| He who was born of the Most Pure Virgin Mary, he who suffered greatly and without blame, he who was crucified and died on a cross between two thieves, he was the first among people to rise from the dead. ‘He has been raised, as he said he would be’ (Mt 28:6). The tomb is empty. There remain in it only the swaddling clothes in which his body was wrapped. The myrrh-bearing women came to the place of the Lord’s burial ‘very early in the morning … at the rising of the sun’ (Mk 16:2) and did not find Jesus there, for neither the stone that blocked the entrance into the cave, nor the guard who kept watch by it, nor even death itself could withstand the great power of the Living God. ‘Hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure’ (Is 5:14), exultant Hades had been ready to engulf its most powerful enemy, yet instead froze in fear, for it had been illumined by the light of the Godhead. Christ has vanquished corruption and destroyed death. Through the first man, who disobeyed the Maker and fell away from the Fount of eternal life, evil came into the world and sin reigned over people. Christ ‘the last Adam’ (1 Cor 15:45) has vanquished death of the spirit, death of the soul and death of the body. ‘For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,’ St. Paul tells us (1 Cor 15:22). All that we have lost in the first Adam we have acquired anew in Christ. The Lord’s Passover is truly the ‘great gift of the divine economy’ (St. Theodore the Studite). Having overcome the human person’s alienation from his Maker, the Saviour has granted to us the possibility of being united with him. As St. John Damascene says, through the Cross of Christ we have been ‘granted resurrection … The gates of paradise have been opened to us, our nature now sits at the right hand of God and we have become the children of God and his heirs’ (An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book 4). We are all called upon to be worthy of this gift. The Son of God, in assuming our nature, has become like us in all things apart from sin. Through his earthly life and sufferings on the Cross he has shown us an example of the greatest humility and obedience to the heavenly Father, an example of struggle against temptations and allurements, and through his resurrection he has destroyed the fetters of sin and granted to us the power and means to vanquish evil. It is in this struggle that one grows spiritually and becomes a morally free person. |
| There is also a passage in On the Divine Names by St. Dionysius the Areopagite that speaks of the Apostles gathering to gaze at the body that was the vessel of God. Scholars consider this a pseudepigraphal work from late-fifth-century Syria, but notable Orthodox voices such as Fr. John Romanides and Fr. Dumitru Stniloae upheld the authenticity of the writings, meaning there could actually be a first-century reference to the Dormition of the Theotokos. Following these fragments and disputed works, the oldest extant Greek homily for the feast is that of John of Thessalonica who served as metropolitan between 610 and 649, and the roughly contemporary sermon of the Palestinian bishop Theoteknos of Livias. There are several other well-known early homilies on the Dormition by St. Modestus of Jerusalem, St. Andrew of Crete, St. Germanus of Constantinople, St. John of Damascus, and St. Theodore the Studite, among others. Through the hymns for the feast of the Dormition and the Synaxarion the Church depicts the story of Mary’s passing from this life and her translation into Heaven. Having asked to be given notice of her coming repose, the Archangel Gabriel appeared to the Mother of God three days prior, announcing her coming sleep and handing her a palm branch from Paradise which indicated that in death she would overcome corruption. Rejoicing at the news she went to pray on the Mount of Olives where even the trees bowed in reverence to her. She then returned home and prepared herself for her burial. Her friends lamented that they were losing her but she assured them that she would continue to pray for them and the whole world. Suddenly there was a noise like thunder and her house was filled with the Apostles who had been miraculously gathered from around the world to bid farewell to the Theotokos—all except for the Apostle Thomas. Having taken leave of all present she prayed to Christ for peace throughout the world and gave up her holy soul to her Son and God Who had appeared with the Archangel Michael and a host of angels. |
| The mom who covers her children, who wipes the tears of tragedy and suffering. The mom who calms the hearts from the storms of life, and who pacifies the mind, as Saint Theodore the Studite will write and chant. The mom who as soon as one stands opposite her icon she fills with joy, which is why they chant together with the sacred hymnographer: " In hymns we thank, glorify and praise your immeasurable mercy and great strength, confessing to all. " The mom who is the protector of all Christians. " The protection of Christians, Virgin Mother of the Lord. " To our mom. To the mom of the world we leave our hope and our endurance always, especially in these difficult days our homeland is going through. To our mom we open our heart, as the Venerable Sophia of Kleisoura would say. We supplicate to the Panagia with the sacred troparia of our Church, as Elder Paisios advised, with the purpose of guiding us to her Son and our God. The Panagia is supplicated