THEOLOGIA ORTHODOXAstudia.ubbcluj.ro/download/pdf/1232.pdfassociated in iconography with the...

THEOLOGIA ORTHODOXAVol. 64, No. 1, June 2019

STUDIAUNIVERSITATISBABEŞ‐BOLYAI

THEOLOGIAORTHODOXA

Vol.64,No.1(June2019)

EDITOR‐IN‐CHIEF:VASILESTANCIU,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,Romania

EXECUTIVEEDITORS:

NICOLAETURCAN,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaGABRIELGÂRDAN,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,Romania

EDITORIALBOARD:

IOANCHIRILĂ,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaȘTEFANILOAIE,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaPHILIPLEMASTERS,McMurryUniversity,UnitedStatesTHEODORNIKOLAOU,Ludwig‐Maximilians‐UniversitätMünchen,GermanyKONSTANTINOSNIKOLAKOPOULOS,Ludwig‐Maximilians‐UniversitätGermanyEUGENPENTIUC,HollyCross,Brooklin,UnitedStatesAcad.IOAN‐AURELPOP,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaADOLFMARTINRITTER,Ruprecht‐Karls‐UniversitätHeidelberg,GermanyHANSSCHWARZ,UniversitätRegensburg,GermanyMARIANSIMION,HarvardUniversity,UnitedStatesLUCIANTURCESCU,ConcordiaUniversity,Montreal,Canada

EDITORIALASSISTANT:

RĂZVANPERȘA,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaADVISORYBOARD:

MetropolitanANDREIANDREICUȚ,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaVALERBEL,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaDANIELBUDA,LucianBlagaUniversity,Sibiu,RomaniaIOAN‐VASILELEB,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaALEXANDRUMORARU,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaRADUPREDA,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaCRISTIANSONEA,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaSTELIANTOFANĂ,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,Romania

PROOFREADERS:

MARKMADELEY,BruxellesADRIANPODARU,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaRĂZVANPERȘA,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaANIELASILADI,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,RomaniaIOANASONEA,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,Romania

http://studia.orth.rohttp://www.studia.ubbcluj.ro/serii/th_orth/

EDITORIALOFFICE:EpiscopNicolaeIvanStr.,f.n.,Cluj‐Napoca,Romania,

Email:[email protected](PrincipalContact)

©Photoonthefrontcover:FlorinFlorea

YEAR Volume64(LXIV)2019MONTHJUNEISSUE1

PUBLISHEDONLINE:2019‐06‐30PUBLISHEDPRINT:2019‐06‐30

ISSUEDOI:10.24193/subbto.2019.1

CONTENTS

I.BIBLICALTHEOLOGY

STELIANPAȘCA‐TUȘA,IOANPOPA‐BOTA,TheByzantineiconicrepresentationofthecherubim:Scripturalreferencepoints...................................................................5

II.SYSTEMATICTHEOLOGY

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY,BasiltheGreatontheEschatologicalUnityoftheBodyofChrist........................................................................................................................21

BENEDICT (VALENTIN)VESA,TheChristologyofSt. IsaacofNinivehandtheEastSyriacTheologyofthe7‐8thcenturies.........................................................39

JOOSEOP KEUM, Church, Minjung and State: The Revival of ProtestantChristianityinNorthKorea..............................................................................................53

RADUPETREMUREȘAN,ThePositionofFatherDumitruStăniloaeon theTheophaniesandMarianApparitionsofHisTimes................................................73

III.HISTORICALTHEOLOGY

DRAGOȘ BOICU, The Consolidation of Donatism in the First Half of theFourthCentury......................................................................................................................83

III.PRACTICALTHEOLOGY

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR,ColourinMuralPainting:VirtueinConservationandRestoration..........................................................................................................................101

V.VARIA

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB,KyivTheologicalAcademyin1869‐1884:AnAttempttoCombineTheologicalandPedagogicalEducation..........................................111

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR,ThePlaceofStudentsandWorkersActivisminPolitics:AHistoricalReflection...............................................................................133

VI.REVIEWS

PatriciuVlaicuandRăzvanPerșa,eds.,CanonicalTraditionandMissionoftheChurch (Cluj‐Napoca: PresaUniversitară Clujeană, 2018), 350 pp.(DRAGOȘBOICU).............................................................................................................147

Paul Siladi,Word and Image (Cluj‐Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană,2019),588pp.(DRAGOȘBOICU)..............................................................................151

MaxOxbrowandTimGrass,eds.,TheMissionofGod.Studies inOrthodoxandEvangelicalMission,RegnumStudies inMission (Oxford:RegnumBooksInternational,2015),258pp.(MAXIMMORARIU)...............................155

SUBBTO64,no.1(2019):5‐20DOI:10.24193/subbto.2019.1.01

I.BIBLICALTHEOLOGY

THEBYZANTINEICONICREPRESENTATIONOFTHECHERUBIM:SCRIPTURALREFERENCEPOINTS

STELIANPAȘCA‐TUȘA*,IOANPOPA‐BOTA**

ABSTRACT.Theaimof this study is to tacklea subjectof iconography fromaScripturalperspective.Inotherwords,wewishtostudytheextenttowhichtheiconicmorphologyofthecherubimabidesbythedetailsmentionedintheHolyBookandassumesthetheologicalmessageitconveys.WeareawarethattheHolyScriptureisnottheonlysourceforiconography.Iconpainterscanalsouseothersourceswhencreatingtheirartisticrepresentations.However,ifthemorphologythey represent originates in theHoly Scripture, then it is compulsory that theelementstakenfromthebiblicaltextsshouldbecorrectandnotatalldistorted.Inourresearch,weshallfocusespeciallyontheTetramorph,amorphologythathasgreatlychallengedthecreativityoficonpainters,inordertoclarifythemysteryofits origin. Contrary to the general view, some terminologists and icon paintersconsideredthismorphologypropertothegroupoftheseraphimandnottothatofthecherubim.Inourendeavour,weshallalsousethemethodofcontextualisationandlinguisticanalysis,butthemainworkingmethodisspecifictotheChristianEastandplacesprimacyon theunityof the textand the integrityof the theologicalmessage.Keywords:cherubim,iconicmorphology,hermeneia,MironCristea,DionysiusofFourna,Ezekiel,Tetramorph

Introduction

Cherubim are angelic beings about whom the Holy Scripture and inparticular theOldTestamentoffersus themostdetailswith respect to theirappearance.This isnotby chance, as the cherubimarementioned in all thecategoriesofcanonicaltextsfromtheOldTestament.StartingwiththeGenesis,

*LecturerPhD,FacultyofOrthodoxTheology,Cluj‐Napoca,[email protected]**AssociateResearcherPhD,FacultyofOrthodoxTheology,Cluj‐Napoca,[email protected]

STELIANPAȘCA‐TUȘA,IOANPOPA‐BOTA

6

theyareentrustedwiththemissionofmysteriouslysignallingGod’spresence.Inthemindofthechosenpeople,thecherubimwereassociatedwiththeholyspace, given their place at the entrance to Eden (Gen 3:24) and especiallygiventheirartisticrepresentationsportrayingtheirfaceinvariouswaysinthebiblicalsanctuary.Whetherwerefertothefaceswovenontheveil(Ex36:35)oronthecurtainsofthetabernacle(Ex26:1)ortothecherubimontheArkoftheCovenant(Ex25:18‐22;accordingto37:7‐9)ortothosethatguardedtheHolyofHollies(2Chron3:10‐13)ortootherrepresentationsfromtheareaoftheTempleoftheearthly(3Kg6:32‐33;7:27‐29)orheavenly(Ez41:17‐20)Jerusalem,thecherubimhadtheroleofofferingthechosenpeoplethepossibilitytoreachthecommunionwiththeOneenthronedbetweenthecherubim(2Kg19:15;Ps80:1;Is37:16)orflyingonthewingsofthecherubim(Ps18:10).

Even though we have enough Scriptural details to reconstruct theiconicmorphologyof thesecelestialbeings,therepresentationof thecherubimhasbeenagreatchallenge for iconpainters.This isdue, inparticular, to theinformationprophetEzekielprovideswithrespecttotheirappearanceintheinauguralvision,whereGod’sgloryisdescribed.Theartisticrepresentationofthecherubim in thiswritinghas led to theso‐calledTetramorph,portrayingfourfacesunitedinasinglebody.Takenseparately,thesefourfaceshavebeenassociated in iconography with the evangelists, given the patristic exegesiswhich correlated their imagewith the four faces of the beings described byEzekiel.Althoughthecherubimarelinkedwiththreeanimals(thelion,thebulland the eagle), their appearance is anthropomorphous1 or at least partiallyhumanoid(Ez1:5‐14)2.Theyhaveseveralpairsofwingsandamultitudeofeyeson their body. And, to deepen evenmore themystery of theirmorphology,they are associated with winged wheels of fire that move in line with thecherubim’sbody.

WehaveprovidedtheseScripturaldetails inordertounderstandthereasonwhy theartistic representationof thecherubimhasbeenchallengingforiconpainters.ThelackofaunitaryScripturaldiscoursewithrespecttotheirappearance has led to iconicmorphologies that are not consistentwith theHolyScripture.Forthesereasons,wewishtoanalysetheiconicrepresentationofthecherubimdescribedintwohermeneias3,propertotheEasternworld,and

1 IoanChirilă,Fragmentariumexegetic filonian [Veinal exegetic collectionof fragments] (Cluj‐Napoca:Limes,2002),104.

2 J. Skinner, The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, Chapters I.‐XXXIX.With Introduction and Notes(Cambridge:UniversityPress,1897),44.

3WeshallresorttotheGreekhermeneiaofmonkDionysiusofFourna(HermeneiaofthePaintingArt,re‐editedbySofiain2000)andtotheonlyRomaniahermeneia,whoseauthorispatriarchMironCristea (Iconografia și întocmiriledin interiorulbisericii răsăritene [Iconography andcompilationsfromwithintheEasternChurch],editedinSibiuin1905,followingWesternsources,yetadaptedtotheByzantinespecificity.


7

to ascertain their faithfulness to these sources. We shall focus solely onByzantinemorphologies inorder to restrict evenmore the areaof research.Sincethepresentstudyaimsatanintroductoryapproach,ofageneralnature,we shall not analyse the specificity of distinctive representations in variouschurches, like Andela Gavrilovic did4. Consequently, we shall not resort torecentWesternspecialisedresearchexceptforcasesofreconstructionoftheOldTestamentreligiouscontext5.TheworkingmethodusedfortheanalysisofScriptural texts is specific to the Christian East, but we shall also resort tocontextualisation and linguistic analysis where necessary. The presentresearchshallbedividedintwosections:onededicatedtohermeneiasandtheothertotheHolyScripture.

ScripturalmorphologyofthecherubimWehavetestimoniesaboutthecherubimandinparticularabouttheir

appearance and their mission from the Book of Genesis (3:24). They arementionedforthefirsttimeinthecontextoftheexpulsionofthefirstmanandwoman fromtheGardenofEden.Then,Godplacedcherubimwitha flamingswordattheentrancetoHeaven.Theirmissionwasnotnecessarilytoguardthegardenfromaneventualabusiveattemptofmantogetbackinside6,buttoremind Adam and Eve of the state they had before their fall, when theyresembledangelsandcouldbeclosetoGod.PhiloofAlexandriabelievedthattheflamingswordhadtheroleofshowingmen,evenatnight,thepresenceofHeaven,thespaceofdirectcommunionbetweenthemandGod7.FatherIoan

4AndelaGavrilovic“TheRepresentationoftheCherubintheNarthexoftheDecaniMonasteryAbovethePortalLeadingtotheNave.ContributiontotheResearchoftheIconographyandMeaningoftheCherubinSerbianMedievalArt,”ZbornikMaticeSrpskezaLikovneUmetnosti‐maticaSrpskaJournalforFineArts46(2018):13‐34.

5ThemainsourceforthisareaofresearchisAliceWood,OfWingsandWheels.ASyntheticStudyoftheBiblicalCherubim(Berlin/NewYork:WalterdeGruyter,2008),267p.Wealsohaveinmindstudiessuchas:RaananEichler,“Cherub:AHistoryofInterpretation”,Biblica96.1(2015):26‐38; Raanan Eichler, “When God Abandoned the Garden of Eden: A Forgotten Reading ofGenesis3:24”,VetusTestamentum65(2015):20‐32;LydiaLee,“‘YouWerethe(Divine)Cherub’:APotentialChallengetoYhwh'sSoleDivinity inEzekiel28.14”, Journal fortheStudyofTheOldTestament41.1(2016):99‐116;MaryJ.Carruthers,“Arsoblivionalis,arsinveniendi:TheCherubFigureandtheArtsofMemory”,Gesta48.2MakingThoughts,MakingPictures,MakingMemories:AspecialissueinHonorofMaryJ.Carruthers(2009):99‐117;WolfgangC.Schneider,“The'Cherubentry'inthe'TempleofLight'–ThestagingofthespiritualidentityoftheChristianemperorinthelateAntiquity”,ZeitschriftfurAntikesChristentum–JournalOfAncientChristianity10.2(2006):336‐357;D.Launderville,“Ezekiel'sCherub:Apromisingsymboloradangerousidol?”,CatholicBiblicalQuarterly65.2(2003):165‐183.

6Eichler,“WhenGodAbandonedtheGardenofEden,”20‐32.7Chirilă,Fragmentarium[Collectionoffragments],106.


8

Chirilăunderlinesthattheseangelsconveythegreatnessofdivineglory8andinvitetocommunion,theirrolenotbeinginanycasethatofinterposingthemselvesbetweenman andGod: “The cherub is a revelation, amessenger of theOnewho isuncontainable,he isnotahindrance,butadiscovery,acall.Theyaretheimageofceaselessministrytowardswhichmanhastostriveandaspire.”9

Unfortunately,thisepisodedoesnotprovideanydetailthatcouldhelpus reconstruct the morphology of the cherubim. The fact that they swirledflamingswordsmakesusbelievetheyhadarms.Likewise,theswirling flaming10swords offer us the possibility of presupposing that their appearancewas fiery,thattheirnatureresembledthefirethatshedslight.EvenifJosephusFlavius(Ant.8.3.3)11statesthatnooneknowshowthecherubimlook like12,webelievethat,fromJewishliterature,wecanretainthefactthattheywereplacedinfrontofthedoorsofHeaven in order tobe contemplatedbymen, just like apainterlooksathismodelbeforerepresentinghimartistically(Philo,DeCherubim)13.Likethis,menwereofferedthepossibilityoftryingtobelikethem,mysteriouslytakingontheirimagethroughdispassionandcomprehension,accordingtoOrigen14.

Thecherubimarementionedagaininthecontextofworkscarriedoutat the tabernacle.Moses received fromGod the commandofmaking artisticrepresentationscherubim’sfacesontheArkoftheCovenant,ontheveilandonthecurtainsthatcoveredthetabernacle(Ex26:1‐31).Onthisoccasion,weare provided with a few details regarding the appearance of the cherubim(Exodus25:18‐22;acc.37:7‐9).Wenoticethatthecherubimhavewingsandfaces.Moreover, theyhad toberepresentedone in frontof theother, facing theCovenant,withtheirwingsopensothattheylookedlikecovering,shadowing

8IoanChirilă,“Porţilecerului.Oreabordareateologieiicoaneidinperspectivadimensiuniisimboliceşitranscendenteaactului liturgic” [ThegatesofHeaven.A reapproachof the theologyof theiconfromtheperpectiveofthesymbolicandtranscendantdimensionoftheliturgicalact],inCaieteleEchinox.Teoriașipracticaimaginii.Imaginarulcultural[TheEchinoxNotebooks.Theoryandpracticeoftheimage.Culturalimaginationfield],vol.2(Cluj‐Napoca:Dacia,2001),57.

9Philo,Onthecherubim(DeCherubim),trans.byF.ColsonandG.Whitaker(Harvard:UniversityPress,Cambridge,2014),14‐27.

10SaintJohnChrysostom,OmiliilaFacere[HomiliesonGenesis],inPărințișiscriitoribisericești21[ChurchFathersandWriters21],trans.byDumitruFecioru(Bucharest:IBMO,1987),213.

11 JosephusFlavius,Antichităţi iudaice [Jewishantiquities], vol. 1, trans. by IonAcsan (Bucharest:Hasefer,2002),440.

12Itispossiblethatthefirstmanandwomanweresowellacquaintedwiththecherubimthatnoadditionaldescriptionoftheirappearancewasnecessary.N.M.Sarna,“Genesis”,inTheJPSTorahcommentary,vol.1(Philadelphia:JewishPublicationSociety,1989),375.

13IoanChirilă,“CunoașterealuiDumnezeuînVechiulTestamentprinteofanieșianghelofanie”[KnowingGodintheOldTestamentthroughtheophanyandangelophany],AnuarulFacultățiideTeologieOrtodoxă1[AnnualoftheFacultyofOrthodoxTheology1](1998):101‐102.

14K.Stevenson,M.Gluerup,“Ezekiel,Daniel”,inAncientChristianCommentaryonScriptureOT,vol.13,(DownersGrove:InterVarsityPress,2008),4.


9

and,whynot,offeringprotection.TheseScripturaldetailsprovideuswithtwoelementsspecifictoallangelicbeings,whicharealwayspresentintheiconographicrepresentationsofangels:thewingsandthefaces.Iftheirwingssuggesttheirspiritualnature,theirfacesrevealusthepersonalopennesstowardscommunion15.Wecanpresupposethatthefaceofthecherubimisanthropomorphous,havinginmindthecommunionalsideentailedbythepresenceoftheseangelicbeings.

Graspingatthisopenness,weunderlinethefactthat,inrabbinicliterature,theHebrewtermcherub16which,byassociationwithanAkkadiancorrespondentkarabu,meanstopray,togiveblessing,towelcomesomeone,topraise(agodoraperson)ortoofferasacrifice17,wouldmean“child”.RabbistranslatetheAramaicrabialikethis,claimingthatthetermcherubcanbetranslatedby“likeachild”(Sukkah 5b). Considering that the face of the cherubim is represented iniconographyas thatof a child,whichemphasises theirpurityandplenitude,webelievethisrabbinicinterpretationmighthavebeenasourceofinspirationforEasterniconpainters.

AnewScripturaldetailthathelpsusreconstructthefaceofthecherubimcan be found in the second book of Chronicles (3:10‐13).From this text,wefindoutthat,whenSolomonbuiltthetemple,heaskedhiscraftsmentobuildintheHolyofHolliestwowingedcherubim,10cubitstall,standinguprightontheirfeet,theirfaceturnedtowardstheHolyandimplicitlytowardsthepeople,inordertosuggesttheideaofcommunion18.Thedetailthatcatchesourattentionisthatthecherubimhaveabodyandlegs.Mostlikely,theirappearanceresemblesthatofaman.Thewingsaretheonlydetailthatdifferentiatesthem.Stillinthecontextofbuildingthetemple,wenoticethatfacesofcherubim(1Kg7:27‐29)werealsoengravedonthepanelsofpostamentsthatsupportedthebronzesea,inordertourgetowardsinnerpurity19.Wearenotprovidedwithanydetailregarding

15Eichler,“Cherub,”33.JillMiddlemas,ThedivineImage(Tubbingen:MohrSiebeck,2014),69.16Moredetailsonthebranchesoftheverbalrootkrbcanbefoundin:DavidFreedmanandM.P.O'Connor, “bWrK. (kerub)”, in Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz‐Josef Fabry(eds.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, vol. 7, trans. by David Green (GrandRapids: EerdmansPublishingCompany, 1995), 308;M.Kmosko, “KerubundKurib”,BZ 11(1913): 225‐234;W.FAlbright, “Whatwere the Cherubim?”,BA 1 (1938): 1‐3; J. Trinquet,“Kerub,Kerubim”,DBS5(1957):161‐86;M.Haran,”TheArkandtheCherubim”,IEJ9(1959):30‐38,89‐94;ClausWestermann,Genesis1‐11,inAContinentalCommentary(Minneapolis:FortressPress,1994),274.

17PaulShalom,“Cherub”,inFredSkolniketal.(eds.),Encyclopaediajudaica,vol.4(FarmingtonHills:KeterPublishingHouse,2007),600.

18 Louis I. Rabinowitz, “Cherub in the Aggadah”, in Fred Skolnik et al. (eds.), Encyclopaediajudaica,vol.4(FarmingtonHills:KeterPublishingHouse,2007),601.

19 Lamar E. Cooper, “Ezekiel”, inTheNewAmericanCommentary 17 (Nashville: Broadman&HolmanPublishers,2001),58.


10

their shape,butweare told that the cherubimwereengraved togetherwithlionsandbulls.ThisassociationwilleasetheunderstandingofEzekiel’sinauguralvision.

Beforeanalysing thedetailsofferedbyEzekiel in thevisionofdivineglory,weshallremindyouofthefactthat,likefortheothertwosanctuaries,theprophetmentionsfacesofcherubiminhisdescriptionofthenewtempleofJerusalem(Ez41:17‐20).Inthecaseofthismention,aswell,wepointoutthepresenceofasignificantdetail:thecherubimhadtwofaces,oneofamanandoneofalion.Itisinterestingtonoticethatthecherubimarerepresentedasbicephalousonthewallofthetemple(likeinanicon).Havinginmindthattheiriconicrepresentationwastwo‐dimensional, it ispossiblethatthismannerof representationwas theonerecommendedby theprophetwithrespect tothe cherubim.Even if hepresents the cherubimasbeingshaving four faces,whentheyappearonthewallofthetemple,hechoosesabicephalousiconicrepresentation.Atwo‐dimensionaliconicrepresentationwouldhaveallowedforallfacestobeshown,likewecanseeinthecaseoftheTetramorph,butEzekielprefersonlytwoofthem.Weshallclosethissectionwherewehavesummedup the Scriptural texts inwhich the cherubim appear in the Old Testament, byspecifying that inoneof thevisions,where theprophetdescribes the cherubimonceagain,hedrawsourattentiontothefactthat,undertheirwings,thecherubimhad“whatlookedlikehumanhands”(Ez10:8).

Beforedescribing theway inwhich theprophetEzekielportrays thecherubiminhisinauguralvision,wecallattentiontothefactthattheseheavenlybeings, presentduring theophanies, havebeenpersonifiedby exegetes,whohaveassociatedthemwiththedarkcloudthatkeepsthemysteryofGodhead.Inthepast,thecherubimwereconsideredbeingsoftheairwho,intime,providedthenameofonegroupofthefirsttriadofangels20.

Inhisvision,EzekieldescriedthewayinwhichhesawGod’sgreatnessunfoldbeforehiseyes21.Startingwiththe4thverse,hepresentstheheavenlybeings accompanying God (Ez 1:4‐15)22. A similar description that containsmanyoftheelementsofthispropheticpresentationcanbereadinthetextoftheApocalypse,whichshowsGod’sThrone,surroundedby24chairsonwhicholdmendressedinwhiteclothes,wearinggoldencrowns,weresitting.Nexttothethrone,onecannoticethepresenceofthefourlivingcreaturesintheimageof

20Widyapranawa,TheBookofIsaiah,31.ForotherdetailsregardingthemannerinwhichthecherubimwereperceivedinthereligiouscontextduringthetimeoftheOldTestament,see:Lee,“YouWerethe(Divine)Cherub”,99‐116andSchneider,“The'Cherubentry'”,336‐357.

21D.I.Block,TheBookofEzekiel·Chapters1‐24,inNICOT(GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1997),96.22Launderville,“Ezekiel’sCherub,”170.


11

anox,alion,aneagleandaman(Rev4:6‐11).Aseaofglass,clearascrystal,thefire,thelightningscomingoutofthethroneandthethundersaddtothisheavenlyviewthatverymuchresembleswhatEzekielsaw23.

Beforemoving forward,we point out to the fact that this textmadesomeiconpaintersbelievethattheTetramorphwasaspeciesoftheseraphim.Theargumentsonwhichtheycouldfoundtheiropinionarethefollowing:theseraphic chant and the number of wings. The former is meant to link heapocalyptic text to Isaiah’svision,whomentions that theseraphim,standingbefore God, were continuously singing to one another the following hymn:“Holy,holy,holyistheLordAlmighty;thewholeearthisfullofhisglory.”(Is6:3).IntheApocalypse,thefirstpartofthischantisidentical,onlytheseconddiffers.Webelievethat,becauseofthisassociation,someiconpaintersmadethisconfusion.ThefactthatIsaiahdoesnotmentionthecherubiminhisvisiondoes not automatically mean they were not present. Considering that thethroneswerethere(Is6:1),wherecouldtheothergroupofangelsofthefirsttriadhavebeen?Giventhattheynowchantthesamehymn,webelievetheywere also present then, even if the prophet’s attention was directed onlytowardstheseraphim.Wealsothinkthat,althoughtheyarenotmentionedinEzekiel’s vision, the seraphimwere presentwhenGod’s glorywas revealed.The frequent references to fire, burning coal and lightnings entitle us tobelievethattheoneswithafieryface(theseraphim)werealsopresentinthetheophanyoftheApocalypse.

Thesecondargumenttheaforementionediconpainterscouldconjureup (opinionsharedalsoby thepatriarchMiron24) is that thecherubim fromEzekiel’svisionandthosementionedinthesanctuary(here,wehaveinmindthose from theArkof theCovenant, the two standing in theHolyofHollies,facingthepeople,thosewovenontheveiloronthecurtainsandthosecarvedonthegoldenacaciawalls)hadonlytwopairsofwings.Theonesreferredtoin theApocalypse and the seraphimmentioned by Isaiah had threepairs ofwings.ThisiswhywebelievetheTetramorphandtheothericonicstructuresthatportraycherubimhavethisnumberofpairsofwings.Inotherwords,the

23 For details on Ezekiel’s vision, we recommend the subchapter dedicated to this event inWood,OfWingsandWheels,95‐138.

24 “Theyarestillportrayedwithsixwings,withahaloaroundtheirhead,with the faceofanangelandholdingtheGospelat theirchestwithbotharms. Inthemiddleof thetwowingsabovetheirhead,thereisaneagle;onthepairofwingsfromtherightside,theyhavealionand,onthatfromtheleftside,theyhaveoxen,abull.[They]lookupwards.”ElieMironCristea,Iconografia și întocmiriledin interiorulbisericiirăsăritene [Iconographyand compilations fromwithintheEasternChurch](Sibiu:Tiparultipografieiarhidiecezane,1905),82.


12

cherubimdonotborrowonepairofwingsfromtheseraphim...,theyhavesixwings,accordingtotheApocalypse25.

Inhisvision,Ezekieldoesnotspecifywhatexactlytheseliving creaturesare.Hedoes it in chapter10,whenhe indicates that thebeingshe sees aresimilartothosefromtheinauguralvision,namelycherubim(10:15‐20).Here,newdetailsareofferedregardingthewayinwhichthesebeingsact,theirroleinrelationtoGodandtheconnectionbetweenthesebeingswhohadfourfacesandthewheelsoffireonwhichtherewerewingsandeyes(Ez10:4‐22).Theonlynoticeabledifferences are the following: here, theprophet replaces thefaceofabullwiththatofacherub(v.14)and,now,thefacethattakesprecedenceisthatofthecherub,notthatoftheman.Consequently,someexegetesconsideredthatthecherubmusthavethe faceofabull.Letusnot forget,however, thatman’sfaceisfirstamongtheothers,afactreceivedassuchiniconography26.TheTargumretains this identificationandmentions in the firstchapter thatEzekielmakes reference to the cherubim. This would also be confirmed bySirach,whostatedthat:“Ezekielsawthevisionofglory,whichwasrevealedtohimbythechariotof thecherubim”(Sir49:8).Obviously, the languageusedherebytheprophetissymbolic,offeringusatleasttheframeworksnecessarytosolvethemysteryofEzekiel’svision.

Hermeneuticreferencepointsfortheiconicrepresentationofthe

cherubimPatriarchMironprovides iconpainterswitha fewways inwhich the

cherubim can be represented on thewalls of churches, but also in icons: a.bodiless,two‐wingedangels,wearingadiademandhavingahaloaroundtheirhead; b. angels with four wings, on which there are many eyes. If threecherubimaretobepainted,theonesonthesidesfollowtheformermodelandthe one in the middle shall be represented with four wings27. Dionysius of

25Weunderline,onthisoccasion,thattheprayerprecedingtheepiclesis,whichremindsusofthethreefoldangelicchant,hasabiblicalargument.Notonly theseraphimchantHolyHolyHoly,butalsothecherubimand,togetherwiththem,alltheheavenlypowers:“WethankYoualsoforthisLiturgy,whichYouhavedeignedtoreceivefromourhands,eventhoughthousandsofarchangelsandtensofthousandsofangelsstandaroundYou,theCherubimandSeraphim,six‐winged,many‐eyed,soaringaloftupontheirwings,singingthetriumphalhymn,exclaiming,proclaiming,andsaying:Holy,Holy,Holy...Togetherwiththeseblessedpowers,Master,Wholovesmankind,wealsoexclaimandsay:HolyareYouandmostholy...”LiturghierPastoral[PastoralLiturgicalTexts](Iași:Trinitas,2004),189‐190.

26Carruthers,“TheCherubFigureandtheArtsofMemory,”114.27Cristea,Iconografie[Iconography],102.


13

FournamentionsinhisHermeneiathatthecherubimarerepresentediniconsunder the form of a child’s head with wings28.The same description is alsomentioned by patriarch Miron Cristea in his iconographic guide29. In thesection dedicated to the groups of angels, Dionysius does not offer otherdetailsregardingthemanner inwhichthecherubimarerepresented,buthedoesmentionthecherubimwhendescribingthewayinwhichthefacesofthefourevangelistsarepainted.TheyareaccompaniedbyasymbolthathelpstheobservereasilyidentifywhichofthefourmenpaintedatthebaseofthedomeisJohn,Matthew,LukeandMark30.Next,Dyonisiusoffersanexplanationwithrespect to the association between the evangelists and these animals. Thesource of inspiration for this iconographic model is the Holy Scripture, inparticularEzekiel’sinauguralvision.Thefourfaceswereseenbytheprophetat the river Chebar, in Babylon, when he looked at the brightness of God’sglory:“And[thesymbolsoftheevangelistsfor,emphasisadded]thefourfaces[all together, inoneappearance,emphasisadded],arepaintedwithacrownaround their head, like this having the face of the angelwith sixwings andholdingtheGospelwithbothhandsinfrontofthechest,withaneagleinthemiddleof thetwowings,abovethehead;anda lion intherightwingontheside;andanoxinthelefthand,lookingupwards,havingGospelsattheirfeet.ThisishowprophetEzekielsawitall.”31

Ifweread the textofEzekiel’svision,wewilleasilyobserve that theGospels held by each being are missing from the image described above.Therefore,wenoticethatDyonisiusdoesnotdescribethefaceofthatangelicbeing that had four faces, but an iconic structure called Tetramorph, also

28DyonisiusofFourna,Erminiapicturiibizantine [Hermeneiaof thePaintingArt] (Bucharest:Sofia,2000),67.

29Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],80.30“Whentheysitonthechairandwrite,havinginfrontofthemthewingedsymbols,holdingGospelsandlookingatthem.1.Matthewsittinginthehouseandwriting(thebeginningofhisGospel):ThisisthegenealogyofJesustheMessiahthesonofDavid,thesonofAbraham.[Ithasasasymbol,translator’semphasis]man.2.Mark, inhishouse,writing:ThebeginningofthegoodnewsaboutJesustheMessiah,theSonofGod,asitiswritteninIsaiahtheprophet:Iwillsendmymessengeraheadofyou,whowillprepareyourway.[Ithasasasymbol,translator’semphasis]thelion.3.Luke,insidethehouse,underthebaldachin,writing:Manyhaveundertakentodrawupanaccountofthethingsthathavebeenfulfilledamongus...[Ithasasasymbol,translator’semphasis]theox.4.Saint John theTheologian,sitting in thecaveand lookingbackat thesky inawe,having[his]right[hand,translator’semphasis]onthekneeandhislefthandspreadtowardsProchorus;andSaintProchorus,sittinginfrontofhim,writes:InthebeginningwastheWord,andtheWordwaswithGod,andtheWordwasGod.[Ithasasasymbol,translator’semphasis]theeagle.”DyonisiusofFourna,Erminiapicturii[HermeneiaofthePaintingArt],147.

31DyonisiusofFourna,Erminiapicturii[HermeneiaofthePaintingArt],147.


14

inspiredbythesamevision.ThedescriptionshowsthattheTetramorphisaniconographic representationbasedon the faceof the cherubim thatprophetEzekielsaw.

Followingtheexplanationsthatclarifytheissueofthesymbolsoftheevangelists,DyonisiusalsoofferstheiconpainteraChristologicalinterpretationofthese images, in order to justify their presence next to the four Apostles:“Interpretation:Theoneresemblingmanpictures theembodiment [and Christ’shumannature,translator’semphasis].Theoneresemblingalionpictures[Christ’s,translators’emphasis]royalwork[andpower,translator’semphasis].Theoneresemblinganox showsus [Christ’s, translators’emphasis] sanctifyingworkandpriesthood.AndtheoneresemblinganeagleshowsustheadventoftheHolyGhost[andthegreatestmeaning,theGodheadofJesus,translators’emphasis].”32TheinterpretationoftheauthorofthehermeneiaspringsfromtheTraditionoftheChurchwhich,bymeansofSaintGregorytheGreat,assumedasymbolicinterpretationofEzekiel’svision33.WeshallprobablyprovidemoredetailsonthepatristicapproachofEzekiel’stextinafutureresearchinwhichweshallrelate to themanner inwhichtheChurchFathers fathomthemysteryof thecherubim’sappearance.

Inhishermeneia,patriarchMironCristeamentions thefact that the fourbeingsassignedwithanobvioussymbolicmeaningarerepresentedtogetherfor the first time in a mosaic from the 12th century in the Church of SaintPudenziana.Theyarenotplacednexttotheevangelists,butoneachsideofacross thatdominates the compositionof an iconographic representation: “Inthismosaic,wecanseeanimalshovering–totherightandtotheleftofthecross–,whicharethesymbolsthatthefirstChristiansassignedtotheevangelists,basedonprophetEzekiel’svision(1:5‐20)andonSaint John(Rev4:7),where four

32DyonisiusofFourna,Erminiapicturii[HermeneiaofthePaintingArt],147.33HeexplainsinthefourthhomilyonEzekielthewayinwhichthefourimagesarecorrelatedwith the evangelists. Saint Gregory the Great,Omilii la Profetul Iezechiel [Homilies on theBookoftheProphetEzekiel],trans.byElenaSimaandIleanaIngridBauer(Iași:Doxologia,2014), 70‐3, 95. SaintNicholas Cabasilas embraces this idea, claiming that “the four livingcreatures(Ez1:5)areheraldsoftheEconomy,(theapostles)whotravelledtheentireworldpreachingChristasaman–whichisshownthroughthefaceoftheman–,asoriginatingfromakingly ancestry –which is shown through the faceof the lion– andas aheavenly,not earthlyemperor–whichissuggestedthroughthefaceoftheeagle–,whopurifiesmenwithHisBlood–whose prefiguration was the face of the ox (acc. to Ez 1:10)”. Saint Nicholas Cabasilas,Cuvântăriteologice:laIezechiel—Hristos—FecioaraMaria.ScrieriI[TheologicalDiscourses:onEzekiel—Christ—VirginMary],trans.by.IoanIcăjr.(Sibiu:Deisis,2010),56.Thisideaistakenfrom Saint Irenaeus.Irenaeus, Adversus haeresis, in K. Stevenson and M. Gluerup, “Ezekiel,Daniel”,inAncientChristianCommentaryonScriptureOT(DownersGrove:InterVarsityPress,2008),4.


15

mysterious animals stand before God’s throne. Each has a different shape,withthewholebodycoveredwitheyesandwithmanywings.”34

Unlike Dyonisius, who onlymentions themeaning of these symbols,patriarchMironoffersanargumentfortheassociationofthefourbeingswiththeEvangelists, each creaturebeing correlatedwitha certainEvangelist.Heclaims thatman is thesymbolof theEvangelistMatthewbecausehisGospelstartswith thegenealogyof theSaviour,whichemphasisesGod’shumannature(Mat1:1‐2).The lion is the symbolofMarkbecause theEvangelist startshiswritingwiththeresoundingwordsofJohntheBaptist,whoannouncedloudly,likealioninthedesert,theadventoftheMessiah.AnotherreasonwouldbethatMarkvisiblyhighlightstheSaviour’skinglydignity,madeobviousthroughthenumerous miracles related. The ox is correlated with the Gospel of LukebecauseheinsistsonthesacerdotaldimensionoftheSaviour,whooffersHimselfasaredeemingsacrifice.Inthissense,thereferencetopriestZacharyandtorituals fromtheTemple isnotaccidental.And, lastbutnot least, theeagle isassociatedwithJohnbecausehewantedtoemphasiseJesusChrist’sGodheadthrough arguments that raise “our mind in the higher spheres of Christiandogma”35.Nonetheless,itisnecessarytospecifythattheaforementionedcorrelationshave been established in time. There are iconographic representations inwhich, for example, Mark is linkedwith a lion and Johnwith an eagle36. Inothers, the eagle or the lion is correlatedwithMatthew37. These differences areinsignificant for the present approach.What is relevant is that the four beingsmentionedbyEzekiel havebeen acceptedby theTraditionof theChurch assymbolsoftheEvangelists.Thefactthatinsomerepresentationstheeagleoranyof thesebeings isassociatedwiththeEvangelist JohnorMatthewis lessmeaningful.Theideaitselfisthemostimportantone,notaspecificcorrelationthat can be justified through a certain argument which can be applied toanotherevangelistaswell.

IntheEasterniconographictradition,animagehasbeencreatedthatsumsupinasinglefacethefourbeingspresentedinthebookofEzekielandintheRevelation.This iconicrepresentation iscalledaTetramorph. Its descriptionwaswrittendowninDyonisius’hermeneia,without,however,itsnamebeingspecified.PatriarchMironreferstoTetramorphs,but,likewehavementioned

34Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],99‐110.35Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],110.36 See details in theTetraevangelions of Vatopedi and of theDochiariouMonastery from theHolyMountain.Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],111.

37 Even in patristic writings, there can be associations that different from the ones alreadymentioned.Forexample,SaintAugustinebelievesthelionisasymbolthatsuitsmuchbettertheevangelistMatthew,whohighlightsGod’skinglydignity.


16

before,hebelievestheyareaspeciesoftheseraphim,notofthecherubim.Inone of the previous studies38, inwhichwe presented how the group of theseraphimisrepresentedinicons,weexplainedthereasonswhytheTetramorphisincluded in representations that are specific to the seraphim. The frequentmentioningoftheseraphimandthecherubiminprayersandinliturgicalsongs,thefactthatEzekiel’svisiondoesnotclearlystatethatthefourbeingsmentioned inthefirstchapterarecherubimandthefactthatTetramorphshavesixwingshavemadecertainiconpaintersmakethisconfusion.WebelievethislastargumenthasalsodeterminedpatriarchMironstatethattheTetramorphsisaspeciesoftheseraphim.Whendescribingthem,hestartswiththisargument:“...theso‐calledTetramorphs... are portrayedwith sixwings,with a halo around their head,withthefaceofanangelandholdingtheGospelattheirchestwithbotharms.Inthemiddleofthetwowingsabovetheirhead,thereisaneagle;onthepairofwings fromtheright side, theyhavea lion and,on that fromthe left side,theyhaveanox,abull.They lookupwards.This ishowprophetEzekielsawthem: Their faces looked like this: Each of the four had the face of a humanbeing,andontherightsideeachhadthefaceofalion,andontheleftthefaceofanox;eachalsohadthefaceofaneagle(1:10)”39.

In his iconographic guide, (after the description of the Tetramorph)thepatriarchmakesaconnectionbetweenthefourbeingsandthesymbolsoftheEvangelists,statingthattheyrepresentattributesofthegivenapostles.Itisnotbychancethathemakesthisassociation,asthereisanimmediatereferencetotheideaofevangelicalunity.Althoughtherearefourdifferentpresentationsofthe Gospel of Christ, this is still one of them: “The Tetramorph is thus thecombinationof the fourattributesof theEvangelists inasingle image, it isabodywithfourheads.Matthew’sman,Mark’slion,Luke’sbullandJohn’seaglehaveeachsettheirheadonawingedman,onanangel.Thiscombinationwantstosaythatthefourevangelistsareone.ThisfourthpartisverymuchusedinGreekiconography,whileitisbarelyknowninthewesternone40.Inotherwords,theTetramorphholdswithintheideaofunityand,implicitly,ofuniquenessoftheGospel.TheiconpainterwhomadethismodelofartisticrepresentationofthefourbeingsfromthebookofEzekielhadinmindtheemphasisoftheunityoftheGospelandnotnecessarilyanexerciseoficonicrepresentationofcelestialbeingswho do not have a counterpart in the visibleworld orwho possiblyhaveoneonlyinthemythicalorreligiousimaginationfieldfromtheEgyptian38StelianPașca‐Tușa,“Iconizareaserafimilor–reperelebibliceșipatristicecareaustatlabazarealizării acesteimorfologii iconice și amesajului ei teologic.” [The iconic represenationoftheseraphim–biblicalandpatristicreferencepointsonwhichthisiconicmorphologyanditstheologicalmessagewere based] in Inhonorempr.prof.univ.dr.VasileStanciu, ed.DanielMocanu(Cluj‐Napoca:PUC,2018),337‐354.

39Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],82.40Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],82.


17

or Mesopotamian area. Even if the Tetramorph, as an iconographic model,appearedanddevelopedintheEast,intheGreekworld,itwasalsoassumedintheWest,especiallyduringtheMiddleAges,asitverymucharousedtheinterestofpainters. The act ofmaking this iconic structure, involved and required thecreativesideofartistsand,asaconsequence,inmanuscripts,onfrescoesandonmosaicswehavevariousrepresentationsoftheTetramorph.

Forthesereasons,althoughhesaidthattheiconographyoftheTetramorphwasbarelyknownintheWest,thepatriarchpresentedamorphologyoficonsspecific toWesterners, kept in amanuscript calledHortusdeliciarum,whichwasmadebythenunHerraddeLandsbergbetween1167‐1185andwhichisnowpart of the collection of the library of Strasbourg. The image ofanimalecclesiae, which symbolises and, at the same time, personifies Christianreligion, combines the four symbols in one figure: “It has four legs and fourheads.Thetrunkofthebodyisthatofahorse.Theheadsaretheonesassignedto theevangelists;oneof aman, anotherof aneagle, of abull, of a lion.Thesameforthefourlegs:one–therightoneinfront–ofaman,another–theleftoneinfront–ofaneagle,thethird–therightonebehind–ofabullandthefourth–theleftonebehind–ofalion.Thebullisbothattheheadandatthelegs,placedinfrontofthelion.Why?Maybebythepainter’smistake.Adifferentrepresentation is justified, with man – as a special being – put in the first,honoraryplace,thesoaringeaglesecond.Now,thelionshouldfollowand,attheend,thebull,thesimplest.Wefindthesesymbolsinthisordermanytimes;even in the aforementionedmanuscript (at the Crucifixion), surelymade underByzantine influence”41.Theonlynotabledifferenceof this iconic structure isthefactthat,intheChristianEast,thebodyoftheTetramorphisthatofamaninsteadof ananimal.Thisbetterhighlights thepre‐eminenceof thehuman faceamongthesebeings.TheotherdifferencesarerelatedtothepeculiarityofWesternart,whichisnotapriorityforourstudy.

Therefore,sincethebeingsthatmakeuptheTetramorpharepartofascripturalvisioninwhichthemainroleisheldbythegroupofthecherubim,wecansaythattheiconicmorphologyoftheTetramorphispartoftheimageryofthecherubim. It is to theartistic representationsof thisgroupofangels thatwehavededicatedthisstudy42.Forthisreason,weshallnotinsistontheologicaldetails.WeshallonlymentionthattheartisticrepresentationofthesecelestialbeingssignalsGod’presence.Theonewholookedatthefacesofthecherubim,eitherontheArkoftheCovenantorontheHolyofHollies(thisprivilegewas

41Cristea,Iconografia[Iconography],83.42 Stelian Pașca‐Tușa, “Implicațiile teologice ale reprezentărilor heruvimilor în sanctuarulbiblic”[Theological implicationsofthecherubim’srepresentations inthebiblicalsanctury],in Icoană.Mărturie creștină. Totalitarism [Icon. Christian testimony. Totalitarianism], eds.VasileStanciuandCristianSonea(Cluj‐Napoca:PresaUniversitarăClujeană,2017),57‐72.


18

allowedonlytothehighpriest)orontheveilorattheonesengravedonthewallofthetempleoronthebronzesea,hadtobeawarethatGodwasabovethem, invisible, a fact perceived in theother categories ofwritings from theOldTestament (1Kg4:4; 2Kg6:3; 2Kg22:11; 4Kg19:15; Ps 17:12; 79:2;98:1; Is 37:16; 3 Tin 1:3143). The fact thatGod revealedHimself in the holytabernacle/templeabovetheArkoftheCovenantthatwasundertheshadowof the wings of the cherubim is enough argument for the aforementionedstatement.

ConclusionsTheapproachof iconicmorphologies fromanexegeticperspective is

necessarywhentheseiconographicstructuresareinspiredfromtheHolyScripture.Inotherwords,itisappropriatetostudyfirstwhetherthewayinwhichiconpainters chose to represent an event, a personor an angelic being is in linewiththescripturaltextand,implicitly,withthemessageitconveys.Reachingsometheologicalconclusionsthatsumuptheessentialdetailsrelatedtooneoftheaforementionedcategoriescanclarifycertainconfusionsthatmightbecausedbyafragmentaryperspective.

Inthecaseofthecherubim,wehavenoticedthatcertainiconpaintersorauthorsofhermeneiasconsideredthatthetetramorph,asaniconic structure,must be included in the group of the seraphim. This direction is erroneous.ThecontentofEzekiel’sprophecyprovesthecontrary.Thetetramorphmustbeincludedintheformsofrepresentationofthecherubim.Throughthiskindofapproach,weonlywanttoclarifyamistakethathasslipped,eitheroutofinattention or out of ignorance, in specialised literature.We are aware that,besidestheHolyScripture, iconographyalsohasothersourcesof inspirationthatareimportantwhenconveyingatheologicalmessage.

We believe that, through the present research, we have opened thedoortowardsamoreindepthstudyoftheiconicmorphologyofthecherubim.Theothersourcesassumedby iconpainters in theartistic representationofthecherubimarestilltobetackledinthefuture.Here,werefermainlytopatristictextsandtohymnography.

Acknowledgments:Thisworkwas supportedbyTeMATIC‐Art, Project co‐financedbyFEDRthrough Competitiveness Operational Programme 2014 – 2020, Funding contract:14/01.09.2016.

43Thesongoftheyoung;itisanadditiontotheBookofDavid.ItdoesnotappearinWesternversionsoftheBible.


19

REFERENCES

Albright,W.F.“WhatweretheCherubim?.”BA1(1938):1‐3.Block,D.I.TheBookofEzekiel·Chapters1‐24.InNICOT.GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1997.Carruthers,MaryJ.“Arsoblivionalis,arsinveniendi:TheCherubFigureandtheArtsof

Memory,”Gesta48.2MakingThoughts,MakingPictures,MakingMemories:A specialissueinHonorofMaryJ.Carruthers(2009):99‐117.

Chirilă,Ioan.“CunoașterealuiDumnezeuînVechiulTestamentprinteofaneișianghelofanie.”[KnowingGodintheOldTestamentthroughtheophanyandangelophany]AnuarulFacultățiideTeologieOrtodoxă 1 [Annual of the Faculty of Orthodox Theology 1](1998).

———.“Porţilecerului.Oreabordareateologieiicoaneidinperspectivadimensiuniisimboliceşitranscendenteaactuluiliturgic.”[ThegatesofHeaven.A reapproachofthetheologyoficonfromtheperpectiveofthesymbolicandtranscendantdimensionoftheliturgicalact]InCaieteleEchinox.Teoriașipracticaimaginii.Imaginarulcultural[TheEchinoxNotebooks.Theoryandpracticeoftheimage.Culturalimagination],vol.2.Cluj‐Napoca:Dacia,2001.

———.Fragmentariumexegeticfilonian[Veinalexegeticcollectionoffragments].Cluj‐Napoca:Limes,2002.

Cooper,LamarE.“Ezekiel.”InTheNewAmericanCommentary17.Nashville:Broadman&HolmanPublishers,2001.

Cristea,ElieMiron.Iconografiași întocmiriledin interiorulbisericiirăsăritene[Iconographyand compilations from within the Eastern Church]. Sibiu: Tiparul tipografieiarhidiecezane,1905.

DyonisiusofFourna.Erminiapicturiibizantine[HermeneiaofthePaintingArt].Bucharest:Sofia,2000.

Eichler,Raanan.“Cherub:AHistoryofInterpretation.”Biblica96.1(2015):26‐38.———.“WhenGodAbandonedtheGardenofEden:AForgottenReadingofGenesis

3:24.”VetusTestamentum65(2015):20‐32.Flavius, Josephus. Antichităţi iudaice, [Jewish antiquities]. Vol. 1. Translated by Ion

Acsan.Bucharest:Hasefer,2002.FreedmanDavidandM.P.O'Connor.“bWrK.(kerub).”InJohannesBotterweck,HelmerRinggren

andFabry,Heinz‐Josef(eds.).TheologicalDictionaryoftheOldTestament.Vol.7.TranslatedbyDavidGreen.GrandRapids:EerdmansPublishingCompany,1995.

Gavrilovic, Andela. “The Representation of theCherubin the Narthex of the DecaniMonasteryAbovethePortalLeadingtotheNave.ContributiontotheResearchof the Iconography and Meaning of theCherubin Serbian Medieval Art.” ZbornikMaticeSrpskezaLikovneUmetnosti‐maticaSrpska Journal forFineArts46 (2018):13‐34.

Haran,M.“TheArkandtheCherubim.”IEJ9(1959).Irenaeus.Adversushaeresis. In K. Stevenson andM. Gluerup, “Ezekiel, Daniel.” InAncient

ChristianCommentaryonScriptureOT.DownersGrove:InterVarsityPress,2008.Kmosko,M.“KerubundKurib.”BZ11(1913):225‐234.


20

Launderville,D.“Ezekiel'sCherub:Apromisingsymboloradangerousidol?.”CatholicBiblicalQuarterly65.2(2003):165‐183.

Lee,Lydia.“‘YouWerethe(Divine)Cherub’:APotentialChallengetoYhwh'sSoleDivinityinEzekiel28.14.”JournalfortheStudyofTheOldTestament41.1(2016):99‐116.

LiturghierPastoral[PastoralLiturgicalTexts].Iași:Trinitas,2004.Middlemas,Jill.ThedivineImage.Tubbingen:MohrSiebeck,2014.69.Pașca‐Tușa,Stelian.“Iconizareaserafimilor–reperelebibliceșipatristicecareaustat

la baza realizării acesteimorfologii iconice și amesajului ei teologic.” [The iconicrepresentationof seraphim– biblical andpatristic referencepoints onwhich thisiconicmorphologyand its theologicalmessagewerebased]In Inhonorempr.prof.univ.dr.VasileStanciu. EditedbyDanielMocanu. Cluj‐Napoca:Presa UniversitarăClujeană,2018.

———. “Implicațiile teologice ale reprezentărilor heruvimilor în sanctuarul biblic.”[Theologicalimplicationsofthecherubim’srepresentationsinthebiblicalsanctury]InIcoană.Mărturiecreștină.Totalitarism[Icon.Christiantestimony.Totalitarianism].EditedbyVasileStanciușiCristianSonea.Cluj‐Napoca:PresaUniversitarăClujeană,2017.

Philo,On thecherubim (DeCherubim), trans.byF.ColsonandG.Whitaker.Harvard:UniversityPress,Cambridge,2014.

Rabinowitz,Louis I. “Cherub in theAggadah.” InFredSkolniketal. (eds.).Encyclopaediajudaica.Vol.4.FarmingtonHills:KeterPublishingHouse,2007.

Sarna,N.M.“Genesis.”InTheJPSTorahcommentary,vol.1.Philadelphia:JewishPublicationSociety,1989.

Schneider,Wolfgang C. “The 'Cherubentry' in the 'Temple of Light' – The staging of thespiritualidentityoftheChristianemperorinthelateAntiquity.”ZeitschriftfurAntikesChristentum–JournalOfAncientChristianity10.2(2006):336‐357.

SaintGregorytheGreat.Omilii laProfetul Iezechiel [Homilieson theBookof the ProphetEzekiel].TranslatedbyElenaSimaandIleanaIngridBauer(Iași:Doxologia,2014.

Saint John Chrysostom.Omilii laFacere [Homilies on Genesis]. InPărinți și scriitoribisericești21[ChurchFathersandWriters21].TranslatedbyDumitruFecioru.Bucharest:IBMO,1987.

SaintNicholasCabasilas.Cuvântăriteologice:laIezechiel—Hristos—FecioaraMaria.ScrieriI[TheologicalDiscourses:onEzekiel—Christ—VirginMary].TranslatedbyIoanIcăjr.Sibiu:Deisis,2010.

Shalom,Paul.“Cherub.”InFredSkolniketal.(eds.).Encyclopaediajudaica.Vol.4.FarmingtonHills:KeterPublishingHouse,2007.

Skinner, J.TheBookof theProphet Isaiah,Chapters I.‐XXXIX.With IntroductionandNotes.Cambridge:UniversityPress,1897.

Stevenson,K. andM.Gluerup, “Ezekiel,Daniel.” InAncientChristianCommentaryonScriptureOT.Vol.13.DownersGrove:InterVarsityPress,2008.

