You are on page 1of 15

St Symeon the New Theologian ( 949-1022 ) .

Byzantine Spiritual Renewal in search of a precedent.
by
John Anthony McGuckin
Ecclesiastical History Society
STUDIES IN CHURCH HISTORY VOLUME 33
THE CHURCH RETROSPECTIVE.
OXFORD. 1996.
Introductory Remarks.
St. Symeon the New Theologian is , without question, one of the most original and
intriguing writers of medieval Byzantium. Indeed, although still largely unknown in
the West, he is surely one of the greatest of all Christian mystical writers
1
; not only
for the remarkable autobiographical accounts he gives of several visions of the divine
light, but also for the passionate quality of his exquisite Hymns of Divine Love , the
remarkable intensity of his pneumatological doctrine
2
, and the corresponding fire he
brings to his preaching of reform in the internal and external life of the Church. He
was a highly controversial figure in his own day. His disciples venerated him as a
saint who had returned to the roots of the Christian tradition and personified its
repristinisation. His opponents, who secured his deposition and exile, regarded him
as a dangerously unbalanced incompetent who, by overstressing the value of
personal religious fervour, had endangered the stability of that tradition. The Vita
which we possess was composed in 1054, in an attempt to rehabilitate Symeon’s
memory and prepare for the return of his relics to the capital from which he had been
expelled when alive. This paper will investigate how he himself understood and
appropriated aspects of the earlier tradition ( particularly monastic spirituality )
hoping to elucidate why he felt himself inspired to reformist zeal, and why many of
his contemporaries ( not simply his 'worldly opponents' as his hagiographer would
have us believe ) regarded him as unbalanced. It will end by attempting some
reflection on what the controversy reveals on the larger front about how the Church
'selectively looks back on itself' , so to paraphrase our president's description of the
conference theme, and whether the model of tradition and its reception exemplified
in this Byzantine writer can offer anything to the dialogue between history and

Symeon's own writings show that he is high in the company of the finest Byzantine poets. Symeon Eulabes of the Studium monastery . a member of a highly placed aristocratic family. As the light accustomed his eyes to its radiance. thus effecting. and the child's education was briefly interrupted. Symeon experienced an extraordinary vision of a brilliant light. the reconciliation he was longing for. Twenty seven years after the event. and the second was the divine presence to whom his spiritual father had presented him. the year of another bloody palace revolution. It was possibly at this time that he first came to a monastery for protection and met the monk who. after the death of Romanos II. We learn that in 969. but at least that his inner consciousness was more acutely aware of his failings. It is. hinting that his behaviour even deteriorated into greater dissoluteness. but this is merely one of the many topoi of hagiography with which Nicetas obscures important historical details in his subject's Vita . when Symeon was again well placed in the society of the Imperial court. of course. Symeon tells us that a decisive event happened shortly afterwards which made him realise that it was none other than Symeon Eulabes who was the 'living saint in the present generation' whom he had been anxiously and urgently seeking to effect his reconciliation. Symeon was born around 949 3 . At eleven years of age he was sent to Constantinople for his education. and this . Symeon explained that the first light was the presence of his spiritual father. At the time. In 963. he consulted the elder who gave him spiritual books to read. His biographer. a palace revolution brought down Symeon's uncle and patron. and recommended a small rule of prayer. something of a topos in Byzantine literature to lament one's former sins. In 969. while interpreting it for the benefit of his own monks. in later years. as it were. the vision of 969 did not seem to alter much his actual behaviour. he realised that behind and beyond it there stood a yet greater light. was to become his spiritual father. but the point is here genuinely meant by Symeon . however.theology which the doctrine of Tradition (Paradosis) inevitably initiates. and the young Symeon continued at court. Nicetas Stethatos. particularly the Spiritual Law of Mark the Hermit. in a constant attempt to reduce every element of conflict Page 2 2 from a life that had more than its fair share of it.not necessarily that he was any more corrupt than most in that period or social condition. The political upheavals soon settled down. Details of the Life. bursting in on him ecstatically as he was saying his prayers in his chamber. portrays him as 'agrammatos'. well capable of elegant Greek even though he normally prefers a simple and direct style.

