Prolegomena, Notices, and Prefaces

NOTICE.

Theodore the Studite, abbot of the Studium—that is, a monastery founded in Constantinople by a certain Roman named Studius (a)—was born in the same city in the year of Christ 759. ^A In the year 794 he became archimandrite of the Saccudion monastery in the suburban area of his ancestors, taking the place of his uncle Plato, who was still living (b). Subsequently, because Patriarch Tarasius did not dare to resist the Emperor Constantine VI when the latter, having repudiated his wife Maria, had taken Theodota as his wife, Theodore publicly declared both Constantine and Tarasius unworthy of the communion of Christians. As a result, he was ordered into exile at Thessalonica in the year 796; but, following the death of Constantine, he was recalled with great honor by Irene the very next year and was made abbot of the Studium (c). After this time, taking the gravest offense at the appointment of Nicephorus—a layman—as Patriarch of Constantinople in the year 806, and at the restoration of Joseph the oeconomus, he made a new secession from the Patriarch; as a result, a synod was convened against him in the year 809 (d), and he was subjected to a second exile, being restored two years later by Michael Rangabe in the year 811. Finally, when the edict of Leo the Armenian against the veneration of images was published in the year 814, he girded himself for the struggle for the images, which he waged most fiercely with the greatest contention of spirit, pouring all the force of his intellect and learning into this cause, and not hesitating to endure for this sake the hardships of new, various, and longer exiles, and of a most harsh imprisonment for several years, until he was restored by Michael Balbus in the year 821. Hence, because he appeared to favor the rebel Thomas against Michael, he departed the city again in the year 823, and died in the year 826 (e) on November 11—the day on which the Greeks celebrate his memory—on the promontory of Acritas, in the neighboring peninsula of Saint Tryphon. He had as his successor in the abbacy of the Studium, Naucratius, whose encyclical letter concerning the death of Theodore was edited in Greek and Latin (f) by Combefis in volume I of the *Auctarium novum Bibliothecæ Patrum*, pp. 855-882, with additional notes (g). To the Greeks he is the ^B "new confessor," and in Labbe, quite inappropriately, a "martyr"; by Creyghton (h) he is also wrongly conflated with Theodore Graptus. Allatius brings forward a passage from his Life, written in Greek by John or some other person, in *De interstitiis ordinum apud Græcos*, p. 181, and in *De libris eccles. Græcor.*, p. 138, as well as elsewhere. He calls it "uncertain" in *De consensu*, p. 226. Furthermore, it is that same work which Baronius used in its Latin translation by Jacques Sirmond, and from which he derived most of the material in the ninth volume of his *Annals* covering the years 795-826; however, the complete text, in Greek and Latin, was edited by Jacques de la Baune S.J. from a manuscript of the Jesuit College in Paris, under the name of the monk Michael, in the fifth volume of Sirmond’s works (Paris, 1696, folio, pp. 1-88), while attesting that in another codex (i) it is attributed to Theodore Daphnopates. That same most learned man also observes regarding the affairs of Theodore in the [text continues]

consult the Life of Saint Plato, April 4; Saint Nicholas the Studite, February 4; Saint Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, March 13; and Nicetas, Hegumen of Medikion, written by his disciple Theosterictus, April 3; Saint Tarasius, Patriarch, February 25; and Saint Theophanes the Confessor (Sygriensis), Abbot, March 12. He has also dealt not negligently with the published and unpublished writings of Theodore, to whose observations I have added my own. FABR. ^A Concerning this man—in his own way pious and constant, but also a persistent cultivator and patron of the images and relics of the saints—compare G. Cave, *Hist. lit. SS. eccl.*, vol. II, p. 8 ff.; Oudin, *Comment. de SS. script. eccl.*, vol. II, p. 32 ff.; R. Ceillier, *Hist. gén. des aut. ecclés.*, vol. XVIII, p. 489 ff.; Hamberger, *Zuverlässige Nachrichten*, vol. III, p. 559; Laur. Mosheim, *Institt. H. E.*, cent. IX, part. II, cap. 2, § 13; Saxius, *Onomast.*, part. II, p. 93; Schroeckh, *Christliche Kirchengeschichte*, part. 23, p. 105-112; Arnold, *Kirchen- und Ketzer-Histor.*, vol. I, p. 327, ed. Schafhausen, 1740, fol.; Walchius, *Histor. hæresium*, etc., vol. X, p. 659 ff.; XI, p. 332 ff., 283 ff.; and if you wish, what I have written in *Introduct. in Hist. L. Gr.* II, 2, p. 301; and the Supplement to it, part. II, p. 253. HARL.

