| The Disclosure of the Divine Liturgy by Pseudo-Gregory of Nazianzus: Edition of the Text and Commentary 1. Introduction There can be no doubt that liturgical commentaries formed a prominent part in the Eucharistic thinking of the Byzantines and other Orthodox peoples, especially in the second millennium A.D. 1 . While some of these texts, including the Historia ecclesiastica by PseudoBasil the Great (attributed in some manuscripts to St. Germanus of Constantinople 2 ), the Protheoria by Nicholas and Theodore of Andida, and works by St. Nicholas Cabasilas and St. Symeon of Thessalonica, are well known to modern scholars, the other commentaries are known – and quoted – much less. This is partly due to excessive reliance on the results of a famous study of the history of Greek liturgical commentaries by René Bornert 3 , which, despite its scholarly value, is less comprehensive than it seems to be. In fact, it ignores a number of liturgical commentaries, either because Bornert considered them unimportant, or simply because he was unaware of them 4 . These include a specific family of visionary commentaries composed in the form of a dialogue, held between St. John (the Evangelist or Chrysostom) and the Lord 5 , or St. Basil and St. Gregory of Nazianzus 6 , or St. Gregory of Nazianzus and «the venerable fathers» 7 . The influence of these commentaries on popular Orthodox thinking and imagery, despite their being ignored by modern scholars of Byzantine liturgical theology and art history has, in the fullness of time, been comparable to that of the more «classical» commentaries mentioned above. This article contains an editio princeps of the original Greek text of the explanatory dialogue between Pseudo-Gregory of Nazianzus and «the venerable fathers», entitled The Disclosure of the Divine Liturgy 8 . The text tries to present itself as a dialogue, but is actually a monologue, since Gregory’s interlocutors are mentioned only twice, at the very beginning and the end. The overall plot of Gregory’s story is built around his vision of heavenly powers taking a direct part in the Eucharistic celebration. |
| The Eucharistic Context of Pastoral Response to Contemporary Challenges in Marriage, Family, and Sexuality Source: Eastern Christian Insights [Introductory Note: The short paper below was my presentation at a recent symposium on contemporary pastoral issues in sexuality held in the Netherlands.] The celebration of the Eucharist provides a necessary context for understanding the pastoral response of the Orthodox Church to contemporary challenges in marriage, family, and sexuality. As St. Nicholas Cabasilas commented on the Eucharist, “its aim is the sanctification of the faithful.” Likewise, the aim of the union of husband and wife is their sanctification, their participation in the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. Even as the Church enters mystically into the eschatological reign in the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, the married couple become participants in the heavenly banquet through their common life in Christ. Through both Eucharist and marriage, human beings participate in the fulfillment of their ancient vocation to become like God in holiness. Themes of offering, sacrifice, blessing, and communion are intrinsic dimensions of both sacraments. These holy mysteries also manifest the fulfillment of basic human desires and needs for life and love. Bread and wine become nourishment for eternal life, while conjugal union becomes an entrance into the heavenly bridal chamber. Due to the physical dimensions of each practice, communicants and spouses share as whole persons in the restoration of their humanity as they direct their hearts for fulfillment in God. Since the “one flesh” relationship between husband and wife serves as a sign of the relationship between Christ and the Church, their union is to become nothing less than an icon of the salvation of the world. (Eph. 5: 31-32) After describing how the “one flesh” union of marriage includes husband, wife, and child, St. John Chrysostom notes that “Our relationship to Christ is the same; we become one flesh with Him through communion…” St. |