Within the year of his entrance to Studium. The visions had the effect of elevating. despite appearances to the contrary. Shortly after joining his spiritual father at the Studium. and it marks his definitive abandonment of politics and entry to the monastic state. on the occasion of yet another coup d'état. if one was not sure. his basic assurance of Page 3 3 direct revealed experience as the primary and only sure way of the theologian. and thus the main gate to the interpretation and transmission of the tradition. in 979-980. not only testifies to his reformist zeal. then the answer was simply that one had not . but also to the fact that he was acting as second founder of the site . and suffice for now to translate that as meaning that for him there could be no authentic Christianity without corresponding affectivity. or perceived sensibility of the divine grace. and secondly the central importance of 'tears' in the spiritual life. as a Christian. This was the time of Symeon's second vision of the light. he was appointeded as Higumen there. This rapid elevation. From this time onwards.anguished need for reconciliation prepared him for the real conversion experience that occurred seven years later. for Symeon. the ultimate canon of Christian authenticity. he had left for the smaller monastery of St. versions in Symeon's own writings 4 . For Symeon. the assurance of inner experience becomes. firstly the doctrine of the primacy of the spiritual father and his all-encompassing role as mediator ( paradoxically) of the direct experience of God to the disciple. in 976. and different. Symeon tried to form the monks. Both doctrines protected and encapsulated in the strongest form. in his arraignment of 1003. This explains why both aspects of his doctrine involved him almost immediately in major controversies. In the latter. This uncompromising doctrine of the priority of experience. and therefore was not a Christian at all. Mamas by the Xerokerkos gate. many of whom . As soon as he was established as Higumen. an aristocrat capable of calling upon substantial resources for the renovation of his new 'household'. he witnessed the light again. and equally rapid refurbishment of the site that followed. whether one had experienced the divine presence. Symeon emerges as one of the great expositors of the Greek patristic doctrine of Penthos. almost as two supreme principles of his thought thereafter. and Symeon sets out his belief most consistently in the letter he addressed to the Synkellos on that occasion 5 . was the main cause at issue in his conflict with the patriarchal theologian Stephen of Nicomedia. and within three years. The remarkable accounts of these visions ( more seemed to have followed ) are contained in several separate.

without necessarily involving him in any real biblical study. In 1009 he was exiled from the capital to Chrysopolis ( Paloukiton ) where he regathered a small community. or access to. when he became a monk. but thirty was a sizeable number for the time. and Gregory was not only the ultimate authority of the day. and the role the re-interpretation of the past plays in the process of ecclesial reform or renewal ? Reform in Search of a Precedent. In 995. but even the common text used in the grammatical schools of the capital. and yet. The scriptures are Symeon's most significant external source. The hagiographer suggests it was a small group of disaffected worldings. Here I would like to consider two representative issues from the narrative : firstly. So much for the bare history. inquiring into his trinitarian orthodoxy in a process designed to show up his lack of formal theological training. Everyone knew Gregory. Symeon's writings betray very little direct textual influences at all. and it is clear that regular hearing of the texts in a liturgically atomistic way was responsible for this familiarity he has which can allow him such a scriptural style. the patriarchal court instigated another process of investigation. as part of a campaign aimed at discrediting and impugning the honour of Symeon himself. In 1005 he was deposed from office and placed under house arrest in his own monastery. we are told that no less than thirty monks openly revolted against him. sometime between 995-998. James. to confuse St. Of the six instances two are merely . It is easier to fall back on the primacy of experiential knowledge when one is not too encumbered with textuality. He is able. he had little experience of. in this pattern of spirituality based upon his inner sensibility. What does it reveal for us about the issue of the appropriation of tradition. and in 1003 a formal trial was initiated against him. for example.had many years experience. with considerable vigour. and continued in that office for many years. and where he died in 1022. The only common explicit citation of author Symeon makes is to Gregory the Theologian (Nazianzen). These he applies in a widely spread carpet of allusions. undoubtedly the majority of the community. as Holl has noted 6 . within a few years of his monastic profession he was engaged in the teaching office of Higumen. and secondly what this model of envisaging the working of Christian tradition suggests in the light of our contemporary concerns about historical relativism. While he did form an inner circle of disciples. one observes that he is only mentioned six times in over three hundred pages of the English text of the Catechetical Discourses. Symeon's prior history as a dilettante aristocrat explains easily enough why. the written Christian tradition. Symeon's own manner of appropriating the tradition as he perceived it. Symeon's liturgical cult of his spiritual father was forbidden . Paul and St. Within a few years of this unsuccessful revolt. But although Gregory is the most commonly cited source.