Trinquet,J.“Kerub,Kerubim.”DBS5(1957):161‐186.Westermann,Claus.Genesis1‐11.InAContinentalCommentary.Minneapolis:Fortress

Press,1994.Wood,Alice.OfWingsandWheels.ASyntheticStudyoftheBiblicalCherubim.Berlin/New

York:WalterdeGruyter,2008.


II.SYSTEMATICTHEOLOGY

BASILTHEGREATONTHEESCHATOLOGICALUNITYOFTHEBODYOFCHRIST

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY*

ABSTRACT.BasiltheGreatinthefourthcenturyADarguedthatallmaterialentities are constantlycarried away by motion. He spoke of the flow ofexistence as “ever pressing on and passing away and never stopping in itscourse.”Hisgeneralconjectureinrespectwithspatiotemporalexistentswasthatmotionandtimeconstantlyshiftandtwisttheirephemeralselves,leadingthemtoannihilation.Hence,noentitythatissubjecttotimepersistssoastopreserveitsessentialcore.TheBodyofChristinitstemporaldimension, i.e.the visible Body, may also follow a sort of current. It may also experienceconstantchange.Thelackofontologicalstabilityisthemaincharacteristicofallunredeemedexistents.TheBodyofChrist,ontheotherhand,isnotameretemporalentity.Ithasaneschatologicalselfthatwillneverbedestroyed.Thiseschatologicalunitywillneverfadeaway.Itisorderedbyadifferentkindoftime.ThisarticleaimstoshedlightoncertainfoundationalaspectsofBasil’stheoryofeschatologicalunityandofthechangingself.ItendeavorstoexplicateBasil’s eschatological threads presented in theHexameron. It attempts todemonstratethatBasil’ssubtleandnuancedanalysisofthesubjectoffersanexplanatory framework capable of making sense of more recent events inecclesiasticalhistory.Keywords:SaintBasiltheGreat,UnityofChurch,Eschatology,BodyofChrist,EasternOrthodoxyThisarticlerepresentsmyreworkingofapaperdeliveredduringthe

2018conferenceattheUniversityofClujdedicatedtothe100yearsanniversaryoftheunificationoftheRomaniannation.TheconferencealsoindirectlycelebratedthelongandturbulenthistoryoftheRomanianchurch.Anecclesiasticalaspectofthis celebrationappears tohaveanextraordinary significance in the lightof

*Rev.PhD.,ColumbiaUniversity,USA.E‐mail:[email protected].

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

22

variousoppressiveorhostilecivilandecclesiasticalpowersthatconfrontedthenationanditsecclesialselfforcenturies.ItisamiraclethattheRomanianchurchnotonlymanagedtosurvivethroughtimesoasitpreserveitsinstitutionalcore,butalsotoincreaseinnumber.Italsointroducedtotheworldauniqueecclesiasticalheritageasfarastheology,churchartsandarchitectureareconcerned. In general, the 2018 conference in Cluj revolved around the topic ofunity.WhatistheunityoftheRomaniannationandoftheRomanianchurch?Indeed, as far as the current state of conditions is concerned, this “unity” istransient.Thenationispartiallyunified,havingvariousexclavesinneighboringcountries. Its territory also contains various enclavesof other ethnic groupsthatpopulatedtheRomanian land forcenturies.ThesituationbecomesevenfurthercomplicatedbythefactthattheRomanians,asoftoday,haveaconsiderablysizeddiaspora invariouspartsof theglobe.Thesamecanbesaidabout theRomanianchurch.ApparentlyneitherthenationalstatenorthenationalchurchcanexclusivelysecuretheunityoftheRomanians.WemayalsorecallthefactthatalargegroupofRomaniansabroadtooktheirrefugeunderanecclesiasticalumbrellaofvariousnon‐Romanianecclesiasticalentities(i.e.thosethatdonotbelongjurisdictionallytothePatriarchateofBucharest).OnesuchalargegroupbelongstotheOrthodoxChurchinAmerica.Hence,thenotionofunity,asfarasthe national state and thenational church are concerned, appears not to beperfectlyinstantiatedinreality.Suchaunityispartial,perhapssignifyingtheworkinprogressthatthenationundergoesinordertoattainfullyitsunification.However, onemay also suggest that the notionof unityproper (i.e.withoutqualification)maynotbeappliedtohistoricalentitiescharacterizedbyaparticularplaceonthemaporaparticularjurisdictionalterritory.Inthiscaselanguageandculturewouldprobablyconstitutetheprinciplesofunity.However,eventhesevariablesmaynotpersist,atleastforthosewhoareinthediaspora.Moreover,ifwelookattheEuropeanhistorywemayseethatmostoftheborderswereinconstant fluxacrosshistory.Where isunity then?Wemayconcludethat thenotionofunity transcends spatialboundariesand temporal constraints.Anyconcreteandtangibleentityofthisworldappearstobechoppedintotemporalbitsandconstrainedbyaveryparticularplacesubjecttoincreaseanddiminishing.Itssensiblemanifestationcanshrinktoanalmostinvisibleandimperceptiblestate,vanishingforsometimefromitsplaceandreappearinginanotherplace.However,someofitsconstituencymayexistinvisibly.Thisunityalsotranscendslanguageandculture.Whatdoesthenunityproperconsistin?InthescopeofthispaperIassumethatunityproperisaneschatologicalreality,onethatbelongstothefabricofredeemedexistencesandispreservedforever“invisibly.”Indeed,theseobservationsofminedonotmeantounderestimatetheimportanceofthestate tradition. Itremainscrucial insecuringthecontinuityof theRomanianexistence,itscultureandtradition.


23

TheideaofunityhasasignificantappealtotheOrthodoxpeople.Eveninthestateofterritorialandecclesiasticalfragmentationwepreserveaveryunitive phronema. The notion of unity is deeply ingrained in our collectiveconsciousness,even if firstand foremost itreferstothatwhich isaboveandbeyondperceptibletraits.Theidealoftheunitedchurchisourguidingprinciple.However,thecurrentstateofaffairsindicatesthatthisidealremainsfarremovedfromreality.TheHolyCatholic andApostolicChurchsubsists in the stateoffragmentation. It is chopped intovarious constantly contestingecclesiasticalbits.Thoseecclesiasticalbitsmaintaintheirownsubsistence,someofthembeingin communionwithothers, some ‐ not. TheEucharistic unity exists among thefourteenhistoricalOrthodoxself‐governedbodies.However,thisunitydoesnotextendbeyondOrthodoxy.Itdoesnotencapsulatenon‐ChalcedonianOrthodoxy.ItdoesnotmaintainunionwiththechurchofRome.Andithasaveryremotetypeofcommunionwithreformedchurches,whichconsistsinamererecognitionofthevalidityoftheirbaptism,Eucharistandministry. Anotherwaytolookatthisissuewouldbetosaythattheideaofunityisonlypartiallyinstantiated.Itentersthefabricofexistentsinsuchwaysthatwe clearly perceive its traits. However, none of these can fully satisfy ourconceptualrulerthatweapplytojudgeinstances.Wethusexperienceacertaincognitivedissonanceasfarasthetalkaboutunityispursued.Istherearesolutionto this issue? A reasonable way out of this situation is to ask the patristicauthoritiesforhelp.BasiltheGreat,thebishopofCaesarea,gaveusafascinatingaccount of temporal and extended unities so as to contrast them with aneschatologicalunityofredeemedexistents.TothisaccountIwilldirectmygaze. The fourthcenturyChristian thoughtwasmarkedoffby theongoingcontroversy over the nature of God and its hypostatic instantiations. Thiscontroversyintroducedvarioussplitsanddivisionsintothelifeofthechurch.ItshouldbenotedthattheunityofthechurchatthetimewaslargelysecuredbythenewlyChristianizedimperialauthorities.1Asaresult,thevisiblebodyofChristreachedtheclimaxofitsunitivemodeofsubsistence.2However,neithertheimperialcoercivepower,noraninternalcodeofconduct(i.e.canonlaw)could prevent the body of Christ fromdivision and fragmentation. Basil the

1 JohnMeyendorff, ImperialUnity andChristianDivisions: theChurch, 450‐680AD.(Crestwood,N.Y.:St.Vladimir'sSeminaryPress,1989),8‐20.

2Itwillsoonstartlosingitsunitivemodeofsubsistencethusundergoingmultiplelarge‐scalesplits.ThefifthcenturydevelopmentwillbedetrimentalforunityasthechurchwillbefracturedintotwomainbranchesdifferingintheirassessmentoftheroleofthecouncilofChalcedon.

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

24

Greatwroteashorttreatise,DeJudicioDeiduringtheoutbreakoftheAnomoean(i.e. heteroousian) controversy, associated with such prominent heterodoxtheologiansasAetiusandEunomius.3Themoodofthistreatiseispastoralanditsstyleisrhetorical.Itsoundslikeanexhortationtounity.AlthoughthecontentsofthetreatisepertaintoanongoingAriancontroversynowexperiencinganewtwist, its ramifications seem far‐reaching. In this treatise Basil describes aparticularmanifestationofanongoingtheologicalcontest.Hedoesnotintendtodiveintoadeepermetaphysicallevelofanalysis.Hedoesnotjuxtaposethetwomodesofbeing,onewhichispropertotheKingdom,andanotherone–belongingtotheworld.Rather,Basilseemstopursuehisquestforunity.Hewritesthat:

in the Church of God alone, for which Christ died and upon which Hepoured out in abundance the Holy Spirit, I noticed thatmany disagreeviolentlywith one another and also in their understanding of theHolyScriptures.MostalarmingofallisthefactthatIfoundtheveryleadersoftheChurchthemselvesatsuchvariancewithoneanotherinthoughtandopinion,showingsomuchoppositiontothecommandsofourLordJesusChrist,andsomercilesslyrendingasundertheChurchofGodandcruellyconfoundingHisflock(DeJud.31.653,14‐26).

Indeedthecorruptivepowerofevilseemstocreepintothelifeofthechurchthusintroducingthespiritofdivisionanddisintegration.Heimploreshisreaderstoquenchthespritofcontentiousnesssoastorestoreharmony.Heexhortshisreadersbysayingthat:

itissoobviouslyandundeniablyessentialforunitytobefullyrealizedinthewholeChurchatonce,accordingtothewillofChristintheHolySpirit,and,ontheotherhand,disobediencetoGodthroughmutualdiscordissodangerousandfatal(DeJud.31.661,3‐8).

Basil gives a similar assessment of the situation inDeSpiritu Sanctocomparingthestateofaffairswithanavalbattle.4He isawarethateventheimperialpowercannotassureunity.Basildoesnotgoasfarastodeclarethattheprincipleofecclesiasticalunityisextrinsicmerelyduetothefactthat,asasensibleentity, thebodyofChrist, followsthetrajectoryofallothersensible3Aetius,“TheSyntagmation.”inL.R.Wickham.“TheSyntagmationofAetiustheAnomean.”TheJournalofTheologicalStudies19,no.2(1968):532–69.&Eunomius.LiberApologeticus.inRichardPaulVaggione,Eunomius:TheExtantWorks.OxfordEarlyChristianTexts.FirstEdition,3–78.Oxford:ClarendonPress,1987.

4Basil,DeSpir.S.30.76,1‐4.Basil’sdisappointmentwiththeecclesiasticalaffairsofhistimeseemstoreachitsclimaxinthistreatise.


25

particulars. On the contrary, unity is intrinsic to this divinely‐organized ordivinely‐constituted entity. Its unity is instituted by Jesus Christ Himself.Accordingtothisapproachsuchadivinely‐constitutedunityofthevisibleBodyofChristmustendureforever.Andyet,thisunitiveagendadoesnotseemtofindsupportinallChristianquarters.Whyso? Basilcriesoutassertingthat“neverbeforehastherearisensuchdiscordandquarrelingasnowamongthemembersof theChurch inconsequenceoftheirturningawayfromtheone,great,andtrueGod,onlyKingoftheuniverse”(DeJud.31.656,8‐11).Thismovetowarddisunityandindeterminacyisclearlyperceivedasevil.Basildoesnotseemtoremaincontentwith theconjecturethatahigherdegreeofunitydoesnotbelongtothisworld,that itcannotbeinstantiatedintherealmofsensibleparticulars.Hearguesthatthisevilcomesfromourself‐determinationandwearefullyresponsibleforit.Ifthisconstrainingpowerofself‐determination,ofthefreedomofchoice,preventsusfromattainingunity,what canprevent us fromchasing away the spirit of contentiousness,fromhealingthewoundsleftbytheschisms?Iftheroot‐coreofdisunityanddisintegrationliesinourhumanself,whatcanpreventusfrommakinganefforttorestoreunityofthevisiblebodyofChrist?Basil’sexhortationspreciselyaimtotargetourowninclinationsdetrimentaltotheecclesiasticalunity.InothertreatisesBasil indeedmakesanattempt toanalyze thenatureofeviland itsimpactontheBodyofChrist.HetellsusthatourestrangementfromGodleadsus to annihilation. This estrangement is associated with our grasping anduncontrollable irrational nature that needs supervision and guidance by therulingrationalfaculty.Thus,ourincapacitytomakegooduseofourhegemonicfaculty(i.e.reason)isresponsibleforallevils.Itisassociatedwithignoranceandperversion.BasilalsoremindsusthatSatanisthetruerulerofthisworld.5However,inthescopeofthistreatise,Basildoesnotpursuethislineofanalysis,perhapsseeingitsintrinsiclimitationsindiscerningthesubjectathand. Wecan,however,seeanotherapproachtothesameissue,associatedwith a conceptual andmethodological shift tometaphysics and eschatology.Basil seems tobemakinga leap from theanalysisofdisunity to a thoroughinvestigationofthefabricofbeingsandtheroleofunityinit.However,evenwhenlookedat fromthisnewperspective, the issue indeeddoesnotappear

5InhisHomilyExplainingthatGodisnottheCauseofEvilBasiltakesgreatpainstoadapttheprivativetheoryofeviltoChristianthoughtsoastobuilduphisowntheodicy.HearguesthatevilistheprivationofgoodandestrangementfromGod.Meantime,healso(andquite surprisingly) tellsusaboutungodlypowers,dominionsand principalities,perhapsre‐evokingthemajorelementsofChristianphronemaofthepreviouscenturies,markedoffbythemassivewavesofpersecution.

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

26

verydifferent.Howdoweunderstandunity?AclassicalPlatonictreatmentofunityistoaffirmthatunityproperbelongstothenoeticworld.Asfarassensibleparticulars are concerned, their unity is extrinsic. They come‐to‐be unifiedthroughparticipation.Thus,thetrueunity(i.e.oftheintelligibleentitiesopento participation) becomes dissolved intomultiplicity through participation. As aresult,theunityofsensibleparticularsalwayshasadiminisheddegreeofwholeness.Theirexistenceisclassifiedbypartialityandnotbytheholisticstate. InthisnewcontextBasiltellsusthatanintrinsiccharacteristicofthisworldconsistsinitsimperfection.Unityproper,ontheotherhand,isamarkofperfection.ItshouldbenotedinthiscontextthatBasil’ssubtleandprofoundargumentsclearlyexhibithisclassicaleducation.Indeed,BasilwaseducatedinclassicalthoughthavingspentyearsofhislifeinAthensstudyingphilosophyandrhetoric.SomerecentattemptstouncoverthephilosophicalunderpinningsofBasil’sthoughtclearlytestifiedBasil’scommitmenttoPlatonicmetaphysics.JohnRist’scarefulandthoroughanalysisofBasil’sphilosophyindicatedthatBasil’sconceptualcontentswerelargelyindebtedtoMiddlePlatonismand,evenmoreso,toNeoplatonism,includingPlotinianandevenpost‐Plotinianthought.6 Wemustalsokeepinmindthat,accordingtoNeoplatonism,theworldofoursisalwaysmixedwithnon‐being.Italwayssuffersfromimperfection.Wecannotfindaperfectinstantiationofanyideaintheworldofsensibleparticulars,includingthatofunity.Perfection,ontheotherhand,belongstotheworldofintelligiblerealities.Basilfullyaffirmsthisconjecture.However,hemakessomefurtherpointssoastoassertthatthisprincipleseemstoberathereschatological,pertaining to redeemed subsistences, those that belong to the reality of theKingdom.Basil’sChristianbackgroundinthiscontextcomestotheforefrontsofhisphilosophicaldevelopments.HisdiscourseentailthattheBodyofChristhasthedualmodeofsubsistence.Hespeaksofvariousnaturallimitationsinthejourneytounityandconfirmsthatthesensibleinstantiationsofunity(i.e.unifiedthings)maynotbepure.ItwouldfollowthatthevisibleBodyistransientandincomplete.Itsunityisconditional.ItindeedcannotbeabsoluteduetothefactthatthevisibleBodybelongstothisrealm.However,BasilexhibitshiscommitmenttoregenerationandtotherealityoftheBodyofChristinitspureandredeemedstate. A treatise that clearlyexhibitedBasil’sontological commitmentswastheHexaemeron.Thereheshiftedhisintellectualcursorfromthestatementsonimperfection and partiality as far as particular manifestations of unity are

6JohnRist,“Basil’s‘Neoplatonism’:ItsBackgroundandNature.”inPaulJonathanFedwick,BasilofCaesarea,Christian,Humanist,Ascetic:aSixteen‐HundredthAnniversarySymposium(Toronto:PontificalInstituteofMediaevalStudies,1981),137‐220.


27

concernedtoananalysisofunityproper,aimingtosetoutanontologicalschemaofexistentsinthelightoftheunitiveprinciplethatpermeatesallexistentsandgivesthemadegreeofcoherence.Basil,notunexpectedly,resortstoclassicalPlatonictwo‐worldmetaphysic.Hetellsusthatpriortothecreationofthisworldthereexisted“intellectualandinvisiblenatures,alltheorderlyarrangementofpureintelligenceswhoarebeyondthereachofourmindandofwhomwecannotevendiscoverthenames”(Hexaem.1.5,9‐11).Thoseintelligences,beingeternalandinfinite,outstripthelimitsoftimeandplace.Thisorderisatemporalandunextended.He tellsus that thoseentities “fill theessence” (συμπληροῖ τὴν οὐσίαν)of theinvisible world. Their being is thus essential to the being of the intelligibleworld. However,heamendsthisstatementwiththefollowingone,assertingthat“tothisworldatlastitwasnecessarytoaddanewworld,bothaschoolandtrainingplacewherethesoulsofmenshouldbetaughtandahomeforbeingsdestinedtobebornandtodie”(Hexaem.1.5,16‐20).Thus,theworldofourswassubsequentlycreated.Whatisthenatureofitsconstituents?Itseemsthatthe souls preexist the creation of this world. They are intellectual entitiescapableofchangingtheirmodeofsubsistencesoastodescendintonon‐beingandbecomeincarnate.Whataboutothernatures?WhatdoesBasiltellusaboutthem?Apparentlytheydonotpossessanessentialcoreofitsownkind.Theyarenon‐essentialparticularsrepresentingbundlesofmatterandproperties.

Donotletusseekforanynaturedevoidofqualitiesbytheconditionsofitsexistence,butletusknowthatallthephenomenawithwhichweseeitclothed regard the conditions of itsexistenceand complete itsessence.Trytotakeawaybyreasoneachofthequalitiesitpossesses,andyouwillarrive at nothing. Take away black, cold, weight, density, the qualitieswhich concern taste, in oneword all thesewhichwe see in it, and thesubstancevanishes(Hexaem.1.8,18‐28).

Hence, sensible particulars are simply bundles of properties. Theyparticipate in the intelligible beings and become what they are throughparticipation.Theyarealsonamedafterthoseintelligibleentitiesthatareopento participation. Their “essence” is thus derivative. However, the souls andecclesial entities do not seem to fall under such a class of existents. Theseentitiesare indeedpartiallyor fully immersedin thisworld.Theyhavetheirsensiblemanifestation.Moreimportantisthat,justoppositetosensibleparticulars,theyalsohaveanessentialcore.Thus,theiressenceisnotacquiredbyamereparticipationintheintelligiblerealities.Itisnotephemeral.Thereissomethingthat persists throughout all changes and never fades away, even upon thedissolutionoftheirsensiblecharacteristics.Inotherwords,theseentitiesare

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

28

notmereshadows,orreplicas,orimitations,orimagesofsomeprimaryrealities.Onthecontrary,theyaretherealitiesoftheirownkind,thosethatbridgethetwoworlds,experiencepilgrimageintheworldofsensibleparticularswithout losingtheiressentialself.7TheirbeingispreordainedbyGod’spronoiainsuchawayastoallowthemtosurvivechangeandtohavevarioussensiblemanifestations.8 AnotherissuethatBasilaccentuatesinthistreatiseisthattheworldisnot self‐constituted. It was once generated. He then infers that the fate ofgeneratedsensibleparticularsistoceasetoexistatacertaininstantoftime.Thisconcernsnotonlythingscharacterizedbyirregularmotion,butalsothecelestial bodies that appear to perpetually revolve around their axis. Theirperpetuity,however,isnotwithoutqualifications.Basilwarnsusthatwemustnotbeconfusedbythefactthattheymoveinacircularcourse. Indeed,“it isdifficultforoursensestodefinethepointwherethecirclebegins”(Hexaem.1.3,3‐4).Heimploresthereadernottobelieve“thatbodiesimpelledbyacircularmovementare,fromtheirnature,withoutabeginning”(Hexaem.1.3,4‐5).Heargues that our perception cannot clearly detect the beginning and the endpointsofthecircle.However,henotes,“althoughwearenotsensibleof it, itreallybeginsatsomepointwherethedraughtsmanhasbeguntodrawitatacertainradiusfromthecenter”(Hexaem.1.3,9‐11).Hence,thecelestialbodiesrevolving in the circle must have had their proper beginning in time. Basilcontinuesbysayingthat“thatwhichwasbegunintimeiscondemnedtocometoanendintime.Iftherehasbeenabeginningdonotdoubtoftheend”(Hexaem.1.3,20‐2).HeinsiststhatwemustnotattributecharacteristicsofGodandof theintelligiblenatures,suchaseternityandun‐originateexistence,tothislimitedmaterialworld.Since itspartsaresubject togenerationanddestruction, thewholemustbynecessitysubmittothefateofitsparts.Thisconcernsthecelestialbodiesandtheentirecreatedvisiblecosmos. Moreimportantly,welearnfromBasilthattimeorderedthemotionsofallparticularbeingsofthisvisibleuniverseinrespectofbeforeandafter.Basiltellsusaboutcertaincharacteristicsofthiskindoftimeassertingthatitwascreatedinafashionanalogoustothatoftheworld.Hence,thistimeisimmersedin the realities of theworld being isomorphic to them. Basil speaks of “the

7 AsOlgaDruzhinina rightly pointedout, “Scholars alsodonot take into account StBasil’sviewoftheChurchasatwo‐dimensionalmysticalrealitythatexistsinheavenandonearthatthesametimewiththestrongbondbetweenthesetwoparts.”“TheEcclesiologyofStBasiltheGreat:ATrinitarianApproachtotheLifeoftheChurch.”Dissertation(UniversityofManchester,2015),13.

8AsJ.Callahanrightlypointedout,theentireaccountofMoseshas“foritschiefpurposetheedificationoftheChurchandofoursouls.”JohnF.Callahan,“GreekPhilosophyandtheCappadocianCosmology.”DumbartonOaksPapers12(1958):29‐57,32.


29

successionoftime,foreverpressingonandpassingawayandneverstoppinginitscourse”(Hexaem.1.5,21‐3).Thistimethusflowsbeingsubjecttomotion.IntheAdversusEunomiumhewouldalsoarguethatthistimeiscoextendedwiththeworld.9Thistimeisnotpresenttousasaunifiedwholeanditspartsappearnon‐existent.Basil fully endorsesAristotle’s paradoxof the non‐existenceoftime.10Heexclaims:“isnotthisthenatureoftime,wherethepastisnomore,the futuredoesnotexist,and thepresentescapesbeforebeingrecognized?”(Hexaem.1.5, 23‐5). He tells us that such is also “the natureof the creaturewhichlivesintime—condemnedtogrowortoperishwithoutrestandwithoutcertainstability”(Hexaem.1.5,26‐8).Hepresentsitasbeing“obligedtofollowasortofcurrent…carriedawaybythemotion”(Hexaem.1.5,29).Thismotionleadssensibleparticulars“tobirthortodeath…[they]liveinthemidstofsurroundingswhosenatureisinaccordwithbeingssubjecttochange”(Hexaem.1.5,30).This“flowing”timeisprimarilyresponsibleforthedestructionofunredeemedexistents.Theirfateistoceasetoexistatacertaininstant.Hereagain,BasilfullyacceptsAristotle’sconjecturethattimeleadsthingstoannihilation.11However,sensibleparticularsdonotceasetoexistinstantaneouslybutremaininexistenceforacertainperiod.Theyareorderedandpositionedwithin the fabricof createdexistentsinaveryparticularway.Whatkeepstheminexistence?Howdoallthesethings,subjecttotimeandextension,coheretogether? Thingsareheldtogetherbysomepowers.Basilemphaticallyassertsinthiscontextthat:“allissustainedbytheCreator’spower”(Hexaem.1.9,25‐6).Heunsurprisinglyattributes thissustainingpowertoGod.God is theproperprincipleofunityandintegrityfortheentirecreation.ItwasGodwho:

welded all the diverse parts of theuniverseby links of indissolubleattachment and established between them so perfect a fellowship andharmonythatthemostdistant,inspiteoftheirdistance,appearedunitedinoneuniversalsympathy(Hexaem.2.2,58‐61).

Hence,theprincipleofarrangementofallsensibleentitiesisextrinsic.Theyarenotself‐constitutedandnotself‐structured.Theconstellationoftheirconstituents and their harmonious arrangement is introduced from outside.Moreover, this extrinsicprinciple thatholds thingsby forceor violence alsonecessitates theirceasingtobeatacertainpoint in time.Basilconcludesbysayingthatthecontrarietyoftheelementsandtheirstrugglenecessarilyeffectstheirdissolution.Thecauseoftheirdestructionistheirimpositionbyviolence

9“Χρόνος δέ ἐστι τὸ συμπαρεκτεινόμενον τῇ συστάσει τοῦ κόσμου διάστημα.”Basil,AE.1.21,28‐30.Inthistreatisehewasconcernedexclusivelywiththe“movingtime.”

10Aristotle,Phys.4.10,217b.29‐218a.8.11Ibid.,Phys.4.10,221a.28‐221b.8.

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

30

withinacertainstructureandthemerefactthatheterogeneousentitiesmaynotco‐existpeacefullywithinanartificiallycreatedwholeforalongperiodoftime.Thus:

A body to whichviolenceis done andwhich is placed in opposition tonature, after a short but energetic resistance, is soon dissolved into asmanypartsasithadelements,eachoftheconstituentpartsreturningtoitsnaturalplace(Hexaem.1.11,31‐4).

Theelementsofthebodiesthustendtoreunitewiththeirnaturalplace.From the veryoutsetof hisdiscourse,Basil seems to fully acceptAristotle’stheoryofnaturalplaceandofitspowertoorganizeexistents.Thistheoryseemstoplayaroleinexplainingnaturalphenomena.BasilalsoreviewsAristotle’sconceptionofelements(i.e.earth,air,fireandwater).Hespeaksoftheconflictofelementsthatareheldtogetherbyforce,arguingthatthisconflictnecessarilyleadssensibleparticularstoannihilation.Hence,itisthestriveoftheelementstoreunitewiththeirnaturalplaceandtheheterogeneityofthecompoundedwholesthatseemstoberesponsibleforthedespoliationofsensibleparticulars.Thecommonconceptual threadthatheshareswithAristotle is thatsensibleparticularspassawaybecauseoftheirconstitution(orbecauseofthenatureofitsconstituents).Basilobservesthatthemaintenanceofthecompositecelestialbodies,thosethatconsistinthefoursimplebodies,12appearstoalsorequireaspecialforceasitseems“impossibletoputevenasingleoneoftheirmovementsinaccordandharmonywithallthosethatareindiscord”(Hexaem.1.11,24‐6).Therefore, thecelestialbodiesareheld together inharmonybytheextrinsicforce. They consist of heterogeneous elements thatmay experience struggleandbedissolvedintime.

It is interesting to observe that as far as “intangible” and essentialentities are concerned, Basil at times pursues classical Platonic thread thuspresentingthemassomesortofideasorintelligiblecontentsthattheireternalcontemplatorutilizestocreatetheworld.Atothertimes,hespeaksofthemascreatedentitiesthatconstitutetheinvisibleworld.However,hiskeyanduniquetheoryconcernsaneschatologicalunityofredeemedexistentsfullyreincorporatedintothelifeofGod.Theseintermediaryentitiesaresoulsandecclesiasticalentities.ItshouldbenotedinthiscontextthatwhenBasilspeaksoftheserealitieshislanguageappears illusiveasheclearlyaimstoaccentuate the fact that theseentitiescannotbefullyaccessibletousthroughthenetofintertwininglogoi.In

12Hedoesnotruleoutthenotionofaetherrightaway.However,inhisanalysisofthecompositecelestialbodieshedoesnotseemtomakeuseofit.Hence,thefifthelementdoesnotplayasignificantroleinBasil’sdiscourse.Heseemstoendorsetheviewthatthecelestialbodiesconsistofthesameelementsasthesublunarones.


31

otherwords,ourdiscursiveintellecthasnaturallimitationsingraspingcertainaspectsoftheserealities.Althoughwemayhavesomeintuitivegraspofsuchbeings,wemaynothavethisintuitionextendedtoourownposthumousself‐awareness since we must not know future contingencies and we may notsynthesizeourimmediateintuitionoftheideaswiththenotionofthecontinuityofourownself‐awarenessinitsnon‐sensiblemodeofexistence.Hence,adiscourseonthemattersofthesoulandtheecclesiaandonthenatureofthebody‐souland celestial‐terrestrial ecclesia connection, according to Basil, always facesvarious epistemological impediments. What is clear, however, is that theiressentialselvesareeschatologicalrealities.Thus,wemustwaituntiltheendoftimewhentheveilwillberemovedsothatallredeemedexistentsmayseethebeautyoftheBodyofChristbydirectvision.Wewouldnolongerneeddiscursivereasoningtoarriveatalimitedunderstandingofit.Asfarasthecurrentstate ofconditionsisconcerned,wemayexperiencetheredeemedBodyofChristmysticallyinliturgicalcelebrationswithoutafulldiscursivegraspofitsessentialself.Basil,however, gives us some hints about its redeemed state by saying that the end(eschaton)isjustlikethebeginning.Soperhapswecanintellectuallydescendtothebeginningsoastoseethingsyettocome.

Alltheconstituentsofthisworldwerecreated.Theycameintobeingoutofnon‐beingataparticularinstantoftime.Hence,wemaytrackthembacktotheiroriginssoastobetterunderstandhowtemporalentitiesfunction.Moreover,wemayalsoglimpseintothepureanduncontaminatedsubsistenceoftheoriginalcreation.Firstly,Basiltellsusthatthecreationoftheworldwasinstantaneous,bringingintoexistenceallthingsaccordingtothepre‐ordainedintelligibleschemadesignedbyGod.Hetellsusabouttherapidandimperceptiblemomentofcreation,arguingthat the“beginning”mustbe indivisibleand instantaneous(Hexaem.1.6,20).Heapproachesthecreationnarrative(i.e.thesixdaysofcreation)asmetaphorically delineating causal and logical relationswithinGod’s creativeactioncompressedinaninstant.ThesequenceofdaysthusdepictedismeanttoexhibitasetofrelationswithinGod’screativeactascendingfromlesstomorecomplexaspects,astheintroductionofthelightlogicallyprecedesandconditionstheintroductionofhumanbeings.13

13InthiscontextIwouldliketoexpressmydisagreementwiththeotherwisesubtleand persuasive description of Basil’s theory by J. Callahan. Callahan argued that,accordingtoBasil,God'swill,thoughinitselftimeless,manifestsitselfbysuccessioninthetemporalorder.”Callahan,“GreekPhilosophy,”34.HearguedthatBasil’stheoryofcreationhasanthropomorphicelementsandconsequentlyjuxtaposedittoGregoryofNyssa’saccountofinstantaneouscreation.However,thiscontrastbetweenthetwogreatCappadocianthinkersseemsartificial.ThetextitselfdoesnotgiveusanydoubtsaboutBasil’stheoryofinstantaneouscreation.

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

32

Godcreatedallthingsinthebeginning.Thisstatementonthesecondphaseofcreation(i.e.thecreationofallvisiblethings)needssomeclarification.Basilimmediatelypointsouttothehomonymyofthe“beginning.”Itcanmeandifferentthings.Heisconcernedwithaveryparticularmeaningsignifying“theepochwhentheformationof thisworldbegan”(Hexaem.1.6,53).Basil thenassertsthatwemayintellectuallydescendintothepastendeavoringtodiscoverthe“beginning”ofcreation,meaningthefirstinstantofcreationandthefirstmovement of time. This also means that we need to make a leap from thetemporaltotheatemporalorpre‐temporal.Whenwasitthattimemovedalongwithcreation?Basilnotesthat:

if some objector tell us that the beginning is a time, he ought then, asheknowswell,tosubmitittothedivisionoftime—abeginning,amiddleand an end.Now it is ridiculous toimaginea beginning of a beginning.Further,ifwedividethebeginningintotwo,wemaketwoinsteadofone,or rathermake several,we reallymakean infinity, forall thatwhich isdividedisdivisibletotheinfinite(Hexaem.1.6,23‐8).

Hence,themeaningofthe“beginning”isthatofanatemporalandindivisibleinstant of creation: “Godmade summarilythat is to say all at once and in amoment”(Hexaem.1.6,32–3).Thismeansthatthebeginningassuchdoesnotbelongtotheflowingtime.Itisnotapartofourextendedandcontinuoustime.Itdoesnothaveparts.Asaresult,itcannotbesubjecttodivision.Neithercanitbesubjecttothatwhichisordered“inrespectofthebeforeandafter.”Instead,itisorderedbyadifferentkindoftime.

Basil,followingPhilo,makesasubtlesemanticdistinctionbetweenthe“firstday”(πρώτη ἡμέρα)ofcreationand“oneday”(ἡμέρα μία).Hearguesthatthismysticalonedayofcreationinitiatestheseriesandsetsoutanintervalanddurationoftime.However,itselfbyitselfitisnotsubjecttotimeknowntous.Inotherwords,itisnotanelementoftheflowingtime.Itisnotframedwithinthetemporallyorganizedcausalchainsofcreatedrealities.Havingbeenfollowedbythesecond,thirddays(ἡμέρα δευτέρα, τρίτη),thosethatcompriseasequence,itdoesnotfunctionasamemberofthisseries.Itis“whollyseparatedandisolatedfromall theothers.τοῦ γὰρ μοναχοῦ καὶ ἀκοινωνήτου πρὸς ἕτερον ἡ τὸν χαρακτῆρα δεικνύουσα” (Hexaem. 2.8, 56‐7). We may then conclude that, whereas thebeginningoftimerepresentsanindivisible(ἀμερές)andunextended(ἀδιάστατον)instant(Hexaem.1.6,19),“oneday”isalsoanunextendedandself‐enclosedentity,separatedfromallotherentities.Itconstitutesthefoundationalprotologicalunit.Itmysticallyembracesall “sixdays”orcreation. Itrevolves immovablyarounditself.Itordersourshiftingtimethusassuringthecontinuityofallprocessesintheworld.Thatiswhytheyneverfail.Itsetsoutthepatternfortherevolution


33

oftime.ItisanontologicallystableentitythatbelongstotheoriginalconditionsofGod’screation.Moreover, itordersallredeemedexistentsandassurestheperpetuityoftheirsubsistence.Basilarguedthat“whetheryoucall itday,orwhetheryoucalliteternity,youexpressthesameidea.Ὥστε κἂν ἡμέραν εἴπῃς, κἂν αἰῶνα, τὴν αὐτὴν ἐρεῖς ἔννοιαν”(Hexaem.2.8,70‐1).Contrarytotheflowingtime, thismonadic time is responsible for the continuity and uninterruptedsubsistenceofredeemedexistents.Itdoesnotleadthemtoannihilation.

Basil’sjuxtapositionbetweenthemovingorflowingtime,designedtoordersensibleparticularsandsharingfoundationalcharacteristicswiththemandthesingleandisolatedtime,mademanifestby“oneday,”immediatelyremindsusofsomeclassicalconceptualthreadinrespectoftime.Whatarethey?WemaythinkofAristotle’stheoryofmeasureandstartingpointinMet.Ι.1.However,whatalsocomestomindisIamblichus’taxonomyofshifting/flowingtimeandthemonadictimewhichisanintermediarybetweentimeandeternity.14ThequestionaboutthephilosophicalunderpinningsofBasil’stheoryisimportantasitmayhelpusunderstandtheextentofBasil’scommitmenttopost‐PlotinianNeoplatonism.Fornow letus say thatBasil appeared tobeoneof themostlearnedChristianthinkersofhistime.

WealsolearnfromBasilthatthebeginningandtheendaretypologicallysimilarorthesame.“Oneday”ofcreationmysticallymimicsthelast(i.e. theeighth)dayofcreation,onethathecalls“thedayoftheLord.”Basiltellsusthat:

itisinorderthatyoumaycarryyourthoughtsforwardtowardsafuturelife, thatScripturemarksby thewordone thedaywhich is the typeofeternity(μιανὠνομασετοῦαἰῶνοςτὴνεἰκονα),thefirstfruitsofdays,thecontemporaryoflight,theholyLord’sday(τὴνἁγιανΚυριακἡν)honoredbytheResurrectionofourLord.Andtheeveningandthemorningwereoneday(Hexaem.2.8,74‐7).

Basil’semphaticunitiveapproachis furtheraccentuatedinDeSpirituSanctowherehearguedthat“‘one’and‘eight’arethesame,andthe‘one’dayreallyrefersbothtoitselfandtothe‘eighth’day”(DeSpir.S.27.66,72‐3).Thisdaywastotallyunknowntothe(pagan)sagesofthisworld.Whereastheycoulddirecttheirgazetothebeginnings,theyseemedtobeunawareoftheultimateendofallcreation.Hence,thelasttimeswerenotunveiledtothem.They:

14ShmuelSambursky&SalomonPines.TheConceptofTimeinLateNeoplatonism:TextswithTranslation,Introduction,andNotes(Jerusalem:IsraelAcademyofSciencesandHumanities,SectionofHumanities,1971),26‐47.

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

34

havenotknownhowtoraisethemselvestotheideaoftheconsummationofallthings,theconsequenceofthedoctrineofjudgment,andtoseethattheworldmustchangeifsoulspassfromthislifetoanewlife.Inreality,asthenatureofthepresentlifepresentsanaffinitytothisworld,sointhefuture lifeoursoulswillenjoya lotconformabletotheirnewcondition.Buttheyaresofarfromapplyingthesetruths,thattheydobutlaughwhenweannouncetothemtheendofallthingsandtheregenerationoftheage(Hexaem.1.4,15‐24).

Indeed the ideaof regenerationor re‐creation (ἀποκατάστασις)waswell‐knowntovariousphilosophicalschools,notablytotheStoicphilosophers.However, as far as its application is concerned, they couldnot, according toBasil,drawproperconclusionsfromthegivensetofpremises.Theyseemedtoconfinetheirthoughtwithamoremechanisticaccountofregeneration,beingincapabletoseethemysticalandredemptiveaspectof it.Basilspeaksoftherestorationofbeings to theiroriginalconditions.15However, thisrestorationpertainsonlytoredeemedexistents.Allothersappeartobesubjecttojudgmentandtheconsequentannihilation.Thetimeoftheirsubsistenceissetwithinthelimitsofafiniteduration.Itisorderedexclusivelybytheflowingtime.Andthistypeoftimecannotsecuretheperpetuityoftheirsubsistence.

Basiltellsusthatecclesiaisadivinelyinstantiatedentity.HearguesthatitistheworkoftheSpiritwhoisnotpresentphysicallyinthesenseofbeingdiffused in thematerialuniversebut, rather,asworking invisiblywithin theintangible or immaterial realm. However, the results of this work manifestthemselvesinthevisiblerealm.ThemysticalbodyofChristhasitsvisibleandtangibledimension.ItisthecommunityofthefaithfulguidedbytheSpiritandscatteredacrossplacesandageswhilepreservinganintegralunityinvisibly.Itisinthestateofpilgrimage,makingatransitionsoastoredeemitsmembersand unite them with God, restore the original communion with God. Itanticipatesthecompletionofhistoryandthetransitiontoanahistoricalstate.As a result, if we look at its essential self and also at its visual historicalmanifestations,wemayexperiencea certain cognitivedissonance, expectingtheideaofunitytobeperfectlyinstantiatedinthistransienthistoricalrealityandseeinginitssteaddisunityandfragmentation.However,thequestforunitymustalwaysbebalancedwiththeunderstandingofitslimitedapplicability.Ourvisiblerealmofsensibleentitiesistheplaceofdivinepaideia.Itwascreatedinorder toeducate thesoulsand toreunite themwithGod.Assuch, itaims toapproximateunitywhileactuallyfindingitselfinthestateofdivision.

15FormoreinfoseeanexcellentarticlebyHilariaRomelli,“BasilandApokatastasis:NewFindings.”JournalofEarlyChristianHistory4.2(2014):116–136.


35

It thiscontextwemustalsopointout thehomonymyofeschatology.Thiswordfirstandforemostindicatesthelastthings.However,italsosignifiesthe completeness of history (of salvation) made manifest by the IncarnatepresenceofChrist.Hence,eschatologystandsnotonlyforthecompletionofthetemporal seriesof theworld, an instantwhen it terminates,butalso for thefullnessorwholenessorcompletenessofreality.Thiscompleteness isnevergiventousasasensibleformsincethesensibleuniverseischoppedintospatialandtemporalbits.Itisneverpresenttousasasimultaneouswhole.Inthemindoftheancients,bothmeaningsofeschatonwereintrinsicallyconnected.ThatiswhyitwasnosurprisethatduringthefirstcenturiesofChristianhistorythefaithfulhadanimminentexpectationoftheSecondComingandtheJudgment.Once the fullnesshasrevealed itselfhistorically in the IncarnatepresenceofChrist, all existing causal chains must be dissolved and all temporal seriesterminate.However,bythefourthcenturytheseexpectationsfadedawayandthefullnessoftheKingdomwasnolongerassociatedwiththeterminationofatemporalseries.Historymustkeepunfoldingitselfuntil itreachesadivinelydesignedbutunknowntousinstant.Consequently,theideaofsimultaneity(orofanimminentsuccession)oftheIncarnatepresenceandthefinalJudgmentlost its vital force. And the collectivemindset of Christianity ever sincewasmarkedoffbyacertain tensionbetweenanalreadyexistingpresenceof theKingdomandanexpectationof its futureall‐embracingefficacy.Eschatologythusembracedthe fullnessof theKingdomin itsbothaspects, the IncarnatepresenceandtheSecondComingassociatedwiththeendofhistory.Hence,the“eighthdayofcreation”andthefullrestorationofbeingsandtheirreconciliationwiththeCreatorrequiredthecompletionofthepresent“seventhday.”Andtheexistingtensionbetweenthe“already”and“notyet”wasresolvedexclusivelyintheformofliturgicalcelebrations.

In the course of our sensible (i.e. terrestrial) subsistencewe do notreally experience fullness, completeness or wholeness of being. Unity andwholenessbelongprimarilytotheintelligible.Inaddition,unityandwholenessalsomarkedofftheoriginalconditionsofcreation.However,inthefallenandunredeemedstate,ourvisibleuniversedoesnotexhibitanoriginal,properorunqualifiedunityandwholeness.Itratherrepresentsparticularization,separationanddissipationofbeings.Theirunitivemodeofsubsistenceisnolongerareality.Theyareseparatedfromthewhole,thrownintodisunity,dissipatedandfractured,choppedoff into spatial and temporal bits. Evenmore so, our experience ofeschaton,ofthefinalandwholisticstateofconditions,isacaricatureoftherealandtrueeschaton.Oureschaton,thelastthingsthatweexperience,thecompletionofanyaction,justcontrarytowhatAristotleproposedintheEN,isnotreallyaccompaniedbypleasure,butalwaysbypainandsuffering.Whatweexperienceis

SERGEYTROSTYANSKIY

36

rather disappointment and frustration of expectations. And, ultimately, oureschatonisdeathandannihilation,thecessationofallcausalchainsassociatedwith our subsistence, the end of all temporal series of our existence, theirterminatingpoint.Wemay,however,haveagraspoftheunityandwholenessofbeingduringliturgicalcelebrations,whenweexperiencethefullnessoftheKingdom,whenweconfessandtrulyperceivetheunitiverealityofecclesia,oneandundivided,whenweseetheredeemedexistentsbroughtintocommunionwithGod.Itwillbe“seen”directlybytheeyeofthesoulbythosewhoreachthefinal destination of their pilgrimage in the Kingdom of God. At this fleetingperiodofourterrestrialexistence,however,wemustprayfortheunityofthechurchandforthesalvationofallcreationsothatwemaymysticallyanticipateitsgloriousredeemedselfintheeschaton.

We can then conclude that, according to Basil, the notion of unityprimarilyreferstoprotologicalandeschatologicalconsiderations.However,itsvisiblemanifestationsareequallyimportant,eveniftheperfectunitivemodeofsubsistenceisunattainableforthethingsofthisworld.ThebodyofChristinitsvisibleformcanonlyapproximateunity.Itisorderedbytheflowingtime.Itsdis‐unitivesubsistenceisconditionedbythebasicparametersofthesensiblerealm.Itisscatteredacrossplacesandages.However,itpreservesitsessentialcore,onethatwillshineoutinitsbeautyandwillexhibititsfullnessattheendoftimeataninstantofthefinalconsumptionofallbeingsunderthedreadfuljudgmentseatofChrist.Thus,beingasensibleandtransiententityinthestateofpilgrimage,movingandshiftingitselfthroughplaceandtime,havinganimperfectmanifestationofitsunitivemodeofsubsistence, italsohasitseschatologicalself,onethatwemayexperienceliturgicallyandonethatfunctionsasaguidingprincipleofourlife.Thiseschatologicalselfisontologicallystable,orderedbyadifferent kind of time, one that assures the continuity of its posthumousredeemedsubsistence.ItismyconjecturethatBasil’sanalyticschemacanhelpusmakesenseofrecentecclesiasticaldevelopments.This,Isuggest,mayalsocontributetotheongoingdiscussionontheunityoftheRomaniannationandchurch.

REFERENCESAetius.“TheSyntagmation.”InL.R.Wickham.“TheSyntagmationofAetiustheAnomean.”

TheJournalofTheologicalStudies19,no.2(1968):532–69.Aristotle.DeCaelo.InPaulMoraux,Aristote.Duciel,Paris:LesBellesLettres,1965.———.Physics. Edited byWilliamD. Ross. InAristotelisPhysica. Corrected Edition.

ScriptorumclassicorumbibliothecaOxoniensis.Oxford:ClarendonPress,1966.


37

BasiltheGreat.ContraEunomium.InPatrologiaeCursusCompletus,SeriesGraeca29.EditedbyJean‐PaulMigne.Paris:Migne,1857–1866.EnglishtranslationinMarkDelCoglianoandAndrewRadde‐Gallwitz.St.BasilofCaesarea.AgainstEunomius.Washington,DC:TheCatholicUniversityofAmericaPress,2011.

———.DejudicioDei.InPatrologiaeCursusCompletus,SeriesGraeca31.EditedbyJean‐PaulMigne.Paris:Migne,1857–1866.EnglishtranslationbyM.MonicaWagner in Saint Basil: The AsceticWorks. Fathers of the Church 9. New York: TheCatholicUniversityofAmericaPress,1950.

———.Despiritusancto.MignePG32:67‐218.EnglishtranslationbyBlomfieldJacksonNPNF8.2.GrandRapids:Wm.B.Eerdmans,1968.

———. Hexaemeron. In Homélies sur l’Hexaéméron. Deuxième édition. Texte grec,introduction et traduction de Stanislaus Giet. Sources Chrétiennes 26. Paris:Éditions du Cerf, 1968. English translation in Phillip Schaff andHenryWace,Basil:LettersandSelectWorks.NiceneandPost‐NiceneFathers,Secondseries.Vol.8.Peabody,MA:Hendrickson,2004.

Eunomius.LiberApologeticus.InRichardPaulVaggione,Eunomius:TheExtantWorks.OxfordEarlyChristianTexts.FirstEdition,3–78.Oxford:ClarendonPress,1987.

Callahan,JohnF.“GreekPhilosophyandtheCappadocianCosmology.”DumbartonOaksPapers12(1958):29‐57.

Druzhinina,Olga.“TheEcclesiologyofStBasiltheGreat:ATrinitarianApproachtotheLifeoftheChurch.”Dissertation.UniversityofManchester,2015.

Meyendorff,John.ImperialUnityandChristianDivisions.Crestwood,NY:St.Vladimir’sSeminaryPress,1989.

Rist,John.“Basil’s‘Neoplatonism’:ItsBackgroundandNature.”inFedwick,PaulJonathan.BasilofCaesarea,Christian,Humanist,Ascetic:aSixteen‐HundredthAnniversarySymposium.Toronto:PontificalInstituteofMediaevalStudies,1981,137‐220.

Romelli,Hilaria.“BasilandApokatastasis:NewFindings.”JournalofEarlyChristianHistory4.2(2014):116–136.

Sambursky,Shmuel&Pines,Salomon.TheConceptofTimeinLateNeoplatonism:TextswithTranslation,Introduction,andNotes.Jerusalem:IsraelAcademyofSciencesandHumanities,SectionofHumanities,1971.


THE CHRISTOLOGYOF ST. ISAACOFNINIVEHANDTHEEASTSYRIACTHEOLOGYOFTHE7‐8thCENTURIES

BENEDICT(VALENTIN)VESA*

ABSTRACT.IsaacofNinivehisoneofthemostprominentEastSyriacauthor,whosedatesgotoacomplexhistoricalandreligioustime(7‐8thcenturies)–theArabconquestandtheWestSyriacproselytism,andyetaperiodofflourishingtheologicalliterature.Hisdiscourseshaveapracticalperspectiveandtheymaybe easily lectured as a gnoseological‐mystical itinerary, communicated in atechnicallanguage,inalineofaspecifictradition(s).Theologicallyspeaking,thepossibilityofachievingdivineknowledgecanbeexpressedonlywithintheChristologicalframe,asChrististheperfectManandperfectGod,andanyhumanknowledge resides in Him. In consequence it is dependent on theway oneexpressestherelationbetweenChrist’stwonatures(communicatioidiomatum).IsaacofNinivehdoesnot systematicallydealwithChristology,butonemayidentifyinhisdiscoursesanattitude,aphraseologyandamystictheology,inconsequence, described as divine knowledge, perception and vision. In thispaperwewilldealwithIsaac’sChristologicalperspectiveintheframeoftheChristological disputes of his time, and, in consequence, wewill search foridentifyingthetypeofmysticsheprofesses.Keywords:Christology,incarnation,dwelling,dyophysitism,deification.

ThefirstobservationonecanunderlineafteranattentivereadingofIsaacofNiniveh’s discourses is that he disagreedwith the doctrinal disputes andconsequentlyhedidnotreallyinterveneintheChristologicaldiscussions1.HeisquitediscreteandevensilentwhencomesaboutthepolemicdoctrinalissuesthatoccurredintheChurchlifeofhistime.Thereforeonecanhardlyfindsalientpoints in Isaac’sworks regarding this topic. It is not difficult to observe hisattitudeintheadmonishmentheaddressesagainstthosewhodogmatiseandsupportdoctrinaldiscussions–therightwayofactingisthepracticeofvirtue.

* VeryRev. Lecturer, PhD, ThD,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity, Faculty ofOrthodox Theology. E‐mail:[email protected].

1M.MoronyspeaksaboutthemysticalecumenismprofessedbyIsaacofNiniveh.FordetailsseeM.Morony,IraqaftertheMuslimConquest(GorgiasPress,2005),380.

BENEDICT(VALENTIN)VESA

40

Wewill give two suggestive examples: Confound critics by the power of thyvirtues,notbyword;andtheimprudenceofthosewhowillnotbepersuadedbythepeacefulnessofthylips,notbysound2;or:Whenthoubecomestangryatanyoneandzealousforthesakeoffaithbecautious3.

Thedisputesaroundorthodoxyprove,inhisopinion,thatthetruthhasnotbeenyetachieved:Theonewhoseemstobezealoustowardsmenbecauseofthetruth,hehasnotyetlearnedwhatthetruthis4.Thisargumentcanbesupportedbytheabsence inhisdiscoursesof theproblematicphraseology thatgeneratedconflictsinmatterofChristologyinthecommunityhebelongedtoandbythehistoricalinformationwehave.Wewilladdressboththeissuesinthenextfewpages.

Isaac’sChristologicalphraseologyWewillfirstlyrefertothelanguagethebishopofNinivehemploysfor

expoundinghisChristologicalvision.Onecanaffirmthatheusestheterminologyspecific to his East Syriac theological tradition, in particular inherited fromTheodoreofMopsuestia,butwithcautiousnessandinterpreted.Wewillgivesomesignificantexamples,dividedintotwoimportantcategories.Firstly,afrequentexpressionreferstothedescriptionofthebodyofChristastemple/tabernacleofthedivinity: the humannature5, borrowedbyChrist, becamea sanctuary6,atempleforHisdivinity7,oragloriousTabernacleofHiseternalbeing8;atemplemadeofflesh9oranabode–theManwhomDivinitytookfromusforhisabode10…

2MysticTreatisesbyIsaacofNinivehtranslatedfromBedjan’sSyriactextwiththeintroductionandregistersbyA.J.Wensinck(Wiesbaden:NieuweReeks,DeelXXIII,1,1969),abbreviatedI,IV,33;for the Syriac text,Mar IsaacusNinivita,Deperfectione religiosa,ed. byPaulBedjan (Paris‐Leipzig,1909),abbreviatedB.