| John Anthony McGuckin St. Nicholas Cabasilas (ca. 1322-ca. 1391) A. EDWARD SIECIENSKI Byzantine theologian and spiritual writer known chiefly for his books The Commentary on the Divine Liturgy and The Life in Christ. Born Nicholas Chamaetos in 1322, he was the nephew of Nilus Cabasilas (1298–1363), whose surname he used throughout his life. Nilus had succeeded Gregory Palamas as archbishop of Thessa- lonica and was the author of several important anti-Latin tracts later used at the Council of Florence (1438–9). Although born in Thessalonica, Nicholas was educated at Constantinople and entered the imperial service, later becoming an official and friend of John VI Cantacuzenos (1347–54). During the civil war between John VI and John V Palaeologus (1341–91), Cabasilas sided with Cantacuzenos, who entrusted him with several important diplomatic missions and (briefly) considered him as candidate for patriarch following the deposition of Callistus I. When in 1354 John VI Cantacuzenos was deposed, Nicholas retired from public life and concentrated his energies on theological matters. He was once thought to have succeeded his uncle Nilus as archbishop of Thessalonica; however, it is more likely that he entered monastic life, serving as a priest at the Manganon monastery near Constantinople. Cabasilas’s hospitable open-mindedness has led some to believe that he was influenced by the so-called “Latin-minded” theologians surrounding his contemporary, Demetrius Cydones (1324–98). However, among Cabasilas’s works are a firm defense of hesychasm against Nicephorus Gregoras (ca. 1295–1360) and a new edition of his uncle’s book against the Latins on the procession of the Holy Spirit. He also wrote several homilies and hagiographical works, many of which manifest a particular concern for social justice and the need to redress economic and institutional inequities. Cabasilas’s two most famous works are his Life in Christ and Commentary on the Divine Liturgy. The Life in Christ emphasized the synergy of divine and human activity in the process of salvation, the role of individual and public prayer, and the union with Christ made possible by the mysteries of baptism, chrismation, and Eucharist. Although thoroughly Eastern in its outlook, the influence of Latin theology can be seen in Cabasilas’s explanation of the atonement, which closely follows Anselm of Canterbury’s satisfaction theory. His Commentary on the Divine Liturgy (a work that found admirers in the West and was even quoted favorably by the Council of Trent) spoke of the transformative and mystical aspects of the liturgy, especially as it related to the eternal, heavenly liturgy. It became, alongside the earlier work of Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople (715–30), the most significant commentary on the Byzantine liturgy in the Eastern tradition. |
| Материал из Православной Энциклопедии под редакцией Патриарха Московского и всея Руси Кирилла Содержание НИКОЛАЙ КАВАСИЛА Св. Николай Кавасила. Икона. Нач. XXI в. Иконописная мастерская мон-ря ап. Иоанна Богослова в Суроти близ Фессалоники Св. Николай Кавасила. Икона. Нач. XXI в. Иконописная мастерская мон-ря ап. Иоанна Богослова в Суроти близ Фессалоники Хамаэт [греч. Νικλαος Καβσιλας Χαμαετς] (между 1319 и 1323, Фессалоника - после 1397, К-поль), св. прав. (пам. греч. 20 июня), визант. богослов, литургист, церковный и общественный деятель. Жизнь Биографические сведения о Н. К. достаточно фрагментарны и неравномерно освещают отдельные периоды его жизни. В источниках и в исследовательской лит-ре встречается смешение представителей рода Кавасила (об этом аристократическом семействе см.: Αγγελπουλος. 1977; см. также: Шамгунова. 2002; Она же. 2003): Н. К. путали прежде всего с его дядей, Нилом Кавасилой , митр. Фессалоникийским, мирское имя которого было Николай; с Михаилом Кавасилой (PLP, N 10101) и с Димитрием (?) Кавасилой (PLP, N 4443) - в последнем нек-рые ученые видели упоминаемого Никифором Григорой сторонника свт. Григория Паламы ( Niceph. Greg. Hist. Vol. 2. P. 1025; см., напр.: Beyer H.-V. Demetrius Kabasilas: Freund und späterer Gegner des Gregoras//JÖB. 1989. Bd. 39. S. 135-176; в наст. время считается доказанным, что в «Истории» Никифора Григоры речь идет о Ниле Кавасиле, см.: Theophile (Kislas), hierom. Introd.// Nil Cabasilas. Sur le Saint-Esprit. P., 2001. P. 44, 48-50; о смешении носителей фамилии Кавасила см., напр.: Νλλας. 1968. Στ. 831-832). Наиболее полная и достоверная реконструкция биографии Н. К. представлена в работах: Salaville. 1953, Idem. 1958; Loenertz. 1955; Νλλας. 1968; Idem. 1969; Αγγελπουλος. 1970; Congourdeau, ed. 1989. Vol. 1. P. 11-25; Christou. 1999; относительную ценность сохраняет труд: Lot-Borodine. 1958 (ср.: Plested. 2012. P. 101. Not. 154). Лучшим на сегодняшний день изложением биографии Н. К., основанным на материале источников и многочисленных исследований, является статья: Spiteris, Conticello. 2002 (см. особенно: P. 315-322: раздел, посвященный жизни Н. К. (составлен Я. Спитерисом); ср.: Plested. 2012. P. 101. Not. 153). См. также: Νλλας. 1979; Congourdeau. 1990; Eadem. 2007; Spiteris. 1996; Поляковская. 1998; Мейендорф. 2001; Metso. 2010; Plested. 2012. P. 100-107; or evi . Nicholas Cabasilas. 2015; Idem. Nikolas Kabasilas. 2015; Pino. 2017. |
