| John of Damascus and Theodore Studite, as well as Patriarch Germanos of Constantinople, to make an answer to these charges and to develop the church’s theology of the icon extensively. Between 775 and 780 Emperor Leo IV the Khazar reigned, the son of Constantine V, who was neither an iconodule (one who venerates icons), nor an iconoclast (one who fights those who venerate icons). There was a respite between the two phases (780–813) when the Empress Irene (mother of Constantine VI Porphyrogennetos, who was aged 10 when he became emperor in 780) convened a synod in Nicea in 787 (Council of Nicea II) in order to restore the veneration of icons in the churches. This synod, the seventh and last of the ecumenical councils of the church, was presided over by Patriarch Tarasius. It confirmed that the use of icons was already an ecclesiastical tradition, and decided that church traditions ought to be preserved reverently, and without innovations; whether these longstanding traditions were written or oral. The painting of icons was declared such a foundational tradition which is in conformity with the gospel. Icon and gospel were indeed complementary to each other. The synod of 787 also made clear the critically important distinction between the veneration of icons (proskynesis) and adoration (latreia). The first (veneration) is given by Christians to holy persons and things (including images of Christ, his Mother, and his saints); the latter (adoration) is due, in spirit and truth, to God alone. The distinction introduced an important semantic sophistication into the church’s understanding of prayer, reverence, and the sacramentality of icons. It was based on the teaching of St. Basil the Great, echoed by St. John of Damascus, which stated that whoever venerates an image in fact venerates only the person there depicted, since the reverence shown to the icon passes immediately as honor given to its archetype. The second phase of the iconoclastic crisis started with Emperor Leo V the Armenian (813–20) and lasted until the death of Emperor Theophilus in 842. |
| Almost 400 of these letters (the longer ones) belong to Barsanuphius, while almost 450 letters belong to John. Whereas early monastic literature has concentrated on monastic development, the correspondence ofBarsanuphius and John redresses a balance in this regard, focusing much attention on the concerns of lay persons. The letters involve more or less all of the main actors of the period, with the exception of women. They include monks from the monastery of Abba Seridos and simple laypersons from the surrounding community, through to high- ranking political officials and ecclesiastical leaders; bishops ask about ordinations; lay people inquire about illness and healing, legal and economic matters, marriage and death, property rights and popular superstitions. The ascetic teaching of the letters includes such concepts as gratitude in all circumstances and constant joy, as well as two terms that they coin, namely “not reckoning oneself as anything” and avoiding “the pretense to rights.” Beyond scriptural references, relatively few proper names are recorded in the letters, which continue the tradition of the Apophthegmata Patrum. Through Doroth- eus of Gaza, Theodore the Studite also accepts the authority of their teachings, whose extensive influence is evident in John Klimakos and, through John, in Symeon the New Theologian and the 14th-century Hesychasts. Barsanuphius and John are liturgically commemorated on February 6. REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Chryssavgis, J. (2003) Letters from the Desert: A Selection of the Spiritual Correspondence of Barsanuphius and John. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Hevelone-Harper, J. L. (2005) Disciples of the Desert: Monks, Laity, and Spiritual Authority in Sixth- Century Gaza. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Sts. Constantine (Cyril) (ca. 826–869) and Methodios (815–885) BRENDA LLEWELLYN IHSSEN Brothers Constantine-Cyril and Methodios were born, raised, and educated in Thessaloniki, an area populated by Slavs for several centuries before them. |
| The Second Council of Nicea was soon seen as an ecumenical council (though the West was dubious about it for a while, having received a defective copy of the statement of faith) and it has remained as the seventh and last of the ecumenical councils in Orthodox estimation. Empress Irene and her son were present for the proceedings, as were two papal legates and over three hundred bishops. Behind the theological debate on the appropriateness of the use and veneration of icons was a deeper metaphysical dialogue centered on the concepts of reality and image, on sacramentality and right representation. These complex ideas were deeply rooted in ancient philosophy. The Council of Nicea exposed iconoclasm as a form of Platonism, or a belief system that denigrated the central fact of the