The Life in Christ by Nicholas Cabasilas:A Mystagogical Work

by

Nicholas Denysenko*

A glimpse into 14th century Byzantine theology reveals a world centered on the

hesychast controversy, unleashed by a battle between Barlaam the Calabrian, a

Greek from South Italy, and Gregory Palamas, a monk from Mount Athos.1 Hesy-

chasm had evolved over a period of centuries, and the monks had refined the so-called

‘‘Jesus Prayer’’wherein one assumes a low, seated posture, controls breathing, and

repeats the words, ‘‘Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me.’’ Within

the context of the prayer setting, Gregory Palamas (d. 1359) taught that one could

have a transformative spiritual encounter with God by beholding the very light that

radiated from Jesus at his transfiguration on Mount Tabor. In this experience, one

receives the gift of theosis by partaking in God’s energies.2 In his introductory

article on the hesychasts, Kallistos Ware includes Palamas’s contemporary, Nicolas

Cabasilas (d. c.1397/1398), as a hesychast alongside Gregory of Sinai and Pala-

mas, two of the most prominent hesychastic teachers.Yet Ware’s treatment of Cabasi-

las in the text is marked by brevity, aligning him with the others because Cabasilas

‘‘sees continual prayer as the vocation of all.’’3

These introductory remarks are germane to an evaluation of Nicholas Cabasi-

las’s theology because some historians of Byzantine theology have attempted to

* Dr. Nicholas Denysenko received his Ph.D. in Liturgical Studies/Sacramental Theology from

The Catholic University of America in May 2008. A member of the Orthodox Theological Society of

America and an ordained deacon of the Orthodox Church in America, he is adjunct faculty in the

Religion Department of George Washington University in Washington, DC. He may be contacted at

kolja@verizon.net.1 For a brief and concise summary of the dispute, see Kallistos Ware, ‘‘The Hesychasts: Gregory

of Sinai, Gregory Palamas, Nicolas Cabasilas,’’ in The Study of Spirituality, eds. C. Jones, G. Wain-

wright, E. Yarnold (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986) 242-55. Ware emphatically

asserts that this controversy ‘‘was not a dispute between the Latin West and the Greek East, but essen-

tially a conflict within the Greek tradition, involving two different ways of interpreting Dionysius the

Areapogite’’ (249). See also John Meyendorff’s A Study of Gregory Palamas (trans. George Lawrence

[Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998]), which still stands as the classical work out-

lining the background to the controversy and the intricacies of Gregory Palamas’s doctrine.2 See Ware, 248-53. While hesychasm commonly refers to the practice of saying the ‘‘Jesus Prayer,’’

¹suc…a translates into ‘‘quiet, still,’’ the prevailing atmosphere during the uttering of the prayer.3 Ibid., 255.

SL 38 (2009) 242-60

242

identify hesychast leanings and concepts in his works, especially his treatise The

Life in Christ.4 While such endeavors to situate Cabasilas within his immediate

milieu might appear appropriate, the search for hesychasm in The Life in Christ

conditions its evaluation, and obscures the original contribution he makes to

medieval Byzantine theology. The pattern of imposing hesychasm on Cabasilas

is perhaps best exemplified by Boris Bobrinskoy:

No less than by his Christocentric sacramental doctrine, Nicholas Cabasilas is

close to the hesychastic tradition by all his teaching on ceaseless vigilance,

awareness, and contemplation of the love of God. . . . The ascetic doctrine of

hesychasm concerning the invisible warfare, the guard of the heart and cease-

less prayer, is praised and given particular stress by Cabasilas.5

This article evaluates Cabasilas’s themes in The Life in Christ without pre-

supposing possible connections to hesychasm. This analysis attempts to illuminate

the treatise’s unique qualities and contributions by explicating select themes from

The Life in Christ, which provides a general exposition on the way participation

in the sacraments results in humanity’s divinization. Corollary commentary will

focus on Cabasilas’s methodology, how lex orandi and lex credendi interrelate in

his work, and how his own objective was to define a spiritual life for a lay audience

that is grounded in their sacramental participation.

I. An Analysis of The Life in Christ

Those who have studied Cabasilas generally agree that he was a layman through-

out the entirety of his life, and was never ordained a priest nor tonsured to the

monastic ranks. The arguments asserting his consecration as metropolitan of Thes-

salonica at the very end of his life have been dismissed as a case of mistaken

identity with his famous uncle Nilus.6 The exact date of Cabasilas’s death is unknown,

4 When quoting, I will refer to the English translation, The Life in Christ, trans. Carmino J.

deCatanzaro, intro. Boris Bobrinskoy (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1974). The

critical edition is in two volumes: La vie en Christ, Livres I–IV, ed. Marie-Helene Congourdeau,

Sources chretiennes 355 (Paris: Cerf, 1989). Congourdeau has also provided the introduction with

critical text, translation, annotation and index in La vie en Christ, Livres V–VII, Sources chretiennes

361 (Paris: Cerf, 1990). Carmino deCatanzaro’s chapter numbers differ from Congourdeau’s; I will

cite deCatanzaro’s throughout.5 Bobrinskoy, introduction to Cabasilas, The Life in Christ, 28-29. Bobrinskoy’s introduction to

deCatanzaro’s translation was originally published as ‘‘Nicolas Cabasilas: Theology and Spirituality,’’

in Sobornost 7 (1968) 483-505. Also see Ware (n. 1 above), Myrrha Lot-Borodine, Nicolas Cabasilas:

Un maître de la spiritualite byzantine (Paris: Editions de l’Orante, 1958), and John Meyendorff, Byzan-

tine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press, 1974)

108.6 See Congourdeau, introduction to La vie en Christ, Livres I–IV, 17-22.

243

though it certainly occurred after 1391, and probably around 1397/1398.7 The ques-

tion concerning his ecclesiastical rank is unusual, as treatises on the Christian life

that are not directed towards a monastic audience are unusual in the corpus of

Byzantine spiritual literature.8 Cabasilas displayed considerable intellectual dexter-

ity in his own literary output, also producing a mystagogical commentary on the

eucharistic Divine Liturgy (On the Divine Liturgy), several homilies and eulogies,

brief liturgical works, secular writings, and letters.9 The exact date for both The

Life in Christ and On the Divine Liturgy is unknown, on account of the complexity

of their textual transmission in the manuscript tradition.10 The Life in Christ exem-

plifies perhaps his most masterful output as he walks his audience through the

sacraments of initiation, and expresses a consistently christocentric spiritual life.

