Man in Metanoiacal Dialogue with God: The Biblical and Hesychastic Message of the Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete [1 ed.] 9783666573491, 9783525573495

Citation preview

Krzysztof Leśniewski

Man in Metanoiacal Dialogue with God The Biblical and Hesychastic Message of the Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 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

Lublin Theological Studies in connection with The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin edited by Adam Kubiś (The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin) in cooperation with Nicholas Adams (University of Birmingham), Marek Jagodziński (The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin), Paweł Mąkosa (The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin) Advisory Board Klaus Baumann (University of Freiburg), David Fagerberg (University of Notre Dame), Zdzisław Kijas (Seraphicum, Rome), Juan Luis Lorda (University of Navarra), Dalia Marx (Hebrew Union College, Jerusalem), Łukasz Popko (École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem), Ilaria Ramelli (University of Cambridge; Durham University; Sacred Heart University, Milan), Carl-Maria Sultana (University of Malta)

Volume 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 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

Krzysztof Les´niewski

Man in Metanoiacal Dialogue with God The Biblical and Hesychastic Message of the Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 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

The project is funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education within the program “Regional Initiative of Excellence” in 2019–2022, project number: 028/RID/2018/19.

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek: The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data available online: https://dnb.de. © 2022 by Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Theaterstraße 13, 37073 Göttingen, Germany, an imprint of the Brill-Group (Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands; Brill USA Inc., Boston MA, USA; Brill Asia Pte Ltd, Singapore; Brill Deutschland GmbH, Paderborn, Germany, Brill Österreich GmbH, Vienna, Austria) Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau, V&R unipress and Wageningen Academic. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher. Typesetting: le-tex publishing services, Leipzig Cover design: SchwabScantechnik, Göttingen

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Verlage | www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht-verlage.com ISBN 978-3-666-57349-1

The series

“Lublin Theological Studies” (LTS) is a series sponsored by the Faculty of Theology of the John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin (KUL). It contains the finest studies and edited collections written both by members of this faculty and by other collaborating theologians. The title of the series indicates that all the books published will be theological in their content but, beyond that, might be related to any of the disciplines of theology, broadly speaking: biblical, systematic and practical theology. The common factor linking all of these studies is their provenance, namely Lublin. The Faculty of Theology in Lublin, founded in 1918, has managed to evolve its own original “take” on theological discourse. For one thing, it is grounded in personalism. This orientation is especially evident in the field of systematic theology, which even developed its own semiotic-personalistic method of research. Indeed, within academia the Lublin School of Theology is sometimes referred to as the “Lublin Personalistic School”. Historically speaking, theologians in Lublin were rather forced, due to the relative isolation of the “iron curtain” era, to develop their own original approaches. Thus, in different fields of theology they have come to present an innovative relecture and reception of various Western and Eastern theologies and theologians. Moreover, theology in Lublin is cultivated within the context of Eastern and Central Europe, as a dialogue between the Western Churches (including various Protestant denominations) and the Eastern (Orthodox and Catholic) Churches. In this way, Lublin has long been, and still is, a meeting point at the crossroads between West and East, a geographical distinction that has had a unique, visible impact on the research emanating from here. The theological faculty in Lublin actually represents the largest theological school in all of Central and Eastern Europe. Currently, this faculty consists of about 90 highly qualified academics and some 1,100 students. The professional teaching staff focus heavily on research, each year producing several monographs, as well as edited volumes presenting the results of international conferences organized by this faculty. Many of these works, we are pleased to note, have been embraced, and deemed influential, by members of the wider academic community. Until now, our many publications have been dispersed among various publishing houses, and have thus far been written predominantly in the Polish language. Now, however, with the advent of the LTS series – publishing exclusively in English – comes what we believe will be a more methodical and focused approach. It is our sincere hope that this new series will, in the years to come, more effectively expose many important theological works to the worldwide readership they deserve.

Table of Contents

Introduction.......................................................................................... 11 I.

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece of Eastern Christian Hymnography .................................................................................. 1. Genesis of the Canon .................................................................... 1.1 Psalms in the Church of the First Centuries ............................. 1.2 Biblical Songs....................................................................... 1.3 The Oldest Christian Hymns .................................................. 1.4 Troparion ............................................................................ 1.5 Syrian Hymnography ............................................................ 1.6 Kontakion ........................................................................... 1.7 Canon ................................................................................. 2. Elements of the Morphological Structure of the Great Canon ............ 2.1 Odes ................................................................................... 2.2 Heirmoi .............................................................................. 2.3 Troparia .............................................................................. 2.4 Triadika .............................................................................. 2.5 Theotokia ............................................................................ 2.6 The Versicle: “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me” ............. 3. The Great Canon in the Liturgical Tradition of the Orthodox Church ...................................................................................... 3.1 The Use of the Great Canon in the First Week of Great Lent ....... 3.2 The Use of the Great Canon in the Fifth Week of Great Lent .......

II. The Image of God in the Great Canon ............................................... 1. God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons .................................... 2. God the Father (Θεός Πατήρ) ........................................................ 3. The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ) ..................................................... 3.1 Jesus (Ιησούς) ...................................................................... 3.2 Christ (Χριστός) ................................................................... 3.3 The Son of the Theotokos (Υιός της Θεοτόκου) ......................... 3.4 The Son of David (Υιός του Δαβίδ) .......................................... 3.5 The Lord (Κύριος) ................................................................ 3.6 The Almighty (Παντοδύναμος) .............................................. 3.7 The Saviour (Σωτήρ) ............................................................. 3.8 The Lamb of God (Ανμός τοῦ Θεοῦ)........................................

31 31 31 36 38 39 41 44 46 50 50 52 53 55 56 57 58 59 60 65 67 74 76 78 80 89 90 91 95 95 101

8

Table of Contents

3.9 The King (Βασιλέυς) ............................................................. 3.10 The Judge (Κριτής) ............................................................... 3.11 The Word (Λόγος)................................................................. 3.12 The Physician (Ιατρός) .......................................................... 3.13 The Creator (Κτίστης, Πλαστουργός, Ἐργάτης) ......................... 3.14 The Lover of Mankind (Φιλάνθρωπος) .................................... 3.15 The Good Shepherd (Ποιμίν καλός) ........................................ 4. The Holy Spirit (τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα) ................................................... III. The Identity and Drama of Man and the Chance for Salvation in the Great Canon ........................................................... 1. Man as the Creature of God .......................................................... 1.1 Man Created by God............................................................. 1.2 Man Created in the Image and Likeness of God ........................ 1.3 Man as a Fallen Creature – a Sinner ........................................ 2. The Structural Elements of the Human Person ................................. 2.1 The Intellect (νούς) ............................................................... 2.2 The Spirit (πνεύμα)............................................................... 2.3 The Soul (ψυχή) ................................................................... 2.4 The Body (σώμα) and the Flesh (σάρξ) .................................... 3. Man and Spiritual Threats ............................................................. 3.1 Thoughts (λογισμοί) ............................................................. 3.2 Delusions (πλάνες) ............................................................... 3.3 Temptations (πειρασμοί) ....................................................... 3.4 Imaginations (μορφώσεις) ..................................................... 3.5 Pleasures (ἡδοναί) ................................................................ 3.6 Brutish Desires (παράλογοι ορέξεις) and Animal Appetites (κτηνόδεις ορέξεις) ................................................ 3.7 Uncontrolled Longings (ὁρμαί) .............................................. 3.8 Unrestrained Desires (ἀκρασία) ............................................. 3.9 Stubborn Wilfulness (αὐθάδεια) ............................................. 3.10 Rejection of the Commandments (αθέτηση των εντολών) ......... 3.11 Trespasses (παραπτώματα) .................................................... 3.12 Evil Deeds (κακουργίαι) ........................................................ 3.13 Wickedness (ἀνομία) ............................................................ 3.14 Sins (ἁμαρτίαι)..................................................................... 3.15 Passions (πάθοι) ................................................................... 3.16 Gluttony (ἀδηφαγία)............................................................. 3.17 Adultery (μοιχεία) ................................................................ 3.18 Love of Money (φιλαργυρία).................................................. 3.19 Murder (φόνος)....................................................................

103 104 106 107 108 111 113 115

121 121 122 124 125 130 131 135 136 150 154 154 163 163 164 165 165 167 167 168 169 170 171 171 174 176 183 183 184 185

Table of Contents

4. Man on the Path to Salvation ......................................................... 4.1 Abiding in the Word of God................................................... 4.2 The Change of the Intellect (μετάνοια) .................................... 4.3 Compunction (κατάνυξις) ..................................................... 4.4 Tears (δάκρυα) and Crying (θρήνος)....................................... 4.5 Lamentation (θρηνωδία) ....................................................... 4.6 Remembrance of Death (μνήμη θανάτου)................................ 4.7 Meditation on Last Judgement ............................................... 4.8 Sobriety of the Soul (νηφαλιότης της ψυχής) and Vigilance of the Soul (εγρήγορση ψυχής) ................................. 4.9 Humility (ταπείνοσις) ........................................................... 4.10 Prayer (προσευχὴ) ................................................................ 4.11 Fasting (νηστεία).................................................................. 4.12 Action (πράξις) .................................................................... 4.13 Virtue (αρετή)...................................................................... 4.14 Chastity (ἁγνεία).................................................................. 4.15 Prudence/Self-Control (σωφροσύνη) ...................................... 4.16 Contemplation (θεωρία)........................................................ 5. The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person....................................

186 186 189 203 206 214 216 219 222 223 225 225 227 228 229 229 230 233

Conclusion ........................................................................................... 243 Bibliography ......................................................................................... 255 Annex. The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete: The Source Text in Greek and Its Translation into English ......................................... 283 Subject Index ....................................................................................... 317

9

Introduction

The first Christians formed a community of faith founded on the proclamation of the Word of God and liturgical gatherings. They were animated by “one heart and soul” (Acts 4:32), for in each one and in all of them together there was the love of God the Father, the grace of Jesus Christ and the communion of the Holy Spirit. Experiencing God as the Most Holy Trinity, they tried to live in the image of the One who led them from death to life. Liturgical gatherings of the first Christians were theological mystagogies, serving as an introduction to the mystery of God’s love towards man. Eastern Christianity has preserved its liturgical identity in a particularly special way. This truth was expressed in a synthetic way by Archimandrite Basil (Gondikakis) of the Holy Mount Athos: Outside the framework of the Divine Liturgy, where God manifests His glory by the offering and self-emptying of His Son, and the faithful confess the trinitarian truth by their love for one another, it is impossible to understand Orthodox faith and theology.1

For Orthodox Christians, lex credendi is revealed through lex orandi. The orthodoxy of their faith relates to the prayer of the Church, especially liturgical prayer. Every day, the Church prays that the time of this world becomes a new time in which new life is revealed. This prayer is part of not only the daily cycle, but also the liturgical year, the most important event of which is the celebration of Easter – Christ’s Pascha. Its magnificence was proclaimed by St Gregory the Theologian: The Lord’s Passover, the Passover, and again I say the Passover to the honour of the Trinity. This is to us a Feast of feasts and a Solemnity of solemnities as far exalted above all others (not only those that are merely human and creep on the ground, but even those that are of Christ Himself, and are celebrated in His honour) as the Sun is above the stars.2

The Feast of the Resurrection of Christ is an eschatological event in the life of the Church through which Christians participate in the “new time”, the time of grace

1 Archimandrite Vasileios of Stavronikita, Hymn of Entry. Liturgy and Life in the Orthodox Church (trans. E. Briere; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1984), 30. 2 St Gregory of Nazianzus, “Oration XLV. The Second Oration on Easter”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 7 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans 1983) 832–853, on p. 833.

12

Introduction

of the Kingdom of God.3 The eschatological significance of the Resurrection of Christ is revealed above all in His victory over death. Christ’s Pascha is the path from darkness to light, the emergence from the abyss to the earth, the entrance from earth to heaven, the transition from death to life. It is for this very reason that the Resurrection of Christ is celebrated as a manifestation of the Saviour’s omnipotence,4 for if Christ had not risen, the faith of Christians would have been ineffective (cf. 1 Cor 15:17).5 The Resurrection is not only the culmination of Christ’s work and his earthly life, but the very centre and true essence of the Christian Gospel: “It is the beginning of a new life, a new Reality, a sudden revelation of Eternal Life, which has entered the structure of our lives and appeared as a transforming Power.”6 The new Life, which almost two thousand years ago raised from the tomb, was given to believers in Christ to share in the joyful experience of victory over death. This truth is expressed in the troparion sung by Orthodox Christians during the Paschal cycle: “Christ is risen! He has overcome His death and endowed those in His graves with life”. The proclamation of the victory of life over death is heralded to believers at the end of the Paschal matins: “Christ is risen and life reigns! Christ is risen and there are no dead in the graves any longer”. All Orthodox services gravitate around the Pascha. The year-round cycle of feasts and Sundays is a great walk and pilgrimage towards this goal.7 Deepening the mystery of Christ’s resurrection requires appropriate spiritual preparation. For this reason, the period of Great Lent is essential in the Church’s liturgical cycle. Lent is intended to help believers see and taste new life, by purifying their hearts, changing their intellect, and promoting deep repentance and compunction. However, before Orthodox Christians are introduced to these special forty days of the Great Lent, they have to experience five weeks, each of which has its own theme, as expressed by the name of Sunday, and refers to a relevant pericope of the Gospel. Each of the Lenten Sundays is intended to serve as a call for in-depth reflection on life and recognition of one’s own sinfulness. The first is the Sunday of Zacchaeus (cf. Luke 19:1–10). The person of Zacchaeus symbolizes the soul that awakens from sinful lethargy and overcomes the deceitful shame of the

3 Cf. A. Schmemman, Introduction to Liturgical Theology (trans. A.E. Moorehouse; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996), 216–219. 4 Cf. L. Ouspensky, “The Descent into Hell”, in L. Ouspensky/V. Lossky (ed.), The Meaning of Icons (trans. G.E.H. Palmer/E. Kadloubovsky; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 1989) 187–8, on p. 187. 5 All the quotes from the Old and New Testament in this monograph are taken from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, 1989. In addition, some words and phrases will be given from the Greek original. 6 M.S. Arseniev, “Resurrection and Transfiguration”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 4/1 (1957) 16–28, 16. 7 Cf. A. Schmemann, Great Lent (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 1996), 11–13.

Introduction

world’s judgments. It also awakens an ardent desire to give up one’s previous life to follow the Saviour. The second Sunday of the Pre-Lenten Season is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee (cf. Luke 18:10–14). The Gospel read during the Divine Liturgy shows the contrast between pride, self-praise and self-complacency and humility,8 embodied in Christ himself when saying: “learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart” (Matt 11:29). The Sunday of the Prodigal Son (cf. Luke 15:11–32), which calls for a way out of the pit of lust and a return to the home of the good and merciful Father,9 is preceded by the fourth Pre-Lenten Sunday, known as the Sunday of the Last Judgment (cf. Matt 25:31–46) or Meat-Fare Sunday. The second name has a pastoral character, as from this Sunday a period of abstinence from meat consumption begins. Christ’s parable of Last Judgment prompts us to reflect on the criterion according to which the Saviour will judge people when He comes again. The parable clearly indicates that this measure will be the criterion of love for all others we meet on the path of our life.10 The last Pre-Lenten Sunday is the Sunday of Forgiveness (cf. Luke 21:8–9, 25–27, 33–36; Matt 6:14–21), also known as Cheese-Fare Sunday (because it is an introduction to a period of rigorous fasting, during which the faithful also give up eating dairy products), or the Sunday of Adam’s exile from paradise.11 The observance of strict fasting should help the faithful resist the impulses of their fallen nature by strongly rejecting the absolute rule of the body and matter over the spirit. The Church recalls the recommendation of Jesus: “But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret” (Matt 6:17–18). Fasting is intricately linked with the need for forgiveness: “but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matt 6:15). Sin appears in divisions, signalled by quarrels, discord or hatred. The demolition of the fortress of sin requires forgiveness, which presupposes the return to harmony, unity and love. Forgiveness enables the Kingdom of God to enter the fallen and sinful world. In the liturgical practice of the Orthodox Church, the evening service on the Sunday of Forgiveness gives the priest and the faithful the opportunity to ask for forgiveness. During this communal act of mutual forgiveness of sins and reconciliation, paschal songs are sung, which express anticipation for the celebration of the Resurrection of Christ.12 The Monday following the Sunday of Forgiveness starts the period of forty days of Great Lent which is then followed by Holy Week. The duration of Lent is based

8 Cf. Schmemann, Great Lent , 18–21. 9 Еп. Дионисий (Лукин), “Богослужения Великого Поста как путь души христианской через Голгофу к Воскресению”, Журнал Московской Патриархии 4 (1967) 51–62, on pp. 51–53. 10 Cf. Schmemann, Great Lent, 23–26. 11 Cf. N. Denysenko, “Rituals and Prayers of Forgiveness in Byzantine Lent”, Worship 86 (2012) 140–160. 12 Cf. Schmemann, Great Lent, 27–30.

13

14

Introduction

on Old Testament events. Suffice it to mention that Moses fasted for forty days on Mount Sinai (cf. Exod 34:28), and the prophet Elijah refrained from eating for forty days when he was heading for Mount Horeb. Christ himself also fasted for forty days and forty nights in the desert, tempted by the devil (cf. Matt 4:1–2). In the first centuries of Christianity, Lent was counted differently. In Eastern Christianity, Saturdays and Sundays were not included in this period. In Constantinople, starting in the 7th century, a few weeks of Shrovetide were introduced as an adaptation time, helping to better prepare for the beginning of Lenten spiritual struggle.13 The two Sundays preceding Great Lent, i. e. the Sunday of the Last Judgement and the Sunday of Forgiveness, in reverse order, recapture the history of salvation, as they direct the spiritual gaze of believers towards its beginning (Adam in Paradise) and its end (Christ’s parousia). Just as the individual Sundays of the Pre-Lenten Period have their own names and references to important evangelical themes, each of the Sundays of Great Lent have a special significance which stems from the Gospel and their reference to patterns and symbols which help in the process of spiritual transformation.14 Although the first two Sundays of Great Lent are not directly connected with this period of the ecclesiastical year, they are indirectly connected with it, because they make the faithful aware that the basis of Christian identity is to profess the true faith. Both celebrating the Triumph of Orthodoxy (the first Sunday of Great Lent) and remembering the person and work of St Gregory Palamas (the second Sunday of Great Lent) help Orthodox Christians understand that worshiping God “in spirit and truth” (John 4:23) requires not only knowledge of the Church’s dogmatic teaching, but also calls for defending it when it is attacked. The celebration of the Triumph of Orthodoxy is a celebration of the victory the iconodules claimed over the iconoclasts on the 11th of March, 843, on the first Sunday of Great Lent. As a result of this event, the veneration of icons was restored in Constantinople.15 The appreciation of the struggle of the Archbishop of Thessaloniki, St Gregory Palamas (1296–1359), in defending the teachings and practices of the holy hesychasts, is nothing more than a repeated triumph of Orthodoxy.16 The memory of the Great Defender of hesychasts is an opportunity to remind the faithful of the teaching of Eastern Christianity about the one God in the Most Holy Trinity, who is unknowable in His Being and who manifests Himself through uncreated personal energies. This

13 Cf. K. Ware, The Meaning of the Great Fast, in The Lenten Triodion (trans. Mother Mary/K. Ware; London: Faber & Faber, 1984) 30–34. 14 Cf. G. Bertonière, The Sundays of Lent in the Triodion: The Sundays without a Commemoration (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1997). 15 Cf. J. Gouillard, Le Synodikon de L’Orthodoxe. Edition et commentaire (Paris: Editions E. de Vaccard, 1967), 129–138. 16 Cf. Schmemann, Great Lent, 73.

Introduction

teaching also results in practical recommendations for living in a hesychastic way, that is to say, through spiritual struggle, to submit to the transforming action of God, which is so important in the Lenten period. The third Sunday of Great Lent (the Sunday of the Holy Cross) prepares us to remember the Crucifixion of Jesus on Good Friday and his victory over death. For believers this is an indication to die for passions.17 The fourth Sunday of Great Lent is dedicated to St John Climacus (6th – 7th century) – the famous hesychast, ascetic and superior of St Catherine’s Monastery on Mount Sinai. His work entitled The Ladder of Divine Ascent 18 is one of the spiritual texts particularly recommended for reading in the Lenten Period. The fifth Sunday of Great Lent is dedicated to the person of St Mary of Egypt (344–421), who is the model of fervent contrition and a radical penitential life19 . The faithful are reminded of the whole life of the Penitent, described by the Patriarch of Jerusalem – St Sophronius, on Thursday of the fifth week of Great Lent.20 In the liturgical calendar, she is remembered on the 1rst of April. In the liturgical book of the Orthodox Church for Great Lent, namely the Lenten Triodion ( Τριώδιον κατανυκτικόν),21 two characteristic constitutive elements can be distinguished: the Psalter cycle and other biblical readings from the Old Testament and the liturgical hymnography cycle (canons, stichera, hymns).22 Reference to the times of the Old Covenant is supposed to help the faithful realize that, just like the Chosen People, they are heading towards Christ, who is the fulfilment of the history of salvation. Entering the spiritual situation of the Chosen People proves indispensable because of the sinfulness with which we so often fall away from the new life already received from Christ through our baptism, which means going back to the times of old. The double reading of the Psalter, the Book of Genesis, the Book of Isaiah and the Book of Proverbs has been a sign of the Eastern Church’s concern for the awakening of faith and the quality of moral life of believers for many centuries.23 Listening to the description of God’s activity in the work of creation and showing His concern for the salvation of mankind should help one use the inexhaustible riches of His

17 Cf. Ware, The Meaning, 53. 18 Cf. John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent (trans. C. Luibheid/N. Russell; New York/Ramsey/ Toronto: Paulist Press, 1982), 71–291. (PG 88, 632A–1205D). 19 Cf. J. MacRory, “St Mary of Egypt”, in The Catholic Encyclopedia (New York 1910, http://www. newadvent.org/cathen/09763a.htm) [access on 23 March 2022]. 20 Cf. Sophronios of Jerusalem, “The Life of St Mary of Egypt”, in The Great Canon. The Work of Saint Andrew of Crete (Jordanville, NY: The Printshop of St Job of Pachaev, 2017) 79–94. 21 Cf. Τριώδιον κατανυκτικόν (Αθήαι: Εκ της Εκκλησιαστικής Τυπογραφίας του Φοίνικος, 1994). 22 Cf. Ware, The Meaning, 38. 23 Cf. J. Miller, “The Prophetologion: The Old Testament of Byzantine Christianity”, in P. Magdalino/R. Nelson (ed.), The Old Testament in Byzantium (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & Collection, 2010) 55–76, on pp. 67–68.

15

16

Introduction

wisdom.24 For Orthodox Christians, the Lenten period is a time of special intimacy with the Word of God, a time of listening to the living voice of God so that one’s faith may deepen: “So faith comes from what is heard” (Rom 10:17). The saints, to whom the successive Sundays of Great Lent are dedicated, through their ascetic life and intimacy with the Word of God, give the faithful an example of care for consistent adherence to the true faith (St Gregory Palamas), spiritual ascent towards God through a change of intellect and compunction (St John Climacus), as well as for fervent contrition and a radical penitential life (St Mary of Egypt). These three saints also represent three types of Eastern Christian monasticism: Athonic, that of Sinai and Egyptian, which in their essence are based on abiding in the Word of God and are united by the ideal of a hesychastic life. Great Lent in the tradition of Eastern Christianity is a time which prepares the faithful for a celebration of the Pascha of Christ. Although the liturgical practice of the successive Sundays of the Pre-Lenten Season and Great Lent itself has evolved significantly over the centuries, individual Sundays are characterised by thematic coherence. Through God’s Word and penitential practices the faithful are encouraged to engage in a spiritual struggle. For more than a thousand years, a special help in the process of a holistic opening for the love of God in the Most Holy Trinity during Great Lent is provided by a masterpiece of Byzantine hymnography – the Great Canon. Its author is St Andrew of Crete (660–740), the Bishop of Gortyna, and at the same time one of the most outstanding Byzantine hymnographers.25 When evaluating his work, Makarios Makri emphasized:

24 Cf. Schmemann, Great Lent, 38–41. 25 St Andrew of Crete was born around 660 in Damascus. There he learned grammar, rhetoric and philosophy. At the age of fifteen, he joined the Lavra of St Sabbas the Sanctified near Jerusalem. Around 685, when the files of the Sixth Ecumenical Council (3rd Council of Constantinople – 680–681) were sent to Jerusalem, the Bishop of Jerusalem, Theodor (745–770), appointed Andrew, a monk at that time, as an archdeacon and sent him to Constantinople to pass on to the Emperor Constantine IV Pogonatos the consent of the Church of Jerusalem to the Council’s decisions. After completing his mission, Andrew stayed in Constantinople, where he was ordained an Archdeacon of the Temple of Divine Wisdom (the Hagia Sofia). For twenty years he managed an orphanage and a shelter for the elderly. Then he was ordained the Bishop of Gortyna in Crete (between 692 and 711). In 712 he participated in the synod in Constantinople, which condemned Monothelitism. Although he was initially a supporter of this heresy, after the fall of Emperor Philippikos Bardanes (713) he submitted to the teachings of the Church. Under Emperor Leo III Isaurian (717–741) he was involved in defending the worship of icons. He also organized the defence of Crete against the Saracens, and during plague and famine on the island he went to Constantinople to organise help for the faithful. He died in 740 on the island of Lesbos, on his way back from the capital of the empire. Cf. Ν.Β. Τομαδάκης, “Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης”, in Θρυσκευτική και Ηθική Εγκυκλοπαιδεία (2 vol.; Αθήναι: Εκδότης Αθ. Μαρτίνος, 1963) 674–93; M.-F. Auzépy, “La carrier d’André de Crète”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 88/1 (1995) 1–12; G. Bardy, “André de Crète”, in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité

Introduction

He wrote books with great wisdom and knowledge, in a state of spiritual contemplation. He praised the light of the Immaculate Mother of the Word of God in numerous praises, and he also worshiped the life-giving Cross of the Saviour [...]. He beautified many feasts in honour of the Mother of God and saints with his songs. He wrote the texts and composed the melodies to many canons and troparia, thus adorning the feasts and prompting the people to experience spiritual joy. Desiring to encourage those praying for repentance in their hearts, expressed with the streams of tears, he created the Great Canon, which not only brings about deep contrition and a change of the intellect [...] but also constantly stimulates believers to learn about the whole sacred history in order to contemplate heavenly realities.26

The Great Canon is a special work which has played an important role in the Eastern Christian liturgical tradition for over a thousand years. Initially, believers listened to its contents on Thursday of the fifth week of Great Lent, which helped them reflect deeply on their spiritual state in relation to the Word of God, mobilise for the final stage of their spiritual struggle during Holy Week and experience the Pascha of Christ. After the fall of Constantinople (1453) and the growing spiritual crisis resulting from Turkish captivity, one of the Byzantine hierarchs, in order to stimulate believers to be more intimate with the Word of God and to undertake penitential practices, introduced the Great Canon also in the first week of Great Lent. Interestingly, while in the fifth week of this liturgical period, the Great Canon is performed in its entirety as part of Matins, in the first week it is divided into four parts (Monday to Thursday) and constitutes an integral part of the Great Compline. In this context, an obvious question arises: What is so special about this poem that it begins and ends the 40-day preparation period for the Resurrection of Christ in Eastern Christianity? The search for an answer to this question, which includes a set of other, more specific questions, is the main research objective of this monograph. The present monograph is entitled: Man in a Metanoiacal Dialogue with God. The Biblical and Hesychastic Message of the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete. The aim of this monograph is to analyse the main message of the Great Canon, which provides guidelines for Christians to open up to God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons and thus to discover who He is, as well as to become aware of various kinds of one’s own entrapment in sins. To facilitate the diagnosis of man’s spiritual state, the Great Canon contains references to persons, events and wisdom, which St Andrew of Crete derived from the books of the Old and New Testaments. The Great Canon is a special work of hymnography of the Christian East, as it features hesychastic

Ascétique et Mystique. Doctrine et histoire (1 vol.; Paris: Beauchesne, 1937) 554–5; S. Vailhé, “Saint André de Crète”, Échos d’Orient 5 (1902) 278–87. 26 Quoted after: Ν.Β. Τομαδάκης, “Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης”, 676–677.

17

18

Introduction

terminology, which enables both an in-depth analysis of the state of one’s soul and points to specific spiritual remedies for imaginative thoughts planted by evil spirits and sinful passions that plague man. This hymnographic masterpiece can be seen as an introduction to liturgical hesychasm, through which the faithful gathered in worship, communally and individually, are invited to an intellect-transforming dialogue with God and thus are encouraged to examine themselves in the mirror of the Word of God. Since no critical edition of this work is available, the source basis of the text is taken from Patrologia Graeca,27 which basically corresponds to the text included in the Lenten Triodion.28 The liturgical use of the Great Canon was regulated for the first time by sources from the 9th century (Theodore the Studite’s Ipotyposis),29 which recommend singing this hymn on Thursday of the fifth week of Great Lent. The text of the Great Canon is also found in the oldest known Greek and Slavic Triodia. In the Greek Lenten Triodion, dated back to the 10th century (a manuscript from St Catherine’s Monastery on Mount Sinai – Sinaiticus Gr. 734–735), the Great Canon is separated from the body of the texts of daily worship on Thursday of the fifth week of Great Lent, which according to A.A. Lukashewich may indicate that the hymn was added to the Triodion during this period. In the Lenten Triodion from the 11th century (a manuscript of Vatopedi Monastery – Vatopedi 315–949), the Great Canon is recommended to be sung in fragments from Monday to Friday during the fifth week of Great Lent. A similar division of the order of reading the Great Canon (without the possibility of stating whether it concerns the first or fifth week of Great Lent) can be found on the margins of the Slavic Lenten Triodion dating from the 12th –13th century (РГАДА. Тип. 137). The Greek Lenten Triodion from the 11th century (a manuscript of the Vatopedi Monastery – Vatopedi 771) recommends singing of the Great Canon on the fifth Sunday of Great Lent, which suggests that the liturgical use of this hymn since ancient times was associated with the fifth week of Great Lent, but was not necessarily assigned to a particular day.30 The Great Canon is very difficult to translate into modern languages. An accurate translation is virtually impossible. Greek syntax and lexis retain originality and ambiguity only in the original text. The play on words, which refers to biblical content, is more or less lost in translations into other languages. Each more difficult fragment

27 Cf. Κανών ο Μέγας, PG 97, 1330D–1386C. 28 Cf. “Κανών ο Μέγας. Ποίημα του αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, in Τριώδιον κατανυκτικόν (Αθήαι: Εκ της Εκκλησιαστικής Τυπογραφίας του Φοίνικος, 1994) 626–663.

29 А.М. Пентковский, “Ипотипосис”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная Энциклопедия (26 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2011) 193. 30 А.А. Лукашевич, “Великий Канон”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная Энциклопедия (7 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2004) 453–4.

Introduction

of the poem in translation offers only one of several possible interpretations. In this monograph, the author uses the English translation of the Great Canon, which was made by Mother Mary and Archimandrite Kallistos Ware for the Lenten Triodion31 , and his own literal translation from the original Greek. The quotation of words and phrases from the original Greek text will not, in principle, be given in nominative forms, but will be quoted in their original form. The source text will be quoted in accordance with the division indicated in Annex, and references to the text in the main body of this monograph will be indicated by square brackets. Although the Great Canon has been widely known in Eastern Christianity for over a thousand years, it was not widely commented on either at the end of the first millennium or in the second millennium, i. e. until the 19th century. Only two commentaries have survived. The first one is the commentary of Acacius Sabaita from the early 13th century, published by A. Giannouli in 2007.32 The second one is an anonymous commentary dating back to the 15th century, originating from the Athonic Monastery of Iviron, stored in the Synodic Library in Moscow.33 For several decades, the Great Canon has been a research field for theologians from various countries. The studies in Greek worthy of particular attention include the monographs by L. Chatzekostas,34 P.K. Christou,35 A.W. Glaros,36 S. Kutsas,37 E.K. Prigkipakes38 and T. Tzormpatzoglou,39 and works by A. Kalamata,40

31 Cf. Mother Mary/K. Ware, “The Great Canon by St Andrew of Crete”, in: The Lenten Triodion (London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1984) 378–415. 32 “Magnus Canon in commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, in A. Giannouli, Die beiden byzantinischen Kommentare zum Grossen Kanon des Andreas von Kreta: eine quellenkritische und literaturhistorische Studie (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaftern, 2007) 225–383. Cf. M. Richard, “Le commentaire du grand canon d‘André de Crète par Acace le Sabaïte”, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 34 (1965) 304–311. 33 Владимир архимандрит (ed.), Систематическое описание рукописей Московской Синодальной (Патриаршей) библиотеки, ч. I , Рукописи греческие (Москва: Синод. тип., 1894), 426–7. 34 Cf. Λ. Χατζηκώστας, Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης. Ο Μεγάλος Κανόνας (Λευκοσία: Έκδοση Όμιλος Πνευματικής Ανανεώσεως, 2001).

35 Cf. Π.Κ. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανόν Ανδρέου του Κρήτης (Θεσσαλονίκη: Έκδοση Ἀνάτυπο, 1952). 36 Cf. Α.Β. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, Παιδαγωγικά στοιχεία στο Μεγάλο Κανόνα του Ανδρέα Κρήτης (Θεσσαλονίκη: Ακρίτας, 2000).

37 Cf. Σ. Κούτσας, Αδαμιαίος θρήνος. Ο Μέγας Κανόν Ανδρέου του Κρήτης. Εισαγωγή-κείμενομετάφραση-σχόλια (Αθήναι: Αποστολική Διακονία, 1988).

38 Cf. Ε.Κ. Πριγκιπάκης, Η Θεοτόκος και το μυστήριο της Οικονομίας κατά τον Άγιο Ανδρέα Κρήτης (Ρέθυμνον: Έκδοση Ι.Μ. Τιμίου Προδρόμου Ατάλης Μπαλή, 2011).

39 Cf. Π. Τσορμπατζόγλου, “Ο Ανδρέας Κρήτης (660–740) και απίθανος χρόνος συγγραφής του Μεγάλου Κανόνος”, Βυζαντινά 24 (2004) 7–42.

40 Cf. Α. Καλαμάτα, “Η θεολογική διδασκαλία του αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, in: Ο Άγιος Ανδρέας, αρχιεπίσκοπος Κρήτης ο Ιεροσολυμίτης, πολιούχος Ερεσού Λέσβου (Μυτιλήνη-Λέσβος: Ιερά Μητρόπολη Μυτιλήνης, 2005) 221–35.

19

20

Introduction

Th. Ksides,41 S. Mpalatsoukas,42 P. Nellas,43 A. Papadopoulos-Kerameos,44 P. Paschos,45 N. Politos,46 Ch. Themelis47 and Th. Zisis.48 Monographic studies in Russian referring to the Great Canon are predominantly intended for the general public. This applies to the monographs by I. Troitskoy,49 Hegumen Filip (Simonov)50 and K. Vereemeenko,51 as well as articles by M.I. Bogoslovskiy,52 V. Milov,53 with the exception of the studies by T. Borisova,54 Monachinia Ignatiya (Petrovskaya)55 and

41 Cf. Θ. Ξίδης, “Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης: ο πρώτος κανονογράφος”, Νέα Εστία 45 (1949) 292–8. 42 Cf. Σ. Μπαλατσούκας, “Άνθρωπος και κτήση στον Μέγα Κανόνα του αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, in Ο Άγιος Ανδρέας, αρχιεπίσκοπος Κρήτης ο Ιεροσολυμίτης, πολιούχος Ερεσού Λέσβου (ΜυτιλήνηΛέσβος: Ιερά Μητρόπολη Μυτιλήνης, 2005) 329–43. 43 Cf. P. Nellas, “The Anthropological and Cosmological Context of Union with God. A Study of the Service of the Great Canon”, in Deification in Christ. The Nature of the Human Person (trans. N. Russel; Crestwood, NY: St Vladmir’s Press, 1987) 161–196. 44 Cf. Α. Παπαδόπουλος-Κεραμεύς, “Ο Μέγας Κανόν του Αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, Εκκλησιαστικός Φάρρος 3 (1910) 501–513.

45 Cf. Μ. Ψάχος, “Ο Μέγας Κανών του Αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης. Μικρή εισαγωγή στην κατανυκτική ποίησή του”, Ριζάρειος Εκκλησιαστική παιδεία 4 (1988) 315–326. 46 Cf. Ν. Πολίτος, “Έκστασις και ανάστασις κατά τον «Μέγαν Κανώνα». Φιλοσοφικές προσεγγίσεις”, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 47 (1987–1988) 149–200.

47 Cf. Χ. Θέμελης, “Σχόλια εις τον Μέγαν Κανώνα Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, Αγιορείτικη Βιβλιοθήκη 16 (1951), 46–50, 103–7, 208–211, 273–6; 19 (1954), 368–370; 20 (1955), 10–13, 72–5, 167–70, 281–3, 354–7; 21 (1956), 13–16, 116–8, 138–40, 220–6, 282–4, 348–52. 48 Cf. Θ. Ζήσης, “Ανδρέας Κρήτης ο Ιεροσολυμίτης (660–740). Περί της ζωής και του έργου του”, Επιστημονική Επετερίς Θεολογικής Σχολής Αριστοτελείου Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλονίκης 4 (1995) 9–19.

49 И. Троицкой, О мудрости. Размышления над двумя тропарями Великого канона Андрея Критского (Москва: Издательство Православного Свято-Тихоновского Богословского Института, 1998).

50 Филипп (Симонов) игумен, Училище покаяния. Схолии на полях Великого канона (Москва: Паломникъ, 2008).

51 К. Веремеенко, Уроки покаяния в Великом каноне Андрея Критского (Москва: Издательство Московской Патриархии РПЦ, 2013).

52 М.И. Богословский, “Великий канон святого Андрея Критского”, Христианское чтение 1 (1836) 129–84.

53 В. Милов, Чтения по литургическому богословию (Москва: Издательство Сретенского монастыря, 2012), 162–78. 54 Cf. T. Borisova, “Old Church Slavonic Translation of the Great Canon of Repentance by St Andrew of Crete: The Earliest Stages of History”, Cyrillomethodianum 19 (2014) 53–65. 55 Игнатия (Петровская) монахиня, “Место Великого канона преподобного Андрея Критского и других его произведений в песнотворческом достоянии Церкви”, Альфа и Омега 1/23 (2000) 298–319; 2/24 (2000) 289–310; “Гимнографическое творчество преподобного Андрея Критского”, Богословские труды 25 (1984) 260–75.

Introduction

V.M. Kirillin.56 Research on the Great Canon is also conducted by two Romanian theologians: I. Durlea57 and A. Prolipcean.58 It is worth noting the studies written in French: O. Clément,59 J. Getcha60 and V. Iljine,61 and in English: D. Costache,62 M.B. Cunningham,63 D. Krueger64 and F. Mathewes-Green.65 The list of scholarly

56 В.М. Кириллин, “Великий Покаянный канон Святителя Андрея Архиепископа Критского в древнерусской переработке”, Древняя Русь. Вопросы медиевистики 3/13 (2003) 79–94.

57 Cf. I. Durlea, “Metanoia în Canonul cel Marel al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, Anuarul Facult ăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Universitatea Bucureşti (2001) 569–77. 58 Cf. A. Prolipcean, Η δογματική διδασκαλία του Μεγάλου Κανόνα του Αγίου Ανδρέα Κρήτης (Θεσσαλονίκη: Αφοι Κυριακίδη Εκδόσεις Α.Ε., 2017); Antropologia î n Canonul cel Mare al Sf ântului Andrei Criteanul (Botosani: Axa, 2004); “Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul – aspecte tehnice”, Ortodoxia 1/2 (2009) 100–134; “Creatia ca Euharistie în Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, Teologie şi Viaţă 21/1–4 (2011) 105–113; “Erori traductologice în Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, in C. Tărnăuceanu (ed.), Antiquitas Vivens, (Iasi: Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza Iasi, 2014) 195–211; “«From Adam to Moses»: the Typology of the Old Testament Characters from the Kontakia of Romanos the Melodist and its Assessment on the Great Canon of Andrew of Crete”, Revista Ecumenica Sibiu 7/3 (2015) 388–421; “О evaluare a imnografiei creştine: Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul sau despre Biblia în miniatură”, Mitropolia Olteniei 61/1–4 (2009) 204–248; “Sensul şi întrebuinţarea conceptului de μετάνοια în Canonu cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, Anuarul Facult ăţi de Teologie Ortodoxâ “ Patriarhul Justinian” din Bucureşti 7 (2007) 641–66. 59 Cf. O. Clément, Le chant des larmes. Essai sur le repentir. Suivi de la traduction du poème sur le repentir par saint André de Crète (Paris: Desclé de Brouwer, 1982); “Notes sur le Grand Canon de Saint André de Crète”, Contacts 32 (1980), 206–234, 294–330. 60 Cf. J. Getcha, “Le grand canon penitential de saint André de Crète: Une lecture typologique de l’histoire du salut”, in C. Braga/A. Pistola (ed.), La liturgie, interprète de l’Écriture. II. Dans la compositions liturgiques, prières et chants. Conférences Saint-Serge. 49e Semaine d’Études Liturgiques (Roma: Clv, 2003) 105–120. 61 Cf. V. Iljine, “Le mystère de la pénitence et le Grand Canon de Saint André de Crète”, Messager de l’Exarchat du Patriarche Russe en Europe Occidentale 6 (1955) 8–16. 62 Cf. D. Costache, “Byzantine Insights into Genesis 1–3: St Andrew of Crete’s Great Canon”, Phronema 24 (2009) 35–50; “Reading the Scriptures with Byzantine Eyes: The Hermeneutical Significance of St Andrew of Crete’s Great Canon”, Phronema 23 (2008) 51–66. 63 Cf. M.B. Cunningham, “Andreas of Crete’s homilies on Lazarus and Palm Sunday: the preacher and his audience”, Studia Patristica 31 (1997) 22–41; “Andrew of Crete: a high-style preacher of the eighth century”, in Preacher and audience (Leiden: Brill, 1998) 267–293. 64 Cf. D. Krueger, “The Great Kanon of Andrew of Crete. The Penitential Bible, and the Liturgical Formation of the Self in the Byzantine Dark Age”, in B. Bitton-Ashkelony/L. Perrone (ed.), Between Personal and Institutional Religion: Self Doctrine, and Practice in Late Antique Eastern Christianity (Turnhout: Brepols, 2013) 57–97. 65 Cf. F. Mathewes-Green, First Fruits of Prayer: A Forty-Day Journey Through the Canon of St Andrew (Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press, 2006).

21

22

Introduction

contributions relating directly or indirectly to the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete can be supplemented by the articles of P. Milko (in Slovak).66 The monographs and articles on the Great Canon published so far concentrate on the description of penitential, dogmatic and liturgical themes. The authors also draw attention to the richness of its biblical contents, which serve as an aid in guiding believers towards God in the Most Holy Trinity.67 What is the Great Canon and how is it unique? The Great Canon is a masterpiece of Byzantine hymnography, which consists of nine odes containing 245 (234) short troparia. The first troparia of each ode serves as an introduction to the theme, while the following troparia develops this theme through examples from Scripture, supplications and requests and assurances to God.68 St Andrew of Crete was not only a poet, but also a composer. The melodies of the heirmoi, i. e. the initial troparia of each canon ode, were models for other hymnographers who wrote troparia to the melodies he composed. To this day 60 heirmoi written by St Andrew of Crete, along with their own melody, have been preserved in Orthodox liturgical books. Each heirmos, referred to as an idiomelon, is characterised by great melodic richness. The Great Canon is distinguished by simplicity and very careful selection of words. Without imitating anyone, the author, in the rhythmic form of a troparion, was able to express both dogmatic truths and refer to important figures and biblical themes in order to make his soul aware, through a dialogue, of its sinfulness and encourage it to undertake spiritual struggles. Previously published scholarly and pastoral reflections on the Great Canon, although they help in understanding this work, also make us aware that it is difficult to discover all the richness hidden therein. This monograph is an innovative attempt to analyse and interpret the Great Canon. It is not intended as a commentary on the individual troparia, although it examines their contents as part of contextual research. Nor will this work be a synthetic presentation of the dogmatic truths contained in the Great Canon, although the main focus will be on trinitarian, Christological, pneumatological as well as anthropological issues. The present monograph can be viewed as an existential and personalistic key to the Great Canon. This masterpiece is in fact a treasury of wisdom of the Word of God, through which a Christian can learn about the God in whom he believes and reflect on himself as a creature of God, as well as learn the kinds of spiritual threats he is subject to and what is necessary for him to follow the path of salvation. The theology of the Great Canon is above all existential in nature, as its source is the personal experience of St Andrew of Crete, who for 66 Cf. P. Milko, “Słužba Velkého Kánonu sv. Ondřeje Krétského z perspektivy hesychasmu”, Annales Historici Prešoviensis (2005) 43–66. 67 Cf. Costache, “Reading the Scriptures”, 57–60. 68 Cf. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανών Ανδρέου του Κρήτης, 21.

Introduction

a certain period of time succumbed to dogmatic misapprehension, convinced of the rightness of Monothelitism.69 The realization of various dangers to which he and others for whom he was an authority were subject to, made him consider himself the greatest sinner at the end of his life (i. e. at the time when he created the Great Canon)70 and he felt the need to expiate and help others in professing their true faith.71 This kind of spiritual sensitivity cannot be treated only as a poetic convention, which consists in identifying the lyrical subject with the author. The spiritual depth of the Great Canon is particularly evident when it is chanted during liturgical services. It is then that St Andrew’s personal confessions transform into the confession of the collective subject, owing to which each listener treats the poetic utterance as a description of the condition of his or her soul. The masterpiece of St Andrew of Crete is infused with a deep reverie over one’s own identity and spiritual condition. Although it includes the motifs of an examination of conscience, including contrition and deep repentance, these things do not dominate the basic message. The recognition of one’s own immeasurable sinfulness is contrasted with the magnificence of the One God in the Most Holy Trinity, who “desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4). Having returned to the true faith, though with all sincerity acknowledging that no one was as sinful as himself, the Bishop of Gortyna did not concentrate on himself, but on the blessed God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercy and God of all consolation, who comforts man in every affliction (cf. 2 Cor 1:3–4). Although he found in himself the sentence of death, and thus acknowledged his sin and his falling away from God, as a result of which he discovered that he could not trust himself, he did not fall into despair, but, thanks to the Word of God, he trusted in God who raises the dead (cf. 2 Cor 1:9). It seems that the existential findings of the Apostle of the Nations: “Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death so that we would rely not on ourselves but on God” (2 Cor 1:9)” can serve as a leitmotif to make the reading of the metanoiacal and soteriological message of the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete more obvious. Entering the depths of one’s own soul, which, as a result of excessive reliance on reason, has strayed, leading to 69 Cf. C. Hovorun, Will, Action and Freedom. Christological Controversies in the Seventh Century (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2008), 5–51; F. Winkelmann, Der monenergetisch-monotheletische Streit (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001). 70 Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανών, 9. “The circumstances and the time of creation of this canon are unknown. Of course, the work also contains elements and personal instructions, but these must be treated with great caution”. 71 According to P.K. Christou, there was a transitional period in the life of St Andrew of Crete, during which he moved away from God. Christou believes that the Great Canon cannot be seen as a work related to its author’s return from Monothelitism, because St Andrew’ss metanoia should be of different character. The Greek theologian does not give any factual arguments underpinning the credibility of his thesis. Cf. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανών, 9–10.

23

24

Introduction

the creation of a distorted image of God, combined with the realization that it has contributed to a lustful and sinful life, was probably a turning point in the earthly existence of the Archbishop of Crete. If this had not been the case, would His work have such a powerful effect on believers for so long? Is dialogue with his own soul, which is the structural axis of the Great Canon, merely a rhetorical exercise aimed at arousing the interest of his listeners? Is it not rather a poetic form of standing before God who knows “what was in everyone” (John 2:25) in the truth of the Word of God? Opening up to the Word of God and listening to the story of salvation presented in it makes it possible to create structures of faith within the human person, because “faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ” (Rom 10:17).72 Thus, how does St Andrew of Crete encourage believers, through his Great Canon, to be intimate with the Word of God? How, through his own experience of the fall, does he want to help others in fighting their demons and remaining in communion with God? In what terms does he describe salvation? What is the intellect for him? The Great Canon is helpful in discovering the truth about oneself by invoking biblical pericopes and phrases, as well as by referring to Philokalic wisdom. The cognitive aspect of the Bishop of Gortyna’s masterpiece is strengthened with its emotive function. Numerous questions and examples of negative and positive attitudes of the protagonists of the Old and New Testament serve this purpose.73 Although the Great Canon includes references to specific biblical images, both to people and situations, the way they are interpreted is left to the imagination and associations of the listener. The hermeneutical key is the assumption that the listener is well acquainted with Scripture, and therefore is able to receive and interpret the message in his or her mind.74 This is also achieved through elliptical statements, which greatly contribute to the universality and timelessness of the Great Canon. A consistent internal dialogue between the narrator and his soul is not only an invitation, but also a model to follow. It shows how to transcend oneself and one’s own limitations and how to open up to God, which is possible only by the power of the Word of God. The believer is motivated to fight against demons and is guided towards the complete Truth. Only in the light of God’s Word is it possible to make

72 Cf. G. Florovsky, “Revelation and Interpretation”, in Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1972) 17–36. 73 Cf. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανών, 24–7. 74 Krueger, The Great Kanon, 87: “In the Great Kanon, Andrew gathers the sweep of salvation history into a single literary unit, bringing the entire cast of biblical characters to bear on the formation and wounding of the Christian conscience”.

Introduction

a reliable diagnosis of one’s spiritual state and to acknowledge oneself as a sinner.75 By referring to carefully selected people, symbols and situations from the history of salvation, St Andrew of Crete gives man the opportunity to have a deeper insight into oneself and one’s life.76 Biblical associations directly and indirectly refer to the current state of awareness of the listener of the Great Canon. These associations acquire new meanings, conditioned by one’s current stream of flowing thought, situation, spiritual-psycho-physical condition and/or level of concentration. Each reception of the masterpiece of the Archbishop of Crete is thus unique. While it is listened to during a church service, its reception is additionally influenced by the sacred space engulfed in twilight, illuminated only by burning candles, the presence of other believers and its rhythmic melodious recitation by priests.77 Listening to the Bishop of Gortyna’s dialogue with one’s own soul, in which the “rational self ” seems to be above the “spiritual self ”, raises many questions and associations with both the biblical and existential phrases heard.78 Believers, listening to the content of the Great Canon and submitting to its rhythms, have an opportunity to enter into inner harmony and a specific kind of concentration. Listening to the successive troparia, they realize who is the God in whom they believe. The multitude of images they are unable to control leads to the conviction that God is always greater than anything one can think of Him. Analysis of the Great Canon requires an appropriately selected research method. This masterpiece is multi-layered, and its particular value relates to the different kinds of tensions, connections and interplay found between the three layers of its contents – biblical, existential and spiritual. The Great Canon is a poetic work in which the most important structural element are rhythmic troparia which encompass several verses. Analysis of the contexts in which important concepts appear 75 Krueger, The Great Kanon, 68: “The Great Kanon recounts the major events and personages of the Bible to accuse the conscience of sin and to prompt the soul to seek divine rescue”. 76 Krueger, The Great Kanon, 76: “Andrew’s treatment of specific biblical figures illuminates his techniques and objectives. Because he aims to draw a moral judgement on the narrative self, his engagement with the biblical narrative remains fairly basic. He does not appear to draw significantly from ancient commentarial traditions. He refers to enough detail in the story to make contrast between what his soul has been doing and what he ought to have been doing, but he eschews a deeper inquiry into to text so typical of Jewish and Christian exegesis in Late Antiquity. He does not expand the narrative by adding additional, extrabiblical detail, in the mode of midrash, nor does he compose additional dialogue giving depth to the characters as in earlier liturgical hymnography, as in the Syriac soghita or Greek kontakion. He generally avoids a typological reading of Old Testament figures and episodes as prefiguring Christ. Instead, the Bible comes mediated only by a hermeneutic of self-accusation”. 77 Cf. Mathewes-Green, First Fruits of Prayer, 37. 78 Krueger, The Great Kanon, 63: “The Great Kanon illustrates and dramatizes a style of the self formed in a typological and dialectical relationship with the biblical narrative, particularly as that narrative might be experienced liturgically”.

25

26

Introduction

presupposes repeated references to the same verses. Unlike works of prose, the scientific analysis of hymnographic works requires a return to the same threads, although each time a different keyword is the point of reference. The richness of the content of the short verses, which are not a narrative description but a symbolic reference to persons, events, attitudes or choices made, presupposes the need to repeatedly refer to the same biblical text. It is also worth stressing that the poetic stanzas do not contain definitions of key terms. Their designations can only be determined by examining the contexts in which they occur. In this way, new aspects of the analysed reality can be captured. The adopted research method consists in the selection of key terms and then searching for all the verses in which they occur. It is only on a thus prepared basis that a synthesis is carried out, enriched with references to the theological and spiritual tradition of Eastern Christianity. Examination of concepts and texts is then used to find answers to the question of how to interpret a given issue. This is not easy though, because theological and existential synthesis is made on the basis of various short and multi-threaded verses of the Great Canon. In order to link all these components into a coherent whole and present the fullest possible picture of the reality being analysed, it is necessary to correlate different threads concerning the same subject. Consequently, on this basis, it is then possible to make binding conclusions on specific topics and to summarise the monograph. Review of the current state of research on the Great Canon has led to the discovery that its essential contents have not yet been presented in conjunction with a contextual analysis of the vocabulary used within. If this masterpiece of Byzantine hymnography is a specific record showing the drama of man in relation to God, the terminology used therein to describe both man and God is important. The analytical work consisting in the selection of concepts and the examination of all the contexts in which they occur, as well as their classification into logical content sequences, is the basis for the existential and personalist interpretation of the Great Canon made in this monograph. The examination of individual words includes not only assigning them to thematic groups, but also analysing the frequency of their occurrence and indicating where they come from and how they are used. For a thorough analysis it is important to find an answer to the question: What kind of vocabulary was used by the hymnographer from Crete? While it is clear that the Great Canon uses biblical vocabulary, we can also ask the question if whether it is the only kind of vocabulary we can find in the work. In order for the monograph to maintain a coherent structure, three groups of problems were selected. The first one is of a more formal character, the other two form the substantive body of investigation. The starting point of theological exploration is analysis of the genesis, structural elements and liturgical use of the Great Canon. Part One examines the genesis of the canon as a hymnographic genre. Successive stages in the development of hymnography are presented, starting from the first centuries of Christianity. In

Introduction

order to show the origins of the canon, questions are asked about the role of psalms, biblical songs and the oldest Christian hymns in the Church of the first centuries. Further, the special role of the troparion in the development of Eastern Christian hymnography is discussed. Understanding the characteristic structures of Byzantine hymnography presupposes a reference to the impact of Syrian hymnography on the development of the strophic structure of sacred poetry. This forms a basis for reflection on kontakion, which was a kind of sung sermon that incorporated some doxological elements. Due to the fact that the Great Canon is a poetic work, presentation and analysis of the elements of its morphological structure cannot be omitted in its scholarly analysis. Canon as a hymnographic genre consists of odes, heirmoi, troparia (including triadika, theotokia) and verses: “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me”, which gradually replaced the pre-Jerusalem practice of interweaving the troparia of a canon with verses of biblical songs. The presence of The Great Canon in the liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church raises questions about its use in the first and fifth week of Great Lent. Part Two constitutes a theological analysis aimed at presenting the image of God and His salvific will as found in the Great Canon. An important component of this analysis is the reconstruction of St Andrew of Crete’s vision of God, which enables one to interpret the metanoical and soteriological message of his work. This part opens with a presentation of the mystery of God as the Most Holy Trinity. The next three sections are devoted to the three Divine Persons, that is God the Father, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit. While the text of the Great Canon only mentions the Persons of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, the Person of the Son of God is shown in all the richness of His titles. The Bishop of Gortyna used as many as fifteen terms to describe the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. They will be analysed both in relation to the Christology of the New Testament and to the contexts in which they are present in the Great Canon. The images of the Son of God, which are shown as: Jesus, Christ, the Son of the Theotokos, the Son of David, the Lord, the Almighty, the Saviour, the Lamb of God, the King, the Judge, the Word, the Physician, the Creator, the Lover of Mankind and the Good Shepherd, amaze with their Christological richness and at the same time reveal the salvific will of God. The extraction of the images of God from the poetic stanzas of the Great Canon is the starting point for the analysis of the mystery of the human person made in Part Three. Beginning with reflection on man’s creation and his existence in God’s image and likeness, the fact of his ontological collapse, as a result of which he lost his original bond with God, is important for anthropological analysis. Presenting man as God’s creature provides a good basis for discussing the structural elements of his personal identity encompassing his intellect, spirit, soul and body/flesh. Analysis of the Great Canon also allows allows for identification of the cause of man’s drama and various spiritual threats. In this part of the monograph, these causes are not only extracted and properly ranked, but also submitted to a contextual analysis to

27

28

Introduction

show that they form a coherent diagnostic concept typical of hesychastic spirituality. The terms used by the hymnographer are characteristic of the Philokalic works of Eastern Christianity. The presence of such terms as: “thoughts”, “delusions”, “temptations”, “imaginations”, “pleasures”, “unrestrained longings”, “animal appetites”, “brutish desires”, “lack of self-control”, “stubborn wilfulness”, “rejection of the commandments”, “trespasses”, “evil deeds”, “wickedness”, “sins” and “passions”, but also: “gluttony”, “adultery”, “love of money” and “murder” proves that it is justified to formulate the hypothesis that St Andrew of Crete was deeply rooted in the hesychastic tradition, which dates back to the early monastic traditions of the Desert Fathers.79 His embedding in the monastic life of Jerusalem and Constantinople testifies to the fact that he was not only familiar with Philokalic literature, but also practiced the constant prayer of Jesus and undertook the ascetic struggles typical of hesychasm. Philokalic terminology was used in the Great Canon not only to present a wide range of spiritual dangers, but also to indicate the spiritual remedies through which man can follow the path of salvation. Thus, in the fourth section of Part Three, specific recommendations for spiritual therapy are indicated. Although its individual elements are hidden in the Great Canon, they can be found and systematised in some logical order. It is clear from the masterpiece of the Bishop of Gortyna that entering the path of salvation begins with listening to the Word of God. Careful listening to the Gospel and reflecting on the wisdom present in the Old and New Testament contributes to a change of the intellect and compunction, accompanied by tears, crying and lamentation. This process is strengthened by thinking about the end of life and death and meditating on the Last Judgement. Among the hesychastic recommendations relating to the soul, St Andrew of Crete stresses the role of vigilance and sobriety. Other important elements on the path of salvation include abasement, prayer and fasting. A well-targeted action contributes to living a virtuous life, the achievement of ever greater chastity/virtue and prudence/self-control. By undertaking spiritual struggles, man can receive the gift of contemplation. Of course, it should be remembered that the Great Canon is, above all, a poetic meditation on one’s own sinfulness and, at the same time, provides a hopeful insight into the mystery of the good, just and merciful God who wants to snatch sinners out of the clutches of sin, free them from the fetters of passions and bring them into His Kingdom. Hymnographic works are not ready-made recipes for spiritual illnesses. In the tradition of Eastern Christianity, they are, first and foremost, verses of praise, the aim of which is to show the magnificence of God, who constantly cares about His creatures. It is for this very reason that the Great Canon is an invitation to enter into the mysteries of the Word of God, an invitation to diagnose one’s spiritual condition and an invitation to take advantage of the healing

79 Cf. Milko, “Słužba Velkého Kánonu”, 53–65.

Introduction

and salvific remedies available in the Church. This work, in a brilliant way, combines the hesychastic tradition with the liturgical tradition, giving the faithful in Great Lent the opportunity to come out of the closed self to meet with the man-loving God. The Mother of God responded to God’s love in the most perfect way. She thus remains an unsurpassed model and at the same time an ardent intercessor for mankind. Just as each of the nine odes of the Great Canon ends with a theotokion, i. e. a troparion that refers to the Mother of God, in the last part of this monograph Her Person will be to the subject of theological reflection. It is also worth remembering that the Great Canon offers a synthesis of Byzantine hermeneutics. The method of interpretation of biblical texts used in it refers to the ultimate goal of the Word of God, which is to transform the life of a Christian according to the Wisdom of God,80 which is a process that requires a complete embracing of God by the subordination of all spheres of one’s life to His will.

80 Cf. Costache, Reading the Scriptures, 51.

29

I.

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece of Eastern Christian Hymnography

The starting point for our reflection on the Great Canon is a presentation of the origins and subsequent stages of the Christian hymnographic tradition. Only on this basis can the morphological structure and the implementation of the Great Canon in the liturgical tradition of Great Lent be analysed. These three issues of a formal nature form the basis for substantive analyses of terminology and the theological and existential themes present in this masterpiece of Eastern Christian hymnography.

1.

Genesis of the Canon

Description of the Canon as a mature form of Byzantine hymnography requires the outlining of the historical context of the prayer traditions of the Christian East. To this end, the role of psalms, biblical songs and original Christian hymns in the Church of the first centuries must be discussed, followed by reflection on the emergence of troparion as a hymnographic genre which contributed to greater involvement of the faithful in common prayer. Another important issue for understanding the canon is to present the characteristic features of Syrian hymnography and its possible impact on the development of Byzantine hymnography. Only in this context can the kontakion be viewed as a sung sermon that incorporates doxological elements. After presenting the most essential features of the kontakion, it will be possible to address the structural and thematic richness of the canon. 1.1

Psalms in the Church of the First Centuries

The Book of Psalms is a collection of poetic texts for various occasions, hence psalms respond to specific existential human needs. A large group of psalms form lamentations. Although their structure is not always the same, some characteristic features can be distinguished. These psalms usually begin by crying out to God and complaining about the suffering experienced by a person or community of believers. Another element is the psalmist’s intercessory request to God for His salvific intervention and the expression of trust in God’s grace. There is often an acknowledgement of guilt or a curse upon enemies. Another group of psalms are hymns, or prayers of glory. They have an uncomplicated structure. They start with an exhortation to worship God, then they give reasons for praising the Lord and end

32

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

with a renewed encouragement to worship. There are also psalms of thanksgiving, in which the psalmist in various ways expresses his gratitude to God for His great works, which take place both in the life of an individual and in the entire community. They begin by expressing gratitude for God’s salvific activity, which is usually described in more detail in following verses, and end with a call to the whole community to thank God.1 The singing of psalms was an important part of the worship of God by the People of the Old Covenant.2 It is therefore perfectly obvious that the first Christians, especially those who were descendants of the Jewish nation, used to sing psalms or songs that were created on the basis of the biblical psalms. Already in the synoptic Gospels there are pericopes, which clearly describe that Jesus and His disciples sang psalms for the Pascha (i. e. Psalms 113–118 – LXX).3 On the basis of the Acts of the Apostles, it is known that Paul and Silas sang hymns to God in prison (cf. Acts 16:25). In the Epistle to the Colossians, the Apostle teaches that psalms, hymns and songs full of spirit play a significant role in the reception of the Good News: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom; and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to God” (Col 3:16). Similarly, the author of the Epistle to the Ephesians calls for filling oneself with the Spirit, which is facilitated by psalms, hymns and spiritual songs – such singing makes it possible to praise God in one’s heart (cf. Eph 5:18–19). It is worth noting that although in the New Testament there are some hymns modelled on the psalms, there is no single book that would be similar in its entirety to the Book of Psalms of the Old Testament. In the early days of Christianity, psalms were sung in a synagogue-like manner, in which the cantor sang the whole psalm, and the congregation sang an additional phrase after each verse. The character of the singing was varied and ranged from simple recitation to sophisticated cantillation, which was similar to the Old Testament practice of temple worship. Christians adopted the Jewish custom of singing psalms with two alternating choirs.4 Egon Wellesz points to four elements of the

1 Cf. C. Cory, “Uncovering Early Christianity’s Hymn Tradition”, The Bible Today 51/3 (2013) 141–143. 2 The Talmud attests to three types of singing of psalms: direct (each verse is sung by a soloist or choir), responsive (verses are sung alternately by a cantor and choir) and antiphonal (verses are sung alternately by a choir divided into two groups). See J.P. Swain, “Psalmody”, in Historical Dictionary of Sacred Music (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2006), 181; L.J. Weinberger, Jewish Hymnography: A Literary History (London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization in association with Liverpool University Press, 1998); S. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship (Nashville, TN: Eerdmans, 1962). 3 Cf. Mark 14:26; Matt 26:30. 4 For various practices related to the singing of psalms in the Church of the first centuries, see E. Werner, The Sacred Bridge. The Interdependence of Liturgy and Music in Synagogue and Church during the First Millennium (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1959), 133–139; J. Mateos, “La psalmodie dans le rite byzantine”, Proche-Orient Chrétien 15 (1964) 107–126.

Genesis of the Canon

musical structure of psalms – an initial clausula leading to the note on which a verse is chanted; the tenor, or repeated recitative (slightly chanted) tone; an occasional mediant, or half-cadence; and the finalis, a cadence marking the end of the verse.5 Psalms, together with other Old Testament songs, were an important part of God’s worship, especially in monastic environments.6 The ubiquity of biblical texts was ensured by the ascetic practice of learning them by heart.7 The interiorisation of psalms and other biblical songs was one of the most important elements of monastic practice, since complete immersion in these texts made it possible to acquire tools to interpret experiences and events. The words, metaphors and symbols taken by the monks from the Word of God became the basis for both self-expression and dialogue with others.8 Christian scholars of liturgy and monasticism emphasize the fact that “the psalmodic movement” appeared in the Church in the 4th century.9 These authors closely link the origins of the Egyptian monastic movement to the use of psalms to express human experience in theological terms. St Athanasius the Great (293–373) presents a typical patristic approach to the Psalter. He proves that psalms are a compendium of biblical history, because they thematically refer to the most important events in the history of the Chosen People. He compares them to “a garden” (ὁ παράδεισος) containing everything that can be found in other Old Testament books. He also stresses that the so-called royal psalms are prophecies that should be referred to Christ,10 for what only becomes visible in the Incarnation is already audible in the Psalter.11 An important contribution of

5 E. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1962), 36. 6 Cf. J. Wortley, “Psalmody and the Desert Fathers”, Psaltiki: the online journal 4 (2012) 10–16; J. Quasten, Music and Worship in Pagan and Christian Antiquity (Washington D.C.: Pastoral, 1983), 59–73; S. Gillingham, Psalms Through the Centuries: Volume One (Malden, MA – Oxford: Blackwell, 2008), 13–46. 7 Cf. C. Stewart, Cassian the Monk (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 101–103. 8 Cf. G. Lindbeck, “Scripture, Consensus, and Community”, in R.J. Neuhaus (ed.), Biblical Interpretation in Crisis, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989) 74–101. 9 Cf. J. McKinnon, “Desert Monasticism and the Later Fourth-Century Psalmodie Movement”, Music and Letters 75 (1994) 505–521; J. Dyer, “The Psalms in Monastic Prayer”, in N. Van Deusen (ed.), The Place of the Psalms in the Intellectual Culture of the Middle Ages (Albany, NY: Suny Press, 1999) 59–89; J. Dyer, “The Desert, the City and Psalmody in the Late Fourth Century”, in S. Gallagher (ed.), Western Plainchant in the First Millenium (Burlington, VT: Routletdge, 2004) 11–43; L. Dysinger, Psalmody and Prayer in the Writings of Evagrius Ponticus (Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 2005), 48–61. 10 Cf. B. Fischer, “Psalmus vox Christi patientis: selon l’Épitre à Marcellinus de S. Athanase”, in Ch. Kannengiesser (ed.), Politique et Théologie chez Athanase d’Alexandrie. Actes du Colloque de Chantilly 23–25 septembre 1973 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1974) 305–311. 11 H.-J. Sieben, “Athanasius über den Psalter: Analyse seines Briefes an Marcellus. Zum 1600. Todesjahr des Bischofs von Alexandrien”, Theologie und Philosophie 48 (1973) 157–73, on p. 166: “Im Psalter ist schon vor der Menschwerdung hörbar, was in der Menschwerdung sichtbar wird”.

33

34

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

Athanasius was pointing out the difference between the Psalter and other parts of the Old Testament. The Psalter is a kind of a “model (εικόν) to guide souls”, for psalms teach us “how” (πως) to understand someone’s experience and “what” (τι) to give as an answer. According to St Athanasius, the psalms were anticipated by Christ before the Incarnation as a prefiguration of His own way of living in the flesh. It is thanks to the psalms that Christians can understand the human life of Christ as a model to follow. For in the Incarnation, Christ became a model (τύπος) of both the earthly and heavenly man.12 While the writings of the Old Testament prophets are significant as an announcement of the coming of Christ, the words of the psalms, with the exception of the Messianic or prophetic ones, can be assimilated by those who sing them. In this way, the events they depict can be seen as one’s own experience reflected in a mirror. By singing the psalms with one’s own voice, one has the opportunity to perceive these events and process them using one’s own “senses” or “feelings”. In the same way, those who listen to the psalms, either sung or recited, recognize themselves in the words they hear. St Athanasius points to the diagnostic and therapeutic aspect of personal identification with the words of psalms, as they contribute to the transformation of one’s life.13 The exceptional significance of the Psalter derives from its performative nature. For what is “foretold” or “told” in other biblical books is sung in the Psalms.14 Singing strengthens the personal nature of the texts. By referring to the traditional antique Greek synthesis of musical harmony with emotional states and passions, St Athanasius associates the singing of psalms with the stabilisation of the inner condition of the one who sings them.15 Those who sing psalms in such a way that the melody of the lyrics flows from the rhythm of their souls and is consonant with the Spirit,

12 Athanasius the Great, “A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcelinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms”, in: Athanasius: The Life of Antony and the Letter To Marcellinus (trans. R.C. Gregg; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1979) 101–130. Cf. C. Stewart, “The Use of Biblical Texts in Prayer and the Formation of Early Monastic Culture”, American Benedictine Review 62/2 (2011) 188–201, on pp. 190–92. 13 Cf. Athanasius the Great, “A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcelinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms” 11, on pp. 109–111. 14 Cf. Athanasius the Great, “A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcelinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms” 2, 3, 8, 9, 27, on pp. 101–102, 106–107, 123–124. 15 Athanasius the Great, “A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcelinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms” 28, on pp. 124–125: “The harmonious reading of the Psalms is a figure and type of such undisturbed and calm quanimity of our thoughts. For just as we discover and ideas of the soul and communicate them through the words we put forth, so also the Lord, wishing the melody of the words to be a symbol of the spiritual harmony in a soul, has ordered that the odes be chanted tunefully, and the Psalms recited with song.”

Genesis of the Canon

such people sing with the tongue, but singing also with the mind they greatly benefit only themselves but even those willing to heare them Blessed David, then, making music in this ways for Saul, was himself well pleasing to God, and drove away from Saul the trobled and frenzied disposition, making his soul calm. […] For thus beautifully singing praises, he brings rhythm to his soul and leads it, so to speak grom disproportion to proportion, with whe result that, due to its steadfast nature, it is not frightened by something, but rather imagines positive things, even possessing a ful desire for the future goods. And gaining its composure by the singing of the phrases, it becomes forgerful of the passions and, while rejoicing, sees in accordance with the mind of Christ, conceiving the most excellent thoughts.16

This kind of understanding of the singing of psalms is also testified to by St John Cassian, who taught psalmodic prayer.17 The “formula” introduced by this Western hesychast in practice summarised the whole Psalter in one verse. He justified this kind of prayer practice by the fact that in one verse one can encapsulate any feeling that comes from human nature: “It can be adapted to every condition and can be usefully deployed against every temptation.”18 By recommending constant meditation on a single verse of a psalm, St John Cassian did not suggest that we should not pray using the whole Psalter, or stop reading other biblical books. His prayer formula was intended to keep the mind in a state of attention so as not to succumb to distracting thoughts.19 By constantly feeding on the Scriptures, the monk receives all the feelings of the psalms: “The zeal of his soul makes him like a spiritual deer who feeds on the high mountains of the prophets and the apostles, that is, on their most high and most exalted teachings. Nourished by this food, which he continually eats, he penetrates so deeply into the thinking of the psalms that he sings them not as though they had been composed by the prophet but as if he himself had w ritten them, as if this were his own private prayer uttered amid the deepest compunction of heart.”20 He considers them as being directed towards his own person, not with their meanings, which have taken place in the past or in the prophet, but as happening, filling his interior every day.21 When reciting or singing psalms, everything that constitutes the Christian life takes on a new meaning. Like many other monastic writers, St John Cassian, understands prayer

16 Athanasius the Great, “A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcelinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms” 29, on pp. 125–126. 17 Cf. St John Cassian, “Conference Ten: On Prayer”, in John Cassian, Conferences (trans. C. Luibheid; New York: Paulist Press, 1985) 125–140. 18 St John Cassian, “Conference Ten: On Prayer”, 133. 19 Cf. St John Cassian, “Conference Ten: On Prayer”, 125–6, 136–8. 20 St John Cassian, “Conference Ten: On Prayer”, 137. 21 Cf. St John Cassian, “Conference Ten: On Prayer”, 137.

35

36

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

(oratio) both in the general and specific sense. In the general sense, oratio involves all forms of prayer, i. e. psalmodia and communal meditation on the Word of God, so as to better remember God and reflect on God’s providence.22 In the specific sense, oratio is the individual prayer of a monk who speaks in silence to God in his heart during the moments of recess after each psalm.23 The first Christian monks were convinced that their singing was an earthly representation of heavenly singing. In the following verse, psalms are interpreted in this very spirit: “The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.”24 Evagrius of Pontus taught that “Psalmody belongs to multiform wisdom (cf. Eph. 3:10)”25 and “[it] puts the passions to sleep and works to calm the incontinence of the body.”26 The ability to sing psalms is a gift coming from God, for which, like the gift of prayer, we must ask God intensely.27 Through rational and in-tune singing of the psalms the monk becomes like a “young eagle soaring in the heights.”28 1.2

Biblical Songs

It is an undeniable fact that Christianity emerged in a Jewish context. For this reason, the temple and synagogue liturgy and the Word of God taken from the Old Testament had an influence on the formation of the Christian worship of God. When we analyse Christian services, and especially Orthodox services, we can see how much Old Testament content they contain – in the form of symbols, expressions and images. Apart from psalms or prophecies, there are also biblical songs. It is widely believed that biblical songs are one of the important sources of Eastern Christian hymnography.29 These are songs that were written by the prophets and righteous of the Old Covenant in order to celebrate the most important events in their lives as well as in the lives of the nation of Israel.30 It is also known that both Old and New Testament songs were used in early Christian services. This is confirmed

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Cf. P. Helm, The Providence of God (Dovners Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1994), 93–120. Cf. Stewart, Cassian the Monk, 100–101. Ps 19:1. Evagrius of Pontus, “On Prayer” 85, in R.E. Sinkiewicz (ed.), The Greek Ascetic Corpus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 202. Evagrius of Pontus, “On Prayer” 83, 202. Evagrius of Pontus, “On Prayer” 87, 202. Evagrius of Pontus, “On Prayer” 82, 202. Cf. R.E. Messenger, Christian Hymns of the First Three Centuries (New York, NY: The Hymn Society of America, 1942), 3–14.

30 К. Керн, Литургика. Гимнография и эортология (Москва: Крутицкое Патриаршее Подворье, 2000), 23–4.

Genesis of the Canon

by the Codex Alexandrinus from the early 5th century,31 which contains nine Old Testament songs,32 the apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh (Κύριε Παντοκράτωρ), three New Testament songs,33 and the so-called Morning Hymn, beginning with the words: Δόξα ἐν ὑψίστοις Θεῷ.34 Of these fourteen biblical songs35 , nine have been included in the Byzantine Psalter.36 Nine songs (Οι ἐννέα ̓Ωδαί) in the Byzantine Church were introduced to Matins (ὄρθρος), most likely before the year 550.37 Seven of them are from the Old Testament and two are from the New Testament. In the Orthodox tradition the following canticles are assumed: 1. The song of Moses after crossing the Red Sea (Exod 15:1–19); 2. The song of Moses before his death (Deut 32:1–43); 3. The prayer of Anna (1 Sam 2:1–10); 4. The prayer of Habakkuk (Hab 3:2–19); 5. The prayer of Isaiah (Isa 26,1–19); 6. The prayer of Jonah (Jonah 2,3–10); 7. The song of Azariah (Dan 3:26–45); 8. The song of the Three Young Men (Dan 3:52–88);38 9. The prayer of Mary (Luke 1:46–55), the prayer of Zachariah (Luke 1:68–79).39 In the manuscripts three terms are used to refer to a song: “ode” (ωδή), “prayer” (προσευχή, ευχή) and “hymn” (ύμνος).40 These songs were usually sung by a soloist. After each or every two verses, the faithful gathered at the service sang a refrain from the first verse of the given song.41 It is worth remembering that nine songs were sung at a marked time and place. Their performance from the beginning took into account a set rhythm. Over time, these songs became very important in

31 Cf. J. Knust, “The Biblical Odes and the Text of the Christian Bible: A Reconsideration of the Impact of Liturgical Singing on the Transmission of the Gospel of Luke”, Journal of Biblical Literature 133/2 (2014) 341–65, on pp. 352–356. 32 Cf. Exod 15:19; Deut 32:1–43; 1 Sam 2:1–10; Isa 26:9–19; Jonah 2:3–10; Hab 3:2–19; Isa 38:10–20; Dan 3:26–45; Dan 3:52–88. 33 Cf. Luke 1:46–55; Luke 2:29–32; Luke 1:68–79. 34 Cf. H. Schneider, “Die biblischen Oden im christlichen Altertum”, Biblica 30 (1949) 30–65, on pp. 52–57. 35 Cf. Werner, The Sacred Bridge, 139–140. 36 Cf. Schneider, “Die biblischen”, 245–268; D. Krueger, The Great Canon, 70–71. 37 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 38–39. 38 For discussion of songs in the Book of Daniel, see В.В. Василик, Происхождение канона (Богословие, история, поэтика) (Санкт-Петербург: Издательство Санкт-Петербургского Государственного Университета, 2006), 56–9.

39 Василик, Происхождение канона, 24–5. 40 Knust, “The Biblical Odes”, 357. 41 Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 39.

37

38

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

Christian practice, both for Coptic monks and Latin-speaking Christians. Their exceptional importance is evidenced by the fact that they were sung in Greek even by liturgical congregations that did not know the language. Biblical songs give an insight into the religious life of Christian communities living in the first centuries AD.42 Following the 6th century, biblical songs and psalms were still sung in Constantinople, although the tradition of performing them together had gradually been fading away. As a result of the evolution of the content of services in the following centuries, nine biblical songs contributed to the structure of the canon as a mature form of liturgical worship of the Triune God.43 1.3

The Oldest Christian Hymns

The main purpose of old Christian hymns was to praise God. The singing of hymns as well as the melodic recitation of psalms was an important part of the church and synagogue services of the People of the Old Covenant. Hymns were free paraphrases of biblical texts or texts that referred to the content of Revelation. By singing hymns, Christians expressed their gratitude for the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies. Initially, musical motifs were mainly derived from the Jewish tradition, but gradually the formation of Christian hymns was also influenced by pagan poetry. Gnostic circles were particularly active in hymnographic works. Very few hymns have survived from the first three centuries of Christianity, mainly due to an orthodox reaction in the middle of the 3rd century. As part of the “purification” of liturgical services from gnostic texts, new hymns which were not fully based on words taken from Scripture and were not fully orthodox were rejected. However, over time hymnographic creativity and variety were restored. Hymns were sung to different melodies: simple – syllabic ones and more complex forms, in when two or three sounds were used per one syllable of text. The hymnographer, in the Christian East referred to as the melodos, wrote new lyrics to existing music or composed new melodies to existing lyrics.44 Nonetheless, all hymns that were not based on the Word of God would be consistently excluded from liturgical use. The element of the personal profession of faith, which was characteristic of the original old Christian hymns, was gradually becoming lost.45

42 Knust, “The Biblical Odes”, 364–5. 43 А.А. Ткаченко/М.С. Желтов, “Библейские песни”, in Алексей Патриарх (ed.), Православная энциклопедия (5 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2002) 62–71. 44 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 40. 45 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 147.

Genesis of the Canon

Byzantine hymnography had been created from the second half of the 5th century until the 11th century. Two periods can be distinguished in its development. In the first one, lasting from the mid-5th to the 7th century, the kontakion was created, and in the second period, beginning at the end of the 7th century, the canon appeared. The Byzantine hymnographers adopted the principle of the holistic combination of words and melody as the basic rule of their work. Their talent would be used as a discreet adornment of liturgical services. They did so by concentrating on sublime narrative, metric diversity and sophisticated structure in order to express the spirit of the Byzantine form of worship in the most perfect way possible.46 In Byzantine hymnography, the very important element is the Christological interpretation of Old Testament theophanies.47 This was supposed to demonstrate to the faithful that Jesus Christ is God in Paradise, God of patriarchs and prophets, God of Exodus48 and the Giver of the Law at Sinai. This kind of reading of the history of salvation is not a typical ethical or typological allegory,49 but a liturgical exegesis50 which in a mystical way introduces the faithful to Καιρός, i. e. the time of salvation, which is God’s “present”. In Byzantine hymnography, biblical exegesis is directed towards theophany, becoming a mystagogy, an opening to the experience of God in Three Persons.51 1.4

Troparion

Christian hymnography intensely developed in the East, which with this being linked to the gradual growth of the Byzantine Church. Hymnographers were developing a form of original monostrophic hymns, drawing inspiration from the singing traditions of the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria. An important achievement of Eastern Christian hymnography was the poetic and musical form, called the troparion. Initially, the name troparion concerned short prayers, a kind of poetic prose, which were inserted after each verse of melorecited psalms. Troparia were organised into stanzas – until the 4th century they were short and easy to remember, from the 5th century they became longer and therefore they

46 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 157–8. 47 Cf. G.W. Savran, Encountering the Divine. Theophany in Biblical Narrative (London/New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2002). 48 Cf. R. Hendel, “The Exodus in Biblical Memory”, Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2001) 601–622. 49 Cf. C.W. Macleod, “Allegory and Mysticism in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa”, Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1971) 362–79. 50 Cf. Ch. Hannick, “Exégèse, typologie et rhétorique dans l’hymnographie byzantine”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 53 (1999) 207–18. 51 Cf. B.G. Bucur, “Exegesis of Biblical Theophanies in Byzantine Hymnography: Rewritten Bible?”, Theological Studies 68 (2007) 92–112, on pp. 111–12.

39

40

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

were sung only after the three to six last verses of a psalm. Already at this point, troparia became an integral part of Matins (ὄρθρος) and Vespers (εσπερινός), as a complement to the psalms, nine biblical songs and prayer formulas of the first centuries of Christianity.52 The very name of troparion implies its use for singing, with a concrete indication of the modal system. The Greek word τρόπος refers to one of the established interval orders within a given musical tone. What is a troparion? Generally speaking, it can be described as a short hymn consisting of a single stanza, which refers either to some religious event or saint, or to a holiday of the liturgical year. It is characterised by a poetic form, expressed by the beauty of its content and originality. Just as in the first centuries of Christianity, contemporary troparia are interwoven between the verses of psalms. In Byzantine ecclesiastical poetry, the troparion was a literary genre with a wide range of content. The creation of troparia was a manifestation of the spirit of piety of Christians, who wanted to express in this way that everything that they were involved in has a reference to God.53 The formation of troparia was largely influenced by the situation of the Church. At a time when the foundations of the Christian doctrine were being defined, the imperial Byzantine Church was reluctant to create new troparia, especially when they were not based on biblical content. The ecclesiastical authorities were afraid that heretical motifs would appear in new troparia. This concern to preserve the legitimate faith resulted in a temporary ban on writing new troparia. Eventually, however, when the Church under Constantine the Great was officially recognised and the right to freedom of worship guaranteed by the empire, gifted hymnographers were able to enrich the liturgical life of Eastern Christianity. New troparia, although often not directly taken from Scripture, always included some reference to biblical themes. Interestingly, sometimes their melodies were modelled on heretical compositions. In this way the creators wanted to make heretics come back to the Orthodox faith. Troparia were song jointly by all those gathered in common prayer.54 There are two hymns dating from the 3rd or 4th century that still play an important role in Eastern Christian worship, namely: O Gladsome Light (Φῶς Ἱλαρόν) and

52 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 171; N. Uspensky, Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1985). 53 Cf. M. Chryssavgis, “The Troparion in Worship: Participation by the Congregation in Byzantine Chant”, Phronema 2 (1987) 45–54, on pp. 46–7. 54 Cf. D. Conomos, Byzantine Hymnography and Byzantine Chant (Brookline, MA: Hellenic College Pr., 1984), 13–14.

Genesis of the Canon

the Great Doxology (Μεγάλη Δοξολογία).55 The first of these hymns – an important element of Orthodox Vespers – was sung by a priest at the centre of the church, while the second was sung together by two choirs located on the right and left sides of the church as they descended towards the centre (καταβασία). In the 6th century, Emperor Justinian wrote the hymn The Only Begotten Son (Ὁ μονογενὴς Υἱός), which is sung during the Divine Liturgy. It performed the function typical of a troparion – it was a refrain to the psalm verses that make up the second antiphon of the Liturgy of the Faithful. In order to make a temporal synthesis, it remained to this day at the end of the second antiphon, as a one-time refrain-troparion completing the antiphon. The three mentioned hymns were so well known to all believers that no musical notation from the first millennium has been preserved. In the case of the hymn O Gladsome Light, the first preserved musical notation comes from the 16th century, whereas in the case of the Great Doxology and The Only Begotten Son, the oldest records date back to the 13th century.56 We have only very scarce information about the first phase of composing troparia, when their stanzas were loosely connected. In a later period, troparia were characterized by a common guiding thought.57 Today, the troparion is a stanza, usually consisting of six to eight verses, which has two main functions in Orthodox services. Therefore, we can distinguish the troparion of the liturgical day (ἀπολυτίκιον), which is its symbolic synthesis, formula or sign, and the troparion of the canon. The latter type of troparion evolved as a refrain to the verses of a psalm or biblical song. 1.5

Syrian Hymnography

Syrian hymnography is important for understanding Byzantine hymnography, because the former, together with Hebrew hymnography, has contributed to the development of the strophic structure of sacred poetry. The relationship between

55 The first part of the Great Doxology was created in the first half of the 3rd century at the latest. It was based on a doxological verse from the Song of The Three Young Men. In its entirety, The Great Doxology was a triadological and Christological hymn, which introduced anaphora. It is an example of how biblical songs, combined with the need to create a song necessary for liturgical celebration, contributed to the creation of a hymn of exceptional and timeless significance for Orthodox Christians. Cf. Василик, Происхождение канона, 85–116. 56 Conomos, Byzantine Hymnography, 11: “It is generally held that, like their Gregorian counterparts, the Byzantine hymns had simple tunes, generally based on the principle of one tone to each syllable of the text, to render them suitable for congregational singing. They were familiar to everyone and consequently did not need to be written down. О Gladsome Light has no music before the sixteenth or seventeenth century. The Great Doxology [...] and Only Begotten have no written tradition before the thirteenth century.” 57 Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 175.

41

42

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

these three cultural circles is complex because the Syrians adopted some of the hymnographic terms of the Hebrews and the Hebrews adopted other terms from the Byzantines58 . For example, the Syrian term for two related verses is beitha. Its Hebrew equivalent is beitha, and the equivalent Byzantine is oikos. All these terms mean “house”. In contemporary times it is difficult to determine who was the first to use this term – the Jews or the Syrians.59 Syrian poetry is characterized by the equal number of syllables in each verse. The isosyllabic principle and an equal number of syllables can be seen in the poetry of St Ephrem.60 In Syrian hymns of the classical period (350–750) there is no trace of rhythm.61 The Syrian influence on Hebrew and Byzantine poetry was limited only to metre, strophic structure and general poetic form.62 The development of Syrian hymnography is closely connected to the person of St Ephrem.63 Taking into account formal and analytical criteria, the following types of Syrian hymnography can be distinguished: Quala (lit. voice, sound, tone) is a kind of liturgical poem that is responsorially or antiphonally sung with verses of the psalms; Madrasha (lit. narrative, treatise) is the most popular form of Syrian hymnody. Originally, it was an apologetic or polemic poem. Over time, the term was used for responsorial hymns, in which the choir sang an unchanging refrain. The themes of madrashas were diverse, including both biblical and theological topics. The melodies of madrashas could serve as a model for other poems; Sogitha (lit. dialogue, singing songs) is a special kind of madrasha. It is a dialogic hymn with a simple metre, which, besides memra, has become one of the basic structures for the Byzantine kontakion. Sogitha was usually antiphonally sung by two choirs. The stanza of a sogitha consists of four verses. The acrostic is doubled, which means that each pair of verses starts with the same letter of the alphabet. Since the Syrian alphabet consists of twenty two letters, there were forty four stanzas in one song. Sogitha had a great influence on the formation of both the rhymed

58 Cf. E. Werner, “Hebrew and Oriental Christian Metrical Hymns. A Comparison”, Hebrew Union College Annual 23 (1950–1951) 397–432, on pp. 397–398. 59 Cf. W. Christ/M. Paranikas, Anthologia graeca carminum christianorum (Leipzig: B.G. Teubnerl, 1871), LXVII. 60 Cf. A. Baumastark, Geschichte der syrischen Literatur (Bonn: A. Marcus und E. Webers Verlag Dr. jur. Alvert Ahn, 1922), 40. 61 Cf. P.E. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza (Oxford: Blackwell 2 1959), 29. 62 Cf. Werner, “Hebrew and Oriental”, 401–403. 63 This is testified to by Jacob of Sarug, who was the biographer of St Ephrem. Cf. J. Gribomont, “La tradition liturgiques des hymnes pascales de s. Ephrem”, Parole de l’orient 4/1–2 (1973) 191–246; Ch. Shepardson, Anti-Judaism and Christian Orthodoxy: Ephrem’s Hymns in Fourth-Century Syria (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2008).

Genesis of the Canon

homily and the development of dramatic liturgical poetry. It was thanks to the soghita that elements of dialogue appeared in the kontakion;64 Memra (lit. speech, word) is a spoken, not sung, poem (poetic homily) with didactic, epic or narrative content. Its verses are written according to the isosyllabic principle. Some memras are strophic, but they lack a regular refrain. Usually there are seven syllables in each verse of a memra, although this number might vary between five and twelve. In the 20th century, as a result of research on Old Russian poetry, it started to be commonly believed that memra is the main archetype of the Byzantine kontakion;65 Ba’uta (lit. request) is a kind of Eastern litany (ektenia), or supplicatory prayer. It is sung by a cantor, the refrain is performed by the choir; Teshbochta (lit. praising, extoling) is a kind of song – this term originally referred to biblical songs that were not part of the Psalter. Later this term was used to describe hymns of moderate length and simple construction sung by a choir; Enyana (lit. responsorium) was initially a sequence of stanzas connected by a refrain, which then became a very popular form of singing combined with a paraphrase of psalms and canticles. Enyana is not a hymn in the strict sense of the word; Maurebe (lit. praises) are antiphonal insertions between individual verses of the Song of Mary; Tachshfto (lit. supplications) are supplicatory chants, arranged according to the Eastern Christian Octoechos (i. e. the eight-tone system).66 Syrian hymnody encompasses both dramatic and homiletic components.67 Many Syrian hymns have been preserved in the Octoechos, i. e. the collection of troparia, songs and hymns written and edited by Severus of Antioch and Paul and Jacob of Edessa.68 All Syrian hymns are sung in accordance with the principle of the cycle of eight tones. The liturgical meaning of Octoechos is rooted in the custom of using eight tones, which coincided with eight consecutive Sundays, especially after Pentecost.69

64 Cf. J. Grosdidier de Matons, Romanos le Mélodie et les origines de la poésie religieuse à Byzance (Paris: Beauchesne, 1977), 26–31. 65 Werner, “Hebrew and Oriental”, 417. 66 Cf. P. Maas, “Das Kontakion”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 19 (1919) 285–306; C. Émereau, Saint Éphrem le Syrien (Paris: Maison de la Bonne presse, 1919). 67 Cf. I.H. Dalmais, “Hymnodie et catéchèse: mimre, madrashe, kontakia”, Hymnographie (2000) 171–177. 68 Cf. Baumastark, Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, 45–47. 69 Cf. Baumastark, Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, 267–69.

43

44

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

1.6

Kontakion

The creation of the kontakion in its final form is connected with the person of St Romanos the Melodist.70 This new kind of hymn was a sung, metric sermon which contained some doxological elements.71 The kontakion is a revolutionary creation in the history of Byzantine singing for three reasons. Firstly, this hymn introduces into Greek verse a stressed metre (later called the Byzantine metre), which replaced the quantitative metre (the Hellenic metre) of Classical Greek verse.72 In Classical Greek, it was characteristic to assign a metric value to a long or short vowel, whereas in the kontakion this metric value was given to the syllable, which could either be stressed or not, which was itself subsequently important. Secondly, new metric structures appeared in the kontakion, which differed from predictable classical metric patterns because they were not regular.73 Thirdly, the kontakion contributed to the revival of ecclesiastical poetry by introducing a dialogue between people who were the heroes of the presented salvific reality. In this way, the listener of the kontakion participated in a psychological and spiritual depth that manifested itself in the drama of the situation.74 On the basis of research on the hymns of Romanos the Melodist, Paul Maas pointed to the compatibility of the kontakion with the three main types of Syrian poetry, namely: soghita, madrasha and memra.75 Kontakia come from Syria and Antioch. Alexander Ligas claims that the didactic and homiletical tradition of St John Chrysostom contributed to the establishment of the kontakion in Constantinople.76 St Romanos the Melodist drew extensively on the works of this eminent Church Father.77 The kontakia created by

70 Cf. E. Catafygiotou Topping, “St Romanos the Melodos: Prince of Byzantine Poets”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 24/1 (1979) 65–75; H. Hunger, “Romano il Melode – poeta, predicatore, retore – ed il suo pubblico”, Römische Historische Mitteilungen 25 (1983) 305–332. 71 Cf. Василик, Происхождение канона, 47; J. van Rossum, “Romanos le Mélode et le «kontakion»”, Hymnographie (2000) 93–104. 72 Stressed metre has been transferred from Semitic poetry into Greek poetry. See J.B. Pitra, Hymnographie de l’Église grecque (Rome: Imprimerie de la Civiltà cattolica Collection, 1867), 33. 73 Cf. Ch. Hannick, “Zur Metrik des Kontakion”, in: H. Hunger (ed.), Byzantios: Festschrift fiir Herbert Hunger zum 70. Geburtstag (Vienne: E. Becvar, 1984) 107–119. 74 Cf. Hannick, “Zur Metrik des Kontakion”, 172. 75 He noted that: the acrostic is of Semitic origin and always appears in sogitha, the refrain is obligatory in madrasha, the dialogue is characteristic of sogitha; a sogitha presents biblical themes in a dramatic way, the memra is a metric sermon, the Syrian metre is based on the principle of stressed metre, the metric structure of the madrasha is complex. Cf. Maas, Das Kontakion, 290. 76 Cf. A. Lingas, “The Liturgical place of the kontakion in Constantinople”, in C.C. Akentiev (ed.), Liturgy, architecture, and art in the Byzantine world: Papers of the XVIII International Byzantine Congres (Moscow, 8–15 August 1991) and Other Essays Dedicated to the Memory of Fr. John Meyendorff (Sankt-Petersburg [s.n.], 1995) 50–57. 77 Cf. Василик, Происхождение канона, 48.

Genesis of the Canon

St Romanos the Melodist are characterized by a maturity of style, resulting from the adaptation of Syrian ecclesiastical poetry to Byzantine hymnography. Many of the thousands of kontakia he wrote were introduced to the liturgy of Constantinople, which had a positive impact on the development of spirituality in the 6th and subsequent centuries.78 Following the example of the Cappadocian Fathers and St John Chrysostom, in a true preacher’s manner, St Romanos the Melodist juxtaposes the patterns typical of Greek poets and orators with the Christian ideas and patterns which show the Divine Truth as drawn from the Gospels.79 The emergence of the kontakion as a new form of hymnography is still a matter of dispute among scholars.80 Josè Grosdidier de Matons believed that the kontakion was the work of Greek genius. He argued that St Romanos the Melodist did not use sources written in Syriac, including those of St Ephrem.81 This thesis is in opposition to the claims of previous researchers, who considered the kontakion to be an offshoot of Syrian poetry implanted into Greek poetry.82 Based on the source material, it is difficult to decide which of these positions is fully justified. This is particularly the case as there exist many facts that make it difficult to completely deny the Syrian roots of the kontakion. Today, it is assumed that in addition to St Romanos the Melodist, Anastasius and Kyriakos contributed to the creation of the kontakion. This new genre of ecclesiastical poetry, which in comparison with the troparion, was more independent of Scripture in terms of content, and more elaborate in terms of form, appeared in the first decades of the 6th century and became widespread in Eastern Christianity between the end of the 6th and mid-12th centuries.83 Even to this day, no documents have been found that could determine when the kontakion was introduced to Byzantine liturgical services.84 The name “kontakion” itself appears in written sources only in the 9th century.85

78 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 183–184. 79 Cf. P. Maas, “Die Chronologie der Hymnen des Romanos”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 6 (1906) 1–44; D. Krueger, “Romanos the Melodist and the Christian Self in Early Byzantium”, in E. Jeffreys (ed.), Proceedings of the 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies (1. vol.; Aldershot: Routledge, 2006) 255–76. 80 Cf. Ch. Hannick, “Le kontakion dans l’histoire de la musique ecclesiastique byzantine”, Ostkirchliche Studien 58/1 (2009) 57–66. 81 Por. J. Grosdidier de Matons, Romanos le Mélodie et les origins de la poésie religieuse à Byzance (Paris: Beauchesne, 1977). 82 Cf. W.L. Petersen, “The Dependence of Romanos the Melodist upon the Syriac Ephrem: Its Importance for the Origin of the Kontakion”, Vigiliae Christiane 39 (1985) 171–187, on p. 171. 83 Cf. Керн, Литургика, 31–2. 84 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 179. 85 Cf. E. Mioni, Romano il Melode (Torino: Paoline Edizioni, 1937), 10.

45

46

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

A kontakion usually consists of a series of 18–30 stanzas, each repeating the metre and melody of the first stanza, gradually developing a general theme.86 A single stanza is called a troparion or oikos. A troparion can be from three to thirteen verses long. A kontakion begins with a prooemion (προοίμιον) – sometimes called a koukoulion (κουκούλιον),87 i. e. is a short troparion, metrically and melodically independent from subsequent parts, consisting of two or three stanzas. The prooemion together with the successive stanzas of the kontakion are connected by an ephimnion (ἐφύμνιον), which concludes all stanzas, as well as a musical modus, i. e. an echos (ἦχος). The presence of a refrain at the end of each stanza proves that the kontakion was sung by a soloist and the ephimnion was sung by the choir. It is also characteristic of a kontakion that its stanzas were alphabetically or acrostically linked to one another.88 Due to the fact that at the time when kontakia flourished in the Greek language the difference between long and short vowels disappeared, a rule was introduced that all stanzas should have the same number of syllables as the heirmos (εἱρμός), after which they are modelled, and that the place of stress of the verses of the heirmos must be concordant with what is in the verses of individual stanzas. Each creator of a kontakion was supposed to be both a very good poet and musician, because poetry and music in this hymnographic form had to be in unison.89 1.7

Canon

The development of Byzantine hymnography reached its peak with the emergence of the most mature poetic form, the canon (κανόν – measure, principle, rule).90 This multi-stanza poetic form was introduced at the end of the 7th century to Matins (ὄρθρος), i. e. the morning service. Originally, between the 5th and 7th centuries, the term “canon” referred to the rule of daily prayers of Palestinian monks, over

86 Cf. Керн, Литургика, 30. 87 Cf. Werner, Hebrew and Oriental, 398. 88 An acrostic (Gr. akrostichon, from akros – edge, peak; stichos – verse) is a rhymed work in which the initial letters of subsequent verses form words that express a certain meaning. This poetic form appears in the Old Testament in Lamentations (Lam 1–4), Psalms (Ps 25, 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, 145) and the Poem about the Capable Wife (Prov 31:10–31). In post-biblical poetry, acrostics were used to indicate the structure of a text, or to give the author’s name or a particular reference to a verse from Scripture. In the Byzantine hymnody, acrostics were used by, among others, St Romanos the Melodist. Cf. Werner, Hebrew and Oriental, 428. 89 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 179–83. 90 Cf. Керн, Литургика, 40.

Genesis of the Canon

time they started to refer only to morning prayers, the essential element of which are biblical songs.91 The canon is a poetic form, composed of nine odes, in which troparia repeat their metre and melody. The main principle of the canon is that the stanza of each ode is subordinated to a stanza called a heirmos (εἱρμός),92 which imposes a certain strophic, rhythmic and melodic structure on the remaining stanzas, called troparia.93 Each ode originally consisted of six to nine troparia. These nine odes of each canon were modelled on nine biblical songs.94 The basic idea of the canon was to paraphrase Scripture in such a way that through various variations and meditations on a theme taken from the Bible, a series of stanzas would be composed which would be related to the same guiding idea. Additional verses are added to individual verses taken directly from Scripture, so that the main biblical message is highlighted and easier to memorize. The fact that the whole canon consists of nine odes is not accidental. The number nine indicates a triple confirmation of the Holy Trinity and the number of Angelic Choirs.95 The odes of each canon are hymns of praise. Initially, the canons were composed for Great Lent, later – especially for the period between Easter and Pentecost, and over time for all holidays of the liturgical year.96 With regards to the number of odes in the canon, it can be seen that the canons were also created without a second ode, thus instead of nine there were rather eight odes. Egon Wellesz explains this by the fact that the second ode, being modelled on a second biblical song, the Song of Moses before his death (Deut 32:1–43), and due to its funerary character, was intended only for Great Lent. Therefore, canons for other periods of the liturgical year were written without the second ode.97 According to Eric Werner, the majority of the canons consisted of only eight odes because they wanted to follow the system of eight tones of the Octoechos, which prevailed in Byzantine hymnody.98 It is difficult to unequivocally decide what was the real reason for this. Perhaps the claims of both researchers are

91 Cf. М. Желтов, “Канон”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная энциклопедия, (Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2012) 204.

92 Heirmos (eirmos) is a term that literally means oar and refers to the image of a ship (boat), which was one of the key symbols of the Church. Thus the canon is ecclesiological in its structure. 93 Василик, Происхождение канона, 24. 94 Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 198. 95 Cf. Werner, Hebrew and Oriental Hymns, 418. It is worth noting that the development of the theology of nine Angelic Choirs is connected with the treatise by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, entitled The Celestial Hierarchy (Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, The Complete Works (trans. C. Luibheid; New York/Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1987), 143–191), which was first mentioned in 512. 96 Cf. A. Baumstark, Liturgie comparée. Principes et méthodes pour l’étude historique des liturgies chrétiennes, (Chevetogne: Ėdition Chèvetogne, 1939), 28–29. 97 Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 198. 98 Werner, Hebrew and Oriental Hymns, 419.

47

48

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

justified. In any case, if we relate the symbolism of nine odes to nine Angelic Choirs, the canon should be seen as a hymnographic expression of imitation (μίμησις) of the angelic world and angelic singing, because each of its odes ends with praising God in the Holy Trinity and the Mother of God (which is particularly present in the tradition of St Andrew of Crete). The canon speaks not only of heaven, but also of Earth, for the history of salvation takes place on Earth, starting with the crossing of the Red Sea (the theme of the first biblical song – Exod 15:1–19), which is a prefiguration of the Resurrection of Christ, and ending with the Incarnation of the Word of God (the theme of the ninth biblical song – Luke 1:46–55). The canon is also a mystagogical work, because its first song (referring to the first biblical song) typologically refers to baptism, and its eighth song (referring to the Song of the Three Young Men – Dan 3:52–88) is a preview of the Eucharist – the descending of the Word of God to the faithful and the filling of them with the Holy Spirit. It is therefore right to believe that the key to the creation of the canon was not literary motifs, but religious and liturgical reasons, and above all the encouragement to participate in large numbers in liturgical services. The creation of troparia – the essential component of the canon – reflecting the trinitarian and Christological theology of believers, was based on the contemplation of Jesus Christ – the Word Incarnate, who resurrects the dead and raises sinful man from the fall.99 The main difference between the kontakion and the canon is the latter’s greater and more varied use of music. While all the stanzas of the kontakion were sung to the melody of the heirmos, which was determined by the desire to emphasize the meaning of the words sung, the songs of the kontakion additionally emphasize the importance of the music itself. The melody of the heirmoi was structurally transformed by increasing the number of sounds per syllable of text to two or three. In this way the musical structure of the canon became more ornate and corresponded to the greater splendour of liturgical ceremonies in the Byzantine Empire.100 It is commonly accepted that the creator of the canon as an hymnographic form was St Andrew of Crete.101 As it has already been pointed out, the basis for the constitution of the canon were biblical songs, which in Christian antiquity were added to psalms. Each of the songs was accompanied by a refrain, which was transformed into troparia. Heirmoi were introduced as the link between a biblical song and a troparia. In the general liturgical practice of the Byzantine Church, due

99 Cf. Василик, Происхождение канона, 260–1. 100 Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 202–3. Cf. Wellesz, “Kontakion and Kanon”, in I. Anglès (ed.), Atti del Congresso Internazionale di Musica Sacra organizzato dal Pontificio Istituto di Musica Sacra e dalla Commissione di Musica Sacra per l’Anno Santo, Roma, 25–30 maggio 1950 (Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1950) 131–133. 101 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 28.

Genesis of the Canon

to the large number of troparia, biblical songs were abandoned.102 Eventually, the canon became a popular hymnographic form that was a permanent element of Eastern Christian services. St John of Damascus,103 the author of the famous Paschal Canon sung during the Easter Vigil, particularly contributed to the popularization of canons. Thousands of canons have survived to this day, most of which were written for liturgical purposes. The fact is that only a small part of them was included in liturgical books, i. e. in Menaia, Triodia and Octoechos. In contemporary times, canons are present in such services as Matins, Compline, the service of supplication (παρακλητικός κανόν) and the service for the dead. Although, according to the Typikon, canons should be sung, in practice they are recited, both for monastic purposes and during church services.104 Mikhail Skaballanovitch put forward a hypothesis that the original form of the canon was the so-called single-song, i. e. a hymnographic form based on the Song of the Three Young Men (cf. Dan 3:52–88), which corresponds to the eighth ode of the later canon. First, the single-song took the form of a two-song (as a combination of the eighth and ninth biblical songs), and then the form of a threesong (by combining subsequent songs, from the first to the seventh, corresponding to subsequent days of the week, with the eighth and ninth songs).105 The problem of the origin of the canon and the formation of its morphological structure has not yet been fully resolved. Perhaps the previous hypotheses will find confirmation based on discovered hymnographic papyri and translations of hymns into Old Georgian.106 The issues outlined above are essential to analysis of the elements of the morphological structure of the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete. This masterpiece of hymnographic art, a mature form of the mastery of liturgical poetry, in various ways assimilated earlier prayer traditions – from psalms to biblical songs and the

102 In some monasteries, in both the Greek-Byzantine and Slavic traditions, it is still recommended to sing biblical songs. Especially in monasteries during Great Lent, the custom of singing biblical songs is still common. 103 It is also worth identifying other eminent creators of canons: St Germanus (Patriarch of Constantinople), St Cosmas of Maiuma, St Theodore the Studite and St Joseph the Hymnographer. 104 This was due to inconsistencies in relation to a song as a model and subsequent troparia, which in translation did not repeat the metre of the model stanza, and thus their singing caused significant problems. The Stoglavy Synod (Moscow, 1551) approved such a way of performing the canon in which only heirmoi were sung, and troparia were recited by lectors. According to the GreekByzantine tradition, canons should be sung. Cf. Желтов, Канон, 208–9. 105 Cf. М. Скабалланович, Толковый типикон: объяснительное изложение типикона с историческим введением (Казань: Издательство дела Н.Т. Корчак-Новицкого, 1910), 267–8.

