|

Personal
Experience Of The Holy Spirit According To The Greek Fathers
by
Kallistos Ware, Bishop of Diokleia
Paper presented at the European Pentecostal/Charismatic
Research Conference held in Prague on 10-14 September 1997
The Holy Spirit supplies
all things:
He causes prophecies to spring up,
He sanctifies priests,
To the uninitiated He taught wisdom,
The fishermen He turned into theologians.
He holds in unity the whole structure of the Church.
-- From an Orthodox
hymn on the Feast of Pentecost
Solovetsk and
Sunderland
Around the year 1890 an Anglican
traveller from Sunderland, the Revd Alexander Boddy, Vicar of All
Saints, Monkwearmouth, came as a pilgrim to the great Solovetsky
Monastery on the White Sea in the far north of Russia. One thing in
particular impressed him. It was a depiction of the descent of the
Holy Spirit at Pentecost:
'In the dome of the great
cathedral and the monastery of Solovetsk is a striking
representation of the first Christians gathered on the first
Whitsunday, looking up with glorified faces as the flaming baptism
of the Holy Ghost falls upon the infant Church. In the centre of the
foreground is the mother of our Lord also receiving the gift.'
1
When, nearly two decades later,
on the occasion of a famous visit from T.B. Barratt, there was an
outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Boddy's Sunderland parish on 31
August 1907, is it not likely that this 'striking representation' of
Pentecost that he had seen in Russia was still vividly present in
his memory? A formative event in the history of British
Pentecostalism turns out in this way to have, as one of its sources,
the iconography of an Orthodox monastic church.
This unexpected connection
between Orthodox Christianity and the origins of the
twentieth-century Pentecostal movement in Britain naturally leads us
to ask: can we discover other links, on a more specifically
theological level, between Orthodoxy and Pentecostalism? How far is
the Christian East sympathetic to a 'charismatic' understanding of
the spiritual life? At first sight it might appear that there is but
little affinity. Orthodoxy, it might be said, is liturgical and
hierarchic, whereas Pentecostalism is grounded upon the free and
spontaneous action of the Spirit; Orthodoxy appeals to Holy
Tradition, whereas Pentecostalism assigns primacy to personal
experience.
Anyone, however, who searches
more deeply will soon realize that stark contrasts of this kind are
one-sided and misleading. In actual fact, many of the Greek Fathers
insist with great emphasis upon the need for all baptized Christians
to attain in their own personal experience a direct and conscious
awareness of the Holy Spirit. No one can be a Christian at
second-hand: such is the frequently repeated teaching of the
Fathers. Holy Tradition does not signify merely the mechanical and
exterior acceptance of truths formulated in the distant past, but it
is in the words of the Russian theologian Vladimir Lossky - nothing
else than 'the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church2
here and now, at this present moment.
"The worst of all
heresies"
The vital significance of the
Holy Spirit for the Christian East will be apparent if we consider
one of the outstanding mystical authors of the Middle Byzantine
period, St. Symeon the New Theologian (949-1022). Each of us, he
maintains, is called by God to experience the indwelling presence of
the Spirit ' in a conscious and perceptible way', with what he
describes as the 'sensation of the heart'. It is not enough for us
to possess the Spirit merely in an implicit manner:
Do not say, It is
impossible to receive the Holy Spirit;
Do not say, It is possible to be saved without Him.
Do not say that one can possess Him without knowing it.
Do not say, God does not appear to us.
Do not say, People do not see the divine light,
Or else, It is impossible in these present times.
This is a thing never impossible, my friends,
But on the contrary altogether possible for those who wish.3
All the charismata
available to Christians in the apostolic age, Symeon is passionately
convinced, are equally available to Christians in our own day. To
suggest otherwise is for Symeon the worst of all possible heresies,
implying as it does that God has somehow deserted the Church. If the
Gifts of the Spirit are not as evident in the Christian community of
our own time as they are in the Book of Acts, there can be only one
reason for this: the weakness of our faith.
