St.'s understanding of Christian life Nicholas Kavasila and its modern significance

A modern Christian, living in a world of endless temptations, false teachings, and delusions, needs strong pillars to lean on so as not to drown in a sea of ​​temptation. Such pillars are the holy fathers of the Church, to whose heritage we turn, drawing there “living water” and finding true spiritual guidelines. The speech of Priest Demetrius Batrellos emphasizes the exceptional significance of the works of the outstanding Byzantine theologian and liturgist Saint Nicholas Kavasila. In his outstanding book, Histoire des idées politiques, Philippe Nemo gives a very interesting overview of the anthropology of Nicolo Machiavelli, the author of the famous work The Prince. Machiavelli had a very pessimistic view of human nature. People are incorrigibly vicious. They are only “good” when it serves their interests. Nemo believes that Machiavelli's pessimism regarding human nature is associated with “the instability, unreliability and rampant violence that characterized the Italy of his time” (early 16th century) 1 . This can also be said about his namesake Nikolai Kavasil. As a young man, Cabasilas was immersed in turbulent political life. His experience of the civil war and the atrocities committed by the so-called “Zealots” in his hometown of Thessaloniki influenced his pessimistic view of man. In Cabasilas's famous book, On the Life in Christ, written later in life, which will be the focus of our attention, he expresses this pessimism quite clearly. In this work, which deals with the meaning of the sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist, Kavasila argues that before baptism a person is nothing, he simply does not exist 2. Here we notice the connection between existence and sinfulness, typical of patristic theology. According to Kavasila, outside the Church man is darkness, man is possessed by demonic powers 3 . Cabasilas has a very negative assessment of humanity as a whole. In his opinion, before the incarnation, humanity only moved from bad to worse. His spiritual condition was deteriorating all the time. People were so vicious that they did not even strive for liberation from the tyranny of sin 4 . The sinfulness of mankind was so deep and pervasive that even the Old Testament righteous were enslaved by it. For Cabasilas, the Old Testament righteous were just as subject to the law of sin as any other person. The main difference between them and all other sinners was that the latter felt comfortable and happy in their sinful state, while the former sighed and wanted to throw off the shackles of sin 5 . According to Cabasilah, these righteous men of the Old Testament were preparing themselves for a future righteousness, which alone is true righteousness 6 . The following example illustrates this. There are two categories of patients. Representatives of the first are looking for a doctor and are happy when they see him coming to them. Representatives of the second category do not even realize that they are sick and feel an aversion to medications. The doctor, writes Cabasilas, calls the former healthy not because they are healthy, but because they will recover - unlike the latter. The Old Testament righteous people belong to the first category 7. They are healthy only in anticipation of the future and righteous only in comparison with other people, their contemporaries. Their righteousness is relative 8 . Cabasilas is also a pessimist regarding the ability of words to influence the souls of people and their lives. He explains his position by referring to the lives of the apostles. While the apostles simply listened to Christ, nothing changed for the better in them and no virtues worthy of admiration appeared 9. The failures of the apostles were similar to the failures of the Old Testament righteous, who were also helped only by the word of God, 10 but this could not lead to true righteousness. The emphasis that Cabasilas places on the one hand on the sinfulness of men, and on the other on the inability of words to heal their spiritual ills, serves his purpose of emphasizing the efficacy of the sacraments, namely baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist. Kavasila believes that baptism imparts new life to a person. Confirmation enables him to move forward and gives him new spiritual strength. Holy Communion is the food that sustains him in his new life in Christ 11 . Thanks to these three sacraments, an almost complete transformation of human personality and life occurs. The grace bestowed in these sacraments is abundant and powerful - so that sometimes Cabasilas speaks of it as almost compelling and irresistible 12. A person does not participate in any way in the event of his spiritual birth, just as he does not participate in a natural birth 13. The new birth is solely the work of God 14 . Of course, a person must interact with Christ for the sake of his salvation, but this