and rendered it 'personalist' in a particularly intense manner. therefore. non-textual. The really important fund of Symeon’s ascetical knowledge. except that now. the dictum of the Theologian which Symeon has taken most to heart is that resonant Praescriptio Haeretoricorum from the . comes to the same point. His use of Gregory Nazianzen and his other patristic authorities. are ultimately subsumed to make two great points : the primacy of the experience of grace in the life of a Christian. the works ( both written and preached ) of his father Symeon Eulabes 11 . he is offering the selfsame paradigm. has internalised the tradition to an extraordinary degree. while the fourth applies him in a most uncharacteristic manner to press home the point of the necessity for tears 9 : all in all a most idiosyncratic employment 10 .a demand that resulted in the revolt of many of his monks who felt this was to go far beyond the normal traditions of monastic obedience to the Higumen. and the critical importance of the spiritual father in its actual mediation in the daily life of the Church 12 . to be spiritual father in his own turn to the monks of St. Symeon. Even when he is making conscious reference to his own experience. three consist of sentences using Gregory to argue that experiential perception is the goal of theology 8 . is suggested to be a common and shared inner experience rather than a body of agreed external data. The authentic tradition of Christianity . needless to say. Mamas. as Higumen. Of all that he has read.Page 4 4 symbolic. All his sources. even his own accounts of the visions of light he himself enjoyed. is . and the authority for much of what he teaches. He is demanding from them the same extraordinary degree of discipleship that characterises that particular relationship of obedience to the living saint . In other words. he is claiming by virtue of the experience mediated to him. in short. allusions 7 and of the other four. he is implicitly offering that experience as proof of his right to stand as successor to the spiritual father.

This work. We may remember that he singled out Mark as one of the texts he could cite by name. now an abbot. needless to say. It also has to be contextualised by remembering that Gregory was one of the most learned men of his age. for Symeon it was something else again.beginning of the Five Theological Orations 13 . only to those who have experienced the purification of divine grace and can thereby advance in the divine initiation. in his Letter to the Synkellos Stephen 14 . This elevation of the affective perception of grace over the logical strictures of doctrine was. the Spiritual Law is a collection of traditional fifth century monastic apophthegms : a no-nonsense advocacy of regular observance of the ascetical life. When Symeon. the result could only be a radical sharpening of the contrast in the overall theological picture. propounded in the fourth century by Gregory in the course of a precise apologetical argument with Neo-Arian logicians 15 . For Gregory. for he says that of those Page 5 5 few axioms of the book which he had 'fixed in his heart' the chief one was the . In the latter case. This he appeals to in the time of his trial. to set up such a prescriptive canon was one thing . is another example of the same process at work. and indeed the influential book that had been given to him by his spiritual father. refers back to the impact this work had on him as a young man. who was among other things a devotee of Sappho. he goes on to offer three citations from it that are actually from its companion volume On those who think they can be justified by works 17 .) The summative citation Symeon chooses is illuminating. to the end that it is not everyone to whom the gift and right of theologising has been given. he reduces the whole argument to a synonym of his elder's doctrine of spiritual affectivity. one who believed that literary and philosophic culture were fundamentally necessary preparations for that very 'purification of the mind' which alone admitted the vision of God. and a much less universalist outlook. but Photius at least was able to cite them as distinct works. (Admittedly the treatises were always closely paired. While he mentions the 'Spiritual Law' 16 . Symeon's treatment of the text of Mark the Hermit. with a far more limited base of operation.