Writings of Theodore the Studite Published (j)

In the same fifth volume of the Works of Sirmond, printed in clear type, correctly and provided with a copious index, are presented in Greek and Latin these writings of Theodore the Studite:

1. *Oration on the Holy Images*, delivered against Leo the Armenian, which the author of the Life of Theodore presents on pages 32-37, with the version of Sirmond. FABR. Among the adversaria of Langbænius, see *Cat. mss. Angliæ*, etc., I, p. 268, no. 7, for the testimonies of Patriarch Photius and Theodore the Studite on the veneration of images. ^B In *Cat. bibl. Barberinæ*, vol. II, p. 453, the *Oration on the Holy Images* of Theodore the Studite is cited; the same oration of Theodore, in Latin, Paris, 1555, 4to. Compare a little later, no. 10. HARL.

2. *Testament*, pp. 63-69, with a version by the same Sirmond, which Baronius edited in the year 826, no. 51 ff. It also exists in a version by Joannes Livineius (who had used the codex of Cardinal Sirlet), together with the catechetical sermons of Theodore translated into Latin, Antwerp, 1602, 8vo, and in the *Bibliotheca Patrum*, Lyons edition, 1677, vol. XIV, p. 895. Christ. Woldenbergius also edited it in Latin along with his book on the testaments of the ancients, Rostock, 1651, 4to. Jacobus Tollius also [edited it] in Greek in *Insignibus itineris Italici*, Utrecht, 1696, 4to, from a codex of the Pauline Library at Leipzig, which its most worthy prefect, Joachimus Fellerus, had shared with him. But he wrongly attributed the Latin version, which he added on p. 179, to Sirmond, professing on p. 191 that nothing was more putrid or puerile; for whoever compares it will find (k) that it is the version of Livineius, not Sirmond. FABR. The *Testament* (that is, the confession of faith written by Theodore shortly before his death on the doctrine and truth of the Holy Trinity, on the honor and adoration of holy images and relics, on the canon of the divine books, on the excellence of the monastic life, with added precepts for a strict way of life to be observed by monks, especially by the abbot his successor) exists in manuscript at Munich in *cod. Bavar.* 217; see V. Cl. Hardt in *Aretini Beyträgen*, etc., 1805, part. IV, p. 365 ff. In *cod. Vindobon.* 25, 3. See Lambec. VIII, p. 629 ff. Kollar. Florence, in *cod. Laurent.* 4, 13, plut. 4. V. Bandin. *Cat. codd. Gr. Laur.* I, p. 520 ff. Venice, in *cod. Marciano* 141. V. *Cat. codd. Gr. Marc.* p. 81. In *cod. Naniano* 62, no. 125, and 68, no. 131. V. *Cat. codd. Gr. Nan.* p. 100, and 132. In the Sfortiano codex, attested by Montfauc. *Bibl. biblioth. mss.* I, p. 701 C, and vol. II, p. 1332 D, concerning the codex of the monastery of the Holy Trinity near Constantinople, etc., *Testament* and other things. In *cod. Matrit.* IV. V. Iriart. *Cat. codd. Gr. Matrit.* p. 19. Cod. 37 Coislin, in the *Collection of places of Sacred Scripture, ecclesiastical writers, etc.* of Nicon. V. Montfauc. *Bibl. Coislin.* p. 111. Paris, in four codices of the public library. HARL.

3. *Dogmatic Book, containing three refutatory discourses against the Iconoclasts, in favor of the cult of images*, pp. 71-134. ^C The author of the *Life* mentions it on p. 22. Sirmond translated the first and second, Jacobus de la Baune the third. FABR. At Paris, in *cod.* 5394, there are three *Antirrhetici* against the Iconoclasts, and those things mentioned by Fabricius, nos. 4-7. At Vienna, in *cod. Cæs.* 77, no. 80, *Excerpt against the Iconoclasts from Nicephorus, Photius, and Theodore the Studite* in *Euthymii Zigabeni Panoplia dogmatica*. V. Lambec. III, p. 422, Kollar. Ibid., in *cod.* 157, no. 5, two testimonies of Photius and Theod. Stud. on the holy images and on the difference between holy images and idols. V. Lambec. Theod. Stud. opp. Ibid., in *cod.* 5255, 19, *Life, by Michael the monk*; inc. *Life* in *cod. Ottobon.* at Rome, and in the Sfortiano. V. Montfaucon, *Bibl. biblioth. mss.* I, p. 185 A, and 701 E. Add above in the *Elogia* of the Holy Theodore the Studite. HARL.

