To Be Transformed by a Vision of Uncreated Light:
A Survey on the Influence of the Existential Spirituality of Hesychasm on Eastern Orthodox History
(Part 2)
The Spread of Hesychasm in the 14th and 15th Centuries: The Russian Experience
While the hesychastic controversy was playing itself out within the Byzantine Empire, the aforementioned St. Gregory of Sinai continued to disseminate hesychastic spirituality outside the confines of Byzantium. After leaving Athos in 1325 because of Turkish raids, the Sinaite wandered around the Byzantine Empire with his disciples before finally settling in the wilderness of Paroria in 1335. Located on the border of the Byzantine Empire and Bulgaria, Gregory lived under the patronage of John Alexander, the Tsar of Bulgaria, teaching hesychastic spirituality to those who surrounded him. Greeks were numbered as his disciples, though mainly Bulgarians and Serbs came under his direction. This settlement "served as a link between the Greek and the Slav worlds," and can be given some credit for creating a renaissance of hesychasm within the Slavic world. As Kallistos Ware asserts, it was monks from Paroria, and their immediate disciples, who were responsible for a revival of hesychasm within Slavic monasteries in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.[57] Added to the efforts of Gregory, hesychastic Patriarchs of Constantinople - like Kallistos (ruled 1350-54; 1355-63), Philotheus (1354-5; 1364-76), and Ignatius Xanthopoulos (1397), endeavoured to spread the movement throughout Slavic lands.[58] Their efforts were successful. While translations of Greek works into Slavonic had occurred since the time of the missionary efforts of St. Cyril and St. Methodius in the ninth century, the fourteenth century witnessed a flurry of translating activity amongst the Balkan Slavs, particularly amongst Bulgarian and Serbian monks.[59] This new activity came as a direct result of the hesychastic renaissance, and entire works connected with the hesychastic movement were translated from Greek into Slavonic. These translations included the works of contemporary hesychasts such as Gregory of Sinai, Gregory Palamas, Nicholas Kabasilas, (c. 1320-1391), Patriarch Kallistos, and Patriarch Ignatius Xanthopoulos. Likewise, ascetic Church Fathers important to the hesychastic movement were translated into Slavonic; these included Isaac the Syrian, a seventh century monk who wrote on the ecstatic experiences possible through prayer, as well as St. John Climacus, St. Symeon the New Theologian, among others.[60] Added to this revival of translation, many Russian monks acted as copyists and translators in Greek monasteries in Constantinople and Mount Athos.[61] The end result was the heretofore-unseen proliferation of patristic sources made available to Russian Christianity through Russian monks and pilgrims who transported manuscripts back to Russia from Byzantium. Whereas only two ascetic Fathers were available in Kievan Russia (St. Basil the Great and St. John Climacus), a great wealth of patristic literature became available to Russians in the fourteenth century. Therefore, it is not surprising that this renaissance of translating activity caused by the revival of hesychasm coincided with a revival of monasticism within Russia.
By the fourteenth century, monasticism in Russia was in great need of some sort of renewal. The thirteenth century witnessed to the cataclysmic invasion of Mongol forces onto Russian soil, whereby many monasteries were destroyed and communication with Byzantium was greatly diminished. After more than a century of Mongol oppression, Russian monasticism found itself with very few examples of spiritual greatness. George Fedotov described the situation as follows:
The first century of Mongol yoke not only led to the destruction of the life of the state and the culture of ancient Russia, but it also suffocated the spiritual life for a long time...The material distress and the length of the struggle for life were so great that general degradation was the natural result of it. After more than a century, the Russian Church had no more new holy monks.[62]
It was out of such an atmosphere that "the renewer of monasticism in Russia" emerged - St. Sergius of Radonezh (1315-1392).[63] St. Sergius' life was lived contemporaneously with the revival of hesychasm occurring throughout much of the Christian East. However, he began his monastic career at a time when Russian monasticism had yet to reap the benefits of this renaissance which had revived monasteries and the spiritual life in other Orthodox lands. Nevertheless, even as a young man Sergius read the Scriptures, liturgical works, and Church Fathers which were all available at the Rostov library where he spent much of his youth. His reading inspired within him a desire for monastic life, and at the age of 23, Sergius left the world to live the eremitic life; an uncharacteristic decision given that cenobitism was the predominant form of monastic life within Russia. At the same time, it was a decision which was monumentally significant for the renewal of Russian monasticism. Whereas the monasteries of Kievan Russia were generally cenobitic monasteries in urban areas, Sergius led the movement which brought the "monasticism of the desert" to fourteenth century Russia, specifically to the northern forests of Russia around the Volga River known as the Northern Thebaid.[64] Corresponding to this movement into the Russian 'desert' was the first emergence of mysticism within Russian monasticism; a development which was very much connected to the flowering of hesychasm in the rest of the Orthodox world, making its way on to Russian soil.
While Sergius became a hermit to escape the world, the world inevitably came to him. As has been the case throughout Christian monastic history, holy men and women have attracted disciples who wished to learn from them. Such was the case with Sergius. After two years of living in solitude, Sergius was approached by monks wanting to emulate his asceticism and learn from him. The end result was the foundation of Holy Trinity Monastery; a monastic community which was loosely organised as a skete, a small monastic village with individual huts located around a central church, though it eventually converted to a cenobitic community at the urging of the Patriarch of Constantinople.
Of crucial importance to this study is the emergence of mysticism, and mystical experiences, in Russia connected with St. Sergius. Epiphanius the Wise, Sergius' biographer, described one of Sergius' mystical experiences:
One day the saint [Sergius], in accordance with his usual rule, was keeping vigil and praying for the brotherhood late at night when he heard a voice calling, "Sergius!" He was astonished, and opening the window of the cell he beheld a wondrous vision. A great radiance shone in the heavens, the night sky was illumined by its brilliance, exceeding the light of day.[65]
Such visions of light and fire were characteristic of Sergius' mysticism; the first Russian monk to have such experiences.[66] Can it simply be coincidence that visions of light emerged in Russia at precisely the same time that hesychasm - a spirituality which placed great emphasis on visions of the uncreated light of Tabor - was making inroads onto Russian soil? There is no doubt that Sergius was fully aware of the hesychastic movement. Not only was he in direct contact with two hesychast patriarchs, Kallistos and Philotheus, but a number of his disciples had direct connections with Mount Athos where hesychasm was flowering. For example, two of Sergius disciples, Sergius of Naroma and Athanasius, future abbot of Serpukhov, both came from Mount Athos where they laboured as copyists.[67] A connection between the hesychastic movement and St. Sergius becomes even more obvious upon observing that manuscripts of the writings of prominent hesychasts which date from the fourteenth century have been found in the library of Holy Trinity. Indeed, some of these manuscripts come from the pen of Sergius himself, including copies of the writings of St. Symeon the New Theologian and St. Gregory of Sinai.[68] Given these connections of the St. Sergius and Holy Trinity monastery with the wider hesychast movement, it is clear that the fourteenth century hesychastic renaissance was very influential in the renewal of Russian monastic life.
St. Sergius' influence on Russian monasticism extended far beyond the walls of the Holy Trinity Monastery. Sergius himself founded nine monasteries, and his immediate disciples founded twelve. In the following years after Sergius' death, Holy Trinity founded fifty monasteries, and these fifty monasteries founded forty more. All in all, from the beginning of the fourteenth century until the mid-fifteenth century, 180 new monasteries were founded; most of which were influenced by the example of Sergius.[69] These monasteries continued to foster connections with Mount Athos and with other monasteries in Byzantium and the South Slavic countries, where hesychasm continued to flourish in the fifteenth century despite the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453.
In the latter half of the fifteenth century, this connection with the spirituality of Mount Athos was strengthened through the efforts of St. Nil Sorskij (1433-1508).[70] Led to the monastic life through the influence of the "ascetical tone of the current literature of his day," Nil was tonsured at Kirillo-Belozerskij monastery in the Northwest of Russia.[71] While there, he came under the spiritual direction of Paisij Jaroslavov; a monk imbued with the spirit of Athonite monasticism. Under his tutelage, Nil was exposed to the writings of prominent ascetic Fathers, including St. Nilus of Sinai (d. c. 430), one of the first ascetic writers to refer specifically to the Jesus Prayer,[72] St. Symeon the New Theologian, and significantly, St. Gregory of Sinai.[73] Through this reading under Paisij's direction, Nil was initiated into the practice of inner prayer, and in 1465 he left Russia for Mount Athos and Constantinople in order to immerse himself more completely into this hesychastic spirituality.