106 Cf. J. Mateos, “Quelques problèmes de l’Orthros byzantine”, Proche-Orient Chrétien 11 (1961), 17–35, 201–220.

49

50

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

oldest of Christian hymns. Its final shape was also determined by some genres of Syrian hymnography as well as the troparion and the kontakion.

2.

Elements of the Morphological Structure of the Great Canon

The morphological structure of the Great Canon consists of characteristic elements which form a well-thought-out whole, both poetic107 and musically coherent. The Great Canon consists of nine odes, with each encompassing a number of troparia. It is assumed that in total there are 245 troparia, including 11 heirmoi.108 Among the troparia, three types can be distinguished, which due to their special function have the following names: heirmoi, triadika and theotokia. Particularly important from the formal point of view are heirmoi, which start each ode or part of an ode (as in the case of Ode II and Ode III). They determine the metre, the places of stress in the poem and the melody of the troparia making up a given song. However, in terms of content, a very important role is played by triadika, which are the doxology of the Holy Trinity, and theotokia, which are an expression of veneration of the Mother of God and highlight Her role in the history of salvation. Triadika and theotokia complete each song. In addition, within the morphological structure of the Great Canon, the versicles “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me” are distinguished. Although they were not written by St Andrew of Crete, they have been part of this work for centuries in place of verses from biblical songs. 2.1

Odes

The Great Canon consists of nine odes (αἱ ὁδοί), with this being the rule for all canons written by St Andrew of Crete.109 In contrast to subsequent generations of hymnographers, in the Great Canon the author did not omit the second ode, which is particularly penitential in nature.110 These odes constitute the greatest structural element of the canon. They correspond to nine biblical songs. Each of them is distinguished by its structure, metre, intonation and thematic reference to the relevant biblical song. Within the structure of individual odes, a heirmos and troparia can be distinguished. Individual odes encompass a different number of

107 Cf. Th. Detorakis, “Le vocabulaire d’André de Crète. Mots non thésaurises par G.W.H. Lampe”, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 36 (1986) 45–60. 108 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 57–9. 109 Cf. И.А. Карабинов, Постная Триодь (Санкт-Петербург: Типография В. Смирнова, 1910), 100. 110 Cf. Θ.Λ. Κολλυρόπουλος, Περί του προβλήματος της Β΄ωδής των κανόνων (Πάτρα: Θ.Λ. Κολλυρόπουλος, 2012), 267–358.

Elements of the Morphological Structure of the Great Canon

troparia: Ode I – 25, Ode II – 29 and 12 (this ode consists of two parts), Ode III – 9 and 19 (this ode consists of two parts), Ode IV – 29, Ode V – 23, Ode VI – 17, Ode VII – 22, Ode VIII – 22, and Ode IX – 27. The fact that Odes II and III consist of two parts probably derives from the ancient practice of dividing biblical songs. These songs are composed of a large number of troparia, which makes them more laconic and aphoristic as compared to Odes I, IV, VII and IX. The measure of the metre for an individual ode is determined by the heirmos with which it begins, thus serving as a kind of model to imitate in following troparia. The rhythm of a stanza never goes beyond the boundary of the measure introduced in the heirmos. From the example of the Great Canon we can see that St Andrew of Crete fully took into account the principles of liturgical rhythmic poetry. In this work he did not use the acrostic, which was common for later canonists, nor was he guided by the preservation of symmetry, which appears in canons composed by later hymnographers. The Greek text of the Great Canon is distinguished by the beauty of its cadence and sound, which translators into other languages managed to render only to a small extent. Compared to the original, even the translation into Church Slavonic loses much, both in terms of its structure and content. In the Greek text, there are words with the same or similar ending sound. One can notice assonance between words, a play on words, a play on meaning or the repetition of one sound in a stanza. Why does the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete consist of nine odes? Is the number nine accidental or fully intentional? During the lifetime of St Andrew of Crete, nine biblical songs were sung during morning services. They were divided into three parts, each of which contained three songs. They were separated by the so-called μεσώδια. The number nine symbolized the “triple nature of the Trinity”. In her doctoral dissertation from 1982, a Georgian researcher of the hymnographic composition of the canon argued that the division of the canon as a liturgical form of poetry can be justified by artistic-philosophical and theological-symbolic arguments.111 The “tripartite” division here refers to the three parts of the created world (heaven, earth, abyss). In the 12th century, the Byzantine chronicler and theologian Joannes Zonaras justified the special meaning of the number nine in relation to the canon. He claimed that the number nine is the largest of all figures, larger than tens, hundreds, thousands or myriads. The size of the canon as a sung poetic form results from the fact that it consists of nine odes.112 For this exact

111 Cf. Л.С. Квирикашвилли, Композиция гимнографического канона (doctoral dissertation; Тбилиси 1982).

112 Cf. Joannis Zonarae, Expositio Canonum Anastasimorum Damasceni, PG 135, 424.

51

52

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

reason, the presence of the second ode in the canon is very important.113 The most important fact, however, is the reference of the “tripartite” nature to God Himself in the Most Holy Trinity. For St Andrew of Crete, as well as for other great hymnographers, the number nine, symbolizing heaven, was an image of God Himself and was an expression of his great Trinitarian sensitivity. The tripartite form of the canon (3 times 3) was supposed to remind man, as a being immersed in history, about God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons who is the Creator of man. The Great Canon is an exceptional work which already at the level of its structure reminds man that the Triune God is his Saviour. Almost every ode of the Great Canon consists of two parts. In the first one, the hymnographer usually enters into a dialogue with his soul, enumerates his sins and indicates ways of improvement. In the second part, he prays to God, asking for mercy. Twice, he confesses that no one has sinned like he has (cf. Ode IV.2; VIII.18).114 The metre and tone of the individual songs of the Great Canon have a special influence on its poetic character. The metre arranges the flow of words so that the structure of an ode expresses the intention of the author. The tone enlivens the rhythm of the stanza, thus contributing to expressing its melodic beauty. St Andrew was very sensitive to the sound of words, which in odes were chosen in such a way that the listener would be introduced to their deepest sense by experiencing the beauty of their melody. The Great Canon comprises about 1500 different words. The most numerous are: soul (108 times), Saviour (53 times), God (52 times), to sin (38 times), Christ (35 times), to save – to be saved (28 times), Lord (27 times), metanoia and to imitate (23 times), life and passions (22 times), and sin and tears (21 times). 2.2

Heirmoi

In the vast majority of odes there is a single heirmos (Odes I, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX). Exceptions to this rule are Odes II and III, which contain two heirmoi each. Each heirmos is very important in a given ode, because the structure of the following troparia, triadika and theotokia depends on the heirmos. When creating a heirmos, the poet decides about the metre and places of stress in the poem, while also remaining the original composer of a melody (μελῳδός).115 The troparia following

113 There is no second ode in the canons of St John of Damascus and St Cosmas of Maiuma, and the canons composed by Joseph the Hymnographer and Theophanes either have or lack a second ode. Except for the Lenten period, after the 9th century canons in fact did not include a second ode. 114 Cf. Карабинов, Постная Триодь, 104. 115 The term melodos was used to describe poets who wrote texts while simultaneously composing music for them.

Elements of the Morphological Structure of the Great Canon

a heirmos are fully dependent on a heirmos’ composition. While symmetry is visible in the form of the canon itself, the symmetry of individual troparia remains hidden. Heirmoi, in contrast to troparia, are still sung in liturgical practice. The basis for contemporary sung heirmoi of the Great Canon in the Russian Orthodox Church, as well as in the Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church, is the melody composed by Dmitry Bortniansky (1751–1825). In his composition, he used the traditional melody, which he shortened but thus kept its original simplicity and penitential tone. The musical score of the melody of the heirmos of the Great Canon became an integral part of the Lenten Triodion. Heirmoi were usually composed as a paraphrase of the Hymn of Victory, which is the first biblical song (cf. Exod 15). The heirmoi written by St Andrew became a point of reference for later hymnographers, such as St John of Damascus, Patriarch Germanus, Joseph the Hymnographer, Symeon the Metaphrast and many others. According to some researchers, such as Archbishop Filaret Gumilewski116 or the nun Ignatia,117 the work of St Andrew of Crete was written in prose. They claim that it was not St Andrew who was the author of the heirmoi, but St John of Damascus. However, the opinions of these two researchers were not documented in any way in source material. 2.3

Troparia

Of all the canons written by St Andrew of Crete and still in modern use, the Great Canon is distinguished by the largest number of troparia, which make up the nine odes. If we take into account that there are 115 troparia in the Canon for Palm Sunday, 80 in the Paschal Canon, 113 in the Canon for St Thomas Sunday, and 109 in the Canon for the Sunday of the Myrrhbearing Women, the number of 245(234) troparia in the Great Canon is impressive. Some Orthodox liturgists, such as I. Karabinov, put forward the hypothesis that not all of the troparia were created by St Andrew of Crete. Russian researcher at the beginning of the twentieth century believed that the triadika and some of the theotokia of the Great Canon were written by St Theodore the Studite.118 As Sergiey Pravdoliubov rightly notes, there is no justification for this kind of claim in ancient manuscripts. Referring to the work of M.A. Momina, he recalls that there are no preserved manuscripts from the time of St Theodore the Studite, and the oldest surviving Greek triodia (from the 10th century) and Slavic triodia (from the 12th century) testify to the diverse order of liturgical services. The various editions of 116 Cf. Филарет (Гумилевский) архиепископ, Исторический обзор песнопевцев и песнопения греческой Церкви (Санкт-Петербург: Издание книгопродавца И.Л. Тузова, 1860), 199.

117 Cf. Петровская, “Гимнографическое творчество”, 266. 118 Карабинов, Постная Триодь, 100–1.

53

54

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

the texts of triodia still need to be thoroughly examined. The facts support the claim that St Andrew of Crete not only created triadika and theotokia to the Great Canon but also to all other canons he wrote.119 The lack of triadika in some of the later manuscripts of his canons only proves that they were shortened in liturgical practice. The inner rhythm of the troparia of the Great Canon defines the syntax of the whole work. Most troparia have a logical relationship across columns of verses. The number of sentences in a given troparion is different, it can be assumed that this depended on the author’s desire. Essentially, each troparion contains one leading theme. The metric scheme of the troparia in an individual ode determines the way of presenting the thought that is the leitmotif thereof. Troparia include interrogative and exclamatory sentences. The structure of a troparia in no way interferes with the specific intonational lightness of of verses. This occasional inversion does not disturb the semantic coherence of a text either. Different types of comparisons can be seen in troparia. Of particular importance are those relating to people of the Old and New Testaments, comparisons to inanimate things and symbolic comparisons borrowed from the Scripture. There are also repetitions of words or groups of words forming part of a verse, which are a sort of refrain. This happens in adjacent troparia or in several troparia that are close to each other. Such a repetition of words was intended to improve the concentration of the listener and to make it easier to remember the content of the main theme. In addition to the troparia, which can be assigned to one of the general themes listed above, in the Great Canon there are also special troparia with precisely defined themes. These are heirmoi, triadika and theotokia. It is worth noting that in the work of St Andrew of Crete, biblical images are consistently arranged in a chronological order. Analysis of the Great Canon shows that its author created his work without keeping the exact chronological order of salvation events, thus ordeing them in light of his own metanoical vision. Perceiving man as a person whom God in the Most Holy Trinity wants to heal and save, he selects an image from the Old Testament and unexpectedly combines it with an evangelical parable. It seems that St Andrew of Crete is guided by the logic of the heart, which is far from a rational and schematic approach. This is the reason why he returns to some images or comparisons in following troparia, encouraging the minds of listeners to immerse themselves more and more deeply in the salvific Word. St Andrew of Crete created troparia in such a way that they would help monks to mourn their sins. The vehicle of the poetics of the troparia is a melody composed in such a way that listeners could reach a state of mindfulness and with their whole

119 М.А. Момина, “О происхождении греческой Триоди”, Палестинский Сборник 28/91 (1986) 112–9.

Elements of the Morphological Structure of the Great Canon

selves open up to the salvific message of the proclaimed Word of God. Referring to the monastic spiritual tradition by using poetic language and expressing the essence of God’s love for man was attractive due to the calming beauty of the melodic line and, at the same time, this melody contributed to the experience of a very personal encounter with the Saviour. From a formal point of view, it can be said that owing to the verbal and melodic richness of the troparia, the canon won over the kontakion, the Alexandrine tendency claimed victory over the Antiochian tendency in the hymnography of the Christian East.120 The troparia which form part of the canon are saturated with great symbolism and multi-level references to biblical themes. They were particularly beloved by monks, who found this poetic and musical structure to be a great help in spiritual contemplation of God who loves man. 2.4

Triadika

The triadikon is a very important element in the structure of a canon. It completes each ode of the Great Canon or part of it, as in the case of Odes II and III. In particular, Triadika highlight the symmetry of the Great Canon as a hymnographic form. According to Sergiey Pravdoliubov, the presence of triadika in the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete is connected with monastic prayer practice (πρᾶξις), the aim of which is the contemplation (θεωρία) of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons. The spiritual struggle thereof leads to the purification of soul and body, as a result which the human person can contemplate the Triune God in an increasingly non-imagistic way. Moreover, it is worth noting that in the time of St Andrew of Crete, theologizing meant teaching about the Most Holy Trinity. This kind of theology was widely practised in the monastic environment. The trinitarian dogma was a very important element of hymnography. It was through the singing of hymns, which contained stanzas praising God in the Trinity that fundamental reception of the trinitarian dogma was achieved. At the same time, the singing of the text, which contained the most important dogmatic truths, played the important role of the salvific purification of man from sinful thoughts and thus directed his mind towards the mystery of the Three-Personal God. The presence of triadika at the end of each of the odes of the Great Canon reminds one that the aim of the radical monastic life is to contemplate heavenly mysteries, and especially the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity. Each triadikon is the culmination of a shorter or longer sequence of troparia and refers their contents

120 С.С. Аверинцев, Поэтика ранневизантийской поэзии (Москва: Азбука-классика, 2004), 103.

55

56

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

to the trinitarian dogma. In this sense each of odes can be compared to a spiritual journey to the Most Holy Trinity. Praising the Most Holy Trinity is the most effective way of purification and treatment of the human mind from its sinful tendencies. The main purpose of triadika is selfless praise and worship of God, the Creator and Lord of all life. Triadika refer to the old Christian doxology: “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, both now, and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen”. The words of this prayer are not only a dogmatic doxology, but also have the special power experienced by many hesychasts who were constantly fighting against demons. If we compare triadika from the Great Canon with triadika from the canons written by later hymnographers, we notice that in the work of St Andrew of Crete they are of an exceptional nature, resulting from his choice of words and the melody of individual verses. It is difficult to agree with the view that the probable author of the triadika in the Great Canon is St Theodore the Studite,121 as the triadka thereof appear in all canons created by St Andrew of Crete. This confirms the common belief that St Andrew of Crete “revealed himself as the brightest lamp shining with the light of the Most Holy Trinity.”122 Since in the preserved output of St Andrew of Crete there are no works except canons in which there are references to the Holy Trinity, it might be assumed that it is precisely because of the poetic doxology contained in canons that he went down in the history of Eastern Christian hymnography as “shining with the light of the Most Holy Trinity”. The fact that triadika are not always present in later manuscripts may pose a certain difficulty in adopting this view. However, it seems that this only indicates there was a tendency to abridge canons, with this also to the Great Canon. Furthermore, it should be noted that no later hymnographers who wrote triadika produced texts that would be as mature in poetic terms, or composed the accompanying melodies that would be as organically linked to texts, as is the case with the Great Canon and other canons written by St Andrew of Crete. 2.5

Theotokia

The theotokion originally referred to the ninth ode of the canon, which contained an invocation of the Theotokos.123 In the context of the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete, theotokion is the name of the troparion made in honour of the Mother of God. Theotokia serve as texts ending a given ode in the canon. Their content is often not related to preceding troparia.124 121 122 123 124

Cf. Карабинов, Постная Триодь, 101. Минея служебная. Июль (Киев: Киево-Печерская лавра, 1894), 31.

Cf. Wellesz, A History of Byzantine, 242. Cf. О.В. Венцель, “Богородичен”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная Энциклопедия (5 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2002) 507–8.

Elements of the Morphological Structure of the Great Canon

Theotokia are lyrical in nature, and are a pious reference to the Theotokos. In all canons by St Andrew of Crete, i. e. not only in the Great Canon, theotokia (together with triadika) end each ode. Theotokia express the personal relationship of their author to the Mother of God. They externalize a state of mind and inner experience related to the cult of the Theotokos. 2.6

The Versicle: “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me”

Initially after each troparion, an appropriate verse of a biblical song was sung. It is probable that this addition significantly extended the duration of services, thus the calling “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me” was introduced. It is difficult to determine when this took place. In the Russian tradition, only the heirmoi and the refrain have been preserved: “Have mercy on me, God, have mercy”; however, by the decision of the Stoglavy Synod, troparia started to be recited. The GreekByzantine tradition has preserved the ancient custom of singing both heirmoi and troparia with refrains. In the past, each verse “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me” was accompanied by three prostrations.125 This means that the singing of this verse had to be much longer than it is today. Doing so many prostrations was very helpful in rejecting distracting thoughts, with this contributing to a state of constant concentration. The structural elements of the Great Canon described above prove that this work was intended to be characterised by the maturity of its hymnographic form. The very specific structure of the canon, including: odes, heirmoi, troparia, triadika and theotokia served the faithful as an aid in experiencing the salvific contents extracted from the Word of God, thus opening and focusing their minds on God, the Creator and Saviour of mankind. Both the individual structural elements of the Great Canon and their arrangement introduce listeners to experiencing the presence of God in the Most Holy Trinity and the Mother of God, to follow the path of recognition of one’s own sinfulness, to the changing of intellect (μετάνοια) and compunction (κατάνυξις). The subsequent introduction of the versicle “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me”, repeated after each troparion, was intended to make believers aware that the spiritual transformation of man sought by God in the Trinity of Persons is only possible if one discovers and humbly acknowledges one’s sinfulness. The Great Canon is characterized by a carefully thought-out poetic and musical form, the aim of which is to help man achieve spiritual stillness (ἡσυχία) and openness to the Word of God.

125 Cf. N. Nilles, Kalendarium manuale utriusque Ecclesiae orientalis et occidentalis (2 vol.; Insbruck: Libraria Feliciani Rauch, 1897), 148.

57

58

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

3.

The Great Canon in the Liturgical Tradition of the Orthodox Church

It is difficult to judge whether St Andrew of Crete wrote the Great Canon for liturgical purposes or to express his spiritual state.126 The question remains open as to whether it was a form of personal confession or was also an invitation to the faithful to make an examination of conscience in light of God’s Word. It is possible that the Great Canon was sung in Crete during the Great Lent while St Andrew was still alive and that it was popularised in Constantinople by his spiritual offsprings. The fact is that it was not until fifty years after its author’s death that the Great Canon entered permanently into the liturgical practice of Constantinople. This happened as a result of a great earthquake in Constantinople (17 March 790). The inhabitants of the capital were in panic and prayed using the Great Canon because of its penitential character. They wanted to implore God’s deliverance from misfortune.127 An expression of penitential remembrance of the great earthquake in Constantinople was the introduction of the work of St Andrew of Crete to the services of the fifth week of Great Lent. The choice of this time was determined by the liturgical calendar. The fifth week of Great Lent (at that time without an assigned liturgical theme) was the most appropriate time, as the third week focused on adoration of the Lord’s Cross, and the sixth Sunday was the feast of Christ’s entry into Jerusalem – Palm Sunday. The return to the original function of the Great Canon, namely the call to repentance and a change of the intellect, was the work of St Theodore the Studite (759–826). However, it is difficult to agree with the view of M.A Momina that it was St Theodore who moved the reading of the Great Canon from the fifth week to the first week of Great Lent, because in the Byzantine liturgical books of the 12th century this work was only intended for the Thursday of the fifth week.128 It is impossible to establish when exactly the Great Canon entered the liturgical practice of the fifth week of Great Lent.129 Since the 15th century, the services of the Thursday of the fifth week of the Great Lent have not changed. The manuscripts from that period show that the Great Canon was performed on the Thursday of the fifth week. In antiquity, the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete was sung in its entirety, similarly to how the Paschal Canon of St John of Damascus is sung today. Originally, the Great Canon was sung in a monodic and antiphonal manner by two choirs, both of the right and the left. The original singing of the Great Canon differed from its contemporary performance in that, together with troparia, an appropriate verse 126 Cf. Карабинов, Постная Триодь, 105–6. 127 Cf. Н.Д. Успенский, “Святая Четыредесятница”, Журнал Московской Патриархии 3 (1945) 33–8, on p. 37. 128 Cf. Момина, О происхождении греческой Триоди, 112–9. 129 Cf. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανόν, 10–11.

The Great Canon in the Liturgical Tradition of the Orthodox Church

from a biblical song was sung, which was later replaced by the call: “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me.”130 In the Greek Church, the custom of singing troparia in the canon, not just heirmoi, has been preserved. In the first four days of the first week of Great Lent, the Great Canon is part of the Great Compline and is performed after the Great Doxology. In the fifth week of Great Lent, the Great Canon is sung on Wednesday evening as part of Thursday Matins. The Greek theologian P.K. Christou emphasizes that The Great Canon, being sung by the assembled faithful during joint services, takes on a particularly communal character, expressing the universal pain of mankind, sighing under the weight of sins. The inclusion of the Great Canon in Lenten services fulfils its pedagogical aim, inter alia, through referring to biblical examples, giving reasons and recommendations, but also presents a sullen picture of the condition of man, immersed in sin, and exposes the grace of a new life with God.131

Apart from the pedagogical message, one can also point to its “specific therapeutic and perfecting function”, for the aim of the Great Canon is to make man aware of the tragedy of the unnatural situation in which he finds himself as a result of sin and to strengthen him in his fight against sinful passions with the power of his unity with Christ.132 3.1

The Use of the Great Canon in the First Week of Great Lent

Preserved Greek and Slavic Triodia until the 16th century do not include the text of the Great Canon in services scheduled for the first week of Great Lent. For pastoral reasons, St Andrew of Crete’s masterpiece was introduced to the services of the first week after the fall of Constantinople in 1453. So far, researchers have not established when and where the Great Canon was first included in the Great Compline. In the first week of Great Lent, the Great Canon is divided into four parts and read from Monday to Thursday as part of the Great Compline. It is a three-part service. In the first part, six psalms are chanted and the phrase is sung: “God with us”. In the second part, psalms are accompanied by a prayer of King Manasseh (cf. 2 Chron 33:12–13). The third part consists of psalms and a prayer of praise of God,

130 Cf. А. Горский/К. Невоструев, Описание славянских рукописей Московской Синодальной Библиотеки (3 part; Москва: Московская синодальная типография, 1869), 506–7. 131 Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανόν, 51. 132 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 172.

59

60

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

after which a theotokion is sung, followed by “Lord of powers, be with us...” and verses of Psalm 150. The typikon recommends that these chants be “loud and slow.” The service begins with the recitation of Psalm 69(68). According to the Russian tradition, during chanting, the priest approaches the centre of the church, where the lectern is located, with the book of Triodion, from which the Great Canon is to be recited. A candle on a high candlestick is burning at the lectern. After reciting the psalm, the Great Canon begins. At the beginning of each ode, choristers sing the heirmoi twice. After each troparion they sing a corresponding verse: either “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me” or “Holy Father Andrew pray to God for us” or “Holy Mother Mary, pray to God for us.” During the slow singing of these verses, all those present in the temple perform three prostrations. Choristers bow while singing the next troparion. The priest chants the troparia.133 At the end of Great Compline, for the first four days of Great Lent, the rite of forgiveness is performed. The priest stands in front of the iconostasis, facing the faithful, prostrates and says the following words: “Blessed be the venerable fathers, brothers and sisters, forgive me the sinful for what I have sinned with word, deed and all my senses”, to which everyone answers: “May God forgive you, holy father.”134 3.2

The Use of the Great Canon in the Fifth Week of Great Lent

In the fifth week of Great Lent, the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete is chanted at Matins (in the Slavic tradition and in the Greek monastic tradition), thus called the Matins of the Great Canon. The typikon recommends singing the Great Canon “slowly and with a repentant heart.”135 In both the Greek and Russian traditions, heirmoi are sung twice, at the beginning and end of each ode. In the Russian tradition, all the troparia are chanted by the bishop, priest or priests located at the centre of the nave with the royal door of the iconostasis closed. If more priests are present at the service, each of them can be assigned to read whole odes or their fragments. After each troparion of the Great Canon, the choir should sing the verse: “Have mercy on me, O Lord, have mercy on me”. Since the service also includes a troparia relating to St Mary of Egypt136 and a troparia dedicated to St Andrew of Crete, they should be preceded by singing the appropriate verse: “Holy Mother Mary, pray to God for us” or “Holy Father Andrew, pray to God for

133 Cf. Настольная книга священнослужителя (4 vol.; Москва: Издание Московской Патриархии, 1983), 526.

134 Cf. М.С. Красовицкая, Литургика (Москва: Издательство Православного СвятоТихоновского гуманитарного университета, 2020), 150–60.

135 Настольная книга священнослужителя, 543. 136 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 166.

The Great Canon in the Liturgical Tradition of the Orthodox Church

us.” When singing these verses, three prostrations are recommended. The Typikon also recommends that the choristers bow immediately after singing a verse. When two choirs sing during the service, only the members of the choir that is not currently singing take the bow. The heirmoi from Ode II are sung once.137 A certain liturgical manuscript from St Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai is an interesting testimony to the great popularity of the Great Canon in the 10th century.138 In this Triodion, St Andrew of Crete’s hymnographic masterpiece was moved from Matins to Vespers on the Thursday of the fifth week of Great Lent, which was done for pastoral reasons.139 The Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete entered the liturgical tradition of Great Lent relatively quickly after its creation. Initially, it was practised in Crete, then in Constantinople, and later, due to its unique metanoical character as the only hymnographic work in Eastern Christianity, it began to be performed twice: in the first and fifth weeks of Great Lent. While in the first week it is divided into four parts, with each of which being an integral part of Great Compline, in the fifth week it is included in its entirety in Thursday Matins. Despite the differences resulting from the specificity of the service of which the Great Canon is part of, each of its two liturgical performances is intended to serve the same purpose, namely to help the faithful carry out an examination of conscience and to stimulate them into changing their intellect (μετάνοια) and showing compunction (κατάνυξις) for the sins they have committed. As P. Nellas observes, experience of the Great Canon during the church service helps man enter a different time and space. Being a poetic theological treatise, it primarily serves as a prayer, as an “ecclesial liturgical action” that transforms man and the whole world.140 Analysis of the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete requires examination of the origin and subsequent stages of the Christian hymnographic tradition. This chapter has thus presented a synthetic outline of the prayer traditions of the Christian East. The starting point was a discussion of the role of psalms in the Church of the first centuries. The singing of psalms was not only an integral part of worship of God by the People of the Old Covenant, but was also then taken over by the followers of Christ. The first Christians, who came from the Jewish people, not only worshipped God through the singing of psalms, but also created songs and hymns modelled on the psalms of Scripture. In Christian monasticism, psalms and other biblical songs were treated as an aid in expressing man’s existential states and as a compendium of biblical history. The singing of psalms was not only a way of worshipping God, 137 Cf. Настольная книга священнослужителя, 543–4. 138 Cf. Krueger, The Great Kanon, 90. 139 Triodion. Codex Sinaicus Gr. 734–735. This Triodion includes the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete in its entirety, although without refrains (Gr. 735, 69–83). 140 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 169.

61

62

The Great Canon as a Masterpiece

but also a way to achieving spiritual harmony. This was accomplished through the synthesis of the Word of God with musical harmony, human emotional states and passions. The diagnostic and therapeutic aspect of singing psalms had been emphasized already in the first centuries of Christianity. Church and synagogue liturgy was extremely important for Christian hymnography. It is from these liturgies that, in addition to the singing of psalms, biblical songs were also adopted and used to celebrate the most important events in the lives of the prophets and righteous of the Old Covenant and all of Israel. Of the fourteen biblical songs, nine were incorporated into the Byzantine Psalter. Seven of them came from the Old Testament and two from the New Testament. These songs were performed appropriately, with particular emphasis on their intended rhythm. The oldest Christian hymns were in essence free paraphrases of biblical texts. Their purpose was to express gratitude for the fulfilment of Messianic prophecies. Although initially the contents of Christian hymns depended on biblical pericopes, they were later influenced by pagan poetry. Byzantine hymnographers tried to integrate words with melody by synthesizing their sublime narrative with diverse metres and sophisticated structures. Theophanies from the Old Testament were usually interpreted in a Christocentric manner in order to introduce the faithful into salvific time, in which they could experience the Three-Personal God. An important achievement of Eastern Christian hymnography was its poeticomusical form, called troparion – a type of poetic prose written in stanzas. From the 5th century onwards, troparia became an integral part of liturgical services as a complement to psalms. A troparion is a short one-stanza hymn that refers to a religious event, saint or holiday in the liturgical year. It is characterized by the beauty of its content and originality as expressed in its poetic form. Three hymns from the first centuries of Christianity have become a permanent feature of the liturgical services in Eastern Christianity, these are: O Gladsome Light, the Great Doxology (3rd or 4th century) and the Only Begotten Son (6th century). Today, a troparion usually comprises six to eight verses. Byzantine hymnography was influenced by Syrian hymnography, which had an impact on its metre, strophic structure and general poetic form. Based on formal and analytical criteria the following types of poems, songs, stanzas and litanies are distinguished in Syrian hymnography: quala, madrasha, sogitha, memra, ba’uta, teshbochta, enyana, maurebe, and tachshfto. While singing, Syrian hymns are subject to the principle of a cycle of eight tones. A great role in the history of the Byzantine hymnography was played by kontakion. St Romanos the Melodist contributed to its final form. Kontakia come from Syria and Antioch. In comparison with troparion, this new genre of ecclesiastical poetry was more independent from biblical content, and appeared in a more developed form in the first decades of the 6th century. This musical form was common in the Christian East until the mid-12th century. A kontakion usually consists of 18–30

The Great Canon in the Liturgical Tradition of the Orthodox Church

stanzas, with each repeating the metre and melody of the first stanza (prooemion), and gruadually develops a general theme. The characteristic feature of kontakion is the alphabetical or acrostic connection of stanzas and the adoption of the principle that all stanzas should have the same number of syllables as the heirmos, which is their model. Creating kontakia required great poetic and musical skills. The most mature form of poetry in Byzantine hymnography is the canon, introduced to Matins at the end of the 7th century. The canon is a poetic structure consisting of nine odes, the metre and melody of which are repeated in troparia. The first troparion of each ode, called the heirmos, imposes a specific strophic, rhythmic and melodic structure on the remaining troparia. The canon paraphrases the texts of the Scriptures in such a way as to build, through variations and meditations on the main theme, a sequence of stanzas directly linked to itself. It is assumed that St Andrew of Crete was the creator of canon as a hymnographic form. The second section of Part One discussed the elements of the morphological structure of the Great Canon: odes, heirmoi, troparia, triadika, theotokia and the verse: “Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me”. It has been indicated that the individual structural elements of St Andrew of Crete’s hymnographic masterpiece were intended to serve as an introduction to the experience of the presence of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons and in the Mother of God, which thus becomes the basis for the spiritual transformation of man who discovers and recognizes his sinfulness. The Great Canon is a carefully thought-out poetic and musical form, helpful in achieving spiritual stillness (ἡσυχία) and opening oneself to the Word of God. The third section of Part One was concerned with the presence of the Great Canon in the liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church, i. e. its use during the first and fifth week of Great Lent. For its first few hundred years, the masterpiece of St Andrew of Crete had only been used at Matins on the Thursday of the fifth week of Great Lent, and it was only later (most likely in the 16th century) that it entered the structure of the Great Compline of the first four days of the first week of Great Lent.

63

II.

The Image of God in the Great Canon

The mystery of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons who, at the same time, constitute an inseparable and indivisible unity resulting from His divine being, is a part of reality that human reason cannot grasp.1 God as the Most Holy Trinity can be experienced only in the sphere of faith, accessible only to the human intellect.2 The dogma of the Holy Trinity lies at the centre of Orthodox theology.3 Jesus Christ taught about God the Father and the Spirit of the Father. The three apostles, Peter, James and John, heard the voice of the Father on Mount Tabor (cf. Mark 9:2–8).4 The apostolic community preserved Christ’s teaching on the Triadic Divinity. Christ is the Son born of the Father, who came to earth “in the Father’s name” (John 5:43) to seek and keep the Father’s will and commandments (cf. John 4:24, 5:30, 15:10) and to make His name known to all people (cf. John 17:6). Christ speaks to His Father in prayer (cf. Matt 11:25, 26:39; John 17:1–25) and commends His own spirit to Him when He dies on the cross (cf. Luke 23:46). At the same time, however, Jesus says that “The Father and I are one” (John 10:30) and “All that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15). The unity of the Son of God with the Father is supposed to form the basis of the unity of all believers. This is the main motive of Jesus’ High Priestly Prayer to God the Father: “I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me” (John 17:20–23). Christ also reveals the truth of the Holy Spirit.5 He heralds His coming: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth 1 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 70–71; A. Papanikolaou, Being with God. Trinity, Apophaticism, and Divine-Human Communion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006), 91–127. 2 Cf. V. Lossky, The Vision of God (trans. A. Moorhouse; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1983), 11–169; P.C. Bouteneff, Sweeter than Honey. Orthodox Thinking on Dogma and Truth (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2006), 19–96. 3 Cf. J.D. Zizioulas, Lectures in Christian Dogmatics (London: T&T Clark, 2008), 40–64; M. Pomazansky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology (trans. S. Rose; Platina, CA: St Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 2009), 73–102. 4 Cf. M. Öhler, “Die Verklärung (Mk 9:1–8): die Ankunft der Herrschaft auf der Erde”, Novum Testamentum 38/3 (1996) 197–217. 5 Cf. J.D. Zizioulas, Being as Communion. Studies in Personhood and the Church (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1985), 126–132.

66

The Image of God in the Great Canon

who comes from the Father, he will testify on my behalf ” (John 15:26). Jesus also points to the Holy Spirit’s special role: “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you” (John 14:26).6 The way in which the Gospels speak of God clearly indicates the existence of three different Divine Persons who exist without being autonomous individuals. Each of the Persons of the Holy Trinity does not exist for Himself and does not have existential autonomy. They all form a unity of life, will and action of God in the Trinity.7 John the Evangelist asserts that “God is love” (1 John 4:16). He does not treat love as an attribute of God, but wants to express the truth that love is the way in which God exists. Each of the Divine Persons exists not for Himself, but as a gift of communion in love with the other two Divine Persons. The life of one Divine Person becomes the life of the other Divine Persons as a result of the realisation of life as koinonia. The infinite, uncreated freedom of each of the Divine Persons is identical to infinite uncreated love. This identity of freedom and love in God is dynamic, which is well expressed by the Greek term perichoresis (περιχώρησις), literally: to dance around.8 This dance of freedom and love, in which the Persons in God are constantly and eternally involved, can be compared to three spinning suns that permeate one another in light. In introducing believers to the mystery of the Holy Trinity, St Gregory of Nazianzus, one of the Cappadocian Fathers, preached: “[…] when I speak of God for you too, that you may share this laudable and blessed feeling. And when I speak of God you must be illuminated at once by one flash of light and by three. Three in Individualities or Hypostases, if any prefer to call them, or persons, for we will not quarrel about names so long as the syllables amount to the same meaning; but in respect of the Substance – that is, the Godhead. For the Godhead is one in three, and the three are one, in whom the Godhead is, or to speak more accurately, Who are the Godhead.”9 The life of God is eternity, because it is

6 Cf. B. Bobrinskoy, “The Indwelling of the Spirit in Christ. «Pneumatic Christology» in the Cappadocian Fathers”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 28 (1984) 49–65. 7 Ch. Yannaras, Elements of Faith. An Introduction to Orthodox Theology (trans. K. Schram; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 22. 8 Cf. V. Harrison, “Perichoresis in the Greek Fathers”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 35 (1991) 53–65; C.A. Disandro, “Historia semantica de perikhoresis”, Studia Patristica 15 (1984) 442–47; P. Stemmer, “Perichorese. Zur Geschichte eines Begriffs”, Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte 27 (1983) 9–55; J. Moltmann, “Périchorèse: un mot magique de l’Antiquité pour une nouvelle théologie trinitaire”, Transversalités – Revue del’Institut catholique de Paris 76 (2000) 145–61. 9 St Gregory of Nazianzus, “Oration XXXIX. Oration on the Holy Lights XI”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 7 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 702–718, on pp. 709–710. Cf. Ch.A. Beeley, Gregory of Nazianzus on the Trinity and the Knowledge of God. In Your Light We Shall See Light (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 187–233; J.A. McGuckin,

God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons

personal. Each of the Divine Persons is eternal because they love and are loved.10 The Church Fathers taught that there is one Being in God who simultaneously has the hypostases of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and who is whole in each of Them. The perichoretic-personal life is the modus of such an existence of Divine Persons, which reveals the existence of personal relationships in the Most Holy Trinity. Without these relations, the Trinitarian koinonia could not exist.11 The main aim of Part Two is to seek an answer to the question of how St Andrew of Crete sees the God in whom he believes. In the Great Canon, each of the odes contains references to biblical texts and the dogmatic tradition of Eastern Christianity. The image of God therein consists of phrases concerning the Holy Trinity, as well as the individual Divine Persons. In the following sections of this part, the lexical and dogmatic layer of the Great Canon will be analysed in order to present, in a synthetic way, St Andrew of Crete’s vision of the Holy Trinity and how he perceives the Persons of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

1.

God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons

A solemn confession of faith in God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons is the dogmatic culmination of each of the nine odes of the Great Canon. References to God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons appear ten times in triadika and one time in a theotokion [Ode VII.22]. Triadika are troparia that are placed before the end of each ode or part of an ode which starts with a heirmos. The appearance of triadika in individual odes is as follows: Ode I.24, Ode II.40, Ode III.8, Ode III.27/18, Ode IV.28, Ode V.22, Ode VI.16, Ode VII.21, Ode VIII.21, Ode IX.26. It is worth noting that in Ode II (which consists of two parts due to the presence of two heirmoi), a triadikon appears only in the finale, whereas in Ode III (also two-part) a triadikon appears twice, thus constituting a Trinitarian summary (just before the theotokion) of both parts. The characteristic feature of the Great Canon is its doxological profession of faith in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, who form an inseparable unity,12 which

“Perceiving Light from Light in Light: The Trinitarian Theology of Saint Gregory the Theologian”, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 39 (1994) 7–32. 10 Cf. Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 49. 11 Cf. M. Himcinschi, “Some Considerations Regarding the Cappadocian Trinitarian Ontology”, in Dumitraşcu (ed.), The Ecumenical Legacy of the Cappadocians (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015) 21–38, on pp. 34–5; E. Durand, La périchorèse des Personnes Divines. Immanence mutuelle. Réciprocité et communion (Paris: Cerf, 2005); В. Hebblethwaite, “Perichoresis: Reflections on the Doctrine of the Trinity”, Theology 80 (1997) 255–61. 12 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 71.

67

68

The Image of God in the Great Canon

fully corresponds with the teaching of the Church of the first centuries.13 It is God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons who gathers believers in prayer.14 Individual triadika reveal the most important dogmatic truths concerning the Triune God.15 In the triadikon of Ode I, God is worshiped as the “Trinity beyond all beings in Unity” (Ὑπερούσιε Τριάς ἡ ἐν Μονάδι). St Andrew of Crete presents God first as the Trinity (Τριάς), with this being typical of the entire dogmatic tradition of the Christian East.16 According to the teaching of St Gregory the Theologian: The Trinity […] is truly a trinity. Trinity does not mean an itemized collection of disparate elements. […] Rather, Trinity is a comprehensive relationship between equals who are held in equal honor; the term unites in one word members that are one by nature and does not allow things that are indivisible to suffer fragmentation when their number is divided. 17

The uniqueness of the number three is that it overcomes division by combining one and many. Many ancient peoples treated the number three in a special way because, from the mathematical point of view, it was considered exceptional; from the philosophical point of view, it was considered perfect; and from the theological point of view, it was considered sacred. With regards to God, the number three should not be treated as a material number for counting purposes, because the inseparably connected Divine Persons always constitute a unity, hence 3=1.18 The number three is the perfect number which Christians have considered from the very beginning as a symbol of divinity. Every use of it in the Scriptures refers to the three Divine Persons.19 The three Divine Persons are one God, because each

13 Cf. G.L. Prestige, God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1981), 242–64; C.P. Venema, “Gregory of Nyssa on the Trinity”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 8/1 (1992) 72–94. 14 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 165. 15 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 72–3. 16 V. Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1976), 52: “Though the Latins might express the mystery of the Trinity by starting from one essence in order to arrive at the three persons; though the Greeks might prefer the concrete as their starting point (that is to say, the three hypostases), seeing in them the one nature; it was always the same dogma of the Trinity that was confessed by the whole of Christendom before the separation”. 17 Gregory of Nazianzus, “Oration 23”, in Select Orations (trans. M. Vinson; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2003) 138. 18 Lossky, The Mystical Theology, 48. 19 M. Szram, Duchowy sens liczb w alegorycznej egzegezie aleksandryjskiej (II–V w.) (Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2001), 129.

God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons

contains the unique Divine nature in a different way.20 They are connected in a different way than people can be connected to one another. The Divine Persons are not as similar to each other as human beings are to each other. The differences between the Divine Persons are greater than the differences between human beings, because each of Them reveals all of Their nature, but differently. Each of the three Divine Persons has two remaining Divine Persons in Themselves.21 In subsequent triadika, the author of the Great Canon defines the mystery of the Holy Trinity with successive truths that were formulated in the first centuries of the Church. The Most Holy Trinity has no beginning (Ἄναρχε) and is an uncreated (ἄκτιστε), inseparable unity (ἀμέριστε Μονάς) [Ode II.40/11]. The truth of the unity of the Most Holy Trinity, which is God22 is the essential message of the first triadikon of Ode III.8: “Ὦ Τριάς Μονάς, ὁ Θεός”. The second triadikon of the same Ode [III.27/18] specifies that the Most Holy Trinity is one (Μονὰς), simple (ἁπλῆ),23 uncreated (ἄκτιστε), with its nature having no beginning (ἄναρχε φύσις). Most importantly, this triadikon, for the first time in the Great Canon, contains a confession that God “is praised in the Trinity of Persons” (ἡ ἐν Τριάδι ὑμνουμένη ὑποστάσεων). Depicting the fact that God is the Trinity of Persons, the hymnographer of Crete first used the term υπόστασις in order to highlight the reality of the existence of the Divine Persons.24 This is confirmed in another triadikon [Ode IV.28], thus starting with the statement that the essence of God is undivided (Ἀμέριστον οὐσίᾳ). However, this is soon followed by the statement that God is unconfused in His Persons (ἀσύγχυτον τοῖς προσώποις). Presenting God as the Trinity of Persons, St Andrew of Crete uses both concepts to express the truth about the personal existence of God, i. e. ὑπόστασις and πρόσωπον.25 20 Cf. B.E. Daley, “The Persons of God and the Person of Christ in Patristic Theology: An Argument for Parallel Development”, in A.B. McGowan/B.E. Daley/T.J. Gaden (ed.), God in Early Christian Thought. Essays in Memory of Lloyd G. Paterson (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2009) 232–50. 21 Cf. D. Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity. In the Beginning There Was Love (trans. R. Clark; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2012), 26. 22 Cf. J. Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology. Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York, NY: Fordham University, 1979), 18–196. 23 For a discussion on the simplicity of the Holy Trinity, see D. Stăniloae, The Experience of God (trans. I. Ionită/R. Barringer; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1994), 144–9. 24 In Greek antiquity, ὑπόστασις was so closely linked to the concept of “essence”/”substance” (ουσία) that these terms were eventually equated. In his Letter to the Bishops of Egypt and Libya (Athanasius the Great, Circular to Bishops of Egypt and Libya, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 4 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 655–658), St Athanasius the Great clearly equates these concepts. In his opinion, ὑπόστασις and ουσία have no other meaning than existence itself (ὁ Ὢν), since ὑπόστασις and ουσία are existence (ὕπαρξις). 25 The terms πρόσωπον and persona are derived from the Etruscan term phersu, which originally meant a ritual or theatre mask. Initially, the term πρόσωπον was treated with great reservation in the Christian East because the term had no ontological content and therefore threatened to promote

69

70

The Image of God in the Great Canon

At the first Council of Constantinople (381), the convened bishops professed their faith “in one Godhead (θεότης), Power (δύναμις) and Substance (ουσία) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, the dignity being equal (ομότιμος) and the majesty being equal (συναϊδίου της βασιλείας) in three perfect hypostases (ἐν τρισί τελειοτάταις ὑποστάσεσιν), i. e. three perfect persons (τρισί τελείοις προσώποις).”26 In its dogmatic rulings on the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, the Christian East initially used jointly the terms υπόστασις and πρόσωπον. Gradually, however, the concept of πρόσωπον absorbed the semantic scope of the concept ὑπόστασις and thus took on ontological content and indicated the referential character of the person.27 Etymologically, πρόσωπον is a combination of two Greek words: πρός (towards) and ωψ (in Genitive: ὦπος) – a face. A person is therefore someone who is directed towards the face of someone else. By combining the semantic scopes of the terms ὑπόστασις and πρόσωπον, the Eastern Fathers of the Church wanted to preserve the ontological content of each Person of the Most Holy Trinity and, at the same time, to emphasise the importance of Their inter-trinitarian references.28 A very interesting term, which also appears in this triadikon is “Triune Deity”, and is professed in a theological way as: θεολογῶ σε τὴν Τριαδικὴν μίαν Θεότητα. The word θεολογῶ (“theologically” or “in a theological way”) was lost in some translations into modern languages. It seems, however, that for the author of the Great Canon, this term was not a random word, but was precisely chosen to emphasize the truth of the One God and God in the Trinity of Persons, which can only be explored in a theological way, i. e. through prayer and worship. Evagrius Ponticus taught that only one who prays is a theologian.29 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity crosses the boundaries of human reason. Therefore, the only way to discover who is the One God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons is the theological way, which for Christians living in the first centuries meant through prayer. In the first four triadika of the Great Canon, the individual Divine Persons are not indicated by name. Only in the triadikon of Ode V is the Holy Trinity, which is One God

26 27 28 29

Sabellianism (i. e. a belief in the manifestation of God in three roles). Cf. M. Nédoncelle, “Prosopon et persona dans l’antiquité classique”, Revue des sciences religieuses 22 (1948) 279–99; J.D. Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness. Further Studies in Personhood and the Church (London: T&T Clark, 2006), 156–9. “The Synodical Letter. Council of Constantinople a.d. 382”, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 14 vol., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 394–6. Cf. Ch. Yannaras, Relational Ontology (trans. N. Russel; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2011). Cf. Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 33–7; in D. Staniloăe, Theology and the Church (trans. R. Barringer; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1980), 73–108. Evagrius Ponticus, “On Prayer 60”, in The Greek Ascetic Corpus, 199: “If you are a theologian, you will pray truly, and if you pray truly, you will be a theologian”. See D.W. Fagerberg, “Prayer as Theology”, in R. Hammerling (ed.), A History of Prayer. The First to the Fifteenth Century (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2008) 117–36.

God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons

glorified, with there being simultaneous reference to each of the Divine Persons, that is, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. St Andrew of Crete addresses the Triune God as Holy three times, thus seeking to exalt Him as the Fountain and Peak of Holiness, while at the same time professing the Holiness of each of the Divine Persons, with this done to remind us that God is a simple Being (ἁπλῆ οὐσία) and Unity (Μονὰς).30 The Trinitarian dogmatic synthesis of the triadikon of Ode V is a wonderful model of Christian worship of God: Σέ, Τριάς, δοξάζομεν, τὸν ἕνα Θεόν ·Ἅγιος, Ἅγιος, Ἅγιος εἶ, ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Υἰὸς καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα· ἁπλῆ οὐσία, Μονὰς ἀεί προσκυνουμένη.

We glorify Thee, O Trinity, the one God. Holy, holy, holy art Thou: Father, Son and Spirit, simple Essence and Unity, worshipped forever.

The divine essence (οὐσία) exists forever, without beginning in three Persons: in the unborn Father, in the Son born of the Father and in the Spirit who comes from the Father to the Son. The divine essence began to exist with the Divine Persons.31 Similarly, St John of Damascus (675–749) emphasized that these three personal qualities, i. e. being unborn, being born and being original, are what differentiates the three Most Holy Persons.32 In Ode VI we can see a certain significant change as compared to the triadika of the previous five odes. This change consists in a shift of the mode of revealing the Trinitarian truths. While in the first five odes, God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons is praised by man, in the triadikon of Ode VI, unexpectedly, God Himself speaks of Himself: Τριάς εἰμι ἁπλῆ, ἁδιαίρετος, διαιρετὴ προσωπικῶς, καὶ Μονὰς ὑπάρχω τῇ φύσει ἡνωμένη, ὁ Πατήρ, φησίν, ὁ Υἱὸς καὶ θεῖον Πνεῦμα. “I am the Trinity, simple and undivided, yet divided in Persons, and I am the Unity, by Nature one”, says the Father and the Son and the Divine Spirit.

30 Cf. A. Radde-Gallwitz, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Transformation of Divine Simplicity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 143–235; B. Krivocheine, “The Simplicity of the Divine Nature and the Distinctions in God According to St Gregory of Nyssa”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 21 (1977) 76–104. 31 Cf. Staniloăe, The Holy Trinity, 29. 32 John of Damascus, “The Orthodox Faith” 8, in Writings (trans. F.H. Chase, Jr.; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1999), 186: “[…] the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are one in al things except the being unbegotten, the being begotten, and the procession.”

71

72

The Image of God in the Great Canon

Contrasting the two concepts of “undivided” (ἀδιαίρετος) and “divided” (διαιρετὴ) is a typical example of the language of paradox, as used in apophatic theology33 to emphasize that God, as an uncreated reality, eludes the rationality of human thinking, thus dominated by bivalent logic, in which this same reality can be something and simultaneously is not something. The mystery of God exceeds the human ability of understanding this reality.34 God as the Source of life and all existence and the Cause of existential freedom is always greater (semper maior) than any human imagination.35 The apophatic way of saying who God is serves as a humble confession of His Divine greatness and is a protection against any attempts to objectify the truth, inconceivable for created beings, that He is both the One God and God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons.36 According to Vladimir Lossky: Apophaticism teaches us to see above all a negative meaning in the dogmas of the Church: it forbids us to follow natural ways of thought and to form concepts which would usurp the place of spiritual realities. For Christianity is not a philosophical school for speculating about abstract concepts, but is essentially a communion with the living God.37

The apophatic attitude contributes to the fact that Christian theology also uses the language of poetry, images and symbols to express dogmatic truths, especially those referring to the Most Holy Trinity. This enables us to go beyond the language of conventional logic and schematic concepts.38 The poetic and, at the same time, very precisely dogmatic presentation of the mystery of one God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, which is portrayed in the triadika of the Great Canon, testifies to the apophatic attitude of the Great Canon’s author.

33 Cf. S. Panou, “Apophatische Gotteserkenntnis”, Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 13 (1971) 280–314; H.F. Hägg, Clement of Alexandria and the Beginning of Christian Apophaticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 15–268; Ch. Yannaras, On the Absence and Unknowability of God. Heidegger and the Areopagite (trans. H. Ventis; London: T&T Clark, 2005), 59–110. 34 Cf. J.D. Zizioulas, “The Being of God and the Being of Man. An essay in theological dialogue”, in The One and the Many. Studies on God, Man, the Church, and the World Today (Alhambra, CA: Sebastian, 2010) 17–40, on pp. 26–30. 35 Cf. Ch. Yannaras, “The Trinitarian God as the Casual Principle of Existential Freedom”, in The Meaning of Reality. Essays on Existence and Communion, Eros and History (Los Angeles, CA: Sebastian & Indiktos, 2011) 13–19. 36 Cf. V. Lossky, “Apophasis and Trinitarian Theology”, in In the Image and Likeness of God (trans. by J.H. Erickson/Th.E. Bird; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1985) 13–29; Staniloăe, The Experience of God, 95–117; R.S. Brightman, “Apophatic Theology and Divine Infinity in St Gregory of Nyssa”, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 18/1–2 (1973) 97–114. 37 Lossky, The Mystical Theology, 42. 38 Cf. Yannaras, Elements of Faith, 17.

God as the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons

In the triadikon of Ode VII, the soul is called to praise God above all and everything (τὸν πάντων Θεόν) by singing. The Most Holy Trinity once again is defined as simple (ἁπλῆ) and undivided (ἀδιαίρετε). However, it is worth noting that this triadikon includes a very dogmatic statement in relation to the Holy Trinity, that It is consubstantial (ὁμοοούσιε). The term ὁμοοούσιε initially had Trinitarian connotations, and it was only at the Council of Chalcedon (451) that it was referred to Christ.39 St Andrew of Crete stresses that the Most Holy Trinity has one nature (φύσις μία). Probably taking into account the phrase from the First Epistle of John the Apostle 1:5: “God is Light”, the author of the Great Canon praises God and confesses that he is Lights (φῶτα) and Light (φῶς) and the three Holies (ἅγια τρία). The image of the Most Holy Trinity as Light or Three Suns resembles the conception of the Cappadocian Fathers, who in this way wanted to express the ontological completeness of each of the Divine Persons.40 The theotokion that ends Ode VII also mentions the fact that the Holy Trinity is undivided. In relation to the Mother of God, there is a justification for her being the Mother of God (Θεογεννῆτορ): “for Thou hast given birth to One of the undivided Trinity, Thy Son and God” (ὅτι τῆς ἀχωρίστου Τριάδος ἀπεκύησας τὸν ἕνα Υἱὸν καὶ Θεόν). In the penultimate triadikon [Ode VIII.21], St Andrew of Crete begs God for mercy. According to Trinitarian logic, which characterizes all triadika of the Great Canon, he focuses both on individual Divine Persons and on the One Trinity (Τριὰς Μονάς). Each of the Persons of the Holy Trinity is defined in a way that constitutes Their personal nature. The author of the Great Canon turns to God the Father: “Father without beginning (eternal)” (Ἄναρχε Πάτερ), to the Son of God: “coeternal Son” (Υἱὲ συνάναρχε) and to the Spirit: “loving Comforter” (Παράκλλητε ἀγαθέ) and “the Spirit of righteousness” (Πνεῦμα τὸ εὐθές). From the second part of the analysed triadikon we can learn that God the Father is the “Begetter of the Word of God” (Λόγου Θεοῦ Γεννῆτορ), the Son of God is the “Word of the Eternal Father” (Πατρὸς ἀναάρχου Λόγε), and the Holy Spirit is a “living and creative Spirit” (Πνεῦμα ζῶν καὶ κτίζον). This double way of defining the individual Persons in the Trinity aptly renders the relationship between Them. God

39 B. Bobrinskoy, The Mystery of the Trinity. Trinitarian Experience and Vision in the Biblical and Patristic Tradition (trans. A.P. Gythiel; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1999), 222: “The term homoousios was originally trinitarian. In 451, at Chalcedon, a transfer from this to a Christological usage will be made, to speak of the double consubstantiality of Christ, both as to the humanity and as to the divinity. Later, the Fathers will speak of consubstantiality from the anthropological point of view, signifying the consubstantiality of the human being with God, through grace.” 40 Cf. J.D. Zizioulas, “The Trinity and Personhood: Appreciating the Cappadocian Contribution”, in Communion and Otherness, 157; Th. Норко, “The Trinity in the Cappadocians”, in B. McGinn/J. Meyendorff/J. Leclercq (ed.), Christian Spirituality. Origins to the Twelfth Century (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1985) 260–76.

73

74

The Image of God in the Great Canon

the Father is in relation to the Son, because he is the “Father without beginning”, “Begetter of the Word of God”, and the Son of God is “coeternal”, the “Word of the Eternal Father”. Although the Person of the Holy Spirit is not directly referred to God the Father and to God the Son, from the indication that he is a “loving Comforter”, a “Spirit of righteousness”, a “living and creative Spirit”, one can conclude that he stays in a relationship of love to both God the Father and God the Son. The last triadikon of the Great Canon [cf. Ode IX.26] concerns a synthesis of the revelation of God as the consubstantial Trinity (Τριὰς ὁμοοούσιε) that is a community of Divine Persons: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, which has a single nature (τὸν ἕνα φύσει). The God of Christians is a Unity (Μονὰς) and, at the same time, is tri-personal (ἡ τρισυπόστατος). Those praying to God in the Trinity are called to glorify the Father (Πατέρα δοξάζοντες), magnify the Son (Υἱὸν μεγαλύνοντες) and worship the Spirit (Πνεῦμα προσκυνοῦντες). For God is the true God (ἀληθῶς Θεόν) and it is precisely as the true God that he is “Life and Lives, Kingdom without end” (ζωήν τε καὶ ζωάς Βασιλείαν ἀτελεύτητον).

2.

God the Father (Θεός Πατήρ)

The person of God the Father is mentioned nine times in the Great Canon, of which six times He is mentioned by name as the Father and three times as the Creator. In the triadikon of Ode VIII, which is a supplication to the Holy Trinity for mercy, the Archbishop of Crete addresses God the Father as the: “Father without beginning” (Ἄναρχε Πάτερ). The term ἄναρχος literally means “without beginning”. The truth that God the Father is “without beginning” is reinforced in the same triadikon by the addition that Christ is the “Word of the Eternal Father” (Πατρὸς ἀναάρχου Λόγε). God the Father is united with the other two Persons of the Trinity by nature (τῇ φύσει ήνωμένη) [Ode VI.16]. The concept of the Person of the Father, who is “without beginning” and “without cause” is an important statement in the Eastern patristic tradition.41 The uniqueness of God the Father results especially from the fact that He does not owe the beginning of His existence to any of the two remaining Hypostases of the Holy Trinity.42 In Eastern Christianity, the important thing, in reference to the teachings of the Cappadocian Fathers, is the “monarchy of the Father”, i. e. His being the only Source (Πηγή), the only Cause (Αιτία) and the only Principle (Αρχή) in the Most Holy Trinity.43 The idea of “cause” (αιτία) was introduced into Trinitarian theology by

41 Cf. Bobrinskoy, The Mystery of the Trinity, 263. 42 Cf. John of Damascus, “The Orthodox Faith” 8, 187. 43 Cf. Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 113–54.

God the Father (Θεός Πατήρ)

the Cappadocian Fathers to indicate that the ontological principle (αρχή) cannot be equated with substance or nature, but with the Person of God the Father.44 An important role in the description of the unity of the Holy Trinity is played by the term περιχώρησις,45 by means of which St Basil the Great46 and St Gregory of Nazianzus47 explain that each Person in the Trinity has full and indivisible nature in God and has a share in the other Persons thereof. According to St Maximus the Confessor, God the Father in the eternal act of love gives His nature to the Son and the Holy Spirit in such a way that in each of them it remains one and undivided.48 The Divine Persons therefore share one and the same nature, each one of Them having all of it. God the Father is the source of the Divinity of the Most Holy Trinity and it is Him who gives a singular and indivisible nature to the Son and the Holy Spirit. As Vladimir Lossky rightly notes: “The Greek Fathers always maintained that the principle of unity in the Trinity is the person of the Father.”49 God the Father is the Creator of all things (τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ) [Ode 1.2, cf. Ode I.9]. St Andrew addresses a request to God the Creator (ζωοπλαστήσας), who moulded clay in giving man flesh (σάρκα), bones (ὀστᾶ), breath (πνοὴν) and life (ζωήν), that he might be accepted by Him, the Maker (ὦ Ποιητά), Deliverer (Λυτρωτά) and Judge, (Κριτά) in a state of repentance [cf. Ode 1.10]. The cry: “με44 Cf. K. Leśniewski, “The Cappadocians’ Stress on the Monarchia of the Father in Metropolitan John D. Zizioulas”, in N. Dumitrascu (ed.), The Ecumenical Legacy of the Cappadocians (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015) 39–61, on p. 46. 45 Cf. M. Telea, “The Use of the Term Perichoresis in the Trinitarian Dogma According to St Gregory of Nyssa”, in The Ecumenical Legacy of the Cappadocians 235–245. 46 Basil, Letter 38, To His Brother Gregory, concerning the Difference between Substance and Person, in Letters (1 vol. (1–185); trans. Sister Agnes Clare Way; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2008) 96: “For, all the attributes of the Father are beheld in the Son, and all the attributes of the Son belong also to the Father, since both the whole Son remains in the Father and has the whole Father in Himself. Therefore, the person of the Son becomes, as it were, the form and face of the knowledge of the Father, and the person of the Father is known in the form of the Son, although the individuality observed in them remains for the clear distinction of their persons.” Cf. S.M. Hildebrand, The Trinitarian Theology of Basil of Caesarea: A Synthesis of Greek Thought and Biblical Truth (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2007). 47 Gregory of Nazianzus, “The Fifth Theological Oration. Oration 31. On the Holy Spirit” 14, in Five Theological Orations, trans. S. Reynolds; (Estate of Stephen Reynolds 2011) 107: “For us there is one God, because there is only one divine nature, and all that proceeds from the One is referred to It, although we believe that there are Three. For one is not more and another less God; nor is One before and another after; neither are They divided in will or parted in power; nor can you find here any of the qualities of divisible things. To put the matter concisely, the divine nature undivided in those who are distinct; there is a unique fusion of Light, as if three suns were joined to each other.” Cf. J. Egan, “Primal Cause and Trinitarian Perichoresis in Gregory Nazianzen’s Oration 31”, Studia Patristica 27 (1993) 21–28. 48 Cf. St Maximus the Confessor, Scholia in Librum De Divinis Nominibus II.3, PG 4, 221A. 49 Lossky, The Mystical Theology, 58.

75

76

The Image of God in the Great Canon

τανοοῦντα δέξαι με” has a double meaning. It can be translated as “accept me in

repentance” or “accept me in changing my intellect”. It follows from the idea of Divine Fatherhood, treated as an ontological category, that God is called the Father not only because he has a Son, but also in recognition of the fact that God as the Father is the Creator.50 This truth was dogmatized at the Council of Nicaea (325): “We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible.”51 In the Great Canon, God the Father is shown as the One who, outside time (ἄχρονον), begets the Son [Ode III.28/19] and therefore the hymnographer from Crete uses the name “Genitor” to refer to Him (Γεννήτορι) [Ode IV.18]. God the Father, like the Son of God and the Spirit of God, is Holy (Ἄγιος) [Ode V.22] and therefore is glorified (Πατέρα δοξάζοντες) [Ode IХ.26]. The fatherhood of God the Father is unique and perfect, not only because of the mystery of the relationship between the Father and the Son, but also because it forms the basis of all human fatherhood, the source of the perfect grace coming from the “Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). The following phrase from the Epistle to the Ephesians is very significant in this context: “For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth takes its name” (Eph 3:14–15). In the New Testament, Divine Fatherhood is the foundation of all fatherhood, both human and spiritual. Trinitarian dogma is the basis for presentation of the Person of God the Father. St Andrew of Crete praises God in a doxological formula as the Trinity of Persons [cf. Ode VI.16]. God the Father, as one of the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, inseparable from other Divine Persons, as well as the whole Most Holy Trinity, is simple. The Person of God the Father is Love (cf. 1 John 4:8–16) and is the Source of Love, thus manifested by the Persons of the Son of God and the Holy Spirit.

3.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

God the Father remains a hidden God (cf. Isa 45:15) who “dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see” (1 Tim 6:16).52 His Person is revealed through the Son of God.53 The Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is the Onlybegotten (Μονογενής) of the Father. The mystery of the Son of God is brought closer in the definition of faith of the Council of Chalcedon:

50 Cf. Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 117. 51 “The Nicene Creed”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 14 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 42. 52 Cf. Exod 33:20; John 1:17–18. 53 Cf. G. O’Collins, Christology. A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2 2009), 119–40.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

Following the holy Fathers we teach with one voice that the Son [of God] and our Lord Jesus Christ is to be confessed as one and the same [Person], that he is perfect in Godhead and perfect in manhood, very God and very man, of a reasonable soul and [human] body consisting, consubstantial54 with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood; made in all things like unto us, sin only excepted begotten of his Father before the worlds according to his Godhead; but in these days for us men and for our salvation born [into the world] of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God according to his manhood. This one and the same Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son [of God] must be confessed to be in two natures, unconfusedly (ασυγχύτως), immutably (ατρέπτως), indivisibly (αδιαιρέτως), inseparably (αχωρίστως) [united], and that without distinction of natures being taken away by such union, but rather the peculiar property of each nature being preserved and being united in one Person and subsistence, not separated or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten, God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Prophets of old time have spoken concerning him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ hath taught us, and as the Creed of the Fathers hath delivered to us.55

Who is the Son of God Jesus Christ for the Bishop of Gortyna? This question is particularly important when we consider the rather long period of time in which the hymnographer from Crete was under the influence of Monothelitism, a heresy which was finally condemned by the Church at the Third Council of Constantinople (680–681).56 In the Great Canon, the Person of the Son of God is an essential point of reference in soteriological and metanoical reflection.57 It is for this reason that the Bishop of Gortyna used as many as fifteen titles to refer to the Second Person of the Trinity. By confessing in poetic stanzas that the Son of God is: Jesus, Christ, Son of Theotokos, Son of David, Lord, Almighty, Saviour, Lamb of God, King, Judge, Word, Physician, Creator, Lover of Mankind and Good Shepherd – the author of the Great Canon expressed not only his faith in Jesus’ Divinity and humanity, but also pointed to His unique role in the history of salvation and His relationship with the community of the Church and every man. Through analysis of individual Christological titles and New Testament references in the individual stanzas of the Great Canon, an attempt is here made to seek an answer to the fundamental question of who Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was for the Archbishop of Crete.

54 Cf. P.F. Beatrice, “The Word «Homoousios» from Hellenism to Christianity”, Church History 71/2 (2002) 243–72. 55 “The Definition of Faith of the Council of Chalcedon”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 14 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 515–519, on pp. 516–517. 56 Cf. J. Romanides, An Outline of Orthodox Patristic Dogmatics (trans. G.D. Dragas; Rollinsford, NH: Orthodox Research Institute, 2004), 68–75. 57 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 94–105.

77

78

The Image of God in the Great Canon

3.1

Jesus (Ιησούς)

In the Great Canon, the Name of Jesus appears seven times in different contexts. In six cases, the author directly addresses the Son of God using this very name. The name Jesus encapsulates the truth that “Yahweh is salvation”. This meaning of the Greek word Ιησούς derives from its Hebrew source: Yehoshua, Yeshua – “Yahweh saves”. This name has an important meaning in expressing the historicity of the God-man.58 For the first time, the name Jesus appears in Troparion 8 of Ode I. The author, aware of his sinfulness, confesses to Jesus that he did not follow Abel’s righteousness (δικαιοσύνῃ) and did not offer gifts (δῶρά) worthy of his Person, or commit godly actions (οὐ πράξεις ἐνθέου), since he was not able to make a pure sacrifice (θυσίαν καθαράν) and thus was unable to live an unblemished life (βίον ἀνεπίληπτον). The Bishop of Gortyna addresses Jesus, born of Mary, begging for his mercy by identifying himself with the man described in the parable of the merciful Samaritan, who was wounded by robbers (cf. Luke 10:30–35).59 Complaining that his suffering had not attracted any interest from both the priest and the Levite,60 he confidently asks Jesus to come to him and take pity on him [Ode I.15].61 Aware of his sins, he falls down before Jesus and asks for forgiveness and compassion [cf. Ode I.22]. The words addressed to Jesus: “Thou art my beloved Jesus” (Σὺ εἶ ὁ γλυκὺς Ἰησοῦς) testify to the intimate closeness that a believer enjoys as a result of a genuine opening

58 W. Foester, “Iesous [Jesus]”, in G. Kittel/G. Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1985), 361. 59 Cf. M.S. Enslin, “Luke and the Samaritans”, The Harvard Theological Review, 36/4 (1943) 284–92; B. Younger, “Luke 10,25–37 – Preaching Like the Good Samaritan”, Review and Expositor 90 (1993) 393–98. 60 Commentators on the parable of the good Samaritan show that this parable is an attack on Judaism, in which strangers, that is to say people who do not belong to this religious community, are not given the opportunity to participate in God’s mercy. Through this parable, Luke the Evangelist wanted to point out that the roles in God’s Kingdom will be reversed. The priest and the Levite (belonging to the temple authorities) will be excluded, while exiles and outcasts will be taken in by the merciful God. The image of the good Samaritan must have been shocking for the Jewish community. In the Gospel according to Luke, this parable was intended to sensitise the minds of the Jews towards a God open to the fate of every man. Cf. K.A. Reich, Figuring Jesus. The Power of Rhetorical Figures of Speech in the Gospel of Luke (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2011), 105; S.H. Ringe, Luke (Luisville, Ky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995), 158; B. Malina/R.L. Rohrbaugh, Social Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1992), 347. 61 In his commentary on this troparion, Acacius the Sabaite gave a symbolic meaning to the individual phrases of the parable: “Who was that man? It was Adam. What was Jerusalem? It was a city of virtues. What was Jericho? It was a city of hell. Who were the robbers? They were demons killing human nature. Whose city is Jerusalem? It was a city of people living in virtue”. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 239.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

up to the God-man. For St Andrew of Crete, Jesus is the Creator (Πλαστουργός) and Saviour (Σωτήρ) of man who alone can justify mankind [cf. Ode III.7]. Having in mind the parable from the Gospel according to St Luke about a woman healed by Jesus, who for eighteen years had had a spirit that crippled her, which manifested itself in the fact that she was bent over and could not stand up straight (cf. Luke 13:11–13),62 the author of the Great Canon orders his soul to imitate the woman bent over to the ground and thus, by worshiping Jesus, regain the ability to walk in God’s path: Τὴν χαμαὶ συγκύπτουσαν μίμοῦ, ὦ ψυχή· πρόσελθε, πρόσπεσον τοῖς ποσὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ἵνα σε ἀνορθώσῃ, καὶ βηματίσεις ὀρθῶς, τὰς τρίβους τοῦ Κυρίου.

O my soul, do as the woman who was bowed to the ground. Fall at the feet of Jesus, that He may make thee straight again: and thou shalt walk upright upon the paths of the Lord [Ode V.19].

Thematic reference to walking straight on the paths of the Lord is a reference to Psalm 23(22): “[The Lord] leads me in right paths for his name’s sake.”63 At the end of Ode IX a vision of Jesus’ crucifixion was presented, based on two evangelical pericopes (cf. Matt 27:51–53 and Luke 23:44–45): Ἡ Κτίσις συνείχετο σταυρούμενόν σε βλέπουσα· ὄρη καὶ πέτραι φόβῳ διερρήγνυντο· καὶ γῆ συνεσείετο καὶ ᾍδης ἐγυμνοῦτο· καὶ συνεσκότασε τὸ φῶς ἐν ἡμέρᾳ, καθορῶν σε, Ἰησοῦ, προσηλωμένον σαρκί.

Creation was in anguish, seeing Thee crucified. Mountains and rocks were split from fear, the earth quaked, and hell was despoiled; the light grew dark in daytime, beholding Thee, O Jesus, nailed in the flesh [Ode IХ.23].

In order to show the drama of the events that took place immediately after the death of Jesus, the Archbishop of Crete draws attention to the description found in the Gospel of Matthew. He does not quote the whole verse directly, but chooses words and phrases to capture the apocalyptic horror thereof: “the earth quaked”, “the rocks were split” (Matt 27:51). He expressed the content of two verses: “The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. After His resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many” (Matt 27:52–53) in a brief statement: “hell was despoiled.” This reference to the event of Jesus’ death, which is the content of the second part

62 Cf. H. Torgerson, “The Healing of the Bent Woman: A Narrative Interpretation of Luke 13:10–17”, Currents in Theology and Mission 32 (2005) 178–86. 63 Ps 23(22):3.

79

80

The Image of God in the Great Canon

of the troparion, is linked to the description from the Gospel according to Luke: “It was now about noon, and darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon, while the sun’s light failed; and the curtain of the temple was torn in two. Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, ‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit’. Having said this, he breathed his last” (Luke 23:44–46).64 The evangelical presentation of the facts connected with the Passion and death of Jesus on the Cross65 gains a new perspective in the Great Canon, because it emphasizes that a solar eclipse happened because created nature saw Jesus nailed to the cross.66 In Ode IX.25 the author begs Jesus the Judge (Κριτά), who will come again with angels to judge the whole world (κρῖναι Κόσμον ἅπαντα), to look at him with the eye of mercy and take pity on him, for he is aware that he has sinned more than any other man [lit. he has sinned more than all human nature]67 (τὸν ὑπὲρ τὴν πᾶσαν φύσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἁμαρτήσαντα). It is worth noting that in the first verse of the troparion, the hymnographer addresses Jesus: “O my Judge who dost know me” (Κριτά μου καὶ γνῶστά μου), which is a reference to a verse from the Gospel according to John: “But Jesus on his part would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to testify about anyone; for he himself knew what was in everyone” (John 2:24–25). 3.2

Christ (Χριστός)

The name Christ appears 26 times in the Great Canon. Already in the first troparion of Ode I, St Andrew of Crete initiates a dialogue with Christ, begging Him in His mercy to grant him forgiveness for his sins (ἀλλ’ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν). Only Christ can heal a human being [cf. Ode I.14],68 for He is the Physician (ἰατρός), healing (θεράπευσον) the body (Tὸ σῶμα) and the spirit (τὸ πνεῦμα), as the author asserts in Ode IV.17. The imitation (μίμησις) of the behaviour of the woman suffering from a haemorrhage, i. e. running and grasping of Christ’s garment, is a necessary condition for healing. Then, as is recalled in Ode V.18, Christ says: “Thy faith has saved thee” (Ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε). In this troparion there is a reference to the evangelical parable about the healing of

64 Cf. D.P. Senior, The Passion Narrative according to Matthew: A Redactional Study (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1975). 65 Cf. P.L. Gavrilyuk, The Suffering of the Impassible God. The Dialectics of Patristic Thought (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 64–90. 66 Cf. J. Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Christian Thought (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1987), 69–89. 67 Cf. D.J. Constantelos, “Irenaeos of Lyons and His Central Views on Human Nature”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 33 (1989) 351–63. 68 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 238.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

a woman suffering from haemorrhage (cf. Matt 9:20–22).69 The words of Christ addressed to the woman: “Thy faith has saved thee” (ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε)” (Matt 9:22) are quoted literally.70 The troparion also contains a request to Christ to make His Church firm upon the unshaken rock of His commandments: Ἐπὶ τὴν ἀσάλευτον, Χριστέ, πέτραν τῶν ἐντολῶν σου τὴν Ἐκκλησίαν σου στερέωσον.

St Andrew of Crete encourages his soul to imitate the priest of God, and at the same time the lonely King, who can be considered an image of Christ’s life among men in the world [cf. Ode III.22/13].71 In the original Greek text it was clearly indicated which person the author of the Great Canon had in mind. On the basis of the Book of Genesis, it can be concluded that this priest and king is Melchizedek72 : “And King Melchizedek of Salem73 brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High” (Gen 14:18).74 This assumption becomes even more obvious when we consider the pericope from the Epistle to the Hebrews, in which Christ is presented as a Melchizedek–like priest75 : “This King Melchizedek of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him; and to him Abraham apportioned one-tenth of everything. His name, in the first place, means ‘king of righteousness’; next he is also king of Salem, that is, ‘king of peace’. Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever”

69 Cf. D.H. Bromley, “The Healing of the Haemorrhaging Woman: Miracle or Magic?”, Journal of Biblical Studies 5/1 (2005) 1–20; V.K. Robbins, “The Woman Who Touched Jesus’ Garment: Socio-Rhetorical Analysis of the Synoptic Accounts”, New Testament Studies 33/4 (1987) 502–15. 70 St John Chrysostom in his “Homily XXXI on Matthew 9:18”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), The Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (1 Series; 10 vol.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark/Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996) 442–52, on p. 445 explains that the woman suffering from a haemorrhage, “though she was bound by her affliction, yet her faith had given her wings. And mark how He comforts her, saying, ‘Thy faith hath saved thee.’ Now surely, had He drawn her forward for display, He would not have added this; but He saith this, partly teaching the ruler of the synagogue to believe, partly proclaiming the woman’s praise, and affording her by these words delight and advantage equal to her bodily health.” 71 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 416. 72 Cf. O. Michel, “Melchizedek”, in G. Kittel/G.W. Bromiley (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (4 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans 1967) 568–71; J.L. Mattingly, “Melchizedek”, in New Catholic Encyclopedia (9 vol.; Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1981) 626–7. 73 Cf. J.A. Emerton, “The Site of Salem, the City of Melchizedek (Genesis XIV 18)”, in J.A. Emerton (ed.), Studies in the Pentateuch (Leiden: Brill, 1990) 45–71. 74 Cf. F. Cornelius, “Genesis 14”, Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenchaft 72 (1960) 1–7. 75 Cf. M. Delcor, “Melchizedek from Genesis to the Qumran Texts and the Epistle to the Hebrews”, Journal for the Study of Judaism 2 (1971) 115–45.

81

82

The Image of God in the Great Canon

(Heb 7:1–3).76 The content of the above pericope is directly related to the verse of Psalm 110(109), which is recognized as a royal psalm of a messianic character: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek,’”77 which is an Old Testament announcement of the eternal dignity of Christ as the high priest.78 The absence of an explicit indication in the troparion of the name Melchizedek in relation to Christ, unlike in many other troparia referring directly to persons from the Old and New Testaments, can only testify to the obvious character of the Christ–Melchizedek parallel.79 For St Andrew of Crete, as well as for his contemporaries, this kind of typology was obvious, and based on common knowledge of the Scripture. Two different words were used in the concerned troparion to denote following/imitation (ἀφομοίωμα; μιμήθητι), with this being done in order to strengthen the spiritual message of the main idea: Τὸν ἱερέα Θεοῦ καὶ βασιλέα μεμονωμένον, τοῦ Χρίστοῦ τὸ ἀφομοίωμα, τοῦ ἐν κόσμῳ, βίου ἐν ἀνθρώποις, μιμήθητι.

Follow the example of Melchizedek, the priest of God, the King set apart, who was an image of the life of Christ among men in the world [Ode Ш.22/13].

The author of the Great Canon directs the confession of his sins to Christ the King [cf. Ode V.3]. The term “I have sinned” (ἥμαρτον) appears twice. This is due to a deepened awareness of the weight of his own sin and, at the same time, this results from his intention to make believers aware that sin is a loss of spiritual purity (ἁγνείας) and to recommend moderation in desire, clear-headedness and reason (σωφροσύνης). The term sophrosyne (σωφροσύνη) has a wide range of meanings, usually referring to the preservation of virtue and temperance.80 From

76 Cf. G. Granerod, “Melchizedek in Hebrews 7”, Biblica 90 (2009) 188–202; E. Dimmler, Melchisedek Gedanken über das Hohepriestertum Christi nach dem Hebräerbrief (Kempten: Verlag Josef Kösel & Friedrich Pustet, 1921); F.L. Horton, The Melchizedek Tradition: A Critical Examination of the Sources to the Fifth Century A.D. and in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976). 77 Ps 110(109):4. Cf. G. Granerod, Abraham and Melchizedek. Scribal Activity of Second Temple Times in Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 (Berlin/New York, NY: De Gruyter, 2010), 215–46; P.J. Nel, “Psalm 110 and the Melchizedek Tradition”, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 22/1 (1996) 1–14. 78 Cf. J.A. Fitzmyer, “‘Now this Melchizedek...’ Heb. 7:1; Ps. 110:4, Gn. 14:8ff.”, in Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament (London: Eerdmans, 1971) 221–43. 79 Cf. D. Flusser, “Melchizedek and the Son of Man”, Christian news from Israel 17 (1966) 228–39; H. Rusche, “Die Gestalt des Melchizedek”, Münchener Teologische Zeitschrift 5 (1955) 230–52. 80 Cf. A. Rademaker, Sophrosyne and the Rhetoric of Self-Restraint. Polysemy & Persuasive Use of an Ancient Greek Value Term (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2005), 1–40, 322–353; H. North, Sophrosyne: Self-Knowledge and Self-Restraint in Greek Literature (Ithaca, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1966).

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

a hesychastic point of view, it seems more appropriate to underline the fact that this term concerns a unifying wisdom that consists of moderation, soberness and spiritual concentration. A comparison with the brothers who sold Joseph (cf. Gen 37:27–28) illustratively shows that man, through sin, loses those who are closest to him. St Andrew of Crete, through the personification of spiritual purity and clear-headedness, helps to realize that through sin man loses the essential value that determines his identity. This is for the case in Ode V.3: Ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, Χριστὲ Βασιλεῦ· Ἥμαρτον, ἥμαρτον, ὡς οἱ πρὶν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ ἀδελφοὶ πεπρακότες τὸν τῆς ἁγνείας καρπὸν καί τὸν τῆς σωφροσύνης.

I confess to Thee, O Christ my King: I have sinned, I have sinned like the brethren of Joseph, who once sold the fruit of purity and chastity.

The soul is called upon to confess boldly and sincerely (παρρησίᾳ) its actions to Christ. The phrase from Ode IV.381 : “set them before thine eyes, and let the drops of thy tears fall” (προσάγαγε καὶ σταγόνας στάλαξον δακρύων σου·) shows that the author of the Great Canon refers here to evil deeds. Mourning one’s own sins before Christ is conducive to purifying the soul and opening up to God’s mercy. Ode IX of the Great Canon presents an image of Christ focused on His earthly life, teaching and activity. The starting point is the reminder contained in Ode IX.5 that Christ became a child and accepted human flesh (Χριστὸς ἐνηπίασε σαρκὶ προσομιλήσας μοι).82 The next phrase says that Christ performed of his own free will everything that belongs to the nature of man, except for sin (καὶ πάντα ὅσα ὑπάρχει τῆς φύσεως, Βουλήσει ἐπλήρωσε τῆς ἁμαρτίας). This content can be directly linked to the verse from the Epistle to the Hebrews: “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin” (Heb 4:15).83 The Archbishop of Crete specifies the general idea of Christ’s similarity to man, concentrating on Christ’s belonging to human nature. Similar to man in everything – Christ bestows on the soul a model (ὑπογραμμόν) and an image (εἰκόνα) of His graciousness (συγκαταβάσεως). The next troparion, starting with the words “Christ became man” (Χριστὸς ἐνηνθρώπησε), indicates the purpose of the Incarnation.84 To make the Incarnation a reality, the aim was to call thieves (λῃστὰς) and harlots (πόρνας) to

81 “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 275–78. 82 Cf. J. Meyendorff, “Christ’s Humanity: the Paschal Mystery”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 31 (1987) 5–40. 83 Cf. G.B. Caird, “The Exegetical Method of the Epistle to the Hebrews”, Canadian Journal of Theology 5 (1959) 44–51. 84 Cf. B. Studer, Trinity and Incarnation. The Faith of the Early Church (trans. M. Westerhoff; Collegeville, MN: T&T Clark, 1993), 43–219.

83

84

The Image of God in the Great Canon

change their intellect/repent (καλέσας εἰς μετάνοιαν). The Incarnation opens the gate of the Kingdom, through which the Pharisees, publicans and adulterers can pass, changing their lives.85 Ode ΙΧ.6 is a call to the soul for repentance: “My soul, change you intellect/repent (ψυχὴ μετανόησον), for all this sinners pass before thee in changing their life (μεταποιούμενοι).” Consistently referring to the earthly life of Christ, the hymnographer from Crete reminds us of subsequent acts: the salvation of the magi (cf. Matt 2:12), the gathering of the shepherds (cf. Luke 2:9–12), the bringing of renown to the old man Simeon (cf. Luke 2:34) and the old widow Anna, who was a prophet (cf. Luke 2:36–38). It also reminds us of the infants who became martyrs because of Christ (cf. Matt 2:16–18; Ode IX.7).86 After this, emphasis is put on Christ’s temptation, which preceded his public activity. With reference to the pericopes of the Gospel according to Matthew (4:3–9), Luke (4:1–13) and Mark (1:12–13), the key phrases of Ode IX.9 make the struggle of Christ with the devil more obvious. The narrative of the analysed troparion begins with a simple, passive statement: “Christ was being tempted” (Χριστὸς ἐπειράζετο), which evokes the evangelical descriptions of this event. Moreover, there is information, expressed in active voice, about what the other person in the dialogue, the devil, was doing. While it is only said of Christ that he was being tempted, there is information with regards to the devil, not only that he tempted (Διάβολος ἐπείραζε), but also how he undertook this temption. The examined troparion refers to the first and third temptation. However, there is no mention of the devil’s second temptation (cf. Matt 4:5–7). The first temptation was to make Christ turn stones into bread. According to the evangelical description, the tempter approached the Saviour when he felt hunger after having fasted for forty days and forty nights (cf. Matt 4:2). Then the tempter said: “If you are the Son of God, command that these stones become loaves of bread (εἰπὲ ἵνα οἱ λίθοι οὗτοι ἄρτοι γένωνται)” (Matt 4:3). In contrast to the simple dialogical form found in the evangelical description, the reference to the first temptation in the Great Canon is pictorial: “the Devil tempted Him, showing Him the stones that might be made bread” (Διάβολος ἐπείραζε δεικνὺς τοὺς λίθους, ἵνα ἄρτοι γένωνται). In the same way, referring to the subsequent vision, St Andrew of Crete presents the essence of the third temptation: “[the devil] led Him up into a mountain, to see in an instant all the kingdoms of the world” (εἰς ὄρος ἀνήγαγεν ἰδεῖν τὰς βασιλείας τοῦ κόσμου πάσας ἐν ριπῇ). From the three-verse description in the Gospel according to Matthew (cf. Matt 4:8–10), the troparion contains only a reference to the first verse: “[...] the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world” (Πάλιν παραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς ὄρος

85 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 170–71. 86 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 358–66.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

ὑψηλὸν λίαν, καὶ δείκνυσιν αὐτῷ πάσας τὰς βασιλείας τοῦ κόσμου). In the vision

of temptation presented in the troparion, there is simply a mountain (εἰς ὄρος), not “a very high mountain” as in the evangelical description. Instead of describing the second temptation, the troparion contains a warning to the soul: “O my soul, look with fear on what happened; watch and pray every hour to God” (Φοβοῦ, ὦ ψυχή, τὸ δρᾶμα· νῆφε, εὔχου, πᾶσαν ὥραν Θεῷ). In this brief recommendation, which contains a reference to past events that have already passed, very specific tasks have been presented to the soul, i. e. to remain in fear of God, vigilant and prayerful. The evangelical source of the above call is Christ’s words from the Garden of Gethsemane: “Stay awake and pray that you may not come into the time of trial; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matt 26:41). In his presentation of the first miracle in Cana (cf. John 2:1–11), the Archbishop of Crete stressed that, as a result of Christ’s blessing, “marriage is honourable” (Ὁ γάμος μὲν τίμιος) and the marriage bed is undefiled for both [spouses] (ἡ κοίτη δέ ἀμίαντος). The aim of transforming water into wine was to change the soul. Troparion 12 of Ode IX evokes the image of Christ performing the first miracle (πρῶτον θαῦμα) with the intention: “to bring thee, my soul, to a change of life” (ἵνα σὺ μετατεθῇς, ὦ ψυχή). In the next troparion of Ode IX, the author recalls two miracles of healing and one miracle of resurrection performed by Christ. The first is the healing of the paralytic lying on his stretcher (cf. Matt 9:2–7). The healing was connected with the prior forgiveness of sins given to the paralysed man. Christ performed this miracle by seeing the faith of the people who brought the paralytic to him. The second miracle was the healing of the centurion’s paralysed servant after Christ entered Capernaum (cf. Matt 8:5–13). As it was the case with the paralytic, the intercession of a healthy person was also important in relation to the paralysed man. On hearing of a paralysed servant, Christ expressed his willingness to go where that person was (cf. Mt 8:7), but the centurion said: “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only speak the word (ἀλλὰ μόνον εἰπὲ λόγῳ), and my servant will be healed” (Matt 8:8). The juxtaposition of the miracles of healing that occurred as a result of the requests submitted to Christ by the healthy was construed on the basis of a certain logical chronology. The paralysed man is brought to Christ by people who are kind to him, asking for healing. The centurion does not bring his servant to Christ, but merely asks him to “only speak the word”, because he believed that Jesus’ word had such power that his servant would recover. The centurion’s outstanding faith was praised by Christ: “Truly I tell you, in no one in Israel have I found such faith (οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ Ἰσραὴλ τοσαύτην πίστιν εὗρον)” (Matt 8:10). Between the verses referring to miracles, in Troparion 13 of Ode IX there is a brief mention of the resurrection of the widow’s only son, known as the Young Man of Nain (cf. Luke 7:11–15). This time the miracle happened, because Christ, at the sight of the widow, “had compassion for her” (ἐσπλαγχνίσθη ἐπ’ αὐτῇ) (Luke 7:13) and “raised from the dead the young man” (νεανίσκον θανόντα ἐξήγειρε).

85

86

The Image of God in the Great Canon

The troparion concludes with a reference to Christ’s dialogue with the Samaritan woman (cf. John 4:1–26).87 From the whole pericope, which concerned the spiritual healing of a sinner of an unknown name, St Andrew of Crete only reminds us that Christ revealed himself to a woman from Samaria, and through a dialogue with her He addressed words to the soul about worshiping [cult] in the spirit [of God]. This expresses the truth that the most important thing in the relationship between man and God is to worship God in a spiritual way, “for the Father seeks such as these to worship him” (John 4:23). By referring to words: “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24), the author of the Great Canon wanted to emphasize that believers should perceive all the kinds of miracles that Christ performed from the perspective of worshiping the Triune God. A synthetic reference to such rich content proves both the outstanding poetic artistry of St Andrew, and the way this content is presented proves that he truly lived in accordance with the Good News: Παράλυτον ἒσφιγξε Χριστὸς τὴν κλίνην ἄραντα καὶ νεανίσκον θανόντα ἐξήγειρε, τῆς χήρας τὸ κύημα καὶ τοῦ Ἑκατόνταρχου, καὶ Σαμαρείτιδι φανεὶς τὴν ἐν πνεύματι λατρείαν σοί, ψυχή, προεζωγράφησεν.

Christ gave strength to the paralyzed man, and he took up his bed; He raised from the dead the young man, the son of the widow; healed the centurion’s servant; and He appeared to the woman of Samaria, and spoke to thee, my soul, of worship in spirit [Ode IX.13].

The contents of Troparion 15 of Ode IX88 focus on Christ the Word (Χριστὸς ὁ Λόγος), who heralded the Good News to the poor (πτωχοῖς εὐηγγελίζετο),89 healed the sick (Τὰς νόσους ἰώμενος), treated the crippled (κυλλοὺς ἐθεράπευσε),90 ate together with tax collectors (τελώναις συνήσθιεν),91 talked to sinners (ἁμαρτωλοῖς ὡμίλει), and by touching the hand of the daughter of Jairus, brought back a departed soul (τῆς Ἰαείρου θυγατρὸς τὴν ψυχὴν προμεταστᾶσαν ἐπανήγαγεν ἁφῇ τῆς χειρός).92 The hymnographer from Crete also reminds the soul [Ode ΙΧ.19] that Christ preached the Gospel to the cities and instructs the soul that it should fear

87 Cf. M. Girard, “Gesu passa per la Samaria (Giovanni 4: 1–42)”, Annali di Scienze Religiose 9 (2004) 111–121; T.L. Brodie, The Gospel According to John. A Literary and Theological Commentary (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1993), 214–24; J.-L. Ska, “Jésus et la Samaritaine (Jn 4). Utilité de L’ancien Testament”, Nouvelle Revue Théologique 118 (1996) 641–52; J.F. McHugh, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on John 1–4 (London/New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2009), 262–99. 88 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 116. 89 Cf. Luke 4:17–19. 90 Cf. Matt 11:5. 91 Cf. Luke 5:27–30. 92 Cf. Mark 5:41.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

their example in order not to suffer the fate of the residents of Sodom, whom He “condemned to hell” (ἕως ᾍδου κατεδίκασε). Although the cities were not named in the troparion, it is known from the Gospel according to Luke that they refer to Chorazin and Bethsaida (cf. Luke 10:13). The main message of the verse: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades! (ἕως ᾅδου καταβιβασθήσῃ)”93 was abridged in the Great Canon to the word relating to judgement. Christ wants to save the soul by all means [cf. Ode VII.9]. His glory will be feared during the Last Judgment [cf. Ode VIII.20].94 Christ deserves the song of praise, for he took flesh of a Virgin and came to dwell among us [cf. Ode II. Heirmos].95 Requests addressed directly to Christ appear five times in the Great Canon. The first is a cry to Him not to reject the greatest sinner (as the Archbishop of Crete considered himself to be): Ἥμαρτόν σοι μόνος ἐγώ, ήμαρτον ὑπέρ πάντας· Χριστὲ Σωτήρ, μὴ ὑπερίδῃς, με.

I alone have sinned against Thee, I have sinned more than all men; reject me not, O Christ my Saviour [Ode III.5].

This sincere confession refers to the statement of St Paul: “[...] Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners – of whom I am the foremost (Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, ὧν πρῶτος εἰμι ἐγώ).”96 The second request is a form of meditation on Christ’s sacrifice, who through His crucifixion made an offering of His Body and Blood for all people.97 Owing to the gift of the Body, it is possible to refashion man again, and owing to the gift of Blood, man can be washed clean. Christ gave up His Spirit to bring man to His Father. In Troparion 18 of Ode IV, God the Father is called Father (Γεννήτορ). In the final part of this troparion, St Andrew of Crete refers to two evangelical verses, i. e. the cry of Christ from the cross: “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit (Πάτερ, εἰς χεῖράς σου παρατίθεμαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου)”,98 and to the verse: “Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit (καὶ κλίνας τὴν κεφαλὴν παρέδωκε τὸ πνεῦμα).”99 The spirit that Christ gave up on the cross enables the believer to meet with God the Father.

93 Luke 10:15. 94 Cf. N. Arseniev, “Contemplation of the Glory of God in the Early Christian Message”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 8 (1964) 112–20. 95 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 244–48. 96 1 Tim 1:15. 97 Cf. J. Moltmann, The Crucified God. The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology (trans. R.A. Wilson/J. Bowden; New York, NY: Fortress, 1974), 65–81. 98 Luke 23:46. 99 John 19:30.

87

88

The Image of God in the Great Canon

For exactly this reason, the troparion includes the following words: “[...] Thou hast given up Thy spirit, O Christ, to bring me to Thy Father” (τὸ πνεῦμα παρέδωκας, ἵνα ἐμὲ προσάξῃς, Χριστέ, τῳ σῷ Γεννήτορι). The hymnographer depicts Christ as a “calm haven” (Λιμένα σε γαλήνιον) [Ode VI.14], who offers salvation. Being aware of his spiritual state, the author calls out from the depths of his heart: “O Lord, Lord Christ; come quickly, before it is too late, and deliver me from the lowest depths of sin and despair” (Δέσποτα Χριστέ· ἀλλ’ ἐκ τῶν ἀδύτων βυθῶν τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τῆς ἀπογνώσεώς με προφθάσας ρῦσαι) [Ode VI.14]. In an internal dialogue with his soul, the author of the Great Canon recommends that the soul implore Christ with prayers (προσευχαῖς), fasting (νηστείαις), chastity (ἁγνείᾳ) and reverence (σεμνότητι) [Ode IX.4].100 He commands that the soul cry out to Christ from the depths of the heart, following the faith of the woman of Canaan: “Save me also, Son of David” (Υἱὲ Δαυίδ σῶσον κἀμέ) [Ode IХ.20]. By referring to the pericope about the faith of the woman of Canaan (cf. Matt 15:21–28),101 St Andrew of Crete wanted to remind his soul that the woman interceded for her daughter, who was “tormented by a demon (κακῶς δαιμονίζεται)”.102 The woman continued to cry out to Christ to save her daughter, even though initially “he did not answer her at all” (Matt 15:23), and Christ’s followers encouraged him to send her away (cf. Matt 15:23). Even when she heard from Christ that He was sent only “to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, she did not stop pleading, but came even closer and fell down before him, asking from the depths of her heart: “Lord, help me (Κύριε, βοήθει μοι).”103 When Christ put the woman of Canaan to one more test and said: “It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs” (Matt 15:26), she answered with unshakeable hope: “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table” (Matt 15:27). After these words, Christ not only healed the woman’s daughter, tormented by a demon, but also praised the unshakeable faith of her mother: “Woman, great is your faith! (Ὦ γύναι, μεγάλη σου ἡ πίστις).”104 The English translation of the concerned troparion slightly differs from the Greek original. While in the original text of the Great Canon, the troparion starts with the words [lit.]: “My soul, do not turn out worse, rejecting the faith of the woman of Canaan, before she heard that her daughter was healed by the Word of God” (Μὴ χείρων, ὦ ψυχή μου, φανῇς δι’ άπογνώσεως, τῆς Χαναναίας τὴν πίστιν ἀκούσασα, δι’ ἧς τὸ θυγάτριον λόγῳ Θεοῦ ἰάθη), in the English translation the original meaning of this phrase has been modified with the introduction of the

100 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 357–58. 101 Cf. G. Jackson, Have Mercy on Me: The Story of the Canaanite Woman in Matthew 15,21–28 (Sheffield: Bloomsbury, 2002). 102 Matt 15:22. 103 Matt 15:25. 104 Matt 15:28.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

word “despair”: “Be not overcome by despair O my soul; for thou hast heard of the faith of the woman of Canaan, and how through it her daughter was healed by the word of God” [Ode IХ.20].105 In the Greek text emphasis is put on the importance of the faith of the woman of Canaan, while the most important message in the English text seems to be that the soul should not remain in a state of despair. There is no mention of the despair of the woman of Canaan in the evangelical text, it is thus obvious that the original text of the Great Canon is closer to the evangelical narrative than its translation into English. 3.3

The Son of the Theotokos (Υιός της Θεοτόκου)

The Great Canon contains a threefold reference to the fact that Jesus Christ is the Son of the Theotokos. In the second theotokion which completes Ode II there is a fervent request: Most pure Lady, Mother of God, the hope of those who run to thee and the haven of the storm-tossed: pray to the merciful God, thy Creator and thy Son, that He may grant His mercy even to me. Ἄχραντε Δέσποινα, Θεογεννῆτορ, ἡ ἐλπὶς τῶν εἰς σὲ προστρεχόντων καὶ λιμὴν τῶν ἐν ζάλῃ, τὸν ἐλεήμονα καὶ Κτίστην καὶ Υἱόν σου ἱλέωσαι κἀμοὶ ταῖς ἱκεσίαις ταῖς σαῖς.

In the following theotokion, the Archbishop of Crete confesses that the Mother of God the the Son (Υἱὸν), begotten outside time (ἄχρονον) by the Father (Τὸν ἐκ Πατρὸς), gave birth within time (ἐν χρόνῳ), without knowing man (ἀπειράνδρως) [Ode III.28/19]. The third mention of the birth of the Son by the Mother of God (Θεογεννῆτορ) appears at the end of Ode VII. This time, the theotokion is a solemn proclamation of the Mother of God as the One who gave birth to One Person of the Most Holy Trinity. By using the plural form in this theotokion, St Andrew of Crete expresses the faith of the Church, worshipping the Mother of God because of her unique role in the history of salvation: Ὑμνοῦμέν σε, εὐλογοῦμέν σε, προσκυνοῦμέν σε, Θεογεννῆτορ, ὅτι τῆς ἀχώριστου Τριάδος ἀπεκύησας τὸν ἕνα Υἱὸν καὶ Θεόν· καὶ αὐτὴ προανέῳξας ἡμῖν τοῖς ἐν γῇ τὰ ἐπουράνια. We praise thee, we bless thee, we venerate thee, O Mother of God: for thou hast given birth to One of the undivided Trinity, thy Son and God, and thou hast opened the heavenly places to us on earth [Ode VII.22].

105 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 372–74.

89

90

The Image of God in the Great Canon

3.4

The Son of David (Υιός του Δαβίδ)

Three times in the Great Canon, Jesus Christ is referred to as the Son of David.106 The basis for the use of this title are evangelical pericopes. In Troparion 16 of Ode VIII, St Andrew of Crete reminds us of the call of the woman of Canaan, begging the Saviour to free her daughter from an evil spirit. This woman cried: “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon” (Matt 15:22).107 St Andrew wishes to express his faith in the Saviour similarly to the woman of Canaan: “Imitating (μιμούμενος) the woman of Canaan (Τὴν Χαναναίαν), I cry to Thee (βοῶ), Son of David (τῷ Υἱῷ Δαυΐδ): ‘Have mercy on me’ (Ἐλέησόν με)”. For the second time, the same words appear at the end of Ode IX, in Troparion 20, also in relation to the faith of the woman of Canaan: “Son of David, save me (Υἱὲ Δαυΐδ σῶσον κἀμέ).”108 These words are strengthened by a begging for mercy addressed to the Son of David in the next troparion [cf. Ode IХ.21]. Also in this context the author cries: Σπλαγχνίσθητι σῶσον με· Υἱὲ Δαυΐδ, ἐλέησον, ὁ δαιμονῶντας λόγῳ ἰασάμενος· φωνὴν δὲ τὴν εὔσπλαγχνον, ὡς τῳ Λῃστῇ, μοι φράσον· Ἀμήν σοι λέγω, μετ’ ἐμοΰ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ Παραδείσῳ, ὅταν ἔλθω ἐν τῇ δόξῃ μου.

O Son of David, with Thy word Thou hast healed the possessed: take pity on me, save me and have mercy. Let me hear Thy compassionate voice speak to me as to the thief: ‘Verily, I say unto thee, thou shalt be with Me in Paradise, when I come in My glory.’

The healing power of the Word of the Son of David was revealed in the description of the healing of the epileptic (cf. Luke 9:38–42). It was then that Jesus, with His Word, commanded the unclean spirit to leave the suffering boy, so that he could be healed (cf. Luke 9:42). The last verse of the troparion is a paraphrase of Jesus’ words from the cross, addressed to the good thief: “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43).109 St Andrew of Crete deliberately replaced

106 Cf. J.D. Kingsbury, “The Title ‘Son of David’ in Matthew’s Gospel”, Journal of Biblical Literature 95 (1976) 591–602; J.J. Stamm, “Der Name des Königs David”, Vetus Testamentum Supplement 7 (1960) 165–83. 107 Cf. E. von Lövestam, “Jésus Fils de David chez les Synoptiques”, Studia Theologica 28 (1974) 97–109; Y. Levin, “Jesus, ‘Son of God’ and ‘Son of David’: The ‘Adoption’ of Jesus into the Davidic Line”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 28 (2006) 415–42. 108 Cf. W.R.G. Loader, “Son of David, Blindness, Possession, and Duality in Matthew”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44 (1982) 570–85. 109 Cf. G. Macaskill, “Paradise in the New Testament”, in M. Boskmuehl/G.G. Stroumsa (ed.), Paradise in Antiquity. Jewish and Christian Views (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010) 64–81.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

“today” from the Gospel with “when I come in my glory”, thus giving the prayerful request a timeless, eschatological meaning, so that it carries hope for believers. 3.5

The Lord (Κύριος)

The title Κύριος was granted to Jesus from the very beginning of Christianity.110 This is evidenced in early Christian credos, the most famous of which comes from the Epistle to the Romans: “Jesus is Lord” (Rom 10:9). Using the title Κύριος, the Church expresses the mystery of Christ, who is the Son of God and the Son of Man, as well as the truth that his reign is the same as that of God Himself. In the New Testament, the title Κύριος appears many times, indicating the greatness of Christ’s power and reign. In Byzantine hymnography, Christ is often depicted as Lord and Master sitting on the throne of God.111 In the Great Canon, the title Κύριος appears 17 times. In most cases, it concerns the Person of Jesus Christ. The hymnographer from Crete either addresses Jesus Christ in this way or, in using this title, depicts various actions of His earthly life. By confessing his sinfulness or wishing to see the Lord, he emphasizes His power. It should be noted that the title Κύριος appears in the Great Canon in various contexts, and usually refers to evangelical texts. For the first time in this troparion the title Κύριος is used in Ode II, with this brining to mind the description of Jesus walking on the lake (cf. Matt 14:22–33). In this evangelical pericope, Peter, seeing Jesus walking on the lake, wanted to approach him. He knew that he was unable to do this on his own, so he said to Jesus: “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water” (Matt 14:28). When he heard the word from his Lord: “Come” (Matt 14:29), he got out of the boat and started walking towards Jesus. When he reached the Lord, he became frightened of the strong wind that had just blown and began to sink. Before the stormy waters of the lake absorbed him, he managed to shout: “Lord, save me! (Κύριε, σῶσόν με).”112 Then Jesus “reached out his hand (ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα) and caught him, saying to him: ‘You of little faith, why did you doubt?’” (Matt 14:31). St Andrew of Crete compares the storm on the lake, or more precisely the rocking of boats by waves opposite the wind, to the storm of sin that has surrounded him. In referring to the fact that Jesus gave his hand to the sinking Peter, he asks the Lord to also give him a hand: “O compassionate Lord. But stretch out Thine hand to me, as once Thou hast to Peter” (εὔσπλαγχνε Κύριε· ἀλλ’ ὡς τῷ Πέτρῳ, κἀμοὶ τὴν χεῖρα ἔκτεινον) 110 Cf. W. Bousset, A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus (trans. J.E. Steely; New York, NY: Baylor University Press, 1970), 119–152. 111 Cf. В. Bucur, “«The Feet that Eve Heard in Paradise and Was Afraid»: Observations on the Chrystology of Byzantine Hymns”, Philosophy and Theology 18/1 (2006) 3–26, on pp. 9–16. 112 Matt 14:30.

