Skip to main content

Full text of "Eastern Christendom"

See other formats 


INI III! Ill II III II 



1 33 304 



THE PUTNAM HISTORY OF RELIGION 
Eastern Christendom 



Eastern 
Christendom 



A Study of the Origin and Development of the Eastern 
Orthodox Church 



NICOLAS ZERNOV 

Spalding Lecturer in Eastern Orthodox Culture^ 
University of Oxford 



FOUNDED 1131 




G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS NEW YORK 



ig6i by NICOLAS ZERNOV 
FIRST AMERICAN EDITION 

All rights reserved This book) or parts thereof, must not 
reproduced in any form without permission. 



Library of Congress Card Catalog Number: 61-5715 

MANUFACTURED IN GREAT BRITAIN 



CONTENTS 



PREFACE 15 

I THE CHURCH IN THE EAST DURING THE STRUGGLE FOR 

SURVIVAL. FIRST TO FOURTH CENTURIES 19 

The Church and Judaism The split of the Church from Israel The 
Church and Hellenism The Church and the Roman State The 
persecution: its origin and nature The causes of the Christian 
victory Early sects and heresies Writers and teachers of the Eastern 
Church in the second and third centuries 

II THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS AND THE ORIENTAL 

SCHISM. FOURTH TO EIGHTH CENTURIES 39 

Constantine the Great (306-337) The Emperor and the Ecumenical 
Council Ariamsm The consequences of Nicaea The victory of 
Nicene Orthodoxy The second Ecumenical Council and the Emperor 
Theodosius (379-395) The mass conversion of the Empire and its 
effects upon the Church St John Chrysostom (347-407) The 
Nestorian schism The Second Council of Ephesus (449) The 
Fourth Ecumenical Council (451) The Chalcedoman Schism 
Justinian I and his ecclesiastical policy (527-565) The Chalcedonian 
definition and the separation of the Oriental Churches Christianity 
and Nationalism Christianity outside the Byzantine Empire 
Rome and the Christian East Eastern monasticism 

III THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE 
CRUSADES. EIGHTH TO THIRTEENTH CENTURIES 81 

Islam The Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681) The revival of the 
Western Empire The Fihoque controversy The conversion of the 
Slavs The Photian schism Byzantine shortcomings and achieve- 
ments The significance of Humbert's excommunication The 
coming of the Crusaders The sack of Constantinople on Good 
Friday, 1204 The Slavonic speaking Churches Russia's conversion 
to Christianity The first fruits of Russian Christianity 

IV THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM. 
THIRTEENTH TO FIFTEENTH CENTURIES 115 

Russia under the Mongol yoke (1240-1480) Sergius of Radonezh 
(1314-1392) The missionary work of the Nestorian Church The 
Mongols and Christendom The Mongols and the conversion of Asia 
to Islam The last years of the Empire 

V THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION. FIF- 
TEENTH TO EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES 133 

The Ottoman Empire The Orthodox Church under the Turkish 
yoke The Orthodox East between Rome and the Reformation, Cyril 
Lukaris (1572-1638) The Orthodox Church and the Moscow 
Tsardom Two tendencies in Russian Orthodoxy The schism in the 
Russian Church The Orthodox in Poland and the Ukraine The 



CONTENTS 

incorporation of the Ukraine into Moscow Tsardom and the Council of 
1666-67 Archpnest Awacam (1620-82) The Russian Church on 
the eve of the reforms of Peter the Great (1668-98) Peter the Great 
(1682-1725) and the abolition of the Moscow Patriarchate The 
Nonjurors and the Orthodox Church The St Petersburg Empire and 
the Russian Church in the eighteenth century St Tikhon of Zadonsk 
and Paisy Velichkovsky Western ascendancy over the Christian East 
The Church of St Thomas in South India The Church of Ethiopia 
The Nestorian Church of the East The Church of the Armenians The 
Coptic Church The Jacobites Balkan Christians in the seventeenth 
and eighteenth centuries The Eastern Orthodox under the Hapsburg 
rule The Christian East at the time of its decline (fifteenth-eighteenth 
centuries) 

VI THE PERIOD OF INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND 

NATIONAL LIBERATION. NINETEENTH CENTURY 175 

The Russian Church at the beginning of the nineteenth century St 
Serafim of Sarov (1759-1832) Optina Pustm The Metropolitan 
Philaret of Moscow ( 1 782-1 867) The revival of missionary work The 
Slavophils Alexey Khomiakov (1804-1860) The emergence of 
national autocephalous Churches in the Balkans The Serbian Church 
The Prince-bishops of Montenegro The Church of Greece The 
Church of Rumania The Church of Bulgaria Success and failure of 
the Balkan Churches The Orthodox in Austria-Hungary The 
Russian Intelligentsia and the Orthodox Church Feodor Mikhail- 
ovich Dostoevsky ( 1 82 1-8 1 ) Vladimir Sergei vich Soloviev ( 1 853-1 900) 

VII THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL. TWENTIETH CEN- 
TURY 202 

The Russian Religious Renaissance Four converts from Marxism to 
Christianity Attempts at reform of the Russian Church (1905-14) 
Father John of Kronstadt (1829-1908) The All-Russian Council 
(August i8-November 9, 1917, and January 2O-April 7, 1918) 
Reorganization of the Eastern Churches after the First World War 
(1914-18) The revival of Christianity in the Balkans The main 
characteristics of Eastern Christendom in the nineteenth and twentieth 
centuries The Communists' godless campaign The reaction of the 
Orthodox The Russian Church in exile and its meeting with the 
Christian West The Russian emigrants and the Ecumenical Move- 
ment The present state of the Eastern Church 

VIII THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 227 

The significance of doctrine in the East The authority of the Church in 
the EastThe Holy Scripture and Church tradition The Com- 
munion of Saints Canonization of Saints among the Byzantine 
Orthodox The Mother of God Prayers for the departed The 
Eucharistic doctrine 

IX WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 238 

Holy Communion The Sacraments of the Eastern Christians 
Baptism Confirmation Confession Holy Unction Ordination 
Marriage Other sacramental rites Offices of the Eastern Church 
The Liturgical Books used by the Eastern Christians Some reasons 
for the difference between Eastern and Western approaches to 
Christian worship 



CONTENTS 

X THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 266 

The Church and the Child The Church and the laity The last 
rites Advanced training in spiritual life The Orthodox Church and 
ethical and social problems 

XI THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 276 

The meaning of ikons and frescoes for the Orthodox Subject matter 
of ikons and frescoes The ikons of the Church feasts Doctrinal ikons 
The revival of art in the Christian East Stages in the evolution of 
Byzantine Art The Schools of Russian ikon painters The Eastern 
and Western artistic traditions 

CONCLUSION THE CHRISTIAN EAST AND THE CON- 
TEMPORARY WORLD 297 

MAPS 301 

NOTES 303 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 305 

INDEX 3^9 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



1 . Santa Sophia^Constantinople. Founded 548 AD. Photo: Hirmer Verlag. 

2. Interior of Santa Sophia, Constantinople. Photo: Hirmer Vet lag. 

3. Interior of the mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna. 5th century. Photo: 
German Archaeological Institute, Rome. 

4. Interior of the Gapella Palatina, Palazzo Reale, Palermo. I2th century. Photo: 
Alinan. 

5. St Ripsima, Etchmiadzin, Armenia. 7th century. Photo: Academy of Construction 
and Architecture of the USSR. 

6. Santa Sophia, Novgorod, Russia. 1045-50 AD. Photo: Academy of Construction and 
Architecture of the USSR. 

7. King's Church, Studenica, Yugoslavia, I3th century. Photo: Cecil Stewart. 

8. Monastery church of GraCanica, Yugoslavia, c. 1320 AD. Photo: Mis %ernov. 

9. Church of the Intercession, Nerl, Russia. 1 165 AD. Photo; Academy of Construction 
and Architecture of the USSR. 

10. St Demetrius, Vladimir, Russia. 1193-97 AD. Photo. Academy of Construction and 
Architecture of the USSR. 

11. St Basil, Red Square, Moscow. 1554-1560 AD. Photo: Academy of Construction and 
Architecture of the USSR. 

12. Church of the Transfiguration, Kizhi, Lake Onega, Russia. Early i8th century. 
Photo: Academy of Construction and Architecture of the USSR. 

13. Tomb of St Athanasius, Convent Church at Lawras, Mt Athos. Photo: Karl Eller. 

14. Interior of the Cathedral of the Assumption, Moscow, c. 1475-9. 

15. Interior of the Church at Topola, Serbia, soth century. Photo: Cecil Stewart. 

1 6. Egyptian funeral portrait, University College, London, c. 2nd or 3rd century AD. 
Photo: University College, London. 

17. Ikon of St Paraskeva, Novgorod. I4th century. 

1 8. Ikon of Madonna and Child. 

19. Procession of martyrs, mosaic in the nave of San t' Apollinare Nuova, Ravenna. 
Mid 6th century. Photo: Anderson. 

20. Mosaic of the Emperor Justinian, in San Vitale, Ravenna. Mid 6th century. 
Photo: Alinan. 

21. Mosaic of the Empress Theodora, in San Vitale, Ravenna. Mid 6th century. 
Photo: Alinan. 

22. Mosaic of Christ, mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna* 5th century. Photo: 
German Archaeological Institute, Rome. 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

23. Mosaic of Christ Pantocrator, in the church at Cefalu, Sicily. I2th century. 
Photo- 



24. Mosaic of Christ Pantocrator, in the church at Daphni, Athens. 1 100 AD. Photo: 
Hmz. 

25. Christ surrounded by apostles and angels, in the dome of Santa Sophia, 
Salonika, Greece gth century. Photo Lykides, Salonika. 

26. Mural of the Deisis, Christ between the Virgin and St John the Baptist, Santa 
Sophia, Constantinople. I2th century. Photo: Hirmer Vet lag. 

27. Mosaic of the Emperor Leo VI, in Santa Sophia, Constantinople. Photo: Hinz* 

28. Mosaic of the Emperor Constantme IX Monomachos and his wife the Empress 
Zoe, in Santa Sophia, Constantinople, nth century. Photo- Hinz. 

29. Mosaic of St Demetrius between two bishops, in the Church of St Demetrius, 
Salomca. c. gth century. Photo: Hinz. 

30. Mosaic of Saints Peter and Damian, in the Church of Saints Cosmas and 
Damian, Rome. Mid Gth century. Photo Hans Sibbelee. 

31. Mosaic of Saints Gregory, Basil and John Chrysostom, Capella Palatina, 
Palermo. Photo: Anderson. 

32. Mosaic of the Census, Church of Kahrieh Djami, Constantinople. I4th century. 
Photo: Hinz. 

33. Ikon of Our Lady of Vladimir. I2th century. Photo. Academy of Construction and 
Architecture of the USSR. 

34. Ustug ikon of the Annunciation. 1 1 th-i 2th century. Tretiakov Gallery, Moscow. 
Photo: Academy of Construction and Architecture of the USSR. 

35. Head of St John the Baptist. i6th century. 

36. Ikon of St Alexis, Metropolitan of Moscow, i 7th century. 

37. Ikon of the Annunciation. i5th century. 

38. The Washing of Feet by Duccio. Siena. Photo: Anderson. 

39. Ikon of the Nativity, Novgorod. I5th century. Photo: Academy of Construction and 
Architecture of the USSR. 

40. Ikon of the Descent from the Cross. i5th century. Tretiakov Gallery, Moscow. 
Photo: Academy of Construction and Architecture of the USSR. 

41. Ikon of the Laying in the Bier. I5th centuiy. 

42. Painting of the Descent into Hell. Mt Athos. Photo: Karl Filer. 

43. Ikon of the Holy Trinity by Rublov. c. 14.11. Tretiakov Gallery, Moscow. 
Photo: Academy of Construction and Architecture of the USSR. 

44. Ikon of the Only Begotten Son the Word of God. ibth century. Reproduced from 
Kondakov: The Russian Icon. 

45. Ikon of the Vision of St Peter of Alexandria. i6th century. Reproduced from 
Kondakov: The Russian Icon. 

46. Ikon of the Procession of the Venerable and Life Giving Cross. 1 7th century. 
Photo: Reproduced from Kondakov: The Russian Icon. 

47. Two monks at Mt Athos. Photo- Karl Eller. 

10 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

48. Old Monk, Mt Athos. Photo- Karl Eller. 

49. Ikon painting, Mt Athos Photo Karl Eller. 

50. Young monk, Mt Athos. Photo: Karl Eller. 

51. An Archimandrite, Mt Athos. Photo- Kail Eller. 

52. Simonopetra Monastery, Mt Athos. 

53. One of the Meteor a monasteries in Greece. 

54. Burial of Patriarch Timotheus of Jerusalem. Photo 'Radio Times 9 Hulton Picture 
Library. 

55. Easter Service in an Orthodox church. Photo: Karl Eller. 

56. Priests at the Easter Service. Photo: Karl Eller. 

57. An Orthodox service. Photo: Greek Tourist Office, London. 

58. Priests and Deacons of the Orthodox faith. Photo: Kail Eller. 

59. The ikonostasis in an Orthodox Church. P/wto: Gteek Tourist Office ', London. 

60. Procession of the relics of St Spyridon, Corfu. 

61. Dance of David, in Ethiopia. Photo* Thomas Pakenham. 

62. St Tikhon, Bishop of Voronezh ( 1 724-83) . 

63. Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow (1782-1867). 

64. Alexey Stepanovich Khomiakov (180460). 

65. Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky (1821-81). Photo. Mansell Collection. 

66. Vladimir Sergeievich Soloviev (1853-1900). 

67. Father John of Kronstadt (1829-1908). 

68. Bishop Nikolay Velimorovich of Ohnda (1880-1956). 

69. Father Sergey Bulgakov (1871-1944). 

70. Athenagoras, Patriarch of Constantinople. 

7 1 . Alexey, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia. 



II 



This book is dedicated to the memory of 
H. JV. Spalding, 1877-1953 

and of his wife 
Nellie Spalding, 1876-1957 

whose vision and generosity endowed the study of Eastern Christianity 
in the University of Oxford 



PREFACE 



CHRISTENDOM has been identified with Europe for more than a 
millennium. In the eyes of Asiatic and African people Christianity is 
the religion of Western man and is closely linked with the scientific 
and technical civilization which has originated in Western Europe. 
This generally accepted picture, however, misses an important fact; 
at least a third of all contemporary Christians do not consider them- 
selves Western, but describe their Church as Eastern Orthodox. 

If one could take in all Europe at a glance from some central point 
such as Switzerland one would be struck by a great division in the 
architecture of the churches. In the West the churches have steeples, 
spires and square towers rising above die ordinary dwellings. In the 
East, by contrast, domes and cupolas replace the spires, and the further 
East one looks the more complete is the transformation. Moreover the 
interior of the Eastern churches reveals an even greater difference. 
A solid screen separates the eastern end from the rest of the building 
and conceals the altar from the congregation, except when the central 
door in it is opened. These round churches with cupolas, richly 
decorated with sacred pictures, mark the Eastern half of Christendom. 

Greece, the Balkans, the Caucasus, Western Asia, Egypt and Ethiopia 
are the traditional home of the Orthodox Churches. Russia and Siberia 
were added to them later. The lands of the Eastern Christians at present 
form geographically a huge triangle separating the Christian West from 
the non-Christian Oriental world. Its base is 12,000 miles long, stretch- 
ing across the Russo-Siberian plain from Petzamo in the West on the 
Arctic Ocean where the Russian and Finnish frontiers meet, to Alaska 
in the East where the Indians were Christianized by the Russian mis- 
sionaries in the nineteenth century. The western side of the triangle cuts 
across Finland, Estonia and Latvia, moves south towards Galicia and 
the Carpathian Mountains, splits Jugoslavia in two halves, touches 
Albania and reaches the Southern apex of the triangle in Egypt. The 
eastern side runs through Ethiopia, passes across Palestine, Syria and 
Iraq, and from there reaches Turkestan, Manchuria, North China, 
Japan and Korea. The great majority of Eastern Christians now live 
within this triangle. 

One isolated outpost of Eastern Christianity is to be found in South 

15 



PREFACE 

India, where the Orthodox Church has survived in Travancore until the 
present day, the remnant of the previously widespread Nestorian Church 
of the Persian Empire. Communities of Eastern Orthodox can also be 
found all over Western Europe, especially in France and Belgium. 
They are also scattered throughout Great Britain and her Dominions. 
Africa has many Orthodox Christians, mostly Greeks and Syrians, and 
there is a native African Orthodox Church in Uganda. Australia too 
has many Russian and Greek parishes. The largest number of Orthodox 
in the West live in the United States of America, which has three 
million Orthodox drawn from almost every nation of the Christian East. 

The geographical position of the Eastern Christians explains their 
history. Placed between the Christian West and Islam, the Eastern 
Christians had to face pressure from both sides, and this led to their 
defeat and to the loss of their political freedom. All Eastern Christians 
have experienced the bitterness of the yoke of hostile neighbours at some 
period of their history, but most have eventually regained their inde- 
pendence, although at the cost of part of their former territory and some 
of their co-religionists. This has meant that the Eastern Christians 
situated on the fringe of the triangle have been divided and partially 
absorbed into communities foreign to them. This has happened all 
along the Eastern frontier where the Eastern Christians have lived for 
centuries subjected to their Islamic conquerors: in Egypt, Syria and Iraq 
the Christians are now only a minority, whereas in the past these 
countries were the strongholds of Eastern Orthodoxy. On the Western 
frontier the picture is the same. The Albanians and Jugoslavs are 
divided by their ecclesiastical allegiance; some are Latins, others 
Orthodox. A similar situation exists in the frontier countries of Czecho- 
slovakia, Latvia, Estonia and Finland. The people of all these lands 
belong partly to Eastern and partly to Western traditions, while the 
nations inside the triangle, the Greeks, Serbians, Bulgarians, Ruma- 
nians, Russians and Georgians, are solidly Orthodox. 

Christianity is essentially a universal religion not confined to any one 
region or nation, and yet its concrete manifestations are strongly 
coloured by language, temperament and the local customs of its 
adherents. 

The present work is concerned mainly with the Eastern part of 
Christendom to whose history, teaching, worship and art it is intended 
as a general introduction. But although the Christian East and West 
have lived a separate existence for the last five hundred years, and at 
times have almost lost sight of each other, they cannot be studied in 
isolation. Their similarity and contrast, their attraction and repulsion 

16 



PREFACE 

form a central theme of Church history, and their relations are therefore 
referred to on many pages of this book. 

Those readers who desire more detailed knowledge of the Eastern 
Church will find some additional material in the notes and classified 
bibliography. 

The seventy-one illustrations cover both the architecture of Eastern 
Churches and also mosaics, frescoes and ikons which have a prominent 
place in the life and worship of the Orthodox. Some of them show the 
religious ceremonies and customs of the Christian East. 

In producing this book I have been assisted by several people to 
whom I owe much gratitude. To Mrs Arthur Ward for typing my 
manuscript, to the Reverend Patrick Thompson, and Mrs Essex-Lewis 
for reading it and making valuable suggestions, to Professor T. Talbot 
Rice for his comments on the chapter on the Sacred Art, to Miss 
Vanessa Jebb and Mrs Robin Porteous for their help in selecting the 
illustrations. My special thanks are due to Professor E. O. James 
for his advice and encouragement, and to Miss Mary Bromley who 
read the first draft of this work and helped me to put into its final shape. 

Oxford N. ZERNOV 



CHAPTER ONE 

THE CHURCH IN THE EAST DURING 
THE STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL 

(i-iv CENTURIES) 

Tlie Chwch and Judaism The split of the Church from Israel The Church and Hellenism 
The Church and the Roman State The persecution: its ongin and nature The causes of the 
Christian victory Early sects and heresies Writers and teachers of the Eastern Church in the 

second and third centuries 



The Church and Judaism 

THE CHRISTIAN community came into being on the Feast of Pentecost, 
when a small group of Galileans 'were all filled with the Holy Ghost, 
and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utter- 
ance'. 1 This event took place in Jerusalem, a frontier city of the Roman 
Empire, facing the unconquered Orient. It opened a new era in the 
spiritual evolution of mankind. The new religion spread rapidly along 
the lines of communication within the Jewish Diaspora. During the 
lifetime of the Apostles this expansion reached Spain and probably 
India; Rome, Alexandria, Antioch and other great cities became centres 
of Christian activities. 

The history of the Church presents a picture of continual adaptation 
to an ever-changing environment. It consists of advances and retreats, 
victories and defeats; but in spite of all these changes it reveals such a 
tenacity of purpose, such a unity of faith, that the Christian Church is 
distinguished from all other religions. 

The first problem which confronted the followers of the Messiah was 
adjustment to the Jewish community within which their religion was 
born. The Jews occupied a unique place in the Roman multinational 
State. Racially akin to the other inhabitants of Syria and Arabia, they 
yet formed a closely knit group, fiercely resisting fusion with their neigh- 
bours. This stubborn aloofness was an outcome of their religious history, 
for the Jews not only professed an uncompromising monotheism, sharply 
opposed to the predominant polytheism of other nations, but also 
believed that God had entered into a personal covenant with Israel, had 
ordered His chosen people to obey His law, and had promised to redeem 
them from sin and oppression. The books of the Old Testament contain 
the story of a long process of education and purification, in the course 
of which Israel, sometimes obedient, sometimes rebellious, had brought 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

a new race into being, capable of fulfilling the task assigned to it by 
Yahweh. Faith in the humanly impossible, readiness to suffer for the 
sake of the covenant, a heightened self-awareness and a profound 
realization that holiness and trust were indispensable conditions for 
communion with the Lord of Hosts became some of the striking 
characteristics of the chosen people. 

The ardent expectation of deliverance from all their afflictions which 
would be linked with the coming of a special divine messenger reached 
its height in the century which saw the birth of the Church, After a 
period of political independence under the Maccabees (168-63 BG) 
which had intensified Jewish national and religious aspirations, Pales- 
tine became incorporated in the Roman state and was increasingly 
exposed to enforced hellenization. Under Herod the Great (37-4 BG), 
who ruled over Judaea, Samaria and Galilee as a King appointed by the 
Roman senate, and under his successors, pagan cities were founded in 
Palestine where hellenized foreigners worshipped their many gods. 
Temples were erected to Augustus, and the land inhabited by a people 
who abhorred any graven image was polluted by triumphant paganism. 
Under the impact of this defeat and humiliation a number of Jews 
began to mix with Gentiles and to give up their religious and national 
exclusiveness. But this apostasy only increased the zeal of the rest, who 
with renewed vigour asserted their unshaken confidence in the promised 
deliverance and reduced to a minimum all contacts with the outside 
world. Such conduct led inevitably to constant clashes with the Roman 
authorities. Hardly a year passed without a local revolt or a major 
rebellion. Some historians consider that no fewer than 250,000 Jews 
perished during the century preceding the destruction of Jerusalem in 
70 AD. These figures represent a heavy toll on a small population which 
probably did not surpass a million people. In that atmosphere of acute 
suffering an apocalyptic literature flourished and any rebel who claimed 
to be the Messiah easily gathered fanatical supporters. 

The struggle in Palestine had important repercussions elsewhere. 
Most Jews in the first century belonged, not to Palestine, but to the 
Diaspora. Their colonies could be found in all the important seaports 
and prosperous commercial centres of the Empire, and even far outside 
its borders, in India, Ceylon and Ethiopia. This Diaspora, which con- 
tained five times more Jews than the Holy Land, presented the same 
picture of tension and exclusiveness, but without that constant blood- 
shed which was such a tragic feature of Israel's history in its native 
territory. The Jews in the Diaspora were obliged to have more contacts 
with the surrounding population, and some mingling with Gentiles 

20 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

could not be entirely avoided. The Old Testament was translated into 
Greek in Alexandria in the second century BC. There were also some 
converts to Judaism who acted as intermediaries and helped the first 
Christians to penetrate into the gentile community. 

The message of the Gospel was at first addressed exclusively to that 
hard pressed and yet undefeated nation, which was so acutely aware of 
the gulf that separated it from the rest of mankind. The response was a 
mixed one; some Jews were converted, but the majority refused to 
accept Jesus Christ as the promised Messiah. The crucified Galilean 
clashed too sharply with the conventional figure of a national liberator 
associated in their minds with the coming of the Redeemer. The infant 
Church broke out almost at once from the confines of orthodox Judaism. 
The fearless witnesses to the Risen Christ could soon be seen mixing 
with the Gentile crowds ostracized by the Jews. 

The split of the Church from Israel 

The crucial decision to separate from Israel was made by the Christians 
when they realized the universality of their religion and decided to 
incorporate the converts from paganism on equal terms into their society. 
This step was truly revolutionary for there existed in the first century 
the strongest possible contrast between Israel and the Hellenistic world. 
The pagans were disillusioned, submitting to blind fate as the force that 
governed both gods and men; the universe as they saw it had many 
divinities but no real master, no guiding principle and no rational pur- 
pose, whilst Jews were certain of their privileged position and full of 
hope. Yet the Christian message was accepted by some members of 
both societies and it was their close collaboration which built up the 
strong yet flexible framework of the Church, and made its teaching 
sufficiently universal to escape confinement to one ethnic or cultural 
group. 

Judaism provided Christianity with its basic assertion that the God 
of Israel chose this stubborn and vital race for the special purpose of the 
reconciliation with mankind, and that Jesus Christ was the promised 
Messiah, who offered deliverance from the power of ignorance and sin 
to all those who believed in him. Israel also supplied the Church with 
the Holy Scriptures, and with the rites of initiation and covenant, which 
in a modified form became the foundation stones of Christian worship 
and organization. From Judaism the infant Church learned to gather 
its members to regular weekly services at which the scriptures were read, 
instruction given, and the divine presence made real by the corporate 
encounter, at the Eucharistic meal, with the founder of the Church. 

21 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

From the same source the Church inherited the sense of being a separate 
community, radically different from those who did not acknowledge 
the one true God, and instead of Him, worshipped as it affirmed man- 
made idols. The chosen people also showed an example of complete 
dedication to the sacred cause and of courage in asserting their uncom- 
promising standpoint. The Jews taught the Church that God is Holy 
and that His servants must be ready to be tested by fire. 

The Church and Hellenism 

God is love, but the burning flame of divine compassion consumes all 
that is impure. This and other fundamental convictions borrowed from 
the Jews gave the Church its stability and enormous power of resistance. 
But its ability to expand, to penetrate into new fields, to meet the 
variety of human needs, and to satisfy very different requirements and 
aspirations the Christians learned through their contacts with the 
Hellenistic world. The greatest of its contributions was the Greek 
language. It is of the utmost importance in the history of the Church 
that, though its founder spoke in Aramaic, his voice reached the wider 
circle of mankind in Greek, for in that tongue the books of the New 
Testament and many of the Patristic commentaries on them were 
written. No other language could have served this purpose so well, for 
it was able to express philosophical concepts with a vigour and subtlety 
unattainable elsewhere, and at the same time to convey the profoundest 
religious feelings with poetry and grace. The Hellenized world also 
helped the Church to see the unity of mankind, and the fundamental 
similarity of men's intellectual and spiritual problems. From the Greek 
philosophers and writers the Church learned the art of logical thinking 
and scientific speculation. The Greek was not only a worshipping 
creature, like the Jew; he was also a thinker and an artist, and the 
Christian Church found an honoured place for these types of human 
activity. The Greeks provided the Church with its theologians, with 
men who critically examined the text of the Holy Scriptures, who inter- 
preted it in the light of contemporary thought, and formulated its main 
doctrines with the help of philosophical terms. Thus the Church was 
fertilized by two Eastern traditions, Judaism and Hellenism, the latter 
of which had already combined Greek philosophy with Oriental 
mystic religions. 

The Church and the Roman State 

The material foundation for the rapid expansion of Christianity was 

provided by a third partner however, this time of Western origin. This 

22 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

was the Roman Empire, with its political and legal institutions. The 
genius of the Latin mind conceived and realized in the first centuries of 
the Christian era a multi-national State, \\ith a strong centralized 
authority vested in the Emperor, but so organized as to enjoy municipal 
autonomy. Such a policy guaranteed the unity of the realm, security of 
communication, easy exchange of goods and ideas, and at the same time 
encouraged local initiative and welcomed regional developments. The 
Roman Empire was an impressive achievement; the urban population 
was proud of the title of Roman citizen. Tenure of property was 
defended by law, the duties and responsibilities of citizens were clearly 
defined, elections of municipal officers were regularly held, and the 
benevolent rule of a single monarch offered legal protection to all free 
inhabitants. 

The missionary work of the Church was undertaken in this universal 
state: the preachers of the Gospel travelled along routes made safe by 
well-disciplined legions; the Christian communities, accepting the 
Roman idea of law and order, were organized as self-supporting units, 
governed by democratically elected officers; the example of a single 
earthly ruler administering impartial justice facilitated the spread of the 
Gospel teaching that almighty God is the sole master of all men and 
yet respects human freedom. 

The Church encountered the most favourable conditions where 
these three major influences were at work. The Latin, Hellenic and 
Jewish elements of civilization were best represented in the main cities 
of the Eastern or Greek-speaking half of the Empire, and it was there 
that the new religion secured its chief strongholds during the first three 
centuries. The Christian communities consisted mostly of the urban 
proletariat, although a certain number of people of culture and high 
social rank joined the Church from time to time. Each community was a 
self-governing unit, led by a bishop, assisted by presbyters, deacons and 
deaconesses. A bishop's duties included presiding over the Eucharistic 
meal, the central act of Christian worship; instruction and baptism of 
converts; and maintenance of discipline. Presbyters and deacons cared 
for widows and orphans, for the sick and destitute. The churches were in 
regular communication with their neighbours; alms were collected and 
sent to communities in distress; hospitality was willingly afforded to 
travellers. There was no central authority, but the Churches founded by 
the Apostles and situated in important centres enjoyed prestige, and 
their leadership was willingly accepted, the most prominent among 
them being the Churches of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch. The 
exchange of opinions and news was maintained. Gaul corresponded 

23 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

with Syria; North Africa with Asia Minor; Rome with Alexandria; 
Greece with Spain. 

At first the Church appeared to the Roman authorities to be another 
Jewish sect; but the distinction between the New and the Old Israel 
was soon made clear, and for Christians this began three hundred years 
of persecution, which shaped the Church into a force capable of defeat- 
ing the Empire. The second problem that confronted the Christians was 
how to survive in a hostile Roman world. 

The Persecution: Its Origin and Nature 

Judaism, Hellenism and the Roman State were not only the cradle of 
the Church but also the powers that tried to stifle it. The most bitter 
and persistent enemy was Judaism, its next of kin. The destruction of 
Jerusalem in 70 AD, when the Christians left the doomed city and retired 
to Pella, put the final seal on the separation between the two com- 
munities. To the Jews, the Christians had accepted an impostor as the 
true Messiah, who, being man, claimed to be one with the Heavenly 
Father, and who, as proof of his unique position, pardoned sins and 
released His followers from the yoke of the law. Jesus Christ was pro- 
claimed in the synagogues to be a destroyer of the Covenant between 
Yahweh and Israel. 

If the leaders of Judaism had had a free hand in dealing with the 
Christians, they would have tried to annihilate them altogether. But 
the fall of Jerusalem and the rapid spread of the Church outside the 
borders of Palestine placed the Christians beyond the reach of their 
most determined antagonists. 

Opposition on the part of Hellenistic society was also widespread but 
differed from the enmity of the Jews. The Gentiles attacked the Christians 
on two different levels. The lower classes feared and hated them as an 
irritating and incomprehensible minority; the upper classes despised 
them as narrow-minded and bigoted. The cosmopolitan urban popula- 
tion of the Eastern provinces of the Empire was used to a multiplicity 
of cults and mystery religions. Some of these sects had their own places 
of worship to which no strangers were admitted, but even those who 
regarded Mithras, or the Great Mother of Phrygia as their particular 
protectors also frequented other temples, took part in popular festivals 
and did not differ from others in their conduct. The Christians \vcre 
quite unlike other devotees: they were not a separate race like the Jews, 
but were drawn from all classes and nations; yet they behaved in striking 
contrast to their own relatives and former friends. They refused to offer 
sacrifices to the gods and they abstained also from the gladiatorial 

24 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

games and other popular entertainments. All these unaccountable 
features made them highly suspect in the eyes of the common people. 
The Christians were accused of being godless, of dabbling in dangerous 
magic, and their presence was treated as an offence to the recognized 
deities. 

Whenever any calamity occurred, earthquake, fire or epidemic, 
these disasters were explained as being the vengeance of the gods 
outraged by the impiety of the Christians. The city mob was always 
ready to assault them, to drag them to the courts and clamour for their 
destruction. The hostility of the plebeians was paralleled by the disdain 
of the cultured and sophisticated. Steeped in classical literature, 
fascinated by poetry and rhetoric, enlightened by the writings of the 
great philosophers, educated Romans looked down on the Christians as 
uncouth and ignorant outcasts, sunk in superstition and worshipping an 
obscure Galilean crucified by order of the Imperial government. The 
upper classes did not fear the Christians and thought they deserved 
punishment, not because they were godless, but because they challenged 
the supreme authority of the State and spread ideas likely to undermine 
the political and social order. . 

Hellenistic society was much less determined in its hostility than 
the Jews. The city mob was dangerous when excited, but its zeal for 
persecution often subsided as quickly as it arose. The upper classes were 
in most cases too sceptical themselves to take Christianity seriously and 
were more contemptuous than antagonistic. 

The third enemy of the Church was the Empire itself and it alone had 
the necessary means to destroy the new religion. The Roman State was 
on principle tolerant of the beliefs of its subjects. Many diverse cults 
were practised in the capital and in the provinces; temples dedicated to 
foreign gods stood side by side with those honouring the traditional 
deities of the Latin people. Even the Jews obtained concessions and were 
allowed to follow their customs, being exempt from observances which 
clashed with their convictions. Christianity, however, was not included 
among the tolerated religions. On several occasions the Emperors made 
determined attempts to eradicate it. At first these persecutions were 
casual and lacked consistency; gradually, however, they became better 
planned and wider in range. The greatest number of victims was claimed 
by the last and fiercest of all the persecutions, that of Diocletian and his 
co-rulers in the fourth century. 

The first assault on Christians was made by Nero (57-68) who com- 
manded their mass execution in Rome in order to appease the popular 
discontent caused by the great fire which destroyed a large part of the 

25 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

capital. The Apostles Peter and Paul, with a number of their followers, 
were put to death, but no attempt was made to extend persecution to 
other parts of the realm or to justify it on any other grounds than an ill- 
founded charge of incendiarism. Nero's successors did not at first adopt 
a uniform policy towards the Christians whom they treated however as 
adherents of an illicit religion, liable at any time to be arrested, deported 
or executed and to have their property confiscated. For a long time no 
special legislation was enacted against them. Persecution was therefore 
severe under some Emperors like Domitian (81-96), and slackened 
under others like Commodus (180-192). Some of the Caesars were even 
favourably disposed, like Alexander Severus (222-235) or Philip the 
Arab (244-49) . The intensity of persecution varied also from province 
to province and often depended on the zeal of local officials. 

The exchange of letters between Pliny the Younger, governor of 
Bithynia (111-113), and the Emperor Trajan (98-117) one of the most 
humane and enlightened rulers of the Empire, throws some light upon 
the reasons for this hesitant policy. Pliny found a large number of 
Christians in his province. He believed them to be undesirable and 
punished those who fell into his hands, but he did not think that they 
presented such a serious danger as to deserve wholesale destruction, so 
he addressed a letter to the Emperor asking for instructions. The 
Emperor's reply expressed approval of Pliny's moderate policy. Trajan 
wrote: 

'My worthy Pliny, you have followed the correct line of conduct in 
dealing with those who were brought before you as Christians. They 
must not be hunted down; if they are denounced and convicted they 
must be punished but with the reservation that anyone who denies being 
a Christian and actively proves it by adoring our gods must be forgiven 
on the ground of his repentance no matter how suspect his past. Nor 
may anonymous accusations be taken into consideration on any charge; 
this would set a bad example and would not be in keeping with the 
spirit of our time.' 2 

Trajan was hesitant and so were many of his predecessors and suc- 
cessors. It was difficult to be precise about the offence committed by 
Christians, and yet it was generally realized that the Church was a 
subversive society the very existence of which challenged the claims of 
the Roman state to be obeyed in all matters civil and religious. 

Such was also the opinion of Marcus Aurelius (161-180), the 
enlightened philosopher on the Imperial throne who condemned 

26 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

Christians as dangerous and obdurate fanatics. 3 Only when the Em- 
perors realized at last the true character of the Christian opposition did 
they inaugurate an anti-Christian campaign which aimed at the total 
extermination of this dangerous religion. The test became the willing- 
ness of a citizen to offer sacrifice to gods approved by the Empire. For 
the first time the limits of the State's power over the individual were 
delineated and the line of conduct taken by the martyrs led to the 
foundation of a new society in which freemen could breathe and live. 
Decius (249-51) was the first ruler who made it obligatory for all to 
conform to the cult of the Emperor, and who ordered a systematic 
search for Christians. All those who disobeyed were condemned to 
death or deportation. His policy was followed by several other Em- 
perors, by Callus (251-53), Valerian (253-59) and Aurelian (270-75). 
Its culminating point was reached under the great reforming autocrat 
Diocletian (284-305), who undertook the last and the best planned 
attack. 

Diocletian, though a mere soldier, was a born statesman. He suc- 
ceeded in restoring order in the decaying Empire, though at the price of 
making it a totalitarian state. Local autonomy was curtailed to meet the 
increasing dangers of internal unrest and foreign invasions. The pro- 
vinces were reshaped, finance reorganized, the whole economy regu- 
lated. Diocletian created a powerful bureaucracy and surrounded 
himself with an elaborate ritual. For the first time jewels appeared on 
the garments and shoes of a Roman Emperor, and he demanded 
worship of his sacred person like an Oriental monarch. Such a ruler, 
seriously believing in his divine attributes, was bound to come into 
conflict with the Church, which had meanwhile greatly increased in 
numbers. Diocletian made careful preparations for a final decisive 
assault on the unsuspecting Christians. He consulted the oracle of 
Apollo at Didyma and having found an auspicious date issued a decree 
in March 303 ordering the systematic destruction of every Christian 
building. He saw, from his palace in Nicomedia, the burning of the 
main Church of that city. A series of Imperial edicts followed this first 
injunction. Christians were expelled from all government offices, 
deprived of their rank, left without state protection and without right 
of appeal against any offender, but liable themselves to be tortured and 
executed without regard for their previous status. The ageing Emperor, 
who had started his campaign against the Church in association with 
his son-in-law and co-ruler Galerius (293-311) in the nineteenth year 
of his reign, wanted to avoid a general massacre of Christians. His main 
intention was to deprive the members of the Church of their buildings 

27 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and sacred scriptures, to destroy their organization and to frighten the 
bulk of them into submission. Only the leaders of the community were 
expected to offer serious resistance; but once the persecution was 
launched, the original intentions were soon forgotten and all over the 
Empire innumerable victims were put to torture and death. The only 
exceptions were the prefectures of Gaul and Britain ruled by Constan- 
tius Ghlorus (293-306), one of Diocletian's subordinates with the title of 
Caesar. 

It remains a riddle why Diocletian postponed his contest with the 
Church till the end of his reign and why he suddenly abdicated on 
May i, 305, at the height of his anti- Christian campaign. Galerius and 
Constantius were proclaimed his successors. This change brought the 
persecution of Christians to an end in the entire Western half of the 
Empire allotted to Constantius, but Galerius persisted in his attempts to 
stamp out the Church in his Eastern domain. He died in 3 1 1 from some 
unidentified, disfiguring and painful disease. On his deathbed he 
recalled the edict against the Christians and the agony he suffered was 
interpreted by his contemporaries as a sign of the defeat of this most 
bitter enemy of the Church. The loss of human life during this last 
persecution surpassed all previous records. Equally overwhelming was 
the destruction of Church buildings, libraries and documents. The 
Church suffered severely; while many Christians showed firmness and 
were martyred, many others collapsed and surrendered to their perse- 
cutors. But the Church was not annihilated and the Empire gained 
nothing; rather, the authority of its rulers was compromised. 

The causes of the Christian victory 

The Mediterranean world during the first centuries of the Christian 
era enjoyed a political, economic and social unity unsurpassed in its 
history. However, these remarkable achievements emphasized an inner 
despondency and discord. Pessimism and a sense of impending doom 
were widespread; time was seen as self-repeating without beginning or 
end; history moved in endless cycles; the gods were immortal but neither 
better nor wiser than men, and like men, ultimately helpless. Popular 
mythology represented the divinities as frivolous and irresponsible, 
incapable in their multiplicity of satisfying man's quest for communion 
with the divine. The mystery religions, either orgiastic or magical, 
failed to meet the needs of more sober minds; while the noble ideals of 
self-control preached by the stoics seemed to be beyond the reach of 
ordinary men. 

Classical civilization was confused in its ideas of good and evil; it 

28 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

offered no promise of a better future and the secret of happiness had 
been lost. When men are deprived of joy and hope they and their society 
become cruel. The gladiatorial games excited the populace by the sight 
of bloodshed and torture; the poor were oppressed; orphans and 
widows were sold into slavery; the sick were abandoned to die of hunger 
and thirst. Homo homini lupus est, as the popular Roman proverb bluntly 
put it. 

Christianity broke into this world of pessimism and frustration with a 
cry of victory. Men saw the face of the Creator, learned the purpose of 
life and breathed the intoxicating air of hope and freedom. 

There are several testimonials dating from the transitional period 
which describe this inner change in the converts. One of the most elo- 
quent is that of St Cyprian, the bishop martyr of Carthage (d. 258). He 
was a distinguished lawyer, a man of wealth and culture, versed in 
classical poetry and philosophy. Here is his description of the effect his 
baptism produced upon him: 

'When I was still in darkness, uncertain of my wandering steps, 
knowing nothing of my real self and remote from truth and light, I used 
to think it impossible that a man could retain all his bodily structure 
and yet be transformed in heart and soul.' 4 

'But now, by the help of the water of new birth the stain of former 
years has been washed away and a light from above, serene and pure, 
has been infused into my reconciled heart, and a second birth has made 
me a new man.' 5 

This experience was not merely a passing emotion, it enabled him to 
lead a new life. The same St Cyprian relates certain episodes which 
occurred in his native city during the epidemic which broke out at the 
end of the Decian persecution (251). All who could, fled the towns, 
leaving behind the sick and dying. All rules of decency were forgotten, 
everyone tried merely to save his own life. But the Christians alone were 
unafraid, they preserved their inner peace and self-control and looked 
after the sick and dead. The most astonishing feature of their conduct 
was that they nursed even their enemies who had persecuted them. 
There was something revolutionary and unaccountable in Christian 
mentality and behaviour, something that staggered and frightened the 
heathen world by its contrast with accepted standards. This regenera- 
tion of the converts proclaimed the dawn of a new epoch. 

It is impossible to explain the victory of the Church without recog- 
nizing that a previously unknown force had entered into history. A 

29 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

world-wide Community was born whose members were not frightened 
by death and preserved their unity without the use of fear and compul- 
sion. The message of the Gospel surpassed the ideas preached by the 
Gentiles and by the Jews: it revealed God not only as omnipotent, but 
as loving; not only as just, but as merciful. The Christians had a sense of 
purpose, of belonging, combined with fortitude, charity and humility 
and this enabled them to become the builders of a better social order. 
The source of their inspiration was not a novel doctrine, but the per- 
sonal encounter with that enigmatic Galilean, who promised to his 
followers his continuous assistance and a degree of love and unity 
hitherto unobtainable by men. The striking feature of the new religion 
was the fulfilment of this daring pledge. 

Early sects and heresies 

During the centuries of suffering and persecution the Christians 
maintained their unity in a remarkable way, yet various dissenting 
groups arose in their midst from time to time and separated themselves 
from the main body, either on account of their special discipline 
(sectarians) or of their defective teaching (heretics) . 

The point of dispute usually centered on the manner and degree of 
Church adaptation to the non-Christian environment. Some of these 
sects wanted to combine Christianity with observance of the Mosaic 
Law, and in this way to avoid a final rupture with Judaism, These 
Christians were repudiated by the Jews and criticized by the Christians 
and they gradually disappeared as a result of the widening gulf between 
the Church and the Synagogue. More persistent were the attempts to 
build a bridge between Christianity and Hellenism. This movement is 
known under the name ofgnosis. The history of the Church in the second 
and the third centuries was profoundly disturbed by the activities of 
several Gnostic teachers like Basilides, Valentinus and Marcion. There 
were even instances of entire local Christian communities embracing 
gnosticism as their creed. In spite of considerable variety in detail the 
Gnostics displayed an essential similarity. They all considered this world 
to be the creation of an inferior deity who was responsible for the 
unfortunate mixture in man of immortal spirit and unclean matter. 
Many Gnostics thought that God, as revealed in the Old Testament, was 
this demiurge opposed to the good God whom Jesus Christ called His 
Father. The Gnostics were syncretists who tried to reconcile the current 
religious ideas of the Hellenistic world that the cosmos was a divine 
emanation with the teaching of the Gospel. The word 6 gnosis' implied 
possession of secret and superior knowledge concerning the mystery of 

30 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

life and death withheld from others. The extravagance of their specula- 
tions and disagreement among themselves were their main weak- 
nesses ; their strength lay in their theology according with the temper of the 
age, for they spoke a language that appealed to a sophisticated audience. 
The Gnostics formed their own conclaves and attacked the Catholics 
from outside, treating them as inferiors in wisdom and education. 

In striking opposition to this syncretism was the sect called the 
Montanists. Its adherents tried to undermine the allegiance of Christians 
to the Catholic Church from within. Their founder, Montanus, was a 
Phrygian who lived in the middle of the second century. He claimed to 
be a prophet and shared his authority with two remarkable women, 
Priscilla and Maximilla, who were both revered by their followers as 
possessing the gifts of the Holy Spirit, such as prophesy, speaking with 
tongues and healing. The sect imposed a rigorous asceticism upon its 
adherents and aroused unrestrained enthusiasm in them. One theme in 
their preaching was the imminence of the second coming. The Mon- 
tanists had many of the characteristics common today among the 
Pentecostals and other revivalist sects. They made a number of converts 
all over the Empire, including the gifted North African writer and 
apologist, Tertullian (150-222), who later, however, seceded and formed 
his own sect. 

The Montanists stressed the prophetic element in the life of the Church 
at the expense of regular discipline and sound learning. They were 
strongly anti-pagan and many were martyred. Their austerity did not 
appeal to all Christians, some of whom were tempted to embrace a life 
of ease and wealth whenever persecution abated. The best known 
example of such worldliness was Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, 
who was expelled from his see by the synod in 268 for the pomp and 
extravagance of his conduct. 

These deviations were resisted by the main body of Christians who 
adhered to the Apostolic tradition incorporated in the books of the New 
Testament. During these formative centuries a selection was made of 
those writings which were to be recognized as authentic, while others 
were repudiated as inconsistent with the original message. The first 
enumeration of the books of the New Testament dates from the begin- 
ning of the third century (Muratori's fragment). This separation of 
original from interpolated writings was a gradual process which ended 
in unanimous acceptance of the present canon. 

The important factor in this struggle of the Church against its internal 
and external adversaries was the Apostolic succession of its bishops. No 
one could become head of a local church unless he was approved and 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

consecrated by the neighbouring bishops. This rule checked the 
influence of extremists and maintained unity among the Christians. 
Fellowship and intercourse with the older churches founded by the 
Apostles helped smaller and less instructed communities to preserve 
their orthodoxy and to combat heresy and schism. 

Writers and teachers of the Eastern Church in the second and third centuries 
Two types of Church leaders are known to us from the early centuries: 
martyrs, who bore witness to the truth of their religion by suffering; and 
apologists, who wrote in defence of their beliefs. 

Among the martyrs, St Ignatius of Antioch (died between 107-117) 
is the most vivid figure. Little is known about his origins, his conversion, 
or even of the circumstances which led to his arrest and condemnation, 
but we can still hear his voice rejoicing at the approach of martyrdom 
and we possess in his writings a unique revelation of the martyr's state 
of mind. The aged bishop wrote seven epistles during his slow and pain- 
ful journey in chains from Antioch, the place of his birth in Christ, to 
Rome, the scene of his death. He addressed his letters to different 
Christian communities, urging them to remain faithful to the Gospel 
and to obey and venerate their teachers and pastors. In his Epistle to 
Rome he said: 

C I write to all the Churches and make known to all as my last wish, 
that I desire freely to die for God, at least if you do not prevent it. I 
beseech you, show no misplaced sympathy on my account. Let me be a 
bait for the wild beasts, so that I may be found as pure bread of Christ, 
or rather coax the wild beasts that they may become my tomb, leaving 
nothing of my body to be a burden to anyone after my death. Then 
shall I be a disciple of Jesus Christ in the true sense of the word, when 
the world sees even my body no more. Pray for me to Christ, that by 
these instruments I may be found a fitting sacrifice to God.' 6 

In the latter part of the same epistle he wrote: 

Trom Syria to Rome I fight with wild beasts by land and sea, by 
night and day, being bound to ten leopards, I mean to a band of soldiers 
who, though treated with friendliness, become only the more cruel. Yet 
through these injuries I am growing into true discipleship. May 
nothing visible or invisible prevent me from attaining to Jesus Christ. 
Come fire, cross, grappling with wild beasts, cutting and mangling, 
wrenching of bones, hacking of limbs, crushing of my whole body; 

32 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

come all the wicked torments of the devil upon me, only let me reach 
the presence of Christ. 5 

The Epistle of an eyewitness, describing the martyrdom of St Igna- 
tius's younger contemporary, St Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna (d. 156), 
and some of his companions, gives a similar picture of exultation and 
fortitude. The anonymous author wrote: 

'Who can choose but admire their nobility and endurance and love 
for the Master. I speak of the men who were so tortured with whipping 
that their bodies were laid open to their veins and arteries, yet they 
endured it, so that all who saw them pitied and lamented their fate. 
Not one of them sighed or groaned, for the Lord stood by them and 
consoled them.' 7 

These contemporary documents reveal the dilemma confronting the 
Roman authorities who desired to discredit Christianity, and to assert 
the right of the State to control the beliefs of its citizens, but had no 
intention of making heroes and martyrs. On many occasions persecution 
produced the opposite results by raising the prestige of the new 
religion and by attracting the attention to it of wider circles. 

The contest between heathen and Christian was not confined how- 
ever to the realm where the executioner and gaoler had the last word. 
The antagonists also met on the level of intellectual argument. Several 
Christian writers tried to explain to the learned heathen the foundation 
of their belief in the Incarnation. Among these defenders of Christianity 
the most prominent were Clement of Alexandria (150-215) and Origen 
(185-253). 

The latter part of the second century and the first half of the third 
were times of a powerful revival in Hellenistic philosophy. Its temper 
had changed, however, for it had acquired a distinct religious bias, 
and even its greatest representative, Plotmus (d. 270), regarded himself 
as a religious teacher. At the same time Oriental mysticism captured 
some of the best minds. India attracted special curiosity and many 
seekers expected to find illumination in the land of Brahmins and 
Fakirs. 

The questions with which these intellectuals were preoccupied were 
centred upon the nature of God, the purpose of the physical universe 
and its relation to the unchanging spiritual world. Their attention was 
also drawn to the problem of the origin of evil and the destiny of the 
immortal soul after its separation from the mortal body. Syncretism 

c 33 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

was popular and many writers tried to reconcile the Old Testament with 
the writings of Plato and Aristotle. A popular author of that time, 
Numenius, described Plato as 'Moses speaking in Greek'. 8 

This religious and philosophical revival strengthened pagan opposi- 
tion to the Church. A number of writers such as Celsus, Philostrates, 
Numenius and especially Plotinus and his disciple Porphyry attacked 
the Christians on the grounds of their departure from the sound founda- 
tion laid down by the Greek philosophers and of their preference for 
the writings of obscure Hebrew prophets and teachers. The third cen- 
tury saw the last determined intellectual assault of classical culture on 
Christianity. In this difficult period the Church found a number of 
eloquent champions who not only defended the teachings of the Gospel 
with success but also counter-attacked with vigour and conviction. The 
pagan enemies of Christianity were confident of their superiority, for 
they based their arguments on contemporary philosophical and scien- 
tific ideas. The Christian apologists seemed out of date, but their inde- 
pendence from current thought proved to be an asset on many occa- 
sions. For instance, Plotinus derided them for denying that the sun and 
the stars had a higher intelligence than men; such an attitude seemed to 
him an obvious absurdity. 9 His defence of polytheism against mono- 
theism used arguments which likewise soon lost their appeal. 10 

The main encounter between the Christian philosophers and their 
pagan rivals took place in Alexandria, the most cultured city of the 
Empire. Its academies and schools, the Museum, the Serapeum, the 
Sebastion attracted students from all parts of the world where Greek 
rhetoric and philosophy were studied and admired. It had also long 
been a centre of Jewish learning. Philo (20 30-50 AD) and Josephus 
(37100 AD) worked there and the Greek translation of the Old 
Testament, the Septuagint, had been made in Alexandria. The 
Christians, following the example of the Greeks and Jews, founded their 
best known Catechetical School in the same famous city. A number of 
outstanding teachers, Pantaenus (200), Heracleus (247), Denys (265), 
Theognostus (280), Pierius (310), Peter (311)5 Didymas the blind (398) 
and Rhodon maintained a high standard of instruction for more than 
two hundred years. But Clement and Origen were the greatest of these 
teachers. 

It is probable that Clement was born about 150 AD in Athens, where 
he was brought up a devout pagan and received an excellent education. 
There is some evidence that he was connected with the Imperial family, 
to which his full name Titus Flavius Clemens bears witness. He moved 
to Alexandria at the age of thirty, and there started his brilliant career 

34 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

as a leading apologist and head of the Catechetical School some time 
after 190. 

The persecution begun in 202 by Septimus Severus (193-211) forced 
him to leave Egypt. In 2 1 1 he appeared as a much venerated teacher in 
Cappadocia, where one of his former pupils, Alexander, was bishop; he 
died there about 215. 

Clement was an accomplished writer, poetically gifted with an excep- 
tional intellectual grasp. He did not know Latin but his Greek was 
immaculate. Though most of his books are lost or survive in small 
fragments, three of his major works are complete and help us to under- 
stand the philosophical climate of Alexandria and the way in which 
Clement presented Christianity to his sophisticated listeners. In the 
first of these books, the Protrepticos (exhortation), he exposes the incon- 
sistency of pagan mythology, and calls his readers to listen to the living 
God speaking through the prophets and revealing himself in the Incar- 
nate Logos. The second book,, Paidagogos (the instructor), introduces 
readers to Christian doctrine. The third, Stromateis (a miscellany), 
initiates inquirers into the mysteries of the New Revelation. 

Clement loved and respected Greek philosophy, considered Plato a 
precursor of Christ, quoted Socrates and Pythagoras in support of the 
truth of Christian teaching, and regarded the history of the Oriental 
Empires as a providential preparation for the coming of the Messiah. 
But he was convinced that the questions raised by the philosophers of 
antiquity could find their true answers only in the message of the gospel, 
and that the old myths and legends of Greece had been made obsolete 
by Christian revelation. 'Now the fables have grown old', wrote 
Clement, c and Zeus is no longer a serpent, no longer a swan, nor an 
eagle, nor a furious lover. He no longer flies, nor loves boys, nor kisses, 
nor acts with violence.' 11 Traditional paganism was still alive, it 
fiercely resisted the Christian advance, but its vitality was sapped, for 
the moral frivolity and inconsistency of its myths deprived it of dignity, 
authority and power. 

Clement saw in Christianity the fulfilment of all that was best in the 
Hellenistic world; he regarded man as the most perfect being created by 
God. He wrote: 

C A noble hymn to God is man, immortal, founded upon righteousness. 
The oracles of truth are engraved upon him; for where else save in the 
wise soul can truth be written, or love, or reverence, or gentleness? 
Those who have had these divine characters inscribed and sealed upon 
their souls deem such wisdom a fair port of departure on whatever 

35 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

journey their course is set and this wisdom is also a haven of peace and 
promise of a safe return.' 12 

Clement treated c life as a holy festival' 13 and this can be taken as the 
epitome of his outlook. It is remarkable that this optimistic and 
courageous note was sounded at the time when martyrdom confronted 
Christians all over the Empire. 

Clement laid the foundation of Christian apologetics, but their most 
- complete system was produced by Origen, his successor at the Catecheti- 
cal School. Origen was born in Alexandria, in 185. His father, Leonidas, 
was a Greek, a man of wealth and learning. His mother was a native of 
Egypt, and both parents were convinced Christians. The family pos- 
sessed a large library which introduced the young Origen to the world of 
Classical culture. As a boy, he impressed everyone with his unusual 
intellectual powers, the maturity of his judgment and his insatiable 
desire for information. At the age of seventeen, he faced the great crisis 
of his life when his father was arrested and martyred, the magnificent 
library confiscated, the family ruined. Origen longed to share his father's 
crown of martydom, but his life was spared. He started teaching both 
pagan philosophy and Christian doctrine and in spite of his youth soon 
acquired a reputation as an able instructor. He continued his own 
studies and joined the school of Ammonias Sacas, formerly a docker in 
Alexandria, later a convert to Christianity, although ending his career 
as a Neoplatonist in opposition to the Church. Ammonius has left no 
writings, but his excellence as a teacher is proved by the fact that two of 
the greatest religious thinkers of the century, Origen and Plotinus, 
were taught and trained in his school and owed much to him. 

Origen's growing popularity provoked local jealousies and forced 
him to leave Alexandria in 231. He transferred his school to Caesarea, 
where he continued to teach for another nine years. In 240 he was 
thrown into prison and savagely tortured. The end of persecution 
released him but his health was ruined and he died in 253 at the age of 
68, in Tyre. 

Origen was a man of astounding industry. He spent all his nights 
writing, and his days lecturing. He wrote more than 6,000 books(!), 
mostly commentaries on the Holy Scriptures. He was the first Biblical 
scholar, and for twenty-eight years he worked steadily on a critical 
examination of the Old Testament. This assiduity resulted in the fifty 
volumes of his Hexapla which contained six parallel texts of the Old 
Testament in Hebrew and in Greek translations. 

His curiosity knew no limits. He was interested in every aspect of life 

36 



THE CHURCH IN THE EAST 

and in every philosophical problem. He combined fearless intellectual 
honesty with complete dedication to Christianity. His ardent nature 
pushed him to extremes of self-mortification; on a sudden impulse he 
castrated himself whilst still in the flower of his youth, an act which he 
regretted later in life and which was used against him by his critics. 

Origen was an original and powerful thinker and could argue 
against the enemies of Christianity with the full knowledge of Greek 
philosophy and science. He was also an outstanding teacher who not 
only instructed, but also formed the personalities of his pupils. One of 
the most illustrious of these, St Gregory Thaumaturgus Bishop of 
Neocaesarea (213-70), described the years he spent in the school of 
his beloved master, with deep gratitude and warm affection. He wrote: 

c Origen collected for our benefit all that each philosopher had to 
offer in truth and usefulness for the edification of mankind. But he did 
not want us to become attached to any one teacher, however wise he 
was considered by other men. Origen taught us to venerate only God 
and His Holy prophets.' 14 

In a passage of the panegyric dedicated to Origen, St Gregory dealt 
with the inspired quality of his teacher's interpretation of the Holy 
Scriptures: 

c The Universal Ruler, who speaks through the prophets, beloved of 
God, and who inspires all prophetic works, all mystical and divine 
discourse, honoured Origen as His friend and established him as the 
master. Those things that God conveyed through others in an enigmatic 
way, Origen revealed in a clear and intelligible manner. Origen's 
interpretations of the Scriptures were inspired by the Holy Spirit, for 
no one can fully understand the prophetic voice, unless he is guided and 
helped by the same Spirit that spoke through the Prophet.' 15 

For his defence of Christianity Origen used much that he found in 
Greek philosophy, and incorporated in his system certain ideas which 
have remained outside the main tradition of the Church, such as the 
pre-existence of all souls, which he believed were created at the same 
time equal and eternal. Origen looked upon man's earthly life as a 
period of purification and testing for those celestial spirits which failed 
to make a clear choice between good and evil; he also hazarded the 
opinion that all human beings will eventually be saved. 

Origen's unparalleled knowledge of classical philosophy provoked 

37 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

attacks on him from two sides. Pagan opponents of Christianity such as 
Porphyry were indignant that Origen, a man of such learning, was a 
Christian. Porphyry wrote: 'Origen lived as a Christian but thought as a 
Greek and he applied the Greek arts to an alien belief.' 16 His Christian 
critics objected that he, being a Christian, borrowed too much from 
pagan philosophy. Yet Origen was able to combine, in a truly creative 
way, his Christian faith and his classical education. 

One of his best known books was the reply to Celsus (c. 180), a dis- 
tinguished Roman and a determined critic of the Christians. Celsus 
was an educated man, who had studied Christian literature. He raised 
a number of objections to the veracity of the gospels which were repeated 
by many later opponents of Christianity. Celsus deplored the spread of 
the new religion: according to him, it had undermined the foundations 
of the Roman Empire. He ridiculed the Old Testament as full of in- 
credible miracles and fables. He denied the Virgin birth of the Messiah 
and insisted that the story of the resurrection was invented by hysterical 
women and skilfully used by the Apostles. Celsus represented the 
Christians as crafty, subversive agents, who penetrated into wealthy 
houses and seduced women and children to their perverted faith when 
the master of the house was away from home. 

Origen's reply to these accusations has become a classic. He asked 
Celsus whether men who deliberately deceived others would be willing 
to die as martyrs in witness of their own lie, and also how a lie could 
alter people's lives and uplift them morally and intellectually to a level 
previously inaccessible. Celsus had ended his treatise with an appeal 
addressed to Christians to give 'up their religion and become loyal 
citizens of the Empire. Origen's concluding words express a hope that 
the rulers of the Roman state will be converted and recognize the 
supremacy of the divine Law revealed by Christ; this wish was realized 
some seventy years later. 

The Christian community in the East matured intellectually under 
Origen's inspiring tuition. More than any other, he prepared its mem- 
bers for the new and more complex tasks which confronted them after 
recognition of the Church by the Empire. 



CHAPTER TWO 

THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS AND 
THE ORIENTAL SCHISM 

(iv-vm CENTURIES) 

Constantino the Great (306-337) The Emperor and the Ecumenical Council Arianism 
The consequences of Mcaea The victory of Nicene Orthodoxy The second Ecumenical 
Council and the Emperor Theodosius (379-395) The mass conversion of the Empire and its 
effect upon the Church St John Chrysostom (347-407) The Nestorian schism The Second 
Council qfEphesus (449) The Fourth Ecumenical Council (451) The Chalcedonian Schism 
Justinian I and his ecclesiastical policy (527-565) The Chalcedonian definition and the 
separation of the Oriental Churches Christianity and Nationalism Christianity outside the 
Byzantine Empire Rome and the Christian East Eastern monasticism 



Constantine the Great (306-337) 

AT THE TIME when Diocletian's persecution had shaken the Church 
and unbalanced the Empire, Constantine, the son of Constantius 
Chlorus, and a young lieutenant of the dreaded old Emperor, created an 
entirely unforseen situation by establishing co-operation between the 
Church and the Roman state. Among the Eastern Christians he is 
revered as a saint and styled 'Equal to the Apostles'. Few men have had 
such influence upon the destiny of mankind as this brilliant soldier who 
altered the course of history by making the Church and the Empire 
partners for the next seventeen hundred years. He also extended the life 
of his realm for another twelve hundred years by transferring its capital 
to the shores of the Bosphorus. For several centuries to come Constanti- 
nople was to remain the centre of an original and vigorous Christian 
culture. 

Constantine was a genius, great in every sense, a tall, impetuous man, 
always victorious, a ruler of vision and a practised administrator. Only 
a man of Constantine's imagination could have conceived so daring a 
plan as that of uniting the opposites: the Church and the Empire; only 
a man of his statesmanship and wisdom could have made it so lasting an 
alliance. There are conflicting interpretations of his motives. Some 
historians consider him a sceptic, skilfully using the growing power of the 
Church against his political opponents,* but this ignores the universal 
belief of his time in the intervention of benevolent and malignant spirits 
in public and private affairs; it ill-accords with Constantine's own state- 
ments and is also inconsistent with his acceptance as a Christian by 

* Among whom are Gibbon, Burckhardt, Schwartz, and Harnack. 

39 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

contemporary leaders of the Church. 

The story of his conversion by the vision of the cross on the eve of one 
of the most decisive military engagements of his reign, the battle of the 
Milvian Bridge in 312, is reported by two Christian historians, Lactan- 
tius and Eusebius. After his spectacular victory, Constantine met, in 
Milan, his Eastern Co-Emperor, Licinius (312-324). As a result, 
Licinius issued in 313 the famous edict of religious toleration known as 
the Edict of Milan. It was published in Nicomedia and mainly affected 
the Eastern half of the Empire, for the West already enjoyed religious 
peace. The proclamation ran: 

'When I, Constantine Augustus, and I, Licinius Augustus, came 
under favourable auspices to Milan and took into consideration all that 
pertained to the common prosperity ... we resolved to grant to 
Christians and to all men freedom to follow the religion they chose, 
that whatever heavenly deity exists may be propitious to us and to all 
who live under our government.' 1 

This decree established equality between Christian and heathen; but 
after his victory over Licinius in 324, Constantine began to stress still 
more his leaning towards Christianity by his active interest in Church 
affairs. He convoked and presided over the Councils and systematically 
altered the legislation of the Empire in accordance with the teaching of 
the gospels. The new laws penalized certain sexual offenders (forni- 
cators for instance), 2 removed penalties previously imposed upon 
celibates, made divorce more difficult, 3 facilitated the liberation of 
slaves, protected prisoners, widows and orphans and gave bishops 
certain magisterial powers. 4 Yet Constantine was not baptized until the 
end of his life and never relinquished the pagan title ofPontifex Maximus. 
His conduct was not inconsistent. Constantine called himself the bishop 
of those outside the Church, 5 his role being to attract converts by offer- 
ing Christians every opportunity to exercise their benevolent influence 
on heathen society. He believed that their community, kept together by 
voluntary consent, could teach the lesson of unity to the rest of his 
people. 

The Emperor and the Ecumenical Council 

In 324 Constantine became sole ruler of the Empire. The period of civil 
wars and political rivalries over, he hoped to enjoy undisturbed tran- 
quillity and was therefore particularly sensitive to any disturbance, 
especially among the Christians whom two disagreements troubled at 

40 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

that time. The first concerned the date when Easter should be cele- 
brated; the second, a quarrel between Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria 
(312-327)3 and his learned and eloquent presbyter. Anus (d. 336). 

To bring these two conflicts to a speedy end and to show his special 
benevolence to the Church, Constantine convoked a council of bishops 
from all parts of his domain, and even from outside its borders. The idea 
of the council was probably suggested to him by Hosius, Bishop of 
Cordoba (265-358), who acted as his adviser on ecclesiastical matters 
and took a leading part in the Council's proceedings. Constantine dele- 
gated Hosius to make preliminary investigations into the origin of the 
Alexandrian dispute, and his firm stand against Arius influenced Con- 
stantine's own early policy in this theological controversy. 

The custom of deciding important matters at gatherings of Church 
leaders dated from Apostolic times. 6 Under the persecution, the 
Christians had continued to hold similar consultations when possible 
and their decisions were morally binding on the Churches represented. 
North Africa and Rome had held such councils at regular intervals; they 
were less frequent in the East. The council convened by the Emperor, 
however, was different from its predecessors in being empowered to 
legislate both for Church and Empire, for its decrees were recognized as 
laws. 

The First Ecumenical Council is one of the great landmarks in the 
history of the Church. At the Emperor's orders and at the expense of the 
state several hundred bishops gathered in Nicaea, a small town near 
Nicomedia, then the capital. Most of the bishops came from Asia Minor, 
Palestine, Syria and Egypt. Two presbyters represented Sylvester 
(3 1 4-335), the aged bishop of Rome; North Africa also sent delegates, 
and four or five bishops came from outside the Empire. It was an im- 
pressive assembly: Some of its participants were renowned for learning; 
others for holiness; others bore the marks of torture suffered during the 
recent persecution. Constantine showed these last special signs of respect. 
The personality of the Emperor dominated the synod, which lasted 
from May to June, 325. Constantine was fifty-one, and at the height of 
his glory and power. His solemn entrance so much impressed the bishops 
that Eusebius compared him to an angel of God. 7 Clothed in purple 
raiment, adorned with gold and precious stones, he addressed the 
representatives of the Church as their friend and fellow believer: 

'It was for some time my chief desire to enjoy the spectacle of your 
united presence, and now that this wish is fulfilled I feel myself bound 
to render thanks to God the Universal King. . . . Delay not, dear 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

friends, delay not, ye ministers of God and faithful servants of Him who 
is our common Lord and Saviour: begin to discard the causes of that 
disunion which exists among you and remove the perplexity of con- 
troversy by embracing the principles of peace. ... By such conduct you 
will please the Supreme God and confer an exceeding favour on me, 
your fellow servant. 38 

This friendly harangue, accompanied by the presents he lavished on 
the bishops, could not but produce an overwhelming impact upon men 
who had recently been exposed to the fury of persecution. Eusebius 
went so far as to describe the Imperial banquet, to which the bishops 
were invited before their dismissal, as e a picture of Christ's Kingdom, a 
dream rather than a reality 5 . 9 

The Emperor was an astute statesman with a sure grasp of the essen- 
tial difference between the Empire and the Church. He was resolved to 
control them but he realized that the same policy would not do for 
both. He was an autocratic but not a lawless monarch. He governed a 
legally organized state with a Senate that codified Imperial decrees and 
was responsible for their orderly application. Constantine built his 
relations with the Church on a familiar legal basis. The Episcopal 
Councils, in Constantine's view, had to perform the same function as 
the Roman Senate and their proceedings were similar: the bishops, like 
Senators, sat in a circle round the Emperor's seat, formulated answers 
to questions raised by the Sovereign and, if he approved, these decisions 
became law. There was one essential difference: the Senators acted in 
their own right, and their resolutions were carried by a majority- vote; 
the bishops' verdict was only valid if inspired by the Holy Spirit, of 
which the sign was unanimity. On this point Constantine departed from 
senatorial practice and so made it possible for the Church to retain its 
proper character. The bishops at the Ecumenical Councils were there- 
fore able to repeat the words which prefaced the resolution of the first 
Christian council gathered in Jerusalem in 52. The Apostles and the 
representatives of the local Church had then boldly declared: e lt 
pleased the Holy Spirit and us. 510 They were confident that they were 
guided and inspired because they spoke with one heart and one mind. 
The same formula was used by the Ecumenical Councils. The Emperor's 
role was only to sanction decrees passed by the synod and to back them 
with State power. Such was the plan of ecclesiastical administration 
conceived by Constantine and it was a remarkable achievement which 
made possible the close collaboration between the Byzantine, and later 
the Russian, Empires and their Churches. 

42 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

The first question, the date of Easter, was easily resolved at Nicaea; 
but the second problem, Alexander's dispute with Arius, proved difficult. 
Most of the bishops found Arms' s teaching defective, for it suggested 
that Jesus Christ the Incarnate Logos was inferior to God the Father, 
but a number of the Council's members also criticized Alexander's 
excommunication of Arius as harsh and precipitate, and were therefore 
unwilling to condemn outright this heretic. After long debate, in which 
the deacon Athanasius (293-373), one of Alexander's chief supporters, 
revealed his theological insight and ardour for orthodoxy, the vast 
majority accepted a new formula prepared by Hosius and supported 
by Athanasius. It defined more exactly than hitherto the equality of the 
Father and the Son. The Greek word homoousios (of the same substance) 
was introduced into the creed and sanctioned by the Council. 

Only two bishops refused to sign. Their stubborn opposition raised the 
crucial question: could so small a minority be disregarded and the 
Inspiration of the Holy Spirit claimed, or should the Council disperse 
without reaching any binding decision? We do not know what alterna- 
tives were suggested to the Emperor. Nor do we know who had the 
final word in this matter, but we know what Constantine did in the 
end, and his action had far-reaching consequences for the whole history 
of the Church. He ordered the removal of the two dissenters; whereupon 
the remaining bishops unanimously promulgated their decrees in the 
name of the Holy Ghost. The refractory bishops were not molested, and 
no protest against this intervention has been recorded. It probably 
seemed at the time that Constantine had found a simple and practical 
way out of a hopeless dilemma, but in reality he had established a 
dangerous precedent of compulsion and intimidation. Once force had 
been accepted as legitimate, further acts of cruelty and persecution 
might be committed thereafter in the name of the Prince of Peace. 

Constantine, elated by his victory, despatched the bishops to their 
dioceses. In his letter addressed to all the Churches, he praised the 
achievements of the synod and commanded Christians to receive its 
decrees e with all willingness as truly divine injunctions and to regard 
them as a gift of God. For whatever is determined in the holy assembly 
of the bishops is to be treated as indicative of the divine Will.' 11 Con- 
stantine trusted that the 'unanimity' achieved at Nicaea would end the 
harmful dispute; but events soon dissipated this optimism. The Nicene 
Council, instead of securing the tranquillity within the Church, pro- 
voked an outburst of unprecedented theological hostilities which kept 
the Eastern Christians in a state of feverish activity for more than half a 
century and disturbed the West for another two hundred years. 

43 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Arianism 

The dispute that began in 319 between bishop Alexander and his 
leading presbyter Arius, then aged sixty-three, was at first local, only 
affecting the Church of Alexandria, but it spread fast all over the East 
and became one of the major doctrinal conflicts of the fourth century. 

Arius, with his pale face and long hair of an ascetic, with his poetical 
imagination and commanding voice and stature, was an impressive 
personality. He had a large and devoted following and had many ad- 
mirers especially among the influential body of dedicated virgins. He 
was a devout and learned man, a disciple of a much revered martyr, 
Lucius (d. 312) Bishop of Antioch. Arius wanted to explain the mystery 
of the Incarnation in terms of contemporary Hellenistic philosophy and 
in doing so he distorted the Apostolic tradition and fell into heresy. He 
taught that if the Father begat the Son then one had to envisage a time 
when the Son did not exist and thus he placed Christ in an inter- 
mediate position between the Creator and the creation. 

Arius believed in Jesus Christ devotionally as the Saviour of mankind 
but theologically he subordinated the Son to the Father. He quoted 
several texts of the Gospels in support of his contention that the Second 
Person of the Holy Trinity, the Incarnate Logos, was unequal to God 
the Creator whom Jesus Christ referred to as His Father. 12 Arianism 
stood in open contradiction to the fundamental assertion of the Catholic 
faith that the reconciliation between God and mankind and the 
redemption of the world was accomplished neither by a messenger sent 
from above, nor by a holy man or prophet uplifted to a higher sphere 
when his task fulfilled, but by the Almighty Author of the Universe 
Himself who was the unique and undivided source of all beings. 

The Church from Apostolic times was resolutely opposed to any idea 
of demiurges or divinities subordinate to the supreme God, the doctrine 
common to the Gnostic sects. The Gospel teaching that God is love is 
based on the belief that in the person of Jesus Christ, who was born, 
crucified and has risen, the triune God Himself suffered the agony of 
death as known to men. Perfect love does not shrink from any sacrifice 
or humiliation. Only if Jesus Christ shared the same nature with His 
Father could the Christian conviction that God has become known to 
mankind and offered His fellowship to His creation be justified. Arius, 
teaching of an inferior Christ, shrouded the Creator of the universe in 
impenetrable mystery, and deprived the members of the Church of 
that certainty that God truly loved and cared for men, which was 
essential to the Orthodox doctrine. 

Arius called attention to the central problems of Christian theology, 

44 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

and its discussion required all the wisdom and learning available among 
leaders of the Church; but from the first the dispute he provoked 
acquired the character of personal rivalry with Alexander, and this 
encouraged the stubborn presbyter to maintain an extreme position and 
engendered bitter animosity.* When Arius started composing popular 
songs incorporating his ideas, Alexander expelled him from the ranks 
of the clergy and forced him to leave Alexandria. Arius migrated to 
Palestine and later to Nicomedia where he found many sympathizers, 
not necessarily as the propagator of heretical tenets but as the victim of 
autocratic treatment, f 

At the Nicene Council the majority of bishops repudiated Arianism 
as false, but only a few liked the word homoousios which was associated 
in their minds with the previously condemned teaching of Paul of 
Samosata (d. c. 270), who had obliterated distinction between the Father 
and the Son. Constantine's personal intervention in support of this 
controversial theological expression, however, carried it through the 
uneasy assembly. As soon as the bishops returned home many of them 
began to regret their decision, for they had to face the difficult task of 
explaining to their people the reason for the acceptance of a creed 
containing a word which had no biblical authority behind it, a word 
which had first been introduced by heretics. 

Besides this difficulty there was another one connected with the 
wording of the Nicene Creed. Hitherto the Christian used only bap- 
tismal creeds which, in positive terms, affirmed their belief in the Holy 
Trinity and Jesus Christ as their Saviour. The Nicene Creed introduced 
new and speculative elements which were the matter of controversy 
among the theologians. It contained, for instance, the following 
references to the Incarnate Logos: 

'And those who say that once He was not, or that before His genera- 
tion He was not, and that He came into being out of nothing, or those 
who claim that the Son of God is of other substance or essence or 
created, or alterable, or mutable; the catholic Church anathematizes/ 

These indictments reflected theological debates in the Council, and 

* The Church historian Socrates described the beginning of the Anan dispute in the 
following way: 'One day Alexander attempted in the presence of the presbyters to explain 
with a perhaps too philosophical minuteness that great theological mystery, the unity of the 
Holy Trinity. Arius, imagining that the bishop was subtly teaching as Sabellius the Lybian, 
from love of controversy took the opposite side.' (Socrates, Hist. Ecc. t i, 5.) 

f Sozomen, another Church historian, says: 'Many of the people sided with Arius and his 
partisans, as frequently happens in similar cases, because they believed them to have been 
ill-treated and unjustly excommunicated. 9 (Hist. Ecc., i, 15.) 

45 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

many Christians could not grasp their importance. Most of the bishops 
tried therefore to shelve the new creed and adhere to their own tradi- 
tional local confessions of faith. A few openly repudiated the Nicene 
formula and these Constantine banished and replaced by men who would 
obey the council. This action set the Church on fire. Hostility burst out 
among the bishops, who accused each other of heresies. These incrimi- 
nations led their victims into disgrace and exile. In self-defence the 
expelled clergy appealed to the Emperor, pleading their orthodoxy and 
denouncing their rivals. 

Theological parties were formed, and they clashed at numerous 
episcopal gatherings, convoked to restore peace. The main point of 
contention was the term homoousios. Resistance was psychologically 
explicable, for this word was prematurely imposed upon the East, but 
theologically the term expressed the traditional faith and therefore its 
defenders refused any concession, and even such an alternative as 
homiousios (of like substance), suggested as a compromise, was rejected 
by the upholders of the Nicene Council. Many bishops preferred exile 
to the changing of a single vowel. 

Constantine, realizing the futility of compulsion, recalled the banished 
bishops and used every means to restore peace in the Church; but he 
failed, for dissension was rife. His sons were even less successful; 
lacking his magnanimity and vision, and behaving like petty tyrants, 
they supported their favourite bishops and persecuted those they dis- 
liked. Some of these Emperors were Orthodox, and some Arian, while 
others vacillated and favoured doctrinal compromise. During this period 
of theological battles and confusion, the central figure was St Athanasius 
the Great, Patriarch of Alexandria (327-373), who occupied St Mark's 
Chair for forty-six years. Though physically almost a dwarf he was an 
intellectual giant, a man of indomitable courage, with a burning zeal 
for orthodoxy. He combated Arianism without mercy. He became Bishop 
of Alexandria at the age of thirty-six and at once began campaigning in 
defence of the Nicene theology. He composed books and pamphlets 
and appealed in person and in writing to the Emperors, asking them to 
defend the orthodox and punish heretics. He fought the battle in Egypt 
and outside its borders, creating enemies and attracting admirers. He 
was four times exiled by Imperial edicts, spent almost fifteen years in 
foreign lands or in hiding, but he outlived his enemies, including sixteen 
Emperors, with most of whom he was in continuous conflict. 

Athanasius was a new kind of Christian leader. He was a dignitary 
who commanded obedience and whose influence rivalled that of the 
civil governors. He was belligerent and as unlike his humble prede- 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

cessors as the post-Nicene Church was unlike the Christian community 
under persecution. Athanasius has often been represented as a saviour 
of Orthodoxy who rescued the Church from Arianism single-handed. 
Such a description of his role is hardly justified, for at no time did the 
majority depart from their traditional faith. The disturbance that 
followed the Council was caused not so much by doctrinal apostasy, but 
more by the introduction of compulsion into the Christian community. 
Athanasius himself was largely responsible for it. He was therefore 
attacked, not only by those who criticized his theology, but also by 
those who objected to his interference in the life of other communities 
and who disliked his use of force and his aggressiveness. 

The consequences of Nicaea 

At first glance the contrast between the Church before and after 
Nicaea seems bewildering. During the first three centuries of its existence 
the Christian community had displayed the power of unity and concord 
and had won the battle against the Empire. In the middle of the fourth 
century the same Church suddenly lost its inner harmony and was split 
into hostile factions. Christians who had refused to obey Imperial 
orders now invoked the secular arm to close down rival places of wor- 
ship and arrest their clergy. The main cause of this transformation was 
the abrupt fusion of Church and Empire. The life of the Christian com- 
munity before Nicaea had been based on freedom, membership of the 
Church involved sacrifice. Nicaea altered these fundamental conditions: 
the Church became a privileged body. The State undertook the protection 
of its unity and orthodoxy. Those who infringed its rules were to be 
punished like civil offenders. The confession of faith, which until this 
time had been a secret revealed only to initiates* became not only 
public, but so vigorously defended that any cleric who dared deviate 
from it was liable to severe penalties. The Church leaders, who until 
then had enjoyed purely moral authority, saw themselves transformed 
into Imperial officials with powers of coercion that to some were 
irresistible. The less scrupulous behaved like tyrants. Bishop George, for 
instance, who was sent to Alexandria in 357 to replace Athanasius, 

* St Hilary (d. 367), one of the most learned bishops of the West, writing in 356 from his 
exile in the East to his own Church in Gaul, explained to his flock that the creed which hither- 
to had been kept secret had now become the subject of public debate and that the local 
confessions of faith were to be replaced by the Nicene Creed, which he himself had never used 
till he was expelled from his diocese for his defence of Orthodoxy against Arianism. (Hilary, 
de Synod 91.) St Cyril of Jerusalem (315-86) in his catechetical letters also disapproved of 
written creeds. He writes: 'I wish you to commit to memory when I recite the Creed; not 
writing it out on paper . . . taking care while you rehearse it that no catechumen chances 
to overhear it.* V, 12. The same attitude is shared by Sozomen, I, 20. 

47 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

treated those who refused to recognize him so cruelly that his own 
flock drove him from the city. But even the best men, like St Athanasius, 
had frequent recourse to force. The aged Sylvester, the Pope of Rome, 
the cautious Hosius, the ardent Athanasius, the learned Eusebius, all gave 
up the freedom of the Church in exchange for the protection of the Empire. 

This surprising surrender was linked with growing emotional tension, 
centred in Egypt, and especially in Alexandria. That great city of 
extremes was always ready to support some new cause with wild 
enthusiasm. In the fourth century it swung into fierce reaction against 
the sexual licence previously prevalent among its inhabitants. The most 
austere forms of self-mortification excited general admiration; sex was 
regarded as degrading; virginity was praised as the chief Christian 
virtue. A large number of men and women embraced a life of dedicated 
celibacy. The emotional strain under which many of them lived is well 
reflected in the life of St Antony (251-356), whose temptations, des- 
cribed by St Athanasius, greatly impressed Christians all over the world. 

This stress on virginity became so unbalanced that it provided a 
favourable ground for the passionate outbreak of the cult of the leader, 
which has always been one of the characteristics of Egyptian mentality. 
The head of the Christian community in the Nile Valley acquired a 
unique position: he was not only regarded as superior to all other local 
bishops, but became an object of devotion unknown in other parts of 
the Church. He was the popular hero of Egyptian Christians, their 
divine oracle and the champion of their awakening nationalism. 

In this atmosphere doctrinal disputes also became passionate. 
Theological issues were debated in the streets and markets with an 
enthusiasm usually reserved for sport or politics. The supporters of one 
school of theology abused their opponents and praised their own leaders, 
as inspired by God and infallible. This verbal hostility, once accepted as 
compatible with Christianity, easily led to deeds of violence. Tolerance 
and moderation were branded as a betrayal of truth. Dogmatic zeal 
exempted Christians from charity and forgiveness. State intervention 
was welcomed by the contesting parties. As far as the East was con- 
cerned, Egypt played a fatal role in opening the gates of the Church to 
the use of secular force. The Church which excelled all others in the 
exercise of asceticism and in the cult of the leader was also the first to 
surrender its freedom. It is therefore significant that the same African 
soil became the scene of two disastrous schisms in the early Church: 
the Donatist schism, which eventually extinguished Christianity in 
North Africa, and the Monophysite schism, which delivered the major 
part of the Christian East into the hands of Islam. 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

The victory of Nicene Orthodoxy 

Unrest within the Church caused by the Nicene Council coincided with 
a period of troubles for the Roman Empire. Constantine's sons, Con- 
stantius (337-361), Constantine II (337-340) and Constans (340-350), 
fought each other and weakened the Empire at a time when it needed 
all its strength to resist the barbarians' increasing pressure. Their 
nephew and successor, Julian the Apostate (361-363), having unsuc- 
cessfully tried to revive paganism, perished when leading his army 
against the Persians. Valens (364-378) was an active supporter of the 
Arians and his attempts to fill the leading sees with heretics led to 
further confusion. He was killed during a campaign against the Goths* 

His successor, Theodosius I (379-395)5 restored at last the peace of 
the Church and revived the political might of the Empire. He convoked 
a synod in Constantinople in 381 (the Second Ecumenical Council) 
which proclaimed that only Nicene Theology was Orthodox, and there- 
by ended, as far as the East was concerned, the disputes caused by the 
First Ecumenical Council. This victory was not only due to Imperial 
support; it was also the result of serious theological thinking by three 
outstanding men known to us as the Cappadocian Fathers (Plate 31) : St 
Basil the Great (329-379), St Gregory Nazianzen (330-389) and St 
Gregory of Nyssa (335-396). These new leaders of the Eastern Church 
ensured the triumph of the Apostolic tradition. Their opponents were 
ready to shape their theology to suit current philosophical idioms, and so 
win Court approval. The Cappadocian Fathers, men of integrity and 
courage, did not seek Imperial favours. They were firm without being 
pugnacious, ascetics yet free from fanaticism, Orthodox but desiring 
the restoration of peace in the Church. They worked to reconcile the 
Nicene party and the Conservative majority of the Eastern Christians. 
They achieved their aim by justifying doctrinally the contested term 
homoousios, and by resisting any State intervention in doctrinal disputes. 
They were men of deep learning and culture who heroically defended 
the freedom of the Church and the dignity of its pastors. They upheld 
the Nicene formulation because they believed it expressed the traditional 
faith of the Church and not because it had been sanctioned by the 
Emperor. 

Their great achievement was to have clarified theological terms. 
They coined a new vocabulary capable of expressing the Christian 
vision of God. The language of Greek philosophy had been unequal to 
this task and helped to cause the confusion and bitterness of the post- 
Nicene disputes. The contemporary Church historian Socrates (379- 
445) was right when he compared the bishops in their endless disputes 

D 49 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

to men fighting each other in the dark, not knowing with any precision 
the doctrinal position of their adversaries and attributing heresies and 
errors to them which they repudiated. 13 The Cappadocians brought 
light into this chaos and at the same time purified the moral atmosphere 
among the leaders of the Church by their freedom from personal ambi- 
tions and by their genuine concern for the welfare of the whole 
community. 

St Basil was born in 329 in Caesarea, the capital of Cappadocia, and 
an important commercial centre on the crossroads which linked the 
Euphrates with the Black Sea, and Constantinople with the Persian 
Empire. His father was a wealthy lawyer and a devout Christian; his 
mother Emilia was renowned for her beauty and piety. His parents had 
ten children, and three of their sons and one of their daughters are 
numbered among the Saints of the Church. Basil was educated in 
Constantinople and in Athens, where he met his lifelong friend, 
Gregory Nazianzen. Another of his fellow students was Julian, the 
future Emperor. On his return to his native city, Basil intended to follow 
his father's profession, but the sudden death of his brother, Nancratius, 
and the example of his sister, St Macrina, turned his mind to religion. 
Macrina was a remarkable woman who exercised a powerful influence 
upon all who came in contact with her. She formed a religious com- 
munity for women and her charity and wisdom made her famous all 
over Pontus and Cappadocia.* 

St Basil followed Macrina' s advice and retired to his father's estate 
where he gathered like-minded young men round him; and founded a 
small community which played a significant role in the evolution of 
Eastern monasticism. He was convinced that a well organized mona- 
stery directed by a wise and experienced teacher was of greater benefit 
than a lonely life in the desert, for those who wanted to dedicate them- 
selves to the worship of God. He himself renounced the world, not 
because he despised it, but because his love for God called him to give 
up all other loyalties and attractions. The rules he composed showed, 
however, that love for God can never be separated from love for men. 
Basil was too remarkable a leader to remain for long in the seclusion 
of monasticism. The Church needed his services. In 358, Eusebius, 
bishop of Caesaria, ordained him presbyter against his will. In 370, 
after Eusebius's death, Basil was elected his successor. It was a hard time 
for the Church. The Emperor Valens was supporting the different 
ramifications of Arianism; the Orthodox were not only oppressed but 
also divided, for they had no recognized leader. Athanasius was getting 

* St Gregory of Nyssa has left a moving description of his beloved sister (Vita St Macrinae). 

50 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

old, and his influence was in any case confined to Egypt. The Pope of 
Rome was orthodox, but he was far away and unable to assist the 
defenders of the traditional faith in the East. At this moment Basil 
assumed the role of leader and brilliantly performed his task of uniting 
the Church under the banner of the Nicene theology. He was weak in 
health, peace loving and genuinely humble, but he had rare firmness of 
character. He combined tolerance and patience with an uncompro- 
mising stand for orthodoxy. Once, cross-examined by the much dreaded 
prefect Modestus, Basil provoked him into shouting 'No one ever dared 
to speak to me in this manner!' Basil's reply was: Trobably you have 
never met a bishop. 5 He used another language when he tried to per- 
suade Church leaders. As a theologian he vindicated the term homoousios 
in the eyes of the conservative Eastern bishops. As an ecclesiastical 
statesman he laboured to restore communion between East and West, 
employing the pre-Nicene method of inter-church correspondence and 
objecting to all forms of compulsion. In this he differed from St 
Athanasius who was often ready to use the secular arm in defence of 
orthodoxy. 

The chief obstacle to reconciliation at that time was the existence of 
dissident groups in Antioch and Constantinople which were in com- 
munion with Rome and Alexandria, and claimed to be the sole repre- 
sentatives of orthodoxy in the East. In order to maintain their position 
they misrepresented the doctrinal stand of St Basil and of other con- 
servative theologians in the Asiatic provinces. Basil's main object was to 
persuade the militant supporters of the Nicene Council that most 
Eastern bishops who objected to the term homoousios were nonetheless 
genuinely Orthodox. 

Basil spared no efforts to remove the misunderstanding created by 
the pro-Nicene extremists. He wrote letters, sent emissaries, invited 
Western bishops to come to the East and meet him and his friends; 
though often rebuffed, he persevered. He died in 379 without seeing the 
reconciliation completed, but he had the satisfaction of observing many 
signs that the Churches were moving in the right direction and that 
concord would soon be restored. 

In all his labours Basil was greatly helped by his friend and disciple 
St Gregory Nazianzen, son of a poor cleric of a small sect later recon- 
ciled to the Church. His mother Nonna, a stern and ascetic woman, 
dedicated her only child to the service of God and brought him up in 
the spirit of orthodoxy. Gregory was small of stature, red haired, always 
in bad health, but like Basil, fearless and uncompromising. A gifted 
poet, a writer of excellent prose, he would have preferred a quiet literary 

51 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

life, but circumstances forced him to take an active, and at times decisive 
part, in the defence of Orthodoxy. He was ordained presbyter, like 
Basil against his will, and was later forced by Basil himself to become 
bishop of the forlorn township of Sasima. Basil needed his support in the 
campaign against the Arians, but Gregory for a long time resented this 
violation of his privacy by his best friend. He felt himself unworthy of 
his sacerdotal duties and longed for his austere solitude on his father's 
estate. 

In the year of St Basil's death, Gregory suddenly appeared in Con- 
stantinople. The Capital was at that time a stronghold of the anti- 
Nicene party and the supporters of the homoousios had not a single 
Church at their disposal. St Gregory began celebrating and teaching in 
a room in a private house. He soon became the most popular preacher 
in the capital and it was probably at that time that he delivered his 
five famous orations on the Holy Trinity. They represent one of the 
highest achievements in theology of the Eastern church. 

St Gregory penetrated deeper than any other divine into the mystery 
of the Triune God, whose inner life of love is the timeless intercourse of 
three distinct persons who are but one being. God is one in three and 
three in one, was the refrain that accompanied St Gregory's sermons. In 
his teaching on the Incarnation St Gregory emphasized the all-impor- 
tant doctrine that only because one of the Holy Trinity became a real 
man, can men ascend to union with the Godhead. The birth of Christ 
created a situation which was logically contradictory, for the Incarnate 
Logos being both God and man retained the characteristics of his two 
natures and at the same time remained one person, a proof that man 
can be united with God without being deprived of his personality. 
Gregory wrote: 

'Christ was born, but he was already begotten; he issued from woman, 
but she was a Virgin. He was baptized, but he remitted sins as God. He 
thirsted, but he said "If any one thirst let him come unto me and 
drink". He prayed, but he hears prayers. He asked where Lazarus was 
laid, for he was a man; and he raised Lazarus, for he is God. He dies, 
but he gives life. He is buried, but he rises again. He descends into hell, 
but he saves the damned.' 14 

St Gregory's writings are full of imagery and poetical beauty; at the 
same time they are doctrinally precise for he avoids arbitrary specula- 
tions and adheres to the original apostolic tradition of the Church. 
When Valens died in 378, Theodosius, his successor, came to Con- 

52 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

stantinople; being a staunch upholder of Nicene Orthodoxy he at once 
ordered the transfer of all Churches to the pro-Nicene clergy. The Arian 
bishop of the capital was expelled and Gregory was elevated to the 
leading see, by public acclamation. He who had complained that super- 
vising the ecclesiastical affairs of a small township in Cappadocia was 
an unbearable burden, accepted with fortitude the administration of 
the Church of the capital. His success surprised even his friends and 
admirers, but it also provoked animosity in those who objected to his 
rapid rise to power. 

