Get Theodore the Stoudite the ordering of holiness Roman Cholij free all chapters

Download the full version of the ebook at ebookname.
com
Theodore the Stoudite the ordering of holiness

Roman Cholij
https://ebookname.com/product/theodore-the-stoudite-the-
ordering-of-holiness-roman-cholij/
OR CLICK BUTTON
DOWNLOAD EBOOK
Download more ebook instantly today at https://ebookname.com

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...
The Ordering of Time 1st Edition George Lucas
https://ebookname.com/product/the-ordering-of-time-1st-edition-george-
lucas/
ebookname.com
The Selected Letters of Theodore Roosevelt Theodore

Roosevelt
https://ebookname.com/product/the-selected-letters-of-theodore-
roosevelt-theodore-roosevelt/
ebookname.com
Victorian Biography Intellectuals and the Ordering of

Discourse David Amigoni
https://ebookname.com/product/victorian-biography-intellectuals-and-
the-ordering-of-discourse-david-amigoni/
ebookname.com
Alkaloids Secrets of Life Aklaloids Chemistry Biological

Significance Applications and Ecological Role 1st Edition
Tadeusz Aniszewski
https://ebookname.com/product/alkaloids-secrets-of-life-aklaloids-
chemistry-biological-significance-applications-and-ecological-
role-1st-edition-tadeusz-aniszewski/
ebookname.com
Ben Jonson A Life 1st Edition Ian Donaldson
https://ebookname.com/product/ben-jonson-a-life-1st-edition-ian-
donaldson/
ebookname.com
Machine Dreaming and Consciousness 1st Edition Edition J.

F. Pagel And Philip Kirshtein (Auth.)
https://ebookname.com/product/machine-dreaming-and-consciousness-1st-
edition-edition-j-f-pagel-and-philip-kirshtein-auth/
ebookname.com
Books on Early American History and Culture 1971 1980 An

Annotated Bibliography Raymond D. Irwin
https://ebookname.com/product/books-on-early-american-history-and-
culture-1971-1980-an-annotated-bibliography-raymond-d-irwin/
ebookname.com
Isaac Bashevis Singer A Life 1st Edition Janet Hadda
https://ebookname.com/product/isaac-bashevis-singer-a-life-1st-
edition-janet-hadda/
ebookname.com
THE LURE OF FASCISM IN WESTERN EUROPE 1st Edition Dietrich

Orlow
https://ebookname.com/product/the-lure-of-fascism-in-western-
europe-1st-edition-dietrich-orlow/
ebookname.com
Criminology Canadian edition Freda Adler
https://ebookname.com/product/criminology-canadian-edition-freda-
adler/
ebookname.com
Theodore the Stoudite: The Ordering of Holiness
Roman Cholij
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566976.001.0001
Published: 2009 Online ISBN: 9780191701993 Print ISBN: 9780199566976
FRONT MATTER
Copyright Page 
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566976.002.0004 Page iv
Published: May 2009
Subject: Early Christianity
p. iv
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With o ces in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan South Korea Poland Portugal
Singapore Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries
Published in the United States
by Oxford University Press Inc., New York
© Roman Cholij, 2002
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
Database right Oxford University Press (maker)