The Life in Christ is divided into seven books.11 In the first book, Cabasilas states

that the life in Christ begins in the present life, and establishes the soteriological

presuppositions in Christ’s Pascha and incarnation:

We were justified, first by being set free from bonds and condemnation, in that

He who had done no evil pleaded for us by dying on the cross. By this he paid

the penalty for the sins which we had audaciously committed; then, because

of that death, we were made friends of God and righteous. By his death, the

Savior not only released us and reconciled us to the Father, but also ‘‘gave us

power to become children of God,’’ in that He both united our nature to Him-

self through the flesh which He assumed, and also united each one of us to

His own flesh by the power of the mysteries.12

In this statement, Cabasilas establishes the primacy of the sacraments as the means

of encountering God and living the life in Christ, demonstrating that they provide

7 Ibid., 16. Congourdeau mentions that Cabasilas’s friend, Demetrios Kydones, died in 1397 or

1398, and neither he nor Cabasilas makes reference to the other’s passing.8 Ibid., 17.9 See the critical edition of his commentary on the Divine Liturgy, Nicolas Cabasilas, Explica-

tion de la divine liturgie, ed. Severien Salaville, Sources chretiennes 4 bis (Paris: Cerf, 1967). From

this point forward, I shall refer to the title of this treatise as On the Divine Liturgy and use the

English translation in Nicholas Cabasilas, A Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, trans. J. M. Hussey

and P. M. McNulty (London: SPCK, 1966). Congourdeau provides a conveniently categorized bibli-

ography of Cabasilas’s works (26-27).10 On the dating of On the Divine Liturgy, see Salaville, introduction, 52. On the dating of The

Life in Christ, see Congourdeau, 66-67. Both Salaville and Congourdeau rely on Paris Gr. 1213, a

monastic manuscript dating to the first half of the 15th century, for much of the text in the critical

editions.11 See Congourdeau, 28-41, for an outline of the structure of the work.12 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 1.7 (53-54). DeCatanzaro literally translates ‘‘musthr…wn’’as ‘‘mys-

teries,’’ and I will retain that within the quoted portions, but will use ‘‘sacraments’’ liberally within

the main text. See La vie en Christ 1.32 (104-7).

244

access to the paradigmatic salvific events that occurred within history. This is the

key to his methodological approach, which he elaborates in the following text:

He [Christ] entered into the Holy Place when he had offered himself to the

Father, and he leads in those who are willing, as they share in His burial. This,

however, does not consist in dying as He died, but in showing forth that death

in the baptismal washing and proclaiming it upon the sacred table, when they,

after being anointed, in an ineffable manner feast upon Him who was done to

death and rose again.13

He then applies this interpretation of participation through sacramental symbols

to the sacraments in general, crowning them as the means by which Christians

participate in Christ’s life:

The gates of the mysteries are far more august and beneficial than the gates of

Paradise. The latter will not be opened to anyone who has not first entered

through the gates of the mysteries, but these were opened when the gates of

Paradise had been closed. . . . This is the life which the Lord came to bring,

that those who come through these mysteries should be partakers of His death

and share in His passion. Apart from this it is impossible to escape death.14

Cabasilas does not specifically situate the sacraments in the church per se, but

appears to apply an absolute quality to the necessity of sacramental initiation,

which could certainly be interpreted as conditioning his comprehension of eccle-

sial boundaries. That said, Cabasilas’s purpose was to establish the primacy of

participation in the sacraments in receiving salvation from God.

Cabasilas demonstrates the manner by which the sacraments endow Christians

with new life in Christ. For him, there is no life outside of Christianity, as ‘‘baptism

confers being and in short, existence according to Christ.’’15 Cabasilas does not

equivocate, as he characterizes nuptial imagery as an inadequate analogy for the

fullness of personal union that results from sacramental union with Christ.16 Instead,

he focuses on the martyrs as more appropriate examples, since they ‘‘gave up their

heads and limbs with pleasure, but could not even by word betray Christ.’’17 The

person resulting from union with Christ in the sacraments is changed, endowed

13 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 1.8 (56).14 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 1.9 (56-57); cf. La vie en Christ I.40, 42 (115-17).15 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 1.6 (49); cf. La vie en Christ 1.19 (94-95).16 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 1.3 (46-47): ‘‘It would appear that marriage and the concord

between head and members especially indicate connection and unity, yet they fall far short of it and

are far from manifesting the reality. Marriage does not so join together that those who are united

exist and live in each other, as is the case with Christ and the Church.’’17 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 2.3 (46). Cabasilas uses the verb ‘‘¢postÁnai’’ or ‘‘betray’’ to

accentuate the martyrs’ union. Cf. La vie en Christ 2.10 (84).

245

with new faculties that engender knowledge of God and participation in the divine

life.18 This infusion of new faculties holds tremendous importance for the entire

purpose and destiny of humanity:

This therefore becomes clear: the baptismal washing has instilled into men

some knowledge and perception of God, so that they have clearly known Him

who is good and have perceived His beauty and tasted of His goodness. This,

I affirm, they are able to know more perfectly by experience than were they

merely to learn it by being taught.19

Cabasilas synthesized multiple theological axioms within a sacramental con-

text. He points to the notion of the human telos in Greek patristic theology, the

goal of knowing, perceiving, and participating in the life of God for the purpose

of being divinized. In this last passage, Cabasilas prioritizes the acquisition of

knowledge through experience over learning. However, this experience is not

isolated to a particular mode of prayer, but instead entails direct participation in

the sacramental life, which begins with baptism. Cabasilas has adopted an incar-

national approach to explicating the qualities of the new person who emerges from

sacramental participation, as ‘‘it is Christ who bestows birth and we who are born;

and as for him who is being born, it is quite clear that He who generates confers

His own life on Him.’’20

Cabasilas identifies God as the telos for the human journey that begins with new

birth. God has even implanted desire into human souls, which functions as one

of the newly-bestowed faculties in differentiating between good and evil.21 Love

and joy, fruits of the gifts received at new birth, are also weapons that lead to

victory, as attested by the saints.22 The picture painted by Cabasilas is not inun-

dated with a starkly dualistic battle between God and the devil over human souls.23

18 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 2.9 (80). ‘‘The birth in Baptism is the beginning of the life to

come, and the provision of new members and faculties is the preparation for that manner of life. . . .