91

92

The Image of God in the Great Canon

[Ode II.4]. A supplication tο the Lord that He should not close His door but leave it open to the penitent is the theme of Troparion 26 of Ode II. The motif of closing gates or shutting a door appears in the evangelical parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids (cf. Matt 25:1–13).113 The vision of the kingdom of heaven similar to the ten bridesmaids who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom was supposed to encourage vigilance. Although St Andrew of Crete referred to the evangelical parable of five wise bridesmaids who took their lamps and oil in flasks and five foolish ones who forgot to take oil to their lamps only by the symbol of a closing door, it is easy to arrive at the truth he wanted to emphasize in this way.114 This identification with the foolish bridesmaids who came after midnight and asked: “Lord, Lord, open up to us! (κύριε κύριε, ἄνοιξον ἡμῖν)”115 was rendered in the troparion with almost the same words: “Lord, Lord, but open it to me” (Κύριε, Κύριε· ἀλλ’ ἄνοιξον μοι) [Ode II.26]. The Great Canon reminds on two occasions that the Lord threw fire on the people of Sodom. In the Book of Genesis we can find a description of the events which resulted in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (cf. Gen 19:1–28). St Andrew of Crete, in remembering the verse: “Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulphur and fire from the Lord out of heaven” (καὶ Κύριος ἔβρεξεν ἐπὶ Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα θεῖον, καὶ πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου ἐξ οὐρανοῦ)”116 and the evangelical presentation of it: “[...] but on the day that Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed all of them (ἔβρεξεν πῦρ καὶ θεῖον ἀπ’ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ἀπώλεσεν ἅπαντας)”117 in the first part of the troparion he wrote: “Roused to anger by their transgressions, the Lord once rained down fire from heaven and burnt up the men of Sodom (Ἔβρεξε Κύριος παρὰ Κυρίου πῦρ ποτέ, ἀνομίαν ὀργῶσαν πυρπολήσας Σοδόμων) [Ode II.38/9]. In the second part of the same troparion, the Bishop of Gortyna reproaches his soul for kindling the fire of Gehenna, which will burn in bitter pain. Jesus Himself (cf. Mark 9:42–48) warned against being thrown into hell, where the fire does not die out (cf. Isa 66:24; Judith 16:17), because of becoming “a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe” (Mark 9:42). The radicality of Jesus’ teaching in this regard is astonishing: “And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be

113 Cf. J.D. Kingsbury, “The Title «Kyrios» in Matthew’s Gospel”, Journal of Biblical Literature 94/2 (1975) 246–55. 114 Cf. John Chrysostom, “Homily LXXVIII on the Gospel of Matthew (25, 1–30)”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), The Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (1 Series; 10 vol.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark/Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996) 818–833. 115 Matt 25:11. Cf. K.P. Donfried, “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins (Matt 25:1–13) as a Summary of Mathean Theology”, Journal of Biblical Literature 93/3 (1974) 415–28. 116 Gen 19:24. 117 Luke 17:29.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

thrown into hell (βληθῆναι εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός).”118 The reference to fire raining down from heaven by the Lord and the burning down of the land of Sodom appears again at the very beginning of Ode III, in the first troparion: “The Lord, my soul, once rained down fire from heaven and consumed the land of Sodom” (Πῦρ παρὰ Κύρίου, ψυχή, Κύριος ἐπιβρέξας, τὴν γῆν Σοδόμων πρὶν κατέφλεξεν).119 The context of the use of the title Κύριος in the other heirmos of Ode III, which similarly to Ode II consists of two parts, is completely different. This time this use concerns a request to the Lord to strengthen one’s wavering heart in the rock of the commandments. The title of the Lord in this short stanza appears twice. It is repeated at the ending of the heirmos – in its proclamation of faith, which is a confession that Jesus alone (μόνος) is Holy (ἅγιος) and Lord (Κύριος). The Archbishop of Crete confesses with regret: “I have sinned, O Lord, I have sinned against Thee” (Ἡμάρτηκα Κύριε, ἡμάρτηκά σοι) [Ode III.12/3] and from the bottom of his heart begs for mercy: Ἐλέησον, Κύριε, έλέησόν με, ἀναβοῶ σοι, ὅτε ἥξεις μετ’ Ἀγγέλων σου ἀποδοῦναι πᾶσι κατ’ ἀξίαν τῶν πράξεων.

Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me, I cry to Thee, when Thou comest with Thine angels to give to every man due return for his deeds [Ode Ш.25/16].

The second part of this verse refers to the eschatological announcement of God, who will give to each of believer according his actions (cf. Rev 2:23).120 Sometimes the Great Canon contains references to biblical texts, but their exact location in Scripture cannot be easily given. This is the case with the heirmos beginning Ode IV, which refers to an unnamed prophet who heard from the Lord that He wants to be born of the Virgin (ἐκ Παρθένου). It is likely that St Andrew of Crete was thinking about the prophet Isaiah, who heralded: “the Lord (Κύριος) himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman (ή παρθένος) is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel” (Isa 7:14, cf. Matt 1:23). Twice in the whole work, the title Lord (Κύριος) is juxtaposed with the title Master (Δέσποτα). These two words then appear as a phrase: “Master and Lord” (Δέσποτα Κύριε). In the first case the above phrase appears in a troparion comparing Joseph’s being thrown into a pit with the burial and resurrection of Christ.121 According to the Book of Genesis, Joseph, the beloved son of Israel (cf. Gen 37:3), was thrown by jealous brothers (cf.

118 119 120 121

Mark 9:47. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 270–71. Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 160. Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 417.

93

94

The Image of God in the Great Canon

Gen 37:4) into an empty pit (ἔρριψαν εἰς τὸν λάκκον).122 Troparion 6 of Ode V also begins with a reminder that “Once Joseph was cast into a pit” (Εἰ καὶ λάκκκῳ ᾤκησέ ποτέ Ἰωσήφ). In the second case, the phrase “Master and Lord” (Δέσποτα Κύριε) appears in a request to wash clean the eyes of the soul in order to behold in the mind the Pre-eternal Light [cf. Ode V.21]. In the Great Canon, Jesus Christ is addressed with a request that He spare the work of His hands, which is sinful [cf. Ode V.16]. Jesus, as Lord, has the power to forgive sins [cf. Ode IV.1]. St Andrew of Crete confesses his faith in the second Person of the Trinity, who is the Lord (Κύριος): “Thou alone art pure by nature” (ὁ τῇ φύσει καθαρός αὐτὸς ὐπάρχεις μόνος) “and none save Thee is free from defilement” (καὶ ἄλλος πλήν σου οὐδεις ὐπάρχει ἔξω ρύπου) [Ode V.16]. In Ode IX, the title Lord appears two more times in relation to Jesus’ earthly life. The Bishop of Gortyna presents an image of Jesus fasting in the desert: “The Lord fasted forty days in the wilderness, and at the end of them He was hungry, thus showing that He is man” (Νηστεύσας ὁ Κύριος ἡμέρας τεσαράκοντα ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, ὕστερον έπείνασε δεικνὐς τὸ ἀνθρώπινον) [Ode IХ.8]. When writing the above stanza, St Andrew of Crete had in his memory the following verse from the Gospel according to Matthew (4:2): “He fasted forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was famished (καὶ νηστεύσας ἡμέρας τεσαράκοντα καὶ νύκτας τεσαράκοντα ὕστερον ἐπείνασεν)”. The basis for the continuation of this troparion was Jesus’ words: “This kind of evil spirits is driven away only by prayer (ἐν προσευχῇ) and fasting (νηστείᾳ).”123 St Andrew of Crete weaves these words into a warning addressed to the soul: “Do not be dismayed, my soul: if the enemy attacks thee, through prayer and fasting drive him away” (Ψυχή, μὴ ἀθυμήσῃς· ἄν σοι προσβάλῃ ἐχθρός προσευχαῖς τε καὶ νηστείαις ἐκ ποδῶν ἀποκρουσθήτω). The last use of the title Lord (Κύριος) in the Great Canon indicates the power of the One to Whom this term refers, since it is used in a troparion depicting the miracles that Jesus performed. In a very synthetic form, this troparion refers to seven of Jesus’ miracles, namely: healing a woman suffering from a haemorrhage who touched the Lord’s robe (cf. Matt 9:20–22); cleansing lepers; restoring sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, speech to the dumb, and the ability to walk to the lame (cf. Matt 11:5), and straightening, by the power of the Word, a woman bent to the ground (cf. Luke 13:11–13). All these miracles were performed by the Lord to bring the wretched soul (ἀθλια ψυχή) to salvation (ἵνα σὺ σωθῇς) [cf. Ode ΙΧ.14].124

122 Gen 37:24. 123 Matt 17:21. 124 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 367–72.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

3.6

The Almighty (Παντοδύναμος)

The title “Almighty” (Παντοδύναμε) is used only once in the Great Canon as the last word in Troparion 23 of Ode I. Its immediate context indicates that this title refers to Jesus Christ [cf. Ode I.22]. Being aware of his sinfulness, St Andrew of Crete addresses the Almighty with a plea to save him in his mercy, which he expresses in a brief cry: “Save me, Almighty” (σῶσόν με Παντοδύναμε). This troparion starts with the following words: “Enter not into judgement with me (do not engage in litigation with me), bringing before me the things I should have done, examining my words and correcting my impulses” (Μὴ εἰσέλθῃς μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐν κρίσει, φέρων μου τὰ πρακτέα, λόγους ἐκζητῶν, καὶ εὐθύνων ὁρμάς), and evokes an image of God from the prophecy of Jeremiah: “I the Lord test the mind and search the heart, to give to all according to their ways, according to the fruit of their doings” (Jer 17:10). It is also worth considering the content of the words of this troparion in the light of God’s promise in the Book of Isaiah: “Come now, let us argue it out, says the Lord: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be like snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool” (Isa 1:18), which encourage the sinner to ask Almighty God for mercy. Furthermore, it is worth remembering that in the Third Book of Maccabees 6:2–4 (LXX), Eleazar prays to God with these words: “King of the great power (βασιλεῦ μεγαλοκράτωρ), Almighty God Most High (ὕψιστε, παντοκράτωρ Θεὲ), governing all creation with mercy (τὴν πᾶσαν διακυβερνῶν ἐν οἰκτιρμοῖς κτίσιν) [....] manifesting the light of your mercy (φέγγος ἐπιφάνας ἐλέους)”. In this verse it can be seen that already in the Old Covenant the omnipotent God had revealed Himself as merciful and compassionate with regard to the fate of His creatures. 3.7

The Saviour (Σωτήρ)

Jesus is the Saviour (Σωτήρ) of mankind.125 He became a man to save what was lost (cf. Luke 9:56, 19:10).126 His purpose is the salvation of man (cf. John 5:34) and the salvation of the world (cf. John 3:17, 12:47). By saving others, Jesus did not save himself when He was on the cross (cf. Mark 15:30). As the Saviour, Jesus saves people in various ways: He restores health to the sick (cf. Matt 9:21; Mark 3:4, 5:23, 6:56), saves Peter while walking on a lake and the disciples sailing by boat during a storm (cf. Matt 8:25, 14:30), forgives the sins of the sinful woman (cf. Luke 125 Cf. W.C. Placher, Jesus the Savior: The Meaning of Jesus Christ for Christian Faith (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 109–81. 126 Cf. В. Леонов, Основы православной антропологии (Москва: Издательство Московской Патриархии Русской Православной Церкви, 2013), 263–5.

95

96

The Image of God in the Great Canon

7:48), and through His presence encourages Zacchaeus to repentance (cf. Luke 19:9). Jesus’ Gospel is the “message of salvation” (Acts 13:26; cf. 11:14), addressed first to the Chosen People (cf. Acts 13:26) and then to other nations (cf. Acts 13:47, 28:28). The conditions for salvation are faith in the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 16:30; Mark 16:6), and the calling out of His name (cf. Acts 2:21). Luke the Evangelist gives Jesus the title of Saviour (cf. Luke 2:11), and Matthew links salvation with the very name “Jesus”, which means: “the Lord saves” (cf. Matt 1:21). Jesus is our “God and Saviour” (Tit 2:13). He came into the world to save sinners (cf. 1 Tim 1:15), and through His death and resurrection He became for men “the source of eternal salvation” (Heb 5:9) and the Saviour of the Body, i. e. the Church (cf. Eph 5:23).127 In the Great Canon, the title “Saviour” (Σωτήρ) is the most widely used title in relation to the Son of God, Jesus Christ. It appears as many as 48 times, which is a telling proof that St Andrew of Crete wanted to emphasize that the God of Christians is, above all, the Saviour who wants the salvation of those who believe in Him.128 Although the title of Saviour also applies to God the Father (cf. 1 Tim 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10), the Archbishop of Crete uses it only in relation to the Son of God. In the various troparia of the Great Canon, the term “Saviour” is used in different contexts. As a result of analysis of these contexts, five main thematic blocks can be identified in the use of the term “Saviour”: - in realizing one’s own sinfulness (9 times); - in confessing one’s sins (10 times); - in mourning one’s sins (9 times); - in requesting the Saviour to take pity on the sinner (6 times); - in various kinds of requests to the Saviour, e. g. for transformation, healing or protection (14 times). Self-reflection on the state of one’s personal identity in the Great Canon does not only provide a retrospective insight into one’s consciousness, but is of a relational nature. Having noticed the various manifestations of sinfulness within himself, the Bishop of Gortyna does not withdraw, but considers his sins in relation to the Saviour. Having within him the image of the Saviour, he confesses, in the sincerity of his heart, that he has defiled (κατερρύπωσα) that which was created in His image and likeness (τὸ κατ’ εἰκόνα καὶ καθ’ ὁμοίωσιν) and has stained the garment of his

127 Cf. G. Delling, “The Significance of the Resurrection of Jesus for Faith in Jesus Christ”, in C.F.D. Moule (ed.), The Significance of the Message of the Resurrection for Faith in Jesus Christ (trans. R.A. Wilson; London: SCM, 1968) 77–104. 128 Cf. J. Meyendorff, “New Life in Christ: Salvation in Orthodox Theology”, Theological Studies 50 (1989) 481–99.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

flesh (Ἐσπίλωσα τὸν τῆς σαρκός μου χιτῶνα) [Ode II.15].129 A love for material things and living without value (Φιλόϋλον καὶ φιλοκτήμονα βίον τῆς ἀκτησίας) resulted in him being overwhelmed by a heavy yoke [Ode II.17]. Since his youth, he had rejected the Saviour’s commandments (Ἐκ νεότητος Σωτήρ , ἐντολάς σου ἐπαρωσάμην), had gone through life ruled by the passions (ὅλον ἐμπαθῶς) [Ode I.20]. With the passions (τοῖς πάθεσιν) St Andrew of Crete had discoloured the first beauty of the image (Κατέχρωσα τῆς πρὶν εἰκόνος τὸ κάλλος) of the Saviour [Ode II.21]. In reflection on the Saviour’s presence, the author of the Great Canon also remembers that he had imitated the wantonness, i. e. unclean deeds (ἠσελγηκότας ἐμιμησάμην) of the people who lived in the time of Noah (cf. Gen 6:5–13; Matt 24:37–39), and thus also deserved to be condemned to drown in the flood (cf. Ode III.11/2). He noticed that the waves of his sins (τῶν πταισμάτων) returned and engulfed him (ἐπαναστραφέντα ἐκάλυψέ με), and as such he became similar to the Egyptians and their charioteers, who were engulfed by the waves of the Red Sea (cf. Exod 14:21–28) [cf. Ode VI.5]. In rejecting the Saviour’s “words of life” (τὰ ζωηρά λόγια)130 [cf. Ode I.6],131 the hymnographer of Crete had become a lost “royal drachma” (βασίλειον δραχμήν) [Ode VI.15]. For the author of the Great Canon, the Saviour is God to whom he confesses his sins (τὰς ἁμαρτίας) and murderous thoughts (μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ) [Ode I.11]. In asking the Saviour to be merciful, he compares himself to a publican, because he is convinced that none of Adam’s children have ever sinned against Him as much as he has (οὐδεὶς γὰρ τῶν ἐξ Ἀδὰμ ὡς ἐγὼ ἥμαρτέ σοι) [Ode II.24]. The thought that its author has sinned more than all other people appears four more times in the Great Canon [cf. Odes III.5; IV.4; V.15; VIII.18]. In each case, this deep existential recognition of his own sinfulness is juxtaposed with the Person of the Saviour. Being aware that ultimately no sin can overshadow the resurrected Lord, St Andrew confesses with devotion: “Though I have sinned, O Saviour, yet I know that Thou art full of loving-kindness” (Εἰ καὶ ἥμαρτον Σωτήρ ἀλλ’ οἶδα ὅτι φιλάνθρωπος) [Ode I.12]. In experiencing the heavy burden of sin, St Andrew simply cries: “I confess to Thee, O Savior; I have sinned” (Ἐξομολογοῦμαι σοι, Σωτήρ· Ἥμαρτον) [Ode III.4]. For the Saviour, knowing everything that is hidden (Σὺ γινώσκεις μου τὰ κρύφια) can show His mercy [Ode I.19]. This cry to the Saviour to have mercy on the sinner is repeated several times. It is accompanied by further specific requests for what is conducive to transformation and conversion. In the first troparion of Ode VIII, the Archbishop of Crete also begs the Saviour to awaken in his mind the longing to turn 129 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 250–51. 130 Cf. John 6:67–69: “So Jesus asked the twelve, ‘Do you also wish to go away?’ Simon Peter answered him, ‘Lord, to whom can we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.’” 131 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 233–34.

97

98

The Image of God in the Great Canon

back to God, which is one of the fundamental themes of St Luke’s soteriology132 (Σωτήρ, διέγειρόν μου τὸν νοῦν πρὸς ἐπιστροφήν). In Troparion 13 of the same Ode VIII, the author begs for deliverance from fire (τοῦ πυρὸς) and for a granting of remission through virtue and repentance/a changing of the intellect (ἀρετῆς καὶ μετάνοιας). Awareness of one’s own sins and their confession to the Saviour are only the beginning of a spiritual transformation. Man needs to fully open himself up to salvation in Christ. Tears have a special role in this process of opening up completely to a personal meeting with the Saviour. For this reason, St Andrew of Crete treats the shedding of tears in front of the Saviour as integrally connected with awareness of one’s own sinfulness and subsequent request for purification, forgiveness and salvation. As an evangelical model of man mourning his own sins, the author of the Great Canon presents the harlot (ἡ Πόρνη) [cf. Ode II.5 and 22; Ode VIII.14 and 17]. Luke’s description of the harlot’s incursion into the house of one of the Pharisees, who invited Jesus to himself for a meal, although laconic in form, is shocking with its obvious drama, as described in just two verses: “And a woman in the city, who was a sinner, having learned that he was eating in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment. She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her tears (κλαίουσα, ἤρξατο βρέχειν τοὺς πόδας) and dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet (κατεφίλει τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ) and anointing them with the ointment” (Luke 7:37–38). The harlot did not say a single word, and Jesus the Saviour said to her: “Your sins are forgiven (Ἀφέωνταί σου αἱ ἁμαρτίαι)”133 and then leaving, He said to her: “Your faith has saved you, go in peace (Ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε· πορεύου εἰς εἰρήνην).”134 The power of expression of the woman’s state of mind, expressed through tears flowing abundantly from her eyes, revealed everything that she was not able to express in words out of shame. The Saviour, hearing the sinner’s unspoken anguish and seeing her faith, forgave her “sins, which were many (αἱ ἁμαρτίαι αὐτῆς αἱ πολλαί)” because “she has shown great love (ἠγάπησε πολύ).”135 In identifying himself with the harlot, the Archbishop of Crete sheds tears and asks: “my merciful Saviour show me mercy” (Ἱλάσθητί μοι Σωτήρ τῇ εὐσπλαγχνίᾳ σου) [Ode ΙΙ.5; cf. Ode VIII.14]. He also asks the Saviour to accept his tears as ointment (ὡς μύρον δέχου, Σωτήρ, κἀμοῦ τὰ δάκρυα) [Ode II.22]. Echoes of these two evangelical pericopes are found

132 Cf. R.C. Tannehill, “Repentance in the Context of Lukan Soteriology”, in J.H. Ellens/D.L. Ellens/ R.P. Knierim/I. Kalimi (ed.), God’s Word for Our World. vol. II. Theological and Cultural Studies in Honor of Simon John De Vries (London/New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2004) 199–215. 133 Luke 7:48. 134 Luke 7:50. 135 Luke 7:47. Cf. J.J. Kilgallen, “Forgiveness of Sins (Luke 7:36–50)”, Novum Testamentum 40/2 (1998) 105–16.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

in the words of Troparion 17 of Ode VIII: “As precious ointment, O Saviour, I empty on Thine head the alabaster box of my tears. Like the Harlot, I cry out to Thee” (Tὸ τῶν δακρύων, Σωτήρ, ἀλάβαστρον ὡς μύρον κατακενῶν ἐπὶ κεφαλῆς κράζω σοι ὡς ἡ Πόρνη).136 The first echo is the above mentioned pericope about a harlot from

the Gospel according to Luke (7:37–38), and the second is the story according to St Matthew about the woman who anointed Jesus before his death: Now while Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very costly ointment, and she poured it on his head as he sat at the table (προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ γυνὴ ἔχουσα ἀλάβαστρον μύρου βαρυτίμου καὶ κατέχεεν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ ἀνακειμένου).137

Owing to tears, the sinner can be washed clean of lust (ἀκολάστως) and filth (βεβορβόρωμαι) [cf. Ode II.23]. However, man does not have tears that are associated with works of repentance and compunction (ἔργα μετάνοιας κατάνυξιν μετὰ δακρύων) [Ode VIII.15]. They are a gift from the Saviour. Knowing this, the Bishop of Gortyna asks: Oὐ δάκρυα, οὐδὲ μετάνια ἔχω, οὐδὲ κατάνξιν αὐτάν αύνι ταῦτα, Σωτήρ, ὡς Θεὸς δώρησαι. I have no tears, no repentance, no compunction; but as God do Thou Thyself, O Saviour, bestow them on me [Ode II.25]. Tears, which are a gift from the Saviour, are given back to Him by man, asking for salvation [cf. Ode II.28]. St Andrew offers Him “the tears of [his] eyes” (tὰ δάκρυα τῶν ὀμμάτων) along with the groanings of his heart, which cries: “I have sinned against Thee, O God; be merciful to me” (Ὁ Θεὸς ἡμάρτηκά σοι, ἱλάσθητί μοι) [Ode VI.1].

As the merciful God, the Saviour is also being asked to take pity on His creation (οἴκτειρον ὡς Θεός Σωτήρ τὸ ποίημά σου) [Ode II.3]. Five times this takes the form of a personal begging for mercy: “Saviour, have mercy on me” (Σωτήρ, αὐτός με οἴκτειρον) [Odes IV.23; IV.25; IV.26; IV.27]. In Troparion 18 of Ode VII, the request for mercy is extended to Verse 14 of Psalm 51(50): “Restore to me the joy of Thy salvation (ἀποδος μοι τὴν ἀγαλλίασιν τοῦ σωτηρίου σου)”. This call for pity is combined with a desire to remain in God’s joy: “O Saviour. But take pity on me,

136 Cf. S.A. Harvey, “Why the Perfume Mattered: The Sinful Woman in the Syriac Exegetical Tradition”, in P.M. Blowers (ed.), In Dominico: Essays on Patristic Exegesis in Honor of Robert Louis Wilken (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002) 69–89. 137 Matt 26:6–7. Cf. B.P. Robinson, “The Anointing by Mary of Bethany”, Downside Review 115 (1997) 99–111.

99

100

The Image of God in the Great Canon

as David sings, and restore to me Thy joy” (Σωτήρ, [...] οἰκτείρας [...] ὡς ψάλλει Δαυΐδ, τὴν ἀγαλλίασιν). The Great Canon contains requests to the Saviour made in relation to the story of salvation presented in Scripture. Two of them refer to the Old Testament. St Andrew of Crete turns to God and says: “Give me an ever-contrite heart and poverty of spirit, that I may offer these [lit. all that] to Thee as an acceptable sacrifice, O only Saviour” (καρδίαν μοι δώρησαι συντετριμμένην· πτωχείαν πνευματικήν, ἵνα ταῦτά σοι προσοίσω ὡς δεκτὴν θυσίαν, μόνε Σωτήρ) [Ode IX.24]. In this part of the troparion, a verse from the Psalms is used: “The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” (καρδίαν συντετριμμένην καὶ τεταπεινωμένην ὁ Θεὸς οὐκ ἐξουδενώσει)”,138 as well as a reference to the evangelical blessing: “Blessed are the poor in spirit (Μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι), for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:3), and even a phrase from the Epistle to the Philippines: “a pleasing sacrifice (θυσίαν δεκτήν).”139 The author of the Great Canon also refers to the words of Psalm 51(50) in other troparia. In the conclusion of Troparion 17 of Ode IV, this verse is used: “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow (ραντιεῖς με ὑσσώπῳ, καὶ καθαρισθήσομαι, πλυνεῖς με, καὶ ὑπὲρ χιόνα λευκανθήσομαι).”140 This troparion ends with the following words: “Wash, purify and cleanse me, O my Saviour, and make me whiter than snow” (πλῦνον· δεῖξον χιόνος Σωτήρ μου, καθαρώτερον). In the patristic tradition, the heart is treated as the centre of human life with its psychosomatic constitution and physical organ, all of which and through which a mystical transition is made from the level of the soul to that of the body and vice versa.141 The heart is not only a bodily organ, but also a psychological way of functioning. In this sense, the functions of the soul are based in the heart. The heart is therefore the source of life for the body and is the centre of the soul. It is the deepest centre of consciousness of a free and rational human being, and is where the encounter between God and man takes place.142 A verse appears in the Great Canon: “Do not cast me away from your presence (μὴ ἀπόῤῥὶψης με ἀπὸ τοῦ προσώπου σου)”,143 which is almost directly recalled in Troparion 18 of Ode I: “O Saviour: cast me not away from Thy presence” (Σωτήρ, μὴ ἀπόρρὶψης τοῦ σοῦ προσώπου). The vast majority of requests made by St Andrew of Crete to the Saviour are inspired by the texts of the New Testament. Recalling

138 139 140 141

Ps 51:17. Phil 4:18. Ps 51:7. Cf. Zacharias Archimandrite, The Hidden Man of the Heart (1 Peter 3:4). The Cultivation of the Heart in Orthodox Christian Anthropology (Essex: Mount Thabor, 2008), 1–165. 142 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 179. 143 Ps 51:11.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

that Jesus saved the sinking Peter (cf. Matt 14:29–32), in hoping for salvation, the author calls out to the Saviour: “Stretch out Thy hand and lead me up from the depths of sin” (ρῦσαι ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα, καὶ ἀνάγαγε τοῦ βυθοῦ τῆς αμαρτίας) [Ode VI. 13]. Comparing himself to poor Lazarus (cf. Luke 16:19–24), St Andrew of Crete begs the Saviour not to be thrown into Hell, but for forgiveness of his sins [cf. Ode I.13]. In Troparion 19 of Ode I, he specifies that he would like the Saviour to forgive him for his offences (πταίσματά), both voluntary and involuntary (τὰ ἑκούσια καὶ τὰ ἀκούσια), those overt and hidden (τὰ φανερὰ καὶ κρυπτά), and those both known and unknown (γνωστὰ καὶ ἄγνωστα). It is here worth noting that there is a similar phrase in the prayer before Holy Communion in the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom: “I beseech you, have mercy on me and forgive me my offences, voluntary and involuntary, in word and in deed, in knowledge and in ignorance […].”144 In the Gospels, the Saviour is presented as a physician who heals lepers and paralytics (cf. Matt 4:24; Luke 5:18) and stops the haemorrhaging of a woman suffering from blood loss (cf. Luke 8:43–44). St Andrew of Crete appeals to the mercy of the Saviour-Physician [cf. Ode V.17] and asks him: “But come to me [Yourself], O Christ my Saviour, and heal me” (αὐτός μοι ἐπιστάς Χριστὲ Σωτήρ, άτρευσον) [Ode I.14].145 The Saviour is also a shepherd caring for a lost sheep that have gone astray (cf. Luke 15:4). Therefore, it is not surprising that the Bishop of Gortyna, in comparing himself to lost sheep, asks the Saviour to find him and include him in His flock of sheep [cf. Ode VIII.19]. To the Saviour in Whom he would be justified (μου· ἐν σοί, Σωτήρ, δικαιωθήσομαι) [Ode III.7], the author of the Great Canon says: “teach me to do Thy will” (δίδαξόν με, Σωτήρ, ποιεῖν τὸ θέλημά σου)146 [Ode V. Heirmos], and “make me a son of the day” (ἀλλ’ ὡς ἡμέρας υἱόν, Σωτήρ ἀνάδειξόν με). The term “son of the day” was taken from the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, in which St Paul reminds Christians that they are “children of light and children of the day” (1 Thess 5:5). 3.8

The Lamb of God (Ανμός τοῦ Θεοῦ)

In the New Testament (and especially in the Gospel of John, the Acts of the Apostles, the First Epistle of Peter and the Book of Revelation) Jesus Christ is identified with a lamb. John the Baptist said that Jesus is “the Lamb of God who takes away the

144 The Divine Liturgy of Our Father Among the Saints John Chrysostom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 43. 145 “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 238: “The wounds of sins first of all strip us of good thoughts and thoughts of God, but You, Lord Jesus Christ, do not reject the creation of Your hands, heal my wounds and give me health and lead me into Your Kingdom”. 146 This phrase comes from Psalm 143(142):10: “Teach me to do your will”.

101

102

The Image of God in the Great Canon

sin of the world (ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου).”147 In the Great Canon, Jesus is referred to as the Lamb of God only once. Based on a phrase from the Gospel of John, St Andrew of Crete addresses a request to the Saviour: Ὁ Ἀμνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὁ αἴρων πάντων τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν.

O Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of all, take from me the heavy yoke of sin, and in Thy compassion give me tears of compunction [Ode I.16].148

Perceiving Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God requires reference to the Old Testament, and especially to the Servant of Yahweh announced by the prophets. The prophet Isaiah compared the Servant of Yahweh to a lamb led to the slaughter that did not open its mouth (cf. Isa 53:7). The Servant of Yahweh, in dying, makes atonement for the sins of His people. His humility and submission to His persecutors is an image of the attitude of Jesus, who kept silent before the Sanhedrin (cf. Matt 26:63) and said nothing to Pilate (cf. John 19:9). The Lamb of God revealed in the New Testament is also announced by the Passover lamb, which God ordered to be consumed by the Chosen People since the time of the Egyptian captivity. Each family was to offer to God a lamb “without blemish, a year-old male” (Exod 12:5) and eat it in the evening, sprinkling its blood on the doorpost of the house. Owing to the blood of the lamb, firstborn Jewish children were spared by the Angel-Destroyer, while firstborn Egyptian children were lost. As a result of this, over time the blood of a lamb gained a salvific value in the Jewish tradition. The image of Christ as the Lamb of God has its roots in the Semitic tradition. Thus, it is no accident that St Peter the Apostle addresses the following words to the followers of Christ: “You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without defect or blemish” (1 Pet 1:18–19). The culmination of the apocalyptic visions of “a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered” (Rev 5:6) and of a lamb standing on Mount Zion (cf. Rev 14:1) is the hymn of those who will defeat the Beast, singing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb: “Great and amazing are your deeds, Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are your ways, King of the nations!” (Rev 15:3). According to the message of the New Testament, Jesus Christ is the Lamb who redeems people for the price of his

147 John 1:29. 148 In the Greek text, the ending of this troparion speaks of forgiveness (παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν).

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

own blood (cf. Heb 9:12–15), thus giving them the opportunity to avoid sin (cf. 1 Pet 1:15; 1 John 3:5–9).149 To the Lamb of God, Christ, sacrificed as our Pascha (cf. 1 Cor 5:7), the hymnographer from Crete addresses a supplication for the removal of the yoke of his heavy sins, believing in the power of the One who, together with God the Father, sits on the throne (cf. Rev 22:1–3). Only can He, in His compassion for sinful man, forgive transgressions and lead to the source of living water. This motif, taken from the Great Doxology sung at Matins, has been present in the Church’s liturgy since the first centuries. 3.9

The King (Βασιλέυς)

The title “King” in relation to Jesus Christ150 appears only once in the Great Canon. St Andrew of Crete addresses Christ the King in the following words: Ἐξομολογοῦμαιί σοι, Χριστὲ Βασιλεῦ· Ἥμαρτον, ἥμαρτον, ὡς οἱ πρὶν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ ἀδελφοὶ πεπρακότες τὸν τῆς ἁγνείας καρπὸν καὶ τὸν τῆς σωφροσύνης.

I confess to Thee, O Christ my King: I have sinned, I have sinned like the brethren of Joseph, who once sold the fruit of purity and chastity [Ode V.3].

Jesus as King and Messiah is the Son of God Himself. In the Gospels, Jesus approved of the title “king” only as a messianic title in referring to prophetic promises (cf. Matt 21:1–11).151 But he did not want any political association with this title (cf. Luke 23:2), because His kingdom “is not from this world” (John 18:36). The Kingdom of Jesus Christ is the Kingdom of God, which is worthy of giving up everything for. The enthronement of the Son of Man took place at the time of His resurrection. At that time He sat down on the throne of the Father in heaven (cf. Rev 3:21). God the Father appointed His Son “King of kings and Lord of lords” (cf. Rev 19:16; 17:14; 1:5). Christ, while reigning as the universal Lord, exercises royal authority over people, which he will hand over to God the Father when the time comes (cf. 1 Cor 15:24). At this point “the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah” (Rev 11:15) will come. The reign of God is the time of salvation. This will be proclaimed by a loud voice speaking in heaven: “Now have come the salvation and the power and

149 Cf. G. Florovsky, “Redemption”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1976) 95–159. 150 Cf. P. Bouteneff, Christ and Salvation, in M.B. Cunningham, E. Theokritoff (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 93–106, on pp. 98–9. 151 Cf. J. Nieuviarts, L’Entrée de Jésus à Jerusalem (Mt 21,1–17). Messianisme et accomplissement des Écritures en Matthieu (Paris: Cerf, 1999), 33–282.

103

104

The Image of God in the Great Canon

the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Messiah, for the accuser of our comrades has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God” (Rev 12:10). During this time of the Church, being those who have overcome the evil one, the followers of Jesus Christ are called to share in the glory of his kingdom (cf. Rev 3:21). Every Christian is to become increasingly similar to the image of Christ the King. In order to express this truth, St Andrew of Crete compares himself to the royal drachma (βασίλειον δραχμήν), which has long been lost (ἀπώλεσας Πάλαι) and asks the Saviour to seek and find His image (ἀναζήτησον καὶ εὑρὲ τὴν σὴν εἰκόνα) [Ode VI.15]. The evangelical parable of a coin lost by a woman (cf. Luke 15:8–9), recalled by the Bishop of Gortyna, concludes with the following words: “Just so, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents” (Luke 15:10). The motif of seeking and finding appears at the end of the analysed troparion. It is worth noting that in the troparion there is also a request to the One who is the Word (Λόγε) to light the lamp which is symbolised by St John the Baptist (ἀνάψας λύχνον τὸν Πρόδρομόν σου), for it was said of St John the Baptist that: “He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light” (John 5:35). The Archbishop of Crete is aware that man himself cannot find the strength to return to Christ. For this reason, he asks his King to find His “image” (εἰκόνα), i. e. a man who is lost because he has sinned. 3.10 The Judge (Κριτής) The title “Judge” (Κριτής) in the Great Canon basically refers to Jesus Christ, although the direct context in which this word appears does not always unequivocally indicate that it refers to the Son of God. The lack of precision as to whether St Andrew of Crete refers to Jesus Christ, God the Father or God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons leaves some room for a certain amount of freedom of interpretation [cf. Ode II.30/1; Ode IV.2; Ode IХ.1]. However, given its broader context, it can be assumed that the title “Judge” is attributed primarily to Jesus Christ. The term “Judge” is used eleven times in the Great Canon. This term does not appear only in the Odes: III, V and VI. In general, it can be said that addressing the “Judge” is accompanied by an awareness of one’s own sinfulness, a confession of sins and a fear of being judged because of evil done. The image of Christ as Judge has been moderated by combining this title with such titles as: the Redeemer/Deliverer (Λυτρωτά) [cf. Ode I.10; Ode IV.5] or the Saviour (Σωτήρ) [cf. Ode VIII.13]. Judging the sinful acts committed by people, the Judge is righteous, (Δικαιοκρῖτα) [cf. Ode IV.24; Ode VIII.13] merciful [of good heart] (εὔσπλαγχνος) [cf. Ode VIII.20], and compassionate (οἰκτίρμον) [cf. Ode IV.24]. The prophet Isaiah addressed the compassionate God: “Look down from heaven and see, from your holy and glorious habitation. Where are your zeal [literally fervour] (ὁ ζῆλος σου) and your might (ἡ

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

ἰσχύς σου)? Where is the stirring of your feelings? Do not stop Your mercy, please (τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν σου, ὅτι ἀνέσχου ἡμών).”152 Revelation of God, who is righteous and who is the Judge, is supposed to make the soul fearful (φοβοῦ) and encourage it to “forsake previous sin” (ἀποσπάσθητι τῆς πρώτης ἀμαρτίας) [Ode II.30/1], because the end draws near (Ἐγγίζει τὸ τέλος), and the soul dot not make itself ready for the meeting. Meanwhile, the Judge (Κριτής) is near, at the door (ἐγγὺς ἐπι θύραις), which means that the time of life (ὁ χρόνος τοῦ βίου) is coming to an end [Ode IV.2]. The troparion closes with an existential reflection on the transience and vain anxiety of care [cf. Ode IV.2]. The Archbishop of Crete, aware that he has sinned much more than other people, begs the righteous Judge (Δικαιοκρῖτα), who has the power to pardon sins (ἀφιέναι ἀμαρτήματα) not to forsake His creation (τὸ πλάσμα) and not to despise His works (τὰ ἔργα) [Ode IV.l]. Being judged very severely “by his own conscience” (ὑπὸ τῆς οἰκείας συνειδήσεως), the author calls out to his Judge and Saviour: spare (φεῖσαι), deliver (ρῦσαι) and save (σῶσόν). It is worth recalling in this context that already for the Chosen People it was obvious that only God knows the heart of man (cf. 1 Kings 8:39), i. e. all that is hidden in man. And since God knows the heart of man, it is impossible to hide from Him the secrets of one’s heart. The hymnographer of Crete sincerely confesses to God the Judge “the secrets of his heart” (Τὰ κρύφια τῆς καρδίας), abasing himself in his affliction (τὴν θλῖψίν). He asks God to attend to this self-judgement (πρόσχες τῇ κρίσει μου) and have mercy (ἐλέησον) on him in His compassion [cf. Ode VII.2]. A cry to God the Judge, who knows man, ends the Great Canon. St Andrew of Crete focuses on an apocalyptic vision of judgment when Christ, as the Judge, comes again with His angels to “judge the whole world” (κρῖναι Κόσμον ἅπαντα). This is a reference to the Gospel according to Matthew: “For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done” (Matt 16:27).153 The judgment of the world concerns everyone. Thus, it is worth remembering that the haughty Pharisee (Φαρισαῖος αὐχῶν) was condemned (κατεκρίνετο), because he was boasting: “I thank Thee, O God” and uttered other words of madness (ἀνοιας); while the publican (Τελώνης) was saved (ἐσῴζετο), because he cried out to God with kindness: “Have mercy on me” (Ἐλέησον με);154 and the harlot (Πόρνη) turned to chastity (ἐσωφρόνιζε)155 [cf. Ode IX.16]. Meanwhile, as a result of examining the state of his heart, the author of the Great Canon comes to the conclusion that he is boastful and self-confident, and thus more like the Pharisee than the publican. For

152 Isa 63:15. 153 Cf. W. Horbury, “The Messianic Associations of ‘The Son of Man’”, Journal of Theological Studies 36 (1985), 34–55. 154 Cf. Luke 18:9–14. 155 Cf. Luke 7:36–50.

105

106

The Image of God in the Great Canon

this very reason he asks God not to judge him together with the Pharisee, but to give him the abasement (τὴν ταπείνωσιν) of the publican as the only Compassionate (μόνε Οἰκτίρμον) and righteous Judge (Δικαιοκρῖτα)[cf. Ode IV.24]. St Andrew of Crete is deeply convinced that only God, who is at the same time the righteous Judge and Saviour (Σωτήρ), can have mercy on man, save him from fire (τοῦ πυρὸς) and bestow upon him virtue (ἀρετῆς) and repentance (μετάνοιας). There is a fearful apocalyptic vision of when Christ will sit on His throne as Judge (Κριτής) and His dread (τὴν φοβερὰν) glory (δόξαν) will be revealed, and the furnace will be burning (καμίνου καιομένης) [Ode VIII.20]. Hence the question remains relevant: “What shalt thou do, then, miserable soul, when the Judge comes to examine thy deeds?” (διό μοι, τάλαινα ψυχή τί ποιήσεις, ὅταν ἔλθῃ ὁ Κριτὴς ἀνερευνῆσαι τὰ σά) [Ode IX. 1]. 3.11 The Word (Λόγος) Four times in the Great Canon the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is referred to as the Word (Λόγος). First, St Andrew of Crete states the truth that the Eternal Word – Jesus Christ – gave His life for all people: “Thy Body and Thy Blood, O Word, Thou hast offered at Thy Crucifixion for the sake of all” (Tὸ Σῶμα σου καὶ τὸ Αἷμα σταυρούμενος ὑπὲρ πάντων ἔθηκας Λόγε) [Ode IV.18]. The sacrifice of the Body (Σῶμα) was intended to refashion (ἀναπλάσῃς) man, and the sacrifice of the Blood (Αἷμα) was supposed to wash him clean (ἀποπλύνῃς). At the same time, Jesus Christ gave up the Spirit (τὸ πνεῦμα) to bring man to God the Father – the Genitor (Γεννήτορι) [cf. Ode IV.18]. The gift of the Body and Blood of the Saviour is the condition of eternal life. Christ explains the Word to His disciples: “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them” (John 6:53–56). Christ is the Word of God (Λόγου Θεοῦ), or “the Word of the Eternal Father” (Πατρὸς ἀναρχου Λόγε) [cf. Ode VIII.21]. The Bishop of Gortyna addresses a request to Jesus Christ: “O Word, light Thy lamp, Thy Forerunner (St John the Baptist), and seek and find again Thine image” (ἀλλ’ ἀνάψας ύχνον Πρόδρομόν σου Λόγε, ἀναζήτησον καὶ εὑρὲ τὴν σὴν εἰκόνα) [Ode VI.l5], that is to say, restore the royal likeness to Your creature [cf. Ode VI.l5]. Christ the Word (Χριστὸς ὁ Λόγος) [Ode IX.15] is the source of the “words of life” (τὰ ζωηρά λόγια) [Ode IV.20], which are the Good News He preached to the poor (πτωχοῖς εὐηγγελίζετο) [cf. Ode IX.15]. The proclamation of the Good News to the poor is a phrase taken from the Gospel according to Luke 7:22: “the poor have good news brought to them” (πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται). The prophet Isaiah had already announced the good news: “The spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

the Lord has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed (Πνεύμα Κυρίου ἐπ’ ἐμὲ, οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέ με· εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς)”156 [cf. Ode IX.15]. 3.12 The Physician (Ιατρός) An important part of Jesus’ mission, besides preaching the Good News and casting out demons, was to heal the sick. In people’s common perception, He was not only the Teacher of God’s truth, but also the Healer or Physician who healed in ways that went beyond the laws of nature. All the Gospels, and especially the Gospel according to St Luke, emphasize the Saviour’s healing work. Jesus Himself confessed: “Listen, I am casting out demons and performing cures today and tomorrow (ἰδοὺ ἐκβάλλω δαιμόνια καὶ ἰάσεις ἀποτελῶ σήμερον καὶ αὔριον).”157 He called himself a “physician”. We have a parabolic saying to testify to this: “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick (Οὐ χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ἰσχύοντες ἰατροῦ, ἀλλ’ οἱ κακῶς ἔχοντες); I have come to call not the righteous but sinners” (Mark 2:17). He expressed the same truth in the form of a proverb: “Doctor, cure yourself (ἰατρέ, θεράπευσον σεαυτόν).”158 In the Great Canon, Jesus is called “Physician” twice [cf. Ode IV.17 and Ode VIII.15]. Once the need for a physician to heal the soul is indicated [cf. Ode IX.3], it is said that Christ heals sicknesses [cf. Ode IX.15]. The Archbishop of Crete begs Christ as a Physician (ἀλλ’ ὡς ἰατρός Χριστέ) to heal both his body and spirit, for he experiences that he is sick. Examining himself, he makes the diagnosis: “I have defiled my body, I have stained my spirit, and I am all covered with wounds” (Tὸ σῶμα κατερρυπώθην, τὸ πνεῦμα κατεσπιλώθην, ὅλος ἡλκώθην) [Ode IV.17)]. Knowing that Christ is more than a physician who heals bodily diseases, he asks him to simultaneously heal his body and spirit through repentance (διὰ μετάνοιας). He calls out to his Saviour (Σωτήρ μου): “heal” (θεράπευσον), “wash” (ἀπόλουσον), “purify” (καθαρόν) to make himself “whiter” (δεῖξον χιόνος Σωτήρ μου καθαρώτερον) than snow. Writing the last verse of Troparion 17 of Ode IV, St Andrew of Crete considered the words of the psalm: “Purge me with hyssop (ραντιεῖς με ὑσσώπῳ), and I shall be clean (καθαρισθήσομαι); wash me (πλυνεῖς με), and I shall be whiter than snow (καὶ ὑπὲρ χιόνα λευκανθήσομαι).”159 In addition, it is important to note that through the change of the intellect/repentance (διὰ μετάνοιας), it becomes possible to heal the whole human person, not just the spirit. This truth is further emphasized in Troparion 15 of Ode VIII, where the author of the Great Canon 156 157 158 159

Isa 61:1. Luke 13:32. Luke 4:23. Ps 51:7.

107

108

The Image of God in the Great Canon

turns to Jesus with deep conviction: “Thou art the one Physician” (μόνε ἰατρέ). Recognizing the putrefaction of his humble soul (Τὴν σηπεδόνα, [...] τῆς ταπεινῆς μου ψυχῆς), he asks the Saviour to heal it (θεράπευσον). It is interesting to note that the troparion gives details on how the “one Physician” is supposed to do this. St Andrew of Crete was inspired by the Gospel according to Luke, or more precisely by the parable of the merciful Samaritan, who took care of the man who went from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell into the hands of robbers. These robbers stripped him, wounded him and left him half dead. Neither a priest nor a Levite helped him (cf. Luke 10:30–32). Help was only given by a Samaritan who, when he saw him, “bandaged his wounds (κατέδησε τὰ τραύματα αὐτοῦ), having poured oil and wine on them (ἐπιχέων ἔλαιον καὶ οἶνον).”160 In the analysed troparion, the Bishop of Gortyna asks the Physician-Saviour: “Apply plaster and pour in oil and wine” (μάλαγμά μοι ἐπίθες καὶ ἔλαιον καὶ οἶνον) [Ode VIII.15]. The troparion ends with an explanation of what these medicines are in the spiritual sphere, i. e. these are works of repentance (ἔργα μετάνοιας) and compunction (κατάνυξιν) with tears (δακρύων). From this evangelical description, we know that Christ not only healed the sick (Τὰς νόσους ἰώμενος), and the paralysed (κυλλοὺς ἐθεράπευσε), but also resurrected people from the dead (cf. Ode IX. 15). Christ the Word (Χριστὸς ὁ Λόγος), with the touch of his hand, brought back the departed soul of Jairus’ daughter (τῆς Ἰαείρου τὴν ψυχὴν προμεταστᾶσαν ἐπανήγαγεν ἁφῇ τῆς χειρός) (Ode IX.15). In the Gospel according to Mark, the description of the bringing back to life of Jairus’ daughter is intertwined with the healing of a woman suffering from a haemorrhage (cf. Mark 5:21–43), with both testifying to the fact that Jesus, as a Physician, had an effect on both the body and the soul of man. St Andrew of Crete considered the Gospel to be a special remedy in healing the soul. For if the Gospel is of no effect (ἀργεῖ Εὐαγγέλιον) and the whole of Scripture is ignored by man (Γραφὴ δὲ πᾶσα ἐν σοὶ παρημέληται), the wounds of the soul are multiplied (αἱ τραυματίαι σου ψυχή ἐπληθύνθησαν) [Ode IХ.3]. The only physician capable of healing a soul is Christ [cf. Ode IХ.3]. He works in believers through His Word, in particular through the Gospel. 3.13 The Creator (Κτίστης, Πλαστουργός, Ἐργάτης) The Christian doctrine of God as Creator has its basis in the Old Testament.161 It is also a fact that the very idea of creation dates back in Israel to the earliest parts of antiquity, as things were in the eastern circle before even Abraham. Stories about the

160 Luke 10:34. 161 Cf. W. Zimmerli, Old Testament Theology in Outline (trans. D.E. Green; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1978), 32–43.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

creation of the world were known both in Egypt and Mesopotamia. It is supposed that the very name of God, Yahweh, originally defined His function, namely: “He who creates life”, or “Creator”. The image of God the Creator already appears in Genesis. When Melchizedek blesses Abraham, he says: “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, maker of heaven and earth (τῷ Θεῷ τῷ ὐψίστω, ὃς ἔκτισε τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν)” (Gen 14:19). Abraham himself takes “God Most High, maker of heaven and earth (Κύριον τὸν Θεὸν τὸν ὕψιστον, ὃς ἔκτισε τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν)”162 as a witness. In the New Testament, the doctrine of God as Creator was developed and subsequently acquired a new meaning in light of the Incarnation of the Eternal Word, for God created the world by the power of His Word (cf. 2 Cor 4:6). Jesus Christ, the Son of God is closely related to the Father in His creative activity. St Paul bears witness to this: “For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:6). Being the Word of God, He has existed from the beginning with God before He became flesh (cf. John 1:1‫–ؘ‬4.14) at the end of time. As the Power of God and the Wisdom of God, (cf. 1 Cor 1:24) he “sustains all things by his powerful word” (Heb 1:3), “for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created (ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα).”163 St Irenaeus of Lyon referred to the anthropomorphic image of God the Father, creating the world and man with both His “Hands” – with the Son and the Holy Spirit.164 According to this interpretation, the creation of the world and man is the work of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons.165 In the Great Canon, the image of God as the “Creator” (Κτίστης) appears six times. The word “Creator” (Πλαστουργός) in relation to God is used twice. St Andrew of Crete does not so much concentrate on showing God as the Creator in the broader context of the theology of creation, but rather tries to make the soul aware that it comes from the Creator of everything. Encouraging the soul (ψυχή) and the flesh (σὺν τῇ σαρκί) to make confession, that is to confess sins to the Creator of everything (τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ), and to express remorse through “tears of repentance” (ἐν μετανοίᾳ δάκρυα) [Ode I.2], he wishes to emphasize our dependence on the One who is the Source of all existence. With reproach, St Andrew reminds his soul in one of the successive troparia of Ode I that, like Cain (cf. Gen 4:5), he has offered “defiled actions” (πράξεις ρυπαράς), “a polluted sacrifice” (θυσίαν ψεκτὴν) and

162 Gen 14:22. Cf. B. Ziemer, Abram – Abraham. Kompositionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Genesis 14, 15 und 17 (Berlin/New York, NY: De Gruyter, 2005), 11–160. 163 Col 1:16. 164 Cf. J. Breck, “«The Two Hands of God». Christ and Spirit in Orthodox Theology”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 40 (1996) 231–46. 165 Cf. M.C. Steenberg, Irenaeus on Creation. The Cosmic Christ and the Saga of Redemption (Leiden/ Boston, MA: Brill, 2008), 61–84.

109

110

The Image of God in the Great Canon

“a worthless life” (ἄχρηστον βίον) to the Creator of all (τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ), and therefore deserves condemnation (κατεκρίθημεν) [Ode I.9]. This is all to say that his soul intended to build a tower without God (Πύργον ἐσοφίσω οἰκοδομῆσαι) [Ode II.36/7]. It rushed to decorate this stronghold with its lusts (ὀχύρωμα πῆξαι ταῖς σαῖς ἐπιθυμίαις ἐίμὴ), and wanted to build this tower for the sake of these same lusts. However, the author could not achieve this goal, because the Creator (Κτίστης) confounded these cunning designs (κατέαξεν εἰς γῆν τὰ μηχανήματά) [Ode II.36/7].166 As can be easily guessed, the tower described by St Andrew of Crete has its prototype in the biblical tower of Babel (cf. Gen 11:3–9).167 Just like the first people who wanted to achieve unity without God, the sinful soul also wants to build a tower of its own identity based on lusts. The “inhabitants of the whole earth” indicated in the Book of Genesis (Gen 11:1) invented and produced a material for the construction of the tower by themselves, a material which was completely different from the material used at the time. Instead of stones they had bricks burnt in fire, and instead of mortar they used bitumen (cf. Gen 11:3). In rejecting God, who was their Creator, they wanted to build “a tower with its top in the heavens (πύργον, οὗ ἔσται ἡ κεφαλὴ ἕως τοῦ οὐρανοῦ).”168 However, they did not manage to finish their work, as “the Lord confused the language (συνέχε Κύριος τὰ χείλη πάσης τῆς γῆς).”169 The soul who wants to build its own tower with “lusts” and “cunning designs”, a tower which would be independent of the Creator, will not complete this task because God does not allow for His creation to rise above the Creator. The hymnographer from Crete asks the Mother of God to intercede with God, the merciful God and Creator (τὸν ἐλεήμονα καὶ Κτίστην) [Ode II.41/12]. God the Creator is simultaneously God the Saviour: Εἰργάσω τὴν σωτηρίαν ἐν μέσῳ τῆς γῆς, ὁ Κτίστης, ἵνα σωθῶμεν· ἑκουσίως ξύλῳ ἀνεσταύρωσαι· ἡ Ἐδὲμ κλεισθεῖσα ἀνεῴγνυτο· τὰ ἄνω, τὰ κάτω, ἡ κτίσις, τὰ ἔθνη πάντα σωθέντα προσκυνοῦσί.

O Creator, Thou hast worked salvation in the midst of the earth, that we might be saved. Thou were crucified of Thine own will upon the Tree; and Eden, closed till then, was

166 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 265–69. 167 Cf. B.W. Anderson, “The Tower of Babel: Unity and Diversity in God’s Creation”, Currents in Theology and Mission 5 (1978) 69–81; P.J. Harland, “Vertical and Horizontal: The Sin of Babel”, Vetus Testamentum 48 (1998) 515–33. 168 Gen 11:4. 169 Gen 11:9.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

opened. Things above and things below, the creation and all peoples have been saved and worship Thee [Ode IV.19].170

God the Creator “since eternity” (πρὸ αἰώνων) is a king who is “working salvation in the earth” (εἰργάσατο σωτηρίαν ἐν μέσῳ τῆς γῆς).”171 The phrase “since eternity” can also be translated as “from the beginning of the world”. “God created the ages” (Θεὸς ὁ κτίσας τοὺς αἰῶνας) [Ode V.23] and to Him, as “the Creator of all” (Κτίστην πάντων), the Mother of God addresses intercessory prayers [cf. Ode VI.17]. God, in the Great Canon, is also referred to as the “Creator” (Πλαστουργός). This term derives from the second description of the creation of man. The Book of Genesis illustrates that “God formed man from the dust of the ground (καὶ ἔπλασεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον, χοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς), and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being” (Gen 2:7). Hebrew thought emphasizes the fact that God brought man into existence as a “living being.”172 Unlike the Greek dualism of soul and body, man here constitutes a spiritual and bodily whole.173 The verb “formed” (ἔπλασεν) has the same etymology as “Creator” (Πλαστουργός), i. e. the One who “created”, or more precisely “formed” man from the dust of the ground. Interestingly, the second appearance of the word Πλαστουργός in the Great Canon refers to Jesus. St Andrew of Crete addresses him with the words: “Thou art my beloved Jesus, Thou art my Creator” (Σὺ εἶ ὁ γλυκὺς Ἰησοῦς, σὺ εἶ ὁ Πλαστουργός) [Ode III.7]. 3.14 The Lover of Mankind (Φιλάνθρωπος) The term “Lover of Mankind” (Φιλάνθρωπος), when used in relation to God, appears six times in the Great Canon. It is worth noting that this title is one of the most popular titles in the Christian tradition. It can be found both in services and in the personal prayers of Orthodox Christians. St Andrew of Crete uses the phrase “Lover of Mankind” in troparia, in which he concentrates on the sinfulness of the human person and on God, who is the only one who can forgive sins or crimes. In Ode I, the title “Lover of Mankind” appears twice in two consecutive troparia, which serve as a kind of examination of conscience for the Archbishop of Crete.

170 Cf. Ps 74(73):12: “Yet God my King is from of old, working salvation in the earth”. The indicated troparion of the Great Canon also clearly refers to the permanent troparion of the sixth canonical hour (tone 2) read after the Psalms. 171 Ps 74:12. 172 Cf. J. Barr, The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality (Minneapolis, MN: SCM, 1993), 38–40. 173 Cf. R.A. Di Vito, “Old Testament Anthropology and the Construction of Personal Identity”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61 (1999) 217–38, on p. 226.

111

112

The Image of God in the Great Canon

They express his deep conviction that God, who is the Saviour, is also the God who is the “Lover of Mankind”: Εἰ καὶ ἥμαρτον, Σωτήρ, ἀλλ’ οἶδα ὅτι φιλάνθρωπος εἶ· πλήττεις συμπαθῶς καὶ σπλαγχνίζῃ θερμῶς· δακρύοντα βλέπεις καὶ προστρέχεις ὡς Πατὴρ ἀνακαλῶν τὸν Ἄσωτον.

Though I have sinned, O Saviour, yet I know that Thou art full of loving-kindness. Thou dost chastise with mercy and art fervent in compassion. Thou dost see me weeping and dost run to meet me, like the Father calling back the Prodigal Son [Ode I.12].

The quoted troparion was created as a result of deep reflection on the verse from the Gospel of Luke which describes the meeting of the prodigal son with his merciful father: “So he set off and went to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion (ἐσπλαγχνίσθη); he ran and put his arms around him and kissed him” (Luke 15:20).174 In the next verse, the author of the Great Canon compares himself to Lazarus lying at the door (cf. Luke 16:20), and just as the Psalmist, he hopefully cries out to God, confident that the Lord will save him.175 He also remembers the call from Psalm 71(70):9: “Do not cast me off in the time of old age; do not forsake me when my strength is spent (μὴ ἀπόρριψῃς με εἰς καιρὸν γήρως, ἐν τῷ ἐκλείπειν τὴν ἰσχύν μου μὴ ἐγκαταλίπῃς με)”. This request is linked to an announcement made in the Book of Genesis: “[...] you shall be buried in a good old age” (Gen 15:15). The combination of evangelical imagery with the content of verses, taken from two psalms and referring to a verse from the Book of Genesis, is another proof that the work of St Andrew of Crete was based on these remembered Words of God: Ἐρριμμένον με, Σωτήρ, πρὸ τῶν πυλῶν σου, κἂν ἐν τῷ γήρει, μή με ἀπόρριψῃς εἰς ᾍδου κενόν· ἀλλὰ πρὸ τοῦ τέλους ὡς φιλάνθρωπός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν .

I lie as an outcast before Thy gate, O Saviour. In my old age cast me not down empty into hell; but, before the end comes, in Thy love grant me remission of sins [Ode I.13].

The echo of the words of St Paul from his First Epistle to Timothy about God “who desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (ὃς

174 Cf. J. Cantinat, “Les Paraboles de la Miséricorde (Luc XV, 1–32)”, Nouvelle Revue Théologique 77 (1955) 246–64; G. Forbes, “Repentance and Conflict in the Parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11–32)”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 42 (1999) 211–29; F. Bovon, L’Œuvre de Luc. Études d’exégèse et de théologie (Paris: Cerf, 1987), 29–47; J.D.M. Derrett, “Law in the New Testament: The Parable of the Prodigal Son”, New Testament Studies 14 (1967–1968) 56–74; L. Schottroff, “Das Gleichnis vom verlorenen Sohn”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 68/1 (1971) 27–52. 175 Cf. Ps 55:17.

The Son of God (Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ)

πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν)”176 can be

heard in the Great Canon several times. In Troparion 27 of Ode II, St Andrew of Crete stresses that the “Lover of Mankind” (φιλάνθρωπος) is the One who wants to save everyone (ὁ πάντας θέλων σωθήναι). The author cries from the depths of his heart to God who is Love (cf. 1 John 4:8) by saying: “in Thy goodness call me back and accept me in repentance” (σὺ ἀνακάλεσαί με, καὶ δέξαι ὡς ἀγαθὸς μετανοοῦντά με). The Bishop of Crete hopes that God, who is Love, can be asked to be merciful (οἰκτείρησον), and as the “Lover of Mankind” He will give forgiveness to those who ask with faith (φιλάνθρωπε, καὶ παράσχου πίστει αἰτουμένοις τὴν ἄφεσιν) [Ode III.26/17]. The God who loves man has the power to pardon sins (τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἀφιέναι ἀμαρτήματα) [Ode IV.1]. This last phrase is taken from the Gospel according to Mark: “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins (ἀφιέναι ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἁμαρτίας).”177 The proof of the intimacy of St Andrew of Crete with the humanity loving Saviour is the heirmos of Ode V, in which he begs not only for the forgiveness of his sins but also for enlightenment (φώτισον) and guidance in His commandments in such a way as to do God’s will (ὁδήγησον κἀμέ, ἐν τοῖς προστάγμασί σου· καὶ δίδαξόν με, Σωτήρ, ποιεῖν τὸ θέλημά σου). In this verse we can also see the cries of the Psalmist: “Teach me, O Lord, the way of your statutes, and I will observe it to the end (Nομοθέτησόν με, Κύριε, τὴν ὁδὸν τῶν δικαιωμάτων σου, καὶ ἐκζητήσω αὐτὴν διαπαντός)”,178 “Teach me to do your will, for you are my God”,179 and “I delight to do your will, O my God.”180 The second verse is recalled from the Epistle to the Hebrews: “[...] I have come to do your will, O God (τοῦ ποιῆσαι, ὁ Θεός, τὸ θέλημά σου).”181 3.15 The Good Shepherd (Ποιμίν καλός) The image of Jesus Christ as the Good Shepherd (Ποιμήν καλός) is most fully depicted in the Gospel according to John (cf. John 10:1–21).182 The Son of God is shown there as the One who reveals to His disciples the love of the Father. Jesus is the Good Shepherd, for He gives His life for His sheep (cf. John 10:15.17–18). He knows His sheep (cf. John 10:14) by name (cf. John 10:3), and came to earth so

176 1 Tim 2:4. 177 Mark 2:10. Cf. L.S. Hay, “The Son of Man in Mark 2:10 and 2:28”, Journal of Biblical Literature 89/1 (1970), 69–75; M.D. Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark (London: S.P.C.K., 1967). 178 Ps 119(118):33. 179 Ps 143(142):10. 180 Ps 40:8. 181 Heb 10:7. 182 Cf. J.H. Neyrey, “The ‘Noble Shepherd’ in John 10: Cultural and Rhetorical Background”, Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2001) 267–91.

113

114

The Image of God in the Great Canon

that “they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10).183 In the synoptic Gospels we can find announcements of John’s allegory.184 Such announcements include the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem (cf. Matt 2:6), which fulfils the prophecy of Micah (cf. Mic 5:1), the image of the Shepherd coming to the aid of the people who “were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (Matt 9:36; cf. Mark 6:34), and the description of the gathered disciples as a “little flock” (cf. Luke 12:32). From the New Testament, we learn that although this “little flock” will be harassed by wolves from outside (cf. Matt 10:16; Rom 8:36), as well as threatened from within by those in sheep’s clothing (cf. Matt 7:15), the weary Shepherd will rise from the dead and gather the flock again in the Galilee of pagans (Matt 26:31–32; cf. Zech 13:7). In the final days the Good Shepherd, who is Lord of all the sheep, will separate the sheep from the goats in His flock (cf. Matt 25:31–33).185 In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Good Shepherd is called the “Great Shepherd of the sheep” (Heb 13:20), while in the First Epistle of St Peter he is called the – “chief shepherd” (1 Pet 5:4). The Son of God as the Shepherd and Guardian (τὸν ποιμένα καὶ ἐπίσκοπον) brings stray lambs to the right path, and restores them to health through His own martyrdom (cf. 1 Pet 2:24–25). In an apocalyptic vision, Christ the Lamb is presented as the Shepherd who leads His sheep to the springs of the water of life (cf. Rev 7:17). In the Great Canon, the phrase “Good Shepherd” is used twice in relation to Jesus Christ, including one explicit mention thereof. St Andrew of Crete asks unto his Lord: Σὺ εἶ ὁ Ποιμὴν ὁ καλός· ζήτησόν με τὸν ἄρνα, καὶ πλανηθέντα μὴ παρίδῃς με.

Thou art the Good Shepherd: seek me, the lamb that has strayed, and do not forget me [Ode III.6].

The above troparion is based on a verse from the Gospel according to John: “I am the good shepherd (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός). The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11), and on an evangelical parable concerning a lost sheep (cf. Luke 15:4–6). At another time the Archbishop of Crete refers to Christ more indirectly as the Good Shepherd, although it is clear from Troparion 19 of Ode VIII that this is an

183 J. Beutler/R.T. Fortna (ed.), The Shepherd Discourse of John 10 and its Context: Studies by members of the Johannine Seminar (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). 184 Cf. J. Willitts, Matthew’s Messianic Shepherd-King. In Search of ‘The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel’ (Berlin/New York, NY: De Gruyter, 2007), 95–156. 185 Cf. J.A.T. Robinson, “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats”, New Testament Studies 2/4 (1955–56) 225–237; K. Weber, “The Image of Sheep and Goats in Matthew 25:31–46”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (1997) 657–78.

The Holy Spirit (τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα)

image of the Saviour that he has in his heart. Asking to “spare His creation” (Φεῖσαι Σωτήρ, τοῦ ἰδίου πλάσματος), he begs Him as a shepherd (ὡς ποιμὴν) to make him a pupil (θρέμμα) of only his sheep (ἐν τῇ νομῇ προβάτων). It is also worth noting that in the analysed troparion, the author refers to verses from the Old and New Testament which manifest the Good Shepherd’s care: “as a shepherd seeks the lost sheep that has gone astray; snatch me from the wolf (ζήτησον ὡς ποιμὴν τὸ ἀπολωλὸς πρόβατον· πλανηθέντα ἐξάρπασον τοῦ λύκου). Psalm 119(118) ends with the verse: “I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek out your servant.”186 This also expresses the prophecy of Isaiah: “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have all turned to our own way” (Isa 53:6), and a vision of Jeremiah: “My people have been lost sheep; their shepherds have led them astray” (Jer 50:6). This troparion also includes a reference to the promise that God made to the sheep of the Chosen People: “I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak, but the fat and the strong I will destroy. I will feed them with justice” (Ezek 34:16). This comparison of the Saviour to the Good Shepherd also refers to the pericope of the Gospel according to Matthew that describes the joy of finding a stray sheep (cf. Matt 18:12–14).

4.

The Holy Spirit (τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα)

The Holy Spirit is inseparable from God the Father and the Son of God. However, while the Son of God, possessing a human nature, reveals to us not only who He is Himself, but also who is the One He is constantly looking at, namely God the Father, the Holy Spirit has no face of his own and for this reason it is virtually impossible to anthropomorphize Him. One can only hear the voice of the Holy Spirit and state “where it comes from or where it goes” (John 3:8).187 He always acts through the person he takes possession of and transforms.188 One can learn of Him in the depths of one’s heart. Jesus Himself revealed: “You know him, because he abides with you, and he will be in you” (John 14:17). The Word of God represents the presence of the Holy Spirit, referring to symbols taken from the natural world, and especially to the elements: fire, wind, air, and water. The Spirit of God renews both the interior of the human person and the face of the earth.189 Reflection on the Third Person of the Most Holy Trinity makes us aware that God is the absolute

186 Ps 119(118):176. 187 Cf. C.K. Barrett, “The Holy Spirit in the Fourth Gospel”, Journal of Theological Studies 1 (1950) 1–15. 188 Cf. N. Matsoukas, “The Economy of the Holy Spirit. The Standpoint of Orthodox Theology”, The Ecumenical Review 41 (1989) 398–406. 189 Cf. Ps 104(103):20.

115

116

The Image of God in the Great Canon

Mystery that transcends the limits of human reason and does not allow us to forget that “God is Spirit” (John 4:24, cf. 2 Cor 3:17).190 The mystery of the Holy Spirit is one of the least developed themes in the Great Canon. This seems obvious because in the tradition of Eastern Christianity, pneumatology is not an independent and separate theological discipline, but is integrally linked to Christology, trinitology and soteriology.191 While St Andrew of Crete refers to the Person of the Son of God many times, he mentions the Holy Spirit only five times. The Holy Spirit is mentioned by name only in four triadika [cf. Ode V.22; Ode VI.16; Ode VIII.21; Ode IX.26], the main purpose of which is to express worship of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons. In addition, the Archbishop of Crete refers to the fact that Christ gave up the Holy Spirit [cf. Ode IV.18]. Thus, the source material of the Great Canon is very sparse in analysing the Person of the Holy Spirit. On the basis of immediate contexts it can be stated that the most important message for believers is the fact that the Holy Spirit is one of the Three Persons of the Most Holy Trinity.192 The fact that the Holy Spirit is mentioned in the triadika, i. e. in doxological troparia, indicates that Christians are called to glorify and praise the one God in the Trinity of Persons, the Holy Spirit together with the Son of God and God the Father. The author of the Great Canon expresses this difficult dogmatic truth in a doxological formula: Σέ, Τριάς, δοξάζομεν, τὸν ἕνα Θεόν ·‘Ἅγιος, Ἅγιος, Ἅγιος εἶ, ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Υἱὸς καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα· ἁπλῆ οὐσία, Μονὰς ἀεὶ προσκυνουμένη. We glorify Thee, O Trinity, the one God. Holy, holy, holy art Thou: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, simple Essence and Unity, worshipped forever [Ode V.22. Triadikon].

The truth of the Trinity (Τριάς) – simple (ἁπλῆ), undivided (διαιρετὴ) yet divided (διαιρετὴ) in Persons (προσωπικῶς), and at the same time a unity (Μονὰς) by nature oneness (τῇ φύσει ἡνωμένη), which says (φησίν) the Father (ὁ Πατήρ), the Son (ὁ Υἱὸς) and the Divine Spirit (θεῖον Πνεῦμα) – found in Troparion 16 of Ode VI is expressed in the form of a narrative given by God Himself. The three-person God in this triadikon is revealed in the Communion of Three Persons, one of whom is the Spirit of God.

190 Cf. P. Grech, “2 Corinthians 3,17 and the Pauline Doctrine of Conversion to the Holy Spirit”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 17 (1955) 420–37; D. Greenwood, “The Lord is Spirit: Some Considerations of 2 Cor 3:17”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34 (1972) 467–72. 191 Cf. C.N. Tsirpanlis, Introduction to Eastern Patristic Thought and Orthodox Theology (Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 1991), 83. 192 Cf. J. Meyendorff, “The Holy Spirit as God”, in The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1982) 153–65.

The Holy Spirit (τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα)

In Troparion 21 of Ode VIII, the Holy Spirit together with the rest of the Holy Trinity are asked to show Their mercy. In this triadikon, the Holy Spirit is called the Living and Creative Spirit (Πνεῦμα ζῶν καὶ κτίζον), as well as the Loving Comforter (Παράκλητε ἀγαθέ) and the Spirit of Righteousness (Πνεῦμα τὸ εὐθές).193 While God the Father is glorified (Πατέρα δοξάζοντες) and the Son of God is magnified (Υἱὸν μεγαλύνοντες), the most appropriate way of praising the Holy Spirit, according to St Andrew of Crete, is to worship him by bowing (Πνεῦμα προσκυνοῦντες) [cf. Ode IХ.26]. For centuries in the monastic tradition of Eastern Christianity bowing has played a great role, as it helps to express both praise to God and humility before the Giver of Life. It can be concluded that it is not accidental that in the Great Canon bowing is attributed to the Person of the Holy Spirit, since the Spirit of God is the “Breath” which in prayers is combined with the process of human breathing. By combining human breathing with the “Divine Breath” and living by the Word of God, the body of a Christian increasingly becomes “a temple of the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 6:19)194 in which Christ lives (cf. Gal 2:20). However, it should be noted that, depending on the context, the term προσκυνοῦντες can be considered as an act of bowing (προς – towards, κίνησις – movement or as worship and adoration in a broader sense. In order to transform the human person, Christ not only sacrificed His flesh and blood through death on the Cross, but also gave up the Spirit on the Cross to bring Himself to His Father.195 The gift of the Body was intended to refashion or recreate (ἀναπλάσης) man, and the gift of the Blood was to wash away (ἀποπλύνῃς) sins. The statement made by the Bishop of Crete: “Thou hast given up Thy Spirit” (τὸ πνεῦμα παρέδωκας) [Ode IV.18] has its origin in this verse from the Gospel according to John: “When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished’. Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit (παρέδωκε τὸ πνεῦμα).”196 Orthodox exegesis indicates that this is the so-called Johannine Pentecost, i. e. the transferring of the Holy Spirit from the Cross to believers. It is worth noting that the author of the Great Canon does not refer to the moment of Jesus’ death as presented in the Gospel according to Luke: “Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, ‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit’ (Πάτερ, εἰς χεῖράς σου παρατίθεμαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου). Having said this, he breathed his last (καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν ἐξέπνευσεν).”197 The

193 Cf. G. Johnston, The Spirit-Paraclete in the Gospel of John (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970). 194 Cf. G.D. Fee, Empowering Presence. The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, MI: Baker Academic, 1994), 134–37. 195 Cf. F.-M. Léthel, Théologie du l’agonie du Christ. La liberté humaine du Fils de Dieu et son importance sotériologique mises en lumière par saint Maxime le Confesseur (Paris: Beauchesne, 1972), 59–64. 196 John 19:30. 197 Luke 23:46; cf. Mark 15:37.

117

118

The Image of God in the Great Canon

Greek term ἐξέπνευσεν means that someone exhales or takes their last breath. The word παραδίδωμι has a broader semantic scope, because it means: “to pass on”, “to hand over”, “to deliver”, “to link”, and even “to teach orally or through written tradition” (see Mark 7:13; Luke 1:2). The theological reflections in Part Two of this monograph are focused on the mystery of one God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons. In the Great Canon, St Andrew of Crete presented a Christian image of God, which consists of both the doxological contents, present in the triadika, and references to biblical pericopes showing God’s creative and salvific acts. This presentation of the image of God professed by the hymnographer from Crete is essential for both soteriological and metanoical reasons. The vision of God which emerges from the text of the Great Canon is a proof not only of the living faith of its author, but also of its roots in the dogmatic tradition of the Christian East. Doxological reference to the Trinitarian dogma – combined with a focus on the Person of Jesus Christ, the Son of God – constitutes, as intended by the Bishop of Gortyna, a testimony of his return to orthodoxy after years subscribing to Monothelitism.198 In this chapter, phrases referring to the Holy Trinity and individual Divine Persons have been analysed from a lexical and dogmatic perspective. A solemn confession of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons is the dogmatic culmination of each of the nine odes of the Great Canon. In reference to the teaching of the Church of the first centuries, in the triadika of the Great Canon St Andrew of Crete doxologically confesses his faith in God in the Trinity of The Most Holy Persons, who themselves form an undivided unity. These poetic stanzas emphasize first the Trinity of God and then His unity. In this masterpiece of the Bishop of Gortyna, one can notice a dual approach to the mystery of God. Whereas in the first five odes God is praised by believers, in the triadikon of Ode VI the mode of narrative is changed and God says of Himself: “I am the Trinity, simple and undivided, yet divided in Persons, and I am the Unity, by Nature one”. It is characteristic of the Great Canon to encourage the soul to praise God by singing. In the last triadikon [cf. Ode IX] there is a solemn proclamation that God is a consubstantial Trinity, a unity of Divine Persons: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, which have one nature. It is truly one God by nature, who is “Life and Lives, Kingdom without end”. For St Andrew of Crete, God the Father is a person who is “without beginning”, “without cause” and “simple”, who constitutes an important dogmatic truth in the

198 Cf. G. Florovsky, The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eight Century (Vaduz: Notable & Academic – Büchervertriebsanstalt, 1987), 204–7.

The Holy Spirit (τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα)

patristic tradition of the Christian East. God the Father is the Creator of everything, “Begetting” the Son of God outside time. The author of the Great Canon is particularly focused on the Person of the Son of God. While God the Father is a hidden God, the Son of God is the One who, for the salvation of mankind, became man, died and rose again. The Bishop of Gortyna was writing the Great Canon towards the end of his life, at a time when he returned to the true faith of the Church. Perhaps an awareness that his adherence to the heresy of Monothelitism had distorted his image of the Son of God gave rise to the need to clearly show who the Saviour is by faithfully and frequently referring to the texts of the New Testament and especially the Gospels. In the Great Canon, there appear as many as fifteen names or titles for the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. In dogmatic, biblical and existential contexts, the hymnographer from Crete reveals that the Son of God is: Jesus, Christ, the Son of the Theotokos, the Son of David, the Lord, the Almighty, the Saviour, the Lamb of God, the King, the Judge, the Word, the Physician, the Creator, the Lover of Mankind and the Good Shepherd. In this way St Andrew of Crete expresses faith in both the Divinity and humanity of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, and also points to His unique role in the history of salvation and His relation to the community of the Church and to every person. The Third Person of the Holy Trinity is mentioned in the Great Canon only five times. The Holy Spirit is mentioned by name only in four odes. In Ode IX we learn that while God the Father is glorified and the Son of God is magnified, the most appropriate way to praise the Holy Spirit is to worship Him by bowing.

119

III.

The Identity and Drama of Man and the Chance for Salvation in the Great Canon

The question about the essence of God cannot be separated from the question of man. The psalmist already asked of God: “What are human beings that you are mindful of them?” The search for an answer to the question of the mystery of the human person is a task that requires taking into account both the identity of man as a creature of God1 and his personal structure, and in particular requires reflection on the content and the links the basic anthropological categories (the intellect, the spirit, the soul and the body/flesh).2 In view of the fall of the first people – Adam and Eve – and the effects thereof on human nature,3 a deepened anthropological reflection should take account of the human drama caused by various spiritual threats caused by evil spirits.4 This part of the monograph, devoted to man, must thus contain some practical indications as to what people need in order to find their path to salvation. The contained anthropological analyses culminate in examination of the portrayal in the Great Canon of the Mother of God, Mary, who is the New Eve.

1.

Man as the Creature of God

From the Christian point of view, reflection on the human person begins with a reminder that it is God who is the Creator and man who is the creation. On the basis of the troparia that make up the Great Canon, the verses about man as a creature of God are analysed. First, we will have to consider the very fact of man’s creation, and then the fact that man was created in the image and likeness of God. In the Great Canon, the author also did not hesitate to confess that he is the greatest of sinners, which is a manifestation of the anthropological truth that man is a fallen creature.

1 Cf. J. Meyendorff, “Creation in the History of Orthodox Theology”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 27 (1983) 27–37. 2 Cf. J.B. Green, Body, Soul, and Human Life. The Nature of Humanity in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 35–71. 3 Cf. Ch. Yannaras, The Enigma of Evil (trans. N. Russel; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2012), 29–37. 4 Cf. Costache, Reading the Scriptures, 62–3.

122

The Identity and Drama of Man

1.1

Man Created by God

Man has no autonomous identity. He is created by God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons.5 St Andrew of Crete expresses this using three biblical concepts: τὸ ποίημά, τὸ πλάσμα and κτίσις. The first one, τὸ ποίημά, refers in the Old Testament to both the creative work and the creative activity of God. In the Greek translation of the Book of Genesis, there appears the word ἐποίησεν, which expresses the truth that God created heaven and earth (Gen 1:1 – LXX). The same word was used to express the creative work of God which led to the creation of man (Gen 1:27).6 In the New Testament, the term ποίημα can be found in the Epistle to Ephesians (2:10), where it refers to Christians. Here the inspired author reminds the Ephesians: “For we are what he has made us (ποίημα), created in Christ Jesus (κτισθέντες ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ) for good works.” In the Great Canon, the notion of ποίημα in relation to man appears only once in the context of expressing regret for sins committed and asking for God’s mercy. The Bishop of Gortyna begs the Saviour to have mercy on His creation: “But as God take pity on Thy creation, O Saviour (τὸ ποίημά σου)” [Ode II.3]. In the Septuagint, God’s creative activity is described with the word ἔπλασεν, the semantic content of which is related to such activities as the moulding or forming of something. For God is the one who “formed (ἔπλασεν) man from the dust of the ground” (Gen 2:7, cf. Gen 2:8).7 This kind of activity of God the Creator was specified in the Old Testament by indications of specific actions of God. Among others, God creates man’s eyes,8 breath,9 spirit10 and heart.11 The absolute sovereignty of God12 over His creation was emphasized through the use of the verb “mould”, “form”. In relation to God’s action, this verb appears 36 times in the Old Testament, while as the noun πλάσμα – it is used only 6 times, including only once in relation to man: “For he knows how we were made (το πλάσμα), he remembers that we are dust.”13 In the New Testament, St Paul used the term πλάσμα

5 Cf. M. Prokurat, “Orthodox Perspectives on Creation”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 33 (1989) 331–49; G. Florovsky, “Creation and Creaturehood”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1976) 43–78. 6 Cf. H.D. Preuss, Old Testament Theology (2 vol.; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996), 114–17. 7 Cf. J. Rogerson/Ph. Davies, The Old Testament World (London: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 117. 8 Cf. Ps 94(93):9. 9 Cf. Prov 24:12. 10 Cf. Zech 12:1. 11 Cf. Ps 33:15. 12 Cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps 95(94):5. 13 Ps 103(102):14.

Man as the Creature of God

to emphasise the absolute sovereignty of God over creation: “But who indeed are you, a human being, to argue with God? Will what is moulded say to the one who moulds it (τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι), ‘Why have you made me like this?’” (Rom 9:20). Although in the Septuagint, the term πλάσμα is used only to refer to Adam, while in the New Testament, and more specifically in the First Epistle to Timothy, it is also used with reference to Eve: “’For Adam was formed first (ἐπλάσθη), then Eve.”14 In the Great Canon, the term πλάσμα is used twice, for the first time in the triadikon of Ode II, beginning with an invocation of the Holy Trinity and ending with a supplication for the salvation of the sinful man who is a creature (πλάσμα) of God [cf. Ode II.40/11]. The request not to abandon the creation that is God’s work is also repeated in the troparion that starts Ode IV: Τὰ ἔργα σου μὴ παρίδῃς· τὸ πλάσμα σου μὴ παρόψῃ.

Do not despise Thy works; do not forsake Thy creation.

The third concept expressing the truth that God is the Creator and man is His creation – ἡ κτίσις – is used three times. Each time it refers not only to man but to all living beings. The biblical message clearly shows an image of God as the Creator of the world, of all creatures and of man. For God in His mercy saves all nations (τὰ ἔθνη πάντα), and they worship (προσκυνοῦσί) before their Creator. He opened (ἀνεῴγνυτο) Eden, closed (ἡ Ἐδὲμ κλεισθεῖσα) for creation (ἡ κτίσις) from both above (τὰ ἄνω) and below (τὰ κάτω) [cf. Ode IV.19].15 The Creator, crucified on a tree by His own will (ἑκουσίως ξύλῳ ἀνεσταύρωσαι) [Ode IV.19], spoke to His creation in a special way. Upon seeing Him crucified (σταυρούμενόν), all creation was in anguish (συνείχετο) [Ode ΙΧ.23].16 The heirmos of Ode VIII is an ode of praise to God sung by both the Heavenly Hosts (Ὃν Στρατιαὶ Οὐρανών) and by all beings with the breath of life. St Andrew of Crete includes angels, “everything that has breath” (πᾶσα πνοὴ) and the whole creation (κτίσις) in this ode of praise and exaltation of God [cf. Ode VIII. Heirmos].17 This description of creation found in the Great Canon combines theology, anthropology, cosmology and the history of salvation in a complex synthesis which draws its inspiration from the Book of Genesis.18

14 15 16 17 18

1 Tim 2:13. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 284–5. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 375–9. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 342–3. Costache, Byzantine Insights, 38. Cf. T.E. Fretheim, The Pentateuch (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1996), 70.

123

124

The Identity and Drama of Man

1.2

Man Created in the Image and Likeness of God

The fact of man’s creation in God’s image and likeness is presented in the Great Canon from a Christological perspective, which is characteristic of the anthropology of the Greek Church Fathers.19 Jesus Christ, through his Incarnation, became a human child (ἐνηπίασε) and shared in the flesh (σαρκὶ προσομιλήσας).20 He also became an example (ὑπογραμμόν) and image (εἰκόνα) of His condescension (συγκαταβάσεως) for the human soul [Ode IХ.5]. St Andrew of Crete is fully aware that through his sinfulness he has lost the image of the Saviour, and compares himself to the long lost royal coin [cf. Ode VI.15]. St Luke placed the parable of the lost coin at the centre of three parables that reveal the essence of God’s forgiveness. Chapter 15 of the Gospel according to St Luke begins with an attack by the Pharisees and scribes, appalled by the attitude of Jesus, who “welcomes sinners and eats with them” (Luke 15:2). For “all the tax collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to” (Luke 15:1) the Saviour. After the parable of finding a lost sheep, the Messiah compares the converted sinner to the coin that has been found: “Or what woman having ten silver coins, if she loses one of them, does not light a lamp, sweep the house, and search carefully until she finds it? When she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbours, saying, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin that I had lost’” (Luke 15:8–9). To find the lost coin, the woman from the parable “lights the lamp”, or literally “touches the lamp” (ἅπτει λύχνον). St Andrew of Crete associates the motif of the lamp with the person of St John the Baptist, who “was a burning and shining lamp (ὁ λύχνος ὁ καιόμενος καὶ φαίνων)” (John 5:35) asking the Saviour to “light the lamp of His Predecessor” (ἀνάψας λύχνον τὸν Πρόδρομόν σου). The mission of St John the Baptist was to prepare the way for the Messiah (cf. Luke 1:76) by being the voice of the one crying in the wilderness (cf. John 1:23). Being a lamp full of light and heat, when the true Light came, he humbly confessed, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). Though, as it is written in the Gospel according to St Matthew: “Among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Matt 11:11). Being aware that he is an image of Christ, the Bishop of Gortyna therefore addresses a request to him: “O Word, seek and find again Thine image” (Λόγε ἀναζήτησον καὶ εὑρὲ τὴν σὴν εἰκόνα) [Ode VI.15]. This cry to find God’s image, coming from the bottom of the heart, stems from the realization that through one’s sin this image has been gradually denied. This negation of the image of God in man 19 Cf. Z.C. Xintaras, “Man – the Image of God According to the Greek Fathers”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 1 (1954) 48–62. 20 Cf. V. Lossky, Orthodox Theology. An Introduction (trans. I.I. Kesarcodi-Watson; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1989), 36–39, 90–4.

Man as the Creature of God

is shown in a dynamic way. First, in comparing his spiritual centre to the “tabernacle/ tent built by God (θεοτυπώτου σκηνῆς), the author of the Great Canon ascertains that he neglected (ὑπεριδὼν) his “internal” (τῆς ἔνδον) tabernacle, because he cared only for “outward adornment” (Τῆς ἔξωθεν εὐκοσμίας) [cf. Ode II.19]. As a result of this lack of concern for the “beauty of the original image” (τῆς πρὶν εἰκόνος τὸ κάλλος), this tabernacle has been discoloured by giving in to passions (τοῖς πάθεσιν·). The Bishop of Gortyna returns once again in Troparion 18 of Ode VII, admitting he violated the Saviour’s commandment (ἐντολήν) and, in falling into a state of passions (πάθεσιν), destroyed all beauty and goodness (ὅλον κάλλος) in himself. St Andrew of Crete, convinced that he is unable to change on his own, asks the Saviour to find him like the “once lost coin” [Ode II.21]. Living a life of passion [cf. Ode II.14] leads to the devastation of the human person, which in Troparion 15 of Ode II is expressed in the following words: Ἐσπίλωσα τὸν τῆς σαρκός μου χιτῶνα καὶ κατερρύπωσα τὸ κατ’ εἰκόνα, Σωτήρ, καὶ καθ’ ὁμοίωσιν.

I have stained the garment of my flesh, O Saviour, and defiled that which was made in Thine image and likeness.

Only the One who performed miracles (θαύματα), healed lepers (ἰασάμενος λεπροὺς) and the paralysed (παραλύτους), as well as healed a woman suffering from the flow of blood – as soon as she touched his garment – can lift man from this state of collapse. Being God, the Saviour became similar (ἐμορφώθης) to man and gave him a new identity, thus forgiving him of his sins [cf. Ode V.17]. 1.3

Man as a Fallen Creature – a Sinner

Human sinfulness is one of the main themes of the Great Canon. St Andrew of Crete states the fact that man is sinful in the first eight odes of his work. In most cases it is a simple statement, of which the most important element is the word: “I have sinned” (ἥμαρτον). On many occasions, the painful confession “I have sinned” is combined with a reference to God the Saviour who wants to save His children. In individual troparia, in directly referring to a personal confession of sinfulness, the author of the Great Canon concentrates on God, because He is the God who loves man (φιλάνθρωπος). Poetic phrases referring to biblical images are infused with hope and emotional fervour. Deep repentance expressed by crying comes to the foreground. The sinner’s submission to the merciful God who cares about the fate of His creation is one of the main threads of the Great Canon, owing to which this Lenten liturgical poem offers a special hope for the saving of the prodigal son.

125

126

The Identity and Drama of Man

Already in the first personal confession of his own sinfulness, which is formulated in Troparion 12 of Ode I, the Archbishop of Crete is not so much focused on himself but rather on God who saves: Εἰ καὶ ἥμαρτον, Σωτήρ, ἀλλ’ οἶδα ὅτι φιλάνθρωπος εἶ· πλήττεις συμπαθῶς καὶ σπλαγχνίζῃ θερμῶς· δακρύοντα βλέπεις καὶ προστρέχεις ὡς Πατὴρ ἀνακαλῶν τὸν Ἄσωτον.

Though I have sinned, O Saviour, yet I know that Thou art full of loving-kindness. Thou dost chastise with mercy and art fervent in compassion. Thou dost see me weeping and dost run to meet me, like the Father calling back the Prodigal Son.

Starting this troparion with the word “though” (Εἰ), St Andrew of Crete shifts the emphasis from the undeniable fact of human sinfulness to the Saviour, the Father (Πατὴρ) “loving man”, running to the rescue of his stray child. The repeated confession “I have sinned against Thee” (ἥμαρτον σοι) is combined with a request for forgiveness [cf. Ode III.4], mercy and pity [cf. Ode VIII.1], for only Jesus can lift the sinner from the fall and, being the compassionate God (εὔσπλαγχνός), take from him the heavy yoke of sins (ἆρον [...] τὸν βαρύν τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode I.22]. The Saviour hears the desire of the heart of the person calling: “I have sinned against Thee, O God (Ὁ Θεὸς ἡμάρτηκά σοι), be merciful to me” [Ode VI.1; cf. Ode III.10/1]. This phrase is taken from the prayer of the tax collector who, aware of his sinfulness, said: “God, be merciful to me, a sinner! (ὁ Θεός, ἱλάσθητί μοι τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ)” (Luke 18:13). Sin not only concerns the spiritual sphere of man, but is also a violation or depravity of the flesh. Being aware of this, the hymnographer from Crete calls out to the Merciful One: “I have sinned and violated the vessel of my flesh” (Ἐξήμαρτον ἐνυβρίσας τὸ σκεῦος τὸ τῆς σαρκός) [Ode IV.25]. Even in sin, man remains a creation (πλάσματός) of God that in a state of sinful fall can only cry out: “Spare, spare, O Lord!” (Φεῖσαι, φεῖσαι, Κύριε) [Ode V.16]. By remaining in the state of sin, man abandons God’s way. St Andrew of Crete therefore follows the Psalmist: “I went astray” and adds, “I have set aside Thine commandments”21 (ἠθέτησα τὴν ἐντολήν σου·) and “in sins have I progressed” (ἐν ἁμαρτίαις προήχθην) [Ode VII.1]. He also wonders to whom his “soul of many sins” (πολυαμάρτητε ψυχή) has become similar to [Ode II.31/2]. With reference to biblical figures, the Bishop of Gortyna states that none of Adam’s children have sinned as he has sinned against God [cf. Ode II.24],22 for he has become like Cain (cf. Gen 4:3–8), Lamech (cf. Gen 4:19–24) [cf. Ode II.31/2] and the brothers who sold Joseph (cf. Gen 37:12–28). It should be noted that Joseph is “the fruit of purity” (τὸν τῆς ἁγνείας καρπὸν) who consolidated wisdom and self-control (τὸν τῆς σωφροσύνης) [Ode V.3]. Even

21 Cf. Ps 119(118):67. 22 Cf. Costache, Byzantine Insights, 41–2.

Man as the Creature of God

the sin of David’s forefather is not as great as the sins of the author’s own soul, although David sinned only twice (ἥμαρτε διτττῶς), pierced with the arrow of adultery (βέλει τοξευθεὶς τῆς μοιχείας) and stabbed with the spear of murder (τοῦ φόνου) [Ode VII.4]. David once joined sin to sin (ἀνομήματι), adding murder to fornication, but he showed a twofold repentance. But the soul, which committed even greater evil than that of David, did not repent before God [Ode VII.5]. In the psalm he himself wrote, David confessed his sins to God and accused himself in words: “Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin!” (Ps 51:1–2), which St Andrew of Crete paraphrased briefly in the following words: “Have mercy upon me (Ἐλέησόν με·), for against Thee only have I sinned, O God of all. Do Thou cleanse me (καθάρισόν με)” [Ode VII.6]. This state of sinfulness is incomparably greater than that of the harlot (Πόρνη), for no other man on earth is as sinful as the author of the Great Canon [cf. Ode VII.17]. Thus the reproach addressed to his soul that is more wicked (σκαιοτέρα) than that of all sinners both “before the law” (πάντων τῶν πρὸ νόμου) and “after the law” (μετὰ νόμον) is not surprising [Ode VIII.8]. The hymnographer confesses six times that he considers himself to be the greatest sinner. How should his words be interpreted? Did they result from his doctrinal fall and his joining the heresy of Monothelitism? The context of such statements remains problematic. We will never know whether St Andrew of Crete identified himself with the speaking subject. The work appears to be universal, allowing everyone who listens to it to discover their sinfulness. One can hear in it an echo of the words of Paul the Apostle, who in the First Epistle to Timothy wrote: “The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the foremost” (1 Tim 1:15). In relation to salvation in Christ, human sinfulness takes on a completely new meaning. To consider oneself as the greatest sinner is not an empty declaration and has nothing to do with a low self-esteem. St Paul knew from his own experience that Jesus Christ loves him unconditionally and the Saviour’s love is more powerful than human sinfulness. The Apostle of the Nations, “formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and a man of violence” (1 Tim 1:13) received mercy so that in him, “as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display the utmost patience, making an example to those who would come to believe in Him for eternal life” (1 Tim 1:16). The awareness of the immensity of one’s own sinfulness opens a person, through the action of the Holy Spirit, to give witness to others of the endless love of God. If the Holy Spirit proves man wrong about sin (cf. John 16:8) and Jesus comes into the world to “call not to the righteous but sinners” (Mark 2:17), this recognition of one’s own sinfulness becomes possible only when one discovers that God is love (1 John 4:16). In the text of the Great Canon, the statement of the existential spiritual condition of Bishop of Gortyna, similarly as in the case of St Paul, directly refers to the salvific mission of Christ:

127

128

The Identity and Drama of Man

Ἥμαρτόν σοι μόνος ἐγώ, ἥμαρτον ὑπὲρ πάντας· Χριστέ Σωτήὲ, μὴ ὑπερίδῃς, με.

I alone have sinned against Thee, I have sinned more than all men; reject me not, O Christ my Saviour [Ode III.5].

The basic idea of this troparion is repeated in subsequent variations like a leitmotif in consideration of one’s own sinfulness, from which one can only be liberated by the One in Whom there is no sin. In the same ode, the Archbishop of Crete once again returns to confessing his sinfulness, while at the same time pleading with the Lord to be merciful, although there is no one among mankind who has committed sins like him [cf. Ode III. 12/3]. He confidently entrusts himself to the righteous Judge (Δικαιοκρῖτα·), whom he also considers the Lover of Mankind (Φιλάνθρωπε·), and asks Him: “Despise not Thy works, forsake not Thy creation” (Τὰ ἔργα σου μὴ παρίδῃς· τὸ πλάσμα σου μὴ παρόψῃ) [Ode IV.1]. The next two troparia – the first of which contains a warning of imminent death [cf. Ode IV.2], the second a wake-up call [Ode IV.3]23 – prepare the author for the painful conclusion that there is “no sin, no evil deed, no wickedness” in life that he did not commit. In this place of reflection on his own sinfulness and life in immorality (ἐπλημμέλησα),24 St Andrew of Crete tries to express how he has sinned, that is “in mind, word and intent, in disposition, thought and act” (κατά νοῦν καὶ λόγον καὶ προαίρεσιν καὶ θέσει καὶ γνώμῃ καὶ πράξει) [Ode IV.4]. The examination of the actions performed (τὰ ἔργα) by the author clearly shows that he surpassed all people in his sins [cf. Ode V.15]. For the last time in the analysed work, the motive of being the greatest sinner appears in Ode VIII and is combined with a call to the merciful Saviour (εὔσπλαγχνε Σωτήρ) to accept the penitent (μετανοοῦντα): “Against Thee alone have I sinned; I have transgressed, have mercy on me” (Ἥμαρτόν σοι μόνῳ, ἠνόμησα, ἐλέησόν με) [Ode VIII. 18]. As a result of committed sins, man has found himself stripped naked of God (γυμνωθέντα Θεοῦ) and of the eternal Kingdom and its joy [cf. Ode 1.3], and his soul has tasted the deceptive food and has fallen [cf. Ode I.4].25 The plot of the Great Canon reveals the fall of the soul through a voice that exposes and calls on the soul to wake up and not persist in the state of the fall.26 What can this sinloving (φιλαμαρτήμων) and wretched (τάλαινα) soul do when the consequences of its actions are reached? [cf. Ode IV.16]. From this life of darkness (Σκότος), being in the night of sin (ἡ νὺξ τῆς ἁμαρτίας), it can only cry out to the Saviour for a transformation, as a result of which it will be able to become “a son of the

23 24 25 26

Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 275–8. Cf. Ps 119(118):67 – “Before I was humbled I went astray (ἐγὼ ἐπλημμέλησα)”. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 231–3. Cf. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανόν, 33.

Man as the Creature of God

day” (ὡς ἡμέρας υἱόν) [cf. Ode V.1]. The one who has become a dwelling place of fleshly defilements (σαρκικῶν) and passions (μολυσμάτων) can be transformed if he confesses his sins to God [cf. Ode VII.13] and will then quickly depart from these evil sins (τῶν πονηρῶν τὰς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode VIII.12].27 The author of the Great Canon cries to his God in pain: “I confess to Thee, O Saviour, the sins I have committed, the wounds of my soul and body, which murderous thoughts, like thieves, have inflicted inwardly upon me” (μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ) [Ode I.11]. Upon having an insight into his own interior, one becomes clear that there is no hope of a lenient judgment from God. Therefore, all that remains is to appeal to God’s mercy: Μὴ εἰσέλθης μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐν κρίσει, φέρων μου τὰ πρακτέα, λόγους ἐκζητῶν, καὶ εὐθύνων ὁρμάς· ἀλλ’ ἐν οἰκτιρμοῖς σου παρορῶν μου τὰ δεινά, σῶσόν με, Παντοδύναμε.

Enter not into judgement with me, bringing before me the things I should have done, examining my words and correcting my impulses. But in Thy mercy overlook my sins and save me, O Lord almighty [Ode I.23].

This request to the Saviour is preceded in Ode I by the supplication for forgiveness of sins (παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν) [cf. Ode I.13]. This is expressed in the form of a cry to take away or remove the heavy yoke of one’s sins (ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode I.18]. St Andrew of Crete is fully aware that God knows both “voluntary (τὰ ἑκούσια) and involuntary (τὰ ἀκούσια) falls/offences (πταίσματά)”, and “manifest (τὰ φανερὰ) and hidden (κρυπτά)” sins [Ode I.19]. Just as He once saved Peter, who plunged into the depths of the lake (cf. Matt 14:24–33), in the same way the Father can save the soul calling to Him from the depths of sin (τοῦ βυθοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode VI.13]. Hence St Andrew of Crete perceives Christ, who is the Lord of human existence, “from the lowest depths of sin and despair” (ἐκ τῶν ἀδύτων βυθῶν τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τῆς ἀπογνώσεώς) as a calm haven (Λιμένα γαλήνιον) [cf. Ode VI.14]. Twice in the Great Canon, the author addresses a supplication for salvation from sins to God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons [cf. Ode I.24; II.40/11]. First, in Ode I, this request is preceded by a doxological declaration of faith in the divinity of the Trinity and His Unity: Ὑπερούσιε Τριάς, ἡ ἐν Μονάδι προσκυνουμένη, ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας· καὶ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς δάκρυα κατανύξεως. Trinity beyond all being, worshipped in Unity, take from me the heavy yoke of sin, and in Thy compassion grant me tears of compunction [Ode I. Triadikon].

27 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 345–9.

129

130

The Identity and Drama of Man

Similarly, at the end of Ode II, the first to be praised is the “Trinity uncreated and without beginning, undivided Unity” (Ἄναρχε ἄκτιστε Τριάς, ἀμέριστε Μονάς). This is followed by a request for Him to accept a sinner in his repentance (μετανοοῦντά) and not reject but spare and deliver from the fire of condemnation (φεῖσαι καὶ ρῦσαι τοῦ πυρὸς καταδίκης) His creation (πλάσμα) that is the sinner (ἡμαρτηκότα) [Ode II.40/11. Triadikon]. The Christological motif of the forgiveness of sins is recalled only once in the whole of the Great Canon – in Troparion 20 of Ode IV. St Andrew of Crete refers to the Saviour’s sacrifice on the tree of the Cross.28 He wants to be cleansed with Christ’s Blood and drink the Water that flowed out of the side of Jesus. For they are for the author the drink of forgiveness (ἀφέσεως) [of sins], purification (καθαίρωμαι) and anointing (χριόμενος) [Ode IV.20]. This great gift of the Saviour is given by the Church, because the Church, like a chalice (κρατῆρα), has received that which gushed out from the side of the Lord and mixes the life-giving (ζωηφόρον) stream of forgiveness (ῆής ἀφέσεως) with the stream of knowledge (γνώσεως) in the image of two Covenants (Διαθηκῶν): the Old and the New. The Greek term κρατῆρα essentially means a vessel for mixing liquids. Drinking from the chalice of the Church that contains the life-giving gifts of the Saviour, His Blood and Water, is to immerse oneself in the source of awakening (ἐξέβλυσε) [cf. Ode IV.22]. It is worth noting that in the Great Canon the request to remove from the sinner the “heavy yoke of sin” (ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας) is once addressed to the Mother of God. She is the “hope and protection” (ἐλπὶς καὶ προστασία) of those who praise her in odes (ὑμνούντων) [Ode I.25. Theotokion].

2.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

In Christian anthropology, to describe a human person it is necessary to refer to concepts such as “the intellect”, “the spirit”, “the soul” and “the body/flesh”. Their understanding requires taking into account the fundamental thesis of the spiritual, psychological and corporeal unity of the human person29 in discussion with the thesis that man is a complex structure which cannot be fully understood.30 St Andrew of Crete, as well as the majority of Byzantine theologians, describes man in trichotomic categories, but it should be noted that he does not define the semantic scope of these categories. In referring to biblical texts, he tries to invite the listener 28 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 413. 29 Cf. Ch. Yannaras, Person and Eros (trans. N. Russel; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2007), 43–70. 30 Cf. J.W. Cooper, Body, Soul and Life Everlasting. Biblical Anthropology and the Monism-Dualism Debate (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989), 33–203.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

to deeply reflect upon the mystery of human identity. The following four sections analyse the structural elements of the human person, that is: the intellect, the spirit, the soul and the body/flesh in all the contexts in which they appear in the Great Canon. 2.1

The Intellect (νούς)

The term “intellect” (νοῦς) appears fourteen times in the Great Canon. This important category in the anthropology of the Christian East is fundamental to understanding man in relation to God and to all kinds of spiritual realities, especially those that want to destroy the identity of the human person.31 St Andrew of Crete does not explain exactly what the intellect is. He refers to the intellect in the same way as he does to the soul or to the body/flesh. This lack of a closer definition of the intellect due to the then common understanding of the intellect as the spiritual centre of man.32 In the anthropology of the Christian East, it is a common belief that the intellect of a natural man is the sum of all his cognitive functions and is the centre of their unity. The intellect is the eye of the soul, the light of reason of the human being, which enlightens and guides the human person. When the intellect is not in communication with God, its cognitive functions become very limited.33 The hymnographer from Crete focuses his attention on what happens in and with the intellect, because he believes that it has a substantial impact on the whole spiritual condition of a human being. His understanding of the intellect is in line with the teachings of the Eastern Church Fathers and the experience of hesychastic spirituality. From the Great Canon we learn that the intellect has the ability to see God [cf. Ode IV.9]. If God is the Eternal Light, then the intellect, created in God’s image34 –

31 Cf. N.A. Williams, The Divine Sense. The Intellect in Patristic Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 1–142, 190–239; I. Kotsonis, The Nous (Thessaloniki: Publications of the Holy Monastery of St Gregory Palamas, 1999), 13–62. 32 K. Leśniewski, “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi... ”. Hezychastyczna metoda uzdrawiania człowieka (Lublin: KUL, 2006), 69: “According to hesychastic spirituality the intellect has a special significance because, owing to this supreme power of man, it becomes possible to know God, the inner essence of things and the principle of created things.” 33 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 180. 34 Cf. St Peter of Damascus, Book I. A Treasury of Divine Knowledge, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware The Philokalia (3 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber: 1984), 134–5. (Όσιος Πέτρος ο Δαμασκηνός, “Βιβλίον Α’. Της υποθέσεως του βιβλίου του οσίου και θεοφόρου πατρός υμών Πέτρου Δαμασκηνού”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νυπτικών (G’ vol.; Ἀθῆναι: Εκδοτικος Οικος “Αστηρ”, 1991), 53).