Symeon. for the work was originally designed as a repudiation of the basic principle of the Messalians against whom Mark was writing. however cursory. but they barely touched on their spiritual activity except as reflected in such activities. the emphasis in this 'desert literature' is on asceticism and regularity of praxis as the witness of true sanctity. and goes on to demonstrate how these two illustrate his thesis that asceticism is only meant to be a prelude to the experience of the vision of Christ . Symeon begins by offering an intimate and essentialist interpretation of the monasticism of the ancients : 'Do you wish to hear what our holy fathers did when they stayed in their cells ?' 20 But then. now an abbot of about seventeen years standing. the standard catechetical reading of eastern monasteries. a fairly obvious implicit claim to be the very 'equal of the saints of old' himself. and first learn of their outward activities. exactly the claim he is deconstructing in regard to his antagonists. here reviews and summarises the meaning of the whole prior monastic tradition. for centuries. He takes the examples of Antony and Arsenius. almost from any source one might care to choose. As is evident from any reading. Those who wrote the lives of the saints described their outward activities . Now this is an extraordinary exegesis of the whole. The literature remained . in another bold hermeneutic he dismisses the whole ascetical literature as merely a preliminary to something far greater. as master. the greatest masters.. The section deserves close study for it is clearly an attack on his opponents within the community. an attack on the ascetics of his community who preferred the rhythmn of this traditional asceticism to the charismatic nature of Symeon's appeal to inner light. and that without the experiential vision there is no gain in the monastic life. the secrets of this inner life is . namely that one could most certainly not rely on internal mystical experience as a canon of grace 19 .' Symeon's claim to be able to open up. of the lives of the early monks. We may not be too far off the mark if we recognise behind Symeon's rebuke in the text to 'those who look on themselves as equals of the saints of old'. Our final example of his manner of thus 'sharpening the contrasts' is provided by the interesting section in the sixth Catechetical Discourse . His exegesis of Antony's labours describes . and then I will tell you about the spiritual activities in which they were engaged.. an external reality that hardly touches what is really going on within : 'Read their lives. then. of course.doctrine that internal spiritual conscience was the primary guide to truth 18 .

to be supplied by Symeon from a generic scriptural passage 21 for there is certainly no literary tradition that gives such an occurrence any prominence. since no extant writing by this father seems to mention this. all is reduced to the point of seeing and experiencing. since that spiritual father proved by his experience that he was the equal in this generation of those great saints of old. he was filled with joy and said . “Lord.so that he could experience and see the very thing that Antony the Great was given to see and experience ! Why then is it not recorded that he saw the Lord ? Was he not found worthy to see the Lord on the basis of all these toils ? Far from it ! He too was granted the vision of God. If you want to be sure of this. Similarly with Arsenius.' 23 The 'work in question' never existed ! The point is that Symeon claims to know what Antony and Arsenius experienced in their inmost soul purely by reference to the same experience in his own soul. The ultimate paradigm of tradition becomes that inner experience that is passed on from heart to heart within monasticism as its secret inner life. and thus supersedes them in the order of things by his providential proximity. is synonymous with the greatest of the monastic founders. In Symeon's case his initiation into monasticism is reduced to the single channel of his spiritual father's teaching. the whole tradition comes down to the two Symeons. but this. and is focused to a fine point in their doctrine of spiritual affectivity. de facto .' The account of where and how Antony actually 'saw' the face of Christ needs . go over the Chapters Arsenius himself composed 22 and you will know from them that in truth Page 6 6 he too saw God. The latest editor of Symeon's text adds a kindly footnote at this point : 'The work in question seems to have been lost.how all his struggle fell into insignificance before the vision he enjoyed : 'And when Antony saw this.' Needless to say there is no work of Arsenius that focuses on this. But here even Symeon senses his argument is textually weak: 'Why did Arsenius perform all this asceticism ? . even though the narrator did not make this clear. where were you until now ?”. and had been set free from those sufferings. however. And so. distinct from all external observances. Seeing and experiencing is thus .

