constantinian Church (73). Moreover, Dix analyzes the structure of this prayer as follows, a) Address: Relation of the Father to the Eternal Word. b) Thanksgiving for Creation through the Word. c) Thanksgiving for the Incarnation of the Word. d) Thanksgiving for Redemption through the Passion of the Word. e) Statement of Christs purpose in instituting the Eucharist. f) Statement of His Institution of the Eucharist. g) Statement of His virtual command to repeat the action of (g) with a virtual promise of the result attaching to such repetition. h) Claim to the fulfillment of the promise in (g). i) Offering of the elements j) Constituting obedience to the command in (g), with an interpretation of the meaning understood by this obedience. k) Prayer for the effects of communion. l) Doxology. commenting, This prayer was written down more or less verbally in this form at Rome c. A.D. 215, but the author emphatically claims that it represents traditional Roman practice in his own youth a generation before. It appears certain that some of the phrasing in a-e is of his own composition, and represents his own peculiar theology of the Trinity; and it is at least possible that the wording of other parts of the prayer is from his own pen. But this does not make it improbable that the structure of the prayer as a whole (including a-e) and some of its actual wording were really traditional at Rome. Dix also offers parallels between Hyppolitus and Justin Martyrs eucharistic passages. Only in the Ethiopian Church of Abyssinia is Hyppolitus Eucharistic prayer still used. It bears the significant name of Mass of the Apostles (Jungman 66).

The Apostolic Constitutions While in the first three centuries we see outlines of the liturgy, in the fourth century, we find its actual words, especially in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions (also known as the Clementine Liturgy). The Apostolic Constitutions is a

763

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

handbook of church teaching which appeared in Syria toward 380. The Apostolic Constitutions is a handbook of church teaching. It is the earliest most significant liturgical document known to exist. It claims to be based on earlier works of similar kind, such as those by Justin, Hyppolitus, or Clement, and to convey the teachings of the Apostles transmitted to the Church by St. Clement of Rome. It has eight books. The first 6 books are based on the Didascalia Apostolorum, a lost treatise of the third century, of Greek origin, which is known through Syriac versions. The 7th book is based on the Didache. The 8th book is a mixed compilation. Let us see the following table related to the eighth book:

The first two chapters of book 8 of the Apostolic Constitutions seem to be based on a lost work of Hippolytus of Rome, Concerning Spiritual Gifts. Chapters 3-22 apparently are based on Hippolytus Apostolic Tradition (formerly called Egyptian Church Order) and contain an elaborate description of the Antiochene liturgy, including the so-called Clementine liturgy. This is a valuable source for the history of the mass. Chapters 28-46 of book 8 contain a series of canons, and chapter 47 comprises the so-called

Apostolic Canons, a collection of 85 canons derived in part from the preceding constitutions
and in part from the canons of the councils of Antioch (341) and Laodicaea (c. 360). It includes a list of biblical books that omits the Revelation to John but places the Apostolic Constitutions and the two letters of Clement in the canon of Scripture. (Apostolic Constitutions Hippolytus Book VIII) Table 80: Book eighth of the Apostolic Constitutions

Fortescue states that the liturgy depicted in the eighth book as it stands is Antiochene, and is closely related to the Rite of Jerusalem... It would seem, then, that it represents one form of a vaguer type of rite that was in its main outline uniform in the first three centuries (Liturgy). Wybrew also says that the Clementine Liturgy, in its general form, can be taken as representative of the rite of Antioch in the late fourth century, from which that of Constantinople ultimately derived (38). He adds: The Clementine Liturgy enables us to form a reasonably accurate picture of late fourth century eucharistic worship in the province of Antioch. It testifies to the consolidation of the liturgical tradition in the East, parallel to that revealed by Ambrose of Milan in the West. The eucharistic prayer, which at least up to the third century had been extempore, at the discretion of the bishop, now became a 764

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

fixed text. There was, of course, nothing like the uniformity of text and practice that later came to characterize eucharistic worship throughout the Church. It was still possible for new eucharistic prayers to be composed, of course following traditional lines; and considerable variety existed in the manner of celebrating the service. But the Clementine Liturgy provides us with a reasonable guide to the basic shape of the Liturgy of Constantinople at the end of the fourth century. It offers us an adequate starting point for tracing the specific development of Byzantine eucharistic worship. (44-45) The Clementine Liturgy includes scripture readings, sermon, dismissal of catechumens, a comprehensive litany, corporate intercessory prayer, kiss of peace, procession of the gifts to the altar, and an anaphora, intercessions, and the communing of the faithful. (Williams). Let us view an example of the Prayer after the Participation: Now we have received the precious body and the precious blood of Christ, let us give thanks to Him who has thought us worthy to partake of these His holy mysteries; and let us beseech Him that it may not be to us for condemnation, but for salvation, to the advantage of soul and body, to the preservation of piety, to the remission of sins, and to the life of the world to come. Let us arise, and by the grace of Christ let us dedicate ourselves to God, to the only unbegotten God, and to His Christ. And let the bishop give thanks (Chap. XIV). Dixs summarizing words can help us close this pre-Constantine period and understand the diversity of local traditions of these eucharistic prayers that emerged afterwards: We have seen that the eucharist is primarily an action, our obedience to our Lords command to Do this; and that this action is performed by the Shape of the Liturgy, the outline of the service viewed as a single continuous whole. We have also seen that the meaning of this action is stated chiefly in the great eucharistic prayer, which formed the second item of that Tour-action shape of the Eucharist which has come down almost from apostolic times. Since this prayer was originally the prayer, the only prayer in the whole rite, it was there that the whole meaning of the rite had to be stated, if it was to be put into words at all in the course of the service. We have also noted that, while the tradition as to the outline of the rite was always and everywhere the same, there was no such original fixity about the content and sequence of this prayer. Its text was subject to constant development and revision, so that it varied considerably from church to church and from period to period, and even (probably within narrower limits) from celebrant to celebrant. Finally it is worth noticing that during the first three centuries, the distribution of the communion formed an important part of the Eucharist, but in the fourth and following centuries it declined. This was mostly due to the separation of the clergy and

765

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

the faithful as a result of Constantines patronizing of the former and the preeminence attained by bishops. Activity 1. In The Didache, a) Find passages indicating: prophesying and that the Eucharist was still joined to the agape; b) See if there is a clearly expressed consecration; c) see in which elements it resembles todays liturgy. 2. Write a brief summary of the importance of Clement of Romes allusions to the early liturgy. 3. In Pauls Epistle to the Hebrews find its five references to the term high priest or priesthood, and explain its use in comparison to that given by Clement and Ignatius. (Answer: Hebrews 2:17; 3:1; 4:14, 15; 8:1) 4. Explain the change of the Sabbath to the Lords Day on Sunday in the above mentioned Fathers. 5. What is the most ancient description of the order of the Divine Liturgy? Explain your answer. 6. Read and briefly comment these other references to the Liturgy in this anteNicean Period: a. Ignatius of Antioch, Eph., xiii, xx, Phil., iv, Rom., vii, Smyrn., vii, viii b. Irenaeus, Adv. Hr., IV, xvii, xviii; V, ii; c. Clement of Alexandria, Pd., I, vi; II, ii d. Origen, Contra Cels., VIII, xxxiii, In Matt., xi, 14

Activity 154: The Liturgy in the first three centuries

Your Own Research 1. Define the words Sursum Corda, Anamnesis, Words of Institution, Oblation, Epiclesis, and Doxology. 2. Find the differences between the meaning of the epiclesis in the Roman Church and in the Orthodox Church. Write a three-page paper on the Apostolic Constitutions (date, sources, compiler, etc.) 3. Read the liturgy (also called as Clementine liturgy) depicted in its eighth book (v-xv) as well as a summary in Appendix G. Then (1) See the relationship between them and (2) try to find similarities between it and the ones described by Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr. See Apostolic Constitutions - Hippolytus Book VIII (http://www.piney.com/DocApos Constitu3.html) and Liturgy (http://www.newadvent.Org/cathen/09306a .htm).
Activity 155: The Apostolic Constitutions

766

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE LITURGY IN THE BYZANTINE CHURCH (IV-XV CENTURIES) Let us now approach the development of the liturgy in the Byzantine Church, extending from the fourth to the fifteenth century. It includes: Early Byzantine period (324-842), which goes up to the end of the iconoclastic crisis (725-842); Middle Byzantine Period (843-1261), and Late Byzantine Period (1262-1454). EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (324-842) This period embraces the emerging of the Byzantine Empire to the end of the iconoclastic crisis. Within it, the seven ecumenical synods took place. As previously noted, in 313 the Edict of Milan issued in the names of the Roman Emperors Constantine I, ruler of the western parts of the Empire, and Licinius, who ruler of the eastern, tolerated Christianity, removed penalties for professing Christianity, and returned confiscated Church property. Christian worship now being legalized, liturgical development was unrestricted and thus quickened. Yet, it did not become a revolution, in spite of the appearance of new services in the daily cycles, especially in monasteries, and the liturgical evolution of special days of the week. Schmemann states: In studying the liturgical changes which took place in the post-Constantine period, it should be remembered that the freedom which the Church acquired in the so-called Edict of Milan was fundamentally a freedom of cult. In order to evaluate properly what this meant for Christian, it should be noted that for over two hundred years the cult has been the main item in the roster of crimes for which Christians ha been punished by the Empire. In the early Church worship was necessarily restricted and curtailed by this secrecy... . Thus the freedom of cult bestowed was, first of all, an opportunity for her to express fully. Externally this expression might appear to be revolutionary. But if we look more carefully into this exuberant growth of cult, we see its evident continuity with the early Christian cult as defined by the apostolic lex orandi. It is really impossible to speak of a liturgical revolution in the fourth century, if by this we mean the appearance of a type of worship differing radically from that which had gone before. (Introduction to Liturgical Theology 95-96) Notwithstanding, as he mentions, it is also difficult, however, to deny the profound changes which after all did mark the Churchs liturgical life beginning with the epoch of

767

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Constantine (98). To understand these changes, Schmemann believes, we should take into account the factor of liturgical piety: It was rather the change in liturgical piety which introduced a complexity and peculiar dualism into the development of worship, and which leads us now to see in that worship, the continuation or revelation of elements contained within it from the very beginning and, at the same time, a certain real metamorphosis which made the Christian cult in part something other that what it was in the early Church. (99) This liturgical piety was determined by a consciousness of the absolute newness of the reality manifested and embodied in the Church and its cult and characterized by eschatological and ecclesiological dimensions. Schmemann adds that it gave a completely unique character to the Christian worship in the first three centuries revealing the significance of its lex orandi322 (103). These two dimensions will be present in the changes which will occur in the Constantine era, a moment when the Church and the Empire came to terms with one another, and a moment of an extraordinary complication of cult. As mentioned above, the Byzantine liturgy is derived from the old liturgy of Antioch in the disposition of its parts, whose earliest form was the Apostolic Constitution. The Antiochene rite323 was one of the parent rites found in the fourth century along with that of Rome, Gaul, Alexandria, and Antioch. These parent rites are not casual references to the liturgy but complete ones from which all others derived. Fortescue, in Liturgy, explains the reason of the survival of these rites:

Schmemann considers the Typikon as the crystalized lex orandi of the Orthodox East. He explains that taking the rule of prayer of the end of the third century as a point of departure of this process, the history of the Typikon falls into two periods: the first from the fourth to the nine century, when both types of worshipparish and monasterydeveloped simultaneously, gradually merging and influencing each other; the second, from the ninth to the present, in which the Ordo developed within an already complete sequence (Introduction to Liturgical Theology 149). 323 The family of liturgies originally used in the Patriarchate of Antioch begins with that of the Apostolic Constitutions; then follow that of St. James in Greek, the Syrian Liturgy of St. James, and the other Syrian Anaphorus. The line may be further continued to the Byzantine Rite (the older Liturgy of St. Basil and the later and shorter one of St. John Chrysostom (Adrian Forstecue, Antiochene Liturgy).

322

768

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Except for the Gallican Rite the reason of the final survival of these liturgies is evident. Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch are the old patriarchal cities. As the other bishops accepted the jurisdiction of these three patriarchs, so did they imitate their services. The Liturgy, as it crystallized in these centres, became the type for the other Churches of their patriarchates. Only Gaul and north-west Europe generally, though part of the Roman Patriarchate, kept its own rite till the seventh and eighth centuries. Jungman confirms this assertion when he says that Since the fourth century the differentiation of the liturgy was mainly along the lines of the patriarchal divisions. The great metropolitan or patriarchal churches became the centers of a particular liturgical rite. In these patriarchal sees an order of worship was fixed, and this order sooner or later became obligatory within the entire sphere of influence of the see in question. (202) This differentiation as Dix asserts, in the The Shape of the Liturgy, began to develop around the Synaxis: The principal differences in the various rites began to develop around the introductory parts of the service, that is, the introduction to what had originally been the Synaxis. The very earliest components were probably a preliminary censing by the bishop or celebrant, followed by the singing of a group of psalms, prefixed to the lexicons. Geographically it begins in what is for the far east of classical Christendom, though the censing was afterwards adopted by the central group of Greek churches. (445) Fortescue, in The Rite of Constantinople, asserts that The Byzantine use in both its liturgies (of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom) follows exactly the order of Antioch. A number of other parallels make the fact of this derivation clear from internal evidence, as it is from external witness. This drawing of the Byzantine rite on the Antiochene one was due, among other factors, to the eclectic character it had, as Meyendorff explains: It is well known that, since the capital of the empire was moved to the New Rome, the Church of Constantinople began to build up a very eclectic theological and liturgical tradition. Before becoming itself an independent intellectual center, it welcomed talents and ideas from everywhere. From Alexandria it adopted the system of the computation of the date of Easter. From Antioch came several of its most distinguished leaders (including St. John Chrysostom, Nestorius and, in the sixth century, Romanus the Melode) bringing Antiochian liturgical traditions of the capital. The arguments of the Christological debates of the fifth and sixth centuries were primarily conceived in Syria and Egypt; Constantinople tried only to preserve and synthesize the

769

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

valuable elements of the two trends. (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 118) Robert Taft, in The Evolution of the Byzantine, Divine Liturgy, 324 explains how in a third stage there was a period of unification of rites in the Byzantine period in which there was a filling out of the primitive liturgical outline following Justins Apology. This was done in what he calls soft points: (1) before the readings, (2) between the Words service and the Eucharistic prayer, and (3) at the communion and dismissal that follow this prayer. He notes that At the primitive liturgy these are the three points of action without words: (1) the entrance into church, (2) the kiss of peace and transfer of gifts, and (3) the fraction, communion, and dismissal rites. What could be more natural than to develop the ceremonial of these actions, cover them with chants, and add to them suitable prayers? For one of the most common phenomena in later liturgical development is the steadfast refusal to let a gesture speak for itself. Taft comments how this development and unification began at the end of the fourth century and ended in the sixteenth century: They extend from the end of the 4th century until the beginning of the 16th. From the end of the 4th, because the writings of John Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople from 397- 404, are our first witness to its liturgical uses; to the beginning of the 16th because the first printed edition of our liturgy appeared in 1526, and it was the printing press rather than the intervention of bishop, synod, or liturgical commission, that was responsible for the final unification of liturgical usage in the Byzantine East. From another perspective, Schmemann distinguishes four basic processes in the history of worship after the conversion of Emperor Constantine: (1) Development and complication of external ceremonial of worship, related at first to the building of churches; (2) the increasing complication of liturgical cyclesthe Church Year, the week and the day; the appearance of new feasts or whole festal cycles, new liturgical days and new services; (3) the rapid growth of hymnody, which gradually became the main element of worship; and finally (4) the extraordinary development of the Sanctoralthe reverencing of the tombs of the saints, relics, etc. (Introduction to Liturgical Theology 94-95)

Taft sees four stages in the development of the liturgy: A first stage or separation of the Lords supper from the agape; a second, or appearance of written formularies such as that of Justin; a third or period of unification after the founding of Constantinople; and a fourth or the emergence of the rites as identifiably distinct entities. Taft sees regressive traits and violation of the core rite in the fourth stage.

324

770

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Based on Mansvetov and Skaballanovich,325 he further divides the history of all these processes into the following periods: (1) the fourth and fifth centuriesas the epoch of unchecked liturgical flowering, and all the profound changes in the Churchs life connected with this growth; (2) the sixth to eighth centuriesas the epoch of gradual stabilization of new cult forms; and (3) beginning with the ninth centurythe epoch of the final completion of the Byzantine type of worship, when it acquired its present form. (Introduction to Liturgical Theology 95) Regarding the meaning of the Divine Liturgy, Father Pavlos Koumarianos, in Symbol and Reality in the Divine Liturgy, distinguishes two periods, a first one up to the iconoclast controversy, with St Maximus the Confessor (ca. 580-662) as its supreme representative, and, a second, from the iconoclastic controversy to the present day: We need to distinguish these two periods because, as we shall see, after the iconoclast controversy the understanding of the rites performed in the Divine Liturgy changes to a great degree. Up to the time of iconoclasm, what is important in the Liturgy is what the faithful (clergy and laity) are all doing together. Interpretation and understanding of the Liturgy in this period is based on the rites per se, and these are rites performed by all, not just by the clergy. The Divine Liturgy is an action: it does not symbolise something, it is something. It is an act of Communion of the Faithful, with each other and with God; a communion which is a foretaste of the Kingdom of God. He explains the second period as follows: In the second period, however, there develops a form of allegory or symbolism which basically has to do with what the priest does. In this period, what matters is not what the faithful and clergy do together as a whole, but what the priest does in front of the faithful, and every one of the priests actions symbolises something. In other words, the Liturgy is understood as a kind of drama, in which the faithful watch a representation of the life of Christ performed by the clergy. This change in the understanding of the Liturgy gave rise to a change in the rites as well. Parts of the Liturgy which did not fit in with this representational symbolism fell into disuse or were modified so as to conform to the prevailing system of symbolism.

Your Own Research Briefly compare and contrast the four parent rites of Antioch, Alexandria, Rome, and Gaul. You can find information in the article Liturgy by Fortescue (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09306a.htm).

325

Schmemann does not mention bibliographical references of these writers.

771

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Activity 156: The parent rites

Activity 1. From which of the four parent rites does the Byzantine one derive? 2. What did the Edict of Milan introduced in terms of liturgy? Was it a real revolution? Explain your answers. 3. Why can we say that the Byzantine rite is eclectic? 4. What are Tafts soft points? What does he mean by that? 5. List the periods outlined by Taft, Schmemann, and Koumarianos.
Activity 157: Preliminary questions on the development of the Byzantine Liturgy

The Fourth and Fifth Centuries: The Liturgies of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom These two centuries are the most important ones for the development of Byzantine liturgy as the main two liturgies used in Constantinople appearedthat of St. Basil and that of St. John Chrysostom. We have the oldest extant orders of these two liturgies at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century in the Barberini Codex,326 which already have some developments of the original rites. Before this manuscript, we have to search for references to both rites in important documents or personalities of this period, including Basil, Chrysostom, Gregory Nazianzus, and Patriarch Proclus. Furthermore, although probably already existing in the fourth century, the third liturgy, Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, is explicitly mentioned in the seventh century, in the Quinisext Ecumenical Synod (Trullo 692).
Barberini gr.336, preserved in the Vatican Library, is the oldest and, without any doubt, the most famous manuscript containing the Byzantine Euchologion, i.e. the liturgical book which presents the Eucharistic prayers, the presidential prayers of the Liturgy of the Hours, the rites of the sacraments and a large collection of blessings and prayers for various situations and necessities. The greater part of these texts, naturally in a different textual recension, are still in use today in the patriarchate of Constantinople and in all the Churches which belong to the liturgical tradition which scientifically is called Byzantine. (Stefano Parenti) Table 81: The Barberini Codex

On the editions of the two liturgies and the manuscripts in which they are contained, see Frank E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western I, Oxford 1896.

326

772

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

The oldest of these two liturgies, which was also first used in Constantinople, is ascribed to St. Basil the Great (d. 379), Bishop of Caesarea (370-379) in Cappadocia. Yet, he did not exactly compose it but rather reformed it from a previous one, as J. F. Goggin remarks in Liturgy of St. Basil: That St. Basil composed a liturgy, or rather reformed an existing liturgy, is beyond doubt, since besides the constant tradition of the Byzantine Church there are many testimonies in ancient writings to establish the fact. Goggin mentions a treatise on the tradition of the Divine liturgy attributed to St. Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople in 438 (d. 446): When the great Basil ... saw the carelessness and degeneracy of men who feared the length of the Liturgynot as if he thought it too longhe shortened its form, so as to remove the weariness of the clergy and assistants. Not long afterwards our father, John Chrysostom, zealous for the salvation of his flock as a shepherd should be, considering the carelessness of human nature, thoroughly rooted up every diabolical objection. He therefore left out a great part and shortened all the forms lest anyone ... stay away from this Apostolic and Divine Institution. (De traditione divin Miss327) According to Proclus, Basil shortened the length of the liturgy to save men from slothfulness and degeneracy. To corroborate the existence of St. Basils liturgy, Goggin also mentions the testimony of a letter of Peter the Deacon, one of the Scythian monks sent to Rome to settle certain dogmatic questions. In about the year 520, Peter wrote to the African bishops in exile in Sardinia, mentioning the Liturgy of St. Basil: Hence, also, Blessed Basil, Bishop of Caesarea, in a prayer of the holy altar, with which almost the entire East is familiar, says among other things: Grant us, O Lord, Thy strength and protection; make the evil good and preserve the just in their righteousness. For Thou canst do all things and there is no one who may oppose Thee; for when Thou desirest, Thou savest, and no one resists Thy will.328 According to Peter the Deacon, who even quotes passages of it, this liturgy was known and used throughout almost the entire East. There are other documents that testify to

327
328

Patrologia Graeca 45, 849. Qtd in Fortescue, The Rite of Constantinople. Patrologia Latina, 45, 449. Qtd. in Goggin.

773

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Basils Liturgy as a genuine work as well as the reforms he supposedly made. Canon 32 of the Quinisext Ecumenical Synod (Trullo 692), when referring to the consecration with wine and water, mentions Basils liturgy: For also James, the brother, according to the flesh, of Christ our God, to whom the throne of the church of Jerusalem first was entrusted, and Basil, the Archbishop of the Church of Caesarea, whose glory has spread through all the world, when they delivered to us directions for the mystical sacrifice in writing, declared that the holy chalice is consecrated in the Divine Liturgy with water and wine. And the holy Fathers who assembled at Carthage provided in these express terms: That in the holy Mysteries nothing besides the body and blood of the Lord be offered, as the Lord himself laid down, that is bread and wine mixed with water. Therefore if any bishop or presbyter shall not perform the holy action according to what has been handed down by the Apostles, and shall not offer the sacrifice with wine mixed with water, let him be deposed, as imperfectly shewing forth the mystery and innovating on the things which have been handed down. We do not know the exact modifications he made to the liturgy in use in his Caesarean church, yet in a letter Basil sent to the clergy of Neocaesarea (Letter 207), he mentions the changes he has made to the liturgy regarding the introduction of a new way of singing psalms329. Furthermore, St. Gregory Nazianzus (d. 390), in his Oration 43 (Funeral Oration on the Great S. Basil, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia) refers to Basils reordering of prayer, Of his care for and protection of the Church, there are many other tokens ... legislation written and unwritten for the monastic life: arrangements of prayers, adornments of the sanctuary, and other ways in which the true man of God, working for God, would benefit the people: one being especially important and noteworthy (Chap. 34). Gregory of Nyssa (died c. 395), in Laudem Fratris Basilii, also says that Basil carefully arranged the form of the Service330 (Fortescue, The Rite of Constantinople). Addressing the difficulty to know the exact reforms Basil did in the liturgy, Mastrantonis remarks:

329 330

This matter will be studied in more detail when dealing with the development of Byzantine music. Patrologia Graeca 46, 808. Qtd. in Fortescue, The Rite of Constantinople.

774

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

It is not known precisely just what the nature of the Basilian reform was, nor what liturgy served as the basis of the saints work. Very probably he shortened and changed somewhat the liturgy of his own diocese, which was akin to the Liturgy of St. James. In later times it underwent some development, so that with our present knowledge of its history it would be almost impossible to reconstruct it as it came from the pen of the Bishop of Caesarea. According to the tradition of the Greek Orthodox Church, their liturgy is practically the work of St. Basil, due allowance being made for changes and amelioration in the course of time. This is older than either of the other two Byzantine liturgies, and is mentioned under the name of St. Basil in ancient times as if it were then the normal liturgy. Regarding this point, Fortescue also states, St. Basil made a reformation of the Liturgy of his Church, and that the Byzantine service called after him represents his reformed Liturgy in its chief parts, although it has undergone further modification since his time (The Rite of Constantinople). Moreover, as suggested, Basil seems to have reformed the rite used in Caesarea, which was a local form of the great Antiochene rite, with many local variations and additions. This is proved, says Fortescue, from the disposition of the present Liturgy of St. Basil, the fact that before the emerging of Constantinople as a Patriarchal site, Antioch was the head of the Churches of Asia Minor as well as of Syria, and also by the absence of any other source. Additionally, of the two Antiochene liturgies now extant(1) that of the Eighth Book of the Apostolic Constitutions and (2) parallel to it in every way, the Greek Liturgy of St. Jamesthe Basilian Liturgy has a greater likeness to the Liturgy of St. James than to the former. Fortescue explains: From the beginning of the Eucharistic prayer (Vere dignum et justum est, our Preface) to the dismissal, Basils order is almost exactly that of James. But the now extant Liturgy of St. James has itself been considerably modified in later years. Its earlier part especially (the Liturgy of the Catechumens and the Offertory) is certainly later than the time of St. Basil. In any case, then, we must go back to the original Antiochene Rite as the source. But neither was this the immediate origin of the reform. It must be remembered that all living rites are subject to gradual modification through use. The outline and frame remain; into this frame new prayers are fitted. As a general rule liturgies keep the disposition of their parts, but tend to change the text of the prayers. (The Rite of Constantinople) He continues,

775

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

St. Basil took as the basis of his reform the use of Caesarea in the fourth century. There is reason to believe that that use, while retaining the essential order of the original Antiochene service, had already considerably modified various parts, especially the actual prayers. We have seen, for instance, that Basil shortened the Liturgy. But the service that bears his name is not at all shorter than the present one of St. James. We may, then, suppose that by his time the Liturgy of Caesarea had been considerably lengthened by additional prayers (this is the common development of Liturgies). When we say, then, that the rite of Constantinople that bears his name is the Liturgy of St. James as modified by St. Basil, it must be understood that Basil is rather the chief turning-point in its development than the only author of the change. It had already passed through a period of development before his time, and it has developed further since. Nevertheless, St. Basil and his reform of the rite of his own city are the starting-point of the special use of Constantinople. In this sense, Wybrew also notes that: Reshaping an existing anaphora, Basil incorporated into his revision his own carefully formulated theological ideas. His anaphora reflects the fully developed Trinitarian thought of the latter part of the fourth century, which is henceforth firmly established in the Byzantine liturgical tradition. The Eastern part of the church was far bolder than the Western in allowing its worship to be influenced by current theological thought. In particular the Byzantine Liturgy embodied the view of late-fourth century Trinitarian theology that is the Holy spirit who sanctifies and consecrates. (56) It is most likely that St. Basils Liturgy was used before the time of St. Chrysostom. This is attested by St. Gregory Nazianzus in his 38th Oration, delivered at Constantinople on Dec. 25, 380, or on Jan. 6, 381. He had accepted the See of Constantinople to combat the Arians, which he did for two years (379-381). As Fortescue comments, in this oration he quotes the Eucharistic prayer that his hearers know and which is the same as the one he mentions in his Oration 6th, delivered in Cappadocia. According to Fortescue, This proves that, at any rate in its most important element, the liturgy used at the capital was that of Cappadociathe one that St. Basil used as a basis of his reform. It would therefore be most natural that the reform too should in time be adopted at Constantinople. Yet, he goes on, it would seem that before Chrysostom this Basilian Rite (according to the universal rule) had received further development and additions at Constantinople (The Rite of Constantinople). Wybrew also refers to this fact by emphasizing the great friendship existing between 776

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Gregory of Nazianzus and Basil: What more natural than he should have used there the anaphora used by his friend in Caesarea? The prestige enjoyed by Basil would have made its introduction into the Great Church331 no difficult matter. His may well then have been the prayer which Chrysostom found in use when he came to Constantinople in 397 (56). The second rite in used in Constantinople was that of St. John Chrysostom. Born in Antioch (347-407), he was Patriarch of Constantinople from 397 to 404. Chrysostom did not only modify Basils rite but left both his reformed rite and that of the Basil to be used in Constantinople. We have seen in the above text by Proclus, who in 438 brought the body of St. John Chrysostom to Constantinople and placed it in the church of the Apostles, how Chrysostom also shortened a liturgy, supposedly that of Basil and for similar purposes: caring for the salvation of his flock (F.J. Bacchus, St. Proclus Patriarch of Constantinople). Chrysostom modified Basils rite the same way Basil modified the older rite of Antioch. Later, Fortescue, talks about this tradition of the Church and about the further modification of Chrysostoms liturgy: There is no reason to doubt this tradition in the main issue. A comparison of the Liturgy of Chrysostom with that of Basil will show that it follows the same order and is shortened considerably in the text of the prayers; a further comparison of its text with the numerous allusions to the rite of the Holy Eucharist in Chrysostoms homilies will show that the oldest form we have of the Liturgy agrees substantially with the one he describes. But it is also certain that the modern Liturgy of St. Chrysostom has received considerable modifications and additions since his time. (The Rite of Constantinople) Although it did not completely displace the older rite of St. Basil, Chrysostom Liturgy, with some modifications, progressively became the common Eucharistic service of Constantinople, spreading, as the city became a Patriarchal site, throughout the Orthodox world.

331

The Great Church is Hagia Sophia.

777

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

In addition, Wybrew explains how Chrysostom regularly spoke of the Eucharist as a mystery, in the sense of we see one thing and believe another: That is what is seen, heard and touched in the Eucharist can be understood by the senses and known by natural reasons. But the spiritual, heavenly realities concealed in it can be grasped only by faith and the enlightenment given by the Holy Spirit. The Sacrament is a sign of a reality greater that itself, which is nevertheless mad present and available in the sign. (62) He also comments that Chrysostom places particular emphasis on the Eucharist as the anamnesis of the many things God has done for us, and especially of the sacrifice of the cross and he urges his congregation to realize that at the Eucharist they are truly in the Upper Room (63). Wybrew also notes that By the end of the fourth century the Eucharistic memorial of Jesus, like Paschal celebration, was beginning to be understood less in a sacramental, and more in a dramatic, historical way. This tendency was strengthened as this particular tradition of interpretation developed. It had a profound influence on every aspect of Byzantine Eucharistic worship; it was given expression in prayers added to the rite; it inspired a wealth of ceremonial development; it helped to share the late Byzantine iconographic scheme of church decorations; and it had a lasting effect on Orthodox Eucharistic piety. (66) Though these two Eucharistic liturgies did not acquire their final shape until the ninth century, in the sixth century they were fixed by canon law (Liturgy of Saint Basil). In the seventh century, the Mystagogy (Initiation into the Mystery) of St. Maximus the Confessor (580-662), will give new insights into the liturgy performed in Constantinople.

778

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Activity 1. Regarding St. Basils Liturgy, List the documents corroborating St. Basils liturgy and its main source rite. Explain the reason for Basil shortening it. Describe the theological idea of the anaphora he incorporated and revised. State if this liturgy was used before that of St. Chrysostom.

2. Regarding St. Chrysostoms Liturgy, answer the following questions: What liturgy did Chrysostom seem to revise? Why did he shorten the liturgy? What was the meaning Chrysostom gave to the Liturgy?

3. What does Wybrew mean when he says that the liturgy was beginning to be understood less in a sacramental way and more in dramatic, historic way?
Activity 158: The liturgies of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom

The Seventh Century: Maximus the Confessor In the seventh century the Empire lost Syria, the Holy Land, Egypt, and North Africa to invading Islamic armies. For a time the Muslims merely tapped the economy of these regions, leaving intact many of the Byzantine institutions they had overrun, including the liturgy. Meyendorff asserts this was a period of self-affirmation of Byzantium, and thus of its liturgy: The resulting permanent schism and the new political and cultural situation that prevailed in the seventh century put an end to the period of pluralism and interrelation of several major centers in the Christian East. Confronting Islam and facing new barbarian invasions, Byzantium entered a period of relative isolation and defensive self-affirmation. It is at this time that Byzantine Orthodoxy became practically identified with the Byzantine liturgy. No formal decree of liturgical centralization and uniformity was ever issued, but de facto de liturgy of the Great Church of Constantinople became the only acceptable standard of churchmanship. (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 118) For him, the canons of the Trullan or Quinisext Council (692) show this new sense of self-sufficiency, condemning the Armenian Church for not mixing water into the Eucharistic wine (canon 32); forbidding to celebrate the Eucharist during Lent

779

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

except on Saturdays, Sundays, and Annunciation day (canon 52); condemning the fasting practices of Rome and Armenia (canons 55-56) as well as the ancient tradition of offering honey and milk during the Eucharist (canon 57), by setting up regulations on iconography in accordance with patterns and theological ideas prevailing in Byzantium (canon 82) (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 118). He further comments: If considered together with the numerous other disciplinary decrees of the Trullan Council, these canons faithfully reflect the rigid and self-assured postured adopted by the Byzantine church on the eve of the period when, after an iconoclastic crisis, it entered a time of spectacular missionary expansion. To the newly converted Slavs and to other nations which remained for centuries in the religious and cultural orbit of Byzantium, the liturgy and practice of the Great Church were generally presented as untouchable, and converts were generally encourage to maintain literal and rigid compliance with every detail. (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 118) Maximus Mystagogy, probably written around 628-630, is the most important source of both the meaning and structure of the liturgy of this pre-iconoclastic period. This important work is an explanation of ecclesiastical symbolism, of relevance for liturgical history. As Wybrew states, Maximus Mystagogy, being the first work of its kind, helped to establish a tradition, and to popularize a way of understanding and living the liturgy which became an accepted part of Orthodox Christianity (101). George Dion Dragas, in The Church in St. Maximus Mystagogy, remarks the significance this Father attributes to the Church as total mystery and a complete everyday experience: In this Mystagogy, Saint Maximus presents us above all with the total mystery of the Church, which embraces all reality in its totality and its parts, and gives it an eternal significance. He is able to do this by employing the Greek Patristic ontological category of the eikon. Thus, the Church is presented as a reality, which does not stand over or against the world but alongside, with and for the world, viz as a reality, which reveals its proper function. Indeed the Church is the proper eikon of the world. She is the world seen in another perspective which is more human, and which is imbued with a divine quality of being and manner of existence. Saint Maximus leads us to see the great mystery of the Church in the specific and realistic eikons which constitute our total everyday experience, and which, far from opposing one another, help distribute the light of Gods glory and truth from the outer galaxies of heaven to the innermost sanctum of

780

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

the soul, the human mind. In this perspective the Church is a manner of existence, which transforms all creaturely existence in its totality and in its parts without leaving anything outside. In Maximus Mystagogia, we also find a sequence of the Divine Liturgy previous to the iconoclastic crisis. Koumarianos explains this order along with its meaning in the following terms: According to St Maximus, the eschatological character of the Liturgy is demonstrated right from the beginning, at the opening of the Liturgy when the bishop and presbyters go up to the synthronon332 an action which images the enthronement of the Lord at the Fathers right hand, bringing human nature with him (Chap.8). After that, the Gospel reading indicates the end of the world (Chap.13).The dismissal of the catechumens images the future judgement (Chap.15). The beginning of the Liturgy of the Faithful images in advance the entry of those who are worthy into the bridal chamber of Christ (Chap.15). The kiss of peace prefigures and portrays the concord and unanimity and identity of mind that all will leave with each other in faith and love at the time when the ineffable good Things are revealed, through which those who are worthy receive intimate familiarity with the Word of God (Chap.17). The Offering of the Eucharist is performed as an expression of the gratitude of the just for the divine gifts they enjoy in the Kingdom of God (Chap.18). The triumphal hymn indicates that union and equality of honour with the bodiless and intelligible powers which will be manifest in the future (Chap.19).The Lords Prayer is the symbol of the real and living adoption which will be given by the gift and grace of the Holy Spirit (Chap.20). Finally, the reception of Holy Communion indicates the adoption which through the goodness of our God will come about in every way upon all who are worthy, the union and intimacy and divine likeness and deification.(Chap. 20) According to Koumarianos description, we see the procession to the synthronon, the Gospel reading, the Liturgy of the Faithful, the kiss of peace, the Offering of the Eucharist, the triumphal hymn, the Lords Prayer, gift and grace of the Holy Spirit, and finally the reception of Holy Communion. Let us read Maximus actual words from chapter 24 of the Mystagogy, regarding these and other items of the Byzantine liturgy: The first entrance during the [eucharistic] celebration [synaxis] signifies (broadly-speaking) the first appearance of [Christ] our God, and especially the conversion of those who are led by him and with him ... The divine melodies of the chants indicate the divine pleasure and delight which comes takes place in the souls of all. By means of [these chants] they are mystically strengthened:
332

The raised seats behind the altar.

781

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

they forget past labors for virtue and are renewed in eager desire for the divine and pure benefits yet to be achieved... The holy Gospel is (broadly-speaking) a symbol of the fulfilment of this [present] age. ...The descent of the high priest [i.e. bishop] from the throne and the dismissal of the catechumens signify (broadly-speaking) the second coming of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ from heaven, together with the separation of sinners from the saints and the just retribution rendered worthily to each... . The ceaseless and consecrating doxology of the holy angels in their Holy, holy, holy signifies, (broadly-speaking), that equality of lifestyle, conduct and harmony in rendering divine praise that will characterize both heavenly and earthly powers in the age to come. Then the human body rendered immortal by resurrection will no longer weigh down the soul by corruption, nor will it be weighed down; instead, through transformation into incorruption it will take on the power and capacity to receive Gods advent... . The blessed invocation [epiklesis] of [our] great God and Father and the proclamation One is holy ... and the partaking of the holy and life-giving mysteriesthese signify that adoption, union, familiarity, likeness to God and deification that will come in every way to all the worthy through the goodness of our God. By this means God himself will be all in all equally in [all] of the saved: as a pattern of beauty resplendent as a cause in those who are resplendent along with him in grace by virtue and knowledge.

Illustration 78: The Divine Liturgy333

See: <http://www.nd.edu/>. God the son is dressed as a bishop. He receives the liturgical gifts brought to him by a procession of the celestial hierarchy. See further symbolism of this icon in its source website.

333

782

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Wybrew thinks that in the seventh century, the readings which immediately followed the entry, included texts from the Old Testament, from the Epistles, and from the Gospel, but believes that by this century preaching had declined in Constantinople, as Maximus the Confessor does not mention a homily in his exposition of the rite. He also said that in the seventh century the prayer for the catechumens before they were dismissed had dropped out as there were no penitents to dismiss. He also mentions that even if Maximus Mystagogy does not mention the prayers of the faithful they still have their place after the dismissal of the catechumens. Also in the seventh century the bread and wine for the Eucharist were brought in from the skeuophylakion (treasure), which stood near the northeast corner of the church. It has become popular by the sixth century, a moment in which the Cherubic Hymn was added. By the time of Maximus, the creed now called Nicene, was also well established (80-84).

Illustration 79: Skeuophylakion of Hagia Sophia334

Moreover, Maximus says nothing about the Eucharistic prayer except that the Sanctus is sung by the whole congregation. Wybrew tells us that after the creed was sung, the bishop began the anaphora, usually that of Basil, less frequently that of
334

See: <http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/fineart/html/Byzantine/index.htm>.

783

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Chrysostom at that moment. He adds that at the end of the eighth century most of the anaphora was said silently, as in current Orthodox practice. The Lords Prayer and the invitation to Communion, Holy things for holy people, followed as they had been performed in Chrysostoms time. The conclusion of the service with the hymn Let our mouth be filled with your praise, O Lord, was introduced by Patriarch Sergius in the year 624. The adjectives divine, immortal, and lifegiving were added later (86-89).

Activity 1. What does Meyendorff mean by the self-affirmation of Byzantium? What is the implication for the Byzantine Church and its liturgy? 2. Read the canons of the Trullan Council quoted in this section and corroborate the meaning Meyendorff gives them. 3. List the sequence of the Liturgy as depicted by Maximus. 4. According to Koumarianos and Maximus actual words, what meaning does Maximus attribute to the Liturgy?
Activity 159: The Liturgy in the seventh century

The Eight and Ninth Century: The Barberini Codex These two centuries, as it is well known, embrace the iconoclastic controversy, the violent debate over devotional religious images that devastated much of the empire for over a hundred years (726-842). It is within this period that the Barberini Codex appears. This codex is the first extant document of the liturgies of Basil and Chrysostom. The Barberini Codex is a testimony of how the liturgy was performed in these two centuries, but it can also help us reconstruct the two primitive liturgies when contrasting it with the liturgy described by Maximus or when putting it against the background of Chrysostoms homilies. This codex can also help us see the kinds of additions and modifications the Byzantine liturgies were undergoing. Wybrew says: The Liturgy in the early seventh century still preserved its early simplicity of structure, although to the actions and prayers with made up the primary core of the rite secondary elements had already been added. When evidence for the text

784

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

of the Liturgy first emerges in the Codex Barberini of the late eight or early ninth century it is clear that subsequent development have begun the process by which then primary elements became increasingly surrounded, and to some extent obscured by additions to the service. (103) He adds: The eighth century was a turning point in the development of Byzantine worship. It witnessed the controversy over the veneration of icons, whose vindication opened the way for the formulation of a scheme of church decoration which linked the sacred building and its iconography closely with the celebration of the Liturgy. The Liturgy itself came to be understood as a kind of icon. (103) But not only did the primitive liturgies suffer modifications and omissions, the symbolism of them also changed forcing some anomalies, as Koumarianos and Taft note. Regarding this codex, Wybrew says: The Codex Barberini shows that several developments had taken place since the seventh century, which are of considerable importance for the shape of the liturgy. Additions had been made to the rite which tended to obscure the clear structure it still had in the time of Maximus, and some of these were to develop still further in the next few centuries. (109) The most significant additions were at the beginning of the Liturgy, in the Proskomide and the enarxis,335 which did not exist in the original rite as shown by Maximus. As Taft comments: We can see at a glance that the enarxis is made of up later, secondary additions to the liturgy, for its formulae are all common to the liturgies of Chrysostom and Basil, which are independent only from the prayer over the catechumens. Now any time we see common elements in two liturgies, it is obvious that they went from one formulary to the other, or were introduced to both simultaneously from some third source after they had begun to share a common history as variant liturgical formularies of the same local church, to whose liturgical shape the both were thenceforth made to conform. Also referring to the additions seen in the Barberini Codex and the reconstruction of the primitive Byzantine rite, Fortescue mentions the Little Entrance

The enarxis, which introduces the Liturgy of the word, includes: Initial blessing, Litany and prayer I, Antiphon I, litany and prayer II, Antiphon II, Litany and prayer III, Antiphon III with added troparia, entrance procession, entrance prayer, Trisagion prayer and chant. In his article, Taft compares and contrasts the elements of the enarxis depicted in the Barberini codex with that of today.

335

785

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

part of the enarxisas well as the Great Entrance and the Creed as the points at which the primitive rite started: In order to reconstruct the rite used by him [Chrysostom] we must take away from the present Liturgy all the Preparation of the Offerings (Proskomide), the ritual of the Little and Great Entrances, and the Creed. The service began with the bishops greeting, Peace to all, and the answer, And with thy spirit. The lessons followed from the Prophets and Apostles, and the deacon read the Gospel. After the Gospel the bishop or a priest preached a homily, and the prayer over the catechumens was said... (The Rite of Constantinople) The reason for this way of greeting when entering a church is explained in Chrysostoms Homily 3 on Colossians: Therefore we pray, asking for the Angel of peace, and everywhere we ask for peace (for there is nothing equal to this); peace, in the Churches, in the prayers, in the supplications, in the salutations; and once, and twice, and thrice, and many times, does he that is over the Church give it, Peace be unto you. Wherefore? Because this is the Mother of all good things; this is the foundation of joy. Therefore Christ also commanded the Apostles on entering into the houses straightway to say this, as being a sort of symbol of the good things; for He says, When ye come into the houses, say, Peace be unto you; for where this is wanting, everything is useless. And to His disciples Christ said, Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you. (John xiv. 27) This prepares the way for love. And he that is over the Church, says not, Peace be unto you, simply, but Peace be unto all. Additionally, in his Homily 36 on First Corinthians, Chrysostom explains the meaning of the answer with your spirit, For in truth the Church was a heaven then, the Spirit governing all things, and moving each one of the rulers and making him inspired. But now we retain only the symbols of those gifts. For now also we speak two or three, and in turn, and when one is silent, another begins. But these are only signs and memorials of those things. Wherefore when we begin to speak, the people respond, with your Spirit, indicating that of old they thus used to speak, not of their own wisdom, but moved by the Spirit. Moreover, Wybrew narrates Chrysostoms likely procession to the throne in one of Constantinoples churches and greeting very visually: It was this setting that Chrysostom presided over the celebration of the Eucharist. He entered with his attendant clergy through the central, royal doors leading from the narthex into the nave. He was preceded by lights and incense, and by a deacon carrying the book of the Gospels. When the procession reached the sanctuary the Gospels were place on the altar as a symbol of Christ, the Word of God, and the clergy went to their respective places. The bishop gave the 786

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

greeting: Peace be with you all, to which the people responded: And with your spirit. He then ascended the throne for the readings. (50) Thus at the end of the fourth century, in the primitive introit, both the clergy and the people entered the church and proceeded directly to the throne. There were no Proskomide or Prothesislargely added as a consequence of monastic influence (Taft), no antiphons, no litanies, no prayers, nothing, as we find in the Barberini codex. Very important to remark is that the additions of the enarxis are made to the entrance procession as other additions will be made to the Great Entrance. For Taft, it is not an exaggeration to say that practically every addition to the Byzantine Eucharist from Justinian until the post-iconoclast period had its origin in the stational rites of Constantinople. Wybrew thinks that the Prothesis, strictly speaking, Was less than an addition to the service itself than one to the preliminary preparation of the elements. We have seen how in the East the people deposited their offerings of bread and wine on their way into church, and how, at the Great Church, at any rate, they did so at the skeuophylakion, detached from the Church. No mention is made of what to begin with a purely practical action until the early eighth century, when Germanos shows that it acquired symbolic significance. The bread of the prothesis was taken and pierced by a liturgical spear. This may have been done in silence in Germanos time. But by the time of the Codex Barberini the prayer of the oblation in the present rite of the prothesis had been added in the rite of St. Basil, to be said by the priest in the skeuophylakion, while he puts the bread onto the paten. (109) At that time, as Wybrew quotes from Patriarch St. Germanos (d. 733), the priest used one whole prosphora and did not cut it as is todays custom: The priest receives the prosphora on a paten from the deacon of subdeacon, takes the lance and cleans it, then makes the sign of the cross on the prosphora with it and says He was lead as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a sheep before his shearer is dumb. When he has said this he puts the prosphora on the holy paten ... Having said this he takes the holy chalice ... (109) Discussing the elements of the enarxis, Taft explains that the initial blessings appeared after the Barberini Codex, in the tenth century, and that the synapte or litany is out of place. He says that in the primitive liturgy it occurred after the readings, but was moved to the beginning of the liturgy at the end of the ninth century. Wybrew

787

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

comments that placed after the entry, the synapte further complicated the beginning of the service, and separated the Trisagion from the entry to which it had once belong (113). Williams, in Early Eastern Orthodox Liturgy, says that the Litanies probably developed from the practice of the early church in the singing of Psalms by the faithful as they assembled and waited outside the church. He sees a Jewish ancestor in them: It goes back to the Jewish liturgical use of chanted Psalms, and incorporates an antiphonal chant from Judaism. Now there was the need and opportunity for a prayer of the people. Other elements of the enarxis, the three antiphons and their collects, found in the Barberini Codex, were added to the liturgy between 630 and 750. They are not mentioned by Maximus the Confessor in his Mystagogy, written as noticed in 628 or 630, when the liturgy began with the entry of the celebrant and the people into the church. Yet Germanos (d. 733), in his Historia ecclesiastica (Chap. 23), does mention the antiphons: The antiphons of the Liturgy are the prophets predictions which foretold the coming of the Son of God... that is, they reveal His incarnation which we proclaim again, having embraced knowledge of it through those who have become servants, eyewitnesses and attendants of the Word. 336 So they must have been added, Taft comments, at the beginning of the eighth century; however up to the tenth century these three antiphons were not regarded as fixed part of the liturgy and no every liturgy had it. Furthermore, the Trisagion at the Little Entrance, deeply Trinitarian and thus anti-Arian in character, was said to have been revealed to Proklos of Constantinople (434-47), which can give the date of its insertion in the liturgy (Fortescue, The Rite of Constantinople).

336

Qtd. in Passage to Heaven: An Appreciation of the Divine Liturgy.

788

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

After the enarxis, what we called the Liturgy of the Catechumens continues. Regarding the readings, Wybrew also points out the omission of Old Testament reading dates from the time of Germanos, and the psalm, which had been sung between the first two readings came to be called the prokimenon (113). Furthermore, in the Barberini Codex there is the ektene (Litany of Fervent Supplication), a litany that immediately follows the gospel. It is here where it appeared for the first time. This litany also entered the liturgy from the stational services (Taft). According to Wybrew, its origin is to be sought in the penitential processions of supplication, or rogations, which were held on the anniversaries of natural or other disasters from which Constantinople suffered. Each time the procession halted the deacon recited the extene, or great Kyrie eleison (114). Furthermore, the Cherubic hymn that accompanies the Great Entrance and the Creed that follows, just before the beginning of the Anaphora, was apparently added by Justin II (565-78) in the second half of the sixth century (Fortescue, The Rite of Constantinople). Taft sees some regressive traits, what he calls a fourth stage, in the evolution of the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom regarding the pre-anaphora: Meanwhile the regressive evolution whereby primitive elements were suppressed in favor of later additions is proceeding. By the 8th century the Old Testament reading (1), the prayers over the penitents (2), and elements of the psalmody have been suppressed (3), and the prayer of blessing that concluded the Liturgy of the Word in the time of Chrysostom has been displaced (4). By the ninth century the litany of the faithful has shifted forward (5). He continues: The disappearance from the Liturgy of the Word of its final blessing illustrates another common liturgical development in this period: the gradual blurring of the clear division between the Liturgies of Word and Eucharist. The present prayers of the faithful of the Liturgy of Basil are another example of this. They are really prayers of preparation for the eucharist, and certainly are not original to the Liturgy of the Word. In the same process, the kiss of peace, formerly the conclusion of the Word service, becomes detached from the concluding prayers of the synaxis and moved to before the anaphora by the addition of later ritual elements between the pax and the end of the Liturgy of the Word.

789

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Taft also comments that the Eucharistic prayer or anaphora has undergone little ritual evolution, and the textual modifications it exhibits would require a close philological and literary analysis of the Greek text ... Regarding the audibility of eucharistic prayer, Wybrew believes that although the codex Barberini could be taken to imply that the first part of the prayer was still recited audibly, it is practically certain that the whole prayer was said silently, punctuated by certain phrases chanted out loud (119). At that moment, the liturgy concluded with the Prayer behind the Ambo. Taft says: The original final blessing prayer, the so-called Prayer behind the Ambo ... was probably said from the great ambo in the center of the nave as the clergy processed down the solea or processional path on their way out of the church to the skeuophylakion at the end of the service. One more prayer, the Prayer in the Skeuophylakion, was said in the skeuophylakion at the consummation of the left-over gifts, thus rounding off the liturgy just as it began, with a prayer over the gifts in the sacristy. We have seen that most eastern liturgical developments were mainly incorporated at the entrance or introduction of the service, although some were also added at the conclusion of the service. These developments came about in response to the needs of the church, and led to a change in the understanding of worship, as Schmemann comments: It is important to stress that what was changed was not worship itself in its objective content and order, but rather the reception, the experience, the understanding of worship. Thus the historian can easily establish not only continuity in the development of Eucharistic prayers, but also the essential identity of their basic structures. The assembly of the Church, Scripture, Preaching, the Offertory, the Anaphora and finally the Communion this structure of the Eucharist remains unchanged. (Introduction to Liturgical Theology 127)

The Interpretation of the Liturgy The vision of Germanos I of Constantinople, the iconodule Patriarch of Constantinople, deposed in 730, can give us a hint as to the meaning the liturgy had for him at the beginning of the Iconoclast controversy. Wybrew says of him:

790

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

It is not surprising that his exposition of the Liturgy should not only treat in the traditional manner as an image of heavenly realities, but should draw upon the Antiochene tradition of Theodore of Mopsuestia in order to expound at least the first part of the rite as a representation of the earthly life of Christ. He also expounds the essential significance of the Liturgy as a sacramental celebration in which the memorial of Christs self giving is made and the reality of the future Kingdom, already inaugurated, is anticipated. (128) In this period, Koumarianos, in addition to viewing the Eucharist as an anticipation of the last things, as portrayed by Maximus, he views it as communion, which gives a specific structure to the Liturgy: In the case where the Eucharist is understood as communion, the rites performed in the Liturgy form stages in achieving this communion, which is accomplished and evolves gradually through particular acts of communion. The Liturgy starts off as a gathering which is to end up as communion and union. More specifically, the liturgy begins with the gathering of the faithful with their shepherd in one place at the same time. The assembly of the faithful in one place (epi to auto) is the fundamental precondition for communion, which will gradually be built up among the faithful and between them and God in the course of the Liturgy. After this initial act of the gathering of the People of God under the bishop and presbyters, there follow the readings. The faithful hear the readings together, and together they express their obedience to the will of God, whereas the catechumens are dismissed since they have not definitively declared their obedience to the divine will through Baptism. In this way, the Synaxis is not just any assembly, but the gathering of the People of God. Later on, as the Liturgy is celebrated, the gathering will become Communion and Union. In order for the Eucharist to be celebrated, the gifts of the faithful are placed on the Holy Table. They will be offered to God in the Anaphora. An essential precondition for communion with God, however, is love and communion among the faithful themselves. This is why the Anaphora is preceded by the Kiss of Peace, as a confession of the love of the faithful for each other. The gathering, then, has become a communion of love. After the Kiss of Peace, the communion of love among the faithful advances to the stage of the Anaphora, the offering of the Eucharist. Koumarianos also emphasizes the anaphora as being a form of communion: The Anaphora, then, is an act of communion. The entire creation is united through man in an act of thanksgiving and praise to God: with one mouth and one heart it glorifies God and refers its existence back to him. But the Anaphora is an act of communion for another reason too: the offering of the Eucharist is not accomplished by creation through its own powers, but through the grace and operation of the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as empowered by him, every creature endowed with reason and intelligence worships [the Father] and offers up to him the everlasting hymn of praise (cf. Anaphora of St Basil). This relationship of referring ones being to Another, to the Father, is nothing other than Christs mode of existence, and only through Christ can it be accomplished. The whole of creation, then, in the Holy Spirit, offers and refers itself through Christ to God 791

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

the Father. After this, the Lords Prayer which follows is the natural consummation and seal upon the Holy Anaphora. The communion of the faithful with one another and with God receives its culmination, its seal and its completion in the reception of Holy Communion. But as we will see, after the iconoclast crisis and to the present day, according to Koumartianos, although what the clergy and faithful did together was important but what the priest does in front of the faithful was crucial: everything he does has symbolism. Activity 1. What is the Barnerini Codex? How can It help us see the development of the liturgy in its time and in previous centuries? 2. How had the liturgy changed from the time of Maximus? In which part of the Liturgy were placed the more significant additions? 3. What part of the current Divine Liturgy was absent from the primitive one 4. How many prosphoras were cut in the proskomedia in the seventh century? 5. What elements did the enarxis of liturgy depicted in the Barberini Codex have? Make some comments on their development from previous centuries. 6. What meaning did the liturgy attain in these centuries?
Activity 160: The liturgy in the eight and the ninth century

THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE PERIOD (8431261) As noted, the Middle Byzantine period begins in 843 with the end of the Iconoclastic controversy, which had disturbed the peace of the empire for almost two centuries, and finished in the year 1261 when the Byzantines recaptured Constantinople from the crusaders, who had sacked the city in 1204. At the beginning of the period, the two Eucharistic canons used were those attributed to St Basil and St. John Chrysostom. As Wybrew notes there were few changes in the liturgy from the ninth century until the eleventh century. We have seen that at the end of the ninth century the synapte was moved from the place it had after the reading to the beginning of the liturgy. We have also noticed that the initial blessing appeared in the tenth century, after the Barberini

792

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Codex, and that up to this century the three antiphons were not regarded as fixed parts of the liturgy. Yet at the end of the Iconoclast period, in the middle of the ninth century, there emerged a new spirituality that recognized that icons could help the faithful move from the material to the immaterial. The recognition of icons brought some changes to the ordo (directives and rubrics or liturgical directions) of the liturgy regarding the use of icons. Archbishop Piero Marini, in Iconography and Liturgy, says: The iconoclast controversy concluded with an official Church teaching on images. ... Rules were laid down for the liturgical use of images; an icon of a saint could never be placed at the same rank as an icon of Christ or the Blessed Virgin Mary; only the saint to whom the Church was dedicated was entitled to a special place. The ancient sanctuary screen which separated the altar from the rest of the Church was filled with icons after Nicaea II, and gradually was transformed into the present-day iconostasis. These directives had to do with icon kissing, censing, lighting, and venerating. During the course of the eighth century, the iconoclastic controversy also led to the dissolution of the earliest urban monasteries and their traditions. The monks of the Studios, in Constantinople, one of the most influential of the urban monasteries, devised their own order or Typikon combining the Cathedral Office of Hagia Sophia or Great Church with the tradition of the Saint Sabbas monastery, founded by St. Sabbas (d. 532) at Jerusalem in the year 484. It was influenced by practices and customs of the early monastic communities in Egypt, Palestine and Asia Minor, as well as the Cathedral Office of Jerusalem, as Calivas explains, in The Origins of Pascha and Great Week. During the seventh and eighth century this Palestinian Typikon, Calivas continues, had been revised and enriched by a massive infusion of ecclesiastical poetry. The resulting synthesized Studite Typikon spread to other monastic communities too. In 1034, Patriarch Alexis wrote the first complete Studite Typikon. It was this Typikon which was introduced into the Rus land in the tenth century.

793

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

In the course of the eleventh century, the Studite synthesis was reworked and further modified by Palestinian monks. In this process, Calivas continues, a new, revised Typikon of St. Sabbas was produced and established, also gaining popularity and use across the Byzantine Empire as the Studite Typikon. At the beginning of the thirteenth century, during the occupation of Constantinople by Latin crusaders (12041261), the Sabaite Typikon began to replace both the Typikon of the Great Church, which regulated the Cathedral Office at Constantinople as well as the Studite Synthesis at Constantinople. As Calivas comments: The Cathedral Office had four services for the daily cycle: Vespers, Pannychis,337 Orthros and Trithekte.338 The structure, order and number of services differed from the Monastic Office. While elaborate and imposing, the Cathedral Office lacked the large body of hymnody contained in the revised Monastic Office. By comparison it had become the more staid of the two. For this and other reasons, it finally fell into disuse. However ... various elements of the Cathedral Office had already passed into the monastic Typikon. From the fifteenth century until 1838 all Orthodox Churches, whether parish or monastic, followed the same basic Typikon of St. Sabbas.
The Typikon (Gk. Typikon, , from typos, order or decree; Slav. Ustav, rule) is a written rule detailing the services of the Church, how they are to be celebrated, and how the various liturgical cycles are combined on any particular day. Thus, the Typikon contains the directions for the use of all the other liturgical books of the Byzantine Rite. It may be useful to distinguish a Typikon from an ordo. An ordo is a pattern for liturgical services; each service, as celebrated in a particular Church, has its own ordo, and the entire collection of these patterns can be called the ordo of that Church at a given time. In the early Church, the ordo might be entirely traditional, and only recorded in travellers accounts. But as the cycles of moveable feasts (the Paschal cycle) and immoveable feasts (the saints days and commemorations) evolved, and a great body of hymnody was written for both sets of feasts, the ordo of the Byzantine Churches became too complicated to trust to memory and thus the Typikon (a detailed ordo, in written form) came into being. (The Typikon, Metropolitan Cantor Institute) Table 82: The Typikon

Your Own Research

Greek for Vigil. During the first ages, during the night before every feast, a vigil was kept. In the evening the faithful assembled in the place or church where the feast was to be celebrated and prepared themselves by prayers, readings from Holy Writ, and sometimes also by hearing a sermon (Eve of a Feast). Thus it was a preparatory service on the eve of a feast. 338 Tritoekte (Terce-Sext) was a special Lenten office centered on the preparation of Catechumens for Baptism. It originated in the early stages of the cathedral worship, fully developed by the eight century, and disappeared with the decline of the Great Church ( Mariana Dimitrova).

337

794

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Write a paragraph about: a) The Monastery of St. Sabbas and its Typikon, and b) The Monastery of Studios and its Typikon.
Activity 161: The Typikon

As Wybrew notices, from the ninth to the eleventh centuries some changes were occurring, which if, they had not yet arrived at the capital, were later to influence the liturgy of the Great Church. These changes again concerned the prothesis and the enarxis. Quoting an unknown eleventh-century patriarch of Constantinople, who describes the prothesis for the benefit of Bishop Paul of Gallipoli, he remarks that the only difference from Germanos description of it is that only a portion of the prosphora is used and not the whole one. Yet, at the end of the eleventh century, several prosphorae came to be used, four, as Nicholas Germanicus, Patriarch of Constantinople (1084-1111) prescribed: one representing the Lord, another the Mother of God, a third the archangels and all the angelic orders, and a fourth, the forerunner, John the Baptist, the apostles, prophets, holy bishops, and all the saints (135-136). Regarding the enarxis, Wybrew also explains that, in the eleventh century, the Liturgy in Constantinople still began with the antiphons, and the Great Litany was sung after the Little Entrance, and before the Trisagion. However, the Great Litany was sometimes sung before the antiphons, in its present place, though it was not yet its fixed position. Only from the thirteenth century on, was the Great Litany used in todays position, therefore fixing the old prayer of the faithful at the beginning of the Liturgy of the Catechumens. By the eleventh century, outside Constantinople, the Typika consisting of the Psalms 103, 146, followed by the troparion Only-begotten Son, and the Beatitudeswere sung as an alternative introduction, supplanting in some churches the antiphons (137-138). Additionally, Wybrew comments that the secondary character of both the prothesis and the enarxis continued to be shown by the fact that they were

795

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

presided over by a priest even at a Liturgy celebrated by a bishop (138). Moreover, in the eleventh century, the prayer behind the ambo was still used as a concluding prayer of the liturgy, and after it the antidorom was distributed (138). Regarding what follows the Prayer in the Ambo, Taft says: What follows this prayer in todays rite is the traditional ending of the Byzantine monastic office, which was added to the mass as a second conclusion, in the middle ages, because of a more recent tendency in Byzantine liturgical development to shape all the services so that their beginning and end look more or less alike. The Romans are doing somewhat the same thing today. The only difference is that they have chosen as their model the Liturgy of the Word, whereas the Byzantines, under monastic influence, opted for the Palestinian monastic office that came to hold sway throughout the Byzantine East after the fall of Constantinople to the Latins in the Fourth Crusade. (1204) But if little had changed in the Liturgy from the ninth to the eleventh century, there was indeed a development in its interpretation seen in the eleventh centurys Protheoria, by Nicholas, Bishop of Andida (1054-1967) in Pamphylia.339 Wybrew summarizes this bishops opinions, he considers it unsatisfactory to confine the symbolism of the Liturgy to the passion, death and resurrection of Christ, as Germanos has on the whole done. For Nicholas the Liturgy is also a representation of the birth and early life of Christ... . unlike Germanos he concentrated almost entirely on interpreting the Liturgy in terms of the historical life of Christ. He makes passing reference to the Old Testament types of the Eucharist in the patristic tradition, and to the Liturgy as a reflecting the worship of heaven. (139-144) and rightly criticizes this approach: There is little or no organic connection between the symbol and the reality symbolized: the liturgical rite is arbitrarily fitting into a preconceived pattern of interpretation in an over-elaborate and highly artificial way (144). By the twelfth century, as John Meyendorff explains, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom became the eucharistic form celebrated in Byzantium:

Ancient name for the fertile coastal plain in southern Turkey. In ancient geography, Pamphylia was the region in the south of Asia Minor, between Lycia and Cilicia, extending from the Mediterranean to Mount Taurus, todays name for the fertile coastal plain in southern Turkey.

339

796

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

According to the Medieval Byzantine ordo reflected by the twelfth-century canonist Balsamon the liturgy of John Chrysostom is the usual Eucharistic form celebrated throughout the year, except during Lent; Basils is used only on ten solemn occasions. The ancient liturgy of St. James however was not entirely forgotten in Jerusalem and a few other local communities. Of ecclesiological importance was the fact that the Eucharist remained a solemn, festal celebration in Byzantium and presupposed in principle the gathering around the Lords table by the entire local Christian community. (Byzantine Theology: Historical trends and doctrinal themes 117)

Activity 1. Briefly explain the development of the Typikon in Middle Byzantine Period. 2. What changes did the Divine Liturgy suffer in this period? 3. What is the antidorom?
Activity 162: Middle Byzantine Period

797

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

THE LATE BYZANTINE PERIOD (12611453) The period known as the Late Byzantine lasted from 1261the end of the occupation of Constantinopleuntil the fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the Ottoman Turks. After the occupation of Constantinople by Latin crusaders, the Typikon of the Great Church could not be re-established because it was too complicated and as it required a great number of clergy. Likewise, the Studite Typikon was abandoned. During the thirteenth and the fourteenth century, the Great Church progressively adopted the Typikon of St. Sabbas, which although largely remaining a monastic ordo, incorporated some cathedral elements. By this time, as already mentioned, in a process that had begun in the twelve century, St. John Chrysostoms rite had become the normal rite, while Saint Basils rite eventually being used only ten times a year. According to Wybrew, in spite of the local variations existing in the Orthodox world, by the fourteenth century, the Orthodox liturgy had reached the full state of its development and a process of consolidation was under way. He believes that this was due to the widespread influence of the Diataxis of Philosteos, Patriarch of Constantinople (1353-1354 and 1364-1376) and formerly the hegumenos of the Great Lavra on Mt. Athos. The Diataxis is an order for the Liturgy giving detailed directions for its celebration. He also drew up another Diataxis, regulating the priests and deacons part in Matins, Vespers, and Liturgy. Philosteos gives the first line of most prayers. This order shows that, excepting a few details, the Liturgy had attained the form it now has. Philosteos rubrics were introduced in the Great Church when he become Patriarch, and soon spread to the Slav as well as the Greeks Churches (145). The orders of the fourteenth centurys Diataxis seen against the background of the eleventh century and that of the current liturgy show some changes. For example, although the Proskomidia is identical to the one used today, as Wybrew notes, in the

798

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

fourteenth century the deacon also cuts out particles in commemoration of himself or of any living and departed he wishes to pray for. He also places them on the paten, as the priest does. This is not done today. Wybrew also reports that by this time the number and diversity of prayers needed by the priest in the course of the different services increased, some of them, such as the prayers accompanying the vesting of the clergy, were already present in the thirteenth century. It might be the case that is was not before the fourteenth century that prayers were provided to be said before the icons of the Christ the Pantocrator and the Mother of God in the iconostasis, and on entering the sanctuary (153-154). Wybrew also explains that in the fourteenth century, the Little Entrance was a purely symbolic procession as the book of the Gospels were now kept in the altar and the procession begun where today it ends namely in the sanctuary. Also, in the Great Entrance, the priest regularly took part in the procession as is done today. Philosteos also prescribes commemorations to be made quietly during this procession (May the Lord God remember all of us in his Kingdom), without interrupting the Cherubic hymn. As Wybrew notes, these silent commemorations were also made during the twelfth and the thirteenth century. By the fifteenth century, however, they were spoken out loud, interrupting the singing of the Cherubicon and dividing it into two. Another development concerned the deposition of the gifts on the altar. Originally it seemed that whoever carried in the chalice and paten placed them on the altar. Yet by the thirteenth century, the priest or the bishop, if it was an episcopal liturgy, took them from the deacon and placed them on the altar (155-156). Wybrew comments that this was another instance of liturgical function passing from a lower to a higher order of hierarchy (157).

799

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Moreover, reflecting on the great liturgical emphasis the Orthodox tradition pays to the epiclesis or invocation of the Holy Spirit in the Anaphora, Philostheos directs the deacon to bow his head slightly and to point to the paten and chalice, also answering amen, amen, and making three reverences. Philostheos also prescribes the communion of the clergy in detail while recognizing that there might be no lay communication at all (Wybrew 158). Interpretation of the Liturgy Two writers can help us discover the interpretation of the Liturgy in the fourteenth and fifteenth century,: Nicholas Cabasilas (c. 1320-c. 1390), with his work Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, and, a century later, Symeon of Thesalonika (1416/7-1429), with his Interpretation of the Church and the Liturgy, On the Holy Liturgy, and Treatise of Prayer (1425). These two theologians make comment on a Liturgy whose essential developments have come to an end. For Wybrew, Nicholas Cabasilas retains the interpretation of the rite, stemming from the Antiochene school, as a symbolic representation of the historical life of Jesus (158). He comments that unlike Nicholas of Andida, he applies the principle with discretion and moderation, insisting on the primary significance of prayers, readings and actions which makes up the service (158). Cabasilas, for example, sees in the Service of the Word a manifestation of Christ himself: After He who was foretold had appeared and made Himself manifest, no one could pay attention to the words of the Prophets. Therefore after the showing of the Gospels, the prophetic texts cease and we sing something from the New Testament: we praise the all-holy Theotokos or the other saints, and we glorify Christ Himself for coming to dwell among us. (Commentary on the Divine Liturgy Chap. 20) 340

340

Qtd. in Passage to Heaven: An Appreciation of the Divine Liturgy.

800

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Christ is all present in the congregations prayer after the Gospel urged by the deacon, while the priest, in the sanctuary, prays in a low voice that the prayers of the faithful may be acceptable to God: And what prayer could be more fitting for all, after the Gospel, than one for those who keep the Gospel, who imitate the goodness and generosity of Christ, the shepherds of the people and those who govern the state. These, if they are faithful to the precepts of the Gospel, as the Apostle says: Achieve after Christ that which is lacking in Christ (Col 1:24), in governing His flock as He would wish. Such, too, are the founders and heads of religious houses and churches, the teachers of virtue and all those who in any way contribute to the common good of the Church and of religion; they have a place here and are entitled to the prayers of all. (Commentary on the Divine Liturgy 23) As Cabasilas explains, Christs merciful presence continues in the Anaphora, in the breaking of the bread: The priest breaks the Holy Bread, saying, Broken and distributed is the Lamb of God: broken and not dismembered, always eaten and never expended, but making holy those who receive it. Since this warm water is not only water, but shares the nature of fire, it signifies the Holy Spirit, who is sometimes represented by water, and who came down upon the apostles in the form of fire. This point in the Liturgy represents that moment in time, for the Holy Spirit came down after all things pertaining to Christ had been accomplished, In the same way, when the holy offerings have attained their ultimate perfection, this water is added. (Commentary on the Liturgy 36-37) With it, Christ unites with our human nature and makes our flesh a part of his divine person (Passage to Heaven: An Appreciation of the Divine Liturgy). Regarding Symeon of Thesalonika, who wrote within the Alexandria tradition represented by Maximus the Confessor, Wybrew comments that for him: it (the Liturgy) is made up of symbols which contain a hidden reality... But properly understood liturgical symbols reveal two different orders of reality. First and foremost they set before the worshipper the whole saving economy of God in Christ: his voluntary humiliation in his incarnation, passion and death; and his resurrection and glorification. The Liturgy at the same time fulfils the Old Testament prefigurations of Christ, and anticipates the ultimate reality of the heavenly Kingdom. (158-164) This is what Symeon says about the Trisagion hymn, uniting the teaching of the Fathers and the psalm of David in the praise of the holiness of Trinity:

801

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

The Fathers originally received from the angels the Holy, holy, holy and from David the remainder, where he glorified God in Trinity, saying, My soul thirsted for God, the mighty One, the living One (Ps 41:3), and rightly and most appropriately composed the Trisagion Hymn. As a mark of petition they addedagain from Davidthe have mercy on us. (Treatise on Prayer 24)341 Through the incarnation of Christ, angels and men associate in the service of God when they chant the Trisagion: there have come to be one church of angels and men, says St. Symeon (Wybrew 168). As already noticed, Koumarianos talks about a second period in the development of the interpretation of the Liturgy from the iconoclastic controversy to the present time. The liturgy is a form of theatrical symbolism, an allegory of the representation of the life of Christ, a repetition of the events of the life of Christ: According to this allegorical interpretation, the parts of the Liturgy are understood as follows: The Prothesis symbolises the birth of Christ. The Little Entrance and the readings symbolise the Lords public preaching ministry. The Great Entrance symbolises the burial of Christ; according to St Nicholas Cabasilas, however, it symbolises Christs last journey to Jerusalem. For the remaining parts of the Liturgy, things are not so clear: the Anaphora, because of the exclamation, Take, eat , can symbolise either the Last Supper (according to most commentators) or the Crucifixion (according to Cabasilas). ...The Epiklesis of the Holy Spirit symbolises Pentecost. When the altar doors are opened and the priest comes out with the Precious Gifts at In the fear of God ...This symbolises the Resurrection of Christ. Koumarianos sees some disruptions in historical sequence, such as the fact that according to Cabasila, the Last Supper may symbolize the Crucifixion or the Resurrection of Christ when Pentecost has already occurred. He believes as Wybrew also notes, that this form of symbolism is something that has been imposed on the Liturgy after the event, and that when the Early Church originally established the order of the Liturgy, it had no idea of providing a dramatic representation of the life of Christ. He adds that The fact that the Early Church had in mind no such idea is demonstrated above all by the discrepancy between the rites themselves and their allegorical interpretation. He gives two example, the first regarding the Prothesis.
341

Qtd. in Passage to Heaven: An Appreciation of the Divine Liturgy.

802

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

According to the dramatic-representational interpretation, the Prothesis symbolises the birth of Christ, with the icon of the Nativity above the table of preparation, while its words refer exclusively to the Crucifixion. Secondly, according to this same interpretation, the Great Entrance symbolises the burial of the Lord or his entry into Jerusalem; however, if we read the texts of the prayer nothing is said about this burial or entry of the Lord. In these prayers we ask God to make us worthy to offer the unbloody sacrifice. The Typikon was finally printed in 1545 especially solidifying it and becoming the earliest of the printed Typika. It prevailed throughout the Orthodox world until the nineteenth century. For Calivas, these revisions together with the infusion of new poetry composed by Sabaite and Studite monks and others resulted in the formation of the Horologion and the liturgical books we know as the Octoechos, Triodion, Pentecostarion, and Menaia (The Typikon, Metropolitan Cantor Institute;

Meyendorff, The Byzantine Legacy 119; Calivas). Yet the Studite Typikon continued to be used in the Slav lands (The Typikon, Metropolitan Cantor Institute). Wybrew comments that the inherent conservatism which increasingly characterized the Byzantine Church from the eighth century onwards was inherited in full measure by the Slav Churches founded from Constantinople (173). However, Wybrew remarks that conservatism does not imply that changes are not taking place in the celebration of the Liturgy in the Orthodox Churches. For example, in the Soviet Union and in other places, not least in the diaspora, many Orthodox receive Communion more frequently now than for many centuries; in Greek practices, the litanies between the Gospel and the Great Entrance are normally omitted, some priests, at least, speak some part of the anaphora audibly; in some churches the people join in singing some parts of the service such as the Trisagion, the creed, or the

803

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Lord Prayer (175). Also the tradition of symbolic interpretation of the Liturgy in terms of the historic life of Christ has not been abandoned, but although it survives, Wybrew says that it does so in a rather fragmented and attenuated form and seems to have lost the vitality once had (175). Wybrew finally points out that such changes, however, do not amount to a liturgical movement in the Western sense, and Western Christians generally perceive the Orthodox liturgy as a traditional, conservative expression of eucharistic worship (176).

Activity 1. Explain the development of the Typikon during the Late Byzantine Period. 2. What was de effect of Philosteos Ditaxis in the Liturgy of the fourteenth century? 3. What does it show in relation to the previous and todays content of the Divine Liturgy? 4. List some of the characteristics of the Liturgy of this period. 5. Briefly list the interpretation of the Liturgy Cabasilas and Symeon of Thesalonika make. 6. According to Koumarianos, what is the general interpretation of the Liturgy from the iconoclastic controversy to the present day? What problem does he see? 7. Find passages which show the symbolism of the Prothesis as the birth of Christ. 8. Read the prayers of the Great Entrance and find what they symbolize.
Activity 163: The liturgy in the Late Byzantine Period

Your Own Research Explain the development of the Typikon from the Late Byzantine Period to the nineteenth century. Read Calivas and The Typikon (Metropolitan Cantor Institute). You can find their reference in the Bibliography.
Activity 164: The Typikon

Let us now briefly discuss the origin of the Liturgy of the Hours and the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts.

804

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

THE DIVINE OFFICE OR LITURGY OF THE HOURS AND THE LITURGY OF THE PRESANCTIFIED GIFTS The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts came about when the early Church did not consider the performance of the Divine Liturgy in penitential seasons to be appropriate. It is sometimes ascribed to St. Gregory Dialogus. In the Liturgy of the Hours, however, we cannot find any names being associated as in the case of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom with the history of the Liturgy. It has its roots in Judaism. The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts Due to the joyousness accompanying the performance of the Liturgies of St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom, the early Church did not regard them as suitable for the penitential season of the Great Fast. For this reason, the Synod in Laodicea (364 AD) prescribed in its canon 49: During Lent the Bread must not be offered except on the Sabbath Day and on the Lords Day only. In its canon 52, the Sixth Ecumenical Council of Trullo (692) forbade the performance of the Divine Liturgies during the Great Lent except on Saturday, Sunday, the Feast of the Annunciation, and Holy Thursday in favour the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts342 (The Liturgy of the Presanctified). This canon commands: On all days of the holy fast of Lent, except on the Sabbath, the Lords day and the holy day of the Annunciation, the Liturgy of the Presanctified is to be said. Balsamon comments: We do not call the service of the Presanctified the unbloody sacrifice, but the offering of the previously offered, and of the perfected sacrifice, and of the completed priestly act. Also commenting on this canon, Van Espen states: The Greeks therefore confess that the bread once offered and consecrated, is not to be consecrated anew on another day; but a new offering is made of what was before consecrated and presanctified: just as in the Latin Church the consecrated or presanctified bread of Maundy Thursday is offered on Good Friday. The Patriarch Michael of Constantinople is quoted by Leo Allatius as saying that
342

In the Latin Church now occurs only on Good Friday.

805

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

none of the mystic consecratory prayers are said over the presanctified gifts, but the priest only recites the prayer that he may be a worthy communicant. The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts,343 a combination of Vespers and a communion ritual, is not a true Divine Liturgy because it contains no consecration of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. The holy communion that we receive at a Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts is the species of consecrated bread only, which is consecrated the preceding Sunday and kept in the tabernacle. Unconsecrated wine is added for reasons of taste and facility in swallowing the Holy Communion. The whole anaphora is thus omitted. This ancient liturgy is, as commented, sometimes ascribed to St. Gregory Dialogus who prior to becoming Pope of Rome served in Constantinople as a papal envoy, but it is more probable that he simply recorded it from the oral tradition and introduced it to the western Church (The Liturgy of the Presanctified). Fortescue explains the origin of this rite: A great part of the rite is simply taken from the corresponding parts of St. Chrysostoms Liturgy. The present form, then, is a comparatively late one that supposes the normal Liturgies of Constantinople. It has been attributed to various personsSt. James, St. Peter, St. Basil, St. Germanos I of Constantinople (715-30), and so on. But in the service books it is now officially ascribed to St. Gregory Dialogos (Pope Gregory I). It is impossible to say how this certainly mistaken ascription began. The Greek legend is that, when he was apocrisiarius at Constantinople (578), seeing that the Greeks had no fixed rite for this Communion-service, he composed this one for them. (Liturgy) The Divine Office or Liturgy of the Hours The Liturgy of the Hoursalso called Divine Officecan be traced to the Apostolic period and even back to the liturgical tradition of Judaism. Dugmore notes that From the very beginning the daily services, modeled on the synagogue ritual, were common to both East and West, although in certain areas there could also be deviations

343

It is traditionally celebrated on Wednesdays and Fridays of the first six weeks of Great Fast, and on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday of Holy Week (The Liturgy of the Presanctified). You can find the actual liturgy in <http://www.byzantines.net/liturgy/presanctified.htm>.

806

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

from the general custom of the Church (57). Fernand Cabrol, in Divine Office, addresses its Jewish origin too: The custom of reciting prayers at certain hours of the day or night goes back to the Jews, from whom Christians have borrowed it. In the Psalms we find expressions like: I will meditate on thee in the morning; I rose at midnight to give praise to thee; Evening and morning, and at noon I will speak and declare: and he shall hear my voice; Seven times a day I have given praise to thee; etc. The Apostles observed the Jewish custom of praying at midnight, terce, sext, none (Acts 10:3, 9; 16:25; etc.). The Christian prayer of that time consisted of almost the same elements as the Jewish: recital or chanting of psalms, reading of the Old Testament, to which was soon added reading of the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, and at times canticles composed or improvised by the assistants. Gloria in excelsis and the Te decet laus are apparently vestiges of these primitive inspirations. Cabrol also hypothesizes a development of the Divine Office from the Mass of the Catechumens: The development of the Divine Office was probably in the following manner: The celebration of the Eucharist was preceded by the recital of the psalms and the reading of the Old and New Testaments. This was called the Mass of the Catechumens, which has been preserved almost in its original form. Probably this part of the Mass was the first form of the Divine Office, and, in the beginning, the vigils and the Eucharistic Synaxis were one. When the Eucharistic service was not celebrated, the prayer was limited to the recital or chanting of the psalms and the reading of the Scriptures. The vigils thus separated from the Mass became an independent office. During the first period the only office celebrated in public was the Eucharistic Synaxis with vigils preceding it, but forming with it one whole. In this hypothesis the Mass of the Catechumens would be the original kernel of the whole Divine Office. He continues explaining the derivation of the various offices from the vigils preceding the Liturgy: The Eucharistic Synaxis beginning at eventide did not terminate till dawn. The vigils, independently of the Eucharistic service, were divided naturally into three parts; the beginning of the vigils, or the evening Office; the vigils properly so called; and the end of the vigils or the matutinal Office. For when the vigils were as yet the only Office and were celebrated but rarely, they were continued during the greater part of the night. Thus the Office which we have called the Office of evening or Vespers, that of midnight, and that of the morning, called Matins first and then Lauds, were originally but one Office. If this hypothesis be rejected, it must be admitted that at first there was only one public office, Vigils. The service of eventide, Vespers, and that of the morning, Matins or Lauds, were gradually separated from it. During the day, Terce, Sext, and None, customary hours of private prayers both with the Jews and the early Christians, became later ecclesiastical Hours, just like Vespers or Lauds. Complin appears as a 807

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

repetition of Vespers, first in the fourth century. Prime is the only hour the precise origin and date of which are knownat the end of the fourth century. It is true that by the end of the fifth century, a century of great liturgical flourishing, the Liturgy of the Hours was similar to that of today: a Vigil or Night Serviceafterwards Matinsand seven day officesLauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers, and Compline. With the exception of Prime and Compline which were the last to appear, not earlier than the fourth century, as Cabrol notes, these hours are mentioned in an exhortation included in the Apostolic Constitutions: Offer up your prayers in the morning, at the third hour, the sixth, the ninth, the evening, and at cock-crowing: in the morning, returning thanks that the Lord has sent you light, that He has brought you past the night, and brought on the day; at the third hour, because at that hour the Lord received the sentence of condemnation from Pilate; at the sixth, because at that hour He was crucified; (1) at the ninth, because all things were in commotion at the crucifixion of the Lord, as trembling at the bold attempt of the impious Jews, and not bearing the injury offered to their Lord; in the evening, giving thanks that He has given you the night to rest from the daily labours; at cock-crowing, because that hour brings the good news of the coming on of the day for the operations proper for the light. But if it be not possible to go to the church on account of the unbelievers, thou, O bishop, shalt assemble them in a house, that a godly man may not enter into an assembly of the ungodly. For it is not the place that sanctifies the man, but the man the place. And if the ungodly possess the place, do thou avoid it, because it is profaned by them. For as holy priests sanctify a place, so do the profane ones defile it. If it be not possible to assemble either in the church or in a house, let every one by himself sing, and read, and pray, or two or three together. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there all I in the midst of them. (2) Let not one of the faithful pray with a catechumen, no, not in the house: for it is not reasonable that he who is admitted should be polluted with one not admitted. Let not one of the godly pray with an heretic, no, not in the house. For what fellowship hath light with darkness? (3) Let Christians, whether men or women, who have connections with slaves, either leave them off, or let them be rejected. (VIII, iv, 34) Fortescue refers to these two hours giving some bibliographic references: To this series of Hours two were added in the fourth century. John Cassian (Instit., III, iv) describes the addition of Prime by the monks of Palestine, and St. Basil refers (loc. cit.) to Complin (apodeipnon) as the monks evening prayer. Prime and Complin, then, were originally private prayers said by monks in addition to the official Hours. (The Rite of Constantinople)

808

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

He also traces the origin of the Divine Office, as well as the rites for sacraments and sacramentals344 to the use of Antioch, and comments: St. John Chrysostom, as soon as he comes to Constantinople, introduces the methods of Antioch in keeping the canonical Hours (16, VIII, 8). Fortescue further offers the elements of the Divine hours: With regard to the Divine Office especially, it has the same general principles in East and West from a very early age. Essentially it consists in psalm-singing. Its first and most important part is the Night-watch (pannychis, our Nocturns); at dawn the orthros (Lauds) was sung; during the day the people met again at the third, sixth, and ninth hours, and at sunset for the hesperinos (Vespers). Besides the psalms these Offices contained lessons from the Bible and collects. (The Rite of Constantinople) Cabrol too comments on the composition of the Liturgy of the Hours from his premise of its origin in the Mass of the Catechumens: the elements of which these hours are composed were at first few in number, identical with those of the Mass of the Catechumens, psalms recited or chanted uninterruptedly (tract) or by two choirs (antiphons) or by a cantor alternating with the choir (responses and versicles); lessons (readings from the Old and New Testaments, the origin of the capitula), and prayers. The development of these rites is not within the scope of the chapter to discuss, yet it is deem necessary to clarify, as it will be explained in Chapter 9, that Byzantine theology does not distinguish between sacraments and sacramentals and does not make a strict limitation to the number of sacraments. As we read in Sacraments in the Orthodox Church: In the patristic period there was no technical term to designate sacraments as a specific category of church acts: the term mysterion was used primarily in the wider and general sense of mystery of salvation, and only in a subsidiary manner to designate the particular actions which bestow salvation. In this second sense, it was used concurrently with such terms as rites or sanctifications. Theodore the Studite in the ninth century gives a list of six sacraments: the holy illumination (baptism), the synaxis (Eucharist), the holy chrism, ordination, monastic tonsure, and the service of burial. The doctrine of the seven sacraments appears for the first timevery characteristicallyin the
The Roman Catholic Church distinguishes between sacraments (i.e. Baptism, Confession, Communion, Confirmation, etc.) and sacramentals (Rosary and other Marian Devotions, Sacramentals of Protection, Christmas Prayers, etc.)
344

809

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Profession of Faith required from Emperor Michael Paleologus by Pope Clement iv in 1267. The Profession had been prepared, of course, by Latin theologians.

Activity 1. Briefly explain the origin and development of the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts. 2. Briefly explain the origin and development of the Liturgy of the Hours.
Activity 165: The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts and the Liturgy of the Hours

3. SOME CONCLUDING WORDS These concluding words by Taft invites to reflection: By way of conclusion, let me anticipate a typical question: We have been observing the evolution of the most complex ritual in Christendom. Who legislated it all? The answer, of course, is no one. The Eastern solution to the Western dilemma of rubricism or anarchy is not canon law, nor the liturgical commission, nor the Congregation of Rites, but the supple continuity of a living tradition. There may be a message here for us all. Yes, paradoxically, the living Tradition, the Holy tradition which holds an eternal saving truth dictate the development of Liturgy, of the rule of prayer of the Orthodox Church. Yet, this process cannot be truly defined as historical, as the Liturgy is in itself supra-historical. Nicolai Gogol (1809-1852), the great Russian novelist, in Meditations on the Divine Liturgy (1887), gives us the simile we need when he says: Before the Gospel, the deacon comes with the censer in his hand to fill the church with sweet fragrance for the reception of the Lord, reminding us by this censing of the spiritual cleansing of our souls with which we should attend to the fragrant words of the Gospel.345 The Holy tradition transmits itself in history as the incense transmits the sweet fragrance making us spiritually aware to cleanse the word, to hear the fragrant words of the prayers of the Liturgy.

345

Qtd. in Passage to Heaven: An Appreciation of the Divine Liturgy.

810

Chapter 7: History of Orthodox Liturgy

Final Activity Having read this chapter and done all its activities, write a five-page paper incorporating its main ideas. Follow the following diagram: a) introductory or topic paragraph, b) body or development, and c) concluding paragraph. Add your own reflection.
Activity 166: Final activity on the development of Orthodox liturgy

Final Activity Write a ten-page synthesizing what has been said in this chapter about the development of the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Offices. Add your own reflections.
Activity 167: Final activity on the development of the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Offices

811

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Chapter 8 THE LITURGICAL ENVIRONMENT: THE ORTHODOX CHURCH BUILDING AND LITURGICAL VESTMENTS
In this chapter, I will deal with the liturgical environment of the Orthodox Church, focusing on (1) the church building, including aspects of its iconostasis (icon stand) and iconography, and (2) liturgical vestments. I will mainly approach these two issues from a historical perspective. I will follow, especially in the exposition of the development of the church building, a timeline similar to the one followed in the preceding chapter, that is from its Jewish background to the end of the Byzantine Empire and beyond. The latter will deal with some aspects of the post-Byzantine period. 1. THE ORTHODOX CHURCH BUILDING INTRODUCTION Jesus said: For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them (Matt. 18:20). When the faithful gathers in the church, in the building consecrated to God and intended for worship, the Lord is invisibly present in it and receives our prayers there. In the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts the following special entrance hymn is chanted: Now the powers of heaven do serve invisibly with us. Lo, the King of Glory enters. Lo, the mystical sacrifice is upborne, fulfilled. Let us draw near in faith and love, and become communicants of life eternal. Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia. Since the powers of heaven do serve invisibly with us, the church, says Alexander Mileant, may be considered a bit of heaven on earth or an island of the kingdom of heaven (The Temple of Godan island of Heaven on our sinful earth).

812

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

As Aghiorgoussis comments, the architecture and iconography of the Church, like the Divine Liturgy or the Creeds of the Church, are two other forms in which the doctrinal tradition of the Church is expressed (The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church). It is true that through the long history of the Orthodox Church, a church characterized by its mystical theology, by the personal experience of the divine mysteries, a definite style of church building has developed (Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church 8). This style, as Father Thomas Hopko states, in The Orthodox Faith, is characterized by the attempt to reveal the fundamental experience of Orthodox Christianity: God is with us. According to Hopko it is Christ the Immanuelmeaning God with uswho has determined the architecture of the Orthodox Church building. It is in Christ through the Holy Spirit that God is with man (vol 2, Worship 3). The dwelling place of God is with man, as we can read in Scriptural passages such as Ephesians 2: 21-22In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spiritor Acts 7: 48The most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet. And the Orthodox temple, Hopko continues explaining, reveals Gods dwelling in men: Orthodox Church architecture reveals that God is with men, dwelling in them and living in them through Christ and the Spirit. It does so by using the dome or the vaulted ceiling to crown the Christian church building, the house of the Church which is the People of God. Unlike the pointed arches which point to God far up in the heavens, the dome or the spacious all-embracing ceiling gives the impression that in the Kingdom of God, and in the Church, Christ unites all things in himself, things in heaven and things on earth, (Ephesians 1:10) and that in Him we are all filled with all the fullness of God. (Ephesians 3:19) (34) Indeed, God is the First Source and Center of all things and beings. He, undivided in the Trinity, irradiates a unifying quality. In Colossians 1: 17 we read And

813

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And, this unifying quality of the Deity is, as Hopko asserts, reflected in the interior of the Orthodox temple: The interior of the Orthodox Church building is particularly styled to give the experience of the unity of all things in God. It is not constructed to reproduce the upper room of the Last Supper, nor to be simply a meeting hall for men whose life exists solely within the bounds of this earth. The church building is patterned after the image of God Kingdom in the Book of Revelation. Before us is the altar table on which Christ is enthroned, both as the Word of God in the Gospels and as the Lamb of God in the eucharistic sacrifice. Around the table are the angels and saints, the servants of the Word and the Lamb who glorify himand through him, God the Fatherin the perpetual adoration inspired by the Holy Spirit. The faithful Christians on earth who already belong to that holy assembly ...fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God... (Ephesians 2:19)enter into the eternal worship of Gods Kingdom in the Church. (4) Gods creativity is also a manifestation of His unity. He gives man, made in His image, the possibility of a holy artistic expression, also unifying his or her own personality. For Frank Schaeffer (ed.), the church artistic tradition of architecture, iconography, or music, is based on the Orthodox Christian doctrine of human creativity rooted in Gods love for man and the world in creation. Because man is created in the image and likeness of God, and because God so loved man and the world, as to create, save and glorify them by His own coming in Christ and the Holy Spirit, the artistic expressions of man and the blessings and inspirations of God merge into a holy artistic creativity, which truly expresses the deepest truths of the Christian vision of God, man, and nature. (Christian Doctrine) He remarks regarding icons: The icon is Orthodoxys highest artistic achievement. It is a gospel proclamation, a doctrinal teaching and a spiritual inspiration in colors and lines. The traditional Orthodox icon is not a holy picture. It is not a pictorial portrayal of some Christian saint or event in a photocopy way. It is, on the contrary, the expression of the eternal and divine reality, significance, and purpose of the given person or event depicted. In the gracious freedom of the divine inspiration, the icon depicts its subject as at the same time both human and yet full of God, earthly and yet heavenly, physical and yet spiritual, bearing the cross and yet full of grace, light, peace and joy. In this way, the icon expresses a deeper realism than that which would be shown in the simple reproduction of the physical externals of the historic person or event. Thus, in their own unique way the various types of Orthodox icons, through their form and style and manner of depiction, as well as, through their actual contents and use in the Church, are an inexhaustible source of revelation of the Orthodox doctrine and faith.

814

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

For Aghiorgoussis, iconography is also a means of expressing the faith, the dogmatic and doctrinal tradition in the life-context of the Orthodox Church: The icons, books of the illiterate, teach most of the faith to one who knows how to read them. Painted according to an austere tradition, in an austere style, after prayer and fasting by the iconographer, the icons become windows of heaven, revealing to the faithful heavenly mysteries, the mysteries of faith. The icons become a real, sacramental presence of the persons or realities depicted in them, thus leading the faithful to communion with the person or the reality depicted in them. (The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church) In several places, echoing Clement, Athanasius said that the Word became man so that man might be made god. For Aidan Hart, in Some Principles of Orthodox Church Architecture, This is a synergy of God offering Himself and man offering himself. The ultimate role of church architecture is to reflect this truth and to help our deification become a reality. Church design and construction is rooted both in heaven and in earth, in timeless principles and in the specifics of locality and time. This means that a comparison of Orthodox churches throughout the world and in different periods shows that they have the same principles in common and that they are yet each unique, that they are indigenous and varied. A common experience of God unites them, while the local character, climate, building materials and community needs distinguish them. We could say that the ideal community of traditional church architecture reflects the nature of the Holy Trinity, having no division and no confusion, one yet with distinctions. It reflects Pentecost, where the one Holy Spirit descends uniquely on each disciple as a tongue of fire, inspiring him to declare the same truth in the local tongue. Church Plan Before explaining the development of the church building during the centuries, it is necessary to have some preliminary idea of the church plan and to be acquainted with its technical vocabulary. It is important to know, on the one hand, that most Orthodox churches are built East-West. We enter in the West, symbolizing the darkness, and walk to East, to the light. Archpriest Seraphim Slobodskoy, in The Divine Services, says: An Orthodox Church is built with the altar at the eastern end, directed towards the light from whence the sun rises. The Lord Jesus Christ is for us the Dayspring, for from

815

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Him has dawned upon us the eternal Divine Light. In the church prayers, we also call Jesus Christ the Sun of Righteousness and the Dayspring from on high. Orthodox churches were initially built in the form of a basilica, a long rectangular structure, having a small projecting structure at the entrance (the portico or porch) and a curved apse at the opposite end. The interior of the basilica was divided by rows of columns into three or five sections called naves, the central one being higher than those on the sides with windows in it. Such basilicas were characterized by an abundance of light and air. But the church architecture was not something static and soon churches were also built in other shapes as well. Thus, in Byzantium architects began to build cross-shaped churches with arches and a dome or cupola over the central part of the church. Hart talks about this cruciform type, a cross floor plan with a dome over the center: The cruciform style was more purpose-designed as a church than the basilica, and is therefore generally considered to be a richer and fuller expression of the Churchs experience. It was probably conceived out of a combination of the basilica (with its west to east movement), and centrally oriented mausolea and baptisteries (which were circular, octagonal, or variations thereof, and usually domed). Occasionally, but more rarely, churches were also built round or octagonal. The church architecture of Byzantium had an enormous influence on the Orthodox East (Mileant, The Temple of God ). Hopko provides the following general plan of an Orthodox temple, including the following main three elements, the sanctuary, the nave, and the vestibule or narthex (The Orthodox Faith, vol 2; Worship 4):

816

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 80: Plant of an Orthodox Church Building

We see that the narthex is located at the far end from the churchs main altar,

Illustration 81: Narthex or vestibule346

and the nave and the sanctuary are separated by an icon screen or iconostasis from the nave. Furthermore, the sanctuary or altar contains the altar table and the oblation table. Hopko does not mention the apse, which is a semicircular projection covered with a hemispherical vault. The apse is the termination at the sanctuary end of a church, generally semicircular in plan but sometimes square or polygonal. Eastern Byzantine churches may have a triple apse:

346

See: <www.answers.com>.

817

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 82: Byzantine Church with a triple apse347

In Byzantine churches, the altar is in the larger central apse; the oblation table or Prothesis, in the apse to the right; and the Diaconicon to the left. The Diaconicon is a name given to a chamber on the south side of the central apse of the church, where the vestments, books, etc, that are used in the Divine Services of the church are kept. The three main parts of the church building, the narthex, or entranceway; the nave, or church proper; and the sanctuary, or altar, corresponded in early church to a division of classes of Christians: the catechumens or learners, the faithful, and the clergymen, all occupying specific areas during worship (Diaconicon, Byzantine Art, The Church as a Building, Apse1, Apse2). Some Definitions For St Cyril of Jerusalem, in Catechetical Orations, as for many Church Fathers, the word church means convocation or reunion: 24. And it is rightly named (Ecclesia) because it calls forth and assembles together all men; according as the Lord says in Leviticus, And make an assembly for all the congregation at the door of the tabernacle of witness. And it is to be
347

See: <www.answers.com>.

818

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

noted, that the word assemble, is used for the first time in the Scriptures here, at the time when the Lord puts Aaron into the High-priesthood. And in Deuteronomy also the Lord says to Moses, Assemble the people unto Me, and let them hear My words, that they may learn to fear Me (Deuteronomy 4:10). And he again mentions the name of the Church, when he says concerning the Tables, And on them were written all the words which the Lord spoke with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the Assembly; as if he had said more plainly, in the day in which you were called and gathered together by God. The Psalmist also says, I will give thanks unto You, O Lord, in the great Congregation; I will praise You among much people. For Leonid Ouspensky, in Theology of the Icon (vol. 1), the word church also designates the Body of Christ, His Kingdom made up of the communion of the faithful, and also the place of worship. ... Thus a church is an image, an icon of the Church, the Body of Christ (18). He points out to the difference between the church, as the house of the Lord, and all other buildings: A Church, as the place where this sacrament [the Eucharist] is fulfilled and where men, united and revived, are gathered together, is different from all other places and building. It is characteristics that, among the various names which the Christians gave to their temple, such as church or the house of the Lord, the most frequent designation was the house of the Lord. This name itself already underlies the difference between a church and all other buildings and expressed its specifically Christian meaning. (18) Averky distinguishes between church, or house of the Lord, and temple, which refers to a building specially consecrated to God: The liturgical rule of today prescribes for services to be performed for the most part in the temple. Concerning the very name temple, templum, nao, it came into use around the IV century. Before, the name was applied by the pagans to the places where they assembled for prayer. Among us, the Christians, the name temple refers to a building specially consecrated to God, in which the faithful gather for the receiving of the grace of God through the sacrament of Communion and other sacraments, and for the lifting up of prayers of a communal nature to God. Since the faithful, who themselves comprise the Church of Christ, gather in the temple, the temple is likewise called a church, a word which came from the Greek kuriakon, which means house of the Lord, domus Dei. This title was adopted from the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament (Gen. 28:17, 19, 22). From the Greek word kuriakon, by changing the letters k and u to the Russian letters and , the Russian word was formed, which also means a house or temple of the Lord.

819

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Additionally, Schmemann, in Liturgy and Life: Christian Development through Liturgical Experience, explains that the double use of the word church (naos, khram), Christian community and worship house, is in itself an indication of the function and nature of the Orthodox temple: to be the place of the leiturgia, the place where the community of the faithful fulfils itself as the Church of God, as the spiritual Temple. It had a long historical development and exists in a great variety of national expressions. But the common and the central idea is that of the temple as heaven on earth, the place where through our participation in the liturgy of the Church, we enter into communion with the age to come, the Kingdom of God. (35) He mentions a concept central in Orthodox liturgy: the temple as heaven on earth. Indeed the temple has a long historical development, beginning in the fourth century, with the end of the persecutions by the pagans. Yet before that time Christians gathered either at private houses or in catacombs in times of persecutions, both of these places assisted in the delineation of the church building and its iconography. The Orthodox Church considers the church building as sacramental, as a holy place, rather than as a holy community. The consecrated space of the church, where the Eucharist is celebrated, is the place where the reality of the Kingdom is anticipated, and its iconography is an integral part of this sacred space (Wybrew 177). Church decoration, which at the beginning had primarily a didactic purpose in a mostly illiterate society, also acquired a sacramental role, as well as a mystical role in meditative prayer. As in this chapter I will also deal with iconography, it is necessary to define its use here. Very often there is a distinction between wall painting, whether a fresco or a mosaic, which is part of the church architecture, and icons painted on board which is in itself an object of art. However, following Ouspensky, I will consider the icon as a sacred image, whether they are paintings on board, frescoes, mosaics or sculptures (35). Moreover, it is also important to mention, with Ouspensky, that The Orthodox Church maintains and teaches that the sacred image has existed from the beginning of Christianity. Far from being opposed to the latter, the

820

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

image is, on the contrary, its indispensable attribute. The Church declares that the icon is an outcome of the Incarnation; that it is based upon this Incarnation and therefore belongs to the very essence of Christianity, and cannot be separated from it. (36) Ouspensky explains the rejection of images by ancient authors such as Tertullian, Origen, and Eusebius, and by some Christian circles as a certain confusion toward the imagea confusion which was undoubtedly due to the lack of an adequate artistic and verbal language (40), and, I would add, the lack of awareness of the Holy Tradition. Based on this Tradition, the Orthodox Church asserts that the icon of Jesus, what it is called in the West the Holy Face, existed when He lived on earth, and icons of the Virgin were made after Pentecost. Thus, the sacred image, as Ouspensky remarks belongs to the very nature of Christianity, since it is not only the revelation of the Word of God, but also of the Image of God, manifested by the God-Man. Activity 1. Hopko quotes several biblical passages when talking about the Church building, namely I Pet. 2: 4-5; II Cor. 6: 16, read them and discern what they say about the temple of God. 2. List the parts of the Byzantine church. 3. Define temple and church. 4. When did the temple come into use by Christians? 5. Explain the concept of the temple as heaven on earth. 6. What do we understand by icon in this chapter? 7. What does the Orthodox Church maintain and teach about the sacred image?
Activity 168: Preliminary activity on the Orthodox Church building

JEWISH AND NEW TESTAMENT BACKGROUND The meaning of the Christian temple is connected with the heritage of the Old Testament. The Tabernacle of the Old Testament prefigures the New Testament church. The Orthodox Church has consciously attempted to retain elements of Jewish Temple and synagogue worship not only in ritual patterns as we have noticed in the preceding chapter, but also in their ecclesiastical architecture. Thus, the arrangement of an 821

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Orthodox church is modeled on the first tent-temple, the tabernacle, for divine worship erected by Moses under Gods guidance. The Lord says to Moses: According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it (Ex 25:9). He also told him: And thou shalt rear up the tabernacle according to the fashion thereof which was shewed thee in the mount (Ex 26:30). In Hebrews 8:5, we also read: Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. In Exodus 26 and 27 we can find these instructions to build the tabernacle based on a divine pattern. What follows is a plan view of Moses tabernacle:

Illustration 83: The Tabernacle of Moses348

We can see that the tabernacle or sanctuary consisted of a Court or Courtyard, and a structure which was divided into two rooms, the Holy of Holies and the Holy Place. These two rooms contained furniture and utensils which were used in the service of the Sanctuary. These three portions correspond to the narthex or vestibule, the altar

348

See The Tabernacle of Moses is the Body of Jesus Christ.

822

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

(or sanctuary), and the nave of the Orthodox temple. In Exodus we can also find passages describing the requirements for curtains to divide the space between the holy place, where the ark of the covenant was located, and the most holy.349 31 And thou shalt make a vail of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen of cunning work: with cherubims shall it be made: 32 And thou shalt hang it upon four pillars of shittim wood overlaid with gold: their hooks shall be of gold, upon the four sockets of silver. 33 And thou shalt hang up the vail under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail the ark of the testimony: and the vail shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy. (Ex. 26: 31-33) In this mobile temple, the holy place and the most holy place, shielded from outside view, corresponded therefore to two levels of sacrality and had distinctive rules of access. In 2 Chronicles 3:1-14 and 4:22, we witness the construction of the Temple of Jerusalem, and again, the division of the two holy places by a curtain. We also note the two entrances to the temple, to the nave or holy place and to the most holy place: 1 Then Solomon began to build the house of the LORD at Jerusalem in mount Moriah, where the Lord appeared unto David his father, in the place that David had prepared in the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite. ... 7 He overlaid also the house, the beams, the posts, and the walls thereof, and the doors thereof, with gold; and graved cherubims on the walls. ... 14 And he made the vail of blue, and purple, and crimson, and fine linen, and wrought cherubims thereon. And the snuffers, and the basons, and the spoons, and the censers, of pure gold: and the entry of the house, the inner doors thereof for the most holy place, and the doors of the house of the temple, were of gold, most holy place and the doors of the nave of the temple were of gold. (4:22) In the New Testament, we also find references to the temple, but now the division of the sacred spaces is broken after Jesus death. In Luke 23: 45, we read And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. The separation of the sacred spaces was broken. The temple was no longer seen as a physical building of sacrifice. A new temple, the body of Jesus, had emerged with Jesus sacrifice, a new covenant with God. In John 2: 19-22, we read:

For this scriptural description of the sacred spaces within the Jewish temple, I am following Brennan, in Entrances and Barriers: Door, the Icon and Sacred space from an Eastern Christian Perspective.

349

823

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 21 But he spake of the temple of his body. 22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said. Also there are no physical doors; Christ is the door to salvation: 19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; (Hebrews 10:19,20) Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. (Luke 13:24) Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. (John 10:7) Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:6) Slobodskoy addresses this new accessibility of the sacred spaces after Jesus death on the cross and his resurrection: As the Holy of Holies signified in the Old Testament Temple, the Altar represents now the Kingdom of Heaven. In those times, no one could enter the Holy of Holies except the High Priest, and even he only once a year, with the blood of purification. This signified that the Kingdom of Heaven, after the fall of man into sin, was closed to man. The High Priest was a prototype of Christ, and his action foretold that a time would come when Christ, through His shedding of blood, suffering on the Cross and Resurrection, would open the Kingdom of Heaven to all. Therefore, when Christ died on the cross, the veil of the temple which closed off the Holy of Holies was torn in two. From that moment on, Christ has opened the gates to the Kingdom of Heaven, for all who with faith would come unto Him. The Sanctuary of the Temple [the holy place] corresponds in an Orthodox church to the Nave, the middle part of the building. No one had the right to enter the Old Testament sanctuary except the priest; yet all believing Christians may stand within the Nave of the church because the Kingdom of God is closed to none. In Entrances and Barriers: Door, the Icon and Sacred space from an Eastern Christian Perspective, Brennan states that Clearly, for the early Christians, the concept of sacrality became less involved with place than with a mystical connection with Jesus, whom they believed to be the Christ, or anointed Messiah of God. He adds:

824

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Early in the history of the people of Israel the concept of sacred space was institutionalized in the tabernacle and temples. The early Christian church, in reaction to its perceived rejection by the Jewish authorities, developed a mystical and allegorical understanding of sacrality as focussed on the person and role of Jesus, called the Christ and Son of God. In the New Testament, reconciled believers are an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation (1 Peter 2:9-10), and they might enter into the holy of the tabernacle and pray. In todays Orthodox Churches instead of the veil we find the iconostasis dividing the altar from the nave as well as distinct entrances to the nave and the altar. The altar is accessed through three doors in the iconostasis: small doors at the north and south ends, and a larger, usually double door in the center. The iconostasis bears an array of sacred images arranged in fairly consistent order. Yet, as we will see, the iconostasis does not really separate the nave from the Holy of Holies; rather, it brings them together. It is the link between heaven (the Holy of Holies) and the nave (the Holy Place). Everything is symbolic upon the Iconostasis. In the New Testament we can also find the earliest Scripture reference to the altar table. St. Paul says: Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lords table and of the table of devils (I Cor. 10: 21). As Hasset, in History of the Christian altar, says, the Apostle contrasts between the table of the Lord (trapeza Kyriou) on which the Eucharist is offered, and the table of devils, or pagan altars. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Apostle also mentions the Christian altar: We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle (13:10). Hasset says that here St. Paul refers to the Christian altar as thysiasterion, the word by which the Septuagint alludes to Noahs altar. As we have seen with Ouspensky, the Orthodox Church teaches that the sacred image is essential to Christianity as it is a manifestation of the Son of God. This seems to contradict Old Testament passage like Exodus (20:4): Thou shalt not make unto thee

825

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Yet it is not so, as Ouspensky, says, as Orthodox perspective is a fulfilment of the Old Testament. He says, the existence of the image in the New Testament is implied by its prohibition in the Old Testaments (41). Basing his opinion on John of Damascuss Treatises in the Defense of Holy Icons, he adds the very prohibition against representing the invisible God implies the necessity of representing God once the prophesies have been fulfilled (44). He further explains that the words of the Lord: You have seen no images; hence do not create any, mean create no images of God as long as you have not seen Him. [His italics.] As above mentioned, according to the Tradition of the Orthodox Church, during Jesus life on earth there already was an image of him, called by the Orthodox Church, the icon not made by human hands, and, as already said, the Holy Face by the Western Church. It is also called the mandylion or the holy napkin. This icon was made by Christ Himself. As we read in The Icon in the Christian Orthodox Church, It is derived from the story of King Abgar of Edessa. He sent a messenger to summon Christ to his court to cure him of an affliction. The messenger found Christ busy preaching to his followers. Upon hearing King Abgars request, Christ wiped his face on a cloth and gave it to the messenger to give to his King. King Abgar received the cloth and opened it to find the impression of Christs face upon it. The King recovered from his affliction and placed the cloth in a special place over the city gates. This history is reflected in a sticheron in tone 8 from Vespers and in another sticheron in Matins. We have no references of this image before the fifth century. It is first mentioned in the fifth century in the Doctrine of Addai. In the sixth century, Evagrius, in his Ecclesiastical History, mentions this image, calling it the icon made by God. It is also mentioned in the iconoclastic period (Ouspensky 51-52).

