The Fifth Eothinon
Two Sermons
|
PROPHECY
By
St. Cyril of Alexandria
(Gospel of Luke, Sermon 156: c. 430)
As
two of the disciples walked to a village called Emmaus, they conversed with
one another concerning Christ, regarding Him as no longer living, but
mourning Him as dead. And as they conversed, Jesus Himself drew near and went with them, without being
recognised by them, for their eyes were
held that they should not know Him. And He says to them, ‘What is it, I pray,
of which you converse with one another as you walk thus, mournfully?’ And one
of them, whose name was Cleopas, answered and said, Are You only a stranger
in Jerusalem,
&c. And then they tell Him of the rumours of the resurrection brought by
the women, and of that by Peter, but they believe them not. For by saying, And women also astonished us, who found
not the body, they show that they had not been induced to believe the
news, nor regard it as true tidings, but as a cause of trouble and
astonishment: and Peter's testimony, who had seen only the linen bandages at
the sepulchre, they did not consider as a trustworthy proof of the resurrection,
because he did not say that he had seen Him, but inferred that He had risen
from His being no longer there. And you must know that those two belonged to
the number of the seventy, and that Cleopas' companion was Simon -not Peter,
nor he of Cana- but another of the seventy. In
this discourse, the Lord shows that the law was necessary to make ready the
way, and the ministry of the prophets to prepare men for faith in this
marvellous act, that so when the resurrection really took place, those who were
troubled at its greatness, might remember what was said of old, and be
induced to believe. He brings forward, therefore, Moses and the prophets,
interpreting their hidden meaning, and making plain to the worthy what to the
unworthy was obscure, so settling in them that ancient and hereditary faith
taught them by the sacred books, which they possessed. For nothing which
comes from God is without its use, but all and several of them have their
appointed place and service. In their due place, servants were sent before to
make ready for the presence of the Master, by bringing in beforehand prophecy
as the necessary preparative for faith, that, like some royal treasure, what
had been foretold might, in due season, be brought forward from the
concealment of its former obscurity, being unveiled and made plain by the
clearness of the interpretation. Having thus then stirred up their minds by
the writings of the law and the prophets, He afterwards, more plainly, sets
Himself before them, when, having consented to their request to go with them
to the village, He took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and divided it
among them. For their eyes, it
says, were held that they might not
know Him, until, namely, the word had entered, stirring up their heart to
faith, and then, rendering what they had before heard and believed visible,
He offered them the sight seasonably after the hearing. He does not, however,
continue with them, for He vanished,
it says, out of their sight. For
our Lord's relation to men after His resurrection does not continue the same
as before; for they too have need of renovation, and a second life in Christ,
so that the renewed may associate with the renewed, and the incorruptible
approach the incorruptible. For which reason, as John tells us, He did not
permit Mary to touch Him, until He should go away and return again [Jn 20:17].
Cleopas, it says, and his companion, rose up that same hour, the same, of
course, in which Jesus had vanished out
of their sight, and returned to
Jerusalem: but it does not say that they
found the eleven gathered together that same hour, and told them what had happened concerning
Jesus, but after the lapse of as many hours, as sufficed for walking the
sixty furlongs between the two places; and during this interval it was that the Lord was seen by Simon; but this
took place on the fortieth day after His resurrection, on which day He was
also taken up. This evangelist, therefore, has omitted the events that took
place in the intervening time, but says that Cleopas and his companion found the eleven discussing in
private, and saying, that the Lord is
risen, and has been seen by Simon: and of Simon, the evangelist has not
mentioned either where, or when, or how this took place. It was during these intervening
days that those events also took place, and they occurred in Galilee, as Matthew has recorded [Mt 28:16]. Let us
glorify, therefore, Him Who, being God the Word, became man for our sakes;
Who suffered willingly in the flesh, and arose from the dead, and abolished
corruption; Who was taken up, and hereafter shall come with great glory to
judge the living and the dead, and to give to every one according to his
deeds. By Whom and with Whom, to God the Father be glory and power, with the
Spirit, for ever and ever. Amen!