and to which not only Symeon appealed. who shone like the sun in the midst of the famous monastery of Studium. than as a serious attempt to prosecute any real doctrinal error. The trial for heterodoxy in 1003. for Symeon. not in the past. then. the patriarchal court wished to temper Symeon's doctrine. that is the unofficial canonisation of his master which was at the heart of most of Symeon's adherence to the principle of the primacy of a theology of inspiration. but this context is fanciful. and clearly taught in the Theological Orations of Gregory Nazianzen which were standards of Byzantine confession. rather the manner in which that inspiration was communicated. and set as the final arbiter. others widened the remit of their understanding of 'inspiration'. to whom the rest of the Discourse is dedicated : 'That most blessed saint in our own generation. This primacy of the present moment in Symeon's theology harmonises with much other Eastern Christian thought on the 'Tradition' (Paradosis) that regards it as a living and dynamic reality in ways quite distinct from the terms of argument employed in Western (Catholic and Protestant) apologetics on the subject 25 . for the only canon of the authentic tradition must . Sabas. One notices the startling originality of the premise. Symeon Eulabes. as the structure of this sixth Catechetical Discourse makes clear. Tradition is. The point was not whether God’s inspiration was primary or not. and Euthymius serves only to introduce the life of his real paradigm of monastic spirituality 24 . The trial did not turn on the question of icons.' This is the theology of interiority taken to its highest pitch. yet this was the case only because the conditions prevailing in the early eleventh century meant Page 7 . For this reason. and thus makes him out to be an iconodule confessor . then. On this central issue. the very reference to Antony and Arsenius.the measure of all. however. It is easy to see why Symeon caused alarm to his own contemporaries. and it is against this canon that he understands the past to be correctly interpreted ( he means 'authoritatively claimed' ) and by means of this canon that the direction of the future is set. the current authentic experience of grace. was evidently staged more to expose Symeon’s lack of formal theological learning. For the patriarchal synod to refuse permission for the cult was a calculated way of limiting the extent of a doctrine that was otherwise shared by official orthodoxy. the highest measure of the authentic tradition of the Church. exist in the present generation of the Church. His hagiographer reduces the trial to a matter of his defence of the holy icons. not denounce it . Symeon took a rigorist experiential view on that. but on the issue of painting an icon of Symeon Eulabes. This is none other than Symeon Eulabes. but also his opponents.

the offer proved the source of immense disagreements. Symeon was still enough of a public theologian to be aware of this. In later centuries. but the most inevitable model of change there can be. Despite his certainty of his rightness. in the same way that he had given it to his mediator Symeon Eulabes. then the experience would indeed open up for his disciples in their own turn. that his hermeneutic was the sole correct one. is not always enough to control the transmission of tradition which. to doubting the very validity of the experience itself which was out of the question. Conclusions. lay in his efforts to convince others who had not shared that experience directly. and where the problems of historical relativism have only become more acute since Newman's day. and also invites scepticism as to Newman's presumption that growth led to maturity . and so his attempts to argue how such a canon of experience can become 'normative' have an abiding interest for those who wish to consider the nature of the reception and the transmission of Christian tradition across the ages : an issue which has come to trouble the contemporary Church acutely in an age where the very principle of such Paradosis has come to be doubted. To doubt his analysis of Christianity would be tantamount. and then go on to sketch out some general thoughts on what relevance this theological model of reception may continue to have. As a conclusion to this all too rapid review. claimed nothing like this. Symeon. of course. for claims of authenticity are never far removed from claims to authority. of course. Newman famously wrestled with the problem in his image of the 'development' of tradition in terms of organic and homogeneous growth. by definition. He believed that if obedience was given to him as spiritual father. raises the issue of growth not simply being progress. and his role as teacher and leader . and held to it firmly within a total society. Symeon's intense and remarkable experiences provided him with the unquestioned certainty of his rightness. for it can equally be seen to lead to senility and decay. and ultimately revolt. if pushed. such important divergence could not have been so readily atoned by an implicitly agreed ecumenicity. I would like to consider some of the implications of Symeon's style of appropriating the prior tradition on the basis of inner self-authenticating experience. But even in this limited world of the small monastic community. particularly in the western Church. This is why he offers such a doctrine in the context of catechising his own monks. always associated in Christian tradition with the deepest forms of authenticity.7 that all the protagonists accepted the basis of that doctrinal tradition already established ( in the most precise of manners) as oecumenical orthodoxy. His model of the reception of the tradition presumed that elect elements of his generation had . But that analogy. of course. His problem. for him. has to be common in a way that affective experience cannot hope to be. Inner spiritual experience.