826

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Orthodox Tradition also believes that St. Luke the Evangelist painted three icons of the Virgin after Pentecost. This tradition is transmitted by liturgical text, especially those of the feasts of Our Lady of Vladimir and in a sticheron in tone 6 sung during Vespers. We have no references from this image until the sixth century. This reference is made by Theodore, a Byzantine historian from around the year 530. There are also further references by St. Andrew of Crete and St. Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, in the eighth century (Ouspensky 62-63).

Activity 1. Explain the Jewish background of the Christian temple and the change in sacrality Jesus brought. 2. List the first references of the Christian altar.
Activity 169: Jewish and New Testament background of church building and church decoration

Your Own Research Write a history of the New testament icons of the image of Christ and of the Virgin from its beginning to the end of the Byzantine Period. Add images of them.
Activity 170: The Holy Face

Let us discuss the art of the first century, considering that especially in the east no many images remain due to the iconoclast period, the Crusaders, and, of course, the ravages of time. EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH (I-III CENTURIES) APOSTOLIC AGE (FIRST CENTURY) As pointed out in Chapter 7, at the beginning, Jewish Christians gathered at synagogues and met at private homes for their Eucharistic meal. They were later expelled from the synagogues but continued meeting in private houses, in the largest convenient room. We know that many Christians had been born Jews, and even some

827

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Gentile Christians had first become Jews, and had also been part of the synagogue. Also, as noticed, the first Christians considered themselves as JewsMessianic Jews and believed the ancient Jewish hope of the coming of Messiah had been fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth. Yet they rejected many legalistic burdens imposed on the faithful such as the ritualistic washing of hands, burial restrictions or the required fasts, and, as commented in the Part I, they had begun to be considered not just as a Jewish sect but heretical. Also some doctrine likes that of the incarnation (and potentially the Trinity) and the idea of the blood atonement in the person of Jesus Christ scandalized the Pharisees. Further, in 66 AD, Christians did not hesitate to cease Jewish religious observances as decree by the Roman emperor Hadrian, when most of the rest of Judaism rose up against this decree. Hence, they were regarded as traitors. Thus around 90 AD, a group of Jewish leaders, trying to form a new Sanhedrin (Council) in Palestine to replace the one that had once gathered in Jerusalem decided Christians were to be expelled from synagogue worship. Now expelled from synagogue worship, they continued meeting at home for their eucharistic meal, although in times of persecutions they met at catacombs, and had their liturgy in crypts, normally in crypts and tombs of martyrs. Each local Christian community established its own structure for fellowship, yet they all seemed to have had one or more overseers (episcopos) or elders (presbyters). There are many scriptural evidences that during the period of the New Testament, within thirty years after the crucifixion, Christians gathered in small groups in private houses for worship, fellowship, and instruction. In the First Epistle to the Corinthians, written about 57 AD, we find a Christian assembly in the house of Aquila and Priscilla in the city of Ephesus: The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and

828

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house (1 Corinthians 16:19). In the Epistle to the Romans,350 written in the winter of 57/58, there is a reference to the assembly in the Roman house of Priscilla and Aquila: 3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: 4 Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. 5 Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the first fruits of Achaia unto Christ (Romans 16:3-5). In the Epistle to the Colossians, written in the late fifties earlier sixties AD, the assembly in the house of Nympha is mentioned: 15 Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house (Colossians 4:15). In the area of Laodicea, there seems to be another church house: And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea (Colossians 4: 16). In the Epistle addressed to Philemon, written about the same date as that of Philemon, a meeting in the house of Philemon is suggested: Paul sends greetings to the assembly of Christians meeting Philemons house at Colossae: 1 Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellow labourer, 2 And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in thy house... (Philemon 1-2). Similarly, there also seemed to be other church houses in Ephesus and Rome. Krautheimer, in Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, gives a good description of what these homes were like: And as the congregations were recruited by and large from the lower and middle classes [1 Cor.1:26-31], their houses would have been typical cheap houses. Such houses are know to us, if not from the first and second centuries, at least from the fourth and fifth. In the Eastern provinces, they were apparently onefamily buildings up to four stories high. The dining-room on top was the only large room, and often opened on a terrace. This is the upper floor, the anageion
350

The dating in this section follows those given by Brown.

829

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

or hyperoon frequently mentioned in the Acts [Acts 1:7; 20:8], the room high up, open to the light, of which Tertullian still speaks after A.D. 200. The furnishings would simply consist of a table and three surrounding couches, from which the dining-room takes its name in Latinized Greekthe triclinium. The main couch opposite the entrance was presumable reserved for the elder, the host, and speaker as honoured guest. The congregations might crowd the room, including the window sills, so that at Troas from the heat of the many lamps and the length of the sermona young man fell from the fourth floor (the tristegon), only to be resurrected by the preacher, St. Paul [Acts 20:5-10]. In Rome, where tenement houses with horizontal apartments were the rule, not necessarily including a dining-room, any large chamber may have served for these gatherings. No other rooms would have been required by the congregations. (24) 351

Activity Check the correction of these scriptural references to church houses. When you finish write your own reflection on these church houses. Church in Caesarea: The house of Philip the evangelist (Acts21:7-12) House Church in Colossae: The house of Philemon (Philem. 1-2) House Churches in Corinth: The house of Titus Justus (Acts 18:7) The house of Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11) The house of Stephanas (1 Cor. 16:15) The house of Gaius (Rom. 16:22-23) House Churches in Ephesus: The house of Aquila and Priscilla (1 Cor.16:19) Anonymous houses (Acts 20:17-21) House Churches in Jerusalem: Anonymous houses (Acts 2:46-47) Anonymous houses (Acts 5:42) Anonymous houses (Acts 8:3) The house of Mary (Acts 12:12) House Church in or near Laodicea: The house of Nympha (Col. 4:15) House Churches in Rome: The house of Aquila and Priscilla (Rom.16:3-5) The house of Aristobulus (Rom. 16:10) The house of Narcissus (Rom. 16:11) The house of Asyncritus (Rom. 16:14)
351

Qtd. in Lashway.

830

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

The house of Philologus and Julia (Rom.16:15) The house of Paul (Acts 28:16, 23, 29-31) House Church in Thessalonica: 7. The house of Jason (Acts 17:1-9) House Church in Troas: 8. The house with an upper room (Acts20:7-12) (Adapted from Lashway)
Activity 171: House churches in the New Testament

What follows is an example of the earliest identified Christian church-house, acquired by the congregation of Dura Europos (Syria), around 240. It can give us an idea of how these church houses looked at that time:

Illustration 84: Christian church-house of Dura Europos (Syria)352

As we can see, one room was turned into a baptistery (D) with a font (E); another room was used for religious training (F), while a larger room was used for the church or eucharistic gathering (G). Wybrew explains that this room was the resultant of running two rooms together to provide space enough for the eucharistic gathering of some fifty or sixty people. He also states that only the baptistery was decorated with frescos, the first evidence of Christian iconography making use of themes appropriate to funerary arts such as the Good Shepherd or Adam and Eve (22):
352

See: Early Christian Architecture.

831

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 85: Dura Europos baptistery353

Illustration 86: Adam and Eve and the Good Shepherd painting above the baptistery (Dura-Europos)354

Though this building at Dura-Europos would have been used in a period between official state persecutions (if it occurred this Far East), the reality or threat of persecution seems not to have precluded the establishment of Houses for the Church. In Edward Foley, in From Age to Age: How Christians Have Celebrated the Eucharist, gives the following passage suggesting a public congregation at a house living under persecution: When he came to the house in which the Christians gathered [for worship], Felix the high priest and supervisor [of the colony of Cirta] said to bishop Paul, Give me the scriptures of the law and whatever else you have here as ordered so that you may be able to comply with [this order]. Paul said, The lectors have the scriptures, but what we have here we give, to chalices of gold, six chalices of silver, six silver jars, a silver dish, seven silver lamps, two torches, seven
353 354

See: <http://www.contracosta.edu/Art/190EarlyChristianJewishByzStudyImages.htm>. See: <http://www.contracosta.edu/Art/190EarlyChristianJewishByzStudyImages.htm>.

832

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

short bronze candlesticks with their candles, eleven bronze lamps with their chains... Afterwards the book chests [amaria] in the library were found to be empty.355 Foley adds that during persecutions, not only were Christians martyred but buildings were destroyed and books were burned. These objects and buildings served the community in prayer, but they also began to take on identities of their own (37). For Richard Krautheimer, until 200 A.D. a Christian architecture did not exist: Until A.D. 200, then, a Christian architecture did not and could not exist. Only the state religion erected temples in the tradition of the Greek and Roman architecture. The savior religions [for example Mithras or Isis], depending on the specific form of their ritual and the finances of their congregations, built oratories above or below ground, from the simplest to the most lavish but always on a small scale. Christian congregations prior to 200 were limited to the realm of domestic architecture, and further, to inconspicuous dwellings of the lower classes. (24)356 Averky also comments that Christian temples as specifically houses of worship only began to appear among Christians in significant numbers after the end of the persecutions by the pagans, i.e., in the IV century. However, temples were already being built before this since at least the III century. The Church did not go from meeting in private homes or catacombs to building basilicas over night or even from converted houses to basilicas. Michael White believes, in The Social Origins of Christian Architecture,357 that Christians, before and even after 313, most likely by necessity of numbers, were building larger rectangular hallsnot basilicas. These halls of the Church, expansions of the smaller domestic structures, seemed to represent only larger spaces and not significant changes in or developments of liturgical life. He believes that early Christians did not seem to have great concern for church buildings (v.1, 4, 22).358

355

From the Acts of Munatus Felix (19 May 303) as cited in the Acts of Zenophilus. Qtd. in Programming Statement Draft Work in Progress. 356 Qtd. in Lashway. 357 Qtd. in Programming Statement Draft Work in Progress. 358 Volume I: Building God's House in the Roman World: Architectural Adaptation Among Pagans, Jews and Christians.

833

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

We do not know for certain if these house-churches had some sort of partition, barrier, or demarcation, later called the iconostasis, between the altar and the gathering place of the faithful. This is most likely as the Jewish temple had it between the Holiest of the Holiest and the Holy Place. Hart however says that archaeological finds do show they existed early on. He gives the example of a house turned into church in Salon, Dalmatia, dated to around 300 AD. We can assume that the demarcation would vary depending on the local space and the needs of the people. Yet, it is true in all these early churches that whether any kind of physical barrier existed or not, the altar table was clearly visible to the faithful. The Eucharistic liturgy officiated in these house churches or these Halls of the Church must have been close to that described by Justin in his First Apology, and by Hyppolitus of Rome in the Apostolic Tradition. As mentioned above, during the time of persecutions, Christians often gathered for their religious ceremonies for their departed loved ones in catacombs or subterranean cemeteries, especially crypts and tombs of martyrs. The catacombs also mark the beginning of Christian art, an art meant to be didactic. Michael Quenot, in The Icon, Window on the Kingdom, says that Christian art appears at the very moment when a certain expressionism replaced an art depicting both form and volume of the human body. The search for new ways to express the impulses of the soul in painting was perfectly appropriate for the first Christians artist (18). There was great veneration for these holy places on the part of the Christian community. John Dominic Crossan, in The Christian Catacombs in Rome, gives a social reason for the existence of catacombs: The city of Rome was ringed by burial sites. Since you could not be buried in Rome itself within the city boundaries unless you were somebody like the emperor, you had to be buried around the perimeter of Rome. So, if you were a noble family, youd have tombs aboveground, mausoleum-like tombs. If you were a slightly lower class, you would be buried below ground because the

834

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

material below the ground outside Rome is called tufa;359 its very, very strong, its very easy to carve and very strong. You could have two, three, four, and even five layers below ground of burial sites. He also points out the fact that they were not hideouts, they were not places where Christians were hiding. They were quite public, where everyone of this class was being buried. So, Christians were being buried in the catacombs. And although we cannot exclude the fact that some Christians in time of fierce persecution might have sought refuge in the catacombs, scholars agree that the catacombs were not hiding places. The Romans knew where they were (The Catacombs of Rome). Anton de Waal stresses the fact that Christians constructed their own catacombs and did not use existing galleries as places of burial for their dead. He also describes the Christian catacombs as follows: The catacombs are, therefore, entirely of Christian construction. As a rule a stairway leads below the surface to a depth of from thirty-three to forty-nine feet or even more; from this point diverge the galleries, which are from ten to thirteen feet in height, and seldom broader than would be necessary for two grave-diggers, one behind the other, to carry a bier. Side galleries branch off from the main galleries, intersecting other passages. From this level or story steps lead to lower levels where there is a second network of galleries; there are catacombs which have three or even four stories, as, for example, the Catacomb of St. Sebastian. The labyrinth of galleries is incalculable. It has been asserted that if placed in a straight line they would extend the length of Italy. Along the passages burial chambers (cubicula) open to the right and left, also hewn out of the tufa rock. In the side walls of the galleries horizontal tiers of graves rise from the floor to the ceiling; the number of graves in the Roman catacombs is estimated at two millions. The graves, or loculi, are cut out of the rock sides of the gallery, so that the length of the bodies can be judged from the length of the graves. When the body, wrapped in cloth, without a sarcophagus, was laid in the spot excavated for it, the excavation was closed by a marble slab or sometimes by large tiles set in mortar. For the wealthy and for martyrs there were also more imposing graves, known as arcosolia. An arcosolium was a space excavated in the wall above which a semicircular recess was hewn out, in which a sarcophagus was sometimes placed; in the excavation below, the body was laid and covered with a flat marble slab.
359

The soil on which the city of Rome is built, as well as that of the surrounding district, is of volcanic origin, consisting of three strata: one above the other: the uppermost is the so-called pozzolano, earth from which the Romans, by an admixture of lime, prepared their excellent cement; next is a stratum of tufa, made up half of earth and half of stone; the lowest stratum is composed of stone (Anton De Waal)

835

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Michael White, in Christian Catacombs in Rome, comments that it is about the same time as the persecutions of Decius, middle of the third century, that the Christian catacombs developed. Also, when Christianity was being preached in Rome there were already pagan and Jewish catacombs. They were all considered sacred and protected by Roman law. The right to burial was sacred and inviolable White adds: One of the things we do see in the middle of the third century is theres a growing number of Christian burial societies run by the church. We even hear of whole groups of diggers, these are the people who literally dig out the catacomb burial places, and the Christians are one of the most important mortuary establishments in the city of Rome. He also explains: And so, these catacombs literally are like colonies of ants going farther and farther down into this soft... rock, and as you go in, what you can do is, you can see up the walls as they dig the burial loculi, or chambers, where they slide the body in place. Those are the cheap burials. And we cant, in some cases, tell whether theyre pagan or Jewish or Christian. The more elaborate burials become large rooms carved out in the rock, where they actually look like little chambers or homes, and here we see some elaborate paintings, and the rooms can be entirely decorated in frescos and much more elaborate kind of burial chambers are built within them for the bodies. In many cases, too, this is where we see some of the most Christian funerary arts starting to develop; whole scenes of the family of Jesus or images from gospel stories or stories from the Hebrew Scriptures or the symbol of the orans and the good shepherd. All of these reflect a burgeoning Christian iconographic tradition just as theyre on this cusp of breaking into the mainstream of Roman society. As we have seen, White mentions frescos on more elaborate curial chambers such as the orans and the Good Shepherd. Here is an illustration of the Orans, from the Catacomb in Via Anapo, Rome, from the middle of the 3rd Century AD:

836

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 87: The Orans, praying figure from the catacombs360

This figure standing with arms raised in prayers represents the pious soul (Wybrew 22). What follows is a fresco of the Good Shepherd, also dated mid third century:

Illustration 88: The Good Shepherd361

This fresco of the image of Christ as the Good Shepherd was found on the ceiling of the Vault of Lucina in the Catacomb of Callixtus in Rome. It was based on several biblical passages, including the 23rd Psalm and sayings of Jesus (Good Shepherd). It is an expression of philanthropy and represents Christ (Wybrew 22). The Good Shepherd was also in the baptistery of the church-house of Dura Europos. It was indeed a especially popular image in the early Christian centuries. Besides these images, there were scenes from the Old and the New Testament such as Jonah and the whale, Noah and the Ark,

360 361

See: <http://www.akg-images.co.uk/_customer/london/collections/pirozzi.html>. See: <http://www.akg-images.co.uk/_customer/london/collections/pirozzi.html>.

837

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Daniel in the lions den, Abraham and Isaac, the raising of Lazarus, and the adoration of the Magi (Wybrew 22). In the so called Cubicles of the Sacraments, also in the Catacombs of Saint Callixtus, dated to the beginning of the third century, we can find frescos of a symbolic character, with scenes of baptism and the Eucharist. Here, too, we find the oldest representation of baptism: the person administering it places his right hand on the head of another being baptized immersed in water (Stefania Falasca, The Catacombs of Saint Callixtus in Rome). We can also see the prophet Jonah, a symbol of the resurrection (The Catacombs of Saint Callixtus):

Illustration 89: The cubicle of the sacraments362

Wybrew notes that there are no instances from the third century of Christian decoration of the eucharistic hall, yet the frescos found in the catacombs and in the church-house of Dura Europos make clear, that iconography which was later to play so important part in the decoration of Christian churches, especially in the Byzantine tradition, had its roots in the Hellenistic art of the third century, adapted to express fundamental Christian themes (23). As Ouspensky also says: The art of the catacombs is above all an art that teaches faith. Most its subjects, symbolism as well as direct,

362

See: <www.catacombe.roma.it>.

838

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

corresponds to sacred texts: those of the Old Testament and of the New, as well as liturgical and patristic texts (66). Quenot states that Christian artists also chose for their models sources of pagan imagery of their day. As an illustration, philosophers enjoyed great esteem; thus, numerous works portrait sages seated in a semicircle or solitary teaching others. The icon of Pentecost portraits the Apostles seating in a semicircle, representing the unity of the Church. Another example of this is Hagia Sophia, which was dedicated to Wisdom. The church is the custodian of Wisdom, and Christ as its Master and its Supreme Philosopher. Quenot remarks that Pagan symbols revived and transformed by Christians abound: seasons announce the Resurrection; a ship depicts prosperity and also the church; the peacock, the dove, the palm tress, and gardens symbolize Paradise. Yet Christians did not just limit themselves to adapting symbols that already existed; they invented new ones, especially from the second century onward. The adoration of the Wise Men represented the admission of pagans to the faith; the multiplication of breads the eucharistic banquet; the vine symbolized the mystery of Gods grace for the baptized and so forth. (18) During the first three centuries, the cross often was represented by an anchor. In the second century, the fish represented the most important symbol for Christians. It forms an acrostic abbreviating the dictum Iesous Christos Theou Yio Soter (Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour). In The Paedagogus, Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 215) mentions some of these symbols: And let our seals be either a dove, or a fish, or a ship scudding before the wind, or a musical lyre, which Polycrates used, or a ships anchor, which Seleucus got engraved as a device; and if there be one fishing, he will remember the apostle, and the children drawn out of the water. For we are not to delineate the faces of idols, we who are prohibited to cleave to them; nor a sword, nor a bow, following as we do, peace; nor drinking-cups, being temperate. (Book III, Chap. 11) Quenot asserts that the thematic and stylistic unity of Christian symbolism from this era is astonishing. It serves well to emphasize the close relationship that existed between the local churches of Italy, North Africa, Spain, and Asia Minor (20).

839

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Additionally, Wybrew talks about another aspect of classical art, namely portraiture, which was to become of great importance in Orthodox tradition, both in private and public worship. It is possible, he adds, that painting portraits began very early on. He mentions a portrait of the Apostle John that, Lycomedes, a disciple of him, had commissioned from an artist friend (23). Additionally, in the The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus, we hear of a fourth century miraculous statue of Christ, also mentioned by Eusebius: Having heard that at Csarea Philippi, otherwise called Paneas, a city of Phnicia, there was a celebrated statue of Christ which had been erected by a woman whom the Lord had cured of a flow of blood, Julian (360-363 A.D.) commanded it to be taken down and a statue of himself erected in its place; but a violent fire from heaven fell upon it and broke off the parts contiguous to the breast; the head and neck were thrown prostrate, and it was transfixed to the ground with the face downwards at the point where the fracture of the bust was; and it has stood in that fashion from that day until now, full of the rust of the lightning. The statue of Christ was dragged around the city and mutilated by the pagans; but the Christians recovered the fragments, and deposited the statue in the church in which it is still preserved. Eusebius relates that at the base of this statue grew an herb which was unknown to the physicians and empirics, but was efficacious in the cure of all disorders. It does not appear a matter of astonishment to me, that, after God had vouchsafed to dwell with men, he should condescend to bestow benefits upon them. (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Ser. II, Vol. II, Book 5, Chap. 21) Alexander Nagel and Christopher S. Wood, in Interventions: toward a new model of Renaissance anachronism Interventions, refers to this statue and how it entered the Golden Legend: But this statue is presented as an ancient work. Of course, no such artifact had survived from Early Christian times. The literary tradition, however, mentions an ancient bronze statue of Christ. The early-fourth-century church historian Eusebius had described a bronze statue group in Paneas (present-day Baniyas, north of the Sea of Galilee) that showed a woman kneeling in supplication before a man with a cloak draped over his shoulder and with his arm outstretched to her. Eusebiuss account was retold and embroidered throughout the Middle Ages and in the thirteenth century made it into the pages of the Golden Legend, one of the most widely read devotional texts of the later Middle Ages. In the Golden Legend the two-figure group had become a single statue of Christ.

840

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

The persecutions, which had begun under Nero, and continued at intermittent periods, came to and end with the Edict of Milan (313) and the proclamation of religious freedom by Emperor Constantine the Great. However, catacombs continued to be burial places for some more time. Stefania Falasca summarizes the history of the catacombs of Saint Callixtus after the fourth century: In the fourth century, the catacombs of Saint Callixtus were developed to a considerable degree. Faithful preferred this among the Churchs cemeteries for their repose alongside the tombs of the martyrs and in order to partake of their intercession. The practice of burying the dead in underground cemeteries continued until the early fifth century or until about the time of the sack of Rome by the Visigoth Alaric in 410. Between the fifth and ninth centuries and before many of the martyrs relics were translated to various churches in Rome, these catacombs became a sanctuary visited by thousands of pilgrims, according to the ancient medieval and the inscriptions conserved in the catacombs themselves. After this edict, Christian churches were being built throughout Rome and the whole Empire. As Hart tells us, from this edict to the iconoclastic crisis, beginning in the eighth century, in response to liturgical development, the low partition separating the sanctuary from the nave tended to project out into the nave. Hart mentions the findings of a Greek archaeologist, A.K. Orlando, who has reconstructed in drawings two such fourth century screens. He believed they existed, one in a church at Daphousiae in Locris and another at Olympia, both in Greece: The first is a three sided low carved wall with a simple opening for the entrance to the altar. In the second church the front partition stretches between two pillars, and has two smaller columns either side of the central opening, surmounted by an arch. The side walls are thick undecorated extensions of the pillars plinths (Hart). What follows is a picture of the church at Olympia.

841

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 90: Photo of the altar partition of a fourth century Christian church at Olympia363

In the Greek Fathers and in Greek Liturgies we find many references to the altar table. Trapeza, used by St. Paul as we have seen, was the favourite term for altar either used alone or with the addition of such reverential qualifying terms as iera, mystike. The Christian altar as thysiasterion, the word by which the Septuagint alludes to Noahs altar, is also used by many Fathers and historians, Hasset says. This term is used by Eusebius uses it, in his Church History, when describing the altar of the Great Church: Why need I now describe the skilful architectural arrangement and the surpassing beauty of each part, when the testimony of the eye renders instruction through the ear superfluous? For when he had thus completed the temple, he provided it with lofty thrones in honor of those who preside, and in addition with seats arranged in proper order throughout the whole building, and finally placed in the middle the holy of holies, the altar, and, that it might be inaccessible to the multitude, enclosed it with wooden lattice-work, accurately wrought with artistic carving, presenting a wonderful sight to the beholders. (Book 10, Chap. 4, 44) Hassett also explains that The earliest Christian altars were of wood, and identical in form with the ordinary house table. The tables represented in the Eucharistic frescoes of the catacombs enable us to obtain an idea of their appearance. He illustrates it with the fresco of the Fractio Panis (the breaking of bread), found in the Greek Chapel in the Catacomb of Saint Priscilla:

363

Taken by me on site (August 2007).

842

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 91: Fresco Fraction Panis (Greek Chapel)364

This fresco, dating from the first decades of the second century, shows seven persons seated on a semi-circular divan before a table of the same form. One of them is breaking the bread. According to Hassett, these tabular-shaped altars of wood continued in use till well on in the Middle Ages. In the catacombs we can also find the earliest stone altars. There existed a custom of celebrating the Eucharist on the tombs of the martyrs. This custom, Hasset explains, can be traced to the first quarter of the second century.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Activity What is Dura Europos? What frescos can be found there? What are the catacombs? What frescos can be found in them? When do we have the first Christian church buildings? In what parts of the catacombs did Christians gather for their worship services in time of persecutions? What are the tufa, the cubicula, and the arcosolium? What was the first representation of Christ to be found? Which frescos do we find in the catacombs? What kind of altar do we find in this period? Search Google (images) and find the icon of Pentecost. Make a copy; then, describe it.

Activity 172: House churches and Catacombs in the first three centuries

364

See: <http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/research/theology/ejournal/Issue2/Damien_Casey.htm>.

843

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH BUILDING IN THE BYZANTINE CHURCH (IV-XV CENTURIES) As in the previous chapter this period covers the development of the church building in the Byzantine Empire. This period extends from the fourth to the fifteenth century at the fall of the Byzantine Empire. The sections included here are: Early Byzantine period (324-842), which goes up to the end of the iconoclastic crisis (725842); Middle Byzantine Period (843-1261), and Late Byzantine Period (1262-1454). EARLY BYZANTINE PERIOD (324-842) As we have seen, before the Edict of Milan, Christians had shown an innate creativity to adapt homes to be consecrated as temples of worship to God and even to erect temples in spite of the difficulties and dangers they had to face. With the edict and the promotion of Christianity to the rank of state religion, church building started to flourish. There emerged a formal Christian architecture that reflected its new imperial status. Quenot describes this period: Christian art burst forth from the catacombs and replaced art themes of pagan inspiration. Just imagine the upheaval that took place! Christians recovered what had been confiscated from them. Thereafter, artists were commissioned and worked openly for the new religion. The decorative arts, architecture, but mainly painting, all collaborated both in edifying believers and convincing others. (20) New churches were freely constructed in Rome and throughout the empire. Constantine commanded the construction of many beautiful churches, especially in Constantinople, which he dedicated in 330 as the new capital of the Roman Empire. Architects did not model the new churches on pagan temples, seen as old-fashioned in the 4th century, but, rather, on the secular building type of pragmatic features: the double apse basilica (Greek: royal house). It was a large rectangle having the span of its roof held by two rows of pillars running along the length of the building:

844

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 92: Basilica Ulpiae (Rome)365

Illustration 93: Drawing of the interior of the Basilica Ulpiae (Rome)366

As Edward Foley explains, in From Age to Age: How Christians Have Celebrated the Eucharist, architects adapted the secular basilica for Christian use by removing the west apse and placing the entrance to the straight west end:

See:<http://web.educastur.princast.es/proyectos/jimena/pj_leontinaai/arte/webimarte2/WEBIMAG/RO MA/basil.htm>. 366 See:<http://web.educastur.princast.es/proyectos/jimena/pj_leontinaai/arte/webimarte2/WEBIMAG /ROMA/basil.htm>.

365

845

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 94: Early Christian rectangular church367

Aidan Hart, in Some Principles of Orthodox Church Architecture explains its origin: The basilica was basically adopted with little adaptation from a Roman secular building type, used variously for such purposes as law court, council chamber, covered market and gymnasium. The similarity of secular and liturgical basilica is such that it is sometimes difficult for archaeologists to tell them apart. The word basilica means royal, and so by extension the building was a city building. This fitted in with the Churchs sense of itself being the City of God. In any case, the basilica was the only building of the pagan Roman Empire which was suitable for large Christian assemblies, since the interiors of pagan temples were designed only for the priests and the sacrifices, not for the worshipping public. In basilicas, the bishop would sit in the apse in the place where the civil authority would be seated in places of secular use. This building, as Foley observes, was perfectly suited for processions and demanded from the Church a higher level of order (48).368 The fact that a secular building was used for Christian worship, demonstrates, for Williams and Anstall, in Orthodox Worship: A Living Continuity with the Synagogue, the Temple and the Early Church, as already suggested, that the building in

367 368

See Williams and Anstall, 49. Qtd. in Programming Statement Draft work in progress.

846

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

and of itself was not the most important aspect of the temple. Nevertheless, Williams and Anstall see the limitations of the basilica, The basilica had inherent limitations. First, the two rows of columns divide the inner space of the Church into three sections, and so the assembly is divided into three sections. Only the center portion could house a united congregation; the result was three congregations. In larger basilicas with subdivisions, the result could be five separate groupings. In addition, the length of the basilica resulted in a further separation due to the distance from the rear to the altar. (50) and how the early Byzantine architects solved this problem: For the early Byzantine architects, beginning under Constantine, these problems were solved by developing a building where everything was there for its own purpose. The most dramatic aspect of this architectural development was replacing the rectangle with a square building with no columns, but with a dome atop it to cover the span. The bema with the ark, the lectern, and bishops seat could be centrally located with no hindrance to the believers assembling around the bishops and readers for the synaxis. The assembly would then open for the procession of the holy gifts to the altar and rearrange itself so as to be gathered around the altar. It is easy to see from the diagram below how this architectural arrangement would enhance worship. (50) The resultant shape, as can be seen from the illustration, was a central square plan:

Illustration 95: Byzantine adaptation of a rectangular church plan

An example of such a church is Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom). It was rebuilt by Emperor Justinian in the sixth century and had the form of a square. With Hagia Sophia the basilicas classic rectangle was widened to a square and topped with an immense flattened dome.

847

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

However, nothing remains of the first Hagia Sophia, founded by Constantine the Great in the fourth century and completed by his son Constantius II (337-361). It was first named The Great Church, as it was the largest church in Constantinople. Fourth century theologians gave it its current name, Hagia Sophia, symbolizing the second divine attribute of the Holy Trinity. It is believed originally to have been erected over the ruins of an ancient temple to Apollo, on a hill overlooking the Sea of Marmara. Socrates Scholasticus (Constantinople, 379-450), in Church History, attributes the completion of the Great Church in 360 to Constantius II (337-361), son of Constantine the Great: About this period the emperor built the great church called Sophia, adjoining to that named Irene, which being originally of small dimensions, the emperors father had considerably enlarged and adorned. In the present day both are seen within one enclosure, and have but one appellation (Book II. Chap 17). Seemingly, the Church was dedicated on 15 February 360. The building was built with a timber roof, like its contemporary religious edifices, on an oblong basilica. This first church burned down on June 20, 404 in a riot when John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, was sent to exile for his criticism of the Empress Eudoxia, wife of Emperor Arcadius (395-408). Although nothing remains of this first church, we can assume that a low altar partition must have separated the sanctuary from the nave, similar to the one we have seen in Olympia or the one found in the Balkan Peninsula on the island of Lesbos, in Lochrida, also from the fourth century. What follows is a reconstruction:

848

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 96: Altar partition of 4th century Lochrida Basilica369

In 415, Emperor Theodosius II (408-450) rebuilt Hagia Sophia and it was inaugurated again on October 10, 415. This newly restored Hagia Sophia was to stand intact for slightly more than a century. Constantine also built other churches in Constantinople such as the destroyed Church of the Holy Apostles and the Church of Hagia Irene, to which Hagia Sophia was originally adjoined, as we have seen. The church of the Holy Apostles at Constantinople, of about the same size as Hagia Sophia, was originally erected by Constantine in 333 and completed by Constantius II, who procured the relics of St. Andrew, Luke, and Timothy to be enshrined in the church. What follows is a drawing illustrating it:

369

See: <http://liternet.bg/publish9/mkoeva/nasledstvo/ikonostas_en.htm>.

849

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 97: The Church of the Holy Apostles at Constantinople370

The church had the form of a Greek cross,371 with five domes, one at the crossing and another on each of the arms of the cross:

Illustration 98: Plan view of the Church of the Holy Apostles372

370

371

See: <http://members.fortunecity.com/fstav1/monaster.html>. The church plan in the form of a Greek cross had a square as a central mass and four arms of equal length.

850

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

The historian Eusebius of Caesarea describes Constantines building of this church in honor of the Apostles: After this he proceeded to erect a church in memory of the apostles, in the city which bears his name. This building he carried to a vast height, and brilliantly decorated by encasing it from the foundation to the roof with marble slabs of various colors. He also formed the inner roof of finely fretted work, and overlaid it throughout with gold. The external covering, which protected the building from the rain, was of brass instead of tiles; and this too was splendidly and profusely adorned with gold, and reflected the suns rays with a brilliancy which dazzled the distant beholder. The dome was entirely encompassed by a finely carved tracery, wrought in brass and gold. (Eclessiastical History, Chap. 58) He continues, describing the church as follows: Such was the magnificence with which the emperor was pleased to beautify this church. The building was surrounded by an open area of great extent, the four sides of which were terminated by porticos which enclosed the area and the church itself. Adjoining these porticos were ranges of stately chambers, with baths and promenades, and besides many apartments adapted to the use of those who had charge of the place. (Chap. 59) Eusebius adds that Constantine also erected his own mausoleum in this Church. All these edifices the emperor consecrated with the desire of perpetuating the memory of the apostles of our Saviour. He had, however, another object in erecting this building: an object at first unknown, but which afterwards became evident to all. He had in fact made choice of this spot in the prospect of his own death, anticipating with extraordinary fervor of faith that his body would share their title with the apostles themselves, and that he should thus even after death become the subject, with them, of the devotions which should be performed to their honor in this place. He accordingly caused twelve coffins to be set up in this church, like sacred pillars in honor and memory of the apostolic number, in the center of which his own was placed, having six of theirs on either side of it. Thus, as I said, he had provided with prudent foresight an honorable restingplace for his body after death, and, having long before secretly formed this resolution, he now consecrated this church to the apostles, believing that this tribute to their memory would be of no small advantage to his own soul. Nor did God disappoint him of that which he so ardently expected and desired. For after he had completed the first services of the feast of Easter, and had passed this sacred day of our Lord in a manner which made it an occasion of joy and gladness to himself and to all; the God through whose aid he performed all these acts, and whose zealous servant he continued to be even to the end of life, was pleased at a happy time to translate him to a better life. (Chap. 60)

372

See: <http://homepage.mac.com/paulstephenson/trans/mesarites.html>.

851

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

There are other manuscripts which have preserved the text of an epigram placed over the main gate to the church, recording the deaths of the Twelve Apostles: Mark is put to death by the people of Alexandria. The great sleep of life Matthew sleeps. Rome sees Paul die by the sword. Philip is given what was given Peter. Bartholomew suffers death on the cross. Simon too on the cross ends his life. In Rome vain Nero crucifies Peter. In life and death John lives. Luke died peacefully at the end. The men of Patras brutally crucify Andrew. A knife severs the life paths of James. Lances kill Thomas in India.373 Nicholas Mesarites (born c. 1163-4), who composed his Ekphrasis, or Description of the Church of the Holy Apostles, between 1198 and 1203, tells us a reference to it when talking about the mausoleum of Constantine: But let us, if you please, go off to this church which lies toward the east, so that we may look at the things in it, in order to admire and describe them- this church whose founder our discourse has already declared to be Constantius. 2. This whole church is domical and circular, and because of the rather extensive area of the plan, I suppose, it is divided up on all sides by numerous stoaed angles, for it was built for the reception of his fathers body and of his own and of the bodies of those who should rule after them. 3. To the east, then, and in first place the body of Constantine, who first ruled the Christian Empire, is laid to rest within this purple-hued sarcophagus as though on some purple-blooming royal couch he who was, after the twelve disciples, the thirteenth herald of the orthodox faith, and likewise the founder of this imperial city. (Chap. XXXIX, 1-3) Mesarites believes that Constantius, Constantines son, was also buried there. Before Hagia Sophia, Emperor Constantine also commissioned Hagia Irene in the 4th century. It reputedly stands on the site of a pre-Christian temple. In its current form, the church measures 100m x 32 m. It has the typical form of a Roman basilica, consisting of a nave and two aisles, divided by columns and pillars. It comprises a main space, a narthex, galleries, and an atrium. The dome is 15m wide and 35m high and has twenty windows (Byzantine Architecture).
373

Qtd. in Church of the Holy Apostles, Constantinople.

852

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 99: Church of Hagia Irene at Constantinople374

Wybrew tells us that after the Edict of Milan there seems to be no immediate flourishing of iconography (30). The first initiatives came from the imperial palace. Constantine had the Chi-Rho, the monogram of Christ, placed on his legions military standards and shields. Supposedly, in 312, Constantine had dreamed he had seen this monogram in the sky and had heard the words in hoc signo eris, meaning in this sign you will be the victor. He had won a great victory. This monogram derives from the first two letters of Christ in Greek (CRistos). This symbol was frequently found on the reverse of coins issued after Constantines victory:

.
Illustration 100: The monogram of Christ375

374 375

See: <www.answers.com>. See Chi Rho (Christogram).

853

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Using a formula employed in the antiquity for depicting gods, coins and medals were also issued with representations of the Emperor. The following illustration shows a commemorative coin issued on the consecration (deification) of the dead Constantine I, the only man in history to be both deified and canonized. The Emperor is depicted as ascending into a Christian heaven. He also bears the legend DV CONSTANTINVS (the god Constantine) (Constantine I the Great):

Illustration 101: Coin with Constantine I ascending into heaven376

As I commented in Part I, according to Byzantine philosophy, there was a strong bond between the Church and the State. The earthly state was a reflection of the divine Kingdom, and the basileus (emperor), who ruled by divine authority, was Christs representative on earth. Palace art had a decisive influence on the development of Christian iconography in the following centuries. Christ was no longer represented as a philosopher or doctor but mainly as the Master of the Universe enthroned as a basileus Also, bishops were able to promote images of Christ, which could be granted the same cult as the portraits of the basileus (Wybrew 31; Quenot 22). An example of this kind of representation is Christ Pantocrator (meaning Ruler of All, All Powerful, Lord of Hosts), often
376

See Constantine I the Great.

854

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

occupying the entire dome of a church over the altar and the central figure of iconostases. The Pantocrator, a central icon of the Eastern Orthodox Church, usually shows Jesus Christ seated, like an Emperor, on a throne. This is a detail of Christ Pantocrator (12rth century) from the dome of the Church of Martorana (Palermo):

Illustration 102: Christ Pantocrator (La Martorana)377

What follows is the oldest known Christ Pantocrator, which survived the period of destruction of images during the Iconoclastic disputes. It was produced in St. Catherines monastery (Sinai) in about 540:

377

See: <http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Haskins%20Lecture/LaMartoranaInterior.htm>.

855

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 103: Christ Pantocrator (Saint Catherines Monastery at Mount Sinai)378

We can see that this is a full frontal facial image of Christ. Wybrew states that From imperial art too came that rigidity of expression and immobility which characterized much later representation. They were held to be essential characteristics of the emperor and his officials, elevated as they were above ordinary human weakness and aided by divine grace (31). We can find representations of martyrs with a court dress or of Christ sitting enthroned with the Apostles at the last judgment as the tribunal sat at the law court (31). The Basilica of SantAgnese fuori le mura in Rome (Saint Agnes Outside the Walls) built over St. Agneses fourth century catacomb grave, shows a seventh century apses mosaic portraying St. Agnese (291-304) against a golden field, the sword of martyrdom at her feet.379 She is slim, young and appearing in her Byzantine court dress, embroidered with the phoenix:

378 379

See: <www.monasterygreetings.com>. Agnese, or Agnes, was a 12- or 13-year-old virgin martyr, who died under Emperor Diocletian.

856

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 104: Detail of the mosaic in the apse of the Basilica of SantAgnese fuori le mura380

Illustration 105: Sant Agnese, martyr381

St. Basil the Great writing in this period says that as the Word of the Holy Scripture is an image, so the image is also a word: By depicting the divine, we are not making ourselves similar to idolaters; for it is not the material symbol that we are worshipping, but the Creator, Who became corporeal for our sake and assumed our body in order that through it He might save mankind. We also venerate the material objects through which our salvation is effected - the blessed wood of the Cross, the Holy Gospel, Holy Relics of Saints, and, above all, the Most-Pure Body and Blood of Christ, which have grace-bestowing properties and Divine Power.382

See: <http://www.accesscom.com/~arz/travels/rome_2005/mausoleum.html>. On each side, stand Pope Symmachus, who restored Constantias first church, and Honorius I. 381 See: <http://www.florin.ms/holmhurst2.html>. 382 Qtd. in Icons and Their History.

380

857

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Leonid Ouspensky, in the Theology of the Icon, asserts that there occurred a rapid progress in the definition of rites and in the decoration of churches. Eusebius describes this in the following manner, referring to the Peace of the Church and the restoration of churches: And finally a bright and splendid day, overshadowed by no cloud, illuminated with beams of heavenly light the churches of Christ throughout the entire world. And not even those without our communion were prevented from sharing in the same blessings, or at least from coming under their influence and enjoying a part of the benefits bestowed upon us by God. All men, then, were freed from the oppression of the tyrants, and being released from the former ills, one in one way and another in another acknowledged the defender of the pious to be the only true God. And we especially who placed our hopes in the Christ of God had unspeakable gladness, and a certain inspired joy bloomed for all of us, when we saw every place which shortly before had been desolated by the impieties of the tyrants reviving as if from a long and deathfraught pestilence, and temples again rising from their foundations to an immense height, and receiving a splendor far greater than that of the old ones which had been destroyed. (Book 10, chap. 1-2) Quenot writes that the fact that emperors themselves joined Christianity led to a mass of new converts. They visited and attended the services of the many beautifully decorated churches and were often able to acquire relics, objects having been in contact with the bodies of saints, so that when the Church accepted the practice of the making of religious images by the end of the fourth century, it only served to confirm a widespread practice. Certainly these images fostered the remembrance of those they represented, in spite of the strong opposition from theologian bishops. (22) As Ouspensky tells us, the symbols employed in the first centuries were incomprehensible to these new converts and large historical cycles of monumental painting portraying the events of the Old and the New Testament appeared in churches in the fourth and the fifth centuries (81). He adds that it is also in this period that the dates of most of the major feasts were set, along with their iconographic schemes for them, which it are still followed in the Orthodox Church today (81). Wybrew also comments that the basilican churches of the fifth century began to be decorated in accordance to a consistent scheme with sequences of both the New

858

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Testament and Old Testament scenes on the walls of the nave. Besides, decorative patterns filled any space between them. Additionally, conventional designs of the mother of God, of Christ Pantocrator, or the saint in whose honour the church was dedicated, filled the vaults. While mosaic covered the upper part, rich marble slabs covered the lower part of the walls and pillars. The veining of the marble slabs contributed enormously to their decorative value (74). In the fifth century, in Constantinople, the church building was the setting in which both the Liturgy of St. Basil and that of St. Chrysostom were officiated. If it the preceding centuries the martyrs were the pillars of the Church, in this period, the pillars were all the theologians and ascetic saints. It was the time of great saints such as St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. John Chrysostom, St. Gregory Nyssa, St. Anthony the Great, St. Macarius of Egypt, and many others. One of them, St. Basil, says on the use of images: What the word transmits through the ear, the painting silently shows through the image, and by these two means, mutually accompanying one another ... we receive knowledge of one and the same thing (Homily on the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste).383 In this quote, Basil also seems to refer to the didactic goal of painting, an important goal of the Church in these earlier centuries. Ouspensky notes that the teaching of the Church as well as the living experience of the ascetics became the source that fed the sacred art and guided and inspired it. This art, he indicates, found it necessary, on the one hand, to transmit the truths that are formulated dogmatically, and on the other hand to communicate the living experience of these truthsthe spiritual experience of the saints, the living Christianity in which dogma and life are one (83). Ouspensky also states that For the Church in its own
383

Qtd. in Holy Icons

859

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

domain, the spiritual, it was a question of possessing an art that would educate the Christian people in the same the liturgy did, that would convey to them dogmatic teaching, and sanctify them with the presence of the grace of the Holy Spirit (90). Moreover, as Hasset comments, from the fourth century on, the great veneration in which martyrs were held, caused two important changes regarding altars: The stone slab enclosing the martyrs grave suggested the stone altar, and the presence of the martyrs relics beneath the altar was responsible for the tomblike under-structure known as the confessio. In the fourth century, St. John Chrysostom attests the use of the stone altar: For this altar is admirable because of the sacrifice that is laid upon it: but that, the merciful mans, not only on this account, but also because it is even composed of the very sacrifice which makes the other to be admired. Again, this is but a stone by nature; but become holy because it receives Christs Body: but that is holy because it is itself Christ Body. (Homily 20, II Corinthians) Gregory Nazianzus, in On the Baptism of Christ, also attest to the use of stone altars in the fourth century: For this holy altar, too, by which I stand, is stone, ordinary in its nature, nowise different from the other slabs of stone that build our houses and adorn our pavements; ... Yet, although there were restrictions in the West to the use of wooden altar, this was not so in the East, which continues to use wood, as well as stone or even metal (Hassett). In 532, Justinian I (527-565), last of the great Roman emperors, rebuilt the Great Church, which was consumed in flames a second time by a rampaging mob at the time of Monophysite heretics. Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea (c. 500 - c. 565), in On Buildings (De Aedificiis) describes the so called Nika Riot as follows: Some men of the common herd, all the rubbish of the city, once rose up against the Emperor Justinian in Byzantium, when they brought about the rising called the Nika Insurrection. ... And by way of showing that it was not against the Emperor alone that they had taken up arms, but no less against God himself ... they had the audacity to set fire to the Church of the Christians, which the people

860

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

of Byzantium call Sophia. ... So the whole church at that time lay a charred mass of ruins.384 We can assume that no decoration survived from the Great Church. In History of the Wars, Procopius narrates how Emperor Justinian ordered the construction of the new basilica, choosing the architect Anthemius of Tralles for such endeavour: The Emperor, disregarding all questions of expense, eagerly pressed on to begin the work of construction, and began to gather all the artisans from the whole world. And Anthemius of Tralles, the most learned man in the skilled craft which is known as the art of building, not only of all his contemporaries, but also when compared with those who had lived long before him, ministered to the Emperors enthusiasm, duly regulating the tasks of the various artisans, and preparing in advance designs of the future construction. (De Aedificiis)385 The construction work lasted from 532 to 537. Measuring 220 feet by 250 feet along its main floor, the new Hagia Sophia was laid out as a rectangle, at the center of which was a square.

Illustration 106: Plan view of Hagia Sophia386

Procopius, in this same work, depicts Hagia Sophia as being of indescribable beauty:

384 385

Qtd. in Hagia Sophia (2). Qtd. in Hagia Sophia (2). 386 See: <https://oncourse.iu.edu/access/content/user/leach/www/c414/constant.html>.

861

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

[The Church] is distinguished by indescribable beauty, excelling both in its size, and in the harmony of its measures, having no part excessive and none deficient; being more magnificent than ordinary buildings, and much more elegant than those which are not of so just a proportion. The church is singularly full of light and sunshine; you would declare that the place is not lighted by the sun from without, but that the rays are produced within itself, such an abundance of light is poured into this church....387 He continues, describing the construction as follows: Now above the arches is raised a circular building of a curved form through which the light of day first shines; for the building, which I imagine overtops the whole country, has small openings left on purpose, so that the places where these intervals occur may serve for the light to come through. Thus far I imagine the building is not incapable of being described, even by a weak and feeble tongue. As the arches are arranged in a quadrangular figure, the stone-work between them takes the shape of a triangle, the lower angle of each triangle, being compressed where the arches unite, is slender, while the upper part becomes wider as it rises in the space between them, and ends against the circle which rests upon them, forming there its remaining angles. Referring to the dome, Procopius, says: A spherical-shaped dome standing upon this circle makes it exceedingly beautiful; from the lightness of the building, it does not appear to rest upon a solid foundation, but to cover the place beneath as though it were suspended from heaven by the fabled golden chain. All these parts surprisingly joined to one another in the air, suspended one from another, and resting only on that which is next to them, form the work into one admirably harmonious whole, which spectators do not dwell upon for long in the mass, as each individual part attracts the eye to itself. The church was dedicated on 27 December 537. Sengul G. Aydingun, in Hagia Sophia, describes the magnificent opening ceremony that took place: Justinian drove up to the church in his victory chariot, and was welcomed in the atrium by Patriarch Menas.388 The two men entered the church hand in hand. Justinian was so impressed by its splendour, that he exclaimed, Thanks be to God for blessing me with the good fortune of constructing such a place of worship. Quenot tells us that Hagia Sophia, as well as other churches in Constantinople, Jerusalem, Ravenna and elsewhere, witness to the genius and intense spirituality of that era (22).
See Bibliography for some passages of Procopius De Aedificiis. Menas (or Mennas) was appointed by Justinian I as patriarch of Constantinople in the 536. He continued until the year 552.
388 387

862

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Unfortunately several earthquakes damaged the Hagia Sophia. In 553, one weakened the floating roof and, in 557, a second earthquake split the supporting arch, causing the collapse in 558 of the arch and dome. In 563 a new dome was constructed and the Hagia Sophia was restored. An officer in the imperial household of the Byzantine emperor Justinian, Paul the Silentiary389 (d. Constantinople, 575-580), in Descriptio S. Sophiae, draws on the imagery of Hagia Sophia as a dome of Heaven, when it was reconstructed in 562 after its collapse in an earthquake: Above all rises into the immeasurable air the great helmet [of the dome], which, bending over, like the radiant heavens, embraces the church. And at the highest part, at the crown, was depicted the cross, the protector of the city. And wondrous it is to see how the dome gradually rises wide below, and growing less as it reaches higher. it does not however spring upwards to a sharp point, but is like the firmament which rests on air, though the dome is fixed on the strong backs of the arches....Everywhere the walls glitter with wondrous designs, the stone for which came from the quarries of sea girt Proconnesus. The marbles are cut and joined like painted patterns, and in stones formed into squares or eightsided figures the veins meet to form devices; and the stones show also the forms of living creatures.... Subsequent earthquakes in 869, in 989, in 1344, in 1766, and in 1894 also damaged the church, but every time it was restored (Hagia Sophia (1); (Hagia Sophia (2); St. Sophia; Hagia Sophia Mosque, Hagia Sophia Church; About the Great Church). What follows are illustrations of the current church building, which remains substantially the same as it was in Justinians time:

389

He was responsible for the silence in the imperial palace, hence his name.

863

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 107: Hagia Sophia390

Illustration 108: The Dome of Hagia Sophia391

In the article Iconostasis, taken from the Internet Encyclopaedia of Religion, we read: When Justinian constructed the great church, St. Sophia, in Constantinople, he adorned it with twelve high columns (in memory of the twelve Apostles) in order to make the barrier or chancel, and over the tops of these columns he placed an architrave which ran the entire width of the sanctuary. On this architrave or crossbeam large disks or shields were placed containing the pictures of the saints, and this arrangement was called templon (templum), either from its fancied resemblance to the front of the old temples or as expressing the Christian idea of the shrine where God was worshipped. Hagia Sophia became a matchless model of the new type of Christian Church, and also provided the pattern of the liturgical office, which was adopted throughout the Orthodox world. This adoption was generally spontaneous, and it was based upon the
The central dome is 102 feet in diameter and 184 feet in height. Arches at the east and west are buttressed by half-domes. Final domes were completed in 563. See: <www.byzantines.net>. 391 See: <www.answers.com>.
390

864

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

moral and cultural prestige of the imperial capital (A History of the Orthodox Church: The Church of Imperial Byzantium). Meyendorff states that The Wisdom of God, or Hagia Sophia, remained for centuries the greatest religious office in Christendom. Serving as a cathedral for the archbishop of New Rome, the ecumenical patriarch, it provoked amazement in the whole world and had a great aesthetic and, therefore, missionary impact (Byzantine Theology 115). As already mentioned, Prince Vladimirs choosing of Eastern Orthodoxy, in the tenth century, as the faith of his people over Roman Catholicism, Islam, and Judaism, attested to the impressive splendor of Constantinople and the cathedral of Hagia Sophia. Referring to both the liturgy and the building the envoys said that we cannot forget that beauty (Russian Primary Chronicle). Thus, Hagia Sophia was crucial in the adoption of Christianity by the Rus. Ware notes that in the year 612 there were in the staff of Hagia Sophia 80 priests, 150 deacons, 40 deaconesses, 70 subdeacons, 150 readers, 25 cantors, and 100 doorkeepers (265). This can give us an idea of the magnificence of the cathedral and its service. Yet, few mosaics have survived from Hagia Sophia due to earthquakes or the Iconoclast crisis, even though new mosaics replaced earlier ones in the 9th century after the period of Iconoclasm. At the churchs conversion into a mosque in the fifteenth century, the mosaics in Hagia Sophia as well as in other churches were covered with plaster. The New Hagia Sophia built by Justinian, Wybrew says, provided the architectural setting for a rite which during these centuries was steadily receiving additions to its prayers and other formulae, and whose ceremonial was steadily evolving (67). Emperor Justinian, who had an extensive program of church building, not only restored Hagia Sophia, but also other churches such as Hagia Irene and the Church of Holy Apostles. Hagia Irene was also burned down during the Nike revolt in 532, and it

865

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

was restored by Justinian in 548. As it happened to Hagia Sophia, Hagia Irene was later heavily damaged by an earthquake in the year 740 and was rebuilt by Constantine V (741-775). It was enlarged during the eleventh and the twelfth century (Byzantine Architecture). Furthermore, two centuries after its completion, Emperor Justinian completely rebuilt the Church of the Holy Apostles and consecrated it on June 28, 550. Yet, in 1461 Mehmet II demolished it and built a mosque on the site (The Christian East, Church of the Holy Apostles, Byzantine Architecture). The sixth and seventh centuries are a continuation of the decoration started in the previous centuries maintaining influence from court art and narrative sequences of the New Testament and the Old Testament passages. In Ravenna, Italy, we can see some very well preserved mosaic showing the typical features of this period. This city was reincorporated into the Eastern Roman Empire by the armies of Justinian in 540 and became the seat of the Byzantine government in Italy as well as the center of mosaic making. The basilican church of San Apollinare Nouvo at Ravenna (Italia) allows us to see some better preserved decorations from this century. The church was first built sometime before 526, when it was Arian Christian (under the Ostrogothic kings) and the Ostrogothic mosaics were more inclined to treat Christ naturalistically and accommodate him within a Roman imperial framework (Ravenna Mosaics). On the north side of the nave we can see a procession of the Magi moving from west to east to offering gifts to Christ the child enthroned with Mary:

866

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 109: North side of nave of San Apollinnare Nuovo at Ravenna392

On the south side of the nave a procession of 26 martyrs leaves the Palace of Theoderic and moves towards Christ the King, to offer him homage:

Illustration 110: South side of nave of San Apollinnare Nuovo at Ravenna393

Additionally the mosaics of the sanctuary of San Vitale394 also in Ravenna, dedicated in 548, provide us with a good illustration of the decoration of a sanctuary of the sixth century:

392 393

See: <http://www.paradoxplace.com>. See <http://www.paradoxplace.com>. 394 St. Vitale was a second-century martyr.

867

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 111: Sanctuary of St. Vitale in Ravenna395

On the north wall is a well known representation of Justinian entering the church with Maximianius, the archbishop of Ravenna:

Illustration 112: Justinian with Maximianius396

On the south wall there is a representation of the Empress Theodora, both escorted by clergy and members of the court:

395 396

See: <http://www.execulink.com/~dtribe/blog/sanvitale.jpg>. See: <http://www2.students.sbc.edu/pegues00/seniorseminar/vitalemosaics.html>.

868

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 113: Empress Theodora and attendants397

Additionally, the church has a mosaic on a Pantocrator in the apse:

Illustration 114: Christ Pantocrator giving a martyrs crown to St. Vitalis398

The remaining spaces on the walls are filled with Old Testament scenes. The following mosaic shows Moses receiving the Law on Mt Sinai:

397 398

See: <http://www2.students.sbc.edu/pegues00/seniorseminar/vitalemosaics.html>. See: <http://www.ou.edu/class/ahi4263/byzhtml/p03-07.html>.

869

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 115: Moses receiving the Law399

Above the arch on the north wall, there is also a mosaic with a scene from the Old Testament showing Abraham and Sarah entertaining the three angels:

Illustration 116: Abraham and Sarah entertain the three angels400

The mosaics of this church were made under the authority of Justinian, whose general Belisarius took the city in 540. Artisans from Constantinople may have followed the army and had a hand in the mosaic work (Ravenna Mosaics) (Wybrew 74-75). In the Church of San Pietro in Vincoli (Rome, Italy), there is a mosaic, probably belonging to the year 682, showing St. Sebastian401 (d. 287) with a beard in court dress, with no trace of an arrow, also facing the beholder, as we have seen in other mosaics:

See: <http://www.hp.uab.edu/image_archive/ulj/uljc.html>. See: <http://www.jesuswalk.com/abraham/7_intercession.htm>. 401 St. Sebastian is said to have died under the persecution of Christians by the Roman emperor Diocletian in the 3rd century.
400

399

870

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 117: St. Sebastian martyr in a court dress402

Wybrew says that there was a tendency that came to predominate from the latter part of the sixth century onwards, to represent sacred figures facing the beholder. He says that this practice, which originated in the religious art of Eastern Hellenism, in northern Mesopotamia or in Iran, had a decisive influence on Byzantine religious art. Wybrew comments that its intention was to depict the figure as present to the beholder, who through the image could enter into a relationship with the person represented (75). He adds: It was from this tradition that the Byzantine theology of the icon was formed in the heart of the eighth-century iconoclastic controversy... As this tendency grew stronger, it gradually drove out the rich variety of Greek decorative designs and patterns. The fully frontal figure stood against a severely plain background, and the older narrative composition began to disappear from church decoration, though it was not after the iconoclastic controversy that a new, coherent pattern of decoration emerged. (75-76) The technique was not only used in the decoration of churches but also in the making of portable icons to be kept and venerate at homes. The Quinisext Council (691692) records the first official canon about the icon and its importance at that moment, a century earlier than the Iconoclast Controversy:

402

See <http://bode.diee.unica.it/~giua/SEBASTIAN/PICS/vincoli.jpg>.

871

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

In some pictures of the venerable icons, a lamb is painted to which the Precursor points his finger, which is received as a type of grace, indicating beforehand through the Law, our true Lamb, Christ our God. Embracing therefore the ancient types and shadows as symbols of the truth, and patterns given to the Church, we prefer grace and truth, receiving it as the fulfillment of the Law. In order therefore that hat which is perfect may be delineated to the eyes of all, at least in coloured expression, we decree that the figure in human form of the Lamb who taketh away the sin of the world, Christ our God, be henceforth exhibited in images, instead of the ancient lamb, so that all may understand by means of it the depths of the humiliation of the Word of God, and that we may recall to our memory his conversation in the flesh, his passion and salutary death, and his redemption which was wrought for the whole world. (Canon 82) The canon decreed artists no longer to represent Christ as the ancient lamb, but rather to paint His humanity in order to manifest his incarnation and redeeming of the world. Ouspensky notes that in spite of the already mentioned first image of Christ during his own lifetime and the narrative sequences of the Old and the New Testament, in the seventh century there were symbolic representations of the human form of Christ. This fact made it necessary for the council to deal with the depiction of Christ as the faithful had to be guided to the position adopted by the Church. Ouspensky also remarks the importance of this canon 82: After having prescribed the use of the direct image, Canon 82 formulates the dogmatic basis for this usage, and this is precisely where the essential value of this canon lies. For the first time, a conciliar decision formulates the link between the icon and the dogma of the Incarnation, the life of Christ in the flesh. This christological basis of the icon will be greatly developed by the defenders of icons during the iconoclastic period. (95) This Council also marks the end, Ouspensky continues, of the dogmatic struggle of the Church in defense of the two natures in Christ, His humanity and his Divinity (98). For Quenot it is more appropriate to use the word icon from the beginning of the eight century. It was a moment when sacred images became an object of veneration for the entire church. He says that this was a moment when fervor sometime bordered on superstition, to the point that the icon of a deceased saint would become the godparent of a newly baptized person (26). This and many misunderstandings and other abusive practices (such as that of placing the eucharistic bread before eating it on 872

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

an icon or some arbitrary depiction of Christ) led to an iconoclastic reaction.403 It was sporadic up to the eighth century, but in full swing around 730, when the Emperor Leo III promulgated an edict, ordering the removal and destruction of all holy icons from churches and privates homes. He rejected any representation of Christ and His saints. This edict had consequences for the Byzantine Empire; it not only brought divisions in society, but also harm relations with Rome. The Council of 754 at Hieireia, convened by Constantine V with Iconoclastic clergymen, agreed to a formal condemnation of the cult. Regarding the depiction of Christ, the emperor and the Council held that the practice was beyond the accepted double nature of Christ and emphasized instead His human form. For the iconoclasts, however, Christs divinity absorbed His humanity. The veneration of icons was not only akin to paganism but it was also a heresy. For the iconoclasts the only permissible representation of the humanity of Christ was the bread and wine of the Eucharist. But as Ouspensky explains Iconoclasm, both in its teaching and practices, undermined the saving mission of the Church at its foundation. In theory, it did not deny the dogma of the Incarnation. On the contrary, the iconoclasts justified their hatred of the icon by claiming to be profoundly faithful to this dogma. But in reality, the opposite happened; by denying the human image of God, they consequently denied the sanctification of matter in general. They disavowed all human holiness and even denied the very possibility of sanctification, the deification of man. In other words, by refusing to accept the consequences of the Incarnationthe sanctification of the visible, material worldiconoclasm undermined the entire economy of salvation. (146) In this century, John of Damascus, in On the Divine Images defended the use of images in this way: In former times God, who is without form or body, could never be depicted. But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see. I do not worship matter; I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter; who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God. How could God be born out of
403

See Part I for a more extended analysis of the Iconoclast Controversy.

873

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

things which have no existence in themselves? Gods body is God because it is joined to His person by a union which shall never pass away. The divine nature remains the same; the flesh created in time is quickened by a reason-endowed soul. In this same work, as did Basil, Damascus also emphasized the pedagogic nature of the image for the illiterate: We use all our senses to produce worthy images of Him, and we sanctify the noblest of the senses, which is that of sight. For just as words edify the ear, so also the image stimulates the eye. What the book is to the literate, the image is to the illiterate. Just as words speak to the ear, so the image speaks to the sight; it brings us understanding. ((I.16) In 787, the Seventh Council of Nicaeathe Seventh Ecumenical Council reaffirmed the official dogmas of the church and condemned as heresy the Iconoclastic positions. Thus the use of icons returned. Iconoclasm revived in the early part of the ninth century, but it was again defeated in 843. It meant the triumph of Orthodoxy over all the heresies. Yet, it was due to this massive destruction of icons that so few from the centuries before the iconoclast crisis remain in Constantinople. To find them one must go to places quite a distance from Constantinople: Greek and Coptic monasteries in Egypt, St. Catherines monastery on Mount Sinai, Rome, and also fourth century Christian Georgia (Wybrew 104; Quenot 26-27; Dionysios Hatzopoulos). During the early seventh century, the liturgy still preserved its early simplicity of structure, although secondary elements were being added to the actions and prayers which made up the primary core of the rite, as the Codex Barberini of the eighth or early ninth century shows (Wybrew 103). Hart says that in response to liturgical developments, from Church Peace in the fourth century until the iconoclastic period, the low chancel barrier that divided sanctuary and nave tended to project out into the nave, thus becoming three sided. As time passed, further columns tended to be added to the wall. Also an architrave was placed on top. What follows is a drawing of an early iconostasis, made of columns and with an architrave.

874

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 118: Drawing of an early iconostasis404

The Eastern Church eventually imitated this type of open iconostasis, until the fifteenth century when it became high and with several tiers, preventing the faithful from seeing the sanctuary. Activity 1. What was the shape of the earliest church temples in the Byzantine Period? Why? 2. What was the next development in the shape of church? Why? 3. What kind of iconostasis may Hagia Sophia have? 4. Which other churches besides Hagia Sophia did Constantine found? What shapes did the have? 5. Briefly describe Christian art in the fourth and the fifth centuries 6. Briefly describe the development of church decoration from the sixth century to the iconoclast period. Give examples 7. List the arguments regarding icons of iconoclasts and iconodules. 8. What is the position of the Orthodox Church regarding icons?
Activity 173: Church building and church decoration in Early Byzantine Period (324-842)

THE MIDDLE BYZANTINE PERIOD (8431261) This period runs from the end of the Iconoclastic controversy in 843 to 1261 when the Byzantines recaptured Constantinople from the crusaders. In this period there are some changes in the perception of church decoration as well as in the shape of the

See: <http://thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/2006/05/on-rood-screens-and-iconostasesquick.html>.

404

875

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

church building. Wybrew delineates some basic principles governing the development of iconography after the victory of those in favor of icons: The image must first be made so as to make clear its identity of meaning with its prototype: persons and events must be clearly recognizable. Not only were they depicted in accordance with fixed rules, but they were identified by a title. This enables worshippers to relate to the image, which had further to be represented frontally, so that there could be a real meeting between the image and its prototype, and the beholder. ... Finally, each image had to occupy its proper place in the hierarchical order of things: first Christ, then his mother, the angels and saints in their due order of precedence. (106) As Wybrew notices, the design of the Church was a reflection of its symbolism and provided the most suitable framework from the hierarchical arrangement of the images it needed to contain (107). Wybrew continues: From this moment on it is less that adequate to speak of church decoration, for the mosaic or frescoes applied to the building formed an integral part of the sacred space into which the worshipper entered for the celebration of the sacred mysteries. Church building, church decoration and the Liturgy coalesced into a complex of symbols, in which the divine mystery of Gods saving love was made present in order that the worshipper might be caught up into it and participate in the worship and life of heaven. (107) This apse mosaic, depicting the enthroned Virgin and Child, is one of the oldest of the surviving mosaics in Hagia Sophia. The mosaic dates from the second half of the 9th century, during the reign of Emperor Michael III (842-867) or Basil I (867-886). This figurative apse mosaic replaced a cross mosaic from the Iconoclast period.

876

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 119: Enthroned Virgin and Child405

Additionally, from the ninth century on, the basic form of the cruciform type, a cross floor plan over the center, tended to be set within a square floor plan, the areas between the arms having been filled in to make subsidiary spaces. The cross-in-square church was surmounted by a central cupola (Hart). John Yiannias, in Orthodox Art and Architecture describes it as follows: In the simplest terms, this kind of church is cubical on the first level and cruciform on the second, with a dome resting on a cylinder at the intersection of the arms of the cross, and smaller domes or vaults over the four corners of the cube, between the arms of the cross. Schematically this church type looks like this:

Illustration 120: Scheme of the cross-in square church406

405

See: <http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/hagia-sophia-photos/apse-mosaic-mary2-c-osseman. pg. tml>.

877

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

If we add three apses on the east and a narthex on the west, the ground plan looks something like this (Yiannias):

Illustration 121: Ground plan of the cross-in square church407

As we can see, the cross-in square church, the common mid-Byzantine style, is made up of three aisles, each one terminating in an apsidal chapel at the east, with a transverse nave, known as the exonarthex, at the west. The first cross-in square church of which we have record is the Nea Ekklesia or New Church. It was built in the imperial palace in Constantinople by Basileus I (867 886), who offered it to Christ, the immortal groom. It was destroyed by a lightning in 1490. Yet, we have descriptions of this church by Constantine VII, grandson of Basil I, in his Vita Basilii, and by Patriarch Photius in his preaching at its consecration in 881. Constantine comments: Its ceiling, which consists of five domes, shines with the gold and the images, beautiful as the stars. The exterior part, decorated with copper, looks like gold. The walls on each side are embellished with expensive marble slabs of colorful veins and the sanctuary is enriched with gold and silver, precious stones, and pearls408 (La iglesia monstica). Photius depicts it as follows: In the dome there is a figure of a man, representing Christ made of small coloured stones. You could say that he is looking down over the world, and considering its order and its government, so strikingly has the artist expressed, in shape and colour, the Creators providence for us. In the cross-shaped sections
406

See Yiannias. See Yiannias. 408 My own translation from Spanish.

407

878

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

around the dome of the cupola, a large number of angels is depicted, who crowd around the Lord to serve him. From the apse which rises from the sanctuary there shines forth the figure of the Virgin, who spreads her immaculate hands for us, and bestows on the Emperor good fortune and victory over his enemies. The apostles and martyrs, and the prophets and patriarchs, adorn the temple, which is filled with their images.409 Since there are no remains left, and we know that this cross-in square church had five domes, several reconstructions have been proposed (Nea Ekklesia).This is one of them:

Illustration 122: The New Church410

Admired by everyone, the Nea exerted a lasting influence, and we can find several churches in Constantinople, from 900 to 1200, with similarities in both the plan view as well as in style and details. On of them is the north side church of the Monastery of Fenari Isa (Constantine Lips Monastery Church), consecrated in 907 or 908, and dedicated, as a Greek table on the apse says, to the Virgin Mary. The Church is the earliest surviving example of the cross-in-square type with a dome carried on four columns, a plan commonly followed in the Middle Byzantine Period (Megaw 279).

409 410

Qtd. in Wybrew, 107. See Nea Ekklesia

879

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 123: Constantine Lips Monastery Church (909)411

Another cross-in square church is the Church of Myrelaion-Bodrum Camii, also in Constantinople, built about 920:

Illustration 124: Church of Myrelaion -Bodrum Camii412

By the eleventh century the middle Byzantine style of church had also spread from Constantinople to other Christian regions. An example can be found in Athens, in the church of Panaghia (Athens), founded around 1050 A.D. The church is also crossin-square type, of the complex four-column type, with three apses on the east side and a narthex on the west. A domed chapel dedicated to Aghia Varvara was added to the north side and the exonarthex, with three pitched roofs, was built slightly later in front of both churches:

411
412

See: <http://www.archmuseum.org/biyografi.asp?id=10070>. See: <http://www.thais.it/architettura/Bizantina/indici/INDICE3.htm#0046>.

880

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 125: Church of Panaghia Kapnikarea413

Also by the eleventh century, after a restrained period church decoration was more elaborate. The church was divided in three iconographic zones. The first one was the upper zone, representing heaven. It consisted of the cupolas, high vaults, and semidome of the apse and contained the images of Christ, the Virgin, and angels, respectively. The second was the upper parts of the vaults and the pendentives immediately below the cupolas. The cycles of the great festivals were represented here. Increasing in number as time went on, these representations depicted the different stages of the incarnation, passion and resurrection of Christ. The third was the lowest zone reserved for individual saints sorted in hierarchical order (Wybrew 131-133). Wybrew remarks: These iconographic developments linked the eleventh-century church still more closely than its ninth-century predecessor to the Liturgy celebrated. Still heaven on earth and the communion of saints, it was now also the representation of the saving work of God in Christ by which earth was reunited with heaven, the material universe transfigured, and mankind restored to the paradise from which it had fallen. Its correspondence with the Liturgy which made present, in its whole and in its parts, the saving mystery of Christ, cold not fail to be clear to the worshipper. (133) Examples of similar decorative patterns are the monastery church of Ossios Lukas and the church of Daphne (also Daphni) in Greece, and the church of the Nea Mony (New Monastery on the Island of Chios. Let us see the apse of the Church of Ossios Lukas, including its iconostasis:
413

See: <http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/>.

881

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 126: Apse and Iconostasis of the Church of Ossios Lukas414

From this Middle Byzantine Period is the following mosaic from Hagia Sophia. On it we can see Emperor John II Komnenos, the Virgin Mary and the Empress Irene (1118). As we have previously seen the emperor and his wife are depicted in close relationship with things heavenly.

Illustration 127: Madonna and Child between Empress Irene (right) and Emperor John II Comnenus415

During the eleventh and the twelfth centuries, as Quenot remarks, there was an intense cultural life in Byzantium that expressed itself in a flourishing of both art and
See: <http://web.mac.com/rlcastro/iWeb/topographies/EA90A263-4381-487B-9219-B804D063E4B8. html>. 415 See: <http://www.concise.britannica.com/ebc/art-16355/Madonna-and-Child-between-Empress-Ireneand-Emperor -John-II>.
414

882

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

theology. However, he adds, the Crusaders invasion in 1204, along with the looting and plundering of Constantinople, left the Empire without moral force and material resources. Painters in large numbers fled into exile throughout the East and the West, and to the Balkans, he tells us (29). It was a period of almost sixty years (1204-1261) of tyrannical misrule in Constantinople, which paved the way for the downfall of the Byzantine Empire. In the tenth century, the evangelization of the Rus promoted by Patriarch Photus, a devout iconodule, did not only bring the evangelization of pagan land, but also the building of churches imitating the Byzantine style and the diffusion of icons. Already at the end of the tenth century, we can find Russo-Byzantine workshops (Quenot 29). The Church of Hagia Sophia in Kiev, built in the eleventh century, is an example of the building of churches in this post-missionary period:

Illustration 128: Sketch of the reconstruction of the original exterior appearance of Hagia Sophia in Kyiv416

In Byzantine Architecture we read about the influence of Byzantine architecture in the Rus: From Kiev the Byzantine style of architecture soon spread throughout the principalities of Novgorod and Vladimir-Suzdal. The emphasis of the Byzantine church on the physical splendour of its edifices was a cardinal factor in determining the characteristics of Russian ecclesiastical architecture. Everything
416

See: <http://www.wumag.kiev.ua/index2.php?param=pgs20064/86>.

883

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

connected with the design and decoration of the new churches followed the Byzantine pattern; and the standard scheme of the Greek Churchthe cross inscribed in a rectangle and the dome supported on piers or on pendentives became the accepted type for Orthodox churches. The design and support of the central dome or cupola, together with the number and disposition of the subsidiary cupolas, remained for a long time the principal theme of Russian architecture. By the eleventh century, Wybrew comments, the Byzantine liturgy, the rite of the Great Church of Constantinople, can be rightly called Orthodox liturgy. It has become distinct from that of the West, and, made more and more uniform. It was displacing other local rites within the Empire and had spread to the new churches founded among the Slav people. From the 13th century dates this Byzantine mosaic of Christ Pantocrator from Hagia Sophia. It is a vestibule fragment depicting Christ holding a jewelled Gospel book:

Illustration 129: Vestibule mosaic of Hagia Sophia representing Christ417

Christ is surrounded by roundels portraying the Virgin Mary, the angel Gabriel, and a bearded emperor, believed to represent Leo VI asking for forgiveness for his four marriages (Byzantine Art). From the restoration of icons until the fall of Constantinople to the Crusaders, we can see icons of the Saviour, the Virgin, and John the Baptist upon the architrave.
417

See: <http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/d/images/deesis_hagiasophia_lg.jpg>.

884

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Instead of them, or sometimes as well as these icons, we can see images of the Saviour and the Virgin on the piers at either end of the screen and dividing the sanctuary from the chapels either side (Hart). We can find examples of this screen at Torcello Cathedral, Venice, built as a Byzantine basilica in the 1100s:

Illustration 130: Iconostasis of Torcello Cathedral (Venice)418

We can see tiers of icons and frescoes at St. Panteleimon in Nerezi, Macedonia (1000-1100s) and in the Protaton church at Mount Athos (13th century). (Hart)

Illustration 131: Iconostasis of the Protaton church at Mount Athos419

418

See: <http://www.all-art.org/history136.html>.

885

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Activity 1. In your own words, summarize the developments of church building and decoration in the Middle Byzantine Period. 2. Make a brief comment on Russias church building and decoration in this period.
Activity 174: Church building and church decoration in Middle Byzantine Period (843-1261)

THE LATE BYZANTINE PERIOD (12611453) After the recapturing of Constantinople, there were new developments in Byzantium in both church architecture and decoration. As Wybrew explains, by the fourteenth century, in a moment when the Orthodox liturgy had reached the full term of its development and a process of consolidation was taking place, the church building acquired other designs besides the cross-in square church. Basilican-style and Greekcross churches were again built, each part the Orthodox world evolving its characteristic shape. Wybrew also notices that by the fourteenth century the mosaic decoration of the Middle Byzantine period, which was confined to certain areas of the churchthe lower walls were faced with marblegave way to cheaper fresco painting covering the interior entirely. Moreover, although the basic themes of the earlier period remain, there was an increase in new themes in order to fill the whole building, such the emerged basilica type. A great variety of narrative sequences, such as those used before the iconoclastic crisis, began to appear again (148-149). Linked with the liturgy, the apse usually contained the Mother of God, through whom the Word became flesh. Below, the communion of the Apostles was represented. The earliest example is the fresco of Hagia Sophia in Kiev, in the eleventh century, depicted twice:

419

See: <http://www.pravoslavieto.com/poklonnichestvo/athos/karyes/img/protation_internal_view.jpg>.

886

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 132: Communion of the Apostles (Hagia Sophia, Kiev)420

Wybrew says that this is one of the new themes of iconography as it does not represent a historical scene. Christ, as if He were a bishop, gives the communion to the Apostles. This scene, he adds, reflects admirably the teaching of the commentaries, in which the Liturgy celebrated on earth is both an image of the Last Supper, and a representation of the worship in heaven. The communion of the Apostles combines historical, liturgical, and spiritual realities in one image (149). Beneath the communion of the apostles, the liturgists are also depicted. On the walls of the sanctuary, there were often representations of the Old Testament type of the Eucharist, such as the offerings of Abel as that of Melchizedek, on the tympanum of the church of St Vitale, in Ravenna,

420

See: <http://www.icon-art.info/masterpiece.php?lng=en&mst_id=989&top_id=&mode=mos>.

887

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 133: Sacrifices of Abel and Melchizedek (St. Vitale, Ravenna)421

In the decoration of the prothesis there were liturgical themes. The Christ Pantocrator was still placed on the central dome; yet, in a basilica shaped church, it was moved to the semi-dome of the apse, the next holiest place. Christ, robed as a bishop and thus in imperial clothes, wait for the procession of the Great Entrance. By the fourteenth century, new cycles of major festivals, not strictly related to the cycle of Christs life appeared on the upper parts of the walls and vaults of the church. Moreover, there were cycles showing the life of a particular saint, mainly the saint in whose honor the church was dedicated. They were added to the regular representations of individual saints adorning the lower parts of the nave walls in hierarchical order. From the thirteenth century, in the narthex or side-chambers, or in the porch there were depictions of the seven ecumenical councils (150-151). Wybrew summarizes this period as follows: The expanded iconography of the fourteenth century, while is included the elements of the classical middle-Byzantine scheme, contained a good deal of narrative material less closely related to the original principles of iconic representations. In addition it embraced scenes in which historical and nonhistorical elements were confused, invisible realities being depicted in terms of their earthly images. (152)

421

See: <http://www.casesf.com/san_vitale.htm>.

888

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

By the middle of the fourteenth century, the Liturgy had practically acquired the form it has today. In the late Byzantine church (1261-1453) we see icons of the Saviour, the Virgin and saints being placed in the spaces between the columns of the separating screen itself. The above depicted Church of Ossios Lukas in Greece (11th century) as it can be seen now has such a screen, with the openings to the side chapels still left without doors.

Illustration 134: Scheme of iconostasis of Ossios Lukas422

It was not until the fourteenth century that the sanctuary progressively came to be completely shut off from the sight of the congregation by a solid screen or iconostasis. Yet, still by the fifteenth century we can still see low chancel barriers, common before that date in all churches, basilican and otherwise. Averky also believes that the current high iconostasis appeared no earlier than the than XV-XVI centuries. He bases himself on St. Symeon of Thessalonica, who in his fifteenth century composition on the temple, does not mention anything concerning the contemporary high iconostasis. There is, however, a tradition, he adds, that rather

See: <http://web.mac.com/rlcastro/iWeb/topographies/EA90A263-4381-487B-9219-B804D063E4B8. html>.

422

889

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

high iconostases were already introduced by St. Basil the Great, so that the prayerful attention of the clergy might not be distracted. Nowadays, this icon screen consists of three doors, with five tiers of icons of the Saviour, the Mother of God, saints and, usually, of liturgical feasts. What follows is a five-tier iconostasis of a Russian church:

Illustration 135: A five-tier iconostasis (Moscow)423

It is often said that the iconostasis isolates the priest and at the same time blocks the complete view of the frescos on the sanctuary walls. Quenot believes that we should reevaluate the iconostasis in terms of the theology of the icons: By no means a barrier, the iconostasis is, positively speaking, the maximal expression of all that the icon can reveal to us visually. Behind it there is nothing to be seen. Why? Simply because the wondrous mystery that is celebrated there could never be situated on our human, visual level, so to speaks; such wondrous mystery is perceived not buy human eyes, but only by the soul in communion. (48)

See: <http://www.dkimages.com/discover/Home/Geography/Europe/Russia/Moscow/Moscow-206. html>.

423

890

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Your Own Research 1. Read The iconostasis in Appendix Q and find an image depicting the five tiers the iconostasis has as described by Averky. 2. Describe the function and meaning of the following elements: upon the Altar Table (the antimins, the Gospel, the cross, the ark or tabernacle, the communion set, candles), behind the Altar (the candelabrum), to the left or north of the Altar (the Table of Oblation, including the holy chalice or cup, the diskos, the star, the spear, the spoon, the sponge or cloth, the coverlets, the ladle) in the sanctuary (the censer, the dikiri and trikiri, altar fans or ripidi, the aspergillum, the font, the myrrh box,) to the side of the sanctuary (the vestry)

[You can see Averkys Liturgics and Slobodskoys The Church Building and Its Arrangement]
Activity 175: The iconostasis, tiers and functions

Byzantine influence in both church building plan and iconography remained quite constant until the end of the thirteenth century. Yet the fall of Constantinople in 1453 marked the end of prestigious epoch in history. The Turks transformed the beautiful churches into mosques. This period practically coincided in time with the victory of Russia against the Tartars who had oppressed them for more than two centuries, from 1238 to 1480. As commented in Part I, from 1350 to 1550 Russian Orthodoxy underwent a golden age of spirituality, and the early fifteenth century witnessed the emergence of the characteristic onion domes of Russian church buildings as well as masterpieces of iconography by Theophanes the Greek, Andrei Rublev, and Daniel Chorny, which adorned cathedrals and churches throughout Moscow. We cannot forget the Novgorod school (twelfth-sixteenth century) of iconography, which reached the height of its development at the turn of the fourteenth century, and the Yaroslavl school of iconography began within the thirteenth century and developed greatly during the sixteenth century. It is not surprising that after Byzantiums fall to the Turks, this new 891

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Russia inherited Byzantiums place as protector of the Orthodox world. Furthermore, the renewal of Churchs life of prayer was parallel to the revival of iconography. Let us see some icons from this time. The icon that follows, from the Novgorod School, is a depiction of the famous Holy Face, dating from the first half of the 12th century:

llustration 136: Holy Face (Novgorod School)424

This representation of the Holy Face from the Yaroslavl School dates from the first half of the thirteenth century:

424

See: <http://www.icon-art.info/>.

892

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 137: Holy Face (Yaroslavl School)425

We find a perfect example of this Russian renaissance in Rublevs Trinity, painted in honor of Sergius vision of the Trinity.

Illustration 138: Rublevs Trinity426

Andrei Rublev (1360/70-1430), canonized by the Russian Church in 1988, was a disciple of Theophanes and a fervent disciple of St. Sergius of Radonezh. He, Quenot asserts, paved the way for an emancipated style of painting in Medieval Russia (29).

425 426

See: <http://www.icon-art.info/masterpiece.php?lng=en&mst_id=831&top_id=&mode=img>. See: <www.ku.edu>.

893

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

The Russians rekindled the flame of the extinct Byzantine Empire (Kenot 29). Many Russian temples were built in Byzantine style such as the Church of the Tithe, the Wisdom Cathedral, the Kiev Caves Lavra, and the Monastery of St. Michael in Kiev; the Cathedral of the Holy Trinity, in Pskov; the Cathedral of the Dormition, in Vladimir; or the Church of the Dormition, in Rostov (Averky). What follows is the Church of the Dormition in Rostov, the very first church in northeast Russia. It was founded in 991, when Russia was baptised. The Cathedral has been rebuilt four times. Its current structure is almost 500 years old:

Illustration 139: The Church of the Dormition (Rostov)427

In 1505-1508, Ivan III, a great church builder, erected in Moscow its first cathedral, dedicated to the Archangel Michael, which later became the burial place of all Grand Princes and tsars.

427

See: <http://www.russianbells.com/zvons/zvon-index.html>.

894

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 140: Archangel Michael Cathedral428

Yet as we can see Russian temples differed in many ways from those of Byzantium. Averky points out some of them: A characteristic peculiarity, which distinguishes Russian domes from the domes of the Greeks, is that above the dome, below the cross, a special cupola resembling an onion was placed. The first form that was purely Russian in style is called the marquee or column style. This has the appearance of several separate churches, united into one, each of which appeared to be a pillar, or marquee, crowned by a dome and a cupola. Aside from the large quantity of onion-shaped cupolas, the marquee style is characterized by a variety of colors and diversity in paints. Averky gives some examples such as the Church of the Village of Clerks and the Church of St. Basil the Blessed in Moscow. He explains: For instance, due to the absence of marble and stone, there were no columns. Stone temples were very few in number. In the construction of wooden churches, of which there was an especially large number in the north, due to the abundance of wood materials, Russian craftsmen displayed much of their own taste and independence. According to Quenot, icon painting reached it loftiest expression between the end of the fourteenth century and the middle of the sixteenth. In the seventeenth, the decadence of icons begins. It was connected, Quenot adds, to the progressive

428

See: <http://www.world66.com/europe/russia/moscow/sights/cathedralofthearchangel>.

895

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

abandonment of tradition, resulting from ever increasing Western influence, which caused the levels of both spiritually and theological research to fall (31). As we have seen, the extension of the iconostasis increased upwards and side ways, especially in Russia beginning in fifteenth century reaching up to even five tiers of icons. Yet, this number of tiers, as Hart comments, did not reach outside Russia although there was a tendency for increased height, often including, as in Athos, crucifixes two or more metres high surmounting the screen. Nowadays, there is much variability. This is what Williams and Anstall comment upon describing the interior of a current Byzantine cruciform church: The church building is frequentlythough not inevitablyfashioned in the form of a cross. Where this is the case, the foot of cross is at the western end, where the people enter. At the eastern end a screen bearing icons stands between the main body of the church ( the nave) and the eastern extremity where the altar table is located (the sanctuary). This screen may be tall and run completely across the width of the nave or be waist high; it may appears as a solid wall or look more like a screen with icons suspended on it; it may have double doors in the center, or be open in the center and thus partially separate the nave from the sanctuary. Such differences are generally the result of cultural or local traditions. (107)

Activity 1. In your own words, summarize the developments of church building and decoration in the Late Byzantine Period. 2. Make a brief comment on Russias church building and decoration in this period.
Activity 176: Church building and church decoration in Late Byzantine Period (1261-1453)

SYMBOLISM OF THE CHURCH BUILDING Ouspensky explains that the symbolism in churches is based on an essential reality of Christian life: the sanctification of man and with him of the whole visible world, resulting in peace between God and the word. This truth, he adds, is the main subject of Church symbolism, which points to the forthcoming universal Kingdom of

896

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

God. It is precisely this orientation towards the future, this building up to the future, which distinguished Christian worship from all others (21). Already in the fourth century, Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, upon the consecration of a church in Tyre, provides an explanation of the symbolism of different parts of the church. This panegyric was addressed to Paulinus, Bishop of Tyre. In the following passage, Eusebius mentions, the outer wall, the vestibule, the sanctuary, symbols of purification, and gates: Thus, enclosing a much larger space, he fortified the outer court with a wall surrounding the whole, which should serve as a most secure bulwark for the entire edifice. And he raised and spread out a great and lofty vestibule toward the rays of the rising sun, and furnished those standing far without the sacred enclosure a full view of those within, almost turning the eyes of those who were strangers to the faith, to the entrances, so that no one could pass by without being impressed by the memory of the former desolation and of the present incredible transformation. His hope was that such an one being impressed by this might be attracted and be induced to enter by the very sight. But when one comes within the gates he does not permit him to enter the sanctuary immediately, with impure and unwashed feet; but leaving as large a space as possible between the temple and the outer entrance, he has surrounded and adorned it with four transverse cloisters, making a quadrangular space with pillars rising on every side, which he has joined with lattice-work screens of wood, rising to a suitable height; and he has left an open space in the middle, so that the sky can be seen, and the free air bright in the rays of the sun. Here he has placed symbols of sacred purifications, setting up fountains opposite the temple which furnish an abundance of water wherewith those who come within the sanctuary may purify themselves. This is the first halting-place of those who enter; and it furnishes at the same time a beautiful and splendid scene to every one, and to those who still need elementary instruction a fitting station. But passing by this spectacle, he has made open entrances to the temple with many other vestibules within, placing three doors on one side, likewise facing the rays of the sun. The one in the middle, adorned with plates of bronze, iron bound, and beautifully embossed, he has made much higher and broader than the others, as if he were making them guards for it as for a queen. In the same way, arranging the number of vestibules for the corridors on each side of the whole temple, he has made above them various openings into the building, for the purpose of admitting more light, adorning them with very fine wood-carving. But the royal house he has furnished with more beautiful and splendid materials, using unstinted liberality in his disbursements. (Book X, Chap. 4, 37-42)

897

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Eusebius completes this description appealing to the beauty of the building and its symbolism as a whole building, also referring to the sanctuary: It seems to me superfluous to describe here in detail the length and breadth of the building, its splendor and its majesty surpassing description, and the brilliant appearance of the work, its lofty pinnacles reaching to the heavens, and the costly cedars of Lebanon above them, which the divine oracle has not omitted to mention, saying, The trees of the Lord shall rejoice and the cedars of Lebanon which he has planted. Why need I now describe the skillful architectural arrangement and the surpassing beauty of each part, when the testimony of the eye renders instruction through the ear superfluous? For when he had thus completed the temple, he provided it with lofty thrones in honor of those who preside, and in addition with seats arranged in proper order throughout the whole building, and finally placed in the middle the holy of holies, the altar, and, that it might be inaccessible to the multitude, enclosed it with wooden lattice-work, accurately wrought with artistic carving, presenting a wonderful sight to the beholders. (Book X, Chap. 4, 43-44) Ouspensky notices that the symbolism of the church acquires its most complete theoretical expression in the seventh and eighth century. This is seen, for example, in the commentaries St. Maximus the Confessors Mystagogy or in the writings of St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (seventh century). It is not a coincidence because the spiritual force of the Holy Tradition integrates all church elements. These two centuries are also the time of great hymnographers such as St. Andrew of Crete or St. John of Damascus (23), as we will see in Part IV. Ouspensky comments that St. Maximus the Confessor and St. Sophronius see in the church the image of the spiritual and visible worlds, the image of that which we perceive with our senses. They particularly emphasize the cosmic importance of a church, as an image of the entire created but transfigured world (23). Also summarizing the writings of other religious writers such as St. Germanus (eighth century), who calls the church a divine house, and St. Symeon of Thessalonica (fifteenth century), who calls a church paradise and the gift of Paradise, he asserts: Thus, a church is a very complex reality, having a meaning rich in content. It is a sacred placed where the members of the Church commune in the divine life through the sacraments. Being the first fruits of the Kingdom to come, it is both

898

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

a part of this Kingdom, as it already exists on the earth, and an anticipation of the coming in glory. It is an image of the Divine Kingdom, towards which the Church leads the world. (24) One of its most characteristic and earliest meanings, the church as a ship, is already found in the fourth century, in the Apostolic Constitutions: And first, let the building be long, with its head to the east, with its vestries on both sides at the east end, and so it will be like a ship. In the middle let the bishops throne be placed, and on each side of him let the presbytery sit down; and let the deacons stand near at hand, in close and small girt garments, for they are like the mariners and managers of the ship: with regard to these, let the laity sit on the other side, with all quietness and good order. And let the women sit by themselves, they also keeping silence. In the middle, let the reader stand upon some high place: let him read the books ... (Book II, Chap. LVII) Indeed the rectangular-shaped church planthe basilicaresembles a ship. It is a ship with the Lord as the captain, who guides you through the stormy sea to a calm harbour (Milleant, The Temple of God). The Christian is sailing, as if in Noahs Ark, towards salvation or heaven. Thus, Hart sees in the basilican church type a symbolic meaning of action, motion: Here the emphasis is on the transitory nature of our present life, of our movement towards the heavenly city to come. The basilica is primarily, therefore, a church plan which emphasises action, motion. Moreover, according to Milleant, the cross-shaped church reminds us that we are saved through faith in the Crucifixion, through our suffering (The Temple of God). The cross is the very foundation of Christian faith. Hart explains the symbolism of the cruciform type: On the one hand the cruciform churchs east-west arms offer the basilicas forward movement, with its sense of pilgrimage from the fallen world (the west) towards the age to come (the east). On the other hand its dome (with its emphasis on the interior) and its more or less cubic nave, intimately proportioned, create a sense of being present now in paradise, of God being present among the congregation. Pilgrimage and immanence are thus combined. Another element of the cross-in-square which is symbolically rich is the transition from square to cross to circle (or cube to cross to dome) as we move up the church. This affirms the union of earth (symbolised by the square) with heaven (the circle) through the cross of Christ. Although a practical way of dealing with snow, the onion roofs of Orthodox churches also have a spiritual meaning: One cupola signifies Christ; three cupolas 899

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

symbolize the Holy Trinity; five cupolas represent Christ and the four Evangelists; seven cupolas symbolize the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the sacred number of seven; nine cupolas represent the nine ranks of Angels; and thirteen cupolas signify Christ and the twelve Apostles (Orthodox Tradition and Symbolism). Slobodskoy, who sees the sanctuary, the nave, and the vestibule or narthex as a reflection of the Holies of the Holies, the sanctuary, and the courts of the Old Testament temple, states that As the Holy of Holies signified in the Old Testament Temple, the Altar represents now the Kingdom of Heaven. In those times, no one could enter the Holy of Holies except the High Priest, and even he only once a year, with the blood of purification. This signified that the Kingdom of Heaven, after the fall of man into sin, was closed to man. The High Priest was a prototype of Christ, and his action foretold that a time would come when Christ, through His shedding of blood, suffering on the Cross and Resurrection, would open the Kingdom of Heaven to all. Therefore, when Christ died on the cross, the veil of the temple which closed off the Holy of Holies was torn in two. From that moment on, Christ has opened the gates to the Kingdom of Heaven, for all who with faith would come unto Him. Furthermore, he continues, in the Old Testament no one had the right to enter the Old Testament sanctuary except the priest; yet all believing Christians may stand within the Nave of the church because the Kingdom of God is closed to none. Slobodskoy also explains that in the Orthodox Church the narthex has no essential significance today, though in earlier times catechumens who were preparing to become Christians, but not ready for the Mystery of Baptism, stood there (The Divine Services). For Hopko the vestibule or narthex symbolizes this world; the nave is the place of the Church understood as the assembly and people of God; and the altar, called the sanctuary, symbolizes the Kingdom of God (The Orthodox Faith, vol 2, Worship 4). For Aghiorgoussis, the narthex is the preparation for the entrance into heaven; the transept of the church, with the dome above it, represents heaven itself; and the sanctuary, the Holy of Holies, with the altar in its center, represents the holy dwelling place of

900

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

God and Gods throne. This symbolism is especially vivid in the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, during which the Kingdom of God breaks through to be present in the midst of the congregation (The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church). For Schmemann the narthex or vestibule, where baptism was performed, had the symbolic meaning of letting the newly baptized enter into the fullness of the Church. This is the reason why the new member was led in a solemn procession into the church. The second part, the nave, the central part of the temple, is the gathering place of the faithful and also the Church itself. The faithful assembling in the Temple is the visible part, the visible expression of the whole Church. Moreover, the whole church decoration symbolizes the unity of the Church on earth with the Church in heaven or rather their identity. As Williams and Anstall, tell us, the elements of church decoration are not isolated embellishments, but sacramental aids to worship: Stained glass and painted icon depict the Lord, His Blessed mother and the Saints, and signal event from His early life. Or perhaps the sound of chanting from choir or cantor is what arrests you. These things are not decorations, neither are they irrelevant embellishments piled one upon the other like the clutter of centuries. They are instead deeply significant sacramental aid to worship, and are use deliberately to create the ambience sacreethe holy atmosphere which addresses the entire human beingdirecting all the human senses towards the sweetness of God. (106) They are said to be windows to the Kingdom of Heaven. The whole atmosphere of the interior of a temple appeals to our senses (icons, candles, music). It represents Paradise and the Kingdom of Heaven (Orthodox Tradition & Symbolism). For Schmemann, the sanctuary is the mystical center of the church. Schmemann says that it represents (in the sense of making present, actualizing, revealing to us) the Throne of God, the Table of the Divine Banquet, and the altar of his Sacrifice (Liturgy and Life 35-37). Like the whole atmosphere irradiating from the temple, the services and the Eucharist prepare us and to attain insight of what the Kingdom within us could be like when we are connected with it (Orthodox Tradition & Symbolism).

901

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

For Ouspensky, the sanctuary symbolically represents the house of God, the heaven of the heavens. It represents that which goes beyond the created world. Then the nave of the church represents the created world. But is a world which is justified, sanctified and deified; it is the Kingdom of God, the new earth and the new heavens. The narthex, according to the Fathers, as Ouspensky adds, symbolizes the unredeemed part of the world, a world lying in sin, and even in hell (24-27). The iconostasis also has a symbolic meaning. According to Hart, The iconostasis aims to reinforce on the horizontal axis what is depicted on the vertical axis namely the incarnation of God (Christ born of the Virgin) and the deification of the human person (the saints). As a wall, the iconostasis shows us that we are not yet in heaven, that we are on a journey. And simultaneously, as an array of icons and as a wall with doors, it shows how heaven and earth have been united in Christ. As the iconostasis is considered a link between heaven (the Holy of Holies) and the nave (The Holy Place). Quenot asserts: The iconostasis is ... not limited to simply recapitulating the entire economy of salvation for our eyes and our senses, though this is already a fact if great importance; it suggests a spiritual passage into another world which remains invisible to our earthly eyes. In other words, it symbolizes that boundary between the sensual world and the spiritual world. Beyond its didactic intent or purpose, the iconostasis invites us to a spiritual communion with the Celestial Church. It serves to emphasize that essential bond between the sacrament of the glorious Body of Christ, the Eucharistand the icon, the representation of His Transfigured body. (48) Brennan says that the doors of the iconostasis, which provides the clergy with direct access to meeting point of the heavenly and earthly realms of the Christian cosmogony, are thresholds for sacrality. They become a mysterious, bidding, and forbidding objects, depending on the viewers perspective. SOME CONCLUSIONS Indeed God in his infinity is far from us but at the same time close in that he dwells in us lightening our souls and mind. And the Orthodox temple and its decoration attempt to be a great mystical temple irradiating light to those beholding it. Through it 902

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

we almost physically experience Gods dwelling within us. God becomes nearer and we discern a bit of that great temple of light where He abides. This is what the psalmist says: Lord, I have loved the habitation of thy house, and the place where thine honour dwelleth. ... I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the LORD. (Psalms 26:8; 122:1). It is true, that aided by mans creativity, in the Divine Liturgy, surrounded by the magnificence of the church building and the beautiful frescos and icons, we see the light with the spiritual eyes of the faith. When we study the evolution of the church building and its decoration and thus its symbolism and its closeness to the Liturgy, we cannot forget that they express the essence of Christianity manifested through the Holy Traditionthe eternal, creative effort of man in conjunction to the Spirit to bring infinity to the comprehension and experience of the faith sons of the Heavenly Father. The earthly temple in its manifold meanings, in its representation of celestial abode of God, bring these faith son to the realization of Beauty, Truth, and Goodness, the manifestation of the Deity on our humble world.

Activity With telegraphic sentences, list the different symbolisms of the church building.
Activity 177: Symbolism of the Church building

Final Activity Having read this section on the Church building and done all its activities, write a five-page paper incorporating its main ideas. Follow the following diagram: a) introductory or topic paragraph, b) body or development, and c) concluding paragraph. Add your own reflection.
Activity 178: Final activity on church building and decoration

903

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

2. LITURGICAL VESTMENTS INTRODUCTION When conducting the services the clergy bishops, priests, and deacons must be dressed in special, sacred robes or vestments. This was done from very early in the Christian era. Both the strict separation of the solemnity of public worship and of the clergy from the body of the laitywe need to remember that in the Byzantine Empire the clergy were officials of imperial rankrequired some corresponding liturgical attire. They were symbolical of grades of the clergy and of different parts of the worship. These vestments are generally made of brocade or some similarly suitable material and adorned with crosses or other symbolic signs. The colourful, meaningful liturgical dress, along with the magnificent inside decoration of the building and shape of the church building, the candles, the odour of incense, the choir singing, and the solemnity of the gestures and movements forms part of the whole Orthodox experience and an integral part of the Holy Tradition. Orthodox clerical vestments came into being both trying to preserve the old dress traditions and to show forth the glory of the Kingdom. In the following pages we are going to view Orthodox liturgical vestments429 and adornments pertaining to deacons, priests, and bishops, as well as their meaning and origin from the early church. The meaning will be described in the context of their use in the Divine Liturgy. Moreover, their Greek meaning will be given in footnotes in order not to hinder the clarity of the exposition.

As there are some equivalences between eastern and western vestments to which I will refer, it is necessary to list the vestments in the Latin church. These are the amict or humeral, similar to the Jewish ephod; the alb (white cope or surplice), the cincture, the maniple, the orarium or stole for the priest; the chasuble, the pectoral, and the miter for the bishop; the pallium for the archbishop. To these are to be added the episcopal ring and the staff or crozier (Philip Schaff, Liturgical Vestments).

429

904

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF LITURGICAL VESTMENTS Jewish background Although modern critics do not see a direct relationship between the vestments worn by Christians in the Liturgy and those worn by the Jewish priest at the Temple, it remained a fact in Christian liturgy that the clergy had to wear a different type of clothing when performing the divine rites, at least in the Constantine period. In Liturgical Vestments, we read: The stately outward appearance of the public worship, and the strict separation from the body of the laity, required corresponding liturgical vesture, after the example of the Jewish priesthood and cultus, symbolical of the grades of the clergy and the different parts of the worship. In Exodus 28 and 39 we read how God gives specific instructions for the clothing of those who are to serve in his temple. Aaron and his sons are set apart from the common people as priests that will minister to God. This is what chapter 28 (1-8) of Exodus says: 1 And take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priests office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aarons sons. 2 And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. 3 And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aarons garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priests office. 4 And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priests office. 5 And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen. 6 And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work. 7 It shall have the two shoulder pieces thereof joined at the two edges thereof; and so it shall be joined together. 8 And the curious girdle of the ephod, which is upon it, shall be of the same, according to the work thereof; even of gold, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen... . Let us see an illustration of this type of dress:430

See in Appendix T a more detailed picture with the garments worn by high priests following the instructions given by God in Exodus and Deuteronomy.

430

905

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 141: Jewish High Priest431

They were garments which indicated Aarons separation for God, garments only worn by him and his son in the holy place to perform their sacred duties. Obviously the ones vested by priests at the Temple were different from those worn by people in daily life, and thus different from those Jesus and His disciples worn. The Dress of Jesus and His Disciples Clearly, compared to what liturgical vestments were in the Jewish era and in the present Christian era, the clothes worn by Christ and his disciples, and thus the first Christians, were much simpler and less sumptuous. Yet in the New Testament more so than in the Old Testament, clothing was important as a sign of prestige. So much that Jesus has to exhort his disciples, And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on (Luke 12:22). Jesus clothing as that of his apostles seemed to be the same type an ordinary Jewish worn in the first century: a shirt (chaluk), as an undergarment upon his skin, and two outward garments, a tallith (mantle or cloak) and a tunic.

431

See: <www.specialtyinterests.net/>.

906

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 142: Current Jewish Tallith432

Jesus worn these two upper garments before washing his disciples feet: He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself (John 13:4). Jesus wearing the chaluck seems to be clear as he mentions of laying aside of the upper garments. Clement of Alexandria, in The Instructor (Book II), uses this passages to criticize costly vessels: The Lord ate from a common bowl, and made the disciples recline on the grass on the ground, and washed their feet, girded with a linen towel He, the lowly-minded God, and Lord of the universe (Chap. 3) In addition, Luke mentions Jesus cloak And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years, but no one could heal her. She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and immediately her bleeding stopped (8:43-44). Moreover, the tunic (robe or coat), according to John was seamless: Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout (19:23). It therefore was of a kind that fitted closely about the neck. His upper garment was of the customary sort and shape, probably made of white woolen cloth, as Mark (9:3) suggests in his details of the account of the Transfiguration, bearing the four prescribed tassels at the corners. These tassels were borne in fulfilment of the

432

See: <www.religionfacts.com/>.

907

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

commands in Numbers 15:38-39 and Deuteronomy 22:12 as a reminder to obey the laws of the Lord. Moreover, above the tunic, Jesus would naturally wear a linen girdle, wound about the waist. He would also wear sandals on his feet, as Matthew narrates, I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. But he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes433 I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire (3:11). We have no description as to his headdress, though no Jewish teacher of that day would appear in public with the head uncovered and he might have worn the customary white linen napkin (sudarium), wound round the head as a turban, with the ends of it falling down over the neck, yet some critics dont agree on this item. (Dress) As we have seen in the previous chapter, in Hagia Sophia there is an icon of Christ from the sixth century, wearing a mantle and a tunic:

Illustration 143: Christ of Hagia Sophia, vestibule mosaic fragment434

Most likely, the dress of Jesus disciples was not materially different from those worn by himself. Let us see a illustration from about the thirteenth to fourteenth centuries, taken from Catherines Monastery (Egypts Sinai). This portable icon depicts the
433 434

It is translated as sandals in the RSV (Revised Standard Version). See: <www.hp.uab.edu>.

908

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Apostles Paul, Andrew, and Peter, also wearing a mantle and a tunic, as well as a gird and sandals:

Illustration 144: the Apostles Paul, Andrew and Peter435

Beginning Church Hierarchy and Tradition When talking about clerical vestments, we also need to take into consideration, as Wybrew reminds us, that from the beginning the Church had a structure, which had an influence on the differentiation of attires. The bishops had inherited at least some of the functions of the Apostles in the government of the local church they assisted, and only as the church spread did the presbyter acquire sacramental functions. Deacons aided bishops in their functions, taking also care of the charitable work of the local church (32). This hierarchy led to the creation of different vestments for the clergy. According to the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, particular law is to be observed in regard to the attire of clerics (CCEC can. 387). Yet this general law does not prescribe one particular form of attire for all clergy throughout the world. And although the particular Churches sui iuris436 are to prescribe their own laws, they should

See: <http://touregypt.net/featurestories/catherines2-32.htm>. A Church sui iuris is one of its own right with an acknowledged autonomy with regard to government and discipline.
436

435

909

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

take into consideration the traditions and customs of each Church sui iuris. The CCEC includes all clerics deacons, presbyters and bishops.437 In the Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, there is a clarification on the legislation promulgated by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches on the 6th of January 1996, under No. 66: As for the non-liturgical dress of the clergy, it is appropriate that the individual Churches sui iuris return to the style of the traditional Eastern usage.438 Furthermore, in the current legislation, we find an attempt to reform and to revert to the authentic tradition. B. David Kennedy says, in Clerical Attires: The spirit of recent legislation calls for a reform and return to the authentic traditions. This legislation implies there is to be no imitation of the Roman rite or hybridization, let alone the polemical approach of some who attire themselves in clothes that are different from the Orthodox in order to make a point about being Catholic. It is apparent that the mind of the legislator is directing all clerics in the Eastern Catholic Churches to adopt the traditional practice of the Orthodox clergy in regards to clerical attire. In the following pages we will see the traditional Eastern usage for both liturgical and non-clerical attire of Orthodox clergy. But let us first approach its main periods of development. Activity 1. See Appendix T and list the garment worn by Jewish High Priests. 2. List the garments Jesus might have worn. 3. What does the CCEC prescribe?
Activity 179: Jewish background, beginning church hierarchy and Tradition

FOUR MAIN PERIODS OF DEVELOPMENT OF LITURGICAL VESTMENTS It is clear that from the times of Christ and the founding of the Early Church, liturgical dress has undergone some evolution. Joseph Braun, in Vestments,
This is unlike the Code of Canon Law for the Roman Church regarding clerical attires which excepts permanent deacons, although not transitional deacons. 438 Qtd. in B. David Kennedy.
437

910

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

distinguishes four main periods in the development of the Christian priestly dress: the first period embracing the age before Constantine; the second, extending from about the fourth to the ninth century (or Early Byzantine Period); the third, from the ninth to the thirteenth century; and the fourth, from the thirteenth century to the present time, more pertaining to history of the liturgical vestments in their rubrical evolution, adornment, and the nature of the material from which they are made. According to this division, during the first and second period, the development of the priestly vestments was complete in Eastern Europe, that is from pre-Constantine period to the ninth century, and thus it will be the main focus of the following pages. That of Western Europe was completed later, in the thirteenth century. As Braun comments, during the first period, from the first to the fourth centuries, as many historians agree there is no difference between the liturgical dress and the secular costume. Daily attire was also worn at the offices of the Church. Nevertheless, it seems logical to think that in times of peace and under normal conditions better garments were probably used, and these were especially reserved for the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries. It would undoubtedly have scandalized the faithful if they had seen the dusty, dirty, or worn garments. In his homily on Ezekiel, written about 379-391, St Jerome states quite clearly that the divine religion has one dress in the service of sacred things, another in ordinary intercourse and life.439 These words might suggest that probably there was already a difference between liturgical dress and ordinary life dress in the pre-Constantinian period. Moreover, this article, Vestments, also mentions the possibility that as early as the close of the preConstantinian period, liturgical vestments such as the orarion (stole) and the omophorion (or pallium) came into use among deacons and bishops.
439

Patrologia Latina 25: 437. This bibliographical reference is taken from Archimandrite Chrysostomos (21).