131

132

The Identity and Drama of Man

originally, before the fall of the irst Parents – also had shone with God’s Light.35 Turning away from the Trinitarian Light, which took place in Eden, darkened the intellect. Troparion 9 of Ode II evokes the admiration of the intellect for the beauty of the tree of knowledge in Eden,36 which itself led to a cognitive disturbance. St Andrew of Crete explains that this was a deception prepared by the devil. The opponent, i. e. the one who was originally called Lucifer or “Light Bringer”, turned away from God’s Light and tries to bring the intellects of people, who are created in the image of the God of Light, into the land of darkness. The opposition “light – darkness” is key to explaining the anthropological category of the intellect. An intellect directed towards the Triune God is a “sophronic” intellect, i. e. a pure, transparent intellect that learns holistically. The Greek term σωφροσύνη also means temperance, innocence, virtue, self-restraint (cf. 1 Tim 2:9; Titus 2:12), prudence and reason (cf. Acts 26:25). The clarity of the intellect makes it possible to reflect on God’s Light in itself and illuminates the soul. This is only possible if we completely focus on God. Focusing the intellect on God opens one to the Energies of God’s Light. If tthese energies penetrate the intellect, it becomes completely transparent.37 If the human intellect is polluted [cf. Ode II. 34/5] and defiled [cf. Ode V.14] by lustful desires to which it succumbs, its beauty is lost [cf. Ode II.20].38 Then the intellect falls into a state which St Andrew of Crete describes as ὑποβρύχιον νοῦν. These mysterious words have no continuation. The author of the Great Canon does not specify in what reality the intellect is immersed [cf. Ode V.13].39 The immediate context of the next troparion [cf. Ode V.14] clearly indicates that this state does not concern God’s Light, but rather the darkness originating in lustful desires. Succumbing to the evil thoughts that arouse lustful desires is linked to the intellect’s ability to imagine different kinds of colourful images. These realities that cause a dispersion and darkening of the intellect are images of things that are cognisable through the senses, both in the present and in the past. A characteristic feature of the intellect is its ability to produce images of past events, which is often used by

35 Cf. Ch. Stavropoulos, Partakers of Divine nature (trans. S. Harakas; Minneapolis, MN: Light and Life Publishing Company, 1976), 25–7. 36 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 413. 37 Cf. St Diadochos of Photiki, “Λόγος ασκητικός διηρημένος εις ? κεφάλαια πρακτικά – γνώσεως και διακρίσεως πνευματικής”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νηπτικών (A’ vol.; Αθήναι: Εκδοτικός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1982), 246. (St Diadochos of Photiki, “On Spiritual Knowledge and Discrimination: 100 Texts 40”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (London/Boston: Faber & Faber: 1979), 265). 38 Cf. A. Meredith, “The Concept of the Mind in Gregory of Nyssa and the Neoplatonists”, Studia Patristica 22 (1989) 35–51. 39 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 305–8.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

demons to arouse lustful thoughts.40 In Troparion 9 of Ode V, the hymnographer from Crete introduces the term “Egyptian mind” (τὸν Αἰγύπτιον νοῦν). St Andrew of Crete does this by reminding the soul that it did not do what great Moses did, namely that it did not strike and kill its very “Egyptian mind.”41 The term “Egyptian mind” directly refers to the act performed by Moses, described in Exodus (cf. Exod 2:11–15).42 From this passage we learn that Moses, seeing how a certain Egyptian beat a Hebrew, could not come to terms with this fact. It upset him so much that he killed his compatriot’s persecutor. Although he knew he was risking much, he took advantage of the situation, having previously checked that there were no other Egyptians around. This act was the beginning of a radical change in his life. He had to flee from Pharaoh’s revenge to Midian. With his act he set the example to his compatriots that they did not have to accept the role of slaves, but could leave their country of slavery. St Andrew of Crete, in referring to the events described in the Book of Exodus, contrasts two types of minds: that of Moses and that of the Egyptian. The “Egyptian mind” is an oppressive reality that consistently strives for total and merciless subjugation of the minds of the Chosen People. In referring to the courageous and even bold act of Moses, the author of the Great Canon wants to make the faithful aware that in order to win the battle against personal evil, which is symbolised by the “Egyptian mind”, it is necessary to radically dissociate oneself from the evil thoughts and images that try to subjugate and oppress the human intellect. Otherwise, the soul will imitate shameful desires in its mind (ὃν αὐτὴ ἐμιμήσω κατὰ νοῦν, ὦ ψυχή, ἡδυπαθείαις αἰσχραῖς) [Ode VII.11].43 The intellect is thus presented as an integral part of the soul. In the anthropology of Eastern Christianity, from the very beginning we can see the coexistence of two concepts of the human being: the trichotomic and the dichotomic.44 The former distinguishes the intellect (and sometimes the spirit), the soul and the body/flesh. According to the dichotomic conception – the soul and the intellect are perceived as one spiritual reality, which is complemented by material reality, namely the body/ flesh. St Andrew of Crete came from Syria, where the influence of Hebrew thought was definitely much greater than Greek thought. Though he was born in Damascus, 40 Cf. Evagrios the Solitary, “Texts on Discrimination in Respect of Passions and Thoughts 2”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (1 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber: 1979), 38–9. (Εύαγριος Ποντικός, “Κεφάλαια περί διακρίσεως παθώνα και λογισμών Β’”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νηπτικών Α’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτικός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1982), 44–5).

41 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 318–9. 42 Cf. Ph.G. Ryken, Exodus. Saved for God’s Glory (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 57–67; S.M. Langston, Exodus through the centuries (Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006), 35–7. 43 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 338–42. 44 Cf. J.-C. Larchet, Mental Disorders and Spiritual Healing. Teaching from the Early Christian East (trans. R.P. Coomaraswamy/G.J. Champoux; Hillsdale, NY: Angelico Press/Sophia Perennis, 2005), 16–33.

133

134

The Identity and Drama of Man

he spent the significant years of his spiritual formation in Saint Sabbas Monastery in Jerusalem. For this reason, he essentially treated the human being as a spiritual body or embodied soul. This Old Testament concept of man was influenced by the development of the hesychastic practices typical of the monastic environment in both Jerusalem and Constantinople, which was linked to the creative reception of an anthropological terminology derived from classical Greek philosophy. The resulting anthropological synthesis strongly emphasised the importance of the intellect as the spiritual centre of man. Regardless of whether the intellect was treated as an autonomous reality in relation to the soul or as an integral part of the soul, the practitioners of hesychasm believed that that the spiritual state of man depends on what happens to and in the intellect.45 The actions of the soul have such a significant impact on the intellect that they can even lead it to its death. The soul can do this with its disordered aspirations or longings (κτείνασα τὸν νοῦν ταῖς παραλόγοις ὁρμαῖς) [Ode II.31/2].46 A dead intellect is compared to a young murdered man (φονευτήν [...] τὸν νοῦν ὡς νεανίσκον) [Ode II.35/ 6]. The destruction of the intellect is complete, as the murdered mind turns to ashes, disintegrates and disperses, similarly so does the body after death (ὅλως ὅλον τὸν νοῦν χοῦν ἀπετέλεσα) [Ode II.6]. Hence, an awareness of sin seems obvious. St Andrew of Crete, in a manner typical of the hesychastic tradition, states that every sin was committed with the intellect first (κατὰ νοῦν). In Troparion 4 of Ode IV, a specific order of getting entangled in evil is presented. Every sin first occurs in the intellect, and only then is it expressed in a word (λόγον), intention (προαίρεσιν), disposition (προαίρεσιν), thought (γνώμῃ) or act (πράξει). A wounded intellect (Ὁ νοῦς τετραυμάτισται) together with a soul anxiously awaits the Judge who will investigate the acts committed by a human being [cf. Ode IX.1]. This vision of waiting for the Judge is terrifying. But God in the Trinity of Persons is not only a just Judge, but is also a merciful Saviour who does not want the death of the sinner. Only He can awaken the intellect and raise it from a state of death, and thus bring it back to life. A request for mercy and an awakening of the intellect made by the sinner to the Saviour is the starting point of Troparion 1 of Ode VIII (Ἡμαρτηκότα, Σωτήρ, ἐλέησον διέγειρόν μου τὸν νοῦν πρὸς ἐπιστροφήν). An intellect transformed by God will be able to see the Eternal Light (ἴδω σε νοερῶς τὸ φῶς τὸ πρὸ αἰώνων) [Ode V.21]. The intellect can thus plunge into darkness or shine with Eternal Light.47 If the intellect is completely cleansed of lustful thoughts, it enlightens the soul with clear

45 Cf. K. Leśniewski, “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi…”, 79–83. 46 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 258–62. 47 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 180–1.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

reasoning. The sun of justice shines within it.48 The vision of the intellect presented in the Great Canon is fully in line with the teachings of the Philokalic Fathers, who stressed the intellect’s pivotal importance on the path of man to God. Everything that concerns the whole human person depends on the direction of the intellect as it either brings the soul and body into ever increasing darkness or, as we approach the Eternal Light, undergoes a transformation. This transformation of the intellect (μετανοία) is a constant task to which Christ calls all people. 2.2

The Spirit (πνεύμα)

The term “spirit” (πνεύμα) used with reference to man appears twice in the Great Canon, and only in Ode IX. In Troparion 1, in his description of the manifestations of his sinfulness, the Bishop of Gortyna confesses that his spirit is sick (νοσεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα). This troparion is very interesting from an anthropological point of view because it speaks not only of the human spirit but also of the intellect (νοῦς) and the body (σῶμα), and in the final part the soul (ψυχή) is also mentioned. In the anthropology of the Christian East, within the trichotomic vision of the human person, the following are distinguished: the intellect, the soul and the body/flesh, or: the spirit, the soul and the body/flesh. The fact that St Andrew of Crete referred to both the spirit and to the intellect in one short troparion perhaps shows that in this way he wanted to emphasise the importance of the spiritual element in man.49 By invoking two images relating to spiritual suffering, i. e. the wounded intellect (Ὁ νοῦς τετραυμάτισται) and the sick spirit (νοσεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα), the statement that his life is dead (ὁ βίος νενέκρωται) takes on a deeper meaning [Ode IХ.1]. In Troparion 24 of Ode IX there is no direct mention of the term “spirit” as a noun, but it appears in the adjectival form. One of the requests in this poetic stanza is the cry for the gift of spiritual poverty (πτωχείαν δὲ πνευματικήν). This directly relates to the first of the blessings in the Gospel according to St Matthew: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:3). The association between the request to God for the gift of an ever-contrite heart with the fervent cry for spiritual poverty or poverty of the spirit, to offer them both as a pleasant sacrifice to the only Saviour, derives from the realisation that man is

48 Cf. Nikitas Stithatos, “On the Inner Nature of Things and on the Purification of the Intellect: One Hundred Texts 67”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/ Boston: Faber & Faber: 1995), 126–7. (Νικήτας Στηθάτος, “Δευτέρα φυσικόν κεφάλαιον εκατοντάς περί της νοός καθάρσεως 67”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νηπτικών (G’ vol.; Αθήναι: Εκδοτικός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991), 315).

49 Dumitru Staniloae taught that a human being is a spirit that is capable of feeling and knowing reality through the senses. A human being is a spirit that learns, moves and retains its self-awareness. Cf. Staniloae, The Experience of God , 72–3.

135

136

The Identity and Drama of Man

too weak to achieve such a state through his own efforts. This is why the troparion begins with a confession by the author of the Great Canon that his strength has failed him (ἰσχύς μου ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐξέλιπε) and he is not able to give any worthy fruits of repentance (Ἀξιους μετάνοιας καρποὺς). 2.3

The Soul (ψυχή)

In the anthropology of Eastern Christianity, the “soul” is one of the most important concepts that serves to show the mystery of the human person.50 The issues that concern the soul make reference to both biblical threads and philosophical concepts.51 In theology, the human soul is characterised in various ways, indicating both its uniqueness, functions and the threats to which it may be subjected. In the Semitic tradition and in Orthodox spirituality, it is emphasized that during human life the soul is inextricably linked to the human body, and at the same time has the opportunity to make free choices, either for or against God.52 “Soul” (ψυχή) is the most common word found in the Great Canon. St Andrew of Crete uses it 108 times to show the essence of humanity and to relate the human person to spiritual realities, that is, to God and demons. In the analysed text, the soul also plays the role of the inner “self ”, with which man is in a constant dialogue over his spiritual condition and the need for a spiritual transformation. This inner conversation is the leitmotif of the Great Canon, and is linked to both biblical themes and introspective reflections on one’s own sinfulness. In this dialogue, the “self ” seeks to make the soul aware of the infinite love and goodness of God the Creator and Saviour as well as the consequences of its desire to seek autonomy, as a result of which it cuts itself off from the One who gives it identity as His creation. Various examples of biblical characters are intended to make the soul reflect on the state in which it has found itself and encourage it to change its way of life. In each of the nine odes of the Great Canon, the term “soul” appears at least several times: in Ode I – 6 times, in Ode II – 11 times, in Ode III – 13 times, in Ode IV – 11 times, in Ode V – 13 times, in Ode VI – 8 times, in Ode VII – 15 times, in Ode VIII – 11 times and in Ode IX – 20 times. Who is man in the depths of his being? What is the relationship between the inner self and the soul? Can a person be identified with his or her soul? St Andrew of Crete reflects on this from the personal level of his “self ”, wondering how he relates to his soul and what is the result of this relation. He is aware that his soul

50 Cf. В. Леонов, Основы православной антропологии (Москва: Издательство Московской Патриархии Русской Православной Церкви, 2013), 47–70.

51 Cf. C. Tresmontant, Le problem de l’âme (Paris: Ėditions de Seuil, 1971). 52 Cf. Leśniewski, “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi…”, 55–68.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

has lost its beauty because his own will plunged it into darkness. This was because of his lusts, which gave him pleasure: Ἠμαύρωσα τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ ὡραῖον ταῖς τῶν παθῶν ήδοναῖς. With the lusts of passion I have darkened the beauty of my soul [Ode II.6].

Through lustful passions (τοῖς πάθεσι) the Archbishop of Crete not only defiled his soul (βλάπτων) and became his own idol (Αὐτείδωλον ἐγενόμην) [cf. Ode IV.26], but he also “wasted the substance of his soul” (τὴν οὐσίαν τῆς ψυχῆς καταναλώσας) [Ode IV.21]. In the Greek original, emphasis is put on the agent, because in the further part of the troparion there is a clear allusion to being a prodigal son, which refers to the parable from the Gospel according to St Luke (cf. Luke 15:11–32). This truth about the wasting of one’s soul is expressed even more radically in the troparion that refers to the Old Testament figure of Lamech. The Archbishop of Crete reproaches himself for fervently emulating Lamech, whom he calls a murderer (Ὢ πῶς ἐζήλωσα Λάμεχ τὸν πρῴην φονευτήν) for having killed his soul [Ode II.35/ 6]. While in Genesis Lamech declares that he is ready to kill an adult (Gen 4:23), the author of the Great Canon claims that he, like Lamech, has already slayed his soul as an adult (τὴν ψυχὴν ὥσπερ ἄνδρα).53 The thought of killing one’s own soul appears again in Troparion 7 of Ode I, where the volitional aspect of this act is highlighted: Τὴν τοῦ Κάϊν ὑπελθὼν μιαιφονίαν τῇ προαιρέσει, γέγονα φονεὺς συνειδότι ψυχῆς.

By my own free choice have I incurred the guilt of Cain’s murder. I have killed my conscience, bringing the flesh to life and making war upon the soul by my wicked actions.

In addition to acknowledging that the soul was condemned to suffering and died as a result of deliberate choice, the author admits that he was wounded (τέτρωμαι) and smitten (πέπληγμαι) by enemy arrows ( τὰ βέλη τοῦ ἐχθροῦ) that have pierced his soul ( τὰ καταστίξαντά μου τὴν ψυχὴν) [Ode II.37/8]. As a result of personal actions and enemy attacks, the soul has been injured and suffers. A reflection on this state of the soul appears several times in the Great Canon. The soul is wounded by sins [cf. Ode I.11], and its wounds have been multiplied (αἱ τραυματίαι σου ὦ ψυχή ἐπληθύνθησαν) because there is no physician to cure it (οὐκ ὄντος ἰατροῦ τοῦ ὑγιοῦντός σε) [Ode IХ.3]. The miserable soul (ψυχὴ ἀθλια) [Ode I.9] is a wretched

53 According to tradition, Lamech killed Cain (by shooting him with a bow or by throwing a stone at him). Cf. J.L. Kugel, Traditions of the Bible. A Guide to the Bible as It Was at the Start of the Common Era (Cambridge, MA, London: Harvard University Press, 1998), 167; “Why was Lamech Blind?”, Hebrew Annual Review 12 (1990) 91–103.

137

138

The Identity and Drama of Man

and suffering soul (τάλαινα ψυχή), because it is sin-loving (φιλαμαρτήμων οὖσα) [Ode IV.16]. For this reason, it suffers more than David, who sinned twice, pierced by an arrow shot from the bow of adultery (βέλει τοξευθεὶς τῆς μοιχείας) and ran through by the spear of murder (τῷ δὲ δόρατι ἁλούς τῆς τοῦ φόνου) [Ode VII.4]. The Archbishop of Crete asks his unfortunate soul what it will do when the Judge (ὁ Κριτής) comes to examine it (ἀνερευνῆσαι τὰ σά) [Ode IX.1]. And when that Judge comes, in what condition will he find the unfortunate and sin-loving soul? In the Great Canon, there is an introspective question addressed to the soul, which concerns its spiritual state: “To whom shall I liken thee, O soul of many sins?” (Τίνι ώμοιώθης, πολυαμάρτητε ψυχή) [Ode II.31/2].54 In answering this question, the Bishop of Gortyna compares his soul to people from the Old Testament.55 He reproaches it for emulating those who did evil instead of following the example of those who were in a close relationship with God. The first category of biblical figures includes: Eve [cf. Ode I.4], Cain, Lamech [cf. Ode II.31/2], Esau [cf. Ode IV.11], Edom (this is the second name of Esau) [cf. Ode IV.12], Hagar, Ishmael [cf. Ode III.20/11] and Ephraim [cf. Ode VI.3].56 In the second category of biblical figures, the author of the Great Canon mentions Shem [cf. Ode III.14/5], Jacob and the twelve Patriarchs born of him [cf. Ode IV.10], Job57 [cf. Ode IV.13] and Moses [cf. Ode V.7].58 He strongly urges his soul to reflect on the models and examples of all the righteous (ἅπαντας [...] δικαίων) from the Old Testament as well as to imitate them (μίμησαι) and flee from the sins (τὰς ἁμαρτίας) of the wicked (τῶν πονηρῶν) [cf. Ode VIII.12].59 The soul is therefore to follow the intention/choice (τὴν προαίρεσιν) of Abraham (cf. Gen 12:1–4),60 who abandoned the land of his fathers and became a wanderer (μετανάστην) [cf. Ode III.16/7]. Other people from the Old Testament whose choice is worthy of following include: Isaac – who prepared to be offered mystically as a new and unwonted sacrifice to the Lord61 (καινὴν θυσίαν μυστικῶς

54 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 258–62. 55 Cf. D. Krueger, “The Old Testament and Monasticism”, in P. Magdalino/R. Nelson (ed.), The Old Testament in Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks/Washington, D.C.: Harvard University Press, 2010) 199–221. 56 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 309–15.  57 Cf. M.-L. Guillaumin, “Reserches sur l’exégèse patristique de Job”, Studia Patristica 1 (1975) 304–8. 58 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 292–300. 59 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 345–9. 60 Cf. J.B. Wells, God’s Holy People. A Theme in Biblical Theology (Sheffield: A&C Black, 2000), 185–207. 61 Cf. J.A. Fitzmyer, “The Sacrifice of Isaac in Qumran Literature”, Biblica 83 (2002) 211–229; J.E. Wood, “Isaac Typology in the New Testament”, New Testament Studies 14 (1968) 583–9; R.J. Daly, “The Soteriological Significance of the Sacrifice of Isaac”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 39 (1977) 45–75; R.L. Wilken, “Melito, The Jewish community at Sardis, and the Sacrifice of Isaac”, Theological Studies 37 (1976) 53–69; PR. Davies, “Martyrdom and Redemption: On the Development of Isaac Typology in the Early Church”, Studia Patristica 17 (1982) 652–58.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

ὁλοκαρπούμενον τῷ Κυρίῳ)62 [cf. Ode III.18/9];63 Moses – who asked God to heal

Miriam from leprosy (cf. Num 12:6–13)64 [cf. Ode VI.4], lived in the desert and saw God in a fiery bush65 (cf. Exod 3:2–6; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37; Acts 7:30–34) [cf. Ode V.10], and struck the waves of the Red Sea with a rod to divide them (cf. Exod 14:15–31) [cf. Ode V.11]; Joshua – who entered the Promised Land (cf. Num 14:30; 32:11–12) [cf. Ode VI.10]; Manasseh – in his repentance and compunction for the evil he committed (cf. 2 Kings 33,:1–20) [cf. Ode VII.16]; Elijah – who rode on a chariot of virtue from earth up to heaven (cf. 2 Kings 2:11)66 [cf. Ode VIII.2]; the widow of Zarephath – who fed the soul of the prophet Elijah (cf. 1 Kings 17:9–24) [cf. Ode VII.15]; Jeremiah – who lamented in a muddy pit (cf. Jer 38:6–13) [Ode VIII.9]; Daniel – who closed the mouth of wild beasts (cf. Dan 6:17–23)67 and the young men who were with Azarias in a fiery furnace and who by faith quenched the flames68 [cf. Ode VIII.11]. Negative examples of the soul from the Old Testamentare shown: Jezebel and Ahab [cf. Ode VII.14].69 Jezebel was the wife of King Ahab. Through her persuasion, Ahab introduced the cult of the gods of weather and fertility, which she worshiped. Jezebel ordered the killing of the prophets of the true God, and in their place she introduced the prophets of Baal. Only the prophet Elijah survived on Mount Carmel and killed these false prophets who worshipped Baal (cf. 1 Kings 16:31; 18:4,13,19; 19:1–2,21).70 Jezebel died a violent death ten years after the death of her husband (2 Kings 9:30–37). Ahab was the seventh king of the northern kingdom of Israel. Continuing the policy of his father, King Omri, he wanted to unite the country. He entered into an alliance with the Phoenicians by marrying Jezebel, who was the daughter of Ethbaal, the King of Tyre. He succumbed to his wife and introduced the cult of Baal as a god and ordered the erection of 62 Gen 22:1–12. 63 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 416. 64 Cf. B. Robinson, “The Jealousy of Miriam: A Note on Num. 12”, Zeitschrift für die Altentestamentum Wissenschaft 101 (1981) 428–32. 65 Cf. W.J. van Bekkum, “What’s in the Divine Name? Exodus 3 in the Biblical and Rabbinic Tradition”, in G.H. Kooten (ed.), The Revelation of the Name YHWH to Moses. Perspectives from Judaism, the Pagan Graeco-Roman World, and Early Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 2006) 3–15; B. Robinson, “Moses at the Burning Bush”, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 75 (1997) 107–22; N. Wyatt, “The Significance of the Burning Bush”, Vetus Testamentum 36 (1986) 361–5. 66 E. Haag, “Die Himmelfahrt des Elias nach 2 Kg 2,1–15”, Trierer Teologische Zeitschrift 78 (1969) 18–32. 67 Cf. S. Pace, Smyth & Helwys, Bible Commentary: Daniel (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2008), 207–12. 68 Cf. Dan 3:19–90; W.S. Towner, “The Poetic Passages of Daniel 1–6”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 31 (1969) 317–26. 69 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 119. 70 Cf. G. Ostborn, Yahweh and Baal (Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1956); L. Bronner, The Stories of Elijah and Elisha as Polemics against Baal Worship (Leiden: Brill, 1968).

139

140

The Identity and Drama of Man

pagan altars on many hills of his country. He was killed during the siege of Ramoth in Gilead by the Arameans (cf. 1 Kings 16:28–22:53; 2 Kings 1:1–22.8). In the Old Testament, Jezebel symbolizes a dissolute and unscrupulous woman, while Ahab embodies wickedness and infidelity to God. The Archbishop of Crete also gives examples (ὑποδείγματα) from the New Testament which are intended to bring the soul to the deep repentance (πρὸς κατάνυξιν), which characterises the righteous (δικαίους).71 He persuades the soul to turn its back on sinners (ἁμαρτωλοὺς ἐκτρέπου) and implore Christ with prayers (προσευχαῖς), fasting (νηστείαις), chastity (ἁγνεία) and reverence (σεμνότητι) [cf. Ode ΙΧ.4].72 It is worth noting that in the Great Canon, the soul is encouraged to follow two suffering women described in the Gospels. The first is a woman suffering from a haemorrhage, who touched the hem of Christ’s garment (cf. Mark 5:21–34). The wretched soul (ἀθλια ψυχή) like this suffering woman, is supposed to want the Saviour to save it from afflictions (μαστίγων) and say to it: “Your faith has saved thee” (Ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε) [Ode V.18]. The other woman from the New Testament that the soul should follow is the one who had a spirit that had crippled her for eighteen years as a result of which she wasq bent to the ground. Though she wanted to, she could not straighten herself up in any way (cf. Luke 13:11). It was to her that Jesus said on the Sabbath in one of the synagogues: “Woman, you are set free from your ailment (ἀσθένείας).”73 When Jesus put his hands on that woman, she immediately stood up straight (ἀνωρθώθη) and praised God (ἐδόξαζε τὸν Θεόν).74 If the soul, like that woman, falls at the feet of Jesus (πρόσπεσον τοῖς ποσὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ), it will walk upright (ἀνορθώσῃ) upon the paths of the Lord (τὰς τρίβους τοῦ Κυρίου) [Ode V. 19]. Aware of the various dangers that the soul may face, the Bishop of Gortyna warns and encourages it to make responsible decisions. The warnings he addresses to his soul are also related to situations described in both the Old and New Testament. He warns the listeners four times of the disaster suffered by the residents of Sodom. In the first troparion of Ode III, he reminds the soul of the fire raining down from God who burned the land of Sodom, because its people were wicked and lecherous, and despised the laws of God and man. Their spiritual condition is presented in a few words from the Book of Genesis: “The people of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the Lord” (Gen 13:13). Because of their sinfulness, “the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulphur and fire from the Lord out of heaven” (Gen 19:24). This fire consumed everything: “and he [the Lord] overthrew those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground” (Gen 71 72 73 74

Cf. Krueger, The Great Canon, 81–3. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 357–8. Luke 13:12. Cf. Luke 13:13.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

19:25). This reference to a catastrophic image of the desolation caused by the raging of God is intended to serve as a warning to the soul not to remain evil. St Andrew of Crete encourages his soul to follow Lot: Εἰς τὸ ὄρος σῴζου, ψυχή, ὥσπερ ὁ Λὼτ ἐκεῖνος, καὶ εἰς Σηγὼρ προανασώθητι.

O my soul, flee like Lot to the mountain, and take refuge in Zoar before it is too late [Ode III.2].

He calls on its soul to flee from the flames that consumed Sodom, for if it continues to live in sin, it will not flee from the “destruction by the fire of God” (φθορὰν θείας φλογώσεως) [Ode III.3]. In Troparion 24, which evokes Lot’s escape from Sodom, the author of the Great Canon directly orders the soul to follow Lot’s example and flee from the flames (τὸν ἐμπρησμόν), i. e. flee from sin (τῆς ἁμαρτίας· φεῦγε) and the flames of every brutish desire (φλόγα πάσης παραλόγου ὀρέξεως). This order also makes the soul realise that the time of life passes (ὁ χρόνος τοῦ βίου τρέχει) as a dream (ὄναρ) or as a flower (ἄνθος) and that the end (τέλος) draws near. He asks the soul why it does not prepare for meeting the Judge, who is already close (ἐγγὺς), and even very close, at the door (ἐπὶ θύραις) [Ode IV.2]. This door is already open (ἡ θύρα ἠνέωκται) and the the Kingdom is already present (τῆς Βασιλείας ἤδη), because Christ became man (Χριστὸς ἐνηνθρώπησε). The call Christ made to the thieves (λῃστὰς) and harlots (πόρνας) was aimed at changing their intellect towards repentance (μετάνοιαν). The same call for spiritual transformation applies to the soul. Hence the call of the soul to change qits intellect and not lag behind, to break out of the state of sinfulness before the Pharisees (Φαρισαῖοι) and publicans (Τελῶναι) and to change one’s life (μεταποιούμενοι) [Ode IХ.6]. The Archbishop of Crete reminds his soul of the reproaches that Jesus made in relation to the cities where most miracles occurred but which did not repent (cf. Matt 11:20). In this way he refers to the Saviour’s bitter words: “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, on the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades. For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I tell you that on the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom than for you” (Matt 11:21–24). The hymnographer from Crete thus turns to his soul with care: “Thou knowest, O my soul, how the cities to which Christ preached the gospel were cursed (κατηράθησαν)”, and then he adds: “Fear (φοβοῦ) their example, lest thou suffer the same punishment. For the Master likened them to Sodom (Σοδόμοις) and condemned them to hell (ἕως ᾍδου κατεδίκασε)” [Ode IХ.19]. The author of the Great Canon also warns his soul

141

142

The Identity and Drama of Man

not to fall into greater despair than that of the woman of Canaan before hearing that her daughter was healed (ἰάθη) by the Word of God (λόγῳ Θεοῦ). The Greek original uses the term χείρων, which refers to Charon (Χάρων), known from Greek mythology as the god of the dying and the one who carries souls across the Acheron River (Styx). Charon was usually depicted as a gloomy, ruthless and merciless old man. The concept of χείρων can be translated as despair precisely because of its etymological connection with the Greek god of dying and in reference to the evangelical periscope about the woman of Canaan (cf. Matt 15:21–28).75 In the second part of the concerned troparion St Andrew encourages us to cry out from the bottom of our hearts (ἐκ βάθους τῆς καρδίας) to Christ like the woman of Canaan: “Save me also, Lord, Son of David”76 [cf. Ode IX.20].77 In addition to the warnings addressed to the soul to bring about its spiritual renewal, the Archbishop of Crete repeatedly accuses it of turning away from God and choosing immorality in a life of passions. One can ask why accusations levelled against the soul are one of the main themes of the Great Canon. There are twentyfive of them, and they do not only appear in Odes I and IV. St Andrew of Crete consistently reproaches the soul for deviating from God, thus pointing out what is wrong and perverse in its conduct, as well as indicating what good could have been part of it but was rejected, with this being because the soulwas intoxicated with lustful desires. All accusations and reproaches against the soul can be seen as encouragement towards a thorough examination of one’s conscience, the aim of which is to arouse deep repentance and regret for having broken away from God who is Love. Accusation of and coming to terms with one’s own soul begins with reminding it that it “skipped” (παραδραμοῦσα) all who lived before the Law (πάντας τοὺς πρὸ νόμου), who were righteous, and thus did not become like Seth, while reminding the soul that it did not imitate Enos (cf. Gen 4:26, 5:6–7, 9–11; 1 Kings 1:1; Luke 3:38), Enoch78 (cf. Gen 5:22; Heb 11:5) nor Noah79 (cf. Gen 6:8–9:29) [Ode II.32/3]. It remained outside the Ark of salvation (ἐκτὸς τῆς σωστικῆς Κιβωτo) because it “opened the windows of the wrath of God” (ἐξήνοιξας τοὺς καταρράκτας τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ σου) [Ode II.33/4].80 Why, then, does this soul not tremble when it has defiled its flesh (ρυπωθεῖσα τὴν σάρκα) and polluted its mind (τὸν νοῦν κατασπιλώσα)? [cf. Ode II.34/5]. As part of an internal meditation, the Bishop of

75 Cf. B. Witherington III, Women and the Genesis of Christianity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 74–6. 76 Matt 15:22. 77 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 372–4. 78 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 414–5. 79 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 415. 80 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 262–4.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

Gortyna wonders why his soul, in its perversity, intended to rush to build a tower and establish a stronghold for its lusts (ταῖς σαῖς ἐπιθυμίαις). St Andrew of crete also tells it to be aware that the Creator (Κτίστης) confounded the souls designs (συνέχεεν τὰς βουλάς σου) and dashed its devices to the ground (κατέαξεν εἰς γῆν τὰ μηχανήματα, σου) [Ode II.36/7]. He also reproaches the soul for its kindling of the fires of Gehenna (τὸ πῦρ ἐξέκαυσας τὸ τῆς γεέννης), in which it will burn in pain [Ode II.38/9]. He also reminds the soul that it imitated Ham, one of Noah’s three sons, who did not cover his father’s nakedness (cf. Gen 9:18–27). His soul shamelessly did not cover his neighbour’s shame (τὴν αἰσχύνην οὐκ ἐκάλυψας τοῦ πλησίον), but walked backwards with an averted face [Ode III.13/4]. It is worth noting that the term ἐκάλυψας was used in in Psalm 85:2 to describe the salvific act of God. The psalmist states: “You forgave the iniquity of your people; you pardoned all their sin”. Leaving the neighbour uncovered is a metaphorical opposition to what God does by covering [pardoning] all the sins committed by man. Thus, a soul that does not follow the act of God consciously chooses to remain in sin without wanting to be forgiven of its guilt. The Bishop of Gortyna reproves his soul, reminding it of Patriarch Jacob’s dream of the ladder (cf. Gen 28:10–22). With pain, he reproaches his soul that for not providing a firm foundation for reaching up (τί μὴ ἔσχες βάσιν ἀσφαλῆ) from earth to heaven (ἀπὸ γῆς πρὸς τὰ οὐράνια) through its godly actions (τὴν εὐσέβειαν) [Ode III.21/12]. It is painful for him that the whole soul has sold itself to sin (ἐπράθης τοῖς κακοῖς), which is in complete opposition to the situation of Joseph, who was a figure of the Saviour, sold by his brothers into bondage (cf. Gen 37:2–36)81 [Ode V.4]. St Andrew’s miserable soul (τάλαινα ψυχή) also did not kill (οὐκ ἀπέκτεινας) love of the world, just as the great Moses killed the man beating his compatriot (cf. Exod 2:11–12),82 for this reason St Andrew of Crete’s soul will not be able to dwell in the wilderness empty of passions (τὴν ἔρημον τῶν παθῶν) [cf. Ode V.9]. The Archbishop of Crete compares the defiled life of his soul to the deeds of Hophni and Phinehas, who appropriated sacrificial meat although it should have been be offered to God (cf. 1 Sam 2:12–17), with this at the same time reminding the soul of the burnt offering made by Aaron, which was consumed by a fire coming from the Lord (cf. Lev 9:23–24).83 The author describes the fire consumed by Aaron’s sacrifice as a “blameless, undefiled fire” (πῦρ ἄμωμον, ἄδολον) and contrasts it with the “polluted life” (ρερυπωμένον βίον) of a soul that does not offer itself to its Creator and Saviour [cf. Ode V.12]. It is with sadness that the author of the Great Canon notes that his foolish (άγνώμονα) 81 Cf. Th.L. Thompson, The Origin Tradition of Ancient Israel I. The Literary Formation of Genesis and Exodus 1–23 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1987), 116–21. 82 Cf. G.W. Coats, Moses. Heroic Man, Man of God (Sheffield: A&C Black, 1988), 49–51. 83 Cf. M. Aberbach/L. Smolar, “Aaron, Jeroboam, and the Golden Calves”, Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967) 129–40.

143

144

The Identity and Drama of Man

soul makes arbitrary choices (τὴν προαίρεσιν ἔσχες) like the people of Israel, who once instead of feeding on God’s manna (cf. Exod 16:4.20–21.31; Num 11:7–8), “senselessly preferred the pleasure-loving gluttony of the passions” (ἀλόγως τὴν φιλήδονον τῶν παθῶν ἀδηφαγίαν) [Ode VI.6]. He reproaches his soul, reminding it of its choice of “swine’s meat, the flesh-pots and the food of Egypt” (τὰ ὕεια κρέα καὶ τοὺς λέβητας καὶ τήν Αἰγύπτιον τροφὴν) instead of “the food of heaven” (τῆς ἐπουρανίου). By doing so, the soul has become similar to the ungrateful people who roamed the wilderness (ἀγνώμων λαὸς τῇ ἐρήμῳ) [Ode VI.8].84 Instead of drawing from the Rock, which is Jesus – the Fountain of Wisdom from which flow the rivers of divine knowledge (κρουνοὺς θεολογίας), the soul values more “the wells of Canaanite thought” (τὰ φρέατα προετίμησας τῶν Χαναναίων ἐνννοιῶν) [Ode VI.7]. This allusion to Canaanite wells is not accidental. Due to the lack of rainfall in summer in the Promised Land, securing access to water was crucial for survival. The Old Testament provides some examples of human and animal deaths from direct and indirect water shortages (cf. Gen 21:16; 1 Kings 18:5). The water supply was important for every settlement and every Israeli family. Wells and cisterns were dug around human settlements and places where sheep and cattle grazed. The digging of wells in rocky ground required a lot of effort. It should not come as a surprise that the captive Israelis were very happy when they heard the announcement that they would have wells in the land of Canaan, to which they would come, which they would not have to dig themselves (cf. Deut 6:11). Most wells in the land of Canaan were supplied with groundwater. The wells, which were supplied by a spring, were highly valued. Such wells were called “sources of living water”, which later served as a basis for numerous metaphors relating to spiritual life. The accusatory speech of the prophet Jeremiah, which is a message from God, helps one better understand the exhortations of the Archbishop of Crete to the soul: “My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living water, and dug out cisterns for themselves, cracked cisterns that can hold no water” (Jer 2:13). The comparison of the Source of living water, which is God, with cisterns which leak accumulated rainwater, symbolising foreign gods, gives an even better insight into the leitmotif of the analysed troparion. The soul that returns to God is like the Chosen People85 who follow the One who “lets them walk by brooks of water” (Jer 31:9). The iniquity (ἀνομία) done by the soul is greater than the iniquity of King David who sinned by fornication (τὴν μοιχείαν) and murder (φόνῳ).86 The sinful king showed a twofold (διπλῆν) repentance (τὴν ετάνοιαν) [cf. Ode VII.5]. St Andrew of Crete reproaches his soul for subjecting its free dignity (τὸ 84 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 315–17. 85 Cf. H.D. Preuss, Old Testament Theology (1 vol.; Louisville, KY: Horst Dietrich, 1995), 40–138. 86 Cf. 2 Sam 11:1–27, 12:1–23; J. Hoftijzer, “David and the Tekoite Woman”, Vetus Testamentom 20 (1970) 419–44.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

ἀδούλωτον σοῦ ἀξίωμα) to the body (τῷ σώματί σου), for listening to the counsel

given by Ahitophel of Gilo. However, this faithful friend and treacherous advisor to King David, when his scheming failed, ended his life by suicide87 [cf. Ode VII.9]. The soul thus becomes similar (προσαφωμοίωσας) to the rebellious King Solomon in his mature years, who lost the glory (θαυμάσιος) that marked his entire life even though, in earlier times, grace (χάριτος) and wisdom (σοφίας) filled him. Hence, the life of the soul separated from God becomes cursed, as in the case of Solomon [cf. Ode VII. 10]. This lover of wisdom (ὁ ἐραστὴς σοφίας) defiled himself (κατερρυποῦτο) through relations with harlots and became a stranger to God (ξένος Θεοῦ). It is painful that the soul imitates Solomon, directing its intellect (κατὰ νοῦν) to shameful desires (ἡδυπαθείαις αἰσχραῖς) [Ode VII.11].88 The grudge that the author of the Great Canon bears against his soul also refers to other people from both the Old and New Testaments, to the children killed by Herod’s order and to John the Baptist and the harlot. The author’s soul is not worthy of receiving the grace that Elisha had received when he divided the waters of the Jordan with the mantle of the prophet Elijah (cf. 2 Kings 2:14),89 due to its greed and uncontrolled desire (δι’ ἀκρασίαν) [cf. Ode VIII.3]. In Troparion 4 of Ode VII, St Andrew of Crete considers “the double portion of grace” (διπλῆν χάριν), which Elisha received (cf. 2 Kings 2:9–10) when he took up Elijah’s cloak (cf. 2 Kings 2:13).90 With reference to this pericope from the Old Testament, the author reproaches his soul for the second time, that it was precisely because of its uncontrolled desires (δι’ ἀκρασίαν) that it was not prepared to receive this biblical grace. He accuses his wretched soul that it has always imitated the polluted thoughts (τὴν γνώμην τὴν ρυπαρὰν) of Gehazi [Ode VIII.6]. By doing so, St Andrew of Crete wants to remind his soul that the servant of the prophet Elisha was filled with greed and ran after Naaman, healed from leprosy, against his master’s will,91 and when he caught up with the former leper, the servant took two talents of silver and two pairs of cloths from him (cf. 2 Kings 5:1–24). and was then punished for this deed. By the words of Elisha, Naaman’s leprosy clung to him (cf. 2 Kings 5:27).92 In this context it should therefore come as no surprise that the Archbishop of Crete calls upon his soul to flee from the fires of hell (φεῦγε τῆς γεέννης τὸ πῦρ) and to turn

87 Cf. 2 Sm 17:15–23. 88 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 338–42. 89 Cf. R.A. Carlson, “Elisée: Le successeur d’Elie”, Vetus Testamentum 20 (1970) 385–405; H. Gunkel, “Elisha – The Successor of Elijah (2 Kings II, 1–18)”, The Expository Times 41 (1929–30) 182–6. 90 Cf. R.P. Carroll, “The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel”, Vetus Testamentum 19/4 (1969) 400–15. 91 Cf. W.J. Bergen, Elisha and the End of Prophetism (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999), 111–24. 92 Cf. R.D. Moore, God Saves. Lessons from the Elisha Stories (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990), 71–84.

145

146

The Identity and Drama of Man

away from its wickedness (ἐκστᾶσα τῶν κακῶν σου). The term “in thine old age”, used in this troparion with reference to the soul, seems to indicate that the Great Canon was written in the final phase of the life of St Andrew of Crete’s93 [cf. Ode VIII.6]. In reference to Elisha, the person of the Shunammite woman is also recalled, who hosted this prophet, offering him a meal and a place to sleep (cf. 2 Kings 4:8–11). Comparing the ardent desire to offer hospitality shown by the Shunammite woman with the behaviour of the soul that has welcomed neither a stranger (ξένον) nor a traveller (ὁδίτην) in its house, Elisha predicts that this soul will be cast out weeping (θρηνῳδοῦσα) from the wedding chamber (νυμφῶνος) [cf. Ode VIII.5]. This vision is a reference to the parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids (cf. Matt 25:1–13), which ends with the words of the bridegroom: “Truly, I tell you, I do not know you” (Matt 25:12). Though the soul has heard about the residents of Nineveh who repented before God (μετανοοῦντας Θεῷ) in sackcloth and ashes (cf. Jonah 3:5–9), it did not follow them. On the contrary, it turned out to be more wicked and worse than all (σκαιοτέρα πάντων) who sinned before the Law and after the Law [cf. Ode VIII.8]. In Troparion 2 of Ode IX, the Bishop of Gortyna tells his soul that it has not learnt from previous teachings and is not able to compare its way of acting with the behaviour of people from the Old Testament, both the righteous (δικαίους) and the wicked (ἀδικους). He is astonished that his soul imitated only the wicked and did not follow the example of the righteous. Instead of thinking deeply about all those who have been mentioned in the Old Covenant since the creation of the world (κοσμογένεσιν) who chose to live in virtue, the author’s soul has focused on sinning against God (εἰς Θεὸν ἐξαμαρτήσασα). This soul has also disregarded the people described in the New Testament. It did not follow (οὐκ ἐζήλωσας) the wise men (Μάγους), shepherds (Ποιμένας), infant martyrs (Νηπίων), elders (Πρεσβύτην) or aged widows (γηραλέαν Χήραν). Because of its disrespectful attitude towards all these admirable people, the soul will be judged (κρίνεσθαι) [cf. Ode ΙΧ.7].94 St Andrew is also surprised that his soul did not even follow the positive example of St John the Baptist, that “Forerunner of grace” (ὁ Πρόδρομος τῆς χάριτος), to whom the inhabitants of all of Judea and Samaria came to listen to (ἀκούοντες), confess their sins to (ἐξωμολογοῦντο τὰς ἁμαρτίας) and be baptised by (βαπτιζόμενοι προθύμως) [cf. Ode IX.11]. The wretched soul (ὦ τάλαινα ψυχή) does not imitate (οὐκ ἐζήλωσας) the harlot from the Gospel, who

93 There is no consensus among researchers concerning the time of creation of the Great Canon. Some believe that it was written by St Andrew of Crete at a young age when he attended the Sixth Ecumenical Council. Others, on the other hand, are convinced that the Great Canon was written at the end of his life, when he became Archbishop of Gortyna. Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 53–7. 94 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 358–66.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

anointed Jesus’ feet with her precious alabaster oil and tears (σὺν δάκρυσιν), and then wiped them clean with her hair (cf. Luke 7:37; Matt 26:7; Mark 14:3; John 12:3).95 With such repentance, the Saviour tears into pieces the record of the soul’s previous sins (τῶν ἀρχαίων ἐγκλημάτων τὸ χειρόγραφον) [cf. Ode IX.18]. The Archbishop of Crete calls to his soul with all his might to confess its sins to Christ: Ἀνάνηψον ὦ ψυχή μου· τὰς πράξεις εἰργάσω, ἀναλογίζου καὶ ταύτας ἐπ’ ὄψεσι προσάγαγε καὶ σταγόνας στάλαξον δακρύων σου· Awake, my soul, consider the actions which thou hast done; set them before thine eyes, and let the drops of thy tears fall. With boldness tell Christ of thy deeds and thoughts, and so be justified [Ode IV.3].

This call finishes with an invitation addressed to the soul to boldly confess (εἰπέ παρρησίᾳ) to Christ all deeds (τὰς πράξεις) and thoughts (τὰς ἐνθυμήσεις), because through telling the truth it will be justified [Ode IV.3].96 The soul is also encouraged to confess with its flesh (ἐξομολογοῦ) to the Creator of all (τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ) all its past brutishness and to offer to God tears of repentance (ἐν μετανοίᾳ δάκρυα) [cf. Ode I.2]. The Bishop of Gortyna compares the difficult situation of his soul to the departure from God made by Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab. These men, together with Korah and two hundred and fifty other men from the community of Israel, rebelled against Moses and blasphemed against God, for which they fell alive into Sheol together with their families and all those who joined them (cf. Num 16:1–35). Reproaching his soul for becoming a stranger to God because it left Him, St Andrew of Crete makes his soul cry out (κράξον) with all its heart (ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας) to be spared by the Lord [cf. Ode VI.2]. The soul is called to embrace repentance (πρόσδραμε τῇ μετανοίᾳ) and to be healed from leprosy (λέπραν), which befell it as a result of its wicked thoughts and unlawful acts, thus becoming similar to King Uzziah (cf. 2 Kings 26:1–23). The hymnographer from Crete warns his soul not to fall into the trap of unlawfulness (τῶν ἀνόμων ταῖς παγίσιν), but to hasten to repentance (ἀλλ’ ἀσπάζου τὴν μετάνοιαν) [Ode VIII.7, cf. Ode IХ.10]. The soul has to repent, because Christ Himself, by becoming a man (ἐνηνθρώπησε), called thieves and harlots to repentance and to a change of the intellect (εἰς μετάνοιαν) [cf. Ode IХ.6]. St Andrew of Crete indicates that the purpose of the miracle (θαῦμα) of turning water into wine, which Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee (cf. John 2:1–11), was to bring the soul to a change of life (σὺ μετατεθῇς, ὦ ψυχή) [cf. Ode

95 Cf. Krueger, The Great Canon, 83–6. 96 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 275–8.

147

148

The Identity and Drama of Man

IX.12]. The renewal (ἀνακαινίσθητι) of the soul is therefore a necessary condition for it to do good and live in contemplation (θεωρίᾳ βιοῦν) [cf. Ode IV.6]. The prerequisite for spiritual health is to avoid the temptations that lead to a propagation of lust and sin. The Bishop of Gortyna encourages the soul to come out of the land of Haran (cf. Gen 11:31) and go to the land of Canaan (cf. Gen 11:32; 12:4).97 In St Stephen’s speech before the Sanhedrin that he gave before matrydom, he recalls God’s command to Abraham: “Brothers and fathers, listen to me. The God of glory appeared to our ancestor Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran, and said to him, ‘Leave your country and your relatives and go to the land that I will show you.’ Then he left the country of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. After his father died, God had him move from there to this country in which you are now living” (Acts 7:2–4).98 The land to which the soul should go is the land flowing (ρέουσαν) with eternal life (ἀείζωον) and immortality (ἀφθαρσίαν) [Ode III.15]. This is the land that Abraham inherited (ὁ Ἀβραὰμ ἐκληρώσατο), for God led Abraham to “a land flowing (ῥέουσαν) with milk and honey” (Deut 26:9). The soul should avoid the presumption (αὐθάδειαν) displayed by Uzzah, who touched the Ark of the Covenant and was struck down by the wrath of God (cf. 2 Sam 6:6–8). It should also respect God with reverence (σέβου τὰ θεῖα καλῶς) [cf. Ode VII.7]. Jeroboam, who rebelled against King Solomon (cf. 1 Kings 11:26) and Rehoboam, son of Solomon (cf. 1 Kings 11:43), disobeyed the council of elders who formed his father’s circle when he became king and as a result lost ten generations of Israel (cf. 1 Kings 12:1–19), with this being an example of people whom the soul should not follow. The Bishop of Gortyna reproaches his soul for rivalling (παρεζήλωσας) the actions of Jeroboam and Rehoboam, and instead it should avoid their example and cry to God: “I have sinned, take pity on me” (Ἥμαρτον, οἴκτειρόν με) [cf. Ode VII.12]. The Archbishop of Crete exhorts his soul to remain vigilant. He gives the example of Ishmael who was rejected because he was the child of a slave. When Sarah, Abraham’s legitimate wife, noticed that Ishmael was making fun of her son Isaac, she ordered her husband to drive him out with his mother Hagar (cf. Gen 21:9–10).99 What happened to Ishmael is intended as a warning to the soul to be watchful (νῆφε) lest something similar happen to it because of its lusts (πάθῃς λαγνεύουσα) [cf. Ode

97 Cf. J. Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven, CT: Echo Point Books & Media, 1975); H. Boers, “The Significance of Abraham for the Christian Faith”, in Theology out of the Ghetto. A New Testament Exegetical Study on Religious Exclusiveness (Leiden: Brill, 1971) 74–104. 98 Cf. A.F.J. Klijn, “Stephen’s Speech – Acts VII. 2–53”, New Testament Studies 4/1 (1957) 25–31; J. Kilgallen, The Stephen Speech. A Literary and Reductional Study of Acts 7,2–53 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1976), 27–120. 99 Cf. С. Bakhos, Ishmael on the Border. Rabbinic Portrayals of the First Arab (New York, NY: Suny Press, 2006), 14–23.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

III.19/10]. Recalling the great patriarch Jacob (cf. Gen 32:25–32), St Andrew of Crete calls out: “Be watchful, O my soul, be full of courage like Jacob the great Patriarch” (Гρηγόρησον, ὦ ψυχή μου, ἀρίστευσον ὡς ὁ μέγας ἐν Πατριάρχαις) [Ode IV.9]. Furthermore, the author orders his soul not to forget its animal appetites (τὰς κτηνώδεις ὀρέξεις) and not put them above the kingdom of Christ (τῆς βασιλείας Χρίστοῦ) [cf. Ode VII.3]. The soul should take note of Jesus’ fasting. After all, the Saviour fasted for forty days in the desert (cf. Luke 4:1–2). In addition, it should not, like its Lord, be discouraged and afraid if the enemy attacks it (μὴ ἀθυμήσῃς· ἄν σοι προσβάλῃ ἐχθρός), but should drive the Beast away through prayer and fasting (προσευχαῖς τε καὶ νηστείαις) [cf. Ode IX.8]. The soul should also remember that even the Saviour Himself was tempted by the devil (cf. Matt 4:1–10). St Andrew of Crete refers to two of the three temptations described in the Gospel, namely the temptation to turn stones into bread (cf. Matt 4:3) and the temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the world (Matt 4:8–9). In order not to succumb to such temptations, the soul hears the words: “O my soul, look with fear on what happened; watch and pray every hour to God” (Φοβοῦ, ὦ ψυχή, τὸ δρᾶμα· νῆφε εὔχου, πᾶσαν ὥραν Θεῷ) [Ode IХ.9]. The soul is not only urged to remain alert and to resist the attacks of its enemies, but it is also called to listen to what God says and to see His action in the history of salvation. In this way, salvific events become current events in the lives of the faithful.100 St Andrew of Crete, in referring to the following verse from the Book of Deuteronomy: “See now that I, even I, am he; there is no God besides me” (Deut 32:39), encourages his soul to hear the Lord crying for (ἐνωτίζου ψυχή μου, τοῦ Κυρίου βοῶντος) it to forsake its previous sin (τῆς πρώτης ἁμαρτίας) and fear (φοβοῦ) the One Who is Judge and God [cf. Ode II.30/1]. The example of King Hezekiah of Judah, who became fatally ill, is to be instructive for the soul (cf. Isa 38:1). When the prophet Isaiah came to this king and told him: “Thus says the Lord: Set your house in order, for you shall die; you shall not recover” (Isa 38:1), he prayed to God: “Remember now, O Lord, I implore you, how I have walked before you in faithfulness with a whole heart, and have done what is good in your sight” (Isa 38:3). This prayer was accompanied by a profound cry and Hezekiah was heard by God. The Lord commanded Isaiah: “Go and say to Hezekiah, Thus says the Lord, the God of your ancestor David: I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life” (Isa 38:5). This passage about the mortal illness and miraculous healing of King Hezekiah serves as an indication to the soul to reflect on its passing life and to cry (δακρύω) and beg God to add years to one’s life (προσθεῖναί χρόνους [...] ζωῆς), for only He is the Lord of life and death [cf. Ode VII.20]. In order to save the soul, Christ performed numerous miracles: He healed

100 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 171.

149

150

The Identity and Drama of Man

the paralytic lying on his bed (cf. Mark 2:1–12),101 brought the widow’s son back to life (cf. Luke 7:11–17), healed the centurion’s servant (cf. Luke 7:1–10), healed the spirit of the woman from Samaria (cf. John 4:4–38) and revealed to her the truth about serving God in spirit (John 4:24) [Ode IX.13], healed a woman suffering from a haemorrhage (cf. Mark 5:21–34), purified lepers (cf. Luke 17:11–19), restored sight to the blind (cf. John 9:1–40), made the lame walk (cf. John 5:1–18), healed the deaf and mute (cf. Mark 7:31–37), healed the woman bent to the ground with His word (cf. Luke 13:10–17) [Ode IX.14],102 healed the crippled, ate with tax collectors (cf. Matt 9:9–13; Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32), talked to sinners and brought the daughter of Jair back to life with the touch of His hand (cf. Mark 5:21–43). He did all these miracles, while proclaiming the Good News (cf. Matt 4:23) [Ode IХ.15]. This image of the great works of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons is intended to encourage the soul to continuously praise its Creator and Saviour: “Sing, O my soul, and glorify Life and Lives (ζωὴν καὶ ζωάς), the God of all (τὸν πάντων Θεόν)” [Ode VII.21]. In the Great Canon, we also find requests to God to take care of the soul. The Bishop of Gortyna, like the psalmist, calls out to his Saviour: “Give ear to the groaning of my soul, and accept the tears that fall from my eyes (Ἐνώτισαι τοὺς στεναγμοὺς τῆς ψυχῆς μου καὶ τῶν ἐμῶν ὀφθαλμῶν προσδέχου τοὺς σταλαγμούς)” [Ode II.28]. It is worth noting that one of the psalms begins similarly: “Give ear to my prayer, O God; do not hide yourself from my supplication” (Ps 55:1). In the times of the Old Covenant, a fervent request103 combined with crying was seen as a special way of atoning to God.104 Being aware that his soul is sick, the author of the Great Canon addresses a request to the Saviour and Physician to heal his humbled soul from putrefaction (τὴν σηπεδόνα θεράπευσον τῆς ταπεινῆς μου ψυχῆς). He also begs for a bandage (μάλαγμάλα) to be applied, i. e. that He cover him in oil (ἔλαιον) – works of repentance (ἔργα μετάνοιας) and wine (οἶνον) – compunction with tears (κατάνυξιν μετὰ δακρύων) [cf. Ode VIII. 15]. 2.4

The Body (σώμα) and the Flesh (σάρξ)

According to the biblical understanding of man, adopted by the anthropology of the Christian East, the corporeality of the human person in the Great Canon is perceived in two ways. In Greek, as in some other European languages, two concepts

101 R.T. Mead, “The Healing of the Paralytic – A Unit?”, Journal of Biblical Literature 80/4 (1961) 348–54. 102 See “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 367–72. 103 Ps 130:1–2. 104 Cf. Ps 6:5–7.

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

are used to refer to the corporeal nature of the human being. The first is σῶμα,105 i. e. the organised and living reality of man, while the second is σαρκός (σαρξ), i. e. the body in the sense of sinful flesh or in the physiological sense. The terms “body” and “flesh” appear in the work of St Andrew of Crete in contexts concerning the existential condition of the human being, especially in descriptions of the various pathological states created as a result of spiritual attacks led by demons. Reference to the body is helpful in showing the essence of spiritual crisis and in presenting the level of one’s own decline made as a result of succumbing to lustful desires and falling into the slavery of sin.106 In the Great Canon, the term “body” (σῶμα) occurs 9 times while and the term “flesh” (σαρκός/σαρξ) is found 13 times. The internal crisis referred to in Troparion 13 of Ode V concerns both the soul and the body. The Archbishop of Crete confesses that his soul and body became like Jannes and Jambres, the magicians who opposed Moses (cf. 2 Tim 3:8), when the prophet and Aaron revealed the power of God before the pharaoh (cf. Exod 7:10–12). Although in the Book of Exodus, the magicians who, like Moses and Aaron, threw sticks before Pharaoh which turned into serpents, were not mentioned by name, St Paul probably knew their names from the apocryphal work entitled The Book of Jannes and Jambres. This book is mentioned by Origen.107 Commenting on a pericope of the Gospel according to St Matthew (cf. Matt 27:3–10), Origen mentions a number of extra-biblical (secret) writings, including a work on Jannes and Jambres, and refers to the work of Eusebius, stating that “according to the Jewish tradition, they were the sons of Balaam and the first teachers of Moses, and then his main opponents, who lost their lives with the Egyptian troops in the Red Sea.”108 Writing that in his soul and body he became like Jannes and Jambres, the hymnographer from Crete wanted to express that he lived his whole life in isolation from the true God and that he did everything that those magicians did in their “secret arts” (Exod 7:11), which came from demons. This realisation of his own sinfulness gave rise to the confession: “In my soul and body, O Master, I have become like Jannes and Jambres” (Γέγονα, Δέσποτα, Ἰαννὴς καὶ Ἰαμβρής τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ τὸ σῶμα). The enemy’s arrows pierce both the soul and the body (τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ τὸ σῶμα) of the human being, causing wounds [cf. Ode II.37/8]. The external attacks make the body feeble (τὸ σῶμα μεμαλάκισται) and the soul sick (νοσεῖ τὸ

105 Cf. R.H. Gundry, Soma in Biblical Theology With Emphasis on Pauline Anthropology (Cambridge/ New York/Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 159–216. 106 Cf. Γλάρος, Θεία Παιδαγωγία, 83–4. 107 Origen, Contra Celsum IV:51(trans. H. Chadwick; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003) 226. 108 Cf. A. Pietersma (ed.), The Apocryphon of Jannes & Jambres the Magicians (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 43–7.

151

152

The Identity and Drama of Man

πνεῦμα) [Ode IX.1]. Attacks can also be of an internal character, as aggression

against the body can also manifest itself in the soul. The Archbishop of Crete does not hesitate to reproach his soul in one of the troparia that it has been stoned by the body with its evil deeds (ψυχή [...] λιθοκτονήσασα τὸ σῶμα κακουργίαις) [Ode II.31/2],109 and in another he reminds his soul that it has subjugated its free dignity to its body (Ὑπέταξας τὸ ἀδούλωτον σοῦ ἀξίωμα τῷ σώματί σου) [Ode VII.9]. In the second case, the body in the meaning of σῶμα is here exceptionally treated in a way that is usually associated with the flesh (σαρκὸς). Based on analysis of other troparia which include reference to σῶμα, it can be observed that the body is not perceived here as a negative reality. The body is wounded by sin, and defiled and killed by lustful desires. Sin hurts not only the soul of man, but also the body, as is unequivocally stated in Troparion 11 of Ode I: Ἐξαγγέλλω σοι, Σωτήρ, τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἃς εἰργασάμην, καί τὰς τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τοῦ σώματός μου πληγάς [...].

I confess to Thee, O Saviour, the sins I have committed, the wounds of my soul and body […] [Ode I.11].

In a similar way, the author of the Great Canon expresses the state of his humanity in Troparion 17 of Ode IV: Tὸ σῶμα κατερρυπώθην, τὸ πνεῦμα κατεσπιλώθην, ὅλος ἡλκώθην [...]. I have defiled my body, I have stained my spirit, and I am all covered with wounds […].

A violent predilection for lust (lustful desires!) can kill the body (τὸ σῶμα ἀποκτείνας), as Cain once killed his brother Abel (cf. Ode II.35/6).110 Hence the need for the sacrifice of Christ, who offered His Body and Blood (Tὸ Σῶμά σου καὶ τὸ Αἷμα) for the sake of all [cf. Ode IV.18]. The flesh (σαρκὸς) comes from God. The creator, like a potter moulded clay, giving it flesh, bones (σάρκα καὶ ὀστᾶ) and the breath and life (πνοὴν καὶ ζωήν). This image of God the Creator presented in Troparion 10 of Ode I refers to the description of the creation of man in Genesis: “the Lord God formed (ἔπλασεν) man from the dust of the ground, and breathed (ἐνεφύσησεν) into his nostrils the breath of life (πνοὴν ζωῆς); and the man became (ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος) a living being

109 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 258–62. 110 Cf. J.B. Glenthoj, Cain and Abel in Syriac and Greek Writers (4th –6 th Centuries) (Leuven: Peeters, 1997).

The Structural Elements of the Human Person

(ψυχὴν ζῶσαν).”111 The Bishop of Gortyna reprimands himself, because he is aware that the flesh that was created by God has been adorned with a coat of shameless thoughts (Ἐκόσμησα τὸν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀνδριάντα τῇ τῶν αἰσχρῶν λογισμῶν) and as a result of this he is condemned (κατακρίνομαι) [Ode II.18]. In this way he has stained the garment of his flesh (Ἐσπίλωσα τὸν τῆς σαρκός μου χιτῶνα) and defiled what was made in God’s image (τὸ κατ’ εἰκόνα) and likeness (καθ’ ὁμοίωσιν) [Ode II.15].112 Furthermore, he has violated (ἐνυβρίσας)113 the vessel of his flesh (τὸ σκεῦος τὸ τῆς σαρκός μου) [Ode II.15]. By his own free choice he has even incurred (τῇ προαιρέσει) the guilt of Cain’s murder, because by bringing his flesh to life (ζωώσας τὴν σάρκα), he has consciously made war upon the soul (γέγονα φονεὺς συνειδότι ψυχῆς) [Ode I.7].114 As part of his introspection, the hymnographer from Crete discovered that instead of Eve, who perceives with her senses – what is visible (αἰσθητῆς) and accessible to the intellect (ἡ νοητή), he has passionate thoughts (ἐμπαθὴς λογισμός) in his flesh (ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ) [Ode I.5]. He reproaches his soul for having opened the windows of God’s wrath, as a result of which the deluge flooded the earth, with one’s flesh (τὴν σάρκα), deeds (τὰς πράξεις) and life (τὸν βίον) remaining outside the Ark of salvation [Ode II.33/4].115 This vision of the flesh that belongs to the soul clearly indicates the conviction of the Archbishop of Crete that all decisions concerning man as a whole, including his body, are made at the level of the soul. This is confirmed by another troparion in which he directly accuses his soul of defiling the flesh (ρυπωθεῖσα τὴν σάρκα) [cf. Ode II.34/5]. Therefore, it is entirely justified to call upon the soul to turn with its flesh (σὺν τῇ σαρκί σου) to the Creator of all (τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ) and to confess (ἐξομολογοῦ) to Him its past brutishness [Ode I.2]. Only He can restore the flesh to its original beauty and purity. Therefore, St Andrew earnestly begs his Lord: “Make the garment of my flesh as white as snow (τὴν τῆς σαρκός μου στολὴν λευκάνας ὡς χιόνα) [Ode V.14]. The Great Canon also includes the theme of perceiving the flesh from the soteriological perspective. God, the Creator of the Ages (Θεὸς ὁ κτίσας τοὺς αἰῶνας) united himself with human nature (ἥνωσεν ἑαυτῷ τὴν τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσιν) [cf. Ode V.23 Theotokion]. Singing that Christ took flesh from the Virgin and came to dwell among us (Χριστόν, τὸν ἐκ Παρθένου, σαρκὶ ἐπιδημήσαντα) [Ode II. Heirmos], the hymnographer from Crete refers to the Incarnation of the Son of God,

111 Gen 2:7. Cf. E. McMullin, “Creation ex Nihilo: Early History”, in D.B. Burrel/C. Cogliati/J.M. Soskice/W.R. Stoeger (ed.), Creation and the God of Abraham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010) 11–23; Ph. Sherrard, “The Meaning of Creation ex Nihilo”, in Christianity. Lineaments of a Sacred Tradition (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1998) 232–44. 112 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 250–1. 113 The term ἐνυβρίσας appears only once in the New Testament. Cf. Heb 10:29. 114 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 235–7. 115 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 262–4.

153

154

The Identity and Drama of Man

drawing on a very brief, yet semantically rich, verse from the Gospel according to St John: “And the Word became flesh (ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο) and lived among us (ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν).”116 Emmanuel’s body was woven in the womb (ἐν τῇ γαστρί ἡ σὰρξ) of the Mother of God [Ode VIII.22. Theotokion]. Christ became a child (Χριστὸς ἐνηπίασε) and shared in human flesh (σαρκὶ προσομιλήσας) [Ode IХ.5]. He was eating in the flesh (σαρκὶ) at the wedding in Cana [Ode ΙΧ.12] and he was nailed in the flesh (σαρκὶ) to a cross (προσηλωμένον) [Ode ΙΧ.23].117

3.

Man and Spiritual Threats

The anthropological analyses that make up the content of the previous two points serve as an important introduction to what can be described as cardiognosis – the study of the condition of the heart and what is happening in the spiritual life of the human being. In order to describe the drama in which people take part, the Bishop of Gortyna uses terms that were used by hesychasts to describe the strategy of demons attempting to spiritually enslave human beings and cause their subsequent spiritual death. In this context, the question arises if whether the Great Canon is merely a masterpiece of Byzantine hymnography, or is it also a hesychastic work? The terms used in this work seem to unequivocally indicate that it can be included among Philokalic works. The following paragraphs of this section discuss concepts that are important in diagnosing the spiritual state of man. The hymnographic masterpiece of the Bishop Gortyna contains such concepts as: “thought”, “delusions”, “temptations”, “imagination”, “pleasures”, “brutish desires” and “animal appetites”, “uncontrolled longings”, “unrestrained desires”, “stubborn wilfulness”, “rejection of the commandments”, “trespasses”, “evil deeds”, “wickedness”, “sins”, “lusts” and “passions”, “gluttony”, “adultery”, “love of money” and “murder”. This list of spiritual dangers and the references in the Great Canon to biblical pericopes that depict man’s sinful fall can be treated as evidence that its author was not only familiar with the hesychastic tradition, but also consciously used it. 3.1

Thoughts (λογισμοί)

Logismoi (λογισμοί) or all sorts of imaginative thought, is one of the most fundamental hesychastic concepts. The problem of combating tormenting thoughts was already recognised in the first centuries of Christianity. The Apophthegmata Patrum contains many helpful pieces of advice. Thoughts, and evil thoughts in particular,

116 John 1:14. 117 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 375–9.

Man and Spiritual Threats

have an influence on the imaginative sphere of man, causing internal anxiety and a distracting of the mind away from focus on God. By giving in to evil thoughts, man leaves God’s path and enters the paths proposed by demons. In the tradition of the Christian East, it has been commonly believed since ancient times that evil thoughts are instigated by evil spirits, which in their own way try to change the focus of the human intellect. Demons, through evil thoughts, exploit the desires of a human person in a way that is contrary to nature, turning his thoughts onto unsatisfiable desires, characterized by lust and greed. Individual evil thoughts, depending on the degree of human consent, take different forms in order to arouse the desire to satisfy a particular type of image intensified by the alluring of different senses. Evagrius Ponticus systematised evil thoughts through a perspective based on the old Greek concept of the soul. In the view of the Greek philosophers, the following spheres were distinguished in the soul: desire – related to the physiological functioning of the body (επιθυμία), passion – related to mental life (θυμός), and intellect (νους). The assignment of three main types of evil thought to this tripartite structure of the soul corresponds to a holistic understanding of the spiritual-psychophysical structure of man. The systematisation of evil thought, as done by Evgarius, makes reference to the biblical tradition, Greek (and especially Stoic) philosophy and the experience of monks living in the Egyptian desert. The assignment of each of the three types of evil thought to the spirit, soul and body creates a logical arrangement. And thus, for instance, the sphere of desire (or the sphere of the human body) is attacked by: gluttony, sexual promiscuity and greed; the sphere of passion (or the sphere of the mental functioning of a human being) is subject to: anger, sadness and acedia. The sphere of the intellect (otherwise known as the spiritual sphere), on the other hand, can sometimes be dominated by vanity and pride. In the centuries that followed, Christian monks, as well as the Church Fathers, contributed a great deal to both the hesychastic diagnosis of spiritual threats and their proper therapy. The study of thought, the identification of its spiritual sources and ways of influencing people, was not only an essential element of monastic formation, but was also part of liturgical formation. The Lenten period was particularly a time of intense reflection spiritual dangers and the ways in which they can be overcome. The penitential atmosphere of the Lenten services celebrated in the Christian East had its basis in the evangelical call for conversion and repentance. Deeper reflection on the Word of God, coming from both the Old and New Testament, triggered by extensive reading of larger parts of individual books of Scripture, as well as by listening to the singing of hymns or other literary forms which are based on various biblical images, helps the faithful to transform their minds. Hymns often incorporate hesychastic terminology, which allows for a more personal reference to the words, deeds and attitudes of the biblical figures contained therein for the goal of examining one’s own spiritual state. The Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete

155

156

The Identity and Drama of Man

is a great example of the use of hesychastic terminology being combined with certain references to positive and negative attitudes described in Scripture.118 It is no coincidence that there appear such concepts as: “passionate thought” (ἐμπαθὴς λογισμός) [cf. Ode I.5], “shameful thought” (τῶν αἰσχρῶν λογισμῶν) [cf. Ode II.18], “murderous thought” (μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ) [cf. Ode I.11] and “deceitful thought” (ἀπατηλοὺς λογισμοὺς) [cf. Ode VI.11]. Each of these terms has a reference to personal evil, which has a destructive effect on the state of the human mind. It is clear that the Great Canon is not a work that discusses the meaning of the terms used in it. St Andrew of Crete intertwines biblical images with hesychastic terminology and by referring directly to commonly understood metaphors, he indicates how to interpret them. The biblical thread, into which the concepts essential for spiritual struggle are interwoven, provides the listeners of the Great Canon not only with a sense of understanding, but at the same time encourages these listeners to live by these same concepts. The frequent comparison of one’s own spiritual state to important people in the history of salvation facilitates a deeper reflection on the Word of God, and thus enables a spiritual insight into one’s own state of mind. The drama of Eve described in the Book of Genesis119 can be interpreted as a drama of the human soul [cf. Ode I.4].120 The vision of Eve, who tasted the forbidden fruit, makes man realize that he too has drank bitterness [cf. Ode I.5]. The Archbishop of Crete deliberately makes us aware of the real dimension of this parallel. In Troparion 4 of Ode I it is said of Eve that: “she tasted the deceptive food” [lit. bitterness] (ἐτρώθης πικρῶς), and in the following troparion, the phrase “whenever I taste of it, I find it bitter” (γευόμενος ἀεὶ τῆς πικρᾶς καταπόσεως) is used in reference to the soul. The bitterness (πικρῶς) that Eve experienced is compared with the bitterness (πίκρᾶς) experienced by man as a result of succumbing to passionate thoughts (ἐμπαθὴς λογισμός).121 The Great Canon has a typological form. Having a biblical image in his mind, its author presented its content in one or two consecutive troparia. These condensed poetic verses were formulated in such a way that for the Christians listening to them there would supposedly be a spiritual transformation. The repeated use of important notions and the biblical images that accompanied them consolidated the meaning of these notions in the memory of listeners. What content is associated with the passionate thought referred to in Troparion 5 of Ode I? In its synthetic form the troparion juxtaposes two Eves:

118 119 120 121

Cf. Prelipcean, Anthropologia în Canonul, 94–8. Cf. Gen 3:1–7. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 231–33. Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 413.

Man and Spiritual Threats

Ἀντί Εὔας αἰσθητῆς ἡ νοητή μοι κατέστη Εὔα, ὁ ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ ἐμπαθὴς λογισμός, δεικνὺς τὰ ἡδέα, καὶ γευόμενος ἀεὶ τῆς πικρᾶς καταπόσεως.

Instead of the visible Eve, I have the Eve of the mind: the passionate thought in my flesh, showing me what seems sweet; yet whenever I taste from it, I find it bitter [Ode I.5].

The visible Eve or the Eve who percieves reality with her senses or in a sensual way (presented in the troparion preceding the analysed one) – is a reference point that indicates the current state of mind focused on the image of Eve. Eve’s imaginative personalisation is very concrete because it reminds us that through her passionate desire she had fallen away from God. The spiritual vision of Eve in the state of sin encapsulates this passionate thought. It is clearly indicated in this troparion that passionate thought is related to the sphere of human corporeality (ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ), i. e. gluttony, sexual promiscuity and greed. Furthermore, in a few words St Andrew of Crete also shows the mechanism of the influence of passionate thought. This strategy relies on being absorbed by a reality which seems attractive and desirable. The pictorial announcement of sweetness, heralded by a passionate thought, is only an imaginative illusion which is supposed to enchant and deceive the human mind. The evil spirit, as in the case of the biblical Eve, applies the same strategy of lying to the human soul or mind. It tries to suggest a thought that will result in an act contrary to God’s command. Entering into dialogue with the thought which a demon suggests changes one’s perception of reality. The Biblical Eve, influenced by the conversation with the cunning snake, forgot that God forbade her to eat the fruit from the tree that was in the middle of the garden (cf. Gen 3:3). Losing focus on His Word, she “[...] saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise” (Gen 3:6). Exactly in the same way, the human soul or intellect forgets, under the influence of a passionate thought, the prohibitions imposed by God and succumbs to the illusions and promises which come from the evil spirit. The Archbishop of Crete, aware of the sinful spiritual condition of man, also points to the fact of repetition and submission to these passionate thoughts. He does this through the use of the term “always” and “ever” (ἀεὶ). While the act of disobedience to God committed by the biblical Eve was a one-time act, doing evil under the influence of succumbing to passionate thoughts is a permanent state for every human being. The inclusion of the notion “always” in the cause and effect relationship between “sweetness” and “bitterness” should help us realise that passionate thought constantly overwhelms us and constantly lures us in with a promise which we know from the very beginning will not be fulfilled. This presents the drama of a man who has a weak memory and learns with great difficulty to make wise choices on the basis of trust in the Word of God and his own previous experience. The repetition of doing the same evil,

157

158

The Identity and Drama of Man

because of a succumbing to a passionate thought, is supposed to lead to radicalism in choosing God, so that no one and nothing else can overshadow Him. In their fight against man, demons put on a multicoloured coat of shameful thoughts to adorn him make his idol. This is how the author of the Great Canon describes the spiritual transformation of man, as a result of which he is subject to judgment: Ἐκόσμησα τὸν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀνδριάντα τῇ τῶν αἰσχρῶν λογισμῶν ποικίλῃ περιβολῇ καὶ κατακρίνομαι.

I have adorned the idol of my flesh with a many-colored coat of shameful thoughts, and I am condemned [Ode 11.18].

This short troparion presents a very important truth relating to the mind. The many-colored coat of shameful thoughts in hesychastic spirituality is regarded as a great threat to the intellect. The Philokalic Fathers taught that the human intellect is an image of the invisible God. If the mind is purified by spiritual knowledge and contemplation, it becomes a pure and transparent mirror of God122 and shines with God’s light. The intellect, which has become worthy of seeing God’s light,123 gives the flesh (σαρκός) the power to do what is not in its power.124 In union with God, the intellect achieves freedom from thought, image, shape and materiality. However, due to the fact that the intellect has the ability to imagine, it can produce or be influenced by various shapes and images in those who do not guard it. In this context, it is worth recalling that St Gregory of Sinai warned against allowing the intellect to be influenced by colours, shapes and images.125 Thus, the phrase “a many-coloured coat of shameful thoughts” is not just a poetic image of human sinfulness, but has a direct reference to the Philokalic theology of the intellect. The

122 Cf. St Maximos the Confessor, “Various Texts on Theology, the Divine Economy, and Virtue and Vice. Third Century 51”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (2 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1981), 222. (Μάξιμος Ομολογητής, “Κεφάλαια διάφορα θεολογικά τε και οικονομικά και περι αρετής και κακίας. Εκατοντάς πέντε 51”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Β’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1984), 136.

123 Cf. V. Lossky, “The Theology of Light in the Thought of St Gregory Palamas”, in In the Image and Likeness of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary,1985) 45–69. 124 Cf. St Gregory Palamas, “To the Most Reverend Nun Xenia”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995), 318–19. (Γρηγόριος ο Παλαμάς, “Προς την σεμνότατην εν μοναζούσι Ξένον. Περίπατον και περί των τικτομένων εκ της κατά νούν σχολής”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991), 112). 125 Cf. St Gregory of Sinai, “On Prayer: Seven Texts”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995), 283. (Γρηγόριος ο Σιναΐτης, “Περί του πως δει καθήζεσθε τον ησυχάζοντα εις την ευχήν και με ταχέως ανιστάσθε”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991), 85–6).

Man and Spiritual Threats

thought of being condemned, which ends the troparion, emphasises how dangerous it is to succumb to the “many-coloured” and thus very attractive illusions, appearing in the form of “shameful thoughts”, which are planted by evil spirits. St Andrew of Crete compares the threat coming from the thoughts planted by demons to the danger posed by thieves [cf. Ode I.14].126 Although the term thieves does not appear explicitly in the Greek original, it appears to be a logical complement. The verse of the concerned troparion is limited to the words: “I have become spoils/prey to my thoughts” (Ὁ λησταῖς περιπεσὼν ἐγὼ ὑπάρχω τοῖς λογισμοῖς μου·). The original Greek text unequivocally points to the danger posed by thoughts. The remaining part of the troparion in a pictorial way illustrates the painful effects of the aggression of thoughts, that is, beating and wounds. Therefore, these are not good or indifferent thoughts, but evil thoughts. For this reason they were described as murderous thoughts (μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ) [cf. Ode I.11]. Such thoughts lead to sin, causing wounds to both the soul and the body. Murderous thoughts, like pirates or thieves inflict wounds inwardly upon man (ἅς μοι ἔνδον μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ λῃστρικῶς ἐναπέθηκαν) [Ode I.11]. Man should not succumb to deceitful thoughts but rather overcome them (τοὺς ἀπατηλοὺς λογισμοὺς ἀεὶ νικῶσα). This message from Troparion 11 of Ode VI is addressed to man in reference to Joshua’s victorious battle over the Amalekites (cf. Exod 17:9–13; Josh 9:3–27). According to the description found in the Book of Exodus, the victory of Joshua, who chose the warriors himself from among the people of Israel, was not only his personal victory, but was a victory for which Moses pleaded with God. While Joshua with his warriors were fighting against the Amalekites, Moses was standing with his hands raised above. As long as he held them up, Israel prevailed. Whenever Moses lowered his hands out of fatigue, the scales turned in favour of the Amalekites. In order to prevent the defeat of the Chosen People, when Moses’ arms were numb, Aaron and Hur, who accompanied him, took a stone and placed it under him so that he could sit on it. Each of them then supported one of Moses’ hands so that they were constantly raised upwards (cf. Exod 17:10–12). Although the troparion mentions only Joshua’s victory over the Amalekites, an attentive listener of the Great Canon can recall the circumstances of that victory. The call to rise up and make war against the passions of the flesh (τῆς σαρκὸς τὰ πάθη) through victory over deceitful thoughts (ἀπατηλοὺς λογισμοὺς), which starts Troparion 11 of Ode VI, with its simultaneous reference to Joshua’s fight against the Amalekites – supported by the prayers of Moses, Aaron and Hur – indirectly points to a strategy for fighting evil thoughts. By referring to the description of this battle found in the Book of Exodus, St Andrew of Crete stresses that victory over evil thoughts cannot be achieved on one’s own. The picture of Joshua’s

126 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 238.

159

160

The Identity and Drama of Man

fight with the Amalekites reminds us that he fought together with select fighters and that he was supported in this fight by intercessory prayer addressed to God. To fight against deceitful thoughts like Joshua also requires the selection of appropriate means for fighting and the intercessory prayers of those who want to achieve victory. The troparion clearly indicates that there exists a link between deceitful thoughts and the passions of the flesh. Within the framework of the hesychastic strategy, the Philokalic Fathers teach that the fight against demons begins with defeating all kinds of evil thoughts. Only when evil thoughts are overcome is victory over the passions of the flesh possible. As in other troparia, anthropological hesychastic terminology and the biblical narrative serve as a tool for spiritual transformation. The tendency of the human soul to be greedy is universal. St Andrew of Crete tries to cure it by comparing its way of being with what Gehazi, the greedy servant of the prophet Elisha, did [cf. Ode VIII.6]. The deed of Gehazi, described in the Second Book of Kings (cf. 2 Kings 5:20–27),127 calls for a deep reflection on the essence of greed. If a soul is reproached for having imitated Gehazi’s polluted thoughts, desires or illusions, it immediately brings to mind the image of the greedy, leprous servant of the prophet. The prophet recognized what was hidden in Gehazi’s heart. He not only reminded him: “Is this a time to accept money and to accept clothing, olive orchards and vineyards, sheep and oxen, and male and female slaves?” (2 Kings 5:26), but he also uttered words that completely changed not only his further earthly life, but also those of his children: “Therefore the leprosy of Naaman shall cling to you, and to your descendants forever” (2 Kings 2:27). The warning to the soul not to be dominated by greed, as in the case of Gehazi, is reinforced by a vision of the fires of Gehenna, which threaten it. Gehazi become a victim of greed forever, but the soul still has a chance, if it abandons evil. This poetic stanza aims at awakening an awareness of what has happened in the past and to encourage radicalism in standing up against evil: Τοῦ Γιεζῆ ἐμιμήσω, τάλαινα τὴν γνώμην τὴν ρυπαρὰν πάντοτε, ψυχή· οὗ τὴν φιλαργυρίαν ἀπώθου κἂν ἐν γήρει· φεῦγε τῆς γεέννης τὸ πῦρ ἐκστᾶσα τῶν κακῶν σου.

O wretched soul, always thou hast imitated the polluted thoughts of Gehazi. Cast from thee, at least in thine old age, his love of money. Flee from the fire of hell, turn away from thy wickedness [Ode VIII.6].

In Troparion 7 of Ode VIII, the theme of leprosy appears. The biblical reference is King Uzziah, who entered the temple of the Lord although he was not entitled to

127 Cf. A. Lemaire, “Gehazi et les ‘Hautes Faits D’Elisée’: Remarques sur l’histoire de la rédaction des cycles d’Elie et d’Elisée”, in J.J. Adler (ed.), Haim M.I. Gevaryahu Memorial Volume (Jerusalem: World Jewish Bible Center, 1990) 41–52.

Man and Spiritual Threats

make an offering on the altar of incense (cf. 2 Chron 26:16). He did not listen to the priest Azariah and eighty other brave priests (cf. 2 Chron 26:17) who warned him: “It is not for you, Uzziah, to make offering to the Lord, but for the priests the descendants of Aaron, who are consecrated to make offering. Go out of the sanctuary; for you have done wrong, and it will bring you no honour from the Lord God” (2 Kings 26:18–19). Having heard these words, Uzziah got angry with the priests. Then leprosy appeared on his forehead (cf. 2 Kings 26:19). After the Lord touched him (cf. 2 Chron 26:20), “[...] King Uzziah was leprous to the day of his death, and being leprous lived in a separate house, for he was excluded from the house of the Lord” (2 Chron 26:21). What happened to King Uzziah in the troparion is brought to reference with the soul of man. The Bishop of Gortyna accuses the soul that it imitated Uzziah, as a result of which it was affected by leprosy in double form. He calls his soul to consider the unlawfulness it has committed (λογίζῃ παράνομα δὲ πράττεις·), to abandon its deeds (ἄφες ἃ κατέχεις) and hasten to repentance (καὶ πρόσδραμε τῇ μετανοίᾳ). Human sinfulness manifests itself in a variety of ways and refers to all spheres of human personal existence. Troparion I of Ode IV presents an ardent confession, based on deep self-knowledge, of one’s own sinfulness. The acknowledgement that one is the greatest sinner, which means that no one has sinned like oneself and that there is no sin that has not been committed at all levels of one’s personal existence, is not just a rhetorical device. It is the result of deep reflection on one’s own spiritual condition. In this short troparion, the hymnographer from Crete managed to capture the truth not only of his own spiritual condition, but also to confess with humility, following St Paul, that he is the greatest of sinners (cf. 1 Tim 1:15): Οὐ γέγονεν ἐν τῷ βίῳ ἁμάρτημα, οὐδὲ πρᾶξις, οὐδὲ κακία ἣν ἐγώ, Σωτήρ, οὐκ ἐπλημμέλησα κατὰ νοῦν καὶ λόγον καὶ προαίρεσιν, καὶ θέσει καὶ γνώμῃ καὶ πράξει ἐξαμαρτήσας, ὡς ἄλλος οὐδες πώποτε.

No sin has there been in life, no evil deed, no wickedness, that I have not committed, O Saviour. I have sinned as no one ever before, in mind, word and intent, in disposition, thought and act [Ode IV.4].

Therefore, as the Philokalic Fathers taught, sin is not confined to human actions, but permeates all spheres of the human person, paralysing especially the imagination and the volitional sphere. Although in the examined troparion there is no overt reference to evil thoughts and desires, it must be taken into account that sinfulness expressed in thought, word and deed is a disease of the will which manifests itself in a change of intent and inner disposition. Committing a sin through word or act becomes possible when, under the influence of passionate thoughts, man breaks

161

162

The Identity and Drama of Man

away from his focus on God, which in practice means concentrating on the mental images that are created under the influence of thoughts suggested by demons. It is no accident that a reference to the Saviour appears in the middle of this troparion. This creates an opposition between man, who through sin has lost the identity of being a child of God, and the Saviour, who can restore such an identity. The desire to be with the Saviour gives the sinner a new energy and hope for liberation from the bondage of evil. This thought continues in the subsequent troparion [cf. Ode IV.5]. It is revealed directly that it is not God who judges, although he is the Judge, but that man is judged by his own conscience. This is frightening, because “there is nothing in the world that is more judgmental” or that forces us to face the truth. The only way to free oneself from the accusation of one’s own conscience is, therefore, to turn to the One Who, being both Judge and Redeemer (Κριτά, λυτρωτά), knows man best. For He knows what is hidden in one’s heart (cf. John 2:25). Only God who loves man can save his servant. That is why, tormented by the accusations of his conscience, the author of the Great Canon begs God from the bottom of his heart: Ἐντεῦθεν καὶ κατεκρίθην, ἐντεῦθεν κατεδικάσθην ἐγὼ ὁ τάλας ὑπὸ τῆς οἰκείας συνειδήσεως, ἧς οὐδὲν ἐν κοσμῳ βιαιότερον. Κριτά, λυτρωτά μου καὶ γνῶστά, φεῖσαι καὶ ρΰσαι και σῶσόν με τὸν δοῦλόν σου.

For this I am condemned in my misery, for this I am convicted by the verdict of my own conscience, which is more compelling than all else in the world. O my Judge and Redeemer, who knowest my heart, spare and deliver and save me Thy servant [Ode IV.5].

The conviction of being the greatest sinner is also stressed in Troparion 3 of Ode II. It is worth noting that the confession of one’s own sinfulness is accompanied by a request for mercy, addressed to God the Saviour: Ἡμάρτηκα ὑπὲρ πάντας ἀνθρώπους· μόνος ἡμάρτηκά σοι· ἀλλ’ οἴκτειρον ὡς Θεός, Σωτήρ, τὸ ποίημά σου.

More than all men have I sinned; I alone have sinned against Thee. But as God take pity on Thy creation, O Saviour [Ode II.3].

Recognizing oneself as the greatest sinner can be regarded as one of the leitmotifs of the Great Canon. The confession: “I have sinned more than all men” (ἐγώ, ἥμαρτον ὑπὲρ πάντας) [Ode III.5] reappears in other troparia in a slightly modified form. In Ode IV.1 it is the statement: “I have sinned as a man, I alone, more than any other man”, and in Ode III.12/3: “There is no sinner whom I have not surpassed in my offences.” This kind of statement is based on an analysis of one’s deeds, which is openly expressed in Troparion 15 of Ode V: “When I examine my actions, I see

Man and Spiritual Threats

that I have gone beyond all men (ὑπερβάντα ἅπαντα ἄνθρωπον) in my sins (ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις).” However, the main point of reference for this reflection on one’s own sinfulness is not other people, but God, with whom the hymnographer from Crete conducts an internal dialogue [cf. Ode VIII.18; Ode IХ.25]. 3.2

Delusions (πλάνες)

Demons try in different ways to put man in a state where he will not be able to distinguish between good and evil. To this end, in addition to temptation, they try to exploit the delusions (πλάνης) to which the mind is subject. In the Great Canon, delusions are mentioned twice – in the first Triadikon of Ode III and in Troparion 16 of Ode IV. In the latter case, the term appears in the context of the inner dialogue between man and his soul. The narrator warns his sin-loving (φιλαμαρτήμων) and wretched soul (τάλαινα ψυχή) against unexpected events that may happen to it if it goes astray (τὰ τοῦ πλάνου) and falls into snares (ἔνεδρα) [cf. Ode IV.16]. It is worth noting that the term πλάνης in the New Testament expresses a departure from the path of truth, which is the same as falling into error, delusion or deception (cf. Matt 27:64; Rom 1:27; Eph 4,14; 1 Tes 2:3; 2 Pet 2:8; 2 Pet 3:17). In the First Epistle of John (4:6) there is a direct reference to the spirit that leads man astray – τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πλάνης, i. e. the spirit of error, which is certainly an evil spirit. These aberrations or delusions, which are dangerous to the soul, can at first seem very attractive. It is only after some time that one can realize that they are only a deceptive illusion generated by the enemies of salvation. Therefore the prayer addressed to the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons to save one from error (ἐκ πλάνης), temptations and other spiritual threats is fully justified [cf. Ode III.8 Triadikon]. 3.3

Temptations (πειρασμοί)

Every attack by evil spirits begins with temptation (πειρασμὸν). Through temptation, demons try to influence the spiritual sphere of the human person. Temptations in their essence are all kinds of delusions that cause a cognitive disturbance in the human intellect, which draw a person away from God. The term “temptation” appears only twice in the Great Canon. As in the case of other notions important in spiritual struggle, St Andrew of Crete does not explain its meaning. This notion appears in the first triadikon of Ode III, where it constitutes one of three elements of a request addressed to the Holy Trinity for salvation from primary spiritual threats. In a single thought sequence, the Archbishop of Crete combines delusions (πλάνης), temptations (πειρασμῶν) and distress (περιστάσεων), which he probably treats as dangerous and painful, although he does not state this explicitly [Ode III.8 Triadikon]. The very fact that the request to be freed from temptations is addressed to God shows that man cannot resist them with his own strength alone. St Andrew

163

164

The Identity and Drama of Man

of Crete uses the term “temptation” for the second time in the last theotokion of his work. He asks the all-pure Mother of God (Θεογεννῆτορ ἄχραντε·) and Queen (βασιλεύουσα) that she put to flight every temptation (πάντα πειρασμὸν) [Ode IX.27 Thetokion].128 3.4

Imaginations (μορφώσεις)

Imaginations (μορφώσεις), i. e. all kinds of visions of persons and things that appear in the intellect in different shapes or as shapeless, as well as multicoloured representations of desires as presented in hesychastic spirituality, are usually associated with desires. Although in the Great Canon the term “imagination” is used only once to describe the negative effects of images on the human mind, this fact is a sufficient proof to show that St Andrew of Crete not only used hesychastic terminology, but also, in his personal struggles, experienced the power of lustful images. Troparion 20 of Ode II is not only a record of the spiritual states of the author of the Great Canon, but is also a demonstration typical of hesychastic teaching, of how desires are thrown at the intellect in order to deprive the intellect of its luminous beauty: Μορφώσας μου τὴν τῶν παθῶν ἀμορφίαν, ταῖς φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς ἐλυμηνάμην τοῦ νοῦ τὴν ὡραιότητα. With my lustful desires I have formed within myself the deformity of the passions and disfigured the beauty of my mind [Ode II.20].

This focus on pleasure as a result of the imaginations of lust is connected with a specific kind of attack (ὁρμαῖς) which results in the devastation of the beauty of the intellect. In this short troparion, the Bishop of Gortyna rendered the essence of what happens as a result of demonic invasion. From an analytical point of view, the phrase “deformity of the passions” (τῶν παθῶν ἀμορφίαν) is interesting. It indicates that passions, although they refer to realities that actually exist, are ultimately not real and are merely an imaginary desire. Something that appears as an amorphous being (ἀμορφίαν) dynamically changes its shape in the human imagination, often adopting such different forms that it is an unrealistic combination of different people or things. The unreal entity that thus emerges in consciousness exists in the mind of a human being insofar as it evokes hedonistic sensations and lustful desires. Shapeless desires tempt the human intellect to defile its luminous beauty, which is a gift from God. God, being Light (cf. 1 John 1:5), wants man to walk in light (cf. 1

128 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 379–83.

Man and Spiritual Threats

John 1:7), for He created him in His image and likeness (cf. Gen 1:27)129 and made him part of the Church by virtue of His Word. If man concentrates on shapeless desires, this contributes to the acquiring of a predilection towards a hedonistic life, which in turn weakens the intellect, which as a result loses its luminous beauty. 3.5

Pleasures (ἡδοναί)

The experience of pleasure (ἡδοναί) is usually linked to submission to passions (παθῶν). The more a person becomes a victim of the passions that attack him, the more his soul sinks into darkness and loses its beauty (τὸ ὡραῖον), and the mind, instead of being transparent and penetrated by the spiritual Divine Light, dies, turning into ashe (χοῦν) [cf. Ode II.6]. The Bishop of Gortyna illustrates the effects of a hedonistic life as being enslaved by one’s passions. In the way typical of the whole Great Canon, in the first person singular, he writes about the consequences of pleasures. The symbolism of darkness and ashe makes the situation of a sinner, who has lost himself in the desire to experience pleasure, even more dramatic. The term “pleasure” (ἡδοναῖς) appears three times in the Great Canon: in Ode II.6, Ode IV.12 and Ode VII.11 In the last two cases, pleasure has a sexual connotation and this is expressed through reference to two biblical figures – Esau and Solomon.130 Esau from the Old Testament, who was called Edom, is mentioned because of his raging lust for women and the unrestrained desires of his soul, which had a predilection for the sin of sensual pleasure [cf. Ode IV.12]. By contrast, King Solomon is portrayed as the one who defiled himself by sensual passions alone (τῶν παθῶν αὐτοῦ κατερρυποῦτο·), because he was attracted by a pleasure (ταῖς ἡδοναῖς ἐξελκόμενος) which consisted in becoming a lover of harlots and strangers to God (πορνῶν γυναικῶν καὶ ξένος Θεοῦ). The lover of wisdom (ἐραστὴς σοφίας) thus became a lover of harlots (πορνῶν ἐραστὴς). The author of the Great Canon reproaches himself for imitating the pleasures and shamelessness of Solomon’s life in a spiritual way, i. e. in his intellect and soul (κατὰ νοῦν ὦ ψυχή) [Ode VII.11].131 3.6

Brutish Desires (παράλογοι ορέξεις) and Animal Appetites (κτηνόδεις ορέξεις)

The Archbishop of Crete encourages the soul to flee from the flame of every brutish desire (φεῦγε φλόγα πάσης παραλόγου ὀρέξεως), giving it the example of Lot who

129 Cf. G.H. Clark, “The Image of God”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 12/4 (1969) 215–22. 130 Cf. Ch. Yannaras, Against Religion. The Alienation of the Ecclesial Event (trans. N. Russell; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2013), 118–20. 131 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 338–42.

165

166

The Identity and Drama of Man

escaped from Sodom [cf. Ode III.24/15]. In the Great Canon, the phrase “brutish desire” occurs only once. Although its conceptual scope is not specified, taking into account the context, it can be assumed that this brutishness, which is expressed by the Greek word παραλόγου, is the opposite of living according to the Logos, the Word Incarnate. Sodom, from which Lot was fleeing, was a city of corruption. Focused on satisfying their own lusts (cf. Gen 19:4–5), its inhabitants disregarded the commandments of God. Their godless lives led to the unleashing of the wrath of God, who “rained on Sodom [...] sulphur and fire” (Gen 19:24). In this context, “brutish desires” can be understood as insatiable desires that are contrary to the nature of man who is created in the image and likeness of God. Succumbing to “brutish desires” leads to destruction and death. The phrase “animal appetites” (τὰς κτηνώδεις ὀρέξεις) is also unique, not only because of its single appearance in the Great Canon, but also because of its biblical context. The word ὀρέξεις, depending on the adjective that describes it, can be translated not only as “desire” but also as “drive”. In Troparion 3 of Ode VII, the hymnographer from Crete reminds us of an event from the youth of Saul from the tribe of Benjamin, who lived in the 11th century BC. The First Book of Samuel describes the disappearance of the donkeys that belonged to Kish – Saul’s father. While looking for them Saul wandered through the hill country of Ephraim and passed through the land of Shalishah, Shalim, Benjamin and the land of Zuph until he reached Ramatain, where he met the prophet Samuel (1 Sam 9:1–21).132 This man of God first hosted him (cf. 1 Sm 9:22–27) and then anointed him as king (cf. 1 Sam 10:1–2). This troparion presents a slightly modified version of the events. While the Old Testament description does not indicate how the disappearance of donkeys occurred, the troparion mentions that it was Saul himself who lost them (Σαούλ ποτε ὡς ἀπώλεσε τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ). Through this kind of narrative procedure, St Andrew of Crete highlighted the message that it was owing to his searching that he unexpectedly (πάρεργον) gained the kingdom (τὸ βασίλειον) of Israel. The short-term loss of animals was therefore Providence-sent, as it led to an encounter with the man of God who anointed him as king. In the second part of the troparion, the hymnographer from Crete warns his soul not to prefer its animal appetites (τὰς κτηνώδεις ὀρέξεις) to the Kingdom of Christ (τῆς βασιλείας Χριστοῦ) [Ode VII.3]. The events of the Old Testament inspired the author of the Great Canon to reflect on the relationship between the animal appetites of the soul and the supreme value that is the Kingdom of Christ.

132 Cf. B. Green, How Are the Mighty Fallen. A Dialogical Study of King Saul in 1 Samuel (New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic, 2003), 204–10; D.M. Gunn, The Fate of King Saul. An Interpretation of a Biblical Story (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1980), 61–5; D. Vikander Edelman, King Saul in the Historiography of Judah (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 44–50.

Man and Spiritual Threats

3.7

Uncontrolled Longings (ὁρμαί)

The concept of “uncontrolled longings” (ὁρμαί) was used seven times in the Greek version of the Great Canon. It encompasses quite a wide range of semantic content and can also be translated as violent aspirations, drives, urges or impulses. From the contexts in which it appears, it is clear that it is treated as a negative reality that is difficult to control. Submission to it can contribute to God’s anger. Being aware of this, the Bishop of Gortyna asks God not to judge him according to his deeds ( τὰ πρακτέα), words (λόγους) and uncontrolled impulses (ὁρμάς) and to treat him mercifully [Ode I.23]. Uncontrolled longings, along with the proclivity towards pleasures and passions, contribute to the destruction of the beauty of the intellect [Ode II.20]. Especially when they do not refer to the truth of God’s Word, they become illogical and disordered (παραλόγοις ὀρμαί) [Ode II.31/2].133 In such cases, they can be compared to the violent murderous behaviour of Cain, who killed Abel (cf. Gen 4:1–16).134 The hymnographer form Crete reproaches himself that just as Cain the murderer (ὡς Κάϊν ὁ φονεύς) killed his brother, so did he kill his body with his sensual longings (ὁρμαῖς) [cf. Ode II.35/6]. He reprimands his miserable soul, constantly succumbing to disordered, yet pointless and uncontrolled longings (ταῖς παραλόγοις ὁρμαῖς ἀεὶ παρανομοῦσα) [Ode V.5]. The double sin of King David – adultery and murder (cf. 2 Sam 11:2–27), is indicated in the Great Canon as a reference point for even greater sins of the soul caused by uncontrolled sensual impulses (κατὰ γνώμην ὁρμαῖς) [Ode VII.4]. The Great Canon also mentions Absalom’s deed through which he defiled his father David’s bed. His soul rebelled against nature and through its unholy deeds (πράξεις αἷς ἐξύβρισε) followed Absalom’s proclivity for passionate and sensual pleasures (ἐμπαθεῖς καὶ φιλήδονους ὁρμάς) [Ode VII.8]. 3.8

Unrestrained Desires (ἀκρασία)

Lack of self-control in the sphere of sensuality leads to madness and the arousal of lust, which in turn ends up in one’s enslavement in sin. A telling example of this vice is the person of Esau from the Old Testament,135 who was called Edom because of his raging lust for women (θηλυμανίας), or more precisely, he was tormented with unrestrained desire (ἀκρασίᾳ) and burning (πυρούμενος) for sensual pleasure

133 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 258–62. 134 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 414. 135 Cf. Genesis 36:2. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews negatively evaluates Esau: “See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springs up and causes trouble, and through it many become defiled. See to it that no one becomes like Esau, an immoral and godless person, who sold his birthright for a single meal” (Heb 12:15–16).

167

168

The Identity and Drama of Man

(ταῖς ἡδοναῖς) [Ode IV.12]. Due to a lack of composure (δι’ ἀκρασίαν), the soul of the Bishop of Gortyna did not receive the grace to perform miracles, which would be similar to Elisha who with the mantle of the prophet Elijah once divided the waters of the Jordan [cf. Ode VIII.3]. Elisha was aware of the power of the prophet Elijah’s mantle, as he saw him take it off, roll it up and us it to hit the waters of the river so that they separated and people could then walk on a dry riverbed (cf. 2 Kings 2:8). When this mantle was offered to Elisha by Elijah when he was assumed into heaven, Elisha returned to the river Jordan and struck the waters with it, and the water parted to both sides (cf. 2 Kings 2:9–14). The motif of the mantle that Elisha received from Elijah returns in the next troparion. St Andrew recalls the prophet Elisha, who, through the mantle given to him, received a double portion of grace (διπλῆν χάριν) from God to remind his soul that it has no share in this grace due to its uncontrolled desires (ὦ ψυχή μου ταύτης οὐ μετέσχες τῆς χάριτος δι’ ἀκρασίαν) [Ode VIII.4]. Through the double reference of receiving the gift of the grace to perform miracles, which the prophet Elisha had received from the prophet Elijah by means of a mantle emanating with God’s power, and the double reminder to his soul that it was not worthy to receive this gift, St Andrew of Crete highlights the importance of the virtue of self-control in spiritual life. 3.9

Stubborn Wilfulness (αὐθάδεια)

Each man is endowed with free will. One can choose the way of God and remain in intimacy with the Creator and the Saviour, or one can deviate from it (cf. Ps 1:1–6). St Andrew of Crete warns against arbitrary, impertinent, bold obstinacy, which leads to a fall and persistence in the state of sin. The author conducts an inner dialogue with his soul, reminding it that it has become like the Egyptian slave Hagar. Following her example, the soul gave birth to a “new Ishmael” (νέον Ἰσμαήλ),136 which is stubborn wilfulness (τὴν αὐθάδειαν) [cf. Ode III.20/11].137 This recalls the pericope from the book of Genesis about how Hagar,138 when she became pregnant with Abram’s child, began to disregard his rightful wife Sarai (cf. Gen 16:4). The author of the Great Canon shows not only the dangers related to stubborn wilfulness, but also the importance of humble submission to God. For the second time he warns in Ode VII not to fall into a state of stubborn wilfulness and presumption. This time such a warning involves worshipping God. He recalls David’s retrieval of the Ark of God from the city of Baale-judah. From the Second Book of Samuel we learn that the Ark of God was placed on a new cart and was

136 Cf. Gen 16:1–15. 137 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 271–5. 138 Cf. A. Cooper, “Hagar In and Out of Context”, Union Seminary Quarterly Review 55 (2002) 35–46.

Man and Spiritual Threats

brought out from the house of Abinadab. The cart was driven by his sons, Uzzah and Ahio. This was accompanied by dancing to the sounds of songs and various musical instruments (cf. 2 Sam 6:1–5). The end of the trip was dramatic: “When they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen shook it. The anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God struck him there because he reached out his hand to the ark; and he died there beside the ark of God” (2 Sam 6:6–7). It follows from this that the Ark of God was not only feared by the enemies of the Chosen People (cf. 1 Sam 5:1), which brought them punishment for insults (cf. 1 Sam 6:19), but it was also not to be touched even by Jews (cf. Num 4:5).139 Both touching and looking at it was threatened with death (cf. Num 4:15,20). If Uzzah was aware of this, why did he commit an act of stubborn wilfulness and touch the Ark of God? In the second part of the examined troparion, St Andrew of Crete suggests that the soul should flee form presumption (αὐθάδειαν) and respect with reverence the things of God (σέβου τὰ θεῖα καλῶς) [Ode VII.7]. 3.10 Rejection of the Commandments (αθέτηση των εντολών) God’s commandments, both in the Old and the New Testament, are an expression of His concern for man. Their purpose is to help man on the path to salvation. According to the hymnographer from Crete, his great-grandfather Adam was justly banished from Eden (τῆς Ἐδὲμ προεξερρίφη) because he disobeyed (μὴ φυλάξας) one commandment (ἐντολὴν).140 Reflection on Adam’s fate141 leads the author to reflection on himself, as a result of which the Archbishop of Crete discovers that he constantly rejects the words of the life (τὰ ζωηρά [...] λόγια) of God142 [cf. Ode I.6].143 Adam’s sin, with which the believer identifies his own sinfulness,144

139 Preuss, Old Testament Theology, 253–4. 140 Gen 3:23–24. Cf. H.S. Benjamins, “Keeping Marriage out of Paradise: The Creation of Man and Woman in Patristic Literature”, in G.P. Luttikhuizen (ed.), The Creation of Man and Woman. Interpretations of the Biblical Narratives in the Jewish and Christian traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2000) 93–106; J. Boojamra, “Original Sin According to St Maximus the Confessor”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 20 (1976) 19–30. 141 Cf. P.W. Kahn, Out of Eden. Adam and Eve and the Problem of Evil (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007), 16–52; G.A. Anderson, The Genesis of Perfection: Adam and Eve in Jewish and Christian Imagination (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 21–176. 142 Cf. Krueger, The Great Canon, 76–8. 143 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 233–4. 144 Cf. J.S. Romanides, “Original Sin According to St Paul”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 4 (1955–56) 5–28; The Ancestral Sin (trans. G.S. Gabriel; Ridgewood, NJ: Zephyr Publishing, 2008), 155–69.

169

170

The Identity and Drama of Man

is a voluntary change of direction, or more precisely a change of reference.145 By making oneself an end in itself, man becomes his own idol, thus breaking the iconic relationship with God. When man decides to exist autonomously, he constrains himself to created time and space and to created nature, which manifests itself both in the physiological and spiritual dimension.146 The motive of rejecting the Words of the Saviour appears five more times in the Great Canon. The Greek term τὰς ἐντολάς denotes both God’s orders and His commandments. The painful confession: “From my youth, O Saviour, I have rejected Thy commandments” (Ἐκ νεότητος, Σωτήρ, τὰς ἐντολάς σου ἐπαρωσάμην) is an acknowledgement of St Andrew of Crete’s own sinfulness. Introspection helps him discover that on the path of his life to date, his heart was not ruled by the Saviour but by passions (ἐμπαθῶς) and that he was careless (ἀμελῶν) and lazy (ρᾳθυμῶν) [cf. Ode I.20]. It should thus come as no surprise that the two heirmoi of Ode III contain a request to the Saviour to make His commandments the basis of the author’s personal identity. The cry of the Archbishop of Crete from the second heirmos of Ode III is more personal. By proclaiming: “Thou alone art Holy and Lord” (ὅτι μόνος ἅγιος ὑπάρχεις καὶ Κύριος), he begs God to strengthen his “wavering heart” (σαλευθεῖσαν τὴν καρδίαν) on the “rock of his commandments” (ἐπὶ τὴν πέτραν τῶν ἐντολῶν σου) [Ode III. Other heirmos]. This awareness of one’s own sinfulness, doing evil and rejecting God’s commandments vividly appears again in Troparion 1 of Ode VII. The simple confession: “I have sinned, I have offended, I have set aside Thy commandments” (Ἡμάρτηκα, ἐπλημμέλησα καὶ ἠθέτησα τὴν ἐντολήν σου) is this time supplemented by a description of the author’s current state of spiritual illness: I have sinned, I have offended, I have set aside Thy commandments; for in sins have I progressed and to my sores I have added wounds. But in Thy compassion have mercy upon me, O God of our fathers. “I have sinned, I have offended” (ὅτι ἐν ἁμαρτίαις προήχθην καὶ προσέθηκα τοῖς μώλωψι τραῦμα ἐμοί). The violation of commandments (παρέφθειρα τὴν ἐντολήν) is here associated with discolouring the image of God (κατέχρωσα τὴν εἰκόνα σου) [cf. Ode VII.18].