3I,V,55.4IsaacofNiniveh(IsaactheSyrian),TheSecondPart.ChaptersIV‐XLI,transl.bySebastianBrock,CSCO554/Syr224,(Lovanii,1995),abbreviatedII,3.4,77;fortheSyriactextIsaacofNiniveh(IsaactheSyrian),TheSecondPart.ChaptersIV‐XLI,ed.bySebastianBrock,CSCO555/Syr225(Lovanii,1995).

.ܟܝܢܐ5.ܒܝܬ ܡܩܕܫܐ6.ܗܝܟܠ ܩܘܕܫܐ ܕܐܠܗܘܬܐ7.5,1II,;ܡܫܟܢ ܫܘܒܚܐ ܕܡܬܘܡܝܘܬܐ8.2:19‐21JohnSee5,1;II,ܗܝܟܐܠ ܕܒܣܪܐ9.ܠܥܡܘܪܝܗ 10

THECHRISTOLOGYOFST.ISAACOFNINIVEHANDTHEEASTSYRIACTHEOLOGYOFTHE7‐8thCENTURIES

41

theManwhocompletelybecame its temple11; thedivinity12chose todwell13 inman…likeinatemple14.ThisimageryhasperfectcorrespondenceintheNewTestament. It is also true that, soon after the Christological conflicts, it wasdroppedby theByzantine or theWest Syriac theology, andyet, in the earlytheologyitwasindiscriminatelyused15.

AsecondspecificexpressionreferstothedescriptionofChrist’shumanityasthegarmentofdivinity16,ortheideaofGodbeingclothedinhumanity–theCreator isclothed inhumanbeing17.ProfessorSebastianBrockhasstudiedindetail the theology of clothing in the Syriac tradition and showed that thisexpression has a long story in the East Syriac theology, starting with theScriptureitself18.Inshort,onecansaythatAdamwasclothedinlightandglory.After the fall, hewas stripped of his robe. Christ is the onewho re‐clothedmankindwiththisrobe.Therearethreeessentialmomentsinthisprocess:theNativity,theBaptismandtheDescent/Resurrectionand,correspondently, threewombs–ofVirginMary,ofJordan19andofSheol20.

Whendealingwith the incarnatedWord, Isaacuses twoof the termsimplied in the Christological disputes, omitting exactly the one that createdproblems ( ܩܢܘܡܐ - qnwma, hypostasis). In the frame of his own theologicaltradition, he speaks about two natures ( ܢܐܟܝ / kiane) united in one person/ܦܪܨܘܦܐ) parswpa). This unionmakes the humanity of Christ be veneratedtogetherwithHisdivinity.Wewillrenderbelowatextthatsuggestivelysupportsthecoexistenceofthetwonatures,workinginunion:

WedonothesitatetocallthehumanityofourLord–Hebeingtrulyman–God and Creator and Lord; or to apply to Him in divine fashion thestatementthat `ByHishandstheworldwasestablishedandeverythingwascreated…HegrantedtohimthatheshouldbeworshippedwithHim

.11,12II,;ܗܝܟܠܗ 11.ܐܠܗܘܬܐ12.ܠܥܡܘܪܝܗ13.5,6II,–dwelling11,12;II,;ܗܝܟܐܠ1415FordetailsseeS.Brock,“ClothingMetaphorsasaMeansofTheologicalExpressioninSyriacTradition”,StudiesinSyriacChristianity,Variorum,XI(1992),11‐38,here15‐16.

TheologicalofMeansaasMetaphors“ClothingBrock,S.also:See11,24;II,;ܠܒܘܫܐ ܕܐܠܗܘܬܐ16Expression”,11‐13.

.11,28II,;ܒܪܘܝܐ ܒܒܪܢܫܐ1718ForthefirsttimethisexpressionwasusedbyE.Peterson,“TheologiedesKleides”,BenediktinischeMonatsschrift,19(1934),347‐356.

19OnecaneasilyidentifythesacramentaldimensionofSyriactheology.20S.Brock,“ClothingMetaphors”,11‐13.


42

indistinguishably,withasingleactofworshipfortheManwhobecameLordandforthedivinityequally,whilethe(two)natures21arepreservedwiththeirproperties22,withoutbeinganydifferenceinhonour23.HavingobservedthatIsaachighlightstheexistenceofthetwonatures

inChrist,reflectingthedefinitionofthecouncils,itisnecessarytomakeastepforwardtryingtoidentifythewaytheyconnectthemselvesinthecontextoftheChristologicaldyophisitedoctrineofhis tradition.Asonecouldhavealreadygrasped, Isaac is faithful to theEast Syriac Christologywhenusing both thetermsnature andperson and, omitting the thirdproblematic term (qnwma),seemstoavoidanytheologicaldebate.

In the Second collection there is one important fragment where theBishopofNinivehpresentsasyntheticpanoramaofhisChristologicalvision.Onecanidentifythetwotermsinvolvedinthetheologicaldiscussions,butthecrucialone(qnwma)again isabsent.Therehe insistson the fact that, in theunion,eachnaturekeepsitsownproperties,toavoidanyconfusionofnatures.HisdefinitionisclearlyagainsttheWestSyriacChristology,whenstressingthatChristisnotinonenature:

IlCristoSignoreèsiailprimogenito24,sial’unigenito25.Leduecoseinfattinonsonoinun’unicanatura26,perchédivieneprimogenitodimoltifratelli,ma(é)unigenitopernoneservialtragenerazioneprimaedopodilui.Leduecosesiavverano(rispettivamente) inDioenell’uomo27, che furonouniti in una persona28, senza che si confondessero le (proprietà) dellanaturaperl’unione29.FromalltheseexamplesonemayidentifythatIsaac,describingtheunityof

GodandhumaninChrist,highlightsthedistinctionofthetwonatures,soastopreserve the proprieties from confusion. God willingly dwelt in Jesus andbecauseofhissacrificehewaslifteduptoGodtheWordandhewasgiftedwith.ܟܝܢܐ2122AmongtheEastSyriaccouncilsonlytwoaddresstheissueofproperties–thatofCatholicosJoseph(554)andthatfrom612,duringBabaitheGreat.TheyseemtoechotheChalcedoniandefinition.See:SynodiconOrientaleouRecueildeSynodesNestoriens/abbreviatedSO,ed.andtransl.byJ.B.Chabot(Paris,1902),97‐98.

23II,11,21.ܒܘܟܪܐ24.ܝܚܝܕܝܐ25.ܒܚܕܢܝܘܬ ܟܝܢܐ26.ܒܐܠܗܐ ܘܒܪܢܫܐ ܕܐܬܚܝܕܘ27.ܠܚܕ ܦܪܨܘܦܐ28.3.1,49II,;ܚܕܝܘܬܐ29


43

thesamehonour.Thisisthecrucialpointforhismysticaltheology,becausethewayheexpresses theunionofnatures inChrist conditions thepossibilityofknowingGod.Isaacassertsthat:Allthatappliesto(theMan)israisedupto(theWord)whoacceptsitforhimself,havingwilledtomakeHimshareinthishonour…sowehaveacquiredanaccurateknowledge30oftheCreator31.

ThesoteriologicalroleofIncarnationisinterpretedinthesameframeoftheEastSyriactradition.Whenspeakingaboutsalvation,inparticular,theAlexandrinetraditionusesthetermdeification(theosis),basedontheunionofhumanwiththedivinenatureandthecommunicatioidiomatuminthepersonofChrist.Despite the firmdistinctionof thenatures inChrist, Isaacuses thesametermtodescribetheprocessofknowledge,inadifferentperspectiveand,yet,notcontradictorily32.Hedoesnotuseitveryoftenandyetonecanfinditinatriplesense–symbolical,theological,aswellasmystical.SoastoillustratethesymbolicalusewewillgivetwoexamplesfromtheFirstCollection:thepracticeofasceticlifeleadshumanstobecomeagodonearth33;or,intheadjectivalfrom,thesameconceptispresent:aspiritualmaniscalleddivine34.Occasionally,onecanalsofindtheconceptinatheologicalform.IntheThirdCollection,Isaac’srhetorically asks:Andwhatway of lifedid it offer in exchange for becoming‘God’35? …What position could be greater than that of divinity? And behold:creationhasbecome‘God’36.37Thirdly,Isaacspeaksaboutbecominggodsfromamysticalperspective.ThistimeintheSecondCollectiononemayfindthisideaexpressedwithintheeschatologicalexpressionofthefinalunity:inthelifetocomeweallwillbecome‘gods’bythegraceofourCreator38.

Thesacrifice,theresurrectionandtheascensionofChristopeneduptheway of ascending human nature towards God. Using the words of HilarionAlfeyev,whileinterpretingIsaac’stheology,deificationisperceiveddynamically,as

.ܝܕܥܬܐ ܚܬܝܬܬܐ3031II,11,22.32IntheSyriacterminologyonemayfindtheconceptoftheosis,butitisusedveryrarelyinthisform.(ܡܬܐܠܗܢܘܬܐ) For details see S. Seppälä, In SpeechlessEcstasy.Expression and Interpretation ofMysticalExperienceinClassicalSyriacandSufiLiterature,StudiaOrientalia98(Helsinki,2003),144‐145.

.95)(B,64VI,I,;ܐܠܗܐ ܥܒܕܝܢ ܒܐܪܥܐ ܠܒܪܢܫܐ33.124‐125)(B,84‐85XIII,I,;ܐܠܗܝܐ34.ܐܠܗܐ ܬܗܘܐ35.ܗܘܬ ܠܗ ܒܪܝܬܐ ܐܠܗܐ3637 IsaccodiNinive¸Terzacollezione,editodaSabinoChialà,Lovanii, InAedibusPeeters,CSCO346‐347(Lovanii,2011),abbreviatedIII,5,4‐5;OndivinizationintheSyriactradition,seeN.Russell,TheDoctrineofDeificationintheGreekPatristicTradition(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2004),AppendixI.

.3.1,62II,;ܕܟܠܢ ܥܬܝܕܥܢܢ ܕܢܗܘܐ ܐܠܗܐ ܒܛܝܒܘܬܗ ܕܒܪܘܝܢ38


44

anascentofthehumanbeing,togetherwiththewholecreatedworld,todivineglory,holinessandlight39.WewillquotebelowaparagraphwhereIsaachimselfdescribestheprocessofsalvationinauguratedinChrist’sincarnationandpotentiallyachievedbythewholecreation.Here,theauthor,underlyingtheuniversalvalueofsalvationinChrist,pointstosomeexpressionsstrictlyconnectedwiththeprocessofknowledgeandthetheologicalcontroversiesofhistime–lightandglory:

Amidineffablesplendour(theFather)raisedHimtoHimselftoheaven,tothatplacethatnocreatedbeinghadtrod,butwhitherhehad,throughhisown(action),invitedallrationalbeings,angelsandhumanbeings,tothatBlessedentryinordertodelightinthedivinelight40inwhichwasclothedtheManwhoisfilledwithallthatisholly,whoisnowwithGodinineffablegloryandsplendour…His intensionwas togive toallknowledgeofhisglory41.AnotherimportantexpressionimpliedbyIsaacindescribingtheunion

ofnaturesinChristisvoluntaryunion,borrowedfromtheBookofHeracleidis42andusedintheEastSyriacChristology43.TheWordofGodincarnatedinordertorenewusbythemeansofvoluntaryunion44withtheflesh45,revealingthewaybywhichhumanmayberaisedtoGod’smystery46.

Lastly,wewillevokeatermusedbyIsaac,whichseemsatleastunusualand,probablycontroversial for theEastSyriacdyophisitism,despite its longhistory47. In order to describe the level of intimacy of creation with God,39H.Alfeyev,TheSpiritualWorldofIsaactheSyrian(Kalamazoo,2000),57.EvagriusFrankenberg,W.ed.“Letters”,Evagrius:atoccursalsoexpressionThis;ܢܘܗܪܐ ܐܠܗܝܐ40Ponticus (Berlin, 1912), 554‐634), or some contemporary authors like Sahdona:Martyrius/Sahdona.Oeuvres spirituelles,ed.byA.deHalleux,CSCO255‐256/Syr113‐114, IV,21; andDadisho:Commentairedulivred’AbbaIsaïe(logoiI‐XV))parDadišoQatraya,ed.byC.Draguet,CSCO326‐327/Syr144‐145,XIII,12.

,(1958)28POGuillaumont,A.byed.Gnostica,KepalaiaEvagrius,11,29‐30;II,;ܝܕܥܬܐ ܕܚܘܫܒܗ411,II.55.

42P.Bedjan(ed.),Nestorius.Lelivred’HéraclidedeDamas(Paris,1910),264.43A.Vaschalde,BabaiMagni.LiberdeUnione,CSCO79‐80/Syr34‐35,91..ܚܕܝܘܬܐ ܨܒܝܢܝܬܐ4445II,5,7.46Onemayidentifythesoteriologicalaccentnotinincarnation,inanobjectiveway,butmoreintherevelationofGodaslove,developedinasubjectiveresponseofhuman.Infact,thisistheveryreasonofIncarnation/seeII,3.4,78,discussedbyI.Hausherr,“Unprécurseurdelathéoriescotistesurlafindel’incarnationIsaacdeNinive”,EtudesdeSpiritualitéOrientaleOrientaliaChristianaAnalecta,183(1969),1‐5.

47Specifictothepseudomacarianhomiliesand,consequently,tosomepartsofSyriactheology;seeC.Stewart,WorkingtheEarthoftheHeart”.TheMessalianControversyonHistory,TextsandLanguagetoAD431(Oxford,1991),169‐203.


45

achievedinthesacrificeofChrist,theBishopofNinivehusesthetermmingling48oftheCreatorwiththecreation.Hedoesnotspeakaboutessentialunity,andyethespeaksaboutmingling:theworldhasbecomemingledwithGod,andcreationandCreatorhavebecomeone49.

TheconclusiononecandrawfromthisshortanalysisisthatthesharpdistinctionbetweenthenaturesintheTheodoriantraditionisnotreallypresentinIsaac’swritings.TheuncreatedWordandthecreatedmanJesusisoneandthesameperson.Consequently, theunionofChrist,whichdenotes the assumedMantotheTrinity,throughunionwiththeWord,representstheverybasisortheperfectminglingofthesaintswithGod50.Andfinally,salvationcanbedescribedastheprocessofthehumannature’sascensiontothedivinelightandgloryofthedivinity,byfollowingChrist,who,byHisunion,deifiedhumannature.

Isaac ofNiniveh and the theological disputes in the East Syriac

communityRegarding Isaac’s biography, there are mainly two short notes, due to

Ishod’nahdeBasra51andananonymauthor,publishedbyRahmani52.ThebishopofBasraofferstwointerestingpiecesofinformationaroundIsaac,whicharemostprobably colligated.The first one refers to someof Isaac’s sentences thatwerecontestedbyDanielbarTubanitha,BishopofBetGarmai;theotherone,locatedattheveryendofthenote,liststhenameofIsaacnexttothatofJohnofApamea,JohnDalyathaandJosephHazzaya,whilestressingthereasonforhisresignationfromtheseeofNiniveh–theenvyofthecontemporary,thesameattitudemanifestedagainstthesethreespiritualpersonalities.Ifthefirstsourceisdated9thcentury,thesecondone15thcentury,but,asPaoloBettiolosuggests,thelatteronemighthaveusedinformationandmaterialveryclosetotheeventsitevokes,aroundRabbanShaburMonastery, takingintoconsiderationthedetails itgivesconcerningMarYozadaqinhiscorrespondencewithBushir,fromRabbanShaburMonastery,andthepacifisttoneofthetext53.Heplacesthesourcesofthistextatthemiddleofthe

theWorkingStewart,C.seeauthorsPatristicdifferentattermtheofhistorytheFor;ܚܘܠܛܢܐ48EarthoftheHeart,169‐203.

.5,18II,;ܐܬܚܠܛ ܥܠܡܐ ܒܐܠܗܐ ܘܗܘܬ ܠܗ ܒܪܝܬܐ ܘܒܪܘܝܐ ܚܕ4950II,7,3.51Jesudenah,évêquedeBaçrah,LivredelachastetécomposéparJésudenah,évêquedeBasrah,publiéettraduitparJeanBaptisteChabot(Rome,1896),63‐64(53‐54).

52EphraimIIRahmani,StudiaSyriaca,vol.I(Beirut,Deirel‐Sharf,1904),ܠܓ(33‐32).53FordetailsseeP.Bettiolo,“Congettureintornoaun’assenza:TommasodiMarga,IsaacodiNiniveeletensioniinterneallachiesasiro‐orientaletraVIIeIXsecolo”,E.Coda–C.MartiniBonadeo(ed.),Del’AntiquitétardiveauMoyenÂge(LibrairiePhilosophiqueJ.Vrin,2014),149‐169,here150.


46

8thcentury,inatimeofasilentreceptionofIsaac’swritings,afterthefirstpolemicstage54.ThistextmentionsIsaac’ssubtlemind,toexplainhisresignation.

Inathirdnote,dated9‐10thcentury,HanunIbnYuhannaIbnas‐Salt55alsoevokesthecontestationsraisedagainstsomeofIsaac’ssentences.Hewritesthatoneofhisvisitors,Abual‐‘Abbas‘IsaIbnZaydIbnAbiMalik,hommeconnupoursessentimentsreligieux,sonintelligence,sabontéetsonmérite56,remembersthattheCatholikosJohnIbnNarsaispentonedaynexttohimreadingtheworksofIsaac.BeingaskedabouthisopiniononIsaac’stheologyandthecontestationofDaniel,hehadclearlyrespondedthatMarIsaacspeaksthelanguageofthebeingsinHeavenandDanielspeaksthe languageofthebeingsofearth57.Wedonotknowexactlywhatthethreeproblematicideaswere,butweknowfromAbdishoofNisibe(13thcentury)58 thatDaniel addressed awork against the so calledTheFifthPart ofIsaac’sworks.SabinoChialàhadpublishedtwohomiliesthatpossiblybelongedtothiscollection,dedicatedtoGod’sprovidence59.Iftheirauthenticitycanbeproven,onemightgetanideaabouttheargumentofthecontestation60.

Around these items of information, DanaMiller advances two possibleexplanations:eithertheloftyteachingsofIsaacshookDaniel’stheologicalconceptionsortheenvyandthemaliceagainstthesaint,aspointedinIsho’dnah’snotice61.Ibnas‐Saltgivesussomemore informationwhichmightsupport thesehypotheses.WhenspeakingaboutthewayIsaac’swritingswerereceivedandreadduringhistime,heasserts:

Thisholymanwrotehisepistlesandworksforperfectmonksinwhomheperceivedapureintellect,abundantunderstanding,indeficientknowledge,andperfectworshipofGod.Andthey, inturn,worshippedhiswritings,acknowledged their truth, adhered to his path, andwere aided by theexcellence of his guidance. Then these monks unanimously agreed towithholdhiswritingsfromallwhowereunabletocomprehendthem62.

54P.Bettiolo,“Congettureintornoaun’assenza”,149‐150.55Cf.Traitéreligieux,philosophiqueetmoraux,extraitsdesoeuvresd’IsaacdeNinive(VIIesiècle)parIbnas‐Salt(IXesiècle),P.Sbathéd.,Imp.‘Al‐Chark’(LeCaire,1934),p.16‐19.

56Cf.Traitéreligieux,philosophiqueetmoraux,109.57Traitéreligieux,philosophiqueetmoraux,109.58ScriptorumEcclesiasticorumCatalogus,1725,104.59“DuediscorsidellaQuintaPartediIsaccodiNinive?”,OrientaliaChristianaPeriodica,79(2013),61‐112.

60 It is about the very optimistic tone of the discourses up to expressing the idea of a finalrestoration.On this connection see S. Chialà, “TwoDiscourses of theFifthPart of Isaac theSyrian’sWritings:ProlegomenaforApokatastasis?”,TheSyriacWritersofQatarintheSeventhCentury(GorgiasPress,2014),123‐132.

61Cf.“Translator’sIntroduction:AHistoricalAccountoftheLifeandWritingsoftheSaintIsaactheSyrian”,D.Miller,TheAsceticalHomiliesofStIsaactheSyrian(Boston,HolyTransfigurationMonastery,1984),LXXXIII.

62Traitéreligieux,philosophiqueetmoraux,109.


47

Inoneotherplacehestressesthesameidea:The readingofMar Isaac’swritings isonly suitable for amanwhohasplungedintothedivineScriptures,whosesoulisaptforinquiriesoftheintellectandwhohasavoidedthelustoftheworldinhisthoughtsandhismind…Youthshavebeenrightlyforbiddentodelveintothesecretsofthewritings of this virtuous man, because wisdom is only known by itsadherents63.ThereisasecondinterestinginterrogationregardingIsaac’splaceinthe

ecclesiologicallandscapeofhistime.ItisfocusedonthereasonofhisresignationfromtheseeofNiniveh,afteronlyfivemonthsfromhiselectionasbishopofthiscity.Isho’dnahofBasragivesnoexplanationforhiswithdrawal,hementionsonlythatheabdicatedhisepiscopacybyareasonwhichGodknows,while the textofRahmaninamestheacutenessofhisintellectandhiszealasthemainreasontoleavetheseeofNiniveh.Thismightbeanargument,takingintoconsiderationtheloftinessofhistheology,aswehavehighlightedabove.Athirdsimplisticexplanation,thistimeevokedbyJosephAssemaniandassumedbyNikephorosTheotokis,isfoundinVatican’s198thManuscript.ThisshortextractstatesthatshortlyafterhiselectionasbishopofNiniveh,Isaacfacesacommonsituation–hewasaskedtojudgethecauseofonemanagainsthisdebtor.WhenheappealedtoScripture,byaskingtheonewhohadlentthemoneytoforgetaboutthedebtor,atleast,toprolongtheloanrefund term, the answer of the rich man was to lay aside the Scripture. TheconclusionIsaacdrewwasthat,ifthegospelisnotpresent,thenhisplaceisnotthere.Andhedecidedtogobacktohishermiticallife64.Thisinformationmightbecorrelatedtoaninternaldetail,whereIsaacspeaksaboutonehermitwholefthissolitarylifeandbecamebishop.Thelossofdivinegraceisconsideredtobetheresultofchanginghislifestyle.Thisrecitemightbeanautobiographicalpieceofinformation65.Thiswayofdealingisrecurrentformonastics.Nevertheless,thislasttheoryhasnosolidbasetobeaccepted.

Around this problem, Sabino Chialà advances three hypotheses: Isaac’sattachmenttothesolitarylife,pointedabove,atimeofcrisisforhischurchandhisdifficultytointegrateinaregionfarawayfromhisnativeland66.Amongthesethreehypotheses,webelievethemostconsistentandvalidonereferstothepolemicalatmospherethatcharacterisedhistiming,withitstwocomponents–canonicalandtheological.

63Traitéreligieux,philosophiqueetmoraux,75‐76.64J.S.Assemani,BibliothecaOrientalisClementino‐VaticanaI,PropagandaFidae,Roma,1725,445.65I,35,p.167(B,249).66 S.Chialà,Dall’ascesieremitica.Ricerche su IsaacodiNinivee la sua fortuna,BibliotecadellarivistadistoriaeletteraturareligiosaXIV(Firenze‐Olschki,2002),81.


48

Weremember from the shortbiographieswehave that IsaachadbeentakenbyCatholikosGeorge,whenhecametohisnativeregionin676toconvokeacouncil67 soas tosolveanoldconflictbetween theMetropolisofRevArdashir,whichwasatthattimeinschismwiththeSeeofSeleucia.HewasordainedbishopinBetAbeMonastery,inNorthMesopotamia,whereIsho’yahbIIIandGeorgeHimselfreceivedtheirmonasticformation.Inthiscontextappearstheenvyofthosewhodweltintheinterior68forsomebodycomingfromBetQatraye.Adjacently,stressingagainIsaac’spacifistattitudeinatimeofharshproselytistWestSyriacattitude69,wecaneasilyunderstandthathemighthavebeennotverywellwelcomedandhedid not feel at ease in this situation. Despite the fact that Isho’dnah does notcondition Isaac’s abdication on the envy of his faithful, but on the contestationaroundhistheology,onecaneasilyarguethatthiselementoccupiesanimportantplacewhendealingwithIsaac’spositionwithintheecclesiasticallandscapeofhiscommunity.

Besidesthat, itwouldbeofgreatimportancetorefertoIsaac’spossibleconnections with the so called Messalian polemics. It is useful to bring intodiscussionagainthefirstbiographicalnoteofIsho’dnah,fromwhereonecanlearnaboutIsaac’sthreethemesthatproducedreactionsandthelistingofhisnamenexttothemysticscondemnedbyPatriarchTimothyI.FieyarguesthattheMetropolitanofBasrausesaneutraltoneinhiswritings,exceptwhenhemanifestsaclearpositivepositionregardingthethreemystics–JohntheSolitary,JosephHazzayaandJohnDalyatha70,demonstratingthathisopinionwasnotalwaysaccordingtotheofficialdoctrineofhisChurch71.PaoloBettioloshowsthatthisisduetothedirectattitudeagainstTimothy’scouncilandthesentencingofthethreemystics.However,onecannuanceIsho’dnahattitude–itrevealsdivergenceswithTimothy’sposition,but,atthesametime,convergenceswithhissuccessor,Isho’barNun72.ItisalsotruethatIsaacwasnotcondemnedintheprocessofthemystics,andyetitseemsIsho’dnahidentifiesaconnectionbetweenhimandthem,addinghisnameonthelist.

67ForthecanonsoftheCouncilseeSO,215‐226(480‐490).68The territoriesaroundTigrisandEuphrates.Theecclesiasticalprovincesweredivided intointernal,theoldestones,whoseleadersparticipatedtothepatriarchalcouncils,andexternal,formedofterritoriesrecentlyevangelized,whoseleaderdidnotparticipatetothepatriarch’selectionandtheyweredesignateddirectedbythisone;cf.A.M.Eddé–F.Michau–C.Pirard,Communautéschrétiennesenpaysd’islam,dudébutduVIIesiècleaumilieuduXIesiècle(Paris,1997),26.

69SeethefoundationofMetropolisofTagrit(628‐629).70Cf.J.M.Fiey,“Ichô’dnah,métropolitedeBasra,etsonœuvre”,Orientsyrien11(1966),431‐450(here450); “Isho’dnah et la Chroniquede Seert”,MélangesoffertsauR.PFrançoisGraffin–Paroledel’Orient6‐7(1975‐1976),447‐459(here449‐450).

71“Ichô’dnah,métropolitedeBasra,etsonœuvre”,449.72P.Bettiolo,“Congettureintornoaun’assenza”,154.


49

Inthesameframe,nexttothisinformation,werememberthatduringIsaac’stimetherewasasuspicionofMessalianismarounda fewimportantcharacters,whoeventuallyhadtoleavethemonastery,afteralotofcontestationfromtheirbrothers.ItwasthecaseofMarAfnimaran,whofoundedamonastery,whichJohnDalyathafrequentedbeforejoiningthemonasticlife,andJacobHazzaya,bothofthemspiritualfathersofBlessedSteven,themasterofDalyatha,inMarYozadaqMonastery73.ThismonasterywasalsoaccusedofMessalianism,ifwerememberthatNestoriusofNuhadra,monkinthisconvent,whenelectedbishopofBetNuhadra,wasasked todo ananti‐Messalianprofessionof faith, beforehisordination.Then,thelatteronewasthediscipleandbiographerofJosephHazzaya,thethirdauthorcondemnedbythecouncil.Therefore,atleasthypothetically,onecanadvancetheideathatIsaacwasnotforeigntothistheologicaldirection.Ifwerecalltheideaexpressed byVittorioBerti, the East Syriac Church knew in itsmonasteries andschoolsdivergencesregardingtheconceptionofunionwithGodand,inconsequence,divergencesontheChristianlife,ingeneral,generatedbythecontactbetweentwodifferentconceptionsregardingspirituallife–onemoremystical,andtheothermoreinstitutional74.Hence,onemayspeakaboutaChristologicalperspectivethatallowsanexperiential theology. Isaachimselfwasa significantname in thispolemicalmeeting.

ConclusionOnecanargueafterthisshortanalysisthatintheEastSyriacChurchof

Isaac’stimetherewasnounitaryChristologicaldoctrine.Wecanspeakeitheraboutpartiesor,moreexact,aboutdifferentperspectiveswithin theparties.Thus,thegoalofmonasticspiritualitywasradicallydifferentfromtheintellectualpractices.Inthisframe,theasceticsmanifestedananti‐scholasticattitude,byanexperientialtheologythatgivesspacetoadirectcontactwiththedivinity,atthe levelof themindandheart.To justifytheirperspectivemanytimestheyadvocatedabalancedandconciliatoryposition,or,maybe,sometimes,reformativeattitudes,intermsofChristology,andsotheywerenotalwaysinthelineoftheirChurchtheologicaltradition.ThisecumenicalpositionwasseldomassimilatedasMessalianbytherepresentativesofthephilosophical75partyoftheirChurchcommunity.

73MarYozadaq,whodeclaredhimselfdiscipleofIsaacofNiniveh.74Cf.VitaestudidiTimoteoI(†823)patriarcacristianodiBaghdad.Ricerchesull’epistolarioesullefonticontigue(CahiersdeStudiaIranica41,Chrétiensenterred’Iran3),Paris,157‐166.

75Cf. “TheCulminationofMonastic Ideology: IsaacofNiniveh”,A.H.Becker,FearofGodand theBeginningofWisdom.TheSchoolofNisibisandtheDevelopmentofScholasticCultureinLateAntiqueMesopotamia(Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,2006),184‐188(here187‐188).


50

Speakingabout IsaacofNiniveh, to recall thephraseologyofMichaelMorony,hewasanimportanttransitionfigure,coordinatingnearlytheentiresetof ideasassociatedwith loveofmysticism76.Thesameauthoraddsother twonamesnexttoIsaac’sname–JacobHazzayaandJosephHazzaya–inordertoadvocate the idea that a groupof ascetics shifted the emphasis fromasceticmysticism,propelledbyfearandinducedbyextremeformsofself‐denial,toanecstaticmysticism,basedontheloveofGod.Thus,headoptedaconciliatoryposition, while advising believers to abandon all literature that could divideChristians77.Inthesameline,heexpressedhismysticaltheologyinaChristologicallanguagethatavoidsanypolemicdiscussions.Itisnotaboutasimplequietism,sothattodetachfromthecurrentevangelism,theologicaldisputesandstateintervention,butabout liberationof thespirit fromtemporalauthority78.Hetakesuponanecumenicalmysticism79whichhasasdirectconsequenceatypeofspiritualtoleration80.

REFERENCES Alfeyev,H.TheSpiritualWorldofIsaactheSyrian.Kalamazoo,2000.Assemani, J.S.BibliothecaOrientalisClementino‐VaticanaI.Roma:PropagandaFidae,

1725.BabaiMagni.LiberdeUnione,ed.ByA.Vaschalde,CSCO79‐80/Syr34‐35.Berti, V. Vita e studi di Timoteo I († 823) patriarca cristiano di Baghdad. Ricerche

sull’epistolarioesullefonticontigue.CahiersdeStudiaIranica41,Chrétiensenterred’Iran3.Paris.

Bettiolo,P.“Congettureintornoaun’assenza:TommasodiMarga,IsaacodiNiniveeletensioni interneallachiesasiro‐orientale traVIIe IXsecolo.” InDe l’AntiquitétardiveauMoyenÂge,editedbyE.CodaandC.MartiniBonadeo,149‐169.Paris:LibrairiePhilosophiqueJ.Vrin,2014.

Brock,S.“ClothingMetaphorsasaMeansofTheologicalExpressioninSyriacTradition.”StudiesinSyriacChristianity,Variorum,XI(1992):11‐38.

Chabot, J.B., ed. and trans. Synodicon Orientale ou Recueil de Synodes Nestoriens/abbreviatedSO.Paris,1902.

Chialà, S. “Duediscorsi dellaQuintaPartedi IsaccodiNinive?”OrientaliaChristianaPeriodica,79(2013):61‐112.

76M.Morony,IraqaftertheMuslimConquest,464.77P.Wood,TheChronicleofSeert.ChristianHistoricalImaginationinLateAntiqueIraq(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2013),162.

78M.Morony,IraqaftertheMuslimConquest,450.79M.Morony,IraqaftertheMuslimConquest,380.80Deemallpeopleworthyofbountyandhonour,betheyJewsormiscreantsormurderers(I,IV,39)


51

———.“TwoDiscoursesoftheFifthPartofIsaactheSyrian’sWritings:Prolegomenafor Apokatastasis?”, 123‐132. In The SyriacWriters of Qatar in the SeventhCentury.GorgiasPress,2014.

———.Dall’ascesieremitica.Ricerchesu IsaacodiNinivee lasua fortuna.BibliotecadellarivistadistoriaeletteraturareligiosaXIV.Firenze‐Olschki,2002.

DadishoQatraya.Commentairedu livred’Abba Isaïe(logoi I‐XV))parDadišoQatraya,editedbyC.Draguet,CSCO326‐327/Syr144‐145.

Eddé,A.M.,F.Michau,andPirard,C.Communautéschrétiennesenpaysd’islam,dudébutduVIIesiècleaumilieuduXIesiècle.Paris,1997.

EphraimIIRahmani.StudiaSyriaca,vol.I.Beirut,Deirel‐Sharf,1904.EvagriusPonticus. “Letters.” InEvagriusPonticus, editedbyW. Frankenberg.Berlin,

1912.———.KepalaiaGnostica,editedbyA.Guillaumont.PO28.1958.Fiey,J.M.“Ichô’dnah,métropolitedeBasra,etsonœuvre.”Orientsyrien11(1966):431‐

450.———.“Isho’dnahetlaChroniquedeSeert.”MélangesoffertsauR.PFrançoisGraffin–

Paroledel’Orient6‐7(1975‐1976):447‐459.———.AssyriechrétienneIII‐BéGarmaïBetAramayéetMaishannestoriens.Bayrouth:

DarEl‐MachreqÉditeurs,1968.Hausherr, I. “Unprécurseurde la théoriescotistesur la finde l’incarnation Isaacde

Ninive.”EtudesdeSpiritualitéOrientaleOrientaliaChristianaAnalecta,183(1969):1‐5.

Isaac of Niniveh (Isaac the Syrian).The SecondPart.Chapters IV‐XLI. Translated bySebastianBrock,CSCO554/Syr224.Lovanii,1995.

———.TheSecondPart.ChaptersIV‐XLI.EditedbySebastianBrock,CSCO555/Syr225.Lovanii,1995.

IsaccodiNinive.Terzacollezione,editodaSabinoChialà,Lovanii,InAedibusPeeters,CSCO346‐347.Lovanii,2011.

Jesudenah,évêquedeBaçrah.LivredelachastetécomposéparJésudenah,évêquedeBasrah.PubliéettraduitparJeanBaptisteChabot.Rome,1896.

Mar Isaacus Ninivita.De perfectione religiosa. Edited by Paul Bedjan. Paris‐Leipzig,1909.

Martyrius/Sahdona,Oeuvresspirituelles.EditedbyA.deHalleux,CSCO255‐256/Syr113‐114.

Miller, D.TheAsceticalHomiliesof St Isaac the Syrian.Boston, Holy TransfigurationMonastery,1984.

Morony,M.“TheCulminationofMonasticIdeology:IsaacofNiniveh.”InFearofGodandtheBeginningofWisdom.TheSchoolofNisibisandtheDevelopmentofScholasticCulture in LateAntiqueMesopotamia, by A. H. Becker, 184‐188.Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,2006.

———.IraqaftertheMuslimConquest.GorgiasPress,2005.MysticTreatisesbyIsaacofNinivehtranslatedfromBedjan’sSyriactextwiththeintroduction

andregistersbyA.J.Wensinck.Wiesbaden:NieuweReeks,DeelXXIII,1,1969.


52

Nestorius,Lelivred’HéraclidedeDamas.EditedbyP.Bedjan.Paris,1910.Peterson,E.“TheologiedesKleides.”BenediktinischeMonatsschrift,19(1934):347‐356.Russell,N.TheDoctrineofDeification intheGreekPatristicTradition.Oxford:Oxford

UniversityPress,2004.Sbath P., ed.Traité religieux,philosophique etmoraux, extraitsdesœuvresd’Isaacde

Ninive(VIIesiècle)parIbnas‐Salt(IXesiècle).LeCaire:Imp.‘Al‐Chark’,1934.Seppälä,S.InSpeechlessEcstasy.ExpressionandInterpretationofMysticalExperiencein

ClassicalSyriacandSufiLiterature.StudiaOrientalia98.Helsinki,2003.Stewart,C.“WorkingtheEarthoftheHeart”.TheMessalianControversyonHistory,Texts

andLanguagetoAD431.Oxford,1991,169‐203.Wood,P.TheChronicleofSeert.ChristianHistoricalImagination inLateAntiqueIraq.

Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2013.


CHURCH,MINJUNGANDSTATE:THEREVIVALOFPROTESTANTCHRISTIANITY

INNORTHKOREA

JOOSEOPKEUM*

ABSTRACT.The issue of church and state takes us to the heart ofmissionbecausetheGospelisthegoodnewsineverypartofhumanlifeandsociety.ThroughoutthehistoryoftheChurchinKorea,theissuesofchurchandstate,religion and society havebeendeeply connected to thedevelopment of theKoreanchurches.Indeed,animportantfactorinChristianity’ssuccessinKoreahas been its frequent identification with political movements promotingKorean nationalism, independence, democracy, and Korean reunification.EspeciallyinNorthernKoreabeforethedivisionofthepeninsulain1945,andin North Korea after it,1 the church‐state relationship has been one of thecrucial issuesdetermining the fateof the churches. It is thepurposeof thisarticletointroducetherevivalofProtestantChristianityinNorthKoreaintheCommunistcontext,withspecialreferencetoissuesofchurchandstate.

Keywords:ChurchandState,ProtestantChristianity,NorthKorea,Gospel

HistoricalParadigmsofChurchandStateRelationsinNorthKoreabefore1972

TheMinjung‐CenteredOppositionalParadigm

ProtestantChristianitywasintroducedtotheKoreanpeninsulathroughManchuriainthelate19century.ItarrivedinanorthernKoreansocietythatsufferedfromeconomic,socialandpoliticaldiscrimination,inrelationtoSouthern

* Reverend,Professor.PresbyterianUniversityandTheologicalSeminaryofSeoul.E‐mail:[email protected].

1The terms ‘Northern Korea’ and ‘Southern Korea’will be used as shortened names for ‘thenorthernregionof theKoreanpeninsula’and ‘thesouthernregionof theKoreanpeninsula’before thepartition in1945.The terms ‘NorthKorea’and ‘SouthKorea’willbeusedwhereappropriateinplaceoftheofficialnames,‘DemocraticPeople’sRepublicofKorea’and‘RepublicofKorea,’fortheperiodafter1945.

JOOSEOPKEUM

54

Korea,attheendoftheChosunDynasty.Againstthetraditionalcastesystemofthesouth‐centeredConfucianism,northernProtestantismengagedintheenlightenmentofsocialequalityamongthenorthernminjung.2NorthernProtestantismdevelopedtheideaofsocialreformation,whichemphasizedarepublicanpolity,emphasizingtheroleofthepeopleagainstthatofthemonarch.TranslationoftheBibleintoHangul,thelanguageofminjung,gavetheminjunganewvisionoftheKingdomofGod,whereeveryhumanbeingisequal.

When Korea was colonized by Japan, the exploitation by the JapanesecolonialgovernmentconcentratedonNorthernKoreabecauseofitsminingindustry,andinordertopreparetheJapaneseinvasionofManchuria.Undertheseconditions,ProtestantChristianityinNorthernKoreadevelopedasanimportantfocusof theindependencemovement,inparticularthroughleadingtheMarchFirstIndependenceMovementin1919.KoreannationalismthusbecameanimportantcharacteristicofnorthernProtestantism.When the Japanese imposedShinto shrineworship3tosuppress the rise of Christian nationalism, the northern Christians stronglyresisted,onthegroundsthatitwasanissueofstatusconfessionis.Byleadingtheindependencemovement,northernProtestantismwasrecognizedasapatrioticreligionbythenorthernminjung.

Therefore, the church‐state relationship in Northern Korea beforeindependencemodeledaparadigmofChristianoppositiontothestate,aimedagainstboththesouth‐centeredChsunDynastyandJapanesecolonialrule.Inthedevelopmentofthisoppositionalparadigm,thenotionofbeingthechurchoftheminjungwas important inNorthernKoreanChristian self‐identity.NorthernProtestantismunderstoodboththeChosunmonarchyandtheJapanesecolonialstateastyranniesthatoppressedtheminjung.Therefore,resistanceagainstthestatewasjustifiedonthegroundsoftheliberationoftheminjung.ProtestantChristianityinNorthernKoreawashighlyrespectedbytheminjungasapatrioticand,indeed,aminjungreligion.Thisoppositionalparadigmofchurch‐staterelationswas a major cause of Protestant Christianity’s original success in NorthernKorea.

2Theword“minjung”isaKoreanpronunciationoftwoChinesecharacters:“min”and“jung.”“Min”literallymeans“thepeople”;“jung”means“themass.”Combiningthesetwowords,wegettheideaof“themassofpeople.”Yet“minjung”isamoreinclusivewordthanthemass.Atthesametime,itmustbeacknowledgedthatthereisnosingleagreedmeaningofminjungevenamongtheminjungtheologiansthemselves,becauseminjungmovementsbrokeoutspontaneouslyindiversefields.Nevertheless,itisalsotruethatwhenonelooksatitshistoricalorigins,arough,“rule of thumb” definition of the term emerges as follows: “theminjung are thosewho areoppressedpolitically,exploitedeconomically,alienatedsocially,andkeptuneducatedinculturalandintellectualmatters.”

3ForageneralunderstandingofShintoism,see,W.G.Aston,Shinto:TheWayoftheGods(London:Longmans,1905);“TheShintoShrines:AProblemConfrontingtheChurch”,IRM29,(1940):161‐188;CTCBulletin3,No.3(HongKong:CCA,1982).

CHURCH,MINJUNGANDSTATE:THEREVIVALOFPROTESTANTCHRISTIANITYINNORTHKOREA

55

TheCompetitiveOppositionalParadigmDuringJapaneserule,bothProtestantChristianityandtheCommunist

movement,especiallyKimIl‐sung’santi‐Japaneseguerillas,werecentersoftheindependencestruggleinNorthernKorea.Withliberationin1945,anewphasebegan.NorthernProtestantismandCommunismnowencounteredeachotherasideologicalrivalsinthetaskofnationbuilding.TheChristianattempttotakepolitical hegemony through organizing the first modern political party inKoreanhistory,theChristianSocialDemocraticParty,wasoffsetbyKimIl‐sungandhisfollowers,whoestablishedaCommunistregimewiththesupportoftheSovietArmy.KimIl‐sunginvitedtheChristianstocooperateinnationalconstructionthroughjoiningaunitedfront.However,theFiveProvincesJointPresbytery(FPJP),whichactedprovisionallyinplaceoftheGeneralAssemblyofthePresbyterianChurchofKoreaintheNorth,rejectedthisoption,andfellbackontheoppositionalparadigmofchurchandstatethathadprevailedduringJapaneserule.ThenorthernChristiansarguedthatChristianitycouldnotco‐existwithatheisticCommunism.Therefore,theChristianscompetedforpoliticalpowerthroughorganizingChristianpartiesandclashedwiththeCommunistsoverseveralpoliticalissues,andmostnotablythatoftheboycottofthegeneralelection.4

InthisprocessofpoliticalcompetitionandconflictwiththeCommunists,thenorthernProtestantChristianslostthesupportoftheminjung.Oneofthemainreasonsbehindthecompetitionandconflictwastheissueoflandreform.ThenorthernChristiansrejectedtheCommunistlandreforminordertomaintaintheirrecentlyupgradedsocialstatus,inwhichtheyhadrisenoutoftheminjungtobecomepartoftheelite.Asaconsequence,thenorthernminjungwelcomedtheCommunistpolicyofsocialreform,butdidnotfavorofthenorthernChristians’attempttogainpoliticalpower.BecauseoftheCommunistsuppressionandthedisapprovaloftheminjung,thepoliticalinitiativesoftheFPJPfinallycollapsed.Withtheoutbreakof theKoreanWar(1950‐1953), themajorityofnorthernProtestantChristiansevacuatedtotheSouthtoavoidthediscriminationandpersecutiontheyexpectedtoexperienceunderCommunistrule.

TheaboveoppositionalparadigmbetweenthechurchandtheCommuniststate succeeded the traditional paradigm of opposition between church andstatebeforeliberation.However,thepositionofthechurchalteredafterliberation,bythefactthatitlostthesupportoftheminjung‐axis.Fromthiswecanconcludethatinthedevelopmentofanoppositionparadigmagainststate,thesupportoftheminjungisacrucialfactor.Withoutit,ChristianitycouldnotsucceedinNorthKorea.

4See,JooseopKeum,“RemnantsandRenewal:AHistoryofProtestantChristianityinNorthKorea,withSpecialReferenceto IssuesofChurchandState,1945‐1994”,PhDThesis(UniversityofEdinburgh,1992),116‐128.

JOOSEOPKEUM

56

TheDiplomaticCooperativeParadigmWiththeestablishmentoftheNorthKoreanstatein1945,acooperative

paradigmdevelopedbetweentheleadersoftheNorthKoreanChristianAssociation(NKCA)5andthenewCommunistgovernmentemerged.TheNKCArecognizedthat theCommunist social reformwasnecessary inNorthKorea. Therefore,theysupportedtheKimIl‐sungregime,andparticipatedintheUnitedFrontofNorthKorea.TheNKCAandtheCommunistregimethusdevelopedacooperativeparadigmofchurch‐staterelations.

AlthoughthisChristiangroupwasaminoritywithinthenorthernchurches,itheldecclesiasticalpowerwithandthroughCommunistsupport.TheNKCAleadersintroducedaradicalrenewalprogramtorootnorthernProtestantismintheCommunistsoil.However,thisprocessofrenewalwaslargelydependentonthesupporttheyreceivedfromtheCommuniststate,andwascarriedoutthrough a top‐down method. The theological justification or basis for thisapproachwasveryweak,andinanycasedeficient.WhentheKoreanWarbrokeout,theNKCAleaderscontinuedtheircooperativeparadigmbysupportingtheCommunistcauseagainsttheUN“PoliceAction,”6whichcarriedthesupportoftheWCCandwesternchurches.However,theircooperationresultedinfailurebecausethemajorityofnorthernChristians,includingmanyleadersofNKCA,fledtotheSouthduringthewar.

Thus,justastheFPJP’soppositiontotheCommunistgovernmentlostthesupportof thenorthernminjung, sotoothecooperationparadigmof theNKCAfailedto findsupportamongthegrassrootsChristians inNorthKorea.Although theNKCAsupported the land reform,anddeclared its intention toworkfortheminjung,mostofitsactivitieswereactuallyconcentratedonsecuringecclesiasticalpowerthroughabureaucraticapproachtotheCommuniststate.WhiletheFPJPaimedatobtainingthesecularpoliticalpowerthroughcompetingwiththeCommunists, theNKCAaimedatthesamethingthroughdiplomaticcooperationwiththeCommunistleaders.Botheventuallyfailed.

The original intention of the NKCA was to renew the church‐staterelationship through rooting northern Protestantism in the Communist soil.

5ConcerningtheNKCA,see,ibid.,140‐149.6TheUN’sinterventionintheKoreanWarwasthefirstmilitaryactioninherhistory.FromthebeginningoftheWar,theUShadparticipated.However,PresidentTrumansentAmericanairandnavalpowertoKorea“withoutcongressionalapproval.”ThelackofsuchapprovalmeantthatTrumancouldnotcallforgeneralmobilization.Therefore,hebroughttheissuetotheUN,to cover the shortage of ground soldiers. Truman called his intervention inKorea a “policeaction”so thathewouldnothave togetadeclarationofwar.According toB.Cumings, this“policeaction”inauguratedthepatternforsubsequentconflictsinVietnamandPersianGulf,inwhichwarswere declared by executive decision rather than through proper constitutionalprocedure.B.Cumings,Korea’sPlaceintheSun(NewYork:W.W.Norton,1997),265.


57

AlthoughtheNKCAaimedtobeachurchfortheminjungintheory,inpractice,itsactivitywasfocusedondiplomaticcooperationwiththeCommunists.TheNKCAfailedtoachieveanauthenticrenewalofthenorthernchurchesbecauseitattemptedtoachievetherenewalsimplythroughbureaucraticchanges.

Althoughby1949theNKCAhadbecometheonlyrepresentativeProtestantorganizationinNorthKorea,itpaidthepriceforitsuncriticalcooperationwiththegovernment.TheNKCAbecameasortofreligiousspokesmanfortheKimIl‐sungregime.ThediplomaticcooperativeparadigmoftheNKCAresultedinadependencyofthechurch‐axisonthestate‐axisattheexpenseoftheminjung‐axis.ItsuncriticalcooperationwiththesecularstatealsobroughtaboutanidentitycrisisintheNKCAinregardtopublicissues.

TheParadigmofCatacombAftertheKoreanWar,onlyonefourthofProtestantChristiansandafew

NKCA pastors remained in North Korea. However, they were not able toreconstructtheirchurchesbecauseofthesocialantipathytowardtheChristians,thegreatmajorityofwhomhadsupportedtheenemyduringthewar.Inthiscontext,theremnantChristians(whowerenotpartoftheNKCA)againcollectivelyboycottedthegeneralelection,asanactionaimedagainsttheKimIl‐sungregimein1958.Thisboycottbroughtaboutasevere“Anti‐ReligiousCampaign”bytheCommunists.TheCommuniststate legalizedapolicyofsocialdiscriminationagainst the Christians. Anti‐Communist underground Christian leaderswereexecuted, and anti‐Christian propaganda and sloganswere displayed acrossNorthKorea.BecauseoftheNKCA’sconcentrationonabureaucraticapproach,itwasnotabletoprovideatheologicaljustificationforthecontinuedexistenceofChristianityinNorthKoreanCommunistsociety.

Consequently,theremnantChristianswereindifficultytoopenlyenjoyreligiouslifeafter1958.Thestate‐axisabsolutelyoverwhelmedthechurch‐axis,anddidnotallowanyreligiousfreedom.Thisparadigmofchurch‐staterelationswas similar to theparadigmof theCatacombs inRomeduring theNeronianpersecution.

ThediscriminationandpersecutionpracticedagainstChristiansinNorthKoreafrom1958‐1972pointstothefailureoftheformerchurch‐staterelationships,developedbytheNKCAandtheFPJP.BoththecompetitiveoppositionalparadigmoftheFPJPandthediplomaticcooperativeparadigmoftheNKCAhadignoredtheaxisof theminjung.Therefore,whentheCommuniststate introduced itshostile ideological attackonnorthernProtestantism, the remnantChristianswereneitherabletojustifytheirChristianexistenceintheNorthKoreanCommunistsociety,norabletoreceiveanysupportandsympathyfromtheminjung.ThistaughtnorthernProtestantismanimportantlesson:adiplomaticrapprochement

JOOSEOPKEUM

58

with the statewas clearly not enough to secure the survival of the church;ratherithadtobeachurch“with”and“for”theminjung.Furthermore,itwouldhavetoarticulateatheologicalunderstandingofthesignificanceofChristianchurchesinaCommunistsociety.

TheRevivalofChristianityinNorthKoreasince1972

TheContextofRevival

Thepost‐1972periodcanbecharacterizedasapoliticallystabilized,orstatic era inNorthKorea. During the 1950s, Kim had faced serious internalpolitical challenges from his Communist rivals. In the 1960s, there was anexternalcrisis,theSino‐SovietDispute,whichthreatenedhisleadership.Inthiscontext, theyearof1972wasavery importantturningpoint innotonlytheecclesiasticalbutalsothepoliticalhistoryofNorthKorea.Inthatyear,KimIl‐sungsucceededinrewritingtheconstitutionandwaselectedpresidentoftherepublic. 7 In contrast to previous general elections, there was neither aChristianboycott,norfactionaryresistancenorforeigninfluence.Thepoliticalstabilitywhichthen followedinNorthKoreawasan importantaspectof thecontext in which Protestant Christianity revived. In this atmosphere, theCommunistsnolongerregardedtheChristiansasapossiblepoliticalthreat.

Inthe1970s,therebegantobedefinitesignsofarealignmentintheoldEast‐Westconfrontation.TherewasaSino‐AmericanrapprochementandtheSoviet‐Japanese and Sino‐Japanese peace treatieswere concluded. It was in1972thatallthesedramaticchangesbecamehistoricalrealities.TheColdWarclimate that had created thedivisionof theKoreanpeninsulawas changing.BothNorthandSouthKoreawereforcedtoreadjusttheirpositiontocopewiththe new developments. A series of reunification talks between two Koreasundertakenandlasteduntil1975.8

For thenorthern churches, theNorth‐Southdialogue,while it lasted,createdanewopportunityforrevival.Onaccountofit,NorthKoreansocietywasexposedtotheSouthandoutside.Often,duringthedialogue,NorthKoreawasquestionedastowhethertherewasreligiousfreedom.ThisquestionwasposedinsuchawaythatitfocusedonthepresenceofChristiansandexistenceofchurchesinNorthKorea.ItmusthavecausedsomeembarrassmenttoNorthKorean Communist officials, who claimed the superiority of their political7Kimwasthepremierofthecabinetbefore1972.ConcerningthepoliticaldevelopmentinNorthKoreainthisperiod,see,V.Mikheev,“PoliticsandIdeologyinthePost‐ColdWarEra”,inHanS.Park,ed.,NorthKorea:Ideology,Politics,Economy(Simon&Schuster,1996),87‐104.

8See,RepublicofKorea,NationalUnificationBoard,South‐NorthDialogueinKorea,No.54(Seoul,1992).