911

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

As already noted, nowadays, most scholars agree that in spite of the fact that priests of the Old Testament worn liturgical vestments for the celebration of the rites, Christian liturgical ones are not really adaptations of them, but developed from the dress of the Roman world. Nevertheless, as suggested, the Old Testament the idea of wearing a special kind of clothing in the performance of liturgical rites did influence the Church, as St. Jerome indicated in the above quote can also be presumed. In Orthodox Liturgical Dress: an Historical Treatment, Archimandrite Chrysostomos asserts that it is only in spirit that Christian vestments were modelled after Jewish vestments, contrary to what the so called ritualistic model defends:440 The ephod and the breastplate are without parallels in Christian liturgical vesture, unless one accepts the far-fetched notion that the ephod, worn around the neck, corresponds to the Western amice, worn around the neck under the outer garb. The breeches are clearly explained and have no counterpart in Christian ecclesiastical dress. He concedes that the tunic, coat, and girdle might have had some parallels in the Christian scheme of dress, yet, quoting Flavius Josephus (37-101 AD), in the Jewish Antiquities, (vol 4), which appeared in 94 AD, he asserts that there is no evidence to show that Christian modelled their vestment after those of the Jewish priesthood as early as the first century. Macalister, in Ecclesiastical Vestments, provides some reasons for this fact: Apart from these considerations, may we not ask with reason why the early Christians, a poor and persecuted sect, could possibly assume and maintain an elaborate and expensive system of vestments such as the Jewish? And if the assumption had been made after the days of persecution were past, surely some record of the transaction would have been preserved till our own day? ... We possess a tolerably full series of the acts and transactions of ecclesiastical courts in all parts of the known world from the earliest times-how is it that all record of such an important proceeding has perished? (12) It also seems plausible to think that to distance themselves from the Jewish faith, Christian priests of the pre-Constantine era vested normal clothing, yet, as commented,
The ritualistic approach defends that the vestments of the early Christian Church were modeled after the liturgical garments of the Jewish Levitical priesthood (Chrysostomos 16).
440

912

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

cleaner and better quality than day-to-day wear. One can say that there was no prescribed clerical attire in the early centuries of Christianity. Additionally, the Church does not currently believe that the style of garbs is from any Divine command, but merely that special vestments are appropriate for special circumstances. Moreover, Chrysostomos refers to a second approach, the antiquarian. This approach sees the origin of the Christian liturgical vestments in the ordinary dress of the Roman citizenry of the first Christian centuries. Regarding this approach he complains about the lack of exactness in the period in which this took place, some believing it happened during the first or second century, others much later. Chrysostomos thinks that by the fifth century, as the words of Jerome already suggested, there was already a separation of ordinary from liturgical vestments. Upon studying other sources, this historian concludes that there is little evidence that special liturgical garments were set aside in early Christianity before the fifth century, but if there was special dress, they must have been modelled after ordinary dress. Chrysostomos remarks that it is likely that the liturgical dress of the Christian Church has its beginning in these four hundred years, but the greater evidence leads one to believe that the idea was only germinating and not yet achieved full expression (24). In short, we can say that there is not evidence that Christian copied the use of the robe by Pagan priests for liturgical use. Within the second period, after the legalization of Christianity in 313, the Church continued to refine clergy vestments in the sense of who wore what, when, and how until about the year 800 when liturgical norms for vesting were basically standardized in the East.441 Additionally, Wybrew describes how the public recognition of the Christian Church in the fourth century made all the bishops enjoying the status of senior imperial offices, and how this influenced their way of dressing:

441

In the West it also mainly remained as such until the renewal following the Second Vatican Council.

913

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

They soon came to be preceded, like their elders colleagues, by lights and incense when they made their official way to church. Like them too, there wore the dress the Roman upper classes, made obligatory for imperial officials by Theodosius I. Over the linea, the undergarments, they wore the tunica, and on top of that the casulla. These garments developed into the alb or sticharion, the deacons tunicle, and the chasuble or phelonion. But in the fourth century the clergy were indistinguishable in their dress from any decently attired Roman official. They certainly wore their best clothes when they presided over the Christian assembly: and some took to wearing a pallium, as a badge of office and even a gird, in origin part of military as distinct from civil dress. (32) Talking about the pre-eminence bishops attained, Staff, in The Lower Clergy, says: To this spiritual pre-eminence of the bishops was now added, from the time of Constantine, a civil importance. Through the union of the church with the state, the bishops became at the same time state officials of weight, and enjoyed the various privileges which accrued to the church from this connection. They had thenceforth an independent and legally valid jurisdiction; they held supervision of the church estates, which were sometimes very considerable, and they had partial charge even of the city, property; they superintended the morals of the people, and even of the emperor; and they exerted influence upon the public legislation. They were exempt from civil jurisdiction, and could neither be brought as witnesses before a court nor be compelled to take an oath. Their dioceses grew larger, and their power and revenues increased.442 In this period some bishops committed many excesses due to the influence they exercised and the dependence the lower clergy had on them. It was also a moment in which episcopate and presbyterate were rigidly distinguished. Nevertheless, the memory of their primitive identity lingered and we find oppositions to their ostentatious display of outer marks of dignity. Thus, at the end of the fourth century, Jerome, in Commentary to Titus (1:7), reminds bishops that they owe their elevation above the presbyters, not so much to Divine institution as to ecclesiastical usage; for before the outbreak of controversies in the church there was no distinction between the two, except that presbyter is a term of age, and bishop a term of official dignity... If we read the words of the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to Titus (1:7) we understand Jeromes words: For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre... (Schaff, Lower Clergy).
442

Nowadays, Orthodox bishops wear similar vestments as those worn once by the Emperor in church.

914

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

There were also other commentators of the Greek Church who agreed with Jerome in maintaining the original identity of bishops and presbyters as in the New Testament. Thus did Chrysostom, also in the fourth century, in his Homily 1 to the Ephesians says: To the fellow-Bishops and Deacons. What is this? were there several Bishops of one city? Certainly not; but he called the Presbyters so. For then they still interchanged the titles, and the Bishop was called a Deacon. For this cause in writing to Timothy, he said, Fulfil your ministry, when he was a Bishop. For that he was a Bishop appears by his saying to him, Lay hands hastily on no man. (1 Tim. v. 22.) And again, Which was given you with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. (1 Tim. iv. 14.) Yet Presbyters would not have laid hands on a Bishop. And again, in writing to Titus, he says, For this cause I left you in Crete, that you should appoint elders in every city, as I gave you charge. If any man is blameless, the husband of one wife.); which he says of the Bishop. And after saying this, he adds immediately, For the Bishop must be blameless, as Gods steward, not self willed (Tit. i. 7.). So then, as I said, both the Presbyters were of old called Bishops and Deacons of Christ, and the Bishops Presbyters; and hence even now many Bishops write, To my fellowPresbyter, and, To my fellow-Deacon. But otherwise the specific name is distinctly appropriated to each, the Bishop and the Presbyter. To the fellowBishops, he says, and Deacons. Written in 384, Jeromes Letter 22 (To Eustochium),443 presents a vivid picture of the luxury, profligacy, and hypocrisy of the Roman society and sketches a sarcastic description of the Roman priests. They squandered all their care on dress and perfumery, curled their hair with crisping pins, wore sparkling rings, paid far too great attention to women, and looked more like bridegrooms than like clergymen (Schaff, The Lower Clergy): There are othersI speak of those of my own orderwho seek the presbyterate and the diaconate simply that they may be able to see women with less restraint. Such men think of nothing but their dress; they use perfumes freely, and see that there are no creases in their leather shoes. Their curling hair shows traces of the tongs; their fingers glisten with rings; they walk on tiptoe across a damp road, not to splash their feet. When you see men acting in this way, think of them rather as bridegrooms than as clergymen. Certain persons have devoted the

This letter is perhaps the most famous of Jeromes letters. Besides complaining about the luxury, profligacy, and hypocrisy prevalent among Roman men and women, he offers some biographical details. In this letter he also presents a full account of the three kinds of monasticism then practiced in Egypt (St. Jerome).

443

915

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

whole of their energies and life to the single object of knowing the names, houses, and characters of married ladies. (Chap. 28) In addition, Wybrew records the opinion of Celestine I, Bishop of Rome in the early fifth century who insisted in that it was by holiness rather than by special adornments that bishops should be distinguished (33) It seems that in the Greek Church the situation was little better. Gregory Nazianzus (325-389), being himself a bishop,444 often criticizes ambition, the official jealousies, and the luxury of the hierarchy, and expresses the wish that the bishops might be distinguished only by a higher grade of virtue (Schaff, The Bishops). Edward Gibbon (1737-1799), in The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Chapter XXV), explains that Gregory Nazianzus, in his Oration XXXII, describes the pride and luxury of the prelates who reigned in the Imperial cities; their gilt car, fiery steeds, numerous train, etc. The crowd gave way as to a wild beast. This historian of the Roman Empire also remarks how Emperor Valentinian in 370 A.D. restrains the avarice of his clergy: The strict regulations which have been framed by the wisdom of modern legislators to restrain the wealth and avarice of the clergy may be originally deduced from the example of the emperor Valentinian. His edict, addressed to Damasus, bishop of Rome, was publicly read in the churches of the city. He admonished the ecclesiastics and monks not to frequent the houses of widows and virgins; and menaced their disobedience with the animadversion of the civil judge. The director was no longer permitted to receive any gift, or legacy, or inheritance, from the liberality of his spiritual daughter: every testament contrary to this edict was declared null and void: and the illegal donation was confiscated for the use of the treasury. By a subsequent regulation it should seem that the same provisions were extended to nuns and bishops; and that all persons of the ecclesiastical order were rendered incapable of receiving any testamentary gifts, and strictly confined to the natural and legal rights of inheritance. Schaff, in The Seven Ecumenical Councils, refers to a certain Eustathius that he identifies as bishop Sebaste in Armenia, who wore a conspicuous garb and was not willing to appear in the ordinary dress of a clergyman of his day. According to Schaff,
He was Bishop of Nazianzus (329-374), in the south-west of Cappadocia, and for a long time Patriarch of Constantinople.
444

916

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

he was condemned by the Synod of Gangra, which took place between 325 and 381, after Nice and before the First Council of Constantinople. After his condemnation, Eustathius gave up wearing his peculiar garb and other eccentricities. Moreover, the ancient epitome of Canon XVI of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicaea, 787 AD), also addresses the excesses of clergy regarding vestments: Bishops and clergymen arraying themselves in splendid clothes and anointed with perfumes must be corrected. Should they persist, they must be punished. Schaff tells us that Balsamon and Zonaras refers to the magnificence in dress assumed by some of the superior clergy among the Iconoclasts, wearing stuffs woven with threads of gold, and their loins girt with golden girdles, and sentences embroidered in gold on the edge of their raiment. In the eight century, Patriarch Germanos of Constantinople from 715 to 730, in Historia ecclesiastica et mystica, attributed to him, assigns different vestments to the clergy. He assigns the use of the sticharion and orarion to the deacon; the sticharion, epitrachelion, zone, and phelonion to the priest; and the sticharion, epitrachelion, zone, phelonion, and omophorion to the bishop,445 Chrysostomos comments that he does not mention some clothes currently used such as the sakkos and epimanika, nor does he mention the episcopal liturgical accessories such as the epigonation, mitre staff, trikerion and dikerion or the aetos (eagle rug). He believes that the epimanika werent a later innovation, but Germanos, he says, might well have excluded them from his enumeration of liturgical vestments, either on the basis that they were insignificant, or because they had not yet gained symbolic significance (31). As for the episcopal regalia, he adds that it is understandable as they are essentially innovations of a later period (31).

445

Qtd in Chrysostoms (31) from Patrologia Latina 98:394.

917

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

For the East this second period is the most important in the history of liturgical vestments. Braun asserts: The process of development which was completed in this period includes five essential elements: definitive separation of the vestments worn at the liturgical offices from all non-liturgical clothing, and especially from that used in secular life; separation and definitive settlement of certain articles of dress; introduction of the sacrales distinctiva; employment of the vestments definitively assigned for use at the Divine offices with retention of the ordinary clothing under these vestments; lastly, introduction of a special blessing for the vestments intended for liturgical use. Although one cannot know exactly how far the development was consummated, it seems clear that the pace of both Eastern and Western Churches was different, and most probably the development reached its end more rapidly in the Eastern than in Western Europe, and that the Orient was the model for Western Europe, at least regarding certain garments such as the stole and pallium. Additionally, for the creation of a special priestly costume that differs from the garments ordinarily worn, it is important to remark that he poenula (cloak or mantle) and the long tunic, which was of universal use in the third century and were also worn in the offices of the Church, were gradually replaced in daily life, from about the sixth century, by the shorter tunic and the more convenient open mantle. Yet the Church did not join in this return to the former fashion, but retained the existing costume, which was more suitable to the dignity of the Divine offices; this fact, the writer says in itself was the beginning of a rubrically distinct priestly dress (Braun). During the third period, extending from the ninth to the thirteenth century, the priestly vestments in Western Europe completed their development. Regarding Oriental Rites, already completed in the previous period, as mentioned, only the pontificial vestments were enriched. These were the sakkos, still a patriarchal vestment; the epimanika; the epigonation, probably introduced before this period, whose name was not epigonation until the twelfth century. Finally, in the fourth period, from the

918

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

thirteenth century to the present time, there is little or no development in the East. Only the episcopal mitre was added to the liturgical dress of the Greek period (Braun).

Activity 1. Which four periods does Braun distinguish in the development of liturgical vestments? When was the development of the priestly vestments in Eastern Europe complete? 2. What is the difference between the antiquarian model and the ritualistic model? 3. What is the difference between the pre-Constantine between liturgical dress and ordinary life dress? 4. What is Archimandrite Chrysostomoss position on early clergy vestments? 5. According to Wybrew how did the recognition of the Christian Church in the fourth century affect clergy vestment? 6. Briefly explain the reaction against clergys excesses? 7. What garments does Patriarch Germanus assign to the clergy? What item does he omit? 8. List any other development in eastern clergy garment after the second and most important period.
Activity 180: Periods in eastern clergy vestments

LITURGICAL AND NON-LITURGICAL VESTMENTS The vestments worn in the Eastern Church vary in appearance for every degree of office (bishop, priest or deacon), some being common to the three of them. When the clergy wear their sacred vestments, they are instruments of God, through whom the Holy Spirit acts. They become the representatives of Christ through whom the Grace of the Holy Spirit is bestowed upon the faithful. There are liturgical and non-liturgical vestments. The liturgical ones are not only demanded for the Divine Liturgy, but also for such services as Easter Vigil, Easter Vespers, Good Friday Matins or Good Saturday Matins. The non-liturgical ones are intended for daily use.

919

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Readers vestment Readers are not considered clergy, so they dont wear liturgical vestments. Yet, when set apart by the bishop, they are vested with a short tunic (phelonion), which he wears when reading the epistle for the first time. They are also permitted to wear a cassock, although many do so only when attending services. Let us see a picture to illustrate this short tunic:

Illustration 145: Reader vestment of a short phelonion446

Deacons Vestments The deacons vestments consist of the sticharion,447 the epimanika,448 and the orarion, or horarion.449 The sticharion is a long tunic with white sleeves that reaches the ankles, covering the whole person. It can also be vested by subdeacons. In Against Jovinianus (Book I), Jerome refers to the linen ephod worn by Samuel the Levite: At the same time we must not forget that Samuel was a Levite, not a priest or high-priest.
446

Ordination done by Archbishop Dmitri of Dallas and the South (OCA) on October 2, 2004 at St Vladimirs Seminary (Three Hierarchs Chapel). See <http://old.svots.edu/Three-Hierarchs-Chapel /2004-1005-patterson/index.html>. 447 From the Greek , generally translated as dalmatica. This long coat corresponds to the broidered coat, tunica (Ex. xxviii. 39) of the Jewish priest, and the alba and dalmatica of the Latin church. Sticharion means garment with lines because in ancient times it was white with darker lines running through it. 448 From the Greek , on the arms. It was originally a napkin hung upon the left arm of deacons and priests, afterward only of bishops. 449 From the Greek or (hour of prayer). It corresponds to the Latin stola.

920

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Hence it was that his mother made for him a linen ephod, that is, a linen garment to go over the shoulders, which was the proper dress of the Levites and of the inferior order. The Levite was equivalent to the deacon. The sticharion (or tunica damaltica) seems to have been in used by the third century, as Macalister contends (33). He tries to demonstrate this fact by noting the St. Cyprian was led to his martyrdom in 258 vested in a tunica dalmatica. Chrysostomos explains that the first use of the sticharion as a purely liturgical garment is described in the writings of Saint John Chrysostom (349407) which depicts an attire with is in every respect the sticharion, but his uses the word chitoniskos to identify it (37).450 Rev. Cecil Daniel Wray, in A Short Inquiry, explains that the antiquity of it in the Eastern Church appears from Gregory Nazianzus, Bishop of Nazianzus (329-374), and in the Western Church from the works of S. Cyprian (d. 258), bishop of Carthage. Thus from this reference we can assume that it was already used by the late third or early fourth century. The epimanika are cuffs or manacles the deacon wears under the sticharion, around the wrists, and laced with cords. The epimanika and the sticharion are also worn by higher ranks of clergy such as priests and bishops. According to Chrysostomos there is little evidence that the cuffs were used prior to the twelve century when they first appeared in ecclesiastical literature (59). We have seen that they are not mentioned by Germanos of Constantinople. The orarion (or stole) is a long, narrow band of cloth unique to the deacon. He wears it on top of the sticharion over the left shoulder so that one of the ends falls in front and one in the back. It is made of the same material as the sticharion with fringe on the ends. The words Holy, Holy, Holy are usually embroided upon it. It seems to be nothing more than a handkerchief in the time of St Gregory the Great. The meaning

450

Patrologia Graeca 58:745. Qtd. in Chrysostomos, 35.

921

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

is clear when we read that Gregory gave two oraria and two camisae as gifts to Constantinople.451 The orarion is the deacons distinctive vestment. Holding one end of it with his right hand, he raises it slightly when he recites prayers. When the Lords Prayer is recited, the deacon changes its shape, wearing it over both shoulders and around his waist crosswise so that both edges fall in front. Bound in the form of a cross under both arms the orarion facilitates the deacons movements during Communion. The subdeacon also wears the orarion, but always wrapped around his body. However, it was not always the case as it was prescribed by the provincial synods that took place between the First and the Second Ecumenical Synod. Canon 12 says: A sub-deacon must not wear an orarium nor leave the doors. Zonaras and Balsamon narrate that, in ancient time, it was the place of the subdeacons to stand at the church doors and to bring in and take out the catechumens and the penitents at the proper points in the service. Zonaras explains that one does not need to be surprised as this, like many other ancient customs, has been entirely changed and abandoned (Schaff, The Seven Ecumenical Synods). In this same period, the Ancient Epitome of Canon 23 also refers to prohibition of cantors and readers to use the orarium. Let us see an illustration of these garments:

451

Patrologia Graeca 77:887. Qtd. in Crysostomos (41).

922

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 146: Deacons vestments452

1. Sticharion 2. Epimanika 3. Orarion

Priests Vestments The priests vestments consist of the under-vestment or sticharion, the epitrachelion,453 the zone,454 the epimanika, the phelonion,455 as well as some episcopal vestments like the epigonation,456 or nabedrenyk, that certain priests are allowed to wear as a sign of honor. Additionally, the sticharion is similar to that used by the deacon. As suggested, it is illustrative to remember that when serving at the synagogue, Jewish priests worn a white linen ephod (Exodus xxviii, 4). Also, the Ancient of Days are represented as having garments white as snow (Daniel vii, 9) and when Jesus Christ was transfigured, his attire was white as light. In To Pammachius Against John of Jerusalem, Jerome describes it beautifully:
452 453

See: <http://artemis.crosslink.net/~hrycak/vestment.html>. From the Greek , around the neck; often called simply a stole in casual Englishlanguage usage. 454 From the Greek z , girdle, cingulum, balteus, or cincture. 455 From the Greek (plural, , phelonia), a wide mantle, corresponding to the chasuble of the Roman Catholic Church. 456 From the Greek , over the knee.

923

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Accordingly, our Lord was not so transfigured on the mountain that He lost His hands and feet and other members, and suddenly began to roll along in a round shape like that of the sun or a ball; but the same members glowed with the brightness of the sun and blinded the eyes of the Apostles. Hence, also, His garments were changed, but so as to become white and glistening, not aerial, for I suppose you do not intend to maintain that His clothes also were spiritual. (Chap. 29) Moreover, whenever angels have appeared to man, they have always been clothed in white apparel. Wray refers to S. Jerome in his days, both maintaining the ancient use of the white surplice and reproving the needless scruples of those who oppose it: what offence, says he, can it be to GOD for a Bishop or a Priest to proceed to the communion in a white garment? The epimanika are also similar to those used by the deacon. Moreover, the epitrachelion or stole is equivalent to the deacons orarion, but it is worn around the neck and comes down in front so that the two inner strips are fastened together in the front for convenience. The priest may not conduct any service without his epitrachelion, just as a deacon may not do it without his orarion. Yet as a sign of ecclesiastical mark priests and bishops wear the stole around the neck while the deacon over his left. Moreover, while the priest wears this stole under the chasuble and the bishop over his chasuble, the deacon wears it over his uppermost vestment. Schaff states: But what makes it evident still more clearly, is that the orarium of the priest and of the deacon, looked upon as a visible and distinctive mark of these orders, was unknown at Rome, at least down to the tenth century, while it had been adopted everywhere else. To be sure, the orarium is spoken of in the ordines of the ninth century; but from these it is also evident that this vestment was worn by acolytes and subdeacons, as well as by the superior clergy, and that its place was under the top vestment, whether dalmatic or chasuble, and not over it. But that orarium is nothing more than the ancient sweat-cloth (sudarium), the handkerchief, or cravat which has ended up by taking a special form and even by becoming an accessory of a ceremonial vestment. (Seven Ecumenical Councils) Thus not only bishops had a distinctive insignia; deacons and priests had their distinctive mark too. Listing some historical sources, Schaff concludes that In view of these facts one is led to the conclusion that all these insignia, called pallium, omophorion, orarium, stole, epitrachilion, have the same origin. They 924

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

are the marks of dignity, introduced into church usage during the fourth century, analogous to those which the Theodosian code orders for certain kinds of civil functionaries. For one reason or another the Roman Church refused to receive these marks, or rather confined itself to the papal pallium, which then took a wholly technical signification. But everywhere else, this mark of the then superior orders of the hierarchy was adopted, only varying slightly to mark the degree, the deacon wearing it over the left shoulder, the bishop and priest around the neck, the deacon over the tunicle which is his uppermost vestment, the priest under the chasuble; the bishop over his chasuble. (Excursus on the Vestments of the Early Church) The zone, most likely the Byzantine counterpart of the Roman girdle, is a belt worn around the waist over the sticharion and the epitrachelion. The phelonion is a long, wide cape without sleeves with an opening for the head at the top and the front largely cut away to free the hands. It is attached to the zone on the right side. It is worn over all the other garments. According to Chrysostomos, this vestment undoubtedly originates in the garments which, in Rome during the third and the fourth century, began to replace the toga as the outer garment in formal wear (43). Priests can also wear a pectoral cross around their neck, over the phelonion. As a sign of distinction, priests, like bishops, may too vest the epigonation or palitsa, a diamond-shaped piece of stiff cloth that hangs on the right side of the body at kneeheight. It is suspended by one corner from a strap drawn over the left shoulder. According to Crysostomos, the epigonation is mentioned in a rubric of questionable date of the liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom (347?-407?). Yet, in the eleventh century (ca. 1054), there is a direct reference to this attire in a letter from Peter, Patriarch of Antioch, to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Kerularios, in which he refers to it as the enchirion.457 Furthermore, the earliest artistic representation of this garment dates from the fourteenth century (53). Let us see an illustration of the priests vestments:

457

Patrologia Graeca 120:799. Qtd in Chrysostomos (53).

925

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 147: Priests vestments458

1. Sticharion 2. Epitrachelion 3. Zone 4. Epimanika 5. Phelonion 6. Epigonation Bishops vestments The bishop also wears the sticharion, epitrachelion, zone, epimanika, and epigonation. Additionally, the phelonion is replaced with the sakkos.459 In addition, a bishop wears the omophorion,460 the pectoral cross (3), the engolpia461 (4) (medallions), the miter462(5), the dikerion and trikerion (6), and the nabedrenyk or epigonation (7). The sakkos, used in imitation of the imperial garb, is a very luxurious outer vestment originally worn by the Byzantine emperor. It reaches below the knees, but it is shorter than the sticharion and has wide, shorter sleeves so that the sticharion and the epitrachelion are visible underneath. It is always buttoned up the sides. The omophorion
See: <http://artemis.crosslink.net/~hrycak/vestment.html>. From the Greek , a short coat with rich embroidery, without sleeves, and with little bells. 460 From the Greek , corresponding to the Latin pallium, but broader, and fastened about the neck with a button. It means that which goes over the shoulder. 461 From the Greek , a general term for something worn upon the bosom. 462 From the Greek , crown.
459 458

926

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

is the bishops stole. It is wrapped around his shoulders so that one end falls in front and the other behind. Thus it is worn over the sakkos and around the neck and shoulders. As with the priest and his epitrachelion, the bishop may not conduct any service without his omophorion. It reminds the bishop that he must be concerned for the salvation of the fallen like the good shepherd who, when he has found the lost sheep, carries it home on his shoulder, as its Greek name connotes. The omophorion, or pallium, was a mark of imperial distinction. Chrysostomos believes that its adoption by all Eastern bishops. And only by the bishop of Rome (and his several associates) in the West exemplifies the closeness of the Byzantine Church to the imperial prototype and the distinct and exclusive course of the Roman (47). This researcher also mentions St. Isidore of Pelusium (d. circa 436), monastics in the desert of Egypt, who describes the pall with the symbolic representation of the lost sheep carried on the shoulder of the Good Shepherd.463 The pectoral cross is worn over the omophorion. As mentioned above, it may also be worn by priests. The engolpion (medalion) is a highly decorated round or oval image of Christ or the Theotokos464 worn on a chain over the omophorion, over the breast of the bishop. It is the official distinctive sign of the bishop which he may wear at all times. The mitra (mitre, crown), modelled on the ancient Byzantine imperial crown, it is a head dress decorated with small images of Christ and the four Evangelists within the frames of precious stones bearing the cross on top. It is the highest ecclesiastical authority which is given to a bishop. At times, certain priests are allowed to wear the mitre as a sign of a special dignity conferred upon them. The mitra was adopted by

463 464

Patrologia Graeca 78: 272. Qtd by Chrysostomos (48). When the engolpion depicts Mary as the subject of the icon, it is called a panagia, from the Greek .I means all-holy, one of the titles of the Theotokos. It is worn by all bishops. All primates and some bishops below primatial rank have the dignity of a second engolpion, which usually depicts Christ.

927

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Byzantine bishops in the fifteenth century along with the episcopal staff (Chrysostomos 63) The dikerion and trikerion are double and triple branched candlesticks. They are used by the bishop to give solemn blessings. They likewise are symbolic of the effect of the imperial model on the development of liturgical worship in the Byzantine Church (Chrysostomos 64). Let us see these garments:

Illustration 148: Bishops vestments465

1. sakkos 2. omophorion, 3. pectoral cross 4. engolpion 5. miter 6. dikerion and trikerion 7. epigonation In addition to these liturgical vestments, an eastern bishop usually wears several distinctive garments. These are the mandyas,466 the crozier467 or pastoral staff, and the

465 466

See: <http://artemis.crosslink.net/~hrycak/vestment.html>. From the Greek , mantle. 467 From the Greek ,, sceptrum.

928

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

kamelavkion. The mandyas, or mantle, is a long, sleeveless cape that fastens at the neck and the feet. It is terminated by two serpents with a cross in the center. This staff covers everything but the head. It is worn at official ceremonies, but not during the Divine Liturgy. The kamelavkion is a cylindrical hat covered by a monastic veil usually with a small brim on top. It can be worn by the three orders of priesthood. Let us see an illustration of these items including the above-mentioned pectoral cross and the engolpion:

Illustration 149: Other clerical garments468

1. mandyas 2. pastoral or episcopal staff 3. pectoral cross 4. engolpion 5. kamelavkion Let us also see a picture of some of the actual garments for deacons, priests, and bishops:

468

See: <http://artemis.crosslink.net/~hrycak/vestment.html>.

929

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 150: Orthodox clergy vestments. From left to right vestments for deacons, priests, and bishops469

In public, bishops, priests, and deacons also wear a cassock. Monks and nuns can wear a cassock too. It is a floor-length garment, usually black, with large sleeves fitted like shirt sleeves. There are two types of cassock, the under and the outer cassock. The under or inner cassock (more often simply cassock) is usually worn under the liturgical vestments. The outer cassock, also called a ryasa or riassa (Greek raso, Russian ), is also a long garment, but is fuller or more loosely fitting. It is worn over the inner cassock. Let us see some illustrations of the cassock, inner and outer. The Russian style of the inner cassock is double-breasted, closely fitted on the torso. It has a high collar buttoned on the left side:

469

Source: Liturgix <http://liturgix.safeshopper.com/index.htm?909>.

930

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 151: Inner cassock (Russian style)

470

The Greek style is somewhat fuller than the Russian version. It has a cord or a ribbon around the waist and a high collar buttoned in the front:

Illustration 152: Inner cassock (Greek style) 471

The outer cassock is a more voluminous garment:

470 471

See: <www.answers.com>. See: <www.answers.com>.

931

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Illustration 153: Outer cassock

472

In the Russian tradition, seminarians, readers or subdeacons do not wear the outer cassock. Yet, in the Greek tradition, readers and chanters might wear it in church, frequently with no inner cassock beneath it but directly over secular clothing. When celebrating a divine service such as vespers or matins, the priest should wear the outer cassock. These are cases in which the rubrics prescribe for a priest to be less than fully vested (Cassock). Regarding the use of clerical dress, canon 7 of the 4th Ecumenical Council (year 451), says if any cleric or monk arrogantly affects the military or any other dignity, let him be cursed. Something similar was previously ordered by the lxxxiii (lxxxii) Apostolic Canon. It warns the cleric who takes military service with deposition from his clerical office. The Greek commentators of the Middle Ages, Balsamon and Zonaras think that the above canon 7 selects a more severe punishment, that of excommunication, because it has in perspective those clerics who have not merely taken military service but at the same time have laid aside their clerical dress and put on secular clothing. Canon 27 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680) makes also clear that

472

See: <www.answers.com>.

932

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

priest should wear appropriate clothing when in the city or when travelling:

clergyman must not wear an unsuitable dress either when travelling or when at home. Should he do so, he shall be cut off for one week (Schaff, The Seven Ecumenical Synods). Regarding the colours of vestments, the Typikon only specifies light or dark vestments, so local tradition is the only reference. Six liturgical colours are used in the Orthodox Church: white, green, purple, red, blue, and gold. Later, black vestments also came into use. Orange and rust are also worn in some places. Furthermore, the color of the vestments is tied to the liturgical significance of that service. For example, green, signifying hope, is used for Pentecost; red, deep red, symbolizing the blood on the Cross, the blood of the martyrs, is used on the feast day of a martyr; or purple, a symbol of the suffering of Christ, is used during the week days of the Great Lent (Liturgical Vestment: Colors of the Orthodox Church).473 Meaning of the Liturgical Attire in the Clergys Vesting Process of the Divine Liturgy In addition to these functions, most vestments carry a symbolic meaning as well, but we need to consider that it did not create the priestly dress; they are, rather, the result of the appearance of these vestments and of the defining of the individual ones (Braun). It seems that the first to receive symbolical interpretation was, as indicated, the omophorion, and then the orarion, by Isidore of Pelusiom (died about 440). Furthermore, in Historia ekklneiastike, probably of the eighth century, we find the earliest symbolism of the entire priestly dress of the Greek Rite. This work was used by

The source of this internet article is Nastolnaya Kniga Sviashchenno-sluzhitelia, Volume 4, Moscow, 1983; translated in The Messenger of St. Andrews Russian Orthodox Cathedral, Philadelphia, June, JulyAugust, September, 1999.

473

933

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

Greek liturgists until the Middle Ages as the basis for their symbolical interpretation of the Greek sacred vestments. There are several kinds of symbolism: it can be moral, given by the liturgists from the ninth to the eleventh century, symbolizing the priestly virtues of their wearers; typico-dogmatic, in the twelve century, in which the vestments acquire meaning in reference to Christ whose representative is the priest; typico-representative appearing first in the course of the fifteenth century, quickly becoming very popular. In this symbolism, the vestments are interpreted as symbolizing the instruments of Christs Passion and death as the robe put on him in mockery (alb), the fetters (cincture, maniple). The priest as he clothes the liturgical vestments typifies Christs suffering. A fourth and final feature is the allegorical, in which the priest is seen as the warrior of God, and his vestments are regarded as the weapon in his spiritual struggle. This kind of symbolism, never widespread, appeared first in the ninth and tenth century but did not develop completely until the twelfth century. Up to the fifteen century, moral symbolism was customary among Greek liturgists, this symbolism is currently widely used (Braun). Much of this symbolism is often indicated by the prayer that the priest says as he puts on each item. These prayers are verses taken from the Old Testament, usually the Psalms. Thus, let us study this symbolic meaning of liturgical vestments in the clergy vesting of the Divine Liturgy the Earthly Heaven, as Ware calls it in his The Orthodox Church (264). It is through it that Orthodox devotees joyfully celebrate the presence of the Kingdom on earth and bear witness to the reality of Christs resurrection and Ascension, and follow Christ, in and within him, to his heavenly Kingdom. I will mainly focus on the priests vestments. Yet I will also make some comments on the bishops vestments, who, in some churches, vests outside the Holy Place, and some on

934

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

the deacons vestment, especially the orarion that has the same global meaning as the priests epitrachelion. Before explaining the meaning of the vestments, let us see the following illustration with the order of vestment of priests in the Divine Liturgy, which comes after the Entrance Prayer and prior to the Liturgy of Preparation:

Illustration 154: Vestments for the Orthodox Divine Liturgy474

A. Sticharion B. Epitrachelion and epimanika C. Zone D. Phelonion Thus, after the Entrance prayers, the priest along with the deacon, enters the sanctuary by the south door, bows reverentially three times before the altar, kisses the Holy Gospel, the altar, and the Cross. Then he takes his sticharion and, bowing three times towards the east, says silently: O God, cleanse me, a sinner, and have mercy on

474

See Vestments for the Orthodox Divine Liturgy.

935

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

me.475 After this, he vests it, representing the garment of salvation and the robe of gladness. This robe of Salvation, as it also called, is based on Revelation 7:9-10: 9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; 10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. While dressing this attire, the priest recites the following prayer, taken from Isaiah 61:10:476 My soul shall rejoice in the Lord, for He has clothed me with the garment of salvation; He has covered me with the robe of gladness; He has set a crown on me as on a bridegroom; and as a bride is adorned with jewels, so has He adorned me. The sticharion represents the baptismal robe and its white colour denotes purity of soul, spiritual cleanliness, which is necessary for the clergy of any ecclesiastical rank when officiating in the Divine Liturgy and other church services. It is thus symbolic of a pure, tranquil conscience, as well as of a spotless life and of the spiritual joy in the Lord. It symbolizes the white robe of the angel who announced to the Myrrh bearing women the glad tidings of the Lords Resurrection (Mark 16:5). It also recalls the tunic which the Lord Jesus Christ wore on earth and in which he accomplished our salvation. As white is an emblem of purity, being Christs ministers, his representatives, they are to be pure from sin. In Against Jovinianus (Book I), Jerome quotes Ecclesiastes 9:8 (Let your garments be always white) expressing that The eternal whiteness of our garments is the purity of virginity (Chap. 29).

475

All the references to the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom will be taken from The Divine Liturgy According to St John Chrysostom (with Appendixes), Second Edition, New York: St. Tikhons Seminary Press, 1977. 476 In the King James version we read: I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.

936

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

After the sticharion, the priest vests the epitrachelion with the following prayer (Psalm 133:2): Blessed is God who pours out His grace upon His priests, as myrrh upon the head that runs down the beard of Aaron, which ran down to the helm of his garment. This stole symbolizes the sheep, that is, a member of the flock of Christ (John 10:11) as well as the grace of the Holy Spirit that flows down abundantly upon the officiating clergy. There are two sets of tassels adorning the epitrachelion, the one on the top representing the souls of the living which the priest is responsible for and the one on the bottom representing the souls of those who have fallen asleep in the Lord. Additionally it signifies the double portion of grace bestowed on a priest, in comparison to that of a deacon, for the celebration of the Mysteries. The orarion, the deacons stole, signifies the Grace of God which he received in the Mystery of Ordination. It also symbolizes the wings of angels, the servants of God, and thus of the deacons responsibility to be a servant of the Church. After the stole, the priest, provided he has been blessed with it, puts on the epigonation. While doing this, he reads (Psalm 45: 3-5): Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, O Mighty One, in Thy comeliness and in Thy beauty. Go forth and prosper and reign, for the sake of truth and meekness and righteousness, and Thy right hand shall guide Thee wondrously, always, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. The epigonation (or shield) is symbolic of the sword of the Spirit, that is, the strength of the Word of God, which is called spiritual armor. Thus it is a spiritual sword. Then, he puts on the zone. The symbolism of this girdle or belt is given by the following biblical passage (Psalm 18: 32-33), which the celebrant recites while he fastens it over the sticharion and the epitrachelion: Blessed is God, Who girds me with strength and makes my way blameless. He makes my feet like hinds feet, and sets me secure on the heights.

937

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

The zone means readiness to serve the Lord. It is also symbolical of the gift of strength, the divine power that strengthens the priest during the course of his serving. It is through this strength that God aids him in his service to the community, and exhorts him to a blameless life. After it, he wears the epimanika. Averky, in Liturgics, says that the cuffs remain the clergyman that he must set his hope not in his own strength, but in the right hand of God, His might and His help. It is for this reason, he adds, that at the putting on of the cuff onto the right hand he prays: Your right hand, O Lord, is glorified in strength. Your right hand has crushed the enemies. In the fullness of Your glory You have shattered the adversaries (Exodus 15: 6-7); and the following one, when he places it on his left hand: Your hands have made me and have fashioned me. Grant me understanding and I shall learn from your commandments. (Psalm 119:73) The epimanika recall the bonds with which the most pure hands of the Lord were bound during his passion, and represents strength, the creative power of God, patience, and good will. They also serve as a reminder to those conducting the services that they celebrate the Mysteries not by their own powers, but by the power and Grace of God. Then, the priest puts on the phelonion and reads the following words from the Psalms: Thy priests, O Lord, shall clothe themselves with righteousness, and Thy Saints shall rejoice with joyfulness, always, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. (Ps. 132:9) The phelonion has the same symbolic meaning as the bishops sakkos, in that it represents the purple mantle with which the Romans dressed the Savior during his passion. The ribbons sewn on it recall the streams of blood which flowed over His garments. In addition to this the phelonion reminds the priests of the garment of righteousness with which they must be vested as servants of Christ. It also denotes that

938

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

priests are invested with truth and should be ministers of the truth. After vesting the priest washes his hand while reciting a prayer. As commented, while the deacons and the priests vesting occur in the Holy Place, also called bema or chancel, that of the bishop takes place in some churches outside the holy place or sanctuary, before the people. Let us see the order of vesting of the bishop, taking into account that some of them have already been discussed above. Before starting, it is necessary to mention that as each vestment is put on, the first deacon says Let us pray to the Lord, and the protodeacon recites each appropriate vesting prayer. Thus first the bishop wears the epitrachelion, with a symbol alike to that of the priests sticharion; then, he wears the zone, the right epimanika, the left epimanika, and the epigonation. Later, the sakkos, which like the phelonion, recalls the purple mantle of the Saviour. The prayer said by the proto-deacon are similar to those pronounced but the priest, yet the term priest is changed by high priest. After that he wears the omophorion, usually decorated with the figure of Christ or that of a lamb, as we have seen, symbolizing the stray sheep that Christ, the good shepherd, carried on his shoulders. When he is vesting the following prayer is recited: When Thou didst take upon Thy shoulders human nature which had gone astray, o Christ, Thou didst bear it to heaven unto thy God and Father. Always, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen. Then, he wears the pectoral cross, which is worn as a reminder that the bishop bears his cross and upholds the commandments of Scripture and faithfully fulfils the holy and saving words of Jesus Christ. With the pectoral cross he prays: Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. Always, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.(Mark 8:34) Afterwards he wears the engolpion, which is a sign of the purity of heart which a bishop should possess and prays (Psalm 51:10): Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Then, he vests the mitre, which symbolizes the glory of

939

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

the Lord. Some think that it is symbolic of the crown of thorns which was placed on the head of the Saviour; others, that it represents the Gospel of Christ to which the bishop always remains subject. He reads as he vests it (see 2 Samuel 12:30 and I Chronicles 20:2): The Lord has set upon thine head a crown of precious stones; thou didst ask life of him, and he gaveth thee length of days. Always, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. He also blesses with the dikerion and trikerion, which respectively represent the dual nature of Christ (human and divine) and the Holy Trinity. These are the fundamental truths preached by the Bishop from the throne. Another of the bishops items is the pastoral staff. The serpents on it are symbolical of the visible and invisible enemies of the Church and the Cross represents the power which Christ has granted to the Church and is entrusted to the Bishop. The staff also reminds us of the staff of Moses with which he led the Israelites to the Promised Land and the good shepherd tending to his flock. It is reminiscent of the brass serpent erected by Moses to heal the Israelites. It symbolizes prudence and discretion be as cunning as serpents and as gentle as doves (Averly, Liturgics; Hopko, Worship, vol, 2; Archpriest D. Sokolof, A Manual of Divine Services; The Clergy and Their Vestments, Liturgical Vestments, (A) and (B); The Priesthood and its Vestments: A few Notes; Order Of Vesting) SOME CONCLUSIONS One wonders how the sacred vestments which are supposed to symbolize the abased condition of Christ the Savior, are so richly, preciously adorned. As previously said, the Orthodox Church sees its Liturgy, and thus the clerical vestments, as an expression of heaven of earth and as a witness to the more glorious sufferings of the Lord. For example, the precious cross, which is embroidered on all church liturgical

940

Chapter 8: The Liturgical Environment

vestments, is a sign of the victory of the Lord over sin, death, and Hades, and by it the Church wants to convey the meaning that it wishes to boast of nothing else but the cross of the Lord Jesus: But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world (Gal. 6:14). In addition, in the Eastern Orthodox Liturgical, vesture does serve as a reminder of the beauty and magnificence of our call as Orthodox Christians: to worship God with our whole being-body, mind and soul.

Activity 1. List the vestments of deacons, presbyters, and bishops, and shortly describe each of them. 2. List the meaning of each of these clerical vestments. 3. List the meaning of the colors of clerical vestments.
Activity 181: Clergy vestments (1)

Activity Copy the illustration 150 above with clergy vestments and, using arrows, write the name of each of the parts of the vestments of the deacon, priest, and bishop.
Activity 182: Clergy vestments (2)

Final Activity Having read this section on clergy vestment and done all its activities, write a threepage paper incorporating its main ideas. Follow the following diagram: a) introductory or topic paragraph, b) body or development, and c) concluding paragraph. Add your own reflection.
Activity 183: Final activity on liturgical vestments

941

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Chapter 9 CONTEMPORARY LITURGICS AND LITURGICAL CATECHESIS

INTRODUCTION With his Diataxis, or the order of the Divine Liturgy, Philotheos Kokkinos, the Patriarch of Constantinople (1353-1354 and 1364-1376) and formerly the hegumenos of the Great Lavra on Mt. Athos, shows that the Divine Liturgy acquired in the midfourteenth century the form that it has today. Essentially, the Diataxis is an outline of the Divine Liturgy for the priest and deacon, which gives the first line of most prayers (Wybrew 153). Previously, other relevant holy services such as Matins, Vespers, or Compline, had already attained its final form. The liturgy, as Meyendorff asserts, played a central part in maintaining the doctrinal integrity, the authenticity, which today makes Orthodoxy Orthodox, the identity of the Orthodox Church. He explains that Byzantium knew many heretical patriarchs and emperors and was the scene of many pseudo-councils. No human institution, taken in isolation from the whole body of the Church, could pretend infallibility. But the liturgical tradition always remained the central expression of the life of the Body, a witness to its permanence and integrity. Such is one of the most essential aspects of the Byzantine inheritance which we now share. (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 116) Thus, Liturgy played a fundamental role in maintaining the Orthodox Churchs identity in the darkest hours of its history along ages. It aided the survival of Christianity during the many centuries of Muslim rule in the Middle East and the Balkans as it became the only source of religious knowledge and experience. Likewise in the former Soviet Union, liturgy, since it was the only religious manifestation legally authorized, became the most cherished element of Orthodox communities. In this Chapter 9, I will deal with Orthodox worship as it is today by describing its prayer cycles, meaning of the holy services, liturgical books, Scriptural reading, and

942

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

a process model of catechesis, linked to worship and the liturgical periods. Finally, I will also address western rites and Canon Law, as parts of the students own research. In fact, western rites are legitimate western continuation of liturgies celebrated in the undivided Church, before the Schism of 1054. Liturgical law is part of canon law, as it legislates the ways in which we celebrate, the actions we use to give life to those celebrations and the design and environment of the space in which we celebrate (Donna Cole, The law of liturgy) 1. CONTEMPORARY LITURGICS Archbishop Averky makes a statement that can serve as introduction to this section: The subject of liturgics is the history of Orthodox Christian worship. Orthodox worship is the entirety of the prayers, hymns, and sacred rites which are performed in the Church of God on earth by hierarchical persons, as lawful representatives of Christ. Worship is performed for the faithful, and in unity with them, according to an established order. Through worship the faithful are called upon to express their feelings of faith in God, as well as hope and love for Him; they enter into mystical communion with Him; and they receive the power of grace for the living of a Christian life, which leads to salvation. As Averky points out, worship is the manifestation of the prayer life of the Church of Christ, and as such has a great significance for man. Throughout the history of the Orthodox Church the divine services of ancient Byzantium amazed many by their majestic, orderly beauty and led them to Christ, to the Orthodox faith. This beauty parallels its complex development in the midst of its unchangeable character. Linked to the Holy Tradition, the divine services of the Orthodox Church have a history, a rich, meaningful narrative of two millenniums, which indeed lead us back to the early church. Averky quotes the words of the Apostle Paul, when he tells Christians that all things be done decently and in order (I Cor. 14:40). The divine services of the Orthodox Church have developed over the centuries decently and ordered. Their authors, Averky adds, were the Holy Apostles and the 943

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Holy Fathers and hymnographers of the Church. The rite of worship was formed by ascetics and heroes of the spirit, in deserts and in monasteries. Averky continues: Therefore the wealth of prayers, ideas, images, and thoughts which has accumulated over the ages, which is kept and preserved in thick church books and leather bindings, must resound in the souls of contemporary believers through fervent worship. And whoever loves the prayers of the Church, once he has understood their contents, will love also their harmonious order. For him, there is a human participation and cooperation in the divine services which makes it unique: The most important element in the divine services is the living, personal participation of both those who come to pray and of those who perform the divine services those who serve, the readers, and the chanters. Only that which is felt and experienced by the performers of the divine services themselves will reach the hearts of those who pray. Archbishop Averky also stresses the uniformity of the liturgical worship of the Eastern Orthodox Church. This is due to the fact that is has not experienced the Reformation movement that transformed liturgical form and music as in the case of Protestantism nor a twenty century council that modified worship and music as is the case of the Roman Catholic Church. Furthermore, in contrast to its western counterpart, eastern liturgy made a stronger impact on the Christian Church as it has always been envisioned as a total experience of the community and the clergy, appealing simultaneously to the emotional, intellectual, and aesthetic faculties of man. It is impossible to understand Orthodox Church worship if we neglect this holistic nature, its wholeness (The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship and Sacraments). In Worship, Rev. Thomas Fitzgerald states: Worship is an experience which involved the entire Church. When each of us comes together for Worship, we do so as members of a Church which transcends the boundaries of society, of time and of space. Although we gather at a particular moment and at a particular place, our actions reach beyond the parish, into the very Kingdom of God. We worship in the company of both the living and the departed faithful.

944

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Moreover, Fitzgerald distinguishes two dimensions of Orthodox worship which are reflected throughout all Services of the Church: First, Worship is a manifestation of Gods presence and action in the midst of His people. It is God who gathers His scattered people together, and it is He who reveals Himself as we enter into His presence. The Worship of the Orthodox Church very vividly expresses the truth that God dwells among His people and that we are created to share in His life. Second, Worship is our corporate response of thanksgiving to the presence of God and a remembrance of His saving actions especially the Life, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Orthodox Worship is centered upon God. He has acted in history, and He continues to act through the Holy Spirit. We are mindful of His actions and we respond to His love with praise and thanksgiving. In so doing we come closer to God. For the Orthodox Church worship is the coming of the Christ, the True Light, into the world, as Man, for the salvation of humankind. The Russian saint John of Kronstadt (1829-1908) says: The Church us one and the same with the LordHis body, of his flesh and of His bones. The Church is the living vine, nourished by Him and growing in Hum. Never think of the Church apart from the Lord Jesus, from the Father and Holy Spirit.477 The worship of God the Trinity is fundamental to the life and spirit of the Eastern Church. In the office of Vespers, for example, which marks the beginning of the day in the Orthodox Church, there is an invitation which describes this attitude at the heart of Orthodoxy: O Come, let us Worship and bow down before our King and God. O Come, let us worship and bow down before Christ, our King and God. O Come, let us worship and bow down to Christ Himself, our King and God.

Activity 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. According to Averky, what is the object of Liturgics? Why is uniformity an essential characteristic of Orthodox liturgy? What fundamental role did the Orthodox liturgy have in the past? Why is Orthodox worship considered a total experience? What two dimensions of Orthodox worship does Fitzgerald distinguish?
Activity 184: Preliminary concepts of Orthodox liturgy
477

Qtd. in Ware, The Orthodox Church, 239.

945

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

THREE GLOBAL FEATURES OF ORTHODOX LITURGY Contrasting the simplicity of the Western Eucharist to the matchless ceremonial of Orthodox liturgy, Hugh Wybrew comments that western worshippers enter a new world when they go into an Orthodox Church to attend a celebration of the Divine Liturgy. He refers to the magnificent interior decoration of the building, the clerical vestments, the candles, the odour of incense, the choir singing, the solemnity of the gestures and movements (2-3). All governed by a tradition going back many centuries that attempts to reflect heaven on earth. Taft provides a very good summary of the Divine Liturgy from a Western onlooker: To the Westerner onlooker, perhaps the most striking quality of the rite that has evolved from the eucharist of the Great Church is its opulent ritualization, a ceremonial splendour heightened by its marked contrast to the sterile verbalism of so much contemporary Western liturgy, where worship often seems just words. The Byzantine mass ritual is structured around a series of appearances of the sacred ministers from behind the iconostasis or sanctuary barrier. The most important of these appearances are the two solemn introits. The minor introit or Little Entrance of the Word service, after the opening rite of the enarxis, is a procession with the gospel, said to symbolize Christs coming to us in the Word. The other, major or Great Entrance at the beginning of the Eucharistic part of the service, right after the intercessory prayers following the readings, is a procession bearing to the altar the gifts of bread and wine prepared before the beginning of the liturgy. It is said to prefigure Christs coming to us in the sacrament of His Body and Blood. Both these fore-shadowings are fulfilled in to later appearances, the procession of the deacon with the gospel lectionary to the ambo for the reading; and the procession of the celebrant to distribute in communion the consecrated gifts, after they have been blessed in the Eucharistic prayer. He also refers a very relevant point for Orthodoxy, that liturgy is not ceremonial, but prayer: Most of the ritual is taken up with such comings and goings. But liturgy is not ceremonial. It is prayer. And so these ceremonies are the ritual expression of a text. In the present-day Byzantine rite the liturgical formulae comprise two distinct levels. While the deacon stands outside the doors of the iconostasis chanting the litanies and leading the people in prayer, within the sanctuary a parallel service is preceding. Through the open doors of the icon screen the altar is distantly visible, brilliantly lighted and enveloped in clouds of incense,

946

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

impressing upon the worshipper a sense of mystery and sacredness. Before this altar, within the holy of holies stands the celebrant, his back to the people as he faces the East, reciting in silence the priestly prayers. When the priest has to bless or address the people he comes out. Inside he is talking to God. In the same thread, Ware, who calls Orthodox Worship the Earthly Heaven, delineates three global features of Orthodox worship as conclusions from the oftenmentioned story of how Vladimir, Prince of Kiev, while still a pagan, desiring to know which was the true religion, had sent his followers to visit various countries of the world. The princes envoys observed different religious practices until they attended the Divine Liturgy in the Church of the Holy Wisdom in Constantinople, where the full festival ritual of the Byzantine Church was set in motion to impress them. They found their ideal religion there, which were expressed in the words they reported back to this tenth century prince. Let us quote these words once again. We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for surely there is no such splendour or beauty anywhere upon earth. We cannot describe it to you: only this we know, that God dwells there among men, and that their service surpasses the worship of all other places. For we cannot forget that beauty. From this story Ware draws the following features characteristic of the Orthodox Church and its worship. Firstly, worship is the expression of the beauty of the spiritual world, a celestial beauty. Secondly, worship is nothing else than heaven on earth, and its most unique expression, the Holy Liturgy, embraces these two elements at once. In both heaven and on earth the Liturgy is one and the sameone altar, one sacrifice, one presence. When the faithful gather to perform the Eucharist, regardless of the outward appearance of the church, not merely the local congregation is present, but the Church universalthe saints, the angels, the Mother of God, and Christ himself. Ware quotes the words sung at the Great Entrance in the Liturgy of the Pre-sanctified: Now the celestial powers are present with us, and worship invisibly. Thirdly, Orthodox

947

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

approach to religion is fundamentally a liturgical approach. Doctrine is understood in the context of divine worship Orthodoxy means alike right belief and right worship, for the two things are inseparable. The Russians envoy did not ask about moral rules nor demand a reasoned statement of doctrine, but only desired to watch the different nations at prayer. To back his ideas, Ware provides two illustrative quotes. The first one is by Every: Dogma with them is not only an intellectual system apprehended by the clergy and expounded to the laity, but a field of vision wherein all things on earth are seen in their relation to things in heaven, first and foremost through liturgical celebration (The Byzantine Patriarchate 9). The second is by Florovsky: Christianity is a liturgical religion. The Church is first of all a worshipping community. Worship comes first, doctrine and discipline second (The Elements of Liturgy in the Orthodox Catholic Church, 24) (The Orthodox Church 264-266). Orthodoxy has a liturgical way of approaching religion and it is necessary to understand the central place of worship in the life of the Orthodox Church as an element of the Holy Tradition. Ware states Orthodoxy sees man above all else as a liturgical creature who is most truly himself when he glorifies God, and who finds his perfection and self-fulfilment in worship. Into the Holy Liturgy which expresses their faith, the Orthodox peoples have poured their whole religious experience. It is the Liturgy which has inspired their best poetry, art, and music. (The Orthodox Church 266) Father Michael Pomazansky, in The Liturgical Theology of Father A. Schmemann, says something that can complement Wares delineation of the global features of Orthodox liturgy: What is it in the Divine services, something significant and visible to everyone, that distinguishes the Orthodox Church from all other confessions of the Christian Faith? It is communion with the Heavenly Church. This is our preeminence, or primogeniture, our glory. The constant remembrance of the Heavenly Church is our guiding star in difficult circumstances; we are strengthened by the awareness that we are surrounded by choirs of invisible comforters, co-sufferers, defenders, guides, examples of sanctity, from whose nearness we ourselves may receive a fragrance. How fully and how consistently

948

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

we are reminded of this communion of the heavenly with the earthly by the content of our whole worship... Pomanzansky also remarks on continuity of the liturgy with the revelation: Is this awareness of the unity of the heavenly and the earthly proven by the revelation of the New Testament? It is proven totally. Its firm foundation is found in the words of the Saviour: God is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for in Him all are living (Luke 20:38). We are commanded by the Apostles to remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their lives (Heb. 13:7). Protestantism is completely without an answer for the teaching of the Apostle found in Hebrews 12:2223, where it is said that Christians have entered into close communion with the Lord Jesus Christ and with the Heavenly Church of angels and righteous men who have attained perfection in Christ.

Activity (1) Enumerate the three global features of Orthodox liturgy with a brief explanations of each one: o o o (2) According to Pomanzansky, what distinguishes Orthodox divine services from those of other faith confessions such as Protestantism?
Activity 185: Three global features of Orthodox liturgy

MAIN EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP It is now necessary to delineate the current expressions of worship in the Orthodox Church to be able to have a better grasp of its development. Fitzgerald distinguishes four main ones: The Eucharist, the sacraments, special services and blessing, and the daily offices. Let us view them in more detail complementing them with the ideas and reflections of other theologians: (1) The Eucharist, which is the most important worship experience of Orthodoxy. Hopko says that The Holy Eucharist is called the sacrament of sacraments in the Orthodox tradition. It is also called the sacrament of the Church. The Eucharist is the 949

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

center of the Churchs life. Everything in the Church leads to the Eucharist, and all things flow from it. It is the completion of all of the Churchs sacraments the source and the goal of all of the Churchs doctrines and institutions. (vol. 2, 34) The Eucharistic Liturgy or Divine Liturgy is at the center of Orthodox worship, as Hopko points out: The Divine Liturgy is the common work of the Orthodox Church. ... the Divine Liturgy is the common action of Orthodox Christian officially gathered to constitute the Orthodox Church. It is the action of the Church assembled by God in order to be together in one community gathered to worship, to pray, to sing, to hear Gods word, to be instructed in Gods commandments, to offer itself with thanksgiving in Christ to God the Father, and to have the living experience of Gods eternal kingdom through communion with the same Christ Who is present in his people by the Holy Spirit. (Worship, vol. 2, 154) The two most frequently used Eucharistic liturgies are the liturgies of St. John Chrysostom and of St. Basil the Great. These two liturgies differ only in the text of the Eucharistic canon. Their overall structures, established in the high Middle Ages, are identical.

The Csarean or Byzantine Liturgy is used in the countries which were evangelized from Constantinople, or which came under its influence for any considerable period. It is used, for example, by the Orthodox and Uniat Greek churches in the Orient, as well as by the Greek communities in Italy and Sicily. Translated into the Old Slavonic it is used by Orthodox and Uniat Catholics in Russia and in some parts of the Austrian Empire; translated into Georgian and Rumanian it is used respectively in Georgia and Rumania. It has also been translated into several other languages and dialects for use in the Russian dependencies and where the Russian Church has missions, as well as into Arabic for use in Syria. Since the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom has become the normal liturgy of the Greek Church, that of St. Basil is now used only on the Sundays of Lent with the exception of Palm Sunday, on Holy Thursday and Holy Saturday, on the vigils of Christmas and of the Epiphany, and on the feast of St. Basil, which in the Greek calendar occurs on the first day of January. (Liturgy of St. Basil) Table 83: Liturgy of St. Basil

The Eucharistic liturgies begin with an elaborate rite of preparation (proskomide). A priest on a separate table of oblation disposes on a paten the particles of bread that will symbolize the assembly of the saints, both living and dead, around Christ, the Lamb of God. Then follows the Liturgy of the Catechumens, which begins with a processional entrance of the priest into the sanctuary with the Gospel (Little Entrance) and which includes the traditional Christian Liturgy of the Wordi.e., the reading from the New Testament letters and the Gospels as well as a sermon. This part of the liturgy ends with the expulsion of the catechumens, who, until they were baptized, were not admitted to the sacramental part of the service. The Liturgy of the Faithful includes another ceremonial procession of the priest into the

950

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

sanctuary. He carries the bread and wine from the table of oblations to the altar (Great Entrance); the following recitation of the Nicene Creed, the Eucharistic canon o anaphora eucaristica, the Lords Prayer, and Communion areas in the Westthe characteristic parts of the Byzantine Liturgy of the Faithful. The bread used for the Eucharist is ordinary leavened bread; both elements (bread and wine) are distributed with a special spoon. (Adapted from The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship and Sacraments) Table 84: The structure of the Eucharistic liturgies

Moreover, during the period of Lent, the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, attributed to St. Gregory the Great, is used as it is more appropriate for the penitential season of the Great Fast. It consists of vespers combined with additional prayers and communion. The communion bread is consecrated and reserved at the previous Sundays Divine Liturgy. In The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, we read: The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts is one of the great masterpieces of Orthodox piety and liturgical creativity. It reveals the central Christian doctrine and experience in its form and content; namely that our life must be spent in prayer and fasting in order to be in communion with Christ who will come like a thief in the night. It tells us that all of our life, and not only on fast periods, is completed with the Presence of the Victorious Christ who is risen from the dead. It witnesses to the fact that Christ will come at the end of the ages to judge the living and the dead, and to establish Gods Kingdom of which there will be no end. It tells us that we must be ready for His arrival, and to be found watching and serving; in order to be worthy to enter into the joy of the Lord. The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts is one of the most beautiful and meaningful liturgies in the Orthodox Christian Church.

In the Eastern Orthodox and Greek-Catholic Churches, the Words of Institution are the only portion of the Anaphora that is spoken aloud by the priest. The specific words spoken by the priest differ, depending upon which form of the Divine Liturgy is being celebrated: Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom: For the bread: Take, eat: this is My Body, which is broken for you for the remission of sins. For the wine: Drink of it, all of you: this is My Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many, for the remission of sins. Liturgy of St. Basil the Great: For the bread: He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles, saying: Take, eat: this is My Body, which is broken for you for the remission of sins. For the wine: He gave it to His holy disciples and apostles, saying: Drink of it, all of you: this is My Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many, for the remission of sins. Orthodox Christians and some Eastern Catholic Churches do not interpret the Words of Institution to be the moment the Holy Gifts (bread and wine) are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. In fact, they do not define a specific moment of change; however, they understand the process to be completed (perfected) at the Epiclesis (the calling-down of the

951

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Holy Spirit upon the Gifts. The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts This liturgy does not contain the Words of Institution, since it is actually a Vespers service at which the faithful receive from the Reserved Mysteries (Sacrament) which were Consecrated the Sunday before (hence the name: Pre-sanctified). (Words of Institution) Table 85: The Words of Institution in the three liturgies of Eastern Christian Churches

(2) The Sacraments. They affirm Gods presence and action in the important events of our Christian lives. Contemporary Orthodox catechisms and textbooks all affirm that the Church recognizes seven mysteria or sacraments, all of them related with the Holy Eucharist: Baptism, Chrismation, Communion, Confession, Marriage, Holy Orders, and Anointing of the sick. No council recognized by the Orthodox Church ever defined the number of sacraments; it was only through the Orthodox confessions of the 17th century, directed against the Reformations various confessions, that the number seven was generally accepted. These Orthodox confessions were endorsed by local councils but, in fact, they were associated with individual authors (e.g., Metrophanes Critopoulos, 1625; Peter Mogila, 1638; Dostheos of Jerusalem, 1672). For the Orthodox Church these confessions only have a historical importance as the Orthodox theologians look for consistency in Scripture and Tradition rather than in these confessions as it has been expressed in the ancient councils, the early Fathers, and the uninterrupted life of the liturgy (The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: The Basic Doctrines). Thus the underlying sacramental theology of the Orthodox Church is based, however, on the notion that the ecclesiastical community is the unique mysterion, of which the various sacraments or sacramentalia are the normal expressions (Eastern Orthodoxy).478

478

In Appendix M, you will find a short explanation of the seven sacrament or mysteria.

952

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Illustration 155: The Baptism of Christ479

(3) Special Services and Blessings. Likewise, they affirm Gods presence and action although in other events, needs, and tasks of the faithfuls life. (4) The Daily Offices or Cycle. These are the services of public prayer that occur throughout the day, at regular periods. Through them, the Orthodox celebrate the time of salvation in which we live, sanctifying the time of the world with the presence of Christ. These are the daily non-sacramental worship of the Orthodox Church. Vespers (Hesperinos) and Matins (Orthros) are the longest and the most elaborate of the Orthodox Services. Other services are Compline (Apodeipnon), the midnight prayer (Mesonyktikon), and the four canonical or divine hoursi.e., offices to be said at the First (6:00 AM), Third (9:00 AM), Sixth (12:00 noon), and Ninth (3:00 PM) hours. Yiannis Vitaliotis, in The Byzantine Divine Liturgy: Evolution and Structure, compares the Divine Liturgy with other religious services: The Greek word for service, akolouthia, implies a specific sequence or order, and is thus applicable to all religious rites, which include Vespers, Midnight Office, the Hours, the service for the sanctification of the water, and so on. These services are distinguished from the Divine Liturgy by the fact that the sacrament of the Divine Eucharist is not celebrated during them. Nevertheless, they are often closely associated with it in the practice of the Church. We may note by way of example that Matins and the first Hour normally precedes its celebration, or the Vespers which is associated with the eve of Epiphany or
479

See: <www.icons.spb.ru>.

953

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Christmas Eve, as well as with the Liturgy for Holy Thursday and Easter Saturday. These services consist of a basic, unchanging skeleton, to which are added a number of supplementary elements (hymns, psalms, readings from the Old and the New Testament), that vary in accordance with the day of the week, the particular feast, and the period of the liturgical calendar. The Divine Liturgy is often set within this daily cycle, being normally celebrated between the Sixth and the Ninth Hour (although, during Fast Periods it is celebrated after Vespers). However, it is not prescribed to be celebrated every day (as it is in many cathedrals and monasteries). As Archbishop Averky states, in Liturgics, The Divine Liturgy is the focus, the most important service of the entire daily cycle, in relation to which all the other services are but in preparation for its fitting performance and the communion of the Holy Mysteries of Christ. For this reason the clergyman who desires to perform the Divine Liturgy is obliged by the rules of the Church to serve or, at the very least, listen to or read at home all the other services of the daily cycle. In addition to this daily cycle, there are two others: The Weekly Cycle of the Eight Tones (Octoechos), the Annual Cycle of Movable Feasts (dependent upon Pascha), and the Annual Cycle of Fixed Feasts, beginning on the first day of the Church Year - September 1. These three cycles are combined and superimposed on each other, giving the Liturgical Year a constant and unfailing variety. Barrois, in Scripture Readings in Orthodox Worship, refers to the annual cycle and to the dominical cycle, part of the daily cycle, in the following terms: In other terms, there are two series of celebrations: the annual cycle of annual cycle of feats, dated more or less conventionally; and the dominical cycle, centered on the date of Easter,480 namely the Lenten Triodion, Great and Holy Week, Pascha, the seven weeks to the Sunday of Pentecost, and the Sundays from Pentecost to the Sunday of Zacchaeus. This second cycle urges us to forward beyond the limits of history, till He come (1 Cor. 11:26) But as Hopko says although the liturgical year starts in September 1, the feast of the Resurrection of Christ is the real liturgical center of the annual cycle of Orthodox worship. He says that All the elements of Orthodox liturgical piety point and flow from Easter, the celebration of the New Christian Passover. Even the fixed feasts of the
480

See Appendix H: The Paschal cycle.

954

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Church such as Christmas and Epiphany which are celebrated according to a fixed date on the calendar take its liturgical form and inspiration from the Paschal feast (Worship, vol. 2, 70). There is a last cycle, the Cycle of Life, which embraces the life of the faithful from birth to death (Thomas Fitzgerald, The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship and Sacraments, To Believer, Who are Byzantine Catholics?).

Illustration 156: Pascha

481

Ware also delineates four basic patterns of worship expression in the Orthodox Church, which have similarities with those above: (1) Holy Liturgy: The Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, of St. Basil, and of the Presanctified Gifts, done for distribution of communion on the weekdays of Great Lent. (2) Divine Office: the two chief offices of Matins and Vespers, together with the Midnight Office, the First, Third sixth and Ninth hours and Compline (3) Occasional Offices: Baptism, Marriage, Monastic Profession, Royal Coronation, Consecration of a Church, Burial of the Dead. (4) Lesser Blessings: blessing of corn, wine, and oil; of fruits, fields, and home; of any object or element (Ware, The Orthodox Church 267).
481

See: <www.orthodox.clara.net>.

955

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Activity 1. Enumerate the four main expressions of Orthodox worship with brief explanations of each one: 1) 2) 3) 4) 2. Search the internet and find an example of lesser blessings.
Activity 186: Three global features of Orthodox liturgy

Activity Read the Table above dealing with eucharistic liturgies and Appendix K and list the main parts of the Divine Liturgy, including the proskomide, with a brief explanation of each one.
Activity 187: The structure of the Eucharistic Liturgies

Activity On the internet article Who are Byzantine Catholics?, there is a good summary of the Divine Liturgy: In the Divine Liturgy, we begin worship by assembling together as the Body of Christ, and celebrating the presence of Christ among us with psalms and hymns. Standing attentively in His presence, we are taught by His Words in the Epistle and Gospel, and learn how to apply the Gospel to our lives in the sermon. We then respond to God by freely offering the sacrifice of our own lives to Him in the form of bread and wine, and, uniting our sacrifice with Christs own eternal sacrifice, we ascend with and in Christ to His table in His heavenly Kingdom, where He feeds us with the gift of His Body and Blood, transforming us into His Body, making us bearers of Christ and partakers in His nature, and uniting us with Him in His Kingdom. Following the Divine Liturgy, we return to the world as witnesses to what we have seen in the unfolding of the Kingdom of God before our eyes, and as missionaries to the world, sanctifying it with the presence of Christ. Read this description of the Divine Liturgy carefully and try to identify in it its main structure.
Activity 188: Meaning and structure of the Divine Liturgy

Activity See Appendix H and read sources A, B, and C. Then answer the following questions: 1. When does the Orthodox liturgical calendar begin?

956

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

How many cycles are there in the Orthodox Church? What are the services and prayers of the daily cycle? What is the weekly cycle? What are the elements of the annual or yearly cycle? How is the Pascha feast settled? What other feasts depend on it?
Activity 189: Liturgical Cycles

Your Own Research In The Priests Service Book (http://biserica.org/Publicatii/ServiceBook/ index.html), among other services, you will find the offices of Vespers, Compline, Midnight Office, Matins; the Divine Liturgy (St. Chrysostom, St. Basil, Presanctified Gifts); other sacramental services, blessings and prayers; and the monthly calendar. Take a look at them and give a short example of each of them by writing just a short passage identifying the service as well as the part within the service it belongs. For example: b) The Service of the Crowning: The Processional Psalm (Blessed is everyone that fears the Lord.)
Activity 190: Examples of Divine Services and other blessings

LITURGICAL BOOKS The Eastern Church has several liturgical books we need to take into account when addressing its worship dimension. These books are taken from the Sacred Scriptures, and are consequently termed the divine service books. These Church service books were written by the Fathers and teachers of the Orthodox Church in accordance with the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Tradition. Four books contain the ordinary parts of the service: Liturgikon or Book of Divine Services for the Priest and Deacon, Horologion or book of the Hours, Euchologion or Books of the Needs, and Archieratikon or Book of the Bishop. Three books contain the Scriptural readings used in the services: The Psalter, Gospel Book, Apostol, and Prophetologion, that contains the Old Testament readings for Vespers.482 A single book contains all the hymns which recur in an eight-week cycle throughout the year: Octoechos, which is a special book for

482

The Lectionary is a book that contains the Evangelion, the Apostle, and the Prophetologion

957

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

the Sundays and weeks following Pentecost. Four books contain the parts of the services for the liturgical year: Triodion, Pentecostarion, Menaion, and Typikon, or Book of the Ordo. The Triodion and the Pentecostarion are special liturgical books for the Easter Cycle of worship. The Menaion includes the specific services for each day of the month. The Festal Menaion is the book which contains all the services (including the hymns) for the fixed days of celebration for the Lord and His Mother and certain saints. It contains the services for nine out of the Twelve Great Feasts of the Orthodox calendar, most notably for Christmas and Epiphany. The Festal Menaion, as well as the Triodion and Pentekostarion, contain various segments of the Old and the New Testaments. There also is a prayer book, the Anthologion in Greek (or a Sbornik in Slavonic), and chant books (Liturgical Books, Metropolitan Cantor Institute).

REGULATION FOR THE SERVICE OF THE DEDICATION OF A CHURCH (According to the Typikon of the Great Church of Christ) REGULATION FOR THE TYPIKON On a Sunday. If it takes place on a Sunday, at Vespers, at Lord, I have cried, 4 Stichera of the Resurrection are chanted, 3 of the Dedication and 3 of the Saint of the Church. Glory of the Saint of the Church. Both now the 1st Theotokion of the Tone of the week. The Readings of the Dedication. The Resurrection Aposticha, Glory of the Saint of the Church, Both now of the Dedication. The Resurrection Apolytikion, that of the Saint of the Church and that of the Dedication. At Matins. The Resurrection Kathismata and those of the Dedication in place of the Theotokia. The Resurrection Canon, that of the Dedication and that of the Saint of the Church. The Resurrection Exapostilarion, that of the Saint of the Church and that of the Dedication. At Lauds, 4 Stichera of the Resurrection and 4 of the Dedication. Glory of the Saint of the Church. Both now of the Dedication. Great Doxology and Today salvation. <http://web.ukonline.co.uk/ephrem/typikon.htm>.

Table 86: Example of Typikon

Barrois, in Scripture Readings in Orthodox Worship, describes the use of Scriptural readings in Orthodox worship following the directives of the three liturgical books: the Triodion, which contains the services from the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee, tenth before Easter, to Great and Holy Saturday (21); the Pentecostarion, which

958

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

contains the services from Pascha to the Sunday after Pentecost, the Sunday of All Saints (103); and the Festal Menaion, whose order Barrois uses to analyze the bible readings in the major feasts of the Lord and the Theotokos (135). He explains that except for some spare readings from the Old Testament on the vigils of the Ascension and Pentecost, or some feast days listed in the Festal Menaion, the Byzantine lectionary from the Pentecostarion on, exclusively uses the New Testament (103). As it marks the Rule of the divine services, the Typicon or Ordo needs further explanation. Pomazansky, in The Liturgical Theology of Father A. Schmemann, is against seeing the development of the Rule of Divine services, as Pomazansky asserts, as an ordinary historical manifestation, formed as a result of the influence of changing historical circumstances. However, he explains that: The Typicon, in the form which it has come down to our time in its two basic versions, is the realized idea of Christian worship; the worship of the first century was a kernel which has grown and matured to its present state, having now taken its finished form. We have in mind, of course, not the content of the services, not the hymns and prayers themselves, which often bear the stamp of the literary style of an era and are replaced one by another, but the very system of Divine services, their order, concord, harmony, consistency of principles and fullness of Gods glory and communion with the Heavenly Church on the one hand, and on the other the fullness of their expression of the human soul from the Paschal hymns to the Great Lenten lamentation over moral falls. For Pomazansky the supposedly static form of the Rule of the Divine Liturgy does not entail petrification or fossilization, but finality of growth: The present Rule of Divine services was already contained in the idea of the Divine services of the first Christians in the same way that in the seed of a plant are already contained the forms of the plants future growth up to the moment when it begins to bear mature fruits, or in the way that in the embryonic organism of a living creature its future form is already concealed. To the foreign eye, to the non-Orthodox West, the fact that our Rule has taken a static form is viewed as petrification, fossilization. For us this static form represents the finality of growth, the attainment of all possible fullness. Such finality of developed form we also observe in Eastern Church iconography, in church architecture, in the interior appearance of the best churches, in the traditional melodies of church singing. Further attempts at development in these spheres often lead to decadence, leading not up but down. One can draw only one conclusion: we are nearer to the end of history than to the beginning ... Of

959

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

course, as in other spheres of Church history, so also in this sphere of liturgics we should see a path established by God, Providence, and not only the logic of causes and effects. In the following table, there is a summary of what it was said about the Typikon in Chapter 7:

The order of services or prayer in the Eastern Orthodox Churches is set forth in the Typicon, a volume that provides the order of church rites for all services, special prayers, and church celebrations for the whole year. The two main sources of the Typicon are the ancient Ordo of St. Sabas monastery in Palestine (the Jerusalem Ordo), and the later Studite monastery in Constantinople. These monastic centers were places where the existing practices were complied and synthesized and codified into a more standardized form. The St. Sabas Ordo is associated with many great monastic saints in Palestine, and the churches and monasteries associated with holy places in the area around Jerusalem. The Ordo of St. Sabas developed as the Church grew, as monasticism prospered and became a normal part of Church life, and as monasticism was an important part in the battle against heresies. It became the rule of prayer for the whole Church, and reached its final synthesis in the ninth century. (Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: The Byzantine Typicon) Table 87: The Byzantine Typicon

Pomanzansky concludes by saying that Orthodox public prayer is based on the very same dogmatic and psychological foundations on which it was made in Apostolic and ancient Christian times, notwithstanding the difference in forms of worship. Therefore the Gospel and Apostolic Scriptures are not seen in a refraction through some kind of special prism, but in their immediate, straightforward sense. Activity Read the above analysis of the liturgical books and Appendix I and write short description of these liturgical books. When you finish add a short passage to each one illustrating its content. Apostolos: Archieratikon: Evangelion: Great Euchologion: Hieratikon: Horologion : Menaion : Octoechos : Pentecostarion : Prophetologion :

960

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

9.

Psalter : Small Euchologion: Triodion : Typikon:

Activity 191: Liturgical Texts

ORTHODOX LAITY AND DIVINE SERVICES Orthodox laity may read or chant some portion of the daily ecclesiastical office (Vespers, Small Compline, Midnight Office, Matins, First Hour, Third, and Sixth Hours, the Ninth Hour), except the Divine Liturgy, which is replaced by the Typica.483 Archpriest Roman Lukianov, in Prayer Life in an Orthodox Home, addresses the topic of unceasing prayer for laity. He echoes what the late Archbishop Andrew of Rockland taught his spiritual children regarding what the holy Fathers of the Church established long ago. To be, as the Apostle commands, in a state of constant prayer, Lukianov adds, one must have regular prayers at intervals of no more than four hours. Indeed, if one places the daily cycle of church services in its proper, ancient order, one will see that the interval between services is always three hours or less. The following table has the order Archbishop Andrew delineated:

6:00 p.m. Vespers 9:00 p.m. Compline and Evening prayers The Midnight Office 3:00 a.m. Morning prayers and Matins 7:00 a.m. First Hour 9:00 a.m. Third Hour 12 noon Sixth Hour 3:00 p.m. Ninth Hour Table 88: Outline of times for the Daily Prayer Cycle

483

See an example of Typica provided by Archpriest Sergei Shukin in <http://pages.prodigy.net/ rjohnwhiteford/typica.htm>.

961

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

According to this archbishop, except on the eves of certain feasts and in some monasteries, the Divine Liturgy is generally set between the first and the sixth hour. In the following table, there are some rules for laity when reading the services:

The reading of service books should be conducted according to the following rules: 1. All [readers] services are to begin with the exclamation: Through the prayers of our holy fathers, O Lord Jesus Christ our God, have mercy on us. Amen. 2. All the priests prayers and exclamations are omitted. 3. In place of the Great and Augmented Ectenias and the Ectenia of Supplication, Lord, have mercy is said twelve times; in place of the Small Ectenia, three times. 4. The Gospel is not intoned, but read in an ordinary voice. [Note: Every Orthodox Christian is obliged to read the Gospel privately, according to the ecclesiastical lectionary found in church calendars. 5. All other hymns, psalms and prayers are read or sung as when a priest serves. 6. The Typica is read in place of the liturgy. (Archpriest Sergei Shukin, When No Priest is Available) Table 89: How laymen read service books

In Appendix N you can also see two different worship service schedules for two different monasteries. LITURGICAL AND PERSONAL PRAYER We know that Jesus Christ himself prayed and taught men to pray, and, for the Orthodox Church, prayer both personal or individual and liturgical is a condition to become a follower of Christ. There is no doubt that prayer is the first, most important charge a Christian is given. In Part II we studied the Prayer of the HeartLord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner! This is a personal, intimate prayer that can be repeated throughout the day and assist devotees to encounter God in the lighted depth of their heart to advance in the path of theosis. For the Orthodox, the heart is the indwelling place of the soul, of the Spirit of God, and any true prayer leads the believer to the heart, to a place where we share his or her inner self with no other human person but with the Lord. God is not longer out there but inside us and we feel his

962

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

indwelling Presence guiding us, stirring our hearts, guiding us, enlightening our mind (Jarmus, dir.) However, prayer can take many forms. It can just be as brief as a sweet remembrance of the Lord in the midst of our duties or a quick Thank You to God for his many blessings. For this personal prayer we are not required to be in any special place, at any special time. Father Michael D. Jordan, in A New Perspective on Prayer, states: Whatever form it takes, whatever reason you go to the Lord, the important thing is that you remembered Him. Its not how many words you say, your feelings often say it for you. Its not how elaborate your prayer is, for the greatest prayer on earth is the most simple prayer, Lord, have mercy. When you participate in the Divine Liturgy do you realize that the entire service is a Prayer Service to the Lord? Its often been said that when you sing, you pray twice; this is certainly true when you respond to the prayer petitions of the Priest with Lord, have mercy. When we participate in the Divine Liturgy, indeed a prayer service as Jordan asserts, or in any other official services or worship, we use a more formal type of prayer, prayers already written for the believer and rooted in Tradition. The psalmist says Worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness (29:2). Paul tells believers: Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:28-29). The Russian theologian Vasili Rozanov wrote: Prayer is the most sublime experience of the human soul, and worship is the most profound activity of the people of God. There is no life without prayer. Without prayer there is only madness and horror. The soul of Orthodoxy consists in the gift of prayer.484 Thus prayer is at the center of Orthodoxy, not only in the inner temple, but also in the outward temple of the faithful. Both, private or personal prayer and corporate, liturgical prayer (taking place in the Divine Liturgy, the Holy Mysteria, and other
484

Qtd. in Calivas.

963

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

services of the Church) are encouraged by the Orthodox Church and are means to converse with God. In the article The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: Orthodox Worship, we read: Prayer is the essence of the Orthodox Christian way of life. It is the means by which one achieves communion with God. Moreover, it is the means by which one experiences the presence of God in his/her life. Through a disciplined and regimented prayer life one enables him/herself to keep a continuous focus on Christ and His will. For Orthodoxy, prayer is lifting of the mind and heart to God. Genuine, personal and liturgical or group prayer aid our spiritual growth, increase our revelation of truth, beauty and goodness, and model our soul according to Gods will. Genuine prayer comes either when we talk to the Father with words as in the Liturgy or standing in silence. It is our being open to His will that is important for us. Prayer is in itself a religious experience. Jarmus (dir), in Prayer in Eastern Orthodox Spirituality, distinguishes four movements in our prayers: glorification, thanksgiving, confession of sins and supplication/entreaty. Hopko, basing himself in the traditional catechism of the Church, distinguishes three types of prayer asking, thanking, and praising to which he adds a fourth type: lamenting before God. All four kinds of prayer are found in the Bible and can be uttered in both personal and group or congregational prayer as in the Divine Liturgy. Also, in the Orthodox Church, all prayer is Trinitarian. Orthodox believers pray in the Holy Spirit, through Jesus the Son of God, and in his name, to God the Father. They also pray to the saints as mediators, being of great importance among them, Mary, the Theotokos. Hopko adds that the power of the prayer to bring us to God, and to strengthen us in doing his divine will that is essential (Worship, vol. 2, 6061). Following the Old Testament, the Orthodox Church exhorts its faithful to make formal prayers according to the hours of the day: in the morning, in the afternoon, in the

964

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

evening, before sleep, before meals. In Daily Prayers for Orthodox Christians: The Synekdemos,485 there are several types of prayers listed: The Symbol of Faith, Morning Prayers, Prayers at Mealtime, Prayers before Sleep, The Six Psalms, Small Compline, Service of Preparation for Holy Communion, Thanksgiving Following Holy Communion. In Prayers for Orthodox Christians, the following one are listed: O Heavenly King and Psalm 51 (Psalm of Repentance), The Creed: The Symbol of Faith, Hymn to the Theotokos, The Jesus Prayer, Prayer of the Hours, Morning Prayers, Evening Prayers, Before and after Meals, Before Reading the Holy Scripture, Before and after Holy Communion, Before and after any Work, For the Sick, For the Departed Selected Liturgical Hymns, Lenten Prayer of St. Ephrem, Selected Psalms, Prayer at the Opening of a Sacred Council. The following table shows an example of prayer before and after meals:
BEFORE MEALS In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Our Father, Who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen. Lord, have mercy. (3x) O Christ our God, bless the food, drink, and fellowship of Thy servants, for Thou art holy always, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen. AFTER MEALS We give thanks to Thee, O Christ our God, that Thou hast satisfied us with Thy earthly blessings; deprive us not also of Thy Heavenly Kingdom. As Thou didst come to Thy disciples and didst grant them peace; so come to us and save us, O Savior. Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen. Lord, have mercy. (3x) Blessed is God, Who has fed and nourished us with His bountiful gifts by His grace and compassion always, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen. (Prayers for Orthodox Christians) Table 90: Prayers before and after meals It is a very popular prayer book of the Orthodox Church present for a long time among Greek Orthodox Christians. The Synekdemos contains some 1300 pages of text in the original Greek.
485

965

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

The goal of our prayer is to encounter Christ, and we do not only encounter him in our private prayers but in worship. Fr. A. Calivas, in Orthodox Worship, says The Orthodox Christians inhabit and measure time by a calendar itself touched by the Incarnate Word of God. The recurring rhythms of the year, the months, the weeks, and the days alternating with nights mean much more than the simple passage of time. They also constitute the decisive and supreme moments when the Word of God was incarnate and lived among us, when He was born, died, rose again and ascended into heaven. These acts, upon which our salvation is grounded, occurred once and for all. But in the very rhythm and flow of time they are remembered, celebrated and experienced anew. In every liturgical event we encounter Christ, who once was dead and now lives; who is the same yesterday and today and forever (Heb. 13: 8). In every liturgical event he renders actual both His past saving work and its fulfillment. Amid the flux of time, worship introduces us to the end of time (Matt. 18: 20). He who is enthroned on high with the Father is also invisibly with us (prayer of the Divine Liturgy). He, who is to come again to judge the living and the dead, has never left us and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age. (Matt. 28: 20) Thus our personal prayer should be distinguished from the prayer in church, which is a communal prayer. Hopko says: In church we pray with others, and we should therefore discipline ourselves to pray all together as one body in the unity of one mind, one heart and one soul. Once again this does not mean that our prayers in church should cease to be personal and unique; we must definitely put ourselves into our churchly prayer. In the Church, however, each one must put his own person with his own personal uniqueness into the common prayer of Christ with his Body. (62) Liturgical or congregational prayer is very effective and highly fraternizing in its consequences. In public worship, the devotees engage in prayer to be uplifted morally and spiritually as a group with implications for the individual composing the group and participating in it. But not only the group, whole cities and nations can be helped by such community prayers as it is intended when devotees wholeheartedly respond Lord, have mercy in the various litanies of the Divine Liturgy. Genuine group prayer can led individuals, cities, nations, and the whole humankind to resolute, valorous accomplishments. Liturgical, community devotions can also prevent the danger associated with too much private praying. But congregational prayer has also the risk of

966

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

becoming far too aesthetic, as it might result in the losing of its fraternizing influence and might cause insular mysticism and the isolation of its faithful. In Part II, I also mentioned, Pauls admonishment to pray without ceasing (I Thess. 5, 17), and unceasing prayer is at the core not only of personal prayer but of worship, of liturgical prayer. This is seen, for example, in the Little Litany: PRIEST: Again and again in peace let us pray to the Lord. CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. This repetitive format of the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom is similar in following Jesus command. Besides, according to St. Luke, Jesus urges us to pray without becoming halfhearted: 1 And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint; 2 Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: 3 And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. 4 And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man; 5 Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me. 6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith. 7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? (Luke 18: 1-8) Furthermore, peace is not only at the center of personal prayer but of worship and thus it is the underlying condition for prayers and actions in Orthodox liturgy. Jesus exhorts us: Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift (Mat. 5:24) (Worship and Prayer). Yet, in a sense, as we saw above, Jarmus is right when asserting that both personal and liturgical prayers are corporate acts, that is, carried by a single body (the body of Christ). He says that this is obvious in liturgical prayer, as a group of believers are gathered together in one place; yet, Jarmus, adds, even when one prayer in private, one is joining his or her voice to the countless other Orthodox Christians throughout the

967

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

world who are also lifting their hearts to God in prayer at that time. However, as Hopko says, we do not attend the church merely to pray: We go to church to be together, to sing together, to meditate the meaning, of the faith together, to learn together and to have union and communion together with God. This is particularly true of the Divine Liturgy of the Church... The church services are not designed for silent prayer. They exist for the prayerful fellowship of all Gods people with each other, with Christ and with God. (62) It is true, though, that personal prayer and formal prayer must be linked together, and it is in Divine Liturgy when prayer gains a supra-dimension embracing the whole personality. As we know the Divine Liturgy consists of readings from the Scriptures and of solemn hymns and prayers, but Pope Pius X emphasizes the Divine Liturgy as a whole prayer experience: The Holy Mass [The Divine Liturgy] is a prayer itself, even the highest prayer that exists. It is the Sacrifice, dedicated by our Redeemer at the Cross, and repeated every day on the Altar. If you wish to hear Mass as it should be heard, you must follow with eye, heart, and mouth all that happens at the Altar. Further, you must pray with the Priest the holy words said by him, in the Name of Christ and which Christ says by him. You have to associate your heart with the holy feelings which are contained in these words and in this manner you ought to follow all that happens on the Altar. When acting in this way you have prayed Holy Mass.486 In the Papal Encyclical, Orientale Lumen, the Pope John Paul II proclaims: Liturgical prayer in the East shows a great aptitude for involving the human person in his or her totality: the mystery is sung in the loftiness of its content, but also in the warmth of the sentiments it awakens in the heart of redeemed humanity. In the sacred act, even bodiliness is summoned to praise, and beauty, which in the East is one of the best loved names expressing the divine harmony and the model of humanity transfigured, appears everywhere: in the shape of the church, in the sounds, in the colours, in the lights, in the scents. The lengthy duration of the celebrations, the repeated invocations everything expresses gradual identification with the mystery celebrated with ones whole person. Thus the prayer of the Church already becomes participation in the heavenly liturgy, an anticipation of the final beatitude.487 For the Orthodox Church, through the Divine Liturgy the faithful joyfully celebrates the presence of the Kingdom on earth. They are witness to the reality of Christs
486

Qtd. in Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (According to the Byzantine Rite of the Catholic Church). New Revised Liturgy. 487 Qtd. in The Divine Services.

968

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

resurrection and Ascension, and follow Christ, in and within him, to his heavenly Kingdom.

Illustration 157: The Divine Liturgy, Angel carrying chalice488

From this tradition of prayer of the Orthodox Church springs the above mentioned Typicon, whose main content includes the works of the Holy Fathers and the ascetics of the Church and their prayers: Prayer is the main activity in the spiritual life of an Orthodox Christian. Prayer is the necessary means for spiritual growth and the struggle with passions and is an endless need for the believer. But, prayer must be learned under the direction of those who have already achieved perfection in prayer, i.e., from the Holy Fathers, whose prayers, rites, and customs have been accepted by the whole Church and introduced into the Order of Divine Services. From here then is derived the sacred significance for the Church Typicon. (Typikon, Part I) As we know the Byzantine missionaries, in contrast to their Latin counterparts, prayed in the vulgar tongue of the people, and from the beginning it did not maintain any principle of uniformity in language. However, as Fortescue notes, today it is only in Romania that the liturgical language is the same as that of the people. Furthermore he tells us about the four main languages the Rite of Constantinople uses Greek, Arabic, Old Slavonic, and Rumanian: Greek (from which all the others are translated) is used at Constantinople, in Macedonia (by the Patriarchists), Greece, by Greek monks in Palestine and Syria, by nearly all Orthodox in Egypt; Arabic in parts of Syria, Palestine, and by a few churches in Egypt; Old Slavonic throughout Russia, in Bulgaria, and by all Exarchists, in Czernagora, Servia, and by the Orthodox in Austria and Hungary; and Rumanian by the Church of that country.
488

See: <www.skete.com>.

969

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

He adds other minor languages: Later Russian missions use Estonian, Lettish, and German in the Baltic provinces, Finnish and Tatar in Finland and Siberia, Chinese, and Japanese... . Although the Liturgy has been translated into English ... , a translation is never used in any church of the Greek Rite. The Uniates use Greek at Constantinople, in Italy, and partially in Syria and Egypt, Arabic chiefly in these countries, Old Slavonic in Slav lands, and Rumanian in Rumania. It is curious to note that in spite of this great diversity of languages the ordinary Orthodox layman no more understands his Liturgy than if it were in Greek. Old Slavonic and the semiclassical Arabic in which it is sung are dead languages. (Fortescue, The Byzantine Rite) Activity 1. Contrast and compare private and liturgical prayer 2. What are the four main languages the Byzantine Liturgy uses throughout the Orthodox world?
Activity 192: Comparing and contrasting private and liturgical prayer

BIBLE READING IN THE ORTHODOX WORSHIP Introduction In the above pages we have seen how the liturgical books can provide some light on the scriptural reading in Orthodox worship. We have also seen that, for the Orthodox Church, the Bible does not stand in dichotomy with Tradition but is an intrinsic part of it. In Holy Scripture in the Orthodox Church, Father Demetrios Serfes explains how the Bible is both liturgical and patristic and highlights its importance for worship: The Bible is the book of the Church. We therefore read Holy Scripture, not as isolated individuals, but as members of the Church. In order to keep Holy Scripture in the mind of the Church, we observe how Scripture is used in worship, and how it is interpreted by the Holy Fathers. Our approach then to the Bible is both Liturgical and Patristic. The Eastern Orthodox Church belief about Holy Scripture that is the Bible of the Old Testament and the New Testament we must be fully aware from within Holy Tradition. Tradition is a life, a personal encounter with Christ our Lord in the Holy Spirit. Tradition then not only is kept by the Church it lives in the Church, it is the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church. The Bible is then the supreme expression of Gods revelation to man. Similarly, for John Breck, in Scripture in its Tradition: The Bible and its interpretation in the Orthodox Church, the Scripture as written text is born in Tradition.

970

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

He states that Christ is the Orthodox hermeneutical principal and it is from this perspective that Orthodox Christianity holds both Old and New Testament to be books of the Church. Together they constitute the Churchs canon or rule of truth that alone determines what are and what are not authentic elements of Holy Tradition (10). Moreover, the soul of the Orthodox Church is prayer, both personal and liturgical, but it is also Holy Scripture since the Christian Church is a Scriptural Church. Liturgical prayer, which is what centers our attention now, is based on the canonical writings. Thus the Bible, both the Old and the New Testament are present in Orthodox worship. In the Apostolic Constitutions (Book II, Chap. V), written about 400 AD, there is a passage that can illustrate the use of the Bible in the Early Church: Let him be patient and gentle in his admonitions, well instructed himself, meditating in and diligently studying the Lords books, and reading them frequently, that so he may be able carefully to interpret the Scriptures, expounding the Gospel in correspondence with the prophets and with the law; and let the expositions from the law and the prophets correspond to the Gospel. For the Lord Jesus says: Search the Scriptures; for they are those which testify of me. (John 5:39) And again: For Moses wrote of me. (John 5:46) But, above all, let him carefully distinguish between the original law and the additional precepts, and show which are the laws for believers, and which the bonds for the unbelievers, lest any should fall under those bonds. We can also find many references to the Bible in the Holy Fathers. As an illustration, Clement of Rome in his Letter to the Corinthians (Chap. 45) says in an inspiring way: Look carefully into the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit.

971

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Illustration 158: St. Matthew the Evangelist489

As we will see, Orthodox worship services are based on the Holy Scriptures. There is no worship service which does not include a passage from the Bible, either the Old or the New Testament (The Bible). This is said in the Divine Liturgy Priest: Wisdom! Let Us Attend! Let Us Hear The Holy Gospel! Peace Be Unto All! Choir: And To Thy Spirit!

Moreover, being the book of the Church, we read the Bible not as isolated individuals, but as members of the Church as we pay attention to the interpretation of the Holy Fathers. The Orthodox approach to the Holy Scriptures is both Liturgical and Patristic. The Eastern Orthodox Church relies on the Septuagint for its Old Testament teachings. The Septuagint contains the standard 39 books of the Old Testament canon, as well as certain apocryphal books. Furthermore, the text of The Orthodox Study Bible includes the Septuagint, and the New Testament and Psalms are based on the New King James Version. There is a total of seventy-six books, forty-nine in the Old Testament
489

From Great Lavra, Holy Mt. Athos, Greece.See: <www.serfes.org>.

972

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

and twenty-seven in the New Testament. Let us see a table with the books of the Old and the New Testament used by the Orthodox Church, to which I will refer to in the Bible readings of the Divine services:
BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 1. Genesis 2. Exodus 3. Leviticus 4. Numbers 5. Deuteronomy 6. Joshua 7. Judges 8. Ruth 9. Kings I (I Samuel) 10 Kings II (II Samuel) 11. Kings III (I Kings) 12. Kings IV (2 Kings) 13. Chronicles I 14. Chronicles II 15. Esdras I 16. Esdras II (Ezra) 17. Nehemiah 18. Tobit 19. Judith 20. Esther 21. Maccabees I 22. Maccabees II 23. Maccabees III 24. Psalms 25. Job 26. Proverbs 27. Ecclesiastics 28. Song Of Solomon 29. Wisdom of Solomon 30. Wisdom of Sirach 31. Hosea 32. Amos 33. Michah 34. Joel 35. Obadiah 36. Jonah 37. Nahum 38. Habakkuk 39. Zephaniah 40. Haggai 41. Zachariah 42. Malachi 43. Isaiah 44. Baruch 46. Lamentations of Jermiah 47. Epistle of Jeremiah 48. Ezekiel 49. Daniel BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 1. Matthew 2. Mark 3. Luke 4. John 5. Acts 6. Romans 7. First Corinthians 8. Second Corinthians 9. Galatians 10. Ephesians 11. Philippians 12. Colossians 13. First Thessalonians 14. Second Thessalonians 15. First Timothy 16. Second Timothy 17. Titus 18. Philemon 19. Hebrews 20. James 21. First Peter 22. Second Peter 23. First John 24. Second John 25. Third John 26. Jude 27. Revelation

Table 91: Books of the Old Testament and the New Testaments accepted by the Orthodox Church

Yet the Bible is not only explicitly read but also gives meaning to many elements of worship, including the liturgical cycles, the building, iconography, and clergy vestment. Peter E. Gillquist says, in Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Faith, that the Bible comes itself alive at the liturgy: One of the things that has comforted me most in the worship of God through the time-proven liturgy of the Church is that so many of the passages of the Bible that I never understand have come to life. It is as though heavens drama of worship is playing live, right in my home town and in the very Christian community to which I belong. Since the liturgy is a procession of the people of God to His heavenly throne, not only is Christ really present with us, we are really present with Him as the Scriptures say, in the heavenlies. (82)

973

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT For the Orthodox Church, tradition the living memory of the church is the matrix in which the scriptures are composed, and it is, then, the Church that produces canonical Scriptures. For Breck, logically, this justifies the primary importance it lays on the writings of the New Testament. Yet, this fact does not imply, as Breck adds, lack of attention to Old Testament books,490 which are to be understood and interpreted in relation to Jesus Christ, their source He is the Logos and fulfillment the Hebrew Scriptures point to him in its deepest meaning. From this standpoint, we approach the Bible to deepen our faith as we seek understanding, in a hermeneutical circularity since understanding can only be attained through the eyes of the faith. And it is again Tradition that provides such a hermeneutical direction to the canonical books of the church, comprising both the Old and New Testament books (10-12). But it is this same hermeneutical principle, which has its consequences in the Orthodox Churchs doctrinal teaching and liturgical prayers, which makes some books more significant for the Orthodox Church than others. Regarding the Old Testament Books, Breck states that Psalms, prophecies and historical narratives are read constantly, as are the Epistles and Gospels (15). Accordingly, and in contrast to the scientifically oriented biblical interpretation of Westerners, the Old Testament books are important, as indicated above, as they are seen within a salvation-history framework, in terms of Promise and Fulfillment. Breck adds that there is a typological relationship between the two Testaments, being the events and experiences of the Hebrew people types or prophetic figures that will find ultimate meaning in the messianic age. Also,
From the beginning Christians regarded the Jewish canon as distinctively their own. The body of literature which developed in their midst did not replace but supplemented the Jewish canon. Around 200AD we already find the terms Old Testament and New Testament, palaia diatheke and kaine diatheke (Voorwinde).
490

974

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

according to Stylianopoulos, in The New Testament: An Orthodox Perspective, the Old in the Old Testament implies no diminution of its revelatory character. From the point of view of the inner, organic unit existing between the two Testaments it is plausible to agree that historical narratives of the Old Testament are important for the Orthodox Church. Breck delineates a series of parallelisms between both Testaments which shows this: Moses and Melchizedek are types or prophetic images of Christ, the true Lawgiver and High Priest. The Temple of the Old Covenant prefigures the Church of the New Covenant. The manna is interpreted as a typologically image of the Lords Supper. (1923) For him the point is that behind the biblical narratives there is ultimate reality, ultimate truth. Thus what really happened in the Exodus does not constitute the essence of the type. It is its interpretation or spiritual significance that counts. Therefore the historicity of the events is of second importance; yet, it doesnt mean that history doesnt matter. For example, for the writer of the psalms what happened in Egypt led to Israels liberation and constitution as the Lords chosen people, but the typological interpretation of the event goes beyond the historical intervention of God to embrace Gods saving activity within the sphere of humankind. It is the interpretation of that event what becomes an element of Tradition in the form of Old Testament writings. Thus, for the Orthodox Church as it was for the Apostles and the Fathers of the Church the events of Israels history have a supra historical dimension. Something of salvation value did happen to the Jewish people, but also, due to the unchanging, eternal Word of God, what happened has salving consequences in the New Testament and in todays society (28). From this typological point of view, the Prophetic Books, also permeated by history, are important to the Orthodox Church. The prophets speak primarily to the men of their own time, and their message springs out of the circumstances in which they live.

975

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

But not only that: their message is not a mere revelation of Gods will, but of God Himself. Its significance, then, extends beyond the prophets own time. The Word of God does not change. Ellison, in The Old Testament Prophets, calls the prophets the heralds of the New Testament as they foretell the coming of the Saviour of the world. He adds: before us, scattered throughout various passages of the prophets writings, but abundant when taken all together, is a depiction of the future events of the Gospel and its portrayal of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself (12). Similarly, the psalms do not only point to the future lot of the Chosen People, but also to a Messianic dimension, both literally and typologically, as Ellison asserts. As an illustration, the author of the Hebrews bases his interpretation of the Exodus on the psalmist (Ps 94/95: 7-11) to present Jesus as the antitype of Moses. The Fathers interpret many psalms as prophecies of the coming, kingdom, priesthood, passion, death, and resurrection of the Messiah (34). For this reason, the Psalter is very frequently used in the liturgy of the Orthodox Church from the time of Christ and the Apostles. Today it is used in liturgical services such as matins, vespers, hours, and the Divine Liturgy. Summarizing, narrative books, prophesies and, especially psalms are of importance for the Orthodox Church for the messianic dimension underlying their salvation messages. In Orthodox worship, the entire Psalter is appointed to be read through once every week in church. It is recited each week during the course of Vespers when the liturgical day begins in the Orthodox Church and Matins, and in Lent twice a week. The Psalter is simply the biblical book of the Psalms of David arranged for liturgical use, divided into twenty sections called kathismata. Each kathisma is further divided into three stasis. As an illustration, at Great Vespers, Psalm 103 (Bless the Lord, O my

976

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

soul ...) 491 is read and Psalms 140, 141, 129, and 116 (O, Lord, I have cried unto Thee ...) are chanted in the tone of the day (Vespers). Moreover, six psalms are read by the Chanter or Reader: 3, 37, 62, 87, 102 and 142 at Sunday Matins (Matins). Furthermore Psalm 51 (Have mercy on me, O God) is recited by the priest at the Divine Liturgy, following the prothesis, while incensing the altar table. The Psalms 103 (Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name.) and 146 (Praise ye the LORD. Praise the LORD, O my soul.) are sung as the antiphons at the Divine Liturgy of the Lords Day. Additionally, the Psalms are read in some sacramental services. At the Funeral Service, for example, selection of verses from Psalm 119 (LXX 118), in three stanzas, are read (The Funeral Service of the Orthodox Church). Regarding other books from the Old Testament, Barrois says that Byzantine liturgy limits the reading of them to certain seasons and to a restricted number of feasts throughout the year, and with less rigour than the reading of the Psalms. He adds that they are chosen, on the one hand, according to a course of lesson in more or less continuous sequence, following the order of chapters in the books of the Bible; and, on the other hand, regarding a particular theme of a given Old Testament passage set in relation, historical, typological or prophetical, which the character of the day or feast (18). He gives detailed contents and significance of these Old Testament readings from the Triodion and the Pentecostarion, but makes a good summary of it that is significant for the purpose of this paper: The regular course of continuous Old Testament readings begins in the week following the Sunday of the Last Judgment. In Holy Week proper Old Testament lessons are added to the running lectionary of Lent. These lessons are prophecies and chapters of the Old Testament foreshadowing the events of the Passion of the Crucifixion, for the edification of the faithful and the preparation of the catechumens for baptism, according to the usage of the early churches. The
491

All the Bible quotations are taken from the King James version.

977

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Vigils of the Entrance of Our Lord into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday), of the Ascension, and of the Sunday of Pentecost have their own Old Testament lessons. (18) As an illustration, the Divine Liturgy not celebrated on the Wednesday and Friday of the third week of the Lenten Triodion, readings of the Old Testament prophecies are prescribed these days at the Sixth Hour and Vespers, hence lessons from Joel (1:12-16 and 3:12-21) are read on Wednesday and from Zechariah (8:7-17; 8:19-23) on Friday. In addition, although except for the Psalter, the Old Testament is not read explicitly at the Divine Liturgy, the Thrice-Hoy Hymn, sung in the Small Entrance, is taken from Isaiah 6:1-5 (... Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.) Gillquist quotes chapter 6 of Isaiah to describe the vision of worship in heaven: worship as seeing, as hearing, as touch and taste, as smell, and as mission (77-90). Barrois states that he has surveyed the lectionary as a whole and, among the prophetic books, nothing is read of Ruth, Samuel, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Tobith, and Maccabees; among the wisdom and poetic books, nothing is read of Ecclesiastes, the Song of song and Ecclesiasticus; and, among the prophets, nothing is read of Lamentations, Hosea, Amos, Obadiah, Nahum and Haggai (19). The Books of the New Testament As noted, the Epistles and Gospels are constantly read in Orthodox liturgical worship, except for the Book of Revelation, the only New Testament writing which is not read liturgically in Orthodox worship. At the Divine Liturgy there is a series of Epistle readings, taken from the Acts of the Apostles as well as from the apostolic letters of the New Testament, and Gospel readings prescribed in regular order for each day of the Church Year, as well as special readings on the feasts of saints or other Church celebrations. These readings, as Barrois asserts, are generally chosen with a content, in harmony, with the proper character of the feast or the occasion (19). Barrois

978

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

also explains that the Scripture passages selected for the period extending from the Sunday of All Saints to the beginning of the Triodion in the calendar year are organized following a general principle of continuous reading. Yet, those from the time that covers the beginning of the Lenten Triodion to Pentecost show a concern for the preparation of the faithful for the celebration of the paschal mystery (19-20). Thus, the Gospel reading on the Sunday of the Last Judgment (Mt. 25:31-46) is a prophetic discourse of Christ, which preceded the events of Great and Holy Week (26): 31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat ... Notwithstanding, at the Divine Liturgy other New Testament readings are used. At the Anaphora, for the example, the priest reads II Corinthians (3:14): The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. Other New Testament passages are not explicitly read but are the source of many parts of the Divine Liturgy, namely Colossians 3:1-3, Timothy 2:5, or Hebrews 9:24, 10-10-14, at the Eucharistic Canon, or 1 Timothy 1:15 at the Communion, when the priests prays: I believe O Lord and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who camest into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first (Hopko, vol. 2, Worship 183-185). As already mentioned, the New Testament is also read at the daily cycle of prayer. The Magnificat or Song of Mary, for example, is usually chanted or read during the Sunday Matins service: 46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

979

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name. 50 And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation... . . (Luke 1:46-55) Likewise, the Nunc Dimittis, called Simeon the God-receiver, also taken from Luke, is read at daily Vespers and sung at Great Vespers,492 along with Psalm 140, 141, 129, and 116: 29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: 30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, 31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; 32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel. (Luke 2:29 32) According to the Festal Menaion, the Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos is celebrated on September 8 with the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom which is conducted on the morning of the Feast and preceded by a Matins service. A Great Vespers is conducted on the evening before the day of the Feast. Scripture readings for the Feast are the following: At Matins: Luke 1:39-49, 56. At the Divine Liturgy: Philippians 2:5-11; Luke 10:38-42; 11:27-28. There are also passages from the Old Testament read at the Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos: At Vespers: Genesis 28:10-17; Ezekiel 43:27, 4:4; Proverbs 9:1-11 (Feast of the Nativity of Our Most Holy Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary). Barrois explains that the unknown circumstances of Marys birth are not essential; the point is rather the indispensable role of the Virgin in the mystery of the Incarnation as the title of the feast indicates Theotokos or Mother of God. Therefore there is, for example, a typological connection of the Old Testament readings at Vespers with the Mystery of the Incarnation (Barrois 138).

Daily Vespers is similar to Great Vespers, with the following changes: Litany of Fervent Supplication is moved after the apolytikion and Theotkion which follow the Trisagion prayers. The Prayer of St. Simeon read, instead of sung.

492

980

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Illustration 159: The Birth of the Theotokos493

Moreover, also according to the Festal Menaion, at another of the fixed feats, the Transfiguration of Our Lord (August 6), Luke 9:28-36 is read at Matins and Matthew at the Divine Liturgy. At Vespers three lessons, with a typological meaning, are read: Exodus 24:12-18; Exodus 33:11-23; 34:4-6,8; and First Kings 3-9, 11-13, 1516 (Barrois 166-167).

Illustration 160: Transfiguration of Christ494

The New Testament is also read at other worship services. At Baptism-Chrismation, the Epistle reading is Rom 6:3-11 (Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?) and the Gospel reading is Matthew 28:16493 494

See: <www.antiochian.org.au>. See: <www.orthodoxchristendom.com>.