In 381, when Theodosius convoked a Council of Eastern bishops in 
Constantinople to confirm the victory of the Nicene Orthodoxy, the 
Patriarch of Alexandria questioned Gregory's right to occupy his chair, 
for he was originally elected bishop of Sasima and such a transfer was 
contrary to ecclesiastical rules. Gregory refused to fight for his position. 
He left the capital and returned to his father's estate in Ariansus, where 
he died in 389. 

In his farewell oration he painted a striking picture of the new type of 
wealthy prelate in whose company he felt himself a stranger. 

'No one told me that I was to compete with Consuls and Prefects 
and illustrious Generals. No one told me I was expected to place 
the treasuries of the Church at the service of gluttony and the Poor 
Boxes at the service of luxury. No one told me I must be equipped 
with superb horses and ride in expensive chariots or that everyone must 
make way for the Patriarch, as though he were some kind of wild beast. 515 

St Gregory, shrunken, poorly dressed, but with his fiery imagination 
and biting tongue, stood in sharp contrast with the opulent bishops who 
behaved and lived like State officials. Gregory's dismissal opened the 
long rivalry between Alexandria and Constantinople, which ended by 
pushing the presiding bishops of those two cities into separate ecclesias- 
tical camps. 

The third great Cappadocian was St Gregory of Nyssa. This younger 
brother of St Basil the Great had nothing of St Basil's commanding 
personality. He was not an ecclesiastical leader but a creative and ori- 
ginal thinker. St Gregory was a married man. His beautiful wife, 
Theosebeia, became a deaconess. Both are revered as saints by Eastern 
Christians. He, like Gregory Nazianzen, was compelled by St Basil to 
accept episcopal orders, but his gentle and poetical nature was ill- 
suited to ecclesiastical warfare. His theological writings breathe a joyful 
optimism, inspired by the victory achieved by Christ's resurrection. St 

53 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Gregory believed that human nature would be restored to its original 
glory and beauty, for man is created in the living image of God and is 
blessed by his maker with immortality. According to St Gregory, man's 
fall only temporarily deprived him of righteousness given to him in 
Paradise, and again to be bestowed on him at the end of history. 

St Gregory took part in the work of the Second Ecumenical Council 
in 381 and was greeted there as a pillar of Nicene Orthodoxy. The 
Emperor Theodosius respected his judgment and he was sent as Imperial 
legate to investigate the state of the Churches in Arabia and Babylon. 
But he was not at ease as Caesar's envoy and preferred working in 
Nyssa, where he ended his life in peace in 396. In many respects he is, 
both as theologian and as writer, the nearest to our time and mentality. 
Gregory loved nature, he loved the earth and all that belonged to it, and 
in this he was an exception in his own generation which seemed so 
absorbed in the contemplation of eternal life that it lost interest in 
earthly joys and responsibilities. St Gregory's greatness as an original 
thinker was acknowledged in 787 by the Seventh Ecumenical Council 
which gave him the remarkable title of 'Father of the Fathers of the 
Church'. 

The Second Ecumenical Council and the Emperor Theodosius (379-395) 
The Second Ecumenical Council convoked by the Emperor Theo- 
dosius in 381 in Constantinople was restricted, due to political troubles, 
to the bishops of the Eastern part of the Empire. It was a much smaller 
gathering than the First, for only 150 members attended, but it left as 
deep a mark upon the development of the Church. The confession of 
faith it sanctioned was an adaptation of a local baptismal creed, probably 
that of Jerusalem, but it became the creed of the whole Church, the 
bond of unity among all Eastern Christians and an important link 
between them and the Christian West. This creed, now usually known 
as the Nicene Creed, although it belongs to the Second Council, incor- 
porated the word homoousios from the original Nicene creed. The four 
Canons adopted by the Second Council defined the ecclesiastical 
provinces and forbade their leaders to interfere with affairs outside their 
frontiers. This prohibition was directed mainly at Alexandria whose 
Popes had acquired the habit of behaving as supreme heads of Christen- 
dom. The Bishop of Constantinople was raised to the dignity of Patriarch 
and was assigned to the second place of honour after Rome, Alexandria 
taking only third place. This greatly wounded the Egyptian prelates' 
pride. 

When Council members had finished their work they sent a letter 

54 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

to the Emperor informing him of their decisions. Theodosius in response 
ordered that Church property all over the Empire should be handed 
over to those bishops who were in communion with Nectarius of 
Constantinople, Timothy of Alexandria, Diodorus of Tarsus, and 
Optimus of Antioch. 

Constantine made the bishops solely responsible for the formulation 
of doctrines and for the discipline of the Church. Theodosius himself 
decided which theological school was right. In 383, he convoked a 
conference of the heads of the diverse Christian sects, and when they 
presented to him their various confessions of faith he chose the one 
embodying the Nicene Orthodoxy and ordered the rest to be publicly 
burned. He published a law forbidding all Christians who rejected the 
Nicene Council to hold prayer meetings. 16 The Anti-Nicene opposition 
collapsed everywhere in the East with surprising speed. Its leaders 
were too much compromised by their previous reliance on State support 
to offer serious resistance to the Emperor's new policy. Besides, they 
were divided, and many of them recognized the soundness ofhomoousios 
as interpreted by the Cappadocian Fathers. Imperial protection was 
welcomed by the Orthodox party, few members of which counted the 
price the Church had to pay for the Emperor's right to choose a school 
of theology and make it the criterion of Catholicism in the Empire. 

The mass conversion of the Empire and its effects upon the Church 
In the course of the fourth century the life of the inhabitants of the 
Eastern half of the Mediterranean world, of Egypt, Syria and Asia 
Minor, experienced a spiritual transformation which had far reaching 
repercussions in the secular sphere. The Christian faith, hitherto 
professed by a minority, replaced the ancient religions; ascetic ideals in 
an extreme form captured the imagination of the masses; and theologi- 
cal problems evoked widespread interest, unparalleled in the history of 
the Church. St Gregory of Nyssa graphically described this absorption 
with religious speculation when he said of the shopkeepers of Con- 
stantinople: 

e lf you ask a man to change a piece of silver, he informs you that the 
Son differs from the Father; if you ask the price of a loaf, you are told 
in reply that the Son is inferior to the Father; and if you inquire whether 
the bath is ready, you are solemnly informed that the Son was made of 
nothing.' 17 

The inrush of converts altered the composition of the Christian com- 

55 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

munity. The characteristic noise and excitement of the Oriental market 
penetrated the peaceful precincts of the Christian temple. The long and 
careful preparation previously required for baptism was relinquished; 
discipline was relaxed, with the result that the barriers between Christians 
and the rest of the population were considerably lowered. What the 
Church lost in purity, the Empire gained in the better treatment of its 
citizens. Under Christian influence, mercy to criminals, help for the 
poor and the sick, and the prohibition of cruel and immoral entertain- 
ments were all recognized as the duty of the State. The greatest change, 
however, affected the Emperor. He was seen as a human being, subject 
to the same rules of conduct as other Christians; no longer elevated 
above moral control, but called upon to show mercy and forgiveness, 
and at the Last Judgment to give an account of all his private and pub- 
lic deeds. 

This sudden change of the hostile Empire into a friend and even 
protector of the Church stimulated the many sided growth of the 
Christian community which was particularly spectacular in the East. 
In spite of intense doctrinal disputes its history in the fourth and fifth 
centuries is one of the most glorious in its annals. Membership rapidly 
increased; theological thought matured and deepened, art flourished, 
and philanthropic institutions greatly improved the life of the under- 
privileged. The Church became a great power, with the result that con- 
siderable wealth was put at the disposal of its leading bishops, causing 
a moral deterioration of some of them. Several personal conflicts arose, 
the most tragic being concerned with St John Chrysostom (the Golden 
Mouthed), the greatest preacher of this period, and an intrepid social 
reformer. 

St John Chrysostom (347-407} 

In 387, during local riots in Antioch, the statues of Theodosius I and his 
family were smashed by the mob. This act of defiance was regarded as 
one of the most serious political crimes at that time, and harsh retalia- 
tions were expected, including executions and mass deportations. The 
city was seized with panic and the frightened populace implored the 
Patriarch to plead with the Emperor for mercy and forgiveness. 

The aged Flavianus (d. 404) set out at once on a difficult journey to 
the capital, braving the winter storms and the frozen snow-covered 
mountain passes. His mission was crowned with success. Theodosius as a 
Christian monarch pardoned the city. The bearer of ultimate political 
power recognized in the Church a higher moral authority than his own, 
and obeyed it. 

56 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

The troubles in Antioch brought to the fore John, one of the city 
presbyters (Plate 31). During the weeks when the citizens had lived in a 
state of anxiety and suspense, awaiting the news from the capital, he 
delivered daily sermons in which he contrasted the vices of the opulent 
city with the precepts of the Gospel, and called his hearers to amendment 
of their lives. These discourses have been preserved and they provide a 
vivid picture of the state of contemporary Christianity and of the 
outstanding quality of the famous preacher. 

The good news of Imperial pardon deeply moved the citizens. The 
moral atmosphere of Antioch was transformed and John acquired a 
wide popularity as a fearless and dedicated pastor and reformer. It was 
natural therefore that when in 398 the Patriarchal throne of Con- 
stantinople fell vacant, the Emperor Arcadius (395-408) was advised to 
entrust the Church of his capital to the zealous priest. St John was 
unwilling to accept this elevation, but was eventually forced to submit 
to the Imperial pressure. Theophilus, the Pope of Alexandria (d. 412), 
an ambitious prelate, was nominated by the Emperor to be St John's 
consecrator, and from that day the enmity arose between Theophilus 
who lived as a great magnate, and St John, an ascetic whose main 
concern was social justice and charity to the poor. From the first, St 
John encountered strong opposition to his campaign for the evangeliza- 
tion of the city. The clergy of the capital were worldly and negligent of 
their duties; the rich were sunk in luxury; the poor were ignorant and 
corrupt. St John relentlessly attacked all these evils, and was soon 
surrounded by determined enemies, who resented the presence of a man 
of pure life and uncompromising zeal. His greatest opponent, however, 
was Theophilus, who was jealous of the popularity of his rival and of the 
priority of honour enjoyed by the see of Constantinople. 

The Empress Eudoxia at first admired St John, but later she too 
became his foe. At her invitation Theophilus came to Constantinople in 
403 and assembled a synod of bishops in the palace of the Oak Tree, in a 
suburb of Chalcedon. He brought twenty-nine of the thirty-six members 
from Egypt. None had any right to interfere in Church administration 
in the capital, according to the rule passed by the Second Ecumenical 
Council of 381. Nevertheless, this illegal assembly summoned St John 
to appear before it, and in his absence condemned him on various false 
charges. He protested against this violation of law and justice, but did 
not want to fight in his own defence, and surrendered to the Imperial 
bodyguard. As soon as he was carried away from Constantinople an 
earthquake shook the city, and the terrified Eudoxia begged John to 
return to his flock. 

57 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Theophilus meanwhile fled to Egypt, fearing that the indignant 
populace would assault him and his supporters. St John's return still 
further enraged his opponents. Eudoxia resumed her campaign against 
him, the police arrested and deported many of his friends, while the 
Emperor was too weak to defend the man whom he had brought to 
Constantinople. 

In 404, when St John was again arrested, a disastrous fire destroyed 
the Senate House and the Cathedral which Constantine had built. 
Nevertheless, this time the Patriarch was sent to Cucusus, a remote 
outpost of the Empire, where he soon became a centre of attraction. It 
was said that Antioch was deserted, and that its most prominent 
citizens had moved to that obscure village in order to benefit from his 
teaching. This popularity intensified hostility among those responsible 
for his exile. In spite of failing health, he was ordered to move further 
north, to Pityas in the Caucasus, but he died on the way on i4th Septem- 
ber, 407. His last words were: 'Glory be to God for everything.' 

In 438 his relics were transferred to Constantinople, and the reigning 
Emperor Theodosius II (408-50), together with his three sisters, knelt 
beside the coffin, imploring the Saint to pardon their father and mother 
for all the evils they had done to him. His exile, like that of St Gregory 
of Nazianzen, showed how difficult it was for a zealous Christian to 
remain in charge of the Church in Constantinople, and how dangerous 
for the future of Christianity was the determined hostility of the Popes of 
Alexandria. But this tragic story also indicates the moral ascendency of 
men of strong faith and pure life. St John became a hero of his Church, 
an example and inspiration, which deepened the spiritual life of the 
entire Christian community. 

The Nestorian schism 

During this painful conflict the Roman Church stood firmly on the side 
of the unjustly condemned Patriarch, and this uncompromising defence 
of the great saint helped the rehabilitation of his name. The temporary 
schism in the ranks of the Eastern Christians caused by the exile of John 
Chrysostom was soon healed, and was followed by an interval of peace 
in the first quarter of the fifth century. This did not last long, however, 
for the right claimed by the State to arrest and exile any prelate accused 
or even suspected of heresy provided too many opportunities for 
intrigues and plots among the less scrupulous hierarchs. 

The new conflict was started by another priest from Antioch, the 
learned monk Nestorius, who was made Patriarch of Constantinople in 
427. Nestorius was the opposite to John Chrysostom; his main concern 

58 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

was the suppression of dissident groups, instead of improving the moral 
life of his own flock. With the aid of the police he undertook an energetic 
campaign against heretics, during which he closed places of unauthorised 
worship. He also attempted to define with greater precision than 
hitherto the distinction between God and man in Christ, thus bringing 
his own orthodoxy into question by his opponents. The traditional 
belief in Jesus Christ as the promised Messiah implied that He was both 
true God and real man, yet also one person, not two beings operating in 
the same body. This paradoxical assertion of unity and distinction could 
be interpreted in two different ways/One school of thought, associated 
with Alexandria, saw Jesus Christ primarily as the Incarnate Logos, 
and stressed the divinity of the Saviour. The Antiochian school empha- 
sized Christ's manhood, and dwelt on all those aspects of the Incarna- 
tion that revealed Jesus as having the experiences and limitations of 
ordinary men, with the exception of their sins and inward divisions. 
Both interpretations were within the orthodox tradition and were 
complementary. ) 

Nestorius was a militant representative of the Antiochian school; he 
offended his audiences in Constantinople by stressing the distinction 
between the divine and human natures in Christ, even objecting to the 
traditional title of Theotokos (God-Bearer) given to the mother of Jesus 
whom he preferred to call c Christ-Bearer 5 . (The doctrinal dispute started 
by Nestorius in Constantinople soon attracted the attention of St Cyril 
(412-444), the nephew of Theophilus, the newly-elected Pope of Alex- 
andria. Vflyril was a brilliant theologian and a born leader of the 
nascent nationalism of Egypt. He commanded the blind allegiance of 
many thousands of monks and consecrated virgins, and was an un- 
crowned king of his people. His zeal for Orthodoxy was not accompanied 
by charity to his rivals and from the first his rule was marked by the acts 
of violence of his fanatical followers. The Jews and heathens were the 
first to suffer; his doctrinal opponents fared no better. Even Orestus 
the Prefect of the city was in danger of his life at the hands of the 
infuriated mob when he dared to oppose the patriarch. 

Cyril's appearance on the scene of the controversy raised by 
Nestorius's sermons predicted an impending storm. Disagreement was 
aggravated by the active interest of Rome, which sided decisively with 
Cyril against Nestorius. To prevent trouble the Emperor Theodosius II 
announced the convocation of an Ecumenical Council at Ephesus. 
Without waiting for the Council Cyril issued twelve anathemata against 
Nestorius. He enumerated a series of errors that precluded membership 
in the Church which included several propositions taught in Antioch. 

59 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Nestorius and others of the Antiochian school counter-attacked, 
accusing Cyril of heresy. 

The Ecumenical Council of Ephesus met in 43 1 . Passion and ani- 
mosity prevailed; Cyril and his supporters in alliance with the local 
bishop acted as if the Council had no other business than to confirm the 
anathemata. Nestorius's supporters, the Oriental bishops led by John, 
Patriarch of Antioch (d. 422), were delayed on their way to the Council, 
and Cyril used this opportunity to summon his followers and solemnly 
excommunicate Nestorius before John's arrival. When John and his 
party at last reached Ephesus and heard of this, they in turn excom- 
municated Cyril and his ally Memnon, Archbishop of Ephesus. The 
dismayed Emperor confirmed both excommunications and ordered 
Nestorius, Cyril and Memnon out of office. 

Nestorius alone obeyed the Imperial command and was banished. He 
died in exile in 452. Cyril fled to Egypt and continued the battle from 
his stronghold. After prolonged and intricate negotiations a peace by 
compromise was concluded in 433 between Cyril and John of Antioch. 
Cyril retained his patriarchate but withdrew his anathemata. The 
Oriental bishops sacrificed Nestorius and subscribed to his deposition. 
Both parties, however, were dissatisfied for they were convinced that 
their opponents' teaching was erroneous and should be suppressed. 

The point of contention was no longer homoousios, but physis the 
nature of Christ. The Oriental spoke of two natures in Christ, divine 
and human Duophysitism. The Alexandrians insisted upon one 
nature Monophysitism saying that the Saviour, being one Person, 
has but one nature, at once divine and human. This difference in 
expression was so subtle that both formulae could be accepted, yet this 
was not the opinion of the ardent partisans of each school of thought. 
They read into their opponents' expression a dangerous deviation from 
the truth. The difficulty of disentangling this confusion was further 
aggravated by conflicting interpretations of the terms involved. Such 
Greek words as hypostasis could be understood both as person and sub- 
stance, and the wordphysis (nature) was used both as an abstract and a 
concrete term and sometimes was also identified with substance. Both 
parties recognized God and man in Jesus Christ and therefore it was 
possible for them to reach agreement; but the patience and forbearance 
which this required were absent. The label "heretic 9 , once attached to 
an opponent, excluded further conversation with him, and any subse- 
quent attempt to achieve mutual understanding was branded as a 
betrayal of truth. After an Imperial decree had declared Nestorius to be 
a traitor and Judas all contact with him became a criminal offence. 

60 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

Nestorius himself repudiated the opinions attributed to him by his 
adversaries, and his own writings do not show him to be an extremist. 
The school of Antioch was never convinced that be deserved the treat- 
ment he received at Ephesus. Cyril's supporters were equally angered 
at the shelving of his anathemata, which they considered the best test of 
Orthodoxy. 

The Second Council of Ephesus (449) 

The doctrinal truce concluded between Cyril and the Asian bishops 
was maintained for fifteen years in spite of opposition by the extremists. 
Cyril himself was increasingly moderate towards the end of his life. 
Unfortunately his successor Dioscorus (444-51)5 also a dominating 
character, revived the struggle by resuming his attacks on the Patriarch 
of Constantinople, for which an opportunity was provided by a much 
revered old monk Eutychius, abbot of a monastery in the capital. He 
was a well-known ascetic with admirers in high quarters, and a per- 
suasive exponent of Alexandrian theology. In his sermons and instruc- 
tions he tended to treat the human side of Jesus Christ as nearly 
assimilated to His divinity. 

In 448 at the local council of bishops presided over by Flavianus, 
Patriarch of Constantinople (446-49), one member drew attention to 
the dangers of such teaching. Eutychius, summoned before the synod, 
defended his position; the bishops condemned him and deprived him of 
his orders. This harsh treatment shocked the admirers of Eutychius, 
among whom was the eunuch Chrysaphius, the Emperor's favourite. 
Under his influence Theodosius II decided to vindicate Eutychius by 
convoking another Ecumenical Council. 

The second synod of Ephesus, known as the Robber Council, met in 
August 449. Its misdeeds offered glaring proof of the ever-increasing 
subjection of the Church to Imperial control which had begun at 
Nicaea. Not only was the programme of the Council arranged by the 
Court, but even membership of the synod was restricted to those who 
could be depended on to comply with the Imperial plans. So, for in- 
stance, Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus, the most learned spokesman of the 
school of Antioch, was not only expelled from his see on the eve of the 
Council, but forbidden by the Emperor to attend, even if invited by its 
members. 

Other Imperial letters appointed the Archimandrite Barsumas, an 
ardent supporter of Eutychius, to represent the Syrian monks. Dios- 
corus, together with his doctrinal allies, Juvenalius of Jerusalem and 
Thalassius of Caesarea, were nominated Chairmen of the Council. In 

61 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

violence and irregularity its proceedings surpassed other Ecumenical 
synods, and demonstrated the moral deterioration of the Eastern clergy, 
especially of the ascetics under Dioscorus's direction. The Council pro- 
claimed its belief that after the Incarnation Christ had one nature which 
was both divine and human. This was a confirmation of CyriPs theo- 
logical formula, but this doctrinal victory so easily obtained did not 
satisfy Dioscorus and his party. The old rivalry between Alexandria 
and Constantinople once more flared up. As the First Council of 
Ephesus was the scene of Cyril's triumph over Nestorius, so the Second 
Council of Ephesus saw Dioscorus trampling on Flavianus. But there 
was a difference between these two victories. Nestorius was a militant 
anti-Alexandrian, who had offended many Christians by his refusal to 
call the Virgin Mary Theotokos. Flavianus was not a belligerent 
theologian, but merely president of the synod that had degraded 
Eutychius. Disregarding these facts, Dioscorus declared Flavianus a 
heretic and without giving him any chance of self-defence forced the 
Council to approve this arbitrary decision. As soon as this had been 
done, the crowd of monks and sailors from Alexandria, whom Dioscorus 
had brought to Ephesus, invaded the Church where the sessions of the 
synod were held. The Patriarch tried in vain to save his life by clinging 
to the altar. He was dragged away by the excited Egyptians and so 
severely manhandled that he died after three days. The public murder 
of an innocent prelate, with the connivance of rival bishops, was the 
price paid by the episcopate for failure to protest against the deporta- 
tion of the two bishops who had disagreed with the majority at Nicaea 
in 325. 

This Second Council of Ephesus ended with a solemn declara- 
tion that the Nicene orthodoxy was the only true rule of faith and that 
all who dared deviate from it deserved severest punishment. The closing 
scenes of the Council manifested the joy of the victors who shouted enthu- 
siastically, 'Those who contradict Dioscorus blaspheme against God. 
God has spoken through our Patriarch; the Holy Spirit has inspired 
him. All who keep silence are heretics.* 18 Flavianus was not the only 
victim; other representatives of the school of Antioch, including 
Dominus, the Patriarch of that city, were also deprived of their offices 
and exiled. 

The violence displayed at Ephesus and Flavianus's death at the 
hands of Dioscorus's followers stirred all Christians. They were used to 
the punishment of heretics, but not to the murder of Patriarchs at 
episcopal assemblies. Nevertheless, as long as Theodosius reigned, no 
opposition to the Council was raised. In 450 Theodosius died and was 

62 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

succeeded by his sister, Pulcheria, who reversed his ecclesiastical policy. 
Chrysaphius was executed and the convocation of another council was 
ordered, with the purpose of revising the irregular proceedings of its 
predecessor. 

The Fourth Ecumenical Council (451} 

Originally planned for Nicaea, the new synod met in October 451 at 
Chalcedon, a suburb of Constantinople. Its leaders were the papal 
legates, who brought with them The Tome, a letter composed by Pope 
Leo The Great (441-61) and addressed to Flavianus. This epoch- 
making document defined Christ as one person having two natures, a 
formula explicitly repudiated by Dioscorus and his followers. Leo's 
Tome incorporated the current theology of the Western Church. Its 
terminology was more precise, for the words used by Latin Christians, 
persona, substantia, natura, were lacking in the complexity and richness of 
meaning of the Greek equivalents, prosopon, hypostasis, ousia, physics. 

The Council of Chalcedon reversed the decisions made at Ephesus: 
Dioscorus was degraded; Theodoret, together with other members of 
the Antiochean school, was vindicated on condition however that they 
condemned Nestorius. The members of the Council declared that St 
Peter spoke through Leo, and that they all agreed with his teaching. 
More than 500 bishops were present and the Fourth Council was the 
largest of all the Ecumenical synods. The Eastern Episcopate did not 
intend to go farther than to redress the wrongs committed at Ephesus, 
but the Imperial representatives urged them to draw up a doctrinal 
statement which once and for all would end the dispute concerning one 
or two natures in Christ. There was little enthusiasm among the bishops 
for fulfilling this request, but under strong government pressure a com- 
mission was set up which produced the famous Chalcedonian definition. 
It aimed at safeguarding the mystery of the Incarnation by four 
negatives without attempting to explain it in a rational way. It states 
that the two natures in Christ are united without absorption, without 
admixture, without division and without separation. This formula was 
a compromise in face of three distinct types of terminology, in use in 
Rome, Alexandria and Antioch. The Chalcedonian formula may be 
described as expressing the Greek tradition which kept the balance be- 
tween the extremes of the Western and Oriental interpretations of the 
Incarnation. The Council ended in universal jubilation and loud 
declarations of achieved unanimity. But there were signs of another 
storm in the encounter between the bishops and the Syrian monks, led 
by the ascetic, Barsumas. Angry words and wild accusations were 

63 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

exchanged and some bishops shouted at the monks, 'Down with Bar- 
sumas, the murderer. Let him be taken to the amphitheatre, and thrown 
to the beasts.' The cries which had accompanied the martyrdom of so 
many Christians were now raised by Christians against their co-reli- 
gionists for no other reason, than that they preferred one theological 
expression to another. 

As soon as the Chalcedonian Council ended, the Emperor Marcian 
(450-457), the nominal husband of the aged Pulcheria, issued a stern 
order, addressed to all Christians, to accept the synod's decision and to 
stop debating on the controversial issues. The Empire hoped to secure 
peace within the Church by making the Chalcedonian definition obli- 
gatory. This premature attempt at compulsory uniformity was grossly 
ill-timed. Christians were not yet ready to accept one theological 
expression as universally valid: passions ran too high. It would have 
been wiser to postpone imposition of the Chalcedonian formula, but 
once the Council had sanctioned it the State felt obliged to press it upon 
all Christians, with tragic consequences for the Oriental Churches. 

The Chalcedonian schism 

In response to this Imperial command to submit to Chalcedon the 
Syrian monks in Jerusalem started a rebellion led by the ascetic 
Theodosius. Murder and arson accompanied this protest. Only after a 
regular battle with the armed monks did the Imperial troops restore 
order in Palestine. Similar bloody revolts occurred elsewhere, worst of all 
in Egypt. The Popes of Alexandria had long been regarded by the in- 
habitants of the Nile Valley as their monarchs, in favourable contrast 
with Imperial authority represented by the civil governors sent from 
Constantinople. Dioscorus's exile was seen as a national humiliation and 
with singular unanimity the entire country rejected Chalcedon, declar- 
ing its adherence to the formula of e one nature' associated with the name 
of St Cyril and sanctioned by the Second Council of Ephesus. 

The Christological dispute acquired a new colour. The defence of 
Monophysitism became linked in Egypt with opposition to foreign rule. 
'One nature 5 was accepted as the national creed, in token of Egypt's 
resistance to Imperial oppression. The civil authorities saw the danger 
and tried to lower tension by appointing as Patriarch, Proterius 
(452-57)5 who belonged to Dioscorus's school. But even he was rejected 
by the populace as an Imperial nominee. In 457 the Emperor Marcion 
died; his death was the signal for a general uprising in Alexandria. 
Proterius was expelled and Timothy, surnamed the Cat (Aelure, 
457-77)5 was elected and consecrated Patriarch. He was far from being 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

an extremist in theology for ke repudiated Eutychius. Nevertheless, he 
represented the Church of Egypt, which was Monophysite, and his first 
act was to repudiate Chalcedon and to excommunicate Leo of Rome 
and Anatolius of Constantinople. 

In spite of this challenging action he retained his see, for the Imperial 
government was frustrated by the stubborn opposition of the Egyptians, 
and Marcion's successors gave up for the time being their attempts to 
impose the Chalcedonian definition by force upon Oriental Christians. 
They searched for a compromise; a most ingenious scheme was spon- 
sored by the Emperor Zeno (476-91) who, on the advice of his energetic 
Patriarch Acacius (471-89), proposed a general appeasement by elim- 
inating the explosive term 'nature' from the theological debates. Zeno 
issued a document called Henoticon or Instrument of Union (482). Its 
doctrinal content was orthodox, but it did not mention Chalcedon. At 
the same time it repudiated both extreme wings of the contending 
parties by condemning Eutychius and Nestorius. The majority of 
Eastern bishops felt satisfied by this temporary solution and signed the 
Henoticon. Even the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria, Peter 
Mongas (The Stammerer) (477-90), accepted it. This peace was ended, 
however, by Pope Felix III (483-92) who, in 484, excommunicated 
Acacius for his attempt to avoid the use of the Chalcedonian definition. 
This action encouraged all opponents of reconciliation and Henoticon 
was eventually repudiated with equal ardour by both adherents and 
critics of the Fourth Council. Whenever the central party represented 
by Constantinople met the demands of the Monophysites, it incurred 
excommunications from Rome; whenever it made peace with the West 
it was violently attacked by the Egyptians. Such was the dilemma con- 
fronting the outstanding ruler of this period, Justinian I, who spared no 
effort to solve the Monophysite dispute. 

Justinian I and his ecclesiastical policy (527-65) 

Justinian was one of the most remarkable of Constantine's successors. 
His magnificent portrait in San Vitale in Ravenna suggests a person of 
dominating personality (Plate 20). He may be described as the ideal 
type of Byzantine Sovereign, devoted to duty, possessed of abounding 
energy, a great builder of towns, fortresses, bridges and churches, and 
famous as codifier of the Canon Law. He had profound religious con- 
victions, was sober, even ascetic. In his magnificent palaces, surrounded 
by elaborate ritual, he drank no wine, ate little, slept on a bed of wood. 
His main interest was theology, and nothing gave him more satisfaction 
than to spend time in his library, studying the writings of the Fathers 

E 65 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and discussing doctrinal issues with bishops and monks. He was greatly 
assisted in the exercise of his Imperial duties by his able wife, Theodora 
(d. 548) (Plate 21), a woman of humble origin (her father was a bear- 
tamer in a circus). She carried the burden of government with dignity 
and imagination and shared her husband's passion for theology and 
doctrinal discussion. 

The gifted couple had great ambitions: they embarked on a grandiose 
plan of restoring the Empire to its former glory and bringing peace and 
concord to the Church. Their exceptional energy and dedication 
achieved spectacular results: the Barbarians were expelled from North 
Africa and Italy; the Western Empire was restored; the Council of 
Constantinople (the Fifth Ecumenical Synod of 553) was accepted by 
the majority of Christians; and that miracle of architectural perfection, 
the Cathedral of the Divine Wisdom (Plates i and 2), rose on the shore 
of the Golden Horn-, to crown their long and arduous reign. But these 
victories were too forced to be permanent: the conquests in the West 
exhausted the Empire's military strength and were but a temporary 
check to the Barbarian advance; Church unity, cemented by a liberal 
use of intimidation, proved illusory. In fact, Justinian did irreparable 
harm, for his persistent efforts to achieve an enforced reconciliation 
between the Chalcedonians and the anti-Chalcedonians resulted in their 
final separation. 

His ecclesiastical policy was based on two principles: that State 
security and prosperity depended on orthodoxy of faith confessed by the 
Sovereign and his people; and that the Emperor's supreme duty was to 
safeguard the integrity of the Church and the soundness of its teaching. 
In the preface to his Sixth Novella (535) he wrote: 

'There are two main gifts bestowed by God upon men: the priesthood 
and the Imperial authority (sacerdotium et imperium). Of these, the 
former is concerned with things divine, the latter with human affairs. 
Proceeding from the same source, both adorn human life. Nothing is of 
greater importance to the Emperors than to support the dignity of the 
priesthood, so that the priests may in their turn pray to God for them. 
We, therefore, are highly concerned to maintain the true doctrines, 
inspired by God, and to honour the priests. The prosperity of the realm 
will be secured if the Holy Canons of the Apostles, preserved and ex- 
plained by the Holy Fathers, are universally obeyed.' 

Because of this belief Justinian intervened in the life of the Church 
and produced one scheme of reconciliation after another. He con- 

66 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

sidered himself one of the leading theologians of his time and composed 
several doctrinal statements which he tried to press upon Church mem- 
bers. His conviction that the Emperor was responsible to God for the 
orthodoxy of his subjects, made Justinian a ruthless persecutor of Jews, 
Samaritans, heathens and heretics; he degraded exiled and imprisoned 
those bishops and priests who dared to disagree with his ecclesiastical 
proposals. His Imperial predecessors were content to support one or 
other episcopal party; but Justinian went further; he elaborated his 
own theological formulas and imposed them on the Christian com- 
munity. His efforts were directed to finding ways of reconciling the 
main body of the anti-Chalcedonians, led by Severus the Patriarch of 
Antioch (d. 538), with the supporters of the Fourth Ecumenical 
Council. 

Justinian and Theodora never classed Monophysites among heretics, 
and treated their dispute with the Chalcedonians as a split within the 
Catholic Church. Among many attempts to bridge the gulf, the most 
important one was known as The Three Chapters. Imperial censure was 
here directed against three eminent East Syrian Theologians of the 
Antiochian school; the latter were vindicated by the Chalcedonian 
Council, and sharply criticized by the Monophysites. They were Theo- 
dore of Mopsueste (d. 428), Nestorius's teacher, Theodore of Cyrus (d. 
458) and Ibas of Edessa (d. 457). In 543, Justinian issued a dogmatic 
edict condemning the writings of these theologians who had all died at 
peace with the Catholic Church and who were highly venerated by the 
East Syrians both within the Byzantine Empire and outside its borders, 
in Persia, Central Asia and India. This Imperial Order was unpopular 
among the Chalcedonians and met with strong resistance in the West. 
But Justinian was determined that all the bishops should accept his 
condemnation. After a prolonged struggle with the opposition he con- 
voked a synod in Constantinople in 553, which sanctioned his decree. 
Pope Vigilius (538-55), who was brought to Constantinople and was 
virtually Justinian's prisoner, at first resisted the Emperor, but even- 
tually gave up the unequal contest and signed the acts of the synod. 
Many Christians were disturbed by the novelty of this censure directed 
against the dead, who had been revered during their lifetime for their 
piety and learning. 

The Emperor's zeal, his use of intimidation and his harsh treatment 
of the Pope, did not produce the desired result. The Monophysites were 
not impressed: nothing less than the rejection of Chalcedon could bring 
them back into communion with Rome and Constantinople; but Justi- 
nian was not ready to make this final concession. 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

In the West, especially in North Africa, Northern Italy, and Illyricum, 
the decrees of the Council of Constantinople were received with 
hostility, and for some time a schism existed between Rome, where the 
Council of 553 was recognized, and other Western Churches which 
repudiated it. 

Justinian's successors, Justin II (565-78), Tiberius II (578-82) and 
Maurice (582-92), alternated between repression and toleration of the 
anti-Chalcedon opposition, and all equally failed to reconcile the con- 
testing parties. Meanwhile, a remarkable man called Jacob Baradai 
(d. 578), disguised as a beggar, was travelling all over the Asiatic 
provinces of the Empire, consecrating bishops and ordaining priests for 
the Monophysites. He was pursued by the police but always managed 
to escape, and he succeeded in making two Patriarchs, twenty-seven 
bishops and thousands of priests and deacons. Owing to his ingenuity 
and energy, a parallel body of clergy to that recognized by the Empire 
came into being in Syria and Palestine. The bishops ordained by 
Jacob bore the same titles as the Chalcedonian hierarchs, and became 
known as the Jacobites. 

Another leading anti-Chalcedonian was an Egyptian monk called 
Peter. He was secretly ordained bishop in 575 by the opponents of the 
Imperial Church and took the title of Patriarch of Alexandria. He or- 
dained at once more than seventy bishops and thus laid the foundations 
of an independent ecclesiastical organization in Egypt. Only the State 
officials and the Greek minority remained under the jurisdiction of the 
official hierarchy, which was nicknamed Melkites (King's men), by the 
indigenous population, who stood solidly on the side of St Cyril and his 
condemned successor, Dioscorus. 

By the end of the sixth century the unity of Eastern Christians was 
irreparably lost. The Patriarchs of Constantinople and the majority of 
the Greeks had accepted the Chalcedonian formula; Egypt had rejected 
it. Syria, Palestine and the rest of the Asian provinces were split into 
Chalcedonian and anti-Chalcedonian factions, which were identified 
with the Greek and the Syriac-speaking communities. The Christians 
of Armenia ignored Chalcedon. The Christians of the Persian Empire 
refused to recognize the Council of Ephesus and were treated as 
Nestorians by the Orthodox. They supported the theology condemned 
by the Fifth Ecumenical Council. Only Constantinople remained in 
communion with the West. The rest of the Orient was hostile to Rome 
and the only bond of unity among all these non-Byzantine Christians 
was their withdrawal from any brotherly relations with Latin-speaking 
Christians. 

68 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

The Chalcedoman definition and the separation of the Oriental Churches 
The story of the Monophysite schism and the disintegrating consequences 
of the Chalcedonian Council raise a number of perplexing problems, the 
solution of which is vital to an understanding of the Christian religion. 
How, for example, was it possible for a Council, convoked to remedy 
injustice committed by its predecessor and attended by more than 500 
bishops, a synod rightly claiming to be the most representative of the 
Ecumenical assemblies, to provoke such hatred among Christians that 
it led to civil wars? How could an ecclesiastical gathering, which at its 
concluding session had displayed such enthusiasm and unanimity, 
become a stumbling block to unity and concord? Why did persistent 
efforts at reconciliation, made by genuinely devout Emperors, supported 
by some of the best theologians, end in a fiasco? The most puzzling side 
of this bitter conflict is the moderation of the doctrinal formula evolved 
at Chalcedon, deliberately couched in negative terms to avoid the danger 
of inadequate definition of the mystery of the Incarnation. 

At first sight there is something inexplicable in the passionate quality 
of debate and the innumerable acts of violence committed on both sides 
during the Christological controversy. Chalcedonians and anti-Chalce- 
donians professed the same religion, recited the same creed, often quoted 
the same Fathers of the Church, worshipped in a similar manner, and 
adhered to the Apostolic hierarchy; and yet they fought so fiercely 
against each other that many preferred exile and even death to com- 
munion with their co-religionists, and were so enraged that they burned 
the Churches and profaned the rival sacraments. This animosity was so 
widespread that when the Mohammedans invaded the Empire the 
Monophysites welcomed them as liberators and opened the gates of 
their cities to these enemies of Christianity. And yet, if any one examines 
the point of contention between the two parties, the one or the two 
natures of Christ, he is confronted with distinctions so subtle as to be 
imperceptible except to a trained theologian. 

In studying the schism the first point to be stressed is the fact that the 
struggle was not between orthodoxy and heresy (as was the case during 
the Gnostic disputes in the second and third centuries, or during the 
Arian controversy in the fourth century), but between two recognized 
traditions which represented equally venerable and ancient schools of 
thought. The Chalcedonian conflict was a genuine tragedy, for its 
actors were all Orthodox, of sincere convictions, deeply devoted to the 
Church, and yet unable to recognize each other as members of the same 
body. One of the causes of such blindness was the aggressive intervention 
of the Empire. It was the State that forced the unwilling members of 

69 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the Chalcedonian Council to produce their doctrinal definition of the 
two natures. It was the State that imposed the formula upon the restive 
Egyptian and Oriental Christians. It was the State that by banishing and 
imprisoning the leaders of the opposition made them so belligerent and 
bitter. It was the State again that, by pressing for its own candidates, 
provoked the clandestine ordinations of local men, and thus created 
parallel and conflicting hierarchies. 

The dangers of State intervention were increased by the inner con- 
dition of the Church which was aifected by two opposite tendencies: the 
longing for greater uniformity and the spread of virulent nationalism. 

Christianity and Nationalism 

At the time when the leaven of Christianity began to stir the Eastern 
world, Imperial administration had successfully imposed a cosmopolitan 
civilization upon the majority of the subject peoples. The city popula- 
tion was hellenized, the Greek language widely used, the other ancient 
languages of the East were reduced to the level of dialects spoken by 
rustics without culture. Only the Jews had resisted this process of 
assimilation and retained their own script and sacred writings, but even 
they increasingly used Greek in the synagogues of the Diaspora. People 
and races mixed freely within the framework of the universal State, 
forgetting their own exclusiveness. National barriers were crumbling, 
and the memories and legends of the past lingered mainly among the 
most backward communities. 

In the early days Christianity represented a final state of this cosmo- 
politan development, for it admitted everybody and stressed the unity 
and equality of all, independent of race or social origin. When, however, 
it spread from town to country and beyond the fringes of the Empire, 
penetrating into the barbarian regions, it began to produce opposite 
effects. It stirred the national consciousness of peoples and created a 
sense of special vocation. 

A mature and spiritually awakened person is not only a fully 
developed individual, but also an articulate representative of his race 
and culture. Christianity did not level down its converts, but brought 
out potentialities peculiar to each nation. This process of national 
self-realization however, clashed with the sense of ecclesiastical uni- 
versality, and the tension created by these seemingly opposite principles 
caused conflict and strife within the Christian community. 

The Church in the East grew too quickly in the course of the fourth 
and fifth centuries. Practically the entire multi-national population of 
the Empire became, at least nominally, Christian. The anti-pagan 

70 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

legislation of Justinian brought into the fold of the Church a mass of 
ill-instructed and undisciplined people. They were stirred by the new 
religion; the awakening of nationalism was one of the consequences of 
their baptism, yet the sense of brotherhood with Christians of different 
language and temperament was still beyond many of these new con- 
verts. The Church having always been a supra-national community 
recognized the equality of all its national groups. As long as the local 
characteristics in worship and teaching were acknowledged as legiti- 
mate, unity remained; but with the increase of state pressure aiming at 
uniformity, and accompanied by the fear of divergency among 
Christians themselves, the variety of national traditions became an 
explosive which shook the whole fabric of the Catholic Church. 

The idea of God as a stern ruler who required from his worshippers 
strict adherence to prescribed forms, and who approved only one 
doctrinal formula and was angered by those who used another verbal 
expression of the same faith, gained ascendancy among many Christians. 
It was especially popular among the monks who were trained to obey 
rules carefully drawn up by their superiors. The gap between them and 
the parochial clergy gradually grew wider. Even when other Christians 
were ready for reconciliation, the ascetics refused to make peace. 
Although they were men who were supposed to have left the world 
behind, they were the most active carriers of nationalism and their 
militant mood was an irresistible obstacle to peace. The ideal of uni- 
formity, mixed with nationalism, led inevitably to sectarianism and 
schism. The Egyptians claimed that their confession of faith was the 
only one acceptable to God; the Romans insisted that it was their special 
prerogative to be the guardians of Orthodoxy; the Greeks were equally 
confident of their superiority. Yet all realized that unity was one of the 
indispensible marks of their religion and hence those desperate efforts to 
preserve it, which were frustrated by determination to make peace only 
on their own terms. The Christological conflict became a struggle 
between Egyptian and Syrian nationalisms and the centralized 
authority of the Empire. It became a mass movement which could no 
longer be appeased by theological arguments and agreements. 

The rejection of the Chalcedonian formula was used as a standard 
under which the rebels against Constantinople united their ranks. The 
awakened nationalism in Egypt, in Syria and in other parts of the 
Empire had no normal channel of expression. Their old native dynasties 
had died out, the aspiration for political independence was dormant, the 
only form of self-determination that offered itself to people was in the 
sphere of ecclesiastical policy. The prestige of the presiding bishop, the 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

theological victory of their native leaders were manifestations of a 
growing opposition to Imperial dictates. Neither politicians, nor 
generals, nor athletes, were the heroes of the subject nations, but bishops 
and theologians. Competitive theological formulae were used as wea- 
pons for fighting Christians whose language and outlook differed from 
their own. 

The confusion and bitterness were greatly increased by the fact that 
none of the contesting parties realized the importance of the national 
element in their disputes. They were convinced that the only point that 
mattered was a correct definition of the Orthodox faith, and regarded 
their opponents not as nationalists searching for self expression but as 
dangerous heretics, wilfully distorting the gospel truth and exposing 
themselves to the sinister control of the powers of darkness. Such blind- 
ness to the real issues doomed all efforts towards reconciliation from the 
outset. 

Nationalism, ignored officially by the Church, burst out in the ugly 
form of religious chauvinism. Christians in Egypt and Asia, which had 
given so many martyrs, saints and ascetics to Christendom, were its 
main victims. Hatred of foreigners led to doctrinal exaggerations and 
ultimately to such intolerance as resulted in a permanent schism. Only 
the revival of local autonomy could have preserved the unity of the 
Church. But neither the Empire nor the majority of Church leaders 
were ready for such concessions. They preferred an enforced uniformity 
with its inevitable consequence of rebellion. The Christians were being 
steadily forced into a position in which the price of unity was the disap- 
pearance of local initiative and tradition. Their choice lay between 
submission to the State dictatorship and schism, with the result that 
many favoured schism. 

Christianity outside the Byzantine Empire 

The new national awareness arising from belief in the Incarnation pro- 
duced almost opposite results outside and inside the Empire. It disinte- 
grated the Byzantine State but consolidated the independent nations of 
the East and gave them stability and vigour. The first nation to identify 
itself with the religion of the Incarnation was Armenia. In 301 King 
Tiridates III (261-314) proclaimed Christianity to be the faith of his 
people. By this act he erected a permanent barrier against the Persians, 
his powerful neighbours, who were ardent Zoroastrians. 

The King was converted by St Gregor Loosavorich (St Gregory the 
Illuminator, d. 325) who also belonged to the royal family, but for a 
long time was persecuted by Tiridates and spent more than fifteen years 

72 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

in prison. In 302, St Gregor was ordained Bishop. In 303 he founded 
Etchmiadzin, which to this day is the seat of the Catholicos, the head of 
the Armenian Church. The mass conversion of the Armenians, who 
knew neither Greek nor Syriac, the two languages in which the Holy 
Scriptures circulated in Asia at that time, created the problem of 
translation. This task was successfully achieved by two heroes of 
Armenian history: Bishop St Sahak I (387-439) and St Mesrop 
Mashthotz (354-440) a former secretary to the King and a man of 
exceptional learning. They not only rendered the Holy Scriptures into 
Armenian but also invented a special alphabet for their people, con- 
sisting of thirty-six characters which were excellently suited to the sounds 
of their language. The Armenians as a nation came into being after 
their joining the Christian Church. Their literature and culture date 
from that time. Their allegiance to Jesus Christ became a sign distin- 
guishing them from their non-Christian neighbours, and they retained 
it through all the trials of their stormy history. 

A similar conversion took place almost simultaneously among the 
Georgians, who inhabited the south-western region of the Caucasus. 
The Apostle of Georgia was a slave girl, Nina (d. 335). Her unusual 
personality, her ardent faith and her gift of healing so impressed King 
Merian and Queen Nana that they were baptized, and in 330 adopted 
Christianity as the religion of their people. Later, the Georgian Church 
also acquired its own alphabet and translated the Bible and the Service 
books into its own tongue. The Georgians have always been the staunch 
allies of the Byzantine Empire, and so preserved their link with the 
Church of Constantinople. The Armenians followed the same policy, 
but sent no representatives to the Chalcedonian Council for they were, 
at the time, in the midst of a devastating war against the Persian 
invader. In 491, the Synod of Valarshapet repudiated the Chalcedonian 
definition and the Armenians subscribed to the formula of compromise 
between the Chalcedonian and anti- Chalcedonian Council, the 
Henoticon of the Emperor Zeno. Consequently their Church became 
branded as heretical and Monophysite by the Byzantine theologians. 
Various attempts at reconciliation between Constantinople and 
Etchmiadzin made in the course of the seventh and again in the tenth 
centuries, were never brought to successful completion, owing mainly 
to the political unrest of the time. 

In the middle of the fourth century Christianity penetrated into 
Ethiopia. The first Bishop, St Frumentius, was ordained by St Athana- 
sius in 350. In the sixth century the Bible was translated into Ghiez, 
which is still the liturgical language of the Church, although no longer 

73 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

understood by the people. The Ethiopians, like the Copts and the 
Syrians, repudiate the Chalcedonian Council and are Monophysites. 

The most controversial problems are raised by the origins of 
Christianity in India and Ceylon. According to the firm belief of the 
Indian Christians their Church was planted by the Apostle Thomas, 
who met a martyr's death in their country; this was circa 72. In the 
absence of any reliable records this story cannot be substantiated, but a 
number of indirect proofs suggest it is based on fact. Nothing further is 
known about the early history of the Indian Church until 345, when a 
group of Persian Christians, led by the merchant, Thomas of Cana, and 
by a bishop, Joseph, fled to India from persecution in their own country 
and reinforced the local Christians. The members of this group today 
still form a separate community and do not inter-marry with the rest of 
the e St Thomas 5 Christians. Cosmos Indicopleutes, 'The Indian 
Voyager 5 , who in 522 visited the Malabar coast, found in south India 
and Ceylon long-established and flourishing communities.* At that time 
the Indian Church was in communion with the Churches of Mesopo- 
tamia, but was not in contact with the main centres of Christendom. 

The Indians, in contrast with the other Oriental Christians, did not 
translate the scriptures and services into their own tongue but used the 
Syriac version until the nineteenth century. This failure, combined 
with the caste system, prevented the growth of Christianity in their land, 
and the Orthodox Church of Malabar has remained a restricted com- 
munity, confined to the Malayalam-speaking people, who belong to the 
higher castes. The Orthodox Church in Ceylon died out, and Christianity 
was reintroduced there by Western missionaries. 

The hardest trials befell the Church in the Persian Empire. 
Christianity had penetrated there in the first century, but it did not 
find favourable conditions among the Iranian people. Christians in 
Persia worked at great disadvantage: their- scriptures and literature 
were written in Syriac, a language unfamiliar to the inhabitants; and 
the despotic Oriental monarchy made no such provision for the protec- 
tion of its citizens as the Roman State. The Zoroastrian religion spon- 
sored by the Persian kings was more intolerant of the new faith than the 
Hellenized paganism of Rome. In spite of all these obstacles, the 
Christian faith made a number of converts, many of whom were 
martyred. 

The peace secured by Constantine between Church and State still 
further complicated the Christian position in the Persian Empire; 

* He described his adventures in a book called Universal Christian Topography, written 
between 535 and 550. 

74 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

Christians were identified by their rulers with Rome, the main enemy of 
their own country. For forty years they were fiercely persecuted, but in 
383, Shapur III (383-88) reversed the policy of his predecessors, and 
established friendly relations with Constantinople. He allowed Christians 
to extend their missionary work, which carried the message of the Gospel 
to the furthest ends of the Persian Empire. 

The period of peace did not last long, and to avoid the threat of being 
constantly accused of plotting with Byzantium against their own rulers, 
Christians in Persia decided to break with the Greeks. In 480, led by the 
Metropolitan Barsuma (457-84), they proclaimed their independence 
on the ground that the true faith, which they identified with the 
Antiochian School of Theology, was suppressed by their Byzantine 
neighbours. The Persian Christians were consequently styled Nestorians 
by the Greeks, and all contacts suspended. Nizibis became the centre of 
learning for the Persians, and there for several centuries they trained 
their theologians and scholars. The sixth century was a time of intense 
missionary activity in the Persian Church. Bishoprics were founded in 
Merv, Herat, Samarkand and still further East. Central Asia and 
Afghanistan were dotted with Christian communities. Some of these 
Persian missionaries went to the West, and one of them, Ivan, conducted 
his apostolic labours in St Ives, Cornwall. 

Thus as far as the Eastern neighbours of the Roman Empire were 
concerned the Gospel preaching helped some of them to grow into 
articulate nations with a culture and literature of their own; to others 
Christianity brought trials and persecution, which prevented the Church 
from becoming the consolidating factor in the life of these people. 
Christianity acted as a stimulating and disturbing factor all over the 
East, making its converts mature persons, and distinguishing them from 
the rest of the population by their enterprise, better education and sense 
of responsibility. Thus in the course of the first six centuries of its 
history Christianity spread over a considerable part of Asia and pene- 
trated into Ethiopia. It had no success however among the more 
primitive inhabitants of tropical Africa and it met with little response 
among Buddhists and Hindus. 

Rome and the Christian East 

A special problem for the Eastern Christians was their relations with 
Italy, North Africa and Gaul, all of which regarded the Pope of Rome 
as their presiding bishop. From the time of the reconciliation between 
the Church and the Empire the organization of the Christian com- 
munity tended increasingly to follow the pattern of Imperial admini- 

75 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

stration and the bishops of bigger cities received the title of Metro- 
politan, and authority over their episcopal neighbours. By the middle of 
the fifth century five Metropolitans were given yet further authority and 
called Patriarchs. The first among them was the Pope of Rome, whose 
jurisdiction extended over the entire Western half of the Empire and 
over a considerable part of the Balkans (Illiricum). 

The second place belonged to the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constan- 
tinople, the Archbishop of the New Rome who supervised thirty-nine 
Metropolitan districts with some four hundred diocesan bishops. The 
Provinces of Thrace, Pontus and Asia were controlled by him. The Pope 
of Alexandria was the third hierarch and ruled over Egypt with its 
fourteen Metropolitans and one hundred and fourteen bishops. The 
fourth, the Patriarch of Antioch, had thirteen Metropolitans and one 
hundred and forty bishops in Syria and Arabia. The fifth, the Patriarch 
of Jerusalem, presided over Palestine with its five Metropolitans and 
fifty-nine bishops. In theory all the five Patriarchs were equal, and the 
destiny of the Church was entrusted to their fivefold leadership. In 
reality however, the importance of Patriarchates differed considerably 
and the rivalry among the principal sees became one of the main prob- 
lems of Church life in the course of the fifth and sixth centuries. First 
there was strife between Constantinople and Alexandria which ended 
in the defeat of Egypt. Later a still more serious conflict arose between 
Rome and the Eastern Patriarchs. Its roots lay not only in the altered 
political position of the Roman bishops, who were increasingly regarded 
as temporal as well as spiritual leaders of their people, but also in the 
belief that the Popes were the successors of St Peter and as such endowed 
with special prerogatives. 

Since the third century the Roman State had been ruled by two Em- 
perors, one supervising the Eastern, the other the Western half of the 
Empire. In 476 the last Western Emperor, Romulus Augustus (475-76) 
was dethroned by Odovacar, a barbarian chieftain, and theoretically the 
Empire was reunited under the Eastern Emperors, but in reality Italy 
and Gaul were no longer controlled by Constantinople. The collapse 
of the Western Empire released the Popes from the Imperial control and 
St Leo the First (440-61) raised high the prestige of his see, by opening 
negotiations with the barbarians as the authorised spokesman and 
protector of the entire Christian population. His claims found support 
in the fictitious donation of Constantine, according to which Pope 
Sylvester (314-35) received from the great Emperor the sovereign 
rights over the lands around Rome. Amidst the chaos and uncertainty 
of life during the barbarian invasions, the Popes acquired an aura of 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

stability and power that reflected the glory of the Eternal City. They 
were the sole guardians of a superior civilization, and as such the recog- 
nized leaders of the whole Western Church. Appeal to the papacy 
became the best defence for clergy against the arbitrary rule of bar- 
barian chieftains. This significant evolution of the papacy did not affect 
the Byzantine East, where the Pope was still treated only as the first 
Metropolitan among equals. The Orthodox often appealed to Rome in 
asking its Patriarch to be an impartial arbiter in their numerous con- 
flicts and the Popes as a rule efficiently performed this service, but the 
idea that the Roman prelate was the head of the Church remained 
foreign to the Orthodox mind, and the Oriental Christians outside the 
Empire were even less aware of the growth of papacy. 

Until the Iconoclastic Movement of the seventh century no major 
dispute arose between the four Eastern Patriarchs and their Western 
brother although the communion between them was often interrupted; 
yet the seeds of the coming conflict were sown in the fifth century when 
the Popes secured greater political independence and at the same time 
began to be regarded in the West as St Peter's exclusive successors. 

Eastern Monasticism 

One of the most impressive characteristics of Eastern Christendom after 
its reconciliation with the Empire was the spectacular growth of 
monasticism which originated in Egypt. St Antony (251-356) was 
regarded as the pioneer of this movement. He withdrew into the desert 
of Nitria around 270. His lonely fight against the temptations of spirit 
and flesh fired the imagination of many admirers who flocked to his cell 
and a number of them started to imitate his austerities. No exact 
figures of the number of Egyptian monks are available, but the move- 
ment acquired such dimensions that towns and villages were abandoned 
and the desert was populated by ascetics, eager to undergo the most 
severe mortification for the sake of fuller communion with God. The 
popular enthusiasm for this type of Christian discipline became so 
powerful that many members of the Church considered that monks 
alone were the faithful following of Christ, who obeyed without com- 
promise His Commandments. 

The next stage in the evolution of the monastic movement was 
reached under the direction of Pachomius (d. 348). He had experienced 
the dangers of isolation and to counter them organized a communal life 
for the ascetics. His monastery had several houses each inhabited by 
thirty to forty monks, under the supervision of an experienced elder. 
Pachomius's scheme met with general approval and he himself became 

77 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the founder of nine monasteries and two nunneries. 

From Egypt monasticism spread rapidly to Palestine, Syria, Asia 
Minor, Greece and Mesopotamia. In all those countries it acquired 
special characteristics, and yet retained its original purpose. In Palestine 
for instance, the monks congregated in the Lauras, which consisted of 
separate hermits' cells built around the Church and the central building 
used for the training of novices. The hermits gathered together for 
services on Saturdays and Sundays and recognized as their superior the 
elected abbot. Several of them, like St Euthymius, St Theodosius, and 
St Sabas, enjoyed a wide reputation for their holiness and wisdom. St 
Sabas was instrumental in building seven Lauras including the Great 
Laura. 

It was in Syria that asceticism reached its most extravagant forms. St 
Simeon Stylites (d. 450) spent thirty years on the top of a pillar. He 
exercised great influence over the surrounding population and both 
Christians and heathens flocked in thousands to him in search of his 
spiritual help and advice. Other stylities like St Daniel (d. 489) and St 
Symeon the Younger (d. 593) imitated him. In Cappadocia monasticism 
took another direction. Under the leadership of St Basil the Great 
(d. 379) the coenobitic or communal life started by Pachomius was 
perfected. St Basil reduced the numbers of monks in each monastery, so 
that the abbot could know intimately each of them and be sure that the 
right balance between prayer and labour, study and rest was preserved. 
In his rules St Basil advocated a more moderate form of asceticism and 
he left a permanent mark on the development of Eastern monasticism. 
It would be, however, inaccurate to call the Orthodox monks 
*Basilians J as some Western writers do, for the idea of religious orders 
has never appealed to the Orthodox mind. 

The Christological disputes caused by the Chalcedonian Council 
split Eastern monasticism in two. The Mohammedan conquests in the 
seventh century arrested the development of its Oriental branch, but 
among the Byzantine Orthodox monasticism continued to flourish. 
From the tenth century, Mount Athos, with its numerous monasteries 
and hermit cells became the great centre of ascetic tradition. Constanti- 
nople, too, until its fall in 1453 contained many monasteries and 
convents and in later centuries the monastic movement found a favour- 
able soil in Russia where it spread wide over the entire country, reaching 
the shores of the Pacific Ocean. 

The motives that promoted the growth of Eastern monasticism were 
varied. The main impulse came from Christ's words addressed to the 
young man c lf thou wilt be perfect go and sell that thou hast and give 

78 



THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS 

to the poor 5 . 19 Many recruits joined the monastic communities in search 
of this perfection and they were encouraged by the unusual prophetic 
and healing gifts displayed by ascetics, which were regarded as a proof 
of divine approbation for this type of life. 

Undoubtedly there were others who wanted to exchange the transient 
joys of life in the world and its manifold troubles and sorrows for the 
shelter of a well organized community. But although personal concern 
for security and safety often played an important part, it would be a 
onesided approach to the mentality of the Eastern monk if his longing 
for communion with God were understood only in terms of the indivi- 
dual's search for his own salvation. 

Monasticism was essentially a corporate movement aiming at realiza- 
tion of the new Christian order in its integrity. Monks and nuns not 
only discarded their family ties and obligations, but they contracted at 
the same time fresh and tighter bonds, sharing their labour and 
property with like-minded brothers and sisters. They exchanged one 
type of allegiance for another which was more exacting and required a 
complete obedience to freely chosen leaders. The ascetics were compared 
to the angels, and they were conceived as forming well-ordered angelic 
legions animated by the spirit of love and obedience to their Creator. 
The change of name which accompanied the joining of a religious com- 
munity indicated the readiness of the monk to die in the old world in 
order to be reborn into a new society. The monks did not despise those 
who stayed behind; they wanted to help and uplift the rest of the 
Church. Hospitality to the poor, help to the sick, readiness to assist and 
advise those in need of wise council were from the start characteristics 
of the monastic communities; yet charity, manual labour, bodily 
mortification and even psalmody were treated not as ends in themselves, 
but only as the means for achieving the main object of ascetic with- 
drawal from the ordinary life, that is worship and adoration of the 
Triune Creator. The desert Fathers thought that there was no other 
activity as noble, as all absorbing as this, and no one could perform it 
better than in close fellowship with other like-minded ascetics. Through- 
out the vicissitudes of its long and troubled history Eastern monasticism 
has never given up this ideal and Orthodox monks have always been 
dedicated to the praise of God which is the chief purpose of their com- 
munal existence. 

The life of the Christian community has been greatly enriched by the 
monastic movement. It helped to accentuate those Charismatic gifts 
of the Holy Spirit, prophecy, healing, the knowledge of man's inner 
state, which the Church offers to its members but which are often 

79 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

unexplored by Christians. The ascetics and mystics penetrated deeply 
into the mystery of communion between God and man and have made 
the path of its further discovery easier for others. They also greatly 
enriched worship and the services of the Orthodox Church received 
their eventual shape in monastic communities. But the monastic 
movement had its negative as well as its positive features and its 
main defect was a desire to hasten the coming of the kingdom of God 
by cutting short the process of gradual transformation of human 
society. 

The determination to subdue the flesh to the dictates of the spirit 
acquired a disproportionate importance. The fight against sexual 
temptations and the fear of heretical deviations dominated the mind of 
many ascetics and this created a spirit of intolerance which made the 
monks a menace to the Church in the troubled years of Christological 
disputes. Their fanatical bands were ready to assault their doctrinal 
opponents, and those who claimed to be the promoters of an integral 
Christian order introduced hate and enmity into the ranks of the 
believers. The monks failed to realize that the use of force could be 
disastrous; that zeal for correct doctrine did not justify violence; and 
that asceticism did not exempt them from charity towards doctrinal 
opponents. 

The Eastern monks were largely responsible for the disruption of 
Church unity; their uncompromising stand contributed to the pas- 
sionate atmosphere that surrounded theological debates. They were 
heroic followers of their Lord, but deficient in self-restraint. The reli- 
gious outlook of many Eastern monks, indeed, became so unbalanced 
that it facilitated the victory of Islam. The ascetics were audacious 
pioneers, creating a new society based on faith in the Incarnation. They 
tried to storm the heavenly Jerusalem, but in so doing became victims 
of their own impatience and, against their own original intentions, the 
standard bearers of an aggressive nationalism. 



80 



THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE 
CHRISTIAN EAST 




In 548 AD the Emperor Justinian founded his magnificent 
cathedral of Santa Sophia in Constantinople, still the 



Domes and Cupolas of the East 




5 and 6 

One of the earliest churches still preserved, St Ripsima 
at Etchmiadzin, Armenia (above), built in the seventh 
century, has a large centralized pointed dome, a local 
development from the Byzantine tradition. A Russian 
interpretation of the Byzantine dome is in the eleventh 
century church of Santa Sophia at Novgorod (below) 





7 and. 8 

The Kings and Princes of Serbia built and endowed 
many churches the thirteenth century King's Church at 
Studenitca (above). A gem of Serbian architecture, the 
monastery church of Gracanitca, built c. 1320, has 
elaborately carved vivid red brickwork (belovu) 




Pre -Tatar Restraint 




The twelfth century church of the Intercession on the 
river Nerl reflects the harmony and restraint of Russian 




IO 



Restraint in form was sometimes set off by elaborate 
decoration. St Dimitry of Vladimir, a grander edition 



Post-Tatar Exuberance 




ii and 12 

The originality of the sixteenth century St Basil's 
Church m Red Square at Moscow (left] derives from the 
attempt to reproduce the early wooden churches of 
Russia in stone. These predominated in the north where 
stone was hard to come by. The early eighteenth cen- 



Decorative Profusion 




The tomb of St Athanasms (d. 
1004) in the Convent Church 
which he founded at Lavra, 
Mount Athos, is adorned with 
impressive frescoes and hanging 
lamps under a marble 
baldacchino 



14 

Continually reminding the wor- 
shipper of his fellowship with the. 
Saints, the zJhtf^ 
screen) and pillars of t 
dral of the Assumpttbii, 
of the late fifteenth century, are 
entirely covered with frescoes of 
the holy figures of Christendom 





Built in the twentieth century as a burial place of the kings of Serbia, the 
modern church at Topola is in the traditional Orthodox style. Its whole 
interior is covered with mosaic reproductions of ancient frescoes from all the 
Serbian monasteries 



IKONS AND MOSAICS 
Twenty Centuries of the Ikon Style 





i6, 17 and 18 

Byzantine ikon painting is in- 
debted to the vivid, naturalistic 
Egyptian portraits of the first and 
second centuries AD (left) . In the 
beautiful fourteenth century ikon 
of St Paraskeva, Novgorod 
(above) , the features have become 
stylized and spiritualized. In 
the twentieth century the tradi- 
tion of ikon painting continues 
to live but the style has become 




The Glory of the Empire 




19 

(above) Sobriety and discipline: characteristics of the Emperor's court which 
are reflected in this imperial procession of martyrs holding crowns of glory, 
at Sant' Apollinare in Ravenna 

20 and 21 

The great Justinian (above right), empire-builder and theologian, was 
equally interested in the reconquest of the western lands lost to the barbarians 
and in the preservation of Orthodoxy among his subjects. He is surrounded 
by courtiers and bishops His wife, the Empress Theodora (below righj), was 
born a circus girl but developed the qualities of a great statesman. She 
shared her husband's passion for theology and doctrinal discussion 



Saviour of the World 




22, 23 and 24 

The beardless Christ in Galla Placidia's fifth century 
mausoleum (above) was an attempt to show the Saviour 
as a mighty hero, triumphantly holding his Cross But a 
more Oriental approach, at Cefalu in Sicily, emphasizes 
His role of Ruler of the Universe and Sage (above right) . 
This mosaic was made by artists of the Constantinople 
school in 1147 The twelfth century Pantocrator at 
Daphni, near Athens (below right), is stern and for- 
bidding. The Saviour is seen above all as Judge 



'l^jKafc 



'^K 







The ascending Christ, in the ninth century dome of 
Santa Sophia at Salonika, is surrounded by Apostles and 
angels. The style is also monumental but movement has 
been introduced into the composition 




26 

The twelfth century Deisis in Santa Sophia is a climax of 
Byzantine art. It introduces profound human feelings of 
sorrow and compassion into the traditional setting, in 
which Christ is no longer the stern Judge but the 
Redeemer 



Christ and the Emperor 




27 and 28 

A close relationship was felt to exist between the Byzan- 
tine rulers and the Heavenly Ruler: the Emperor Leo 
(above) prostrates himself before Christ; Constantine IX 
Monomachius is on Christ's right and his wife, the 
Empress Zoe, on His left (below). Mosaics in Santa Sophia 




Saints of the Church 




29 

A striking example of a highly stylized yet realistic 
treatment: St Demetrius of Salonica stands between two 
donors whose square haloes indicate that the mosaic 
was executed during their lifetime 




30 

The influence of Byzantium on mid-sixth century 
Roman art was considerable: mosaic of St Peter and St 
Damian in the church of Cosmas and Damian, Rome 




St Gregory, St Basil and St John 
Chrysostom are the three great 
ecumenical teachers of the 
Eastern Church, They are shown 



aermo 



From Byzantium to Russia 



32 

The last flowering of Byzantine art gave rise to complex 
and elaborate compositions: the fourteenth century 
mosaic of the Census in the church of Kahrieh Djami, 
Constantinople 





33 

Painted in twelfth century Constantinople and later 
brought to Russia, the ikon of Our Lady of Vladimir is a 
supreme example of the blending of deep emotion with 
the traditional stylization 



Evolution of the Russian Ikon: Portraits 




34 



Characterized by large staring eyes and simplicity of 
gesture, the Ustug ikon of the Annunciation belongs to 
the earliest period of Russian ikon painting 




35 

A sixteenth century head of 
St John the Baptist shows the 
expressionist treatment adopted 
by later ikon painters 



36 

A very elaborate, almost minia- 
ture type of decoration with 
great attention given to detail. 
A typical seventeenth century 
ikon: portrait of the fourteenth 
century Metropolitan of Mos- 
cow, St Alexis (d. 1378) 




Biblical Scenes 




37 and 38 

The highly stylized setting of the 
fifteenth century ikon of the 
Annunciation (above) shows the 
Orthodox love of symbols: the 
hanging curtain in the back- 
ground, a conventional repre- 
sentation to indicate that the 
scene takes place indoors, was 
copied by Duccio in his Washing 
of the Feet (below) without any 
understanding of the real pur- 
pose of the device 





39 

The ikon of the Nativity represents in detail the words of 
the traditional Christmas hymns sung in the Orthodox 
Church 




4O and 41 

Meeting of the First and Second 
Adam: the painter of the Descent 
from the Gross (above) draws the 
eye of the beholder down from 
Christ's body to Adam's skull at 
the foot of the Gross Probably 
by the same early sixteenth 
century artist, the Entombment 
(left) is another traditional sub- 
ject among Russian ikon pain- 
ters. The movement of the 
woman's hands reflected in the 
shapes of the hills changes her 
sorrow into cosmic grief 




4* 

The Anabasis (Descent into Hell) is a scene often chosen 
by Byzantine artists to represent the Resurrection 
Christ breaks down the Gates of Hell, at his feet, and 
liberates Adam and Eve 



Doctrine and Speculation 



fc>; 




43 

Painted in the golden age of the Russian ikon, Rublev's 
famous Holy Trinity (c. 141 1) uses the scene of the three 
angels' visit to Abraham to state the Christian belief in 
the Holy Trinity 




44 

A sixteenth century ikon illustrating the Eucharist 
Hymn: the Only Begotten Son the Word of God 




45 

The Arian controversy which split the unity of the 

Church is symbolically represented by the torn robe of 
the angel in the early seventeenth century ikon of the 
mystical Vision of St Peter of Alexandria 




One of the special feasts of the Church interpreted in 
seventeenth century ikon: the Procession of the Venerable 
and Life-Giving Gross recalls an ancient festival held in 
Byzance to celebrate the consecration of a pool of healing 
with a piece of the True Cross 



CEREMONIES AND LIFE 
OF THE CHURCH 

Monks and Ascetics of Mount Athos 





one of the most famous, Since the tenth century it has 



enthusiasm for lion painting still thrive. The head of 
of the monastic communities is the Archimand 



CEREMONIES AND LIFE 
OF THE CHURCH 

Monks and Ascetics of Mount Athos 



47-51 

Monasteries still play a very important part in the life of 
the Eastern Church. Athos, Holy Mount of the East, is 
one of the most famous, Since the tenth century it has 
atirely male community. Traditions such 





as the uncut hair and beard of Eastern monks and 
enthusiasm for ikon painting still thrive. The head of 
of the monastic communities is the Archimand 



The Church at Prayer 




54 

On January 21, 1956, Patriarch Timotheus of Jerusalem 
was buried. Clothed in all his vestments his body is on 
view to Orthodox Arab and Greek mourners 




55 and 56 

The Orthodox Easter Service, always held at night, is the most important 
festival and is celebrated with great joy and splendour. With candles in his 
hand the priest, assisted by the deacon, announces the Resurrection to the 
congregation (above). At the end of the Easter service a row of priests, holding 
the books of the Gospel, crosses and ikons, receive the salutations of the rest 
of the clergy and the congregation (below] 





57 and 58 

There are no chairs or benches, the congregation crowds around the clergy 
(above) . Eastern worship lacks the precision and restraint of the West but 
conveys a powerful impression of the reality of the Divine Presence and has a 
strong corporate sense. Frequently a service is presided over by many priests 
and deacons together (below) 





59 

Separating the sanctuary (the Heavenly Jerusalem) from the main body of 
the church (the Earthly Jerusalem) : the ikonastasis has three doors of which 
the central 'Royal' door opens onto the "Throne 5 or altar. The profusion of 
ikons, candles and frescoes creates an impression of the Saints and 
congregation, gathered together in one body 




60 

Processions and services in the open air form an integral part of the life of the 
Church. The relics of St Spyridon are carried annually through the streets of 
Corfu 



Religious Dance in Ethiopia 




61 

The Ethiopian Church forms an isolated and most 
original outpost of Eastern Christendom, preserving 
many Old Testament customs such as these religious 
dances performed by the priests 



PERSONALITIES OF THE CHURCH 

Bishops and Prophets 



62 

An example of holiness at a time 
of scepticism: St Tikhon (1724- 
1783), Bishop of Voronezh (right), 
retired to sixteen years of seclusion 
at Zadonsk in protest against the 
spread of Western rationalism 
among the educated Russians. He 
is 'Bishop Tikhon' in one version 
of Dostoevsky's The Possessed 





63 

Cautious adviser to the Tsar, a 
wise statesman and brilliant theo- 
logian: Philaret, Metropolitan of 
Moscow (1782-1867), was a lead- 
ing mind in the nineteenth century 
Church and author of the Im- 
perial Decree in 1861 announcing 
the emancipation of the peasants 




An ardent Sla\ophil in argument 
with Philaret- Alexey Stepanovich 
Khomiakov 1804-1860; was a 
lay theologian and philosopher 
of history 



65 

Prophet of the Revolution who 
warned the Russians of ihe results 
of the atheistic materialism advo- 
cated by the Intelligentsia: Feodor 
Mikhailovich Dostoevsky (1821- 
1881), greatest of the Russian 
novelists, was a convert to Ortho- 
doxy after four years of Siberian 
prison 




The Eve of the Revolution 




66 

Vladimir Sergeievich Soloviev 
(1853-1900) provided a philo- 
sophical basis for Dostoevsky's 
prophecies. He foresaw the ascen- 
dancy of China and the coming of 
totalitarianism 



Preparing the Russian Church for 
its approaching trials by his 
preaching on purity and dedica- 
tion: Father John of Kronstadt 
(1829-1908) also had a nation- 
wide reputation for healing 




68 

Bishop Nikolay Velimorovich of 
Ohrid (1880-1956;, an outstand- 
ing preacher and national leader 
in the revival of the Church in 
Serbia 



69 

Convert from Marxism to 
Christianity: Father Sergey Bul- 
gakov (1871-1944) was an ex- 
professor of economics and an 
outstanding theologian of the 
Russian Church 





Church Leaders Today 




70 

The senior hierarch of the Ortho- 
dox Church is the Ecumenical 
Patriarch Athenagoras of Con- 
stantinople, one of the four ori- 
ginal patriarchates of Byzantium 



7* 

Head of the largest Orthodox 
community, consisting of about 
i oo million members, Alexey, Pat- 
riarch of Moscow and All Russia, 
holds a key position in the Church 
today 




CHAPTER THREE 

THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN 
ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

(viii-xin CENTURIES) 

Islam The Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681} The revival of the Western Empire The 
Filioque controversy The conversion of the Slavs The Photian schism Byzantine short- 
comings and achievements The significance of Humbert's excommunication The coming of 
the Crusaders The sack of Constantinople on Good Friday, 1204 The Slavonic speaking 
Churches Russia's conversion to Christianity The Jirst fruits of Russian Christianity 



AT THE BEGINNING of the seventh century the two rival Empires of 
the East, Byzantium and Persia, entered upon the fiercest of all their 
contests, with fatal consequences for both. At first the Persians led by 
Chosroes II (590-628) were victorious. In 612 they entered Syria; in 
614. Jerusalem was taken, and the true Gross, discovered by Constan- 
tine's mother, Helen, was carried away by the triumphant enemy to their 
capital. The next year the Persians appeared on the Asiatic side before 
Constantinople, whilst the Avars approached the capital from the north- 
west. The Empire was saved by Heraclius (61041). Undismayed by 
these defeats he consolidated the government and launched a counter- 
attack in 622. His five campaigns against the Persians were enthu- 
siastically supported by the Christian population. Sergius, Patriarch of 
Constantinople (61038) placed at the Emperor's disposal the trea- 
sures of the Church. Heraclius not only recovered all the lost territories, 
but penetrated into the heart of the enemy's domain, and in 628 he took 
Seleucia-Ctesiphon, and there found the Holy Cross which he brought 
back to Jerusalem. He was an outstanding military leader and a wise 
statesman. He recognized the vital importance of religious unity in this 
time of extreme danger to his Christian state, and spared no efforts to 
reconcile the Chalcedonian and the anti-Chalcedonian parties. The 
scheme he and his grandson Constans II (642-68) sponsored is known 
as Monotheletism. According to it, Jesus Christ, although he had two 
natures, had only one will. The advocates of this proposition hoped to 
bridge thus the gulf between the Monophysites and Duophysites. They 
argued that the acceptance of two wills in Christ logically led to the 
possibility of inner conflict within his person. 

A number of the supporters of the Ghalcedonian Council, including 
Pope Honorius I (625-38), approved this theological speculation, but 

F 81 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

two staunch Orthodox, Maximus the Confessor (580-662) and Soph- 
ronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (634-68), resolutely opposed it, for they 
taught that will was a function of nature and not of person. If Christ 
had two natures, divine and human, then according to them he must 
also have two wills* The West followed the lead of Maximus and 
rejected Monotheletism. Constans II tried to force the Popes into sub- 
mission. He arrested and deported Pope Martin I (649-55) w ^ dkd i* 1 
the Crimea a confessor to the Catholic faith. The only result of the 
Emperor's efforts was the appearance of a third Monothelete party 
among the Eastern Christians.* 

Islam 

At a time when the Byzantine Emperors made their last desperate 
attempts to reunite Christendom anew enemy suddenly appeared on the 
Eastern horizon: Islam. There is no greater puzzle in the religious his- 
tory of mankind than the spectacular spread of Mohammedanism and 
the hold it has had ever since on the minds of Oriental peoples. Nothing 
had indicated, even remotely, the possibility of the rise of a new world 
religion among the poor and ignorant tribes of Arabia who spent their 
energy in interminable skirmishes with their neighbours. 

The early life of Mohammed (570-632) did not suggest his later 
significance. He was distinguished neither by learning nor asceticism. 
He was employed as a trade agent by a wealthy widow, Khadija, 
whom at the age of twenty-five he married and so improved his social 
standing. In 619 Mohammed heard the call to be the prophet of the 
Almighty and embarked on the career of religious reformer. This date 
is one of the great turning points in the history of mankind. When he 
died, in 632, he was the master of Arabia and the inspired leader of his 
people. 

The early spread of Islam was irresistible. Damascus and Edessa 
were taken in 636, Jerusalem in 638, Caesarea in 640, Mesopotamia 
was conquered in 641, Egypt surrendered in 642, North Africa was 
overrun in 647, Spain invaded in 711-15. Persia was also attacked, the 
Sassanian dynasty (226-651) destroyed, together with Zoroastrianism, 
which for more than a millennium had been the sole religion of its 
people. Iran was incorporated in Islam and gave up its ancient faith 
and tradition. These astonishing victories, the fascination the Koran 
exercised over its followers, and the number of converts it made among 
the subjugated nations create several perplexing questions. What was 
Islam's main source of strength? Why did it overrun the Christian lands 
* They sxirvived only in Lebanon and are known today as the Maronites. 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

with such ease? How did it extinguish belief in the Incarnation, among 
those who had so firmly accepted it? Why has there not been any 
significant return to the Christian faith among the people conquered by 
the followers of Mohammed? There is no doubt that one of the major 
factors in the Mohammedans' initial success was the fratricidal struggle 
between the Chalcedonians and anti-Chalcedonians in the Byzantine 
Empire. 

For the Monophysites the Mohammedans came as supporters and 
liberators. The invaders advanced under the green banners deliberately 
chosen as the colour traditionally associated with the anti-Chalcedonian 
party. At a time when every aspect of social life had acquired theological 
significance, even the Blues and Greens, the two factions in the Hippo- 
dromes that contested for popularity in the Byzantine cities, were split on 
the Chalcedonian issue. The Syrians and the Copts thought the in- 
vaders would offer them better terms than the exacting imperial admini- 
stration, which tried to impose upon them Chalcedonian definition. 
Many Byzantine strongholds gladly opened their gates to the armies of 
the Prophet, welcoming them as their co-religionists. 

It is usually insufficiently realized how close Islam was in its early 
years to the Oriental version of Christianity. The Koran taught not only 
the virgin birth and Christ's freedom from sin, but also regarded Him 
as the God appointed Judge of mankind at the Last Judgment. As late 
as the eighth century St John of Damascus (d. 749), the outstanding 
theologian of his time, still looked upon the Mohammedans as a 
Christian sect. He wrote: 'At that time a false prophet named Moham- 
med arose, who having read the Old and New Testaments, in all likeli- 
hood through association with an Arian monk, organized his own 
sect.'* 1 

It was only much later that the real opposition between Christianity 
and Mohammedanism became apparent, both to the conquerors and 
to the conquered. This confusion as to the nature of Islam explains in 
part its initial lightning advance, but other causes contributed to the 
permanence of its hold. Islam not only defeated the Empire; it also 
superseded Christianity. At first sight this seems inexplicable, for it 
drastically lowered the cultural, social and artistic life of the Eastern 
nations whose passionate intellectual curiosity and all-absorbing 
preoccupation with theological speculations were arrested by the accept- 
ance of final truth as proclaimed in the Koran. Women, hitherto allowed 

* Recent research has conclusively proved that Mohammed was much influenced by 
Nestorianism. At the time of the rapid expansion of Islam its supporters and its opponents 
treated each other as professing together a religion based on the Biblical revelation. 

83 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

equality with men, and an active part in the affairs of the Christian 
community, were forbidden public life, veiled and confined to their 
homes. Magnificent frescoes and mosaics of Christian art were defaced 
or whitewashed, so as not to offend the sight of 'true believers'. Self- 
government was suppressed everywhere, the arbitrary rule of sultans, 
sheiks and other Islamic chiefs replaced the elected representatives of 
the people. Scholarship was confined to the study of the sacred Islamic 
texts; most of the crafts were relegated, as inferior occupations, to the 
defeated Christians. 

After three centuries of absorbing intellectual and artistic activity, 
drastic social experiments and tense conflicts, Egypt, Syria and Meso- 
potamia slowly but irresistibly sank into a state of mental resignation, 
political stagnation and fatalistic acceptance of Oriental despotism. 
God, who had been revealed to the Mediterranean people through the 
Incarnation of His Son, who had been seen by them face to face, 
became once more a remote and inaccessible Being raised high above the 
miseries and vicissitudes of earthly life, inscrutable in his dealings with 
men. 

The chief attraction of Islam was that it was practical: it did not 
demand seemingly superhuman efforts. Keeping the fast of Ramadan, 
almsgiving, the daily repetition of five short prayers, a pilgrimage to 
Mecca, the Holy War and belief in One God and in His Prophet, was 
all that was required for salvation. The Christian East on the eve of the 
Islamic conquest had forgotten the limitations of human nature. Many 
members of the Church desired to imitate the angels: hence the mass 
movements towards the sexless life of monks and nuns; hence the 
exodus from towns and villages into the desert; hence extraordinary 
feats of self-mortification which showed to what an extent men could 
subdue their bodies at the dictates of the spirit. Some of these Eastern 
ascetics slept only in a standing position, others immured themselves in 
dark cells or lived on pillars, or ate only herbs, and even those not more 
than once a week. 

Islam stopped all these excesses. It swept away the exaggerated fear of 
sex, discarded asceticism as unnecessary, banished the fear of hell for 
those who failed to reach perfection, quenched theological inquiry and 
ended the argument between Monophysites and Duophysites. Islam 
was like the sand of the desert, burying rich and varied vegetation. But 
at the same time it extinguished the flames of hate. It created a sense of 
solidarity and brotherhood which had been lost among the contending 
Christians. 

The Eastern Christians had displayed heroic virtue, but had been 

84 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

wilful and uncharitable towards their theological opponents, and this 
was their undoing. They were not ready for the Christian order and 
were reduced to the status of a despised and enslaved minority. 

The Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-81} 

The Emperor Constans II was murdered in Sicily in 668. His son 
Constantine IV (668-85) was an a ^le leader who after a five years 
siege of Constantinople (673-78) by the Saracens, defeated them by 
land and sea and saved his realm from extinction. But the revived 
Empire was no longer so multi-national as before; it was mainly con- 
fined to the Greek speaking population. Egypt, Syria and Palestine had 
been given up; Greek was made the official language of the state and 
officials were renamed accordingly. The status of the Patriarch of Con- 
stantinople was also changed. He became sole spokesman of the 
Byzantine Church, for the other three Eastern Patriarchs were not only 
enslaved by the Mohammedans, but also lost the major part of their 
flocks who went over to their anti-Chalcedonian rivals. 

These changes deprived the Monophysite dispute of its previous 
significance. The new task was to strengthen the link between Rome and 
Constantinople. This was achieved in 680 when the Sixth Ecumenical 
Council met in the capital. It held eighteen sessions, from 7th Novem- 
ber 680 to 1 6th September 68 1. Its proceedings were tedious, mere 
reading and discussion of various doctrinal documents, but the Council's 
work was free from violence or state interference. The Chalcedonian 
party obtained complete satisfaction. No one advocated any con- 
cessions to the opponents of the Fourth Ecumenical Council. All who 
in the past had been inclined to compromise were anathematized, 
including the Pope Honorius, listed by the synod among the heretics. 
The Sixth Ecumenical Council closed the controversy raised by Nes- 
torius at the beginning of the fifth century and marked the end of a 
period in the history of Eastern Christendom. 

Iconodasm and the Seventh Ecumenical Council (387} 

The victory of Constantine IV over the Arabs in 668, though it rescued 
the Empire from subjugation to Islam, did not remove the menace of 
this formidable opponent. The entire Eastern and Southern frontiers 
were henceforth permanently exposed to attack. The Empire needed a 
strong and efficient government, which it found in the Isaurian 
Dynasty (717-867). 

Leo III (717-41), the founder of the house, and his son, Constantine 
V (741-75), were vigorous rulers who consolidated the Empire, and 

85 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

considerably enlarged its territory. They were both social reformers and 
legislators. In 740 Leo III promulgated a new legal code which marked 
an important advance on Justinian's Novellas and showed a further 
increase in Christian influence. Marriage was no longer to be considered 
as a dissoluble contract, but as a lifelong union. Equality between men 
and women was confirmed by giving the mother the same rights as the 
father; the death sentence for crimes was drastically limited; women 
found guilty of adultery were exempted from flogging. This tendency 
towards more humane treatment of criminals and greater respect for 
women were accompanied by an attempt to reform Church life, which 
caused a new split in its ranks. 

Disputes within the Christian community had usually been provoked 
by bishops and theologians, accusing each other of heresies. But 
Iconoclasm, the new conflict, had a different origin. The initiative was 
taken by the Basileus, supported, however, by a number of prominent 
bishops. Its object was to check the excessive veneration of sacred 
pictures representing Jesus Christ, His mother and the saints and to 
oppose monasticism, pilgrimages and special devotion to various 
shrines. 

Iconoclasm may be described as the last Oriental protest within 
Christianity against Hellenism, which was interwoven with the tradi- 
tion of the Byzantine Church. It was part of that movement towards 
Monotheism and simplified theology, the most powerful expression of 
which was Islam itself. Although the Emperor and the army valiantly 
resisted the formidable pressure of Islam, they nonetheless fell under its 
influence and tried to alter the life and worship of the Church on points 
which were particularly criticized by the Mohammedans, viz, the 
veneration of holy pictures, the cult of the saints and celibacy. 

It is not likely that the Iconoclastic Emperors thought of bridging the 
gulf between Islam and Christianity, and so reconciling the two reli- 
gions. It is more probable that they, being themselves non-Greek in 
origin, shared the view that God cannot be depicted by any human form. 
The army supported its leaders in their campaign against images, most 
soldiers of that period being recruited amongst Armenians, Mardaites, 
Isaurians and other Asiatic peoples. 

The first edict, ordering the removal of the ikons from the churches, 
was issued in 725. It met with strong opposition in Greece and Italy, 
but was accepted in Asia. Germanus, the Patriarch of Constantinople 
(7 I 5-3 Q }y Ppe Gregory II (715-31) and the best theologian of the 
Eastern Church of that period, John of Damascus (676-749), all 
protested. Germanus was expelled from Constantinople, but John of 

86 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

Damascus was out of reach; he lived in territory occupied by the 
Mohammedans. The Pope, still a nominal subject of the Empire, was 
too far away to be dethroned. But Leo III punished him by confiscating 
the estates of the Roman see in Sicily and Southern Italy, and trans- 
ferring the dioceses in Illyricum from Rome to Constantinople. These 
measures had fatal consequences for Christendom. They created an- 
tagonism between the Old and the New Rome, and forced the Popes to 
look for new friends and protectors; these they found in the Franks. 
The revival of the Western Empire as a rival to Byzantium was pre- 
pared by the Iconoclastic Emperors who tried and failed to enforce their 
policy in the West. 

Constantine V, Copronymus (741-75), was more of a theologian than 
his father, Leo III, and his campaign against the ikons was still more 
vigorously pursued. He convoked a council in Constantinople in 753 
which gathered some three hundred and forty bishops. They declared 
that the only lawful representation of the Saviour was the Eucharist, 
and that figures and pictures which could depict only his human side 
were therefore heretical. Neither Rome, nor Antioch, nor Alexandria 
sent delegates to this council. Constantine's son and successor, Leo IV, 
the Khazar (775-80), relaxed his father's oppressive measures against 
the Ikonodules. On his death the regency feU upon Irene, an accom- 
plished Athenian, an ardent devotee of the ikons. She managed to 
elevate to the Patriarchal see of Constantinople a learned Secretary of 
State, Tarasius (784-806), and under his presidency the Seventh 
Ecumenical Council was convoked at Nicaea in 787. About three 
hundred bishops attended it. The Pope sent two legates. The decisions 
of the Council of 753 were repudiated and veneration of the ikons 
was approved. The Council drew a distinction between adoration, 
which could be addressed to God alone, and the honour paid to 
holy pictures, which were venerated for the sake of their prototypes. 
The Seventh Council reaffirmed the true humanity of the Saviour, 
by proclaiming that Jesus Christ could, like any other human being, 
be represented in portraiture. The Council stressed the independence 
of Church from State in the third of its twenty-one canons. 

As far as the East was concerned the work of dogmatic definition was 
completed by the Seventh Ecumenical Council and the Orthodox 
Church does not recognize the authority of later councils convoked in 
the West. The Catholic faith had triumphed, but in the course of these 
long and often confused struggles, the Eastern part of Christendom was 
split, and as a result the Oriental wing of the Church became separated 
from Rome and Constantinople and, under Islam, stagnated. 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The revival of the Western Empire 

During the period of troubles caused by the Iconoclastic Emperors, 
relations between Rome and Constantinople were often strained. 
Meanwhile political conditions in the West underwent important 
alterations. The barbarians who had destroyed the Western half of the 
Empire had begun to settle down and form more permanent political 
units. The Popes, increasingly cut off from the Byzantine Sovereigns, 
sought the friendship and protection of the barbarian rulers, who were 
flattered by association -with prelates reflecting the ancient glory of the 
Imperial city mistress of the world for so many generations. 

The Iconoclastic controversy exacerbated the new situation, for 
Rome supported the Orthodox and suspended communion with the 
East whenever the Iconoclasts were in control of the Patriarchal see of 
Constantinople. During this time of tension an event occurred which 
had momentous consequences for the future of Christian Europe. In 
8oo 3 Pope Leo III (795-816) crowned Charlemagne (771-814) as 
Emperor, in the old Basilica of St Peter in Rome. This elevation of a 
Western barbarian upset relations between Eastern and Western 
Christians. Since Justinian's time it had been generally believed that 
divine Providence had established two institutions for the salvation of 
men: the Church and the Empire. The first was responsible for the 
spiritual welfare of people, and guided them to the eternal kingdom, 
w r hile the second was responsible for the peace and order of temporal 
life, affording protection to the Church so that it might serve men 
undisturbed. The Empire, like the Church, was one and indivisible, 
guided and protected by God, but as the unity of the Church did not 
exclude the co-existence of many bishops, so the Empire could and often 
did have several co-Emperors. 

In theory the reappearance of an Emperor in the West should have 
been welcomed, but the crowning of Charlemagne was not a friendly 
action or a proper extension of Imperial authority over the Western 
lands occupied by barbarians. It was a revolutionary blow, a challenge 
to the Basileus. A Western barbarian had been elevated to the throne 
without the knowledge and consent of the legitimate Monarch. 

The crowning of Charlemagne set up a rival universal state, and 
because only one Empire was conceivable, a disquieting choice was 
thereby offered to Christians. This was clearly understood by both 
parties, yet an open clash was at first averted. The Eastern Emperor was 
in trouble in 800, and closed his eyes to the offence; he even sent a 
message of welcome to his 'illegitimate' brother. Charlemagne, similarly, 
was not ready to attack the Eastern Emperor. He started a search for 

88 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

heresy, however, hoping to establish his claim as the only rightful 
successor to Constantine. At a time when uniformity of ritual, and even 
of custom, was increasingly regarded as an indispensable sign of doc- 
trinal orthodoxy it was not difficult to label any Christian community 
'heretic'. Eastern and Western Christians had always followed then- 
own traditions, and by the ninth century these had diverged consider- 
ably, so the Western bishops who supported Charlemagne easily 
provided him with the required evidence, the most weighty accusation 
being the alleged corruption of the Creed by the omission of the phrase 
Filioque. Such was the beginning of the so-called Filioque controversy 
which till today has remained a stumbling block in the way of Eastern 
and Western co-operation. 

The Filioque controversy 

Before Nicaea a neophyte was expected to confess his faith in the words 
of a creed which proclaimed belief in the Triune God and in the Incar- 
nation. Local churches had their creeds which differed verbally, but 
were identical in essence. 