|
LITURGY
By
Fr. Richard Demetrius Andrews (2010)
http://stgeorgegoc.org/pastors-corner/fr-ricks-sermons/liturgy-is-our-emmaus-road-5th-eothinon
There
are several meaningful aspects to this passage, but the angle I would like to
take today, is that Christ’s encounter with the two disciples on the road to
Emmaus is a model for the Divine Liturgy. The Liturgy consists of two main
parts: 1) the Liturgy of the Word; and 2) the Liturgy of the Eucharist. The
first aspect of the Divine Liturgy experience is the Synaxis, or gathering of the faithful. In other words, we
assemble together and then wait for the Shepherd to appear. In the prayer of
the Third Antiphon the priest says, ‘Lord, You have given us grace to offer
these common prayers with one heart. You have promised to grant the requests
of two or three gathered in Your name.’ In today’s Eothinon, we see the two disciples, Cleopas and Luke (according
to most Church Fathers), together. It says that Jesus Himself drew near and went with them. This is a very
important point, because we may often think of Liturgy and Church as the
place we go to, to get something, like when we go to McDonalds, or to the
grocery store. We express this when we arrive at any time of our choosing, as
opposed to gathering at the appropriate time, and then waiting. We are called
to wait for the Lord. Christ will draw near to us. He cannot be called, or
summoned, or controlled by us. This is underlined by the fact that the two
disciples did not know Jesus, even
when He was walking right there, with them. In addition, Christ addresses
Cleopas and Luke as foolish ones
and slow of heart. This is because
they wanted the Messiah on their own terms. How do we gain a correct
understanding of who Jesus Christ is? Notice how the Lord did not abandon or
condemn the two disciples after admonishing them. Rather, it says, And beginning at Moses and all the
Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning
Himself. In other words, Jesus teaches the disciples. The Liturgy of the
Word, the first part of the Divine Liturgy, focuses on the didactic, teaching ministry of the
Church. At the Small Entrance the Gospel Book is brought into the midst of
the assembly. Then a passage from one of St. Paul’s epistles is read, followed by a
pericope from one of the gospels. The correct understanding and application
of the lessons in the readings is expounded to us by the bishop or priest, in
the sermon or homily. It appears, however, that Cleopas and Luke still did
not recognize Jesus even after teaching them the scriptures. For it says, Now it came to pass, as He sat at the
table with them, that He took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to
them. Then their eyes were opened and they knew Him; and He vanished from
their sight. Here, we see the nascent form of the second part of the
Divine Liturgy, the Liturgy of the Eucharist, in which the bishop or priest
brings the offering of bread and wine in procession at the Great Entrance and
places them on the heavenly altar, before God’s throne. Subsequently, we pray
that God consecrate the offering to become His Body and Blood, as the
celebrant blesses breaks and gives us the bread of Holy Communion.
Ironically, it says that after the disciples’ eyes were opened and they knew
Christ, He vanished from their sight.
This is a difficult verse, but one interpretation is much like the one we referred
to earlier: That Jesus comes and goes, appears and disappears, as He wills,
not as we will, or wish, or want. We are called to gather, be ready and wait
for the Lord. The end of today’s passage may help us understand: right after
Christ vanishes we read, And they said
to one another, ‘Did not our heart burn within us while He talked with us on
the road, and while He opened the Scriptures to us?’ Hopefully, at the
end of the Liturgy, our hearts are burning, too. In other words, we feel the
energy and excitement of communing with our Creator. We also feel the peace
and tranquility of being steadied by our Savior. How often does the devil
seek to prevent us from attending and participating in the Divine Liturgy? He
poisons our hearts and minds with all sorts of thoughts and excuses, to avoid
the Liturgy of the Word and of the Eucharist. He may even put real obstacles
in our path, through a series of mishaps, misfortunes and mistakes. Even if
we do make it to Church, Satan may still attack us, to distract us and prevent
us from experiencing God’s grace. Yet, if we persevere to the end, all these
problems fade away, consumed in the burning love of God’s fiery presence. Finally,
this points us to the Liturgy after the Liturgy. Liturgy comes from two Greek words meaning ‘the work of the
people’: divine worship is hard work. Prayer is not easy. Once the Divine
Liturgy is complete, we have other work to do. When Cleopas and Luke become
aware of the burning desire within their hearts, they do not hold onto it for
themselves. It says, So they rose up
that very hour and returned to Jerusalem,
and found the eleven and those who were with them gathered together, saying,
‘The Lord is risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!’ And they related about
the things that had happened on the road, and how He was known to them in the
breaking of bread. We must also talk up the Liturgy of the Word and the
Liturgy of the Eucharist, because the Divine Liturgy is our road to Emmaus,
where we meet the risen Christ. Amen!