Symeon goes on to draw some
startling conclusions from this. When asked, for example, whether
lay monks, not ordained to the priesthood, have the power to 'bind
and loose' that is to say, to hear confessions and to pronounce
absolution he answers that there is one essential qualification, and
one only, which empowers a person to act as confessor and to bestow
forgiveness of sins; and that is the conscious awareness of the
indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. Monks who possess such
awareness, even though not in holy orders, may confer absolution
upon others; but anyone who lacks such awareness - even though he
may be bishop or patriarch - should not attempt to do this.4
Symeon speaks also of a 'second
baptism', the baptism of tears, which is conferred on those who are
'born from above' through the Holy Spirit:
'When someone suddenly lifts up
his gaze and contemplates the nature of existing things in a way
that he had never done before, then he is filled with amazement and
sheds spontaneous tears without any sense of anguish. These tears
purify him and wash him in a second baptism, that baptism of which
our Lord speaks in the Gospels when He says, 'if someone is not born
through water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of
heaven.' Again He says, 'If someone is not born from above' (cf.
John 3:5,7). When He said 'from above', He signified being born from
the Spirit.'
Symeon even seems to consider the
second baptism more important than the first; for he regards the
first baptism - sacramental baptism through water - as no more than
a type' or foreshadowing, whereas the second baptism is to be seen
as the truth' or full reality: 'The second baptism is no longer a
type of the truth, but it is the truth itself.' 5
How far is Symeon's standpoint
typical of Eastern Christendom? He himself warns his readers that he
is a 'frenzied' or 'manic zealot':6 are his remarks,
then, to be discounted as the ravings of an extremist? Let us
compare Symeon with three other writers, all of whom emphasize the
Holy Spirit, and all of whom are held in high esteem within the
Orthodox spiritual Tradition: with St. Mark the Monk (Plate fourth
or early fifth century), alias Mark the Hermit or Mark the Ascetic;
with the author or authors of the Homilies attributed to St.
Macarius of Egypt, but in fact of Syriac origin (late fourth
century); and with St. John Climacus (c.570-c.649), author of The
Ladder of Divine Ascent, a work which Orthodox monks are
supposed to reread each Lent.
Three Questions
In assessing how these different
writers understand baptism 'with the Holy Spirit and fire' (Luke
3:16), let us ask three more specific questions:
(i) Must the indwelling
presence of the Holy Spirit be always a conscious indwelling, or
can there be an indwelling of the Paraclete which is unconscious
yet nonetheless real?
(ii) What is the relationship
between sacramental baptism that is to say, water baptism - and
'baptism with the Holy Spirit and fire'? Is the 'second baptism'
in the Spirit to be seen as something radically new, conferring
a fresh grace distinct from that of water baptism, or is the
'second baptism' essentially the reaffirmation and fulfillment
of the first - not a fresh grace but the realization and
manifestation of the grace already received in our sacramental
baptism with water?
(iii) What outward
experiences - tongues, tears and the like - accompany and
express our attainment of a conscious awareness of the Spirit?
Any answers that we propose need
to be offered with diffidence and humility, for it is hard to
contain within verbal formulae the living dynamism of the Spirit.
Pointing as He does always to Christ and not to Himself (John 15:26;
16:13-14), He remains elusive and hidden so far as His own
personhood is concerned. He is 'everywhere present and filling all
things', to use the words of a familiar Orthodox prayer, but we do
not see His face. Symeon the New Theologian emphasizes this
mysterious character of the Paraclete in an Invocation to the
Holy Spirit which precedes the collection of his Hymns.
'Hidden mystery', he calls the Spirit, treasure without name ...
reality beyond all words ... person beyond all understanding'; and
he continues: 'Come, for Your name fills our hearts with longing and
is ever on our lips; yet who You are and what Your nature is, we
cannot say or know.' 7
Let us display, then, an
apophatic reticence in all that we assert concerning the free and
sovereign Spirit, who is like the wind that 'blows where it chooses:
and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes
from or where goes' (John 3:8).
St. Mark the Monk:
from 'secret' to 'active' presence
Little known in the West, Mark's
writings have always been popular in the Christian East. They are
included in the first volume of that classic collection of Orthodox
spiritual texts The Philokalia; in the Byzantine period there
was even a monastic adage, 'Sell everything and buy Mark'. Reacting
against the Messalians (an ascetic movement originating in
fourth-century Syria), Mark insists in trenchant terms upon the
completeness of baptism. He is speaking, of course, about
sacramental baptism:
'However far someone may advance
in faith, however great the good he has attained ... he never
discovers, nor can he ever discover, anything more than what he has
already received secretly through .baptism.... Christ, being perfect
God, has bestowed upon the baptized the perfect grace of the Spirit.