Just as it is impossible to live this natural life without receiving the organs of Adam and the human

faculties necessary for this life, so likewise no one can attain that blessed world alive without being

prepared by the life of Christ and being formed according to His image.’’19 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 2.15 (89); cf. La vie en Christ 2.74 (200).20 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 2.9 (81).21 Ibid., 2.19 (95-98). ‘‘God has implanted the desire into our souls by which every need should

lead to the attainment of that which is good, every thought to the attainment of truth. . . . For those

who have tasted of the Savior, the object of desire is present’’ (96).22 Ibid., 2.21 (101). ‘‘Armed with these weapons of love and joy it was impossible for the saints

to be overcome either by terrors or pleasures. Joy prevailed over miseries, pleasures were incapable

of drawing aside or destroying those who were held together and bound to Him by so great a power

of affection.’’23 Cabasilas does acknowledge the traditional renunciation of the evil one in his treatment of the

exorcism, the insufflation, and the renunciation in baptism; cf. ibid., 2.3 (69-71).

246

Nevertheless, his language appears intentionally to engage the corollary life of

virtue entailed by baptism. The newly baptized have the task of performing ‘‘great

and virtuous deeds,’’and accomplishing ‘‘wondrous works,’’without being destroyed

by miseries and pleasures.24 Cabasilas, however, is not a determinist. While Christ

is the active agent in Cabasilas’s scheme, the one who infuses and endows, humans

are not completely passive instruments who simply enact predetermined events

from God’s plan. God respects humanity’s free will, which baptism does not remove.

With regards to receiving the gift of salvation, humans have the power to exercise

their free choice, though any variance with God’s will manifested by disorder in

this life deprives them of this gift:

Since he is infinite in goodness He will for us every good thing and bestows

it on us, subject to the free exercise of our own will. Such, then, is the benefit

of Baptism. It does not throttle or restrain the will. Since it is a faculty nothing

prevents those who enjoy its use from living in wickedness if they so wish,

just as the possession of a sound eye would not prevent those who desire it

from living in darkness.25

Continuing the presentation in his third book, Cabasilas applies a mystagogical

approach as he proceeds to demonstrate the way the sacraments enable a virtuous

life. The brevity of this book does not diminish its contribution. Cabasilas engages

a pithy discourse on the gifts received from the Holy Spirit in chrismation (literally,

‘‘tÒ qe‹on mÚron’’):

So the effect of this sacred rite is the imparting of the energies of the Holy

Spirit. The chrism brings in the Lord Jesus Himself, in whom is man’s whole

salvation and all hope of benefits. From Him we receive the participation in

the Holy Spirit and through Him we have access to the Father. . . . the gifts

which the chrism always procures for Christians and which are always timely

are . . . godliness, prayer, love, and sobriety.26

Chrismation as a component of initiation brings the new Christian into the life of

the Holy Trinity. In this pithy statement, Cabasilas explains how the gift of the

Holy Spirit begins a life of personal union with Jesus Christ. The gifts of ‘‘godli-

ness, love, prayer, and sobriety’’ constitute the realities of ongoing growth and

conversion in the Christian life. Work is required to maintain a fruitful communion

with Christ and the Father. Cabasilas presents God’s divine plan for humanity’s

salvation in an incarnational paradigm. In chrismation Jesus himself is ushered

24 Ibid., 2.21 (100-101).25 Ibid., 2.11 (85). This section includes an excursus on the resurrection and the impotence of

apostasy.26 Ibid., 3.4 (106-7).

247

into the candidate and imparts the Holy Spirit and his gifts; through the Holy Spirit

the initiates obtain access to the Father. Cabasilas’s presentation has not disinte-

grated into the imposition of a specific trinitarian model onto the sacrament. Rather,

the procession of his argument follows the presupposition of the intimate union

and active agency of Christ in the sacramental event. Cabasilas explains chrisma-

tion as the beginning of an intimate, personal union with Christ, which the Holy

Spirit sustains. The goal of this union is the telos, the restoration of communion

with the Father. Cabasilas’s explanation also implies a soteriological motif: new

Christians grow into the likeness of Christ through this union, and the activities

of the Christian life lead to divinization. Thus, in this brief book, Cabasilas has

shown how the sacrament itself sets in motion the process of growing in the Chris-

tian life. His explanation, a pithy expression of christological and pneumatological

dynamics, also shows how the lex orandi not only reveals the lex credendi, but

also the spiritual life (lex vivendi).

Cabasilas does not separate spiritual growth from the pangs of human develop-

ment, emphasizing that those who have abandoned the spiritual journey in Christ

upon reaching maturity should be assured of Christ’s ongoing presence.27 Essen-

tially, his notion of the permanence of the gifts given at the sacrament is similar

to the Western notion of sacramental character. Engaging and using spiritual

gifts requires full human participation which incorporates the use of reason and

morality, and includes the training of one’s character and will. This means that

whatever challenges a Christian faces, the gifts one receives at chrismation are

permanent and can be a source of renewal even after one has abandoned Chris-

tianity. Thus, this brief section on chrismation constitutes a core component in a

Christian’s spiritual journey towards theosis. It draws from a strong incarna-

tional model and relates a Christian’s participation in the life of the Trinity to the

process of ongoing conversion.

In the fourth book, Cabasilas explicates the significance of holy communion.

Communion is the crown of initiation, the perfection of the life in Christ which com-

menced with baptism and continued in chrismation. Cabasilas expertly describes

the distinguishing qualities of holy communion without separating Christ’s unique

activity here from his agency in the first two components of initiation:

As He washes them in Baptism He cleanses them from the filth of wickedness

and imposes His own form upon them; when He anoints them He activates

27 Ibid., 3.4 (108). ‘‘Since this mystery takes place in infancy, they have no perception of its gifts

when it is celebrated and they receive them; when they have reached maturity they have turned aside

to what they ought not to do and have blinded the eye of the soul. Yet in truth the Spirit imparts His

own gifts to those who are being initiated. . . . Nor has the master ceased from doing us good, since

He promised to be with us until the end. This sacred rite, then, is not an empty thing.’’