|
This insert is a
gift from our Byzantine
School. We invite you to join us on the last Thursday
of each month at 6 pm, as we explore the selection of liturgy “specials” for
each week, and other issues related to the liturgical services of our Church.
Next mtg – 2/25/16! Please consult the Sunday Bulletin for our regular
announcements, or contact Tasos, ioanniam@yahoo.com or (937)232-9665.
|
Dear Eugenia and Polychronius,
To add further to the discussion on St. Kassiana, I am contributing the
following translation and personal thoughts.
Here is an excerpt translated from *A Historical Survey of the Hymnographers
& Hymnography of the Greek Church*, by the renowned hagiologist and church
historian Archbishop Philaret (Gumilevsky) of Chernigov (St. Petersburg:
Tuzov Press, 1902), pp. 272-275:
Kassia, Kassiana, Eikasia. In manner of life a pious nun; by education, a
learned woman; by birth, a noble virgin. She lived at the beginning of the
9th century, during the reign of Emperor Theophilus and his successor.
Kodinus, describing the antiquities of Constantinople, mentions the
monastery of Eikasia, which was founded by this virgin nun. ³The Monastery
of Eikasia,² he writes, ³was built by the virgin Eikasia, a pious nun,
beautiful of face and of mind.² Zonaras describes the circumstances which
led to Cassia¹s forsaking the world and building the monastery.
³Theophilus,² he writes, ³intending to choose a consort for himself,
summoned eleven beautiful virgins, among whom was the virgin Kassia, who
surpassed the others in beauty, and was as learned as she was nobly born.
Theophilus examined them, holding in his hand a golden apple which he would
give to the one who pleased him most. When he came to Eikasia he said,
marveling at her beauty: ŒAll that is evil hath come from a woman.¹
Eikasia, meekly, her cheeks blushing red with chastity, replied: ŒBut from a
woman all that is more sublime hath come.¹ Defeated by the words of the
virgin, Theophilus walked away and gave the golden apple to Theodora, a
native of Paphlagonia. Not having gained a royal marriage, Eikasia
established the monastery which bears her name, in which she lived for
herself and for the Lord. Excelling in her education, she wrote letters in
which there is no trace of pedantry or pleasantry. Thus did she reach the
end of her life, having betrothed herself to the heavenly King instead of an
earthly king, and having inherited the heavenly kingdom instead of an
earthly kingdom.² Leo Grammaticus records the same incident in his history
of Theophilus.
Kodinus says that during the reigns of Theophilus and his son, Michael,
Kassia composed many canons, stichera and other works, which are quite
marvelous. The same is said by the early 11th century anonymous author who
describes events of the past.