interaction occurs only after a person has received the sacraments, and sometimes it seems quite easy. The victory was achieved by Christ, writes Cabasilas, and not by us 15. We participate in this victory only because we applaud Christ and glorify His victory 16 . He won the battle, but we are also getting married. Our interaction with Him for the sake of our salvation consists only of this - that we do not shy away from the crown of glory with which Christ crowns us, that we do not commit spiritual suicide by turning weapons against ourselves 17 . However, later in his Life in Christ, Cabasilas will show in more detail how a Christian should act and sit down to keep the candle of grace burning 18 . To convince his readers of the reality of transformation, which is possible only through the sacraments, Cabasilas turns to the martyrs of the early Church. The martyrs not only endured the suffering inflicted on them, but also experienced great love for this suffering and desired it, as well as death itself, which would bring them closer to Christ 19 . Cabasilas gives a special example of the martyrdom of Porphyry 20 . He was a mime actor. He once ridiculed Christian baptism. During the performance the audience laughed, but for Porfiry himself it became a genuine renaissance. He immediately confessed his faith in Christ and was put to death that same day. This actor, who tried to mock Christian baptism, became a Christian and a martyr. And this happened not because of the Christian teaching with which he was familiar, but under the influence of the irresistible power of the sacrament of baptism 21 . There is, however, an objection to what Cabasilas says. How is it that so many Christians lead sinful lives despite having received the grace of the sacrament? In response to this objection, Cabasilah says that this is because they have essentially voluntarily rejected this grace and are resisting it in their lives. Cabasilas states that the fruits of grace given in the sacraments are inexpressible joy, supernatural love and amazing works 22. He speaks more about sacramental grace, which gives rise to beautiful, luminous deeds, in the sixth chapter of his essay “On Life in Christ.” Here Cabasilas explains what Christians must do to remain in fellowship with Christ and experience His abundant grace. And it is here that Cabasilas expounds his moral teaching. For example, a significant part of this chapter is devoted to the analysis of those blessings and beatitudes spoken of in the Sermon on the Mount. The last, seventh, chapter is called “What is the person who has received the sacraments and carefully preserved the grace received from the sacraments.” Both the title and the content of this chapter indicate that for Cabasilas the goal of life in Christ is the sanctification of Christians, the formation, as we would say, of a holy character. So the process begins with the sacraments, continues in the ethical space and ends with personal holiness. The completion of this process is attributed to the eschaton, because, as Cabasilas says already in the first phrase of his work, “life in Christ originates in this life and begins here, and is completed in the future life, when we reach that day [eschaton]” 23. This was a brief overview of the main aspects of Cabasilia's theology, which found expression in his essay "Seven Words on Life in Christ." Let us now turn to the consequences that can be drawn from this theology in relation to the moral life of a Christian. Below I will outline seven such important implications for how we should live as Christians in the modern world. 1. From Cabasilah's understanding of the condition of people before baptism (and perhaps also, at least to some extent, of those who, by their sinful lives, have separated themselves from the grace of God) it becomes clear that non-Christians cannot follow God's commandments - and this is true, according to Cabasilah, even of the Old Testament righteous. Therefore, although God's commandments are obligatory for everyone, only Christians can observe them. This means that we cannot expect people in general to do what they ought to do simply because they cannot do what they ought to do because they have not been transformed by the grace of God through the sacraments. Therefore, Christian ethics is not applicable to everyone simply because only Christians can live according to its standards. Only by becoming a member of the Christian community, the Christian Church, does a person gain the opportunity to live truly humanly, that is, to lead a holy life. This, of course, makes the mission absolutely necessary for the life of the world. 