After the recognition of the Church by the Empire in the fourth 
century the wording of all these baptismal creeds was standardized and 
the text which was finally adopted at the Second Ecumenical Council of 
Constantinople in 381 became the Creed of the Catholic Church. The 
later Councils, the Third and Fourth (Ephesus 431 and Chalcedon 451), 
prohibited all alterations and additions, and decreed that communion 
among local churches would depend on acceptance of the Nicean- 
Constantinopolitan confession of faith. This decision was approved by 
all Churches, and when, therefore, the Western prelates accused the 
Byzantine bishops of altering the creed, they raised a major issue which 
profoundly shook the Orthodox. The point of the controversy centred 
on two Latin words FUio que 'and from the Son'. This contested phrase 
refers to the relation of the Holy Spirit to the other persons of the Holy 
Trinity. The Western bishops insisted that the creed should state C I 
believe in the Holy Spirit . . . who proceeds from the Father and from 
the Son*. The Eastern Christians said *I believe in the Holy Spirit who 
proceeds from the Father 5 . Who was right, and who wrong in this 
dispute? Historically speaking, the Orthodox were correct. The creed, 
as sanctioned at Constantinople, and as finally approved by the Eastern 
and Western Bishops at the later Councils, adhered to the text of St 
John's Gospel, chapter XV, verse 26, which describes the Holy Spirit 
as proceeding from the Father. The Frankish prelates of the ninth 
century who knew little history, were genuinely convinced that their 

89 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

version of the creed was the right one, and had no idea how, when, or 
where the fatal addition was made. 

Pope Leo III (795-816) was a better informed person. He was 
annoyed by the opening of a controversy which did not contribute to 
the prestige of Western learning. He tried to stop it by ordering the text 
of the original creed to be engraved on silver plates which he prominently 
displayed in his Cathedral. His efforts produced no permanent results. 
The Western Emperors supported the addition and in 1014 Pope 
Benedict VIII (1012-24) sanctioned the recitation of the altered creed 
in Rome at the Coronation of the Emperor Henry II (1002-24). After 
that the creed with the Filioque clause became the accepted confession of 
faith for all Western Christians.* 

The place, the time, and the reason for this change in the text of the 
creed is one of the most obscure points in Church history and a detailed 
account of it lies outside the scope of this book. It suffices here to state 
that a number of Western divines like St Augustine (d. 430), the Popes, 
St Leo I (440-61) and St Gregory the Great (590-604) , spoke about 
the Holy Spirit as proceeding from the Father and the Son, and similar 
expressions were current also among some Eastern theologians. But 
these expressions did not affect the text of the creed which was treated 
both by East and West as finally settled. The alteration of the creed 
occurred some time in the sixth or seventh century in Spain, probably by 
mistake, for the Spanish Church had few men of learning in those 
centuries, and it is most likely that those who first introduced the 
Filioque clause thought that they were using the original version. It is 
improbable that the men who were responsible for this addition had 
any intention of challenging the authority of the Ecumenical Councils. 
They were motivated by the desire to stress the equality of the Father 
and the Son, which was denied by their opponents, the local Arians, 
and the statement that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and 
the Son seemed to serve this purpose. The altered creed gradually 
penetrated into Gaul and Britain, but remained a local peculiarity of 
the barbarian Churches and therefore caused no offence to the East. 
The dispute arose only when the Carolingian Bishops accused the 
Orthodox of suppressing what had never been there. The question, 
once raised, became the cause of endless theological debate. Each side 
tried to prove that the other professed a heretical doctrine of the Holy 
Spirit. No satisfactory solution of this controversy has yet been found. 
There are theologians on both sides who ascribe the utmost doctrinal 
significance to this different wording, and there are others who think 
* The Sorbonne resisted the innovation however till the i3th century. 

90 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

that both versions, if rightly interpreted, can express the same catholic 
faith. 

The conversion of the Slavs 

The end of Iconoclasm brought about a powerful revival of Byzantine 
Christianity. A remarkable artistic inspiration swept across the Empire; 
Churches were redecorated, and mosaics, frescoes and ikons 3 superior to 
those of the earlier period, appeared everywhere. Learning was en- 
couraged and the University of Constantinople attracted a number of 
outstanding scholars. This was also a time of intense missionary work, 
which reached its greatest success in the conversion of the Slavic peoples, 
who entered the Orthodox Church equipped with the Bible and Litur- 
gical books translated into their own language. Yet this great missionary 
enterprise helped to increase hostility between East and West, although 
at first it was jointly sponsored by Rome and Constantinople. 

The Apostles of the Slavs were two brothers, Cyril (d. 869) and 
Methodius (d. 885). They were natives of Salonica, a Greek city sur- 
rounded, in the ninth century by Slavonic-speaking rural populations, 
and they were probably fluent in this tongue. Cyril and Methodius 
belonged to the cultural elite of their time. Educated in Constantinople 
they retired to a monastic life but were soon recalled to the Capital and 
entrusted with missionary work. The evangelization of the barbarians 
was considered by the Byzantine Empire as an expression of its Christian 
vocation, and also as an important part of its consistent policy of main- 
taining good relations with its neighbours, whose conversion was 
expected to make them less aggressive. In 863, the two brothers, 
equipped with a Slavonic translation of the Holy Scriptures made by 
them, were dispatched from Constantinople to remote Moravia, in 
response to the request of Prince Rastislav. 

This unexpected demand, and the eager response of the Empire, 
were part of the complex political situation in Central Europe in the 
middle of the ninth century. The Moravians, inhabiting Central 
Europe, wanted to be associated with the superior civilization of 
Christendom, but their Germanic neighbours, led by the Archbishop of 
Salzburg, were more intent on imposing their political rule over them 
than on acquainting them with the message of the Gospel. In order to 
join the Church and yet retain their identity and independence, Prince 
Rastislav and his chieftains decided to ask Byzantium to come to their 
aid. This request coincided with the appearance on the Empire's 
Western frontiers of a new enemy, the Bulgarians the Asiatic nomads 
who invaded the Balkans, conquered the Slavs, adopted their language, 

9* 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and formed a strong militant state situated between the Empire and 
Moravia. Thus, if the Greeks could help the Moravians against the 
Germans the Moravians could help the Greeks against the Bulgarians, 
and an alliance between Rastislav and the Empire was beneficial for 
both sides. The missionary brothers, who were able to preach the 
Gospel in the language of the Moravians and Bohemians had a resound- 
ing success. Princes, nobles and common people were baptized, churches 
were erected. The Prankish clergy were alarmed and accused Cyril and 
Methodius of heresy alleging that only three languages, Hebrew, Greek 
and Latin, used for the inscription on the Cross, could be lawfully 
employed in Christian worship. In order to vindicate their cause the 
two brothers had to go to Rome where they were favourably received, 
for both Hadrian II (867-72) and his successor, John VII (872-82), 
were disturbed by the growing independence of the Germanic bishops, 
and welcomed the unexpected help of the Greek missionaries in check- 
ing their ambitions. 

Cyril died in Rome in 869 but his brother was consecrated by the 
Pope Archbishop of Sirmium, with an independent jurisdiction over 
Moravia and Pannonia, also inhabited at that time by Slavs. On his 
way to his diocese Methodius fell into the hands of the Archbishop of 
Salzburg and spent a long time in prison, but eventually he managed to 
reach Moravia and complete his work there. He died in 885. 

The Slavonic-speaking Church did not survive in Central Europe. 
In 906 another wave of Asiatic nomads, the Hungarians, destroyed the 
Moravian Empire. The Germanic clergy exploited this disaster and 
suppressed the use of Slavonic. The last stronghold of the Slavonic 
liturgy, the Sazava Monastery in Bohemia was latinized in 1096. But 
the Slavonic speaking Christians, defeated in Moravia and Bohemia, 
found a refuge in Bulgaria, where Tsar Boris (852-89) offered them every 
encouragement and protection. The alphabet invented by the brothers, 
the so-called 'glagoKtic', in its modified form 'Cyrillic', became the 
script used by all Slavs in the Orthodox Church, and the translations by 
Cyril and Methodius facilitated the birth of Slavonic literature in 
Bulgaria, and later in Serbia. The missionary work of the two brothers 
deeply affected the history of Europe. The Bulgarians became strong 
supporters of Byzantine Orthodoxy. Their neighbours the Serbs, after a 
period of hesitation between Rome and Constantinople, also joined the 
Eastern half of Christendom. In the next century, Vladimir, Prince of 
Kiev (d. 1015), followed the same path, and thus the majority of the 
Slavs found their spiritual home in the Orthodox Church, which spoke 
to them in their own language. 

92 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

The other Slavs, however, embraced the Latin tradition. The Croats, 
the Slovenes, the Czechs, Slovaks and Poles became incorporated in the 
society of Western Christian nations and looked to Rome for spiritual 
leadership. 

The Photian schism 

The foundation of the native-speaking Church in Bulgaria, so im- 
portant for the future growth of Slavonic culture, brought about an 
alarming deterioration of relations between the Eastern and Western 
parts of Christendom. Tsar Boris is remembered in Church history not 
only as the first Christian ruler of his nation, but also as the man who 
provoked the acute conflict between Rome and Constantinople, known 
as the Photian Schism. 

Photius (820-91) was a distinguished civil servant, one of the most 
learned men in Constantinople. Although a layman he was recognized 
as a theologian of repute. In 857 Ignatius, Patriarch of Constantinople 
(846-57 and 867-78), was deposed by the Emperor, Michael III, the 
Drunkard (842-67). In the ensuing crisis Photius was hastily ordained 
and installed as Patriarch (858-67). The Pope, Nicholas I (S5&-67), 
whose relations with Constantinople were already strained, refused to 
recognize Photius as a lawful bishop. He sent two legates to Con- 
stantinople with a letter in which he asserted his right to supervise the 
affairs of all Churches, including that of Constantinople. The legates 
were commissioned to investigate the election and report on it to the 
Pope. Nicholas, however, mentioned in his epistle the possibility of 
Photius's recognition if ecclesiastical provinces in South Italy, Sicily 
and Illyricum, cut off from Rome during the Iconoclastic controversy, 
were returned to his jurisdiction. 

In 86 r, a council was held in Constantinople at which the legates 
presided. After prolonged deliberation, they declared, in the name of 
the Roman Pontiff, that Photius was legitimate holder of the office. 
This victory of the newly-elected Patriarch was bought at a high price. 
Not only had Papal legates acted as supreme judges in the case of the 
two rival claimants to the Ecumenical throne, but their right to do so 
had been acknowledged by the Empire and the Church. 

Nicholas was much embarrassed by the complex situation. He was 
pleased that his authority had been recognized but disturbed because 
return of the desired provinces was withheld, and this was especially 
important for the ancient province of Illyricum partially coincided with 
a powerful Bulgaria, whose ruler Boris was contemplating his own and 
his people's conversion to Christianity. The question whether he would 

93 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

join Eastern or Western Christendom was of the utmost importance for 
the far-seeing Pope, who realized all the consequences of such a momen- 
tous decision. In the ensuing acrimonious correspondence between 
Rome and Constantinople the question of Bulgaria acquired central 
importance. The devious policy pursued by Tsar Boris led the anta- 
gonists to accuse each other of departing from the Apostolic tradition. 
Thus the competition between Rome and Constantinople, till then 
concerned with their spheres of influence and jurisdiction, suddenly 
assumed a sinister tone. Each side charged the other with heretical 
innovations, and thus transferred their controversy to new and dangerous 
ground. 

Boris shrewdly tried to make best use of this rivalry. At first he 
corresponded with Rome, but in 864-65 he accepted baptism from the 
Greeks, asking the Emperor, Michael III, to be his sponsor. He was so 
impressed with the splendour of the Patriarchal service that he re- 
quested a Patriarch of his own in his capital; he was politely refused* In 
anger he turned once more to the Pope and in 866 two Latin bishops 
came to Bulgaria carrying with them a long epistle composed by Nicho- 
las in response to the questions raised by Boris. Most of them were of a 
practical nature and typical of Boris's mentality; for instance he asked 
whether women could wear trousers without endangering their salva- 
tion. The Pope's replies were wise and helpful, but at the end of his long 
epistle he made some bitter attacks on the Greeks, warning the Bul- 
garians against their Patriarchs' departure from sound tradition. 

The Latin intrusion excited Greek indignation. In 867 Photius con- 
voked a synod in Constantinople, at which Pope Nicholas's action was 
condemned, and the Latin missionaries in Bulgaria were accused of 
many errors and innovations. The most serious was the heretical teach- 
ing about the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the 
Son. Thus the Filioque controversy, first raised by Charlemagne at the 
beginning of the century, and successfully dealt with by the Pope, 
was reiiatroduced. 

In the same year Pope Nicholas died and Photius was expelled from 
his throne by the new Emperor, Basil (867-88), who had murdered his 
benefactor, Michael III. Ignatius was restored but did not show much 
gratitude for the defence of his cause by Rome and maintained the anti- 
Latin policy of his predecessor. In 878, after Ignatius' s death, Photius 
once again became Patriarch. This time he resumed communion with 
Rome and the schism was brought to an end. 2 He himself died in 891, 
in exile, having been for the second time deprived of his Patriarchate in 
886 by the Emperor Leo VI (886-912). 

94 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

Meanwhile Tsar Boris once more changed his mind; in 869 he ex- 
pelled the Latin Bishop and brought back the Greeks. This incorporated 
his realm finally into the orbit of Byzantine Orthodoxy. 

The sad story of the Photian schism was an indication of creeping 
disease in the Church. There was nothing surprising in a barbarian's 
concern with minute questions of daily custom in food and dress, but it 
was distressing that the occupants of the two principal sees of Christen* 
dom were ready to accuse each other of heresies on account of similar 
trivialities: the Greeks objected to the Latin rule allowing cheese to be 
eaten in Lent, and the Latins fulminated against the alleged Greek 
disapproval of taking baths on Wednesdays and Fridays. Such a men- 
tality made concord impossible in a community of diverse nations. The 
Church meanwhile suffered for its leaders 3 lost vision of its true Ecumeni- 
cal nature. Having publically denounced each other as heretics, 
nothing could prevent East and West from drifting further apart. 

Byzantine shortcomings and achievements 

The Byzantine Empire attained one of the summits of its long and 
glorious history under the able rule of the Macedonian Dynasty 
(867-1056). For two centuries Constantinople, unsurpassed in wealth, 
culture and artistic achievement, dominated the Mediterranean world. 
Its magnificent churches, adorned with marble and mosaics, and 
numerous palaces, libraries, hippodromes, monasteries and hospitals, 
made it an object of wonder to all. The efficiency of its civil admini- 
stration, the discipline of its aimed forces, the skill of its artisans and the 
experience of its bankers and merchants made Byzantium the most 
prosperous and stable country of Christendom. Its gold besant was for 
centuries the only universally recognized currency, commanding the 
same confidence from China to Ireland, from Africa to the steppes of 
South Russia. The idea maintaining this vigour and stability was the 
belief that Jesus Christ was ruler of this extraordinary realm. The 
Empire was His and the sovereignity of the Incarnate Lord was 
realistically interpreted. The Imperial Palace contained an empty 
throne on which the book of the Four Gospels was placed and this seat of 
honour was reserved for the invisible presence of the Heavenly Master. 
The laws were promulgated in the name of Jesus Christ and His head 
crowned with the Imperial diadem was stamped on the gold besant. 
The army marched shouting rhythmically, 'Christ is Conqueror', and 
carried His image on their banners. The Emperor was only His vice- 
regent and his dress and behaviour emphasized his role as a visible ikon 
of the invisible King (Plate 28). 

95 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Acceptance of the Incarnate Logos as Sovereign of the State meant 
that its constitution was based on the Gospels. The Byzantines took their 
religion seriously, they tried to build up their political, social and 
intellectual life on the basis of Christ's teaching. The first consequence 
was a profound sense of equality. Any inhabitant of the Empire, what- 
ever his race or social class, might rise to the highest positions in the 
state, including the Imperial throne. Women were as eligible for 
sovereignty as men, and enjoyed esteem and freedom unknown else- 
where. The centralized power of the monarch was not arbitrary, but 
controlled by Christ's commandments so that, paradoxically, the demo- 
cratic spirit permeated this highly centralized and minutely regulated 
society. 

The foreign policy of Byzantium was directed towards conversion of 
the heathen and establishment of good relations with neighbouring 
peoples. The army was called 'Christ-loving', for its task was to protect 
the Christians from barbarian aggression. Care of the poor, the sick and 
the helpless was a function of the state. Many charitable institutions 
were endowed and maintained at the Emperor's expense. Some of these 
hospitals housed several thousand inmates who were looked after by 
doctors and priests. The builders of the Byzantine Empire had a great 
and inspiring vision; they saw themselves as chosen servants of the 
Creator of the Universe. Constantinople was a divinely protected 
city; its golden domes reflected the celestial glory resting on this earthly 
capital of the Eternal King. 

This noble belief was the source of many remarkable achievements 
but like all things human it had its negative sides. The main weakness 
was a too close identification of the divine prototype with the imperfect 
human counterpart. The Byzantines were tempted to take the symbolic 
for the achieved. They considered a ritualistic action sufficient in itself 
and neglected its moral implications. They were burdened and immo- 
bilized by the pretence that in their realm Christ's kingdom was realized 
and they closed their eyes to many flagrant violations of New Testament 
teaching on the pretext that their social and political order was approved 
and sanctioned by their divine Master. They became self-satisfied, and 
this prevented them from further scientific and technical exploration, 
the two spheres in which they showed little interest or acumen. This 
over-emphasis on symbolism led them to such a curious abuse as the 
appointment of eunuchs to a number of important offices in the Palace. 
They were supposed to represent angels, and as Christ was surrounded 
by the celestial host, so the Emperor was attended by sexless human 
beings. The Basileus himself occupied a paradoxical position. He was a 

96 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

sacred figure and any action directed against him was not only a 
political crime, but sacrilege and was cruelly punished; yet if a plot 
against him was successful his defeat was taken as a sign of divine dis- 
pleasure and the new Emperor who had probably murdered his prede- 
cessor was acclaimed as God chosen ruler of his people. Byzantine 
political life was full of intrigues; the centralized administration 
mistrusted local self-government and suppressed economic initiative; 
equality was not confirmed by freedom; the static conception of life 
hindered progress. These shortcomings of the Byzantine social order 
were the more serious because they also affected the structure of the 
Church, and in parts were even caused by a distorted vision of its 
mission among both leaders and the rank and file. 

The Byzantine Christians handed too many of their responsibilities 
and functions over to the Empire. They endowed the state with reli- 
gious significance, which made the Empire as indispensable for the 
salvation of mankind as the Church itself, and raised the Emperor to the 
status of a member of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. The Empire and the 
Church became so closely allied that at times they could hardly be 
distinguished and this fusion made the Church increasingly vulnerable 
and dependable on State support. 

The Byzantine break with Rome 

Having united Empire and Church in an indissoluble union, the 
Orthodox exposed themselves to the political rivalries between Byzan- 
tium and Western Europe. At the beginning of the second millennium 
the papacy enjoyed a remarkable revival, after its almost total eclipse 
during the Dark Ages. A number of energetic Popes were elected in 
succession. This change occurred at the time when the Ecumenical 
Patriarchs also reached the height of their power, sharing in the authority 
and prestige of their victorious Empire. 

The new clash between Rome and Constantinople was caused princi- 
pally by the cultural competition between the Greeks and Latins, both 
sides being firmly convinced of the superiority of their own tradition. 

Two parallel movements of reform were started within the Western 
Church in the eleventh century, one, directed by the Cluniac monks, 
aimed at the improvement of monastic life; the other, associated with 
Lorraine, was determined to tighten ecclesiastical discipline, suppress 
simony, and prevent the appointment of unsuitable men to episcopal 
office. Both these movements hoped to succeed by strengthening the 
authority of the Popes and by enforcing celibacy upon the clergy. They 
drew their inspiration from the same source the renewed appreciation 

o 97 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

of Latin learning and culture. The Germanic and Slav converts to 
Christianity were so fascinated by the majesty of the vanished Roman 
State that they considered their own languages unworthy of use in 
divine worship and did not feel properly incorporated in the Church 
until they had mastered not only the Latin language but also the out- 
look that went with it. 

The Germanic Emperors backed the reform movement, for they needed 
a better educated and disciplined clergy for their civil and ecclesiastical 
administration. In order to strengthen the papacy the Emperors raised 
their own kinsmen to the papal throne and this policy affected radically 
the relations between the Popes and the Patriarchs. Until the eleventh 
century the occupants of the two principal sees belonged to the Medi- 
terranean world, and though they argued with each other they had 
much in common. The situation changed when men of different 
temperament and background became heads of the Latin Church.* 
Born and bred in France and Germany, they were strangers to the 
Greeks and Italians. They assumed that their customs represented the 
authentic Apostolic tradition, and they pressed two of their innova- 
tions, the Filiogue addition to the creed and compulsory celibacy of the 
clergy, upon the unwilling southerners.*)* When they had achieved their 
victory in Italy the reformers decided to impose the same novelties upon 
the Greeks, and this naturally provoked the greatest indignation in 
Byzantium. 

The Christian West was inspired by a vision of the centralized 
authority of the papacy, not only independent but superior to all other 
powers. The celibate clergy, obedient to the head of the Church and 
exempt from the control of secular rulers, provided the basis for the 
monarchy of St Peter. This majestic edifice of medieval Catholicism, 
boldly conceived by strangers to the climate of earlier Christianity, 
found its visual expression in the grandeur of romanesque and later 
gothic church architecture. 

The consolidation of papal autocracy in the thirteenth century 
It is significant that the transformation of the papacy from one of the 
Patriarchates of the Roman Empire into a sacred monarchy coincided 
with the appearance of the Normans in Italy. They were invited there 

* The first German pope was Gregory V (996-999) Silvester II (999-1003) was French. 
Between 1009 and 1058 came five Germans, and there were two more Frenchmen before 
uoo. 

f The decrees against married clergy were passed by the reforming Synods of Augsburg 
952, Poitiers 1000, Goslar 1019, Pavia 1022, Selingstad 1023, Bourges 1031, Rome 1047. 
Finally Pope Gregory VII excommunicated all married priests in 1074. 

98 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

by Pope Benedict VIII (1012-24) * n IOI 6 to help him in his struggle 
against the Arabs and Byzantines. The Normans soon took control of 
Sicily, penetrated into Southern Italy and became a major political 
force. They played a decisive part in the drama of the schism between 
Rome and Constantinople, and without their active participation it 
would not have occurred in the middle of the eleventh century. 

It started in 1049 when a Frenchman, Bruno of Toul, became Pope 
Leo IX (d. 1054). At that time Constantine Monomachus (1042-55) 
occupied the Imperial throne of Constantinople (Plate 28). The 
Normans coveted the Byzantine provinces in South Italy and were an 
equal menace to the papal possessions. It was natural for the Emperor 
and the Pope to consider closer co-operation, and after an exchange of 
letters Leo IX sent three legates to Constantinople to secure an alliance 
with the Empire. His legates were Humbert of Mourmontiers, the 
Cardinal Bishop of Silva Candida (1010-63), Frederick of Lorraine, 
Chancellor of the Roman see, later Pope Stephen IX (1057-58), and 
Peter, Archbishop of Amalfi, a city which contained a large Greek 
population and was a vassal state of Byzantium. 

The legates reached Constantinople in April 1054 and at once 
entered into acrimonious dispute with Michael Cerularius, Patriarch 
of Constantinople (1043-58), a person of distinction, once thought a 
suitable candidate for the throne of the Empire, a stern disciplinarian, 
narrow minded and much aware of the exalted position of his see. He 
was a stronger person than the easy-going Constantine Monomachus, 
and the Patriarch enjoyed greater popularity in the city than the 
Emperor. This encouraged him to take an opposite line of conduct, 
and instead of welcoming the envoys from Rome he resolutely opposed 
them. This hostility was due to a previous encounter between Michael 
and Humbert which arose in the course of the Patriarch's attempts to 
enforce Greek practices on the Armenians recently brought under the 
political control of the Empire. In his campaign for uniformity Michael 
had declared the use of unleavened bread at the Eucharist a heretical 
innovation, but the Armenians who practised it had pointed out that 
Rome, together with the entire West, was on their side. The Patriarch, 
irritated by this resistance, had in 1052 ordered the Latin clergy in 
Constantinople to follow Greek usage, and when they refused he closed 
their churches. This move was accompanied by publication of a belli- 
gerent epistle written at the Patriarch's command by Leo, Archbishop 
of Ohrida, and addressed to John, the Greek bishop of Trani in Apulia. 
Leo of Ohrida criticized Western liturgical customs and condemned not 
only the use of unleavened bread but fasting on Saturdays in Lent and 

99 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the manner of singing Alleluia. All these deviations from the ritual 
approved at Constantinople were treated as serious offences against 
Orthodoxy, and Bishop John was asked to send the letter to the Pope 
and the rest of the Prankish clergy. 

A reply to this attack had been written by Humbert who had shifted 
the controversy to ground particularly attractive to supporters of the 
Lorraine movement He discussed at length the prerogatives of the 
Roman see basing his arguments on the forged Isidorian decretals dating 
from the middle of the ninth century, which in the eleventh century 
were regarded in the West as the most important vindication of papal 
supremacy, but were still unknown in Constantinople. 

Such having been the first contact between Michael and Humbert, 
the Patriarch treated the legates from the West when they reached 
Constantinople as men ignorant of the Apostolic tradition, while 
Humbert explained to Constantine that before any alliance between the 
Empire and the papacy could be concluded, Michael must submit to 
Leo IX. The Emperor tried in vain to come to terms with the papal 
envoys, but the Patriarch obstructed his negotiations. 

News soon reached Constantinople that Leo had died on igth April 
a prisoner of the Normans. Michael at once suspended all contacts 
with Humbert and his companions declaring that they had now lost 
their credentials. Humbert took advantage of the Pope's death to act 
independently and on Saturday, i6th July 1054, he marched into the 
Cathedral of St Sophia just at a time when the celebration was to begin, 
and laid on the altar a bull of excommunication. He then left the church, 
solemnly shaking the dust off his feet and shouting at the dumbfounded 
congregation, Videat Dens etjudicat. The bull was at once taken to the 
Patriarch, and when it was translated into Greek it proved to be one of 
the most curious documents in the history of Christian disputes. The 
excommunication was directed, not against all Orthodox Christians, 
but only against Michael Cerularius, Leo of Ohrida, Michael Constan- 
tine, the Patriarchal Chancellor, and those who followed their 
lead. 

The justification of their expulsion from membership of the Catholic 
Church was a unique collection of facts and fiction. The facts were 
trivial, the fiction grotesque. Cardinal Humbert accused the Patriarch 
of erroneous teaching that the Eucharistic bread had a soul, that women 
in labour could not be baptized, that men who shaved their beards were 
not worthy of receiving the Sacrament; other incriminations were 
simony, the approval of castration and re-baptizing Latin Christians. 
The greatest of all his crimes was the wilful corruption of the Nicene 

100 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

creed from which, it was alleged, the Patriarch had deleted the words 
Filioque. 

This extraordinary document revealed not only the bigotry of its 
author but a surprising ignorance of history. Humbert was respected as 
a learned man, but he was so ill-informed that he had no idea that the 
original creed did not include the Filioque clause, and that compulsory 
celibacy of the clergy was not an Apostolic tradition. Michael lost no 
time in convoking a local council of bishops and excommunicating 
Humbert and the other legates, calling them impostors. The Emperor, 
refusing to be dragged into this unedifying exchange of ecclesiastical 
hostilities, sent back Humbert loaded with presents hoping that the new 
Pope would repudiate the action of the hot-tempered Cardinal. This 
expectation was not gratified, for the Normans were determined to 
prevent an alliance between the Pope and the Emperor and they made 
the resumption of further negotiations impossible. 

It is remarkable that the breach of communion between Rome and 
Constantinople happened when the papal see was vacant and that the 
act of excommunication was never confirmed, nor indeed, repudiated 
by any Roman Pontiff. 

The significance of Humbert's excommunication 

The year 1054, once accepted as the date of the schism between East 
and West, has recently been challenged. Some historians minimize the 
importance of 1054: they point out the continuance of friendly inter- 
course between Latin and Greek Christians after the 'excommunication 5 
and the absence of any reference to it in the Byzantine chronicles of that 
period. Other historians say the rupture between Rome and Con- 
stantinople took place earlier under the Patriarch Sergius II (995-101 9) . 
In 1009 Pope Sergius IV (1009-12), on the occasion of his election, 
sent the customary profession of his faith to Constantinople. It contained, 
for the first time, the Filioque clause. As the result of this the Patriarch 
refused to include the Pope's name in the list of lawful bishops and thus 
official communion between the two leading sees was suspended. 

It is arguable, however, that this omission of the Pope's name from the 
diptychs at Constantinople did not suggest to contemporaries that the 
unity of the Church was broken. Even Cardinal Humbert described 
Constantinople as civitas Christianissima et Orthodoxa and he treated the 
Emperor with due respect as a Catholic sovereign. The rest of the Eastern 
Churches did not consider that their relations with Rome had under- 
gone any drastic alteration either in 1009 or in 1054, and they continued 
to regard the Latins as members of the Catholic church* Yet, in spite of 

101 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

all this evidence Humbert's excommunication was a tragic landmark in 
the history of the Church, Both sides firmly believed in the unity of 
Christendom, but their vision of what the Catholic Church ought to be 
was no longer the same. Not only were their worship, discipline, customs 
and outlook different, but there was a serious divergence in regard to 
the structure of the Christian community. The West saw the Church as 
a sacred monarchy, and the Pope as the source of all authority in 
teaching and administration. The Greeks had no place for that type of 
papacy in their system. They were ready to treat the Bishop of Rome as 
the senior hierarch, but the idea that the Pope was an ecclesiastical 
monarch to be obeyed by the rest of Christendom was alien to the Byzan- 
tine tradition and neither side was prepared to make any concessions. 

This refusal to recognize as legitimate the divergence in the structure 
of the Church encouraged an endless controversy between Greeks and 
Latins, which included not only constitutional problems, but also minute 
details of ritual and custom, each side producing catalogues of heresies, 
such as the wearing of rings by Western bishops, the use of organ music 
or genuflection. It was obvious that for such minds the unity of the 
Church could only be expressed through complete uniformity, and that 
required the powerful assistance of the secular arm if it was to be en- 
forced. This wrong idea of unity led to compulsion which was the fatal 
breeding ground of hatred and disruption. From the ninth century 
onwards the Eastern and Western branches of the Church, each allied 
to its own Empire, harassed each other whenever political circumstances 
were favourable. 

Nevertheless the secular arm was not strong enough by itself to disrupt 
the Eucharistic communion between the Eastern and Western Christians 
and so bring to an end their sacramental unity. This last act of schism 
could only be authorized by a hierarch having the right to speak and 
act in the name of the whole body. 

The concentration of power and authority in the hands of a single 
bishop, the Pope in the West and the Ecumenical Patriarch in Byzan- 
tium, made the disaster of the schism possible. Cardinal Humbert 
thought that he was entitled to sever the Patriarch and his associates 
from the Church. The Greeks were equally convinced that the Latins 
could be deprived of their membership in the Catholic Church by the 
act of a synod presided over by the Patriarch. In an atmosphere of 
disputes and quarrels, embittered by acts of violence and oppressions, 
the weapon of excommunication in the hands of individual prelates 
acquired a truly menacing character. Its destructive power was amply 
demonstrated by the sad story of the eleventh century schism. 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

And yet, despite all these internal deformations and widespread 
misconceptions, the Church still possessed its power of unity, as the 
time taken to consummate the schism proves. There were also a certain 
number of Christians on both sides who were not entirely committed to a 
static conception of the Church, and who objected to the prevalent 
tendency towards uniformity; but these ecumenically-minded Christians 
were constantly defeated, not so much by argument as by their oppo- 
nents' liberal use of coercion, which frustrated all efforts towards 
reconciliation. 

The story of the schism between East and West is not, however, so 
discreditable to the Christian religion as might at first appear. The 
Christians were deprived of their Eucharistic fellowship only because 
they conceived it on a basis which clashed with their own teaching and 
because they applied methods which the New Testament explicitly 
condemned. No wonder, therefore, that their purposes were defeated. 
The really astonishing fact was that it took another four hundred years 
to destroy their unity finally. 

The coming of the Crusaders 

While the Byzantines were fighting the Normans in South Italy and the 
Eastern and Western Christians were evolving their own systems of 
ecclesiastical order, new enemies of Christendom appeared in the East 
and began a steady advance upon Constantinople. These were the 
Seljuk Turks, originally nomads from Central Asia. At an early stage 
they had embraced Islam. This conversion, on the one hand, arrested 
their cultural development, for they became imitators of the Arabs, 
adopting their outlook and script, ill-suited to their own mentality and 
language; on the other hand, it helped their rise to leadership among 
Islamic nations. The Turks were invariably victorious, for they were a 
unified group, bent on conquest, whereas their enemies were divided, 
irresolute and foolish enough to solicit Turkish help against their 
neighbours. In 1055 *he Seljuks invaded Mesopotamia and took 
Baghdad. In 1071, owing to the dissensions among the Christians, they 
inflicted a disastrous defeat upon the Byzantine army at Manzikert, 
from which the Eastern Empire never fully recovered. It was a black 
year for Constantinople, for the Greeks also yielded at the same time 
their last foothold in Italy to the Normans. 

The end of the eleventh century may be regarded as the beginning of 
the Empire's downfall. Islam in the East and the Latin Christians in the 
West were equally determined to annihilate the Christian East. For 
four hundred years the Empire struggled on two fronts, but its fate was 

103 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

sealed; it might have defeated one adversary, but the combined power 
of both was too great for successful resistance. 

One of the most able Byzantine Emperors of that period was Alexius 
Gomnenus I (1081-1118), and it was during his reign that the Latin 
Christians launched their crusade against Islam. 

To many Christians in the West, the heroic and romantic aspects of 
the Crusades have obscured their negative results, for the Crusaders 
antagonized the Orient and introduced the spirit of brutality and 
persecution into their own Church. In the end they destroyed the last 
traces of fellowship between Eastern and Western Christians. Their 
greatest crime was the barbarous sack of Constantinople, an act that 
opened the way for the Turkish invaders into the heart of Europe. 

The beginning of the crusades was spectacular: on syth November 
1095 the Pope, Urban II (1088-99), preached his epoch-making sermon 
at the Council of Clermont, in which he summoned the Christian West 
to rescue the Holy Places from the tyranny of infidels, and make the 
road safe for pilgrims to Christ's birthplace and to the city of His death 
and resurrection. The response was enthusiastic and several armies of 
Crusaders soon started on their march to the East. In 1096-97 they 
entered the well cultivated lands of Byzantium. The first contact be- 
tween these undisciplined and rapacious Western warriors and the local 
population was not encouraging to either side. The Crusaders were 
bewildered by the prosperity and refinement of the Empire's inhabi- 
tants, and inhibited by the unfarniliarity of Eastern customs. The 
Orthodox Churches, with domes and ikons, were unlike their own 
buildings; the services were equally different. The simple soldiers felt 
that they were encountering a religion alien to their own. The Knights 
were dazzled by the achievements of Byzantium and envied its wealth 
and civilization. The Emperor Alexius urgently needed men for his 
campaign against the Turks and would have welcomed recruits to his 
own army, but the sight of an independent force marching across his 
territory, conducting the war on its own terms with the purpose of 
creating independent Western principalities in the former domains of 
the Empire, greatly alarmed him. He was, however, a clever diplomat 
and able administrator. He concluded an agreement with Western 
leaders, stipulating that any reconquered province should be restored 
to the Emperor. Some of the Crusaders, exemplified by Godfrey of 
Bouillon, were men of honour and high ideals and kept faithfully to 
their agreements. Others insisted that everyone should retain his own 
conquests. 
Alexis efficiently protected his own people against the pillage and 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

rapine of the Crusaders by creating a special body of police which 
accompanied the passage of Western armies across his state. In spite of 
all these precautions, Baldwin's soldiers sacked a suburb of Constan- 
tinople; another detachment of Crusaders ruined Castoria, a prosperous 
city in Macedonia. The Eastern Christians looked with surprise and 
indignation at the coarse and violent Latin warriors. The idea of a Holy 
War of aggression was abhorrent to them. They were especially shocked 
when they saw bishops, abbots and monks fully armed and behaving 
like ordinary soldiers. The Orthodox were also puzzled to find so great a 
difference between the Latin approach to the Church and their own 
and many of them were reluctant to recognize Western Christians as 
professing the same religion. 

The Crusaders were at first victorious and in 1099 took Jerusalem. 
The expansion and consolidation of their territory did not, however, 
improve their relations with Eastern Christians. When a new city was 
taken by assault the entire population suffered at the hands of the 
invaders, the Crusaders showing no respect for the lives and property of 
Christians. Conditions became even worse when their rule was firmly 
established, for they tried to replace the local clergy by their own men, 
and in 1 100 John, a Greek Patriarch of Antioch, was forced to quit his 
city; he was replaced by a Latin prelate. This date marked a further 
step in the alienation of East and West and created a new reason for 
antagonism between their clergy. The most unprincipled crusaders 
were the Normans who made no secret of carving out private kingdoms 
for themselves. Bohemund of Taranto, son of Robert Guiscard, had 
fought in Italy against the Emperor before the crusades began. When he 
took Antioch, he refused to hand it over to Alexius. And so the gap 
between Greeks and Latins quickly widened and they soon mistrusted 
each other as much as the Mohammedans. The same Bohemund con- 
ceived the idea of a crusade against the Orthodox Christians. In 1103, 
after his release from captivity by the Turks, he toured Europe recruit- 
ing a new army, this time not against the infidels but against the 
Empire, accusing Alexius of double dealing and collusion with the 
enemies of the Cross. He failed, but the idea of a Holy War against 
schismatics was born, and it cast its sinister shadow on relations between 
the Crusaders and Byzantium. 

The sack of Constantinople on Good Friday, 1204 

The twelfth century saw the rapid decline of the Eastern Empire and the 
moral and political degeneration of the Crusaders who, although unable 
to dislodge the Mohammedans and establish a permanent political 

105 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

settlement, secured several strongholds in Syria and Palestine, and 
became a third partner in a contest in which, before their arrival, only 
Eastern Christians and Mohammedans were involved. The Italian 
merchant republics, Venice, Genoa and Pisa, following in the Cru- 
saders' wake, established trading posts wherever possible, and their 
conflicting interests still further complicated the confusion created by 
the Latin arrival in the Near East. 

Meanwhile the Empire suffered several military setbacks. In addition 
the throne was contested by rival candidates who did not scruple to 
invoke the aid of foreigners. The Crusaders behaved increasingly like 
mercenaries, ready to serve any master and treated Eastern Christians 
and Mohammedans alike, as their enemies. This gradual sinking of the 
original ideal to the level of a war for conquest reached its nadir at the 
beginning of the thirteenth century, in the so-called Fourth Crusade. 
The great Roman Pontiff Innocent III (1198-1216), inspired by the 
same vision as Urban II, wanted to see Christian nations marching as a 
united force against the followers of the false prophet. But if the Pope was 
faithful to the old ideal the men who responded to his call were unlike 
the first Crusaders. They were led by Marquis Boniface of Montferrat, 
who accepted the Venetian offer to transport his army by sea to Egypt 
if he would capture the city of Zara and hand it over to that Republic. 
So the first military exploit of the Knights of the Cross was to take and 
sack a Christian city which belonged to the King of Hungary, a good 
Catholic and faithful servant of the Pope (1202), 

Innocent indignantly excommunicated the Crusaders, but soon 
forgave them, hoping that they would turn their attention to the war 
against the Saracens. But this was not to be, for whilst the army was 
still celebrating its victory over Zara, a Byzantine Prince, Alexius, son 
of the deposed Emperor Isaac Angelus (i 185-96), arrived at their camp 
and asked Boniface to help him to recover his father's throne. The Cru- 
saders agreed to assist the Pretender and the Venetians gladly offered 
their fleet. In April 1203 the Crusaders sailed from Zara and reached 
Constantinople in June. The Emperor Alexius III (1195-1203) made 
no preparations in defence of the city, but although he was unpopular, 
he found loyal support among the inhabitants and the citizens refused 
to admit the Pretender. The Crusaders were baffled, for they had 
expected an easy triumph; instead, they had to fight hard against the 
defenders of the capital. Alexius III, however, was not a man of courage; 
he fled from Constantinople and the officials hastily reinstated the blind 
Isaac Angelus. The Crusaders agreed to a truce, on condition that their 
candidate, Alexius IV, was proclaimed Co-Emperor with his father. 

106 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

Alexius on his side confirmed his readiness to stand by all the obligations 
he had contracted at Zara, including submission to the papacy and 
trade concessions to Venice. 

The rash promises made by the young prince proved hard to fulfil. 
The treasury was empty, the Patriarch and people refused to acknow- 
ledge the Pope as head of the Church, the Venetians were hated and no 
one had any respect for the puppet Emperor. In February 1204, the 
excited population dethroned Alexius IV. Both he and his father 
perished, and another nobleman called Alexius Murzuphulus was 
proclaimed Emperor. 

The Crusaders decided to strike, and, after a short but fierce struggle 
broke into the city on Good Friday, 1204, and for three days savagely 
sacked the great capital of the Christian East, which had never before 
been conquered. The looting of Constantinople is one of the major 
disasters of Christian history. The city contained innumerable and 
irreplaceable treasures of classical antiquity and of Christian art and 
learning. All the best that the Mediterranean world possessed was 
gathered there. For three days, a wild crowd of drunken and blood- 
thirsty soldiers killed and raped; palaces, churches, libraries and art 
collections were wantonly destroyed; monasteries and convents were 
profaned, hospitals and orphanages sacked. A drunken prostitute was 
placed on the Patriarch's throne in the Cathedral of St Sophia and sang 
indecent songs to the applause of the Crusaders, whilst the Knights were 
busy hacking the high altar to pieces; it was made of gold and adorned 
with precious stones. 

In those three days mankind lost some of its greatest masterpieces of 
art. The Church lost its unity, the Empire the strength to resist the 
Asiatic invaders. The sense of fellowship between Eastern and Western 
Christians, which had survived so many setbacks and trials, and resisted 
so many attempts at disruption, at last finally collapsed. One could no 
longer speak of the Latins and the Greeks as being members of the same 
Church, The polluted altars, the sacred vessels stained with blood, the 
ravaged religious houses too eloquently declared the end of Christian 
unity. 

Pope Innocent was at first horrified at the results of his efforts, but 
later he became reconciled to the act of destruction, for the Crusaders 
hastily elected their own Emperor and Patriarch, both of whom recog- 
nized the supremacy of the Pope in the name of the ruined city. The 
Latin Empire of Constantinople led a shadowy existence for half a 
century (1204-1261). It was an artificial construction, which lasted as 
long as it did only because of the weakness and divisions among the 

107 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Greeks. At last Michael VIII Palaeologus (1260-82) expelled the 
Crusaders and returned to Constantinople from Nicaea, where the 
Greek government had found a temporary abode. Byzantium survived 
for another two hundred years, but it was no longer a normal life, but 
death agony. The Crusaders had undermined its effective resistance 
against the Turks. It was only a question of time till the city fell into 
their hands. The Turks, when they came, came to stay. The Crusaders 
failed to rescue the Holy Land from the Mohammedan yoke; instead 
they delivered the Christian East into the hands of its Oriental oppressors. 

The Slavonic-speaking Churches 

After the rise of Islam, the Byzantine Church and culture lost their hold 
on the bulk of the inhabitants of Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt, but found 
a new domain among the Slavonic-speaking peoples. 

The Byzantine version of Eastern Christianity became the religion 
of the Serbians, Bulgarians, Macedonians and Russians. After their 
conversion to Christianity in the ninth century the Bulgars twice created 
an impressive Empire and tried each time to subdue the Greeks and 
make Constantinople their capital. Simeon (893-927) was the first 
Bulgarian ruler to assume the title of Tsar. In 913 he brought his army 
up to the walls of Constantinople, but failed to take the city. In 923 he 
had a private conference with the Basileus and secured an annual 
subsidy from the intimidated Greeks, together with recognition of the 
Bulgarian Church as an independent body under an Archbishop resi- 
dent in the capital, Great Preslav. The Empire founded by Simeon 
lasted, however, only till 972. His successor, Tsar Peter (927-69), was 
unable to control his unruly nobles and the might of his State was under- 
mined. During the reign of his son, Boris II (969-76), Bulgaria was 
invaded by Sviatoslav of Kiev (945-73), who devastated Great Preslav 
and captured the Tsar. The Emperor, John I Tzimisces (969-76), 
marched into Bulgaria in 972 and divided the defeated Empire into two 
independent realms. One of them, Western Bulgaria, under the rule of 
Tsar Samuel (976-1014), with its capital in Ohrid on the shore of a 
beautiful mountain lake, became a centre of Slavic art and learning. 
Samuel resumed the wars against Byzantium but Basil II (976-1025), 
surnamed Bulgaractonus, for his resounding victory, completely routed 
the Bulgarian Army (25th July 1014). Samuel died the same year and 
his State was dissolved. 

The Second Bulgarian Empire flourished from 1 186-1241 . It reached 
its zenith under the rule of John Asan II (1218-41) who called 
himself the Tsar of the Bulgars and the Greeks. This time, the capital 

108 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

was fixed in Tirnovo. Profiting by the rivalry between the Greek and 
Latin Empires, the Bulgarians were able to maintain ascendancy over 
their neighbours. In 1236, John Asan attempted to take Constantinople, 
then occupied by the Crusaders, but he was repulsed. After his death, 
anarchy sapped the Bulgarian realm, and the continuous strife among 
Balkan Christians facilitated the advance of the Turks. In 1382 they 
took Sofia; in 1393 Tirnovo; in 1398, Vidin, the last Bulgarian strong- 
hold. For five hundred years, till 1878, the Bulgarians were reduced to 
slavery under the Islamic invaders. 

The story of their neighbours, the Serbians, was similar in its main 
outlines. These gifted and spirited people, who had settled in the Balkans 
some time in the sixth century, had periods of greatness when led by 
able rulers; but tribal rivalry and lack of co-operation invariably ruined 
their attempts to establish a stable political order. The founder of the 
dynasty which made the Serbians a nation was Stefan Nemanja 
(1151-95), who extended his rule over the neighbouring tribes and 
enlarged his territory at the expense of the Byzantine Empire. The fruits 
of his labours were in danger of being squandered by his sons, but 
disaster was avoided by the youngest, called Rastko, who became the 
Patron Saint of Serbia and the true builder of national unity. This 
remarkable man became a monk when still a youth, and received the 
name of Sava. In 1207 he returned to his country from Mount Athos 
and succeeded in restoring peace among his brothers. In 1217, he went 
to Nicaea, the temporary capital of the Byzantine Empire (for Con- 
stantinople was occupied by the Latins) and was consecrated there by 
the Ecumenical Patriarch as Archbishop of all the Serbian lands. In 
1222, he crowned his brother Stefan in the monastery of 2ia as the 
first King of the Serbs. He died in 1236 in Tirnovo but his relics were 
solemnly transferred to Milisevo Monastery two years later. They 
were burnt in 1595 by the Turks in an attempt to stamp out the longing 
of the Serbians for freedom. St Sava's part in the history of the Serbs 
has no parallel in the life of other nations. He was more than an able 
organizer of the Church or a patron Saint. He remains their beloved 
teacher, a living example of a truly Christian man, the symbol of 
Serbian unity and of their indestructible link with Byzantine Orthodoxy. 
There is no Serbian who does not venerate St Sava. His feast is a national 
holiday. 

The climax of Serbian political might was reached during the reign 
of King Dushan (1331-55)- He proclaimed his realm an Empire in 
1345 and called himself the Emperor of the Serbs, Bulgars and Greeks. 
The Serbian Archbishop became a Patriarch in 1351 with his seat at 

109 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Pe. Dushan was not only a military leader but also a legislator and 
patron of the arts. He was regarded as a dangerous enemy by the 
Greeks and the Ecumenical Patriarch refused to recognize the title of 
Patriarch assumed by the head of the Serbian Church. Only in 1375 
when the Byzantines and the Serbians were equally menaced by the 
Turks did they come to an agreement, but it was too late. In 1389, at 
the battle of Kosovo, the Turks destroyed the independence of Serbia. 
The flower of the Serbian nation perished on the battlefield with their 
Tsar, Lazar (1371-89). Long centuries of slavery lay ahead of the de- 
feated people. Though Kosovo was a national disaster, it was a heroic 
fight remembered with pride as well as mourning. Lazar's widow, 
Militsa, founded a convent for widows of the slain and became their 
abbess. She is counted among the saints of the Church. She displayed 
fortitude and faith in the ultimate victory of Christianity, in the darkest 
hour of her nation's defeat and humiliation. 

The story of the Orthodox southern Slavs reveals the overwhelming 
attraction for them of Constantinople, and of its brilliant civilization. 
Serbian and Bulgarian ecclesiastical architecture and painting dating 
from the centuries of their rivalry with Byzantium are a remarkable 
achievement. Most of these artistic treasures can be found in the mona- 
steries built and endowed by Serbian and Bulgarian rulers in the 
twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, such as Studenica, Pec, 
Decani, Graanica. Ohrida, the one-time capital of Bulgaria, con- 
tains remarkable churches adorned with magnificent frescoes dating 
from the eleventh and twelfth centuries. 3 But the proximity of Con- 
stantinople, which they called Tsargrad and 'Queen of Cities', was the 
cause of their undoing. 

Instead of concentrating their strength on building up their own 
national states they wasted it on grandiose schemes of Empire building 
which involved them in constant struggles with their neighbours. The 
Slavic Tsars tried to imitate the Basileus, hoping to make their arch- 
bishops equal to the Ecumenical Patriarch. These exaggerated ambitions 
contributed to the instability of the Christian states in the Balkans and 
aided Turkish victory, for when in 1353 the nomads crossed the Straits 
and landed in Europe, they found the disunited Balkan nations, who 
were unable to stop their advance. The fall of Constantinople dragged 
the rest of the Orthodox Christians, settled on the former territory of 
the Empire, into the same abyss. 

Russia's conversion to Christianity 

The Russians also felt the fascination of Constantinople, but their 

no 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE GRUSADES 

geographical remoteness and their particular national problems led to 
their different historical development from that of the Southern Slavs. 

Russia's conversion to Christianity took place in the midst of growing 
tensions between East and West, but at first it promised an improve- 
ment in their relations. The prime mover was the Grand Prince 
Vladimir of Kiev (979-1015), one of the most remarkable rulers in 
Russian history. Kiev in the tenth and eleventh centuries was an im- 
portant centre of international trade, for the Mediterranean Sea, the 
main thoroughfare between East and West, was blocked at that time by 
Islamic pirates. It was therefore safer to carry goods along the protected 
shores of the Black Sea and up the Russian rivers to where these 
approach but do not meet other rivers flowing down to the Baltic. 
There, Eastern merchandise was distributed among Western countries. 
Kiev stood at the centre of this river traffic and the city's wealthy 
population included Slavs, Greeks, Germans and Scandinavians. The 
Princes of Kiev were themselves of Viking origin. 

In the tenth century, native paganism was losing its hold on many 
Russians and the number of Christians was rapidly increasing. At the 
beginning of his rule Vladimir was opposed to the new religion, but he 
changed his mind and decided to be baptized and to convert also his 
people to Christianity. Such a step had important political consequences, 
for the entry into the community of Christian nations implied recog- 
nition of the sovereignty of the Christian Emperor, who was deemed to 
be the sole supreme master of all Christian princes and people. Vladimir, 
like other heathen rulers of Europe, had been confronted with a choice 
between the Eastern and Western Empires, and on his decision 
depended the incorporation of his vast domains in one of these big 
political and cultural units which were just then beginning to compete 
with each other. 

Prince Vladimir was a great monarch. He can be compared with 
Charlemagne in the breadth of his political schemes and in his skill in 
carrying them out. His Empire covered the majority of European 
Russia, the Baltic States and part of Poland. His leadership was also 
recognized by the Princes of Hungary and Moravia, The realm of 
Kiev therefore included Eastern and Western areas of Europe, and 
Vladimir might have joined either. He refused to commit himself, and 
by an adroit use of diplomacy and military force managed to obtain 
from Constantinople an ecclesiastical settlement which corresponded 
with his desire to found a Church independent of outside authorities. 
His Church had a Western organization, as the Cathedral of Tithes he 
built reveals, for Tithe was a Western method of securing ecclesiastical 

in 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

income not an Eastern one; but the ritual he adopted was Eastern and 
the language of the services was Slavonic. In the tenth century, Vladimir 
made use of the earlier translations by Cyril and Methodius and their 
disciples. The Russian chronicle describes in dramatic form the 
Prince's search for the best religion. It tells how Vladimir sent out his 
envoys to all neighbouring countries. They studied Islamic practices 
among the Arabs, Judaism as professed by the Khazars whose Kingdom 
was situated in the lower region of the Volga, and the Latin Church in 
action in the West. None of these religions impressed them favourably. 
They were carried away however by the splendour of Byzantine liturgy 
when they visited St Sophia in Constantinople. The narrator of the 
Russian chronicle records that the envoys declared to Vladimir that 
they did not know whether they were still on earth or in heaven, when 
they assisted at divine service. It was the beauty and glory of the Byzan- 
tine ritual at the height of its artistic perfection which brought the 
Russians into the Orthodox fold. The actual story of the sending of the 
envoys to neighbouring countries may be a legend, but it accurately 
states the importance of aesthetic appeal in Byzantine worship. The love 
of beauty has been one of the chief characteristics of Russian Christians. 
The word 'Orthodoxy* was translated into Slavonic as 'Pravoslavie\ 
which means true glory, or right worship, and this aspect of religion has 
always been prominent in the Russian mind. 

In 989 Vladimir organized the mass baptism of his people after a 
successful campaign against Kherson, the Byzantine stronghold in the 
Crimea. His military victory allowed him to dictate his own conditions 
to the defeated Empire; he not only obtained bishops of his own choice, 
but also a wife, Anna, the Emperor's sister. Vladimir entered the circle of 
civilized nations not as a suppliant but as a powerful Christian sovereign. 

His attempt to hold the balance between East and West was not 
followed by his successors. The Russian converts were influenced by the 
anti-Latin feelings which animated their Greek teachers. Vladimir's 
son, Yaroslav the Wise (1019-54), accepted the Patriarch of Constanti- 
nople as supreme overseer of the Russian Church, and as a sign of this 
new ecclesiastical orientation a second cathedral was consecrated in 
Kiev in 1039, &&* ***& dedicated to the Divine Wisdom (Santa Sophia), 
in imitation of the mother church of Constantinople. After this eccle- 
siastical revolution the Russians became the most faithful adherents of 
Byzantine Orthodoxy, and its most ardent supporters. 

The fast fruits of Russian Christianity 

The Russian Christians from the beginning of their history displayed a 

112 



THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

number of characteristics which put them apart from the rest of 
Christendom. 

Prince Vladimir astonished his Byzantine advisors by proposing to 
abolish capital punishment as incompatible with the Christian religion. 
He also impressed his teachers by charity so great that all the poor of 
his capital were fed and cared for at his expense. His two youngest sons, 
Boris and Gleb, were canonized for a deed without precedent in 
Christian history. 

The news of their father's death reached Boris when he was returning 
home at the head of his troops after a successful expedition against the 
marauding nomads. He heard simultaneously that his eldest brother, 
Sviatopolk, intended to attack him and thus secure Boris's domain. The 
young prince, to the surprise of everybody, refused to lead his men into 
battle against his brother. He told them it was their duty to fight for the 
protection of their country, but not to be involved in the rivalry between 
him and his brother. He preferred to be slain rather than cause the 
death of others when this could be avoided. His murder in 1015, and 
that of his brother, Gleb, who shared his views, so deeply stirred the 
nation that Sviatopolk had to flee from the country and perished in 
exile. 

A similar emphasis on the social implications of the Christian faith 
was manifested in the remarkable life of St Theodosius (d. 1074), the 
founder of the famous monastery of the Caves near Kiev. He was the 
son of well-to-do parents and as a youth he voluntarily shared the manual 
work of the serfs and wore the same poor dress, desiring in this identifi- 
cation with the humble and oppressed to follow Christ, who, being God, 
lived among the poor as one of them. 

Even when Theodosius became Abbot of his monastery he continued 
to work as one of the servants. The same spirit of charity and forgive- 
ness is seen in the testament of Prince Vladimir Monomakh (i 1 13-25), 
one of the most successful rulers of pre-Tatar Russia. This remarkable 
document is inspired by a consistently Christian outlook. During his 
long and brilliant political career Vladimir practised the principles and 
virtues he preached. 

He was a peacemaker in dealing with other Russian princes, but a 
bold and successful warrior when defending his country against the 
nomads. Christianity for him was the rule of life and he advised his 
sons to practice daily self-examination, and always to pray before 
going to sleep and to give alms. He wrote: 

'Above all, do not forget the poor; feed and protect them as well as 

H 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

orphans and widows. Do not allow the powerful to oppress others. Do 
not kill anyone, and do not allow the death sentence to be pronounced, 
even on the worst criminals, for they too have Christian souls. Fight 
against pride in your minds and hearts. Remember we are all mortal: 
today we are alive; tomorrow we shall be in our graves. All that we 
possess is not ours, but God's. Never bury your treasures in the ground; 
this is a great sin. Respect the old as if they were your father, and treat 
the young as your brothers, 3 

The deeply Christian spirit of his testament and the popularity it 
enjoyed witness to the strong hold of the new religion on the Russian 
people. 

Russia, during the Kiev period (980-1240), reached a high level of 
civilization. Its capital was the second largest city in Europe, next to 
Constantinople. The cathedrals of St Sophia, erected by Yaroslav in 
Kiev and in Novgorod, were the finest buildings outside Byzantium.* 
(Plate 6.) 

The use of the Slavonic language in worship, and translation of the 
Bible and other Christian literature into that tongue, facilitated the 
growth of Russian culture. In the West, access to higher education was 
made difficult by the necessity of learning Latin. However, this disci- 
plined the minds of barbarian converts, and helped to create a body of 
people bearing a tradition superior to and distinct from their own. Such 
division between clergy and laity did not take place in Russia. Russian 
Christianity was grafted on to an undeveloped paganism, and the new 
faith quickly secured the people's allegiance. This process, however, 
left various national defects unchanged, such as lack of self-control and a 
tendency to anarchy, weaknesses characteristic of Slavonic history. 

The Russia of the Kiev period was culturally advanced, but politically 
unstable owing to the rivalry of its numerous princes, and the inde- 
pendence of its commercial cities. This deficiency in statesmanship 
proved fatal when Russia was suddenly invaded by the Mongols in the 
middle of the thirteenth century. 

* Both Cathedrals are still standing in spite of all the vicissitudes of Russia's stormy history. 



CHAPTER FOUR 

THE MONGOL INVASION AND 
THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

(xm xv CENTURIES) 

Russia under the Mongol yoke (1240-1480) Sergius of Radonezh (1314-1392) The mis- 
sionary work of the Nestorian Church The Mongols and Christendom The Mongols and 
the conversion of Asia to Islam The last years of the Empire 

THE SACK of Constantinople in 1204 was followed by another major 
calamity for Eastern Christians: the sudden irruption of the Mongols. 
The nomads of Mongolia were split into many rival tribes, and despised 
by their more civilized neighbours; no one expected any serious danger 
from those wild desert horsemen. Their spectacular rise to power in the 
thirteenth century was as unforeseen as the Mohammedan conquest of 
the Near East and North Africa in the seventh century. The builder of 
the Pan-Asian Empire was Temuchin (1167-1227), the son of a small 
chieftain. He begun his military exploits by attacking and defeating the 
Tatars, a neighbouring tribe which had treacherously poisoned his 
father. It is ironical that his hordes became known in Europe by the 
name of that annihilated clan, changed however to Tartars, the men of 
horror bursting out from 'Tartarus'.* After many adventures Temuchin, 
having united all the Mongols, was proclaimed supreme Khan or Em- 
peror in 1206 and took the name of Genghis Khan. In the next four 
years (1211-1 5) he subdued the powerful and populous Chinese Empire, 
and after this victory turned West and devastated Transoxania, 
Bokhara, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Persia. He captured all the principal 
cities of Central Asia and of Afghanistan: Samarkand, Merv, Nishapur 
and Herat. 

The sweeping raids of his horsemen were irresistible, owing to their 
iron discipline and to their mobility, which upset all the calculations of 
contemporary military experts. The Mongols, using two horses alter- 
nately, could travel day and night, for they were able to doze in the 
saddle and eat rough meat, which made long camp halts unnecessary. 

But such energy was not sufficient to build an empire, and here 
Genghis Khan skilfully employed experienced Chinese bureaucrats, led 
by Eliu Chu Tsai. The speed and efficiency of the Mongol postal system 

* The chronicler Matthew Paris (thirteenth century) wrote: 'The detestable race of Satan 
the Tartars . . . rushed forth like demons loosed from Tartarus.* (Matthew Paris, I, 312.) 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and the excellence of their methods of taxation brought stability to their 
conquests. The Pax Mongolica made travelling safe in Asia and opened 
regions in the heart of that vast continent which before and after its 
time were closed to the outside world. 

The military skill of the nomads and the experience of the Chinese 
bureaucrats do not, however, explain the secret of Genghis Khan's 
drive, which ultimately lay in a sense of mission dominating all his 
plans. He believed that the supreme God of the Eternal Blue Sky had 
commissioned him to establish universal peace, and would grant him 
victory over all his opponents as long as he obeyed the divine decrees. 
Although Genghis Khan and most of his followers were Shamanists he 
made no attempt to impose his creed upon the conquered. On the 
contrary he displayed a genuine respect for every type of religion and, 
believing that the supreme deity accepted diverse cults, he punished 
every sacrilege or disrespect shown to any priest, monk or soothsayer. 

Genghis Khan died in 1227 in the middle of his victorious campaigns. 
Under his elected successors in the course of the next two centuries, 
Russia, Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine, and later India, were added 
to the domains ruled by the Mongols. 

The Mongol conquest had far reaching repercussions in the history 
of Eastern Christians. On the one hand it temporarily relaxed the 
Turkish pressure on the remaining Byzantine possessions, for on two 
occasions the Tatars inflicted heavy blows upon the Mohammedans in 
Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, first in 1256-58, and again in the 
fifteenth century. Their last victory at Ankara in 1402 prolonged the 
life of the tottering Empire for another half century. On the other hand 
the Tatar rule for two hundred years cut off the Russian Church from 
the rest of Christendom and retarded and partially distorted the growth 
of Russian culture. 

Another disastrous result of Mongol imperialism was the destruction 
of the Nestorian Church by Tamerlane (1369-1405), the fiercest of the 
Asian despots. 

Russia under the Mongol yoke (1240-1486) 

The Russians, like the rest of Europe, had heard little of the Mongols 
until their sudden invasion of the country. After three devastating cam- 
paigns (1237-41) Russia ceased to exist as an independent nation. The 
small and unco-ordinated Russian forces were crushed by successive 
waves of advancing nomads. Kiev and all other principal cities were 
burnt to the ground, the people were massacred or carried away as 
slaves. The greatest calamity struck the richer southern provinces; the 

116 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

Franciscan papal envoy to Mongolia, John of Piano Carpini, crossing 
Russia in 1245, recorded in a description of his voyage that he found no 
inhabitants in the once thickly populated region. Only two cities 
sheltered by the marshy lands of the north escaped destruction: Nov- 
gorod and Pskov. 

The Mongols intended to subjugate the rest of Europe, and when they 
reached the Adriatic Sea in 1242 no military power could have stopped 
them; but the West was saved by the death of their Supreme Khan, 
Ugedey, in 1241. As soon as the messenger from Mongolia reached the 
Tatar army quartered in Hungary, its commander, Khan Batu, 
ordered his men to move back to South Russia. He wanted to be nearer 
the scene of the election of the Supreme Khan. He had intended to 
resume his conquest of the West, but intrigues and disagreements at the 
Court forced him first to postpone and later to abandon his campaign. 
So Europe escaped the Mongol yoke, while Russia became solidly 
incorporated in the pan-Asian Empire. 

As soon as the news of the disaster that had befallen the Russian 
people reached their Western neighbours a crusade was organized, not 
against the heathen nomads, but against the small Russian territory 
near the Baltic Sea, which had by chance been left undestroyed. In 
this desperate hour of Russian history a remarkable prince, Alexander 
Nevsky (d. 1263), saved Novgorod and Pskov from the Crusaders. At 
the head of a handful of men he defeated first the Swedes (1240), and 
later the Teutonic knights (1242). This double victory made possible 
the survival of Orthodoxy in Russia, for the Mongols took the Russian 
Church under their protection. 

The Russian recovery was slow and painful. Most of the survivors 
were scattered either in the forest lands of the north-east or in Galicia 
and the Carpathian mountains. They were allowed to resume their 
labour, and the administration was left to the Russian princes closely 
supervised by the Mongolian overlords. The Tatars took possession of 
the Steppes and continued their nomadic existence, despising the 
Russians engaged in agriculture. 

At first the latter periodically rebelled against their enslavers, but 
their uprisings were invariably suppressed and their hopes of liberation 
gradually faded. Throughout these years of trial the only light left to 
them was their Church. The Mongols showed marked respect for the 
Metropolitans of Kiev whom they exempted from taxation, with free- 
dom to travel over the whole country. Several prelates showed courage 
and zeal worthy of their calling. They had no permanent seat for their 
cities were in ruins, but moved from place to place, bringing people 

117 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

consolation and acting as living symbols of their unity. 

Russians and Greeks were usually appointed in turn to these respon- 
sible posts. One of them, Theognost (1325-52), decided to fix his resi- 
dence in Moscow, which was an important event in the history of 
Russia. At the time of the Tatar invasion Moscow was an insignificant 
township. It had a number of able princes, however, who instead of 
plotting against their neighbours concentrated on improving the 
administration of their small domain. One of these, Ivan Kalita (John 
the Purser) (1328-41), so named for his charity and financial skill, 
made his principality an oasis of peace and order in the midst of rivalry 
and anarchy. The transfer of the Metropolitan's see to Moscow greatly 
enhanced its prestige, and from the middle of the fourteenth century it 
became the unchallenged centre of religious and national revival. 

In 1380 Prince Dmitry of Moscow (1359-89) presiding over an all- 
Russian coalition inflicted the first defeat on the Tatars at the battle of 
Kulikovo Pole. This victory did not mark the end of the Tatar yoke. 
The Mongols were still stronger than the Russians and re-established 
their control, but Kulikovo Pole is nevertheless an important landmark 
in Russian history, for it delivered the Russians from their fear of the 
nomads by destroying the belief in their invincibility. This liberation 
from fear was prepared by the labours of one of the greatest saints of 
the Russian Church, St Sergius of Radonezh. 

Sergius of Radonezh (1314-92) 

As a young man St Sergius withdrew into the green wilderness of the 
virgin forests some fifty miles north of Moscow. After several years of 
seclusion he was joined by other men who desired a life of prayer and 
contemplation. Gradually a community was formed and St Sergius 
became its Abbot. He was not a man who sought promotion; his only 
wish was to dedicate himself to the worship of his Creator, but his 
humility, single-heartedness, and freedom from anxiety and fear made 
him the teacher of his people. Rich and poor, prince and peasant sought 
him out to ask his advice. Prince Dmitry of Moscow, on the eve of the 
Kulikovo Pole, also went to the elder and obtained St Sergius's blessing. 
The encouragement given by the Abbot to military resistance to the 
Tatars appears at first sight to contradict his characteristic work of 
peacemaking. The first church he built was dedicated to the Holy 
Trinity in order that his disciples, inspired by the vision of the perfect 
unity of the Three, might learn to live at peace among themselves. 
Several times he undertook long and exhausting journeys to restore 
concord among the quarrelling princes. As a rule he was successful, for 

118 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

all recognized his impartiality and holiness. In the case of the Tatars, 
however, he acted differently, for refusal to fight meant the massacre 
and deportation of the helpless. The almost total depopulation of central 
Asia wrought by the hordes of Tamerlane early in the next century 
explains the action of the Russian saint. War was evil, in his view, but 
the abandoning of victims to their fate was still more evil, and on this 
ground St Sergius encouraged Prince Dmitry to advance into the Steppes 
and there meet the formidable enemy. The Russian victory was the 
result of this bold action. The peace-loving saint contributed more than 
anyone else to the liberation of his nation from fear and from the 
Mongols. 

St Sergius had many disciples, and the fifteenth century was a period 
of Russia's spiritual renewal. Religious houses were founded all over the 
country, learning was revived and ikon-painting reached its golden 
period; the greatest of the artists, Rublev (1370-1430), dedicated in 
1411 his masterpiece, the ikon of the Holy Trinity (Plate 43), to the 
memory of St Sergius, his teacher. 

By the end of the century Russia had acquired considerable military 
power. In 1480 another Muscovite Prince, Ivan III (1462-1505), at 
last repudiated the Tatar sovereignty. By that time Ivan had the title of 
Grand Prince of Russia, for he controlled most of the north-eastern 
provinces. But south-west Russia, with Kiev, was not under his rule. It 
had been incorporated into the Polish-Lithuanian State, and its recovery 
became the main political concern of post-Tatar Russia. 

The liberation of Moscow from the Mongols coincided with the fall of 
Constantinople in 1453. In 1472 Ivan III married Sophia, niece of the 
last Byzantine Emperor, and assumed his prerogatives as his successor. 
Moscow, now the only free capital among the Eastern Christians, 
became their recognized centre and their only hope of ultimate libera- 
tion from Islam. 

The missionary work of the Nestorian Church 

The Tatar conquest altered the course of Russian history and left a 
lasting imprint upon its Christianity. The Mongols had an even more 
decisive impact on the destiny of the Nestorian churches which had 
spread all over Asia in the early middle ages. 

The destruction of the Sassanian Empire by the Arabs (638-50) had 
brought temporary relief to the native Christians. The Mohammedans 
annihilated Zoroastrianism, but showed tolerance to the Christians. 
Caliph Omar (634-44) granted them the status of a milet, an auto- 
nomous community within the Islamic state. The Christians were 

"9 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

allowed to maintain their schools, to convoke councils and to be judged 
by their trusted men. They were forbidden to proselytize among the 
Moslems, but were free to convert heathen to their faith. They were 
treated as socially inferior, but were valued for their skill and learning. 

The Persian Christians were enterprising travellers and ardent mis- 
sionaries. Their lively communities could be found far beyond the fron- 
tiers of the Abbasid Caliphate. They reached China, India, Ceylon, and 
even penetrated into Mongolia and Tibet, bringing light and a wider 
vision of life to these isolated and inaccessible regions. Their chief 
centre of learning was Nisibis, the seat of the famous theological school, 
where not only theology but also Greek Philosophy was taught, first 
in Syriac and later in Arabic. Thence the knowledge of Plato and Aris- 
totle was transmitted by the Arab and Jewish scholars to Spain, and 
from there it reached the rest of Europe in the later middle ages. 
Another important school of theirs was in Seleucia where medicine was 
studied. The Nestorians were renowned doctors. Some of them exercised 
considerable political influence, being confidants and advisers of such 
Caliphs as Harun al Rashid (785-809) and his successors. 

The third centre of Christian scholarship was Merv, where many 
translations were made from Greek and Syriac into the languages 
spoken in Samarkand and Bokhara. 

The Nestorian Church reached its widest expansion during the time 
of the Patriarch Timothy the Great (778-820). He was resident in 
Baghdad and commanded the allegiance of twenty-five Metropolitans 
and more than a hundred bishops. Many of his flock lived outside the 
Abbasid Caliphate, and bishops from such remote places as Sumatra, 
Malabar, Mongolia and Eastern Siberia recognized his authority. He 
sent out missionaries to Tibet and to various nomadic tribes and conse- 
crated bishops for them who moved with their flocks over the vast open 
spaces of central Asia. 

Timothy's successors continued the policy of expansion. One of these 
missionary bishops Subhaliso, for instance, supervised the Christians 
scattered in Dailam and Gilon on the south side of the Caspian Sea. In 
1009 the Metropolitan of Merv converted twenty thousand heathen 
Turks to Christianity. Simultaneously a Mongol tribe, the Keraits, who 
lived south of Lake Baikal also joined the Nestorian Church. 

In the same period during the T'ang Dynasty (618-907) a consider- 
able number of Chinese were converted. In 781 an important monu- 
ment was erected in Sianfu the capital of China of that period which 
gives a description of the history of the Chinese Church, and shows the 
importance it had in the life of the nation. The later history of the 

120 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

Chinese Church is less known, though the periods of persecution were 
relieved with toleration. 

The thirteenth century saw another revival of the Church in China. 
In 1275 the Archbishopric of Peking was created, and churches were 
built in Chen-Kiang, Yang Chou and Hang Chou. A special depart- 
ment of the administration was established to look after the affairs of 
the Christians. This expansion of the Nestorian Church was brought to 
an end by the Mongols. At first their victories seemed to offer new 
possibilities for the spread of Christianity in Asia, but these hopes were 
not justified. The close of the fourteenth century saw the catastrophic 
collapse of the Asian Churches brought about by Tamerlane's hordes. 

The Mongols and Christendom 

The coming of the Mongols and their conquest of China, Central Asia 
and Persia placed the Nestorian Christians in the forefront of an entirely 
new situation. The new masters of Asia were in search of a more con- 
sistent religion than their primitive Shamanisms. It was obvious that 
Jesus Christ, Mohammed, or Buddha would eventually become their 
supreme teacher. 

At first, Christianity had a considerable advantage over its rivals, for 
the Uighur Turks who were the first to be incorporated in the Mongol 
Empire, and who represented a higher civilization than Ghenghis 
Khan's own tribe, were mostly Christians. The Keraits, the Naimans 
and the Ongut Turks, who were all closely allied to the Mongols, were 
also predominantly Nestorians. The Kara Khitai were Buddhists and 
Taoists, and only the Western Turks were Moslems. Christianity exer- 
cised greater influence in the headquarters of the Mongol Empire 
than other religions, for many of the wives and mothers of the Khans 
were Christians, being members of the Kerait Royal family. Several of 
these masterful women played decisive roles in politics: for instance 
Baigi, the mother of Kublai Khan (1260-1294), and Duluz Khatum, 
the wife of Hulagu (1256-1265). Many high officials were also 
Christians, such as Chinkai and Bolgai, both chancellors, and Kitbaka, 
the chief lieutenant of Hulagu. 

Pope Innocent IV (1241-54), with the foresight of a great statesman, 
grasped the extreme urgency and importance of the religious problem 
raised by the Mongol victories and despatched several missions. The 
first papal envoys were John of Piano Carpini and Lawrence of Portu- 
gal, both Franciscans. They spent two years on their long journey to 
Karacorum, the tent capital of the new empire (1245-47). They carried 
with them two papal bulls addressed to the Emperor of the Tatars. 1 1 

121 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the first. Innocent IV stated his claim to be St Peter's successor and 
urged the Khan to accept his authority; in the second he reprimanded 
the Mongols for devastating the Catholic kingdoms of Hungary and 
Poland. 

The Tatars, then contemplating the conquest of Europe, replied in a 
document revealing their religious interpretation of their amazing 
military successes. Khan Kuyuk (1240-48), author of this epistle, 
expressed the typical Mongol reaction to the Papal demands. He wrote: 

c By the power of Eternal Heaven we are the ruler of all nations and 
this is our command: if it reaches thee, thou who art the great Pope 
together with all the Princes shalt come in person to pay us homage and 
to serve us. Thou hast also said that it would be well for us to be baptized. 
This request we cannot understand. Thou likewise sayest that we should 
become a trembling Christian like the Nestorians and worship God and 
be an ascetic. How dost thou know whom God absolves, and to whom 
He shows mercy? How dost thou know that thy words have God's 
sanction? From the rising of the sun to its setting all lands have been 
made subject to us. Who could do this contrary to the will of God? 
Now thou shouldst say with a sincere heart "I will submit and serve 
you", and we shall recognize thy submission. If thou dost not observe 
God's command we shall know thee as our enemy. 5 

This letter, sealed in November 1246, spoke a language unfamiliar to 
European diplomacy, the language of a world where the claims of the 
papacy to control Emperors and Kings were met with surprise. The 
Pope was disappointed but he persevered, and several other missions were 
despatched by him and his successors. The most important were those of 
Brother William of Rubruck, another Franciscan (1253-55) who has 
left a vivid description of his stay among the Tatars, and that of John of 
Monte Corvino, who spent twelve years at the Court of Timur 
(1294-1307). 

These later envoys met with a much more friendly reception, for the 
Mongols had by that time embarked on a great military campaign 
aiming at the annihilation of Islam, and were eager for Christian 
co-operation. A unique chance of mass conversion was suddenly offered 
to the Church and probably only one man at that time realized its 
supreme importance. He was St Louis, King of France (1226-70), but 
he was misled by his ambitious brother, Charles of Anjou, King of 
Naples and Sicily (1268-85), and died during the disastrous expedition 
against Tunis. After his death no one in Europe was equal to the task of 

122 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OP BYZANTIUM 

meeting the Mongols' request for friendship and collaboration. 

This little-known episode in the long contest between Asia and Europe 
contained potentialities of major significance for the history of the world 
and the fatal mistakes committed by the Christians had tragic 
consequences. The Mongols led by Hulagu started their campaign 
against Islam in 1255; th&r intention was to restore Palestine to the 
Christians and to end Mohammedan control over the Near East. 
Mesopotamia was conquered in 1257, Baghdad in 1258 and the Abbasid 
Khalifate abolished with the execution of Mustasim, the last Kalif. The 
next year Hulagu advanced into Syria and took Edessa; his General, 
Kitbaka, a Nestorian Christian, captured Aleppo and Damascus in 
1260. The only remaining Mohammedan realm was Egypt where the 
majority of the population was Christian. Hulagu, sure of his victory, 
sent envoys to the Mamluk Sultans to demand submission. They 
were put to death and the Mongols began their march towards the Nile 
Valley. At this crucial moment a civil war in the Caucasus forced 
Hulagu to withdraw his main force from Palestine. The news of the 
retreat reached Egypt and encouraged the Mamluks to start a counter- 
attack. They were uncertain of their chances and appealed for help to 
the Crusaders, who controlled the shortest and safest route for the 
Egyptian advance. The Barons of Outremer met in Acra and decided to 
assist the Moslems. They were antagonized by the favours which the 
Mongols showed to the Eastern Christians and thought that the defeat 
of the Mamluks would not bring any advantage to the Latin Christians. 
The Egyptian Army safely crossed the Crusaders' territory and in a 
decisive engagement at Ain-Jalut the greatly reduced detachment of 
the Mongols was defeated (1260). It was a decisive victory. The Mon- 
gols never repeated their drive towards Egypt. 

In 1268 the Mamluks rewarded their Christian allies by annihilating 
them. Sultan Baibar (d. 1277), a Kipchak Turk who had assumed 
supreme power over Egypt, expelled the Crusaders from Antioch, their 
most important possession. Its fall was followed by the quick surrender 
of other strongholds until the last, the island fortress of Ruad, was 
captured in 1303. The entire coast of Syria and Palestine was devastated 
by the victorious Moslems; this time they did not spare Christian 
populations and turned fertile regions into a desert. The barons had 
miscalculated the temper of their Islamic rivals and paid in full for 
the mistake, which their hostility to Oriental Christians had caused 
them to make. 

The defeat in Ain-Jalut did not, however, end negotiations between 
the Christians and the Mongols. Khan Abaka (1265-82), Hulagu's son, 

123 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

sent an embassy to the Council of Lyons in 1274, offering his alliance. 
Edward I, King of England (1272-1307), wrote an enthusiastic letter 
to the Mongol Khan hoping to meet him soon in Palestine liberated by 
their joint efforts from the enemies of the Holy Cross. In response, six 
Mongol envoys visited England in 1277, but they failed to stir the King 
and his barons and the expected crusade was indefinitely postponed. In 
1286 Abaka's son, Argun (1284-91) sent the last and the most impres- 
sive mission to Europe. In order to create a favourable atmosphere a 
prominent Christian, Rubban Sauma, was appointed as the head of the 
delegation. He was a Chinese Christian and confidant and schoolmate 
of the Nestorian Patriarch, Mar Jahballaha III (1281-1317) who was an 
Ongut Mongol born and bred in Peking. The Mongol mission visited 
Rome, Paris and London in 1287. It was received everywhere with 
honour; the learned and devout Chinaman was much admired. He 
acquainted Western Christians with a Church, the existence of which 
was not suspected in Europe. His efforts to conclude a military alliance 
between the Mongols and Christian rulers, however, came to nothing, 
although Khan Argun announced that he would be baptized in 
Jerusalem as soon as he recovered the city from the Moslems. In antici- 
pation of this event he baptized one of his sons and gave him the name 
Nicholas in honour of the reigning Pope. Christian Europe remained 
deaf to these appeals from the East. Its rulers were absorbed in their 
quarrels and problems. Khan Argun died in 1291. The same year Acra 
was taken by the Mamluks and Palestine was finally lost to the Cru- 
saders. Khan Ghazan (1295-1304) drastically altered the policy of his 
father. He embraced Islam and this led to the conversion of the rest of the 
Mongols. The whole of central Asia with the exception of Tibet became, 
like the Near East, solidly incorporated into the Islamic community. 

The Mongols and the conversion of Asia to Islam 

The Mongol Empire which spread from the China Sea to the Black 
Sea and temporarily provided stability and ease of communication all 
over this vast territory offered a unique opportunity for Christians to 
convert Asia to their religion. The Mongols showed increasing friendli- 
ness towards Christians and their hostility to Islam made them eager for 
closer links. Their ultimate conversion to Islam therefore requires some 
explanation. 

The Tatars encountered Christianity under three distinct forms. The 
most congenial to them was the Oriental Christianity professed 
by several tribes a.kin to them. The court of the Great Khan was 
full of Nestorians mostly employed as craftsmen, scribes and doctors; 

124 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

they were valued as experts, but despised as a subject race. Khan 
Kuyuk described them as e trembling Nestorians' in his epistle to the 
Pope, and for the conquerors of Asia it would have been humiliating to 
accept the faith of these subservient and at times underhand men. 

The Russian Orthodox Church impressed the Mongols more favour- 
ably, and some of the Russian princes and bishops, such as St Alexander 
Nevsky (d. 1263) and the Metropolitans Cyril (1242-81) and Alexis 
(1353-78) were highly esteemed by the Khans. Yet conversion to the 
Russian Church would have meant giving up their national customs. 
Later such acceptance of Christianity became frequent, and led to the 
incorporation of Mongols in the Russian community; but at this decisive 
moment, at the end of the thirteenth century, when the Tatars ceased to 
be ferocious invaders and began to co-operate and inter-marry, the 
Russians missed their opportunity, for they conceived Christian life in 
too narrow a manner. The Russians were intensely ritualistic; they 
observed the Old Testament distinction between clean and unclean 
food, and the Mongol habit of eating any kind of meat and drinking the 
fermented milk of mares (kumis) revolted them. They treated the Tatars 
as impure and several princes and envoys preferred death to the pollu- 
tion entailed by conformity with Mongol customs. Most notable among 
these martyrs was Prince St Michael of Chernigov and his boyar 
Fedor, killed by the Mongols in 1246 for their refusal to follow the 
prescribed ritual of the Khan's court. 

The Latin missionaries represented another extreme tendency. The 
Franciscan Friars who came to Mongolia from Rome astounded the 
Tatars by their courage, simplicity and complete disregard of earthly 
advantages and riches; but the Mongols were baffled by their declara- 
tion that all kings should owe allegiance to the Vicar of Christ. The 
Khan and his courtiers inquired as to the number of horsemen and 
camelmen serving in the Pope's army, and when they realized that their 
own military strength was far superior, they declined to submit to the 
Pope's authority if that was the price of baptism. To men bred in the 
wild deserts of Asia, controlling territories the size of which surpassed 
the imagination of medieval Europe, such submission was incompre- 
hensible. Even the Nestorian Christians were unable to grasp the im- 
plications of the papal doctrine. When Rabban Sauma reached Rome 
in 1 289 no one there had ever heard of his Patriarch Mar Jahballaha III. 
The cardinals wished however to learn whether that unknown prelate 
recognized the Pope as the Head of the Church. Sauma answered, 
'Never has any man from the Pope come to us Eastern Christians. The 
Holy Apostles taught our fathers the true faith and so we hold it intact 

125 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

to this day.' 2 If the papacy meant nothing to a learned Chinese 
Christian how could its significance be understood by a Shamanist 
Nomad? 

Islam was more accommodating. Its simple rules of faith and conduct, 
its unity and its strength of conviction impressed the Mongols, who were 
able to enter into its orbit without abandoning their national customs 
and habits of thought. The acceptance of Mohammed as their master 
by the Mongols closed Asia to Christianity for many centuries to come. 
This conversion also meant the almost complete annihilation of Oriental 
Christians. Tamerlane (1363-1405), the last great military leader of 
the Mongols, was a fanatical Moslem, and in his devastating march 
across Asia he virtually exterminated Christianity. Pyramids of skulls, 
cities levelled to the ground, fertile plains turned into desert, marked 
the triumphant progress of this scourge of Asia. 

The Nestorian Christians did not apostatize. They were physically 
exterminated, and with their destruction the cultural and intellectual 
life of Central Asia rapidly declined. Their tragic history was a 
curious mixture of glory and failure. They were learned and zealous 
Christians, most of them doctors, merchants and clerks in state offices. 
They were excluded by their Islamic masters from any leading posts in 
the government and had no right to serve in the army. They belonged 
to a tolerated community which was nevertheless looked down upon 
and despised by the master race. They therefore acquired many features 
common to such minorities. They were affected by enforced recourse to 
cunning and intrigue. They lived in constant danger of being suddenly 
attacked by the Mohammedan mob and put to death by an ill-tempered 
and suspicious Sultan. They lived under a political order which did not 
restrict the arbitrary will of the irresponsible rulers who were equally 
free to lavish favours or to inflict punishment ^discriminatingly on all 
their enslaved subjects. 

The Nestorian Church perished, for the wind of the desert blew it 
away before it had time to establish firm roots in the shifting sands of 
Central Asia. 

The Florentine Council (1439) 

During the years of the Empire's agony the Basileus had continued to 
make desperate efforts to secure military help from the West. This was 
to be purchased only by submission to the Pope, and negotiations for 
such a surrender went on all the time. Once they seemed to have suc- 
ceeded at the Council of Lyons in 1274. Michael VIII (1260-82) was 
an able diplomat who by accepting Roman protection acquired tem- 

126 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

porary immunity from another attack from the West. His main advei- 
sary was Charles of Anjou, King of Naples and Sicily. This aggressive 
brother of St Louis IX of France (1226-76) invaded Southern 
Italy in 1266, on the invitation of Pope Urban IV (1261-64). Having 
defeated King Manfred of Sicily (1255-66) and executed the fifteen- 
year-old Conradin, the last offspring of the Hohenstaufens (1268), 
Charles embarked on building up an Empire of his own at the expense 
of Byzantium. The reconciliation of Michael VIII with the Pope post- 
poned Charles's campaign. The Sicilian Vespers (1282), the successful 
revolt of the local population against Charles and his French troops, 
removed the danger of Western aggression, and the Byzantines re- 
covered their ecclesiastical freedom by repudiating the union with 
Rome concluded at Lyons. 

The last attempt at reconciliation with the papacy was made on the 
eve of the fall of the Empire. The Emperor, John VIII (1425-48), 
was determined to obtain reinforcements from the West, the last hope of 
saving his realm, which was now confined to Constantinople and a 
narrow strip of land on the Asiatic coast of the Sea of Marmora. On 
24th November 1437, the Basileus, accompanied by his brother Deme- 
trius, the Patriarch Joseph II (1416-39), and twenty- two bishops, set 
sail for Italy. They reached Venice on 8th February 1438, and at once 
opened negotiations with the Pope, Eugenius IV (1431-47), 
who convoked a Council for the purpose of restoring unity with 
the Greeks. The first sessions of this synod took place at Ferrara, but 
on xoth January 1439, the assembly was transferred to Florence 
where the act of reunion was signed by both sides in July of the same 
year. 

The Council of Florence was a representative gathering; the Patri- 
archs of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem sent envoys, and Isidore, 
Metropolitan of Moscow (d. 1463), acted in the name of the Russian 
Church. The Orthodox Bishops were divided. One section led by Bis- 
sarion, Archbishop of Nicaea (1395-1472), and Isidore of Moscow, who 
was a Greek, desired reunion with the Latin West, not only for political 
but also for religious reasons. The other section, led by Mark, the Arch- 
bishop of Ephesus (d. 1443), thought that surrender to Rome meant 
betraying the Apostolic tradition preserved by the Christian East. 
The Latins were led by Cardinal Julian Caesarini (1398-1444). The 
trivial points which had loomed so large in the polemic between Greeks 
and Latins in the preceding centuries were brushed aside. The whole 
problem of the schism was considered from a purely doctrinal point of 
view. It was believed that if theological understanding could be 

127 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

achieved the unity of Christendom would be immediately restored and 
the Islamic menace eliminated. 

Five main items were selected for deliberation, the Filioque clause, 
purgatory, papal primacy, Eucharistic bread, and the words of conse- 
cration of the elements for Holy Communion. Consideration of the 
Filioque clause took the longest time. Mark of Ephesus attacked the 
Western addition, both on the ground of its theological implications and 
also as a violation of the agreement reached at the earlier Ecumenical 
Councils not to alter the creed sanctioned by the synods. This doctrinal 
debate was opened on 2nd March and lasted until June. It ended with a 
Western victory. The scholastic theologians had by that time elaborated 
an intellectual scheme defending the double procession of the Holy 
Spirit; they were well equipped for the dispute and drove Mark of 
Ephesus and his supporters into a merely defensive position. The Ortho- 
dox tried by quotations from the Fathers to prove that the original for- 
mula alone represented the Apostolic tradition which excluded the 
doctrine of double procession, but the Latins showed that a number of 
ancient and revered ecclesiastical writers had described the Holy Spirit 
as proceeding from the Father through the Son. On the strength of these 
expressions, Bissarion of Nicaea and other Greeks, being urged by the 
Emperor to make concessions to the Latins, accepted the theology of the 
double procession and agreed to restore their unity with Rome. The 
minority, led by Mark, protested in vain. 

The other points of divergency, the bread of the Eucharist, Purgatory, 
and the words of Consecration, were amicably solved, both sides accept- 
ing the Eastern and Western practice and teaching in these matters as 
traditional, and therefore lawful. 

The most interesting side of the Florentine Council was the solution 
of the papal problem. This crucial point of divergence escaped the 
attention of the debating parties for some time. The Greeks were 
genuinely surprised when the Latins raised it towards the end of the 
discussions. The Byzantine theologians having solved the Filioque prob- 
lem, deemed that no further doctrinal obstacle stood in the way to 
reconciliation. The Greeks were unaware of the centrality of the papacy 
for the West. This fact was proved by the quick agreement reached by 
both sides. The Orthodox accepted a formula proposed by the Latins 
with the proviso that the privileges and rights of the Eastern Patriarchs 
should remain unaltered. 

Having secured their independence, they declared: c We recognize 
the Pope as Sovereign Pontiff, Vice-Regent and Vicar of Christ, 
Shepherd of all Christians, and Ruler of the Churches of God. 5 These 

128 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

impressive titles conveyed a different meaning to East and West. The 
East was not concerned with the extent of the papal power within the 
Latin Church. Its sole desire was to remain free from it in its own 
domain. 

The Florentine Council was concluded by a solemn proclamation of 
the unity achieved. Mark of Ephesus refused to sign the declaration of 
reunion however, and his defiance indicated the strength of Byzantine 
resistance to the surrender to Rome made by the hard-pressed Emperor 
and his prelates. 

The reconciliation proved to be an illusion. The returning Greek 
delegates were met with undisguised hostility. People openly said they 
would rather be ruled by the Turks than by the Pope. The Moslems, at 
least, would not interfere with their ecclesiastical affairs. Even more 
uncompromising was the reception of the news in Moscow; the Metro- 
politan Isidore had to flee from Russia. Both Prince and people 
unanimously repudiated the terms of capitulation; only Bissarion and 
his supporters stood firm in defence of the Florentine union. They 
eventually joined the Roman Church, and Bissarion ended his life as a 
prominent Cardinal. 

The capture of Constantinople by the Turks was interpreted by many 
Eastern Christians as a deserved punishment for the betrayal of 
Orthodoxy by Emperor and Patriarch. No negotiations for reunion 
have been conducted between Rome and Constantinople since 1439. 

The history of the schism between the East and the West reveals two 
important facts: (a) that it did not occur suddenly, but took some five 
hundred years to develop; (b) that the main cause in the separation, 
the growth of papal authority in the West, was at no time recognized by 
the contesting parties as the root problem. 

Eastern and Western Christians argued all the time on side issues 
like the use of leavened or unleavened bread, or the lawfulness of the 
addition of the Filioque clause to the creed, or the rival claims to juris- 
dictions. Such blindness in itself contributed to their ultimate defeat. 
They had lost understanding of one another, and were talking at cross 
purposes. It is only in the present century that some of the underlying 
reasons for their divergency of outlook have been discovered. They will 
be discussed in the chapters on Eastern Orthodox doctrine and worship. 

The last years of the Empire 

During the last two hundred years of its history Byzantium, though 
moribund as a state, remained spiritually and artistically alive. It was 
a. time of artistic inspiration when mosaics and frescoes of exquisite 

i 129 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

harmony and beauty were created. Although only few of them have 
survived, some can still be seen in the recently restored Church of St 
Saviour in Constantinople (Kahrieh Djami) (Plate 32), and in the 
ruined churches of Mistras, capital of the Peloponnese, the last strong- 
hold of Greek resistance to the Turks. Its numerous churches, precari- 
ously perched on the slope of a precipitous mountain overlooking the 
plain of Sparta, speak eloquently of the profoundly humane and 
genuinely Christian outlook of these doomed defenders of orthodox 
freedom. 

The revival of art was accompanied by a remarkable mystical move- 
ment known as Hesychasm. It originated in Mount Athos which, after 
963, had become the exclusive preserve of monks. Gregory Palamas 
(1296-1359) who ended his life as Archbishop of Salonika was one of 
the most outstanding of the Hesychasts. His writings reveal deep pene- 
tration into the mystery of man's communion with the divine. He taught 
that God is inaccessible in His inner self but that the entire creation is 
permeated with the divine energy which illuminates the universe and 
establishes the most intimate personal relations between man and the 
Creator. He maintained that the light in which Christ was seen by the 
Apostles on the Mount of Transfiguration was that uncreated energy 
and that it has been observed since by other men with purified hearts 
and minds. 

A contemporary of Palamas was Nicholas Cabasilas (d. 1380). He 
was one of the most powerful Byzantine writers and two of his works, 
The Life of Christ and The Explanation of the Divine Liturgy, are classics of 
Orthodox literature. Cabasilas was a layman, but his exceptional erudi- 
tion and rare religious insight made him an authority on Eucharistic 
worship and a recognized teacher of spiritual life. Philosophy also 
flourished in the works of Planudes, Plethon and Bissarion. Several 
distinguished historians among whom were John Cantacuzene, 
Niciphorus, Gregoras, Ducas and Chalcocondylas left well-documented 
records of their time. 