981

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

20 (Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.) At the Funeral Service, besides the Psalms mentioned above, there are two Scripture Readings: (a) 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and (b) John 5:24-30 (The Funeral Service of the Orthodox Church). In short, there is a frequent use both of the Old Testament, often with a typological meaning, and of the New Testament in Orthodox worship. The Orthodox Church is a Tradition-oriented church, and the Bible, which is an integral part in included in it and emerges from it, is at the core of its eternal Apostolicity. 2. WESTERN RITES: YOUR OWN RESEARCH At the beginning of the twentieth century, Saint Tikhon, Patriarch of Moscow, in his Farewell Address to America, where he had served as both Archbishop and evangelizer said: The Light of Orthodoxy is not lit for a small circle of people. No, the Orthodox Faith is catholic; it is a commandment of its founder, Go into all the world (Mark 16:15). It is our obligation, therefore, to share our spiritual treasure, our truth, our light, and our joy with those who do not have these gifts495 It is true, as we have

seen in Chapter 7, that from the earliest beginning of Christianity, there always have been divergences in the manner in which the Eucharist was celebrated in the various regional Churches. These variations were due, and continue to be truth, according to local traditions, racial temperaments, historic development and language, including translations. In spite of its conservatism, the Orthodox Church requires unity of spirit and not uniformity in the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Your Own Research 1. Read Appendix I and write a summary of Fr. Alexey Youngs An Introduction to Western Rite Orthodoxy. 2. Also read The Western Rite: Is It Right for the Orthodox?
495

Qtd. in Young.

982

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

(http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/liturgics/johnson_ western_rite.htm). 3. When you finish, express your own feelings about it.
Activity 193: Western rites

I believe that western rites represent a restoration of the legitimate Western Liturgy of the Undivided Church of the first millenium, by Patriarchal authority, for the worship benefit of the Orthodox believer outside Orthodox countries. One of the glories of the Orthodox Church is its public worship, its unique way of expressing itself in the liturgy. As we have seen it is a liturgy consisting of a very rich variety of rites and ceremonies including prayers, solemn hymns, formal theological statements as well as bodily perceptions and gestures (e.g., music, incense, prostrations) or the visual arts which are the result of an outward, historical evolution of the changeless revelatory truth. The worship of the Orthodox Church has a great theological richness and spiritual significance springing forth from its close link to the Holy Tradition which accounts for its most significant features. (The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship and Sacraments).

3. LITURGICAL CATECHESIS AS A MODEL OF HOLISTIC EDUCATION

LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI AN AXIOM AT THE CENTER OF HOLISTIC

LITURGICAL CATECHESIS The Latin axiom lex orandi, lex credendi, that could be translated the rule of prayer determines the rule of faith, or the way we pray, shows what we believe, was the principle that guided the first Christians. Thus, their religious teaching or catechesis was a consequence of their rule of prayer, and therefore holistic in nature. Catechesis was rooted in the liturgy, and thus in the Holy Tradition, which is perpetuated through it. This Tradition, a tradition full of the experience of men who knew and lived in the presence of God, impelled and impels to a holistic education which embraces the whole,

983

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

complete man. It was and should be an education aiming at theosis, at the deification of its recipients. And it is within the Liturgy, the most sacred reflection of the Holy Tradition and the mystical experience of the Fathers, that this teaching can take place. Religious education is essentially biblical, but the Bible is understood against the light of apostolic tradition. In the fourth century, Basil of Caesarea says: we dont limit ourselves to what has been recorded in the gospels as well as in the acts and the epistles, but we add other doctrines transmitted through oral teaching and which hold an important place in the mystery.496 Salma Fayad, in Orthodox Perspectives in the Development of Religious education Curricula, tells that these other doctrines are the liturgical and sacramental traditions, the framework through which the Scriptures were understood (51). There are some biblical quotes that can help us understand Orthodox religious education and the need for a liturgical, holistic approach: Acts 2:41-42; Ephesians 4:1116; Romans 6:17-19; Romans 12:3-8; Titus 2:1-15; 1 Corinthians 1:10-31; 1 Corinthians 12:1-28; James 3:1; II Timothy 2:1-7; II Timothy 3:10-17. The first quote, Acts 2: 41-42, already points out to this goal: 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine497 and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. (Acts 2: 41-42) This passage is part of Lukes Pentecostal narrative, consisting of an introduction (Acts 2:1-13), a speech ascribed to Peter declaring the resurrection of Jesus and its messianic significance (Acts 2:14-36), and a favorable response from the audience (Acts 2:37-41). Full of the Holy Spirit, the disciples devoted themselves to the teaching of the word, to fellowship with one another, to the breaking of bread or communion, and to prayer. The

Qtd. in John Meyendorff, Initiation la Thology Byzantine, 16. Acts 2:42: They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer (NIV).
497

496

984

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

spreading of the Word is done in an integral context of the whole religious personality as a member of the Church (learning/teaching context, worship, and community). For Orthodoxy and its catechetical ministry, the mystery of Christs death and resurrection has a central role. Sophie Koulomzin, in Our Church and Our Children, referring to the task of educating children in the Orthodox faith, talks about the sense of the reality of God the Christian educator should impart: [The italics are hers.] The first basic, indispensable, and difficult task of the Christian educator is to convey to the child a sense of the reality of God: in other words, to help the child to know God, as distinct from convey to the child knowledge about God. It is precisely this sense of the reality of God that is so strongly eroded in our present society (20). Koulomzin gives as an example the answer to Jesus given by the blind man after he has been healed: 35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? 36 He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? 37 And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. 38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him. (John 9: 35-38) Koulomzin rightly asserts that Jesus was not asking for a correct formulation of belief, that is, for knowledge about God, but for a recognition of the power that entered the blind mans life as Gods power (20). She adds that the two alternatives, the two possibilities living and thinking within the experience of Gods presence or outside of it exist at every age. Likewise, for Father Alexander Schmemann, in Liturgy and Life: Christian Development through Liturgical Experience, religious education is not merely the communication of knowledge, not training a human being to become a good person, but to edification the building up of a member of the Body of Christ, a member of that

985

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

new chosen race and holy nation whose mysterious life in this world began on the day of Pentecost (41). In similar terms, Fayad defines the goal of religious education: Religious education aims at deifying the human being, at restoring the image of God. It does not then consist in teaching ideas and behavioral patterns, which would amount to an ethical anthropology. It seeks the eternal citizenship in the Kingdom. It helps the Church members in deepening their belonging to the Body of Christ, according to their needs and the environment in which they live, so that they become bearers of light for the world through their sanctification. (47) Undoubtedly, that is what Orthodox Religious Education should be aimed at: at deification, to an eternal citizenship in the Kingdom, to a deepening of belonging in the Body of Christ. Similarly, Constance J. Tarasar, in his dissertation A process Model for the Design of Curriculum for Orthodox Christian Religion Education, while addressing to the interdisciplinary ambit of religious education should have, alludes to this holistic dimension: Religious education is an interdisciplinary field of study and practice, requiring a synthesis of knowledge and skill from many sources: theology, education, psychology, and philosophy, at the very least. Its task goes beyond the mere transmission and acquisition of knowledge, for its goal is to integrate a person in every dimension of their lives. Its intention is intention is to lead them freely, knowingly, and without coercion to accept a tradition of living and learning that will challenge and sustain them throughout their lives. (1) Tarasar applies the process approach based on concepts, procedures, and attitudes common nowadays in the teaching-learning of many subjects at schools and universities to religious teaching. Thus, he is convinced that the task of religious education is not merely the transmission of learning but, as it has, like all of Orthodox theology, an experiential level which integrates a person in every dimension of their life. For him, this inclusive form of education requires a flexible curriculum with parameters broad enough to include goals or intentions directed to the long-term nurturing of attitudes, the spiritual knowledge and prayer, or the behaviors modelled by parents, community leaders, or saints (2).

986

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Tarasars process model for the design of curriculum in Orthodox Christian religious education reflects the basic elements of curriculum design, while remaining faithful to the tradition of the church, as expressed in the Orthodox family of churches (2). Furthermore, the instructional implementation of this curriculum should occur in all three contexts of the churchs life, already delineated above: in worship, in formal teaching situations, and in the life of the home and community through praxis. Therefore, these three contexts must be taken into consideration by curriculum planners if they are to create a curriculum for holistic religious education (3). This integration of worship, teaching, and practice is accomplished in liturgical worship. For Mary J. McDonald, in Building a Eucharistic Community: A Handbook for Liturgical Catechesis, to live the Christian life, members of the assembly should have an active participation in the liturgy, but this cannot be done without a full-scale, lifelong liturgical catechesis for people of all ages. For her the Eucharist should be at the very heart of the life of the Christian community, thus the whole parish will gather at the Sunday celebration. Rather, McDonald proposes Eucharistic living as the norm every day of the week. Bringing with them all that they are, and offering themselves to the Father in union with the sacrifice of Christ, the community enters deeply into the paschal mystery, both collectively and individually. Strengthened at the Lords table they are sent forth again to minister, to continue Christs work, to be Eucharist to others. This cycle is repeated again and again. For her, liturgical catechesis is not catechesis about the Eucharistic celebration, though this will be a small part of it, instead is a process that is centered on the liturgy and grows out of the Sunday celebration itself, at the same time fostering more active participation. It becomes the way people of all ages are formed in faith. Thus there is no curriculum, in the accepted sense of the word. The structure of the catechetical process is based on the seasons of the liturgical year. The learning of doctrine flows very naturally from the themes of the weekly Scripture readings. Therefore it is a

987

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

process of formation rather than a program of instruction. The concentration on the Sunday readings stimulate not only a knowledge and love of Scripture, but also link the members of the community, to the liturgical year and the Eucharist, and forms them into true disciples. Thus, for McDonald, the lectionary is the catechetical text. She adds, emphasizing the holistic, experiential nature of this life-long process approach: The aim of liturgical catechesis is not only to turn out children, teens or adults who are religiously literate; it is to form them into disciples of Jesus Christ, who live the values of the Gospel and work, in whatever situation they find themselves, to build up the kingdom of God. Far from eroding belief, it builds up faith in heart and soul as well as head. This type of lectionary-based, holistic formation, McDonald states it is not new. In fact it is a restoration of the catechetical model that was the norm in the early centuries of Christianity. In fact, as Perkins remarks: Through the formational processes, the tradition is acquired, sustained and deepened. The aim of such processes is to conserve and provide roots in the past. It is an intentional, experiential, nurturing process within every aspect of parish life. Further, it is foundational to the whole catechetical process, and is essential and developmentally possible for children. Through the educational processes, people critically examine the tradition, reshape it and apply it to life. Such educations aim is to transform and provide openness to the future. It is an intentional, reflective, converting process related to every aspect of parish life. Secondary to the formational processes in that it necessarily follows experience in sequence, it is essential and developmentally possible for most adolescents and adults. He also points out to the integrative, reflective task: For example, within the liturgical dimension there is a possible estrangement between the churchs worship and its action in the world. One essential task of catechesis is to help the church prepare for meaningful worship by reflecting on its life in the world. Another is to help it prepare for faithful action in the world by reflecting on worship. In this way, catechesis can bring about the integration of the two foci [one in the church and one in the world] of the liturgical dimension. Moreover, in his book, Tarasar also mentions the history of liturgical catechesis and show its application in the holistic model of religious education. Let us see some notes on the historical background of holistic catechesis.

988

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

Activity Why can we say that Orthodox religious teaching is holistic? Religious teaching is biblical, but how is the Bible understood in Orthodoxy? Read the following scriptural passages and comment on what they say about teaching of the Word? [Ephesians 4:11-16; Romans 6:17-19; Romans 12:3-8; Titus 2:1-15; 1 Corinthians 1:10-31; 1 Corinthians 12:1-28; James 3:1; II Timothy 2:1-7; II Timothy 3:10-17.] Explain the following phrase: educating children in the Orthodox faith means imparting a sense of the reality of God. Summarize Tarasars process model. Explain the following phrase: the lectionary is the catechetical text.
Activity 194: The holistic, experiential nature of Orthodox religious teaching

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF ORTHODOX, HOLISTIC RELIGIOUS EDUCATION As Salma Fayad comments, Christ was the first doctor: Teaching was an essential aspect of his activity. He taught everyday and everywhere he went. He often addressed the Scriptures, not merely to recall them but to interpret them. Also, his teaching was done in the synagogue, that is, in the context of a liturgy of the Word. When he used parables he did not intend only to instruct but to demand an explanation (47), to incite to an internal response, to a change. Fayad adds: Christ was always concerned about the group to be formed. Indeed He addressed the multitude, but He was permanently education the core group of the twelve. He associated them in His mission and made them report about their work. Finally Jesus did not only say what was to be done, but as a perfect educator, He also lived according to His teaching. (47) At Pentecost, as we saw above, the disciples proclaimed the message of salvation: Christ, the Son of God, had died and risen again to grant us eternal life. Their preaching was intended to create faith as the first stage (Fayad 48). In those early years, worship was the center of Christian life, and hence the teachings of the Church. Christians would gather not only for worship and to celebrate their common faith, but to experience their common life. New members incorporated into the community through baptism and Eucharist, and were educated in the faith in that context. In his article

989

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

entitled Orthodox Perspectives in Religious Education, Tarasar summarizes the history of Orthodox religious education in five types of experiences: (1) The conversion experience, (2) the catechetical experience, (3) the monastic/ascetical experience, (4) the Scholastic/Pietistic experience, and (5) the secular/sectarian experience. The first one, the conversion experience, was the individualized education when the church was composed of small communities. The conversion was aimed at full participation in Christian community. This call was a call to repentance affecting ones entire being in the determination to follow the path of Gods Kingdom. Christian life was a life of (a) teaching and learning, (b) life of worship, prayer and Eucharistic fellowship, and c) a life of witness and services to others (28-30). The second one, the Catechetical experience, started when a greater number of believers began to attend church and required preparation for baptism. In this preparation the whole community was involved, and admission for catechumenate was selective, many being were refused. Hippolytus of Rome, in his The Apostolic Tradition, composed about the year 215 in Rome, comments how the Christians who evangelized these postulants and who accompanied them to Church had to approve of their attitude to become catechumens: Those who are newly brought forward to hear the Word shall first be brought before the teachers at the house, before all the people enter. 2 Then they will be questioned concerning the reason that they have come forward to the faith. Those who bring them will bear witness concerning them as to whether they are able to hear. 3 They shall be questioned concerning their life and occupation, marriage status, and whether they are slave or free. 4 If they are the slaves of any of the faithful, and if their masters permit them, they may hear the Word. If their masters do not bear witness that they are good, let them be rejected. 5 If their masters are pagans, teach them to please their masters, so that there will be no blasphemy. (15: 1-5) Then, the new catechumens were informed of the basic requirements of the Christian life:

990

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

6 If a man has a wife, or a woman has a husband, let them be taught to be content, the husband with his wife, and the wife with her husband. 7 If there is a man who does not live with a woman, let him be taught not to fornicate, but to either take a wife according to the law, or to remain as is. 8 If there is someone who has a demon, such a one shall not hear the Word of the teacher until purified. (15: 6-8) Also, as Hyppolitus narrates, once the candidates were accepted, their life was examined, 1 When they are chosen who are to receive baptism, let their lives be examined, whether they have lived honorably while catechumens, whether they honored the widows, whether they visited the sick, and whether they have done every good work. 2 If those who bring them forward bear witness for them that they have done so, then let them hear the gospel (Chap.20: 1-2) and they even had to abandon their occupations if they were contrary to Christian morals: They will inquire concerning the works and occupations of those are who are brought forward for instruction. 2 If someone is a pimp who supports prostitutes, he shall cease or shall be rejected. 3 If someone is a sculptor or a painter, let them be taught not to make idols. Either let them cease or let them be rejected. 4 If someone is an actor or does shows in the theater, either he shall cease or he shall be rejected. 5 If someone teaches children (worldly knowledge), it is good that he cease. But if he has no (other) trade, let him be permitted. 6 A charioteer, likewise, or one who takes part in the games, or one who goes to the games, he shall cease or he shall be rejected. 7 If someone is a gladiator, or one who teaches those among the gladiators how to fight, or a hunter who is in the wild beast shows in the arena, or a public official who is concerned with gladiator shows, either he shall cease, or he shall be rejected. 8 If someone is a priest of idols, or an attendant of idols, he shall cease or he shall be rejected. 9A military man in authority must not execute men. If he is ordered, he must not carry it out. Nor must he take military oath. If he refuses, he shall be rejected. 10 If someone is a military governor, or the ruler of a city who wears the purple, he shall cease or he shall be rejected. 11 The catechumen or faithful who wants to become a soldier is to be rejected, for he has despised God. 12 The prostitute, the wanton man, the one who castrates himself, or one who does that which may not be mentioned, are to be rejected, for they are impure. 13 A magus shall not even be brought forward for consideration. 14 An enchanter, or astrologer, or diviner, or interpreter of dreams, or a charlatan, or one who makes amulets, either they shall cease or they shall be rejected. 15 If someones concubine is a slave, as long as she has raised her children and has clung only to him, let her hear. Otherwise, she shall be rejected. 16 The man who has a concubine must cease and take a wife according to the law. If he will not, he shall be rejected. (16: 1-16) The sins the catechumen could commit in their professions were related to those major sins of idolatry, homicide, or impurity. In sum, Hyppolitus words show that the 991

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

catechumenal period at the beginning of the third century was a long period of examinationit lasted three yearsand formation before final admission. This formation was given by teachers but also by clergy or laity. The chosen ones were first exorcised with an imposition of hand, and later by a more solemn exorcism by the bishop: 1 Catechumens will hear the word for three years. 2 Yet if someone is earnest and perseveres well in the matter, it is not the time that is judged, but the conduct. (17: 1-2) 1 When the teacher finishes his instruction, the catechumens will pray by themselves, separate from the faithful. 2 The women will also pray in another place in the church, by themselves, whether faithful women or catechumen women. 3 After the catechumens have finished praying, they do not give the kiss of peace, for their kiss is not yet pure. 4 But the faithful shall greet one another with a kiss, men with men, and women with women. Men must not greet women with a kiss. 5 All the women should cover their heads with a pallium, and not simply with a piece of linen, which is not a proper veil. (15: 1-5) 1 After the prayer, the teacher shall lay hands upon the catechumens, pray, and dismiss them. Whether such is one of the laypeople or of the clergy, let him do so. 2 If any catechumens are apprehended because of the Name of the Lord, let them not be double-hearted because of martyrdom. If they may suffer violence and be executed with their sins not removed, they will be justified, for they have received baptism in their own blood. 3 From the time at which they are set apart, place hands upon them daily so that they are exorcised. When the day approaches on which they are to be baptized, let the bishop exorcise each one of them, so that he will be certain whether each has been purified. 4 If there are any who are not purified, they shall be set apart. They have not heard the Word in faith, for the foreign spirit remained with each of them. 5 Let those who are to be baptized be instructed that they bathe and wash on the fifth day of the week. 6 If a woman is in the manner of women, let her be set apart and receive baptism another day. 7 Those who are to receive baptism shall fast on the Preparation of the Sabbathb. On the Sabbath, those who are to receive baptism shall all gather together in one place chosen according to the will of the bishop. They shall be commanded to pray and kneel. 8 Then, laying his hand on them, he will exorcise every foreign spirit, so that they flee from them and never return to them. When he has finished exorcising them, he shall breathe on their faces and seal their foreheads, ears and noses. Then he shall raise them up. 9 They shall all keep vigil all night, reading and instructing them. 10 Those who are to be baptized are not to bring any vessel, only that which each brings for the eucharist. It is indeed proper that each bring the oblation in the same hour. (19: 1-10) After being baptized, catechumens partook of the bread. But, as Hippolytus remarks, baptism and Eucharist were not an end but a beginning: 38 When these things

992

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

are done, they shall be zealous to do good works, and to please God, living honorably, devoting themselves to the church, doing the things which they were taught, and advancing in piety (21:38) (A History of the Catechumenate in Rome ca. 215). Tarasar believes that in this period the threefold focus of the Churchs life were teaching and preaching, witness and service, and prayer and Eucharistic fellowship (Orthodox Perspectives in Religion, 31). The elements of this focus were interrelated and integrated. Referring to the context and the liturgical periods embracing this catechumenal period, he adds: Intended as the preparation for adults whose intention was to convert to Christianity, the catechumenate took place in the context of the worshipping community and extended for a long as three a years. It involved training and practice in Christian behaviour (ethics, morality), formal instruction, and exorcism and participation in part of the liturgical life of the church. The final phase of the catechumenate took place during the period leading to Easter, when those candidates who were to be received into the church during the Paschal Liturgy received the final instruction. (A Process Model 4) As this researcher adds, this integral connection continued though more elaborate to the fourth century, the beginning of the third period he classifies: This integral connection between worship, teaching, and practice continued in the church and was formalized in the second to the fourth centuries when an elaborate system of education called the catechumenate was developed in the church (A Process Model 3). Tarasar praises the holistic approach of Early Christian catechumenate as it gave the Church a catechetical content which was incorporated in its liturgical life: The catechumenate of the Early Church provided a holistic approach to Christian religious education through total involvement of persons in the life of the Christian community in worship, teaching, and praxis. The catechumenate also provided the church with a body of content for catechesis that has been incorporated into the churchs liturgical life as part of its Lenten structure. This same content of lent has also influenced the development of other liturgical cycles in the church, e.g. preparation for Christmas, Theophany, and other major feats. Consequently, it is through worship that much of the content of the catechumenate has been preserved ... (A Process Model 5)

993

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

But he complains that what has been lost today is a systematic program of instruction and nurture for children and adults in the areas of formal teaching and praxis in church life (5). This third period of monastic/ascetical experience emerges in the fourth century, upon the official recognition of Christianity by the Emperor Constantine. Lots of people converted to Christianity and many children were baptized, thus diminishing the need for an adult catechumenate. Also no program for post-baptismal training was planned for those who had been baptized as children. During this period, due to the huge development of liturgy, hymnography, and iconography, the faithful found new ways of learning about the faith (A Process Model 7). Yet, laxity came to the life of the faithful and thus new heresies, resulting in doctrinal controversies and, consequently, a more institutionalized church. Also, to counteract the new problems and spiritual dangers to the faith, the Empire constructed large churches, even changing the rite to become the so-called cathedral rite, as distinct from that of the monastic communities. Tarasar quotes Meyendorff, in Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes, in his reference to this cathedral rite (Orthodox Perspectives 32). Let us read this quote as it describes the problems in the Byzantine society: Devoting comparatively little time to scriptural reading, or psalmody, this rite had favoured the mushrooming of hymnography and the development of the liturgy as a mystery, or drama. It was indeed difficult to preserve the communal concept of Christian worship, or the notion that the Eucharist is a communion meal, when the liturgy began to be celebrated in huge basilicas holding several thousand worshippers. But since the early Christian community was now transformed into a crowd of nominal Christians (a transformation described as a real tragedy by Chrysostom in his famous sermons at Constantinople), it was necessary for the Church to emphasize the sacred character of the Christian sacraments to protect them from secular profanation, and to surround them with veils and barriers thus practically excluding the mass of the laity from active participation in their celebration, except through the singing of hymns. (118)

994

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

In this context there began a new militancy in the form of monasticism and asceticism; it started in the desert but soon spread to the cities. Witnessing through prayer to the basic truth of Christ, monastics confronted those who held heretical teachings, but also disputed with emperors and bishops. Tarasar says that the positive aspect of the ascetical tradition was the focus once again on the personal relationship in teaching now a kind of disciple/elder relationshipa personal confrontation in a one-to-one relationship of teacher and pupil ... Much of what forms both the content and the context of Christian education today is derived from this Byzantine heritage (Orthodox Perspectives 34-35). Yet by medieval times, in what Tarasar classifies as a fourth period, Scholasticism and Pietism did not contribute positively to the development of Orthodox education. These trends, which influenced Orthodox thought, definitively broke down the integration of worship. This westernization, Tarasar regrets, led to the disintegration of the holistic life of the worshipping community, resulting in a form of reductionism in each dimension of church life: worship (liturgical and sacramental) was reduced to cultic forms or meaningless ritual, teaching to the repetition of standard formulas, and Christian praxis the life in common manifested in witness, service, and acts of charity to minimal codes of conduct. In short, it was the secularization of theology and education in the church. (A Process Model 7) This secularization, the fifth period classified by Tarasar, is the most pervasive element of our society today as it tends to compartmentalize life into its various aspects. Consequently, the Church becomes merely one more of other aspects such as the political, social, or economic. He complains: Instead of seeing the Church or the Kingdom of God as the norm by which society is measured, we find the Church being measured by the normshowever changeable they may beof the society (Orthodox Perspectives 34-35). Religious education has, therefore, been separated from worship and taught as any other subject in public school or weekly in parishes. Also there has

995

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

been an emphasis of childrens education in detriment to adult education. In Religion Education and Human Development, Michael Grimmit remarks the humanizing concern of religious education (202). Activity 1. Tarasar summarizes the history of Orthodox religious teaching in fine types of experiences. List them and give a short explanation. 2. Summarize Hippolytus words about the catechumenate.
Activity 195: Historical background of Orthodox Catechesis

INTEGRATIVE, HOLISTIC RELIGIOUS EDUCATION: THE ORTHODOX TASK TODAY The teaching experience of those early centuries in Christian life is the main basis for holistic religious education and the core discussion for todays curriculum designers and philosophers such as Tarasar. This researcher believes that Orthodox educational effort today and in the future should be based on three things. The first issue is conversion. We should direct our attention not only outwardly, but also inwardly. Catechesis should incite to live fully and totally a life in Christ. The second point is liturgical integration, which focuses on both the community as the context of our faith, worship, and life, and the Kingdom as the goal of that life (Orthodox Perspectives, 41). Preparing the believer to participate in the liturgy goes beyond the teaching on the meaning of liturgical texts and actions. This liturgical integration is made real in the family, the third area. The family embraces not only the small family of parents and children, but the larger family of the parish community (Orthodox Perspectives, 3944). Already at the end of the fourth century or beginning of the fifth, Chrysostom (347407), in Address to Vainglory and the Right Way for Parents to Bring Up their Children, insists that the father should give careful attention to the education of his children from the very beginning. He gives many instructions such as this:

996

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

Let the children then hear nothing harmful from servants or tutors or nurses. But, even as plants need the greatest amount of care when they are tender shoots, so also do children; and so let us take thought for good nurses that a fair foundation from the ground up be laid for the young and that from the beginning that may received nought that us evil. (Chap. 37) As a proponent of a liturgical catechesis, Tarasar, as mentioned above, also delineates a process model of religious education, within a curriculum based on the liturgy of the Orthodox Church: In one sense, the church has already formulated its curriculum; every liturgical service, festal celebration, and season has been intentionally constructed to communicate the basic truths of the faith and to led persons into the life God. The task of the curriculum specialist is to articulate these truths (A Process Model 9). In this model, Tarasar represents his holistic, process approach in three interrelated and integrated circles signifying the three contexts that lead to wholeness: worship (church, temple), teaching (school or formal instruction), and praxis (home and community life). All Orthodox curricula must be designed to embrace these three contexts. He also identifies a three-dimensional matrix: (A) the content of the domain, i.e., theological statements drawn from liturgical texts and commentaries; (B) educational goals, developed on the basis of the content; and (C) the refinement of these goals according to specific stages of human development. To illustrate his point he uses as an example the sacrament of Baptism. Tarasars rationale for choosing this sacrament makes clear the idea of this model: The sacrament of Baptism was chosen for this study because it is the sacrament of initiation, the first act by which a person is incorporated into the life of the church, and as such, contains the essential vision and teachings of the church (Process Model 18). Thus the content of this curricular approach is the content of the church (Scriptures, liturgy, prayer, iconography, hymnography, hagiography, etc.) which is examined according to

997

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

the categories of God, person, world, and Church. These categories are interrelated and describe the relationship of God to God, to the human person (s), to the world, and to the church; the relationship of human person (s) to human person (s), to the world, and to the church; the relationship of the world with itself and the church; and the relationship of the church with itself (55). An illustration of this model based on the service of Baptism consists of extracting passages from this sacrament, such as this one: 1.2 In thy name, O Lord of truth, an in the Name of thine Only-begotten Son, and thy Holy Spirit, I lay my hand upon thy servant, (name), who has been found worthy to flee unto thy holy Name, and to take refuge under the shelter of thy wings. 1.3 [...] This text is the data base; it is examined for the teachings contained therein, with the help of the commentary. Thus, we can obtain the following theological statement: 1. The true God is One God in Trinity: God the Father. His Only-Begotten Son, and His Life-creating Spirit. (1.2/1.3) The next step is the analysis of the statements in terms of the primary relationship (s) delineated above: 1. God: God statement 1 There are also other statements such as God: Person or God: Church. Then the evaluations are reviewed. From there, Tarasar takes educational goals based on (a) knowledge, understanding; (b) attitude, values; and (c) behaviors/skills (Process Model 67), thus encompassing the whole personality. In his article Orthodox Perspective, Tarasar gives a summary that can help us understand this holistic approach: To summarize then, our task as Orthodox educators is to communicate that vision of the Kingdom which gives meaning and direction to the whole of life. And the experience of the Church makes clear to us that his holistic vision of life cannot be communicated unless the very life of the community reflects that wholenessin its teaching, in it worship, and in its life of witness and service. Therefore, our understanding of religious education, our understanding of what constitutes the curriculum of our teaching, must be broadened. It must encompass and reflect our total experience as members of the Church, the Body of Christ. (44) 998

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

I agree with Tarasar that Orthodox Religious education should go back to the holistic view that characterized the catechumenate of the past: a holistic vision of life shaped by religion, by an Eucharistic, eschatological vision of life in continuous search for deification. Activity 1. LIst the bases Tarasar delineates regarding Orthodox religious teaching. 2. According to Tarasar, what are the three contexts that lead to wholeness in religious education? Give an example.
Activity 196: Tarasars integrative, holistic catechesis

4. CANON LAW: YOUR OWN RESEARCH It is true that taken by themselves, the canon laws of the Church can be considered misleading, and one tends to discard them completely. However, if one takes them within the wholeness of Orthodox experience, these canons do assume their proper place and purpose and show themselves to be a rich source for discovering the living Truth of God in the Church. In viewing the canons of the Church, the key factors are Christian knowledge and wisdom which are borne from technical study and spiritual depth (Canons of the Orthodox Church). As Ernst Benz explains, Rudolf Sohm, the well-known historian of Church Law, asserts that canon law caused the downfall of the early Church because it meant the repression of the spontaneous operation of the Holy Spirit. Yet, Benz notes: The primitive Church was also ruled by law, for even the earliest communities wished to be guided by the apostles instructions. The pastoral epistles of Paul virtually established the constitution of the Church. Moreover, the authority of the Holy Spirit transformed the inspired commands of the prophets within the Church into statutes of permanent validity. Spirit and law were not opposites; spiritual holiness created Sacred Law; the authority of the one upheld the authority of the other. (34) Additionally, Benz comments that heresy was also a reason that impelled the Church to set fixed standards, employing three bulwarks to counteract it. They were the canon of 999

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

the New Testament, the Creed, and the apostolic succession of bishops, all of then resting upon a common foundation: the idea of apostolicity. He furthermore delineates the principal sources of the Churchs codified law, namely: 1. the Holy Scripture, especially the New Testament, from which the early Christians drew instructions on the structure, the sacramental and the marital practices of their communities; 2. the oral tradition of the Orthodox Church; 3. Church customs, as long as they did not run counter to Scripture or oral tradition; 4. the canons of the seven ecumenical councils recognized by the Orthodox Church; and the Trullanum,498 which was the supplement to the legislative work of the fifth and sixth ecumenical councils (Constantinople, 553 and 680-81). 5. the decisions of various special synods and the decrees of the Fathers of the Churchespecially Basil, Athanasius, Cyril of Alexandria, Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssaand the pronouncements of famous ecclesiastical jurists of the Byzantine Middle Ages. (36)

Your Own Research Read Patsavos The Canonical Tradition of the Orthodox Church499 and summarize what he says about: 1. The theological basis for the Churchs law 2. The composition of the Churchs Law 3. The characteristics of Churchs Law
Activity 197: Canon Law

SOME CONCLUSIONS After dealing with some aspects of Practical Theology, and having seen an example in the integrative, holistic character of the liturgical catechesis, we can hope, with Perkins for an integrative process of all the sub-disciplines and dimensions of Practical Theology: My dream is that the old divisions in ministerial studies, with their clerical emphasis and their specialized disciplines such as Christian education, will dissolve, and that a field of practical theology made up of people with broad
The Trullanum was a meeting held in Constantinople in 692 at which the Apostolic Canons of the fourth century were likewise ratified. 499 In Bibliography see the internet site of this article.
498

1000

Chapter 9: Contemporary Liturgics and Liturgical Cathechesis

theological knowledge and a deep, holistic understanding of each dimension as well as a focused concern for one dimensionwill emerge. Then all practical theology courses would be team-taught and would aim at integration. In some cases, a course in Christian initiation would integrate every dimension. Other classes would integrate two dimensions, as I do now in courses on liturgical catechesis, moral catechesis and spiritual catechesis. Each would integrate theory and practice, foundational theology and secular disciplines, as well as experience in church and society with reflection in the divinity school. Perkins limited imagination, as he qualifies it, is also what this researcher aims at. This attitude and approach can be employed in Orthodoxy, in the way they are already being used by many individuals: by having the Holy Tradition as the integrative, reflective force of all these sub-disciplines.

1001

PART IV: ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC

PART IV ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC

(A Study of Church Music in Byzantium and Russia, and of the Theology of Orthodox Church Music)

1002

PART IV: ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC

INTRODUCTION TO PART IV
Orthodox Liturgical music, as well as other church arts such as architecture or iconography, is part of the dogmatic tradition of the Orthodox Church and thus of its Holy Tradition, and a consequence of mans creativity as a son of God made unto His image. Orthodoxy is a singing and praying culture. When Orthodox believers gather to pray, they sing, and much of the theology of the Orthodox Church is passed on through sacred song in the liturgical services. Singing and praying are two elements intrinsically joined in Orthodox worship, and when the Orthodox faithful sing the goal is not only to acknowledge the meaning and content of the hymns they sing, but to know, to experience what they are singing. Music makes their praying come alive, whatever be the style of music they sing: So whatever style of music we sing, be it chant or choral, and whatever particular tone we sing it all in, the music is there to give movement, power, and life to the words of the hymns we pray, so that we might be united and in communion with our prayers even becoming prayer in our very being. This, in turn, will lead us to our communion with God through His Son and Word, Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit. (Sacred Music: Orthodox Liturgical Music) Liturgical music gives movement, power and life to the hymns we are praying, and makes our praise and thanks to God like a flight to him. A hymn, as Carl F. Price remarks, in What is a Hymn?, expresses the worshippers attitude toward God, or Gods purposes in human life. Emphasizing its emotional and spiritual quality as well as its unifying feature, Price says: A Christian hymn is a lyric poem, reverently and devotionally conceived, which is designed to be sung ... It should be simple and metrical in form,

1003

PART IV: ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC

genuinely emotional, poetic and literary in style, spiritual in quality, and in its ideas so direct and so immediately apparent as to unify a congregation while singing it.500 Like liturgy itself, Orthodox liturgical music is part of the Holy Tradition. Johann von Gardner, one of the best theorists of Byzantine music, in Russian Church Singing (vol. I: Orthodox Worship and Hymnography), refers to this link of Orthodox music to Tradition and the exclusion of a mere aesthetic dimension: Since the Church in a sense is timeless, existing both outside of time and encompassing all time, its singing also must preserve the traditions of the past while maintaining a link with the present. Above all, the singing of the Church must never stray from its central essence: the liturgy. It must avoid at all costs the tendency to pursue exclusively aesthetic or personal, subjective goals. (13) It is due to this timeless but at the same time historical dimension that the approach to Orthodox music obliges researchers to look back to the beginnings of church singing. Gardner adds: Only a thorough knowledge of the entire system and history of Orthodox Liturgical singing will enable this middle ground to be found (13). It is from this historical dimension that I will attempt to address three main topics of Orthodox Church Music related to Church music in Byzantium, Church Music in Russia, and Theology of Church Music: Development of Byzantine Hymnody The Arrival of Church Singing and its Early Development in Russia The Role of Music in the Holy Services

Activity 1. 2. 3. 4.
500

What is liturgical music? What does it do to the words of the hymns? What is the relationship between singing and praying? According to Price, what is a Christian hymn? Is it the aesthetical dimension of music important in Orthodox worship?

Qtd. in What Is a Hymn and Why Do Christians Sing Them?

1004

PART IV: ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC

Explain your answer. 5. Listen to any liturgical song from the Divine Liturgy. Try to find one in your native language. What is your reaction to it?
Activity 198: General introduction to Part IV

1005

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Chapter 10 DEVELOPMENT OF BYZANTINE HYMNODY

INTRODUCTION Much of the Orthodox liturgical music that came to us, including that of Russia, and its significance, had its origin in Byzantine civilization. It was a composite of Eastern-Western character, as Egon Wellesz asserts in A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (32). It is also interesting to note at this point, as Wellesz also remarks, that Byzantine music was entirely vocal and, whether chanted by one or more singers or by a choir, was always homophonic, a kind of music composed and performed in one single melodic line (32). Likewise, Gardner points out that: Orthodox liturgical singing is vocal musicmusic produced by human voices alone, which in conjunction with words, accompanied worship services (vol. 1, 21). This is a consequence of the prohibition in churches of organs and the facts that other instruments were banned inside churches. Gardner explains: Ordinarily explanations for the ban of instrumental music are sought on the basis of ascetical tendencies, which are prominent in the Orthodox Church and in the Eastern churches in general. Indeed, such reasons are given by some Russian historians and theoreticians in the field of liturgical singing, who cite the views of certain Church Fathers upon this subject. These views are well-known: instrumental music was widely used by pagans at their religious ceremonies; Christians, on the other hand, should praise God not with inanimate artificial instruments, but with the most noble and natural instrumentthe human voice. (vol. 1, 22) The holy services of the Orthodox Church are always sung either in a solemn recitative tone, also called eknophonetics (from the Greek, meaning cry out, exclamate) in the case of prose, or chanted, in the case of poetry, both having their function, especially with chanting as we will see in the last paper. These two methods of expression together, as Hilkka Seppl asserts, in The Solemn Recitation, create the

1006

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

characteristic atmosphere in the church (119). Seppl points out that the music used with prose texts such as the Psalms or Scripture readings varies according to the type of text, and remarks that the music gives power to the text and aims at clarifying it (120). He adds that The different manners of solemn reading are characteristic to all Orthodoxy. Day and night are divided in different services, which essentially contain reading of prayers, psalms and other holy writings (120). He also believes that the solemn recitation, which is never entirely interrupted, express the desire of the oriental people to praise the Lord, and manifests the unceasing prayer to God (122).
Although chant was probably sung since the earliest days of the church, for centuries they were only transmitted orally. The earliest systems involving neumes are of Aramaic origin and were used to notate inflections in the quasi-emmelic recitation of the Christian holy scriptures. As such they resemble functionally a similar system used for the notation of recitation of the Quran, the holy book of Islam. This early system was called ekphonetic notation, from the Greek ekphonesis meaning quasi-melodic recitation of text. (Neume History) Table 92: Ekphonetic notation

Activity 1. Listen to any liturgical song from the Divine Liturgy. Find one in your native language. What is your reaction to it? 2. What two types of musical expressions do we find in the holy services of the Orthodox Church? 3. Define ekphonetic notation, cantillation, neume, and plainchant. Give an example of each of them.
Activity 199: General concepts on liturgical music

Lets us know approach the development of Byzantine Hymnody, introducing it with some preliminary remarks regarding the concepts of hymn, Hymnody, and Hymnology, as well as the periods covered by this topic. PRELIMINARY REMARKS Dimitri Conomos, in Orthodox Byzantine Music, defines Byzantine music as follows: Strictly speaking, Byzantine music is the medieval sacred chant of Christian Churches following the Orthodox rite. This tradition, encompassing the Greek-speaking world, 1007

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

developed in Byzantium from the establishment of its capital, Constantinople, in 330 until its fall in 1453. It is undeniably of composite origin, drawing on the artistic and technical productions of the classical age, on Jewish music, and inspired by the monophonic vocal music that evolved in the early Christian cities of Alexandria, Antioch and Epheus. Wellesz says that the term Byzantine music has been applied by modern scholars to Eastern ecclesiastical chant, sung in Greek, and to the melodies of a certain group of ceremonial poems in honour of the emperor, the Imperial family, and high dignitaries of the Orthodox Church (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 1). He adds that this definition excludes secular music whose knowledge has been derived only from the comments on it by the Fathers of the Church and Byzantine chroniclers who contrast the evil influence of theatrical music with the purifying spirit of sacred music (1). This hostile attitude is easy to understand, says Wellesz: From the second to the fourth centuries the members of Christian civilization were tempted to take part in the theatrical performances, dances, and processions they were constantly witnessing. This fact explains the warning voices which many Christian writers raised against the theatre of the Devil, which destroyed the modesty of the family life (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 79) I will later refer to some of the opinions of the Fathers of the Church and council dispositions on pagan music. Although these opinions and dispositions are not of primary importance for this chapter, it is however true that by demonizing this type of music, they extolled sacred music. THE CONCEPT OF HYMN AND HYMNODY For a better understanding of the Byzantine music and its development, it is necessary to approach the concept of hymn (from the Greek hymnos, to sing). We know that the early Christians concept of hymn differs from what we have for long understood by hymn, which Clemens Blume defines as a song whose sequence of words is ruled by meter or rhythm, with or without rhyme, or, at least, by a symmetrical arrangement of the stanzas (Hymn). This limitation was not acknowledged by the

1008

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

earliest Christian authors and their pagan contemporaries.501 For Christians, hymns were used as a general term including the psalms, the Biblical canticles, the doxologies, and all the other songs of praise to God in prose or in rhythmical language. In Hymnody and Hymnology, Blume also refers to this wide sense of the word hymn, emphasizing, at the same time, their synagogue descent: To praise God in public worship through songs or hymns in the widest meaning of the word is a custom which the primitive Christians brought with them from the Synagogue. For that reason the ecclesiastical songs of the Christians and the Jews in the first centuries after Christ are essentially similar. They consisted mainly of the psalms and the canticles of the Old and New Testaments. The congregation (in contradistinction to the cantors) took part in the service, it seems, by intoning the responses or refrains, single acclamations, the Doxologies, the Alleluias, the Hosannas, the Trisagion, and particularly the Kyrie-Eleison, and so originated the Christian folk-song. He continues by saying: Genuine hymns even in the broadest sense of the term were not yet to be met with. Even the four songs handed down to us through the Constitutiones Apostolicae which were intended as hymns in the morning, in the evening, before meals, and at candle lighting, cannot be considered hymns. They are rather prayers which, in spite of the lyric tone and rhythmic quality evident in some passages, must be considered as songs in prose, similar to the Prefaces of the Mass, and which are mainly composed of extracts from the Scripture. In this same article, Blume provides the following definition of hymnody: Hymnody, taken from the Greek (hymnodia), means exactly hymn song, but as the hymn-singer as well as the hymn-poet are included under (hymnodos), so we also include under hymnody the hymnal verse or religious lyric. Hymnology is the science of hymnody or the historico-philological investigation and aesthetic estimation of hymns and hymn writers. In the article Hymnody: What Is It?, we also read a difference between hymnody and hymnology: Hymnody refers to the activities of writing and/or singing hymns. Various traditions, types of hymns and styles of singing hymns are generally designated using the term, hymnody. For example, Greek hymnody ... The term, hymnody should not be

In ancient pagan literature, hymnos designated a prize song to the gods or heroes set to the accompaniment of the cythara. It was at first written in the epic measure like the oldest hymn to the Delphic Apollo, later in distichs or in the refined lyric measures of Alcus, Anacreon, and Pindar (Blume, Hymn).

501

1009

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

confused with the term, hymnology, which refers to the systematic study of the history and use of hymns and is a subdivision of the discipline of musicology. ORTHODOX SERVICE BOOKS CONTAINING LITURGICAL MUSIC Byzantine hymns can be found in the service books, especially in the Typikon, which contains the liturgical texts, including the complete poetical ones. The Octoechos (the Parakletike), contains the Proper of Vespers, Matins, Orthros, and Mass for all the days of the year. It is divided into eight parts containing the offices for a week. Each of them is sung in one of the eight ecclesiastical modes. Other relevant service books are the Heirmologion, exclusively dedicated to the chanter; the Triodion, which contains a great number of kanons,
502

the Sticheron, with a good number of stichera; the Kondakarion or Psaltikon, with a

whole collection of kontakia, and the Asmatikon, the book of the choir (Wellesz, A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 133-145). Alexander A. Bogolepov, in The hymns of the Orthodox Church, also refers to some of these Orthodox service books, such as the Menaion, Triodion, and Octoechos, which represent an outstanding collection of the poetry of the Christian East. He says that in the liturgical books we find many hymns which only differ from one another in their slight variations on constantly repeated themes, and many others in which the unfading beauty of genuine poetry is at once perceived. From the first centuries of Christianity, musicians like other artists have created their masterpieces for the purpose of worship. Bogolepov also mentions some of the most important names of the authors often associated with these works, some of them Church Fathers: John of Damascus, who illumined the Holy Church in his hymns, Cosmas of Maiuma, whose liturgical books are called a vessel of divine grace and the glory of the Church, Roman the Melodious, John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Anatolios, Patriarch of Constantinople, Sofronios, Patriarch of Jerusalem, Andrew of Crete, Archbishop of Cortyna, the nun Cassia, and many, many others.
In these pages, the Greek names of songs will be written in italics and lower case letters. Yet, some authors spell these names in capital letters. Thus, when quoting an author, I will follow his or her own spelling.
502

1010

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

He adds something important: We are separated from them by long centuries, and yet they still live with us in their works. In their voices we hear the voice of the whole Orthodox Church. The Church regards them as expressing most clearly her own thoughts and feelings.

PERIODS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BYZANTINE HYMNODY To give a better perspective on the process of development of Byzantine hymnography, I have divided it into two periods: the pre-Byzantine and the Byzantine periods. The first one, up to 330, when the Emperor Constantine proclaimed Byzantium, thereby known as Constantinople, as the new capital of the Roman Empire (the Nova Roma), covers aspects of its classical and, especially, Jewish roots. The second period covers the fourth century to the eleventh when ecclesiastical authorities banned the introduction of new hymns. During this period, from the middle of the ninth century toward the middle of the tenth century (726843), the Iconoclast Controversy appeared paradoxically to produce a flourishing of Byzantine music. Papadakis, in Chant Development: Byzantine Music History, explains: Byzantine music is known to have flourished in the face of threatening dangers. It has done so before in the eighth and ninth centuries during the Iconoclast Controversy. Instead of losing faith and creativity, the hymnographers of the age were considered of the greatest in the history of Byzantine music. We are seeing something of this reaction today, proving that Byzantium is still alive and well, even after over five centuries from its historical end. During this period too, as Meyendorff asserts, the self-reliance and rigidity of Byzantium, previously noted when talking about Byzantine liturgy, was not completely accepted. As an illustration, in the eighth and ninth centuries, the Byzantine Church adopted a large body of Hymnography coming from St. John of Damascus (The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church 118-9).

1011

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Up to the present day, which will not be treated here, as Papadakis tells us, there has been some refinement, the most important being the simplification of the notation in 1821 by John Koukouzeles and the great council of 1881. Activity Define Byzantine music. What is the time span of Byzantine music? What does Wellesz say about pagan music? What is the difference between the concept of hymn in the beginning centuries of Christianity and that of todays? Give an example of hymn in the early Church. 5. What is the difference between hymnody and hymnology? 6. List some of the service books containing sacred music. 7. What two main periods of Byzantine liturgical music will be dealt with in this section
Activity 200: Preliminary remarks on Byzantine Hymnody

1. 2. 3. 4.

Your Own Research Search the web and find definitions of the terms octoechos, kanon, sticheron, and heirmo.
Activity 201: Definition of some sacred music sacred terminology

PERIODS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BYZANTINE HYMNODY PRE-BYZANTIUM ERA: CLASSIC, JEWISH, AND EARLY CHRISTIAN ROOTS In his article Orthodox Byzantine Music, Dimitri Conomos addresses the composite origin of Byzantine chant: It is undeniably of composite origin, drawing on the artistic and technical productions of the classical age, on Jewish music, and inspired by the monophonic vocal music that evolved in the early Christian cities of Alexandria, Antioch and Ephesus. Papadakis, in Byzantine Music History, says that the earliest roots of Byzantine music go back to Pythagoras philosophy on the division of chords. He distinguishes between the contribution of Pythagoras and that of the Jews on Byzantine music:

1012

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Traditionally, Pythagoras is taught as the founder of what has evolved to become Byzantine music. This is true to a certain extent. Where the Jews contributed tradition and practice, Pythagoras contributed theory. He was the first to connect music to mathematics and pioneered the study of acoustics. Pythagoras was also the first to create modes of music and to ascribe ratios to several series of notes. This created scales which are the basis of the Oktoechos (English: eight modes) which is the center of Byzantine music theory (Pythagoras notes are still used in Western music as well).503 Papadakis also explains the similarities of feelings between ancient Greek musical modes and the eight modes of the Byzantine music: Ancient Greek musical modes are simply different arrangements of notes of varying pitch. These arrangements create scales that are related to one another but are characterized by different feelings, much like a major scale compares to a minor scale in Western music. Thus, modes were classified by assigning different names to them according to the feeling which they imitated.504 The eight modes that are comprised from Byzantine music are separated into three genres of feelings. This is directly descendent of the ancient Greek practice, for in both systems, the number and names of the genres are the same. He finally classifies the three genres of feelings in its coincidence with ancient Greek practice: (1) Enharmonic: modes that are of this genre are heavy and/or powerful in nature. One may think of an ancient Byzantine army singing a war song when one hears music in this scale. (2) Chromatic: these modes are sad but harmonious. Funeral and mourning hymns are usually sung in this scale. (3) Diatonic: this scale is the one closest to the Western or European musical scale. Miracle hymns and Christs spoken words are sung in this usually happy scale. However, this scale is almost universally used in Byzantine music as well, being the scale which possesses most modes (four Diatonic modes compared to two Enharmonic and two Chromatic). Egon Wellesz, in The New Oxford History of Music, also talks about these roots of Byzantine music. He remarks that the music of the Byzantine church ... was a legacy from the music of the Synagogue, and that Byzantine music theory was treated by Hellenistic and Byzantine philosophers only in the course of their metaphysical speculations on numbers (43).505 In a different book, Wellesz also says that music was treated by Early Christian writers not as an aesthetic but as an ethical problem. He
503
504

Papadakis cites the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1981, 662-663, 704-705, v.12) to support his assertion. Papadakis also quotes the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1981, 740, v.12) to support his opinion. 505 Qtd. in Papadakis.

1013

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

adds that This conception of the art of music ... is closely associated with the ideas of the Greek philosophers who dealt with musicPythagoreans, Empedocleans, Plato and his followers, Neo-Pythagoreans, and Neoplatonistsand with the views of the Greek musical theorists (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 96). Wellesz goes on: The connection between Greek philosophy and the Christian ideal of music becomes even closer under the influence of Neoplatonism, which had absorbed elements of the Pythagoreans and Gnostic systems. In both these systems emphasis was laid on the task which music must fulfill of producing harmony between soul and body, tempering passions, giving grace and dignity to manners, elevating the soul. Gradually the ascetic attitude of the Pauline doctrine, represented in Chrysostoms Exposition in Psalmum 41, is replaced by the Neoplatonic, which aims at a perfect rendering of the psalms. (97) Moreover, Wellesz confirms Pitras contribution to the study of Byzantine hymnography in his works Hymnographie de lglise grecque (1867) and Analecta, which marked the beginning of systematic research in Byzantine hymnography. On the one hand, Pitra discovered the poetic structure of Byzantine hymns of the Greek Church. Seeing that these hymns were composed in strophes of equal meter, he reconstructed their metrical scheme indicated in the manuscripts by the dots at the end of the cola and periods. On the other hand, Pitra traced the origins of the genre seeing the hymns as part of the service and subordinated to its requirements and suggests that the origins of the Byzantine hymn-writing might be found in the hymnography of the Syrian and other Eastern Churches and even in the Jewish hymns, canticles, and psalms (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 7) Wellesz also mentions W. Meyer, who first carried out detailed research into Syriac hymnography, showing that the hymns of Ephraem must be regarded as models for Greek Kontakia, the early form of Byzantine poetry. Wellesz quotes Meyers words, the main point of his essay: It was Semitic Christians, who were nearer to the source of Christianity that the Greeks and Romans, that rhythmical poetry came to Greek and Latin Christians. Wellesz adds that Meyers findings were supported by a

1014

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

scholar such a H. Grimme, and after that, the connection between Syriac and Byzantine hymnography was no longer disputed. Studies in Byzantine hymnography were rescued from their isolated position and linked up with work on Semitic poetry (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 7). Another hypothesis of Pitra, that Jewish hymnography should be investigated, was later also confirmed, Wellesz continues. D.H. Mller showed that the speeches of the Prophets were composed in a definite poetical form, consisting of strophes and antistrophes which could be of equal or unequal length. The unit of the strophe is the sentence, covering one or two lines. The combination of two or more sentences of similar but not identical character is effected by the poetical means of parallelismus membrorum Strophe and antistrophe are related by the responsio, a similar poetical device which connects a group of sentences of either similar or contrasting character. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 7) Additionally, Mllers theory was the basis of Wehofers findings concerning the fact about the dependence of Romanus (490-560), the creator of the kontakion, on Ephraem. After that, he asserts, there were studies dealing with the reconstruction of the texts and the metrical structure of the kontakia of Romanus. Wellesz also emphasizes the fact that at the end of nineteenth century, for the first time, the principles of textual criticism applied to the editing of Greek and Latin classical texts were also applied to the works of Byzantine hymnographers (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 7). It is also important in the pre-Byzantium period to refer to some Scriptural passages underlining Pauls exhortation to singing in praise of the Lord: How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm,506 hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying (1 Cor. 14:26). As an illustration, Florovsky, in The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century, emphasizing the creative improvisation regarding psalm singing in the second and third centuries refers to this quote:
Hymn in ASV: What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.
506

1015

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

At an earlier time creative improvisation occupied a very significant place in the liturgy (see I Corinthians 14:26). This was the case even in the second and third centuries, as the testimony of Justin Martyr and Tertullian bear witness. These were primarily hymns and psalmssongs of praise and thanksgiving. It is sufficient to name the great prayer in the Epistle of Clement of Rome. Other of these ancient hymns remained in liturgical use forever; for example, the ancient hymn Gladsome Light, which dates back to the very earliest of times and is still sung at every Vesper Service in the Orthodox Church. Mention must also be made of the doxologies and hymns of thanks in the Alexandrian copy of the Bible, and in the seventh book of the Apostolic Constitutions. Christians introduced liturgical chants in their worshipping practices, not only following the above admonition by Paul but also this one: Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord (Col. 3:16).507 There are many other Scriptural passages in which these terms are mentioned. Let us analyze these terms in more detail.

Illustration 161: Canticle508

The Terms Psalms, Hymn, and Spiritual songs For Rev. John Gill, in Discourse on Singing of Psalms as a Part of Divine Worship,509 the terms psalms, hymn, and spiritual songs refer to the Book of Psalms:
507 508

Quotes are taken from the King James version. See: <http://www.smithcreekmusic.com/Hymnology/Latin.Hymnody/Canticle.html>.

1016

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

1. By psalms, is meant the book of psalms, composed by David, Asaph, Heman, and others, under the inspiration of the Spirit of God; which is the only sense in which this word is used throughout the whole New Testament: Nor is there any reason to believe, that the Apostle Paul designs any other in the above mentioned places; or the Apostle James, when he says (Jam. 5:13), Is any merry? let him sing psalms. 2. By hymns, we are to understand, not such as are composed by good men, without the inspiration of the Spirit of God... . I take hymns to be but another name for the book of psalms; for the running title of that book may as well be, the book of hymns, as of psalms; and so it is rendered by Ainsworth, who also particularly calls the 145th psalm, an hymn of David: So the psalm which our Lord sung with his disciples, after the supper, is called an hymn, as the psalms of David in general, are called, by Philo the Jew, umnei hymns, as they are also songs and hymns by Josephus. 3. By spiritual songs, may be meant the psalms of David, Asaph, etc. the titles of some of which, are, songs, as sometimes a psalm and song, a song and psalm, a song of degrees, and the like; together with all other scriptural songs, written by men inspired by God, and are called spiritual, because the author of them is the Spirit of God, the writers of them men moved and acted by the same Spirit; the subject matter of them spiritual, designed for spiritual edification, and opposed to all profane, loose and wanton songs. He concludes: These three words, psalms, hymns, and songs, answer to , and , the titles of Davids psalms; and are, by the Septuagint, rendered by the Greek words the Apostleuses. I shall not trouble you with observing to you how these three are distinguished by learned men, one from another, but only observe, what has been remarked by others before me; that whereas the Apostle, in his exhortations to singing, directs to the titles of Davids psalms, it is highly reasonable to conclude, that it was his intention that we should sing them. Blume talks about the arbitrary distinction between psalms and hymns: The modern distinction between psalms and hymns is arbitrary. The former word was used by the LXX as a generic designation, probably because it implied an accompaniment by the psaltery (said by Eusebius to have been of very ancient use in the East) or other instruments. The cognate verb psallere has been constantly applied to hymns, both in the Eastern and in the Western Church; and the same compositions which they described generically as psalms were also called by the LXX as odes (i.e. songs). (Hymn) Yet Wellesz, addressing this question of the synonymy of these three terms defends their individuality:

509

Preached the 25th of December, 1733 to a Society of Young Men, Who Carry on an Exercise of Prayer on Lords-Day Mornings, at a Meeting-House on Horslydown, Southwark.

1017

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

The individuality of psalm, hymn, and spiritual songs is obvious to the student of comparative liturgiology. The three groups of chants of which the Apostle speaks [Col. 3: 16] corresponds to the different kinds of singing customary in the Byzantine ritual, as throughout the Eastern and Western Churches. It derived from the Jewish liturgy of the Synagogue which the followers of Christ used to attend daily, though, of course, the Christian community of Jerusalem went also to the Temple. (Acts 2: 46, 47; 3:1) ... But it was from the Synagogue that the Christian communities took over the tradition of reciting, chanting, and singing, as more fitting from their simple service that the elaborate rite of the Temple, with its great choirs and instrumental music. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 34) Wellesz continues, linking this Christian music to the synagogue: For training Christian congregations in singing, converted readers and precentors from the synagogue were chosen. The schola cantorun sang from the Psalter with Esdras is said to have compiled for the Levites. The people answered with responses taken from a collection of short verses and liturgical formulae made for the use of the Jewish congregation. The acceptance of the Jewish institution of readers and precentors, specially trained for the office, made it possible to introduce into Christian worship antiphonal singing (as described in Exod. xv. 1 and 21 and Judges v. 1-31), and psalms sung by a soloist with responses from the congregation (as described in the second book of the Apostolic Constitutions [ii:57]: after the reading of the two lections someone else must chant the hymns of David ad the people must answer with responses. (35) Regarding the first term, psalm, Wellesz comments that the early Christians sung the psalms in the way customary in the Jewish Synagogue: the precentor sang the whole psalm, and the congregation responded after each verse with an interpolated phrase. The performance varied from simple recitation to elaborate cantillation with the character of the feats and in accordance with the liturgical prescription for the particular part of the service (35). Regarding the term hymns, he says The hymns were sung to melodies ranging from a simple syllabic type to chants in which two or three groups of notes could be sung to one syllable of the text (40). Wellesz remarks: In the Byzantine, as in other branches of the Eastern Church, ecclesiastical poetry gave the melodos or poetcomposer the opportunity to exercise his talents in the writing of hymns. He could either write new words to already existing hymns, adapting them melodically and rhythmically to the new poems, or he could compose a new melody (40). Finally, he 1018

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

defines spiritual songs as chants of the melismatic type, the most important part of which are the Alleluias (41). Wellesz continues: From all these considerations it is evident that the groups of chants of which St. Paul speaks correspond to actual liturgical usages, and that the Christians to whom the Epistles were addressed would have understood the meaning of each term and have been able to differentiate between them. The continuity in the development of Eastern Chant from Early Christian times to the apogee of hymnography allows us to adopt the same classification, and to divide Byzantine liturgical chant in the following three groups: (1) Psalmody (Psalms and Canticles); (2) Hymns (Verses, Stanzas and Hymns, Litanies and Processional songs); and (3) Spiritual Songs (Alleluias, Songs of Praise). (42) Notwithstanding, Wellesz concludes that It should be understood that, musically, no absolute differentiation between the three groups is possible (42). There are also many Old Testament passages referring to hymn singing, especially those taken from the Psalmsthe Old Testament book most often used by the Orthodox Church. One should not be surprised if there are Jewish antecedents in Christian use of singing in the liturgy, like there are in Christian liturgy itself. Papadakis summarizes: So we can see that the transferral of the Jewish tradition was primarily practical in nature. This means that the origin of what is today Byzantine music was based on the established practices of converted Jews whose liturgy emulated that of the Synagogues from which they came: they simply kept the practices that they learnt from the many years they spent singing and worshipping in their Synagogues and applied these practices to the worship of, what was to them, a continuation of their religion. We know that at the beginning Christians considered themselves Jews and borrowed from the synagogue. Meter of the Psalms Another issue is that related to the meter of the psalms. Gill believes that they were originally written in meter: It is inquired, whether the book of psalms was originally written in verse or metre? The reason of this enquiry is, that if it should appear that it was not originally written in Hebrew metre, then there is no reason why it should be translated into metre in another language, and so consequently not to be sung in

1019

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

the manner we do. To which, I answer, That the book of psalms, with some other writings of the Old Testament, were originally written in metre, is universally allowed by the Jews, and does also appear from the different accentuation of them, from that of other books. To prove his point, Gill quotes several sources among them the Jew Josephus, when he says, That David being free from war, and enjoying a profound peace, composed songs and hymns to God, of various metre; some trimetre, i.e. consisting of three feet, and others pentametre, i.e. of five feet. He also quotes St. Jerome, who states: If it should seem incredulous to any that the Hebrews have metre, or that the Psalms or the Lamentations of Jeremiah, or almost all the scriptural songs are composed after the manner of our Flaccus, and the Greek Pindar, and Alcaeus, and Sappho; let him read Philo, Josephus, Eusebius Caesariensis, and hell find, by their testimonies, that what I say is true. Gill finally says: But be this as it will, theres reason enough to conclude, that the book of Psalms was originally written in verse; and therefore it is lawful to be translated into verse, in order to be sung in the churches of Christ. Likewise, in the Preface of the The Bay Psalm Book, we read: As for the scruples of some regarding the translation of the psalms into meter (because Davids psalms were sung without meter), we answer thus: First, there are many verses, in various psalms of David, that run in rhythms ...; this feature shows, at least, the lawfulness of singing psalms in English rhythms. Second, the psalms are penned in verse forms that are suitable to the poetry of the Hebrew language, and not in the common style of such other Old Testament books as are not poetic. Regarding the metrical character of the psalms, Joseph Jacobs and W. H. Cobb explain: The question whether the poetical passages of the Old Testament show signs of regular rhythm or meter is yet unsolved; the question involves principally Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and most of the prophetical books, with many songs and speeches contained in the historical books... . No one can establish the metrical character of the whole of this literature, and no one can successfully deny that it is metrical in part. The former of these statements will be generally accepted; for those who wish to find meter in the Old Testament are obliged to make many emendations of the text. As the second statement is often controverted, the appeal must be made to a trained and unprejudiced ear (not eye). Upon analyzing some psalms and reviewing some biased research they conclude:

1020

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

So far as the evidence extends at present, it can only be asserted that the Hebrew poets were acquainted with meter, and employed it very freely, changing at will from one form to another, within the same composition, but making the substance of their thought so far paramount over its form that they were often unwilling to wait for a perfect rhythmical expression. In the words of Walter Drums, we find a good explanation of this issue, with quotes by early Fathers: Is there metre in the Psalms? The Jews of the first century A.D. thought so. Flavius Josephus speaks of the hexameters of Moses (Antiq., II, xvi, 4; IV, viii, 44) and the trimeters and tetrameters and manifold meters of the odes and hymns of David (Antiq., VII, xii, 3). Philo says that Moses had learned the theory of rhythm and harmony (De vita Mosis I, 5). Early Christian writers voice the same opinion. Origen (d. 254) says the Psalms are in trimeters and tetrameters (In Ps. cxviii; cf. Card. Pitra, Analecta Sacra, II, 341); and Eusebius (d. 340), in his De Praeparatione evangelica, XI, 5 (P.G., XXI, 852), speaks of the same metres of David. St. Jerome (420), in Praef. ad Eusebii chronicon (P.L., XXVII, 36), finds iambics, Alcaics, and Sapphics in the psalter; and, writing to Paula (P.L., XXII, 442), he explains that the acrostic Pss. cxi and cxii (cx and cxi) are made up of iambic trimeters, whereas the acrostic Pss. cxix and cxlv (cxviii and cxliv) are iambic tetrameters. (Psalms) Yet, this writer adds, alluding to modern researchers: Modern exegetes do not agree in this matter. For a time many would admit no metre at all in the Psalms. Davison (Hast., Dict. of the Bible, s. v.) writes: though metre is not discernible in the Psalms, it does not follow that rhythm is excluded. This rhythm, however, defies analysis and systematization. Driver (Introd. to Lit. of O. T., New York, 1892, 339) admits in Hebrew poetry no metre in the strict sense of the term. He finally delineates the four schools which find meter in the Psalms whether approaching Hebrew meter by quantity, by the number of syllables, by accent, or by both quantity and accent. In the second century, a Father of the Church, Justin, in his Hortatory Address to the Greeks, seems to suggest the existence of meter in hymns when warning the men of Greek to pay less attention to the metrical numbers of poetry and more to the advent of the Saviour: ... the matters of the true religion lie not in the metrical numbers of poetry, nor yet in that culture which is highly esteemed among you, do you henceforward pay less devotion to accuracy of metres and of language; and giving heed without contentiousness to the words of the Sibyl, recognise how great are the 1021

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

benefits which she will confer upon you by predicting, as she does in a clear and patent manner, the advent of our Saviour Jesus Christ; (Chap. 38) He advises them, in case of hesitation, to heed the hymn of praise to the Almighty God: And if you still hesitate and are hindered from belief regarding the formation of man, believe those whom you have hitherto thought it right to give heed to, and know that your own oracle, when asked by some one to utter a hymn of praise to the Almighty God, in the middle of the hymn spoke thus, Who formed the first of men, and called him Adam. And this hymn is preserved by many whom we know, for the conviction of those who are unwilling to believe the truth which all bear witness to. ... From every point of view, therefore, it must be seen that in no other way than only from the prophets who teach us by divine inspiration, is it at all possible to learn anything concerning God and the true religion. (Chap. 38) As Justin suggests, it is only through knowledge that comes from divine inspiration that we can learn about God and the true religion. References to Early Christian Chanting and Pagan Music There are many documents that witness to the singing of hymns by Christians. Some of the authors of these documents, mainly Church Fathers, also allude to pagan music of ceremonies and festivities expressing their rejection. One of the first references to early Christian singing in made by Pliny the Younger,510 in his letter to Trajan emperor, A.D. 112, summarizing the charge against the Christians. Let us see this letter again: But they declared their guilt or error was simply thison a fixed day they used to meet before dawn and recite a hymn511 among themselves to Christ, as though he were a god. So far from binding themselves by oath to commit any crime, they swore to keep from theft, robbery, adultery, breach of faith, and not to deny any trust money deposited with them when called upon to deliver it. This ceremony over, they used to depart and meet again to take foodbut it was of no special character, and entirely harmless. They also had ceased from this practice after the edict I issued by which, in accord with your orders, I forbade all secret societies. (Pliny and Trajan: Correspondence, c. 112)

Pliny was the governor in the Roman province of Bithynia (modern day Turkey) when a number of Christians were brought into his court. 511 In other translations, such as that done by Whiston, recite is rendered as sing: That they were wont, on a stated day, to meet together before it was light, and to sing a hymn to Christ, as to a god.

510

1022

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Tertullian (c. 155-225) makes a reference to this letter by Pliny in his Apology, commenting this accusation, hence confirming its historical certainty and authenticity: For the younger Pliny, when he was ruler of a province, having condemned some Christians to death, and driven some from their steadfastness, being still annoyed by their great numbers, at last sought the advice of Trajan, the reigning emperor, as to what he was to do with the rest, explaining to his master that, except an obstinate disinclination to offer sacrifices, he found in the religious services nothing but meetings at early morning for singing hymns to Christ and God ... (Chap. 2) Eusebius, in Church History (III), cites Pliny too, and observes, that Pliny declared that he found nothing impious in them, nothing done by them contrary to the laws, except that rising early together, they sung a hymn to Christ after the manner of a god. Plinys letter is not quoted by Justin Martyr (100165), only a generation after Pliny himself, but he ratifies the use of music in Christian worship. We have an illustration in his Dialogue with Trypho, based on Psalm 96 (1-3), where he emphasizes the singing of psalms to the Lord And I answered, Attend to me, I beseech you, while I speak of the statement which the Holy Spirit gave utterance to in this Psalm; and you shall know that I speak not sinfully, and that we are not really bewitched; for so you shall be enabled of yourselves to understand many other statements made by the Holy Spirit. Sing unto the Lord a new song; sing unto the Lord, all the earth: sing unto the Lord, and bless His name; show forth His salvation from day to day, His wonderful works among all people. He bids the inhabitants of all the earth, who have known the mystery of this salvation, i.e., the suffering of Christ, by which He saved them, sing and give praises to God the Father of all things, and recognize that He is to be praised and feared, and that He is the Maker of heaven and earth, who effected this salvation in behalf of the human race, who also was crucified and was dead, and who was deemed worthy by Him (God) to reign over all the earth. (Chap. 74) Additionally, in his First Apology, Justin says: What sober-minded man, then, will not acknowledge that we are not atheists, worshipping as we do the Maker of this universe, and declaring, as we have been taught, that He has no need of streams of blood and libations and incense; whom we praise to the utmost of our power by the exercise of prayer and thanksgiving for all things wherewith we are supplied, as we have been taught that the only honour that is worthy of Him is not to consume by fire what He has brought into being for our sustenance, but to use it for ourselves and those who need, and with gratitude to Him to offer thanks by invocations and hymns for our creation, and for all the means of health, and for the various qualities of the different 1023

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

kinds of things, and for the changes of the seasons; and to present before Him petitions for our existing again in incorruption through faith in Him. (Chap. 13) According to John Gill, in A Discourse on Singing of Psalms as a Part of Divine Worship, Justin, in his Epistle to Zena and Serenus,512 says if it will be allowed to be genuine, speaks of the singing of psalms, hymns, and songs; and directs to the use of psalmody, in such a manner, as not to grieve our neighbors. Clement of Rome (d. ca. 100) says in Recognitions (Book III): And how can any one obtain knowledge of Gods wisdom, unless he be constant in hearing His word? Whence it comes, that he conceives a love for Him, and venerates Him with worthy honour, pouring out hymns and prayers to Him, and most pleasantly resting in these, accounts it his greatest damage if at any time he speak or do anything else even for a moment of time; (Chap. 62) One can know God by pouring of hymns Thus music appreciation for Clement helps spiritual attainment. In his Epistle to the Corinthians, Clement writes a prayer which was one of the Prefaces of the Mass such they were sung in the earliest days of Christianity. The first paragraph follows:513 Thou made to appear the enduring fabric of the world by the works of Your hand; Thou, Lord, created the earth on which we dwell,Thou, who art faithful in all generations, just in judgments, wonderful in strength and majesty, with wisdom creating and with understanding fixing the things which were made, who art good among them that are being saved and faithful among them whose trust is in You; O merciful and Compassionate One, forgive us our iniquities and offences and transgressions and trespasses. Reckon not every sin of Your servants and handmaids, but You will purify us with the purification of Your truth; and direct our steps that we may walk in holiness of heart and do what is good and well-pleasing in Your sight and in the sight of our rulers. Yea, Lord, make Your face to shine upon us for good in peace, that we may be shielded by Your mighty hand and delivered from every sin by Thine uplifted arm, and deliver us from those who hate us wrongfully. Give concord and peace to us and all who dwell upon the earth, even as You gave to our fathers, when they called upon You in faith and truth, submissive as we are to Thine almighty and allexcellent Name. (Epistle to the Corinthians, Chap. 60)

512 513

I havent been able to find further information about this epistle. You can find the whole prayer in Appendix V.

1024

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Moreover, Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-215), in The Instructor (Book II), Chapter 4, on How to Conduct Ourselves at Feasts, exhorts the faithful to sing as a thankful revelry. He sees the psalm as a melodius and sober blessings as a spiritual song: In the present instance He is a guest with us. For the apostle adds again, Teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your heart to God. And again, Whatsoever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and His Father. This is our thankful revelry. And even if you wish to sing and play to the harp or lyre, there is no blame. You shall imitate the righteous Hebrew king in his thanksgiving to God. Rejoice in the Lord, you righteous; praise is comely to the upright, says the prophecy. Confess to the Lord on the harp; play to Him on the psaltery of ten strings. Sing to Him a new song. And does not the ten-stringed psaltery indicate the Word Jesus, who is manifested by the element of the decade? And as it is befitting, before partaking of food, that we should bless the Creator of all; so also in drinking it is suitable to praise Him on partaking of His creatures. For the psalm is a melodious and sober blessing. The apostle calls the psalm a spiritual song.514 (Chap. 4) In this same work, we also find A Hymn to Christ the Saviour. The first stanza follows:515 I. Bridle of colts untamed, Over our wills presiding; Wing of unwandering birds, Our flight securely guiding. Rudder of youth unbending, Firm against adverse shock; Shepherd, with wisdom tending Lambs of the royal flock: Your simple children bring In one, that they may sing In solemn lays Their hymns of praise With guileless lips to Christ their King. (Book III, Chap. 12) This extolling and praise of the psalm contrasts with Clements rejection of pagan music and its minstrels in favour of the Levitical song: Amphion of Thebes and Arion of Methymna were both minstrels, and both were renowned in story. They are celebrated in song to this day in the chorus of the Greeks; the one for having allured the fishes, and the other for having surrounded Thebes with
514 515

Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16. You can find the whole prayer in Appendix V.

1025

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

walls by the power of music. Another, a Thracian, a cunning master of his art (he also is the subject of a Hellenic legend), tamed the wild beasts by the mere might of song... . (Exhortation to the Heathen, Chap. 1) Clement exhorts to hear a sacred prophetic choir, which contains the real Truth: But let us bring from above out of heaven, Truth, with Wisdom in all its brightness, and the sacred prophetic choir, down to the holy mount of God; and let Truth, darting her light to the most distant points, cast her rays all around on those that are involved in darkness, and deliver men from delusion, stretching out her very strong right hand, which is wisdom, for their salvation. And raising their eyes, and looking above, let them abandon Helicon and Cithron, and take up their abode in Sion. For out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, Isaiah 2:3the celestial Word, the true athlete crowned in the theatre of the whole universe. What my Eunomos sings is not the measure of Terpander, nor that of Capito, nor the Phrygian, nor Lydian, nor Dorian, but the immortal measure of the new harmony which bears God`s namethe new, the Levitical song. Soother of pain, calmer of wrath, producing forgetfulness of all ills. (Chap. 1) He further contrasts the singing of the pagan minstrels with his own song, which has come to loose the bitter bondage of tyrannizing demons: To me, therefore, that Thracian Orpheus, that Theban, and that Methymnan,men, and yet unworthy of the name,seem to have been deceivers, who, under the pretence of poetry corrupting human life, possessed by a spirit of artful sorcery for purposes of destruction, celebrating crimes in their orgies, and making human woes the materials of religious worship, were the first to entice men to idols; nay, to build up the stupidity of the nations with blocks of wood and stone,that is, statues and images,subjecting to the yoke of extremest bondage the truly noble freedom of those who lived as free citizens under heaven by their songs and incantations. But not such is my song, which has come to loose, and that speedily, the bitter bondage of tyrannizing demons; and leading us back to the mild and loving yoke of piety, recalls to heaven those that had been cast prostrate to the earth. It alone has tamed men ... (Chap. 1) In addition, Tertullian (ca. 155-225), who lived about the same time as Clement of Alexandria, refers to the singing of palms in many of his writings. In his Apology, he also mentions Plinys letter to Trojan: For the younger Pliny, when he was ruler of a province, having condemned some Christians to death, and driven some from their steadfastness, being still annoyed by their great numbers, at last sought the advice of Trajan, the reigning emperor, as to what he was to do with the rest, explaining to his master that, except an obstinate disinclination to offer sacrifices, he found in the religious services nothing but meetings at early morning for singing hymns to Christ and God, and sealing home their way of life by a united pledge to be faithful to their religion, forbidding murder, adultery, dishonesty, and other crimes. (Chap.2)

1026

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

In Chapter 39 of this work, Tertullian describes this singing of hymns: After manual ablution, and the bringing in of lights, each is asked to stand forth and sing, as he can, a hymn to God, either one from the holy Scriptures or one of his own composinga proof of the measure of our drinking. He even describes the composing of hymns outside the Scriptures. Moreover, in A Treatise on the Soul, he says referring to a sister among them We have now amongst us a sister whose lot it has been to be favoured with sundry gifts of revelation: Whether it be in the reading of Scriptures, or in the chanting of psalms, or in the preaching of sermons, or in the offering up of prayers, in all these religious services matter and opportunity are afforded to her of seeing visions (Chap. 9). Thus he alludes to the singing of psalms as a part of worship. Likewise, St. Cyprian, in his Epistle 1 (To Donatus) points out to religious music in the gathering of Christians: Let the temperate meal resound with psalms; and as your memory is tenacious and your voice musical, undertake this office, as is your wont. You will provide a better entertainment for your dearest friends, if, while we have something spiritual to listen to, the sweetness of religious music charm our ears (Chap. 16). Florovsky explains the theological power the psalms attained in the second century in the dogmatic character of the Christian liturgy: [the Italics are his.] This is connected with its mystical realism. On the human side, the liturgy is, first of all, a confessiona testimony of faith, not only an outpouring of feelings. It is for this reason that the dogmatic and theological disputes left such a noticeable trace on the history of liturgical poetry. As early as the dogmatic disputes of the late second century, references to ancient psalms to the glory of Christ, the Lord God, receive the power of a theological argument as evidence from liturgical tradition. St. Basil the Great, in his disputes with the Arians over the Divinity of the Spirit, also relies on the testimony of liturgical tradition. Pope Celestine subsequently advances a general principle that a law of faith is defined as a law of prayer ut legem credendi statuit lex supplicandi (Capitula Celestini 8, alias 11)... Thus the liturgical rite obtains recognition as a dogmatic monument or dogmatic source. (The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century)

1027

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Origen (ca. 185-253), in Contra Celsus (Book VIII), speaks of praise singing in ones own native language, Any one will be convinced that this is a false charge which Celsus brings against us, when he considers that Christians in prayer do not even use the precise names which divine Scripture applies to God; but the Greeks use Greek names, the Romans Latin names, and every one prays and sings praises to God as he best can, in his mother tongue. For the Lord of all the languages of the earth hears those who pray to Him in each different tongue, hearing, if I may so say, but one voice, expressing itself in different dialects. For the Most High is not as one of those who select one language, Barbarian or Greek, knowing nothing of any other, and caring nothing for those who speak in other tongues. (Chap. 37) also showing that singing in the early Christian Church developed mainly as a congregational activity. In Book I of the Apostolic Constitution, a late fourth century collection which reveals the moral and religious observances of the third and the fourth centuries, we read how the writer exhorts to sing the hymns of David: Or if thou stayest at home, read the books of the Law, of the Kings, with the Prophets; sing the hymns of David; and peruse diligently the Gospel, which is the completion of the other (Chap. 5). In Book V, the author exhorts the faithful to avoid reading a heathen hymn or obscene song: Even your very rejoicings therefore ought to be done with fear and trembling: for a Christian who is faithful ought neither to repeat an heathen hymn nor an obscene song, because he will be obliged by that hymn to make mention of the idolatrous names of demons; and instead of the Holy Spirit, the wicked one will enter into him (Chap. 10). This can also mean a rejecting of the classical meter based on quantity. In Book VII or Didache, we also see the benefits of hymn singing for the mans soul: Wherefore every man ought to send up a hymn from his very soul to Thee, through Christ, in the name of all the rest, since He has power over them all by Thy appointment (Chap. 35). Also in Book VII, we find three daily prayers or hymns: Morning Prayer, and Evening Prayer, and a Prayer at Dinner. The first one reads:

1028

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Glory be to God in the highest, and upon earth peace, good-will among men. We praise Thee, we sing hymns to Thee, we bless Thee; we glorify Thee, we worship Thee by Thy great High Priest; Thee who art the true God, who art the One Unbegotten, the only inaccessible Being. For Thy great glory, O Lord and heavenly King, O God the Father Almighty, O Lord God, the Father of Christ the immaculate Lamb, who taketh away the sin of the world, receive our prayer, Thou that sittest upon the cherubim. For Thou only art holy, Thou only art the Lord Jesus, the Christ of the God of all created nature, and our King, by whom glory, honour, and worship be to Thee. (Chap. 47) The Evening Prayer reads: Ye children, praise the Lord: praise the name of the Lord.516 We praise Thee, we sing hymns to Thee, we bless Thee for Thy great glory, O Lord our King, the Father of Christ the immaculate Lamb, who taketh away the sin of the world. Praise becomes Thee, hymns become Thee, glory becomes Thee, the God and Father, through the Son, in the most holy Spirit, for ever and ever. Amen. Now, O Lord, lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, according to Thy word; for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation, which Thou hast prepared before the face of all people, a light for the revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel.517 (Chap. 48) The Prayer at Dinner reads. Thou art blessed, O Lord, who nourishest me from my youth, who givest food to all flesh. Fill our hearts with joy and gladness, that having always what is sufficient for us, we may abound to every good work, in Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom glory, honour, and power be to Thee for ever. Amen. (Chap. 49) Scholars also add a fourth hymn to these three, the Pho Hilaron ( ), believed to have been composed by St. Athenogenes (d. 305) on the way to being martyred. This saint martyr, called the Old Theologian, is often depicted as an elderly bishop with the executioners arm paralyzed until the saint has completed his song. The Roman Martyrology states: In Pontus, the birthday of Saint Athenogenes, [is celebrated, he was] an aged theologian, who, when about to consummate his martyrdom by fire, sang a hymn of joy, which he left in writing to his disciples. He is probably identical to the bishop who suffered at Sebaste, Armenia, with ten disciples under Diocletian on July 16; therefore estimating his death as around 305 A.D. The Pho Hilarion reads as follows:
516 517

Ps. cxiii. 1. Luke ii. 29, etc.

1029

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

O gracious light, pure brightness of the ever living Father in heaven, O Jesus Christ, holy and blessed! Now as we come to the setting of the sun, and our eyes behold the vesper light, we sing your praised, O God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You are worthy at all times to be praised by happy voices, O Son of God, O Giver of Life, and to be glorified through all the worlds.518 This hymn, known in English as Hail Gladdening Light, O Gladsome Light, or O Gracious Light, is an ancient Christian hymn originally written in New Testament Greek. It is the earliest known Christian hymn, recorded outside of the Bible, probably dated in the second century, which is still being used today. The hymn is featured in the Vespers of the Byzantine liturgy used by the Orthodox and Eastern-rite Catholic traditions. It is the first to be considered an actual hymn in the modern sense. Blume refers to these four songs, situating the four of them in the Apostolic Constitutions:519 Genuine hymns even in the broadest sense of the term were not yet to be met with. Even the four songs handed down to us through the Constitutiones Apostolicae which were intended as hymns in the morning, in the evening, before meals, and at candle lighting, cannot be considered hymns. They are rather prayers which, in spite of the lyric tone and rhythmic quality evident in some passages, must be considered as songs in prose, similar to the Prefaces of the Mass, and which are mainly composed of extracts from the Scripture. (Hymnody and Hymnology) Blume continues: The first of these four interesting songs is the Morning Hymn ... ; we call it the Hymnus Angelicus: Doxa en hypsistois theo (Gloria in excelsis Deo). The first part of this song of praise was written before 150 A.D., and Saint Athanasius, after translating it into Latin, inserted the whole in the Western Liturgy ... The Evening Hymn: Aineite, paides, Kyrion, aineite to onoma Kyriou is the same as the Gloria in excelsis in a shorter form and with the first verse of Psalm cxii as introduction. The Hymn of Grace at meals begins: Eulogetos ei, Kyrie, ho
This hymn can by listened to at Msica Litrgica: <http://www.orthodoxworld.ru/spanish/music/ Liturgy /index.htm>. See Gladsome Light. 519 I have tried to find the inclusion of Phos Hilarion in current versions of the Apostolic Constitutions, and I havent been able to find it in this collection.
518

1030

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

trephon me ek neotetos mou, ho didous trophen pase sarki. These words show plainly their origin in the Holy Scriptures, and from them can be seen to what extent, if at all, they are ruled by rhythm and metre. Yet, this writes adds that Phos Hilaron: The fourth song, the celebrated Candle-light Hymn beginning ... is more rhythmical than the others. It is usually divided into twelve verses; these verses vary between five, six, eight, nine, ten and eleven syllables. He furthermore says: This at most is the very beginning of what is termed a hymn in metrical language, but complains that the The fact that in the fifth and later centuries these songs and prayers were called hymns is another instance of the error committed in determining the origin of hymnody by deductions from passages in ancient writers where the expression hymnos or hymnus occurs. It is true that Phos Hilaron has been part of the Eastern tradition from the time of St. Basil (329?-379), as we discover an apparent reference to it in De Spiritu Sancto: I will now adduce another piece of evidence which might perhaps seem insignificant, but because of its antiquity must in nowise be omitted by a defendant who is indicted on a charge of innovation. It seemed fitting to our fathers not to receive the gift of the light at eventide in silence, but, on its appearing, immediately to give thanks. Who was the author of these words of thanksgiving at the lighting of the lamps, we are not able to say. The people, however, utter the ancient form, and no one has ever reckoned guilty of impiety those who say We praise Father, Son, and Gods Holy Spirit. And if any one knows the Hymn of Athenogenes, which, as he was hurrying on to his perfecting by fire, he left as a kind of farewell gift to his friends, he knows the mind of the martyrs as to the Spirit. On this head I shall say no more. (Chap. 73) Thus, though composed in the pre-Byzantium age, this hymn has been a part of Byzantine vespers for as long as it has existed (Phos Hilarion). In the Apostolic Constitutions (Book II, chap. 57) we also find references to congregational responsorial singing: In the middle, let the reader stand upon some high place: let him read the books of Moses, of Joshua the son of Nun, of the Judges, and of the Kings and of the Chronicles, and those written after the return from the captivity; and besides these, the books of Job and of Solomon, and of the sixteen prophets. But when there have been two lessons severally read, let some other person sing the hymns of David, and let the people join at the conclusions of the verses. Afterwards let our Acts be read, and the Epistles of Paul our fellow-worker, which he sent to 1031

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

the churches under the conduct of the Holy Spirit; and afterwards let a deacon or a presbyter read the Gospels, both those which I Matthew and John have delivered to you, and those which the fellow-workers of Paul received and left to you, Luke and Mark. And while the Gospel is read, let all the presbyters and deacons, and all the people, stand up in great silence; (Chap. 57) Additionally, we see that psalms are chanted after the lessons from the Old Testament. In addition, we also notice how the whole psalm was read, a usage that went on till the fifth century. But even if the above mentioned Christian hymns were not hymns in the strict sense of the word, they will become very relevant for Byzantine Christians.

Activity Write about the roots of Byzantine music. What are the three genres of feelings? According to Wellesz, which are Pitras contributions? Why are St. Pauls 1 Corinthians 14:26 and Colossians 3: 16 important? What does John Gill think about the terms psalm, hymns, and spiritual songs? What does Wellesz think about them? 6. Do psalms have meter? Explain your answer. 7. What do Plinys letter to Trajan and the Fathers comments on it show? 8. What is the opinion of the Fathers regarding pagan celebrations? 9. Which three daily prayers can we find in the Apostolic Constitutions? Are they hymns in the strict sense of the word? 10. Why is the hymn Phos Hilaron important? What is the story behind it? What is it called in English? Read it and make a short comment on it. 11. What do the Apostolic Constitutions say about congregational responsorial singing? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Activity 202: Pre-Byzantium Era

BYZANTINE ERA Introduction Let us study this Byzantine era by dividing it into two main periods, a first one, a continuation of Early Christian Hymnody, from the fourth to the sixth century; and a second one, from the sixth century, starting with the reign of Justinian and the emerging of Byzantine

1032

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Hymnography, to the eleventh century. Some words will also be said regarding the period from the eleventh century to the end of the Byzantine Empire in 1453. In the first period many hymns were written to counteract the activity of the heretics. It is also in this period when St. Basil introduced antiphonal singing and it is the time of the Greek compositions in quantitative metric of St. Ephraim and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. But it is especially, in the second period, with Justinian I (ruled 527-565), that we find examples of hymns, in the strict sense delineated above, intended to be sung in Christian worship, especially the kontakion, a long poetic homily, based on stress rather than on quantity, which marks the beginning of Byzantine Hymnography. Already in 528, by decree, Justinian decided the daily singing of the three main offices, Matins, Orthros, and Vespers for all the clergy who were attached to a church (Wellesz, A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 123-125). In his thirty-eight years of reign, Justinian made important efforts aiming at strengthening the religious life of the Empire. He created, Wellesz tells us, a powerful ecclesiastical administration, by furthering the building of churches and monasteries, and by connecting secular life to a hitherto unprecedented extent with ecclesiastical ritual (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 164). As we will see, two centuries after the death of Justinian, another type of hymn appeared, the kanon, which replaced the kontakion. From the mid-eighth century to the mid-ninth century the disastrous Iconoclastic Controversy took place, as already commented, causing a spiritual reaction expressed in religious poetry and many excellent songs.

First Period: From the Fourth to the Sixth Century It is true that the flourishing of Christianity and thus Christian hymnody would not have occurred if it had not been for Constantines legalization of the practice of Christianity at the beginning of the fourth century. Then the art of singing began to 1033

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

flourish as choir schools became established. In this century we find authors that might be considered the Christian predecessors of Byzantine hymnody, and a continuing sense of psalm singing as praise to the Lord. Eusebius of Caesarea (256-340), Emperor Constantines biographer, alludes to hymn singing in his Church History (Book X): 1. Thanks for all things be given unto God the Omnipotent Ruler and King of the universe, and the greatest thanks to Jesus Christ the Saviour and Redeemer of our souls, through whom we pray that peace may be always preserved for us firm and undisturbed by external troubles and by troubles of the mind. 2. Since in accordance with your wishes, my most holy Paulinus, we have added the tenth book of the Church History to those which have preceded, we will inscribe it to you, proclaiming you as the seal of the whole work; and we will fitly add in a perfect number the perfect panegyric upon the restoration of the churches, obeying the Divine Spirit which exhorts us in the following words: 3. Sing unto the Lord a new song, for he has done marvelous things. His right hand and his holy arm has saved him. The Lord has made known his salvation, his righteousness has he revealed in the presence of the nations. Eusebius is referring to Psalm 98:1-2 and from that he asserts: 4. And in accordance with the utterance which commands us to sing the new song, let us proceed to show that, after those terrible and gloomy spectacles which we have described, we are now permitted to see and celebrate such things as many truly righteous men and martyrs of God before us desired to see upon earth and did not see, and to hear and did not hear. (Chap. 1: 1-4) Eusebius wants to celebrate the peace Christian churches had been granted with a new song. Let us remember that in this work Eusebius narrates the history of the Church from the apostles to Constantines time, his own time. While in previous books he had narrated Christian persecution until Constantines victory over Maxentius in the West and over Maximinus in the East, in Book X, he tells us about the reestablishment of the churches and the rebellion and conquest of Licinius. St. Basil of Caesarea (330-379), Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia from 370 to 379, and a contemporary of Chrysostom, from his cloister, had a special influence on the development of psalmody with refrains (Florovsky, The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century). Basils liturgical procedures are seen in a letter of complaint he sends to the clergy of Neocaesarea (Letter 207), for their hatred for him for having

1034

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

innovated Church music. At the beginning of this letter Basil describes the reason of his letter, You all concur in hating me (Chap.1), and alludes to Sabellius the Libyan and Marcellus the Galatians wicked opinion against him. Then he explains the reason for such a furious and truceless war: they allege psalms and a kind of music varying from the custom which has obtained among you, and similar pretexts of which they ought to be ashamed (Chap 1). He defends his congregation by saying that we rejoice to have assemblies of both men and women, whose conversation is in heaven and who have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof; they take no thought for food and raiment, but remain undisturbed beside their Lord, continuing night and day in prayer. Their lips speak not of the deeds of men: they sing hymns to God continually, working with their own hands that they may have to distribute to them that need. (Chap 2) Later Basil, giving an answer to the accusation regarding their singing of psalm, explains the ancestry of his antiphonal singing: The customs which now obtain are agreeable to those of all the Churches of God. Among us the people go at night to the house of prayer, and, in distress, affliction, and continual tears, making confession to God, at last rise from their prayers and begin to sing psalms. And now, divided into two parts, they sing antiphonally with one another, thus at once confirming their study of the Gospels, and at the same time producing for themselves a heedful temper and a heart free from distraction. Afterwards they again commit the prelude of the strain to one, and the rest take it up; and so after passing the night in various psalmody, praying at intervals as the day begins to dawn, all together, as with one voice and one heart, raise the psalm of confession to the Lord, each forming for himself his own expressions of penitence. If it is for these reasons that you renounce me, you will renounce the Egyptians; you will renounce both Libyans, Thebans, Palestinians, Arabians, Phnicians, Syrians, the dwellers by the Euphrates; in a word all those among whom vigils, prayers, and common psalmody have been held in honour. (Chap. 3)

Antiphonal singing denotes dividing a group of singers into two groups in such a way that they are (usually) separated spacially from each other, for example: the right and left sides of a church; the front of a church and the balcony in the back of the church. The singings usually alternate (one group sings and the other group responds). It is to be distinguished from Responsorial singing, which denotes singing a response to a chanted or read verse of scripture (usually a psalm). A cantor or priest sings or reads the verse and the choir or congregation sings the response. (Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE) Table 93: Antiphonal singing

1035

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

In spite of the accusation, St. Basil did not deny that his was a new procedure already accepted by Egyptians, Libyans, Theban, Palestinians, Syrians, etc. As already commented, the early Christian Church also borrowed from the Jewish Temple and Synagogue musical practices the technique of antiphonal and responsorial singing. In the concluding paragraph Basil emphasizes words that come from the Spirit, while recriminating the clergy of Neocsareas own use of innovational litanies520 of a penitential nature, But, it is alleged, these practices were not observed in the time of the great Gregory. My rejoinder is that even the Litanies which you now use were not used in his time. I do not say this to find fault with you; for my prayer would be that every one of you should live in tears and continual penitence. We, for our part, are always offering supplication for our sins, but we propitiate our God not as you do, in the words of mere man, but in the oracles of the Spirit. And what evidence have you that this custom was not followed in the time of the great Gregory? You have kept none of his customs up to the present time. (Chap. 4) while his cloister did not petition God with human phrases but with the words of the Spirit. Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea also comments that the Christians were still practicing the methods of singing described by Philo of Alexandria in his description of the first century Jewish ascetic sect called, the Therapeutae. Eusebius says: Then again he writes as follows concerning the new psalms which they composed: So that they not only spend their time in meditation, but they also compose songs and hymns to God in every variety of metre and melody, though they divide them, of course, into measures of more than common solemnity (Church History, Book 2, Chap. 17: 13). Eusebius goes on: These things the above-mentioned author has related in his own work, indicating a mode of life which has been preserved to the present time by us alone, recording especially the vigils kept in connection with the great festival, and the exercises performed during those vigils, and the hymns customarily recited by
Probably the litanies developed from the practice of the early church in the singing of Psalms by the faithful as they assembled and waited outside the church (Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: Early Eastern Orthodox Liturgics).
520

1036

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

us, and describing how, while one sings regularly in time, the others listen in silence, and join in chanting only the close of the hymns; (Church History, Book II, Chap. 17: 22) The method Philo described is the antiphonal congregational singing of the Therapeutae: They rise up together and ... form themselves into two choirs, one of men and one of women, the leader chosen from each being the most honoured and most musical among them. They sing hymns to God composed of many measures and set to many melodies, sometimes chanting together, sometimes antiphonally ... It is thus that the choir of the Therapeutae of either sex note in response to note and voice to voice, the deep-toned voices of the men blending with the shrill voices of the womencreate a truly musical symphony. (De vita contemplativa 521 ) In the Old Testament we can also find passages which document that congregations participated in antiphonal singing (e.g. Nehemiah xii.31-9) (Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE). In this Byzantine Era, we again find a rejection of pagan celebrations. Canons 53 and 54 of the Council of Laodicea say: Canon 53: CHRISTIANS, when they attend weddings, must not join in wanton dances, but modestly dine or breakfast, as is becoming to Christians Canon 54: MEMBERS of the priesthood and of the clergy must not witness the plays at weddings or banquets; but, before the players enter, they must rise and depart. (The Council of Laodicea in Phrygia Pacatiana 364 A.D.) Additionally, Canon 15 says: No others shall sing in the Church, save only the canonical singers, who go up into the ambo and sing from a book. The German theologian comment, Hefele (1809-1893), makes the following comment on this canon: The only question [presented by this canon] is whether this synod forbade the laity to take any part in the Church music, as Binius and others have understood the words of the text, or whether it only intended to forbid those who were not cantors taking the lead. Van Espen and Neander in particular were in favour of the latter meaning, pointing to the fact that certainly in the Greek Church after the Synod of Laodicea the people were accustomed to join in the singing, as Chrysostom and Basil the Great sufficiently testify. Bingham propounded a peculiar opinion, namely, that this Synod did indeed forbid the laity, to sing in the church, or even to join in the singing, but this only temporarily, for certain
521

Qtd. in Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE.

1037

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

reasons. I have no doubt, however, that Van Espen and Neander take the truer view. (Deaconess: Council of Laodicea) As this council forbids others to sing in the church than the canonical singers, it is plausible to think that the order of singers have arisen early in the fourth century, owing to the decay of congregational singing (The Dialogue of Palladius concerning the Life of St. John Chrysostom, Note n: 598). In canon 59 of this council we also read: No psalms composed by private individuals nor any uncanonical books may be read in the church, but only the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testaments. Florovsky sees in this canon a rejection of false hymns. As he says, it was an attempt to consolidate a definite canon in the liturgy as well, excluding all unholy hymns from the liturgical ordinary. This prohibition refers to all false hymns into which dogmatic ambiguity and even plain delusion had easily entered. Phrygia had always been in its own way a nest of heresy, and psalms were a very convenient and effective means for disseminating and instilling false views. We know very well that this means was constantly being utilized by ancient sectarians and false teachers. It is sufficient to recall the hymns or psalms of the Gnostics and Montanists, and, from a later era, the hymns of Arius in his Thalia and Apollinarius New Psalter. Under the conditions of dogmatic struggle, the attempt to bring liturgical singing within precise and strict bounds was entirely understandable. The simplest solution of all was to return to Biblical psalmody, to the proclaiming of the canonical psalms attributed to David. From the beginning they came into Christian use from the observances of the services from the synagogue. In the fourth century Biblical motifs became even more noticeable in the liturgy. This was instituted deliberately it was not merely an involuntary recollection. (The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century) Blume comments how heretical hymns cause Christian authors, beginning with St. Ephraim, to compose hymns in order to counteract the heretical ones: The earliest safe historical data we find in endeavouring to trace the origin belong to the fourth century. The writing of Christian hymns intended to be sung in Christian congregations was first undertaken to counteract the activity of the heretics. The Gnostics Bar-Daisan, or Bardesanes, and his son Harmonius had incorporated their erroneous doctrine in beautiful hymns, and, as St. Ephraem the Syrian says, clothed the pest of depravation in the garment of musical beauty. As these hymns became very popular an antidote was needed. This induced St. Ephraem (d. 378) to write Syrian hymns. His success inspired St.

1038

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Gregory of Nazianzus (d. 389) to counteract the heresy of the Arians by Greek hymns.522 (Hymnody and Hymnology) Labourt, in St. Ephraim, describes the Syrian hymns of this saint as follows: The hymns (Syriac madrash, i.e. instructions) offer a greater variety both of style and rhythm. They were written for the choir service of nuns, and were destined to be chanted by them; hence the division into strophes, the last verses of each strophe being repeated in a kind of refrain. This refrain is indicated at the beginning of each hymn, after the manner of an antiphon; there is also an indication of the musical key in which the hymn should be sung. Labourt also quotes a hymn from an Epiphany Hymn by St. Ephraim: Air: Behold the month. Refrain: Glory to Thee from Thy flock on the day of Thy manifestation. Strophe: He has renewed the heavens, because the foolish ones had adored all the stars | He has renewed the earth which had lost its vigour through Adam | A new creation was made by His spittle | And He Who is all-powerful made straight both bodies and minds Refrain: Glory to Thee etc. Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 330-390) also authored several hymns in Greek. He wrote them in polymetrical form and using, as St. Ephraim classical, quantitative metric. For Blume, Gregory Nazianzus was the first creator of hymns in the wider sense of the word: Greek hymnody, if we take hymn in the wider sense of the word, begins with St. Gregory of Nazianzus (d. 389). In their outer form his numerous and often lengthy poems still rest on ancient classical foundation and are exclusively governed by the laws of quantity. Their language unites delicacy and verbal richness to subtility of expression and precision of theological definition while glowing with the warmth of feeling. (Hymnody and Hymnology) What follows is the first two stanzas of an English translation of one of his hymn entitled Hymn to God:523 1. O Thou, the One Supreme oer all! For by what other name May we upon Thy greatness call, Or celebrate Thy fame?
About the same time, St. Ambrose (d. 397) composed Latin hymns. St. Hilary of Poitiers (d. 366), had previously composed Latin hymns, but had been unsuccessful because they failed to please the popular taste. 523 See the complete hymn in the Appendix V.
522

1039

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

2 Ineffable! to Thee what speech Can hymns of honour raise? Ineffable! what tongue can reach The measure of Thy praise? (Hymn to God) Like other Church Fathers, St. John Chrysostom (Syria, ca. 347-407), Bishop of Antioch, then of Constantinople, criticizes the theatre very harshly, at a time when Antioch was, after Alexandria, the chief theatrical center. In his thirty-seventh homily on Matthew, he describes the corruption of the spectacles he has seen in Antioch in his address to the Christian community, a minority in a pagan city: And what again is the applause? what the tumult, and the satanical cries, and the devilish gestures? For first one, being a young man, wears his hair long behind, and changing his nature into that of a woman, is striving both in aspect, and in gesture, and in garments, and generally in all ways, to pass into the likeness of a tender damsel. Then another who is grown old, in the opposite way to this, having his hair shaven, and with his loins girt about, his shame cut off before his hair, stands ready to be smitten with the rod, prepared both to say and do anything. The women again, their heads uncovered, stand without a blush, discoursing with a whole people, so complete is their practice in shamelessness; and thus pour forth all effrontery and impurity into the souls of their hearers. And their one study is, to pluck up all chastity from the foundations, to disgrace our nature, to satiate the desire of the wicked demon. Yea, and there are both foul sayings, and gestures yet fouler; and the dressing of the hair tends that way, and the gait, and apparel, and voice, and flexure of the limbs; and there are turnings of the eyes, and flutes, and pipes, and dramas, and plots; and all things, in short, full of the most extreme impurity. (Chap. 7) For Chrysostom the society is turned upside down and he warns the faithful against this drama in his desire to shut down the scene: When then will you be sober again, I pray you, now that the devil is pouring out for you so much of the strong wine of whoredom, mingling so many cups of unchastity? For indeed both adulteries and stolen marriages are there, and there are women playing the harlot, men prostituting, youths corrupting themselves: all there is iniquity to the full, all sorcery, all shame. Wherefore they that sit by should not laugh at these things, but weep and groan bitterly. What then? Are we to shut up the stage. (Chap. 7) In his sixth homily to Matthew, he says It becomes not us then to be continually laughing, and to be dissolute, and luxurious, but it belongs to those upon the stage, the harlot women, the men that are trimmed for this intent, parasites, and flatterers; not them that are called unto heaven, not them that are enrolled into the city above, not them that bear 1040

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

spiritual arms, but them that are enlisted on the devils side. For it is he, yea, it is he, that even made the thing an art, that he might weaken Christs soldiers, and soften the nerves of their zeal. For this cause he also built theatres in the cities, and having trained those buffoons, by their pernicious influence he causes that kind of pestilence to light upon the whole city, persuading men to follow those things which Paul bade us flee, foolish talking and jesting. (Chap. 10) On the contrary, Chrysostom, in his Homily 28 on the Romans, exhorts the faithful to sing and praise the Lord: Let us sing then the Psalm of good deeds, that we may cast out the sin that is worse than the demon. For a demon certainly will not deprive us of heaven, but does in some cases even work with the sober-minded. But sin will assuredly cast us out. For this is a demon we willingly receive, a self-chosen madness. Wherefore also it has none to pity it or to pardon it. Let us then sing charms over a soul in this plight, as well from the other Scriptures, as also from the blessed David. And let the mouth sing, and the mind be instructed. Even this is no small thing. For if we once teach the tongue to sing, the soul will be ashamed to be devising the opposite of what this sings. Nor is this the only good thing that we shall gain, for we shall also come to know many things which are our interest. Additionally, in his Homily 19 on Ephesians, he states: Do you wish, he says, to be cheerful, do you wish to employ the day? I give you spiritual drink; for drunkenness even cuts off the articulate sound of our tongue; it makes us lisp and stammer, and distorts the eyes, and the whole frame together. Learn to sing psalms, and you shall see the delightfulness of the employment. For they who sing psalms are filled with the Holy Spirit, as they who sing satanic songs are filled with an unclean spirit. What is meant by with your hearts to the Lord? It means, with close attention and understanding. For they who do not attend closely, merely sing, uttering the words, while their heart is roaming elsewhere. Rev. Alexander Blaikie, in A Catechism on Praise, mentions the singing of psalms in catechetical instruction by Chrysostom and Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386?): Chrysostom also suggested that a good way of receiving a Christian education was to read from the Bible and to sing the Psalms, which would have had a good effect upon the childs soul. Under Cyril of Jerusalem the church included psalmody in its catechesis. Moreover, the following quote from De poenitentia,524 attributed to St. John Chrysostom, as Florovsky asserts, does not only suggest the popularity of the

524

De poenitentia, Patrologia Graeca 54, 12-13. Qtd. in Mark Bailey. 1041

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

psalms in fourth century worship, but also witness to the custom of psalmody with refrains (The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century): If the faithful are keeping vigil in the church, David is first, middle, and last. If at dawn anyone wishes to sing hymns, David is first, middle, and last. In the holy monasteries, among the ranks of the heavenly warriors, David is first, middle, and last. In the convents of virgins, who are imitators of Mary, David is first, middle, and last. In the deserts where men hold converse with God, David is first, middle, and last. For Florovsky, this was the rebirth of Old Testament custom.525 This theologian also attributes the further development of hymnody to the use of refrains: From the refrains there gradually developed new psalms closely tied to the Biblical text which they reveal or elucidate... . Sometimes verses from patristic works were joined to the Psalms and Biblical songs. For example, the abbot Dorotheus speaks of St. Gregory of Nazianzus song of dicta. Monastic liturgies, whether cenobitic or anchoritic, were more penitential as opposed to the more ancient cathedral liturgy which was solemn and laudatory. New liturgical poetry begins to develop comparatively late and very gradually on the new foundation. New hymns are composed. Florovsky refers to Auxentius (died after 460), an ascetic who retired to Mount Oxia, near Chalcedon and that he would proclaim individual verses and the crowd, who would throng into his cave, would answer with short refrainfrom the Psalms or ancient hymns. Wellesz remarks that We should have no information about the state of the fifth-century hymnography if a group of troparia of Auxentius had not been transmitted in Vita526 of the saint (Wellesz, A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 174).

O dweller of the wilderness and angel in the body! You were a wonder-worker, O our God-bearing Father Auxentius! You received heavenly gifts Through fasting, vigil and prayer: Healing the sick and the souls of those drawn to you by faith: Glory to Him who gave you strength!
525 526

See the refrain in the very text of 135th Psalm. Georgius, a pupil of Auentius wrote the Vita. See Vita S. Auxentii, Patrologia Graeca 114: 1412.

1042

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Glory to Him who granted you a crown! Glory to Him who through you grants healing to all! Table 94: Venerable Father Auxentius, Troparion, Tone I

Florovsky also mentions Anthimius, one of Auxentius friends, as the first creator of anthems. Likewise Wellesz considers Anthimius, the Orthodox poet, as the first hymn-writer to be mentioned by name, but he adds other authors such Timocles, the Monophysite. Yet he regrets that none of the troparia of these hymnodists has come down to us, or at least under their names (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 174). Wellesz remarks the relevance of the troparion in the development of Byzantine Hymnography: From the aesthetic point of view, these hymns are as important as the longer forms which developed later; from the musical point of view they are of even greater importance, because their texture is richer than that of the melodies which are sung to the Kanons (171). He adds: The name Troparion was given to short prayers which, in the earliest stage of hymnography; were written in poetic prose and inserted after each verse of a psalm. In the fifth century, when the Troparia were composed in strophic form and became longer, these poetical prayers were sung only after the three to six last verses of psalms. Hymns of these kinds are known to have formed part of Matins and Vespers in and monasteries of the fifth century. (171)

Illustration 162: A Troparion527

527

See: <http://www.patronagechurch.com/chant/Bridegroom%20Matins%20-%20Prostopinije.htm>.

1043

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

As we will see in the next period, the troparia developed into the kontakia and the kontakia into the kanons. From the Sixth to the Eleventh Century: Kontakia and Kanons At the beginning of the sixth century, in addition to the troparion, as Wellesz states, another genre of ecclesiastical poetry began to flourish: the kontakion, which more independent of Scripture and more extended in form. He says that its growth coincides with the increase of Byzantine piety in the Justinian era (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 179). Conomos explains that this dramatic homily usually paraphrases a Biblical narrative and was sung during the Morning Office (Orthodox Byzantine Music). Yet, the name kontakion does not occur until the ninth century. Most scholars refer to Romanus (490-560), the creator of the kontakion, reputed of Syrian origin, as the first true Byzantine hymnologist. What is strange, as Florovsky asserts, that none of the historians mention Romanus, one of the greatest Byzantine poets; we can read about his life in the Menaion, under October 1(The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century): Our venerable father Romanus the Melodist, deacon, who merited the name the Melodist from his sublime art in composing ecclesiastical hymns in honor of the Lord and the saints. In Blumes Hymnody and Hymnology, we read the following about him: We may look upon the inventive and stirring writer Romanos (d. probably c. 560) as the real founder of Greek hymnody. In his poems the quantitative principle has completely given way to the accentual, rhythmical principle; and with the triumph of this principle the great day of the Greek Christian hymnody begins. About eighty hymns of Romanos have come down to us; nearly all of them show the artistic form of the Kontakia528 ... Clear and precise in theological language, he possesses in a high degree the depth and fire of a true lyric poet.

528

The term kontakion comes from the staff about which the inscribed roll was wrapped.