We for our part cannot possibly add to that grace, but it is
revealed and manifests itself increasingly, the more we fulfil the
commandments .... Whatever, then, we offer to Christ after our
regeneration was already hidden within us and came originally from
Him.'
Mark ends - for he is strongly
Pauline in spirit - with a quotation from Romans 11:35 - 36: 'Who
has first given a gift to God, so as to receive a gift in return?
For from Him... are all things.8
Baptism, according to the Monk's
teaching, confers upon us a total purification from all sin, both
original and personal; it liberates us from all 'slavery', restoring
the primal integrity of our free will as creatures formed in God's
image; and at the same time, through our immersion in the baptismal
font, Christ and Holy Spirit take up their abode within us, entering
into what Mark terms 'the innermost and uncontaminated chamber of
the heart', the innermost and untroubled shrine of the heart where
the winds of evil spirits so not blow'.9
At this point Mark makes a
crucial distinction, summed up in the two Greek adverbs m u s t i k
v V meaning 'mystically' or 'secretly', and e n e r g u v V ,
meaning 'actively'. Initially, at sacramental baptism -and Mark
seems to envisage primarily the situation of infant baptism - the
indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit is given to us 'secretly', in
such a way that we are not at first consciously aware of it. We only
become 'actively' conscious of this presence if we acquire a living
faith, expressed through our practice of the divine commandments. In
this way baptism plants within us a hidden seed of perfection, but
it rests with us - assisted always by God's grace - to make that
seed grow, so that it bears conscious and palpable fruit. While we
cannot "add* to the completeness of baptism, God nevertheless awaits
a response on our part; and if we fail to make that response,
although the Spirit will still continue to be present 'secretly' in
our heart, we shall not feel His presence 'actively' within us, nor
experience His fruits with full conscious awareness.
Such is Mark's map of the
Christian pilgrimage. Our starling-point is the presence of
baptismal grace within us 'secretly' and unconsciously; our
end-point is the revelation of that grace 'actively', with what he
terms 'full assurance (p l h r o j o r i a ) and sensation (a i s q
h s i V )'. As he states:
'Everyone baptized in the
Orthodox manner has received secretly the fullness of grace; but he
gains assurance of this grace only to the extent that he actively
observes the commandments.' 10
Our spiritual program can
therefore be summed up in the maxim 'Become what you are'. We are
already, from the moment of our sacramental baptism as infants ,
'Spirit-bearers' in an implicit and unconscious manner. Our aim is
therefore to acquire conscious experience - several times Mark uses
the Greek term p e i r a - of Him who already dwells within us:
'All these mysteries we have
received at our baptism, but we are not aware of them. When,
however, we condemn ourselves for our lack of faith, and sincerely
express our belief in Christ by performing all the commandments,
then we shall acquire experience within ourselves of all the things
that I have mentioned; and we shall confess that holy baptism is
indeed complete and that the grace of Christ is invisibly hidden
within us; but it awaits our obedience and our fulfilment of the
commandments.' 11
We are now in position to assess
the answers which Mark offers to our three questions.
(i) It is abundantly clear
that Mark allows for an indwelling presence of the Spirit that
is unconscious yet nonetheless real. Such, in his view, is
precisely the position of those who have been baptized in
infancy. They receive a genuine indwelling of the Paraclete, and
this 'secret' indwelling will never be altogether lost, however
careless or sinful their subsequent lives may be; as Mark puts
it, 'Grace never ceases to help us in a secret way. l2
At the same time Mark regards this 'secret' presence as no more
than an initial starting-point; and he clearly affirms that the
vocation of every baptised Christian without exception is to
advance from this to a conscious awareness of the Spirit.
(ii) In Mark's view, this
conscious awareness of Spirit experienced 'actively' and 'with
full assurance and sensation' is in no sense a new grace,
distinct from the grace conferred in water baptism, but it is
nothing else than the full 'revelation' of the baptismal grace
conferred upon us at the outset. The baptized Christian 'never
discovers, nor can he ever discover, anything more than what he
has already received secretly through baptism'. Everything is
contained implicitly in the initial charisma of baptism.