today by persons whom we do not give any importance to repeating daily thousands of times the archangelic greeting of " Rejoice, Theotokos and Virgin " . Along with the entire choir of Saints in the Kingdom of Heaven, together with those also who live today in the trenches of life and with the prayers of those who support the world, we also send her our supplications: For our Church, For our nation, For the ill who suffer, For our needy brethren, For those battered by the scourges of our times, For the blood being spilled in Syria, Egypt, and in other countries, For every human soul which is to be found with every need. May the Panagia speak to the hearts of the powerful of the earth. May she speak to all of our hearts. May she teach us humility in order to find our lost self. May she help us to regain again that which we lost, that is, our sustenance together with our life-providing and life-bearing Tradition. My Panagia, my joy, my consolation, my hope, my breath, save us from every circumstance. 26 августа 2013 г. Подпишитесь на рассылку Православие.Ru |
| John, who had a humble opinion of himself, first balked at the task but then set about writing the treatise out of obedience to the request of the Raithu monks. He thus called the work, The Ladder, explaining his choice: " I have built a ladder of ascent… from earth to holiness… In honor of the thirty years of the Lord, I have built a ladder of thirty steps, which if we climb it to the age of the Lord, we will be righteous and safe from falls. " The aim of this treatise was to teach us that the attainment of salvation requires difficult self-denial and intense ascetical labor. The Ladder first suggests the cleansing of sinful impurity, the uprooting of vices and passions of the " old man " ; second, it shows the restoration of God's image in man. Although the book was written for monks, any Christian who lives in the world will find it a reliable guide on the ascent to God. Pillars of spiritual life such as St. Theodore the Studite, St. Sergius of Radonezh, St. Joseph of Volokolamsk, and others continually referred to The Ladder as the best book for soul-saving instruction. The content of one of the steps of The Ladder (No. 22) discusses the labor of uprooting vainglory. St. John writes, Like the sun, which shines on all alike, vainglory beams on every occupation. What I mean is this: I fast, and turn vainglorious. I stop fasting so that I will draw no attention to myself, and I become vainglorious over my prudence. I dress well or badly, and am vainglorious in either case. I talk or I remain silent, and each time I am defeated. No matter how I shed this prickly thing, a spike remains to stand up against me. A vainglorious man is a believing idolater. Apparently honoring God, he actually is out to please not God but men. To be a showoff is to be vainglorious. The fast of such a man is unrewarded and his prayer futile, since he is practicing both to win praise. A vainglorious ascetic doubly cheats himself, wearying his body and getting no reward.… The Lord frequently hides from us even the perfections we have obtained. |
| In this same manner the “Council” of Crete will be judged. All of us are called as faithful members of the body of the Church to give our assessment. It is incumbent upon of all of us to speak out. It is our duty to express our priestly and monastic conscience, to simply and humbly put forth our thoughts, to express our view before our Shepherds. It is our duty to take our share of the personal responsibility but also our responsibility to our spiritual children and the many faithful believers who entrust us with their agony, anxiety, but also their outrage surrounding the events of the “Council” of Crete. What we have written here in the present work, as well as our writings on the same issues which preceded it and whatever writings, with the help of God, may follow, constitute our small response to the self-evident truths of our faith, to the deposit of faith handed down by the holy Patriarchs, bishops, clergy, venerable monastics, and lay confessors of our faith, in our duty to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. They constitute our obedience to our Holy Fathers who made clear to us that in matters of faith we must offer an account. Not an account based on personal opinions, but the account [of the Faith] of the Holy Fathers, the Holy Ecumenical and Local Councils, inspired by the Holy Spirit, the authentic and living word of our contemporary elders and of all who remain faithful to Orthodox tradition and continue “following the Holy Fathers.” 1. A Plea of the Saints and of Contemporary Bishops, Clergy and Professors of Theology Saint Theodore the Studite clearly states that “It is a commandment of God that we not keep silence when the Faith is endangered… when it concerns the faith, we cannot say ‘Who am I? Am a priest? No. Nobleman? No. General? From where? Farmer? Not even this. I am a poor man, trying to secure only my daily bread. I don’t have learning, nor interest in this matter. Woe to you! The stones will cry out and you will remain silent and indifferent? Even the poor man on the day of judgment will have no excuse if he does not speak now, because he will be judged even for this alone.” |