The Ottoman Turks and the fall of Constantinople 

The Byzantines were living an intense and highly articulate life, but 
they had no physical strength to resist the incursions of the Turks. These 
nomads, without culture, but obedient to the will of their sultans, gained 
ascendency over the rest of the Moslems and steadily advanced towards 
the West. Defeated by the Mongols in 1243, they recovered under a new 
dynasty whose founder was Othman (1290-1326) and he gave them the 
name by which they are known as the conquerors of Constantinople. 

130 



THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

From the fourteenth century onwards it became clear that these Asiatics 
were the unquestioned masters of the Near East. Their progress was at 
first slow, but once a city was taken no recovery of the lost territory could 
be attempted. In 1326 the Turks took Brusa, in 1331 Nicaea, in 1337 
Nicomedia. Their advance was not only facilitated but even actually 
encouraged by the dissensions and rivalry among their Christian 
opponents. So the Emperor, John VI Cantacuzene (1347-54), foolishly 
invited the Turks to come to his rescue. On his instigation they landed 
on the European shore and defeated the Serbians in 1353. In the next 
year they established themselves at Gallipoli, and having acquired this 
foothold rapidly began to expand their rule over Thrace. 

In 1365 the Sultan Murad (1353-89) transferred his capital to 
Adrianopolis and so sealed the fate of the Byzantine Empire. It was now 
solidly encircled by the Turks and its only contact with the rest of the 
world was henceforth by sea. 

The founding of an Islamic State on European soil alarmed the 
Christian West. But the attempts to unite the European powers against 
it failed. Amadeus of Savoy hastily organized a crusade, but his force 
was inadequate and he was repulsed by the Turks in 1366. In 1402, 
however, the scene suddenly changed; once again on account of the 
Mongols. In the battle of Angora, Tamerlane annihilated the Turkish 
army with its Christian auxiliaries supplied by the conquered Balkan 
nations. The Christians were offered a chance of liberation, but the 
unique opportunity was missed and the Turks resumed their conquest of 
Europe. In 1430 they took Salonica, the city next in importance to 
Constantinople. In 1472 they invaded Hungary and thus reached the 
heart of Europe. The last attempt at their expulsion was made by King 
Vladislav VI (1434-44) of Poland and Hungary. Betrayed by the 
Venetians and unsupported by the Balkan Christians, his army of 
Hungarians, Poles and Bohemians was crushed at Varna in 1444 by 
the Turks. The King was killed and with him any hope of saving 
Constantinople was lost. 

Mohammed II (1451-81) laid siege to the great capital in Feb- 
ruary 1453 when the city had been largely depopulated by civil war 
and the ravages of plague. The Emperor Constantine XI (1449-53) 
had only 10,000 men to defend his capital, yet its prestige was so great 
and its high walls so formidable that Mohammed almost gave up the 
attempt although he had brought 150,000 men with him. He was 
persuaded, however, to continue the siege by a Hungarian renegade, 
Urban, who constructed heavy artillery for the Turks. After several 
days of bombardment a breach in the wall was made on sgth May 

13* 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

14.53. On that day the last Eucharist was celebrated in S Stophia; the 
Emperor and the remnants of his army, Greeks and Latins, all made 
their communion. That same morning the Islamic hordes poured into 
the city massacring the population, burning and ravaging everything 
on their way. The Emperor, who bore the name of the Founder of 
the City, died fighting in its streets. The Patriarch was slain. When 
Mohammed rode on horseback into the cathedral he found it filled 
with the dead bodies of those who had vainly sought refuge in the 
temple. According to a legend, the onslaught started before the cele- 
bration of the Holy Communion was completed, and the priest in his 
sacred vestment vanished miraculously behind one of the marble 
columns, carrying the Chalice with him. The Eastern Christians still 
believe that Hagia Sophia will one day be restored to Christian worship 
and the divine service interrupted by the Turks will again be sung in 
this Cathedral of the Holy Wisdom. 

Mohammed wanted to repopulate Constantinople with his own 
people, but the Turks felt strangers in a city built by men of another 
race, culture and religion; so the Sultan allowed the scattered Christians 
to return to their homes and resume life as artisans and traders, being 
treated as a subject race by their proud Asiatic conquerors. This was 
the end of the great realm, but the Orthodox Church survived the 
disaster and continued to minister to its enslaved members. 

The defects and limitations of Byzantine political and social order 
facilitated the decline of the Empire; its bureaucracy was over-organized, 
private enterprise was too narrowly supervised, and constant wars 
sapped the strength and wealth of the people. Yet the Empire perished 
not from internal disease but from external attacks. Without the stab in 
the back inflicted by the Crusaders in 1204, Byzantium would perhaps 
have been able to resist the Turks and so preserve for posterity its unique 
treasures of classical and Christian art and learning. 



132 



CHAPTER FIVE 

THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION 
AND OPPRESSION 

(xv-xvm CENTURIES) 

The Ottoman Empire The Orthodox Church under the Turkish yoke The Orthodox East 
between Rome and the Reformation, Cyril Lukaris (1572-1638} The Orthodox Church and the 
Moscow Tsardom Two tendencies in Russian Orthodoxy The schism in the Russian Church 
The Orthodox in Poland and the Ukraine The incorporation of the Ukraine into Moscow Tsar- 
dom and the Council 0/1666-67 Archpriest Avvacum (1620-82) The Russian Church on the 
eve of the reforms of Peter the Great (1668-98} Peter the Great (1682-1*725) and the abolition of 
the Moscow Patriarchate The Nonjurors and the Orthodox Church The St Petersburg 
Empire and the Russian Church in the eighteenth century St Tikhon of Zadonsk and Patsy 
Velichkovsky Western ascendancy over the Christian East The Church ofSt Thomas in South 
IndiaThe Church of EthiopiaThe Nestorian Church of the East The Chutch of the 
Armenians The Coptic Church The Jacobites Balkan Christians in the seventeenth and 
eighteenth centuries The Eastern Orthodox under Hapsburg rule The Christian East at the 

time of its decline 



The Ottoman Empire 

THE CAPTURE of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453 removed the 
last obstacle to their advance. For the next two centuries Islam pressed 
hard on Southern and Central Europe. Mohammed II (1451-81) 
extended his power over the greater part of the Balkans; the Aegean 
islands were conquered in 1457-62, the Ionian Islands in 1479, and the 
Crimea in 1476. Egypt was incorporated by Selim I (1512-20) in 1517 
and this victory delivered Palestine and Arabia to the Turks. The posses- 
sion of Mecca and Jerusalem entitled the Sultan to proclaim himself 
Caliph, or supreme ruler of Mohammedans all over the world. The 
Ottoman Empire reached its greatest expansion under Suleiman the 
Magnificent (1520-66). He expelled the Knights Hospitallers from 
Rhodes in 1522 and in 1526 the larger part of Hungary was brought 
under his control. In 1538 the entire coast of the Red Sea fell under the 
Turkish sway and this enabled them to raid India. In September 1529 
120,000 Mohammedans appeared before the walls of Vienna but failed 
to take the city. Three times (1526, 1529, 1532) the Turks invaded 
Austria. These attacks on the Hapsburgs had important repercussions 
in the religious history of the West, for they enabled the Protestant 
Princes of Germany to consolidate their political power whilst their 
Roman Catholic opponents were engaged in a struggle against the 
Turks. In 1541 the Turks captured Budapest and in 1547 forced the 

133 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Emperor to become their tributary. Nevertheless they were unable to 
advance further West or to establish their hegemony in Europe. In 1571 
they suffered their first serious setback in the naval battle of Lepanto. 
This, however, did not much affect their formidable military strength 
and they were able to go on fighting simultaneously in Tunis, Persia, 
the Caucasus, Hungary and Austria. 

During this period of Turkish expansion, civil administration and 
even military command were to a large extent in the hands of foreigners, 
recent converts from Christianity. For example, Ibrahim Pasha 
(1523-36), the famous Vizier of Suleiman the Magnificent, was a Greek; 
so too was the skilful naval commander, Khaireddin Pasha; Mohammed 
Sokolich, Grand Vizier (1560-79) under Selim II (1566-74) and Murad 
III (1574-95) was a Serbian; the dynasty of Kiuprili Viziers (1656-91) 
was Albanian. 

The Turks showed little interest in routine administration, delegating 
it to men recruited from the conquered nations. This indolence demoral- 
ized the Sultans and led to the political decline of the Ottoman State. In 
1606 the Turks signed a peace treaty with the Hapsburgs at Zsitva- 
Torok by which they recognized the Austrian Empire as a power equal to 
their own and the Emperor ceased to pay tribute to the Sultan. After a 
second unsuccessful attempt to capture Vienna in 1683, the Turks 
concluded a disadvantageous peace with a European coalition in 1699, 
at Karlowitz, by which they ceded Hungary, Transylvania, Croatia 
and Slavonia to Austria, Podolia to Poland, and the Morea and Dal- 
matia to Venice. For the first time Russia was a partner in a joint 
European action and received the fortress of Azov. This peace treaty 
was the turning point in relations between Turks and Christians. After 
Karlowitz the Ottoman Empire began its long and tortuous retreat 
from the West. 

The Orthodox Church under the Turkish yoke 

As long as the Turks were at the height of their power the subjugated 
Eastern Christians had no means of open resistance and were obliged to 
adapt their religious and cultural life to adverse conditions. The 
Mohammedans forced the heathens they conquered to choose between 
conversion to Islam and extermination; subjugated Christians and Jews 
were recognized as c people of the Book 5 and were allowed to practise 
their religion, although exluded from citizenship. Christians, therefore, 
enjoyed a certain autonomy but suffered from many limitations; the 
Turks divided Christians not according to nationality but confession. So 
all the Byzantine Orthodox, whether Greeks, Arabs, Serbians or Alba- 

134 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

nians, were grouped together; the non-Chalcedonian Copts were treated 
as a separate body; so were the Armenians and the Nestorians. Each of 
these communities was governed by a Hierarch approved by the Sultan. 
The Patriarch of Constantinople was the only officially recognized 
spokesman of all the Byzantine Orthodox. He was their Supreme Judge 
with direct access to the Sultan. Other Patriarchs and bishops lost their 
independence and were reduced to the rank of his subordinates and 
spent much of their time in Constantinople in order to be near the 
source of intrigue and power. 

The Patriarch's position was exalted and precarious at the same time. 
Of one hundred and fifty-nine Patriarchs during five hundred years of 
Turkish rule, only twenty-one died a natural death in office. Six were 
murdered, twenty-seven abdicated, one hundred and five were arbitrarily 
removed. The Sultans could at any moment dismiss the Patriarch or any 
other bishop who incurred their displeasure. Few were able to exercise 
their pastoral duties in peace. Some were expelled and restored as many as 
four or five times, and yet in spite of all these dangers the post, although 
obtained and kept through bribery, and exposed to the rivalry and 
machinations of the envoys of Western powers, was eagerly sought 
after. 

In these circumstances the Christians suffered acutely. No new 
churches were built. No church might call attention to its existence 
either by ringing bells or by putting a cross on the building. Systematic 
training of the clergy was abandoned, higher education made impossible, 
the schooling of children reduced to a few rudiments. Bribery and 
corruption, as the basis of Turkish administration, had a specially 
adverse effect on the authority of the clergy. Every office had to be 
purchased and the bishops and priests were obliged to recoup the money 
from their flock. The greatest calamity, however, was the obligation to 
provide the Sultans with slaves. 

At five-yearly intervals Christian boys between eight and fifteen were 
inspected by the Turks; the strongest and most intelligent were selected, 
converted to Islam and made the slaves of the Sultans. The majority 
were drafted into a special army corps, called Janissaries. These ex- 
Christians were the main instrument of oppression, for they were often 
turned into fanatical Moslems. Later they acquired considerable poli- 
tical power which was used to end the rule of many Sultans. The rest of 
the Christian recruits were assigned to other kinds of service in the 
Sultan's household and some reached important positions in the State. 

This constant loss of the most vigorous males was one of the reasons 
for stagnation in the Christian East. This iniquitous tribute of boys 

135 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

lasted for more than two centuries (1430-1685) and when it was at last 
abolished the position of Christians soon improved. But even under 
these degrading conditions Eastern Christians did not lose their enter- 
prise and natural abilities. Some went to Italy for their studies, others 
received instruction from a few learned monks who heroically main- 
tained the tradition of scholarship amidst the greatest obstacles and 
hazards. Trade, crafts and diplomatic service were in most cases in 
Christian hands. 

The Orthodox East between Rome and the Reformation 
While the Byzantine Church was making its last vain attempts to reach 
a working agreement with the papacy, the Western Christians were in 
the grip of the Conciliar Movement, which aimed to suppress abuses 
and generally to improve Church life. The Conciliar movement was 
supported by many high-minded clerics, but its leaders lacked unity and 
practical wisdom. The papacy was resolutely opposed to these attempts 
at curtailing its authority, and by the end of the fifteenth century these 
plans for peaceful reformation had failed. The religious revolution of the 
sixteenth century took place when the Christian East was absorbed in 
the struggle for mere survival. The Russians were engaged in fierce 
fighting against the Tatars on their Eastern and Southern frontiers. The 
Greeks were too harassed by political troubles, too isolated psycholo- 
gically and politically from the West, to participate in the debates 
between Catholics and Protestants. The Reformation was thus an 
exclusively Western concern and this led to peculiar limitations in 
theological thinking and liturgical changes. 

But if the Orthodox were unable to influence events in the West, both 
parties in the Reformation dispute were eager to find support in the 
East for their claims to represent authentic Christianity. The first 
attempt to secure allies among the Greeks had been made by the 
Hussites as early as the fifteenth century. These Czechs who revolted 
against Rome sent several emissaries to Constantinople and tried to link 
their movement with the Orthodox Church. The fall of the city ended 
these negotiations. Martin Luther and his collaborators were no less 
determined by letters and personal interviews to have their activities 
approved by Eastern opponents of the papacy. These contacts revealed 
the gulf between the Christian East and West in the sixteenth century. 

The Orthodox were bewildered by the Reformation; some merely 
regarded Protestantism as a new error born of Rome, 'the mother of all 
heresies'. Others hoped to persuade Calvinists and Lutherans to return 
to the sound doctrines of an undivided Church and to discard all Latin 

136 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

innovations. Few of the Orthodox realized that Protestantism carried 
the Roman premises to their logical conclusion and for the time being, 
therefore, had no common language with the East. But this fact was not 
grasped, and various schemes of reunion based on doctrinal agreement 
and propounded either in Tubingen, the stronghold of Lutheranism, or 
in Geneva, the home of Calvinism, were favourably received by some of 
the Eastern Christians. The Roman Catholics, stimulated by the 
counter reformation, and having found a new militant force in the 
Jesuits, were alarmed and spared no efforts to break up these attempts at 
co-operation, Constantinople became the focal point of intense compe- 
tition which reached a dramatic climax when Cyril Lukaris became 
Patriarch. 

Cyril Lukaris (1572-1638} 

Lukaris, a native of Crete, belonged to a well-to-do family. He studied 
in Padua where the more fortunate Greeks of the Islands sent their sons 
for higher education. As a youth he became known to Meletius Pigas 
(1592-1602), an enlightened Patriarch of Alexandria, who ordained 
him in 1593 at the age of twenty-one. Meletius was keenly aware of the 
importance of raising the standard of education among the clergy and 
of forming closer links with the non-papal West. He encouraged Cyril 
to accept an invitation to Lithuania where the Roman Catholics had 
begun an energetic campaign against both Protestants and Orthodox. 
Cyril spent some years teaching theology, first in Vilna and later in 
Lvov, the capital of Galicia. He was present with his friend, Nichi- 
phorus Pataschos, at the Council of Brest-Litovsk in 1596, where the 
majority of the Orthodox bishops went over to Rome, but the parochial 
clergy and laity remained faithful to their tradition. The ensuing perse- 
cution of the Orthodox by the Poles cost the life of his companion, but 
Cyril escaped arrest and returned to Egypt. On the death of his bene- 
factor he was elected Patriarch of Alexandria (1602-20). His experiences 
in Poland and Lithuania, and the Jesuit propaganda in Turkey had 
convinced him that the Orthodox needed the help of the Protestants in 
order to resist the increasing aggressiveness of the Latins. Accordingly he 
despatched one of his best priests to the West, Metrophanes Krito- 
pulos, who spent five years in Oxford (1617-22), six years in Germany 
and Switzerland, and two years in Venice. After his thirteen years' 
sojourn among the Protestants and Romans Metrophanes returned to 
the East and ended his life as Patriarch of Alexandria (1636-39). His 
mission was successful; he had gained first-hand knowledge of religious 
conditions in England and on the Continent and could provide Cyril 

137 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

with the information he needed for an energetic campaign against Rome. 
This he began while still in Alexandria, but he soon realized that the 
battle had to be fought from Constantinople and he managed to be 
transferred there in 1620. This made him the central figure of a highly 
dramatic contest in which Rome, Geneva, France, Austria, Holland 
and England all took part. 

The story of the Patriarch reveals the internal state of the Orthodox 
Church, the pressure it had to withstand from the divided Western 
Christians, and the peculiar mixture of religious, political and commer- 
cial interests at work in Constantinople in the seventeenth century. The 
main actors in this drama were the French, Austrian, Dutch and 
English ambassadors. Since 1535 France had been recognized by the 
Turks as the protector of Christians in their Empire, which privilege 
encouraged the Jesuits to campaign for the submission of the Orthodox 
to Rome. The election of Cyril, their opponent, was a challenge to 
French prestige, and her envoy, the Comte de Cezy, helped by his 
Austrian colleague, and using all the methods of Oriental diplomacy, 
denunciations and bribes, succeeded in removing Cyril from office. The 
Protestant diplomats defended Cyril and helped him regain his position. 
This game was repeated several times. Meanwhile Cyril conceived the 
plan of establishing a union between the Orthodox and the Protestants. 
It is impossible to ascertain whether he envisaged the possibility of 
doctrinal agreement or whether he aimed only at practical co-opera- 
tion. His daring scheme caused the Jesuits to see him as a dangerous 
heretic, the Turks as a cunning political intriguer, for the French accused 
him of instigating raids by the Ukrainian Cossacks, which had become a 
serious menace to Turkish security on the Black Sea. Cyril tried to 
avoid publicity about his negotiations, but his Protestant friends desired 
tangible proof of his approval of reformed theology. A fatal role in this 
complicated plot was performed by Antoine Leger, a Calvinist from 
Geneva, Chaplain to the Dutch Legation. He was instrumental in 
publishing Cyril's Confession of Faith which appeared in Latin in 1629, 
in Geneva. This document contained several Calvinistic articles, which 
were at once refuted by other Orthodox prelates. Nevertheless, the 
majority of the clergy and the people remained loyal to their Patriarch 
and when the Jesuits replaced Cyril by a Romanizing bishop, Athana- 
sios Patelarios, the intruder was expelled after twenty-two days. Cyril 
was reinstated for the fourth time, but his new victory made his enemies 
determined to get rid of him altogether. The first plot to murder him 
failed, but in 1638 he was once more defeated and thrown into prison. 
His Roman opponents bribed his jailers to strangle him while the Sultan 

138 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

was away. Cyril was murdered on syth June. His body was thrown into 
the sea but was found by a fisherman and now rests in the Patriarchal 
Church in Phanar. 

The story of Cyril Lukaris indicates the determination of both 
Romans and Protestants to drag the Orthodox into their controversy, 
and the political and theological dangers which this entailed for Eastern 
Christians under the Turkish yoke. The assassination of Cyril stopped 
for a time attempts at reunion between Protestants and Orthodox. 
Negotiations were resumed only at the beginning of the eighteenth 
century when a new factor had appeared the rising power of Russia 
and the offer of unity came from England, not from the Con- 
tinent. 

Cyril's active interest in Western theology was an exception, rather 
than a typical example of the Orthodox attitude of the rest of Christen- 
dom. The majority of the Greeks, embittered by the West's unbrotherly 
behaviour during the last years of the Byzantine agony, wanted nothing 
to do with any Westerners. Only a minority realized the futility of such 
a negative attitude and the need to remain in touch with Western 
thought, which was progressing unhampered by Islamic oppression. 
Those Orthodox who desired higher education could obtain it only in 
Western universities, and both Roman Catholics and Protestants were 
ready to accept a certain number of Eastern students, for both parties 
were anxious to increase the number of their supporters among the 
future leaders of the Church in Constantinople. This training in the 
West was purchased in most cases by temporary apostasy, though most 
Greeks were staunchly Orthodox and looked upon their studies abroad 
as a means of arming themselves against their teachers' propaganda. 
Once they returned home, therefore, they resumed membership in their 
own Church. Nevertheless, few altogether escaped the theological im- 
pact of their heterodox training: intellectually they lost touch with their 
own tradition; their opposition to Rome was based on Protestant prin- 
ciples, and that to the Reformers on Jesuit teaching. The Orthodox 
could no longer speak with their own voice and the rest of Christendom 
stopped listening to their message. 

The Orthodox Church and the Moscow Tsardom 

From the time of her liberation from the Tatars in 1480, Russia had 
been expanding and this growth of political power was accompanied by 
a sense of special vocation associated with the belief in Moscow as the 
third and last Rome. This idea was the outcome of the conviction shared 
by Eastern and Western Christians that the Empire was as indispensable 

139 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

as the Church to the divine plan of salvation. The fall of Byzantium was 
interpreted as a sign of the approaching end of the world. (This was 
generally expected to take place in 1492 seven thousand years from 
the creation, according to an accepted calculation.) As an alternative 
another theory was propounded, that of the transference of Imperial 
prerogatives from one nation to another. The foundation for this vision 
of succeeding Empires fulfilling their missions and being replaced when 
they proved unfaithful is found in the book of the Prophet Daniel. 1 His 
Four Empires were interpreted in the light of the commentary by St 
Hippolytus (d. 236) who identified them with Babylon, Persia, the 
Empire of Alexander the Great, and Rome. During the ascendancy of 
the last kingdom the greatest events of history were to take place in- 
cluding the Incarnation and the Last Judgment. Rome was to have no 
successors, but the capital of Christendom might change its locality, 
although retaining its sacred name. So the Orthodox called Constanti- 
nople the second Rome, after the schism with the West and when it was 
taken by the Turks Moscow became the third Rome. This belief shaped 
Russian thinking; the latter saw themselves as the guardians of unpol- 
luted orthodoxy. Linking their history with the glories of antiquity 
they felt called to world-wide service, failure in which duty would entail 
divine rejection and punishment. 

These thoughts, mingled with awe and exaltation, were expressed by 
a monk, Philothey, who wrote in an epistle to Basil III, Grand Prince 
of Moscow ( 1 505-33) : 

'The Church of old Rome fell for its heresy; the gates of the second 
Rome, Constantinople, were hewn down by the axes of the infidel 
Turks; but the Church of Moscow, the new Rome, shines brighter than 
the sun over the whole universe. Thou art the ecumenical sovereign, 
thou shouldst hold the reins of government in awe of God; fear Him 
who has committed them to thee. Two Romes have fallen, but the third 
stands fast; a fourth there cannot be. Thy Christian Kingdom shall not 
be given to any other ruler/ 

These words, written in Pskov in the fifteenth century, were prophetic. 
Philothey foresaw the greatness of his country at a time when the very 
existence of Moscow was scarcely acknowledged by Europe, In 1547, 
fifteen years after Philothey's epistle was composed, Ivan IV (1533-84) 
assumed the title of Tsar, which the Russians interpreted as equivalent 
to Basileus; and in 1596 the Metropolitan of Moscow was made a 
Patriarch. The document announcing this event reproduced the words 

140 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

of the learned elder almost verbatim, and they were confirmed by the 
signatures of the four Eastern Patriarchs. 

The Russians accepted the challenge of responsibility predicted by 
Philothey, but their interpretation of the essence of Orthodoxy differed 
considerably from that of Byzantium. The first Rome bequeathed to 
Christendom law, order and discipline, and proclaimed the universality 
of the Church. The old Rome represented the paternal authority of the 
Father. The second Rome Constantinople offered intellectual 
leadership. It had done much to formulate creeds and combat heresies. 
Its function was appropriate to the Logos, the second person of the Holy 
Trinity. The third Rome, Moscow, expressed the conviction that the 
entire corporate life of a nation should be inspired by the Holy Spirit. 

The Russia of the Muscovite Tsardom which rose out of the ruins of 
the Tatar occupation was different from the Russia of Kiev. So was the 
Church, which transferred the seat of its chief bishop from the old to the 
new capital. The Russia of Kiev was a young and enthusiastic disciple 
of Byzantium; the Russia of Moscow was a Christian outpost of the 
Asiatic world. It was behind Europe in science, in military and technical 
skill, but there was one domain where the Russians were masters, and 
this was the sphere of worship understood as covering all aspects of 
personal, social and national life. In that art of Christian conduct 
described by the Russians as bitovoe blagochestie (the piety of daily life) 
the Muscovites were unrivalled. Orthodoxy, etymologically understood 
as 'True Glory' (Pravoslavie), permeated their whole culture. The Rus- 
sians achieved a remarkable spiritual unity. Tsar and boyars, merchants 
and peasants, all were members of the same Orthodox community, 
speaking the same language, sharing the same ideal, observing the same 
pattern of behaviour and completely understanding each other. Their 
inspiration came from their belief in the Incarnation, confirmed by the 
drama of the Eucharist, performed on each feast day by the entire 
nation. The parish church was the Russians' university, their concert 
hall, their art gallery, and above all the holy place, which reminded 
them that this world, in spite of its imperfections, was the temple of the 
Holy Spirit, and that man's vocation was to work for its transfiguration. 
The bright cupolas of the Russian church adorned with golden crosses, 
the innumerable ikons depicting the triumphant saints, the joy of the 
Easter celebrations, all these typical manifestations of Russian 
Christianity eloquently declared the determination of the Russian people 
to sanctify their national life and uplift it to holiness and brotherly love. 

A Russian of that period was a dedicated person expressing his joys 
and sorrows in a manner attuned to his religion, regulating his diet in 

141 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

commemoration of the events described in the New Testament, facing 
death as a person ready to meet his judge and Saviour, and from his 
first to his last breath playing a part in the cosmic drama of redemption. 

The Byzantines saw in Jesus Christ the Emperor; the Russians re- 
garded their community as protected by the saints, the chosen vessels of 
the Holy Spirit, the greatest among whom was the Mother of God, 
the Virgin Mary. 

Neither Constantinople nor Moscow lived up to th^ir ideal; but their 
failure does not rob them of significance, for they beneld a great vision, 
ennobling and uplifting mankind. 

Two Tendencies in Russian Orthodoxy 

The growth of Russian Orthodoxy was accompanied by the appearance 
of two distinct tendencies, both traceable to St Sergius of Radonezh. 
The spokesman of one of them was St Nil of Sorsk (1433-1508). His 
school of thought, known as Nonpossessors, stressed freedom of spiritual 
life, was opposed to any use of coercion in religious matters, disapproved 
of too close a relation between Church and State, and welcomed fellow- 
ship with the rest of the Orthodox. St Nil himself was a good scholar, he 
had spent some time on the Holy Mount of Athos and his spirituality 
was in tune with the Hesychast movement. The name of Nonpossessors 
was applied to St Nil and his followers for their refusal to acquire lands 
and control the peasants labouring on them. They considered pre- 
occupation with the management of property incompatible with the 
monastic profession, and thought that an ascetic had to endurd poverty 
and privation as part of his religious training. St losif of Volotsk 
(1439-1515) represented the opposite viewpoint. He was an able 
administrator, a lover of Russian piety, a patron of art and a keen 
promoter of good works. He stood for the right of the monastic com- 
munities to possess lands and serfs, and on this basis to maintain educa- 
tional and philanthropic institutions. His friend and ally Gennady, 
Archbishop of Novgorod (d. 1505), advocated severe punishment of 
heretics and other disturbers of religious peace, considering it a duty of 
the State to protect Orthodoxy and suppress errors, but to the Non- 
possessors such persecution was forbidden by the gospels. 

As long as these two schools of thought co-existed in Russia the bal- 
ance and freshness of its religious and cultural life were preserved. 
Unfortunately, however, matrimonial troubles in the family of the 
Grand Prince of Moscow, Basil III (1505-33), brought about the 
defeat of the Nonpossessors. Their adherent, the Metropolitan Varlaam 
of Moscow (1511-22) who disapproved of the Prince's second marriage, 

142 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

was removed and Daniil (1522-39), a determined enemy of the Non- 
possessors, took his seat. He used every means to suppress their move- 
ment and consequently their influence began to decline from the middle 
of the sixteenth century. Russia's cultural development became one- 
sided, ritualism was over-emphasized, learning neglected, dependence 
on the State increased, and the appreciation of freedom lost. 

The victory of the Possessors played a part in the tragic fate of one of 
the most interesting personalities of that epoch, St Maxim the Greek 
(1470-1556); his coming to Moscow in 1516 offered the Russian 
Orthodox a unique opportunity of enlarging their mental and spiritual 
horizon by linking their cultural life with the Renaissance in Italy. For a 
long time mystery surrounded his origins, but his identity has recently 
been established. 2 He was a native of Greece, who had gone to Italy in 
1492 and there plunged into the intellectual and artistic controversies 
of the Renaissance. An admirer of Girolamo Savonarola (1452-98), he 
joined the Dominican Order (1502-04), but feeling dissatisfied with its 
spirit he returned to Greece and spent eleven years on Mount Athos 
(1505-16). In 1516 he went to Russia on the invitation of the Grand 
Prince of Moscow, who desired to improve Russian scholarship. Maxim 
stood for the best in Christian learning. He was a man of great integrity, 
dedicated to Orthodoxy, fearles^ and uncompromising in his attitude 
to sloth, ignorance and abuses. He had something of the flame which 
burned in his teacher, Savonarola. He was received with open arms by 
the Nonpossessors and roused the enmity of the losifians, who, having 
consolidated their position, attacked Maxim as a dangerous innovator 
and critic of Russian customs. 

His arrest and long imprisonment (1531-51) ended, for centuries to 
come, the possibility of any profitable exchange of ideas between 
Moscow and the rest of Christendom. The Possessors drove the Russian 
Church into isolation and provincialism. Their victory was confirmed by 
the Council of the Hundred Chapters, convoked in Moscow in 1551, at 
which the bishops in their replies to Tsar Ivan IV (1533-84) asserted 
the supremacy of Russian Orthodoxy over the Greek version. 

Ivan IV, the first Russian tyrant, was a militant representative of the 
idea of sacred autocracy as conceived by losif of Volotsk. When St 
Philip, Metropolitan of Moscow (1566-69), rebuked Ivan for his cruelty 
and oppression, the Tsar found sufficient subservient clergy, to condemn 
and degrade him. Philip was murdered and so the Russian Church 
began to pay for too close an alliance with Moscow Tsardom. 

During Ivan's reign the Russian drive towards the East began. In 
1552, the Russians took Kazan and thus broke through the Tatar 

143 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

barrier which had prevented them from extending their domains east- 
wards. In 15563 Astrakhan surrendered to Moscow and the whole 
course of the Volga River became open to Russian navigation. Siberia 
was entered in 1555, and in less than a century the Muscovites had 
reached the Pacific Ocean (1640). These conquests were commemor- 
ated by the erection of one of the most original of Russian churches, St 
Basil, on the Red Square in Moscow (Plate n). The architects, Barma 
and Postnik, by providing each of the seven cupolas with its own design 
and colour, expressed the vision of Asia converted to Christianity by the 
Russian Church, Persian, Turkish, and Indian architectural motifs 
are interwoven with the pattern of Russian wooden structures. St 
Basil's reveals the fusion of Oriental and Byzantine elements in post- 
Tatar Russian art and culture. 

The schism in the Russian Church 

Russia's remarkable achievements, and no less obvious limitations, were 
fully revealed in the tragic story of the schism which occurred in the 
middle of the seventeenth century. Early in the century Russia passed 
through a major political crisis known as the Time of Troubles 
(1598-1613), when the end of the dynasty of Rurik, on the death of 
Tsar Feodor (1584-98), caused civil war and anarchy, aggravated by 
the invasion of Poles and Swedes. The enemies penetrated into the heart 
of Russia and even Moscow was captured by the Poles. The Russians 
recovered their unity under the leadership of Patriarch Germogen 
(1606-12) and the monks of St Sergius monastery. The national 
revival was inspired by the faith and love for the Orthodox Church. 

In 1613 Michael Romanov, a boy of sixteen, was elected Tsar of 

Moscow by the National Assembly and order was gradually restored. 

The shattering events of the interregnum, when foreigners and bandits 

ravaged the country, and when sanctuaries were polluted and Christian 

customs discarded, provoked a movement of reformation among the 

younger clergy who desired to see their people morally purged. Most of 

these zealots came from humble homes but the popular character of the 

Russian Church did not bar them from reaching leading positions. 

One of them, Nikon (1605-81), the son of a blacksmith, became 

Patriarch of Moscow in 1652; others, like Awacum (1620-82), Ivan 

Neronov (1591-1670), Longuin and Lazar, received the charge 

of leading parishes in Moscow and neighbouring cities. These men of 

integrity and faith started a vigorous campaign for the spiritual 

renewal of the people and they were particularly concerned with 

the responsibility of the upper classes to set an example of genuinely 

144 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

Christian conduct. The second Tsar of the Romanov family, 
Alexey (1645-76), was a devout Christian and gave wholehearted 
support to this movement. He was particularly attached to 
Nikon, who had gained popularity by his stand for justice and 
Christian probity. When Nikon was elected Patriarch a wave of expec- 
tancy passed through the country, but instead of a speedy advance to 
further triumphs of Orthodoxy the Russian Church suffered an unex- 
pected disaster, due to a split within the reforming party. Its immediate 
cause was a decree issued by the Patriarch in 1653 ordering Russians to 
follow the Greek ritual in all cases when this differed from their own. 
These differences of ceremonial affected among others such customs as 
the manner of making the sign of the Cross and the number of Alleluias 
sung at church services. 

The reforming priests led by Awacum refused to obey the Patriarch. 
Nikon, instead of explaining the reason for his order, banished the 
protesting clergy. This only inflamed their zeal. A large number of 
laity also repudiated the amended ritual and thus the Russian Church 
lost its unity. Nikon's opponents formed their own community and to 
this day remain a separate body known as Old Believers, or Old 
Ritualists. 

It was common in the past among Russian historians to see in this 
schism a proof of the intellectual backwardness of the Muscovites before 
their Westernization in the eighteenth century. The cause of the schism 
was said to be an obscure dispute about details of ritual, and the 
Patriarch's opponents were stigmatized as narrow-minded fanatics who 
preferred to split the Church rather than consent to minor alterations. 
In reality there were serious political considerations which promoted the 
Patriarch to start his campaign for the unification of the Muscovite and 
Greek and Ukrainian rituals and no less weighty reasons for the repu- 
diation of his reforms. 

In the middle of the seventeenth century Russians were the only 
independent nation among the Orthodox and they received urgent 
appeals for help both from Christians suffering under the Turks and 
from their kinsfolk oppressed by the Poles in the Ukraine. Moscow 
became an important centre for Eastern Christians who came to Russia 
for alms and protection. These contacts with Greeks, Arabs, Balkan 
Slavs and Ukrainians revealed the existence of a number of differences 
in ritual between the Muscovites and other Orthodox. At that time, 
when the static conception of the Church prevailed, any disagreement 
on such matters was explained as a departure from the Apostolic tradi- 
tion and caused bitter arguments. The Russian government, now 

K 145 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

planning a campaign for the liberation of Eastern Christians beginning 
with the Ukraine and extending to the Balkans, required unity and 
concord among all the Orthodox. Tsar Alexey and his friend the 
Patriarch were moved by a vision of the Eucharist being celebrated 
once more in Hagia Sophia, in Constantinople, when the Russian Tsar, 
surrounded by all five Patriarchs, would announce the end of the 
Turkish yoke and the deliverance of the Orthodox from their subjection 
to Islam. For the sake of this mission they were both ready to sacrifice 
the beloved customs of Moscow Orthodoxy, arguing that the Greeks, 
teachers in Christ of the Russians, must know the original patterns 
better. 

The Patriarchs' policy implied that the Russians were wrong when 
they claimed that the centre of Orthodoxy was transferred from Con- 
stantinople to Moscow, and this was precisely the belief which Nikon's 
opponents were not ready to give up. They were convinced that the 
Greeks and the Ukrainians, deprived of political freedom and obliged 
to train their clergy in Roman Catholic and Protestant seminaries, no 
longer preserved the authentic tradition. Recent research has confirmed 
the Old Believers' assertion. The ritual of the Russian Church at the time 
of schism faithfully reproduced the Byzantine liturgical customs of the 
eleventh century, for the Russians had altered nothing in the order of 
services, whereas the rest of the Orthodox under the impact of the West 
modified some of their customs and teaching. These changes were par- 
ticularly noticeable in the neighbouring Ukraine which at the very time 
of the schism appealed to Moscow for help and protection. 

The Orthodox in Poland and the Ukraine 

The Ukraine, the original home of the Russian people, fell into the 
hands of the Lithuanians in the fourteenth century. At first the invaders 
readily accepted the cultural leadership of the Russians and many of 
them joined the Orthodox Church. In 1386 the Grand Duke of Lithu- 
ania, Jagiello (1377-1434), married Jadwiga, the Queen of Poland 
(1384-99), and the two countries became dynastically united. One of 
the conditions of this union was Jagiello's conversion to Rome; he also 
promised to make Latin Christianity the religion of his people. He him- 
self was duly re-baptized, for he was already a member of the Orthodox 
Church, but his attempt to bring others into the Roman fold met with 
opposition. He wisely refrained from using force and Lithuania secured 
autonomy and religious toleration under the rule of his cousin Vitovt 
(d. 1430). Until the second part of the sixteenth century Lithuania and 
Poland co-existed peacefully. The Russians in Lithuania and in the 

146 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

Ukraine followed their Orthodox tradition and were not pressed to 
change their religion. The situation was altered, however, in 1569, when 
Poland and Lithuania, menaced by the growing power of Moscow, 
concluded a much closer union at Liublin: Kiev, with a part of the 
Ukraine, was handed over to Poland, which had always been a militant 
Roman Catholic state. This transfer coincided with the rapid spread of 
Protestantism in Lithuania and Poland, where the considerable German 
colony turned Lutheran; and many Lithuanians became Calvanists. In 
order to stop this desertion the Jesuits were invited to Poland and their 
arrival greatly changed the position of the parties. The Jesuits opened 
excellent schools for the sons of the gentry, and quickly stamped out 
Calvinism among the leading families of Lithuania. 

Having obtained this victory they cast their eyes on the Orthodox, 
who had just been brought under the political control of the Poles. 
Poland was an aristocratic State; only the nobles had political rights, 
and only those of them who belonged to the Roman Church were 
entitled to the privileges of the gentry. Many of the leading Russian 
Orthodox families, therefore, deserted their Church and nation, and 
went over to Rome. This apostasy strengthened the resolve of the rest 
of the Orthodox in the Ukraine and in Lithuania to stand firm for their 
faith and language. Numerous lay brotherhoods were organized which 
opened schools and printed books in defence of their religion. 

This resolute resistance showed the Jesuits that they could not expect 
an easy victory. They conceived a new plan of conversion; the Russians 
were to keep their Eastern tradition intact, the only change being recog- 
nition of the Pope as Supreme head of all Christians. This scheme met 
with the approval of several Orthodox bishops who were promised, in 
case of success, equality with the Roman episcopate which enjoyed 
many privileges (including seats in the Senate) denied to the Orthodox 
hierarchs. King Sigismund (Vasa) III (1587-1632), an ardent Roman 
Catholic, gave his full support. The negotiations between Rome and the 
Russian bishops were conducted in great secrecy for the influential lay 
brotherhoods were expected to resist. 

When all the details were agreed upon a Council of the Orthodox 
Church was convoked in Brest Litovsk (1596). It was divided from the 
first. The majority of the bishops and a minority of the priests and laity 
were for union with Rome; the rest were against it. 

In spite of this division, the pro-Romans proclaimed their recognition 
of the Pope, and the King at once declared them the only lawful 
representatives of the Russian Church in his dominions. Those who 
refused to surrender were outlawed, bishops and priests were expelled, 

147 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

churches closed, persecution began. Deprived of their bishops the 
opponents of union were harassed on all sides, and a number of them 
began to despair, a despondency aggravated by the events of the Time 
of Troubles, during which the Poles occupied even Moscow. The turn- 
ing point, however, occurred in 1620 when Theophanes, the Patriarch 
of Jerusalem (1608-45), on his way to Moscow, secretly ordained seven 
Orthodox bishops in the Ukraine. The Polish government ordered their 
immediate arrest, but unexpectedly a new force came to the rescue 
the Cossacks. These pirates of the steppes, outlaws from Poland and 
Russia, were mostly Orthodox, but originally they showed little respect 
for any religion. They recognized no authority and their camps in the 
no-man's land of the lower reaches of the Dnieper and the Don were 
a menace to Tatars, Turks and Poles alike. Yet when the Orthodox fell 
victim to organized persecution, the Cossacks protected them and 
forced the Poles to make important concessions. Under this unexpected 
patronage the Orthodox reopened their schools and restored their 
Church life. 

The Theological Academy of Kiev became the centre of resistance to 
Rome. It was no longer sufficient to train men for the priesthood; they 
had to be equipped to contend with the Uniates, who had behind them 
the support of the Roman Church with its scholastic achievements, 
financial resources and political influence. The Orthodox in the Ukraine 
felt isolated. Moscow had no understanding of their position, the Greeks 
were fighting for survival and the Kievan theologians could not expect 
help from anywhere. At this critical moment a man of outstanding per- 
sonality and learning became their leader Peter Mogila (1596-1647). 
He was the son of a Moldavian Prince educated in Paris; a Sorbonne 
graduate, he enjoyed every refinement of European culture, but unlike 
many other Orthodox nobles he had remained faithful to his Church and 
offered it his services. In 1633 he was elected Metropolitan of Kiev, and 
during the fourteen years of his episcopate he revised the whole policy of 
his Church in regard to the West. 

Mogila realized that it was impossible to fight against Rome with 
those remnants of learning which the Ukrainian Orthodox had pre- 
served from better days. Men who knew only their own Slavonic 
language and some Greek had no access to contemporary literature, 
most of which was in Latin; he therefore made Latin the language of 
instruction in his Academy and forced the reluctant Orthodox to study 
in the original the writings of their opponents. 

The Councils held in Kiev in 1640 and in Jassiin 1642 supported his 
reforms and approved the service books and catechisms he compiled 

148 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

which contained several adaptations from Latin sources. Mogila trained 
a number of men skilled in dialectics and capable of arguing against the 
Uniates. Those Eastern Christians who had submitted to Rome now 
found themselves at a disadvantage. They were thought of as inferior 
Catholics. Their bishops were not, in spite of promises given, of equal 
standing with the Roman prelates and were not admitted to the 
Senate. The Orthodox despised them as traitors, and whenever Eastern 
Christians gained freedom of action, the Uniates were the first to suffer. 
Peter Mogila bought his success, however, at a price. The training in 
the Latin language, the study of the manuals of Roman and Protestant 
theology, inevitably affected the thinking of his pupils. Their theology 
avoided Western extremes, but lost sight of genuinely Orthodox teach- 
ing. The Ukrainian Orthodox were Latinized and when the Mus- 
covites met them they could feel at once their deviation from the familiar 
tradition, without always being able precisely to formulate the points of 
departure in question. 

The incorporation of the Ukraine into Moscow Tsardom and the Council of 
1666-67 

In 1648 the entire Ukraine rose against Polish rule, Bogdan Khmel- 
nitsky (d. 1669), leader of the rebellion, liberated his people; he 
expelled all Jesuits, Uniates and Jews from the Orthodox lands. Later, 
defeated and hard pressed by the victorious Poles, he appealed for help 
to Tsar Alexey. The National Assembly in Moscow, after long hesita- 
tion, agreed to declare war on Poland. On 8th January 1654 the Rada, 
the assembly of the Cossacks, recognized the Moscow Tsar as 
Sovereign. 

The war between Russia and Poland lasted till 1667, neither side 
being able to secure a decisive victory. This exhausting conflict was 
aggravated by the intervention of the Swedes, the Crimean Tatars and 
the Turks. A peace of compromise was at last concluded; the Ukraine 
was divided, Kiev and its theological Academy handed over to Russia. 
In this way the ecclesiastical isolation of Moscow was brought to an end. 
A school equipped with Latin manuals, directed by scholars familiar 
with the intricacies of Western controversy, was incorporated in the 
Russian Church, which since the thirteenth century had lived without 
contact with Western thought. 

During the war with Poland the Tsar was often away from Moscow; 
he left the government in the hands of the Patriarch who used his power 
for a vigorous campaign against the Old Believers. When in 1657 
Alexey returned to Moscow his relations with the Patriarch were no 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

longer the same. The Tsar lost his previous blind confidence in his 
friend and Nikon, realizing this, tried to restore his authority by a 
dramatic step. He suddenly left Moscow and declared that he would not 
return until the Tsar made peace with him. Alexey refused to open 
negotiations and for nine years the Russian Church had an absentee 
Patriarch who did not govern it. This new crisis was more than a mere 
disagreement between two former friends; it reflected another and even 
deeper cleavage among the leaders of Russia than the one provoked by 
the vexed question of the changes in ritual. 

From the start of his rise to power Nikon had aimed at the establish- 
ment of the independence of the Church from the State. He used the 
same title of Great Lord (Veliki Gosudar) as the Tsar and never failed to 
emphasize the moral ascendency of the sacred ministry over the secular 
power. His determined opponents were the boyars who wanted to take 
control of vast ecclesiastical lands and to deprive the hierarchy of its 
legal independence. 

The devout Tsar at first shared Nikon's aspirations, but later changed 
his mind and sided with the boyars. This was a decisive conflict in 
Russian history, which prepared the ground for the drastic seculariza- 
tion of the country in the eighteenth century. Nikon was defeated 
because his rash policy and ill-advised reforms offended and anta- 
gonized many of his supporters and with his defeat the cause of Church 
independence was lost. 

The struggle between the Tsar and the great Patriarch was brought 
to an end by the Moscow Council of 1666-67. ^ ts convocation was a 
major disaster in the history of the Russian Church. The Council was 
presided over by two Eastern Patriarchs, Paisius of Alexandria 
(1665-85) and Macarius of Antioch (1647-72), specially invited to 
Moscow for the purpose. But the main actor in this ecclesiastical 
gathering was an unscrupulous Greek adventurer, the ex-Uniate 
Bishop Paisius Ligaridis. He had been an admirer of Nikon when the 
Patriarch was in power, but had turned against his benefactor when 
Nikon fell. 

The Council first excommunicated all who opposed the Patriarch's 
reforms and so cut off the Old Believers from the rest of the Russian 
Orthodox. Secondly, it condemned the Patriarch and deprived him of 
his orders. Thirdly, it declared that the Council of the Hundred Chap- 
ters of 1551, much venerated by the Russians as voicing their conviction 
of the superiority of their own Orthodoxy, had no authority on the 
ground that it was composed of ignorant men. The Russian bishops were 
reluctant to sign such a humiliating statement, but they were forced to 

150 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

do so by the Eastern Patriarchs and Paisius Ligaridis. Nikon died in 
1 68 1, having outlived the Tsar Alexey and most of his foes. During his 
years of exile he was treated as a simple monk, but he was buried as a 
Patriarch with all the honours belonging to this office, and as such is 
remembered by the Russian Church. He was a man of great gifts and 
equally great limitations, a born leader who unexpectedly failed, when 
he reached the summit of power, for want of wisdom and moderation. 

Archpriest Avvacum (1620-82} 

The chief opponent to Nikon's reforms was Archpriest Awacum, a 
man of outstanding zeal and courage, a talented writer who personified 
Moscow culture. An acquaintance with him is essential to an under- 
standing of Russian Orthodoxy. Awacum, like Nikon, came from a 
humble home, that of a poor village priest. He was ordained at twenty- 
one, and was immediately involved in a struggle with men of authority. 
He was a fearless reformer who refused to keep silent in the face of 
abuses and injustices. Transferred to Moscow he became known to the 
Tsar and his household and won the admiration of many fervent 
Christians in high positions. His fierce denunciation of Nikon's surrender 
to the Greeks caused him to be sent into exile. He and his family spent 
ten years (1653-63) in Eastern Siberia with a small detachment of 
Cossacks sent to explore that wild region. In his autobiography, com- 
posed in 1673, Awacum, with superb literary skill, described his 
adventures. This book marks an epoch in Russian literature. Written in 
prison, with the purpose of strengthening the partisans of his movement, 
this first autobiography in the Russian language not only reveals its 
author's strength of personality, but also presents a magnificent example 
of seventeenth-century spoken Russian. Awacum discarded the con- 
ventional literary style of contemporary writers and created a master- 
piece which stands far above the rest of the literature of Moscow 
Tsardom. 

Awacum did not spare his opponents; he used crude words, and 
expressions more suited to the market place than to ecclesiastical con- 
troversy, but his sincerity, his fervent faith and his readiness to expose his 
own faults and weaknesses, captivate the reader. 

A central figure in the gallery of persons described by Awacum was 
Pashkov, head of the Siberian expedition. He was a law unto himself, a 
brute used to being feared and obeyed by all his subordinates. Awacum 
was his helpless prisoner, but undismayed by flogging and tortures he 
stood firm against his formidable opponent and finally won the battle. 
Awacum was the stronger of the two personalities. The priest was 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

respected by all members of the expedition, including the wife and son of 
the dreaded commander. Awacum had an iron constitution; even 
when exposed naked to the frost of Siberia he refused to surrender. Left 
alone in charge of the sick and wounded, without arms or protection 
he brought his party safely back to Russia after six months travel 
across unmapped country inhabited by hostile tribes. In summarizing 
this dramatic part of his life he wrote: Tor ten years Pashkov 
tormented me, or maybe I tormented him. I know not which: God 
will decide on the day of Judgment.' 

Awacum's wife was a woman of the same courage and strength. Two 
scenes from his autobiography introduce her. Awacum is describing 
their forced march in Eastern Siberia: 

'The country was barbarous, the natives hostile, so we feared being 
separated from each other, and yet we could not keep pace with the 
horses for we were a hungry and weary pair; and my poor old woman 
tramped along and at last she fell. And I came up to help her, and she, 
poor soul, began to complain to me saying "How long, Archpriest, are 
these sufferings to last?" And I said, "Till death," and she with a sigh 
answered, "So be it, let us be getting on our way." 5 

The second episode was the most decisive in Awacum's life. He relates 
that when after ten years of suffering in the wilderness of Siberia, he at 
last reached the Russian settlements and learned that many men of his 
faction had either perished or yielded to pressure, his courage failed him, 
and he began to think about reconciliation with the Tsar and the 
Patriarch. He turned to his wife for advice and asked her, 'What must I 
do? Am I to speak or to hold my peace?' Honour, prosperity and 
freedom for him and his family depended on this decision; but this was 
not the road chosen by her for her beloved husband. Her reply was 6 I 
and the children give our blessing to continuing the preaching of the 
word of God as heretofore'. 'And,' adds Awacum, 'I bowed to the 
ground before her, and shook myself free trom blindness.' The crown of 
martyrdom awaited him at the end of his long and stormy life, and he 
was sent to win it by his faithful wife. In 1682 Awacum was burnt alive 
with three of his closest companions. They suffered this punishment, as 
the official act runs, because of 'the great blasphemies they uttered in 
regard to the Tsar and his household 5 . 

Awacum's death by fire deeply stirred his followers and many men 
and women among the Old Believers chose to die in their burning homes 
to which they themselves set fire rather than be contaminated by con- 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

formity with the Nikonites, the name they gave to the rest of the Russian 
Orthodox. 

Awacum was a passionate man, extreme in his views and actions, but 
he was a dedicated priest for whom the overwhelming reality of the 
divine presence made the sufferings and privations of earthly existence 
of no account. He was the true spokesman of Moscow Orthodoxy, a 
firm believer that his beloved city was the third Rome. When, at the 
Council of 1666, the Eastern Patriarchs tried to extract his submission 
and pointed out the duty of conformity Awacum replied, 

C O you teachers of Christendom, don't you know that Rome fell 
away a long time ago and lies prostrate, and that Poles and Germans 
fell in the same manner, being the enemies of Christendom to the end. 
Even among you, Orthodoxy has become particoloured, and no wonder, 
if by the violence of the Turkish Mohammed you are impotent today. It 
is you who henceforth should come to us to be taught. By the gift of 
God there existed among us a sacred autocracy, till the time of Nikon 
the apostate. In our Russia, under our pious princes and Tsars, the 
Orthodox faith was pure and undefiled and the Church knew no 
seditions. 5 

Such was Awacum's creed and he was ready to die in witness to the 
special Christian calling which he believed was assigned to Holy 
Russia. Nikon and Awacum were typical representatives of Russian 
culture, a culture rich in devotions and artistic achievements but defi- 
cient in intellectual discipline and self restraint. The Muscovite outlook 
was integral, inspired by faith in its unpolitical Orthodoxy; its convinced 
upholders had an overwhelming sense of their mission but their inter- 
pretation of Orthodoxy was so restricted, and their attachment to their 
own customs so blind, that, in spite of knowing their gifts should be 
shared with the rest of Christendom, they chose to split their own com- 
munity for the sake of uniformity on such matters as the correct way to 
make the sign of the Cross, or the proper direction of Church proces- 
sions. This tragedy of isolation and of the lost sense of proportion occurred 
when Russia was once more entering the society of Christian nations. 
Awacum's contest with Nikon was the end of Moscow's self-sufficiency; 
Russia could no longer remain cut off from the rest of Christendom. 

The Russian Church on the eve of the reforms of Peter the Great (i 668-98} 
The withdrawal of Nikon's opponents, the Old Believers, from partici- 
pation in the life of the Church increased the speed and one-sided- 

153 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

ness of the Westernization of Russia. The merchants, the free peasants 
of the East and North and the Cossacks, the hard core of the Old 
Believers' community, were the most independent and enterprising 
classes, and their loss was calamitous for the main body of the Church at 
a time when the country was exposed to the impact of Western civiliza- 
tion. One of the most urgent needs of the Church was the improvement 
of theological knowledge. Tsar Alexey was aware of this. Among several 
scholars he invited to Moscow from Kiev, the most notable was a 
learned elder, Epiphany Slovenetsky (d. 1676), of the old Kiev school of 
theology. 

Versed in the Greek Fathers, but not in the Latin scholasticism intro- 
duced by Peter Mogila, Epiphany was a genuine scholar, conservative 
but not reactionary. He wanted to raise the educational standard of the 
Muscovite clergy, but was opposed to slavish imitation of the West. 
He was retiring but courageous, and spoke in defence of the Patriarch 
Nikon after his fall, although he had not been one of his friends when 
Nikon was in power. 

Epiphany wished for gradual progress, not drastic change, and was 
warmly supported by Boyar Feodor Mikhailovich Rtishchev (1625-73), 
one of the most attractive characters of seventeenth-century Moscow. 
He and his sister Anna were Christian humanists, patrons of learning, 
founders of charitable institutions, imbued with Christian humility and 
a genuine sense of brotherhood. They granted freedom to all their serfs 
and their charity was boundless. They were both deeply attached to the 
Church and observed all the ritual of daily life evolved by Muscovite 
Orthodoxy; but they were open to new ideas and welcomed Epiphany 
and other Greek and Ukrainian scholars who brought with them the 
intellectual discipline lacking in Russian culture. 

Enlightened conservatism aiming at gradual reform was, however, 
soon superseded by another tendency, introduced by the pupils of 
Peter Mogila, and in particular by another Ukrainian monk, Simeon 
Polotsky (d. 1680). Simeon knew no Greek but was at home with Latin, 
and his eloquence and polished manners were a novelty in Moscow. His 
urbanity made him indispensable at court functions. Tsar Alexey 
entrusted the education of his children to this persuasive cleric who 
taught them Latin and Polish and acquainted them with the manners 
of the West. Simeon looked down on the Muscovite clergy as uncouth 
and boorish. He was himself a man of superficial mind but he had 
acquired a large amount of miscellaneous information and at first 
greatly impressed his unsophisticated hearers; but his Latinized theology 
and his haughty behaviour eventually provoked the suspicion and ani- 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

mosity of the higher clergy of Moscow. His chief opponent was the 
Patriarch., Joakim (1674-90), who was supported by two learned 
Greeks, loanikius and Sophronius Lichudis, sent to Moscow by 
Dositheus, the Patriarch of Jerusalem (1663-1707), a staunch defender 
of Orthodoxy who was alarmed by the spread of Westernized theology 
in Russia. 

The Greek brothers were well trained in anti-Latin polemics, for they 
had been educated in Venice and Padua. As soon as they arrived in 
Moscow, in 1880, they attacked Sylvester Medvedev (d. 1691), who 
had succeeded Simeon Polotsky as the leader of the pro-Latin Ukrain- 
ian party. 

The chief point of contention was the moment of consecration of the 
Eucharistic elements. The Latin tradition identified this moment with 
the words 'Take, eat, this is my body 5 , pronounced by the celebrant. 
Sylvester Medvedev followed this teaching, but his opponents con- 
sidered that the invocation of the Holy Spirit which follows the words 
of institution was the moment of consecration. The Council of 1690 
brought victory to the anti-Latins. Medvedev was condemned and 
several manuals of theology, printed in Kiev, were declared heretical 
and withdrawn from circulation. 

The Muscovite clergy had only a short time to enjoy their victory. 
The new Tsar, Peter, was not interested in gradual change but was 
determined to make a European nation of Russia, at a single stroke. 

Peter the Great (1682-1725) and the abolition of the Moscow Patriarchate 
Peter was the thirteenth child of Tsar Alexey, and at his birth in 1672 
no one could have foreseen that he would ascend the throne and alter 
the course of Russian history. 

His father was married twice. The feuds of the Miloslavskys and the 
Narishkins, the families of the two wives, interfered with Peter's educa- 
tion and distorted his character. He was four years old at his father's 
death; ten when his eldest half-brother, Tsar Feodor II (1676-82), died 
childless after a short and promising reign. His other half-brother, 
Ivan, was a passive, sickly youth, and Peter, a vigorous and healthy 
child, was hastily proclaimed Tsar by the partisans of the Narishkin 
family. 

Sophia, Peter's masterful half-sister, organized a counter plot. Her 
armed supporters invaded the Kremlin and proclaimed Ivan and Peter 
as co-rulers. In this palace revolution several of Peter's uncles and other 
relatives were savagely butchered before his eyes and this scene of 
horror was never erased from his mind. From that fatal day Peter 

155 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

became the enemy of Moscow and an irreconcilable opponent of its 
way of life. 

For the next seven years the country's government remained in 
Sophia's firm hands. This ambitious princess kept Peter, the nominal 
Tsar, away from the capital and deliberately neglected his education, 
Alexey saw that his eldest children were carefully brought up. Feodor 
spoke Latin fluently and was refined in his manners, but Peter grew up 
seif-willed and undisciplined, unable even to spell, but with a strong 
bent for mechanical and practical things, usually overlooked in 
Muscovite Russia. One of his passions was for sailing, a sport previously 
unknown in Russia, which he learned from foreign craftsmen settled in 
Moscow. In 1689 Peter had a decisive clash with his sister. He forced 
Sophia to retire to a convent. His main ambition was to secure for his 
country an outlet to the sea, and after twenty-one years of hard fighting 
against Sweden (1700-21), he gained control of the Baltic, and made 
Russia a first-class military power. 

During these strenuous years under the constant menace of foreign 
invasion, Peter undertook far-reaching internal reforms. He substituted 
for the paternal rule of the Moscow Tsars a centralized and absolutist 
monarchy on the Western model. The administration was handed over 
to a bureaucracy, copied from Sweden. The army was properly trained 
and armed, industry and commerce encouraged and education im- 
proved. These changes, accompanied by heavy taxation and other 
oppressive measures arising from firmer state control, provoked strong 
discontent. Conservatives, who resented the privileges granted to 
foreigners and disliked Western customs, expected the Church to voice 
their grievances. Peter decided to deprive the Church of its freedom 
and so prevent its being the mouthpiece of the Russian people. It was a 
difficult task, for although the Church was greatly weakened by the 
Old Believers' schism, it remained the strongest bond the Russian 
deople knew, and was more real to them than state or nation. 

It took Peter twenty-one years of careful manoeuvring and planning 
to defeat the Church. In 1700, after the death of the Patriarch Adrian, 
one of Peter's favourites, Stefan Yavorsky (1658-1722), was appointed 
guardian of the vacant Patriarchal throne. During the next twenty 
years Peter filled the episcopal seats with men of his own choice, mostly 
Ukrainians, who were unpopular in the Muscovite dioceses and 
dependent therefore on the Tsar's favour. The most subservient and the 
most learned was Bishop Feofan Prokopovich (1681-1738). He was well 
versed in Western Theology and had Protestant leanings. He favoured 
secular control of Church administration as it existed in Lutheran 

156 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

countries. Peter wanted to introduce this into Russia. Under his super- 
vision Feofan composed the Ecclesiastical Regulations published in 1721, 
giving a new and subordinate position to the Church. In this document 
the old forms of ecclesiastical government were ridiculed and attacked, 
the Muscovite customs were criticized and the advantages of the new 
system highly praised. The central point of this legislation was the 
abolition of the Patriarchate and its replacement by a permanent council 
of clergy called the Holy Governing Synod. 

Various reasons for this drastic change were presented. One was the 
alleged greater impartiality and efficiency of a collegiate organ as com* 
pared with the rule of a singleman; another was the dangerous idea of the 
great importance of the Patriarch entertained by 'ignorant people' who 
thought him equal to the Tsar. The final argument was that the 
Emperor, having absolute power, could not tolerate rivals who, like the 
Bishop of Rome, or some of the Byzantine Patriarchs, might have the 
audacity to claim authority over the secular ruler. In order to eradicate 
such misconceptions a collegiate body was instituted composed of 
persons chosen by the Tsar and obedient to him. The Synod consisted 
of a president, two vice-presidents and eight other members who were 
either bishops, monks or married priests. Each member, including the 
president, had one vote and all resolutions had to be approved by a 
majority. 

The Synod had no precedent in the history of the Orthodox Church, 
being not a representative body, as every member was nominated by the 
Tsar and could be dismissed by him. Every one of them had to take a 
special oath and declare C I acknowledge the Monarch of all Russia to 
be the final judge of this college 5 . The total dependence on the Emperor 
was still further emphasized by the appointment of a secular official 
called the Procurator of the Synod. "This watchful eye' of the Monarch 
was not a member of the Synod and he had no vote, but he occupied a 
key position for he alone was responsible for the agenda of the sessions 
and he submitted decisions to the Emperor for his signature. Only 
resolutions thus approved were acted on. If one adds to the functions of 
the Procurator his right to suggest to the Sovereign suitable candidates 
for the Synod one realizes the supreme importance of these 
officials. 

The first members of the Synod were all Ukrainians. The Muscovite 
bishops, though excluded, were required individually to sign a docu- 
ment approving the Synod, on pain of expulsion from their dioceses. 
The more stubborn, like Ignaty, Bishop of Tambov, and Isaiah, 
Metropolitan of Nizhni-Novgorod, were by then already removed. The 

157 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

rest gave their unwilling approbation. In 1723 the Eastern Patriarchs, 
depending on Peter's favour, also recognized the strange college as 
'their beloved brother in Christ 9 . 

There were several reasons for the failure of the Russian hierarchs 
to avoid having this grotesque caricature of ecclesiastical government 
imposed on them. The main one was, of course, the withdrawal of the 
Old Believers. The other was that the Orthodox would have stood firm 
in defence of their faith and resisted any attempt to alter their sacra- 
mental tradition, but Peter did not touch these sides of Church life. He 
attacked the weakest feature of the Russian Church its constitution. 
Orthodox Canon law prescribes a carefully designed system of eccle- 
siastical administration. Bishops and clergy are to be elected. Bishops 
must convoke diocesan councils and be consulted regularly by the senior 
hierarch. These regulations safeguarding the freedom and authority of 
the Church had never been observed in Russia. The bishops were few 
(up to the eighteenth century only sixteen), distances were enormous 
and councils held only in exceptional circumstances. These defects were 
mitigated by the family spirit prevalent in pre-Petrine Russia. Although 
the rights of the bishops and the Patriarch were never clearly defined 
and the Tsar had a good deal to say in their election, their spiritual 
authority was universally recognized and the Tsars were always the 
first to set an example of filial obedience to the Patriarchs. The latter 
had the customary right to remind the sovereigns of their Christian 
duties of mercy and forgiveness whenever measures undertaken by the 
government seemed too harsh or unjust to Christian people.* One 
symbol of the Tsar's acceptance of authority of the Church was the 
Palm Sunday procession: on that day the Patriarch, representing Christ,, 
rode through the streets of the capital on an ass whilst the Tsar humbly 
led the animal. 

Peter ended this moral ascendancy of the Church. He silenced the 
bishops, abolished the Patriarchate, suppressed parochial freedom and 
paralysed the Church. The Moscow Tsars had always been such faithful 
and devout members of the Church that no provision had been made to 
protect it from their unlawful interference. The majority of Russians 
hoped and prayed that the next monarch would deliver the Church 
from bondage. No call to organized opposition was sounded and as a 
result, for more than two hundred years, the Russian Church lost the 
right to speak freely on any major moral or religious issue. 

Peter himself was the first to suffer the evil consequences of his policy. 
In 1718 he clashed with his son and heir, Alexey, who fled abroad. The 

* This right of intervention was called Pechalovanie. 

158 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

young man was persuaded to return home by his father's word that no 
punishment would be inflicted upon him. Peter failed to keep his 
promise and his son perished under torture during interrogation. The 
Tsar was obviously tormented by his conscience and before the fatal 
act was committed he asked the leading bishops to advise him. In the 
old days the Patriarch would have voiced the Christian mind of the 
nation. Now the bishops, nominees of the Tsar, were afraid to interfere, 
although they did mention the virtue of forgiveness in their non- 
committal reply. Peter's action upset the lawful succession to the throne 
and plunged the country into the turmoil of palace revolutions which 
convulsed Russia for the whole century. 

But neither Peter nor his agents, the Procurators of the Synod, were 
able to alienate Russians from the Church who remained faithful to 
their forefathers' tradition. The Orthodox never accepted the idea that 
the Emperors, or anybody else, had the right to control the Church of 
God. The Church was much older than the Empire, it might be tem- 
porarily subdued, but not substantially altered or destroyed. The 
Empire collapsed in 19175 but the Church survived the catastrophe 
made inevitable by Peter's suppression of the voice of free Christian 
opinion. 

The Nonjurors and the Orthodox Church 

During Peter's reign a curious episode in the relations between Eastern 
and Western Christians occurred, an attempt at corporate reunion 
between them made by the Nonjurors. These learned and conscientious 
divines of the Anglican Church, who refused to break their oath of 
allegiance to the Stuarts, encouraged by Peter, sent three letters to the 
Patriarch of Constantinople stating the conditions of reunion acceptable 
to them and received two replies. The correspondence lasted from 1716 
to 1725. Nothing came of this first attempt at reunion between the 
Anglicans and the Orthodox, for the Nonjurors wanted the Eastern 
Christian to alter several liturgical customs, notably the direct invoca- 
tion of the saints, the veneration of ikons and the adoration of the 
Eucharistic elements. Above all, they objected to the special devotion 
shown to the Mother of God. The Eastern bishops advised the Non- 
jurors to give up their Calvinistic-Lutheran heresy and this suggestion 
offended the English divines who were highly critical of the continental 
Protestants. In the eighteenth century neither side was willing to listen 
to criticisms and suggestions yet this exchange of letters began discus- 
sions which became more fruitful in the course of the next two 
centuries. 

159 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The St Petersburg Empire and the Russian Church in the eighteenth century 
St Petersburg, the new capital of Russia, was a strange city, neither 
Russian nor European, a city of beauty and grandeur but with a feeling 
of doom and unreality hanging over it. Equally bizarre was the Empire 
which replaced the old Moscow Tsardom. Socially it was sharply 
divided from the beginning until its tragic end. The ruling class was 
Westernized, wore European dress, preferred to speak foreign languages 
and treated Paris as their metropolis. They sought wisdom and instruc- 
tion at German universities and read French books and newspapers to 
keep in touch with the latest political thought. They imitated Europe 
with ardour in the conviction that Western philosophy and social 
science offered a panacea for all defects and failures, including those 
affecting their national life. 

Peter rebuilt Russia in accordance with Western plans. Two centuries 
after him Vladimir Ulianov-Lenin (1870-1924), another admirer of 
European wisdom, blew up the Empire when attempting to complete 
the work started by the revolutionary Tsar. Both of them represented 
the minority of the Russians. The rest of the nation, especially the 
peasants, considered the West an enemy and an oppressor, for the 
Empire had extended the burden of serfdom which became especially 
degrading in the second half of the eighteenth century, and was 
abolished only in 1861, 

After Peter's death in 1725 the Empire seemed very insecure. Neither 
Russian nor foreign observers believed it would survive. Several attempts 
were made to reverse the process of Westernization and to restore 
Moscow to its previous place of honour. But these efforts produced no 
permanent results. The contact with Europe, secured at a high price, 
was too valuable to be given up and it was not only kept but deepened. 
The eighteenth century was a turbulent period in Russian history. 
The nation was stirred by its attempts to adjust itself to new conditions. 
The government was mostly in the hands of incompetent and ignorant 
adventurers, many of foreign origin, whilst the throne was occupied by 
women and children who had neither moral nor legal right to this 
exalted position. Peter, in his desire to assert his absolutist claims, had 
decreed that the reigning sovereign was alone responsible for the choice 
of a successor. He himself failed to make use of this doubtful privilege, 
but by this law he destroyed all semblance of legality or stability in the 
Russian succession. 

The state of the Russian Church was deplorable. The Synod was 
exposed to all the intrigues and vicissitudes of court revolutions. The 
bishops were promoted or degraded on grounds which had nothing to 

1 60 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

do with religion. The parish clergy were utterly dependent on the 
arbitrary decisions of bishops recruited among the monks, mostly 
newcomers from the Ukraine. New theological schools for the training 
of the clergy slavishly followed Western patterns. The textbooks were 
in Latin and so was the teaching. 

This state of oppression reached its climax during the long reign of 
Catherine II (1762-96). This gifted and ambitious German woman 
who usurped the Russian throne regarded herself as the enlightened 
and benevolent ruler of a barbaric people. She was responsible for the 
spread of the most inhuman forms of serfdom. She professed the scep- 
tical rationalism of Voltaire. The Orthodox Church was for her con- 
taminated by ignorance and superstition. Among the Procurators of the 
Synod she appointed were free thinkers and men openly hostile to 
Christianity. One of her actions was to sequestrate lands belonging to 
the Church and drastically to reduce a number of religious houses. 
These measures met with resolute protest from a few of the more 
independent bishops. Their leader was Arseny Matsievich, Metro- 
politan of Rostov, starved to death in 1772 by order of the Empress for 
his criticisms of her policy. Other bishops were imprisoned or unfrocked. 

During Catherine's reign St Petersburg blossomed in all its extrava- 
gant beauty; the Empress and her entourage followed the latest Paris 
fashions and copied the great capitals of Europe; but this refinement 
and luxury were purchased by the slave labour of Russian peasants, 
who made unsuccessful but formidable attempts to get rid of foreign 
rule under the Cossack, Pugachev. For a short while the rebels controlled 
most of the Eastern provinces (1773-75). 

Catherine was fortunate in securing the services of several men of 
exceptional ability. Among her generals the greatest was Alexander 
Suvorov (d. 1800). In the course of two wars against the Turks, the 
Russians for the first time penetrated deep into the Balkans, in 1768-74 
and again in 1787-92. The peace treaty concluded at Kuchuk Kainarjie 
in 1774 established Russian control over the Black Sea and granted 
Russian monarchs the right to protect the Orthodox population in 
the Ottoman Empire. This was a turning point in the history of the 
enslaved Eastern Christians whose hopes of liberation ceased to be an 
unrealizable dream. 

The three partitions of Poland in which Catherine unwillingly took 
part (1772, 1793 and 1795) brought into the Empire another large 
section of the Orthodox Ukrainians and White Russians, but it also 
added a territory inhabited by Roman Catholic Poles and by a con- 
siderable number of Jews. The Russian Empire was greatly enlarged, 

T, 161 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

but as it grew its political, social and religious conditions also became 
more complex. 

In the second half of the eighteenth century the upper classes of 
Russia began to desert their Church in search of other ways of life, some 
of them emancipated from Christian faith and morals altogether. Some 
regarded themselves as Voltaire's disciples; others joined the Free- 
masons. These deserters were few at first, but they all belonged to the 
aristocracy and their outlook gradually penetrated to the lower classes. 

The inrush of new ideas, closer contact with the West, the subju- 
gation of the Church to bureaucratic control, had not only negative, 
but also positive results for Russian Christianity. The closing of many 
monasteries relieved the Church of the burden of men and women 
without genuine religious vocation; acquaintance with Christian litera- 
ture of the West introduced Russians to some of the great works of 
Christian piety; mixing with Balkan Orthodox, unrestricted by the St 
Petersburg bureaucracy, stimulated the revival of Russian monasticism. 

St Tikhon ofadonsk and Paisy Velichkovsky 

Two Church leaders of that period deserve special mention: St Tikhon 
of Zadonsk (1724-83) and Paisy Velichkovsky (1722-94). St Tikhon 
was born in the family of a poverty-stricken Church cantor. He was 
sent to one of the newly-opened seminaries in which the sons of the 
Russian clergy were drilled in Latin scholasticism. Endowed with a 
lively mind and a vivid imagination, he progressed rapidly in his 
studies. He was ordained, took monastic vows, and was appointed 
teacher of theology (Plate 63). 

In 1763, at the early age of thirty-nine, he became Bishop of 
Voronezh. The city was a frontier town at that period, facing the open 
steppes inhabited by the Cossacks. The unruly people, the undisciplined 
clergy, the general atmosphere of unrest and violence which he en- 
countered there taxed his health. In 1767 he gave up ecclesiastical 
administration for which he was ill-suited and withdrew to a small 
monastery in Zadonsk. For the next sixteen years he lived there in 
seclusion and poverty as a simple monk. This flight from the world and 
its conflicts did not mean severing himself from suffering mankind. On 
the contrary, St Tikhon dedicated himself to the service of all in need of 
help and advice. He maintained a large correspondence and wrote 
several books of devotion in which he freely incorporated the elements 
of Western Christianity which he found congenial to Russian Ortho- 
doxy. His love, humility and patience won him the deep attachment of 
many disciples and admirers. Even during his lifetime he was venerated 

162 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

as a holy man, and he was canonized by the Russian Church in 1861. 

Father Zosima of The Brothers Karamazov, and still more Bishop 
Tikhon in The Possessed,* give us Dostoevsky's portrait of this Russian 
saint and prove the impact St Tikhon had upon the greatest of 
Russian novelists. 

Paisy Velichkovsky was born in the Ukraine in 1722. He entered the 
theological Academy of Kiev, but he disliked its scholasticism and 
longed for the Orthodox patristic tradition. He left Kiev and became a 
monk on Mount Athos, the home of unpolluted Orthodoxy. 

There he started his great work of translating into Russian the Greek 
classics on asceticism and contemplation. He collected a number of 
ancient manuscripts and took them to Moldavia where, in 1779, he 
was elected Abbot of Niamez Monastery. There, until the end of his 
life, he worked day and night on translations, surrounded by an increas- 
ing number of faithful disciples. He made the experience of the great 
Eastern mystics available to the Russian Church. Many of these 
writings had never been translated before, others could only be found in 
rare ancient manuscripts. One of his books called Dobrotolubie, contain- 
ing extracts from the writings of the Eastern Fathers on prayer, acquired 
especially wide popularity, f It became a manual of instruction in the 
art of Christian living and helped many Russians to lead a better 
Christian life. 

Paisy himself was an experienced spiritual director, and revived the 
true monastic tradition of the Orthodox Church which had fallen into 
decay in many parts of the Eastern world in the eighteenth century. He 
recalled the Orthodox to the sources of their tradition. He taught 
patristic Greek to his pupils and advised them to read the Fathers of 
Eastern Orthodoxy instead of studying the writings of the Roman 
Catholic and Protestant controversalists. 

The eighteenth century ended in Russia with the short and tragic 
reign of Paul I (1796-1801). He was a maniac and visionary, obsessed 
by the desire to revive the sacred kingship profaned by the rationalist 
monarchs of his time, including his own mother, Catherine II. 

In his deranged mind the ideal of an Orthodox Empire was combined 
with Prussian militarism and medieval knighthood. He invited the 
Knights of Malta to settle in Russia and he accepted the title of their 
Grand Master. He made a statute describing himself as head of the 
Church. It was a meaningless claim, for it contradicted Orthodox 

* The chapter describing Bishop Tikhon is however usually omitted from the text of the 
novel. 

f An English abbreviated translation was published in 1951. See Writings from Philokalia 
translated by E. Kadlonbovsky and G. Palmer (London, Faber & Faber, 1951). 

163 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

teaching and, besides, the Russian Church was only one member of the 
community of Eastern Christians. Nevertheless this assertion gave rise to 
the misconception that the Russians professed Caesaro-papism. 

In reality Paul Fs declaration was the arbitrary act of an irresponsible 
ruler and was repudiated by the Russian Church as soon as it was able 
to express its true opinion at the freely elected Council in 1917. 

Western ascendancy over the Christian East 

The sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were the dark 
period in the history of the Christian East. Political oppression, poverty 
and ignorance undermined the strength of this community. It was also 
the time of Western ascendancy when both the Roman Catholics and 
the Protestants took for granted their superiority over the Byzantine 
and Oriental Churches. 

The unequal contest between the Christian East and the West went 
on both in Europe and Asia; one of its battlegrounds was the remote 
outpost of Eastern Christendom, the Orthodox Church of the Malabar 
coast in South India. 

The Church of St Thomas in South India 

The Portuguese discovered the existence of St Thomas Christians after 
Vasco da Gama landed near Calicut on i4th May 1498. The Christian 
community in India consisted of some 30,000 families at that time and 
was governed by the Metropolitan, Mar Yahballaha, assisted by three 
suffragan bishops, Mar Denha, Mar Jacob and Mar Johanes, all 
natives of Mesopotamia and representing the Nestorian version of 
Oriental Christianity. 

The arrival of the Portuguese coincided with Moslem incursions into 
South India. In 1502 the Indian Christians asked Vasco da Gama to 
take them under his protection. This was a political move and the 
Orthodox did not expect that their alliance with the Portuguese would 
affect their church life and at first it did not. The newcomers made no 
attempt to interfere with the affairs of the Malabar Christians; St 
Francis Xavier, the great missionary of that epoch (1506-52), who spent 
three years in South India, and baptized several thousand pagans, did 
not proselytize among the Orthodox and maintained friendly relations 
with them. He even recommended to Portuguese King John III (the 
Pious, 1521-57), one of the bishops, Mar Jacob, "as a virtuous and 
saintly old man, who has well served God and Your Majesty for 
forty-five years'. 

These amicable relations began to deterioriate in the second part of 

164 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

the sixteenth century. As early as 1455 Pope Callistus III (1455-68) had 
granted to the Portuguese jurisdiction over the whole of Africa and 
Southern Asia. For some time this privilege was nominal, but with the 
rapid growth of their overseas possessions, the Portuguese started to 
make practical use of it. As far as the Indian Church was concerned this 
implied that the King of Portugal had the right to nominate its bishops 
and supervise its administration. The Indian Orthodox were totally 
ignorant of the Papal claims to universal jurisdiction. However, being 
used to acknowledging the authority of the Nestorian Patriarch of 
Babylon, they had no difficulty in transferring their allegiance to the 
even more remote figure of the Pope. But things began to look different 
when the Portuguese started to Latinize their worship and alter their 
ancient traditions. These were strikingly different from the Western 
ways, for they incorporated many Hindu customs; the priesthood, for 
instance, was a privilege open only to the sons of certain families; much 
teaching was oral; the services were celebrated in Syriac, like the 
Sanskrit of the Hindus, a sacred but incomprehensible language. All 
the bishops were foreigners who came from Mesopotamia and they 
lived like Hindu saints, in isolation, never mixing with their flock. 
Portuguese attempts to bring these unusual Christians into line with 
their own ecclesiastical policy provoked many conflicts, which came to a 
head at the end of the sixteenth century. 

In 1595 Alexis de Menez, as Portuguese Archbishop of Goa, was 
entrusted by Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605) with the task of disen- 
tangling the confused situation. He spent several months visiting the 
scattered communities of the Malabar Christians, travelling down 
crocodile infested rivers and crossing hills in tropical jungle. He im- 
pressed the Orthodox with his zeal and courage and he managed to 
persuade clergy and laity to merge their Church with that of Rome. On 
2 1 st June 1599 a synod was held at Diamper. Eight hundred and thir- 
teen delegates representing this ancient Church made a solemn con- 
fession of faith as prescribed by the Council of Trent (1565): they 
acknowledged Papal supremacy, accepted the compulsory celibacy of 
their clergy and agreed to alter the ritual of their worship. 

This complete victory was partly the result of a display of Portuguese 
military power, for the Viceroy sent a detachment of troops to Diamper 
to watch over the council's proceedings. This seeming triumph of the 
Latins was accompanied by the wholesale burning of Orthodox service 
books and other ecclesiastical documents. This destruction was so 
thorough that hardly any reliable information is available today about 
the life and teaching of the Indian Church prior to the sixteenth century. 

165 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The next events were typical of Eastern people who visibly yield 
under strong external pressure, but are capable of long and stubborn 
inward resistance. The Latinization of their Church was strongly 
resented by the St Thomas Christians, but it took them more than half a 
century to reassert their independence. Rebellion flared up in 1653. 
Its immediate cause was the arrest and murder by the Portuguese of 
Bishop Ahatalla, who had come secretly to India from Babylon at the 
invitation of Rome's adversaries. When the news of his assassination 
reached the Orthodox their leaders met at Mattancherry and held a 
synod in the vicinity of the much revered ancient bent (cooneri) cross. All 
the delegates solemnly pledged themselves to return to their old tradi- 
tion and to repudiate their submission to Rome. As a visible token of 
their unanimous determination they all took hold of the ropes tied to the 
cross and repeated together their oath to defend their religious freedom. 

A confused struggle between the Portuguese and the Indians followed 
this act of defiance; the rebels had no bishop and were obliged to resort 
to irregular ordinations by presbyters, in order to supply their parishes 
with clergy. This action gave the Jesuits the chance to persuade many of 
the Indians to resume obedience to Rome; while others continued their 
resistance. 

In 1663 the Dutch expelled the Portuguese from Malabar, which 
allowed the Orthodox to regain their lost contacts with other Eastern 
Christians. Mar Gregorious, a Syrian bishop, arrived in 1665 and 
restored the Apostolic ministry among the Indians by reordaining their 
clergy. He represented, however, not the Nestorian, but the Jacobite 
tradition of Oriental Christianity, and since his time the St Thomas 
Christians have acknowledged the Syrian Patriarchs of Horns as their 
ecclesiastic superior. 

Those Indians who returned to Rome have formed a separate com- 
munity, known today as Syro-Romans. Their worship and teaching are 
Latinized, but they have retained certain features which keep them 
apart from the ordinary Latins of their country. 

Thus the Orthodox Christians of South India, who had preserved 
their faith and unity in the midst of Hinduism for sixteen hundred 
years, became divided through meeting the Christian West. Their 
community was split into two halves, and the gulf between them is as 
unbridgeable today as it was in the seventeenth century. 

The Church of Ethiopia 

The story of the contact between Rome and the Ethiopian Christians is 

in some ways similar. The Negus David (1505-40) maintained a corres- 

166 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

pondence with King John III of Portugal, and with several Popes. At 
first the Latins seemed natural allies against the Moslems. In 1603 a 
Jesuit, Pedro Paez, converted the Negus Za Donghel to Rome. The 
King was murdered the next year, but his successor, Susneyos, in 1623, 
declared Roman Catholicism the religion of Ethiopia, In 1626 Alfonso 
Mendez arrived from Rome with the title of Patriarch of Ethiopia, and 
began drastic reforms. A regular persecution of those who opposed 
these Western innovations was pursued with great vigour. This policy 
made the Roman Church so unpopular in Ethiopia that the next Negus, 
Fasilidas, expelled the Jesuits and repudiated the union with Rome. 
This time no schism resulted for the Ethiopians unanimously returned 
to their traditional forms of Church life. Up to the Italian invasion in 
1936 their mountain realm remained closed to all outside influences. 
Some of its customs, such as circumcision and the use of sacred dances 
in worship (Plate 62), link the Ethiopian Church to Old Testament 
religion more closely than any other branch of Christianity. 

The Nestorian Church of the East 

No other Christian community had such ups and downs in its history as 
the Nestorian Church of the Persian Empire. In the fourteenth century 
its outposts in Central Asia, Turkestan and Persia were annihilated in 
the massacres which accompanied Tamerlane's campaigns. Only a 
small remnant survived in Mesopotamia and in the wild mountains of 
Kurdistan. Five dioceses were left out of more than two hundred which 
had existed in the previous centuries. The Patriarchs moved to Mosul. 
Ecclesiastical administration degenerated into a system of hereditary 
appointments; the Patriarch selected one of his relations, usually a 
nephew, as guardian of the throne, Natar Curaga, who succeeded him in 
the religious and secular control over all Nestorians. 

In 1552 this order was upset by a conflict between the Abbot Sulaka 
and Shiman Dinkha, the Natar Curaga of the late Patriarch, Shimanbar 
Mama. The Nestorians of the plain the communities of Mosul and 
Nisibis supported Abbot Sulaka as their candidate for the Patriarchate 
the Nestorians of Kurdistan, Shiman Dinkha. The latter happened to 
be the only bishop among the Nestorians at that time, so he assumed the 
title of Patriarch and seized control of Church property. His opponents 
appealed to Rome to consecrate Abbot Sulaka. The Pope, Julius III 
(1550-55), welcomed this unexpected request; Sulaka was consecrated 
and received the title of Patriarch of the Chaldeans, as the Nestorians 
reconciled to Rome are still called. 

Sulaka consecrated five other bishops when he returned to Mosul 

167 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and since then the Nestorian community has been divided between the 
Church of the Plain and the Church of the Mountains. 

Both communities adhered at first to the Natar Curaga system and 
for some time there was little difference between them; switches in 
allegiance from one to the other were common during the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries. Some Nestorian bishops submitted to Rome; 
some of the Chaldeans returned to their Mother Church. At last the 
Roman authorities began training their clergy in the Western tradition 
and this stabilized the Chaldean Church as a body with Latinized 
ritual and outlook. In 1778 the Christians of the Plain made their final 
submission to Rome, and the Nestorian Church of the East was irrepar- 
ably split. The Chaldeans still have their centre in Baghdad, but the 
Nestorians who used to have their stronghold in the mountains of 
Kurdistan were massacred by the Mohammedans at the end of 
World War I, and their remnants dispersed over Lebanon and 
Palestine. 

The Church of the Armenians 

The strongest resistance to the Islamic invaders was made by the 

Armenians. This valiant nation has fought, undismayed, against its 

many invaders and found in its Church the mainstay of its national 

independence. 

The Armenians were overrun by the Saracens in the ninth century. 
Etchmiadzin, their ecclesiastical capital, was destroyed, and for 
five hundred and forty years the Catholicos had no fixed residence 
(901-1441). 

During that troubled time many Armenians migrated to the West 
and in the eleventh century they founded the Kingdom of Little 
Armenia in Cilicia (1080-1395). It was the period of the Crusades and 
the Armenians were valuable allies to the Western knights. King Lavan 
II (1185-1219) opened negotiations with the Crusaders convinced that 
nothing short of close co-operation among all Christians in the Near East 
could save the latter from defeat. In 1 199 he recognized the Pope as his 
Sovereign and was crowned by the papal legate. The majority of the 
Armenians were unwilling to become Latins and the King was there- 
fore anointed by his own bishop too in conformity with the Orthodox 
ritual. He persuaded the papal legate, however, to accept the submis- 
sion of twelve bishops as a token of the nation's incorporation in 
Western Christendom. This first act of union had little practical effect. 
At the end of the thirteenth century the need for greater military 
assistance from the West induced King Hetoom II (1289-1305) to 

1 68 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

adopt a more accommodating policy towards the Latins. In 1307 a 
synod at Sis sanctioned various changes in worship and teaching in 
compliance with papal requests. These concessions proved to be of no 
real value, for the Crusaders' days were numbered, and the Armenians, 
abandoned by the West, lost their political independence in 1375 but 
regained their religious freedom. Their link with the Latins has left 
however a permanent mark on their ritual. For example, Armenian 
bishops wear Western mitres and carry pastoral staffs after the Latin 
model. 

The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were a dark period in Armenian 
history. Moslem oppression, aggravated by internal disorders, decreased 
their opportunities but not their desire for learning. This tenacious 
people never gave up hope of regaining independence and were deter- 
mined to preserve their cultural inheritance. The Catholicos, Michael 
of Sebastia (1545-76), started a printing press in the Armenian lan- 
guage. He sent one of his agents, Abgar of Tokat, to Italy and, in 1565, 
the first Armenian book was published in Venice. Other printing houses 
later appeared in Rome, Constantinople, Amsterdam and Etchmiadzin. 
This longing for education was the source of acute conflict in Constanti- 
nople, where an influential and prosperous colony of Armenians had 
settled. Roman emissaries used both force and persuasion to win these 
Armenians over to their side by promising them educational facilities 
and political protection. The French Ambassador, Marquis Feriol, 
abducted the Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople, Avedic Tokat, to 
France, where he was tried and condemned by the Inquisition in 



In spite of these acts of violence, the Armenians, either scattered all 
over Europe and Asia or persecuted in their own country, were forced 
to look to the West to maintain their learning and cultural tradition. 
One of these scholars, Mikhitar, after many wanderings, found refuge 
on the little island of San Lazaro, near Venice, and there in 1717 he 
started a community of learned monks which has remained an im- 
portant cultural centre for Armenians. 

One condition which was imposed upon Mikhitar was submission to 
Rome. But he held aloof from the campaign of conversion and a tradi- 
tion of impartial scholarship has been retained by the religious com- 
munity he founded. 

The Armenians, like other Oriental Christians, lost their unity as the 
result of Roman and Protestant propaganda. Three million remained 
Orthodox, and one hundred thousand are divided between the Roman 
and Protestant confessions. 

169 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The Coptic Church 

The National Church of Egypt, strongest opponent of the Chalce- 
donian Council, broke away from, the Byzantine Orthodox in the sixth 
century. At first it was favoured by the Moslems, but conditions 
gradually deteriorated and it was reduced to a minority group called 
The Copts by their Islamic masters. 

In 1594 the Jesuits made a determined attempt to persuade the Copts 
to submit to Rome: this failed. In 1630 a French priest, Father Agathen- 
gelo of Vendome, worked among the Copts, but his zeal and eloquence 
could make no converts. The Uniate Copts date only from the nine- 
teenth century and number forty thousand, as against two and a half 
million of the Orthodox Copts. 

The Jacobites 

Roman propaganda had far greater success with another group of 
anti-Chalcedonians, the Jacobites of Syria and Palestine. The scattered 
Jacobites, harassed by the Mohammedans, needed financial help and pro- 
tection. This was willingly offered to them by Western Powers, especially 
by France, on condition of their submission to the papacy. In 1701 
Andrew Akhidian, a supporter of union with Rome, became bishop of 
Aleppo. His designs became known to his flock and his attempts to 
effect reconciliation led to riots. His supporters among the clergy were 
thrown into prison by the Turkish authorities and for seventy-seven 
years no one dared reopen negotiations with Rome. 

In 1783 the Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch nominated as his successor 
Mar Michael Yarweh, Archbishop of Aleppo, who submitted to Rome. 
The Orthodox expelled him with the help of the Turks and Yarweh 
fled to Lebanon. He started the line of Syrian Patriarchs reconciled to 
the papacy. Thus the Jacobites were split, in the eighteenth century, 
into two groups of almost equal numbers (about 80,000 at present). 

Such is the story of the impact of the Christian West upon the Oriental 
Christians. Many of them hoped to find friendship and much-needed 
assistance in the West. They recognized the West as better equipped 
and more enlightened, and some were ready to accept the Roman 
leadership in exchange for improved education and greater order and 
efficiency in their own Church life. The price of such submission was 
invariably the Latinization of their rites, the abandonment of their 
ancient traditions and acceptance of Latin clergy as supervisors. As a 
result, only a minority became Uniates; the majority remained faithful 
to their own community, although it had morally and intellectually 
deteriorated under Mohammedan oppression, Bribery, intrigue and 

170 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

spiritual isolation sapped the vitality of the Oriental Christians; but 
conversion to the West was not an antidote against these evils, for both 
Rome and Protestantism looked on the Christian East as inferior and 
degraded, to be redeemed only by absorption. Western recognition of 
the value of the Christian East came only in the twentieth century. 

Balkan Christians in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries 
The state of the Eastern churches was more hopeful in the Balkans than 
in the rest of the Ottoman Empire, for Balkan Christians had the advan- 
tage of being a majority in their own lands, whilst the Oriental 
Christians were minorities scattered among Mohammedans. The Balkan 
Christians lived nearer to the free Christian countries and an occasional 
breath of fresh air reached them, which was denied to the peoples of 
Asia. 

The end of the seventeenth century displayed unmistakable signs of 
Turkish decline. In 1688 the Hapsburgs captured Belgrade and Vidin, 
and were enthusiastically welcomed as liberators by the Serbs. This 
success was short-lived, however. In 1690 the Turks drove the Austrians 
out of Serbia and Bulgaria. This defeat meant a national catastrophe to 
the Serbs, who, led by their Patriarch, Arsenie III, left their homeland 
in large numbers and fled to Banat with the retreating Austrians 
(1691). The lands abandoned by the Serbs were partially occupied by 
the Arnauts of Albania, which upset national equilibrium in the heart 
of the Balkan peninsula. The Turks, alarmed by this mass exodus, 
abolished the last remnants of ecclesiastical autonomy in the Serbian 
Church, and handed over its administration to the Phanariot Greeks, 
who were the best-organized body within the Ottoman Empire and who 
hoped in due time to replace their Asiatic masters.* 

The eighteenth century was thus a time of intensified competition 
among the Balkan Christians. The Phanariots, being engaged in 
trade, amassed considerable fortunes and were able to purchase from 
the Turks all the remunerative ecclesiastical and civil appointments 
open to Christians. This system of organized bribery enabled the Greeks 
to control most of the bishoprics and they began systematically the work 
of Hellenizing the non-Greek Orthodox, who were in the majority. 
Greek was made the language of worship, the few parochial schools also 
taught their pupils in Greek. The Phanariots hoped to restore the Byzan- 
tine Empire, but for the time being they were most obedient and pliable 
Christian subjects, and the Turks trusted them more than the rest. The 

* The name Phanariot is derived from the part of Constantinople which was reserved for 
the Greeks and where all the best families had their residence. 