(iii) As to the outward
experiences which accompany this conscious awareness of the
indwelling Spirit, Mark is reticent. He does not speak about
visions, dreams, trances and ecstasy.
Nowhere have I found in his
writings anything that could be interpreted as a reference to
speaking with tongues. His allusions to tears are infrequent; so far
from exalting the gift of tears, he warns us, 'Do not grow conceited
if you shed tears when you pray.'13 He does indeed
believe that our aim is to experience consciously the energies of
the Spirit' and to reach the state above nature', where the
intellect (n o u V ) 'discovers the fruits of the Holy Spirit of
which the Apostle spoke: love, joy, peace and the rest' (cf. Gal.
5:22).14 But he does not specify what precise form these
'energies' and 'fruits' are to take.
When interpreting an author such
as Mark, it is helpful to make a distinction between 'experience'
(in the singular) and experiences' (in the plural). There are surely
many Christians who feel able to say in all humility, 'I know God
personally', without being able to point to any single event such as
a vision, a voice, or a concentrated 'conversion crisis' of the kind
undergone by St. Paul, St. Augustine, Pascal or John Wesley.
Personal experience of the Spirit permeates their whole life,
existing as a total awareness, without necessarily being
crystallized in the form of particular 'experiences'. When Mark and
other Greek Fathers refer to our conscious awareness of the
'energies' or 'fruits' of the Spirit, they may well have in view an
all-embracing 'experience' of this kind, rather than any specific
and separate 'experiences'.
The Macarian
Homilies: light, tears and ecstasy
The Homilies attributed to
Macarius are better known in the West than are the writings of Mark
the Monk: John Wesley, for example, was an enthusiastic reader of
the Homilies, characteristically observing in his diary for
30 July 1736, 'I read Macarius and sang.' Whereas Mark is evidently
an opponent of Messalianism, the Homilies are commonly
regarded as a Messalian or semi-Messalian work. But in fact, when
Mark and the Homilies are carefully compared, their
respective theologies of baptism turn out to be not so very
different. It is true that the best-known group of Macarian texts,
the collection of the Fifty Spiritual Homilies (known as
Collection II or Collection H), is largely silent about sacramental
baptism; but there are a number of important references to it in the
other main groups, Collection I (B) and III (C).
In agreement with Mark, the
Macarian Homilies see sacramental baptism as the foundation
of all Christian life: 'Our baptism is true for us and valid, and it
is the source from which we receive the life of the Spirit.' 15
The Homilies concur with
Mark in insisting furthermore upon the completeness of baptism: 'In
possessing the pledge of baptism, you possess the talent' in its
completeness, but if you fail to work with it, you yourself will
remain incomplete; and not only that, but you will be deprived of
it.' 16
Mark would not have said, 'you
will be deprived of if, for he believes that the gift of baptismal
grace can never be wholly lost. But otherwise the two authors agree:
baptism is 'complete' or 'perfect', but in order to experience the
full effects of the sacrament, we need to 'work' with the initial
charisma of baptism by fulfilling the commandments.
Once more in agreement with Mark,
the Macarian writings state that the gift of the Holy Spirit is
conferred 'from the Moment of baptism'.17 Just as Mark
envisages a progress from baptismal grace present 'secretly' to
baptismal grace experienced 'actively', so likewise the Homilies
maintain that the indwelling presence of the Spirit, conferred at
baptism, is something of which we ere initially unconscious. The
Spirit's working is at first so slight that the baptized person is
ignorant of His activity:
'Initially divine grace exists
within a person in such a subtle way that he is unaware of its
presence and does not understand [that it is within him].... But if
we persist and advance in all the virtues, struggling with full
exertion, then baptism will increase in power and will be revealed
in us, making us perfect through its own grace.' 18
This, as we have noted, is
exactly Mark's teaching: through our fulfilment of the commandments
and our ascetic struggles, the hidden grace of baptism is gradually
'revealed' in its full power.