1044

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Illustration 163: Saint Romanos529

The kontakion was based on stress rather that on quantity. Florovsky says that kontakia were hymns of praise for Holy Days. He adds: The Kontakion is organized in a strophic system and usually consisted of twenty-four stanzas. Each stanza is a perfect structural imitation of the first. The metrical system of the Kontakion is based on stress and accent and hence the rhythm was influenced by the melody (The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century). Wellesz also offers a good definition of the kontakion: The Kontakion consists of from eighteen to thirty, or even more, stanzas all structurally alike. The single stanza is called Troparion; its length varies from three to thirteenth lines. All the Troparia are composed on the pattern of a model stanza, the Hirmus. A Kontakion is built either on the pattern of a Hirmus specially composed for it, or follows the metre of a Hirmus already used for another Kontakion or group of Kontakia. At the beginning of the Kontakion stands a short Troparion, metrically and melodically independent of it: this is the Prooemium or Kukulion, which, at a larger stage consists of two or three stanzas. Prooemium and Kontakion are linked together by the refrain, the Ephymnium, with which all the stanzas end, and by musical mode. The occurrence of the refrain at the end of each stanza indicates that the Kontakia were sung by a soloist, the choir singing the refrain. (179-189)

529

See: <www.networks-now.net>.

1045

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Illustration 164: A kontakion530

St. Romanos prelude to the Kontakion for the Nativity is still sung and has become one of the best-loved hymns of the Orthodox Church: Today the Virgin gives birth to him who is above all being, And the earth offers a cave to him whom no one can approach. Angels with shepherds give glory, And magi journey with a star, For to us there has been born a little child, God before the ages.531 In this period, other poets followed Romanus, namely the Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, a Monothelite (ruled from 610-38) and the Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem (ruled from 634-638). Yet, in the second half of the seventh century, a new type of hymn suddenly emerged supplanting the kontakion, the kanon, introduced by St. Andrew of Crete (660-740), Archbishop of Gortyna in Crete. To explain this sudden change from kontakia, Wellesz refers to Pitra, in Analecta sacra: The new Melodes composed most of their hymns in the dark days of the Iconoclastic controversy. The hymn-writers of this period, threatened with persecution, exile, and death, were no longer preoccupied with the elegance of their diction, but only with the expression of the somber mood of their age in their rough and passionate songs (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 199).

530 531

See: <http://www.patronagechurch.com/music_scores/Kontakion%20Res%208%20new.gif>. Qtd. in Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: Early Orthodox Chant and Music.

1046

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

From 725 to 842, the disastrous Iconoclastic Controversy took place, provoking as commented above, spiritual reaction expressed in religious poetry and many excellent songs (Hymnody and Hymnology). Papadakis explains that: The controversy of Iconoclasm was a surprising boost to monastic hymnography. Although the persecution, torture, and death of monks was ordered by the Iconoclast Empire for over 100 years until 842, the inhabitants of the monasteries found courage in the persecution and hymnography increased in activity within the Empires persecuted inhabitants. Even after the controversy came to an end, hymnography enjoyed a prosperous period of renewed interest. Wellesz says, referring to this reaction against the period of Puritanism, that From that period a number of manuscripts have come down to us, containing both texts and music of the liturgical hymns. These manuscripts transmit the rich treasury of hymnody in all the various stages of musical notation from the earliest to the most fully developed, and they are the source for the study of Byzantine ecclesiastical music (Wellesz, A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 170).

Illustration 165: A kanon532

The kanon, currently sung at matins, was further developed and refined, in this midst of this controversy, by St. John of Damascus (676-749) and Kosmas, also known as Kosmas of Jerusalem and of Maiuma (died ca. 760). Conomos asserts that Essentially, the kanon is a hymnodic complex comprised of nine odes. These odes, as
532

See: <http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~ef/music/tunes/reels.gif/kanon31-.gif >.

1047

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

he tells us, were originally attached to nine Biblical canticles and related by means of corresponding poetic allusion or textual quotation. He explains: Each ode consists of an initial troparion, the heirmos, followed by three, four or more troparia which are the exact metrical reproductions of the heirmos, thereby allowing the same music to fit all troparia equally well. The nine heirmoi, however, are metrically dissimilar; consequently, an entire kanon comprises nine independent melodies (eight, when the second ode is omitted, which are united musically by the same mode and textually by references to the general theme of the liturgical occasion, and sometimes by an acrostic. Heirmoi in syllabic style are gathered in the Heirmologion, a bulky volume which first appeared in the middle of the tenth century and contains over a thousand model troparia arranged into an oktoechos (the eight-mode musical system). (Orthodox Byzantine Music) According to Wellesz, in the later development of hymn-writing, from the beginning of the ninth century on, we should take into account the Studios monastery at Constantinople, which became the center of Byzantine hymnography. From this monastery, Theodore Studites (759-826), along with other hymn-writers of the Studios inaugurated a second great period of the kontakion. Wellesz compares him with Romanus, his chief model, saying that Theodores poetical diction was more elaborate than that of Romanus, but is a no less convincing expression of religious ardor. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 229). Besides this second great period of the kontakion, there were new developments in kanon writing. The troparion also, the oldest form of Christian poetry remained in use in Byzantine liturgy. Wellesz says that they increased as the result of extension of the service and the introduction of new feats of the saints He adds that New hymns were added to the oldest layer of Troparia, and were either sung to new melodies or composed and sung to already existing ones. They were sung between the stanzas of the Kontakia, and, at a later date, between the Odes of the Kanon. They range from stanzas consisting of from one to three lines, written in poetical prose, to poems of a lyrical character (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 239).

1048

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Finally, Wellesz clarifies terms such as the theotokion and the stichera. He says that the theotokion is the term for the ninth Ode of a Kanon which contains an invocation of the Mother of God. He explained its use in the change John of Damascus (690 -749) introduced in the character of this ninth ode due to the increased veneration of the Mother of God (242). What follows is an illustration of the Resurrection Canon currently sung at Matins: Ode 1. Tone 1. The Irmos. Your triumphant right hand, in a manner fitting God, has been glorified in strength, O Immortal; for in its infinite strength it broke in pieces the enemy, and made a strange new way for the Israelites in the deep. Troparia. With immaculate hands working as God, you fashioned me in the beginning from dust, stretched out those hands on the Cross, calling back from the earth my corruptible body, which you had taken from the Virgin. He, who by divinely breathing placed a soul in me, submitted to being slain for me and delivered his soul to death; and having freed it from eternal bonds and raised it with himself, he glorified it with incorruption. Theotokion. Hail source of grace, hail ladder and gate of heaven, hail lampstand and golden jar, and unhewn mountain, who bore for the world Christ the Giver of life. (On Sunday Morning: At Matins) As we see, nowadays the ode533 is divided into a heirmos and tropario. In the canon, the heirmos sets the tune for each ode, and the troparia follow it. The last troparion of the ode, the theotokion, refers to Our Lady (The Rite of Constantinople). John of Damascus also introduced the oktoechos, which has Jewish roots. Papadakis describes it as follows: The Oktoechos is the way that the Byzantine Church collected hymns according to the mode in which they were composed. Thus using one of the eight different modes in Byzantine music meant that there were eight divisions of hymns in the Oktoechos. Literally meaning eight modes, the Oktoechos cycles through each of the divisions every week (Saturday night Hesperinos, vespers, being the exact office in which the mode switches) so that by the end of the eight weeks every division is read and sung. Regarding these eight modes, Conomos asserts:

The odes often make an acrostic in their initial letters; sometimes they are alphabetic (The Rite of Constantinople).

533

1049

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Unlike acclamations and lectionary recitatives, Byzantine psalmody and hymnody were systematically assigned to the eight ecclesiastical modes, that, from about the 8th century, provided the compositional framework for Eastern and western musical practices. Research has demonstrated that, for all practical purposes, the oktoechos, as the system is called, was the same for Latins, Greeks, and Slavs in the middle ages. Each mode is characterized by the deployment of a restricted set of melodic formula that is peculiar to the mode and that constitutes the substance of the hymn. (A Brief Survey of the History of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Chan) Hilkka Seppl, in The System of the Eight Ekhoi and Orthodox Church Music in Finland, notes that the Byzantine system of oktoekhos which crystalized in the 8th century not only reflects theoretical ideas of music but also contains a lot of aesthetic thoughts and dogma of the Orthodox Church. The Byzantine elements had a strong influence of the formation of Orthodox music. This resulted from the normative character of the Orthodox arts, and is visible in the architecture, in the icon painting and in the music of the church generally. (86) In the same article, Seppl says:

The doctrine of the eight church modes is very important because it above al reveals that the liturgical music belongs to the holy substances within the church. The church music cannot be separated from the holy texts and from the holy time, that is from the celebration of holy worship. The number eight is the holy number in Christian worship. It reflects the dogma of the resurrection of Christ, which happened on the eight day. In Christs resurrection the Old Testament seven-day week joined with the new time, the eighth day, our earthly lives with the eternal, heavenly life. (86-87) As Seppl explains, the chrystalization of the doctrine of the eight modes coincided with the definition of the dogma of the holy icons, which was aided by St. John of Damascus, as commented above, regarded at the same time as the stabilizer of the eight modes (Seppl 87). This musicologist also notes that, importantly, these different scales, gave expression to the liturgical periods of the ecclesiastical year, the weeks (each eight-week period makes one eight-shift unit), feats and Lent. The system of the ekhoi to a large extent fixed the liturgical musical forms, not only as part of the single melody but even in their entirely (86).

1050

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

Wellesz also talks about the stichera which he considers as the most important and numerous independent group of Troparia. They were sung after the Psalms cxli, cxxix, and cxvi in the Evening Office although later, as they increased in length, they were sung in various parts of the Evening and Morning office (243). The sticheron of Great Saturday Orthros is: Come, let us see our Life lying in the tomb, that he may give life to those that in their tombs lie dead. Conomos stresses the importance of it for the variety of its liturgical usage: Festal stichera, accompanying both the fixed psalms at the beginning and end of Vespers and the psalmody of the Lauds (the Ainoi) in the Morning Office, exist for all special days of the year, the Sundays and weekdays of Lent, and for the recurrent cycle of eight weeks in the order of the modes beginning with Easter. Their melodies preserved in the Sticherarion, are considerably more elaborate and varied than in the tradition of the Heirmologion (Orthodox Byzantine Music) In the Council in Trullo (692), we see again how public shows and theatrical performances are anathematized. This is seen especially in canons 24, 51, 62, and 71: Canon 24: No one who is on the priestly catalogue nor any monk is allowed to take part in horse-races or to assist at theatrical representations. But if any clergyman be called to a marriage, as soon as the games begin let him rise up and go out, for so it is ordered by the doctrine of our fathers. And if any one shall be convicted of such an offence let him cease there from or be deposed. Canon 51: This holy and ecumenical synod altogether forbids those who are called players, and their spectacles, as well as the exhibition of hunts, and the theatrical dances. If any one despises the present canon, and gives himself to any of the things which are forbidden, if he be a cleric he shall be deposed, but if a layman let him be cut off. Canon 62: The so-called Calends, and what are called Bota and Brumalia, and the full assembly which takes place on the first of March, we wish to be abolished from the life of the faithful. And also the public dances of women, which may do much harm and mischief. Moreover we drive away from the life of Christians the dances given in the names of those falsely called gods by the Greeks whether of men or women, and which are performed after an ancient and un-Christian fashion; decreeing that no man from this time forth shall be dressed as a woman, nor any woman in the garb suitable to men. Nor shall he assume comic, satiric,

1051

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

or tragic masks; nor may men invoke the name of the execrable Bacchus when they squeeze out the wine in the presses; nor when pouring out wine into jars [to cause a laugh], practising in ignorance and vanity the things which proceed from the deceit of insanity. Therefore those who in the future attempt any of these things which are written, having obtained a knowledge of them, if they be clerics we order them to be deposed, anti if laymen to be cut off. Canon 71: Those who are taught the civil laws must not adopt the customs of the Gentiles, nor be induced to go to the theatre, nor to keep what are called Cylestras, nor to wear clothing contrary to the general custom; and this holds good when they begin their training, when they reach its end, and, in short, all the time of its duration. If any one from this time shall dare to do contrary to this canon he is to be cut off. (The Quinsext Council, or the Council in Trullo, 692) Wellesz remarks: The Council in Trullo marked the climax of resistance against the maintenance of celebration rooted in pagan customs and rites. It went so far as to ban the acclamation which had been sung at the other councils. Thus it came about that no acclamations were sung at the council in Trullo, though it was presided over by the Emperor himself, who was accustomed to be greeted on such occasions by the clergy with carefully prepared sentences executed in the manner as in the Hippodrome. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 85) Finally, regarding notation in the period, Conomos, in A Brief Survey of the History of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Chant, assserts: There were no notes to record music until after the 9th century. St Isidore of Seville in the 7th century lamented the fact that the sounds of music vanished and there was no way of writing them down. Only towards the end of the first millennium was it felt that the singers fragile memories were not adequately conserving the sacred melodies that something was done to fix the plainchants in writing. Byzantine chant manuscripts date from the 9th century, while lectionaries of Biblical readings with ecphonetic notation begin about a century earlier. Fully diastematic Byzantine notation, which can be readily converted into the modern system, surfaces in the last quarter of the 12th century.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Activity What happened in Justinians time? What did the Iconoclastic Controversy provoke? Why were St. Basils liturgical procedures important for the development of Byzantine hymnody? Why are St. Pauls 1 Corinthians 14:26 and Colossians 3: 16 important? Can we find passages of antiphonal singing in the Old Testament? Where? What does the Council of Laodicea prescribe about pagan celebrations? Comment on canon 59 of this council. 1052

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

8. Why did St. Ephraim compose his hymns? 9. What meter did St. Gregory Nazianzus use? 10. Why did St. John Chrysostom criticize pagan theater so harshly? What does he propose Christians to do instead? 11. What does Florovsky think about refrains? Who is for him the first creator of hymns? 12. Define the terms troparion and kanon. 13. According to Wellesz, why are the troparia important for the development of Byzantine hymnody? On the internet, find an example of this hymn and listen to it. Then list its name and the sacred service in which it is located. 14. Define the term kontakion. 15. Who was Romanus? On the internet, find an example of Kontakion and listen to it. Then list its name and the sacred service in which it is located. 16. When did the kanon appear? Narrate its development. On the internet, find an example of this hymn and listen to it. Then list its name and the sacred service in which it is located. 17. What is the oktoechos? Who introduced it? 18. What other hymns does Wellesz list? 19. what does the Council of Trullo say about theatrical performances?
Activity 203: Byzantium Era

Later Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Periods Blume explains that in the ninth century there occurred a disastrous event for hymnody: the revision of the hymnal. In the Liturgy, beautiful kontakia were replaced by kanons and many of the old hymns were improved, mutilated, as this writer remarks, showing the decline of poetic feeling. Moreover, in the eleventh century, the Greek liturgy ceased to develop and there was no soil for religious poetry. This was the end of creative poetical composition (Hymnody and Hymnology, Greek Literature). This final period of Byzantine chant was largely devoted, as Conomos explains to the production of more elaborate musical settings of the traditional texts: either embellishments of the earlier simpler melodies, or original music in highly ornamental style (Conomos, Orthodox Byzantine Music). After that time only a few isolated hymn writers appeared in Byzantium. Some of these distinguished authors of sacred poems, i.e. kanons, were John Mauropus 1053

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

(eleventh century), bishop of Euchaita, John Zonaras (twelfth century), and Nicephorus Blemmydes (thirteenth century) (Blume, Hymnody and Hymnology, Greek Literature). In the fourteenth century, one of the most celebrated Maistores or masters is St. John Koukouzeles who is compared in Byzantine writings to St. John of Damascus himself, as an innovator in the development of chant. Conomos describes the evolution of Byzantine music after the fall of Constantinople: The multiplication of new settings and elaborations of the old continued in the centuries following the fall of Constantinople, until by the end of the eighteenth century the original musical repertory of the medieval musical manuscripts had been quite replaced by later compositions, and even the basic model system had undergone profound modification. (Orthodox Byzantine Music) In A Brief Survey of the History of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Chant, he divides in five periods the history of the evolution of church music from the fall of Constantinople until the Greek revolution (See Appendix X). As Conomos explains, in the fifth period, by early nineteenth century, Byzantine musical notation had become so complex and technical that only highly skilled chanters were able to interpret them correctly. The so-called Three Teachers, Chrysanthos of Madytos (ca. 1770-46), Gregory the Protopsaltes, and Chourmouzios the Archivist began the much needed reform of the notation of Greek ecclesiastical music, mainly the simplification of the Byzantine musical symbols. Their work became a landmark in the history of Greek Church music because they were responsible for the introduction of the system of neoByzantine music which gave the form of todays Byzantine music. (Orthodox Byzantine Music). For Papadakis, this revision was nothing more than a definition of the scales and modes as well as the simplification of the notation. Nowadays, as this practitioner of Byzantine music points out: A new age of hymnography is seemingly to evolve to meet the new needs of the world. Ancient melodies are being fitted to English and French hymns created using metrically similar words and phrases. The mastores are slowly resurrecting an art that has been literally dead since the eleventh and twelfth centuries when

1054

Chapter 10: Development of Byzantine Hymnody

there were so many hymns already present in the church that hymnography became outlawed. Activity 1. Briefly explain what happens in hymnody a) from the ninth to the fourteenth century, and b) from the fifteen to nineteen century? (See Appendix X) 2. What can be said about current Orthodox liturgical music
Activity 204: Later Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Era

Final Activity Write a five-page paper summarizing the development of Byzantine liturgical chant. Conclude with your own reflections on the topic.
Activity 205: Final Activity on Byzantine liturgical music

1055

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

1056

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Chapter 11 CHURCH MUSIC IN RUSSIA

INTRODUCTION: MAIN PERIODS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIAN CHURCH SINGING After having focused on the development of hymnody from the early Christians to the end of the Byzantine Empire, I will concentrate on the arrival of Church singing and its development in Russia until the sixteenth century, before it began to be influenced by western trends. Logically, the development of Russian liturgical singing is parallel to the development of the Russian Church, which is itself linked to Russias historical development, as we saw in Part I when talking about the history of the Russian Church. Yet, although the history of the Russian Church was clearly influenced by the social-political events of Russia, not all relevant periods of church music evolution coincide with these social-political events. Before focusing on the early developments of Russian Church music, let us view the periodization made by Johann Von Gardner in his two volumes of Russian Church Singing, Vladimir Morosan in Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, and Ivan Moody in an Outline History of Russian Chant. Gardner sees two main epochs in Russian liturgical singing, the first, from the tenth century to the mid-seventeenth century, and from the second half of the seventeenth century to 1917. The first period has two distinguishing features monophony and vocal polyphony of a unique character, entirely different from the Western-style, a polyphony that suddenly burst out in the middle of the seventeenth century (vol. 1, 142-143). Gardner says that All written monuments of liturgical singing prior to the mid-sixteenth century are, without exception, monophonic. Manuscripts containing polyphony for two o more voices begin to appear only in the second half of the sixteenth century. But this polyphony is fundamentally different from contemporaneous Western

1057

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

European polyphony, since it is in no way based upon the principles of instrumental music. (vol. 1, 143) Within the first epoch Gardner classifies four periods: (1) the period of origins, from 988 to approximately the eleventh century; (2) the period of the kondakarian singing, from the end of the eleventh to the end of the thirteenth century; (3) the period dominated by znamenny singing alone, from the beginning of the fourteenth to the around the beginning of the sixteenth century; and (4) the period of early Russian polyphony, from the sixteenth century to the mid-seventeenth century (vol. 1, 143-144). He further divides the period of origins into two parts. The first, or preparatory period, spans from the formation state under the princess of Rurikid dynasty, prior to Prince Vladimir I to the Baptism of Rus in the year 988 A.D. The second spans from the Baptism of Russia to the middle or later part of the eleventh century, when the Ostromirov Gospel (c. 1056-1057) appeared. This monument, which contains ekphonetic neumes, is the first known written monument of liturgical singing (vol. 2, 3). Moreover, Gardner refers to a second epoch, which he also divides into four periods: (1) the period of Polish-Ukrainian influence, from the second half of the seventh century to the mid-eighteen o slightly later; (2) the period of Italian Influence, from the middle of the eighteenth throughout the first third of the nineteenth century; (3) the period of German influence, from the second third until the end of the nineteenth century; and (4) the period of the Moscow School, from the very end of the nineteenth century to today. Historically, this second epoch covers Imperial Russia until 1917, from the eighteen to the twentieth century, a period in which we witness the abolition of the Russian patriarchate by Peter the Great and the subordination of the Church to the Holy Synod, to the secular state bureaucracy. As we know, the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 caused the temporary decay of Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy had to confront the beliefs and political policies of militant atheists who tried to eliminate Christianity from Russia.

1058

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Researching choral performance, Vladimir Morosan, in Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, alluding to the roots of the Russian choral tradition, also offers a certain periodization of Russian church music. Morosan first approaches the origins of liturgical singing in Kievan Russia; second, the period of the Tatar Yoke (1238 to 1480), and, third, the singing masters of Novgorod (1480-1564 and 1564-1652) (3-36). Then Morosan addresses choral part-singing (1650-1825), referring, like Gardner, to the Western influence on Russia liturgical singing, and the later emergence and development of national choral style until the October Revolution, with the virtual destruction of the Orthodox Church and the dissolution and reorganization of all the institutions engages in the cultivation of choral singing (76-126). Ivan Moody, in an Outline History of Russian Chant, follows a different periodization: (1) The beginning of Sacred Music, from the late eleventh or early twelfth century, when the earliest manuscript with musical notation were discovered, to sixteenth century, (2) the sixteenth century; and (3) the seventeenth-nineteenth centuries In the following pages, I will focus on the development of Russian Liturgical singing, including not only the Kievan period but also the outlining of the Tartar period (1237/8 to 1480), and the emerging of Moscow as political center. The timeline of these pages ends before the emerging of early Russian polyphony in the sixteenth century. With this periodization, I have excluded the westernization of Russian church music, and tried to cover the whole period of monophony, the periods of the znamenny and kondakarian singing, the last centuries of Byzantine until fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453, and the proclamation in the sixteenth century of the Church of Russia as the Third Rome. The fifteenth century witnessed a great expansion and creativity in the field of liturgical singing. It is in this century when the singing masters of Novgorod appeared. Also, in this century, Moscow began to grow while Kiev declined as a

1059

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

consequence of the Tartar occupation (Ivan Moody). This periodization thus follows that Moody calls the beginning of the Sacred Music in Russia, that of Morosan up to the Singing Masters of Novgorod, and that of Gardner up to the period dominated by znamenny singing alone after the demise of the kondakarian. I believe that without approaching these elements, a study of the beginning of Russian sacred music may not be complete. Other minor sources, such as the internet article Russian Orthodox Hymnody, will be also used, generally considering, however, that the limit of space and the characteristics of this essay will impede a full discussion of the period. Students will do their own research on periods not covered in these pages.

Activity 1. Delineate the periods of Russian liturgical music classified by Gardner, Morosan, and Moody. 2. What is the classification this text uses when discussing the beginning of Russian sacred chant. What time span does it cover? 3. What period is not dealt within this text?
Activity 206: Main periods in the development of Russian church singing

KIEVAN RUSSIA: THE ORIGINS OF RUSSIAN LITURGICAL SINGING Preparatory Period Liturgical music was brought to Russia through Bulgaria from Byzantium along with Christianity. In this early period, Church singing was monophonic as it was imported from Byzantium. As it has already been noted in Part I, in the second part of the ninth century, Byzantium sent an evangelizing mission led by the brothers Cyril and Methodius (863- 866) to the Rus. This mission was crucial for Russian culture. Cyril, whose fame is traditionally linked with the creation of the Cyrillic alphabet, and his brother Methodius, brought to Moravia liturgical books, which they translated into the

1060

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Slavonic tongue. Thus, in Moravia they implanted the Byzantine-Slavonic Rite, which became the common heritage of Russian worship. According to Meyendorff, in Byzantium and the Rise of Russia, In the tenth century, when Byzantine Christianity was formally adopted in Russia, a great number of scriptural, liturgical, and historical texts existed already in Slavic translation, prepared either during the Cyrillo-Methodian mission in Moravia, or later in Bulgaria. The cultural connection between Russia, the Cyrillo-Methodian mission and Bulgaria is recognized by the Russian Primary Chronicle, whose text, repeated in all later chronicles, included an account of the conversion of Bulgarians and Moravians and emphasizes that the language used by Byzantine missionaries in Moravia prevails also among the Rus and the Danubian Bulgarians. (18) Yet, Meyendorff adds: It is difficult to determine which translations were imported from abroad and which were made in Russia. In any case, there is no doubt that the immediate need of the Church was satisfied as a first priority: the entire New Testament, passages of the Old Testament which are a part of the liturgical cycles (particularly the Psalms), the texts of the Eucharist and the sacraments, as well as the immense corpus of Byzantine hymnography. (18) He also says that the Primary Chronicles,534 which narrates the history of the Ancient Rus from around 850 to 1110, includes the entire New Testament, the Psalter, and the Oktoechos, which as it has been mentioned, contains the hymnography proper for the repeatable cycle of eight weeks (18). In another book, The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church, Meyendorff comments: It would not be an exaggeration to affirm that Byzantine Christian civilization was passed on to the Slavs primarily through the liturgy and only secondary through the translations of other texts, legal, theological and scientific. This fact is most evident in the case of the Russians. The famous account of Vladimirs conversion in the Primary Chronicle are mostly concerned with the external forms of worship and disciplinary matters: the worship of the Muslims worship is seen as abominable; that of the Germans as lacking beauty, and that of the Greeks, in St. Sophia, as having transported Russians up to the very heaven. (127) The liturgy served as the main means to the expansion of Byzantine culture and thus implanted the roots of the development of Russian sacred singing. Regarding the

534

Translated into English as Tale of Bygone Years.

1061

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Byzantine okctoechos, Seppl, in Church Singing in the Valamo Tradition, refers to Russian neum notation: In accordance with the Byzantine model, liturgical singing in Slavonic was governed by a system of eight different modes, eight echoi or tones. In this connection a tone means a certain type, not a single melody. The notation of tones was done in neumes, or signs placed above the words. The Russian neumes, the oldest form of the modern hook-like notes, are called stolp notation. Stolp means pillar. The eight-week cycle of eight tones was called a pillar. (241) It was a time, as Dimitri Obolensky says, in The Byzantine Impact on Eastern Europe, when the Empire, having recently emerged from the Iconoclast Crisis, had entered a period of vigorous growth, and when its civilization, thrusting deep into the heart of Eastern Europe, began to gain the allegiance of the Slav world. A powerful instrument for gaining this allegiance had just been discovered: the Old Church Slavonic language developed and refined by the Byzantine missionaries Cyril and Methodius modeled on Greek, yet close, in the early Middle Ages, to the Slavonic vernacular tongues. The translation into this language of the Greek scriptures and liturgical offices by Cyril and Methodius and their disciples laid the foundation of a composite Graeco-Slav culture which spread through Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages. The new language, Church Slavonic, became the ecclesiastical lingua franca of the Slavs, most especially the Serbs and Bulgarians, from whom the Russians would import the texts of worship. Although regretting the lack of systematic research in this concern, Gardner says that the development of liturgical singing in the early Bulgarian Orthodox Church unquestionably influenced the formative stages of liturgical singing in the newly established Church in Kievan Rus (vol. 2, 10). In the Slavic Life of Constantine-Cyril, we can read that Cyril taught his Moravian disciples the whole ecclesiastical officematins, the hours, vespers, Compline and the liturgy.535 In the ninth century, in Byzantium, in monasteries and cathedrals the holy services of Matins, Vespers, and the Divine Liturgy were already celebrated. On the eve of more solemn festivities Matins and Vespers were joined by the penitential or rogatory processions during which prayers, psalms and hymns were
535

Qtd. in Meyendorff, The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church, 125.

1062

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

chanted. This became known as Litiya (Gr. Litajnoto entreat, to supplicate) or as All-night Vigil. Additionally, in monasteries, besides these two services, worship included the Hours, Compline, and Midnight Service. Thus we can conclude that Cyril and Methodius introduced a Monastic order of services (i.e. Typikon) into Moravia and provided natives all the services practiced in the Byzantine Rite (Our Slavonic Liturgy). But the Slavonic liturgy created by these two brothers needed a poetic form, something that not only Cyril but Methodius also had mastered. Cyrils talent for poetry is seen in this Introductory Prayer that calls the Slavs to listen to the word of the Gospel: Listen, now, all the Slav people, Listen to the Word, for it has come from God the Word that nurtures mans soul, the Word that sustains hearts and minds, the Word that prepares us to know God. Just as without light there can be no joy for the eye, which looks at the Lords entire creation yet everything is neither beautiful nor visible for it so every illiterate soul will know no joy. And understanding all this, brethren, we give you the needed advice which will divert all people from a brutish life and lust; for you, whose mind has remained uneducated, while listening to the word in a strange tongue, do not hear it as the voice of a honey-toned bell. (Welkya The Creation of the Slav Script) However, as it can easily be understood, the ecclesiastical literature being translated into Slavonic from Greek was not written in the form of the poem, but in the form of rhythmical prose: The basic fund of ecclesiastical literature in translation brought to Russia from Bulgaria was being replenished by Russian translations of the Greek originals. The translations did not coincide with the originals exactly, because of the difference in Grammar and Phonetics. Original Greek ecclesiastical texts were written in a form of a poem, while the translation was done in a form of rhythmical prose. (Russian Orthodox Hymnody) Thus causing a process of adaptation of the Byzantine style:

1063

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

It caused a change in the manner of its execution. Comparing Greek and Slavonic variants of one and the same hymn, the researchers noticed that it was not mere imitation, but the process of adaptation of the Byzantine style on Russian soil took place. Formation of Early Russian hymnodical traditions was a complicated process of adaptation of Greek standards to local conditions. (Russian Orthodox Hymnody) Cyril and Methodius not only translated the books into Slavonic, but also taught the faith in Slavonic guided by an apostolic desire to reach the Slavic people, who were outside the sphere of Latin and Greek. With it, as suggested, they elevated the vernacular to a sacred language of worship. Once the evangelizing process had started, it infiltrated into Russia.

1. 2. 3. 4.

Activity What is the precedence of Russian liturgical music? What was the role of Cyril and Methodius in the early development of liturgical music? Which liturgical materials were translated into Slavonic? Which Byzantine sacred services were introduced by Cyril and Methodius?
Activity 207: Preparatory stage of Russian liturgical singing

From the Baptism of the Rus (988) to the Tartar invasion But the conversion of Rus to Christianity and the adaptation of liturgy and chanting were not only due to this missionary effort but as a consequence of the significant affinity of Russian character with Orthodox Christianity. As Zernov comments, there were some features of the Russian pagan background, congenial with Eastern Orthodoxy, which helped the transition to Christianity without causing much upheaval (5). This Slavonic heathen culture also helped the Russians in the process of adaptation of Byzantine hymnody. Yet, Morosan does not consider the secular music so relevant in the development of Russian church chanting. He says:

1064

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

While folk song may have indeed influenced the tonal structure of liturgical chant melodies over the centuries, one must be very cautious in assuming that elements from the secular (and mostly pagan) vocal music of the Easter Slavs could have easily found their way into the Church. The Church, headed by the Greek hierarchy, resolutely opposed all secular music-making even outside the liturgical domain. Moreover, it already had an established body of music fixed in melodies content by the notation and in the manner of performance by the use, while the church canons restricted the execution of liturgical singing to ordained clergy. The above factors undoubtedly presented formidable obstacles to the infiltration of liturgical singing by secular folk elements. (12) Morosan is correct. We have previously seen how Clement of Alexandria, between the end of the second century and beginning of the third, in Exhortation to the Heathen, harshly criticises pagan celebrations. Likewise, John Chrysostom, at the end of the fourth century, criticizes the secular theatre very harshly in his Homily 37 on Matthew. Also in the fourth century, in the Apostolic Constitutions (Book VIII), we again find statements in the same sense, this time describing the effeminate nature of theatrical performance: If one belonging to the theatre come, whether it be man or woman, or charioteer, or dweller, or racer, or player of prizes, or Olympic gamester, or one that plays on the pipe, on the lute, or on the harp at those games, or a dancing-master or an huckster, either let them leave off their employments, or let them be rejected. If a soldier come, let him be taught to do no injustice, to accuse no man falsely, and to be content with his allotted wages: if he submit to those rules, let him be received; but if he refuse them, let him be rejected. He that is guilty of sins not to be named, a sodomite, an effeminate person, a magician, an enchanter, an astrologer, a diviner, an user of magic verses, a juggler, a mountebank, one that makes amulets, a charmer, a soothsayer, a fortune-teller, an observer of palmistry. Furthermore, as commented, in the forth century, the council of Laodicea (canons 53 y 54) rejects Pagan celebrations, and, at the end of the seventh century, the Council of Trullo anathematizes public shows and theatrical performances. Interestingly, the author of Optina Pustin male choir, St. Petersburg, says the following regarding the znamenny, which would appear later, at the end of the eleventh century: Znamenniy chant avoid consciously the secular and pagans musical genres and images. Simultaneously, a unison structure of the chant did not create in a perception spacious images of sounds beauty. Being not attracted by spacious images of the low world Znamenniy chant, through the spiritual essence of the music, elevated the believing souls to the upper world, nourishing them with the heavenly truths. 1065

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Another factor favoring the rapid advance of Christianity, and thus of Byzantine hymnody among Russians, was, as already suggested, that they heard the Gospel preached and the services celebrated in their native tongue. Additionally, they were also profoundly influenced by the beauty and artistic perfection of the Byzantine rite, as we have seen in the words retold to Prince Vladimir by the envoys sent to Constantinople. When we remember these words, we realize how they emphasize the divine mystery and beauty of worship. This aesthetics of divine beauty and holiness laid the foundation of the Russian worship and chanting, as an integral part of it, for the next thousandyears. The hearts of the Russians were charmed by the beauty of the Greek divine service. The author of Russian Orthodox Hymnody describes Byzantine philosophys emphasis on beauty as follows: Byzantine philosophy considered the Beauty to be the virtue of God... The aim of a singer was to perform divine melodies of celestial hierarchy. Orthodox theology teaches that ecclesiastical hymns are the echo of celestial singing of the angels, heard by a composers soul and transmitted to people in his works. A hymnographer must follow strict standards of heavenly origin, without adding anything personal, because ecclesiastical hymns are dictated by angels. Those hymns were not created by men, but by celestial hierarchy; that is why they were anonymous. The aim of the hymnographer was not to express his individuality, but to understand, and to reproduce heavenly standards with the help of sacred patterns of Byzantine hymnody Kanon, which had to be strictly followed. It was in the tenth century, at the time of the Baptism of the Rus, when the kanon of Byzantine hymnody was formed and transmitted, as if from the Heavens, to the Russian soil. During centuries, the Russians kept this love for the beauty of the rite, and for long solemn services and magnificent hymnody, but developed their unique hymnography. It was not a process of imitation, but of adaptation of Greek standards to local conditions (Russian Orthodox Hymnody). Yet, as Gardner says, in this early pre-Tartar period, there are no written documents with the exception of the abovementioned Ostromirov Gospel, with ekphonetic signs. Gardner suggests that the lack of monuments following the Baptism of the Rus to the middle of the eleventh century

1066

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

might have been a result of fires, wars, pillaging, etc. Yet he adds that in this chronicles of this period we can see some direct and indirect references to liturgical singing (vol 2, 13-16). From them, Gardner mentions the arrival of three Greek court singers with Princess Anna, and wonders how these Court singers could affect liturgical singing in Kievan Rus. He believes that these singers may have sung together with Slavic singers in the Desiatinnaia Church founded by Vladimir, initiating a practice that later became quite common in the Russian Church, whereby one choir sang in Slavonic, while the one on the opposite side sung in Greek (vol. 2, 23). Morosan quotes another earlier mention of the arrival of church singers to the court in the year 1051 (0r 1053), taken from the Book of Degrees of the Royal Genealogy (Stepennaya kniga): Thanks to the faith of the Christ-loving Yaroslav there came to him from Tsargrad [Constantinople] three God-inspired singers with their families. From them originated in the Russian land angel-like singing, wonderful osmoglasie [singing according to the Eight Tones], and specially tripartite sweet-singing and the most beautiful demestvennyi singing to the praise and glory of God. (4) The text also refers to tripartite or three voiced singing and three singers Greek singers brought during this monarch. Morosan suggests that, while we can accept the account of these three singers, the term tripartite might be anachronistic as three part sweet singing refers to sixteenth century three-part polyphony (Morosan 4; Gardner, vol. 2, 31). Yet, it is interesting to corroborate the affinity with Byzantium liturgical singing in the angel-like singing. We only have to read the Cherubic Hymn. St. Theodosius of Pechery, cofounder with St. Anthony of the Kievan Monastery of the Caves (Petchersky Lavra), in the second half of the eleventh century, paid great attention to the harmonious singing of the monastery choir and introduced the basic principles of the Byzantine teaching of angelic singing into Russia. He substantiated the most important Byzantine conception of celestial angelic hymnody, which presented

1067

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

the reflection of heavenly hymns, and had the aim of bringing the human soul to harmony with the Heavens (Russian Orthodox Hymnody). Furthermore, the oldest Russian chant, the znamenny chant, a refinement of the chants inherited from Byzantium soon to appear, was considered to be the reflection of angelic singing as it expressed the state of estrangement of men from earthly matters (Russian Orthodox Hymnody). Regarding the extent of the participation of lay persons in liturgical singing, Gardner asserts that there are clear evidence that after the Baptism of Rus there was participation of the entire congregation, and that there is no evidence that would deny this participation as responses such as Lord, have mercy or Grant it, O Lord connotes. He adds: Presumably, from the very beginning of the Church of Rus, such participation took place in the Slavonic language and in a popular musical style accessible to persons without special training. Meanwhile, the special trained and organized singers sand the hymns that changed from service to service, as well as those hymns that could not be sung by the assembly because of their relative complexity. (vol. 2, 37) In this period, regular celebrations of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom might have been held, most likely in Greek, although texts in Church Slavonic were available from the earlier converted Bulgarians and Serbs (A History of the Russian Church). Also, during Kievan period, the Russian Church was subject to Constantinople, and until the invasion of the Mongols in 1237 the Metropolitans of Russia were usually Greek. In this period, about half of the bishops were native Russians (Ware 80).

Development of Znamenny and Kondakarian Singing

As related, by the end of the eleventh century, the territory of the East Slavs had been Christianized from Novgorod in the north to beyond Kiev in the south. Yet Christianization was not complete as missionary monks followed colonizers in the northeast regions. This was a moment in which Monasticism began to be established in

1068

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Russia. It was around that time when we find the earliest extant documents containing Russian liturgical chants. I have already mentioned the arrival in Rus of the three Greek singers ion 1052 and the Ostromirov Gospel (1056-57), which for Gardner signaled the beginning of the second period of the first epoch he classifies. Yet, as he says, the Ostromirov Gospel, although representing an aspect of the liturgical vocal art such as notated ekphonetic reading, it does not contain examples of actual liturgical chants (vol. 2, 63). Ekphonetic notation was not widely used in Russia. Most probably solemn reading of the Gospel was transmitted orally (Russian Orthodox Hymnody). At the end of the eleventh century and beginning of the twelfth we find liturgical musical monuments with two types of notations, a) the stolp or znamenny (from the word znamia, meaning sing or neumekryuk) and the kondakarian. Manuscripts containing stolp notation include ten sticheria, five triodia, four heirmologia, and two menaia (Gardner, vol. 2, 65). We cannot find monuments of znamenny notation prior to the beginning of the twelfth century, though it is assumed that it began in the late eleventh century. There are also some extant hymn books from the eleventh century, but they do not include notation. This is again also probably due to the predominant oral tradition in Russian hymnody (Russian Orthodox Hymnody). Neither of these notations is still as of today fully readable (Morosan 4). Even though these two types of chants coexisted, Gardner identifies this early period of the appearance of these two chants, from the end of the eleventh to the end of the thirteenth century, as the period of kondakarian singing. He explains that even though the znamenny was more widely used, the kondakarian was unique to this period. In terms of liturgical practice, Gardner comments that this period is characterized by the use of Constantinopolitan liturgical order. Cathedrals at this time used the order of

1069

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

the Great Church ... the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Constantinople, while monasteries employed the order of the Constantinople Monastery of Studios (vol. 1, 144). The kondakarian, used to perform kontakia, differed from the znamenny both graphically and in the kind of text which it was employed to accompany. As Morosan explains, being both ideographical rather than diastematic, the stolp or znamenny chant notation has a different neumatic notation that of the kondakarian notation (4). Kondakarian notation consisted of two rows of neumes above the line of text. It was by nature quite melismatic and was performed in solo fashion by virtuoso singers, while the congregation sang refrains (PSALM). On the internet article The Optina Pustin male choir, St. Petersburg, we read: The Kondakar chant was one of the most masterful extent of the Byzantine Church singing of the virtuous type, which originated from the highest church and courtier circles. They chanted virtuously the most important and complicated thingsthe Kondakions. The choir singers were settled on a high platform in a center of the temple, while the faithful inside the church added to it one and the same refrain. After the reform of 1274 in Vladimir a Kondakar singing lost its significance as a part of the Matins Order. Stephen Reynolds, in Lesser Known Varieties of Russian chants, states the following regarding the kondakarian: Liturgically, this chant was used with the sung service of the Great Church, the cathedral service, and its disappearance seems to be connected with the disuse into which that form of worship fell in the fourteenth century. The melodies are elaborate, suggesting that this chant was the preserve of highly trained singers in cathedrals; there may have been a simpler, orally-transmitted counterpart for smaller parish churches, but about this we can only speculate.

1070

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Illustration 166: Twelfth-century Kondakarion notation 536

Furthermore, Gardner explains that kondakarian singing was primarily used in Russian cathedral churches, which at that time mostly followed the use of Hagia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople. Consequently, he says, there is no doubt that this type of hymn was Byzantine in origin (vol. 2, 130). He adds that the complexity of kondakarian notation, which differs markedly from stolp notation, leads one to imagine that kondakarian singing was also quite complex and difficult requiring singers who were experienced and highly trained. Naturally, such singers could only be found in organized church singing establishments ... (vol. 2, 130) Regarding the znamenny notation, which would last longer than kondakarian notation, Morosan says: The ideographic neumes of stolp notation ... served as a type of shorthand to remind the singer of the contour of the melodic line; the notation does not indicate the exact size of the intervals or the modes or scales in which these intervals were executed. Similarly, no clues exist as to the pitch level at which the melodies were sung. Structurally the melodies are syllabic-neumatic, with only occasional melismas of more than three notes. Only one neume was written above each text; thus melismatic passages can be recognized by the multiple repetition of a given world. Judging from the large proportion of signs indicating a repeated note, recitation on a single pitch prevailed. (5) Let us see an illustration with znamenny notation:
536

Twelfth-century kondakarion notation. D. Razumovsky, plate from the Library of Nizhni-Novgorod Monastery (Q. I No. 32, 113). See Gauthier.

1071

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Illustration 167: Znamenny notation537

The author of Optina Pustin male choir, St. Petersburg, says: Each sign of the Znamenny notation signified usually from one to seven sounds, or even more then that. At the same time it gave an exact notation concerning a height, length, color, and strength of the resounding vivid description of the singing manner, and, at last, a scriptural interpretation of the sign. This system of signs prevent a chant from the spontaneous interpretation led the spiritual labour of the singers in the proper direction. As well as the kondakarian, the znamenny chant notation was a succession of the old Byzantine notation and performance. The author of Russian Orthodox Hymnody, comments on the roots of this neum system of notation, which first appeared in Byzantium in connection with cheironomy (the art of the movement of the conductors hands and fingers): The oldest type of neum notation was the one that served to record solemn chant-like reading of The Apostle and the Gospel. It was called ekphonetic notation. Syntactical division of a text and intonational formulas were recorded with the help of special signs that were borrowed from Greek syntactical stress system. They did not show the exact height and length of separate sounds, but marked the stops, the rise and fall of the voice, and marked out separate words and phrases. Ekphonetic signs were not widely used in Russia. We know only
This illustration is znamenny notation with Shaidurovs red (cinnabar) letters designating the height and inflection of tone. The passage is an irmos. It is taken from the book Irmosy tserkovanago znamenny penia, (Kiev: Knigoizdatelstvo Znamenny Peniye, 1913). See Gauthier.
537

1072

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

two manuscripts dated back to the middle of the XIth century, where those signs were used. They are the Gospel of Ostromir, and so-called uprians sheets. Most probably the tradition of solemn reading of the Gospel and the Apostle was transmitted orally. However, the Russian composers did not blindly follow the Byzantine patterns and created a unique Russian Church chanting. In Russian Orthodox Hymnody, we read: Neums are met in Early Russian manuscripts from the early twelfth century. This special kind of neum notation presents a variety of Early Byzantine system of notation that was formed in the eleventh century. This notation was the basis of Russian kryuk notation (kryuk means a hook). Thus the basis of kryuk notation was Early Byzantine notational system revised and enlarged by the Russians. This revision reflected the peculiarities, typical of Russian national character: when transmitted to Russian soil, Byzantine melodies lost their original sharpness and agitation and acquired a calm and even character. Thus appeared the main chant of Early Russian hymnody - Znamenny chant. In this period, according to Gardner, the main places where liturgical chant flourished were: Kiev, the seat of the metropolitanate where the ruling Greek metropolitan and his Greek clergy resided; Novgorod, where the bishops were primarily Slavs, and the Slavic element in liturgical singing was, in all likehood, more prominent,; and in various diocesan centers, such as the cities of Vladimir ... and Smolensk, whose bishop was a Greek eunuch named Manuel, famed singer who arrived in Rus in 1130 with other two Greek singers. (vol. 2, 71) It is finally important to quote the summary Morosan makes of this period about the performance of early liturgical chant. He deals with elements already discussed, but also highlights other important ones, also dealt with by Gardner (vol. 2, 72-77), regarding singers, ensembles, and congregational participation. This is the way Morosan delineates the features of early sacred singing: 11. Evidence from contemporaneous Greek Byzantine practice, from early Russian uses, and from the notation, suggests that the Byzantine tradition of virtuosic solo singing continued in early Russia. 12. Similar evidence suggests that the congregation participated in performing refrains and responses, although the exact musical nature of this participation cannot be ascertained. 13. The singing establishment at a cathedral or other large church included a canonarch, a leading singer, one or two domestiks,538 and an undetermined
Both Morosan (8-10) and Gardner (vol. 2, 23-26) discuss the meaning of this term as well as that of klirosy. For Gardner a domestik is the leader of the right and left choirs.
538

1073

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

number of ordained singers,539 who on occasion were joined by noncelebrating higher clergy. 14. The places designated for the performance of liturgical hymns were the ambo, an elevated platform in the center of the church, and the areas to the right and left of the Royal Doors that later came to be known as klisory. 15. There is no conclusive evidence that ordained singers were organized into choral ensembles, and the musical function of such ensembles, if they existed (e.g. unioson, sustaining an ison, improvised heterophonic performance, etc.), remained undetermined. The Tartar invasions of Eastern Europe in 1237 interrupted the development of Russian hymnody for more than two centuries (until 1480). This is a period considered Russias Dark Age. Activity 1. Comment on the pagan background of Russian liturgical singing. 2. What do the words of Prince Vladimirs envoys on Byzantine rite tell us about Russian personality? 3. What was the concept of beauty in Byzantine philosophy? 4. According to Gardner what is the first extant monument of Russian chant? What kind of notation did it use? Why isnt it considered an actual Russian hymn? What arent there more extant monuments in this period? 5. Comments on the chronicles of this period. 6. Who was St. Theodosius of Pechery? What did he introduce? 7. Did lay people participate in liturgical chanting? 8. Which two actual chant monuments appeared at the end of the eleventh century or beginning of the twelfth century? What is the difference between them? 9. Enumerate some of the characteristics of the kondakarian or kontakarian. 10. Enumerate some of the characteristics of the znamenny. 11. Explain the Byzantine roots of the neum and its development in Russia. 12. Read Morosans features of early Russian church singing and define anonarch, domestic, and ambo.
Activity 208: From the Baptism of the Rus to the Tartar invasion

As already commented, Canon 15 of the Council of Laodicea (c. 363-364) says: No others shall sing in the Church, save only the canonical singers, who go up into the ambo and sing from a book. This tradition was reaffirmed by a decree of the council in the City of Vladimir (1274) which says: no one who was not especially ordained has the right to stand on the ambo. According to Morosan, this council rule suggests that nonordained lay individuals may have been aspiring to perform musical functions reserved for clerics (7).

539

1074

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

The Period of the Tartar Yoke (Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries) and the 16th Century In 1240 Kievan Rus ceased to exist as an independent State. Kiev was sacked by the Mongols, and excepting far northern cities such as Novgorod, which were geographically sheltered, the whole Russian land was overrun. It was not until the defeating of the Tartars (1480), that culture, and thus, the development of sacred chanting, were able to resume with no constraint. Thus, kondakarian musical notation declined from practice after Tartar invasion and was replaced by znamenny notation. We cannot find any liturgical-musical manuscript in kondakarian notation existing in the fourteenth century. The extant monuments are exclusively in the stolp notation, which does not vary much from the stolp notation from the pre-Tartar period. Morosan attributed the disappearance of books containing kondakarian notations to the decline of Byzantine influence in Russian ecclesiastical affairs, to the lack of Greeks ability to control their Russian metropolitanate due to the crusaders occupation of Constantinople (1204-61), the Tartar invasions of Russia, and by the Turkish invasions of Byzantium. Morosan also thinks that the disappearance of kondakarian singing may have also and very importantly occurred due to the liturgical reforms enacted by the council in the City of Vladimir. These reforms substituted the two above mentioned usages employed until then in Russia with the single Usage of Mount Athos and Jerusalem for monasteries and cathedrals (13-14). He also says that in spite of the fact that kondakarian may have been employed for solo singing and znamenny for choral unison singing, the prevailing socio-political economic conditions of Russia during the fourteenth century and the fifteenth centuries favored solo over choral singing. The instability of life and the decimation of human resources brought about by the Tatar invasions made it extremely difficult to maintain organized musical establishments; and it was undoubtedly easier to find a single singer who knew the melodies and the notation than it was to find several singers who could perform as an ensemble. (15)

1075

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

Morosan continues saying that: The fourteenth and the fifteenth centuries probably did not witness the establishment of systematic cultivated tradition of choral singing in Russia. Since the chronicles from this period do not specifically mention either the type of singing used or the manner in which it was performed, one may conclude that the liturgical singing had become quite common place in Russia, and that no innovation occurred during this period that would have attracted the attention of chroniclers. (16) Morosan believes, with Gardner, that many essential features of kondakarian notation survived in the demestvenny chant (23), which appeared in the second half of the sixteenth century. Stephen Reynolds says that the demise of Kondakarian singing left a gap in the chant of Rus; the genre of troparia in the broad sense (including apolytikia, kontakia, and sessionals) was left mostly unprovided for. But while kondakarian chanting declined in the fourteenth century znamenny chanting dominated the liturgical scene during a period of approximately two hundred years duration between the disappearance of kondakarian notation and the appearance of put notation at the end of the fifteenth century (Gardner, vol. 2, 179). As we have seen, from the beginning of the sixteenth century to the middle of the seventeenth century two additional types of singing or chants appeared and developedthe put and the demestvennyin addition to the znamenny chant of the preceding years (Gardner, vol. 2, 251-252). The put chant emerged after the ending of the Tartar yoke, in a moment when Moscow raised as the new center of political power in Russia. But also at the end of the fifteenth century (1480 or 1489), as Morosan explains, a significant musical event occurred in Moscow, which marked the beginning of a new era in Russian liturgical singing: the establishment of the first known corps of singers at the Court of the Great Prince of Muscovy. This period is nevertheless known as the Novgorod period, as a great school of chant composers arose in this city (1617). We need to remember that Novgorod escaped from the devastating Tartar invasion.

1076

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

This city was also the home of the earliest creator of stolp chant (18). The Novgorod period lasted from 1480 to 1564, and then continued at the Imperial Court when Ivan IV (The Terrible) brought these singers to Moscow. For liturgical chant, this meant that the repertoire of signs for znammeny increased, and manuals (azbuki) began to be written explaining the neumatic system (Velimirovic 65).540 In the middle of the sixteenth century Russian polyphony begun. As Gardner states, the type of polyphony sung at this time was peculiarly and indigenously Russian, notated in staffless neumatic notation, and not to be confused with choral partsinging based on Western models, which was to become the distinguishing characteristic of the entire second epoch (vol. 2, 252). Let us remember that the second epoch defined by Gardner lasts from the second half of the seventeenth century to the period of the Moscow School, which was interrupted by the political events of 1917. Amazingly, znamenny chant was remarkably well-preserved when it was tucked under the wings of the Old Believers, who saw it as their chant (Russian Znamenny Chant). The Old Believers separated after 1666-1667 from the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church as a protest against church reforms introduced by Patriarch Nikon. From its earlier stages of Byzantine influence, Russian liturgical music followed a very eventful path like the Russian Church itself, but nevertheless its own, unique path. However, never did the invisible connection of the Byzantine religious world disappear in Russian chant. It was also non-instrumental and the text, and thus the voice, even more than the melody, played a major role, as I will indicate in the next pages. This would determine the creative work of composers and interpreters along the centuries.

540

Qtd. in Moody.

1077

Chapter 11: Church Music in Russia

c) d) e) f) g) h)

Activity Explain the circumstances of the disappearance of the kondakarian. In what other chant might it have survived, according to Gardner? Describe the fate of znamenny chant from the Tartar invasion to the sixteenth century. Which other two chants appeared in this period? What was the Novgorod period? When did polyphony begun? What is the main characteristic of Russian sacred music in the second epoch delineated by Gardner?
Activity 209: From the Tartar invasion to the sixteenth century

Final Activity Write a five-page paper summarizing the development of Russian liturgical chant from its preparatory period to the sixteenth century. Conclude with your own reflections on the topic.
Activity 210: Final activity on Early Russian church singing

Your Own Research Enumerate the main characteristics of Russian Church singing from the sixteenth century to the Russian Revolution. You can read Gardners and Morosans books or search the Internet for references on this period.
Activity 211: Russian church singing

1078

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

1079

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Chapter 12 THEOLOGY OF CHURCH MUSIC: THE ROLE OF MUSIC IN THE HOLY SERVICES
PRELIMINARY REMARKS The holy services of the Orthodox Church are always sung either in a recitative tone or chanted, both having their distinctive function within the holy services. In the following pages, although I will mention recitation, I will mainly focus on chanting. Among other functions, both share the expression of unceasing praise, of an unceasing dialogue between the earthly and the celestial, very similar to the way liturgical prayer does in worship. As Seppl has noted, the solemn recitation is an expression of the faithful to praise the Lord unceasingly (The Solemn Recitation 122). Also chanting, which is a constant in Orthodox divine services, often expresses an unceasing wish to praise the Lord and live his teachings. This echoes the Biblical exhortation of unceasing prayer (I Thessalonians 5:17), which Hesychasm adapted especially in their use of the Jesus Prayer. According to the Fathers, unceasing prayer led to deification, to theosis, to the attainment of communion with God. Thus liturgical music aids in this attainment. The Divine Liturgy, in which music from solemn recitative to hymns are functionally integrated, is in itself an act of unceasing prayer and praise to the Lord. This is shown when the deacon says Again and again... in the little litany. Fr. Alexander Schmemann, in Introduction to Liturgical Theology, explains that for early Christian, psalms, litanies, and even hymnsi.e. for material written expressly to be sung were to the same degree the prayer of the Church, all were subordinated equally to the general scheme of worship (165). In an interview with the Russian Orthodox Composer, Bishop Alfeev, on Music as Prayer, he says: Music in church should be an

1080

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

avenue to deeper prayer, not a distraction, says a Russian Orthodox bishop and composer. In the interview he is also asked the following question: Q: What role does music have in your personal prayer life? Bishop Alfeev: Music plays a very important role in the Orthodox liturgy. As a bishop I celebrate liturgy every Sunday and on all feast days. The quality of the choir and the repertoire that it chooses is something of importance for me. Being formed as a musician from my very early years, I cannot completely dissociate myself from music when it is sung in the church, and even as I am reading liturgical prayers, I continue to hear the singing. Last summer I composed The Divine Liturgy and The All-Night Vigil for the choir a cappella. My main aim was to write such music that would not distract from prayer either for me or my parishioners. Singing in the church should be oriented towards prayer and should not be turned into a concert, as often happens. The best examples of a truly prayerful singing could be found in Russian Znamenny chant, an equivalent of the Western Gregorian chant. This unison chant is simple, but it is meaningful and moving. Thus liturgical singing is a degree of praying, praying unceasingly like the holy services themselves. The power of music helps the faithful experience the meaning of the content they are singing. Therefore, liturgical music, like prayer, is in itself a religious experience, and may have a similar role such as that of glorification, thanksgiving, and praising. Like the divine services in which it is integrated, liturgical music is a functional part of divine services and the Holy Tradition, and as such it is scriptural, apostolic, and patristic. As an illustration many passages from the Scriptures are reflected in the liturgy. Hence its role in the services agrees with the dogmatic and experiential basis of the Orthodox Churchs theology. It consequently possesses a great theological richness and spiritual significance which springs forth from its close link to the Holy Tradition which accounts for its most significant features (The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship and Sacraments). And it is through this integration that the holy services of the Orthodox Church

1081

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

represent the larger context in which one can evaluate the function or role of chanting. The Orthodox Church through the years has devised rubrics that govern the place the music should take in every service as well as its function, and has selected through the centuries the texts and actions to be enhanced by music. A hymn, for example, can accompany a ritual action or may heighten the prayer of the priest or the assembly or even enliven a burdensome part. Obviously, a song is then not independent from the service in which it is included, but has a liturgical function. Additionally, even the form of the hymn has been prescribed along the centuries of the development of the liturgy. A hymn form appropriate for one context may not be appropriate for another. Very often then, the broader meaning of a service can help identify the particular meaning of a hymn, thus it is important to see what the main divine services and their meaning are. The three main holy services of the Orthodox Church, and the ones I will focus on, are the Divine Liturgy, Vespers, and Matins, all of them set within the daily cycle of prayer, the services of public prayer that occur throughout the day, at regular periods. Through them, the Orthodox faithful celebrate the time of salvation in which we live, sanctifying the time of the world with the presence of Christ. At Vespers, the Orthodox celebrate the birth of the Kingdom of God which itself begins with the end of this world, with the evening of this world. It is a celebration of the finality of the present world and the dawn of the eternal new day in Christ. Psalms, chants, and hymns are sung to celebrate the creation and fall of this world, and its redemption, renewal and transfiguration inaugurated by Christs Death and Resurrection. At Dawn, in the prayer service of Matins, also with psalms, chants, and hymns, the Orthodox run to greet the Risen Lord whose Resurrection made the dawn of a new life possible. It is a praise of the dawn of the day without evening, and glorification of God who has fulfilled all things in Himself. During the course of the

1082

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

day, in the brief services known as the Divine Hours, the Orthodox Church remembers the saving presence of God, particularly the events of Christs suffering passion for our sake. Furthermore, the Divine liturgy is the most important service of the Orthodox Church. The other sacred services are not but a preparation, as already mentioned, for its fitting performance and the communion of the Holy Mysteries of Christ (Averky, Liturgics). The Eucharist is the most important worship experience of Orthodoxy and its therefore at the center of Orthodox worship. All of the liturgical chanting of the Orthodox Church has its roots in the Byzantine period, and brings with them the complex theological dimension of the period. Wellesz explains both its emotional/experiential and dogmatic nature: Byzantine Hymnography is the poetical expression of Orthodox theology, translated through music, to the sphere of religious emotion. It mirrors the evolution of the dogmatic ideas and doctrines of the Orthodox Church from the early days of the Eastern Empire to the full splendour of the service at the height of its development. Neither the poetry nor the music, therefore, can be judged independently of each other; verse and voice are intimately linked together. Nor, since they are part of the liturgy, can they be judged according to the aesthetical standards which we are use to apply to works of art which are the expression of individual feelings. The monks who composed the hymns had to bear in mind that there artistic contributions to the service must fit into the place for which there were destined. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 157) And, as delineated above, a hymn attains its meaning in conjunction with the service in which it is inserted. Wellesz clarifies: The restriction on the free play of imagination induced the hymn-writers to pay special attention to elevated diction, metrical variety, and elaborate structure. This tendency coincided with the predilection of the public for formal perfection. But whereas in secular Byzantine poetry this tendency produced artificiality and sophistication, sacred poetry achieved real greatness through the spiritual qualities of the hymn writers. Combining a colourful style, rich in images and bold similes, with sensitiveness to structure balance, they succeeded in producing poems which reflect to a remarkable degree the spirit of Byzantine worship. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 158) I will not deal with the differences between Greek and Russian divine services, which are out of the scope of these pages, and something which will not affect this study. I will keep the old order regarding the Divine Liturgy. These differences are very 1083

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

well outlined in Archbishop Basil Krivosheins Some differences between Greek and Russian Divine Services and their significance. An example will suffice: Following the 1838 reform, the Greeks (except the Athonite monks who kept the old order) replaced Psalms 102/103 (Bless the Lord, O my soul) and 145/146 (Praise the Lord, O my soul) as well as the Beatitudes, which follow, by antiphons, i.e. brief appeals to the Theotokos or to Christ, Who is risen and is praised in His saints. The Russians continue to sing, each Sunday, the two noted psalms and the Beatitudes. They are replaced by antiphons only at great feasts or on weekdays. The dropping of the psalms and the Beatitudes has the advantage (if it can actually be considered the advantage) of shortening the Divine Liturgy. However, it pays to regretfully note that the Liturgy of the Catechumens thus loses its didactic and Biblical character, both Old and New Testamentary, which must be a part of it. The same can be said about the 1838 reforms deletion of the prayers for the catechumens. It becomes unclear why the first part of the Liturgy continues to be called Liturgy of the Catechumens. We will note that the Athonite Greek monks continue to pray for the catechumens during Liturgy throughout the whole year.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Activity Why can we say that there is a chanting quality to all of the Orthodox sacred services? What do recitative tone and chanting have in common? Relate prayer and chanting. What does Bishop Alfeev say about it? Why is music integrated in the divine services? Why is the broader meaning of the services important to see the role of music in them? Explain the meaning and significance of Vespers, Matins, and the Divine Liturgy. Describe both the experiential and dogmatic nature of the hymns.
Activity 212: Preliminary remarks on the role of music in the holy services

PRAISE SINGING IN THE SCRIPTURES Chanting has a varied role in the divine services, especially praising, which along with others were already prefigured in the Scriptures. We have previously seen how Paul admonishes Christians to sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with grace in your hearts to the Lord (Col. 3:19). Paul invites the faithful to sing praise unto the Lord: Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will

1084

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

I sing praise unto thee (Heb. 2:12). An also to make a sacrifice of praise to God continually: By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name (Heb. 13:15). Following this injunction to a continuous sacrifice of praise, early Christians adopted chants as an integral part of their worshipping activities. In Acts, we also hear this singing of praise: And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises541 unto God: and the prisoners heard them [...] (Acts 16:25). In the Epistle of James we hear: Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms542 (James 5:13). The Bible translations render at times sing of praise as sing psalms. In fact, the Book of Psalms is called by the Hebrews Theillim, that is, Hymns of Praise. Yet only half of them are of praise and thanksgiving, while the other half are of lamentation and petition. Additionally, most of them have both. Generally, the psalmist uses any experience of joy or sorrow to praise the Lord, to give thanks to Him with joy. Let us see other cases of the word hymn/psalm in this sense, in the New Testament: And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. (Matt. 26:30) And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. (Mark 14:26) [] Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord [...]. (Eph. 5:19) Also in the New Testament, we find the use of the words sing or song. In I Corinthians we read the intention of a wholehearted song: What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also (14:15). In the Book of Revelations, we also find:

Hymns in ASV (American Standard Version): But about midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening []. 542 Sing of praise in ASV: Is any among you suffering? Let him pray. Is any cheerful? Let him sing praise.

541

1085

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

and they sang a new song... (5: 9), and they sang a new song before the throne... (14: 3), and they sing the song of Moses... (15: 3) In the Old Testament we find many cases of this praise singing, especially in the psalms: The LORD is my strength and my shield; my heart trusted in him, and I am helped: therefore my heart greatly rejoiceth; and with my song will I praise him. (Psalm 28:7) And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD. (Psalm 40:3) I will praise the name of God with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. (Psalm 69: 30) Praise ye the LORD. Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise in the congregation of saints. (Psalm 149:1) For in the days of David and Asaph of old there were chief of the singers, and songs of praise and thanksgiving unto God. (Neh. 12:46) Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise from the end of the earth, ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein; the isles, and the inhabitants thereof. (Is. 42:10) There are other cases of singing intended to the Lord in the Old Testament: Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. (Ex. 15:1) And Miriam answered them, Sing ye to the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. (Ex. 15:21) Sing unto the LORD, all the earth; shew forth from day to day his salvation. (1 Chr. 16:23) So the number of them, with their brethren that were instructed in the songs of the LORD, even all that were cunning, was two hundred fourscore and eight. (1 Chr. 25:7) And when he had consulted with the people, he appointed singers unto the LORD, and that should praise the beauty of holiness, as they went out before the army, and to say, Praise the LORD; for his mercy endureth for ever. (2 Chr. 20:21) I will sing unto the LORD, because he hath dealt bountifully with me. (Psalm 13:6) O come, let us sing unto the LORD: let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation. (Psalm 95:1) O sing unto the LORD a new song: sing unto the LORD, all the earth. (Psalm 96:1)

1086

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

O sing unto the LORD a new song; for he hath done marvellous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory. (Psalm 98:1) I will sing unto the LORD as long as I live: I will sing praise to my God while I have my being. (Psalm 104:33) Sing unto the LORD with thanksgiving; sing praise upon the harp unto our God: (Psalm 147:7) Praise ye the LORD. Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise in the congregation of saints. (Psalm 149:1) Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise from the end of the earth, ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein; the isles, and the inhabitants thereof. (Is. 42:10) Sing unto the LORD, praise ye the LORD: for he hath delivered the soul of the poor from the hand of evildoers. (Jer. 20:13) As we have seen, Paul in his epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), exhorts to the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs; and what these are, it will be proper to inquire. We can see that there seem to be two different kinds of singing, hymn singing and singing in general. The latter seemingly occurred when there was a cause for a celebration, such as for example a battle or there was an opportunity to praise God. Hymn singing generally occurred as group activity (individuals did not sing a hymn by themselves), to cheer each other up (Paul and Silas in prison: Acts 16:25), or for edification (or moral and spiritual instruction: 1 Cor. 14: 25-27; Col. 3:16). Moreover, we find in the Bible spontaneous singing as a natural response to stressful or overwhelmingly joyful events (Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE.). In Lukes Gospel we find canticles543 such as the Magnificat, the Benedictus, and the Nunc Dimittis,544 considered to be complete hymns, that were sung in the liturgy of the time (Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE). The Rev. Canon Leon Morris, in Luke: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries), remarks that the Gospel of Luke, the Greek companion of Saint Paul on

From the Latin, canticulum, or little song. A canticle is a hymn-like passage of scripture in the Bible which is similar to a Psalm but occurs in a book other than the Book of Psalms. (Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE.). 544 See the Appendix U for further information on these three canticles.

543

1087

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

his journeys, is a singing Gospel.545 The Magnificat or Canticle of Mary is found in Luke 1:46-55; the Benedictus, or Canticle of Zacharias, in Luke 1:68-79; and the Nunc Dimittis, or Canticle of Simeon, in Luke 2:29-32. The Church over the centuries has used these three canticles as the climax of the three major Hours: Morning Prayer (Benedictus), Evening Prayer (Magnificat) and Night Prayer (Nunc Dimittis). Wellesz explains that these hymns, still no hymn in the strict sense of the words, were sung to melodies ranging from a simple syllabic type to chants in which two or three groups of notes could be sung to one syllable of the text (40). He adds: It is obvious from the hymns or fragment of hymns, preserved in the New Testament that their original purpose was the praise of God. Like the chanting of psalms, the singing of hymns was a religious custom deeply rooted in the practice of the Temple and the Synagogue, and consequently familiar to the first generation of Christian. But these hymns were free paraphrases of the text and were not based exclusively on the words of the Scriptures, and there was an orthodox reaction against them in the middle of the third century. All new hymns were condemned and only those found in the Scriptures were tolerated. This measure explains why so few hymns survive from the beginnings of Christianity. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 41) Yet, Wellesz, alluding to the important role these hymns played in religious life, explains their endurance in Eastern Liturgy: But they [hymns] played too large an important part in the religious life to be completely suppressed. They had embellished the liturgy; their loss was felt to decrease its splendor. The Church, particularly in the East, had to change its attitude. By altering passages containing heretical doctrines, and by putting new words to melodies of pagan or Gnostic poetry, the old practice was restored, and hymnography developed more richly than before. (A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography 41) Psalms were also sung in the early days of Christianity conforming with the custom of the Jewish synagogue, as previously mentioned. Wellesz explains: The precentor sung the whole psalm, and the congregation responded after each verse with an interpolated phrase. The performance varied from simple recitation to elaborate

545

Qtd. in Penkala.

1088

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

cantillation with the character of the feast and with accordance with the liturgical prescription (35). Wellesz also refers to the spiritual songs, or chants of the melismatic type, the most important part of which are the Alleluias (41).

Activity 1. Comment on praise singing in the Scriptures. Make your own conclusions. 2. Who wrote the Magnificat, the Benedictus, and the Nunc Dimittis? What is their content? What type of Hymns are they according to Wellesz? 3. What does the phrase of the melismatic type mean?
Activity 213: Praise singing in the Scriptures

TWO CONCEPTS OF CHANTING Schmemann, in Introduction to Liturgical Theology, talks about the change in the function of the Churches chanting while referring to two different concepts of chanting: We have said that the chanting of songs and hymns and spiritual songs was an essential part of Christian worship and was inherited from the Hebrew tradition. In spite of this demonstrated inheritance by the Church of Hebrew chant forms and traditions, however, there can be no doubt that here again after the fourth century a profound change gradually occurred. This was not a change or development in musical theory or technique, but a change in the function of the Churchs chanting, its new place in the general structure or worship, its acquisition of new liturgical significance (in 164-165). He explains this changing alluding, on the one hand, to a first concept of chanting, a singing quality that has been assigned to almost every text read in Church. The psalms, for example, he adds, are read as a form of chant, and even the ancient Ordos refers to the entire service as chant, and all of its parts as a singing praise to God. The same concept of worship as chanting is found in the New Testament (Rev. 4:9; 14:3, 15:3 and Col. 3:16). This concept of chanting in the Ordo, he comments, is based on the Semitic concept of chanting. Schmemann, on the other hand, further alludes to a second concept of chanting, and its independent function:

1089

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

On the other hand there is within our Ordo a second, narrower, more specialized concept of chanting. This is the chanting which is set in contrast to reading. A whole great area of worship (the Oktoichos, for example) consists almost exclusively of hymnody: troparia, kanons, versicles, etc. Moreover the musical execution of this material, its division according to tones, stylistic similarities, etc., represents its main purpose. It can be said that here chanting acquires its own independent significance, is set apart as a special element of worship distinct from all others. (165-166) He then contrasts the two types of chanting, emphasizing the special role of chanting in this second sense and its central place in worship: If in the first view all worship is expressed melodically, and is chanting in some sense, then in this second view chanting is isolated and acquires its own special function in worship. So much significance is attached to this function that the Ordo directs the chanting or non-chanting of a given text depending on the festal nature of the service. One of the earliest Church hymns or canticlesthe Great Doxologyis in our modern Ordo directed sometimes to be sung and sometimes to be said. Chanting has become the expression and sign of festival character, of a festal day (by means of the number of versicles, etc.). Secondly, chanting has acquired its own special material, which has gradually taken a central place in worship. (166) In addition, Schmemann explains the evolution of place or liturgical function and content or poetical form of chanting in the Ordo: The position of chanting in Byzantine worship was determined by two coordinates. Its place in the structure of worship, what we have been calling its liturgical function, may be traced to the ceremonial, festal concept of cult, characteristic of Hellenic liturgical piety, while its content and poetic form may be traced back to the early Christian, biblical and Semitic tradition. (167-168) He further comments the synthesis of these two co-ordinates, place and content and poetical form, as expressed in Pseudo-Dionysius: These two co-ordinates reach a synthesis in that theologically liturgical interpretation of the Churchs chanting which we find first clearly expressed in Pseudo-Dionysius, which in turn defined the whole subsequent development of the Churchs hymnography within the framework of the Byzantine Ordo. According to Dionysius the hymns, songs and poems used in Church are a resounding or echo of the heavenly chanting, which the hymnographer hears with a spiritual ear and transmits in his work. The Churchs hymn is a copy of the heavenly archetype. We recognize here that familiar principle of consecration to a higher order, a hierarchical ascent to an invisible reality. The Churchs canticles are proclaimed by angels, and therefore the hymnographer must follow the established types of heavenly origin (hence the significance of the model in Byzantine hymnography, understood as a metaphysical

1090

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

concept rather than as an object of simple imitation). Here it is important only to take note of this new understanding of the Churchs chanting as a special element in worship, an understanding clearly connected with the experience of worship as a festal and mysteriological ceremony. (168) The churchs hymns are a reflection and imitation of the heavenly archetype. David Drillock, in Words and Music in Orthodox Liturgical Worship: An Historical Introduction, also emphasizes the Byzantine idea of worship as an imitation of heavenly praise: Earthly worship is an imitation of heavenly praise. The earthly church at prayer unites the faithful with the prayer of the angelic praise. This thought is not simply a Byzantine theoretical supposition combined with platonic imagery, but is the vision of the Prophet Isaiah and the account of heavenly worship expressed in the fourth chapter of the book of Revelation. That the song of the church on earth is united with the praise in heaven is a theme found in the writings of many of the church fathers. He mentions St. John Chrysostom: Above, the hosts of angels sing praise; below men form choirs in the churches and imitate them by singing the same doxology. Above, the seraphim cry out in the thrice-holy hymn; below, the human throng sends up the same cry. The inhabitants of heaven and earth are brought together in a common assembly; there is one thanksgiving, one shout of delight, one joyful chorus.546 As Schmemann, Drillock also points out to Dionysius in the idea of angelic transmission of the chant itself: Byzantine mystical thought developed the idea of the angelic transmission of the chant itself. In the sixth century Pseudo-Dionysios articulated the concept of the divinely inspired prototype; the idea of an intuitive divine inspiration ... in which the hymns and chants are echoes of the heavenly song of angels, which the prophets gave to the people through a sense of spiritual hearing. Thus, as he suggests, the task of the musician is not self-expression, not creation that reflects individual, personal feelings, attitudes, and principles, but to comprehend and reproduce the heavenly songs, to re-create divine images that were transmitted by means of ancient religious archetypes.

546

Patrologia Graeca 56: 97.

1091

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Following this thread, as Alexander A. Bogolepov remarks, in The hymns of the Orthodox Church, refers to the conjunction of the heavenly and the earthly: One of the richest and deepest sources of the poetic thought of Orthodox hymns lies in this marvellous conjunction ofand at the same time the inevitable contradistinction betweenthe heavenly and the earthly. Antithesis is the natural form for its poetic expression, and the wealth of striking antitheses is one of the characteristic features of Orthodox hymns. In them we find an expression of reverent worship in the face of what is for mans mind the incomprehensible union of the divine and human, which led to the birth of Him who has no beginning, the death of Him who is immortal, and life beyond the grave. The vision of this conjunction in Christs earthly life of two such contradictory principles breaks through the external setting of the events in His life. We begin to see them with a kind of double vision, so that behind the visible phenomena things are revealed in a world unseen by the naked eye and perceived only by the eye of the spirit. The belief in this angelic transmission of sacred chant, in the assumption that the early Church united men in the prayer of the angelic choirs, is basic to the understanding of Byzantine music. Bogolepov concludes: The effect that this concept had on church music was threefold: first, it bred a highly conservative attitude to musical composition; secondly, it stabilized the melodic tradition of certain hymns; and thirdly, it continued, for a time, the anonymity of the composer. For if a chant is of heavenly origin, then the acknowledgement received by man in transmitting it to posterity ought to be minimal. This is especially true when he deals with hymns which were known to have been first sung by angelic choirs such as the Amen, Alleluia, Trisagion, Sanctus and Doxology. Consequently, until Palaeologan times, was inconceivable for a composer to place his name beside a notated text in the manuscripts. An illustration of this is seen in the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. After the Litany of Peace, two psalms are chanted in the first and the second antiphons, which we hear, Pomazansky says, as it were a gathering together into one of the liturgies of the earthly and of the heavenly Church (The Holies for the Holy: An Overview of the Divine Liturgy). This two psalms are Bless the Lord, O my soul (Ps. 102), and Praise the Lord, O my soul (Ps. 145). They are a call to the earthly members of the Church to glorify God.

1092

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Activity Which two differing concepts of chanting does Schmemann distinguish?

Activity 214: Two concepts of chanting

A MAIN PURPOSE: PROVIDING AN EMOTIONAL COLOR TO CONCRETE LITURGICAL TEXT For the Orthodox Church, liturgical music, which is vocal as opposed to instrumental, has the main role of providing an emotional color to concrete liturgical texts. This is important for the experiential character of its theology, also known as mystical theology. This experiential character denotes individuality, personalization which is undoubtedly enhanced by music, and at the same time congregational. A liturgical prayer or singing like praising involves the whole congregation, and melody makes this link stronger, but at the same time, the individual faithful experiences in his praising the eternal values of truth, goodness, and beauty, the celestial values represented in the holy services. Yet, as we will see, the liturgical texts to which a melody is applied also have other relevant meanings, forms, and styles, given by the structure of the services of which they are an integral part. Thus it is important to point out, as Gardner does when formulating two questions: What is Orthodox liturgical singing in essence? and What role does it play in Orthodox worship? He explains that Orthodox liturgical music is vocal music music produced by human voices alone, which in conjunction with words, accompanies the worship services (21). He also comments, alluding to the Fathers of the Church, that the rejection of instrumental music was rooted on the fact that it was widely used by pagans at their religious ceremonies; thus, Christian praised God with the human voice, the most noble and natural instrument, and not with animate artificial instruments (22). Gardner believes that only the word, in its many expressions of prayer, glorification, instruction, exegesis, or homily, is able express concrete, logically

1093

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

formulated ideas. This does not happen with instrumental music, which by its nature can only evoke emotional elements, thus enhancing individuality and variety of interpretation (22). He remarks: Only the word can give musical sounds a definite, unambiguous meaning. And in worship only the word can clearly express the ideas contained in prayer, instruction, contemplation, etc... . On the other hand, the word taken in conjunction with musical sound can combine logical clarity and precision of meaning with the emotional response of verbal ideas. Herein, it seems, lies the reason why the musical element is admitted into the Orthodox liturgy only in conjunction with the word. Either the musical sounds give emotional coloration to the logically concrete of the liturgical texts, or the musical expression arises as an emotional reaction to the ideas expressed by the words. (22-23) I somehow disagree with Gardner in the sense that the emotional coloration the liturgical texts achieves with music, although congregational in nature, is also individual and personal. As Gardner points out, in the Orthodox Church there is no service in which music does not form part of it, yet we need to distinguish a gradation in the singing performed. In this gradation we have, on the one hand, psalmody or recitation upon a single pitch, described by the Latin term recto tono, as well as more elaborate styles of reading and exclamation, known as ekphonesis, These gradations are not strictly singing, but they neither they fall into the category of ordinary speech. On the other, there is a more luxuriant, polyphonic singing of one or several large choirs. He affirms that One kind of musical setting flows out to another, determined by the content of the text and its position in the service. All the different types and gradation of musical setting combine in the service to form an integrated musical whole in which the musical element serves to direct the attention to ideas expressed in the text and bring about an emotional reaction on the part of the listener. (24)

Activity Explain one the main purposes of liturgical music: Providing an emotional color to a concrete liturgical text. Try to add your own experience.
Activity 215: Main purposes in Liturgical music

1094

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

STYLE OF PERFORMANCE, TYPES OF HYMNS, AND SIGNIFICANCE OF HYMNS IN THE MAIN SERVICES OF THE DIVINE LITURGY, VESPERS, AND MATINS For Gardner the style of performance, the type of hymns and the significance of the texts play an important role within the structure of the holy services. They also determined them (Russian Church Singing: Orthodox Worship and Hymnography 25-53) STYLE OF PERFORMANCE AND TYPES OF HYMNS Gardner refers to the styles of performance of the hymns, determined by the structure of the service and their liturgical function: by a soloist (celebrant, reader, or cantor) and by a choir. It is necessary to explain further that in the style by a soloist we find the antiphonal style, used primarily for the performance of stichera and psalms; the epiphonal and hypophonal style, elements which correspond to a refrain that preceded the verse or an unchanging one that follows a psalm verse; the responsorial style; the canonarchal style or singing with a prompter, used primarily for constantly changing hymns such as the stichera; and the hymn style. In the hymn style he includes hymns such as the Cherubic hymn and the greater part of the hymns from the Liturgy of the Faithful, as well as O Gladsome Light from Vespers and Matins (31-33). Gardner also delineates 12 types of hymns, whose name depends to a great extent upon the position it occupies in the scheme of a particular service and upon the overall musical format of the service (34). The first is the sticheron. It is usually inserted between the verses of a psalm, although there are other positions too and different stichera. For example, the stichera on praises which is only found on Sunday or feast-day Matins; the stichera on the Beatitudes, sung at the Divine liturgy, interpolated into the verses of the Sermon of the Mount or Third Antiphon or the Gospel stichera, related in content to the eleven Resurrection Gospel readings read at Sunday Matins. Gardner remarks the importance of the stichera as a whole from a hymnographical and liturgical point of view as they

1095

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

communicate the main theme of a given dayan event from the New Testament or the life of a saint. They are hymns that serve the most to direct the thoughts of the worshippers in a particular direction. He adds that their simple melodies help the listener to easily memorize the text (36-37). The second is the troparion, sung in recto tono at various services of a given day and often repeated a number of times during the same service. It is sung at Vespers towards the end of the service before the dismissal; at Matins, at the beginning and at the end, after the Great doxology; or at the Divine Liturgy, after the Little Entrance. The troparion provides a summary of the central liturgical theme of a given day or service. The third is the kanon, which as previously said, is based on the nine Biblical canticles. Its heirmos, by its content, Gardner says, serves as a connecting link between the theme of the Old testament canticles and the New Testament hymn which is developed in the troparia of the given ode (40). The kanon occupies a central position in matins (38-43). The fourth is the kontakion, which unlike the kanon, is not based on Old Testament themes. The kontakion develops the theme of the event or saint being celebrated. The Akathistos Hymn to the Mother of God, a type of kontakion, is sung at the Matins on Saturday of the fifth week of Great Lent. The fifth is the hypakoe, which is similar to a troparion, and is sung at the Matins of Easter, Nativity, and Theophany. The sixth is the antiphon. This term, as Gardner says, applies to the psalms performed verse by verse during the Liturgy of the Catechumens, the first three Glories of the first kathisma at Saturday evening Vespers, and the three troparion-like stanzas performed at resurrectional Matins before the reading of the Gospel (45-49). The seventh is the prokeimenon, which consists of one or two verses of a given psalm that directly precedes the reading of the Holy Scripture. At the Divine Liturgy, for example, the prokeimena are related to the main theme of the occasion being celebrated. There are also

1096

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

prokimena at Vespers and at Matins. The eighth is the alleluia, which precedes the reading of the Gospel at the Divine Liturgy. The alleluia, like the prokeimenon, can involve the whole congregation. The ninth is the katabasia, or coming together of both the right and left choir in the center of the church. The tenth is the exaposteilarion, a troparion-like stanza sung at Matins preceding the Psalms of Praise and their stichera. The eleventh is the communion hymn, a verse from the psalm sung during the communion of the clergy. Its content is selected according to the theme of the day. The final one is the magnification, usually beginning with the word magnify. It is sung after the Polyeeleos, at Matins (49-53). Gardner points out that the arrangement of these hymns is done according to the Typikon, which makes the service an integrated ideological and musical whole from a musical-literary point of view. As a result, the structure of the liturgy has a decisive influence on the style of the performance and upon the extent and manner in which the musical element is employed (53). He also alludes to this integration I have mentioned: And it is for this reason that it is impossible to separate the liturgical singing of the Orthodox Church from the liturgy itself or to consider it exclusively in musical terms (53).

Significance of Hymns
As Gardner says, The texts of the hymns are inserted between prayers and reading, accompany procession of the clergy, and are interwoven among psalm verses in an established order and in accordance with specific rules. The texts of the hymns are intended to focus the thoughts of the listener upon the central theme of a feast or upon the commemoration of a given saint. At other times, the hymns serve to instruct the congregation in the major dogmas of the Orthodox faith, often in a poetic, but nevertheless dogmatically pure form. (26) These hymns, as he adds, which constitute a major portion of Orthodox services, contain the entire theological teaching of the Orthodox Church presented in poetic, popular idiom suitable for singing. Thus it is sufficient for those attending the service merely to listen carefully to the hymns and the readings in order to receive the essential

1097

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

doctrines of the faith (26). Thus there is a significant connection between musical element and the text as the former becomes the vehicle with the help of which the texts are more profoundly impressed upon the memory and consciousness of the listener and are, at the same time, interpreted emotionally (26). As suggested above, the liturgical music in the holy services functions as an integral part of them, giving them a multilevel dimension, from praising the Lord, the main role chant had in Early Christian services and gathering, to the support of dogmatic position and against heresies. Gardner distinguishes six types of hymns according to their significance: (1) hymns in the strict sense of that word, that is, poetic texts that offer to God praise (doxological hymns) or prayer (devotional hymns); (2) hymns of dogmatic nature; (3) hymns that describe historical event; (4) hymns of a moralistic nature; (5) hymns of a contemplative nature, and 6) hymns that accompany liturgical actions (Russian Church Singing: Orthodox Worship and Hymnography 25-30) I will now give the significance of some of the hymns of these three holy services within their structural context. The order of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is as follows: Proskomedia (Offering in Greek) or Office of Preparation of bread and wine needed for the liturgy; the Liturgy of the Word, which consists of intercessions and readings from the Psalms, the Epistles and Gospels; and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. In the Liturgy of the word, within the Second Antiphon, there is a short chant, the Hymn of the Incarnation, O Only-Begotten Son, (I John 4: 9) O Only-begotten Son and Word of God, Who art immortal, yet didst deign for our salvation to be incarnate of the Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary; and without change wast made man; and wast crucified also, O Christ our God, and by thy death didst Death subdue; who art one of the Holy Trinity, glorified together with the Father and the Holy Spirit: save us. with all the main dogmas concerning the Person of Jesus Christ:

1098

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

a) He is the Only-Begotten Son of God, and b) the Word of God, c) He is Eternal, immortal, d) that He willed for the sake of our salvation to become man, e) that His Mother Mary is the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin, f) that He was united to man unalterably, for ever, g) that He was crucified, though He was God, h) that by death He trampled down death, i) that he is One of the Holy Trinity, j) that He is glorified equally with the Father and the Holy Spirit; and the hymn ends with the evangelical cry, save us. (PomazanskyThe Holies for the Holy: An Overview of the Divine Liturgy) Then, in the Third Antiphon, after the Little Litany, the choir sings the praises of the blessed holy ones from the Gospels, the Beatitudes (Matt. 5:3-12): Blessed are the poor in spirit... Blessed are they that mourn ... Blessed are the meek... Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in the Heavens. They indicate: the spiritual qualities necessary for a Christian seeking the mercy of God: humility of spirit (spiritual poverty) and contrition concerning ones sins, meekness when drawing near the righteousness of God, purity of heart, compassion for ones neighbor, seeking peace in all situations, patience amid every temptation, and a readiness to endure dishonor, persecution, and death for Christ, trusting that as a confessor for Him, and for such ascetic struggles, one can expect a great reward in Heaven. (The Divine Liturgy) We can consider the Gospel Beatitudes, as a hymn of a moralistic nature. Hymns of this type, as Gardner explains, contain no prayer to God, but speak directly to the listener in the manner of a sung sermon (28). Instead of the Gospel Beatitudes, on the great feasts of the Lord, the festal troparion is sung several times with various verses. Pomazansky explains that, according to the Typicon, between the verses of the Beatitudes, there are hymns from the canon of the saints of the given day or from the canon of the feast, and a little later the troparia and kontakia of the day. In this way, the Saints are called upon to join in the glorification with us. After the Little Entrance, which is an expression of entering into the Sanctuary and joining there the Saints, the Church glorifies those Saints or the sacred event of the Feast Day by singing triumphant hymns in their honor troparia and kontakia. These are special short

1099

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

hymns sung in one of the Eight Tones composed in honor of the Feast or Saint (s). They express the essence of the Feast or the life and spiritual feats of the Saint (s). In The Divine Liturgy2, we read: The Troparia and Kontakia are similar to each other in length, literary form, etc., but each stresses a different aspect of the essence of the commemoration. While the Troparion provides us with a picture of the external side of the commemorated event, the Kontakion draws attention to the inner aspect, and vice versa. The Kontakia, however, usually reflect more fully the essence of the sacred event. The author of this internet article illustrates this assertion with the following examples of troparion and kontakion of the Feast of Holy Pentecost: Blessed art Thou, O Christ our God, Who hast revealed the fishermen as most wise by sending down upon them the Holy Spirit; through them Thou didst draw the world into Thy net. O Lover of Man, Glory to Thee! [Troparion] When the Most High came down and confused the tongues, He divided the nations; but when He distributed the tongues of fire, He called all to unity. Therefore, with one voice, we glorify the All-Holy Spirit! [Kontakion] Afterwards, the priest, in secret, during the Little Entrance, even calls upon the angels to join in this common glorification, Grant that the holy angels may enter with us that together we may serve and glorify your goodness. For to You belong all glory, honor, and worship to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and to the ages of ages. Amen. Also in a low voice the priest blesses the entrance mentioning the saints: Blessed is the entrance of your saints always, now and forever and to the ages of ages. Amen. Pomazansky says, Thus the earthly, the Saints and the Angels are made ready and united for the meeting of the Lord, Who comes for His earthly ministry. The Trisagion Hymn, Holy God..., is then chanted:547 Amen. Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us (3).
However, for the Nativity of Christ, the Baptism of the Lord, Pascha and Bright Week, and the Day of the Holy Trinity, as well as on Holy Saturday and Lazarus Saturday, we chant, As many as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ: Alleluia. This hymn is chanted because in the early days of the Church, the catechumens received Holy Baptism on these days. On the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross of the Lord (September 14) and on the third Sunday of Great Lent (when the veneration of the Cross is celebrated) instead of the Trisagion we chant, before Thy Cross we bow down, O Master, and Thy Holy Resurrection we glorify (The Divine Liturgy).
547

1100

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Glory to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and to the ages of ages. Amen. Holy Immortal, have mercy on us. (Pomazansky, The Holies for the Holy: An Overview of the Divine Liturgy) The Trisagion Hymn is believed to have been divinely revealed at Constantinople as the text sung by the angels (perhaps a Trinitarian expression of Revelation 4:8). It is a hymn of worship to the Most Holy Trinity, one the oldest chants of the Byzantine Liturgy. The roots of this hymn date back to the ecstasy of Isaiah and the vision of St. John the Evangelist (Is. 6:3, Rev. 4:8). This solemn hymn is a glorification of the Trinity and also has a dogmatic character. The addition of the Trisagion Hymn to the Liturgy can be traced to the time of Patriarch Proclus (434-446 A.D.), a period when the heresies were beginning to appear, mainly Arianism and Monophytism, which developed in the East. Being the Trisagion deeply Trinitarian, it is also anti-Arian in character. This hymn has a very interesting history which reflects its theological character. In Canon 81, of the Council in Trullo (692), we read: Whereas we have heard that in some places in the hymn Trisagion there is added after Holy and Immortal, Who was crucified for us, have mercy upon us, and since this as being alien to piety was by the ancient and holy Fathers cast out of the hymn, as also the violent heretics who inserted these new words were cast out of the Church; we also, confirming the things which were formerly piously established by our holy Fathers, anathematize those who after this present decree allow in church this or any other addition to the most sacred hymn; but if indeed he who has transgressed is of the sacerdotal order, we command that he be deprived of his priestly dignity, but if he be a layman or monk let him be cut off. In the ancient epitome of this canon, we read: Whoever adds to the hymn Trisagion these words Who was crucified shall be deemed heterodox. The addition of the phrase condemned by this canon was probably made first by Peter Fullo, and although indeed it was capable of a good meaning, if the whole hymn was understood as being addressed to Christ, and although this was admitted by very many of the orthodox, yet as it was chiefly used by the Monophysites and with an undoubtedly heretical intention, it was finally ousted from this. (Medieval Sourcebook: The Quinsext Council, (or the Council in Trullo), 692. This is the interpretation found in Trisagion hymn: Orthodox explanation:

1101

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Peter Fullo (i.e., the Fuller) and the Theopaschites following him were the first to add to the Trisagion Hymn the words who was crucified for our sake, after the words Holy and Immortal. These heretics, therefore, together with such addition, were condemned by the Council which was held in Rome A.D. 487 under Pope Felix before the Fifth Ecum. Council, and Peter Fullo indeed was anathematized by it (See the Preface of the Fifth Ecum. C.O.) But inasmuch as there are still some successors to the heresy of Fullo to be found reciting the Trisagion hymn together with this blasphemous addition, the present Council anathematizes those who accept it and who either in church and publicly or in private join this addition to the Trisagion. Accordingly, if they happen to be clerics, it deposes them from office; but if they happen to be laymen, it excommunicates them. St. John of Damascus, in An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (Book III), also refers to this hymn, considering blasphemous the addition done by Peter the Fuller, a Patriarch of Antioch at the end of the fifth century: This being so, we declare that the addition which the vain-minded Peter the Fuller made to the Trisagium or Thrice Holy Hymn is blasphemous; for it introduces a fourth person into the Trinity, giving a separate place to the Son of God, Who is the truly subsisting power of the Father, and a separate place to Him Who was crucified as though He were different from the Mighty One, or as though the Holy Trinity was considered passible, and the Father and the Holy Spirit suffered on the Cross along with the Son. Have done with this blasphemous and nonsensical interpolation! For we hold the words Holy God to refer to the Father, without limiting the title of divinity to Him alone, but acknowledging also as God the Son and the Holy Spirit: and the words Holy and Mighty we ascribe to the Son, without stripping the Father and the Holy Spirit of might: and the words Holy and Immortal we attribute to the Holy Spirit, without depriving the Father and the Son of immortality. (Chap. 10) There was a parallel development in Eastern liturgical with the insertion of the above mentioned hymn Monogenes, meaning Only-Begotten, which was a response to the Monophysite heresy. The Only Begotten Son, is ascribed to Justinian I (527565), and, as we can seen, figures in the introductory portion of the Divine Liturgy. It was included in the Byzantine liturgy following the second Antiphon approximately in 535-536 A.D. (Eastern Orthodox Liturgics). Following the trisagion, at the conclusion of the Epistle lesson, the prokeimenon is chanted, which is a special, brief psalm verse that changes according to the day. It has a threefold refrain Alleluia!. Furthermore, during the Great Entrance, which consists of

1102

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

the transferral of the gifts prepared for the Eucharist from the Table of Oblation to the Holy Table the Cherubic hymn is sung, marking the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist: Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim And who sing the thrice-holy hymn To the life-creating Trinity Now lay aside all earthly cares, That we may receive the King of All, Who comes invisibly upborne by the angelic host! Alleluia, allelluia, alleluia! According to Gardner, this hymn is an example of hymns that accompany liturgical actions, relating in poetic form the symbolic meaning contained in those actions. He says that the character of this hymn is mixed, combining both the contemplative element and an explanation of the symbolism contained in the liturgical action. The Cherubic Hymn was added to the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom by order of the Emperor Justinian by the end of the sixth century. According to Pomazansky, as this hymn depicts the transfer of the gifts. It lifts up the minds of the faithful to the coming of the Lord of hosts Himself, at this moment those standing in the church are called upon to fulfil an angelic ministry. He adds: The transfer of the gifts, which have been prepared for sanctification, represents the laying of the Saviour in the tomb. At this point we must concentrate upon those sacred remembrances of the things lived through on Great Friday and on the Great Sabbath of Passion Week, so that, later, at the end of the Liturgy we might rejoice in the Resurrection and the Ascension of the Lord (The Holies for the Holy: An Overview of the Divine Liturgy) In The Divine Liturgy, we read: The words of the original Greek for upborne in triumph mean literally, borne aloft as on spears. This refers to an ancient practice when a nation, desiring to solemnly glorify its king or war leader, would seat him upon their shields, and raising him aloft would carry him before the army and through the city streets. As the shields were borne aloft on the spears, so it would seem that the triumphant leader was carried by their spears. The Cherubic Hymn reminds the faithful that they have now left behind every thought for daily life, and offering themselves as a likeness of the Cherubim, are found close to God in Heaven and, together with the angels, sing the thrice-holy hymn in praise of God.

1103

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

During the consecration of the gifts, the choir chants: the Holy, Holy, Holy: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of Sabaoth, heaven and earth are full of thy glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest. This hymn is taken partly from the Prophet Isaiah and partly from the Apocalypse (Revelation) of St. John. It is a hymn of praise. The following hymn, We hymn Thee, is also a hymn of praise: We hymn thee, We bless thee, We give thanks unto thee, O Lord, and we pray unto thee, O our God. Gardner calls these praising hymns hymns in the strict sense of the word: poetic texts that offer to God praise (doxological hymns) or prayer (devotional hymns). In We hymn Thee, we address to God the Father as the Eucharist is an offering to him. The Epiclesis is followed by prayers remembering all those who have gone before us, especially the Holy Virgin Mary, the Theotokos, Again we offer unto Thee this reasonable worship for those who have fallen asleep in the faith: ancestors, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and every righteous spirit made perfect in faith. As he receives the censer, the priest continues: PRIEST: Especially for our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary. in whose honour the choir sings this beautiful hymn of praise, the Hymn to the Theotokos: Meet it is in truth to bless thee, O Theotokos, who art ever blessed and allblameless, and the Mother of our God. More honorable than the Cherubim and more glorious without compare than the Seraphim, who without corruption gavest birth to God the Word, verily Theotokos, we magnify thee. Let us now turn to the significance of hymns in the holy services of Vespers and Matins, which as we know, define the day. In Genesis, the first book of the Bible, we read: And there was evening and there was morning, the first day (Gen. 1:5 [LXX]). Thus, the order of services called for Vespers, the first part of the All-night Vigil, to end late in the night; and for Matins, the second part, to finish at dawn. Thus, in the

1104

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Orthodox Church, the liturgical day begins in the evening with the setting of the sun, a practice which follows the biblical account of creation: And there was evening and there was morning, one day (Gen. 1:5). And Great Vespers, the first service of worship for a new day, leads us through the Old Testament to the New. In this service many psalms are chanted, each one having a role within the overall meaning of the service. For example, after the opening exclamation, portions of Psalm 104 are sung, signifying that at the Creation, the Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters (Gen. 1) (Introduction to the Service of Great Vespers in the Orthodox Church). Yet, the first true hymn we find, during the entrance of the clergy in the sanctuary through the Royal Doors, is O Gladsome Light... O Gladsome Light of the holy glory of the Immortal Father, heavenly, holy, blessed Jesus Christ. Now we have come to the setting of the sun and behold the light of evening. We praise God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. For it is right at all times to worship Thee with voices of praise, O Son of God and Giver of Life, therefore all the world glorifies Thee. This ancient hymn praises Christ as the first ray of the New Testament Light. It reminds us that the created light, the light of the sun, is inadequate when compared to the Divine, Uncreated Light which is Christ. After a prokeimenon, which announces the days spiritual theme, another hymn follows, the Song of St Simeon: Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace according to Thy word, for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation: which Thou hast prepared before the face of all people. A light for revelation to the Gentiles, and to be the glory of Thy people Israel (Luke 1:29-32). Although this hymn has a historical dimension, at the same time, it proclaims our own vision of Christ, the Light and Salvation of the world. Afterward, the alreadynoticed dogmatic hymn, The Thrice-Holy Prayers (Trisagion) is sung. It is followed by the troparion (theme-hymn). Gardner mentions the theotokia-dogmatika or stichera dogmatica sung at Saturday Vespers, at the end of the verses following Lord, I call

1105

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

upon Thee, referring to the incarnation of Christ and the virginity of the Mother of God. In fact, although Great Vespers contains hymns of praise and of dogmatic character, it has an overall historical, and, at the same time, a timeless dimension. It evocates the creation, fall, expulsion from Paradise, and anticipation of the coming of the Saviour who brings light to the world (Introduction to the Service of Great Vespers in the Orthodox Church; Hopko, vol. 2, Worship 63-65 ). Matins are based in the expectation of Christs final coming. According to the Apostolic Constitutions, morning prayers were introduced by the Fathers to give thanks to God for sending us the light (VIII, 34). As with Vespers, the Matins service is introduced with the chanting of psalms. Likewise, there are various litanies and other prayers and blessings interspersed according to the observance of the day. After the chanting of the introductory psalms and the Great Litany and the verses on God is the Lord, the troparion for the day follows. Then, after the kathisma readings, a kanon is sung. As Gardner explains the kanon has a central position in Matins. It is divided in three sections separated one from another by Little Litanies and other short hymnssedalens, hypakoem, and kontakia with oikos (43). As noticed above, its nine odes are based on nine Old Testamental canticles, which were selected by the Christian communities for their morning services: The Song of Moses after the crossing of the Red Sea (Ex. 15:1-21). The Song of Warning given by Moses to his people before his death (Deut. 32:1-43). The Song of Hannah exulting for bearing a son (I Sam. 2:1-10). The Song of Habakkuk foreseeing the coming of the Messiah (Hab. 3:1-19). The Song of Isaiah rejoicing for the restoration of Israel in Messianic times (Is. 26:9-19). The Song of Jonah after his deliverance from the belly of the whale (Jon. 2:310). The Prayer of Azariah in the furnace of fire (Dan. 3:26-45). The Song of Thanksgiving of the three young men delivered from the fiery flames in Babylon (Dan. 3:52-90). The Canticle of the Blessed Virgin: My soul magnifies the Lord (Luke 1:4655). (Matins: Morning Services according to the Byzantine Rite). 1106

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Christian communities eventually adapted these biblical canticles as their liturgical morning hymns of praise, thanksgiving, and supplication, inspired by the expectation of the second coming of Christ. Later these biblical canticles provided hymnographers the theme to each of the nine odes of the kanon (Matins: Morning Services according to the Byzantine Rite). The kanon is thus full of biblical reminiscences, as Florovsky points out when referring to St. Andrew, the composer of the kanon: Biblicism is characteristic for St. Andrew. At times he virtually repeats Biblical texts. The Great Canon is overcrowded with Biblical reminiscences. A long line of vivid penitential images from the Bible stretches from Adam to the prudent thief. The Biblical text is very often perceived allegoricallybut this is moral, not speculative, allegorism. (The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century) The nine odes of the kanon symbolize the nine Angelic Choirs who unceasingly, day and night, praise the almighty God (Pseudo Dionysius, The Celestial Hierarchy548). Before its ninth ode, a hymn of praise, the song of Mary, the so-called Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55) is still sung. In the kanon, the Church shows the faithful how the miracle of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ enlightens human nature (Matins: Morning Services according to the Byzantine Rite). The kanon has a celebrating nature, as Father Victor Potapov asserts, in The All-night Vigil ServiceThe Evening Sacrifice: Each individual canon has a specific subject of celebration: the Most Holy Trinity, an event from the Gospel or from the history of the Church, prayers to the Theotokos, or the magnification of a saint or saints of the day. The Sunday kanons (read on Saturday evening in usual Russian practice) celebrate the Resurrection of Christ and the ensuing enlightenment of the world, the victory over sin and death. Festal kanons illuminate in detail the meaning of the feast and the life of the saint, as a model of the transfiguration of the world already taking place. The Church in some measure celebrates Christs victory over sin and death by contemplating the light of this transfiguration reflected in the canons.

548

Patrologia Graeca 3, 119 ff. Qtd. in Matins: Morning Services according to the Byzantine Rite.

1107

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Therefore, kanons have a celebrating, praising dimension. St. John of Damascus, as mentions by the introduction to this hymn, expresses this celebration in his Paschal Kanon. What follows is a selection of it: O, day of Resurrection! Let us beam with festive joy! This indeed is the Lords own Passover, for from death to life, from earth to heaven, Christ has led us, as we shout the victory hymn: Christ is Risen from the Dead! As we gaze upon our dazzling Christ: Behold his Rising - a brilliant flash of light divine! Let all Creation dance in celebration! For Christ has risen: Christ our lasting joy! Yesterday, my Christ, they buried me with You; Today I rise with You! Yesterday Your partner in death was I; tomorrow, O my Saviour, let me share the glory of your realm! (Psalms) As the author of Matins: Morning Services according to the Byzantine Rite remarks: In the spirit of our ultimate celebration of the Heavenly Liturgy, we join the Angelic Hosts during Matins in praise, thanksgiving and honor to Almighty God, One in the Blessed Trinity. After the kanon, a Great Doxology is also chanted. Then, the troparion is repeated once again before the congregation is dismissed. As in Vespers, the Revelation and the symbol of light are central to the morning service (Hopko, vol. 2, Worship 66.). Throughout the holy services, the word of praise Alleluiah is present. During the Divine Liturgy, it is heard before the reading of the Gospel, once the reading of the Epistle is finished; at the end of the Cherubim hymn, signalling the translation of the Sacraments from the table of ablations to the Holy Throne; after the Communion and at the end of the liturgy. It is also sung on many occasions during the vigil. It expresses that to which all divine services are dedicatedthe praise of God. Fr. George Benigsen, in Minor Words of the Liturgy, explains its origin and meaning: The word Alleluiah, which appears with such frequency in the hymns and prayers of our Liturgy, is of Hebrew origin. The last syllable iah Is an abbreviated form of Jahveh or Jehovah, the Old Testament name for God. The preceding syllables mean praise. The whole word, then, means praise God, praise the Lord. The Christian Church began early using this word of praise in the liturgical texts. The word became an expression of joy and triumph, a hymn 1108

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

to triumphant faith. In our Church, it is a part of all services, including the services of repentance during Great Lent and the services for the dead. The entire life of the Church is built on the unwavering faith in Christs Resurrection. The attitude of the Church even to death is permeated with the joyous expectation of the forthcoming meeting with Christ and the life everlasting in the Kingdom of God. Regarding morning hymns, as St. Basil exclaims: What state can be more blessed than to imitate on earth the choruses of angels? to begin the day with prayer, and honour our Maker with hymns and songs? As the day brightens, to betake ourselves, with prayer attending on it throughout, to our labours, and to sweeten our work with hymns, as if with salt? Soothing hymns compose the mind to a cheerful and calm state. Quiet, then, as I have said, is the first step in our sanctification; the tongue purified from the gossip of the world; the eyes unexcited by fair colour or comely shape; the ear not relaxing the tone or mind by voluptuous songs, nor by that especial mischief, the talk of light men and jesters. (Letter 2) Yet not only with morning hymns, but with all sacred music we approach the heavenly liturgy celebrated by angels in praise of the Lord. With hymns, as St. John of Damascus, rightly says, we join with the saints in worshipping: In psalms and hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19), in contrition and in pity for the needy, let us believers worship the saints, as God also is most worshipped in such wise. Let us raise monuments to them and visible images, and let us ourselves become, through imitation of their virtues, living monuments and images of them. (An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book IV, Chapter XV) Activity 1. From Gardners point of view, enumerate: a) the styles of performance b) the types of hymns c) the six main types of hymns according to their significance. 2. When doing (c) add one example of each of these six types from the holy services. 3. See Appendix Y and listen to the liturgical music of the Divine Liturgy. Then, make commentaries on it based on the notes given in this chapter. Also express your feelings regarding it.
Activity 216: Style, type, and significance of liturgical hymns

1109

Chapter 12: Theology of Church Music

Final Activity Write a three-page paper summarizing the role of music in the holy services. Conclude with your own reflections on the topic.
Activity 217: Final activity on the role of music in the holy services

1110

CONCLUSION: THE INTEGRATIVE POWER OF THE HOLY TRADITION

CONCLUSION: THE INTEGRATING FORCE OF THE HOLY TRADITION

As this work concludes I need to mention once again the essential pillar of Orthodoxy, the Holy Tradition, changeless in the face of time. Anthony Ware comments, alluding to many of the elements treated in this work, that in spite of the tragic breaks which marked Orthodox history outwardlythe capture of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem by Arab Muslims; the burning of Kiev by Mongols; the two sacks of Constantinople; the October Revolution in Russia, inwardly the Orthodox Church has a continuity, a changelessness. As in the primitive Church, children are still baptized by three-fold immersion, babies, and small children receive the Holy Communion; in the liturgy, the deacon, recalling the early days when the Church entrance was jealously guarded, still cries out: The doors! The doors! The Creed is still recited without any additions. Indeed, in the Orthodox Church, there is a sense of invariability, a determination to remain loyal to the past, a sense of living continuity with the Church of ancient times. This living continuity, as Ware describes, is summed up for the Orthodox in the word Tradition549 (The Orthodox Church 195-196), as we often have discussed in these pages. Thus although Tradition exists or lives in history it has a timeless dimension, like Christ, his founder. As noted, Bebis remarks that Tradition is a gift of the Holy Spirit, a living experience, which is relived and renewed through time. It is the true faith, which is revealed by the Holy Spirit to the true people of God. Thus, throughout these pages, as we have dealt with so many topics of Orthodoxy, we have seen that the Holy Tradition has shown to be an extraordinary powerful, living force which, guided by the Holy Spirit, has integrated history,
549

The italics in this paragraph are Wares.

1111

CONCLUSION: THE INTEGRATIVE POWER OF THE HOLY TRADITION

theology, and sacred music in a remarkably coherent whole. We might need another thousand pages and the aid of the Spirit to decipher its intricate, insightful labyrinth in which eternity and time, infinity and finite coexist in the associative presence of God the Father. It is in this Presence, manifested by the God-Man, in His indwelling in the heart of man, that we will join everlastingly. Man cannot fully encompass the Holy Tradition because it brings together the reality in actuality and the eternal reality in potentialitythe deification of man. The Father does fully understand the time struggle of his children to be like Him because he lovingly embraces our finitude. It is through the tirelessly, loving effort of the Fathers of the Church, of those men who experienced God, that this Holy Tradition is nowadays present in the life and worship of the faithful, the living Church. They understood the fact that although we could argue over opinions about God, the experience with him and in him exists beyond mere intellectual logic. Let us finish this work by quoting the initial words of Symeon of Thessalonica in his Book on the Church: With love, we pass on to you that which we have taken from the Fathers. For we offer nothing new, but only that which has been passed on to us, and we have changed nothing but we have retained everything, like a creed, in the state in which it has been given to us. Symeon ends reflecting the spirit of the Orthodox Church: We worship exactly as Christ Himself did and as did the apostles and the Fathers of the Church.550

Final Activity Write your own conclusions.