171 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Phanariots also obtained secular control of the rich provinces of 
Moldavia and Wallachia. From 1712 until 1821 the posts of Gospodars 
of these provinces were sold by the Turks to the rich Greek families of 
Constantinople. A Gospodar enjoyed his privileges for only three years 
during which he extracted all he spent, and more. Such rapacity natu- 
rally increased mutual distrust among Balkan Christians. 

The Phanariots had miscalculated: they failed to Hellenize the Slavs 
and the Rumanians, and instead of becoming the leaders of liberation 
they incurred the hostility of other Orthodox. The secular nationalism 
of the West was still unknown at that time in the Balkans where 
Christians regarded themselves as members of the same Orthodox 
family, the only difference being linguistic. The Phanariot policy created 
however a spirit of rivalry among them and in consequence the Balkan 
Christians were unable to act together in their struggle against the 
Turks. 

These inner divisions provided opportunities for the Western powers, 
in particular England and Austria, to interfere and this led to the fatal 
policy of dividing the Balkans, which eventually dragged Europe into 
the disastrous wars of the twentieth century. 

The Eastern Orthodox under Hapsburg rule 

In 1699, by the peace of Karlowitz, the Austrian Empire acquired 
considerable territory ceded by the Turks. This victory greatly increased 
the number of Orthodox within the Hapsburg domain and the govern- 
ment multiplied its efforts to induce the Eastern Christians to submit to 
Rome. As early as 1652 an isolated branch of the Russian Orthodox 
Church in the Carpathian mountains had been forced into union. In the 
eighteenth century the same policy was vigorously pursued in Transyl- 
vania. The majority of the Christians there were Orthodox Rumanians, 
but they were treated as outcasts. Only four Western confessions, 
Roman, Lutheran, Calvinist and Unitarian were recognized. The 
Orthodox clergy were degraded to the level of serfs and had to carry the 
burden of heavy taxation and manual labour, from which other 
Christian ministers were exempt. The Orthodox laity was systematically 
oppressed. Union with Rome was offered to the Rumanians as an 
immediate remedy for these evils. The clergy were promised the same 
treatment as those of Western confessions; the laity was assured 
improved status. In 1701 the majority of the Rumanians of Transyl- 
vania accepted union with Rome, though a substantial number re- 
mained Orthodox. This remnant, deprived of its own bishops, was 
temporarily put under the supervision of the Serbian clergy, for the 

172 



THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

Serbs stubbornly resisted the policy of Latinization and all efforts to 
turn them into Uniates had failed. They were newcomers in Austria 
and they retained that spirit of independence which they had kept alive 
for centuries under the Turks. They were also a valuable military force 
occupying the frontier zone between the Ottomans and the Hapsburgs 
and therefore they enjoyed certain privileges denied to other Orthodox. 
Their resistance gave such courage to the rest of the Eastern Christians 
that the Austrians were unable to enforce union with Rome upon all 
their orthodox subjects. 

The Christian East at the time of its decline (fifteenth-eighteenth centuries) 
The fall of the Byzantine Empire in the middle of the fifteenth century 
was a great landmark in the evolution of Eastern Christianity. The 
State which was believed to be indestructible collapsed, the Queen city 
elected by God was sacked by the infidels. Since the time of the Emperor 
Constantine the Orthodox regarded the Empire as their shield and 
protector and handed over to it many functions previously exercised by 
the Christian community itself. The blow suffered by the Church was 
shattering but not fatal. It survived the disaster but life was greatly 
impoverished and deprived of several essential activities. The main 
change was that its further growth became difficult. Under Islam, 
Christians had a comparative security of tenure, but were forbidden to 
expand and this crucial limitation profoundly affected their psychology. 
Instead of looking forward, they remembered with longing their glorious 
past. The Eastern Christians became intensely conservative. Orthodoxy 
was identified in their minds with immobility, rigorous adherence to 
forms shaped in better days became the only policy available to them. 
Such arrested development damaged many sides of Church life. Its 
theology lost originality and vigour, worship became stereotyped, 
philanthropic and educational work was reduced to a minimum, 
missionary activities ceased altogether. 

This decline coincided with renewed pressure from the West. The 
Eastern Christians, fighting in self defence on ground chosen by Western 
controversialists had produced a number of defective formulae. From 
this time dates the idea that the first seven Ecumenical Councils form the 
final and unalterable authority for the Orthodox Church, that there are 
only seven Sacraments and that there exists a precise moment when 
consecration of the Eucharistic elements takes place. Pressed on two 
sides by Islam and the West, the Eastern Christians so closely associated 
Church with nationality that they confined Orthodoxy to their own 
people and became indifferent to the religious condition of the rest of 

173 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the world. And yet, in spite of all these failures, Christianity did not die 
out among them. 

The Eucharist spiritually fed the faithful, the Gospel illuminated their 
minds, and their undying love for freedom gave them strength to con- 
tinue their struggle for their liberation from the Islamic yoke. The 
Christian East was chained to the walls of its prison, but it refused to 
surrender, trusting that God in his mercy would one day deliver his 
servants from captivity. 

The only exception to this state of slavery were the Russians; their 
Church was expanding with the growth of the Moscow Tsardom but it 
also suffered from excessive conservatism, and was even more suspicious 
of the West than the Greeks and Orientals. The confusion between 
essential and secondary elements in religion was so widespread in 
Russia that its leading Christians split their community just at a time 
when unity was required for their campaign to liberate their oppressed 
co-religionists. 

This gloomy picture has, however, one redeeming feature. The 
static conception of the Church universally accepted by all Christians 
during those centuries seriously distorted their thought and actions. 
Most of the Western controversies of the sixteenth and seventeenth 
centuries were therefore lamentably one-sided and many decisions 
taken at that time upset the balanced presentation of Christianity. The 
Eastern Christians, deprived of their freedom, escaped the dangers of 
doctrinal sectarianism and of liturgical inadequate improvisation. 
Their conservatism saved them from many mistakes committed by the 
West. The Orthodox were behind the West in scholarship and organiza- 
tion, but they were sustained by their firm conviction that they kept the 
Apostolic teaching intact and that in their worship they faithfully 
preserved the Patristic tradition. 

At the end of the eighteenth century the Christian East sank to its 
nadir. Islam was shattered but still undefeated, and its grip over the 
Orthodox remained as oppressive as ever. The Russian Church was 
paralysed and humiliated, the West was aggressive and confident of its 
superiority over the East. In that hour of darkness a faint light appeared 
on the far horizon. It came, most unexpectedly, from France, the old 
enemy of the Orthodox: the explosive ideas of liberty, equality and 
fraternity proclaimed by the French Revolution politically and in- 
tellectually stimulated the Christian East, and contributed to the 
recovery of its freedom. 



174 



CHAPTER SIX 

THE PERIOD OF INTELLECTUAL 
STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

(xix CENTURY) 

The Russian Church at the beginning of the nineteenth century StSerafim ofSarov (1759-1832) 
Optina Pustin The Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow (1782-1867) The revival of missionary 
work The Slavophils Alexey Khomiakov (1804-60) The emergence of national autocephalous 
Churches in the Balkans The Serbian Church The Prince-bishops of Montenegro The 
Church of Greece The Church of Rumania The Church ofBulgaria'-~Success and failure of the 
Balkan Churches The Orthodox in Austria-Hungary The Russian Intelligentsia and the 
Orthodox Church Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky (1821-81) Vladimir Sergeevich Soloniev 



The Russian Church at the beginning of the nineteenth century 
THETRANSITION from the eighteenth to the nineteenth centuries was 
a highly dramatic period, charged with tensions and revolutionary 
turmoil throughout Europe. In Russia the unbalanced and unpredict- 
able Emperor Paul I was assassinated in 1801, to be succeeded by his 
son, Alexander I (1801-25)5 an enlightened and liberal ruler who at 
first commanded an enthusiastic admiration from his subjects. Napo- 
leon's invasion of Russia in 1812, and his defeat, raised Alexander to 
leadership among the Great Powers, and brought the Russian army into 
the heart of Europe. In 1815 the Cossacks lit their camp fires in La 
Place de P Opera, in Paris. 

Alexander's reign was remarkable for the appearance among Russians 
of a body of a genuinely Westernized people. Since Peter the Great's 
reforms, the upper class had borrowed their dress, speech and manners 
from the French, but even these Russians had remained cultural 
strangers to the Western world. By the end of the eighteenth century 
a change had begun. Nikolay Karamzin (1766-1826), author of some 
sentimental novels and one of the first Russian historians, visited 
Western Europe in 1789-90. In 1791-92 he published Letters of a 
Russian Traveller in which he expressed a novel sense of belonging to the 
Western World. Homer and Virgil, Moliere and Racine, Voltaire and 
Kant were no longer mere names to this educated Russian. He was 
moved by classical ruins, shed tears reading sentimental stories and was 
uplifted by the desire to see his fellow men liberated from the bondage 
of political oppression. 

This close association with European culture had important reper- 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

cussions in religious ideas. Suspicion of the Christian West was replaced 
by the desire to discover a common language with Roman Catholics 
and Protestants. The Emperor himself took the lead; for the momentous 
historical events in which he had played such a prominent part changed his 
previous rationalist outlook. He became a mystic and searched for signs 
and symbols revealing divine providence. Alexander professed a religion of 
the heart and rejected both doctrines and sacraments as mere formalized 
manifestations of Christianity, unnecessary to true initiates. He was 
convinced that not only all Christians but all believers in God could join 
in a common endeavour to promote goodwill among men. In his 
friend, Prince Alexander Golitsin (1773-1844), he found an enthu- 
siastic supporter of his creed. Golitsin was appointed head of a dual 
ministry of education and religion, with the task of building up the 
entire educational system of the Empire on religious foundations 
acceptable to all confessions. This plan was supplemented by encourage- 
ment of the Bible Society, founded in 1812, modelled after the British 
Bible Society, started in 1804. At first it had a resounding success but 
when Alexander's brother, Nicholas I (1825-55), ascended the throne, 
circulation of the Holy Scriptures in spoken language was forbidden as 
politically dangerous, and the Society's work was restricted to circu- 
lating the Bible in languages other than Russian.* 

The emphasis on the emotional, pietistic elements of Christianity, so 
marked among the higher circles of St Petersburg society, was accom- 
panied by similar tendencies in the lower classes. This may be seen in 
the success of various sects, some of which promised their followers 
liberation from sin and carnal desires by orgiastic experience. The most 
-active was the Khlisti sect. Its adherents claimed to be possessed by the 
Holy Spirit and, this stage once reached, they could do no wrong; they 
indulged in ritual dances which often ended in sexual promiscuity. In 
contrast to this clandestine sect was another, the Skoptsi, founded by 
Kondraty Selivanov (d. 1832), advocating voluntary castration as the 
surest road to bliss and salvation. Other sects drew their inspiration 
from German pietism, calling themselves Spiritual Christians because 
they repudiated the Sacraments and the hierarchy and preached anar- 
chism in social matters. In this irrational atmosphere of confusion, 
emotional tensions and official disapproval of confessionalism, the posi- 
tion of the Orthodox Church was far from easy. 

During the eighteenth century the clergy of the Russian Church had 
been increasingly isolated from the common people. Candidates for the 

* The New Testament in Russian was allowed to be printed again in 1 863. The Old Testament 
in Russian was published in 1875. 

176 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

priesthood and episcopate were restricted to the graduates of the 
seminana where sons of the clergy were trained. Latin was used in these 
schools and their textbooks were copies of either Roman Catholic or 
Protestant manuals. This unsatisfactory education in an alien spirit cut 
off the parochial clergy from the lower classes, who adhered to tradi- 
tional Orthodoxy.^ The upbringing in Seminaries did not, however, 
raise bishops and priests to the level of the Westernized upper classes 
with their preference for the French language, literature and manners. 
This cultural isolation of the Russian clergy was further aggravated by 
their legal status. The Imperial legislators had suppressed Church self- 
government but had not provided the clergy with an adequate state 
subsidy. Parishioners no longer had any say in appointing their pastors 
whom the bishops selected at their will. But the upkeep of a parish 
priest and his assistants remained as in the old days a parish responsi- 
bility and often this led to friction and discontent. The bishops too were 
nominated without consulting the members of the Church and were 
controlled by the Synod, which could move them from one diocese to 
another, promote or demote them. Yet the Church was not dead: it 
remained the most vital force in the life of the Russian people; it gave 
them their sense of brotherhood and dedication to the service of God and 
man. The Church was the only meeting place for Russians of all classes 
and conditions; it was the bond uniting them to their past and remind- 
ing them that they were all primarily Orthodox Christians and only in 
the second place masters and serfs, peasants and nobles. 

St Serqfim of Sarov (1759-1832) 

The significance of the Church to the nation can be seen in such men as 
St Serafim of Sarov, one of the most beloved saints of the Russian people. 
Born in Kursk, in central Russia, he belonged to the artisan class 
little touched by Western influence. His father and mother were in the 
building trade and deeply devoted to the Church. At the age of eighteen 
Prokhor Moshin (his secular name) joined the monastic community of 
Sarov, lost in the immense forests of the Eastern province of Tambov. 
There he passed through all the stages of Orthodox asceticism, gradually 
increasing the severity of his exercises until he attained to such contem- 
plation of the divine love that he could abstain for days and nights from 
food and sleep. He spent a thousand consecutive nights kneeling in 
prayer on a stone near his lonely forest hut. All these tests of endurance 
and obedience to the divine will found their consummation in service 
to suffering mankind. In 1825, after seventeen years of seclusion, St 
Serafim opened the doors of his cell to all who wanted to consult 'him. 

M 177 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Physically he was drastically changed; the bent old man bore little 
resemblance to the strong healthy youth who had come to Sarov, but 
the elder's shining blue eyes, his radiant love and his knowledge of men 
showed that his sufferings and trials had not been wasted. For the 
remaining seven years of his life he was visited by an endless stream of 
people; as many as four or five thousand a day came to see him, to 
touch him, to be comforted. He remained humble, retiring; often he 
gave enigmatic counsel, but boundless compassion was poured out on 
all. St Serafim was both a healer and a seer. One of his disciples, 
Nicholas Motovilov, cured by St Serafim of an apparently incurable 
disease, has left a remarkable document describing his conversation 
with the elder. 

At the end of a discourse about the ultimate purpose of life consisting 
of perfect union with the Holy Spirit, which transforms and illuminates 
human nature, Motovilov saw the light of transfiguration about which 
St Serafim had been telling him. Motovilov wrote: 

'After these words, I looked at his face and there came over me an 
even greater awe. Imagine in the centre of the sun, in the dazzling 
brilliance of its midday rays, the face of a man who talks with you. You 
see the movement of his lips and the changing expression of his eyes, you 
hear his voice. You feel someone grasp your shoulders yet you do not 
see the hands, but only a blinding light spreading several yards around 
and throwing a sparkling radiance across the snow blanket on the glade 
and on to the snowflakes which besprinkled the elder and me.' 1 

St Serafim did not stand alone. A genuine revival of monasticism 
and spirituality took place in Russia in the nineteenth century. Rare 
gifts of holiness and prophecy were revealed by men and women of all 
classes and orders. 

Optina Pustin 

The ascetic tradition, revived by Paisy Velichkovsky in the eighteenth 
century in Moldavia (see p. 163), was brought to Russia by his numerous 
disciples. One of them, Leonid (1768-1841), settled in Optina Pustin, a 
monastery near Tula, and became well-known as a spiritual adviser. He 
was succeeded by another man of holiness and wisdom, Makary 
(1788-1860), and later by the most famous of the Optina elders, 
Amvrosy (1812-91), whose disciples, Anatoly (d. 1922) and Nektary 
(d. 1928), met the storm of the Communist Revolution, were ejected 
from their monastery and died as confessors. Optina was not only an 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

important centre of monastic life: it was also a meeting place for the 
bearers of the authentic patristic tradition of Eastern Orthodoxy and 
for Westernized intellectuals in search of Christian teaching unpolluted 
by bureaucratic interventions or Western controversies. Gogol 
(1809-52), Dostoevsky (1821-81), Tolstoy (1828-1910), Vladimir 
Soloviev (1853-1900) and Rozanov (1856-1919) were among the visi- 
tors to Optina. Ivan Kireevsky (1805-56) and Constantin Leontiev 
(1831-1891), two remarkable Russian thinkers, made Optina their 
permanent home. Yet Optina, like all Russian monasteries, was not 
reserved for intellectuals and the spiritual elite; it was open to all; the 
elders were ready to discuss intricate problems of mystical theology or 
homely peasant problems selling a cow or arranging a marriage. The 
whole of life, with its daily labour, financial concerns, personal relations, 
was brought before them and then seen in the light of man's ultimate 
destiny, that of a creature whose earthly task was to learn to love God 
and his neighbours in joyful freedom. 

The Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow (1782-1867) 

St Serafim, the elders of Optina and other representatives of genuine 
Russian Orthodoxy, held aloof from ecclesiastical administration by the 
Procurators of the Synod. They did not argue with official circles, where 
their spiritual freedom created suspicion, but neither were they ready to 
support the anti-canonical system introduced by Peter the Great. 
Among the bishops of that period were not only time-servers and bureau- 
crats but also scholars and ascetics; few, however, were statesmen. The 
exception was Philaret (Drozdov), Metropolitan of Moscow from 
1821-67 (Plate 64). Son of a poor Church cantor, he was educated in a 
seminary where he learnt good Latin but little theology. He took monas- 
tic vows and in 1809 at the age of twenty-one was ordained and sent to 
St Petersburg as one of the best young preachers. There he imbibed that 
spirit of open-mindedness and religious tolerance which emanated from 
the Throne. For the rest of his life Philaret remained a liberal but the 
main part of his ecclesiastical career coincided with the reactionary 
reign of Nicholas I (1825-55) which prevented him from making his 
full contribution to the Church. 

Philaret was a frail man of retiring disposition but with such a 
brilliant mind that he dominated the entire Russian scene and no major 
decision on any ecclesiastical problem was ever settled without him. He 
was ordained Bishop in 181 7 and four years later transferred to Moscow. 
This appointment secured him a permanent seat in the Synod, though 
during the tenure of the Procurator's office by General Protasov 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

(1836-55), Philaret was not invited to attend the Synod sessions. But 
even during that time he was asked for his opinion which often crucially 
influenced the Synod's decisions. 

Under Protasov's rule the Russian Church had to keep silence. That 
dashing cavalry officer was appointed by the disciplinarian Emperor to 
look after ecclesiastical affairs and keep the bishops in due subordina- 
tion. Protasov's ideal was uniformity and obedience. He tried to copy 
Roman discipline and one of his projects was to declare the Slavonic 
text of the Bible authentic, in imitation of the Roman attitude to the 
Vulgate. Philaret was too cautious to oppose the all-powerful Procu- 
rator openly, but his carefully formulated comments on this and other 
similar proposals were so cutting that the General had to give up some 
of his most cherished plans. Philaret was a born theologian; his vast 
reading made him the leading divine in the Russian Church but he re- 
frained from writing books, and only his printed sermons acquaint us 
with the vigour of his original thought. He also left several volumes of 
letters, many of which contain his judgments on problems of Church 
administration. His wisdom raises his opinions to the level of authorita- 
tive pronouncements expressing the true mind of the Russian 
Church. 

He was opposed to the confessional chauvinism then prevalent in 
official circles. He never missed an opportunity of stating that Protasov's 
attempts to treat Western Christians as heretics were not binding, and 
that declarations made in this spirit by bishops and theologians were 
only their private opinions. He even went further, declaring that so 
long as the Russian Church was deprived of canonical organs of admini- 
stration any doctrinal decision made in its name had no validity. 

Philaret survived both Protasov and Nicholas I. He lived long enough 
to see the liberal reforms inaugurated by Alexander II (1855-81) and 
had the honour and satisfaction of being author of the 1861 manifesto in 
which the Tsar released the Russian peasants from serfdom, flhe Russian 
Church owes a great debt to Philaret for he prevented ignorant and 
self-confident men from making pronouncements in its name which 
contradicted its genuine tradition.) 

The revival of missionary work 

The Russian Church never lacked men who regarded missionary work 
as their vocation but the seventeenth century schism and the oppressive 
state control of the St Petersburg Empire were unfavourable to such 
work and for a time it declined. Nevertheless, the urge to spread the 
message of salvation was so strong that a remarkable expansion of 

1 80 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

missionary activities took place in Russia in the middle of the nineteenth 
century. It was due to several outstanding men. The pioneer was 
Makary Glukharev (1792-1847), an enthusiast, always ready for 
adventure, yet a devoted admirer of cautious Philaret, who never failed 
to support his unconventional disciple. Influenced by Philaret, Makary 
took monastic vows and spent some time at the Monastery of Glinsk 
whose abbot was another Philaret (d. 1841), a well-known saintly 
elder. Makary, widely read in Eastern and Western mysticism and an 
excellent linguist, translated the works of St Augustine (d. 430), St 
Teresa of Avila (d. 1582) and Pascal (1623-62) into Russian. He was so 
ecumenically minded that he hoped for a Church where Orthodox, 
Roman Catholic and Protestant altars might stand under the same roof. 
When in 1819 he met two Quakers, Stephen Grillet (1773-1855) a 
former atheist and French Royalist and William Allen (1770-1843) a 
distinguished Professor of Chemistry, both touring in Russia, he felt a 
deep spiritual affinity with these two devout men. He prayed with them 
and discussed the question of religious education. In 1830 Makary went 
to the Altay mountains of Central Siberia and was confronted by the 
task of evangelizing a people whose language, outlook and culture had 
never before been studied. He soon mastered the Telengut dialect, the 
most widely used among these nomadic tribes. He translated the Bible 
and extracts from the Liturgical books and conducted services in the 
vernacular. Makary lived in the same primitive conditions as his flock, 
using the limited means at his disposal for building schools and helping 
the converts to start a new life based on Christian teaching. He was 
reluctant to baptize people unless convinced they had really accepted 
the message of the Gospel. During the fourteen years he spent in the 
wild Altay mountains he made only six hundred and seventy-five con- 
verts. But he laid a sound foundation for further work, and under his 
devoted disciples, the Archpriest Landishev and the Archimandrite 
Vladimir, twenty-five thousand of the forty-five thousand inhabitants 
of the Altai region, became Christians. The mission founded by Makary 
remains one of the best organized and most successful of the Russian 
Church. 

Makary was too active a spirit to forget the condition of his 
Mother Church. He was grieved at its lack of freedom and particularly 
indignant at the suppression of the Russian text of the Bible. He himself 
had worked hard on it and could not understand how the privilege of 
worshipping God in the spoken language could be granted to the Altay 
people and denied to Russians by the same authorities. He wrote to the 
Synod but his unsolicited advice was interpreted as a sign of insubor- 

181 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

dination. Makary was ordered to do penance by celebrating the 
Eucharist daily for six weeks. The zealous priest was surprised to learn 
that members of the Synod regarded frequent communion as a punish- 
ment. So wide was the gap between these officials and the true spirit of 
Orthodoxy. Makary died prematurely in 1847, while planning to travel 
to Palestine through Germany where he hoped to publish his Biblical 
translations, forbidden in his own country. 

Another equally indefatigable missionary of this period was Father 
John Veniaminov (1797-1879). During his first sixteen years of mis- 
sionary work, he was a priest (1824-40), and for twenty-eight years an 
itinerant bishop (1840-68) under the name of Innokenty. He was a self- 
educated man, equally gifted in languages and mechanics. He became a 
parish priest in Irkutsk, capital of Eastern Siberia, but soon asked to be 
sent to Alaska, part of the Russian Empire until 1 864. He settled down in 
Unalaska, the administrative centre of the Aleutian Archipelago, one of 
the most inhospitable parts of the world, where frost, fogs and storms 
made life hard and perilous. He mastered the Aleutian language, a task 
which no foreigner had attempted before him because of its many 
guttural sounds. He composed an alphabet and grammar and in this 
tongue wrote a remarkable book The Way to the Kingdom of Heaven 
which later was translated into Russian, gaining wide popularity for its 
simple and direct appeal. 

Veniaminov taught the Aleutians not only religion but various useful 
crafts and he himself learned the art of navigating a seal-skin canoe and 
travelled fearlessly from one island to another undismayed by raging 
storms or polar darkness. Ten years spent among the Aleutians resulted 
in the mass conversion of these people. Transferred to Sitka, he learned 
the language of the Kolosh Indians and became their tutor in Christ. 
Raised to Episcopal dignity in 1840, he received as his charge the 
Aleutian and Kurile Islands, the peninsulas of Kamchatka and Alaska 
and the entire province of Yakutsk. He was constantly on the move, 
using canoes, sailing boats, reindeer and dog-sledges and snow-shoes as 
means of transport. His knowledge of local languages and dialects was 
prodigious and he was universally trusted and loved by the natives. 
When in 1868 he succeeded Philaret as Metropolitan of Moscow he left 
four separate and well-organized dioceses: Alaska and the Aleutian 
Islands; Vladivostok and Kamchatka; Amur and Blagovekchensk and 
Yakutsk and Viluisk. As Metropolitan of Moscow he maintained a keen 
interest in missionary work and inaugurated the Orthodox Missionary 
Society which continued its activities up to the time of the Communist 
Revolution. During the second part of the nineteenth century more than 

182 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

twenty-five thousand people, mostly natives of Siberia, were converted 
by missionaries from this Association. 

The story of Russian missions would be incomplete without mention- 
ing two other men who also laboured at that time. One was a layman, 
Nikolay Ivanovich Ilminsky (1822-1891)5 the other was Nikolay 
(Kasatkin), first Orthodox Bishop of Japan (1836-1912). Ilminsky, like 
his two illustrious predecessors, was also an exceptional linguist. His 
special interest was missionary work among the Mohammedans, and he 
completely reorganized it. 

He graduated in 1848 from the Theological Academy of Kazan and 
was appointed Professor of Oriental languages. Besides Hebrew, Greek 
and Latin, he could speak Arabic, Persian, Tatar, Cherimis, Chuvash, 
Mordvin, Kirgiz, Yakut and several other Siberian languages. He was 
perplexed by the failure of Christian missions among tribes in the Volga 
and Ural regions and by the spread of Islam there. After much research, 
he spent two years in Cairo, at the Moslem university, without being 
recognized as a stranger, he concluded that the literary language of the 
Tatars and Kirgiz was so infused with the Mohammedan theology and 
so closely associated with the Koran, that no Christian message could 
be delivered through that medium. Ilminsky therefore decided to use 
the spoken language of these people, a vocabulary without Islamic 
associations. He abandoned the complex Arabic script, known only to 
men trained in Islamic schools, and produced a phonetic script easy for 
the common people to learn. This change produced remarkable results; 
the Christians in the Eastern provinces of Russia increased, for services 
conducted in their spoken tongue made the Christian message intelli- 
gible to them. An immediate consequence of this change was ordina- 
tion of pupils of schools opened under Ilminsky's direction. During his 
lifetime forty-four Tatars, ten Chuvash, nine Cheremis and two Votiaks 
were ordained. Christianity became rooted in the life of these people 
and spread so rapidly that Meshera and Mordva were entirely con- 
verted, the majority of the Chuvash and Cheremis entered the Church, 
and only among the Tatars did Christians remain a minority. 

The greatest success of Russian missions was achieved, however, not 
within the Empire but in Japan. The Apostle of the Japanese was Ivan 
Kasatkin (1836-1912). In 1853 the Russians, with other European 
Powers, were allowed to establish diplomatic missions in Japan. 
Kasatkin, who took monastic vows and changed his name to Nikolay, 
was sent as Chaplain to the Russian Embassy in Tokio in 1861. He was 
interested in Japanese religion and culture, learned the language and 
began to celebrate in Japanese in the Embassy Chapel. An increasing 

183 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

number of Japanese attended this novel service. The first convert to the 
Orthodox Church was Paul Savabe, a Buddhist priest, baptized in 1868. 
By 1874 there were f our hundred Orthodox Japanese; in 1875 Paul 
Savabe and John Sakai were ordained Priests. In 1880 Kasatkin was 
made bishop and the Church began to grow rapidly. The Russo- 
Japanese War (1904-05) was a testing time for the growing community. 
Bishop Nikolay stayed with his flock and identified himself with them. 
He died in 1912 leaving a Church about thirty thousand strong, divided 
into thirty parishes, having some forty priests and deacons and one 
hundred and forty-six catechists. The Orthodox Church in Japan, 
isolated after the Communist Revolution, survived and has continued 
its steady progress till today. 

Such are the main outlines of the missionary work of the Eastern 
Orthodox in the nineteenth century. None was possible except in the 
Russian Church, for the rest of the Orthodox were either still under the 
Mohammedans or only just emerging from their long captivity. For 
some time an impression has existed in the West that Eastern Christians 
have no missionary spirit. This is due to ignorance of the facts. In a 
volume dedicated to Ilrninsky's memory in 1891, the following incident 
was reported. The curator of the Biblical Museum in Mulhausen wrote 
to the authorities of the Russian Church inquiring whether any transla- 
tions of the Bible had been made by its members. He was staggered 
when in response he received a crate of books containing translations 
into more than sixty languages. The Russian Church in 1 899 had twenty 
missions inside the Empire and five foreign missions in Alaska, Korea, 
China, Japan and Persia. 

The Slavophils 

The Russian Church under Nicholas I was a strange body ruled by a 
cavalry officer and bishops who, though socially inferior, were ranked 
with military and state officials and were awarded similar decorations. 
In spite of being in the bureaucratic grip the Church pulsated with its 
own independent life, and men and women with exceptional prophetic 
and healing gifts, saints, missionaries and mystics were not lacking 
among its members. Its chief defect was the growing alienation of the 
Westernized minority. For example, Alexander Pushkin (1799-1836), 
the greatest Russian poet of the nineteenth century and a man who 
deeply loved and understood his people, was a contemporary of the 
greatest Russian saint of that period, St Serafim of Sarov (1759-1833) 
but it is unlikely that either ever heard of the other. They lived in 
separate worlds. 

184 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

A group of gifted Russian intellectuals, known under the misleading 
name of Slavophils, were the first who tried to end this harmful state of 
affairs. They belonged to the landed gentry and had deep roots in the 
Russian soil. The best known among them were the brothers Ivan 
(1806-56) and Piotr (1808-56) Kireevsky, the brothers Constantine 
(1818-60) and Ivan (1823-86) Aksakov, Nikolay Yazikov (1803-46), 
Alexander Koshelev (1806-83), Yury Samarin (1819-76) and Alexey 
Khomiakov (1804-60). They had been brought up like the rest of their 
class in an atmosphere of Western culture, were fluent in European 
languages and had travelled in Germany, France and Italy, But they 
differed from other Westernized Russians in retaining their link with 
their Church whose traditions they loved and understood. The Slavophils 
were painfully aware that most of their class were strangers in their own 
country. They were convinced that Russia had as much to offer Europe 
as to receive, if only the originality and value of Orthodox culture were 
recognized. The Slavophils were suspected by the Government and 
prohibited from disseminating their ideas through the Press. They met 
in drawing rooms of the old capital and spent hours in heated debates 
with their opponents, the Westernizers, men like Alexander Herzen 
(1812-70) and Nikolay Ogarev (1813-77). 

One of the Slavophils, Yury Samarin, enumerated in a letter the 
topics of conversation in his circle: 

'We used to argue about the relation between Orthodoxy, Latinism 
and Protestantism. Is Orthodoxy the undifferentiated and primitive 
form of Christianity from which other higher expressions of religion 
have arisen? Or is Orthodoxy the unchangeable fullness of religious 
truth? What is the difference between Russian and European culture? 
Does it depend on their respective stages of development or is it some- 
thing fundamental? Must Russian culture be increasingly swamped by 
the West or should the Russians penetrate deeper into Orthodoxy and 
discover the foundations of a new universal culture?' 2 

These animated discussions were centred on subjects which the 
Russians had debated in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries when 
belief in Moscow, as the third Rome, had brought about the schism 
within their Church. Again two parties appeared. The Westernizers 
denied the originality of Russian culture. They were convinced that 
their country was backward and needed to learn both wisdom and 
technical knowledge from the West. They did not believe that the 
Orthodox Church had any message. The Slavophils on the other hand 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

were practising Christians who were firmly convinced that the Ortho- 
dox Church had preserved the original fullness of the Christian revela- 
tion. Rome, with its over-emphasis on authority, and Protestantism 
with its excessive stress on individualism, typified for the Slavophils the 
defects of nineteenth-century European civilization with its egoism, 
aggressiveness and self righteousness. The Slavophils thought that the 
recognition of the importance of a sense of community was essential for a 
more balanced social and political order. They were ostracized by the 
majority of their contemporaries, and ridiculed as eccentrics; but their 
work had a permanent value and led to the spiritual and cultural 
renaissance which took place in Russia on the eve of the Communist 
Revolution. The leading figure and the most original mind among the 
Slavophils was Alexey Stepanovich Khomiakov. 

Alexey Khomiakov (1804-60) 

Khomiakov (Plate 64) received his first instruction from a French tutor, an 
emigrant Roman priest who taught him French and Latin. He later added 
Greek, English, German and Sanskrit to these languages. Khomiakov's 
mother, strong in character and deeply devoted to the Orthodox 
Church, helped him to revere the faith of his forefathers. He never 
deserted Orthodoxy, his spiritual home. Khomiakov was a man of 
many gifts, a poet of distinction, a painter and the inventor of an engine 
that won a medal at a London exhibition. He was also a historian of 
original insight and he compiled the first Russian-Sanskrit dictionary. 
He was a competent landlord, an amateur doctor and above all, a 
theologian who opened new vistas to the Russian Church and delivered 
its thought from entanglement with Western controversies and slavish 
imitation of foreign patterns. Outwardly his career was uneventful. As a 
cavalry officer in the Imperial Guard he took part in the Russo-Turkish 
War of 1829, but soon retired to spend the rest of his life as a well-to-do 
landlord, dividing his time between Moscow and his estates. He was 
happily married and had eight children. He died prematurely from 
cholera whilst treating his peasants for this deadly disease. A man of his 
intellect, knowledge and dynamic personality would have occupied a 
leading position in the political or educational life of any country but 
Russia of his time. Nicholas I distrusted men of initiative and imagination 
and, above all, he feared that freedom which for Khomiakov was indis- 
pensable. Khomiakov was a great Russian patriot, but he was above all 
a genuine Christian and therefore suspected by the police of being a 
revolutionary and a free-thinker. None of his books was allowed publica- 
tion in Russia during his lifetime. History, philosophy, politics, all 

1 86 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

attracted his attention, but his main contribution was to theology. He 
was familiar with philosophy, and able to clothe traditional beliefs of 
Eastern Orthodoxy in the language of contemporary thought. 

His approach was so unusual, and the true image of Orthodoxy had 
been distorted for so long by ecclesiastical bureaucrats that Khomiakov 
was accused of modernism and only recognized after his death as the 
authentic spokesman of his Church. His most striking assertion was that 
both Rome and Protestantism represented the same individualistic 
approach to religion, whilst the Christian East had preserved the original 
corporate interpretation of Christianity. He taught that Western 
Churches, by fixing Church authority in the Pope or in the Bible, had 
equally departed from the earlier tradition, according to which the 
entire community was inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit. 

Before Khomiakov's time Orthodox theologians had been hard 
pressed by Western controversialists and had tried to defend themselves 
with Western arguments. Khomiakov broke away from these tactics by 
placing the Orthodox Church not between Rome and Geneva, but 
above them. For Khomiakov the Church was not an institution, but a 
living organism. He dismissed as wrong the search for an external 
source of infallibility in which the Christian West had been engaged 
since its separation from the Orthodox Church. He wrote: 'Infallibility 
resides solely in the ecumenical fellowship of the Church united by 
mutual love; the guardianship of dogmas and the purity of rites is 
entrusted, not to the hierarchy alone but to all members of the Church 
who are the body of Christ.' 3 

For Khomiakov the communion of love was indispensable for the 
understanding of truth, to the balanced sacramental life and to 
constructive social action; but love presupposed freedom. Whenever 
freedom was suppressed, man's creativity was curtailed and intellectual 
and moral life stagnated. This emphasis on freedom and personal 
responsibility was linked with an equally strong stress on the importance 
of community. c Man's loneliness/ wrote Khomiakov, c is the cause of his 
impotence; whoever separates himself from others creates a desert 
round himself. A self-centred individual is powerless; he is the victim of 
irreconcilable inner discord/ 4 

Such ideas were unacceptable to the Westernized Russian liberals 
who demanded unrestricted liberty for the individual, and to the 
Imperial Government which insisted on obedience and subordination as 
indispensable to stable political order. 

Seven years after Khomiakov's death the liberal reforms made pos- 
sible the appearance of his theological works in Russia, and in the pre- 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

face to the first edition Yury Samarin boldly described his teacher as a 
Doctor of the Church. He was right. The title of Doctor of the Church 
belongs to Khomiakov as a landmark in the history of Russian 
Christianity, as a man who revived the patristic tradition within the 
framework of nineteenth century thought and made Orthodoxy 
intelligible to educated Russians. 

The emergence of national autocephalous Churches in the Balkans 
In the nineteenth century the Mohammedan occupation of the Balkans 
was five hundred years old; yet the Turks remained aliens in creed, race 
and political outlook, neither absorbed by the conquered nor able to 
make them part of Islam. The spark of freedom that had been kept alive 
in the subjugated people by the Orthodox Church at last flared up in a 
consuming flame. One cause was Russia's steady advance against the 
Turks; another was the penetration of French revolutionary ideas into 
the Oriental world. Napoleon's conquest of Egypt and his acquisition 
of the Ionian Islands in 1797 stirred the Christian East and gave it new 
courage to break away from slavery. 

The Serbian Church 

The Serbs were the first to rebel. In 1804 they rose under Karageorge. 
Defeated, they rebelled again in 1815 under the banners of Obrenovich 
and after long and bitter strife secured their autonomy. 

In 1830 the Turks recognized Milosh Obrenovich as hereditary 
prince of Serbia. The Serbians obtained the right to build churches 
and schools, and to organize their own administration, though still 
obliged to pay tribute to the Sultan. As a guarantee of their obedience 
Turkish garrisons remained in strategic positions. In 1831 the Patriarch 
of Constantinople granted autonomy to the Serbian Church within the 
newly-created principality and so freed it from Phanariot control. 
Milentije Pavlovich was consecrated the first Archbishop of Belgrade 
and Metropolitan of Serbia. 

In 1879 the Serbian Church became autocephalous, which means not 
only self-governing, but equal of the other Churches in the Orthodox- 
Byzantine tradition. The first decades of freedom were full of trials for 
the Serbian Church. It had few experienced and educated clergy, while 
hampered by political instability, personal rivalry and intrigues. 
Nevertheless, constructive work was started. Petar Jovanovich, Metro- 
politan of Serbia (1833-58), founded a theological seminary on the 
Russian pattern and started to send the more promising young men to 
complete their training in Russia. One of these, Mihajlo Jovanovich, 

188 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

became the best known of the great Serbian Archbishops of the nine- 
teenth century (1859-81 and 1889-98). Under him the Serbian Church, 
once having acquired autocephalous status, came into conflict with the 
State. He was exiled for eight years. The cause of this conflict was the 
anticlerical bias of the political leaders of liberated Serbia. They had 
mostly been educated in France and Germany and uncritically imi- 
tated the West. They aimed at founding a secular state and disregarded 
the Serbians 3 deep attachment to the Orthodox Church which had 
saved them from spiritual and moral collapse under the Turks. 

This anticlericalism and positivism remained fashionable to the end 
of the Serbian monarchy, among the Westernized minority. Intellectual 
confusion, moral instability and superficiality characterized this class, 
which showed little understanding and still less appreciation of the 
nation's cultural and religious tradition. 

The Prince-bishops of Montenegro 

A unique ecclesiastical situation developed among the Orthodox 
Montenegrins. They were racially akin to the Serbians, but their mountain 
stronghold had never been completely subjugated by the Turks and they 
were the first to secure their political independence. Their resistance had 
acquired a religious character so that the bishops had become their 
national leaders. Danilo Petrovich (1697-1735) was the first bishop to 
establish contact with Russia and to acquire a position akin to that of a 
secular ruler. The morale of the Montenegrins was greatly strengthened 
by this alliance. Danilo's successor was his nephew, Sava Petrovich 
(1735-82), who collaborated with his cousin, another bishop, Vasilje 
Petrovich. The latter visited Russia three times and managed to publish 
The History of Montenegro in Moscow in 1754, which stimulated 
widespread sympathy for his tiny country and secured considerable 
help. 

This dynasty of bishop-rulers reached its most glorious stage in 
Petar I Petrovich Negosh (1782-1830) and his successor, Petar II 
Petrovich Negosh (1830-51). In 1799 the Sultan Selim III (1783-1807) 
recognized the independence of Montenegro and simultaneously its 
Church gained autonomous status. Petar I was canonized by his 
Church for incessant and self-sacrificing labours for his people. His 
nephew, Petar II, was a philosopher and poet of originality and power, 
a man of wide outlook and a capable administrator. 

His successor, Danilo Petrovich (1851-60), brought the rule of the 
Prince-bishops to an end. He married and became his country's first 
secular prince, 

189 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The Church of Greece 

The Serbian revolt did not attract Western attention but the Greek 

uprising in 1821 stirred Europe profoundly. 

It began in several places at once: on 6th March Prince Alexander 
Hypsilantis, one of the Phanariots, unfurled the flag of Greek freedom 
in Moldavia; on 25th March Germanos, the Metropolitan of Patras, 
called on his people to rise against their Mohammedan oppressors, and 
the inhabitants of several Greek islands simultaneously proclaimed 
their independence. 

This rebellion had been prepared by secret societies, the most im- 
portant of which was Philiki Hetaireia (Association of Friends). It 
numbered some 200,000 members who disseminated an education 
directed towards patriotism and a desire for political liberation. 

News of the Greek uprisings reached the political leaders of the West 
at the time of the Conference of Laibach. In this reactionary period, 
Alexander I of Russia was in an awkward position. Traditionally, the 
Russians regarded themselves as supporters of the oppressed Balkan 
Christians, but the Holy Alliance, initiated by Alexander, included the 
Turkish Sultan whom he was thus obliged to support against the 
Christian revolutionaries. 

Prince Hypsilanti was easily defeated for he had entirely miscalcu- 
lated the attitude of the Moldavians. They had no sympathy with the 
Phanariots and were therefore unwilling to aid his small army. The 
uprising in Morea, however, was enthusiastically supported by the 
entire population, and in spite of Turkish military superiority it ended 
in a Greek victory. A wave of phil-Hellenic sentiment induced the 
governments of Russia, England and France to intervene on the Greek 
behalf. 

At the battle of Navarino in 1827 ^ e Turko-Egyptian fleet was 
destroyed, and after a defeat suffered during the war with Russia 
(1828-29), the Sultan agreed to grant Greece independence. The first 
King chosen by the great powers was Otto of Bavaria (1833-62) under 
whom the government of the country fell entirely into the hands of 
Germans who neither understood nor respected the people they had to 
rule. They pursued a policy of strict control over the Church and insti- 
tuted a Synod on the Russian pattern. An early problem was the 
regularization of relations with the Patriarch of Constantinople. In 
1821, as soon as the news of the rebellion reached the capital, the 
Patriarch Gregory V (1797-98; 1806-08; 1818-21) was murdered by the 
Turks, together with some 30,000 Greeks. Under such conditions it was 
difficult to maintain relations with Constantinople and in 1833 the 

190 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

thirty-three bishops of liberated Greece proclaimed the autocephalous 
status of their Church. The Patriarch Constantius (1830-34), however, 
refused to sanction this action. A deadlock ensued which adversely 
affected the status of the Greek church. Meanwhile, the German 
bureaucracy had grown suspicious of a Church that voiced the anti- 
foreign feelings of the bulk of the people. The number of bishops was 
reduced to ten and soon to four, all old and decrepit. Protests led to the 
arrest of the more vigorous clerics and laymen. 

Conditions improved, however, in the second part of the nineteenth 
century. Reconciliation between Constantinople and the Synod of the 
Greek Church was achieved in 1852 when the latter' s autocephalous 
status was sanctioned by the Ecumenical Patriarch Anthimus IV 
(1840-41 and 1848-52). The number of dioceses was increased to 
twenty-four, and a movement for raising the standard of Christian 
knowledge and education was started by the people themselves, who 
remained devoted to the Orthodox Church, in spite of the apostasy of a 
Westernized minority. 

The difficulties encountered by the zealots of Orthodoxy are well 
illustrated by the story of the Archimandrite Eusebius Matthopoulos 
(1849-1929), founder of the Zoe brotherhood. He was a remarkable 
monk who joined a religious community at the age of fourteen and was 
ordained deacon when he was seventeen. As a youth he came under the 
influence of several staunch defenders of Orthodoxy like Ignatius 
Lampropoulos (d. 1869) and Apostolas Makrakis (d. 1905) who boldly 
opposed the abuses and corruption in their Church. The old evil of 
simony introduced by the Turks was renewed after the liberation by 
some Greek politicians and in 1875 a public scandal arose when three 
bishops were found guilty of obtaining their sees by bribing Cabinet 
ministers. M?Ljrakis, Eusebius and their friends led the protest against 
this violation of public morality and ecclesiastical canons, but the 
Synod of the Greek Church, composed of similarly compromised men, 
brought the defenders of Orthodoxy to trial and condemned them in 
1879 on a f a k e charge of heresy. The new Synod revised this sentence, 
however, and the three bishops were degraded and the exiled zealots 
released from confinement in remote monasteries. Eusebius resumed his 
evangelistic campaign of preaching and teaching all over the country 
and gained wide popularity. But Apostolos Makrakis, embittered by the 
episode, refused to recognize the Synod's authority and formed his own 
sect. This drifted into an unhealthy state of credulous belief in his 
political predictions based on his interpretation of the Book of the 
Revelation. Makrakis was endowed with a vigorous and original mind 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and had an exceptional knowledge of theology, but the self-confidence 
which led him to assume the role of prophet separated him from the 
Orthodox Church. After his death in 1905 his sect came to an end, but 
his writings enjoy considerable popularity and he has many admirers, 
especially among the Greeks in the United States. 

Father Eusebius was as learned and uncomprising as Makrakis, but 
he was free from self-assertion. He realized that Greek religious progress 
depended on the co-ordinated efforts of many devout Christians, and 
with this idea he founded a community of evangelists. The Greek 
Church owes a debt of gratitude to him for a remarkable institution, the 
Zoe brotherhood, inaugurated in 1909. It had a noteworthy success, 
though its full impact was felt only after the First World War. 

The Church of Rumania 

Russia's victory over the Turks in 1828-29 secured recognition of 
autonomy to Wallachia and Moldavia, two provinces mainly inhabited 
by Rumanians. For five years (1829-34) they were under the en- 
lightened government of Count Kiselev, who organized a militia, 
improved finance and brought order into the administration. The 
economic prosperity consequent on his reforms encouraged a liberal 
movement among intellectuals. France, its politics, literature and cul- 
ture, attracted young Rumanians, and in 1848 a successful revolution 
secured a liberal constitution for Wallachia, ruled at that time by 
Prince Guika. 

Nicholas I, who acted as self-appointed guardian of reactionaries all 
over Europe, stepped in and used Russian troops to suppress the liberals. 
His intervention provoked a conflict with the Turks, who claimed 
sovereignty over the two Danubian Principalities, and the tension thus 
created between Russia and the Ottoman Empire was one of the con- 
tributory factors to the Crimean War (1853-55). As long as hostilities 
lasted, the Austrians occupied the Principalities. At the Congress of 
Paris (February-March 1856), England insisted that Turkish rule of 
Rumania be restored, but the combined French and Russian opposition 
prevailed. In 1858, at another Conference of Paris, the Great Powers 
agreed to allow the Principalities to establish similar constitutions on 
condition that they remained separate. This artificial arrangement 
collapsed when Wallachia and Moldavia elected the same man, as 
their ruler, Prince Alexander Cusa (1859-66). Their fusion in one realm 
called Rumania was accepted by the Turks in 1862 and England had no 
choice but to concur. 

In 1866 Alexander Cusa was forced to abdicate and was replaced by 

192 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

Prince Charles of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringan (1866-1914), who in 
1 88 1 was proclaimed King. In 1864 the Church of Rumania declared 
its independence of Constantinople. A land reform in the same year 
deprived it of many of its possessions, mostly the property of Greek 
monasteries endowed by the Phanariots, who controlled Church and 
State in the Principalities up to 1821. In 1885 the Ecumenical Patriarch 
recognized the autocephality of the Rumanian Church and its canonical 
position was regularized. 

The condition of the Church in Rumania in the nineteenth century 
was far from satisfactory. An anti-clerical government treated it as a 
department of the State, the bishops were appointed by politicians and 
the parochial clergy, recruited from peasants, were looked down upon by 
the Westernized upper classes. Only towards the end of the century did 
the Rumanian Church begin to adjust itself. In 1890 a theological 
faculty was added to the University of Bucharest (founded 1869). The 
training of priests was improved and the output of Christian literature 
increased. Like the Greeks, most Rumanians remained deeply attached 
to the Church and the monasteries continued their beneficent influence 
though the ruling class had neglected religion. 

The Church of Bulgaria 

The Bulgarians were the last of the Balkan Orthodox nations to gain 
independence. Geographically nearest to Constantinople they suffered 
more than others from the dual oppression by Turks and Phanariots. 

The first sign of Bulgarian revival appeared in 1762, when the Monk 
Paisy published his History of the Bulgarian People. By the middle of the 
nineteenth century schools had been founded which taught the 
Bulgarian language and propagated the idea of liberation. The other 
Balkan states had freed themselves from the Turks before rejecting 
Phanariot control in ecclesiastical administration. In Bulgaria the order 
was reversed so that when in 1870 the Sultan permitted the Bulgarians 
to have an independent Church organization the Patriarch, Anthimus 
VI (1845-48; 1853-55; 1871-73), excommunicated them (September 
1872). This act was not approved of by the other Eastern Churches, and 
the schism between Constantinople and Bulgaria did not cut off the 
Bulgarian Church from the rest of the Orthodox. Anthimus, Bishop of 
Vidin, became their first Exarch (1872-88). 

This ecclesiastical victory encouraged the Bulgarians to claim political 
freedom. In 1875-76 an uprising was put down by Turkish irregulars, 
with much cruelty and bloodshed. Russia came to the rescue and de- 
feated the Turks. The creation of a strong and united Bulgaria was 

N 193 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

opposed by Britain. The Berlin Congress of 1878 split Bulgaria into 
three sections: the largest was handed over to the Sultan; Prince 
Alexander of Battenberg (1879-86) was elected ruler of the central part 
of Bulgaria; the remainder became a separate State called Eastern 
Rumelia, which in 1885 after a referendum rejoined the main body. 
The encouragement given to it caused Alexander's downfall, and Prince 
Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg (1887-1918) was elected in his place. The 
political leader during that confused time was Stefan Stambulov 
(1887-94), an ambitious and unscrupulous man with radical views on 
religion and openly hostile to the Church. He met a strong opponent in 
Clement, Metropolitan of Tirnovo (d. 1901), who firmly defended the 
freedom and dignity of the Bulgarian Church. Under Ferdinand the 
country was brought into the sphere of German influence and most 
Bulgarian theologians went for their studies to Germany and not as 
before to Russia. 

Success and Failure of the Balkan Churches 

In every Balkan country the national survival under the Turks was 
made possible by the Church. The Orthodox Church brought these 
nations to the threshold of independence but its clergy were unable to 
maintain their authority in the next period of their evolution. The chief 
cause of failure was their lack of intellectual preparedness for their new 
role. Deliverance from suffocating Turkish control opened to the Balkan 
nations the exciting world of Western civilization, with its conflicting 
ideas, radical, social and political theories and unrestricted facility for 
learning and discussion. The young men sent to train in the West 
eagerly and uncritically absorbed the rudiments of a superior civiliza- 
tion and came back to their own countries with a firm belief in Western 
ability to provide ready-made solutions to all their problems. They were 
determined to reshape their own countries in accordance with the most 
up-to-date Western doctrines. The leaders of the Orthodox Church 
could not meet this challenge. Some were patriotic and devout men, 
but hardly any of them had had Western training and their outlook and 
manners seemed obsolete to politicians educated in Paris or Germany. 
Even those theologians who had studied abroad and had university 
degrees (at first rare exceptions) were of little use, for they regarded 
their own Church as backward and in need of reform. 

Russia, which had experienced the same turmoil a century earlier, 
could not be of much help, for those who understood the situation, like 
the Slavophils, were made ineffectual by official censorship and the 
antagonism of the Westernized classes, whilst most Russian intellectuals 

194 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

still copied Europe and the Balkan Christians naturally decided to go to 
the original source themselves. This wholesale imitation of the West was 
encouraged by the German Protestant rulers of the Balkans. These 
potentates had no knowledge of their subjects' history and were alien to 
the Orthodox Church and its genius. 

This division between the Orthodox background and the new 
imported ideas damaged the growth of Balkan culture. In the nine- 
teenth century it lacked originality and cohesion, for past achievements 
were forgotten and ignored.* Only after the First World War did the 
Balkan intellectuals realize that they possessed a tradition of their own 
with many remarkable achievements. 

The Orthodox in Austria-Hungary 

The tragic lack of understanding between the Church and the 
Westernized leaders of the Balkan nations was due to their long isolation 
from the rest of Christendom. It might have been expected that those 
Orthodox who were incorporated earlier in the Austrian-Hungarian 
Empire would have been able to help their co-religionists both culturally 
and theologically in emerging from the Turkish yoke. They were the 
Carpatho-Russians, the Ukrainians of Galicia and Bukovina, the 
Rumanians of Transylvania, the Serbians of Bonat and Voivodina, the 
Dalmatians and Bosnians. These scattered Orthodox were unable,, 
however, to accomplish this task, being themselves oppressed in their 
own lands. The Viennese government looked with deep suspicion upon 
the Balkan national revival, and patronized the Uniates to counter- 
balance the danger of reunion of its own Orthodox subjects with their 
fellow Christians outside the borders of a dual monarchy. When it met 
with strong resistance the government tried to inflame national frictions 
among the Orthodox. Accordingly, Eastern Christians in Austria- 
Hungary were divided into several separate ecclesiastical provinces 
which received different treatment from the State. These were the 
Serbian Church under the Metropolitan of Karlovci; the Rumanian 
Church in Transylvania under the Metropolitan of Hermannstadt 
(or Sibiu) ; the Church of Bukovina and Dalmatia, which included 
Rumanians, Ukrainians and Serbians, people of different national and 
linguistic background; and the Church of Bosnia and Herzogovinia, 
two provinces annexed by Austria in 1875. 

Altogether two and a half million Orthodox were under the Haps- 

* Serbian medieval architecture is among the finest in the Orthodox world, but the Serbian 
cathedrals and churches built in the nineteenth century after liberation were second rate 
copies of a decadent Austrian style. 

195 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

burgs in the second half of the nineteenth century. Disunited, treated as 
an undesirable minority, hindered in their cultural and religious activi- 
ties, these Orthodox were in need themselves of help and encourage- 
ment from the Balkan Christians who were culturally less advanced but 
spiritually more alive than their fellow Christians under the Austro- 
Hungarian domination. 

The most oppressed Church in the Empire was that of Transylvania. 
Its priests were regarded as serfs; an Orthodox could not be appointed 
to any government post, and the only escape from the status of a pariah was 
to join the Uniates. Yet many Rumanians resisted all attempts to induce 
them to submit to the Pope. In 1810 they succeeded in obtaining their 
own bishop, Vasilie Moga (1810-46). The conditions attached to his 
appointment were curiously similar to those governing the lives of the 
Christians under the Turks. He was forbidden to persuade ex-Orthodox 
Uniates to rejoin his Church or to prevent any of his flock from going 
over to Rome. Even if an entire Uniate parish deserted to Orthodoxy, 
their Church and school would remain the property of the Uniate 
priest, who retained his stipend. The bishop was particularly reminded 
that he represented a religion which was not 'received 9 in Transylvania, 
although it was the creed of its original inhabitants, and that he could 
not claim the same rights as the Roman Catholic and Uniate clergy. In 
spite of everything Bishop Moga rebuilt his diocese on a sound basis and 
gave his people fresh courage. His successor, Audrey Shaguna ( 1 848-73) , 
was a still greater man. He had received a good education, spoke fluent 
Hungarian and German and his love of and dedication to his Church 
and people were such that a number of Uniates returned to Orthodoxy 
in spite of all its disadvantages, and after one and half centuries of 
obedience to Rome. 

Orthodox status in other provinces of the Austrian Empire was more 
favourable. They gradually gained the right to erect churches with 
such visible signs of buildings dedicated to worship as bells, towers 
and crosses, and with an entrance on the street and not in a backyard.* 
In 1 875 the seminary for the training of priests in Chernovci was reformed 
and made into a faculty of theology. Until 1848 all instruction was in 
Latin but later both the Rumanian and Ukrainian languages were 
introduced. 

The most vigorous of all Orthodox communities was the Serbian 
which came to Austria at the end of the seventeenth century as allies in 
the war against the Turks, and which, therefore, had retained facilities 
for worship and instruction denied to other members of the Orthodox 

* The Turks imposed the same prohibition upon the Orthodox. 

196 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

Church. They had their own Seminary in Karlovci and this small city, 
not far from the Serbian borders, was made the centre of their religious 
and cultural life. 

Towards the end of the century the Orthodox in Hungary and Austria 
acquired a veneer of Western civilization, but were further removed 
from their original tradition than their less educated compatriots of the 
Balkans, who fought for and obtained political freedom to shape their 
own destiny. 

The Russian Intelligentsia and the Orthodox Church 

The defeat suffered by the Russian Empire during the Crimean War 
(1853-55) discredited the militaristic and bureaucratic order which 
Nicholas I (1825-55) bad imposed on the Russian nation for thirty 
years. Its artificial rigidity was at last ended and his son and successor, 
Alexander II (1855-81), inaugurated liberal reforms, the most impor- 
tant being the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. This belated change in 
the social structure of the Empire coincided with the appearance of the 
intelligentsia, a phenomenon without parallel in the life of other nations. 
The Russian intelligentsia was neither a social class, nor an intellectual 
elite, nor a political party. It contained people drawn from all classes, 
of different standards of education, of opposing political ideas but with 
certain fundamental convictions, which may be summarized under 
three headings: that the injustice from which the peasants suffered was a 
national sin and that the privileged minority was morally responsible 
for it; that autocracy was an evil which caused economic backwardness 
and social inequality and ought therefore to be ended; and that the 
radical political and philosophical theories of the West if applied to 
Russia were bound to produce immediate improvements in all spheres 
of life. These principles were accepted with religious fervour which 
came from the Christian background of the majority of the intelli- 
gentsia, although atheism and materialism were regarded as marks of a 
progressive outlook. These Russian enthusiasts of European radicalism 
and socialism identified Europe with irreligion. 

It was typical that the most popular leaders of the intelligentsia, 
such as Nikolay Chernishevsky (1828-89) and Nikolay Dobrolubov 
(1836-61), were sons of priests, and retained a sense of service to a 
sacred cause when they embraced positivism and nihilism and dismissed 
Orthodox Christianity as obsolete. The Church's main crime in their eyes 
was its negative attitude to violence and its unwillingness to fight auto- 
cracy with revolutionary weapons. The intelligentsia passionately wanted 
to uplift the Russian peasants but despised the people's faith and therefore 

197 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

remained misunderstood and mistrusted by the bulk of the population. 
The left-wing leaders of the intelligentsia believed in automatic pro- 
gress; they predicted that an ideal social order would suddenly arise out 
of the bloodshed and destruction of revolution. They therefore concen- 
trated on undermining the political structure of the country 
without giving thought to the practical consequences of its collapse. 
Among those few who foresaw the sufferings which would result from 
the victory of atheistic materialism in Russia was one of the greatest of 
Russian thinkers and writers, Feodor Dostoevsky. 

Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky (1821-81} 

Dostoevsky (Plate 66) was a doctor's son, born in Moscow. As a youth 
he fell under the influence of French Socialism. He was arrested and 
condemned to death in 1849 for participating in a clandestine society 
where radical political ideas were discussed. The sentence was com- 
muted and instead Dostoevsky spent four years in a Siberian prison. 
These terrible experiences altered his outlook and he returned to St 
Petersburg in 1859 a convinced Christian. 

He had met sin in men in its most appalling and revolting forms; he 
had lived in enforced intimacy with hardened criminals and observed 
the mentality of torturers and executioners. He was absorbed in the 
study of evil but was even more fascinated by his experience of the reality 
of human freedom in the choice between hatred and love. He predicted 
with the authority of a prophet that mankind was preparing a rebellion 
against God, on an unprecedented scale, in the name of progress and 
emancipation. He realized that the muddle-headed and naive Russian 
intelligentsia was heading straight for the disaster of despotic totali- 
tarianism. He wrote: The preachers of materialism and atheism who 
proclaim man's self-sufficiency are preparing indescribable darkness 
and horror for mankind under the guise of renovation and resurrection.' 5 
Amidst the suffering of his Siberian exile Dostoevsky 'met Christ, 
whom', as lie said, C I learned to know as a child but whom I had de- 
serted when I became a liberal European.' 6 He foresaw that those who 
rejected Christianity and the Church did so to prove to themselves and 
to others that men were masters of their own destiny and that no moral 
power higher than man's existed in the Universe. These 'benefactors' 
were building a gigantic prison of compulsory uniformity and would 
show no mercy to those who refused to be slaves in the future totalitarian 
realm. Men were afraid of freedom, according to Dostoevsky, and eager 
to exchange it for security and material prosperity. But men could never 
be truly happy without freedom and therefore having once lost it 

198 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

they would struggle for its recovery, even at the cost of suffering and 
death. 

In his greatest work, The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor*, Dostoevsky 
confronts a defender of totalitarianism with Christ. The Inquisitor 
accuses Jesus Christ of disregarding the frailty of human nature, for 
men cannot fulfil the self-denying requirements of unadulterated 
Christianity, The Inquisitor represents himself as the true lover of men 
who would satisfy their material needs, take the burden of freedom away 
from them and make them prosperous and happy. 

During this passionate diatribe against the teaching of the Gospel 
Christ keeps a silence so eloquent that The Legend is one of the few pieces 
of world literature, outside the New Testament, that gives a living pic- 
ture of Jesus Christ. 

Dostoevsky was not a theologian in the technical sense of the word. He 
never used the word 'redemption' but all his writings are based on a 
profound experience of Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Christ was 
not, for Dostoevsky, a teacher of wisdom, not an example of high moraf* 
conduct; He was truth, beauty and goodness incarnate in perfect 
humanity. By loving Christ, by clinging to Him, sinful and divided men 
could recover harmony and integrity. In Christ evil was conquered for 
in the light of His divine countenance the ugliness of self-centred 
existence was exposed in its ultimate wickedness. 

Dostoevsky found his conception of Christianity embodied in the 
Orthodox Church. He believed that Russian Christians had a message 
for the rest of the world and that their community would play a central 
role in the inevitable conflict between Christian and anti-Christian 
forces. He predicted that this clash would occur at the end of the cen- 
tury. Dostoevsky's warnings were dismissed by the Russian intelligentsia. 
He was admired as a gifted novelist but the profound religious intuitions 
underlying all his fiction were overlooked. Dimitry Merezhkovsky 
(1865-1941) was the first to introduce Russian readers to this theology. 
Since that time Dostoevsky has been recognized as the foremost 
Christian thinker of Russia. 

Vladimir Sergeevich Soloviev (1853-1900) 

Among the intellectuals of the nineteenth century was one who fully 
shared Dostoevsky's convictions and who provided them with a solid 
philosophical basis. He was the most outstanding of Russian philoso- 
phers Vladimir Soloviev (Plate 66). 

Soloviev, like Dostoevsky, gave up his Christian faith for positivism 

* Included in his novel The Brothers Karamazov* 

199 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

and materialism but soon abandoned these. He studied first science and 
then philosophy. In his thesis, written in 1874 and entitled The Crisis of 
Western Philosophy, he asserted the need of a synthesis of faith and reason 
for further progress in creative thinking. Although his approach to 
philosophy was out of harmony with the outlook shared by his exam- 
iners, his ability was such that he was offered an academic appoint- 
ment and sent abroad to complete his studies. Soloviev was, however, 
not only a gifted scholar; he was also a visionary and a prophet. During 
his stay in London, a mystical experience in the Reading Room of the 
British Museum compelled him to go to Egypt and there in the desert 
he had the crucial revelation of his life, a meeting with Hagia Sophia, the 
Divine Wisdom. On his return to Russia he gave up his academic 
career and for the rest of his life he remained a freelance philosopher 
and an itinerant teacher of wisdom. Soloviev was a poet, a social 
reformer, an original theologian, a forerunner of the Ecumenical move- 
ment but, like Dostoevsky, he was above all a prophet who foresaw the 
approaching cataclysm in the history of Russia and Europe. 

Soloviev was a disciple of the Slavophils and a personal friend of 
Dostoevsky, but he went beyond them. He was not only critical of the 
Christian West, as were his predecessors; he realized the vital im- 
portance of reconciling East and West, for he was also acutely aware of 
the defects of Orthodox Christianity. Before his time the Russians either 
accepted the West as their teacher or stubbornly adhered to their own 
tradition. Few contemplated the possibility of restoring communion 
between Rome and the East and if they did thought in terms of surren- 
der by one side to the dictates of the other. Soloviev saw the Church as 
consisting of three distinct and equally necessary elements personified 
by the Apostles, John, Peter and Paul. He identified the Gospel 
according to St John with the contemplative spirit of the Christian 
East. Rome represented the Petrine tradition of action and leadership. 
The intellectual and scholarly interests of the Protestants he linked 
with St Paul and with Pauline interpretation of the Gospel message. 
Soloviev was an optimist, believing in the possibility of Christian 
reintegration. He preached the responsibility of members of the Church 
for the social and ecSfromic conditions of mankind and prayed and 
worked for the victory of charity in relations between Jews and 
Christians. Though Orthodox he was ready to receive Holy Communion 
in the Roman Church. He was a lonely figure misunderstood on all 
sides: but his dedication to the Christian cause, the stimulus of his 
brilliant writings and his mystical intuitions were such that he was 
esteemed even by those who disagreed with his ideas. 

200 



INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL LIBERATION 

In 1900 he published a book which seemed to repudiate his previous 
optimistic conclusions. 7 In the story of Antichrist he prophesied 
Church reunion, but not as a result of properly conducted deliberations. 
He foresaw the coming of a world dictator who, under the mask of 
benevolence and protection, would impose his iron rule on all religions. 
Only a minority of Christians drawn from diverse confessions would 
refuse to recognize the dictator as the Great Benefactor of mankind, 
and persecution would be launched against them till under the pressure 
of extreme danger the faithful remnant of the followers of the Messiah 
would relinquish their age-long prejudice and disagreement and 
restore their unity. This final act of Church history would coincide with 
the end of the world. Such is the theme of Soloviev's strange book. A 
spirit of tension permeates its pages. A vision of approaching catastrophe 
seems to have imposed itself upon the seer and constrained him to con- 
tradict his earlier opinions. The picture of Antichrist, the Universal 
Ruler, is so powerfully drawn that it seems like a realistic portrait and 
not mere fiction. Soloviev was made the vessel of this revelation but 
he could no longer endure its burden. 

In the preface to his last book, composed at Easter 1900, Soloviev wrote: 

"Even in this amended form I still feel there are numerous defects in this 
work, but the not far distant image of pale death quietly advises me 
not to put off its publication. 5 

Soloviev proved to be a good prophet even in his own case. His life 
ended suddenly on 3ist July at the early age of forty-seven. The doctors 
failed to diagnose his case; his vitality seemed to be exhausted and his 
organism refused to serve any more. He was homeless all his life, and he 
died in the house of friends with whom he had found a temporary 
refuge. His extraordinary personality left an indelible mark upon Rus- 
sian culture. His enigmatic figure concludes the story of the Eastern 
Church in the nineteenth century. 



20 1 



CHAPTER SEVEN 

THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

(xx CENTURY) 

The Russian Religious Renaissance Four converts from Marxism to Christianity Attempts at 
reform of the Russian Church (1905-14) Father John of Kronstadt (1829-1908} The All- 
Russian Council (18 August-g November 7977 and 20 January-? April 1918) Reorganiza- 
tion of the Eastern Churches after the First World War (1914-18} The revival of Christianity 
in the Balkans The main characteristics of Eastern Christendom in the nineteenth and twentieth 
centuries The Communists* godless campaign The reaction of the Orthodox The Russian 
Church in exile and its meeting with the Christian West The Russian emigrants and the 
Ecumenical Movement The present state of the Eastern Church 



The Russian Religious Renaissance 

THE TWENTIETH century brought a marked change in the European 
cultural and religious atmosphere which was particularly felt in Russia. 
The excessive utilitarianism and drab materialism of her intelligentsia, 
their exclusive preoccupation with social and economic problems, their 
cult of the peasants, faded away, and poetry, art, and religion 
regained the place of honour denied them in the last decades of the 
nineteenth century. This artistic and religious renaissance began among 
the intellectual &ite in the two capitals of St Petersburg and Moscow, 
but it spread rapidly and on the eve of the First World War the younger 
generation of the Russian intelligentsia had moved away from the belief 
that Darwinism solved the mystery of creation and that materialism was 
the last word in enlightenment. Positivism was no longer accepted as 
dogmatic truth and was replaced by an intense search for other philo- 
sophic viewpoints. A desire to understand the symbolic language of 
Christianity became fashionable and brought some leaders of the 
intelligentsia into the Orthodox Church; others embraced Occultism 
and Theosophy or were satisfied with their own mystical intuitions. 
Poets like Alexander Blok (1880-1921), Andrey Biely (1880-1935), 
Viacheslav Ivanov (1886-1949), writers like Dimitry Merezhkovsky 
(1865-1941), Vasily Rozanov (1856-1919), composers like Alexander 
Scriabin (1871-1915), painters like Mikhail Vrubel (1856-1910), V. 
Vasnetsov (1848-1942), Michail Nesterov (1862-1942), Nikolay 
Reirih (1874-1947) and Vasily Kandinsfcy (d. I944) 1 were all pre- 
occupied with religious problems and their approach to art was in sharp 
contrast with the moralistic and didactic tendencies of the older 
generation. The renewed interest in Christianity facilitated personal 

202 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

encounters between the intelligentsia and leaders of the Orthodox 
Church, the two sections of Russian society which had lost contact with 
each other. 

In 1901, on the initiative of Merezhkovsky, his wife Zinaida Hippius 
(1869-1945), and of V. M.Skvortsov (1859-1 932), alay theologian and a 
keen missionary, regular and successful religious meetings were started 
in St Petersburg. The clergy and professors of the Theological Academy 
discussed with writers and noted intellectuals such questions as the 
mission of the Church, and its dogmas and ethics. It was an entirely new 
experience for both sides, for the intelligentsia had previously treated 
such problems as outside the realm of its concerns. Similar societies 
were organized in Moscow and in Kiev. The spiritual and cultural 
revival owed much to Vladimir Soloviev who thus achieved posthumous 
popularity. The poets regarded him as their master, the philosophers 
studied his works, the theologians became aware of the importance of 
his ideas. 

Among his disciples the most notable were four ex-Marxists who at 
the beginning of the century abandoned materialism and atheism and 
joined the Orthodox Church. 

Four converts from Marxism to Christianity 

They were Piotr Struve (1870-1944), Sergey Bulgakov (1871-1944) 
(Plate 69), Nikolay Berdiaev (1874-1948) and Simeon Frank (1877- 
1950). Their conversion was an event of the first importance, a turning 
point in the evolution of the intelligentsia. In the nineteenth century 
there had been severe critics of the intelligentsia but most of them were 
political conservatives and their criticisms were therefore brushed aside. 
This time the campaign against materialism was opened by 
recognized and respected members of the intelligentsia, by four 
philosophers and economists, who had acquired the reputation of 
being able exponents of Marxism, the latest doctrine borrowed from the 
West and accepted as a panacea for all social and economic evils. The 
desertion of these prominent men profoundly affected the temper of the 
intelligentsia. The old guard of radicalism was alarmed but younger 
people welcomed the stimulating ideas in the writings of these philo- 
sophers who in 1909, with several friends, published a symposium 
Vehki (Signposts) which provoked heated controversy. In five months six 
editions of the book appeared. Readers were impressed by its underlying 
unity though the authors did not see each other's articles before 
they were printed. Their main theme was the logical contradiction be- 
tween social utopianism, which confidently expected economic justice, 

203 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

peace and prosperity to be achieved all over the world, and the belief 
that the universe was the outcome of blind physical forces and bio- 
logically dependent on a struggle for the survival of the fittest. The con- 
tributors to Vehki insisted that the hope of a moral organization of 
society rested on the belief that the cosmos had an author, and a pur- 
pose intelligible to men. Christianity was the most progressive force in 
the evolution of mankind for it gave the assurance that moral effort and 
aspiration were in harmony with the will of the Creator, who had 
revealed his design for the Universe through the life, death and resur- 
rection of Jesus Christ. The symposium called the intelligentsia to 
return to religion, to give up terrorism as a legitimate political weapon 
and to recognize that disregard of the Christian code could only lead to 
revival of that enslavement to the despotic state from which men had 
been liberated by Christ. Vehki reiterated Dostoevsky's prediction that 
atheistic egalitarianism would bring about tyranny on an unprece- 
dented scale. The weight of these warnings was augmented by their 
authors' intimate knowledge of Lenin and other exponents of Marxism, 
who had been their associates, and by their familiarity with the philo- 
sophical and economic theories according to which the communist 
social order was to be planned. The ex-Marxists had arrived at their 
conclusion after hard and long inner struggles in the course of which 
they had rejected atheism as a false interpretation of reality and em- 
braced Christianity as the only satisfactory solution of life's mystery. 

These former revolutionaries did not however surrender their 
intellectual freedom. On the contrary, they joined the Church intending 
to resume their campaign for a better social order and in the hope of 
seeing the Christian community released from bureaucratic control. 
Their expectations were justified. The Russian Church started to move 
away from the fixity which marked its life in the nineteenth century. 



Attempts at reform of the Russian Church 
Russia's defeat in the war against Japan (1904-05) led to open expres- 
sion of popular discontent with bureaucratic inefficiency. Nicholas II 
(1894-1917) made concessions to public demands for greater freedom. 
One of the laws promulgated in 1905 guaranteed religious equality to 
all citizens of the Empire and offered the right of self-government to 
religious associations. The Russian Church alone had no share in the 
benefits. Count Witte (1849-1915), the initiator of these liberal reforms, 
recognized this anomaly and entered into negotiations with the Metro- 
politan of St Petersburg, Anthony (Vadkovsky) (1899-1912), with a 
view to securing greater liberty for the Orthodox. The Metropolitan 

204 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

responded warmly to the offer and sent a memorandum to the Govern- 
ment suggesting improvements in ecclesiastical administration. This 
document when published broke the long silence imposed upon the 
Orthodox by State control. The revival of Church autonomy was 
demanded in all parts of the country. Even the bishops, carefully selected 
from the more obedient clergy, openly manifested a desire for far- 
reaching reforms. On 23rd March 1905, the members of the Synod 
sent a petition to the Emperor for a convocation of Church Council and 
the restoration of the Patriarchate. Nicholas II expressed his approval 
and, as a preliminary step, a commission was set up to prepare the 
council's programme. A careful questionnaire was sent out to all the 
bishops asking their opinion on the best ways of improving Church life. 
Their replies and minutes of the preconciliar committee were published 
in 1906 and are valuable material in illustrating the state of the Church 
on the eve of dissolution of the Empire. A remarkable feature of these 
documents is the unanimity with which the leaders of the Russian 
Church repudiate the order which had governed their lives for two 
hundred years. Only two diocesan bishops out of sixty-two did not advo- 
cate its abolition. The preconciliar committee included no defenders of 
the Synod. The question was, what organization should replace it? The 
Conservatives favoured restoration of the Patriarchate, the Liberals 
wanted something more democratic. 

The news of the forthcoming liberation of the Church was enthu- 
siastically received all over the country and newspapers and magazines 
devoted much space to discussions of the prospective reforms. These 
bright expectations were not fulfilled, however. The Empire founded by 
Peter the Great refused to release the Church. The urgently needed 
improvements were indefinitely postponed under various pretexts, 
and in the last years of the Empire's agony the ecclesiastical administra- 
tion was further degraded, for it fell under the influence of Grigory 
Rasputin* (1872-1916), a peasant from the Urals who had gained 
a reputation for holiness in Court circles. It was a time when many 
false teachers and prophets attracted admirers and moral laxity was 
widespread; but the same period saw a strong revival of genuine 
Christianity, manifested in the appearance of a number of out- 
standing theologians like Fr Pavel Florensky (1882-1949), M. M. 
Kareev (1866-1934), V. Nesmelov (18631920), Metropolitan Antony 
(Khrapovitsky) (1863-1936), and of Christian philosophers like Prince 
Sergey Trubetskoy (1862-1905) Prince Evgeny Trubotskoy (1863- 

* Rasputin is often mistakenly described as a monk. He was a married man and had two 
children. 

205 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

1920), V. Ern (1879-1919) and N. Novgorodtsev (1863-1927). As 
the Russian Church neared the time when it would be put to its 
severest test, the grace of the Holy Spirit became abundant. Among 
charismatic Christians a special place belongs to Father John of 
Kronstadt. 

Father John of Kronstadt (1829-1908) 

Fr John Sergiev (Plate 67) was for many years Dean of the cathedral in 
the Russian naval base guarding the approaches to St Petersburg. He 
acquired a nationwide reputation for his exceptional healing gifts and 
his power to change the hearts of men. He could cure the sick even at a 
distance when requests for help reached him by letter or telegram. 
His crowded services were attended by people from all parts of the 
country. Fr John revived frequent communion among his followers and 
used public confession of sins as a means of conversion. He was also an 
excellent organizer and created a number of philanthropic institutions, 
which housed and provided employment for several thousand people in 
need of assistance (about 8,000 in 1902). His diary, entitled My Life in 
Christ, has become one of the most popular devotional books and is 
translated into many languages. Another priest of rare spiritual insight 
was Alexey Mechev (d. 1 923) . He had an exceptional gift of helping people 
to know themselves. In the years of the First World War and at the 
beginning of the Communist revolution his prophetic insight attracted 
crowds to his services. Nikolay Berdiaev visited him before his expulsion 
from Russia by the Communists in 1922 and was greatly comforted by 
Fr Alexey's assurance that his exile was providential and would offer 
him an opportunity of spreading widely his Christian message. Fr Alexey 
had never been outside Russia but he accurately diagnosed both the spiri- 
tual condition of Europe between the two world wars, and the response 
which Berdiaev's message would evoke among Western Christians. 

The All-Russian Church Council (i8th August-gth November 1917 and 
soth January-jth April 1918) 

In February 1917 the Empire collapsed in the middle of the world war. 
The liberal provisional government failed to maintain its authority and 
growing anarchy soon paralysed military operations and civil admini- 
stration. In those months of chaos and privation the only constructive 
force was the Church. It was reorganized on a proper canonical basis 
and the most valuable reforms were achieved by the All-Russian Coun- 
cil. The speedy convocation of this Council was the work of the last 
Procurator of the Synod, Professor Anton Kartashev (1875-1960). He 

206 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

was appointed in July 1917 and at once gave up the title associated with 
subjugation of the Church. As Minister of religion he offered every 
possible assistance to the Church in bringing the bishops and other 
representatives together. The Council met in Moscow on i5th August 
1917. It included all that was best in the Russian Church among clergy 
and laity. In spite of the anarchy preceding the Communist uprising 
in October 1917, which established Lenin's dictatorship, hostile 
to the Church, the Council accomplished a number of far-reaching 
reforms; the Patriarchate was restored and Tikhon (Beliavin) 
(1866-1925) was chosen (3ist May 1917). Self-government was revived 
and central and diocesan organs of administration were established. 
The success of the Council was remarkable, for its members showed 
wisdom and maturity in their judgment when the rest of the nation, 
especially its political leaders, had lost all sense of proportion. The 
vitality and strength of the Russian Orthodox was proved by their 
ability to devise the proper constitution of the Church under the most 
unfavourable conditions of the civil war and after two centuries of 
subjugation to bureaucratic control by the Empire. 

The Council was also the triumph of those leaders of the intelligentsia 
who returned to the Church before the outbreak of the Revolution, 
trusting in its constructive force. The outstanding man of this group, 
Professor Bulgakov, was elected to the supreme Church Soviet, insti- 
tuted as a permanent organ of administration by the Council. Thus the 
necessary reconstruction of Church government was completed pre- 
cisely at the moment when the Communists began their campaign 
against all religions. 

Reorganization of the Eastern Churches after the First World War 



The First World War caused the collapse of four empires, the Russian, 
German, Austrian and Ottoman. Their disappearance led to drastic 
changes in the life and destiny of all Eastern Christians. 

To deal first with the Orthodox of the Byzantine rite: the Patriarchate 
of Constantinople, which included some eight million Christians before 
1914, was reduced to some 80,000 Greeks resident in Constantinople; 
the Greeks remaining in Asia Minor were expelled from their ancient 
homes after the Turkish victory over the Greeks in 1922. The leaders of 
the Turkish Republic consented only under foreign pressure to allow 
the Ecumenical Patriarch to retain his residence in the Phanar and 
imposed many irksome restrictions on his movements. The Greeks of 
Rhodes and some other neighbouring islands and the Greeks of the 

207 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Diaspora, especially numerous in America, continued to recognize him 
as their spiritual head. These Greeks outside Turkey added some 
500,000 to his flock. The Patriarch of Alexandria became a subject of 
independent Egypt; his jurisdiction extended over all Greeks in Africa 
and comprised some 120,000. 

The Patriarchate of Antioch had its territory divided between the 
two republics of Syria and Lebanon. Some 280,000 Orthodox Arabs 
were left under his supervision, of whom 100,000 were scattered all over 
the world, the dioceses of North and South America containing the 
majority. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem suffered from the disturbing 
conflict between the Arabs and Israel. Most of its 50,000 people were 
Arabs, but the Patriarch himself and the leading clergy were all Greeks 
and this created friction and discontent. 

The autocephalous Church of Cyprus (360,000) retained its status as 
did the smallest of the Orthodox Churches, that of Mount Sinai (300). 
The largest, that of Russia, restored its Patriarchate in 1917 and disap- 
peared soon after from the scene of international relations, cut off from 
the rest of the world by the Communists. 

The collapse of the Russian Monarchy revived the autocephalous 
status of the ancient Church of Georgia (2,500,000) which had been 
absorbed in the Russian Church at the beginning of the nineteenth 
century after the incorporation of Georgia to the St Petersburg 
Empire. 

Five new autonomous Churches came into existence as a result of the 
Communist Revolution: the Orthodox Churches of Poland (4,500,000), 
of Finland (70,000), of Lithuania (55,000), of Latvia (160,000), of 
Estonia (250,000). Some of them accepted Constantinople as their 
Ecclesiastical Supervisor, others remained nominally linked to the 
Russian Church. Uncertain of their allegiance were the Church of 
Japan (40,000) and the Russian Orthodox Church in North America 
(1,500,000). 

The Church of Greece greatly increased its numbers by the influx 
of refugees from Asia Minor. In 1910 it had two million, after the 
First World War six million. A vast extension in territory and 
numbers also took place in the Churches of Serbia and Rumania. The 
Serbian Church became a Patriarchate (in 1920) and absorbed the 
Church of Montenegro and the Serbian dioceses in Austria and 
Hungary. Its members mounted from 2,300,000 (1910) to 7,000,000 
(1925). The Rumanian Patriarchate included the Orthodox of Wall- 
achia, Moldavia, Bessarabia, Bukovina and Transylvania. In 1910 the 
Rumanian Church counted 4,550,000; after the War 15,000,000. 

208 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

The Church of Bulgaria also grew but less than the others for the 
Bulgarians were twice defeated, in the Balkan War of 1912 and in the 
First World War. In 1910 their Church was 1,500,000 strong; its mem- 
bership in 1924 had risen to 5,000,000. 

The Albanian Church acquired autocephalous status in 1922 and 
numbered some 215,000 members. 

Another Church came into being that of Carpatho-Russia in 
Czechoslovakia. This isolated branch of the Russian Church had 
accepted Union with Rome in 1652. Several attempts by some of these 
Uniates to return to the Orthodox Church were treated by the Austro- 
Hungarian Government as political treason. When their land became 
incorporated in the Czech Republic, some 200,000 of theUniates became 
Orthodox while some 500,000 remained under Rome. 

No less important changes took place among the Oriental Orthodox. 
The worst fate befell the Armenians. During the war they were com- 
pletely exterminated by the Turks in their own land and only those 
who happened to live in Constantinople survived. The Church in 
Soviet Armenia was at the same time exposed to Communist 
oppression. Nevertheless, that vigorous race continued to cling to 
its national Church, which numbered some 3,000,000 members in 

I930- 

The Copts of Egypt (900,000) and the Monophysites of Ethiopia 
(8,000,000) continued as before in their isolation, stubbornly opposing 
any deviation from the forms of Church life unchanged since the Middle 
Ages. The Syrian Orthodox Church of Travancore, on the contrary, 
showed signs of revival. The educational standard of its clergy was much 
improved, missionary work started and its representatives took an 
active part in ecumenical work and entered into contact with the 
Orthodox of the Byzantine tradition, with whom they had never been 
in touch before. These improvements, however, caused a split in 1908 in 
its ranks. The more conservative section remained under the control of 
the Syrian Jacobite Patriarch resident in Horns but the more pro- 
gressive party, led by the Catholicos Gevarguese, rejected this tutelage 
and asserted its right to self-government. Each branch had at that time 
some 500,000 members. In 1959 both sides were at last reconciled. The 
Jacobites of Syria continued to decline in strength and numbers. From 
400,000 they were reduced to 80,000 after the war. The Nestorian or 
Assyrian Church suffered even more grievously. After proclamation of 
Iraq's independence in 1920, the Mohammedans massacred their 
Christian compatriots. Out of 200,000 in 1910, only some 70,000 
survived as fugitives from their own country. Their spiritual head, Mar 

o 209 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Shimun, was expelled and found a temporary refuge in England, later 
moving to the USA. 

In general terms one may say that those Eastern Christians who 
remained under the control of Islam continued to decline, whereas 
those who secured freedom displayed considerable vitality in spite of 
manifold obstacles and trials. 

The revival of Christianity in the Balkans 

The main problem confronting the greatly enlarged Balkan Churches 
was to amalgamate Christians who for centuries had lived under diverse 
political and economic systems and developed their own characteristics. 
Some of these Christians had only recently emerged from Turkish 
oppression; others had a century's experience of independence; others 
had been for longer or shorter periods incorporated in Austro-Hungary. 
Rivalry, suspicion, misunderstandings were inevitable; the Orthodox 
from Austria looked down on others as less cultured; the clergy drawn 
from independent states claimed priority in Church Government for 
they had won their freedom by a hard struggle, whilst the rest had been 
liberated without the sacrifices and dangers of rebellion. 

These clashes in ecclesiastical circles were aggravated by political 
conflicts in the newly-formed states which brought some of them to 
civil war, as in the case of Jugoslavia under German occupation 
(1940-44). But in spite of everything, these Christian communities 
were able to start work in earnest for the moral and religious education 
and improvement of their nations. Their efforts towards spiritual 
renewal took various forms, but all aimed at securing a wider and more 
responsible participation of the laity in the life of the Church, at reviv- 
ing its missionary spirit and raising the standard of pastoral work among 
the clergy. 

In Greece the renewal was associated with several missionary move- 
ments including the Zoe brotherhood of theologians and preachers. 
In 1938 the society had some eighty members, the majority lay theo- 
logians (only twelve were in Holy Orders) devoting all their time to 
preaching and teaching. Most had theological degrees, all were celi- 
bates and held all possessions in common. If they desired to marry, they 
might still work but were no longer treated as full members. The 
brotherhood organized Sunday schools (298 schools with 30,500 pupils), 
published popular religious literature, a magazine oe (circulation 
76,000) and was responsible for catechitical instruction. All work was 
voluntary. No subsidies were accepted from outsiders. The new methods 
introduced by Zoe at first aroused suspicion and its activities were 

210 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

several times examined by the Synod. It finally received full approba- 
tion in 1923. Its success was such that other, similar societies have been 
formed under direct control of the Synod. 

The Zoe brotherhood is a typical example of an unofficial Orthodox 
movement. Lay members of the Eastern Church have a strong sense of 
responsibility for the life and work of their community. 

A similar movement started by ordinary peasants greatly improved 
the life of the Serbian Church. It began after the end of the First World 
War among soldiers returned from captivity. In the prisoner-of-war 
camps they had learned to read the Holy Scriptures together and to 
discuss religious questions. They continued to do so in their villages, 
bringing others into their study circles. This movement was spon- 
taneous and at first had no recognized leader (the clergy kept aloof 
from it) but was Orthodox in teaching and spirit. It acquired a 
nation-wide significance when it attracted the attention of the most 
remarkable Bishop of the Serbian Church, Nikolay Velimirovich of 
Ohrid (1880-1956) (Plate 68), who consented to lead the movement. 
A powerful preacher and an original thinker, he was able to speak both 
to the learned and to the simple. Under his inspiring guidance, the 
Bogomolci, as they were called, stirred and renewed the life of the 
Serbian Church. One of their important contributions was the annual 
convention usually held near a famous monastery which attracted large 
numbers of pilgrims. In consequence, the religious vocation among 
women was revived. This had died out in the Balkans under the Turks 
but in the post-war years a number of convents were founded in Serbia. 
They were directed at first by Russian nuns who came as refugees to 
Yugoslavia, but the Serbians later assumed responsibility for them; 
several have even survived under the Communists. 

A more complex movement known as the Iron Guard was started in 
Rumania between the two wars. It acquired a strong political colouring. 
Its main supporters were young men and women including university 
students. These Rumanians reacted sharply against that secularism of the 
West which had been so fashionable among older educated Rumanians, 
who despised their own culture and religion, and treated emancipation 
from the Orthodox Church as a mark of inclusion in the circle of civi- 
lized people. The Iron Guard regarded Church membership as the 
sign of true love and understanding of Rumania. The political bias of 
the Iron Guard towards Fascism compromised the religious value of the 
movement and diverted it from its original purpose of strengthening 
and purifying the life of the Rumanian Church. 

The rise of National Socialism in Germany brought about a crisis in 

211 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the political life of the Balkan people. Their sympathies were with the 
Western democracies but they found themselves caught between 
Communists and Fascists. The Second World War left all Balkan 
countries except Greece behind the Iron Curtain. The Communists 
after gaining power avoided direct attack on the Church and followed 
the example of Stalin's post-war policy, allowing the Church to main- 
tain its organization on condition it complied with the law prohibiting 
religious propaganda. 

The main characteristics of Eastern Christendom in the nineteenth and twentieth 
centuries 

During the two last centuries the Russian Church was a dominant 
factor in the life of the Eastern Christians. It was not only a much larger 
body greatly exceeding in numbers all other Orthodox put together but 
it was also the recognized partner of a mighty Empire whilst the rest lived 
either under an oppressive rule of non-Orthodox, or were divided 
between small states. 

The main problem for Eastern Christians during that period was the 
disintegrating impact of Western civilization which captured the 
imagination of the younger generation. Their desire to copy Europe led 
them to a critical and even hostile attitude towards the Orthodox Church, 
dismissed as part of the old, obsolete order. The defenders of Orthodoxy 
among the Westernized section at first were few. They increased 
markedly however towards the end of the period. Here again Russia 
occupied the key position, the most fanatical atheists and the most 
convinced defenders of Christianity could be found among her people. 
The battle between godlessness and religion which took place in Russia 
after the collapse of the Empire was an event surpassing the limits of 
Eastern Christendom. The Communist dictatorship pressed the Eastern 
Christians into the front line of a world-wide conflict and thereby ended 
that isolation of the Orthodox which had affected their life and thought 
during the past millennium. The Christian East and West once more 
became partners in the great adventure of building up a universal 
Christian order. The story of the contest between the Communists and 
Russian Christians provides one of the central themes in religious history 
of the twentieth century. 

The Communists' Godless Campaign 

The Communist attack on Christians, liberals and fellow-socialists in 
1917 came as a shock to the majority of the Russian intelligentsia. Yet 
Vladimir Ulianov-Lenin (1870-1924), the indisputable head of the 

212 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

Party, acted in exact conformity with the predictions of the authors of 
Vehki. He was not only convinced that he possessed the secret of human 
happiness; he was equally sure that he alone was able to bring felicity 
and prosperity to mankind and that, therefore, it was his revolutionary 
duty first to silence and later to eliminate altogether all those who had 
other ideas about the ultimate purpose of human life. Lenin realized 
that his most radical opponents were the Christians who saw the world 
and humanity in an entirely different light from dialectical materialism. 
He felt a deep personal aversion to God and never missed an oppor- 
tunity of deriding the believers. In his eyes it was he, Lenin, not Jesus 
Christ who was the Saviour of mankind. 

Lenin's passionate belief in the absolute truth of his doctrine has been 
unreservedly accepted by the Communists. The uncompromising oppo- 
sition of the Party to Christianity reflects faithfully its founder's con- 
victions. This determined enmity has been further exacerbated by a 
number of ideas which Christians and Communists share, but which 
they interpret in different ways. The notion of evil, for instance, is 
accepted by the Communists, but is identified with economic exploita- 
tion. Sin is understood as the support of the Capitalist order; providence 
as the law of progress defined by dialectical materialism. The Saviour of 
mankind is the Party which under the direction of its inspired leaders 
alone can secure to men the bliss and security of a classless society. The 
belief in these dogmatic statements excludes the possibility of a peaceful 
co-existence between Christianity and Communism and the history of 
the Church under Soviet rule reveals the persistent attempts of the 
Government to suppress all Christian influence. The tactics of the 
Communists can vary considerably and their frontal attacks have often 
been followed by intervals of temporary appeasement, but the Party 
leaders have never given up their final object of making dialectical 
materialism the only acceptable outlook for people under their control. 
As far as Russia is concerned, the Communist campaign against the 
Church three times reached the highest degree of intensity this 
happened in the years 1918-23, 1929-32 and 1937-39. On all 
three occasions the Communists hoped to annihilate Christianity 
altogether, but each time they failed in their object and were obliged to 
retreat. 