At the outset, then, so the
Homilies affirm, the Spirit is present 'invisibly', but if we
persevere on the path of Christian obedience we shall gradually come
to experience His presence with power and assurance':
'In His own wisdom the heavenly
Physician bestows the heavenly bread - that is to say, the power of
the Spirit invisibly through the holy mystery of the "washing of
rebirth' (Titus 3:5) and of the Body of Christ; and through the
"word of consolation' (Heb. 13:22) in the Scriptures He nourishes
and warms the damaged soul that is still subject to the passions and
that is not yet capable of experiencing the energy of the Spirit
with power and assurance, whether on account of its childishness or
because of its lack of faith and its carelessness. Every soul, on
receiving the remission of sins in holy baptism according to the
measure of its faith, participates in the energy of grace: one
receives it with power and assurance, another with weaker energy of
grace .... Thus the grace of the Spirit bestowed in baptism seeks to
overshadow each person in abundance and to grant to each more
speedily the perfection of divine power, but the degree to which
someone shares in this grace depends on the measure of that person's
faith and piety.' 19
This is less clear and coherent
than the treatment that we find in Mark; also the Homilies
seem to envisage adult baptism whereas Mark thinks primarily in
terms of infant baptism. But there is no fundamental discrepancy
between the two authors. Both agree that there is a progressive
advance from an unconscious presence of the baptismal gift of the
Spirit to a conscious awareness of the baptismal gift "with full
assurance and sensation' (a phrase used by the Homilies as
well as by Mark).
How, then, do the Macarian
Homilies answer our three questions?
(i) The Homilies
clearly assert that, in certain cases at any rate, the
indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit conferred at baptism is
at first unconscious: He is present within us 'invisibly, in
such a way that we are 'unaware' of Him. At the same time,
however, it is the vocation of every baptized Christian to
advance from unconsciousness to conscious awareness, so that we
experience this gift of the Spirit 'with full assurance and
sensation'. Here the Homilies, like Mark the Monk, rely
heavily upon the language of feeling. Sometimes the Homilies
describe this higher stage of conscious awareness as 'baptism
with fire and the Spirit',20 a phrase nowhere found
in Mark's writings.
(ii) This 'baptism with fire
and the Spirit' does not, however, connote a new and distinct
gift of the Spirit, but according to the Homilies it is
nothing else than the developed and conscious awareness of the
gift of the Spirit inherent in water baptism. As with Mark, it
is water baptism that constitutes the 'source' of all our life
in the Spirit.
(iii)lf the Homilies
and Mark prove thus far to be in substantial agreement, in their
respective answers to the third question there is a significant
difference between them. The Homilies emphasize various outward
experiences that accompany the conscious awareness of the
Spirit, in a way that Mark does not. Macarius speaks, for
example, about a vision of divine light received by the
spiritual aspirant,21! and about his illumination by
'non-material and divine fire'.22 These Macarian
texts concerning light and fire had an important influence upon
the mystical theology of the fourteenth-century Byzantine
Hesychasts, and they were taken up in particular by St. Gregory
Palamas (1296-1359). The Homilies also attach more
importance than Mark does to the gift of tears. Only if we
'weep' shall we experience the 'power" of the Spirit:
'If anyone is naked because
he lacks the divine and heavenly garment which is the power of
the Spirit... let him weep and beseech the Lord that he may
receive the spiritual garment from heaven.' 23
Unlike Mark, the Homilies
speak explicitly about trance-like and ecstatic experiences:
'Sometimes a person when praying
has fallen into a kind of trance (e c t a s i V ) and has found
himself standing in church before the sanctuary; and three loaves of
bread were offered to him, leavened with oil...'
There have been other occasions,
Macarius continues, when the impact of a vision of inner light has
proved so devastating that a person loses normal self-control:
'Swallowed up in the sweetness of
contemplation, he was no longer master of himself, but became like a
fool and a barbarian towards this world, so overwhelmed was he by
the excessive love and sweetness of the hidden mysteries that were
being revealed to him.' 24
There is no parallel in Mark's
writings to this kind of language.
There is even a possible allusion
in one Homily to speaking with tongues. Recalling the outpouring of
the Spirit at Pentecost, Macarius says: As for the apostles, they
cried out willy-nilly. Just as a flute, when air is blown through
it, gives out the sound that the flute-player wants, so it is also
with the apostles and those who resemble them. When they were 'born
from above' (John 3:3,7) and received the Paraclete Spirit, the
Spirit spoke in them as He wanted.25
The reference here to those who
'resemble' the apostles suggests that the speaking with tongues on
the day of Pentecost has been continued in later ages of the Church.
But this is an isolated passage which has no exact parallel
elsewhere in Macarian corpus, and so it would be unwise to base too
much upon it.