2. Cabasilah makes it clear that words have limited power in influencing people's lives. People don't change simply because of words they hear; they change under the influence of God's grace, which is given primarily in the sacraments. This does not mean that preaching and teaching are useless. If this were so, then Cabasilas would not have written his book. Education and wisdom are very important. That is why, in an earlier work, Cabasilas states that uneducated saints are inferior to educated ones and should seek the latter’s advice 24 . However, the Church must view itself not as primarily a religious ideology or a philosophical or religious “school,” but as a Eucharistic community. Christian teaching must be rooted in the Eucharistic experience of the Church. Moreover, Cabasilah's limited faith in the power of speech can help Christians question the authoritarian claims of the human logos—both in the sense of logic and in the sense of ideological, political, or other rhetoric. 3. According to Cabasilas, the grace of the sacraments is very, very powerful. A person cannot do anything for his salvation until he has been baptized. But after baptism, confirmation and communion, the grace that he received, although not irresistible, is so strong that a person simply needs not to resist it - in order to achieve salvation. Even the knowledge of God, which leads to salvation, has to do not so much with thoughts and words as with the experience of participation in the sacraments. For Cabasilas, the most important thing for Christians is their participation in the holy sacraments and in the Eucharist in particular. Everything else depends on this. In church life, organized on the principles of the theology of Cabasilia, a central place is given to the daily celebration of the liturgy and frequent participation in the Eucharist. 4. This approach of Cabasilas sharply distinguishes his theology from moralism. He has no antinomies. He firmly believes that man must follow the commandments of God. However, keeping the commandments must be considered in the context of man's sacramental union with Christ. Christ transforms a person through the sacraments, and only after this is a person able to fulfill the commandments of Christ. By doing this, he continues to live the life in Christ that he gained through participation in the sacraments 25 . And although ethics is important, man's unity with Christ has nothing to do with the external, legalistic, moral unity that dries up in the process of man's observance of God's law. On the contrary, it is an ontological, organic unity, thanks to which man is a member of the Body of Christ, a sacred vessel with the blood of Christ, and therefore his moral life is a consequence of this Christ-centered identity. 5. The theology of Cabasilas is very close to the ideas of the so-called “virtue ethics”. Christian life is something that has to do not primarily with doing, but with being. Doing is a consequence of being. Sin is not only an action, but also - I would say, predominantly - a condition, a state of corruption and disease 26. Christian transformation, which begins through a person’s participation in the sacraments, is the healing and sanctification of a person and cannot be reduced to improvement of behavior. The purpose of the Christian life is to make people holy. Saints do holy things. And these actions, in turn, make Christians even more holy. Holiness of character is the basis of moral behavior. This holiness is both bestowed and sustained by the sacraments. It is observed through a person's fulfillment of God's commandments and leads to the maturity of Christian character. 6. Cabasilas' emphasis on the primacy of the sacramental life corrects the hesychasts' emphasis on certain monastic practices. Kavasila was a friend of Gregory Palamas and other prominent leaders of the hesychast movement, and his uncle, Archbishop Nilus Kavasila of Thessalonica, also supported the hesychasts. However, in the theology of Nicholas Cabasilas we do not find characteristic emphasis on such monastic practices as the incessant repetition of the Jesus Prayer, fasting, vigil, the importance of renunciation of the world, or even the significance of the vision of the uncreated light, which was a burning issue during the hesychast disputes of the 14th century 27 . In a well-known passage, Cabasilas writes that every Christian can focus his attention on Christ without going into the desert, without eating special food, without dressing differently than other people, without damaging his health, etc. On the contrary, a person can remain in his home and go about his professional affairs: a general can remain a general, a tiller can remain a tiller, etc. and at the same time live life to the fullest in Christ. These remarks represent an indirect but very clear corrective to the emphasis on a specifically monastic spirituality which was so important in the Byzantine world and often created the impression that there were two classes: monks called to perfection, and all others who are a kind of second-class Christians who cannot aspire to the heights of Christian perfection. Cabasilah's theology is more catholic. The sacraments are established for all Christians, and there is no privileged access to them. Since everything else, including Christian teaching and monastic life, is less important than participation in the sacraments, and since monastics living in monasteries and people living “in the world” are equal as regards their sacramental membership in the Body of Christ, there is no reason to place special emphasis on monastic practices as the most important, much less as the only path to Christian perfection 28 . 