| Archive Paschal Message of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia 1 May 2021 year 09:00 Paschal Message of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia to the Archpastors, Pastors, Deacons, Monastics and All the Faithful Children of the Russian Orthodox Church. Your Graces the archpastors, reverend pastors and deacons, all-honourable monks and nuns, dear brothers and sisters: On this chosen and holy day, full of Paschal joy and glorious light, the life-affirming glad tidings are being passed on from mouth to mouth, from heart to heart: CHRIST IS RISEN! In these words, we confess the unshakeable faith in Him, by Whose Cross we stood on Holy Friday and for Whom we mourned along with His disciples and myrrh-bearing women when praying before the Shroud. And this very day, together with the Angelic Host, revealing the unity of the earthly and the heavenly Church, we triumphantly proclaim: Today salvation has come to the world; for Christ is risen as Almighty (Paschal Canon, Irmos of Ode 4). The Pascha of the Lord is the most striking testimony to God’s wisdom and the boundless love of the Creator for humankind. The dawn of history, as we know, was darkened by the spiritual tragedy – through the fall of the progenitors the doors of Heaven were closed to people, and from that time onwards suffering and death have been the inevitable consequence of human sinfulness. Yet, having lost the communion with God the Source of life, people were not deprived of His mercy and love. At the same time, as Nicholas Cabasilas, a 14th century saint, wrote, the love of God was boundless, yet there was no sign to express it (The Life in Christ, VI). Love manifests itself in doing good for one’s neighbours and in the willingness to endure hardships, distress and even sufferings for their sake, and the Saviour shows it all. By His Incarnation He renews the human nature damaged by sin, and by His death on the Cross He delivers us from the power of evil. Thus we have received life in Christ, St. Ephrem the Syrian concludes, We have eaten His Body in place of the fruit of the Tree…, the curse has been washed away by His innocent blood and in the hope of resurrection… we walk in the new life (Commentary on the Diatessaron, 21). |
| Patriarch Kirill: Pascha of the Lord Is the Boundless Love of the Creator for Humankind Source: DECR Photo: foto.patriarchia.ru/Sergei Vlasov Your Graces the archpastors, reverend pastors and deacons, all-honourable monks and nuns, dear brothers and sisters: On this chosen and holy day, full of Paschal joy and glorious light, the life-affirming glad tidings are being passed on from mouth to mouth, from heart to heart: CHRIST IS RISEN! In these words, we confess the unshakeable faith in Him, by Whose Cross we stood on Holy Friday and for Whom we mourned along with His disciples and myrrh-bearing women when praying before the Shroud. And this very day, together with the Angelic Host, revealing the unity of the earthly and the heavenly Church, we triumphantly proclaim: Today salvation has come to the world; for Christ is risen as Almighty (Paschal Canon, Irmos of Ode 4). The Pascha of the Lord is the most striking testimony to God’s wisdom and the boundless love of the Creator for humankind. The dawn of history, as we know, was darkened by the spiritual tragedy – through the fall of the progenitors the doors of Heaven were closed to people, and from that time onwards suffering and death have been the inevitable consequence of human sinfulness. Yet, having lost the communion with God the Source of life, people were not deprived of His mercy and love. At the same time, as Nicholas Cabasilas, a 14 th century saint, wrote, the love of God was boundless, yet there was no sign to express it (The Life in Christ, VI). Love manifests itself in doing good for one’s neighbours and in the willingness to endure hardships, distress and even sufferings for their sake, and the Saviour shows it all. By His Incarnation He renews the human nature damaged by sin, and by His death on the Cross He delivers us from the power of evil. Thus we have received life in Christ, St. Ephrem the Syrian concludes, We have eaten His Body in place of the fruit of the Tree…, the curse has been washed away by His innocent blood and in the hope of resurrection… we walk in the new life (Commentary on the Diatessaron, 21). |