59

systemoverthatoftheSouth.ThroughthedialoguetheNorthKoreanCommunistsalsobegantolearnabouttheChristianstrugglefordemocracyandsupportfortheminjung intheSouth.Untilthen,fortheCommunistsintheNorth,theimagetheyhadofChristianitywasonlyasan“Americanimperialisticreligion.”However,theminjungtheologyofthesouthernchurchesgavethemadifferentpicture.Itwasan extraordinaryexperience for them,which forced them to reconsidertheirunderstandingofChristianity.Consequently,forthefirsttime,KimIl‐sungmadeanopenaddressin1973,inwhichherecognizedthat“Christianityhassomeresourcesfortheliberationofminjung.”9

TheNewPlatformInthiscontext,in1972,thecentralcommitteeoftheKoreanChristian

Federation(KCF,theformerNKCA)gatheredtogethertodiscusstherevivalofthechurchesinNorthKorea,andadoptedwhatitcalleda“newplatform”forthispurpose.Firstly,theKCFthedeclaredthatChristianityisapatrioticreligionofNorthKorea.TheKCFdeclaredthattheChristiansfullysupportedtheirgovernment,andwouldcooperatewithitspolicy:

With patriotism, we will make efforts for the prosperity of the countryupholdingtheconstitutionandpolicyoftheRepublicgovernment.10

It is understandable that the newplatform thus starts by expressing

strong support for the state. The KCF needed to reassure the governmentbecauseofthehistoryofoppositionbetweenthechurchandthestateinNorthKorea.Therevivalofthechurcheswasnotaimedagainstthegovernment,andwouldnotthreatenitsauthority.Thiswasnotmerelypoliticallipservicepaidto theCommunistgovernment.Rather,ProtestantChristianitywasgenuinelytryingtorootitselfamongtheNorthKoreanpeopleasapatrioticreligion,andsheditsimageofbeingatoolof“Americanimperialism.”

Secondly, the KCF explained further some of the ways in which therevivalwouldbenefitNorthKoreansociety:

We will strive to eliminate all sorts of discrimination based on gender,nation, religion,propertyandclass, and toestablisha free, equal societyfoundedonthespiritofChristianCharity.11

9KWP,ChosunJoongangNyungam,TheYearbookofNorthKorea,(Pyongyang:KWPPress,1974),261.

10ThePlatformoftheKoreanChristianFederation,1972,Article1.11Ibid.,Article2.

JOOSEOPKEUM

60

The secondarticle indicated that the revivedchurchwouldnotworkonlyfortheChristians.Rather,itpromisedthattheChristianswouldcontributetothewidercommunity.

Thenthirdly,theKCFexpresseditsecclesiasticalconcerns:

TheKCFwillworktodefendthefreedomoffaithandreligiouslifeforthedevelopmentofChristianityinNorthKorea,includingworkforevangelism,andtherightsanddemandsoftheChristians.12

AlthoughtheinternalconcernsoftheKCF,theactualrevivalandspread

of Christianity comes thirdly, this was nevertheless a powerful declaration,demandingreligiousfreedominNorthKorea.ItalsoshowsgreatconfidenceinthesolidfaithoftheremnantChristians.

As amatter of fact, the revised constitution ensured the freedom ofreligion,initsarticle54.However,atthesametime,italsoguaranteedwhatitcalled “the freedom of anti‐religious propaganda.” 13 Article three of theplatformoftheKCFwasastrongrequesttothegovernmenttorealizethespiritof the constitution, and not to apply it only one‐sidedly. The KCF tried toconfirmthatthefreedomoffaithinthenewconstitutionspeciallyincludedthefreedomofevangelism.Thiscanevenbeinterpretedasanindirectcriticismofthe“freedomofanti‐religiouspropaganda,”whichwasaleft‐overfromtheAnti‐ReligiousCampaign,whichhadbeenusedtorestrictandsuppressevangelism.TheKCFunderstood the freedom to evangelize as anessential aspectof thefreedomofreligion.

TheHouseChurchesInadditiontothenewplatform, in thesameyear(1972)therevived

centralcommitteeoftheKCFdecidedtoreopentheseminary,register individualChristiansandreconstructtheecclesiasticalorderoftheKCF.ThiswastobeaninstitutionalrevivalofthenorthernProtestantism.However,behindit,therewasalso the revival of the house churches, which is most significant from theperspectiveofminjungbecausethegrassrootsChristianswerethepeoplewhooriginallydevelopedthehousechurchtraditioninNorthKorea.Theypreservedtheirfaithcommunitiesunderground,inspiteofpersecution,from1958‐1972.Evenafter1972,theyhaverevivedandstrengthenedtheircommunitiesby theirowninitiative.ThischaracteristicallowsustodefinethehousechurchesastheminjungChristiancommunityinNorthKorea.

12Ibid.,Article3.13TheSocialistConstitution,Article54.


61

In1972,whentheAnti‐ReligiousCampaignfinallydisappeared,theKCFdidnothaveexactstatisticsofhowmanyChristiansremainedinNorthKorea.Therefore,surveyingtheremnantChristians,andregisteringthemwiththeKCF,wasan important task for the KCF to undertake, as they set about reconstructingecclesiasticalorder.

Table)DistributionofMembershipoftheKCF,1984‐200214

Year 1984 1988 1996 2000 2002

Membership 5,000 10,000 12,000 12,343 13,043

Thestatisticsgivenabovefor1984,1988,and1996areapproximate

number for the membership of the KCF. Only more recently, did the KCFannounce the exact numbers of its membership. Although the figures wereapproximate,itseemsthatthemembershipwasdoubledinthefouryearsfrom1984‐1988,andincreasedbyabout300membersannuallyfrom1988‐1996.

By1984,theKCFhadfinishedsurveyingthesituationofhousechurchesacrossNorthKorea.Therewereabout500housechurches,andeachchurchhadabouttenmembers.TheaverageageoftheChristianswasfifty‐fiveyearsold,and70%ofthemwerewomen.15ItiscertainthatthemajorityofthechurcheshadjoinedtheKCFby1984.Inotherwords,by1984,thehousechurchesandtheKCFseemtohavereachedasituationofmutualtrust.Recently,in2002,theKCFhaslaunchedanevangelismcampaign,aimingtoincreasemembershipto14,000 by 2004.16 It is certain that one of the characteristics of ProtestantChristianityinNorthKoreaisitsstronginterestinevangelism,inaccordancewiththeevangelistictraditionofKoreanChristianity.

The house church is a unique ecclesiological form of ProtestantChristianity in North Korea. It may be described as a small congregationalcommunity under lay leadership. At first, the remnant Christians started toorganizehousegroupsinthedisasteroftheKoreanWar.TheChristiansmetinthehousesoflayleaderstocarryontheirreligiouslifebecausetheirpastors

14Thestatisticsof1984arefromJ.Moyeretal.,“VisitofaDelegationtotheD.P.R.K.fromMay24toJune10,1984”,LutheranWorldFederation,4;1988fromT.M.Brown,“TripReport:EastAsia,October27‐November28,1988”,Asia/PacificDesk,AnglicanChurchofCanada,20thFebruary1989,7;1996fromK.Park,“NorthKorea‐BackgroundoftheChurches”WCCMemorandum,25thJune1996,1;2000fromY.Kang,“KeynoteSpeech”,TheSeventhKoreanChristianConferenceforPeacefulReunificationofFatherland,13thDecember2000,Fukuoka,Manuscript,4;2002fromYoung‐sup Kang, “Keynote Speech”, The Eighth Korean Christian Conference for PeacefulReunificationofFatherland,23rdJune2002,Tozanso,UnpublishedPaper,3.

15NCCCUSA,op.cit.,9.16Young‐supKang,op.cit.

JOOSEOPKEUM

62

had evacuated to the South.During theAnti‐ReligiousCampaignperiod, thestateofficiallyabolishedthehousecommunities,butmanycontinuedtoexistunderground.Inthiscontext,thechurchhadtobeorganizedasasmallandlay‐centeredsecretfaithcommunityforsurvival.Thissmallandsecretlay‐centeredcongregational model of house church, under persecution, is similar to theecclesiasticalformoftheFirstChurch,duringtheearlycenturies.

However,in1988,therewasanewphenomenoninthehousechurchtraditioninNorthKorea.From1972onwards,theundergroundhousegroupshad been coming out into the open, and registeringwith the KCF.With thereopeningoftheseminary,thehousegroupsbegantobedevelopedashousechurches, where ordained ministers would proclaim the Word of God andcelebratethesacraments.Remarkably,in1988,theBongsuChurchwasbuiltinPyongyang,andhasnow450members.TheChilgolChurchwasbuiltin1991inmemoryofdeaconKangBan‐suk,themotherofKimIl‐sung,andhasnow150members.Thetwochurchesabsorbedmorethanhalfofthe50housechurchesinPyongyang.From1988,anewcongregationalmodelbegantoemergeinNorthKorea,andwasevidentintheBongsuChurchandtheChilgolChurch.AsintheSouthKoreanChurch,seniorandassociatepastorswereappointed,elderswereelected,choirswereorganized,andthechurchbuildingswerebeautifullydecoratedbytheChristiansofthetwochurcheswhobelongedtotheurbanelite.

TheKCF,whichtooktheinitiativeinconstructingthesetwochurches,saidthemasasymboloftherevivalofProtestantChristianityinNorthKorea.Indeed,itwasanhistoriceventinthehistoryoftheNorthKoreanchurch.TheChristianswereproudofwhattheyhadfinallyachieved.However,whentheKCFencouragedbythesesuccesses,triedtobuildanotherchurchinHamhung,thehousechurchesthererejectedit.AlthoughtheestablishmentoftwoorganizedchurchesinthecapitalcitywashighlyimpressiveforthegrassrootsChristiansin Hamhung, they preferred the atmosphere and fellowship of their housechurches.Asamatteroffact,thisrejectionwaspredictedwhensomeformerhouse church Christians criticized the atmosphere of the Bongsu Church. E.Weingartnernotes thatduringhisdays in theBongsuChurch, about twentyformerNakrangHouseChurchmembersreturnedtotheirhousechurch:17

Theysoon found that it feltuncomfortable in sucha largesetting.Thereweremanypeopleinthecongregationwhomtheydidnotknow.Itseemedimpersonal.Aftertheservicepeoplesimplyreturnedtotheirhomes.Theydidnothaveanychancetostayandmingle.Theymissedthequietoftheirmeetings,thecomfortofcommuningwiththosewhomtheytrusted.Theymissedhavingsnacksanddrinksandvisitingwitheachotherafterworship.Eventually,theyleftBongsuandreassembledtheirsmallhousechurch.18

17InterviewwithErichWeingartner,12thApril2001,NorthBay,Canada.18E.Weingartner,“GodLeavesNoOneWithoutHope”,UnpublishedPaper,25thMarch2001,4‐5.


63

Thisindicatesthereasonwhythehousechurchesdonothurrytoconstructchurchbuildingsandbigcongregations.Indeed,the511housechurches19whichovercame“thefire‐kilnofsuffering”havemostlydevelopedasadistinctecclesiologicalstructureinNorthKorea,whichpreservesclosefellowshipbetweenbelievers.

TheReopeningofPyongyangTheologicalSeminaryThe revival of ProtestantChristianity inNorthKorea beganwith the

restartingof theologicaleducation.FromtheKoreanWaruntil1972, therehadbeennotheologicaleducationinNorthKorea.Therefore,fortheKCF,thetrainingof new pastors was the most urgent priority for the revival. Just as the Anti‐ReligiousCampaignwasanexternalchallengefortheChristians,sotoothelackofpastorswasaseriousinternalcrisisfortheKCF.Althoughtherewerelayleaders,preaching and sacraments were rare and very restricted in house churches.Communionwasusuallyheldonlytwiceayear,atEasterandChristmas,conductedbycirculatingpastors.Ontheseoccasionsseverallocalcongregationswouldcometogether.20However,eventhiswaslimitedtothehousechurchesinlargercities.Inthiscontext,thepriorityofthereopenedthePyongyangTheologicalSeminary21wastotrainpastors.Theseminaryoffersathree‐yearscourseofBachelorofDivinity.Most students have degrees in other subjects before entering their theologicaltraining.22Ineverythree‐year,fromtentofifteennewstudentsareenrolled,anewgroupofstudentsenteringwhenthepreviousgroupgraduates.23

Thereopeningof theseminary fundamentallychanged the lifeof thehousechurchesinNorthKorea.Withtheappointmentofordainedpastors,thehousechurchesbecamemorestableandactive.Whentheseminaryreopened,onlytenpastorswereleft,butasaresultofrestartingtheologicaleducation,housechurcheshadmoreopportunityofhavingordainedpastorstoministertothem.By1989,thirty‐sevengraduatesfromtheseminaryhadbeenordained,andservedinhousechurches.24By1995,seventystudentshadgraduatedfrom19ThestatisticsaretakenfromYoung‐supKang,op.cit.,3.20NCCUSA,“ConfidentialReportoftheNCCCUSAOfficialDelegationVisittoNorthKorea”,19thJune‐2ndJuly1987,8.

21ThePyongyangTheologicalSeminarywasopenedin1901bySamuelMoffet.ItwasabolishedbytheJapanesein1938becausetheprofessorsandstudentsopposedShintoshrineworship.With liberation, itreopenedin1945.However,withtheoutbreakoftheKoreanWar, itwasclosedagain.

22Forexample,accordingtoBong‐ilPaik,allbuttwoofhistenclassmates,whograduatedin1995,haduniversitydegreesbeforegettingintotheologicaleducation.InterviewwithBong‐ilPaik,5thApril2001,Pyongyang.

23Kyung‐seo Park, “North Korea‐Background of the Churches,”WCCMemorandum, 25th June1996.

24Ibid.

JOOSEOPKEUM

64

theseminary.AccordingtothereportfromtheKCFtotheWCC,fifty‐twohadbeenordainedandtheotherswerehavingpastoraltrainingintheirplacementin1997.25Inthisperiod, thenumberofProtestantChristians inNorthKoreadoubled. According to Bong‐il Paik, the graduates prefer to work in housechurchesratherthanKCFofficesbecauseofthe“atmosphereoffellowshipinhousechurches,andtheirevangelisticzeal.”26

Itseemsthatthetrainingissimilartowhatusedtobegivenintheoldseminary inmissionary times aswell, sometimeswithoutmuch change. Forexample,accordingtoInsikKim,Rev.Deuk‐ryongKim,whotaughtHomiletics,usedhisnotes,whichhehadtakenintheclassofHomileticsgivenbyAllenClarkbytheendofthe1930s.27WhenE.Weingartneraskedaboutthetextbooks,Ki‐junKoh,answered,“Weuseoldbooksthathavesurvivedfromoldseminaries.”

The KCF has often expressed strong political opinions against “USimperialism”andthe“militarydictatorshipofSouthKorea.”Inthisrespect,itsoundsasifthetheologyoftheseminarycouldberadicalandpolitical.However,althoughtheKCFhasaninterestinpoliticalissues,thatdoesnotmeanthatthetheologyoftheseminaryisradical.Onthecontrary,mostspecialistsonChristianityinNorthKoreaagree that the theological educationof the seminary isquiteconservative.28AccordingtoDong‐kunHong,whowasapart‐timelectureratthe seminary, “theological educationof thePyongyangTheological SeminarypreservestheconservativeKoreanPresbyteriantradition,whichwasinfluencedbytheAmericanmissionaries.”29

Indeed, the theological development of the seminary had been heldback,eversinceitsabolitionin1938.Aftereightyearsofnon‐existence(1938‐1945),theseminaryreopenedforfiveyears(1945‐1950),butitcloseditsdoorsagainforanothertwenty‐twoyears(1950‐1972).Inthiscircumstance,itwasdifficult fortheseminarytodevelop itsowntheology.Furthermore, thestaffmembers of the reopened seminarywere drawn from among ten survivingpastors,whowereeducatedbefore1950.Whattheytaughtwasbasedontheirownconservative theology, inwhich theyhadbeen trainedby theAmericanmissionaries.ThetheologicaleducationinNorthKoreaisstillfairlybasic.Itis

25“FromtheCentralCommitteeofKCFtotheAsiaDeskofWCC”,June1997.26InterviewwithBong‐ilPaik,5thApril2001,Pyongyang.27InterviewwithRev.Dr.InsikKim,13thDecember2000,Fukuoka,Japan.28Theauthoraskedsamequestionon the theological characteristicsof the seminary toeightspecialists,Prof.Kyung‐seoPark,Rev.Young‐ilKang,Rev.Dr.InsikKim,Prof.SyngmanRhee,Rev.DwainEpps,Rev.Dr.Seong‐wonPark,Mr.EricWeingartnerandRev.Dr.Dong‐kunHong.Allintervieweespointouttheconservativenatureofitstheology.

29InterviewwithRev.Dr.Dong‐kunHong,13thApril2001,LosAngeles.HongvisitedNorthKoreaforsixmonthseveryyearfrom1989‐2001fromUSAtolectureattheKimIlSungUniversityandPyongyangTheologicalSeminary.Hepassedawayon11thNovember2001inPyongyangduringhisvisitforthelectureship.


65

notyetequippedtotrainpeopleasindependentresearchers.Rather,itsmaintargetisministerialformation,thetrainingofpastors.ForthedevelopmentofNorthKoreantheology,theKCFmustconsiderhowtoupgradethequalityofitsseminary.However,sincethereopening,thePyongyangTheologicalSeminaryhasbeenthebackboneoftherevivalofProtestantChristianity,bytrainingandprovidingpastors.

PublicationofBibleandHymnbookWhentheKCFwasstudyingthesituationofhousechurches,itdiscovered

anotherurgentdemandoftheremnantChristians.TheChristianswereeagertohaveanewBibleandhymnbook.TheBibleandhymnbookhadnotbeenprintedsince the liberation in North Korea. Therefore, the language used was notappropriateinmodernKorean.Moreover,eventhisoldversionofBiblewasnotsufficientfortheChristiansbecauseonlyafewcopieshadsurvivedduringtheAnti‐ReligiousCampaign.Suk‐jungSongstateshisexperiencein1982asfollows:

Duringtheworship,wecarefullywatchedtheBibleandhymnbookofthemembers. The covers ofmost of themwereworn out…Some had hand‐copiedBibles.However,therewerecolorfulunderlinings.TheymightreadseveraltimeswholepagesofBible.Aftertheworship,IheardthatsomehidtheirBibleinavat(forKimchi),andusedtoreaditonlyinthenight.30

Inresponsetothis,theKCFpreparedthepublicationofanewKoreanBibleandhymnbook,fromthemid‐1970son.TheNewTestamentwaspublishedin1983andtheOldTestamentin1984.In1984,thecompleteBiblewasbroughtoutandtheKCFprinted10,000copiesofit.Theyalsoprinted10,000copiesofthenewhymnbooks.However,by1987,noneofthemwereleft.ThenumberofProtestantChristianshadalreadyreached10,000.TheKCFthereforereprintedtheBibleandthehymnbookin1990.31

Atfirst,theKCFhadintendedtobringoutanentirelynewtranslation,buttheleaderssoonrealizedthatthiswouldbeoverambitious.Therefore,thewritten Korean of the Bible was modernized, and partly revised through acomparative readingwith Hebrew and English Bibles. However, Ki‐jun Kohfranklysaid thatmanypreferred theUnitedKoreanBible,whichwas jointlytranslated andpublishedby theProtestant andRomanCatholic churches inSouthKorea,in1977.32Intheprefacetothehymnbook,theKCFsaidthe“hymns30Suk‐jungSong,“WhatISawandWhatIHeard”,inBundaneulTuieonumeo,editedbyEun‐sikYang,AcrosstheDivision(Seoul:Jungwonmunhwa,1988),222.

31Jung‐hyunPaik,BukhanedoKyohoega Itnayo?AreThereChristianChurches inNorthKorea?(Seoul:Kookminilbosa,1998),121.

32Ibid.,120.

JOOSEOPKEUM

66

aretakenfromtheNewHymnbook,DepartmentofEducation,PCK,1939,withmodernizedwords.”33Thehymnbooksin1990wereprintedattheAmityPrintingCompanyinNanjing,withthesupportoftheUnitedBibleSociety.34

Inadditiontothereopeningoftheseminary,thepublicationofthenewBibleandhymnbookwereeventsofsymbolicimportancefortherevival.TheChristiansdonated2%oftheirmonthlyincometotheKCFforthepublication,duringthisperiod.35Now,theChristians,whohadhiddentheBibleinKimchipots,werefreetoreadtheBibleandsinghymnsopenly.EveryChristianswasatlastabletohaveacopyoftheBibleandhymnbookforthemselves.OneverySunday,theyrejoicedandworshipedinhousechurcheswiththeirnewBibleandhymnbook.

InternationalEcumenicalRelationshipsAs J. Hormadka predicted when theWCC Toronto Statement, which

supportedtheUNPoliceActioninKorea,wasissued,theecumenicalrelationshipbetweentheNorthKoreanchurchandtheWCChadbeenclosedsincetheKoreanWar.36TheinternationalecumenicalrelationshipsoftheKCFwerefrustratedbythepoliciesoftheColdWar.EspeciallyduringtheAnti‐ReligiousCampaignperiod, the North Korean church was completely isolated from the worldChristiancommunity.However,therevivalofProtestantChristianityinNorthKoreabroughttherevivalofitsinternationalecumenicalfellowshipaswell.

Duringthe1970s,theKCFstilldidnothavefullconfidenceintheWCCbecauseoftheWCC’searliersupportforthepoliceactionduringtheKoreanWar.Instead,theKCFpreferredtoparticipateactivelyinanorganizationcalledthe Christian Peace Conference (CPC). However, the CPC played a role ofreconciliationbetweentheKCFandtheWCC.TheCPCleadersinformedtheKCFofthechangesthathadtakenplaceintheWCCaftertheriseofthenotionofthesocialgospelatthe1968UppsalaAssembly,andencouragedtheKCFtotakemoreinterestintheWCC.

In1981,theKCFthensentalettertotheWCC,andaskedforinformationonmembership of theWCC.37 Heung‐soo Kim claims that this application wasrejectedbythecentralcommitteeoftheWCCbecausetheWCChadnoconfidenceintheexistenceofChristiansinNorthKorea,andalsohadsomedoubtsabout

33Chasongga,Hymnbook(Pyongyang:KCF,1984),2.34Jung‐hyunPaik,BukhanedoKyohoegaItnayo?,123‐124.35NCCCUSA,“ConfidentialReportof theNCCCUSAOfficialDelegationVisit toNorthandSouthKorea,19June‐2July1987,”21.

36“FromHromadkatoVisser’tHooft”,30thNovember1950.37“FromSung‐ryulKimtoWCC”,January1981.


67

thepoliticalpurposeoftheapplication.38However,WCCdidnotrejecttheKCF,but explored new possibilities of establishing a relationship. Two executivesecretaries of the International Affairs (CCIA), E. Weingartner and V. Hsu,secretlyvisitedtheKCF,andsuggestedadirectmeetingbetweenthenorthernandsouthernChristiansforreconciliation.TheycamebackwithnewsofactiveChristianlifeinhousechurchesinNorthKorea.Furthermore,theKCFacceptedtheWCC’sinvitationtomeetthechurchleadersfromSouthKoreaattheCCIAconferenceonPeaceandJusticeinNorth‐EastAsia,29thOctober‐3rdNovember,Tozanso,Japan,whichwasespeciallyorganizedtodiscusstheissueofKoreanreunification.39

TheTozansoconferencemadeahistoricresolutiononKorea, theso‐calledTozansoProcess,whichitrecommendedtotheglobalecumenicalfamily:

8.2.1.TheWCCbeaskedtoexplore,incollaborationwithCCA,thepossibilityofdevelopingrelationshipswithchurches,ChristiansandothersinNorthKorea,throughvisitsandformsofcontact.8.2.2. The WCC, in collaboration with CCA, should seek to facilitateopportunitieswhereitwouldbepossibleforChristiansfrombothNorthandSouthKoreatomeetindialogue.8.2.3.ThechurchesbeencouragedtosharewiththeWCCandtheCCAplansforcontactswithandresultsofvisittoNorthKorea.40

AnofficialresolutionhadnowbeenestablishedallowingandencouragingtheWCCtodevelopitsrelationshipwiththeKCF.In1985,thefirstofficialvisitfromtheWCCtoNorthKoreawascarriedonfrom10th‐19thNovember.41SincetheTozansoconference,NorthKoreanchurchhasparticipatedintheglobalecumenicalmovement. On the other hand, the international ecumenical fellowship alsocontributedtotherevivaloftheKCF.

TheChristian‐JucheanDialogueJucheisthewordthatsumsupthepoliticalthoughtofKimIl‐sung.Asa

systemofvalues, Juche iscommonlytranslatedas“self‐reliance.”ThisnotionhasbecometheblueprintofNorthKoreansocietyandthecentralguidancefor

38Heung‐sooKim,AHistoryoftheChurchesinNorthKoreaAfterLiberation,6.39ConcerningtheTozansomeeting,see,CCIAed,PeaceandJusticeinNorthEastAsia:ProspectsforPeacefulResolutionofConflict (Geneva:WCC‐CCIA, 1985); E.Weingartner, “The TozansoProcess:AnEcumenicalcontributiontotheStruggleforPeaceandJusticeinNorth‐EastAsia”,PeaceAndReunificationofKorea(Geneva:WCC‐CCIA,1990),12‐28.

40“FindingsandRecommendations”,CCIA/WCCConsultationonPeaceandJusticeinNorthEastAsia,29thOctober‐2ndNovember1984,Tozanso,Japan.

41E.Weingrtner,“TheTozansoProcess”,17.

JOOSEOPKEUM

68

policies. IthasevolvedthroughvariousphasesrangingfromamerepoliticalslogantoacomprehensiveWeltanschauung.Inhisownexplanationoftheidea,KimIl‐sungsaidthatthebasisofJucheis“manismasterofnatureandsociety,andthemainfactorthatdecidesallmatters.’42Themasterofsocialistconstructionisthemasses,andthepowertoeffectrevolutionandconstructionrestswiththepeople.Themasterofone’sfateisoneself,andpowertocontrolone’sfaterestswithoneself.43Assuch,manshouldnotbesubjectedtoenslavementofanykind,whether it iscausedbyeconomicpoverty,political subjugation,ormilitarydominationonthepartofotherhumanbeings.Therefore,Juche’sself‐reliancehasbeeninterpretedasmeaningahuman‐centeredworld‐view.

WhilebeinganideologythatproclaimeditselftobeessentiallysocialistandMarxist,Jucheinfactstandsindefianceofmaterialdeterminismofhistory.TheMarxistpremiseofeconomicormaterialstructureasthesubstructureuponwhichallsuperstructuresarefoundedisunequivocallyrejected.Instead,intheJuche ideology,itisthespiritualconsciousnessthatdeterminesthecourseofhistoryanditaloneunderliesallotherstructures.44Infact,Juche’sfundamentaldeviationfromMarxismbeginsatthispoint.45

TheJucheIdeaalsosuggeststhepracticalguidingprinciplestobetakeninregardtorevolutionandconstruction:Juche(self‐relience)inideology,Chaju(self‐independence)inpolitics,Charip(self‐sustenance)ineconomy,andChawi(self‐defense)inmilitarymatters.46ThesefoursloganswhichNorthKoreausedfordevelopingan indigenousCommunismwasaremarkableattemptatself‐reliancewithintheCommunistbloc.InMarx’sManifestooftheCommunistParty,“workershavenonationoftheirown.”However,intheJucheIdea,theconceptofnationalismwasgivenapositiveinterpretation,andintegratedintotheprocessofthesocialistrevolutionthenpresumedtobetakingplaceinthethirdworldcountries.TheJucheideacriticallystatesthatimperialismispossibleevenwithintheCommunistbloc,andcanbepracticedbytheCommunistsuperpowers.IntheJucheidea,nationalindependenceisnotasub‐taskoftheCommunistrevolution,butithasanequal importancewith theCommunist revolution, especially in theThirdWorldcontext.ThisisacrucialdifferencecomparedtoorthodoxMarxism.47

42KimIl‐sungWorks,vol.27(Pyongyang:ForeignlanguagesPublishingHouse),491.43Concerning the Juche Idea, see, Kim Il‐sung, Juche sasang e daehayeo, On the Idea of Juche(Pyongyang:KWPPress,1977);KimIl‐sung,UrihyukmyungeseoeuiJucheedaehayeo,OntheJucheinOurRevolution(Pyongyang:KWPPress,1970);AcademyofSocialSciencesed,HyukmyungkwakunsulekwanhanKimIlSungDonjieuiSasangkwakeuwidaehanseanghwallyuk,TheThoughtofComradeKimIl‐sungonRevolutionandConstructionandItsGreatStrength(Pyongyang:SahoeKwahakwonChulpansa, 1969);Kim Jong‐il,On the Juche Idea (Pyongyang: ForeignLanguagesPublishingHouse,1982).

44KimJong‐il,op.cit.,9‐10.45See,J.Keum,op.cit.,293‐291.46See,ExpositionoftheJucheIdea,99‐124.47IntheEuropeancontext,nationalismhasbeenconsideredasanegativeideology.However,in


69

ThenationalisticcharacteristicoftheJucheIdearootedwellinthesoilofNorthKorea,becauseofthenortherners’historicalexperienceofbeingsubjectedtodiscrimination.

Rev.Ki‐junKohwasthefirsttosuggestaChristian‐Jucheandialogue,inhispaper“SocialismandChristianityinNorthKorea.”48AssoonashewaselectedasthegeneralsecretaryofKCFin1981,heproposedthedialogueasanewpolicyoftheKCF.KohexaminedwhyandhowtheChristiansandthesocialistswerenowabletolivetogetherwithoutaconflictbetweenthetwobelief‐systems,asituationthatwasverydifferentfrompreviousexperience.HebelievedthattheanswerofthisquestionwouldclarifythetheologicalidentityofrevivedChristianityinNorthKorea.Healsoasked:“IsitpossiblefortheChristiansandtheJucheanstocooperatetogether in the constructionof socialist country, and for the reunificationoffatherland?”andonthepresumptionthattheanswertothisquestionwouldbeaffirmative, “Where is the rationale for this cooperation?”49Thesewere thetheologicalquestionsthatrevivedNorthKoreanChristianityneededtoanswer,yettheywereremarkable.Whilethechurcheshadreopenedsince1972,nobodyhadtriedtointerprettheirexperiencesbeforeKoh.RespondingtotheKoh’sproposal,theInstitutefortheJucheIdeainPyongyangandsomeKoreantheologianslivingabroaddecided toopenadialoguewith theKCF.A consultationprocessof theChristian‐Juchean dialoguewas launched and consultationswere held annuallyfrom1981‐1991andanumberofscholarsparticipated.

Throughoutthedialogue,the issueof jucheandminjungwasoneof themostimportantagendafordiscussion.Althoughoneofthesesystemsisatheology,whichdevelopedwithintheclimateofthesufferingminjungduringthemilitarydictatorshipsinSouthKoreainthe1970s,whiletheotherisapoliticalideology,whichdevelopedwithin the circumstanceof the reconstructionofNorthKoreaaftertheKoreanWarandemphasizedpoliticalindependenceagainstChinaandtheSoviet Union during the 1950s, both begin their theological and philosophicalargumentwiththeissueofhistoricalsubjectivity.ThefirstprincipleoftheJucheideaisthat“manisthesubjectofhistory.”50Ontheotherhand,thefirsttheologicalthemeofminjungtheologyis“theminjugassubjectofhistory.”51

theAsiancontext,wheremostcountriesexperiencedcolonialism,nationalismhasbeen positivelyinterpretedinrelationtonationalliberationmovements.

48Later,thispaperwaspublishedinSouthKorea.Dong‐kunHonged.,ViennaesoFrankfurtkkaji:Buk kwa Haewoi Dongpo, Kidokja kaneui Tongil Daehwa 10 Nyun Hoego, From Vienna toFrankfurt:AMemoryofTenYearsofReunificationTalksbetweentheNorthKoreanChristiansandtheKoreanChristianDiaspora,(Seoul:Hyungsangsa,1994),135‐143.

49Ibid.,140.50KimIl‐sungWorks,vol27(Pyongyang:ForeignlanguagesPublishingHouse),491.51Yong‐bockKim,MessiahandMinjung:Christ’sSolidaritywiththePeopleforNewLife,5.

JOOSEOPKEUM

70

Thisisnotacoincidentalconjunctionbut,inbothinstances,theresultofindigenizationofforeignideas.TheJucheideashouldbeseenasindigenousKoreanCommunism,andminjungtheologyasindigenousKoreanliberationtheology.BotharestronglyrootedintraditionalKoreanphilosophies.Oneofthecharacteristicsoftraditional religion and philosophy in Korea is humanism. The two influentialmodernKoreanbeliefs,theJuche ideaandminjungtheology,donotstandapartfromthisstrong,humanistictraditionoftheKoreanethos.Bothhavelinkswiththetraditional humanism of Korean thought through declaring that “man,” or the“minjung”arethesubjectofhistory.ThisisahighlyimportantreferencepointforthedialoguebetweentheJuche ideaandminjungtheology,becausebothhaveasimilarityintheirmethodologyofindigenizationaswellintheirashuman‐centeredapproachtohistory.BothbeliefslinkupwiththetraditionalKoreanconcernforthepeoplewhosuffer.This“commonground”isaremarkablebasisfortheChristian‐Jucheandialogueandforworkingtogetherforthesufferingminjung.

Asaresultofthetenyearsconsultationprocess,themostdramaticchangeintheofficialJucheanunderstandingofChristianitywasintheamendmentofthearticleonreligionintheconstitution.Article54ofTheSocialistConstitutionin1972hadsaid:“Citizenshavefreedomofreligiousbeliefandfreedomofanti‐religiouspropaganda.”However,thereferencetothe“freedomofanti‐religiouspropaganda”wascompletelydeleted in theKim IlSungConstitution in1992.ComparedthestillexistingArticle46oftheChineseConstitution,whichtalksabout“thecitizen’srighttoenjoyfreedomnottobelieveinreligion,”52thecompletedeletionof the “freedomof anti‐religiouspropaganda” inNorthKoreawas aremarkablechangeofreligiouspolicy. It iscertainthattheChristian‐Jucheandialoguehadinfluencedtheabovechanges.

TheMinjung‐CenteredCooperativeParadigmWhiletheformercooperationparadigmpracticedbytheNKCAandthe

KWPhadmerelybeenadiplomaticone,thenewrevivedcooperativeparadigmwasbasedonmutualunderstandingthroughtheologicalandethicaldialogue.Thepointofconvergencebetweenthetwodifferentsystemsofthoughtwasthesimilarityoftheirunderstandingoftheminjungasthesubjectofhistory.ThissimilarityhasservedasatheologicaljustificationoftheKCF’scooperationwiththeCommuniststate.Consequently,thearticleof“anti‐religiouspropaganda,”whichhadbeenthelegalfoundationoftheCommunists’discriminationtowards

52Concerning criticisms on this article, see, T. Lambert,TheResurrection of theChineseChurch(Illinois:SHAW,1991),37;withW.Rees‐Mogg, “ReligiousPolicyofChina,” InterviewwithJianZemin,TheTimes,18thOctober1999.


71

theChristians,wasdeletedfromtheconstitution.ThedialoguebroughtaboutapositivechangeintheNorthKoreanunderstandingofChristianity.Inthismeaningfulrenewal,theminjung‐centeredcooperativeapproachemergedasanewparadigmofchurch‐state relations in North Korea. Northern Protestantism introduced theminjungasthedynamicelementinarevivedunderstandingofchurch‐staterelations.

Conclusion:TheMinjung‐CenteredApproachinChurch‐StateRelationsThroughtheaboveresearch,wecanconcludethatnorthernProtestantism

hasdevelopeddiversehistoricalparadigmsofchurch‐staterelations,andthateachparadigmdecisivelyinfluencedthefateofthenorthernProtestantchurches.Theissuehasnotbeenmerelyalegalandinstitutionaldebateonspecificissueslikereligiouseducation,religioustax,statechurchorfreechurchetc.Rather,hasbeenaresponsetothewholemodernhistoryofNorthKorea,withitsmajorthemesofcolonization,nationalconstruction,partition,waretc.

ProtestantChristianityinNorthKoreahasexperimentedwithawiderangeofhistoricalparadigmsofchurch‐staterelations,fromoppositiontocooperation,andeachparadigminfluencedProtestantChristianity’ssuccessorfailureinNorthKoreaindifferentways.Inthisexperienceofsuccessandfailure,thenotionofaminjung‐centeredapproachwasakeyissue,whichdecidedtheappropriatenessofeachparadigm.Throughourexaminationofthevarioushistoricalparadigms,wehaveidentified that the conceptof theminjung has tobe included in thebilateralrelationshipbetweenchurchandstateforestablishingaproperrelationship.IntheNorthKoreancontext,thenotionoftheminjunghastobethecriterionfordeterminingwhetherthenorthernchurchshouldopposethestateorcooperatewithit. Ifthestatedevelopedpoliciesinfavoroftheminjung,andtheminjungsupporttheirgovernment,thechurchcancooperatewiththestate.However,ifagovernmentistyrannicalandoppressestheminjung,thechurchcannotallowthelegitimacyofthegovernment,andmustopposethestate.Therefore,thetriangularapproachof church,minjungand state is a highly relevant analyticalmethodology for thenorthernchurchesincriticallyassessingtheirchurch‐staterelations.

REFERENCES“FindingsandRecommendations.”CCIA/WCCConsultationonPeaceandJusticeinNorth

EastAsia,29thOctober‐2ndNovember1984,Tozanso,Japan.“FromtheCentralCommitteeofKCFtotheAsiaDeskofWCC.”June1997.AcademyofSocialSciences,ed.HyukmyungkwakunsulekwanhanKimIlSungDonjieui

Sasangkwakeuwidaehanseanghwallyuk.TheThoughtofComradeKimIl‐sungonRevolutionandConstructionandItsGreatStrength.Pyongyang:SahoeKwahakwonChulpansa,1969.

JOOSEOPKEUM

72

Aston,W.G.Shinto:TheWayoftheGods.London:Longmans,1905.———.“TheShintoShrines:AProblemConfrontingtheChurch.”IRM29(1940).Brown,T.M.“TripReport:EastAsia,October27‐November28,1988.”Asia/PacificDesk,

AnglicanChurchofCanada.20thFebruary1989.CCIA,ed.PeaceandJusticeinNorthEastAsia:ProspectsforPeacefulResolutionofConflict.

Geneva:WCC‐CCIA,1985.Chasongga,Hymnbook.Pyongyang:KCF,1984.Cumings,B.Korea’sPlaceintheSun.NewYork:W.W.Norton,1997.Hong,Dong‐kun,ed.ViennaesoFrankfurtkkaji:BukkwaHaewoiDongpo,Kidokjakaneui

TongilDaehwa10NyunHoego.FromViennatoFrankfurt:AMemoryofTenYearsof Reunification Talks between the North Korean Christians and the KoreanChristianDiaspora.Seoul:Hyungsangsa,1994.

Il‐sung,Kim.Juchesasangedaehayeo,OntheIdeaofJuche.Pyongyang:KWPPress,1977.———. Uri hyukmyung eseoeui Juche e daehayeo. On the Juche in Our Revolution.

Pyongyang:KWPPress,1970.Jong‐il,Kim.OntheJucheIdea.Pyongyang:ForeignLanguagesPublishingHouse,1982.Keum, Jooseop. “Remnants and Renewal: A History of Protestant Christianity in North

Korea,withSpecialReferencetoIssuesofChurchandState,1945‐1994.”PhDThesis.UniversityofEdinburgh,1992.

Kang, Y. “Keynote Speech.” The Seventh Korean Christian Conference for PeacefulReunificationofFatherland,13thDecember2000.

Kang,Young‐sup.“KeynoteSpeech.”TheEighthKoreanChristianConferenceforPeacefulReunificationofFatherland.23rdJune2002.Tozanso,UnpublishedPaper.

KimIl‐sungWorks.Vol.27.Pyongyang:ForeignlanguagesPublishingHouse.KWP.ChosunJoongangNyungam,TheYearbookofNorthKorea.Pyongyang:KWPPress.

1974.Lambert,T.TheResurrectionoftheChineseChurch.Illinois:SHAW,1991.Mikheev,V. “Politics and Ideology in thePost‐ColdWarEra.” InNorthKorea: Ideology,

Politics,Economy,editedbyHanS.Park.Simon&Schuster,1996.Moyer,J.etal.“VisitofaDelegationtotheD.P.R.K.fromMay24toJune10,1984”,Lutheran

WorldFederation.NCCUSA. “ConfidentialReportof theNCCCUSAOfficialDelegationVisit toNorthKorea.”

19thJune‐2ndJuly1987.Paik, Jung‐hyun. Bukhanedo Kyohoega Itnayo? Are There Christian Churches in North

Korea?Seoul:Kookminilbosa,1998.Park,Kyung‐seo.“NorthKorea‐BackgroundoftheChurches.”WCCMemorandum.25th

June1996.Rees‐Mogg,W.“ReligiousPolicyofChina.”InterviewwithJianZemin.TheTimes.18th

October1999.RepublicofKorea,NationalUnificationBoard.South‐NorthDialogueinKorea,No.54.Seoul,

1992.Song,Suk‐jung.“WhatISawandWhatIHeard.”InBundaneulTuieonumeo,editedbyEun‐

sikYang.AcrosstheDivision.Seoul:Jungwonmunhwa,1988.Weingartner,E.“GodLeavesNoOneWithoutHope.”UnpublishedPaper.25thMarch2001.———.“TheTozansoProcess:AnEcumenicalcontributiontotheStruggleforPeaceand

JusticeinNorth‐EastAsia”,PeaceAndReunificationofKorea.Geneva:WCC‐CCIA,1990.


THEPOSITIONOFFATHERDUMITRUSTANILOAEONTHETHEOPHANIESANDMARIANAPPARITIONS

OFHISTIMES

RADUPETREMUREȘAN*

ABSTRACT.Duringtheinterwarperiod,aswellasthecommunistdictatorship,anumberofmiraculousapparitionsoccurredinRomania–boththeophaniesand Marian apparitions. They generated “spiritual awakening” movementsamongthemembersoftheRomanianOrtodoxChurch.SuchinstanceswerethevisionsofshepherdPetreLupuofMaglavit(1935),thevisionsofMotherVeronicaof VladimireștiMonastery (1937), and those of Sister Virginia, respectively,which resulted in the establishment of the “New Jerusalem” Monastery atPucioasa (1955).Likesimilarphenomenawithin theRoman‐Catholicworld,theophaniesandMarianapparitionsinRomaniadividedthelayandecclesiasticelites by generating divergent opinions. This study presents the position ofFatherDumitruStăniloaeontheseunusualphenomenaandtheiradherents.Itisaverydifficultissue,generallyavoidedbytheologicalresearchasitpresupposesanuancedinterpretation,liketheoneofferedbythegreattheologianonthegroundsofhisvasteruditionanddeeptheologicalinsights,aswellashispersonalreligiousexperience.Keywords: Dumitru Staniloae, Theophanies,MarianApparitions, RomanianOrthodoxyOn31May1935–aFriday,shepherdPetreLupufromMaglavit(avillage

insouthernRomania,closetotheDanube)claimedtohaveseenawhite‐beardedOldMan,whocommandedhimtotellpeopletorepent,observethefeastdays,attendtheChurchandstopsinning.Theapparitionoccurredthreetimes,andonSaturday,15June1935,PetracheLupufirstdescribedhisvisionstothevillagepeople,alsoannouncingthepriestandthemayor.Apilgrimagebeganimmediately,gatheringtensandlaterhundredsofdevoutpeoplefromtheneighboringvillages,allseekingtoobtainafirst‐hand,detailedaccountofthewondrousevent1.

*AssociateProfessor,UniversityofBucharest.E‐mail:[email protected],Invaziasectelor.AsupracreștinismuluisecularizatșiintensificareaprozelitismuluineopăgânînRomâniadupădecembrie1989,vol.II(Constanța:Europolis,1999),155‐158;RaduPetreMureșan,AtitudineaBisericilorTradiționaleEuropenefațădeprozelitismuladvent.Impactulînsocietateacontemporană(București:EdituraUniversitățiidinBucurești,2007),573‐576.

RADUPETREMUREȘAN

74

However,itsimpactwouldhavebeenlimited,ofmerelylocalrelevance,butforthemajordailynewspaperswithwidereadership(Dimineața,Curentul,andUniversul)whichattachedsuchimportancetotheeventthattheyoffereditnationalcoverage.Reporterssentbythesepublicationsdescribedthemagnitudeofthispilgrimage(20,000believersweresaidtovisitMaglaviteveryday),quotedtheshepherd’saccountandinterviewedthevillagepriest,andveryimportantly,madeknowntheunexplainablehealingsamongthepilgrims2.

Between22‐25September1935,FatherDumitruStăniloaevisitedMaglavit,asoneoftheprominentecclesiastical figureswhofeltcompelledtotraveltothis“siteofmiraculoushappenings”inordertowitnesstheeventstakingplacethere.Atthetime,thegreatRomaniantheologianwas32yearsold,hadbeenapriestsince1932,aneditoroftheperiodicalTelegrafulRomân[RomanianTelegraph]sinceJanuary1934,andaprofessorattheTheologicalAcademy“Andreiana”inSibiu(professorattheChairofHistoryandPastoralTheologysince1July1932,anda tenuredprofessor at theChairofDogmaticTheology andApologetics,since1October1936)3.

Accordingtohisowndeclarations,FatherStăniloaehadanunexpected,astonishingpersonal experience atMaglavit, towhichhe attested truthfully:“IprofessorandpriestD.Stăniloae,testifybeforeGodandthepeople,aboutthefollowingmiraculoushealings,whichImyselfwitnessedatMaglavit,infullawarenessandcontrolofmy faculties”.FatherDumitruStăniloaegoesontoenumeratenine“wondrousfacts”hehadwitnessedhimselfatMaglavit,wherehehadtheoportunitytotalktothepeoplewhoclaimedbeingcuredofvariousdiseases,illnessesorinfirmities4.

Besidethemiraculoushealingshewitnessedandtowhichhetestified,FatherDumitruStăniloaehimselfhadastrangeexperience,whilehewaslisteningtoPetracheLupu.WequotethetestimonyofFatherDumitruStăniloae:“Ialsoconfessthat,inadditiontothemiraculoushealingsIhavewitnessedmyself,and

2Amongthenewspaperarticles,wemention:“UnomcareavorbitVinericu...Dumnezeu.Satepuseînmișcaredemișcareaunuicioban”newspaperDimineața, June27,1935,13;“Viațaomuluicareavorbit cuDumnezeu”,Curentul, (July 3, 1935): 2; “Cum s‐a arătat Dumnezeu ciobanului Petre”,Curentul,(July4,1935);“MănăstirealuiDumnezeu”,Curentul(July20,1935):3;“Maglavitul‐locdepelerinaj”,Curentul(July291935):3.

3FlorinDuțu,ViațaPărinteluiDumitruStăniloae,1903‐1993(București:EdituraFloaredecolț,2015),16‐17.

4Pr.Dr.DumitruStăniloae, “VindecărileMinunatevăzutedemine laMaglavit”,TelegrafulRomân,LXXXXIIII,no.41(29September1935):2‐3,articlealsoincludedinthevolumeCulturășiduhovnicie.Bookpublishedwith the blessing ofHisBeatitudeDaniel, Patriarch of theRomanianOrthodoxChurch.Edited,introduction,notesbyIon‐DragoșVlădescu(Bucharest:BasilicaPublishingHouse,2012), 712‐717; Pr. Dr. Dumitru Stăniloae, “VindecărileMinunate văzute demine laMaglavit”,RenaștereaXIII,no.47(6October1935):40.

THEPOSITIONOFFATHERDUMITRUSTANILOAEONTHETHEOPHANIES…

75

sawwithmyowneyes,Iexperiencedanothermiracle:Ididsee,withoutanydoubt,butkeepingmycalmandcriticalthinking,astrangefigurebehindPetracheLupu,whilehewasstandingontheplatform,around11a.m.Itlookedlikeabig‐sizedbust,ofablue‐greenishhue,thatcouldbeseenagainstthehorizon.Itwasnotacloud,foritmovedtotherightorleft,followingthemovementsofPetrache,anditdidnotdissipategradually,butitappearedanddisappearedallatonce.NeitherwasittheshadowofPetrache,becauseotherswerestandingontheplatformnexttohim,butnothingcouldbeseenbehindthem.Ihadheardmanypeoplespeakingaboutthisbust,butIdidnotknowwhattothinkofit.NowIsawitmyself,asdidmanypeoplewhowerearoundme:fatherMocanu,hiswife,mywife,andotherpersons”.

FatherStăniloae’saccountofhisvisittoMaglavitendedabruptly,withoutanyconclusionsorcommentaries:“ThesearethewondrousthingsIwitnessedatMaglavit.ItakefullresponsibilitybeforeGodandmyfellowpeople,inthatIamdeclaring nothing but the truth. I will not recount here any of themiraclesdescribedbyothers.Icanonlysaythatmanyoccureveryday,morethananyonecancount.Iconcludewithoutanycommentary.Thisarticlecontainsmerefacts.”

***

The January1936 issue ofGândirea [Thought], an important culturaljournaloftraditionalistorientation,publishedtwoarticlesonMaglavit.Onewasauthored by Nichifor Crainic, the journal’s director and professor of MysticalTheologyattheFacultyofOrthodoxTheologyinBucharest,andtheotherwaswrittenbyFatherDumitruStăniloae.NichiforCrainichadvisitedMaglaviton23October1935andportrayedtheman(PetracheLupu)whosehumblenesshadgenerated“thishugewaveofmysticaldevotion”.Hisaccountfollowedthreedirections:anassessmentoftheshepherd’smentalhealth;hismannerofprayingforthepeople;andhisreligiouspsychology,respectively5.WhathewitnessedatMaglavitwasacollectivemovement,engagingthesoulsofmillionsofpeople.Asthismovement was prompted by a lonely, illiterate shepherd’s spiritual experience(whichwas inwardandpersonal,henceuncontrollable), it followed that thephenomenon was essentially mystical. Nichifor Crainic also attested to the“strangefigure”,andconcludedthatthephenomenon“requiresextensivetheologicalresearch,inordertoascertainitstruenature.Wehavemerelyprovidedadescriptivepresentation,withnootherclaimsthanthecompletehonestyofrecordedfacts.Ifwearewrong,whichisquitepossible,timewilltell.Itisonlytimethatcanofferanycertainty,eithertodisproveortoconfirmourperceptions.Actually,thisisthemethodemployedbyourChurch,whichproclaimsandacknowledgessaintlinessonlywhenappearanceshavebecomecertainties”(p.11).

5NichiforCrainic,“VizitălaMaglavit”,Gândirea,XV,no.1(January,1936):1‐11.

RADUPETREMUREȘAN

76

ThearticlepublishedbyFatherDumitruStăniloaeinthejournalGândireawas a comprehensive theological study entitled “Încercare despre teofanii.InterpretareavedeniilorluiPetracheLupu”[“Ontheophanies.CommentariesonthevisionsofPetracheLupu],containingmanyinsightsintomattersofpsychologyandpsychoanalysis6.Thestudyaimedtodemonstratetheerrorofthosewhoclaim that God cannot showHimself to the people, based on the text of theGospelaccordingtoJohn:“noonehaseverseenGod”(JohnI,18).FatherDumitruStăniloaeexplainsthisbytheantinomicmannerofspeakingintheScriptures,whichemploycontradictoryexpressionsconcerningGod’saccessibility,orinaccessibilityrespectively,inrelationtomen.Thisissuewaspartiallysettledby14th‐centuryhesychastdebates,whichclarifiedthefactthatGodisinaccessiblebyHisessence,butHisenergiesandworksdescendtous;theideawasfurtherdevelopedbymodernRussiantheologians,especiallyBulgakovandBerdiaev.

According to Father Dumitru Stăniloae, the highest step along one’sascensionalpath towardsGod lies in feelingHimclose tooneselfandwithinoneself,asaperson(p.16).ItisverydifficulttorelatetoGodastoaperson,withtheonlydifferencethatHeisinvisibletobodilyeyes:“WethinkofGodindeisticterms–basedontheeffectsofHisworksinthepast,andwefeelHiminpantheisticterms–asactsemanatingfromsomeimpersonalforce,butwefailtoperceiveHimasaperson,inpersonalistterms.Thisisthetruth,mostofthetimes.Howdifficult,howrarelydowereallymakeourprayerintoaconversationwithGod‐ourneighbor!”.

Followingthislogic,ourgreattheologianaskshowisitpossiblethatGodshould showHimself topeople, in a sensorial (material)way? Father DumitruStăniloae enumerates several theophaniesmentioned in the Holy Scripture,whenthesewereperceivedbyasinglepersonbutnotbytheothersaround(themartyrdomofHolyArchdeaconStephen; the shepherds, onLord’sNativity),thenheconcludesthatsuchsituationsweresimilartoPetreLupu’svisions,fortherespectiveapparitionswerenotseenbytheshepherdsaccompanyinghim,althoughtheycouldhearhimtalkingtosomeone(p.18).Moreover,thecaseofthisshepherdcorroboratestheassertionofSaintGregoryPalamas,ArchbishopofThessaloniki,whostatedabouttheTaboriclightthattheapostlesdidnotseethatlightwiththeirbodilyeyes,butmostlikelytheycontemplateditmentally.