Activity 218: Your own conclusions

550

Patrologia Graeca 155:701AB. Qtd. in Ouspensky 22.

1112

Glossary

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND NAMES551

Adoptionism Adoptionism is an error concerning Jesus that first appeared in the second century. Those who held it denied the preexistence of Christ and, therefore, His deity. Adoptionists taught that Jesus was tested by God and after passing this test and upon His baptism He was granted supernatural powers by God and adopted as the Son. As a reward for His great accomplishments and perfect character Jesus was raised from the dead and adopted into the Godhead. Anaphora (Greek, naphor, offering, sacrifice) A liturgical term in the Greek Rite. It is variously used in the liturgies of the Greek Orient to signify that part of the service which corresponds substantially to the Latin Canon of the Mass. It also signifies the offering of Eucharistic bread. In the Greek Rite the Anaphoras are numerous while in the Roman Rite the Canon of the Mass is from time immemorial quite invariable. The Greek Anaphora is substantially of apostolic origin, though in its present form it dates from the end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century when St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom (respectively) shortened the liturgy that until then was very long and fatiguing. The term is of much importance, given its antiquity, for the demonstration of the sacrificial character of the Holy Mass. (Andrew J. Shipman) Andropov, Yuri Vladimirovich Andropov (1914 1984) was a Soviet politician and General Secretary of the CPSU from November 12, 1982 until his death just sixteen months later. St. Anthony St. Anthony was born into a wealthy family. When his parents died, he and his sister shared their wealth. Since his sister was a minor, he made sure she was cared for and then gave away all his portion of the inheritance to the poor and went into the desert to live the life of asceticism as a monk. St. Anthony took to heart the words of the Lord: If you desire to be perfect, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow me (Mark 10:21). Many people imitated his example and went and lived close to him, thus populating the desert. St. Anthony is considered the Father of Orthodox Monasticism, for his kind of monasticism, that of living alone with God as his only companion, remained the most cherished monastic ideal for the monks of the Christian Orthodox Church throughout the ages. While in the desert, St. Anthony preoccupied himself with prayer and study. Before teaching himself how to read and write, it is said that he memorized most of the Sacred Scriptures simply by having other monks read Gods Word to him. St. Anthony was committed to refining the rules of monasticism and to establishing a number of monasteries throughout Egypt and the surrounding region. Soon his fame spread throughout the East, and those who thirsted for spiritual fulfillment constantly sought his wise counsel. Once when a number of Greek philosophers tried to test him and impress him with their knowledge, he posed this profound question to them: Which is older: the book, or the wisdom it contains? St. Anthony used to say Learn to desire humility, for that will cover your sins. All sin is hateful to God, but the most hateful of all is pride of heart. Do not consider yourself learned or wise, or all your toil will be lost and your ship will arrive empty at the shoreIf you have great power,
This list includes relevant terms and people related to the development of Orthodoxy. The definitions have been taken and/or adapted from many general Internet sources such as dictionaries, glossaries, citations, encyclopedias, etc. See Bibliography. When the definition or reference has been taken from a specific author, it will be noted.
551

1113

Glossary

threaten no man with death; know that according to nature you also are subject to death and that each soul takes off its body as its final clothing. Because of the great respect that the entire Church had for him, St. Anthony was invited to attend the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea in 325 A.D. Although he held neither title nor power, he was called upon to give a defense of the Orthodox faith concerning the Divinity of Christ against the Arian heresy. St. Anthony died in 356 A.D. at the age of 105 in his beloved desert monastery. (Adapted from St. Anthony the Great) Apocatastasis552 A name given in the history of theology to the doctrine which teaches that a time will come when all free creatures will share in the grace of salvation; in a special way, the devils and lost souls (New Advent). Appanage The portion of land assigned by a sovereign prince for the subsistence of his younger sons. Apollinarianism This heresy, which began to spread in 362, consisted in the denial of a rational soul to the incarnate Logos, asserting that the God-Man took on only the irrational soul and material body, having His divinity in place of the rational soul (Kallinikos) Apologetics The word apologetics is derived from the Greek word apologia, which means to make a defense. It has come to mean defense of the faith. Apologetics covers many areas: who Jesus is, the reliability of the Bible, refuting cults, biblical evidences in the history and archeology, answering objections, etc. In short, it deals with giving reasons for Christianity being the true religion. The history of apologetic literature involves the survey of the varied attacks that have been made against the grounds of Christian, Catholic belief. A first division scholars make is the period from the beginning of Christianity to the downfall of the Roman Empire (A.D. 476). It is chiefly characterized by the twofold struggle of Christianity with Judaism and with paganism. Apologists The writers who succeeded the Apostolic Fathers represent starting the second century, as it were, the adolescence of Church Literature. As their common characteristic is a bold defense of the faith, they have been called the Apologists. Two apologists are Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, and the Athenian philosopher, Aristides, both of whom presented apologies to the Emperor Hadrian on behalf of their unjustly persecuted fellow-Christians. To them must be added the philosopher, Justin, who addressed two apologies to Marcus Aurelius, under whom he was martyred in 166; the Athenian, Athenagoras, who flourished between the years 170-180, and addressed an Intercession on behalf of the Christians to the Emperors Marcus Aurelius and Commodus; and Theophilus of Antioch (d. 182), who submitted an exposition of the Christian faith to his pagan friend Autolycus. All three present a sincere and detailed account of the beliefs of the Christians and of their manner of life, thus giving the lie to the false and unfounded accusations of their enemies that they met by night to indulge in orgies and to slaughter and eat new-born babes. Justin especially was an excellent apologist, and defended Christianity not only against the pagans, but also, in another work entitled A dialogue with Trypho, against the Jews. His life was a tireless search for truth; one after another, he went through every system of philosophy, and sat under every learned man of his age, without finding satisfaction for his spiritual craving, until finally he attained peace in Christianity. To
When finding a reference to New Advent, use Search New Advent to find out its exact location in this web site.
552

1114

Glossary

the end of his days he continued to wear the philosophers gown, convinced that Christianity was the only infallible philosophy of life. (Kallinikos 21) Apostasy The falling away from the faith. It is a revolt against the truth of Gods word by a believer. It can also describe a group or church organization that has fallen away from the truths of Christianity as revealed in the Bible. Apostolic Tradition Theologians call the teaching of the Scriptures the Apostolic Tradition. It encompasses what the Apostles lived, saw, witnessed and later recorded in the books of the new Testament. The bishops and presbyters, whom the Apostles appointed as their successors, followed their teaching to the letter. Those who deviated from this apostolic teaching were cut off from the Church. They were considered heretics and schismatics, for they believed differently from the Apostles and their successors, thus separating themselves from the Church. This brings into focus the Church as the center of unity of all Christians. This is the ecclesiastical or ecclesiological characteristic of Tradition. The Church is the image and reflection of the Holy Trinity since the three persons of the Holy Trinity live, indwell, and act in the Church. The Father offers His love, the Son offers His obedience, the Holy Spirit His comfort. Only in the historical Church can we see, feel, and live the presence of the Holy Trinity in the World. Arianism An ancient theological error that appeared around the year 320. It taught that God could not appear on the earth, that Jesus was not eternal and could not be God. Additionally, it taught that there was only one person in the Godhead: the Father. Jesus, then, was a creation. It was condemned by the Council of Nicaea in 325. This movement split in three factions: those who argued that the Father and Son are unlike; those who believed that Father and Son are alike, but not consubstantial; and those who thought that Father and Son were almost one substance a group which eventually accepted the Nicene position. The Jehovahs Witness cult is an equivalent, though not exactly, of this ancient error. Arius Arius (250-336) was a presbyter of the church district of Baucalis in Alexandria. Trained in Greek philosophy, he became an ascetic, and his attempts to clarify the nature of the Trinity, produced a creed which that was for many contemporaries heretical. His philosophical background prevented him from accepting the notion that God could become man: he taught that Jesus was not eternal and co-equal with the Father, but created by Him. He was not God, but not human either, rather a kind of demi-God. Arius was excommunicated in 320 by the bishop of Alexandria, and in 325 he was condemned and exiled by the Council of Nicaea, which asserted the equality of Father and Son in eternity, and that the Son and the Father were homoousios, that is to say, consubstantial. Arius returned in 334, but died in 336. (Haldon 20) Athanasius the Great St. Athanasius the Great (d. 373 A.D.) was born of Christian parents and educated in Alexandrias catechetical school. He became deacon and secretary to his bishop Alexander, whom he accompanied to the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. The Council condemned Arianism which denied the eternity of the Word of God and the Divinity of Christ in full. He vigorously defended Orthodoxy and refused all compromise with Arians and semi-Arians, who were, however, strongly represented at the imperial court. He became bishop in 328 A.D. at the age of about 30 and made extensive pastoral visits in his province, but was soon the target of bitter

1115

Glossary

attacks by Arians and Meletians. Summoned to the hostile Council of Tyre and appealing to the emperor for fair treatment, he was exiled and then restored, deposed, and then reinstated. Much of his life was spent in exile. St. Athanasius was a prolific author and strongly contributed to the theology of the Redemption. The theme of his early work (Of the Incarnation of the Word of God) is the restoration of fallen man to the image of God in which he was created, through God the Words union with mankind. He insisted that the Nicene term Homoousios was necessary to formulate correctly the truth of Christs Scriptural revelation. He was also the biographer of St. Antony of Egypt. This biography was devoted to the single combat of the hermit against the powers of evil. He died beloved and triumphant on May 15, 373 A.D.. Augustine of Hippo Born 354 in Thagaste in Numidia (North Africa), the son of a pagan father and a Christian mother (Monica). He had early Christian training, but initially rejected the faith. He became a Manichean before finally turning Christian (under the influence of Ambrose). In his early years he taught rhetoric (moving to Rome for this reason in 382, then to Milan in 384), then underwent a conversion experience around 385. He tried to return to seclusion in Africa, but was made priest, then coadjutator bishop of Hippo in 395, and soon after became sole holder of the episcopal title. He died in 430 as the Vandals besieged Hippo. His theology was extremely predestinarian and rigid (he was Calvins primary inspiration), but his voluminous works were widely treasured. His many quotations are in Latin (though he was aware of the importance of the Greek), and he is responsible for the famous remark about the Itala being the best of the Latin versions. His text does not seem to indicate which Latin type this is, however; while his Latin text is pre-vulgate, it is clearly not the African Latin of Cyprian, and does not seem to be purely European either. (In Paul, his text is considered to be close to r of the Old Latinbut r is quite distinct from the other Latin witnesses. Souter lists his text in the Acts, Catholic Epistles, and Apocalypse as close to h.) Theologically, his two most important works are the City of God and the largely autobiographical Confessions.

Autocephalous Self-governing nature of Orthodox eastern churches. Each national church is independent of others, yet possesses full agreement on matters of doctrine and faith. Basil the Great of Csarea One of the great Cappadocian Fathers, he was the brother of Gregory of Nyssa. Born of a well-to-do family around 330 (d. 379), he studied in several cities before becoming a hermit (358?) and did much to reform and organize the eastern monastic rules. In the 360s he became a presbyter, then in 370 Bishop of Cappadocian Csarea. Along with his brother and his friend Gregory of Nazianzus, he was one of the great defenders of Nicene orthodoxy in the mid to late fourth century, particularly after the death of Athanasius. He was probably around fifty when he died on the first day of 379, and although he felt frustrated by the schisms which remained in the church (the Principate was still promoting heterodox causes, and Rome had rejected his claims), his work was important to the reunification of orthodoxy which soon followed. He also made some changes in church order, and worked to keep the ascetic movement under episcopal control. He has been called the true founder of communal... monasticism. His book On the Holy Spirit was one of the great writings of Nicene Christianity. He also wrote letters which illuminate the problems of a bishop in those troubles times. Debate continues about the authenticity of some of his minor works. Von Soden considers his text to align with the Purple Uncials; if true, this would make it almost but not quite purely Byzantine. Bolsheviks The wing of the Russian socialist party (the RSDRP) that recognized Lenins leadership; it was opposed by the rival Menshevik group, which was suspicious of Lenins motives. The factional

1116

Glossary

split occurred in 1903, and became permanent despite periodic attempts at reconciliation; from about 1904, the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks were effectively two separate parties. Generally, the Bolsheviks saw themselves as a small, tightly organized revolutionary vanguard though they were far less centralized than they would become after the revolution - and were opposed to the formation of a mass socialist party. They also tended to be more unscrupulous than the Mensheviks, feeling that their revolutionary ends justified any means. Prior to 1917, they were fairly strong in Moscow, but did not really have a large base. After Lenin and the Bolsheviks seized control of Russia in the October Revolution in 1917, the faction was renamed the Communist Party. Boris and Gleb First Russian Orthodox Saints, sons of Vladimir. Rather than rise up in violence against their half brother, these early believers became humble martyrs for their faith. Boyar A boyar was a member of the highest rank of the feudal Ruthenian (Russian) and Romanian aristocracy, second only to the ruling princes, from the 10th through the 17th century. Brezhnev, Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev (1906 1982) was effective ruler of the Soviet Union from 1964 to 1982, though at first in partnership with others. He was General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1964 to 1982, and was twice Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet (head of state), from 1960 to 1964 and from 1977 to 1982.

Byzantine Empire Byzantine Empire, successor state to the Roman Empire, also called eastern Empire and East Roman Empire. It was named after Byzantium, which Emperor Constantine I rebuilt (A.D. 330) as Constantinople and made the capital of the entire Roman Empire. Although not foreseen at the time, a division into eastern and western empires became permanent after the accession (395) of Honorius in the West and Arcadius in the East. Throughout its existence the Byzantine Empire was subject to important changes in its boundaries. The core of the empire consisted of the Balkan Peninsula (i.e., Thrace, Macedonia, Epirus, Greece proper, the Greek isles, and Illyria) and of Asia Minor (present-day Turkey). The empire combined Roman political tradition, Hellenic culture, and Christian beliefs. Greek was the prevalent language, but Latin long continued in official use. Catherine II the Great Among her accomplishments was the conquest of the Crimea and southern Ukraine from the Ottoman Turks. For the first time Russia extended to the Black Sea. Also during her reign Poland was extinguished, as Russia, Prussia and Austria partitioned its territory amongst themselves. A Grand Duchy of Warsaw was briefly revived during the Napoleonic Wars, and in 1815 a small Grand Duchy of Poland was assigned to the Tsar to be administered in personal union with Russia. Catherine even had aspirations to deal a final death blow to the Turks, thereby reviving the old Byzantine Empire. Naming one of her grandsons Constantine, after the first and last emperors reigning from Constantinople, she thought to groom him for a new imperial role in the eastern Mediterranean. Russian claims to Tsarigrad, or the Emperors City, would dominate foreign and military policy through the catastrophe of the Great War of 1914-1918.

1117

Glossary

Chernenko, Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko (1911 1985) was a Soviet politician and General Secretary of the CPSU who led the Soviet Union from February 13, 1984 until his death just thirteen months later. Cherenkov was also Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet from April 11, 1984, until his death. Christ Christ is a title. It is the N.T. equivalent of the O.T. term messiah and means anointed one. It is applied to Jesus as the anointed one who delivers from sin. Jesus alone is the Christ. As the Christ He has three offices: Prophet, Priest, and King. As Prophet He is the mouthpiece of God (Matt. 5:27-28) and represents God to man. As Priest He represents man to God and restores fellowship between them by offering Himself as the sacrifice that removed the sin of those saved. As King He rules over His kingdom. By virtue of Christ creating all things (John 1:3; Col. 1:16-17), He has the right to rule. Christ has come to do the will of the Father (John 6:38), to save sinners (Luke 19:10), to fulfill the O.T (Matt. 5:17), to destroy the works of Satan (Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8), and to give life (John 10:10,28). Christ is holy (Luke 1:35), righteous (Isaiah 53:11), sinless (2 Cor. 5:21), humble (Phil. 2:5-8), and forgiving (Luke 5:20; 7:48; 23:34). Christian The word Christian comes from the Greek word christianos which is derived from the word christos, or Christ, which means anointed one. A Christian, then, is someone who is a follower of Christ. The first use of the word Christian in the Bible is found in Acts 11:26, And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. It is found only twice more in Acts 26:28 and 1 Pet. 4:16. Christology The study of Christ (Jesus) as revealed in the Bible. Some of the issues studied are: 1) His deity, 2) His incarnation, 3) His offices (See Christ), 4) His sacrifice, 5) His resurrection, 6) His teaching, 7) His relation to God and man, and 8) His return to earth. It is also a subject or field of dogmatic theology examining the belief of the church and the history of beliefs about Christ. Church The word is used in two senses: the visible and the invisible church. The visible church consists of all the people that claim to be Christians and go to church. The invisible church is the actual body of Christians; those who are truly saved. The true church of God is not an organization on earth consisting of people and buildings, but is really a supernatural entity comprised of those who are saved by Jesus. It spans the entire time of mans existence on earth as well as all people who are called into it. We become members of the church (body of Christ) by faith (Acts 2:41). We are edified by the Word (Eph. 4:15-16), disciplined by God (Matt. 18:15-17), unified in Christ (Gal. 3:28), and sanctified by the Spirit (Eph. 5:26-27). Clement of Alexandria Titus Flavius Clemens was born in the mid-Second century, probably of pagan Athenian parents. In the latter part of that century, after years of travel and study under a variety of masters, he met Pantnus, the head of the Catechetical School. Clement became an instructor around 190, and eventually became the schools leader. He left Alexandria around 202/203 as a result of the persecution under Severus, and died a few years later (after 211 but before 217) in Asia Minor.

1118

Glossary

Clement was apparently a prolific writer; Eusebius lists ten books he wrote (the Miscellanies (Stromateis), the Outlines, the Address to the Greeks, the Pdagogus, and a series of shorter works). A few other works are mentioned by other writers. Of these, we have most of the Miscellanies (apparently never completed; Clement himself called it not a careful literary composition and notes stored up for my old age), the Address, and the Pdagogus. The latter two were designed to introduce non-Christians to the faith; the former is a collection of philosophical reflections and notes. The text of Clement is diverse; it has readings of all known text-types. Presumably he gathered all these different forms in his wide travels and wide studies. A few of the problems with Clements text may result from his own rather casual style of quotation. Clement of Alexandria should not be confused with Clement of Rome, who wrote 1 Clement and had assorted later works attributed to him. Clement of Rome The name Clement is often associated with the oldest known non-canonical Christian writing, which we call 1 Clement. This anonymous letter was written from Rome to Corinth (then experiencing strong internal dissent) around 95 A.D. , and was for a time held in such high esteem as to be considered canonical. As such it is found in the Codex Alexandrinus. 1 Clement was held to be the work of Clement, the third bishop of Rome (following Linus and Anencletus, and omitting Peter and Paul). This Clement was held, in turn, to be the Clement of Phil. 4:3 (so Eusebius, H. E. iii.15, following Origen. Others suggested the Roman nobleman Titus Flavius Clemens, executed by the Emperor Domitian in 95 on apparent suspicion of Christianity. All of this is, at best, speculation. Eusebius tells us that Clement was Bishop of Rome from the twelfth year of Domitian (about 93) to the third year of Trajan (100/101), crediting him with nine years of service. The importance of 1 Clement lies not so much in its quotations (few of which are important for textual criticism; they are usually allusions at best) as for what it tells us about the canon. It appears to refer to a collection of Pauls letters, and it alludes to both Hebrews (which is in fact a major influence on the letter) and 1 Peter, showing that both were in circulation by its time. Interestingly, 1 Clement shows no particular knowledge of any of the Gospels. Such was the popularity of 1 Clement that a number of later documents, including 2 Clement and the Clementine Homilies, were credited to him. But there can be no doubt that they came from other hands. Compline The services offered after dinner and before bedtime. There are two kinds Great or Grand Compline and Small compline. This service began as a rite observed by monastics in their cells before going to bed. In time it was given a more public expression and developed as we have it today. Cossack A Russian ethnic group drawn from a number of various tribes of Slavic warriors who settled in the Don River area. These military men formed an elite corps of horsemen in czarist Russia. Their tradition of invincibility continues to this day. Cyril of Alexandria Born in the third century of a well-known Alexandrian family, he became Patriarch of Alexandria in 412. His opinions are rather diffuse; much of his thought seems to come from Platonic philosophy, and his arguments are often rather vague, poorly supported, and illogical. Thus he cannot be regarded as a great Christian thinker, though he accomplished much for the church. Although most of his writings are exegetical, he played a vigorous role in the controversies with the Monophysites. He should perhaps be credited with finally vanquishing

1119

Glossary

Apollinarianism. Nestorius accused him of making Jesus imperfectly human, but Cyril, a passionate debater, managed to out-maneuver and out-argue Nestorius at every turn (both Cyril and Nestorius were temporarily deposed in 431, but Cyrils deposition, while passed by a small group of bishops, was confirmed by the authorities simply to keep the peace. He was soon restored, while Nestoriuss punishment proved permanent). Cyril died in 444, and was later canonized. The text of Cyril, as might be expected, is Alexandrian, although an assortment of alien (including Byzantine) readings are found in it. Cyprian Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus was born near the beginning of the third century, probably in Carthage. He was well-educated, with a legal background (it has been speculated that this influenced his immense respect for Tertullian), and taught rhetoric in the 240s. He became a Christian rather late in life, and was not baptised until 246. Soon after (248/9), by popular demand, he became Bishop of Carthage. He fled Carthage during the Decian persecution of 249, and was subjected to condemnation as a result. He nonetheless returned to his bishopric in 251. In the following years the Roman church split into factions under Cornelius (who was willing to forgive those who lapsed during the persecution) and Novatian (who was not). Cyprian argued strongly in favor of Cornelius, and his arguments helped swing Catholic orthodoxy toward Cornelius. When the Valerian persecution arose in 258, Cyprian decided not to flee again. He saw to it that he was arrested in Carthage, and was executed soon after. Cyprians surviving works consist of a large number of letters and ten or so treatises on churchrelated subjects. These include On Exhortation to Martyrdom, On the Lapsed, and On the Unity of the Church. The last is perhaps his most important work; unfortunately, two forms of certain key passages are in circulation. Cyprian derived many of his ideas from Tertullian, whom he called the Master. His text is, not surprisingly, the African Old Latin, and is considered to be very similar to k of the Gospels and h of the epistles. Several pseudonymous works, such as de Montibus Sina et Sion and the Ad Novatianum, eventually circulated under Cyprians name. Perhaps the most important was de Rebaptismate, which led Eusebius to believe that Cyprian called for rebaptising those who fell into heresy, though in fact he held the opposite position. Diachronic [Greek : dia- (across) + chronos (time)] It studies something that happens as it changes itself, its form, or its role across time. This is the long view of something, not a snapshot at a particular time. It is usually called a historic view. Divine Liturgy An Eucharistic Liturgy. It is the Orthodox equivalent to the Roman Catholic Mass or to the Protestant service of Holy Communion. In the Orthodox Church there are four Eucharistic Liturgies used. The most common is the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, the liturgy used on all Sundays except those which fall during the Great Lent, and all holy days on which a eucharistic liturgy is served except for the eves of Pascha, Christmas and Theophany, Holy Thursday, and the feastday of St. Basil the Great (January 1). The Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great, used on the Sundays of Great Lent, Holy Thursday, the Eves of Pascha, Christmas, and Theophany, and the Feast of St. Basil the Great. The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts which is actually an extended Vespers service at which Holy Communion which was consecrated on the previous Sunday is distributed. The Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts is used during weekdays of Great Lent when the full celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy is prohibited. The Liturgy of St. James, is served only in certain places on the feastday of St. James the Brother of the Lord and first Bishop of Jerusalem. Diaspora

1120

Glossary

Dispersion. Biblically, it refers to the dispersion of the Jews outside of Israel from the time of the Babylonian Captivity until now. It has also been applied to the dispersion of Christians after 70 A.D. when Rome sacked Jerusalem and thousands of Christians fled and dispersed throughout the Mediterranean area. Doctrine What the Church of Jesus Christ believes, teaches, and confesses. Doctrine is not the only, not even the primary activity of the church. The church worships God and serves mankind; it works for the transformation of this world and awaits the consummation of its hope on the next. The form which Christian doctrine, so defined, has taken in history is tradition. Like the term doctrine, the word tradition refers simultaneously to the process of communication and to its content. Thus tradition means the handing down of Christian teaching during the course of the history of the church, but it also means that which was handed down. Much tradition was formulated over against heresy. (Pelikan 1) Dogma Basic beliefs and truths contained in the Bible and the Holy Tradition of the Church as defined by the Ecumenical Councils and the Fathers of the Church. Dogma is studied by the field of dogmatic theology. Dogmatics The study of dogmas and the source that they come from done through the discipline and rigor of an orderly system. It is one of the key fields of study for those training to be ordained.

Donatism Donatism was the error taught by Donatus, bishop of Casae Nigrae that the effectiveness of the sacraments depends on the moral character of the minister. In other words, if a minister who was involved in a serious enough sin were to baptize a person, that baptism would be considered invalid. Dionysius of Alexandria Dionysus of Alexandria was born around the turn of the third century, and came to Christianity from paganism and Gnosticism. He studied under Origen, and became director of the Catechetical School when Origens successor Heraclas became bishop. Dionysus succeeded to the episcopate following Heraclass death in 247. From that time on he went in and out of exile as a result of various persecutions. (He took a certain amount of glee in pointing out that, during the Decian persecution, he simply stayed at home while the authorities searched everywhere but there.) Finally he died in 264/5 during the famines that followed the revolt of the Roman governor of Egypt. Dionysus was a prolific writer, and he contributed heavily to the fight against the heresies of Paul of Samosata, Nepos, and Sabellius, as well as weighing in on the topic of rebaptism of heretics and the lapsed. Of this corpus, however, only a few letters have survived, supplemented by some fragments and quotations from Eusebius and others. We know, however, that he did a careful analysis which proved that the author of the Apocalypse was not the author of the Gospel and Letters of John. Ecclesiology

1121

Glossary

The study of the Christian church, its structure, order, practices, and hierarchy. Ecumenical Council (Gr. Synodos; Sl. Sobor) Assembly of representatives from all church jurisdictions convoked for the settlement of ecclesiastical or doctrinal problems and disputes. The Orthodox Church recognizes the following seven Ecumenical Councils: Nicaea, in 325. Fathers present, 318. Condemned Arianism, defined divinity of Christ, and composed first part of Creed. Constantinople, 381. Fathers, 180. Condemned Apollinarianism, defined divinity of Holy Spirit, and completed the Creed. Ephesus, 431. Fathers, 200. Condemned Nestorianism and defined the term Theotokos. Chalcedon, 451. Fathers, 630. Condemned Monophysitism. Constantinople, 553. Fathers, 165. Condemned heretics and pagans. Constantinople, 680. Fathers, 281. Condemned Monothelitism. The so called Quinisext or in Trullo was held in Constantinople Constantinople (Trullo), 692 and regulated disciplinary mattes to complete the Fifth and the Sixth Ecumenical Councils. Nicaea, 787 (again in 843). Fathers, 350. Condemned Iconoclasm.

Eschatology The study of the teachings in the Bible concerning the end times, or of the period of time dealing with the return of Christ and the events that follow. Eschatological subjects include the Resurrection, Resurrection, the Rapture, the Tribulation, the Millennium, the Binding of Satan, the Three witnesses, the Final Judgment, Armageddon, and The New Heavens and the New Earth. In the New Testament, eschatological chapters include Matt. 24, Mark 13, Luke 17, and 2 Thess. 2. In one form or another most of the books of the Bible deal with end-times subjects. But some that are more prominently eschatological are Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Joel, Zechariah, Matthew, Mark, Luke, 2 Thessalonians, and of course Revelation. Eusebius of Caesarea Eusebius of Caesarea (ca. 260340 A.D.) was born in Palestine, was a student of the presbyter Pamphilus whom he loyally supported during Diocletians persecution. He was himself imprisoned in Egypt, but became Bishop of Caesarea about 314. At the Council of Nicaea in 325 he sat by the emperor, led a party of moderates, and made the first draft of the famous creed. Of Eusebius many learned publications we have Martyrs of Palestine and Life of Constantine; several apologetic and polemic works; parts of his commentaries on the Psalms and Isaiah; and the Chronographia, known chiefly in Armenian and Syriac versions of the original Greek. But Eusebius chief fame rests on the History of the Christian Church in ten books published in 324325, the most important ecclesiastical history of ancient times and a great treasury of knowledge about the early Church. Evagrius Ponticus Disciple and teacher of the ascetic life, Evagrius of Pontus (34599) both astutely absorbed and creatively retransmitted the spirituality of Egyptian and Palestinian monasticism of the late fourth century. Migrating from his home in Asia Minor, Evagrius spent some time in Constantinople, where he was ordained a deacon by his spiritual father, Gregory of Nazianzus, in 379. Fleeing from the temptations of an affair, Evagrius migrated to Jerusalem, where he joined the monastery of Melania the Elder and Rufinus. By 383 he had arrived in Egypt, where he met many of the central figures of Egyptian monasticism. In his remaining years, Evagrius practiced rigorous ascesis and wrote extensively about the intersection of the Bible and the

1122

Glossary

struggles of the spiritual life. He drew inspiration from Origen, Neoplatonism, and his experience as a monk and theologian. He was later condemned by the Church, mainly for doctrines that appear in the Kephalaia Gnostica, along with Origen and Didymus the Blind. Yet his writings deeply influenced many subsequent theologians and leaders of monasticism, including Sts. John Cassian, Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, John Climacus, Isaac of Nineveh, and Simeon the New Theologian. The Armenian and Georgian Orthodox Churches commemorate him, but his condemnation still holds in other Orthodox churches and the Roman Catholic Church (Evagriuss inclusion in the most recent edition of Butlers Lives is the result of an editorial error). The condemnation Evagrius was intertwined with that of Origen (ca. 185-ca. 251). Many scholars of the last century have suggested that the kind of Origenism the Church condemned was that of Evagrius. This has helped to rehabilitate Origens stature in modern ecclesiastical circles, but has, in turn, cast a shadow over Evagriuss role. Not all scholars accept that Evagrius can be categorized so easily. His role in the anti-Origenism of the late 390s is important, but nebulous. The Fifteen Anathemas of the 530s or 540swhen anti-Origenism reached a formulation accepted by the sixth and seventh Ecumenical Councilsshow that one of Evagriuss major works, the Kephalaia Gnostica, or an adaptation of it, was used to formulate an Orthodox stance against Origenism. Only in the late 6th and 7th c. does Evagriuss name become attached to the work of the fifth Ecumenical Council, possibly because of hostile trends developing in monasticism. Gentile Those who are not Jews. Gentiles is often used biblically in reference to nations.

Glasnost
Russian term for public discussion of issues and accessibility of information to the public. Devised by Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev to provoke public discussion, challenge government and party bureaucrats, and mobilize support for his policies through the media. Gnosticism The primary form of Christian heresy in the very Early Church was Gnosticism. The term comes from the Greek word gnosis, meaning knowledge. Gnosticism was vigorously refuted by Paul, John and Peter in the New Testament, as well as by many of the Early Church Fathers, including Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Justyn Martyr. General characteristics of Gnosticism include: (1) They believed in salvation through gnosis, or knowledge, not through faith. They often believed that Christ was a revealer of the hidden knowledge necessary for salvation. (2) Gnostics believed in a body of secret instructions given to the apostles by Christ, and would point to New Testament verses such as Mark 4:33-34 or 1 Cor.2: 6-7 as indicators of the existence of such a body of knowledge. (3) Some Gnostics viewed Christ as a great prophet, but not as being divine. (4) Many Gnostics believed in Dualism, or the view that there are two Gods of equal power in the Universe - one evil (who created the world and all material things), and one good (who created all spiritual and heavenly things). The evil God was often associated with the Old Testament God. The battle between the good god and the evil god was often expressed in terms of the battle of the Kingdom of Light vs. Kingdom of Darkness. (5) Some Gnostics believed that the soul (created by the good god) was lured (by the evil god) into the transitory physical body. Hence, the goal of humankind is to escape from the evil physical body and return to the godhead, or become one with the good god. As a result, some Gnostics believed that ones soul could go through multiple iterations in an impure physical body (reincarnation). (5) The Gnostics believed that there was revealed truth to be found in many religions. (6) Since the evil god created everything worldly or material, the Gnostics believed that all material things are evil. Two practices came out of this view. One was an

1123

Glossary

extreme form of asceticism denial of the flesh and the other was antinomianism. Antinomianism basically states that, since the body is inherently evil, but the soul is pure, it doesnt matter what you do with your body (sort of the sex, drugs, and rock and roll view of 1900 years ago). (7) Some Gnostics believed that there were different spiritual levels of human beings. Those on the highest level were guaranteed salvation; those on the lowest level were denied salvation, and everyone in between had to fight for salvation. (8) Some Gnostics believed in Docetism (from Gr. dokesis, or semblance), which viewed that Christ was a pure spirit, not a flesh and blood human being. This view comes out of the dualist viewpoint that matter is created from the evil god, thus a manifestation of the good god could never exist in a carnal, fleshly form. (1 John 4:1-4, 2 John 7 may be refutations). Gorbachev, Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev (born March 2, 1931) was leader of the Soviet Union from 1985 until 1991. His attempts at reform led to the end of the Cold War, but also caused the end of the political supremacy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Gregory of Nazianzus Born around 329/330, his father was Bishop of Nazianzus. In 362 he became a priest. He never actually became Bishop of Nazianzus himself. Rather, he was chosen Bishop of the small town of Sasima at the instigation of his friend Basil the Great. This was part of Basils attempt to place as many orthodox bishops as possible in an area that had slipped from Basils control. Gregory was reluctantand, indeed, the move backfired when Gregory was transferred to Constantinople in 379/380. Bishops at this time were not supposed to change jurisdictions, and the transfer was used as an argument against Gregory. Tired of the controversy, he retired in 381 and turned to writing an autobiography. Despite the controversy,, he was of immense service to the church in a troubled time. Along with Basil of Csarea and Gregory of Nyssa, he was one of the three great Cappadocian Fathers who helped save orthodoxy against Arianism. He died around 390/1. Of his writings we have a series of orations plus some letters and poems. Gregory of Nyssa He was younger brother of Basil the Great of Csarea and an equally staunch defender of orthodoxy. He was appointed bishop of Nyssa by his brother in 371 (he was only about 35 at the time). Later he was moved to Sebaste in Roman Armenia. As well as producing assorted exegetical works, he argued strongly for Nicene orthodoxy against Arianism, doing much of his best work after Basils death. Gregory died in 394. Gregory of Palamas The scion of a noble Anatolian family, St. Gregory was born, probably at Constantinople, c. 1296. After his fathers death, he became a monk, as did several members of his family. He entered a monastery on Mt. Athos and followed the rule of St. Basil. He lived on Athos in solitude for most of the following twenty years. In the 1330s, he began to defend the practice of hesychasm against the attacks of people like Barlaam of Calabria, who denied, among other things, that the light of Tabor which hesychasts experience is the uncreated light. Athough the 1341 council of Constantinople upheld Gregorys teachings about theosis, he was excommunicated in 1344. Three years later, he was consecrated bishop of Thessaloniki. Because hesychasm had come to have political as well as theological associations, the choice was not popular, and he entered his see with the aid of the Byzantine emperor. The Turks captured Gregory in 1354 and kept him captive for a year. He died in 1359. Gregory believed that although God is ultimately unknowable, man can experience his energies through the sacraments and mystical experience, which are possible because of the Incarnation of Christ. The practice of the Jesus prayer opens one to Gods energies.

1124

Glossary

Hesychasm Spiritual movement in the Byzantine Empire (fourteenth century) developed on Mount Athos, Greece. The term means to be quiet and signifies the system of spiritual development through meditation, contemplation, and perfection to the degree of absolute union with God (theosis). It is one of the forms of Orthodox Mysticism and is still practiced in the Orthodox world. Hippolytus A student of Irenus, Hippolytus was probably born around 170 and spent much of his early life in Rome (Origen was among those who heard him speak). In the early third century he openly voiced his disgust with the laxity of the Bishops of the time. This led to a schism in the Roman church in 217, with Hippolytus appointed Pope in opposition to the official candidate Calixtus. He continued to oppose the various Popes until 235, when both Hippolytus and his rival Pontianus were sent to the mines during the Persecution of Maximin. He probably died there, although there is a chance that he lived to return to Rome in 236. In any case, he was buried in 236. His death healed the schism in Rome. A statue of Hippolytus lists his literary works and shows that he was a prolific writer. Relatively little of this survives, however; we have portions of his Refutations of All Heresies in Greek (though some have thought this to be from another author, perhaps named Josephus (not the Jewish historian); Photius credits Hippolytuss On the Universe to Josephus), and various other works such as the Apostolic Tradition in translation. Curiously for a western author, most of his works are preserved in eastern languages (Georgian, Armenian, Old Church Slavonic). Eusebius, though familiar with a number of these works, did not know his history, for he describes him as a prelate like Beryllus, though his see is unknown.

Homoousios
Christ is one in essence (homoousios) with the Father. He is no demigod or superior creature, but God in the same sense that the Father is God: true God from true God, the Council of Nicaea (325) proclaimed in the Creed which it drew up, begotten not made, one in essence with the Father. (Ware 10)

Hypostasis
IN the First Ecumenical Council, the Cappadocian FathersSaints Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390?), Basil the Great (330?-379), and his younger brother, Gregory of Nyssa (died 394)emphasized Gods threeness: Father, son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (hypostasis), but three persons in one essence. Iconoclasm The 8th century was dominated by the controversy over iconoclasm. The two sides in the battle were called iconoclasts (opposed to icons), and iconophiles or iconodules (in favor of icons). The iconoclasts claimed that icons were being worshiped, while the iconodules argued that it was only veneration of icons and a type of salute of the original depicted in the icon. (The actual Greek word for this veneration is proskynesis, and it the same veneration that was given to the Emperor). It involved humble reverence and bowing, but it was not worship. Icons were banned by Emperor Leo III, leading to revolts by iconophiles within the empire. Thanks to the efforts of Empress Irene, the Second Council of Nicaea met in 787 and affirmed that icons could be venerated but not worshipped. Irene also attempted a marriage alliance with Charlemagne, which would have united the two empires, but these plans came to nothing. The iconoclast controversy returned in the early 9th century, but was resolved once more in 843. The grave issue of iconoclasm led to the loss of Rome. In 800, during the reign of Irene, the Frank Charlemagne was crowned emperor of the West at Rome. In addition, these controversies did not help the disintegrating relations with the Roman Catholic Church and the Holy Roman

1125

Glossary

Empire, which were both beginning to gain more power of their own. Golden era rule was reestablished. Ignatius of Antioch St. Ignatius of Antioch (died somewhere between A.D. 98 - A.D. 110 as a martyr in Rome) was the third Bishop or Patriarch of Antioch, after Saint Peter and Evodius, who died around A.D. 68. Eusebius, (Historia Eccl., II.iii.22) records that Ignatius succeeded Euodius. Making his apostolic succession even more immediate, Theodoret (Dial. Immutab., I, iv, 33a) reported that Peter himself appointed Ignatius to the see of Antioch. Ignatius, who also called himself Theophorus (vessel of God), was most likely a disciple of both Apostles Peter and John. Seven of his letters, used by Eusebius, have survived to this day; he is generally considered to be one of the Apostolic Fathers (the earliest authoritative group of the Church Fathers) and a saint by both the Catholic, who celebrate his feast day on February 1, and the Orthodox churches, who celebrate his feast day on December 20. Ignatius based his authority on living his life in imitation of Christ. Intelligentsia This term is used to describe the scientific, literary, artistic and other intellectual members of society. It is of Russian revolutionary origin, separating this group from the middle class (merchants, tradesmen, bankers, lawyers etc.) and the workers and peasants. Irenaeus One of the most important early Fathers, known almost entirely for one work, the Adversus Hreses (Against Heresies). This work describes a number of heretical movements of which we would otherwise have no knowledge, and so provides important historical and textual information about the early church. Born in the early-to-mid second century, probably near Smyrna, Irenus studied under Polycarp, then moved to Lyons, where he was bishop from 177/178. His great work was written around 185 (At least, the third book lists popes up to the reign of Pope Eleutherusi.e. 174189). He probably died late in the second century. Gregory of Tours (who wrote in the sixth century) reports that he succeeded the martyred bishop Photinus, converted the whole city of Lyons to Christianity, and was then martyred himself (the first of many local martyrs; History of the Franks I.29). All of this would inspire more confidence if it had more confirmation, e.g. in evidence that Lyons actually did turn Christian. Sadly for posterity, the Greek original of the Adversus Haereses has perished almost completely. All that endures, apart from fragments (one on a potsherd!) and quotations in authors such as Epiphanius, is a Latin translation, probably from the fourth or perhaps the third century (in Africa?), plus some material in Syriac. (Souter argues, based on the fact that one quotation follows the Lucianic recension of the Septuagint, that the Latin translation must be from the fourth century; however, we now know that Lucianic readings precede sometimes Lucian.) While the translation seems to preserve the outline of Irenuss text fairly well, one may suspect the scriptural quotations of assimilation to the Old Latin (the Greek text, insofar as we have it, often disagrees with the Latin). One other work of Irenaeuss survives, the Apostolic Preaching, preserved in Armenian. Comparison with the Adversus Hreses seems to show two different sorts of text, heightening the suspicion that at least one book has been assimilated to the current local version. Eusebius also quotes from a variety of writings, and mentions letters such as To Blastus, on Schism and To Florinus, on Sole Sovereignty, or God is not the Author of Evil. John Chrysostom

1126

Glossary

He was called golden-mouthed. Born in Antioch to a well-to-do family around 345, he chose a monastic career around 375 (having previously studied rhetoric under Libanius). His father was the pagan Secundus; his mother, Anthousa, a Christian, who widowed early in life, entrusted his education to Libanius, the most famous sophist of the day. So great was the boys devotion to learning that when asked by the pagans whom he would leave as his successor, Libanius answered: John, unless the Christians steal him from us. But John, who had hardly known his father, followed his mothers religion and was baptized, later becoming a presbyter at Antioch, where he delivered sermons for many years. His speech was golden, and his life the life of a saint. His fame spread to the imperial court at the capital, whither the king, Arcadius, enticed him by a ruse, and persuaded him to become Archbishop of Constantinople, to the great joy of the people. But John was not only the protector of the poor and the oppressed; he was a fearless censor of crime and corruption in high places. This roused the enmity of the Empress Eudoxia, whose own conduct was not above reproach, and with the assistance of other sinners she contrived to banish the holy man to the depths of Armenia, where eventually he died in 407, in the midst of snow and ice and every kind of hardship. Glory to God for everything, were his dying words. Chrysostom was the most popular and practical of the great Greek Church orators, and his sermons, which fill eighteen large volumes, may still be read with great profit and enjoyment today. He was not only an excellent psychologist, who probed deeply into the social evils of the world, but a commentator who in his interpretation of Holy Writ followed the literal and sober method which was the distinctive feature of the School of Antioch. His text is generally regarded as Byzantine, and is one of the earliest examples of the type, butlike most early witnesses to the Byzantine texthe often departs from the developed Byzantine text of later centuries, possibly in the direction of the western text. (Adapted from Kallinikos) John of Damascus Born in Damascus after the Islamic conquest, probably around 650. His father served as a treasury official in the Islamic government. (It was common for Christians to hold such posts.) For a time John also served the government, but some time around 695-707 he entered a Jerusalem monastery. Later he became a priest, and turned to writing. His major work for our purposes is a commentary on Paul (which, however, is largely based on Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Cyril of Alexandria). He also wrote concerning the heresies of his time, such as iconoclasm, and about Islam. Justin Martyr Born early in the second century in Palestine, but of a pagan family, he later turned Christian and apologist. He wrote extensively to justify Christianity to pagans (he directed writings to the Emperors Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius, as well as producing the famous Dialogue with Trypho), and is one of the earliest Christian writers whose works survive in large quantities. He alludes to scripture regularly, but rarely with precision; it is rarely possible (especially in the synoptic gospels) to tell what his actual text was, or even which book he is quoting, as he is so given to paraphrase (it is believed he used the Gospel of Matthew most frequently). He was martyred in the reign of Marcus Aurelius around 165. Tatian, who knew Justin, reports that this was at the instigation of the cynic philosopher Crescens, who considered Justin to be showing him up.

Kenosis
This is a teaching concerning Jesus incarnation. The Kenosis attempts to solve some paradoxes between the nature of God and of man as united in Jesus. For example, how could an all knowing God become a baby, or how could God be tempted? The Kenosis maintains that God, when becoming a man, divested Himself of some qualities of being a man. In a sense, the Kenosis is God minus something; God subtracting some qualities of deity to become a man.

1127

Glossary

Kerygma (Gr. message; preaching) Proclaiming or preaching the word of God in the manner of the Apostles. It is a method of church instruction centered mainly on Christ and the concept of salvation.

Khlysty
A sect which teaches that it is permissible to overcome the temptations of the flesh by yielding temporarily to them. (Zernov 150) Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeyevich He was born in 1894, in Kalinovka, Russia and died in 1971, Moscow. He was the leader of the Soviet Union after the death of Joseph Stalin. He was First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1953 to 1964 and Chairman of the Council of Ministers from 1958 to 1964. Kievan Rus Kievan Rus, medieval state of the eastern Slavs. It was the earliest predecessor of modern Ukraine and Russia. Flourishing from the 10th to the 13th cent., it included nearly all of presentday Ukraine and Belarus and part of NW European Russia, extending as far N as Novgorod and Vladimir. According to the Russian Primary Chronicle, a medieval history, the Varangian Rurik established himself at Novgorod c.862 and founded a dynasty. His successor, Oleg or Oleh (d. c.912), shifted his attention to the south, seized Kiev (c.879), and established the new Kievan state. The Varangians were also known as Rus or Rhos; it is possible that this name was early extended to the Slavs of the Kievan state, which became known as Kievan Rus. Other theories trace the name Rus to a Slavic origin. Oleg united the eastern Slavs and freed them from the suzerainty of the Khazars. His successors were Igor (reigned 912-45) and Igors widow, St. Olga, who was regent until about 962. Under Olgas son, Sviatoslav (d. 972), the Khazars were crushed, and Kievan power was extended to the lower Volga and N Caucasus. Christianity was introduced by Vladimir I (reigned 980-1015), who adopted (c.989) Greek Orthodoxy from the Byzantines. The reign (1019-54) of Vladimirs son, Yaroslav the Wise, represented the political and cultural apex of Kievan Rus. After his death the state was divided into principalities ruled by his sons; this soon led to civil strife. A last effort for unity was made by Vladimir II (reigned 1113-25), but the perpetual princely strife and the devastating raids of the nomadic Cumans soon ended the supremacy of Kiev. In the middle of the 12th century a number of local centers of power developed: Halych in the west, Novgorod in the north, Vladimir-Suzdal in the northwest, and Kiev in the south. In 1169, Kiev was sacked and pillaged by the armies of Andrei Bogolubsky of Suzdal, and the final blow to the Kievan state came with the Mongol invasion (1237-40). The economy of the Kievan state was based on agriculture and on extensive trade with Byzantium, Asia, and Scandinavia. Culture, as well as religion, was drawn from Byzantium; Church Savonic was the literary and liturgical language of the state. According to some scholars the history of the Kievan state is the common heritage of modern Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, although their existence as separate peoples has been traced as far back as the 12th cent. Ukrainian scholars consider Kievan Rus to be central to the history of the Ukraine. Law The Law is Gods instructions concerning the moral, social, and spiritual behavior of His people found in the first five books of the Bible. The Law consists of the 10 commandments (Exodus 20), rules for social life (Exodus 21 - 23), and rules for the worship of God (Exodus 25 - 31). Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich

1128

Glossary

Lenin (1870-1924) was the man who established Communism. He was intelligent, singleminded, ruthless, and unscrupulous. The son of a provincial school official; his older brother was executed for plotting to kill the Czar. Educated as a lawyer; an active Marxist from the early 1890s; arrested and exiled to Siberia 1895-1900, after which he went abroad. Published What Is To Be Done? in 1902, calling for an ultra-disciplined socialist party under ultracentralized leadershipwith Lenin in charge, naturally. An attempt to impose this program at a Party Congress in 1903 split the RSDRP into Lenins Bolshevik faction and the opposing Menshevik group; the rift never healed, and the RSDRP was weakened by factional squabbles. Lenin returned to Russia 1905-1907, but failed to play a significant role in the 1905 Revolution, and in the following years he seemed to be feuding himself into oblivion. WWI revived his prospectsthinking that he might be useful, the Germans shipped him back to Russia in Apr.1917; he subsequently systematically undermined the Provisional Government until he was able to seize power in the October Revolution, perhaps the first modern coup. Lenin immediately began creating a harsh revolutionary dictatorship; he was soon facing Civil War and foreign intervention, but responded with brutal determination, and defeated his many enemies piecemeal. After once-loyal Bolsheviks rebelled at Kronstadt in 1921, he partly moderated his extreme policies. Wounded by an SR terrorist in 1918, Lenins health began to decline, and from 1922 he suffered a series of strokes. In his last months he began to issue warnings against Stalin, but was paralyzed before he could take action and died Jan.21.1924. Litany A litany (Lat. litania, letania, from Gr. lite, prayer or supplication) is a well-known and much appreciated form of responsive petition, used in public liturgical services, and in private devotions, for common necessities of the Church, or in calamities to implore Gods aid or to appease His just wrath. This form of prayer finds its model in Psalm 135: Praise the Lord, for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever. Praise ye the God of gods ... the Lord of lords ... Who alone doth great wonders ... Who made the heavens, with the concluding words in each verse, for his mercy endureth for ever. Similar is the canticle of praise by the youths in the fiery furnace (Dan., iii, 57-87), with the response, praise and exalt him above all for ever. In the Mass of the Oriental Church we find several litanies in use even at the present day. Towards the end of the Mass of the catechumens the deacon asks all to pray; he formulates the petitions, and all answer Kyrie Eleison. When the catechumens have departed, the deacon asks the prayers: for the peace and welfare of the world, for the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, for the bishops and priests, for the sick, for those who have gone astray, etc., to each of which petitions the faithful answer Kyrie Eleison, or Grant us, 0 Lord, or We beseech Thee. The litany is concluded by the words, Save us, restore us again, 0 Lord, by Thy mercy. (Litany) Logos The Greek word for word. Mentioned only in the writings of John. John 1:1 says, In the beginning was the Word [logos] and the Word [logos] was with God and the Word [logos] was God. The Logos is sometimes used to refer to the second person of the Trinity as the Son in pre-incarnate form. Jesus is the word [logos] made flesh (John 1:1,14). Marcion In some ways the most important of the Fathers, since his editorial work on Luke and the Pauline Epistles may have given an important impetus to the formation of the New Testament canon. Marcion was born in the late first century in Sinope (on the Black Sea in Pontus). The son of a bishop, and himself apparently a successful businessman, he went to Rome at around 138, but was expelled from the church there in 144. He went on to form a rival church. His death date is unknown. Without going into detail about Marcions theology, we should note that he separated the Gods

1129

Glossary

of the Old and New Testaments. This may have led him to downplay the Old Testament allusions from his New Testament (which consisted only of Luke and the ten Pauline Epistles to churches); it is often claimed that he removed these references. However, in 1 Corinthians we have evidence that he retained at least nine of eleven Old Testament citations. Marcions writings and his Bible text have not survived; we know them only from citations by authors such as Tertullian and Epiphanius. This, combined with the fact that Marcion rewrote the documents he studied, makes it difficult to recover his underlying text. (Nor are we helped by the fact that our best evidence about him comes from Tertullian, who was quite capable of rewriting his sources). Marcionism Marcionism is a sect founded in A.D. 144 at Rome by Marcion of Sinope. It continued in the West for 300 years and in the East some centuries longer, especially outside the Byzantine Empire. After the Roman-Jewish Wars of 66-73, 115-117 and 132-135 anything Jewish was very unpopular in Rome. Into this context stepped Marcion. The premise of Marcionism is that many of the teachings of Jesus are incompatible with the Old Testament. Marcion, according to Tertullian and Epiphanius, using Luke 6:43-45 (a good tree does not produce bad fruit) and Luke 5:36-38 (nobody tears a piece from a new garment to patch an old garment or puts new wine in old wineskins), set about to recover what he considered the authentic teachings of Jesus. The result was probably the first Christian Bible Canon outside of the Septuagint and it consisted of parts of Luke and the Letters of Paul and Marcions Antithesis which contrasted the teachings of Jesus with the teachings of the Old Testament. Because of the rejection of the Old Testament which originates in the Jewish Bible, the Marcionites are believed by some Christians to be anti-Semitic. Indeed, the word Marcionism is sometimes used in modern times to refer to anti-Jewish tendencies in Christian churches, especially when such tendencies are thought to be surviving residues of ancient Marcionism. For example, on its web site, the Tawahedo Church of Ethiopia claims to be the only Christian church that is fully free of Marcionism. The Marcionites also taught that the tetragrammaton did not represent an all-encompassing God, but rather the Hebrew perception of God which was either imperfect, or reflective of an entirely separate deity. According to the Marcionites, Christ was not the Son of this god, but was sent by Elohim, the name they gave to an all-encompassing and omni-benevolent God. The Marcionites associated the tetragrammaton with the demiurge. In distinguishing this deity from an omnibenevolent God, they took a dualistic stance shared by many religions of the Middle East, including the faith which grew to absorb Marcionism: Manichaeism. Chiefly for these reasons, the Roman Catholic Church and other orthodox churches consider Marcionism to be a heresy. Marcionism is undergoing a revival, as part of the larger Gnostic revival inspired by the discovery of the texts at Nag Hammadi and popular works by authors such as Elaine Pagels and Dan Brown. Marx, Karl German philosopher (1818-1883) author of Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital; predicted the overthrow of existing political and economic institutions. Matins The Liturgy of Morning Prayers of the Church. Matins consists of a: the Six Psalms, b: The Great Litany and the verses on God is the Lord with the troparion for the day, c: the kathisma readings, d: Psalm 50/1 e: the Canon (a type of hymnography in which Biblical Odes are augmented by hymnography appropriate to a particular occasion not to be confused with the prayer of consecration of the Roman Catholic Mass) f: Lauds or Psalms of Praise with appropriate verses, g: the Doxology h: Conclusion. As with Vespers, there are various litanies and other prayers and blessings interspersed according to the observance of the day.

1130

Glossary

Messiah Messiah is a Hebrew word. It means anointed one. It is the equivalent of the N.T. word Christ which also means anointed. Jesus, as the messiah, was anointed by God (Matt. 3:16) to carry out His three-fold ministry of Prophet, Priest, and King. As the messiah He has delivered the Christian from the bonds of sin and given to him eternal life. In that sense, messiah means deliverer, for He has delivered us. The Messiah was promised in the O.T. in the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15). Messalianism It is heresy that originated in Mesopotamia in A.D. 360. The Messalians denied that the Sacraments give grace and declared that the only spiritual power is prayer leading to possession by the Holy Ghost. Such possession eventually led to immorality, from which they were also called The Filthy. They were condemned by various bishops and councils of the Church. Middle Platonism The Platonism from the first century B.C. to the second century A.D. is called Middle Platonism. It ends with Plotinus (204-70 A.D.), who is considered the founder of Neoplatonism. Middle Platonism had been prepared for in the move from skepticism to eclecticism by Antiochus of Ascalon (ca. 130-68 B.C.). At this time, when the Academy was moving toward Stoicism, the Stoa was becoming more Platonic. The first century B.C. saw a revival in the study of Plato and Aristotle, who returned to a position of predominance they have not lost since. The idea of the soul as distinguished from the body reappeared and became the basis of patristic and medieval philosophy. The thinkers included among the Middle Platonists Plutarch, Apuleius, Maximus of Tyre, and Albinusprovide the bridge to Neoplatonism, the dominant philosophy at the end of paganism. Middle Platonism provided the intellectual background for the work of the Christian apologists of the second centuryJustin Martyr, Tatian, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria. Even in the New Testament Platonism has been seen reflected in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Middle Platonism was Platonism influenced by Stoic ethics, Aristotelian logic, and Neopythagorean metaphysics and religion. The Middle Platonists started with the idea that it might be possible to reconcile Platos and Aristotles views about the universe and divine things. Albinus, for instance, identified Aristotles Supreme Mind (the Unmoved Mover) with Platos Good (which became the first principle of the world of forms). The Platonic ideas or forms became the thoughts within the divine mind. Philo of Alexandria is the first extant author explicitly to give this formulation: the ideas are the thoughts in the mind of the Supreme God of Judaism. In view of Philos general lack of philosophical originality and incorporation of existing philosophical commonplaces it is conjectured that this reconciliation of Plato and Aristotle may go back to Antiochus. The Middle Platonists exalted the absolute transcendence of the Supreme Mind (God). This is the head of a hierarchy of being reached only through intermediary powers. The universe is animated by a World Soul. Direct knowledge of the transcendent Mind is impossible, but a negative theology gives an indirect knowledge of God (Adapted from Middle Platonism: General Characteristics)

Mir: The peasant commune

Modalism The error that there is only one person in the Godhead who manifests himself in three forms or manners: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Monarchianism Heretics of the second and third centuries. The word, Monarchiani, was first used by Tertullian

1131

Glossary

as a nickname for the Patripassian group (Adv. Prax. x), and was seldom used by the ancients. In modern times it has been extended to an earlier group of heretics, who are distinguished as Dynamistic, or Adoptionist, Monarchians from the Modalist Monarchians, or Patripassians [Sabellians]. Monarchianism, or Monarchism as it is sometimes called, is a belief that was held by some in the early time of Christianity and centers around God as one person, that God is the single and only ruler. This has been regarded has heretical by mainstream Christianity and was explicitly codified as such since the late 2nd century. The problem with reconciling such a belief with the orthodoxy of the Church was that the Catholic interpretation of God as the Trinity, while it places the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as co-eternal, equal beings, does not go so far as to say that all three are the same person, which is the principal tenet of the flavor of Monarchism known as Modalism, which states that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are exactly one and the same as the Father (in different modes). Thus, Monarchianism in-and-of itself does not represent a complete theory of the relation of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit so much as a simple tenet that requires further extension. Monoenergism A schismatic Christian doctrine related to Monophysitism. In the 7th century, Byzantine emperor Heraclius attempted to solve the schism created by the Monophysites and Chalcedonians, and suggested the compromise of Monoenergism. This compromise adopted the Chalcedonian belief that Christ had two natures, combined with the Monophysite view that Christ had one will. The definition of the term will was left deliberately vague. Monoenergism was accepted by the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, as well as by the Armenians, though not by the Patriarch of Jerusalem or Pope Honorius I. The lack of support from the Pope led Heraclius to abandon the belief in 638. Instead he declared the doctrine of Monothelitism, though this did not solve the schism either. Monism The view that there is only one basic and fundamental reality, that all existence is this one reality even though we perceive different aspects of this reality. Monomakh, Vladimir Vladimir II (Vladimir Monomakh) or (10531125), grand duke of Kiev (111325); son of Vsevolod I, prince of Pereyaslavl and grand duke of Kiev (ruled 107893). On his fathers death he became prince of Pereyaslavl, but supported his cousin Sviatopolk for grand duke of Kiev in order to avoid warfare among the princes of Russia. Vladimir gained popularity as a result of his successful campaigns (1103 and 1111) against the Cumans, nomadic invaders who were a constant threat to Russian lands. When Sviatopolk died Vladimir succeeded him. Under his reign the state flourished and grew in power. He enacted social legislation, extended colonization in the northeastern forests, and built new towns. Monophysitism This is an error regarding the two natures of Jesus. It states that Jesus two natures are combined into one new one; the problem here is that neither God nor man was represented in Christ but a new third thing. (Other errors regarding the two natures of Christ are Nestorianism and Eutychianism.) Monotheletism or Monothelitism 7th-century opinion condemned as heretical by the Third Council of Constantinople in 680. This doctrine, by declaring that Christ operated with but one will, although he had two natures, opposed the intent of the Council of Chalcedon. Monotheletism [Greek, one will] was first proposed in 622 and was immediately adopted by Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, for political reasons, as a compromise between Monophysitism and orthodoxy. The eastern hierarchy, while

1132

Glossary

doubtful of the dogma, tended to support Heraclius. In 631, Cyrus of Phasis, patriarch of Alexandria, promulgated a Monothelite thesis, which was opposed by Sophronius, a Palestinian monk (later patriarch of Jerusalem). At Sophroniuss behest, Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople, wrote to Pope Honorius I for advice. The pope replied with a letter that apparently supported the doctrine of one will but forbade further discussion of the question. Soon afterward (638) Heraclius published the Ecthesis, which defined Monotheletism as the official imperial form of Christianity. When the Ecthesis arrived in Rome, Pope Severinus, Honorius successor, immediately condemned it, ex cathedra. Heraclius, before he died, disclaimed the Ecthesis and attributed it to Sergius. Heraclius successors, Constantine III and Constans II, however, continued to enforce the heresy. Popes John IV and Theodore I anathematized Monotheletism, but they could do little in face of imperial support of it. Constans II withdrew the Ecthesis and promulgated instead the Typus, a decree flatly forbidding the mention of one will or two wills or one energy or two energies in the Second Person. The Typus was favorable to the Monophysitism established in the empire but would have silenced the orthodox. Intended to make peace, it brought the controversy to a crisis. In 649, Pope St. Martin I convened a Lateran Council to condemn Monotheletism and was subsequently seized by the emperor, imprisoned, and exiled. St. Maximus was the most vigorous opponent of Monotheletism. The accession of Constantine IV to the imperial throne brought toleration for the Catholics. After the Council at Constantinople in 680, Monotheletism died out except among the Maronites in Syria. There was a brief revival of imperial Monotheletism from 711 to 713. The last of the Christological controversies, the Monotheletism question enhanced the prestige of the papacy, which took the lead in opposing official imperial heresy. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact It is also known as the Hitler-Stalin pact or Ribbentrop-Molotov pact or Nazi-Soviet pact and formally known as the Treaty of Nonaggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It was in theory a non-aggression treaty between the German Third Reich and the Soviet Union. It was signed in Moscow on August 23, 1939, by the Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov and the German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop. The mutual non-aggression treaty lasted until Operation Barbarossa of June 22, 1941, when Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Although officially labelled a non-aggression treaty, the pact included a secret protocol, in which the independent countries of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania were divided into spheres of interest of the parties. The secret protocol explicitly assumed territorial and political rearrangements in the areas of these countries, which practically rendered it into an aggressive military alliance, in spite of its official name. Subsequently all the mentioned countries were invaded by the Soviets, the Nazis, or both. Only Finland, which fought twice against the Soviet Union in WWII, successfully resisted conquest, but was forced to concede territory. Montanism Montanism: a heresy that claimed the Holy Ghost superseded the revelation of Christ and was supplementing the revelation of Christ, such that they were acting under a new outpouring of the Spirit. Pope St. Zephyrinus (199-217) denied them communion with the Church. Note that this same heresy is prevalent in the Church of the New Order, when it proposes that the Deposit of Faith, as revealed by Our Lord Jesus Christ, can be updated or modernized or even replaced by some kind of spirit of the times. Montanism was an early Christian sectarian movement of the mid-2nd century A.D., named after its founder Montanus. Although the mainstream Christian church prevailed against Montanism within a few generations, this sect persisted in some isolated places into the eighth century. Some people have drawn parallels between Montanism and Pentecostalism (which

1133

Glossary

some call Neo-Montanism). The most widely known Montanist was undoubtedly Tertullian, who is sometimes called the Father of the Latin Church. Nestorianism Nestorianim took its name of Nestorius, a monk of Antioch who had studied under Theodore of Mopsuestia. In 428 he was appointed bishop of Constantinople by Theodosius II, but aroused considerable hostility when he publicly supported the preaching of his chaplain that Mary could not be referred to as the Theotokosthe God-Bearer. Demonstration in the city followed, and the emperor was persuaded to summon the third ecumenical council after Cyril, bishop of Alexandria (which saw itself as a rival to Constantinople), appealed to Rome, and the Roman Pope Celestine condemned Nestorius. The Nestorians developed a theology in which the divine and human aspects of Christ were seen not as unified in a single person, but operated in conjunction and they referred to the Virgin as ChristotokosCrist-bearerto avoid attributing the Divinity with too human a nature. The Nestorians were accused, unfairly, of teaching two persons in Christ, God and Man, and thus two distinct sons, human and divine. This position was condemned in 431 (council of Ephesus), and proceeded to secede, formally establishing a separate Church at their own council oat Seleucia-Ctesiphon in Persia in 486, whence it established a firm foothold in Persia and was spread across northern India and Central Asia as far a China during the following centuries, where it survives today particularly northern Iraq as the Assyrian Orthdox Church. (Haldon 21) Nevsky, Alexander Alexander Nevsky (1220-63), Russian national hero and saint. The son of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, grand prince of the medieval Russian state of Vladimir, Alexander was elected prince of the state of Novgorod in 1236. In 1240 he won a victory over the Swedes on the Neva River near present Saint Petersburg, thus acquiring his surname, Nevsky (of the Neva). The following year, he led the army of Novgorod against the Teutonic Knights, driving them from Russian soil and defeating them in a battle at Lake Peipus, Estonia, in April 1242. Later generations viewed this victory as having saved Russia from western domination. When the Mongols invaded Russia from the east, Alexander collaborated with them, acting as mediator between his people and the Mongol Golden Horde. In 1246 the Mongols made him grand prince of Kyiv, and in 1251 they installed him as prince of Vladimir, replacing his brother Andrei. As ruler of Vladimir, Kyyiv, and Novgorod, he did much to unify the principalities of northern Russia. Alexander is recognized as a saint by the Russian Orthodox church; his feast day is September 12. Nikon Patriarch of Moscow (1652-1658; d. 1681). He was of peasant origin, born in the district of Nishni-Novgorod in 1605, and in early life was known as Nikita. In 1652 the Patriarch of Moscow died and Nikon was appointed his successor. As head of the Church of Russia Nikon set about many important reforms, especially the reform of the service books. This led the Church into a fatal crisis. Nominalism It is an erroneous modern philosophy teaching that there are no absolutes, only the senses and feelings. This philosophy led to the denial of several doctrines of the Church (the divinity of Christ, the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the Saints). Oikoumene: One universal Christian society. Origen

1134

Glossary

Born of a Christian family in 184/5, his father Leonidas died in the persecution in the tenth year of Severus (202); Eusebius tells us that Origen wanted to be martyred at the same time but was prevented by his mother, who hid all his clothing to keep him from going out). Even at this early age the formidably able Origen was already able to support his mother and siblings by teaching rhetoric. About a year later Bishop Demetrius appointed him to direct the Alexandrian Catechetical School, succeeding Clement of Alexandria. Soon after this, if Eusebius is to be believed, he neutered himself to fulfill Jesus comment about those who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Ecc. Hist. vi. 8; the story of Origen occupies a large portion of this book of Eusebiuss history. Origen left Alexandria during Caracallas 215 persecutions, and spent a few years in Csarea before Demetrius called him back to Egypt and chastised him for preaching without being ordained. In 230/1 he was ordained a presbyter while on a journey. Demetrius felt that Origen was flouting his authority and managed to have Origen barred from teaching in Alexandria. He left Alexandria for Csarea, where he spent the rest of his life. He suffered during the Decian persecution, and this may have hastened his death, which took place in the reign of Decius (so Eusebius) or soon after (so most moderns). Although Origens views were later to be condemned (he believed, e.g., in the pre-existence of souls), his scholarship during his lifetime was unquestioned. He had trouble with the church hierarchy, but this seems to have been due to jealousy rather than doctrinal reasons. Origen was fortunate enough to have a wealthy patron, Ambrose (not the father of that name, but an Alexandrian whom Origen had converted to his way of thinking), who allowed him to devote his life to writing and scholarship. (Epiphanius reports that his writings totaled six thousand volumesi.e. presumably scrollsalthough Rufinus, probably correctly, calls this absurd. Jerome gives a list describing 177 volumes on the Old Testament and 114 on the New. Fewer than 10% of these survive in Greek, and the Latin tradition is only slightly fuller.) He died in 232. St. PACHOMIUS St. Pachomius (293?346) was a Christian ascetic and founder of cenobitic monasticism. Information about Pachomius has been much confused in the many legends and biographies preserved in various versions and translations. Born of pagan parents in Upper Egypt, Pachomius encountered Christianity for the first time in the city of Latopolis (Copt., Esnen; modern-day Isna) while serving in the military. There he was impressed with the seemingly virtuous life of local Christians and by the love they showed for all people. After his conscription ended, Pachomius returned to his village, Chinoboskeia (Copt., Schneset), and was baptized. Because of his great love for God, he decided to become a monk and was placed under the spiritual guidance of the ascetic Palemon. In Egypt at the time the eremitic life as established by Antony of Egypt was dominant. After receiving divine exhortation, Pachomius decided to organize a monastic community. In an abandoned village on the east bank of the Nile, near Dendera, Pachomius established a monastery surrounded by a wall and named it Tabennis (c. 318). The small number of ascetics there soon increased greatly, creating a need for other monasteries. Under his direction, nine monasteries for men and two for women were established. In order to administer the newly established monasteries more effectively, Pachomius moved the center from Tabennis to Pebu, where he was installed as general leader, or hegumen (Gr., hgoumenos). His sister Mary became the first hegumen in one of the womens monasteries. A wealthy monk, Petronius, gave financial support to Pachomius to retain control of his institutions during a general meeting of the monks in Pebu at Easter. Pachomius died on May 9, 346, in an epidemic that took the lives of about a hundred monks (Pachomius Religion Biography) Paissy Velichkovsky

1135

Glossary

A young Russian at the theological academy of Kiev, Paissy Velichkovsky (1722-1794), horrified by the secular tone of the teaching, fled to Mount Athos and there became a monk. In 1763 he went to Romania and became Abbot of the monastery of Niamets, which he made a great spiritual center, gathering round him more than 500 brethren. Under his guidance, the community devoted itself specially to the work of translating Greek Fathers into Slavonic. At Athos Paissy had learnt at first hand about the Hesychast tradition, and he was in close sympathy with his contemporary Nicodemus. He also made a Slavonic translation of the Philokalia, which was published at Moscow in 1793. Paissy laid great emphasis upon the practice of continual prayerabove all the Jesus Prayerand on the need for obedience to an elder or starets. His monastic movement, while outward-looking and concerned to serve the world, also restored to the center of the Churchs life the tradition of the Non-Possessors, largely suppressed since the sixteenth century. It was marked in particular by a high development of the practice of spiritual direction. (Adapted from Ware 117)

Parousia
A Greek term that means arrival or coming. The term is often referred to as the time of Christs return; hence, the Parousia, i.e., 2 Thess. 2:1. Patristic Literature Patristic literature refers to the writings of the Fathers of the Christian church (the Greek word patristikos means relating to the fathers) between the latter part of the 1st century A.D. and the middle of the 8th century. It can therefore be distinguished from New Testament theology at one end and from medieval scholasticism and Byzantine systematization at the other. It reflects the philosophical and religious thought of the Hellenistic and Roman world from which it derived the bulk of its concepts and vocabulary. The themes of this vast literature are manifold, but the theological reflection of the Fathers focused for the most part on questions of Christology and the Trinity. Although writers of the East and West had much in common, perceptible shades of difference can be found in their theologies. A scientific theology developed in the East and was marked by a blend of biblical theology and Platonic idealism (especially in Alexandria) or Aristotelian realism (especially in Antioch). In the West, Christian writers generally depended on the Greek theological tradition, which they often clarified in definitions or interpreted in juridical categories, until the emergence in the late 4th century of a sophisticated Latin theology. Patristic literature falls into three main periods. The anti-Nicene period (before A.D. 325) includes the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, the apologetic and antiheretical literature, and the beginnings of speculative Greek theology. The major figures of this period include Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Origen, and Tertullian. The period between the councils of Nicaea (325) and Chalcedon (451) was the golden age of the Nicene fathers (including Eusebius of Caesarea, the first major church historian), the Alexandrians (most notably Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria), the Cappadocians (Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa), and the Antiochenes (John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia). This was also the period of the great Latin fathers: Hilary of Poitiers, Ambrose, Jerome, and, above all, Augustine. The final period of patristic literature ends with Gregory I (the Great) in the West and John Damascene in the East. Pelagianism The teaching of a monk named Pelagius in the fifth Century. He taught that mans will was and still is free to choose good or evil and there is no inherited sin (through Adam). Every infant born into the world is in the same condition as Adam before the fall and becomes a sinner because he sins. This is opposed to the Biblical teaching that we are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3) and that we sin because we are sinners. Pelagius said we are able to keep the commandments of God because God has given us the ability. Therefore, there is no need of

1136

Glossary

redemption and the crucifixion of Jesus is merely a supreme example of love, humility, obedience, and sacrifice. This heresy has its relatives in the form of the cults that deny the total dependence upon God and maintain that salvation is obtainable through our own efforts. Philo of Alexandria Philo (20 BCE - 40 CE) was a Hellenized Jewish philosopher born in Alexandria, Egypt. The few biographical details concerning him are found in his own works, especially in Legatio ad Caium, (embassy to Caius) and in Josephus (Antiquities xviii. 8, 1; comp. ib. xix. 5, 1; xx. 5, 2). The only event that can be determined chronologically is his participation in the embassy which the Alexandrian Jews sent to the emperor Caligula at Rome for the purpose of asking protection against the attacks of the Alexandrian Greeks. This occurred in the year 40 CE. Philo included in his philosophy both Greek wisdom and Judaism, which he sought to fuse and harmonize by means of the art of allegory that he had learned as much from Jewish exegesis as from the Stoics. His work was not widely accepted. The sophists of literalness, as he calls them (De Somniis, i. 16-17), opened their eyes superciliously when he explained to them the marvels of his exegesis. Philos works were enthusiastically received by the early Christians, some of whom saw in him a Christian. Eusebius speculated that the Therapeutae, the Jewish group of ascetic hermits in the Egyptian desert that Philo describes in De vita contemplativa (Contemplative Life) was in fact a Christian group. Pobedonostsev, Konstantin Arch-reactionary Czarist official. Born 1827, died 1907. Law professor; Pan-Slav nationalist; tutored the future Alexander III; Procurator of the Holy Synod, 1880-1905. For a generation, he was one of the most influential advisers on Russian domestic policy, consistently upholding full Czarist autocracy and opposing all liberal reform. He was finally ousted by Witte shortly after the October Manifesto ended autocracy in 1905. Polycarp of Smyrna Bishop of Smyrna. Born in the third quarter of the first century, he learned directly from apostles and others who knew Jesus. He in turn tutored Irenaeus. He was martyred in 155 or 156 (so many moderns) or 167 or 168 (so, e.g., Eusebius, who dates the event to the reign of Marcus Aurelius) or perhaps even later (one manuscript states that Irenus had a vision of his death while in Romei.e. 177but if this were true, it would seem likely that Irenus would have mentioned it). He is said to have been in his eighties, and certainly he must have been very old. Only fragments of his writings (notably a letter to the Philippians, though this is now believed to be composite, with the final tow chapters coming perhaps from the time of Ignatius and the rest being later) have been preserved, but he was held in such high respect that it is likely that he influenced other writersnotably, of course, Irenus. We do have a description of his martyrdom; while it lacks the extravagance of some such stories, it still seems somewhat exaggerated. Possessors/Non-possessors Controversy in the medieval Russian Orthodox Church over those who advocate a close union between the powerful ruler and rich, strong church (possessors) and those who thought the church should concern itself with contemplation and spiritual perfection with little interruption from the state (non-possessors). Prokopovich, Feofan He was born in Kiev and studied at the Kiev Academy, Polish schools, and the College of St. Athanasius in Rome where, instead of succumbing to Catholic theology he developed a lasting hatred of Catholicism and fell under a Protestant orientation. While prefect of the Kiev Academy he impressed Peter on several occasions with sermons glorifying the tsar for his

1137

Glossary

victory at Poltava. Thereupon he was brought to St. Petersburg as first bishop of Pskov and then archbishop of Novgorod. (Ways of Russian Theology) Putin, Vladimir He was born in Leningrad, Russia (now St. Petersburg), in 1952. He is best known As: President of the Russian Federation, 2000. As the hand-picked successor of Boris Yeltsin, Vladimir Putin was elected president of the Russian Federation in 2000. After earning a law degree in 1975, Putin joined the KGB, the security force of the former Soviet Union. He spent years working primarily in East Germany, then left the service in 1991 and became active in the politics of St. Petersburg (formerly Leningrad). He was brought to Moscow by Yeltsin in 1996 and served as an administrator in the Kremlin and an official for the security organizations which replaced the KGB. In 1999 Putin became Yeltsins fifth prime minister in 17 months, and then became acting president when Yeltsin left office. He was officially elected to the office in 2000 and then re-elected in a landslide vote in March of 2004. Rasputin, Grigori Rasputin (1860s?-1916) was bizarre, dissolute religious con-man whose close ties to the Imperial family allowed him to become a major political player, with tragic consequences. A Siberian peasant, he was a wild youth; after a religious conversion he became an itinerant holy man, evidently influenced by the sexually-charged khlyst heresy. He arrived in St. Petersburg in 1903; his down-home religious style and powerful personality made a strong impression and he soon began to penetrate high society - literally so, for he enjoyed sexually humiliating his upper-class followers. From about 1906 he developed a close, but non-sexual, rapport with the Imperial family, presenting himself as a pious man-of-the-people and successfully faith-healing the ailing Czarevitch. When objections arose to his growing influence, he protected his position by increasingly interfering in state affairs, developing a taste for power and becoming a major political influence by 1911. This odd situation did much to destroy any remnants of respect for the crown. After the Czar left to take direct command of the army in 1915 during WWI, Rasputin virtually ruled Russia through the Czarina, installing incompetent and corrupt favorites in key positions. On Dec.29/30.1916, he was murdered by a group of well-connected conservatives; the Russian monarchy fell a few weeks later. Romanov Russian dynasty Ruled Russia for 304 years, from the accession of Michael Romanov in 1613 to the abdication of Michael, the brother of Nicholas II, in 1917. Rus: Ancient people who gave their name to the land of Russia. Sergius of Radonezh Born Barfolomei Kirillovich in 1314, St. Sergius of Radonezh came from a once-wealthy family and lived with his parents until their deaths in 1334. He was tonsured a monk three years later and was ordained a priest. In 1340, he established the monastery of the Holy Trinity, one of forty which he founded. He created several monastery schools and taught farmers better methods of farming. He refused the patriarchate of Moscow in 1378. Two years later, he urged Prince/St. Dimitri Donskoi to fight the Tatars, whom Donskoi defeated at Kulikovo. Sergius died in 1392. Serfdom Serfdom refers to legal and economic status of peasants under feudalism economic system, specifically in the manorialism (also known as seigneurialism) system. A serf is a laborer who is bound to the land, and form the lowest social class of the feudal society. Serfs differ from slaves

1138

Glossary

in that serfs are not property themselves and cannot be sold apart from the land which they work.

Skete
A type of monastery in Russia. A skete is a small cottage where two or three monks lived together. Nilus, the originator of this dwelling place for monks, believed a skete to be more conducive for prayer and spiritual growth that either a large, cenobitic monastery. (Pospielovsky, The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia 58) Slav A member of an ethnic group that originated in central Asia and later moved into Russia and eastern Europe. Slavophilism It was an ideological movement that arose in the 1840s in Russia. At that time there were intense controversies raging concerning the meaning of Russias history, sparked by Chaadaevs First Philosophical Letter published in the journal Teleskop in 1836. In many ways the focal point of these debates was precisely Peters reforms. The Slavophiles, believing in the uniqueness of the Russian spirit, which they defined in terms of Slavic nationality and Orthodox Christianity, rejected Peters attempt to bring Russia on the path of western European history and saw the present evils in Russia as the result of a westernized aristocracy and government spiritually and culturally divorced from the huge masses of the Russian people. (Florovsky, Ways of Russian Theology) Soviet: Local revolutionary council. Soviets Impromptu working-class governing bodies that appeared in 1905. Soviets first appeared as strike committees; by the time of the October general strike they were challenging the local governments in St. Petersburg and other cities. The Czarist regime crushed them as soon as it was able to, by early 1906. Soviets reappeared in 1917, when the Bolsheviks made use of them to gain power. Stalin, Josif Brutal Soviet dictator. Born 1879, died 1953. Sociopathic, manipulative, vengeful, ambitious but a gifted administrator with excellent political skills. His early life is obscure - Georgian; poor background; seminary education; active in revolutionary politics from about 1899 as an underground organizer for the Bolsheviks in the Transcaucasus; frequently arrested, often escaped. He was a minor figure before 1917, but played an active role in the October Revolution and in the Civil War. Commissar for Nationalities to 1922; General Secretary of the Communist Party thereafter. He outmaneuvered his more prominent rivals in the factional struggles of the 1920s, and secured dominance over the Soviet regime by 1929. He then suddenly switched from a pragmatic to an extreme approach, horrifically collectivizing agriculture and establishing a tightly controlled command economy. From 1934-1938 he instigated the Great Purge, exterminating most of the Old Bolsheviks, a great many Soviet military and naval officers, and millions of other citizens, while making his own power absolute and promoting an extreme cult of personality. His leadership in WWII was sometimes inept and often brutal, but ultimately effective. After the war, he clamped down harder than ever and seemed to be preparing a new purge when he died suddenly in 1953.

Staret
A religious adviser (not necessarily a priest) in the eastern Orthodox Church.

1139

Glossary

St. Petersburg Named the Window on the West, became the capital of Russia during reign of Peter the Great. It remained the capital until 1918. It was renamed Petrograd in 1914 and Leningrad in 1924. Symeon the Theologian St. Symeon was born in Galatia in Paphlagonia (Asia Minor) in 949 A.D.. His parents, Basal and Theophana, were Byzantine provincial nobles. St. Symeon received only the basics of a primary Greek school education until he was about eleven years old. He finished his secondary education at the age of 14 in the court of the two brother emperors Basil and Constantine Porphyrogenetes. At 14, he met St. Symeon the Studite, who became his spiritual father and who led him into the life of asceticism and prayer. Although he wanted to enter the famous monastery of the Stoudion at the age of 14, his spiritual father had him wait until he turned 27. During this period of preparation, St. Symeons elder continued to counsel and guide him, preparing him gradually for the monastic life even in the midst of worldly cares. St. Symeon occupied himself with the management of a patricians household and possibly entered the service of his emperor as a diplomat and a senator. While busy in the world he also strove to live a monks life in the evenings, spending his time in night vigils and reading the spiritual works of Mark the Hermit and Diadochus of Photike. One of his elders advice was, if you desire to have always a soul-saving guidance, pay heed to your conscience and without fail do what it will instill in you. (St. Symeon the New Theologian) Synchronic [Greek : syn- (together) + chronos (time)]. Studying things that happen in the way they exist at one specific moment. This is the immediate-term (the now) view of one or more happenings as they happen at one time, a snapshot view, without reference to what happened before or after. The Hours Offices or services which mark the various principal hours of the day. The First Hour is about 6:00 a.m., or early morning just after sunrise, the Third Hour is about 9:00 a.m., or midmorning. The Sixth Hour is about noon or midday, the Ninth Hour is about 3:00 p.m. or midafternoon. While the original intent of these services was to mark the passage of the day, it is now usual for them to be combined or aggregated with other services so that there is a block of services served together in the morning and another block of services served together in the evening. The Midnight Office The office or service which begins during the middle of the night i.e. anytime well after sundown and well before daybreak. In ordinary parishes, practically the only time the midnight office is served is at the Paschal services. Theophany [Greek theophaneia; theo- (God) + phaneia (to show oneself, appear]. It means the visible appearance of god to a human being. For example, the Creator appeared to Adam and Eve in visible form in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3:8). Tertullian Quintus Septimus Florens Tertullianus was born shortly after the middle of the second century to a pagan family in Carthage (his father was a Roman centurion). Early in life he practiced law in Rome, returning to his native city as a Christian shortly before the turn of the third century. His wit and sprightly tongue made him a gifted controversialist, and he wrote extensively

1140

Glossary

against the various enemies of the church. Butlike many convertsthe staid life of the official church was not sufficient for him. He wanted a return to prophecy. After some years of trying and failing to restore the spiritual nature of the Catholic Church, he became a Montanist (c. 207. Jerome reports on this explicitly: Remaining a presbyter of the church until... middle age, ...Tertullian was, by the envy and false treatment of the Roman clergy, driven to embrace the opinions of Montanus, which he has mentioned... under the title The New Prophecy). This in turn apparently wore thin for him, and in his last years he seems to have tried to form an independent congregation. Last heard from around 220, he probably died shortly thereafter. No list of Tertullians works is extant, but historians have identified at least 43 titles. Of these, all or part of 31 survive. Some of these, however, date from after he left the Catholic Church. Even so, Cyprian called him the Master, and made it a policy to read from his works every day. Tertullians text is somewhat problematic, as he wrote in Latin but apparently used primarily Greek texts which he translated himself. Theopaschism Theopaschism is the belief that a god an suffer. In Christian Theology this involves questions like was the crucification of Jesus a crucification of God?. The question is central to the Nestorian and the argument about the ecumenical Council at Chalcedon which eventually led to a split in the Church between those that accepted theopaschism (the Church) and those that didnt (non-Chalcedonian, monophysite oriental orthodox churches). Theosis Greek term indicating deification, becoming god, being made god. The Greek Fathers took texts such as 2 Corinthians viii, 9 and Johg n xvii, 22-3 and similar texts and spoke of humanitys deification. If man is to share in God glory, they argued, he is to be perfectly one with God, this means in effect that man must be deified: he is called to become by grace what God is by nature. Accordingly Saint Athanasius summed up the purpose of the Incarnation by saying: God became man that we might be made god (On the Incarnation 54) (Ware 9). According to Orthodox belief, a Christians ultimate goal is theosis. This is the belief that God became man so that man might become God. Christ was considered by the church to be both fully divine and fully human. His human will to act, however, always followed his divine will. Although human beings can never be fully divine, by following the teachings of the Orthodox Church, they can strive in their actions to come as close as possible to being God-like. The Three Cappadocian Fathers553 The battles waged for Orthodoxy by Athanasius were continued by the three Cappadocians. Basil (d. 379), whose mother, Emmelia, was a most devout woman, studied philosophy in Athens. There he made a life-long friend of his fellow-student, Gregory of Nazianzus, with whom he retired, when their philosophical studies were ended, to a hermitage in Pontus, in order to study the works of Origen, and to prepare himself for a theological career. Basils learning and virtue soon raised him to the archbishopric of Caesarea, which long remained under his pastoral care. To him is due the credit for having founded the first poor-house in the world, called by his con-temporaries the Basilias, on which he expended his whole income. His love of Orthodoxy brought him into conflict with the Arian Emperor Valens, before whom he remained undaunted. His interpretative, doctrinal and ethical treatises, like his letters, shine out in the front rank of the worlds literature, and justify the title bestowed on him, torchbearer of the universe. In his homilies on the Hexaemeron, he blends religion with natural science for the understanding of the people; and his Advice to the young on how to profit by the writings of the ancient Greek authors is worthy of study. His death was lamented, not by Christians alone, but even by Jews and pagans. His brother, Gregory of Nyssa (d. 394), excels in
553

These Fathers of the Church are also studied individually.

1141

Glossary

his works rather as a speculative philosopher and scholar than as a practical moralist. Philosophical speculation also characterizes the work of Gregory of Nazianzus (d. 390), already mentioned as the friend of Basil, whom the people named the Theologian on account of the sermons on the divinity of the Logos which he preached against the Arian heresy in the church of Saint Anastasia at Constantinople, in order to draw the current of popular opinion back into the channels of uncorrupted faith. So popular had Gregory become at that time that Theodosius the Great invited him to become Archbishop of Constantinople, a position from which he soon retired when he realized the perpetual machinations of which it was the center. Poet in his poetry and his sermons, Gregory was a poet in his life also, being the opposite to his practical and phlegmatic friend, Basil. Tikhon, Patriarch In Oct 1917, Russian Orthodox delegates meeting in Moscow elected this Metropolitan of Moscow Patriarch. He was the first to serve in this capacity for some 225 years. Tikhon died in 1925. Tradition The term tradition comes from the Latin traditio, but the Greek term is paradosis and the verb is paradido. It means giving, offering, delivering, performing charity. In theological terms it means any teaching or practice which has been transmitted from generation to generation throughout the life of the Church. More exactly, paradosis is the very life of the Holy Trinity as it has been revealed by Christ Himself and testified by the Holy Spirit. The roots and the foundations of this sacred tradition can be found in the Scriptures. For it is only in the Scriptures that we can see and live the presence of the three Persons of the Holy Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. St. John the Evangelist speaks about the manifestation of the Holy Trinity (1 John 1-2). The essence of Christian tradition is described by St. Paul (Ephes. 2:1314). He admonishes: Brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions (tas paradoseis) which you have been taught, whether by word or our epistle (2 Thess. 2:15). (Bebis) Trisagion: The Thrice-holy chant. Valentinians A Gnostic group founded by Valentinus in the second century. Valentinus spent time in Rome (c. 135-160), but the center of the cult was in Egypt. Valentinus and his followers (such as Ptolemaeus, Heracleon, and Theodotus) created a system which began with Depth and Silence and involved thirty aeons of which Wisdom was the youngest and the mother of Jesus. Details vary, but the heresy was strong enough to have provoked reactions from Irenus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria. Much of their system is now known from the writings at Nag Hammadi. Vigil The service created by combining Vespers and Matins. Vigil is usually prescribed on the eves of Sundays and Great feasts or Holy Days. This is often called the All Night Vigil because when it is done in its absolute entirety it takes all night (12-14 hours) World War I (19141918) Imperial, territorial, and economic rivalries led to the Great War between the Central Powers (Austria-Hungary, Germany, Bulgaria, and Turkey) and the Allies (U.S., Britain, France, Russia, Belgium, Serbia, Greece, Romania, Montenegro, Portugal, Italy, and Japan). About 10 million combatants killed, 20 million wounded.

1142

Glossary

World War II (1939-45) World War II, also known as the Second World War, was a mid-20th-century conflict that engulfed much of the globe and is generally considered the largest and deadliest continuous war in human history. The conflict began by most western accounts on September 1, 1939 with the German invasion of Poland (the Pacific war is taken to have started on July 7, 1937 with the Japanese attack on China) and lasted until the summer of 1945, involving many of the worlds countries. Some historians contend that the Italian occupation of Ethiopia (The Second ItaloAbyssinian War) which lasted seven months in 1935-1936 was the actual start of World War II. Virtually all countries that participated in World War I were involved in World War II. Many consider World War II to be the only true world war due to the overwhelming number of nations involved and the extraordinary number of theatresfrom Europe and the Soviet Union to North Africa, China, South East Asia and the Pacific. In World War I non-European theatres had seen quick and short colonial battles, but in World War II these theatres demanded far more resources and human sacrifice. Yeltsin, Boris (1931-2007) He was born in Sverdlovsk, Ukraine. He is best Known As: The first post-Gorbachev president of Russia. The Energizer Bunny of Russian politics, Boris Yeltsin was an engineer and minor Communist Party official of the U.S.S.R. before winning the Russian presidency by popular vote in 1989. Eager to speed up reforms, he opposed the policies of Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, yet was instrumental in defeating a coup against Gorbachev in 1991. After the Soviet Union collapsed, Yeltsin remained in power, and despite political setbacks, rumors of heavy drinking and at least two heart attacks, was reelected to office in 1996. He retired abruptly on 31 December 1999, saying he had decided that Russia must enter the new millennium with new politicians. His replacement was Vladimir Putin.

1143

Appendixes

APPENDIXES

1144

Appendixes

APPENDIX A 1. LETTERS OF GOVERNOR PLINY AND EMPEROR TRAJAN554 Pliny, Governor of Bithynia, Queries the Emperor Trajan (98-117) Concerning the Imperial Policy toward Christians.
It is my custom, my Lord, to refer to you all things concerning which I am in doubt. For who can better guide my indecision or enlighten my ignorance? I have never taken part in the trials of Christians: hence I do not know for what crime nor to what extent it is customary to punish or investigate. I have been in no little doubt as to whether any discrimination is made for age, or whether the treatment of the weakest does not differ from that of the stronger; whether pardon is granted in case of repentance, or whether he who has ever been a Christian gains nothing by having ceased to be one; whether the name itself without the proof of crimes, or the crimes, inseparably connected with the name, are punished. Meanwhile, I have followed this procedure in the case of those who have been brought before me as Christians. I asked them whether they were Christians a second and a third time and with threats of punishment; I questioned those who confessed; I ordered those who were obstinate to be executed. For I did not doubt that, whatever it was that they confessed, their stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy ought certainly to be punished. There were others of similar madness, who because they were Roman citizens, I have noted for sending to the City. Soon, the crime spreading, as is usual when attention is called to it, more cases arose. An anonymous accusation containing many names was presented. Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, ought, I thought, to be dismissed since they repeated after me a prayer to the gods and made supplication with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for the purpose together with the statues of the gods, and since besides they cursed Christ, not one of which things they say, those who are really Christians can be compelled to do. Others, accused by the informer, said that they were Christians and afterwards denied it; in fact they had been but had ceased to be, some many years ago, some even twenty years before. All both worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ. They continued to maintain that this was the amount of their fault or error, that on a fixed day they were accustomed to come together before daylight and to sing by turns a hymn to Christ as a god, and that they bound themselves by oath, not for some crime but that they would not commit robbery, theft, or adultery, that they would not betray a trust nor deny a deposit when called upon. After this it was their custom to disperse and to come together again to partake of food, of an ordinary and harmless kind, however; even this they had ceased to do after the publication of my edict in which according to your command I had forbidden associations. Hence I believed it the more necessary to examine two female slaves, who were called deaconesses, in order to find out what was true, and to do it by torture. I found nothing but a vicious, extravagant superstition. Consequently I have postponed the examination and make haste to consult you. For it seemed to me that the subject would justify consultation, especially on account of the number of those in peril. For many of all ages, of every rank, and even of both sexes are and will be called into danger. The infection of this superstition has not only spread to the cities but even to the villages and country districts. It seems possible to stay it and bring about a reform. It is plain enough that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented again, that the sacred rites, which had been neglected for a long time, have begun to be restored, and that fodder for victims, for which till now there was scarcely a purchaser, is sold. From which one may readily judge what a number of men can be reclaimed if repentance is permitted.

554

Taken from Ray C. Petry (editor). Also see Pliny and Trajan: Correspondence, c. 112 CE.

1145

Appendixes

Trajans Reply
You have followed the correct procedure, my Secundus, in conducting the cases of those who were accused before you as Christians, for no general rule can be laid down as a set form. They ought not to be sought out; if they are brought before you and convicted they ought to be punished; provided that he who denies that he is a Christian, and proves this by making supplication to our gods, however much he may have been under suspicion in the past, shall secure pardon on repentance. In the case of no crime should attention be paid to anonymous charges, for they afford a bad precedent and are not worthy of our age.

2. 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF CANCELLING OF EX-COMMUNICATION BY ROME AND CONSTANTINOPLE

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 30, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Here is the message Benedict XVI sent to Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople on the feast of St. Andrew, patron of that patriarchate. The message was handed to the patriarch by a delegation sent by the Pope and headed by Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. *** To His Holiness Bartholomew I Archbishop of Constantinople Ecumenical Patriarch The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you! My love to all of you in Christ Jesus (1 Corinthians 16:23-24). It is with great joy that I write to Your Holiness on the occasion of the Feast of Saint Andrew, apostle and brother of Saint Peter. The delegation which I send to you, led by the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, His Eminence Cardinal Walter Kasper, brings you the warmest fraternal greetings of the Church of Rome. While I myself would have wished to be present to assure you personally of my affection for you in the Lord and to pray with you, I nevertheless convey my fervent hope for an even deeper communion which will overcome those obstacles remaining between us and enable us to celebrate together the Holy Eucharist, the one sacrifice of Christ for the life of the world. This year we commemorate the Fortieth Anniversary of 7 December 1965, that day on which Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, dissatisfied with what had occurred in 1054, decided together at Rome and Constantinople to cancel from the Churchs memory the sentence of excommunication which had been pronounced. That momentous event became the basis of a renewed relationship marked by reciprocal respect and reconciliation. We remember with joy the inspiring words pronounced that day in the Cathedral of the Phanar by the beloved Patriarch Athenagoras: God is Love (1 John 4:9): love is the God-given mark of the disciples of Christ, the power which gathers in unity the Church, and the source of its peace, harmony and order, as a perpetual and brilliant manifestation of the indwelling Holy Spirit (Response to the Common Declaration, 7 December 1965). Indeed, this cancellation marked the beginning of a new season of ecclesial life, a season of dialogue, which has seen significant progress yet remains challenged to continue the rigorous pursuit of its much cherished goals. In this regard, it is a source of great satisfaction to me that after a pause of some years our theological dialogue begins once again. I pray that it will indeed be fruitful and am confident that no effort will be spared to make it so. He who puts his hand to the plow must not turn back (cf. Luke 9:62). Rather, he must persevere and bring his work to completion, sowing the seed and awaiting the abundant harvest that God in his goodness will provide. Attentive then to what the Spirit says to the needs of the Churches today and in the

1146

Appendixes

future, I assure Your Holiness and the Holy Synod, and through you all the Orthodox Churches, that the Catholic Church remains irrevocably committed to promoting all suitable and helpful initiatives to strengthen charity, solidarity and theological dialogue between us. In the joy of the Feast of Saint Andrew, Holy Guardian of the Church of Constantinople, I renew to Your Holiness my fraternal love and send you my warm greetings in the embrace of peace. From the Vatican, 26 November 2005 Benedictus PP. XVI

3. LINK BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND STATE IN ENGLAND

Face to faith The appointment of the new Archbishop of York raises questions about the link between church and state, writes Steve Parish Saturday December 3, 2005, The Guardian The Archbishop of York is duly enthroned - though he preferred to call the service his inauguration - after a lengthy process of consultation, selection and prayer, and prime ministerial and royal approval. While John Sentamu for York was not such an obvious choice as Rowan Williams for Canterbury, there is no sense that it was a compromise to avoid more divisive candidates. Racist hate mail suggests it is certainly controversial for some people. But no one seems bothered that it remains essentially a political appointment, although the new archbishop did say in an interview that he had bluntly asked the Archbishop of Canterbury if 10 Downing Street had had a hand in the nomination process, and had been assured that they hadnt. The present system, cobbled together in Jim Callaghans time, was supposed to give the church the final say in choosing bishops, but left the PM with a theoretical veto - not unreasonable as 26 bishops have votes in the Lords. Mrs Thatcher reputedly exercised the veto once or twice, and Tony Blair certainly has, but only once - so far as is known, as internal debates of the Crown Nominations Commission are secret. It was a hot issue at general synod in the 70s, but the system has produced so few rogue bishops that the church now seems content with political involvement. The downside may be a lack of cutting-edge bishops, for even those with a reputation for instituting change find themselves somewhat tamed by the job spec of the bishop as a focus of unity i.e. not offending anyone. Disestablishment isnt necessarily a dead duck, but (not surprisingly) few diocesan bishops would support a church-led campaign for disestablishment, and about half would oppose such a move by the government - though most think establishment is no longer essential for the church. Bishop Colin Buchanan, the arch-disestablisher, has retired with no obvious successor; its not a vote winner in synod elections. While an end to the church-state link is unlikely, there are scenarios that might prompt a crisis. One threat may be the indifference of parliament. It has been proving difficult to get a quorum at meetings of its ecclesiastical committee, which has to approve church measures coming from general synod - a system devised in 1919 to get over the problem that the church might wait years for parliamentary time for any changes it wants to make to its governance or its worship. There is still scope for minor reform. A review group chaired by Baroness Perry in 2001 recommended some changes. In what could be seen as simply recognising the facts or as going back on the churchs earlier demand to appoint its bishops, the Crown Appointments Commission was renamed the Crown Nominations Commission. But Perry said we should

1147

Appendixes

retain what Buchanan calls the lunatic procedures for the formal election of bishops, whereby the college of canons in a diocese gets a cong dlire from the monarch commanding a free and fair election - and another letter telling them who to elect. Perry said this demonstrated the consent of the church. But the college of canons consists of people appointed by the monarch or by the previous bishop. Its possible that a sufficiently inappropriate candidate might be rejected, but its never happened. Edward VI abolished elections in 1547 (Elizabeth I restored them) as they were to no purpose, and seeming also derogatory and prejudicial to the kings prerogative royal, as well as tedious and expensive. Its too late for this appointment, but - after abolition of the penalty of forfeiting all your goods if you dont vote for the monarchs candidate - maybe a bold college in some less prominent diocese will say it cant be bothered with this nonsense, and just email the Queen to get on with appointing the man (or woman, before too long) who has emerged from the careful process of selection. Steve Parish is a vicar in Warrington, and author of an academic dissertation on why the church avoided disestablishment in the 19th century.

1148

Appendixes

APPENDIX B DEVELOPMENT AND REFUTATION OF CHRISTOLOGICAL ERRORS

Errors that Deny or Diminish the Reality or Importance of the Full Divinity of Jesus the Christ The Orthodox Response and Doctrinal Position Errors that Deny or Diminish the Reality or Importance of the Full Humanity of Jesus the Christ Docetism: Christ only appeared to be human.

Ignatius of Antioch: If Jesus was not human like us, he could not have saved us. Irenaeus: If the human being of Jesus had not been united to God, our salvation is incomplete. Ebionitism: denial of divinity and Irenaeus: if He who is the pre-existence of Christ. Son of Christ, the Savior is not fully God had no existence prior to God then we are not fully birth from Mary. saved nor do we have Subordinationism: the Son may salvation permanently. have divinity or divine attributes but is of a lower order than the Father.

Gnosticism: Jesus humanity was not essential for salvation

Arianism: the Logos (or preexistent Son of God) is not God in the proper sense of the word, but a creature, albeit the first and highest creature and mediator between God and the rest of creation. Antiochene Errors or Erroneous Tendencies Logos-anthropos (Word-man): the Word became a human being; the eternal Word assumes the full humanity of Jesus into itself; God dwells in the assumed man. Nestorianism (CE 451):
proposed doctrine that there are two separate Persons in the Incarnate Christ, one divine, one human: rejected theotokos proposed christokos. Later Nesotrianism (Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, Ibas) writings supposedly supportive of Nestorius

Council of Nicaea (325 CE): Jesus is homoousios with the Father; i.e. of the same substance with the Father true God.

Council of Constantinople (381 CE): The soul of Jesus is a human soul. Council of Ephesus (431 CE): Mary is the mother of God. In Christ there is only one divine person. Council of Chalcedon (451 CE): In Christ there are two natures, truly God and truly man, unmixed and unconfused. 2nd Constantinople (553 A.D.) reaffirmed Chalcedon with particular refutation of Nestorianism 3rd Constantinople (680 CE) affirmed doctrine of two nature and a consequential affirmation of two wills and

Alexandrian Errors Or Erroneous Tendencies Logos-sarx (Word-flesh): the Word became flesh but the enfleshed Logos not fully human. [Note: erroneous logos-sarx not to be confused with orthodox use of logos-sarx of Cyril et al.]

Apollinarianism: (erroneous
logos-sarx) denies existence of rational human soul.

Monophysitism: in the Incarnate

Christ there was a single divine nature.

Monothelitism: in Christ there is only one will and that will is divine.
Monenergism: there is but one

1149

Appendixes
two operations. operation or activity in the Incarnate Christ and that is divine, not human.

1150

Appendixes

APPENDIX C BYZANTIUM 1. CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BYZANTINE EMPERORS

324-337 Constantine I Political Development : Foundation and development of the state church. 337-361 Constantius Economics and Law: System of combines. Heavily industrialized cities linked with provisioning regions Rome-Sicily, Constantinople-Egypt. 361-363 Julian 363-364 Jovian 364-378 Valens 379-395 Theodosius I 395-408 Arcadius Political Development: 395: Official separation of the eastern and western halves of the Empire. Construction of the wall fortification of Constantinople. Economics and Law : Codex Theodosianus. 408-450 Theodosius II Political Development : 431: Council of Ephesus. Secession of the Nestorians. 450-457 Marcian 457-474 Leo I 474 Leo II 474-475 Zeno 475-476 Basiliseos 476-491 Zeno (again) Political Development: 476: End of the western half of the Empire. Germanic principalities set up in the western half of the Empire. 491-518 Anastasius I Political Development : System of military settlements in the province of Libya. Economics and Law : Lex Romana Visigothorum (506), Spain. Germans outside the imperium romanum. The customary law of the Germanic peoples. 518-527 Justin I 527-565 Justinian I Political Development: Regions regained by Italy and Africa are governed by exarchs. War with Persia. Aim of the war is to secure the trade route to India. Economics and Law : 533: Corpus juris civilis of Justinian I (Latin). Early Greek version (paraphrase of Theophilus). The so-called Anonymus Greek version of the Digest. Greek collection of canon law (nomocanones).

1151

Appendixes

565-578 Justin II Economics and Law : Changeover to a measure of natural economy. Wages paid in part in kind by the state (officials and soldiers wages). Contraction of money economy. Firm control of domestic trade. Increase in planned economy. Little remains outside the system of assignment. 578-582 Tiberius I Constantine 582-602 Maurice 602-610 Phocas 610-641 Heraclius Political Development : Byzantine and Persian Empires attacked by the Arabs spurred on by the new Muslim faith. 610. Continuation of the War with Persia. The downfall of Phocas should have satisfied Chosroes, but he now had bigger ambitions to augment his empire, and thus increased his war effort. The Byzantine Army demoralised by the recent events gave only nominal defense. 611-620. Persian Victories in Syria and Anatolia. Antioch and most of the remaining fortresses in Syria, Mesopotamia and Armenia were captured in 611. Eventually Damascus and Jerusalem capitulated too (614). Chosroes then began to invade Anatolia with full force. After a long seige, Persian armies captured Chalcedon on the Bosphorus. Here the Persians were within one mile of Constantinople, and they were there for ten years. Meanwhile, they captured Ancrya and Rhodes; remaining Armenian fortresses. This Persian occupation further attenuated Byzantine strength by depriving them of recruiting ground. 616-619. Persian Conquests in Egypt. By defeating Byzantine garrisons in the Nile Valley, Persia marched across the Libyan desert. These victories cut off the important grain supplies to Constantinople from Egypt, since Constantinople was dependant upon it. 617-619. Renewed Avar invasions. Avars swept through the Balkans, reaching the walls of Constantinople. 619-621. Heraclius and Sergius. Heraclius vainly attempted to reorganize the army. In despair, he prepared to leave Constantinople and return to Africa. At this point, Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople ignited a new wave of patriotism in Constantinople. By reproaching and entreating Heraclius, he obtained an oath from him that he would never abandon the capital. In return, Sergius promised to make available all the resources of the Church. With renewed energy and confidence, Heraclius turned to the task of reorganizing his army and empire. With the somewhat reluctant sanction of Sergius, he emptied the over-crowded monasteries to recruit monks into his army, and seized as much wealth as he could from the churches in the capital. He bought peace with the Avars chieftain by paying a large indemnity. Meanwhile, he negotiated and pretended to consider Persias terms, while preparing for an offensive. 641 Constantine III and Heraclonas 641 Heraclonas 641-668 Constans II 668-685 Constantine IV Political Development : Reorganization of the Empire with the introduction of themes. 674-678: Siege of Constantinople. First use of Greek fire. Economics and Law : Between 600 and 800: private legal codes: The Farmers Law (Georgikos Nomos) and the Rhodian 685-695 Justinian II 695-698 Leontius

1152

Appendixes

698-705 Tiberius II 705-711 Justinian II (again) 711-713 Philippicus 713-715 Anastasius II 715-717 Theodosius III ******************************* 717-741 Leo III Political Development : Successful defense of Constantinople against the Arabs (717). 726: Beginning of the iconoclast controversy. Anti-monastic attitude of the Emperors. Economics and Law : 726: the Ecloga. 741-775 Constantine V 775-780 Leo IV 780-797 Constantine VI 797-802 Irene 802-811 Nicephorus I 811 Stauracius 811-813 Michael I Rangabe 813-820 Leo V 820-829 Michael II 829-842 Theophilus 842-867 Michael III Political Development : End of the iconoclast controversy. Mission to the Slavs: Constantine and Methodius. 864: Bulgaria, leading Balkan power accepts the Greek Orthodox faith. Economics and Law : Procheiros Nomos: between 867 and 879. Epanagoge: between 879 and 886. The Tactica (military manual), c.900. Revision of canon law. 867-886 Basil I Economics and Law : Development of Byzantine foreign trade with the West. Treaties granting monopolies. Rise of Venice as distributor of Byzantine goods in the West. 886-912 Leo VI 912-913 Alexander Political Development : The legitimate Emperor overshadowed by a co-Emperor from the aristocracy. 913-959 Constantine VII 920-944 Romanus I Lecapenus Political Development : Eastern policy of the Byzantine Empire is directed by the Asia Minor magnates. Economics and Law: Result of blockade of Byzantine and Islamic goods: Beginning of shortage of luxury wares in the West. Development of a western industry in North Italy

1153

Appendixes

and the Rhine valley. 956-963 Romanus II Economics and Law : Beginning of Venetian trading agreements with Muslim states. 963-969 Nicephorus II Phocus 969-976 John I Tzimisces Political Development : Russia accepts Orthodoxy Christianity. 976-1025 Basil II Economics and Law : Emperors from the aristocratic magnate class give up a planned economy. Liberalizing of the grain trade. 1025-1028 Constantine VIII 1028-1034 Romanus II Argyrus 1034-1041 Michael IV 1041-1042 Michael V Political Development: Dynastic crisis arises out of a struggle for control of the government. 1042 Zoe and Theodora 1042-1055 Constantine IX Monomachus 1055-1056 Theodora (again) 1056-1057 Michael VI 1057-1059 Isaac I Comnunus 1059-1067 Constantine X Ducas Political Development : The Byzantine Empire faces a double treat from Seljuk Turks attacking Asia Minor and from the Normans in Europe. Economics and Law : Economic crisis. The attempt to create a state monopoly of corn overturns price control. 1068-1071 Romanus IV Diogenes 1071-1078 Michael VII Ducas 1078-1081 Nicephorus III Botaneiates Economics and Law : Debasement of the Byzantine currency. Reduction of gold content of the solidi. 1081-1118 Alexius I Comnenus Political Development : 1082: Alliance with Venice. 1118-1143 John II Comnenus Political Development: Struggle with the Hohenstaufen for control of the Mediterranean. 1143-1180 Manuel I Comnenus 1180-1183 Alexias II Comnenus Economics and Law: End of independent Byzantine economy. Privileges granted to Italian maritime cities. Individual treatises with these cites limit Byzantine sovereignty.