Iriart, *Cat. codd. Gr. Matrit.* p. 19. In *cod. Escorial* (attested by Pluer in *Itinerar. per Hispan.* p. 192) many things exist, viz.: *Sermon on the Adoration of the Holy Cross*, with the catechesis of Chrysostom to his disciples; and his *Testament*; *Iambic poems on various subjects*; and *Description of the habitation of the Studium with the Life of the same Theodore*. Florence, in *cod. Laurent.* 414, plut. 4. V. Bandin. *Cat. codd. Gr. Laur.* I, p. 521. In *cod. Naniano* 62 end and 68. V. *Cat. codd. Gr. Nan.* p. 100 ff. and 132. Venice, in *cod. Marciano* 141, *Life of Theodore by the monk Naucratius*, which is followed by 12 poems and other things pertaining to the same Theodore. V. *Cat. codd. Gr. Marc.* p. 80. Paris, in *cod. bibl. publ.* 5394, no. 10, with many others. HARL.

(j) Several opuscula, at Rome in the monastery of St. Salvator, in codices 72 and 73. V. Montfauc. *Bibl. biblioth. mss.* I, p. 199 A. At Milan in the Ambrosian library. V. Montfauc. *l. c.* p. 505 B. Vienna, ibid. p. 540 C, 542 E. HARL. (k) Tollius is reproved on this account in *Mem. Trevolt.* a. 1703, p. 1228; Bælius *Lexic. Supplem.* under Livineius.

^A IV. p. 335. — In Turin codex 212, various brief works of Theodore the Studite against the Iconoclasts, as well as letters and several iambic verses against the Iconoclasts, which you will seek in vain among the iambs edited by Sirmond; and for this reason the compiler of the Catalogue of Greek Codices of Turin published them in Greek with a Latin version, p. 305 seqq. Ibid. p. 380, in the mutilated codex 276 of the same, are letters and other brief works against the Iconoclasts. In the Moscow codex 297 are 12 chapters of Theodore the Studite. They begin: *If therefore anyone does not confess the Lord...* Here (as Matthæi says in *Not. m. Græc. Mosq. synod.* p. 193, 8vo), in chapter 12, many things are argued against the Iconoclasts. HARL.

4. *Refutation and overthrow of the acrostic iambic poems composed by the Iconoclasts John, Ignatius, Sergius, and Stephen*, which themselves are set forth in part, and in part are subjected to, pp. 135-159. Translated by Jacques de la Baune. ^B Idem Baunius.

5. *Certain problems against the Iconoclasts*, pp. 160-164. Translated by the same Baunius.

6. *Seven chapters against the Iconoclasts*, pp. 165-173. Translated by the same Baunius.

7. *Epistle to Plato the archimandrite concerning the veneration of sacred images*, pp. 173-176. Translated by the same Baunius.