6DumitruStăniloae,“Încercaredespreteofanii.InterpretareavedeniilorluiPetracheLupu”,Gândirea,XV,no.1(January1936):14‐29.ThestudyisbasedonaseriesofarticlespublishedinTelegrafulRomân:“Încercaredespreteofanii(I),TelegrafulRomân,LXXXXIII”,no.40(22September1935):1;“Încercaredespreteofanii(II),TelegrafulRomân,LXXXXIII”,no.40(20October1935):1;“Încercaredespre teofanii (III),TelegrafulRomân, LXXXXIV”, no. 2, (5 January 1936): 1; “Încercare despreteofanii(IV),TelegrafulRomân,LXXXXIV”,no.3(12January1936):p.1‐2;“Încercaredespreteofanii(V),TelegrafulRomân,yearLXXXXIV”,no.4(19January1936):1‐2;ThefivearticlesareincludedinthevolumeCulturășiduhovnicie.ArticolepublicateînTelegrafulRomân,volI(1930‐1936),705‐711,718‐722,759‐768,769‐778,779‐787.


77

Atthispoint,FatherDumitruStăniloaeundertakesathoroughanalysisofapparitions(visions)producedbyimaginationorbyhallucinations,invariousinstances:delusion,nightmare,delirium,dementia,andherefersthereaderstotheworksof reputable specialistsofhis times. Inhisopinion, Petrache Lupu’svisionsdidnotbelongtothecategoryofhallucinationphenomenaofanytype,sincebydefinitionhallucinationsare“projectionswithadestructivecharacter,harmful to both the individualwhose personality they undermine, and to thesocietyatlarge”(p.23).Onthecontrary,PetracheLupuwasmentallyhealthy,and his visions did not generate anything morbid and unsound but theypromotedspiritualhealthandstrength.

Withregardtoimagination,FatherDumitruStăniloaestatesthatthisisthepathfollowedbyeverythingthatcomesforthfromthedepthsofthesoul,sothatwemaybecomeawareofit.By“depthsofthehumansoul”hedesignatesnotonlyrepresentationsandimagesfromthepastorbiologicalurges,buttheverysourceofhumanlifefromwhichstemone’sunderstandingoftheworld,one’svirtues,one’sfeelings,one’screativepower(p.18).Theimagesthatpresentthemselves to our awareness are not exclusively produced by conscious orunconscious imagination. Father Dumitru Stăniloae points out that inmanycases,theyareproducedwithinusbyanexternalcausewhichdoesnothaveasubjectivenature,byanoutwardagent.Wedonotalwaysmeetthatexternalfactor,oragent,byourwillorourinterest.PetracheLupu’svisionisacaseinpoint.“There isnoreason ‐FatherDumitruStăniloaepointsout–todoubtthattheimageseenbyPetreLupuisaninstantiationoftherealityitexpresses:God”(p.26).

ItisknownthatGod,whenHechoosestorevealHimselfinsuchawaythatnodoubtscanexistconcerningHisrevelation,showsHimselfinahumanform.Actingonthehumansoul–FatherDumitruStăniloaegoesontosay–thereforeactingoncreated“matter”,GodkindlesalightthereandprovidesanimageofHimself;andtheimageofahumanbeingissomehowthemostnaturalforminwhichGodappears(p.28).Hisdogmatic,psychologicalandpsychoanalyticalarguments lead Father Staniloae to a categorical conclusion: “Aswe can see,thereisnothingtopreventusfrominferringthatPetracheLupuhasindeedseenGod.Hisvisionhasalltheattributesofatheophany”.

The interwar period was marked by sustained efforts to define theRomanianidentity.OutstandingthinkerssuchasNichiforCrainic,NaeIonescu,ConstantinRădulescuMotruorLucianBlagaendeavoredtodescribetherelationshipbetweenOrthodoxyand“Romanianism”,thatis,the“Romanianspirit”,orspecificcharacter.BecausedebatesonthisissuetendedtodownplaytheroleofOrthodoxyinthemakingoftheRomanianspiritandasintegralpartofit,FatherStăniloaedevelopedan“ethnictheology”bywhichhepostulatedacloserelationshipbetweenthetwo,goingasfarastoequateOrthodoxyandRomanianism.

RADUPETREMUREȘAN

78

From1933onwards,FatherStăniloaepublishedaseriesofarticlesin“Telegrafulromân[TheRomanianTelegraph]”journal,praisingthegroupknownasOasteaDomnului[TheLord’sArmy],awell‐known“spiritualawakening”movementemergedwithintheRomanianOrthodoxChurch,AccordingtoFatherStăniloae,OasteaDomnuluihadthemeritofre‐establishingthebondbetweenChristand“thesoulofourpeasants”andcontributingtothe“emergenceofanewtypeofpeasantry,trulybelongingtoourfuture”:apeasantrynotdominatedbyalcoholism,byhopelessness,byroughnesstowardschildren,notdeceivedbythepromisesofpoliticians,but insteadlovingtheChurchandreadytohelpthoseinneed,interestedinreadingdevotionalliteratureandabovealltheHolyScripture.“Itisanewpeasantry,FatherStăniloaewrote,becauseitstandsonnew3spiritualgrounds;itisthepeasantrybelongingtoourLordJesusChrist”7.ByassertingthevitalroleoftheRomanianvillage,FatherStăniloaedevelopedatrue“theologyoftheRomanianpeople”asatheologicalcounterparttothepoliticaldiscourseofthetimes(whichdescribedpeasantryastherepresentativeandtheholderofthetruevaluesoftheRomanianpeople)8.

InFebruary1935,FatherStăniloaepublishedthearticle“Ortodoxieșinațiune[OrthodoxyandNation]”9,andinOctober1935,hereiteratedthesameideasinthearticle“RomânismșiOrtodoxie[RomanianismandOrthodoxy]”10.PetracheLupu’svisionsoccurredinthesummerof1935,thatisatatimewhenFatherStăniloaewasdiligentlyconstructingatheologicaledifice, intendedtoexpressthecomplexrelationshipbetweenfaithandnation,betweenOrthodoxyandtheRomanianspecificcharacter,orspirit.This iswhyFatherStăniloae’spositionon“thetheophanyatMaglavit”canonlybeunderstoodandconsideredinthecontextofhis“ethnocentric”theology,whichhedevelopedduringhishugepolemicbothagainstCatholicismandProtestantism,andagainst somegreatthinkersofinterwarRomania,especiallyConstantinRădulescuMotruandLucianBlaga.

His arguments are based on his perception of the nation as a livingorganism,andofethnicityasexpressionofalifecommunity.Ifanethnicgroupfailstobespiritualizedbyreligion(inthiscase,Orthodoxreligion),thenit isthreatened by dangerous deviations and pathological excesses. Father Stăniloae

7Dr.DumitruStăniloae,“Oțărănimenouă”,TelegrafulromânLXXXI,no.15‐17(18February1933):1‐2.8Pr.Prof.Dr.IlieMoldoveanu,“ActualitateagândiriiPărinteluiDumitruStăniloaecuprivirelaetnicșietnicitate”inPersoanășicomuniune.PrinosdecinstirePărinteluiProfesorAcademicianDumitruStăniloaelaîmplinireavârsteide90deani,ed.IoanIcăjr.(Sibiu,1993),120‐130;LecturerGeorgeEnache,PhD,“Biserica‐societate‐națiunestatînRomâniainterbelică.Explorăriînorizontliberal”,RevistaTeologică,no.2(2010):166‐202.

9DumitruStăniloae,“Ortodoxieșinațiune”,GândireaXIV,no.2(February1935):76‐84.10DumitruStăniloae,“RomânismșiOrtodoxie”,GândireaXV,no.8(October1935):400‐409.


79

considersthatOrthodoxyhaspervadedandhasleftitsimprintontheRomanianpeople,andthistwo‐millenniasymbiosis“allowsusanalmostaprioricbelief–thattheRomaniansoulhasbeenshapedandfashionedbyOrthodoxy”.HeanalyzesthespiritualandsocialpracticesoftheRomanianvillage,andpointsoutthat“thismysticalbondwiththeextra‐humanworld,thatis,theanimalandvegetalrealms,hasbeencreatedundertheinfluenceofOrthodoxy”(p.405),thenconcludesthat“thepeoplemostpervadedby,andinfusedwiththeOrthodoxspiritualityistheRomanianpeople. ItwasbornChristian. ItneverknewanyotherreligiousstructuretounderminetheOrthodoxone...”(p.407)

Accordingly, Father Stăniloae as the founder and championof a true“mysticaltheologyofthenation”,couldonlysalutethemassivepilgrimagetoMaglavit,inwhichhesawthebeginningsofamovementofspiritualreawakeningoftheRomanianpeople11.Hisvisittothis“siteofmiracles”reinforcedthisconviction,andthisledhimtothetheologicaljustificationofPetracheLupu’svisions,whichhedidincompletesincerityandtakingfullresponsibility.

Thetribulationsofhistory(dictatorship,war,thecommunistregime)hinderedboth collective religiousmanifestationsandmystical thought in itsvariousexpressions,Between1937‐1939,aformermemberofOasteaDomnului[TheLord’sArmy]group,VasilicaGurău(laterMotherVeronica)claimedshehadwitnessedanumberoftheophaniesandMarianapparitions,whichpromptedhertoestablishaconventatVladimirești(Galațicounty),duringthewaryears.Theremarkablespiritualevolutionofthismonasticsettlementposedagreatchallengetotherecentlyinstalledcommunistregime,whichdecidedtocloseitdownin1955,whileMotherVeronicaandothernunsweresenttotheinfernalcommunist prisons. In his turn, Petrache Lupu was imprisoned during thecommunistdictatorship,andafterhisreleasehemaintainedcompletesilence,untilhisdeathin1994.

IcouldnotfindinthewritingsofFatherStăniloaepublishedafter1938,anymentionofthe“Vladimireștiphenomenon”,whosemagnitudewassimilartothatofthe“Maglavitphenomenon”.However,thetheologicalliteratureoftheearlyyearsof thecommunistregimecontainedseveralarticleswhich, in thewordsofaRomaniantheologian,demonstratedhow“researchersintoFundamentalTheologywere allowed towork in their field, but could never contradict thepostulatesofmilitantatheism”12.Inthiscontext,wenoteanentire1949issueof“StudiiTeologice[TheologicalStudies]”journal(no.5‐6,July‐August1949),whereseveralprofessorsofTheologyprovidedargumentsderivedfromthediscipline11DumitruStăniloae,“Exagerări”,TelegrafulRomânLXXXXIII,no.39(15September1935):1.12Rev.Prof.ConstantinDrăgulin,“PărintelePetruRezuș,unapologetdeseamă”,Luminanewspaper,31March2011,(https://ziarullumina.ro/documentar/parintele‐petru‐rezus‐un‐apologet‐de‐seama‐13182.html).

RADUPETREMUREȘAN

80

theytaught,againstsuperstition,occultism,witchcraft,magic.Thestereotypicalmannerinwhichthesearticlesopenandend,leadsmetobelievethatthisspecialissueof“StudiiTeologice” journalwasactuallycommissionedbythe communistauthorities.TwoarticlesweresignedbyFatherProfessorPetruRezuș,who veryharshlydenouncedthe“Maglavitphenomenon”oftheinterwartimes,aswellastheeventsatVladimirești,datingfromthesameperiod13.

In1952,FatherDumitruStăniloaepublishedanextensivestudycondemningthe“falsemysticism”withgeneralstatementsonsuchphenomena,butwithoutanyexplicitmentionofMaglavitorVladimirești14.Falsemysticism,placed inthecategoryof“religiouscounterfeit”,is“adispositionofthesoulwhichexpectsor seesmiracles everywhere,which seeks visionsandattachesa supernaturalqualitytoanypersonwhoislessordinary”.FatherStăniloaeclassifiesmiraculousphenomenaandvisionsintothreecategories,pertainingtooccultism(magic,witchcraftandsuperstition),topathologicalconditions,andtofraud,andanalyzesthemanifestationsofeach.Theconclusionofhisstudyisthatpromotersoffalsemysticismarepersonswithcertaindisordersofthesoul,whofindthemselvesatvariouspointsin‐betweenhealthandamedicalcondition.Theyliveinsociety,andso their obsessions and so‐called visions have an impact on the religiousdispositionofagreatnumberofpeople.Theirfixedideasbecomevisionsofpurelyterrestrialorigin,aremanifestinmaterialforms,andbringaboutnothingnew.

Thetruevisions,expressionsofthedivinerevelation,areaboveanymaterialformandtheyreceiveonlyasymbolicone,toindicatespiritualsignificance,asdotheBookofRevelationortheBookofDaniel.Moreover,truevisionsarerareandtheyserve loftymissionarygoals: “Whenapersonclaimstohavevisions,evenonadailybasis,andontheotherhandthatpersonisunableofconductingseriousmissionaryactivity,thenthatindividualiscertainlymentallyderangedorafraud,orelseavictimofignorance...Ignoranceisthemostimportantvehiclespreadingfalsemysticism.Theepidemicformsoffalsemysticismareasadtell‐talesignthatapeopleisreligiouslybackwardandcastashamefullightonthereligiousshepherdsofanation”.

Onemightthinkthatbythesegeneralconsiderations,FatherStăniloaeactuallymakesacriticalhinttotheMaglavitphenomenonandthushecontradictshisownstatementsmade30yearsearlier,onPetracheLupu’svisions.Indeed,FatherStăniloaewasforcedtocomplywiththepolicyofthecommunistauthorities,aswereallprofessorsofTheologyatthetime.Actually,inan“ActivityReport”

13Rev.Prof.PetruRăzuș,“Criteriologiafalselorteofanii,StudiiTeologice”,no.3‐4(May‐June1949):226‐237;idem,“Criteriilerevelațiuniidivineșicombatereafalselorteofanii”,StudiiTeologice,no.5‐6(July‐August1949):345‐364.

14Rev.Prof.DumitruSăniloae,“Formeleșicauzelefalsuluimisticism”,StudiiTeologiceno.5‐6(May‐June1952):251‐271.


81

hesubmittedtotheDepartmentofReligiousAffairs,againincompliancewiththeregime’srequirements,henotedthatinthepreviousyearhehadpublished,amongothers,thestudyentitled“Formeleșicauzelefalsuluimisticism[Formsandcausesof the falsemysticism]” in “StudiiTeologice”,No.5‐6,1952; there, hestates,“Idenouncedandcriticizedanumberofmorbidorill‐intendedmanifestationsandactsintherealmofreligiouslife”15.

Inmyopinion,this“compliance”withthecommunistpolicieswascarriedout in the same delicate, discreet manner that was characteristic of FatherStăniloae,anddidnotnecessarilydenyhispositiontakenin1935‐1936ontheeventsofMaglavit.Bettersaid,inthetermsofTeodorBakonsky,thebiographyofFatherStăniloaecontainedtwoStăniloae,differentbutnotnecessaryantagonistic16.Inthefirst,interwarpart,thereistheyoungnationalist,educatedinthespiritof the journal “Gândirea”, there is the right‐wing, philo‐Orthodox and anti‐Catholic,pro‐Europeanandanti‐Marxistprofessor.This“firstconfigurationoftheself”reactstothehorizonofreality,andpromptshimtotakeastandonPetracheLupuphenomenon,oronthe“hereticalgnosticism”ofLucianBlaga.Thentheyoungromanticwassucceededbythegrown‐upmanpersecutedbythe“unjusthistory”andbytheoldStăniloae.Theselaterexperiences,constitutingthe“summerandautumnofapatriarchofRomanianreligiousthought”ledhimawayfromanypolitical stanceandspiritualizedhim,helpinghimtorevisithisethnocentricposition.ThesecondStăniloaeisthephilocalicchampion,thepatristicexegetewhotranslatedthousandsofpages,andaboveallthemaninpossessionofcertainties.Allthesebiographicalandspiritual(st)agesrenderhimallthemorevaluableandtracearichandcomplete,fullyresponsibledestiny.

REFERENCESBakonsky, Teodor, Tătaru Cazaban, Bogdan, eds. Dumitru Stăniloae sau paradoxul

teologiei.Centenar1903‐2003.București:EdituraAnastasia,2003.Crainic,Nichifor.“VizitălaMaglavit.”Gândirea,XV,no.1(January,1936):1‐11.David,Petre,prof.dr.Invaziasectelor.Asupracreștinismuluisecularizatșiintensificarea

prozelitismuluineopăgân înRomâniadupădecembrie1989. Vol. II. Constanța:EdituraEuropolis,1999.

15ThereportcanbeaccessedonthecurrentwebsiteofStudiiTeologicejournal,(http://studiiteologice.editurilepatriarhiei.ro/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=49&lang=en).

16TeodorBakonsky,BogdanTătaruCazaban,eds.,DumitruStăniloaesauparadoxulteologiei.Centenar1903‐2003,(Bucuresti:EdituraAnastasia,2003),13‐14.

RADUPETREMUREȘAN

82

Enache,George,PhD.“Biserica‐societate‐națiunestatînRomâniainterbelică.Explorăriînorizontliberal.”RevistaTeologică,no.2(2010):166‐202.

FlorinDuțu.ViațaPărinteluiDumitruStăniloae,1903‐1993.București:EdituraFloaredecolț,2015.

Moldoveanu, Ilie, pr. prof. dr. “Actualitatea gândirii Părintelui Dumitru Stăniloae cuprivirelaetnicșietnicitate.”InPersoanășicomuniune.PrinosdecinstirePărinteluiProfesorAcademicianDumitruStăniloaelaîmplinireavârsteide90deani,ed.IoanIcăjr.Sibiu,1993,120‐130.

Mureșan,RaduPetre.AtitudineaBisericilorTradiționaleEuropenefațădeprozelitismuladvent.Impactulînsocietateacontemporană.București:EdituraUniversitățiidinBucurești,2007,573‐576.

Răzuș,Petru, rev.prof. “Criteriile revelațiuniidivineși combaterea falselor teofanii.”StudiiTeologice,no.5‐6(July‐August1949):345‐364.

———.“Criteriologiafalselorteofanii.”StudiiTeologice,no.3‐4(May‐June1949):226‐237.Stăniloae,Dumitru.“Exagerări.”TelegrafulRomân,LXXXXIII,no.39(15September1935):1.———.“Formeleșicauzelefalsuluimysticism.”StudiiTeologiceno.5‐6(May‐June1952):

251‐271.———.“Încercaredespreteofanii.InterpretareavedeniilorluiPetracheLupu.”Gândirea,XV,

no.1(January1936):14‐29.———.“Oțărănimenouă.”TelegrafulromânLXXXI,no.15‐17(18February1933):1‐2.———.“Ortodoxieșinațiune.”Gândirea,XIV,no.2(February1935):76‐84.———.“RomânismșiOrtodoxie.”Gândirea,XV,no.8(October1935):400‐409.———.“VindecărileminunatevăzutedeminelaMaglavit.”TelegrafulRomânLXXXXIIII,

no.41(29September1935):2‐3.


III.HISTORICALTHEOLOGY

THECONSOLIDATIONOFDONATISM

INTHEFIRSTHALFOFTHEFOURTHCENTURY

DRAGOȘBOICU*

ABSTRACT.TheDonatistMovement represents a phenomenon that can bestudiedasaparadigmfortheemergenceofschismsandtheirevolutionfromacanonical‐disciplinary deviation to a dogmatic‐moral one, transforming thedissident group into a heretical one. This study aims to deepen theway inwhich the resistance of the Numidian clergy was consolidated during theConstantiniandynastydespitetheconcessionsandpressuresexertedonit.Keywords:Constantine theGreat,NorthAfrica,Donatism,DonatusMagnus,circumcelliones

TheChurchwasconsideredfromtheverybeginningatheandricinstitution,

wanted,foundedandledbyGod,infallibleinitsownrightasanextensionoftheBodyofChrist–itshead;evenso,throughouthistoryitwasfacedwithaproblemcommontoalllivingorganisms:mutation.Ofcourse,wedonotreferinthiscasetothesuddenappearanceofanewgeneticcharacterthatreflectsamodificationof the hereditarymaterial, but rather to a fundamental change in structure,whetherdisciplinary,liturgicalordogmatic.SincetheveryfirstcenturyoftheChristianera,aseriesofcommunitieshaveemerged,withtheirownparticularitiesthatdistancedthemfromthekerygmataughtbytheApostlesintheNearEastandtheMediterraneanBasin.Leavingasideforamomenttheformaldistinctionbetweenheresyandschism,wenoticethatthetendencyoffragmentationisaconstitutivefeatureofChristianreligion,astheSaviourHimselfsaid, ‘DoyouthinkIcametobringpeaceonearth?No,Itellyou,butdivision.Fromnowontherewillbefiveinonefamilydividedagainsteachother,threeagainsttwoandtwoagainstthree’(Luke12:51‐52).

*AssistantProfessor,“LucianBlaga”University,Sibiu,Romania.E‐mail:[email protected].

DRAGOȘBOICU

84

Paradoxically, the protection Emperor Constantine the Great and hissuccessorsprovidedforChristianityfurtherfavouredthespreadofthisphenomenoninthe4thcentury,andoneofthemostseriousdivisionsthataffectedtheChurchoncethepersecutionsceasedwastheDonatistschism.

Againstthebackdropofthedissensionssurroundingthesuccessionforthe Episcopal Seat of Carthage, two groups were formed and both claimedjurisdictionovertheentireAfricanChristianity:theDonatists–thesupportersofMajorinus–andtheso‐calledCatholics/Orthodox–whosupportedCaecilianasthelegitimatesuccessorofBishopMensurius1.Inordertoresolvetheconflict,theNumidianorDonatistclergyrepeatedlyappealedtoEmperorConstantinetheGreat,whoorderedtheexaminationofthecomplaintsmadeagainstBishopCaecilianbyfoursynods(Rome–313,oneinAfricathesameyear,Arles–314,Milan–316),favouringthedecisionsofthelatter.However,therigoristfactionoftheDonatistsasserteditselfinnorthernAfrica,gainingnumerousfollowerswhowerebreaking the communionwith theCaecillianistsand isolating themselvesfromallthosesuspectedofbeingtraditoresorinanyrelationshipwiththem.

ThefirstpersecutionsagainsttheDonatistsTherepeatedpleasoftheDonatistsfortheEmperortointervenehad

inevitablyimpactedthecommunityfromtheperspectiveofthepropertylaw,sinceashewasinfavourofBishopCaeciliantheEmperorwasnowboundtoseizeDonatist churches and give them to the Catholics,who considered therightfulownersofecclesiasticalbuildingsinNorthAfrica.

After several years of restricting the Donatists’ activity, Constantinefoundthathedidnotsucceededincausingthemtoabandontheschism,butonthecontrarytheyendangeredthemselvesevenmore,victimizingthemselvesand legitimizing their persistence through the cult dedicated to themartyrskilledaccidentallyduringtheevacuationoperationsof thechurchesgiventotheCatholics.

However,theeventsthatunfoldedbetween316and321arequiteunclearandthelackofconsensusamonghistoriansonthistopicraisesenduringdoubts.Most scholars interpret the fewsources recording thisperiodas signsof an

1Foradetailedgenesisofdonation,seeW.H.C.Frend,TheDonatistChurch.AMovementofProtestinRomanNorthAfrica(Oxford,1952),andBrentShaw,AfricanChristiansandSectarianHatredintheAgeofAugustine(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2011).AlsoseePr.Prof.NicolaeChifăr,“Mișcareadonatistășipoliticareligioasăconstantiniană(TheDonatistMovementandConstantine'sReligiousPolicy)”,RevistaTeologică,no.4(2012):129‐130,andDanielNicolaeVălean’scontribution,Erezii,controverseșischismeîncreștinismulsecolelorI‐XI(Cluj‐Napoca:Limes,2009),74‐78.

THECONSOLIDATIONOFDONATISMINTHEFIRSTHALFOFTHEFOURTHCENTURY

85

atrociouspersecutionofDonatistslaunchedbyimperialtroops,onConstantine’sorders. But apart from the letter addressed to EumaliusVicarus (November316)andtheDonatisttextofPassioSanctiDonati,wehavenootherevidencetoprove these persecutions took place2. The restitution of the churches wasundoubtedlycarriedoutwithgreatdifficultyandoftenbyforce,butimperialforcessentbyEmperorConstantinewere instructedtouseonlytheclubstoimplementhisdisposition[quinongladiissedimpiafustiumcaedetricidabantur];thisdetailstressesevenmorehis intentionto takeover theedificeswithoutkillingDonatists.ThistestimonyisgivenbythealreadymentionedDonatist text,whichamongotherpiecesofinformationalsoreportsthedeathofaclericinthemostaccidentalcircumstances:BishopHonoratusofSicilibba’sthroatwas‘gashed’bytribune’sswordduringamêlée3.

ThisviewseemstobesupportedbyOptatusofMileve,whorecallsthenumerousDonatistpetitionsagainstthekillingscausedbyPaul’sandMacarius’smissionsinCarthage,BagaiandNovaPetra(in347),buttheschismaticsdidn’tblameLeontiusandUrsaciuswhohadcoordinatedtherestitutionsbetween317and321.Thereisthereforenosolidevidencethatsystematicretaliationhadtakenplaceinthatinterval,butonlymoderateimplementationoftheimperialprovisionsthatstipulatedthetransferofchurchestoCatholicclergyandtheexileof riotousDonatistbishops4.

DespitethemeasurestakenbyConstantine,thedissidentsstrengthenedtheir position by taking advantage of the clashes with law enforcement tolegitimizetheirvictimhood,whiletheEmperorandtheCaecilianistclergywereconsideredagentsorassociatesofSatan forhavingusedmoneyandvariousfavourstoluretheDonatistsandbreaktheirresistance5.Moreover,before321theyaddressedadocumenttoConstantinetheGreatinwhichtheycategoricallyrejectedanykindofcommunionwithCaecilianandhissupporters.ThiscausedtheEmperortosuspendanyattempttorestoreunitytothechurchinAfrica,asthepathofdialoguehadneverbeenopened6,whiletheDonatistsmaintainedtheirpositionwiththesameobstinacyasbefore314.

Therefore,Constantinepublishedarescriptoftolerancewithwhich,withoutaccepting their demands, he suspended their persecution and recognized the2NoelLenski,“ConstantineandtheDonatists.ExplorigtheLimitsofReligiousToleration”,inReligiöseToleranz.1700JahrenachdemEdiktvonMailand,MartinWallraff(Hg.),ColloquiaRaurica(Berlin/Boston:DeGruyter,2016),108sqq.

3PassioDonati,VII,PL8:755:“episcopijugulumtribunigladiusnonpenetravit,tamencompunxit”.4See:ÉricFournier,“ConstantineandEpiscopalBanishment:ContinuityandChangeintheSettlementof Christian Disputes”, inClericalExile inLateAntiquity, ed. Julia Hillner, JörgUlrich and JakobEngberg(FrankfurtamMain:PeterLang,2016),47‐66.

5NoelLenski,“ConstantineandtheDonatists”,123.6NoelLenski,“ConstantineandtheDonatists”,112.

DRAGOȘBOICU

86

existenceofamassiveruptureinthenorthAfricanChurch.Consequently,hesummoned the Donatist clergy back from exile and proclaimed a relativereligiousfreedominAfrica;thenon5May321hesentVerinus,vicarusAfricae,aletterinforminghimoftheprovisionsoftherescriptoftolerance.

However, until theheavenly cure takes its effect,wemustkeepourplansbehindsothatwewouldcultivatepatienceandendureeverythingthroughthevirtueoftranquillity(totumtranquillitatisvirtutetoleremus)nomatterwhat they might try or do in their arrogance through the practices ofintemperance.Donotrewardevilwithinjustice(Rom.12:17),forwereallyneedtoserveGod,lestwebefoolstotakerevengeintoourownhands(Rm12:19)especiallywhenourfaithshouldgiveusthecertaintythatanythingthatweendurefromsuchpeoplebecauseoftheirmadness,willcounttoGodasamartyrdom7.ThispassagefromtheletteraddressedtotheAfricanbishopsexpresses

the same frustration and helplessness of the Emperor in his attempt topersuadetheDonatiststorenouncetheschism,althoughhehasmaderepeatedconcessionsandeventriedtoforcethemtoacknowledgeCaecilian.Hedeprivedthemoftheplacesofworshipandexposedthemtoaharshertreatment,hopingthatthedeprivationswillmakethemmoreconciliatoryorevencausethemtogiveuptheiroppositiontotheChurchfromwhichtheyhaveseparated,bringingthembacktoConstantine'smuchdesiredunity.

But the edict of 5 May 321 has facilitated the spread of DonatiststhroughoutNorthAfrica.ItseemsthatinthiscontexttheactionsofschismaticsbecamemoredaringandculminatedintherebellionledbyAxidoandFasir,‘ducessanctorum’,whoterrifiedtheruralareasandthreatenedthepublicorderuntiltheywererepressedbycomesTaurinus8.WemustmentionthatthisisthefirstcaseinwhichacertainformofChristianityidentifieditselfwithanationalmovement,thereligiousoppositiontoRomehavingastrongpoliticalcorrespondent9.

7EpistolaConstantiniImperatorisadepiscopos(321)inH.v.Soden,UrkundenzurEntstehungsgeschichtedesDonatismus,1913,reed.byH.v.Campenhausen,KleineTextefürVorlesungenundŰbungen,122,(Berlin,1950),52:“Verumdumcaelestismedicinaprocedat,hactenussuntconsilianostramoderandaut patientiam percolamus et, quicquid insolenta illorum pro consuetudine intemperantiae suaetentantautfaciunt,idtotumtranquillitatisvirtutetoleremus.Nihilexreciprocoreponaturiniuriae(Rm12,17);vindictamenimquamdeoservaredebemus(Rm12,19)insipientisestmanibususurpare,maximecumdebeatfidesnostraconfiderequicquidabHuiusmodihominumfurorepatieturmartyriigratiaapuddeumessevaliturum”.

8OptatusdeMileve(Afrus),DeSchismateDonatistarumAdversusParmenianum,LibriVII,III,4,CSEL26,ed.CarolZiwsa,(Viena,1893),82.

9SeethepositionofBrentShaw,SacredViolence.AfricanChristiansandSectarianHatredintheAgeofAugustine(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2011),54‐55.


87

ItisobviousthattheEmperordisapprovedoftheDonatistposition,andwemaysaythat,asschismaticsremainedunwaveringintheirbeliefs formulatedimmediatelyafterCaecilian'selectionasBishopofCarthage,Constantine theGreatalsofirmlymaintainedhisprejudiceexpressedasearlyas312whenheaccusedthemof‘stillabidingintheirmadness’10.Theconcessionsmadetothedissidentscameatthepriceofacondescendingtoneandtheconstructionofarhetoricofdisapproval,bothelementsthatcanbeidentifiedintheepistlesentbyConstantine to theAfricanbishops in33011, the lastpiece in theDonatistdossierduringhisreign.Thistextexpressesevenmoreclearlytheemperor’sdisapproval,whenhedoesnothesitatetocharacterizeDonatus’ssupportersasmad,stubborn,sick,andsatanic.Theemperor'sdisgustbecomesevenplainerfromhisorderthattheNumidianCatholicbishopsshouldnolongertrytoregaintheChurchinCirta,abusivelyoccupiedbytheDonatists,assuringthemthathewillbuildanewchurchforthem,askinginreturntoseverallconnectionswiththesedissidentslackingcommonsenseandopennessfordialogue.Onthecontrary,theymustbeleftinGod’shands:

Indeed, the judgmentof theMostHighGodisseenfromthisgreaterandmore righteous situation, that He is so tolerant of such people, andcondemnswithpatiencealltheiniquitieswhichtheycommit,bearingthem,sinceGodpromisedthatHeistheVindicatorofall12.

Ofcourse,therelaxationoftherestrictionsonDonatistscouldbeseen

inthewidercontextoftheRomanEmpire’s internalpolicy,andespecially inconnectiontotheconflictsbetweenConstantinetheGreatandLicinius.Thus,onecannoticethatwhenthefirstanimositiesbetweenthetwoemperorsappearedin314‐316,Constantinechosethepathofdialogueandcouncils,andaftertheendofthecivilwar,ConstantinintervenedmorebrutallyintheDonatistissueand,notbeingpressedbyotherfactors,heallowedsomesmalldisturbancesinNorthAfrica.However,in321,thetensionsbetweenLiciniusandhisbrother‐in‐lawresurfacedafterConstantinviolatedtheprovisionsofthe316A.D.peacetreaty,sendingtroopsinLicinius’sterritoriesinpursuitofsomeSarmatianswhohadinvadedhis territories.Thesituationwasrepeateda fewmonths laterwhenConstantineattackedtheGothswhodevastatedThrace,whichiswhytheemperor

10EpistolaConstantiniImperatorisadCaecilianum,inH.v.Soden,UrkundenzurEntstehungsgeschichtedesDonatismus,8‐9.

11EpistolaConstantiniadepiscoposNumidas,inH.v.Soden,UrkundenzurEntstehungsgeschichtedesDonatismus,53‐56.

12EpistolaConstantiniadepiscoposNumidas,inH.v.Soden,UrkundenzurEntstehungsgeschichtedesDonatismus,55.

DRAGOȘBOICU

88

oftheEastaccusedhimofviolatingthetreatyandbeganpreparationsforanewcivilwar.ThistimeConstantineneededtoensuretheloyaltyoftheAfricanprovinces,especiallysincethatregionprovidedthewheatsuppliesnecessarytoRomeandthewholeofItaly.

Coincidentallyornot,theintervalsofpoliticalconflictcorrespondtothoseinwhichEmperorConstantinetheGreatappearedtobeconciliatory,althoughhewasawareoftheDonatists’errorsandwasfrustratedbythestubbornnesswithwhichtheysupportedtheircause.However,aftertheyear324,whenhebecamethesolerulerof theRomanEmpire,Constantinedidnotresumethepersecutionofschismatics,adecisioninfluencedbytheaggravationoftheAriancrisisthatledtotheconvocationoftheFirstEcumenicalSynod(Nicaea,325)butalsobyhisstrongconvictionthattheDonatistoppositionconsolidatedinthelastdecadecouldbeshakenonlybydivinejudgment,asittranspiresfromthetwoConstantiniantextsin321and330.

WhatstandsoutistheconvictionoftheDonatiststhattheyarethe‘sonsofmartyrs’whomakeupthe‘ChurchofTruth’.Thisconvictionemphasizestheabilitytobuildanidentityaroundthenotionofmartyrdominanerainwhich,at least theoretically, therewasnoconflictbetweenChristianityandEmpire.However,usinganyoccasionthatantagonizedtheauthorities,theymissednoopportunitytoappearasvictimsofanaggressionoftheemperor,whoprovedtobenobetterthanthepersecutorsDiocletianandGalerius,whiletheDonatistsweretherightfuldescendantsofthemartyrsanddidnothesitatetobecomemartyrsthemselveswhenthesituationrequiredit.TheauthorityaccumulatedthroughthesacrificeofthedissidentsgavetheDonatistgroupaspecialimpulse,butalso a typical self‐sufficiency that further strengthened thearroganceof the ‘fewchosen’,radicalizingthemonapathfarfromtheevangelicalprecepts.Onceengagedin thisradicaldynamic thatescalateddaily in increasinglyabsurdsituations,presented as tests to be overcomewith the same obstinacy, the schismaticsendedupcommittinghorribleatrocitiesthathadnothingincommonwiththespiritualityandtheliturgical‐dogmaticthesaurusthattheyclaimedtoprotect.

TheevolutionofDonatismduringthereignsofthesonsofConstantine

theGreatThedeathofgreatConstantineleftadeepvoidinthepoliticallifeofthe

RomanEmpire,butthisdidnotstopthetransformationoftheMediterraneanspaceintoasocietyinwhichtheChristianelementwasdominant.Thisevolutionwouldprovetobefullofcontrastsandparadoxes.Theempirewasdividedbetweenthesonsof ‘Constantine:Constantine II (337‐340),Constantius II (337‐361)and


89

Constans(337‐350)–asfollows:‘heallocatedtotheeldesthisgrandfather'sportion(Galia,BritaniaandSpainwithMauritaniaTingitana),tothesecondthegovernmentoftheeast(Egyp,Orient,AsiaandPons),andthatbetweenthem(Italia,Africa,Pannonia,IllyricumandTracia)tothethird’13.

ThePeaceoftheEmpirewouldsoonbedisturbedwhenthestep‐brothersofthegreatConstantine,JuliusConstantius,Dalmatius,Hannibalius,andallthemale descendants of ‘Theodora’s lineage’ – the legitimate wife of EmperorConstantius (I) –, would bemassacred. Just Galus and Julian, children then,remainedalive.ThehistorianPhilostorgius,acknowledgedforhisArianpenchant,wishingtojustifythisact,whosemainbeneficiarywasConstantius(II),statesthat thesebloodymeasureswerereprisalsagainst thosewhowererumoured tohavepoisonedthegreatConstantine,becausehisdeathwasnotnaturalatall14.

However, the shedding of bloodwas not enough to restore politicalbalance.Thereturntotheformofpolyarchicgovernmentwouldprovedifficultas conflicts soon arose between the three brothers. While Constantius wasforcedtocopewiththePersiansintheOrient,theconflictbetweenConstansandConstantineIIbrokeoutintheWest.However,ConstansdidnottolerateConstantine’sinterferenceforalongtime,whichiswhyhewouldtrytoconsolidatehis autonomy. Consequently, Constantine,wishing to restore order, invadedConstans’sterritoriesatthebeginningoftheyear340,butinhismarchthroughItaly,stillfaithfultotheemperorofSirmium,hefacedstrongresistancefromthepopulation,andinthecourseoftheBattleofAquileiain340,Constantinewaskilled,andhisbodywasthrownintothewatersoftheAlsaRiver,nearthecity15.

Thus, Constans became sole ruler of the entireWest. Together withConstantius,heincreasedtheprovisionsofthelegislationfavourabletoChristiansandwasparticularlyinvolvedinecclesiasticalissuesowingtotheAriancrisis,but just likehis father,hepostponedbaptism to theendof life, aproof thatChristianityhadnospecialmeaningyetforthepoliticallifeoftheEmpire.

SupportersofthetwoChristianfactions,NiceanandSemi‐Arian,ConstansandConstantiuswouldhavetenserelations,buttheexternalpressuresoftheFrankson theDanubianandRenan frontiersandof thePersians in theEastprevented the escalation of violence between the two brothers. The field ofdoctrinalbattlebetweenSemi‐ArianismandorthodoxywasfornowIllyricum,where awhole series of synods (Sardica 343, Sirmium348, 351, 357)were

13Eusebius,LifeofConstantine, introduction, translation,andcommentarybyAverilCameronandStuartG.Hall(Oxford,NewYork,1999),172‐173.

14RobertM.Franks,“TheDynastyofConstantineDownto363”,inTheCambridgecompaniontotheAgeofConstantine,ed.NoelLenski(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2006),99.

15DumitruTudor,Figurideîmpărațiromani,vol.2(București:Ed.EnciclopedicăRomână,1974),92.

DRAGOȘBOICU

90

organized.Theirpurposewastoreachaconsensus:thecondemnationofpureArianism.Regarding these councils,we shouldnote the special support thatConstantiusgavetheSemi‐Arianbishops.

Thebalance struck in this fashionbetween the twoChristian groupswouldbedestroyedwith theproclamationofFlaviusMagnetiusMaximusasemperorintheWestandthemurderofConstansintheyear350.Convincedthathewasfollowinghisfather’sdream,Constantius’sgoalwastorebuildtheterritorialunityoftheEmpire,butalsotorestorereligiouspeace.Therefore,afterpacifyingthePersianfrontier,hepersonallycametoIllyricumthe followingyear,ontheonehandtosupporttheSemi‐ArianpartyattheSirmiumSynodof351,andontheotherhandtofollowtheusurper’sactionsandtoorganizetheoffensiveagainsthim.ThefirstconfrontationbetweenthetwowouldtakeplaceinthesameyearatMursa,whereMagnetius’stroopswouldbedefeated,whiletheusurperwouldbechasedfortwomoreyearsuntilhekilledhimselfatLugdunuminGaul16.Thus,ConstantiusruledaloneovertheentireEmpire17.

FortheChurchofAfrica,thecivilwarsoftheperiod340‐353representedatimewhen theDonatist dissidentsbecame stronger: theyhad crystallized theiroppositiontoeverythingthatmeantecclesiatraditorium,andasignificantroleinconsolidatingtheirstancewasplayedbyastrangemixtureofself‐victimizationandviolentoutbursts.ThedissidenceofbishopDonatusandhisclergytooktheformofaseriousintransigence,affirmedasanabsoluterefusaltocompromise,butprovedtobeasymptomofself‐sufficiencythatwasanequallyimpuremotivation18.

TheradicalismpromotedbyDonatusMagnuswasextremelyattractive,soabout300Africanbishopsrecognizedhisauthority,andbytheendofthereign of Constantine the Great, 270 bishops were reunited in a synod atCarthageunderDonatus’spresidency,wheretheydebatedfor75daysoverthevalidityoftheSacramentsperformedbythetraditoresclergy.AccordingtotheviewsofSaintCyprian,thevalidityoftheSacramentswascloselyrelatedtothemoralstateortheworthinessoftheminister.Althoughduringtwoandahalfmonthsofdiscussiontherewasnodefinitivedecision,DonatussupportedtherebaptismofalltheCaecilianistswhowereincommunionwithhim,astherewasnovalidbaptismoutsidethiscommunion.Thisviewwouldbeembracedandappliedbytheotherbishops,althoughtherehavebeenexceptionssuchasthesituationfacedbyBishopDeuteriusofMacriinMauritania19.

16 JohnMeyendorff, Imperialunityandchristiandivisions.TheChurch450‐680A.D. (NewYork: St.Vladimir’sSeminaryPress,1989),7.

17Tudor,Figurideîmpărațiromani,98‐100.18AndreiPleșu,“Undialogdesprecurajșicompromisuri”(I)https://pressone.ro/andrei‐plesu‐la‐70‐de‐ani‐un‐dialog‐despre‐curaj‐si‐compromisuri‐i/,accessedMay20,2019.

19Augustin,Epistola93,43,PL33:329‐330.


91

Consequently,themomentofConstantinetheGreat’sdeathfoundDonatusreinforcinghisauthority,whileCaecilian’sdescendantsatthehelmoftheChurchofCarthageremainedunknownforalmostaquarterofacentury20.

Besides,with a few exceptions, the authority of BishopDonatuswasrecognizedinallAfricanprovinces,andhisrecognitionastheheadofCarthage–and,therefore,astheprimateofallRomanAfrica–wasevenintendedbyEmperorConstans21.ThedullpresenceofGratus,theCaecilianistbishopofCarthage,hadalsogreatlycontributedtothestrengtheningoftheDonatistelement,aswellasto the generalization of the schismatic state by the isolation of all thosesuspectedofbeingtraditoresorinanyrelationshipwiththem.

Itseemsthatitwasnotonlyanecclesiasticalseparation,butalsoasocialone inwhich thecontactsbetween the twopartieswere limited topersonalattacksandsometimesstreetviolence.Althoughitistemptingtomakeasimplisticassociation between certain social strata that have embraced Donatism orremainedincommunionwiththeChurchofRomeandtheCaecilianistclergy,therecanbenopreciseelementoverlapping thereligiousoptionwithaparticularenvironment, orwith a certain political orientation. On the contrary, in theabsenceofrealopposition,Donatismwasembracedbybothcitizensandslaves,bytheinhabitantsofthebigcities,andtheruralareas,byintellectualsandfarmersalike.

Inthesameperiod,theDonatistfactiondevelopedfromapatrimonialpointofview,withmanypropertiesbeingacquired,which,accordingtohistorianWilliamHughCliffordFrend,wasratherthesymptomofthelossoftheinitialenthusiasmthattheDonatistMovementhadasaspontaneousreactionofoppositionagainstthosewhobetrayedChrist,andasaresultofthedevelopmentofaspecificroutineofaninstitutionalizedorganism22.Thesechanges,aswellasthedifferencesof opinion among the main leaders of this group, have caused successivefragmentationsresultinginsixfactions:Rogatists–themostmoderate,Urbanists,Claudianists,Primianists,Maximianists,andCircumcellions.

Thelatter,alsocalled‘Agonistici’or‘fighters’,werearadicalDonatistgroupmadeuplargelyofnomadicBerbersandday‐labourerswhowereworking‘withtheirbentbackandsweatytemples’23.TheyarementionedbyAugustineaspeasantsoragriculturalworkers (agrestes)whohaveabandoned theirplotsandnowspreadfearonthegreatproperties24,thelandlordsbeingperceivedasSatan’s

20Frend,TheDonatistChurch,168.21Frend,TheDonatistChurch,169.22Frend,TheDonatistChurch,170.23OptatusdeMileve,LibriVII,V,7,135‐136:“quicurvatodorsoetdesudatislateribussinusterraefaciat”.

24Augustin,ContraGaudentium,I.28.32,PL43:725.

DRAGOȘBOICU

92

agents25.Asaresult,theactionsoftheCircumcellionshadbothreligiousandeconomicnature,andtheydirectedtheiraggressionagainsttheso‐calledtraditores,butalsoagainstthegreatcreditorsandtheownersoflargeagriculturallands.

However,theaspectofsocialrevolutionwassecondary,Circumcellionsbeingfanaticsultimately,whohadabandonedsedentarylivingtostraythroughdifferentvillages,livingfromtheworkofthosetheywereindoctrinatingwithextremistprinciples.TheCircumcellionappellationisderivedfromthe‘circum‐cella’formula,indicatingthattheseradicalDonatistswerenourishednearthesmallruraltemples,convertedinChristianchapelsoraroundthesanctuariesraised on the tomb of a martyr or saint. Their activity was predominantlycarried out in the countryside in the form of a perpetual pilgrimage: livingtemporarily around the graves of the saints, they were emphasizing thevocationofeveryChristian–atravellerofthislife,‘forherewehavenolastingcity,butweseekthecitythatistocome’(Heb.13,14).Butevenso,somecentrescouldbefoundfromwheretheactionsoftheCircumcellionswerecoordinated.These centreswere located in the rural areaofnorthernNumidia in the so‐calledcastella(fortifications)ofFussalaandSinitum26.

Nomadiclifeandthedevotiontomartyrshavefacilitatedtheformationof their own and distorted conception of martyrdom within Circumcelliongroups,whichtheseDonatistsweretooreadilywillingtoembrace. In fact, itwas the expression of a general ennui caused by the lack of social and / ormaterialoutlookforthesedisenfranchisedgroups,duetothesocialinequitiesspecific to the ancient society.This general state of dissatisfaction created apsychologicalavailabilityformartyrdom,alsopreparedbyritualdancesaswellas libations that degenerated into Bacchic orgies, meant to intercede theblessingandpowerofmartyrsburiedintheplacesthatwerenowpopulatedbyCircumcellions.Cladinmonochromecolours,asIsidorofSevilleremembers27,they rushed upon the unfortunate victims, agitating up the fearsome clubsAugustinesaidCircumcellionsusedtothreatentheirenemies,although,

‘neither Christ nor the emperor can be shown to have allowed this: theprivateuseofclubsand firebrands,and this illegalmadness.because it’swritten:“sheathethesword”(Mat.26,52),theythinkthere’snocrimeinusingclubs!Notsothatsomeoneshouldbekilled(ofcourse)butsothattheymightbebadlybeatenandthenlaterdie,havingsufferedfromlong

25W.H.C.Frend,MartyrdomandPersecutiontheEarlyChurch.AStudyofaConflictfromtheMaccabeestoDonatus(Oxford:BasilBlackwell,1965),556.

26Frend,TheDonatistChurch,172‐173.27 Isidor,Deofficiisecclesiasticis, II,15,PL83:796‐797:“Circumcellionum,quihabitumonachorumusquequaquevagantur”.


93

torture.butiftheyhadpity,theycouldkillwithoneblowoftheirclubs.Theycall their clubs “israels”becauseGodheld thisname inhonour, but theyshamethenamemorethanthebodiestheyhavebeaten’28.Thetextreflectsboththedeterminationofthosewhocalledthemselves

‘militesChristi’,andthecautionintheactofviolence,using‘non‐lethal’weapons,theirpossessionbeingallowedbytheauthorities.However,thisdidnotdiminishtheaggressivenesswithwhichtheCircumcellionssupportedandimposedtheirdoctrinalandsocialviewpoint,butonthecontrary,itincreasedthedevotiontothemartyrs andmartyrdom. Thereupon they sought to provoke the Romanlegionsinordertobekilledandbesentamongthesaints29,shoutingastheywent to death ‘Deo laudes!’ (a formula that inevitably leads us to themorerecentuseof‘Allahuakbar’,shoutedbytheauthorsofthesuicidebombings).

Suicidal attacks are attested both by Donatist and Catholic sources.Thus,Tyconius (†423), aDonatist sympathizer, eventuallyexcommunicatedfor his various views on the rebaptism of the Caecillianists, said of theCircumcellionsthat‘theydonotliveinthesamemannerasotherbrothersdo,butkillthemselvesasifforloveofmartyrdom,sothatwhentheydepartfromthislifetheymightbecalledmartyrs’30.Ontheotherhand,SaintPhilastrius,theBishopofBrescia(†ca.397),informsusthat‘inAfricatherearethosecalledcircuitores,whosurroundthedomainsandgatherthosewhomtheydiscoverontheroadtobekilledbythosesayingthattheywanttosuffermartyrdom,andthatiswhymanyhavesometimescommittedrobberies.However,beingputtotortures,theyenduretheevildestructionofthemisfortune,andsomeofthemareviolentlykilled.Theyarerushingtoperishwithoutreasonandaredefyingdrawbackstoreceiveanhonourabledeath,butinsteadofcleansingthemselves,theygetevenmoreentangledinthefuturejudgmentofGod’31.

28Augustin,PsalmuscontrapartemDonati,147,154–162(PL43:28):“Vosenimnonvultispacem.Illiminanturdefuste…NonChristus,nonimperatorhaecprobaturpermisisse,/fustesetignesprivatosetinsaniamsinelege./QuiascriptumestRecondegladium,scelusnonputantinfuste,/nonuthomomoriatur, sedutconquasseturvalde/etposteamoriatur inde, iamcruciatus in languore./Sedtamensimiserentur,occidentetunofuste./FustesIsrahelesvocantquodDeusdixitcumhonore,/utplusvastentipsumnomenquamcorpusquodcaeduntinde”.(

29cf.JohnJosephA’Becket,“Agonistici”,inTheCatholicEncyclopedia,Vol.1,(NewYork:RobertAppletonCompany,1907),accessibleathttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01223a.htm.(3.03.2019).Seealso,ClaudeLepelley,“Iuvenesetcircconcellions:lesdernierssacrificeshumainsdel’Afriqueantique”,Antiquitésafricaines,vol.15(1980):261‐271.

30Tyconius: “Et istinonvivuntaequaliterutceteri fratres,sedquasiamoremartyrumsemetipsosperimunt,utviolenterdehacvitadiscedentesetmartyresnominentur”,inTraugottHahn,TyconiusStudien.EinBeitragyurKirchen‐undDogmengeschichtedes4.Jahrhunderts(Leipzig,1900),68.

31Philastrius,DiversarumHaereseonLiber,85(PL12:1197‐1198).

DRAGOȘBOICU

94

A firstconflict involving theCircumcellionsbrokeout in340and theImperialreactiondidnotdelay;anticipatingthecreationofacentrifugalmovementcentred on the Donatist dissidence, towards the end of Emperor Constans’sreign(337‐350),therewasanewattempttoliquidatetheschism.Therefore,in347, theEdict issued in317wasrenewed inorder for theDonatists topassunder the authority of the Caecilianist Bishop of Carthage, Gratus, and theopponentsof the imperial judgmentwere threatenedwithharsh retaliation,whilerigorousbishopsweretobesentintoexile(thecaseofDonatusMagnus),orevenputtodeaththroughpublicexecution(thecaseofMarculusandother9bishops).

Asaresult,Circumcellionsconstituted ‘remarkablebandsofnomadicterrorists, recruitedhaphazardly from thedregs of the population, from thediscontentedofeveryraceandprovince,fugitiveslaves,ruinedfarmers,oppressedcolons,outlawedcriminals,socialfailures,excommunicatedCatholics,andpurelyreligious fanatics’32. But although theywere the avant‐garde of theDonatistChurch,forwithoutthesupportofthese‘gangsofsavages’theDonatismwouldbeencrushedrapidlybyimperialforces,thevariedcompositionofthisradicalgroupandtheunpredictabilityoftheCircumcellionsmadetheschismaticbishopssometimesdisavowtheiractions,eveniftheyusedthemasaninstrumentofhatredandrevenge33.Thisbecameobviousduringtheuprising(340A.D.)ledbythe‘captainsofthesaints’,FasirandAxido,whodisplayedremarkablesadism,terrorizingtheirvictims,towhomtheysentthreateninglettersdescribingthevariouskindsoftorturestowhichtheywouldbesubjectedwhentheywouldcatchthelandlords34.

Infact,someoftheDonatistbishopsweresooverwhelmedbytheexcessesoftheiralliesthattheymetinacouncil35andcomplainedtoTaurinusthat‘suchpeoplecannotbereformedwithintheChurch’36,claimingtheydidnotaccepttheecclesiasticaldisciplineandaskedhimtointervenefortheirpacification.

DuringthisactionledbyTaurinus,manyCircumcellionswererepressedinthefairswheretheymet,andsomeofthemlosttheirlivesduringtheconfrontations,as it happened atOctavia inNumidia. Those killedwere immediately declaredmartyrs,andClarus, thepriestofSubbula,buried them in thechurch,givingthemthehonourthatonlythebishopsnormallyenjoyed37.Onthisoccasion,theDonatistbishopswhichtookpartatacouncil inNumidiahaveforbiddentheburialofsuchpeopleinthebasilicas38.

32R.PierceBeaver,“TheDonatistCircumcellions”,ChurchHistory4,no2(1935):125.33Beaver,“TheDonatistCircumcellions”,126.34PaulMonceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,vol.4(Paris,1912),31.35Monceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,31.36OptatusdeMileve,LibriVII,III,4,p.75:“dicunturhuiusmodihominesinecclesiacorriginonposse”.37Frend,TheDonatistChurch,176.38Monceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,32.