| The Mystery and the Process of Death An interview with Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and St. Vlassios by Pavel Chirila, Professor and Doctor at St Irene’s Hospital in Bucharest (Romania). 1. Question: Tell us something about death, something that comes spontaneously to you, something you consider extremely important. Answer: What comes spontaneously to mind is that death is a terrible mystery, as we chant in the Funeral Service, which is a poem by St. John Damascene. This is related to the fact that the soul is violently detached from the harmony of its union with the body. It is also a sad event, because it is related to man’s corruptibility and mortality which is manifested in all life. In addition, it brings to my memory the Service of the Resurrection of Christ, which we Orthodox celebrate with splendour. We hold lit candles in our hands and sing triumphantly the hymn of victory: “Christ is risen from the dead, by death He has trampled down death, and on those in the tombs He has bestowed life”. This beautiful image shows our attitude towards life and death. We are corruptible and mortal, but we possess the “medicine of immortality”, which is the resurrected Christ. Employing modern terminology, we may say that by the incarnation of the Son and the union of humanity with the divine nature in the person of the Logos, a “spiritual cloning” has taken place, our mortal nature has been united with the life of God. This is why death has changed its name and is now called " dormition " (falling asteep) and the places where the departed ones are buried are called " cemeteries " (“dormitories” in Greek, where people sleep), not burial grounds. So, when I see people holding a lit candle and chanting “Christ is Risen” on the night of the Resurrection of Christ, I understand better that we should regard death as a process of passing from the “land of Egypt” to the “land of Promise”, from death to life, which takes place in Christ, and as a hope for our resurrection which again takes place in Christ. It would be very fortunate if we were to anticipate death in this position, holding the candle of the Resurrection and chanting “Christ is Risen”. After all, we are “ strangers and pilgrims” in this life; our true country is elsewhere. I am always impressed by the words of St. Nicholas Cabasilas (14th century), that while we live here on earth we are like an embryo in our mother’s womb, and at the moment of death we are born, we get out of that womb. This is why in the Orthodox Church the saints are celebrated on the day of their dormition or their martyrdom, not on the day of their physical birth. |
| A special session was dedicated to the History of the Church, since Fr. Meyendorff was a renowned expert on the history of Byzantium and the Slavs. Dr. Pavel Pavlov presented a paper on the relationship between Gregory Palamas and the Islamic world ( “ Palamas ’ View on Islam: Byzantine Insights for Contemporary Society ” ). Dr. Marie-Hélène Congourdeau presented a paper on ‘‘ Nicholas Cabasilas and his defense of Gregory Palamas against the ‘ trifles ’ of Nicephoros Gregoras. ” Dr. Marie-Hélène Blanchet presented an analysis of the development of the use of the term " katholikos " in Byzantium ( " The Different Meanings of the Term ‘ katholikos ’ in Byzantium at the End of the Middle Ages: a Confessional Controversy ” ). Finally, Dr. Constantin Vétochnikov presented a paper on “ The Patriarchal Missions in the Russian Lands during the 14th and 15th Century. ” Transitioning to the last section of the rich and diverse program, dedicated to the Church in the contemporary world, a young scholar from Yekaterinburg, Mr. Andrey Levitskiy, talked about the activities and publications of Fr. Meyendorff in Russia ( “ Fr. John Meyendorff ’ s Publications in Russia: the Story of a ‘ Memorial Festschrift ’ " ) and the circumstances around the notorious “ autodafé ”— burning of books of, among others, Fr. Meyendorff and Fr. Alexander Schmemann, which had been organized in Yekaterinburg by Church authorities in 1998. During the last section, the lectures also touched on the role that Fr. Meyendorff had played in the Ecumenical Movement: Fr. Nicolas Lossky (St. Sergius Institute), Fr. John Meyendorff and the Ecumenical Movement ; Dr. Nicholas Kazarian (St. Sergius Institute), “ Fr. Jean Meyendorff and the WCC. ” Protopresbyter Boris Bobrinskoy, former Dean of St. Sergius, presented a paper on " Palamite Pneumatology in the Context of My Contacts with Fr. John Meyendorff, " in which he showed that Fr. Meyendorff had detected a possible breakthrough in the dead end, ancient controversy on the Filioque. |