1154

Appendixes

1183-1185 Andronicus I Comnenus 1185-1195 Isaac II Angelus 1195-1203 Alexius III Angelus 1203-1204 Isaac II Angelus (again) and Alexius IV Angelus Political Development : 1202-1204: Fourth Crusade. Capture of Constantinople. Setting up of the Latin Empire. 1204 Alexius V Murtzuphlus Political Development : Political consolidation in Asia Minor: Empire of Nicaea. Economics and Law : Sound economic basis of the Byzantine Empire in Asia Minor. 1204-1222 Theodore I Lascaris 1222-1254 John III Ducas Vatatzes 1254-1258 Theodore II Lascaris Political Development : 1250: Defeat by Louis IX of France at Damietta in Egypt. 1258-1261 John IV Lascaris Political Development : 1261: Constantinople retaken by the Byzantines. 1261-1282 Michael VIII Palaeologus Political Development : Alliance between the Byzantine Empire and the Ilkhan Hulagu of Persia against the Seljuks of Asia Minor. 1272: Alliance with the Tartars of South Russia. 1274: Union between Byzantine and Roman churches. Economics and Law : 1261: Treaty of Nymphaeum. Political-economic agreements give the command of the straits to the Genoese. 1282-1328 Andronicus II Palaeologus Political Development : 1282: Sicilian Vespers and the end of the Latin Empire. 1328-1341 Andronicus III Palaeologus 1341-1391 John V Palaeologus Political Development : Beginning of the period of decline. 1347-1354 John VI Cantacuzenus Political Development : Byzantium between the rising Ottoman state and the national states in the Balkans (Serbia, Bulgaria) and Hungary. Economics and Law : The Empire is the base for Genoese trade with eastern Asia. 1376-1379 Andronicus IV Palaeologus 1390 John VII Palaeologus 1391-1425 Manuel II Palaeologus Political Development : Internal disintegration: social struggles between magnates and zealots. Failure to change the old universal Byzantine Empire into a national state in the Peloponnese. 1425-1448 John VIII Palaeologus 1448-1453 Constantine XI Palaeologus Political Development : Conquest of Constantinople by the Turks (1453). Certain Greek

1155

Appendixes

regions survive under Venetian rule until the eighteenth century (areas of Byzantine culture). <http://www.yasou.org/default.htm>. In 1453 Mehmed II overthrew the Byzantine Empire and claimed the title of Caesar; his successors continued this claim.

2. A QUICK LIST OF EMPERORS OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE

324-337 337-361 361-363 363-364 364-378 Constantine I Constantius Julian Jovian Valens 811813 Michael I, Rhangab 813820 Leo V, the Armenian 820829 Michael II 829842 Theophilus II 842867 Michael III 842866 Bardas 867 Theophilus II Macedonian Emperors 867886 Basil I, the Macedonian 886912 Leo VI, the Wise 912913 Alexander III 913959 Constantine VII, Porphyrogenitus 919944 Romanus I, Lecapenus 959963 Romanus II 963969 Nicephorus II, Phocas 969976 John I, Tzimisces 9761025 Basil II, Bulgaroktonus 102528 Constantine VIII 102850 Zo 102834 Romanus III, Argyrus 103441 Michael IV, the Paphlagonian 104142 Michael V, Calaphates 104254 Constantine IX, Monomachus 105456 Theodora 105657 Michael VI, Stratioticus 105759 Isaac I, Comnenus 105967 Constantine X, Dukas 1067 Andronicus 1067 Constantine XI 106771 Romanus IV, Diogenes 107178 Michael VII, Parapinakes 107881 Nicephorus III, Botaniates 10811118 Alexius I, Comnenus 111843 John II, Calus 114380 Manuel I 118083 Alexius II 118285 Andronicus I 118595 Isaac II, AngelusComnenus 11951203 Alexius III, Angelus 120304 Alexius IV 1204 Alexius V, Dukas Latin Emperors 120405 120516 121617 121828 122861 Baldwin I Henry VI Peter de Courtenay Robert de Courtenay Baldwin II

379-395 Theodosius I 395408 Arcadius 408450 Theodosius II 450457 Marcianus 457474 Leo I 474 Leo II 474491 Zeno 491518 Anastasius I 518527 Justin I 527565 Justinian I 565578 Justin II 578582 Tiberius, Constantinus 582602 Mauricius 602610 Phocas I 610641 Heraclius I 641 Constantine III 641 Heracleon 641668 Constans II 668685 Constantine IV 685695 Justinian II 695698 Leontius II 698705 Tiberius III, Apsimar 705711 Justinian II (restored) 711713 Philippicus 713715 Anastasius II 715717 Theodosius III 717741 Leo III, the Isaurian 741775 Constantine V, Kopronymus 775780 Leo IV 780797 Constantine VI 797802 Irene 802811 Nicephorus I 811 Stauracius

Nicaean Emperors 120622 122254 125459 125861 Theodore I, Lascaris John Dukas Vatatzes Theodore II, Lascaris John IV, Lascaris

The Paleologi 126182 Michael VIII 12821328 Andronicus II 12951320 Michael IX 132841 Andronicus III 134147 John V 134754 John VI, Cantacuzene 135576 John V (restored) 137679 Andronicus IV 137991 John V (restored) 1390 John VII 13911425 Manuel II 142548 John VIII 144853 Constantine XI or XIII

1156

Appendixes

3. SELECTIVE BYZANTINE TIMELINE: HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE TURBULENT HISTORY OF THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE
330: After enlarging the ancient Greek city of Byzantium, Constantine I renames it for himself and establishes an imperial residence there. Constantinople becomes the capital in 359, and eastern Romans (Byzantines) come to call it simply The City. 527: Justinians reign begins. He is responsible for the re-conquest of Africa and Italy and a codification of Roman Law that affects many future civilizations. With the support of his wife Theodora (who had once been a courtesan), he puts down the Nike rebellion. 550: Procopius of Caesarea, counsel to the great general Belisarius and author of several official histories in which he wrote approvingly of Justinian, writes his Secret History, which is published after his death. In it he attacks the characters of the emperor and Theodora, stating: ... these two seemed not to be human beings, but veritable demons, and what the poets call vampires: who laid their heads together to see how they could most easily and quickly destroy the race and deeds of men; and assuming human bodies, became man-demons, and so convulsed the world. (Chapter 12.) 610: Heraclius overthrows the mad emperor Phocas. He institutes a system of themes, wherein the soldiers defending a district are the free peasants of that district with a stake in the defense of their homes (instead of mercenaries). This system, adopted by succeeding emperors and expanded throughout the lands, saves expense and strengthens the empire; but Heraclius overextends himself fighting historys first Holy War and loses Syria, Palestine, Persia and Egypt. 695: Justinian II is deposed. His nose is cut off (resulting in the name Rhinotmetus) and he is banished to Cheron. 705: Justinian II regains the throne with the help of Slavic and Bulgarian forces. He proceeds to wreak havoc on all who opposed him. 726: Leo the Isaurian launches a crusade against the use of icons in the church and sparks the Iconoclastic Controversy, which rages for many years and ultimately results in a division in the Church at the end of the eighth century. 787: Irene of Athens, regent to her son the Emperor Constantine VI, obtains important concessions in the matter of the veneration of images at the Seventh General Synod of Nicaea. For this she is honored as a saint in the Greek Orthodox Church. 797: After canceling her sons betrothal to Rotrud (the daughter of Charlemagne), forcing him to marry someone he hated, sanctioning a second marriage (which made him a bigamist) and having him scourged with rods when he showed signs of escaping her power, Irene orders the

1157

Appendixes

blinding of Constantine VI and takes the throne in her own right. 860s: Missionaries set out from Constantinople to convert the Bulgarian and Slavic peoples to Christianity. The brothers Cyril and Methodius learn the Slavic language and teach the liturgy in the vernacular; Cyril devises an alphabet (Cyrillic) for the Slavs. 1054: The Latin Roman Church and the Greek Orthodox Church excommunicate each other. 1096: Emperor Alexius Comnenus, having appealed to Pope Urban II for help against the Turks, greets the first crusaders from the west. Alexius sends them to Asia Minor where their victories reclaim land for the Empire. 1204: Powerful Venetians convince the fighters of the fourth crusade to attack Constantinople before moving on to the Holy Land. The unwary residents of the City suffer the worst devastation in Constantinoples history, and Venice reaps the spoils. 1261: Control of the city at last passes from the Venetians to the Paleologus Dynasty. The once splendid empire is now not only reduced in size but in its economic and intellectual health and freedom. 1453: The last emperor of Byzantium, Constantine XI, leads a force of 4,000 troops and succeeds in holding off 160,000 advancing Turks for seven weeks. But the City, now all that is left of the Byzantine Empire, suffers its inevitable fate and falls on Tuesday, May 29.

1158

Appendixes

4. HIERARCHICAL SUCCESSION OF THE PATRIARCHAL SEE OF CONSTANTINOPLE UNTIL THE FALL OF THE CITY555
Gennadios II Scholarios 1453 1456, 1458, 1462 - 1463 Athanasios II 1450 - 1453 Gregory III Mammas 1443 - 1450 Metrophanes II 1440 - 1443 Joseph II 1416 - 1439 Euthymios II 1410 - 1416 Matthew I 1397 - 1410 Kallistos II Xanthopoulos 1397 Anthony IV 1389 - 1390, 1391 1397 Neilos Kerameos 1379 - 1388 Makarios 1376 - 1379, 1390 1391 Philotheos Kokkinos 1354 - 1355, 1364 - 1376 Kallistos I 1350 - 1354, 1355 1363 Isidore 1347 - 1350 John XIV Kalekas 1334 - 1347 Jesaias 1323 - 1334 Gerasimos I 1320 - 1321 John XII Glykys 1315 - 1320 Nephon 1310 - 1314 John XII 1294 - 1303 Athanasios I 1289 - 1293, 1303 1309 Gregory II Kyprios 1283 - 1289 John XI Bekkos 1275 - 1282 Joseph I Galesiotes 1267 - 1275 Germanos III 1267 Nikephoros II 1260 - 1261 Arsenios Autoreianos 1255 - 1259, 1261 - 1267 Manuel II 1244 - 1255 Methodios II 1240 Germanos 1222 - 1240 Manuel I Charitopoulos 1215 1222 Maximos II 1215 Theodore II Eirenikos 1213 - 1215 Michael IV Autoreianos 1207 1213 John X Kamateros 1198 - 1206 George II Xiphilinos 1191 - 1198 Dositheos 1190 - 1191 Leontios Theotokites 1189 - 1190 Niketas II Muntanes 1186 - 1186 Basil II Kamateros 1183 - 1186
555

Kosmas II Attikos 1146 - 1147 Michael II Kurkuas 1143 - 1146 Leon Styppes 1134 - 1143 John IX Agapetos 1111 - 1134 Nicholas III Grammatikos 1084 1111 Eustathios Garidas 1081 - 1084 Kosmas I 1075 - 1081 John VIII Xiphilinos 1064 - 1075 Constantine III Lichoudes 1059 1063 Micahel I Kerularios 1043 - 1058 Alexios I Studites 1025 - 1043 Eustathios 1019 - 1025 Sergios II 999 - 1019 Sisinios 996 998 Nicholas II Chrysoberges 984 - 996 Anthony III Studites 974 - 980 Basil I Skamandrenus 970 - 974 Polyeuktos 956 - 970 Theophylaktos 933 - 956 Tryphon 928 931 Stephen II 925 - 928 Euthymios 907 - 912 Nicholas I Mystikos 901 - 907, 912 925 Anthony II Kauleas 893 - 901 Stephen I 886 - 893 Photios I the Great 858 - 867, 877 886 Ignatios I 847 - 858, 867 - 877 Methodios I 843 - 847 John VII Grammatikos 836 - 843 Anthony I 821 - 836 Theodotos I Kassiteras 815 - 821 Nikephoros I 806 - 815 Tarasios 784 806 Paul IV 780 - 784 Niketas 766 - 780 Constantine II 754 - 766 Anastasios 730 - 754 Germanos I 715 - 730 John VI 712 - 715 Cyrus 705 - 711 Kallinikos I 693 - 705 Paul III 687 - 693 George I 679 - 686 Theodore I 677 - 679 Constantine I 675 - 677

Eutychios 552 - 565, 577 582 Menas 536 - 552 Anthimos I 535 - 536 Epiphanios 520 - 535 John II of Cappadocia 518 520 Timothy I 511 - 518 Makedonos II 495 - 511 Euphemios 489 - 495 Phrabitas 488 - 489 Akakios 471 - 488 Gennadios I 458 - 471 Anatolios 449 - 458 Phlabianos 446 - 449 Proklos 434 - 446 Maximianos 431 - 434 Nestorios 428 - 431 Sisinios I 426 - 427 Attikos 406 - 425 Arsakios of Tarsus 404 - 405 John I Chrysostom 398 - 404 Nektarios 381 - 397 Gregory I the Theologian 379 - 381 Maximos 380 Euagrios 379 Demophilos 370 - 379 Eudoxios of Antioch 360 - 370 Makedonios I 342 - 346, 351 360 Eusebius of Nicomedia 339 341 Paul I 337 - 339, 341 - 342, 346 - 351 Alexander 314 - 337 Metrophanes 306 - 314 Probus 293 - 306 Rufinos I 284 - 293 Dometios 272 - 284 Titus 242 - 272 Eugenios I 237 - 242 Kastinos 230 - 237 Kiriakos I 217 - 230 Philadelphos 211 - 217 Mark I 198 - 211 Olympianos 187 - 198 Pertinax 169 - 187

Orthodox Research Institute. 25 May 2006. <http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/resources/ hierarchs/constantinople.htm>.

1159

Appendixes
Theodosios I Borradiotes 1179 1183 Chariton 1177 - 1178 Michael III of Anchialus 1170 1177 Luke Chrysoberges 1156 - 1169 Constantine IV Chliarenos 1154 1156 Neophytos I 1153 Theodotos II 1151 - 1153 Nicholas IV Muzalon 1147 - 1151 John V 669 - 675 Thomas II 667 - 669 Peter 654 - 666 Paul II 641 - 653 Pyrrhos I 638 - 641, 654 Sergios I 610 - 638 Thomas I 607 - 610 Kyriakos 596 - 606 John IV Nesteutes 582 - 595 John III Scholastikos 565 - 577 Alypios 166 - 169 Laurence 154 - 166 Euzois 148 - 154 Athendodoros 144 - 148 Polycarp II 141 - 144 Felix 136 - 141 Eleutherios 129 - 136 Diogenes 114 - 129 Sedekion 105 - 114 Plutarch 89 - 105 Polycarp I 69 - 89 Onesimos 54 - 68 Stachys the Apostle 38 - 54 St. Andrew the Apostle Founder

1160

Appendixes

APPENDIX D MAPS OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA AND ASIA MINOR

As mentioned, over the centuries, the eastern part of Byzantium varied greatly, but its core remained the Balkan Peninsula and Asia Minor until it collapsed to the Ottoman forces. This is a map of the Balkan Peninsula:

Illustration 168: The Balkan Peninsula556

The Balkan Peninsula encompasses present-day Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, European Turkey, and Yugoslavia. Now let us see a map depicting Asia Minor:

Illustration 169: Asia Minor557

556 557

See: <www.balkanology.com/> See: <www.crystalinks.com/asiaminormap.gif>

1161

Appendixes

Asia Minor is a broad peninsula that lies between the Black and Mediterranean seas. It is a region of the ancient world that corresponds roughly to modern day Turkey or the peninsula of its Greek name, Anatolia. During the Middle Ages, as a part of the Byzantine Empire, it became a center of Christianity and the guardian of Greek and Roman culture. One of the chief medieval trade routes passed through the region. As the power of the empire declined, Arabs and Mongols invaded. In the 15th century the Ottoman Turks conquered the peninsula and made Istanbul (then known as Constantinople) the capital. The Ottoman Empire lasted until the establishment of the republic of Turkey in 1923.

1162

Appendixes

APPENDIX E LIST OF RUSSIAN LEADERS 1. RULERS OF THE KIEVAN RUS BEFORE THE TARTAR INVASION558
Ryurik, ruler of Novgorod Oleg, first ruler of Kiev, c. 882-913 Igor, 913-945 Svyatoslav I, 945-973 Yaropolk I, 973-978 St. Vladimir I, 978-1015 Svyatopolk I, 1015-1019 Yaroslav the Wise, 1019-1054 Izayaslav I, 1054-1073 Svyatoslav II, 1073-1076 Izayaslav I, 1077-1078 Vsevolod, 1078-1093 Svyatopolk II, 1093-1113 Vladimir Monomakh, 1113-1125 Mstislav I, 1125-1139 Yaropolk II, 1132-1139 Vyacheslav, 1139-1146 Izayaslav II, 1146-1154 Yury Dolgoruky, 1149-1157 Rostislav, 1154-1167 Andrei Bogolyubsky, Grand Prince of Kiev, 1157-1174 Vsevolod III, ruler of Vladimir-Suzdal, 1176-1212 Yury II, 1212-1238 (David T. Koyzis)

558

Note that the succession did not always pass directly from father to son, but sometimes between other male relatives, including brothers and uncles and nephews. Overlapping dates are due to princes ruling in different appanage principalities, all nominally under Kievan suzerainty.

1163

Appendixes

2. RULERS OF THE TARTAR-MONGOL PERIOD

Yaroslav II, ruler of Kiev, then of Vladimir, 1238-1246 Svyatoslav III, 1247-1248 Andrei II, Prince of Vladimir, 1249-1252 Alexander Nevski, Prince of Novgorod, then of Vladimir, 1252-1263 Yaroslav III, Prince of Tver, 1263-1271 Vasili Yaroslavavich, 1272-1277 Dmitri, 1277-1294 Andrei, 1294-1304 Mikhail, 1304-1313 Yury Daniilovich, 1313-1322 Dmitri, 1322-1325 Alexander of Tver, son of Mikhail, 1326-1328

3. PRINCES OF MOSCOW
Daniil, first Prince of Moscow, 1263-1303 Yury, 1303-1325 Ivan I, Kalita, Grand Prince of Vladimir, 1328-1340 Simeon, Grand Prince of All Russia, 1340-1353 Ivan II, 1353-1359 Dmitri Donskoy, 1359-1389 Vasili I, 1389-1425 Vasili II, 1425-1462 Ivan III, The Great, first Sovereign of All Russia, 1462-1505 Vasili III, son of Ivan III and Sophia Paleologi (niece of last Byzantine emperor), 1505-1533 Ivan IV, The Terrible, 1533-1584, first Tsar of Russia in 1547 Feodor I, 158498 Boris Godunov, 15981605 Feodor II, 1605 Dmitri, the False Dmitri, 16056 Vasily IV Shuysky, 160610 vacant throne, 161013

4. TSARS OF RUSSIA, 1547-1721

Ivan IV (Ivan the Terrible) (1547-1584)

1164

Appendixes

Simeon Bekbulatovich (1574-1576) (fake tsar set by Ivan IV) Feodor I (1584-1598) - last of the Riurikovich Boris Godunov (1598-1605) Feodor II (1605) False Dmitri I (1605-1606) Vasili IV (1606-1610) Succession broken due to Time of Troubles Michael I (1613-1645) - first of the Romanovs: elected Tsar following the Time of Troubles Aleksey I (1645-1676) Feodor III (1676-1682) Ivan V (1682-1696) (joint ruler with Peter I) Peter I (Peter the Great) (1682-1721) (joint ruler with Ivan V until 1696)

5. EMPERORS OF RUSSIA, 1721-1917

Peter I (Peter the Great) (1721-1725) Catherine I (1725-1727) Peter II (1727-1730) Anne (1730-1740) Ivan VI (1740-1741) Elizabeth (1741-1762) Peter III (1762) Catherine II (Catherine the Great) (1762-1796) Paul (1796-1801) Alexander I (Alexander the Blessed) (1801-1825) Nicholas I (1825-1855) Alexander II (Alexander the Liberator) (1855-1881) Alexander III (1881-1894) Nicholas II (Nicholas the Bloody, Tsar Martyr Nicholas) (1894-1917)

6. SOVIET LEADERS

1165

Appendixes

7. PRESIDENTS OF RUSSIA The President of Russia is the highest position within the Government of Russia. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, two individuals have been elected to the presidency. The president is elected every four years by a direct vote of the Russian population. The next scheduled vote is slated for 2008.
Boris Yeltsin1 (July 10, 1991 December 31, 1999) two terms. Vladimir Putin2 (December 31, 1999 present) Currently serving a second term

1166

Appendixes

APPENDIX F THE FATHERS AS DEFENDERS OF FAITH

A) Ivan M. Andreyev, A Short Historical Review of Apologetic Works in Connection with the General History of Theology (Fragment) Religious delusions (paganism, pantheism, atheism, etc.) appear in the history of mankind just as early as other delusions (scientific, philosophic, political, etc.). We find refutations of them in profound antiquity. For instance, in the book Wisdom of Solomon, there are elements of cosmological proofs of the existence of God, and a historical refutation of the falsity of idol worship. In general, the Bible concerned itself very little with questions of proof of the existence of God since in biblical times very few doubted the existence of God. Belief in God then was so clear and strong that every doubt in His existence seemed simply lunatic or another form of psychic abnormality and irrationality. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God (Ps. 13:1). Ancient Greek philosophy, mainly in the persons of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, contributed much that is valuable for defending the foundations of religious beliefs and for criticizing atheistic and materialistic teachings. Our Lord Jesus Christ, in view of the supernatural signs and miracles performed by Him, had no need to turn to so-called scientific and philosophical proofs to corroborate His teachings. For that time, faith alone was enough. Faith was summarized in a heartfelt reception of that which the extraordinary Teacher spoke about. What could Christs answer be to Pilates question: What is truth? When He HimselfTruth incarnate(I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life) stood before the questioner? The Apostles and early Christians preached Christ crucified and resurrected as a veritable fact, and were not in need of any scientific and philosophical structures and dialectical subtleties. And preachers themselves, in the name of Christ, performed miracles through their faith. At first, Christianity was accepted only through faith, and only later did faith itself become an object of reflection. Appearing in a Judeo-pagan world, Christianity, in defending itself from attach, was forced to disclose the delusions of the pagans and Hebrews. It was necessary to prove to the pagans that the Christian God is the true God; and to the Hebrews that Christ is the Messiah promised by the prophets. In answer to the persecutions of the governing powers, the Christians had to refute defamation and prove that they not only were not injurious to the government, but on the contrary, were very useful, in consequence of the high moral basis of the new teaching. This explains the character of early Christian Apologetics. The most ancient Christian Apologetic belongs to Quadratus (written to the Roman Emperor Hadrian in 126 A.D.) The historian Eusebius cites a fragment of it in which Quadratus witnesses that some of those resurrected by Christ lived up to his own day. Since Christianity was being accepted not only by ordinary and unlettered people, but also by people highly educated in philosophy and acquainted with all of the Hellenistic wisdom, the latter most naturally began to defend the new Christian truths in the light of rationalistic, philosophical achievements of honorable, worldly knowledge. In answer to the criticism of Christianity by the pagan savants and philosophers Flavius Arrianus (+96 A.D.), Lucian of Samosata (120-200 A.D.), Celcus (2nd century), and later the Neoplatonists Porphyrius (233304), Philostratus (+217), Hierocles (+305) and others, Christianity put forth remarkable apologists from among former pagan philosophers and savants who had accepted Christianity. Among them were such as Apollos (mentioned by Apostle Paul), Justin the Philosopher (100165), his pupil Tatian, Quadratus (mentioned above as the first apologist), Aristides, (the full text of whose apology was found by Randall Harrison in 1889), the philosopher Athenagoras, then Pantaenus (formerly a Stoic philosopher), Clement of Alexandria and others.

1167

Appendixes

In the struggle between the young Christian idea and the age old pagan philosophy, an urgent need became apparent: to show forth Christianity as a coherent system of thought or philosophy with a reasonable argumentation which could be contrasted to and could respond to pagan philosophical systems. In connection with this, a new problem appeared. It was necessary to decide in principle the question of the relationship of intellect to faith and philosophy to Christianity, in order to resolve the perplexing questions which were arising concerning the proper place of science in regard to Christian faith. The appearance of new heresies also suggested the same problem. In view of this, some Fathers and teachers of the Church began to deem it necessary to reveal the dogmas of the faith with the help of logical methods and to fashion them into a system, setting up against the false gnosticism of heretical schools the true gnosticism of the Christian Church. These teachers of the Church gave a wide scope to their intellect in investigating and defining the dogmas of faith. Other teachers and church writers, believing the cause of heresy to lie in the heretics faulty understanding of the role of human intellect and therefore in their improper application of it to Christian dogmas, endeavored to expound Church teaching using only Relation as a basis. The main defender of intellect and philosophy was the so-called Alexandrian school. In Alexandria, that center of learning, with its schools and institutes of learning eclipsing famous Athens, the Christian Church for the first time mastered school learning and took advantage of philosophy for the service of faith. Working here were philosophers who had turned to Christianity, among whom was Clement of Alexandria. Clement, in a definitive manner, solved the question of the relationship between Christianity and philosophy, faith and science, in terms of a full recognition of the participation of honorable intellect in matters of the faith. According to Clement, there is no knowledge without faith, and no faith without knowledge. He contended for the indispensability of a faith revealed by learning and supplied with possible proofs, and for an internal bond of faith and knowledge. Knowledge obedient to faith, and faith strengthened by knowledge, both mutually accompanying each other, comprise a beneficial accord between themselves. Knowledge succeeds faith; it does not precede it. Clement of Alexandria, the first to attempt to prove Christian theology through knowledge and philosophy, can be called the ancestor of Apologetics as a science. The same thoughts about the benefits of science and the participation of intellect in matters of faith were also spread by Origen, a pupil of Clement. The thesis of Origen, On First Principles, was the first attempt to create a theological system in which the dogmas of faith are linked, argued, and elucidated by general thought. A sharp contrast to the Alexandrian school was presented by the North-African school. The most characteristic representative of it was a Carthagenian priest, Tertullian. He sharply denied all that Clement and Origen affirmed. Having accepted Christianity at a mature age, he gave himself to it with the passion of his ardent natureto fanaticism. Tertullian completely denied the importance of the intellect in uncovering the dogmas of faith. In his opinion, heresy is the daughter of philosophy. Believing in Jesus Christ and the Gospel, we have no need to believe in anything else but that. The lust of curiosity concerning objects of faith must be completely rejected; the passion towards science must be suppressed by a yearning for salvation. I believe because it is an absurdity. Neither Origen nor Tertullian was recognized by the Church as Fathers and unimpeachable Orthodox Church teachers. They were even subjected to censure and condemnation. But the influence of some of their works was considerable. The Holy Fathers and teachers of the Church, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, and Gregory of Nyssa, were partly educated on Origen. St. Cyprian of Carthage was a pupil of Tertullian. The influence of the Alexandrian school proved to be considerably stronger/ In the 4th century, the Christians of the East had neither a fear of intellect, an apprehension of science, nor an enmity towards pagan philosophers. St. John Chrysostom was a pupil of the pagan scholar

1168

Appendixes

Livanius, a teacher of eloquence. St. Basil the Great and St. Gregory the Theologian received their higher education in pagan Athens. All Greek theology during the brilliant, lively and creative age of the Ecumenical Councils, to a certain extent, shows the mark of classic Greek philosophical methods. This period ends with The Fountain of Knowledge, St. John of Damascus (7th century). The extremely brusque, universal dogmatic formula of Tertullian, Credo quia absurdum est ( I believe because it is an absurdity), finally was not accepted either in the East or in the West. The intellect was acknowledged also as having been given to man by God, and for this reason harmony was reached between true scientific-philosophical knowledge and true religious faith, and the motto of Christian Apologetics became the affirmation: I believe because it is NOT an absurdity. In the history of Apologetics it is impossible not to note the great importance of St. Dionysius of Alexandria (often called the Great), a prominent philosopher and theologian of the 3rd century. In his work, Of Nature, is contained a deadly criticism of the teachings of Epicurius about the origin of the earth as the consequence of a collision of atoms. Developing the ideas of Origen against materialistic atheism, St. Dionysius of Alexandria proved with exceeding conviction that the relationship of atoms is possible only on condition that they are subordinated to the universal governing force of Divine Providence. The great Fathers a and teachers of the Church of the epoch of the Ecumenical Councils were not only firm in faith and devoted to the Gospel and of the holy life, but were also widely educated in science and possessed a philosophical depth of thought and a dialectical delicacy. Notwithstanding the greater practical aim of the Latin West, the limitation of its education in comparison to the Hellenized East, and the weakness of its interest in delicate abstractions, the West also did not follow Tertullian, its first teacher and author, but followed the eastern teachers. For a long time, the West learned form the Christian East, as once stern Rome learned from subjugated Greece. In the epoch of the Ecumenical Councils, great apologetic significance was possessed in the East by many works of St. Athanasius the Great (296-373), St. Basil the Great (329-379), St. Cyril of Alexandria (+444 A.D.), the Blessed Theodoret (+457 A.D.), and others. At this time theologians active in the field of Apologetics in the West were St. Vincent of Lerins (+450 A.D.), Lactantius (+325 A.D.), and especially the Blessed Augustine (354-430), that greatest theologian and apologist of the West... The Blessed Augustine passionately defended intellect and recommended dialectics for theologians. The creative activity of the Christian East flourished during the era of the Ecumenical Councils. B) Sal Ciresi, Church History: The Early Apologists (Herald, issue of 9/5/02) Ecclesiastical history is replete with individuals who explained, guarded and defended the Catholic Faith. Despite laborious study, frequent roadblocks, and occasional martyrdom, this task of apologetics is indispensable for Catholicism. After the Apostles, the task of apologetics fell to the Church Fathers. A brief survey of their apologetic literature is illuminating. Practically speaking, the Fathers who engaged in apologetics were following an earlier pattern discovered in the Holy Bible. The Greek word apologia can be rendered as defense, reply or answer (cf. Acts 22:1; 1 Cor.9:3; 1 Pt 3:15). The milieu subsequent to the New Testament era dictated this Patristic defense. For starters, false rumors of immorality by Christians were circulated in society. Additionally, the state treated the profession of the Catholic Faith as a capital crime. Further, aggressive polemicists began to produce writings that attacked Gods revealed religion. To counter these problems, the Fathers responded in speech and print. The survey below reveals a wide spectrum of issues addressed in Patristic apologetic literature.

1169

Appendixes

Quadratus, a native of Asia Minor, wrote his Apology to Adrian circa A.D. 124. Contained in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 4.3.2, the Apology notes that certain recipients of miracles from the Lord Jesus Christ were still alive in the second century. The testimony afforded by these beneficiaries of the miraculous assisted in spreading the Gospel. The Letter to Diognetus, written by an anonymous author A.D. 125-200, is another interesting apologetics treatise. This defense of the Faith asserts that Christians, far from having no role in secular society, were really constituted as the soul of the world (Letter 6.2). This fact is just as relevant in A.D. 2002. Circa A.D. 140, Aristides of Athens composed his Apology. This Athenian philosopher explains that Christianity is the true religion; traceable in its origin to the only begotten Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ (Apology 15). In our present age, this truth should not be watered down or ignored by Catholics, but taught with patience and charity. Aristo of Pella (Palestine), perhaps the first apologist to address the relationship between the Old and New Covenants, authored Discussion Between Jason and Papiscus Concerning Christ. Composed circa A.D. 140, the Discussion demonstrates the reasonableness of the allegorical interpretation (i.e. typology) of sacred Scripture. This methodology is essential for Biblical studies. The Apology for Christian Philosophy, composed A.D. 161-180, came from the rhetorician of Asia Minor named Miltiades. Part of Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 5.17.5, the Apology is a vindication of Christianity addressed to the temporal rulers of the day (e.g. Marcus Aurelius). Again, further encouragement to interact with the world. A.D. 165175, Tatian the Syrian wrote his Address to the Greeks. Tatian upholds the truth that God is without beginning and has always existed (Address 4). It is interesting to see, even in the second century, the Fathers interacting with such a profound concept. St. Melito, the bishop of Sardis in Libya, penned his Apology for Christianity circa A.D. 170. Discovered in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 4.26.14, the work of the bishop mentions the Christian use of the Old Testament. These books are integral to the Catholic Church. Supplication for the Christians, written circa A.D. 177, comes to us from Athenagoras of Athens, a Christian philosopher. This treatise states that the prophets of the Old Testament, who functioned under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, reveal prophecies that testify to the truths of the Catholic Faith (Supplication 7). Fulfilled prophecy is an excellent device for apologetics. Circa A.D. 181, St. Theophilus of Antioch composed Discourse to Autolycus. This treatise contains one of the earliest written expressions of the term Trinity in reference to the Triune Godhead (Discourse 2.15). Undoubtedly, Trinitarian theology was aided by the Patristic thinkers. These samples are a small part of the apologetic literature from the Fathers. These early apologists covered a wide range of topics: miracles; Christian social interaction; the Churchs divine origin; Scripture and the function of doctrine. It is an outstanding endeavor to follow the example of the early Fathers and be able to explain, guard and defend the Catholic Faith.

1170

Appendixes

APPENDIX G THE LITURGY OF THE EIGHTH BOOK OF THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS The liturgy of the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, then, represents the use of Antioch in the fourth century. Its order is this: First comes the Mass of the Catechumens. After the readings (of the Law, the Prophets, the Epistles, Acts, and Gospels) the bishop greets the people with II Cor., xiii, 13 (The grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the charity of God and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all). They answer: And with thy spirit; and he speaks to the people words of comfort. There then follows a litany for the catechumens, to each invocation of which the people answer Kyrie eleison; the bishop says a collect and the deacon dismisses the catechumens. Similar litanies and collects follow for the Energumens, the Illuminandi (photizmenoi, people about to be baptized) and the public penitents, and each time they are dismissed after the collect for them. The Mass of the Faithful begins with a longer litany for various causes, for peace, the Church, bishops (James, Clement, Evodius, and Annianus are named), priests, deacons, servers, readers, singers, virgins, widows, orphans, married people, the newly baptized, prisoners, enemies, persecutors, etc., and finally for every Christian soul. After the litany follows its collect, then another greeting from the bishop and the kiss of peace. Before the Offertory the deacons stand at the mens doors and the subdeacons at those of the women that no one may go out, nor the door be opened, and the deacon again warns all catechumens, infidels, and heretics to retire, the mothers to look after their children, no one to stay in hypocrisy, and all to stand in fear and trembling. The deacons bring the offerings to the bishop at the altar. The priests stand around, two deacons wave fans (ripdia) over the bread and wine and the Anaphora (canon) begins. The bishop again greets the people with the words of II Cor., xiii, 13, and they answer as before: And with thy spirit. He says: Lift up your mind. R. We have it to the Lord. V. Let us thank the Lord. R. Right and just. He takes up their word: It is truly right and above all just to sing to Thee, Who art truly God, existing before all creatures, from Whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named. and so the Eucharistic prayer begins. He speaks of the only begotten Son, the Word and God, Saving Wisdom, first born of all creatures, Angel of thy great counsel, refers at some length to the Garden of Eden, Abel, Enoch, Abraham, Melchisedech, Job, and other saints of the Old Law. When he has said the words: the numberless army of Angels the Cherubim and six-winged Seraphim together with thousands of thousand Archangels and myriad myriads of Angels unceasingly and without silence cry out, all the people together say: Holy, holy, holy the Lord of Hosts, the heaven and earth are full of His glory, blessed forever, Amen. The bishop then again takes up the word and continues: Thou art truly holy and all-holy, highest and most exalted for ever. And thine only-begotten Son, our Lord and God Jesus Christ, is holy ; and so he comes to the words of Institution: in the night in which He was betrayed, taking bread in His holy and blameless hands and looking up to Thee, His God and Father, and breaking He gave to His disciples saying: This is the Mystery of the New Testament; take of it, eat. This is My body, broken for many for the remission of sins. So also having mixed the cup of wine and water, and having blessed it, He gave to them saying: Drink you all of this. This is My blood shed for many for the remission of sins. Do this in memory of Me. For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you announce My death until I come. Then follow the Anamimnesis (Remembering therefore His suffering and death and resurrection and return to heaven and His future second coming ), the Epiklesis or invocation (sending Thy Holy Spirit, the witness of the sufferings of the Lord Jesus to this sacrifice, that He may change this bread to the body of thy Christ and this cup to the blood of thy Christ ), and a sort of litany (the great Intercession) for the Church, clergy, the Emperor, and for all sorts and conditions of men, which ends with a doxology, and all the people say: Amen. In this litany is a curious petition (after that for the Emperor and the army) which joins the saints to living people for whom the bishop prays: We also offer to thee for (upr) all thy

1171

Appendixes

holy and eternally well-pleasing patriarchs, prophets, just apostles, martyrs, confessors, bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, readers, singers, virgins, widows, laymen, and all those whose names thou knowest. After the Kiss of Peace (The peace of God be with you all) the deacon calls upon the people to pray for various causes which are nearly the same as those of the bishops litany and the bishop gathers up their prayers in a collect. He then shows them the Holy Eucharist, saying: Holy things for the holy and they answer: One is holy, one is Lord, Jesus Christ in the glory of God the Father, etc. The bishop gives the people Holy Communion in the form of bread, saying to each: The body of Christ, and the communicant answers Amen. The deacon follows with the chalice, saying: The blood of Christ, chalice of life. R. Amen. While they receive, the xxxiii Psalm (I will bless the Lord at all times) is said. After Communion the deacons take what is left of the Blessed Sacrament to the tabernacles (pastophria). There follows a short thanksgiving, the bishop dismisses the people and the deacon ends by saying: Go in peace. (Apostolic Constitutions)

1172

Appendixes

APPENDIX H LITURGICAL CYCLES OF SERVICES In this appendix there are two different ways of focusing on the cycles. Notice that in source B, the cycles are five instead of four. There is also a source C, which explains how Pascha is dated. A) The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: Orthodox Worship and Calivas, Orthodox Worship.
The Daily Cycle of prayer The daily non-sacramental worship of the Orthodox Church consists mainly of the Evening Service of the Vespers (Esperinos) and the Morning Service of Matins (Orthros), which are the longest and the most elaborate of the Orthodox Services. In addition to them, the daily cycle contains the following Services: The four services of the Hours (Hores); The Compline Service (Apodeipnon); The Midnight Service (Mesonyktikon).

The Evening Service of Vespers In the Orthodox Church the liturgical day begins in the evening with the setting of the sun. This practice follows the biblical account of creation, And there was evening and there was morning, one day (Gen. 1:5). The service celebrated with the setting of the sun is Vespers. It takes us through creation, sin, and salvation in Christ. The service also contains a variety of festal elements that concentrate on particular moments in sacred history, and/or commemorate the lives of saints or memorable events in the life of the Church. The Morning Service of Matins (Orthros) Like the Vespers Service, the Orthros Service is centered in thanksgiving for the coming of the true light of Christ and calls all to repentance by uniting the elements of morning psalmody and prayer with mediation on Biblical canticles, the Gospel reading, and the particular theme of the day in the given verses and hymns. The service also contains a variety of festal elements which concentrate on particular moments in sacred history, and/or commemorate the lives of saints or memorable events in the life of the Church. The Four Services of the Hours The central prayer of each hour is the Lords Prayer. In addition each hour has a set of psalms, hymns, and a distinctive prayer for that Hour. Each Hour has a particular theme based upon some aspect of the Christevent and salvation history. The general themes of the Hours are : the coming of the true light (First); the descent of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost (Third); the crucifixion and passion of the Lord (Sixth); and the death and burial of our Lord (Ninth). Each of the Hours is numbered with intervals of the day : the first (our sunrise); the Second (our midmorning, 9:00 AM); the Third (noonday, 12:00 PM) and; the Fourth (midday, 3:00 PM). The Compline Service It is a service of psalms and prayers to read following the evening meal before one retires to sleep. It focuses on three things: thanksgiving for the day that has passed; protection for the ensuing night; and forgiveness of wrongs committed during the day.

1173

Appendixes

The Midnight service This service consists of psalms and prayers that are said in the middle of the night. This service focuses on the significant middle of the night events that are found in Scripture, the resurrection of our Lord and His Second Coming. The Weekly Cycle As the liturgical life of the Church developed and expanded, days of the week took on special meaning. Gradually the Orthodox East developed its weekly cycle, which succinctly celebrates the entire yearly cycle. Sunday the Lords Day, a weekly Pascha. As the first day of the week it serves as a witness to the risen Lord. Monday the second day of the week is dedicated to the angels. Tuesday the third day of the week honors St. John the Baptist and through him all the prophets. Wednesday 559 Thursday the fifth day of the week is dedicated to the Holy Apostles and St. Nicholas who stands as a model for all the great hierarchs, the successors to the Apostles and the teachers of the Church. Friday [See footnote for Wednesday] Saturday the sixth day of the week the Church commemorates the martyrs. The ascetics, and all those who have fallen asleep in the hope of the resurrection. The Yearly Cycle The festal calendar of the Orthodox Church is a result of continuous development. Each age adds to it its own significant ecclesiastical events and its own martyrs and witnesses of the faith, who in the purity of their hearts have seen the invisible God as in a mirror, and through whom divine grace has richly flowed to us (Fr. A. Calivas). It is always in progress. The Orthodox liturgical year begins on September 1st, in accordance with an ancient custom initiated by Constantine the Great in the early fourth century. The succession of the feasts and fasts of the liturgical year vary in importance and are usually divided into two large categories: immovable and movable. The immovable feasts fall on the same date from year to year while the movable feasts are related to the celebration of Pascha. Each feast is celebrated with the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, because the celebration of the Eucharist constitutes the perpetual festival of the Church (the Eucharist makes the day a true feast, a participation in the joy of the resurrection and the Kingdom, which is to come).

B) To Believer.
The Orthodox Church is composed of five cycles of various durations. These cycles repeat themselves while travelling along a linear time progression which leads to the second coming of Christ.

559

Wednesdays and Fridays bring into focus the combined mystery of the cross and the person of the Theotokos. Both days proclaim two things: a) the immeasurable love of God; b) the saving human response to His love through the acceptance of His will and purpose.

1174

Appendixes

The services of the Orthodox Church are both a part of and exist within these cycles and are modified according to the influences of each cycle at a given point in time. To better understand the significance of the liturgical cycles on Orthodox Worship, it is first necessary to understand the cycles themselves. The Great Cycle of Life The first one is the great cycle of life, which embraces the whole life of a man from birth to death, and which consists in liturgical actions which are not repeated, occurring only once in a persons lifetime. These are Holy Baptism, Holy Chrismation, and the Burial Service. In addition, there also belongs in this great cycle the Sacraments or Sacramental Blessings which bestow special grace for a particular office or vocation with the community. These are Holy Matrimony, the Monastic Tonsure and Holy Orders. The Daily Cycle Another major cycle which involves the entire life of an Orthodox Christian is the daily cycle of prayers and praises offered by the Church, once every twenty-four hours. These services express our remembrance of events which happened at certain hours and contain petitions relevant to these memories. In antiquity the day was considered to begin at sunset and thus was divided according to the following order. Night began at 6:00 p.m. (according to our reckoning) and was divined into four parts (called watches - the time of changing guards): Evening (6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.); Midnight (9:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight); Cock-crow (12:00 midnight to 3:00 a.m.); and Morning (3:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.). Day began at 6:00 a.m. (our reckoning) and it, too, was divided into four watches (or hours). First Hour (6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.); Third Hour (9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon); Sixth Hour (12:00 noon to 3:00 p.m.); and Ninth Hour (3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Following this ancient pattern. Orthodox Christians begin each portion of the day with common prayer, which has resulted in the following eight Services, customarily divided into three groups: Ninth Hour, Vespers, and Compline; Nocturns (Midnight Service), Matins, and First Hour; Third and Sixth Hours. In addition to this daily pattern, in certain monasteries during certain periods of fasting, each of the Hours is followed by an intermediate Office called the Interhour. Also included in the daily cycle are the Offices for the Blessing of the Table and the Morning and Evening Prayers. The Divine Liturgy is often included in this daily cycle, normally being served after the Sixth Hour (although, during Fast Periods it is celebrated after Vespers). Often treated as part of the daily cycle, the Divine Liturgy is not prescribed to be celebrated every day (as it is in many cathedrals and monasteries) and in a theological and mystical sense actually stands outside of chronological time since it also serves as a point of contact with the eternal, where its participants (by virtue of their partaking of the Holy Eucharist) are transported to a point outside of time where there is no past, present or future, but only the eternal Now [The Festal Menaion, trans. Mother Mary and Archimandrite Kallistos Ware, p. 40]. On days when the Divine Liturgy is not celebrated, the Service of the Typical Psalms is celebrated in its place after the Sixth Hour (it also sometimes precedes the Liturgy), thus forming part of the third group of Daily Services with the Third and Sixth Hours. In addition to these two cycles, there are also three others: The Weekly Cycle of the Eight Tones (Octoechos), the Annual Cycle of Movable Feasts (dependent upon Pascha), and the Annual Cycle of Fixed Feasts, beginning on the first day of the Church Year - September 1. These three cycles are combined and superimposed on each other, giving the Liturgical Year a constant and unfailing variety. The Weekly Cycle

1175

Appendixes

Each day of the Weekly Cycle is dedicated to certain special memorials. Sunday is dedicated to Christs Resurrection; Monday honors the Holy Bodiless Powers (Angels, Archangels, etc.); Tuesday is dedicated to the prophets and especially the greatest of the Prophets, St. John the Forerunner and Baptist of the Lord; Wednesday is consecrated to the Cross and recalls Judas betrayal; Thursday honors the Holy Apostles and Hierarchs, especially St. Nicholas, Bishop of Myra in Lycia; Friday is also consecrated to the Cross and recalls the day of the Crucifixion; Saturday is dedicated to All Saints, especially the Mother of God, and to the memory of all those who have departed this life in the hope of resurrection and eternal life. Each week of the Weekly Cycle is centered around the Eight Tones (the basis for Orthodox Church music) and each Week has its appointed Tone. On Saturday Evening of Bright Week (the Eve of St. Thomas Sunday), the cycle of Tones begins with Tone One and, week by week, the sequence continues through the successive Tones, One to Eight, changing to a new Tone every Saturday Evening, throughout the year. The Annual Cycle of Feasts The Annual Cycle of Movable Feasts The yearly cycle of Movable Feasts is that centered around Holy Pascha and is called movable because, being linked with the Feast of Feasts, it shifts from year to year as Pascha itself falls on a different date each year. The Feasts which comprise this cycle are Palm Sunday (the Sunday before Pascha), Holy Ascension (the fortieth day after Pascha) and Holy Pentecost (the Descent of the Holy Spirit - the fiftieth day after Pascha). The Annual Cycle of Fixed Feasts Each day of the year is dedicated to the memory of particular events or Saints and these memorials always fall on the same Calendar date each year. Thus, in honor of each event or Saint (s), special hymns have been composed which are added to the usual hymns and prayers of the day. The Great Feasts Among the feasts of the Church Year, a place of special honor belongs to the Feast of Feasts, Holy Pascha.560 Next in importance come the Twelve Great Feasts, which can be divided into two groups: Feasts of the Lord and Feasts of the Mother of God. Great Feasts of the Lord:561 1. The Universal Exaltation (or Elevation) of the Life-creating Cross (Sept. 14) 2. The Nativity of Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ (Christmas - Dec. 25) 3. The Theophany (or Epiphany) of Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ (Jan. 6) 4. The Entrance of Our Lord Jesus Christ into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday-Sunday before Pascha) 5. The Ascension of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (40 days after Pascha) 6. The Descent of the Holy Spirit (Holy Pentecost - 50 days after Pascha) 7. The Transfiguration of Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ (Aug. 6) Great Feasts of the Mother of God: 1. The Nativity of the Most-Holy Theotokos (Sept. 8) 2. The Entrance (or Presentation) of the Theotokos into the Temple (Nov. 21) 3. The Meeting of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Temple (Feb. 2)
560

The Pascha feast is settled according to the spring equinox and the Jewish Passover. Thus these other feats, which are underlined, are too: Palm Sunday (the Entry into Jerusalem), the Ascension of Christ, and Pentecost (The descent of the Holy Spirit). The following list of dates links only to fixed feasts of the Orthodox Church (New Calendar). For the day on which Old Calendarists celebrate any dates fixed commemorations, add 13 days to that date. All dates having to do with Pascha (Easter) - beginning of Great Lent, the Ascension, Pentecost, etc. - are not fixed.

561

1176

Appendixes

4. The Annunciation to the Most-Holy Theotokos (Mar. 25) 5. The Falling-Asleep (or Dormition) of the Most-Holy Theotokos (Aug. 15) C) Lewis J. Patsavos, Dating Pascha in the Orthodox Church The long-awaited common celebration of Pascha on April 15, 2001 by all Christians has come and gone. It was in 1990 when this coincidence last occurred and will be in 2004 when it occurs again. In anticipation of this common observance by all Christians, much was said and written. What was stressed was the need to keep alive the momentum of the occasion. Unless we all understand the significance of this event, it will remain nothing more than a peculiarity of the calculations related to the date of Pascha. In one sense, that is what it is. But in another sense, it is the convergence of all that we as Christians in the East and West profess regarding the centrality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ as the cornerstone of our faith. Nothing challenges the credibility of this fact to non-believers more than the scandal of our division on this point of celebration. In the ardent desire to address this problematic and troubling reality, the following contribution is offered..... Almost from the very beginning of the existence of the Christian Church, the issue regarding the date of our Lords death and resurrection presented variations. Although the New Testament relates these events to the Jewish Passover, the details of this relationship are not clear. On the one hand, the tradition of the synoptic gospels identifies the Lords last supper with His disciples as a passover meal. This would place the death of our Lord on the day after Passover. On the other hand, the tradition of the gospel of St. John situates the death of our Lord at the very hour the paschal lambs were sacrificed on the day of Passover itself. This variation in the interpretation of the scriptures led to two different practices. The one observed Pascha on the day of Passover, regardless of the day of the week. The other observed it on the Sunday following Passover. By the 4th century, the latter practice prevailed throughout the Church universally; nevertheless, differences continued to exist. In response to this ongoing problem, the First Ecumenical Council convened at Nicaea in 325 took up the issue. It determined that Pascha should be celebrated on the Sunday which follows the first full moon after the vernal equinox-the actual beginning of spring. If the full moon happens to fall on a Sunday, Pascha is observed the following Sunday. The day taken to be the invariable date of the vernal equinox is March 21. Hence, the determination of the date of Pascha is governed by a process dependent on the vernal equinox and the phase of the moon. Another factor which figures prominently in determining the date of Pascha is the date of Passover. Originally, Passover was celebrated on the first full moon after the vernal equinox. Christians, therefore, celebrated Pascha according to the same calculation-that is, on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox. The correlation between the date of Pascha and the date of Passover is clear. Our Lords death and resurrection coincided with Passover, thereby assuring a secure point of reference in time. This assurance lasted, however, only for a short time. Events in Jewish history contributing to the dispersion of the Jews had as a consequence a departure from the way Passover was reckoned at the time of our Lords death and resurrection. This caused the Passover to precede the vernal equinox in some years. It was, in fact, this anomaly which led to the condemnation reflected in Canon 1 of Antioch (ca. 330) and Canon 7 of the Holy Apostles (late 4th century) of those who celebrate Pascha with the Jews. The purpose of this condemnation was to prevent Christians from taking into account the calculation of Passover in determining the date of Pascha. Most Christians eventually ceased to regulate the observance of Pascha by the Jewish Passover. Their purpose, of course, was to preserve the original practice of celebrating Pascha following the vernal equinox. Thus, the Council of Nicaea sought to link the principles for determining the date of Pascha to the norms for calculating Passover during our Lords lifetime.

1177

Appendixes

Despite the intervention of Nicaea, certain differences in the technicalities of regulating the date of Pascha remained even thereafter. This resulted occasionally in local variations until, by the 6th century, a more secure mode of calculation based on astronomical data was universally accepted. This was an alternative to calculating Pascha by the Passover and consisted in the creation of so-called paschal cycles. Each paschal cycle corresponded to a certain number of years. Depending upon the number of years in the cycle, the full moon occurred on the same day of the year as at the beginning of the cycle with some exceptions. The more accurate the cycle, the less frequent were the exceptions. In the East, a 19-year cycle was eventually adopted, whereas in the West an 84-year cycle. The use of two different paschal cycles inevitably gave way to differences between the Eastern and Western Churches regarding the observance of Pascha. A further cause for these differences was the adoption by the Western Church of the Gregorian Calendar in the 16th century. This took place in order to adjust the discrepancy by then observed between the paschal cycle approach to calculating Pascha and the available astronomical data. The Orthodox Church continues to base its calculations for the date of Pascha on the Julian Calendar, which was in use at the time of the First Ecumenical Council. As such, it does not take into account the number of days, which have since then accrued due to the progressive loss of time in this calendar. Practically speaking, this means that Pascha may not be celebrated before April 3, which was March 21, the date of the vernal equinox, at the time of the First Ecumenical Council. In other words, a difference of 13 days exists between the accepted date for the vernal equinox then and now. Consequently, it is the combination of these variables which accounts for the different dates of Pascha observed by the Orthodox Church and other Christian Churches. Specifically with regard to this years date of Pascha, the following observations are made. The invariable date of the vernal equinox is taken to be April 3 (March 21 on the Julian Calendar). Pascha must therefore be observed on the Sunday following the full moon which comes after that date. According to the 19-year Paschal cycle, the first full moon which comes after April 3 this year is on May 1 (April 18 on the Julian Calendar) - the day assigned to the Jewish Passover as calculated originally. In reality, this full moon falls on April 27, a discrepancy left uncorrected in the paschal cycle. As already stated, the provision of the First Ecumenical Council calls for Pascha to be observed on the Sunday following the first full moon after the vernal equinox. Since May 1, for the reasons stated above, is taken to be the date of that full moon, the following Sunday, May 5, is the day on which Pascha is observed this year. If anything, this review of the complexities surrounding the issue of the date of Pascha underscores the compelling need to revisit it with patience and openness. This was the spirit which predominated at the most recent consultation on the matter held in Aleppo, Syria in 1997. One of its conclusions was that the present differences in the calendars and lunar tables (paschal cycles) employed rather than to differences in fundamental theological outlook. In view of the fact that both the Julian and Gregorian modes of calculation diverge from the astronomical data, it behooves us to return to the norms determined by the Council of Nicaea. Although the council did not itself undertake a detailed regulation of the paschal calculation, it did in fact respect available contemporary science regarding the vernal equinox and the phase of the moon. We can do no less today. October, 2001 Dr. Lewis J. Patsavos, Professor of Canon Law Holy Cross School of Theology

1178

Appendixes

APPENDIX I LITURGICAL BOOKS

The books required for the celebration of the Churchs divine services are specific to each ecclesial tradition. The following books are those belonging to the Byzantine liturgical tradition that is the normal usage of the Eastern Orthodox Churches. There are some differences between the Greek and Slavic traditions within the larger Byzantine tradition, and these will be indicated below in the sections covering the relevant books. The Greek name of each book is given first, followed with the Slavonic name in parentheses. Apostolos (Apostol) The Apostolos (book of the apostle), also called the Epistle Lectionary, is the book containing prescribed readings from the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles, arranged according to the Orthodox liturgical year. The lections are used in the first scripture reading in the Divine Liturgy, usually called the Epistle reading. This lectionary often includes the prokeimena and alleluias that are sung before and after the epistle reading, respectively. Archieratikon (Tchinovnik) The Archieratikon (book for the bishop, also spelled Arkhieratikon), is the bishops liturgical service for the Divine Liturgies as well as other services and blessings reserved to the bishop. It is used in celebrating a Hierarchical Divine Liturgy, having pontifical editions of the Divine Liturgies of St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil the Great, as well as the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, and other episcopal services, such as ordinations. Evangelion (Evangelie) Also known as the Tetraevangelion, the Evangelion is the Book of Gospels, usually arranged by the pericopes appointed to be read throughout the liturgical year. It is generally kept on the altar table in a metal case decorated with icons of the evangelists; tradition forbids the use of animal skin on the altar table. Great Euchologion (Bolshoi Ieresky Molitvoslov) The or Great Euchologion principally contains the prayers of the priest, deacon, and reader for Vespers, Orthros, and the Divine Liturgy. Hieratikon (Sluzhebnik) The Hieratikon (also spelled Ieratikon, also known as the Hierotelestikon and the Liturgikon), the book of the priest or Priests Service Book. It contains the priests prayers and petitions for Vespers, Orthros, and Divine Liturgy. Horologion (Tchasoslov) The Horologion is the Book of Hours, containing the fixed texts of the services of the Daily Cycle. There is also the larger Great Horologion (horologion to mega). The Great Book of Hours (Greek Horologion) is a Choir book for the use of the Reader and Singers. It contains the fixed portions of the Daily Offices (Vespers, Matins, etc.) with most of the Priests and Deacons parts omitted. It also contains a list of Feasts and Saints days throughout the year as well as appropriate Troparia and Kontakia for each. In addition there is a section containing Troparia and Kontakia for Sundays and movable Feasts of the period of the Triodion and Pentecostarion, as well as Theotokia for the whole year. There are also contained in this book various Canons and other services in frequent use. In the Russian Church, there is

1179

Appendixes

also an abbreviated form of the Great Book of Hours, called simply the Book of Hours (Russian Chasoslov). For the movable parts of the services (those which change every day) there are four volumes constituting the three main cycles of the Church Year: 1) the Weekly Cycle Octoechos; 2) the Annual Cycle of Movable Feasts Triodion and Pentecostarion; and 3) the Annual Cycle of Fixed Feasts the Menaia.

Liturgikon The Liturgikon (Gk., liturgy book; Slav. Sluebnik, service book) is the priests book for the Divine Liturgies, and also contains the other prayers used by the priest at the altar, such as the prayers of Vespers and Matins. It is also used by the deacon. The corresponding book used by a bishop is the Archieratikon.
At one time, the Liturgikon formed part of the Great Euchologion (Large priestly prayerbook) - a single book that contained all the priests prayers for the Divine Liturgies, the hours of prayer, and the sacraments and other services. Eventually this book was split in two, to form the Liturgikon, containing the Divine Liturgies and the daily prayer services, and the Small Euchologion, or simply Euchologion, containing the other Mysteries and blessings (Metropolitan Cantor Institute). Menaia (Mineya) The Menaia (books of the months) is the collection of twelve books (each a Menaion), one for each month of the calendar year, containing the propers for the immovable feasts and the saints days falling in that month. Octoechos (Oktoikh) Octoechos (book of the eight tones) refers to two books containing the common of the cycle of liturgical services relating to the eight tonesThe Great Octoechos (Parakletike, book of supplication) and an abridged version of it called the Little Octoechos, which contains only the materials for Sundays. Pentecostarion (Tzvyetnaya Triod) The Pentecostarion conatins the propers for the services of the Paschal season, i.e., from the Day of Pascha until the First Sunday after Pentecost. Prophetologion (Paremijnik) The Prophetologion contains the Old Testament readings for Vespers. Psalter (Psaltir) The Psalter is simply the biblical book of the Psalms of David arranged for liturgical use, divided into twenty sections called kathismata. The entire Psalter is appointed to be read through once every week in church (twice during the weeks of Great Lent).Each kathisma is further divided into three stasis. Small Euchologion (Trebnik) Also known as the Book of Needs, the Small Euchologion (mikron euchologion or agiasmatarion, book of blessings) usually contains the forms for the mysteries (sacraments) other than the Eucharist and ordination. Triodion (Triod)

1180

Appendixes

The Triodion (book of the three odes) contains the propers from the three-week pre-Lenten season; the six-week Lenten season, and the Holy Week. A fragment of the First Week of Lent follows: Typikon (Ustav) The Typikon (also spelled as Typicon) is the Book of the Ordo or Book of directives and rubrics, which regulate the order of the divine services for each day of the year. It presupposes the existence of other liturgical books which contain the fixed and variable parts of these services. In the strict monastic sense, the Typikon of the monastery includes both the rule of life of the community as well as the rule of prayer (Calivas, The Origins of Pascha and Great Week). Therefore, it regulates the liturgical celebrations of the Orthodox Church. (Adapted from Liturgical Books and A Dictionary of Orthodox Liturgical Terms)

1181

Appendixes

APPENDIX J WESTERN RITE ORTHODOXY

Western Rite Orthodoxy? Impossible! To be Orthodox you must be Eastern or Byzantine Rite. This is a common reaction to the idea of Western Rite Orthodoxy. The assumption, generally based upon lack of information, is that Orthodoxy is always Byzantine, and that the Western Rite belongs to Roman Catholicism. I converted to Orthodox Christianity in 1970, and gratefully spent the next eighteen years being formed in the Eastern Rite. To this day I greatly venerate and respect the Eastern or Byzantine Rite. It gave me both an attitude of prayer and a holy mode of worship. It exposed me to the incredible world of Orthodox saints, holy fathers, and spiritual guides, without which my soul would have far less religious content. In the mid-1980s I began to be especially interested in the larger question of missionary work in North America. I knew that there were many wellestablished ethnic parishesGreek, Russian, Antiochian, Serbianand I saw that some Western converts are able to adapt to the Eastern Rite after an initial adjustment. After all, I and my family had done so. But as a priest I also encountered former Roman Catholics and Episcopalians who were clearly searching for Christs True Church but were often bewildered and confused by what appeared as complexities in the Eastern Rite. And if the parish with which they came into contact also used very little English in the Liturgy, and emphasized oldworld foods and customs, it was even more difficult for them to make the leap into Orthodoxy. I began to wonder what, if anything, could be done to bring Orthodoxy closer to the mind and heritage of Western people. It wasnt until I heard about the Western Rite movement in the Antiochian Archdiocese that I began to see other possibilities. It was, for me, an astonishing discovery. Whence the Western Rite? It all began several years ago. One afternoon, Archpriest Paul Schneirla, the Vicar-General of the Western Rite in the Antiochian Archdiocese, phoned from Brooklyn to invite me to examine the viability of Western Rite missionary work in Orthodoxy. He sent me a good deal of material to read and study, for I wanted to prove to myself that there really could be such a thing as Western Rite Orthodoxy. I also did some independent research. Thus was launched a fascinating journey through time, into a little-known and rarely discussed aspect of Orthodox liturgical history and developmentthe Orthodox Western Ritewhich is only now coming into its own, demonstrating both its functionality and its rightful and fruitful place in the Church. Of course the whole subject of worship itself is rooted in the universal and One Church of the first thousand years of Christianity. As Father David Abramtsov wrote in his classic study, A Brief History of Western Orthodoxy: From the earliest beginnings of the Christian Church there were divergences in the manner in which the Eucharist was celebrated in the various regional Churches. Within these Churches, with their mixed populations, differing historical development, local traditions, diverse racial temperaments, and the like, it was inevitable that a large number of varying types of Eucharistic prayers or anaphoras should emerge. The unity of the Church of Christ and the unity of the Eucharistic Sacrifice did not require a uniformity in the celebration of that Sacrifice. The liturgical liberty, the variations and local differences were not only tolerated, but were constantly being elaborated upon. What is more important, they manifested the Catholic nature of the Church. Unity in Diversity In the first Christian centuries a family of Eastern Rites evolved in the Middle East and in what later became Byzantium, Russia, and the countries of Eastern Europe. Similarly, a family of Western Rites arose in Europe, Britain, and parts of North Africa. Although these Western Rites

1182

Appendixes

apparently came originally from Antioch, they soon expressed the legitimate mind-set and culture of Western Orthodox Christians. Both liturgical families developed under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in the one undivided Church. Each family of rites fully recognized the other, clergy concelebrated when in each others lands, as opportunities presented themselves. No one thought this odd or unusual, for the Faith was exactly the same and was fully expressed in each rite. Thus, whether in the Eastern or Western parts of the Christian world, Orthodoxy still meant both right-worship and right-belief. The ancient patristic dictum, unity in diversity, was a living part of the Churchs witness (today, as the movement toward reunion between the Orthodox and the so-called Monophysite Churches, such as the Copts, progresses, the Church may soon absorb into her bosom still another family of rites, cut off from the living experience of the Church for more than a thousand yearsjust as the Western Rite had been until recently). In my reading I discovered that, at least from the 17th century on, the Eastern Orthodox patriarchs had a renewed awareness of the diversity of rites in Orthodoxy. Although the average Orthodox Christian today thinks of the contemporary Eastern Rite as fairly standardized, this is not, strictly speaking, true. There are legitimate and sometimes great variations between the so-called Greek and Russian styles of serving the Liturgy. In addition, the Russian Church, both in Russia and abroad, has now restored the use of what is called the Old Ritethe unique liturgical style and text used in Russia for more tha five hundred years before the reforms of Patriarch Nikon of Moscow in the 17th century. The Old and the so-called New Rites now exist side by side and in harmony in the Russian Church. In addition, there are many other variations in the Byzantine Rite, sometimes even within the same Orthodox jurisdictions. Modern Efforts at Establishing a Western Rite In the mid-nineteenth century there were new efforts to bring Western Christianity into the Orthodox fold via the Western Rite. Alexis Khomiakov, the renowned Russian philosopher and theologian, and General Alexander Kireev, a prominent Russian layman, were among those that inspired a critical yet appreciative study of Western Rites among the Orthodox. In fact, in 1870 the holy Synod of Moscow established a permanent commission to examine the rites of Western Christianity for ex-Roman Catholics and Anglicans/Episcopalians. In 1904 this commission was asked by Archbishop Tikhon Belavin of North America (the future Patriarch of Moscow and now a canonized saint)a man of immense spiritual gifts and great missionary heartto examine the American edition of the Book of Common Prayer, used by Episcopalians. After corrections to bring it into conformity with the Orthodox Faith, the Holy Synod gave approval for its use. Because of his interest in Western Rite missionary outreach, Saint Tikhon is today known as the Patron of the Western Rite, and the corrected eucharistic liturgy from the Book of Common Prayer now bears the additional distinction of being called the Rite of Saint Tikhon. Along a similar line, in the 1920s, former Roman Catholic parishes in Poland were received into the Russian Orthodox Church. They were permitted to use the Gregorian Western Rite (named for the seventh-century Orthodox saint and Bishop of Rome, Saint Gregory the Great, called the Dialogist on the Orthodox calendar). At this same time Constantinople concurred in principle with the idea of restored Western Rite Orthodoxy. Then, in the 1930s, the Moscow Patriarchate accepted a Western Rite group in France, about ten parishes, with the wise proviso that clergy of Western and Eastern Rites be able to serve in both rites. This inter-participation in rites, Father Abramtsov explains, is exactly what shows in concrete terms that individual clergy as well as Churches are in communion with each other. Because of dangerous political developments for the Russian Church in the Soviet Union, these French Western Rite clergy came under the jurisdiction of Constantinople in 1953. By 1960 they had been received under the protection of a most remarkable man, Archbishop John

1183

Appendixes

Maximovitch (d.1966) of the Russian Orthodox Church in Exile. Well known to Orthodox Christians throughout the world and in every jurisdiction as a miracle-worker and great ascetic, he is called Blessed John by his venerators today. His tomb in the crypt of the Cathedral of Our Lady, Joy of All Who Sorrow, in San Francisco, is an object of pilgrimage for thousands each year. St. John Maximovitch was canonized in 1994; at the time, his relics were unearthed and found to be miraculously incorrupt. While Archbishop in Europe, John Maximovitch was also the first Orthodox hierarch of modern times to restore to the consciousness of Orthodoxy the previously forgotten saints of the preschismatic Westsuch as Saint Patrick, Enlightener of Ireland, Saint Martin of Tours, and many others. For us in the Antiochian Archdiocese, however, another historic year was 1958 when, after approval from Patriarch Alexander III of Antioch, Metropolitan Antony Bashir, of blessed memory, issued an edict authorizing the use of the Western Rite in North America. He observed that he had met innumerable non-Orthodox Christians in the United States and Canada who were attracted by our Orthodox Faith, but could not find a congenial home in the liturgical world of Eastern Christendom. Thus began a new chapter in the history of the Western Rite movement, which today numbers in excess of 10,000 souls, according to Father Paul Schneirla. In addition, there are a smaller number of Western Rite groups under the Moscow Patriarchate in this country, in the Russian Church in Exile, and under the Patriarch of Romania. Coming Home to my Western Heritage Following a period of personal study and prayer, I was moved to ask for reception into the Western Rite Vicariate of the Antiochian Archdiocese in 1989. The missionary possibilities were, of course, self-evident. But for me personally, this move also meant regaining the rich legacy of my own Western heritage, whichas much as Byzantium is for Greekswas soul of my soul. When His Eminence, Metropolitan Philip Saliba, had received the former Evangelical Orthodox Church into the bosom of Eastern Rite Orthodoxy, he had warmly exclaimed, Welcome home! Now I, too, had come homehome to the Orthodoxy of my own Western forefathers! I have been privileged to be part of the movement into Orthodoxy of two large and thriving Western Rite parishes in Denver, Colorado. Saint Augustines, composed primarily of former Roman Catholics and Episcopalians, was received into the Church by His Grace, Bishop Antoun, in August of 1990. The following year, in October 1991, Saint Marks, a century-old parish of the Episcopal Church, was also received by Bishop Antoun. Because of the ongoing and deepening apostasy of the Anglican/Episcopal Church, several more parishes around the country were received the following year, and more are on the way. Building a workable Western Orthodox witness in the large Orthodox community of Denver has required prayer and creative outreach to the four Eastern Rite parishes of other jurisdictions in our metropolitan area. We have built bridges and strong friendshipsto such an extent that all of the Eastern Rite clergy of Denver not only accept the Western Rite, but invite us to concelebrate with them, and accept our invitations to concelebrate with us in the Western Rite. Much of the leadership for unity was provided by the late Bishop Kallistos of the Greek Archdiocese here in Denver. By his own request he twice presided over a Solemn High Mass at Saint Augustines before his sudden and untimely death. Truly, we have lived to see the ancient principle of unity in diversity restored in the Orthodox Church on this continent as the Holy Spirit is moving to bring as many souls as possible into the Ark of Salvation, Christs True Church. [Fr. Alexey Young (Fr. Ambrose562)]

Fr. Alexey (now Ambrose), after serving in the non-Patriarchal Russian Orthodox Church, joined the Antiochian jurisdiction and served for a time as curate of St. Augustines Orthodox Church in Denver,

562

1184

Appendixes

Colorado. Later he returned to the Russian Orthodox Church, and is now in the Oecumenical Patriarchate, serving as acting superior of St. Gregory Palamas Monastery in Haysville, Ohio.

1185

Appendixes

APPENDIX K THE CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF THE DIVINE LITURGY Although there are not so many changes in content, there are different ways of delineating the main structure of the Divine Liturgy. What follows is just one of them:
The Divine Liturgy of St. Chrysostom consists of readings from the Scriptures and of solemn hymns and prayers. Its spoken words are chanted by the priest and sung by the people, who are now replaced by the cantor or the choir. Besides the spoken words, the main part of the Liturgy is read inaudibly by the priest, a custom that now prevails. Most of the exaltations of the priest are from the ends of the prayers inaudibly read, and have lacked a complete meaning apart from the prayers. It is to be remembered that the Divine Liturgy is offered to enact the Holy Eucharist. Eucharist, from the Greek verb, Eucharistein, and the noun, Eucharistia, has not only the meaning of thanksgiving but, more so, that of sacrifice. Whenever Holy Communion is offered, the partaking by all the faithful is intended. As a prelude there are petitions, Bible readings, exhortations and the confession. They open the awesome drama in which all the faithful participate. This participation includes singing, reading, listening, some gestures and the partaking of Holy Communion. The following is a diagram of the Divine Liturgy: The Beginning: The Liturgy begins with the exclamation: Blessed is the Kingdom of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. With these words we praise, we bless and we glorify, with all our strength the material and the spiritual Kingdom of the Triune God. The people with their response of Amen, so it be, affirm His Kingdom as we enter into the Divine Work of the Church. The Great Litany This is the all embracing prayer of the Church. It is offered by the priest in prayers with the people responding, Kyrie eleison; Lord, have mercy. After asking God for deliverance from all that is harmful and for his divine help and protection we remember the Theotokos and all the Saints and commit ourselves and one another to Christ our God. This litany ends with the invocation of the Trinity to whom is due all glory. Antiphons563 These are psalm verses that are sung by the people. The first antiphon is : Bless the Lord, O my soul ... (Psalm 103); the second antiphon is : Praise the Lord, O my soul (Psalm 146); while the third antiphon consists of the Beatitudes of our Lord. More often than not, the antiphons are suppressed and the refrains are simply chanted : By the intercessions of the Theotokos ... and : Save us O Son as well as the Apolyticon of the Sunday or feast. Following the Second Antiphon, the hymn of faith in the divinity of Christ and His incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection as one of the Holy Trinity for the salvation of man composed by the Emperor Justinian is sung: Only-Begotten Son ...

Antiphons a versicle sung responsively, from Gk. antiphona, from anti- over against + phone voice: In the Orthodox Church there are readings from the Old Testament, especially from Psalms 102 and 145.

563

1186

Appendixes

Entry with the Gospel This entry represents the ancient practice when the priest would transfer the Gospel from the skevophylakion, the place for guarding vessels, to the Holy Altar. Prior to this entry the priest recites a prayer calling to mind the angels and archangels that serve with us and glorify with us. The priest, upon making the entrance to the center of the solea, lifts up the Gospel exclaiming Wisdom, which means Christ, and calls all the people to attention to worship and bow down to Christ. Technically speaking, the Small Entrance is not completed until the singing of the Thrice Holy Hymn. Therefore the troparia and the kontakia which are chanted are considered part of the Small Entrance. The Trisagion At this point in the service we join the angels as they sing the Thrice Holy Hymn (Isaiah 6:1-5). Readings from the New Testament The specific sections of the New Testament read are determined by the Church and are the same every year. The Apostolic Reading Prior to the reading of the Epistle, the Prokeimena are chanted, that is, the psalm verses intoned (reminiscent of the Old Testament readings that were once included) by the chanter/reader. Following the Prokeimena, the reading begins with the priests command Let us attend as these readings are of Christs apostles who were sent into the world to preach the true faith. The Gospel Reading In the Gospel reading we hear the word and the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the Good News of Christ has described by the four Evangelists : Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The priest prepares the people for the Lords Word by saying, Wisdom : Arise, let us hear the Holy Gospel. Peace be unto all. The Sermon The sermon is a sacred teaching based on the written word of God, or a teaching that discusses the lessons of the Christian life. Preaching is the main task of the bishop; however priest, deacons, and even pious members of the laity may preach. Traditionally, the sermon is offered following the reading of the Gospel. At this point the liturgy of the word concludes. THE LITURGY OF THE FAITHFUL The Cherubic Hymn and Entry with the Holy Gifts The Cherubic Hymn and the Entry begin with the intoning of That ever-guarded by Your Power we may give you the Glory, to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages, by the priest. At this point he unfolds the Antimision while reciting the appropriate prayers. The priest then censes the altar, the icons, and the people while reciting Having beheld the Resurrection of Christ... and the 50th Psalm. The unsanctified Gifts are then brought from the table of Preparation (the gifts were originally brought forth from the skevophylakion) and brought to the Altar during which the Cherubic hymn is sung : Let us put away all worldly care so that we may receive the King of all (An addition made in the 9th century). The priest, on behalf of the people recites the words of the penitent thief May the Lord our God, remember us all in -His Kingdom, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages.

1187

Appendixes

Ectenia (Litany) of the Oblation564 These petitions are 10 smaller prayers completing our supplications to the Lord. To these supplications the people respond, Grant this, O Lord. The Ectenia of the Oblation serve to spiritually prepare the faithful to offer the Mystery of the holy Eucharist. The Prayer of Oblation is then inaudibly read by the Priest saying: Enab1e us to offer to Thee gifts and spiritual sacrifices for our sins Kiss of Peace Centuries ago, the clergy as well as the laity would exchange the kiss of peace. This action took place after the priest or deacon said, Let us love one another, that with one mind we may confess. The Christians in attendance offered those in their particular order (i.e. laity to laity, deacon to deacon, priest to priest) a kiss of peace with the words Christ is in our midst. He is and always shall be. This movement took place while the choir chanted Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the Trinity One in essence and undivided because it is only in the love of the Trinity that we can proceed further into the Divine Liturgy. The Creed This is the concise and accurate confession of the Christian faith in 12 articles formulated by 1st & 2nd Ecumenical Councils. After the 9th century it was included and recited in every Liturgy; prior to that time it was recited only during the Liturgy at Easter. Before reciting the Nicene Creed, the deacon or priest says, The doors, the doors; in wisdom let us attend. At this point in the service any unbelievers or remaining catechumens were removed and the Doorkeeper closed the church. The Eucharistic Canon or Anaphora: We now enter the most sacred part of the Divine Liturgy the Anaphora, meaning the lifting-up or the elevation. The Anaphora includes the reading of silent prayers by the priest, dialogues between the faithful and the priest, and a number of liturgical actions. The priest begins, Let us stand aright. Let us stand in awe. Let us take care to offer the Holy Oblation in peace. The people respond A mercy of peace, a sacrifice of praise. Surely, Christ is the peace offering that alone brings Gods mercy. Additionally, He is the most perfect sacrifice of praise that can be offered to God by humanity. The priest then blesses the faithful with the exhortation of St. Paul (2 Cor. 13:14) the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God the Father, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. The cleric offers the fullness of the grace of Christ to the faithful and they in turn offer it back to him. The Eucharistic dialogue continues : Let us lift up our heart. We lift them up to the Lord. Let us give thanks unto the Lord. It is proper and right. The means by which we offer our thanks to God is by the lifting of our hearts to the Lord. With hearts lifted up to the Lord and thanksgiving rendered to God, the prayer of the canon continues. The priest then says Singing, proclaiming, shouting the victory hymn and saying. The people respond with the words of Isaiah : Holy! Holy! Holy! Lord of Sabaoth! Heaven and earth are full of your glory! Hosanna in the highest! Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the Highest. This is the climax of our thanksgiving to God; we join the angels in the Kingdom of heaven praising God the Father for all that he has done through Christ in the world. In this spirit humanity is lifted from the limitations of this age (the service is timeless).

564

Ectenia means litany. Oblation means offering. It is a solemn offering or presentation to God. It is thus applied to certain parts of the Eucharistic service. This part is also called Litany of the Ofertory.

1188

Appendixes

The faithful focus on the night when the Divine Son gave himself up for the life of the world. He took bread in His holy, pure, and blameless hands; and when he had given thanks and blessed it, he gave it to his holy disciples saying: Take! Eat! This is my Body which is broken for you for the remission of sins. And likewise after supper, he took the cup saying, Drink of it all of you. This is my Blood which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins. The priest continues the prayer silently and then while intoning, Offering You these gifts from Your own gifts, in all and for all he elevates the gifts towards heaven. In this offering, all the limitations of this life are broken. Humanity is filled with the gifts of the Spirit. After the gifts are elevated, the priest prays with the people that the gifts are changed into the very Body and Blood of Christ. The Holy Spirit is invoked, or called upon, as He is the one who guarantees the indwelling of the God with men in the Eucharist of the Church and in the Kingdom to come. The Holy Eucharist is offered in remembrance of Christ. In Him all things are made perfect and called to mind: forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and every righteous spirit made perfect in faith. And especially our most holy, pure, blessed and glorious Lady the Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary. During the censing of the gifts, the priest continues to commemorate the whole Church, and all mankind. Petitions Again small prayers are offered for the spiritual welfare of the city, the nation, the Church and the individual. Lords Prayer This prayer as the name suggests is the prayer that Christ Himself said- and which he gave as an example for all the believers throughout the ages. At this point in the service the people recite the Lords Prayer; the priest follows it with the exaltation. Breaking the Lamb At this point the priest elevates the Lamb (the consecrated Bread) saying: The Holy things for the holy people of God, and breaks it in commemoration of the actual Eucharist. The priest places the one piece of sanctified bread (IC) into the Chalice filled with the sanctified wine. Also at this time the priest pours warm water, zeon, into the Chalice, symbolizing the living character of the Risen Christ who body and soul are reunited and filled with the Holy Spirit (see, Justin the Martyr). Prayers before Holy Communion and Partaking of the Holy Gifts by the Priest Now the doors of the Altar are generally closed and the priest partakes of the Holy Gifts separately. The priest receives the body from the piece marked (XC) and receives the blood from the Chalice. He then combines both Elements into the Chalice; a later practice of the Church. The faithful meanwhile recite prayers in preparation to receive the Eucharist. Holy Communion Both the Holy Body and Precious Blood of Christ, combined in the Chalice, are given to the prepared faithful when the priest calls them to draw near with reverence. In ancient times the Holy Gifts were given to the faithful separately, first the Body and then the Cup, from which the faithful drank in turn, as is the continued practice for the clergymen today. Thanksgiving Prayers

1189

Appendixes

These are prayers of gratitude to the Almighty God for the blessing that is bestowed upon the faithful to commune with Him. Dismissal Hymn: The priest calls the people to depart with a prayer by which he asks the Lord to save Your people and bless Your inheritance. In conclusion he blesses the people, saying, May the blessing of the Lord come upon you. The people seal the Liturgy by responding, Amen. Blessed bread, antithoron, which means instead of the Gift, is given to all at the conclusion of the Divine Liturgy. (Mastrantonis, The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: The Content and Structure of the Divine Liturgy)

1190

Appendixes

APPENDIX L SERVICE OF PROSKOMIDE

The Offertory (Proskomide) takes place as follows : 1. The priest stands before the Beautiful Gate of the Iconostasion and strengthens himself with a series of prayers, beginning with Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner. Then reciting certain troparia (hymns), he venerates and kisses in succession the Holy Icons of Christ, the All-Holy Virgin Mary, St. John the Forerunner, and the Patron Saint of the Church. He ends with a special prayer, in which he beseeches the Lord to enable him to celebrate the Divine Liturgy blamelessly, without accusation by his conscience for any serious offense. 2. He then enters the Holy Sanctuary, where he makes three acts of reverence before the Holy Altar an kisses both the Book of the Gospel and the Altar, saying again Lord have mercy upon me, a sinner. He then puts on his vestments, blessing and kissing each one of them and reciting verses from Scripture that stress the virtues with which the priest should be adorned. 3. After vesting himself, the priest goes to the washstand and washes his hands, saying : I will wash my hands among the innocents, and so will I go around Thy Altar ... 4. As the service of the Matins (Orthros) continues, the priest moves on the Holy Credence. The Credence is a niche in the wall to the left of the holy cave in which the Savior of the world was born under the poorest conditions. And, so as we prepare to offer the Divine Liturgy, we call to mind the birth of our Holy Religion. 5. The priest then takes one of the loaves of oblation or prosfora offered by the faithful. The prosforon symbolizes the Mother of God, for it was by way of her body that Christ was born in the flesh. Holding the loaf in his left hand and the lance in his right, and touching the lance to the seal stamped on the prosforon, the priest elevates them both to the level of his head, saying You have redeemed us from the curse of the Law by Your precious blood ... then he makes the sign of the Cross over the Credence with the loaf and the lance, reciting Blessed is our God, always, now and forever and from all ages. He then makes the sign of the cross three times over the prosforon, saying each time: In remembrance of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ. He then thrusts the lance into the right side of the central square of the seal, then into the left, then above, then below, reciting with each thrust the corresponding prophecy of Isaiah: He was led as the sheep to the slaughter. And as a lamb dumb before his shearer, He opens not His mouth. In His humiliation His judgment was taken away. Who shall declare His generation?

1191

Appendixes

Then he inserts the lance beneath the seal and lifts up the cubic portion of the bread, the Amnos or Lamb, on which are stamped the letters IC-XC NIKA, Jesus Christ Conquers. This he places on the Holy Paten, pierces it crosswise with the lance, reciting verses from the Bible, which call to mind Christs crucifixion. The priest then pours wine and water into the Holy Chalice, covers it, and puts it aside. 6. Next, he cuts from the prosforon a triangular piece in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and this is placed at the right side of the Lamb. Then three rows of three small pieces are placed on the other side of the Lamb in honor of the apostles, martyrs, and other saints. In front of the Lamb, two rows of smaller pieces are arranged in memory of the living and the dead... The priest then puts the asterisk, symbolizing the star of Bethlehem, on the Paten, and covers with veils both the Paten and the Chalice. He censes the Covered Holy Gifts three times, and finally chants the beautiful closing prayer of the offertory service. (Augoustinos N. Kantiotes, Bishop of Florina, Greece)565

565

Qtd. in The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: Orthodox Liturgical Worship.

1192

Appendixes

APPENDIX M THE SACRAMENTS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH

One of the best-known prayers of the Orthodox Church speaks of the spirit of God being present in all places and filling all things. This profound affirmation is basic to Orthodoxys understanding of God and His relationship to the world. We believe that God is truly near to us. Although He cannot be seen, God is not detached from His creation. Through the persons of The Risen Christ and the Holy Spirit, God is present and active in our lives and in the creation about us. All our life and the creation of which we are an important part, points, to and reveals God. There are special experiences in our corporate life as Orthodox Christians when the perception of Gods presence and actions is heightened and celebrated. We call these events of the Church Sacraments. Traditionally, the Sacraments have been known as Mysteries in the Orthodox Church. This description emphasizes that in these special events of the Church, God discloses Himself through the prayers and actions of His people. Not only do the Sacraments disclose and reveal God to us, but also they serve to make us receptive to God. All the Sacraments affect our personal relationship to God and to one another. The Holy Spirit works through the Sacraments. He leads us to Christ who unites us with the Father. By participating in the Sacraments, we grow closer to God and to receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit. This process of deification, or theosis, as it is known by Orthodoxy, takes place not in isolation from others, but within the context of a believing community. Although the Sacraments are addressed to each of us by name, they are experiences which involve the entire Church. The Sacraments of the Orthodox Church are composed of prayers, hymns, scripture lessons, gestures and processions. Many parts of the services date back to the time of the Apostles. The Orthodox Church has avoided reducing the Sacraments to a particular formula or action. Often, a whole series of sacred acts make up a Sacrament. Most of the Sacraments use a portion of the material of creation as an outward and visible sign of Gods revelation. Water, oil, bread and wine are but a few of the many elements which the Orthodox Church employs in her Worship. The frequent use of the material of creation reminds us that matter is good and can become a medium of the Spirit. Most importantly, it affirms the central truth of the Orthodox Christian faith: that God became flesh in Jesus Christ and entered into the midst of creation thereby redirecting the cosmos toward its vocation to glorify its Creator. THE EUCHARIST The Holy Eucharist, which is known as the Divine Liturgy, is the central and most important worship experience of the Orthodox Church. Often referred to as the Sacrament of Sacraments, it is the Churchs celebration of the Death and Resurrection of Christ offered every Sunday and Holy day. All the other Sacraments of the Church lead toward and flow from the Eucharist, which is at the center of the life of the Church. The previous pamphlet in this series was devoted to the meaning and celebration of the Eucharist in the Orthodox Church. BAPTISM The Sacrament of Baptism incorporates us into the Church, the Body of Christ, and is our introduction to the life of the Holy Trinity. Water is a natural symbol of cleansing and newness of life. Through the three-fold immersion in the waters of Baptism in the Name of the Holy Trinity, one dies to the old ways of sin and is born to a new life in Christ. Baptism is ones public identification with Christ Death and victorious Resurrection. Following the custom of the early Church, Orthodoxy encourages the baptism of infants. The Church believes that the Sacrament is bearing witness to the action of God who chooses a child to be an important member of His people. From the day of their baptism, children are expected to mature in the life

1193

Appendixes

of the Spirit, through their family and the Church. The Baptism of adults is practiced when there was no previous baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity. CHRISMATION The Sacrament of Chrismation (Confirmation) immediately follows baptism and is never delayed until a later age. As the ministry of Christ was enlivened by the Spirit, and the preaching of the Apostles strengthened by the Spirit, so is the life of each Orthodox Christian sanctified by the Holy Spirit. Chrismation, which is often referred to as ones personal Pentecost, is the Sacrament which imparts the Spirit in a special way. In the Sacrament of Chrismation, the priest anoints the various parts of the body of the newlybaptized with Holy Oil saying: The seal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Oil, which is blessed by the bishop, is a sign of consecration and strength. The Sacrament emphasizes the truths that not only is each person a valuable member of the Church, but also each one is blessed by the Spirit with certain gifts and talents. The anointing also reminds us that our bodies are valuable and are involved in the process of salvation. The Sacraments of initiation always are concluded with the distribution of Holy Communion to the newly-baptized. Ideally, this takes place within the celebration of the Divine Liturgy. This practice reveals that Orthodoxy views children from their infancy as important members of the Church. There is never time when the young are not part of Gods people. CONFESSION As members of the Church, we have responsibilities to one another and, of course, to God. When we sin, or relationship to God and to others distorted. Sin is ultimately alienation from God, from our fellow human beings, and from our own true self which is created in Gods image and likeness. Confession is the Sacrament through which our sins are forgiven, and our relationship to God and to others is restored and strengthened. Through the Sacrament, Christ our Lord continues to heal those broken in spirit and restore the Fathers love those who are lost. According to Orthodox teaching, the penitent confesses to God and is forgiven by God. The priest is the sacramental witness who represents both Christ and His people. The priest is viewed not as a judge, but as a physician and guide. It is an ancient Orthodox practice for every Christian to have a spiritual father to whom one turns for spiritual advice and counsel. Confession can take place on any number of occasions. The frequency is left the discretion of the individual. In the event of serious sin, however, confession is a necessary preparation for Holy Communion. MARRIAGE God is active in our lives. It is He who joins a man and a woman in a relationship of mutual love. The Sacrament of Marriage bears witness to His action. Through this Sacrament, a man and a woman are publicly joined as husband and wife. They enter into a new relationship with each other, God, and the Church. Since Marriage is not viewed as a legal contract, there are no vows in the Sacrament. According to Orthodox teachings, Marriage is not simply a social institution, it is an eternal vocation of the kingdom. A husband and a wife are called by the Holy Spirit not only to live together but also to share their Christian life together so that each, with the aid of the other, may grow closer to God and become the persons they are meant to be. In the Orthodox Marriage Service, after the couple have been betrothed and exchanged rings, they are crowned with crowns of glory and honor signifying the establishment of a new family under God. Near the conclusion of the Service, the husband and wife drink from a common cup which is reminiscent of the wedding of Cana and which symbolized the sharing of the burdens and joys of their new life together. HOLY ORDERS The Holy Spirit preserved the continuity of the Church through the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Through ordination, men who have been chosen from within the Church are set apart by the Church for special service to the Church. Each is called by God through His people to stand

1194

Appendixes

amid the community, as pastor and teacher, and as the representative of the parish before the Altar. Each is also a living icon of Christ among His people. According to Orthodox teaching, the process of ordination begins with the local congregation; but the bishop alone, who acts in the name of the universal Church, can complete the action. He does so with the invocation of the Holy Spirit and the imposition of his hands on the person being ordained. Following the custom of the Apostolic Church, there are three major orders each of which requires a special ordination. These are Bishop, who is viewed as a successor of the Apostles, Priest and Deacon, who act in the name of the Bishop. Each order is distinguished by its pastoral responsibilities. Only a Bishop may ordain. Often, other titles and offices are associated with the three orders. The Orthodox Church permits men to marry before they are ordained. Since the sixth century, Bishops have been chosen from the celibate clergy. ANOINTING OF THE SICK (HOLY UNCTION) When one is ill and in pain, this can very often be a time of life when one feels alone and isolated. The Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick, or Holy Unction as it is also known, remind us that when we are in pain, either physical, emotional, or spiritual, Christ is present with us through the ministry of his Church. He is among us to offer strength to meet the challenges of life, and even the approach of death. As with Chrismation, oil is also used in this Sacrament as a sign of Gods presence, strength, and forgiveness. After the reading of seven epistle lessons, seven gospel lessons and the offering of seven prayers, which are all devoted to healing, the priest anoints the body with the Holy Oil. Orthodoxy does not view this Sacrament as available only to those who are near death. It is offered to all who are sick in body, mind, or spirit. The Church celebrates the Sacrament for all its members during Holy week on Holy Wednesday. OTHER SACRAMENTS AND BLESSINGS The Orthodox Church has never formally determined a particular number of Sacraments. In addition to the Eucharist she accepts the above six Mysteries as major Sacraments because they involve the entire community and most important are closely relation to the Eucharist. There are many other Blessings and Special Services which complete the major Sacraments, and which reflect the Churchs presence throughout the lives of her people. Some of these are discussed in the following pamphlet in this series. (Thomas Fitzgerald The Sacraments)

1195

Appendixes

APPENDIX N DIFFERENT SCHEDULES OF SERVICES

Epitropia of the Holy Sepulcher Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem Holy Monastery of the Glorious Ascension http://www.monastery.org/schedule.html Sunday 9:00am - Matins 10:00am - Divine Liturgy Monday 5:30pm - Vespers Tuesday 7:00am - Matins and 1st Hour 5:30pm - Vespers Wednesday 8:00am - Matins 9:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:30pm - Vespers Thursday 7:00am - Matins and 1st Hour 5:30pm - Vespers Friday 7:00am - Matins and 1st Hour 5:30pm - Vespers Saturday 8:00am - Matins 9:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:30pm - Vespers Eve of Feast 5:30pm - Vespers Feast 8:00am - Matins 9:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:30pm - Vespers St. Tikhons Monastery http://www.stots.edu/services.html

Sunday 9:30am - Divine Liturgy 4:00pm - Vespers 4:45pm - Akathist to the Theotokos Monday 5:00am - Matins 7:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:00pm - Vespers Tuesday 5:00am - Matins 7:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:00pm - Vespers Wednesday 5:00am - Matins 7:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:00pm - Vespers Thursday 5:00am - Matins 7:00am - Divine Liturgy 5:00pm - Vespers 5:45pm - Akathist to St. Alexis Friday 5:00am 7:00am 4:00pm 4:45pm

- Matins - Divine Liturgy - Vespers - Matins

Saturday 8:00am - Divine Liturgy 4:00pm - Vigil

1196

Appendixes

APPENDIX O NEW TESTAMENT REFERENCES TO THE EUCHARIST

Matthew 26:17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? 26:18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 26:19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover. 26:20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 26:21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 26:27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom. Mark 4:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. 14:22 And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. 14:23 And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Luke 13:26 Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. John 6:53

1197

Appendixes

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 13:1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simons son, to betray him; 13:4 He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. 19:34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. Acts 2:42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 1 Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 10:21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lords table, and of the table of devils. 11:20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lords supper.

1198

Appendixes

11:21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. 11:22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lords death till he come. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lords body. 11:33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. 11:34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come. Ephesians 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. Colossians 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. Hebrews 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 9:14

1199

Appendixes

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things that that of Abel. 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, 1 Peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 12:11

1200

Appendixes

And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. (http://members.aol.com/saint35/1-a.htm)

1201

Appendixes

APPENDIX P SIX DIMENSIONS IN PRACTICAL THEOLOGY

1) The liturgical dimension (life as worship) focuses on life in a professing community. It includes both the communitys cultic or ritual life (repetitive, symbolic actions expressive of the communitys sacred story) and its peoples daily work (vocation or profession) in the world. 2) The moral dimension (life as seeking justice and peace) focuses on life in a witnessing community. The moral includes both the peoples character their perceptions, dispositions, intentions, attitudes and values and their conscience the processes by which they, as believers in Jesus Christ and members of his church, discern the will of God and, guided by the communitys ethical norms and principles, decide faithful action within particular moral situations. 3) The spiritual dimension (life as relationship) focuses on life in a praying community: it includes both interior experience the direct encounter with God resulting in a personal knowledge of Gods love and exterior manifestation daily life lived in an ever-deepening love relationship with God, or life as a testimony to the sifts of the spirit. 4) The pastoral dimension (life as caring) focuses on life in a serving community. It includes both consciousness, or the embracing of suffering and the identifying with the needy of the world, and sacrificial love: the capacity to live with others in relationships of healing, sustaining, guidance and reconciliation, expressed in caring for the sick, the needy, the poor, the hungry, the lonely and the captive. 5) The ecclesial dimension (life as being) focuses on life in a sacramental community. It includes both community life, lived as a sign of Gods grace expressed through a nurturing, caring family, and institutional life, lived in society in stewardship of Gods gifts and witnessing to Gods intentions. 6) The catechetical dimension (life as becoming) focuses on life in a learning community. It includes both formation through evangelization and enculturation the processes by which we are converted and initiated into the church and its tradition and thereby come to acknowledge ourselves as a people in covenant with God and education, or those processes of actualization that help us to live out our baptism by making the churchs faith more vital, conscious and active in our lives; by deepening our relationship to God; and by realizing our vocation in the world so that Gods saving activity may be manifested in persons and in the church. (John H. Perkins)

1202

Appendixes

APPENDIX Q THE ICONOSTASIS

The altar, as in the ancient Christian temples, so also in those of today, has always been divided from the rest of the temple by a special barrier. In ancient times this was but a railing or colonnade with a cornice and a single row of icons above itself. From this originally low barrier there gradually developed a high wall, covered entirely by several levels of icons, which received the name iconostasis. St. Symeon of Thessalonica, who in the XIV century wrote a special composition on the temple, as of yet mentions nothing concerning the contemporary high iconostasis. From this it has been concluded that the current high iconostasis appeared no earlier than the XV XVI centuries. There is, however, a tradition that rather high iconostasis were already introduced by St. Basil the Great, so that the prayerful attention of the clergy might not be distracted. In the iconostasis, as in the ancient altar barrier, three doors are set: the wider middle doors, which are called holy or royal (for through them, in the Holy Gifts, enters Christ, the King of Glory), and the more narrow north and south doors, which are called diaconal, since through them during the divine services the deacons continually come in and go out. Through the royal doors, or gates, only solemn exits take place. The iconostasis itself today consists of five tiers. In the first, lower row, to the right of the royal doors, the icon of Christ the Savior is set, and to the left, that of the Mother of God. At the right of the icon of the Savior the icon of the feast or saint to whom the temple is consecrated the temple icon is set. These are called the local icons. On the two panels of the royal doors are set images of the Annunciation of the Most Holy Theotokos, and of the four Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John two on each panel. On the north and south doors are set images of the Archangels Michael and Gabriel, or of the Archdeacons Stephan and Phillip. The upper part of the iconostasis is called the tableau. In the second tier, immediately above the royal doors, an icon of the Mystical Supper is placed, as though teaching that those who desire to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, which is symbolized by the altar, must be made worthy to eat at the table of the Lord, which is prepared further inside the altar on the holy table and is offered to the faithful from within the royal doors. On either side of the Mystical Supper, along both sides of the second tier, icons are placed of all of the twelve feasts of the Lord and of the Theotokos. In the third tier, above the Mystical Supper, an icon called the Deisis, which means prayer (or Deisus, as the name has been corrupted in colloquial speech) is placed. The Deisis depicts the Lord Jesus Christ and, at His sides, the Mother of God and St. John the Forerunner, turning to Him with prayerful attitude of body. On each side of the deisis are placed the icons of the twelve Apostles. In the fourth tier the Mother of God is depicted at the center with the Pre-eternal Infant, while along the sides are the Old Testament Prophets who foretold the incarnation of the Son of God. They are depicted with the same signs by which they prototypically portrayed the mystery of the incarnation: Aaron with the rod that blossomed, David with the golden ark, Ezekiel with the sealed doors, and so on. And, finally, in the very highest fifth tier, the God of Sabbath is depicted with His Divine Son in His bosom at the center and the Old Testament Forefathers along either side. The apex of the iconostasis is crowned with the Holy Cross the image of the sign by which eternal salvation was given to men and the gates of the Kingdom of Heaven were opened. On the inside of the altar, before the royal doors, a curtain is hung in Greek, the katapetasma which, in liturgical books, in relation to the royal, as it were, outer doors, are sometimes called the inner curtain, high doors, inner door, or, sometimes, the zaponi (curtains). The opening of the curtain signifies the revealing of the mystery of salvation to the world, just as the opening of the royal doors themselves symbolizes the opening to the world of the entrance to the Kingdom of Heaven.

1203

Appendixes

The iconostasis, which separates the altar from the central part of the temple, is set at the same elevation as the altar. This elevation does not end with the iconostasis, but extends forward into the central part of the temple, and is called the soleass (in Greek, the swlea - soleas elevation). In this way the soleas is as it were a continuation of the altar outside. The area of the soleas that lies opposite the royal doors is usually made in the form of a semicircular ledge, and is called the ambwn the ambon , which in Greek means ascent. On the ambon the Gospel is read, the deacons prayers, or litanies, are pronounced, and sermons are read. Therefore the ambon symbolizes the mount, the ship, and in general all those elevated places to which the Lord ascended to preach, that the people should hear Him the better. The ambon likewise signifies the stone from which the Angel greeted the myrrh-bearers with the glad tidings of the Resurrection of Christ. In ancient times the ambon was set in the center of the temple and was reminiscent of our contemporary lecterns; they were made of stone or metal. At the sides of the soleas places called clirosi are set for the readers and singers. Readers and singers, having been chosen in ancient times by lot, comprise the lot of God and, being set apart from the rest of the faithful for special service to God, are called clerics (from klhroV cliros lot). In liturgical books, the right and left clirosi are also called choirs, for the singers standing on them represent the choirs of Angels singing praise to God. Near each of the clirosi there usually stands a gonfalon. This is an icon hanging on a shaft in the form of a military banner. It is, as it were, the banner around which the warriors of Christ rally, waging war with the enemies of our salvation. These are usually carried at the heads of processions during church feasts. Around the clirosi a railing is usually placed, separating those performing the service from those standing in the temple. Here also the torch is usually placed, which is carried with a lighted candle at the head of processions. (Averky)

1204

Appendixes

APPENDIX R THE CLERGY

Following the example of the Old Testament Church, which had its high priest, priests, and Levites, the holy Apostles instituted bishops, priests, and deacons as the priesthood of the New Testament Christian Church. They are all called members of the clergy because, by means of the Mystery of the priesthood, they receive the Grace of the Holy Spirit for sacred service in the Church of Christ. This enables them to celebrate the divine services, to teach the laity the Christian faith and holy life, and to direct ecclesiastical affairs. The bishops comprise the highest rank in the Church, and therefore receive the highest degree of Grace. Bishops are also called hierarchs, or leaders of the priests. They may celebrate all the Mysteries and all ecclesiastical services. Bishops may serve the usual Liturgy, but they alone may consecrate others into the priesthood, or consecrate Holy Chrism and an Antimins. A bishop is sometimes given another bishop, called a vicar bishop, to assist him in his duties. In their degree of priesthood, bishops are all equal, though the senior and most deserving of them are called archbishops. The bishops whose sees are centered in major cities are termed metropolitans, after the Greek word for a large city, metropolis. The bishops of the ancient major cities of the Roman Empire, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Rome, Alexandria and Antioch, and those of the capitals of certain Orthodox countries, such as Belgrade and Moscow, are called patriarchs. (From 1721 to 1917, the Russian Orthodox Church was governed by the Most Holy Synod. In 1917, an All-Russian Council was summoned which restored the rule of the Church to the Most Holy Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.). Priests comprise the second rank of the sacred ministry. With an episcopal blessing, priests may serve all the Mysteries and ecclesiastical services, save the Mystery of Ordination and the sanctification of Holy Chrism or an Antimins. The congregation of Christians subject to the supervision of the priest is termed his parish. The more worthy and distinguished priests are granted the title of archpriest; the first among these priests is called a protopresbyter. If a priest is also a tonsured monk he is known as a hieromonk. Hieromonks appointed to direct monasteries, or those honored independently of any appointment, are usually given the title of igumen or abbot. Those of a higher rank are called archimandrites, and bishops are chosen from this rank. Deacons form the third and lowest rank of the sacred ministry; in Greek, deacon means a server. Deacons assist a bishop or priest during the serving of the Divine Liturgy, or other Mysteries and services, but they may not serve alone. The participation of a deacon in the divine services is not obligatory, and therefore many churches conduct services without them. Some deacons, particularly in cathedral churches, are deemed worthy of the title of protodeacon. Monks who have received the rank of deacon are called hierodeacons, and the senior of them is called an archdeacon. The subdeacons are also ordained, and help in the altar. They primarily take part in episcopal services. They vest the serving bishop in his sacred vestments, hold the trikiri and dikiri, and hand them to the bishop to bless those present. They may also assist in changing the altar covers. In addition to the three orders of sacred ministry, other lower orders of service in the Church include the readers, or psaltis (Greek), and the sacristans, or ecclesiarchs. They belong to the ranks of church servers who are not ordained to their duties through the Mystery of Ordination, but only through a short series of prayers with an episcopal blessing.

1205

Appendixes

Readers have the duty to read and chant with the choir during divine services, and at homes when services are conducted by a priest. The sacristan is obliged to call the faithful to the divine services with bell-ringing, to light the lamps and candles in the church, to ready and to hand the censer to the serving priest, and to assist the readers in the readings and chantings. Those who conduct services must be dressed in vestments. These are special, sacred robes which are made of brocade or some similarly suitable material, and adorned with crosses or other symbolic signs. (Slobodskoy, The Divine Services)

1206

Appendixes

APPENDIX S COLORS OF THE LITURGICAL VESTMENTS

The most important Feasts of the Orthodox Church and the sacred events for which specific colors of vestments have been established can be united into six basic groups. 1. The group of feasts and days commemorating Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Prophets, the Apostles and the Holy Hierarchs. Vestment color: Gold (yellow) of all shades. 2. The group of feasts and days commemorating the Most Holy Mother of God, the Bodiless Powers and Virgins. Vestment color: Light blue and white. 3. The group of feasts and days commemorating the Cross of Our Lord. Vestment color: Purple or dark red. 4. The group of feasts and days commemorating martyrs. Vestment color: Red. [On Great and Holy Thursday, dark red vestments are worn, even though the church is still covered with black and the Holy (Altar) Table is covered with a white cloth.] 5. The group of feasts and days commemorating monastic saints, ascetics and fools for Christ. Vestment color: Green. The Entrance of Our Lord into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday), Holy Trinity Day (Pentecost) and Holy Spirit Day (Monday after Pentecost) are, as a rule, celebrated in green vestments of all shades. 6. During the Lenten periods, the vestment colors are: Dark blue, purple, dark green, dark red and black. This last color is used essentially for the days of Great Lent. During the first week of that Lent and on the weekdays of the following weeks, the vestment color is black. On Sundays and Feast days of this period, the vestments are of a dark color with gold or colored ornaments. Funerals, as a rule, are done in white vestments. In earlier times, there were no black vestments in the Orthodox Church, although the everyday clothing of the clergy, especially the monastics, was black. In ancient times, both in the Greek and in the Russian Churches, the clergy wore, according to the Typikon, Crimson Vestments: dark (blood) red vestments. In Russia, it was first proposed to the clergy of Saint Petersburg to wear black vestments, if possible, to participate in the Funeral of Emperor Peter II [1821]. From that time on, black vestments became customary for funerals and the weekday services of Great Lent.

Colors According to Various Local Customs White is worn for the feasts and post-feasts of Epiphany, Transfiguration, and Pascha. In antiquity, Christmas and Epiphany were celebrated as one feast, Theophany of the Lord, so, in some places, white is worn on Christmas day, but gold is worn from the second day of Christmas until Epiphany. In Muscovite custom, the Church and the vestments of the priest are changed to white at the prokeimenon of the Holy Saturday Liturgy. And then white is worn until the end of Paschal Matins, and bright red is worn at the Paschal Liturgy and throughout the Paschal season. In some places in Russia, white is worn from Ascension to Pentecost, but in other places, gold is worn for those days. In Carpatho-Russian style, in the Paschal season, white, exclusively, is worn. White, the color of the Resurrection is worn at funerals and memorial services. Also, interestingly, in Russia, at liturgy on Holy Thursday, a white altar cover is used to represent the linen tablecloth of the Last Supper [the priest wears dark red, and the church remains in black until after the liturgy, when the priests vestments return to black].

1207

Appendixes

Green is worn for Pentecost and its post-feast, feasts of prophets, and angels. In some places, green is worn for the Elevation of the Cross in September. In Carpatho-Russian practice, green is worn from Pentecost until the Saints Peter and Paul fast. Green is often worn for Palm Sunday. Gold is worn from Christmas to Epiphany, and in some places, during the Nativity fast. Gold is worn when no other color is specified. In one tradition, gold is worn on all Sundays (except when white is worn), including even the Sundays in all the fasting periods. In Carpatho-Russian style, gold is worn from the eve of Ascension to the eve of Pentecost. Red, especially dark red or blood red, is worn for the Saints Peter and Paul fast, the Nativity fast, Elevation of the Cross (Sept 15), and for all feasts of martyrs. Bright red would be worn for Saints Peter and Paul feast, and for the Angels. In Moscow style, on Mount Athos, and at Jerusalem, bright red is worn on Pascha [after Matins] and on the Nativity. Blue is worn for all feasts of the Virgin, Presentation of the Lord, Annunciation, and sometimes on the fifth Friday of Lent (Akathist). In Carpatho-Russian parishes, blue is worn for the Dormition fast and feast, and then is worn until the Elevation of the Cross, sometimes even until the Nativity fast. Purple is worn on weekends of Lent (black is worn weekdays). In some places, purple is worn on weekdays of Lent (gold on weekends). Black is worn for weekdays in Lent, especially the first week of Lent and in Holy Week. In Carpatho-Russian, formerly Uniate parishes, black is worn on all weekdays for funerals and memorial services and liturgies, as is done in the Roman Catholic Church, though this is not universally true any more. Orange or rust is worn in some places for the Saints Peter and Paul fast, and in other places for Saints Peter and Paul feast through the Transfiguration.

Please note that feast refers to the period from the vigil of the feast until its apodosis, or putting away, usually called the post-feast. The lengths of these post-feasts vary and are given in the Liturgical Calendar and Rubrics. Generally speaking, there is a post-feast of about a week for each of the twelve major feasts. As you can see, there is great variety in ways of doing things. In the Western Church, six colors are used: white, red, rose, green, purple and black. Blue and gold are not used. Black is worn on Good Friday, and at requiem masses. In many parishes the covering on the altar and other tables, other cloths and hangings, the curtain behind the Royal Doors, and even the glass containers for the vigil candles are changed to the liturgical color of the season. In parishes of the Greek tradition, it is customary for the vigil glasses and curtain behind the Royal Doors to remain red in color at all times. Because of the association of the Gospel story of the curtain in the temple being torn in two at the time of the earthquake when our Lord was crucified, and the story of the eggs carried by Pontius Pilates wife all turning red (and our use of red eggs at Pascha) the custom is for the curtain behind the Royal Doors to remain red. Remember that this rich deep reddish purple color is also the ancient color of royalty, and for that reason, it is used behind the Royal Doors and as a drapery on the Golgotha and in other places associated with our Lord and His Mother.

1208

Appendixes

APPENDIX T JEWISH HIGH PRIESTS VESTMENTS

In this appendix there is a detail picture with the garments wore by high priests following the instruction given by God in Exodus and Deuteronomy:

Illustration 170: High Priests Garments566

566

See: <http://biblicalholidays.com/priest_garments.htm>.