Nil's education in Russia was fairly extensive, and gave him a fluent knowledge of Greek. As such, the libraries of Constantinople and Mount Athos furnished Nil with the writings of many ascetic Fathers, and these writings continued to foster Nil's desire to build his spiritual life according to the highest hesychastic ideals.[74] Added to this reading, Nil immersed himself into the spiritual life of Mount Athos under the tutelage of Athonite hesychasts. After spending approximately thirteen years under the guidance of patristic sources and hesychast monks, Nil returned to Russia in 1478 filled with an ardent desire to foster a deeper observance of Athonite spirituality within Russian monasticism. However, upon his return to Kirillo-Belozerskij he noted a marked decrease in the quality of monastic observance. While St. Sergius' renewal of Russian monasticism had produced many monasteries throughout northern Russia, the latter half of the fifteenth century saw a notable decrease in the quality of ascetic life practised within some monasteries. Large benefices were made to monasteries by princes and other landholders with the result that opulence had replaced austerity in certain monastic institutions.[75] Such was the case with Kirillo-Belozerskij. Nil described the situation in the following words: "Nowadays one does not see in the monasteries an observance of the laws of God according to the Holy Writings and the traditions of the Holy Fathers, but rather we act according to our own wills and human ways of thinking."[76] Disgusted with the lack of inner spirituality at Kirillo-Belozerskij in comparison to that of Mount Athos, Nil left for the wilderness to live a life of asceticism and to devote himself to the inner prayer of hesychasm. As was the case when St. Sergius went into the wilderness, Nil's solitude did not last. Instead, he found himself surrounded by monks wanting to be his disciples. It was out of this situation that Nil composed his Ustav or 'Rule' to govern the monastic life of this community. Nil intentionally modelled the monastic life of this community on the monasticism of a skete which was prominent on Mount Athos. Indeed, hesychasm especially flourished in the sketes rather than the ruling cenobitic monasteries on the Holy Mountain in the fifteenth century.[77] Whereas St. Sergius initially founded the Holy Trinity monastery along sketic lines, it was Nil who firmly entrenched the skete as a permanent feature of Russian monasticism.[78]
Of particular importance to this study is the spirituality espoused by Nil in his Ustav. First, Nil's Ustav demonstrates the tremendous influence exerted upon him from his study of the Greek Fathers. In all he quotes thirty-one Fathers, though the writings of Isaac the Syrian, St. John Climacus, St. Symeon the New Theologian, and St. Gregory of Sinai were most often utilised.[79] Given his extensive reliance on patristic sources, his Ustav reads more as a compendium of patristic quotations than a work of originality with the reason being that his purpose was not to provide original conceptions, "but rather to be faithful to the teachings of the Fathers."[80] Second, given the influence of the Fathers on Nil, it is not surprising that he provides a picture of monastic life which has as its supreme goal union with God through mental, or inner prayer. While much of the rule is focused on outward observances of obedience, it is clear that these observances are directed toward fostering contemplation. Of especial importance to Nil was the practice of the Jesus Prayer. He maintained that since Scripture as well as the Fathers exhort ceaseless prayer, the Jesus Prayer was the most advantageous means of obeying this exhortation: "We should endeavor to maintain our mind in silence, remote even from thoughts as may seem legitimate. Let us constantly look into the depths of our heart, saying: 'Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon me."[81] The end goal of this ceaseless prayer is union with God:
For when, by spiritual operation, the soul is drawn to what is divine, and through this ineffable union becomes like God, being illumined in its movements by the light from on high, and when the mind is thus allowed a foretaste of beatitude then it forgets itself and all earthly things and is affected by nothing.[82]
After writing the above, Nil goes on to provide an account of St. Symeon the New Theologian's mystical vision of this uncreated 'light from on high.' Such a reference to Taboric light illustrates the existential focus of Nil's spirituality, largely derived from his encounter with the hesychastic movement through his reading and his experiences on Mount Athos.
This connection between hesychasm and Nil's spirituality played an influential role in the development of Russian monasticism in subsequent centuries. It was noted above that Nil's attempt at monastic renewal came during a period when many monasteries were quite wealthy and ascetic living was on the wane. In answer to this trend, Nil strictly forbade any monastic possessions so as to allow "the renunciation of all care, which means dying to all things" for, in order to attain union with God, the practice of prayer "entails active concentration on the Task of God alone."[83] Such an assertion greatly disturbed St. Joseph Volokolamsk, a monk who stressed that monastic possessions allowed for needed philanthropic work outside the monastery. He wrote:
He who spends church property otherwise than on the poor, beggars, and the prisoners or on essential monastery needs is a sacrilegious person, and he [i.e. Nil] who wants to take away anything that belongs to a monastery is an offender, and the holy regulations curse him.[84]
Georges Florovsky succinctly sums up the key disagreement between the Josephites and the Trans-Volga hermits (as Nil's movement was called): "The former sought to conquer the world by means of social labor within it; the latter attempted to overcome the world through transfiguration and through the formation of a new man, by creating a human personality."[85]
Whereas the Trans-Volga hermits were very much entrenched in patristic heritage, the Josephites "hardly valued Byzantine tradition."[86] However, the 1503 Synod of Moscow decided in favour of the Josephites; a decision which essentially created two very different monastic schools of thought. Josephite monasteries stressed formalism and ritualism over the inner life, and in the process broke any connection with the contemplative emphasis found in contemporary hesychasm.[87] Thus, the weight of carrying Byzantine mystical tradition fell to the shoulders of the Trans-Volga hermits after Nil's death in 1508. Interestingly, many intellectuals could be numbered among the Trans-Volga hermits, in contrast to the Josephites who exhibited a remarkable lack of intellectual life.[88] As such, the task of copying and correcting manuscripts of patristic writings was eagerly undertaken by the Trans-Volga hermits, thus "rendering invaluable service to the literary world of Russia of the 15th and 16th centuries."[89] It is also important to note that the Trans-Volga hermits produced the greatest proportion of canonised saints in Russian in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; a fact which demonstrates the depth of spirituality of these ascetics in comparison to the monks of the Josephite monasteries.[90] In other words, despite the fact that the Josephite position on monastic possession became the official position of the Church, the Trans-Volga hermits acted as guardians of hesychastic mystical theology in Russia, and it was because of their preservation of this mystical theology that hesychasm was able to survive in Russia despite the tumultuous circumstances of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Hesychasm in the 16th and 17th Centuries
Part of the reason why the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries proved to be tumultuous for the hesychastic movement was because of deteriorating conditions within the Byzantine Empire as well as on Mount Athos. It was noted above that the renaissance of hesychasm within fourteenth-century Byzantium occurred at a time when Byzantine civilisation was a fragment of what is once had been. By the mid-fifteenth century, one hundred years after the victory of hesychasm, the Byzantine Empire finally fell to the Turks. On 29 May 1453, the city of Constantinople, the cradle of Byzantine civilisation, came under Muslim control. Initially, under the leadership of the Sultan Mehmet II, the Church fared better than might have been expected; at least on paper. Mehmet saw little reason to actively persecute Orthodox Christians, and indeed saw them as valuable assets to the economy of his empire.[91] Political interests also influenced him to allow the Church to function normally in that a strong Eastern Church preserved a separation from the West, thus preventing the military intervention of any Western Christian country against the Turks.[92]
Needless to say, however, the actual situation for the Orthodox Church under Ottoman rule was greatly inferior to Mehmet's intentions. His successors immediately reneged on many of the rights given to the Church, and ecclesiastical conditions quickly deteriorated. Churches were annexed and turned into mosques, simony became commonplace within the Patriarchate, the laity was heavily taxed, and academies of learning slowly began to disappear as the years wore on.[93] Given that the Patriarchate most often went to the highest bidder, great instability in that office greatly profited Turkish coffers, and led to relative powerlessness on the part of the Patriarch to defend the Church's rights.[94] As a result, when faced with perpetual status as second-class citizens, many Orthodox responded to the proselytising efforts of their Muslim overlords.[95]
Concurrently, the disappearance of educational institutions proved to have a detrimental effect on clergy and laity alike. For those who could afford it, education was to be found in the West; a situation which inevitably led to the conversion of some students to Roman Catholicism, and the westernisation of others who did not. As Kallistos Ware describes this situation: "However great their desire to remain loyal Orthodox, most of them looked at theology to a greater or lesser extent through western spectacles."[96] For those who could not afford to be educated in Western institutions, the situation was bleak. The Patriarchal Academy in Constantinople closed in the early seventeenth century, and no schools existed outside of large towns. Such educational disparity resulted in illiteracy and ignorance among both clergy and laity; a situation noted by an Englishman named Sir Paul Ricaut who made reference to the "Ignorance in their Churches occasioned through Poverty in the Clergy" on his travels in the East in 1678.[97] Indeed, once the words of the liturgy were memorised, a priest's education was generally completed. This decrease in intellectual endeavours among Eastern Christians was coupled with an increase in the influence of Roman Catholic and Protestant missionaries and theology. The extent of this influence is illustrated in the person of Cyril Lucaris, Ecumenical Patriarch from 1620-38. In 1629, he published a treatise on theology which was decidedly Calvinist in its teaching. While this Confession was condemned by the synod in Constantinople in 1638, the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople demonstrated such Western Protestant sympathies illustrates the decree of influence which Western missionaries had on the Eastern Church.[98]
The situation on Mount Athos, the centre of hesychastic spirituality, was somewhat different. Mount Athos was accorded special status by Ottoman sultans in the fifteenth century, meaning that life changed very little on the Holy Mountain during the first years of Ottoman rule. The renaissance of hesychasm in the fourteenth century was still in evidence in the late fifteenth century, as made evident in the influence Mount Athos had on the spirituality of St. Nil Sorskij during his stay from 1465-78. However, despite the continued existence of hesychasm on Athos, the late fifteenth century also brought with it the seeds of deterioration which took root in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The fact that Athos was given protection by the Ottoman Sultans, and that Athos was geographically isolated, meant that the Holy Mountain became a place of refuge in the fifteenth century for those who found themselves in need of respite from the deteriorating conditions in the rest of the Ottoman empire. Consequently, for many seekers survival and preservation of earthly goods replaced the cultivation of heavenly contemplation as the reason for taking the monastic habit.[99] While most of the monks were willing to extend their help in this regard, it is of no surprise that such an action necessarily led to the partial deterioration of spiritual life.