95

Despitetheirexaggeratedclaimstoappearasdefendersofthetruefaith,inthemidstoftheseconfrontations,theDonatistschosetoflirtwiththeAriansaswell.Thus,theAfricanschismandthegreatEasternheresyseemedtomakeacommonfrontagainsttheOrthodox/CatholicChurch.ThisexplainsthesendingofacopyoftheactsoftheSemi‐ArianCouncilofSardicaorPhilippopolis(343A.D.)toBishopDonatusMagnus.However,theseoccasionalcontactswiththeAriansdidnothaveanyseriousconsequencesforthedoctrinalpurityoftheDonatists39.

The lackof influenceof thenewCatholic bishopof Carthage, Gratus,favouredthegrowthoftheauthorityofDonatusMagnusofCasaeNigra,whoclaimedforhimselftheprimacyoftheAfricanChurchandtheimperialrecognitionasthe‘senior’BishopofCarthage.ThetalkswithEmperorConstansadvancedfarenoughanditwasevendecidedtosendadelegationtoAfricatoinvestigatethesituationandreportittothemonarchwhowouldapproveDonatus’srequest.

Thetwoimperialnotaries,PaulandMacarius,arrivedinAfricainthespringof347andmanifestedtheirsympathywiththeCaecillianistclergyfromtheverybeginning,participatingintheserviceofBishopGratus.TheAfricananarchy,theperiodicbrigandageoftheCircumcellionandtheirBerberallies, theimpertinenceoftheDonatists,therapiditywithwhichthedissidentcommunitiesincreased, but also the suspicious relations with the Arians, worried therepresentatives of the central power. Emperor Constans, however, believedhimselftobesufficientlyskilfulandconvincingtorestorepeaceandsuppresstheAfricanschism.Thatiswhyhetriedtoaddressthesituationwithdelicacy,by luring the Donatists with significant material aids, to persuade them toreturnpeacefullyintothebosomoftheUniversalChurch.Therefore,PaulandMacariuswereconsideredtobetheartisansofunity,taskedwithpreparingtheunificationofthetwoChurches,givingalmstocommunitiesandgenerousgiftstomoreinfluentialDonatistbishops.

Donatuswasresentfuloftheofficials’attitudeandwhenPaulandMacariustried to get in touchwith him to complete the investigation, the schismaticleaderissaidtohavereplied‘quidestimperatoricumecclesia’(whathastheEmperortodowiththeChurch?)40.Moreover,heorderedhissubordinateclergytoignorethedelegation’srequestsoranyhelpthatthetwonotarieswouldgivethem.Also,tojustifyhisattitudetowardstheEmperor’smessengers,arumourwasstartedandspread,thatduringtheEucharisticcelebrationledbyBishopGratus, theywouldputastatueofConstansonthealtarandoffered incensesacrifices41.ThisnewelementledtoanevenstrongerantagonismofthemasseswhodespisedidolatrywithalltheirsoulsandwhoassociatedPaulandMacariuswiththepersecutionofDiocletianandthetetrarchy42.39Monceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,33.40OptatusdeMileve,LibriVII,III,3,p.73.41OptatusdeMileve,LibriVII,III,12,p.100.42Frend,TheDonatistChurch,p.178.

DRAGOȘBOICU

96

QuicklyunderstandingthattheycannotreachanyagreementwiththeDonatists,PaulandMacariusreportedthis to theEmperor,whohadalreadyreceivedareprimandfromDonatus43.Consequently,inthemiddleoftheyear347Constanspromulgatedaunionedict,commandingthemergingofthetworivalChurches,or,moreprecisely,theabolitionofallschismaticcommunitiesandthetransferofthebuildingsandothergoodstotheCatholics.

On August 15th 347, a proconsular edict was published in Carthage,which includedmeasures toenforce the imperialdecree,whichreprised theprovisionsofConstantine’sdocumentof317:theconfiscationofchurches,theexileofDonatistsbishops,andthebanonrebaptism44.

Onthisoccasion,aDonatistnamedMaximianustoreupthedocument.Asaresult,hewasdetainedandsubjectedtotorture,whileanotherdissident,Isaac,whohadwitnessedtheincidentandmockedtheCatholics,wasalsoarrestedandtorturedwildly, dying the same day. On the orders of the proconsul, the bodies of bothDonatistswerethrownintothesea,incitingthedissidentsevenmore45.

AfterdefeatingtheweakresistancearoundCarthage,PaulandMacariuswenttoNumidia,whereastheyadvancedtheywerefacedwithincreasinghostility.ThefeelingwasfuelledbytherumourthattheimperialnotarieshadthetaskofforcingtheDonatiststosacrificeinfrontofEmperorConstans’sstatue.Thatiswhy,whenPaulandMacariusarrivedinisolatedvillagesorfarmstheyfoundthemabandoned.SchismaticsweregroupingaroundBishopDonatusofBagai,whoalsocalledintheCircumcelliontostrengthenthisfortress,gatheringsuppliesandpreparingforanarmedconfrontation.

Takingthisintoaccount,PaulandMacariusdidnothesitatetoappealtoSilvestrus,comesAfricae,askingforadditionaltroopstoconfronttheCircumcellionsledbyDonatus.TheimperialarmyoccupiedtheoffensivepositionsandengagedtheDonatists,avengingthetorturestowhichagroupofmilitaryscoutshadbeensubjectedthenightbefore.Theofficerscouldnotdoanythingtostoptheirtroopsfrom devastating the Bagai citadel and its population. During themassacre,Bishop Donatus was captured and murdered, the schismatics immediatelyattributinghimthequalityofmartyrandveneratinghimassuch.

Demoralizedbythisdefeat,theDonatistbishopsgatheredtogetherinacouncilanddecidedtosendtenbishopstoMacariustocondemntheviolenceandtoseekasolutiontorestorepeace.ThemeetingwiththeRomanofficialtookplaceinVegesala,inthenorthoftheAuresMountains,butitfailed.TheDonatistbishopsinsultedMacarius,whoimmediatelywentintoretaliation:heordered the bishops be beatenpubliclywith clubs, thenhe released nine ofthem,whileMarculus,thebishopwhohadstoodoutduetohisunusualinsolence,43Monceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,34.44JacquesBernardNkoaLebogo,Laquerellesurlebaptême:Lesdivisionsdel’Églisechrétienneafricaine(Paris:ÉditionsL'Harmattan,2011),89.

45Monceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,35‐36.


97

wasdetainedasaprisonerandparadedlikeatrophythroughtheplaceswhereMacariustravelled,inspiringfearamongtheDonatists.However,W.H.C.Frendandseveralotherhistoriansplacethemeetingbetweenthedissidentbishopsand the Roman official on June 29th 34746, sixweeks before the incident inCarthage,whichwouldmeanthattheconfrontationinBagaitookplaceearlierthatsummer,beforetheproconsularedictwaspublished.

It is certain that Macarius has been able to appease the dissidentcommunitiesbyterror,puttinganendtotheresistanceandpreventing,atleastforthetimebeing,thefutureviolenceoftheCircumcellions.Finally,whentheimperialtroopsreachedNovaPetra47,Marculusthrewhimselfoffthecliffs,or,accordingtoDonatist sources, hewas helped by soldiers to jump48. Schismatics immediatelyproclaimedhimamartyr,honouringhisrelicsandhismemorialdaywithpiety,andtakingpilgrimagestotheplacewherehislifeended.Intheautumnof1933,duringthearchaeologicalexcavationsinKsarel‐Kelb(Algeria)–theoldVegeselasettlement–theinscription‘memoriadomniMarchuli’wasfoundtotheleftoftheBasilica’snave,andsincethisbuildingundoubtedlybelongedtotheDonatists,theresearchersidentifiedMarculuswiththebishopkilledduringMacarius’scampaign49.

This violent march led by the ‘artisans of unity’ created a negativeimpressionamongbothDonatistsandCatholicswhowereashamedtoproclaimtheunionoftheChurchbasedoncruelactscommittedespeciallybyMacarius.In fact, the impact of these events on theNorth African collectivementalitywouldbesosignificantthat,fromthatpointon,theywouldrefertothe‘MacarianAge’ (Macariana tempora)or ‘Macarianpersecution’ (Macarianapersecutio),andtheCatholicswouldfromthenonbecalledtheMacarians(macariani),thegroupofMacarius(parsMacari)ortheChurchofMacarius(MacarianaEcclesia)50.TheDonatistswouldcrystallizetheirnon‐violentoppositionthroughwritingsbelongingto thegenreofActaMartirica,meant toglorify thevictims(PassioMaximianietIsaaci51andPassioMarculi)andexpresscontemptforthepersecutorspowerlesstocorruptthepuresoulsofthemartyrs.TheRomanauthoritiesaredepictedasagentsofthedevilinthefightagainstthesaintsofGod52.EmperorConstanswasnotsparedbytheauthorsofthesetextsthatportrayedhimas‘thetyrant’and‘theforerunnerofAntichrist’(praecursorAntichristi)53.Thetwo

46Frend,TheDonatistChurch,p.179.47Optatus,LibriVII,III,6andAugustin,ContraCresconiumIII,49,54,statethatMarculuswaskilled.48PassioMarculi,PL8:765.49HippolyteDelehaye,“DomnusMarculus”,AnalectaBollandiana,vol.53(1935):81‐89.50Monceaux,Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne,37‐38.51PassioMaximianiet Isaaciseemstobea letteraddressedbysomeonenamedMacrobiusto thedissidents.W.H.C.FrendidentifiestheauthorwiththeMacrobiustheDonatistBishopofRome.

52Frend,MartyrdomandPersecution,554.53 Passio Marculi, PL 8:761A: “de Constantis regis tyrannica domo et de palatii arce pollutumMacarianaepersecutionismurmurincrepui”.

DRAGOȘBOICU

98

beastssenttoAfrica(duabusbestiisadAfricammissis54)showanunimaginablecruelty,andthemeritofthosewhobearthesufferingisevengreater,asitismadeclearedinthispassageofPassioMaximianietIsaaci:

‘Thustherewasthewarbetweenthefleshandthecorporalpunishment,betweentheprofanersandthedevotee,betweenthevirtuesofthesoulandthemutilation,betweenthesoldierofChristandthesoldiersofthedevil,betweentheonewhosuffersandthejudge,and,ashe(Maximianus)foughtso against them, he was worthy to fight even more gloriously with themultitudeofsufferingsandenemies,sothatthroughoneconfrontationhewouldwinmorethanasinglevictory’55.

For Donatists everywhere, the heroism displayed by the ‘martyrs’

legitimizedtheirradicalpositionevenmore,evenifatthatmomenttheycouldonlybe thehelplesswitnessesof this forcedunion.DonatusMagnushimselfwasforcedtoleaveCarthageandAfricaandlivedinexileuntilhisdeathin355,andforthisreasonthedissidentsproclaimedhimamartyrfallenforthecauseoftheChurchofthepure.

Despitethenominalvictoryachievedbythe imperial troops, theCatholicChurchfailedtocapitalizeonthistriumph,andBishopGratusofCarthagedelayedseizingtheimpulsecreatedbyPaulandMacarius.In348or349,Gratusconvenedasynodwith50bishops,includingsome‘repented’Donatists,buthefailedtoasserthimself as the leader of theAfricanChurch, asAurelian orAugustin56would doseveraldecadeslater.Apartfromthe12canonsonecclesiasticaldiscipline–asignofthelaxitythatappearedduringtheschism–twocanonsreferredspecificallytotheDonatists:oneforbiddingtherepetitionofbaptism(can.1)andtheotherpreventingtheworshipasmartyrsofthosewhokilledorconsciouslyexposedthemselvestosituationsthatwerefatal(can.2)57.

The Donatists quickly recovered their lost positions, waiting for theright moment to manifest their ideas again. Even at the Synod of Carthage(348/349),theCatholicBishopofMadauroscomplainedthatunderthepretextofreconciliationandunification,the‘repented’DonatistBishopstolehisentirecommunity,asituationcommonlyfoundinNumidia58,foreshadowingtherebellionofthereignofEmperorJuliantheApostate.

54PassioMarculi,PL8:761A.55PassioMaximiani et Isaaci,PL 8:769: “Sic illic bellum gestum est inter corpus et poenas, intersacrilegosetdevotum,interaminiviresetlamiantes,intermillitemChristietmillitesdiaboli,interpatientemet iudicemetunussufficitafflictuscontra tantumdimicaresuppliciorumhostiumquegloriosiusmultitudinem,utinunocertaminenonunamvictoriamreportasset”.

56Frend,TheDonatistChurch,183.57KarlJosephvonHefele,Ahistoryofthecouncilsofthechurch:fromtheoriginaldocuments,V,70,vol.II,translatedbyHenryNutcombeOxenham(Edinburgh:T&TClark,1896),400‐402.

58Frend,TheDonatistChurch,184‐185.


99

ConclusionsIronically,theidealofunityofallinonegreatEucharisticcommunion

has transformed itselfover time intooneof themaincausesof theChurch’sfragmentationineversmallerentities,withalmostirreconcilablestandpoints.Whenthesynodalpathprovedtobeinadequate,bothEmperorConstantinetheGreatandhissuccessorstriedtoachievetheunityoftheChurcheitherbydiplomaticmeansorbyimposinganarbitrarydecisionbyforce.Thishasfurthercontributedtotheantagonismofthepartiesinvolvedintheconflict.Thissituationprovesoverdecades that secularauthorityhassometimessoughtanddefended thevaluesofChristianitywithgreatinterest,whiletheprideoftheclergyhasdeepenedthecrisesoftheChurch.Underthepretextofexcessivemoralrigour,suchclergyperpetuated the schismandevenencouragedappallingatrocitieswhichhadnothingincommonwiththespiritualandtheliturgical‐dogmatictreasuretheyclaimtoprotect,andunfortunatelythiskindofsituationsarestillvisibletoday.

REFERENCESA’Becket, John Joseph. “Agonistici.” In The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 1. New York:

RobertAppletonCompany,1907.Augustin.ContraGaudentium,I.28.32,PL43:725.———.Epistola93,43,PL33:329‐330.———.PsalmuscontrapartemDonati,147,154–162(PL43:28).Beaver,R.Pierce.“TheDonatistCircumcellions.”ChurchHistory4,no2(1935):125.Bernard, Jacques. Lebogo, Nkoa. La querelle sur le baptême: Les divisions de l’Église

chrétienneafricaine.Paris:ÉditionsL'Harmattan,2011.Chifăr,Nicolae.“Mișcareadonatistășipoliticareligioasăconstantiniană(TheDonatist

MovementandConstantine'sReligiousPolicy).”RevistaTeologică,no.4(2012):129‐130.

Delehaye,Hippolyte.“DomnusMarculus.”AnalectaBollandiana53(1935):81‐89.EpistolaConstantiniadepiscoposNumidas.InH.v.Soden,UrkundenzurEntstehungsgeschichte

desDonatismus,1913,reed.byH.v.Campenhausen,53‐56.Berlin,1950.Epistola Constantini Imperatoris ad Caecilianum. In H.v. Soden, Urkunden zur

EntstehungsgeschichtedesDonatismus,1913,reed.byH.v.Campenhausen,8‐9.Berlin,1950.

Epistola Constantini Imperatoris ad episcopos (321). In H.v. Soden, Urkunden zurEntstehungsgeschichtedesDonatismus,1913,reed.byH.v.Campenhausen,52.Berlin,1950.

Eusebius. Life of Constantine, introduction, translation, and commentary by AverilCameronandStuartG.Hall.Oxford,NewYork,1999.

Fournier, Éric. “Constantine and Episcopal Banishment: Continuity and Change in theSettlementofChristianDisputes.”InClericalExileinLateAntiquity.ed.JuliaHillner,JörgUlrichandJakobEngberg,47‐66.FrankfurtamMain:PeterLang,2016.

DRAGOȘBOICU

100

Franks, Robert M. “The Dynasty of Constantine Down to 363.” In The Cambridgecompanion to the Age of Constantine, edited by Noel Lenski, 99. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2006.

Frend,W.H.C.TheDonatistChurch.AMovementofProtestinRomanNorthAfrica.Oxford,1952.

Hahn,Traugott.TyconiusStudien.EinBeitragyurKirchen‐undDogmengeschichtedes4.Jahrhunderts.Leipzig,1900.

Hefele, Karl Joseph von. A history of the councils of the church: from the originaldocuments.V,70,vol. II, translatedbyHenryNutcombeOxenham.Edinburgh:T&TClark,1896.

Isidor.Deofficiisecclesiasticis,II,15,PL83:796‐797Lenski,Noel.“ConstantineandtheDonatists.ExploringtheLimitsofReligiousToleration.”In

Religiöse Toleranz. 1700 Jahre nach dem Edikt vonMailand edited by MartinWallraff,ColloquiaRaurica.Berlin/Boston:DeGruyter,2016.

Lepelley, Claude. “Iuvenes et circconcellions: les derniers sacrifices humains de l’Afriqueantique.”Antiquitésafricaines,vol.15(1980):261‐271.

Meyendorff,John.Imperialunityandchristiandivisions.TheChurch450‐680A.D.NewYork:St.Vladimir’sSeminaryPress,1989.

Monceaux,Paul.Histoirelittérairedel’Afriquechrétienne.Vol.4.Paris,1912.OptatusdeMileve(Afrus).DeSchismateDonatistarumAdversusParmenianum,LibriVII,

III,4,CSEL26,editedbyCarolZiwsa.Viena,1893.PassioDonati,VII,PL8:755.PassioMarculi,PL8:765.Philastrius.DiversarumHaereseonLiber,85(PL12:1197‐1198).PleșuAndrei.„Undialogdesprecurajșicompromisuri.”(I)https://pressone.ro/andrei‐

plesu‐la‐70‐de‐ani‐un‐dialog‐despre‐curaj‐si‐compromisuri‐i/,accessedMay20,2019.

Shaw,Brent.AfricanChristiansandSectarianHatredintheAgeofAugustine.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2011.

———.SacredViolence.AfricanChristiansandSectarianHatredintheAgeofAugustine.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2011.

Tudor,Dumitru.Figurideîmpărațiromani.Vol.2.București:Ed.EnciclopedicăRomână,1974.

Vălean,DanielNicolae.Erezii,controverseșischismeîncreștinismulsecolelorI‐XI.Cluj‐Napoca:Limes,2009.

WFrend,H.C.MartyrdomandPersecutiontheEarlyChurch.AStudyofaConflictfromtheMaccabeestoDonatus.Oxford:BasilBlackwell,1965.


III.PRACTICALTHEOLOGY

COLOURINMURALPAINTING:

VIRTUEINCONSERVATIONANDRESTORATION

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR*

ABSTRACT.Thisstudyanalyzesanessentialpartofthepaintingtechnologyregardingthecolours,theirvariousoriginsanduses,criticalfactorsindeterminingthe finalaspectof thepaintings.Numerousvarietiesofcolouredmaterials differfrom each other in terms of brightness, mattness, transparency, coveringpower,etc.Thus, identifyingthechemicalcompositionsofcoloursbymeansoflaboratorytestsismandatoryintherestorationinterventions.Onlyutilizingthisscientificmethod can colouringmaterials be classified. Through the specializedinterventions of mural painting restorers, chromatic truths are uncovered andvaluablecontribution isbrought to theknowledgearrayregardingmethods andcoloursinpainting.Inmuralpaintingcoloursymbolizestraditionandinnovationandtheartofrestorationennoblesandturnsalmostforgottenmasterpiecesintoworksofartworthyofcontemplation.Keywords: mural painting, colour, investigation, conservation, restoration,chromatic

„IfdrawingisofSpiritandcolouroftheSenses,youmustdrawfirst,tocultivatethespirit

andtobeabletoleadcolourintospiritualpaths”‐Matisse.

Muralpaintinginvolvesaseriesoftechnologicalprocessesthatencompassthe science ofmethods and also thematerials usage and processingmeans.Throughrestoration,nomatterthetechniqueused,theoriginalappearanceofthe painting often alters. These changes can be caused by historical events,natural calamities, repainting, vandalism, incompatibility betweenmaterials,

*AssistantProfessor,Babes‐BolyaiUniversity,FacultyofOrthodoxTheology.E‐mail:[email protected]

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR

102

etc.Intheprocessofunravellingthem,historicaldocumentsandinvestigationmethodsspecifictorestorationareused,allwiththepurposeofcollectingtheinformationneededtoestablishtheinterventionmethods.

Examiningthewallsurfacesanddrawingupaninterventionprojectinthe process of conservation‐restoration are preliminary steps in finding outthecausesofthechangesintheaestheticsofthepaintings,whichdeterminetherequiredinterventionmethods.Inspectingthepaintlayercanrevealsurprisingdata regarding the buildingof themonumentor thehistorical events itwassubjectto1.

At the same time, the stratigraphic examination2 of mural paintinguncoverstheeventualneedofemergencyinterventionsmeanttostopdegradationandeliminate itsunwantedeffects.Over time,muralpainting ismarkedby “theimplacable effects of historical time”3 and the technique used to create thepaintingis“thefirstkeywhichopensthepathofactioninrestoration4”.

Anaturalageingofpigments5oreventhatofmortars(thebaseofthepaintlayer)leavesitsmarkonthesurfaceofthepainting.Thematerialageingphenomenon is inevitable and leads to irreversible degradation withundesirable effects; it canbedelayedby the interventionof restorers, but itcanneverbestoppedoreliminated.Also,throughageing,primersandbinderslosetheircohesionpropertiesandthus,thecolourlayerbecomesbrittleoritexfoliates.Muralpaintingexposedtoanaggressivemicroclimate6issubjecttoextensivedegradationprocessesinthebaselayer,resultingincracksorcracknetworkswhichcanreachthesurfaceofthepaintinglayer.

An important part of thepainting technology is knowing the colours,their variousorigins7 anduse, key factors indetermining the final aspect of

1OliviuBoldura,Movileștii:RomanianHistoryandSpirituality,vol.III(Suceava:Mușatinii,2007),151.2Thepreservationstatusoftheensemblecanonlybeestablishedbyexaminationandbyaseriesofinvestigations on the materials used, the execution technique, the identification and timelyinterventions,thetypeofdegradationanditscauses.Themonumentistobeinspectedallalongtheinterventionandinthecaseofpaintings,anynew,unpredictableissuewillbeanalysedinorderidentify the etiopathology of degradation, Corina Popa, „Restoration and Research. Case Study:Mural ensembles of Berca, Potlogi,Măldărești and Tg.Hurezi”, inTheNotebooksofRestoration(Bucharest:ACS,2014)123.

3IoanDarida,“TheRestorationofMuralPaintingTopoloveni‐Inuri”,inTheNotebooksofRestoration,(Bucharest:ACS,2014),164.

4AncaBratu,MuralPaintingofMaramures:PaintingCraftsmenandStylisticInterferences(Bucharest:ACS),333.

5C.Săndulescu‐Verna,MaterialsandPaintingTechnique(Timișoara:Marineasa,2000),67.6 IulianOlteanu,GabrielaOlteanu,“NationalBankofRomania”, in inTheNotebooksofRestoration,(Bucharest:ACS,2014),20.

7Săndulescu‐Verna,MaterialsandPaintingTechnique,67.

COLOURINMURALPAINTING:VIRTUEINCONSERVATIONANDRESTORATION

103

thepaintings.Numerousvarietiesofcolouredmaterialsdifferfromeachotherin terms of brightness, mattness, transparency, covering power, etc. Thus,identifyingthechemicalcompositionsofcoloursbymeansoflaboratorytestsismandatoryintherestorationinterventions.Onlybymeansofthisscientificmethodcancolouringmaterialsbeclassified8.

Colourdegradationinmuralworksofartcanalsohaveinteractivecausessuchas:deficienciesinpigmentmanufacturing,highatmospherichumidityatthe time of painting, bacteria and fungi appearing in organic binders inunventilated dark places9. At the same time, repainting seriously affects theintegrityoftheoriginalworkofartandalsotheusageofimpropermaterialswhich coverparts adjacent to thepainting results in the lossof theoriginalpaintingmaterial.Thediscoveryofmuralensembleshiddenunderrepaintedsurfacesentailstheneedtoreconsiderthevalueoftherestorationwork.

Inthecontextofvarioustypesofdegradationintermsofimagealterationsdeterminedbythedegreeofexposure,theclimaticagentscanstrongly influencethepreservationconditionofoutdoorpaintings.Thewaterresultingfromrainormeltedsnowthatwash theoutdoorpainting, leads toseveredegradationandmayaggravatesomeconstructionandstructureproblems10.

Considerablesurfacesofpaintingsarelostduetostationaryhumidity,especiallyinthelowerpartsofwalls,phenomenonwhichleadstothemacerationofthebaselayer,theemergenceofgapsanderosion,whichultimatelycausethe loss of colour. Humidity caused by condensation, to which humans arecontributingbyusingthemonument, indicatesthe lackofproperventilationanduniformtemperatures.Thedegradationoftherooftriggerstheinfiltrationof humidity,which in turndetermines themigrationof substances from thewallmass to thesurfaceof thepainting, thusgeneratingsometimesmassivelossofthepaintinglayerandthedevelopingofbiologicattacks11.

Thus,atmospherichumidityandtemperaturecombinedwiththewallhumidityand temperature,atmosphericpollutionand thematerialsused for themuralpaintingrepresentcausesof thepainting layerdegradation.Aesthetically,8Ibid.,70‐72,Coloursareclassifiedaccordingtoappearance,originorsource,i.e.naturalorsynthetic.Theyarealsoclassifiedbasedontheirchemicalcomposition,i.e.organicorinorganicsandaccordingto the characteristic of the colouringmaterials: coveringpower, resistance, the consumptionofbinders,hydrophobia,toxicity,grindinganddrying.

9Boldura,Movileștii,157.10OliviuBoldura,MuralPaintinginNorthernMoldavia.AestheticModificationsandRestoration,(Bucharest:ACS,2013),16.

11FloreaOprea,BiologyfortheConservationandRestorationoftheCulturalHeritage(Bucharest:Maiko,2006),10.

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR

104

thechromaticrelationsundergoalterationsbasedonoften irreversible chemicaleffects,suchasoxidation,whichreducestheshineofthemetalfoilscoveringthesurfaces.

The insituanalysiscanhighlightmultiplecauses,oftenmixed, in thedevelopmentof colour layer alteration.Construction flaws leadover time towall cracksanddislocationsand therefore tocolour layerdeterioration. Regularcleaningcauseairdraftsanddustparticlestomoveandadheretothepaintingsurface,whereasbywipingorwashingthewalls,manypaintedsurfacesfadeaway,sometimescompletely.

Thepermanentusageofabuildingwheninpoorconservationstateisanotherfactorthatcanweakentheintegrityofthemuralpainting.Thesourcesofdegradationshouldberemovedbeforeanyworkofrestorationisperformed,but failure toobserverestorationprinciples12entailsadditionaldegradation.Cleaningthemuralsurfaces,consolidatingthepaintinglayerandperformingchromaticintegration,thoughmotivatedbyaesthetics,mustfollowsomescientificprinciplessoastobestpreserveandprotecttherespectiveworkofart13.

Theinterventiononmuralpaintingwiththemostimpactingvisualeffectisthe chromatic integrationof the colour layer, action that cannot be finalizedwithout thorough examination of the support layers. In allmural paintings, nomatter the tradition, an innovating concept emerges14, thus the process ofchromaticintegrationmustbeperformedresponsibly,inlinewiththespecifictechniquesusedtocreatethepainting.

There have been caseswhen historically and artistically valuable muralsurfaceswerelostinhistoricalcontexts15,ormerelyduetounqualifiedhumanintervention.Changingthearchitecturalshapebyoversizingthewindows,buildingoreliminatingthepulpit,changingtheshapeofarches,buildingannexspacesarejustafewelementsthatcanleadtoconsiderablelossesofpaintedsurfaces.Duringthesetypesofremodellingthecolourcoatdegradeswhenexposedtowhitewashunskilfullyappliedorconstructionmaterialdebris16.

Another factorwithsevererepercussionsonthepainting layeris theusageofmixed techniques anddry retouches17.Applying colour layers afterthecalciumhydroxidecarbonationprocesshasended,usingdifferenttypesof

12CesareBrandi,TheTheoryofRestoration(Bucharest:Meridiane,1997),109.13I.OlteanuandG.Olteanu,“NationalBankofRomania”,24‐25.14Bratu,MuralPaintingofMaramures,82.15Ibid.,152.16Darida,“TheRestorationofMuralPaintingTopoloveni‐Inuri”,165.17C.Săndulescu‐Verna,MaterialsandPaintingTechnique,384.


105

materials18tobuildthewalls,havinguneventhicknessesofmortarorplasternotcoveringthesurfaceshomogenously,candamagethepaintingduetocohesionissues.Theseflawsmakethecolourlayerreactdifferentlyduetophysicalandchemicalcharacteristicsspecifictoeachtechniqueandthustheconservationrequiresadditionalcare.

Toconclude,wemaysaythatthecolourlayercanbeaffectedfromoneortwodirections.Thefirstonereferstoproblemsidentifiedontheoutersideofthewall,asmentionedabove,whichcauserepercussionsontheinteriorofthewall.Theseconddirectionreferstotheinsidepartofthewall,thesurfaceofthecolourlayer,whichcanbeaffectedbysuperficialerosionsandpolishing,especially inthelowerareaswherefurnitureisplacedorpeoplerubagainstthewalls19.

Themajor variances betweenmural painting techniques require thesupport layer to be handled differently, otherwise serious alterations andchromaticmigrationofthepaintinglayermayoccur,proofthattheexecutiontechnique is flawed.Restoration carried out by unskilledpeople can lead tothe deterioration ofmural surfaces. Thus, washing areas affected by smokewithofftheshelfproductsandthenrepaintingthosesurfaceswithouthavingconsolidated the pre‐existing colour layer, combining mixed techniques (waterbasedandoilbasedcolours)result instylisticandchromaticalterationsthatdonotmatchtheoriginal.

Theanalysedmortarsoftenbringinformationregardingthecausesofmural decorations deterioration, execution methodology, constituent materialsandvariousparticularities.Slakedlimeobtainedfrompoorqualitylimestone,withimpuritiesortracesofclay,lowquantityorlackofhempfibres,tracesofvegetation, all lead to thedegradationof theplaster layer.Materialsused inthisway,orinthepresenceofhumidity,damagesthecoloursupportlayerandconsequentlythecolourdeterioratesduetofissures,cracks,gapsofdifferentdepthsandsurfaces,macerations,erosionsandfriability.

Among the visible damaging of the colour layer we can mentionpowderiness and exfoliation, two phenomenon with complex causes whichultimately lead to thedisappearingof the layer. Insomecaseswhen chromaticsfade,wecanstillfindlegibletracesofthedrawing.Evenif“thevisualimpactis

18TheoMureșan,“MuralPainting‘afresco’onStone”,ininTheNotebooksofRestoration(Bucharest:ACS,2014),209,“Thedifferentreactionsofstoneandbricktohumidityandtemperaturefactorsdemandtechnologicalcaution:masonryhomogeneity(...)Wemustacknowledgethetechnicaldifficultyimposedbyastonesupport,byaninhomogeneoussupport,theplacementofthehomogenousareasofstoneorbrick,thecompositioncharacteristics,thepresenceorabsenceofpreparationlayers”.

19Bratu,MuralPaintingofMaramures,333.

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR

106

duetothebrightnessofthecolours”20andsometimesthestratigraphicerosionallowsustoseeasuperficialbumpthatcontoursashape21,apieceofclothingoraface,reconstructionbasedonsurfaceswouldgobeyondtheprinciplesofrestoration.Shapeandcolour,differentfromeachother,areperceptualmeansthatwe can recover through specific operations, without altering the authenticappearance.Consolidatingthecolourlayermustbedoneresponsibly,soastopreventthechromaticlayersfromaccidentallyandirreversiblybeingremoved.

Aestheticalterationsoftheoriginalpaintingareduealsotousingunstablepigmentsinthepresenceofenvironmentalfactors.Samplesofpigmentsfromtheaffectedareaandcomparedtests22, highlighted special caseswhere chromaticalterationisclearlydelimited.Thus,weconsiderthatinordertopreservethecolourlayerovertime,eliminatingthesourcesthatenablethedamagingandchoosinghighqualitymaterialsareparamount.

Pigment alteration throughphysical and chemical irreversible processesappearsat exposure tohigh temperaturesandsmoke, especially inareaswherecandlesare litor inadequateheatingsystemsareused.Whenpigments turnbrownorblack,theoriginalaspectofthepaintingislostandthechromaticrangebecomesnarrow.Besidesvariousfactorsthatchangetheauthenticexpressionofimage,wecanidentifyanothercause–themanhimself,theonewhoissupposedtoactuallyprotecttheworkofart.Wecanoftennoticeincisions,accidentalorpremeditatedscratches,namecarving,datesandmessages,whichdegradethepainting.

Specializedrestorersperformastratigraphicexaminationofthemuralpainting,whichidentifiesthetypeofmaterialsused,thestagesofthepaintingprocess and the execution techniques and methods applied. The technical

20RudolfArmnhem,ArtandVisualPerception.APsychologyofCreativeSight,trans.LuminițaCiocan(Iași:Polirom,2011),317.

21 Ibid.“Perse,shapeisbettermeansof identificationthancolour,notonlybecauseitoffersa lotmoretypesofqualitativedifferences,butalsobecausethedistinctivefeaturesofshapesaremoreresistanttoenvironmentalvariations.(...)Shapeisnotaffectedbychangesinbrightnessorcolourintheenvironment,whereasthelocalcolourofobjectsisverysensitivetothem”.

22 Boldura,Movileștii, 155. In order to understand the process of enamel alteration at, pigmentsampleswerecollectedinthewhitechalkyareasandtheblueonesandwereexaminedunderaMC5microscope.Aftercomparingparticlesofthesamestrengthandsize,apowderingphenomenonwasnoticed for thediscolouredpigmentascompared to theparticlesofunalteredenamel.Thealtered pigment does notmaintain physical properties similar to the unaltered one, becomingpowdery.Thisphenomenonisexplainedbythewaythepigmentisprepared.Iftheproportionsofthesubstancescomposingtheglassarenotrespected,manufacturingflawsappear.Followingitsinteractionwithwater,theenamelwillhavealargernumberofalkaliswhichinteractwithcobalt,resulting in the lossof itsbluecolourand indiminishedresistance toattacksof environmentalfactors.


107

procedureofmuralpaintingsiscloselyrelatedtothecompositionofthesupportlayerandthis is the firstoneof thepaintingconservationparameters23. Stylisticoptionsrevealedthroughspecificrestorationprocedures24,suchastheusageofgrout,drawingandcolourtofillinthegapareas,ensureaunitaryimageofthepainting.

Colourisavaluabletestimony,nomatterwhatartmovementitbelongsto.Ittransmits“thesavouroftime”throughtonesandshades.Thewaycolourisappliedisproofoftheassimilationofthe“localartisticinheritancewhichpersistslike a subjacent lode on which characteristics of various styles will graft overtime”25.Theproblemsfacedintheattempttopreserveartisticparticularitiesandcertaintypesofalterations,canfundamentallyinfluenceaestheticappreciations.

Limitingchromaticinterventionsandcarefullyemphasizingthecoloursophisticationdenotetherestorer’sprofessionalism.Herendersallthechromaticbrightness of the past, ensuring the painting conservation26. “All the factorsfavouringthedegradationprocess,thenaturalonesbutalsounskilledhumanintervention,deeplyinfluencetherestorers‘decisions”27.Theencounterwithmural painting contributes to finding a state of mindwhere preserving theindividualityandimagequalityisparamount.

Throughout history we can identify various artistic and aestheticconceptsthatledtothedisappearanceofnumerousmuralpaintingswithrichpelliclesofcolour,appliedusingdiverse techniques.Therefore, therestorers’efforts should be invested in preserving as much chromatic substance aspossible, insuchawaythatovertimeitcanshowthatpigment–basisofallcolours,definesthetechnique,completesandperfectsthemonument.

Withoutcolour,wecannotspeakofmuralpaintingandthe“aestheticinterpretationisdeterminedfirstandforemostbytheimage’sabilitytocommunicatetheartisticmessage”28.Buildinganedificeinvolvesresponsibility,thecorrectattitudewhen choosing buildingmaterials, observing the steps and timesofexecution.Failuretofollowthesestepsrendersthepaintingconfuseintermsofchromaticquality.

23PiaStinghe,“Muralpaintinginoil,”inTheNotebooksofRestoration(Bucharest:ACS,2014),23424 Ibid., 233, “One of the fundamental principles of contemporary restoration is tomaintain andpreserve themonuments in linewith their original individuality. During restoration,materialscompatible with the old ones and traditional work techniques and any intervention must bediscreetandreversible,itspurposebeingtoreconstructtheoriginalaspectofthemonument.Therestorermustactlikeadoctor:findthecausesofdegradationandremovethemandestablishthemostappropriatemethodsofinterventioninsuchawayastoensureitlastsovertime”.

25DanaJenei,GothicMuralPaintinginTransylvania(Bucharest:NoiMediaPrint,2007),47.26CorinaPopa,MedievalMonumentsinOltenia(Bucharest:ACS,2011),104.27Bratu,MuralPaintingofMaramures,333.28Boldura,MuralPaintinginNorthernMoldavia,15.

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR

108

ImagesduringthemuralpaintingatTheSummerAltar,BixadMonastery,Satu‐MareCounty.

Therestorationofmuralworksofartisamultidisciplinaryapproach.

Theconservationandrestorationofmuralpaintingsrequiresthejointeffortsof a restorer, an architect, an art history specialist, a chemist, a biologist, ahydrologist,aconstructionengineerandlast,butnotleast,apainter.Anefficientworkgroupwillproduceexactinformationonallthepaintingcharacteristicsand thisway, the final intervention –chromatic integration,will shapevisualharmony.Theactionsof therestorersareconditionedbythemethodologyofeachmuralpaintingandsupporttechnique.

Theconservationandrestorationofmuralpaintingsthatembellishina uniqueway, bymeans of stylistic and technical elements, buildings, churches,chapels,librariesorpalaces,contributeaswitnessesofthehumancreativevalue.“Once restored, the painted decoration reveals the true artistic and historicsignificanceandhighlightstheauthenticityoftheentirearchitecturalensemble”.2929Bratu,MuralPaintingofMaramures,337.


109

Theseensemblesareimpressivethroughtheirmonumentality,style,proportions,chosenthemesorotherelements,buttheartisticparticularityisreachedthemostwhentheyareemphasizedbychromaticcongruence.

Through the specialized interventions of mural painting restorers,chromatic truths are uncovered and valuable contribution is brought to theknowledgearrayregardingmethodsandcoloursinpainting.Weconcludethatfor the final presentationof eachworkof art, the decorativepurposeof thepaintingmustbe taken into consideration, in suchaway that the chromaticintegration grasps the authentic image.Inmural painting colour symbolizestraditionandinnovationandtheartofrestorationennoblesandturnsalmostforgottenmasterpiecesintoworksofartworthyofcontemplation.

REFERENCESArmnhem,Rudolf.ArtandVisualPerception.APsychologyofCreativeSight.Translated

byLuminițaCiocan.Iași:Polirom,2011[InRomanian].Boldura, Oliviu.Movileștii:RomanianHistoryand Spirituality.Vol. III. Suceava: Mușatinii,

2007[InRomanian].———.MuralPaintinginNorthernMoldavia.AestheticModificationsandRestoration.

Bucharest:ACS,2013[InRomanian].Brandi,Cesare.TheTheoryofRestoration.Bucharest:Meridiane,1997[InRomanian].Bratu,Anca.MuralPaintingofMaramures:PaintingCraftsmenandStylistic Interferences.

Bucharest:ACS[InRomanian].Darida,Ioan.“TheRestorationofMuralPaintingTopoloveni‐Inuri.”InTheNotebooks

ofRestoration.Bucharest:ACS,2014[InRomanian].Jenei,Dana.GothicMuralPainting inTransylvania.Bucharest:NoiMediaPrint,2007

[InRomanian].Mureșan,Theo.“MuralPainting ‘afresco’onStone.”InTheNotebooksofRestoration.

Bucharest:ACS,2014[InRomanian].Olteanu,IulianandGabrielaOlteanu.“NationalBankofRomania.”InTheNotebooksof

Restoration.Bucharest:ACS,2014[InRomanian].Oprea, Florea.Biology for theConservationandRestorationof theCulturalHeritage.

Bucharest:Maiko,2006[InRomanian].Popa,Corina.“RestorationandResearch.CaseStudy:MuralensemblesofBerca,Potlogi,

MăldăreștiandTg.Hurezi.”InTheNotebooksofRestoration.Bucharest:ACS,2014[InRomanian].

VICTORIAGRĂDINAR

110

———.MedievalMonumentsinOltenia.Bucharest:ACS,2011[InRomanian].Săndulescu‐Verna, C.MaterialsandPaintingTechnique. Timișoara:Marineasa, 2000

[InRomanian].Stinghe,Pia.“Muralpaintinginoil.”InTheNotebooksofRestoration(Bucharest:ACS,

2014)[InRomanian].


V.VARIA

KYIVTHEOLOGICALACADEMYIN1869‐1884:ANATTEMPTTOCOMBINETHEOLOGICALAND

PEDAGOGICALEDUCATION

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB*

ABSTRACT.ThearticlerevealsthehistoryofKyivTheologicalAcademy–theonly higher educational institution of Orthodox Church. It functioned onUkrainianlandsoftheRussianEmpire.Basedontheanalysisofhistoricalandpedagogicalliterature,archivematerialsanddocumentsplacedinperiodicals,thepaperdepictstheologicaleducationatKyivTheologicalAcademyingeneralandfocusesonpedagogicaltrainingthatwasorganizedtherewithin1869‐84.StudyofPedagogyasacompulsorysubjectandtakingspecialpracticalclassesonthe4thyearareconsideredtobemaincomponentsofpedagogicaleducationathighertheologicaleducationalinstitution.ThepaperrevealsthecontentofPedagogy, forms and methods of teaching Pedagogy and peculiarities ofstaffing. The article focuses on the attempt of lecturers of Kyiv TheologicalAcademytoorganizestudents’pedagogicalpracticeatlocalseminary,advantagesanddisadvantagesofpedagogicaleducationatKyivTheologicalAcademyandthelevelofeducationtherecomparedwithuniversities.Keywords: Kyiv Theological Academy, Pedagogy, pedagogical education,specialpracticalclasses,theologicaleducation,formofeducation.IntroductionNowadaysinmodernsocietythereisatendencyofgrowinginterestin

religion,Orthodoxmoralvaluesandtraditions.Againstthisbackground,thereis a transformation of Ukrainians’ value‐meaning orientations. With this in

*PhDCandidateofPedagogicalSciencesoftheDepartmentofGeneralPedagogyandPedagogyofHigherSchoolatH.S.SkovorodaKharkivNationalPedagogicalUniversity.E‐mail:[email protected].

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

112

mind, it is not surprising that activedevelopmentof theological educationalinstitutions is the specific feature ofmodern educational practice. Students’trainingforpastoral,missionaryandteachingactivity,whichrequiresknowledgeofpedagogy,istheimportanttaskofworkoftheseinstitutions.Seminariansandstudents’pedagogicaleducationisimplementedinvaryingdegreesalmostatalltheseinstitutions.Takingthisintoconsideration,itisworthusinghistoricalheritage for improving the quality of pedagogical education. In particular,implementationofvaluabledevelopmentsinorganizationofpedagogicaleducationatKyivskaDukhovnaAcademia–KyivTheologicalAcademy(KTA)in1869‐84isofgreat importance.Taking intoaccountthedisadvantagesofpedagogicaltrainingatthishighertheologicaleducationalinstitutioninthespecifiedperiodcanalsobeuseful.

TheproblemofcombinationoftheologicalandpedagogicaleducationatKTAin1869‐84isofscientific interestnotonlyforUkrainianpedagoguesandscientists.Thehighertheologicaleducationalinstitutionhadinternationalsignificance.Belarusians,Bulgarians,Romanians,RussiansandSerbsstudiedthere.Mostofgraduates‐foreignersofKTAwereengaged inpedagogicalactivity intheirnativecountries,contributedtotheriseoftheologicaleducationthere,astheyoccupiedhighpositionsinthelocalchurchhierarchy.1

Kyiv Theological Academy as Theological Higher Educational

Institutionin1869‐84KTAwasestablishedin1819.Itwastheonlyhighertheologicalschool

on Ukrainian lands of the Russian Empire. Started from 1869, the specificfeaturesoffunctioningofitweredeterminedbyanewstatutewhichwasmoreprogressivethanthepreviousstatute.KTAactedaccordingtoittill1884.Dueto thenewstatute, somegeneral elementsofhigher secular educationwereintroduced.Theseelements included facultyorganizing, special‐practical classes,systemofprivate‐habilitation,systemofscientificattestation,correspondenceofapositiontoascientificdegree,etc.andwereimplementedatRussianand1 T. Prishchepa, “Teaching Bulgarians at Kyiv Theological Academy (1878‐1915)” [Навчанняболгар у Київській духовній академії (1878‐1915 рр.)], VisnykKyivskogoNatsionalnogouniversytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Istoriia, no.1 (2015): 34, http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/VKNU_Ist_2015_1_10;V.Tserkovna,“GraduatesfromKievTheologicalAcademy–OutstandingRepresentatives of Romanian Orthodox Clergy of the XIXth Century (on the Materials of“Chisinau Diocesan Registry”) [Випускники Київської духовної академії – видатніпредставники православного духівництва Румунії ХІХ ст.],Naukovyi visnyk Izmailskogoderzhanvogo humanitarnogo universitetu, no. 34 (2016): 141, http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nvidgu_2016_34_27.

KYIVTHEOLOGICALACADEMYIN1869‐1884…

113

other universities at different time. University influence can also be seen inextension of the rights of the teaching corporation, introduction of collegialdiscussion for solving most of problems connected with educational andscientificprocess.Thesestatements,aswellasasignificantincreaseinsalariesofAcademy lecturer,met thedemandsof time,statepolicy ineducationandsocial tendencies.2 According to the new statute, higher theological schoolbecamemoredemocraticandopen.Bothgraduatesofseminariesandclassicalgymnasiums were allowed to enter the Academy.3 Different listeners wereallowedtoattendlectureswiththepermissionoftheCounciloftheAcademy.4KTAsupervisionof the seminariesof its educational‐theologicaldistrictwasabolished,whichgavetheopportunitytofocusoninternalaffairsofthehighereducationalinstitution.

Unlikethepreviousstatutethatprovidedstudents’compulsorystudyofeducationalsubjectsinallforms,thestatueof1869changedthesituation.Accordingtoit,thetheologicalacademyincludedthreedepartments,namely:theological,church‐historicalandchurch‐practicaldepartments.Studentswhowereenlistedinacertaindepartmenttookbothcompulsorysubjectsandthosethatwere assigned to a certain department during for three years. In theirfourth year therewas complete specialization.5 So,multidisciplinarity in thecourseofhighertheologicaleducationalinstitutionwasovercome.ExclusionofMathematicsandPhysicsfromthelistofsubjectsatKTAalsocontributedtoit.

Despite positive influence on educational process at KTA, theintroduction of differentiation of subjects by department had also negativeconsequences.Itcausedweakeningandone‐sidednessoftheologicaltraining.For instance, students at church‐practical department had 13 subjects forthree‐yearcourseofstudy,andonlysixsubjectsweretheological(theywereHoly Scripture, basic theology, pastoral theology, homiletics and history ofpreaching in the Orthodox Church and in the West, church law, church2NataliaSuhova,“ReformsofhigherOrthodoxtheologicaleducationinRussiainthesecondhalfofthe19thcentury”[РеформывысшегоправославногодуховногообразованиявРоссиивовторойполовинеXIXвека](PhDdiss.,St.Tikhon’sOrthodoxUniversityoftheHumanities,2006),21https://vivaldi.nlr.ru/bd000162600/view

3“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies.no.47154dated30May(1869)”[Высочайшеутвержденныйуставправославныхдуховныхакадемий.№47154от 30мая(1869г.)],inTheCompleteCollectionofLawsoftheRussianEmpire:Collection2.Vol.44.(StPetersburg:TipografiiaIIOtdeleniiasobstvennoiIegoImperatorskogoVelichestva kantseliarii,1873),553.

4Ibid.,550.5 “Highest approved statute of Orthodox theological academies”, 545, 552; N. A. Shyp, KyivTheologicalAcademyincultural‐educationalspaceofUkraine(1819‐1919)[Київськадуховнаакадеміявкультурно‐освітянськомупросторіУкраїни(1819‐1919)](Kyiv:NVP“INTERSERVICE”,2010),111‐112.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

114

archaeologyandliturgy).6Despitethesedisadvantages,thestatusofKTAasatheological educational institutionwasundeniable.We can confidently statethat the higher theological school was able to “provide higher theologicaleducationinthespiritofOrthodoxyforeducatedministryoftheChurch,”whichwastheaimofitsactivity.7However,itisdifficulttosayhowwellitmanagedto train teachers for theological‐educational institutionsas itwasoneof thetasksof functioningof it.Canwesaythat“beinganoutpost in thesphereoftraining educated priests, the academies due to availability of humanitariandisciplines in theirprogramsturned intopeculiarpedagogical institutionsofchurch ministry.”8 The answers to these questions can only be given afterinvestigationofpedagogicaltrainingatKTA.

PedagogicalEducationatKyivTheologicalAcademyin1869‐84Reformofhighertheologicalschoolin1869wassupposedtopromote

thequalityofeducationattheologicaleducationalinstitutions.Thestatuteprovidedfororganizationofpedagogicaltrainingofacademystudentswhohadtoteachintheologicalacademies,seminariesandschools.ItwaslimitedtothestudyofPedagogyasacompulsorydisciplineandtakingspecial‐practicalclassesin4thyear.

PedagogywasanimportantsubjectincurriculumatKTA.Theanalysisofprimary sources9 suggests thatdevelopmentof trainingprogramson thissubject, aswell as other disciplines,was the responsibility of lecturerswhotaught it. The studyof authorprogramsand reviewof lessonsofM.Zaitsev,P.LinytskyandM.OlesnytskyallowstocharacterizethecontentofPedagogyclasseswhichtheyconductedduringtheperiodunderresearch.Unfortunately,therearenosimilardocumentsauthoredbyV.Petrov,thatiswhythecontentofPedagogytaughtin1871‐1872academicyearwasnotrevealed.

During1867‐68and1868‐69academicyearsM.ZaitsevtaughtPedagogyforstudentsintheir4thyear.AtthistimePedagogywastaughtfortwoyears.106“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies”,552.7Ibid.,545.8Shyp,KyivTheologicalAcademyincultural‐educationalspaceofUkraine,113.9“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforFebruary1871”[Протоколызаседаний СоветаКиевской духовной академии зафевраль 1871 года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.6(1871):43‐44;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyiv TheologicalAcademyforNovemberandDecember1872”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизаноябрьидекабрь1872года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.3(1873):135‐136.

10SvitlanaKuzmina.“CoursesofPedagogyinKyivTheologicalAcademy:ContentandTraditionsofTeaching”[КурсипедагогікивКиївськийдуховнійакадемії:змістітрадиції викладання],NaukovizapyskyNaUKMA.Filosofiiatareligiieznavstvo,no.76(2008):58,http://nz.ukma.edu.ua/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=246&Itemid=31.


115

ThecontentofPedagogytaughtbyM.Zaitsevwasnotthoughtfulandlogical.Forinstance,inthefirstterm,thefirstclasswasdedicatedtointroductiontoPedagogy;thentherewerePedagogyclassesfocusedoncomparisonofupbringingwitheducation(bothasaprocessandresult),developmentandart;oneclasswasabouthistoryofeducation.Afterthat,studentslearntabouttheimportanceanddifficultyofstudyofPedagogyasamoralandappliedscienceandmethodsofteaching.InthesecondtermM.ZaitsevfocusedhisPedagogyclassesonhistoryofeducationagain(fiveclasses)andpeculiaritiesofmethodicsofteachingdifferentsubjects in seminary (ten classes). Taking into consideration the significance ofmastery ofmethodics for students’ further professional activity, it could havetakenmoretimetostudyit.Furthermore,inthethirdterm,whilestudyingPedagogy,thelecturerdecidedtofocuscompletelyonhistoryofeducationagain.Inthefourthtermheconsideredthegeneralprinciplesofeducation,payingmoreattentiontotheologicalprinciplesandpeculiaritiesoftrainingprocessatpeople’sschooland revealing such directions of education as physical,moral and intellectualeducation.11Evidently,thecontentofPedagogycoursetaughtbyM.Zaitsevwassystemless.TheconductedresearchconfirmsS.Kuzmina’sopinionthatprofessor’sactivity,probably,reflectedmorehisintensesearchforhisownteachingconceptsthansustainableteachingsystem.12

In1872‐1873academicyearPedagogywas taughtbyP.Linytsky.Hefocusedon“historyofpedagogicalideasandtheories”whichexistedduringthesecondhalfofthe16thcentury–the19thcentury.Attheendofacademicyearhemadea reviewofmodernpedagogical ideas.13Certainly, this informationwasnotenoughforstudents’successfulteachingactivityinfuture.

ProfessorP.LinytskyhadcertaininfluenceonthecontentofPedagogyclassesofM.Olesnytskywhowasayoungteacher.TheanalysisofM.Olesnytsky’strainingprogram14 shows that it coveredonly introduction to the scienceofPedagogyandhistoryofPedagogyfromancienttonewtimes.TheintroductioncoveredtheessenceofPedagogy,thedefinitionofup‐bringingandrevealedthe

11Notesofsubjectstakenintheacademyin1867‐68and1868‐69academicyears[Конспектыпредметов,преподаваемыхвакадемииза1867–1868и1868–1869учебныегоды],1869,File5963,Inventory1,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv,97‐104.