In the services of the Church we no longer see canons ascribed to Kassia,
except for one canon only, that of Great Saturday, which, however, was
reworked by Mark, Bishop of Otranto. This is what Theodore Prodromos writes
of the latter circumstance in his explanation of the canon of Great
Saturday: ³Through Ode V, this canon is the work of Mark, Bishop of Otranto;
but Odes VI through IX are by the great hymnographer Cosmas [of Maiuma];
furthermore, as we know from unwritten tradition, long before [Mark of
Otranto] a certain wise and chaste virgin, Kassia, was the composer of these
hymns, i.e. Odes I through V, i.e. she completed the canon. Later men who
edited the canons, considering it improper to attach to the hymns of a woman
odes of that ascetic Cosmas, commissioned Mark to compose troparia, while
retaining the former irmoi. This tradition is quite plausible. For Mark
did not incorporate the initial letters of the irmoi in his acrostic,
although to do so would have been to his advantage. For the initial letter
Œkappa¹ of the irmos Œkymati thalasses¹ [ŒVolnoyu morskoyu¹] and the letter
Œsigma¹ of the next irmos, ŒSe ton epi ydatOn¹ [ŒTebe na vodakh¹] are taken
from the acrostic; but he, setting the irmoi aside as the work of another
and not of himself, wrote the troparia from Œkappa¹ ŒKyrie Thee mou¹
[ŒGospodi Bozhe moi¹], and from Œsigma¹ ŒSymbola tes taphes sou¹ [ŒThe
tokens of Thy burial¹].² It is hence evident that the canon (i.e, through
Ode V) and the irmoi are not the work of Mark. Moreover, one can see this
from the fact that the words ³but we like the maidens² are included in the
irmos of Ode I. That the subject of this verse is a maiden clearly
indicates that the ode belongs not to a man, but to a woman. Since there
were two choirs during the exodus of the Israelites who originally sang this
ode--one consisting of men, the other of women--she, leaving aside the choir
of men, since she is a woman, said, ³we sing like the maidens². Yea, and
the very acrostic of the canon is dual, and, so to say, like twin-peaked
Parnassus. For the canon of Great Saturday was once a tetradion [a four-ode
hymnic composition]: its acrostic was comprised of only part of an iamb,
i.e., ³prosabbaton the, sabbaton melpO mega²--²The pre-Saturday. I hymn the
Great Saturday.² Half of its iamb applies to Great Friday, i.e. the
pre-Saturday, and the rest applies to Saturday, i.e. I hymn the Great
Saturday. But when the canon was continued and a full canon was made out of
the tetradion, the acrostic was also extended, and instead of the incomplete
iamb a complete one was made, i.e. ³kai simeron de sabbaton melpO mega². In
the Slavonic Triodion, one reads in the superscription of the canon: ³The
canon of Great Saturday, from Ode I to Ode VI, is the work of Mark, Bishop
of Hydrous. The irmoi are the work of a certain woman named Cassia. The
Odes from VI to the end are the work of kyr Cosmas.² Thus, in our present
canon of the work of Cassia only the irmoi remain.
As regards other canons, following Prodromos we must admit that it is
probable that certain portions of them, as is the case with the canon of
Great Saturday, are retained in our present canons, undetected by later
readers.
Among the stichera of Cassia, we find the following in the divine services:
1) for the Nativity of Christ, ³When Augustus reigned alone upon the
earth...²; 2) on Great and Holy Wednesday, ³O Lord, the woman who had fallen
into many sins...²; 3) feast of the martyrs Gurius, Salmonas & Habib,
November 15th (not attributed in the Slavonic Menaion, but attributed in the
Greek) ³Edessa rejoiceth...²; feast of the Nativity of the Forerunner, June
24th (³Today is fulfilled the saying of Isaiah...²; and for the feast of the
martyrs Eustratius & companions, December 13th (Let us hymn and piously
praise the God-bearing martyrs...²).
Having said that Kassia composed many stichera, Kodinus adds: ³such are
those of the harlot and the ointment, for all of these belong to her.² The
words of Kodinus indicate that he knew of many stichera written by Kassia
for the penitent woman, and not merely the one which has come down to us.