| An extraordinarily creative intellect allowed Maximus to achieve a truly majestic synthesis of these two approaches. He insisted that it is the Eucharist that most fundamentally expresses the identity of the Church. For him the truth of the ecclesiology of individual purification lies in the transformation and the presentation in Christ of the entire tangible and intelligible world, and of all human relationships. There must be a process of purification by which all negative or worldly elements are driven out, but the purification itself is not the ultimate purpose of the Church. By lifting it and offering it to God, the Eucharist transforms all creation. The Church is the place in which this purification takes place, but rather than producing incorporeal angels, it brings about the salvation of this material world by giving it eternal communion with God. The process of purification must be understood as part of the eucharistic transformation of the world, not as rejecting or devaluing the material and bodily creation. Though at one time or another each of these two aspects has been given greater emphasis, the Church has always held to Maximus’ synthesis. Problems begin when theologians make one aspect bear too much weight. Unbalanced statements can be found in Saint Maximus himself, so some have seen him as a great exponent of the theology of self-purification. Among later Fathers, Saint Gregory Palamas in particular was promoted as a standard-bearer of Orthodoxy and representative of the theology of self-purification. Some scholars believe that there was a tension between those theologians who stressed individual spirituality, the ‘Hesychasts’, and other, eucharistic, theologians of the fourteenth century, such as Saint Nicholas Cabasilas of Thessaloniki (c.1323–c.1391). Saint Gregory Palamas has been commonly portrayed as representative of the ecclesiology in which the divine Eucharist is less important than individual spirituality. Nonetheless, I believe that, taken together, his treatises, doctrinal essays and sermons show that Palamas is agreement with Maximus in regarding the Eucharist as central. We are still waiting for studies that will show us where the other significant representatives of the Patristic tradition, in particular Saint Simeon the New Theologian, stand on this issue. |
| Gamber K. Ordo antiquua gallicanus. Der gallikanische Messritus des 6. Jahrhunderts//Textus Patristici et Litur- gici. Regensburg, 1965. B. 3. Germanus HE Germanus Historia Ecclesiastica. Goar J. Εχολγιον sive Rituale Graecorum complectens ritus et ordines Divinae Liturgiae, officiorum, sacramento- rum, consecrationum, benedictionum, funerum, orationum, etc. Editio secunda expurgata, et accuratior.Venice, 1730. Grabar A. Lempereur Grabar A. Lempereur dans lart byzantin. Paris, 1936. Grabar A. Quel est Grabar A. Quel est le sens de loffrande de Justinien et de Theodora sur les mosaïques de S. Vital?//Felix Ravenna. 1960. 30. P. 6377. Grimsted Grimsted P. K. Archives and Manuscript Repositories in the USSR: Moscow and Leningrad//Studies of the Russian Institute. Columbia University. Princeton, 1972. Habert Habert I. ΑΡΧΙΕΡΑΤΙΚΟΝ: Liber Pontificalis Eccleaiae Graecae. Paris, 1693. Hanssens I. M. CM Hanssens I. M. De concelebratione missae in ritibus orien- talibus. De eius notione et modis, usu praesenti et historia. Romae, 1966.=Divinitas. 1966. 10. P. 482559. Hanssens I. M. IL Hanssens I. M. Institutiones liturgicae de ritibus orientali- bus. Vol. IIIII. Romae, 193032. Hoddinott Hoddinott R. F. Early Byzantine Churches in Macedonia and Southern Serbia. A Study of the Origins and Initial Development of East Christian Art. London, 1963. Høeg-Zuntz Høeg C., Zuntz G. Prophetologium//Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae. Lectionaria. Copenhagen, 19391962. Vol. I. Fasc. 15. Horbatsch Horbatsch O. De tribus textibus liturgicis linguae ecclesias- ticae (Palaeo) Slavicae in manuscriptis Vaticanis. Romae, 1966. Hussey-McNulty Nicholas Cabasilas A Commentary on the Divine Liturgy/Hussey J. M., McNulty P. A. (edd.) London, 1960. Jacob A. Concélébr. Jacob A. La concélébration de lanaphore à Byzance daprès le témoignage de Léon Toscan//OCP. 1969. 35. P. 249256. Jacob A. Eisodosgebet Jacob A. Zum Eisodosgebet der byzantinischen Chrysos- tomosliturgie des Vatican Barb. gr. 336//OS. 1966. 15. P. 3538. |
|
|