8. Two books of Epistles, of which the former contains 57, the latter 219, pp. 177-294-596. Of these, Baronius had scattered here and there some that had been translated into Latin by Sirmond: of the first book, indeed, 38 and 53 to the year 787, n. 58, 59; 4 and 5 to the year 795; 1, 2, 3 to the year 796; 7 to 801; 16, 26, 30 to 806; 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 31 to the year 808; 32 to 36, as well as 38, 39, 43, 48, 51, 53 to the year 809; and 56 to the year 811. Of the latter book, however, 127 to the year 787, n. 63; 1, 2, 8, 18 to the year 814; 9, 10 to the year 815; 4, 11, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 31, 32, 34, 40, 41, 45, 50, 55, 59, 70, 87, 181 to the year 816; 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 to the year 817; 13, 30, 35, 37, 44, 55, 58, 61, 66, 68, 94, 100 to the year 818; 38, 62, 63 to the year 819; 71 to the year 820; 73, 74, 79, 80, 86, 90, 92, 106, 121 to the year 821; 127, 129, 199, 204 to the year 825; 116, 138, 167 to the year 825. Jacques de la Baune, the editor, himself added the translation of those which he did not find in Sirmond’s version in Baronius. Cotelier published in Greek and Latin the 215 responses of the second book, which contain 17 questions addressed to the monk Methodius, under the name of Nicephorus of Constantinople, in *Monumenta Ecclesiæ Græcæ*, vol. II, p. 453. But it is also attributed to Theodore in the codex of the Coislin library, about which see Montfaucon p. 325. FABR. Our Fabricius, in vol. XIII, where he reviewed the Coislin library, noted on p. 843 those things which follow, and which I shall bring here: "The Epistles of Saint Theodore the Studite are held in great number in two codices (Coislin.), namely 94 and 269, both of excellent quality. I rightly place this Catalogue among the *Anecdota*, although it offers only the titles and beginnings; because in the first codex there are 548 epistles, of which Jacques Sirmond edited barely half, and from those which he published, many mangled ones can be restored from both codices. In the 269th codex, moreover, the most ancient of the ninth century, not a few are found which exist neither in the published work of Sirmond nor in the earlier Coislinian codex. The catalogue of the former manuscript, number 94, stands on p. 144; that of the latter, number 269, on p. 312." Add also our Fabricius below in vol. XI, p. 517 of the old edition concerning the Council of Constantinople of the year 806, against which Theodore the Studite inveighed in his letters to Nicephorus of Constantinople and Leo III in Baronius at the year 806, n. 13 seq., and in vol. V of the *Works* of Sirmond, where the letters of Theodore the Studite edited in Greek and Latin by Jacques de la Baune, S. J., are read on pp. 281 and 300, and concerning the Council of Constantinople of 814, p. 519, regarding Theodore the Studite’s letter to the iconoclastic synod of Constantinople, [translated] into Latin from Baronius at the year 814, and in Greek and Latin in Sirmond’s *Works*, vol. V, p. 370, book II of the Epistles of Theodore, epistle 2. — Theodore's epistles, however, hold a kind of primacy among his works. For they serve primarily not only for understanding his life and the disposition of his mind more deeply, but also for illustrating the history of the controversies in the Greek Church, especially those fiercely agitated at that time concerning the veneration of the images of the saints. Manuscripts exist in Paris in the codex of the public library 894: Epistolæ, namely, n. 6, dogmatic, of the third exile, 56; n. 7, of the first and second exile, 56; n. 8, of the third exile, 184. In codices 896, 1, Epistolæ with an index of all those to whom the individual letters were sent. In codices 364 and 1321, 5, and in Montfaucon, *Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscriptorum*, vol. II, p. 1320 B, among the Mazarin codices, an epistle to Naucratius: to the same concerning Digamy in codex Vindobon. 18, 16 (in Sirmond’s *Works*, vol. V, p. 352). See Lambec. VI, part 1, p. 134, and Kollar there. In Moscow, in the synodal codex 32, an epistle to Stephen the Lector. See Matthæi, *Notitia codicum Græcorum Mosquensium*, p. 47, n. 93, 8vo edition; or p. 54, n. 47, folio edition. Add to n. 3. HARL.

9. *Iambics on various subjects*. Brief poems and epigrams of various subjects, 123, with Sirmond for the most part as translator. The first 29 of these are seen in the *Life of Theodore the Studite* at p. 25, marked as *Written precepts in iambic lines*. In the last place of another, I know not of whose authority, in Theo-

Theodore's Greek epigram are subjoined hexameter verses (n), in which, among other things, it is praised that he taught the Studite monks to chant sacred hymns: «He raised up a divine and noble song of hymn-singers.» From ode 115 it is evident that Theodore, before he chose to become a monk, had a wife named Anna, who later consented with her husband to voluntary celibacy, and consigned the children begotten of him to the monastic life. Fabr. MS in cod. Paris. 896, n. 2, and in cod. Turin ad n. 3, as cited, and also Venetian in cod. Marcianus 141, in which there are also 6 iambics on Theodore. See Catal. codd. Gr. Turin. p. 80. Harl.

Published writings of Theodore the Studite, which were not issued with the works of Sirmond.

10. *Dogmatic Oration on the honor and adoration of the holy images*. In Greek with the *Orations on images* of St. John Damascene, Rome 1553, 8vo, and in Latin translated by Godfried Tilmann, Antwerp 1556, 12mo. And in both languages among the works of Damascene, Basel 1575, fol., p. 674. And again in Latin in the *Bibliotheca Patrum*, Paris 1589 and 1644, 1654, vol. III, by another translator, and it is noted there that the passage of that oration is cited by Gennadius, who was formerly Georgius Scholarius, in his *Exposition of the five chapters of the Council of Florence against the Greeks*, ch. 5, sect. 12. Fabr. *The three sermons of John Damascene for the images. Theodore the Studite on the honor and adoration to be attributed to them. Life of John Damascene*, by John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, in Greek, Rome 1553, 8vo.