248

the energies of the Spirit of which He, for the sake of our flesh, became the

Treasury. But when He has led the initiate to the table and has given him His

Body to eat He entirely changes him, and transforms him into His own state.28

He reinforces the inseparability of the three components of sacramental initiation

by describing communion as the ‘‘final mystery,’’ which cannot be surpassed, and

to which nothing can be added. Communion inculcates the fullness of the mutual

indwelling shared by Christ and the participant.29 Cabasilas here ascribes to his

own variant of a particular sacramental realism that does not focus on the trans-

formation of the bread and wine as species or elements, but rather on the trans-

formation of the person and the consequences of this participation:

O how great are the mysteries! What a thing it is for Christ’s mind to be

mingled with ours, our will to be blended with His, our body with His body

and our blood with His blood! What is our mind when the divine mind obtains

control? What is our will when that blessed will has overcome it?30

While this might appear to subscribe to determinism, Cabasilas is actually attempting

to demonstrate how sacramental participation results in the christification rooted

in Pauline theology.31 Christ’s presence does not obliterate the unicity of the human

person, but instead provides the medicine and protection required for preservation

of the Christian journey to theosis.32 Here Cabasilas also accentuates the fullness

of Christ’s work in contrast to the impotence of human works. The efficacy of

Christ’s work comes through the transformation of the participant in holy commu-

nion, the mystery of the mutual indwelling that is positioned at the center of this

treatise:

The divine Dionysius tells us that the divine mysteries themselves do not sanc-

tify and are incapable of their proper effects without the sacred feast being added

to them. How much less is it likely that men’s efforts and righteousness should

be capable of releasing from sin and achieving the other results! . . . For this

28 Ibid., 4.1 (113).29 Ibid., 4.2 (115-16): ‘‘So we dwell in Him and are indwelt and become one spirit with Him. The

soul and the body and all their faculties forthwith become spiritual, for our souls, our bodies and

blood, are united with His’’ (116).30 Ibid., 4.2 (116); cf. La vie en Christ 4.9 (284).31 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 4.2. Cabasilas quotes 2 Corinthians 2:16, ‘‘we have the mind of

Christ’’; 2 Corinthians 13:3, ‘‘you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me’’; Philippians 1:18, ‘‘I

yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus’’; and Galatians 2:20 as the summary, ‘‘it is no longer

I who live, but Christ lives in me.’’32 Ibid., 4.3 (117). ‘‘To revive those who fade away and die because of their sins is the work of

the sacred table alone.’’

249

reason we are baptized but once, but approach the table frequently, for we from

time to time offend against God since we are human.33

Cabasilas touches on a latent issue in liturgical practice here, demonstrating the

necessity of frequent communion during an epoch when the faithful rarely com-

muned. Cabasilas explicitly exhorts his audience to commune frequently in a later

section of the work, stating that no one should ‘‘unnecessarily abstain’’ from com-

munion.34 He responds to the argument that people should abstain from commun-

ion because of unworthiness by emphasizing the benefits of Christ’s presence in

communion which heals sinfulness.35

Finally, the theological synthesis developed in this exposition on the sacraments

of initiation results in his description of the actualization of sharing in God’s life:

This is the reality of our adoption as sons of God. . . . In this case . . . there is

a real birth and a sharing with the only-begotten Son, not of the surname only,

but of His very being, His Blood, His Body, His Life. What, then, is greater

than that the Father of the only-begotten Son Himself recognizes in us His

members and finds the very form of the Son in our faces? . . . Why should I

call this sonship fictitious when it makes us more alike in nature and more

closely akin than natural sonship?36

Thus, partaking of the divine life occurs through participation in the sacraments,

and Christ nourishes the participant’s relationship with him that started with chris-

mation. Christ guards and protects the person, never abandoning him as he progresses

33 Ibid., 4.6 (121). Cabasilas also notes that the sacrament of repentance is limited in its efficacy,

as the ‘‘sacred banquet’’ is required for the fullness of Christ’s presence.34 Ibid., 6.14 (193). ‘‘Him we must seek in every way in order that we may feed on Him and

ward off hunger by constantly attending this banquet. Nor should we unnecessarily abstain from the

holy table and thus greatly weaken our souls on the pretext that we are not really worthy of the

Mysteries. Rather, we must resort to the priests [for Confession] on account of our sins so that we

may drink of the cleansing Blood.’’ Cabasilas does not mention confession, but clearly implies it.

See La vie en Christ 6.102 (128): ‘‘¢ll¦ perˆ tîn ¢marthm£twn pros…ontaj to‹j ƒereàsi, tîn

kaqars…wn p…nein aƒm£twn.’’35 The historical background to this issue has been treated by Nicholas Afanasiev, Трапеза Гос-

одня, Серня Lex Orandi (Kyiv: Temple of the Venerable Agapit Pecherskiy, 2003) 116-28, and idem,

The Church of the Holy Spirit, ed. Michael Plekon, trans. Vitaly Permiakov (Notre Dame, Ind.: Univer-

sity of Notre Dame Press, 2007) 50-57. Afanasiev traces the beginning of regular practice of abstinence

from communion with the conversion of the masses following the Peace of Constantine in 313. He

shows how the canons had threatened those who abstained from communion with excommunication,

with restoration allowed only through demonstrated repentance. The commencement of a new inter-

pretation of such canons is exemplified by the commentary of characters such as Balsamon, who claimed

that those who came into the Church needed to stay to the end in order to receive the antidoron, not

communion. In liturgical life, ‘‘the Lord’s Supper ceased to be a supper, celebrated in and for the

Church’’ (Afanasiev, Трапеза Господня, 123).36 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 5.9 (127).

250

through life’s trials, restoring him when he falls and reminding him of his new

identity as a son of God, sharing Christ’s own identity. In other words, partici-

pating in God’s life originates with God who sees the entire process through to

its end. Cabasilas’s explanation of communion continues his teaching on chris-

mation as he keeps his audience attuned to the organic connection between their

experience of the sacraments and living the Christian life. Communion guarantees

Christ’s continued presence and keeps the Christian in the life of the Trinity. Thus,

the sacramental life represents the locus for the encounter and union between human-

ity and God in Christ, and stands as Cabasilas’s most significant contribution to

medieval Byzantine theology.