Added to this pressure, the monasteries of Athos faced ever-increasing taxation by their Ottoman protectors; a situation which caused many monasteries to focus their attention on the accumulation of capital to pay off their massive debt, and reinforced the deteriorating spiritual conditions on the Holy Mountain. That this deterioration had occurred by the end of the sixteenth century is evident from the 1574 Typikon of Patriarch Jeremiah II written for the Athonite monks. In this document, the Patriarch elucidates a number of violations of monastic practice occurring on Athos. For instance, monks were distilling and drinking spirits, indulging in "gossip, slander, [and] abuse of their neighbours," allowing women into monasteries, and practising somewhat spurious business activities.[100] While monks devoted to the practice of hesychasm continued within the sketes of Athos, their influence was increasingly diminished.[101] Rampant illiteracy limited the acquisition and copying of books, which subsequently limited the extent to which Athonite monasticism was influenced by the patristic ideals espoused by the hesychastic movement.[102] All in all, hesychastic influence on the Holy Mountain was in a period of decline.
Given that Mount Athos played an invaluable role in disseminating and fostering the existential spirituality of hesychasm throughout Orthodox lands, including Russia, it is not surprising that the influence of hesychasm degenerated within Russian monasticism at the same time as it degenerated on the Holy Mountain. As was the case on Athos, hesychasm did not disappear altogether in Russia. However, the aforementioned victory of the Josephites in 1504 compromised the reliance of Russian monasticism on the mystical theology promulgated by St. Sergius of Radonezh and St. Nil Sorskij. Consequently, outward asceticism replaced contemplation, and excessive formalism and ritualism replaced the Jesus Prayer with the result being a general malaise within and without the monasteries of Russia. This period of hesychastic decline occurred simultaneously with a growing trend towards westernisation within Russia that would reach a fevered pitch in the eighteenth century under the rule of Tsar Peter the Great. The degree to which monasticism in Russia ceased to carry a strong voice in favour of Russian Orthodoxy's Byzantine heritage is illustrated by the increasing Western influence over West Russia's academies and theology. Already by 1591 four Western Russian bishops, all former monks, had placed their allegiance with the bishop of Rome despite the efforts of a monk from the Trans-Volga tradition named Artemii to defend Orthodox tradition.[103] Added to that, Peter Mogila (1596-1647), a monk from Kiev's Monastery of the Caves, produced The Orthodox Confession. While this treatise was intended to be a handbook of Orthodox theology, it was "little more than a compilation or adaptation of Latin material, presented in Latin style."[104] Despite its clear Latin influence, the ecclesiastical hierarchies of both Russia and Constantinople enthusiastically endorsed The Orthodox Confession. Mogila also established the Kievan Academy, which was highly influenced by Western theology, and as the seventeenth century wore on, the Kievan Academy became the model for similar academic institutions throughout the rest of Russia.[105] This trend towards westernisation, when coupled with the fractured state of Russian monasticism, illustrates the degree to which hesychasm had declined in the Russian Church.
Hesychasm in the 18th and 19th Centuries: The Renewal of Mystical Theology
Therefore, the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries initiated a period of darkness for hesychasm in the Eastern Church. The eighteenth century proved to be a period when this trend was reversed, and once again Mount Athos was the setting for another renaissance of hesychasm. Interestingly, this renaissance occurred at a time when European Enlightenment thinking was making inroads onto the Holy Mountain through the person of Eugenios Voulgaris (1716-1806). As was noted above, the Greek Church of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries found itself in somewhat dire straits due to the lack of available educational opportunities. Better educated Protestant and Catholic missionaries had made inroads among the Orthodox faithful, and the incentive to convert to Islam was an ever-present threat. In an effort to strengthen Orthodoxy against the spread of Islam, Protestantism, and Catholicism, Patriarch Cyril V of Constantinople (ruled 1748-51; 1752-54) endeavoured to create an educational academy to foster religious and philosophical learning. Given the position of Mount Athos as a place of refuge from Ottoman rule, Cyril V decided on Vatopedi monastery on Athos as the most favourable location for this academy of learning in 1753, and Eugenios Voulgaris was chosen as the school's chief teacher. Voulgaris was a Greek theologian who had been deeply influenced by the modern writings of Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, and Wolff, as well as the philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus.[106] He had already introduced the study of modern philosophy in some isolated Greek schools in the 1740s, and was eager to do the same on the Holy Mountain.[107] Within five years, the school had grown to over two hundred students, though the rest of Athos viewed the Athonite Academy with great suspicion. Despite the fact that Voulgaris appeared to have some appreciation of hesychast theology[108], many of the monks of Mount Athos felt Voulgaris' teaching to be irreconcilable with Orthodox theology and monastic life. By 1761, the school was finally closed. While moral and spiritual life, as well as intellectual activity on Athos had deteriorated to some degree in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the reaction of the monks to modern philosophical thought illustrates their continued unwillingness to depart from the traditions of the Church. As such, it is not surprising that a movement emerged in the latter half of the eighteenth century which endeavoured to elevate Orthodox tradition once again to a position of prominence.