11. *Funeral Oration on St. Plato, his spiritual father*. This, rendered into Latin by William Sirleto, later cardinal, was published by Aloysius Lipomannus, vol. VII of the *Lives of the holy Fathers*, p. 275, and from Lipomannus by Laur. Surius on December 16, as well as another, Laurentius de la Barre, in *Christian History of the Fathers*, p. 118, Paris 1583, fol. Finally, they were edited in Greek from the royal and Vatican libraries by Henschenius and Papebrochius at the end of the *Acta Sanctorum*, vol. 1 April, p. XLVI, and in Latin from a new translation at p. 366. It was published with the *Lausiac History* of Palladius and the *Religious History* of Theodoret, translated into Latin by Gentian Hervet, Paris 1570, 4to, p. 455-497. Fabr. Paris, in cod. 1197, n. 1, public library. Harl.

12. *Oration on the adoration of the precious and life-giving cross in the middle of Lent*. Published his work *De cruce*, vol. II, p. 287; Ingolstadt 1600, 4to (edition in fol. p. 1405). It begins: "A day of gladness and joy." In Latin, *Bibliotheca Patrum*, Lyon edition, vol. XIV, p. 900. Fabr. See above in this volume, p. 246, infra; in vol. XIII, p. 806, old edition. Moscow in cod. synod. 5 and 351, n. 39, according to Matthaei in *Notit. codd. Gr. Mosq.*, p. 19, n. 8, and p. 228, 8vo edition. Paris, in cod. 755, 23, public library, and 773, 32. Venice in cod. Nanianus 71. See Cat. codd. Gr. Nan. p. 137, n. 7. In the *Catalog of MSS of England*, etc., vol. I, p. 38, n. 274; in cod. Gr. Nan. 28, of Thomas Roe. Ibid. p. 56, n. 726, two sermons of Theod. Stud. and an encomium of St. John the Baptist. In cod. 84, of William Laud, at p. 269, n. 8, sermons, among the Adversaria of Ger. Langbaine. According to Montfauc. *Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum MSS*, I, p. 134, *Sermons of Theodore the Studite* in the Vatican library. Harl.

13. *Canon or Hymn on the adoration of the cross*, published in Greek and Latin under the same name by Gretser, vol. III, p. 321.

14. *Canon chanted for the restoration of the holy images*, a poem of the holy father Theodore the Studite. It exists in Greek and Latin, translated by Federico Metio, in Baronius at the year 842; and in Latin in the *Bibliotheca Patrum*, Lyon edition, vol. XIV, p. 898. But the most learned cardinal warns that this hymn is not that of our Theodore, since it appears it was written not before the holy images were restored and peace was returned to the Church, and therefore many years after Theodore's death. Thus Combefis thinks it is of the younger Theodore, who presided at Studium after Naucratius. Fabr. Cf. vol. X, p. 138, old edition. Harl.

15. *The so-called small Catechesis*. A catechesis which is called small, distinguished by 134 short and extemporaneous sermons. It is mentioned in the *Life of Theodore the Studite*, p. 21, and exists in Greek in various libraries: Caesarea, Lambec. 8, p. 295, Bodleian at Oxford, Claromontana, Paris, Seguieriana or Coislin.

NOTES. (n) Also in cod. Paris 894, 11. Harl. (o) Or p. 625 seqq. ed. Kollar. of cod. Caesar. 25, n. 2. Munich in cod. Bavar. 217, in which 135 catecheses are numbered, at the end of which six iambics are read, which the celebrated Hardt in *Aretini Beyträgen*, etc. 1805, part IV, p. 365, transcribed from this codex. In cod. Barocc. 139, in which there are 128 catechetical sermons, of which the first begins... and the last... Idem in cod. 197, sub fin. Proemium in the catechetical oration of John Chrysostom on Easter. It begins: "It is necessary for us..." In the Bodleian library, *Catalog of MSS of England*, etc. I, n. 280, in cod. Cromwell 103, *Small Catecheses* of Theodore the Studite, n. 748; similarly in cod. 108 of Laud, 134 sermons, of which the first ten are lacking. Ibid. n. 153, similarly in cod. Laud 111 catechetical sermons, and among them a homily in memory of St. Plato. Venice in cod. Marcianus 141, *Small Catechesis*; six iambics on Theodore are added. See Cat. codd. Gr. Marc. p. 80. Ibid. in codd. Naniani 62 and 68, catech. 134. But in this one the first four are missing, and the beginning of the fifth. These two codices were diligently reviewed, and the individual 135 catecheses, according to the order in the two codices.