7. Although Cavasilas goes beyond the dominance, often excessive, of monastic spirituality in Christian theology and life, emphasizing the central importance of the sacramental life, accessible to both monastics and lay people, he does not always manage to overcome a purely monastic spirituality in his moral theology. It is to his credit that in his youth he wrote several works condemning usury, which in Byzantium led many Christians to bankruptcy. In these writings, Cabasilah's moral discourse touches on politics and economics and aims to transform society and its institutions in a way that is both radical and prophetic. Cabasilas makes the same attempt in his work, incorrectly called “anti-Zealot,” 29 which he also wrote in the first half of his life, when he was politically active. There he criticized the expropriation and taxation of monastic property by both secular and ecclesiastical authorities. However, as O'Donovan has shown, in this work we see the manifestation of a one-sided desire to protect the property rights of monasteries by appeal to secular Roman law, without any connection with the theological question of the right of monasteries to be primarily landowners. Moreover, in this case we can see some indifference to the common good at a time when Byzantium was in desperate need of means to defend itself (and this included monasteries and religious institutions) from Turkish aggression, which would soon lead to the collapse of Byzantium 30. Be that as it may, we must say that, despite his partly successful and perhaps partly unsuccessful experiences of involvement in politics, economics, social ethics, etc. in his early years, in his more mature writings, Cabasilas demonstrates a more "monastic" theological approach. In his great theological synthesis, which found expression in the works “On Life in Christ” and “Interpretation of the Divine Liturgy” (he is mainly known for them), Cabasilas remains in the context of the “spirituality” typical of his time, without extending his theological vision of the Christian life to the spheres of politics and economics. Moreover, Cabasilas missed some important moral issues. For example, as we have already seen, he does not discuss the question of the legality of monasteries owning significant property. We also saw that in his essay “On Life in Christ” he argues that a general should not change his profession in order to live a Christian life. But how is this profession compatible with Christian life, if we remember the example of the nonviolent life of Christ, as well as His commandment to love our enemies? That is, how can a general, namely a professional killer of his (or, if you prefer, his Empire) enemies, be at the same time a Christian, not to mention be a good Christian, that is, one who is called not only not to take revenge, but also to forgive and love his enemies? As far as I understand, Cabasilas was unable to raise these questions either in his “anti-Zealot” essay or in his later works. St. Symeon of Thessaloniki, another major figure in the field of scramentology, who would become bishop of Cabasilas's beloved Thessaloniki shortly after his death, turned the murder of the Turks into an almost Christian virtue and was ready to anathematize anyone who simply considered the possibility of peacefully yielding to the Turks 31 . In this case, we are dealing with what can be called a dangerous line, beyond which there is a reversal of Christian virtues. He who chooses the peaceful path, refuses to defend himself and kill his enemies, is anathema, but he who fights and kills deserves praise as a loyal supporter of the Empire and the Church. The fact that Cabasilas, firstly, bypassed the above issues, secondly, did not always satisfactorily resolve moral issues (for example, in his “anti-Zealot” work) and, thirdly, failed to incorporate his early moral theology (against usury, for example), dating back to the period of his political activity, into his later theological synthesis, created when he retired from all affairs and, perhaps, in a monastery - all this indicates the limitations of his moral theology in accordance with those typical patterns that we know from the history of Byzantine and Orthodox theology in general. In our day, Orthodox theology, if it wants to avoid drifting into pietism and be more catholic, capable of influencing the world, must find ways to respond to human life in its entirety, including politics, economics, bioethics, environmental issues, sexual ethics, etc., and not just to