Therefore, just as in the fourteenth century, two different schools of thought emerged within the Greek Church. Among Greek intellectuals were those who saw rationalistic Western Enlightenment thinking as a means of strengthening the Greek nation to become liberated from Turkish domination. In reaction to this infiltration of Western ideas, a number of monks emphasised that true strength and liberation could only come through a return to the teachings of the Fathers. The Kollyvades, as these monks were known, emerged in the latter eighteenth century, and from the ranks of this movement came two of the most prominent and influential persons in the renaissance of hesychasm on the Holy Mountain and beyond - St. Macarios of Corinth (1731-1805) and St. Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain (1749-1809). The Kollyvades movement developed due to controversies on Athos regarding the performance of memorial services on Sundays, and the issue of frequent communion.[109] Despite the fact that the rules which governed liturgical observance forbade memorial services on Sundays, these rules were ignored within some Athonite monasteries to the disapproval of those Kollyvades monks who insisted on traditional observance. The Kollyvades monks similarly disapproved of the Athonite tradition of infrequent communion.[110] According to one Kollyvades, St. Macarios of Corinth, this practice of infrequent communion violated Scripture, patristic teaching, and the ruling of Church synods which were all in favour of frequent communion. Underlying both of these issues was the desire of the Kollyvades monks to return to the traditional roots of Orthodox Christianity. As such, these monks not only emphasised the importance of traditional liturgical observance, but also the importance of recovering the rich mystical heritage of Eastern Orthodoxy.[111] That this was so is made event in the life of the aforementioned St. Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain. Before becoming a monk on Mount Athos, Nicodemos came into contact with five Kollyvades monks who had been exiled from the Holy Mountain by their opponents - St. Macarios of Corinth, St. Arsenios of Paros, Silvestros of Caesarea, as well as two priest-monks, Gregory and Niphon. Despite the fact that members of the Kollyvades movement were forced off the Holy Mountain, this dispersion resulted in the dissemination of Kollyvades teaching throughout Greece and the Balkans, thus creating something of a renaissance of Orthodox spirituality in these areas.[112] That Nicodemos was so influenced by members of the Kollyvades movement demonstrates the influence which this movement had. These monks introduced Nicodemos to hesychastic spirituality, fostering a desire within Nicodemos to pursue ceaseless prayer and union with God on the Holy Mountain. Finally in 1775 at the age of 26, with the blessing of his spiritual directors, Nicodemos arrived at the monastery of Dionysiou on Athos to cultivate the hesychastic practice of inner prayer.
While on Athos, Nicodemos devoted himself intensely to hesychastic practices, and in so doing, he garnered the respect and admiration of monks and laity alike who came to him for spiritual direction. Gerasimos Micragiannanitis of Athos, a biographer of Nicodemos who based his biography on the testimony of Euthymios, a contemporary of Nicodemos, described Nicodemos' spiritual accomplishments in these words which deserve full quotation:
Through this blessed way of life [Nicodemos] became full of brightness, light and sanctity. From here, like another Moses, he ascended the mountain of the virtues and entered the glorious dawn of spiritual contemplation, and saw, as far as possible for man to see, the invisible God, heard ineffable words, and received the real illumination of grace, immaterial effulgences and inspirations of the Paraclete. He attained to theosis and became blessed and most God-like, an angel with a body, an inspired mystic with heavenly knowledge, a most accurate revealer of the life of the Spirit, conveying and making clear to us through 'the word of grace' its fruits and blessings, of which he was full.[113]
Nicodemos' example of hesychastic spirituality greatly influenced the Holy Mountain. Monks from all over Athos came to him for spiritual direction, and Nicodemos was invited by monks from the monasteries of Athos to stay with them. As such, Nicodemos was a key figure in the renaissance of hesychasm which took place on the Holy Mountain in the eighteenth century.
However, it was his publishing activities which allowed for the renewal of hesychasm throughout the Orthodox world. In 1777, Nicodemos was approached by Macarios of Corinth to complete and edit a collection of writings by various Eastern Fathers from the fourth to the fourteenth century entitled The Philokalia, meaning "love of the beautiful."[114] Having learned ancient Greek and Latin at the Evangeliki school in Smyrna, Nicodemos was more than capable for this task. He found various manuscripts throughout the libraries of Mount Athos, and proceeded to correct the texts philologically through comparison of texts.[115] As well, he provided brief biographies of each Father contained in The Philokalia, and wrote the prologue. In 1782, The Philokalia was published in Venice. While Nicodemos was one of the most productive writers of his time[116], The Philokalia ranks as one of the most important works for the renewal of hesychasm throughout the Orthodox world. Nicodemos' Prologue to The Philokalia illustrates the fact that the renewal of Orthodox mystical theology was foremost in his mind. He describes the compilation in the following words;
This Book is a treasury of inner wakefulness, the safeguard of the mind, the mystical school of mental prayer. This Book is an excellent compendium of practical spiritual science, the unerring guide of contemplation, the Paradise of the Fathers, the golden chain of virtues. This Book is the frequent converse with Jesus, the clarion for recalling Grace, and in a word, the very instrument of theosis.[117]
Interestingly, Nicodemos stresses in his introduction that the works contained in The Philokalia are not meant for monks alone, but also for the benefit of laypeople.
Formerly, many, even of those who lived in the world, both kings themselves and their subjects, and who were daily under the strains of myriads of secular cares and concerns, had one essential work, to pray unceasingly in their heart. Today, as a result of negligence and ignorance, this practice is extremely rare, not only among those living in the world, but even among the monks themselves who live in quiet.[118]
It is clear that Nicodemos' aim was the rejuvenation of hesychasm among Orthodox of all vocations, and he saw such a renewal as the necessary corollary of effectively creating a strong Church to combat the growing westernisation and persecution under Ottoman rule.[119]
Therefore, the latter half of the eighteenth century and the early nineteenth century witnessed the rise of hesychasm once again on the Holy Mountain. The question that must be answered is the degree to which this renaissance affected the rest of the Greek Church. One important means of ascertaining the degree of religious commitment is by examining the neomartyrs who were put to death for their faith. Between 1453-1699, sixty-six Orthodox Christians were martyred by their Muslim overlords. However, between 1700 - 1867, over one hundred Christians were martyred, with fifty-five being put to death between 1800 - 1867 alone. As Demetrios J. Constantelos suggests, the existence of these neomartyrs, whose numbers significantly increased in the late eighteenth and into the mid-nineteenth centuries, "attests to a revival in the Greek Orthodox Church."[120] Indeed, in 1794 Nicodemos himself exhorted all Orthodox Christians to not allow their persecutors to "steal from you the treasure of your holy Faith," telling them that "by having Jesus, you have gained all earthly and heavenly things."[121] Given the sharp rise in the number of martyrs during this period, it appears that Nicodemos' exhortation did not go unheeded.
Finally, this religious awakening among the Greeks provided the necessary foundation for the independence of Greece from Turkish domination.[122] While it cannot be doubted that the increase in secular Enlightenment thinking in Greece played a key role in the final independence of Greece through its emphasis on revolution, the fact remains that the renaissance of hesychasm prevented fewer Orthodox from converting to Islam at a time when extraordinary social and economic pressure to convert was present.[123] One of Nicodemos' key purposes in publishing The Philokalia, as well as his numerous other works, was to create a religious renewal which would strengthen the Church against the inroads being made by Muslims, Protestants, and Catholics. The religious renewal which accompanied his publishing efforts accomplished just that. When revolution broke in 1821, it was largely only Orthodox Christians who joined in the struggle. Those who had converted to Islam, or to Catholicism, did not.[124] As such, it would appear that the renaissance of hesychasm in the eighteenth and nineteenth century led not only to the religious renewal of the Greek Church, but it provided the Church with the necessary strength to finally pursue independence.
This renewal of hesychasm on Mount Athos and throughout Greece also made its way onto Russian soil. However, just as Western Enlightenment thinking inundated the Greek Church in the eighteenth century, eighteenth century Russia likewise found itself in the midst of rampant westernisation due to the influence of Tsar Peter the Great (reigned 1682-1725). Peter the Great viewed Western political and ecclesiastical organisation with envy, and sought to bring such Western ideals to Russia. As such, in 1721 Peter issued The Spiritual Regulation which abolished the office of the Patriarch of Moscow, and put in place a Synod to govern ecclesiastical affairs; such a move was intentionally directed to bring Russian Orthodox administration more in line with that in Protestant countries.[125] Under his rule, ecclesiastical schools were decidedly Western in perspective[126], and monasteries were ordered to cease from studying or copying books.[127] From Peter's pragmatic perspective, monks contributed very little to society, which led Peter to clamp down on the number of new monasteries. As he put it, "[The monks] say pray and everyone prays. What profit does society get from that?"[128] Peter's successors, Anne (reigned 1730-40), Elizabeth (reigned 1741-62), and Catherine II (reigned 1762-96), continued Peter's elevation of Western secularism, and anti-monastic laws appeared. Indeed, while there were 1200 monasteries in 1700, only 452 were in existence in 1800.[129]
Remarkably, despite these anti-monastic policies, eighteenth century Russia witnessed to a renewal of hesychasm which was directly connected to the renewal taking place on Athos at this time. The person most responsible for this renaissance of hesychast spirituality was Paisii Velichkovskii (1722-94).[130] From the age of seventeen, Paisii was filled with an overwhelming desire to enter the monastic life. In 1741, he was tonsured at the Monastery of the Ascension near Kiev, but was forced to leave after the monastery was closed. After spending a brief sojourn at the Kievan Monastery of the Caves, Paisii decided to leave for Moldavia and Wallachia to escape the suppression of monasteries in Russian territory. He made his way to the hermitage of Cirnul, where he learned inner prayer through the example of his fellow monks. Paisii's biographer, Mytrofan, described Paisii's time at Cirnul:
Dwelling there among those true ascetics he cultivated in his heart the keeping of God's commandments and the diligent practice of moral virtues and constant prayer; and shedding many tears he blossomed and shone forth with divine radiance of the mind, which filled his soul with ineffable joy and roused him to longing for spiritual struggles and utter solitude.[131]
Filled with a desire to find a starets, or spiritual director, who could lead him on to further spiritual heights, Paisii left for Mount Athos just as St. Nil Sorsky had done three centuries previously.