incarnation, preferring abstract symbolism, and a tendency of thought that resisted the idea that matter could be a valid medium of grace and divine revelation. Despite the political effects of the iconoclastic problem on the East and the West and the eventual agreement between the two on the validity of the cult of icons, the attachment to the principle of the quasisacramental character of the holy icons was to a certain degree a special proprium of the Orthodox world, an attitude to worship that partly separated it from the Latin Church, and much more so from the later Reformed Churches that arose out of western Catholicism. SEE ALSO: Ecumenical Councils; Icono- clasm; Iconography, Styles of; St. John of Damascus (ca. 675-ca. 750); St. Theodore the Studite (759–826) REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Giakalis, A. (1994) Images of the Divine: The Theology of Icons at the Seventh Ecumenical Council. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Lossky, V. and Ouspensky, L. (1982) The Meaning of Icons, trans. G. E. H. Palmer and E. Kadloubovsky. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. McGuckin, J. A. (1993) “The Theology of Images and the Legitimation of Power in Eighth Century Byzantium,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 37, 1: 39–58. |
| Following the Latins, Lavrenty Zizany and Peter Mohyla consider a specific, demonstrable proof of divine establishment to be the distinguishing sign of the “sacraments”. If one wished to define this sign exactly and clearly, then one would have to search for a very long time and very carefully in the Holy Bible. If we take them at their word, then we must come the conclusion that so far as the “sacraments” are concerned, the scholastics gave greater significance to ranking them than to demonstrating a direct and exact proof of establishment by divine will. In most cases, they considered as sufficient proof of “divine establishment,” a vague hint in the Gospel or a casual presence of Jesus Christ at the occurrence of some common event of life, although this hint or presence might be remote from its spiritual significance. In other cases, there is not even an example in the life of the Lord which can be mentioned. Moreover, the principle of the provable divine establishment of seven sacraments, degrades other divine services which are no less important and which are certainly divinely established. There is, in fact, a firm testimony of St Basil the Great which establishes the clearly divine origins of rites, acts and manifestations of Church life which are not included in these “seven sacraments”: “Of the teachings and practices preserved in the Church, some we have from written instruction; others we have received silence’ by the Apostolic tradition. Both of these have the same authority in relation to true religion. And no one will contradict these __ no one, that is, who is even moderately knowledgeable in the institutions of the Church. For if we were to attempt to reject such traditions as have no written authority, on the grounds that they are of little importance, we would inadvertently injure the Gospel in its very vitals; or rather, we would make our public preaching a mere phrase and nothing more” (On The Holy Spirit, 27:66). Advocates will not tolerate signs of these “seven sacraments” other than the “external form of inner grace” categorization. Nevertheless, in the life of the Church there are other divine services which fully satisfy these conditions, but which, for some reason, the scholastics do not consider worthy of the name “Holy Mysteries,” [or “sacraments”]. There is even a divine service which has the greatest importance for the whole life of the one receiving it, and has always been regarded, along with baptism, the Eucharist and ordination to be a great manifestation of divine grace, but which is regarded by the scholastics as lower than simple confession or anointing. This divine service is the rite of monastic tonsure, which is called a Holy Mystery in the works of St Dionysios the Areopagite and St Theodore the Studite. Thus we cannot be reconciled with the “internal/external signs” by which we are supposedly obligated to distinguish a “Holy Mystery” from other divine services. |