The first attack was planned and executed by Lenin himself. In his 
original optimism he expected to destroy the Church by one stroke and 
he issued in quick succession a number of drastic decrees against the 
Christians. On 4th December 1917, all Church property was confis- 
cated; on nth December all theological schools were closed; on i8th 

213 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

December civil marriage was made obligatory. On 23rd January 1918 
all these hastily promulgated revolutionary orders were incorporated in 
an anti-religious law aiming at undermining the material foundations of 
religious associations and at depriving them of any power to maintain 
order and discipline. 

As a materialist, Lenin believed that people belonged to the Church 
either because they obtained some material benefit from it (the clergy) 
or because they were ignorant and obsessed with superstitions and fears 
(the laity). He was confident that the self-evident truth of his own teach- 
ing would without any difficulty defeat Christ and His Gospel and Lenin 
allowed therefore both religious and anti-religious teaching and propa- 
ganda. It came as a shock to the Communists to realize that the destruc- 
tion of the Church was a much more difficult task than they had antici- 
pated. There were some Christians, including priests, who publicly 
renounced their religion and, encouraged by the Government, the mob 
profaned some churches and murdered several bishops and priests. But 
in general Communist decrees produced results the very opposite of 
those Lenin expected. They consolidated the Church by relieving it of 
unstable members and thus increasing its vitality and power. The early 
years of Communist rule indeed witnessed a religious revival. 

This unexpected resistance forced the Communists to use more 
brutal methods. The Patriarch Tikhon was imprisoned in 1922, 
whilst the Metropolitan Veniamin of Petrograd (1917-22), who was 
especially popular among the industrial workers, was executed together 
with some of his clergy. These measures were accompanied by an 
attempt to divide the Church by the Communist-sponsored so-called 
'Living Church Movement 3 (1922-26), which attracted several ambi- 
tious bishops and priests who hoped to secure control of the Church 
with the help of the Party. This weapon of schism failed however; the 
vast majority of clergy and people remained faithful to the Patriarch 
and 'The Living Church' dwindled to nothing in spite of State protec- 
tion. 

The Patriarch died on 25th March 1925. His popularity was enor- 
mous; a hundred thousand mourners took part in his funeral, which 
was conducted by sixty bishops and hundreds of clergy. It was the 
striking manifestation of the people's devotion to the Church. The 
Government, alarmed by the undiminishing vitality of the Church, re- 
fused permission for the election of Tikhon's successor and started the 
systematic arrest and deportation to concentration camps of trusted 
priests and bishops. But Lenin's death in 1924, and the struggle for the 
control over the Party that followed, brought a temporary relaxation in 

214 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

the pressure of the anti-religious campaign, and for the next two years 
both people and Church enjoyed comparative freedom. 

The second frontal attack was launched in 1929. This time it was 
conducted by the new dictator, losif Vissarionovich Djugashvili-Stalin 
(1879-1953). The Communists no longer misconceived the strength of 
Christian convictions. They realized that intellectual arguments were 
not adequate to combat belief in God and that therefore the best chance 
of eliminating religion was by complete prohibition of Christian teach- 
ing. The law published in April 1929 made it a criminal offence to 
preach the Gospel, to argue against materialism and atheism, or to 
make any attempt to bring any one into the Church. The only activity 
still allowed to believers was gathering together for worship. Each group 
of worshippers was treated as an isolated unit, which could continue its 
existence on condition that twenty people signed a document expressing 
their desire to pray in public. Those who did so exposed themselves to 
the secret police and were usually gradually arrested. 

The Law of 1929 marked a Christian victory. The omnipotent 
Communist State, in complete control of all means of propaganda, 
education and instruction, was obliged to impose compulsory silence 
upon Christians, who were already deprived of press, schools and 
literature and yet remained undefeated in debates and discussions. The 
years 1929-32, the years of enforced collectivization and mass deporta- 
tion of the peasants, witnessed the wholesale closing of churches and the 
exile and imprisonment of the parochial clergy. But the famine and 
general dislocation of economic life caused by collectivization obliged 
the Communists to make a halt in their anti-religious campaign. Stalin's 
constitution of 1936 even granted the right of citizenship to ministers of 
religion, a right that had previously been denied them. 

The last and fiercest attack on the Church was made in 1937-39. 
These were the grimmest years in the history of the Communist State; 
thousands of people were uprooted and banished to the extreme north 
and Siberia; the army, the party, and the remnants of the intelligentsia 
were exposed to constant purges; spying and denunciation reached 
unheard of proportions. Fear and despondency brought almost all 
manifestations of organized Church life to a standstill. On the eve of the 
Second World War many careful foreign observers were under the 
impression that the Communists had succeeded in intimidating and 
demoralizing Church members to the extent that religion had been 
effectively destroyed, especially among the young, brought up in schools 
giving compulsory anti-religious instruction. The war dispelled this 
illusion. In 194142 the major part of European Russia was overrun by 

215 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the Germans and as soon as the Communist pressure against religion 
was removed, the people spontaneously reopened their Churches. This 
took place all over the country and it happened in spite of twenty years 
of relentless efforts to exterminate Gospel teaching. Everywhere people 
disregarded the privations of the German occupation, repaired the 
buildings, unearthed the sacred vessels, recovered concealed service 
books, formed choirs and induced the clergy to resume their office. The 
figures for the important diocese of Kiev speak eloquently of the deter- 
mination of the Orthodox to revive their Church life at the first oppor- 
tunity: 2 



(Before the (Under (A year after the temporary 

Communists) Stalin) suspension of Communist rule] 

Churches 1,710 2 (?) 616 

Monasteries 23 8 

Monks and Nuns 5^93 - 

Priests 1,435 3 

Deacons 277 i 21 

Cantors 1,400 2 387 

Christian faith proved so strong that Stalin was obliged to retreat 
from his uncompromising position and in 1943 he allowed the election 
of a Patriarch. The Metropolitan Sergy (Stragorodsky, 1861-1944) was 
chosen by the surviving bishops. On his death, Alexey (Simansky) 
became his successor (plate 71). Further concessions were soon made. 
The training of the clergy was resumed and eight seminaries and two 
theological academies were opened. Such theological books as had 
escaped destruction were returned to those schools and religious com- 
munities were recognized (before the War they existed probably in 
secret). A number of Churches were restored for religious use and a 
monthly Church periodical appeared in Moscow. The law of 1929 was 
not abrogated, however, and Christian propaganda remained still a 
criminal offence; but the right to worship, which, though legally 
guaranteed, had been practically denied to Christians between 1937-39, 
was no longer challenged. The victory which the Russian Church thus 
achieved was won neither by the strength of its organization nor by 
inspired leadership but by the faithfulness of countless men, women and 
even children who persisted in their love of Jesus Christ. 

The reaction of the Orthodox 

The Communists miscalculated the strength of the Church and have 

216 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

been obliged to stop their direct assaults against the believers. Now their 
hope of ultimate victory rests on the systematic re-education of the 
masses so as to persuade them of the falsehood of Christian teaching. 
The Christians have also been forced to learn by their mistakes and to 
revise their policy. At first many of their leaders regarded the Com- 
munists as criminal adventurers who had by accident established a 
temporary hold over the nation. The Patriarch Tikhon had issued on 
i gth January 1918 an edict of excommunication directed against those 
who profaned churches, blasphemed and murdered the faithful. This 
excommunication had held no terrors for those who had discarded all 
belief in God. Only gradually did both sides come to realize that the 
struggle would be hard and lasting. 

In the course of the various stages of the anti-religious campaign four 
distinct attitudes towards the Soviet Government emerged among the 
members of the Church. First, uncompromising repudiation of the 
Communists as the enemies of Christ and his Church and a consequent 
refusal to have any dealings with the government. Secondly, recog- 
nition that there was substantial agreement between the Communist 
and the Christian ideas of social order and therefore an offer of colla- 
boration with the Party. Thirdly, insistence on a clear cut separation 
between the Church and the State based on non-interference in the 
internal affairs of each other. Fourthly, acceptance of Communist rule 
as the legitimate form of government and submission to its political 
control on condition of being allowed to keep intact the Orthodoxy of 
doctrine and worship. 

The first and the second points of view were held only by minorities. 
The uncompromising Christians usually ended their lives in concentra- 
tion camps whilst the collaborators were unable to secure the Com- 
munists' support and were therefore rejected alike by both sides. 

The majority of the Orthodox took one of the last two views. They 
had in common the conviction that the Church had to face the fact of 
the Communist order and to refrain from any political opposition to the 
Government. This was not a policy of opportunism, but the outcome of 
the belief that every State exists with the sanction of God, who is the 
ultimate ruler of the universe. The disagreement between the two 
parties in the Church centred on the amount and character of State 
control which could be legitimately accepted in return for the legal 
recognition of the Church. 

Metropolitan Sergy Stragorodsky was one of the leading exponents of 
the fourth point of view and when the Communists came to the con- 
clusion that the existence of the Church had to be recognized, he was 

217 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

elected Patriarch. His policy of acceptance of the Communist control 
over the Church except in the spheres of teaching and worship was 
followed by his collaborators after his death. 

The Soviet Government created a special State department to deal 
with religious affairs. All matters related to the opening of churches, to 
their repair, to taxation of clergy, and to the general supervision of 
Christian activities are its responsibility. The Communists do not inter- 
fere in an open way with the inner life of the Church, but the Religious 
Regulations published in 1945 make it obligatory for every holder of an 
ecclesiastical office from the Patriarch to a parish priest to be registered 
with the Communist authorities before he can exercise his function. 
( 16.26.48.) The government has a right to refuse a registration or to 
cancel it after it has been granted. 

This means that neither the Patriarch nor a diocesan bishop can 
make any appointment without ascertaining beforehand that the sug- 
gested candidate is acceptable to the Communists. This is a compromise 
on both sides; the hierarchs are restricted in their choice, but the 
Communists are also obliged to register a certain number of clergy in 
order to make possible the continuation of organized Church life. 

The status of religious associations in other Communist-controlled 
countries is based on the same principles, although it is usually more 
liberal than in the USSR; and in some countries, like Poland for 
example, even the Christian instruction of children is permitted, 
although only by persons duly registered and approved by the Com- 
munist authorities. 

The struggle between Christianity and Lenin's doctrine of dialectical 
materialism is not yet over. The Communists have the advantage of a 
monopoly of education and they are able to exclude the Christians from 
all leading positions, but they rely upon obsolete scientific theories in 
support of their claims that science has proved the eternity of matter and 
the non-existence of God. They fear and mistrust freedom and refuse to 
the Christians the right to defend by argument their religion, and this is 
their main weakness. 

The Christian cause suffers from the artificial restrictions imposed 
upon the activities of the Church, from the lack of intellectual freedom 
and from the exclusion from its leadership of men considered too inde- 
pendent by the Communists. Its strength lies, however, in the truth of its 
teaching and as far as the Russian Church is concerned, in the Euchari- 
stic experience of its members, which assures them of divine love 
and of the reality of their fellowship with the risen and ascended 
Christ. 

218 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

The Russian Church in Exile and its meeting with the Christian West 
The years 1918-22 were a time of civil war in Russia. After the military 
defeat of the anti- Communist forces, a great exodus took place; more 
than a million people were driven into exile. These fugitives were of 
diverse nationalities, creeds and political opinions, but the majority of 
them belonged to the Russian intelligentsia. The hardship of life outside 
their own country and the bitterness of defeat altered their outlook. 
Many of them recognized the truth of the warnings in Vehki, which had 
predicted that godless Communism, for the victory of which Wester- 
nized Russians had laboured, would bring not equality and freedom but 
ruthless dictatorship. Political disillusionment helped many to find their 
way back to the Church, which became the centre for the colonies of 
Russian exiles, particularly numerous at first in the Balkans, France and 
Germany. 

The younger generation of the intelligentsia had begun this return 
to Christianity even before the Revolution, but the process was hastened 
by the emigration. Members of the Russian Church in Exile were con- 
fronted with many difficult tasks: they were able to organize Church life 
without political interference, but they were handicapped by uncer- 
tainty, poverty and social degradation; they wanted also to help their 
harassed co-religionists in Russia; and they were obliged to define 
their attitude to Western Christians among whom they had to live and 
work. Different solutions of these problems divided the Russian emi- 
grants. The most conservative, led at first by the Metropolitan Antony 
(Khrapovitsky, 1863-1936) and after his death by the Metropolitan 
Anastasy (b. 1873), seeing the Church as the natural ally of the 
Monarchy, thought they ought to struggle for the revival of the Empire. 
Convinced that their views prevailed also among Christians in Russia, 
they assumed the right to speak in the name of the whole Russian 
Church. They were suspicious of and even hostile to Western Christians, 
whom they blamed for failing to organize a crusade against the godless 
Communists. 

The majority of the Russians were opposed to these extremists. Their 
leader for a long time was the wise Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky, 
1864-1946) appointed by the Patriarch Tikhon in 1921 to preside over 
the Russian Church in Western Europe. This central section considered 
that membership of the Church did not commit a Christian to any 
particular political views and they deprecated the claims of any group to 
speak in the name of Christians in Russia. In order to protect itself from 
Soviet interference, this party accepted in 1931 the Ecumenical Patri- 
arch as its ecclesiastical superior who reappointed the Metropolitan 

219 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Evlogy as his Exarch. These Russians wished to establish more cordial 
relations with Western Christians and took an active part in the 
Ecumenical movement. 

The third group remained faithful to the Church in Russia and, as 
soon as the Patriarchate of Moscow was restored in 1943 recognized 
him as their superior. Their attitude to the West was therefore partially 
conditioned by that of the Head of the Russian Church. 

The clashes and tensions among these three groups disturbed the life 
of the Church in Exile but also bore witness to its vitality. One evidence 
of this was the distinguished work of a number of theologians and writers 
who have become famous for their original and vigorous thought. 
Foremost among them were the above-mentioned ex-Marxists, who 
after many adventures met again in Western Europe. Three of them, 
Bulgakov, Frank and Berdiaev, were expelled from Russia in 1922; 
Struve escaped to the West with the remnants of the White Army. To 
these names other Christian leaders must be added: Lev Karsavim 
(1882-1952), Anton Kartashev (1875-1960), V. Zenkovsky (b. 1885), 
G. Florovsky (b. 1893), G. Fedotov (1886-1951), Konstantin Mochul- 
sky (1892-1948), B. Visheslavtsev (1877-1954), Vladimir Lossky 
(1903-1958), L. Zandes (b. 1893), and others who contributed to the 
spiritual and intellectual life of the exiled community. They were 
gifted men equally familiar with both Russian and Western European 
culture and able to interpret them to others. 

The endeavours of the Russians in exile to help their co-religionists 
under the Communists were defeated. The Iron Curtain completely cut 
them off from their own country and people and only on rare occasions 
could even an exchange of news be attempted. 

The organization of independent Church life in Western Europe and 
in America was more successful, although political tensions hindered 
progress. The exiled Russians made their most valuable contribution to 
the Ecumenical Movement and to theology, including Christian inter- 
pretation of social and economic changes brought about by the 
Communists. 

The Russian emigrants and the Ecumenical Movement 

The arrival of Russians in the West coincided with the beginning of the 
Ecumenical Movement, the idea of which was conceived within the 
Anglican communion and was warmly supported by most Protestants. 
The Movement aimed at including all Christian confessions; its purpose 
was to re-examine doctrinal differences in the hope of removing some 
obstacles by impartial and scholarly investigation, and to promo tepracti- 

220 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

cal co-operation between divided Christian bodies. At first two 
independent organizations were started: the Faith and Order Move- 
ment, dealing with the doctrinal side of reunion; and the Life and 
Work Movement, with its social and economic implications. Between 
them they held a number of conferences (Stockholm 1925, Lausanne 
1927, Oxford 1937, Edinburgh 1937, Amsterdam 1939 and 1948). In 
1948 they amalgamated to form the World Council of Churches. 

The Russians in exile played an important part in this work. The 
need for their participation was all the greater for two limitations 
affecting the Movement. The first was the refusal of the Roman Church 
to join; the second the unreadiness of the Christian East to give full 
support. These two facts made the Ecumenical Movement one-sidedly 
Protestant, Anglo-Catholics and Old Catholics representing a minority. 
The Russians in exile, although unable to speak officially in the name 
of their Church, nevertheless voiced the tradition of the Christian East 
and by their active interest in the Movement partially restored the 
balance. Besides participation in the Faith and Order, and Life and 
Work conferences, and numerous commissions, they also established 
fruitful relations with the World Student Christian Federation and with 
the Young Men's Christian Association. The main agents for these 
unofficial contacts were the Russian Theological College in Paris, St 
Sergius's Academy founded in 1925; the Russian Student Christian 
Movement started in 1923 and the Fellowship of St Alban and St 
Sergius inaugurated in 1927. The Russians who supported these three 
organizations were convinced members of their Church who, however, 
saw the West neither as their enemy nor as their superior, but as a 
partner whose gifts were complementary, and on whose co-operation 
the fullness and richness of Christian life and thought depended. 

This new spirit of mutual trust was inspiring. The Christian East, in 
the person of these Russians, for the first time since the fifteenth century 
was not on the defensive. It was meeting the West on equal terms and 
this in spite of the fact that their Church seemed to be crushed by the 
Communists. These Russian Orthodox were confident that the Christian 
faith would triumph again in their country and this gave them strength 
to bear the hardships of exile and to speak with authority and frankness 
to their Western friends. The Christian West soon recognized their 
significance and offered them generous assistance. The Theological 
College in Paris and the Student Christian Movement were helped by 
the World Student Federation, the YMCA and other similar organiza- 
tions, Anglicans in particular being generous and faithful supporters of 
these Russian institutions. The outstanding spokesman of the American 

221 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

YMCA, John R. Mott (1865-1955), was the first who realized the 
intellectual and spiritual value of the exiled Russian theologians and 
secured funds to publish their works. The YMGA Press enabled these 
Russian thinkers to appear in print. Their books were later translated 
into many European languages. This literature, created at a time when 
silence was imposed on Christians in Russia, will sooner or later reach 
their compatriots who have been deprived of freedom of thought and 
speech for several decades in their own country. 

One of the least expected consequences of the Russian exile was the 
conversion to Ecumenical work of the famous Abbe Couturier (1881- 
1953), a Roman Catholic Priest from Lyons. He met the Russians in 
1923 when forty-two years old, and this encounter reorientated his 
interest and made him one of the most remarkable leaders of work for 
Christian reconciliation. 

The Russian emigrants lost their country but not their Church; the 
complete freedom of action they enjoyed made possible their constructive 
contribution to the rest of Christendom by increasing mutual under- 
standing between its divided members. 

The present state of the Eastern Church 

It is too early to make any detailed comment on the new period in the 
history of Eastern Christians which began after the Second World War. 
Two features are, however, sufficiently clearly marked to be mentioned. 
Firstly, the close identification of Church and people which had been 
one of the main characteristics of Eastern Christianity has ended, and 
the Church is becoming aware of its separateness. Secondly, the fear 
of the West that has haunted the Christian East since the fall of Byzan- 
tium has gone. The Orthodox in recent years have been exposed to the 
extreme pressure of Western materialism and atheism as represented by 
Marxism and they have survived. This victory has given them a renewed 
confidence in the vitality of their faith. 

The trust in freedom as the best ally of truth which was so ardently 
preached by the Slavophils is a new experience for most Eastern 
Christians and promises much closer and friendlier relations with the 
Christian West, for a fruitful co-operation among the divided Christians 
depends on their repudiation of any form of compulsion and intimida- 
tion and on confidence in the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 

So in spite of the present hardships and severe trials the Eastern 
Christians look with sober confidence to their future, believing that 
the good news of reconciliation contained in the Gospel is alone 
capable of satisfying the deepest religious needs of mankind and that 

222 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

no other teaching can ever replace the Christian revelation about 
the true nature of God and man. 

In conclusion it may be useful to outline briefly the present state 
of Eastern Christians. They belong to two federations of self-governing 
Churches. The majority follow the Byzantine tradition in faith and 
worship, but the minority still reject the Chalcedonian Council and form 
the Oriental Churches. The Byzantine Orthodox are sub-divided into 
some twenty Churches, some large and influential, others small and 
poor, but all enjoying equality of status and freedom in self-govern- 
ment. No decision can be made in the name of the Orthodox Church 
unless approval is unanimous. There is no effective organ which co- 
ordinates their actions, but their unity is real and they usually display 
unanimity on all major issues. Their inter-Church relations reflect that 
sense of freedom and mutual responsibility which is a marked 
characteristic of the Christian East. 

Five of these Churches have retained the titles and the territory 
which was theirs under the Byzantine Empire. These are the Patriarch- 
ates of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem and the 
Church of Cyprus. The Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople 
(Plate 70) occupies the place of honour among the heads of autocepha- 
lous Churches of the Byzantine Federation. Today his flock is confined 
to Constantinople alone, for the Turkish government does not allow 
Greeks to live anywhere outside that city. The Patriarch, however, also 
exercises his jurisdiction over the Greeks in Diaspora, and Greek 
bishops in Europe and America recognize his authority. He is supposed 
to look after the general interests of the Orthodox, and to take the 
initiative in any discussions of wider interest than those relevant to a 
national Church. 

The Patriarch of Alexandria is next in seniority and his congregation 
is composed mainly of the Greeks resident either in Egypt or scattered 
over Africa. In recent years some 20,000 negroes of Uganda have joined 
the Orthodox Church under the Patriarchate of Alexandria. 

The Patriarch of Antioch, now resident in Damascus, the Syrian 
capital, takes third place. His people are the Christian Arabs, originally 
domiciled in Syria and the Lebanon, but now also scattered over 
the world. They are particularly numerous in North and South 
America. 

The Patriarch of Jerusalem has only 50,000 Christians. Most of them 
are Palestine Arabs, but he is elected from the small group of Greek 
monks who form the Brotherhood of Custodians of Holy Places. There 
has been a long-standing conflict between these Greek monks and the 

223 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Arab Christians, and every election is usually a contested affair creating 
much bad feeling and mutual incrimination. 

In addition to these four Patriarchates, the Church of Cyprus, which 
was not included in any of them in Byzantine time, still retains its 
autocephalous state. There is also the monastic community of Sinai in 
the Arabian desert, which has at its head an Archbishop, and also 
claims independence. 

All these Churches with their Byzantine past enjoy their prestige, 
but are now circumscribed by adverse conditions. Their membership 
has dropped, their learning has declined, and their vitality has been 
sapped by long submission to Islam. They represent the former glory of 
Byzantine Christianity, but the real strength of the Eastern Church 
exists today in five leading national Churches, four of which are pre- 
sided over by the Patriarchs. These are the Churches of Russia, 
Rumania, Greece, Jugoslavia and Bulgaria. 

There are four more Orthodox Churches which enjoy complete inde- 
pendence, but are smaller than the great national Churches. These are 
the Church of Georgia, the Church of Albania, the Orthodox Church in 
Poland and in Czechoslovakia. Thus there are fourteen autocephalous 
Churches in the Federation of the Byzantine Orthodox. Most of them 
call their senior hierarch 'Patriarch'; others prefer such names as 
'Catholicos', 'Metropolitan' or 'Archbishop'. The prerogatives of these 
presiding bishops vary in different Churches, but in most cases they act 
as constitutional monarchs and are expected to consult other bishops 
and the representatives of clergy and laity before taking any decision. 

Besides these Churches there are other members of the Orthodox 
Federation which, because of their limited numbers, or comparatively 
recent origin, still depend on other Churches, and although they also 
enjoy degrees of autonomy, they are not yet entirely self-sufficient in 
their administration. Such are the Churches of Finland, in Japan, 
China and Korea, and the Orthodox Churches in North and South 
America, South Africa, Australia and Western Europe. 

As a description of the internal organization of an autocephalous 
Orthodox Church, the present constitution of the Bulgarian Church is 
here included. 3 

This Church is divided into eleven dioceses, each presided over by a 
bishop with the title of Metropolitan. A diocese is subdivided into 
smaller units called vicariates, composed of parishes. The -supreme 
legislative authority in the Bulgarian Church belongs to the National 
Council, composed of all bishops and the elected representatives of 
clergy and laity. Current Church administration in its religious aspects 

224 



THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

is delegated to the Synod of bishops alone. The Patriarch or presiding 
bishop is elected by the National Council from three candidates selected 
by the Synod. A candidate must be a bishop with at least five years' 
previous experience in administrating a diocese and one not less than 
fifty years of age. The successful candidate must obtain two-thirds of the 
votes. He is elected for life and becomes a permanent president of the 
Synod. 

Besides the Synod, the Bulgarian Church has another supreme 
administrative organ dealing with the financial and practical affairs of 
the Church, consisting of two clergy and two laymen. They are elected 
by the National Council for four years. The Patriarch presides over the 
session of this supreme ecclesiastical soviet. The diocesan administration 
is in the hands of a Metropolitan in consultation with a diocesan council, 
which has four elected members, two clerics and two lay. A Metro- 
politan is chosen by a special electoral college consisting of an equal 
number of clergy and laity. The list of candidates is drawn by the 
Synod and from it two persons must be elected. The Synod has the 
final choice of one of these. An elected Metropolitan retains his title 
and diocese for life. 

The parochial clergy are elected by their parishioners. Parish coun- 
cils, composed of four to six members, assist the clergy in their admini- 
stration of a parish. 

The constitution of the Bulgarian Church reveals the main principles 
of ecclesiastical organization of Eastern Christians. Its structure is 
hierarchical and at the same time democratic. Bishops, parochial 
clergy and representatives of the laity all have their specific responsi- 
bilities and functions. Church leaders are elected, not nominated. It is a 
self-governing body, but on all major issues, especially those connected 
with doctrine and worship, the Bulgarian Church acts in agreement with 
other autocephalous Churches, adhering strictly to the general tradition 
of Eastern Orthodoxy. 

The constitution of other Orthodox Churches follow the same 
pattern, but under different political conditions they often have to 
modify their ecclesiastical laws and adapt themselves to the temper of 
secular governments. 

The approximate numerical strength of Eastern Christians today is as 
follows: 

(a) The fourteen autocephalous Churches of the Byzantine Orthodox: 
i. The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople: 

Greeks in Constantinople 80,000 

Greeks outside Turkey 500,000 

* 325 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

2. The Patriarchate of Alexandria 150,000 

3. The Patriarchate of Antioch 280,000 

4. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem 50,000 

5. The Patriarchate of Moscow, which includes the 

Churches of the Ukraine, White Russia, 
Galicia (ex-Uniates), Lithuania, Latvia, 
Estonia and Carpato-Russia (probably) 100,000,000 

6. The Patriarchate of Yugoslavia 9,500,000 

7. The Patriarchate of Rumania (including the 

ex-Uniates of Transylvania) 1 5,000,000 

8. The Patriarchate of Bulgaria (since 1946) 6,000,000 

9. The Catholicate of Georgia 3,000,000 

10. The Church of Greece 8,500,000 

1 1 . The Church of Cyprus 400,000 

1 2 . The Church of Albania 250,000 

13. The Church of Poland 350,000 

14. The Church of Czechoslovakia 150,000 
To them must be added the Church of Sinai 300 

(b) The four Autonomous Churches: 

1. The Church of Finland 75,ooo 

2. The Church in Japan 40,000 

3. The Church in China 20,000 

4. The Church in Hungary 40,000 

(c) The five Churches being organized: 

1 . The Churches in North and South America 

and Alaska 3,000,000 

2. The Church in Australia 75>ooo 

3. The Church of the Ukrainians in USA and 

Canada 100,000 

4. The Church in Korea 15,000 

5. The Russian Church in exile under the Metro- 

politan Anastasy 50,000 

Altogether there are 150,000,000 Orthodox of the Byzantine rite. 
Besides these there are 21,000,000 Oriental Orthodox comprising 
4,000 Armenians, 2,000,000 Copts, 14,000,000 Ethiopians, 1,000,000 
Orthodox Indians and 80,000 Jacobites in Syria and Lebanon. There 
are in addition some 5,000,000 Uniates and some 5,000,000 Old 
Believers in Russia; in all, some 180,000,000 Christians form the 
Eastern wing of contemporary Christendom. 

226 



CHAPTER EIGHT 

THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE 
ORTHODOX CHURCH 

The significance of doctrine in the East The authority of the Church in the East The Holy 
Scripture and Church tradition The Communion of Saints Canonization of Saints among the 
Byzantine Orthodox The Mother of God Prayers for the departed The Eucharistic doctrine 



WHATEVER THEIR nationality or culture, all Eastern Christians feel 
they are members of one community, and do not doubt their religious 
experience is the same. A strong sense of uninterrupted continuity 
makes them conscious of close kinship with the saints, martyrs and 
teachers of all ages. In spite of this, they feel separate from the Christian 
West. Both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism seem alien and 
defective. In the past a static conception of the Church encouraged both 
East and West to interpret differences in teaching, worship and customs 
as wilful, and therefore heretical departures from the Apostolic tradition. 

There is at present a marked revision of this intransigent attitude: 
Christians have recognized that the Church is subject to growth and 
change within a context of many non-theological elements such as 
national temperament, political, social and economic conditions. A 
chief cause of the difference between East and West lies in the fact that 
Byzantine Orthodoxy grew up in the setting of Greek speech and cul- 
ture and that the Roman ecclesiastical and doctrinal system sprang 
from the Latin mentality. In striving towards universal uniformity as a 
guarantee of truth, Christians failed to realize that the message of the 
Gospel can reach people only through their own language. God speaks 
to all men, but each one hears that voice in his own tongue. Every 
language is a powerful medium, both shaping and shaped by the 
outlook and personality of its users, and carrying in its vocabulary and 
grammar, the collective experience of innumerable generations a 
distinct philosophy of life. Certain ideas clearly expressed in one lan- 
guage cannot be conveyed at all in another. Some notions change their 
meaning when translated by seemingly equivalent words. 

Latin, with its logical precision, its concision, is ideal for formulating 
and dogmatizing. In Greek, with its much richer vocabulary and more 
complex grammar, finer shades of meaning can be expressed, but its 
subtleties may confuse. Greek is the language of philosophers and 
dialecticians, of men who enjoy intellectual speculations. It is essential to 

227 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

remember that even the same words like Catholic and Orthodox 
acquired different meanings in the context of Greek and Latin. The 
word Catholic, as used in the West, means universal. It brings out the 
idea of unity and even uniformity. The Catholic Church is a body 
obeying one head, and adhering to the same ritual and language. 
Catholon in Greek has a much wider range: integrity, wholeness, harmony 
of diverse parts; it is opposed to every form of onesidedness, sectarianism, 
exclusiveness. The Catholic Church signifies for the Orthodox a com- 
munity distinguished by unity in freedom and creating out of many 
races and nations the family of the redeemed. The Slavonic text of the 
creed renders the word Catholic by the word Soborny, from the verb 
sobirat, to gather together. The Catholic Church is the 'gathered' 
Church, offering to each member opportunities for self expression and 
welcoming his special contribution. Catholicity lias always been asso- 
ciated in the East with the use of the vernacular in worship, in the 
West with Latin as the universal tongue of the one Church. 

It is significant that the Roman Catholics refer to the Church always 
in the singular in their liturgy. The Orthodox pray in their litanies Tor 
the peace and good estate of the Holy Churches of God', using the 
plural. For them the Catholic Church consists of many self-governing 
communities united in faith but independent in their administration. 

Similarly the word Orthodox in the West is understood as "correct* or 
'generally approved' and is applied especially to doctrine. In Greek 
doxa stands for both teaching and worship. In Slavonic Orthodoxy is 
rendered by the word Pravoslavie, meaning 'true glory'. When a Russian, 
Serb or Bulgarian calls himself an Orthodox Christian he means he 
belongs to the community which praises and glorifies God in the right 
spirit. Orthodoxy in the East represents a balance between teaching and 
worship, prophecy and sacrament, faith and works. 

An equally significant difference is associated with the Western term 
'sacrament 5 , and Eastern mysterion. 'Sacrament' has legal associations: it 
can be valid or invalid. The very term encourages its users to produce 
clear logical definitions of the character of each sacrament and of the 
benefits derived from taking part in them. The correct form of admini- 
stration has also acquired primary importance. 

The word mysterion (tainstoo in Slavonic) underlines the mystical 
element, that side of the divine-human encounter which eludes rational 
analysis, and regenerates soul and body without disclosing the modus 
operandi. 

Even the Latin word corpus (body) is not identical with the Greek 
word soma, which can only be used of a living organism. Corpus can also 

228 



THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 

he applied to inanimate objects and institutions. When the East asso- 
ciates the word 'body 9 with the Church, it thinks in terms of a living 
community created by the action of the Holy Spirit. The West adds the 
idea of the Church as an institution, either legally established or 
voluntarily promoted by the joint efforts of its members. The difference 
in the use of this key-word has had far-reaching practical consequences. 
The West has always tended to organize the Church along political 
lines; the absolute monarchy of Rome clashes with the republican inde- 
pendence of many Protestant sects. The East sees the Church as a 
Eucharistic fellowship, whose structure has no parallel in any secular 
association. 

The study of these linguistic divergencies and of their impact on the 
doctrinal development is still in its preliminary stage. A considerable 
contribution to it has, however, been made by the Russian theologians 
in exile. Their participation in Ecumenical work has led to important 
discoveries especially as to the difference in Eastern and Western 
approaches to the relation between^ community and individual and 
between matter and spirit. 

The West, starting from the individual, sees the community as the 
outcome of a collective desire to live and act together. For the East the 
community comes first and the individual is seen as a part of the whole. 
Matter and spirit are clearly distinguished in the West and at times 
even opposed to each other. For the East matter is spirit-bearing. The 
theology of both halves of Christendom has been coloured by these 
fundamental convictions and this to a large extent contributed to the 
disruption of their initial fellowship. 

Before analysing the concrete instances of their disagreements it is 
necessary to point out the underlying unity of the Christian East and 
West. They accept the same scriptures as the authoritative source of 
their teaching; the entire East and the largest section of the West 
jointly confess faith in Jesus Christ as Incarnate Lord and Saviour, and 
worship One God in three Persons, th Trinity; the vast majority use 
the Nicene creed as the best summary of thtir common belief.* They 
both regard the sacraments, especially Baptism amd the Eucharist, as 
indispensable parts of the Christian ordinance a$d teach that man 
survives his physical death. < 

This unanimity in essentials throws into relief their lack f unity 
concerning those theological statements wherein the Western indivi- 
dualism and the corporate spirit of the East are expressed. The first 

* The only difference in the creed is the FUioque clause added to the original text by the 
West in the seventh century. See page 89 et seq. 

229 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

divergency deserving attention affects the place of doctrine in the life of 
the community. 

The significance of doctrine in the East 

For the Orthodox the Church is primarily a worshipping community. 
Its main task is to praise the Creator and to teach its members to glorify 
Him in the right spirit. The very word Orthodoxy, so loved by Eastern 
Christians, exalts this function of the Church. This emphasis on worship 
in turn affects the importance assigned to different types of doctrinal 
definitions. They belong to three classes, dogma, theologumena and 
theological opinions. 

The Eastern Christians consider that nothing which has not some 
direct bearing upon divine worship need be dogmatically defined. The 
confession of faith is for them a part of doxology. Dogmas safeguard the 
trinitarian vision of God and the truth of the Incarnation and are 
enshrined in the Creed and in the dogmatic definitions of the Ecu- 
menical Councils. There is a marked difference here between East and 
West. The Western doctrinal systems include such items as the constitu- 
tion of the Church, the nature of man, of sin and grace, and the ways of 
salvation. All these problems are, for Eastern Christians, in the sphere 
governed by theologumena, by the statements made by venerated 
teachers of the Church, and accepted by others; they have not, however, 
the same authority as dogma. But even theologumena do not provide 
the Orthodox with answers to all the doctrinal problems, many of 
which are open to free theological opinion where direct opposition 
arises at times among Church members. An instance of this is the much 
debated question of the status of Western Christians and the character 
of the sacraments administered by the heterodox confessions. On these 
points the Orthodox Church has reached no unanimous decision, whilst 
veneration of the Holy Theotokos, although not defined dogmatically, 
is sanctioned by the universally accepted theologumena about her 
unique position in the economy of salvation. 

It is in the sphere of theologumena and theological opinion that East 
and West usually part company. Among other problems they also 
disagree as to the seat of Church authority, the comparative merits of 
scripture and tradition, and as to the Latin dogma of Transubstantiation 
in the Eucharist. 

The authority of the Church in the East 

In the East the authority of the Church is diffused among its members. 

In the West it has a definite source, the Pope, the Bible, the Articles of 

230 



THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 

Religion. The difference between these two views was well expressed in 
an exchange of letters between Pius IX (1841-1878) and the Eastern 
Patriarchs. In 1848 a reply to the Papal Encyclical, signed by thirty-one 
Eastern bishops, including three Patriarchs, was sent to Rome. They 
declared: 

'The Pope is greatly mistaken in supposing that we consider the 
ecclesiastical hierarchy to be the guardian of dogma. The case is quite 
different. The unvarying constancy and the unerring truth of Christian 
dogma does not depend upon any of the hierarchical orders; it is guarded 
by the totality of the people of God, which is the body of Christ/ 1 

This answer deals with one of the major controversies of Christian 
history, the prerogative of the Roman see. The Pope, who had always 
been the senior bishop, has become to Latin Christians the final judge 
on all questions of doctrine and morals. The non-Roman West has 
rejected his authority altogether and transferred it to the inspired text of 
the Bible or to the official teaching of the individual confessions. The 
East has never fully grasped the implications of this essentially Western 
dispute, for it has adhered to a conception of authority in which there is 
no place for special sources of infallibility. Father Sergy Bulgakov, 
an eminent Russian divine, stated the Orthodox teaching in this 
way: 

'Does any member of the Church possess of himself infallibility in his 
judgment of dogma? No, he does not; every member of the Church is 
liable to error, or rather to the introduction of his own personal limita- 
tions in his dogmatic studies.' 2 

Bulgakov explains this attitude by saying that for the Christian East 
neither the hierarchy nor the councils are organs of infallibility : 

'Only the Church in its identity with itself can testify to the truth. It is 
the Church which agrees or not, with the council. There are not, and 
there cannot be, external forms established beforehand for the testimony 
of the Church about itself.' 3 

This type of corporate authority does not contradict the hierarchical 
structure of the Eastern Churches. The bishops and the priests have 
their clearly defined sacerdotal functions and are also responsible for 
the day to day ecclesiastical administration and for maintaining sound 

231 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Christian teaching. Local and general councils and synods are periodi- 
cally convoked but none can claim infallibility. Their decisions require 
endorsement by the whole community if they are to be recognized as the 
voice of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. 

The Holy Scripture and Church tradition 

Trust in perpetual guidance by the Holy Spirit is the source of Orthodox 
reliance upon tradition. It implies fidelity to the past, for the Holy 
Spirit has taught the truth to the bygone generations of Church mem- 
bers who bequeathed their heritage to their successors; but it also 
means readiness to go forward, to experiment, to engage in new 
adventures. Professor G. Florovsky defines the tradition thus: 

'Loyalty to tradition means not only concord with the past but in a 
certain sense freedom from the past. Tradition is not only a protecting, 
conservative principle, it is primarily the principle of growth and 
regeneration . . . tradition is the constant abiding of the Spirit, and not 
only the memory of words. Tradition is a charismatic, not an historical 
principle.' 4 

The Holy tradition does not compete with the Holy Scriptures, but 
both contain the same truth, for they have the same author, the Holy 
Spirit, who inspired the writers and compilers of books of the Bible and 
opened the minds of Church members to a true understanding of the 
Word of God. 

Eastern Christians firmly believe that the Church has always been, 
and always will be protected by divine power and that so long as 
Christians remain within the Eucharistic fellowship they will be able to 
distinguish truth from error. This stress on mutual love as an indis- 
pensable condition of communion with the Holy Spirit explains the 
Orthodox attitude to the Saints. 

The Communion of Saints 

Every Christian is called to perfection, and is capable of revealing the 
image of God hidden in him. Only a few, however, become so trans- 
formed during their earthly life through willing co-operation with 
divine grace that they can be recognized as saints by other Christians. 
Their charity, wisdom and charismatic gifts of healing and prophecy are 
of immense assistance to other less advanced members of the Church. 
These, the saints, are the bearers of the authentic tradition, for it is not 
learning or ecclesiastical honours, but purity of heart and mind that 

232 



THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 

makes a Christian capable of hearing the authentic voice of the Holy 
Spirit. 

Eastern Christians, in both public and private prayers, ask the saints 
to pray for them and they pray for the saints. This uninterrupted 
communion with the victorious representatives of past generations, 
which begins with the Old Testament patriarchs and prophets, and 
includes the apostles, the eye-witnesses of the Incarnation, the martyrs, 
teachers and holy men and women of all nations throughout the 
centuries, makes Eastern Christians deeply rooted in Orthodoxy and 
offers them protection from heresy and schism. They test novel teachings 
or practices by considering how they harmonize with the lives and faith 
of the saints. All that might separate Christians from fellowship with 
the saints is rejected, all that can enrich it is welcomed. 

The question is sometimes raised whether this devotion to the saints 
might divert attention from the worship of God; whether it might create 
an opinion that the saints can help better than God can. 

The Orthodox do not regard the saints as mediators, but as teachers 
and friends who pray with them and assist them in their spiritual ascent. 
Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry was surrounded by disciples 
who did not prevent others from meeting Him, but on the contrary- 
helped newcomers to find the Master. In the same manner fellowship 
with the saints facilitates communion with God, for their Christlike 
character brings others nearer to the divine source of life and light. All 
mankind is involved in the process of deification and the saints are those 
who, having advanced nearer to the ultimate goal, can uplift the rest. 

Canonization of Saints among the Byzantine Orthodox 

The names of those who rejoice in fellowship with their Creator are 
known only to God. The Church on earth remembers few of the saints, 
mostly those who struck their contemporaries 5 imagination and whom 
in consequence their fellow Christians gratefully and lovingly remem- 
ber. Canonization of a saint is recognition by responsible Church leaders 
that such a remembered Christian, in his life and teaching, accords with 
other saints and may therefore be invoked in public prayers, and his 
acts and opinions used as an example for imitation by others. Canoniza- 
tion in the Orthodox Church begins locally. Its first requisite is con- 
tinuous and increasing love and veneration for such an outstanding 
Christian by members of his community. The next step is reached when 
the hierarchy of a local church undertakes to examine all records left by 
the holy man or woman, and if these prove satisfactory, then the last 
part of the act is performed and canonization is announced and other 

233 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

autocephalous churches are informed. This considered judgment of the 
Church is essential, for sometimes people of exceptional spiritual gifts, 
but not necessarily of sound moral life and Orthodox faith, attract 
admiration and can mislead their followers. The Holy Spirit not only 
illuminates the holy men and women, but also reveals who are the 
chosen vassals of His Grace to other members of the Church. 

The Mother of God 

Among the saints a unique place is reserved for the Mother of God the 
Virgin Mary. The long process of purification and enlightenment of the 
Jewish race so vividly described in the Old Testament reached its 
culmination in the Theotokos. In her the faith and heroism of many 
generations of the Chosen People found fulfilment. She accepted with 
humility the challenge of the Annunciation. During the lifetime of her 
Son she kept in the background, but she presided over the assembly of 
apostles on the day of Pentecost, when the new period in the history of 
mankind was inaugurated by the descent of the Holy Spirit. 'Warm 
veneration of the Theotokos is the soul of Orthodox piety/ writes Fr 
Bulgakov. 5 Her name is constantly invoked in both liturgical and per- 
sonal prayers, she is loved, not only as the Mother of Christ, but also as 
the Mother of mankind, for she embraces in her charity the entire 
human family, of which her Son is the sole Redeemer. 

Her ikons can be seen everywhere, the hymns and prayers addressed 
to her are universally used, but the Christian East refrains from dog- 
matizing on her behalf and here again a difference is revealed between 
the Latin and the Byzantine traditions, for the Christian East has not 
included the recent Marian pronouncements of Rome among its 
dogmas. 

The prayers for the departed 

The Christian West has been inclined to speculate about the destiny of 
the departed. Roman Catholics have elaborated doctrines which imply 
that Christians, after death, pass through an intermediary state of 
purification before they can come into the divine presence. Many 
Protestants have rejected this teaching and believe that bliss or torment 
awaits each man after his death, and no further alteration in his con- 
dition is possible. 

Eastern Christians have never been attracted to these clear-cut 
answers to the mystery of death. Their underlying conviction is that the 
end of physical existence closes only one stage in human ascent towards 
God, and that the seeds of good and evil sown on earth continue to 

234 



THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 

bring forth fruit long after the death of the individual. The final 
reckoning can be made only at the end of history. So even the blessed 
do not reach their full glory immediately after death and those who 
failed to learn how to love in freedom are not deprived of the possibility 
of improvement in their position through the compassion of their 
friends. So the Orthodox Church prays for all the departed, both 
saints and sinners, trusting in the power of mutual love and forgiveness. 
It is reluctant to subscribe to the Roman doctrine of Purgatory as a 
place of pain and expiation, for it believes that a merciful God washes 
away the transgressions of all who sincerely repent and have been 
reconciled to the Church. 

The Eucharistic doctrine 

The final point of doctrinal difference is connected with the Eucharist. 
The Roman West has defined the form, matter, effect and ordinary 
ministry of each sacrament. Concerning the Eucharist it has elaborated 
the doctrine of Transubstantiation, which explains the change in the 
Eucharistic elements in terms of Aristotelian philosophy which distin- 
guishes the substance of every material object from its external mani- 
festation, such as colour, weight and smell. The Roman Church teaches 
that at the Eucharist the substance of bread and wine is replaced by the 
substance of Christ's Body and Blood, but that to our senses their appear- 
ance remains unaltered and the Eucharistic gifts continue to look and 
taste as bread and wine. 

Most Protestants, in opposition to Rome, have formulated their own 
Eucharistic doctrines, such as Consubstantiation, according to which the 
communicant, while receiving bread and wine, partakes simultaneously 
of the Body and Blood of Christ. 

The Orthodox do not share this desire for precision in approaching 
the mystery of the Holy Communion. They ask God to change the 
bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Saviour, but are reluc- 
tant to define either the character or the exact moment of this change. 

The increased importance given to the Eucharist which is noticeable 
in all confessions today, has extended their understanding of its meaning 
and purpose, and has mitigated the bitterness of the controversies that 
have raged in the past around the sacrament of unity and love. 
East and West are today much nearer to each other in sacramental 
theology and in practice, than at the time of their separation. 

Such are some of the doctrinal differences between the Eastern and 
Western Christians. Their roots go deep down into their corporate 
experience and psychology. Western man has always been more confi- 

235 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

dent than his Eastern counterpart in the power of human reason to 
penetrate into the mystery of life, and to define with precision the rela- 
tions between Creator and creation. Hence the labours of Western 
divines in constructing elaborate theological systems, aiming at pro- 
viding authoritative answers to a number of questions raised by 
inquiring minds. Hence also the usual distinction between the trained 
theologians and the laity who are supposed to accept without question 
the statements of their teachers. 

The entire theology of the West is more rational, more abstract and 
more authoritarian than that of the East. The East stresses the trans- 
formation of the whole human being, of his restoration to the original 
prototype and the enlightenment of mind and heart which accompanies 
man's rebirth in Christ through the action of the Holy Spirit. This 
transfiguration brings men into new and more personal fellowship with 
the Triune God, but however intimate their communion, the divine 
essence remains impenetrable to the human mind, since the Eastern 
emphasis on apophatic or negative theology, insists that we can only 
say that God is beyond all our definitions and speculations. 

This, however, does not exclude the Eastern desire to understand the 
nature of man, of the world which surrounds him and of the ways 
leading to his deification; but all these speculations have no claims to 
final authority, and therefore the Byzantine Churches have always 
refused to identify Orthodoxy with any one teacher, system of theology 
or institution, the path chosen by Rome, by Oriental Christians such as 
Nestorians and Jacobites, and by conservative Protestants. Orthodox 
theology, therefore, is experimental, rooted in the Eucharistic worship, 
linked organically with prayers and asceticism, and consequently close 
to the heart and mind of all Christians. A sharp line of demarcation 
between trained theologians and lay people has never existed in 
the East. The Orthodox consider that the real distinction lies between 
those members of the Church who grow in holiness and wisdom, and 
those who remain absorbed in self, and are therefore incapable of 
sharing fully the life of grace offered to the faithful of the Christian 
community. 

This difference in approach is significant, and its consequences can be 
traced in the social and devotional life of Eastern and Western 
Christians. It does not destroy, however, the unity of their faith in 
Christ and the acceptance of the universal truth of his message. 

In the past these disagreements among Christians were exploited by 
controversialists, and antagonisms were encouraged, whilst the posses- 
sion of substantial common ground was seldom recognized. Today an 

236 



THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 

increasing number of Christians begin to realize that the distinct con- 
fessions can be seen not only as rival systems, but also as complementary 
approaches to the same religion, and that the true progress of 
Christianity depends not on the suppression of diverse traditions by any 
one of them, but upon the willingness of the divided members of the 
Church to enter into fruitful collaboration and friendly discussions with 
one another. 



237 



CHAPTER NINE 

WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE 
CHRISTIAN EAST 

Holy Communion The Sacraments of the Eastern Christians Baptism Confirmation 

Confession Holy Unction Ordination Marriage Other sacramental rites Offices of the 

Eastern Church The Liturgical Books used by the Eastern Christians Some reasons for the 

difference between Eastern and Western approaches to Christian worship 



EASTERN CHRISTIAN worship differs considerably from that of the 
Christian West. The architecture of the churches, their interior decora- 
tion, the shape of the liturgy, the position of the clergy and the conduct 
of the laity are all features dissimilar in East and West. 

Churches in the East are usually small, and are either round or built 
in the form of a Greek cross. The most distinctive feature is the Ikono- 
stasis, a solid screen with three doors, dividing the eastern end from the 
rest of the building. Behind the central, or 'Royal 5 door is the altar, 
called the 'Throne 9 , which is only visible when this door is open 
(Plate 59) . When during the service the doors are closed the clergy are 
not visible to the congregation. The laity participates in the service by 
supporting the prayers said by the priests and deacons, with reverent 
gestures, bows and frequent use of the Sign of the Cross. Sometimes they 
join in the singing, but usually the choir represents them. The services 
are dramatic, vocal and colourful, processions are formed and the clergy 
come in and go out through the doors of the screen, magnificent vest- 
ments are worn, incense is constantly used, children, even infants in 
their mother's arms are communicated with adults: Eastern worship 
lacks the precision and restraint of the West, but conveys a powerful 
impression of the reality of the divine presence and stimulates mystical 
union between God and man. 

The ritual of the Eastern Churches is the product of a long and com- 
plex evolution; yet it is much nearer the services of the early Christians 
than is the case in the West, and for this reason may be described as 
more primitive or archaic. Orthodox worship has three channels of 
expression: the chief one is the sacrament of Holy Communion (alter- 
natively described as the Eucharist, the Mass, the Divine Liturgy or the 
Lord's Supper), the second one is the administration of other sacra- 
ments, the number and the purpose of which are differently defined by 
the Orthodox and the West, and, finally, various types of public offices, 

238 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

not sacramental, consisting of reading the Holy Scriptures and singing 
hymns and psalms. 

Holy Communion 

Eastern Christians usually refer to their Communion Service by the 
Greek word Eucharist (Thanksgiving). This most sacred act of Christian 
worship commemorates the Last Supper which Jesus Christ shared with 
His disciples on the night of His betrayal by Judas. The evening meal 
which preceded the culminating events of Christ's mission was not an 
ordinary supper, but a ritualistic feast in which the Jews remembered 
their miraculous deliverance from bondage in Egypt. The Eucharist 
therefore, links His blessing of the bread and wine with the mighty 
deeds of God, who led his people into the Promised Land. 

All Eastern liturgies faithfully adhere to this two-fold character of the 
service, although differing considerably in detail. Most scholars distin- 
guish four main types: (i) The Western Syrian or Jacobite; (ii) The 
Eastern Syrian or Chaldean; (iii) The Coptic and Ethiopian; (iv) The 
Byzantine and Armenian. Each of these groups includes several rites. 
Altogether nearly one hundred versions of the Communion Service 
are still used by Eastern Christians. Yet in spite of this all Eastern 
Eucharists follow the same basic pattern differing in several important 
points from the parallel development which in the West culminated in 
the Roman Mass. For example, the Eastern Eucharist is celebrated at 
the altar which is partially concealed from the congregation by a screen 
or veil. It may be presided over by a number of priests and requires a 
deacon to act as link between the congregation and the ceremonies at 
the altar. The laity play a vital part in the services which are always 
vocal. The liturgy begins with preparation of the bread and wine on a 
special table, and these elements are transferred to the altar in the course 
of a solemn procession. The Holy Spirit is invoked on the holy gifts and 
on the congregation during a prayer called Epiclesis (invocation) . The 
lay people are communicated in both kinds, usually by intinction from 
the chalice. These are features common to all Oriental rites. 

The central part of the service, called Anaphora (offering, sacrifice), is 
also similar throughout the East. It begins with the Preface or prologue, 
in which God is thanked for the creation of man. Then comes the 
Sanctus (angelic praise to the Lord and Master of the Universe) which is 
followed by the Anamnesis or commemoration of the works of Christ, His 
cross, His tomb, His resurrection and ascension. The Anamnesis includes 
the words 'take, eat; this is my Body', and 'drink ye all of this', spoken 
by Him at the Last Supper. The Anamnesis is completed by the Epiclesis, 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

after which comes the Intercession, or Great Prayer for all, living and 
dead, summed up in the "Our Father 5 . The Anaphora ends with the 
elevation of the Host, the fraction of the elements and communion. 

The prayer of intercession is the least stabilized part of the Eastern 
Eucharistic Canon. In the Alexandrian rite of St Mark it comes before 
the Sanctus; in the Chaldean version is precedes the Epiclesis; in the 
Byzantine tradition it follows the Epiclesis. 

All the four main groups of the Eastern liturgies represent one or 
another ancient local tradition. The Western Syrian or Jacobite rite 
follows the Antiochian pattern which took its present shape in the fourth 
century. It is now used only by the Monophysites or those Eastern 
Christians who still refuse to accept the Chalcedonian Council of 
four hundred and fifty-one. Their ecclesiastical centre is in the city of 
Horns in Syria, but their largest numbers are in the Kerala Province of 
South India. The Jacobite rite is more primitive than the Byzantine. 
Its liturgical language is Syriac and the liturgy is named after St James 
the Apostle. The chief part of the Eucharist (the Anaphora], which has 
only two different versions of prayer in the Byzantine ritual, has almost 
seventy alternatives among the Jacobites, all associated with the names 
of apostles or well-known saints, though few were composed by those 
to whom they are now ascribed. The most common among these 
Anaphores are assigned to St John the Evangelist, the Twelve Apostles, 
St Mark, St Cyril, St Eustathius and St Clement. The celebrant may 
select any of the seventy Anaphores, but that of St Eustathius is one of the 
shortest and is more frequently used. An important characteristic of this 
Syrian rite is a reading of the Old Testament as well as the lesson taken 
from the New Testament, an ancient custom become obsolete among 
other Eastern Christians. 

The Eastern Syrians or Chaldeans are now a small remnant of the 
Church of the Persian Empire. They have three liturgies, the most often 
practised being the Eucharist of the Apostles which goes back to the 
origins of the Christian community in Persia. The liturgy of St Theodore 
is sung on Sundays from Advent till Palm Sunday. The liturgy of Nes~ 
torius is celebrated only five times a year, on the Feast of Epiphany, on 
the day of St John the Baptist, on the feast of the Doctors of the Greek 
Church, on Maundy Thursday, and on Wednesday and Thursday 
during the fast of the Nenevites commemorating the episode described 
in the Book of Jonah (III, 5, 10), and observed only by the Chaldeans. 
Their liturgical language is Eastern Syriac, although their vernacular 
is Arabic. 

The Copts of Egypt also have three Eucharistic rites, the most ancient, 

240 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

that of St Clement, being celebrated only once a year on the Friday in 
Passion Week. This liturgy is derived from an original Alexandrian 
tradition associated with St Mark the Evangelist, founder of the Church 
in Egypt. Two other rites, of St Gregory and St Basil, resemble the 
Byzantine order. The first is used on three occasions only, Christmas 
Day, Epiphany and Easter Sunday. The second covers the rest of the 
year. The liturgical language is still ancient Coptic. 

The Ethiopians have seventeen different liturgies, all derived from 
the Coptic rite, but representing a much greater variety of Anaphores 
than those used in Egypt. The liturgical language of the Ethiopian 
Church is ghiez. It remained the spoken language till the seventeenth 
century, but has been since replaced by Amharic, and is no longer 
understood by the worshippers. 

The Byzantine Church has four liturgies: of St John Chrysostom 
which is the usual service; of St Basil the Great, celebrated only ten 
times a year, on the eves of Christmas and Epiphany, St Basil's Day 
( i st January), five Sundays in Lent, and Thursday and Saturday in 
Holy Week; the liturgy of St Gregory of Rome (the presanctifical) 
is celebrated on Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent, and finally, the 
liturgy of St James the Apostle, used only on rare occasions. These 
services are translated into many languages in accordance with local 
needs. 

The Armenian Church is unique among Eastern Churches in having 
only one rite. It combines two Byzantine liturgies (of St Chrysostom and 
St James) and is known under the name of St Gregory the Illuminator. 
Its liturgical language is classical Armenian which differs considerably 
from the spoken tongue. 

Numerically the largest body of the Eastern Christians makes the 
Eucharistic offerings according to the rite associated with St John 
Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople. This service has achieved 
greater cohesion and balance than most Eastern versions of the Holy 
Communion and is typical of Orthodox worship./! t commemorates in 
dramatic form the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus 
Christ. It is divided into three parts: the Prothesis (or preparation of the 
bread and wine), the liturgy of the Catechumens, and the liturgy of the 
Faithful. During the Prothesis, the priest, assisted by a deacon and 
servers, cuts the bread for the Eucharistic offering and puts it on the 
paten. He pours wine into the chalice and mixes water with it. These 
actions are accompanied by prayers to associate them with Christ's 
sacrifice on the cross and His final victory. Symbolically the Prothesis, 
which takes place behind the screen and remains unseen by the con- 

Q, 241 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

gregation, represents the hidden years of the Incarnate life which Jesus 
spent at home, unknown to the world, before He started on His mission. 

In the Russian Church lay members bring lists of names to the service 
people for whom they require special prayers to be said. These are 
given to the priest, together with small round loaves, and during the 
Prothesis he reads the names, taking a portion from each loaf sent up 
and putting them on the paten. In Greece, bread, wine and olive oil are 
offered by the congregation from their own fields, vineyards and olive 
groves. 

The second part of the liturgy, called the liturgy of the Catechumens, 
begins with the solemn exclamation of the celebrant, 'Blessed be the 
Kingdom of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost'. The 
Eucharist is an action which proclaims the coming of the Kingdom of 
God, and at the same time actualizes its hidden presence. The gathered 
believers in the Incarnation are already part of the Messianic realm and 
are at the same time the agents willing to extend it over the world. The 
liturgy of the Catechumens commemorates Christ's teaching and heal- 
ing ministry. Its main theme is the proclamation of His message. The 
Book of the four Gospels is brought in a procession and presented 
to the congregation whilst the Beatitudes are usually sung or recited. 
They are the essence of the New Testament and remind hearers that 
communion with God is achieved only by a change of heart, and not by 
the observance of external rules. 

The reading of the Holy Scriptures follows this procession, after 
which a sermon is usually preached and prayers are said which cover the 
spiritual and material needs of the congregation. The clergy and people 
pray together for the sick, the suffering and the departed. In early 
centuries the Catechumens (those who desired to join the Church but 
were not yet baptized) left the service at this juncture, and only the 
Chrismated (i.e. baptized and confirmed) members remained for the 
last and most sacred part of the Eucharist. 

The liturgy of the Faithful opens with another procession, during 
which the celebrant and his assistants transfer the bread and wine from 
the table used for the Prothesis to the altar (the Throne 5 ). Meanwhile, 
the cherubic hymn is sung: We, that in a mystery figure forth the 
Cherubim, sing now the thrice holy hymns to the life-quickening 
Trinity; let us lay aside all the cares of this life.' Many Christians asso- 
ciate this procession with Christ's going to Jerusalem for the last time 
to His crucifixion. / - > 

The Nicene Creed is recited after this procession, followed by an 
ancient Jewish dialogue repeated by the priest and people, which Christ 

242 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

used at the Last Supper with His disciples. The priest says 'Let us lift 
up our hearts', and the people answer 'We lift them up unto the Lord'. 
The priest then says 'Let us give thanks unto the Lord', and the congre- 
gation respond 'It is meet and right so to worship the Father, the Son 
and the Holy Ghost, the Trinity consubstantial and undivided'. This 
last response links the Old Testament with the New. 

This dialogue is followed by the main prayer of the Eucharist 
(Anaphora) in which the priest thanks God for all the benefits bestowed 
by Him upon his creation, and gradually conies to the greatest of all of 
these, the Incarnation of His Son. The celebrant remembers the Last 
Supper and repeats Christ's commandment: 'Take, eat; this is my Body, 
which is broken for you for the remission of sins; drink ye all of this; this 
is my Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many 
for the remission of sins.' The congregation confirms these two injunc- 
tions by saying 'Amen'. These so-called words of institution are brought 
to their consummation by invocation of the Holy Spirit. The clergy and 
people jointly ask the Heavenly Paraclete to descend upon the gathered 
Church and to bless and hallow the gifts of bread and wine offered by 
the congregation, and to change them into the blessed Body and 
precious Blood of Christ. This prayer (Epidesis) is one of the most 
solemn and distinctive features of all Eastern rites. After it the congre- 
gation sings or recites the Lord's Prayer, and then the communion 
begins. The clergy first partake of the bread and the wine behind the 
closed doors of the screen. Then these are opened wide and the chalice 
containing both elements is brought to the people with the words: 
'With the fear of God, with faith and love, draw near.' This culminating 
point of the whole service is identified in the minds of Eastern Christians 
with Christ's resurrection. They communicate in the belief that they 
share the risen life of their Saviour. 

The service ends when the congregation, blessed with the chalice (to 
signify Christ's Ascension), have the remaining unconsecrated bread 
(the Antidoron) distributed among them. This last act of the Eucharistic 
offering unites all present into one family, whether they were communi- 
cants or not. 

Such are the main outlines of the liturgy of St John Chrysostom. In its 
present form it dates from the eighth century, but incorporates older 
elements which go back to the first centuries of Christian History. The 
Eucharist, therefore, is a sacred link with past generations who have 
worshipped God in the same spirit and followed the same ritual from 
time immemorial. It also unites different nations and people who form 
the Orthodox community today. The service is the same everywhere, 

243 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

>ut the language, music and customs vary considerably. In a big 
;athedral the service may be long and elaborate. In a small rural church 
t may be reduced to a bare minimum; but it never loses its distinctive 
Characteristics. It represents the same mixture of solemnity and home- 
mess, of awe-inspiring mystery and childlike confidence in divine love 
ind forgiveness. 

Some Christians order their worship in such a way that it consists 
Diimarily of pleading the sacrifice of the Cross. Others stress the element 
rf instruction; but for Eastern Christians the Eucharist is the gate to 
Heaven. It carries them into a world beyond space and time, with its 
oeace, beauty and holiness, and offers them a taste of eternal life in 
their earthly existence. The following quotations may help the reader to 
snter into the atmosphere of Eastern Eucharistic worship. They are 
taken from the description of the Orthodox service by an Englishwoman, 
Miss C. E. Padwick. 

c You enter the church and you have no fixed position. You are a 
transient comer, free to move, free to prostrate yourself when the Spirit 
moves you, without causing any remark. You are there perhaps for only 
part of a long service, and this is the picture of the true relationship of 
our little spasmodic acts of attention and the eternal worship for ever 
offered in the heavens. Before you the church is divided into two by the 
ikonostasis. Beyond that screen the heavenly mysteries are enacted. The 
Royal Doors at once reveal and conceal the actions of that other world. 
From the screen look down on you the faces of human fellow-wor- 
shippers, true fellow-worshippers with us, but now lifted out of our 
transiency, the Saints, the elder brethren who are with Christ. And the 
pictures of these precursors are ranged under the Figure of the Crucified 
who makes one the whole family in heaven and earth. The screen with 
the message of the Incarnation does not reach to the roof of the church. 
There above it in apse or dome are more unearthly figures, solemn, still; 
against a background perhaps of pure gold, all teasing details omitted as 
though they looked out from a passionless eternity. High above all is 
the figure of Christ the almighty ruler of the ages, Lord not of the human 
world but of all worlds. Below Him are the angels, prophets and men in 
a wonderful order ranged in a timeless act of worship. Beneath such a roof 
|and behind such a screen the drama of the Eucharist is enacted. The 
;service sets forth indeed the Lord's death from the standpoint of His 
jheavenly triumph, ever remembering that the Lamb of God is slain 
from the foundation of the world and yet remains the source of eternal 
life. At the breaking of the bread the priest is to say "Broken and dis- 

244 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

tributed is the Lamb of God, Son of the Father, who is broken but not 
divided, ever eaten and never consumed, and who sanctifies those who 
participate". 

e ln Van Eyck's great altar-piece at Ghent the Heavenly Lamb is 
seen surrounded with His people, kings, bishops, knights, merchants, 
hermits and the rest; and to all flows out the living stream of His 
heavenly Grace. In the Orthodox liturgy the picture is reality. To the 
Heavenly Lamb, enthroned and central, prayer is made for all sorts and 
conditions of men now on earth, for kings and rulers, for travellers and 
sufferers, and for the city and the congregation there present; and a 
memorial is made of those who worship with us beyond the veil, Saints 
mentioned by name or in the company of all the departed whose 
memory we celebrate.' 1 

This description of Eastern worship conveys the importance of the 
outer setting for the full impact of its Eucharistic rite. Its inner content, 
however, is not conditioned by architecture or by ikons; it makes 
direct appeal to every worshipper. 

The Communion service' is understood in the East primarily as a 
corporate meal, and like all meals it reminds men of the interdepen- 
dence of the whole creation. Men need to eat and to drink like all other 
animals and plants, and not only for the maintenance of their well- 
being, but also for their creative activities. So the Eucharistic feast 
teaches men that material elements of food can be transformed by them 
into higher forms of energy such as prayer, thought and charity. Thus 
the universe is able to address its creator as "Our Father' through the 
mind of worshipping men. 

Nicholas Cabasilas, an Eastern theologian of the fourteenth century, 
called attention to the 'human' character of the food consumed at the 
Eucharist. 2 Jesus Christ ordered His disciples to eat bread and drink 
wine, and by doing so He sanctified the whole process of civilization, for 
these two products require long preparation and much labour. They 
are the result of careful study and observation of nature combined with 
technical inventiveness. In Christian worship man comes to meet his 
Creator, not empty-handed. It is not enough for him to praise His 
Maker; he is ordered to appear before Him with the fruits of the earth 
transformed and uplifted by his work. 

There are religions which despise matter, and which call their 
followers to forget as far as possible the physical universe, and to lose 
sight of it in spiritual contemplation. Christianity teaches differently. 
Man is responsible for the rest of creation, and the Eucharist is a con- 

245 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

stant reminder of his duty to transform nature and to make it a better 
channel for activities of the spirit. 

It is no accident that a scientific civilization, which tries not only to 
understand the structure of the cosmos but also to use this knowledge 
for the benefit of mankind, has arisen among nations trained in 
Eucharistic worship. It was in this unique service that men began to see 
the physical universe as a friend instead of fearing and despising it. 
They learned also the sacredness and dignity of every type of labour, 
including manual work, which has been considered as degrading both 
by the classical civilization andby the non-Christian religions of theEast. 

' There is yet another lesson contained in the Eucharist, that of the 
interdependence of all human beings. At each communion service the 
celebrant and communicants are not alone in having an honoured 
place, but also those who have sown the seed, gathered the harvest, 
ground the corn, baked the bread and transported it. Likewise all who 
have tended the vines, crushed the grapes and made them into wine; 
who have worked in the mines and forged the metal of which the sacred 
vessels are made; who have printed the books and made the vestments 
of the priests; who have painted the ikons, composed the hymns and 
provided music for them; and finally all who have built the temple of 
God and contributed to its beauty and glory. 

This universality of the Eucharist is emphasized by the invitations to 
come and eat and drink, addressed to all believers in the Incarnation. 
A meal may be a demonstration of unity and friendship, but it can also 
be used as a means of separation. Many religions stress this by forbidding 
their followers to share their food with those who belong to other castes 
or to the other sex. There are large sections of mankind where men and 
women do not eat together; where social distinctions are standardized 
by segregation at meals. Christianity cuts across all these barriers. The 
Eucharist is offered to all; the only condition imposed is the faith of the 
participant. His race, class and origin are brushed aside as irrelevant, 
for all men bear the divine image and according to Christian teaching 
are the children of God. It is significant that the practical application of 
this belief in the essential unity of all human beings, as exemplified by 
the rise of democracy, has taken place first among those nations which 
incorporated the Eucharist in their regular worship. 

Such are some of the cultural and sociological consequences of the 
communion service. Its religious message reveals the essence of the 
New Covenant. By offering the bread of the mystical Body of Christ 
and by blessing the sacred cup, Christians enter into the most intimate 
organic unity with God and with one another. They greet the author of 

246 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

the Universe as their friend and collaborator, who offers his com- 
panionship to all who believe in His Incarnate Son. This experience of 
perfect communion between the believer and the Divine Logos is 
powerfully expressed by St Simeon the New Theologian, one of the 
great mystical writers of the Byzantine Church (d. 1033). 

'Thou hast vouchsafed me, O Lord, that this corruptible temple, my 
human flesh, should be united to Thy holy flesh, that my blood should 
be mingled with Thine, and henceforth I am Thy transparent and 
translucent member. I am transported out of myself. I see myself such 
as I am to become. Fearful and at the same time ashamed of myself I 
venerate Thee and tremble before Thee.' 3 

Such is the power and the significance of the Holy Communion, yet 
the Eucharist has nothing magical about it. Those who are renewed and 
strengthened by it retain their freedom, and many fail to benefit from it 
altogether. Their unfaithfulness and carelessness deprives them of the 
gift they have received and bars them from its regenerating influence. 
Nevertheless the impact of the Eucharistic worship can be traced to all 
spheres of life in Christian countries. The nations brought up in its 
atmosphere have produced art, science, economic and social orders 
which bear the imprint of their Eucharistic experience. Christianity can 
be defined as the religion of those who meet each other and their 
Creator at the Eucharistic meal. All other sacraments and services of 
the Church are subordinate to this central act of Christian worship. 

The Sacraments of the Eastern Christians 

The sacraments are corporate liturgical actions by which Christians 
invoke divine blessings upon certain material objects like bread, wine, 
water and oil, or upon people being married or set apart for some special 
service. Eastern Christians call the sacraments 'Mysteries', and inter- 
pret them as twofold movements between God and man. The word 
'mystery' emphasizes the divine part which transforms and purifies. 

The teaching and practice of the East, while distinct from that of the 
West, is nevertheless not opposed to it. Western Christianity defines and 
classifies the sacraments more precisely and in greater detail than the 
Eastern Church. The early Christians took it for granted that the 
Church was endowed with the power and authority to bestow sacra- 
mental grace upon its members, but the number of the sacraments 
remained undefined. The process of differentiation started in the West. 
In the thirteenth century the schoolmen selected seven sacraments as 

247 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

having been ordained by Christ Himself. The form, matter and pur- 
pose for each were fixed, and these seven were elevated above other 
sacramental actions. The East did not participate in this, and so avoided 
being committed to a certain artificiality of scholastic classification 
which tried to find the proper 'matter 9 and 'form' for all seven sacra- 
ments in the Holy Scriptures. For instance, the handing of the chalice 
by the bishop to the priest was considered as the 'matter' of Ordination, 
though it was in reality a later custom of the West, unknown in the 
Early Church. Reaction against this excessive formalism soon followed. 

In the fourteenth century Wycliffe (d. 1384) challenged the sacra- 
mental doctrine so formulated. His protest was taken up by John Hus 
(d. 1415) and by his Bohemian supporters. The reformers of the six- 
teenth century, Martin Luther (d. 1546), John Calvin (d. 1564) and 
Ulrich Zwingli (d. 1531), were also strongly opposed to the Roman 
teaching, and elaborated their own systems along the lines first adum- 
brated by the Latin divines, and brought the scholastic teaching to its 
logical conclusion. 

Only two sacraments out of the seven, Baptism and Holy Com- 
munion, were retained by the Protestants as necessary for salvation and 
as explicitly ordered by Jesus Christ. Their purpose and character was 
expounded in a novel way and the mode of their administration 
variously revised. This new theory and practice has since become the 
main barrier separating the two halves of Western Christendom, and so 
far has made reconciliation impossible. 

Other Protestants like the Quakers and the Salvation Army for 
instance went still further in their denunciation of the Roman tradition, 
and abrogated all the sacraments, reducing Christian worship to vocal 
or silent prayer. 

At first the East took no part in this classification and reduction of the 
number of the 'Mysteries'. It used the seven sacraments sanctioned by 
the Roman Church, but also treated as sacraments the Blessing of the 
Water on the feast of Epiphany, the taking of vows by a monk or nun, 
the consecration of a church, the anointing of a monarch, and the 
recognition as brethren of Christians willing to unite themselves by this 
sacred bond with each other.* Eastern Christians continue the practice 
of the Early Church which regarded many manifestations of its liturgical 
life as sacramental. 

In the seventeenth century Orthodox theology was, however, 
exposed to the repercussions of the Western sacramental controversy. It 
was a period of decline in scholarship among the Eastern Christians. 

* The Sacrament of Brotherhood is used only in the Serbian Church. 

248 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

The Mohammedan yoke made regular training of the clergy in their 
native lands impossible, and a number of men, educated in Roman 
Catholic and Protestant countries, borrowed ideas current in the West. 
The term 'seven sacraments' was accepted, and certain other definitions 
copied from the Roman system were uncritically absorbed and incor- 
porated into the manuals of theology. 

However, the use of the word Mysterion protected the Orthodox from 
the desire of some of their leaders to imitate the West more closely 
and rationalize further the divine-human encounter. The sacramental 
practice of the East has therefore remained richer and less formalized 
than that of the West, and has retained many features which link it 
with the life and faith of the Early Church. 

Baptism 

Initiation into the Christian community in the East, as in the West, is by 
Baptism. The Orthodox practice is three-fold immersion, using the 
traditional formula: 'The servant of God (name) is baptized in the name 
of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.' This signifies the death of a 
sinner and his resurrection and redemption as a new Christian. In the 
case of an adult, Baptism is preceded by the recitation of the Nicene 
creed and by renunciation of the powers of evil. In the baptism of 
infants two sponsors on behalf of the child confess the Orthodox faith 
and accept in his name the offer of new life in the fellowship of the 
Church. 

There are two features in the Eastern rite which distinguish it from 
that of the West. In the West the celebrant says 'I baptize 5 ; in the East 
the formula used is 'The servant of God is baptized 5 , thus stressing the 
corporate character of this act of initiation in which the Church receives 
the new member into its sacred fold. The baptizer in the East acts on 
behalf of the whole body, and not on his own sacerdotal authority. The 
second distinctive feature of the Eastern rite is the belief in its cosmic 
significance. This conviction is expressed in the prayer of consecration 
of the water, which precedes the threefold immersion. The grace of the 
Holy Spirit is invoked upon it in the following words: 

'Great art Thou O Lord, and marvellous are Thy works, and there is 
no word which sufficeth to hymn Thy wonders. Before Thee tremble all 
the powers endowed with intelligence. The sun singeth with Thee, the 
moon glorifieth Thee, the stars meet together in Thy presence, the light 
obeyeth Thee, the water springs are subject unto Thee. Wherefore O 
King, who lovest mankind, come Thou now and sanctify this water by 

249 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and grant unto it the grace of redemp- 
tion and the blessing of Jordan. Make it the fountain of incorruption, 
the gift of sanctification, the remission of sins and the remedy of 
infirmities.' 

This prayer implies that every baptism not only adds another mem- 
ber to the Universal Church, but also extends the domain of the mani- 
fest Kingdom of the Holy Trinity. The sanctification of water as part of 
nature is a step in the gradual redemption of all life on earth, a process 
which 3 however, depends on man's willingness to co-operate with his 
Creator. 

Confirmation 

The corporate and cosmic interpretation of Baptism is extended by the 
manner of administering Confirmation (or Holy Chrismation), which in 
the East follows immediately upon Baptism. Although the priest anoints 
the new Christian, the sacrament is episcopal as in the West, for the 
Chrism, or holy oil, must have been consecrated by a gathering of 
bishops presided over by the senior hierarch of the autocephalous 
Church. Such consecration takes place during Lent, and is a lengthy 
and solemn ceremony. Each time, the newly-prepared Chrism is added 
to the old, and thus an uninterrupted supply of the sacred oil is pre- 
served. Whenever the priest anoints with this Chrism he conveys the 
blessing of the united episcopate of all times. The words pronounced by 
the priest as he anoints the different parts of the body: 'The seal of the 
gift of the Holy Spirit' are the same used by the Jews at circumcision, 
and thus link the old with the new Israel. 

Confirmation is differently understood by East and West. For the 
Orthodox, Chrismation is not the renewal of baptismal vows, but lay 
ordination, by which the Christian receives a special grace, in his 
capacity of layman, to participate in the administration of all other 
sacraments. These are corporate actions, and both ordained 
ministers and Chrismated lay people are essential for their proper 
celebration. 

The consecration of the Chrism by the head of each national Church 
emphasizes the ecumenical character of Confirmation. It is a sacrament 
of Christian unity, for as all Church members are anointed with the 
same Chrism, so they are brought into fellowship of the same body. 
Chrismation is the sacrament of Pentecost. On that day the Theotokos 
and the apostles received the gift of the Holy Spirit, which brought 
their personal uniqueness into full light. Similarly the Holy Chrism 

250 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

bestows on every member of the Church the power to make his own 
creative contribution to the life of the community in a spirit of perfect 
freedom, and to develop those abilities and interests which distinguish 
him from the rest of mankind. It marks the acceptance of individual 
responsibility in the fellowship of the Church. 

The important consequence of Eastern practice is that children from 
their infancy are accepted as communicants under parental responsi- 
bility. Modern psychology recognizes the profound impact which 
good or bad influences make upon the first years of life, and the fact 
that the children of Orthodox parents share in the Eucharist from 
infancy binds them more strongly to the Church than in some other 
denominations. 

Confession 

The Orthodox practice of Confession is based on three convictions: 
(a) that men are morally answerable for their actions and that their 
conscience can be trained; (b] that they are all responsible for each 
other, for their thoughts, intentions and deeds are intricately inter- 
woven with those of their neighbours; (c) that sincere reconciliation 
with men secures divine forgiveness, which effectively and permanently 
removes the stain of sin. 

The Eastern form of Confession is the expression of the age-long 
experience of the Orthodox Church in dealing with repentant sinners. 
Its aim is to restore in the penitent the trust in divine love and forgive- 
ness, by reconciling him to the community he has harmed by the evil 
that is in him. This reconciliation is achieved by helping him to see his 
wrong actions in a new light, and to assist him in his resolution to alter 
his conduct and repair the damage already done. 

It is not easy for the individual to estimate the gravity of his be- 
haviour. Often he judges his serious offences lightly, and provides 
excuses which seem to him to be wholly satisfactory, while he experi- 
ences disproportionate shame and guilt for lesser offences. Confession 
aims at helping a Christian to achieve a more balanced evaluation of 
his actions. 

The form of the sacrament differs in the Orthodox Church from the 
Western usage, where the priest occupies the seat of judgment and the 
penitent kneels beside him when he confesses his sins. In the East the 
penitent stands in front of a small desk on which the Book of the 
Gospels and the Cross are placed. The priest does not sit, but stands by 
his side. After introductory prayers, the confessor addresses the penitent 
and says to him: 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

'Behold my spiritual son, Christ standeth here invisibly and rcceiveth 
thy confession. Wherefore be not ashamed, neither be afraid, and con- 
ceal nothing ... so shalt thou have pardon from our Lord Jesus Christ. 
Lo, His holy image is before us, and I am but a witness bearing testi- 
mony before Him of all things which thou hast to say to me.' 

The priest of the Orthodox Church is not a judge, but a physician 
helping the penitent to recover his spiritual health. By articulating his 
misdeeds the penitent achieves two important results; he objectifies his 
wrong actions and thus detaches them from his inner self. At the same 
time he receives the necessary medicine for his fight against his afflic- 
tions in the form of sacramental grace and the wise advice of the priest. 
There is little formalism in Eastern confession, and most confessors 
have their own way of approaching it. Some ask questions to facilitate 
self-disclosure. Others refrain from questioning. Some encourage the 
penitent by telling him how others have committed the same and even 
graver transgressions, yet have recovered moral integrity and health; an 
experienced confessor can also bring home to a self-satisfied or careless 
Christian that actions he thinks unimportant and excusable are serious 
offences that might undermine his moral strength. Some priests con- 
fine confession to prayers in which they solicit divine forgiveness and 
assure the penitent that the All Merciful and All Loving God is ready 
to wash away the stain of sin from all who are willing to alter their 
conduct and have reconciled themselves with their fellow men. The 
Confession concludes with the following petition: 

'Our Lord and God, merciful, gracious and long-suffering . . . 
forgive now O Lord this Thy servant (name); grant him the assurance 
of repentance, pardon and remission of his sins, and absolve him from 
all his offences, voluntary and involuntary; reconcile and unite him to 
Thy Holy Church, through Jesus Christ Our Lord.' 

This last petition has a special significance. A sincere confession not 
only releases a penitent from the burden of his sins, but also establishes a 
closer and happier fellowship between him and the other members of 
the Church. Loneliness and mistrust of others is one of the inevitable 
consequences of sin. Repentance restores man to unity with God and his 
neighbour. 

The last act of confession is the absolution pronounced by the priest. 
The Russian Church borrowed its present form from the West in the 
seventeenth century and the confessor says: 

252 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

'May our Lord and God Jesus Christ, through the grace and bounties 
of his love towards mankind, forgive thee (name) all thy transgressions. 
And I, an unworthy priest, through the power given unto me by Him 
do forgive and absolve thee from all thy sins. 9 * 

The use of the pronoun 'I* is foreign to the Orthodox tradition and 
the Greek and other Oriental Churches do not employ it. 

The frequency of confession is left to the discretion of individuals. 
Among Russians confession is considered to be an integral part of every 
preparation for communion; in other Eastern Churches it is regarded 
as indispensable only in the case of a serious moral fall. In some 
Churches, only priests selected for this purpose by their bishops are 
authorized to hear confessions; in other parts of Eastern Christendom 
every priest is expected to act as a confessor. 

Holy Unction 

In the Orthodox Church anointing with holy oil is regularly practised 
and greatly valued. This sacrament is used in cases of bodily and mental 
illness, and by those seeking renewal and purification. In most cases the 
priest is invited to the sick person's house and administers the sacrament 
there, but recently its application has been extended, and in many 
Russian parishes this sacrament is offered during Lent to all members 
of the congregation who desire to avail themselves of its healing powers. 
In other Churches pilgrims to the holy shrines receive this special 
blessing. 

The service consists of seven lessons dealing with the healing ministry 
of Christ. Each of these readings is followed by anointing. Usually 
several, preferably seven, priests take part in this service. The underly- 
ing idea of the sacrament is the interdependence of man's physical and 
spiritual natures. Some physical infirmities affect morality, and sins 
and transgressions can leave their marks on the body. 

While the Sacrament of Penance heals the mental side of men, Holy 
Unction does the same for their bodies. The administration of this 
sacrament by several priests emphasizes that in this case the healing 
power belongs to the Church and not to an individual. The Eastern 
Christians recognize and highly esteem the gift of healing possessed by 
some exceptional persons, but in Holy Unction every priest is called to 
help suffering Christians and to alleviate their bodily infirmities together 
with the moral weakness resulting from them. 

* A Greek and Russian form of absolution can be found in A Manual of Eastern Orthodox 
Prayers, London 1945, pp. 51 and 59. 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Ordination 

The corporate spirit of Eastern Christianity finds expression in the 
manner in which bishops, priests and deacons are consecrated. The 
West has been split on this vital point since the Reformation. Some of 
the Western confessions, Roman Catholics, Old Catholics and Angli- 
cans, insist that the ordination of clergy can be lawfully performed only 
by bishops in the Apostolic succession. The Protestants repudiate this, 
and stress the inner call to the ministry. They consider the laying on of 
hands as merely a confirmation of this call which may be performed by 
any authorized representatives of a given confession. 

The Eastern practice differs from both the Western forms. It com- 
bines elements which are separately emphasized in the practice of other 
Churches. In the East the ordinand is first brought into the congrega- 
tion gathered for celebration of the Holy Eucharist. The two sub- 
deacons then ask the assembly to sanction the ordination, and the 
unanimous approval, first of the lay people and afterwards of the clergy, 
who say Axious ('He is worthy to be ordained') is taken as an expression 
of divine approbation. 

Then the candidate kneels before the bishop, who lays his hands on 
his head, and in the name of the whole Church sanctions the choice 
made by the local congregation. 

Eastern Christians believe that the Holy Spirit speaks through the 
body of church members who are at unity among themselves. Every 
local Church is a living cell in the universal organism and has power to 
act on behalf of the whole body, but on condition that it remains in 
concord with the rest. The role of the bishop in the East is that of a 
witness, who testifies that the local congregation has retained its bond of 
unity with the Catholic Church. The Apostolic succession is a sign that 
successive generations enjoy mutual love and remain in fellowship with 
all believers in the Incarnation. 

Marriage 

The sacrament of marriage is known as 'crowning 9 in the Eastern 
Church. This is a solemn blessing by the Church of man and woman, 
that their new life together may be one of unity and concord, after the 
pattern of Christ's union with his Church. 

The service combines some features of Ordination with those of the 
Eucharist. The bride and bridegroom are solemnly conducted by the 
priest to the middle of the church, where the crowning takes place in 
symbolic representation of the union between Christ the King and His 
Bride, the Holy Church. The priest blesses them three times, with the 

254 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

words C O Lord our God, crown them with glory and honour'. Crowns 
are then placed upon their heads, and are worn till the end of the ser- 
vice. After the reading of the Epistle (Ephesians v, 20-23), and the 
Gospel (John ii, 1-12) and the recitation of the Lord's Prayer, the bride 
and bridegroom drink wine from the same cup in token of their new 
unity. The priest then takes them by the hand and leads them three 
times round the lectern, while the choir sings the hymns sung at the 
Ordination service. The similarity of the rites of Ordination and 
Marriage in the East expresses the belief that the clergy ought to live in 
unity and love with the community delivered to their charge. 

The solemnity of this service emphasizes the sanctity of married 
life, and the connection between the mystery of human love and the 
love of God for His creation. Nevertheless the Eastern Churches of the 
Byzantine tradition allow divorce and even remarriage. This practice 
does not seem to the Orthodox incompatible with their high esteem for 
marriage. They believe that in marriage two people enter into an 
organic relation, so close that it is not dissolved even by death. It follows 
from this that, in its ideal, marriage can never be repeated, but this 
high standard cannot be imposed upon every Christian, for there are 
numerous causes which may deprive married couples of the experience 
of true love and unity. Some, for instance, find it difficult to remain 
single after the death of husband or wife; the married life of others may 
be ruined by prolonged absence, insanity, imprisonment for life, or 
unfaithfulness. In all these cases the Church, as a loving mother, con- 
descends to the frailty of her children and gives her blessing to a second 
marriage. This service, however, is different from the glorious crowning; 
it contains a clearly penitential note, for those who enter upon a second 
marriage have failed to preserve the fidelity to their first intention. The 
priest says the following prayer: 

*O Lord Jesus Christ . . . cleanse the iniquities of Thy servants because 
they, being unable to bear the heat and burden of the day and the hot 
desires of the flesh, are now entering into the bond of second marriage, 
as Thou didst render lawful by Thy chosen vessel, the apostle Paul 
saying "For the sake of us humble sinners, it is better to marry in the 
Lord than to burn 5 '.' 

The penitential rite of second marriage is used both for the widowed 
and for the divorced. In order to make it clear that second marriage is 
tolerated, not approved, the Church requires that both priests and 
deacons shall only marry once, and candidates for Holy Orders may 
not choose widows or divorcees for their wives. If they feel they must 

255 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

marry again, and this is often a real problem for clergy whose wives die 
while their children are still young, they are not condemned by the 
Church, but they are no longer allowed to exercise their priestly func- 
tions, though they often continue to work for the Church as readers or 
choir-masters. 

Other sacramental rites 

Besides these major sacraments the Orthodox Prayer Books contain 
more than forty other rites and sacramental blessings, which cover all 
the needs and tasks of human life. The Church invokes the grace of the 
Holy Spirit upon both sacred and secular objects, such as churches, 
ikons, houses, fields, animals and plants. Some of these ceremonies, like 
the great Blessing of the Water on the day of Epiphany (the feast of 
Christ's baptism in the Eastern Church) are sacramental in the full 
sense of the word; others are no more than blessings bestowed either by 
the priest or by lay-people. 

The Orthodox believe that the Church has power to sanctify and 
purify all life, both matter and spirit, and that wherever and whenever 
she operates through the sacramental actions of her members, the 
matter receives the grace of the Holy Spirit and becomes the vehicle 
of His life-giving and saving influence. 

Offices of the Eastern Church 

For the Orthodox Church the sacraments represent the high marks of 
men's communion and collaboration with the Creator. Besides these 
corporate liturgical actions their Church offers also numerous other 
occasions for praise and prayers. 

Eight of these services are regularly used and are arranged through- 
out day and night at equal intervals. For liturgical purposes the 
Christian East adheres to the old Roman system of counting time. The 
night is divided into twelve hours, from sunset or 6 p.m. The day begins 
at sunrise or 6 a.m. The round of offices begins with Vespers sung at 
6 p.m.; Compline follows at 9 p.m.; Midnight Service (Nocturn) at 
12; the First Hour (Prime) at 6 a.m.; Matins at 7 a.m.; the Third Hour 
(Terce) at 9 a.m.; the Sixth Hour (Sext) at 12 noon; the Ninth Hour 
(None) at 3 p.m. These services are recited separately in religious 
communities and provide frequent opportunities for worship. In parish 
churches the offices are grouped together in two main services, one held 
in the morning, the other in the evening. The liturgical material for 
these offices is rich in content and of various origins. The Old Testament 
psalms are widely used and supply a foundation for all the services. 

256 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

Readings from the Old and New Testaments also have an important 
place in Eastern worship, but the greatest part consists of metrical 
hymns and prayers composed at different periods and in different 
lands of Eastern Christendom. Most of these religious poems are 
Byzantine. One of the leading Western experts on Eastern worship, 
Cardinal Pitra (1812-89) wrote: 

'Nowhere has poetry received from the Church a fuller appreciation 
and encouragement than in the Greek lands of Homer. While it is 
evident that this great monument of hymnography could not have been 
created by a single effort, it is nonetheless difficult to follow the various 
stages of its development through the centuries. One realizes there have 
been successive creations, stages superimposed upon unfathomable 
depths, and many generations of poets, known and unknown.' 4 

The greatest Orthodox hymnographers were St Ephraim the Syrian 
(d. 378) and his disciple, Roman the Melode, who came from Syria to 
Constantinople. Roman popularized the art of religious poetry in the 
capital, and was followed by a number of Byzantine poets, Anatolius 
(d. 458), Sergius (d. 638) (both the Patriarchs of Constantinople) and 
George the Deacon (seventh century) . The later hymnographers include 
Andrew of Crete (d. 720) the author of a magnificent penitential poem 
recited every Lent. 5 In the eighth century Cosmas, Bishop of Maiuni 
(d. 743) and St John of Damascus (d. 749) enriched the worship of the 
Eastern Church. In the following centuries valuable additions were also 
made by Joseph the Hymnographer (d. 983), the Emperor Leo the 
Philosopher (886-912) and St Theodor the Studite (d. 826), an ardent 
defender of ikons. 

Several women also contributed to this religious poetry. The best 
known was a nun called Cassia (ninth century), author of one of the 
most moving hymns of the Orthodox Church, which describes the 
washing of Christ's feet by a harlot. This hymn is sung on Tuesday and 
Wednesday in Holy Week. Most of this elaborate poetry, however, was 
bequeathed to the Orthodox Church by anonymous writers. Only a 
proportion of this rich hymnography is incorporated in the printed 
service books and used regularly. The rest exists in manuscript and is 
only available to experts. 

The language of Eastern poetry is ornate and contains a profusion of 
epithets in which the Oriental imagination luxuriates. It has many 
points in common with the shining colours of mosaics, for it exhibits 
the same combination of rich artistry with adherence to the strict code 

R 257 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

of convention characteristic of Byzantine art. 

The current services of the Orthodox Church conform to a complex 
system of cycles. The first is the seven days of the week, each with its 
own theme, reflected in the prayers. Sunday is the day of the Resurrec- 
tion; Monday commemorates the angelic hosts; Tuesday St John the 
Baptist and the Prophets; Wednesday and Friday, Christ's Passion; 
Thursday, the apostles, St Nicholas and all the saints; Saturday, all the 
departed, especially martyrs. 

The second cycle is based on the eight musical modes, each of which 
has its own set of hymns. A new mode is introduced on Saturday 
night and dominates the offices for the rest of the week. This cycle 
covers a period of eight weeks, after which the first mode is used 
again. 

The third cycle is that of the year. Each day commemorates its own 
saints and the important events of Christian history; when the service 
is constructed hymns can be chosen from several themes in the service 
books for the day. These cycles provide an ever-changing and seldom 
repeated pattern of hymns and prayers. The task of composing the 
daily office requires expert knowledge and there is a special book, 
Typicon, of rules and advice. 

There are two periods in the year when the rhythm of the service is 
changed, Lent and Easter. The music, the prayers and even the struc- 
ture of each office is altered. The Lenten services are long and peniten- 
tial, accompanied by kneeling and prostration. Easter, celebrated with 
a joyful sense of victory, contrasts sharply with the Lenten austerity. 
Orthodox do not kneel during the six weeks that follow Easter, and the 
music and hymns reflect the triumphant rising of the Saviour from the 
grave. 

The Russian Church celebrates Easter Matins at midnight, and the 
special atmosphere of jubilation created on that occasion has no 
parallel in the experience of other Christians. To be present at this 
service is to realize why the Orthodox Church is sometimes described as 
the Church of the Resurrection (Plates 56 and 57). 

Another characteristic of the Christian East is the close connection 
between Church prayers and family life. Many services are sung by a 
priest and his assistant, either in church or at home, at the request of his 
parishioners. Some are thanksgiving for God's blessing; others are 
requests for divine help, prayers for the sick, for a person starting upon a 
journey or commencing new work, for children going to school and for 
the departed. They cover all aspects of life with all its joys and sorrows. 
Frequently after a public service in a parish church an occasional 

258 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

office is sung and a small congregation is formed for this purpose while 
the majority of worshippers go home. 