Unfortunately, Paisii arrived at Mount Athos before the renaissance of hesychasm under Nicodemos, and he was unable to find an adequate spiritual director. Rather than leaving the Holy Mountain, Paisii decided to live in solitude. While in solitude, Paisii immersed himself in the teachings of the Greek Fathers, and practised the Jesus Prayer. Before too long a number of Russian and Slavic monks approached him to become their spiritual director. Their numbers grew to such a size that they were forced to buy the Cell of Elijah the Prophet where they built cells and a church. Having been educated in Greek, Paisii came to notice certain mistakes in the Slavonic texts of patristic writers. He soon made it a priority to correct these patristic texts, a priority which manifested itself throughout the rest of his life.
In 1763, twelve years before Nicodemos arrived on Athos, Paisii left Athos for Moldavia with sixty monks. His biographer, Mytrofan, describes his reasoning for leaving Athos: "[His desire was to] enlighten with his teaching those who sat in darkness of ignorance and bring them to understanding through the correction and translation anew from the Greek into his own language of the theological books of the fathers."[132] It was this translating activity which proved to influence a great renaissance of monastic life on Russian soil. Near the end of Paisii's life, Nicodemos published The Philokalia. Paisii immediately realised the importance of this collection of ascetic writers for Russian monasticism, and as such he translated The Philokalia into Slavonic in 1793, a mere eleven years after Nicodemos published it in Greek. Calling it Dobrotolubiye, or love of good, Paisii's translation unleashed a great return to contemplative thinking within Russian monasticism. The writings of the ascetic Fathers were once again elevated to a place of prominence, leading to a great revival of hesychasm within the monastic institutions.[133] The popularity and influence of the Dobrotolubiye is illustrated by fact that two more editions were published in the nineteenth century; in 1822 and 1832. Added to his translation of The Philokalia, Paisii also translated the writings of St. Nil Sorsky, thus appealing to a golden age of Russian monasticism as a model for renewal.[134]
Paisii's emphasis on hesychast spirituality had an incredible influence on Russian monasticism, not only through the Dobrotolubiye, but also through the number of his disciples who became superiors and starets in monasteries throughout Russia. The sheer number of monasteries in Russia affected by those who either came under the direction of Paisii, or who came under the direction of one of his disciples is astounding. According to one count, over 107 monasteries in Russia came under the influence of Paisii's teachings.[135] Through the emphasis by these disciples of Paisii on returning to the hesychasm of Mount Athos and St. Nil Sorsky, Russian monasticism witnessed great growth throughout the nineteenth century. While only 452 monasteries existed in 1810, over 800 existed by 1900.[136] Through their work, Paisii's disciples instituted "a great revival of spiritual life" within the monasteries of Russia, where "interest and love for the reading and study of books were aroused."[137] More importantly, the influence of the Dobrotolubiye was not restricted only to the monasteries. Lev Gillet writes; "It was through this collection of texts that not only monks but simple village people became familiar with the Fathers and with the Jesus Prayer."[138]
This revival is best illustrated by taking a brief look at St. Seraphim of Sarov (1759-1833), the Optino starets, as well as the popular book The Way of a Pilgrim (published 1884). Of all monks in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, St. Seraphim most clearly reflected the precepts of hesychasm as embodied in The Philokalia, which he was familiar with. Indeed, Paul Evdokimov refers to St. Seraphim as "an icon of Orthodox spirituality."[139] Seraphim emphasised the importance of the Jesus Prayer, and made it clear that hesychasm was not meant for monks alone, but also for those in the world.[140] His teaching on this matter is illustrated most clearly in a conversation Seraphim had with a layman by the name of Nicholas Motavilov. After hearing Seraphim emphasise the importance of having a vision of God to vouchsafe the filling of the Spirit, Motavilov writes;
"How I long to understand completely!" [Motavilov speaking.]
Then Father Seraphim gripped me firmly by the shoulders and said: "My friend, both of us, at this moment, are in the Holy Spirit, you and I. Why won't you look at me?"
"I can't look at you, Father, because the light flashing from your eyes and face is brighter than the sun and I'm dazzled!"
"Don't be afraid, friend of God, you yourself are shining just like I am; you too are now in the fullness of the grace of the Holy Spirit, otherwise you wouldn't be able to see me as you do."[141]
Seraphim later goes on to state that the existential theology of hesychasm is available to all: "The fact that I am a monk and you are a layman doesn't make any difference."[142]
The fact that laypeople took Seraphim's exhortation to heart is illustrated by the sheer number of seekers who came to him for spiritual direction. It is also illustrated by the number of seekers who went to the starets at Optino for spiritual direction. Optino had a direct connection with Paisii as a disciple of his, Theophanes, settled there in 1800. As well, the first of the celebrated starets, Leonid, was instructed by a disciple of Paisii's at another monastery. Throughout the nineteenth century, three celebrated starets - Leonid (1768-1841), Macarius (1788-1860), and Ambrose (1812-1891) - had an incredible effect on the spiritual lives of the Russian people.[143] Counted among their lay-disciples were the celebrated authors Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Leo Tolstoy, as well as countless other lay-persons from all walks of life. Advocating unceasing prayer and the study of the Fathers, the starets of Optino worked tirelessly to publish patristic writings, including the translations of Paisii, the writings of St. Nil Sorsky, as well as many of the writers to be found in The Philokalia. These translations made their way to academies and seminaries, to bishops, priests, and to other monasteries, thus maximising their influence throughout Russia.[144]
Perhaps no other document reveals the extent of this influence than The Way of a Pilgrim.[145] Written anonymously and published in 1884, the story revolves around a pilgrim who wanders throughout Russia in search of the best means to obey St. Paul's exhortation to 'pray without ceasing' (I Thess. 5.17). Though his travels he is introduced to The Philokalia and the Jesus Prayer. As he wandered throughout Russia studying The Philokalia, the Jesus Prayer slowly began to enter his heart whereby the Prayer formulated itself to the heartbeat of the Pilgrim. In the process, he comes across a number of other people of all walks of life who have come to recognise the importance of practising the Jesus Prayer as a means of achieving union with God. At one point the Pilgrim writes;
What I have, every man can have. All that is necessary is to descend in silence into the depths of one's heart and call on the name of Jesus Christ frequently. In this way one can experience interior light and many things will become clear to him, even the mysteries of the kingdom of God.[146]
Such a statement illustrates a point about The Way of a Pilgrim made by George Fedotov that the hesychast tradition, re-introduced into Russia by Paisii and his disciples, "was not held within the confines of monasteries," but was clearly influential throughout all of Russian society.[147]
This revival of hesychasm within the Russian Orthodox Church continued right up to the time of the Revolution in 1917. Optino's influence continued unabated up to the end of the nineteenth century, and other mystics continued to be influential throughout the nineteenth and into the twentieth centuries. For instance, Father John of Kronstadt (1829-1908), a parish priest, worked towards the spread of hesychastic spirituality through his preaching and writing. His work introduced a new type of 'spiritual priest' intent on focusing on spiritual discipline.[148] More importantly, Theophan the Recluse (1815-1894), a monk at Vyshen, greatly influenced the spread of hesychasm throughout Russia through his translation of the Dobrotolubiye from Slavonic into Russian in 1877, with reprints made in 1883, 1885, 1905, and 1913. Added to this translation activity, his numerous letters of direction to his disciples reveal Theophane's emphasis on hesychasm being accessible to monk and layperson alike:
Nobody can dispense with inner prayer...True, there is spiritual prayer linked with oral or exterior prayer, whether at home or in church, and there is also spiritual prayer, by itself, without any special outward form or bodily posture; but in both cases the essence of the thing is the same. Both forms are obligatory for the layman as well as the monk.[149]
Given the above examples, it is clear that hesychast spirituality, as brought into Russia through Paisii's disciples, was tremendously influential in the revival of an experiential theology both within and outside monastic walls. It enabled much of Russian Orthodoxy to emerge in the nineteenth century from the pressures of westernisation exerted upon it throughout the eighteenth century with a renewed interest in patristics and in hesychast theology.