Reprinted 2007
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Kghts Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover
And you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
ISBN 978-0-19-924846-9
Roman Cholij
FRONT MATTER
Acknowledgements 
Published: May 2009
It gives me great pleasure to thank those who have been Instrumental in seeing this book to print. This work
started life as a doctoral dissertation at Oxford University where I spent a number of rewarding years as a
member of Christ Church. My gratitude Is thus rst expressed to all those who tutored me during my
student years as a postgraduate, but most particularly Dr Kallistos Ware who, with much patience, good
humour, and great learning, guided me through the uneven terrain of eastern Christian studies and to the
award of the M.Phil. and D.Phil. degrees.
Secondly, sincere thanks are due to those scholars from whose insightful and expert advice I pro ted much
in the preparation of this book, especially my examiners Professor Averil Cameron, Warden of Keble
College, Oxford, and Professor Andrew Louth of Durham University, Dr. Ken Parry, external reader, Dr
Joseph Munititz SJ of Campion Hall, Oxford, Professor John Behr, and Professor John Erickson, both of St.
Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, New York. Any defects in this book are due entirely to the author
and not to his guides and mentors!
My gratitude is directed next to those who sponsored my studies at Oxford University: Aid to the Church in
Need and the London Oratory (in particular to the late Very Revd Michael Napier). Bishop Basil Losten of the
Ukrainian Catholic Diocese of Stamford. Connecticut, USA, and to my mother Wiktoria. I am also indebted to
Campion Hall, Oxford, the Ponti cal Oriental Institute, Rome, and Bishop Michael Kuchmiak of the
Ukrainian Catholic Exarchate of Great Britain for the critical support I received in the nal stages of my
doctoral studies. Although my personal circumstances have changed since these years of study, I hope and
trust that this book will be some reward to my sponsors for their investment in me.
The writing of this study was the easy part! The real work lay in seeing it through to publication, which fell
on an outstanding editorial team at Oxford University Press. This team includes Hilary O’Shea, Jenny
Wagsla e. Enid Barker, and Lucy Qureshi, whom I thank for their highly professional work.
p. viii Finally, I wish to thank one special individual who has been a major inspiration and source of
encouragement and without whose patient insistence this book would not have seen the light of day—
Louise de Muscote, fellow member of Christ Church, linguist, and my wife. It is to her I dedicate this book.
Roman Cholij
Michaelmas 2001
Roman Cholij
FRONT MATTER
Abbreviations 
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566976.002.0007 Pages ix–x
Published: May 2009
AA.SS
Acta Sanctorum
AnBoll.
Analecta Bullandiana
BF
Byzantinische Forschungen
BHG
Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca
BMGS
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies
BZ
Byzantinische Zeitschrift
CCL
Corpus Christianorum. Series Lalina
CSCO
Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium
CSEL
Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum
CSHB
Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae
DOP
Dumbarton Oaks Papers
DS
Dictionnaire de spiritualité
DTC
Dictionnaire de théologie catholique
EEC
Encyclopaedia of the Early Church, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1992)
EH
Dionysios the Pseudo-Areopagite, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, ed. G. Heil and A. M. Ritter, Corpus Dionysiacum,
Patristiche Text und Studien, 36 (Berlin, 1991)
EL
Ephemerides Liturgicae
EO
Échos d’Orient
Ep.
Epistula
Ep.
Epitimia
GCS
Griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller
GOAR
J. Goar (ed.), Εὐχολόγιον sive Rituale Graecorum…, 2nd edn. (Venice, 1730)
JEH
Journal of Ecclesiastical History
Joannou
P.-P. Joannou, Fonti, 9, Discipline Générale Antique, (Grottaferrata/Rome, 1962–3)
JÖB
Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik (before 1969, Jahrhuch der Österreichischen byzantinischen
Gesellschhaft)
JTS
Journal of Theological Studies
MC
Theodore the Stoudite, Magna Catechesis. Cited according to Sancti Theodori Studitae Sermones Magnae
Catecheseos, ed. J. Cozza-Luzi, in A. Mai, Nova Patrum Bibliotheca (Rome, 1888, 1905)
MGH
Monumenta Germaniae historica
p. x NPB
Nova Patrum Bibliotheca
OCA
Orientalia Christiana Analecta
OCP
Orientalia Christiana Periodica
ODB
Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium
PC
Theodore the Stoudite, Parva Catechesis. Cited according to:
μικρὰ κατήχησις, ed. N. Skretta, Ὀρθόδοξος Κυψέλη (Thessalonica, 1984), ii
PG
Patrologiae cursus campletus. Series graeca, ed. J. P. Migne
PK
Papadopoulos-Kerameus ed. of
Ἀρχαιογραϕικὴς Ἐπιτροπη̑ς (St Petersburg, 1904).
PL
Patrologiae cursus compuletus. Series latina, ed. J. P. Migne
RB
Regulae Brevius Tractatae (RB)
REB
Revue des études byzantines
RF
Regulae Fusius Tractatae
SC
Sources chrétiennes
SVThQ
Saint Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly
TC
Tvorenija Catechesis, unedited Catechesis in Russian translation, in Tvorenija prepodobnago otsa nashego i
ispovidnyka Feodorja Studitja v russkom perevod, 2 vols. (St Petersburg, 1907).TCI: Book I of the Great
Catecheses; TCIII: Book III of the Catecheses (in vol. ii)
TDNT
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
TM
Travaux et mémoires
TU
Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur
TWNT
Theologishen Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament
Viz. Vrem.
Vizantijskij vremennik
Roman Cholij
FRONT MATTER
Introduction 
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566976.002.0008 Pages xi–xvi
Published: May 2009
This book started life as a doctoral dissertation from the University of Oxford, Faculty of Theology, defended
in late 1996. Signi cant scholarship since that time has been incorporated into the text of this present work
and noted in the bibliography.
Theodore the Stoudite has in recent times become increasingly popular as a subject for study. This is partly
due to advances in ninth-century Byzantine historical scholarship in general, and partly to progress made
in critical editions of texts ascribed to Theodore.
Up until the latter part of the nineteenth century, and the beginning of the twentieth, comparatively little
was known about Theodore or his writings outside restricted monastic circles. This changed when a handful
of patristic scholars (especially French, German, and Russian) decided to take an interest. Biographies
appeared (one in Fnglish by Alice Gardner) together with some monographs on Theodore’s monastic
activities, and critical editions of some parts of his catechetical writings were produced.
Many studies have since appeared on various aspects of Theodore’s life. Advances with critical editions of
minor literary works were made in the 1960s but the bulk of the writings most consulted by scholars still
remained unedited or in an unsatisfactory state. Only recently, in 1992, did a critical edition of his most
important writings—his letters—appear. This work, by the German Byzantinist George Fatouros (Theodori
Studitae Episiulae, Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae, 31 (Berlin, 1992)), which also includes painstaking
annotations and indices, has since stimulated even more quality writing on the Stoudite and has borne its
rst major fruit in a biographical study by Thomas Pratsch: Theodoros Studites (759–826)—zwishen Dogma
und Pragma (Frankfurt, 1998).
Theodore the Stoudite has always been important to historians who have interested themselves in ninth-
century Byzantium because of the great deal of rst-hand accounts of events that he provides. This is
particularly true of the period of the second phase of iconoclasm in which Theodore lived. No history book
p. xii on Byzantium, as a consequence, neglects mention of the Stoudite. Nor has there been a lack of
important studies, especially within the last forty years, on second iconoclasm and image theory, and the
Byzantine ecclesiastical issues of Theodore’s time.
Important, too, have been the studies on the monastic writings and monastic life of Theodore (to which
Julien Leroy OSB contributed so much).
Despite all of this, as the Byzantinist Rosemary Morris commented in 1995, ‘it is surprising that there is no
full-length modern study of Theodore the Stoudite’ (Monks and Laymen in Byzantium 843–1118 (Cambridge,
1995), 14 n. 13). Thomas Pratsch has now lled part of the gap, but his study, although meticulously
documented, has an intentionally narrow focus. It is based almost entirely on the letters, and although it
admirably unravels and expertly expounds on the major political events of Theodore’s life, it does not
interest itself in the religious or intellectual part of Theodore’s life and activities. A full-length biographical
study requires both an accurate account of the political and ecclesiastical issues of the time (the domain of
historians such as Pratsch) and an understanding of the theological and spiritual traditions within which
Theodore worked (the domain of the theologian). In other words, an inclusive full-length biography of
Theodore the Stoudite is an interdisciplinary task.
Another di culty in producing a comprehensive full-length biography on Theodore revolves around the
source material. Part of the edited source material, the Catecheses, is di cult to access. Also, a new critical
edition of the entire corpus of Catecheses is much needed. Furthermore, in the past (with the exception,
perhaps, of the pioneering Russian scholars) the source material has rarely been studied in its entirety.
Historians have tended to neglect the Catecheses, which due to their preaching tone have been of less
immediate interest to them, whereas theological specialists such as Leroy and Hausherr have devoted
themselves almost exclusively to the study of the Catecheses, being more interested in the religious mind of
Theodore and less in his political activities, which are re ected in the letters. A full study of the life and
thought of Theodore requires familiarity with and an understanding of both these major sources. Besides,
much theology is contained in the letters and interesting insights into daily Byzantine life and its concerns,
and Theodore’s own life and concerns, is found in the Catecheses.
p. xiii There were two reasons for the choice of subject of this work. The rst, as Rosemary Morris had correctly
noted, wan that there was no modern full-length study of Theodore, and therefore biography, that
accurately set the context for the study of particular issues, or for his theological thought. Many tine
specialized studies had been produced since the writing of the early biographies (which are still useful
today), and there had been many advances in Byzantine historical sciences, but these had not been pulled
together to update the story of Theodore. The work by Pratsch leaves many important areas untouched.
The intention of the rst part of this book is to o er an updated and comprehensive account of the life and
work of Theodore to those who might have little familiarity with this intriguing gure and who would prefer
to become more familiar through reading about it in English. Whilst it uses a wide base of secondary
sources, this account also draws directly on the primary sources. As a result, certain details are given which
are not found in any of the published literature. Also, sections 1.10.1 and 1.10.2, which give an explanation
and analysis of the Small and Great Catecheses. will hopefully prove to be helpful to the more specialized
reader struggling to make sense of these particular sources.
The second reason for this study was the keen awareness that explanations of Theodore’s involvement in
the ecclesiastical issues of the day found in the literature often fail to give adequate weight to the Stoudite’s
theological outlook, and the place this had within wider Byzantine church society. In other words, historians
have not maximized the resources of theology in their e ort adequately to portray this churchman.
To understand Theodore’s involvement in the controversies of his time requires some understanding of
what it meant for him to be a Christian, a member of the church, and a member of the Byzantine Christian
society. Theodore was, after all, rst and foremost a monastic reformer. This point is often forgotten by
historians, and its implications ignored. A monk was, to Theodore, simply a ‘true Christian’. The theological
principles behind his monastic reform, therefore, were the same principles which should direct the whole of
Christian society. Thus, as a help to other Byzantinists, and as a theological research project, I had wanted
to analyse carefully Theodore’s theology of the Christian life.
p. xiv Theodore’s theology is underpinned by the truism that the end or purpose of this life is the attainment of
holiness and salvation. At the same time there is a way or manner by which this end should be attained, a
manner which is not haphazard or spontaneous, but ordered. Hence the subtitle; The Ordering of Holiness.
The order follows on the principles of the Gospel and its interpretation by the Fathers of the church, by their
sole authority or in synodal pronouncements. And the church has its spiritual traditions and internal life. It
exercises its ministry through preaching the Word and through its rites of sancti ation. Hence the division
of this book into Part 2, Principles of Order, and Part 3, Principles of Holiness.
It was Patrick Henry’s excellent doctoral dissertation, Theodore of Studios: Byzantine Churchman (Yale
University, 1969), which unfortunately was never published as a whole work, and which analysed the
question of church and authority, that inspired the content and structure of Part II. The account given of the
theological grounds for obedience and Theodore’s theological understanding of authority are a necessary
complement, and at times corrective, to Henry’s work. Chapter 2 is entitled Obedience and Authority. The
main issues studied and discussed by Henry are re-evaluated in the light of this theological analysis. To
complete Part II, and for the sake of comprehensiveness, a fresh look is taken at the much-worked subject
of church and state (Ch. 3, Church and Emperor). This argues that Theodore cannot be taken as a
representative of a non-Byzantine ideal of church autonomy.
Part III. Principles of Holiness, consists of three chapters. Chapter 4, Rites of Sancti cation, is an essay in
historical theology which o ers some new insights to theologians and students of theology on matters of
eastern liturgy and sacraments during a period of history that has kept many of its secrets. What scant and
scattered information Theodore gives in his writings concerning ritual practices, and their probable
meaning, is described. A fuller context for these rites is also given for the sake of those not specialized in
these elds.
The two principal rites of sancti cation, baptism and eucharist, are treated separately, together with the
subject of heresy, in Ch. 5. This is done out of convenience since the issue of the validity of heretical
sacraments, also examined, and which receives some discussion in Theodore’s writings, primarily a ects
these two rites.
p. xv Chapter 6. Saneti cation of Lay Person and Monk, is the culmination of all the previous chapters that
analyse the requirements for holiness. Although given some examination in Part II, greater attention is paid
in this chapter to the di erences in the lay and monastic vocations. It is argued that both share the same
fundamental Christian vocation based on baptism and that there are no grades of perfection in this identical
calling, only levels of di culty in living it out. According to Theodore, the monk is privileged—by the
protected society in which he lives and the absence of family and worldly cares—in having a more secure
path to God than the lay person. Seeing the monk as essentially a lay person living within monastery walls
does have implications for the Byzantinist. For monastic theology becomes, with appropriate nuances, the
theology of the laity.
If Theodore’s theology, or approach to Christianity, was shared by Christians at large in Byzantine society—
and it is argued that such seems to have been the case in the period dealt with—then a study of this theology
helps the Byzantinist to understand better the world-view of the Byzantine citizen. This being the cast,
Theodore’s Catecheses become just as important as his letters to the historian seeking to understand (as far
as this is possible to a twentieth-century researcher) ninth-century Byzantine society.
In this work the whole corpus of Theodore’s writings was studied, with the exception of the hymns that are
attributed to him only by tradition. The corpus includes over 550 letters and 390 Catecheses, some twenty
other works, and a lew by later authors but attributed to Theodore. The Catecheses are cited by a system
explained in Part I.
A Textual Note
With regard to translations, where these already existed they were used, often with some changes being
made. Patrick Henry, in particular, is the source for several citations from, the letters, which have been
excellently translated, taken from his thesis or articles. They are found mostly in Part II. I have not noted
this in the text, but these occur when his work or his material are being discussed. The great majority of
translations, however, which includes all the Catecheses, are my own. I have been selective in citing the
p. xvi Greek original, especially with long translations, so as not to overload the footnotes which are already
very substantial. Transliterating Greek names seems always to be a problem in English. By and large I have
tried to give them in their Greek, rather than Latin, forms. Examples would be ‘Nikephoros’ in place of
‘Nicephorus’, or ’Athanasios’ in place of ‘Athanasius’ (unless this occurs in a title or citation from another
author). Although this manner of spelling is less familiar to English readers, it corresponds more to what is
accepted by Byzantinists. The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium has been my main guide. Occasionally, when
the name thus transliterated would appear very odd, I have left it in a more familiar form. References to
works by or attributed to, Theodore published in volume 99 of Migne, Series Graeca, are usually cited with a
Latin title. This has been the convention in most of the secondary literature and a convention I have chosen
to maintain. The only exceptions I have made (in keeping with a newer convention) are the Hypotyposis and
Epitimia (spelt with Latin characters) in place of Constitutiones Studitanae and Poenae Monasteriales
respectively. Biblical quotations are usually taken from the Revised Standard Version (unless from an
author’s citation).
Roman Cholij
CHAPTER
1 Life and Times of Theodore the Stoudite 