The bulk of the rest of this prodigious work attends to cultivating the proper

human disposition through virtuous thoughts and deeds, grounded in orienting

one’s mind on Christ.37 Cabasilas expounds his interpretation of the Incarnation

as the paradigmatic event for the formation of human nature by referring to

Christ as humanity’s fulfillment, beginning with the creation story:

It was for the new man that human nature was created at the beginning, and

for him mind and desire were prepared. Our reason we have received in order

that we may know Christ, our desire in order that we might hasten to Him. We

have memory in order that we may carry Him in us, since He Himself is the

archetype for those who were created. It was not the old Adam who was the

model for the new, but the new Adam for the old.38

Cabasilas appears to embellish a sense of human development modeled after

Christ’s paradigm that originated in Irenaeus.39 The difference is that Cabasilas’s

process is firmly grounded in sacramental participation. The absolute value of

christification achieved through this process is exemplified by a complete and

total dependence on and orientation towards Christ.40

Cabasilas attends to humanity’s manner of living and spiritual practices in the

following sections with particular focus on constant, hourly prayer directed towards

Christ. While some consider this an implicit reference to the practice of the Jesus

Prayer, Cabasilas’s own commentary appears to suggest the possibility of multiple

means of achieving this goal:

37 Ibid., 6.6, 7, 9 (207-12). Cabasilas consistently recommends vigilance: practice in meditating

on what is good in order to overcome evil.38 Ibid., 6.12 (190).39 See James Purves, ‘‘The Spirit and the Imago Dei: Reviewing the Anthropology of Irenaeus of

Lyons,’’ The Evangelical Quarterly 68 (1996) 103-5, and his elaboration on the process of human

‘‘becomingness’’ in Irenaeus. This entails a gradual spiritual growth in the likeness of God, following

Christ’s incarnational paradigm, enabled by the Holy Spirit.40 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 6.12: Cabasilas portrays Christ as the ‘‘resting place’’ and ‘‘goal

of all things’’ for man.

251

But that we may be able to have our attention always directed towards Him

and have this zeal at all times, let us call on Him, the subject of our salvation,

at every hour. There is no need whatever of special formalities for prayers, nor

need those who call upon him have any special places or a loud voice. There

is no place in which He is not present; it is impossible for Him not to be near

us. For those who seek Him He is actually closer than their very heart.41

This seems to exclude a direct reference to the hesychast’s Jesus Prayer, espe-

cially since Cabasilas uses the Beatitudes as his source for a spirituality that

informs the virtuous life borne from sacramental initiation.42 Cabasilas instead

allows his audience the flexibility to utilize the most effective means of discov-

ering the prayers that will lead them towards contemplation of Christ.

This brief review of the core elements of Cabasilas’s The Life in Christ portrays

this work as a masterpiece of Byzantine sacramental theology. Cabasilas’s mag-

isterial extrapolation of theology from liturgical contents and structures is striking

for its resemblance to the instruction typical of the mystagogical catecheses of the

4th century. These classical mystagogies, explicating the sacramental experience

of new or prospective initiates, do not separate baptism, chrismation, and eucha-

rist, but rather present them as a unitary whole comprising initiation. Granting the

theological unicity of their respective works, Cyril of Jerusalem,Ambrose of Milan,

Theodore of Mopsuestia, and John Chrysostom commonly indicate a unitary pro-

cess of initiation which is sealed by partaking of the eucharist.43 More signifi-

cantly, as pastors, their treatises explain the theological meaning of the rites of

initiation to those preparing for initiation (and the newly baptized) in practical

terms, which is mystagogy.44 Their common understanding of a single process of

initiation that begins with baptism and culminates in the eucharist, their eluci-

dation of the ritual’s liturgical theology, and the way they relate the sacraments

to divinization, corresponds to our author’s The Life in Christ.

41 Ibid., 6.13 (192).42 Cf. ibid., 6.10 (175-89).43 For background to these works, see Enrico Mazza, Mystagogy: A Theology of Liturgy in the

Patristic Age, trans. Matthew J. O’Connell (New York: Pueblo, 1989), especially his bibliography for

primary and secondary reading (176ff.). English translations are provided in Edward Yarnold, The

Awe-Inspiring Rites of Initiation: The Origins of the R.C.I.A., 2nd ed. (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical

Press, 1994).44 Yarnold, 167. Cyril and Ambrose delivered their catecheses to the newly initiated during the

Easter octave, whereas John and Theodore provided their lectures before initiation. Mazza reviews

the various definitions of mystagogy (1-3), settling on ‘‘liturgical theology.’’

252

Notably, Cabasilas’s renown in sacramental theology comes from his achieve-

ment in On the Divine Liturgy.45 The Life in Christ has generated the most interest

for its spiritually-oriented theology and its coincidence with Palamas’s hesychasm,

and then for its prolonged elaboration of soteriology, with the sacramental contri-

bution assigned a secondary degree of signification.46 The remainder of this article

will attend to these subjects in order to compare their weightiness with his sacra-

mental emphasis, and assist in determining the originality of Cabasilas’s The Life

in Christ.

II. The Life in Christ: A Soteriological Treatise?

Panayiotis Nellas endeavored to discover whether The Life in Christ answers

the famous question posed by Anselm’s 11th century classical treatise Cur Deus

Homo. Nellas, clearly assuming a pejorative stance towardsAnselm’s work, asserts

that Cabasilas restored Pauline terminology back to the forefront, advancing the

notion of deification as christification.47 Nellas essentially reads The Life in Christ

as a repositioning of Christian anthropology along the lines of a creation-deification

model in which the sacraments function as paths to incorporation in Christ.48 Nel-

las identifies complete union with God as the purpose of Cabasilas’s treatise, with

the eucharist assuming the central locus for the actualization of the hypostatic union

in which humanity acquires an ontological change.49 The sacraments become some-

thing like a place, a created dwelling for God with his body. Nellas credits Cabasi-

las (along with Gregory Palamas) for restoring traditional theological anthropology

by establishing the creation-deification model of soteriology, a crowning theologi-

cal accomplishment of the 14th century.50 Nellas asserts thatAnselm’s theory restricted

45 The classical work on this subject is by Rene Bornert, Les commentaries byzantins de la divine

liturgie du VII e au XV e siecle, Archives de l’Orient chretien 9 (Paris: Institut francais d’etudes byzan-

tines, 1966). Also see Michael Klimenko, ‘‘On the Divine Liturgy: Nicholas Cabasilas and his Com-

mentary,’’ Diakonia 19 (1966) 215-36; Constantine Tsirpanlis, The Liturgical and Mystical Theology

of Nicolas Cabasilas (Athens: Reprinted from ‘‘Theologia,’’ 1976); and Hans-Joachim Schulz, The