3.11 Trespasses (παραπτώματα) The term “trespasses” [sins] is used five times in Ode I of the Great Canon. It is used each time the phrase “forgiveness of sins” (παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν) is employed.

145 Cf. Prelipcean, “From Adam to Moses”, 412–3. 146 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 175.

Man and Spiritual Threats

In Troparion 1, St Andrew addresses his lamentation (θρηνωδία) to Christ asking Him to grant him, in His compassion, forgiveness of his sins (ἀλλ’ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν). The same exact request expressed at the end of Troparion 13 is preceded by a call to the One who is God who loves man (ὡς φιλάνθρωπος) to not throw the author into hell (με ἀπόρριψῃς εἰς ᾍδου). A request for forgiveness of sins also ends Troparia: 16, 17 and 18. In the first of these, Christ is presented as the Lamb of God (Ἀμνὸς ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ) who takes away the sins of all (ὁ αἴρων πάντων ἁμαρτίας). The next one contains a request to the merciful Creator (Πλαστουργῷ [...] εὔσπλαγχνός), and the last one – the request to the Saviour (Σωτήρ). The term “trespass” appears 21 times in the New Testament, and twice in the form of παραπτωμάτων. In his Epistle to the Romans, St Paul explains: “For the judgment following one trespass (δι’ ἑνὸς ἁμαρτήσαντος) brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses (ἐκ πολλῶν παραπτωμάτων) brings justification.”147 For the second time the term παραπτωμάτων is used in a Christological context. The author of the Epistle to the Ephesians, in his wonderful hymn about the salvific activity of Christ, used the phrase “forgiveness of trespasses”, which St Andrew adopted in the Great Canon. Explaining that “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses (τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν παραπτωμάτων), according to the riches of his grace” (Eph 1:7), points to the soteriological aspect of the Saviour’s sacrifice, as a result of which man is freed from the state of sinfulness. 3.12 Evil Deeds (κακουργίαι) Negative thoughts and a passionate attitude towards other people end in evil deeds, and in the temporal sense – evil behaviour. In the Great Canon, the term “evil deed” (κακουργία) is used only once. As part of an internal monologue, the Archbishop of Crete reproaches his soul that it “has stoned the body to death with evil deeds” (λιθοκτονήσασα τὸ σῶμα κακουργίαις) [Ode II.31/2].148 The term κακουργία does not appear in the New Testament. 3.13 Wickedness (ἀνομία) Doing evil places man on the path of wickedness. The law in the Old Testament was based on various kinds of instructions given by God, which were supposed to be the norm of conduct for the Chosen People.149 In the beginning the law, the 147 Rom 5:16. 148 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 258–62. 149 Cf. E.A. Martens, God’s Design. A Focus on Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994), 77–81.

171

172

The Identity and Drama of Man

Torah in Hebrew, included all the laws that were related to the person of Moses. In the New Testament, the term “Law” refers to Judaic legislation and is contrasted with the economy of grace, initiated by Jesus (cf. Rom 5:15; John 1:17). It is worth noting that the New Testament also refers to the “law of Christ (τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χρίστοῦ).”150 Although Jesus violently opposes the Law, understood as a set of customs established by ancestors, whose followers and propagators are scribes and Pharisees,151 He himself adheres to the Law (cf. Matt 8:4). In His teachings he clearly emphasises: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (τὸν νόμον) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish, but to fulfil (πληρῶσαι).”152 In fulfilling the Law, Jesus reveals Himself as the Lawgiver and reminds us that the essence of the Law of the Chosen People is identical with the essence of the Law of the Kingdom of God and can be summarised in two commandments: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength, […] You shall love your neighbour as yourself ” (Mark 12:30–31). In his teaching based on the Gospel, St Paul proves that man is justified by faith in Jesus Christ and not by the works of the Law (cf. Gal 2:16; Rom 3:28).153 Man cannot justify himself by keeping the Law of God as much as possible – man is justified free of charge through the sacrifice of Christ (cf. Rom 3:21–26).154 Thus, for a Christian, the Law is related to the Person and work of Christ, while lawlessness and wickedness are a conscious renunciation of being in a relationship of love with the Saviour.155 The concept of “wickedness” (ανομία) appears four times in the Great Canon. In Ode II, the Bishop of Gortyna states that all the princes of evil [the ruling passions] (πάντες οἱ ἀρχηγοὶ τῶν κακῶν) have ploughed long furrows of wickedness (τὴν ἀνομίαν) on his back [Ode II.10]. This troparion refers to the Verse 3 of Psalm 129(128) taken from LXX: “The [sinners] ploughers (οἱ αμαρτωλοί) ploughed on my back, they made their furrows (ἐμάκρυναν) [of wickedness] (ἀνομίαν) long”.

150 Gal 6:2. 151 Cf. A.F.J. Klijn, “Scribes, Pharisees, Highpriests and Elders in the New Testament”, Novum Testamentum 3/4 (1959) 259–67. 152 Matt 5:17. Cf. R. Banks, “Matthew’s Understanding of the Law: Authenticity and Interpretation in Matthew 5:17–20”, Journal of Biblical Literature 93 (1974) 226–42. 153 Cf. C.H. Cosgrove, “Justification in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection”, Journal of Biblical Literature 106 (1987) 653–70; L. Ramoroson, “La justification par la foi du Christ Jésus”, Science et Esprit 39 (1987) 81–92; J.D.G. Dunn/A.M. Suggate, The Justice of God. A Fresh Look at the Old Doctrine of Justification by Faith (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993), 17–42. 154 Matt 13:41. Cf. J.N. Aletti, God’s Justice in Romans. Keys for Interpreting the Epistle to the Romans (trans. P.M. Meyer; Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2010), 81–7. 155 Cf. B.L. Martin, Christ and the Law in Paul (Leiden: Brill, 1989); G. Howard, “Christ the End of the Law”, Journal of Biblical Literature 88 (1969), 331–7.

Man and Spiritual Threats

The author of the Great Canon slightly modifies the original text of the psalm, inserting in place of the word “sinners” the phrase “all the princes of evil”, which results from the desire to indicate that the ultimate cause of wickedness is not sinful people, but evil spirits. It seems reasonable to claim that this procedure resulted from the adoption of hesychastic assumptions about the origin of evil and passions. Jesus invokes the consequences of Sodom’s wickedness referred to in Chapter 19 of the Book of Genesis: “[…] but on the day that Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and sulfur from heaven and destroyed all of them” (Luke 17:29; cf. Gen 19:24–25). This motif was used by St Andrew of Crete in another troparion featuring the word “wickedness” [cf. Ode II. 38/9]. This time it links the content of the verse from Genesis with the content of the verse from the Gospel of Luke, and at the same time alludes to the warning of the messengers who came to Lot: “Get up, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or else you will be consumed in the punishment of the city” (Gen 19:15). In this context, the use of the term “wickedness” to refer to the rain of fire sent by God to burn the sinful inhabitants of Sodom is perfectly understandable. In the text of the Great Canon this is expressed with the following words: “Roused to anger by their transgressions, the Lord once rained down fire from heaven and burnt up the men of Sodom (Ἔβρεξε Κύριος παρὰ Κυρίου πῦρ ποτέ ἀνομίαν ὀργῶσαν πυρπολήσας Σοδόμων) [Ode II.38/9]. For the last time, the term “wickedness” appears in a double form in Ode VII. This time the hymnographer from Crete reminds us of the offences of King David: “David once joined sin to sin, adding murder to fornication” (Συνῆψε μὲν ὁ Δαυΐδ ἀνομήματι τὴν ἀνομίαν φόνῳ γὰρ τὴν μοιχείαν ἐκίρνα) [Ode VII.5]. David’s wickedness, described in the Second Book of Samuel (11:2–17) consisted in his departure from God to whom he owed everything. What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord (cf. 2 Sam 11:27). The wickedness committed by David, as well as by many others described in the Old and New Testaments, should be perceived from an eschatological perspective, as the evangelical warning thereof is still relevant: “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin (πάντα τὰ σκάνδαλα) and all evildoers (ποιοῦντας τὴν ἀνομίαν)” (Matt 13:41).156 The phrase “greater and greater wickedness” (τῇ ἀνομίᾳ εἰς τὴν ἀνομίαν), which may have been an inspiration for the troparion about the iniquities committed by King David, appears in the Epistle to the Romans (6:19). St John the Apostle identifies sin with wickedness: “Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin (ἡ ἁμαρτία) is lawlessness (ἡ ἀνομία)” (1 John 3:4). On the other hand, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews treats these two concepts as different realities: 156 Cf. J. Bowker, “The Son of Man”, Journal of Theological Studies 28 (1977) 1–30; В. W. Bacon, “Jesus as Son of Man”, The Harvard Theological Review 3/3 (1910) 325–40; H.M. Teeple, “The Origin of the Son of Man Christology”, Journal of Biblical Literature 84/3 (1965) 213–50; A.J.B. Higgins, The Son of Man in the Teaching of Jesus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980) 55–116.

173

174

The Identity and Drama of Man

“I will remember their sins (τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν) and their lawless deeds (τῶν ἀνομιῶν) no more” (Heb 10:17). 3.14 Sins (ἁμαρτίαι) Sin is a concept that is mentioned in both the Old and New Testaments. Beginning with the sin of the First Parents, which is disobedience to God’s command, mankind experiences its various falls, as a result of which it separates itself from the Creator. The semantic scope of the term “sin” is very broad. In the Old Testament, this concept is described by referring to human relationships. Of these, the most characteristic include: misconduct, wickedness, rebellion, injustice and debt. The prophets stigmatised the sins of the Chosen People, stressing in particular that sin is an insult to God and the severance of one’s personal relationship with Him. The New Testament shows Jesus Christ stigmatizing sin, but at the same time, revealing the mercy of God for sinners. The Saviour comes into the world to “take away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). As a result of Christ’s victory over sin, through his death and resurrection, through baptism – a Christian “becomes a new creation” (2 Cor 5:17).157 It is also a fact that as long as one remains in a mortal body, one is in danger of succumbing to sin and its passions (cf. Rom 6:12). Hence sin, which originally comes from evil spirits, is a real threat to the Christian on the path of salvation. Throughout the Great Canon, there are various references to sin. The Bishop of Gortyna reflects on his own sinfulness and the salvific power of God, who saves from sin. He asks the Saviour to free him from his sins. As part of his inner dialogue, he calls on the soul to break away from sin and turn away from sinners. One of the most characteristic motifs in the Great Canon in relation to sin is awareness of one’s own sinfulness. Usually, this comes down to simple statements, for instance: “I have sinned, I have offended, [...] in sins have I progressed” (Ἡμάρτηκα, ἐπλημμέλησα, [...] ὅτι ἐν ἁμαρτίαις προήχθην) [Ode VII.1]. With reference to the confession of St Paul, who admits that he is the greatest of sinners (cf. 1 Tim 1:15), St Andrew of Crete does not hesitate to say: “I have sinned as a man, I alone, more than any other man” (µόνος ἥμαρτον ὡς ἄνθρωπος ὑπὲρ πάντα ἄνθρωπον) [Ode IV.1, cf. Ode IХ.25]. The author believes that he has surpassed everyone (ὑπερβάντα) in his sin (ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις) [cf. Ode V.15], and his life, shrouded in darkness (σκότος) and thick [lit. deep] mist (βαθεῖά ἀχλὺς), is nothing but the night of sin (ἡ νὺξ τῆς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode V.1]. Through his sins (διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας),

157 Cf. W.H. Gloer, “2 Corinthians 5:14–21”, Review and Expositor 86 (1989) 397–405, on p. 399; M.V. Hubbard, New Creation in Paul’s Letters and Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 133–87.

Man and Spiritual Threats

he imitated Adam – the first-formed man, stripping himself of God, the eternal kingdom and its joys [Ode I.3]. In such a fallen state, conducting an internal dialogue, the author calls upon the soul to confess its sins to God (λέγε Θεῷ τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου) [Ode VII.13]. This confession of sins is also presented in the Great Canon in the first person singular: “I confess to Thee, O Saviour, the sins I have committed” (Ἐξαγγέλλω σοι Σωτήρ, τὰς ἁματίας ἃς εἰργασάμην) [Ode I.11]. The Archbishop of Crete takes example from the residents of Judea and Samaria who came to John the Baptist and confessed their sins (ἐξωμολογοῦντο τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἑαυτῶν) [cf. Ode IX.11]. The image (εἰκόνα) of Christ who became a child (ἐνηπίασε) and shared in the human flesh (σαρκὶ), and thus in the body of every human being, and did everything that belongs to human nature (τῆς φύσεως), with the exception of sinning, serves for the hymnographer as the basic model of God’s mercy (συγκαταβάσεως) [cf. Ode IX.5]. Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of all and takes them upon himself (ὁ αἴρων πάντων τὰς ἁμαρτίας) [cf. Ode I.16]. He talked to sinners during his earthly life (ἁμαρτωλοῖς ὡμίλει) [cf. Ode IX.15], and forgave the harlot of her sins (cf. Luke 7:47), because He was the One who had the power to forgive sins (Πόρνη ἐλάμβανε τὰς ἀφέσιμους λύσεις παρὰ τοῦ ἔχοντος ἰσχὺν ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας) [Ode ΙΧ.17; see Ode IV.1]. Christ is the God who searches out men’s hearts (ὁ ἐρευνῶν καρδίας) and burns up their sins (φλογίζων ἁμαρτίας) [Ode II.39/10]. In the Great Canon, like a refrain, there is a request for liberation from the heavy yoke of sin. The phrase: “Take from me the heavy yoke of sin” (ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας) appears six times in Ode I [in Troparia: 16, 17, 18, 22, 24 and 25]. In two cases it is addressed to Jesus Christ [cf. Ode I.16 and I.22], once to God the Creator (Πλαστουργῷ) [cf. Ode I.17], in one case to the Saviour (Σωτήρ) [cf. Ode I.18], and one time to God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons [cf. Ode I.24. Triadikon]. It is worth noting that the exact same request is also addressed to the Mother of God: “Mother of God [...] (Θεοτόκε [...] ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode I.25. Theotokion]. In Ode VI, the Bishop of Gortyna begs Christ twice to lead him out of the depths of sin. In the first case, this supplication refers to the passage form the Gospels, which presents Jesus saving the sinking Peter when he tried to walk on water (cf. Matt 14:28–32). Having this dramatic scene in mind, St Andrew of Crete calls out: “As Thou hast saved Peter when he cried out, ‘Save me’, come quickly, O Saviour, before it is too late, and save me from the beast. Stretch out Thine hand and lead me up from the depths of sin (ἀνάγαγε τοῦ βυθοῦ τῆς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode VI.13]. In the subsequent troparion addressed to Christ, who is his Lord (Δέσποτα), the author’s supplication for delivery from the lowest depths of sin (ἐκ τῶν ἀδύτων βυθῶν τῆς ἁμαρτίας) is supplemented by a cry for delivery from despair (τῆς ἀπογνώσεώς) [Ode VI.14].

175

176

The Identity and Drama of Man

In the disputes with his soul, the hymnographer from Crete wishes to break his soul away from sin three times. Recalling that God is a just Judge, he commands his soul to forsake its former sins [cf. Ode II.30/1], come out of the land of Haran (identified with sin), and similarly to Abraham, go to the Promised Land [cf. Ode III.15/6]. He urges it to flee from the flames of sin (τὸν ἐμπρησμόν [...] φεῦγε ψυχή μου, τῆς ἁμαρτίας), like Lot, who fled from Sodom (cf. Gen 19:16–25) [Ode III.24/ 15]. Twice in the Great Canon there is a warning that the soul should flee from the sins of the wicked (ἔκφυγε δὲ πάλιν τῶν πονηρῶν τὰς ἁμαρτίας) [Ode VIII.12].158 In the second case, examples (τὰ ὑποδείγματα) derived from the New Testament help the soul make the rights choices [cf. Ode ΙΧ.4].159 3.15 Passions (πάθοι) Thoughts originating from evil spirits, as a result of the consent of man who separates himself from God, transform into passions (πάθοι),160 thus resulting in a paralysis that manifests itself in different spheres of one’s personal existence.161 The concept of “passion” appears seven times in the Great Canon. St Andrew of Crete points out the very fact of falling into it and focuses on adapting to it in the soul. Moreover, he strongly emphasizes that passions are the cause of suffering for the soul and body. He calls on the soul not to succumb to them, but to turn to God and confess to Him its sins. The problem of passion, which is closely related to the thoughts suggested by evil spirits, is not a marginal subject. On the contrary, it facilitates a proper interpreting of biblical references. It is no coincidence that the Great Canon contains key concepts found in Orthodox anthropology and the hesychastic method of diagnosing spiritual realities and the therapy thereof with the power of God’s Word. Just as in the case of thoughts originating from demons, the meaning of and the way in which passions work is presented in an introspective form. While having discussions with his soul, the Archbishop of Crete reproaches it that through its accursed life it has become like King Solomon [cf. Ode VII. 10]. Carried away by pleasures (Ταῖς ἡδοναῖς), Solomon succumbed to his passions (τῶν παθῶν) and defiled himself, having a predilection for harlots, which made him a stranger to God (ξένος Θεοῦ·). Similarly, the soul imitates him with its intellect (ἐμιμήσω κατὰ νοῦν) by continuing shameful pleasures [Ode VII.11].162 The hymnographer

158 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 345–9. 159 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 357–8. 160 Cf. D. Staniloae, Orthodox Spirituality. A Practical Guide for the Faithful and a Definitive Manual for the Scholar (trans. J. Newville; South Canaan, PA: St Tikhon’s Seminary, 2002), 77–118. 161 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 178. 162 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 338–42.

Man and Spiritual Threats

from Crete reproaches his soul for its predilection for passions. He mentions the overwhelming burden of passion and oppression, as well as of persecution by the enemy (ὁ ἐχθρὸς καταπιέζει με) [cf. Ode II.16]. Reflection on what is happening in the depths of the soul gives rise to an analysis of the spiritual ravages caused by imagined passions: Μορφώσας μου τὴν τῶν παθῶν ἀμορφίαν, ταῖς φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς ἐλυμηνάμην τοῦ νοῦ τὴν ὡραιότητα. With my lustful desires I have formed within myself the deformity of the passions and disfigured the beauty of my intellect [Ode II.20].

The above troparion proves that the author of the Great Canon was deeply rooted in hesychastic spirituality. According to the teaching of the hesychastic Fathers, the mind is beautiful when it is focused on God. In this state it is illuminated by God’s Light. If, however, the mind concentrates on passions that begin with sensual things, this beauty gets obscured and distorted. The key role in this process is played by images, which are a form of presence of a sensory object in the consciousness. The passion-driven stimulation of man’s natural powers is therefore determined by a sensory object. Demons stimulate this object, trying to encourage the soul in various ways to be seduced by imaginations and to commit sins.163 A person who succumbs to imaginations full of passion, which are prompted by evil thoughts, has great difficulty in stopping his external “self ” from committing sins. Each evil thought that manifests itselft in passion-driven imaginations can, as a result of human consent, develop into a corresponding passion. It is worth noting that according to hesychastic teaching, passion is not identified with sin but is treated as a sinful condition or as an illness of the soul caused by sin.164 Passions not only distort the original beauty of God’s image in man but also discolour it. Being aware that this discolouration is something bad, St Andrew of Crete confesses with all sincerity: “I have discoloured with the passions the first beauty of the image, O Saviour” (Κατέχρωσα τῆς πρὶν εἰκόνος τὸ κάλλος, Σῶτερ) [Ode II.21]. This troparion does not explain what the nature of this discolouration is, however it becomes quite obvious if one considers the hesychastic interpretation of the way in which passions and the evil thoughts that cause them work. The spirit of a lie feeds the intellect with appropriately selected thoughts and images in attractive shapes and colours shining with demonic energy. The original beauty of the intellect is a luminous beauty that cannot be broken down into the individual

163 Cf. Leśniewski, “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi…”, 172. 164 Cf. G.I. Mantzarides, Orthodox Spiritual Life (trans. K. Schram; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1994), 114.

177

178

The Identity and Drama of Man

colours of the spectrum. This beauty is characterised by transparency due to the Divine Energies. If a person breaks away from God who is Light, the light of that person’s intellect begins to fragment. Then the unified primary and shining beauty is broken down. The intellect subsequently ceases to shine and begins to shimmer in different colours, with this being caused by the lustful imaginations that dazzle the intellect. A person then loses himself and becomes similar to a lost coin. It is for this reason that in the second part of the analysed troparion the hymnographer from Crete begs the Saviour to seek and find him like a lost coin. This reference to the pericope of the Gospel according to St Luke (cf. Luke 15:8–10)165 identifies a person with the concerned “lost coin” and arouses one’s desire to become a repentant sinner. A life of passion (φιλήδονου ζωῆς) and self-indulgence (τῇ ρύσει τῆς έμπαθοῦς) causes a man on the spiritual level to put on a garment that is defiled and shamefully bloodstained [cf. Ode II.14]. This defilement is, of course, the work of evil spirits who constantly strive to deprive man of the beautiful and shining robe given by God. St Andrew of Crete points out that passions, for which the soul has a predilection, are assimilated by the soul. As a result of which, negative changes occur in the soul’s identity. With pain, the author reproaches his soul for its entanglement in destructive lusts which are incompatible with the will of God the Creator: Πύργον ἐσοφίσω οἰκοδομῆσαι, ὦ ψυχή, καὶ ὀχύρωμα πῆξαι ταῖς σαῖς ἐπιθυμίαις, εἰμὴ συνέχεεν ὁ Κτίστης τὰς βουλάς σου, καὶ κατέαξεν εἰς γῆν τὰ μηχανήματα σου.

Skilfully hast thou planned to build a tower, O my soul, and to establish a stronghold for thy lusts; but the Creator confounded thy designs and dashed thy devices to the ground [Ode II.36/7].166

In the quoted troparion, one can identify references to the construction of the tower of Babel (cf. Gen 11:3–8).167 The biblical story describes the construction of a high tower made of “brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar” (Gen 11:3), the top of which was to reach to the heavens (cf. Gen 11:4). The tower was not completed because God confused the tongues of the builders (cf. Gen 11:7) and scattered them throughout the earth. The reason for the confusion of tongues and subsequent dispersion was that people were moving ever further away from God after the Deluge because of their hubris. By referring to the story about the tower of Babel (not mentioned by name), St Andrew wants to make the soul aware that God 165 Cf. F. Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas. 3. Teilband Lk 15,1–19,27 (Düsseldorf/Zurich: Benziger Verlag/Neukirchener Verlag, 2001), 13–66. 166 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 265–9. 167 Cf. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Old Testament I. Genesis 1–11, (ed. A. A. Louth/M. Conti; Dovners Grove, IL: InterVasity, 2001), 165–70.

Man and Spiritual Threats

will deal with the passions of the soul the same way as it is described in Genesis. The inclination to hastily realize one’s lusts will eventually be humiliated by the Creator. The lustful senses of the soul, no matter how cunning, are always doomed to failure. Typologically, the tower of Babel illustrates the state of the human soul which wants to build its identity not on God the Creator and the Saviour but in relation to the Devil, i. e. the personal created evil that divides (διάβολος). The soul has voluntarily acquired its abominations (βδελύγματα πάθη) and multiplied them. Focusing on passions, it began to treat them as idols, following the example of King Manasseh, who worshiped pagan idols168 [cf. Ode VII.16]. A person who persists in passions, especially in the passions of the flesh, seeks material things to satisfy his desires. This leads him to a state in which he considers material things to be the source of life to the point where they become an idol for him. Thus idolatry is an inevitable consequence of hedonism.169 St Andrew honestly confesses that he has become his own idol and that he defiled his soul with passions (Αὐτείδωλον ἐγενόμην, τοῖς πάθεσι τὴν ψυχήν μου βλάπτων) [Ode IV.26]. In this troparion, he makes himself responsible for the state of his soul, while in another troparion [Ode VII.8], the soul is made responsible for its tendency to abruptly enjoy passionate and sensual desires (ἐμπαθεῖς καὶ φιλήδονους ὁρμάς) [Ode VII.8]. The deeds of the soul are also compared to the unholy and rebellious deeds (τὰς ἐναγεῖς αὐτοῦ πράξεις αἷς ἐξύβρισε) [Ode VII.8] committed by Absalom when he rebelled against nature and defiled his father’s bed with his concubines (cf. 2 Sam 16:22). The comparison of even just these two troparia shows that the human being is responsible for the evil he has committed. The literary form of an internal dialogue between the personal “self ” and the soul helps one to better understand the spiritual roots and conditions of passionate desires, which destroy the whole person. For the hymnographer from Crete these are destructive consequences of breaking away from God. For this reason, in a state of pain he expresses his internal state: Κατέχρωσα τὴν εἰκόνα σου καὶ παρέφθειρα τὴν ἐντολήν σου· ὅλον ἀπημαυρώθη τὸ κάλλος καὶ τοῖς πάθεσιν ἐσβέσθη, Σωτήρ, ἡ λαμπάς.

I have discolored Thine image and broken Thy commandment. All my beauty is destroyed and my lamp is quenched by the passions, O Saviour [Ode VII.18].

Burying the image of God and destroying all personal beauty by submitting oneself to passion causes the spiritual destruction of the human being. St Andrew of Crete

168 Cf. 2 Kings 21:1–16. 169 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 178.

179

180

The Identity and Drama of Man

refers to the dynamic influence of passions as πάθεσιν. It is like a gust of evil that extinguishes the spiritual lamp, i. e. extinguishes God’s light, which feeds the mind. Freely-chosen passions (τῶν αὐθαιρέτων μου παθῶν) have a negative impact on both the soul and the body (τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ τὸ σῶμα), as they come from the enemy (τοῦ ἐχθροῦ) who wounds them like arrows, injuring the entire human being [Ode II.37/8]. A deep sense of sinfulness is recognisable in the self-accusation: Ὢ πῶς ἐζήλωσα Λάμεχ τὸν πρῴην φονευτήν, τὴν ψυχὴν ὥσπερ ἄνδρα, τὸν νοῦν ὡς νεανίσκον, ὡς ἀδελφὸν δέ μου τὸ σῶμα ἀποκτείνας, ὡς Κάϊν ὁ φονεύς, ταῖς φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς!

Ah, how I have emulated Lamech, the murderer of old, slaying my soul as if it were a man, and my mind as if it were a young man. With sensual longings I have killed my body, as Cain the murderer killed his brother [Ode II.35/6].

The above troparion recalls the names of two characters from Genesis – Lamech and Cain. On the basis of Lamech’s declaration that he is ready to kill the person who attacks him, regardless of whether they are an adult or a child (cf. Gen 4:23), the author of the Great Canon treats him like a murderer. The fact is that Lamech was a descendant of Cain (cf. Gen 4:17–18). His confession of readiness to kill is usually interpreted as a proof of the growing moral savagery among the descendants of Cain (cf. Gen 4:24). Cain did not hesitate to take his brother’s life (cf. Gen 4:6–8). The choice of these two characters was not accidental. What is closer to a person than his soul, intellect and body? After all, these three are indeed one. Attacking them, and especially wounding or murdering them, is nothing more than trying to annihilate oneself. The Archbishop of Crete points out that the body (τὸ σῶμα) can be killed by uncontrolled longings or unrestrained desires (ταῖς φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς), or in other words, by subjecting its will to demonic passions. Although this troparion does not specify the way in which the soul and the intellect die, the use of the first person singular in relation to the perpetrator shows that, as in the case of the body, the soul and the intellect also die because of submission to evil thoughts, which, allowed by the free, created human will, turn into deadly passions. The author of the Great Canon warns his soul to be watchful, lest the same thing that happened to Ishmael should happen to it because of its lust (τι πάθῃς λαγνεύουσα). By reminding the soul that Ishmael was driven out, St Andrew instructs his soul: “O my soul, be watchful” (νῆφε ψυχή μου) [Ode III.19/10]. This advice is reinforced with a reference to the image of Lot fleeing from Sodom and Gomorrah (cf. Gen 19:17–25). This time, St Andrew of Crete calls upon his soul to flee from sin (τῆς ἁμαρτίας· φεῦγε), and also to flee from the flames of every brutish desire (φεῦγε φλόγα παραλόγου ὀρέξεως) [Ode III.24/15]. The soul is given the righteous Joseph as a model to follow (cf. Gen 39:7–20), and especially his pure

Man and Spiritual Threats

mind (σώφρονα νοῦν). Following this righteous man, the soul is supposed to avoid wantonness and sinful indulging in disordered desires [Ode V.5]. The answer as to why St Andrew of Crete chose Joseph to be a model of responsible and dignified behaviour is hidden in Chapter 39 of Genesis. We can learn here that after his abduction to Egypt by the Ishmaelites he was bought by Potiphar, the captain of the Pharaoh’s guards (cf. Gen 39:1). Even in captivity, because of his righteousness, God gave him many graces and whatever he did, it brought good results. Potiphar made Joseph the overseer of his house. In this way God’s blessing went not only to Joseph but also to Potiphar’s entire house (cf. Gen 39:2–5). Joseph became an object of interest to Potiphar’s wife who wanted to make him her lover (cf. Gen 39:7). When she said to him: “Lie with me” (Gen 39:7), he replied to her: “Look, with me here, my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my hand. He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except yourself, because you are his wife. How then could I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” (Gen 39:8–9). Potiphar’s wife did not stop trying to persuade Joseph to sin, but he did not listen to her and focused on his duties. The above story about Joseph being tempted by the wife of the captain of the Pharaoh’s guards is a good example of the strategy of demons and an indication of how to defend against them. Joseph’s attitude towards Potiphar’s wife can be interpreted within the framework of the hesychastic strategy of fighting not only with the spirit of impurity (πορνεία), but also with all other evil spirits as they all try in various ways to make a person first submit to their ideas suggested in images and then commit to the evil deed they strongly urge them to do. Calling Joseph righteous (Ἰωσὴφ τὸν δίκαιον), along with urging his soul not to succumb to the sensual passions suggested by demons, unambiguously leads us to interpret the analysed troparion in light of the hesychastic method of dealing with passionate thoughts. Potiphar’s wife can be treated as a personification of the demon of impurity, and the righteous Joseph – as a soul or mind that pushes away temptation by focusing on its duties. The hesychastic Fathers very often pointed out that the basis for victory in the fight against evil spirits is to reject as quickly as possible everything that they propose in any form, especially in imaginative thoughts. Joseph’s unequivocal and decisive response to the temptation made by Potiphar’s wife, as well as his consistency in not giving in to her successive attacks, illustrate a strategy for fighting demons. It is also worth noting that in further description of the struggle with Potiphar’s wife, the righteous Joseph suffers defeat. Evil seems to win because it leads to Joseph being unjustly accused and imprisoned on charges of rape (cf. Gen 39:11–20). As a result of a false and defamatory accusation, which is typical of evil spirits, Joseph loses all his privileges. Nevertheless, even in this situation, God has not left him alone. God continued to show Joseph mercy and made everything for his benefit. The power of God’s grace made the chief jailer trust Joseph, and he gave him power over all prisoners (cf. Gen 39:21–23). Thus

181

182

The Identity and Drama of Man

Joseph, regardless of his situation, did not succumb to demonic pressure. He could not be enslaved internally, either by intimidation or by defamatory slander. He is a truly righteous man, remaining faithful to the law of God. St Andrew of Crete’s call upon his soul to follow the righteous Joseph is not only an encouragement to live an honest life in accordance with God’s commandments, but also a demonstration of a strategy for combating demons who suggest passionate desires.170 The hymnographer from Crete compares the sinful soul to King Ahab, who turned away from God and worshiped idols, especially Baal. The First Book of the Kings summarizes his conduct in very unfavourable words: “Ahab son of Omri did evil in the sight of the Lord more than all who were before him” (1 Kings 16:30). In the opinion of the author of the Great Canon, his soul has treated Ahab as an example to follow in his defilements and shameful passions (Τὸν Ἀχαααβ παρεζήλωσας τοῖς μιάσμασι) [cf. Ode VII.13]. The Greek word παρεζήλωσας literally means “you were sitting next to”, which is supposed to indicate the concerned soul’s accuracy in following Ahab’s evil deeds. As a result of such an uncritical imitation of Ahab’s idolatrous deeds, the soul becomes a dwelling-place of fleshly defilements (γέγονας σαρκικῶν μολυσμάτων). In the last verse of the examined troparion, the soul is called upon to confess its sins to God with a groan from the depths of its heart. As can be easily noticed, there is a direct link between the passions, which fill the soul like a vessel, and sin. Succumbing to passions results in committing sins. Passions, in turn, emerge in the soul due to a lack of control over one’s senses. This troparion clearly presents the three consecutive spiritual stages of the enslavement of man. A demonic attack first targets the realm of the senses and imagination, then it takes the form of passions to finally lead one to committing sin. Pointing out this truth is another proof of the link between the message of the Great Canon and hesychastic teachings. Among the words relating to spiritual threats, the term ἡδυπαθείαις is also important – with it being the predilection for passions which bring pleasure. The notion of ἡδυπαθείαις is a combination of two words, namely ἡδοναῖς and πάθη. Through the use of the concept of ἡδυπαθείαις, St Andrew of Crete wanted to emphasise the way of life for man, the main aim of which is to concentrate on himself and his needs, without taking into account the fact that its desire to satisfy ever-increasing longings, which usually relate to the basic needs of food, sex and the possession of goods, may pose a great threat to one’s spiritual life and relationship with God. This proclivity for or pleasure from making passions come true (τῶν παθῶν ἡδοναῖς) makes the soul plunge into darkness (ἡμαύρωσα) [Ode II.6]. The Bishop of Gortyna did not even hesitate to say that he was stained with pleasure (ταῖς ἡδοναῖς κατασπιλούμενος) [Ode IV.12]. Carried away by sensual passions (ταῖς

170 Cf. Mathewes-Green, First Fruits, 23.

Man and Spiritual Threats

ἡδοναῖς ἐξελκόμενος τῶν παθῶν αὐτοῦ), he was defiled by them (κατερρυποῦτο)

like Solomon, who instead of wisdom loved harlots (πορνῶν). The Archbishop of Crete chastens his soul because it had a predilection for passions (ἡδυπαθείαις) on which it focused its intellect (κατὰ νοῦν) [Ode VII.11].171 3.16 Gluttony (ἀδηφαγία) In Greek mythology, Adephagia (Ἀδηφαγία) was the goddess and personification of gluttony. She is mentioned in only one source, from which it is known that a temple in Sicily was erected in her honour. She and the goddess Demeter were worshipped there.172 In the Great Canon, gluttony is mentioned only once. It is worth noting that St Andrew of Crete did not use the term γαστριμαργία which was commonly used in Philokalic works. Instead, he uses the word with the stem φάγος, which appears twice in the Gospels in the sense of “glutton” (cf. Matt 11:19; Luke 7:34). With reference to the Chosen People eating manna in the desert, the author of the Great Canon reproaches his soul that instead of choosing the manna (μάννα) miraculously sent by God,173 they made a foolish (ἀλόγως) choice, preferring the pleasure-loving gluttony of the passions (τὴν φιλήδονον τῶν παθῶν ἀδηφαγίαν) [Ode VI.6]. Although the opposition: the gift of the Divine manna – the passion of gluttony seems to naturally refer to food, the phrase that ends the troparion seems to indicate a wider semantic scope and thus can be translated as “seeking to satisfy the voraciousness of the passions.” In this sense, this phrase also emphasises the insatiability of all passions, since each passion tries to achieve a state of greatest possible satisfaction through consuming itself. 3.17 Adultery (μοιχεία) The term “adultery” (µοιχεία) appears twice in the Great Canon. St Andrew of Crete used this notion in his work, and not the notion of “prostitution” (πορνεία) commonly used in Philokalic literature. While πορνεία, in various lexical forms, appears 25 times in the New Testament, μοιχεία is a rare word that is used only three times by the Evangelists. Twice, μοιχεία appears in lists of evil intentions coming out of the heart of man (cf. Mark 7:22; Matt 15:19), and once in a passage from the Gospel of St John concerning a woman caught in adultery (cf. John 8:3).

171 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 338–42. 172 Cf. D. Whitehead, “Observations on ‘Hadephagia’”, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 145/2 (2002) 175–86. 173 Exod 16:11–18. Cf. Ph.G. Ryken, Exodus. Saved for God’s Glory (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 423–33.

183

184

The Identity and Drama of Man

In two consecutive troparia, the Archbishop of Crete presents the drama of King David, who, under the influence of sexual passion, exploited the wife of one of his subjects and then contributed to his death (cf. 2 Sam 11:2–24). The author of the Great Canon repeats twice the phrase: “he was pierced with the arrow of adultery” (βέλει [...] τοξευθεὶς τῆς μοιχείας) [Odes VII.4 and 5]. In this way the author wants to emphasize that adultery is not merely a mere sensual desire, but a threat that is external and autonomous in relation to man. “The arrow of adultery” (βέλει τῆς μοιχείας) is fired by someone who wants to at least hurt, if not kill his victim. St Andrew of Crete further highlights the drama of adultery by linking it to murder (τοῦ φόνου) [cf. Ode VII.4–5]. The teaching about the connection of demonic attacks and the interactions of individual passions is an important message of the hesychastic diagnosis in Philokalic works. 3.18 Love of Money (φιλαργυρία) The notion “love of money” (φιλαργυρία) is used in the New Testament only once. In his First Epistle to Timothy, St Paul, writing about the dangers of getting rich, instructs his beloved child that it causes people to fall “[...] into temptation (πειρασμὸν) and [they] are trapped (παγίδα) by many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin (ὄλεθρον) and destruction (ἀπώλειαν). For the love of money (φιλαργυρία) is a root of all kinds of evil (πάντων τῶν κακῶν).”174 The love of money is one of the eight main passions in the monastic tradition of the Christian East.175 In the Great Canon, love of money is mentioned only once in Ode VIII. St Andrew of Crete recalls the deed of Gehazi, who was a servant of the prophet Elisha. The Old Testament story about the healing from leprosy of the army commander of the King of Aram – Naaman (cf. 2 Kings 5:1–14) mentions that Gehazi, against the will of the prophet Elisha, ran after the healed commander and said to him: “Please give them a talent of silver and two changes of clothing” (2 Kings 5:22). Before that, when the Prophet Elisha heard from Naaman: “Now I know that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel; please accept a present from your servant” (2 Kings 5:15), he said to him: “As the Lord lives, whom I serve, I will accept nothing!” (2 Kings 5:16). Despite Namaan’s insistence, the prophet strongly refused to accept the payment. When Gehazi, after taking his undue possessions, appeared before Elisha, he did not admit where he had returned from. The prophet then said to him: “Did I not go with you in spirit when someone left his chariot to meet you? Is this a time to accept money and to accept clothing, olive orchards and

174 1 Tim 6:9–10. 175 Cf. R. Newhauser, The Early History of Greed. The Sin of Avarice in Early Medieval Thought and Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 47–61.

Man and Spiritual Threats

vineyards, sheep and oxen, and male and female slaves? Therefore the leprosy of Naaman shall cling to you, and to your descendants forever” (2 Kings 5:26–27). This biblical pericope ends with a dramatic statement: “So he left his presence leprous, as white as snow” (2 Kings 5:27). In the concerned troparion, the Bishop of Gortyna reproaches his soul that it imitated Gehazi’s way of perceiving reality, his polluted thoughts (τὴν γνώμην) and has always (πάντοτε) defiled itself (τὴν ρυπαρήν) with the love of money (οὗ τὴν φιλαργυρίαν) [Ode VIII.6.]. The Greek term γνώμη has a wide range of meanings. Depending on the context, it can be translated not only as a way of perceiving reality or a way of knowing, but also as intelligence, judgement, understanding, will, opinion, decision and reason. The choice of this biblical pericope made by St Andrew of Crete to make the listener of the Great Canon aware of the dangers of succumbing to greed in the form of love of money indicates that he considered such a love to be a great spiritual threat, causing not only a disease of the spirit but also of the body. Gehazi, who could not resist this temptation, experienced not only rejection from the prophet Elisha, but also an incurable disease of the body. Therefore, the ending call to the soul to flee from the “fires of hell” (τῆς γεέννης τὸ πῦρ) and to renounce its wickedness (τῶν κακῶν) is fully justified [Ode VIII.6.]. 3.19 Murder (φόνος) Murder (φόνος) is the greatest spiritual threat that a person can face. This word, which appeared nine times in the New Testament, is used three times in the Great Canon. For the first time it appears in the adjectival form in connection with thought. Confessing his sins to the Saviour, the Archbishop of Crete admits that his soul and body are wounded by murderous thoughts (μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ) [Ode I.11]. Murder (φόνος) and adultery (μοιχεία), are the main themes in two troparia [cf. Ode VII.4 and 5] that relate to the sin of King David. On referring to the demonic attack on the “forefather of God” (πατρόθεος), as a result of which he not only made the wife of his subject commit adultery, but also contributed to the death of her husband, St Andrew of Crete reproaches his soul for having sinned even more by succumbing to the “impulses of its will” (ταῖς κατὰ γνώμην ὁρμαῖς) [Ode VII.4]. The list of the evil that comes from the heart of man (ἐκ τῆς καρδίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων) presented by St Mark mentions both adultery and murder (cf. Mark 7:21). In the Byzantine version of this Gospel, their order is slightly different from the commonly accepted Greek text, i. e. adultery (μοιχεῖαι), prostitution (πορνεῖαι) and murder (φόνοι).176 It is likely that this direct consequence of the sins resulting

176 Mark 7:21.

185

186

The Identity and Drama of Man

from not being able to control human sexual sphere and the sin of murder became an impulse for illustrating their causal relationship in relation to the drama of King David.

4.

Man on the Path to Salvation

The Great Canon is not limited to its diagnosis of the spiritual state of the human person. Although this diagnosis, the effect of which can be expressed by the statement of St Paul: “we had received the sentence of death so that we would rely not on ourselves” (2 Cor 1:9), is necessary in order to realize what the consequences of sin and deviation from God are, it is only a prelude to opening up to the presence of the One who has “no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from their ways and live” (Ezek 33:11). The saving and salvific action of God is a kind of therapy that can bring the sinner from spiritual death back to life.177 According to the teaching of St John the Apostle, the basis of man’s spiritual resurrection can only be compliance with the Word of God (cf. John 5:24). The following sections of this chapter examine concepts relevant to the spiritual transformation of man. As has already been noted in the previous chapter, the Bishop of Gortyna recommends the use of spiritual medications that form an integral part of the hesychastic tradition. Beginning with the role of God’s Word in the life of the Christian, as evidenced in the whole Great Canon, this section describes spiritual the remedies through which man can be liberated by God’s grace from the feeling of helplessness in the face of the personal evils that haunt him, and guided from the state of sin and spiritual death be brought towards life in the loving and merciful God. On this path of salvation, the following are essential: a change of the intellect, compunction, tears, lamentation, thinking about the end of life and death, and meditation on Last Judgment. The human soul is also required to remain vigilant and sober, as well as to grow in humility through fasting, action, virtue, and living in chastity, prudence/self-control and contemplation. 4.1

Abiding in the Word of God

The whole Great Canon is a testimony to the great intimacy of its author with the Word of God. St Andrew of Crete treats Scripture as the Word of God addressed to man. In dialogue with his soul, the author refers to examples taken from both the Old and the New Testaments in order to bring his soul to a state of metanoia

177 Cf. Игнатия Муних (Петровская), Церковные песнотворцы (Москва: Библиотека журнала «Альфа и Омега», 2005), 63–6.

Man on the Path to Salvation

and deep repentance. He taught that through the Church, the Saviour – through His “life-giving side” (τὴν Πλευράν σου τὴν ζωηφόρον) – offers “a twofold stream of awakening” (ὁ διπλοῦς ἐξέβλυσε κρουνὸς), namely that of forgiveness (τῆς ἀφέσεως) and knowledge (γνώσεως) [Ode IV.22]. This Christocentricity of the Word of God is particularly emphasized in Ode IX, which contains a reference to the mission of Christ in the Word (Χριστὸς ὁ Λόγος) [cf. Ode VI.15], heralding the Good News (πτωχοῖς εὐηγγελίζετο) to the poor [Ode IX.15]. This last phrase is borrowed from the Gospel according to Matthew 11:5: “and the poor have good news (πτωχοὶ εὐηγγελίζετο) brought to them.” The author of the Great Canon reminds his soul that not everyone wanted to listen to the Gospel. The example of cities that rejected the Good News and were cursed by Christ, and thus were compared with Sodom, is supposed to make the soul fear following their example [cf. Ode IХ.19]. The basis of this troparion is the pericope of the Gospel according to St Luke that depicts the sending of seventy-two disciples by Jesus to “every town and place where he himself intended to go” (Luke 10:1) to heal the sick and say: “The Kingdom of God has come near to you” (Luke 10:9). In case they would not be received by the inhabitants of a town, the Saviour ordered the disciples to go out into the streets and say: “Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest against you. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near” (Luke 10:11). Jesus also announced: “On that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that town” (Luke 10:12). Further, the Gospel enumerates the towns that did not want to listen to the Good News: “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But at the judgment it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades” (Luke 10:13–15). In a retrospective reflection, the Bishop of Gortyna confesses: “I have not hearkened to Thy voice, I have not heeded Thy Scripture” (Οὐκ ἤκουσα τῆς φωνῆς σου, παρήκουσα τῆς γραφῆς σου) [Ode IV.27]. St Paul taught that “Faith comes from what is heard (ἄρα ἡ πίστις ἐξ ἀκοῆς), and what is heard (ἡ δὲ ἀκοὴ) comes through the word of Christ (διὰ ῥήματος Θεοῦ).”178 Failure to listen to the Voice of the Saviour breaks one’s relationship with the One who is the Word Incarnate. If a Christian does not listen to the Voice of Christ, he loses faith and does not have the strength to obey the commands of Scripture. It is for this very reason that St Andrew of Crete combines listening to the Gospel and obedience to the teachings of the Bible in one thought. If the Good News is not heard, “the Gospel is of no effect” (ἀργεῖ Εὐαγγέλιον), the whole of Scripture is ignored by man (Γραφὴ δὲ πᾶσα ἐν σοὶ παρημέληται), and the prophets and all

178 Rom 10:17.

187

188

The Identity and Drama of Man

the words of the righteous are useless (Προφῆται ἠτόνησαν καὶ πᾶς δικαίου λόγος) [Ode IХ.3]. The author of the Great Canon sets before his soul examples (ὑπογραμμόν) from the Old Testament (τῆς παλαιᾶς Διαθήκης) to incorporate them in its behavior: “Imitate the holy acts of the righteous and flee from the sins of the wicked” (μίμησαι δικαίων τὰς φιλοθέους πράξεις· ἔκφυγε δὲ πάλιν τῶν πονηρών ἁμαρτίας) [Ode VIII.12].179 The author’s soul is also given examples (ὑποδείγματα) from the New Testament (Τῆς Νέας) to bring (ἐνάγοντά) it to compunction. The soul is encouraged to follow the righteous and to turn away from sinners. Only then will it be able to implore (ἐξιλέωσαι) Christ through prayer (προσευχαῖς), fasting (νηστείαις), chastity (ἁγνείᾳ) and reverence (σεμνότητι) [given to Him] [Ode IX.4].180 The essential task of the soul is to achieve great intimacy with [Holy] Scripture (γραφὴ), so that the content thereof may all dwell in the mind (ἐνδιάθετον) [cf. Ode IX.2]. From the hesychastic point of view, the internalisation of the received Word of God forms the basis for a change of the intellect (μετανοίᾳ). When a Christian listens to the “Begetter of the Word of God” (Λόγου Θεοῦ Γεννῆτορ) [Ode VIII.21. Triadikon], this Word, which is the Good News of the Kingdom of God, makes him change his way of life. The Gospel is “the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith” (Rom 1:16). The Saviour acts using His power not only among people, but also in every human being. In Eastern Christianity, Scripture is an icon of God himself. The words kept in the mind of a Christian reveal the truth about God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons. The words of Jesus – the Eternal Word – reach believers in a special way: “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God” (Mark 4:11). Love of Jesus presupposes the observance of His teaching, i. e. abiding in the Good News (cf. John 14:23), i. e. living with the Word that is Jesus Christ. Living by Scripture in the mind (ἐνδιάθετον) makes it possible to profess together with St Paul: “It is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” (Ga 2:20). In biblical language, listening to the Word of God means being obedient to it, i. e. both keeping it in one’s mind (heart) and following what was prescribed in the message of Jesus. The way in which St Andrew of Crete uses the Word of God in the Great Canon clearly shows that it was for him the source of life from which he constantly drew wisdom of God. The poetic stanzas, which he created by referring to people and examples taken from the whole of the Bible, are a proof that for him Scripture was his “light and salvation” (cf. Ps 27:1). Like many other saints, the hymnographer from Crete read aloud and listened to the Word of God,

179 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 345–9. 180 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 357–8.

Man on the Path to Salvation

especially the Gospels, so intensely that he knew it by heart. This kind of practice has been an element of spiritual formation in the monastic circles of Greek and Slavic Orthodoxy for centuries. 4.2

The Change of the Intellect (μετάνοια)

The concept of μετανοία play a special role in the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete.181 Before analysing all the contexts in which it appears in the hymnographic masterpiece of the Bishop of Gortyna, it will be very useful to refer to the New Testament. The starting point for a precise definition of the semantic scope of the term μετανοία is the proclamation made by Jesus: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent (μετανοεῖτε), and believe in the good news (πιστεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ)” (Mark 1:15). The Saviour heralds the fulfilment of the time of grace and the approaching Kingdom of God. He calls for the transformation of minds and faith in the Good News.182 During Apostolic times, the meaning of the term μετανοείτε evolved. Emphasis had shifted from the transformation of the intellect, which takes place as a result of the preaching of and faith in the Gospel, to repentance.183 Therefore, in later New Testament writings, this term acquired the meaning that has prevailed until today, namely to: “convert”, “repent”, “regret” or “show contrition.”184 Meanwhile, the direct context in which the term μετανοεῖτε appears in the Gospel according to St Mark indicates that Christ’s call should be treated, first and foremost, as a commitment to making an effort to change one’s intellect, which becomes possible through faith in the Gospel. Listening to the Good News brings a faith that transforms the intellect. This is the original meaning of the term μετανοεῖτε. It is the original meaning, because the Gospel according to St Mark is the oldest – contemporary biblical scholars claim that it was created

181 Cf. Mathewes-Green, First Fruits, 13. 182 In Jesus’ teaching, μετανοεῖτε is an imperative that is included in the proclamation of the Kingdom of God. The change of the intellect is a fundamental condition that is incorporated into the eschatological kingdom, and is present in the person of Jesus. The teaching and the miracles He performed are a call to repentance as the final and unconditional decision, i. e. turning to God in full obedience. Cf. J. Behm, “Metanoeo and Metanoia in the NT”, in G. Kittel/G.Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (trans. G.W. Bromiley; Great Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company/The Paternoster Press, 1985) 642–3. 183 Cf. L. Petcu, Early Church Fathers on Repentance and Confessions of Sins (Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2017), 69–79. 184 Cf. J. Alonso, “La metánoia com lógica de la fe”, Scripta Theologica 42 (2010) 585–610.

189

190

The Identity and Drama of Man

between the fire of Rome in 64 AD and the demolition of Jerusalem in 70 AD;185 it is usually dated to the year 65.186 In the Gospel of St Mark, the notion of μετανοεῖτε appears in a different context than in the other synoptic Gospels or other New Testament writings, which emphasize not so much a change of the intellect (as the etymology indicates) but the reality of repentance for sins, conversion and penance. In the latter sense, the word was used in the Gospel of St Matthew: “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes (πάλαι ἂν ἐν σάκκκῳ καὶ σποδῷ καθήμεναι μετενόησαν)” (Matt 11:21). This vision of sackcloth and ashes as a sign of repentance for sins certainly determines the penitential interpretation of the term μετανοία. This is especially the case given the fact it is strengthened by an image of the inhabitants of Nineveh in the next chapter of that same Gospel: “The people of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the proclamation of Jonah (ὅτι μετενόησαν εἰς τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰωνᾶ), and see, something greater than Jonah is here!” (Matt 12:41; cf. Luke 11:32).187 In the Gospel according to St Luke, the concept of μετανοεῖτε also appears in the framework of the catastrophic information about the Galileans whose blood Pilate mixed with that of their victims (cf. Luke 13:1). In response to this news, Jesus asked his disciples: “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were worse sinners than all other Galileans?” (Luke 13:2).188 This is followed by: “No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish as they did (οὐχί, λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀλλ’ ἐὰν μὴ μετανοῆτε, πάντες ὡσαύτως ἀπολεῖσθε)” (Luke 13:3), which serves as a warning about death (annihilation, loss, destruction), which one can avoid only by being in a state of μετανοία. The repetition of this warning in Verse 5, after Jesus had previously invoked the image of the eighteen inhabitants of Siloam who died under the ruins of a collapsed tower (cf. Luke 13:4), certainly gives a penitential overtone to concepts such as μετανοία or μετανοεῖτε. This warning, in the penitential sense, also appears in Acts 3:19 – “Repent therefore, and turn to God so that your sins may be wiped out (μετανοήσατε οὖν καὶ ἐπιστρέψατε εἰς τὸ ἐξαλειφθῆναι ὑμῶν τὰς ἁμαρτίας)”. St Peter recommends: “Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of

185 R.Th. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Great Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2002), 39. 186 Cf. A. Winn, The Purpose of Mark’s Gospel: an Early Christian Response to Roman Imperial Propaganda (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 59. 187 Cf. J.W. Woodhouse, “Jesus and Jonah (Matt 12.39–40; Matt 16.4; Lk 11.20)”, Reformed Theological Review 43 (1984) 33–41; J. Swetnam, “Some Signs of Jonah”, Biblica 68 (1987) 74–9. 188 Cf. M. Kim-Rauchholz, Umkehr bei Luke: Zu Wesen und Bedeutung der Metanoia in der Theologie des dritten Evangelisten (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2008).

Man on the Path to Salvation

your heart may be forgiven you (μετανόησον οὖν ἀπὸ τῆς κακίας σου ταύτης, καὶ δεήθητι τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰ ἄρα ἀφεθήσεταί σοι ἡ ἐπίνοια τῆς καρδίας σου·)” (Acts 8:22). Two words in this verse – μετανόησον and ἐπίνοια – are directly linked to the concept of “intellect” (νοῦς), but the emphasis on renouncing the evil is a strong indication of the tradition of interpreting μετανοία in the sense of “repentance” or “penance”. The term μετανοησάντων also appears in the epistles of St Paul. As in the Gospels according to St Matthew and St Luke, and also in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, the Apostle of the Nations associates this term with turning away from sins, however, he describes this term in relation to: impurity, sexual immorality and licentiousness (cf. 2 Cor 12:21). From the Epistle to the Romans (2:4) we learn that God’s kindness is meant to lead man to repentance (εἰς μετάνοιαν). Saint Paul recommends instructing opponents with gentleness, for “God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth (μετάνοιαν εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀλήθειας)” (2 Tim 2:25). Such repentance is therefore a gift from God, and means a radical break with the past (cf. 2 Cor 12:21). Although it causes regret (cf. 2 Cor 7:9–10), on a deeper level it is God’s salvific work. In Revelations, the term μετενόησαν appears twice. Its first mention refers to people who “did not repent of the works of their hands or give up worshiping demons and idols” (Rev 9:20), and the second time it refers to people who “cursed the name of God” and “did not repent and give him glory” (Rev 16:9). This focus on idols and blasphemies against God, which results from the sin of pride, is in opposition to a change of the intellect and a humble recognition of oneself as a creature of God. In the New Testament, the term μετανοία is used 14 times in its nominal form and 21 times as a verb (μετανοεῖτε). In the contexts in which it appears, they refer either to a change of the intellect (as in the Gospel according to St Mark), or conversion, repentance, contrition, or penance.189 In the works of the Apostolic Fathers, the terms μετανοία and μετανοεῖτε appear in both meanings.190 It can be noticed that their use combines Greek, Semitic

189 Cf. P. Miquel, Lexique du Désert. Etude de quelques mots-clés du vocabulaire monastique grec ancient (Abbaye de Bellefontaine: Editions monastiques, 1986), 184–5. 190 Cf. Clement of Rome, First Letter of Clement to the Corinthians 8.3, in The Apostolic Fathers I. I Clement, II Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache (trans. B.D. Ehrman, Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press, 2003), 17–151 on p. 49; Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 12.2–3; 13.1; 25.4; 26.1; 28.2; 30.1; 32.6; 33.1–3; 35.8; 40.4; 47.4; 51.2; 63.3; 83.2; 95.3; 100.6; 108.1; 118.1; 133.6; 141.1 (trans. T.B. Falls; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2003) 22, 40, 43, 45, 50, 51, 55, 62, 72, 77, 97, 129, 146, 152, 162, 176, 201, 210; Justin Martyr, “The First Apology” 15, 21, 28, 40, 45, 52, 61, in The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Volume 6: Writings of Saint Justin Martyr (trans. T.B. Falls; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2008) 48–49, 57, 64, 77, 83, 89, 100; “Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” 10.6, in The Apostolic Fathers I. I Clement, II Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache (trans. B.D. Ehrman, Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press, 2003), 433.

191

192

The Identity and Drama of Man

and Christian ideas. This leads to the development of penitential discipline.191 The Shepherd by Hermas is a primary example of this kind of tendency in early Christianity. This work clearly indicates this tendency, which had already existed in the second century, to reduce the theological content of the concepts under analysis to the reality of penance and conversion,192 while neglecting or marginalising their primary meaning which referred to the transformation of the intellect through faith in the Gospel.193 The concept of μετανοία is one of the main themes of the Great Canon,194 and forms an important structural theme of this particular liturgical poem.195 It appears 6 times as a noun and 13 times as a verb. As in the New Testament, the metanoical problem concerns both the transformation of the intellect (in the literal understanding of this term) and conversion and repentance.196 Depending on the context, the concepts μετανοία and μετανοεῖτε, in various grammatical forms, can be assigned to the former or the latter semantic scope, or can be understood simultaneously as a change of the intellect and conversion or repentance. Analysis of the Great Canon shows that the terms μετανοία and μετανοοῦντα, in various lexical forms, are present in Odes: I, II, IV, V, VII, VIII and IX. They do not appear in odes III and VI. A certain “metanoical logic” can be identified in the whole work, within which either a penitential reality or the transformation of the intellect is emphasized in particular contexts. Of course, there are also phrases indicating an overlap of the two meanings, i. e. the change of the intellect and repentance.

191 Cf. M. Starowieyski, “La pénitence dans les apophtegmes des Pères du désert”, Vox Patrum 6–7 (1984) 317–26. 192 “The Shepherd of Hermas”, in The Apostolic Fathers II (trans. B.D. Ehrman; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003) 161–473. 193 Cf. Ph. Henne, “La penitence et la redaction du Pasteur d’Hermas”, Revue Biblique 98 (1991) 358–97. 194 Mathewes-Green, First Fruits, 35: “Repentance is the theme in the Great Canon, but that is the theme of virtually all Christian writing in the early centuries. That is, no matter where you look, whether in liturgical, evangelical, biographical, or devotional writing, you find Christians exploring the dynamic balance between two interdependent truths: We are helplessly ensnared in sin, and God, in boundless compassion, rushes to recue us. The more we trust His love, the more we are able to repent; the more we repent, the more powerfully we experience His love. Repentance is joy. This isn’t a common idea in contemporary Christianity, but as you encounter it over and over again in writings like the Great Canon, it begins to fall into place.” 195 Cf. Χρίστου, Ο Μέγας Κανόν, 40. 196 Ch. Yannaras, The Freedom of Morality (trans. E. Briere; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1984), 40: “[...] sin becomes a starting-point for repentance, μετανοία. This word in Greek means ‘change of the intellect’, in other words a change in man’s whole attitude – in his existential stance, not simply in his behavior. Repentance is the recognition that man’s self-sufficiency is inadequate; it is a search for the life which is realized in a personal relationship with God, a thirst for personal communion with Him.”

Man on the Path to Salvation

An example of of this is the phrase: “It is time for repentance” (Μετάνοιας ὁ καιρός) [Ode I.17]. The term καιρός form the New Testament means the time

of God’s action, i. e. the time of God’s grace. In its ontological dimension, it is completely different from the actual or chronological time to which man is subject to as a creature endowed with a mortal body.197 The phrase “Μετάνοιας ὁ καιρός” can be thus translated both as a time given by God to change the intellect and as a time for conversion, penance and repentance for sins. When translated into English, the double meaning of the phrase, which enables a holistic evangelical understanding of the phrase, is lost. Similarly, the double meaning of μετανοοῦντα is hidden in a request to God the Judge and the Mother of God. In the first case, the soul, aware that God created it and is its Judge, addresses a request to Him: “But accept me in repentance (μετανοοῦντα δέξαι με)”, which could be translated as: “But accept me in the state of conversion, penance and repentance for my sins” [Ode I.10]. The soul addresses the same request to the Pure Lady (Δέσποινα ἁγνή) [cf. Ode I.25]. The use of the same phrase twice indicates that the transformation or repentance taking place in the soul is not a reality that concerns only the soul. At a particular time of grace, man entrusts himself with all confidence to God and to his Most Holy Mother, so that his transformation may be implemented. At the beginning of Ode I, the author calls upon his soul to change its intellect, pouring out tears and repenting for sins (μετανοίᾳ δάκρυα) [cf. Ode I.2]. The soul is to go to the Creator of all things in order to confess its sins to Him and to abstain from its past brutishness. Tears of repentance are therefore to be shed for God when the soul realises its sinfulness. The author of the Great Canon connects the fact of the committing of sins by man with his being in a state of brutishness (ἀλογίας) [cf. Ode I.2], which stands in opposition to the state of attention (προσοχή) and vigilance (νήψις) recommended in hesychasm. Thisstate of distraction and lack of focus on God the Creator prevents one’s spiritual transformation. The soul is thus admonished to break free from lethargy. The gift of tears of repentance/ compunction is one of the conditions for the soul’s being for God and being with God. The transformation of the intellect is inseparable from worshiping God: Πρόσεχε, Οὐρανέ, καὶ λαλήσω· γῆ, ἐνωτίζου φωνῆς μετανοούσης Θεῷ καὶ ἀνυμνούσης αὐτόν.

Attend, O heaven, and I shall speak; give ear, O earth, to the voice of one who repents before God and sings His praise [Ode II.1].

197 Cf. O. Cullmann, Christ and Time. The Primitive Christian Conception of Time (trans. F.V. Filson; London: Westminster Press, 3 1962), 37–118.

193

194

The Identity and Drama of Man

A Christian who is in a state of transforming his intellect, and at the same time is penitent or repentant, glorifies God with words taken from the Book of Deuteronomy: “Give ear, O heavens, and I will speak; let the earth hear the words of my mouth” (Deut 32:1). He wants his praise to be heard both in the heavens and on earth [cf. Ode II.1]. Worship of God is born in the mind of a man who is repentant and apologizes before his Lord, for only such a mind experiences the dynamics of transformation.198 Analysis of further troparia of Ode II, in which the term μετανοοῦντά appears, shows that it has a substantial semantic scope. This happens in relation to the eschatological reality, when a believer begs the Saviour: Τὴν θύραν σου μὴ ἀποκλείσῃς μοι τότε, Κύριε, Κύριε· άλλ’ ἄνοιξόν μοι αὐτὴν μετανοοῦντί σοι.

Lord, Lord, at the Last Day shut not Thy door against me; but open it to me, for I repent before Thee [Ode II.26].

This supplicatory cry refers to the parable of the wise and foolish bridesmaids (cf. Matt 25:1–13). The foolish maids, who were not prepared for the Lord’s coming, because they did not buy oil for their lamps, were late and though they cried out: “Lord, Lord, open to us!” (Matt 25:11), they were not allowed to meet the groom. In response, they heard: “Truly, I tell you, I do not know you” (Matt 25:12). This evangelical parable ends with a warning given by Jesus: “Keep awake (γρηγορεῖτε) therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour” (Matt 25:13). Staying alert and holding guard or refraining from dreaming, which the Saviour recommends in the perspective of the end times – since this is how the parable is interpreted – protect against falling into a state of brutishness (ἀλογίας). Focusing on staying vigilant naturally makes a person feel more responsible for the salvation not only of himself, but of others as well. A Christian, with their mind undergoing transformation, with all fervour wishes to be embraced by God, who is goodness (ἀγαθὸς; κλγζ) and whom they can call the: “Lover of mankind” (Φιλάνθρωπε) [cf. Ode II.27]. This kind of request is soteriological in nature. It refers to a phrase from the First Epistle to Timothy, more precisely to the will of God, who “desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4). St Andrew of Crete incorporated only the first part of the quoted verse into the Great Canon [cf. Ode II.26] and thus refers to the salvific will of God in relation to all people. In the triadikon ending Ode II, the request of a penitent sinner is further strengthened

198 Cf. R.R. Phénix Jr./C.B. Horn, “Prayer and Penance in Early and Middle Byzantine Christianity: Some Trajectories from Greek- and Syriac-Speaking Realms”, in M.J. Boda/D.K. Falk/R.A. Werline (ed.), Seeking the Favor of God, Vol. 3: The Impact of Penitential Prayer Beyond Second Temple Judaism (Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008) 225–54.

Man on the Path to Salvation

in relation to the Trinity. The eschatological reality is indicated by the phrase: fire of condemnation/fire of judgment (πυρὸς τῆς καταδίκης). A man cries out to the eternal, uncreated and undivided Holy Trinity not to reject him, but to accept his as a repentant sinner, because he is Their creation [cf. Ode II.40/11. Triadikon]. The soul is encouraged to acknowledge its sinfulness and spiritual transformation through images of people and events described in Scripture. These are usually used as a basis for accusations against the soul. In an inner dialogue the hymnographer from Crete reproaches his soul that through its imitation of Esau, it gave up its birthright, original beauty and blessing. The soul is reminded of its brutishness in action (πράξει) and knowledge (γνώσει). It should therefore recognise its sinfulness and “repent” (μετανόησον) [cf. Ode IV.11]. The story of Esau, who, being tired and hungry, gave Jacob his first born birth right for a bowl of lentils (cf. Gen 25:29–34, 27:36), is given special meaning in the hesychastic tradition and from the perspective of Lenten recommendations. Comparing his soul to Esau, the Archbishop of Crete invites us to reflect on what is more important in life: food to sustain biological life or the blessing of the Heavenly Father, the maintenance of which requires a state of vigilance. Although Esau was a skilful hunter, he concentrated too much on satisfying his earthly needs, he focused too little on his first-born identity and the power of his paternal blessing. Similarly, a person’s soul can be too absorbed by active and thoughtless life, which can lead to a fall at the level of both understanding and action. The order addressed to the soul: “repent now” (νῦν μετανόησον) – because of its fall in the sphere of understanding – can be interpreted as a call for the change of the intellect that is necessary for maintaining vigilance. Through the change of the intellect/repentance it is possible to transform the whole person.199 A defiled body (τὸ σῶμα κατερρυπώθην) (cf. Deut 24:4) and stained spirit (τὸ πνεῦμα κατεσπιλώθην) need healing. For this reason, a man all covered with wounds (ὅλος ἡλκώθην) turns to Christ the Physician, begging Him to wash (ἀπόλουσον) his body and purify (κάθαρόν) his soul through repentance so that it becomes whiter than snow (δεῖξον χιόνος) [cf. Ode IV.17]. This phrase refers to Psalm 51:7, which is very popular in the liturgical and prayer tradition of the Christian East: “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow”. The drama of Ode IV develops in subsequent troparia, in which the term μετανοία appears. Reflection on the brief and fleeing nature of life and the state of man who works hard and is in a bad condition, leads us to open ourselves to God. Man asks his Lord to receive him in a state of repentance (ἐν μετανοίᾳ) and to call him back to full knowledge (έν έπιγνώσει), as this will prevent him from becoming the possession (κτῆμα) and food (βρῶμα) of the enemy

199 Cf. Staniloae, Orthodox Spirituality, 135–47.

195

196

The Identity and Drama of Man

[cf. Ode IV.23].200 This request is repeated three times in slightly modified forms in successive troparia. In Troparion 25 of Ode IV, the Bishop of Gortyna confesses: “I have sinned and violated the vessel of my flesh” (Ἐξήμαρτον ἐνυβρίσας τὸ σκεῦος τὸ τῆς σαρκός μου). Then, in Troparion 23 of the same ode, he asks the Saviour to accept him in repentance (ἐν μετανοίᾳ) and to take pity on him. In the next troparion, a request addressed to the Merciful One to accept him in repentance (ἐν μετανοίᾳ με παράλαβε) is preceded by an emphasis on the fact that the repentant has become his own idol and has utterly defiled his soul with the passions (τοῖς πάθεσι) [cf. Ode IV.26]. Then there comes an explanation as to why this happened – through not listening to the voice of God and not taking the Scripture from the Giver of the Law (Νομοθέτου) seriously [cf. Ode IV.27]. The Greek term Giver of the Law (Νομοθέτῆς) appears ten times in the Septuagint201 and once in the New Testament202 in various lexical forms. St Andrew of Crete evokes the vision of God as the Giver of the Law (cf. IV.27), who, through Moses, gives His people the tablets of the Law to instruct them (cf. Exod 24:12). But the people not only disregard God’s Law, but also became their own idol (αὐτείδωλον ἐγενόμην) [cf. Ode IV.26]. This fourfold supplication addressed to God to accept man in repentance is intended to serve the purpose of deepening one’s awareness of their own sinfulness and promoting a more conscious recourse to the Saviour to ask for salvation from an insidious enemy who wants to take possession of both the body and the soul of man. In Ode V, the term “change of the intellect”/”repentance” (μετανοία) occurs only once – in Troparion 9. The Archbishop of Crete reproachfully asks his soul how it would live through repentance in the wilderness empty of its passions if it does not strike and kill (πλήξασα) the “Egyptian mind” (Αἰγύπτιον νοῦν). The phrase “Egyptian mind” used in relation to Moses’ deed, i. e. his killing of an Egyptian who abused his compatriot (cf. Exod 2:11–15), should be interpreted in a hesychastic way. The hymnographer from Crete describes his soul as pathetic and miserable (τάλαινα ψυχή) because it mistreated this “Egyptian mind”, which is an image of an inner enslavement by passions. Although the phrase Αἰγύπτιον νοῦν can be translated not only as “the Egyptian mind” but also as “the mind of an Egyptian”, the former translation seems more accurate in the context of the whole concerned troparion. The category of the mind, so important in the anthropology of Eastern Christianity, is a fundamental entity for the evaluation of the spiritual state of a human person within the framework of hesychastic practices. If the mind is free from attachment to the goods of this world and is not subject to passions, it shines with God’s light. The “Egyptian mind” is the spiritual centre of the human person

200 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 286–8. 201 Cf. Exod 24:12, Deut 17:10; 2 Macc 3:15; 4 Macc 5:25; Ps 9:21; 24:8; 24:12; 26:11; 83:7; 118:33. 202 Cf. Jas 4:12: “There is one lawgiver and judge who is able to save and to destroy.”

Man on the Path to Salvation

who is obscured by captivating passions. In this short troparion, the Bishop of Gortyna uses concepts derived from Eastern Christian anthropology in relation to the hesychastic method, although one may have the impression that he changes the semantic scope of the terms “soul” and “intellect”. Owing to the dialogical form of the Great Canon, the soul, with which the author has a dialogue, gains the function of being the main decision-making centre of the human person. On such an approach, the intellect appears to be subordinated to the soul and reduced to the role of a performer. Meanwhile, according to the teaching of the Philokalic Fathers, it is the intellect that constitutes the most important centre of the human person, by means of which a man enters into relation with spiritual realities. Hence the conviction of the hesychastic masters that the state of the soul depends on the state of the intellect. The way in which the relationship between the soul and the intellect has been presented allows for a hypothetical statement that St Andrew of Crete was more in favour of a dichotomous concept of the human person than of a trichotomous concept. Treating the intellect as an integral part of the soul, he assumed that the soul is where the basis of freedom lies. Therefore, the soul determines the spiritual orientation of the mind. Such an anthropological concept is actually not far from the basic premises of hesychastic anthropology because in both aforementioned perspectives the division into body, soul and mind or into body and soul is treated functionally. During his earthly life, man – as an integrated whole – remains dynamically oriented towards God or towards demonic realities. The biblical image of Moses killing an Egyptian remains in opposition to the soul that does not strike the “Egyptian mind” in order to go into a secluded place where it would not be plagued by passions. The phrase: τὴν ἔρημον τῶν παθῶν is ambiguous, because it can be understood as a wilderness of passions or as a place isolated from passions. It would be illogical for the author of the Great Canon to ask his soul how it would live in the wilderness of passions through the transformation of the intellect/repentance, since the purpose of the spiritual state defined as μετανοία is to free oneself from passions. Therefore, it seems more reasonable to claim that the transformation of the intellect/repentance is supposed to help the soul to achieve a state of detachment from passions and to achieve an ever greater state of dispassion (απάθεια). The term μετανοία is also present in the last three odes of the Great Canon. Troparion 5 of Ode VII, similarly to other troparia, is a dialogue which combines the image of King David committing sins with reproaching the soul, which although it has done even greater evil than King David, has not repented before God (ψυχή, μὴ μεταγνοῦσα Θεῷ). As has already been mentioned many times, in individual troparia St Andrew of Crete conducts a dialogue with his soul, invoking as arguments references to persons and events taken from Scripture. The analysed troparion presents a very synthetic evaluation of the evil done by King David and a reference to what the king did for the state of his soul. The circumstances of the

197

198

The Identity and Drama of Man

double sin that David committed, namely adultery and murder, are described in the Second Book of Samuel (11:2–26). This story, one of the most famous tales of the Old Testament, which has already been mentioned in other contexts in this monograph, shows how King David’s desire for a woman who was the wife of another man led not only to his wife but also his life being taken away from him. From the hesychastic point of view, David’s double sin, namely forcing Bathsheba to commit adultery and killing her husband Uriah the Hittite, can be interpreted as a strategy of passion, in which one passion entails another. This gives us an insight into the strategy of action of evil spirits, who try to control man as much as possible. The Archbishop of Crete described the essence of David’s double sin as the joining of lawlessness/sin to lawlessness/sin (ἀνομήματι τὴν ἀνομίαν), i. e. a combination of adultery (μοιχεία) and murder (φόνος). After the prophet Nathan made him aware of his sin, King David confessed: “I have sinned against the Lord” (2 Sam 12:13)203 and showed a twofold repentance [cf. Ode VII.5]. St Andrew notes that his soul’s own actions, i. e. those committed by his soul itself, are even more painful, even worse and even more evil than the lawlessness and sins of King David. Therefore, he reproaches his soul for not repenting before God.204 In Troparion 16 of Ode VII, the person of the Judean King Manasseh is recalled, about whom it is written in the Second Book of Kings that “He did what was evil in the sight of the Lord” (2 Kings 21:2) by turning to pagan idols. He rebuilt destroyed high places, erected altars to Baal and erected a sacred pole. He spread pagan worship even in the Temple by building altars to idols there (cf. 2 Kings 21:3–5). He erected a statue of Asherah in the holy place, of which he himself was the creator (cf. 2 Kings 21:7). He misled the people of Israel to do greater evil than the pagan nations (2 Kings 21:9). Manasseh was also famous for practising soothsaying and augury, and for dealing with mediums and wizards (cf. 2 Kings 21:6). He was, therefore, the personification of idolatry, which in hesychastic terminology is described as pride. It is the most dangerous of all passions, the greatest sin that a person can commit. The author of the Great Canon accuses his soul of imitating Manasseh, with the only difference being that it chose to multiply passions (βδελύγματα πάθη) instead of idols. He therefore calls upon his soul, to fervently repent (μετάνοιαν) – like Manasseh – and acquire compunction (κτῆσαι κατάνυξιν). The Bishop of Gortyna, recalling the person of King Manasseh, takes into account not only the record of his sinful life, during which he did much evil and worshiped pagan idols, but also the record from the Second Book of Chronicles concerning his conversion (cf. 2 Chron 33:1–20). After the Assyrian king’s troops captured him and abducted him to Babylon, Manasseh humbled himself before the God of his ancestors and begged

203 Cf. G.H. Jones, The Nathan Narratives (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990), 93–117. 204 Cf. Krueger, The Great Kanon, 79–81.

Man on the Path to Salvation

him in distress (cf. 2 Chron 33:12). The Lord “heard his plea, and restored him again to Jerusalem and to his kingdom” (2 Chron 33:13). After recognizing that “the Lord indeed was God” (2 Chron 33:13), Manasseh completely changed his conduct. Not only did he “take away the foreign gods and the idols from the house of the Lord, and all the altars that he had built on the mountain of the house of the Lord and in Jerusalem” (2 Chron 33:15), but he also “restored the altar of the Lord and offered on it sacrifices of well-being and of thanksgiving; and he commanded Judah to serve the Lord the God of Israel” (2 Chron 33:16). This image of Manasseh’s betrayal of the true God and worship of idols is intended to help the soul understand its spiritual condition. The fervour of the idolater’s change of mind and repentance should give the soul the strength of hope to radically turn to the One who is the source of its life. In addition to the term μετάνοια, the examined troparion features two other terms that are very important in hesychastic spirituality: πάθη and κατάνυξις. The former refers to passion and the latter to compunction. The identification of passion is essential in order to diagnose a person’s spiritual state, while compunction is a spiritual attitude that is inextricably linked to the transformation of the intellect/ repentance. It is worth noting that in Philokalic texts, μετάνοια – in comparison with κατάνυξις – usually means a change of the intellect rather than repentance because the semantic scope of the term κατάνυξις contains a penitential attitude the aim of which is repentance. The main theme of Troparion 19 of Ode VII of the Great Canon is the person of David. The penitential Psalm 51 also plays a significant role, through which the fallen David addresses his supplication to God: “Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions” (Ps 51:1). This cry for mercy to the only Saviour is the culmination of the call to the soul to turn back (Ἐπίστρεψον) and repent (μετανόησον), and to uncover (ἀνακάλυψον) all that is hidden (κεκρυμμένα), for He is the God to whom everything is known [cf. Ode VII.19]. Yet the human soul is called upon to openly reveal to God all that it has done. Only by confessing all transgressions and sins is it possible to truly acknowledge one’s own guilt and enter the path of conversion and transformation of the intellect. Ode VIII presents a synthetic repetition of the metanoical threads that appeared in earlier odes. The troparia of this ode contain introspective calls to the soul and requests to God, who is simultaneously the righteous Judge and Saviour, for the change of the intellect of the soul. Aware of his spiritual state, the author turns to God: “I have sinned, O Saviour, have mercy on me!” (Ἡμαρτηκότα, Σωτήρ, ἐλέησον) [Ode VIII.1]. This call is specified in the next verse of the troparion. The Bishop of Gortyna asks for his mind to be awakened (διέγειρόν μου τὸν νοῦν) and turned back (πρὸς ἐπιστροφήν δέξαι). In the hesychastic tradition, the awakening of the mind is the beginning of spiritual transformation, as a result of which the intellect is illuminated with God’s Light, which is the basis for the deification of the

199

200

The Identity and Drama of Man

whole human person.205 The intellect that is asleep or obscured by the darkness of passions is unable to distinguish properly between spiritual realities206 and lacks the strength to concentrate on God, who is Light (cf. 1 John 1:5). The Archbishop of Crete perfectly understands that he himself is too weak to awaken his intellect and turn it to God’s Light. He knows that the primary cause of any change of the intellect and its turn to the good is the Person of the Saviour. He therefore calls to Him to be accepted in his repentance (μετανοοῦντα). The Word of God has the power to awaken the intellect and illuminate it with God’s Light. Being aware that sin has been committed volitionally, as the words of the troparion indicate: “I have sinned myself ” (ημαρτόν σοι μόνῳ), “I have done evil” (ἠνόμησα), the sinner cries out: “have mercy on me” (ἐλέησόν με) [Ode VIII.1]. The soul should hasten to repentance (πρόσδραμε τῇ μετανοίᾳ) by being reminded of what happened to King Uzziah [cf. Ode VIII.7]. According to the Second Book of Chronicles, when King Uzziah became a mighty king, he fell into such great pride that: “He was false to the Lord his God, and entered the temple of the Lord to make offering on the altar of incense” (2 Chron 26:16). Azariah and eighty other brave priests of the Lord demanded that the king should leave the holy place, explaining to him that he had betrayed God (cf. 2 Chron 26:18). The words of the Lord’s priests made King Uzziah angry. Then “a leprous disease broke out on his forehead, in the presence of the priests in the house of the Lord, by the altar of incense” (2 Chron 26:19). Thus the king was touched by God, and his further life was marked by loneliness and suffering: “King Uzziah was leprous to the day of his death, and being leprous lived in a separate house, for he was excluded from the house of the Lord” (2 Chron 26:21). The Bishop of Gortyna reproaches his soul that it followed Uzziah, and because it adopted his jealousy it shared his leprosy (λέπρα) in the form of a double retreat, caused by wicked thoughts and unlawful acts. The only remedy for this kind of “spiritual leprosy” that has affects the soul is to abandon everything and hasten to repentance [cf. Ode VIII.7]. St Andrew of Crete also reminds his soul of the men of Nineveh who repented before God in sackcloth and ashes [cf. Ode VIII.8]. Under the influence of the 205 Cf. V. Lossky, “Redemption and Deification”, Sobornost 12 (1947) 47–56; N. Russell, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004); I.V. Popov, “The Idea of Deification in the Early Church”, in V. Kharlamov (ed.), Theosis. Deification in Christian Theology (2 vol.; Eugene, OR: The Lutterworth Press – James Clarke & Co Ltd, 2011) 42–82; N. Bamford, The Deified Person. A Study of Deification in Relation to Person and Christian Becoming (Lanham, ML: University Press of America, 2012), 107–56; J.A. McGuckin, “The Strategic Adaptation of Deification in the Cappadocians”, in M.U. Christensen/J.A. Wittung (ed.), Partakers of the Divine Nature. The History and Development of Deification in the Christian Traditions (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 95–113. 206 Cf. A. Munzinger, Discerning the Spirits. Theological and Ethical Hermeneutics in Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 45–74.

Man on the Path to Salvation

prophet Jonah’s admonitions, “the people of Nineveh believed God; they proclaimed a fast, and everyone, great and small, put on sackcloth” (Jonah 3:5). And when the news of this reached the king of Nineveh, “he rose from his throne, removed his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes” (Jonah 3:6). Jonah’s proclamation: “Forty days more and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” (Jonah 3:4) made the sinful people of Nineveh (cf. Jonah 3:8) “turn from their evil ways” (Jonah 3:10). Seeing this, “God changed his mind about the calamity that he had said he would bring upon them; and he did not do it” (Jonah 3:10).207 The message of the Book of Jonah is simple and clear. It is enough to listen to the word of God once to entrench it in one’s memory. Hence the concerned accusation addressed to the soul, which should perfectly remember and follow the people of Nineveh who repented of their evil. Meanwhile, the author’s soul is proven to be more wicked than all (σκαιοτέρα πάντων) who have sinned before and after the Law [cf. Ode VIII.8]. An imploratory request is addressed to the righteous Judge (Δικαιοκρῖτα) and Saviour (Σωτήρ): “Have mercy on me and deliver me from the fire that threatens me, and from the punishment that I deserve to suffer” (ἐλέησον καὶ ρῦσαί με τοῦ πυρὸς καὶ τῆς ἀπειλῆς, ἧς μέλλω ἐν τῇ κρίσει δικαίως ὑποστήναι) [Ode VIII.13]. Remembering about the end of life, the hymnographer from Crete asks for a gift of virtue (ἀρετῆς) and a change of his intellect (μετάνοιας). It follows from the troparion that not only virtue, goodness and perfection are gifts of God, but also the transformation of the intellect. In the Great Canon, the one Physician (μόνε ἰατρέ), the Saviour of man, is asked to heal the putrefied soul by using a soothing agent – a bandage (μάλαγμά), oil (ἔλαιον), wine (οἶνον), works of repentance (ἔργα μετάνοιας) and compunction with tears (κατάνυξιν μετὰ δακρύων) [Ode VIII.15]. From the hesychastic point of view, this is a special text, because it shows the illness of the soul and how to heal it. This disease of the soul was compared to leprosy. Both the Old and the New Testament mention people with leprosy. It can be figuratively said that the body of such a person is rotting, i. e. gradually dying. Although the term “leprosy” does not appear in this troparion when St Andrew describes the spiritual state of his soul, he uses the term “putrefaction” (σηπεδόνα), which definitely draws attention to a disease that is not only chronic but even terminal. The vision of a rotting soul is even more frightening than the image of a body rotting during its lifetime. An ordinary physician is not able to cure such a disease. Only the Physician who is also the Saviour can do this. He has the power to apply a miraculous bandage and wash the soul with oil and wine, like the merciful Samaritan described in the evangelical parable did (cf. Luke 10:30–37). It is worth noting that, according to

207 Cf. Т.В. Bolin, Freedom Beyond Forgiveness. The Book of Jonah Re-Examined (Sheffield: A&C Black, 1997), 121–9; S. Goodhart, “Prophesy, Sacrifice, and Repentance in the Story of Jonah”, Semeia 33 (1985) 43–63.

201

202

The Identity and Drama of Man

the centuries-old folk medicine of the Middle East, fresh wounds were first washed with wine and then with oil to relieve pain. From the troparion it can be inferred that the bandage is the work of repentance, oil is compunction and wine is the gift of tears. These three concepts are important elements of the hesychastic method of therapy. The request addressed to the Saviour as the only Physician to heal the rotting soul using these three agents is not accidental. This proves that the Bishop of Gortyna was well acquainted with the hesychastic tradition and considered it to be very effective in treating a chronically suffering soul. It also confirms the thesis that the liturgical tradition in the Christian East was (and, to a large extent, still is) linked to the hesychastic tradition. Ode VIII crowns the cry of the sinner, who is aware that no one has sinned like him, and addressing the merciful Saviour the sinner cries: Εἰ καὶ μηδεὶς ὡς ἐγώ σοι ἥμαρτεν, ἀλλ’ ὅμως δέξαι κἀμέ, εὔσπλαγχνε Σωτήρ, φόβῳ μετανοοῦντα καὶ πόθῳ κεκραγότα· Ἥμαρτόν σοι μόνῳ, ἠνόμησα, ἐλέησόν με.

No one has sinned against Thee as I have; yet accept even me, compassionate Saviour, for I repent in fear and cry with longing: Against Thee alone have I sinned; I have transgressed, have mercy on me [Ode VIII.18].

Asking the compassionate Saviour for His mercy is the expression of a desire to enter into communion with the One who accepted human flesh and human nature. The fact that Christ became man (Χριστὸς ἐνηνθρώπησε) [cf. Ode IX.6] is of great soteriological significance. This phrase refers to the Prologue of the Gospel according to St John: “And the Word became flesh (ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο)” (John 1:14). In a short verse, St Andrew of Crete combines the fact of Christ’s incarnation with His call to repentance addressed to thieves and harlots (καλέσας εἰς μετάνοιαν, λῃστὰς καὶ πόρνας) [cf. Ode IХ.6]. The truth of the Incarnation of the Eternal Word and the Messiah’s call for repentance of those who, under Jewish Law, lived outside of the community of believers due to their sinful way of life, should be the basis for the transformation of the intellect/repentance of the sinful soul (ψυχὴ μετανόησον). The soul is called to repentance because the door of the Kingdom is already open (ἡ θύρα ἠνέῳκται τῆς Βασιλείας ἤδη). An additional incentive for the soul to repent is to realize that pharisees, publicans and adulterers hasten to change their lives [cf. Ode IХ.6]. Encouragement to love (lit. fervent aspiration) and repent (ἀσπάζου τὴν μετάνοιαν) is given through the example of St John the Baptist, whom the hymnographer form Crete does not mention by name in Troparion 10 of Ode IX, but defines in three ways, using information from the Gospels. St John the Baptist is referred to as “a dove who loved the wilderness” (τρυγὼν ἡ φιλέρημος), “the

Man on the Path to Salvation

voice of one crying aloud” (φωνὴ βοῶντος ἤχησε)208 and “the Lamp of Christ” (Χριστοῦ ὁ λύχνος).209 He preached repentance (κηρύττων μετάνοιαν).210 After this presentation of the person of St John the Baptist, there is brief enumeration of the fact that Herod sinned with Herodias (Ἡρῴδης ἠνόμησε σὺν τῇ Ἡρωδιάδι).211 The Archbishop of Crete is able to illustratively convey the truth not only of the prophetic ministry of St John the Baptist, but also remind us that specific people do not want to listen to the call to abandon the path of sin and enter the path of repentance. To every Christian, evoking Herod and Herodias in conjunction with John the Baptist brings clear associations with the price that the greatest of prophets paid for calling for repentance. Hence the warning: “O my soul, see that thou art not trapped in the snares of the transgressors, but embrace repentance” (Βλέπε, ψυχή μου, μὴ παγῇς τῶν ἀνομων ταῖς παγίσιν) [Ode IX.10]. At the end of the Great Canon, aware of the fact that he himself is too weak to bear the worthy fruits of repentance (Ἀξιους μετάνοιας καρποὺς), the Archbishop of Crete asks his only Saviour for an ever-contrite heart and poverty of spirit so that he can offer these to Him as an acceptable sacrifice [cf. Ode IХ.24]. The experience of spiritual weakness is expressed in the words: “my strength has failed me” (ἰσχύς μου ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐξέλιπε) [Ode IХ.24]. It is worth noting that in the last part of this troparion, St Andrew of Crete refers again to a verse from Psalm 51:17: “The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” and to Jesus’ blessing: “Blessed are the poor in spirit (μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι), for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:3). The same terminology is used in both the analysed troparion and in the evangelical blessings: πτωχείαν δὲ πνευματικήν and πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι. In the Great Canon, the transformation of the intellect is the path to knowing one’s spiritual state and union with God.212 4.3

Compunction (κατάνυξις)

The concept of compunction (κατάνυξις) is mentioned only four times in the Great Canon. Its semantic scope in the work of St Andrew of Crete is completely different

208 Cf. Matt 3:3 – “This is the one of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke when he said, ‘The voice of one crying out in the wilderness’”. 209 Cf. John 5:35 – “He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light”. 210 Cf. Mark 1:15 – “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news”. 211 Cf. Mark 6:17–28; Matt 14:3–11. 212 Mathewes-Green, First Fruits, IX.

203

204

The Identity and Drama of Man

from that found in the New Testament.213 In the New Testament this term appears only once as a noun in the Epistle to the Romans 11:8 – “God gave them a sluggish spirit (ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Θεὸς πνεῦμα κατανύξεως)”. This verse refers to Isaiah 29:10: “For the Lord has poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep (ὅτι πεπότικεν ὑμάς Κύριος πνεύματι κατανύξεως)”. A translation closer to the Greek original would be: “’For the Lord has poured the spirit of sleep upon you”. In addition to κατάνυξις, the term κατενύγησαν appears in the New Testament in yet another sense: “Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart (Ἀκούσαντες δὲ κατενύγησαν τῇ καρδίᾳ)” (Acts 2:37). Kατενύγησαν literally means “pierced, pushed”. These biblical verses are not helpful in explaining the meaning of the term κατάνυξις in the Great Canon. Reference should thus be made to later spiritual traditions. This is necessary because St Andrew of Crete did not explain in any way what κατάνυξις is to a Christian. He treated this word as fully understandable. In the Great Canon, it occurs in conjunction with the concept of “change of the intellect/ repentance” (μετάνοια) or with the concept of “tears” (δάκρυα). It can therefore be concluded that these three concepts together constitute a penitential formula and are an essential condition for the change of the intellect and repentance. While μετάνοια means a change of the intellect or repentance, in order to understand what κατάνυξις is, it is necessary to refer to Philokalic works. On the basis of the texts of the hesychastic Fathers, κατάνυξις can be described as profound compunction. Generally speaking, deep compunction is “the state of a man, in which he is aware of both his own sinfulness and the forgiveness given to him by God.”214 According to Nikitas Stethatos, the gift of deep contrition comes from God.215 On the emotional level, compunction is characterized by sadness, tenderness and a joy flowing from sincere repentance for sins committed. It is a kind of shock for the soul, which results in its being stimulated to take action. Under the influence of compunction within the soul, an external decision (coming from God) appears which transforms into an attitude of desire for spiritual transformation. What happens in the sphere of the soul also influences physiological processes, with this being directly expressed by tears. On the level of mental sensations, the effect of deep compunction is πένθος, i. e. a particular kind of grief, affliction, sadness, or

213 Cf. M. Carruthers, The Craft of Thought: Mediation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images 400–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 101–5; B. Müller, Der Weg des Weines: die Tradition des ‘Penthos’ in den Apophthegmata Patrum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2000). 214 Leśniewski, “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi...”, 232. 215 Cf. Nikitas Stithatos, “On the Practice of the Virtues: One Hundred Texts 24”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995), 85. (Νικήτας Στηθάτος, “Πρώτη πρακτικόν κεφάλαιον εκατοντάς 24”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991), 278).

Man on the Path to Salvation

lament.216 Compunction is thus associated with crying. Tears are an expression of sincere contrition.217 Compunction – as the “Divine dew of the Spirit” coming from above – “comforts and refreshes the soul”,218 protecting it from attacks by demons. Importantly, compunction does not only express regret for one’s own sinfulness and lost salvation, but also arouses a desire to help those who need it.219 This great gift of God’s grace is sometimes manifested through various kinds of anguish suffered by man. Discussion of the semantic scope of the concept of κατάνυξις seems essential in order to understand the penitential message of the Great Canon. The Archbishop of Crete is aware that the gift of transformation can only come from God: Oὐ δάκρυα, οὐδὲ μετάνιαν ἔχω, οὐδὲ κατάνξιν· αὐτός μοι ταῦτα, Σωτήρ, ὡς Θεὸς δώρησαι. I have no tears, no repentance, no compunction; but as God do Thou Thyself, O Saviour, bestow them on me [Ode II.25].

Already in his first request, in which the term “compunction” appears, the hymnographer from Crete asks God for a triple gift: tears, repentance and compunction. As part of a constant dialogue with his soul he reminds his soul that, through its conscious choice, it imitated Manasseh’s guilt, the only difference being that instead of idols it placed itself at the centre of the passions (πάθη) and multiplied the the abominations thereof (πληθύνουσα προσοχθίσματα). Recognizing this inner spiritual devastation, the author calls upon the soul to achieve the compunction of the idolatrous king [cf. Ode VII.16]. The change of the intellect/repentance and compunction allow for a destroying of the passions that are a result of demons acting on humans. Each type of passion is a sinful state or illness of the soul caused by sin. In Troparion 15 of Ode VIII once again we can find a request to the Divine Physician and Saviour to heal the soul with the gift of works of repentance (ἔργα

216 H. Hunt, Joy-Bearing Grief: Tears of Contrition in the Writings of the Early Syrian and Byzantine Fathers (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2004), 75–82; J. Driscoll, “Penthos and Tears in Evagrius Ponticus”, Studia Monastica 36/2 (1994) 147–64; H. Hunt, The Reforming Abbot and His Tears: Penthos in Late Byzantium, in E. Russel (ed.), Spirituality in Late Byzantium (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 21–32. 217 Cf. I. Hausherr, Penthos. The Doctrine of Compunction in the Christian East (trans. A. Hufstader; Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1982), 3–10; J. Pegon, Componction, Dictionnaire de la Spiritualité (2 vol.; Paris: Ėditions Beauchesne, 1952), 1312–21. 218 Cf. Νικήτας Στηθάτος, “Πρώτη πρακτικόν κεφάλαιον εκατοντάς 24”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’, 289. (Nikitas Stithatos, “On the Practice of the Virtues: One Hundred Texts 71”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995), 97). 219 Cf. Hausherr, Penthos, 41.

205

206

The Identity and Drama of Man

μετάνοιας), compunction (κατάνυξιν) and tears (δακρύων). A particular way of

encouraging the soul to embark on the path of compunction is to recall examples from the New Testament [cf. Ode IХ.4].220 The author of the Great Canon orders the soul to imitate the righteous (δικαίους οὖν ζήλωσον) and to turn away from sinners (ἁμαρτωλούς ἐκτρέπου). Furthermore, he tells it which actions it can take to implore Christ. This troparion indicates practical help for the soul, making it aware that achieving compunction is inextricably linked not only to specific attitudes of following the righteous and avoiding sinners, but also to prayer (προσευχαῖς), fasting (νηστείαις), chastity (ἁγνείᾳ) and reverence (σεμνότητι). In his Commentary to the Great Canon, Acacius Sabaita calls for putting an end to doing evil and for achieving the state of compunction. According to him, when one achieves perfect compunction, one will gain a deeper knowledge of God’s secrets.221 4.4

Tears (δάκρυα) and Crying (θρήνος)

The spiritual transformation of a person is a very complex process because it concerns all spheres of one’s earthly existence – the spirit, the soul and the body. One of the important manifestations of the spiritual and psycho-physical processes is a crying that has its origin in the spiritual and psychological sphere of man, and is expressed in the physiological sphere by means of tears coming out of the eyes.222 Crying and tears can express both sadness and joy.223 There are more than five hundred references in Scripture to crying and tears. Through various kinds of tears, a man expresses both his mental and spiritual state in relation to himself and others.224 Since time immemorial, also in Greco-Roman civilisation, various scholars reflected on tears and crying.225

220 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 357–8. 221 “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 225. 222 Cf. W.H. Frey, Crying, the Mystery of Tears (Minneapolis, MN: Winston Pr, 1985); F.A. Bogorad, “The Symptom of Crocodile Tears”, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 34 (1979) 76–9. 223 Cf. T. Collins, “The Physiology of Tears in the Old Testament: Part I”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 33 (1971) 18–38; Part II 185–97; K.H. Rengstorff, “Klaio [to cry, weep], klauthmos [crying, weeping]”, in G. Kittel/G. Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 436. 224 On the basis of biblical texts, various types of tears can be distinguished: tears of sorrow (cf. Gen 37:35), tears of joy (cf. Gen 45:1–2; 14–15), tears of gratitude (cf. Luke 7:40–44), tears of compassion (cf. John 11:35; Luke 19:41), tears of concern (cf. Acts 19:31; Phil 3:18; 2 Cor 2:4), tears due to separation (cf. l Sam 20:41–42; Acts 20:37–38; 2 Tim 1:3–4), tears of anxiety (cf. Heb 5:7), tears due to a loss of something valuable (cf. Heb 12:16–17), tears of repentance (cf. Ps 6:7; Luke 6:21; Rom 5:8), tears of punishment (cf. Matt 25:30). See W. Jackson, The Trail of Tears (https://www. christiancourier.com/articles/614-the-trail of-tears) [access on 30 January 2019]. 225 Cf. T. Fögen (ed.), Tears in the Graeco-Roman World (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009).

Man on the Path to Salvation

The Christian East has developed a “theology of tears” due to their importance in spiritual transformation.226 Tears are treated not only as an external manifestation of a human’s mental state, but also as a gift received from God.227 Spiritual crying is expressed in crying with tears of flesh.228 Spiritual crying expresses a deep desire for a personal relationship with God, which has its source in contrition, transformation of the intellect, repentance and compunction.229 Reflection on the gift of tears, especially its significance for human spiritual life is one of the important structural elements of hesychasm.230 The gift of tears is regarded as a sign of an ongoing change of the intellect. The Philokalic Fathers were convinced that the gift of tears was a criterion for assessing the profundity of grief and compunction for sins committed. Tears of grief emanating from the heart are an external sign of the onset of the transformation of a human person. They appear when a person honestly and humbly looks inside and notices a spiritual illness, and then truly desires to be healed. True humility manifests itself in mourning the state of spiritual bondage which occurs as a result of succumbing to demons. It has both an individual dimension – in relation to a person, and a general dimension – in relation to the entire human race. In Philokalic works there are numerous references to crying and tears which have their source both in texts from Scripture and in existential experiences. The Philokalic Fathers wrote about various kinds of tears and their relation to cleansing from sins, deep repentance and remembrance of death. In teaching, they focused on the relationship of tears to prayer and reading the Word of God. They encouraged believers to ask God for this priceless gift, which makes it possible to purify the human intellect and soul. Within the framework of hesychastic practices, prayer combined with tears is of particular importance, as they are believed to facilitate one’s fight against demons. The gift of tears intensifies the process of spiritual purification of man. The constant and abundant shedding of tears also relates to

226 Cf. M. Lot-Borodine, “Le Mystère du “don des larmes dans” l’Orient chrétien”, in O. Clément (ed.), La doulourese Joie. Aperçus sur la prière personnelle de l’Orient Chrétien (Bégrolles-en-Mauges: Bellefontaine, 1974) 131–95; B. Steidle, “Die Tränen, ein Mystiches Problem im Alien Mönchtum”, Benediktinische Montsschrift 20 (1938) 181–7; P. Nagy, Le don des larmes au Moyen Age (Paris: Albin Michel, 2001). 227 Cf. Bishop Kallistos Ware, “«Аn Obscure Matter»: The Mystery of Tears in Orthodox Spirituality”, in K.Ch. Patton/J.S. Hawley (ed.), Holy Tears. Weeping in the Religious Imagination (Priceton, NJ: Princeton University, 2005) 242–54; K.Ch. Patton, “«Howl, Weep and Moan, and Bring It Back to God»: Holy Tears in Eastern Christianity”, in: K.Ch. Patton/J.S. Hawley (ed.), Holy Tears. Weeping in the Religious Imagination, (Priceton, NJ: Princeton University, 2005) 255–73. 228 Cf. L. Gillet, “The Gift of Tears”, Sobornost 12 (1937) 5–10. 229 Cf. H. Hunt, Joy-Bearing Grief: Tears of Contrition in the Writings of the Early Syrian and Byzantine Fathers, 82–4. 230 Cf. J. Chryssavgis, In the Heart of the Desert. The Spirituality of the Desert Fathers and Mothers (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom, 2003), 45–51.

207

208

The Identity and Drama of Man

the experience of God’s Light. Washing through tears in a mysterious way opens man to the experience of God’s Light, which permeates him and brings him into a state that initiates the process of salvation already in earthly life.231 In the liturgical practice of Eastern Christianity, tears and crying are just as important as in hesychastic spirituality. This is a further proof that these two traditions – the liturgical and the hesychastic – are linked. In Lenten services, celebrated in an atmosphere of penance, repentance for sins, compunction, tears and crying are an important leitmotif on the path of salvation. At this particular time of the liturgical year, the starting point is for one to become aware of their own sinfulness and the fact that they cannot rise from it on their own. A feeling of helplessness and powerlessness in the face of the enormity of committed evil generates spiritual tears in one’s heart, which unwittingly turn into streams of tears flowing out of the eyes. This spiritual impulse, which has its source in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, brightens up the intellect sunk in darkness. In the blink of an eye, a glimpse of Divine Truth makes one see the sequences of events that make up a life of torment. It is then difficult to still hide from oneself the inner dilemma of being torn between what one wants to be and what one is. This growing tension leads to the humble recognition that only Christ, in His infinite mercy, can make a difference, because man himself, entangled in evil, has only a feeling of total powerlessness. Could there be any other beginning of a liturgical ode of penance than an internal dialogue on where to begin mourning the acts of a pitiful life? Could St Andrew of Crete have started a bitter reflection on the pitiful life of a sinner differently? Could there be a better start for reflection on one’s own spiritual state during Great Lent? The first troparion of Ode I can be called the “Strophe of Awakening”. In fact at every moment of life this “Strophe of Awakening” makes us aware of the spiritual condition of man entangled in evil and of the fact that he does not have to endure this state: Πόθεν ἄρξομαι θρηνεῖν τὰς τοῦ ἀθλιου μου βίου πράξεις; ποίαν ἀπαρχὴ ἐπιθήσω, Χριστέ, τῇ νῦν θρηνῳδίᾳ; ἀλλ’ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν.

Where shall I begin to weep for the actions of my wretched life? What first-fruit shall I offer, O Christ, in this my lamentation? But in Thy compassion grant me forgiveness of sins [Ode I.1].

The first question is introspective in nature. It is a question asked by a prodigal son, who does not so much seek the origin of the mystery of the evil in his heart, but simply wants to cry out all that makes his life miserable. The author of the Great Canon consciously used the term θρηνεῖν, which suggests that mourning should

231 Cf. Leśniewski, “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi...”, 251–62.

Man on the Path to Salvation

be understood as a kind of sung or rather wailed funeral ode. Since ancient times, threnodies (lamentations, lyrical mourning works), dedicated to the deceased, have expressed a deep sadness or sorrow related to their passing away.232 Therefore, in the retrospective formula of the first question, man is singing a mourning ode to himself. This question hides awareness of one’s own death. The starting point of the mourning ode is the experience of one’s own spiritual death. Although the word death does not appear explicitly in the troparion, it was present in the consciousness of the hymnographer from Crete from the first line of the first troparion of Ode I. An additional argument in favour of this thesis is the description of one’s life as wretched (τοῦ ἀθλίου μου βίου). Thus, this work concerns neither delight in one’s own life nor is a statement that it is wonderful and valuable, but rather is a sad statement that one’s life is worthless and miserable. It is not a maker of the great deeds worthy of a hero, but miserable deeds that form the basis of the singing of laments. The second question testifies to the desire to start a dialogue with Christ. Mournful reflection on one’s own worthlessness does not end in despair, but internally stimulates one to find salvation in the Other, for the Other has the power to restore life. Lamentation with tears (θρηνῳδίᾳ) transforms from a retrospective insight on one’s own interior into a personal dialogue with God. The sinner frantically wonders what he can offer Christ to start living again. What kind of first-fruit (ἀπαρχὴν), what kind of sacrifice? If one does find anything within oneself that could constitute such a foundation for such sacrifice, then one can only turn with fervent supplication to Christ, begging for His forgiveness of offences, transgressions and sins. The work of salvation requires man’s cooperation with God. A sinner who wants to be saved is invited to stand before God. The sinner’s act of will enables a gradual healing process to begin that leads to his complete spiritual and psycho-somatic renewal.233 Troparion 2 of Ode I is the actual beginning of the author’s internal dialogue with the soul. It is not a simple introspection consisting in assessing the soul’s current spiritual state and considering what to do next. It is more than that, namely it is an acknowledgement that the spiritual centre of the human person is not fully identical to the human soul. For this reason, the soul is treated as an inferior reality and is responsible for the evil done by man. The personal, spiritual self addresses the soul in a commanding tone: “Come, wretched soul” (Δεῦρο, τάλαινα ψυχή) “to the Creator of all” (τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ). The soul should not go alone, but with its flesh (σὺν τῇ σαρκί σου), for as long as the time of earthly life lasts, the soul and the flesh form an inseparable unity. The aim of this pilgrimage to God

232 Threnodies derive from old Greek funeral poetry. Threnodies were created, among others, by Simonides of Ceos (cf. J.H. Molyneux, Simonides: A Historical Study (Wauconda, IL: BolchazyCarducci Publishers, 1992)) and Pindar (cf. M.R. Lefkowitz, First-Person Fictions. Pindar’s Poetic “F” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991)). 233 Cf. Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 187.