| St. John of Damascus wrote several treatises in which he answers the iconoclastic theologians who based their opposition to images on: (a) the Old Testament condemnation of idolatry, and (b) on the philosophical presupposition that an image is one in essence with its prototype – hence an image of God will be taken to be God Himself – hence idolatrous. St. John of Damascus addressed the weakness of the theology of the iconoclasts with regard to the Incarnate Jesus. They spoke of a divinity who absorbed humanity and united with it making it devoid of its human characteristics, thus approaching the heresy of Eutyches and the monophysites. St. John emphasized along with Necephorus of Constantinople and Theodore the Studite that through the Incarnation God entered human history and established a special relationship between the divine and the human, between divinity and matter, between the creator and the creation. St John pointed out that: “In former times, God, being without form or body, could in no way be represented. But today, since God has appeared in the flesh and lived among men, I can represent what is visible in God. I do not worship matter, but I worship the creator of matter who became matter for my sake … and who, through matter accomplished my salvation. Never will I cease to honor the matter which brought about my salvation.” St John makes a distinction between worship or adoration (Latreia) which is offered only to God and veneration (Proskynesis) or bowing down before something, that in the Old Testament is offered even by the prophets to kings or other human beings. He also demonstrates that it is wrong to identify every image with its prototype except only in the case of the Son, Who is the image of the Father because they are of the same essence to start with. Hence, the icon is a theological statement of the Incarnation of God and not God himself. His main point was that we venerate icons, but give worship and adoration to God alone. Praying with the Icons |
| Thus, in the icon, the depiction of this mystery is made possible. The basis of the true representative character ofthe icon consists in the decision of God himself to assume a visible human face in the incarnation of his Son. Christ, being the divine image par excellence, thus represents the fulfillment of all images from the Old Testament, and fulfils them all. In short, the incarnation of the divine Logos makes the icon an effective instrument of final revelation and thus of the divine grace of that saving revelation. This is the point of departure of all Orthodox teaching on the icon. This doctrine about the capacity of the uncircumscribable God to be “circumscribed” (the semantic term is closely related to the word for drawing, or image making) in the incarnation ofhis Son (and this understood as a basis for the making of icons) was formulated at the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in 431, where Mary was declared to be not merely Anthropotokos (Mother of a man), and not even Christotokos (Mother of the Christ), but precisely and wondrously, Theotokos (the very Mother of God). Because of this mystical hypostatic union of God and his flesh, the church can legitimately use the paradoxical language of the capacity of the uncircumscribable God to be circumscribed, and can legitimately apply the sign of the icon in its worship. The incarnation, however, represents in itself an abiding paradox, and this quality passes on into the icon, as well. In turning to the incarnation as the basis for the possibility of the icon, the iconodules affirmed as the teaching of the Orthodox Church that what appears as presented by the icon is not the nature of the Son of God, but his hypostasis as incarnated. The iconoclasts had raised the question: “What do we actually see represented in the icon? The humanity or the divinity of Christ?” Theodore the Studite, speaking for the iconodules in general, answered with an apologia based upon the theology of similarity and dissimilarity between image and prototype. |
| CONSTANTINOPLE Towards the end of the 4th century, monasticism came into Constantinople, the imperial capital, and new foundations followed constantly in the city until the fall of the empire in 1453. A new type of city monasticism was born here. Many monks worked in the imperial service. Many looked to St. Gregory the Theologian’s conception of the monk as “quiet in the midst of the city.” Most important was the Studios Monastery, with its reforming of coenobitic life along the lines of a highly liturgical community schedule, and a family of monks bonded in strong obedience to a single higumen. The example of the Studios community, especially under its dynamic leader St. Theodore the Studite (d. 816), became the basis for foundations all over the Orthodox world. Not least among them was the Studite inspired foundation in 961 of the first monastery at Mount Athos, later known as the Great Lavra, which marked the beginning of the rise of Athos as a center of Orthodox monasticism. Athos combined all forms of monasticism: coenobitic, eremitical, and small communities (Sketes) of loosely organized semi-hermits. The great spiritual movement known as Hesychasm, which flourished on Athos in the 13th and 14th centuries, gave spiritual expression to the upsurge and renewal of the anchorite ideal in Orthodox monastic life. PALESTINE The eremitic monasticism of Egypt had a direct influence on Byzantine Palestine, where notables such as saints Silvanus, Hilarion of Gaza, Sabas, and Epiphanius of Salamis all built monasteries. This became the site for the semi-eremitic form of monasticism, where the monks