Hesychasm in the 20th Century: Decline and Renewal
However, despite the fact that the nineteenth century witnessed a great renaissance of hesychasm throughout Orthodox lands, the early twentieth century saw a reversal of this trend on Mount Athos. While the nineteenth century saw great growth in the number of monks on the Holy Mountain largely due to the renaissance of hesychasm in that century, the early twentieth century saw a sharp decline in the number of monks. There are a couple of reasons for this demise. First, the attempts by the Greek government to limit Russian pilgrims after 1913, combined with the 1917 Russian revolution led to a great decrease in the number of monks from Russia.[150] Second, the post-World War II era saw a continuous decline in the number of new postulants from Greece or any other country.[151] With such decline, the population of the Holy Mountain dropped from 7432 in 1920 to 1862 in 1970, and concern was expressed about the continued existence of monasticism on Mount Athos.
However, there is indication that this decline is reversing itself. Coincidentally, this reversal in trends has been linked to yet another renewal in hesychasm on the Holy Mountain. In 1972, the number of monks on Athos increased over the number recorded in 1971; something which had not occurred since 1913.[152] Since that time, the population of Athos has consistently increased. While there were 1146 monks in 1972, there were approximately 1500 monks by 1990.[153] Added to this increase in numbers is the shift in the average age of the monks of Athos. Whereas monks over the age of sixty made up a large proportion of the total population prior to 1972, many more monks under the age forty have taken up residence on the Holy Mountain, and by 1990 these younger monks were in the majority.[154] In large part, this renewal has been caused by the increase in the number of outstanding personalities who have made their way from the sketes on Athos to the cenobitic monasteries to become superiors and spiritual directors.[155] One notable example is that of Fr. Ephraim, a hesychast who left his hermitage to become superior of Philotheou monastery in 1973 when there were only nine monks. Interestingly, by the late 1970s, Philotheou contained over seventy monks with a steady influx of new recruits.[156] Stavronikita monastery was likewise renewed through the presence of hesychast hermits who took up residence in the monastery. In other words, the present renewal of monastic life on Athos is intricately connected to the renewal of hesychasm within the cenobitic monasteries, and the transformation from this renewal has been remarkable. Philip Sherrard describes the current situation on Athos in the following words: "From being a community whose members are old and dwindling, it has become a community with a growing intake and in which one is more conscious of youth than of age...It thrives with vitality."[157]
Interestingly, this renewal of monastic life, and hence hesychasm, has spilled over onto North American soil. This renewal has occurred largely through the work of the aforementioned Father Ephraim, who left the Holy Mountain to foster monastic life among Orthodox Americans. The result has been astounding. Since 1995, Father Ephraim has founded sixteen monasteries in North America, including two in southern Ontario, and the response to these foundations has been phenomenal. A collection of his sayings on the spiritual life, entitled Counsels from the Holy Mountain, have recently been published in English by St. Anthony's Monastery in Arizona, where Ephraim currently lives. Father Ephraim's reputation among those who follow his teachings is summarised by the writer of the prologue to this collection of his sayings. In this prologue, Ephraim is described "a genuine teacher of the spiritual life and a reliable guide for the Christian's journey towards rebirth, since he himself has experienced and learned the divine."[158] The sayings of Ephraim which follow this prologue demonstrate the influence of hesychastic spirituality on Ephraim's teaching:
The Watchful Fathers of the desert teach that through various kinds of ascesis, praxis [practice of the virtues], contemplation, and the moral and spiritual philosophy of watchfulness and prayer, the nous [defined in this book as the energy of the soul] of man is purified, illumined, and perfected, and subsequently it acquires the gift of theology - not academic theology which the theologians in universities possess, but theology proceeding and gushing forth from the divine spring from which the rivers of true, divine theology eternally flow forth.[159]
Through this emphasis on hesychastic spirituality, Father Ephraim has created something of a renewal of monastic and spiritual life within North American Orthodoxy. In a society where materialism and secular thought predominates, the existential spirituality of hesychasm seems to have struck a chord.
Just as the early twentieth century was not favourable to hesychasm in Greece, the situation was likewise unfavourable to hesychasm in Russia during this same period. The renaissance of hesychasm in nineteenth-century Russia has already been noted above. However, the 1917 Russian revolution drastically changed this situation. Almost immediately, the new communist government undertook a program of persecution against monasteries, a fact which can be attested to the sharp decline in the number of monasteries in Russia. Whereas there were between 1000-1500 monasteries in Russia in 1914, only 38 continued to exist in 1941.[160] By 1988, only 21 monasteries still survived.[161] Added to that, many of Russia's brightest thinkers were forced to leave the country.
It is this 'Russian emigration' which has proven to be most beneficial for the spread of Orthodox mystical theology throughout the West. At the time of the Revolution, the Church was still very much in the midst of the spiritual renewal, and this was evidenced by the renaissance of patristic study and translation in the educational institutions.[162] When the revolution forced these scholars to emigrate from Russia, they brought the key features of this patristic renaissance with them. Indeed, key scholars such as Serge Bulgakov (1871-1944), George Fedotov (1886-1951), Vladimir Lossky (1903-58), Alexander Schmemann (1921-83), John Meyendorff (1926-92), and Georges Florovsky began to teach at the Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris, and there made "an impact upon not only Orthodox in the New World but upon other leading Christian groups."[163] These scholars, particularly Georges Florovsky and Vladimir Lossky, sought to bring about a revival of a "living patristic theology" throughout Orthodoxy, and throughout other Christian traditions.[164] In Lossky's own words; "Far from being mutually opposed, theology and mysticism support and complete each other. One is impossible without the other."[165] The existential emphasis of hesychasm is unmistakably present in these words.
The result of this emigration has been the spread of Eastern mysticism throughout the West, even among non-Orthodox Christians. As Lev Gillet wrote, "it is within the Russian emigration that a veritable renaissance of the Jesus Prayer has taken place."[166] The Russian classic, The Way of a Pilgrim, has also been extremely popular in the West, finding followers from all Christian traditions.[167] In response to this renaissance of hesychasm on Western soil, a complete English translation of The Philokalia has been undertaken since 1979. While a previous translation of The Philokalia was in existence since 1951, this translation was based on Theophan the Recluse's Russian translation and only contained about a third of the total material in the Greek Philokalia. The hope of the translators of this earlier volume was that another translation based on the entire Greek version would be made available in the future. As they wrote in the introduction to their translation, "we can only hope that this work [of making a complete translation of The Philokalia] will one day be achieved; it might well be one of the greatest single contributions to the perpetuating in the West what is highest in the Christian tradition."[168] In response to this call, four out of five volumes have now been translated of a complete version of The Philokalia. Added to this publishing activity, The Fellowship of St. Alban and St. Sergius was founded in Britain in 1928 to promote better relations between East and West, and its work has exposed many non-Orthodox to Orthodox spirituality.[169] It would appear that hesychasm has not only rejuvenated the spiritual lives of Orthodox Christians in the West, but it has become a focal point for ecumenical dialogue.