Byzantine Liturgy: Symbolic Structure and Faith Expression, trans. Matthew J. O’Connell (New York:

Pueblo, 1986).46 Severien Salaville provides the most pithy examination in ‘‘Vues soteriologiques chez Nicolas

Cabasilas (XIVe siecle),’’ Revue des etudes byzantines 1 (1943) 5-57. Also see Panayiotis Nellas,

‘‘Redemption or Deification? Nicholas Kavasilas and Anselm’s Question ‘Why Did God Become

Man?,’ ’’ trans. Elizabeth Theokritoff, Sourozh 66 (1996) 10-30.47 Nellas, 13 (23).48 Ibid., 18.49 Ibid., 18-19, 26-27.50 Ibid., 28. Nellas also views Cabasilas’s model as holding promise for ecumenical dialogue, as a

‘‘starting point for ‘fruitful dialogue’ ’’ between Orthodox and other Christian groups, since Cabasilas

‘‘exposed Anselm’s tragic mistake.’’

253

the soteriological axis to Fall-redemption and proposes a creation-deification model

as a solution. An example of his negative attitude towards Anselm includes the

caricature of the ‘‘reduction’’ as an ‘‘asphyxiating cloud.’’51 In Nellas’s evalua-

tion, Cabasilas’s contribution belongs to soteriology and theological anthropol-

ogy, whereas sacramental theology holds a utilitarian function.

Severien Salaville treats the issue more broadly, examining a number of Cabasi-

las’s works in determining whether his soteriology was consistent from one work

to another.52 Salaville also compares Cabasilas’s soteriology with Anselm’s. Sala-

ville notes that Cabasilas’s comments on redemption are utilitarian, serving his

explanation of the eucharist.53 Cabasilas’s approach differs from Anselm’s in his

definition of the sacraments as the gates to redemption. Salaville also comments

on the possibility that Cabasilas used the soteriology of Thomas Aquinas in

presenting his thesis. Salaville concludes that such comparisons are complicated

by the fact that Cabasilas probably never had access to translations of Cur Deus

Homo and the Summa, although he and Aquinas shared many sources, and Cabasi-

las also made reference to the idea of satisfaction. For Salaville, Cabasilas’s works

carry a heterogeneous quality, and his contribution is thus irreducible.54

Rene Bornert agrees with Salaville and takes it a step further by claiming that

On the Divine Liturgy was intended to be a complementary work to The Life in

Christ, characterizing the latter as a treatise on the sacramental mysteries and the

former as a strictly mystagogical commentary.55 Bornert downplays Cabasilas’s

contribution, qualifying his works as a synthetic expose of the traditional struc-

tures of sacramental and liturgical signs. He also asserts that hesychasm appears

in Cabasilas’s work, though in a limited manner.56 Bornert focuses on Cabasilas’s

use of typology, especially in his commentary on the Divine Liturgy. Bornert

places Cabasilas in the patristic tradition by employing both historia and theoria

in On the Divine Liturgy, although (according to Bornert) the historia function

serves theoria.57

51 Ibid., 23.52 See n. 46 above.53 Salaville, 25.54 Ibid., 48-49. The first known Greek translation of Cur Deus Homo was by Manuel Calecas, who

died in 1410.55 Bornert, 217.56 Ibid., 225-26.57 In mystagogical texts commenting on the eucharistic Divine Liturgy, historia loosely follows

the so-called ‘‘Antiochene’’ tradition by interpreting a particular liturgical action or text as signifying

something particular from the gospels or the life of Christ. Theoria interprets the actions as pointing

to a deeper spiritual meaning, sometimes referring to the Christian’s ascending journey to the contem-

plation of God. Most scholars use allegory as the technical term for historia, and anagogy for theoria,

254

A brief analysis of an important passage from On the Divine Liturgy shows how

Cabasilas’s work is primarily mystagogical, especially when he presents two

explanations of liturgical components together. In On the Divine Liturgy, Cabasilas

seems to have been concerned with clarifying liturgical elements for a lay audi-

ence, given the hybrid nature of his commentary. His intent surpasses a mere

endeavor to synthesize allegorical and anagogical interpretations of the text as he

sensitively explains the most practical aspects of the liturgical actions, evidenced

by the following example from his interpretation of the Great Entrance of the

eucharistic Divine Liturgy:

The priest, having said the doxology aloud, comes to the altar of preparation,

takes the offerings, and reverently holding them head-high departs. . . . The

priest goes on, surrounded by candles and incense, until he comes to the altar.

This is done, no doubt, for practical reasons; it was necessary to bring the

offerings which are to be sacrificed to the altar and set them down there, and

to do this with all reverence and devotion.58

Cabasilas then explains the allegorical significance of the text:

Also, this ceremony signifies the last manifestation of Christ, which aroused

the hatred of the Jews, when he embarked on the journey from his native

country to Jerusalem, where he was to be sacrificed; then he rode into the

Holy City on the back of an ass, escorted by a cheering crowd.59

At this point, an anagogical explanation might be expected, but Cabasilas

instead refers this entire action to the anaphora as the center of the eucharistic

liturgy, urging the assembly to prostrate themselves to be remembered in the

priest’s commemoration since ‘‘there is no other means of supplication so pow-

erful, so certain of acceptance, as that which takes place through this most holy

sacrifice.’’60 This section on the Great Entrance is quite short, and ends with a

warning about erroneously venerating the offerings ‘‘as if they were the body and

blood of Christ,’’ since they have not yet been consecrated at this point of the

liturgy. Cabasilas exercised considerable caution in refraining from attaching too

superficial an importance to the entrance of the gifts, and instead directed his

audience to the centrality of the anaphora and its significance.

though they are interchangeable. Maximus the Confessor’s 7th century Mystagogia is the classical

commentary predominantly employing theoria, whereas Germanus of Constantinople uses historia in

his 8th century treatise. For more on the significance of these methods in Byzantine liturgical works,

see Robert F. Taft, ‘‘The Liturgy of the Great Church: An Initial Synthesis of Structure and Interpre-

tation on the Eve of Iconoclasm,’’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers 34-35 (1980-81) 45-75.58 Cabasilas, On the Divine Liturgy, 24 (65).59 Ibid.60 Ibid.