Roman Cholij
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566976.003.0001 Pages 2–78

Published: May 2009
Abstract
This chapter presents an account of the life and times of Theodore the Stoudite to provide an insight
into his faith and, in particular, his monastic beliefs in hopes of seeing his public actions from a
broader perspective and in their proper context. Born in Constantinople in 759 during the reign of
iconoclast Emperor Constantine V, Theodore received his theological training informally from his
general education and later from private study and formal guided tuition as a monk within the
monastery. Theodore's family established the Sakkoudion monastery, which had a distinctive ethos
and regime that attracted many new candidates. The emperor, however, ordered the Sakkoudion
community dispersed after Theodore decided to break communion with the patriarch for his
complicity in what Theodore saw as an adulterous second marriage of Constantine VI. When Augusta
Irene took over the throne, Theodore was o ered the old monastery of Stoudios, which became the
main monastery of the confederation, with Theodore and his followers becoming known as Stoudites.
As a reformer of respected authority and the head of a large group of monks, Theodore became very
in uential, such that he found himself imprisoned or exiled during the second phase of the moechian
controversy and the revival of iconoclasm. At the age of 66, Theodore died while at a monastery at
Prinkipo. In the years following his death, his writings, including his Cathecheses, letters, homilies,
and liturgical works, were assembled into a corpus. His stature within monastic circles as a leader,
teacher, and defender of Gospel values was enormous. As a monastic reformer, his contribution to the
Byzantine Church was unique and long-lasting.
Keywords: Theodore the Stoudite, iconoclasm, Sakkoudion monastery, education, theological training,
reformer, Stoudites, Cathecheses
1.1 Introduction
Theodore the Stoudite (759–826) led anything but an uneventful, uninteresting, and unproductive life. As
1
abbot of the monastery of Stoudios he became a major personality in church and court circles in early
ninth-century Byzantium and is today commemorated in both East and West as a saintly member of the
2
heavenly court, Yet. in his time he defended and propagated views that were decidedly at odds with those of
other revered men, such as his contemporaries Patriarchs Tarasios (784–806) and Nikephoros (806–151).
He was exiled three times by the emperor for his refusal to compromise on what for him were major matters
of church doctrine—issues relating to Emperor Constantine VI’s ‘adulterous’ marriage and to Leo V’s
revival of iconoclasm—but equally he could in uence in better times, decisions of imperial state policy. His
exceptional monastic leadership resulted in his being recognized by subsequent generations as one of the
greatest organizers of coeno-bitic monasticism in the East. He was compared by his supporters to Saint
3
Basil the Great.
p. 4 A by-product of his reform was that his Stoudite monastic confederation played a role in the cultural and
humanistic revival of the ninth century, this being associated especially with the use of minuscule or cursive
4
script in the copying of texts in the monastic scriptoria.
Theodore’s leadership, expressed in protest action and extensive writings, over those who like him were
willing to su er persecution and exile avowedly for the sake of the integrity of Orthodox faith and morals,
also earned him various other eulogistic epithets. His biographer, Michael the Monk, describes Theodore as
5
a ‘Moses’, and Theodore’s successor and closest disciple, Naukratios, writes that he was the ‘mouth-piece
of the Church’, ‘glory of priests’, ‘column of faith’, ‘sun of the Orthodox Faith’, ‘oecumenical teacher’,
6
‘fountain of dogmas’, ‘tuneful lyre of the Spirit’. Anastasius Bibliothecarius (d. 878), a near contemporary
in the Western church and an early translator of one of Theodore’s sermons into Latin, described him as a
7
‘vir valde mirabilis’. Subsequent translators and commentators have likewise been unsparing in their
praise. Theodore had on at least one occasion compared his own epistolary activity in exile to that of St
8
Cyprian of Carthage, little knowing that one day he would be compared to this great Western saint in other
9
p. 5 ways too. To those who appreciated the Roman Catholic signi cance of his life, Theodore was ‘ dei et
10
morum christianorum defensor intrepidus’
Listing Theodore’s admirers and cataloguing the virtues attributed to him, however, should not leave the
impression that Theodore has been spared criticism or negative appraisal. Authors have not been lacking
who interpret his religious zeal in upholding and propagating positions that even his co-religionists
disagreed with as fanatical, arrogant, and intolerant. Confessional allegiance has in the past coloured
judgement on Theodore, rendering the chasm between saint or sectarian unbridgeable by scholarship
11
alone. Some modern scholars, such as Karlin-Hayter, try to cut through religious sympathies and focus on
Theodore’s interventions seen in sociopolitical context and from a personal motive perspective. She
concludes, not without providing her reasons, that Theodore is little more than a ‘byzantine politician in a
12
monk’s gown’. Peter Hatlie and Thomas Fratsch are more cautious in their judgements and acknowledge
13
the complexities of both Theodore as a man and the controversies of his day: ‘Whatever the exact
characterization, an all too common picture of Theodore has been that of a watchful and slightly prying
guardian who, inspired by a strong sense of righteousness, was quick to call his monks into action whenever
14
he was convinced that gross abuses in the church—and to some extent state-a airs—had occurred.’
My hope in this work is to provide an insight into Theodore’s faith, and in particular, into his monastic
p. 6 beliefs, such that Theodore’s public actions can be placed in a much broader perspective and evaluated
more contextually.
1.1.1 Note on Prior Scholarship and Historical Sources
The bibliography on Theodore the Stoudite and the Stoudios monastery is very extensive, especially if other
15
more general works covering the same historical period are to be included. The classic and most
comprehensive monograph on Theodore and his monks, published in 1913–14, is that by the Russian church
histo rian Alexander Pavlovich Dobroklonskij. This is still a useful source, albeit dated and di cult to use
16
(even apart from the Russian language). Around the turn of the century considerable interest in Theodore
17
had been taken by German and French as well as other Russian scholars and a valuable, if somewhat
18
popular, study also appeared in English. Since the early years of this century numerous more specialized
p. 7 studies have appeared on many aspects of Theodore’s career and interests, These will he referred to.
when occasion arises, in the pages that are to follow and in the bibliography.
As for the primaiy sources of the life and career of Theodore, we are fortunate in having much rst-hand
19
material from the pen of Theodore himself especially his letters. Particularly valuable for Theodore’s early
20 21
life are the funeral encomia to his mother Theoktista and to his uncle Plato. An ancient biography,
22
written by the Sloudite monk Michael, and known as Vita B, was written some forty-two years or more
23
after Theodore’s death. It was written according to the norms of ninth-century hagiography (already a
sophisticated literary genre), meaning that historical details have to be treated with caution until
substantiated by more reliable sources. Jt was also based on the funeral encomia, especially on the one to
24
Plato.
Four main variants of the Vita of Theodore are in fact known to scholars, but Vita B is recognized as being the
25
most ancient, and of the four is the most reliable. The others are designated in modern literature as Vita
26 27 28
p. 8 A, C, and D. A more reliable source than the Vita for details of the place of death of Theodore is a
panegyric by an unknown Stoudite monk commemorating an anniversary of the recent transfer (translalio)
of the mortal remains of Theodore, and his brother Archbishop Joseph, from the island of Prinkipo to the
29
Stoudios monastery in Constantinople on 26 January 844. It was thus composed somewhat earlier than the
30
Vita. A letter circulated to the monks by Naukratios. Theodore’s successor, soon after the latter’s death,
31
also corrects details given in the Vita.
Other Vitae of saints may also provide valuable information. Hagiography in general is designed for
edi cation, not information, with the miraculous usually having a prominent place. Chronology is also
often handled arti cially in order to give greater scope for the activities of the hero with bias and
misinformation not infrequently colouring the account. None the less, a discerning reading can reveal
32
details of events, attitudes, and underlying moods that are of great value to the historian. Helpful in
reconstructing the history of Theodore’s time are the Vitae of Patriarch Tarasios, Patriarch Nikephoros,
33
Nikolaos Stoudite, Niketas, Leo. and several others.
Of prime importance for the historical context of Theodore’s life and activity are the accounts of the
34
p. 9 Byzantine chroniclers. Theophanes the Confessor (who ends his account in 813) and the Scriptor
35
Incertus (who covers the years 812–16) provide us with information contemporary to the occurrence of
these events. The main narrative sources for the next years come from the tenth century, with the exception
of the world chronicle of George the Monk (Hamartolos), written either at the end of the reign of Michael III
(842–67) or soon after, and ending in the year 842. This particular chronicle is regarded as being of little
36
historical value. The tenth-century chronicles use sources for the period after Theophanes ends his
account, which are now lost. The anonymous author of the rst part of the chronicle commissioned by
37
Constantine VII, Theophanes Continuatus or Scriptores post Theophanem, covered the period 813–67. The
chronicle of Genesios also covers these same years and is closely related to the account of the continuator of
38
Theophanes. Both accounts, which are iconophile biased and seemingly dependent on the Life of Patriach
39
Nikephoros, need to be read with, discernment. Symeon the Logothete and the so-called Pseudo-Symeon
40
are the other two main tenth-century sources that provide information for our period. All these sources,
41
together with some other even later chronicles, provide us with su cient secure information to place
42
Theodore the Stoudite within a proper historical context.
p. 10
1.2 The Historical Context of Theodoreʼs First Years
Theodore was born in Constantinople in 759 during the reign of the iconoclast Emperor Constantine V (741–
75). The city of Constantinople had barely recovered from the great plague of 747 resulting in a serious
underpopulation that was partially o set by the resettlement of groups from Greece and the Aegean islands.
This left a population of perhaps 50,000 people, although by 780 it may have grown to about 100,000. With
unrepaired damage from a serious earthquake in 740, many buildings and monuments lay abandoned or
43
ruined. Municipal reconstruction was sure but gradual.
Constantinople was the capital of an insecure Empire, much reduced in size from its heyday under Justinian