As regards the worth of the stichera reliably attributed to Kassia, one
must admit that the first two [above] truly deserve our admiration: as much
as the former is solemn and triumphal, so much is the latter full of a
profound sense of contrition. In the latter, Kassia has quite faithfully
expressed the feelings which filled the soul of the penitent sinful woman
who washed the Savior¹s feet with tears; to express such feelings of one who
greatly loved the Lord, Who was rejected by others, Kassia had to sense in
her own soul the fullness of bitter contrition over the corruption of our
soul, she herself had to be filled with that trusting love for the Savior of
sinners, for which men condemned both the sinful woman and the Savior of
sinners. ³Accept my fountains of tears. O Thou Who pourest forth the
waters from the clouds of the sea, bend Thine ear to the sighs of my heart;
O Thou who bowed down the heavens in Thine ineffable abasement, permit me to
kiss and wipe with the hairs of my head Thine all-pure feet, the noise
whereof Eve heard at noonday, and hid herself in fear. My sins are
many...but who can fathom the depths of Thy judgments? O Savior of souls,
my Savior, Who hast infinite mercy, reject me not, thy handmaid.² One must
say that there are not many who are capable of such profound contrition.
The entry on Kassia in *The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium* also includes
the information that Kassiane is identical to Kassia and Eikasia: ³KASSIA,
also Kassiane, Eikasia, and other forms of the name, poet....² The entry
cites an article by E. Catafygiotu Topping, which appeared in the "Greek
Orthodox Theological Review", Vol. 26 (1981), pp. 201-209, which someone
may
have easy access to, and may contain more information of interest to our
group.
The only Greek-language Church calendar of the saints I have in my library,
the *Agioreitikos Epitrapezios Imerodeiktis, Etous 1977*, by the Monk
Dorotheos of the Skete of Xenophontos (published for Mount Athos in
Thessalonica), confirms the date of commemoration for St. Kassiane as 7
September (O.S.): ³Kassianes tes poietrias,...osia.² (The commemoration of
Kassiana the poetess,...monastic saint.)
Some years ago, I was able to consult St. Justin (Popovich¹s) Lives of the
Saints (in Serbian) concerning this saint. When I am able, I will do so
again. If memory serves, he also confirms the sanctity of St. Kassiana and
the date of her commemoration.
As to the variable forms of the name, it is my opinion the Kassia (a name
quite possibly derived from a plant mentioned in the Old Testament--Ex. 30:
24; Ps. 44: 8; Eze. 27: 19) was the saint¹s lay name, under which she earned
her reputation for erudition and as a poetess. Since it is a common
practice in convents to give nuns male names with female endings (e.g., the
abbess of our Mount of Olives Convent is named Moisea), it may well have
been that at her tonsure Cassia was given a female form of Cassian (i.e.,
Cassiana), after St. John Cassian.
I hope to contribute more on this topic as time and access to sources
permit.
Sincerely,
Isaac Lambertsen. Dear Eugenia and Polychronius,
To add further to the discussion on St. Kassiana, I am contributing the
following translation and personal thoughts.
Here is an excerpt translated from *A Historical Survey of the Hymnographers
& Hymnography of the Greek Church*, by the renowned hagiologist and church
historian Archbishop Philaret (Gumilevsky) of Chernigov (St. Petersburg:
Tuzov Press, 1902), pp. 272-275:
Kassia, Kassiana, Eikasia. In manner of life a pious nun; by education, a
learned woman; by birth, a noble virgin. She lived at the beginning of the
9th century, during the reign of Emperor Theophilus and his successor.
Kodinus, describing the antiquities of Constantinople, mentions the
monastery of Eikasia, which was founded by this virgin nun. ³The Monastery
of Eikasia,² he writes, ³was built by the virgin Eikasia, a pious nun,
beautiful of face and of mind.² Zonaras describes the circumstances which
led to Cassia¹s forsaking the world and building the monastery.
³Theophilus,² he writes, ³intending to choose a consort for himself,
summoned eleven beautiful virgins, among whom was the virgin Kassia, who
surpassed the others in beauty, and was as learned as she was nobly born.