1209

Appendixes

APPENDIX U THE CANTICLES OF LUKE

The Magnificat, or Canticle of Mary, is found in Luke 1:46-55. It is Marys great hymn of praise, perhaps composed on her journey to the hill country of Judah to visit her cousin Elisabeth, who was to give birth to John. The wording and imagery of Marys song are similar to those found in Hannahs song of praise at the birth of Samuel (I Samuel 2:1-10), My heart hath rejoiced in the Lord...because I have joyed in thy salvation. The Benedictus, or Canticle of Zacharias, is found in Luke 1:68-79. Zacharias was a direct descendant of Aaron and thus one of the many priests serving the Jewish people. He felt himself to be cursed, however, since he and his wife, Elisabeth, now of old age, had no children. It was while performing his priestly duties, offering incense prior to the evening sacrifice, that the Lord revealed to Zacharias that Elisabeth would bear him a son. From that moment on, Zacharias was unable to speak, until after the birth of John, when he spoke this great canticle. This hymn may be divided in four sections. The first offers thanks to God, using a traditional Hebrew formula, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel. Secondly, it speaks of the great deliverance of Gods people as recorded in the holy covenant of Abraham. The hymn then specifically recalls Johns role as a prophet of the Most High who will go before the Lord to prepare his way. The canticle concludes telling of the salvation that is ours through the Messiah. The Nunc Dimittis, or Canticle of Simeon, is found in Luke 2:29-32. In the latter days of Old Testament history, many of the Jews saw the coming of the Messiah as a violent overthrow of oppressive forces, a powerful new reign for the Second-David. Others, like Simeon, were known as The Quiet of the Land, and spent much time in prayer and quiet watchfulness. It was to Simeon that the Lord promised, through the Holy Spirit, to reveal the Messiah. It is assumed that when Jesus was born Simeon and his wife Anna were quite old. Simeons canticle speaks of the imminence of his death, accepted now in peaceful resignation after having witnessed the coming of Salvation. The hymn deals with the image of freedom from slavery, with death as a release from a long task.

Lukes is a Gospel of prayer and praise, a magnificent exposition of the infinite love of God. (Penkala, The Canticles of Luke)

1210

Appendixes

1211

Appendixes

APPENDIX V PRE-BYZANTINE AND BYZANTINE HYMNS THE PRAYER OF CLEMENT OF ROME

Thou made to appear the enduring fabric of the world by the works of Your hand; Thou, Lord, created the earth on which we dwell,Thou, who art faithful in all generations, just in judgments, wonderful in strength and majesty, with wisdom creating and with understanding fixing the things which were made, who art good among them that are being saved and faithful among them whose trust is in You; O merciful and Compassionate One, forgive us our iniquities and offences and transgressions and trespasses. Reckon not every sin of Your servants and handmaids, but You will purify us with the purification of Your truth; and direct our steps that we may walk in holiness of heart and do what is good and well-pleasing in Your sight and in the sight of our rulers. Yea, Lord, make Your face to shine upon us for good in peace, that we may be shielded by Your mighty hand and delivered from every sin by Thine uplifted arm, and deliver us from those who hate us wrongfully. Give concord and peace to us and all who dwell upon the earth, even as You gave to our fathers, when they called upon You in faith and truth, submissive as we are to Thine almighty and all-excellent Name. To our rulers and governors on the earthto them Thou, Lord, gavest the power of the kingdom by Your glorious and ineffable might, to the end that we may know the glory and honour given to them by You and be subject to them, in nought resisting Your will; to them, Lord, give health, peace, concord, stability, that they may exercise the authority given to them without offence. For Thou, O heavenly Lord and King eternal, givest to the sons of men glory and honour and power over the things that are on the earth; do Thou, Lord, direct their counsel according to that which is good and well-pleasing in Your sight, that, devoutly in peace and meekness exercising the power given them by You, they may find You propitious. O Thou, who only hast power to do these things and more abundant good with us, we praise You through the High Priest and Guardian of our souls Jesus Christ, through whom be glory and majesty to You both now and from generation to generation and for evermore. Amen. (Epistle to the Corinthians, Chap. 60-61)

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIAS A HYMN TO CHRIST THE SAVIOUR

I. Bridle of colts untamed, Over our wills presiding; Wing of unwandering birds, Our flight securely guiding. Rudder of youth unbending, Firm against adverse shock; Shepherd, with wisdom tending Lambs of the royal flock: Your simple children bring In one, that they may sing In solemn lays Their hymns of praise With guileless lips to Christ their King.

1212

Appendixes

II King of saints, almighty Word Of the Father highest Lord; Wisdoms head and chief; Assuagement of all grief; Lord of all time and space, Jesus, Saviour of our race; Shepherd, who dost us keep; Husbandman, who tillest, Bit to restrain us, Rudder To guide us as You will; Of the all-holy flock celestial wing; Fisher of men, whom You bring to life; From evil sea of sin, And from the billowy strife, Gathering pure fishes in, Caught with sweet bait of life: Lead us, Shepherd of the sheep, Reason-gifted, holy One; King of youths, whom You keep, So that they pollution shun: Steps of Christ, celestial Way; Word eternal, Age unending; Life that never can decay; Fount of mercy, virtue-sending; Life august of those who raise Unto God their hymn of praise, Jesus Christ! III. Nourished by the milk of heaven, To our tender palates given; Milk of wisdom from the breast Of that bride of grace exprest; By a dewy spirit filled From fair Reasons breast distilled; Let us sucklings join to raise With pure lips our hymns of praise As our grateful offering, Clean and pure, to Christ our King. Let us, with hearts undefiled, Celebrate the mighty Child. We, Christ-born, the choir of peace; We, the people of His love, Let us sing, nor ever cease, To the God of peace above. (The Instructor, Book III, Chap. 12),

HYMN TO GOD BY GREGORY NAZIANZUS

1. O Thou, the One Supreme oer all! For by what other name May we upon Thy greatness call,

1213

Appendixes

Or celebrate Thy fame? 2 Ineffable! to Thee what speech Can hymns of honour raise? Ineffable! what tongue can reach The measure of Thy praise? 3. How, unapproached, shall mind of man Descry Thy dazzling throne; And pierce, and find Thee out, and scan, Where Thou dost dwell alone? 4. Unuttered Thou! all uttered things Have had their birth from Thee: The One unknown! from Thee the springs Of all we know and see! 5. Mindful, and mindless, all things yield To Thy parental sway For Thou to all art life and shield: They honour and obey. 6. For round Thee centre all the woes Of night and darkling day, The common wants and common throes; And all to Thee do pray. 7. And all things as they move along In order fixed by Thee, Thy watchword heed, in silent song Hymning Thy majesty. 8. And lo! all things abide in Thee, And through the complex whole, Thou spreadst Thine own Divinity, Thyself of all the goal. 9. One Being Thou, all things, yet none, Nor one nor yet all things; How call Thee, O mysterious One? A worthy name who brings? 10. All-named from attributes Thine own, How call Thee as we ought? Thou art unlimited, alone, Beyond the range of thought. 11. What heaven-born intellect shall rend The veiling clouds above? Be Thou propitious! ever send

1214

Appendixes

Bright tokens of Thy love! 12. O Thou the One Supreme oer all! For by what other name May we upon Thy greatness call, Or celebrate Thy fame?

ANACREONTIC HYMN BY ST. JOHN OF DAMASCUS 567

From my lips in their defilement, From my heart in its beguilement, From my tongue which speaks not fair, From my soul stained everywhere, O my Jesus, take my prayer! Spurn me not for all it says, Not for words and not for ways, Not for shamelessness endued! Make me brave to speak my mood, O my Jesus, as I would! Or teach me, which I rather seek, What to do and what to speak. I have sinned more than she, Who learning where to meet with Thee, And bringing myrrh, the highest-priced, Anointed bravely, from her knee, Thy blessed feet accordingly, My God, my Lord, my Christ! As Thou saidest not Depart To that suppliant from her heart, Scorn me not, O Word, that art The gentlest one of all words said! But give Thy feet to me instead That tenderly I may them kiss And clasp them close, and never miss With over-dropping tears, as free And precious as that myrrh could be, Tanoint them bravely from my knee! Wash me with Thy tears: draw nigh me, That their salt may purify me. Thou remit my sins who knowest All the sinning to the lowest Knowest all my wounds, and seest All the stripes Thyself decreest; Yea, but knowest all my faith, Seest all my force to death, Hearest all my wailings low, That mine evil should be so! Nothing hidden but appears
This is prayerful hymn of repentance by St. John Damascene. From The Greek Christian Poets and the English Poets, Translation by Elizabeth Barrett Browning, London. Chapman and Hall, 1863. Text prepared by Saint Pachomius Library.
567

1215

Appendixes

In Thy knowledge, O Divine,

1216

Appendixes

APPENDIX X FIVE PERIODS IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE POST-BYZANTINE CHANT

(a) 1453-1580 a time of renewed interest in traditional forms, the growth of important scribal workshops beyond the capital, and a new interest in theoretical discussions; (b) 1580-1650 a period of innovation and experimentation, the influence of foreign musical traditions, the emergence of the kalophonic (or embellished) chants as a dominant genre, and the conception of sacred chants as independently composed artobjects; (c) 1650-1720 when extensive musical training was available in many centres and when elegantly written music books appear as artistic monuments in their own right. Musicians of this age were subjecting older chants to highly sophisticated embellishments and their performance demanded virtuosic skills on the part of the singers. In addition, the first attempts at simplifying the increasingly complex neumatic notation were being made; (d) 1720-1770 a period of further experimentation in notational forms, a renewed interest in older, Byzantine hymn settings, the systematic production of music manuscripts and of voluminous Anthologies that incorporated several centuries of musical settings; (e) 1770-1820 a time of great flowering in church music composition and the supremacy of Constantinople as a centre where professional musicians controlled initiatives in the spheres of composition, theory and performance. Among these initiatives were: further notational reforms, new genres of chant, the reordering of the old music books, the more prominent intrusion of external or foreign musical elements, and, finally, by 1820, the termination of the hand-copied manuscript tradition. (Conomos, A Brief Survey of the History of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Chant)

1217

Appendixes

APPENDIX Y LITURGICAL MUSIC: THE DIVINE LITURGY OF OUR FATHER AMONG THE SAINTS JOHN CHRYSOSTOM568
Blessed is the Kingdom The Great Litany The First Antiphon The Little Litany The Second Antiphon The Little Litany The Third Antiphon (The Beatitudes) The Little Entrance The Trisagion The Epistle Reading The Gospel Reading The Litany of Fervent Supplication The Litany for the Departed, The Litany for the Catechumens, Cherubic Hymn The Great Entrance The Litany of Supplication The Creed The Anaphora The Hymn of the Theotokos The Litany before the Lords Prayer The Communion The Prayer before the Ambo The Dismissal

568

In mp 3, with text. See Bibliography for reference.

1218

Bibliography

WORKS CITED
PRIMARY SOURCES Alexander of Alexandria. Epistles on the Arian Heresy and the Deposition of Arius. New Advent. 4 September 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Ambrose. On the Holy Spirit. New Advent. 4 September 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Anthony of the Desert. Discourse On Demons. Trans. H. Ellershaw. <http://www. seanmultimedia.com/Pie_Antonyofthedesert_discourseondemons.html>. . The Desert Fathers: Selected sayings from the Apothegmata Patrum. Trans. M.C. Steenberg. Monachos.net. <http://www.monachos.net/monasticism/desert_ fathers.html>. Arsenius. From the Sayings of the Desert Fathers. Copnet. <http://www. coptic.net/articles/SayingsOfDesertFathers.txt>. Athanasius of Alexandria. Ad Afros Epistola Synodica. New Advent. 10 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . De Decretis. New Advent. 23 August 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Deposition of Arius. New Advent. 10 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Four Discourses Against the Arians. New Advent. 10 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . De Synodis. New Advent. New Advent. 10 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/ fathers/>. . Letters. New Advent. 10 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . On the Incarnation of the Word. 8 July 2006. <http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/ VolumeII/MysticalTheology.html>. . Against the Heathen. New Advent. 10 July 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Life of St. Anthony. New Advent. 10 July 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . First Letter to Serapion. 10 March 2006. Early Church Fathers. <http://www.ccel. org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/TOC.htm>. Athenagoras. A Plea for the Christians. New Advent. 11 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Barnabas. Epistle of Barnabas. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/>. Basil of Caesarea. On the Perfection of the Life of Solitaries. Letter 22. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . To the Alexandrians. Letter 139. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>.

1219

Bibliography

. To Gregory his Friend. Letter 14. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . To Eustathius of Sebaste. Letter 233. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . De Spiritu Sancto. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Hexaemeron. 1 July 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Letters. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Cassian, John. Conferences. New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Clement of Alexandria. Exhortation to the Heathen. New Advent. 7 July 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . The Paedagogus. New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Who is the Rich Man that shall be saved? New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . The Stromata. New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Clement of Rome. First Epistle. New Advent. 11 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Second Epistle. New Advent. 12 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Two Epistles Concerning Virginity. New Advent. 10 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Recognitions. New Advent. 17 July 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Vol. 7. The Ethereal Library. 21 November 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.ix.html>. Cyprian. Epistle 1 (To Donatus). New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www.new advent.org/fathers/050601.htm>. Cyril of Alexandria. Commentary on John. Early Church FathersAdditional Texts. Ed. Roger Pearse. 29 August 2006. <http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/cyril _on_john_00_eintro.htm>. Cyril of Jerusalem. Catechetical Lectures. New Advent. 29 June 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/>. . Fifth Mystagogical Catechesis. St. Cyril of Jerusalems Lectures on the Christian Sacraments. Ed. F. L. Cross. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1977. Diadochus of Photiki. On Spiritual Knowledge and Discrimination: One Hundred Texts. The Philokalia. Eds. and trans. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, Kallistos Ware. Vol. 1. London. 1979. Dionysius the Areopagite. Mystical Theology. 8 July 2006. <http://www.esoteric.msu. edu/VolumeII/MysticalTheology.html>.

1220

Bibliography

Early Church Fathers. Trans. Lightfoot and Harmer. 17 July 2006. <http://www. earlychristianwritings.com/churchfathers.html >. Elder Siluan. On obedience>. obedience <http://www.orthodoxphotos.com/readings/siluan/

Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus. Early Christian Writings. 2 July 2006. <http://www. earlychristianwritings.com/diognetus.html>. Epistle to Diognetus. New Advent. 9 July 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ cathen/ 05008b.htm>. Eusebius of Caesarea. Church History. New Advent. 6 June 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Letter on the Council of Nicaea. New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine. Medieval Sourcebook (1997). 10 March 2006. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/ vita-constantine. html>. From the Sayings of the Desert Fathers. Copnet. 2 August 2006. <http://www. coptic.net/articles/SayingsOfDesertFathers.txt>. Evagrius. On Prayer: One Hundred and Fifty-Three Texts. The Philokalia. Eds and trans. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, and Kallistos Ware. Vol. I. London. 1979. Germanos of Constantinople. Historia Ecclesiastica. Trans. Daniel Sheerin. Fairfax, Va: Damascene Foundation, 1984. Gregory of Nazianzus. Orations. New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/>. . Hymn to God. 1 February 2007. <http://theturtlemom.spaces.live.com/blog/cns! C6310623C4F38BE2!166.entry>. . Division II, Ep. I. New Advent. 6 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . To Eugenius. Letter 111. Barrois. The Fathers Speak. . Oration on Holy Baptism. 24 August 2006. <http://www.liturgies.net/Epiphany/ Baptism/nazianzus2.htm>. Gregory of Nyssa. On Virginity. New Advent. 11 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/ fathers/>. . Against Eunomius. New Advent. 11 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Against Praxeas. New Advent. 8 September 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . De Beatitudinibus. Patrologia Graeca. Ed. J.P. Migne. Paris: 1857-66. . Life of Moses. Patrologia Graeca. Ed. J.P. Migne. Paris: 1857-66. . On the Holy Spirit. New Advent.13 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . On Not Three Gods. New Advent.13 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>.

1221

Bibliography

. On Infants Early Deaths. New Advent.13 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/>. . On What it is to Call Oneself a Christian. Patrologia Graeca. Ed. J.P. Migne. Paris: 1857-66. Gregory Palamas. The Triads in Defence of the Hesychasts. Ed. John Meyendorff, trans. Nicholas Gendle. Classics of Western Spirituality (CWS). New York: Paulist Press, 1983. . The Homilies of St. Gregory Palamas. Vol. 1. South Canaan: Penn, 2002. . Topics of Natural and Theological Science on the Moral and Ascetic Life: One Hundred and Fifty Texts. The Philokalia. Vol. IV. Eds. and trans. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, and Kallistos Ware. Vol. 1. London. 1998. . The Declaration of the Holy Mountain in Defence of Those who Devoutly Practise a Life of Stillness. The Philokalia. Vol. 4. . Tomos Synodicos. Patrologia Graeca. Ed. J. P. Migne. Paris: 1857-66. . Pray without Ceasing. Early Fathers from the Philokalia. Trans. Kadloubovsky and Palmer. 8th ed. London: Faber & Faber, 1981. 1 October 2006. <http: //www.saintdemetrios.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/st__gregory_palamas.htm>. .On Prayer and Purity of Heart. The Philokalia. Vol. 4. Edit. Palmer, Sherrard, and Ware. London: Faber and Faber, 1998. . Sermon on the Entry of the Mother of God into the Temple. 15 June 2007. <http://www.oca.org/FSsermons-details.asp?SID=4&ID=3>. Hermas. The Shepherd. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Hesychios the Priest. On Watchfulness and Holiness. The Philokalia. Eds and trans. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, Kallistos Ware. Vol. 1. London. 1979. Hilary of Poitiers. On the Trinity. New Advent. 9 July 2006. <http:// www. Newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Hyppolitus of Rome. Refutation of all Heresies. New Advent. 3 September. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Ignatius of Antioch. Epistle to the Ephesians. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Epistle to the Magnesians. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Epistle to the Romans. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Epistle to Polycarp. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Letters. 1 March 2006. <http://www.saintignatiuschurch.org/ letters.html>. Irenaeus of Lyons. Adversus Haereses. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. 1222

Bibliography

Isaac the Syrian. Ascetic Homilies. Trans D. Miller. Boston, Massachusetts: Holy Transfiguration Monastery, 1984. . Mystic Treatises. Trans. A.J. Wensinck. Amsterdam, 1923; reprinted Wiesbaden, 1969. Jerome. To Matron Celantia. Letter 148. New Advent.15 June 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . To Demetria. Letter 130. New Advent.15 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/ fathers/>. . Against Jovinianus. New Advent. 18 December 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/>. . To Pammachius Against John of Jerusalem. New Advent. 18 December 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. . The Principal Works of St. Jerome. The Ethereal Library. 22 November 2006. . To Eustochium. Letter 22. New Advent. 18 December 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/>. John Chrysostom. De poenitentia. Patrologia Graeca 64, 12-13. . Instructions to Catechumens. New Advent. 5 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Homilies on the Epistle of Hebrews. New Advent. 7 July 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Homilies on Prayer. Pontifical University Saint Thomas Aquinas. 13 September 2006. <http://www.vatican.va/spirit/documents/spirit_20010302_giovanni-criso otomo_en.html>. . Homilies on Romans. New Advent. 29 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Homilies on the Gospel of John. New Advent. 5 September 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Homily 28 on Romans. New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/ 210228.htm>. . Homilies on Matthew. New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/2001.htm>. . Homilies on Philippians. New Advent. 20 December 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/>. . Homilies on Ephesians. New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/fathers/2301.htm>. . Homily on I Corinthians. The Ethereal Library. 22 November 2006. <http://www. ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112.pdf>. . On The Holy Spirit. Gleanings from Orthodox Christian Authors and the Holy Fathers. 15 September 2006. <http://www.orthodox.net/gleanings/theosis. html>. . Homily 3 on Colossians. 20 February, 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/ 230303.htm>. 1223

Bibliography

. Homily 36 on First Corinthians. 27 February, 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/220136.htm . St. John Chrysostom Works. New MBS Edition. <http://www.microbook studio.com/johnchrysostom.htm>. John Climacus. The Ladder of Paradise Ascent. Boston: Holy Transfiguration Monastery, 1978. . John of Damascus. Exposition of the Orthodox Faith. New Advent. 29 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. . Anacreontic Hymn. 18 February 2007. <http://www.balamand.edu.lb/theology/ JoHymn.htm>. .On the Divine Images.12 April 2007. <http://www.goarch.org/en/multimedia /live/isos/supplementary/johnofdamascus.html>. Josephus. Early Jewish Writing. 24 December 2006. <http://www.earlyjewishwritings. om/josephus.html>. Justin Martyr. First Apology. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/ fathers/>. . Second Apology. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Dialogue with Trypho. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Hortatory Address to the Greeks. New Advent. 1 February 2007. <http://www. newadvent. org/fathers /0129.htm>. The King James Version (Rice Reference Edition). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1981. Ignatius of Antioch. The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians. New Advent. 23 November. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. . The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans. New Advent. 23 November. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/>. . Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians. New Advent. 23 November. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/>. Leontius of Jerusalem. Against the Nestorians. Patrologiae Graeca. Ed. J. P. Migne. Paris: 1857-66. Makarios of Egypt. Homily 26. Balamand Monastery. One Hundred & Twenty Wise Sayings from The Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church. 10 June 2006. <http://www.scourmont.be/ studium/ bresard/>. . Spiritual Homilies (1-22). Patristics in English (P.I.E.) Project. Ed Rev. Daniel R. Jennings. 30 July 2006. <http://www.seanmultimedia.com/Pie_homepage.html>. . Fifty Spiritual Homilies of St. Macarius the Great. Trans. A.J. Mason. California: Eastern Orthodox Books, 1974. Mathetes. Epistle to Diognetus. New Advent.15 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/ fathers/>.

1224

Bibliography

Maximus the Confessor. On Knowledge. Selections On Knowledge from St Maximus the Confessor. Monachos.net. <http://www.monachos.net/patristics/maximos_ knowledge.shtml#14>. . Centuries on Charity. Patrologiae Graeca. Ed. J. P. Migne. Paris: 1857-66. .The Church, the Liturgy and the Soul of Man. Trans. Dom Julian Stead. Still River, Ma: St. Bedes Publications, 1982. Metropolitan Philaret. Sermons and Addresses of the Metropolitan Philaret. Moscow: 1844. Nicholas Cabasilas. A Commentary on the Divine Liturgy. Trans. J.M. Hussey and P.A. McNulty. London: SPCK, 1960. Nicephorous the Solitary. Writings from the Philokalia on the Prayer of the Heart. Trans. E. Kadloubosky and G. E. H. Palmer. London: Faber and Faber, 1979. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain. The Life of St. Gregory Palamas. Trans St Gregory Palamas Monastery, Hayesville, Ohio. 29. July 2006. <www.bright.net/~ palamas/>. Origen. De Principiis. New Advent.14 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Against Celsus. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Commentary on the Gospel of John. New Advent.15 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. New Advent.15 June 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>. On Prayer. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. 4 July 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ ccel/origen/prayer.toc.html>. . To Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria. Letter 82. New Advent.15 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Palladius. Lausiac History. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/palladius-lausiac. html>. . Dialogue concerning the Life of St. John Chrysostom .20 February 2007. <http: //www.tertullian.org/fathers/palladius_dialogus_02_text.htm>. Palmer, G.E.H, Philip Sherrard, and Kallistos Ware, eds. and trans. The Philokalia. St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain and St. Makarios of Corinth, compilers. 4 vols. London. 1979-1998. Passage to Heaven: An Appreciation of the Divine Liturgy. Excerpted from Joseph M. Raya. Eyes of the Gospel. Denville, N.J.: Dimension Books, 1978. 5 February, 2007. <http:// www.melkite.org/Passage. html#Enarxis>. Paul the Silentiary. Descriptio S. Sophiae. Medieval Source Book. 2 February 2007. <http://www.fordham.edu/ halsall/source/paulsilent-hagsoph1.html>. Pliny and Trajan: Correspondence, c. 112 CE. Internet Ancient History Sourcebook. 2 December 2006. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/pliny-trajan1.html>.

1225

Bibliography

Polycarp. Epistle to the Philippians. 15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . The Martyrdom of Polycarp. 15 March 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Procopius. De Aedificis. Medieval Source Book. 20 July 2007. <http://www.fordham. edu/halsall/source/procop-deaed1.html>. . History of the Wars. Medieval Source Book. 20 July 2007. <http://www.fordham. edu/halsall/source/procop-wars1.html>. Quotations. One Little Angel.com. 2 August 2006. <http://www.onelittleangel. com/wisdom/home/quotations.asp>. Quotes from the Church Fathers. 15 August 2006. <myCopticChurch.coms collection of articles and literature. <http://mycopticchurch.com/articles/fathers.asp?r=57>. Sayings of the Desert Fathers. 25 September 2006. <http://www.balamand monastery.org.lb/>. Seraphim of Sarov. Conversation with Nicholas Motovilov (III). Wisdom!: Readings from the Fathers of the Church: The holy and life-giving Faith of the Church as expounded by Her Saints. 14 September 2006. <http://chattablogs. com/hagioipateres/archives/ 028492.html>. Socrates Scholasticus. Church History. 2 February 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org /fathers /26012.htm>. St. Theophan the Recluse on Prayer. From the Letters of Bishop Theophan the Recluse. Orthodox Christian Information Center. Trans. Stefan Pavlenko. 20 September. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/theoph_prayer.aspx>. Symeon the New Theologian. The Discourses. Trans. C.J. de Catanzaro. Ramsey, N.J.: Paulist Press, 1980. . On the Mystical Life: The Ethical Discourses. Trans. Alexander Golitzin. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1996. . Practical and Theological Precepts. Writings from the Philokalia on Prayer of the Heart. London: Faber and Faber, 1979. . Moral Speeches. Symeon the Symeon the New Theologian: Holy Communion: Excerpts from speeches 1, 2, 10 & 14. Trans. Elpenor. 28 August 2006. <http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/fathers/symeon-communion. asp> . The First-Created Man. Seven Homilies by St. Symeon the New Theologian. Trans. Seraphim Rose. Platina, Calif.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1994. . The Three Ways of Attention and Prayer. Trans. Demetrios S. Skagias. Myriobiblos. 2 October 2006. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/symeon _threeways.html>. Symeon of Thessalonike. Treatise on Prayer. Trans. H.L.N. Simmons. Brookline, Ma: Hellenic College Press, 1984. Tatian. Address to the Greeks. 15 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/ fathers/>.

1226

Bibliography

Tertullian. Against Hermogenes. 15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Against Praxeas. 15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . Apology. New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers /0301.htm>. . A Treatise on the Soul. New Advent. 1 February 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/0310.htm>. . To his Wife. 16 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . To the Martyrs. 16 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. . On Patience. 16 June 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. . On Fasting. 16 June 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. . On Prayer. 16 June 2006. <http:// www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. . Prescription Against Heretics. library/ter_persc.htm>. 7 March 2006. <http://www.gnosis.org/

Theodoret. Ecclesiastical History. 15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. Theophan the Recluse. The Art of Prayer. London: Faber and Faber, 1966. . Prayer of the Heart: the duty of those living in the world: the duty also of those living in the world. 20 September <http://www. roca.org/oa/87/87f.htm>. . The Path to Salvation. A Manual of Spiritual Transformation. Platina, California: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1998. Excerpts. 20 September 2006. <http: //www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/salvation_theofan.htm>. The Desert Fathers: Selected sayings from the Apothegmata Patrum. Trans. M.C. Steenberg. Monachos.net. <http://www.monachos.net/monasticism/desert_ fathers.shtml>. The Didache. 15 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/>. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Vol VII. The Ethereal Library. 21 November, 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.viii.html>. Theophilus. Ad Autolychum. New Advent. 19 July 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/ fathers/>. The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus. New Advent. 9 July 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org /fathers/>. SECONDARY SOURCES About the Great Church. 3 March 2007. <http://www.neobyzantine.org/byzantium/ onstantinople/stsophia/index.php>. A Brief History of Byzantium. New Advent Inc. 1 January 2006. <http://www. christopherlong.co.uk/pub.byzantium.html>. A Brief Summary of Byzantine History. 1 January 2006. <http://www.metmuseum. org/ explore/Byzantium/byz_1.html>.

1227

Bibliography

Acquiring an Orthodox Mindset. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 2 July 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/default.aspx>. A Dictionary of Orthodox Liturgical Terms. 5 July 2007. <http://www.archangelsbooks. com/articles/liturgics/OrthodoxLiturgicalTerms.asp>. A History of the Catechumenate in Rome ca. 215. 15 January 2007. <http:// www.cyberfaith.com/examining/historyof2-5.html>. A History of the Orthodox Church. The Church of Imperial Byzantium Orthodox Information Center. 13 March 2007. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/ history3.aspx>. A History of the Russian Church. The Russian Orthodox Church of Three Saints. 1 January 2006. <http://www.3saints.com/russchurchhistory.html >. Aghiorgoussis, Maximos E., Monasticism in the Orthodox Church 15 June 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7103.asp>. . The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church. Orthodox Archdiocese Greek of America. 15 September 1990. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/ article8038.asp>. Apologetics. Orthodox Faith. 6 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxfaith.com/ apologetics.html>. Apostolic Canons. New Advent. New Advent. 15 December. <http://www. newadvent. org/cathen/03279a.htm>. A Process Model for the Design of Curriculum for Orthodox Christian Religious Education. Diss. University of New York at Albany, 1989. Apse1. 10 March 2007. <http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-30854/apse>. Apse2. Illustrated Architecture Dictionary -INDEX <http://freenet.buffalo.edu/ bah/ a/DCTNRY/a/apse.html >. Andreyev, Ivan M. Orthodox Apologetic Theology. 15 June 2006. <http://www. holytrinity mission.org>. An Informal Gathering of Resources Relating to Western Rite Orthodoxy. Occidentalis. 22 October 2006. <http://www.allmercifulsavior.com/Western. html>. Ante Nicene Fathers. 5 March 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/>. Antiphon. New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ 01575 b.htm>. Apophthegmata Patrum. New Advent. 12 July 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Apostolic Constitutions. New Advent. 24 January 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen/01636a.htm >. Apostolic ConstitutionsHippolytus Book VIII. 20 February, 2007. <http:// www.piney.com/DocAposConstitu3.html>. Archimandrite Georgios. The Neptic and Hesychastic Character of Orthodox Athonite Monasticism. 8 October 2006. <http://www.greekorthodoxchurch.org/neptic _monasticism.html#pistis>.

1228

Bibliography

Archimandrite Sergius. Christianity and Orthodoxy. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 28 June 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/sergius_chr_orth. aspx>. Asceticism. New Advent. 10 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Asceticism and Monasticism. New Dictionary of Theology. Comp. Greg Williamson (2005). A Short Byzantine History. 2 January 2006. <http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mxb/ byzantine _history.htmland>. Athanasius Doctrine of Divinization. 8 de July 2006. <http://www.angelfire.com/ md/dmorrison/hist/ DIVINIZ.html>. A Time Line of Church History. 1 January 2006. <http://www.saintignatiuschurch. org/timeline.html#timechart>. Azkoul, Michael What Are the Differences between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism? 2 September 2006. <http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage /reading/ ortho_cath.html>. Aumann, Jordan Asceticism and the Christian Life. <http://www.domcentral.org/study/aumann/ascetcsm.htm>. 10 June 2006.

Auxentios of Photiki and James Thornton. Three Byzantine Commentaries on the Divine Liturgy: A Comparative Treatment. Essays on Four Orthodox Liturgical Issues: A Collection of Liturgical Commentaries. Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 1996. 12 June, 2007. <http://www. orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/ph_services. aspx>. Averky. Liturgics. 23 October 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/ liturgics_averky_e.htm>. Aydingun, Sengul G. Hagia Sophia. 2 February 2007. <http://www.aydingun. com/H/dergiler /Skylife/Ayasofya.htm>. Bacchus, F.J. St. Proclus Patriarch of Constantinople. 27 February, 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12449b.htm>. Bailey, Mark. Psalmic Music in Orthodox Liturgy as Foundation, Movement, and Ministry. Orthodox Research Institute. 2 February 2007. < http://www.orthodox researchinstitute.org/articles/music/bailey_psalmic_music.htm>. Baker, E. Social and Political Thought in Byzantium. Oxford: Clarendon, 1957. Balamand Monastery. One Hundred & Twenty Wise Sayings from the Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church. 10 June 2006. <http://www.scourmont.be/studium/ bresard/>. Bamberger, John Eudes. Feast of the Transfiguration: Homily. <http://www. abbotjohneudes.org/h6aug01.html>. Barrois, Georges, ed. The Fathers Speak: St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory Nazianzus, and St. Gregory of Nyssa. Trans. George Barrois. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1986. . Scripture Readings in Orthodox Worship. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1977.

1229

Bibliography

Barry, William. Arianism. New Advent. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01707c. htm>. Bebis, George S. Tradition in the Orthodox Church. Orthodox Archdiocese Greek of America: 1990-1996. 10 March 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/ articles/article7116.asp Bebis>. Benigsen, George. Minor Words of the Liturgy. 23 February 2007. <http://www. stjohndc.org/ Russian/liturgy /e_minor_words.htm#Top>. Benz, Ernst. The Eastern Orthodox Church: Its Thought and Life. Trans. Richard and Clara Winston. New York: Anchor Books, 1963. Excerpts. Ed. Bishop Alexander Mileant. 22 August 2003. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/index _s.php>. Bernard, David K. Oneness and Trinity A.D. 100-300: The Doctrine of God in Ancient Christian Writings. Hazelwood, MO: Word Aflame Press, 1991. Berzonsky, Vladimir. Genuine Prayer. Orthodox Church in America. July 16, 2006 Bulletin 37, Volume XLIII. 28 July 2006. <http://www.oca.org/CHRISTthoughts-article.asp?SID=6&ID=236>. Bettenson, Henry, ed. and trans. The Early Christian Fathers. A selection from the writings of the Fathers from St. Clement of Rome to St. Athanasius. 12 March 2006. <http://www. holytrinitymission.org>. Biographical Sketches of Some Early Christians Whose Writings Are Not in the New Testament up to 313 A.D. 8 March 2006. <http://www.bibletexts.com/glossary /early-christians.htm>. Bishop Hilarion Alfeev on Music as Prayer. 23 February 2007. <http://www.zenit. org/english/>. Blaikie, Alexander. A Catechism on Praise. 2 February 2007. <http://www. covenanter.org/Worship/Catechism/catechismappendix.htm>. Blume, Clemens. Hymn. New Advent. 14 January 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen/07595a.htm>. . Hymnody and Hymnology. New Advent. 14 January 2007. <http://www. newadvent.org/cathen/07596a.htm>. Blume, Michael F. The Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity. 12 March 2006. <http://mikeblume.com/origin.htm>. Bobrinskoy, Boris. The Mystery of the Trinity. Crestwood, N.Y: Saint Vladimirs Seminary Press. Bogolepov, Alexander A. The hymns of the Orthodox Church. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia. 12 January 2006. <http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas /pages /Hymns.html>. Boojamra, J. L. The Church and Social Reform: The Policies of the Patriarch Athanasios of Constantinople. New York: Fordham University Press, 1993. . Foundations for Christian Education. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1989. Boosalis, Harry.Orthodox Spiritual Life according to St. Silouan the Athonite.South Canaan, Pa.: St. Tikhons Seminary Press, 2000. 1230

Bibliography

Bouyer, L. Liturgy and Architecture. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1967. . Eucarista: teologa y espiritualidad de la oracin eucarstica. Barcelona: Editorial Herder, 1969. Brandt, Bernard. A (Little) Light from the East. 27 February, 2007. <http:/ pauca_lux_ex_oriente.blogspot.com/>. Bratcher, Dennis. Ecumenical Christian Creeds. 2 March 2006. <http://www. cresourcei.org/ creedsearly.html>. Braun, Joseph. Vestments. New Advent. 13 December 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen/15388a.htm>. Bray, G. L. Deification. New Dictionary of Theology. Sinclair B. Ferguson, David F. Wright, and J. I. Packer, eds. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1988. Breck, John, Scripture in Tradition. New York: Creswood, 2001. Brennan, Andrei S.P. Entrances and Barriers: Doors, the Iconostasis and Sacred Space from an Eastern Christian. Perspective Axis Mundi. 13 March 2007. <http://www.arts. ualberta.ca/axismundi/2000/entrances_and_barriers.php>. Brsard, Luc. A History of Monastic Spirituality. 9 June 2006. <http://www.scourmont. be/studium/bresard/>. Brianchaninov, Ignatius. On Practicing the Jesus Prayer. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 1 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/ ignaty_jesus.aspx>. Bright, J. A History of Israel. Fourth edition. Lousville-London: Westminster John Press, 2000. Brightman, Frank E. Liturgies Eastern and Western: Oxford: 1896 Brown, Raymond E . An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Doubleday, 1996. Bruce, FF. The Spreading Flame. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958. Bulgakov, Sergey. The Orthodox Church. Excerpts. Ed. Alexander Mileant. 22 August 2003. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/ index_s.php>. Byzantine Architecture. 9 April 2007. <http://members.fortunecity.com/fstav1/archit. html>. Byzantine Art. <http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/b/byzantine.html>. Byzantine Art and Architecture. The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 200105. 9 October 2006. <http://www.bartleby.com/65/by/ByzantinANA.html>. Byzantine Music. Columbia, the Free Dictionary. 20 January 2007. <http://www. infoplease.com/ce6/ent/A0809705.html>. Cabrol, Fernand. Divine Office. New Advent. 4 May 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen/11219a.htm>. Calivas, Alciviadis C. Orthodox Worship. 12 October 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/ en/ourfaith/articles/article7118.asp>.

1231

Bibliography

. The Origins of Pascha and Great Week. 14 October 2006. <http://www.goarch. org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8123.asp>. Kallinikos, Constantine. The History of the Orthodox Church. Los Angeles, CA: Prothymos Press, 1957. Excerpts. <http: //www. holytrinitymission.org/ index_ s.php> Campenhausen, Hans Von. Los Padres de la Iglesia I: los Padres griegos. Trans. Serafn Fernndez. Madrid: Ediciones Cristianas, 1974. Canons of the seven ecumenical councils. 14 December 2006. <http://www.intratext. com/X/ENG0835.HTM>. Canons of the Orthodox Church. 1 June 2007 <http://aggreen.net/canons/canons. html>. Carroll, Thomas K. and Thomas Halton. Liturgical Practice in the Fathers. (Message of the Fathers of the Church, Vol 21). Wilmington, DE., Michael Glazier, 1988. Excerpts. 8 October 2007. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/ liturgical_practice_thomas_carroll.htm>. Cassock. December 8, 2006. <http://www.answers.com/topic/cassock>. Catholic Apologetics. 13 March 2006.<http://www.theworkofgod.org/Library/ Apologtc/R_Haddad/Ibelieve/creed4.htm>. Chadwick, Henry. The Early Church. England: Penguin Book, 1993. . Early Christian Thought and the Classical Tradition: studies on Justin, Clement, and Origen. Oxford 1966. Chant Development: An Outline History of Russian Chant. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 12 January 2007. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitMusDev5 .jsp?hostname=null>. Chant Development: Early Orthodox Chant and Music. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 12 January 2006. <http://www.liturgica.com/l>. Chi Rho (Christogram). 15 June 2007. <http://www.forumancientcoins.com/>. Chomatianos, Demetrios. Letter to Constantine Kabasilas. Ed. J. B. Pitra. Analecta Sacra et Classica Spicilegio Solesmensi Parata, vi (Rome, 1891): cols. 631-632. Chrysostomos. Orthodox Liturgical Dress: an Historical Treatment. Brookline, Massachusetts: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1981. Chrysostomos and Auxentios. Introduction to Scripture and Tradition. In Scripture and Tradition, 1-4. Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 1994. 22 January 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/index.aspx>. Ciresi, Sal. Church History: The Early Apologists. Herald 9/5/02.www. catholicherald.com. 8 October 2006. <http://www.catholicherald.com/ ciresi/02ciresi/ciresi0905.htm>. Communicatio Idiomatum. New Advent. 5 September 2006. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen/04169a.htm>. Conomos, Dimitri. Orthodox Byzantine Music. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 15 January 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ ourfaith/articles/article 7069.asp>.

1232

Bibliography

. A Brief Survey of the History of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Chant. 15 January 2006. < http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/music/History.htm>. Constantelos, D. J. Byzantine Philanthropy and Social Welfare. 2nd Revised Edition. New Rochelle, NY: Aristide D. Caratzas, 1991. Constantine I the Great. 10 June 2007. <http://www.budgetromans.com/ constantine_i.htm>. Crisbasan, Stefan. Orthodox Christian MonasticismHesychasm. 28 July 2006. <http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/orthodox_christianity/10151>. Chirathilattu, Biji. The Relevance of Prayers and Fasts. The Syriac Orthodox Christian Digest (January, 2005). <http://www.socdigest.org/articles/04jan05. html>. Christian Doctrine. New Advent. 9 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/>. Christian Dogmatics. Orthodox Outlet for Dogmatic Enquiries. 10 March 2006. <http ://www.oodegr.com/english/dogma/dogma.htm#pano>. Christou, Panayiotis. The Teaching of Gregory Palamas on Man. Myriobiblos. 1 September 2006. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/christou_palamas. html#_edn2>. Christou, Panayiotis. The monastic life in the eastern orthodox Church. Reprinted from The Orthodox Ethos, Studies in Orthodoxy. Vol. 1. Ed. A. J. Philippou. 9 June 2006. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/index_en.html>. Church History On-Line. 17 July 2006 <http://www.bsmvt.org/ign-eph.html>. Cole, Donna. The law of liturgy: Interpretation and implementation of liturgical documents. 11 June 2007. <http://www.rpinet.com/ml/2902lawl.html>. Coniaris, Anthony M. Achieving Your Potential in Christ: Theosis. Plain Talks on a Major Doctrine of Orthodoxy. Ed. D. A. Riewe. 6 July 2006. <http://theosis. riewe.com/theosis_what_theosis_is_not.htm>. Council of Chalcedon. 21 July 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03555a. htm> . Crossan, John Dominic The Christian Catacombs in Rome. 12 July 2007. <http:// www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/first/catacombs.html>. Crouzel. Origen. Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark LTD, 1999. Church Iconograpy - What is Iconography? 12 April 2007. <http://www3.telus.net/ public/abvm/view_the_iconography.htm>. Church of the Holy Apostles, Constantinople. 13 March 2007. <http://www.sacreddestinations.com/turkey/istanbul-church-of-holy-apostles.htm>. Church of the Holy Apostles (historical site, Constantinople). 2 February 2007. <http://www. britannica.com/eb/topic-269738/Church-of-the-Holy-Apostles>. Cunningham, James W. Vanquished Hope. New York: Crestwood, 1981. Daily Prayers for Orthodox Christians: The Synekdemos. Ed. N. Michael Vaporis. Greek Archdiocese of America. 25 October 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ chapel/liturgical_ texts/daily_prayers.asp>.

1233

Bibliography

DAmbrosio, Marcellino. Early Church Fathers Overview: A Snapshot of the Fathers of the Church. 12 March 2006.<http://www.crossroadsinitiative.com/ library. html>. Davis, Leo D. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils. The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minnesota, 1983. David, Leo Donald. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1983. Davis, Nathaniel. A Long Walk to Church: A Contemporary History of Russian Orthodoxy. Westview Press, 1995 Davis, William Stearns, ed. Readings in Ancient History: Illustrative Extracts from the Sources, 2 Vols. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1912-13. Deaconess: Council of Laodicea 15 January 2006. <http://www.piney.com/FathCan LaodDeaconess.html>. Desert Fathers. New Advent. 9 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. De Waal, Anton. Roman Catacombs 20 March 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/ cathen/03417b.htm>. Diaconicon. Encyclopedia Britannica Online <http://www.britannica.com/eb/ topic160996/diaconicon>. Dictionary of Theology. 2 February 2006. <http://www.carm.org/dictionary.htm>. Dimitrova, Mariana. The Prokeimena in the Lenten Series and the Development of the Genre. 27 February, 2007.<http://musicart.imbm.bas.bg/p/en_dimitrova1.html >. Dio, Casius. History of Rome. Early Church documents. Ed. Ray Petry. 1975. Excerpts from Readings in the History of the Church. 4 March 2006. <http: //www. holytrinitymission.org>. Divine Office. 22 December 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11219a.htm>. Dix, Gregory Dom. The Shape of the Liturgy. New York: The Seabury Press, 1982. Excerpts. 2 May 2007. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/ books/english/shape _of_liturgy_ g_dix.htmEx>. Dogma. Online Encyclopedia. 27 June 2006. <http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/DIO_ DRO/ DOGMA_Gr_Sbypa_from_b6aeiv_to_s.html>. Doherty, Earl. The Jesus Puzzle: Was There No Historical Jesus? 10 March 2006. <http://www.meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Christianity/Other_Articles / the_jesus_puzzle_0.htm>. Dragas, George Dion. The Church in St. Maximus Mystagogy. Theology, no 1, 1985. 27 February, 2007. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/dragas_mystago gy_1.htm>. Dress. Bible search. 22 December 2006. <http://www.thebiblesearch.com/ISBE.asp? BibleID=8323>. Drillock, David Words and Music in Orthodox Liturgical Worship: A Historical Introduction. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 12 January 2006. <http://www. liturgica.com/html/lit EOLitusev3 jsp#byzantine>.

1234

Bibliography

. Liturgical Song in the Worship of the Church. St. Vladimirs Theological Quarterly. 41:2-3 (1997): 186. Drum, Walter. Psalms. New Advent. 24 February 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org /cathen/12533a.htmDumbarton>. Dugmore, C. W. The Influence of the Synagogue on the Divine Office. Westminster, S.W.1: The Faith Press Ltd, 1964. Dulle, Jason. The Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity. 12 March 2006.<http://www. apostolic.net/ biblicalstudies/trinhistory.htm>. EarlyChurch.org.uk. 10 March 2006. <http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/persecution. html>. Early Christian Architecture. 2 December 2006. <http://www.pitt.edu/~tokerism/004 0/syl/christian.html>. Early Eastern Orthodox Liturgy. 10 March 2006. < http://www.liturgica.com/html/l itEOLitEarly.jsp? hostname=null>. Early Christian Writings. 12 March 2006. <http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ shepherd.html>. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: The Byzantine Typicon. 7 January 2007. <http://www. liturgica.com/html/litEOLitBTyp.jsp?hostname=null#1>. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: Early Orthodox Chant and Music. 12 January 2007. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitMusDev2.jsp?hostname=null>. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: Early Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 23 February 2007. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitEarly.jsp?hostname=null>. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics: Liturgical Worship in the Eastern Church. 12 January 2006. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitMusDev.jsp?hostname=null>. Eastern Orthodoxy. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 28 November, 2006. <http://wwwa. search.eb.com/dday/article-11150>. Ecole Glossary. 9 February 2006. html>. <http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/glossary.

Encyclopaedia Brittannica. 2 June 2006. <www.1911encyclopedia.org >. Enloe, T.G. Eastern and Western Trinitarianism Briefly Contrasted. 2000. <http://www.societas christiana.com /Theology/Trinity3.html>. Ellison, H. L. The Old Testament Prophet Men Spake from God. 10 November, 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymisssion.org> and <http://www.intratext.com/X/ ENG08 20.HTM>. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary. 10 November, 2006. <http://mb-soft.com/believe/ txo/aposfath.htm>. Epanagoge. J. and P. Zepos, eds. Jus graecoromanum, 2 (Athens, 1931): pp. 229-368. Explore Byzantium. 10 November, 2006. <http://byzantium.seashell.net.nz/>. Evagrius Ponticus: On Asceticism and Stillness in the Solitary Life. 10 June 2006. <http://www. hermitary.com/solitude/evagrius.html>. Evdokimov, Paul. The Universal Character of Monastic Spirituality. In Communion: Web Site of the Orthodox Peace Fellowship 15 June 2006. <http://www. 1235

Bibliography

incommunion.org/articles/older-issues/the-universal-character-of-monasticspirituality>. Every, George. The Byzantine Patriarchate. London, 1947. Falasca, Stefania. The Catacombs of Saint Callixtus in Rome. 25 March 2007. <http:// www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/CALLIXT.TXT>. Farha, Aaron. St. Seraphim of Sarov. Anthioquian Orthodox Christian Archidiocese of North America (Depart. of Christian Education). 11 September 2006. <http: //www.antiochian.org/1248>. Fayad, Salma. Orthodox Perspectives in the Development of Religious education Curricula. Ed. C.J. Tarasar. Syosset, New York: SYNDESMOS and The Dept. of Religious Education of the Orthodox Church in America, 1983. 46-58. Feast of the Nativity of Our Most Holy Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 4 December 2006. <http://www. goarch.org/en/special/listen_learn_share/vmnativity/learn/>. February Revolution. 10 July 2006. <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9033886 /February-Revolution>. Fedotov, George. The Russian Religious Mind. 2 vols. Belmont, MA: Nordland Press, 1975. . A Treasury of Russian Spirituality. London: 1950. Excerpts. 10 March 2006. <http://www. holytrinitymission.org>. Fenari Isa Mosque (Constantine Lips Monastery Church). 12 March 2007. <http://www.archmuseum.org/biyografi.asp?id=10070>. Filofei. Letter to tsar Vasilii III (1510/1511). V. Malinin, Starets Eleazarova monastyria Filofei i ego poslaniia. Appendix. Kiev: 1901. Fitzgerald, Thomas. History. 10 March 2006. <http://ww.goarch.org>. . The Sacraments. 6 July 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/enourfaith/articles /article7105.asp>. . Worship. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 14 October 2006. <http:// www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7119.asp>. First Council of Constantinople. New Advent. 12 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/3808.htm>. Filioque Controversy. 13 March 2006. <http://mb-soft.com/believe/txn/filioque.htm>. Florovsky, George. St Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers. Sobornost, 4 (1961) 4, 165-176. 12 February 2006. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/ index_en.html>. . The Byzantine, Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers. Collected Works. Vol. 10, Belmont, Mass., Nordland Pub. Co. 1987. 10 March 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymiss ion.org>. . Eastern Fathers of the Fourth Century. Collected Works. Vol. 7, Belmont, Mass., Nordland Pub. Co. 1987. 10 June 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org>.

1236

Bibliography

.Christianity and Culture. Collected Works. Vol. 2. Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Co., 1974. 1 June 2006. <http: /www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/ english/christianity_and_culture_ florovky.htm>. . Ways of Russian Theology. Collected Works. Vol. 6. Belmont, MA: Nordland, 1987. 10 March 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org>. . Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox. Belmont, Mass: 1972. .The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eighth Century. 12 January 2006.<http:// www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/fathers_florovsky_3. htm>. Foley, Edward. From Age to Age: How Christians Have Celebrated the Eucharist (1991) Chicago: Liturgy Training Publications Four Centuries on the Spiritual LifePart II: St. Thalassios the Libyan. Inner Light Productios. 1 August 29006 <http://www.innerlightproductions. com/thoughts/ aug1201.htm>. Fortescue, Adrian. Canon of the Mass. 14 March 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen/03255c.htm>. . Antiochene Liturgy. 20 May 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01571a. htm>. . The Rite of Constantinople 20 May 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ 04312d.htm>. . Liturgy. 14 December. 14 May 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen /09306a. htm>. Galerius and Constantine: Edicts of Toleration (311/313) 15 March 2006. <http: //ancientrome.ru/ius/library/edict/gct.htm>. Gardner, Johann von. Russian Church Singing. Vol. 1: Orthodox Worship and Hymnography. Transl. Vladimir Morosan. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1980. . Russian Church Singing. Vol. 2: History from the Origins to the Mid Century. Transl. Vladimir Morosan. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 2000. Gauthier, Dawn. Russian Znamenny Chant. 12 March 2007. <http://www.geocities. com/Vienna /4612 /znamenny.htm>. Gavin, Frank S.B. The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments. New York: Cosimo Classics, 2005. Gavitt, Philip. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. 2000. 1 March 2006. <http://www. slu.edu/colleges/AS/cmrs/0221002.html>. Gibbon, Edward. The History of The Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire. <http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/index.htm>. Gieschen, Charles. A Pilgrimage, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity. 2001. 2 March 2006. <http://www. ctsfw.edu/online/pilgrim/5-1/gieschen.php>. Gill, John. A Discourse on Singing of Psalms as a Part of Divine Worship. Providence Baptist Ministries: Gills Archives. 28 January 2007. <http://www. pbministries.org/ books/gill/Sermons&Tracts/sermon_54.htm>.

1237

Bibliography

. A Body of Practical Divinity. Providence Baptist Ministries: Gills Archives. 28 January 2007. <http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/Practical_ Divinity/Book _3/ book3_07. htm>. Gillet, Louis. Religious Painting. 25 March 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ 11395a.htm>. Gillquist, Peter E. Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Faith. Ben Lomond, California: Conciliar Press, 1992. Gillum, Gary P. Christology. 2 June 2007. <http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/ basic/christ/christology.html>. Gleanings from Orthodox Christian Authors and the Holy Fathers. 10 September 2006. <http://www.orthodox.net/gleanings/index.html> Glossary of Liturgical Music. PSALM. 28 March 2007. <http://www.orthodoxpsalm. org/resources/glossary/k-o.html>. Glossary of Russia. 2 March 2006. <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/ report/1999/russia/ n2glossa.pdf>. Glossary of Terms. 2 March 2006. <http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/Byzantium /glossary>. Goggin, J.F. Liturgy of St. Basil. 27 February, 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen /02321a.htm>. Goodspeed, Edgar J. A History of Early Christian Literature. 2 March 2006. <http://www. holytrinitymission.org>. Good News Christian Ministry. Christianity and Qumran: The Relationship Between The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity. 1998. 2 April 2006. <http://members. aol.com/ecsl/ christandqumran.htm>. Goppelt, Leonhard. Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975. Gregory of Nyssa. New Advent. 15 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Grimmit, M., Religious education and Human Development. Essex, England: McCrimmons, 1987. Gross, Jules, La Divinisation du chrtien daprs les Pres grecs : contribution historique la doctrine de la grce. Paris: J. Gabalda, 1938. Guide to Early Church Documents. 2 March 2006. <http://www.iclnet.org/pub /resources/christian-history.html>. Hagia Sophia (1). 13 March 2007. <http://www.islamicarchitecture.org/architecture/ monuments/hagia.sophia.html>. Hagia Sophia (2). 13 March 2007. Miscellaneous/Hagia_Sophia.html>. <http://www.gap-system.org/~history/

Hagia SophiaApse Mosaic of the Virgin and Child. 15 June 2007. <http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/hagia-sophia-photos/apse-mosaicmary2-c-osseman.jpg.html>. Haldon, J., Byzantium, A History. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Publishing, 2000.

1238

Bibliography

Halsall, P. Caesaropapism? Theodore Balsamon on the Powers of the Patriarch of Constantinople (1996). Medieval Sourcebook. 3 February 2006. <http://www. fordham.edu/halsall/source /balsamon-cpl.html>. Hanrahan, James. St. Basil the Great (329 - 379): A Life with Excerpts from his Works. Toronto: The Basilian Press, 1979. <http://www.basilian.org/Publica/StBasil/ Stbasil1.htm>. Hart, Aidan. Some Principles of Orthodox Church Architecture 29 March 2007. <http://www.aidanharticons.com/articles/ORTHARC3.pdf>. Hasselbach, Rich. The Jesus Prayer. 28 September 2006. <http://www.fatherrich.com /page29/page31/page31.html>. Hassett, Maurice M. History of the Christian Altar. 20 March 2007. <http://www. newadvent.org/cathen/01362a.htm>. Hatzopoulos, Dionysios. The Iconoclastic Period (711-843). 15 June 2007. <http://www. greece.org/Romiosini/iconoclastic.html>. Heresies, Cults, and Church social cliques. 12 March 2006. <http://www.bibletexts. com/ glossary/ heresy.htm>. Hermits. New Advent. 15 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Heroes of the Fourth Century (Part III): St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. John Chrysostom. Orthodox Research Institute. 20 June 2006. <http://www.orthodox researchins titute.org/ articles/ patrology/heroes_of_4th_century_pt3.htm>. Hieromonk Agapius and St. Nicodemus of Mt. Athos Introduction to the Sacred Canons: What is a Canon?.13 June 2007. <http://www.orthodoxfaith.com/ canons_introduction. html>. Hieromonk Damascene. The Way of Spiritual Transformation. Orthodox Christian Information Center. <http://www. orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/spiritualtransormatio n.aspx>. . What Christ Accomplished on the Cross. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 19 August 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/christcross.aspx>. Hierotheos Metropolitan of Nafpaktos. The Mind of the Orthodox Church. Levadia, Greece: Holy Monastery of the Birth of the Theotokos, 1998. 30 August 2006. <http://www.vic.com/~tscon/pelagia/htm/b12.en.the_mind_of_the_orthodox_ch urch.01.htm>. .Orthodox Psychotherapy. 31 August 2006. <http://www.vic.com/~tscon/pelagia/htm /b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.06.htm#2k>. Hilarion Alfeyev, Prayer in St Isaac of Nineveh. Russian Orthodox Church. 18 September 2006. <http:// orthodoxeurope.org/page/12/2.aspx#_ftnref76>. Hillis, Gregory K. To Be Transformed by a Vision of Uncreated Light: A Survey on the Influence of the Existential Spirituality of Hesychasm on Eastern Orthodox History. Axis Mundi: 2002. 29 July 2006. <http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/ axismundi/articles.php>. Hippolytus of Rome: The Apostolic Tradition. 27 February, 2007. <http://www. bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html>.

1239

Bibliography

Historical Theology. 9 March 2006. <http://www.apuritansmind.com/Historical Theology/Historical Theology-MainPage.htm>. History of Dogmatic Theology. New Advent. 9 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/>. Holy Fathers: Theosis. <http://www.orthodox.net/gleanings/theosis.html>. Holy Ghost. New Advent. 9 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org>. Holy Icons. 12 April 2007. <http://www.dosoca.org/article.php?id=32>. Hopko, Thomas. Second Century: Persecution and Faith. Orthodox Church of America. 3 February 2006. <http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/ChurchAnd Ministry/ChurchHistory/Second_ Century_Persecution_ and_Faith.asp>. . The Orthodox Faith: An Elementary Handbook on the Orthodox Church. 3 vols. New York: Department of Religious Education of the Orthodox Church in America, 1972-1976. 10 October 2006.<http:// www.oca.org>. . vol.1: Doctrine. The Orthodox Church in America. 10 October 2006. <http:// oca.org/OCorthfaith.asp?SID=2>. . vol. 2: Worship. Second Edition. New York: Dept. of Religious Education (The Orthodox Church in America), 1976. <http://oca.org/OCorthfaith.asp?SID=2>. Horsley, Richard A. Jews and Christians in a Roman World. 13 August 2006. <http: //www.archaeology. org/online/ features/romanworld/>. How Are Certain Terms To Be Used? A Miniglossary.Orchid Land Publications. 2000, 2001, 2004. <http://orlapubs.com/AR/R62.html#dogma>. Howell-Smith, A. D. Jesus Not a Myth. London: Watts & Co., 1942. Hussey, J.M. The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986. Excerpts. 13 March 2006. <http: //www. holytrinitymission.org/index_ s.php>. Hymnody: What Is It? Hymnology: The History and Use of Hymns. Smith Creek Music. 12 January 2006. <http://www.smithcreekmusic.com/Hymnology/index. html>. Icons and iconoclasm. Catholic Encyclopaedia. 27 February, 2007. <http://individual. utoronto.ca/hayes/earlychurch/20icons.htm>. Icons and their History. 3 August 2007. <http://www.saintignatiuschurch.org/ icons.html>. Iconostasis. Internet Encyclopedia of Religion. 5 April 2007. <http://www.religionencyclopedia. com/I/iconostasis.htm>. Instituto Superior de Ciencias Religiosas San Agustn. Historia de Israel. Trans. Eloy Requena. Roma, Italia: Edizioni Piemme, 2001. IntroductionMeaning of Rite. 3 December 2006. <http://www.homestead.com/ Easterncatholichymns/ SpasiHospodi.html>. Introduction to the Service of Great Vespers in the Orthodox Church. St. Anne Orthodox Mission. 28 February 2007. <http://www.stanneorthodoxchurch.org/Calenda Services/greatvespers.htm>. Jacobs , Joseph and W. H. Cobb. Meter in the Bible. Jewish Encyclopedia. 20 January 2007. < http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid= 519&letter =M>. 1240

Bibliography

Jarmus, Andrew, dir. Prayer in Eastern Orthodox Spirituality. Published by the Office of Missions and Education, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada. 20 March 2007. <http://www.uocc.ca/pdf/pamphlets/pamphlet.series2.prayer_ cornerstone. pdf>. . Prayer: The Cornerstone of Orthodox Christian Spirituality. Office of Missions and Education (Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada). 22 October 2006. <http://www.uocc.ca/pdf/pamphlets/pamphlet.series2.prayer_cor nerstone.pdf>. John of Damascus. Aswers.com. 30 June 2006. <http://www.answers.com/topic/ john-of-damascus>. Johnson, Phil Apophatic Tradition. 9 March 2006. <http://circleofpneuma.blogspot. com/2005/06/ apophatic-tradition.html>. Joyce, G. H. The Blessed Trinity. New Advent. 11 March 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org>. Jones, Robert. Heresies & Schisms in the Early Church. 3 April 2006. <http://www. sundayschoolcourses.com/heresy/>. Jordan, Michael D. A New perspective on Prayer. 6 July 2006. <http://www.stseraphim.com/prayer.htm>. Joseph of Mt. Tabor Monastery. Monks. Gladsome Light. Summer 2003. 10 October 2006. <http://www.byzantines.net/monastery/ourlife.htm>.. Jungman, Josef A. The Early Liturgy. Trans. Francis A. Brunner. London: Dalton, Longman and Todd, 1959. Kallinikos, Constantine. The History of the Orthodox Church. 10 March 2006. Excerpts. <http:/www.holytrinitymission.org>. Kallistos of Diokleia. Foreword. Georgios I. Mantzaridis. The Deification of Man: St Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition. Trans. Liadain Sherrard. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1984. . The unity of the human person: The body-soul relationship in Orthodox Theology. 24 August 2006. Myriobiblos. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/ english/wear_unity_3.html>. . Person and Personality in Orthodox Teaching. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 8 September 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com /inquirers/ac_ person hood.aspx>. . St Maximos of Kapsokalyvia and Fourteenth-Century Athonite Hesychasm. Myriobiblos. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/wear_maximos.html>. Kantiotes, Augoustinos, N. On the Divine Liturgy. Trans. Asterios Gerostergios. Belmont, MA: Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 1986 Kartashev, Anton. Ocherki po istorii Russkoi Tserkvi. Vol 1. Moscow, 1992. Kelly, J.N.D. Early Christian Creeds. New York: Longman, 1960. . Early Christian Doctrines. New York: Harper, 1978. Kennedy, B. David. Clerical Attire, Vesture, Titles, and Precedence for Deacons, Hierodeacons, Protodeacons and Archdeacons according to the Byzantine

1241

Bibliography

Tradition. St. Ellias Church. Eparchy of Toronto. December 8, 2006. <http:// www. saintelias.com/ca/servers /clerical. php>. Koulomzin, Sophie. Our Church and Our Children. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1975. Koyzis, David T. A Capsule History of Russia. 3 April 2006. <http://www.redeemer.on.ca/ academics/polisci/Russian_ history.html>. Koumarianos, Pavlos. Symbol and Reality in the Divine Liturgy. 27 February, 2007. <http://jacwell.org/Liturgical%20Music/symbol_and_reality_in_the_divine.htm # note1>. Knowledge, Prayer, Vision: Three foundational aspects of the Theology of St Gregory Palamas. Monachos.net. 9 October 2006. <http://www.monachos.net/patristics/ palamas_theology.shtml#_ftnref4>. Krautheimer, Richard. Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1975. Krivocheine, Basil. St. Symeon the New Theologian. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1986. . Some differences between Greek and Russian divine services and their significance. 21 February 2007. <http://www.holy-trinity.org/liturgics/ krivoshein-greekandrussian.html>. Labourt, Jerome St. Ephraem. New Advent. 20 February 2007. <http://www. newadvent.org/cathen /05498a.htm>. La Filocalia: de la Oracin de Jess. Buenos Aires: Editorial Lumen, 1979. La iglesia monstica. Junta de Castilla y Len. 12 March 2007. <http://www. artehistoria. jcyl.es/arte/contextos/4004.htm>. Lewis, C. S. God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics . September 1, 2006. <http://www.merelewis.com/CSL.gitd.1-12.ManOrRabbit.htm>. Liester, Mitchell B. Hesychasm: A Christian Path of Transcendence. Theosophical Society of America. 18 September 2006. <http://theosophical.org/theosophy/ questmagazine/marchapril2000/hesychasm/index.htm>. Liturgical Music Today. 21 February 2007. <http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:YQ7 aDXOJiWoJ:www.dow.org/documents/LITURGICALMUSICTODAY.pdf+role+lit urgical+music&hl=es&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=es>. Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom. Religious-Information Service of Ukraine. 21 February 2007. < http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/spirituality/liturgy/chrysostom/>. Litany. New Advent. 20 October 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09286a. htm>. Litsas, Fotios K. A Dictionary of Orthodox Terminology. 24 March 2006. <http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/dictionary_terminology.htm# d> Liturgical Books. Metropolitan Cantor Institute. 20 October 2006. <http://metropo litancantorinstitute.org/LiturgicalBooks.html?>.

1242

Bibliography

Liturgical Music: The Divine Liturgy of Our Father among the Saints John Chrysostom 2 April 2007. <http://www.orthodoxworld.ru/english/music/ Liturgy_full/index.htm>. Liturgical Rubrics. 26 October 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english /liturgical_rubrics_1.htm#_Toc70898636>. Liturgical Vestments. St. Michael the Archangel Ukrainian Catholic Church. 3 November 2006. <http://artemis.crosslink.net/ ~hrycak/ vestment.html >. Liturgical Vestment: Colors of the Orthodox Church. 14 December 2006. <http://aggreen.net/vestment/liturgical_colors.html>. Liturgy. 20 December 2006 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09306a.htm>. Liturgy of Saint Basil. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 27 February, 2007. <http://www. britannica.com/eb/topic-55024/Liturgy-of-Saint-Basil>. Liturgy of the Mass. 20 December 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen 09790b. htm>. Lffler, Klemens. St. Sebastian. 15 June 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ 13668a.htm>. Logue, Frank. The Jesus Prayer. King of Peace Episcopal Church. 3 October 2006. <http://www.kingofpeace.org/sermons2003-2004/sermon-10240 4.htm>. Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Crestwood, New York, 1976. . Orthodox Theololgy: An Introduction. Trans. Ian and Ihita Kesarcoi-Watson. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1989. . Theology and Mysticism in the Tradition of the Eastern Church. 15 June 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/lossky_intro.aspx>. . The Vision of God. Trans. Asheleigh Moorhouse. London: The Faith Press, 1963. Louth, Andrew. The Cappadocians. The Study of Spirituality. Eds. C. Jones, G. Wainwright, and E. Yarnold. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Lukianov, Roman. Prayer Life in an Orthodox Home. Orthodox Information Center. 22 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/prayer_home.aspx>. Lusk, Rich. What Is Biblical Theology? Story Theology and a Theology of Story. 9 March 2006. <http://www.hornes.org/theologia/content/rich_lusk/what_is_ biblical_theology.htm>. Maas, A.J. Christology. New Advent. 1 June 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/ cathen/14597a.htm>. Macalister, R.S.A. Ecclesiastical Vestments: Their Development and History. London: 1986. Marini, Piero. Iconography and Liturgy. Office of Papal Liturgical Celebrations. 27 February, 2007. <http://benedettoxvi.va/news_services/liturgy/2005/documents/ ns_lit_doc_20050120_marini_en.html>. Maximus Confessor. The Churchs Mystagogy. 5 February, 2007. <http://www. ldysinger.com/ MONS_423/05_lit-prayer/06_maximos.htm>.

1243

Bibliography

McCauley, Patrick. What is Western Rite Orthodoxy? 22 October 2006. <http:// www.allmercifulsavior.com/Liturgy/History.html>. McDonald, Mary J. Building a Eucharistic Community: A Handbook for Liturgical Catechesis. California: Resource Publications, 2001. Excerpts. 12 January 2007. <http://www.rpinet. com/products/bec.html#introduction>. Maloney, George A., S.J. Russian Hesychasm: The Spirituality of Nil Sorskij. Netherlands: Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, 1973. Manastireanu, Danut. The Place of Scripture in Orthodox Tradition. OrthoLogia. 1 June 2007. <http://www.ortho-logia.com/English/RomanianAuthors.htm>. Mastrantonis, George. The Fundamental Teachings of the Eastern Orthodox Church. 3 April 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/access/orthodoxfaith/fundamental_ teachings.html>. . Introduction to the Divine Liturgy. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 22 October 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/ articles/article7117.asp>. Mantzaridis, Georgios I. The Deification of Man: St Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition. Trans. Liadain Sherrard. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press 1984. Matins. Holy Transfiguration Antiochian Orthodox Church. 4 December 2006. <http: //www.htaoc.net/display_page/services/matins>. Matins: Morning Services according to the Byzantine Rite. Byzantine Leaflet Series No. 31. 4 March 2007. <http://www.metropolitancantorinstitute.org/leaflets/L031Matins. html>. Medieval Sourcebook: Council of Chalcedon, 451. 9 March 2006. fordham. edu/halsall/basis/chalcedon.html>. <http://www.

Medieval Sourcebook: Council of Ephesus, 431. 9 March 2006. <http://www. fordham.edu/halsall/ basis/ephesus.html>. Medieval Sourcebook: Council of Nicea, 325. 9 March 2006. <http://www.fordham. edu/halsall/ basis/nicea1.txt>. Medieval Sourcebook: Fifth Ecumenical Council: Constantinople II, 553. 9 March 2006. <http://www. ordham.edu/halsall/basis/const2.html>. Medieval Sourcebook: Sixth Ecumenical Council: Constantinople III, 680-681. 9 March 2006. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const3.html>. Medieval Sourcebook: The Second Council of Nicea, 787. 9 March 2006. <http://www. fordham.edu/halsall/basis/nicea2.html>. Medieval Sourcebook: The Quinsext Council, (or the Council in Trullo), 692. 12 January 2006. < http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/trullo.html>. Megaw, Arthur H. S. The Original Form of the Theotokos Church of Constantine Lips. Dumbarton Oaks Papers. Vol. 18 (1964), 279-298. 12 March 2007. <http://links. jstor.org/>. Mesarites, Nicholas. Ekphrasis on the Church of the Holy Apostles. Trans. Paul Stephenson. 13 March 2007. <http://homepage.mac.com/paulstephenson/trans/ mesarites1.html>.

1244

Bibliography

Metallinos, George. The Theological Question of our Day: An Interview with Protopresbyter. Divine Ascent: A Journal of Orthodox Faith, Vol. 1, Number 2. August 29 2006. <http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/8-9synods. html>. Mether, Thomas. Hesychasm: Orthodox Spirituality Compared and Constrasted with Other Religious Traditions. 2 March 2006. <http://www.strannik.com/ watchful_gate/hesychasm _compared.html>. Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos. St. Gregory Palamas as a Hagiorite. 30 July 2006. <http://www.vic.com/~tscon/pelagia/htm/b16.en.saint_gregory_palamas_ as_a_hagiorite.00.htm>. . Orthodox Psychotherapy. 1 August 2006. <http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en. orthodox_ psychotherapy.000.htm>. . Orthodox Spirituality. <http://www.vic.com/~tscon/pelagia/htm/b15.en.orthodox_ spirituality.01.htm>. Meyendorff, John. Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal themes. New York: Fordham University Press, 1979. . St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1974. . The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1982. . Christ in Eastern Christian Thought. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1987. . Christ as Word: Gospel and Culture. In International Review of Mission, No 294 (1985). 3 April 2006. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/ texts/english/meyendorff_ christ.html>. . Byzantium and the Rise of Russia. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1989. . Initiation la Thology Byzantine. Paris: Les editions du Cerf, 1959. Middle Platonism. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 9 March 2006. <http://www.iep.utm. edu/m/midplato.htm>. Middle Platonism: General Characteristics. 9 theologywebsite.com/ history/midplato.shtml>. Migne, J.P, ed. Patrologiae Graeca. Paris: 1857-66. . Patrologia Latina. Paris: 1844-64. Miller, L. The Crusades (1095-1291). 4 April 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymission. org>. Mileant, Alexander. The Temple of GodAn Island of Heaven on our Sinful Earth. Trans. Seraphim Larin and Fr. Herman. <http://www.fatheralexander.org/ booklets/english/temple.htm>. , ed. The Orthodox Church. Holy Trinity Orthodox Mission. 8 October 2006. <http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/catechism_ext.htm #n4>. March 2006. <http://www.

1245

Bibliography

, ed. The Orthodox C h u r c h. Holy Trinity Orthodox Mission. 4 July 2007. <http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/catechism_ext.htm #n4>. Mills, Gene, The Baptism of Tears: The Two Baptisms of St. Symeon the New Theologian. Quodlibet Journal, Vol. 3, No 3, Summer 2001. 30 August 2006. <http://www.Quodlibet.net>. Monasticism. New Advent. 22 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Monks at Decani Monastery in Kosovo. A History of the Orthodox Church: The Church of Imperial Byzantium. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 4 April 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/ history3.aspx>. Moody, Ivan. An Outline History of Russian Sacred Music. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 12 January 2006. < http://ivanmoody.co.uk/articles.russiansacredmusic.htm>. Moore, Edward. On Time and the Calendar in Orthodox Liturgical Theology: Some Historical Observations. Theandros: An Online Journal of Orthodox Christian Theology and Philosophy. Vol. 1, number 2, Winter 2003/2004. <http://www.theandros.com/index.html>. Morosan, Vladimir. Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia. Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1986. Moser, David. Why so many prayers?. St Seraphim Orthodox Church. 20 September 2006. <http://www.orthodox.net/articles/why-so-many-prayers.html>. Mouravieff, N. A History of The Russian Church. St. Tickons Monastery, 1842. Excerpts. 4 April 2006. <http: //www. holytrinitymission.org>. Nassif, Bassam A. Light for the World: the Life of St. Gregory Palamas (12961359). 29 August 2006. <http://www.antiochian.org/gregory-palamas>. Nea Ekklesia. 15 June 2007. <http://www.byzantium1200.com/nea-eccl.html>. Neume History. <http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Neume_-_History/id/1796 16>. New Advent. 24 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org>. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Ser. II, Vol. 2. 25 March 2007. <http://www.sacredtexts.com/chr/ecf/202/index.htm>. Nicene Creed. 30 June 2006. New Advent. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen /11049a.htm>. Nicol, D. M. Church and Society in the Last Centuries of Byzantium. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Norman, James. Handbook to the Christian Liturgy 5 May 2007. <http://www. katapi.rg.uk /Liturgy/MassCatI.htm>. Norman, Keith Edward. Deification: the Content of Athanasian Serology. Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies. FARMS Ocassional Papers. 9 July 2006. <http://farms.byu.edu/publications/papersmain.php>. Oakley, Austin. The Orthodox Liturgy, London, 1958 Obolensky, Dimitri. The Byzantine Impact on Eastern Europe. The Byzantine Inheritance of Eastern Europe. London: Variorum Reprints, 1982. 8 March

1246

Bibliography

2007. Myriobiblos. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/obolensky_impact. hml>. Oesterley, William O. The Jewish Background of the Christian Liturgy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925. Oleschuk, F.N. Uchitelskaya Gaceta, 26 November 1949. On Sunday Morning: At Matins. 24 February 2007. <http://web.ukonline.co.uk/ ephrem/sun1mc.htm >. Order of Vesting. 22 October 2006. <http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/order-ofvesting.html>. Orthodox Christian Monasticism Hesychasm. 3 October 2006. <http://maxpages. com/democracy/Orthodox_Monasticism>. Orthodox Dictionary. 3 June 2007. Dictionary>. <http://www.monachos.net/library/Orthodox_

Orthodox Eastern Church. The Columbia Encyclopedia. Sixth Edition (2001-05). 9 October 2006. <http://www.bartleby.com/65/or/Orthodox.html>. Orthodox Mysticism: Teachings of the Desert Fathers. Theological Resources and Collections. 22 June 2006. <http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas /nt/ mystic.htm>. Orthodox Outlet for Dogmatic Enquiries. 8 March 2006. <http://www.oodegr. com/english /dogma/dogma.htm>. Orthodox Research Institute. 3 April 2006. <http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/ resources/hierarchs/constantinople.htm>. Orthodox Tradition and Symbolism. Valaam Monastery. 9 April 2007. <http://www. katinkahesselink.net/sufi/gvalaam.html>. Orthodox Vestments. 8 December 2006. <http:// www.lasvegasorthodox.com/library/ Orthodox_ practices/ Orthodox_ Vestments.htm>. Our Slavonic Liturgy. 1 March 2007. <http://www.carpatho-rusyn.org/spirit/chap6. htm>. Outline of Early Christian Hymnody to 300 CE. Hymnology: The History and Use of Hymns. Smith Creek Music. 12 January 2006. <http://www.smithcreekmusic. com/Hymnology/Early.Hymnody/Early.hymnody.outline.html>. Ouspensky, Leonid. Theology of the Icon. Vol. 1. Trans. Anthony Gythiel. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 1992. Pachomius. 15 June 2006. <http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/enc1/pachomius>. Pachomius Biography. 12 June 2006. <http://www.bookrags.com/biographypachomius-eorl-10/in dex.html>. Palmer, W. The Travels of Macarius. The Patriarch and the Tsar. Vol 2. London: 1873. Papadakis, Pavlos. Chant Development: Byzantine Music History. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 12 January 2006. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitMusDev1. jsp?hostname=null>.

1247

Bibliography

Papadakis, Aristides. History of the Orthodox Church. 10 March 2006. <http:// ww.goarch.org/access/com...h/history_of_Orthodox_Church.htm>. Papademetriou, George C. An Introduction to Orthodox Spirituality. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 5 July 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/ articles/article9284.asp>. Paraschiv, Cleopa. Humble-Mindedness: The Doorway to Pure Prayer. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 2 August 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo. com/praxis/humblemindedness.aspx>. Parenti, Stefano. The Barberini gr.336 Manuscript. 27 February, 2007. <http://www. womenpriests.org/traditio/parenti.asp>. Pares, Bernard. A History of Russia. 3rd Ed. London: Knopf, 1937. Patristics. 5 March 2006. <http://www.monksofadoration.org/patrestx.html>. Patristics in English (P.I.E.) Project. Ed. Rev. Daniel R. Jennings. 30 July 2006. <http://www.seanmultimedia.com/Pie_homepage.html>. Patristic Studies Area. Source texts, commentaries, articles, essays and other resources on the Fathers of the Church. 2 March 2006. <http://www.monachos. net/patristics/index.shtml>. Patsavos, Lewis Dating Pascha in the Orthodox Church. 20 November 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7050.asp>. . The Canonical Tradition of the Orthodox Church. 3 April 2007. <http:// www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7071.asp>. Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition. The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600). Vol 1. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. . Christianity and Classical Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. Penkala. Gary. The Canticles of Luke. 20 February 2007. <http://www.canticanova. com/articles/hymns/artd11.htm>. Perkins, John H. Practical Theology: What Will It Become. 12 January 2007. <http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1372>. Peterson, John B. Apostolic Constitutions. 7 June, 2007. <http://www.newadvent. org/cathen /01636a.htm>. Petry, Ray C., ed. Readings in the History of the Church. Excerpts. 11 March 2006. <http: //www. holytrinitymission.org>. Phos Hilarion. 2 March 2007. <http://www.cstone.net/~lbrannon/PhosHilaron.pdf>. Pomazansky, Michael. Orthodox Dogmatic Theology. Ed. Alexander Mileant. 16 November 2003. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/dogmatics_ pomazansky.htm>. . Dogmas and Opinions. Ed. Alexander Mileant. 2001. <http://www.holytrinity mission.org/index.php>. . The Holies for the Holy: An Overview of the Divine Liturgy. Orthodox Information Center. 12 February 2007. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ general/pomaz_lit.aspx>.

1248

Bibliography

. The Liturgical Theology of Father A. Schmemann. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 13 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ phronema/pom_lit.aspx>. Pontifical University Saint Thomas Aquinas. Prayer is the light of the soul. <http://www.vatican.va/spirit/documents/spirit_20010302_giovanni-crisostomo_ en.html>. Pospielovsky, Dimitry. The Russian Church under the Soviet Regime 1916-1982. 2 vols. New York: Crestwood, 1984. . The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia. New York: Crestwood, 1998. Potapov, Victor. The All-night Vigil ServiceThe Evening Sacrifice. 4 March 2007. <http://www.stjohndc.org/Russian/liturgy/e_00_matins.htm#Matins>. Pray without ceasing. 3 March 2007. <http://www.users.bigpond.com/vsamart/ Prayer.html#A% 20PRAYER>. Prestige, G.J. God in Patristic Thought. London: 1936. Pray without Ceasing. 14 September 2006. <http://www.users.bigpond.com/vsamart /Prayer.html>. Prayer. Jewish Encyclopedia. V. 10. 164-171. Prayers for Orthodox Christians. Orthodox Church in America. 24 October 2006. <http://oca.org/OCSelect.asp?SID=2>. Prayer in Evagrius Ponticus and St. Nil Sorski. 15 March 2006. <http:// www.byzantines.net/ scranton/evag.htm>. Prayer without Ceasing (from The Way of the Pilgrim). 8 October 2006. <http://landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/Prayer_without_Ceasing.html>. Psalms. New Advent. 1 February 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12533a. htm>. Price, Carl F. What is a Hymn? Boston, MA: Hymn Society of America, 1937. Primates of Russia, Metropolitans and Patriarchs of Kiev and Moscow. 15 July 2006. <http://www.friesian.com/russpat.htm>. Programming Statement Draft Work in Progress. St. Peters Lutheran Church. 14 July 2007. http://stpeterseastpeoria.wordpress.com/>. Proper Clerical Dress. Orthodox Information Center. 4 December 2006. <http://www. orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/clergy_dress.aspx>. Prostopinije The Liturgical Chant according to the Carpatho-Rusyn Tradition. 20 February 2007. <http:// www.carpatho-rusyn.org/spirit/chant.htm>. Quasten, Johannes. Patrology. 4 vols. Utrecht: Spectrum, 1950-1986. Quenot, Michael. The Icon, window on the Kingdom. London: Mowbray, 1992. Quotations. One Little Angel.com. 29 August 2006. <http://www.onelittleangel.com/ wisdom/home/ quotations.asp>. Quotations about Breathing. 28 September 2006. <http://www.quotegarden.com/ breathing.html>.

1249

Bibliography

Quotes from the Church Fathers. <http://mycopticchurch.com/articles/fathers.asp?r= 105myCopticChurch.coms>. Rakestraw, Robert V. Becoming Like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis. Jets 40/2 (June 1997) 257-269. 9 July 2006. <http://www.bethel.edu/~rakrob/ files/ THEOSIS2.html#1>. Ravenna Mosaics (6th - 7th century). 15 June 2007. <http://www.hp.uab.edu/ image_archive/ulj/uljc.html>. Reeves, Bill H. Notas sobre 2 Corintios. 10 March 2006. <http://www.blaitch.com/ 2Corintios/Cap11.htm>. Religious Life. New Advent. 12 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Reynolds, Stephen. Lesser Known Varieties of Russian chants. 21 February 2007. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitMusDev6.jsp?hostname=null>. Riasanovsky, Nicholas Valentine. A History of Russia. London: Oxford, 1999. Richardson, Cyril C, ed. and trans. Early Christian Fathers. Eugene R. Fairweather, Edward Rochie Hardy, and Massey Hamilton Shepherd (collaborators). NY: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1970. Ridding, Laura, ed. The Travels of Makarius. London, 1936. Righteous Saint John of Damascus. 30 June 2006. <http://www.balamand.edu.lb/ theology/live_of_ saint_john_of_damascus.htm>. Ritcher, Helmut. Hebrew Cantillation Marks and Their Encoding. 20 January 2006. <http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~hr/teamim/intro.html#purp>. Rogers, Jay. The Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 15 March 2006. <http://www. forerunner.com/orthodoxy /X0005_4._Trinity.html>. Roots of Asceticism. 15 June 2006. <http://www.ellopos.net/notebook/patristic. html>. Rossi, Albert S. Saying the Jesus Prayer. St. Vladimirs Orthodox Theological Seminary. 30 July 2006. <http://www.svots.edu/Faculty/Albert-Rossi/ Articles/ Saying-the-Jesus-Prayer.html>. Rowland, Christopher, Christian Origins: An account of the Setting and Character of the most Important Messianic Sect of Judaism, London: SPCK, 1985. Rubrics on Hierarchical Services. 12 December 2006. <http://www.holytrinitymission. org/books/english/ hierarchical_services_rubrics.htm>. Rule of St. Basil. New Advent. 10 June 2006. <http://www.newadvent.org/>. Rusch, William G., ed. and trans. The Trinitarian Controversy. Sources of Early Christian Thought. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980. Russell, Norman. Partakers of the Divine Nature (2 Peter 1:4) in the Byzantine Tradition. Myriobiblos. 24 August 2006. <http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/ english/Russell_partakers.html>. Russia: Glossary. 4 March 2006. <http://www.russiansabroad.com/russian_history _393.html>. Russia: Glossary of names. 20 March 2006. <http://www.ourheritage.net/Great_ Adventures/Waterways of_Russia/ Glossary.html>. 1250

Bibliography

Russia 1904-1914: Glossary and names. 2 March 2006. texas.net /Nat/Rus /RusBios.htm>.

<http://cnparm.home.

Russian Orthodox Church after the Revolution of 1917 14 March 2006. <http:// www.russianmystery.com/russianchurch.php>. Russian Orthodox Hymnody. 12 March 2007. <http://www.novgorod.ru/eng/cult/cd2 /hist_e1.htm>. Russias Time of Troubles. 2 March 2006. <http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/ russia/troubles.html>. Russian Revolution of 1917. 3 August 2007. <http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/ russianrev.html>. Sacred Music: Orthodox Liturgical Music. The Self-Ruled Antiochian Christian Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 12 January 2007. <http://www.antiochian. org/music>. Sacred Sites of Russia. 2 March 2006. <http://www.sacredsites.com/asia/russia/ russia.htm>. Saint Arsenius the Great. The Teacher of the Kings (A.D. 445). Coptic Orthodox Church Network. 2 August 2006. <http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/ synexarion/arsenius.html>. Saint John of the Ladder. 10 October 2006. <http://www.orthodox-christiancomment.co.uk/properofseason-fourthsundayoflent.htm>. Schaeffer, Frank, ed. Christian Doctrine. 5 July 2007. <http://www.fatheralexander. org/booklets/english/ christian_doctrine_ext_e.htm>. Schaff, Philip. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Christian Classics: Ethereal Library. 8 December 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.html>. . The Bishops. History of the Christian Church, Volume III: Nicene and PostNicene Christianity. A.D. 311-600. Christian Classics: Ethereal Library. Fifth edition, revised. 15 December 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc3. html>. . Excursus on the Vestments of the Early Church. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Christian Classics: Ethereal Library. 8 December 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.i.html?highlight=ecumenical,councils #highligt>. . Liturgical Vestments. History of the Christian Church. Vol. 3. Nicene and PostNicene Christianity. A.D. 311-600. Christian Classics: Ethereal Library. Fifth edition, revised. 15 December 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel /schaff/hcc3.html>. The Lower Clergy. History of the Christian Church. Vol. 3. Nicene and PostNicene Christianity. A.D. 311-600. Christian Classics: Ethereal Library. Fifth edition, revised. 15 December 2006. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc3. html>. Serfes, Demetrios. Holy Scripture in the Orthodox Church. 14 October 2006. <http:// www.serfes.org/orthodox/scripturesinthechurch.htm>. Shahan, Thomas J. Apostolic Canons. New Advent. 10 March 2007. <http://www. newadvent.org/cathen/03279a.htm>.

1251

Bibliography

Sisters of the Order of St. Basil. Prayer Corner. 2 September 2006. <http:// www.basiliansisters.org/prayer.html>. Scheske, Eric J. St. Gregory of Nyssa. 15 June 2006. <http://www.catholic.net/RCC/ Periodicals /Faith /2000-910/scheske.html>. Schmmann, Alexander. Liturgy and Life: Christian Development through Liturgical Experience. Syosset, NY.: DRE-Orthodox Church in America, 1974. .Introduction to Liturgical Theology. Trans. Asheleigh E. Moorehouse. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1996. . The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy. Trans. L. W. Kesich. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press 1977. 15 March 2006. Excerpts. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org>. Scorer, Peter. The Russian Orthodox Church 1991-1994. 15 April 2006. www. intellectbooks.com/europa/number2/scorer.htm>. Scotfield, I. La Santa Biblia. Dalton, Georgia: Publicaciones Espaolas, 1973. Scouteris, Constantine. Europe: An Orthodox Perspective. OrthodoxyToday.com. 15 March 2006. <http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/ScouterisEurope.php>. Seppl, H. Church Singing in the Valamo Tradition. Valamo and its Message. Valamo-Seurary (Helsinki, 1983): 240-244. . The Solemn Recitation. Byzantium and the North. Acta Byzantina Fennica, vol. IV (Helsinki, 1990): 119-124. . The System of the eight Ekhoi and Orthodox Church Music in Finland. Erga 1997. Ortodoksisen teologisen laitoksen vuosikirja. Ortodoksisen teologisen laitoksen julkaisuja 22. (Joensuu, 1997): 85-96 Services and Selected Articles on Liturgics. 21 February 2007. <http://aggreen. net/liturgics/services.html>. Shipman, Andrew J. Anaphora. New Advent. 15 March 2007. <http://www. newadvent.org/cathen/01451a.htm>. Shukin, Sergei. When No Priest is Available. Reading the Service Books While Traveling or at Home. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 24 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/services_nopriest.aspx>. Slobodskoy, Seraphim. The Divine Services. 25 March 2007. <http://www. fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/church_services.htm#n2>. Sokolof, D. A Manual of Divine Services. 20 December 2006. <http://www.holytrinity mission.org/books/english/manual_services_sokolov.htm>. Some Pagan items adopted by Christians. 24 November 2006. <http://www.seiyaku. com/customs/pagan-symbols.html#vestments>. Spidlik, Tomas. El Monacato en el Oriente Cristiano. Burgos: Espaa, 2004. Stalin, Josif. Works. Vol. 10. Moscow: 1953. Stambaugh, John and Balch, David. The Social World of the First Christians. London: SPCK, 1986. St. Anthony the Great. 15 June 2006. <http://www.antiochian.org/saint_anthony>. <http://

1252

Bibliography

St. Athanasius Byzantine Catholic Mission. 12 June 2007. <http://www.byzantines. net/ SaintAthanasius/>. Steepheson, P. Eusebius, Vita Constantine. 15 March 2006. <http://homepage.mac. com/paulstephenson/trans/eusebius.html>. Steenberg, Matthew C. Deification: The Restoration of Humanity. 1999. 2 August 2006.<http://digilander.libero.it/benparker/HESYCHASM/Matts%20Writings% 20Deification%20The%20 Restoration%20of%20Humanity.htm>. St. Jerome. New Advent. 23 December 2006. <http://www. newadvent.org/fathers/>. St. Gregory of Nazianzus. New Advent. 15 June 2006. http://www.newadvent.org/>. St. Pachomius, Abbot. 15 June 2006. <http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/ PACHOMI.HTM>. Stroud, Robert C. The Orthodox C. S. Lewis.Conciliar Press. September 1, 2006. <http://www.conciliarpress.com/again/content/view/25/31/9/9/>. St. Sophia. 13 March 2007. <http://www.exploreturkey.com/exptur.phtml?id=174>. St. Sthephen of Perm. Orthodox America. 1 March 2006. <http://www.synaxis. info/apostol/hagiography/saints_other/stephen_perm.html>. St. Symeon the New Theologian. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia. 3 September 2006. <http:// home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/symeon.htm>. St. Symeon the New Theologian. Study Archive. 8 October 2006. <http:// www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/s/symeon_new.html>. St. Tikhons Monastery. These truths we hold: The Holy Orthodox Church: her life and teaching. I IntraText Edition CT. ulogos 2003. 1 March 2006. <http:// www.intratext.com/X/ENG0805.HTM>. Stylianopoulos, Theodore G. The New Testament: An Orthodox Perspective. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1997. Excerpts. 7 March 2006. <http://www. holytrinitymission.org/index_s.php>. Sunday of Saint Gregory Palamas: The Second Sunday of Great Lent. <http://lent. goarch.org/saint_gregory_palamas/learn/>. Systematic Theology. 5 March 2006. <http://www.dabar.org/Theology/ Hodge/ HodgeV1/Int_C01. htm>. Taft S. J, Robert. The Evolution of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy. Orientalia Christiana Periodica XLIII, Roma 1977, 8-30. 9 May 2007. <http://www. myriobiblos.gr/ texts/english/index_en.html>. Tarasar, C.J., ed. Perspectives on Orthodox Education. Syosset, New York: SYNDESMOS and The Department of Religious Education of the Orthodox Church in America, 1983. . Orthodox Perspectives in Religious Education. Perspectives on Orthodox Education. Ed. C. J. Tarasar. Syosset, New York: SYNDESMOS and The Dept. of Religious Education of the Orthodox Church in America, 1983. 26-45. Tacitus. Annales. Early Church documents. Ed. Ray Petry. Excerpts from Readings in the History of the Church. 4 March 2006. <http://www. holytrinitymission.org>. Tatian. 18 July 2006. <http://www.bsmvt.org/ign-eph.html>.

1253

Bibliography

The Anaphora attributed to Antipope Hippolytus. 2 July 2007. <http://www.geocities. com/orccflorida/history/hippolytus.html>. The Ancient Fathers of the Desert .Trans. Chrysostom. 15 June 2006. <http://www. goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8135.asp>. The Apostolic Fathers. 22 March 2007. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01637a. htm>. The Apostles Bible. A Modern English Translation of the Greek Septuagint. Ed., trans., and reviser Paul W Esposito. 19 December 2006. <http://www.apostlesbible. com/>. The Basilica of St. Agnese, Rome. 15 June 2007. <http://www.vaticanexhibit.com/ frescos/agnes.shtml>. The Bay Psalm Book. 12 January 2006. <http://www.reformedprescambridge.com/ articles/bay_psalm_book_modern.pdf>. The Bible. OrthodoxPhotos.com. 14 October 2006. <http://www.orthodox photos. com/readings/Orthodox_Church/The_Bible.shtml>. The Byzantine Synthesis. Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 12 January 2007. <http:// www.liturgica.com/html/litEOLitBSyn.jsp?hostname=null#4>. The Canons of the Holy and Ecumenical Seventh Council. 24 November 2006. The Internet Sacred Text Archive <http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/214214 0687.htm>. The Catacombs of Rome. 25 March 2007. <http://www.arsmar.com/ce_his.htm>. The Catacombs of Saint Callixtus. 12 July 2007. <http://www.catacombe.roma. it/en/cubicu.html>. The Christian East: The early Byzantine period (330726). 20 March 2007. <http:/ /www.britannica.com/eb/article-47308/Western-architecture#488644. hook>. The Church as a Building. 14 July 2007. <http://www.stgeorgecathedral.org/ explanations/church.html>. The Church Building and its Arrangement. 7 June, 2007. <http://www. orthodoxphotos.com/readings/LGFLS/building.shtml>. The Church Fathers and Patristic Citations. 24 March 2006. <http://www.skypoint. com/~waltzmn/ Fathers.html>. The Clergy and their Vestments. OrthodoxPhotos.com. 14 December 2006. <http:// www.orthodoxphotos.com/readings/LGFLS/clergy.shtml>. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. 6th edition. Columbia University Press. 20 March 2006. <http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history>. The Council of Laodicea in Phrygia Pacatiana (364 A.D.) 12 January 2007. <http:// reluctant-messenger.com/council-of-laodicea.htm>. The Crystal Reference Encyclopedia. 2 April 2007. <http://www.reference.com/help /crystal.html>. The Divine Darkness in Gregory of Nyssa. 17 June 2006. <http://www.monachos. net/patristics/nyssa_ uminous_darkness.shtml>.

1254

Bibliography

The Divine Liturgy. Orthodoxphotos.com. 12 February 2007. <http://www.orthodox photos.com/readings/LGFLS/liturgy.shtml>. The Divine Liturgy2. 12 February 2007. <http://www.orthodoxyinamerica.org/article.php ?id=12>. The Divine Liturgy According to St. John Chrysostom. Second Edition, New York: St. Tikhons Seminary Press, 1977. The Divine Music Project. 12 January 2007. <http://www.stanthonysmonastery.rg/ music /Intro_2.htm>. The Divine Services. Orthodox Information Center. 7 June, 2007. <http://www. orthodoxinfo. com/phronema/ph_services.aspx>. The Divine Services. St. Ellias Church. 22 October 2006. <http://www.saintelias. com/ca/services/>. The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity. <http://oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=29>. The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: Worship & Sacraments. Orthodox Information Center. 14 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/doctrine3. aspx>. The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: The Basic Doctrines. Orthodox Christian Information Center. 23 October 2006. <http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general /doctrine1.aspx>. The Elements of Liturgy in the Orthodox Catholic Church. One Church. Vol. 13. New York: 1959. The Edict of Milan. 10 March 2006. <http://gbgm-umc.org/UMW/Bible/milan.stm>. The Fathers of the Church. New Advent. 9 March 2006. <http://www.newadvent .org/fathers>. The First Christians. 7 March 2006.<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline /shows/religion/first/ themovement.html>. The Funeral Service of the Orthodox Church. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 14 November. 2006. <http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/ article9218.asp>. The Glittering Eye. 7 April 2006. <http://www.theglitteringeye.com/archives/ 000960.html>. The Good Shepherd (c.250). 20 March 2007. <http://www.religionfacts.com/jesus/ image_gallery/250_good_shepherd_catacomb_callixtus.htm>. The Holy Trinity. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia. 1 December 2006. <http://www.stspyridon.org.au/ourFaith.php?articleId=85&subMenu=Orthodoxy >. Theissen, Gerd. Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity. Trans. John Bowden. Philadelphia, Fortress Press: 1978. The Nature and Attributes of God. New Advent. 3 September 2006. <http: //www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm>. Theological Dictionary. 2 February 2006. <http://www.carm.org/dictionary.htmt>.

1255

Bibliography

Theophan the Recluse. Prayer of the Heart: the duty of those living in the world. Orthodox America. 30 July 2006. <http://www.roca.org/oa/87/87f.htm>. The Optina Pustin male choir, St. Petersburg. 12 March 2007. <http://www. optinachoir.ru/eng/interestingly.html>. The Order of Divine Services. 7 June, 2007. <http://www.orthodoxphotos.com/ readings /LGFLS/order.shtml>. The Origin of Heart Rhythm Meditation. 2 August 2006. <http://www.applied meditation.org/about_iam/origin.shtml>. The Orthodox Church. Orthodoxphotos.com. 3 June 2006. <http://www. orthodoxphotos.com/ readings/true/orthodox.shtml>. The Orthodox Faith. Greek Orthodox Archidioccese of America. <http://www. goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8029.asp>. The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: Orthodox Worship. 20 October 2006. <http://www. goholycross.org/studies/studies_faith_tradition.html>. The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: Orthodox Liturgical Worship. 20 October 2006. <http://www.goholycross.org/studies/studies_faith_tradition. html>. The Orthodox Faith & Tradition: The Content and Structure of the Divine Liturgy. 20 October 2006. <http://www.goholycross.org/studies/studies_faith_tradition.html>. TheosisDeification. Praxis Research Institute. 6 July 2006. <http://www. praxisinstitute net/Praxis%20Now/Theosis/Theosis_p8.htm>. The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 22 October 2006. <http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/Gifts.htm>. The Pechersk Lavra Monastery. 10 March 2006. <http://www.odyssei.com/traveltips/2251.html>. The Priests Service Book. Holy Trinity Romanian Orthodox Church, Los Angeles, California. 10 June 2007. <http://biserica.org/Publicatii/ServiceBook/index. html>. The Russian Orthodox Church. U.S. Library of Congress. <http://countrystudies.us/ russia/38.htm> The Sacraments in the Orthodox Church. St. Paul the Apostle Orthodox Church. 4 May 2007. 27 February, 2007. <http://www.lasvegasorthodox.com/library/ Orthodox_Practices/ the_Sacraments.htm>. The Structure of Great Vespers. Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America. 21 February 2007. <http://www.antiochian.org/1136996387>. The Tabernacle of Moses is the Body of Jesus Christ. 15 July 2007. <http://www. tabernacleofmoses.org/images/diagram1.gif>. The Trinity. 12 March 2006. <http://webmail.mobap.edu/mcclain/PowerPoint/Trinity .ppt#10>. The Typikon. Metropolitan Cantor Institute. 27 February, 2007. <http://metropolitan cantorinstitute.org/Typikon.html>. Thomas, John, and Angela Constantinides. Byzantine Monastic Foundation Documents: A Complete Translation of the Surviving Founders Typika and Testaments.

1256

Bibliography

Extract. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2000. <http://www.doaks.org/typikaPDF/typ030.pdf>. To Believer. Russian Orthodox Church in Australia. 20 October 2006. <http:// www.orthodoxy.org.au/eng/index.php?p=15>. Trisagion hymn: Orthodox explanation. 30 January 2007. <http://www.monachos. net/forum/showthread.php?t=2486>. Tsirpanlis, Constantine N. Introduction to Eastern Patristic Thought and Orthodox Theology. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1991 Tver, Gabriel. Handbook of Liturgics, 1886. Typika. 24 October 2006. <http://pages.prodigy.net/frjohnwhiteford/typica.htm>. Typikon (Part I). 7 January 2007. <http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/ typikon_1.htm#_To c82138490>. Union with God: Theosis, Divinization, Deification. 23 July 2006. <http://www. frimmin.com/faith/theosis.html>. Valaam Monastery: Orthodox Tradition & Symbolism. 29 March 2007. <http://www. katinkahesselink.net/sufi/gvalaam.html>. Velimirovic, Milos. Russian Chant. Crocker, Richard and Hiley, David, eds. New Oxford History of Music Vol. II: The Early Middle Ages to 1300. Oxford: 1990 Veselin Kesich. The Verbal Icon of Christ. 12 October <2006. <http://www.dneoca. org/articles/verbalicon0496.html>. Vespers. Holy Transfiguration Antiochian Orthodox Church. 4 December 2006. <http ://www.htaoc.net/display_page/services/vespers>. Vestments for the Orthodox Divine Liturgy. 4 November 2006. <http://www.tpub. com/content/religion/14229/css/14229_172.htm>. Vitaliotis, Yiannis. The Byzantine Divine Liturgy: Evolution and Structure. Greek Ministry of Culture. 30 January 2007. <http://www.culture.gr/2/21/215/21505 /215051/2150513/e21505119g.html>. Vlachos, Hierotheos. Orthodox Psychotherapy. <http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en. orthodox_psychotherapy.00.htm>. Volbach, W.F. Early Christian Art. London: Thames and Hudson, 1961. Voorwinde, Stephen. The Formation of the New Testament Canon. 9 March 2006. <http://www. pastornet.net.au/rtc/canon.htm>. Wade, Rick. The World of the Apostle Paul. 1 March 2006. Probe Ministries. <http://www.leaderu. com/ orgs/probe/docs/apospaul.html>. Walker, Willinston, et al. A History of the Christian Church. New York: Scribne, 1985. Ware, Timothy. The Orthodox Church. New Edition. London: Penguin Book, 1997. Webber, Robert E.. Common Roots: Hebrew Foundations of Christian Worship. 2 November 2006. <http://www.restorationfoundation.org/6_110.htm>. Webb, Eugene. Chalcedonian Theology and the Filioque, University of Washington. 9 March 2006. <http://faculty.washington.edu/ewebb/ChTh&Fil.html>.

1257

Bibliography

WebBible Encyclopedia. dictionary/>.

22

March

2006.

<http://www.christiananswers.net/

Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism, New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1958. 15 May 2006. <http://www.ne.jp/ asahi/ moriyuki/ abukuma/weber/world/ethic/pro_eth_frame.html>. Wellesz, Egon and Anselm Hughes, eds. The New Oxford History of Music. 2 vols. London: Oxford University Press: 1954. . A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography. Second Edition. Oxford: Clarendom Press. 1961. WelkyaThe Creation of the Slav Script. 13 March 2007. <http://www.bulgaria.com /welkya/kritika/slave.html>. Western Rite Orthodoxy: Modern History. Occidentales. 20 October 2006. <http:// www.allmercifulsavior.com/>. What Are the Epistles? 1 March 2006. <http://www.cptryon.org/ask/ask/bible. html#epis>. What Is Askesis? St. Anthonys Greek Orthodox Church. 12 June 2006. <http://www. saint-Anthonys.org/orthodox/what_is_askesis.htm>. What Is Dogmatic Theology? 5 March 2006. <http://www.gotquestions.org/ dogmatic-theology.html>. What Is a HYMN and Why Do Christians Sing Them? Hymnology: The History and Use of Hymns. Smith Creek Music. 12 January 2006. <http://www.smithcreekmusic. com/Hymnology/index.html>. What Is Practical Theology? 5 March 2006. <http://www.gotquestions.org/practicaltheology.html>. White, L. Michael. Visualizing the Real World of Acts 16: Toward Construction of a Social Index. The Social World of the First Christians. Essays in Honor of Wayne A. Meeks. Eds. L. Michael White and O. Larry Yarbrough. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. . Christian Catacombs in Rome. 12 July 2007 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/ frontline/shows/religion/first/catacombs.html>. .The Social Origins of Christian Architecture. 2 vols. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press, 1990. Who are Byzantine Catholics? Byzantine Catholic Church in America. 20 November 2006. <http://www.byzcath.org/Faith-and-Worship/Who-Are-Byzantine-catholics.htm>. Williams, Benjamin D. Orthodox Worship: A Living Continuity. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Light and Life Publishing Company, 1990. .Eastern Orthodox Liturgics. 24 litEOLit.jsp?hostname=null>. October. <http://www.liturgica.com/html/

Williams, Benjamin D and Harold B. Anstall. Orthodox Worship: a Living Continuity with the Synagogue, the Temple and the Early Church. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Light and Life Publishing Company, 1990. 10 June 2007. Excerpts. <http://www.liturgica.com/ html/litEChLitCh.jsp>.

1258

Bibliography

Williams, Rowan. Deification. Ed. Gordon S. Wakefield. The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Spirituality. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983. Wisdom! Readings from the Fathers of the Church. The holy and life-giving Faith. 2 August 2006. <http://chattablogs.com/hagioipateres/archives/cat_st_makarios_ the great.htmlof the Church as expounded by Her Saints>. Worship and Prayer. Services and Selected Articles on Liturgics. 12 October 2006. <http://aggreen.net/ liturgics/services.html>. Wybrew, Hugh. The Orthodox Liturgy: The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 2003. Yiannias, John. Orthodox Art and Architecture. 12 March 2007. <http://www. goarch.org/ en/ourfaith/articles/article8025.asp>. Yaksich, Milica. The Ladder of Divine Ascent. 2 September 2006. <http://www. istocnik.com/articles/53/english.html>. Young, Alexey. An Introduction to Western Rite Orthodoxy. 2 April 2007. <http://www. westernorthodox.com/young>. Zernov, Nicholas. The Russians and their Church. 3rd Ed. New York: Crestwood, 1994. . The Russians and their Church. Excerpts. Ed. Alexander Mileant. 1 March 2006. <http: //www.holytrinitymission.org>. Zgourides, George. The Development of Monasticism: From Prior to Anthony the Great to Benedict of Nursia. 15 June 2006. <http://www.westernorthodox. com/monastic>. Znamenny Chant. 12 March 2006. <http://www.oldbelievers.org/znamenny5.html>. OTHER WEB PAGES CITED <www.abcgallery.com>. <www.accesscom.com/>. <www.accesscom.com/>. <www.akg-images.co.uk>. <www.all-art.org/>. <www.allrussiatours.com>. <www.answers.com>. <www.antiochian.org.au>. <www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/>. <www.archmuseum.org/> <www.artlex.com/>. <www.balkanology.com/> <www.benedictseraphim.wordpress.com/>. <www.biblicalholidays.com/>. <www.bode.diee.unica.it/>. 1259

Bibliography

<www.byzantium.seashell.net.nz>. <www.byzantines.net>. <www.calpha.redeemer.ca>. <www.casesf.com/>. <www.catacombe.roma.it>. <www.catholic-forum.com>. <www.caverun.org>. <www.ccel.org>. <www.cgi.ebay.com>. <www.concise.britannica.com/>. <www.contracosta.edu>. <www.countryturkmenistan.tripod.com>. <www.crystalinks.com/asiaminormap.gif> <www.cs.nott.ac.uk/>. <www.dkimages.com/>. <www.dlibrary.acu.edu.au>. <www.egypt.myweb.hinet.net/>. <www.exclassics.com/foxe/foxeills.htm>. <www.execulink.com>. <www.faculty.cua.edu/pennington/>. <www.fixedreference.org/>. <www.florin.ms/>. <www.goarch.org/>. <www.icon-art.info>. <www.in2greece.com>. <www.infoukes.com/>. <www.istrianet.org>. <www.jamesweggreview.org> <www.jesuswalk.com>. <www.josephpatterson.files.wordpress.com>. <www.historyofmacedonia.org>. <www.history.ox.ac.uk/>. <www.holydormition.com>. <www.home.it.net.au/>. <www.homepage.mac.com/>.

1260

Bibliography

<www.homepages.rootsweb.com/>. <www.hp.uab.edu/>. <www.kosovo.net>. <www.ku.edu>. <www.liternet.bg/>. <www.liturgix.safeshopper.com/>. <www.mega.km.ru>. <www.members.fortunecity.com>. <www.members.ozemail.com.au>. <www.michaeltangen.com>. <www.monasterygreetings.com>. <www.monasteryicons.com>. <www.moscow.info>. <www.nd.edu/>. <www.newliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/>. <www.networks-now.net> <www.nyu.edu>. <www.old.svots.edu/>. <www.oncourse.iu.edu/>. <www.orthodoxchristendom.com>. <www.orthodox-christian-comment.co.uk>. <www.orthodox.clara.net>. <www.osl.cc>. <www.ou.edu/>. <www.paradoxplace.com>. <www.patronagechurch.com/> <www.pharos.bu.edu>. <www.pravoslavieto.com>. <www.reclaimingthemind.org>. <www.redsea.gov.eg>. <www.religionfacts.com/>. <www.russianbells.com/>. <www.russia.nypl.org>. <www.rustoys.com>. <www.sacred-destinations.com/>.

1261

Bibliography

<www.saltandlighttv.org>. <www.salvationhistory.com>. <www.serfes.org>. <www.shsu.edu>. <www.skete.com>. <www.smithcreekmusic.com/>. <www.songofazrael.org/>. <www.specialtyinterests.net/>. <www.stjamesok.org>. <www.stpolycarp.org> <www.thais.it/architettura/Bizantina/> <www.theotokos.org>. <www.touregypt.net/>. <www.traumwerk.stanford.edu/>. <www.ucalgary.ca>. <www.ukraine-travel.org>. <www.upenn.edu/>. <www.vladimir-russia.info>. <www.web.educastur.princast.es>. <www.weblio.jp/>. <www.web.mac.com/>. <www.wels.net/>. <www.world66.com/>. <www.wumag.kiev.ua>. <www2.students.sbc.edu/>.

1262