or even Herakleios. At the time of Constantine V, North Africa, much of Spain, Egypt, Palestine, and Syria
were in the hands of the Muslim Arabs who constantly posed a serious threat to the existing southern and
eastern borders of Byzantium. However, with the transfer of the caliphate from Damascus to Baghdad in 750
(following on the overthrow of the Umayyad dynasty by the Abassids) the danger to the south was
somewhat reduced, but bi-annual incursions from the east were the least to be expected. The Christian
communities of the ancient patriarchates of Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch were under Islamic rule and
their leaders, who resided outside their traditional sees, were severely hampered in exercising their
traditional roles both within their own territories and within the greater orbit of Christendom. They no
longer commanded the traditional respect of bygone centuries. The Empire was also threatened from the
north. Constantine’s main preoccupation for the security of the Empire was in fact the threat from the
Bulgars in the north Balkans, a warrior race originally of Turkish origin. To these most of his military
campaigns, in which he was generally successful, were directed. The wars would be continued by his
successors.
p. 11 Eight years before Theodore was born, a major setback for Constantine occurred in the West which was to
have dramatic consequences. The exarchate of Ravenna fell into the hands of the Lombards and was never to
be returned to the Empire, Not only did this mean that Byzantine control over north and central Italy ceased
to exist, but the integrity of the duchy of Rome was now threatened. As a result Pope Stephen II entered into
negotiations with King Pepin of the Prankish kingdom, having been disappointed at the lack of e ective
response from Constantine. This alliance, which would be renewed by subsequent popes, eventually led to
the creation of the Papal States and to secession from the Empire of the East. It also led to the creation of a
44
Western Holy Roman Empire. Tensions with Constantinople had been acute under Constantine’s father,
Emperor Leo III (717–41), who had tried to impose a more e cient tax system on lands under the direct
control of the papacy as yet part of the Empire, but who had been hindered by Pope Gregory II (715–30)
because of the resulting loss of his patrimonies. East Illyricum, Sicily and Calabria had also been wrested
from the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Rome and placed under that of Constantinople, a situation never
45
accepted by the Roman ponti s. Rome had also protested at the iconoclasm of Leo III, the forced
resignation of Patriarch Germanos (730), and the imperial order to remove icons from Roman churches. A
Roman Synod of 731 o cially condemned Byzantine iconoclasm thus bringing the Churches into schism.
Despite this, the popes still continued to show political loyalty to the East, expecting Constantinople to ful l
its obligations towards the Old Rome. When this failed to materialize a new realignment of powers was
formed, with the duchy of Rome becoming a protectorate of the Ranks. The crowning of Charlemagne as
emperor by Pope Leo III in 800 sealed the political break between Rome and Constantinople.
Despite Constantine’s achievements in his military campaigns, structural works in the city of
46
p. 12 Constantinople, e cient military administration of the Empire and creation of the mobile tagmata
47
forces, iconophile historians record his memory in the blackest of terms. Neither he nor his father are
given credit for having restored imperial authority nor for having put an end to the political crisis from
48
previous ine ectual reigns that had nearly brought down the Byzantine empire. Constantine, like Leo III,
was an iconoclast. Therefore he was a bad emperor. Theophanes begins the account of his reign thus:
Constantine’s actions were impiously carried out from the tenth indiction—the rst year of his
reign—to the fourteenth indiction—the year of his end. For he was a totally destructive
bloodsucking wild beast who used his power tyrannically and illegally, rst, he sided against our
God and Saviour Jesus Christ, His altogether immaculate Mother, and all the Saints. He was
deceived by wizardry, licentiousness, blood sacri ces of horses, dung and urine. E eminacy and
summoning demons pleased him, and ever since he was a boy he had partaken in absolutely every
49
sort of soul-destroving practice.
In this year [741] Constantine. the persecutor of the laws handed down from the fathers, became
50
Emperor by divine judgment because of the multitude of our sins.
51
Theophanes also calls him the Forerunner of the Antichrist. Iconophile literature, furthermore, gave
52
Constantine nicknames by which he would be derisively remembered: Kaballinos (‘groom’) and especially
53
Kopronymos (‘dung-named’) for supposedly having opened his bowels during his baptism.
54
The literature on Byzantine iconoclasm (726–87; 815–43) is very extensive. There is no one accepted
55
p. 13 explanation for its origins, theories being almost as numerous as Byzantinists. Constantine’s
56
iconoclasm, which he inherited from his father, is particularly notorious because of its violence and
57
divisive e ects on society. He himself seems to have been a talented, if misguided, theologian,
systematizing and raising the theological discourse from the level of biblical injunction against idolatry to
58
that of Chrislology. But unlike his father, who seems to have acted with some caution and showed no
particular theological pretensions. Constantine went much further in treating the matter as if icon
veneration were an aberration from the true doctrine of the Apostolic Church. Those who venerated icons or
defended them, or who even kept iconophile literature, would be treated not only as enemies of the state but
59
also as heretics. But for this he needed the endorsement of the ecclesiastical authorities. This he received
60
from the carefully planned Synod of Hieria (754). In its canons and anathemas the Council forbade the
production of images, their veneration, erection in churches or private homes, or concealment. Bishops,
p. 14 presbyters. and deacons who disregarded this ordinance were to be deposed and recalcitrant monks or
laymen were to be anathematized and subjected to prosecution under the imperial laws as foes of God’s
61
commandments and the teaching of the Fathers.
The resolutions of the Council, which gave itself an ecumenical title, were soon put into e ect. Constantine
required the army and the populace of Constantinople to take an oath that they would not venerate images.
Monks and monasteries were also particularly targeted. Hegoumenoi received new novices under pain of
62
death. There was to be no communion with monks nor were they even to be greeted. They may have been
the most resistant to the new doctrine and policies, but the emperor seems also to have had his own motives
63
for a personal crusade against them. He referred to them publicly as ‘unmentionables’ (ἀμνημόνϵυτοι) and to
64
monasteries in general as ‘the order of darkness’. A propaganda campaign, attacking the very raison d’être
65
of monasticism, was initiated.
Despite the impression given by the sources, iconoclasm was essentially a Constantinopolitan phenomenon,
other parts of the Empire being a ected to the extent of their proximity to the capital and to the extent of
66
the e orts of individual agents to put into e ect the emperor’s policies. Furthermore, only from the 760s
67
is iconoclastic violence towards monks rst reliably recorded. A graphic account is given by Theophanes of
the cruel determination of the strategos of the Thracesian theme, Michael Lachanodrakon, to implement his
68
p. 15 master’s will, resulting in the extermination of the monastic order in the theme, Of the named
69
iconophile martyrs (of which there are surprisingly few), the most prominent was Stephen the Younger,
70
monk of the monastery of St Auxentios in Bithynia and martyred, according to Theophanes, in 765. The
Vita of St Stephen, was composed c.806 by Stephen the Deacon and in uenced many authors who
71
subsequently wrote on iconoclasm.
1.3 TheodoreʼS Family Background and Education
Born in 759, Theodore the Sloudile was about 5 years of age when Stephen was martyred and when
Constantine’s iconoclasm and anti-monastic violence was at its height. His family was wealthy and socially
well-connected: Theodole, a cousin on his mother’s side, would be crowned Augusta in 795 and become the
72
second wife to Emperor Constantine VI. Although reputedly iconophile and from Constantinople, his
immediate family does not seem to have been adversely a ected by Constantine’s polities, which seems to
73
suggest that there wore ways of conscientious coexistence with the emperor’s religious regime.
74
Theodore’s father. Photeinos. was a highly placed o cial of the imperial treasury and appears to have
75
been learned, even beyond what would be expected of a civil servant. Precious little is known of his blood
76
p. 16 relations. The Vita informs us that he was a pious man and had lived in religious continence with his
wife for some ve years before their mutual decision, in 781, to embrace union with God in the life of
77 78
monasticism. He may subsequently have been ordained a deacon. Photeinos is rarely mentioned in
79
Theodore’s writings, and it has been suggested that he died sometime between 797 and 800.
Photeinos was married to Theoktista. She gures prominently as a major in uence in Theodore’s young life
80
and as a comfort in the rst real trials of his monastic life.
Theoktista was from a senatorial family but had endured a di cult childhood as a result of having lost her
81
parents, Sergios and Euphemia, along with other relatives, in the great plague of 747. She seems to have
received minimal education as a child and taught herself to read only after she had married. A woman of
genuine and strong piety, Theodore tells us she had quickly learned to commit the whole Fsalter to memory,
82
which aided her in the religious upbringing of her children. Theoktista is said to have had a forceful
personality and, with it, a quick temper which was a cause of morti cation for her. She was remembered as
being a true mistress of the household, being strict but also considerate with children and servants alike.
Theodore was greatly devoted to his mother, and was especially grateful for his religious upbringing which
83
made him think of her as a ‘double’ mother (διμήτηρ)—in esh and in spirit. She became an exemplary
84
p. 17 religious, but was still a mother to him in his su ering. Theodore corresponded with her and composed
85
a eulogy after she died when in her 50s (between the years 797 and 800).
Theodore was the eldest of four children. His brother Joseph, born around 762, was destined to become an
86
outstanding hymnographer and archbishop of Thessalonica (around the end of 806), and to share in many
of the trials of Theodore’s later life. He died on 15 July 832, thereafter being numbered among the saints in
87
glory by the Eastern church. Very little is known of the life of his sister, whose name is not even recorded,
88
except that she died young. The Benjamin of the family, Euthymios, also had a short life, being born
between 769 and 774 in Constantinople. Theodore records a pathetic scene of how the young Euthymios
89
despaired at being separated from his mother when the family split up to follow the monastic calling. With