| Ouspensky recounts the Message really produces no new doctrine about the icon, instead, it instructs the iconographers in the norm and orientation of their creative activity. It speaks of the Church’s art being a fusion of dogmatic content, inner prayer and artistic creation (p.272 of Theology of the Icon). I believe this standard as true today, as it was when the Message first appeared, though it was originally thought to be commissioned by the iconographer Dionysius and used by him for instruction to his immediate apprentices and future ones. Authorship of the Message is between SS. Joseph of Volokolamsk and Nilus of Sora, with influence respectively from SS. Gregory Palamus, John of Damascus, Theodore the Studite, decisions of the 7 th Ecumenical Council and utilizes the writings of St. Maximus the Greek, St. Macarius, monk Zenobius of Optina and others. A starting point for us from the Message is the same power of the Holy Spirit, giving expression to the incarnate God man and giving iconographers their creative impetus. If iconographers are going to create icons to reveal the mystical life of the union between God and man, then it behooves them to be communicants of that same spiritual experience. This requires living within the mysteries of the Church, as her sacramental life is their life. The path of their personal salvation is deeply tied to their art; as much as anyone’s personal vocation can be living in the Church. This implies for the iconographer and any church artisan, active participation in the Church and communion with the Body of Christ. He must ascribe to the teachings of the Church and be taught by the Holy Spirit, for that same Holy Spirit enlivens the icon. It was never questioned that those involved in the making of icons would create their art outside the spiritual and sacramental experience of Christ’s Body, the Church. Clearly and simply their work is both the product and teaching of the Trinitarian life, the incarnation and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Leonid Ouspensky summarizes this point of the Message to an Iconographer. |
| " My son, " said Anthony, " you see my cave; it is cramped and dismal, and I fear you will not endure the difficulties of life here. " " Know, O blessed father, " replied Theodosius. " that God Himself has led me to your holiness that I might find salvation. I shall do all that you enjoin. " Foreseeing his future greatness, the blessed Anthony accepted the determined aspirant and bade the priest monk Nikon tonsure him. Theodosius was 23 years old. It was a few years before his distraught mother finally discovered her son’s whereabouts. With great reluctance Theodosius went out to her. At first she vowed that she would die if he did not come home with her. But gradually God softened her heart and she came to see the wisdom of her son's patient admonitions. Following his advice she entered the St. Nicholas convent there in Kiev where she ended her days in peace. When Theodosius became abbot, he saw need for a common rule to unite the growing community--which by that time was living above the ground; only a few hermits were left in the caves--and he sent one of his monks to Constantinople to copy out the rule of the Studite Monastery. The rule governed the daily life of the monk: it set the hours of prayer and work; monks were forbidden to have any personal possessions, everything was held in common; all monks were together for common meals: time, apart from prayer, was to be spent in working; all activity was begun with a blessing from an elder and with prayer. The monks were to reveal their thoughts to the abbot, a practice which roused them to constant spiritual vigilance and helped to check manifestations of the passions before they took root in the heart. Above all things, have fervent charity among yourselves (I Peter 4:8). It was St, Theodosius' choice of the Studite Rule, with its emphasis on the duty of charity and the common good, which served to revive the ancient ideal of strict cenobitism and gave Russian monasticism its characteristic warmth. " What is principally necessary, " taught Theodosius, " is that the youngest should love their neighbor and listen to their elders with humility and obedience. The elders should lavish on the young love and instruction; they should teach them and comfort them. " This attitude created an atmosphere eminently suitable for missionary work, and it was thanks to the monasteries that Christianity was so successfully propagated in Russia. |
| 2:11-13). Do you see the promises and the threats, of what sort and how great they are? For the rest then, brethren, let us strive, let us struggle by the grace of Christ not to shame those things that have been previously mentioned: the banishments, the imprisonments, the scourgings. We may not all have been imprisoned, nor all scourged; but nevertheless the fellowship of life itself becomes a fellowship of sufferings, for if one limb suffers, all the limbs suffer with it; if one limb is glorified, all the limbs rejoice with it (1 Cor. 12:26). And would that we were even more one body and one spirit, as we have been called in one hope of our calling (Eph. 4:4), having Christ as the head, to become well-pleasing to God, to gain the kingdom of heaven, in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be glory and might with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and always and to the ages of ages. Amen. St. Theodore the Studite Mystagogy 21 марта 2017 г. Подпишитесь на рассылку Православие.Ru Рассылка выходит два раза в неделю: Предыдущий Следующий Смотри также The 40 Martyrs of Sebaste: Confession through martyrdom Elder Joseph of Vatopaidi The 40 Martyrs of Sebaste: Confession through martyrdom Elder Joseph of Vatopaidi What were they " suffering at present " from? They were tortured with whatever the devil threw at them, since he is always generating ways to prevent the devout from getting on with their business. He begins with minor internal or external annoyances and reaches even the highest of all evil, death. 