There is much in this that is a salutary correction to notions of the reception of tradition that take their beginning purely in the logical and demonstrable order of textuality or historiography The weakness of Symeon's model is usually argued to be in its nonspecific nature : its unwillingness or inability to cite historical chapter and verse. These things can always be deduced. To support his notion he evoked the image of the Church as a 'Golden Chain' 26 : the number of living saints in each generation that connected the present reality of Church to its past. his model remains instructive. by direct personal intervention. and far from being hopelessly 'personalist' as may at first appear. was not necessarily de-textualised. measured. for all his revolutionary-sounding phrases is. This is. This is a very old evangelical maxim to do with fruits 27 . the standard Studite observance of most monastic houses in Constantinople in his time . after all what Symeon himself taught. and rooted in the notions of communion and initiation. In the first place the essential character of inner experiences is not hopelessly personalist. whose experience had to be paradigmatic precisely because such initiations into the authentic Christian experience could only be delivered . that same 'vision' and 'experience' that had motivated the earlier generations of fathers : the semper idem of the Risen Christ. and this on two grounds. and the charismatic committment to radical discipleship was allied with a clear programme of monastic observance which. therefore. who represented authentic Christianity and by virtue of that experience were compelled to initiate others into that experience.been allowed to appropriate the 'selfsame' reality. one may rightly be more worried by the potential effects in the church of the unquestioningly certain 'visionary' than the stable tedium of the 'safe pair of hands'. His insistence on the total priority of the visionary goal. The transmission and reception . Indeed. for Symeon. Although he did not argue the case textually. and assessed from the external signs of the caused effects. But even so. or passed on. he was citing Symeon Page 8 8 Eulabes and himself as the latest two links in the system. His ecclesiology was thus mystical. and indeed might have had great difficulty in attempting so to do. to all intents and purposes. such a critique of Symeon's model qualifies rather than invalidates it . In the concrete instance. To this extent a mystical ecclesiology or a visionary concept of tradition such as that exemplified by Symeon can indeed be grounded in praxis and measured by visible canons. but it was capable of being effected by personal communion alone. These elect few were the ones.

(45) (Rome. 1928). Hausherr in his monograph : 'Un grand mystique byzantin. (New York. Vie de Syméon le Nouveau Théologien par Nicétas Stethatos. John Anthony McGuckin. Hymns of Divine Love. Symeon The New Theologian : The Catechetical Discourses. 1980) [ hereafter Cat] . The University of Leeds. celebrates the priority of the personal over the institutional : a fundamental ordering of verities which Christianity has ever neglected to its peril. 3 The chronology was established by I. was that this was not the primary issue .28 . The . Secondly. ( New Jersey. in this theology of tradition. From Antiquity to the present day. For him it was only in the quality of the life of the present that there could be given any true recognition of the church's spiritual communion with its past. that is the notion of the reception and transmission of Tradition ( Paradosis). the Church has shown anxiety over the question how it should understand and pass on its essential life from generation to generation in all the vicissitudes of history.' Orientalia Christiana.rather. C De Cantazaro (tr. the Church's problem was how vitally it celebrates that life in each and every present generation. 1982. P. This is an interesting an fertile theology of tradition. In a recent paper I have argued that further political and external correspondences to those Hausherr had first noted add extra support to his basic schema.) St. Symeon's point. such a view of Christian tradition. but looks to the present to demonstrate its communion with the past. his model deserves consideration because. 1975) . its reception and transmission. ( Kalamazoo. NOTES TO THE TEXT 1 There are now several English versions of selected works : G Maloney. 12. one that does not so much look to the past to prove continuity with the present. Symeon The New Theologian The Practical and Theological Chapters and the Three Theological Discourses. 2 Considered here only from the ecclesiological viewpoint. [hereafter 'Vie' ]. and 1985). McGuckin. for all its obscurities.