209

210

The Identity and Drama of Man

the Creator is to offer Him tears of repentance (ἐν μετανοίᾳ δάκρυα). Why is it so important for the soul to offer God tears? According to the teaching of the Philokalic Fathers, tears affect the intellect. They are an external manifestation of the spiritual transformation taking place in the intellect. They can also express an awareness of one’s own sinfulness. The confession of sins to God the Creator is the beginning of a new life. For this reason, the soul is called not only to confess its sins, but also to abstain from past brutishness (ἀπόσχου λοιπὸν τῆς πρὶν ἀλογίας) [cf. Ode I.2]. The hymnographer from Crete expresses his sinfulness through his body posture and words. He fervently asks the Saviour for forgiveness and to take away the heavy yoke of sins from him (ἆρον τὸν κλοιόν, ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας). He needs a sign that his request will be heard. Therefore, as a sinner who wants to experience that the Saviour is a compassionate God (εὔσπλαγχνός), he also dares to ask for tears of compunction (δάκρυα κατανύξεως) [Ode I.22]. While tears of repentance (μετανοία δάκρυα) are a gift from man to God, tears of compunction are a gift from God to man. These two types of tears are an external expression of the exchange of gifts that takes place between God and man. The particular importance of tears of compunction in the process of human transformation is underlined by the repeated request for them addressed to the Trinity, which is the Union of the Divine Persons and at the same time Unity [cf. Ode I.24]. The gift of tears of compunction is granted by the Most Holy Trinity owing to His compassion towards man. A telling example of the importance of the tears shed in the process of spiritual transformation is the image of the weeping harlot [cf. Ode II.5].234 The evangelical image of a woman leading a sinful life, who comes to Jesus and washes His feet with tears (cf. Luke 7:38), carries a huge load of loving zeal. The Bishop of Gortyna confesses to the Saviour that, like her, he offers tears, hoping for the forgiveness flowing from Jesus’ compassion and his mercy towards man. Jesus’ words: “Her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love” (Luke 7:47), which are the culmination of an encounter with a converted sinner, left unsaid in the Great Canon, form the basis of hope for those who flood the merciful Saviour with streams of tears, thus invoking His compassion. One can admire the brevity with which St Andrew of Crete expressed this truth about the transforming role of tears, which come from an awareness of the profoundness of sin and a desire for the compassionate Saviour to breathe new life into the soul: Τὰ δάκρυα τὰ τῆς Πόρνης, Οἰκτίρμον, κἀγὼ προβάλλομαι· Ἱλάσθητί μοι, Σωτήρ, τῇ εὐσπλαγχνίᾳ σου.

I offer to Thee, O merciful Lord, the tears of the Harlot. Take pity on me, O Saviour, in Thy compassion [Ode II.5].

234 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 248–50.

Man on the Path to Salvation

The Archbishop of Crete returns to the evangelical scene of the converted harlot once again, this time recalling that she brought fragrant oil to anoint Jesus’ feet (cf. Luke 7:38). The author, aware that he has sinned like the harlot (Ἡμάρτηκα, ὥσπερ ἡ Πόρνη), cries out to the Lord from the depths of his heart: “I have sinned, I alone have sinned against Thee. Accept my tears also as sweet ointment, O Saviour” (μόνος ἡμάρτηκα σοι· ὡς μύρον δέχου, Σωτήρ, κἀμοῦ τὰ δάκρυα) [Ode II.22]. The value of human tears is underlined by the fact that they are offered to the Saviour as a fragrant oil, i. e. as something precious that is pleasing to God. The problem of falling into sensual passions and defilement through a lack of restraint in the sexual sphere is also shown by the sin of King David [cf. Ode II.23]. The comparison of one’s fall to the fall of King David and the realization of one’s own impurity leads to begging the Saviour to be washed clean by tears. It is not clear from the Great Canon whether this request includes a desire for the Saviour to wash away the sin of impurity of the man turning to Him with His own tears, or whether it is a request to the Saviour for the purifying gift of tears: Ὠλίσθησα ὡς ὁ Δαυῒδ ἀκολάστως, καὶ βεβορβόρωμαι· ἀλλ’ ἀποπλύναις κἀμέ, Σωτήρ, τοῖς δάκρυσι.

Like David, I have fallen into lust and I am covered with filth; but wash me clean, O Saviour, by my tears [Ode II.23].

In this context, it is worth recalling the admonition contained in Acacius Sabaita’s commentary: “Let us, then, our dearly beloved, beware of evil and follow the lives of the saints who spent their lives in tears, clothed in rugged sacks. Those who had been battered by evil become friends of God. All this is written so that we may willingly begin mourning, so that tears may become bread for us day and night, and so that we may sprinkle them on our beds every night, cleansing ourselves of all impurities, and so that we may become worthy to clothe ourselves in wedding robes.”235 This progressive self-reflection leads St Andrew to conclude that there are no tears, no repentance and no compunction (οὐ δάκρυα, οὐδὲ μετάνιαν ἔχω, οὐδὲ κατάνξιν) [Ode II.25]. This statement indicates that these three realities cannot be treated separately. They consist of a single process of spiritual transformation that embraces the whole human person. Although each of these realities concerns the human being as an indivisible whole, it can be pointed out that they are experienced within his trichotomic structure. Tears come from the human body, which means that they reveal the spiritual transformation taking place on the physiological level. The change of the intellect/repentance concerns mainly the spiritual sphere,

235 “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 227.

211

212

The Identity and Drama of Man

as in Christian anthropology is directly related to the mind. Compunction, in turn, is most closely connected with the sphere of the soul, i. e. with one’s mental and emotional life. Ultimately, due to the spiritual value of tears, repentance and compunction, these are realities that do not belong to human nature, but are a gift from God. While repentance and compunction can easily be understood as realities originating in God, tears seem to be inscribed in human nature. Therefore, the question remains open and, if so, why does St Andrew of Crete ask God for the gift of tears without specifying that he means a particular kind of spiritual tears? Tears are mentioned again in the Great Canon, but only in Ode V. This time they are presented as a reality that heals and restores spiritual sight. For this reason, the author expresses a deep desire for his tears to become a pool of Siloam for him. In this way he refers to the pericopes from the Gospel according to St John concerning the healing of a man blind from birth (cf. John 9:1–41), wishing to underline the spiritual message of the miracle of restoring sight he declares: Σιλωὰμ γενέσθω μοι τὰ δάκρυά μου, Δέσποτα Κύριε, ἵνα νίψωμαι κἀγὼ τὰς κόρας τῆς ψυχῆς μου καὶ ἴδω σε νοερῶς τὸ φῶς τὸ πρὸ αἰώνων.

O Master and Lord, may my tears be unto me as Siloam: that I also may wash clean the eyes of my soul, and with my mind behold Thee, the pre-eternal Light [Ode V.21].

Jesus Himself revealed that he is the “light of the world” (John 9:5).236 He told His disciples this before “he spat on the ground and made mud with the saliva and spread the mud on the man’s eyes” (John 9:6) and said to the blind man: “‘Go, wash in the pool of Siloam’ (which means Sent)” (John 9:7). The execution of Jesus’ command made the man blind from birth see. The last sentences of this pericope prove, however, that spiritual sight is much more important for man. This is why Jesus asks the man to whom He has restored his physical eyesight: “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” (John 9:35). When He hears the answer: “Lord, I believe” (John 9:38), Jesus reveals: “I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may see, and those who do see may become blind” (John 9:39). These words alarmed some of the Pharisees, who asked him: “Surely we are not blind, are we?” (John 9:40). Their question clearly indicates that they understood that Jesus spoke not about physical sight, but about spiritual sight. Jesus’ words confirm his mission to judge every human being and indicate that in addition to the bodily eyes, there are also spiritual eyes which can stop seeing under sin (cf. John 9:41). The hymnographer from Crete makes us realise in a strange way that human tears can have the same healing power as the pool of Siloam. Healing through tears,

236 Cf. C.H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 201–12.

Man on the Path to Salvation

which one cries out because of one’s own sinfulness, refers first and foremost to the healing of the soul and the mind. Physical tears are therefore helpful in opening up the spiritual eyes with which one sees the “Eternal Light” – Jesus Christ, Lord and Ruler. In each of the next four odes (VI to IX) we can find a short reference to tears and crying.237 These repetitions help to perpetuate the truth that is unthinkable that the spiritual transformation of man can take place without crying out his sinfulness. The gift of tears coming out of the eyes and pure sighing from the depths of one’s heart brought to the Saviour begin Ode VI: Τὰ δάκρυα, Σωτήρ, τῶν ὀμμάτων μου καὶ τοὺς ἐκ βάθους στεναγμοὺς καθαρώς προσφέρω, βοώσης τής καρδίας·.

I offer to Thee in purity, O Saviour, the tears of mine eyes and groanings from the depths of my heart.

Meanwhile, the heart awakened to compunction confesses in all sincerity and simplicity: Ό Θεός ήμάρτηκά σοι, ίλάσθητί μοι.

I have sinned against Thee, O God; be merciful to me [Ode VI.1].

In this troparion, St Andrew of Crete consciously referrs to the prayer of the tax collector: “God, be merciful to me, a sinner! (ὁ Θεός, ἱλάσθητί μοι τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ)” (Luke 18:13). As can be seen, the concerned verse of the Great Canon is built of the same words as the verse of the parable of the Pharisee and of the tax collector. Troparion 17 of Ode VII contains again a comparison of one’s own sinfulness to the sinfulness of the harlot (Luke 7:36–50). This time the sinner who falls before the Lord confesses that he is worse than the harlot and has transgressed as no other man on earth. These words are combined with a plea to the Lord for His mercy, expressed by the Lord’s calling His creation back to Himself. The uttered words (ρήματά), which are a confession of guilt, combined with a plea for mercy, are brought to God as tears (δάκρυα). To consider oneself as the greatest of all sinners is a reference to the New Testament. In his First Epistle to Timothy, St Paul, aware of his sinfulness, humbly proclaimed that “The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners (ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι) – of whom I am the foremost (ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι ἐγώ)” (1 Tim 1:15). In the tradition of the Christian East, the words of St Paul are an integral part of a prayer before Holy Communion: “I believe, O Lord and confess, that You are truly the

237 Cf. Prelipcean, Anthropologia, 70–75.

213

214

The Identity and Drama of Man

Christ, Son of the living God, Who came into this world to save sinners of whom I am the first.”238 The author also evokes the image of the prophet Jeremiah crying in a muddy pit (cf. Jer 38:1–6), who lamented with a cry (θρήνοις καταβοῶντα) over the fate of the nation: “Is the Lord not in Zion? Is her King not in her? Why have they provoked me to anger with their images, with their foreign idols?” […] Is there no balm in Gilead? Is there no physician there? Why then has the health of my poor people not been restored? O that my head were a spring of water, and my eyes a fountain of tears, so that I might weep day and night for the slain of my poor people!” (Jer 8:19.22–23; 9:1). In Troparion 9 of Ode VIII there is a call for the soul to follow Jeremiah, who sought tears (δάκρυα ζητοῦντα), and his life of lamentation (μίμησαι τὸν τούτου θρηνῴδη βίον). Only then will it find salvation (σωθήσῃ). In the last Ode of the Great Canon, once again an image of the harlot is put before the soul, the harlot who, having taken an alabaster bottle with precious, fragrant oil, poured it on Jesus’ feet, washed them with tears (σὺν δάκρυσιν) and wiped them with her hair [cf. Ode IX.18]. The soul is accused of not imitating the harlot’s conduct towards the Saviour. The accusation against the conduct of the soul is accompanied by a reminder that the Saviour treated the repentant harlot in a special way, namely: “He tore in pieces the record of her previous sins [lit. accusations]” (τῶν ἀρχαίων ἐγκλημάτων τὸ χειρόγραφον ρηγνύντος αὐτῇ). Recalling the image of the repenting harlot (cf. Luke 7:37–38), St Andrew of Crete also reminds us that a man who died as a result of transgressions is not condemned to death. For Christ is not condemned to death: “He forgave us all our trespasses, erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands (ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς δόγμασιν)” (Col 2:13–14). Hence this latter call of the soul to mourn its sins is inscribed in the mercy of the Saviour, who desires us to be rooted and build up in Him (cf. Col 2:7). 4.5

Lamentation (θρηνωδία)

A “Funeral ode” or “lamentation” (θρηνῳδίᾳ) is a concept that has its roots in ancient Greek culture. It was adopted by Christianity to express the mournful and penitential nature of the liturgical services celebrated during Great Lent and especially during the Holy Week. Lamentation is also a literary genre that can be found in the Old Testament Book of Lamentations, which directly follows the book of the prophet Jeremiah. The name of this book in the Septuagint is θρήνοι. The

238 The Divine Liturgy of our Father among the Saints John Chrysostom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 43.

Man on the Path to Salvation

Great Canon was originally called: Θρῶνον,239 which resulted from the sound of the first verse of the initial troparion: “Where shall I begin to weep for the actions of my wretched life?” (Πόθεν ἄρξομαι θρηνεῖν τὰς τοῦ ἀθλίου μου βίου πράξεις) [Ode I.1]. This question opens a long examination of the hymnographer’s conscience, which is based on references to persons and acts described in both the Old and New Testaments. In another question addressed to the Saviour, the Archbishop of Crete wonders: “What first-fruit shall I offer, O Christ, in this my lamentation? (ποίαν ἀπαρχὴν ἐπιθήσω Χριστέ, τῇ νῦν θρηνῳδίᾳ) [Ode I.1]. This troparion ends with an appeal to the mercy of the Son of God and His gentle heart (ἀλλ’ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός), and is completed with begging for forgiveness of sins (μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν) [Ode I.1]. In the Great Canon, apart from the first troparion of Ode I, there are three more references to lamentation (θρηνῶν) and one to the verb “to lament” (τὸν θρῆνον). In Ode II, the Bishop of Gortyna recalls the biblical figure of Lamech, changing the character of his statement from the declarative – “I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me” (Gen 4:23) – to a statement of fact that – “he cried aloud lamenting” (θρηνῶν ἐβόα): “I have slain a man […] and a young man to my hurt” [Ode II.34/5]. This biblical verse is modified to emphasize the devastating effects of the sin of the first people, especially fratricide, in order to produce a better depiction of the drama of a soul that does not care about causing defilement of the flesh (ρυπωθεῖσα τὴν σάρκα) and pollution of the mind (τὸν νοῦν κατασπιλώσα) [cf. Ode II.34/5]. The soul hears the announcement that it will be cast out from the bridal chamber and will be weeping (θρηνῳδοῦσα) because it did not welcome a foreign traveller (οὐ ξένον οὐχ ὁδίτην) [to its house]. This attitude of the soul is contrasted to the hospitality once offered to the righteous (δίκαιον) prophet Elisha by the Shunammite woman (cf. 2 Kings 4:8–12) [cf. Ode VIII.5]. The Archbishop of Crete encourages his soul to imitate the lamentation of the prophet Jeremiah when he was thrown into a muddy pit (cf. Jer 38:6) and called to the city of Zion (cf. Jer 38:1–3), asking for tears. In the biblical description of the prophet Jeremiah’s being thrown into a cistern there is no mention that would indicate that he asked for tears. This interpolation is intended to strengthen the power of prophecy and Jeremiah’s intercessory prayer for the salvation of Zion. It is also likely that the author of the Great Canon, while presenting the drama of the prophet, referred to an earlier chapter of the Book of Jeremiah in which weeping and lamentation are presented as a way of asking for grace from God. Hearing Rachel’s lamentation and her bitter cry, God spoke to her: “Keep your voice from weeping, and your eyes from tears; for there is a reward for your work” (Jer 31:16). The encouragement for the soul to follow (μίμησαι) “the life of lamentation” (θρηνῴδη

239 Cf. T. Borisova, “Old Church Slavonic Translation of the Great Canon of Repentance by St Andrew of Crete: The Earliest Stages of History”, Cyrillomethodianum 19 (2014) 53–65, on p. 53.

215

216

The Identity and Drama of Man

βίον) of the prophet Jeremiah ends with a promise: “you shall be saved” (σωθήσῃ)

[Ode VIII.9]. Apart from references to the Old Testament, the term “lamentation” is used once in connection with the New Testament. Recalling the determination of the Canaanite woman who called out to Jesus: “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon” (Matt 15:22), St Andrew of Crete turns to the Saviour: “Accept my lamentation (δέξαι μου τὸν θρῆνον), as you once [listened to the supplication for mercy] of the woman of Canaan [Ode VIII.14]. 4.6

Remembrance of Death (μνήμη θανάτου)

In the Great Canon, reflection on death includes thinking about both spiritual as well as physical death. Initial lamentation or weeping for the actions of one’s wretched life [cf. Ode I.1] leads to the realisation that by imitating Cain one is guilty of bloodshed. The author confesses that by his own free choice (τῇ προαιρέσει) he became a conscious soul killer (γέγονα φονεὺς συνειδότι ψυχῆς) and someone who brings the flesh to life (ζωώσας τὴν σάρκα) while at the same time waging a war against himself through his wicked actions (στρατεύσας κατ’ αὐτῆς ταῖς πονηραῖς μου πράξεσι) [Ode I.7].240 This very personal insight into the depths of one’s soul can help every Christian to assess one’s own spiritual condition. The fact of killing one’s own soul brings about a state of spiritual death. Breaking unity with the loving God does not result in a vacuum, but opens up spaces for various kinds of idols. An honest confession to killing one’s own soul has great ontological significance. From this troparion we can conclude that killing the soul is not done through a single act, but is the result of a fight against the soul. In order for a soul to die, man consciously has to do commit many evil acts. Referring to the teaching of the Philokalic Fathers, it should be added that each of these acts has its root in evil thoughts, which come from demons. The juxtaposition of the soul (ψυχῆ) and the flesh (σάρξ) clearly shows that in the anthropology of the Christian East, the soul is treated as the spiritual centre of human life, while the body is treated as a reality relating to the external aspect of human existence, a habitat of passion, which is subject to temptations leading to sin. The Philokalic Fathers connected the flesh (σάρξ) with the fall; usually treating it as an image of the human person in a state of decline, for man, by concentrating too much on the things of this world, succumbs to sinful desires, which can lead to spiritual death. For example, Diadochos of Photiki pointed out that fallen flesh (σάρξ) has a tendency to listen to evil spirits and for this reason is tempted to serve its wickedness.241 In this context it is worth recalling what the Apostle of the Nations confessed with pain in his Epistle to the 240 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 235–7. 241 Cf. St Diadochos of Photiki, “On Spiritual Knowledge and Discrimination: 100 Texts 82”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (1 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1979),

Man on the Path to Salvation

Romans: “But I am of the flesh, sold into slavery under sin (ἐγὼ δὲ σαρκικός εἰμι, πεπραμένος ὑπὸ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν)” (Rom 7:14). Confessing the sins he has committed, the Bishop of Gortyna adds that they were caused by murderous thoughts (μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ), which wounded both his soul and his body (τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τοῦ σώματός) [cf. Ode I.11]. The final part of Troparion 11 contains a mysterious phrase, which is connected with the term “murderous thoughts” – λῃστρικῶς ἐναπέθηκαν, which in English is translated as to “have inflicted inwardly like thieves”. It seems that we can find here the message of hesychastic spirituality – that attention is fundamental to spiritual life. Depending on what is the foundation, focus or direction of attention, one can give in or fight against evil thoughts. If attention functions like thieves, that is to say, its purpose is to seize the good and even the lives of others, it itself becomes the prey of demons, and evil spirits have an easy time planting murderous thoughts that contribute to one’s spiritual death. In Ode II, the hymnographer from Crete returns to the theme of the death inflicted upon the body and mind by the soul. Similarly to the actions of Cain and Lamech: Τίνι ὡμοιώθης, πολυαμάρτητε ψυχή; εἰμὴ τῷ πρώτῳ Κάϊν, καὶ τῷ Λάμεχ ἐκείνῳ, λιθοκτονήσασα τὸ σῶμα κακουργίαις καὶ κτείνασα τὸν νοῦν ταῖς παραλόγοις ὁρμαῖς. To whom shall I liken thee, O soul of many sins? Alas! to Cain and to Lamech. For thou hast stoned thy body to death with thine evil deeds, and killed thy mind with thy disordered longings [Ode II.31/2].242

It is clear from this troparion that the soul is responsible for the spiritual death of man. From an anthropological point of view, it is interesting that St Andrew of Crete, referring to spiritual death, which essentially concerns the intellect, adds that this death becomes part of the whole man. Evil deeds cause the death of the body (σῶμα) in the spiritual sense, although it still exists and functions in the physiological sense. Such an understanding of the body derives from the holistic anthropology of Eastern Christianity, in which the body is inextricably linked to the soul and intellect during one’s earthly life. A man can become the killer of his soul, as if it were an adult man. He can also become the murderer of his intellect, as if it were a young man [cf. Ode II. 35/6]. In doing so, he becomes a follower of Lamech, the descendant of Cain who committed fratricide (cf. Gen 4:23). Just as Cain killed his brother, the killing of the body takes

283–4. (Διάδοχος Φωτικής, “Λόγος ασκητικός διηρημένος σε 100 κεφάλαια πρακτικά – γνώσεως και διακρίσεως πνευματικής” 82, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Α’, 262). 242 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 258–62.

217

218

The Identity and Drama of Man

place through sensual longings [lit. uncontrolled lustful longings] (ταῖς φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς) [cf. Ode II.35/6]. God as the “Fountain of Life” (Πηγὴν ζωῆς) is at the same time the “Destroyer of death” (τοῦ θανάτου τὸν καθαιρέτην) [Ode III.10/1]. The death referred to in the above phrase is a spiritual death. The Archbishop of Crete used other words in relation to death in the physical sense. To better understand the indication that God “cleanses from death”, it is worth referring to the Philokalic tradition. This spirituality emphasises that as a result of evil committed, the intellect and the soul are obscured and polluted, and thus lose the ability to reflect God’s Light in themselves. In this sense, spiritual death consists in an immersion in impure spiritual darkness. In this state, man is not only incapable of distinguishing between good and evil, but he, as it were, immerses in the spiritual dirt of evil, from which he can be cleansed only by God who is the “Light of the world”. The role of God as the liberator (purifier) of spiritual death is emphasised in the following words of the troparion: βοῶ σοι ἐκ καρδίας μου πρὸ τοῦ τέλους· Ἥμαρτον, ἱλάσθητι, σῶσόν με

From my heart I cry to Thee before the end: I have sinned, be merciful to me and save me [Ode III.10/1].

This vision of one’s life coming to an end should mobilise the soul to think about death and change its behaviour. Meanwhile, although the Judge is already coming, the soul is not worried about what is important, but is still commits sins. Admonition of the soul is expressed in a reflective, yet warning form: Ἐγγίζει, ψυχή, τὸ τέλος, ἐγγίζει καὶ οὐ φροντίζεις, οὐχ ἑτοιμάζῃ· ὁ καιρὸς συντέμνει, διανάστηθι· ἐγγὺς ἐπὶ θύραις ὁ Κριτής ἐστιν· ὡς ὄναρ, ὡς ἄνθος ὁ χρόνος τοῦ βίου τρέχει· τί μάτην ταραττόμεθα.

The end draws near, my soul, the end draws near; yet thou dost not care or make ready. The time grows short, rise up: the Judge is at the door. The days of our life pass swiftly, as a dream, as a flower. Why do we trouble ourselves in vain? [Ode IV.2].

As a result of an unimportant and sinful life, a person is deprived of the bridal chamber (cf. Matt 9:15; Mark 2:19; Luke 5:34), for the lamp has gone out (ἡ λαμπὰς ἐσβέσθη) and when he was asleep (καθεύδοντι), the door, through which he could get to the supper (τὸ δεῖπνον) was closed. His arms and legs were tied. In this state he is thrown out (ἔξω ἀπέρριμμαι)243 [cf. Ode IV.21]. The author of the Great Canon again returns to reflection on death at the end of Ode IV. From reverie

243 Cf. Ps 31:22 LXX.

Man on the Path to Salvation

over earthly existence a painful statement was born: “The time of my life is short, filled with trouble and evil” (Ὁ χρόνος ὁ τῆς ζωῆς μου ὀλίγος καὶ πλήρης πόνων καὶ πονηριάς) [Ode IV.23].244 The end of life is even more deeply contemplated through a reference in Ode VII to the drama of weeping Hezekiah. When this king of Judah fell deathly ill he prayed to the Lord “and he answered him and gave him a sign” (2 Chron 32:24). But before the miraculous healing of Hezekiah took place, the prophet Isaiah, son of Amoz, came to him and told him: “Thus says the Lord: Set your house in order, for you shall die; you shall not recover” (Isa 38:1). When the king heard the words of the prophet, he turned to God and cried out with a loud cry: “Remember now, O Lord, I implore you, how I have walked before you in faithfulness with a whole heart, and have done what is good in your sight” (Isa 38:3). The fervent prayer of the dying Hezekiah aroused pity in God. He therefore ordered the prophet to tell the king: “Thus says the Lord, the God of your ancestor David: I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life” (Isa 38:5). Hezekiah’s song, which shows the suffering caused by the announcement of the king’s premature death and the hope that came from the salvation he experienced from God, is an important point of reference for reflection on the end of earthly life. It is likely that St Andrew of Crete also remembered from the Old Testament that “Hezekiah did not respond according to the benefit done to him, for his heart was proud. Therefore wrath came upon him and upon Judah and Jerusalem” (2 Chron 32:25). Thinking about the past, which seems like a dream (ὡς ἐνύπνιον ἐγειρομένου), similarly to Hezekiah, St Andrew weeps upon his bed and begs for a priceless treasure, which is addition to his passing of life (χρόνους ζωῆς) [cf. Ode VII.20]. From the perspective of the coming end (πρὸ τέλους), the author of the Great Canon asks the Righteous Judge and Saviour to deliver him from the fire (πυρὸς) and from the punishment that he deserves to suffer [cf. Ode VIII.13]. Contemplation about a “life that is dead” (ὁ βίος νενέκρωται) because the mind is wounded (Ὁ νοῦς τετραυμάτισται), the body has grown feeble (τὸ σῶμα μεμαλάκισται), the spirit is sick (νοσεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα), and speech has lost its power (ὁ λόγος ἠσθένησεν), formulated for the last time in the Great Canon, is intended to make the miserable soul confront the question: “What shalt thou do when the Judge comes to examine thy deeds? (τί ποιήσεις, ὅταν ἔλθῃ ὁ Κριτὴς ἀνερευνῆσαι τὰ σά) [Ode IX.1]. 4.7

Meditation on Last Judgement

Awareness of one’s sinfulness prompts man to turn to Almighty God, asking him not to enter into judgment with him. The beginning of Troparion 23 of Ode I is a

244 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 286–8.

219

220

The Identity and Drama of Man

direct reference to the verse of Psalm 143:2 – “Do not enter into judgment with your servant, for no one living is righteous before you” (LXX: καὶ μὴ εἰσέλθῃς εἰς κρίσιν μετὰ τοῦ δούλου σου, ὅτι οὐ δικαιωθήσεται ἐνώπιόν σου πᾶς ζῶν). St Andrew of Crete quotes the first part of the above verse: “Enter not into judgement with me” (Μὴ εἰσέλθῃς μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐν κρίσει) because he knew very well that man is in a losing position because God assess the value of one’s actions and examines his words and will correct his impulses accordingly. This internal state of tension, which leads to a downfall through uncontrolled movements or aspirations as a result of actions and words (φέρων μου τὰ πρακτέα, λόγους ἐκζητῶν καὶ εὐθύνων ὁρμάς·) reflects the spiritual condition of the human person. Thus, all that man can ask of the Almighty is that he should overlook his sins and save him (ἀλλ’ ἐν οἰκτιρμοῖς σου παρορῶν μου τὰ δεινά, σῶσόν με, Παντοδύναμε) [Ode I.23]. God, as the Judge, examines the heart of man. In the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah, God himself speaks of Himself: “I the Lord test the mind and search the heart, to give to all according to their ways, according to the fruit of their doings” (LXX – ἐγὼ Κύριος ἐτάζων καρδίας καὶ δοκιμάζων νεφροὺς τοῦ δοῦναι ἐκάστῳ κατὰ τὰς ὁδοὺς αὐτοῦ καὶ κατὰ τοὺς καρποὺς τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων αὐτοῦ) (Jer 17:10). This very image of God inspired

the phrase: “Know and see that I am God, searching out men’s hearts” (Γνῶτε καὶ ἴδετε, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Θεός, ὁ ἐρευνῶν καρδίας) [Ode II.39/10]. The meaning of the phrase derived from the Septuagint “I examine the heart” (ἐτάζων καρδίας) is fully preserved in the Great Canon as “I search out hearts” (ὁ ἐρευνῶν καρδίας). A search or examination of the human heart highlights any injustice. God punishes human thoughts (κολάζων ἐννοίας), reproves actions (ἐλέγχων πράξεις) and burns up sins (φλογίζων ἁμαρτίας). To understand the last part of the analysed troparion: “judges the orphan and the humble and the poor” (κρίνων ὀρφανὸν καὶ ταπεινὸν καὶ πτωχόν), a reference must be taken to Deuteronomy 10:18 and Psalm 68:5. Both verses show the attitude of God to orphans and widows. According to the former, God “executes justice for the orphan and the widow” (LXX: ποιῶν κρίσιν προσηλύτῳ καὶ ὀρφανῷ), and according to the latter, “[God is the] Father of orphans and protector of widows (LXX: τοῦ πατρὸς τῶν ὀρφανῶν καὶ κριτοῦ τῶν χηρῶν). Which vision of God – the Judge who administers justice or the Judge who protects the orphan, humble and poor – is closer to St Andrew? Although the Greek concept of κρίνων indicates that God judges, the translation of the Great Canon into English, for example, refers to Psalm 68:5: “[…] in My judgement I protect the orphan and the humble and the poor.”245 If we recall Psalm 82:3: “Give justice (LXX: κρίνατε) to the weak and the orphan; maintain the right (LXX: δικαιώσατε) of the lowly and the destitute”, it

245 “The Great Canon by St Andrew of Crete”, in The Lenten Triodion, 384.

Man on the Path to Salvation

becomes clear that the notion κρίνατε can be understood not only as to “judge”, but also as to “decide” or to “stand up for.” The author of the Great Canon confesses the secrets of his heart to God the Judge, i. e. he confesses all that is hidden in his heart (Τὰ κρύφια τῆς καρδίας μου ἐξηγόρευσά) [Ode VII.2]. This requires humility and is associated with pain and even suffering. However, it is a path to God’s immeasurable mercy. The cry to God: “See my abasement, see my affliction, and attend to my judgement now” (ἴδε μου τὴν ταπείνωσιν ἴδε καὶ τὴν θλῖψίν μου καὶ πρόσχες τῇ κρίσει μου νῦν) is complemented by the supplication: “in Thy compassion have mercy upon me, O God of our fathers” (αὐτός με ἐλέησον ὡς εὔσπλαγχνος, ὁ τῶν Πατέρων Θεός). The hymnographer from Crete addresses God not only as the righteous Judge (Δικαιοκρῖτα), but also as the Saviour (Σωτήρ), who can save man from the fire and punishment he justly deserves [cf. Ode VIII.13]. The rich content of the Great Canon and the way it is conveyed aim at the spiritual awakening of the sinner.246 References to Scripture, treated as the “Book of Life”, reveal a righteous and merciful God, and are supposed to help us realize that there is still time to beg the Saviour for forgiveness of sins. However, it is not known when exactly God will sit on the throne as the Merciful and Compassionate (εὔσπλαγχνος) and, at the same time, as the Judge (Κριτὴς). Then, on that Last Day, He will reveal His dread glory (τὴν φοβερὰν δόξαν σου) [Ode VIII.20]. It should come as no surprise then that the concerned troparion contains a cry of horror: “O Christ, what fear there will be then!” (Χριστέ, ὢ ποῖος φόβος τότε). John the Apostle declares that Christ, the Son of God, received from the Father “all judgment” (ἀλλὰ τὴν κρίσιν) (John 5:22). From the evangelical vision of the Last Judgment we learn that “Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven’ with power and great glory” (Matt 24:30). In further description of this horrifying event, the Archbishop of Crete refers to a vision of the Son of Man taken from the Book of Daniel: “His throne was fiery flames, and its wheels were burning fire. A stream of fire issued and flowed out from his presence” (Dan 7:9–10). This apocalyptic furnace will then burn with fire and everyone will shrink back in terror before the judgement-seat of God (καμίνου καιομένης, πάντων δειλιώντων τὸ ἄστεκτον τοῦ βήματός σου) [Ode VIII.20]. The author of the Great Canon sees God’s judgment in two ways: first as a judgment on the condition of the heart of every human being, and then as a universal and terrifying Final Judgment.247 This vision of judgment triggers uncertainty and 246 Cf. J.S. Romanides, “Man and His True Life According to the Greek Orthodox Service Book”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 1 (1954) 63–83. 247 Cf. B.E. Daley, The Hope of the Early Church. A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 105–23.

221

222

The Identity and Drama of Man

even horror in the man who, in his encounter with God, discovers how much evil there is in his thoughts, words and deeds. For every person, Jesus Christ is always not only an apocalyptic Judge, but also a merciful and compassionate God. The following words from the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel carry hope for mercy: “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from their ways and live” (Ezek 33:11),248 with this quote not losing its relevance in the New Testament. Awareness of judgment over the human heart, deepened by the announcement of Last Judgment, during which all evil will be thrown into a fiery furnace, is intended to help man to radically throw himself into the arms of the merciful God. 4.8

Sobriety of the Soul (νηφαλιότης της ψυχής) and Vigilance of the Soul (εγρήγορση ψυχής)

Twice in the Great Canon we can find the phrase “be watchful” (νῆφε). It is mentioned for the first time in a troparion referring to the biblical pericope about Ishmael’s expulsion by Abraham (cf. Gen 21:9–14). St Andrew of Crete calls for the soul to be watchful (νῆφε), so that it does not share the fate of Ishmael, who was cast out as “the child of a bondwoman” (ὡς παιδίσκης ἀποκύημα) due to a similar (ὅμοιόν) [sexual] lust (πάθῃς λαγνεύουσα) [Ode III.19/10]. The second call for sobriety/watchfulness of to the soul was formulated in reference to a description of the temptation of Christ by the devil. The Bishop of Gortyna invokes two of the three temptations; the first one: “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread” (Matt 4:3), and the third one when the devil took Jesus “to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendour; and he said to him, ‘All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me’” (Matt 4:8–9). After invoking through words the images of these temptations, the author calls out: “O my soul, look with fear on what happened; watch and pray every hour to God” (Φοβοῦ, ὦ ψυχή, τὸ δρᾶμα· νῆφε εὔχου πᾶσαν ὥραν Θεῷ) [Ode IХ.9]. The verb νήφω appears 6 times in the New Testament to indicate sobriety, also understood as abstinence from alcohol. In the First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians, the call to sobriety (νήφωμεν) is combined with a call to vigilance (γρηγορῶμεν).249 St Paul encouraged Timothy to be vigilant throughout his life: “As for you, always be sober (σὺ δὲ νῆφε ἐν πᾶσι), endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, carry out your ministry fully” (2 Tim 4:5). St Peter also taught: “Therefore prepare your minds for action (τῆς διανοίας); discipline yourselves (νήφοντες); set all your hope on the grace that Jesus

248 Cf. M.S. Odell, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: Ezekiel (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2005), 415–16. 249 Cf. 1 Thess 5:6.

Man on the Path to Salvation

Christ will bring you when he is revealed” (1 Pet 1:13), adding that prudence and sobriety are a condition of prayer: “[…] be serious (σωφρονήσατε) and discipline yourselves (νήψατε) for the sake of your prayers (εἰς τὰς προσευχάς)” (1 Pet 4:7). The need for being sober and vigilant makes it possible to resist the attacks of the devil: “Discipline yourselves (νήψατε), keep alert (γρηγορήσατε). Like a roaring lion your adversary the devil prowls around, looking for someone to devour” (1 Pet 5:8). In the Great Canon, the term γρηγόρησον, similarly to the New Testament, complements the notion of νῆφε. Γρηγόρησον, similarly to νῆφε, is used with reference to the soul. The Bishop of Gortyna calls upon his soul to be vigilant (γρηγόρησον) and full of courage (ἀρίστευσον), like the great Patriarch Jacob, to see with the intellect God in the innermost darkness (τὸν ἄδυτον γνόφον) and to become a great merchant (γένῃ μεγαλέμπορος) [Ode IV.9]. It is possible to hear in these verses an echo of the Gospel: “Keep awake (γρηγορεῖτε) therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming” (Matt 24:42). The phrase “keep awake” also appears in the parable of the man who, while going on a journey, assigned to each of his servants a task and commanded the doorkeeper to keep watch (ἵνα γρήγορῇ).250 In this context, Jesus’ reproach addressed to Peter during prayer in the Garden is significant: “Simon, are you asleep? Could you not keep awake (γρηγορῆσαι) one hour?” (Mark 14:37). The combination of vigilance and prayer is a condition for resisting temptation. The Gospel of St Mark shows the cause and effect relationship between vigilance and prayer and being immune to temptation: “Keep awake (γρηγορεῖτε) and pray προσεύχεσθε) that you may not come into the time of trial; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mark 14:38; cf. Matt 26:41).251 St Paul also encouraged vigilance: “Keep alert (γρηγορεῖτε), stand firm in your faith, be courageous, be strong” (1 Cor 16:13). In the Book of Revelation, St John states directly: “Blessed is the one who stays awake (μακάριος ὁ γρηγορῶν)” (Rev 16:15). 4.9

Humility (ταπείνοσις)

Humility, in the biblical sense, is in opposition to vanity and pride. A humble man acknowledges that he has received everything he possesses from God (cf. 1 Cor 4:7). Humility is equivalent to abasement and being open to the grace of God (cf. Jas 4:6; Prov 3:34). For Christians, the epitome of humility is Christ:

250 Cf. Mark 13.34. 251 Cf. D.E. Aune, “«The Spirit is Willing, but the Flesh is Weak» (Mark 14:38b and Matt. 26:41b)”, in D.E. Aune/R.D. Young (ed.), Reading Religions in the Ancient World (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2007) 125–39.

223

224

The Identity and Drama of Man

“[…] though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness.252 And being found in human form, he humbled himself (ἐταπείνωσεν) and became obedient to the point of death – even death on a cross” (Phil 2:6–8).253

He is “gentle (πρᾷός) and humble in heart (ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ)” (Matt 11:29). The Saviour’s humility becomes the basis of St Peter’s encouragement to the first Christians: “And all of you must clothe yourselves with humility (τὴν ταπεινοφροσύνην) in your dealings with one another, for God opposes the proud (ὑπερηφάνοις), but gives grace to the humble (ταπεινοῖς)” (1 Pet 5:5). This truth becomes true in the person of the Mother of God. She herself confesses in the hymn of praise to God: “[...] for he has looked with favour on the lowliness (ἐπὶ τὴν ταπείνωσιν) of his servant (τῆς δούλης)” (Luke 1:48). The Great Canon addresses the subject of humility twice. For the first time, in a troparion referring to the evangelical pericope concerning the prayer of the Pharisee and the tax collector (cf. Luke 18:9–14). Reproaching himself for speaking boastfully (Ὑψήγορος) and with boldness of heart (θρασὺς δὲ καὶ τὴν καρδίαν), the Archbishop of Crete asks the merciful yet righteous Judge (δικαιοκρῖτα) not to judge him and along with the Pharisee, but to grant him the abasement of the Publican (τοῦ Τελώνου ταπείνωσιν παράσχου μοι) [Ode IV.24]. The parable that Jesus told those who “trusted in themselves that they were righteous and regarded others with contempt” (Luke 18:9) shows two attitudes of man towards God. Elevation above others is expressed in the prayer of the Pharisee: “God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income” (Luke 18:11–12) serves as an exemplification of vanity in relation to other people and pride towards God. The humble acknowledgement of one’s sinfulness, manifested by the tax collector, both in his attitude of abasement (“standing far off, [he] would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast”), as well as in the words of his prayer: “‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!” (Luke 18:13), expresses the essence of humility. The request made to God by the hymnographer of Crete to not judge him like a Pharisee, but to give him the humility that the tax collector is manifested, and is deeply rooted in the last verse of the pericope about the Pharisee and the tax collector, namely

252 Cf. Staniloae, Orthodox Spirituality, 180–4. 253 Cf. C.A. Wanamaker, “Philippians 2.6–11: Son of God or Adamic Christology?”, New Testament Studies 33/2 (1987) 179–93; G.D. Fee, “Philippians 2:5–11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose?”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992) 29–46; E. Lohmeyer, Kyrios Jesus: Eine Untersuchung zu Phil 2:5–11 (Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1928); R.P. Martin, Carmen Christi. Philippians ii. 5–11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 24–283.

Man on the Path to Salvation

in the words: “For all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves (ταπεινῶν) will be exalted” (Luke 18:14).254 In a troparion showing a deep and very intimate relationship with God, the author of the Great Canon begs God for the second time to look at his abasement (ἴδε μου τὴν ταπείνωσιν). This request is preceded by the phrase: “the secrets of my heart have I confessed to Thee, my Judge” (Τὰ κρύφια τῆς καρδίας μου ἐξηγόρευσά σοι τῷ Κριτῇ μου). Being aware that Jesus himself knows “what was in everyone” (ἐγίνωσκε τί ἦν ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ) (John 2:25), the author reveals to Him the secrets of his “inner self ” (ὁ κρυπτὸς τῆς καρδίας ἄνθρωπος)” (1 Pet 3:4), and the affliction (τὴν θλῖψίν) which he experiences and asks the compassionate God with all humility to have mercy on him [cf. Ode VII.2]. 4.10 Prayer (προσευχὴ) The Great Canon is a hymn of prayer to God. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the word prayer (προσευχὴ) itself was used only twice, in Ode IX, itself being the last ode. In both cases, St Andrew of Crete encourages his soul to pray to Christ. In Troparion 4 he speaks to his soul: “through prayers (προσευχαῖς)255 and fasting (νηστείαις),256 through chastity (ἁγνείᾳ)257 and reverence (σεμνότητι),258 win back Christ’s mercy”. In Troparion 8, he warns his soul against being dismayed (Ψυχή, μὴ ἀθυμήσῃς), but, if the enemy attacks, he can be driven away (ἀποκρουσθήτω) through prayer (προσευχαῖς) and fasting (νηστείαις). Jesus himself recommends to fight against particularly dangerous demons with prayer and fasting. When answering the disciples’ questions: “Why could we not cast it out?” (Matt 17:19), he replied: “This kind does not go out except by prayer (ἐν προσευχῇ) and fasting (καὶ νηστείᾳ)” (Matt 17:21). 4.11 Fasting (νηστεία) Already in the times of the Old Testament, fasting was combined with supplicatory prayer (cf. Lev 16:29–30) and was an expression of man’s humility before God. Refraining from food throughout the day (cf. Gen 20:26; 2 Sam 2:16; Jonah 3:7) was treated as a religious act because food was considered a gift from God (Deut 8:3). The main motive for fasting is to adopt an attitude of humility in order to open oneself to God’s action and presence. This was the purpose of the forty-day fasts of 254 255 256 257 258

Cf. Mathewes-Green, First Fruits, 15. Cf. Rom 15:30. Cf. Luke 2:37. Cf. 1 Tim 4:12. Cf. 1 Tim 2:2.

225

226

The Identity and Drama of Man

Moses (cf. Exod 34:28) and the prophet Elijah (cf. 1 Kings 19:8). But Jesus’ forty-day fast was a preparation for the proclamation of the Kingdom of God. After fasting for forty days and forty nights, when Jesus was hungry, the devil approached him and said: “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread” (Matt 4:3). Jesus’ reply – “It is written, ‘One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God’” (Matt 4:4) – makes us realize that it makes sense to refrain from taking food in so far as it is linked to feeding on the Word of God.259 It is also a fact that Old Testament prophets had already warned against the formalism of fasting (cf. Jer 14:12), pointing to its connection with the difficulty of seeking true justice (cf. Isa 58:2–11), since its basis is the love of God (cf. Zech 7:5). Pious Jews fasted and prayed (cf. Luke 2:37). It is known from the Gospels that this is what the disciples of John the Baptist and the Pharisees did (cf. Mark 2:18). Jesus recommends discretion in the practice of fasting, so that it is known only to God. Christian fasting is to be a humble fast that opens one’s heart to God the Father (cf. Matt 6:17–18). In the Great Canon, the topic of fasting appears twice, each time in connection with prayer. St Andrew of Crete recommends that the soul, following the example of the righteous and turning away from sinners, should be able to connect prayer (προσευχαῖς) with fasting (νηστείαις) and thus be able to beg Christ for the forgiveness of sins [cf. Ode ΙΧ.4].260 The example of Jesus fasting for forty days in the desert is intended to motivate the soul to fight the demons attacking it: “Do not be dismayed, my soul: if the enemy attacks thee, through prayer and fasting drive him away” (Ψυχή, μὴ ἀθυμήσῃς· ἄν σοι προσβάλῃ ὁ ἐχθρός προσευχαῖς τε καὶ νηστείαις ἀποκρουσθήτω σοι) [Ode IX.8].261 This recommendation comes from an evangelical pericope about the healing of an epileptic, from whom the disciples of Jesus were not able to drive the evil spirit away from (cf. Mark 9:17–28).262 It ends with the Saviour’s explanation: “This kind can come out only through prayer (προσευχῇ) and fasting (νηστείᾳ)” (Mark 9:29).263

259 Cf. J. Piper, A Hunger for God. Desiring God Through Fasting and Prayer (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1997), 51–62; E. Towns, Knowing God Through Fasting (Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image Publishers, 2002). 260 Mark 9:29. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 357–8. 261 J.B. Russell, The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977). 262 Cf. C.E.B. Cranfield, “St Mark 9.14–29”, Scottish Journal of Theology 3/1 (1950) 57–67. 263 Cf. G. Van Oyen, “Demons and Exorcism in the Gospel of Mark”, in N. Vos, W. Otten (ed.), Demons and the Devil in Ancient and Medieval Christianity (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2011) 99–116.

Man on the Path to Salvation

4.12 Action (πράξις) The Greek term πρᾶξις is usually defined as an action, deed, act, practice, as well as a function connected with prolonged activity and/or responsibility.264 In the New Testament, this term is used six times in different lexical forms. In the Great Canon it is also mentioned 6 times. Depending on the context in which it appears, it has a negative or positive meaning. In the negative sense it is associated with concepts such as “sin” or “evil”: “No sin (ἁμάρτημα) has there been in life, no evil deed (πρᾶξις), no wickedness (κακία) that I have not committed, O Saviour” [Ode IV.4]. As many as three troparia were written about the action (τὴν πρᾶξιν) of David, or his sin [cf. Ode VII.4–6]. The last one mentions self-condemnation, which is expressed in Psalm 51. King David, realizing what caused his action (τὴν πρᾶξιν), resulting from sensual passion, accused himself and called out to God: “Have mercy upon me, for against Thee only have I sinned (ἐξήμαρτον), O God of all. Do Thou cleanse me (αὐτὸς καθάρισόν)” [Ode VII.6]. St Andrew of Crete sets for his soul as an example of manly (prudent) action (τῆς σωφροσύνης πρᾶξιν) the action of Moses and encourages it to feed on the wisdom thereof (τιθηνοῦ τὴν σοφίαν) [Ode V.8]. In two successive troparia of Ode IV, action (πρᾶξις) is linked to contemplation (θεωρία). In order to contrast their meaning, the Bishop of Gortyna refers to the two wives of the Patriarch Jacob, i. e. to Leah and Rachel, to show his soul what the difference between them is. The soul should perceive Leah as a personification of action (πρᾶξιν) because she had many children (cf. Gen 29:31–35). Rachel, on the other hand, is a personification of contemplation (θεωρίᾳ) because of the hardships Jacob had suffered so that she could become his wife. Although he liked Rachel and had served her father Laban for seven years in order to marry her, he was deceived by his father-in-law, who on his wedding night deceitfully brought his older daughter, Leah, into his bed. When Jacob found out that he had been deceived and asked Laban about it, he replied that it was not customary in his tribe to marry a younger daughter before the elder. Knowing that Jacob loved Rachel, he also offered her as his second wife, but on condition that Jacob would serve him for another seven years (cf. Gen 29:1–30). It is indispensable that the soul undertake effort (πόνων) in all actions as well as in contemplation [cf. Ode IV.8]. While acquiring action (πρᾶξιν) and knowledge (μετὰ γνώσεως), the soul should remain watchful (γρηγόρησον) and be full of courage (ἀρίστευσον), like the great Patriarch Jacob. Its intellect (νοῦς) will then see (ὁρῶν) God, and contemplate (ἐν θεωρίᾳ) the innermost darkness (ἄδυτον γνόφον) [cf. Ode IV.9].

264 Cf. E. Timiadis, Towards Authentic Christian Spirituality: Orthodox Pastoral Reflections (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1998), 101–29.

227

228

The Identity and Drama of Man

4.13 Virtue (αρετή) In the Hellenistic world, the term virtue (ἀρετὴ) meant the fame, perfection or excellence that was achieved or bestowed upon someone, as well as valour in battle or merit. In the Septuagint there is no reference to the Greek idea of “virtue”. In the New Testament, this word only appears three times. In his Epistle to the Philippians, St Paul uses the term ἀρετὴ to encourage concentration of thought (λογίζεσθε) on “whatever is true (ἀληθῆ), whatever is honourable (σεμνά), whatever is just (δίκαια), whatever is pure (ἁγνά), whatever is pleasing (προσφιλῆ), whatever is commendable (εὔφημα)” (Phil 4:8). At the same time, he combines the concept of “virtue” (ἀρετὴ) with the idea of an act of valour (εἴ τις ἔπαινος), thus indicating the achievement of perfection in life. The concept of ἀρετὴ was similarly understood by St Peter who, making Christians aware that they have already broken free “from the corruption (ἐπιθυμίᾳ φθορᾶς) that is in the world” (2 Pet 1:4); urges them to support, with all zeal, “faith (ἐν τῇ πίστει ὑμῶν) with goodness (τὴν ἀρετήν), and goodness (ἐν δὲ τῇ ἀρετῇ) with knowledge (τὴν γνῶσιν)” (2 Pet 1:5). In the sense of moral perfection, the term ἀρετὴ was used in the First Epistle of Peter to highlight the particular election and vocation of Christians: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts (τὰς ἀρετὰς) of him who called you out of darkness into his marvellous light” (1 Pet 2:9). In the Great Canon, the term “virtue” (ἀρετὴ) was used three times. In Ode I, the Archbishop of Crete reproaches his soul that like a prodigal son (cf. Luke 15:11–32), it has wasted “the substance of the soul” (τὴν οὐσίαν) and is devoid of the virtues of holiness (ἀρετῶν εὐσεβῶν) [Ode I.21]. An example to follow for the soul is the prophet Elijah, who was lifted up to heaven in the chariot of virtues, high above earthly things (Ὁ διφρηλάτης Ἠλίας ἅρματι ταῖς ἀρεταῖς ἐπιβὰς ὡς εἰς Οὐρανοὺς ἤγετο ὑπεράνω ποτὲ τῶν ἐπιγείων) [Ode VIII.2]. The term “chariot of virtues” (ἅρματι ταῖς ἀρεταῖς) is the equivalent of the “chariot of fire” (ἅρματι πυρὸς) found in the very concise description of the parting of Elijah and Elisha: “As they continued walking and talking, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them, and Elijah ascended in a whirlwind into heaven” (2 Kings 2:11).265 By associating “virtue” with “fire”, St Andrew of Crete emphasizes the uniqueness, ardour and also the purification which the soul experiences by practicing virtue. It is no accident that he asks the righteous Judge and Saviour to have mercy on him and to deliver him from fire (ρῦσαί με τοῦ πυρὸς). Before he reaches the end (ἄνες μοι πρὸ τέλους) [of life], the author begs for a granting of virtue (ἀρετῆς) and repentance (μετάνοιας) [cf. Ode VIII.13].

265 Cf. J. Lundbom, “Elijah’s Chariot Ride”, Journal of Jewish Studies 24 (1973) 39–55.

Man on the Path to Salvation

4.14 Chastity (ἁγνεία) The term ἁγνεία occurs only once in the Septuagint (cf. 1 Macc 14:36) and twice in the New Testament (cf. 1 Tim 4:12; 5:2). While in the First Book of Maccabees it is used to refer to the temple, in the First Epistle to Timothy it concerns man. St Paul encourages his disciple to be an example (τύπος) for the believers “in speech (ἐν λόγῳ) and conduct (ἐν ἀναστροφῇ), in love (ἐν ἀγάπῃ), in faith (ἐν πίστει), in purity (ἐν ἁγνείᾳ)” (1 Tim 4:12). Purity in this verse can be interpreted as spiritual clarity. In the Great Canon, the term “chastity” or “purity” (ἁγνεία) is used twice, first, in reference to Joseph, sold by his brothers (cf. Gen 37:1–36). St Andrew of Crete writes that Joseph was “the fruit of purity (τὸν τῆς ἁγνείας καρπὸν) and chastity [modesty, prudence, composure, moderation in desires] (τὸν τῆς σωφροσύνης)” [Ode V.3]. The Patriarch Jacob loved Joseph the most of all his sons because he was born in his old age and also because he was the son of his beloved wife, Rachel (cf. Gen 35:24; 29:18). To call him the “fruit of purity” is linked to the love that led to his conception. The term “chastity” appears again in Troparion 4 of Ode IX, in which the Archbishop of Crete encourages his soul to look at the examples (τὰ ὑποδείγματα) from the New Testament given in the Great Canon to achieve compunction (πρὸς κατάνυξιν), and, as a result of this insight, to follow the righteous and turn away from the sinful. In the final phrase of the troparion, it is clearly indicated that the soul can win back Christ’s mercy through chastity (ἁγνείᾳ) in connection with prayer (προσευχαῖς), fasting (νηστείαις) and reverence (σεμνότητι). 4.15 Prudence/Self-Control (σωφροσύνη) The term σωφροσύνη is a rare word, both in the Septuagint266 and in the New Testament.267 The semantic scope of the term is quite broad. It is usually translated as self-control, self-restraint, prudence, composure or moderation in desire. St Paul says in a conversation with Festus: “[...] I am speaking the sober truth (ἀληθείας καὶ σωφροσύνης ῥήματα ἀποφθέγγομαι).”268 In the First Epistle to Timothy, the term σωφροσύνη is used twice in a note of advice addressed to women. First, St Paul recommends that women should “dress themselves modestly and decently (μετὰ σωφροσύνης)” in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes (1 Tim 2:9); and then claims that women will be saved by

266 Cf. 4 Macc 1:3; 4 Macc 1:6; 4 Macc 1:30. 267 Cf. Acts 26:25; 1 Tim 2:9; 1 Tim 2:15. 268 Acts 26:25.

229

230

The Identity and Drama of Man

giving birth, “provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty [self-control of decency] (μετὰ σωφροσύνης)” (1 Tim 2:15). St Andrew of Crete uses the concept of “prudence/self-control” (σωφροσύνη) twice. First, with regards to the person of Joseph, sold by his brothers (cf. Gen 37:1–36), for him, Joseph is the fruit (τὸν καρπὸν) of purity (τῆς ἁγνείας) and prudence [chastity, self-control] (τῆς σωφροσύνης). [Ode V.3]. Another troparion in the same ode begins by reminding the soul of the midwives who, by Pharaoh’s order, were supposed to kill the newborn boys of the Chosen People, but who did not do so out of fear of God (cf. Exod 1:15–16). When they were called by the ruler and asked: “Why have you done this, and allowed the boys to live?” (Exod 1:18), they replied prudently: “Because the Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women; for they are vigorous and give birth before the midwife comes to them” (Exod 1:19). God rewarded their conduct by providing them with offspring (cf. Exod 1:21). The Bishop of Gortyna wants to encourage his soul to repent and become a spiritual child, which can be facilitated by referring to the prudence of the actions of the Hebrew midwives269 and to the wisdom of Moses: Εἰ τὰς μαίας ἤκουσας κτεινούσας ποτὲ ἄνηβον, τάλαινα, τὴν ἀρρενωπόν, ψυχή, τῆς σωφροσύνης πρᾶξιν νῦν ὡς ὁ μέγας Μωσῆς τιθηνοῦ τὴν σοφίαν.

Thou hast heard, wretched soul, of the midwives who once killed in its infancy the manly action of self-control: like great Moses, then, be suckled on wisdom [Ode V.8].

4.16 Contemplation (θεωρία) The term θεωρία appears only three times in Scripture in the sense of a spectacle or something seen.270 It is worth noting that its use in the New Testament is connected with the death of Jesus on the cross (cf. Luke 23,44–46). St Luke mentions the crowds “who had gathered there for this spectacle (ἐπὶ τὴν θεωρίαν)” (Luke 23:48). In the Great Canon, the word θεωρία does not mean spectacle, but rather vision and contemplation. In this sense it is used in an exhortation to the soul to imitate the way of life of Moses in the desert, to see in contemplation (ἐν θεωρίᾳ) the vision of God (θεοφανείας) in a fiery bush (ἐν βάτῳ) [cf. Ode V.10].271 In the remaining four troparia, the term θεωρία is used in the sense of contemplation.272 Recalling the vision of the ladder that the Patriarch Jacob saw in his dream (cf. Gen

269 270 271 272

Cf. B.S. Childs, “The Birth of Moses”, Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965) 109–22. Cf. 2 Macc 5:26; Dan 5:7; Luke 23:48. Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 301–4. Cf. N.A. Matsoukas, Theologia dogmatica e simbolica ortodossa, vol. 1, Introduzzione alla gnoseologia theologica ortodossa (trans. E. Pavlidou; Roma: Edizioni Dehoniane, 1995), 142–6.

Man on the Path to Salvation

28:10–22),273 the Archbishop of Crete wishes that the soul treats it as an example (δεῖγμα), encouraging action (πράξει) and ascension in knowledge (γνώσει), and contemplation (θεωρίᾳ), with this bringing a renewal (ἀνακαινίσθητι) for for the soul [Ode IV.6]. This visual incentive to make an effort to ascend to God is Jacob’s dream. This Old Testament patriarch saw angels in his dream, who went down a ladder and climbed a mountain, on the top of which he saw God. The dream of James (cf. Gen 28:12) is alluded to in the Gospel of St John the Apostle, thus emphasizing the deity of Jesus Christ: “Very truly, I tell you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man” (John 1:51). According to the teaching of the Church Fathers, the vision of the Jacob’s ladder hides a great mystery and leads to Christ. Origen wrote in one of his Homilies on the Book of Genesis: “What kind of man can understand what that vision contains which Jacob saw in Bethel when he was departing into Mesopotamia, when he said: “This is the house of the Lord and the gate of heaven” (Gen 28:17)? And if anyone can know and understand each individual vision or the things which are in the Law or in the prophets, that man dwells “at the well of vision.”274 A Christological interpretation of Jacob’s dream of a ladder was proposed by St Irenaeus of Lyon. In his work On Apostolic Preaching, he wrote: “And Jacob, going to Mesopotamia, saw him in a dream, as he stood on a ladder, that is, on a tree (cf. Gen 28:10–15). This ladder was fixed from the ground to the sky. After him, those believing in heaven (that is, in the Son of God) enter heaven. For his torment is our ascension. All these kinds of visions point to the Son of God, who talks to and stays with people.”275 St Gregory of Nazianzus compares Jacob’s ladder to the ascetic path,276 while St Gregory of Nyssa, in The Life of Moses,277 gives Jacob’s ladder a mystical meaning.278

273 Cf. C. Houtman, “What Did Jacob See in His Dream at Bethel?”, Vetus Testamentum 27 (1977) 337–51. 274 Origen, “Genesis Homily 11.3. On the fact that Abraham took Cetura as a wife and that Isaac dwelt at the well of vision”, in Origen, Homilies on Genesis and Exodus (trans. R.E. Heine; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2002) 168–175, on p. 173. 275 Irenaeus of Lyons, On the Apostolic Preaching 45 (trans. J. Behr; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1997) 70. 276 St Gregory Nazianzen, “Oration XLIII.71. Funeral Oration on the Great S. Basil, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 7 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 785–831, on p. 825: “I extol the ladder of Jacob, and the pillar which he anointed to God, and his wrestling with Him, whatever it was; and, in my opinion, it was the contrast and opposition of the human stature to the height of God, resulting in the tokens of the defeat of his race.”  277 Cf. Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Moses (trans. A.J. Malherbe; New York/Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1978). 278 Cf. G.S. Bebis, “Gregory of Nyssa’s «De Vita Moysis». A Philosophical and Theological Analysis”, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 12/3 (1967) 369–93.

231

232

The Identity and Drama of Man

The work of St John Climacus entitled The Ladder of Divine Ascent is an example of an ascetic interpretation of Jacob’s ladder.279 This is also how St John Chrysostom perceives it in his Homily on the Gospel of John: “And so mounting as it were by steps, let us get to heaven by Jacob’s ladder. For the ladder seems to me to signify in a riddle by that vision the gradual ascent by means of virtue, by which it is possible for us to ascend from earth to heaven, not using material steps, but improvement and correction of manners.”280 Troparia 8 and 9 of Ode IV illustrate the relationship between action (πρᾶξις) and contemplation (θεωρία). As already mentioned in the section concerning action, St Andrew of Crete compared Jacob’s wives (cf. Gen 29:31–35) to these concepts. Leah is the personification of action, while Rachel is the personification of contemplation [cf. Ode IV.8]. The condition for both action and contemplation is vigilance. Being aware of this, the hymnographer tries to motivate his soul with the words: “Be watchful, O my soul (Γρηγόρησον, ὦ ψυχή μου)” [Ode IV.9]. Owing to the vigilance of the soul, the intellect (νοῦς) is able to see (ὁρῶν) God, with this taking place in contemplation (ἐν θεωρίᾳ) of the innermost darkness (ἄδυτον γνόφον) [Ode IV.9]. In the second case, the reference to contemplation is very dynamic. The Bishop of Gortyna reproaches his soul that it has become mad like a heifer (Ὡς δάμαλις, ψυχή, παροιστρήσα), thus becoming like Ephraim. This comparison is not accidental, as it is written in the book of the prophet Hosea: “Ephraim was a trained heifer that loved to thresh” (Hos 10:11). Angry Ephraim is also portrayed in other verses taken from the same book. The prophet says that “Ephraim herds the wind, and pursues the east wind all day long; they multiply falsehood and violence” (Hos 12:1), moreover he breaks the Law and goes after vanity (cf. Hos 5:11), in Betel he cultivates prostitution (cf. Hos 6:10) and he is joined to idols (cf. Hos 4:17). Although Ephraim has built many altars, they all serve him to multiply his sins (cf. Hos 8:11). He does not even spare his children, whom he made wild animals for slaughter (Hos 9:13). The prophet sadly states that “Ephraim’s iniquity is bound up; his sin is kept in store” (Hos 13:12). It is therefore no coincidence that the Archbishop of Crete demands from his soul to rescue its life (ἀνάσωσον τὸν βίον), gain wings through action (πράξει) and promote the contemplation (θεωρίᾳ) of the intellect [cf. Ode VI.3].281

279 Cf. St John Climacus, Scala Paradisi, PG 88, 632A–1205D. John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent (trans. C. Luibheid/N. Russel; New York/Ramsey/Toronto: Paulist Press, 1982). 280 St John Chrysostom, “Homily LXXXIII”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Homilies on the Gospel of St John and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (1 Series; 14 vol.; Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 1978) 598–609, on p. 608. 281 “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 309–15. Cf. Th. Spidlik, “La theoria et la praxis chez Grégoire de Nazianze”, Studia Patristica 14 (1976), 358–64.

The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person

5.

The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person

The Mother of God was particularly venerated by St Andrew of Crete. He was deeply convinced of her exceptional role in the history of salvation, as well as of her effective intercession with God.282 He knew that the human being is too weak to climb to the heights of the spiritual life with one’s own strength. To achieve this, one needs special help and the intercession of the Mother of God. The help on this road to perfection is the contemplation of the one who herself perfectly realized the anthropological plan of God. The words with which the author of the Great Canon addresses the Mother of God indicate his special intimacy with her. For the Bishop Gortyna, Mary is the great hope of mankind, the one who presents our repentance to God, our haven in the midst of the storms of life, and the one who opens for people the gates of God’s mercy. Almost three quarters of the hymns and almost one third of the homiletical works of St Andrew of Crete constitute texts concerning the Mother of God, and refer to the feasts celebrated in Her honour, especially her Nativity, the Annunciation and the Dormition.283 Four homilies on the Virgin’s Birth,284 one on her Annunciation,285 and three on the Dormition of the Mother of God286 have survived. They include references to the decisions of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. In particular, they highlight the fact of the Incarnation. The Archbishop of Crete stresses that in the womb of Mary, the Word of God became one – God and man.287

282 Nellas, The Anthropological and Cosmological, 166. 283 N. Τωμαδάκης, Η Βυζαντινή Υμνογραφία και Ποίησις (2 vol.; Θεσσαλονίκη: Πουρνάρας ΥΓ 1993), 195. Theotokia can be found even in the Canon on the Raising of Lazarus. Cf. Andrew of Crete, Canon in Lazarum, PG 97, 1385–97. 284 Cf. St Andrew of Crete, In Nativitatem Santicissimae Deiparae I, II, III, IV, PG 97, 805–20; 820–44; 844–61; 861–81. (Andrew of Crete, “On the Nativity I, II, III, IV”, in Wider Than Heaven. EightCentury Homilies on the Mother of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 2008), 71–138). 285 Cf. St Andrew of Crete, In Annunciationem, PG 97, 881–913. (Andrew of Crete, “Oration on the Annunciation of the Supremely Holy Lady, Our Theotokos”, in Wider Than Heaven. Eight-Century Homilies on the Mother of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 2008), 197–219). 286 Cf. St Andrew of Crete, In Dormitionem I, PG 97, 1045–1072; In Dormitionem II, PG 1072–1089; In Dormitionem III, PG 97, 1089–1109. For a discussion on the understanding of the Dormition of the Mother of God found in the tradition of the Christian East, see M.G. Tsichlis, For the Hope of Humanity. The Doctrine of the Dormition of the Theotokos in the Orthodox Christian Tradition (Bloomington, IN: iUniverse, 2011); S.J. Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 9–141. 287 Cf. A. Heisenberg, “Ein jabisches Gedicht des Andreas von Kreta”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 10 (1901) 505–14, on pp. 510–11.

233

234

The Identity and Drama of Man

The structure of the Great Canon contains a special troparion dedicated to the Mother of God. It ends each of the nine odes and is called a theotokion.288 In the theotokia the hymnographer from Crete begs the Mother of God for hope and protection for those who praise her. He also asks the Blessed Virgin to intercede with Christ for the salvation of the soul. The presence of theotokia in the Great Canon is confirmation of the growing veneration of the Mother of God.289 There are 18 references to the Mother of God in the Great Canon. Her role in the history of salvation is evidenced by her titles which appear in various contexts: Mother of God (Θεοτόκος – 4 times, Θεογεννῆτορ – 3 times, Θεοκυῆτορ – 1 time); Virgin (Παρθένος) – 5 times; Mother-Virgin (Μητροπάρθενος) – 1 time; the One who received God (θεοδόχος) – 1 time; Betrothed God Mother (Θεόνυμφον Μητέρα) – 1 time, Ruler (Δέσποινα) – 2 times. The titles: Θεογεννῆτορ, Θεοκυῆτορ and Θεοτόκος (Mother of God) are synonymous. In Greek, the use of synonyms was related to the need to adapt a text to poetic metre. Furthermore, in deeply understanding the meaning of the dogma of the Theotokos itself, St Andrew of Crete conveys its essential content to the faithful, because, as St Gregory of Nyssa taught, “for the first time, the God-Logos took ashes from the ground and formed a man, but this time he took ashes from the Virgin and not only did he form a man, but he formed a man around himself.”290 The hymnographer from Crete asks the Mother of God (Θεοτόκε), who is the hope (ἐλπὶς) and protection (προστασία) of those who praise her in song, to take from him the yoke of his heavy sins [cf. Ode I.25. Theotokion]. He also asks the undefiled Mother of God (Ἄχραντε Θεοτόκε) to intercede fervently (ἱκέτευε ἐκτενῶς) for his salvation (εἰς τὸ σωθῆναι ἡμᾶς) [Ode II.29 Theotokion].291 Through her intercessions (ἵνα ταῖς πρεσβείαις) we may be justified (ταῖς σαῖς δικαιωθῶμεν) [Ode VI.17. Theotokion]. Because the flesh (σὰρξ) of Emmanuel (Ἐμμανουὴλ) was woven (συνεξυφάνθη) in her womb (ἐν τῇ γαστρί σου), the faithful honour (τιμῶμεν) the Theotokos (Θεοτόκον) in truth (ἐν ἀλήθείᾳ) [cf. Ode VIII.22. Theotokion]. It can therefore be concluded that God has found a mother for Himself to reconcile the world to Himself through the Incarnation.

288 Cf. Ι. Φουντούλης, Θεοτόκιον, Μεγαή Ηθική και Θρησκευτική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια (6 vol.; Ἀθῆναι: Πρώτη Έκδοση, 1965), 317; С.С. Аверинцев, “Византийская литература VII-IX вв”, in История всемирной литературы в 9 томах (2 vol.; Москва: АН СССР, 1984) 348–51. 289 Cf. S. Eustratiades, “Andreas o Kretes o Ierosolimites”, Nea Sion 29 (1934) 673–88; C. Emereau, “Hymnographi Byzantini”, Échos d’Orient 21 (1922) 258–79. 290 Gregory of Nyssa, “Against Eunomius” IV.3, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 Series; 5 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 301–304. 291 Cf. L. Gambero, Mary and the Fathers of the Church. The Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought (trans. Th. Buffer; San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1999), 397–8.

The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person

The Mother of God (Θεογεννῆτορ) is the hope not only of those who praise her in odes, but is also the hope (ἐλπὶς) of those who run to Her (τῶν εἰς σὲ ροστρεχόντων), for she is the haven (λιμὴν) of the storm-tossed (τῶν ἐν ζάλῃ) [Ode II.41/12. Theotokion]. The unique role of the Mother of God in the history of salvation is sung in the theotokion that ends Ode VII: Ὑμνοῦμέν σε, εὐλογοῦμέν σε, προσκυνοῦμέν σε, Θεογεννῆτορ, ὅτι τῆς ἀχωρίστου Τριάδος ἀπεκύησας τὸν ἕνα Υἱὸν καὶ Θεόν· καὶ αὐτὴ προανέῳξας ἡμῖν τοῖς ἐν γῇ τὰ ἐπουράνια. We praise thee, we bless thee, we venerate thee, O Mother of God: for thou hast given birth to One of the undivided Trinity, thy Son and God, and thou hast opened the heavenly places to us on earth [Ode VII.22. Theotokion].

The Bishop of Gortyna asks the all-pure (ἄχραντε) Mother of God (Θεογεννῆτορ), who reigns in faith (ἐν σοὶ γὰρ αὕτη πιστῶς βασιλεύουσα), to watch over her city (τὴν Πόλιν), i. e. Constantinople, to “make strong (κρατύνεται) and put to flight (διὰ σοῦ νικῶσα) every temptation (πάντα πειρασμὸν), to despoil the enemy (σκυλεύει πολεμίους) and to rule her subjects (διέπει τὸ ὑπήκοον)” [Ode ΙΧ.27].292 The Mother of God (Θεοκυῆτορ) who, without knowing man (ἀπειράνδρως,) within time (ἐν χρόνῳ) has given birth to the Son of the Eternal Father (τὸν ἐκ Πατρὸς ἄχρονον Υἱὸν) [Ode III.28/19]. St Andrew of Crete addresses a greeting to the Blessed Virgin, similar to the greetingfrom the hymn Akathistos by St Romanos the Melodist: Χαῖρε, θεοδόχε γαστήρ· χαῖρε, θρόνε Κυρίου· χαῖρε, ἡ μήτηρ τῆς ζωῆς ἡμῶν.

Hail, Womb that held God! Hail, Throne of the Lord! Hail, Mother of our life! [Ode III.9. Theotokion]

A more precise interpretation of this greeting can be found in the liturgical books of the Orthodox Church. The Festal Menaion includes the Canon of St Andrew of Crete, and is sung at the matins of the Nativity of the Mother of God.293 The Divine Logos in the mystery of the Incarnation not only accepted human physiology, but in the sacrament of the Eucharist remains with His people until the end of the world.294 The authors of the liturgical texts of the Eastern Church drew on Old

292 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 379–83. 293 Cf. N.E. Denysenko, “The Soteriological Significance of the Feast of Mary’s Birth”, Theological Studies 68 (2007) 739–60. 294 Cf. G. Florovsky, “Cur Deus Homo? The Motive for the Incarnation”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Pub Intl, 1976) 163–70.

235

236

The Identity and Drama of Man

Testament images. They compare Mary’s womb to the fiery furnace from the Book of Daniel (cf. Dan 3:19–23); to the shadow mountain from which the Foundation Stone (i. e. Christ) was taken; to Gideon’s fleece, on which rain descended from Heaven; to the burning bush in the Book of Deuteronomy. These connotations were meant to convey to the faithful the truth that God had come to the world in His Son in a supernatural way, not being subject to the laws of nature, but overcoming them. Giving birth to the Saviour, Mary remained a virgin ante partum, in partum and post partum. In this way, she became a model of love which, in an ecstatic and kenotic way, gives itself to God with confidence and in absolute freedom. The author of the Great Canon compares the womb of the Mother of God to the throne of God: “Behold, then, and see that Christ, my Son, is being proclaimed in the flesh, and my Lord and Son, being venerated, is being hymned, and all the nations venerate him. For they see him enthroned on virginal thrones. Behold, this Virgin has also now been born from our thighs, from whose womb the One who [existed] before the ages, having been made flesh, came forth at the end of the ages, and renewed the composition of the ages.”295

In order to understand this image, one should refer to both the Old and the New Testaments. In the First Book of Kings we can find a description of Solomon’s throne, made of ivory and overlaid with the finest gold (cf. 1 Kings 10:18–20). In the Song of Songs (3:9–10), there is also an image of the throne, a palanquin where a young couple sits during a wedding ceremony. Due to the fact that in the liturgical texts of the Orthodox Church references to the Mother of God are full of marital imagery, it can be concluded that St Andrew of Crete perceived the womb of the Theotokos as the wedding throne, from which God married human nature. Similarly, in Revelation (4:2–5:8) we find an image of the throne on which God sits – from which the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords reigns in full glory and majesty. The heirmos that begins Ode IX refers to the Incarnation and Birth of God in the flesh. St Andrew of Crete reflects on the mystery of the “conception without seed” (Ἀσπόρου συλλήψεως) and the “nativity past understanding” (ὁ τόκος ἀνερμήνευτος); and refers with reverence to the mother who never knew a man (Μητρὸς ἀνάνδρου). As a result of the birth of God, nature has been restored (Θεοῦ γὰρ ἡ γέννησις καινοποιεῖ τὰς φύσεις). Mary is the Bride of God (Θεόνυμφον) and mother (Μητέρα) of all generations that magnify her with true veneration [cf. Ode IX. Heirmos].

295 St Andrew of Crete, “On the Nativity I. On the Nativity of the Supremely Holy Theotokos”, in Wider than Heaven, 82. (PG 97, 817) (PG 97, 805–820).

The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person

Asking to be freed from the heavy yoke of sin and to be accepted in repentance (μετανοοῦντα), the hymnographer from Crete bestows upon the Mother of God the title of “pure Lady” (Δέσποινα ἁγνή) [cf. Ode I.25. Theotokion]. The virginity of the Theotokos is highlighted three times in the Great Canon.296 For St Andrew of Crete strange wonder (θαῦμα) not only emerges from the fact that the Mother of God gave birth within time (ἐν χρόνῳ) to the Son of the Father begotten outside time (Τὸν ἐκ Πατρὸς ἄχρονον Υἱὸν) while not knowing a man (ἀπειράνδρως), but that She also remained (μείνασα) a Virgin (Παρθένος) while breastfeeding (θηλάζουσα) [Cf. Ode 28/19.Theotokion]. The birth of the Son of God by the Virgin was heralded by the prophet Isaiah: “Behold, the Virgin (ἡ Παρθένος) is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel” (Isa 7:14). With reference to Old Testament announcements of the birth of the Son of God by the Virgin Mother, the hymnographer from Crete constructs the theme of the heirmos which begins Ode IV. Being aware that the announcement of the virgin birth of God is unthinkable, he empathizes with the prophet Isaiah and tries to capture his horror and fear. In his vision, the prophet Isaiah, when he heard that God will be born of a Virgin (ὅτι μέλλεις ἐκ Παρθένο) and will reveal Himself to man (ἀνθρώποις δείκνυσθαι), was afraid (ἐφοβήθη) [cf. Ode IV. Heirmos]. Reflection on the identity of the virgin who gives birth (τίκτεις) and remains (μένεις) a virgin (Παρθένος) appears also in the theotokion that ends Ode IV. The mystery of the virginity of the One who is Theotokos becomes the theme of Ode IV. Being and remaining a virgin (παρθενεύεις) is connected with the “new laws of nature” (καινίζει νόμους φύσεως) which are created by the One who was conceived in a virgin womb (ἡ νηδὺς). Through this God wanted to overcome “the natural order” (φύσεως τάξις), for he has the power to do whatever He wishes (βούλεται). The truth about Mary being simultaneously both a virgin and a mother is expressed in her title “Virgin Mother” (Μητροπάρθενος). This time, as in other cases of reflection on Mary’s virginity and parenthood, the hymnographer from Crete indicates that she is inviolate (ἄφθορε) and that she was in no sexual relationship with a man (ἄνανδρε). It is in her that God the Creator of the ages (Θεὸς ὁ κτίσας τοὺς αἰῶνας) united Himself with the human nature (ἥνωσεν ἑαυτῷ τὴν τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσιν) [cf. Ode V.23. Theotokion]. A mother not knowing a man (Μητρὸς ἀνάνδρου) [cf. Ode IX. Heirmos] is the woman named Mary, from whom Jesus sprang (ἐκ Μαρίας ἀνατείλας Ἰησοῦς) [Ode I.15].297 Mary conceived and gave birth to Jesus while remaining a virgin. This is possible owing to the power of the Holy

296 Cf. G. Florovsky, “The Ever-Virgin Mother of God”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Pub Intl, 1976) 171–88. 297 Cf. “Magnus Canon in Commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, 239–41.

237

238

The Identity and Drama of Man

Spirit that filled the Most Holy Theotokos, just as the cloud settled upon the tent of the covenant (cf. Exod 40:35). The image of the Mother of God in the Great Canon is organically linked to the hymns in her honour that were created in previous centuries. In fact, there are no major innovations in the work of St Andrew of Crete.298 It can be noted that Ode III repeats the formula that is present in the hymn of Akathistos by St Romanos the Melodist. There, the author calls on Mary to rejoice in the riches she has received from God: “Χαῖρε, θεοδόχε γαστήρ· χαῖρε, θρόνε Κυρίου· χαῖρε, ἡ μήτηρ τής ζωῆς ἡμῶν.”299 Thus, “the mystery of the Mother of God was revealed only to those within the Church, to the faithful who had received the message and were pressing towards “the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Phil 3:14). More than any object of faith, this mystery is the foundation of our hope, is a fruit of faith, ripened in Tradition.”300 The Orthodox cult of the Theotokos is above all a liturgical cult. This is why the liturgical tradition of the Church, to which the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete also belongs, is the basis for shaping a proper image of the Theotokos in the consciousness of the faithful.301 In his Homily on the Nativity IV, St Andrew of Crete expresses the importance of the Mother of God on the basis of the following Old Testament’s passages: “She is the Theotokos, Mary; the new refuge of all Christians. [She is] the first restoration of the first Fall of [our] forefathers; the return to dispassion of the impassioned race; the vision which was mystically foreshadowed of old in Moses’ [burning] bush (cf. Exod 3:3); the fleece of Gideon (cf. Judg 6:38), which he saw symbolically moistened by noiseless drops from heaven, and, having interpreted the act as a miracle and the rain as a sign, confirmed the conjecture by sacrificial victim (cf. Judg 6:19–24); David’s divinely embroidered purple robe, which attached the acquisition of flesh, like a purple robe, to the incarnated God of David; cherubic throne, supremely great, fiery and lofty, holding in its womb the Lord King Sabaoth, the hyperthyrum of the inaccessible things in heaven where the seraphim stand covered by their wings; with some [wings] covering their faces, some their feet, while with some they fly;

298 Cf. Z.J. Kijas, “Marie dans la tradition de L’Église Orthodoxe Russe”, Miles Immaculatae 2 (1993) 291–305; “Marie dans la liturgie byzantine”, Miles Immaculatae 2 (1994) 426–46; J. Ledit, Marie dans la liturgie de Byzance (Paris: Ėditions Beauchesne, 1976); S. Salaville, “Marie dans la liturgie byzantine ou gréco-slave”, in D’Hubert du Manoir (ed.), Marie (1 vol.; Paris: Beauchesne et ses Fils, 1949) 249–326. 299 Studies on the hymn Akathistos by St Romanos the Melodist: E. Wellesz, “The Akathistos. A Study in Byzantine Hymnography”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 9–10 (1955–56) 141–74; L.M. Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin Mary in the Akathistos Hymn (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 21–218. 300 V. Lossky, “Panagia”, in J.H. Erickson/Th.E. Bird (ed.), In the Image and Likeness of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1985) 195–210, on p. 209. 301 Cf. K. Leśniewski, “The Theotokos and God in Orthodox Spirituality”, Roczniki Teologiczne 48–49/7 (2001–2002) 31–54, on p. 32.

The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person

and they cry out loudly that fearful hymn since they cannot support the sight of his unbearable glory (cf. Isa 6:1–5). The gate of heaven, through which the Master of the heavens alone passed, having granted the entrance to no one after him or before him (cf. Ezek 44:2).”302 The Great Canon is dominated by anthropological content. The Bishop of Gortyna addresses various issues concerning the mystery of the human person. This work is not a systematic lecture, but ather a poetic vision that makes one reflect on fundamental existential questions. The main theme of the Great Canon is the problem of living in sin and in separation from the righteous, merciful and loving God. In conducting an internal dialogue with his soul, the hymnographer from Crete consistently makes his soul, or rather himself, aware that he has lost the identity of being a creature that was not only created by God, but is completely dependent on Him. Biblical references, taken from both the Old and the New Testaments, are a starting point for the soul to become aware of the dramatic situation in which it finds itself, but also serve as a warning and encouragement to awaken. The combination of existential problems with positive and negative examples of man’s attitudes towards God, which are marked by the history of salvation in the Old and New Testaments, gives a new perspective of spiritual insight into one’s own interior. The Great Canon is composed of a diagnostic layer, which helps one to identify the types of demonic influences and their effects, as well as a corrective layer, which could be described as metanoically-catanycticaly essential for a spiritual awakening and return to God. Hesychastic terminology plays an important role in both diagnoses and specific therapeutic recommendations. The masterpiece of St Andrew of Crete is a kind of “poetic Philokalia”, helpful in the diagnosis and treatment of all kinds of spiritual diseases. Its uniqueness derives from the way it reaches human consciousness. The structure of the work refers to the simple instructions of the Desert Fathers who diagnosed the main spiritual problems of man in a few words and indicated what should be done in order to start the process of the transformation of one’s mind. The intention of the author and composer was to create a work with very short verses, rhythmically harmonized into four-verse troparia with a set melody and accents on particular syllables, which were supposed to not only be characterized by formal beauty and evoke salvific biblical truths, but also served as a spiritual tool for achieving repentance of the sinner’s heart.

302 St Andrew of Crete, “On the Nativity IV. On the Holy Nativity of Our Supremely Holy Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary”, in Wider than Heaven 137–38. (PG 97, 880).

239

240

The Identity and Drama of Man

St Andrew of Crete remembered that God does not despise a broken and contrite heart.303 The anthropological problems of the Great Canon can be classified into five fundamental groups: the identity of the human person as a creature of God; the human being as a structural reality; the drama arising from the fall and sin; the concrete indications that help save man; and the Mother of God as a special model for the Christian. For the Bishop of Gortyna it is obvious that man is not an autonomous entity, but was created by God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons. The Christological perspective of the creation of man in God’s image and likeness was important for St Andre of Crete. While considering sinfulness, he focused mainly on himself, which resulted from his conviction that he is the foremost of sinners – which he confessed six times in the Great Canon. It is difficult to see in this only a poetic phrase that would encourage recognition of one’s own sinfulness. It can be assumed that deep down in his heart, the hymnographer from Crete felt deep sorrow and spiritual frustration at his loss of faith (Monothelitism) and at the influence of his erroneous doctrinal beliefs on other Christian believers. The concepts of “the intellect”, “the spirit”, “the soul” and “the body/flesh” are needed to express the truth of the fact that man is a complex structure and at the same time a spiritual, psychological and corporeal unity. The term “intellect” is used 14 times in the Great Canon, but is not specified anywhere, with this indicating that such a perspective was commonly understood. St Andrew of Crete highlights the truth that the intellect has the ability to see God, which it can lose if it succumbs to lustful desires and falls into sin. The notion of “spirit” appears only twice in the analysed masterpiece – in connection with the intellect – with this being a sign of appreciation of the spiritual element in man. “Soul” is the most common word in the Great Canon; it is used an astonishingly 108 times. In the concerned work, the soul is assigned the role of being the inner “self ”, with which man conducts a constant dialogue focused on his own current spiritual condition and the need for change. Recalling figures from the Old and New Testaments, the hymnographer from Crete warns his soul against spiritual dangers and encourages it to make informed and responsible decisions. He does not hesitate to reproach his soul for turning away from God and living in passions. He calls on the soul to remain alert and listen to the Voice of God. The mystery of the human person cannot be revealed without reference to the term “body/flesh”. In the Greek language, “the body” is an organized and living reality (σῶμα), while “the flesh” is used in the physiological and sin-related sense (σάρξ). The body/flesh in the Great Canon is presented as a reality that experiences the effects of sin and is granted salvation.

303 Cf. Ps 51:17.

The Theotokos as the Perfect Human Person

A very interesting group of issues concern spiritual diagnoses. St Andrew of Crete combines hesychastic concepts with biblical content in order to suggestively present the complex problem of demonic attacks upon man and their effects both in the spiritual and bodily sphere. Analysis of the terminology used in the Great Canon makes it possible to distinguish and indicate the relationships between such concepts as: “thoughts”, “delusions”, “temptations”, “images”, “pleasures”, “brutish desires”, “animal appetites”, “uncontrolled longings”, “unrestrained desires”, “stubborn wilfulness”, “rejection of the commandments”, “trespasses”, “evil deeds”, “wickedness”, “sins”, “passions”, “gluttony”, “adultery”, “love of money” and “murder”. The presence of the above notions is an important argument in favour of claiming that the Great Canon is not only a biblical and liturgical work, but is also a hesychastic one as well. Another group of concepts is related to the spiritual transformation of man. Spiritual remedies are an integral part of the hesychastic tradition. The whole of the Great Canon is a testimony to the deep and intimate relationship of its author and composer with Scripture. The way he refers to individual figures or events from the Old and New Testaments indicates a personal relationship with the Word of God. The role that the Word of God should play in the life of a Christian is also evidenced by the Great Canon’s encouragement to change one’s intellect and compunction, to mourning over sins and to lament over one’s own sinfulness. Thinking about one’s approaching end of life and meditating on the Last Judgement is also supposed to help the individual return to the road ofsalvation. In the fight against demons, man’s soul should constantly remain vigilant and spiritually sober. A growth in humility is achieved through ascetic practices (especially fasting) and a rising in virtue, chastity and prudence. In this way, the soul can achieve the ability to contemplate God. The anthropological part of this monograph ends with reflections on the Mother of God, who was particularly venerated by St Andrew of Crete. In the Great Canon there are 18 references to the Theotokos. Each of the nine Odes ends with a troparion called a theotokion, in which the Mother of God is asked to intercede with God and “take the heavy yoke of sins”. In theotokia, Mary is praised as the protection and hope of believers. These small works also emphasize her special role in the history of salvation, in particular in the Incarnation and Birth of the Son of God. The fact of her virginity is also highlighted three times as a “strange wonder”. The “Virgin Mother” is the most perfect model of obedience to God, and for this reason she is “venerated in every truth”.

241

Conclusion

The Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete is rich in biblical, theological and existential content. This masterpiece of Byzantine hymnography is unique due to its keynotes, which can help the Christian reflect on one’s own spiritual condition. The Great Canon has played a special role in Great Lent in the tradition of Eastern Christianity for more than a thousand years, because it is an invitation for deep spiritual insight into one’s own soul and for taking a closer look at oneself in the “mirror of the Word of God”. In this sense, the Great Canon is a liturgical poem intended to cause an awakening in sinners, who are enslaved by all kinds of passions, from the sleep of spiritual death. The Great Canon was written in the form of a dialogue between the narrator, i. e. the Bishop of Gortyna, and his soul, with this being not only an expression of his personal struggles, but also a model of penitential activity for Christians. Although the problem of human sinfulness in St Andrew of Crete’s work resounds strongly, its essential message infuses hope in the mercy of God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, who is the righteous Judge. In the Bible, God is revealed as the Savior who walks the roads and wastelands of human freedom in order to find His lost children and bring them back to a spiritual life. The greatness, goodness and perfection of God are shown in the Word of God. Because of this, while creating the Great Canon the Archbishop of Crete embedded it firmly in the rock of the Word of God through using numerous references to persons and situations present in both the Old and New Testaments. The richness of the Biblical content present in this hymnographic work of the Bishop of Gortyna shines particularly brightly as a result of the terminological analyses that have been undertaken in this monograph. Books and articles published so far are characterized by a focus on selected theological and anthropological topics without any developed reference to analysis of vocabulary. Thorough examination of the Great Canon has made it clear to the author of this monograph that analysis of the terminology of the original Greek would allow for a completely new and original presentation of the themes of this aforementioned work. As a result of this lexical analysis, biblical concepts, theological (Trinitarian, Christological, Pneumatological, and soteriological) notions, as well as anthropological ideas and hesychastic terms were distinguished. Meditation on the vocabulary present therein has resulted in the structure of this monograph. Its starting point is reflection on the concepts essential for presenting a proper image of God as the Most Holy Trinity and as the individual Divine Persons. This theological reflection on the vision of God found in the Great Canon inspired the logical approach to anthropological research found

244

Conclusion

in this monograph. From the Christian point of view, it is obvious that the image of God is inextricably linked to the identity of the human person. Source material has proven to be difficult to analyze for many reasons. The Great Canon contains descriptions of spiritual and existential states of the human being. This work is also a narrative in the form of a dialogue: the conversation of the spiritual “self ” with one’s own soul. In addition, the text is difficult to understand because of its references to persons and situations described in Scripture. Therefore, revealing of the original intention of the author requires precise knowledge of certain biblical pericopes. In addition, it must be pointed out that the troparion of this work, which is the basic structure of the canon, consisting of a few short verses, plays a special role in this poetic text. The syntax and idiomatic vocabulary of the Greek original practically preclude an accurate translation of particular verses into other languages, especially when, at the same time, one would like to take into account their metre, stress and melodic line. It is also worth noting that so far there is no critical edition of the text of the Great Canon, despite all its preserved versions. For the purposes of this monograph, the edition present in Patrologia Graeca was recognized as the most authoritative and reliable. The contents of the Great Canon are inscribed in the dogmatic, biblical and liturgical contexts of the Christian East. In order to maintain a methodological clarity in the content of this dissertation, the author of this monograph has tried to remain close to the source material, developing only upon biblical themes and referring to the dogmatic and hesychastic traditions of the Orthodox Church. Starting with an analysis of the notions and ideas of the Great Canon, it was possible to provide an innovative synthesis thereof with the help of a hermeneutic key, thus enabling a reading of the metanoical and soteriological message of this masterpiece of Byzantine hymnography. The Great Canon is a fascinating work because of its existential nature. It can be considered a form of confession, of facing God and examining one’s own conscience. The characteristic feature of this masterpiece is the fact that it is not a simple dialogue between the soul of man and God, but a dialogue of man with his own soul in front of God. It was written in such a way that one can feel as if one was invited to take part in this dialogue. The hymnographer talks to his soul in front of God and with regards to God, who is his Creator, Judge and Saviour. There is space for everyone else in this conversation too. Every man is a sinner. St Paul expresses this truth in a more general manner: “[...] all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). The Bishop of Gortyna, in taking part in a dialogue with his own soul on the evil that it has performed in all possible dimensions of its own existence, also invites other people to participate in this dialogue and to share their personal reflections on sinfulness. Becoming aware of the numerous sins committed by his own soul, St Andrew of Crete does not reflect in an individualistic manner, but in the presence of the “mirror of the Word of salvation”. This “mirror of the Word of

Conclusion

salvation” is nothing more than a reference to the particular persons and existential situations described in both the Old and the New Testament, starting with the first humans – Adam and Eve – and ending with the thief who was crucified with Jesus. It is difficult to determine why St Andrew of Crete chose these and not other people – both sinful and righteous – to be the point of reference for a profound existential reflection on one’s own sinfulness and the glory of God, who “desires everyone to be saved” (1 Tim 2:4). Even though the choice of biblical figures made by the author of the Great Canon was, to a certain extent, accidental and based on spontaneous associations, it is still necessary to recognize that it is worthy of the highest recognition. Meeting with one’s own soul in front of God in a circle of sinners and righteous of the Old and the New Testament makes it clear that sin is not merely a matter relating to the individual human being, but has a communal dimension. The sin committed by me is not only my sin, but is a sin in which all of humanity is involved. The above assertion may seem to be a radical one, but it is in fact truly Christian. Christians are saved in the Church, and the Church is the Body of Christ, and thus is a reality in which all of the faithful are organically bound together (cf. 1 Cor 12:12–30). Individual sin is not only the sin of a particular person, but is a wound that is inflicted on the entire Body of Christ. Orthodox Christians are invited to participate personally in the poetic dialogue of the Bishop of Gortyna with their own soul in the presence of the “mirror of the Word of salvation”. By doing this, they become participants in a mystagogical event, by which their intellect is illuminated and enabled to have a profoundly spiritual insight into the dark abyss of their own souls. Christians gain the opportunity for a completely new look at their own identity if their soul becomes well acquainted with the Word of salvation. In examining the spiritual condition of his own soul, St Andrew of Crete does not make a simple introspection, but rather a therapeutic insight. He realizes that it is not enough to discover and name the various types of sins, encounters with personal evil, or destructive passions. An analysis of the state of one’s own sinfulness requires the “mirror of the Word of salvation” so as not to fall into the deep sorrow that leads to spiritual death and a state of chronic despair. The “mirror of the Word of salvation” opens to the One who is the Word of God, namely Jesus Christ. Only He who took upon Himself the sins of every human being is the Lord and Savior. This monograph offers an existential key to the Great Canon, for it is an invitation to discover the liberating, healing and saving power of the Word of God. Christians can experience a transformation of their mind and a compunction which will enable them to have a new quality of life if they consciously open themselves to God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons through listening to the Word of God, particularly the Gospels. If one wants to acquire a proper understanding of the message of the Great Canon, it should be placed in the context of the Orthodox teaching of the synergistic nature of the relationship between God and man. Although the radical asymmetry

245

246

Conclusion

that characterizes this relationship, as well as the ontological gulf between God the Creator and man – His creation, is obvious, one has to remember that this relationship pertains to meeting at a personal level. God is always the One who invites us to a dialogue, a meeting, to participate. Man, even though he is a fallen and sinful being, is constantly called by God who is the Lover of Mankind (Θεός Φιλάνθρωπος) to cross the border of one’s own self-centredness, and to ecstatically walk out of one’s egocentricity in order to participate in an encounter with the One who loves unconditionally and desires good. The active cooperation of man with God is not only possible but it is, above all, the fundamental calling of every human being. The first part of this monograph was conceived as a necessary introduction to the hymnography of Eastern Christianity. This work presents the essential elements and the most important stages of the development of this form of Christian hymnography. This became the basis for focusing on the canon itself as the most perfect structure in Eastern Orthodox hymnography, thus taking into account both its formal and material aspects. In order to understand the essence of the Great Canon one has to focus on its structural elements. The canon is characterized by a specific formal structure with larger and smaller parts. The larger parts are formed by odes. Their poetical character is derived from a meter which orders the stream of words and tones, animating the rhythm of a stanza and contributing to its beauty of sound. Each ode starts with a heirmos, followed by between seven and twenty-eight troparia (Ode I – 23, Ode II – 28, Ode II – other heirmos – 10; Ode III – 7; Ode III – other heirmos – 17, Ode IV – 27, Ode V – 21, Ode VI – 15, Ode VII – 20, Ode VIII – 20, Ode IX – 25), a triadikon and a theotokion. An important part of each ode is the vesicle: “Have mercy upon me, О God, have mercy upon me”, which is itself a later addition to the Great Canon. This phrase was incorporated into this masterpiece because of its liturgical use. Troparia can be divided into three types: heirmoi, triadika and theotokia. The heirmos is the troparion which determines the meter, stress and melody of a verse. The Great Canon is made up of 245(234) troparia. Some Eastern Orthodox liturgists assert that not all of the troparia were authored by St Andrew of Crete. It is probable that in the centuries following the creation of the Great Canon, various authors added their own troparia to the original text, and they also possibly shortened the original Greek text. There are numerous versions of this text, and it is hard to distinguish what exactly was a part of the original text written by the Bishop of Gortyna. Even if we take into account all of the preserved manuscripts of the Great Canon in liturgical books, this would not be a sufficient basis for a clear statement on this subject. An additional argument supporting the credibility of such an opinion is made in A Commentary on the Great Canon by Acacius the Sabaite from the beginning of the 13th century, and refers to troparia which are absent from the source edition found in the Patrologia Graeca, Vol. 97. Regarding the troparia themselves, it is worth noting that most of them

Conclusion

have a logical connection to subsequent columns of verses. Basically, each troparion has a guiding thought that is usually expressed in the form of interrogative and exclamative sentences. A melody, composed in such a way that it would help in opening a listener to the salvific message of the proclaimed Word of God, is the medium of the poetics of words. Triadika are troparia which refer to the attitude of worshiping God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons. The faithful who listen to triadika are not only introduced to the mystery of the Trinitarian dogma, but they also worship God, detaching themselves from distractive and sinful thoughts. Theotokia, which express veneration of the Mother of God, are not related to the preceding troparia. Theotokia articulate the personal relationship of their author to the Theotokos and, at the same time, are helpful in shaping Marian devotion. About 1,500 words are used in the Great Canon. The most frequent ones are: soul (108 times), Savior (53 times), God (52 times), to sin (38 times), Christ (35 times), to save – be saved (28 times), Lord (27 times), metanoia (23 times), to imitate (23 times), life (22 times), passions (22 times), sins (21 times) and tears (21 times). The Great Canon is not an autonomous work in the liturgical tradition of the Christian East. It was incorporated into the structure of worship. For this reason, it is necessary to present the use of the Great Canon in relation to Lent and the services with which Lent is connected. This work by the Bishop of Gortyna is an integral part of the Great Compline in the first week of Lent. During the first four days of Great Lent, that is, from Monday to Thursday, the Great Canon is divided into four parts. The liturgical recitation of every part serves as an aid for the faithful in entering the path of spiritual transformation. It is an invitation to open up to God who is coming in His Word. The evening services of Great Compline, which begin with specially selected extracts of the Great Canon, are celebrated in dark Orthodox churches, illuminated only by a few burning candles. Such an atmosphere is very helpful in silencing distractive thoughts and immersing the mind in the presence of God. References to persons and events taken from the Bible serve as the “mirror of the Word of God”. They offer the possibility of a spiritual insight into the state of one’s own soul in a way that increases one’s longing for the fullest possible opening to God who comes to Christians in His Word. In listening to the Great Canon, Christians discover an invitation addressed to them by God in the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons to make an evaluation of their own life in the light of the Word of God and to abide by that life-giving Word. The Orthodox Christian has the opportunity to examine to what extent this intimate encounter with the Word of God has become the cause of significant changes in his life during the second liturgical usage of the Great Canon at Mattins on the Thursday of the fifth week of Lent. This service, for pastoral reasons, usually takes place on Wednesday evening. It encourages the faithful to summarize their spiritual struggles up to then, and to work with zeal similar to that described in the evangelical parable of the laborers hired for only one hour in a vineyard (cf. Matt

247

248

Conclusion

20:1–16). The connection of the Great Canon with the reading concerning the life of St Mary of Egypt serves as an aid in realizing the importance of repentance for sins and in awakening an even deeper desire for change of the intellect (μετάνοια) through listening to the Word of God. It is noteworthy that, in the liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church, the melodious recitation of the Great Canon is combined with prostrations. In this way, the faithful not only express their spiritual humility and humble recognition as sinners, but also involve their bodies in prayer, offering them “as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God” which is an expression of their “spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1). Prostrations from the very beginning have been an essential part of the monastic tradition of Eastern Christianity. Hesychastic masters emphasized that bowing to the ground illustrates the fact that sin is a fall from grace as well as illustrates general human sinfulness, and rising to an upright posture signifies compunction and the promise of a life of virtue. Prostrations are important from the therapeutic point of view and are therefore considered as one of the remedies of treating passions, both in the Hebrew and Christian traditions. It would not be possible to immerse oneself into the metanoical and soteriological message of the Great Canon without theological reflection on God, in whom St Andrew of Crete believed. Hence, the second part of the monograph analyzes all of contents relating to the mystery of God. Who is God for the Bishop of Gortyna? First and foremost, God is the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, while also being an inseparable and indivisible unity. It is God who crosses the limits of human cognition, and at the same time it is God who is present in His Word and God who is the Word. On the basis of the contents of the entire Great Canon, and especially taking into account its triadika (the troparia expressing worship to God), one can formulate the thesis that in describing the mystery of God, it is essential to use concepts taken from apophatic and cataphatic theology. The way of turning to God, as well as the description of His mystery, conveyed in the work by the hymnographer from Crete testifies that the God in whom he believes is the living God, present in the life of man, and a God who is infinitely greater than human beings. The boundary between the uncreated God and created man, with all the consequences of this distinction, has been clearly defined in the thought of St Andrew of Crete. He confesses the dogmatic truth that God is the Trinity of the Most Holy Persons, who themselves are in an inseparable unity, at the end of each ode of the Great Canon. God is thrice-holy because He is the Source and Height of Holiness. While describing the mystery of God, the Bishop of Gortyna uses the language of paradox, and his apophatic way of speaking of God presumably serves as a manner of protecting his speech from anthropomorphizing attempts of analysis. According to Trinitarian logic, there is a focus on each of the Divine Persons, as well as on the Holy Trinity. The Person of God the Father is mentioned six times in the Great Canon. He is portrayed as “Eternal” and the “Creator of everything”. The Father

Conclusion

exists unbegottenly. His fatherhood is unique and perfect. He is inextricably bound to the other Divine Persons and like the whole Most Holy Trinity, is simple. The restraint of the Bishop of Gortyna in his meditation on the mystery of God the Father is fully understandable in light of the dogmatic tradition of Eastern Christianity, which is based on Scripture. Based on the aforementioned analysis of the Great Canon, it is evident that the key Person for St Andrew of Crete is the Son of God – the “only begotten of the Father”. This special focus on the Second Person of the Trinity, although seemingly obvious if one takes into account the New Testament, is even more personal in the case of the Archbishop of Crete. The question “Who is the Son of God?” requires taking cognizance of the fact that the author of the Great Canon had been, for some time, a follower of the heresy of Monothelitism, which was eventually condemned by the Church at the Third Council of Constantinople (680–681). The unorthodox view of the Person of Jesus Christ held by St Andrew when he was archdeacon at the Hagia Sophia led him to a great spiritual crisis. If one additionally considers that, during his service in the capital of the Byzantine Empire, he was a person of great authority (due to his fervent piety and charitable ministry), and that therefore his theological teaching had a strong impact on the faithful, then it would be immediately obvious that such phrases like “For there is no sinner whom I have not surpassed in my offences”, “For no child of Adam has ever sinned against Thee as I have sinned”, or “More than all men have I sinned”, could hardly be seen as rhetorical. Rather, it seems reasonable to assume that, upon returning to the true (Orthodox) faith and being ordained archbishop of Crete, Andrew, when writing the Great Canon, desired to actually make expiation for his sin of erring in matters of faith, and, in poetic form, to express his fervent compunction (κατάνυξις) and radical change of intellect (μετάνοια). The Person of the Son of God, whom the Archbishop of Crete worshipped, and about whom he taught heretically for a certain period of his life, is the essential point of reference in metanoical and soteriological reflection that can be made on the basis of the text of the Great Canon. The Christological content of the Bishop of Gortyna’s masterpiece gives grounds for the discovery that, in poetic verses, there is hidden a living faith in the Divinity of the humanity of Jesus Christ. This also shows His particular role in the history of salvation and his particular relationship to the community of the Church and every human person. One of the findings of this monograph is the constatation that St Andrew of Crete used as many as fifteen titles relating to the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity including: Jesus (Ιησούς), Christ (Χριστός), the Son of Theotokos (Υιός της Θεοτόκου), the Son of David (Υιός του Δαβίδ), the Lord (Κύριος), the Almighty (Παντοδύναμος), the Savior (Σωτήρ), the Lamb of God (Ανμός τοῦ Θεοῦ), the King (Βασιλέυς), the Judge (Κριτής), the Word (Λόγος), the Physician (Ιατρός), the Creator (Κτίστης, Πλαστουργός, Ἐργάτης), the Lover of Mankind (Φιλάνθρωπος) and the Good Shepherd (Ποιμίν καλός). These titles

249

250

Conclusion

appear in various contexts in the text of the Great Canon, among them the dogmatic, biblical and existential contexts are of particular importance. Similarly to the Person of God the Father (Θεός Πατήρ), the Person of the Holy Spirit (τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα) is mentioned only five times in the Great Canon. The Bishop of Gortyna emphasized that Jesus gave us the Holy Spirit from the Cross (cf. John 19:30) and indicates that Christians should worship the third Person of the Most Holy Trinity with the practice of prostrations. This depiction of the image of God on the basis of a contextual analysis of the contents of the Great Canon made way for anthropological research. In Christian theology, the question “Who is God?” is inseparably connected with the question “Who is man?”. Anthropological issues are particularly important in the work of St Andrew of Crete. This monograph presents a comprehensive picture of man being created as a result of analysis of the concepts and topics related to one’s identity, as well as concepts relating to the various spiritual threats and aids found on the way to salvation. The starting point for such an understanding of the identity of the human person is the observation made by the Bishop of Gortyna that man is a creature of God. This fundamental truth of biblical anthropology relates firstly to the very fact of man’s creation, then to the indication that man was created in the image and likeness of God, and finally that, as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, man is a fallen creature. References to the description of the creation of the human being found in the Book of Genesis constitute a complex synthesis of theology, cosmology, anthropology and soteriology in relation to the history of salvation. The creation of man in the image and likeness of God is presented in the Great Canon from the Christological perspective, especially in relation to the Incarnation. St Andrew of Crete also stresses the fact of human sinfulness. Six times he sincerely confesses that he is the greatest sinner. A closer approximation of the mystery of the human person has been made possible by focusing on the essential anthropological notions of Eastern Christianity. The Bishop of Gortyna uses structural terms such as the intellect, the spirit, the soul, the body and the flesh, although he does not explain the meaning of these terms, assuming they are fully understood and their semantic scopes are defined. These terms are present throughout the Great Canon in various contexts, with these being primarily biblical and existential. It should be noted that diagnostic and therapeutic terminology specific to hesychasm is also present. In general, it can be stated that St Andrew of Crete was convinced of the spiritualpsycho-physical unity of the human person. Just like most Byzantine theologians, he showed a trichotomous vision of man. The notion of intellect (νοῦς) appears fourteen times in the Great Canon. This term relates to the spiritual condition of man, and therefore has a direct connection to the metanoical and soteriological message of this masterpiece. The quality of the relationship between man and God depends on what is happening in the intellect. This is an obvious truth, as the intellect has the ability to see God, and through its transparency it can reflect God’s

Conclusion

light and illuminate the soul. If the intellect succumbs to passions, it loses the beauty which it was bestowed by God. The intellect is the spiritual center of the human person. The concept of the spirit (πνεῦμα) appears as a noun only once in the Great Canon, in conjunction with the intellect, the soul and the body. It is difficult to say exactly what the Archbishop of Crete wanted to express with this concept. Perhaps his purpose was to emphasize the fact that man is a spiritual being. The soul (ψυχή) is the most common word in the Great Canon. It is used 108 times. It appears in various contexts, forming an integral part of phraseological collocations of great semantic wealth. The concept of the soul serves to show the essence of humanity, the relationship of the human person to spiritual realities, and is used as both an inner and dialogical “self ”. The author of the Great Canon situates the soul in relation to biblical people and events. In this way, he wants to help the soul realize its sinfulness and awake its desire to be saved by God. The identity of man would be incomplete without taking into account man’s corporeality. St Andrew of Crete refers to the body in connection to the New Testament, and especially to the teaching of St Paul. There are two important notions in New Testament anthropology – σώμα, i. e. the organized whole of the human being and σάρξ, i. e. the physiological structure of man, and, at the same time, his reality of being subjected to sin. The notion of the body (σώμα) is mentioned 9 times, while the notion of the flesh (σάρξ) is mentioned 13 times in the Great Canon. These two notions were used by the Bishop of Gortyna for description of the human pathological condition caused by demons, as seen from the soteriological perspective. From analysis of the Great Canon it became possible to distinguish nineteen concepts used for the depiction of various spiritual threats that man faces. These threats are caused by demons and pose a great danger to the human person. The first four of these spiritual threats, i. e. thoughts (λογισμοί), delusions (πλάνες), temptations (πειρασμοί) and imaginations (μορφώσεις), can be classified as aggressive weapons used by evil spirits for targeted attacks that endanger the intellect of man. Demons, in various ways, try to control the consciousness of the human person and to induce man, by way of imaginative thoughts, to believe and surrender to the overwhelming charm of illusion, which causes spiritual distraction and awakens hedonistic and sensual passions. If Christians do not hide under the shield of faith and do not use the sword of the Word of God (cf. Eph 6:16–17) when fighting attacking evil spirits, they will become victims of their pleasures (ἡδοναί), which gradually change into unrestrained desires (παράλογοι ορέξεις, αὐθάδεια), animal appetites (κτηνόδεις ορέξεις) and uncontrolled longings (όρμαί), thus leading to a loss of control and becoming a slave to stubborn willfulness (αὐθάδεια). In such a condition, Christians reject the commandments (αθέτηση των εντολών) and their actions are characterized by trespasses (παραπτώματα), evil deeds (κακουργίαι), wickedness (ἀνομία) and sin (ἁμαρτίαι). Finally, the human person becomes a slave to passions (πάθοι), and what is even worse, this inclination starts to become one’s

251

252

Conclusion

habit. Only three of the eight main spiritual disorders or passions are mentioned in the Great Canon. These three passions, related to the human body, are gluttony (ἀδηφαγία), adultery (μοιχεία) and the love of money (φιλαργυρία). It is worth mentioning that murder (φόνος) was considered to be the most dangerous result of the impact of personal evil on man. Interestingly, St Andrew of Crete teaches, as is typical for hesychastic masters, that the passions which attack human beings strengthen their power through joint actions. The double sin of King David can serve as an illustrative example: he not only committed adultery with Bathsheba, but also caused the death of her husband. Concepts relating to the subsequent stages of the enslavement of man by demons appear in biblical contexts in which the narrator partakes in dialogue with his soul. The presence of as many as nineteen concepts relating to the diagnosis of spiritual threats in the Great Canon is an important proof that its author was very well acquainted with hesychastic spirituality. It is highly probable that he not only possessed a theoretical knowledge of hesychasm, but that he himself also underwent hesychastic spiritual struggles. It is no coincidence, therefore, that the Great Canon is such an important part of the liturgical tradition of Great Lent. During this period of the liturgical year, Orthodox faithful are particularly encouraged to become acquainted with the practice of hesychasm. The liturgical commemoration of such saints as St Gregory Palamas or St John Climacus helps people turn their attention to the Eastern Christian practice of a psycho-somatic method of prayer. The Great Canon can provide a basis for a thorough diagnosis of the spiritual condition of man. Such a diagnosis is certainly helpful in realizing the many dangers and possible entrapments caused by evil spirits. It is not enough, however, to discover that they all contribute to finding the sentence of death within ourselves due to the evil that we have committed or to recognize that there is no reason for self-trust (cf. 2 Cor 1:9). We need something more for our spiritual resurrection to take place. Spiritual remedies are necessary if somebody would like to experience the presence of God, who has “no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from their ways and live” (Ezek 33:11). The most important of these remedies is continuous abiding to the Word of God. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews assures us: “Indeed, the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Heb 4:12). Listening to the Word of God, especially the Good News, is essential for the fulfillment of the spiritual resurrection of the sinner (cf. John 5:24). The more we become acquainted with the Great Canon, the more we can discover the great intimacy of its author with the Word of God. Listening to the Gospel is synonymous with being obedient to its teaching. The Gospel “works” in the heart of man only when it is heard. Otherwise, all Scripture is ignored by him, and all examples of the people and events described therein are useless. Listening to the Word of God is

Conclusion

the condition for transformation of the intellect (μετάνοια). This word is present in various lexical forms in seven odes (it is only absent in Odes III and VI). One can point out that the Great Canon follows a specific “metanoical logic” characterized by an emphasis on the transformation of the intellect and the meaning of repentance. Because of this “metanoical logic”, especially in the Slavonic tradition, this hymnographic masterpiece is sometimes called: “the Great Penitential Canon”. Compunction (κατάνυξις) is also of great importance in the process of the spiritual transformation of the sinner. Compunction is combined with the transformation of the intellect and tears (δάκρυα). It seems therefore appropriate to treat these three realities as a kind of penitential formula. St Andrew of Crete asks for these three gifts in one of the troparia. The concept of tears is complemented by the concept of crying (θρήνος). Contemplation of the gift of tears and the meaning of crying in the spiritual life of man is essential in hesychasm. Both tears and crying are inseparably linked to the notion of lamentation (θρηνωδία), which expresses the most basic understanding of the Great Canon. This is because this work was originally called Θρήνον in relation to the content of the first troparion of this masterpiece. One of the important duties of hesychasts is their constant thinking about the end of life and death, as well as meditation on Final Judgement. This theme is also present in the Great Canon. It is worth noting that the Bishop of Gortyna was concerned not only with physical death (i. e. the end of earthly life) but also with spiritual death as a result of sin. In his hymnographic work there are instructions on how to encourage the soul to think about death from the perspective of approaching the end of life, since only in this way can the soul be led to a change in its conduct. The judgement of God after death is a two-step reality for man. Firstly, it is a judgement of the heart of the human being, and then it is the universal and frightening Final Judgement. Sobriety (νηφαλιότης της ψυχής) and vigilance (εγρήγορση ψυχής) of the soul of man are essential conditions of its spiritual transformation and are essential for resistance against demonic attacks. Acquiring these two spiritual qualities is crucial for effective opposition against temptation and for fervent prayer. Their effectiveness largely depends on self-abasement and an openness to the grace of God through humility (ταπείνοσις). This is also connected to an invitation to prayer (προσευχὴ) and fasting (νηστεία). From the ascetic point of view, actions (πράξις), which are usually understood as deeds, practices or activities – both good and evil – are of great importance. A concentration on doing good leads to the opening of oneself to God’s gift of virtue (αρετή). The Archbishop of Crete also uses three other concepts in his masterpiece that characterize the spiritual maturity of a Christian: chastity (ἁγνεία), self-control (σωφροσύνη) and contemplation (θεωρία). Christian mystics use the latter notion to express the state of immersion of the soul in God, which cannot be described rationally. St Paul expressly conveyed this state of the soul in

253

254

Conclusion

the following words: “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the human heart conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor 2:9). The final section of this monograph is devoted to its Mariological reflections. St Andrew of Crete was a special venerator of the Mother of God. The manner in which he refers to the Theotokos, in the Great Canon as well as other theological works, shows great affection for Her. There is a special troparion in the structure of his work which particularly relates to the Mother of God. This troparion, called the theotokion, completes each of the nine odes. The titles of the Theotokos present in the Great Canon primarily pertain to the history of salvation. The faithful direct their petitions to the Mother of God, requesting Her intercession with Christ for them and pleading for salvation. The Mother of God is the hope of those who praise Her in song and ask Her for release from the heavy yoke of sin. The virginity of the Theotokos which is synthetically expressed in the title “Mother–Virgin” is stressed three times in the Great Canon. Taking into account the content of all of the troparia related to the Mother of God, it is fully justified to claim that they compromise a good foundation for shaping a right image of the Theotokos in the awareness of the faithful. The research presented in this monograph is of interest to specialists in patrology, spirituality, liturgics and both Orthodox and Roman Catholic theologians. Each of the issues described in this book have broader reference to the doctrine and spirituality of the undivided Church of the first millennium. Further research into the relationship between poems belonging to the hymnographic tradition and works of significance in the spiritual tradition is if particular interest. This could perhaps be the basis for in-depth analyses of what could be called liturgical hesychasm. The Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete is still an undiscovered treasure for theologians and for all Christians desiring to deepen their spiritual life. Although this hymnographic masterpiece belongs, in a special way, to the liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church, it has a great metanoical and soteriological value for all Christian believers. The existential and dialogical exegesis of Scripture present in the Great Canon can inspire contemporary faithful to have a greater intimacy with the Word of God. This monograph can serve as a hermeneutical key for entering into the depths of one’s soul, where everyone has the opportunity to diagnose one’s spiritual condition and meet with God who wants to give us the fullness of life. Let St Andrew of Crete, who went astray in confessing the Orthodox faith, but who was not abandoned by God but was brought by Him to the fullness of truth, be our guide on this road.