Theophilus examined them, holding in his hand a golden apple which he would
give to the one who pleased him most. When he came to Eikasia he said,
marveling at her beauty: ŒAll that is evil hath come from a woman.¹
Eikasia, meekly, her cheeks blushing red with chastity, replied: ŒBut from a
woman all that is more sublime hath come.¹ Defeated by the words of the
virgin, Theophilus walked away and gave the golden apple to Theodora, a
native of Paphlagonia. Not having gained a royal marriage, Eikasia
established the monastery which bears her name, in which she lived for
herself and for the Lord. Excelling in her education, she wrote letters in
which there is no trace of pedantry or pleasantry. Thus did she reach the
end of her life, having betrothed herself to the heavenly King instead of an
earthly king, and having inherited the heavenly kingdom instead of an
earthly kingdom.² Leo Grammaticus records the same incident in his history
of Theophilus.
Kodinus says that during the reigns of Theophilus and his son, Michael,
Kassia composed many canons, stichera and other works, which are quite
marvelous. The same is said by the early 11th century anonymous author who
describes events of the past.
In the services of the Church we no longer see canons ascribed to Kassia,
except for one canon only, that of Great Saturday, which, however, was
reworked by Mark, Bishop of Otranto. This is what Theodore Prodromos writes
of the latter circumstance in his explanation of the canon of Great
Saturday: ³Through Ode V, this canon is the work of Mark, Bishop of Otranto;
but Odes VI through IX are by the great hymnographer Cosmas [of Maiuma];
furthermore, as we know from unwritten tradition, long before [Mark of
Otranto] a certain wise and chaste virgin, Kassia, was the composer of these
hymns, i.e. Odes I through V, i.e. she completed the canon. Later men who
edited the canons, considering it improper to attach to the hymns of a woman
odes of that ascetic Cosmas, commissioned Mark to compose troparia, while
retaining the former irmoi. This tradition is quite plausible. For Mark
did not incorporate the initial letters of the irmoi in his acrostic,
although to do so would have been to his advantage. For the initial letter
Œkappa¹ of the irmos Œkymati thalasses¹ [ŒVolnoyu morskoyu¹] and the letter
Œsigma¹ of the next irmos, ŒSe ton epi ydatOn¹ [ŒTebe na vodakh¹] are taken
from the acrostic; but he, setting the irmoi aside as the work of another
and not of himself, wrote the troparia from Œkappa¹ ŒKyrie Thee mou¹
[ŒGospodi Bozhe moi¹], and from Œsigma¹ ŒSymbola tes taphes sou¹ [ŒThe
tokens of Thy burial¹].² It is hence evident that the canon (i.e, through
Ode V) and the irmoi are not the work of Mark. Moreover, one can see this
from the fact that the words ³but we like the maidens² are included in the
irmos of Ode I. That the subject of this verse is a maiden clearly
indicates that the ode belongs not to a man, but to a woman. Since there
were two choirs during the exodus of the Israelites who originally sang this
ode--one consisting of men, the other of women--she, leaving aside the choir
of men, since she is a woman, said, ³we sing like the maidens². Yea, and
the very acrostic of the canon is dual, and, so to say, like twin-peaked
Parnassus. For the canon of Great Saturday was once a tetradion [a four-ode
hymnic composition]: its acrostic was comprised of only part of an iamb,
i.e., ³prosabbaton the, sabbaton melpO mega²--²The pre-Saturday. I hymn the
Great Saturday.² Half of its iamb applies to Great Friday, i.e. the
pre-Saturday, and the rest applies to Saturday, i.e. I hymn the Great
Saturday. But when the canon was continued and a full canon was made out of
the tetradion, the acrostic was also extended, and instead of the incomplete
iamb a complete one was made, i.e. ³kai simeron de sabbaton melpO mega². In
the Slavonic Triodion, one reads in the superscription of the canon: ³The
canon of Great Saturday, from Ode I to Ode VI, is the work of Mark, Bishop
of Hydrous. The irmoi are the work of a certain woman named Cassia. The
Odes from VI to the end are the work of kyr Cosmas.² Thus, in our present
canon of the work of Cassia only the irmoi remain.