time he seems to have settled into his new life, for he was still with his brother seventeen years later,
Theodore writes to him in March or April 797 at the beginning of the moechian controversy encouraging
90
him to persevere and to be faithful whilst being held as an imperial prisoner. It is very probable that within
the next year Euthymios tragically drowned in the Marmara Sea, when he would have been not far from 30
years of age. Together with nine other monks from Sakkoudion he had set sail from Bithynia towards the
capital city (perhaps to set up a new foundation) but had been caught in a violent storm. Theodore speaks of
this in a catechetical oration of the period. There was a happy ending to the story: Euthymios had appeared
91
in dreams to four monks of the community to assure them that all the deceased had found salvation.
p. 18 Apart from his mother, the major in uence on Theodore’s young life was his uncle Plato. Theoktista’s
92
brother, who was to become Theodore’s spiritual father (‘my father who gave spiritual birth to me’) and
93
mentor for many a year. Born in 735, Plato was raised by his uncle, a high-ranking nancial o cial, who
taught him the profession of notary and was instrumental in helping him become a zygostates of the
94
treasury. In 759, around the time when Theodore was born, he decided to abandon the world, giving away
95
his accumulated wealth ;to, among others, his two sisters. one of whom was Theoktista) and took the
96
monastic habit at the monastery of Symboloi (or Symbola) in the region of Mt. Olympos in Bithynia. He
returned to Constantinople at least brie y in the early reign of Leo IV (773–80), where his reputation as an
exceptional spiritual teacher and guide was such that he was o ered, alternatively, the abbacy of a
97
monastery within the capital and the bishopric of Nikomedia. both of which he declined. He was present at
98
the Second Council of Nicaea (787) where he was part of the moderate party of invited hegoumenoi,
99
supporting Patriarch Tarasios in his attempt to create unity in a very divided Church. He experienced
p. 19 imprisonment and exile for his uncompromising stand towards the second marriage of Constantine VI in
797, and again from 809–11. He died on 4 April 814, being commemorated as a saint soon afterwards by the
100
Sloudite community.
As the son of a court o cial, Theodore would have been given the education appropriate for his position in
101
society and as one expected to follow in his father’s footsteps. At the age of 7 Theodore began his
102
elementary education, προπαιδϵία, under the supervision of an instructor or γραμματιστής. This consisted of
103
learning to read aloud, to count, and to acquire the rudiments of grammar. Following this came his
secondary or general education, ἐγκύκλιος παίδϵυσις, which when completed would have consisted of a cycle of
literary studies (equivalent to the medieval trivium), namely grammar, dialectic, and rhetoric, and a cycle of
scienti c studies (quadrivium), namely arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy. On completion
104
Theodore would have been around 18 and ready for higher studies. At this time in Constantinople there is
no known organized educational institution that Theodore could have been sent to for his education, and it
is to be presumed that all his learning was directed by private tutors.
The Vita makes no mention of the quadrivium, presumably because speci c allusion to such ‘profane’
p. 20 knowledge would have been of little interest to monastic readers. In his writings, However, allusions to
numbers (their perfection and mystical signi cance) and to geometrical gures do indicate some familiarity
105
with arithmetic and geometry. Likewise, his ability to write hymns presupposes knowledge of the rules of
106 107
music and he shows some knowledge of the scienti c causes of natural phenomena —all of which point
to study of the quadrkium. Of more importance, none the less, was the trivium.
108
Vita B states that Theodore learnt grammar, dialectic (‘which specialists call philosophy’), and rhetoric.
109
Grammar also included study of pagan poetry. Some of the authors Theodore studied are alluded to in his
writings, especially in his letters addressed to the educated. These include Homer, Euripides, and
Demosthenes (who were important authors during most of antiquity), Aristophanes, Aeschylus. Diogenes,
110
Plato, and Aristotle. Theodore’s command of grammar, and especially dialectic, were to be of great
111
importance in his polemic with the iconoclasts. His expositions of iconophile theology demanded a keen
understanding of Aristotelian dialectic, the detailed arguments for which could have been taken from a
112
p. 21 number of sources. What is today known as the Dialectica of john Damascene (the rst part of the Fons
113
Scientiae), may have been one such source.
The Greek Menaion for 11 November and the short Synaxarion Vita both claim that Theodore had achieved
114
the ‘highest level of knowledge’. Vita A, besides, claims that he learnt from, philosophers the whole of
115
philosophy ethics, dogmatics, dialectic, and demonstration. Such claims, however, seem to have been
116
dictated more by the canons of the hagiographical genre than by the evidence available. Indeed, scholars
have not been slow to point out that Theodore is not particularly distinguished by the rhetorical skill,
classical background, or literary sophistication expected of one who has supposedly achieved the heights of
117
learning. A curious tale is told in the Vita which illustrates how some of Theodore’s younger
contemporaries shared these modern criticisms. Some disciples of Archbishop Gregory Asbestas of Syracuse
had visited a certain man in Sardinia who was fond of Theodore’s verses, especially those which were
p. 22 composed for the Lenten Triodion, These disciples began to ridicule the poems and their author for not
having been composed according to the rules of art. The guest, who was easily impressed, thereupon
changed his own opinion about their literary merit. That same night the deceased Theodore appeared to his
118
faithless admirer, causing him to be whipped.
On the other hand, it is recognized that Theodore was a skilful wordsmith (as the great number of hapax
legomena in his works indicate) and that his literary prowess could be expressed in the right circumstances
119
with developed forms of Byzantine epistolography and high-style rhetoric.
As for his theological training, this would have been acquired, rst informally during the time of his general
education, and then from both private study and (presumably) formal guided tuition as a monk within the
monastery. During his formative years he would probably have been exposed to the Psalms as a text for
120
grammatical studies. He may well have been given the homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus as a model for
121 122
rhetorical composition, or at the veiy least been exposed to them in church. The vita informs us that he
123
had also, when in his teens, immersed himself in the reading and study of the lives of the saints. Certainly
in the early years of his life as a monk at the Sakkoudion monastery he studied the Scriptures and writings of
124
the fathers, in particular those of St Basil. Manuscripts containing the works of the Fathers, past
theologians, and spiritual writers were not particularly abundant during this period, and it was this,
together with the research activities of the defenders and opponents of icons, that made calligraphy and
125
p. 23 copying such an important monastic activity. Theodore’s uncle Plato is credited with having provided
126
monasteries with scores of personally copied books, and Theodore himself developed the skills of the
127
scribe, always taking a keen interest in books both for reading and for copying. Probably as a result of the
copying activity of his monastery Theodore could consider it to be in possession of an abundance of
128
books.
The lives of the saints, especially of the martyrs, were of great importance to Theodore as means of spiritual
129
growth for himself and his monks and as models of resistance during times of trial. The monastic fathers
130
also provided inspiration for his monastic reform. The writings of the Fathers, along with Scripture,
would have been the main sources for Theodore’s theological education. It is di cult to say to what extent
he had at hand the original works of those whom he quotes, and to what extent he quotes from secondary
131
sources, especially the orilegia that abounded during the iconoclast period. He had the works of Basil the
Great (and the Constitutions of Pseudo-Basil) at hand, and Irom the diversity and frequency of citations from
132
p. 24 Gregory of Nazianzus and john Chrysostom, who, besides were extremly popular authors at that time,
one can presume that he may well have consulted the full texts. His library also contained the Instructions of
Dorotheos of Gaza and Ladder of Divine Ascent of John Klimakos, both of which in uenced his expositions of
133
the monastic life. The immensely popular Spiritual Meadow of John Moschos was almost certainly in his
134
possession. It is quite possible that Theodore also had at hand the full texts of Dionysios the Pseudo-
135
Areopagite, given the in uence the writings of the latter had on Theodore. He seems to have had a copy of
136 137
the Panarion of Epiphanios, and had also read Gregory of Nyssa. Other authors such as Ignatios of
Antioch and Athanasios of Alexandria are quoted but it is impossible to know whether or not he had any of
138
their original works. The fact that he composed epigrams in their honour might suggest that he would
139
have wanted more than an anthology to represent their works.
Theodore’s writings illustrate that he was by temperament a practical person and a man of action rather
140
p. 25 than a speculative theologian. He admits as much when he confesses that he needs recourse to
authority when faced with questions of a speculative type, declaring
141
(‘I have no understanding of di cult conceptual matters) I. Hausherr, an authority on Theodore, believes
this confession to be more than an exercise in humility, intimating that even if Theodore had studied texts
of the Fathers in extenso, he seems to take little note of context and is interested only in the conclusions and
142
the way they are expressed. Certainly, this ‘lazy’ method of doing theology was commonplace during the
143
period. Theodore’s writings in defence of icon veneration such as the three Antirrhetici, on the contrary,
would prima facie seem to evidence critical and analytical powers and an ability to elaborate sophisticated
argumentation when required to do so. However, these arguments were taken from a stockpile of
Aristotelian arguments developed by iconophiles since the Second Council of Nicaea. To this author, they do
not evidence any original creative thinking. Theodore’s passion and his forte lay in the practical application
of Christian theory. He was a highly intelligent practical theologian.
144
Theodore was 16 when Emperor Constantine V died (775), after a rule of thirtv-four years. He was
succeeded bv Leo IV the son of the rst of Constantine’s three wives, and the designated heir. Although
brought up an iconoclast, Leo did not have the same concern with the theological doctrine of iconoclasm as
did his father, and he sought to court those of the ‘indi erent class’—those committed neither to icons nor