Counterbalancing this passage on
Pentecost, there are other occasions when the Homilies condemn the
use of 'unseemly and confused cries' during times of prayer.
Probably the author has in mind certain 'enthusiasts' among the more
extreme Messalians:
'Those who draw near to the Lord
ought to make their prayers in quietness and peace and great
tranquillity, not with unseemly and confused cries .... There are
some who during prayer make use of unseemly cries, as if relying on
their own bodily strength, not realizing how their thoughts deceive
them, and thinking that they can achieve perfect success by their
own strength.' 26
Yet even if the Homilies
do not in fact provide clear support for glossolalia, it is
evident that their author (or authors) expected the conscious
experience of the Spirit to be marked by other external expressions,
such as tears and ecstatic visions.
St. John Climacus:
the baptism of tears
The Ladder of Divine Ascent
by St. John Climacus, abbot of Sinai, provides relatively little
material to help us in answering our questions. Although The
Ladder contains a few (but not very many) references to baptism,
and also a few (but not very many) references to the Holy Spirit,
nowhere are these two themes - the gift of baptism and the grace of
the Spirit - mentioned together in the same passage. It is clear
from numerous statements in The Ladder that Climacus attaches
great importance to personal experience, but he does not develop the
point in explicit detail.
There are, however, two passages
in The Ladder that are significant for our present purpose.
First, Climacus indicates that there is a direct connection between
the gift of the Spirit and obedience to a spiritual father or
mother:
'If you are constantly upbraided
by your director and yet acquire greater faith in him and love for
him, then you may be sure that the Holy Spirit has taken up
residence in your soul and the power of the Most High has
overshadowed you.' 27
To some contemporary Christians
there might seem to be a contradiction between, on the one hand,
strict obedience to a spiritual guide and, on the other, the
personal experience of freedom in the Holy Spirit. But this is not
the way in which Orthodoxy views the matter. On the contrary, it is
precisely through obedience that we learn freedom. The role of the
spiritual guide or 'soul friend' (Celtic amchara) is not to
act as a substitute for the Spirit, but it is specifically through
our relationship with our guide that we are helped to attain
personal awareness of the Spirit's presence. So far from
discouraging a direct contact with the Spirit, our guide seeks to
open the door for us; to vary the metaphor, he or she aims to be
transparent.
The second and more important
passage in The Ladder concerns the gift of tears. Climacus,
as Symeon the New Theologian was later to do, regards this as a
second baptism, which is to be placed on an even higher level than
the first baptism in sacramental water:
The tears that come after baptism
are greater than baptism itself, though it may seem rash to say so.
Baptism washes off those evils that were previously within us,
whereas the sins committed after baptism are washed away by tears.
The baptism received by us as children we have all defiled, but we
cleanse it anew with our tears. If God in His love for the human
race had not given us tears, those being saved would be few indeed
and hard to find.28
This is relevant to the third of
our questions. What outward signs accompany direct experience of the
Spirit? Climacus says nothing about speaking with tongues, but he
attaches deep value to the charisma of spiritual tears. The
gift of tears is also strongly emphasized by Climacus's
contemporary, St. Isaac of Nineveh (Isaac the Syrian).29
St. Symeon the New
Theologian: 'he cries and shouts'
Let us now return to the author
with whom we started, St. Symeon the New Theologian. How far do his
answers to our three questions correspond to those found in Mark the
Monk and the Macarian Homilies?
(i) It might seem at first sight
that Symeon excludes the possibility of an inner presence of the
Spirit that is unconscious yet real; for) in a passage already
cited, he states unambiguously, 'Do not say that one can possess Him
without knowing it.30 Taken literally, these words
suggest that Symeon identifies the reality of grace with the
conscious awareness of it. This is often regarded as a
typically 'Messalian' deviation (although what the Messalians
actually believed is notoriously difficult to establish). In fact,
however, there are other passages in Symeon which imply that he did
not in fact endorse such an extreme position. More than once he
definitely allows for an unconscious working of grace:
'Let us seek Christ, with whom we
have been clothed through holy baptism (cf. Gal. 3:27). Yet we have
been stripped of Him through our evil deeds; for, although in our
infancy we were sanctified without being aware of it (a n a i
s q h t v V ), yet in our youth we defiled ourselves.' 31
'As it is written, 'He who
endures to the end will be saved' (Matt. 10:22). Not only will he be
saved, but he will receive help - at first, without being aware
of it, then with conscious awareness, and soon afterwards with
the illumination that comes from Almighty God.' 32
'When the fear of God leads
someone to cut off his own will, God grants him His will, without
the person knowing it, in a way that he does not perceive.' 33
Symeon - more than Mark the Monk,
more even than the Macarian Homilies - attaches crucial
importance to the attainment, by every Christian without exception,
of a direct, conscious awareness of the Spirit; and this may
sometimes lead him to exaggerated statements. But, as the passages
quoted above clearly indicate, he does not altogether exclude an
unconscious presence of Christ and the Spirit. He too, in common
with Mark and Macarius, envisages a progress from a 'secret' to an
'active' indwelling.