did not live in complete separation, like the hermits; nor in complete community, like coenobitic monks. Rather, there existed a number of independent groups of monks, each of which varied greatly in size, but which would all come together for a Saturday vigil in common, the dawn divine liturgy, and a shared meal, on Sunday. This style often involved a small colony of monks living very secluded lifestyles during the week, perhaps all associated along the same desert valley. Their respective separate dwelling places were linked by a small path (Lavra, or lane) along which they would have some communication, and by which they would all gather for the Saturday vigil services; returning to their hermitages on Sunday evenings. Lavriotic monasticism thus developed, even when the original separate dwellings came to be enclosed in one surrounding wall. Some of the greatest Russian and Greek monasteries today are known as Lavras. |
| Monasticism began to lose ground in these three countries from the beginning of the seventh century, that is, from the time of the Arab conquest; but it never disappeared completely. Today, besides the Orthodox, the Copts, Jacobites, Armenians, and Nestorians also have monasteries. By way of Cappadocia and Asia Minor, monasticism reached the capital of the Empire, Constantinople. Many of the monasteries that were established in the suburbs on both sides of the Bosporus became flourishing organizations, and through their activities influenced the course of ecclesiastical and sometimes of political affairs. The monastery of the Sleepless Ones, which was founded by Alexander about 430, received its name from the fact that the monks praised God throughout the entire day and night, being divided into three groups which succeeded one another in church. The monastery of Studion, likewise founded in the fifth century, by the Roman patrician Studius, became the center of the liturgical development of the eastern Church and the champion of its independence of state intervention. Theodore the Studite, who flourished at the beginning of the ninth century, became through his heroic conduct an exemplar for all monks. In these regions monasticism was definitely destroyed during the period of Turkish conquest. Strong centers of monasticism had already been formed, however, in Greece. Among these, Mount Athos was distinguished from the tenth century onwards, and henceforth called the “Holy Mountain”. In 963, the emperor Nicephoros Phocas issued a decree, granting to the monk Athanasius the right to found there a great lavra, which he did. Within a short time other communities of monks were founded here, and these were placed under the general supervision of the Protos. In order to further the spread of monasticism there, Alexius Comnenus placed all the establishments of Athos under the jurisdiction of the nearest bishop, that of Ierissos. But understandably friction occurred between him and the Protos, and for this reason it became necessary to abolish the jurisdiction of the bishop of Ierissos. This was done towards the end of the fourteenth century. |
| The monasteries seldom consisted of stone buildings. More frequently they were located on a simple country lot surrounded by a palisade, within which (depending on the lay of the land) were scattered huts, small cells, and caves, which served as shelters and places of worship. They were simple and primitive, and often abandoned when the inhabitants either sought greater solitude or fled from the Saracens. The custom these monks had of moving from place to place is reminiscent of the way of life practiced among the Egyptian Desert Fathers and the Celts of Ireland and Scotland. At times some of the monks living together in the same community dwelt in solitude, while others lived in small groups of two or three, alternating periods of solitude with periods of communal life (liturgical prayer, meals, and spiritual instruction) under the spiritual guidance of the monastery’s elder. Others lived in succession within the different forms of monastic life, moving from coenobitism to eremitc life and back. Such were St. Elias the Younger, St. Vitalius of Castronovo, and St. Nilus the Younger. There were generally no fixed rules governing the details of daily life. The community was centered around their elder, who often lived apart. While during the ninth century the level of education among the monastics was not high, this gradually changed in the tenth century. Monks then began to study and copy various manuscripts, among which were liturgical and scriptural texts, Greek patristic works (such as those of St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil the Great, and St. Theodore the Studite), and the Lives of various saints of the East. Few of their written commentaries were local in origin; most were the works of the Holy Fathers. However, by the end of the tenth century an abundance of hagiographical material, as well as hymnography, began to appear. The Italo-Greek monastics played an important part in both the civil and ecclesiastical life of that era. They had a great rapport with the local people, who would come to them for prayers, blessings, counsel, and other kinds of help. This in turn gave them great freedom in dealing with both civil and Church authorities, who as a result interfered little with the life of the monasteries. Rather, bishops and civil leaders often came to the monastics for spiritual guidance. |
|
|