145
to their destruction—to build up popular support, He set about to reverse the anti-monastic policy of
146
p. 26 Constantine by appointing monks to a number of important episcopal sees, but stopped short of
147
actually encouraging the monastic vocation. He did not, however, end the o cial ban on icon
148
veneration. It was only alter his premature death in 7B0 that his iconodule wife, Irene, could think about
bringing about the full restoration of the monastic institution and the restoration of icons. During her rst
year in power, the Chronicle of Theophanes records, ‘The pious began to express themselves freely, the word
of God began to spread, those who sought salvation began to renounce the world without hindrance, the
glory of (rod began to be exalted, the monasteries began to be restored, and every good thing began to show
149
itself’.
Irene was from a prominent family in Athens and had been married to Leo by Constantine V in 769. Their
son Gonstantine VI was crowned junior emperor in 776, when he was but 5 years old. in order to exclude Leo
150
IV’s half-brothers (from Gonstantine V’s third marriage) from the throne. When Gonstantine IV’s father
151
died he was too young, at 10 years of age, to rule. His mother, the Augusta Irene, therefore ruled as regent.
It was around the end of Irene’s rst year as regent that Theodore’s whole family, encouraged by Plato, who
152
was then abbot of the Symboloi monastery, embraced the monastic life. Other wealthy and prominent
men and women, including Theophanes the Gonfessor, the editor of the Chronicle, also took advantage of
153
the change of political climate to do the same. According to the Vita, Theodore’s parents sold their house,
distributed gold to the poor, freed and rewarded their slaves, and then left with the rest of the family for the
154
p. 27 family estate called Boskylion, situated near Katabolos, in Bithynia, south of the Sea of Marmara. This
occurred in 781, when Theodore was 22, his cultivated life of piety making him well prepared for this move.
155
‘What a marvellous event! What a wonderful conversion!’ he would later recall with emotion.
156
At the little monastic centre which the family group set up in Boskytion Theodore was tonsured and
received the monastic habit from his uncle Plato, who in the meanwhile had sacri ced the semi-reclusive
157
life he had practised at the Symboloi monastery in order to devote himself to directing the group.
158
Theodore’s monastic sponsor (ἀνάδοχος) was none other than Theophanes the Confessor.
After some two years or more the group moved to another family property nearby where they founded the
159
Sakkoudion monastery with Plato as its abbot. This monastery would become the headquarters and
educational centre of the ‘Stoudite’ confederation before the move to the capital in 799. A church dedicated
to St John the Evangelist, and richly adorned with mosaics, was built here, which Theodore designed and
160 161
helped construct. One of Theodore’s epigrams commemorates the occasion.
p. 28 The monastery, with its distinctive ethos and regime, prospered and Flourished. attracting many new
162 163
candidates. It may even have been the bene ciary of imperial privileges. After seven years or more as a
lay monk Theodore received holy orders from the hands of Patriarch Tarasios (784–806), sometime after
164
the Council of 787. Plato remained the sole hegoumenos until 794 when, following a dangerous illness.
Theodore was elected co-abbot (at the age of 35). They remained co-abbots for ve years, until the move to
Constantinople, after which Plato took a formal vow of obedience to his nephew and protégé in order to
165
devote himself once again to a more reclusive monastic existence.
1.4 Theodoreʼs Monastic Reform
The years spent at Sakkoudion, among the most tranquil, of Theodore’s career, gave rise to a renewed rule
of monasticism that was to have a remarkable in uence not only on the Byzantine monasticism of
166
p. 29 Theodore’s day, but for centuries to come. Theodore’s role as a monastic reformer, expressed in the
167
form of the Stoudite Rule, is in fact as important for church history as his role as a defender of the icons.
Although the idea for the reform is credited by Theodore to Plato, it is generally acknowledged that the real
168
initiator was Theodore.
In the ninth century various forms of Byzantine monasticism existed: hermits who lived in isolation,
anchorites who maintained contacts with other ascetics or allowed groups of disciples to form around them,
169
and Koinobia, which in reality were like lavrai, with dependent anchorites. Mount Olympos was populated
170
by anchorites during this period, the most famous of whom, during Theodore’s time, being St loannikios.
According to Leroy, the supreme ideal inculcated in the monasteries of the time was not that proper to
171
coenobitic life, namely the life of renunciation or ἀποταγή, but ἡουχία, proper to contemplative life.
172
p. 30 Coenobitic life had, as a result, ‘un style assez spécial’. The task of reasserting the ideals proper to the
173
coenobite was taken on by Theodore, and it remained a constant concern. This concern was so much the
greater because precisely in those times, due to favourable political and economic conditions, many new
coenobitic foundations were being made. Theodore launches an attack on the hegoumenoi of some of these
174
monasteries in words that echo those of Gregory of Nazianzus. According to Ruggieri, Theodore has in
mind those who had founded monasteries, and appointed themselves hegoumenoi, for the sole purpose of
investing and increasing their own property. The nature of their estates would be juridically altered such
175
that as ‘monasteries’ they would enjoy the religious privileges for their development. These hegoumenoi,
Theodore laments, claim to have renounced the world, yet they take their worldly goods and servants with
them into the cloister. ‘Yesterday they knew nothing of monastic profession’, he further notes with irony,
176
‘today they are hegoumenoi.’ Monasticism was in a true state of decadence and needed a return to its
177
authentic sources.
Theodore conceived his reform as a simple return to the original spirit of coenobiticism, rather than as an
178
p. 31 updating and adaptation of the monastic institution as such. In practice it turned out to be ‘an
179
ingenious renovation of Byzantine monasticism, rather than a pure “return to the Fathers”’.
Early in his monastic career Theodore had brought to the attention of Plato that the then widespread
practice of breeding livestock, with all that it entailed, namely keeping domestics and trading, was quite
contrary to the authentic coenobitic spirit of poverty, A true monk had to live by the work of his own
180
hands. Theodore’s prescriptions on poverty, which were the expression of the total detachment required
of a monk, went as far as demanding that each week one’s clothes be exchanged for those that had been
181
worn by another. The quality of a monk’s clothes, according to Theodore, should be such that nobody;
seeing it lying in a public highway, would want to pick it up. If after three days it were still there, only then
182
would it be suitable for the monk.
Theodore’s monastic system was highly regimented. It had a hierarchy of o cers, beginning, after the
abbot, with the second-in-command, the Deuteros. These o cers were responsible for the discipline of the
183
monastery and had to be obeyed. All the monks, in fact, had a speci c o ce or ministry to ful l for the
bene t of the whole community Child members of the community would be under the tuition of nominated
184
p. 32 teachers. Young monks could very well nd themselves as apprentices to a senior craftsman. Several
185
crafts were practised at the monastery, making it take on the physiognomy of a medieval village.
Ministries listed by Theodore include those of the cook or baker, gardener, cattle-driver, sherman, hook-
maker, weaver, cobbler, tailor, and basket-maker. Some monks devoted themselves to the liner arts or to
186
more intellectual occupations. There were goldsmiths and bookbinders, parchment-makers (for
187 188 189
codices), painters or ζωγράϕοι (for the production of icons), hymnographers, and calligraphers.
Physical work was important not just as a means of self-support; it was an integral part of coenobitic
190
spirituality. Not just ϕιλϵργία, but πολυϵργία, was a virtue in the same way as obedience and humility.
191
Intellectual work was regarded as an exceptional occupation. Although the monasterY was indeed a centre
for learning, education or the pursuit of academic excellence was not an end in itself: ‘We did not leave the
world to enjoy pleasures, nor to be learned, or wise, or to be a calligrapher. We came here to be cleansed of
192
p. 33 sin, to learn the fear of God and to humble ourselves to the point of death.’ None the less, a good
education in the doctrine of icons, for example, was something Theodore expected of all his monks once
193
icon theology became an urgent issue. He approved of his monks being erudite, and even took personal
pleasure in helping with their education. But he also warned them of the dangers of pride through
194 195
knowledge. Wisdom did not come through book-knowledge. In an early Catechesis he makes this very
clear:
At the tribunal of Christ it will he of no avail being well-learnt, well-spoken. knowing texts by
heart, being well-read. The Fathers in the Gerontikon were wise not because they knew much–
some were quite uneducated. You can have studied much and yet still be eternally condemned, You
can be saved even if vou cannot distinguish α from β. But if you search out your own will (τὸ οἰκϵι̑ον
θἐλημα) and have learnt everything and know everything, perhaps even the Egyptian alphabet, you
196
will still feel re consuming you for all eternity.
Theodore’s monks were expected to nourish their interior lives with the reading of Scripture and holy
197
books. These books would be borrowed from the monastic library and were to be cared for ‘as if received
198 199
from God’. They were to study and learn by heart the rules of monastic living.
200
The liturgical life of the monasters was its central activity. Work was always to take second place to
201
liturgy and psalmody. Stoudite liturgical usages owed much to Palestinian monasticism as well as to the
usages of the church of Constantinople. The typika that developed after Theodore’s reform, and which
202
p. 34 codi ed this new synthesis, dominated Byzantine monasteries until at least the twelfth century.
An important aspect of Theodore’s reform was the rein traduction of the ancient custom, which had largely
fallen into disuse, of providing a carefully prepared regular teaching or Catechesis for the whole
203
community, which he would pronounce, whenever possible, three times a week in the early morning. In
these Gatecheses he would ‘discuss and examine the commandments of the Lord, in order to excite,
204 205
persuade, threaten and enlighten’ his monks. Reviving this ancient tradition was extremely bene cial
‘because it is part of human nature to remember for a time and then to forget…. [the soul] is like the body
206
which needs food and drink again, and again’ . His re ections were the fruit of his reading of and
207
p. 35 meditation on Scripture and the writings of the Fathers, along with his own personal experience. These
Catecheses, which have been under-studied by scholars, provide valuable insights into the everyday life of a