(ii) Does Symeon also agree with
Mark and Macarius in regarding 'baptism with the Holy Spirit', not
as a new grace, but as the 'revelation' and fulfilment of water
baptism? It has to be admitted that his answer is less clear than
that of his two predecessors. As we have seen, he asserts that water
baptism is no more than a type', while the second baptism of tears
is the truth'.34 He even suggests, in words that I find
disturbing, that not all the baptized receive Christ:
Let no one say, ' I have received
and I possess Christ from the moment of holy baptism.' Such a person
should recognize that it is not all the baptized that' receive
Christ through baptism, but only those who are strong in faith and
in perfect knowledge.35
Perhaps Symeon's point here is
that none of us should rest satisfied with a purely external and
mechanical appeal to our baptism; we have to live out its
effects. But in that case it would have been clearer if he had said,
as Mark does: 'We receive Christ in baptism, but we only become
aware of Him if we fulfil the commandments.'
In general, however, Symeon
affirms categorically that baptism confers forgiveness of sins,
total liberation from tyranny, and the indwelling presence of the
Spirit. To use his own words:
'Descending from on high our
Master through His own death destroyed the sentence of death against
us. He entirely destroyed the condemnation that we inherited from
the transgression of our first father, and through holy baptism He
completely delivers us from it, regenerating and refashioning us;
and He places us in this' world altogether free and no longer
subject to the tyranny of the enemy, honouring us with our original
power of voluntary choice.' 36
'You renewed me through the holy
baptism that fashioned me anew, adorning me with the Holy Spirit.'
37
'Through divine baptism we become
children and heirs of God, we are clothed with God Himself, we
become His limbs, and we receive the Holy Spirit who comes to dwell
within us, which is the royal seal.... All these things, and other
things yet greater than these, are given to the baptized immediately
from the moment of divine baptism.' 38
After a careful assessment of the
evidence, Archimandrite Athanasios Hatzopoulos concludes:
' When Symeon speaks of Baptism
in the Spirit, he means the grace of the renewal of sacramental
Baptism. It is the same grace of the Spirit that makes water-Baptism
a sacrament, which in turn makes possible the gradual renewal of the
image.... The grace man receives in Baptism, which promotes his
spiritual growth, acts as a starting-point in which the end is
present in the beginning.' 39
In the last resort, then, Symeon
concurs with Mark and Macarius in regarding 'baptism with the Holy
Spirit' - the second baptism of tears - as the full realization of
sacramental baptism, not as a new and different grace. But it has to
be confessed that here Symeon constitutes a borderline case.
(iii) Like Macarius, but unlike
Mark, the New Theologian speaks in some detail about the outward
experiences that accompany a full conscious awareness of the Spirit.
First of all, he lays great emphasis upon the gift of tears: the
second baptism is precisely 'a baptism of tears'. Here he appeals
explicitly to John Climacus. Secondly, he assigns a central place in
his mystical theology to the vision of divine light. This light, so
he believes, is God Himself; Christ may sometimes speak to us from
the light, although His bodily form is not seen m the vision.