Conclusion: Hesychasm and the Preservation of Orthodox Distinctiveness
The reason why hesychasm has played an important role of rejuvenating Orthodox Christianity throughout the centuries is because of its existential emphasis which is based on patristic teaching. Since its emergence from the deserts of Egypt, Palestine, and Sinai in the fourth century, ascetic Fathers emphasised the necessity of achieving an experiential union with God. While theosis was understood to be the goal of the Christian life from very early on in the Church's tradition, it was these ascetics from the fourth century through to the fourteenth century who developed a spirituality which viewed ceaseless prayer as a tool towards achieving theosis. For these hesychasts, the entire purpose of the Incarnation was to allow for the deification of humanity through a direct experience of God himself, for they believed that through union with God one is transformed to be God-like. As the hesychastic tradition developed, increasing attention was placed upon Jesus' Transfiguration on Mount Tabor. This Transfiguration manifested the uncreated light of the Godhead to those disciples who followed Jesus up Tabor, and it transformed them in the process. St. Gregory Palamas described the Transfiguration this way:
Christ was transfigured, not by the addition of something He was not, nor by a transformation into something He was not, but by the manifestation to His disciples of what He really was. He opened their eyes so that instead of being blind they could see. While He Himself remained the same, they could now see Him as other than He had appeared to them formerly.[170]
According to the hesychasts, it was through a vision of this uncreated light, the pinnacle of mystical experience, that the one is united with God, for through this vision one is transformed "into light," in the words of St. Symeon the New Theologian.
The fourteenth century proved to be very important for the future of this hesychastic movement, as was seen within this paper. Forced by anti-hesychastic humanist intellectuals to defend the orthodoxy of its spirituality, the hesychastic movement under Palamas formulated a theological justification for hesychasm by appealing to the wealth of patristic sources which supported the hesychastic movement's emphasis on union with God while still preserving God's ineffability. His was an argument based on Orthodox tradition, and his writings are inundated by references to past Church Fathers which were used as evidence for the orthodoxy of hesychastic spirituality. Whereas his humanist opponents appealed to Hellenistic rationalism, akin to the theological scholasticism which was gaining ascendance in the West, the hesychasts appealed to the very roots of Orthodox Christianity to prove their case. For the hesychastic movement, theology was not a discipline which could be subjected to the rigours of rationalistic explanation. Rather, the hesychasts emphasised that traditional Orthodox theology was existential; that it was something to be lived and experienced. Salvation was not a matter of intellectual achievement, as Barlaam seemed to imply, but was a matter of participating in God with the totality of one's being - soul and body. In Palamas' mind, to proclaim otherwise implied the rejection of over one thousand years of Church tradition, and would lead to the death of Eastern Christian theological distinctiveness in the face of increasing westernisation.
Thus, the victory of the hesychastic movement in 1351 preserved this distinctive Eastern Christian ethos in the face of mounting pressure by the humanists to adopt a form of Western theological scholasticism. Interestingly, it was the hesychastic movement which continued to preserve this ethos throughout the seven centuries which followed the hesychastic controversy. During this span of time, Eastern Christianity faced the continued onslaught of westernisation, secularisation, persecution, inward divisiveness, as well as proselytising by Muslims, Catholics, and Protestants; all of which threatened the continued preservation of Eastern Christian theological distinctiveness. However, despite these tumultuous times, the hesychastic emphasis on an existential spirituality based on a strong patristic heritage maintained this distinctive Eastern ethos, thus allowing for continued renewal of the Church despite the presence of adverse circumstances.
It is important to note that these periods of renewal all began within the Eastern Church's monastic institutions; a fact which illustrates the prominent place which monasticism has in the East. During times when Eastern Christendom was faced pressure to reject its roots - as was the case in fourteenth-century Byzantium and under the westernising rule of Tsar Peter the Great in Russia - monks within the East's monastic institutions consistently endeavoured to remind the Church of its rich patristic past. Therefore, it is no surprise that the great renewals of hesychastic spirituality which have occurred since the fourteenth century were accompanied by a corresponding proliferation of patristic writings which were made more readily available to the Church at large. Such was the case under St. Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain and Paisii Velichkovskii's renewal of hesychasm, which was accompanied by the compilation and translation of The Philokalia. In both of these cases, great stress was placed on the necessity of returning to the essential roots of Eastern Christianity by reading the Fathers, and by pursuing theosis as was taught within this patristic literature.
Therefore, the most important role which hesychasm has played throughout the history of Orthodoxy, especially since the fourteenth century, has been as a renewal movement which has consistently called Eastern Christianity to respect and give heed to its tradition. While the renewals of hesychasm were centred within the monasteries, the renewal which occurred within these monastic walls spilled out to create a renewal within the Church-at-large. Consequently, the existential spirituality of hesychasm - a spirituality which stressed the importance of experiencing the divine - became widespread throughout Eastern Christendom among monk and layperson alike. It is interesting to observe that the various renewals of hesychasm which have occurred since the fourteenth century, have occurred during times that witnessed to the increase of philosophical ideas most alien to Eastern Christianity. For instance, the eighteenth century renaissance of hesychasm occurred at the same time as European Enlightenment thinking spread onto Orthodox soil. When faced with these threatening forces, the hesychastic movement has consistently compelled Eastern Christianity to maintain its faithfulness to tradition, and it has continued to emphasise an existential theology over and against a theological rationalism. Interestingly, the existential spirituality of hesychasm has met with great acceptance by Christians in the West, both Orthodox and non-Orthodox, who have found within this spirituality a means of seeking after union with God within a society which has become increasingly unfavourable to institutionalised religion. As such, hesychasm continues to be a vital source of spiritual renewal which continues to foster and strengthen Eastern Christianity's ties to its patristic and existential past.
Bibliography
Amand De Mendieta, Emmanuel. Mount Athos: The Garden of the Panaghia. Michael R.Bruce, trans. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1972.
The Art of Prayer: An Orthodox Anthology. Igumen Chariton of Valamo, ed., E. Kadloubovsky and E.M. Palmer, trans. Boston: Faber and Faber, 1966.
Athanasius the Great, Saint. The Life of Antony and the Letter to Marcellinus. Robert C. Gregg, trans. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1980.
Balfour, David. "Was St. Gregory Palamas St. Gregory the Sinaite's Pupil?" St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly. Vol. 28.2, 1984, pp. 115-30.
Bolshakoff, Sergius. Russian Mystics. Kalamazoo, Mich.: Cistercian Publications, 1976.
Cavarnos, Constantine. St. Arsenios of Paros. Vol. 6 in Modern Orthodox Saints. Belmont, Mass: The Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, Inc., 1978.
---. St. Macarios of Corinth. Vol. 2 in Modern Orthodox Saints. Belmont, Mass: The Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, Inc., 1972.
---. St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite. Vol. 3 in Modern Orthodox Saints. Belmont, Mass: The Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, Inc., 1974.
Chetverikov, Sergii. Starets Paisii Velichkkovskii: His Life, Teachings, and Influence on Orthodox Monasticism. Vasily Likwar and Alexander J. Lisenko, trans. Belmont, Mass: Nordland, 1980.
Chitty, Derwas J. The Desert a City: An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian and Palestinian Monasticism under the Christian Empire. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1966.
Constantelos, Demetrios J. "The 'Neomartyrs' as Evidence for Methods and Motives Leading to Conversion and Martyrdom in the Ottoman Empire." Greek Orthodox Theological Review, Vol. 23.3-4, 1978, pp. 216-34.
Evdokimov, Paul. "Saint Seraphim of Sarov: An Icon of Orthodox Spirituality." Ecumenical Review. Vol. 15.3, 1963, pp. 264-278.
Gillet, Lev. The Jesus Prayer. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1997.
Hausherr, Irènèe. The Name of Jesus. Charles Cummings, trans. Kalamazoo, Mich: Cistercian Publications Inc., 1978.
Ephraim, Elder. Counsels from the Holy Mountain. Florence, AZ: St. Anthony's Greek Orthodox Monastery, 1999.
Fedotov, George P. The Russian Religious Mind: The Middle Ages - The 13th to the 15th Centuries. Belmont, Mass.: Nordland Publishing Co., 1975.
Fedotov, George P., ed. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality. Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1969.
The Festal Manaion. Mother Mary and Kallistos Ware, trans. London: Faber and Faber, 1969.
Florovsky, Georges. Aspects of Church History. Vol. IV of The Collected Works of Georges Florovsky. Belmont, Mass: Nordland, 1979.
---. Ways of Russian Theology: Part One. Vol. V of The Collected Works of Georges Florovsky. Richard S. Haugh, ed., Robert L. Nichols, trans. Belmont, Mass: Nordland, 1979.
Frazee, Charles A. The Orthodox Church and Independent Greece: 1821-1852. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1969.
John Climacus, Saint. The Ladder of Divine Ascent. Colm Luibheid and Norman Russell, trans. Toronto: Paulist Press, 1982.
John of Damascus, Saint. "Homily on the Transfiguration of Our Lord Jesus Christ." Greek Orthodox Theological Review. Vol. 32, 1987, pp. 2-29.