Russian Christians are particularly attached to their patron saints in 
whose names they are baptized. On the day of the commemoration of 
his saint a Russian is congratulated by his friends, and he often asks the 
priest to celebrate a special service on that occasion. 

The Liturgical Books used by the Eastern Christians 

The Bible provides the main material for all services of the Eastern Church. 
Besides the Bible and the above mentioned Typicon, Eastern Christians 
use the following office books for their corporate and private worship: 

The Horologion which includes the unchangeable parts of all services, 
and the prayers assigned to each day of the week. This is a small volume 
which serves as scaffolding for the construction of public worship. 

The Octoekhos, consisting of two parts in which the hymns of the eight 
modes are incorporated. 

The Menaia which consist of twelve big volumes presenting hymns 
required for the daily commemorations. 

The Triodion, the book of Lenten services. 

The Pentikostarion, covering the season of Easter. 

In addition there are two other volumes essential for the conduct of 
Easter worship: 

The Litourgion, required by priests and deacons. It contains the 
prayers and litanies recited by them during the celebration of the 
Eucharist, Matins and Vespers. 

The Euchologion, also used mainly by the clergy. It contains the forms 
of administration of all the other sacraments and also the prayers 
required for occasional services. 

The manuals of prayers, designed for lay people. They include morning 
and evening devotions, the office of preparation before Holy Com- 
munion, the prayers of thanksgiving after it, the Akathist hymns 
addressed to Christ, to His mother and to the Saints, and other 
occasional prayers. 

Some of these manuals have in addition a list of daily Bible lessons 
and the calendar of the Saints. 

Some reasons for the difference between Eastern and Western approaches to 
Christian worship 

The differences between Eastern and Western architecture, services and 
sacraments are theological, psychological and temperamental. As stated 
above, the Western Christian puts the individual above the com- 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

munity, while the East instinctively acts in the opposite way. The West 
sharply separates matter and spirit and tends to oppose what the East 
regards as indissolubly bound, bringing matter into the most sacred 
acts of communion with God. 

Christianity is the religion of the Incarnation, of union between 
heaven and earth, time and eternity, God and man. Its main affirma- 
tion is that divine and human can be made one without losing their 
identity. This is achieved, not because God and the world are the same, 
but because God is the creator, the world is His creation, and the 
Creator is the absolute Master of His own work. He loves it, and desires 
the most intimate fellowship with beings endowed by Him with the 
power of free choice. 

The Christian East and West stand in complete agreement with one 
another as far as these fundamental convictions are concerned. They 
teach that man, as the crown of creation, is called to act as a link be- 
tween God and the world, and, moreover, that he is capable of pro- 
moting or retarding concord and co-operation between the Divine and 
creaturely wills. Eastern and Western Christians, however, begin to part 
company when they attempt to define with greater precision the role 
assigned to each human being in this divine-human encounter. 

For Western Christians, the ray of divine light touching the earth 
illuminates above all the unique value and high responsibility of each 
man and woman made in the image of God. A reborn person is, for 
them, the corner-stone of the new order. The Christian Church is a 
fellowship of individuals called to live the Christian life together. This 
body is distinct from the rest of the world; it stands in opposition to 
temporal kingdoms, and proclaims the supreme power of the Spirit 
over matter and flesh. The redemption itself is conceived in the West as 
man's liberation from earthly bondage, and Church history is inter- 
preted as a never-ceasing struggle between the Kingdom of God and the 
kingdoms of this world. Every moment of time must be redeemed by 
being so filled with meaning that it is joined to the realm of unchanging 
values and so made part of Eternity. 

In the East a man is seen primarily as a member of a community. 
Those who live in peace and love among themselves become the mirror 
of the Holy Trinity, the reflection of the heavenly light. Man grows into 
a person when he realizes his interdependence with his fellow members 
in the Body of Christ. The Church is divine grace operating among the 
redeemed; Christians are those who have responded freely to the call 
from above; they are separated from the world only in the sense of 
coming together to form its sacred heart. Through the Church God 

260 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

brings about the regeneration not only of men but of all nature. Spirit 
and matter are two manifestations of the same reality, and when they 
are sanctified and made the temple of indwelling grace then the past, 
present and future join together, and time stops its flow as it merges 
with the ocean of eternal life and light. 

These distinctions, subtle though they may appear, have deeply 
influenced the presentation of Christian faith in West and East, and 
have consequently affected worship, culture, and even political 
conditions among these nations. This fact can be illustrated by 
examples taken from religious art, customs and liturgical traditions. 
For example, the flame-shaped cupolas of the Russian churches with 
their bright colours proclaim the regenerating power given to the Chris- 
tian community. They announce the coming transfiguration of the 
universe, and they preach that even now the earth is changed into 
paradise whenever the Eucharist is celebrated and divine grace received 
through men's corporate action (plates 11-12). 

The austerer architecture of Western churches symbolizes the conflict 
between two hostile realms; even while asserting that Christian forces 
cannot be defeated, the battlements of the grey walls remind members 
of Christ's army that the struggle is hard, the enemy strong, and victory 
not to be obtained without effort, suffering and sacrifice. This militant 
aspect of Western Christianity is, however, mellowed by another 
message, beautifully expressed in the lofty and serene spires, which tell 
of man's longing to leave this earth behind, with all its turmoil and 
temptations, to be liberated from all material concerns, to reach the 
celestial regions of sinlessness and peace. 

The interior decoration of Eastern and Western churches is also 
eloquent of these two interpretations of Christianity. The Orthodox 
temples represent heaven and earth joined together in glorious union. 
The sanctuary divided from the rest of the building by the screen is 
heaven with its holiness and mystery; it is always there, yet inaccessible 
to sinful man so long as he remains in his isolation; therefore the doors 
leading into the sanctuary are closed except during the service. They 
are wide open however when Christians are gathered together in 
obedience to Christ's commandment, and in faith, love and fear, begin 
to celebrate the Eucharist. Then heaven illuminates the earth, and God 
meets His creation. 

The screen, with the figures of the Incarnate Lord, His Mother, and 
the saints painted thereon, expresses the conviction that man both 
divides and unites the heavenly and the earthly kingdoms. The Royal 
Doors, with their pictures of the Annunciation and of the four Evan- 

261 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

gelists, declare that Christ alone is the door leading to communion 
with the Holy Trinity. 

The interior of Western churches corresponds to the teaching that 
man must be continuously assisted from above in order to make progress 
along the right path. The altar and the pulpit supply mystical and 
intellectual sustenance distributed by the Shepherd to His flock. The 
pews, occupying the nave, organize and also detach members of the 
congregation, helping them to concentrate on their personal decision, 
thus stressing the responsibility of each Christian soldier of the Church 
Militant. This individualistic approach to religion is also revealed in the 
way in which Western and especially Protestant services are arranged. 
They are generally led by one individual, usually the ordained minister, 
on behalf of other individuals, and ideally they are so conducted as to be 
followed easily by everyone. They are well-timed, with a clearly marked 
climax, and the congregation has a full share in singing psalms and 
hymns and in prayers, and great importance is placed on listening with 
undivided attention to the Word of God and to the sermon. 

The freedom and spontaneity of Eastern Christians springs from their 
conviction that they are all members of one great family composed of 
the living and the departed, and that the power of death only partially 
interrupts the fellowship of its members and is unable to rob them of 
their fundamental unity. Whenever the Church of God is gathered 
together in an act of worship, it is the saints and the faithful departed 
who lead the prayers of the congregation, while the Christians on earth 
intermittently join their great company in its never-ceasing praise. The 
strong corporate sense of the Christian East makes it easy for members 
of the Church to treat their participation in worship as a sharing in the 
life of the whole body. 

They come to the liturgy as guests to a banquet, at which the saints 
have the place of honour. This attitude explains the presence of so 
many ikons. By these visible signs, the Christian wants to be reminded 
of his invisible hosts, and his first act when he comes into church is to 
salute them by offering a lighted candle, as a symbol of love and remem- 
brance of his forefathers. This act is often followed by reverently 
kissing the ikon. The customs correspond to the ancient Christian 
salutation of the Kiss of Peace, which is still exchanged by the Orthodox 
at the Easter Night service, and by the clergy at every celebration of the 
Eucharist. 

In contrast to his Western brother, keenly aware of his duty to worship 
God, the Orthodox stresses the privilege of joining the glorious company 
of saints when he goes to church. He knows that whether he stays for 

262 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

minutes or for hours, he makes but an inadequate contribution to the 
never-ceasing worship of the whole Church of Christ. All in the congre- 
gation are equally unworthy of being present yet all are equally wel- 
comed by their loving Father and those elder brothers and sisters who 
have already entered into the joy of eternal life. It is this sense of being 
a member of a family that engenders the informality of individual 
behaviour. Prince and beggar, rich and poor, respected citizen and 
outcast, all have their place at this feast and no one can claim a 
position of authority and honour, since that belongs only to the saints. 
The warmth, joyfulness and family spirit of Eastern worship are 
among its great achievements, and they derive from the corporate 
approach to the liturgical services. 

Pursuing these comparisons, one may say that the different attitudes 
to matter and spirit explain the opposed tendencies in the evolution of 
Eastern and Western sacramental teaching and practice. In the West 
the tendency has been to minimize the material aspect in administering 
the sacraments; in the East that element has been extended as widely as 
possible; in the West, for example, Baptism by sprinkling has replaced 
the solemn rite of the blessing of water and the threefold immersion, 
still practised in the East. The Baptist denomination is nearly unique in 
insisting on immersion, but does not ascribe any importance to the water 
itself, and regards inner conversion as the essential part of the rite. 

The same development took place in the treatment of bread and wine 
at the Eucharist. The Roman doctrine of Transubstantiation, according 
to which only the visible sign of bread and wine are retained, whilst 
their substances are radically altered, and so to speak consumed by the 
divine fire, reduces the material aspect of the sacrament to a minimum. 
Bread is accordingly represented by a thin wafer, and wine is withdrawn 
from the communion of lay people. 

Among some Protestants the communion service has received a 
strictly spiritual interpretation as the act of Union between Christ and 
the soul of the believer. The bread and wine are relegated to the fringe 
of the service, and are no longer consecrated and venerated as the 
vehicles of divine grace, merely regarded as reminders of the Last 
Supper. Their importance is minimized to such an extent that the wine 
in many denominations is replaced by a non-fermented juice. The 
belief that the highest form of worship ought to aim at being 'purely 
spiritual' and devoid of all material association finds fullest expression in 
the Quaker community, which dispenses with all material elements in 
its services. 

In the East the bread and wine of the Eucharist are approached with 

263 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

awe and devotion. The full leavened bread is used and red wine 
warmed by the addition of hot water is offered to the communicants. 
More bread, this time unconsecrated, is distributed at the end of each 
service to all members of the congregation. 

On many occasions other fruits and food are sanctified in the Church 
and eaten there. The sacramental blessings are bestowed by the Eastern 
Church upon other animate and inanimate objects. The Church is 
ready to touch with its transforming hand all that is essential to men 
and related to their daily life and labour. 

The desire and ability to worship, like the urge to create, is innate in 
all human beings. The history of mankind displays an infinite variety of 
forms and objects and purposes of worship, and all these expressions, 
different as they are, reveal awareness that man is neither the beginning 
nor the end of the cosmic evolution, but a link in a chain, both ends of 
which escape his knowledge. 

From the dawn of history men have worshipped the power which 
pulsates in the universe, and manifest in the heat and light emanating 
from the sun, in a stone's solidity, in the steady growth of a tree, in the 
beauty and strength of an animal, in the skill of man's hands, or the 
quickness of his brain. Men have adored that inexhaustible energy, that 
elan mtal^ and identified it with the creator of the Universe, their Lord 
and Master. 

Some religious teachers and reformers refused however to follow the 
well-trodden path of other creeds. They have taught that the world 
of the senses is only a transient illusion projected by men themselves, 
that the realm of the spirit is diametrically opposed to the material 
world and that man can find himself only by liberating his being from 
all earthly concerns. These two different visions of man's part in 
the cosmos have continued to exercise their influence within the 
Christian community and have affected the evolution of its worship 
and lent it variety. 

The austere, whitewashed chapel of the Puritans, devoid of artistic 
adornment, and the lavishly over-decorated Baroque temples represent 
extreme interpretations of the same religion. 

The Orthodox have built their liturgical services on the article of 
their creed, that the Triune God is the omnipotent Maker of Heaven 
and Earth and of all things visible and invisible, and that men are 
intimately linked to the rest of creation. Eastern worship, therefore, 
involves the entire man, together with all nature, his body and soul, his 
mind and his feelings, his moral behaviour, his artistic creativity, and 
the fruits of his labour. 

264 



WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

Man, with his will and reason, can choose to worship God or himself, 
but matter has no such freedom; it follows the line traced by human will. 
Yet matter is grace-bearing and once it is brought into contact with the 
divine power, it becomes Holy and sacred to men. This is the underlying 
conviction of Eastern Christians which shapes their sacramental prac- 
tice; it may seem materialistic and superstitious to those who believe that 
spirit is the only channel of communion between God and Man. The 
Eastern Christians treat as holy not only the sacramental Bread and 
Wine of the Eucharist, the Water of Baptism, the Chrism and the Oil 
used for Chrismation and anointing, but also the vessels required for 
these sacraments, the book of the four Gospels, kept on the throne (or the 
altar) as the symbol of Christ's presence, the vestments of the priest and 
the Cross with which he blesses the people. Ikons are similarly venerated 
for they represent the Incarnate Lord, His All Holy Mother, and the 
saints. All is holy in the holy temple, and everything dedicated to God 
is set apart by divine grace and is transformed by it. 

Liturgical worship is the source of inspiration for the Eastern 
Christians. It appeals to all the senses. The worshipper's eyes behold the 
beauty of the sacred paintings, his ears hear the songs, the incense 
surrounds him with its aromatic fumes, his palate enjoys the blessed 
fruits of the earth, his body glorifies his creator by symbolic gestures, his 
spirit rises in adoration of his Heavenly Father. The entire man is 
supported and uplifted by an atmosphere of worship created by the 
joint efforts of the congregation, united and inspired by their faith and 
love, and by the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. 

Not all Eastern Christians make full use of orthodox worship, 
but nonetheless the majority benefit from the purifying and regenerating 
grace offered in the sacraments and services of their Church. 



265 



CHAPTER TEN 

THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF 
EASTERN CHRISTIANS 



The Chwch and the child The Church and the laity The last rites Advanced training in 
spiritual life The Orthodox Church and ethical and social problems 



THE INFLUENCE of the Church has deeply penetrated the personal, 
social and national life of Eastern peoples. It has helped and guided 
them in their labours, their sorrows, and their joys, yet the Church has 
never imposed its authority and is regarded, not as a master, but as a 
loving mother and protector. It is not identified with the clergy; but 
with the community of the redeemed. 'Christianity is a new life with 
and in Christ, guided by the Holy Spirit,' 1 It attunes men to the mind of 
their Creator and makes them collaborators with Him. 

This all prevailing and yet not dominating role of Eastern Orthodoxy 
contrasts with the paternal authority of the Roman Church which 
controls the thoughts of its members, directing their actions and assist- 
ing them with the detailed instructions on all major moral and intellec- 
tual problems of their life. The Orthodox have a profound organic link 
with their Church but the help and inspiration the Church gives them is 
mainly derived from their participation in its worship which transforms 
and purifies their hearts and minds. 

In the Roman West the Church is often presented as a militant 
force, called to bring the world into obedience to Christ the King. Those 
who join its ranks are promised eternal life. Man, however, in his 
natural state is incapable of enjoying the beatific vision which he lost 
in the Garden of Eden. He needs supernatural grace, which Christ 
placed at the disposal of the Church through His sacrifice on the Cross. 
The Church alone has therefore the power to open the gates of Heaven 
for it controls all means of salvation. The emphasis on jurisdiction, 
discipline and on the special prerogatives assigned to the clergy are all 
characteristics of Roman Catholicism arising out of these fundamental 
convictions. Protestants agree on the fallen state of human nature, 
but differ from Rome by stressing justification by faith alone as the only 
sure way of salvation. 

The East regards sin as only a temporary malady which hurts man 
but does not annihilate his God-like image. The divine love manifested 

266 



THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 

through the Incarnation has made it possible for men to restore their 
filial relations with the Father and reach holiness and purity. The grace 
of the sacraments, the life of ascetic self-control^ of charity and prayer 
can cure men of their inner discord which hinders their spiritual growth, 
fills them with enmity, destroys their harmony with the rest of creation 
and causes suffering, disease and physical death. The Church has power 
to deal with these distortions of humanity, but the Orthodox believe 
that it can help only those who, of their own free will, accepting the 
truth of the Gospel, join its fellowship and receive divine grace through 
its sacraments. To be a Christian means for the Orthodox to merge 
one's own life with that of the whole body of believers and to be thus 
regenerated. On the one hand the Church is cosmic, beyond the control 
of its members, a free gift from above; on the other hand its destiny is 
delivered into the hands of sinful men, and it suffers from their bigotry, 
narrow-mindedness and lack of understanding. It is the organ of the 
Holy Spirit and His august voice is heard in the midst of the congrega- 
tion, but both worthy and unworthy are included in its ranks and often 
those who appear the least important are made the bearers of divine 
message and the keepers of the apostolic tradition. Such a conception of 
the Church explains some seeming contradictions: ritualism of the 
Orthodox is not accompanied by clericalism. Conservatism does not 
mean loss of freedom. Eastern Christianity is not a rigid and authori- 
tarian religion for it manifests itself more in worship and sacraments 
than in catechisms and confessional statements. In order to understand 
the role of the Church in the East, one must observe the home life and 
daily behaviour of its members, for it is in these spheres that Christianity 
operates in their midst. 

Each national Church in the East has its own customs, which at times 
differ considerably from each other. In this chapter Russian customs 
are described as an example of contemporary Orthodoxy. 

The Church and the child 

The first contact between an orthodox and the Church takes place on the 
day of his birth. The priest visits the parents' home, blesses the child and 
recites certain prayers. On the eighth day he calls on the parents again 
and names the child. Every Russian Christian receives the name of a 
saint, who remains for the rest of his life his patron and protector. Some 
parents name their child after the saint on whose day he was born, 
others make their choice on other grounds. 

The prayer read by the priest on this occasion contains the following 
petition: 

267 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

'Grant, O Lord, that this thy new-born servant (name), may ever 
keep thy Holy Name unrenounced, that he may frequent thy Holy 
Church, and be benefited by thy life-giving sacrament, and having 
lived according to thy commandments, he may receive the bliss of the 
elect in thy eternal kingdom.' 

Baptism and Chrismation administered together introduce the infant 
to the fullness of sacramental life. Regular participation in Holy 
Communion offers Orthodox children a possibility of spiritual growth 
which can be of great value in later life. Exalting and purifying 
memories of childhood and youthful experience at sacrament often lead 
to a return to the Church after a period of apostasy. 

The first confession, usually at the age of seven, provides an oppor- 
tunity for the parents and the parish priest to instruct the child. By that 
time he usually knows by heart such prayers as 'Our Father' and 'Hail 
Mary'. He is acquainted with the Nicene Creed and has some idea of 
moral responsibility. After his first confession he is a communicant in his 
own right and is expected to fast and confess his sins before receiving the 
Holy Sacrament. The dramatic and symbolic character of Orthodox 
worship, the frequent processions, the use of incense and the diverse 
activities of clergy and laity attract children's attention and make it 
easier for them to participate in liturgical services than in rites which lay 
greater stress on an intellectual approach to religion. There are also 
domestic customs associated with different seasons of the Christian year, 
often distinguished by special food. Christmas Eve and Epiphany have 
their own symbolic dishes, as has the week before Lent with its pancakes 
(as in the West). Lenten diet is confined to vegetables; all animal food, 
including milk and eggs is excluded. Lent, with this complete trans- 
formation of meals, emphasizes the supreme significance of the events 
commemorated by the Church, which continue to affect the life of 
mankind today. The great feast of Christ's resurrection is also 
reflected in a dramatic way in the customs of a Christian home. 
The Paschal table is dominated for the whole week by the paskha 
and the kulich* surrounded by coloured eggs,| a sight not seen 
again until the next Easter. The riqh variety of custom and ritual 
still in use among the Eastern Christians, the presence of ikons 
in their homes, before which family prayers are said, are edifying 
not only for children, but for adults too, who are reminded 

* A pyramid made of sweet cream-cheese and a round spicy cake. 

t The coloured eggs remind the Christians of a miracle associated with Mary Magdalene 
in whose hands an egg turned red in proof of the Resurrection. 

268 



THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 

they belong to a Christian community, united by its belief in the 
Incarnation.* 

The Church and the laity 

The most important gift that the Orthodox Church offers to all its 
members is the Eucharist. Through participation in this mystery an 
Eastern Christian feels himself renewed, strengthened and enabled to 
share in redemption. It is the principal morning service but frequency 
of communion varies considerably from one national Church to 
another and even from one parish to the next. In general the deep awe 
with which the act of communion is regarded has led to its infrequency. 
In some Churches, such as the Serbian, total abstention from animal 
food for at least a week is expected before each communion, which is 
therefore restricted to special occasions. In other Churches the stress on 
purification makes confession to the priest, and general reconciliation 
with one's neighbours, essential to the act of communion. There is, 
however, a growing tendency towards more frequent partaking of the 
sacrament but most Eastern Christians still receive it only three or four 
times a year and some only once before Easter. Attendance at the 
Eucharist without communicating is therefore the usual practice of 
Eastern Christians who consider that participation in this mystery by 
prayer is uplifting and purifying. At the end of the service each member 
of the congregation receives apiece of bread blessed but not consecrated, 
and this is accepted as a sharing in the great service. 

Next in importance to the Eucharist comes confession, and whether 
resorted to frequently, or only once a year, it brings home to every 
member of the Church his moral responsibility, not only for his outward 
conduct, but also for his inner state, his thoughts, desires, aspirations. 
Confession has a morally educative value and also provides release from 
tensions and anxieties. The practice of confession is based on a convic- 
tion that the inner disharmony in man which in the language of 
Christian tradition is called sin, can be effectively dealt with if the 
penitent recognizes responsibility for his wrong thoughts and actions, 
acknowledges that by committing them he not only harms himself, but 
also adversely affects other members of the community, and seeks a 
remedy in divine forgiveness. 

The Orthodox adhere to the teaching of the Gospel: c lf you forgive 
men their trespasses your heavenly Father will also forgive you.' 2 In 
accordance with this promise a Russian starts his confession by asking 
pardon of all those to whom he is closely connected. Then, a reconciled 

* The meaning of ikons is discussed in Chapter IX. 

269 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

member of the community, he goes to church, where he confesses his 
sins in the presence of a priest, who is not a judge but a witness. Most 
Russian priests acquire experience in confession which helps them meet 
their parishioners' spiritual needs. Some reveal special gifts for the 
administration of this sacrament and these pastors hear confession from 
a much wider circle than their own flock. Every member of the Church 
is free to choose his own confessor. 

Other sacraments and services of the Orthodox Church are grouped 
round the Eucharist. The usual preparation is Evening Song and Matins 
which in the Russian Church are combined and celebrated on Saturday 
night and on the eve of festivals. This service is called the All 
Night Vigil and if not curtailed it lasts from sunset till sunrise; as 
practised still, in some monasteries. In a parish church, however, 
it is usually shortened to two hours or an hour-and-a-half. The 
Vigil is popular among Russians for the beauty of its music, its 
moving ceremonies and the poetry of its hymns and prayers. Many 
of these are taken from the Bible, but others are the works of Byzantine 
poets. 

The Orthodox are also taught to pray every morning and evening at 
home, and a selection of prayers recommended for this purpose is 
found in special manuals. These were originally composed by masters in 
the art of prayer and help the less advanced. The prayer books for the 
laity also contain the office of preparation for Holy Communion and the 
thanksgiving after it. 3 These prayers are a great bond of unity, for they 
have been regularly used by many generations. Some of these 
home prayers deal with special needs, like illness, or blessing for a 
journey or starting a new responsibility or work. In some families 
its members join each other in these prayers. Especially before 
setting out on a voyage a corporate act of worship is customary. 
After sitting some time in silence and recollection, blessing is given to 
the travellers. 

These personal requirements and problems of Church members are 
also the subject of numerous occasional services, which can be celebrated 
either in Churches or in homes on the initiative of lay people. In these 
cases the priest is invited to preside over them and his presence brings 
the blessing and assistance of the whole Church to each of its individual 
members. These occasional services are private and public at the same 
time, for any other Christian may join them if he wishes. Many of these 
services commemorate the departed, for remembrance in prayers of 
those who are no longer on earth is considered the most adequate 
expression of love for them. 

270 



THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 

The last rites 

The last rites of the Church form an impressive part of Eastern worship. 
The Orthodox Church neither minimizes the tragedy of death nor is 
overcome by its destructive power. It prepares its members to face it 
with hope and faith, but also with full awareness of their responsibility 
for what they have done on earth. Eastern Christians ask God in the 
Litany to grant them { a Christian end to their life, painless, peaceful and 
unashamed, and a good answer before the dreadful judgment seat of 
Christ 5 . The last confession followed by Holy Communion is regarded as 
the best preparation for a new existence. Whenever possible the priest 
is also invited to recite special prayers during the passing over of a 
Christian. 4 Normally the body of the departed remains in the house for 
two or three days. During that time the psalter is read by his relatives 
and friends and short services called Panihida are held. The burial 
service contains a deeply moving reflection upon the transient nature of 
earthly life. One of its canticles says: 

'I weep and mourn when I look upon death, and when I see our 
beauty, created according to the image of God, laid in the grave, 
formless, shapeless and without glory. What is this mystery that is our 
lot? Why are we given to corruption and yoked together with death?' 

The service culminates in a farewell to the departed during which the 
congregation sings: 

'Come O brethren, let us give the last kiss to the dead and render 
thanks to God, for our friend has gone from his kinsfolk and rests in the 
tomb and he has no longer a care for the things of vanity and of our 
much-toiling flesh. Where are we now his relatives and friends? Lo, 
we have parted from him to whom Lord, we pray, give eternal rest. 5 

To this prayer a choir responds in the name of the departed himself: 

'I lie voiceless and deprived of breath. Beholding me, bewail me, for 
yesterday I spake with you and suddenly on me came the dread hour 
of death. Come all that love me and kiss me, for never shall I converse 
with you again. For I depart unto the Judge before whom king and 
servant, rich and poor, stand together; for each according to his deeds is 
glorified or ashamed. I beg you all pray to Christ our God for me that 
for my sins I be not bidden unto the place of torments, but be granted 
the light of life. 5 (Plate 54.) 

271 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The concluding prayer asks God 'to place the soul of His departed 
servant in the tabernacle of the just to give him rest in the bosom of 
Abraham and number him with the righteous*. 

The burial service ends with the singing of 'Everlasting Remem- 
brance'; for the Church, in her loving solicitude for all her children, 
remembers them all in her prayers, trusting that this bond of love is of 
real assistance to those who have entered into another life. 

Such are the rites and the sacraments which the Orthodox Church 
places at the disposal of all. To those who desire further training in the 
art of Christian living more is offered. 

/ 

Advanced training in spiritual life 

The monastic communities have played, and still play a great part in 
the life of the Eastern Christians. The offices of the Orthodox Church 
originated in monasteries, and there too the method of confession and 
of spiritual vigilance was developed. Most of the literature on prayer 
and self-examination used by the Orthodox laity is the work of great 
Eastern ascetics. Religious communities in the East do not belong to 
various orders. Every monastery is a self-governing unit, and follows its 
own rules, all of which, however, have much in common. Most Eastern 
monks are not in holy orders and frequently the communities maintain 
themselves by the manual labour of their members. In agricultural 
districts monks and nuns cultivate their lands in the same manner as the 
peasants. Some communities however have more specialized activities 
such as caring for orphans, painting ikons (Plate 49) and printing 
books. 

Monasteries and convents keep their doors open to anyone in need 
of spiritual or material assistance. Most of them offer free hospitality for 
three nights to all visitors. A Christian who wants to make a more care- 
ful preparation for his communion, or to live in retreat, may use a 
monastery for this purpose. In many cases he will find an experienced 
confessor there, who will give the penitent his undivided attention. Such 
a period of spiritual concentration, fasting and prayer is especially 
popular among the Russians and is called govenie (an untranslatable 
term). Many dedicate at least one week every year to this purpose. 
Before the communist revolution several monasteries in Russia, for 
example Valaam of Solovki, welcomed temporary inmates. A person 
who wanted to participate in the prayer life of a religious community 
and be trained in ascetic discipline could join these monasteries for two 
or three years and then return to his usual occupation. Many Orthodox 
are familiar with ascetic literature and follow its advice and instructions. 

272 



THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 

Special popularity is enjoyed by the five volumes of Dobrotolubie (Love 
of the Beautiful] containing extracts from the writings of the Church 
Fathers on the art of prayer. 5 A short prayer called c jesus Prayer' con- 
sisting of a petition C O, Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon 
me, a sinner*, repeated at frequent intervals is recommended by spiritual 
advisors as the foundation of the prayer life. 

An important place in the Eastern Church belongs to Athos, the 
Holy Mount, which since the tenth century has been exclusively 
reserved for monks (Plates 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52). This beautiful 
peninsula in Greece is divided among twenty monasteries each of which 
is a self-governing body. Greeks, Russians, Serbians, Bulgarians and 
Rumanians have their own houses there. Many contain great treasures 
of Christian art and important manuscripts. For several centuries no 
woman has been allowed on Mount Athos, a unique monastic republic, 
and a remnant of the Byzantine world surviving into the twentieth 
century. 

Besides the main monasteries the Holy Mount has many ascetics who 
live in small communities or by themselves. Some dwell in such inac- 
cessible spots that they can be reached only by ladders. Their food is 
supplied to them in a basket hanging over precipitous rocks. 

The Orthodox Church and ethical and social problems 

The Eastern Church is often described as other-worldly and little 
concerned with the material and social sides of life. Its outlook is pre- 
sented as typified by the monks of Mount Athos who withdrew from 
the world with its complex problems and find peace and contentment in 
timeless contemplation. Such a picture of the Eastern Church fails to 
take into account a deep sense of interdependence of all beings common 
to the Orthodox and their realization that man's salvation takes place 
within and not without the community. 

The ethical and social outlook of the Eastern Christians is the out- 
come of their Eucharistic experience. The Orthodox Communion 
service stresses the corporate character of this sacred meal. Reconcilia- 
tion, mutual forgiveness, the recognition that everyone i? responsible for 
each other are underlined by its ritual. Before the recitation of the creed 
the celebrant calls on people Xet us love one another that with one 
accord we may confess'. These words mean that charity is indispensable 
for a proper confession of Orthodox faith, therefore during the singing 
of the creed the celebrants give the kiss of peace to each other and say 
'Christ is in the midst of us*. In the Oriental churches, among the Copts, 
Armenians and Jacobites, the kiss of peace is exchanged also among 

s 373 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

lay people, but among the Byzantine Orthodox it is practised only once 
a year, at Easter. 

This emphasis on reconciliation and forgiveness is also expressed in a 
hymn sung during Eastern Matins: 

'This is the day of Resurrection: Brethren, let us embrace one another 
and forgive those who hate us and thus being illuminated by the feast 
let us exclaim: Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by 
death and upon those in the tombs bestowing life.' 

This constant reminder that a Christian is a man living at peace and 
unity with his neighbour creates moral solidarity among the Orthodox 
and contributes to open hospitality and readiness to share material 
resources with the needy which are some of the characteristics of Eastern 
Christians. Private charity does not exclude however other better 
organized expressions of social concerns, and hospitals, orphanages, 
homes for the old and destitute have always been generously endowed by 
the Orthodox. Sometimes these institutions are attached to religious 
communities, sometimes they are independent. 

The political conditions like the Turkish yoke often interfered with the 
social, educational and philanthropic activities of the Orthodox, but 
these unfavourable factors could never stop them altogether. Since the 
middle of the nineteenth century several leading members of the 
Russian Church have given much thought to the social responsibilities 
of the Christians. The great pioneers in this field were the Slavophils 
and their writings contain much important material on this subject. In 
the twentieth century a number of outstanding Russian economists and 
philosophers made further substantial contributions to this side of 
Christian thought and action. In contemporary Greece the same prob- 
lems also attracted much interest and several societies have been formed 
with this purpose in view. Yet it is essential to recognize that there is 
some marked distinction between the Eastern and Western approach to 
moral and social questions. 

For the Orthodox the Church is not a militant force led by its clergy 
which judges the world from outside and calls it to repentance, but is 
conceived as a leaven which gradually transforms the life of mankind 
from inside by changing the hearts and minds of its members. The 
Church in the East is identified with all its members not only with its 
clergy and theologians; the national and Christian communities are 
seen as intimately connected with each other. This is both the strength 
and the weakness of Eastern Christianity. The Orthodox Church is not 

274 



1'HJi CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 

indifferent to social or political conditions, but is not inclined to preach 
on these subjects or to make public pronouncements; it prefers to work 
behind the scenes, for its members are better equipped to offer passive 
resistance to the non-Christian policy of their rulers than to oppose 
them openly. 

The same misunderstanding accompanies the Western attitude to 
Eastern asceticism. For the Orthodox, the monastic profession and 
asceticism in general does not imply a rejection of Christian responsibility 
for the state of the secular world, but on the contrary, a special training 
for harder and more advanced struggle against evil. But if some of the 
Western incriminations of the Orthodox in social indifference are based 
on a biased approach to Eastern Christianity it is also right to mention in 
this context certain weaknesses of the Christian East affecting un- 
favourably its Church life. These failures of the Orthodox are usually the 
reverse sides of their achievements. Their strong communal sense tends 
to identify the Church and the nation to such an extent that religious 
concerns become subordinate to national interests and ambitions; 
the Orthodox belief in the gradual transformation of society encourages 
submission to the dictates of the state and provides little encouragement 
to an individual stand in the defence of moral principles and social 
justice. The great love for the Eucharist tempts the Orthodox to concen- 
trate all their attention on beauty of worship at the cost of other sides of 
Church life, but these defects of the Eastern Christians, serious as they 
are at times, have never been able to deprive them of their commit- 
ment to a view on life firmly based on the teaching of the Gospels. The 
Orthodox recognize that their personal and social conduct must be 
inspired by the belief in the Incarnation, which reveals to men the 
goodness and blessedness of the earth and the capacity of matter to be a 
vehicle of divine power. The profound appreciation of beauty and glory 
of the creation leads to the insistence that Christian worship ought to 
include the best that artists can produce. 

Art plays a vital role in the life of the Orthodox East. 



CHAPTER ELEVEN 

THE SACRED ART OF THE 
CHRISTIAN EAST 

The meaning of ikons and frescoes for the Orthodox Subject matter of ikons and frescoes The 

ikons of the Church feasts Doctrinal ikons The contemporary revival of art in the Christian 

East--Stages in the evolution of Byzantine Art The schools of Russian ikon painters 

The Eastern and Western artistic traditions 

To PRAISE and bless the Creator is the sublime purpose of the Church 
in the eyes of the Christian East. Not only the spiritual side of man but 
also his physical frame is involved in this act of adoration, for the entire 
creation participates in the timeless liturgy. This feeling for the cor- 
porate and cosmic character of Christianity is expressed in the place of 
honour assigned to art in the East. 

A Roman Catholic may be described as a disciplined member of a 
universal society, a Protestant as a man who has committed himself to 
the religion contained in the Bible. An Orthodox worships God as an 
artist, for he brings to the throne of his Lord and Master the works of 
his creative imagination. The colours and designs of the ikons, the 
sound of the sacred songs, the domes and arches of the buildings dedi- 
cated to the celebration of the divine mystery, are -not merely a useful 
stimulus for the Christian East; they form an integral and indispensable 
part of worship, for man is called upon to humanize the material world, 
and one of the means at his disposal is the transfiguring power of art. 

To a person trained in the Western tradition, Eastern Christian art 
looks remote and enigmatic. Its proper appreciation requires familiarity 
with the outlook of those who have created and admired its master- 
pieces. This chapter attempts an interpretation of the significance of 
art for the East, especially of its sacred pictures, or ikons, which have 
always been objects of special love and veneration among the Orthodox. 

The meaning of ikons and frescoes for the Orthodox 

There is nothing exactly similar in the experience of Western Christians 
to the place which ikons occupy in the life of the Christian East. The 
sacred pictures are not merely suitable decorations for the centres of 
worship; they are not even regarded as a means of visual instruction. 
To the Orthodox, they reveal the ultimate purpose of creation: to be 
the temple of the Holy Spirit; and they manifest the reality of that pro- 
cess of tansfiguration of the cosmos which began on the day of Pentecost 

276 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

and which is gradually extending to all sides of earthly life. At home, or 
on a journey, in hours of danger or in happy moments, an Orthodox 
wishes to see ikons, to gaze through these windows into the world beyond 
time and space and be reassured that his earthly pilgrimage is only the 
beginning of another and fuller life. 

Ikons are prayers enshrined in painted wood, they are sanctified by 
Church blessing and in return assist worshippers in their aspiration to 
heavenly realm by actualizing the divine presence. Thus, ikons differ 
from religious paintings by the symbolic treatment of subjects, by their 
special technique of design and colouring, and above all by the change 
in their substance through the love and transforming prayer of those 
who made them and those who venerate them. 

Subject matter of ikons and frescoes 

Ikons and frescoes can be divided according to subject into three groups: 

1. Portraits of the Incarnate Logos, of His Mother and of the saints. 

2. Pictorial representations of Christian festivals and episodes from 
the lives of the saints. 

3. Symbolic illustrations of Christian doctrine and theological 
concepts. 

The portrait ikons are the most popular and widespread. They remind 
the beholder of the person represented, but in a unique way, for they 
contain both a call and a message. The fore-runners of these Byzantine 
ikons are the Egyptian funeral portraits. The persons commemorated in 
these striking pictures wanted to be remembered by the living when they 
left this familiar world for an unknown and disembodied existence. They 
wished to retain their link with friends and relations and remain in their 
memory and prayers. Accordingly, the departed was represented in the 
prime of life, young, handsome, attractive, with large, wide-open eyes, 
the intention being so to impress the minds of the living with his bodily 
form as to escape (at least partially) the total oblivion of death (Plate 1 6) , 

The early Christian ikons and mosaics followed the same convention. 
The saints whom they represented also looked straight into the eyes of 
their beholders and desired to remain operative in the lives of their 
fellow Christians. As an example of an uninterrupted tradition the 
Russian ikon of St Parasceva, painted in Novgorod in the fifteenth 
century, may be cited (Plate 17), Almost sixteen hundred years separate 
it from an Egyptian portrait. One was created in the hot African desert, 
the other in the marshy damp of the Russian north. Climate, race, 
religion, social and economic conditions are in sharp contrast, but these 
two paintings belong to the same school, for both express the similar 

277 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

underlying conviction that men have found in art an effective weapon 
in their struggle against total annihilation. This ikon, together with the 
Byzantine mosaic of St Demetrius (sixth century) (Plate 29), despite 
their affinity with the Egyptian portrait reveal also a substantial differ- 
ence between the Christian and pagan representations of departed 
people for several important differences were introduced. For instance, 
the shape of the face was altered. Sensual exuberance was discarded 
by making the mouth smaller, and the nose thinner and longer. 
The spiritual nature of man was emphasized; the expression of the 
eyes was also changed. They were no longer the anxious eyes of a 
person looking with longing on the world dear to him which he was 
reluctant to leave. On the contrary, the eyes of the saints testified to the 
peace and contentment of one who has reached his Father's home. The 
saints called Christians to follow in their footsteps, to attain the same 
promised land (Plate 30). They wanted also to be remembered, btft 
with a different purpose in view. 

The ikons forcibly remind the Orthodox of the reality of God's 
kingdom. They represent victorious saints whose changed faces and 
bodies reveal the side of human personality capable of sharing the 
divine life. By gazing at such pictures a Christian experiences a fellow- 
ship with the saints; he is helped by their example and strengthened in 
his resolve to progress along their path. 

The language of the portrait ikons is always purposefully restrained, 
though it is also eloquent and convincing. Those who can follow its 
symbolism receive help, inspiration and deeper understanding of man's 
complex nature. The ikons sometimes appear stiff and impersonal to 
Western eyes, the bodies of the saints seem attenuated and ascetic, 
over-stressing the superiority of the spiritual over the physical nature. 
However, not all the ikons are stern. Some express tenderness, com- 
passion and love, virtues which man shares with the Creator. Eastern 
Christians do not despise the body. Even less do they regard it as an 
obstacle to communion with the divine, but they believe it needs purifi- 
cation and regeneration, and the ikons are a confirmation of this belief. 
This victory over the flesh is expressed through the eyes which reflect the 
eternal bliss experienced by those who have established harmony with 
their Creator. 

The religious and redeeming influence of these images of Christ and 
of His saints reaches its climax in the setting of the interior decorations 
of Orthodox Churches. 

Cecil Stewart described the role of sacred pictures in the following 
passage: 

278 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

'The pictures seem to be arranged in a way which instils a feeling of 
direct relationship between the viewer and the pictures . . . each per- 
sonality is represented facing one, so that one stands, as it were, within 
the congregation of saints. Byzantine art, in fact, puts one in the picture. 
Thus is achieved a spatial dynamic relationship across the volume of the 
church. The beholder belongs within the artistic envelope, and is linked 
visually with the heavenly host. He observes and is observed.' 1 

This close interdependence between the worshipper and the ikons 
explains the preference of Eastern Christians for circular buildings and 
the need for a dome to complete the vision of the Church underlying 
Orthodox liturgy. This liturgy is conceived as a corporate action, and 
the building itself is an image of the cosmos. The cupola represents the 
heavenly vault and contains the picture of Christ Pantokrator the 
ruler and redeemer of the universe (Plates 23 and 24). He is surrounded 
by angels and archangels who serve Him and execute His commands. 
The remaining part of the ceiling and walls are decorated with episodes 
illustrating the redemption of the world, and with pictures of the saints 
who not only look at the worshippers but also converse with one another 
and form their own sacred circle. In the eastern apse, the most signifi- 
cant place after the dome, stands the Virgin Mother, the link between 
the Creator and creation. The Mother of God is the mother of all 
mankind, the friend and protectress of all members of the Church. The 
whole story of the Incarnation is depicted on the walls of an Orthodox 
Church. It begins with the Old Testament patriarchs and prophets; a 
special place of honour is accorded to Joachim and Anna, Simeon and 
John the Baptist. Then come the apostles and the evangelists, the 
martyrs, doctors and teachers, and finally the rest of the saints, drawn 
from all nations and all epochs, from the time when Abraham heard and 
responded to the divine call until our own days when other men and 
women have accepted the message of the Gospels, and have directed 
their lives towards the same ultimate goal (Plates 14 and 15). 

The Basilica of St Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna also conveys the 
reality of the communion of saints, but its artists employed another 
method; they covered the long walls with mosaics depicting the proces- 
sion of the martyrs all moving with one accord towards the altar, and 
the worshipper is carried along with the saints in the same spirit of 
timeless adoration (Plate 19). 

The ikons of the Church feasts 

The mystical and theological strain is also present in the ikons illus- 

279 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

trating biblical scenes or the lives of the saints. Those depicting 
passages from the Gospels stress the approach to the New Testament 
that is so powerfully expressed in Orthodox worship,, namely that 
the life of the Incarnate Lord breaks through the barrier of time 
and takes place in an eternal present. The hymns and prayers of the 
Orthodox Church commemorating Christ's nativity, baptism, trans- 
figuration, death and resurrection usually begin with the words: 'Today 
Christ is born 3 , or 'today He has risen from the dead'. This present 
does not make history less important; on the contrary, the Orthodox 
Church can use the word 'today' with such confidence because it 
believes that all the great and decisive events of the Gospel are historical 
facts, and that there was a day when each event took place; but their 
significance is such that their effects are still operative. 

The other aspect of Orthodox worship, the viewing of history in the 
light of its theological and mystical implications, also finds full expression 
in the ikons. Their masters are never satisfied with a mere factual 
account but add theological commentaries. The ikon of the Nativity 
illustrates all these points (Plate 39) . This ikon is composed of several 
scenes linked by the imagery of Christmas hymns. Its symbolism is that 
of the Creator of the Universe entering history as a newborn babe, and 
the little helpless figure in swaddling clothes of white represents the 
complete submission of Christ to the physical conditions governing the 
human race. Yet He remains Lord of Creation, receiving homage at the 
solemn hour of His appearance on earth. The angels sing praises to the 
infant Redeemer; the Magi and the shepherds bring their gifts; the sky 
salutes Him with the star; the earth provides Him with the cave; the 
animals watch Him in silent wonder; and we humans offer Him one of 
us, the Virgin Mother, the sacred personal link between the Creator and 
creation. The lower scenes underline the scandal of the Incarnation and 
the incredulity with which men confront their Saviour. The right- 
hand scene shows the washing of the infant by the midwife and her 
assistant. It tells us that Christ was born like any other child. The scene 
on the left portrays Joseph, who, having observed the washing of the 
infant, is once again assailed by doubts as to the virginity of his spouse. 
He is tempted by the devil, who suggests that if the infant were truly 
divine He would not have been born in the human way. The mother 
Mary is in the centre, and from her reclining position looks at Joseph as 
if trying to overcome his doubts and temptations. 

The ikon of the Annunciation represents the humility, obedience and 
sense of responsibility shown by the Virgin Mary. She is a free agent, 
but upon her answer depends the destiny of mankind. She is seated on 

280 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

King David's throne, for she is one of his daughters, though called to a 
far greater glory to become the mother of the eternal king. Her perfect 
humility preserves her from the vanity and pride of earthly rulers. She 
accepts the Annunciation as a call to suffering and service. The build- 
ings which form the background of the scene are deliberately unrealistic, 
for the ikon painter is not an archaeologist trying to reproduce a 
Palestinian house of the first century. The veil hanging over the head of 
the Virgin is the conventional indication that the scene is an interior 
one and here again the ikon uses its own symbolic language which can 
be easily misunderstood (Plates 37 and 38). 

The early Italian painters who followed the Byzantine tradition were 
obviously misled by this symbol, and, as Plate 38 illustrates, Duccio 
painted a ceiling in realistic fashion and added the veil almost certainly 
without realizing its original purpose. 

The ikon of the Entombment is remarkable for its rhythm (Plate 41). 
Here again, the Creator of the world is seen as a helpless victim submit- 
ting to hostile forces. There is a striking parallel between the body of the 
Infant Christ and that of the Saviour killed by the hands of His own 
creatures; but not all men were murderers. A few lamented His 
death, and the raised hands of Mary Magdalene vibrate with the pain 
and sorrow of her heart pierced by love, and she is not alone in her grief. 
The hills are shadowed sorrowfully, and their strange shape lifts the 
lamentation of this woman into a cosmic accompaniment. Here, again, 
the symbolism of the picture was missed by Italian imitators. A similar 
well known painting by Duccio is excellent, but its artist obviously failed 
to connect the movement of the hands with the vibrating outlines of 
the hills. 

The doctrinal ikons 

The language of symbolism so widely used in the ikons commemorating 

the feasts of the Church reaches its most elaborate form in the doctrinal 

ikons. 

One of their finest examples is Andrcy Rublev's Holy Trinity (Plate 
43) painted c. 141 1 . Its subject is the visit of three strangers to Abraham, 
in the course of which they announced the birth of a son to him and 
Sarah. The biblical narrative (Genesis xviii, 1-16) is unique, for it uses 
both singular and plural in speaking of the strangers. They are des- 
cribed as three men, but Abraham addressed them as 'My Lord'. This 
peculiarity of language encouraged the biblical commentators to see in 
this episode the first revelation of the trinitarian nature of the Creator, 
and the three messengers became the visible symbol of the Triune God. 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Rublev followed this ancient tradition; his ikon is a supreme example 
of perfect blending of theology and art, for all unnecessary details are 
omitted, and the theological ideas are used in a most natural way in the 
structure of the picture. It produces an impression of profound harmony 
and peace. Three angels sit round the table in an atmosphere which 
vibrates with the self-sacrificing love of the Incarnation. This is indi- 
cated by the chalice which occupies the centre of the picture, with the 
right hand of each angel pointing to it. The angels themselves are 
engaged in a silent discourse with each other. The presiding angel 
addresses himself to his companion on his right hand, who looks at the 
angel sitting opposite to him.* The latter's gently inclined head indicates 
the response to the central figure. His green mantle is the traditional 
colour of the Holy Spirit. All three angels are graceful and spiritual. 
They are gentle but not effeminate; devotional without being sentimen- 
tal. Each is absorbed in his own thought, but they share their concern 
with each other. The theme of their corporate meditation is Christ's life, 
death and resurrection. The table of Holy Communion is shaped like a 




Diagram of Andrey Rublev's Holy Trinity, showing the main outline of this pictorial exposition 

of the Trinitarian doctrine. 

* There are two different interpretations of the angels* positions in Rublev's Holy Trinity 
V. Uzarev (Early Russian Icons, Unesco publication, p. 27) identifies the central Angel with 
Jesus Christ and the Angel on the right side with God the Father. Such a scheme is supported 
by the dress of the central Angel which is the same as that of Ghiist on other Rublev Ikons. 
Besides Rublev's predecessors treated the central Angel as the Redeemer and two otheis as 
Mercy and Justice and it is arguable that Rublev Mowed in their steps. Other commentators 

282 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

chalice, and the chalice itself, with the slain Lamb of God in it, is the 
subject of their contemplation. 

Rublev was not only a creative artist, he was also a thinker and a 
theologian. He expressed his belief in the trinitarian God, the source of 
all life, in appropriate symbols which he skilfully incorporated in his 
scene. The doctrine of God as three in one is stated by a circle enclosing 
a triangle. His God is a living God, and so the circle is not static, but 
moving from right to left. The posture of the head of the central angel 
and the forms of the other two messengers puts this circle in motion. 

According to Rublev the inner life of the Holy Trinity is focused in 
the Holy Communion by means of which the three persons share their 
life and love with creation. The Eucharistic sacrifice is inseparable 
from the Gross and this symbol of Christian faith is also included in the 
picture through the gentle elevation of the central Angel's head above 
two others. The earth, the scene of the Incarnation, is represented by 
the traditional square placed at the foot of the table for in the language 
of the Middle Ages the earth was described as having four corners. It 
rests on the green waters of the ocean which cover the lower part of the 
triangle. Above the right hand angel rises the temple of the Church. 
The timeless heavenly Jerusalem indicates the end of history, whilst the 
green tree* symbolizing the Garden of Eden, speaks of its beginning. It 
is linked with the angel Holy Spirit, the giver of all life and the 
sustainer of the cosmos. 

Here Rublev follows the pattern set forth by the Bible which starts 
its narrative with the garden and concludes it with the city, and he adds 
to it the Cross which he places between the two points. This elaborate 
symbolism does not overload the picture, it deepens its message and 
makes it intelligible to worshippers. 

Rublev's Holy Trinity is so melodious and so rhythmical that it can 
be compared to a symphony. Its main theme, the circle, is repeated in 
the nimbus of each angel and again in the circles of their hair; while the 
second theme, the triangle, is not only the basis of the whole compo- 
sition but also appears in the floor space under the table and in the 
shape of the chalice. 

on Rublev's Ikon identify the central Angel with God the Father who sends His only begotten 
Son into the world and receives into His fold the Holy Spirit. Such a thesis is maintained by 
V. Zander, Les Implications Sociales de la Doctrine de la Trinity Paris, 1936, p. 6, and by Paul 
Evdokimov, L'Orthodoxie, Paris, 1959, p. 235-36. These authors base their argument on the 
inner consistency of their theological interpretation and on the obvious centrality and 
seniority of the presiding Angel. It seems that Rublev, as some other great masters, surpassed 
the conventions of his time and discovered an artistic form better suited to his purpose than 
the symbols with which he was provided by tradition. 

* The tree represents also the Oak of Mambre and the Temple, Abraham's dwelling, 

283 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The originality and depth of Rublev's intuition, however, finds its 
most powerful expression in his colour scheme. Each angel has his own 
distinct posture and colouring, yet they are not separate from each other, 
they are indissolubly united with one another, through the interplay of 
blue, purple and green. The inner tunics of the angels on either side are 
blue, so is the mantle of the presiding angel. But his purple is reflected in 
the outer garment of the right-hand angel, and the Holy Spirit angel 
besides blue also has his green cloak. The colours blend together and 
thus reveal the unity and distinction of each person of the Holy Trinity. 
The ethereal transparency of the colours is unique. The ikon seems to be 
illuminated from within. 

Robert Byron, one of the first western art critics, who saw the ikon 
after its restoration, wrote: c The view was a revelation; before me was 
the greatest masterpiece ever produced by a Slav painter, a work of 
unprecedented invention, to which nothing in art that I could think of 
offered any sort of parallel. It was not that I saw a greater painting than 
any I had seen before, but simply that here was one which differed, in 
its greatness, more than I had thought possible from the accepted canons 
of greatness.' 2 He added: 'The reddish mauves, the pale slate, the 
leaf-green . . . shimmer like hills over a desert in the evening.' 3 

It is the masterpiece of Russian ikonography. Rublev dedicated his 
ikon to the memory of St Sergius of Radonezh, the founder of the 
Monastery of the Holy Trinity and his beloved teacher: it was the 
tribute of the most outstanding artist of the Russian Middle Ages to the 
great saint of his Church. 

This language of symbols and colours was widely used in Russia, until 
its original culture decayed in the eighteenth century. Before their 
encounter with the West, Russians found it more congenial to express 
their ideas in the painting of ikons than in writing theological treatises. 
These theological and mystical ikons were their original contribution to 
the religious art of the Christian East, for the Greeks, though they laid 
much the same stress on the spiritual and inner essence of the portrait 
ikons and reached high perfection in the doctrinal interpretations of the 
Biblical and historical themes, never developed the speculative ikons, 
which attracted the special attention of the Russian Christians. 

One of the Russian popular ikon subjects was Divine Wisdom (Hagia 
Sophia] which dealt with the relation between the Creator and the 
Cosmos. Divine wisdom is mentioned in several Old Testament books, 
and also in the New Testament in I Cor. i, 24-30. As early as the third 
century St Hippolytus of Rome elaborated the connection between the 
Incarnate Logos and the Divine Wisdom and Justinian's dedication of 

284 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

the cathedral in the capital of the Empire to Hagia Sophia proved the 
importance which the theological concept acquired in Byzantine Times. 

The Russians inherited the same tradition, and the cathedrals in 
Kiev and Novgorod built in the eleventh century were also dedicated to 
the Divine Wisdon. At first the Russians followed the Byzantines in 
identifying Divine Wisdom with the second person of the Holy Trinity. 
But later a new interpretation was developed and the ikons painted in 
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries expressed a cosmic approach to 
Divine Wisdom. In these ikons Hagia Sophia is represented as an 
angel seated on the throne, showing that the world was created 
in Wisdom. The Theotokos and St John the Baptist standing on 
either side of the angel proclaim the fulfilments in terms of humanity ol 
the plan of creation conceived by the Holy Trinity before the world 
began. The complex colours of these and similar ikons further emphasize 
the interplay between the mind of the Creator and mankind's response 
to His call to perfection. 

The Russian ikons of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries covered 
many theological and devotional subjects, such as 'The Fatherhood 01 
God', 'The Word of God', 'God rested on the seventh day', 'Our 
Father 9 and c ln this rejoiceth every creature'. As an example of these 
devotional ikons, c the Only Begotten Son' is reproduced in Plate 44. 
It illustrates a hymn dating from the sixth century, probably composed 
by Severus, the anti-Chalcedonian Patriarch of Antioch (d. 538), which 
is sung at every Communion Service in the churches that follow the 
Byzantine tradition.* 

The text of the hymn is: 

'The only-begotten Son and Word of God, who being immortal was 
yet pleased for our salvation to be incarnate of His Holy Mother Mary 
and Virgin, and while remaining unchanged, has become man; save us, 
O Christ our God, who hast endured the Cross and death by death 
undone, who with the Father and the Holy Spirit, being one in Trinity, 
is glorified with them. 9 

Each scene of the ikon represents one of the verses of the hymn. 
In the centre the Theotokos laments the death of Christ to whom she 
gave birth. In the left lower corner the Cross of Christ illustrates the 
words 'who has endured the Cross'. In the right corner, death riding on 
the lion expresses the words 'and death by death undone'. 

* It is a paradox that the hymn is sung by those Christians who repudiate its author for his 
refusal to acknowledge the Council of Chalcedon, 

285 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

Even more striking in its imagery is the sixteenth century ikon called 
The Vision of St Peter, the Patriarch of Alexandria. It illustrates the text: 
C I saw my Lord Jesus Christ as a youth of twelve years. He was wrapped 
in a white shirt torn apart from top to bottom, and he told me, "Arius 
tore my dress; receive him not into communion". 9 (Plate 45.) 

The popularity of these theological and devotional ikons demon- 
strates that in Russia, before its Westernization, the ikons served as 
books, instructing the members of the Church and giving them a firmer 
grasp of its history and doctrine. 

The contemporary revival of art in the Christian East 

Such is the message of the ikons and their place in the devotional life of 
the Orthodox. They have always played an important religious role, but 
their renewed artistic appreciation is a comparatively recent develop- 
ment, for during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there was a 
considerable decline in Eastern art and in many places the ikons were 
replaced by second-rate imitations of Western religious painting. 

There were several reasons, material, aesthetic and psychological, for 
this degeneration of Eastern sacred art. The material factor was im- 
portant; most of the masterpieces of Eastern Christian art were until 
recently either difficult of access, or had been disfigured and altered. 
Many too were in the possession of the Mohammedans who covered the 
frescoes and mosaics with plaster and even preferred to erase them 
altogether when the opportunity for such barbarism arose. But even 
when the old sacred paintings were not wantonly destroyed by Islam, 
the original colouring and design of the famous ikons and frescoes were 
usually obscured. 

The ikons were highly revered by the Orthodox and were therefore 
frequently repainted and restored. After each restoration they were re- 
varnished, and as they gradually darkened the dull browns and greens 
came to predominate and the original glorious colours were lost. By the 
eighteenth century no one realized that beneath the many layers of 
dark paint were concealed the superb paintings of the great medieval 
ikonographers. Even such masterpieces as Rublev's Holy Trinity were no 
longer recognizable, and the Russian art critics of the nineteenth 
century regarded the admiration of their ancestors for this ikon as a 
proof of their deplorable lack of artistic appreciation. In 1904 the first 
attempt was made at cleaning Rublev's painting but its importance 
was only partially revealed. Such a famous authority as Nikodim 
Pavlovich Kondakov (1844-1925) was still under the impression that it 
was 'not even the best copy of Rublev's ikon'. 4 It was only when the 

286 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

restoration was completed years later that the full significance of this 
painting was established. 

During the last two or three decades the technique for restoring the 
ikons to their original state has greatly improved and systematic 
cleaning is now carried out in several special institutes in Russia and 
other countries. 

The frescoes too nowadays attract much interest and study. Many of 
them have been disfigured by later additions, and the so-called renova- 
tions of the nineteenth century were usually undertaken by those who 
had no idea of the real character of Byzantine art. Unwittingly they 
destroyed, or seriously damaged, the great masterpieces by transforming 
them into mediocre imitations of Western pictures. Such mishandling 
has at last been stopped. 

At the same time the improvement in communications has made it 
possible for lovers of art to visit the famous sites such as Hosios Lukas in 
Stiris, near Delphi, or the churches built on the tops of fantastic cliffs in 
Thrace, called Meteora (Plate 53) or the cave churches recently dis- 
covered in Gappadocia. Even a few years ago these outstanding monu- 
ments of Eastern art were inaccessible, but now they are within easy 
reach of ordinary tourists. 

These material discoveries were external accompaniments of an 
inward change in the minds of art lovers. As 1 ong as a painting was 
believed to perform its proper function by reproducing as closely as 
possible the physical universe without attempting its interpretation or 
transfiguration, Byzantine art was bound to remain a closed book. The 
French Impressionists challenged this well-established conviction, 
and they were followed by many still more daring innovators. The 
general result of this revolution was a readiness to appreciate new ideas, 
to recognize the possibility of different approaches to art and to admit 
the appeal of the language of symbols. In the light of this new outlook 
the Orthodox ikons no longer appear primitive and barbaric. Only 
after Christian art had been liberated from a fixed interpretation of 
beauty did the vast and enchanting world of the Byzantine mosaics, 
Serbian frescoes and Russian ikons become accessible. The Eastern 
forms and colourings could at last be appreciated, and through 
this recognition their theological message also became more 
intelligible. 

The reading of the doctrinal language of the ikons remains, however, 
the least advanced aspect of the gradual discovery of Eastern Christian 
art. The difficulty here is threefold. First, the ikon painters took for 
granted a knowledge of certain special symbols which arc now no 

287 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

longer commonly recognized, but without this knowledge the ikon stories 
can never be fully understood. 

Secondly, the ikons form an integral part of Orthodox worship and 
many of their themes illustrate Orthodox hymns and prayers. An ikon 
makes its full impact only when it is contemplated within its context. 

Finally, the ikons are inspired by the vision of a transfigured and 
redeemed universe, the inner heart of Eastern Orthodoxy. Their pur- 
pose is neither to entertain, nor to give aesthetic satisfaction, but to 
proclaim the reality of the reconciliation between the creation and the 
Triune Creator, and thereby strengthen worshippers in their resolution 
to work and pray for fulfilment of the Divine Kingdom. A familiarity 
with Orthodox theology is therefore a further condition of a proper 
understanding of Eastern Christian art. An important contribution in 
this sphere was made by the leaders of the Russian religious renaissance 
of the twentieth century and one of its pioneers, Prince Eugene Trubet- 
skoy (1863-1920) published in 1916 a remarkable book called Philosophy 
in Colour which was the first to open to the Westernized Russians the 
hitherto unexplored world of the medieval ikons. His example was 
followed by L. Uspensky, P. Evdokimov and others whose writings 
acquainted a wider circle of readers with the theology that inspires 
Russian religious art. 

Stages in the evolution of Byzantine art 

A further obstacle that often hinders the appreciation of Eastern 
Christian Art is lack of information about its main stages of evolution. In 
spite of its conservatism, its history is far from being an uneventful 
record of uniformity. Although there are still sharp disagreements 
among the experts on points of detail, considerable progress has lately 
been achieved in the classification of the principal schools of Byzantine 
painting and mosaics. 

The Christian Art of the East had separate origins in a number of the 
big cities. Alexandria, Antioch, Ephesus each had its own tradition, 
influenced by the local pagan art. Gradually, however, Constantinople 
became the main focus of artistic activity and most of the surviving 
examples of early Eastern Christian art belong to the Constantinopolitan 
school in that their creators either lived or were trained in the capital 
of the Empire. So long as Italy remained part of the Byzantine State, 
its art retained many Eastern characteristics and Rome, Ravenna and 
Venice contain magnificent examples of Byzantine mosaics. The 
Constantinopolitan tradition had a glorious but chequered history. 
Three times it reached a high peak of development, and until the end it 

288 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

displayed vitality and superb artistic craftsmanship and genuine 
inspiration. 

The first flowering started in the fourth and lasted until the seventh 
century and was centred in Justinian's reign (527-65) when the 
greatest monument of Byzantine architecture, St Sophia of Con- 
stantinople, was built (Plates i and 2). The Queen city of the East 
no longer contains any mosaics or frescoes dating from this period, but 
Rome, Ravenna, Salonica and Sinai have preserved examples of this 
early Byzantine art. The Church of St George in Salonica has remark- 
able mosaics; they are in a fragmentary state, but enough survives to 
show that they were of outstanding quality and they may be as early 
as the reign of Theodosius the Great (379-95). The largest number of 
early Christian mosaics* are in Ravenna and although the work of 
provincial artists they belong to the Imperial style of the capital. The 
Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, dated c. 44.6, is the earliest of Ravenna 
monuments (Plate 3). San Vitale (Plates 20 and 21), Sant' Apollinare 
Nuovo (Plate 19) and Sant' Apollinare in Classe all belong to the middle 
of the sixth century. The mosaics of Cosmas and Damian in Rome are 
close in time and style to those of the Ravenna churches (Plate 30), and 
one of the most impressive of all is the transfiguration of Christ in the 
monastery of St Catherine of Mount Sinai (sixth century) . 

The Mosaics of churches at Chiti and Lythrangomi, both in Cyprus, 
also date from the pre-Iconoclastic period. So did the magnificent 
Church of the Assumption at Nicaea wantonly destroyed by the Turks 
in 1920. One of the latest monuments of this period is St Demetrius 
Church of Salonica. It belongs to the sixth and seventh centuries and 
contains several votive panels representing the saint and the donors 
(Plate 29). These mosaics combine excellent portraiture with the vision 
of a celestial, unchangeable world; the sacred figures seem to belong 
simultaneously to the divine and terrestial spheres. 

The art of that first period has several common features. The figures 
are monumental; movements are restrained; the divine glory illuminates 
the scene and the saints although retaining individual characteristics 
are part of the eternal unchanging world. The artists who created these 
masterpieces saw the earth as incorporated into the divine realm, and 
their angels formed a link between time and eternity. The traditional 
presentation of the Incarnate Logos was not yet fixed, and sometimes 
Jesus Christ was represented as a beardless youth (Plate 22). Later, 
however, a more mature figure with a beard and long hair shows the 
victory of the Oriental school over the Roman one which had depicted 
Christ as an athletic youth rather than an Eastern sage (Plates 23 and 24). 

T 289 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

The first period of Byzantine art was abruptly terminated by the 
Iconoclastic movement (725-843). By the orders of the Iconoclast 
Emperors sacred pictures were systematically destroyed all over the 
Eastern half of the Empire. Advancing Islam did the same in the lands 
it conquered. The damage done to Christian art was irreparable. The 
end of Iconoclasm in 843 opened the second period of Byzantine 
artistic expansion which coincided with the ascendancy of the Mace- 
donian Dynasty (867-1056) and covered the second part of the ninth 
and the tenth and eleventh centuries. The artistic and religious revival 
of that time was vigorous and inspired by a desire to repair the devasta- 
tion of the Iconoclasts. The artists intended restoration, but they 
gradually moved away from the ideas of the previous epoch. 

The new stage was marked by an increasing introduction of move- 
ment into the composition of the scenes. The style remained monu- 
mental but the excessive rigidity and unearthly solemnity was no longer 
maintained. This can best be seen in the ecstasy of the apostles watching 
Christ's Ascension in the dome of St Sophia in Salonica (ninth century) 
(Plate 25). The Apostles seem to be uplifted in the air and almost 
dancing. The artists of the Macedonian period used more ornate, 
Oriental draperies and in general the celestial world was represented as 
following the same elaborate ceremonial as that evolved by the Byzan- 
tine court. The Emperor was regarded as Christ's representative on 
earth, and his palace as the replica of the Heavenly abode. The majesty 
of an earthly monarch was a reflection of the intangible mystical glory 
of the Divine Kingdom. 

Several recently discovered mosaics at St Sophia in Constantinople 
illustrate well this outlook which saw the Empire and the Church hand 
in hand working for the glory of Orthodoxy the pictures of Leo VI 
(886-912) prostrating himself at Christ's feet (Plate 27), and of Christ 
seated between the Empress Zoe (1028-57) and her second husband, 
Constantine IX Monomachius (1042-55) (Plate 28). The mosaics of 
Nea Moni on the Island of Chios (1042), of the monastic churches of 
Hosios Lukas near Delphi and of Daphni, near Athens (noo), all date 
from the same epoch. The Pantocrator Christ looks down from the 
dome of Daphni, majestic and forbidding (Plate 24). He is the autocrat, 
the Master and the Ruler of the Universe, and under Him is the 
Emperor, His earthly projection, anointed by God to protect and 
govern the redeemed mar; kind. 

In this period of Byza- me glory its artistic influence expanded far 
outside the borders of tf Empire. The mosaics of St Sophia in Kiev, 
the frescoes of St Soph in Ohrid, and later the mosaics in Sicily 

290 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

Cefalu, the Capella Palatina and Monte Reale (Plates 4 and 23) 
were all created by artists trained in Constantinople. 

This brilliant epoch of Byzantine political history ended tragically in 
the twelfth century which saw a rapid decline of the Empire. But this 
collapse was not followed by artistic degeneration. On the contrary it 
was accompanied by a creative reorientation of its art, and some 
of the greatest achievements of the Constantinopolitan school date from 
the twelfth century. Christ, His mother and the saints lose their remote- 
ness, something of their previous majesty is also no longer there. They 
become more human, more loving, more understanding. These warmer 
emotions of tenderness and sorrowful compassion are revealed in the 
ikon of Our Lady of Vladimir, painted in Constantinople and brought 
to Russia (c. 1150), which is one of the masterpieces of the school that 
flourished in the capital of the Empire (Plate 33). 

Robert Byron, who saw it in Moscow after it had been cleaned and 
restored, wrote in 1933: 

c lt is one of the very few paintings in which an ecclesiastical formula 
has been made the vehicle ... of as profound and touching a humanity 
as art has ever been able to express ... the emotion is simple enough: a 
mother caresses the child whose cheek is pressed to hers and whose pale 
gentle fingers fondle her neck. ... In those grave whiteless eyes and sad 
small mouth live the eternal sorrows and joys and the whole destiny of 
man. Such a picture can bring tears to the eye and peace to the soul. 
I have known no other picture so able/ 5 

The same manifestation of discovered humanism can be seen in a 
small church in Nerezi, near Scoplje in Macedonia, painted by an 
unknown Greek artist, in 1 164. 

The greatest surviving picture of this period of transition is the 
Delsis* in the Southern Gallery of St Sophia in Constantinople. It was 
probably placed there at the end of the twelfth century. This mosaic 
can be classed among the best of the world. Christ is represented not as 
the severe judge, but as the Redeemer, strong but compassionate, wise 
and understanding at the same time. The eyes of His Mother reveal 
the depth of her love, while St John the Baptist expresses grief and 
penitence for the sins of mankind (Plate 26). 

The sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders in 1 204 temporarily 
arrested the development of Byzantine art and its last great period 
coincided with the Empire's dying agony in the fourteenth and fifteenth 

* Deisis is Christ represented between His Mother and St John the Baptist. 

291 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

centuries. The Church of Kahrieh Djami, decorated in 1305 (Plate 32), 
the churches of Mistras in the Peloponnese, the last stronghold of Greek 
independence, were the creative peaks of that era, and this last stage of 
Byzantine art preceded and anticipated many of the achievements 
of the Italian Renaissance of the fifteenth century. 

The suffering experienced by the Orthodox Christians, the sense of 
approaching final catastrophe, made the art of this epoch vibrate with 
the full gamut of human feeling. Joy, sorrow, hope and fear are all 
reflected in the murals of the last churches built in Byzantium. Yet it 
was not a pessimistic and defeatist art, for the background upon which 
all these intense emotions were projected remained the same as in the age 
of the Byzantine glory, the faith in the Incarnation and the trust in the 
ultimate victory of good over evil. 

At this time when the artistic genius of Byzantium reached its 
maturity the material basis for its expansion was rapidly shrinking. 
The great Imperial foundations were no longer there, the mosaics were 
still excellent, but they were expensive and increasingly replaced by 
frescoes. The Churches were built on a smaller scale, but they gained in 
the intimacy and cohesion of their decorations. 

After the fall of Constantinople in 1453 the Greek artists continued to 
work under the Turkish yoke. The Macedonian and Cretan schools 
survived right down to the seventeenth century but the creative impulse 
was arrested. No outstanding masters appeared, although a number of 
them retained the skill of the established tradition. The hidden poten- 
tialities of Byzantine art were demonstrated by El Greco Domini- 
cos Theotocopoulos (1541-1614) a native of Crete and one of the 
greatest painters of all time. Although he learned much from Italy, his 
technique and spirituality sharply contrasted with Western outlook, 
and he left a hiatus only bridged much later in the nineteenth century 
by the French Impressionists. 6 His uniqueness shows how different the 
evolution of Western art would have been if the Turks had not destroyed 
Byzantium and its artistic and cultural tradition. 

A special chapter in the history of Eastern art was written in 
Serbia. In the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries the 
Serbian kings and nobles built and endowed a number of monasteries 

y ^ 

such as Zica and Studenica (Plate 7), MileSevo, Pe and Sapofiani (all 
thirteenth century), and Defiani and GraCanica (Plate 8) (fourteenth 
century). Most of them were adorned with magnificent frescoes, in which 
Byzantine art was blended with more Western influences and motives. 
But Serbian art, as well as the art of other Balkan countries after its most 
promising beginning, came to a halt under the oppressive domination of 

292 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

the Ottomans. The only country where the artistic development was 
able to proceed was Russia, and it was there that ikon painting deve- 
loped and acquired a distinct character of its own. 

The schools of Russian ikon painters 

It used to be customary to distinguish five main schools of Russian 

painting. The Kievan or Russo-Byzantine school of the eleventh and 

twelfth centuries, the Novgorod school (twelfth-fourteenth centuries), 

the early Moscow school (fifteenth century), the Stroganov school 

(sixteenth century) and the later Moscow school of the seventeenth 

century. 

This traditional classification of Russian ikons, however, needs con- 
siderable revision, for their more systematic restoration has revealed a 
much greater variety of regional characteristics than hitherto suspected, 
and it has also demonstrated the arbitrariness of certain previously 
maintained divisions. Many Iconographers from Novgorod, for instance, 
worked in Moscow. Many Moscow artists were invited to decorate 
churches in other parts of the country and in meeting and working with 
the local painters created new colour schemes and designs. 

The proper study of Russian ikon painting is only beginning. The 
vast collections of ikons now gathered in Russian State galleries have 
not yet been properly examined. Until this has been done, the classifica- 
tion of Russian ikons according to the schools at present recognized 
cannot be considered as anything more than a preliminary attempt. 
Nevertheless, the main stages of Russian history have left their marks on 
the evolution of this greatest artistic achievement of the Russian Middle 
Ages and the usual division into periods can be helpful. 

Few ikons from the pre-Tatar period have survived the disaster of the 
Mongol invasion, but they display outstanding qualities like the Angel 
of the Annunciation painted in Novgorod in the twelfth century (Plate 
34)* These early Russian ikons closely resemble the Byzantine originals 
and probably were the works of Greek masters or of their pupils. 

The next stage in Russian ikon painting was reached in Novgorod 
and Pskov, two city republics, which alone escaped Mongolian destruc- 
tion. The fourteenth century was the period of their political expansion 
and also of their artistic maturity. The Novgorod artists preferred simple 
subjects which did not require much commentary and explanation. 
Their palette was distinguished by pu,*e colours and bold contrasts. 
Their direct appeal and vigour reflect the mentality and zest of the 
citizens of Novgorod, those daring merchant adventurers, who acquired 
large possessions in north-eastern Russia. 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

At the end of the fourteenth century the artistic Renaissance started 
under the Paleologues, reached Russia in the person of an outstanding 
master, Theophanes the Greek. He decorated several churches in 
Novgorod in an outspoken expressionist style and then in about 1395 
moved to Moscow and thus linked the two main centres of Russian art. 

The fifteenth century was the golden age of Russian ikon painting, 
the age of Andrey Rublev (1370-1430), Master Dionisy (1440-1508), 
Prokhorof Gorodets and Daniel the Black. The rhythm of composition, 
the harmony and luminosity of colour, the depth of theological and 
mystical intuition and warm humanism, give these ikons an unrepeat- 
able perfection. They manifest the belief of their authors in the achieved 
reconciliation between God and his Creation. Love for suffering man- 
kind and firm trust in Divine compassion inspire and illuminate these 
great masterpieces of Russian art (Plate 43). The fifteenth and the first 
part of the sixteenth centuries were the period of Russia's national 
revival when the Russians regained their political freedom and with 
optimism started the rebuilding of their cultural and religious life on 
the spiritual foundation laid down by St Sergius and his numerous 
disciples. 

The consolidation of Moscow's political power in the middle of the 
sixteenth century, the suppression of local autonomy, the increasing 
pressure from autocracy, were reflected in the altered character of the 
ikon style. The school associated with the Stroganov family, the 
merchant princes, who controlled vast lands in the Urals, dominated 
the later-sixteenth and early-seventeenth centuries. Prokopy Chirin, 
Istom and Nikifor Savins were the best known artists of that period. 
Their works are distinguished by intricate details, by over-emphasis 
on decorative motifs. A love for miniature, the preference for highly 
sophisticated compositions superseded the balanced and direct appeal 
of the previous classical period (Plates 36, 44-46). 

The second half of the seventeenth century, which corresponded with 
the end of Russia's political isolation, brought about the Westernization 
of Russian ikons. Simon Ushakov (1626-86) who imitated Western 
masters was an able artist, but he lost the understanding of the essence of 
the ikons when he moved towards the religious paintings oft!-* West. 
To this last fifth period in the evolution of Russian visual art belongs 
the prodigious expansion in frescoes in the northern commercial cities, 
Rostov, Kostroma, Vologda. Romanovo-Borisoglebsk. Their citizens 
completed with each other in building new churches and in lavishly 
decorating them. Yaroslavl alone erected twenty-nine churches in the 
second part of the seventeenth century. 



THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

The reforms of Peter the Great (1699-1725) inflicted the death blow 
upon Russian sacred art. The inrush of Western ideas was overwhelm- 
ing, and imitation of Italian, French and Dutch painting became 
the fashion. Ikon painters lost their artistic prestige and were degraded 
to the level of artisans. Revival began only on the eve of the Communist 
revolution and the effects of renewed appreciation of iconography are 
most marked among the Russian emigrants, who have produced several 
outstanding ikon painters. 

The Russian ikons did not depart from the Byzantine original, but 
they introduced their own interpretation of the sacred art. Its special 
features are ably described by Otto Demus: 

In Russian ikon paintings Byzantine dogma became prayers and 
representation became legend. Clearly told stories with no romantic 
morals, asceticism without martyrdom, saints without devils, light with- 
out shadow, vision without mystic veiling these are the new features 
which emerge in ever clearer form.' 7 

The Eastern and Western artistic traditions 

In concluding this chapter on Eastern Christian art an important 
distinction between the art of the East and of the West must be empha- 
sized. The Christian East has not experienced those turning points and 
opposing tendencies which characterize the evolution of art in the West. 
There is nothing in its history comparable to Romanesque, Gothic, 
Renaissance or Baroque. From the very first, Eastern Christian art 
discovered the dome, the perfect embodiment of its fundamental theo- 
logical convictions. The Orthodox Churches proclaim that the Uni- 
verse is the creation of one Omnipotent God who is the undisputed 
Master of all things visible and invisible, and at the same time the 
Saviour and Judge of mankind. This vision of the unity and harmony of 
the cosmos, and the centrality of the act of redemption was first realized 
architecturally in the sixth century cupola otffagia Sophia in Constanti- 
nople. Since then its innumerable variations have been reproduced all 
over the East and today it remains the most adequate type of building for 
Eastern worship. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries it gave birth 
to the exquisite churches of Serbia (Plates 7 and 8) ; in the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries it branched out into the original architecture 
of northern Russia (Plates u and 12). The mosaics of the fifth and sixth 
century and the ikons of the twentieth century belong to the same 
tradition which is still alive and creative (Plate 18). Byzantine paintings 
are essentially Christian; their main theme remains constant; but within 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

their broad outlines the creative genius of an artist can find ample scope 
for originality. This observation is equally applicable to architecture, 
but the frescoes, mosaics and ikons have especially achieved a happy 
mean between the stability of well-established code and the originality 
of the individual artist. >This sacred art of the East points out the 
historicity of the Christian religion, and also emphasizes the timeless all- 
embracing nature of its message. 

Byzantine art seemed in the past lifeless as long as the unrestrained 
liberty of the artist was regarded as the indispensable condition of true 
inspiration, yet it is possible to be creative and free within a tradition 
which claims to have seen the true light, and which offers firm guidance 
to its artists as to the ultimate purpose of life. This goal, as accepted by 
the Christian East, lies outside the confines of earthly experience, the 
final object being communion with the Triune God who surpasses all 
man's conceptions of truth, beauty and goodness. This awe-inspiring idea 
makes Eastern Christian art progressive and dynamic, for the vision is 
infinite and the greatest achievements are nothing compared to the 
glory of the Divine realm; yet even minor works may share in the 
dignity and authority of revealed truth if they receive their inspiration 
from the same source of Christian orthodoxy. 



296 



CONCLUSION 

THE CHRISTIAN EAST AND THE 
CONTEMPORARY WORLD 



THE HISTORY of the Christian East presents a complex and variegated 
picture: the Church of the martyrs struggling for survival; the Church 
of the Ecumenical Councils absorbed in doctrinal disputes and torn 
asunder by fratricidal struggle; the Church engaged in rivalry with 
Rome and attacked by the Crusaders; the Church oppressed by the 
Turks and molested by the Mongols; the Church in its Russian branch 
claiming universal leadership in the art of Christian living; and the 
contemporary Church challenged by militant atheists. Such are the 
different stages in the evolution of Eastern Christendom and yet they 
reveal a remarkable inner unity. Eastern Christendom during two 
thousand years has remained a distinct community. It is a response to 
Christ's person and teaching from those who feel at home in the Hellen- 
istic philosophical and artistic tradition. Certain fundamental intuitions 
and convictions divide Orthodox from Western interpretations of 
Christianity, such as the stress on the corporate and cosmic aspects of 
redemption, the vivid sense of communion with the departed, the 
rejection of the legalistic and rational approach to religion. These 
differences have estranged Rome and Constantinople. A firm belief on 
each side in its own superiority made co-operation impossible, and East 
and West attempted to build up their ecclesiastical systems without 
consulting each other. 

The resulting one-sided and biased approach to religion seriously 
affected both, and many of the most flagrant defects in Eastern and 
Western Church life can be traced to the fatal rift between them. 

The limitations of confessional Christianity have become more 
apparent in our time than ever before, for the rise of a universal 
scientific civilization has swept away many old barriers and brought 
nations and cultures much nearer to each other. The paradox of the 
present situation is that although belief in the Incarnation was the major 
force in the rise of our present social and economic order, the far 
reaching changes that same technological civilization has brought about 
have contributed to the decline of Christianity. 

The Eucharistic experience gave birth to modern science for it 
profoundly transformed men's attitude to matter. The Church in its 

297 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

sacraments taught that the physical world is good and real and that 
man has been appointed by the Creator to be its responsible master. 
The Eucharistic meal, which introduces the participants into the inti- 
mate circle of Christ's friends, gives Christians confidence in their 
ability to comprehend the mind of the Incarnate Logos and to share 
in his plans for the redemption and transfiguration of the universe. 
Christianity liberated its followers from the fatalism of heathen religions 
and delivered them from fear of the unknown which had haunted men 
since the dawn of history. 

The process of the Christian education of mankind has been far from 
simple. At first the new religion was accepted only by a handful of 
disciples; after conversion of the Greco-Roman world, Christianity was 
greatly stimulated by the remarkable achievements of classical civiliza- 
tion, but also seriously handicapped by the finality and self-assurance 
of its philosophical outlook which became so closely associated with the 
Church as to shape its doctrinal system and ecclesiastical organization. 
The deep-seated pessimism of Hellenism contributed to the Byzantine 
Church's failure to realize the material consequences of the Incarna- 
tion, and to discover the scientific approach to life. This task, therefore, 
fell upon the nations which appeared on the scene of Christian history 
towards the end of the first millennium. They were barbarians, and 
training them in the rudiments of Christianity took a long time. 
Medieval culture was artistically vigorous and original but intellectually 
one-sided and its interpretation of the meaning of the Incarnation failed 
to take into account many essential characteristics of the Christian view 
of man and the world. 

The Renaissance and Humanism of the sixteenth century enlarged 
Christian horizons but also confused the picture by uncritical absorp- 
tion of much classical paganism. The Reformation stimulated and at the 
same time weakened the Christians of the West and provoked the growth 
of rationalism and secularism, which took many Christian convictions 
for granted without recognizing that their optimistic belief in progress 
and in the perfectibility of human nature rest on the facts of the 
Incarnation. 

The scientific civilization of today is a child of mixed marriage, one 
of its parents the Christian belief that man is called by God to take an 
active part in the management of the earth, the other a wilful assertion 
that he is his own master responsible to no one for his actions. Spec- 
tacular scientific discoveries have created such self-confidence and pride 
in these achievements that the original cause of their inspiration man's 
stewardship has been lost sight of, and the existence of a connecting 

298 



CONCLUSION 

link between man's desire to understand the working of the universe and 
his recognition of his sonship to its author is no longer realized. 

Man found freedom, optimism and superior knowledge in the fellow- 
ship of the Church, but these gifts opened to him the means of tyran- 
nizing over his neighbours, of ruthless exploitation of animals, plants 
and all earth's resources on a scale unimaginable in the past. 

The Church foresaw the possibility of this abuse of power, for it has 
always known that man is torn by the opposing desires to serve and love 
his neighbour and to make himself the centre of the universe. Modern 
civilization presents two crucial problems of history with new urgency; 
the creation of a political order that could safeguard the freedom of the 
individual whilst making him a disciplined and responsible member of a 
universal society, and the wise and generous distribution of the gifts of 
the earth for the benefit of all. 

On the right solution of these two tasks depends the immediate 
future of mankind. Both of them in their present form arose within the 
community of Christian nations and can be properly dealt with only in 
the context of Christian belief in the unity of the human family and its 
filial relationship with the Creator of the universe. The Gospels teach 
that man's brotherhood is based on acceptance of the fatherhood of 
God; that man can become his own master only when he acknowledges 
the existence of his Heavenly Judge, that he can feel truly at home on 
earth only when he realizes that his personal existence is not confined to 
life in time and space. Men are called to transform the world, to make it 
the temple of the Holy Spirit. All men's activities contribute to this 
transfiguration. By eating and drinking men spiritualize matter, by 
weaving, by building, by creating works of art, by inventing machines 
that extend the operation of their bodies, they enlarge their senses and 
increase their mastery over the physical universe; men change the face 
of the earth and humanize it. 

These achievements are not in the province of individual efforts, 
but are the result of the co-operative thinking and harmonious col- 
laboration of many minds and hands. Only Christianity can provide the 
ultimate goal of such endeavours with its assurance that victory over 
discord, sin and death is included in the scheme of creation and is not 
wishful thinking. The Christian nations have built a scientific civiliza- 
tion and introduced it to the rest of mankind, but many of their members 
have lost confidence in the truth of their religion and are uncertain of 
the ultimate purpose of their labour. This crisis affects the Christian 
East and West equally. The difficulty of solving the social and scientific 
problems of today is aggravated by the traditional difference in empha- 

299 



EASTERN CHRISTENDOM 

sis between West and East; both sides seem unable to lead men on the 
road of Christian progress because in their present state of non-co-opera- 
tion they cannot give a satisfactory answer to the practical problems of 
contemporary life. 

Moreover, one may even say that the type of civilization now 
regarded as Christian suffers from the defects of its excessively Western 
outlook. In all stages, beginning from a Roman source, with its legalism, 
passing through medieval scholasticism, the Renaissance and the 
Reformation to the rationalism and individualism of today, it has 
remained self-sufficient and self-enclosed, looking down on its Eastern 
partner. Compared to the stormy and invigorating history of the 
Christian West during the past five hundred years, the Christian East 
seems to Westerners to have been plunged in moral and intellectual 
stupor, its development arrested, its creative power exhausted. 

While the Christian West was re-examining the foundations of its 
faith and imposing its dominion on the rest of the world, the Christian 
East was suffering under the oppression of the Asiatic invaders and was 
not able to be engaged in similar adventure. Today they stand side by 
side, each with special contributions. The West offers its readiness to 
experiment, its keenness in the search for truth, and in the defence of 
individual freedom; the East has its trust in the guidance of the Holy 
Spirit, its uninterrupted tradition of teaching and worship and its 
faithfulness to the corporate wisdom of past generations. 

Only together can they solve the problems of contemporary mankind. 
No balanced system of Christian doctrine, no effective action is possible 
without the reintegration of Christendom. Christianity is a universal 
religion, and no single branch of the Christian community, however 
powerful, can present its message convincingly in isolation from the 
rest. Sectarianism is the greatest enemy of Christian progress and its 
cure is reconciliation between the Christian East and West. Their 
separation was the major catastrophe in Christian history, their reunion 
is likely to be one of its greatest triumphs. 



300 



Kelt0ion5 in Europe and North Africa 



Anglican 
Protestant 



Eastern Orthodox 



Roman Catholic 
Mohammedan (Islam) 

Most countries have religious 
minorities and only the main 
religions are shown here 



UNITED 
KINGDOM 



EIRE 




PORTUGAL 
Lisbon 



Religions in Europe and Asia 



| Autonomous Churches 

i 

| Autocephalous Churches 

(Patriarchates) 
Ecumenical Patriarchate, 
of Constantinople 



R Oriental Orthodox Church 

Byzantine* f- J Islam (heretical deviation of 
Orthodox L* J Oriental Orthodox Church) 




NOTES 

CHAPTER I: THE CHURCH IN THE EAST DURING THE STRUGGLE FOR 

SURVIVAL 

1 . Acts ii, 4. 

2. Pliny the Younger, Letters, 10, 97, I. 

3. Marcus Aurelms, Meditations, ii, 3, 2. 

4. St Cypnan ad Donatum, 83. 

5. Ibid., 84. 

6. St Ignatius, Epistle to ike Romans, iv, i. 

7. Martyrdom ofPolycarp, 2. 

8. Eusebius, Prep. Evang. IX, viii, Fig. 9, p. 165. 

9. VitaPlotinusV, 1-15. 

10. Ibid., LX, 32-39. 

11. Clement, Prot. II. 

12. Ibid., X. 

13. Clement, Strom. VII, vii, 49. 

14. Migne, Patrologia Graeca, XV> 174. 

15. Ibid., 85. 

1 6. Quoted by Eusebius, Ecc. Hist., VI, xix, 5-9. 

CHAPTER II: THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS AND THE ORIENTAL SCHISM 

1. Eusebius, Ecc. Hist., X, v. 4. 

2. Cod. Theod., IX, viii., i (April 4, 326) 

3. Ibid., HI, xvi, i (331). 

4. Ibid., I, xxvii, i. 

5. Euscbius, Vita Const., IV, xxiv. 

6. Acts xv, 9. 

7. Eusebius, Vita Const., Ill, x. 

8. Ibid., Ill, xii. 

9. Ibid., Ill, xv. 

10. Acts, xv, 28. 

1 1 . Eusebius, Vita Const., Ill, xx. 

12. Mark, xiii, 32; John, xiv, 28. 

13. Eusebius, Ecc. Hist., II, xxiv. 

14. Gregory, Oratio> xxix, 19-20. 

15. Ibid., xhi, 27. 

1 6. Cod. TJieod., XVI, v, 11. 1213 (383-84). 

1 7. Gregory, Oratio de Deitate Filli, 4, 

1 8. MansL, Sacrorum conciliorumi collectio, Tom, VI, col. 839 and 89, 

19. Math., xix, 21. 

CHAPTER III: THE CHRISTIAN EAST BETWEEN ISLAM AND THE CRUSADES 

1. Migne, P.O., XCIV, col. 763-766. 

2. F. Dvornik, ThePhotian Schism (Cambridge 1948), Epilogue. 

3. Oto Bihalji Merin, Freshen und Ikonen in Serbun und Makedonien (Munich 1958); and 
S. Stewart, Serbian Legacy (London, 1959). 

CHAPTER IV: THE MONGOL INVASION AND THE FALL OF BYZANTIUM 

1. C. Dawson, The Mongol Mission (London, 1955), 73-6. 

2. W. Wigram, The Assyrians and their neighbours (London, 1929), 136. 

CHAPTER V: THE CENTURIES OF ISOLATION AND OPPRESSION 

1. Dan., ii, 36-49, 

2. E* Denisoflf, Maxim le Grecqut et I* Occident (Paris, 1943). 

303 



NOTES 

CHAPTER VI: THE PERIOD OF INTELLECTUAL STIRRING AND NATIONAL 

LIBERATION 

1. Dobbie Bateman, St Serqfim ofSarov (London, 1936), 54. 

2. N. Zernov, Three Russian Prophets (London, 1944)9 53. 

3. Khomiakov, Works, II, 69 (in Russian, 1886). 

4. N. Zernov, Three Russian Prophets (London, 1944), 58 

5. Dostoevsky, Journal of an Author No. 50 (1873). 

6. N. Zernov, Three Russian Prophets (London, 1944), 106. 

7. Soloviev, War, Progress and the End of History: Three Discussions (London, 1915), 

CHAPTER VII: THE TIME OF TESTING AND TRIAL 

1. Will Graham, Kandinsky (London, 1959). 

2. F. Heyer, Die Orthodoxe Kirche in der Ukraine von 1917 bis 1345 (Koln, 1953), 206. 

3. L, Cholakov, 'The Contemporary Organization of the Orthodox Bulgarian Church', 
Revue Internationale de Droit Compare 1 (New York, 1957). 

CHAPTER VIII: THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 
x, N. Birkbeck, Russia and the English Church (London, 1895), 94. 

2. S. Bulgakov, The Orthodox Church (London, 1935), 6 7- 

3. Ibid., 8&-8g. 

4. The Church of God edited by E. Mascall (London, 1934), 64-65. 

5. S, Bulgakov, The Orthodox Church (London, 1935), 137. 

CHAPTER IX: WORSHIP AND SACRAMENTS IN THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

1. C. E. Padwick, Aspects of Holy Communion (Cairo, 1934). 

2. Nicholas Cabasilas, Explication de la Divine Liturgie (Pans, 1944). 

3. St Simeon, La Vie SpiritueUe (Volume XXVII, Number 3), 309-11. 

4. Pitra, Hymnographie de FEglise Grecque (Rome, 1867), 33. 

5. English translation published by Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius (London, 1958). 

CHAPTER X: THE CHURCH IN THE LIFE OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS 

1. S. Bulgakov, The Orthodox Church (London, 1935), 9. 

2. Math., vi, 14. 

3. A Manual of Eastern Orthodox Prayers, English translations (SPCK, London, 1945). 

4. I. Hapgood, Service Book of the Orthodox Church (New York, 1922), 360-7. 

5. Writings from the Philokalia 9 translated into English by E. Kadloubovsky (London, 1951); 
and The Way of a Pilgrim, translated by R. M. French (London, 1954). 

CHAPTER XI: THE SACRED ART OF THE CHRISTIAN EAST 

1. G. Stewart, Serbian Legacy (London, 1959), 44. 

2. R. Byron, First Russia, then Tibet (London, 1933), 117. 

3. Ibid., 115. 

4. N. P. Kondakov, The Russian Icon (Oxford, 1927), 68. 

5. R. Byron, First Russia, then Tibet (London, 1933), 124. 

6. R. Byron, The Birth of Western Painting (London, 1930), 59, 219. 

7. Early Russian Icons, UNESCO, u. 



304 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The purpose of the select bibliography is to help the reader to pursue further studies of various 
aspects of Eastern Christianity referred to in this book. No complete bibliography has been 
attempted, but many works included in this list contain an up-to-date bibliography of their 
own subjects. The French and German books are mentioned only as exceptions in cases where 
no corresponding literature in English is available; magazine articles are not included. 
Except where otherwise stated, the books are all published in London. 