40 Holy Martyrs of Sebaste 40 Holy Martyrs of Sebaste On the following morning, the soldiers were again taken to Agricola. This time the pagan tried flattery. He began to praise their valor, their youth and strength, and once more he urged them to renounce Christ and thereby win themselves the respect and favor of their emperor. The Holy Forty Martyrs— " Winter Is Harsh, but Paradise Is Sweet! " The Holy Forty Martyrs— " Winter Is Harsh, but Paradise Is Sweet! " According to the tradition about the Holy Forty Martyrs, as they were suffering in the freezing lake, they strengthened themselves and one another by saying “Winter is harsh, but paradise is sweet!” This captures the spirit and essence of Christian martyrdom, which always sees the experiences of this world in the light of the heavenly kingdom. Homily Concerning the Forty Martyrs St. Gregory of Nyssa Homily Concerning the Forty Martyrs St. Gregory of Nyssa I believe that persons who have undergone many harsh experiences can give us encouragement because the sufferings which they and others have endured are a source of special joy. A shepherd rejoices when he sees his abundant flock gathered together; although his pen is large, he expands it to accommodate a large number of sheep. Similarly, Peter saw a throng gathered about the Lord and exclaimed, Master, the crowd surrounds you and presses upon you (Lk. 8.45). Комментарии © 1999-2016 Православие.Ru |
| While he was there, Ioannicius the Great, who was practicing asceticism on Mount Olympus, received a divine visitation. The great faster Arsaacius came to him and said, " God has sent me to you, that we might go to the righteous Isaiah the recluse in Nicomedia and learn from him what God desires and what is fitting for His Church. " Now when they came to the venerable Isaiah, he said to them, " Thus saith the Lord: Behold, the end is approaching for the enemies of My image. Go to the empress Theodora and to the Patriarch Methodius and tell them: ‘Cease to do what is not holy, and offer sacrifice to Me with the angels by venerating the countenance of My image and of the Cross’. " Hearing this they immediately left for Constantinople and announced what had been said to Patriarch Methodius and all God’s assembled people. The assembly then went to the empress and found her agreeable in all things, since this was the pious and God-loving tradition of the Fathers. The empress straightway brought out the image of the Theotokos for all to see, and venerating it, she said, " Let all be condemned who do not venerate the images, kissing them in love, not in worship as gods, but as images for the sake of the love of their archetypes. And they rejoiced with great joy. And in response she entreated them to pray for her husband Theophilus. Seeing her faith, they obeyed reluctantly. For Patriarch Methodius among the saints assembled all the people, priests and bishops and proceeded to God’s Great Church. Among the assembled were Joannicius the Great from Olympus, Arsaacius, Pancratius and the disciples of Theodore the Studite, and confessors Theophanes and Theodore Graptoi, Michael of the Holy City and Singelus and many others. And they prayed to God for Theophilus in tears all night long. Now this took place throughout the first week of the Great Fast, with the empress Theodora herself, the women and all the people taking part. Having completed the prayers, the empress Theodora retired at dawn on Friday, and dreamed that she was at the foot of the Cross, and there were several people passing noisily by, wearing various instruments of torture. As she recognized the Emperor Theophilus among those being led with his hands bound behind his back, she followed the group and its guards. When they reached the brass gates, she saw a supernatural vision, a man sitting in front of the image of Christ and Theophilus brought before him. Reaching to touch his feet, the empress prayed for the emperor. He opened his mouth and said, " Great is thy faith, O woman. Know that because of thy tears and thy faith, as well as the prayers and petitions of My servants and My priests, I grant forgiveness to thy husband Theophilus. " Then He said to the guards, " Loose him and give him to his wife. " And taking him, she departed rejoicing in gladness. And immediately the dream left her. |