Kitromilides, Paschalis M. "Athos and the Enlightenment." Mount Athos and Byzantine Monasticism: Papers from the Twenty-eighth Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Birmingham, March 1994. Anthony Bryer and Mary Cunningham, eds. Brookfield, Vermont: Variorum, 1994, pp. 257-272.
Kovalevsky, Pierre. Saint Sergius and Russian Spirituality. W. Elias Jones, trans. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1976.
Lossky, Nicolas. "The Fruitfulness and Contradictions of the Russian Emigration." The Holy Russian Church and Western Christianity. Giuseppe Alberigo, Oscar Beozzo, and Georgy Zyablitsev, eds. London: SCM Press, 1996.
---. "Theology and Spirituality in the Work of Vladimir Lossky." Ecumenical Review. Vol. 51, 1999, pp. 288-93.
Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1976.
---. The Vision of God. Asheleigh Moorhouse, trans. London: The Faith Press, 1963.
Louth, Andrew. Denys the Areopagite. Wilton, CT: Morehouse-Barlow, 1989.
Macarius, Starets of Optino. Russian Letters of Direction: 1834-1860. Iulia De Beausobre, trans. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1975.
Maloney, George A. A History of Orthodox Theology Since 1453. Belmont, Mass.: Nordland Publishing Co., 1976.
---. The Mystic of Fire and Light: St. Symeon the New Theologian. Denville, New Jersey: Dimension Books, 1975.
---. Russian Hesychasm: The Spirituality of Nil Sorskij. Paris: Mouton, 1973.
Mantzaridis, Georgios I. The Deification of Man: St. Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition. Liadain Sherrard, trans. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1984.
---. "Mount Athos and Today's Society." Greek Orthodox Theological Review. Vol. 26.3, 1981, pp. 225-235.
---. "New Statistical Date Concerning the Monks of Mount Athos." Social Compass. Vol. 22.1, 1975, pp. 97-106.
Maximus Confessor, Saint. Selected Writings. George C. Berthold, trans. Toronto: Paulist Press, 1985.
Meyendorff, John. A Study of Gregory Palamas. George Lawrence, trans. London: The Faith Press, 1964.
---. Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes. New York: Fordham University Press, 1974.
---. Christ in Eastern Christian Thought. Cleveland: Corpus Books, 1969.
---. The Orthodox Church: Its Past and Its Role in the World Today. John Chapin, trans. n.p.: Pantheon, 1962.
---. St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality. Adele Fiske, trans. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1974.
Mytrofan. "The Biography by Mytrofan." The Life of Paisij Velyckovs'kyj. J.M.E. Featherstone, trans. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1989.
Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain, Saint. A Handbook of Spiritual Counsel. Peter A. Chamberas, trans. New York: Paulist Press, 1989.
---. "Nikodemos Hagiorites' Introduction to the New Martyrologion." Nomikos Michael Vaporis, trans. Greek Orthodox Theological Review, Vol. 23.3-4, 1978, pp. 193 215.
Nicol, Donald M. Byzantium: Its Ecclesiastical History and Relations with the Western World. London: Variorum Reprints, 1972, pp. 23-57.
Obolensky, Dimitri. "Russia's Byzantine Heritage." Byzantium and the Slavs: Collected Studies. London: Variorum Reprints, 1971, pp. 87-123.
Ouspensky, Leonid. Theology of the Icon: Volume II. Anthony Gythiel, trans. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1992.
Palamas, Gregory St. "The Declaration of the Holy Mountain in Defence of Those who Devoutly Practise a Life of Stillness." The Philokalia. Vol. IV. G.E.H. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, and Kallistos Ware, trans.& eds. London: Faber and Faber, 1995.
---. The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters. Robert E. Sinkewicz, trans.& ed. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1988.
---. The Triads. John Meyendorff, ed., Nicholas Gendle, trans. Toronto: Paulist Press, 1983.
---. "Homily Thirty-four on the Venerable Transfiguration of Our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ, in which is Substantiated that His Light is Uncreated." Greek Orthodox Theological Review. Volume 33.2, 1988, pp. 157-166.
Palmer, G.E.H., Philip Sherrard, and Kallistos Ware, eds. The Philokalia. Vol. I-IV. London:Faber and Faber, 1979.
Papadopoullos, Theodore H. Studies and documents Relating to the History of the Greek Church and People Under Turkish Domination. New York: AMS Press, 1952.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700). Vol. 4 of The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.
Pseudo-Dionysius. The Complete Works. Colm Luibheid, trans. New York: Paulist Press, 1987.
Pseudo-Macarius. The Fifty Spiritual Homilies and the Great Letter. George A. Maloney, S.J., trans. New York: Paulist Press, 1992
Rogich, Daniel. "Homily 34 of Saint Gregory Palamas." Greek Orthodox Theological Review. Volume 33.2, 1988, pp. 135-156.
Runciman, Steven. The Great Church in Captivity: A Study of the Patriarchate of Constantinople from the Eve of the Turkish Conquest to the Greek War of Independence. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1968.
Sevcenko, Ihor. Society and Intellectual Life in Late Byzantium. London: Variorum Reprints, 1981.
Sherrard, Phillip. Athos: The Holy Mountain. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1982.
---. "Paths of Athos." Eastern Churches Review. Vol. 9.1-2, 1977, pp. 100-7.
Sinkewicz, Robert E. "The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God in the Early Writings of Barlaam the Calabrian." Mediaeval Studies, Vol. 44, 1982, pp. 181-242.
Symeon the New Theologian, Saint. The Discourses. C.J. deCatanzaro, trans. Toronto: Paulist Press, 1980.
Thomson, Francis J. "Slavonic Translations Available in Muscovy: The Cause of Old Russia's Intellectual Silence anda Contributory Factor to Muscovite Cultural Autarky." Christianity and the Eastern Slavs (Vol. 1): Slavic Cultures in the Middle Ages. Boris Gasparov and Olga Raevsky-Hughes, eds. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993, pp. 179-214.
Vaporis, Nomikos Michael. "The Price of Faith: Some Reflections on Nicodemos Hagiorites and His Struggle against Islam, Together with a Translation of the 'Introduction' to his 'New Martyrologion.'" Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 23.3-4, 1978, pp. 185-215.
Velyckovs'kyj, Paisij. "The Autobiography of Paisij Velyckovs'kyj." The Life of Paisij Velyckovs'kyj. J.M.E. Featherstone, trans. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1989.
Vernadsky, George, ed. A Source Book for Russian History from Early Times to 1917. 3 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972.
Ware, Kallistos. 'Act out of Stillness': The Influence of Fourteenth Century Hesychasm on Byzantine and Slav Civilization. Daniel J. Sahas, ed. Toronto: Hellenic Canadian Association of Constantinople, 1995.
---. Eustratios Argenti: A Study of the Greek Church under Turkish Rule. London: Oxford University Press, 1964.
---. "God Hidden and Revealed: The Apophatic Way and the Essence-Energies Distinction." Eastern Churches Review, Vol. 7.2, 1975, pp. 125-36.
---. "The Jesus Prayer in St. Gregory of Sinai." Eastern Churches Review. Vol. 4, 1972, pp. 3-22.
---. "The Origins of the Jesus Prayer: Diadochus, Gaza, Sinai." The Study of Spirituality. Cheslyn Jones, Geoffrey Wainwright, and Edward Yarnold, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
---. "Tradition and Personal Experience in Later Byzantine Theology." Eastern Churches Review. Vol. 3, 1970, pp. 131-41.
---. "Wolves and Monks: Life on the Holy Mountain Today." Sobornost. Vol. 5.2, 1983, pp. 56-68.
The Way of a Pilgrim and The Pilgrim Continues his Way. Helen Bacovcin, trans. Toronto: Image Books, 1978.
Zachariadou, Elizabeth A. "A Safe and Holy Mountain: Early Ottoman Athos." Mount Athos and Byzantine Monasticism: Papers from the Twenty-eighth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Birmingham, March 1994. Anthony Bryer and Mary Cunningham, eds. Brookfield, Vermont: Variorum, 1994, pp. 127-134.
Zander, Valentine. St. Seraphim of Sarov. Gabriel Anne, trans. London: SPCK, 1975.
Zernov, Nicolas. The Russian Religious Renaissance of the Twentieth Century. New York: Harper & Row, 1963.