208
ninth-century Byzantine monk and of contemporary customs and events.
Another key feature of Theodore’s spirituality is his emphasis on frequent ἐξαγόρϵυσις, the manifestation to
209
the abbot or spiritual father of ‘thoughts’. This observance was one of the πατροπαράδοτοι (traditions ofthe
Fathers) which, if strictly followed, would be a true imitation of the Fathers, and a true following of the
210
‘archetypal image of the apostolic life’ which they provide. The teaching and example of the Fathers wore
211
to be followed as literally as possible.
St Basil,
212
(‘Our Great Lawgiver, the Divine Basil’), who had enormous stature in the Greek Church, was Theodore’s
213
p. 36 most frequent cited authority, but a careful reading of his works shows that he was actually in uenced,
at least in matters of terminology and monastic organization, more by other Fathers. This is especially true
214 215
of Dorotheos of Gaza, to whom Theodore seems to be most indebted. In fact, it is because of Theodore’s
enthusiasm for Dorotheos. whose thought was in perfect harmony with that of Basil (although in more
developed form), that Dorotheos found his way into the canon of Orthodox Byzantine monastic
216 217
authorities. His disciple Dositheos is also mentioned often as an example to be followed. The in uence
218
of John Klimakos can also be readily detected in Theodore’s works, as well as. although to a lesser extent,
219 220
p. 37 John Cassian and Mark the Hermit. He was also familiar with the lives of the founders of
monasticism and often presented them, their immediate disciples, and other outstanding coenobitic saints
221 222
from Egypt and Palestine as models to he imitated by the Stoudites: Anthony and Pachomios,
223 224 225 226 227 228
Theodostos the Cenobiarch. Arsenios, Hilarion, Silvanos, Euthyniios, Sabas, and several
229
others whose names were to be found in the Gerontikon, and who were true witnesses to authentic
230
primitive monasticism. It was from these saints and their monasteries that Theodore’s monks drew
231 232
inspiration. Theodore’s epitimia were based on the practices of such monasteries.
p. 38
1.5 Beginning of Di iculties: The Moechian A air
While Theodore was laying the foundations of his reform in the quiet of Sakkoudion, life elsewhere was
anything but quiet, Tarasios the Protoasecretis had been elected patriarch in 784 and immediately set about
to restore unity within the church and to reconcile Constantinople with the other four patriarchates. With
Irene’s backing he set in motion the idea of an ecumenical Council which, apart from, condemning
iconoclasm and annulling the Synod of Hieria, would reconcile iconophile and iconoclast bishops.
Furthermore, it would deal with, the problem of simony which had infested the Byzantine church. When the
Council nally concluded its proceedings, in October 787, Tarasios had acquitted himself well on the rst
two counts, with the emperor and empress being acclaimed, as the ‘New Goiistantine and. New Helen’ for
233
their role in re-establishing Orthodoxy. His handing of the simoniacs (bishops who had performed
ordinations for money), however, was controversial and was to cause embarrassment to Theodore in later
234
years.
235
The piety of the Empress Irene, who had so skilfully neutralized initial opposition to the Council, may
p. 39 have been strong, but her political ambitions were much stronger. She had established herself as much
more than a regent for Constantine, the legitimate heir to the throne; she regarded herself as co-ruler.
Indeed, on the coinage issued at this time, where both she and her son are depicted, it is she and not her son
236
who holds the orb, the symbol of rule. When Constantine was still but a child, in 781, she had arranged a
political alliance with the Franks by agreeing for him, when he came of age, to marry Rotrud, the still-
younger daughter of Charlemagne. By early 787 the agreement had been broken. Constantine was 16 and
237
still a boy, but there was no constitutional reason why he should not rule without his mother, and still
less why he should not decide his own future. None the less, his mother arranged a bridal show and
238
compelled her son, in November 788, to take as wife the pretty Armenian Maria of Amnia. The marriage,
239
however, did not work. Although Maria bore Constantine two daughters, Irene and Euphrosyne, he seems
always to have resented his forced wedding and bided his time to do something about it. An army revolt in
November 790 established Constantine as sole ruler—his mother had steadfastly refused to step clown for
him, even though he was now 19—and he banished Irene to her palace of Eleutherios. Unfortunately for
him, though, he was indecisive in his rule and by January 792 he recalled Irene and recon rmed her as co-
ruler. The joint rule lasted till 797. It is no credit to Irene that she led a conspiracy against her son and
ordered that he be blinded in the very room of the Imperial Palace where she had given birth to him. This
240
occurred on 15 August 797. Irene became sole ruler. The hapless young Constantine died of his wounds.
It was during the second period of joint rule that the Sakkoudion monastery found itself in con ict with the
p. 40 throne. Constantine had fallen in love with one of his mother’s ladies-in-waiting, Theodote, who
happened to be a relative of Plato and Theodore. There were rumours that she was not the rst to be the
241
object of his extramarital a airs. A trumped-up charge of conspiring to poison him was the way
242
Constantine chose to secure a divorce. Since this also amounted to treason, the penalty for which, if
proved to be true, was execution, it may have been Tarasios who negotiated that instead Maria be sent to a
243 244
monastery to be tonsured. This in itself, if it were a free choice, would have been a ground for divorce.
245
Maria entered the monastery in January 795, never to return.
In August of the same year, forti ed by a moderate military success against the Arabs, Constantine
announced his betrothal to Theodote, crowned her Augusta (a title which Maria never enjoyed), and married
her at the suburban Palace of St Mamas forty days later in September. The patriarch himself had refused to
bless the union, knowing that the grounds for the divorce had been contrived and that a new union was
246
contrary to church law. He did permit, however, or at least tolerate, that it be blessed by the priest Joseph,
247
steward of St Sophia and abbot of the monastery of Kathara in Bithynia. Nor did the patriarch, for reasons
248
p. 41 of oikonomia, refuse communion to the emperor. The marriage caused some shock to the populace,
249
despite the unusually grand festivity that accompanied the wedding, a fact that his mother Irene used to
250
her advantage when planning his downfall.
Theodore, who at this time was completing his rst year as abbot, broke communion with the patriarch on
251
hearing of his complicity in what he considered to be an adulterous (‘moechian’) second marriage.
Emperor or not, Constantine was still subject to God’s laws which forbade putting away one’s legal wife to
252
take another. Although conscious of the gravity of breaking communion with the head of his church, his
decision, which soon reached the attention of the emperor himself, was fully consonant with his own life
project of combatting the decadence in which monastic life had fallen by insisting on the exact obedience of
253
p. 42 the laws of authentic coenobitic and, by implication, truly Christian life. The emperor tried various
means to break the Sakkoudion opposition, even, reportedly, hoping that a late summer holiday at the
nearby spring-baths of Prousa would bring Theodore and Plato to his presence, but all to no avail. In
February 797 Constantine decided on stronger measures, ordering the arrest of Plato, Theodore, and a few
other monks. The rest of the Sakkoudion community (numbering about a hundred) were dispersed. Plato
was conducted to Constantinople where he was incarcerated in the Imperial Palace. Theodore was ogged,
placed under arrest at the Kathara monastery (his jailer being none other than the steward Joseph), and
then sent into exile with his brother Joseph and a few others to Thessalonica, where they arrived on 25
254
March.
255
This exile, the rst of three, lasted ve months. Theodore’s rst extant letters date from this period.
Unbeknown to Theodore, Irene had been scheming since the time of the Prousa holiday to dethrone her
256 257
son. When she nally succeeded one of her rst acts as new sole ruler was to recall the Sakkoudites. The
steward Joseph was also deposed, and with this relations between the monks and the patriarch were
258
p. 43 restored. The debt of the monks to the empress is expressed by the total absence of any adverse
259
comment about her cruelty to her own child. Theodore’s sole extant letter to Irene, written in 801 alter
she had granted sweeping tax exemptions to the people of Constantinople, is, as Henry notes, ‘fulsome even
260
by Byzantine standards’. Theodore’s biographer describes Irene with the (conventional) epithet of
261
‘Christ-loving’ in the very same sentence as he describes Constantine’s loss of both eyes.
1.6 The Move to the Monastery of Stoudios
During the period immediately following re-establishment of monastic life at the Sakkoudion, the newly
262
acquired fame of Theodore drew many visitors and monastic candidates. According to Theodore’s
biographer, Patriarch Tarasios and the Empress Irene o ered Theodore and his monks the old monastery of
Stoudios on the south-west edge of Constantinople as an alternative to Sakkoudion because Arab incursions
263
made the area unsafe. Theodore moved to this monastery in 798/9. Perhaps an equally pressing reason
p. 44 for this move was the expanding number of monks and the desire to extend the Sakkoudion
264
confederation. At any rate, even after the move Sakkoudion had its monks (reassembled after the Arab
threat had passed?), remaining for a time the mother-house, and Theodore (and other brethren) commuted
265
between the two monasteries. Plato, in the meanwhile, had given up his co-abbacy in favour of his
266
energetic nephew.
267
The Stoudios monastery was founded by a certain Studius who was eastern consul in 454. Just before
assuming this position he had built a church dedicated to Saint John the Baptist (the ‘Forerunner’), perhaps
hoping to have placed there the relic of the head of the saint which had reportedly just been found at Emesa.
Not having succeeded in this he turned the church over to the Akoimetoi (‘sleepless’) monks, named
268
because of their uninterrupted choir services, who then made a foundation there (c460?). When
269
Theodore, himself the ‘imitator of the Forerunner’. arrived there were but a handful of monks, the result
270
of the persecutions of Conslanline V. Numbers grew rapidly, and before long Theodore could speak of
271 272
p. 45 having ‘more than three hundred brothers’. With time this number reached several hundred more.
Theodore’s skills as an administrator and organizer were tested to the full, and he continued to re ne the
273
details of his rule. The Stoudios monastery became the main monastery of the confederation, Theodore
274
himself and his followers becoming known as Stoudites. Their special heavenly patrons were the holy
275
Theotokos and ‘the Forerunner and the Theologian [i.e. Evangelist]’. The ruins of the monastery still
stand.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.