12Kuzmina.“CoursesofPedagogyinKyivTheologicalAcademy,”58.13Reviewof informationgiven inPedagogyclasses to third‐yearstudentsofKyivTheologicalAcademy in1872‐73academicyear [ОбозрениепреподанногопопедагогикестудентамКиевскойдуховнойакадемииІІІкурсаза1872–1873учебныйгод],1873,File1017,Inventory3,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv.

14Programsandnotesoflecturesgivenin1874‐75academicyear.[Программыиконспектылекций,прочитанняхв1874‐1875учебномгоду],1875,File1126,Inventory3,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv,31‐33;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1874‐1875academicyear”[ОтчетосостоянииКиевскойдуховнойакадемиив1874‐1875учебномгоду],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1875):42.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

116

significanceofup‐bringingandindependenceofpedagogicalscience.AswellasP.Linytsky,M.Olesnytskydevoted80%ofthestudytimetohistoryofPedagogy,thoughheexpandedchronologicalboundariesofthispartofthetrainingprogram,unliketheProfessorofPhilosophy.ThecontentofthecourseofPedagogybyM.Olesnytskywas a bit like P.Linytsky’s program only during the first twoyearsofM.Olesnytsky’steachingactivity.From1875‐1876academicyear,thecontentofPedagogyexpandedandchangedsignificantly.ThesubjectcoveredtheinformationaboutintroductiontothescienceofPedagogy,thesubjectofPedagogy,essaysoneducation inthenewtimeandresearchof“elementsofeducation,”namely:“trainingofmind,heartandwill.”15ItshouldbenotedthatM.Olesnytskycoveredsomeproblemsofdidactics,whileteachingthethemeof“trainingofmind.”Forinstance,herevealedteachingtechniques(dogmaticandheuristic),certainprinciplesoftraining(principlesofnaturalness,clearness)andrequirementsforalearnerintheprocessofeducationalwork.16

So,thecontentofPedagogyatKTAdependedgreatlyoncompetenceoflecturerswhotaught it.Turnoverofstaff thathadto teachPedagogycausedsomeproblemswith its content.Oneof theproblemswas theprevalenceofhistoryofPedagogyovertheoryofup‐bringinganddidactics.Duetoeducational‐methodic work of M.Olesnytsky from the mid 70s of the 19th century, thisomissionwasremedied.

WhileteachingPedagogyatKTA,certainformsandmethodswereused.Lecture was the most wide‐spread form of education, but according to theStatutein1868,itlastednot90minutes,but60minutes.17Therewasasystemof distribution of the lecture load at KTAduring the periodunder research.

15ProgramofPedagogylecturesgiventothird‐yearstudentsin1875‐76academicyear[Программалекций,преподанныхстудентамIIIкурсав1875‐1876учебномгодупопедагогике],1876,File1187,Inventory3,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv;“Reportonthestateof Kyiv Theological Academy in 1875‐1876 academic year” [Отчет о состоянии Киевскойдуховнойакадемиив1875‐1876учебномгоду],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1876):22;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1876‐1877academicyear”[ОтчетосостоянииКиевскойдуховнойакадемиив1876‐1877учебномгоду],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2 (1878):20; “Reporton thestateofKyivTheologicalAcademy in1877‐1878academicyear”[ОтчетосостоянииКиевскойдуховнойакадемиив1877‐1878учебномгоду],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1878):258;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1878‐1879academicyear”[ОтчетосостоянииКиевскойдуховнойакадемиив1878‐1879учебномгоду],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1879):18.

16ProgramofPedagogylecturesgiventothird‐yearstudentsin1875‐76academicyear,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv,12,thereverseside.

17SvitlanaMeshkovaia, “SecularcomponentofOrthodoxtheologicaleducationintheRussianEmpire in1857‐1884”[СвітськийкомпонентправославноїдуховноїосвітивРосійськійімперії (1857‐1884 рр.)] (PhD diss., V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 2004), 91;“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies”,553.


117

Accordingtothestatute,professorsandotherregularlecturersgaveasmanylecturesintheirsubjectsastheCounciloftheAcademyappointed.Atthesametime,theCouncildecisionwasnotadministrative‐commandingorrandom,asitwasbasedonlecturers’ideasaboutexpediencyofcertainload.Nevertheless,thestatuteregulatedtheminimumnumberoflectures,havingdeterminedthatatanycombinationsstudentsshouldhavenotlessthan18lecturesaweekintheirfirstyearsandnotlessthan9lecturesaweekintheir4thyear.18Itwasthereason forunequalnumberof lectures inPedagogy indifferent yearsof theinvestigatedperiod.Forinstance,from1869‐1870academicyear,studentshadonelectureaweek,butfrom1876‐1877theyhadtwolecturesaweekattherequestofM.Olesnytsky.19TheanalysisofprotocolsofmeetingsofKTACounciland reports of this higher theological educational institution20 shows thatPedagogylecturesweregivenforallacademystudentsintheir3rdyear.So,wehave reason to considerunreasonable some scientists21 statements that thisacademicdisciplinewasstudiedinallacademydepartmentsinthe4thyear.

It is clear that the peculiarities of lectures depended on lecturers’personalqualities.However,theyhadthedesiretomakeorganizationoftheseeducational forms authoritarian. For example, professors I.Malyshevsky,V.Pevnutsy, D.Pospekhov and Archimandrite Sylvester formulated a set ofruleswhat had to regulate educational process atKTA. Itwasnoted that atlectures“astudentcannotevadeexplanationsandanswersthatalecturercanask,butheshouldnotaskalectureranyquestionsandobjectionsatlectures.Ifastudenthasanydifficultieswithunderstandingtheinformationatlecture,hecanaskexplanation after it and after leaving the lecture room.”22Moreover,studentswerenotallowedtoshowtheiremotionsatlectures.

So, increase in the number of Pedagogy lectures from 1876‐1877academicyearhelpedtoenhancetheeffectivenessofpedagogical trainingat

18Meshkovaia,“SecularcomponentofOrthodoxtheologicaleducation,”96;“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies,”553.

19 “Report on the state of Kyiv Theological Academy in 1871‐1872 academic year” [Отчет осостоянииКиевскойдуховнойакадемииза1871‐1872учебныйгод],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii, no. 11 (1872): 17; “Report on the state of Kyiv Theological Academy in 1875‐1876academicyear,”22;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1876‐1877academicyear,”20.

20“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1875‐1876academicyear,”22;“Reporton the state of Kyiv Theological Academy in 1876‐1877 academic year,” 20. “Protocols ofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJulyandAugust1869”[Протоколызаседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за июль и август 1869 года], TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.1(1870):19.

21Meshkovaia,“SecularcomponentofOrthodoxtheologicaleducation,”128.22“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJulyandAugust1869,”45.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

118

KTA.However,shortdurationoftheseeducationalforms(theylastedlessthanseminars),someauthoritariancharacteroftheirconductingweretheobstaclesforthesuccessfulassimilationofknowledgeinPedagogy.

Students’independentextracurriculardailyworkwasanother importantform of education.23 In academy lecturers’ opinion, itwas aimed at holistic,thoroughstudyofscience,consideringitasasystem.TheCounciloftheAcademywasinconstantsearchforthewaystoimproveefficiencyofthisformofeducationalwork. For example, in 1874‐1875 academic year, KTA rector, Bishop Philaret,pointed out that it was impossible to study the science thoroughlywithoutworkingwithadditionalsources.Itwasnotconsideredtobegood“ifastudentdoesnotreproduceinformationheheardinclasseseverytimeinhismindwhilestudyingathomeandifhedoesnotthinkindependentlyabouttheproblemsraisedatlectures.Withoutit,astudent,evenifheisattentiveatlectures,canhaveonlygeneralideaaboutthesubjects,withoutawarenessofinterconnectionbetweenthemandwithoutacquisitionoftheirscientificmaterial.”24Attheinitiativeoftherector,aspecialcommissionwascreates.Itdevelopedasystemofmeasuresthathadtoprovideathoroughstudy,consciousassimilationofdisciplinesandthe most reasonable organization of different forms of education. Whenconsidering independent extracurricular work, the commission offered thelecturers,Pedagogylecturersinparticular,toinvolvestudentsinreadingandanalysisofadditionalliterature,givingtalksormakingreports.25

Organization of students’ educational‐research work was of greatimportance at KTA. Students in their third year had to prepare a thesis fortheologyPhD.Studentsintheirfourthyearworkedonthemaster’sthesisthatwasusuallydefendedat theendof the fourthyearbut itwasnotnecessary.Mostoftentheworkformaster’sdegreewascompletedaftergraduatingfromthetheologicalacademy.26

Amongmaster’sworks,weshouldfocusonSemenMshanetsy’swork“AboutMoralEducationinChildhood.”27ItwasthefirstandtheonlyPedagogythesisatKTA.Itwasabigworkandconsistedofintroduction,twochaptersofthemaintext,conclusionsandreferences.Unliketheworksdoneatthebeginning

23“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies,”548.24“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1874‐1875academicyear,”67.25Ibid.,70.26“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1874‐1875academicyear,”76;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1876‐1877academicyear,”48‐49;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1878‐1879academicyear,”48.

27 Mshanetsky Semen. Aboutmoral education in childhood [Мшанецкий Семен. Онравственномвоспитании в период детства], 1869, File 436, Fund 304, Institute ofManuscripts of theV.I.VernadskyiNationalLibraryofUkraine,Kyiv.


119

ofthe19thcenturyandthefirsthalfofthe1860s,thesishadreferences.SemenMshanetsy’sthesishadreferencesatthebeginningofthework;thereferencescontained12sources,amongwhichtherewere10foreignpedagogicalworksand K.Ushynsky’s “Man as an Object of Education” and materials from thejournal“Teacher.”28Certainly, theywerenotenoughfortheworkwhichhad169pages.InmostcasesSemenMshanetsyreferredtothestudioofNeckerdeSaussure. In authors’ opinion, the first chapter should depict theory. It wasfocusedoncharacteristicsofchildhoodandperiodizationofit,tasksandmeansofmoraleducationinchildhood.SemenMshanetsyconsideredthesecondchaptertobepractical,soherevealedthefactorsthatinfluencechildren’smoraleducation,namely:“firstly,peoplewhoarearoundthechild;secondly,child’sphysicalandspiritualindividuality;thirdly,education,i.e.townorvillage,parents’houseorschool.”29So,thesecondpartoftheworkwasfocusedontheoryaswell,anditseemsinexpedienttodistinguishit.Ingeneral,thethesiswaswritteninscientificstyleandhadmaterialpresentationlogic.Weagreewiththeconclusionofreviewersof this master’s work, as the work got 3.5 points on a five‐point scale and“bloatedness”ofthethesiswasthemaindisadvantageofit.30

So,Pedagogytheseswerewrittenseldom.Asaresult,wecansaythatstudentswerenotinvolvedenoughineducational‐researchworkinPedagogy.

ThestatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademiesdeterminedtheformsofstudents’assessment.Theseformswereexamsandrepetitions.ThelatterwasanewformofassessmentinKTA.Thestatuteonlydeterminedthenecessityofintroductionof repetitionsbut itdidnotprovideanyadditional instructionsand explanations.31 In order to introduce repetitions as forms of students’assessment, the Council of the Academy had to give instructions. However,therewere not any instructions about repetitions in set of rules concernededucationalprocessinKTAin1869;itwasonlypointedoutthatlecturersinallsubjectsshouldorganizerepetitionsattheirdiscretion.32Havinganalysedfive‐year experience in organizing repetitions by lecturers, the members of theCouncil ofKyiv TheologicalAcademy found it necessary to developdetailedrequirementsforconductingtheseforms.Theydecidedthatrepetitionshadtobeorganizedafterstudyingsomethemesor“partsofscience,”butinPedagogyasacompulsorysubjectrepetitionsshouldbeheldatleastonceinsixmonths.Theycouldbeoralorinwriting.Theresultsoftheserepetitionsattheendof

28Ibid.,2.29Ibid.,30.30Ibid.,171‐172.31“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies,”548.32“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJulyandAugust1869,”46.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

120

termwereannouncedtoadministrationoftheacademydepartmentandtakenintoaccountduringtheyear’sexams.Thatiswhy,studentsconsideredrepetitionstobeanimportantform.33

Itshouldbenotedthatduringthevalidityperiodofthestatuteof1814,exams at KTAwere taken twice a year, but during the investigated period,examsweretakenonceayear,attheendofacademicyear.BoththestatuteandreportsofKTAandprotocolsofmeetingsof theCouncil attest to this.34TheCounciloftheAcademyhadtodeterminethetimeandrulesoftakingexams.35PedagogicalexpediencyoftakingexaminationsdependedgreatlyonthecompetenceoftheCouncil.ThefirstrulesdevelopedbytheCouncilforexamshadgeneralstatementsandwerenotdetailed.Forexample,in1870amonth‐longtermoftakingexamsandtheirtimetableweredeveloped.Moreover,itwasdeterminedthateveryexamhadtobetakenbyalecturerandtwomembersoftheexaminationcommittee. I.Bobrovnytsky,M.Zaitsevandpriest G.Malevansky took Pedagogyexamsforthethird‐yearstudentsin1870.Therulesalsoindicatedthatcouldanswerexaminationquestionsandexaminers’questionsandcouldgetmarkonafive‐pointscale,where5and4meantverysatisfiedstudents’answers,3meantsatisfiedanswers,2and1meantunsatisfiedanswers.36Gradually,therulesandprocedureforexaminationsbecamemorethoughtful,newrulesandconditionswereadded.Forinstance,lecturersstartedtoprovidedstudentswith10days forpreparationforexams,andbeforethemlecturerswereaskedtomakereportsonthecontentofeducationalmaterialgiventostudentsduringtheacademicyear.37

33“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1874‐1875academicyear,”67.34“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1871‐1872academicyear,”36;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1875‐1876academicyear,”60‐61;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademy(30March,26,28April,6and31May1878)”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемии(30марта,26,28апреля,6и31мая1878г.)],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1878):389;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforNovember1870”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизаноябрь1870года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1871):21;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMarchandApril1871”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамартиапрель1871года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.7(1871):56‐59;“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies,”553.

35“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies,”550.36“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforApril1870”[Протоколызаседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за апрель 1870 года], Trudy Kievskojduhovnojakademii,no.8(1870):25‐26.

37“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1878‐1879academicyear,”49;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMarch1873”[Протоколы заседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамарт1873года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.7(1873):351;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforFebruary‐June1876”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизафевраль‐июнь1876года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.8(1876):262.


121

Unlike the first, second and third‐year students who had exams incertain subjects, the fourth‐year students had complex exams. The studentstookcomplexexamsinsubjectsthattheyhadchosenfortheirspecial‐practicalclasses,thatiswhyoneexamcoveredPedagogy,Psychology,HistoryofPhilosophyandTheology.38

So, due to constant improvement of organization and procedure forexamsandrepetitions,systematizationandstrongassimilationofpedagogicalknowledgebystudentswereensured.

Teachingstaffhada significant rolendevelopmentofPedagogyasanewsubjectattheologicalacademies.Attheresearchstage,PedagogyatKTAwastaughtbyM.Zaitsev(1867‐1870),V.Petrov(1871‐1872),P.Linytsky(1872‐1873) and M.Olesnytsky (1873‐1895). M.Zaitsev graduated from KalugaTheologicalSeminaryandStPetersburgTheologicalAcademy.HetaughtLiteratureand Latin at secondary theological educational institution in Kaluga, and hetaughtPedagogyatKTAfrom1867to1870.39

Business tripabroadmadebyM.Zaitsev in1861‐1862promotedhisprofessional development as Pedagogy lecturer. It was organized to studyforeigneducationalandcharitableinstitution.40Hisarticle“Basicprinciplesoftraining”41andschoolbook“Guidetoelementaryeducation,”42whichwaswritteninco‐authorshipwith I.Malyshevskyand colleaguesnoted thatM.Zaitsev “hadgoodinfluenceonyoungstudentsduetolivespeech,throughtirelessactivity,hotworriesaboutdevelopmentofyoungmindsandtender,sincereandnobleattitudetothem.”43Takingthisintoconsideration,M.Zaitsev’sdesiretoreducethenumberofhourstostudyPedagogyatKTAseemsstrange.Inhisopinion,itwasbecauseofthedifficultiesinteachingPedagogyas“thissciencewasdevelopedlittle,particularlytakingintoaccountstrictOrthodox‐Christianfoundationswhich

38“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1877‐1878academicyear,”292;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMay1871”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамай1871года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.9(1871):66.

39ZaitsevNikolaiLazarevich [ЗайцевНиколайЛазаревич],File1466,Fund175, InstituteofManuscriptsof theV. I.VernadskyiNationalLibraryofUkraine,Kyiv; “Necrologue.N.L. Zaitsev.”[Некролог.Н.Л.Зайцев].Pravoslavnoieobozreniie,no.2(1872):82.

40“Necrologue.N.L.Zaitsev,”82.41 N. Zaitsev, “Basic principles of training” [Основные начала обучения], Trudy Kievskojduhovnojakademii,no.9(1868):519–544;N.Zaitsev,“Basicprinciplesoftraining”[Основныеначалаобучения],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.8(1868):296–324.

42N.L.Zaitsev,I.I.MalyshevskiiandI.T.Ekzempliarsky,Guidetoelementaryeducation[Руководствокначальномуобучению](Kyiv,1869).

43“Necrologue.N.L.Zaitsev,”83.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

122

shouldbe thebasisofdevelopmentofPedagogyat theologicalacademies.”44Certainly,thisargumentwasnotconvincing.However,wehavereasontosaythat this positionwasnot connectedwith the lecturer’s irresponsibility andprofessionalincompetence.Becauseofseriousillness,M.Zaitsevdidnothaveopportunity to conduct three Pedagogy classes a week. The analysis of theprotocolsofmeetingsof theCouncil ofKyivTheologicalAcademyandothersources45revealedthatfrom1862M.Zaitsev,whowas22yearsold,hadserioushealthproblems,hesufferedfromjointdisease.WhenhewasappointedasabachelorinKTAin1867,hewenttoworkoncrutches.In1869hisillnessgotworse,andM.Zaitsevwasnotabletogetoutofbedforweeksorevenmonths.Certainly,manylecturesweremissed,andlecturesgivenbyhiminflictedhisphysical suffering. At the end of 1870, M.Zaitsev did not work at KTA anylonger,andin1872,hediedattheageof35.

AftergraduatingfromKTA,V.PetrovstartedtoworkattheDepartmentofPedagogyandMoralTheologyatKTA.FromOctober1871,hestartedtoworkasfull‐timeassociateprofessor.UnlikeM.Zaitsev,V.Petrovspeciallypreparedfor teaching science of education, as in his fourth year at the academy heattended special‐practical classes in Psychology, History of Philosophy,PedagogyandBasicTheologybychoice.Besides,hesuccessfullygavetwotriallectures(lectureinPedagogyandlectureinMoralTheology)inthepresenceofmembersoftheTheologicalDepartment.46BasedontheanalysisofstudyofthereportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1872‐1872academicyear,wecansaythatV.Petrovhadaconscientiousattitudetogiving lecturesandspecial‐practicalclassesinhissubjectsashedidnotmissanyclass.47However,V.Petrov did not have any opportunity to gain experience and improve

44 Caseofreductionof lectures in thedepartmentsofmoral theology,pedagogyandgeneralchurchhistory.10September1869–21October1869[Делоосокращениилекцийпокафедрамнравственногобогословия,педагогикииобщейцерковнойистории.10сентября1869г.–21октября1869г.],1869,File5970,Inventory1,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv,1.

45“Necrologue.N.L.Zaitsev,”82‐83;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJulyandAugust1869,”45‐48.

46“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforDecember1870”[Протоколызаседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за декабрь 1870 года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.3(1871):33;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforSeptember1871”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизасентябрь1871года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1872):44‐45,59‐60;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforOctober1871”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизаоктябрь1871года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.3(1872):1‐3.

47“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1871‐1872academicyear,”20‐21.


123

professionally.Atthebeginningof1872‐1873academicyear,hedidnotappearat the academy because of serious illness, and on September 16, 1872, theyounglecturerdied.48

FromOctober1872,P.LinytskywasassignedtotemporaryteachingofPedagogy. This lecturerwas KTA graduate, aswell. He graduated from thishighertheologicalinstitutionin1865andgotmaster’sdegreeafterdefendingthethesison“DifferentdirectionsofGermanafterHegelPhilosophy ConcerningReligion.”Atthebeginningof1872,P.LinytskyworkedasExtraordinaryProfessorandtaughtphilosophicaldisciplines.InspiteofProfessor’sworkloadbecauseofteachingphilosophicalsubjects,remotenessofhisscientific interests fromPedagogyandlackofspecialtrainingforteachingthissubject,P.LinytskywasnotindifferenttoteachingPedagogy.Forexample,thisisevidencedbythefactthatinJanuary1873herequiredtopurchaseabout20booksonPedagogyfortheacademiclibrary;worksbyV.Vodovozov,A.Diesterweg,M.Korfandotherscientistswereamongthesebooks.49

ThenextlecturerinPedagogyatKTAwasM.Olesnytsky.Whenhewasa student, he stoodout amongotherKTAstudents, and themembersof thetheological department pointed toM.Olesnytsky’s talent and calledhim thebest student on the course.50 Based on the analysis of the sources51we canconclude that he did not have intention to teach Pedagogy: for his special‐practicalclasseshechoseablockofdisciplinesthatincludedsacredscriptureandHebrew,gavetriallecturesinthesesubjectsanddefendedmaster’sthesisonatopicrelatedtosacredscripture.However,thisdidnotstophimfromdeveloping

48“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforSeptemberandOctober1872”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизасентябрьиоктябрь1872года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1873):79,122.

49“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforSeptemberandOctober1872”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизасентябрьиоктябрь1872года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1873):127‐128;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMarch1873,”300‐301.

50“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMay1873”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамай1873года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1873):512.

51“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforApril1873”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизаапрель1873года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii, no. 9 (1873): 414‐415; “Protocols ofmeetings of the Council of Kyiv TheologicalAcademyforSeptemberandOctober1872,”106;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforNovemberandDecember1872,”135‐136;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMay1873,”510‐511;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJanuary1874”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизаянварь1874года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.6(1874):264.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

124

theeducationalcourseonPedagogyandteachingthissubjectsuccessfullyto1895,changingpositionsfromactingAssociateProfessortoExtraordinaryProfessorduringtheperiodunderresearch.

So, the influence of pedagogical staff on the quality of pedagogicaltrainingatKTAcannotbeassessedunambiguously.Ontheonehand,Pedagogywastaughtbythebestgraduatesoftheologicalacademies,andtheyactiveandreadyforprofessionalgrowth.Ontheotherhand,theyoftensucceededeachotheranddidnothaveenoughtimetodelveintopedagogicalscienceandgainexperience.

Special‐practicalclasseswereabsolutelynewformofeducationatKTA.Theywere conducted in the fourth year and took thewhole academic year.Theseclassesweremainlyaimedatimprovingknowledgeofselectedsubjectsandstudents’trainingfortheirteachinginseminaries.Atthebeginningoftheacademicyear,studentchoseagroupofdisciplinesinwhichtheyhadtoattendspecial‐practical classes. In classes students explored seminary trainingprogramsandtextbooks,workedwithsources,gotreadyforwritingmaster’sthesisandtakingmaster’sexamandconductingtriallessons.52Inthemiddleofthe 1870s, a new requirement to educational process was introduced.Accordingtoit, lecturersoftheacademyhadtoinvolvefourth‐yearstudentsmainlyinimprovingtheirknowledgeofselectedsubjectsatthefirsthalfoftheacademicyear.The secondhalf of theacademicyearhad tobededicated tomethodictraining.53Rationingthenumberofhoursforspecial‐practicalclassesper week was another measure that helped to improve new forms ofeducationalworkatKTA.Fromtheendofthe1870s,lecturershadtohaveatleasttwohoursfortheseclasses.54

Special‐practicalclassesinallgroupsofsubjectsoftheacademiccoursediffered in pedagogical orientation. The group of subjects that includedPedagogyhadthegreatestpedagogicalorientation.Thespecificfeatureofthis

52“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1870‐1871academicyear”[ОтчетосостоянииКиевскойдуховнойакадемииза1870‐1871учебныйгод],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.10(1871):10;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademy(30September,11,28Octoberand25November1877)” [ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемии(30сентября,11,28октябряи25ноября1877г.)],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.6(1878):138‐139;“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies,”548;TetianaRohovaandTetianaTverdokhlib,PedagogicalheritageoflecturersofKyivTheologicalAcademy(secondhalfofthe19thcentury–thebeginningofthe20thcentury)[Педагогічнаспадщинавикладачів Київської духовної академії (друга половина XIX – початок XX століття)](Kharkiv:Tsyfrovadrukarnia№1,2013),76.

53“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1876‐1877academicyear,”46;“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1877‐1878academicyear,”265.

54“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1878‐1879academicyear,”25.


125

groupofsubjectswasthatfourth‐yearstudentsofallthedepartmentsoftheacademycouldchoose it. Itwastheonlygroupthat includedsubjectswhichwerecompulsoryinthefirst,secondandthirdyear.Till1871‐1872academicyear, it includedPsychology,History of Philosophy andPedagogy, and from1872‐1873 academic year, it included Psychology, History of Philosophy,PedagogyandBasicTheology.55

The lecturers had some problems with organization of students’training for conducting lessons in seminaries, as the lecturers did not haveenoughexperienceinteachingatsecondarytheologicaleducationalinstitutions.Lessonswereoftencalledlectures,especiallyinthefirsthalfofthe1870s,andthesamerequirementswereimposedbothtolessonsandtolectures.So,itisnotsurprisingthatinDecember1874theHolySynodissuedanorder,accordingtowhichlecturersofKTAshould“payattentiontotriallessonsastheyshowacademygraduates’teachingskills,andtriallessonsshouldbeadaptedtotheconceptsandideasofpupilsforwhomtheyareconducted.”56TriallessonswerealwaysconductedinthepresenceofacommissionofProfessorsandAssociateProfessorsofcertaindepartmentandotherfourth‐yearstudents,ifpossible.Gradesforconductingthelessoncouldbedifferent:from“verysatisfied”(5)to“unsatisfied”(2and1).Studentsusuallyconductedthreetrial lessons,andtheychosetwotopicsofthelessonsthemselvesandonetopicofthetriallessonwasassignedbyalecturer.Triallessonshaddifferenttopics,namely:“Aboutchildren’sgames,”“Aboutreligiouseducation,”“Aboutmeansofeducation,”“Abouteducationalmanagement”etc.57Aftersuccessfulconductingthetriallessons,studentsreceivedcertificatesthatindicatedtherighttotaketeachingpositionsatseminaries.

Itshouldbenotedthat trial lessonswerenot full lessons.Theywererather imitation of lessons as theywere conducted at the academywithoutseminarians.Thesedisadvantages couldbeovercomedue toorganizationofpedagogicalpractice.ItbecameclearnotonlytolecturersofKTAbuttomembersof

55“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforNovember1870,”20;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMay1874”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамай1874года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.7(1874):314;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademy(30September,11,28Octoberand25November1877),”139.

56“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1874‐1875academicyear,”48.57“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademy(30March,26,28April,6and31May1878),”426;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforDecember1871”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизадекабрь1871года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.5(1872):4;“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMay1872”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамай1872года],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.9(1872):32.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

126

theHolySynod.58At the initiativeof theChiefProcuratorof theHolySynod,I.Malyshevsky, P.Lashkariov and P.Linytsky, the pedagogues of the highereducationalinstitutionofOrthodoxChurch,developedaprojectoforganizationofstudents’pedagogicalpractice.59Thisprojectprovidedorganizationofpracticalclassesforstudentsat localseminary.Theseclasseshavetobeconducted insubjectswhichstudentsweregoingtoteachatsecondarytheologicaleducationalinstitutions.Basedontheanalysisofthisproject,wecanassertthatattendingandconductinglessons,checkingpupils’writtenworksandassistingseminaryteacherinconductingrepetitionswerethemainformsandmethodsofpedagogicalpractice.I.Malyshevsky,P.LashkariovandP.Linytskyhadthemostproblemswithorganizationofconductinglessonsbystudents.Pedagogueshadto developsuchasystemwhichcouldnotdisrupt thenormalcourseof theeducationalprocessatseminaryandcouldprovidequalitativepedagogical trainingof futureteachersofsecondarytheologicalschools.Takingthis intoconsideration,thepedagoguesofferedtostartconductinglessonsfromOctober1,“inordertogivestudentsenoughtimetoprepareforthislessonandtogiveseminaryteacherstimetoinvolvestudentsinsubjecttheyteach.”60EachstudenthadtoconductatleastonelessoneverytwoweeksbytimetabledrawnupbytheCounciloftheacademywithPedagogicalmeetingoftheseminary.Studentshadtoconductlessonsinthepresenceofsubjectteacher,andotherstudentsofthegroupcouldalsobepresentatthelessons.Unfortunately,notallpedagoguesatKTAandtheHolySynodwereforstrengtheningofpedagogizationoftheacademy,that iswhythisprojectwasnotimplemented.

So,PedagogyasanindependentsubjectwastaughtatKTAduringthesecondhalfofthe1860s–1884. IfwecompareteachingPedagogyathighertheological educational institution with teaching it at secular educationalinstitutions,i.e.atuniversities,wecansaythattheacademyhadadvantages.Thoughthere was not specific department of Pedagogy in both higher educationalinstitutions,atKTAPedagogywastaughtasacompulsorysubjectforthethird‐yearstudentsandasanelectivesubjectintheirfourthyear.Atspecial‐practicalclassesstudentslearntthemethodicsofteachingPedagogyandotherseminarysubjects and trained for conducting lessons. Universities did not have this

58“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforApril1873,”410‐411.59 “Ideasof commissionabout thewayoforganizationofpractical classes for the fourth‐yearstudentsat localseminary”[СоображениякомиссииоспособеустройствапрактическихзанятийстудентовIVкурсавместнойсеминарии],TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.12(1873):562–564.

60Ibid.,563.


127

training. The analysis of thehistorical literature61 has shown that at seculareducational institutions Pedagogy was taught only for certain categories ofstudentsduringsomeperiodsandlecturershadminimumhoursforteachingit.Forexample,in1877‐1878academicyear,afterafewyears’break,PedagogywastaughtatHistoryandPhilologyFacultyofKyivUniversity.

ConclusionsSo,theresultsoftheresearchshowthattheologicaleducationatKTA

was a bit limited and combined with pedagogical training. At this highertheological school, pedagogical education included study of Pedagogy as acompulsorydisciplineand special‐practical classes in the4th year.Themainadvantagesofpedagogicaltrainingintheacademywere:theinclusionofthelatest achievements of Pedagogy as a science in the content of pedagogicaldisciplines;systematicuseofexamsandrepetitionstocontrolandsystematizestudents’ knowledge; taking special‐practical classes in the 4th year, whichfacilitated students’ familiarization with seminar training programs andtextbooksandtrainingforconductingtriallessons.Themaindisadvantagesofpedagogical training in the academy were: the prevalence of history ofPedagogyovertheoryofup‐bringinganddidactics; insufficientlecturehoursforthisacademicdiscipline;inferiorityoftriallessons,theirimitativecharacter;turnover of pedagogical staff. Though from themid 70’s of the 19th centurysomeomissionswerepartiallyorcompletelyremedied,pedagogicaleducationatKTAremainedlimited.Itwasbecauseofthelackofpedagogicalpractice.KyivTheological Academy did not reach the status of pedagogical educationalestablishment,butthelevelofpedagogicaleducationtherewasmuchhigherthaninuniversities.

61NataliaDemianenko,“Teacher’sgeneralpedagogicaltraininginthehistoryofhigherschoolinUkraine (the 19th century – the first quarter of the 20th century)” [ЗагальнопедагогічнапідготовкавчителявісторіївищоїшколиУкраїни(ХІХ–першачвертьХХст.)](PhDdiss.,Institute of Pedagogy and Psychology of Professioanl Education of National Academy ofPedagogical Sciences of Ukraine, 1999), 22; L. Zelenska, “Kharkiv National PedagogicalUniversity named after H. Skovoroda: milestones of history” [Харківський національнийпедагогічнийуніверситетіменіГ.С.Сковороди:віхиісторії],Pedagogikatapsykhologiia,no.50(2015):173,http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/znpkhnpu_ped_2015_50_21;Shyp,KyivTheologicalAcademyincultural‐educationalspaceofUkraine(1819‐1919),113.

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

128

Discussion

CertainproblemsoforganizationofeducationalprocessatKyivTheologicalAcademyduringthesecondhalfofthe19thcentury–atthebeginningofthe20thcentury were investigated by N.Gupan, Ie.Plekhanov, O.Cherkasov,T.Tkhorzhevska,G.Borovska,V.Ilyin,S.Kuzmina,S.Meshkovaia,M.Muravytska,A.Plekhanov,N.Suhova,M.Tkachuk,V.Fazan,I.Iuras.

ThemostsimilartothesubjectofourresearchisV.Fazan’sPhDthesisdedicatedtothestudyofPedagogyatKyiv,Moscow,St.PetersburgandKazanTheological Academies at the beginning of the 19th century – in the 1920’s.However,inthisscientificwork,thepedagogicaltrainingatthreeabove‐mentionedhighertheologicalacademiesoftheRussianEmpirewasgeneralized,butthepeculiaritiesofpedagogicaleducationatKyivTheologicalAcademywerenotinvestigated.

REFERENCES“HighestapprovedstatuteofOrthodoxtheologicalacademies.no.47154dated30May

(1869).” [Высочайшеутвержденныйуставправославныхдуховныхакадемий.№47154от30мая(1869г.)]InTheCompleteCollectionofLawsoftheRussianEmpire:Collection2. Vol. 44: 545‐556. StPetersburg:Tipografiia IIOtdeleniiasobstvennoiIegoImperatorskogoVelichestvakantseliarii,1873.

“Ideasofcommissionaboutthewayoforganizationofpracticalclassesforthefourth‐yearstudentsatlocalseminary.”[Соображениякомиссииоспособеустройствапрактических занятий студентов IV курса в местной семинарии]. TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.12(1873):562–564.

“Necrologue.N.L.Zaitsev.” [Некролог.Н.Л.Зайцев].Pravoslavnoieobozreniie,no. 2(1872):82–84.

“Protocols ofmeetings of the Council of Kyiv Theological Academy for April 1870.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за апрель1870года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.8(1870):1–44.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJulyandAugust1869.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизаиюльиавгуст1869года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.1(1870):3–75.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforDecember1870.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за декабрь1870года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.3(1871):1–54.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforFebruary1871.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за февраль1871года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.6(1871):1–44.


129

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMarchandApril1871.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамартиапрель1871года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.7(1871):1–60.

“Protocols of meetings of the Council of Kyiv Theological Academy for May 1871.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамай1871года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.9(1871):1–88.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforNovember1870.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за ноябрь1870года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1871):1–76.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforDecember1871.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за декабрь1871года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.5(1872):1–64.


“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforOctober1871.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за октябрь1871года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.3(1872):1–48.

“Protocols of meetings of the Council of Kyiv Theological Academy for September1871.” [Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии засентябрь1871года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1872):1–84.

“Protocols ofmeetings of the Council of Kyiv Theological Academy for April 1873.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за апрель1873года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.9(1873):381–444.

“Protocolsofmeetingsof theCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforMarch1873.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизамарт1873года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.7(1873):329–380.


“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforNovemberandDecember1872.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемииза ноябрь и декабрь 1872 года]. Trudy Kievskoj duhovnoj akademii, no. 3(1873):129–188.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforSeptemberandOctober1872.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемииза сентябрь и октябрь 1872 года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.2(1873):45–128.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforJanuary1874.”[Протоколы заседаний Совета Киевской духовной академии за январь1874года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.6(1874):231–285.


TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

130

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademyforFebruary‐June1876.”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемиизафевраль‐июнь1876года].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.8(1876):225–336.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademy(30March,26,28April,6and31May1878).”[ПротоколызаседанийСоветаКиевскойдуховнойакадемии (30 марта, 26, 28 апреля, 6 и 31 мая 1878 г.)]. Trudy Kievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1878):385–432.

“ProtocolsofmeetingsoftheCouncilofKyivTheologicalAcademy(30September,11,28Octoberand25November1877).” [ПротоколызаседанийСовета Киевскойдуховнойакадемии(30сентября,11,28октябряи25ноября1877г.)].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.6(1878):129–192.

“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1870‐1871academicyear.”[Отчето состоянии Киевской духовной академии за 1870‐1871 учебный год].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.10(1871):1–32.

“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1871‐1872academicyear.”[Отчето состоянии Киевской духовной академии за 1871‐1872 учебный год].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1872):1–46.

“ReportonthestateofKyivTheologicalAcademyin1874‐1875academicyear.”[Отчето состоянии Киевской духовной академии в 1874‐1875 учебном году].TrudyKievskojduhovnojakademii,no.11(1875):23–88.





Case of reduction of lectures in the departments of moral theology, pedagogy andgeneralchurchhistory.10September1869–21October1869[Делоосокращениилекций по кафедрам нравственного богословия, педагогики и общейцерковнойистории.10 сентября1869 г. –21октября1869 г.], 1869, File5970,Inventory1,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv.

Demianenko,Natalia.“Teacher’sgeneralpedagogicaltraininginthehistoryofhigherschool in Ukraine (the 19th century – the first quarter of the 20th century).”[Загальнопедагогічна підготовка вчителя в історії вищоїшколиУкраїни(ХІХ–першачвертьХХст.)].PhDdiss.,InstituteofPedagogyandPsychologyof Professioanl Education of National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences ofUkraine,1999.


131

Kuzmina, Svitlana.“Courses of Pedagogy in Kyiv Theological Academy: Content andTraditionsofTeaching.”[КурсипедагогікивКиївськийдуховнійакадемії:змістітрадиціївикладання].NaukovizapyskyNaUKMA.Filosofiiatareligiieznavstvo,no.76(2008):57–62.http://nz.ukma.edu.ua/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=246&Itemid=31.

Meshkovaia, Svitlana. “Secular component of Orthodox theological education in theRussianEmpirein1857‐1884.”[СвітськийкомпонентправославноїдуховноїосвітивРосійськійімперії(1857‐1884рр.)].PhDdiss.,V.N.KarazinKharkivNationalUniversity,2004.

Mshanetsky Semen. About moral education in childhood [Мшанецкий Семен. Онравственном воспитании в период детства], 1869, File 436, Fund 304,InstituteofManuscriptsoftheV.I.VernadskyiNationalLibraryofUkraine,Kyiv.

Notes of subjects taken in the academy in 1867‐68 and 1868‐69 academic years[Конспектыпредметов,преподаваемыхвакадемииза1867–1868и1868–1869 учебные годы], 1869, File 5963, Inventory 1, Fund 711, Central StateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv.

Prishchepa, T. “Teaching Bulgarians at Kyiv Theological Academy (1878‐1915).”[Навчання болгар у Київській духовній академії (1878‐1915рр.)]. VisnykKyivskogoNatsionalnogo universytetu imeniTarasa Shevchenka. Istoriia,no. 1(2015):34–36.http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/VKNU_Ist_2015_1_10.

ProgramofPedagogylecturesgiventothird‐yearstudentsin1875‐76academicyear[Программалекций,преподанныхстудентамIIIкурсав1875‐1876учебномгоду по педагогике], 1876, File 1187, Inventory 3, Fund 711, Central StateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv.

Programs and notes of lectures given in 1874‐75 academic year. [Программы иконспекты лекций, прочитаннях в 1874‐1875 учебном году], 1875, File1126,Inventory3,Fund711,CentralStateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv.

Review of information given in Pedagogy classes to third‐year students of KyivTheologicalAcademyin1872‐73academicyear[Обозрениепреподанногопопедагогике студентам Киевской духовной академии ІІІ курса за 1872 –1873 учебный год], 1873, File 1017, Inventory 3, Fund 711, Central StateHistoricalArchiveofUkraine,Kyiv.

Rohova, Tetiana, and Tetiana Tverdokhlib. Pedagogical heritage of lecturers ofKyivTheologicalAcademy(secondhalfofthe19thcentury–thebeginningofthe20thcentury) [Педагогічна спадщина викладачів Київської духовної академії(другаполовинаXIX–початокXXстоліття)].Kharkiv:Tsyfrovadrukarnia№1,2013.

Shyp,N.A.KyivTheologicalAcademy incultural‐educational spaceofUkraine (1819‐1919) [Київська духовна академія в культурно‐освітянському просторіУкраїни(1819‐1919)].Kyiv:NVP‘INTERSERVICE’,2010.

Suhova,Natalia.“ReformsofhigherOrthodoxtheologicaleducationinRussiainthesecondhalfofthe19thcentury.”[РеформывысшегоправославногодуховногообразованиявРоссиивовторойполовинеXIXвека].PhDdiss.,St.Tikhon’sOrthodoxUniversityoftheHumanities,2006.https://vivaldi.nlr.ru/bd000162600/view

TETIANATVERDOKHLIB

132

Tserkovna,V.“GraduatesfromKievTheologicalAcademy–OutstandingRepresentativesofRomanianOrthodoxClergyoftheXIXthCentury(ontheMaterialsof“ChisinauDiocesan Registry”) [Випускники Київської духовної академії – видатніпредставникиправославногодухівництваРумуніїХІХст.(заматеріалами"Кишинівських єпархіальних відомостей")]. Naukovyi visnyk Izmailskogoderzhanvogohumanitarnogouniversitetu,no.34(2016):138–142.

http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nvidgu_2016_34_27.ZaitsevNikolaiLazarevich[ЗайцевНиколайЛазаревич],File1466,Fund175,Instituteof

ManuscriptsoftheV.I.VernadskyiNationalLibraryofUkraine,Kyiv.Zaitsev,N.“Basicprinciplesoftraining.”[Основныеначалаобучения].TrudyKievskoj

duhovnojakademii,no.9(1868):519–544.———. “Basicprinciplesof training.” [Основныеначалаобучения].TrudyKievskoj

duhovnojakademii,no.8(1868):296–324.Zaitsev,N.L.,I.I.Malyshevskii,andI.T.Ekzempliarsky.Guidetoelementaryeducation

[Руководствокначальномуобучению].Kyiv,1869.Zelenska, L. “Kharkiv National Pedagogical University named after H. Skovoroda:

milestonesofhistory”[ХарківськийнаціональнийпедагогічнийуніверситетіменіГ.С.Сковороди:віхиісторії].Pedagogikatapsykhologiia,no.50(2015):168–181.http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/znpkhnpu_ped_2015_50_21.


THEPLACEOFSTUDENTSANDWORKERSACTIVISMINPOLITICS:

AHISTORICALREFLECTION

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR*

ABSTRACT.HistoryhasrevealedthatovertimeStudentsandWorkersthroughtheir activism have played significant role in politics as they have acted aschecksinanypoliticaldispensationthatisagainstthecommoninterest.Thisisbecausewhile the proletariats (workers) produce thewealth plundered bythoseinauthority,thestudentsformtheliterati,onwhoseshouldersresttheconscience of the society. It was in line with this mandate that in the 19thCentury, Russian studentswere in the forefront of the struggle against theCzars’ exploitative anddictatorial social system. Similarly, Chinese studentsconstitutedthemostactivegroupsinthefightagainstfeudalismandJapanesecolonization.Inthe1960s,studentstookuparmsinoppositiontoinhumaneWesternconsumersocietiesandtheirexploitationandrepressionofthepoor,blackandyellowraces.AlsoAmericanstudentswereactivelyinvolvedinthecivilrightmovements,especiallyintheSouthernparts.UndertheStudentsforaDemocraticSociety(SDS)theycreatedaclimateofopinionabouttheVietnamWarwhichtheAmericanpeoplecouldnotignore.InAfrica,outburstsinMali,Zaire, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Nigeria and South Africa have shownstudentsandworkersasimportantfactorinthedecolonizationpolitics.Thisisbecausetheoppressivepoliciesofthestatehavemostoftenfurtherimpoverishthem both physically and psychologically. However, with the attainment ofIndependence, this role have been crippled by the forceswhich they paperintends to interrogate. Data obtained from primary and secondary sourcesweredeployedtocarryoutthestudywithananalyticalandnarrativehistoricalmethod.Findings indicatethatoppressivepoliticshasbeenthemajorfactorthat stimulated their role in politics especially during the decolonizationprocess,andthatintheneo‐colonialstate,emergingforcesandpoliciesofthegovernmentaredirectedatdestroyingthisrole.Keywords:Workers,Students,Governance,Politics.

*Lecturer,Department ofHistory, Faculty ofArts,ObafemiAwolowoUniversity, Ile‐Ife.E‐mail:[email protected]

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

134

IntroductionTheoriginoftradeunionmovementinNigeriacouldbetracedtothe

pre‐colonialperiod.At this time, thereexistedguilds,mutualaidgroupsandprofessionaloroccupationalcraftunionsallofwhichfunctiontoplaytheroleoftradeunion.However,theseassociationsarenotinthemodernsenseofitfullfledgedtradeunion.Rather,mostofthemaremerelyworkersassociation.1However, availablehistorical evidencehas revealed that casesof oppressiverules has also manifested in Nigeria especially during the Colonial periodleadingtotheemergenceofworkersandstudentsgroups.Inthisway,activitiessurrounding the emergence of Trade Unionism have been associated withoppressivegovernment.Itisinlinewiththisthatithasbeennotedthus:

Therevolutionarywave,thatthatwasravagingtheworldaftertheSecondWorldWardidnotspareNigeria.ThefirstmajorconfrontationbetweentheColonialmaster and theNigerianworking class broke out in June 1945,undertheleadershipofMichaelImoudu.Thisgeneralstrikelastedfor40daysandalltheworkersdemandscompletelywon.The1945generalstrikemarked a significant turning point in the history of trade unionism inNigeria;itwasnotforjokethatMichaelImoudueventuallybecametheall‐timeNigerianLabourleadernumber1.ThisstrikepassedanunforgettablemessagetothecolonialmastersthatNigerianworkershadfinallyarrivedandwereequallycapableofrevolutionaryacts liketheircounterpart theworldover.IftheNigerianworkershadcarriedoutthismagnificentstruggleunderanindependentworkingclassparty,thequestionofworkerspowermighthavebeenconcretelyposed,butitallendedupasordinaryeconomicstruggle. The colonial masters did not leave this matter for chance; ifNigerianworkingclassof1945wasthatpowerful,whatwouldbecomeofitin1950sandabove?

Fromtheabove,itisclearthattheinceptionofmoderntradeunionin

Nigeriacouldbesaidtocoincidewithcolonialism.Consequently,thefirstsetoftradeunionsweremodelledafterBritishunions.Unlikethesituationinmostdeveloped countries, trade union preceded industrialization in Nigeria.However,attheearliestperiodofcolonialism,Nigerianswerediscouragedfrombelonging to unions as union membership was regarded as anti‐ colonialattitude.2Thissituationspedupthebirthofit,suchthatin1912,thefirsttradeunionorganizationwasborninNigeria.Thestrengthofitorganisationbecame

1D.Otobo,TheRoleofTradeunionsinNigerianIndustrialRelations(London:Malthouse,1987),12.2Ibid.,12.

THEPLACEOFSTUDENTSANDWORKERSACTIVISMINPOLITICS:AHISTORICALREFLECTION

135

evidentinthefactthatby1913,theunionalreadyhaditsbranchesinKadunaand Port‐Harcourt. It is on record that it was initially called Southern CivilService Union, with about 500 memberships, cutting across the length andbreadthofthenation.ItwaslaterrenamedNigerianCivilServiceUnionaftertheamalgamationoftheSouthernandNorthernprotectorates.

ThesuccessoftheactivitiesoftheNigerianCivilServiceUnionandtheneed to check the excessiveness of the colonial administration led to theformationofotherworkersunions.Thisbecameevidentwhenin1931thelongpre‐eminenceofthecivilserviceunionwasbroken.Thiswaswhentherailwayworkerswent on a short and sharp strike led byMichael Imoudu, against anewlyintroducedsystemofcalculatingwages.InthesameyeartheNigerianUnionofTeacherswasinauguratedandthefollowingyeartheRailwayWorkersUnionwasformed.ThestrikebytheRailwayworkerswasseenassignificantbecause they gave a clearer picture of the exploitative manoeuvres of thecolonialgovernmentandhoweverthishadrobbedthepeopleoftheresources.Insupportofthis,O.Kazeemopinedthus:

Colonialpoliticaleconomywasfoundedontheexploitativeprinciple.ThecolonyservedasasourceofcheaperrawmaterialsformetropolitanBritainaswell as amarket for its goods (Colonial economywasmainly gearedtowardsmakingNigeriasupplierofrawmaterialsforimperialisteconomy).Toachieve thisgoal, theBritishcolonizersbuilt railways to facilitate theextractionof rawmaterials like cotton and groundnuts from theNorth,cocoafromtheWestandpalmkernelfromtheEastaswellasmineproductsfromPlateau.Thismaderailwaytransportationthemainpivotuponwhichthe whole colonial economy was resting. The railway workers werecarrying the burden of the colonial economy and felt that their interestmightnotbeproperlyprotectedundertheCivilServiceUnionwheretheywerebefore1931.Expectedly,NigerianRailwayWorkersUnionstartedoutasaverymilitantlabourunionandwasluckytohaveafearlessandhonestleadershipheadedbyPaMichaelImoudu.3These were followed by the formation of the Post and Telegraph

Workers Union, The Nigerian Marine African Union, and the Public WorksDepartmentWorkersUnion,andseveralotherssuchthatby1940therewereovertwelvetradeunionsactivelyorganisingontherailways,atthedocks,inthepostandtelegraphoffices,thePWDs,andtheotherkeypointsinthesinewsoftheeconomicandmilitaryinfrastructureofcolonialNigeria.4

3OlaKazeem,“CentenaryofTradeUnionisminNigeria,”http//www.workersalternative.com.4YusufuBalaUsman,Nigeria:IndependenceonaGoldPlatter?,vol3,no.3(Nigeria:In‐DepthAnalysis,1988),10.

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

136

Whilemostoftheabove‐mentionedUnionscouldbedescribedasformedbythosedirectlyaffectedbycolonialemploymentpolicies,otherbodiesthatwerealsodiscriminatedagainstandwantedanendtowhattheydescribedasunjustpoliciesbegantoemerge.Thus,in1937,Lagos,witnessedtheformationofTheLagosFishermen’Association,followedin1938bytheTaxiDriversUnionandtheCanoeTransportUnion,andin1939bytheWholesaleBuildersAssociationandin1940bytheWomenSellersUnion.EventheNightSoilRemoversUnionwasformedin1942.Inhisanalysisofthesituation,KazeemO.wrote:

...Asaresultofthefactthatcolonialexploitationwasbitingpainfullyhardnotonlyinthesouthernprotectorate,butalsomoreterriblyintheNorthernprotectorate.Nigerianworking class startedoutwithhandsof solidarityandcomradelyinteractionsnation‐wide,withoutanyethnicandreligiousbigotry,evenbeforethenationwasborn.Alotofbattleswerewagedandwonbythisunionagainstthecolonialmastersandthisfurtherencouragedmore workers to enroll and by 1931 another two major unions wereformed:NigerianUnionofTeachersandNigeriaRailwayWorkersUnion.5

Ontheeventualsuccessofthesegroupsinbringinganendtocolonialexploitationinthearea,AremuI.notedthus:

Thefirstgenerationofworkersemergedfromthenascentcolonialeconomicandadministrative structures. Colonial authority preferred forced unpaidlabourbutwaschallengedbytheworkers. Inessence, thecolonialorderpromptedtheemergenceofearlyworkingclassmovement inNigeria. Inbetween the twoworldwars, (from1919and1945) theBritish colonialeconomyintensifiedcolonialexploitationthroughdirectincreasedtaxation,retrenchmentoftheworkforce,wagecuts,casualisationandhourlypayments.Theseperiodsalsomarkedtheradicalizationofthecountry’slabourmovement.Thehighpointof labour’sresistancewasin1941whenNigeria’srailwaymenledbyMichealImouduandtheunion’ssecretary,MrAdenekanmatchedthroughstreetsofLagostoseeGovernorSirBernardBourdillion.Theprotestledtomajorvictoriesfortheworkersintermsofimprovedwagesandabolitionofhourlypaysystem.Subsequentlabouragitationssuchasthe44daystrikesof1945ledbylabourNO1MichealImouduandthe1949EnugucoalIvaValleymassacreinwhich22coalminerswerebrutallykilledbythecolonialpolicefordaringtodemandforwagearrears.Theseagitationslinkedthedemandforbetterworkingconditionsinparticularwiththedemandforindependenceingeneral.NationalistslikeDrNmadiAzikweandObafemiAwolowobackedthe demands of the trade unions, deploying their journalist prowess topressurethecolonialauthoritiestoimprovetheworkers’lot.6

5Kazeem,Ola.“CentenaryofTradeUnionisminNigeria.”6I.Aremu,“TheNigerianEconomyandtheLabourMovement,recordedlivefromFRCNdailycommentary,”(2012),http//www.nigeriacommentaries.blogspot.com.