CHAPTER I 

Preliminary Remarks. The original sources for the study of the early period of Eastern 
Christianity can be found in several collections of their English translations. Ancient Christian 
Writers edited byj. Quastlin and J. Plumpe, 26 vols. 1950-59. Ante-Nicene Christian Library 
ed. by A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, 24 vols, 1867-72. Cambridge Patristic Texts, n vols. 
1899-1927. Library of Christian Classics, 13 vols. 1953-58. Library of the Fathers of the Catholic 
Church anterior to the divisions of East and West, 48 vols. 1839-85. Nwene and post-Nicene Fathers 
edited by P. SchafT 1886-88, ist series 14 vols and 2nd series 14 vols. The last series con- 
tinues the English translation of the most important ecclesiastical historians of antiquity, 
such as Eusebius of Caesarea, Socrates Scholasticus, Sozamen, Theodoret, Jerome, Rufinus 
and the decrees of the first seven Ecumenical Councils. There are also translations of Christian 
literature by diverse authors 1920-50. Series I. Greek Fathers of the Church; Series III. 
Liturgical Texts; Series IV. Oriental writing; Series VI. Selected passages. Those who desire 
to read the Christian literature in the original Greek or Latin may consult Migne, Patrologiae 
Cwrsw Completus, consisting of 390 volumes. 

General Histories of the Early Church. Atlas of the Early Christian World by F. van der Mecr, 
London 1958, gives a vivid picture of the monuments and art of the Early Church, and also 
includes excellent maps. P. Carrington, The Early Christian Churchj 2 vols., 1957, an up-to-date 
and readable introduction to the history of the Early Church. A shorter work is byj. Wand, 
A History of the Early Church, London 1949. More scholarly and detailed information can be 
obtained from: H. Lietzman, History of the Early Church, 4 vols., 1937-51. B. Kidd, A History 
of the Early Church, 3 vols., Oxford 1922. L. Duchesne, The Early History of the Church, 3 vols., 
1909-14, is one of the best books on this subject. Those readers who desire to acquaint them- 
selves with the earlier Church histories are recommended to read Eusebius, the Ecclesiastical 
History, translated by H. J. Lawler, London 1928, which is one of the most important sources 
of information dating from the fourth century, but containing many quotations from earlier 
works, most of which have not survived. Josephs, The Jewish War, translated byj. William- 
son, 1959, gives a vivid contemporary description of Judea from 170 BC till AD 75. The 
question of the number of Jews martyred is discussed in Klausner, Jtsus de Nazareth, Paris, 
p. 242. 

The relation between Judaism and Christianity, C. Dodd, Apostolic Preaching and its develop- 
ment, 1936. G. H. C. MacGrcgor and A. C. Puidy, Jew and Greek tutors to Christ, Edinburgh 
1959. It contains a good bibliography and also includes a chapter on the significance of the 
Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered between 1947 and 1956, which threw a new light on the origins 
of the Christian community. The best books on the Scrolls are: Millar Burrows, The Dead Sea 
Scrolls, 1955, YigaelYadin, The Message of the Scrolls, 1957. 

Christianity and Hellenism. Out of a large number of works dedicated to this subject, only a 
few can be mentioned here: C. Cochrane, Christianity and Classical Culture, New York 1957, 
G. Dodd, The Bible and the Greeks, 1935, E. Hatch, The Influence of Greek ideas on Christianity > 
1959, M. Leistner, Christianity and Pagan Culture, 1951. 

The Early Organization of the Church. J. Weiss, Earliest Christianity (AD 30-150), 2 vols., 
1959. The flight of the Christians to Pella is described by Eusebius, Eccles. Hist. Ill, 5, 3. 
S, Brandon, The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church (1957) considers the destruction of 

X? 35 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Jerusalem as the decisive date when the Christian community finally broke away from 
Judaism. The hostility of the leaders of Judaism to Christ's disciples led to the martyrdom of 
St Stephen (Acts vi, g-vii, 60) and St James (Acts xii, 1-2). This first persecution is described 
by Eusebius ii, 23, and Josephus, The Jewish Warxx, 3, i, 199. Hegesippus iv, Ch. 22, gives 
another version of the same martyrdom. Reasons for the persecution and the martyrs' con- 
duct, see D. Attwater, Martyrs (1958) and H. Workman, The Martyrs of the Early Church, 
1913. Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, II, 3, 2. St Cyprian. See E. Benson, Cyprian, his life, 
his times, his work. St Cyprian's own writings are in Ante-Nicene Christian Library, vols. i and 
2, 1869. 

Gnosticism. S. Angus, The Mystery Religions and Christianity, 1925. F. C. Burkitt, The Church 
and Gnosis, Cambndge 1932. R. Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity (New York 1959) 
contains the most recent Bibliography. R. Wilson, The Gnostic Problem, 1958. 

Montanism. There is no book in English on this subject, but reference to Montamsm can be 
found in all manuals of Church History. The best study of this movement is in French, P. de 
Labrielle, La Crise Montamste, Paris 1913. 

Tertullian. His works in the Ante-Nicene Christian Library, vols. I-III. The best books about 
him are in German: B. Nister, Tertulhan Sein Personlichkeit wd mn Schicfaal, 1950, and H. 
Karp, Schrift und Geist bei Tertullian, 1955. 

Paul of Samosata* There are two books in French about this heretical Bishop of Antioch. 
C. Bardy, Paul de Samosate, Paris 1923. H. de Reidmatten, Les Actes du Prods de Paul de 
Samosate Paradosis, 6, 1 952. 

The Formation of the New Testament. There is a good book by this title by H. F. D. Sparks, 
I952- 

The Origin of the Episcopate. This problem has attracted considerable attention from Church 
historians. C. Gore, The Church and the Ministry, 1936. E. Hatch, The Organization of the Early 
Church, 1882. K. Kirk, The Apostolic Ministry, 1946. J. Lightfoot, The Christian Ministry. B. 
Streeter, The Primitive Church, 1929, an original and provocative treatment of this controversial 
problem. 

The St Ignatius Epistles can be found in many English translations. The most recent in 
vol. I of the Library of Christian Classics, Philadelphia 1953. A vivid portrait of St Ignatius is 
given by R. Payne, The Holy Fire, New York 1957. The martyrdom of St Polycarp in vol. I 
of the Library of Christian Classics, Philadelphia 1953. 

Clement and Origen. The literature about these two leading Alexandrian theologians is 
extensive. The second volume of the Library of Christian Classics (1954) contains some of their 
writings. More information about their contribution to Christian apologetics can be found in: 
R. Hanson, Origen 9 s Doctrine of Tradition, 1951; R. Cadou, Origen, St Louis 1941; V. Osborn, 
The Philosophy of Clement of Alexandria, 1957; R- Tollington, Clement of Alexandria, 1914; 
G. Butterworth, Clement of Alexandria, Harvard Univ. Press, 1953; E. de Faye, Ongen and his 
work, 1926; An older, but excellent book is C. Bigg, The Christian Platonists in Alexandria, 
Oxford 1913; St Gregory Thaumaturgus, Addrews to Origen, Translations of Christian 
Literature, Series I, vol. 8, 1920. 



CHAPTER II 

Preliminary remarks. Original sources: Byzantine Church historians Eusebius, Socrates, 
Sozomen, Theodoret, Evagrius (see page 305). 

The decrees of Ecumenical Councils. Hefele et de Clercq, Histoires des Conciles d'aprts Its 
documents originaux, 1 1 vols. (English translation of the first three volumes only.) The writings 



306 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

of the Church Fathers in Migne and in various translations into English, French and German, 
(see page 365). 

General Histories of the Church (see page 305). 

Histoiies of the Eastern Churches. B J. Kidd, The Churches of Eastern Christendom ftom 
451 to the present time, 1928, gives a factual account without bias. W. Adeney, The Greek and 
Eastern Churches, Edinburgh 1908 (with Protestant bias). Two Roman Catholic authors 
present their versions of Eastern Christianity: D. Attwater, The Christian Chwches of the East, 
2 vols, 1947-48; A. Fortescue, The Eastern Orthodox Church, 1939. A useful addition to the study 
ol Eastern Christianity is: R. Longford-James, A Dictionary of the Eastern Orthodox Church, 1923. 

Special points raised in Chapter II. Constantme's conversion is discussed in the following 
special studies: A. Alfoldi, The Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome, 1948, W. Baynes, 
Constantine the Great and the Christian Church, 1 930 (one of the best) , S. Greenslade, Church and 
State ftom Constantine to Theodouus, 1954; A.Jones, Constantine and the Conversion of Europe, 1952; 
H. Mattingly, Christianity in the Roman Empire, 1955; E. Woodward, Christianity and Nationalism 
in the Roman Empite, 1916. 

The importance and frequency of North African Councils is fully revealed by St Cyprian in 
his correspondence. 

Council of Nicaea. A special study of this Council is A. Burn, The Council ofNicaea, 1925. 

Ananism. H. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, Camb. 1900, and all general Church historians. 
For the study of the creeds sec J. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds, 1950. 

St Athanasius and Ananism. Selected works of St Athanasius tr. by A. Robinson, 1892, also 
Libraiy of Christian Classics, vol. Ill, also R. Bush, St Athanasius, 1888. L. H. Hough, Athanariu? 
the Hero, New York 1906 The latest work is by E. Schwartz, ur Geschichte des At/ianaswt, 
1 059. The accusations against Athanasius are described by Sozomcn, II, a i, 25 St Athanasius, 
Life of tit Anthony. Ancient Christian Writers, vol. 10. 

The Donatist scheme. W. Frend, The Donatist Church, Oxford 1952. G. G. Willis, St Augustine 
and the Donatur Controversy, 1950. For the Monophysite Schism, W. Wigram, The Separation of 
the Monophywtss, 1923. 

The C-appadocian Fathers. Their original works arc published in the Library of Christian 
dairies vol. Ill, and in other collections of Patristic writings. W. Clark, The Ascetic Works of 
St fiasil, London 1925. J, Dan&lou, Platonisme et Thfologie Mystique, Paris 1944. W. Wolker, 
Gregor von Nyssa, 1956. J. Srawley, The Catechetical Oration of St Giegory of Nyssa, 1917. J. 
Plaigneux, St Grfyoire de Nazianze, Pans 1951. Socrates, I, 23. St Gregory of Nyssa left a moving 
description of his beloved sister in his Vita St Macrinae. E. Morison, St Basil and his Rule, a 
study in early monasticum. Oxlord 1912. 

St John Chrysoslom. An excellent up-to-date biography of St John is by Donald Atlwater, 
1959, and a monumental work on his life and time is in two volumes by Dom Chrysostom 
Baur, Dcr Heilige Johannes ChrysoMomus und seine eit. Munich 1929-30. English translation 
1 959-60 includes bibliography. There are also B. Vandenberghe, John of the Golden Mouth, 
1958, and St John Chrysostom and Si Olympias, 1959. St John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Status. 
Library of the Fathers, vol. 9, 1842. 

Ncsloi ius and the Nestorian schism. This has attracted the attention of many historians. 
Ncslorius's surviving work 77ie Bazaar of Heradeides was translated by Driver and L. Hodgson, 
1923. The defence of his position is made by J. Bcthune-Baker, Nestorius and his Teaching, 
1908. F. Loofs, Nestorius and his place in the history of Christian doctfine t 1914. A. Vine, The 
Bazaar of Heracleides, 1948, There is a Roman Catholic repudiation of Nestorius by M. Jugic, 
Nestorius et la controverse Nestorienne, 1912* 

St Cyril of Alexandria. W. Burghardt, The Image of God in man according to Cynl of Alexandria, 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1951. A. Kerrigan, St Cyril of Alexandria* interpreter of the Old Testament, 1952. J. Liebert, La 
Doctrine Christologique de St Cynlle d* Alexandria, 1951. 

Chalcedonian Council. J. MacArthur, Chalcedon, 1931. R. Sellars, The Council of Chalcedon, 
1953, (The latest study). Justinian and his time J. W. Holmes, The age of Justinian and Theodore, 
2 vols., 1905 and 1907. C. Diehl, Figures Byzantines, 2 vols., Paris 1906 and 1908, Justinian, 
Paris, Theodora Imperatrice de Byzande, Paris. A. A. Vasiliev, Justin the First. An introduction to 
the epoch of Justinian, Camb., Mass. 1950. 

Severus of Antioch. Collection of Letters, Pattologia Orientates, Syrian section Vie de Seveie, 
trans, by M. Kugener. A collection of letters, trans, by E. Brooks. Les Homiliae Cat/ie'drales de 
Sevtre d'Antioche, vols. I-X, trans, by diverse scholars. J. Lebon, Lc Monophysisme Sfoerien, 
Paris 1909. 

The Armenians. e l have understood they were the first to embrace Christianity', Sozomen, II, 
8. The best study of the Armenian Churches is by M Ormaman, The Church of the Armenians, 
which includes the description of the origin of Armenian Christianity. Armenian Alphabet, 
see Konum. The life of Mashtots translated mto French by W. Langlois, Histoire Armenienne, 
vol. II. R. Grousset, Histoire de FArmtnie, Paris 1947. K. Sarkissian, Armenian Christian Litera- 
ture (a brief introduction) 1960, A short but useful study. 

The Georgian Church. T. Dowling, Sketches of Georgian Church History, 1912. D. Lang, Lives of 
Georgian Saints, 1956. S. Malan, A short history of the Georgian Church, 1866. Bibhogiaphy: J. 
Kurst, Litterature Georgienne Chrefienne, Paris 1934. 

The Conversion of Ethiopia. This is narrated by several ancient Church historians: Rufinus, 
Hist. Ecc., I, 9; Socrates, Hist. Ecc., I, 15; Theodoret, Hist Ecc , I, 22; Sozomen, II, 23. The 
best introduction to the origins and present state of the Church is H. M. Hyatt, The Church 
of Abyssinia, 1928. There are also three smaller books. D. O'Hanlon, Features of the Abyssinian 
Church, 1946; J. Spencer Triningham, The Christian Church and Missions in Etfiiopia, 1950; 
O'Leary, The Ethiopian Church, 1936. 

India and Ceylon. St Thomas's missionary work in India is contained m Acts of Judas- 
Thomas, composed in Mesopotamia, and containing a mixture of legends and histoiy. The 
detailed analysis of the Church's origin in India is given by A. Mingana. His account of the 
early spread of Christianity in India can be found in the Bulletin of the John Rylands' Library, 
Manchester 1926. Eusebius, Hist Ecc., V, 10, refers to the Indian Church. The first book 
about the Indian Chuich published in England was M. Geddes's History of the Church of 
Malabar, 1694. The best modern works are Cardinal E. Tisserant, Eastern Christianity m India, 
1957, and L. W. Brown, The Indian Christians ofSt Thomas, Cambridge 1956. Both include full 
bibliographies. Other lecent books: F. Keay, A History of the Syrian Church in India, Madras 
1951. E Philip, The Indian Church of St Thomas, Kottayam 1950. N. Zernov, The Chiutian 
East, Delhi 1957. 

The Origins of Monasticism. General works: Owen Chadwick, John Cassian, a study of primitive 
monasticism, Camb. 1950; J. Smith, The rise of Christian monasticism, 1892; J. Hannay, The 
ipint and origin of Christian monasticism, 1903; K. Heussi, Der Ursprung de$ Monchlums, 1936; 
Dom J. M. Bess, Les moines d* Qnent anterieur au Concile de ChdUdoine, Paiis 1900. Special works 
on Egyptian monasticism and the Desert Fathers: E. White, T/ie History of Monasteries of 
Nitria and of Scete, N.Y. 1932; P. Raschlot, Doctrine ascttique des premiers maitres Egypticns de IV 
siecle, Pans 1931; W. MacKean, Christian Monasticism in Egypt, 1920; Helen Waddcll, The 
Desert Fathers, 1936; J. Bremond, Les Pins du Desert, Paris 1927* A vivid contemporary descrip- 
tion of the Desert Fathers is contained in Palladius, The Lausiac History, tr. by W. Clarke, 
1918, also C. Buttle, The Lausiac History of Palladius, 2 vols, Camb. 1898-1904. One of the most 
important manuals of Eastern asceticism is available in English translation: St John Climacus 
(579-649)> Th* Ladder of Divine Ascent, tr. by L. Moore, 1959. T. Lefort, Les Vies Coptes de 
St Pachome, Louvain 1943. R. Gemer, Vie de St Euthyme le grand, Pans 1909. H. Delahayc, Let 
Saints Stylites, Brussels 1923. E. F. Morison, St Basil and his rule, 1912, W. K. L. Claik, St Basil 

308 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

the Great, a study of monastzcism, Camb, 1913. Mount Athos. Kirsopp Lake, The early days of 
monastictsm on Mount Athos, Oxford 1909. 

The Church of the Persian Empire. All ancient Church histories, Socrates, Sozomen, 
Theodoret and Evagrius describe the trials and martyrdom of Christians in the Persian 
Empire. Special studies: A. Vine, The Nestonan Church, 1937, W. Wigram, The Assyrians and 
their neighbours, 1929; Maclean and Browne, The Calhohcos of the East and his people, 1892; 
Browne, The Eclipse of Christianity in Asia, Camb. 1933 One of the older, but still useful, books 
is by J. La Court, Le Christianisme dans V Empire Perse, Paris 1904. 

Rome and the Christian East. This subject is one of the major points of controversy and is 
discussed in all works on early Church history, such as Kidd, Harnack, Robertson, Duchesne, 
Lietzman, Gwatkin and others. Special studies of this subject by Roman Catholics are: 
P. Batiflbl, UEglise Naissante, Pans 1922; Le Si&ge Aportohque, Paris 1924; La Paix Constan- 
tienne, Pans 1914. Duchesne, The Churches separated from Rome, 1907. E. Jaspar, Geichtchte des 
Paps turns, a monumental work. W. Bright, The Roman See in the Early Church. 1896. F. Puller, 
Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, 1915. Jalland, Leo and his time, 1941 ; An Anglican Church 
historian, supporting Papal claims, is S, H. Scott, The Eastern Church and the Papacy, 1928. 

CHAPTER III 

Patriarch Sergius (610-38). His exceptionally important tole in Byzantine history is discussed 
by A. Toynbee in A Study ofHistoiy, voL IV, p. 333, et teq. The detailed account of the reign 
of Jlerachus with the full bibliography in G. Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine Empuc, 
pp. 79-1 10, Oxford 1956. 

Maxim the Confessor. English translation of his works: The Ascetic Life and the Four Centuries 
of Chanty in Amicnt Christian Wnten, vol. 21. Other studies of St Maxim include: H. Balthasar, 
Litwgic (lovrnique, Maxim le Conjesscur. Collection ThSologie, vol. II. L. Ilaushcrr, Phdautie. De la 
tendmw pout soi a Ja chariU felon St Maxim le Confesseur, Paris 1952. P. Sherwood, The earlier 
Ambigita of St Maxim the Confessor and his refutation ofOiigenism, 1954. Studia Anselmiana 36. 

Maiomtes. F. Dib, UEglise Maronite jusqifa la fin du Moyen Age, refers to original sources. 
D. Attwater, The Catholic Eastern Churches, 1935, pp. 180-195, includes a short bibliography. 

/oroast nanism. R. C. Zachner, TJie Teaching of the Magi, 1956. %uwan, A goroastnan Dilemma, 
Oxford 1955, 

Islam. The best source of general information is the Shorter Encyclopaedia ofhlam, edited by H. 
(iil)b and J. Kramers. Leyden 1953. Mohammed^ personality is analysed by Tor Andrac, 
Mohammed* the man and hw faith, 1936. W. Watt, Mohammed at Mecca, Oxford 1953, and Moham- 
med at Medina, Oxrord 1956. A Butler, The Arab Conquest of Egypt, Oxford 1909. The Koran 
translated and interpreted by A. J. Arbery, a vols, 1955. 

The Appeal of Islam. H, Gibb, Modern Trends in Islam, Chicago 1947. W. Cantwcll Smith, 
Mam in Modern History, Princeton 1957. A. Arbciry, The Call of the Minarets, Revelation and 
Rctiwn in Ham, 1957* T. W. Arnold, The Preaching of Islam, 1913, The Legacy of Islam, Oxford 
1931. A. Wensinck, T/ic Muslim Creed, Camb. 1932. A. P. Tntton, Muslim Theology, 1947. 
R, Levy, The Social Structure of Islam, Camb. 1957. Dvnormk, The Cucus pat ties in 
Byzantium m Byzantine-Metabyzantium, New York, vol. I. At the time of the spectacular 
advaxica of Lslam its supporters and its opponents treated each other as professing together a 
religion based on the Biblical Revelations. See A. Vasilicv, Byzantium and Islam, and Bayncs 
and Moss, Byzantium, Oxford 1948, p. 309. The rapid expansion of Islamic civilization and its 
subsequent decline and long stagnation is liable to diverse interpretations. One of the 
important factors for its initial flowering was the political unification of the Mediterranean 
world by Arab conquest, and the considerable religious and intellectual tolerance displayed at 
first by the new masters. The majoiily of the conquered population was then still Christian 
and the intellectual and artistic stimulus came from the Creek classical and Christian sources. 

309 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

H. Gibb says: 'Islamic culture was pegged to that stage at which the Arabic scientists had 
developed the concepts and methods taken over from the Greek.' ( The Influence of Islamic 
Cultuie on Medieval Europe, Manchester 1955, p. 94. ) T. Arnold says: 'Muslim medicine and 
science was derived from Greek sources.' (Muslim Civilization dunng the Abbasid period, The 
Gamb. Med Hist. 1927, vol. IV, pp. 297-8.) 'The learned men were mostly Christians or 
Jews bearing Arabic names.' Ibid, p. 314. The Christian family of Bucht-Yishu produced no 
less than seven generations of distinguished physicians. 9 Ibid, p. 315. The political and eco- 
nomic decline of the Middle East started when the gradual suffocation of the Christian religion 
and consolidation of Islamic Orthodoxy prevented further development of cultural and 
intellectual life in the lands conquered by Islam. Such is the opinion of T. Arnold: 'The 
Muslim political theory contained no principle of growth to provide for the development of 
self-governing institutions; no attempt had been made to widen the basis of government or 
tram the subjects in co-operation with the state.' (T. W. Arnold, op cit , pp. 279-80). The 
remarkable artistic achievement of early Islamic civilization was also mainly due to the 
great cultured wealth which the Arabs found in the lands of the Byzantine Empire. 'In a word 
the cultural development of the Arabs was mostly due to foreign activities and foreign 
materials.' (N. Baynes, Byzantium, Oxford 1948, p. 315.) 

Iconoclasm. E. Martin, A History of the Iconoclastic controversy (1930) is a general introduction to 
this subject. It contains a bibliography. See also: F. Bevan, Holy Images, 1940; C. Clerc, Les 
Theories relatives au cultes des Images chez les auteurs Grecs, Pans 1915; A. Grabar, Ulconoclasmc 
Byzantine, Dossier Archeologique, 1958. A more specialized study is P. Alexander, The Patriarch 
Nicephorus of Constantinople, 1958. It contains an up-to-date bibliography. Leo Ill's legislation 
is discussed by Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine state, pp. 140-2. 

Charlemagne and Byzantium. Libn Carohni condemned equally the Iconoclastic Council ol 
753 and the second Nicene Council of 787. The aim of this Frankish attack on the Orthodox 
Church was to prove that Byzantium embraced heresy, and therefore ceased to be the univer- 
sal Christian state. This was further confirmed by the Frankfurt Synod of 794 which con- 
demned as heretical the veneration of ikons as formulated by the Nicene Council of 787. In 
spite of it the legates of Pope Adrian I (772-95) subscribed to the decisions ol both Synods, 
Byzantine and Frankish. See Ostrogorsky, op cit., p. 164. 

Mohammed and Charlemagne. Special study by J. H. Pirenne, Mohammed and Charlemagne, 
1939- 

Filioque controversy. The detailed account of it is in A. Vacant and E. Mongenot, Diclionnairc 
de Tli&ologie Catholique, vol. V, Pans 1913, pp. 2309-51. The last Western point of resistance 
to this innovation was the Sorbonnc, where the original version of the Creed continued to be 
recited until the middle of the thirteenth century. See also G. Every, The Byzantine Patnajchate, 
1947, p. 150, Footnote i. The current Eastern Orthodox, Anglican and Roman Catholic 
points of view on this subject can be found in the Eastern Churches Quarterly, supplementary 
issue, vol. VII, 1 948, Concerning the Holy Spirit. 

The conversion of the Slavs. The principal authority on this subject is F. Dvornik who has 
published several monumental works. Les Slaves, Byzance et Rome, IX nede, Paris 193(1*; 
Les Ligendes de Constantin et de Methodic, Prague 1933; The Making of Central and Eastern Europe, 
1949; M. Spinka, A History of Christianity in the Balkans, Illinois 1933. 

The Photian schism. An exhaustive study of the schism is made by F. Dvoruik, T/ie Phvtian 
Schism, Camb. 1948. It contains a complete bibliography both of original sources, pp. 
459-73, including more than 500 titles, and a list of the recent books on this subject, pp. 
474-87. A useful book also is G. Every's The Byzantine Patriarchate, 1947. 

Byzantine shortcomings and achievements. A popular book on this subject is by Rcnci 
Guerdan. Byzantium, its triumphs and tragedy, 1956. G. Ostrogorsky, History oj the Byzantine 
State, Oxford 1956. (A scholarly work.) Two excellent general surveys arc by N, Baynes and 
H. Moss, Byzantium, Oxford 1948, and by S. Runciman, Byzantine Civilization, 1948. For 
further reading, consult: Charles Diehl, J. Bury, A. Vasihev and Gibbon. (Biased but excellent 

310 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

prose.) Some of the causes of the Byzantine decline are discussed by A. Toynbee in A Study of 
Hutory> vol. IV, p. 320 et ?eq. See also J. M. Hussey, Church and Learning in the Byzantine Empite 
(867-1185), 1937- 

The Schism between Rome and Constantinople One of the latest and best works is: S. Runci- 
man, The Eastern Schism, a study of the Papacy and the Eastein Churches during the ninth and 
twelfth centuries. Oxford 1955 It contains an up-to-date bibliography. An older work by 
L. Brelner, La Schism Orientals du XI vede, Paris 1899. A Roman Catholic view is stated by M 
Jujie, Le Schism Byzantin, Paris 1941. Jules Gay, Ultalw Mhidionale et I* Empire Byzantw, 
Paris 1904. A. Michel, Humbert and Kerullanos, 2 vols, Padeborn 1934-30. 

The Crusaders. The literature about the Ciusadcrs is extensive, but $. Runciman's Ihrtory 
of the Crusades, 3 vols., Cambridge 1951-54 is not only one of the more recent studies of this 
movement, but also the one which pavs special attention to the effect which it had upon 
relations between the Eastern and Western Churches. A lull bibliogiaphy is included m each 
volume. 

The Slavonic speaking churches. S. Runciman. A Hhtoty of the Pint Bulgarian Empire, 1930. 
The Life ofSt Sava by Bishop Nikolai Velirmrovich, Liber tyville, Illinois, 1951. 

Serbian art. Oto Bchalji Mern, Ftesken und Ikoncn m Serbien nnd Macedonia, Munich 1958. 
C. Stewart, Serbian Legacy, 1959. 

Russia's conversion to Christianity. Original sources: S. H. Cioss, The Russian Ptimary 
Chronicle, Harvard Univ. Press, 1930. R. Michell and N. Foibes, The Chronicle of Novgowd 
), 1914. N. Zcrnov, The Slavonic Review, London, Nov. 1953, April 1954. 



General Histories of the Russian Church. W. Frcre, Some Links in the Chain of the Ruwan 
Church, 194.5 N. Zernov, The Russians and their Chinch, 1945. R. Korper, The Candlelight 
Kingdom, New York, 1955. B. Grunwald, Boris and Gleh, Saints of Russia, 1956. St Thendosius ol 
Kiev. Ills Life in G. Feclotov, A Treasury of Russian tipmluality* iJffA PP- u ~4f)* ^ r lfiflimir\ 
Testament in A. Stanley's lecture? on the History of the KaMern Church, i8(>2. The outlook of the 
Karly Russian Christians is discussed by G. Fedotov in The Rtts&lan ReligiQut Mind, Harvard 
1946. 



CHAPTER IV 

The Mongols. The most comprehensive study in Fjnglish is still an old work, II. Hnwurth, 
History ofthf Mongols^ 4 vois., 1870-88. A vividly written, but a lighter book is M, Prawdin, 
The Mongol Empire, 1940. The best studies of the Mongols are in French by II. Grou.wt, 
V Empire Mongol, 1941, and L 9 Empire des Steppes, 1939. Genghis Khan Timuehin's bio- 
graphies. R. Fox, Genghis Khan, New York i();j6.F,Gn;nard/rV^/f hhan, Paris io;j(). K.( irons- 
set, I*e Conqutrant du Monde, Paris 1944. H. Lamb, Genghis Khan, The, Emperor of all Men, 
New York 191*7. H. Martin, The Rise of Genghis Khan, Baltimore 1950. R. Vliulitmrt'/ov, 
Genghis Khan, Berlin 1922. K. G. Browne, The Eclipse oj C/iristianitv in Ana, Gfuub. 1933. 
Russia under the Mongols, G. Vcrnadsky, The Mongol* andRu\aia, Yule 195,3, includes u good 
bibliography. St Scrgius of Radon e/,h. N, /ernov, SV Scrgiits, tiuildcr of Rm\iu, 1939. This 
includes an English translation of the Saint's life. 

The Church in China. J. Foster, The Church of the Tang Dynasty, 1940'. A, G. Moulcs Chri&tittni 
in China before xs$o, 1930, 

The Mongols and Christian Europe. The translation of the relevant documents ami diaries 
is given by C. l>owson, The Mongol Mission, 1955* a book of a iirst-claas hnporttmcc. S. 
Runciman, A History of the Crusades. Vol. lit aluo gives much useful information. W. Wigrum, 
The Assyrians and their Neighbours, 191*9, p. 136. S. Runciman, 'Die Sicilian Vcapm, Gamb* 



The Florentine Council A comprehensive study of the Council based on a runrful examination 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

of the original sources by I. Gill, The Council of Florence, Camb. 1959, with full bibliography. 

The last years of the Byzantine Empire. Alice Gardner, The Lescarides of Nicaea, 19112. W. 
Miller, Trebizond, the Last Greek Empire, 1926. O. Halecki, The Crusade of Varna, New York 
1943. T. Longman, V Empire Latin de Constantinople, Paris 1949. 

St Gregory Palamas There are three books in French, all by Jean Meyendorff: Triades pour 
la defense des Saints Hesychastes, Louvain 1959. Introduction a U Etude de Grtgoire Palamas, 
Paris 1959, and a more popular book, St Grtgoire Palamas et la Mystique Orthodox, Paris 1959. 

Nicholas Gabasilas. Two of his books are translated. The commentary on the Divine Liturgy, 1960, 
La Vie en Jtsus Christ, Amay sur Meuse 1934. The best book about him is Myrrha Lot Boro- 
dine, Un Matire de la SpmtualiU Byzantine, Nicholas Cabasilas, Paris 1958. 

The Fall of Constantinople. E, Pears, The Destruction of the Greek Empire and The Story oj the 
Capture of Constantinople by the Turks, 1903. H. Russack, Byzanz andStambul Sagen undLegenden, 
Berlin 1941. 

CHAPTER V 

The Ottoman Empire. D. Vaughan, Europe and the Turk, Liverpool 1954. M. Koprulai, Les 
Origines de I 9 Empire Ottoman, Paris 1939. F. Hasluck, Christianity and Islam under the Sultans, 
2 vols, Oxford 1929. 

The Orthodox Church and the Reformers. John Covel, Some Accounts of the Present Greek Church 
with Reflections on their Present Doctrines and Discipline, Cambridge 1722. E. Benz, Wittenberg 
und Byzanz, Marburg Lahn 1949. P. Renandin, LuthJriens et Grecs Orthodoxes, Paris 1903. 

Cyril Lukaris. Germanos, Metropolitan of Thyatmra, Kyrillos Lukaris, 1951. R. Schiier, Der 
Patriarch Kyrill Lukans, Warburg 1927. A. Mettetal, Etudes historiques sur Cyrille Lucar, Stras- 



The Russian Church. N. Zernov, Moscow the Third Rome, 1927. Hildegard Schaeder, Moscow 
des Dritte Rom, Hamburg 1929, Darmstadt 1957. Krupnitzkij, Die Theorie des Dntten Rome, 
1952. E. Sarkisyanz, Russlandund der Missianismus des Orients, Tubingen 1955. Kennet Medlm, 
Moscow and East Rome, Neuchatel 1959. Alexander Soloviev, Holy Russia, The Hague 1959. 
A detailed description of the Russian Christian customs is contained in a book called 
Domostroy (sixteenth century). It remained the manual of Christian conduct up to the time of 
Peter's Reforms in the eighteenth century. 

Two tendencies in Russian Spirituality. St Nil of Sorsk's writings are translated by G. 
Fedovov, A Treasure of Russian Spirituality, pp. 85-136. E. Behr Sigel, Prifoe et Saintett dans 
I'EgliseRusse, Paris 1950. 1. Smolitsch, Die Altrussische Monchtum, Wurzburg 1940. L Smohtsch, 
Leben und Lehre der Startzen, Kx>ln 1952. E. Denisoff, Maxim le Grec et V Occident, Pans 1943. 

Ivan the Terrible. The original source for the study of his reign and outlook is The corres- 
pondence between Prince A. Kurbusky and Tsar Ivan of Russia (1564-79) ed. by J. Fennell, Gamb. 
1955* and Dr Giles Fletcher, which gives an eye-witness description of Russia in the sixteenth 
century. The Treatise of the Russe Commonwealth which is included in the collection of the 
Hakluyt Society, 1856, shows Russia at the close of the sixteenth century. Romanticized 
Biographies: K. Waliszewski, Ivan the Terrible, 1904; S. Graham, The Life of Ivan t/ie Terrible', 
R. Wipper, Ivan Grozny, Moscow 1947 (in English), a study by a well-known Soviet historian. 

The Schism in the Russian Church. W. Palmer, The Tsar and the Patriarch, 6 vols., is the most 
detailed study of the conflict (1871-76). N. Zernov, The Russians and t/ieir Church, 1945, 
The Union of Brest-Litovsk, A. Amman, Ostslavische Kirchengeschichte, Wien 1950. T. Pelesz, 
Geschichte der Union der Ruthenischen Kirche, mit. Rom, 2 vols., Wurzburg-Wien 1881. E. Likovski, 
Die Ruthenich-Romische Kirch&wereinigung genant Union m Brest, Freiburg i.B. 1904. 

312 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Awacum. Awacum wrote his own life story which has been translated by J. Harrison, 
The Life ofArchpnest Awacum, 1924, This book is of utmost importance for the understanding 
of the Russian outlook in the seventeenth century. An excellent study of Awacum and of his 
period is P. Pascal, Awacum et le d&but de Rascol, Paris 1938. 

Peter the Great. A popularly written biography of the Tsar-Reformer is by S. Graham, 
Peter the Great, 1929. A scholarly summary of his reign is by B. H. Sumner, Peter the Great and 
tfie Emergence of Russia, 1950. E. Schuyler, Peter the Great, vols I and II, 1884. 

The Non-Jurors and the Orthodox Church. G. Williams, Tfie Orthodox Church of the East in the 
Eighteenth Century, being the correspondence between the Eastern Patriarchs and the Non- 
Jurmg Bishops, 1868. 

Catherine the Great. Gladys Thomson, Catherine the Great and the Expansion of Riusta, 1 94 7. 

A. Bruckner, Katherine die gweite. G. Gooch, Catherine the Great, 1959. W. Reddaway, Docu- 
ments of Catherine the Great, Gamb. 1931. 

St Tikhon of Zadonsk. Nadejda Gorodestsky, St Tikhon gadonsky, Inspirer of Dostoevsky, 1951, 
G. Fedotov, A Treasury of Russian Spirituality contains some of St Tikhon's writings, pp. 
186-241. 

The Christian East and Rome in the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. D. 
Attwater, The Cat/iolic Eastern Churches, 1935, a comprehensive account of all Eastern Christians 
who have accepted the Papal universal jurisdiction. A. Fortescue, Tlie Umate Eastern Churc/ie* } 
19123, includes a bibliography, also T. Jalland, Ttie Church and the Papacy, 1944. 

CHAPTER VI 

Russian Bible Society. R. Pinkerton, Extracts from letters on his tour in Russia, 1817. R. Pinker- 
ton, Russia or Miscellaneous Observations, etc., 1833. E. Henderson, Bible Researches and Travels 
in Russia, 1825. R. Paterson and E. Henderson, Extracts from Letters during their respective toury 
through t/ie Eastern Provinces of Russia, 1817. J. Paterson, The Book for Every Land. Reminiscences 
of Labour and Adventure in the Work for Bible Circulation in Nortfi Europe and Russia, 1858. 

B. Sccbolm (ed), Memoirs of the Life and Gospel Labours of Stephen Grillet, o, vols., Philadelphia 
1862. E. Benz, Die Abendlandische Sendung des Ostlich Qrthodoxen Kirche im %dtalter der Hdligm 

Mainz 1950. 



Russian Sects. A. Heard, The Russian Church and Russian Dissent, 1887. F. Oonybearc, Russian 
Dissenters, Cambridge, Mass. 1921. S. Bolshakov, Russian Nonconformity, Philadelphia 1950. 

St Seraphim of Sarov. A. Dobbie Batcman, St Seraphim ofSarov, London 1936,.). dc Boausobre, 
The Flame in the Snow (a romanticized life of Seraphim) 1945. G. Fedotov, A Treasury of Russian 
Spirituality, Translation of St Seraphim*s discourse with his disciple Motovilov, pp. 246 -*7<). 

Optina Pustin. J* dc Beausobrc, Russian Letters of Direction* 1944, contains Makary's corres- 
pondence with his followers. M. Rouct dejourncl, Monachisme et Monastics RWMS, Paris i 



Metropolitan Philarct. Select Sermons and Short Biography of the late Metropolitan of 
1873. Philaret, Qwixde Sermons, 3 vols., Paris 1866. Exposition of differences between Eastern 
and Western Churches, R. Pinkcrton, Russia, 3(833, pp. 39-54. Philarct, Catechism in its 
English translation in R, Blackmorc, The Doctrine of the Russian Church, Aberdeen 1845. 

Russian Missionary Work. E. Smirnov, Russian Orthodox Missions, London 1903. S, Bolshakov, 
Tlu Foreign Missions of tfie Russian Orthodox Church, London 1943, A, Spiriclon, Mcs Mmiotis 
SibSrie, Paris 1950, a Diary of a Russian Missionary of the nineteenth century. Or J. Glawk, 
Die Islam Mission der Russische Orthodoxen Kirche, Munster 1959 (Excellent bibliography)* 
K* Latourcttc, A History of Expansion of Christianity, 1954, voL VI, p, 379, estimate* the num- 
ber of the Japanese Orthodox Christians at 32,000 in 19x3 and 41,000 in 1940, 

x 3*3 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The Slavophils. N. Zernov, Three Russian Prophets, 1943. S. Bolshakov, The Doctrine of the 
Unity of the Church in the works of Khomiakov, 1946. N. Riasanovsky, Russia and the West in the 
Teaching of the Slavophils, Gamb., Mass. 1952. A. Khomiakov, The Church is One, 1945 (One of 
the most important theological works of Khomiakov) . His correspondence with W. Palmer is 
found in J. Birbeck, Russia and the English Church, 1895. W. Palmer's visit to Russia in 1840-41 
is described in Notes of a Visit to the Russian Church, 1882, ed. by J. Newman. Khomiakov's 
theological works are available in French: L'Eglise Latins et Protestantisme au point de vue de 
VEglise d* Orient, Lausanne 1872. The best study of his life and thought is also in French. 
A. Gratieux, A. Khomiakov, 2 vols, Paris 1939, and in Abbd Pierre Baron, Un Thiologien laic 
Orthodox Russe au XlXsiecle, Alexis Stepanovich Khomiakov, 1940. 

The Westernisers. E. Carr, The Romantic Exiles, 1933. E. Lampert, Studies in Rebellion, 1957. 

The Liberation of the Balkan Christians from the yoke of Islam. There is no special book 
dealing with the religious aspects of this movement. The factual account of the Greek libera- 
tion is given by G. Woodhouse, The Greek War of Independence, 1952. H. Temperley, History of 
Serbia, 1917. L. Ranke, The History of Servia and the Servian Revolution, 1853. W. Petrovich, 
Serbia, Her People, History and Aspirations, 1915. R. W. Seton-Watson, The Emancipation of 
South-Eastern Europe, 1923. A History of the Rumanians, Camb. 1934. 

Petar Niegosh. J. Wiles, The Mountain Wreath of P. P. Niegosh, 1930. This book contains the 
translation of Negosh's poem and his biography. 

The Church in Greece. Fr Matthopoulos. Seraphim Papakosta, Eusebius MatthopouLos, 1939. 
The Trial of Apostolas Makrakis, Chicago 1954. 

Eastern Orthodoxy in Austria-Hungary. M. Dampier, The Orthodox Church in Austria-Hungary, 
1905. W. Seton Watson's books contain much valuable information about various national 
groups in the Austrian Empire. 

Russian Intelligentsia and the Empire. R, Hare, Pioneers of Russian Social Thought: Studies of 
non-Marxian formation in nineteenth century Russia and of its partial revival in the Soviet 
Union, 1951. E. Lampert, Studies in Rebellion, 1957. 

Dostoevsky. Literature about Dostoevsky is enormous. All his works are available in English, 
including The Diary of a Writer, tr. by B. Brasov, 2 vols, N.Y. 1942, which contains much 
material about Dostoevsky's religious views. This aspect of his works is discussed by N. 
Berdiaev, Dostoevsky, 1934; L. Zander, Dostoevsky, 1948; N. Zernov, Three Russian Prophets, 
1944. A bibliography about Dostoevsky is in The Making of a Novelist, 1950, by E. Simmons. 

V. Soloviev. A Soloviev Anthology by S. Frank, 1950, provides an excellent introduction to his 
writings. Soloviev's works in English translation are: War and Progress and the end of History, 
1915; The Justification of Good, 1918; God, Man and the Church, 1938; Plato, 1935; The Meaning 
of Love, 1946; Lectures on God'Manhood, 1948; Russia and the Universal Church, 1948. Books about 
Soloviev are: N. Zernov, Three Russian Prophets, 1944. E. Munzer, Soloviev, Prophet of Russian- 
Western Unity, New York 1956. M. d'Herbigny, Vladimir Soloviev, a Russian, Newman 1918. 
L. Kobilinski-Ellis, Monarchia Sancti Petin, Mainz- Wiesbaden 1929. D. SlremoukhorT, Vladmir 
Soloviev etson oeuvre messianique, Paris 1935* 



CHAPTER VII 

For the Russian writers and poets of the twentieth century see D, Mirsky, Contemporary Russian 
Literature, Vol. II (1881-1925), 1926. D. Merezkhovsky's novels and essays are available in 
English, French and German translations. V. Rozanov is less known. Only one of his books 
has been translated into English. Solitana, tr. by S. S. Koteliansky, 1927. Nikolay Rocrich's 
main works in English: Spells of Russia, 1920. Himalaya, New York 1926. Altai-Himalaya, A 
Travel Diary, 1930. Himalaya Abode of Light, Bombay 1947. Vasily Kandinsky, see Will 

314 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Graham Kandmsky, 1959. Kandinsky's own books, Uber der geistige in dcr Kunst, 1959. 
Regard sur le passt, Paris 1 946. 

Russian Religious Renaissance of the Twentieth Century. There is no book in English dealing 
with this return to the Orthodox Church of Russian Intellectuals, but the works of several 
prominent writers of this period have been translated mto English including' S. Bulgakov, 
JV. Berdiaev and S. Frank. Bulgakov, Divine Wisdom, 1936, Du Verbe Incarno, Paris 1943, Le 
Paraclet, Paris 1947, The Orthodox Church, 1935, The Vatican Dogma, 1959, Die Tragoedie der 
Philosophic, Darmstadt 1927. Berdiaev, Freedom and the Spirit, 1935, The Russian Revolution, 
1931, Solitude and Society, 1937, The Destiny of Man, 1939, Spint and Reality, 1939, Slavery and 
Freedom, 1944, The Russian Idea, 1948, Towards a New Epoch, 1949. Books about Berdiaev arc: 
D Lawne, Rebellious Prophet, 1960, M. Spmka, Nicholas Berdyaev, Philadelphia 1949; E. 
Lampert, Nicholas Berdyaev, 1945. S. Frank, God with us, 1948. 

The Russian Chuich on the Eve of the Revolution. J. Curtis, Chwch and State m Russia 
(1900-17), New York 1 



Fr John of Kronstadt E. E GoulacfT SergieflT, John Ilytch, 1897. C, Bickersteth, Father John, 
Thought and Counsels, 1899. G. FedoLov, A Treasuty oj Russian Spirituality, pp 350-416. 

Contemporary Orthodox Churches of the Balkans. Seiafim Papakosta, Emebius Maithopoulos, 
1939. M. Constantinides, Life and Work m the Diocese of Athens. A lively description of the 
Church of Gieece after the Second World War is given by P. Hammond, The Water* ofArah, 
1956. O I her books: M. Loughboiough, Rumanian Pilgrimage, 1939. M. Be/a, Die Rumanian 
Church, 1943 R, French, Serbian Church Life, 1942. 

The Russian Chuich and Communism. M. Spinka, The Chutch and the Russian Revolution, 
New York, 1927. M. Spinka, The Church in the Soviet Union, New York, 1956. P. And ei son, 
People, Church and State in Modern Russia, New York 1944. J. Curtis, The Russian Church and the 
Soviet State (191750), Boston 1953. ^** Fedotov, The Russian Church sime the Revolution, Now 
York 1928. N. Timashov, Religion in the Soviet Union^ New York 1942- G. McKoin, The Com- 
munist War on Rehqion, New York 1951. K. Rose, Drci Patriarchen von Moscow, Berlin 1952 
N. Berdiaev, The Origin of Russian Communism, 1937. A view of pro-Communist American is 
reflected in J. Hecker, Religion under the Soviet, New York 19^7, also his Religion and Com- 
munum, 1938. Tlic truth about religion in Russia, 1944, reflects the description of the conflict as 
presented by the Moscow Patriarchate and authorized by the Soviet Government. For the 
present state of the Russian Church sec Russian Orthodox Bishops in the Movie t Union (1941*53)* 
by W. Alexecv, New York x 954 . 

Among a number of the books written by the <acilcd Russian theologians and translated 
into the Western language, the most important are: N, JNossky, History of Russian Philosophy* 
1952; Freedom of Will, 1932; Value and Kxistence, 1935. V. Zenkovsky, The- History of Russian 
Philosophy, 2 vols, if)53; Das Bild von Menschen in dcr Oslkirchc, Stuttgart 1951. V. Lo&sky, Thr 
Mystical Thcolog} of t/ie Kastern Church. 1957; TJ. /ander, Vision and Adion, n)5. P. Kvclokimov, 
L'Otthodoxir, Parts 1959; fafemme ct le Salut du Monde, Paris 1958. G. Fedotov, '/fir Rmsian 
Religious Mind', Harvard 1946. G, Florovsky, The Eastern Orthodox Church and the Ecummical 
Movement, 1950. V. Wcidle, The Dilemma of the Arts, 1918, ami Runia, Ab&ent mid Present, 



The Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Movement. R. Rouse and Stephen Neill, A 
History of the Ecumenical Movement, 1954, contains two contributions on this subject 
G. Florovsky, The Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Movement prior to /.9/fl, pp, 171 usei. 
N. Xcrnov, The Eastern Church and the Ecumenical Movement in the twentieth century, pp. (45-77, 
both articles include bibliography. A Makrakis, Ort/todox-Proiestant Debate, CJhirago 1949 and 
A Scriptural refutation of the Pope's primacy >, Chicago 1931*, represent the most outspoken anti- 
Western point of view. The same attitude to to be found in the books of a convert to Ortho- 
doxy. J. Overbcck, Die Provtdentielle Stellung des Orlhodoxm Rmland und sein lierttf&r Wicder- 
herstellunf* des nchtRlaubigen Katotische Korctut des Abendtandens, l-lall ifJ(>9. J. Ovrrbeek, l)\t 
Wiedervcreiniftung des morgen und abend landischen Kirchen^ Hall ifyt . Another convert from Rome 
to the. Kaatcrn Church wa W. Gucttcc (i8r(> -iB<)), Nouwnircs fl'tin Frftrt wiwtn drtvnu 



315 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

pretre orthodoxe, Pans 1889, ^so his Exposition de la doctrine de l 9 Eglise Cathohque Orthodoxe, 
Pans 1884. A positive attitude towards Eastern and Western reconciliation is expressed in 
L. Zander, Vision and Action, 1952. N. Zernov, The Remtegratwn of the Church, 1952. The rela- 
tions between Eastern and Western Christians are also reflected in the following books: 
S. Bulgakov, The Vatican Dogma, 1959; N. Zernov, Orthodox Encounter, 1961; L. Zander, 
Western Orthodoxy, 1960; E. Mastroyiarmopoulos, Nostalgia Jor Orthodoxy, Athens 1959. D. 
Lawne, St Sergius in Paris, The Orthodox Theological Institute, 1954. The Fellowship of St 
Albans and St Sergius publishes a magazine in English, Sobornost. Information about its work 
and other publications can be obtained from St Basil House, 52 Ladbroke Grove, London, 
Wii. 

The relations between the Anglican and the Orthodox Church. Much valuable material is 
contained in Annual Reports of the Eastern Churches Association from 1893-1909, also occasional 
papers of the Eastern Church Association, I-XVII, 1863-75, New Senes I-X, 1902-04, also the 
Annual Reports of Eastern Orthodox Churches Union, i-n, 1906-35. The magazine, The Christian 
East (1220-38, 1950-54). Between 1908-14 Anglican and Orthodox Church Union published 
a magazine Eirene. 

P. Shaw, The Early Tractarians and the Eastern Churches, 1930, and American Contacts with the 
Eastern Churches (1820-70), Chicago 1939. Ch. Androustos, The Validity of English Ordination 
from an Orthodox-Catholic point of view, 1909. J. Douglas, The Relations of the Anglican Church with 
the Eastern Orthodox, 1921. A. Riley, Birkbeck and the Russian Church, 1917. Chrysostom Papa- 
dopoulos, The Validity of Anglican Orders, 1931. E. Hardy, Orthodox Statements on Anglican Orders, 
New York 1946. W. Vissert t'Hooft, Anglo-Catholicism and Orthodoxy. D. Chitty, Orthodoxy and 
the Conversion of England 1947. H. Hodges, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy A Study of Dialectical 
Churchmanship, 1957. An older, but still useful book is W. Palmer Dissertations on Subjects 
Relating to the Orthodox or Eastern Catholic Communion, 1853. The most recent discussion between 
the Russian and Anglican theologians is reported by the Archbishop of York in Anglo-Russia 
Theological Conference (Moscow, July 1956], 1957. 

Pere. Couturies. M. Villain, L'AbbfPaul Couturies, Paris 1957. D. Allchin, U Abbe Paul Couturies, 
1959- 



CHAPTER VIII 

Faith and Doctrine of the Orthodox Church. S. Bulgakov, The Orthodox Churchy 1935, is the 
best book on the subject. The author is one of the great theologians of the Russian Church. His 
book is authoritative without being pedantic. S. Zankov, The Eastern Orthodox Church, 1929. 
R. French, The Eastern Orthodox Church, 1951. Another introduction to the study of the Eastern 
Christians, which describes them by comparing their faith and woiship with the Christian 
West is by N. Zernov, The Church of the Eastern Christians, 1942. F Gavin, Some aspects of con- 
temporary Greek Orthodox Thought, 1936, an important book for trained theologians. It consists 
of detailed study of contemporary Greek theological writings. The Holy Catechism of Nicolas 
Bulgaris faithfully translated from the original Greek by W. E. Daniel, 1893, introduces the 
reader to the type of instruction which was given to the Orthodox in the seventeenth 
century. The catechisms of the Russian Church and a number of other doctrinal statements 
are found in: R. Blackmore, The Doctrine of the Russian Church, Aberdeen 1844; W. Palmer, 
Dissertations on subjects relating^ to the Orthodox or Eastern Catholic Communion, 1853. Also Mel- 
chisedec, The Orthodox Doctrine of the Apostolic Eastern Church, 1857. A very different book 
giving the present interpretation of Eastern Orthodoxy is The Mystical Theology of the Eastern 
Church, 1957, by V. Lossky. Three symposiums to which both the Eastern Orthodox and 
Anglican theologians have contributed are: The Church of God, ed. by E. Mascall, 1934; The 
Mother of God, ed. by E. Mascall, 1949; The Angel of Light and the Powers of Darkness, 1954. 
The best book in French is P. Evdokimov, L'Orthodoxie, Paris, 1959, and in German: K. Friz, 
Die Stimme des Ostkirche, Stuttgart 1950; E. Benz, Geist undLeben der Ostkirche, Hamburg 1957; 
Fr Heiler, Urkirche und Osthrche, Munchen 1937; J. Tyciak, Wege Ostlicfar Theologie, Bonn 
1946; R. Klostermann, Problems der Ostkirche, Goteburg 1955. Besides the dogmatic decrees of 
the seven Ecumenical Councils the Orthodox Church also accepts the decisions of the nine 

316 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

ancient local Councils, and of the four Synods which met in Constantinople in 86 1, 879, 1341 
and 1351 The last two dealt with the question of divine energy as formulated by St Gregory 
Palainas. The Orthodox also recognize several other doctrinal statements like the confession of 
faith of St Gregory Thaumaturgus, St Athanasius and St John of Damascus, but they have 
not the same significance as the Nicene Creed. Still less is the authority of controversial doc- 
trinal statement issued in the seventeenth century, such as the confession of faith of Peter 
Mogila or that of Dositheus, Patriarch of Jerusalem, approved by the local Synod in 1672. 
These documents served some useful purpose in their own time, but lacked the restraint and 
balance of the accepted Creed. 



CHAPTER IX 

The Worship and Sacraments of the Christian East. Only a small proportion of the service 
books used by the Eastern Christians is available in English translation. The translation of the 
Communion service is the most important. The English text of the Byzantine liturgies of St 
John Chrysoslom and of St Basil the Great exists in seveial translations. One of the more 
recent ones was published by SPCK in London 1939, under the title The Oithodox Liturgy. 
The Coptic Morning Service for the Lord's Day was translated by John, Marquis of Bute, 
London 1908. The Armenian Liturgy was published by Cope & Fenwick, 1907. Other ser- 
vices of the Byzantine rite have been translated by I. Hapgood, Tfie Service Book of the Holy 
Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Church, New York 1922, The English of this useful book docs not do 
justice to the original and has been generally considered to be unsatisfactory* Other English 
translations include: The Coptic Offices, translated by R. Wooley, Madras 1930. The Gteal 
Canon, a poem of St Andrew of Crete, translated by D. Chitty, 1957. The Liturgies of St Mark, 
James, Clement and the Church of Malabar, by the Rev J. Ncale, London 1869. ^ Syti&n Daily 
Offices, translated by A. MacLean, 1894. The Akathistos Hymn, translated by V. McNabb, 
1947. The Manual of Eastern Orthodox Prayers, 1945, contains moining and evening prayers, 
widely used for daily devotions by the Russian Orthodox, and the Rite of Confession. Those 
readers who desire to make a more specialized study of the Eastern Liturgies can find a useful 
bibliography and good treatment of this subject in F. Brightman, The Eastern and Western 
Liturgies, Oxford 1956. S. Salaville, Eastern Liturgies, London 1938. A. King/ Ths Rites of 
Eastern (!hri\tendom, 2 vols, Rorna 1947-48. R. Janin, Egliw Orientates and Rites Onentau*., 
Paii,s 1955. 1C. Merccnier, JM Pribe des Eglises de Rite Byzanlim, 3 vols. N. Cabasilas, A Com- 
mentary on the Divine Liturgy, 1960. A description of Orthodox services as they used to b given 
in the Russian secondary schools is found in Our Mother Church, Her Won/tip and Office*, by 
E, Xvegintscv, 1948. N. Gogol, Meditation on the Divine Liturgy, 1961. 

CHAPTER X 

The Church in the life of the Eastern Christians. An old but useful book giving a vivid picture 
of Russian life is by I X, CJ, Romanoff, Sketches of the Grtco-Russian Church, 1869. Russian Church 
li(c in the? twentieth century before the Communist Revolution is well described by S. Graham, 
The Way of Martha and Mary, 1914, and With tfie Russian Pilgrim to Jerusalem, 1914. The Creek 
Church life after the Second World War is presented by P. Hammond in his book, The Waters 
of Mareth, 1956", Other popular books dealing with the life ami customs of various national 
Churohctt of the East are: N. Arseniev, Ifaly Moscow (religious and spiritual life of Russia in 
the nineteenth century), 1940* M. Loughborough, Rumanian Pilgrimage, x<):J<). K. French, 
Serbian Church Life, K)4U. A. Abrahamian, 77ie Church and Faith of Armenia, 19^0. 1). O'Hanlon, 
Features of the Abyssinian Church, 1946. Surrnad, Bait Mar Shimum, Assyrian Church Ct^tom^ 
i<)o. A unique place in this devotional literature is hold by the two anonymous writings, 
The Way of a Pttgrun, and The Pilgrim continues his way, translated by R, French, 1934. ^ * {l 
diary of a Russian pilgrim describing his adventures in search of holy men and women in 
Russia, in the middle of the nineteenth century. The mystical tradition of the Eastern ( Hmrch 
is revealed in two valuable books written by a monk of the Eastern Church: Orthodox fipiri- 
twlity> 1943, and On t/ie Invocation of the Name of Jesus, 1950. 

Mount Ath<w Many books have been published about Mount Atbos and its i Monastic 

3*7 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

republic. The most important among these works is the study of one of the Holy Elders, 
Staretz Silouan (1866-1938), written by his disciple Archimandrite Sofrony, The Undistorted 
Image, 1958. Other books about Mount Athos are more descriptive: A. Riley, Athos or the 
Mount of the Monks, 1887. R. Byron, The Station, 1949. R. Dawkins, The Monks of Mount Athos, 
1936. F. Hasluck, Athos, 1924. S. Loch, Athos the Holy Mountain, 1957. The author is a Scots- 
man who lived for twenty-five years in the vicinity of the Holy Mountain. P. Sherard, Athos: 
The Mountain of Silence, Oxford 1960. This has excellent coloured photographs. A Greek 
description of Athos is Gonstantm Cavernos's Anchored in God, Athens 1959. An earlier book 
describing Eastern monasteries in the middle of the nineteenth century is by R. Guizon, 
Visits to Monasteries and the Levant, 1840. A similar book is by O. Parry, Six Months in a Syrian 
Monastery, 1895. An account of a stay at Mardin with the Jacobite Patriarch Mar Ignatius 
Peter III. A later description of the same part of the world is given by H. Luke, Prophets, 
Priests and Patriarchs (Palestine and Syria], 1927. 

CHAPTER XI 

The Sacred Art of the Christian East. There has lately been a steady stream of publications 
dealing with the art of the Christian East, and only the most important and most recent works 
on this subject can be given here. Two classical works are O. Dalton, Byzantine Art and 
Archeology, Oxford 1911, and N. Kondakov The Russian Ikon, Oxford 1927. A book of primary 
importance is R. Byron and D. Talbot Rice, The Birth of Western Painting, 1930 It is the work 
of men who have revealed the importance of Byzantine Art for the contemporary world. 
The latest books on Orthodox ikons, mosaics and frescoes are: L. Ouspensky, Essai sur La 
Th&ologie de ricone dans VEglise Orthodoxe, Paris 1960. A. Grabar, Byzantine Painting, 1953. 
D. Talbot Rice, The Beginning of Christian Art, 1957. D. Talbot Rice, The Art of Byzantium, 
1959. L. Ouspensky and V. Lossky, The Meaning of Ikons, 1952, gives not only artistic, but also 
theological explanations of the ikons. The best reproductions of ikons are in the Unesco 
World Series, The Early Russian Ikons. 

Church Architecture. D. Buxton s Russian Medieval Architecture. C. Stewart, Byzantine Legacy, 
1947. C, Stewart, Serbian Legacy, 1959. Gr. Hamilton, The Art and Architecture of Russia, 1954. 

Conclusion 

Christian East and West. The significance of the meeting between Christian East and West 
and some special contributions of Russian Orthodoxy are discussed in the following books: 
P. Sherrard, The Greek East and the Latin West, 1959. A philosophical approach to their con- 
trast and similarity. W. Schubart, Russia and the Western Man, New York 1956. A work of 
great originality and penetration by a German Sociologist who perished during the Second 
World War. N. Gorodetsky, The Humiliated Christ in Modern Russian Thought, 1932. R. Korpcr, 
The Candlelight Kingdom. A Meeting with the Russian Church, New York 1955. N. Zcrnov, 
Orthodox Encounter, 1961. 



3l8 



INDEX 



Abaka, Khan, 123 

Acacius, Patriarch, 65 

Am-Jalut, Battle of, 123 

Akhidian, Andrew, Bishop, 1 70 

Albania, Church of, 209, 2246. 

Aleutians, conversion to Russian Orthodoxy 

of, 182 

Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, 41, - 
Alexander of Battenberg, Prmcc, 1 94 
Alexander Cusa, Punce, 192 
Alexander Severus, Emperor, 26 
Alexander I, Tsar, 1750*., 190 
Alexander II, Tsar, 180, 197 
Alexandria, 19, 23^, 34^., 48, 51, 54^,59, 62 

Patriarchate of, 208, 223 

Popes of, 57fF, 64, 76 
Alexcy, Crown Prince, 1580*. 
Alcxcy Romanov, Tsar, 145^., 1490*., 1546^ 
Alexey (Simansky) Patnarch, 216 
Alexis, Metropolitan, 125 
Alexius III, Emperor, 106 
Alexius IV, Emperor, io6fF. 
Alexius Commmus I, Emperor, 104!!. 
All-Russian Church Council, 164, ao6fF. 
Altay region, conversion to Russian Ortho- 
doxy of, 181 
Amadeus of Savoy, 131 
AmmomuR Sacas, 36 
Amvrosy of Optina Pustin, 178 
Anastasy, Metropolitan, 219 
Anatolius of Constantinople, Patriarch, 65 
Anatoly ol Optina Pustin, 1 78 
Anthimus IV, Patriarch, 191, 193 
Anthimus, Bishop of Vidin, 193 
Anthony (Klirapovitsky) Metropolitan, 205, 

Antioe.h, 19, 23, 51, f>6{r., GifT. 

Patriarehate of, 76, 208, 223 
Apollo, oracle of, 27 
Apostles, the, 19, 23, 2f>, 312, 38, 42, 200 
Araulius, Emperor, 57 
Argun, Khan, 124 
Ariamsm, 44(1., 490% 52*1,, 6V) 
Ariu$, 41, 436". 
Armenia, Orthodox Christianity in, 7ulU, 

99, xGHfT., 209 
Athens, 34, 50 

Athos, Mount, 78, 109, 130, i42iT M 163, 273 
Aurelian, Emperor, 27 
Auatria-I lutigary Empire 

CloIhvpHeof, 207 

Orthodox C Christianity under, 



Baibars, Sultan, 123 
Balkans 

Emergence of Autocephalous Churches 
in, i88ff. 

Orthodox Christianity in, i7ifF, 21 off. 
Baptism, 249/1, 263, 268 
Baradai, Jacob, Bishop, 68 
Barsuma, Metropolitan, 75 
Barsumas, Archimandrite, 61, 63 fF 
Basil, Emperor, 94 
Basil III, Grand Prince of Moscow, 140, 

I42ff. 

Basilides, 30 

Batu, Khan, 1 1 7 

Benedict VIII, Pope, 90, 99 

Berdiacv, Nikolay, 203, 206, 220 

Berlin Congress, the, 194 

Bissarion, Archbishop of NIC aea, 127/1,, 130 

Blok, Alexander, 202 

Bogomolci, the, 2 1 1 

Bohcmuncl of Tanxnto, 105 

Boniface of Montferrat, 106 

Boris, Tsar, 92 fl 

Btest-Litovsk, Council of, 137, 147 

Brotherhood of Custodians of Holy Places, 

223 

Brother* Karamazov, The, 163 
Bucharest, University ol\ 193 
Buddhists, 75 
Bulgakov, Sergey, Archpiiest, 203, 207, 220, 



fuitt, Arrlipnest, 144^., 
Habylon, (Jhiiroh in, 54 



Bulgaria, Church of, <)3fT., 108, nj.'jfr., 209, 

224(1*. 
Bulgarian Empire, io8flT. 

Invasion, 91 IT. 

History of the Bulgarian People , 193 

Rebellion against Turks, xo'jfT. 
v Byron, Robert, 284, 2<)i 
tHyxanliuin, fyff., 85 

Artistic (Icvelopment, K2<)iT. t U7f)ir. 

Jireakwith Rome, 97!^., 107, 1^9 

Decline of, 103^. 

Fall of, 127, laflfT,, 140, i7;jfr. 

Islam's attack on, 83, 85 

Relations between (Hunch and State, 42 

Unrler Miicedoni.'UJs, 95!!'. 

(Jabasilas, Nicholas, 130, 245 
Callistw III, Pope, 165 
Calvin, John, 248 
Calvinism, rjMfl, 147 
Oappudocia, 35, 50, 53, 78, 287 
Cappadocian Fathers, 4-f)fr., 53, 55 
Catechetical School, the, 34^, 
Catherine II, Empress, itii, i<>j 
(lelsus, 34, 38 



INDEX 



Ceylon, Christianity in, 74 

Chalcedon, the Council of, 63^, 696% 738"., 

78, 81, 85, 89, 223 
Chalcedonian definition, the, 638"., 68ff., 71, 

73,83 
Chalcedonian schism, the, 646., 8r, 83, 85, 

170 

Charlemagne, Emperor, 88ff. 
Charles of Anjou, 122, 127 
Charles of HohenzoUern-Sigmaringen, 193 
Chernishevsky, Nikolay, 197 
Chinese Church, I2off. 

T'ang Dynasty, 120 
Chosroes II, 81 
Chrism, 25off. 
Chrismation, 25ofF., 268 
Chrysaphius, 61, 63 
Clement of Alexandria, 336. 
Clement, Metropolitan of Tinorvo, 194 
Clement VIII, Pope, 165 
Clermont, Council of, 104 
Commodus, Emperor, 26 
Communism, 2O7fF., 21 iff 

Campaign against religion, 2i2fF. 
Conciliar Movement, the, 136 
Confession, 2516". 
Confession of Faith, 138 
Confirmation, 25off. 
Constans I, Emperor, 49 
ConstansII, 8 iff., 85 
Constantine, Emperor, sgff., 55, 58, 65, 74, 

76, 81, 173 

Constantine II, Emperor, 49 
Constantine IV, Emperor, 85 
Constantine V, Emperor, 85, 87 
Constantine XI, Emperor, 13 iff. 
, Constantine Monomachus, ggff. 
^Constantinople 
* Council of (AD 553), 66ff. 
Council at (AD 753), 87 
Fall of, 119, 1296, 292 
Latin Empire of, 107 
Patriarchate of, 76, 85, 207, 223 
Rivalry between Alexandria and, 62, 

71,76 

Sack of, 1046., 29 iff. 
Constantius, Emperor, 49 
Constantius Chlorus, 28, 39 
Constantius, Patriarch, 191 
Consubstantiation, 235 
Coptic Church, see Egypt 
Cosmas Indicoplestes, 74 
Cossacks, the, 148^, 151, 154, 162, 175 
Couturier, Abb, 222 
Crimean War, the, 192, 197 
Crisis of Western Philosophy, The, 200 
Crusaders, the, iO3ff., 117, 123, 132, i68fT. 
Cyprus, Church of, 208, 224 
Cyril, Apostle of the Slavs, 9 1 ff,, 112 



Cyril, Metropolitan, 125 
Czechoslovakia, Church of, 2240. 

Damascus, 223 

David, Negus, 166 

Decius, Emperor, 27 

Demus, Otto, 295 

Diaspora, the Jewish, igff., 70 

Dinkha, Shimun, 167 

Diocletian, Emperor, 25, 27ff., 39 

Diodorus of Tarsus, 55 

Dioscorus, Patriarch, 6 iff., 68 

Divorce, 255 

Dmitry, Prince of Moscow, i i8ff. 

Dobrolubov, Nikolay, 197 

Dobrotolubie, 163, 273 

Dominos, Patriarch of Antioch, 62 

Domitian, Emperor, 26 

Donatist schism, the, 48 

Dostoevsky, Feodor, 163, 179, igSff, 204 

Duophysitism, 60, 81, 84 

Dushan, King, xogff. 

Eastern Orthodox Church: pastim 

Forms of Service, 256ff. 

General Structure, 2248". 

Liturgical Books of, 259 
Ecclesiastical Regulations, 157 
Ecumenical Councils, the, 128, 173, 230 

First: see Nicene Council 

Second: 49, ssff., 57, 89 

Third: see Ephesus, Councils of 

Fourth: see Chalcedon, Council of 

Fifth: see Constantinople, Council of 

Sixth: 85 

Seventh: 54, 87 
Ecumenical Movement, 22off. 
Edward I of England, 1 24 
Egypt 

Islam in, 8sff. 

Orthodox Christianity in, 48, 55, 64fT., 

7 iff., 170, 209 
El Greco, 292 
Ephesus, The First Council of, 59ft, 62, 68, 

89 

The Second (Robber) Council of, 6 iff. 
Episcopal Councils, 42 
Ern, V., 206 
Estonia, Church of, 208 
Etchmiadzin, 73 
Ethiopia, Orthodox Christianity in, 73ff., 

i66ff., 209 

Eucharist, forms of, ai, 23, 235ff., 239(1,, 262 
Eudoxia, Empress, 576. 
Eugenius IV., Pope, 127 
Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, 

50 

Eusebius, Church Historian, 4ofT., 48 
Eusebius, Father Mattopoulos, 19 iff. 



INDEX 



Eutychius, Abbot, 6iff., 65 
Evlogy, Metropolitan, 2196. 
Explanation of the Divine Liturgy, The^ 130 

Felix HI, Pope, 65 

Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius, 221 
Fcodor I, Tsar, 144 
Feodor II, Tsar, issff. 
Ferdinand of Saxe-Goburg, 194 
Filioque clause, Sgff., 94, 98, 101, isSff., 
22gn. 

Adoption of, by Spanish Church, 90 
Finland, Church of, 208, 224ff. 
Flavianus, Patriarch of Antioch, 56 
Flavianus, Patriarch of Constantinople, 6 iff. 
Florence, Council of, i a6ff. 
Florensky, Father Pavel, 205 
Florovsky, G., 220, 2312 
Frank, Simeon, 203, 220 
French Impressionists, 287, 292 

Galenus, Emperor, 27!!. 

Gallus, Emperor, 27 

Gaul, 23, 28, 47, 75ff. 

George, Bishop of Alexandria, 47 

Georgia, Church of, 73, 208, 224!?. 

Georgians, 73 

Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, 86 

Germanus, Metropolitan of Patras, 190 

Germany, National Socialism in, 211 

Ghazan Khan, 124 

Ghengis Khan, 1 1 5fT. 

Gnow, soft, 44, 69 

Godfrey of Bouillon, 104 

(iolitsin, Prince Alexander, 176 

Gospels, the, a iff., 30, 32, 34(1*., 38, 44, 57, 75 

Great Britain, 28 

Greece: 

Rebellion against Turks, 190 
CIRurch of, igofF., 208, 224 
Foundation of the Synod, 1 9ofT. 

Gregory II, Pope, 86fT, 

Gregory V, Patriarch of Constantinople, 190 

Hadrian II, Empezor, 92 

Ilarun ai Rashicl, 120 

Hellenism, aoflf., 30, 33!!., 38, 44, 70, 74 

in Balkans, 17 iff 
Henoticon^ 65, 73 
Heraclcua, Catechct, 34 
Hwradiiw, Emperor, 8* 
Herat, 75 

Hcrocl the Great, o 
Hesychanm, 130 
Hetoom II, King, 168 
Ifexapla, 36 
Hinduism, 75, 166 
Holy Gross, the, 8t 
Holy Unction, 253 



Holy Spirit, Inspiration of, 436. 

Holy Trinity, 44ff., 52 

Homiousios, 46 

Homoousios, 43, 45ff., 49, 5 iff., 54^*, 60 

Honorius I, Pope, 81, 85 

Hosius, Bishop, 41, 43, 48 

Hulagu Khan, 121, 123 

Humbert of Mourmontiers, ggff. 

Hundred Chapters, Council of, 143, 150 

Hungarian Invasion, 92 

Hus, John, 248 

ffypostasis, 60, 63 

Hypsilanti, Prince Alexander, 190 



Iconoclasm, 77, 86ff., 91, 93, 290 
Ignatius, Patriarch, 93fF. 
Ikons: 276ff. 

Angel of the Annunciation, 293 

Annunciation, 280 

Deesis, 291 

Divine Wisdom, 284^". 

Entombment, 281 

Holy Trinity, 119, 28 iff., 286 

Nativity, 280 

St Parasceva, 277 

The Only Begotten Son, 285 

Vision of St Peter, 286 
Ilminsky, Nikolay Ivanovich, 183^. 
Incarnate Logos, 35, 438*., 52, 59, 289 

as Sovereign, 95 
Incarnation, belief in the, 33, 44, 52, 59, 

62ff., 69, 82, 80, 82, 84, 230 
India, 19, 33, 67, 74 
Innocent III, Pope, io6fT. 
Innocent IV, Pope, 12 iff, 
Instruments of Union, see Henoticon 
Irene, Empress, 87 
Iron Curtain, 212, 220 
Iron Guard, an 
Isaurian Dynasty, 85 

Isidore, Metropolitan of Moscow, 127, 129 
Isidorian decretals, 100 
Islam, 48, 80, 8f>flf., 103, 108, laaiT. 

in Egypt, 8a(T. 

in Europe, 13 iff., 173*1. 

in India, 164 
Israel, set Jxidaism 

Ivan III, Grand Prince of Russia, 1 19 
Ivan IV, Tsar, 140, 143 



Jaballah, Mar, III, 
Jacobite^ the, 68, i70fT., 209, 236 
Jadwiga, Queen, 146 
Jagicllo, King, 146 
James, Professor E. (X, 17 
Japan, Orthodox Christianity in, 
208, a4flf 



INDEX 



Jerusalem, 19, 42, 54, 64, 8 iff. 

Capture of, 105 

Destruction of, 20, 24 

Patriarchate of, 76, 208. 223 
Jesuits, the, 137*!. 

in Egypt, 170 

in Ethiopia, 167 

in India, 166 

in Poland, 147, 149 
Jesus Christ, 21, 24, 30, 436., 59, 73, 78, 87 

Nature of, 52, 6ofF., 6gff. 3 8iff. 
Joakim, Patriarch, 155 
John Asan II, Tsar, io8ff. 
John VI of Cantacuzene, Emperor, 131 
John of Damascus, 86ff. 
John VII, Emperor, 92 
John VIII, Emperor, 127 
John III, King of Portugal, 164, 167 
John of Monte Corvino, 122 
John, Patriarch of Antioch, 60 
John of Piano Carpini, 117, 121 
Josephus, 34 

Jovanovich, Mihajlo, Metropolitan, i88ff. 
Jovanovich, Petar, Metropolitan, 188 
Judaism, igff., 30, 34, 70, 234, 250 

Separation of Church from, 2 1 
Jugoslavia, 210 

Church in, 2246. 

Julian the Apostate, Emperor, 49fF. 
Julius III, Pope, 167 
Justin II, Emperor, 68 
Justinian I, Emperor, 65fF., 71, 86, 88 
Juvenalius, Patriarch, 61 

Kalita, Ivan, Grand Prince, 1 18 
Karacorum, 121 
Karamzin, Nikolay, 175 
Kareev, M. M., Professor, 205 
Karlowitz, Treaty of, 143, 172 
Kartashev, Professor Anton, 2o6fF., 220 
Khomiakov, Alexey S., iSsflf. 
Kiev, Theological Academy of, 1489*., 154, 

163 

Kiselev, Count, 192 
Kiss of Peace, 262, 273 
Kitbaka, General, i2iff. 
Kondakov, N. P., 286 
Koran, the, 82fT. 
Kronstad, Father John, 206 
Kublai Khan, 121 

Kuchuk Kainarjie, Peace Treaty of, 161 
Kulikovo Pole, Battle of, u8 
Kuyuk Khan, 122, 125 

Lactantius, 40 
Laibach, Conference of, 190 
Landishev, Archpriest, 181 
Last Judgement, 56, 83 



Latvia, Church in, 208 

Lauras, the, 78 

Lavan II, King, 168 

Lawrence of Portugal, 1 2 1 

Leader, cult of, 48 

Legend of the Grand Inquisitor, The, 199 

L6ger, Antoine, 138 

Lenin, Vladimir Ulianov, 160, 207, 2i2fF. 

Leo III, Emperor, 85*?. 

Leo III, Pope, 88, 90 

Leo IV, Emperor, 87 

Leo VI, Emperor, 94 

Leo IX, Pope, 99*?. 

Leo of Ohnda, 99 

Letters of a Russian Traveller, 175 

Licinius, Emperor, 40 

Life of Christ, The, 130 

Lithuanian, Church in, i46fF., 208 

Living Church Movement, 214 

Lucius, Bishop of Antioch, 44 

Lukaris, Cyril, Patriarch, i37fF 

Luther, Martin, I36ff., 248 

Lutheranism, i36fF. 

in Poland and Lithuania, 147 
Lyons, Council of, 1 24 

Makary Glukharev, i8iff. 

Makrakis, Apostolas, 19 iff. 

Manual of Eastern Orthodox Prayers, 253n. 

Marcion, Emperor, 64*?. 

Marcion, Gnostic teacher, 30 

Marcus Aurelius, Emperor, 26 

Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus, 1276. 

Marriage, 2541! 

Martin I, Pope, 82 

Marxism, 2O3ff. 

Maurice, Emperor, 68 

Maximilla, 31 

Maximus the Confessor, 82 

Mecca, 84 

Mechev, Alexey, Archpriest, 206 

Medvedev, Sylvester, Archpriest, 1 55 

Memnon, Archbishop of Ephesus, 60 

Menez, Alexis de, Archbishop of Goa, 1 65 

Melkites, the, 68 

Merezhkovsky, Dimitry, 199, 202 flf. 

Merian, King, 73 

Merv, 75 

Mesopotamia, 74, 78, 82, 84 

Messiah, the, 190% 24, 35, 38, 59 

Methodius, Apostle of the Slavs, 91 flf., i xa 

Methropanes Kritopulos, 137 

Michael Cerelarius, Patriarch, 

Michael III (The Drunkard), 

Michael VIII Palaeologus, 108, 126 

Michael Romanov, Tsar, 144 

Michael of Sebastia, 169 

Mikhitar, 169 

Milan, Edict of, 40 



322 



INDEX 



Mithras, 24 

Moga, Bishop Vasilie, 1 96 

Mogila, Peter, Metropolitan, I48ff, 154 

Mohammed, 82, 8311. 

Mohammed II, Sultan, 13 iff. 

Mohammedans, 69, 78, 83, 858"., 119, 1836% 

1 88, 190, 209 

Mohammedanism, see Islam 
Monasticism, Eastern, 77ff. 

Western, 97 

Mongas, Peter, Patriarch, 65 
Mongols: 

Invasion of Russia, 1 1 sff, 

and Christendom, 12 iff. 

and Islam, 1236. 
Monophysitism, 48, 60, 646% 676., 736., 81, 

836., 209 

Monotheism, 19, 34, 85 
Monotheletism, 8 iff. 
Montanists, the, 31 
Montanus, 31 

Montenegro, Church of, 189, 208 
Moravian Empire, 9 iff. 
Mosaics, 288ff. 
Moscow, Council of, 150, 153 
Motovilov, Nicholas, 1 78 
Mott, John R., 222 
Murad, Sultan, 131 
Mustasun, Gahph, 123 
My Life in Christ, 1*06 

Nana, Queen, 73 

Nationalism, 7off., 80 

Navanno, Battle of, 190 

Ncktary of Optma Pustm, 1 78 

Nero, Emperor, a^ff. 

Nesmdov, V., Professor, 205 

Ncstorian Church, 119*1*., i24fT., 209 

Destruction of, nCff. 

of Persia, iG7fF. 
Nejjtorians, 68, 75, 83n., 236 
Ncstorius, Patriarch, 58(1., 65, 85 
Nevski, Alexander, Grand Prince, 117, 125 
Nicenc Council, the, 41 if., 45fF., 49, 51, 540*., 



consequences of, 47fF. 
Niccnc Creed, 43, 45fF., 54, 100, 1*29 
Nicenc Orthodoxy, 54fT. > 62 

victory of, 49, 51, 53 
Nicholas I, Pope, 93!^ 
Nicholas 1, Tsar, I7<)ft, 184, 186, 192, 197 
Nicholas II, Tsar, 304!?. 
Nicomedia, 4o(F,, 45 
Nikolay (Kasatkin), Bishop of Japan, 
Nikon, Patriarch, 144^, 149!?. 
Nina, Apostle of Georgia, 73 
Nisibis, 75, iso, 167 
Nonjurors, 159 
Nonpossmora, l 



Normans, the, 98, 103, 105 

North America, Russian Orthodox Church 

in, 208 
Novgorodtgov, N., Professor, 206 

Obrenovich, Milosh, Prince, 188 

Odovacar, 76 

Old Believers, the, 145, 149, 150, 1526"., 

i55ff-> J 59 
Omar, Caliph, 119 
Optina Pustin, i78ff. 
Ordination, 254 

Orestus, Prefect of Alexandria, 59 
Oriental Christianity, 60, 63, 65, 68, 70, 72, 
74ff., 84, 209, 223 

Annihilation by Mongols of, 126 

Relations between Western and, 88fT. 

Separation of, from Western Church, 

69,87 

Origen, 33ff. } 366. 
Othman, Sultan, 1 30 
Otto of Bavaria, King of Greece, 190 
Ottoman Empire, 130, 133!!. 

Collapse of, 207 

Condition of Orthodox Church under, 
I34ff., 171 

in Europe, 131, 133^. 
Ousia, 63 
Outrcmer, Barons of, 123 

Pachomius, Abbot, 77JOT. 
Padwick, Miss C. E., 244 
Paidagogous, 35 

Paisius Ligandis, Metropolitan, 150^. 
Paisy, Monk, 193 

Palamas, Gregory, Archbishop, ijjo 
Palestine, 20, 24, 41, 45, 64, 68, 78, 85 
Papacy, position of, 7(JfF., 97/H, roa, 136, 
147, 231 

Relations with By/antium, i7fT., 136 
Paris, Congress and Conference of, 192 
Paul of Samosata, 31, 45 
Paul I, Tsar, 163!!, 175 
Pavolvich, MileMtcj(j, Archbishop, 188 
Pax Mongoiica, x 16 
Pcntccostais, 31 
Persian Empire, 67, 74(1"., fJiff. 

Christianity in, 1 20 
Peter the Great, 153, 155^., u<)f, 
Peter, Patriarch of Alexandria, 68 
Peter I, Pctrovich Ncgosh, 189 
Peter II, Pctrovich Ncgosh* ifJf) 
Pctrovich, Daniio, BiHliop, 189 
Petrovich, Danilo, Prince, 1 89 
Pctrovich, Sava, Bishop, iB<) 
Pctrovich, Vasiljc, Bishop, 189 
Phanariot Greeks, ijilt^ 188, ij)0, 19;^ 
Philarct, Metropolitan of Moscow, 
Philike Ihtaircia, 190 



323 



INDEX 



Philip the Arab, Emperor, 26 

Philo, 34 

Philosophy in Colour, 288 

Philostrates, 34 

Philothey, Abbot, i4off. 

Photian schism, 93fF. 

Photius, Patriarch, 93fE. 

Pkysis, 60, 63 

Pierius, Gatechet, 34 

Pigas, Patriarch Meletius, 137 

Pius IX, Pope, 23 1 

Plato, 34ff. 

Pliny the Younger, 26 

Plotinus, 33fF., 36 

Poland, church in, I46ff., 208, 224!?. 

Partitions of, 161 

Polotsky, Simeon, Archpriest, i54fF. 
Polytheism, igff., 24, 34 
Porphyry, 34, 38 
Possessed, The, 163 
Possessors, i42ff. 
Priscilla, 31 

Prokopovich, Bishop Feofan, I56ff. 
Prosopon, 63 

Protasov, General, xygff. 
Proterius, 64 

Protestantism, 136*!., iSsfF., 171, i86f, 200, 
227ff., 248 

in Lithuania and Poland, 147 
Protrepticus, the, 35 
Pulcheria, Empress, 631!. 
Puntans, 264 
Pushkin, Alexander, 184 

Quakers, the, 263 

Rasputin, Gregory, 205 
Rastislav, Prince, 9 iff. 
Reformation, 136 
Remarriage, 255 
Renaissance, the, 143 
Rhodon, Gatechet, 34 
Roman Empire: 

Reconciliation of Church with, 39fF., 
4 7 ff. 

Relations of Catholic Church with, 
22fT., 38 

Revival of, 88ff. 

Transfer of power to Constantinople, 



Rome (Catholicism), i86fF., 200, 227fF., 248 

iBseak with Byzantium, 97ff., 107, 129 

Mass, 239 

Popes of, 7sff. 
J^ektions with Constantinople, 87ff. 

.SVtfTPapacy 

Romulus Augustus, Emperor, 76 
Rozanov, Vasily, 179, 202 
Rtishchev, Boyar Feodar, 154 



Rubban Sauma, i24fF 

Rublev, Andrey, 119, 28iff., 286, 294 

Rumania, 192 

Church of, i92ff., 208, 21 1, 224 
Russia, 42, 78 

Collapse of Empire, 2O7fF. 

Emancipation of Serfs, 180, 197 

Expansion of, 1438". 

Foundation of Bible Society in, 1 76 

Intelligentsia of, i97ff., 202, 212 

Kiev period, in, 114, 141 

Mongol domination of, i i6fF. 

Moscow Tsardom, 1396", 143, 160 

Incorporation of Ukraine, 149 

St Petersburg Empire, i6off., 208 

War with Japan, 1 84, 204 
Russian Orthodox Church, 141, 161, 176, 
""184, 200, 224 

Abolition of Moscow Patriarchate, 1 55, 
i 57 ff. 

Doctrinal development of, 1426. 

Foundation of, 1 1 iff. 

Holy Governing Synod of, 157, 160, 
i8iff. ~ <nb 

Procurator of, 157, 161, 179, 2o6ff. 

In exile, 2i9ff. 

Influence of, 212 

In Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine, 



Missionary work of, 1 Soflf. 

Mongols and, 117, 125 

Reform of, 2O4ff. 

Religious customs, 2671!. 

Restoration of Moscow Patriarchate, 
205, 207, 220 

Schism in, I44ff., 1491!., 153, 174, 185 

"Sects in, 1 76 

Spiritual renewal in, 119, 202ff. 

Struggle with communism, 252^". 

Jkruggle for independence from State 

of, 150 

Russian Student Christian Movement, 221 
Russian Theological College, 221 

Sacramental Teaching, evolution of, 2636. 

Saints, Doctrine of, 2328*. 

St Anthony, 48, 77 

St Athanasius, 43, 46fT., sofT., 73, 93 

St Basil the Great, 49^., 53, 78 

St Cyprian, 29 

St Cyril of Jerusalem, 47n. 

St Cyril of Alexandria, sgrL, 64, 68 

St Daniel (the Stylites), 78 

St Euthymius, Abbot, 78 

St Francis Xavier, 164 

St Frumentius, 73 

St Gregor Loosavorich, 72fF. 

St Gregory the Great (Pope), 90 

St Gregory Nazianzen, 49fT., 58 



324 



INDEX 



St Gregory of Nyssa, 49ff, 53ff. 

St Gregory Thaumaturgus, 37 

St Hilary, Bishop, 4711. 

St Hippolytus, 140 

St Ignatius of Antioch, ssff. 

St losif of Volotsk, i42ff. 

St John Ghrysostom, Patriarch, 56ff. 

Eucharist of, 24 iff. 
St John of Damascus, 83 
St Leo the Great (I, Pope), 63, 65, 76, 90 
St Louis, King of France, 122, 127 
St Nil of Sorsk, 142 
St Macrina, 50 
St Maxim the Greek, 143 
St Mcsrop Mashthotz, 73 
St Michael of Chernigov, Prince, 125 
St Paul, 26 
St Peter, 26, 63, 76ff. 
St Poiycarp, 33 
St Sabas, 78 
St Sahak I, 73 
St Sava, 109 

St Scrafim of Sarov, i77ff., 184 
St Sergixis* Academy, 221 
St Sergius of Radouesh, i i8fT., 142, 284, 294 
St Simeon the New Theologian, 247 
St Symcon (the Styhtes), 78 
St Symcon the Younger (the Styhtes), 78 
St Thcodosius, of Kiev, 113 
St Thcodosius, of Palestine, 78 
St. Thomas, Apostle, 74 
St Thomas, Church of, 164, 166 
St Tikhon of Zadonsk, i6sfF. 
Saniarin, Yury, 185, 188 
Samarkand, 75 
Samuel, Tsar, 108 
San La/.aro, 169 
Sassanian Empire, 119 
Savabe, Paul, Priest, 184 
Savonarola, Girolumo, 143 
Sclim 1, Caliph, 133 
Selim 111, Sultan, 189 
Selivanov, Kondaraty, 176 
Seljuk Turks, attacks by, 103 
Septimus Severus, Emperor, 35 
Septmigint, the, 34 
Serbia, loofH, i88IF. 

Orthodox Church of, xogfT, i88E, 208, 



an 

Scrgiw I, Patriarch, 8x 
Scrgim II, Patriarch, xor 
Serous IV, Pope, xoi 
Sergy (Stragorodsky), Patriarch, 
Scvcrnm, Patriarch of Antioch, 67, 285 
iShaguna, Andrcy, Bishop, 196 
Shupur III, 75 
Sicilian Vespers, 1117 
Siftimuwl IH (Vusa) King, 147 
Sileucia-Ctttdphon, 81 



Simeon, Tsar, 108 
Sinai, Church of, 208, 224 
Sixth Novella, 66 
Skvortsov, V. M., 203 
Slavophils, the, i84ff., 200, 222, 274 
Slavs, conversion of, 9 iff. 
Slovenetsky, Epiphany, Monk, 154 
Socrates (Church Historian), 45n., 49 
Soloviev, Vladimir, 179, 1996., 203 
Sophia, 155!?. 
Sophronius, Patriarch, 82 
Soul, immortality of, 33 
pre-existence of, 37 

South India, Orthodox Christianity in, 1 64!!. 
Sozomen (Church Historian), 45n., 47n. 
Stalin, JosifV., 215 
Stambulov, Stefan, 194 
Stefan Nemanja, 1 09 
Stephen IX (Pope, Frederick of Lorraine), 



Stewart, Cecil, 278 

Stromateis, 35 

Subhaliso, Bishop, 120 

Sulaka, Abbot, 167*!: 

Suleiman the Magnificent, Caliph, 133 

Suvorov, Alexander, Field Marshal, 161 

Syncretism, 33 

Sylvester, Pope, 41, 48, 76 

Syria, 19, 23, 41, 55, 68, 71, 78, 81, 84^ 

Orthodox Church in, 209 
Syro-Romans, 166 

Tamerlane, 116, 119, 131, 125, 131, 167 

Tarasius, Patriarch, 87 

Tatars or Tartars, the, 115 

Temuchin, 115 

Timur, Khan, 123 

Thalassius, Bishop, 61 

Theodora, Empress, 66fT. 

Theodore of Mopsueste, 67 

Theodoret, of Cyrus, 61, 63, 67 

Thcoclosius I, Emperor, 49, 5ff. 

Theodosius II, Kmperor, 58!!, 6ifT. 

Thcodosius, Monk, 64 

Thcognost, Metropolitan, n8 

TheognosLus, Catechet, 34 

Theophanes, Patriarch, 148 

Thcophilus, Patriarch, 57fE 

Thcosebia, Deaconess, 53 

Thcotokos, the, 59, 62, 230, 234, 250 

Thomas of Cana, 74 

Three Chapters, fa, 67 

Tiberius II, Emperor, 68 

Tikhon (Beliavin), Patriarch, 207, 214, 317, 

3*9 

Time of Troubles, the, 144, 148 
Timothy the Great, Patriarch, 120 
Tiridates III, 74 
Tome, ilie, 63 



INDEX 



Trajan, Emperor, 26 
Transubstantiation, 230, 235, 1263 
Travaixcore, 209 
Trent, Council of, 165 
Trubetskoy, Prince Sergey, 205 
Trubetskoy, Prince Evgeny, 205, 288 
Turkish Empire, see Ottoman Empire 

Ugedy Khan, 117 
Uniates, i48ff., 170, 1956% 209 
Universal Christian Topography, 74 
Urban II, Pope, 104, 106 
Urban IV, Pope, 127 

Valarshapet, Synod of, 73 

Valens, Emperor, 49ff., 52 

Valentinus, 30 

Valerian, Emperor, 27 

Varna, Battle of, 131 

Vasco da Gama, 164 

Vehki (Signposts), 2O3fF., 213, 219 

Veniarmn, Metropolitan, 214 

Vemammov, Father John, 182 

Vehchkovsky, Paisy, Abbot, i62ff., 178 

Velimirovich, Bishop Nikolay, 211 



Vigilius, Pope, 67 
Virgin Mary, 234 
Vladimir, Archimandrite, 181 
Vladimir, Pnnce of Kiev, 92, i uff. 
Vladimir Monomakh, Pnnce, 113 
Vladislav VI, King, 1 3 1 
Voltaire, iGiff. 

Way to the Kingdom of Heaven, 182 

William of Rubruck, 122 

Witte, Count, 204 

World Council of Churches, the, 221 

World Student Christian Federation, 221 

Wycliffe, John, 248 

Yahweh, 20, 24 

Yaroslav the Wise, Prince, 112, 114 
Yarweh, Mar Michael, 170 
Yavorsky, Stefan, Metropolitan, 156 

Zeno, Emperor, 65, 73 
Zoe brotherhood, 19 iff., 21 off. 
Zoroastrians, 72, 74, 82, 119 
Zwingli, Ulrich, 248 



326