Get Theodore the Stoudite the ordering of holiness Roman Cholij free all chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Get Theodore the Stoudite the ordering of holiness Roman Cholij free all chapters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Get Theodore the Stoudite the ordering of holiness Roman Cholij free all chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download the full version of the ebook at ebookname.

Theodore the Stoudite the ordering of holiness

Download more ebook instantly today at https://ebookname.com

The Ordering of Time 1st Edition George Lucas

The Selected Letters of Theodore Roosevelt Theodore

Victorian Biography Intellectuals and the Ordering of

Alkaloids Secrets of Life Aklaloids Chemistry Biological

Machine Dreaming and Consciousness 1st Edition Edition J.

Books on Early American History and Culture 1971 1980 An

Isaac Bashevis Singer A Life 1st Edition Janet Hadda

THE LURE OF FASCISM IN WESTERN EUROPE 1st Edition Dietrich

Subject: Early Christianity

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.

It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,

and education by publishing worldwide in

Oxford New York

Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi

Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi

New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto

Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece

Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan South Korea Poland Portugal

Singapore Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam

Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press

in the UK and in certain other countries

Published in the United States

by Oxford University Press Inc., New York

© Roman Cholij, 2002

The moral rights of the author have been asserted

Database right Oxford University Press (maker)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,

without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,

or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate

reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction

Oxford University Press, at the address above

And you must impose this same condition on any acquirer

Subject: Early Christianity

Subject: Early Christianity

μικρὰ κατήχησις, ed. N. Skretta, Ὀρθόδοξος Κυψέλη (Thessalonica, 1984), ii

Ἀρχαιογραϕικὴς Ἐπιτροπη̑ς (St Petersburg, 1904).

Subject: Early Christianity

1 Life and Times of Theodore the Stoudite 

https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566976.003.0001 Pages 2–78

1.3 TheodoreʼS Family Background and Education

1.4 Theodoreʼs Monastic Reform

1.6 The Move to the Monastery of Stoudios

Section 3. Information about the Project

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

Section 4. Information about Donations to

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

Section 5. General Information About Project

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

You might also like