Bibliography

Sources Κανών ο Μέγας, PG 97, 1330D–1386C. “Κανών ο Μέγας. Ποίημα του αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, in Τριώδιον κατανυκτικόν (Αθήαι: Εκ της Εκκλησιαστικής Τυπογραφίας του Φοίνικος, 1994) 626–663.

Mary Mother/Ware, K., “The Great Canon by St Andrew of Crete”, in The Lenten Triodion (London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1984) 378–415. New Revised Standard Version Bible, National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, 1989.

Ancient Literature Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Old Testament I. Genesis 1–11, (ed. A.A. Louth/ M. Conti; Dovners Grove, IL: InterVasity, 2001). Andrew of Crete, Canon in Lazarum, PG 97, 1385–97. Andrew of Crete, “On the Nativity I, II, III, IV”, in Wider Than Heaven. Eight-Century Homilies on the Mother of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 2008) 71–138. Andrew of Crete, “Oration on the Annunciation of the Supremely Holy Lady, Our Theotokos”, in Wider Than Heaven. Eight-Century Homilies on the Mother of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 2008), 197–219. Andrew of Crete, In Dormitionem I, PG 97, 1045–1072; In Dormitionem II, PG 1072–1089; In Dormitionem III, PG 97, 1089–1109. Athanasius the Great, “A Letter of Athanasius, Our Holy Father, Archbishop of Alexandria, to Marcelinus on the Interpretation of the Psalms”, in Athanasius: The Life of Antony and the Letter To Marcellinus (trans. R.C. Gregg; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1979) 101–129. Athanasius the Great, “Circular to Bishops of Egypt and Libya”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 4 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 641–666. Basil, Letter 38, To His Brother Gregory, concerning the Difference between Substance and Person, in Letters (1 vol. (1–185); trans. Sister Agnes Clare Way; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2008) 84–96. Clement I of Rome, “The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians”, in The Apostolic Fathers I. I Clement, II Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache (trans. B.D. Ehrman, Cambridge/ London: Harvard University Press, 2003), 17–151. Diadochos of Photiki, “On Spiritual Knowledge and Discrimination: 100 Texts”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (1 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber,

256

Bibliography

1979, 255–296). (Διάδοχος Φωτικής, “Λόγος ασκητικός διηρημένος σε 100 κεφάλαια πρακτικά – γνώσεως και διακρίσεως πνευματικής”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Α’, 236–273.)

“Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles”, in The Apostolic Fathers I. I Clement, II Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache (trans. B.D. Ehrman, Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press, 2003), 403–443. Evagrius of Pontus, “Chapters on Prayer”, in R.E. Sinkiewicz (ed.), Evagrius of Pontus. The Greek Ascetic Corpus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 183–209. Evagrios the Solitary, “Texts on Discrimination in Respect of Passions and Thoughts”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (1 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber: 1979, 38–52). (Εύαγριος Ποντικός, “Κεφάλαια περί διακρίσεως παθώνα και λογισμών Β’”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νηπτικών Α’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτικός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1982) 44–57).

Gregory of Nazianzus, “The Fifth Theological Oration. Oration 31. On the Holy Spirit”, in Five Theological Orations (trans. S. Reynolds; Estate of Stephen Reynolds 2011) 97–123. Gregory of Nazianzus, “Oration XXXIX. Oration on the Holy Lights XI”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 7 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 702–718. Gregory Nazianzen, “Oration XLIII. Funeral Oration on the Great S. Basil, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 7 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 785–831. Gregory of Nazianzus, “Oration XLV. The Second Oration on Easter”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 7 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans 1983) 832–853. Gregory of Nazianzus, “Oration 23”, in Select Orations (trans. M. Vinson; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2003) 131–141. Gregory of Nyssa, “Against Eunomius”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 5 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 57–475. Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Moses (trans. A.J. Malherbe; New York/Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1978). Gregory of Sinai, “On Prayer: Seven Texts”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995) 275–286. Γρηγόριος ο Σιναΐτης, “Περί του πως δει καθήζεσθε τον ησυχάζοντα εις την ευχήν και με ταχέως ανιστάσθε”,

in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991) 90–103). Gregory Palamas, “To the Most Reverend Nun Xenia”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/ K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995) 293–322. (Γρηγόριος ο Παλαμάς, “Προς την σεμνότατην εν μοναζούσι Ξένον. Περίπατον και περί των τικτομένων εκ της κατά νούν σχολής”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991) 91–115).

Irenaeus of Lyons, On the Apostolic Preaching (trans. J. Behr; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1997).

Ancient Literature

Joannis Zonarae, Expositio Canonum Anastasimorum Damasceni, PG 135, 422–427. John Cassian, Conferences (trans. C. Luibheid, New York: Paulist Press, 1985). John Chrysostom, “Homily XXXI on Matthew 9:18”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), The Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (1 series; 10 vol.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark/Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996) 442–52. John Chrysostom, “Homily LXXVIII on the Gospel of Matthew (25, 1–30)”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), The Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (1 series; 10 vol.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark/Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996) 818–833. John Chrysostom, “Homily LXXXIII”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Homilies on the Gospel of St John and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (1 series; 14 vol.; Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 1978) 598–609. John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent (trans. C. Luibheid/N. Russell; New York/ Ramsey/Toronto: Paulist Press, 1982. John of Damascus, “The Orthodox Faith”, in Writings (trans. F.H. Chase, Jr.; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1999) 165–406. Justin Martyr, “The First Apology”, in The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Volume 6: Writings of Saint Justin Martyr (trans. T.B. Falls; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2008) 33–111. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho (trans. T.B. Falls; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2003). Maximus the Confessor, Scholia in Librum De Divinis Nominibus, PG 4, 185–416. Maximos the Confessor, “Various Texts on Theology, the Divine Economy, and Virtue and Vice. Third Century”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (2 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1981) 212–234. (Μάξιμος Ομολογητής, “Κεφάλαια διάφορα θεολογικά τε και οικονομικά και περι αρετής και κακίας. Εκατοντάς πέντε”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Β’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1984) 91–109).

Nikitas Stithatos, “On the Inner Nature of Things and on the Purification of the Intellect: One Hundred Texts”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber: 1995) 107–138. (Νικήτας Στηθάτος, “Δευτέρα φυσικόν κεφάλαιον εκατοντάς περί της νοός καθάρσεως”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νηπτικών (G’ vol.; Αθήναι: Εκδοτικός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991) 298–325).

Nikitas Stithatos, “On the Practice of the Virtues: One Hundred Texts”, in C.E.G. Palmer/ Ph. Sherrard/K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (4 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995, 79–106). (Νικήτας Στηθάτος, “Πρώτη πρακτικόν κεφάλαιον εκατοντάς”, in Φιλοκάλια των ιερών νηπτικών Δ’ (Αθήναι: Εκδοτοκός Οίκος «Αστήρ», 1991) 273–97).

Origen, Contra Celsum (trans. H. Chadwick; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). Origen, “Genesis Homily 11. On the fact that Abraham took Cetura as a wife and that Isaac dwelt at the well of vision”, in Homilies on Genesis and Exodus (trans. R.E. Heine; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2002) 168–175. Peter of Damascus, “Book I. A Treasury of Divine Knowledge”, in C.E.G. Palmer/Ph. Sherrard/ K. Ware (ed.), The Philokalia (3 vol.; London/Boston: Faber & Faber: 1984) 74–210.

257

258

Bibliography

(Πέτρος ο Δαμασκηνός, “Βιβλίον Α’. Της υποθέσεως του βιβλίου του οσίου και θεοφόρου πατρός υμών Πέτρου Δαμασκηνού”, in Φιλοκαλία των ιερών νυπτικών (G’ vol.; Ἀθῆναι: Εκδοτικος Οικος “Αστηρ”, 1991) 5–111).

Sophronios of Jerusalem, “The Life of St Mary of Egypt”, in The Great Canon. The Work of Saint Andrew of Crete (Jordanville, NY: The Printshop of St Job of Pachaev, 2017) 79–94. The Apocryphon of Jannes & Jambres the Magicians, Pietersma, A. (ed.), (Leiden: Brill, 1994). “The Definition of Faith of the Council of Chalcedon”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and PostNicene Fathers (2 series; 14 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 515–519. The Divine Liturgy of Our Father Among the Saints John Chrysostom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). “The Nicene Creed”, in Ph. Schaff (ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 14 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 42. “The Shepherd of Hermas”, in The Apostolic Fathers II (trans. B.D. Ehrman; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003) 161–473. “The Synodical Letter. Council of Constantinople a.d. 382”, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series; 14 vol., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 394–6. Triodion. Codex Sinaicus Gr . 734–735. Τριώδιον κατανυκτικόν (Αθήαι: Εκ της Εκκλησιαστικής Τυπογραφίας του Φοίνικος, 1994).

Studies on the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete “Magnus Canon in commentario Acacii Sabaïtae”, in A. Giannouli, Die beiden byzantinischen Kommentare zum Grossen Kanon des Andreas von Kreta: eine quellenkritische und literaturhistorische Studie (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaftern, 2007) 225–383. Auzépy, M.-F., “La carrier d’André de Crète”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 88/1 (1995) 1–12. Bardy, G., André de Crète, in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Ascétique et Mystique. Doctrine et histoire (1 vol.; Paris: Beauchesne, 1937) 554–5. Borisova, T., “Old Church Slavonic Translation of the Great Canon of Repentance by St Andrew of Crete: The Earliest Stages of History”, Cyrillomethodianum 19 (2014) 53–65. Borisova, T., “Old Church Slavonic Translation of the Great Canon of Repentance by St Andrew of Crete: The Earliest Stages of History”, Cyrillomethodianum 19 (2014) 53–65. Clément, O., “Notes sur le Grand Canon de Saint André de Crète”, Contacts 32 (1980), 206–234, 294–330. Clément, O., Le chant des larmes. Essai sur le repentir. Suivi de la traduction du poème sur le repentir par saint André de Crète (Paris: Desclé de Brouwer, 1982). Costache, D., “Byzantine Insights into Genesis 1–3: St Andrew of Crete’s Great Canon”, Phronema 24 (2009) 35–50. Costache, D., “Reading the Scriptures with Byzantine Eyes: The Hermeneutical Significance of St Andrew of Crete’s Great Canon”, Phronema 23 (2008) 51–66.

Studies on the Great Canon of St Andrew of Crete

Cunningham, M.B., “Andreas of Crete’s homilies on Lazarus and Palm Sunday: the preacher and his audience”, Studia Patristica 31 (1997) 22–41. Cunningham, M.B., “Andrew of Crete: a high-style preacher of the eighth century”, in Preacher and audience (Leiden: Brill, 1998) 267–293. Detorakis, Th., “Le vocabulaire d’André de Crète. Mots non thésaurises par G.W.H. Lampe”, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 36 (1986) 45–60. Durlea, I., “Metanoia în Canonul cel Marel al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, Anuarul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Universitatea Bucureşti (2001) 569–77. Getcha, J., “Le grand canon penitential de saint André de Crète: Une lecture typologique de l’histoire du salut”, in C. Braga/A. Pistola (ed.), La liturgie, interprète de l’Écriture. II. Dans la compositions liturgiques, prières et chants. Conférences Saint-Serge. 49e Semaine d’Études Liturgiques (Roma: Clv, 2003) 105–120. Iljine, V., “Le mystère de la pénitence et le Grand Canon de Saint André de Crète”, Messager de l’Exarchat du Patriarche Russe en Europe Occidentale 6 (1955) 8–16. Krueger, D., “The Great Kanon of Andrew of Crete. The Penitential Bible, and the Liturgical Formation of the Self in the Byzantine Dark Age”, in B. Bitton-Ashkelony, L. Perrone (ed.), Between Personal and Institutional Religion: Self Doctrine, and Practice in Late Antique Eastern Christianity (Turnhout: Brepols, 2013) 57–97. Mathewes-Green, F., First Fruits of Prayer: A Forty-Day Journey Through the Canon of St Andrew (Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press, 2006). Milko, P., “Słužba Velkého Kánonu sv. Ondřeje Krétského z perspektivy hesychasmu”, Annales Historici Prešoviensis (2005) 43–66. Nellas, P., “The Anthropological and Cosmological Context of Union with God. A Study of the Service of the Great Canon”, in Deification in Christ. The Nature of the Human Person (trans. N. Russel; Crestwood, NY: St Vladmir’s Press, 1987) 161–196. Prolipcean, A., “«From Adam to Moses»: the Typology of the Old Testament Characters from the Kontakia of Romanos the Melodist and its Assessment on the Great Canon of Andrew of Crete”, Revista Ecumenica Sibiu 7/3 (2015) 388–421. Prolipcean, A., “Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul – aspecte tehnice”, Ortodoxia 1/2 (2009) 100–134. Prolipcean, A., “Creatia ca Euharistie în Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, Teologie şi Viaţă 21/1–4 (2011) 105–113. Prolipcean, A., “Sensul şi întrebuinţarea conceptului de μετάνοια în Canonu cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, in Anuarul Facultăţi de Teologie Ortodoxâ “Patriarhul Justinian” din Bucureşti 7 (2007) 641–66. Prolipcean, A., “О evaluare a imnografiei creştine: Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul sau despre Biblia în miniatură”, Mitropolia Olteniei 61/1–4 (2009) 204–248. Prolipcean, A., Antropologia în Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul (Botosani: Axa, 2004).

259

260

Bibliography

Prolipcean, A., “Erori traductologice în Canonul cel Mare al Sfântului Andrei Criteanul”, in C. Tărnăuceanu (ed.), Antiquitas Vivens, (Iasi: Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza Iasi, 2014) 195–211. Prolipcean, A., Η δογματική διδασκαλία του Μεγάλου Κανόνα του Αγίου Ανδρέα Κρήτης (Θεσσαλονίκη: Αφοι Κυριακίδη Εκδόσεις Α.Ε., 2017).

Richard, M., “Le commentaire du grand canon d‘André de Crète par Acace le Sabaïte”, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 34 (1965) 304–311. Vailhé, S., “Saint André de Crète”, Échos d’Orient 5 (1902) 278–87. Γλάρος, Α.Β., Θεία Παιδαγωγία, Παιδαγωγικά στοιχεία στο Μεγάλο Κανόνα του Ανδρέα Κρήτης (Θεσσαλονίκη: Ακρίτας, 2000). Ζήσης, Θ., “Ανδρέας Κρήτης ο Ιεροσολυμίτης (660–740). Περί της ζωής και του έργου του”, Επιστημονική Επετερίς Θεολογικής Σχολής Αριστοτελείου Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλονίκης 4 (1995) 9–19. Θέμελης, X., “Σχόλια εις τον Μέγαν Κανώνα Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, Αγιορείτικη Βιβλιοθήκη 16

(1951), 46–50, 103–7, 208–211, 273–6; 19 (1954), 368–370; 20 (1955), 10–13, 72–5, 167–70, 281–3, 354–7; 21 (1956), 13–16, 116–8, 138–40, 220–26, 282–4, 348–52. Καλαμάτα, Α., “Η θεολογική διδασκαλία του αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, in Ο Άγιος Ανδρέας, αρχιεπίσκοπος Κρήτης ο Ιεροσολυμίτης, πολιούχος Ερεσού Λέσβου (Μυτιλήνη-Λέσβος: Ιερά Μητρόπολη Μυτιλήνης, 2005) 221–35. Κούτσας, Σ., Αδαμιαίος θρήνος. Ο Μέγας Κανόν Ανδρέου του Κρήτης. Εισαγωγή-κείμενομετάφραση-σχόλια (Αθήναι: Αποστολική Διακονία, 1988). Μπαλατσούκας, Σ., “Άνθρωπος και κτήση στον Μέγα Κανόνα του αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, in Ο Άγιος Ανδρέας, αρχιεπίσκοπος Κρήτης ο Ιεροσολυμίτης, πολιούχος Ερεσού Λέσβου (Μυτιλήνη-Λέσβος: Ιερά Μητρόπολη Μυτιλήνης, 2005) 329–43. Ξίδης, Θ., “Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης: ο πρώτος κανονογράφος”, Νέα Εστία 45 (1949) 292–8. Παπαδόπουλος-Κεραμεύς, A., “Ο Μέγας Κανόν του Αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης”, Εκκλησιαστικός Φάρρος 3 (1910) 501–513. Πολίτος, N., “Έκστασις και ανάστασις κατά τον «Μέγαν Κανώνα». Φιλοσοφικές προσεγγίσεις”, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 47 (1987–1988) 149–200. Πριγκιπάκης, Ε.Κ., Η Θεοτόκος και το μυστήριο της Οικονομίας κατά τον Άγιο Ανδρέα Κρήτης (Ρέθυμνον: Έκδοση Ι.Μ. Τιμίου Προδρόμου Ατάλης Μπαλή, 2011). Τομαδάκης, N.B., “Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης”, in Θρυσκευτική και Ηθική Εγκυκλοπαιδεία (2 vol.; Αθήναι: Εκδότης Αθ. Μαρτίνος, 1963) 674–93. Τσορμπατζόγλου, Π., “Ο Ανδρέας Κρήτης (660–740) και απίθανος χρόνος συγγραφής του Μεγάλου Κανόνος”, Βυζαντινά 24 (2004) 7–42. Χατζηκώστας, Λ., Ανδρέας ο Κρήτης. Ο Μεγάλος Κανόνας (Λευκοσία: Έκδοση Όμιλος Πνευματικής Ανανεώσεως, 2001). Χρίστου, Π.Κ., Ο Μέγας Κανόν Ανδρέου του Κρήτης (Θεσσαλονίκη: Έκδοση Ἀνάτυπο, 1952). Ψάχος, M., “Ο Μέγας Κανών του Αγίου Ανδρέου Κρήτης. Μικρή εισαγωγή στην κατανυκτική ποίησή του”, Ριζάρειος Εκκλησιαστική παιδεία 4 (1988) 315–326.

Modern Literature

Богословский, М.И., “Великий канон святого Андрея Критского”, Христианское чтение 1 (1836) 129–84. Веремеенко, К., Уроки покаяния в Великом каноне Андрея Критского (Москва: Издательство Московской Патриархии РПЦ, 2013). Игнатия (Петровская) монахиня, “Гимнографическое творчество преподобного Андрея Критского”, Богословские труды 25 (1984) 260–75. Игнатия (Петровская) монахиня, “Место Великого канона преподобного Андрея Критского и других его произведений в песнотворческом достоянии Церкви”, Альфа и Омега 1/23 (2000) 298–319; 2/24 (2000) 289–310. Кириллин, B.M., “Великий Покаянный канон Святителя Андрея Архиепископа Критского в древнерусской переработке”, Древняя Русь. Вопросы медиевистики 3/13 (2003) 79–94. Лукашевич, A.A., “Великий Канон”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная Энциклопедия (7 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2004) 453–4. Милов, B., Чтения по литургическому богословию (Москва: Издательство Сретенского монастыря, 2012), 162–78.

Филипп (Симонов) игумен, Училище покаяния. Схолии на полях Великого канона (Москва: Паломникъ, 2008).

Modern Literature Aberbach, M./Smolar, L., “Aaron, Jeroboam, and the Golden Calves”, Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967) 129–40. Aletti, J.N., God’s Justice in Romans. Keys for Interpreting the Epistle to the Romans (trans. P.M. Meyer; Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2010). Alonso, J., “La metánoia com lógica de la fe”, Scripta Theologica 42 (2010) 585–610. Anderson, B.W., “The Tower of Babel: Unity and Diversity in God’s Creation”, Currents in Theology and Mission 5 (1978) 69–81. Anderson, G.A., The Genesis of Perfection: Adam and Eve in Jewish and Christian Imagination (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002). Arseniev, M.S., “Resurrection and Transfiguration”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 4/1 (1957) 16–28. Arseniev, N., “Contemplation of the Glory of God in the Early Christian Message”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 8 (1964) 112–20. Aune, D.E., “«The Spirit is Willing, but the Flesh is Weak» (Mark 14:38b and Matt. 26:41b)”, in D.E. Aune/R.D. Young (ed.), Reading Religions in the Ancient World (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2007) 125–39. Bacon, B.W., “Jesus as Son of Man”, The Harvard Theological Review 3/3 (1910) 325–40.

261

262

Bibliography

Bakhos, C., Ishmael on the Border. Rabbinic Portrayals of the First Arab (New York, NY: Suny Press, 2006). Bamford, N., The Deified Person. A Study of Deification in Relation to Person and Christian Becoming (Lanham, ML: University Press of America, 2012). Banks, R., “Matthew’s Understanding of the Law: Authenticity and Interpretation in Matthew 5:17–20”, Journal of Biblical Literature 93 (1974) 226–42. Barr, J., The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality (Minneapolis, MN: SCM, 1993). Barrett, C.K., “The Holy Spirit in the Fourth Gospel”, Journal of Theological Studies 1 (1950) 1–15. Baumastark, A., Geschichte der syrischen Literatur (Bonn: A. Marcus und E. Webers Verlag Dr. jur. Alvert Ahn, 1922). Baumstark, A., Liturgie comparée. Principes et méthodes pour l’étude historique des liturgies chrétiennes (Chevetogne: Ėdition Chèvetogne, 1939). Beatrice, P.F., “The Word «Homoousios» from Hellenism to Christianity”, Church History 71/2 (2002) 243–72. Bebis, G.S., “Gregory of Nyssa’s «De Vita Moysis». A Philosophical and Theological Analysis”, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 12/3 (1967) 369–93. Beeley, Ch.A., Gregory of Nazianzus on the Trinity and the Knowledge of God. In Your Light We Shall See Light (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). Behm, J., “Metanoeo and Metanoia in the NT”, in G. Kittel/G.Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (trans. G.W. Bromiley; Great Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company/The Paternoster Press, 1985) 642–3. Bekkum van, W.J., “What’s in the Divine Name? Exodus 3 in the Biblical and Rabbinic Tradition”, in G.H. Kooten (ed.), The Revelation of the Name YHWH to Moses. Perspectives from Judaism, the Pagan Graeco-Roman World, and Early Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 2006) 3–15. Benjamins, H.S., “Keeping Marriage out of Paradise: The Creation of Man and Woman in Patristic Literature”, in G.P. Luttikhuizen (ed.), The Creation of Man and Woman. Interpretations of the Biblical Narratives in the Jewish and Christian traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2000) 93–106. Bergen, W.J., Elisha and the End of Prophetism (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999). Bertonière, G., The Sundays of Lent in the Triodion: The Sundays without a Commemoration (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1997). Beutler, J./Fortna, R.T. (ed.), The Shepherd Discourse of John 10 and its Context: Studies by members of the Johannine Seminar (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). Bobrinskoy, B., “The Indwelling of the Spirit in Christ. «Pneumatic Christology» in the Cappadocian Fathers”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 28 (1984) 49–65. Bobrinskoy, B., The Mystery of the Trinity. Trinitarian Experience and Vision in the Biblical and Patristic Tradition (trans. A.P. Gythiel; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1999). Boers, H., “The Significance of Abraham for the Christian Faith”, in Theology out of the Ghetto. A New Testament Exegetical Study on Religious Exclusiveness (Leiden: Brill, 1971) 74–104.

Modern Literature

Bogorad, F.A., “The Symptom of Crocodile Tears”, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 34 (1979) 76–9. Bolin, T.B., Freedom Beyond Forgiveness. The Book of Jonah Re-Examined (Sheffield: A&C Black, 1997). Boojamra, J., “Original Sin According to St Maximus the Confessor”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 20 (1976) 19–30. Bousset, W., A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus (trans. J.E. Steely; New York, NY: Baylor University Press, 1970). Bouteneff, P., “Christ and Salvation”, in M.B. Cunningham/E. Theokritoff (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 93–106. Bouteneff, P.C., Sweeter than Honey. Orthodox Thinking on Dogma and Truth (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2006). Bovon, F., Das Evangelium nach Lukas. 3. Teilband Lk 15,1–19,27 (Düsseldorf/Zurich: Benziger Verlag/Neukirchener Verlag, 2001). Bovon, F., L’Œuvre de Luc. Études d’exégèse et de théologie (Paris: Cerf, 1987). Bowker, J., “The Son of Man”, Journal of Theological Studies 28 (1977) 1–30. Breck, J., “«The Two Hands of God». Christ and Spirit in Orthodox Theology”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 40 (1996) 231–46. Brightman, R.S., “Apophatic Theology and Divine Infinity in St Gregory of Nyssa”, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 18/1–2 (1973) 97–114. Brodie, T.L., The Gospel According to John. A Literary and Theological Commentary (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1993). Bromley, D.H., “The Healing of the Haemorrhaging Woman: Miracle or Magic?”, Journal of Biblical Studies 5/1 (2005) 1–20. Bronner, L., The Stories of Elijah and Elisha as Polemics against Baal Worship (Leiden: Brill, 1968). Bucur, B., “«The Feet that Eve Heard in Paradise and Was Afraid»: Observations on the Chrystology of Byzantine Hymns”, Philosophy and Theology 18/1 (2006) 3–26. Bucur, B.G., “Exegesis of Biblical Theophanies in Byzantine Hymnography: Rewritten Bible?”, Theological Studies 68 (2007) 92–112. Caird, G.B., “The Exegetical Method of the Epistle to the Hebrews”, Canadian Journal of Theology 5 (1959) 44–51. Cantinat, J., “Les Paraboles de la Miséricorde (Luc XV, 1–32)”, Nouvelle Revue Théologique 77 (1955) 246–64. Carlson, R.A., “Elisée: Le successeur d’Elie”, Vetus Testamentum 20 (1970) 385–405. Carroll, R.P., “The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel”, Vetus Testamentum 19/4 (1969) 400–15. Carruthers, M., The Craft of Thought: Mediation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images 400–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).

263

264

Bibliography

Catafygiotou Topping, E., “St Romanos the Melodos: Prince of Byzantine Poets”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 24/1 (1979) 65–75. Childs, B.S., “The Birth of Moses”, Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965) 109–22. Christ, W./Paranikas, M., Anthologia graeca carminum christianorum (Leipzig: B.G. Teubnerl, 1871). Chryssavgis, J., In the Heart of the Desert. The Spirituality of the Desert Fathers and Mothers (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom, 2003). Chryssavgis, M., “The Troparion in Worship: Participation by the Congregation in Byzantine Chant”, Phronema 2 (1987) 45–54. Clark, G.H., “The Image of God”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 12/4 (1969) 215–22. Coats, G.W., Moses. Heroic Man, Man of God (Sheffield: A&C Black, 1988). Collins, T., “The Physiology of Tears in the Old Testament: Part I”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 33 (1971) 18–38; Part II 185–97. Conomos, D., Byzantine Hymnography and Byzantine Chant (Brookline, MA: Hellenic College Pr., 1984). Constantelos, D.J., “Irenaeos of Lyons and His Central Views on Human Nature”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 33 (1989) 351–63. Cooper, A., “Hagar In and Out of Context”, Union Seminary Quarterly Review 55 (2002) 35–46. Cooper, J.W., Body, Soul and Life Everlasting. Biblical Anthropology and the Monism-Dualism Debate (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989). Cornelius, F., “Genesis 14”, Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenchaft 72 (1960) 1–7. Cory, C., “Uncovering Early Christianity’s Hymn Tradition”, The Bible Today 51/3 (2013) 141–143. Cosgrove, C.H., “Justification in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection”, Journal of Biblical Literature 106 (1987) 653–70. Cranfield, C.E.B., “St Mark 9.14–29”, Scottish Journal of Theology 3/1 (1950) 57–67. Cullmann, O., Christ and Time. The Primitive Christian Conception of Time (trans. F.V. Filson; London: Westminster Press, 31962). Daley, B.E., “The Persons of God and the Person of Christ in Patristic Theology: An Argument for Parallel Development”, in A.B. McGowan/B.E. Daley/T.J. Gaden (ed.), God in Early Christian Thought. Essays in Memory of Lloyd G. Paterson (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2009) 232–50. Daley, B.E., The Hope of the Early Church. A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). Dalmais, I.H., “Hymnodie et catéchèse: mimre, madrashe, kontakia”, Hymnographie (2000) 171–177. Daly, R.J., “The Soteriological Significance of the Sacrifice of Isaac”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 39 (1977) 45–75.

Modern Literature

Davies, P.R., “Martyrdom and Redemption: On the Development of Isaac Typology in the Early Church”, Studia Patristica 17 (1982) 652–58. Delcor, M., “Melchizedek from Genesis to the Qumran Texts and the Epistle to the Hebrews”, Journal for the Study of Judaism 2 (1971) 115–45. Delling, G., “The Significance of the Resurrection of Jesus for Faith in Jesus Christ”, in C.F.D. Moule (ed.), The Significance of the Message of the Resurrection for Faith in Jesus Christ (trans. R.A. Wilson; London: SCM, 1968) 77–104. Denysenko, N., “Rituals and Prayers of Forgiveness in Byzantine Lent”, Worship 86 (2012) 140–160. Denysenko, N.E., “The Soteriological Significance of the Feast of Mary’s Birth”, Theological Studies 68 (2007) 739–60. Derrett, J.D.M., “Law in the New Testament: The Parable of the Prodigal Son”, New Testament Studies 14 (1967–1968) 56–74. Di Vito, R.A., “Old Testament Anthropology and the Construction of Personal Identity”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61 (1999) 217–38. Dimmler, E., Melchisedek Gedanken über das Hohepriestertum Christi nach dem Hebräerbrief (Kempten: Verlag Josef Kösel & Friedrich Pustet, 1921). Disandro, C.A., “Historia semantica de perikhoresis”, Studia Patristica 15 (1984) 442–7. Dodd, C.H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). Donfried, K.P., “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins (Matt 25:1–13) as a Summary of Mathean Theology”, Journal of Biblical Literature 93/3 (1974) 415–28. Driscoll, J., “Penthos and Tears in Evagrius Ponticus”, Studia Monastica 36/2 (1994) 147–64. Dunn, J.D.G./Suggate, A.M., The Justice of God. A Fresh Look at the Old Doctrine of Justification by Faith (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993). Durand, E., La périchorèse des Personnes Divines. Immanence mutuelle. Réciprocité et communion (Paris: Cerf, 2005). Dyer, J., “The Desert, the City and Psalmody in the Late Fourth Century”, in S. Gallagher (ed.), Western Plainchant in the First Millenium (Burlington, VT: Routletdge, 2004) 11–43. Dyer, J., “The Psalms in Monastic Prayer”, in N. Van Deusen (ed.), The Place of the Psalms in the Intellectual Culture of the Middle Ages (Albany, NY: Suny Press, 1999) 59–89. Dysinger, L., Psalmody and Prayer in the Writings of Evagrius Ponticus (Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 2005). Edelman, D.V., King Saul in the Historiography of Judah (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991). Egan, J., “Primal Cause and Trinitarian Perichoresis in Gregory Nazianzen’s Oration 31”, Studia Patristica 27 (1993) 21–28. Emereau, C., “Hymnographi Byzantini”, Échos d’Orient 21 (1922) 258–79. Émereau, C., Saint Éphrem le Syrien (Paris: Maison de la Bonne presse, 1919). Emerton, J.A., “The Site of Salem, the City of Melchizedek (Genesis XIV 18)”, in J.A. Emerton (ed.), Studies in the Pentateuch (Leiden: Brill, 1990) 45–71.

265

266

Bibliography

Enslin, M.S., “Luke and the Samaritans”, The Harvard Theological Review, 36/4 (1943) 284–92. Eustratiades, S., “Andreas o Kretes o Ierosolimites”, Nea Sion 29 (1934) 673–88. Fagerberg, D.W., “Prayer as Theology”, in R. Hammerling (ed.), A History of Prayer. The First to the Fifteenth Century (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2008) 117–36. Fee, G.D., “Philippians 2:5–11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose?”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992) 29–46. Fee, G.D., Empowering Presence. The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, MI: Baker Academic, 1994). Fischer, B., “Psalmus vox Christi patientis: selon l’Épitre à Marcellinus de S. Athanase”, in Ch. Kannengiesser (ed.), Politique et Théologie chez Athanase d’Alexandrie. Actes du Colloque de Chantilly 23–25 septembre 1973 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1974) 305–311. Fitzmyer, J.A., “‘Now this Melchizedek...’ Heb. 7:1; Ps. 110:4, Gn. 14:8ff.”, in Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament (London: Eerdmans, 1971) 221–43. Fitzmyer, J.A., “The Sacrifice of Isaac in Qumran Literature”, Biblica 83 (2002) 211–229. Florovsky, G., “Creation and Creaturehood”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1976) 43–78. Florovsky, G.,“Cur Deus Homo? The Motive for the Incarnation”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Pub Intl, 1976) 163–70. Florovsky, G., “Redemption”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1976). Florovsky, G., “Revelation and Interpretation”, in Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Company, 1972) 17–36. Florovsky, G., “The Ever-Virgin Mother of God”, in Creation and Redemption (Belmont, MA: Nordland Pub Intl, 1976) 171–88. Florovsky, G., The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eight Century (Vaduz: Notable & Academic – Büchervertriebsanstalt, 1987). Flusser, D., “Melchizedek and the Son of Man”, Christian news from Israel 17 (1966) 228–39. Foester, W., “Iesous [Jesus]”, in G. Kittel/G. Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1985), 361. Fögen, T. (ed.), Tears in the Graeco-Roman World (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009). Forbes, G., “Repentance and Conflict in the Parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11–32)”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 42 (1999) 211–29. France, R.Th., The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Great Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2002). Fretheim, T.E., The Pentateuch (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1996). Frey, W.H., Crying: the Mystery of Tears (Minneapolis, MN: Winston Pr, 1985). Gambero, L., Mary and the Fathers of the Church. The Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought (trans. Th. Buffer; San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1999). Gavrilyuk, P.L., The Suffering of the Impassible God. The Dialectics of Patristic Thought (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). Gillet, L., “The Gift of Tears”, Sobornost 12 (1937) 5–10.

Modern Literature

Gillingham, S., Psalms Through the Centuries: Volume One (Malden, MA – Oxford: Blackwell, 2008). Girard, M., “Gesu passa per la Samaria (Giovanni 4: 1–42)”, Annali di Scienze Religiose 9 (2004) 111–121. Glenthoj, J.B., Cain and Abel in Syriac and Greek Writers (4th –6 th Centuries) (Leuven: Peeters, 1997). Gloer, W.H., “2 Corinthians 5:14–21”, Review and Expositor 86 (1989) 397–405. Goodhart, S., “Prophesy, Sacrifice, and Repentance in the Story of Jonah”, Semeia 33 (1985) 43–63. Gouillard, J., Le Synodikon de L’Orthodoxe. Edition et commentaire (Paris: Editions E. de Vaccard, 1967). Granerod, G., “Melchizedek in Hebrews 7”, Biblica 90 (2009) 188–202. Granerod, G., Abraham and Melchizedek. Scribal Activity of Second Temple Times in Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 (Berlin/New York, NY: De Gruyter, 2010). Grech, P., “2 Corinthians 3,17 and the Pauline Doctrine of Conversion to the Holy Spirit”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 17 (1955) 420–37. Green, B., How Are the Mighty Fallen. A Dialogical Study of King Saul in 1 Samuel (New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic, 2003). Green, J.B., Body, Soul, and Human Life. The Nature of Humanity in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008). Greenwood, D., “The Lord is Spirit: Some Considerations of 2 Cor 3:17”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34 (1972) 467–72. Gribomont, J., “La tradition liturgiques des hymnes pascales de s. Ephrem”, Parole de l’orient 4/1–2 (1973) 191–246. Grosdidier de Matons, J., Romanos le Mélodie et les origines de la poésie religieuse à Byzance (Paris: Beauchesne, 1977). Guillaumin, M.-L., “Reserches sur l’exégèse patristique de Job”, Studia Patristica 1 (1975) 304–8. Gundry, R.H., Soma in Biblical Theology With Emphasis on Pauline Anthropology (Cambridge/ New York/ Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1976). Gunkel, H., “Elisha – The Successor of Elijah (2 Kings II, 1–18)”, The Expository Times 41 (1929–30) 182–6. Gunn, D.M., The Fate of King Saul. An Interpretation of a Biblical Story (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1980). Haag, E., “Die Himmelfahrt des Elias nach 2 Kg 2,1–15”, Trierer Teologische Zeitschrift 78 (1969) 18–32. Hägg, H.F., Clement of Alexandria and the Beginning of Christian Apophaticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). Hannick, Ch., “Exégèse, typologie et rhétorique dans l’hymnographie byzantine”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 53 (1999) 207–18.

267

268

Bibliography

Hannick, Ch., “Le kontakion dans l’histoire de la musique ecclesiastique byzantine”, Ostkirchliche Studien 58/1 (2009) 57–66. Hannick, Ch., “Zur Metrik des Kontakion”, in H. Hunger (ed.), Byzantios: Festschrift fiir Herbert Hunger zum 70. Geburtstag (Vienne: E. Becvar, 1984) 107–119. Harland, P.J., “Vertical and Horizontal: The Sin of Babel”, Vetus Testamentum 48 (1998) 515–33. Harrison, V., “Perichoresis in the Greek Fathers”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 35 (1991) 53–65. Harvey, S.A., “Why the Perfume Mattered: The Sinful Woman in the Syriac Exegetical Tradition”, in P.M. Blowers (ed.), In Dominico: Essays on Patristic Exegesis in Honor of Robert Louis Wilken (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002) 69–89. Hausherr, I., Penthos. The Doctrine of Compunction in the Christian East (trans. A. Hufstader; Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1982). Hay, L.S., “The Son of Man in Mark 2:10 and 2:28”, Journal of Biblical Literature 89/1 (1970), 69–75. Hebblethwaite, B., “Perichoresis: Reflections on the Doctrine of the Trinity”, Theology 80 (1997) 255–61. Heisenberg, A., “Ein jabisches Gedicht des Andreas von Kreta”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 10 (1901) 505–14. Helm, P., The Providence of God (Dovners Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1994). Hendel, R., “The Exodus in Biblical Memory”, Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2001) 601–622. Henne, Ph., “La penitence et la redaction du Pasteur d’Hermas”, Revue Biblique 98 (1991) 358–97. Higgins, A.J.B., The Son of Man in the Teaching of Jesus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980). Hildebrand, S.M., The Trinitarian Theology of Basil of Caesarea: A Synthesis of Greek Thought and Biblical Truth (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2007). Himcinschi, M., “Some Considerations Regarding the Cappadocian Trinitarian Ontology”, in Dumitraşcu (ed.), The Ecumenical Legacy of the Cappadocians (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015) 21–38. Hoftijzer, J., “David and the Tekoite Woman”, Vetus Testamentom 20 (1970) 419–44. Hooker, M.D., The Son of Man in Mark (London: S.P.C.K., 1967). Hopko, Th., “The Trinity in the Cappadocians”, in B. McGinn/J. Meyendorff/J. Leclercq (ed.), Christian Spirituality. Origins to the Twelfth Century (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1985) 260–76. Horbury, W., “The Messianic Associations of ‘The Son of Man’”, Journal of Theological Studies 36 (1985) 34–55. Horton, F.L., The Melchizedek Tradition: A Critical Examination of the Sources to the Fifth Century A.D. and in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976).

Modern Literature

Houtman, C., “What Did Jacob See in His Dream at Bethel?”, Vetus Testamentum 27 (1977) 337–51. Hovorun, C., Will, Action and Freedom. Christological Controversies in the Seventh Century (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2008) Howard, G., “Christ the End of the Law”, Journal of Biblical Literature 88 (1969), 331–7. Hubbard, M.V., New Creation in Paul’s Letters and Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). Hunger, H., “Romano il Melode – poeta, predicatore, retore – ed il suo pubblico”, Römische Historische Mitteilungen 25 (1983) 305–332. Hunt, H., Joy-Bearing Grief: Tears of Contrition in the Writings of the Early Syrian and Byzantine Fathers (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2004). Hunt, H., “The Reforming Abbot and His Tears: Penthos in Late Byzantium“, in E. Russel (ed.), Spirituality in Late Byzantium (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 21–32. Jackson, G., Have Mercy on Me: The Story of the Canaanite Woman in Matthew 15,21–28 (Sheffield: Bloomsbury, 2002). Jackson, W., The Trail of Tears (https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/614-the-trail oftears) [access on 30 January 2019]. Johnston, G., The Spirit-Paraclete in the Gospel of John (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970). Jones, G.H., The Nathan Narratives (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990). Kahle, P.E., The Cairo Geniza (Oxford: Blackwell 2 1959). Kahn, P.W., Out of Eden. Adam and Eve and the Problem of Evil (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007), 16–52. Kijas, Z.J., “Marie dans la liturgie byzantine”, Miles Immaculatae 2 (1994) 426–46. Kijas, Z.J., “Marie dans la tradition de L’Église Orthodoxe Russe”, Miles Immaculatae 2 (1993) 291–305. Kilgallen, J., The Stephen Speech. A Literary and Reductional Study of Acts 7,2–53 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1976). Kilgallen, J.J., “Forgiveness of Sins (Luke 7:36–50)”, Novum Testamentum 40/2 (1998) 105–16. Kim-Rauchholz, M., Umkehr bei Luke: Zu Wesen und Bedeutung der Metanoia in der Theologie des dritten Evangelisten (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2008). Kingsbury, J.D., “The Title ‘Son of David’ in Matthew’s Gospel”, Journal of Biblical Literature 95 (1976) 591–602. Kingsbury, J.D., “The Title «Kyrios» in Matthew’s Gospel”, Journal of Biblical Literature 94/2 (1975) 246–55. Klijn, A.F.J., “Scribes, Pharisees, Highpriests and Elders in the New Testament”, Novum Testamentum 3/4 (1959) 259–67. Klijn, A.F.J., “Stephen’s Speech – Acts VII. 2–53”, New Testament Studies 4/1 (1957) 25–31.

269

270

Bibliography

Knust, J., “The Biblical Odes and the Text of the Christian Bible: A Reconsideration of the Impact of Liturgical Singing on the Transmission of the Gospel of Luke”, Journal of Biblical Literature 133/2 (2014) 341–65. Kotsonis, I., The Nous (Thessaloniki: Publications of the Holy Monastery of St Gregory Palamas, 1999). Krivocheine, B., “The Simplicity of the Divine Nature and the Distinctions in God According to St Gregory of Nyssa”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 21 (1977) 76–104. Krueger, D., “Romanos the Melodist and the Christian Self in Early Byzantium”, in E. Jeffreys (ed.), Proceedings of the 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies (1. vol.; Aldershot: Routledge, 2006) 255–76. Krueger, D., “The Old Testament and Monasticism”, in P. Magdalino/R. Nelson (ed.), The Old Testament in Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks/Washington, D.C.: Harvard University Press, 2010) 199–221. Kugel, J.L., “Why was Lamech Blind?”, Hebrew Annual Review 12 (1990) 91–103. Kugel, J.L., Traditions of the Bible. A Guide to the Bible as It Was at the Start of the Common Era (Cambridge, MA, London: Harvard University Press, 1998). Langston, S.M., Exodus through the centuries (Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006). Larchet, J.-C., Mental Disorders and Spiritual Healing. Teaching from the Early Christian East (trans. R.P. Coomaraswamy/G.J. Champoux; Hillsdale, NY: Angelico Press/Sophia Perennis, 2005). Ledit, J., Marie dans la liturgie de Byzance (Paris: Ėditions Beauchesne, 1976). Lefkowitz, M.R., First-Person Fictions. Pindar’s Poetic “F” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991). Lemaire, A., “Gehazi et les ‘Hautes Faits D’Elisée’: Remarques sur l’histoire de la rédaction des cycles d’Elie et d’Elisée”, in J.J. Adler (ed.), Haim M.I. Gevaryahu Memorial Volume (Jerusalem: World Jewish Bible Center, 1990) 41–52. Leśniewski, K., “Nie potrzebują lekarza zdrowi... ”. Hezychastyczna metoda uzdrawiania człowieka (Lublin: Wydanictwo KUL, 2006). Leśniewski, K., “The Cappadocians’ Stress on the Monarchia of the Father in Metropolitan John D. Zizioulas”, in N. Dumitrascu (ed.), The Ecumenical Legacy of the Cappadocians (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015) 39–61. Leśniewski, K., “The Theotokos and God in Orthodox Spirituality”, Roczniki Teologiczne 48–49/7 (2001–2002) 31–54. Léthel, F.-M., Théologie du l’agonie du Christ. La liberté humaine du Fils de Dieu et son importance sotériologique mises en lumière par saint Maxime le Confesseur (Paris: Beauchesne, 1972). Levin, Y., “Jesus, ‘Son of God’ and ‘Son of David’: The ‘Adoption’ of Jesus into the Davidic Line”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 28 (2006) 415–42. Lindbeck, G., “Scripture, Consensus, and Community”, in R.J. Neuhaus (ed.), Biblical Interpretation in Crisis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989) 74–101.

Modern Literature

Lingas, A., “The Liturgical place of the kontakion in Constantinople”, in C.C. Akentiev (ed.), Liturgy, architecture, and art in the Byzantine world: Papers of the XVIII International Byzantine Congres (Moscow, 8–15 August 1991) and Other Essays Dedicated to the Memory of Fr. John Meyendorff (Sankt-Petersburg [s.n.], 1995) 50–57. Loader, W.R.G., “Son of David, Blindness, Possession, and Duality in Matthew”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44 (1982) 570–85. Lohmeyer, E., Kyrios Jesus: Eine Untersuchung zu Phil 2:5–11 (Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1928). Lossky, V., “Apophasis and Trinitarian Theology”, in In the Image and Likeness of God (trans. by J.H. Erickson/Th.E. Bird; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1985) 13–29. Lossky, V., Orthodox Theology. An Introduction (trans. I.I. Kesarcodi-Watson; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1989). Lossky, V., “Panagia”, in J.H. Erickson/Th.E. Bird (ed.), In the Image and Likeness of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1985) 195–210. Lossky, V., “Redemption and Deification”, Sobornost 12 (1947) 47–56. Lossky, V., The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1976). Lossky, V., “The Theology of Light in the Thought of St Gregory Palamas”, in In the Image and Likeness of God (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary,1985). Lossky, V., The Vision of God (trans. A. Moorhouse; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1983). Lot-Borodine, M., “Le Mystère du ‘don des larmes dans’ l’Orient chrétien”, in O. Clément (ed.), La doulourese Joie. Aperçus sur la prière personnelle de l’Orient Chrétien (Bégrollesen-Mauges: Bellefontaine, 1974) 131–95. Lövestam von, E., “Jésus Fils de David chez les Synoptiques”, Studia Theologica 28 (1974) 97–109. Lundbom, J., “Elijah’s Chariot Ride”, Journal of Jewish Studies 24 (1973) 39–55. Maas, P., “Das Kontakion”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 19 (1919) 285–306. Maas, P., “Die Chronologie der Hymnen des Romanos”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 6 (1906) 1–44. Macaskill, G., “Paradise in the New Testament”, in M. Boskmuehl/G.G. Stroumsa (ed.), Paradise in Antiquity. Jewish and Christian Views (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010) 64–81. Macleod, C.W., “Allegory and Mysticism in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa”, Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1971) 362–79. MacRory, J., “St Mary of Egypt”, in The Catholic Encyclopedia (New York 1910, http://www. newadvent.org/cathen/09763a.htm) [access on 23 March 2022]. Malina, B./Rohrbaugh, R.L., Social Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1992). Mantzarides, G.I., Orthodox Spiritual Life (trans. K. Schram; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1994).

271

272

Bibliography

Martens, E.A., God’s Design. A Focus on Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994). Martin, B.L., Christ and the Law in Paul (Leiden: Brill, 1989). Martin, R.P., Carmen Christi. Philippians ii. 5–11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967). Mateos, J., “La psalmodie dans le rite byzantine”, Proche-Orient Chrétien 15 (1964) 107–126. Mateos, J., “Quelques problèmes de l’Orthros byzantine”, Proche-Orient Chrétien 11 (1961), 17–35, 201–220. Matsoukas, N., “The Economy of the Holy Spirit. The Standpoint of Orthodox Theology”, The Ecumenical Review 41 (1989) 398–406. Matsoukas, N.A., Theologia dogmatica e simbolica ortodossa, vol. 1, Introduzzione alla gnoseologia theologica ortodossa (trans. E. Pavlidou; Roma: Edizioni Dehoniane, 1995). Mattingly, J.L., “Melchizedek”, in New Catholic Encyclopedia (9 vol.; Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1981) 626–7. McGuckin, J.A., “Perceiving Light from Light in Light: The Trinitarian Theology of Saint Gregory the Theologian”, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 39 (1994) 7–32. McGuckin, J.A., “The Strategic Adaptation of Deification in the Cappadocians”, in M.U. Christensen/J.A. Wittung (ed.), Partakers of the Divine Nature. The History and Development of Deification in the Christian Traditions (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 95–113. McHugh, J.F., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on John 1–4 (London/New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2009). McKinnon, J., “Desert Monasticism and the Later Fourth-Century Psalmodie Movement”, Music and Letters 75 (1994) 505–521. McMullin, E., “Creation ex Nihilo: Early History”, in D.B. Burrel/C. Cogliati/J.M. Soskice/ W.R. Stoeger (ed.), Creation and the God of Abraham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010) 11–23. Mead, R.T., “The Healing of the Paralytic – A Unit?”, Journal of Biblical Literature 80/4 (1961) 348–54. Meredith, A., “The Concept of the Mind in Gregory of Nyssa and the Neoplatonists”, Studia Patristica 22 (1989) 35–51. Messenger, R.E., Christian Hymns of the First Three Centuries (New York, NY: The Hymn Society of America, 1942). Meyendorff, J., “Christ’s Humanity: the Paschal Mystery”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 31 (1987) 5–40. Meyendorff, J., “Creation in the History of Orthodox Theology”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 27 (1983) 27–37. Meyendorff, J., “New Life in Christ: Salvation in Orthodox Theology”, Theological Studies 50 (1989) 481–99. Meyendorff, J., Byzantine Theology. Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York, NY: Fordham University, 1979).

Modern Literature

Meyendorff, J., Christ in Eastern Christian Thought (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1987). Meyendorff, J., The Holy Spirit as God, in The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1982) 153–65. Michel, O., “Melchizedek”, in G. Kittel/G.W. Bromiley (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (4 vol.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans 1967) 568–71. Miller, J., The Prophetologion: The Old Testament of Byzantine Christianity, in P. Magdalino/ R. Nelson (ed.), The Old Testament in Byzantium (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & Collection, 2010) 55–76. Mioni, E., Romano il Melode (Torino: Paoline Edizioni, 1937). Miquel, P., Lexique du Désert. Etude de quelques mots-clés du vocabulaire monastique grec ancient (Abbaye de Bellefontaine: Editions monastiques, 1986). Moltmann, J., “Périchorèse: un mot magique de l’Antiquité pour une nouvelle théologie trinitaire”, Transversalités – Revue del’Institut catholique de Paris 76 (2000) 145–61. Moltmann, J., The Crucified God. The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology (trans. R.A. Wilson/J. Bowden; New York, NY: Fortress, 1974). Molyneux, J.H., Simonides: A Historical Study (Wauconda, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 1992). Moore, R.D., God Saves. Lessons from the Elisha Stories (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990). Mowinckel, S., The Psalms in Israel’s Worship (Nashville, TN: Eerdmans, 1962). Müller, B., Der Weg des Weines: die Tradition des ‘Penthos’ in den Apophthegmata Patrum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2000). Munzinger, A., Discerning the Spirits. Theological and Ethical Hermeneutics in Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). Nagy, P., Le don des larmes au Moyen Age (Paris: Albin Michel, 2001). Nédoncelle, M., “Prosopon et persona dans l’antiquité classique”, Revue des sciences religieuses 22 (1948) 279–99. Nel, P.J., “Psalm 110 and the Melchizedek Tradition”, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 22/1 (1996) 1–14. Newhauser, R., The Early History of Greed. The Sin of Avarice in Early Medieval Thought and Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). Neyrey, J.H., “The ‘Noble Shepherd’ in John 10: Cultural and Rhetorical Background”, Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2001) 267–91. Nieuviarts, J., L’Entrée de Jésus à Jerusalem (Mt 21,1–17). Messianisme et accomplissement des Écritures en Matthieu (Paris: Cerf, 1999). Nilles, N., Kalendarium manuale utriusque Ecclesiae orientalis et occidentalis (2 vol.; Insbruck: Libraria Feliciani Rauch, 1897). North, H., Sophrosyne: Self-Knowledge and Self-Restraint in Greek Literature (Ithaca, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1966).

273

274

Bibliography

O’Collins, G., Christology. A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). Odell, M.S., Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: Ezekiel (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2005). Öhler, M., “Die Verklärung (Mk 9:1–8): die Ankunft der Herrschaft auf der Erde”, Novum Testamentum 38/3 (1996) 197–217. Ostborn, G., Yahweh and Baal (Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1956). Ouspensky, L., “The Descent into Hell”, in L. Ouspensky/V. Lossky (ed.), The Meaning of Icons (trans. G.E.H. Palmer/E. Kadloubovsky; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 1989). Pace, S., Smyth & Helwys, Bible Commentary: Daniel (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2008). Panou, S., “Apophatische Gotteserkenntnis”, Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 13 (1971) 280–314. Papanikolaou, A., Being with God. Trinity, Apophaticism, and Divine-Human Communion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006). Patton, K.Ch., “«Howl, Weep and Moan, and Bring It Back to God»: Holy Tears in Eastern Christianity”, in K.Ch. Patton/J.S. Hawley (ed.), Holy Tears. Weeping in the Religious Imagination, (Priceton, NJ: Princeton University, 2005) 255–73. Pegon, J., Componction, Dictionnaire de la Spiritualité (2 vol.; Paris: Ėditions Beauchesne, 1952). Peltomaa, L.M., The Image of the Virgin Mary in the Akathistos Hymn (Leiden: Brill, 2001). Petcu, L., Early Church Fathers on Repentance and Confessions of Sins (Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2017). Petersen, W.L., “The Dependence of Romanos the Melodist upon the Syriac Ephrem: Its Importance for the Origin of the Kontakion”, Vigiliae Christiane 39 (1985) 171–87. Phénix Jr., R.R./Horn, C.B., “Prayer and Penance in Early and Middle Byzantine Christianity: Some Trajectories from Greek- and Syriac-Speaking Realms”, in M.J. Boda/D.K. Falk/R.A. Werline (ed.), Seeking the Favor of God, vol. 3: The Impact of Penitential Prayer Beyond Second Temple Judaism (Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008) 225–54. Piper, J., A Hunger for God. Desiring God Through Fasting and Prayer (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1997). Pitra, J.B., Hymnographie de l’Église grecque (Rome: Imprimerie de la Civiltà cattolica Collection, 1867). Placher, W.C., Jesus the Savior: The Meaning of Jesus Christ for Christian Faith (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001). Pomazansky, M., Orthodox Dogmatic Theology (trans. S. Rose; Platina, CA: St Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 2009). Popov, I.V., “The Idea of Deification in the Early Church”, in V. Kharlamov (ed.), Theosis. Deification in Christian Theology (2 vol.; Eugene, OR: The Lutterworth Press – James Clarke & Co Ltd, 2011) 42–82. Prestige, G.L., God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1981).

Modern Literature

Preuss, H.D., Old Testament Theology (1 vol.; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995). Preuss, H.D., Old Testament Theology (2 vol.; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996). Prokurat, M., “Orthodox Perspectives on Creation”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 33 (1989) 331–49. Quasten, J., Music and Worship in Pagan and Christian Antiquity (Washington D.C.: Pastoral, 1983). Radde-Gallwitz, A., Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Transformation of Divine Simplicity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). Rademaker, A., Sophrosyne and the Rhetoric of Self-Restraint. Polysemy & Persuasive Use of an Ancient Greek Value Term (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2005). Ramoroson, L.,“La justification par la foi du Christ Jésus”, Science et Esprit 39 (1987) 81–92. Reich, K.A., Figuring Jesus. The Power of Rhetorical Figures of Speech in the Gospel of Luke (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2011). Rengstorff, K.H., “Klaio [to cry, weep], klauthmos [crying, weeping]”, in G. Kittel/G. Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 436. Ringe, S.H., Luke (Luisville, Ky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995). Robbins, V.K., “The Woman Who Touched Jesus’ Garment: Socio-Rhetorical Analysis of the Synoptic Accounts”, New Testament Studies 33/4 (1987) 502–15. Robinson, B., “Moses at the Burning Bush”, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 75 (1997) 107–22. Robinson, B., “The Jealousy of Miriam: A Note on Num. 12”, Zeitschrift für die Altentestamentum Wissenschaft 101 (1981) 428–32. Robinson, B.P., “The Anointing by Mary of Bethany”, Downside Review 115 (1997) 99–111. Robinson, J.A.T., “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats”, New Testament Studies 2/4 (1955–56) 225–237. Rogerson, J./ Davies, Ph., The Old Testament World (London: Cambridge University Press, 2005). Romanides, J., An Outline of Orthodox Patristic Dogmatics (trans. G.D. Dragas; Rollinsford, NH: Orthodox Research Institute, 2004). Romanides, J.S., “Man and His True Life According to the Greek Orthodox Service Book”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 1 (1954) 63–83. Romanides, J.S., “Original Sin According to St Paul”, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 4 (1955–56) 5–28. Romanides, J.S., The Ancestral Sin (trans. G.S. Gabriel; Ridgewood, NJ: Zephyr Publishing, 2008). Rossum van, J., “Romanos le Mélode et le «kontakion»”, Hymnographie (2000) 93–104. Rusche, H., “Die Gestalt des Melchizedek”, Münchener Teologische Zeitschrift 5 (1955) 230–52. Russell, J.B., The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977).

275

276

Bibliography

Russell, N., The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). Ryken, Ph.G., Exodus. Saved for God’s Glory (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005). Salaville, S., “Marie dans la liturgie byzantine ou gréco-slave”, in D’Hubert du Manoir (ed.), Marie (1 vol.; Paris: Beauchesne et ses Fils, 1949) 249–326. Savran, G.W., Encountering the Divine. Theophany in Biblical Narrative (London/New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2002). Schmemann, A., Great Lent (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Press, 1996). Schmemman, A., Introduction to Liturgical Theology (trans. A.E. Moorehouse; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996). Schneider, H., “Die biblischen Oden im christlichen Altertum”, Biblica 30 (1949) 30–65. Schottroff, L., “Das Gleichnis vom verlorenen Sohn”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 68/1 (1971) 27–52. Senior, D.P., The Passion Narrative according to Matthew: A Redactional Study (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1975). Shepardson, Ch., Anti-Judaism and Christian Orthodoxy: Ephrem’s Hymns in Fourth-Century Syria (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2008). Sherrard, Ph., “The Meaning of Creation ex Nihilo”, in Christianity. Lineaments of a Sacred Tradition (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1998) 232–44. Shoemaker, S.J., Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). Sieben, H.-J., “Athanasius über den Psalter: Analyse seines Briefes an Marcellus. Zum 1600. Todesjahr des Bischofs von Alexandrien”, Theologie und Philosophie 48 (1973) 157–73. Ska, J.-L., “Jésus et la Samaritaine (Jn 4). Utilité de L’ancien Testament”, Nouvelle Revue Théologique 118 (1996) 641–52. Spidlik, Th., “La theoria et la praxis chez Grégoire de Nazianze”, Studia Patristica 14 (1976), 358–64. St Andrew of Crete, “On the Nativity I. On the Nativity of the Supremely Holy Theotokos”, in Wider than Heaven, 82. (PG 97, 817) (PG 97, 805–820). Stamm, J.J., “Der Name des Königs David”, Vetus Testamentum Supplement 7 (1960) 165–83. Staniloae, D., Orthodox Spirituality. A Practical Guide for the Faithful and a Definitive Manual for the Scholar (trans. J. Newville; South Canaan, PA: St Tikhon’s Seminary, 2002). Stăniloae, D., The Experience of God (trans. I. Ionită/R. Barringer; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1994). Stăniloae, D., The Holy Trinity. In the Beginning There Was Love (trans. R. Clark; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2012). Staniloăe, D., Theology and the Church (trans. R. Barringer; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1980). Starowieyski, M., “La pénitence dans les apophtegmes des Pères du désert”, Vox Patrum 6–7 (1984) 317–26.

Modern Literature

Stavropoulos, Ch., Partakers of Divine nature (trans. S. Harakas; Minneapolis, MN: Light and Life Publishing Company, 1976). Steenberg, M.C., Irenaeus on Creation. The Cosmic Christ and the Saga of Redemption (Leiden/ Boston, MA: Brill, 2008). Steidle, B., “Die Tränen, ein Mystiches Problem im Alien Mönchtum”, Benediktinische Montsschrift 20 (1938) 181–7. Stemmer, P., “Perichorese. Zur Geschichte eines Begriffs”, Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte 27 (1983) 9–55. Stewart, C., “The Use of Biblical Texts in Prayer and the Formation of Early Monastic Culture”, American Benedictine Review 62/2 (2011) 188–201. Stewart, C., Cassian the Monk (New York – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998). Studer, B., Trinity and Incarnation. The Faith of the Early Church (trans. M. Westerhoff; Collegeville, MN: T&T Clark, 1993). Swain, J.P., “Psalmody”, in Historical Dictionary of Sacred Music (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2006), 181. Swetnam, J., “Some Signs of Jonah”, Biblica 68 (1987) 74–9. Szram, M., Duchowy sens liczb w alegorycznej egzegezie aleksandryjskiej (II–V w.) (Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2001). Tannehill, R.C., “Repentance in the Context of Lukan Soteriology”, in J.H. Ellens/D.L. Ellens/ R.P. Knierim/I. Kalimi (ed.), God’s Word for Our World. vol. II. Theological and Cultural Studies in Honor of Simon John De Vries (London/New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2004) 199–215. Teeple, H.M., “The Origin of the Son of Man Christology”, Journal of Biblical Literature 84/3 (1965) 213–50. Telea, M., “The Use of the Term Perichoresis in the Trinitarian Dogma According to St Gregory of Nyssa”, in The Ecumenical Legacy of the Cappadocians 235–245. Thompson, Th.L., The Origin Tradition of Ancient Israel I. The Literary Formation of Genesis and Exodus 1–23 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1987). Timiadis, E., Towards Authentic Christian Spirituality: Orthodox Pastoral Reflections (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1998). Torgerson, H., “The Healing of the Bent Woman: A Narrative Interpretation of Luke 13:10–17”, Currents in Theology and Mission 32 (2005) 178–86. Towner, W.S., “The Poetic Passages of Daniel 1–6”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 31 (1969) 317–26. Towns, E., Knowing God Through Fasting (Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image Publishers, 2002). Tresmontant, C., Le problem de l’âme (Paris: Ėditions de Seuil, 1971). Tsichlis, M.G., For the Hope of Humanity. The Doctrine of the Dormition of the Theotokos in the Orthodox Christian Tradition (Bloomington, IN: iUniverse, 2011). Tsirpanlis, C.N., Introduction to Eastern Patristic Thought and Orthodox Theology (Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 1991).

277

278

Bibliography

Uspensky, N., Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1985). Van Oyen, G., “Demons and Exorcism in the Gospel of Mark”, in N. Vos, W. Otten (ed.), Demons and the Devil in Ancient and Medieval Christianity (Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill, 2011) 99–116. Van Seters, J., Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven, CT: Echo Point Books & Media, 1975). Vasileios of Savronikita, Archimandrite, Hymn of Entry. Liturgy and Life in the Orthodox Church (trans. E. Briere; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1984). Venema, C.P., “Gregory of Nyssa on the Trinity”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 8/1 (1992) 72–94. Wanamaker, C.A., “Philippians 2.6–11: Son of God or Adamic Christology?”, New Testament Studies 33/2 (1987) 179–93. Ware, K., “«Аn Obscure Matter»: The Mystery of Tears in Orthodox Spirituality”, in K.Ch. Patton/J.S. Hawley (ed.), Holy Tears. Weeping in the Religious Imagination (Priceton, NJ: Princeton University, 2005) 242–54. Ware, K., The Meaning of the Great Fast, in The Lenten Triodion (trans. Mother Mary/K. Ware; London: Faber & Faber, 1984) 30–34. Weber, K., “The Image of Sheep and Goats in Matthew 25:31–46”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (1997) 657–78. Weinberger, L.J., Jewish Hymnography: A Literary History (London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization in association with Liverpool University Press, 1998). Wellesz, E., “Kontakion and Kanon”, in I. Anglès (ed.), Atti del Congresso Internazionale di Musica Sacra organizzato dal Pontificio Istituto di Musica Sacra e dalla Commissione di Musica Sacra per l’Anno Santo, Roma, 25–30 maggio 1950 (Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1950) 131–133. Wellesz, E., “The Akathistos. A Study in Byzantine Hymnography”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 9–10 (1955–56) 141–74. Wellesz, E., A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1962). Wells, J.B., God’s Holy People. A Theme in Biblical Theology (Sheffield: A&C Black, 2000). Werner, E., “Hebrew and Oriental Christian Metrical Hymns. A Comparison”, Hebrew Union College Annual 23 (1950–1951) 397–432. Werner, E., The Sacred Bridge. The Interdependence of Liturgy and Music in Synagogue and Church during the First Millennium (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1959). Whitehead, D., “Observations on ‘Hadephagia’”, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 145/2 (2002) 175–86. Wilken, R.L., “Melito, The Jewish community at Sardis, and the Sacrifice of Isaac”, Theological Studies 37 (1976) 53–69. Williams, N.A., The Divine Sense. The Intellect in Patristic Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

Modern Literature

Willitts, J., Matthew’s Messianic Shepherd-King. In Search of ‘The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel’ (Berlin/New York, NY: De Gruyter, 2007). Winkelmann, F., Der monenergetisch-monotheletische Streit (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001). Winn, A., The Purpose of Mark’s Gospel: an Early Christian Response to Roman Imperial Propaganda (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008). Witherington III, B., Women and the Genesis of Christianity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990). Wood, J.E., “Isaac Typology in the New Testament”, New Testament Studies 14 (1968) 583–9. Woodhouse, J.W., “Jesus and Jonah (Matt 12.39–40; Matt 16.4; Lk 11.20)”, Reformed Theological Review 43 (1984) 33–41. Wortley, J., “Psalmody and the Desert Fathers”, Psaltiki: the online journal 4 (2012) 10–16. Wyatt, N., “The Significance of the Burning Bush”, Vetus Testamentum 36 (1986) 361–5. Xintaras, Z.C., “Man – the Image of God According to the Greek Fathers”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 1 (1954) 48–62. Yannaras, Ch., “The Trinitarian God as the Casual Principle of Existential Freedom”, in The Meaning of Reality. Essays on Existence and Communion, Eros and History (Los Angeles, CA: Sebastian & Indiktos, 2011) 13–19. Yannaras, Ch., Against Religion. The Alienation of the Ecclesial Event (trans. N. Russell; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2013). Yannaras, Ch., Elements of Faith. An Introduction to Orthodox Theology (trans. K. Schram; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991). Yannaras, Ch., On the Absence and Unknowability of God. Heidegger and the Areopagite (trans. H. Ventis; London: T&T Clark, 2005). Yannaras, Ch., Person and Eros (trans. N. Russel; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2007). Yannaras, Ch., Relational Ontology (trans. N. Russel; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox, 2011). Yannaras, Ch., The Enigma of Evil (trans. N. Russel; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2012). Yannaras, Ch., The Freedom of Morality (trans. E. Briere; Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1984). Younger, B., “Luke 10,25–37 – Preaching Like the Good Samaritan”, Review and Expositor 90 (1993) 393–98. Zacharias Archimandrite, The Hidden Man of the Heart (1 Peter 3:4). The Cultivation of the Heart in Orthodox Christian Anthropology (Essex: Mount Thabor, 2008). Ziemer, B., Abram – Abraham. Kompositionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Genesis 14, 15 und 17 (Berlin/New York, NY: De Gruyter, 2005). Zimmerli, W., Old Testament Theology in Outline (trans. D.E. Green; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1978).

279

280

Bibliography

Zizioulas, J.D., “The Being of God and the Being of Man. An essay in theological dialogue”, in The One and the Many. Studies on God, Man, the Church, and the World Today (Alhambra, CA: Sebastian, 2010) 17–40. Zizioulas, J.D., Being as Communion. Studies in Personhood and the Church (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1985). Zizioulas, J.D., Communion and Otherness. Further Studies in Personhood and the Church (London: T&T Clark, 2006). Zizioulas, J.D., Lectures in Christian Dogmatics (London: T&T Clark, 2008). Κολλυρόπουλος, Θ.Λ., Περί του προβλήματος της Β΄ωδής των κανόνων (Πάτρα: Θ.Λ. Κολλυρόπουλος, 2012). Φουντούλης, I., “Θεοτόκιον”, in Μεγαή Ηθική και Θρησκευτική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια (6 vol.; Ἀθῆναι: Πρώτη Έκδοση, 1965) 317. Τωμαδάκης, N., Η Βυζαντινή Υμνογραφία και Ποίησις (2 vol.; Θεσσαλονίκη: Πουρνάρας ΥΓ 1993). Аверинцев, C.C., “Византийская литература VII-IX вв”, in История всемирной литературы в 9 томах (2 vol.; Москва: АН СССР, 1984) 348–51. Аверинцев, C.C., Поэтика ранневизантийской поэзии (Москва: Азбука-классика, 2004). Василик, B.B., Происхождение канона (Богословие, история, поэтика) (СанктПетербург: Издательство Санкт-Петербургского Государственного Университета, 2006). Венцель, O.B., “Богородичен”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная Энциклопедия (5 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2002) 507–8. Владимир архимандрит (ed.), Систематическое описание рукописей Московской Синодальной (Патриаршей) библиотеки, ч. I , Рукописи греческие (Москва: Синод. тип., 1894). Горский, А./Невоструев, К., Описание славянских рукописей Московской Синодальной Библиотеки (3 part; Москва: Московская синодальная типография, 1869). Дионисий (Лукин), “Богослужения Великого Поста как путь души христианской через Голгофу к Воскресению”, Журнал Московской Патриархии 4 (1967) 51–62. Желтов, M., “Канон”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная энциклопедия, (Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2012) 204.

Игнатия Муних (Петровская), Церковные песнотворцы (Москва: Библиотека журнала «Альфа и Омега», 2005). Карабинов, И.А., Постная Триодь (Санкт-Петербург: Типография В. Смирнова, 1910). Квирикашвилли, Л.С., Композиция гимнографического канона (doctoral dissertation; Тбилиси 1982). Керн, К., Литургика. Гимнография и эортология (Москва: Крутицкое Патриаршее Подворье, 2000).

Modern Literature

Красовицкая, М.С., Литургика (Москва: Издательство Православного СвятоТихоновского гуманитарного университета, 2020). Леонов, B., Основы православной антропологии (Москва: Издательство Московской Патриархии Русской Православной Церкви, 2013). Леонов, B., Основы православной антропологии (Москва: Издательство Московской Патриархии Русской Православной Церкви, 2013).

Минея служебная. Июль (Киев: Киево-Печерская лавра, 1894). Момина, M.A., “О происхождении греческой Триоди”, Палестинский Сборник 28/91 (1986) 112–9. Настольная книга священнослужителя (4 vol.; Москва: Издание Московской Патриархии, 1983). Пентковский, A.M., “Ипотипосис”, in Кирилл Патриарх (ed.), Православная Энциклопедия (26 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2011) 193. Скабалланович, M., Толковый типикон: объяснительное изложение типикона с историческим введением (Казань: Издательство дела Н.Т. Корчак-Новицкого, 1910). Ткаченко, A.A./Желтов, M.C., “Библейские песни”, in Алексей Патриарх (ed.), Православная энциклопедия (5 vol.; Москва: Церковно-научный центр «Православная энциклопедия», 2002) 62–71.

Троицкой, И., О мудрости. Размышления над двумя тропарями Великого канона Андрея Критского (Москва: Издательство Православного Свято-Тихоновского Богословского Института, 1998). Успенский, Н.Д., “Святая Четыредесятница”, Журнал Московской Патриархии 3 (1945) 33–8. Филарет (Гумилевский) архиепископ, Исторический обзор песнопевцев и песнопения греческой Церкви (Санкт-Петербург: Издание книгопродавца И.Л. Тузова, 1860)

281

284

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Annex The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete: The Source Text in Greek and Its Translation into English

Ode I. Heirmos

Ode I.1

Ode I.2

Ode I.3

Ode I.4

Ode I.5

Ode I.6

PG 97:1330c Βοηθὸς καὶ σκεπαστὴς

He is for me unto salvation Helper and Protector. He is my God and I glorify Him, God of my fathers is He and I exalt Him, for He is greatly glorified. PG 97:1332a Πόθεν ἄρξομαι θρηνεῖν τὰς Where shall I begin to weep τοῦ ἀθλίου μου βίου πράξεις; for the actions of my ποίαν ἀπαρχὴν ἐπιθήσω, wretched life? What first-fruit Χριστέ, τῇ νῦν θρηνῳδίᾳ; ἀλλ᾿ shall I offer, O Christ, in this ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς my lamentation? But in Thy παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν. compassion grant me forgiveness of sins. PG 97:1332a Δεῦρο, τάλαινα ψυχή, σὺν τῇ Come, wretched soul, with σαρκί σου τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ thy flesh to the Creator of all. ἐξομολογοῦ· καὶ ἀπόσχου Make confession to Him, and λοιπὸν τῆς πρὶν ἀλογίας, abstain henceforth from thy καὶ προσάγαγε Θεῷ ἐν past brutishness; and offer μετανοίᾳ δάκρυα. to God tears of repentance. PG 97:1332a Τὸν πρωτόπλαστον Ἀδὰμ τῇ I have rivalled in παραβάσει παραζηλώσας, transgression Adam the ἔγνων ἐμαυτὸν γυμνωθέντα first-formed man, and I have Θεοῦ καὶ τῆς ἀιδίου βασιλεία found myself stripped naked καὶ τρυφῆς διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας of God, of the eternal μου. Kingdom and its joy, because of my sins. PG 97:1332a Οἴμοι, τάλαινα ψυχή! τί Woe to thee, miserable soul! ὡμοιώθης τῇ πρώτῃ Εὔᾳ; How like thou art to the first εἶδες γὰρ κακῶς καὶ ἐτρώθης Eve! For thou hast looked in πικρῶς, καὶ ἥψω τοῦ ξύλου, wickedness and wast καὶ ἐγεύσω προπετῶς τῆς grievously wounded; thou παραλόγου βρώσεως. hast touched the tree and rashly tasted the deceptive food. PG 97:1332b Ἀντὶ Εὔας αἰσθητῆς ἡ νοητή Instead of the visible Eve, μοι κατέστη Εὔα, ὁ ἐν τῇ I have the Eve of the mind: σαρκὶ ἐμπαθὴς λογισμός, the passionate thought in my δεικνὺς τὰ ἡδέα, καὶ flesh, showing me what γευόμενος ἀεὶ τῆς πικρᾶς seems sweet; yet whenever καταπόσεως. I taste from it, I find it bitter. PG 97:1332b Ἐπαξίως τῆς Ἐδὲμ Adam was justly banished προεξερρίφη ὡς μὴ φυλάξας from Eden because he μίαν σου, Σωτήρ, ἐντολὴν ὁ disobeyed one Ἀδάμ· ἐγὼ δὲ τί πάθω, commandment of Thine, ἀθετῶν διαπαντὸς τὰ ζωηρά O Saviour. What then shall σου λόγια; I suffer, for I am always rejecting Thy words of life? Glory be to the Father. ἐγένετό μοι εἰς σωτηρίαν· οὗτός μου Θεός, καὶ δοξάσω αὐτόν· Θεὸς τοῦ Πατρός μου, καὶ ὑψώσω αὐτόν· ἐνδόξως γὰρ δεδόξασται.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode I.7

PG 97:1332b Τὴν τοῦ Κάϊν ὑπελθὼν

By my own free choice have I incurred the guilt of Cain’s murder. I have killed my conscience, bringing the flesh to life and making war upon the soul by my wicked actions. Τῇ τοῦ Ἄβελ, Ἰησοῦ, οὐχ O Jesus, I have not been like ὡμοιώθην δικαιοσύνῃ· δῶρά Abel in his righteousness. σοι δεκτὰ οὐ προσῆξα ποτέ, Never have I offered Thee οὐ πράξεις ἐνθέους, οὐ acceptable gifts or godly θυσίαν καθαράν, οὐ βίον actions, a pure sacrifice or ἀνεπίληπτον. an unblemished life. Ὡς ὁ Κάϊν καὶ ἡμεῖς, ψυχὴ Like Cain, O miserable soul, ἀθλία, τῷ πάντων Κτίστῃ we too have offered, to the πράξεις ρυπαρὰς καὶ θυσίαν Creator of all, defiled actions ψεκτὴν καὶ ἄχρηστον βίον and a polluted sacrifice and προσηγάγομεν ὁμοῦ· διὸ καὶ a worthless life: and so we κατεκρίθημεν. also are condemned. Τὸν πηλόν, ὁ κεραμεύς, As the potter moulds the clay, ζωοπλαστήσας ἐνέθηκάς μοι, Thou hast fashioned me, σάρκα καὶ ὀστᾶ, καὶ πνοὴν giving me flesh and bones, καὶ ζωήν. Ἀλλ᾿ ὦ Ποιητά μου, breath and life. But accept Λυτρωτά μου καὶ Κριτά, me in repentance, O my μετανοοῦντα δέξαι με. Maker and Deliverer and Judge. Ἐξαγγέλλω σοι, Σωτήρ, τὰς I confess to Thee, O Saviour, ἁμαρτίας, ἃς εἰργασάμην, the sins I have committed, καὶ τὰς τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τοῦ the wounds of my soul and σώματός μου πληγάς, ἅς μοι body, which murderous ἔνδον μιαιφόνοι λογισμοὶ thoughts, like thieves, have λῃστρικῶς ἐναπέθηκαν. inflicted inwardly upon me. Εἰ καὶ ἥμαρτον, Σωτήρ, ἀλλ᾿ Though I have sinned, οἶδα ὅτι φιλάνθρωπος εἶ· O Saviour, yet I know that πλήττεις συμπαθῶς καὶ Thou art full σπλαγχνίζῃ θερμῶς· of loving-kindness. Thou dost δακρύοντα βλέπεις καὶ chastise with mercy and art προστρέχεις ὡς Πατὴρ fervent in compassion. Thou ἀνακαλῶν τὸν Ἄσωτον. dost see me weeping and dost run to meet me, like the Father calling back the Prodigal Son. Ἐρριμμένον με, Σωτήρ, πρὸ I lie as an outcast before Thy τῶν πυλῶν σου, κἂν ἐν τῷ gate, O Saviour. In my old γήρει, μή με ἀπορρίψῃς age cast me not down empty εἰς ᾍδου κενόν· ἀλλὰ πρὸ τοῦ into hell; but, before the end τέλους ὡς φιλάνθρωπός μοι comes, in Thy love grant me δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν. remission of sins. Ὁ λῃσταῖς περιπεσὼν I am the man who fell among ἐγὼ ὑπάρχω τοῖς λογισμοῖς thieves, even my own μου· ὅλως ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν thoughts; they have covered τετραυμάτισμαι νῦν· all my body with wounds, and ἐπλήσθην μωλώπων. Ἀλλ᾿ I lie beaten and bruised. But αὐτός μοι ἐπιστάς, Χριστὲ come to me, O Christ my Σωτήρ, ἰάτρευσον. Saviour, and heal me. μιαιφονίαν τῇ προαιρέσει, γέγονα φονεὺς συνειδότι ψυχῆς, ζωώσας τὴν σάρκα καὶ στρατεύσας κατ᾿ αὐτῆς ταῖς πονηραῖς μου πράξεσι.

Ode I.8

PG 97:1332c

Ode I.9

PG 97:1332c

Ode I.10

PG 97:1332c

Ode I.11

PG 97:1332c

Ode I.12

PG 97:1333a

Ode I.13

PG 97:1333a

Ode I.14

PG 97:1333a

285

286

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode I.15

PG 97:1333a Ἱερεύς με προϊδὼν ἀντιπαρῆλθε, καὶ ὁ Λευΐτης βλέπων ἐν δεινοῖς ὑπερεῖδε γυμνόν. Ἀλλ᾿ ὁ ἐκ Μαρίας ἀνατείλας Ἰησοῦς, σὺ ἐπιστάς με οἴκτειρον.

Ode I.16

PG 97:1333b Ὁ Ἀμνὸς ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὁ αἴρων πάντων τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν.

Ode I.17

PG 97:1333b Μετανοίας ὁ καιρός· προσέρχομαί σοι, τῷ Πλαστουργῷ μου· ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν.

Ode I.18

PG 97:1333b Μὴ βδελύξῃ με, Σωτήρ, μὴ ἀπορρίψῃς τοῦ σοῦ προσώπου· ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, καὶ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς παραπτωμάτων ἄφεσιν.

Ode I.19

PG 97:1333c Τὰ ἑκούσια, Σωτήρ, καὶ τὰ

Ode I.21

Ode I.22

Reject me not, O Saviour: cast me not away from Thy presence. Take from me the heavy yoke of sin and in Thy compassion grant me – remission of sins.

All mine offences, voluntary and involuntary, manifest and hidden, known and unknown, do Thou forgive, O Saviour, for Thou art God; be merciful and save me. PG 97:1333c Ἐκ νεότητος, Σωτήρ, τὰς From my youth, O Saviour, ἐντολάς σου ἐπαρωσάμην· I have rejected Thy ὅλον ἐμπαθῶς ἀμελῶν, commandments. Ruled by ρᾳθυμῶν, παρῆλθον τὸν βίον· the passions, I have passed διὸ κράζω σοι, Σωτήρ· my whole life in κἂν ἐν τῷ τέλει σῶσόν με. heedlessness and sloth. Therefore I cry to Thee, O Saviour, even now at the end: Save me. PG 97:1333c Τὴν οὐσίαν τῆς ψυχῆς As the Prodigal, O Saviour, καταναλώσας ταῖς ἀσωτίαις, I have wasted the substance ἔρημός εἰμι ἀρετῶν εὐσεβῶν· of my soul in riotous living, λιμώττων δὲ κράζω· Ὁ Πατὴρ and I am barren of the τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν, προφθάσας virtues of holiness. In my σύ με οἴκτειρον. hunger I cry: O compassionate Father, come quickly out to meet me and take pity on me. PG 97:1333c Σοὶ προσπίπτω, Ἰησοῦ· I fall down, Jesus, at Thy feet: Ἡμάρτηκά σοι, ἱλάσθητί μοι· I have sinned against Thee, ἆρον τὸν κλοιόν, ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸν be merciful to me. Take from βαρύν, τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, me the heavy yoke of sin, καὶ ὡς εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς and in Thy compassion grant δάκρυα κατανύξεως. me tears of compunction. ἀκούσια πταίσματά μου, καὶ τὰ φανερὰ καὶ κρυπτά, καὶ γνωστὰ καὶ ἄγνωστα πάντα συγχωρήσας ὡς Θεός, ἱλάσθητι καὶ σῶσόν με.

Ode I.20

The Priest saw me first, but passed by on the other side; the Levite looked on me in my distress but despised my nakedness. O Jesus, sprung from Mary, do Thou come to me and take pity on me. O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of all, take from me the heavy yoke of sin, and in Thy compassion give me tears of compunction. It is time for repentance: to Thee I come, my Creator. Take from me the heavy yoke of sin, and in Thy compassion give me tears of compunction.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode I.23

PG 97:1333d Μὴ εἰσέλθῃς μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ ἐν

Enter not into judgement with me, bringing before me the things I should have done, examining my words and correcting my impulses. But in Thy mercy overlook my sins and save me, O Lord almighty. PG 97:1333b Ὑπερούσιε Τριάς, ἡ ἐν Μονάδι Trinity beyond all being, προσκυνουμένη, ἆρον τὸν worshipped in Unity, take κλοιὸν ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, from me the heavy yoke τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας· καὶ ὡς of sin, and in εὔσπλαγχνός μοι δὸς Thy compassion grant me δάκρυα κατανύξεως. tears of compunction. PG 97:1336b Θεοτόκε, ἡ ἐλπὶς καὶ O Theotokos, the hope and προστασία τῶν σὲ protection of those who sing ὑμνούντων, ἆρον τὸν κλοιὸν thy praises, take from me the ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸν βαρύν, heavy yoke of sin and, pure τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας· καὶ ὡς Lady, accept me in Δέσποινα ἁγνή, μετανοοῦντα repentance. κρίσει, φέρων μου τὰ πρακτέα, λόγους ἐκζητῶν, καὶ εὐθύνων ὁρμάς· ἀλλ᾿ ἐν οἰκτιρμοῖς σου παρορῶν μου τὰ δεινά, σῶσόν με, Παντοδύναμε.

Ode I.24. Triadikon

Ode I.25. Teotokion

δέξαι με.

Ode II. Heirmos

PG 97:1336c Πρόσεχε, Οὐρανέ, καὶ

Attend, O heaven, and I shall speak and sing in praise of Christ, who took flesh from a Virgin and came to dwell among us. Πρόσεχε, Οὐρανέ, καὶ Attend, O heaven, and I shall λαλήσω· γῆ, ἐνωτίζου φωνῆς speak; give ear, O earth, μετανοούσης Θεῷ καὶ to the voice of one who ἀνυμνούσης αὐτόν. repents before God and sings His praise. Πρόσχες μοι, ὁ Θεός, ὡς Look upon me οἰκτίρμων, ἱλέῳ ὄμματί σου, in compassion, O God, with καὶ δέξαι μου τὴν θερμὴν Thy merciful eye, and accept ἐξομολόγησιν. my fervent confession. Ἡμάρτηκα ὑπὲρ πάντας More than all men have ἀνθρώπους· μόνος ἡμάρτηκά I sinned; I alone have sinned σοι· ἀλλ᾿ οἴκτειρον ὡς Θεός, against Thee. But as God Σωτήρ, τὸ ποίημά σου. take pity on Thy creation, O Saviour. Ζάλη με, τῶν κακῶν περιέχει, I am surrounded by the εὔσπλαγχνε Κύριε· ἀλλ᾿ ὡς τῷ storm of sin, Πέτρῳ, κἀμοὶ τὴν χεῖρα O compassionate Lord. But ἔκτεινον. stretch out Thine hand to me, as once Thou hast to Peter. Τὰ δάκρυα τὰ τῆς Πόρνης, I offer to Thee, O merciful Οἰκτίρμον, κἀγὼ Lord, the tears of the Harlot. προβάλλομαι· Take pity on me, O Saviour, Ἱλάσθητί μοι, Σωτήρ, τῇ in Thy compassion. εὐσπλαγχνίᾳ σου. Ἠμαύρωσα τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ With the lusts of passion ὡραῖον ταῖς τῶν παθῶν I have darkened the beauty ἡδοναῖς, καὶ ὅλως ὅλον τὸν of my soul, and turned my νοῦν χοῦν ἀπετέλεσα whole mind entirely into dust.

Ode II.1

PG 97:1336c

Ode II.2

PG 97:1336c

Ode II.3

PG 97:1336c

Ode II.4

PG 97:1336c

Ode II.5

PG 97:1336c

Ode II.6

PG 97:1336d

λαλήσω, καὶ ἀνυμνήσω Χριστόν, τὸν ἐκ Παρθένου σαρκὶ ἐπιδημήσαντα.

287

288

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode II.7

Ode II.8

Ode II.9

Ode II.10

Ode II.11

Ode II.12

Ode II.13

Ode II.14

PG 97:1336d Διέρρηξα νῦν τὴν στολήν μου I have tom the first garment τὴν πρώτην, ἣν ἐξυφάνατό that the Creator wove for me μοι ὁ Πλαστουργὸς ἐξ ἀρχῆς, in the beginning, and now καὶ ἔνθεν κεῖμαι γυμνός. I lie naked. PG 97:1337a Ἐνδέδυμαι διερρηγμένον I have clothed myself in the χιτῶνα, ὃν ἐξυφάνατό μοι ὁ tom coat that the serpent ὄφις τῇ συμβουλῇ, καὶ wove for me by his counsel, καταισχύνομαι. arid I am ashamed. PG 97:1337a Προσέβλεψα τοῦ φυτοῦ τὸ I looked upon the beauty ὡραῖον, καὶ ἠπατήθην τὸν of the tree and my mind was νοῦν· καὶ ἔνθεν κεῖμαι deceived; and now I lie γυμνός, καὶ καταισχύνομαι. naked and ashamed. PG 97:1337a Ἐτέκταινον ἐπὶ τὸν νῶτόν μου All the ruling passions have πάντες οἱ ἀρχηγοὶ τῶν κακῶν, ploughed upon my back, μακρύνοντες κατ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὴν making long furrows ἀνομίαν αὐτῶν. of wickedness. PG 97:1337a Ἀπώλεσα τὸ πρωτόκτιστον I have lost the beauty and κάλλος καὶ τὴν εὐπρέπειάν glory with which I was first μου· καὶ ἄρτι κεῖμαι γυμνός, created; and now I lie naked καὶ καταισχύνομαι. and ashamed. PG 97:1337a Κατέρραψε τοὺς δερματίνους Sin has stripped me of the χιτῶνας ἡ ἁμαρτία κἀμοί, robe that God once wove for γυμνώσασά με τῆς πρὶν me, and it has sewed for me θεοϋφάντου στολῆς. garments of skin. PG 97:1337b Περίκειμαι τὸν στολισμὸν τῆς I am clothed with the raiment αἰσχύνης, καθάπερ φύλλα of shame as with fig leaves, συκῆς, εἰς ἔλεγχον τῶν ἐμῶν in condemnation of my αὐτεξουσίων παθῶν. self-willed passions. PG 97:1337b Ἐστόλισμαι κατεστιγμένον I am clad in a garment that is χιτῶνα καὶ ᾑμαγμένον defiled and shamefully αἰσχρῶς τῇ ρύσει τῆς bloodstained by a life of ἐμπαθοῦς καὶ φιληδόνου passion and self-indulgence. ζωῆς.

Ode II.15

PG 97:1337b Ἐσπίλωσα τὸν τῆς σαρκός μου χιτῶνα καὶ κατερρύπωσα τὸ κατ᾿ εἰκόνα, Σωτήρ, καὶ καθ᾿ ὁμοίωσιν

Ode II.16

PG 97:1337b Ὑπέπεσα τῇ τῶν παθῶν ἀχθηδόνι καὶ τῇ ἐνύλῳ φθορᾷ· καὶ ἔνθεν νῦν ὁ ἐχθρὸς καταπιέζει με.

Ode II.17

PG 97:1337b Φιλόϋλον καὶ φιλοκτήμονα βίον τῆς ἀκτησίας, Σωτήρ, προκρίνας, νῦν τὸν βαρὺν κλοιὸν περίκειμαι.

Ode II.18

PG 97:1337b Ἐκόσμησα τὸν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀνδριάντα τῇ τῶν αἰσχρῶν λογισμῶν ποικίλῃ περιβολῇ καὶ κατακρίνομαι.

I have stained the garment of my flesh, O Saviour, and defiled that which was made in Thine image and likeness. I have fallen beneath the painful burden of the passions and the corruption of material things; and I am hard pressed by the enemy. Instead of freedom from possessions, O Saviour, I have pursued a life in love with material things; and now I wear a heavy yoke. I have adorned the idol of my flesh with a many-coloured coat of shameful thoughts, and I am condemned.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode II.19

PG 97:1337c Τῆς ἔξωθεν ἐπιμελῶς

I have cared only for the outward adornment, and neglected that which is within – the tabernacle fashioned by God. Μορφώσας μου τὴν τῶν With my lustful desires I have παθῶν ἀμορφίαν, ταῖς formed within myself the φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς deformity of the passions ἐλυμηνάμην τοῦ νοῦ and disfigured the beauty τὴν ὡραιότητα. of my mind. Κατέχρωσα τῆς πρὶν εἰκόνος I have discoloured with the τὸ κάλλος, Σῶτερ, τοῖς passions the first beauty of πάθεσιν· ἀλλ᾿ ὥς ποτε τὴν the image, O Saviour. But δραχμὴν ἀναζητήσας εὑρέ. seek me, as once Thou hast sought the lost coin, and find me. Ἡμάρτηκα, ὥσπερ ἡ Πόρνη Like the Harlot I cry to Thee: βοῶ σοι· μόνος ἡμάρτηκά σοι· I have sinned, I alone have ὡς μύρον δέχου, Σωτήρ, sinned against Thee. Accept κἀμοῦ τὰ δάκρυα. my tears also as sweet ointment, O Saviour. Ὠλίσθησα ὡς ὁ Δαυῒδ Like David, I have fallen into ἀκολάστως, καὶ lust and I am covered with βεβορβόρωμαι· filth; but wash me clean, ἀλλ᾿ ἀποπλύναις κἀμέ, Σωτήρ, O Saviour, by my tears. εὐκοσμίας μόνης ἐφρόντισα, τῆς ἔνδον ὑπεριδὼν θεοτυπώτου σκηνῆς.

Ode II.20

PG 97:1337c

Ode II.21

PG 97:1337c

Ode II.22

PG 97:1337c

Ode II.23

PG 97:1337c

Ode II.24

PG 97:1337d Ἱλάσθητι, ὡς ὁ Τελώνης βοῶ

τοῖς δάκρυσι.

Like the Publican I cry to Thee: Be merciful, O Saviour, be merciful to me. For no child of Adam has ever sinned against Thee as I have sinned. PG 97:1337d Οὐ δάκρυα, οὐδὲ μετάνοιαν I have no tears, no ἔχω, οὐδὲ κατάνυξιν· αὐτός repentance, no compunction; μοι ταῦτα, Σωτήρ, ὡς Θεὸς but as God do Thou Thyself, δώρησαι. O Saviour, bestow them on me. PG 97:1337d Τὴν θύραν σου μὴ ἀποκλείσῃς Lord, Lord, at the Last Day μοι τότε, Κύριε, Κύριε· shut not Thy door against ἀλλ᾿ ἄνοιξόν μοι αὐτὴν me; but open it to me, for μετανοοῦντί σοι. I repent before Thee. PG 97:1337d Φιλάνθρωπε, ὁ πάντας θέλων O Lover of mankind, who σωθῆναι, σὺ ἀνακάλεσαί με, desirest that all men shall be καὶ δέξαι ὡς ἀγαθὸς saved, in Thy goodness call μετανοοῦντά με. me back and accept me in repentance. PG 97:1340a Ἐνώτισαι τοὺς στεναγμοὺς Give ear to the groaning of τῆς ψυχῆς μου, καὶ τῶν ἐμῶν my soul, and accept the ὀφθαλμῶν προσδέχου τοὺς tears that fall from mine σταλαγμούς, Σωτήρ, καὶ eyes: O Saviour, save me. σοι, Σῶτερ, ἱλάσθητί μοι· οὐδεὶς γὰρ τῶν ἐξ Ἀδὰμ ὡς ἐγὼ ἥμαρτέ σοι.

Ode II.25

Ode II.26

Ode II.27

Ode II.28

σῶσόν με.

289

290

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode II.29. Teotokion

Ode II. Other Heirmos

Ode II.30/1

PG 97:1340a Ἄχραντε, Θεοτόκε Παρθένε,

O Theotokos undefiled, Virgin alone worthy of all praise, intercede fervently for our salvation. PG 97:1340a Ἴδετε, ἴδετε, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι See now, see that I am God, Θεός, ὁ μάννα ἐπομβρήσας who rained down manna in καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ ἐκ πέτρας the days of old, and made πηγάσας πάλαι ἐν ἐρήμῳ τῷ springs of water flow from λαῷ μου, τῇ μόνῃ δεξιᾷ καὶ τῇ the rock, for My people in the ἰσχύι τῇ ἐμῇ. wilderness, by My right hand and by My power; alone. PG 97:1340a Ἴδετε, ἴδετε, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι See now, see that I am God’: Θεός· ἐνωτίζου, ψυχή μου, give ear, my soul, to the Lord τοῦ Κυρίου βοῶντος· καὶ as He cries to thee. Forsake ἀποσπάσθητι τῆς πρώτης thy former sin, and fear Him ἁμαρτίας, καὶ φοβοῦ ὡς as thy judge and God. μόνη πανύμνητε, ἱκέτευε ἐκτενῶς εἰς τὸ σωθῆναι ἡμᾶς.

δικαστὴν καὶ ὡς κριτὴν καὶ Θεόν.

Ode II.31/2

PG 97:1340b Τίνι ὡμοιώθης,

To whom shall I liken thee, O soul of many sins? Alas! to Cain and to Lamech. For thou hast stoned thy body to death with thine evil deeds, and killed thy mind with thy disordered longings. Πάντας τοὺς πρὸ νόμου Call to mind, my soul, all who παραδραμοῦσα, ὦ ψυχή, τῷ lived before the Law. Thou Σὴθ οὐχ ὡμοιώθης, οὐ τὸν hast not been like Seth, or Ἐνὼς ἐμιμήσω, οὐ τὸν Ἐνὼχ followed Enos or Enoch, who τῇ μεταθέσει, οὐ τὸν Νῶε· was translated to heaven, or ἀλλ᾿ ὤφθης πενιχρὰ τῆς τῶν Noah; but thou art found δικαίων ζωῆς. destitute, without a share in the life of the righteous. Μόνη ἐξήνοιξας τοὺς Thou alone, my soul, hast καταρράκτας τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ opened the windows of the Θεοῦ σου, ψυχή μου, καὶ wrath of thy God, and thou κατέκλυσας πᾶσαν, ὡς γῆν, fyast flooded, as the earth, τὴν σάρκα καὶ τὰς πράξεις καὶ all thy flesh and deeds and τὸν βίον· καὶ ἔμεινας ἐκτὸς life; and thou hast remained τῆς σωστικῆς Κιβωτοῦ. outside the Ark of salvation. Ἄνδρα ἀπέκτεινα, φησίν, εἰς ‘I have slain a man to my μώλωπα ἐμοί, καὶ νεανίσκον grief and wounding’, said εἰς τραῦμα, Λάμεχ θρηνῶν Lamech, ‘and a young man ἐβόα· σὺ δὲ οὐ τρέμεις, ὦ to my hurt’; and he cried ψυχή μου, ρυπωθεῖσα τὴν aloud lamenting. Dost thou σάρκα καὶ τὸν νοῦν not tremble then, my soul, for κατασπιλώσασα. thou hast defiled thy flesh and polluted thy mind? Ὢ πῶς ἐζήλωσα Λάμεχ τὸν Ah, how I have emulated πρῴην φονευτήν, τὴν ψυχὴν Lamech, the murderer of old, ὥσπερ ἄνδρα, τὸν νοῦν ὡς slaying my soul as if it were νεανίσκον, ὡς ἀδελφὸν δέ a man, and my mind as if it μου τὸ σῶμα ἀποκτείνας, ὡς were a young man. With Κάϊν ὁ φονεύς, ταῖς sensual longings I have killed φιληδόνοις ὁρμαῖς! my body, as Cain the murderer killed his brother. πολυαμάρτητε ψυχή; εἰμὴ τῷ πρώτῳ Κάϊν, καὶ τῷ Λάμεχ ἐκείνῳ, λιθοκτονήσασα τὸ σῶμα κακουργίαις καὶ κτείνασα τὸν νοῦν ταῖς παραλόγοις ὁρμαῖς.