255

This brief excursion into On the Divine Liturgy corroborates a characterization

of Cabasilas as a teacher who catered his presentation towards the greatest benefit

for his audience. This example reveals a clarifying motif in Cabasilas’s method-

ology. In the Byzantine eucharistic Divine Liturgy, the Great Entrance occupied

a position of enormous visual grandeur, including the participation of ecclesias-

tical and imperial dignitaries.61 The entrance with the gifts began to be interpreted

as a solemn liturgical component as early as Theodore Mospuestia’s 4th century

explanation of the mysteries.62 As participation in communion decreased, the

weightiness of this event grew in prominence, eventually with the addition of

verbal commemorations in response to specific requests for prayer. Cabasilas was

not the first to warn the laity about venerating the bread and wine prior to their

consecration, as evidenced by the complaints stated by Constantinopolitan Patri-

arch Eutyches in the 6th century on the same issue.63 However, his endeavor to

reorient the audience towards a proper understanding of the meaning of the

liturgical structures closely corresponds to his objective in The Life in Christ. In

this sense, The Life in Christ shares a fraternal association with On the Divine

Liturgy, especially considering the gap between chapters 39 and 40 of the latter

work, his explication of the bidding to communion, and the prayers said for those

who have communicated.64 Bornert has correctly noted that The Life in Christ and

its fecund expression of the union between communicants and Christ in holy

communion conveniently fills this gap, although the work cannot be reduced to

solely fulfilling this function.65 Cabasilas’s introduction of a practical concern into

the liturgical commentary evidences his sensitivity to his audience and illuminates

a unique aspect of his treatise.

In conclusion, scholars do not agree on the core theme of Cabasilas’s thesis.

The issue is its purpose. One might expect a late 14th century theological work

to center on one issue, with some commonality between writers of the period. This

explains scholars’ desire to discover soteriological and hesychastic theses in Cabasi-

las’s work, since many of his contemporaries focused on one theological theme.

Nellas’s presentation on Cabasilas does not consider the totality of The Life in

Christ, because unlike Anselm’s treatise, Cabasilas uses a mystagogical method

61 See Taft, A History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, vol. 2: The Great Entrance: A

History of the Transfer of Gifts and other Pre-anaphoral Rites (2nd ed., Orientalia Christiana Ana-

lecta 200 [Rome: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1978]), for a complete treatment of

the historical development of the entrance with the gifts in the Byzantine and related liturgical rites.

See pp. 35-46 for an overview of the early development of the Great Entrance.62 Ibid., 35.63 Ibid., 84.64 Cabasilas, On the Divine Liturgy (92-93).65 Bornert, 217, 229.

256

in presenting the sacraments and explaining how they reveal their inherent soteri-

ology. The example from On the Divine Liturgy demonstrates this, showing that

Cabasilas focused on explaining the meaning of sacramental celebrations to a lay

audience. His explanations are not necessarily systematic, but pastoral, evidenced

by his attempt sometimes to clarify particular issues with two meanings, one prac-

tical, and one theological. The Life in Christ similarly reveals Cabasilas’s objec-

tive, to show how the sacraments begin and sustain Christians’ saving relationship

with Christ. While Cabasilas’s work elaborates the soteriology of union with Christ

and the process of divinization, his purpose is to show how sacramental celebra-

tion culminates in salvation. His work is primarily a mystagogical presentation of

the sacraments, of which soteriology is an organic and related component. The

liturgical celebrations are not utilitarian, but primary events leading to theology’s

proliferation and refinement. This is an important distinction for liturgical the-

ology since, for Cabasilas, the liturgy is the event at which theology is shaped,

formed, and even understood.

III. The Life in Christ: A Hesychastic Work?

As noted throughout, hesychasm was a preeminent teaching of Cabasilas’s milieu,

and some scholars have attempted to identify hesychastic motifs in his work. John

Meyendorff opined that some passages from The Life in Christ are paraphrases

of Gregory Palamas’s Triads,66 whereas several scholars, including Myrrha Lot-

Borodine, Nellas, Ware, and Bornert acknowledge Cabasilas’s unicity, but place

his thesis of theological anthropology from The Life in Christ within the Palamite-

hesychast school.67 Nellas’s conclusion typifies this school of thought:

Nicolas Cabasilas is clearly situated in the Orthodox-biblical-patristic tradi-

tion in general and in the school of St. Gregory Palamas in particular. . . . By

supporting within the specific conditions of the fourteenth century the work of

St. Gregory Palamas, he thus revealed Orthodox truth and contributed to the

condemnation of the heretical humanism of his age. . . . By showing that the

spiritual life can be lived in its fullness even in the world and by sketching the

basic lines of such a way of life, he played a leading part in the vital task of

channeling the great hesychastic renaissance of the fourteenth century into the

world as a renaissance of liturgical and sacramental life.68

66 Meyendorff, 108.67 Lot-Borodine, 108; and Bornert, 225-26, 243.68 Panayiotis Nellas, Deification in Christ: The Nature of the Human Person, trans. Norman Rus-

sell (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1987) 150.

257

Others, such as Steven Runciman, D. P. Miquel, and Joan Mervyn Hussey are

less certain and differentiate Cabasilas from hesychasm and the Palamite school.69

Outside of acknowledging Cabasilas’s support of Palamas and the inevitable encoun-

ter he had with hesychasm in his environment, it is difficult to identify distinctly

hesychast teachings or tendencies in The Life in Christ. Cabasilas and proponents

of hesychasm both emphasize spiritual growth through union with Christ. Both

cultivate spiritual interiority, and Cabasilas, addressing a lay audience, selects a

‘‘common highway for all,’’which he identifies as sacraments and prayer.70 Cabasi-

las essentially opens the sacramental spiritual school he has created to all groups

of people in an important passage:

As is fitting, we omit the things which are proper to each different state of human

life and examine the duties to God which we all have in common. No one would

claim that the same virtues are needed by those who govern the state and those

who live as private citizens, or by those who have made no further vow to God

after the baptismal washing and those who live the monastic life and have taken

vows of virginity and poverty and thus own neither property nor their own selves.