As regards other canons, following Prodromos we must admit that it is
probable that certain portions of them, as is the case with the canon of
Great Saturday, are retained in our present canons, undetected by later
readers.
Among the stichera of Cassia, we find the following in the divine services:
1) for the Nativity of Christ, ³When Augustus reigned alone upon the
earth...²; 2) on Great and Holy Wednesday, ³O Lord, the woman who had fallen
into many sins...²; 3) feast of the martyrs Gurius, Salmonas & Habib,
November 15th (not attributed in the Slavonic Menaion, but attributed in the
Greek) ³Edessa rejoiceth...²; feast of the Nativity of the Forerunner, June
24th (³Today is fulfilled the saying of Isaiah...²; and for the feast of the
martyrs Eustratius & companions, December 13th (Let us hymn and piously
praise the God-bearing martyrs...²).
Having said that Kassia composed many stichera, Kodinus adds: ³such are
those of the harlot and the ointment, for all of these belong to her.² The
words of Kodinus indicate that he knew of many stichera written by Kassia
for the penitent woman, and not merely the one which has come down to us.
As regards the worth of the stichera reliably attributed to Kassia, one
must admit that the first two [above] truly deserve our admiration: as much
as the former is solemn and triumphal, so much is the latter full of a
profound sense of contrition. In the latter, Kassia has quite faithfully
expressed the feelings which filled the soul of the penitent sinful woman
who washed the Savior¹s feet with tears; to express such feelings of one who
greatly loved the Lord, Who was rejected by others, Kassia had to sense in
her own soul the fullness of bitter contrition over the corruption of our
soul, she herself had to be filled with that trusting love for the Savior of
sinners, for which men condemned both the sinful woman and the Savior of
sinners. ³Accept my fountains of tears. O Thou Who pourest forth the
waters from the clouds of the sea, bend Thine ear to the sighs of my heart;
O Thou who bowed down the heavens in Thine ineffable abasement, permit me to
kiss and wipe with the hairs of my head Thine all-pure feet, the noise
whereof Eve heard at noonday, and hid herself in fear. My sins are
many...but who can fathom the depths of Thy judgments? O Savior of souls,
my Savior, Who hast infinite mercy, reject me not, thy handmaid.² One must
say that there are not many who are capable of such profound contrition.
The entry on Kassia in *The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium* also includes
the information that Kassiane is identical to Kassia and Eikasia: ³KASSIA,
also Kassiane, Eikasia, and other forms of the name, poet....² The entry
cites an article by E. Catafygiotu Topping, which appeared in the "Greek
Orthodox Theological Review", Vol. 26 (1981), pp. 201-209, which someone
may
have easy access to, and may contain more information of interest to our
group.
The only Greek-language Church calendar of the saints I have in my library,
the *Agioreitikos Epitrapezios Imerodeiktis, Etous 1977*, by the Monk
Dorotheos of the Skete of Xenophontos (published for Mount Athos in
Thessalonica), confirms the date of commemoration for St. Kassiane as 7
September (O.S.): ³Kassianes tes poietrias,...osia.² (The commemoration of
Kassiana the poetess,...monastic saint.)
Some years ago, I was able to consult St. Justin (Popovich¹s) Lives of the
Saints (in Serbian) concerning this saint. When I am able, I will do so
again. If memory serves, he also confirms the sanctity of St. Kassiana and
the date of her commemoration.
As to the variable forms of the name, it is my opinion the Kassia (a name
quite possibly derived from a plant mentioned in the Old Testament--Ex. 30:
24; Ps. 44: 8; Eze. 27: 19) was the saint¹s lay name, under which she earned
her reputation for erudition and as a poetess. Since it is a common
practice in convents to give nuns male names with female endings (e.g., the
abbess of our Mount of Olives Convent is named Moisea), it may well have
been that at her tonsure Cassia was given a female form of Cassian (i.e.,
Cassiana), after St. John Cassian.
I hope to contribute more on this topic as time and access to sources
permit.
Sincerely,
Isaac Lambertsen.
No comments:
Post a Comment