Ode II.32/3

PG 97:1340b

Ode II.33/4

PG 97:1340b

Ode II.34/5

PG 97:1340c

Ode II.35/6

PG 97:1340c

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode II.36/7

PG 97:1340c Πύργον ἐσοφίσω οἰκοδομῆσαι, ὦ ψυχή, καὶ ὀχύρωμα πῆξαι ταῖς σαῖς ἐπιθυμίαις, εἰμὴ συνέχεεν ὁ Κτίστης τὰς βουλάς σου, καὶ κατέαξεν εἰς γῆν τὰ μηχανήματά σου.

Ode II.37/8

PG 97:1340d Τέτρωμαι, πέπληγμαι· ἰδοὺ τὰ βέλη τοῦ ἐχθροῦ τὰ καταστίξαντά μου τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ τὸ σῶμα· ἰδοὺ τὰ τραύματα, τὰ ἕλκη, αἱ πηρώσεις βοῶσοι τὰς πληγὰς τῶν αὐθαιρέτων μου παθῶν.

Ode II.38/9

PG 97:1340d Ἔβρεξε Κύριος παρὰ Κυρίου πῦρ ποτε, ἀνομίαν ὀργῶσαν πυρπολήσας Σοδόμων· σὺ δὲ τὸ πῦρ ἐξέκαυσας τὸ τῆς γεέννης, ἐν ᾧ μέλλεις, ψυχή, συγκατακαίεσθαι πικρῶς.

Ode II.39/10

PG 97:1340d Γνῶτε καὶ ἴδετε, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι Θεός, ὁ ἐρευνῶν καρδίας καὶ κολάζων ἐννοίας, ἐλέγχων πράξεις καὶ φλογίζων ἁμαρτίας, καὶ κρίνων ὀρφανὸν καὶ ταπεινὸν καὶ πτωχόν.

Ode II.40/11. Triadikon

PG 97:1341b Ἄναρχε, ἄκτιστε Τριάς,

Ode II.41/12. Theotokion

PG 97:1341b Ἄχραντε Δέσποινα,

Ode III. Heirmos

PG 97:1341c Ἐπὶ τὴν ἀσάλευτον, Χριστέ,

Ode III.1

PG 97:1341c Πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου, ψυχή,

ἀμέριστε Μονάς, μετανοοῦντά με δέξαι, ἡμαρτηκότα σῶσον· σόν εἰμι πλάσμα· μὴ παρίδῃς, ἀλλὰ φεῖσαι καὶ ρῦσαι τοῦ πυρὸς τῆς καταδίκης με.

Θεογεννῆτορ, ἡ ἐλπὶς τῶν εἰς σὲ προστρεχόντων καὶ λιμὴν τῶν ἐν ζάλῃ, τὸν ἐλεήμονα καὶ Κτίστην καὶ Υἱόν σου ἱλέωσαι κἀμοὶ ταῖς ἱκεσίαις ταῖς σαῖς.

πέτραν τῶν ἐντολῶν σου τὴν Ἐκκλησίαν σου στερέωσον.

Κύριος ἐπιβρέξας, τὴν γῆν Σοδόμων πρὶν κατέφλεξεν.

Skilfully hast thou planned to build a tower, O my soul, and to establish a stronghold for thy lusts; but the Creator confounded thy designs and dashed thy devices to the ground. I am wounded and smitten: see the enemy’s arrows which have pierced my soul and body. See the wounds, the open sores and the injuries, I cry to Thee; see the blows inflicted by my freely-chosen passions. Roused to anger by their transgressions, the Lord once rained down fire from heaven and burnt up the men of Sodom. And thou, my soul, hast kindled the fire of Gehenna, and there to thy bitter sorrow thou shalt bum. Know and see that I am God, searching out men’s hearts and punishing their thoughts, reproving their actions and burning up their sins; and in My judgement I protect the orphan and the humble and the poor. O Trinity uncreated and without beginning, O undivided Unity: accept me in repentance and save me, a sinner. I am Thy creation, reject me not; but spare me and deliver me from the fire of condemnation. Most pure Lady, Mother of God, the hope of those who run to thee and the haven of the storm-tossed: pray to the merciful God, thy Creator and thy Son, that He may grant His mercy even to me. Upon the unshaken rock of Thy commandments, O Christ, make firm Thy Church. The Lord, my soul, once rained down fire from heaven and consumed the land of Sodom.

291

292

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode III.2

PG 97:1341c Εἰς τὸ ὄρος σῴζου, ψυχή,

0 my soul, flee like Lot to the mountain, and take refuge in Zoar before it is too late. PG 97:1341c Φεῦγε ἐμπρησμόν, ὦ ψυχή, Flee from the flames, my φεῦγε Σοδόμων καῦσιν, φεῦγε soul, flee from the burning φθορὰν θείας φλογώσεως. heat of Sodom, flee from destruction by the fire of God. PG 97:1341c Ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, Σωτήρ· I confess to Thee, O Saviour; Ἥμαρτον, ἥμαρτόν σοι· ἀλλ᾿ I have sinned, I have sinned ἄνες, ἄφες μοι ὡς against Thee. But in Thy εὔσπλαγχνος. compassion absolve and forgive me. PG 97:1341c Ἥμαρτόν σοι μόνος ἐγώ, I alone have sinned against ἥμαρτον ὑπὲρ πάντας· Thee, I have sinned more Χριστὲ Σωτήρ, μὴ ὑπερίδῃς than all men; reject me not, με. O Christ my Saviour. PG 97:1341c Σὺ εἶ ὁ Ποιμὴν ὁ καλός· Thou art the Good Shepherd: ζήτησόν με τὸν ἄρνα, seek me, the lamb that has καὶ πλανηθέντα μὴ παρίδῃς strayed, and do not forget με. me. PG 97:1341c Σὺ εἶ ὁ γλυκὺς Ἰησοῦς, σὺ εἶ ὁ Thou art my beloved Jesus, Πλαστουργός μου· ἐν σοί, Thou art my Creator; in Thee Σωτήρ, δικαιωθήσομαι. shall I be justified, O Saviour. PG 97:1341d Ὦ Τριὰς Μονάς, ὁ Θεός, O God, Trinity in Unity, save σῶσον ἡμᾶς ἐκ πλάνης, us from error and temptation καὶ πειρασμῶν καὶ and distress. ὥσπερ ὁ Λὼτ ἐκεῖνος, καὶ εἰς Σηγὼρ προανασώθητι.

Ode III.3

Ode III.4

Ode III.5

Ode III.6

Ode III.7

Ode III.8. Triadikon

περιστάσεων.

Ode III.9. Theotokion Ode III. Other Heirmos

PG 97:1341d Χαῖρε, θεοδόχε γαστήρ· χαῖρε, Hail, Womb that held God! θρόνε Κυρίου· χαῖρε, ἡ μήτηρ Hail, Throne of the Lord! Hail, τῆς ζωῆς ἡμῶν. Mother of our life! PG 97:1344a Στερέωσον, Κύριε, ἐπὶ τὴν O Lord, upon the rock of Thy πέτραν τῶν ἐντολῶν σου commandments make firm σαλευθεῖσαν τὴν καρδίαν my wavering heart, for Thou μου· ὅτι μόνος ἅγιος alone art Holy and Lord. ὑπάρχεις καὶ Κύριος.

Ode III.10/1

PG 97:1344a Πηγὴν ζωῆς κέκτημαι σὲ τοῦ θανάτου τὸν καθαιρέτην, καὶ βοῶ σοι ἐκ καρδίας μου πρὸ τοῦ τέλους· Ἥμαρτον, ἱλάσθητι, σῶσόν με.

Ode III.11/2

PG 97:1344a Τοὺς ἐπὶ Νῶε, Σωτήρ, ἠσελγηκότας ἐμιμησάμην, τὴν ἐκείνων κληρωσάμενος καταδίκην ἐν κατακλυσμῷ καταδύσεως.

Ode III.12/3

PG 97:1344a Ἡμάρτηκα, Κύριε, ἡμάρτηκά σοι, ἱλάσθητί μοι· οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ὅς τις ἥμαρτεν ἐν ἀνθρώποις, ὃν οὐχ ὑπερέβην τοῖς πταίσμασι.

For me Thou art the Fountain of life and the Destroyer of death; and from my heart I cry to Thee before the end: I have sinned, be merciful to me and save me. I have followed the example, O Saviour, of those who lived in wantonness in the days of Noah; and like them I am condemned to drown in the flood. I have sinned, O Lord, I have sinned against Thee; be merciful to me. For there is no sinner whom I have not surpassed in my offences.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode III.13/4

PG 97:1344a Τὸν Χὰμ ἐκεῖνον, ψυχή, τὸν πατραλοίαν μιμησαμένη, τὴν αἰσχύνην οὐκ ἐκάλυψας τοῦ πλησίον, ὀπισθοφανῶς ἀνακάμψασα.

Ode III.14/5

PG 97:1344b Τὴν εὐλογίαν τοῦ Σὴμ οὐκ

O wretched soul, thou hast not inherited the blessing of Shem, nor hast thou received, like Japhet, a spacious domain in the land of forgiveness. PG 97:1344b Ἐκ γῆς Χαρρὰν ἔξελθε, τῆς O my soul, depart from sin, ἁμαρτίας, ψυχή μου, δεῦρο from the land of Haran, and εἰς γῆν ρέουσαν ἀείζωον come to the land that ἀφθαρσίαν, ἣν ὁ Ἀβραὰμ Abraham inherited, which ἐκληρώσατο. flows with incorruption and eternal life. PG 97:1344b Τὸν Ἀβραὰμ ἤκουσας πάλαι, Thou hast heard, my soul, ψυχή μου, καταλιπόντα γῆν how Abraham in days of old πατρῴαν, καὶ γενόμενον left the land of his fathers μετανάστην· τούτου τὴν and became a wanderer: προαίρεσιν μίμησαι. follow him in his choice. PG 97:1344b Ἐν τῇ δρυῒ τῇ Μαμβρῇ, At the oak of Mamre the φιλοξενήσας ὁ Πατριάρχης Patriarch gave hospitality to τοὺς Ἀγγέλους, ἐκληρώσατο the angels, and in his old age μετὰ γῆρας τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τὸ he inherited the reward of θήραμα. the promise. PG 97:1344b Τὸν Ἰσαάκ, τάλαινα, γνοῦσα, Thou knowest, O my ψυχή μου, καινὴν θυσίαν miserable soul, how Isaac μυστικῶς ὁλοκαρπούμενον was offered mystically as τῷ Κυρίῳ, μίμησαι αὐτοῦ τὴν a new and unwonted προαίρεσιν. sacrifice to the Lord: follow him in his choice. PG 97:1344c Τὸν Ἰσμαὴλ ἤκουσας, νῆφε, Thou hast heard – O my soul, ψυχή μου, ἐκδιωχθέντα, ὡς be watchful! – how Ishmael παιδίσκης ἀποκύημα· βλέπε, was driven out as the child μήπως ὅμοιόν τι πάθῃς of a bondwoman. Take heed, λαγνεύουσα. lest the same thing happen to thee because of thy lust. PG 97:1344c Τῇ Ἄγαρ πάλαι, ψυχή, 0 my soul, thou hast become τῇ Αἰγυπτίᾳ παρωμοιώθης, like Hagar the Egyptian: thy δουλωθεῖσα τὴν προαίρεσιν, free choice has been καὶ τεκοῦσα νέον Ἰσμαήλ, τὴν enslaved, and thou hast αὐθάδειαν. borne as thy child a new Ishmael, stubborn wilfulness. PG 97:1344c Τὴν Ἰακὼβ κλίμακα ἔγνως, Thou knowest, my soul, ψυχή μου, δεικνυομένην the ladder that was shown ἀπὸ γῆς πρὸς τὰ οὐράνια· to Jacob, reaching up from τί μὴ ἔσχες βάσιν ἀσφαλῆ τὴν earth to heaven. Why hast εὐσέβειαν; thou not provided a firm foundation for it through thy godly actions? ἐκληρώσω, ψυχὴ ἀθλία· οὐ πλατεῖαν τὴν κατάσχεσιν, ὡς Ἰάφεθ, ἔσχες ἐν τῇ γῇ τῆς ἀφέσεως.

Ode III.15/6

Ode III.16/7

Ode III.17/8

Ode III.18/9

Ode III.19/10

Ode III.20/11

Ode III.21/12

O my soul, thou hast followed Ham, who mocked his father. Thou hast not covered thy neighbour’s shame, walking backwards with averted face.

293

294

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode III.22/13

PG 97:1344c Τὸν ἱερέα Θεοῦ καὶ βασιλέα

Follow the example

μεμονωμένον, τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸ of Melchizedek, the priest ἀφομοίωμα, τοῦ ἐν κόσμῳ, of God, the King set apart, βίου ἐν ἀνθρώποις, μιμήθητι. who was an image of the life

Ode III.23/14

PG 97:1344d Μὴ γένῃ στήλη ἁλός, ψυχή, στραφεῖσα εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω· τὸ ὑπόδειγμα φοβείτω σε τῶν Σοδόμων· ἄνω εἰς Σηγὼρ διασώθητι.

Ode III.24/15

PG 97:1344d Τὸν ἐμπρησμόν, ὥσπερ Λώτ, φεῦγε, ψυχή μου, τῆς ἁμαρτίας· φεῦγε Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα· φεῦγε φλόγα πάσης παραλόγου ὀρέξεως.

Ode III.25/16

PG 97:1344d Ἐλέησον, Κύριε, ἐλέησόν με,

Have mercy, O Lord, have mercy on me, I cry to Thee, when Thou comest with Thine angels to give to every man due return for his deeds. PG 97:1344d Τὴν δέησιν, Δέσποτα, τῶν σὲ Reject not, O Master, the ὑμνούντων μὴ ἀπορρίψῃς· prayer of those who sing Thy ἀλλ᾿ οἰκτείρησον, praises, but in Thy φιλάνθρωπε, καὶ παράσχου loving-kindness be merciful πίστει αἰτουμένοις τὴν and grant forgiveness to ἄφεσιν. them that ask with faith. PG 97:1345a Μονὰς ἁπλῆ, ἄκτιστε, ἄναρχε O simple Unity praised in φύσις, ἡ ἐν Τριάδι, ὑμνουμένη Trinity of Persons, uncreated ὑποστάσεων, ἡμᾶς σῶσον Nature without beginning, πίστει προσκυνοῦντας τὸ save us who in faith worship κράτος σου. Thy power. PG 97:1345a Τὸν ἐκ Πατρὸς ἄχρονον Υἱὸν O Mother of God, without ἐν χρόνῳ, Θεοκυῆτορ, knowing man thou hast given ἀπειράνδρως ἀπεκύησας· birth within time to the Son, ξένον θαῦμα! Μείνασα who was begotten outside Παρθένος θηλάζουσα. time from the Father; and, strange wonder! thou givest suck while still remaining Virgin. PG 97:1347a Ἀκήκοεν ὁ Προφήτης τὴν The prophet heard of Thy ἔλευσίν σου, Κύριε, καὶ coming, O Lord, and he was ἐφοβήθη, ὅτι μέλλεις ἐκ afraid: how Thou wast to be Παρθένου τίκτεσθαι καὶ bom of a Virgin and revealed ἀνθρώποις δείκνυσθαι, καὶ to men, and he said: ‘I have ἔλεγεν· Ἀκήκοα τὴν ἀκοήν heard the report of Thee and σου καὶ ἐφοβήθην· δόξα τῇ I was afraid. ’ Glory to Thy δυνάμει σου, Κύριε. power, O Lord. PG 97:1347a Τὰ ἔργα σου μὴ παρίδῃς· O righteous Judge, despise τὸ πλάσμα σου μὴ παρόψῃ, not Thy works; forsake not Δικαιοκρῖτα· εἰ καὶ μόνος Thy creation. I have sinned ἥμαρτον ὡς ἄνθρωπος as a man, I alone, more than ὑπὲρ πάντα ἄνθρωπον, any other man, O Thou who Φιλάνθρωπε· ἀλλ᾿ ἔχεις, ὡς lovest mankind. But as Lord Κύριος πάντων, τὴν ἐξουσίαν of all Thou hast the power to ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτήματα. pardon sins. ἀναβοῶ σοι, ὅτε ἥξεις μετ᾿ Ἀγγέλων σου ἀποδοῦναι πᾶσι κατ᾿ ἀξίαν τῶν πράξεων.

Ode III.26/17

Ode III.27/18. Triadikon

Ode III.28/19. Theotokion

Ode IV. Heirmos

Ode IV.1

of Christ among men in the world. Do not look back, my soul, and so be turned into a pillar of salt. Fear the example of the people of Sodom, and take refuge in Zoar. Flee, my soul, like Lot, from the burning of sin; flee from Sodom and Gomorrah; flee from the flame of every brutish desire.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IV.2

PG 97:1347b Ἐγγίζει, ψυχή, τὸ τέλος, ἐγγίζει καὶ οὐ φροντίζεις, οὐχ ἑτοιμάζῃ· ὁ καιρὸς συντέμνει, διανάστηθι· ἐγγὺς ἐπὶ θύραις ὁ Κριτής ἐστιν· ὡς ὄναρ, ὡς ἄνθος ὁ χρόνος τοῦ βίου τρέχει· τί μάτην ταραττόμεθα;

Ode IV.3

PG 97:1347B

Ode IV.4

PG 97,1347b Οὐ γέγονεν ἐν τῷ βίῳ

Ἀνάνηψον ὦ ψυχή μου· τὰς πράξεις σου, ἃς εἰργάσω, ἀναλογίζου καὶ ταύτας ἐπ᾿ ὄψεσι προσάγαγε καὶ σταγόνας στάλαξον δακρύων σου· εἰπὲ παρρησίᾳ τὰς πράξεις, τὰς ἐνθυμήσεις Χριστῷ καὶ δικαιώθητι. ἁμάρτημα, οὐδὲ πρᾶξις, οὐδὲ κακία, ἣν ἐγώ, Σωτήρ, οὐκ ἐπλημμέλησα κατὰ νοῦν καὶ λόγον καὶ προαίρεσιν, καὶ θέσει καὶ γνώμῃ καὶ πράξει ἐξαμαρτήσας, ὡς ἄλλος οὐδεὶς πώποτε.

Ode IV.5

The end draws near, my soul, the end draws near; yet thou dost not care or make ready. The time grows short, rise up: the Judge is at the door. The days of our life pass swiftly, as a dream, as a flower. Why do we trouble ourselves in vain? Awake, my soul, consider the actions which thou hast done; set them before thine eyes, and let the drops of thy tears fall. With boldness tell Christ of thy deeds and thoughts, and so be justified. No sin has there been in life, no evil deed, no wickedness, that I have not committed, O Saviour. I have sinned as no one ever before, in mind, word and intent, in disposition, thought and act.

PG 97:1347c Ἐντεῦθεν καὶ κατεκρίθην,

For this I am condemned in my misery, for this I am convicted by the verdict of my own conscience, which is more compelling than all else in the world. O my Judge and Redeemer, who knowest my heart, spare and deliver and save me Thy servant. PG 97:1347c Ἡ κλῖμαξ, ἣν εἶδε πάλαι ὁ The ladder which the great μέγας ἐν Πατριάρχαις, δεῖγμα, Patriarch Jacob saw of old is ψυχή μου, πρακτικῆς ὑπάρχει an example, O my soul, ἐπιβάσεως, γνωστικῆς of approach through action τυγχάνει ἀναβάσεως· εἰ and of ascent in knowledge. θέλεις οὖν πράξει, καὶ γνώσει If then thou dost wish to live καὶ θεωρίᾳ βιοῦν, rightly in action and ἀνακαινίσθητι. knowledge and contemplation, be thou made new. PG 97:1347c Τὸν καύσωνα τῆς ἡμέρας In privation Jacob the ὑπέμεινε δι᾿ ἔνδειαν ὁ Patriarch endured the Πατριάρχης, καὶ τὸν παγετὸν burning heat by day and die τῆς νυκτὸς ἤνεγκε, καθ᾿ frost by night, making daily ἡμέραν κλέμματα gains of sheep and cattle, ποιούμενος, ποιμαίνων, shepherding, wrestling and πυκτεύων, δουλεύων, ἵνα τὰς serving, to win his two wives. ἐντεῦθεν κατεδικάσθην ἐγὼ ὁ τάλας ὑπὸ τῆς οἰκείας συνειδήσεως, ἧς οὐδὲν ἐν κόσμῳ βιαιότερον. Κριτά, λυτρωτά μου καὶ γνῶστα, φεῖσαι καὶ ρῦσαι καὶ σῶσόν με τὸν δοῦλόν σου.

Ode IV.6

Ode IV.7

δύω γυναῖκας εἰσαγάγηται.

Ode IV.8

PG 97:1347d Γυναῖκάς μοι δύω νόει, τὴν πρᾶξίν τε καὶ τὴν γνῶσιν ἐν θεωρίᾳ· τὴν μὲν Λείαν πρᾶξιν ὡς πολύτεκνον· τὴν Ραχὴλ δὲ γνῶσιν ὡς πολύπονον· καὶ γὰρ ἄνευ πόνων οὐ πρᾶξις, οὐ θεωρία, ψυχή, κατορθωθήσεται.

By the two wives, understand action and knowledge in contemplation. Leah is action, for she had many children; and Rachel is knowledge, for she endured great toil. And without toil, O my soul, neither action nor contemplation will succeed.

295

296

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IV.9

PG 97:1347d Γρηγόρησον, ὦ ψυχή μου,

Be watchful, O my soul, be full of courage like Jacob the great Patriarch, that thou mayest acquire action with knowledge, and be named ‘Israel’, ‘the mind that sees God’; so shalt thou reach by contemplation the innermost darkness, and gain great merchandise. PG 97:1349a Τοὺς δώδεκα Πατριάρχας ὁ The great Patriarch had the μέγας ἐν Πατριάρχαις twelve Patriarchs as children, παιδοποιήσας, μυστικῶς and so he mystically ἐστήριξέ σοι κλίμακα established for thee, my soul, πρακτικῆς, ψυχή μου, a ladder of ascent through ἀναβάσεως, τοὺς παῖδας ὡς action, in his wisdom setting βάθρα, τὰς βάσεις ὡς his children as steps, by ἀναβάσεις πανσόφως which thou canst mount ὑποθέμενος. upwards. PG 97:1349a Ἠσαῦ τὸν μεμισημένον Thou hast rivalled Esau the ζηλοῦσα, ψυχή, ἀπέδου τῷ hated, O my soul, and given πτερνιστῇ σου τὰ τοῦ πρώτου the birthright of thy first κάλλους πρωτοτόκια, καὶ τῆς beauty to the supplanter; πατρικῆς εὐχῆς ἐξέπεσας, καὶ thou hast lost thy father’s δὶς ἐπτερνίσθης, ἀθλία, blessing and in thy πράξει καὶ γνώσει· διὸ νῦν wretchedness been twice μετανόησον. supplanted, in action and in knowledge. Therefore repent now. PG 97:1349b Ἐδὼμ ὁ Ἠσαῦ ἐκλήθη δι᾿ Esau was called Edom ἄκραν θηλυμανίας ἐπιμιξίαν· because of his raging lust for ἀκρασίᾳ γὰρ ἀεὶ πυρούμενος women; burning always with καὶ ταῖς ἡδοναῖς unrestrained desires and κατασπιλούμενος, Ἐδὼμ stained with sensual ὠνομάσθη, ὃ λέγεται pleasure, he was named θερμασία ‘Edom’, which means the red ψυχῆς φιλαμαρτήμονος. heat of a soul that loves sin. PG 97:1349b Ἰὼβ τὸν ἐπὶ κοπρίας Thou hast heard, O my soul, ἀκούσασα, ὦ ψυχή μου, of Job justified on a dung-hill, δικαιωθέντα, τὴν αὐτοῦ but thou hast not imitated ἀνδρείαν οὐκ ἐζήλωσας, his fortitude. In all thine τὸ στερρὸν οὐκ ἔσχες τῆς experiences and trials and προθέσεως temptations, thou hast not ἐν πᾶσιν, οἷς ἔγνως, οἷς οἶδας, kept firmly to thy purpose but οἷς ἐπειράσθης, hast proved inconstant. ἀρίστευσον ὡς ὁ μέγας ἐν Πατριάρχαις, ἵνα κτήσῃ πρᾶξιν μετὰ γνώσεως, ἵνα χρηματίσῃς νοῦς ὁρῶν τὸν Θεόν, καὶ φθάσῃς τὸν ἄδυτον γνόφον ἐν θεωρίᾳ, καὶ γένῃ μεγαλέμπορος.

Ode IV.10

Ode IV.11

Ode IV.12

Ode IV.13

ἀλλ᾿ ὤφθης ἀκαρτέρητος.

Ode IV.14

PG 97:1349b Ὁ πρότερον ἐπὶ θρόνου γυμνὸς νῦν ἐπὶ κοπρίας καθηλκωμένος· ὁ πολὺς ἐν τέκνοις καὶ περίβλεπτος, ἄπαις καὶ φερέοικος αἰφνίδιον· παλάτιον γὰρ τὴν κοπρίαν, καὶ μαργαρίτας τὰ ἕλκη ἐλογίζετο.

Once he sat upon a throne, but now he sits upon a dung-hill, naked and covered with sores. Once he was blessed with many children and admired by all, but suddenly he is childless and homeless. Yet he counted the dung-hill as a palace and hisi sores as pearls.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IV.15

PG 97:1349c Βασίλειον τὴν ἀξίαν, διάδημα A man of great wealth and καὶ πορφύραν ἠμφιεσμένος, righteous, abounding in πολυκτήμων ἄνθρωπος καὶ riches and cattle, clothed in δίκαιος, πλούτῳ ἐπιβρίθων royal dignity, in crown and καὶ βοσκήμασιν ἐξαίφνης τὸν purple robe, Job became πλοῦτον, τὴν δόξαν, τὴν suddenly a beggar, stripped βασιλείαν πτωχεύσας of wealth, glory and kingship.

Ode IV.16

PG 97:1349c Εἰ δίκαιος ἦν ἐκεῖνος καὶ

ἀπεκείρατο.

If he who was righteous and blameless above all men did not escape the snares and pits of the deceiver, what wilt thou do, wretched and sin-loving soul, when some sudden misfortune befalls thee? PG 97:1349c Τὸ σῶμα κατερρυπώθην, I have defiled my body, τὸ πνεῦμα κατεσπιλώθην, I have stained my spirit, and ὅλος ἡλκώθην· ἀλλ᾿ ὡς I am all covered with wounds: ἰατρός, Χριστέ, ἀμφότερα διὰ but as physician, O Christ, μετανοίας μοι θεράπευσον, heal both body and spirit for ἀπόλουσον, κάθαρον, me through repentance. πλῦνον· δεῖξον χιόνος, Σωτήρ Wash, purify and cleanse me, μου, καθαρώτερον. O my Saviour, and make me whiter than snow. PG 97:1349d Τὸ Σῶμά σου καὶ τὸ Αἷμα Thy Body and Thy Blood, σταυρούμενος ὑπὲρ πάντων O Word, Thou hast offered at ἔθηκας, Λόγε· τὸ μὲν Σῶμα, Thy Crucifixion for the sake ἵνα ἀναπλάσῃς με, τὸ δὲ Αἷμα, of all: Thy Body to refashion ἵνα ἀποπλύνῃς με· τὸ πνεῦμα me, Thy Blood to wash me παρέδωκας, ἵνα ἐμὲ clean; and Thou hast given προσάξῃς, Χριστέ, τῷ σῷ up Thy spirit, O Christ, to Γεννήτορι. bring me to Thy Father. PG 97:1349d Εἰργάσω τὴν σωτηρίαν ἐν 0 Creator, Thou hast worked μέσῳ τῆς γῆς, ὁ Κτίστης, ἵνα salvation in the midst of the σωθῶμεν· ἑκουσίως ξύλῳ earth, that we might be ἀνεσταύρωσαι· ἡ Ἐδὲμ saved. Thou wast crucified of κλεισθεῖσα ἀνεῴγνυτο· τὰ Thine own will upon the Tree; ἄνω, τὰ κάτω, ἡ κτίσις, τὰ and Eden, closed till then, ἔθνη πάντα σωθέντα was opened. Things above προσκυνοῦσί σε. and things below, the creation and all peoples have been saved and worship Thee. PG 97:1352a Γενέσθω μοι κολυμβήθρα τὸ May the Blood from Thy side Αἷμα τὸ ἐκ πλευρᾶς σου, ἅμα be to me a cleansing fount, καὶ πόμα, τὸ πηγάσαν ὕδωρ and may the water that flows τῆς ἀφέσεως, ἵνα ἑκατέρωθεν with it be a drink of καθαίρωμαι, χριόμενος, forgiveness. May I be purified πίνων, ὡς χρῖσμα καὶ πόμα, by both, O Word, anointed Λόγε, τὰ ζωηρά σου λόγια. and refreshed, having as chrism and drink Thy words of life. ἄμεμπτος παρὰ πάντας, καὶ οὐκ ἀπέδρα τὰ τοῦ πλάνου ἔνεδρα καὶ σκάμματα· σὺ φιλαμαρτήμων οὖσα, τάλαινα ψυχή, τί ποιήσεις, ἐάν τι τῶν ἀδοκήτων συμβῇ ἐπενεχθῆναί σοι;

Ode IV.17

Ode IV.18

Ode IV.19

Ode IV.20

297

298

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IV.21

PG 97:1352a Γυμνός εἰμι τοῦ Νυμφῶνος, γυμνός εἰμι καὶ τοῦ γάμου, ἅμα καὶ δείπνου· ἡ λαμπὰς ἐσβέσθη ὡς ἀνέλαιος· ἡ παστὰς ἐκλείσθη μοι καθεύδοντι· τὸ δεῖπνον ἐβρώθη· ἐγὼ δὲ χεῖρας καὶ πόδας δεθεὶς ἔξω ἀπέρριμμαι.

Ode IV.22

PG 97:1352b Κρατῆρα ἡ Ἐκκλησία

As a chalice, O my Saviour, the Church has been granted Thy life-giving side, from which there flows down to us a twofold stream of forgiveness and knowledge, representing the two covenants, the Old and the New. PG 97:1352b Ὁ χρόνος ὁ τῆς ζωῆς μου The time of my life is short, ὀλίγος καὶ πλήρης πόνων καὶ filled with trouble and evil. πονηρίας· ἀλλ᾿ ἐν μετανοίᾳ με But accept me in repentance παράλαβε καὶ ἐν ἐπιγνώσει and call me back to ἀνακάλεσαι· μὴ γένωμαι knowledge. Let me not κτῆμα, μὴ βρῶμα τοῦ become the possession and ἀλλοτρίου· Σωτήρ, αὐτός με food of the enemy; but do οἴκτειρον. Thou, O Saviour, take pity on me. PG 97:1352b Ὑψήγορος νῦν ὑπάρχω, Now I speak boastfully, with θρασὺς δὲ καὶ τὴν καρδίαν boldness of heart; yet all to εἰκῇ καὶ μάτην· μὴ τῷ no purpose and in vain. Φαρισαίῳ συγκαταδικάσῃς O righteous Judge, who alone με, μᾶλλον τοῦ Τελώνου τὴν art compassionate, do not ταπείνωσιν παράσχου μοι, condemn me with the μόνε Οἰκτίρμον, δικαιοκρῖτα, Pharisee; but grant me the καὶ τούτῳ συναρίθμησον. abasement of the Publican and number me with him. PG 97:1352c Ἐξήμαρτον ἐνυβρίσας τὸ I know, O compassionate σκεῦος τὸ τῆς σαρκός μου, Lord, that I have sinned and οἶδα, Οἰκτίρμον· ἀλλ᾿ ἐν violated the vessel of my μετανοίᾳ με παράλαβε καὶ ἐν flesh. But accept me in ἐπιγνώσει ἀνακάλεσαι· μὴ repentance and call me back γένωμαι κτῆμα, μὴ βρῶμα to knowledge. Let me not τοῦ ἀλλοτρίου· Σωτήρ, αὐτός become the possession and με οἴκτειρον. food of the enemy; but do Thou, O Saviour, take pity on rile. PG 97:1352c Αὐτείδωλον ἐγενόμην, τοῖς I have become mine own πάθεσι τὴν ψυχήν μου idol, utterly defiling my soul βλάπτων, Οἰκτίρμον· ἀλλ᾿ ἐν with the passions, μετανοίᾳ με παράλαβε, καὶ ἐν O compassionate Lord. But ἐπιγνώσει ἀνακάλεσαι· μὴ accept me in repentance and γένωμαι κτῆμα, μὴ βρῶμα call me back to knowledge. τοῦ ἀλλοτρίου· Σωτήρ, αὐτός Let me not become the με οἴκτειρον. possession and food of the enemy; but do Thou, O Saviour, take pity on me. ἐκτήσατο τὴν Πλευράν σου τὴν ζωηφόρον, ἐξ ἧς ὁ διπλοῦς ἡμῖν ἐξέβλυσε κρουνὸς τῆς ἀφέσεως καὶ γνώσεως, εἰς τύπον τῆς πάλαι, τῆς νέας, τῶν δύω ἅμα Διαθηκῶν, Σωτὴρ ἡμῶν.

Ode IV.23

Ode IV.24

Ode IV.25

Ode IV.26

I am deprived of the bridal chamber, of the wedding and the supper; for want of oil my lamp has gone out; while I slept the door was closed; the supper has been eaten; I am bound hand and foot, and cast out.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IV.27

PG 97:1352c Οὐκ ἤκουσα τῆς φωνῆς σου,

I have not hearkened to Thy voice, I have not heeded Thy Scripture, O Giver of the Law. But accept me in repentance and call me back to knowledge. Let me not become the possession and food of the enemy; but do Thou, O Saviour, take pity on me. PG 97:1353a Ἀμέριστον τῇ οὐσίᾳ, Undivided in Essence, ἀσύγχυτον τοῖς προσώποις unconfused in Persons, θεολογῶ σε τὴν Τριαδικὴν I confess Thee as God: μίαν Θεότητα, ὡς Triune Deity, one in kingship ὁμοβασίλειον καὶ σύνθρονον· and throne; and to Thee βοῶ σοι τὸ ᾎσμα τὸ μέγα, τὸ I raise the great thrice-holy ἐν ὑψίστοις τρισσῶς hymn that is sung on high. παρήκουσα τῆς γραφῆς σου, τοῦ Νομοθέτου· ἀλλ᾿ ἐν μετανοίᾳ με παράλαβε, καὶ ἐν ἐπιγνώσει ἀνακάλεσαι· μὴ γένωμαι κτῆμα, μὴ βρῶμα τοῦ ἀλλοτρίου· Σωτήρ, αὐτός με οἴκτειρον.

Ode IV.28. Triadikon

ὑμνολογούμενον.

Ode IV.29. Theotokion

PG 97:1353a Καὶ τίκτεις, καὶ παρθενεύεις,

Thou givest birth and art a virgin, and in both thou remainest by nature inviolate. He who is bom makes new the laws of nature, and thy womb brings forth without travail. When God so wills, the natural order is overcome; for He does whatever He wishes. Ἐκ νυκτὸς ὀρθρίζοντα, From the night I seek Thee Φιλάνθρωπε, φώτισον, early, O Lover of mankind: δέομαι, καὶ ὁδήγησον κἀμέ, give me light, I pray Thee, ἐν τοῖς προστάγμασί σου· καὶ and guide me in Thy δίδαξόν με, Σωτήρ, ποιεῖν τὸ commandments, and teach θέλημά σου. me, O Saviour, to do Thy will. Ἐν νυκτὶ τὸν βίον μου In night have I passed all my διῆλθον ἀεί· σκότος γὰρ life: for the night of sin has γέγονε καὶ βαθεῖά μοι ἀχλὺς ἡ covered me with darkness νὺξ τῆς ἁμαρτίας· ἀλλ᾿ ὡς and thick mist. But make me, ἡμέρας υἱόν, Σωτήρ, O Saviour, a son of the day. ἀνάδειξόν με. Τὸν Ρουβὶμ μιμούμενος ὁ In my misery I have followed τάλας ἐγὼ ἔπραξα ἄθεσμον Reuben’s example, and have καὶ παράνομον βουλὴν κατὰ devised a wicked and Θεοῦ Ὑψίστου, μιάνας κοίτην unlawful plan against the ἐμὴν ὡς τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος. most high God, defiling my bed as he defiled his father’s. Ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, Χριστὲ I confess to Thee, O Christ my Βασιλεῦ· Ἥμαρτον, ἥμαρτον, King: I have sinned, I have ὡς οἱ πρὶν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ sinned like the brethren of ἀδελφοὶ πεπρακότες τὸν τῆς Joseph, who once sold the ἁγνείας καρπὸν καὶ τὸν τῆς fruit of purity and chastity.

Ode V. Heirmos

PG 97:1353b

Ode V.1

PG 97:1353b

Ode V.2

PG 97:1353b

Ode V.3

PG 97:1353b

Ode V.4

PG 97:1353c Ὑπὸ τῶν συγγόνων ἡ δικαία

καὶ μένεις δι᾿ ἀμφοτέρων φύσει Παρθένος· ὁ τεχθεὶς καινίζει νόμους φύσεως, ἡ νηδὺς δὲ κύει μὴ λοχεύουσα. Θεὸς ὅπου θέλει, νικᾶται φύσεως τάξις· ποιεῖ γὰρ ὅσα βούλεται.

σωφροσύνης. ψυχὴ δέδοτο· πέπρατο εἰς δουλείαν ὁ γλυκύς, εἰς τύπον τοῦ Κυρίου· αὐτὴ δὲ ὅλη, ψυχή, ἐπράθης τοῖς κακοῖς σου.

As a figure of the Lord, O my soul, the righteous and gentle Joseph was sold into bondage by his brethren; but thou hast sold thyself entirely to thy sins.

299

300

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode V.5

PG 97:1353c Ἰωσὴφ τὸν δίκαιον, καὶ

O miserable and wicked soul, imitate the righteous and pure mind of Joseph; and do not live in wantonness, sinfully indulging thy disordered desires. PG 97:1353c Εἰ καὶ λάκκῳ ᾤκησέ ποτε Once Joseph was cast into Ἰωσήφ, Δέσποτα Κύριε, ἀλλ᾿ a pit, O Lord and Master, as εἰς τύπον τῆς Ταφῆς καὶ τῆς a figure of Thy Burial and Ἐγέρσεώς σου· ἐγὼ δὲ τί σοί Resurrection. But what ποτε τοιοῦτο προσενέγκω; offering such as this shall I ever make to Thee? PG 97:1353c Τοῦ Μωσέως ἤκουσας τὴν Thou hast heard, my soul, θίβην, ψυχή, ὕδασι, κύμασι of the basket of Moses: how φερομένην ποταμοῦ, ὡς ἐν he was borne on the waves θαλάμῳ πάλαι, φυγοῦσαν of the river as if in a shrine; δρᾶμα πικρὸν βουλῆς and so he avoided the bitter Φαραωνίτου. execution of Pharaoh’s decree. PG 97:1356a Εἰ τὰς μαίας ἤκουσας Thou hast heard, wretched κτεινούσας ποτὲ ἄνηβον, soul, of the midwives who τάλαινα, τὴν ἀρρενωπόν, once killed m its infancy the ψυχή, τῆς σωφροσύνης manly action of self-control: πρᾶξιν· νῦν ὡς ὁ μέγας like great Moses, then, be Μωσῆς τιθηνοῦ τὴν σοφίαν. suckled on wisdom. PG 97:1356a Ὡς Μωσῆς ὁ μέγας τὸν O miserable soul, thou hast Αἰγύπτιον νοῦν πλήξασα, not struck and killed the τάλαινα, οὐκ ἀπέκτεινας, Egyptian mind, as did Moses ψυχή· καὶ πῶς οἰκήσεις, λέγε, the great. Tell me, then, how τὴν ἔρημον τῶν παθῶν διὰ wilt thou go to dwell through τῆς μετανοίας; repentance in the wilderness empty of passions. PG 97:1356a Τὰς ἐρήμους ᾤκησεν ὁ μέγας Moses the great went to Μωσῆς· δεῦρο δὴ μίμησαι dwell in the desert. Come, τὴν αὐτοῦ διαγωγήν, ἵνα καὶ seek to follow his way of life, τῆς ἐν βάτῳ θεοφανείας, my soul, that ψυχή, ἐν θεωρίᾳ γένῃ. in contemplation thou mayest attain the vision of God in the bush. PG 97:1356a Τὴν Μωσέως ράβδον Picture to thyself, my soul, εἰκονίζου, ψυχή, πλήττουσαν the rod of Moses striking the θάλασσαν καὶ πηγνύουσαν sea and making hard the βυθὸν τύπῳ Σταυροῦ τοῦ deep by the sign of the Holy θείου, δι᾿ οὗ δυνήσῃ καὶ σὺ Cross. Through the Cross μεγάλα ἐκτελέσαι. thou also canst do great things. PG 97:1356b Ἀαρὼν προσέφερε τὸ πῦρ τῷ Aaron offered to God fire that Θεῷ ἄμωμον, ἄδολον· ἀλλ᾿ was blameless and undefiled, Ὀφνεὶ καὶ Φινεὲς ὡς σύ, ψυχή, but Hophni and Phinehas προσῆγον ἀλλότριον τῷ Θεῷ, brought to Him, as thou hast ρερυπωμένον βίον. done, my soul, strange fire and a polluted life. PG 97:1356b Ὡς βαρὺς τῇ γνώμῃ Φαραὼ In my soul and body, τῷ πικρῷ γέγονα, Δέσποτα, O Master, I have become like Ἰαννὴς καὶ Ἰαμβρής, τὴν Jannes and Jambres the ψυχὴν καὶ τὸ σῶμα, καὶ magicians of cruel Pharaoh; ὑποβρύχιον νοῦν· my will is heavy and my mind ἀλλὰ βοήθησόν μοι. is drowned beneath the waters. But do Thou come to my aid. σώφρονα νοῦν μίμησαι, τάλαινα καὶ ἀδόκιμε ψυχή, καὶ μὴ ἀκολασταίνου ταῖς παραλόγοις ὁρμαῖς ἀεὶ παρανομοῦσα.

Ode V.6

Ode V.7

Ode V.8

Ode V.9

Ode V.10

Ode V.11

Ode V.12

Ode V.13

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode V.14

PG 97:1356b Τῷ πηλῷ συμπέφυρμαι ὁ

Woe is me! I have defiled my mind with filth. I pray to Thee, O Master: wash me clean in the waters of my tears and make the garment of my flesh white as snow. PG 97:1356c Ἐὰν ἐρευνήσω μου τὰ ἔργα, When I examine my actions, Σωτήρ, ἅπαντα ἄνθρωπον O Saviour, I see that I have ὑπερβάντα ἐμαυτὸν ὁρῶ ταῖς gone beyond all men in sin; ἁμαρτίαις, ὅτι ἐν γνώσει for I knew and understood φρενῶν ἥμαρτον, οὐκ ἀγνοίᾳ. what I did; I was not sinning in ignorance. PG 97:1356c Φεῖσαι, φεῖσαι, Κύριε, τοῦ Spare, O spare the work πλάσματός σου· ἥμαρτον, of Thine hands, O Lord. I ἄνες μοι, ὁ τῇ φύσει καθαρὸς have sinned, forgive me: for αὐτὸς ὑπάρχεις μόνος, καὶ Thou alone art pure by ἄλλος πλήν σου οὐδεὶς nature, and none save Thee ὑπάρχει ἔξω ρύπου. is free from defilement. PG 97:1356c Δι᾿ ἐμέ, Θεὸς ὤν, ἐμορφώθης Thou who art God, O Saviour, ἐμέ· ἔδειξας θαύματα wast for my sake fashioned ἰασάμενος λεπροὺς καὶ as I am. Thou hast performed παραλύτους σφίγξας, miracles, healing lepers, Αἱμόρρου στήσας, Σωτήρ, giving strength to the ἁφῇ κρασπέδου ρῦσιν. paralysed, stopping the issue of blood when the woman touched the hem of Thy garment. PG 97:1356c Τὴν Αἱμόρρουν μίμησαι, O wretched soul, do as the ἀθλία ψυχή· πρόσδραμε, woman with an issue κράτησον τοῦ κρασπέδου τοῦ of blood: run quickly, grasp Χριστοῦ, ἵνα ρυσθῇς the hem of the garment of μαστίγων, ἀκούσῃς δὲ παρ᾿ Christ; so shalt thou be αὐτοῦ· Ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ healed of thine afflictions σε. and hear Him say, ‘Thy faith has saved thee. PG 97:1356d Τὴν χαμαὶ συγκύπτουσαν O my soul, do as the woman μιμοῦ, ὦ ψυχή· πρόσελθε, who was bowed to the πρόσπεσον τοῖς ποσὶ τοῦ ground. Fall at the feet Ἰησοῦ, ἵνα σε ἀνορθώσῃ, καὶ of Jesus, that He may make βηματίσεις ὀρθῶς, τὰς thee straight again: and thou τρίβους τοῦ Κυρίου. shalt walk upright upon the paths of the Lord. PG 97:1357a Εἰ καὶ φρέαρ, Δέσποτα, Thou art a deep well, ὑπάρχεις βαθύ, βλῦσόν μοι O Master: make springs gush νάματα ἐξ ἀχράντων σου forth for me from Thy pure φλεβῶν, ἵν᾿ ὡς ἡ Σαμαρεῖτις, veins, that like the woman μηκέτι πίνων διψῶ· ζωῆς γὰρ of Samaria I may drink and ρεῖθρα βλύζεις. thirst no more; for from Thee flow the streams of life. PG 97:1357a Σιλωὰμ γενέσθω μοι τὰ O Master and Lord, may my δάκρυά μου, Δέσποτα Κύριε, tears be unto me as Siloam: ἵνα νίψωμαι κἀγὼ τὰς κόρας that I also may wash clean τῆς ψυχῆς μου καὶ ἴδω σε the eyes of my soul, and with νοερῶς τὸ φῶς τὸ πρὸ my mind behold Thee, the αἰώνων. pre-eternal Light. τάλας τὸν νοῦν· πλῦνόν με, Δέσποτα, τῷ λουτῆρι τῶν ἐμῶν δακρύων, δέομαί σου, τὴν τῆς σαρκός μου στολὴν λευκάνας ὡς χιόνα.

Ode V.15

Ode V.16

Ode V.17

Ode V.18

Ode V.19

Ode V.20

Ode V.21

301

302

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode V.22. Triadikon

PG 97:1357b Σέ, Τριάς, δοξάζομεν, τὸν ἕνα

Ode V.23. Theotokion

PG 97:1357b Ἐκ σοῦ ἠμφιάσατο τὸ φύραμά

Ode VI. Heirmos

PG 97:1357c Ἐβόησα ἐν ὅλῃ καρδίᾳ μου

Ode VI.1

PG 97:1357c Τὰ δάκρυα, Σωτήρ, τῶν

Θεόν ·Ἅγιος, Ἅγιος, Ἅγιος εἶ, ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Υἱὸς καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα· ἁπλῆ οὐσία, Μονὰς ἀεὶ προσκυνουμένη. μου, ἄφθορε, ἄνανδρε Μητροπάρθενε, Θεὸς ὁ κτίσας τοὺς αἰῶνας, καὶ ἥνωσεν ἑαυτῷ τὴν τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσιν. πρὸς τὸν οἰκτίρμονα Θεόν, καὶ ἐπήκουσέ μου ἐξ ᾍδου κατωτάτου, καὶ ἀνήγαγεν ἐκ φθορᾶς τὴν ζωήν μου

ὀμμάτων μου καὶ τοὺς ἐκ βάθους στεναγμοὺς καθαρῶς προσφέρω, βοώσης τῆς καρδίας· Ὁ Θεὸς ἡμάρτηκά σοι, ἱλάσθητί μοι.

Ode VI.2

PG 97:1357c Ἐξένευσας, ψυχή, τοῦ Κυρίου σου, ὥσπερ Δαθὰν καὶ Ἀβειρών· ἀλλὰ φεῖσαι κράξον ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας, ἵνα μὴ τὸ χάσμα τῆς γῆς σε συγκαλύψῃ.

Ode VI.3

PG 97:1357c Ὡς δάμαλις, ψυχή, παροιστρήσασα, ἐξωμοιώθης τῷ Ἐφραίμ· ὡς δορκὰς ἐκ βρόχων, ἀνάσωσον τὸν βίον, πτερωθεῖσα πράξει καὶ νῷ καὶ θεωρίᾳ.

Ode VI.4

PG 97:1357d Ἡ χεὶρ ἡμᾶς Μωσέως πιστώσεται, ψυχή, πῶς δύναται Θεὸς λεπρωθέντα βίον λευκάναι καὶ καθάραι· καὶ μὴ ἀπογνῷς σεαυτὴν κἂν ἐλεπρώθης.

Ode VI.5

PG 97:1357d Τὰ κύματα, Σωτήρ, τῶν πταισμάτων μου, ὡς ἐν θαλάσσῃ Ἐρυθρᾷ ἐπαναστραφέντα ἐκάλυψέ με ἄφνω, ὡς τοὺς Αἰγυπτίους ποτὲ καὶ τοὺς τριστάτας.

Ode VI.6

PG 97:1360a Ἀγνώμονα, ψυχὴ τὴν προαίρεσιν ἔσχες ὡς πρὶν ὁ Ἰσραήλ· τοῦ γὰρ θείου μάννα προέκρινας ἀλόγως τὴν φιλήδονον τῶν παθῶν ἀδηφαγίαν.

We glorify Thee, O Trinity, the one God. Holy, holy, holy art Thou: Father, Son and Spirit, simple Essence and Unity, worshipped for ever. O Virgin inviolate and Mother who hast not known man, from thee has God, the Creator of the ages, taken human flesh, uniting to Himself the nature'of men. With my whole heart I cried to the all-compassionate God: and He heard me from the lowest depths of hell, and brought my life out of corruption. I offer to Thee in purity, O Saviour, the tears of mine eyes and groanings from the depths of my heart, crying: ‘I have sinned against Thee, O God; be merciful to me. Like Dathan and Abiram, O my soul, thou hast become a stranger to Thy Lord; but with all thy heart cry out, ‘Spare me’, that the earth may not open and swallow thee up. Raging as a maddened heifer, O my soul, thou art become like Ephraim. As a hart from the nets rescue then thy life, gaining wings through action and the mind’s contemplation. O my soul, the hand of Moses shall be our assurance, proving that God can cleanse a life full of leprosy and make it white as snow. So do not despair of thyself, though thou art leprous. The waves of my sins, O Saviour, have returned and suddenly engulfed me, as the waters of the Red Sea engulfed the Egyptians of old and their charioteers. Like Israel before thee, thou hast made a foolish choice, my soul; instead of the divine manna thou hast senselessly preferred the pleasure-loving gluttony of the passions.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VI.7

Ode VI.8

Ode VI.9

Ode VI.10

Ode VI.11

Ode VI.12

Ode VI.13

Ode VI.14

Ode VI.15

PG 97:1360a Τὰ ὕεια κρέα καὶ τοὺς λέβητας O my soul, thou hast valued καὶ τὴν Αἰγύπτιον τροφὴν the wells of Canaanite τῆς ἐπουρανίου προέκρινας, thoughts more than the ψυχή μου, ὡς ὁ πρὶν veined Rock, Jesus, the ἀγνώμων λαὸς ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. Fountain of wisdom from which flow the rivers of divine knowledge. PG 97:1360a Τὰ φρέατα, ψυχή, The swine’s meat, the προετίμησας τῶν Χαναναίων flesh-pots and the food of ἐννοιῶν τῆς φλεβὸς τῆς Egypt thou hast preferred, my πέτρας· ἐξ ἧς ὁ τῆς σοφίας soul, to the food of heaven, ποταμὸς προχέει as the ungrateful people did κρουνοὺς θεολογίας. of old in the wilderness. PG 97:1360a Ὡς ἔπληξε Μωσῆς ὁ θεράπων When Thy servant Moses σου ράβδῳ τὴν πέτραν, struck the rock with his rod, τυπικῶς τὴν ζωοποιόν σου he prefigured Thy life-giving Πλευρὰν προδιετύπου, ἐξ ἧς side, O Saviour, from which πάντες πόμα ζωῆς, Σωτήρ, we all draw the water of life. ἀντλοῦμεν. PG 97:1360b Ἐρεύνησον, ψυχή, Like Joshua the son of Nun, κατασκόπευσον, ὡς Ἰησοῦς ὁ search and spy out, my soul, τοῦ Ναυῆ, τῆς κληροδοσίας the land of thine inheritance τὴν γῆν, ὁποία ἐστί, καὶ and take up thy dwelling κατοίκησον ἐν αὐτῇ δι᾿ within it, through obedience εὐνομίας. to the law. PG 97:1360b Ἀνάστηθι καὶ καταπολέμησον, Rise up and make war ὡς Ἰησοῦς τὸν Ἀμαλήκ, τῆς against the passions of the σαρκὸς τὰ πάθη, καὶ τοὺς flesh, as Joshua against Γαβαωνίτας, τοὺς ἀπατηλοὺς Amalek, ever gaining the λογισμοὺς ἀεὶ νικῶσα. victory over the Gibeonites, thy deceitful thoughts. PG 97:1360b Διάβηθι, τοῦ χρόνου τὴν O my soul, pass through the ρέουσαν φύσιν, ὡς πρὶν ἡ flowing waters of time like Κιβωτός, καὶ τῆς γῆς ἐκείνης the Ark of old, and take γενοῦ ἐν κατασχέσει τῆς possession of the land of ἐπαγγελίας, ψυχή· Θεὸς promise: for God commands κελεύει. thee. PG 97:1360b Ὡς ἔσωσας τὸν Πέτρον As Thou hast saved Peter βοήσαντα, σῶσον προφθάσας when he cried out, ‘Save me’, με, Σωτήρ· τοῦ θηρός με come quickly, O Saviour, ρῦσαι ἐκτείνας σου τὴν χεῖρα, before it is too late, and save καὶ ἀνάγαγε τοῦ βυθοῦ τῆς me from the beast. Stretch ἁμαρτίας. out Thine hand and lead me up from the deep of sin. PG 97:1360b Λιμένα σε γινώσκω γαλήνιον, I know Thee as a calm haven, Δέσποτα, Δέσποτα Χριστέ· O Lord, Lord Christ; come ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ τῶν ἀδύτων βυθῶν quickly, before it is too late, τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τῆς and deliver me from the ἀπογνώσεώς με προφθάσας lowest depths of sin and ρῦσαι. despair. PG 97:1360c Ἐγώ εἰμι, Σωτήρ, ἣν ἀπώλεσας O Saviour, I am the coin πάλαι βασίλειον δραχμήν· marked with the King’s ἀλλ᾿ ἀνάψας λύχνον τὸν likeness, which Thou hast Πρόδρομόν σου, Λόγε, lost of old. But, O Word, light ἀναζήτησον καὶ εὑρὲ τὴν σὴν Thy lamp, Thy Forerunner, εἰκόνα. and seek and find again Thine image.

303

304

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VI.16. Triadikon

PG 97:1360d Τριάς εἰμι ἁπλῆ, ἀδιαίρετος,

Ode VI.17. Theotokion

PG 97:1361a Ἡ μήτρα σου Θεὸν ἡμῖν ἔτεκε

Ode VII. Heirmos

PG 97:1368c Ἡμάρτομεν, ἠνομήσαμεν,

Ode VII.1

PG 97:1368c Ἡμάρτηκα, ἐπλημμέλησα καὶ

διαιρετὴ προσωπικῶς, καὶ Μονὰς ὑπάρχω τῇ φύσει ἡνωμένη, ὁ Πατήρ, φησίν, ὁ Υἱὸς καὶ θεῖον Πνεῦμα.

μεμορφωμένον καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς· ὃν ὡς Κτίστην πάντων δυσώπει, Θεοτόκε, ἵνα ταῖς πρεσβείαις ταῖς σαῖς δικαιωθῶμεν.

ἠδικήσαμεν ἐνώπιόν σου· οὐδὲ συνετηρήσαμεν, οὐδὲ ἐποιήσαμεν, καθὼς ἐνετείλω ἡμῖν. Ἀλλὰ μὴ παραδῴης ἡμᾶς εἰς τέλος, ὁ τῶν Πατέρων Θεός. ἠθέτησα τὴν ἐντολήν σου· ὅτι ἐν ἁμαρτίαις προήχθην καὶ προσέθηκα τοῖς μώλωψι τραῦμα ἐμοί. Ἀλλ᾿ αὐτός με ἐλέησον ὡς εὔσπλαγχνος, ὁ τῶν Πατέρων Θεός.

Ode VII.2

PG 97:1368c Τὰ κρύφια τῆς καρδίας μου ἐξηγόρευσά σοι τῷ Κριτῇ μου· ἴδε μου τὴν ταπείνωσιν, ἴδε καὶ τὴν θλῖψίν μου καὶ πρόσχες τῇ κρίσει μου νῦν· καὶ αὐτός με ἐλέησον ὡς εὔσπλαγχνος, ὁ τῶν Πατέρων Θεός.

Ode VII.3

PG 97:1368d Σαούλ ποτε ὡς ἀπώλεσε τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, ψυχή, τὰς ὄνους, πάρεργον τὸ βασίλειον εὗρε πρὸς ἀνάρρησιν. Ἀλλ᾿ ὅρα μὴ λάθῃς σαυτήν, τὰς κτηνώδεις ὀρέξεις σου προκρίνουσα τῆς βασιλείας Χριστοῦ.

Ode VII.4

PG 97:1369a Δαυΐδ ποτε ὁ πατρόθεος εἰ καὶ ἥμαρτε διττῶς, ψυχή μου, βέλει μὲν τοξευθεὶς τῆς μοιχείας, τῷ δὲ δόρατι ἁλοὺς τῆς τοῦ φόνου ποινῆς. Ἀλλ᾿ αὐτὴ τὰ βαρύτερα τῶν ἔργων νοσεῖς ταῖς κατὰ γνώμην ὁρμαῖς.

Ode VII.5

PG 97:1369a Συνῆψε μὲν ὁ Δαυΐδ ποτε ἀνομήματι τὴν ἀνομίαν· φόνῳ γὰρ τὴν μοιχείαν ἐκίρνα, τὴν μετάνοιαν εὐθὺς παραδείξας διπλῆν. Ἀλλ᾿ αὐτὴ πονηρότερα εἰργάσω, ψυχή, μὴ μεταγνοῦσα Θεῷ.

‘I am the Trinity, simple and undivided, yet divided in Persons, and I am the Unity, by Nature one’, says the Father and the Son and the divine Spirit. Thy womb bore God for us, fashioned in our shape. O Theotokos, pray to Him as the Creator of all, that we may be justified through thine intercessions. We have sinned, we have transgressed, we have done evil in Thy sight; we have not kept or followed Thy commandments. But reject us not utterly, O God of our fathers. I have sinned, I have offended, I have set aside Thy commandments; for in sins have I progressed and to my sores I have added wounds. But in Thy compassion have mercy upon me, O God of our fathers. The secrets of my heart have I confessed to Thee, my Judge. See my abasement, see my affliction, and attend to my judgement now; and in Thy compassion have mercy upon me, O God of our fathers. When Saul once lost his father’s asses, in searching for them he found himself proclaimed as king. But watch, my soul, lest unknown to thyself thou prefer thine animal appetites to the Kingdom of Christ. David, the forefather of God, once sinned doubly, pierced with the arrow of adultery and the spear of murder. But thou, my soul, art more gravely sick than he, for worse than any acts are the impulses of diy will. David once joined sin to sin, adding murder to fornication; yet then he showed at once a twofold repentance. But thou, my soul, hast done worse things than he, yet thou hast not repented before God.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VII.6

PG 97:1369a Δαυΐδ ποτε ἀνεστήλωσε συγγραψάμενος ὡς ἐν εἰκόνι ὕμνον, δι᾿ οὗ τὴν πρᾶξιν ἐλέγχει, ἣν εἰργάσατο κραυγάζων, Ἐλέησόν με· σοὶ γὰρ μόνῳ ἐξήμαρτον τῷ πάντων Θεῷ· αὐτὸς καθάρισόν με.

Ode VII.7

PG 97:1369b Ἡ Κιβωτὸς ὡς ἐφέρετο ἐπιδίφριος, ὁ Ζᾶν ἐκεῖνος ὅτε, ἀνατραπέντος τοῦ μόσχου, μόνον ἥψατο Θεοῦ ἐπειράθη ὀργῆς. Ἀλλ᾿ αὐτοῦ τὴν αὐθάδειαν φυγοῦσα, ψυχή, σέβου τὰ θεῖα καλῶς.

Ode VII.8

PG 97:1369b Ἀκήκοας τοῦ Ἀβεσσαλὼμ πῶς τῆς φύσεως ἀντεξανέστη· ἔγνως τὰς ἐναγεῖς αὐτοῦ πράξεις, αἷς ἐξύβρισε τὴν κοίτην Δαυῒδ τοῦ πατρός. Ἀλλ᾿ αὐτὴ ἐμιμήσω τὰς αὐτοῦ ἐμπαθεῖς καὶ φιληδόνους ὁρμάς.

Ode VII.9

PG 97:1369b Ὑπέταξας τὸ ἀδούλωτον σοῦ ἀξίωμα τῷ σώματί σου· ἄλλον γὰρ Ἀχιτόφελ εὑροῦσα τὸν ἐχθρόν, ψυχή, συνῆλθες ταῖς τούτου βουλαῖς· ἀλλ᾿ αὐτὰς διεσκέδασεν αὐτὸς ὁ Χριστός, ἵνα σὺ πάντως σωθῇς.

Ode VII.10

PG 97:1369c Ὁ Σολομὼν ὁ θαυμάσιος, ὁ καὶ χάριτος σοφίας πλήρης, οὗτος τὸ πονηρὸν ἐναντίον τοῦ Θεοῦ ποτε ποιήσας ἀπέστη αὐτοῦ· ᾧ αὐτὴ τὸν ἐπάρατόν σου βίον, ψυχή, προσαφωμοίωσας.

Ode VII.11

David once composed a hymn, setting forth, as in an ikon, the action he had done; and he condemned it, crying: ‘Have mercy upon me, for against Thee only have I sinned, O God of all. Do Thou cleanse me. When the Ark was being carried in a cart and the ox stumbled, Uzzah did no more than touch it, but the wrath of God smote him. O my soul, flee from his presumption and respect with reverence the things of God. Thou hast heard of Absalom, and how he rebelled against nature; thou knowest of the unholy deeds by which he defiled his father David’s bed. Yet thou hast followed him in his passionate and sensual desires. Thy free dignity, O my soul, thou hast subjected to thy body; for thou hast found in the enemy another Ahitophel, and hast agreed to all his counsels. But Christ Himself has brought them to nothing and saved thee from them all. Solomon the wonderful, who was full of the grace of wisdom, once did evil in the sight of heaven and turned away from God. Thou hast become like him, my soul, through thine accursed life.

PG 97:1369c Ταῖς ἡδοναῖς ἐξελκόμενος τῶν Carried away by sensual παθῶν αὐτοῦ κατερρυποῦτο· passions, he defiled himself. οἴμοι! ὁ ἐραστὴς τῆς σοφίας Alas! The lover of wisdom ἐραστὴς πορνῶν γυναικῶν became a lover of harlots καὶ ξένος Θεοῦ· ὃν αὐτὴ and a stranger to God. ἐμιμήσω κατὰ νοῦν, ὦ ψυχή, And thou, my soul, in thy ἡδυπαθείαις αἰσχραῖς. mind hast imitated him through thy shameful desires.

305

306

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VII.12

PG 97:1369c Τὸν Ροβοὰμ παρεζήλωσας ἀλογήσαντα βουλῆς πατρῴας, ἅμα δὲ καὶ τὸν κάκιστον δοῦλον Ἱεροβοὰμ τὸν πρὶν ἀποστάτην, ψυχή. Ἀλλὰ φεῦγε τὴν μίμησιν καὶ κράζε Θεῷ· Ἥμαρτον, οἴκτειρόν με.

Ode VII.13

PG 97:1369d Τὸν Ἀχαὰβ παρεζήλωσας τοῖς μιάσμασι, ψυχή μου· οἴμοι! γέγονας σαρκικῶν μολυσμάτων καταγώγιον καὶ σκεῦος αἰσχρὸν τῶν παθῶν. Ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ βάθους σου στέναξον καὶ λέγε Θεῷ τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου.

Ode VII.14

PG 97:1372a Ἐνέπρησεν Ἠλιού ποτε δὶς πεντήκοντα τῆς Ἰεζάβελ, ὅτε τοὺς τῆς αἰσχύνης προφήτας Κατηνάλωσεν εἰς ἔλεγχον τοῦ Ἀχαάβ. Ἀλλὰ φεῦγε τὴν μίμησιν τῶν δύο, ψυχή, καὶ κραταιώθητι.

Ode VII.15

PG 97:1372a Ἐκλείσθη σοι οὐρανός, ψυχή, καὶ λιμὸς Θεοῦ κατέλαβέ σε, ὅτε τοῖς Ἠλιοὺ τοῦ Θεσβίτου ὡς ὁ Ἀχαὰβ ἠπείθησας λόγοις ποτέ. Ἀλλὰ τὴν Σαραφθίαν μιμουμένη θρέψον Προφήτου ψυχήν.

Ode VII.16

PG 97:1372a Τοῦ Μανασσῆ ἐπεσώρευσας τὰ ἐγκλήματα τῇ προαιρέσει, στήσασα ὡς βδελύγματα πάθη καὶ πληθύνουσα, ψυχή, προσοχθίσματα· Ἀλλ᾿ αὐτοῦ τὴν μετάνοιαν ζηλοῦσα θερμῶς κτῆσαι κατάνυξιν.

Ode VII.17

PG 97:1372b Προσπίπτω σοι καὶ προσάγω σοι ὥσπερ δάκρυα τὰ ρήματά μου· Ἥμαρτον ὡς ἥμαρτε Πόρνη καὶ ἠνόμησα ὡς ἄλλος οὐδεὶς ἐπὶ γῆς. Ἀλλ᾿ οἰκτείρησον, Δέσποτα, τὸ ποίημά σου καὶ ἀνακάλεσαί με.

Ode VII.18

PG 97:1372b Κατέχρωσα τὴν εἰκόνα σου καὶ παρέφθειρα τὴν ἐντολήν σου· ὅλον ἀπημαυρώθη τὸ κάλλος καὶ τοῖς πάθεσιν ἐσβέσθη, Σωτήρ, ἡ λαμπάς. Ἀλλ᾿ οἰκτείρας ἀπόδος μοι, ὡς ψάλλει Δαυΐδ, τὴν ἀγαλλίασιν.

O my soul, thou hast rivalled Rehoboam, who paid no attention to his father’s counsellors, and Jeroboam, that evil servant and renegade of old. But flee from their example and cry to God: I have sinned, take pity on me. Alas, my soul! Thou hast rivalled Ahab in guilt. Thou hast become the dwelling-place of fleshly defilements and a shameful vessel of the passions. But groan from the depths of thy heart, and confess thy sins to God. Elijah once destroyed with fire twice fifty of Jezebel’s servants, and he slew the prophets of shame, as a rebuke to Ahab. But flee from the example of both of them, my soul, and be strong. Heaven is closed to thee, my soul, and a famine from God has seized thee: for thou hast been disobedient, as Ahab was to the words of Elijah the Tishbite. But imitate the widow of Zarephath, and feed the prophet’s soul. By deliberate choice, my soul, thou hast incurred the guilt of Manasseh, setting up the passions as idols and multiplying abominations. But with fervent heart emulate his repentance and acquire compunction. I fell before Thee, and as tears I offer Thee my words. I have sinned as the Harlot never sinned, and I have transgressed as no other man on earth. But take pity on Thy creature, O Master, and call me back. I have discoloured Thine image and broken Thy commandment. All my beauty is destroyed and my lamp is quenched by the passions, O Saviour. But take pity on me, as David sings, and ‘restore to me Thy joy’.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VII.19

PG 97:1372b Ἐπίστρεψον, μετανόησον, ἀνακάλυψον τὰ κεκρυμμένα· λέγε Θεῷ τῷ τὰ πάντα εἰδότι· Σὺ γινώσκεις μου τὰ κρύφια, μόνε Σωτήρ· καὶ αὐτός με ἐλέησον, ὡς ψάλλει Δαυΐδ, κατὰ τὸ ἔλεός σου.

Ode VII.20

PG 97:1372c Ἐξέλιπον αἱ ἡμέραι μου ὡς ἐνύπνιον ἐγειρομένου· ὅθεν ὡς Ἐζεκίας δακρύω ἐπὶ κλίνης μου, προσθεῖναί μοι χρόνους ζωῆς. Ἀλλὰ τίς Ἡσαΐας παραστήσεταί σοι, ψυχή, εἰ μὴ ὁ πάντων Θεός;

Ode VII.21. Triadikon

PG 97:1373a Τριὰς ἁπλῆ, ἀδιαίρετε,

Ode VII.22. Theotokion

PG 97:1373a Ὑμνοῦμέν σε, εὐλογοῦμέν σε,

Ode VIII. Heirmos

PG 97:1373d Ὃν Στρατιαὶ Οὐρανῶν

Ode VIII.1

PG 97:1376a Ἡμαρτηκότα, Σωτήρ, ἐλέησον·

ὁμοούσιε καὶ φύσις μία, φῶτα καὶ φῶς, καὶ ἅγια τρία, καὶ ἓν ἅγιον ὑμνεῖται Θεὸς ἡ Τριάς. Ἀλλ᾿ ἀνύμνησον, δόξασον ζωὴν καὶ ζωάς, ψυχή, τὸν πάντων Θεόν. προσκυνοῦμέν σε, Θεογεννῆτορ, ὅτι τῆς ἀχωρίστου Τριάδος ἀπεκύησας τὸν ἕνα Υἱὸν καὶ Θεόν· καὶ αὐτὴ προανέῳξας ἡμῖν τοῖς ἐν γῇ τὰ ἐπουράνια.

δοξάζουσι καὶ φρίττει τὰ Χερουβὶμ καὶ τὰ Σεραφίμ, πᾶσα πνοὴ καὶ κτίσις, ὑμνεῖτε, εὐλογεῖτε καὶ ὑπερυψοῦτε εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας.

διέγειρόν μου τὸν νοῦν πρὸς ἐπιστροφήν· δέξαι μετανοοῦντα, οἰκτείρησον βοῶντα· Ἥμαρτόν σοι μόνῳ, ἠνόμησα, ἐλέησόν με.

Ode VIII.2

PG 97:1376a Ὁ διφρηλάτης Ἠλίας ἅρματι ταῖς ἀρεταῖς ἐπιβὰς ὡς εἰς Οὐρανοὺς ἤγετο ὑπεράνω ποτὲ τῶν ἐπιγείων· τούτου οὖν, ψυχή μου, τὴν ἄνοδον ἀναλογίζου.

Turn back, repent, uncover all that thou hast hidden. Say unto God, to whom all things are known: Thou alone knowest my secrets, O Saviour; ‘have mercy on me’, as David sings, ‘according to Thy mercy’. My days have vanished as the dream of one awaking: and so, like Hezekiah, I weep upon my bed, that years may be added to my life. But what Isaiah will come to thee, my soul, except the God of all? O simple and undivided Trinity, one consubstantial Nature: Thou art praised as Light and Lights, one Holy and three Holies. Sing, O my soul, and glorify Life and Lives, the God of all. We praise thee, we bless thee, we venerate thee, O Mother of God: for thou hast given birth to One of the undivided Trinity, thy Son and God, and thou hast opened the heavenly places to us on earth. The hosts of heaven give Him glory; before Him tremble cherubim and seraphim; let everything that has breath and all creation praise Him, bless Him, and exalt Him above all for ever. I have sinned, O Saviour, have mercy on me. Awaken my mind and turn me back; accept me in repentance and take pity on me as I ciy: against Thee only have I sinned; I have done evil, have mercy on me. Riding in the chariot of the virtues, Elijah was lifted up to heaven, high above earthly things. Reflect, my soul, on his ascent.

307

308

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VIII.3

PG 97:1376a Τοῦ Ἰορδάνου τὸ ρεῖθρον

With the mantle of Elijah, Elisha made the stream of Jordan stand still on either side: but in this grace, my soul, thou hast no share, by reason of thy greed and uncontrolled desires. PG 97:1376b Ὁ Ἐλισσαῖός ποτε δεξάμενος Elisha once took up the τὴν μηλωτὴν Ἠλιοὺ ἔλαβε mantle of Elijah, and διπλῆν χάριν παρὰ Κυρίου· received a double portion αὐτὴ δέ, ὦ ψυχή μου, ταύτης of grace from the Lord: but in οὐ μετέσχες τῆς χάριτος δι᾿ this grace, my soul, thou hast ἀκρασίαν. no share, by reason of thy greed and uncontrolled desires. PG 97:1376b Ἡ Σωμανῖτίς ποτε τὸν δίκαιον The Shunammite woman ἐξένισεν, ὦ ψυχή, γνώμῃ gladly entertained the ἀγαθῇ· σὺ δὲ οὐκ εἰσῳκίσω righteous Prophet: but in thy οὐ ξένον οὐχ ὁδίτην· ὅθεν house, my soul, thou hast τοῦ νυμφῶνος ριφήσῃ ἔξω not welcomed stranger or θρηνῳδοῦσα. traveller; and so thou shalt be cast out weeping from the bridal chamber. PG 97:1376b Τοῦ Γιεζῆ ἐμιμήσω, τάλαινα, O wretched soul, always thou τὴν γνώμην τὴν ρυπαρὰν hast imitated the polluted πάντοτε, ψυχή· οὗ τὴν thoughts of Gehazi. Cast φιλαργυρίαν ἀπώθου κἂν ἐν from thee, at least in thine γήρει· φεῦγε τῆς γεέννης τὸ old age, his love of money. πῦρ ἐκστᾶσα τῶν κακῶν σου. Flee from the fire of hell, turn away from thy wickedness. PG 97:1376b Σὺ τὸν Ὀζίαν, ψυχή, Thou hast followed Uzziah, ζηλώσασα, τὴν τούτου my soul, and hast his leprosy λέπραν ἐν σοὶ ἔσχες ἐν διπλῷ· in double form; for thy ἄτοπα γὰρ λογίζῃ, παράνομα thoughts are wicked, and δὲ πράττεις· ἄφες ἃ κατέχεις thine acts unlawful. Leave καὶ πρόσδραμε τῇ μετανοίᾳ. what thou hast, and hasten to repentance. PG 97:1376c Τοὺς Νινευίτας, ψυχή, O my soul, thou hast heard ἀκήκοας μετανοοῦντας Θεῷ how the men of Nineveh σάκκῳ καὶ σποδῷ· τούτους repented before God in οὐκ ἐμιμήσω, ἀλλ᾿ ὤφθης sackcloth and ashes. Yet σκαιοτέρα πάντων τῶν πρὸ thou hast not followed them, νόμου καὶ μετὰ νόμον but art more wicked than all ἐπταικότων. who sinned before the Law and after. PG 97:1376c Τὸν ἐν τῷ λάκκῳ βορβόρου Thou hast heard, my soul, ἤκουσας Ἱερεμίαν, ψυχή, how Jeremiah in the muddy πόλιν τὴν Σιὼν θρήνοις pit cried out with καταβοῶντα καὶ δάκρυα lamentations for the city of ζητοῦντα· μίμησαι τὸν Zion and asked to be given τούτου θρηνῴδη βίον καὶ tears. Follow his life of σωθήσῃ. lamentation and be saved. πρότερον τῇ μηλωτῇ Ἠλιοὺ δι᾿ Ἐλισσαιὲ ἔστη ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα· αὐτὴ δέ, ὦ ψυχή μου, ταύτης οὐ μετέσχες τῆς χάριτος δι᾿ ἀκρασίαν.

Ode VIII.4

Ode VIII.5

Ode VIII.6

Ode VIII.7

Ode VIII.8

Ode VIII.9

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VIII.10

PG 97:1376c Ὁ Ἰωνᾶς εἰς Θαρσεῖς

Jonah fled to Tarshish, foreseeing the conversion of the men of Nineveh; for as a prophet he knew the loving-kindness of God, but he was jealous that his prophecy should not be proved false. PG 97:1376c Τὸν Δανιὴλ ἐν τῷ λάκκῳ My soul, thou hast heard how ἤκουσας, πῶς ἔφραξεν, ὦ Daniel stopped the mouths ψυχή, στόματα θηρῶν· of the wild beasts in the ἔγνωκας πῶς οἱ Παῖδες οἱ lions’ den; and thou knowest περὶ Ἀζαρίαν ἔσβεσαν τῇ how the Children with Azarias πίστει καμίνου φλόγα quenched through their faith καιομένης. the flames of the fiery furnace. PG 97:1376d Τῆς παλαιᾶς Διαθήκης All the names of the Old ἅπαντας παρήγαγόν σοι, Testament have I set before ψυχή, πρὸς ὑπογραμμόν· thee, my soul, as an example. μίμησαι τῶν δικαίων τὰς Imitate the holy acts of the φιλοθέους πράξεις· ἔκφυγε δὲ righteous and flee from the πάλιν τῶν πονηρῶν τὰς sins of the wicked. ἀπέδραμε προγνοὺς τὴν ἐπιστροφὴν τῶν Νινευιτῶν· ἔγνω γὰρ ὡς προφήτης Θεοῦ τὴν εὐσπλαγχνίαν· ὅθεν παρεζήλου τὴν προφητείαν μὴ ψευσθῆναι.

Ode VIII.11

Ode VIII.12

ἁμαρτίας.

Ode VIII.13

PG 97:1376d Δικαιοκρῖτα, Σωτήρ, ἐλέησον

O righteous Judge and Saviour, have mercy on me and deliver me from the fire that threatens me, and from the punishment that I deserve to suffer at the Judgement. Before the end comes, grant me remission through virtue and repentance. PG 97:1376d Ὡς ὁ Λῃστὴς ἐκβοῶ σοι τὸ Like the Thief I cry to Thee, Μνήσθητι· ὡς Πέτρος κλαίω ‘Remember me’; like Peter πικρῶς· Ἄνες μοι, Σωτήρ, I weep bitterly; like the κράζω ὡς ὁ Τελώνης· δακρύω Publican I call out, ‘Forgive ὡς ἡ Πόρνη· δέξαι μου τὸν me, Saviour’; like the Harlot θρῆνον, καθώς ποτε τῆς I shed tears. Accept my Χαναναίας. lamentation, as once Thou hast accepted the entreaties of the woman of Canaan. PG 97:1377a Τὴν σηπεδόνα, Σωτήρ, O Saviour, heal the θεράπευσον τῆς ταπεινῆς μου putrefaction of my humbled ψυχῆς, μόνε ἰατρέ· μάλαγμά soul, for Thou art the one μοι ἐπίθες καὶ ἔλαιον καὶ Physician; apply plaster, and οἶνον, ἔργα μετανοίας, pour in oil and wine – works κατάνυξιν μετὰ δακρύων. of repentance, and compunction with tears. PG 97:1377a Τὴν Χαναναίαν κἀγὼ Like the woman of Canaan, μιμούμενος, Ἐλέησόν με, βοῶ, I cry to Thee, Have mercy on τῷ Υἱῷ Δαυΐδ· ἅπτομαι τοῦ me, Son of David. Like the κρασπέδου ὡς ἡ woman with an issue Αἱμορροοῦσα· κλαίω ὡς ἡ of blood, I touch the hem of Μάρθα καὶ Μαρία ἐπὶ Thy garment. I weep as Λαζάρου. Martha and Mary wept for Lazarus. καὶ ρῦσαί με τοῦ πυρὸς καὶ τῆς ἀπειλῆς, ἧς μέλλω ἐν τῇ κρίσει δικαίως ὑποστῆναι· ἄνες μοι πρὸ τέλους δι᾿ ἀρετῆς καὶ μετανοίας.

Ode VIII.14

Ode VIII.15

Ode VIII.16

309

310

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode VIII.17

PG 97:1377a Τὸ τῶν δακρύων, Σωτήρ,

As precious ointment, O Saviour, I empty on Thine head the alabaster box of my tears. Like the Harlot, I cry out to Thee, seeking mercy: I bring my prayer and ask to receive forgiveness. Εἰ καὶ μηδεὶς ὡς ἐγώ σοι No one has sinned against ἥμαρτεν, ἀλλ᾿ ὅμως δέξαι Thee as I have; yet accept κἀμέ, εὔσπλαγχνε Σωτήρ, even me, compassionate φόβῳ μετανοοῦντα καὶ πόθῳ Saviour, for I repent in fear κεκραγότα· Ἥμαρτόν σοι and cry with longing: Against μόνῳ, ἠνόμησα, ἐλέησόν με. Thee alone have I sinned; I have transgressed, have mercy on me. Φεῖσαι, Σωτήρ, τοῦ ἰδίου Spare the work of Thine own πλάσματος καὶ ζήτησον ὡς hands, O Saviour, and as ποιμὴν τὸ ἀπολωλὸς shepherd seek the lost πρόβατον· πλανηθέντα sheep that has gone astray. ἐξάρπασον τοῦ λύκου, Snatch me from the wolf and ποίησόν με θρέμμα ἐν τῇ make me a nursling in the νομῇ τῶν σῶν προβάτων. pasture of Thine own flock. Ὅταν Κριτὴς καθίσῃς ὡς When Thou sittest upon Thy εὔσπλαγχνος καὶ δείξῃς τὴν throne, O merciful Judge, and φοβερὰν δόξαν σου Χριστέ, revealest Thy dread glory, ὢ ποῖος φόβος τότε! καμίνου O Christ, what fear there will καιομένης, πάντων be then! When the furnace δειλιώντων τὸ ἄστεκτον τοῦ bums with fire, and all shrink βήματός σου. back in terror before Thy judgement-seat. Ἄναρχε Πάτερ, Υἱὲ συνάναρχε, Father without beginning, Παράκλητε ἀγαθέ, Πνεῦμα τὸ coetemal Son, and loving εὐθές, Λόγου Θεοῦ Γεννῆτορ, Comforter, the Spirit of Πατρὸς ἀνάρχου Λόγε, righteousness; Begetter of Πνεῦμα ζῶν καὶ κτίζον, Τριὰς the Word of God, Word of the Μονάς, ἐλέησόν με. Eternal Father, Spirit living and creative: O Trinity in Unity, have mercy on me. Ὡς ἐκ βαφῆς ἁλουργίδος, As from purple silk, Ἄχραντε, ἡ νοητὴ πορφυρὶς O undefiled Virgin, the τοῦ Ἐμμανουὴλ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ spiritual robe of Emmanuel, γαστρί σου ἡ σὰρξ His flesh, was woven in thy συνεξυφάνθη· ὅθεν Θεοτόκον womb. Therefore we honour ἐν ἀληθείᾳ σὲ τιμῶμεν. thee as Theotokos in very truth. Ἀσπόρου συλλήψεως ὁ τόκος Conception without seed; ἀνερμήνευτος, Μητρὸς nativity past understanding, ἀνάνδρου ἄφθορος ἡ κύησις· from a Mother who never Θεοῦ γὰρ ἡ γέννησις knew a man; childbearing καινοποιεῖ τὰς φύσεις· διό σε undefiled. For the birth of πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαὶ ὡς God makes both natures Θεόνυμφον Μητέρα new. Therefore, as Bride and ὀρθοδόξως μεγαλύνομεν. Mother of God, with true worship all generations magnify thee. ἀλάβαστρον ὡς μύρον κατακενῶν ἐπὶ κεφαλῆς κράζω σοι ὡς ἡ Πόρνη τὸν ἔλεον ζητοῦσα· δέησιν προσάγω καὶ ἄφεσιν αἰτῶ λαβεῖν με.

Ode VIII.18

PG 97:1377b

Ode VIII.19

PG 97:1377b

Ode VIII.20

PG 97:1377b

Ode VIII.21. Triadikon

PG 97:1377d

Ode VIII.22. Theotokion

PG 97:1377d

Ode IX. Heirmos

PG 97:1380c

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IX.1

PG 97:1380d Ὁ νοῦς τετραυμάτισται, τὸ σῶμα μεμαλάκισται, νοσεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα· ὁ λόγος ἠσθένησεν, ὁ βίος νενέκρωται,τὸ τέλος ἐπὶ θύραις· διό μοι, τάλαινα ψυχή, τί ποιήσεις, ὅταν ἔλθῃ ὁ Κριτὴς ἀνερευνῆσαι τὰ σά;

Ode IX.2

PG 97:1380d Μωσέως παρήγαγον, ψυχή, τὴν κοσμογένεσιν καὶ ἐξ ἐκείνου πᾶσαν ἐνδιάθετον γραφὴν ἱστοροῦσάν σοι δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους· ὧν τοὺς δευτέρους, ὦ ψυχή, ἐμιμήσω, οὐ τοὺς πρώτους, εἰς Θεὸν ἐξαμαρτήσασα.

Ode IX.3

PG 97:1380d Ὁ Νόμος ἠσθένησεν, ἀργεῖ τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον, Γραφὴ δὲ πᾶσα ἐν σοὶ παρημέληται, Προφῆται ἠτόνησαν καὶ πᾶς δικαίου λόγος· αἱ τραυματίαι σου, ὦ ψυχή, ἐπληθύνθησαν, οὐκ ὄντος ἰατροῦ τοῦ ὑγιοῦντός σε.

Ode IX.4

PG 97:1381a Τῆς Νέας παράγω σοι Γραφῆς τὰ ὑποδείγματα, ἐνάγοντά σε, ψυχή, πρὸς κατάνυξιν· δικαίους οὖν ζήλωσον, ἁμαρτωλοὺς ἐκτρέπου καὶ ἐξιλέωσαι Χριστὸν προσευχαῖς τε καὶ νηστείαις, καὶ ἁγνείᾳ καὶ σεμνότητι.

Ode IX.5

PG 97:1381a Χριστὸς ἐνηπίασε σαρκὶ προσομιλήσας μοι, καὶ πάντα ὅσα ὑπάρχει τῆς φύσεως, βουλήσει ἐπλήρωσε τῆς ἁμαρτίας δίχα· ὑπογραμμόν σοι, ὦ ψυχή, καὶ εἰκόνα προδεικνύων τῆς αὐτοῦ συγκαταβάσεως.

Ode IX.6

PG 97:1381a Χριστὸς ἐνηνθρώπησε καλέσας εἰς μετάνοιαν, λῃστὰς καὶ πόρνας· ψυχὴ μετανόησον, ἡ θύρα ἠνέῳκται τῆς Βασιλείας ἤδη· καὶ προαρπάζουσιν αὐτὴν Φαρισαῖοι καὶ Τελῶναι καὶ μοιχοὶ μεταποιούμενοι.

My mind is wounded, my body has grown feeble, my spirit is sick, my speech has lost its power, my life is dead; the end is at the door. What shalt thou do, then, miserable soul, when the Judge comes to examine thy deeds? I have put before thee, my soul, Moses’ account of the creation of the world, and after that all the recognized Scriptures that tell thee the story of the righteous and the wicked. But thou, my soul, hast followed the second of these, not the first, and hast sinned against God. The Law is powerless, the Gospel of no effect, and the whole of Scripture is ignored by thee; the prophets and all the words of the righteous are useless. Thy wounds, my soul, have been multiplied, and there is no physician to heal thee. I bring thee, O my soul, examples from the New Testament, to lead thee to compunction. Follow the example of the righteous, turn away from the sinful; and through prayers and fasting, through chastity and reverence, win back Christ’s mercy. Christ became a child and shared in my flesh; and willingly He performed all that belongs to my nature, only without sin. He set before thee, my soul, an example and image of His condescension. Christ became man, calling to repentance thieves and harlots. Repent, my soul: the door of the Kingdom is already open, and pharisees and publicans tod adulterers pass through it before thee, changing their life.

311

312

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IX.7

PG 97:1381b Χριστὸς Μάγους ἔσωσε, Ποιμένας συνεκάλεσε, Νηπίων δήμους ἀπέδειξε Μάρτυρας, Πρεσβύτην ἐδόξασε καὶ γηραλέαν Χήραν· ὧν οὐκ ἐζήλωσας, ψυχή, οὐ τὰς πράξεις, οὐ τὸν βίον· ἀλλ᾿ οὐαί σοι ἐν τῷ κρίνεσθαι!

Ode IX.8

PG 97:1381b Νηστεύσας ὁ Κύριος ἡμέρας τεσσαράκοντα ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, ὕστερον ἐπείνασε δεικνὺς τὸ ἀνθρώπινον. Ψυχή, μὴ ἀθυμήσῃς· ἄν σοι προσβάλῃ ὁ ἐχθρός, προσευχαῖς τε καὶ νηστείαις ἐκ ποδῶν ἀποκρουσθήτω σοι.

Ode IX.9

PG 97:1381b Χριστὸς ἐπειράζετο, Διάβολος ἐπείραζε δεικνὺς τοὺς λίθους, ἵνα ἄρτοι γένωνται· εἰς ὄρος ἀνήγαγεν ἰδεῖν τὰς βασιλείας τοῦ κόσμου πάσας ἐν ριπῇ. Φοβοῦ, ὦ ψυχή, τὸ δρᾶμα· νῆφε, εὔχου, πᾶσαν ὥραν Θεῷ.

Ode IX.10

PG 97:1381c Τρυγὼν ἡ φιλέρημος, φωνὴ βοῶντος ἤχησε, Χριστοῦ ὁ λύχνος κηρύττων μετάνοιαν· Ἡρῴδης ἠνόμησε σὺν τῇ Ἡρωδιάδι. Βλέπε, ψυχή μου, μὴ παγῇς τῶν ἀνόμων ταῖς παγίσιν, ἀλλ᾿ ἀσπάζου τὴν μετάνοιαν.

Ode IX.11

PG 97:1381c Τὴν ἔρημον ᾤκησεν ὁ Πρόδρομος τῆς χάριτος· καὶ Ἰουδαία πᾶσα καὶ Σαμάρεια ἀκούοντες ἔτρεχον καὶ ἐξωμολογοῦντο τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἑαυτῶν, βαπτιζόμενοι προθύμως· οὓς αὐτὴ οὐκ ἐμιμήσω, ψυχή.

Ode IX.12

PG 97:1381c Ὁ γάμος μὲν τίμιος, ἡ κοίτη δὲ ἀμίαντος· ἀμφότερα γὰρ Χριστὸς προευλόγησε, σαρκὶ ἑστιώμενος ἐν τῆς Κανᾶ τῷ γάμῳ, τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον ἐκτελῶν καὶ δεικνύων πρῶτον θαῦμα, ἵνα σὺ μετατεθῇς, ὦ ψυχή.

Christ saved the Wise Men and called the Shepherds; He revealed as martyrs a multitude of young children; He glorified the Elder and the aged Widow. But thou, my soul, hast not followed their lives and actions. Woe to thee when thou art judged! The Lord fasted forty days in the wilderness, and at the end of them He was hungry, thus showing that He is man. Do not be dismayed, my soul: if the enemy attacks thee, through prayer and fasting drive him away. Christ was being tempted; the devil tempted Him, showing Him the stones that they might be made bread. He led Him up into a mountain, to see in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. O my soul, look with fear on what happened; watch and pray every hour to God. The Dove who loved the wilderness, the Lamp of Christ, the voice of one crying aloud, was heard preaching repentance; but Herod sinned with Herodias. O my soul, see that thou art not trapped in the snares of the transgressors, but embrace repentance. The Forerunner of grace went to dwell in the wilderness, and Judaea and all Samaria ran to hear him; they confessed their sins and were baptized eagerly. But thou, my soul, hast not imitated them. Marriage is honourable, and the marriage-bed undefiled. For on both Christ has given His blessing, eating in the flesh at the wedding in Cana, turning water into wine and revealing His first miracle, to bring thee, my soul, to a change of life.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IX.13

PG 97:1384a Παράλυτον ἔσφιγξε Χριστὸς

Christ gave strength to the paralysed man, and he took up his bed; He raised from the dead the young man, the son of the widow, and the centurion’s servant; He appeared to the woman of Samaria, and spoke to thee, my soul, of worship in spirit. PG 97:1384a Αἱμόρρουν ἰάσατο ἁφῇ By the touch of the hem κρασπέδου Κύριος· λεπροὺς of His garment, the Lord καθῆρε, τυφλοὺς καὶ healed the woman with an χωλεύοντας φωτίσας issue of blood; He cleansed ἀνώρθωσε, κωφούς τε καὶ lepers and gave sight to the ἀλάλους καὶ τὴν blind and made the lame συγκύπτουσαν χαμαὶ walk upright; He cured by His ἐθεράπευσε τῷ λόγῳ, word the deaf and the dumb ἵνα σὺ σωθῇς, ἀθλία ψυχή. and the woman bowed to the ground, to bring thee, wretched soul, to salvation. PG 97:1384a Τὰς νόσους ἰώμενος πτωχοῖς Healing sickness, Christ the εὐηγγελίζετο Χριστὸς ὁ Word preached the good Λόγος· κυλλοὺς ἐθεράπευσε, tidings to the poor. He cured τελώναις συνήσθιεν, the crippled, ate with ἁμαρτωλοῖς ὡμίλει· publicans, and conversed τῆς Ἰαείρου θυγατρὸς τὴν with sinners. With the touch ψυχὴν προμεταστᾶσαν of His hand, He brought back ἐπανήγαγεν ἁφῇ τῆς χειρός. the departed soul of Jairus’ daughter. PG 97:1384b Τελώνης ἐσῴζετο καὶ Πόρνη The Publican was saved and ἐσωφρόνιζε, καὶ Φαρισαῖος the Harlot turned to chastity, αὐχῶν κατεκρίνετο· ὁ μὲν γάρ, but the Pharisee with his Ἱλάσθητι, ἡ δέ, Ἐλέησόν με· boasting was condemned. ὁ δὲ ἐκόμπαζε βοῶν· Ὁ Θεὸς For the first cried, ‘Be εὐχαριστῶ σοι· καὶ ἑξῆς τὰ merciful’, and the second, τῆς ἀνοίας ρητά. ‘Have mercy on me’; but the third said, boasting, ‘I thank Thee, O God’, and the other words of madness. PG 97:1384b Ζακχαῖος Τελώνης ἦν, ἀλλ᾿ Zacchaeus was a publican, ὅμως διεσῴζετο, καὶ yet he was saved; but Simon Φαρισαῖος ὁ Σίμων the Pharisee went astray, ἐσφάλλετο, καὶ Πόρνη while the Harlot received ἐλάμβανε τὰς ἀφεσίμους remission and release from λύσεις παρὰ τοῦ ἔχοντος Him who has the power to ἰσχὺν ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας· ὅν, forgive sins. O my soul, gain ψυχή, σαυτῇ ἱλέωσαι. His mercy. PG 97:1384c Τὴν Πόρνην, ὦ τάλαινα ψυχή O wretched soul, thou hast μου, οὐκ ἐζήλωσας, ἥτις not acted like the Harlot, who λαβοῦσα μύρου τὸ took the alabaster box ἀλάβαστρον, σὺν δάκρυσιν of precious ointment, and ἤλειψε τοὺς πόδας τοῦ anointed with tears and Κυρίου· ἐξέμαξε δὲ ταῖς θριξί, wiped with her hair the feet τῶν ἀρχαίων ἐγκλημάτων τὸ of the Lord. And He tore in χειρόγραφον ρηγνύντος αὐτῇ. pieces the record of her previous sins. τὴν κλίνην ἄραντα καὶ νεανίσκον θανόντα ἐξήγειρε, τῆς χήρας τὸ κύημα καὶ τοῦ Ἑκατοντάρχου, καὶ Σαμαρείτιδι φανεὶς τὴν ἐν πνεύματι λατρείαν σοί, ψυχή, προεζωγράφησεν.

Ode IX.14

Ode IX.15

Ode IX.16

Ode IX.17

Ode IX.18

313

314

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IX.19

Ode IX.20

Ode IX.21

Ode IX.22

Ode IX.23

Ode IX.24

PG 97:1384c Τὰς πόλεις, αἷς ἔδωκε Χριστὸς Thou knowest, O my soul, τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον, ψυχή μου, how the cities were cursed to ἔγνως, ὅπως κατηράθησαν· which Christ preached the φοβοῦ τὸ ὑπόδειγμα, μὴ γένῃ Gospel. Fear their example, ὡς ἐκεῖναι· ταῖς ἐν Σοδόμοις lest thou suffer the same γὰρ αὐτὰς ὁ Δεσπότης punishment. For the Master παρεικάσας ἕως ᾍδου likened them to Sodom and κατεδίκασε. condemned them to hell. PG 97:1384c Μὴ χείρων, ὦ ψυχή μου, Be not overcome by despair φανῇς δι᾿ ἀπογνώσεως, τῆς O my soul; for thou hast Χαναναίας τὴν πίστιν heard of the faith of the ἀκούσασα, δι᾿ ἧς τὸ woman of Canaan, and how θυγάτριον λόγῳ Θεοῦ ἰάθη. through it her daughter was Υἱὲ Δαυΐδ, σῶσον κἀμέ, healed by the word of God. ἀναβόησον ἐκ βάθους τῆς Cry out from the depth of thy καρδίας, ὡς ἐκείνη, Χριστῷ. heart, Save me also, Son of David, as she once cried to Christ. PG 97:1384d Σπλαγχνίσθητι, σῶσόν με· Υἱὲ O Son of David, with Thy Δαυΐδ, ἐλέησον, ὁ word Thou hast healed the δαιμονῶντας λόγῳ possessed: take pity on me, ἰασάμενος· φωνὴν δὲ τὴν save me and have mercy. Let εὔσπλαγχνον, ὡς τῷ Λῃστῇ, me hear Thy compassionate μοι φράσον· Ἀμήν σοι λέγω, voice speak to me as to the μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ thief: ‘Verily, I say unto thee, Παραδείσῳ, ὅταν ἔλθω ἐν τῇ thou shalt be with Me in δόξῃ μου. Paradise, when I come in My glory. PG 97:1384d Λῃστὴς κατηγόρει σοι, Λῃστὴς A thief accused Thee, a thief ἐθεολόγει σοι· ἀμφότεροι γὰρ confessed Thy Godhead: for σταυρῷ συνεκρέμαντο. Ἀλλ᾿ both were hanging with Thee ὦ Πολυεύσπλαγχνε, ὡς τῷ on the Cross. Open to me πιστῷ Λῃστῇ σου τῷ also, O Lord of many mercies, ἐπιγνόντι σε Θεόν, κἀμοὶ the door of Thy glorious ἄνοιξον τὴν θύραν Kingdom, as once it was τῆς ἐνδόξου βασιλείας σου. opened to Thy thief who acknowledged Thee with faith as God. PG 97:1384d Ἡ Κτίσις συνείχετο The creation was in anguish, σταυρούμενόν σε βλέπουσα· seeing Thee crucified. ὄρη καὶ πέτραι φόβῳ Mountains and rocks were διερρήγνυντο· καὶ γῆ split from fear, the earth συνεσείετο καὶ ᾍδης quaked, and hell was ἐγυμνοῦτο· καὶ συνεσκότασε despoiled; the light grew dark τὸ φῶς ἐν ἡμέρᾳ, καθορῶν σε, in daytime, beholding Thee, Ἰησοῦ, προσηλωμένον σαρκί. O Jesus, nailed in the flesh. PG 97:1385a Ἀξίους μετανοίας καρποὺς μὴ Do not demand from me ἀπαιτήσῃς με· ἡ γὰρ ἰσχύς worthy fruits of repentance, μου ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐξέλιπε· καρδίαν for my strength has failed μοι δώρησαι ἀεὶ within me. Give me an συντετριμμένην· ever-contrite heart and πτωχείαν δὲ πνευματικήν, ἵνα poverty of spirit, that I may ταῦτά σοι προσοίσω ὡς offer these to Thee as an δεκτὴν θυσίαν, μόνε Σωτήρ. acceptable sacrifice, O only Saviour.

The Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete

Ode IX.25

PG 97:1385a Κριτά μου καὶ γνῶστά μου, ὁ μέλλων πάλιν ἔρχεσθαι σὺν τοῖς Ἀγγέλοις κρῖναι Κόσμον ἅπαντα, ἱλέῳ σου ὄμματι τότε ἰδών με φεῖσαι· καὶ οἴκτειρόν με, Ἰησοῦ, τὸν ὑπὲρ τὴν πᾶσαν φύσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἁμαρτήσαντα.

Ode IX.26. Triadikon

PG 97:1385c Τριὰς ὁμοούσιε, Μονὰς ἡ

Ode IX.27. Theotokion

PG 97:1385c Τὴν Πόλιν σου φύλαττε,

τρισυπόστατος, σὲ ἀνυμνοῦμεν Πατέρα δοξάζοντες, Υἱὸν μεγαλύνοντες καὶ Πνεῦμα προσκυνοῦντες, τὸν ἕνα φύσει ἀληθῶς Θεόν, ζωήν τε καὶ ζωάς, βασιλείαν ἀτελεύτητον. Θεογεννῆτορ ἄχραντε· ἐν σοὶ γὰρ αὕτη πιστῶς βασιλεύουσα, ἐν σοὶ καὶ κρατύνεται, καὶ διὰ σοῦ νικῶσα τροποῦται πάντα πειρασμὸν καὶ σκυλεύει πολεμίους καὶ διέπει τὸ ὑπήκοον.

O my Judge who dost know me, when Thou comest again with the angels to judge the whole world, look upon me then with Thine eye of mercy, and spare me; take pity on me, Jesus, for I have sinned more than any other man. Trinity one in Essence, Unity in three Persons, we sing Thy praises: we glorify the Father, we magnify the Son, we worship the Spirit, truly one God by nature, Life and Lives, Kingdom without end.

Watch over thy City, all-pure Mother of God. For by thee she reigns in faith, by thee she is made strong; by thee she is victorious, putting to flight every temptation, despoiling the enemy and ruling her subjects.

315

Subject Index

A action 15, 28, 61, 66, 78, 83, 91, 93, 109, 122, 127, 128, 134, 137, 143, 147–149, 161, 162, 186, 193, 195, 198, 204, 206, 208, 215–217, 220, 222, 225, 227, 230–232, 251–253 appetites 28, 149, 154, 165, 166, 241, 251 attention 19, 22, 35, 79, 131, 193, 201, 217, 252

H hesychasm, hesychastic 14–18, 28, 29, 35, 56, 83, 131, 134, 154–156, 158, 160, 164, 173, 176, 177, 181, 182, 184, 186, 188, 193, 195–199, 201, 202, 204, 207, 208, 217, 239, 241, 243, 244, 248, 250, 252–254 humility 13, 102, 117, 161, 186, 207, 221, 223–225, 241, 248, 253

B brutishness

I illusion 157, 159, 160, 163, 251 imagination 24, 72, 154, 161, 164, 182 imaginations 28, 164, 177, 178, 251 intention 52, 82, 85, 134, 138, 183, 239, 244, 252

147, 153, 166, 193–195, 210

C chastity 28, 83, 88, 103, 105, 140, 186, 188, 206, 225, 229, 230, 241, 253 compunction 12, 16, 28, 57, 61, 99, 102, 108, 129, 139, 150, 186, 188, 193, 198, 199, 201–208, 210–213, 229, 241, 245, 248, 249, 253 contemplation 17, 28, 48, 55, 148, 158, 186, 219, 227, 230–233, 253 contrition 15–17, 23, 189, 191, 204, 205, 207 D delusions 28, 154, 163, 241, 251 desires 28, 132, 133, 142, 145, 151, 152, 154, 155, 160, 161, 164–168, 177, 179–182, 184, 194, 216, 229, 240, 241, 251 G gluttony 28, 144, 154, 155, 157, 183, 241, 252 greed 145, 155, 157, 160, 185

J judgement 14, 28, 87, 95, 105, 129, 185, 219–221, 241, 253 L lamentation 28, 31, 171, 186, 208, 209, 214–216, 253 longings 28, 134, 154, 167, 180, 182, 217, 218, 241, 247, 251 lust 13, 99, 110, 137, 143, 148, 152, 154, 155, 164–167, 178–180, 211, 222 M metanoia 12, 23, 52, 57, 61, 76, 98, 141, 186, 247 O offences

101, 129, 162, 173, 209, 249

318

Subject Index

P passions 15, 18, 28, 34, 36, 52, 59, 62, 97, 125, 129, 137, 142–144, 154, 159, 160, 164, 165, 167, 170, 172–174, 176–184, 196–198, 200, 205, 211, 240, 241, 243, 245, 247, 248, 251, 252 Philokalia/philokalic 24, 28, 135, 154, 158, 160, 161, 183, 184, 197, 199, 204, 207, 210, 216, 218, 239 pleasures 28, 154, 165, 167, 176, 241, 251 prostrations 57, 60, 61, 248, 250 prudence 28, 132, 186, 223, 229, 230, 241 purification 38, 55, 56, 98, 130, 207, 228 R repentance 12, 17, 23, 58, 75, 76, 84, 96, 98, 99, 106–109, 113, 125, 127, 130, 136, 139–142, 144, 147, 150, 155, 161, 187, 189–193, 195–205, 207, 208, 210–212, 228, 233, 237, 239, 248, 253 S self-control 28, 126, 167, 168, 186, 229, 230, 253 senses 34, 60, 132, 153, 155, 157, 179, 182 sinfulness 12, 15, 22, 23, 28, 57, 63, 78, 91, 95–98, 104, 111, 124–128, 135, 136, 140, 141, 151, 158, 161–163, 169–171, 174, 180, 193, 195, 196, 204, 205, 208, 210,

213, 219, 224, 240, 241, 243–245, 248, 250, 251 sobriety 28, 222, 223, 253 stillness 57, 63 T temptation 28, 84, 85, 148, 149, 154, 163, 164, 181, 184, 185, 216, 222, 223, 235, 241, 251, 253 thoughts 18, 28, 35, 55, 57, 97, 129, 132–134, 145, 147, 153–162, 171, 176, 177, 180, 181, 185, 200, 216, 217, 220, 222, 241 transgressions 92, 103, 127, 173, 199, 209, 214 trespasses 13, 28, 154, 170, 171, 214, 241, 251 V vigilance 28, 92, 193, 195, 222, 223, 232, 253 virtue 28, 82, 98, 106, 132, 139, 146, 165, 168, 186, 201, 228, 232, 241, 248, 253 W weeping 98, 112, 126, 146, 210, 215, 216, 219 wickedness 28, 128, 140, 146, 154, 160, 161, 171–174, 181, 185, 190, 216, 227, 241, 251