But the debt which, like the very appellation itself, is common to all who are

called by the name of Christ, must also be paid by all. Neglect of this debt on

the part of anyone can be excused on no pretext whatever, whether of age, occu-

pation, prosperity or adversity, remoteness, solitude, cities, or tumults—nor even

by any of the numerous excuses in which those accused of crime take refuge.71

In this appeal, Cabasilas draws his own ethical conclusion on the responsibility

that comes with the sacraments. Everyone receives God’s salvation, and everyone

is thus responsible for approaching the sacraments for the forgiveness of sins. This

conclusion originates from his discussion of the sacraments. Thus, interpreting this

work as hesychastic constitutes an imposition of a particular theological teaching

(hesychasm) on Cabasilas’s structural interpretation of the church’s lex orandi.

Cabasilas takes the opposite approach in his treatise, as he shows how the lex orandi

(sacraments) reveals both the lex credendi (soteriology), and a lex vivendi, a rule

for the spiritual life which finds its source in the sacraments.

69 J. Hussey, ‘‘Symeon the New Theologian and Nicolas Cabasilas: Similarities and Contrasts in

Orthodox Spirituality,’’Eastern Churches Review 4 (1972) 139-40; Steven Runciman, The Last Byzan-

tine Renaissance (Cambridge: University Press, 1970) 72-73; and D. P. Miquel, ‘‘L’experience sacra-

mentelle selon Nicolas Cabasilas,’’ Irenikon 28 (1965) 180. Runciman describes Cabasilas as a mystical

humanist. Miquel suggests that Cabasilas could be attempting to mitigate hesychast extremism and

to invite warmly the laity into a spiritual experience.70 Nellas, Deification in Christ, 130-34.71 Cabasilas, The Life in Christ 6.1 (160).

258

In summary, Cabasilas revealed to his audience the magnitude of the theological

and spiritual wealth contained by the church’s sacramental rituals which are imparted

to participants through a variant of sacramental realism. This does not necessarily

dismiss the possibility of hesychast influence on Cabasilas’s theology, but rather

allows us to conclude that hesychasm is not the primary catalyst in a work that

explains the soteriological meaning of the sacraments and the spiritual school they

require. The evidence shows that Cabasilas employed a traditional form of mysta-

gogy by explicating how participation in the sacraments of initiation leads to union

with Christ, and thus, salvation. His mystagogical approach is consistent through-

out the treatise, and should be interpreted as a 14th century renewal of the ancient

mystagogical tradition.

IV. Conclusion

Nicholas Cabasilas’s unique contribution to medieval Byzantine theology from

The Life in Christ does not originate from his soteriology, or even his theological

anthropology, as prominent as these themes are in his work. Rather, Cabasilas has

explicated a unique thesis of theosis through christification by reviving the early

mystagogical paradigm of encounter and union with Christ through the unified

sacraments of initiation.

Historically, the liturgical structures and practices of baptism, chrismation, and

eucharist remained relatively stable in Byzantium up until the 14th century, and some

would argue to the present time. However, a divorce between the theology con-

tained in the liturgical structures, texts, and events and the interpretation of this

liturgical theology slowly transpired following the gradual imperialization of the

church in 313.72 The commentary on the Divine Liturgy by Germanus of Constantin-

ople in the 8th century demonstrates the separation of liturgy’s purpose and its

theological interpretation, as Germanus created a theological system of illustrative

symbolism to compensate for the deterioration of lay participation in communion.73

In The Life in Christ, Cabasilas has restored the primacy of mystagogy in sacra-

mental theology by meticulously describing the way the participants are trans-

formed in the events.

Cabasilas makes another contribution in The Life in Christ in his christocentric

orientation wherein each step in the process is initiated and facilitated by Christ

72 See the instructive essay by Alexander Schmemann, ‘‘Liturgy and Theology,’’ in Liturgy and

Tradition: Theological Reflections of Alexander Schmemann, ed. Thomas Fisch (Crestwood, N.Y.: St.

Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1990) 49-68, esp. 61-68.73 See the comments on the decline in the frequency of communion by Paul Meyendorff in Ger-

manus of Constantinople, On the Divine Liturgy, ed. Paul Meyendorff (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s

Seminary Press, 1984) 39-42. Also see Taft, ‘‘Liturgy of the Great Church,’’ 68-69.

259

himself, and the transformation of the participant occurs through his sacramental

union with Christ. As evidenced by his magisterial exegesis of the liturgy in On

the Divine Liturgy and his knowledge of the liturgical ordo of baptism and the

consecration of the altar, Cabasilas was familiar with the forms and contents of

the Byzantine liturgical rites, and used these to guide his writing. When he empha-

sizes an encounter with Christ, Cabasilas refers to liturgical sources and explains

them as real events that culminate in salvation.74 This encounter focuses on the

transformation of the participants through the active agency of Christ, reflecting

the fundamental New Testament theology of recapitulation and personalization of

everything and everyone in Christ.75 The primary encounter in which conversion

is initiated and developed is in sacramental celebration where the church meets

Christ, and Cabasilas has explained how Christ sanctifies humanity in liturgical

rites. He also confirms that transformation is not limited to the original event, but

is a process that must continually be reinforced through regular encounters with

Christ, followed by the nurturing of the interior spiritual life in accordance with

a person’s particular circumstances.

Cabasilas has thus preceded the 20th century ascendancy of liturgical theology

by emphasizing the renewal of the fullness of sacramental participation and its

significance for participants in The Life in Christ. In this 14th century accom-

plishment, Cabasilas cannot be reduced to be merely a partner of the hesychasts,

nor a synthesizer of previous liturgical commentators, but should be celebrated for

restoring a paradigmatic mystagogical comprehension of and immersion in the

salvific significance of sacramental participation in Christ.

74 Christ’s agency is perhaps most compellingly illustrated by the following text from the ‘‘nemo

dignus’’ prayer immediately preceding the Great Entrance in the Byzantine Divine Liturgy: ‘‘For

Thou art the Offerer and the Offered, the Receiver and the Received, O Christ our God, and to Thee

we ascribe glory. . . .’’ See The Divine Liturgy according to St. John Chrysostom with appendices

(New York: Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America, 1967) 53-54.75 See Robert F. Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine Offıce

and Its Meaning for Today, 2nd rev. ed (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1993) 334-40. Also see

Taft, ‘‘What Does Liturgy Do? Toward a Soteriology of Liturgical Celebration: Some Theses,’’ Wor-

ship 66 (1992) 204-5. Taft’s comments, drawing upon a collection of primary liturgical examples,

point to the formation of a new person through obedience in faith.

260