| From the testimonies of the fourth century we ascertain that in Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch the fast of the holy Apostles was connected with Pentecost and not with the feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul on June 29. In the first centuries, after Pentecost there was one week of rejoicing, that is Privileged Days, followed by about one week of fasting. The canons of Nicephoros, Patriarch of Constantinople (806-816), mention the Apostle " s Fast. The Typicon of St. Theodore the Studite for the Monastery of Studios in Constantinople speaks of the Forty Days Fast of the holy Apostles. St. Symeon of Thessalonica (†1429) explains the purpose of this fast in this manner: " The Fast of the Apostles is justly established in their honor, for through them we have received numerous benefits and for us they are exemplars and teachers of the fast ... For one week after the descent of the Holy Spirit, in accordance with the Apostolic Constitution composed by Clement, we celebrate, and then during the following week, we fast in honor of the Apostles. " Duration of the Fast The Fast of the Apostles came into practice in the Church through custom rather than law. For this reason there was no uniformity for a long time, either in its observance or its duration. Some fasted twelve days, others six, still others four, and others only one day. Theodore Balsamon, Patriarch of Antioch (†1204), regarding the Apostle " s Fast, said: " All the faithful, that is the laity and the monks, are obliged to fast seven days and more, and whoever refuses to do so, let him be excommunicated from the Christian community. " From the work On Three Forty Days Fasts, which is credited to a monk of the monastic community of St. Anastasios the Sinaite (6th or 7th century), we learn that the Fast of the holy Apostles lasted from the first Sunday after Pentecost to the feast of the Dormition of the Most Holy Mother of God on August 15. Later, however, the Fast of the Dormition was separated from it and the month of July was excluded from the Fast of the Apostles. St. Symeon of Thessalonica speaks of the Apostle " s Fast as of one week " s duration. |
| From Crete Gregory sailed to Athos, and without delay he traversed the entire Mountain in an endeavour to discover others familiar with the spiritual teaching imparted to him by Arsenios. Initially he was disappointed. ‘I saw not a few men’, his biographer Kallistos represents him as saying, ‘endowed to the utmost with grey hairs, with under standing and with every dignity of character; but they devoted all their zeal to the active life. If asked about quiet ( hesychia) or the guarding of the mind and contemplation, they said that they did not know of this even by name.’ After long searching, Gregory eventually discovered three monks at the skete of Magoula, not far from the monastery of Philotheou, who possessed some knowledge of contemplation and inner prayer; all others whom he encountered were absorbed exclusively with the active life. Here, at Magoula, he himself settled. If accurate, this testimony provides a revealing picture of the spiritual condition of Athos around the start of the 14th century. It may be that Kallistos, in the common fashion of biographers, has somewhat exag gerated the preceding neglect of inner prayer on the Mountain, in order to underline the personal influence of his hero; yet surely his evidence cannot be wholly discounted. When Gregory arrived, so it would seem, the emphasis at Athos was placed almost exclusively on the external: on manual labour and exact obedience, on fasting and similar ascetic exercises, on the ordered sequence of liturgical prayer. The inner life was overlooked. This prevailing ignorance concerning contemplation and ‘guarding of the mind’ is especially remarkable, in view of the fact that Nicephorus the Hesychast may still have been alive when Gregory first arrived; in any case, his death cannot have occurred long previously. The disciples of Nicephorus must have been so effectively concealed in the remoter regions of the Mountain that Gregory failed to make contact with them. While on Athos, St Gregory of Sinai lived from preference, not in one of the large coenobia, but in the ‘semi-eremitic’ milieu of a secluded skete, in the company of a restricted circle of chosen disciples. This was also the form of monastic life adopted by St Gregory Palamas during most of his time on the Holy Mountain. Alike in the 14th and the 18th centuries, and also in our own day, the Hesychast tradition on Athos has flourished in the sketes rather than the ‘ruling monasteries’. ‘A lover of quiet, if ever there was one’, Gregory of Sinai sought ever to lead a life of silence and withdrawal, hidden from the world. Forced to dwell for a time within the walls of the Great Lavra, he found that ‘constant contact with the monks deprive d him of the hesychia for which he longed’. In this regard he belongs to the lineage of Evagrius Ponticus and St Isaac the Syrian, rather than to the cenobitic way of St Basil the Great, St Theodore the Studite and St Symeon the New Theologian. |
|
|