questions concerning the strictly “spiritual” dimension of this life. But, of course, all this must be done within the broader framework of biblical and patristic theology, as well as the liturgical-sacramental spiritual tradition. In this matter, the legacy of St. Nicholas Cabasilas can be a great source of meaning and inspiration, as well as a call to extend theology to all areas of Christian moral life. Philippe Nemo, Histoire des idées politiques aux Temps modernes et contemporains (Puf, 2002), pp. 48ff. Quote from p. 48. On the Life in Christ, B, 8 and 30. On the Life in Christ, B, 20. On the Life in Christ, B, 41. Here we encounter a view similar to Luther's views on the bondage of the will. On the Life in Christ, A, 30. On the Life in Christ, A, 29. On the Life in Christ, A, 31. On the Life in Christ, A, 29. Panagiotis Nellas tries to clarify this view of Cabasilas, turning to his Mariology, which is expressed in three sermons (see Παναγιώτης Νέλλας, Η περί δικαιώσεως διδασκαλία Νικολάου του Καβάσιλα: Συμβολή εις την Ορθόδοξον σωτηριολογίαν (Pireaus: Καραμπερόπουλος, 1975), pp. 92–100 See also Παναγιώτης Νέλλας, Η Θεομήτωρ: Τρεις Θεομητορικές ομιλίες Νικολάου του Καβάσιλα, κείμενο, εισαγωγή, νεοελληνική απόδοση (Athens: Ίδρυμα Ευαγγελιστρίας Τήνου, 1968). However, it is impossible to conduct a detailed analysis of Cabasilas’ Mariology and its place in his theology. On the Life in Christ, B, 75. Cabasilas also argues that the sacramental experience of Christ is superior to knowledge gained through instruction (ibid. 71, 87, 100). On the Life in Christ, B, 74. On the Life in Christ, A, 17. See, for example, On the Life in Christ, A, 13, where Christ is presented as almost violently effecting the transformation of man, acting as a philanthropic tyrant. On this see also Αθανασίου Α. Αγγελοπούλου, Η εν Χριστώ ζωή κατά τον Νικόλαον Καβάσιλαν τον εκ Θεσσαλονίκης (Athens, 1967), p. 19. On the Life in Christ, B, 16. On the Life in Christ, B, 43–44. On the Life in Christ, A, 42 and 49. On the Life in Christ, A, 49 – 50. On the Life in Christ, A, 15. Cabasilah clearly says that no man will be saved against his own will (ibid., 54, 58, 59 etc.). See especially the sixth word. On the Life in Christ, B, 65. Porphyry suffered in 361, when Julian the Apostate was emperor. On the Life in Christ, B, 78–79. On the Life in Christ, B, 103. On the Life in Christ, A, 1. See his Οστιαρίω Θεσσαλονίκης τω Συναδηνώ, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 46 (1953). See the title of the sixth word. See discussion of sin in On the Life in Christ, B, 39–40. Athanasius Angelopoulos believes that Cabasilas “does not touch upon the question of the uncreated light because he does not fully share the psychophysical method of prayer, with the help of which the hesychasts achieved their main goal - the vision of the uncreated light” (Αθανασίου Α. Αγγελοπούλου, Thessalonica: Πατριαρχικόν Ίδρυμα Πατερικών Μελετών, 1970), p. 78). Angelopoulos is wrong. The vision of the uncreated light was in no way the main goal of the hesychasts, just as Cabasilas fully shared their method of prayer. The difference lies, rather, in the fact that Cabasilas placed special emphasis on the grace of the sacraments being equally accessible to all Christians. However, the rare participation of the laity in the Eucharist, which was the norm in the time of Cabasilas, undermined the sacramental incorporation of the laity and gave special privileges to the clergy, who could perform the liturgy and thereby partake of the Body and Blood of Christ much more often. Cabasilah does not deal with these circumstances. But it is noteworthy that St. Simeon of Thessalonica, who lived a century later and was as fond of worship and the sacraments as Cabasilas, emphasized the importance of frequent communion for both clergy and laity. See Ihor Sevcenko, ‘Nicolas Cabasilas’ “Anti-Zealot” Discourse: A Reinterpretation’, in Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957), pp. 79–171. See Oliver O'Donavan and Joan Lockwood O'Donovan (eds.), From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought (100–1625) (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), pp. 476–7. Let me note that when I was writing this report, I came across the message of the Holy Synod of the Greek Church addressed to the Greeks on the occasion of the Italian attack on Greece on October 28, 1940. The Synod called on the Greek people to wage a “sacred defensive struggle for faith and country,” to which the king and president (then dictator Metaxas) called them. “The Church blesses the sacred weapon,” says the message, which presents the protection of the people as a command of God (κέλευσμα Θεού). Reference is made to Matthew 10:28, and the hearers are assured that God will be on their side if they fight against unjust aggression, imitating their glorious ancestors - some of whom, it should be noted, were pagans (see newspaper Καθημερινή, 29 October 1940, p. 2).