LXV. 36 ( Eucharistic Prayer 2 ). my 'Symeon the New Theologian and Byzantine Monasticism'. Ethical Discourse 5. 13. Cat. Orat 27. 7 Cat. 8 Cat. in . 11 De omvang van de schuldenlast is het meest recent uiteengezet door H. (Oxford D.late Prof. PG 36. Cantazaro. 12 cf. 29.2. p. University of Birmingham. 22. (Leipzig.5. Mount Athos and Byzantine Monasticism. 16 .22. 1996 ) [ Papers of the 28th Symposium of Byzantine Studies. pp lxiii . 4. fn. p.13. 5. Cat. Cantazaro p. 5 . K. Simeon de Nieuwe Theoloog en geestelijk vaderschap. HJM Turner. but this seems to me unconvincing . locating events seven years later . Bryer (ed) . 37-8. 306. 9 Cat. pp.16. 248. Cat. Cantazaro. and gives undue weight to the hagiographer. 35 (Eucharistic Prayer 1). Nicetas . Holl. 310. Cf. 313-14. 10 Met name in het licht van wat Hausherr te zeggen heeft over zijn afhankelijkheid: 'Un des rares Auteurs qu'il parait avoir lus. esp. 3. Phil.15. Christou has argued an alternative scheme. p. St. 'Vie'. Cantazaro. Cat. 1990) 13 Oraties 27-31. Cantazaro. Cantazaro.6. ' 'Vie'. 6 cf.3. p. Thesis van 1995) 'St. 4 cf.who is much Page 9 9 confused in his narrative generally. Hausherr. Cat. 88. A.1994 ]. 107. p. (Leiden. en 1969) pp. 14 . 28. 29. Alfeyev. 2. Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt beim Griechischen Mönchtum. Simeon de Nieuwe Theoloog en orthodoxe traditie '. 1898. (London. saint Grégoire de Nazianze.

' 20 Cat. 17 PG 65. maar het is waarschijnlijker dat hij betekent dat de Kephalaia of spreuken. de identificatie van genade met de mystieke ervaring. cols. 120. 1975) vol. 16 PG 65. in de Apophthegmata. cols. 6. en als zodanig waren standaard elementen van het monastieke Lore. pp lxiii -. Symeon zou kunnen betekenen dat de Doctrina et Exhortatio (PG 66.244. vaste hij in zijn hart. 119. LXV. p.De tekst wordt gegeven in Hausherr. 22 Veel van de uitspraken van Arsenius (een zeer beschaafde en leerde docent aan het hof voordat hij de woestijn bij Scete ingevoerd) zijn te vinden in de Apophthegmata Patrum. 'Vie'.1.2. en je zal de winst te vinden. bedraagt 84 vers met slechts 30 met het onderwerp in de hand.22. '' Cat. 23 . De eerste was is degene die als volgt luidt: "Als je genezing te zoeken. 3. 2. als ik het zo mag zeggen. het antwoord. Doe wat het zegt. als Hausherr notities. 21 1 Peter. Cantazaro p. Cantazaro p. 1617-1622).9. cols. Cantazaro p. waren er slechts drie die. en het resterende gedeelte is met het uitgangspunt dat alleen de ingewijde kan een theoloog zijn. cf Cat. De specifieke quaestio gegeven aan Simeon met betrekking tot de orthodoxie van zijn Trinitarian denken. 19 J Quasten. 6. 506: 'In ieder geval de auteur komt hier in de Open tegen de Messalianen hun basisprincipe energetisch verwerpen. (3 vols. 15 Het was juist bedoeld om de logische propositionalism van de extreme Arian de school aan te vallen van Aetius en Eunomius. 905-930. 18 'Terwijl hij afgeleid profiteren van al zijn passages. patrologie. nemen gehoor geven aan uw geweten.2. Utrecht. 929-966.

. Het is typisch 'Studiet' karakter.121. 120-22. 26. 1. 1982 (1995). Simeon zet zijn Typikon van de dagelijkse vieringen van het St. bijbel. blz. 26 cf. 28 In Cat. Cantazaro pp. Cantazaro pp. Derde Theologische hoofdstukken (3. kerk en Traditie Een Oosters-orthodoxe View. Simeon de Nieuwe Theoloog. Mass. Mamas gemeenschap. 15-20 juli. 72-3.). McGuckin. Florovsky. 274-83. (Belmont. 25 Voor een nadere uitwerking van het argument te zien G.4. 6. 24 Cat. 1975). en volledig onopvallend en bezwaarlijk voor zover zijn gemeenschap zou betrokken zijn. p. 2-4. 27 Mt. fn.Cantazaro.