Thirdly, he describes ecstatic phenomena which have obvious
parallels in modem Pentecostalism:
'A person who has within him the
light of the most Holy Spirit, unable to endure it, falls prostrate
upon the ground; and he cries out and shouts in terror and great
fear, for he sees and experiences something that surpasses nature,
thought and imagination. He becomes as one whose entrails have been
set ablaze: devoured by fire and unable to bear the scorching flame,
he is beside himself, and he cannot control himself at all. And
though he sheds unceasing tears that bring him some relief, the fire
of his longing is kindled to yet fiercer flames. Then he weeps more
abundantly and, washed by the flood of his tears, he shines as
lightning with an- ever-increasing brilliance. When he is entirely
aflame and becomes as light, then is fulfilled the saying, 'God is
joined in unity with gods and is known by them.' 40
It is not surprising that
Symeon's writings are popular among contemporary Orthodox who have
come under the influence of the charismatic movement.
In conclusion, then, we may claim
to have found a large measure of convergence between our Patristic
witnesses:
(i) All agree that it is
possible to possess the Holy Spirit within oneself, without
being conscious of His presence.
(ii) All agree that the
'second baptism' - the baptism of tears or 'baptism with the
Holy Spirit' - is an extension and fulfilment of the first
baptism bestowed sacramentally with water. 'Spirit baptism'
is not to be seen as conferring an entirely new grace, different
from that conferred through "water baptism'.
(iii) Some Eastern Christian
authors, such as Mark the Monk, are reticent in describing the
outward signs that may accompany conscious awareness of the
Spirit. Others, such as Macarius and Symeon, enter into much
fuller detail, referring in particular to the gift of tears, the
vision of divine light and even on occasion to something that
resembles the modem experience of speaking with tongues. But
their allusions to this last are very infrequent.
Of these three points, the second
will surely prove of crucial importance in any future
Orthodox-Pentecostal dialogue.
Footnotes
1. Alexander
A. Boddy, With Russian Pilgrims: being an account of a sojourn in
the White See Monastery and a journey by the old trade route from
the Arctic See to Moscow (London, no date [ca.1931), p.181.1 am
grateful to Dr. David N. Collins, of the University of Leeds, for
drawing my attention to this passage.
2. In the
Image and Likeness of God (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press,
Crestwood 1974), p.152.
3. Hymn
27:125-32.
4. See
Kallistos Ware, Tradition and Personal Experience in Later Byzantine
Theology', Eastern Churches Review 3:2 (1970), pp.131-41,
especially pp. 135-9.
5.
Practical and Theological Chapters 1:35-36.
6.
Catechesis 21:139-40.
7. Sources
Chretiennes 156 (Paris 1969), p. 151.
8. On
Baptism (PG [= J.P. Migne, Patrotogia Graeca] 65:1028BC).
It is somewhat surprising that Mark, while speaking at length about
baptism, says very little about the eucharist.
9. On
Baptism (,PG 65:996C, 1016D).
10. On
those who think that they are made righteous by works 85 (PG
65:944A).
11. On
Baptism (PG 65:993C).
12. On
those who think that they are made righteous by works 56 (PG
65:937D).
13. On the
Spiritual Law 12 (PG 65:908A).
14. On
those who think that they are made righteous by works 57, 83
(PG 65:940A, 941 CD).
15. B43:6.
16. C28:3.
17. Great
Letter (ed. Wemer Jaeger), p.236, line 8.
18. B43:6.
19. B 25:2,
§§2-4.
20. H 26:23;
27:17; 32:4; 47:1; etc. •
21. See, for
example, H 1-8,10.
22. H
25:9-10.
23. H20:1.
24. H 8:3.
25. C 15:4.
26. H 6:4.
27. Ladder,
Step 4 (PG 88:725D).
28.
Ladder, Step 7 (PG 88-.804B).
29. See his
Ascetical Homilies 14 and 37 (35), tr. Holy Transfiguration
Monastery (Boston 1984), pp.82-83, 174: cited in Kallistos Ware,
The Orthodox Way (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood
1995), p.101.
30. See note
3.
31.
Catechesis 2:139-42.
32.
Catechesis 26:63-66.
33.
Practical and Theological Chapters 3:76.
34. See note
5.
35.
Ethical Discourse 10:323-6.
36.
Catechesis 5:381-6.
37.
Thanksgiving 2:17-18.
38. Letter
on Confession 3 (ed. Kari Holl), p.111, line 26 - p.112, line 6.
39.
Athanasios Hatzopoulos, Two Outstanding Cases in Byzantine
Spirituality (Thessaloniki 1991), pp.135,137.
40.
Practical and Theological Chapters 3:21. The final phrase is
from St. Gregory of Nazianzus.

|