137

While theWorkers’Unionwas formedandcontinued to fight for theliberationofthepeople,groupofNigerianstudentsbothathomeandabroadalso came togetheragitate forbetter government conditions inNigeria.Thisaction is well documented in the emergence and activities of West AfricanStudents Union (WASU) between 1925 and 1952. They established a newsmagazineWASU,inwhichtheyundertookpublicenlightenmentsessionssuchas discussion groups, public lectures and conferences designed to influencepoliticalthinkingwithintheBritishPoliticalpartiesandspuractivismathome.MembersalsoundertookregulartourofNigeriatoraiseawareness;asexemplifiedintheactivitiesofleadersLadipoSolankebetween1929and1932,duringwhichincollaborationwithotherstoestablishbranchesofWASUinLagos,Ibadan,Ago‐Iwoye, Ijebu‐Ode, Ile‐Ife,Enugu,Port‐Harcourt, Jos, Zaria andKano. SomeofthesecentreslaterbecameimportantbranchesoftheNigerianYouthMovement,mobilizingNigeriansforagitationagainstcolonialrule.Evenatthelocallevels,studentscontinuetocondemntheactivitiesofthecolonialadministrationaswellasformUnions.Usmangavethepicturethus:

…alongsidethese,oldBoysofvarioussecondaryschoolslikeKingsCollegeandTeachersColleges likeKatsinaCollegeandBauchiTeachersTrainingCollegeorganisedthemselvestoo.TheNigerianUnionofStudentsitselfwasformed in 1939. Kinship and tribal Unions like the Igbirra ProgressiveUnion, the Urhobo Renascent Convention, the IdomaHope Rising Unionsprang up along older ones like the IbibioWelfareUnion and the IbibioFarmersUnion.7FromtheanalysisoftheactivitiesoftheUnionsinthecolonialperiod,it

issafetoarguethatthehistoryofthecountry’slabourandstudentsmovementsare linked to thehistory,progress anddevelopmentofNigeria’s society andeconomy. It is also important to note that the relatively peaceful road toindependenceinNigeriacontrastssharplytoyearsofbloodyarmedstrugglesthatheraldedfreedominothercountries(Mozambique,Angola)asaresultofthe doggedness of both the Students and Workers Union of that period.8Nigeria’srelativepeacefulroadtofreedom,notwithstanding,thelongstruggletotheindependencewasalsocharacterizedbymassresistance,massstrikesand protests, enormous sacrifices largely by Nigerian workers, their tradeunionsandlabourmovement.

7Usman,Nigeria:IndependenceonaGoldPlatter?,10.8SeeAremu,“TheNigerianEconomyandtheLabourMovement.”

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

138

WorkersandGoodGovernancesinceIndependence

Thegeneralideaofstrugglingforselfgovernmentfromcolonialmasterwastocreateasituationinwhichthepeoplewillbefreefromtheoppressivedictatesofforeignruleaswellasasituationinwhichtheresources(bothhumanandnatural)willbechanneltowardsinternaldevelopment.9Forexample,inaletterdated17thSeptember1945,fromPoona,India,aNigerianSoldier,PrivateNo.82602.TheoAyoola,wrotehomethus:

Wealloverseassoldiersarecomingbackhomewithnewideas...wehavebeen told what we fought for. That is ‘freedom’ we want nothing butfreedom.

Inlinewiththeabove,Usman10opinedthattheaboveandactivitiesoftheworkersUnioninNigeriamademattersverycleartotheBritishwiththeirlongexperienceofofcolonisationanddecolonisation,goingbackalmosttwohundredyearstotherebellionofNorthAmericacolonies.

Sinceindependence,theNigeriantradeunionmovementhasledseriesofstrugglesforbothgoodgovernanceanddecentworkagenda.Intheareaofgoodordeceitwage,ithasbeennotedthatisevidentfromtheHarragin,Turdo‐Davis,MillerCommissionsofthepre‐colonialperiodtoAdebo,Udoji,Shagari,2000minimumwagereviewsandthecurrentminimumwageCommissionoftherecenttimes.Intheareaoffightingagainstdictatorship,labourmovementremainedaunifyingforcefornationalunity.Significantlylabourchampionedthestruggleagainstmilitarydictatorshipswithenormoussacrificesthat includeddissolutionsofitselectedexecutivecouncils.Ithasalsobeenattheforefrontoftheresistanceagainstpolicessuchas fuelprice increaseswithoutwhich theearningandpurchasingpoweroftheworkingclasswouldhavebeenerodedbyinflation.ThetradeunionhasservedasbackboneforthefirstdevelopmentaleffortofthenewlyindependentNigeriaduringthefirstandsecondRepublics. Inthedischargeoftheabove,successivegovernmentshavetendedtosee labour as a problem in their attempt to implant their programs. Thus,variousattemptsweremade(atvarioustimes,includinglegislativeactions)toensurethatlabourisamenabletothedictatesoftheregimeinpower.Thiswasmoreduring themilitaryerawhen thevariousmilitary regimesparticularlypursedwithvigourthefightagainststrongunion,whichtheyseeasapotentialthreat,especiallywhenconsideredinthelightofthefactthattheirinterventionin governmenthasno constitutional backing and subject to rejectionon the

9Usman,Nigeria:IndependenceonaGoldPlatter?,10.10Ibid.


139

basisoflegality.11Inthiswayanystumblingblockwasclearedwithallmilitarymightandpower.ItwasinlinewiththisthateventheMediawasatvarioustimesdeclaredenemyandthegovernmenthadtocomedownhardonthem.For example,on the2nddayofAugust,1973, a journalistMr.Amakiriof theObserverhadhisheadshavedwithanoldrustyrazorblade,strippednakedandgiventwentyfourstrokesofthecaneonhisbareback.ThishappenedattheofficeofthethenRiversStatemilitarygovernor,CommanderAlfredDiete‐Spiff,becausehe published the grievances theNigerianUnion of Teachers, RiversStateBranchhadagainstthegovernor.12

TheattemptbytheStudentUniontocheckmatetheillegalityofmilitaryincursion intopolitics,metwith themightofarmsof thegovernmentwhichdescribed their activities as illegal. For example, in 1978, the Obasanjoadministrationdescribedthe1978studentcrisesasthehandiworkofstudentsandtheirhoodlumaccomplices.Inthefederalgovernment’sstatementonthecrisis,itannouncedthus:

Those studentsand theirhoodlumaccomplices…ought tobeashamedofthemselves;…it has been established that the students solicited andemployedtheservicesofundesirable…tocommittheirlawlessacts.13

Asawayofmakingsuretheactivitiesofthestudentswerebroughtundergovernmentcontrol,theadministrationcontinuedtotargetthosetheybelievedwereimportingwhattheydescribedasMarxismintotheschool.Forexample, in1981and1982itattemptedtodeportDrPatrickWilmot,aradicalsociologyteachinginAhmaduBelloUniversity,Zaria,whileithandedoverDrDennisBrutus,ateachingattheuniversityofCalabartotheSouthAfricaIntelligenceAgencies.14

By 1985, the administration of Babangida camewith the policy of theimpositionoftheStructuralAdjustmentProgram(SAP),whichbroughtuntoldhardshiponthepopulace,impoverishingparentsomuchsothatitbecameverydifficultforthemtofinancetheirwardsthroughschool.However,by1986,withtheimplementationofSAP,thethreatofthewithdrawalofeducationsubsidyandtherestrictedenvironmentofacademicpursuitwasresistedbyNigerianStudents.15

11 B.T. Bingel. “Understanding Trade Unionism in Nigeria: Historical Evolution and Prospects forFuture Development,” in Trade Union in Nigeria: Challenges for the 21st Century, edited by F.Adewunmi(Lagos:FredrichEbertFoundation,1997),32‐33.

12Jakande,I.K.,„ThePressandMilitaryRule,”inNigerianGovernmentandPoliticsunderMilitaryRule,editedbyOyeleyeOyediran(London:Macmillan,1979),119.

13A.Iyorchia,EssaysinPopularStruggles(Oguta:ZimPanAfricanPublishers,1986),56‐58.14“Wilmot:SpyorExtremist,”TheAfricanGuardian(March28,1988).15M.Tukur,“TheImmediateFutureofHigherEducationinNigeria,”LettertotheHonourableMinisterofEducation,27thSeptember,1984.B.Olukoshi,ed.,ThePoliticsofStructuralAdjustmentinNigeria(London:JamesCurrey,1993),24.

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

140

LiketheShagari’sadministration,BabangidafinallysucceededindeportingWilmot and continued to target other university teachers and studentswhospokeout.DescribingtheoutcomeofthisKukahwrote:

GeneralBabangidabegantowagewaragainstwhathereferredtoasundueradicalism.The targetwas theacademic community.By this time, it hadsharpeneditstoolsofcontestationwiththemilitary.TheFacultyofArtsandSocialSciences(FASS)inAhmaduBelloUniversity,ZariaanditscounterpartsintheuniversitiesofIbadan,Calabar,PortHarcourtandJos,hadbecomethehotbedsofveryinformedMarxistsradicalisminthe80’s;…Universitylecturerswereharassedordetained.Theywereaccusedofnotteachingwhattheywerepaidtoteach.Fearbegantogriptheacademiccommunityasmanyradical intellectualsbeganwhatwould laterbe referred to theseasonofmigration.16Otherscholars17gavefurtherinformationthus:

AcrossthecampusesinNigeria,membersofASUUthereforecameunderintensepressure..…thegovernmentlaunchedawaracrossthecampuses,seekingtocurbwhatittermedundueradicalism.Thegovernmentfoughtitswarontwofronts.Itsmovetobareitsfangsbyflushingoutsometwentylecturers across the country was thwarted when ASUU secured a courtinjunctionrestrainingtheMinisterofEducationfromgoingaheadwiththedecision.Governmentthenmadeanothermove.BypromulgatingtheTradeUnions[MiscellaneousProvision]Decreeof1986,thegovernmentdisqualifiedASUUfrommembershipofNLC.Alongwiththiscametheremovalofthemandatorycheck‐offsystembywhichUnionsautomaticallydeductedmoniesfromworkers’salariesintothecoffersoftheUnions.

At theendof theday, theappointmentDr.Festus Iyayi,whowasthepresident of the Academic Staff Unio of Universities and lecturer with theUniversityofBeninwasin1987terminatedonthegroundsthathehadbeenengagedinprivatepractice.However,theacademiaarguedthatitwasratherthe fact thathewasbentonopening theeyesofNigerians to theevilof thegovernmentofthedaythatledtohisdeportation.18 ThishostilitycontinuedeveninthereignofAbacha,thusF.Adewumni,specificallynotedthus:

16M.H.Kukah,DemocracyandCivilSocietyinNigeria(Lagos:SpectrumBooksLtd,1999),79.17Olukoshi,ThePoliticsofStructuralAdjustmentinNigeria,193;Kukah,DemocracyandCivilSocietyinNigeria,159.

18“WhywasWilmotDeported,”TheAnalyst3,no.2(March‐April1988):34.


141

EventssincetheascendancyoftheAbacharegimeinNovember1993,havepractically resulted in the complete demobilization of the unions. Theincoherentresponseoforganizedlabourtothepoliticalcrisesthatfollowedtheannulmentofthe1993presidentialelectionprovidedtheopportunityfortheAbachaadministrationtodissolvetheexecutivecommitteesoftheNigerianLabourCongress,TheNationalUnionofPetroleumandNationalGasWorkers (NUPENG) and thePetroleumandNaturalGas Senior StaffAssociation ofNigeria (PENGASSAN)whowere frontally involved in theattempttoforceade‐annulmentoftheelectionresultsin1994.19

Apart fromtheabove, themilitaryadministrationunderGeneral Abachacontinuallyclampeddownonthemedia.Forexample,GeneralAbachawithinitsfirst100daysinoffice,seizedover50,000copiesofTELLmagazinewithoutany reason(January2,1994);ArrestedandmolestedemployeesofGuardianExpress(January4,1994);abortedNUJPressconference(January14,1994);ChargedtheeditorinchiefofRazorMagazineforsedition(January19,1994);ExecutedKenSaro‐Wiwaandothers(January2,1994),DisruptedthemeetingofCampaignforDemocracy,aHumanRightOrganization(February15,1994)(Akinkuotu,A.1994).

EvenbeforetheAbachaAdministration,themilitaryadministrationunderGeneralBuhari,showeditsintolerancetothemediawhentheadministrationcloseddownnewspaperhouses,whilepractitionersweredetained(SomeofthenewsmendetainedincludeTundeThompsonandNdukaIrabor.ThisledtothepopularNUJandGuardianprotest)(NationalConcord,1985).

ThevictoriesoftheStudentbodyinassociationwiththeWorkersUnionininthispursuithavebeenacknowledgedthus:

Studentshaveindeed,overtime,registeredsomeconsiderablevictoriesinthiscountry.ForexamplethedemonstrationagainstMurtala’sdeath,theAlimustgodemonstrationof1978,whichshookevenamilitarydictatorship;the Ango must go demonstration of 1986 which shook Ahmadu BelloUniversity,theanti‐SAPandremovalofoilsubsidyriotsof1989,1990and1991andthedemonstrationagainsttheannulmentoftheJune12electionsin1993wereallspasmsthatmadeNigeriasitupontheissuesoftheday.Tobesure,someof theseclasheswithsecurityagencieshave ledtodeaths.Unfortunately,studentdemonstrationsinNigeriahavetendedtobead‐hoc,chaotic,lackingsubstantialstayingpower,clarityandfocusandabilitytogoacross theboard todrawnational sympathies to their cause.This is notunconnected with the very limited and sectoral interests of the issues

19CitedinA.Adesoji,“TheSubversionofLabourMilitancyinNigeria:ACaseoftheNigerianLabourCongress,”TheNigerianJournalofEconomicHistory,no.5&6(2003),(Ibadan:QuantumPublishers,UniversityofIbadan,2003):32.

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

142

aroundwhichstudentsagitate,namely,theirwelfare,andaccesstoeducationandcampusconditions.Ofcourse,studentsdonotnecessarilyhaveplanstoreplacegovernmentssincetheyhavenostrategicreplacementsfromtheirranks.Giventheirmobilityandthefactthattheyarelargelybirdsofpassage,theycanonlyholdoutamoralvisionforsociety.Whentheymoveon,theyhandthebatonandjointhestruggleinanotherturfinourturbulentnationallife.20

NigerianUnion,GovernmentRepressionandtheRoadAhead ThesituationinNigeriatodayissuchthatanyobserverofWorkersandstudent unionism in Nigeria will have to concede that their dynamism haswaned considerably.While theWorkers union seems to stillmaintain someconsiderableinfluence,theStudentUnionshavegreatlydiminishedasaresultof long years ofmilitary repressions, intimidation, blackmail, infiltration bysecurityagencies,co‐optionofmembersthathavetakentheirtollconsiderably.Ithasalsobeenobservedthatthelackofdemocraticspaceandmisappropriationofresources led to sharp corrupt practiceswithin the various bodies. As such,studentshave toalign themselveswith institutionsandagentsofsometimesdubiousinterestsandcredentialstoremainafloatorsecurethingssuchasgoodgrades,accommodation,etc.thesearesomereasonswhichhaveledtomoraldecay on our campuses, thus turning them into haven for cults and secretsocieties.Thus,insteadofencouragingstudentsbodiestoengagethegovernmentinrobust discourse, the political classwould rather have them become armedthugsforpoliticalactivities.Thishasbeensystematicallyachievedthroughtheunderfundingof theeducationsector,victimizationof lecturers,encouragingbraindrainaswellasrecruitmentamateurstomanagethesystem.Theresultisthatthatenergythatwouldhavebeenchanneledtowardsvibrantunionismis now tailored towards violent cult activities on campus, so much so thatthousandsofstudentshavelosttheirlivestoitwhilepropertiesworthmillionshave also been destroyed. Apart from the injured and those rusticated orexpelled,troubleduniversitiesstudentsaregenerallyknownfortheiractivismeverywhere.21 The above is supported by the table belowwith gives a chronicle ofactivitiesofthesegroupssincetheperiodofmilitaryrepressions,intimidation,blackmail,infiltrationbysecurityagencies.

20Kukah,DemocracyandCivilSocietyinNigeria,160.21A.I.Ajayi,T.E.Haastrup,andF.M.Osalusi.“MenaceofCultisminNigerianTertiaryInstitutions:TheWayOut,”Anthropologist12,no.3(2010):155‐160.


143

TableI:chronicleofactivitiesofCultActivitiesonSomeSelectedInstitutionsDate Activities Place

1985 Anon‐cultstudentincurredthewrathofanotherstudent,whowasacultleaderforsnatchingthelatter’sgirlfriend.

UniversityofNigeria,Nsukka.

1991 AstudentofUniversityofPortHarcourtwasbeheadedduringafeudbetweencultmembers;theactivitiesofsecretcultgroupsresultedinthedeathofaPrincipalAssistantRegistrarandhiswife.

DeltaStateUniversity,Abraka,

2002 A300leveleconomicsstudentwasshotdeadandslaughteredattheDallimoorearea

Ado‐Ekiti,EkitiState.

2006 CultmembersinvadedUniversityofAdo‐Ekiti,burntthecadet’soffice,killedthreestudentsandinjuredstudentsandstaffoftheuniversity

UniversityofAdo‐Ekiti

nd tenstudentsweregunneddowninadaybycultists ObafemiAwolowoUniversity,Ile‐Ife

2006 SeunOyedola,alecturerwasabductedandkilledduringaclashbetweencults

OlabisiOnabanjoUniversity,Ogun

1999 fivestudentswerekilledslainstudentswereGeorge‘YemiIwilade,thethenSecretaryGeneral,OAUStudentsUnion,TundeOke,amemberofDemocraticSocialistMovement,EfeEkede,EvianoEkelemuandYemiAjiteru).

ObafemiAwolowoUniversity

2003 Threestudents—KehindeDosumu,OmotayoSurajuandOlalekanAjaowerekilled.

KwaraStatePolytechnic

2008 TonyIleogbuna,wasmurdered(actingHeadofGeologydepartment)

EnuguStateUniversityofScienceandTechnology

2004 VincentUlohowasmurderedincoldblood. UniversityofBenin

2004 WaleAdeyoriandBanjiofwerekilled FederalPolytechnicIlaro

2005 AshifatOlatunjiSaheed,astudentwasslaughtered PolytechnicIbadan

2005 GbengaJoseph,apolicemanattachedtoanti‐cultsquadofKwaraStatepolicecommandwaskilledbysuspectedcultist

KwaraState

2005 CultistsslaughteredBolajiToniwa,astudent LagosStateUniversity

2012 Cultistkilledafinalyearstudent UniversityofBenin

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

144

InthecaseoftheWorkersUnionvariousgovernmenthavecontinuedtoadoptmanipulativemeasurestowanetheirstrength.Theseranged fromthedissolutionof theexecutives, arrest,detentionand imprisonmentof leaders,sponsoringpro‐establishmentlabourleaderstocentralleadershippositionsaswellassupportingmalcontentswithintherankandfileoflabourmovements.In1976,theNationalExecutiveCommitteeoftheNLCledbyWahabGoodluckwasdissolvedwhileGoodluckalongwithotherlabourmemberswasbannedfromparticipatinginlabouractivitiesin1977.22

TheadministrationofGeneralBabangidawhichdidnothideishatredfortheirradicalpositionmarkedthedoomofthelabourmovement,bymeddlingintotheinternalaffairsofthebody.Thiswasachievedthroughtheprocessofco‐option,enticementandinducement.HavingbeenrattledbytheAliChiromaledNLCduringthestudents’riotsatAhmaduBelloUniversity,Zariain1986.AliChiromahadkeptthegovernmentrestiveduringtheperiodofhisleadershipoftheNLC.ThekillingofstudentsatAhmaduBelloUniversity,Zaria,thedemonstrationsagainstMargaretThatcherandtheresistancetofuelpricehikesweresomeoftheremarkableachievementsoftheChiromaerabetween1986‐1988.Tocurbthepowerof theUnion, thegovernment, sponsoredTakai Shamang,makingavailablefinancialresourcestotheShamangfaction.Theelectionsendedinastalematewhichledtotheso‐calledsackingoftheChiroma‐ledexecutivewithShamang,thecontestant,declaringhimselfaspresident.Withthisimpasse,themilitarywentontoproscribethemovementand installasoleadministratorwholatersawtoanotherroundofelections.Thistime,Mr.PaschalBafyau,whowasconsideredamilitaryapologistbecamethenewPresidentofLabour.23 Under General Abacha, the government sensing the support for theSocialDemocraticParty,ChiefAbiola’sparty,bytheNLCdecidedtouseonlytheoppositionstalwartstokillLabour.Asawayofactualizingthis,theadministrationsackedtheexecutivefollowingtheoilworkers’strikein1995andinitsplaceappointedmembersoftheNationalRepublicanConvention(NRC)toactassoleadministrator. These include Major General Samuel Ogbemudia, Alhaji UbaAhmedandMr.AsonBur.Withthisdevelopment,Labourwasunabletomakeanyseriousinputregardingthewelfareofitsconstituency.24 In line with the above Adesoji25 observed that the fear and apathycreatedinworkersthroughunendingrationalization,retrenchment,wagefreezeaswellasoutlawingtheuseofastrikebecameeffectiveasatooloffrightening

22Adesoji,“TheSubversionofLabourMilitancyinNigeria,”32.23Kukah,DemocracyandCivilSocietyinNigeria,161.24Ibid.,161.25Adesoji,“TheSubversionofLabourMilitancyinNigeria.”,32‐33.


145

labouractivists.Thisnotonlymadeitpossible fortheworkerstobe furtherawayfromtheirleaders,ithasalsomadeitpossiblefortheleadershiptotradeawaytheunionfortheirownaggrandizement.

Conclusion FromthediscoursesofaritisclearfromhistorythatthestrugglesofNigerian workers and students have beenmonumental and their liberationfight through checkmatingdictatorial governance remains one of theirmostsignificantcontributionsinthehistoryofthenationsincecolonialtime.Theseunionsconsistentlyopposedcapitalismduringthecolonialperiodandoppressivegovernancefromtheperiodofindependenceandintheprocessconstructeditsideology of resistance which has assumed its highest exemplification inrevolutionarysocialism. In thisway, thesemovementshavehadaharvestofqualitativesocial,economicandpoliticalimprovements,progressiveinternationalanddomesticlegislationsandtensofindependentworkersandstatestoshowforitsstruggles.Significantly,unlikecrusadesofthebourgeoisies,itsstruggleshavebenefitted theentireoppressedhumanity.Theanti‐colonial struggle inNigeria for example, illustrates the extent to which political and economicstruggleofworkersandtheirstudents’unioncounterpartshaveexpandedtheframeofrightsenjoyedbythecitizenryandimproveditsoverallqualityoflifeHowever, there have deliberate attempt to make sure both bodies do notperformtheserolesinpost‐colonialNigeria,itwasthereforenotsurprisingthatinordertodenytheworkersUnionoftheassociationandfriendshipthatwouldhaveenricheditvariousgovernmenthavedeliberatelypreventedthemfromaffiliating with other International bodies except the International LabourOrganization(ILO)andtheOrganizationofAfricanTradeUnionUnity(OATUU).Thiswasparticularlyobservedinthe1970’sundertheMurtala/Obasanjoregime.This linehasbeen towedbysubsequentadministration, thusweakening theabilityoftheUnionstocheckmatethegovernment.Thisresultedinsituationinwhich the union leadership (both students and workers) became bunch ofmilitarylackeyswhohadnoaffinitywithprinciples,integrityanddemocracy.

For there to be a turnaround there is need for a fundamentalrestructuringoftheentiremovements(especiallythestudentsunions)inordertomakeitrespondbothtotheneedsofitsmembersandalsotohavecloutinsociety.TheseUnionsmustthereforerealizethatthemostpotentweapontheyhaveistheirunionism,whichremainsthethreadthatbindsthemtogether,iftheymustretaintheirrelevance.

EMMANUELOSEWEAKUBOR

146

REFERENCES

“WhywasWilmotDeported.”TheAnalyst3,no.2(March‐April1988).“Wilmot:SpyorExtremist.”TheAfricanGuardian.(March28,1988).Adesoji, A. “The Subversion of Labour Militancy in Nigeria: A Case of the Nigerian

Labour Congress.”TheNigerian JournalofEconomicHistory, no. 5&6 (2003).Ibadan:QuantumPublishers,UniversityofIbadan,2003.

Ajayi, A.I. T.E. Haastrup, and F.M. Osalusi. “Menace of Cultism in Nigerian TertiaryInstitutions:TheWayOut.”Anthropologist12,no.3(2010).

Aremu,I.“TheNigerianEconomyandtheLabourMovementrecordedlivefromFRCNdailycommentary.”2012.http//www.nigeriacommentaries.blogspot.com.

Bingel, B.T. “Understanding Trade Unionism in Nigeria: Historical Evolution andProspects for FutureDevelopment.” InTradeUnion inNigeria:Challenges forthe21stCentury,editedbyF.Adewunmi.Lagos:FredrichEbertFoundation,1997.

Iyorchia,A.EssaysinPopularStruggles.Oguta:ZimPanAfricanPublishers,1986.Jakande, I.K., “The Press and Military Rule.” In Oyeleye Oyediran, ed., Nigerian

GovernmentandPoliticsunderMilitaryRule.London:Macmillan,1979.Kazeem,Ola.“CentenaryofTradeUnionisminNigeria.”2012.

http//www.workersalternative.com.Kukah,M.H.DemocracyandCivilSocietyinNigeria.Lagos:SpectrumBooksLtd,1999.OlukoshiB.,ed.ThePoliticsofStructuralAdjustmentinNigeria.London:JamesCurrey,

1993.Otobo,D.TheRoleofTradeunionsinNigerianIndustrialRelations.London:Malthouse,

1987.Tukur M. “The Immediate Future of Higher Education in Nigeria” Letter to the

HonourableMinisterofEducation,27thSeptember,1984.UsmanY.B.“Nigeria:IndependenceonaGoldPlatter?”Nigeria:In‐DepthAnalysis3,no.

3(1988).———.For theLiberationofNigeria:EssayandLecture1969‐1978. London:Beacon,

1979.

SUBBTO64,no.1(2019):147‐150

VI.REVIEWS

PatriciuVlaicuandRăzvanPerșa,eds.,CanonicalTraditionandMissionoftheChurch(Cluj‐Napoca:PresaUniversitară

Clujeană,2018),350pp.[InRomanian]

Thefirstvolumeofthecollection

“Studii Nomocanonice” brings togetherthepaperspresentedattheInternationalConferenceof CanonLawandOrthodoxTheologyfromBruxelles(3‐5September2015).The13contributionsaredividedin five sections, each of them having adistinct importance for this theologicaldomain: canonical tradition, canonicalprinciples,roleofclergy,Churchandlaw,theactualityofthetradition.

The only article included in thesection The Canonical Tradition of theOrthodox Church is dedicated by Revd.Assoc.Prof.IrimieMargato“TheCanonicalViewofRevd.Prof.LiviuStan”[pp.9‐25],oneof themost importantprofessorsofCanon Law in the Romanian OrthodoxChurch.Hiscanonicalthinkingiscomplexandprofound,andtheauthorunderlinesfive main characteristics: a) his view isbasedonAndreiŞaguna'secclesiasticallycanonicalfoundation;b)LiviuStan'scontri‐butionasapathfinder for theRomanianOrthodoxCanonLaw;c)hispreoccupationtorediscovertheOrthodoxcanonicalprinciples,especiallywiththatoflaity'sparticipationtoChurch'slife;4)hispersistencetoreturntothestudyofecclesiasticlawsourcesande)Stan'sapproachtoallcurrentproblemsfacedbytheChurch.

ThesectionTheFundamentalCanonicalPrinciplesintheTraditionofOrthodoxChurchopenswith thestudysignedbyAssist.Prof. IulianMihaiConstantinescu, “LaTradition canonique orthodoxe et l'application du principe hierarchique dans la viepractiqueecclesiastique(TheOrthodoxCanonicalTraditionandtheImplementationof

REVIEWS

148

thehierarchicalprincipleinthepracticalecclesiasticLife)”[pp.29‐48].Inthiscontributionthe author analyses one of the most important principles for he organization andleadershipoftheChurch–thehierarchicalprinciple,whichisdirectlyrelatedtotheother canonical principles and highlights the problemof “canonical primacy” in thesensethattherecannotbeabishopabovetheecclesiasticalpower,transmittedthroughapostolicsuccession.ThissubjectisevenmorerelevantwhenwethinkthattheuseofthishierarchicalprinciplewithinthepracticallifeoftheChurchhasraisedmanyissues,withsomecanonicalimplicationsfortheinter‐orthodoxrelationships,duetodifferentinterpretationsandecclesiasticalinterestsofsomelocalAutocephalousChurches.

The following study, “Synodality and primacy: expressions of EcclesiasticCommunionandjointResponsibility”[pp.49‐73],writtenbyRevd.Assoc.Prof.PatriciuVlaicu,highlightstherelationbetweenthesacramentalandeschatologicaldimensionof theChurchandthe institutionalone.Theauthoremphasisesontheonehandthewaysinwhichsynodalityismanifestedatthelocallevel,andontheotherthatthiswastheeffectoftheinfluenceoftheRoman‐ByzantineEmpireontheChurch'sstructure.

The study signed by Revd. Assist. Prof. Grigore Dinu Moş, “Is ‘sacramentaloikonomia’acoherentandfaithfulexpressionofOrthodoxecclessiologyandisitusefulfor itsecumenicalvocation?Reflectionsonsometheologicalconceptionsandofficialstatements”[pp.74‐100],exploresthenuancesofthisconceptandthelimitationsofthispractice,underliningthetwopositionsofSt.CyprianofCarthageandSaintBasiltheGreat regarding the admission of heretics and schismatics, and their influence overtime.Theauthorconsidersthatthetheoryof‘sacramentaleconomy’doesnotrepresent“thetraditionandperennialteachingoftheOrthodoxChurch”.

Thethirdsection,TheRoleofClericsintheCanonicalTraditionoftheOrthodoxChurch, begins with the study of Revd. Assist. Prof. Nicolae‐Coriolan Dura, entitled“Communicating the Priest'sMission in a SecularWorld” [pp. 103‐117]. The authoradmitsthatthereisagreattemptationforclericstoidentifythemselveswiththeworld,buttheChurchhaskeptvigil,sothat,throughhercanonicalnorms,theaspectconnectedtothismenaceshouldbeclearedupsincethebiginning.Theyareguidedbytheserulestoknowexactlywhatthenatureoftheirserviceinthisworldis.

The next study, “The historical Developing ofClerical Offices and CanonicalNormsregardingtheclerics intheCanonicalTraditionof theOrthodoxChurch” [pp.118‐165],writtenbyAssist.RăzvanPerşa,analysestheterminologicalandhistoricalconsiderationsregardingthetitleofclericalofficesandemphasizesdifferentwaysofnaming the clericalordersandoffices in theOrthodoxChurch, suchas: inferiorandsuperior clergy. Referring to the non‐clerical personnel the author stresses that theinferior clergy although doesn't receives through χειροτονἰα the admission in thesacramental hierarchy, they have distinct functions and liturgical responsibilities inordertobuildtherelationshipbetweenclericsandlaity.

Thefourthsection,ChurchandLaw,includestwocontributions.Thefirstone,“ThenaturalandlegalpersonsintheOrthodoxChurchandtheCatholicChurch”[pp.169‐198] is signedbyAssoc.Prof.Liviu‐MariusHarosa,whoexplains theconditionsrequiredbylaityandclericstoholdtheirdistinctplaceintheecclesiasticcommunity.Theothertext,“TheReligiousCommunitiesandEuropeanCourtofHumanRights”[pp.

REVIEWS

149

199‐211]belongstoRevd.Ionuţ‐GabrielCorduneanuandpresentsthedifficultiesoftheinternational organism to define ‘faith’ or ‘religion’ and the religious character of acommunity.Finally,theCourthasfoundtwocriteriatoidentifyanyreligiouscommunities:self‐identification (which requires an organized structure) and the approval of thenationalauthority.ThekeyistheinstitutionalautonomyofeveryreligiousgroupandofcoursetheneutralityoftheState.

The fifthandfinalsection,TraditionandMission inactuality,openswiththestudyofJean‐PaulDurand“Lesattentatsdejanvier2015etlerespectlaicendisciplinerFrance.Commentlalibertedelasatire?Responsesdel'Etatdedroitaun‘islamisme’terroriste(TheattacksofJanuary2015andlaicrespectindiscipliningFrance.Howfarcangothefreedomofsatire?ResponsesoftheRuleofLawtoaterrorist'Islamism')”[pp. 215‐224]. The author explores the reaction of the French State towards theterroristattackswhichareidentifiedasIslamistattacks,asinthecaseofCharlieHebdoattack, but the main problem remains the limitations and responsibilities of thejournalists, who are protected by the French law for the freedom of press (29 July1881).ThereareexposedsomeexamplesofattacksagainstbothMuslimsandCatholicChristians,evenagainstthePope,butaccordingtotheFrenchLawandJurisprudenceneither of them was classified as slander and so to risk perpetuating this kind ofsituationsremainsopened.

Revd.Assoc.Prof.CristianSoneatriesinhisstudy,entitled“TheChristianmissioninachangingecclesialandglobalcontext.TheRoleofAcademicOrthodoxTheology”[pp.225‐248],toidentifythemainchallengesofthecurrentChristianmission.Thisincludessolutionsandanswerstoanewkindofspirituality,theneedofanewkindoftheologicaldiscourseandanewwayofmakingmissionamongthemigrantsandproselytes.Finally,theauthoraddressestheproblemofthetheologicalteachinganditsimportance.

The second contribution of Assist. Răzvan Perşa is called “Themission andinvolvementoflayandmonksinthelifeoftheOrthodoxChurchaccordingtoCanonicalTradition”[pp.249‐300]andfollowstheroleofthelaityandmonachism,underliningespecially the rights and duties of laymen: to participate to the exercise of thesacramental,teachinganjurisdictionalpoweraccordingtothecanonicalrulesastheywerespecifiedovertime.

Thenextstudy,“Bioethics:ChallengeandChancefortheChurch.TheChristianunderthepressureofbioethicaldecisions”[pp.301‐331],belongstoRevd.Prof.ŞtefanIloaieandtriestoestablishtheroleofBioethicsintheDialogbetweenscienceandfaith,placedattheinterferenceofmanyotherscientificdomains.TheauthorstressesthattheneedsandvaluesoftheChristianfamilyareunderthepressureofthebio‐ethicaldecisions,whichregardmanyaspectsofourdailylife.ThisiswayweneedlandmarksandaChristianvisionforviableBioethics.

Thelasttext,“Diacriticalthinking.Apologyandculturalmission”[pp.332‐350],iswrittenbyAssist.Prof.NicolaeTurcan,whoprovesthatthediacriticalthinkingjoinsthedialoguewithGodandthedialoguewiththeworld.Thiskindofthinking“maytaketheformofcriticismbutalsoofapologetic;canbecomeaphilosophicaldiscourseinthehorizonoffaith,aChristianphilosophy,aswellasatheologicalformulationinthelightofdivine inspirationandattentiveto thecurrentphilosophy,akindofphilosophical

REVIEWS

150

theology;canappearasanalogousandcontemplativethinking[...]oftenparadoxical,thedialectical thinking takesplace in the intervalbetweenphilosophyand theologyseekingtoglorifywithdiscernmentandfidelitytothe truthof theChurch,Godwhocannotbecomprehendedbythemind”(p.350).

ThepapersincludedinthisvolumehighlightoncemorethatthepreoccupationsinthefieldofCanonLawandMissiologyaddressrealproblemsfacedbyoursocietyandprovethattheOrthodoxTheologyhasasayinsolvingatleastpartofthem.

DRAGOȘBOICU

SUBBTO64,no.1(2019):151‐154

PaulSiladi,WordandImage(Cluj‐Napoca:PresaUniversitarăClujeană,2019),588pp.[InRomanian]

Amongthemostsurprisingworkspublishedinthefirsthalfofthecurrentyear the volume signed by Paul Siladioccupiesaveryaspecialplace.WrittenasaThDthesisunderthecoordinationofFr. Prof. Valer Bel, Siladi's work isattemptingtoprovethatitisimpossibleto fullydeliver theChristianmessage ifwordandimageareseparated.Missionisunderstood as the sum of the Church’sactions,bythemeansofwhichittransmits,sustains, and creates the environmentforexperiencingfaith.

Theauthordivideshisvolumeinnine chaptersprecededbyan Introduc‐tion and followed by Conclusions andBibliography.

The Introduction serves to con‐textualize the topic and shows that theinseparable connection between wordandimageisbasedonChristHimself,Whopossesses the double quality of beingboth the Father’sWord andHis Image.Evenifthewordandtheimagehavebeenthe objects of numerous analyses, theirconnectionhasonlyseldombeenaddressedfromatheologicalpointofview,andthereareonlyafewworksdedicatedexclusivelytoit,mostlyinthewesternprotestantspace(JeanPhillippeRamseyer,JacquesEllul,JerômeCottin).AnotableworkintheRomaniantheology is the Th.D. thesis of fr. Dumitru Vanca, focusing chiefly on didactically andcatecheticalaspects.Allthesecontributionsatthetheologyofthewordandtheimagewillbeanalyzedindetail.

ChapterIentitledStateoftheresearch[p.25‐70]liststheworksdedicatedtotheissueofthewordandtheimageinRomaniafromthesecondhalfofthe20thcenturyon, preciselybecauseRomanian theologians have shown interest in thismatter. Thearticles were divided into three categories, depending on subject matter: studiesdedicatedtotheword,theicon/image,andtotherelationbetweenthem.Inadditiontothese,thereisasectionpresentingthearticlesoficontheologyappearedinrepresentativewesternjournals.Itmustbesaidthatinthemultitudeoflocalpapersdedicatedtotheicon,thereisnotenoughoriginality,neitherinapproach,norinstructure.Theremarkable

REVIEWS

152

iconologyarticleswrittenbyfr.StăniloaehavestoodthetestoftimeandhaveirrevocablymarkedtheRomaniantheologicalthought(restrictingittoChristologyasfr.IoanI.Icăjrcriticizes).EquallyworthyofbeingrememberedarethearticlewrittenbyIoanRămureanuonthevenerationoficonsinthefirstthreecenturiesoftheChristianera,andthewelldocumentedcontributionsoffr.NicolaeChifărinthefieldofByzantineiconoclasmandtheicontheologyelaboratedonthatoccasion.

Chapter IIentitledWordand Image‐Asemanticandphilosophicalanalysis [p.71‐92]isreservedtothetheologicalinvestigationofthetwoconcepts,beginningwiththeiretymologyandthenextendstowardstheirphilosophicalmeanings.Thefirstphasepresentsthemeaningsoftheword ‘cuvânt’ (word)inRomanian,andthencomparesthemtotheamplemeaningstheGreekwordlogoshas.Regardingtheconceptofimage,thetheologicallanguageusestwodifferentkeyconcepts,inheritedfromtheGreek:eikonandeidolon.Althoughbothofthesetermsmay,onacertainlevel,betranslatedwithimage,therelationthetypesofimageshavewithrealityisdifferent.Eikonisanimagereflectingareality,whereaseidolonistheimageofanillusion,ofafigmentofimagination.Themostwell‐knownanalysisofthetwoconcepts inRomaniantheology is fr.Dumitru Stăniloae’sstudy‘Theidolasimageofdeifiednatureandtheiconaswindowondivinetranscendence’.Synthesizingfr.Stăniloae’sideasfromtheintroductiontohisstudy,itcanbestatedthateventhougheikonandeidolonpartiallyshareacommonsemanticfieldcentredontheimage,thedistinctionbetweenthematastrictlyconceptuallevelisn’tallthatunambiguousinthebiblicalsphere.ThelastsectionofChapterIIisdedicatedtoabriefpresentationoftheLatintermsforimage:imago,forma,andfigura.

Chapter III is dedicated to Christology (Logos and Eikon – a Christologicalapproach)[p.93‐150].InChristiantheologytheconnectionbetweenLogosandEikonisbasedontheirunityintheuniquepersonoftheSonofGod,WhotheScripturesdefineastheWordandImageofGod.Thechapterhastwoparts:thefirstonepresentsthephilosophy and the theology of the divine Logos, and the second focuses on theChristologicalsignificanceofthetermeikon.ThefactthattheSonofGodmadefleshwastheFather’sLogosorWordhasneverbeenchallenged,beingpartofwhatmightbecalledthe common doctrinaire corpus of all Christian theologies. For this reason, the spacereservedforthedivineLogosinthestructureofthethesisissmallerthantheonededicatedtotheSonasFather’s Image.ThewaywecomprehendGod’svisibility, considering thebiblicalsources,bearsthemarkofourconfessionalappurtenance.ThisisthecaseoftheFrenchCalvinisttheologian,JérômeCottin,whotriedtooutlineaProtestanttheologyoftheimage,butwhostillholdsfasttothetraditionalpositionsoftheReformation,reaffirmingthe incompatibilitybetweenthe theologyof the imageandthatof theword.For theReformedtheologianssuchasJ.CottinthebiblicalstatementthattheSonis‘theimageoftheinvisibleGod’(Col.1,15)isnothingmorethanareformulationoftheJohannineassertionthattheSonistheWordofGod.Bycontrast,theOrthodoxeasthasdevelopedintimeanimagetheologybasedonChristology.TheissueoftheSon’svisibilitywascentraltotheChurchFathers,asonethathadultimateimplicationsandwasanendlesssourceoftheologicalspeculations.FortheRomaniantheologytheonewhoabsorbedandwentintotheseaspectsofChristologyevendeeperwasfr.DumitruStăniloae.HisvisionislargelyconcentratedonthepointwhereChristologyandanthropologyconnect,elaboratingontheimplicationsoftheembodiedChrist’sbeingGod’sWordandImagehasforthewordandimageusedinhumancommunication.

REVIEWS

153

InChapter IV ,TheManandCreation from theperspectiveofWord– ImageBinom[p.151‐178],theauthoranalysestheconnectionthetwoconceptshaveonananthropologicalandcosmologicallevel.Ontheformerlevel,itissignificantthatthemaniscreatedintheimageoftheLogos‐Image,asyntagmareunitingthetwofundamentalqualitiesoftheSonofGod,namelybeingGod’sWordandImage.ThesequalitiesarealsofoundinthemancreatedintheimageoftheOneWhoisbothLogosandImage.Moreover,theword‐imagebinomial isnotconfinedtotheanthropologicalsphere; itcanbeseenintheentirecreation.Theworldhidesbehindtheimage,throughwhichitisaccessibletous,reasonsofthethingsplacedtherebyGod;whenthemanperceivesthemheknows their source,God theWord.Aneloquentexpression for this is fr. Stăniloae’sphrasenamingtheworld‘plasticisedreason’,ameaningthatbecamematerial,andduetoitscorporeality,accessibletosight.

ChapterV,LogosandEikonintheIconoclastera[p.179‐332],themostextensivesectionofthethesis,isdedicatedtotheanalysisoftherelationshipbetweenlogosandeikon,betweenwordandimageduringtheIconoclasticperiod.Thisageisfundamentalforourtopic,becausethatiswhenthetheoreticalbasesfortheicontheologyarelaidandbecausethoseconflictsare‘thegenesisofathoughtontheimagewehaveinherited’.Theforemostrepresentativesoftheiconodules,namelySt.GermanosofConstantinople,St.JohnofDamascus,St.NicephorosofConstantinopleandSt.TheodoreofStudionhavepaidspecialattentiontotheconnectionbetweenwordandimageintheirtreatises.

ChapterVI,entitledWordandImageintheWesternThinking[p.333‐388],isdedicated to the relationship between word and image in western theology and isconsequentlydividedintotwosections:apresentationofthereceptionandtheconsequencesoftheByzantineiconoclasminthewest,andareviewoftwoworksofreferenceonthetopic,writtenbyJean‐PhilippeRamseyerandJacquesEllul.Theyhaveverydifferentapproachesandperspectives.RamseyerismuchclosertoOrthodoxthantoCatholictheologywhenhewritesaboutthewordofGod:fromthebeginningitisconnectedtothesphereofvisibility,forthesimplereasonthatwhenGodspeaksHealsoacts,orratherGodactsbyspeaking.Hiswordisnotavehicleofintellectualcommunication,butanactionbywhichGodbecomes involved inhistory, callingbeingsand things intoexistence.Thisway,althoughHeisnotactuallyvisible,theWordofGodbecomesvisiblethroughHisactions.AccordingtoJ.Ellul,thesightintroducesaplasticdimensioninbiblicalrevelation.Itisnaturallyanimmaterialplastic,asortofspiritualbodywhosevisibilityoffersitselftotheinnersight.Therefore,sightisaWordinimmaterialimages.Ontheotherhand,theFrenchReformedtheologian,JacquesEllulassumesaniconoclasticposition.Endowedwithfantasticintuitions,Ellul’simagecriticismcannotbefullyignored,evenwhenhewritesabouttheuseoficonsinthechurch.

ChapterVII,WordandImageinModernity[p.389‐424],dealswiththeword‐imagerelationshipinmoderntimes.Thestartingpointistheideathatmodernityandpostmodernismshareacontinuity,notonlyhistorically,butmostlywithrespecttoideas.Thespecificelementofmodernityonasemioticlevelisbreakingthebondbetweensignifierandsignified.Wordsandimagesareself‐referential:theynolongerrefertosomethingfoundbeyondthem.Bothwordsandespeciallyimageshavethisdestiny.Thesolutiontofreetheimagefromthistyrannyistheicon,freefromthelogicofmodernimagery.Insteadoftheimage’sself‐reference,theicon’skenosiswhichfadesasmuchaspossibleinordertoallowabridgetothebeyondtoform.

REVIEWS

154

ChapterVIII,MissionthroughWord,ImageandSacrament[p.425‐464],presentsthemissionthroughword,image,andSacrament.TheentirecultoftheChurchand,aboveall,theSacraments,areexamplesoftheunionbetweenwordandimage,spiritandmatter.Theword,theimage,andtheSacramentaremeansthroughwhichtheChurchcanefficientlyfulfilitsmissiontogrowandtoincorporateallpeopleinthemysticalbodyofChrist,sothattheymayalllivefullythisway.Aspecialaspectofthisunionisthewitnessgivenbytheholinessone’slife.TakingChristasamodelinlifehewhopreachesthewordofGodhas tocomplete thewordsheuttersbyhisown image,as the fulfilmentor theembodimentofthosewords.Thewordwhichdoesn’tbecomearealityintheonewhoarticulates it is a mere empty promise. For someone to have a powerful word, apersuasiveword,capabletoconvertothers,itisnecessarythatthatwordbeaccompaniedbythe imageof thepersontalking,embodyingthemessageoftheGospelshepreaches.This reality is exemplifiedby themonks in theEgyptiandesert, forwhompersonalexampletookprecedenceoverempty,moralisingtalk.

Thelastchapter,InclusiveSimultaneous[p.465‐476],analysesseveralpossibledefinitionsoftheword‐imagerelation.Firstly,thereisthedefinitionofN.Ozolinwhoperceives thisrelationas ‘analogyandcomplementarity’.When this relation is discussedfromatheologicalperspective,itstermsaretheologyandicon,andeverythingbecomesclearernow:thetwoconcepts,analogyandcomplementarity,showtheirfaults,butthisdoesnotannultheirdidacticvalue.Thesourceoftheshortcomingsisthetendencyforamechanicalunderstandingbroughtaboutbythelatterterm.Usually,twocomplementaryobjectsformaunity,whichisoftensomethingelsethanwhateachelementisinitself.Inthiscase,theologyandiconformaunitythatisparadoxicallynothingdifferentfromwhattheyeachexpress.

TheConclusions[p.477‐488]emphasizethatbothconceptsaresimultaneousmeansofcommunicatingandtransmittingrevelation,andtheyareequallymeansofcommunicating and transmitting the faith in God and His work. Jesus Christ is thesupremeandultimatesynthesisofGod’swork,becauseHe is theembodiedSonandWordofGod,aswellas‘theimageoftheinvisibleGod’(Col.1,15).AmongthewaysGodcommunicatesHimselfandhisworktousarethewordandtheimage/icon,inarelationofinclusivesimultaneity,playingamajorpartinthemissionoftheChurch,namelyinpreaching, supportingandexperiencing faith.Thewordand the imagehavevariousconcreteformsofbeingpresentintheChurch.ThewordidfoundintheScriptures,inpreaching,inprayersetc.Theimageisfoundinicons,theimageofChristandHissaints,theimageoftheconfessor,theimageoftheChristianmotheretc.,eventheimageoftheauthenticChristiancommunity.Thewordandtheimageintheirsimultaneity,intheseformsorothers,aremeansofcommunicatingandlivingthefaith,meansofChristianwitnessandmission.Thepreachedwordmustbeaccompaniedby image.Theman,createdintheimageofHeWhoistheWordandtheImageoftheFather,isinhisturnwordandimage,andinorderforhistestimonytobeauthentic,hiswordsmustexpresshis inner reality, theymust spring forth froman authentic experience of the realitypreached.Otherwisethewordsremainemptyandnevergobeyondbeingmeresound(evenarticulatedones),asuperficialshellforadistanttruth.Inthesesituations,theriskofhypocrisyisimmense.

DRAGOȘBOICU

SUBBTO64,no.1(2019):155‐156

MaxOxbrowandTimGrass,eds.,TheMissionofGod.StudiesinOrthodoxandEvangelicalMission,RegnumStudiesin

Mission(Oxford:RegnumBooksInternational,2015),258pp. Mission has always been animportanttopicbothfortheEcumenicaldialogue and the Churches. Therefore,nowadays,theresearchesdedicatedtoitare intensively investigatedanddiscussedin different contexts. An interesting andrecent book from this area can also beconsideredtheoneentitled:TheMissionofGod.StudiesinOrthodoxandEvangelicalMission,editedbyMaxOxbrowandTimGrass,thatbringstogether22studiesinmissiologysignedbyspecialisedpeoplefromdifferentscientificareas. The two editors, namely Rev.CanonMaxOxbrow,whoistheinterna‐tionaldirectorofFaith2ShareandFacilita‐toroftheLausanne‐OrthodoxInitiative,andRev.TimGrass, importantwriterandtheologian with a Baptist background,arehelpedbyother22theologiansfromdifferent confessional and geographicalspaces,andtheyareanalysingdifferentaspectsofmissionanditsunderstandinginOrthodoxandEvangelicalcontexts. In the introductory part (p. 1‐6), after speaking about the way how theevolutionof societyhave shifted theunderstandingofmissionand its relevance fornowadays,theeditorspointaninterestingfactabouttheimportanceofknowingtheotherintheecumenicaldialogue,showingthat: “Manydoctrinal, liturgicalandethical issuesdivideus, andmaycontinue todosountilourLord returns,but increasinglya significantnumberofOrthodoxandEvangelicalChristianshavebecomeconvincedthatthecentralityandurgencyof themission of God can andmust transcend these divisions and bring us together in acommon bond of love for God, each other in his world. The Lausanne‐OrthodoxInitiative (LOI) is one of this kind of expression of this research for reconciliationthroughthetransformingpoweroftheGospel”(p.2).

REVIEWS

156

Afterpresentingtheinstitutionalbackgroundoftheinvestigationandthereasonsof the aforementioned initiative (p. 7‐12), the editors split the content in four bigsections:“Mission”(p.15‐95),“Evangelism”(p.99‐172),“Spiritualtransformation”(p.175‐212) and “Authority” (p. 215‐238). These are the keywords of the whole investigation.Although,atafirstglance,thebooklooks,becauseofthissegmentation,limitedinanartificialway,aseriousreadingshowstherichnessofit. Therefore, theauthorsare investigatingdifferent segmentsof the topic thatcircumscribsthesectionfromdifferentpointsofview.Someofthemcometoitfromabiblicalperspective(like:RamezAttalach,whoseesthemissionfromtheperspectiveofconversionofPeterandCornelius(p.15‐16),MetropolitanGeevargheseMarYulios(pp.17‐19),orFemiAdeleye,whospeaksabouttherelationshipbetweenmissionandneighbourhood(p.20‐23).Others, like father IoanSauca,directorof theEcumenicalInstitutefromBosseyandDeputyGeneral‐SecretaryofWorldCouncilofChurches(pp.51‐67)orCecilM.RobeckJunior(pp.68‐84),comeintodebatefromatheologicalperspective,whiletheologianslikeLukeA.Veronis,triestospeakaboutthechallengesofmissionstartingfromacasestudyfromplaceslikeAlbania(p.85‐89)orEgypt(p.90‐95). Withoutfallingpreytoadidacticattitude,theauthorsalsodefinetermslikeEvangelism,spiritualtransformationorauthorityemphasizingtheirunderstandingindifferent traditions and cultural spaces, the relationship between them and thepotentialkeysofdialogue.Theyspeakthereabouttheevolutionof theirmeaning intheecumenicalspaceandalsoaboutthechallengesinitsdeepening.Theypointthere,asFatherIoanSaucasaysintheconclusionsofhisstudy,thefactthat: “In the past, the theological perspectives on ecclesiology, soteriology andmission of Orthodox and Evangelicals seemed to be irreconcilable, today they aresigns of reconciliation and common perspectives. The differences between OrientalandWestern approaches to theology in general still remain an issue, and at timessignsofmisunderstandinganddifferenceofdiscoursecanbeseen”(p.67). Despite of that, each dialogue attempt and meeting make the theologians,belongingtodifferentconfessionsandspaces,moreconsciousoftheircommonpoints,liketheTrinitarianbaseofmission,asBishopAnastasiosYanoulatosunderlinesit(p.24‐25),butalsoofaspectsliketheecclesiasticalbackground(p.25‐26),orthecommunitarianone,synthetized in thewords “Liturgyafter liturgy”aswell as their theologicalmeaningdevelopedbyfatherIonBria.Thiscanconstitutethebeginningofafruitfulway togetherbeingatrustworthywitnessofaheritageandofasetofspecificallyChristianvalues. Written in an interestingway and bringing together important theologiansfromtheOrthodoxandEvangelicalspaceinadebatededicatedtothemissionanditsoutcomesandtheircontemporaryvalue,thebookentitled:TheMissionofGod.StudiesinOrthodoxandEvangelicalMission,publishedunderthecoordinationofMaxOxbrowandTimGrassisbothanusefultoolintheecumenicaldialogueandahandbookthathelp the reader to understand themission froman inter‐confessional point of viewandtoseeitspotentialdevelopmentintomorrow'ssociety.

MAXIMMORARIU

THEOLOGIA ORTHODOXAstudia.ubbcluj.ro/download/pdf/1232.pdfassociated in iconography with the...

Documents

Transcript of THEOLOGIA ORTHODOXAstudia.ubbcluj.ro/download/pdf/1232.pdfassociated in iconography with the...