^A At the Pauli monastery in Vienna and Leipzig. It was also in the possession of Raphael Trichet du Fresne. It was published in Latin from the translation of Johannes Livineius, canon of Antwerp, at Antwerp, 1602, 8vo, and in the *Bibliotheca Patrum*, edited at Cologne, vol. IX, and Paris, 1644, 1654, vol. II, and Lyons, vol. XIV, p. 830. The reading of this catechesis is recommended to monks in the Triodion and the Menaia of the Greeks, and in the *Typicon* of Irene Augusta in the Benedictine *Analecta Graeca Monachorum*, p. 210. ^B The catechesis "to all the brethren" is cited by Allatius, *De Consensu*, etc., p. 453; the *Kuria Dogmatum* is in the Imperial Codex, Sermon 15, under the name of John of Damascus concerning the adoration of icons, Greek and Latin in the Basil edition of Damascenus, 1579, p. 501. That these catechetical orations were read publicly by the ecclesiarch, with the brothers standing and listening, was noted by Allatius, *De Dominicis Graecorum*, § IX.

16. *Encomium of Saint Bartholomew*, which exists in Greek in the Colbertine codex 340; Lucas Dacherius published it in Latin from the ancient translation of Anastasius in the third volume of his *Spicilegium*, p. 13, Paris, 1659, 4to; vol. II, new ed., fol., p. 124; and Franciscus Combefisius in the *Bibliotheca Concionatoria*, vol. VIII, p. 755, Paris, 1662, folio. FABR. See above in this volume, p. 204. Paris, in codex 1470, no. 44, public library. Turin, in codex 135, fol. 129. See *Catalogus codicum Graecorum Taurinensium*, p. 232. HARL. ...of the library of manuscripts, I, p. 197 B. *On the Nativity of John the Baptist*, in the Sforza codex. See Montfaucon, l.c., p. 700 E, and in *Diarium Italicum*, p. 220 and p. 435. *Didaskalia* of Theodore the Studite, Venice, in the Bibliotheca Justiniani. Paris, in codex 1197, on Saint John the Evangelist; and in two codices on the Nativity of John the Baptist. In codex Barocc. 174, on the Nativity of John the Baptist; in the same place in codex 238, *Encomium of John the Baptist*; the same in codex Laudi 84, or *Catalogus manuscriptorum Angliae*, etc., I, no. 726. On the Nativity of John the Baptist. Turin, in codex 70. See *Catalogus codicum Graecorum Taurinensium*, p. 166, add. no. 24. HARL.

19. *Sermo brevis* for the fourth Sunday of Lent or the Fast, published in Latin from the translation of Johannes Livineius, together with the catecheses of Theodore the Studite, of which I have already spoken. It begins: *Fratres Patresque, Spiritus nos benignitas*. Livineius found this sermon in a manuscript codex, marked as number sixty-eight. FABR. In Venice, in the Nanianus codex 154, *On Fasting and Apathy*. It begins: "Brethren and fathers, the time of the fast..." Eleven other short homilies of Theodore the Studite follow. See *Catalogus codicum Graecorum Nanianorum*, p. 349, no. 31. HARL.

20. *Four Chapters on the Ascetic Life*, which are published in Greek and Latin by Petrus Possinus S.J. in the *Thesaurus Asceticus*, Paris, 1684, 4to. Lambecius mentions five chapters in the manuscripts of the Imperial Library, IV, p. 146, FABR. Or page 331, no. 19, edition of Kollarius. Ibid., in vol. III, p. 479, seq., codex 89, no. 6, is the *Admonitio* of Theodore the Studite *to emulate the lives of the Holy Fathers*; and no. 7, *Admonitio to repentance*. HARL.

21. *Encomium on the third invention of the honored head of the holy Forerunner John the Baptist*. With the translation of Franciscus Combefisius, it was published by Carolus du Fresne, or Cangius, in the book titled: *Traité historique du chef de saint Baptiste*, Paris, 1666, 4to. FABR. See above, in this volume, p. 260, note p. Vienna, in the Imperial codex 35, much fuller than what was published by du Fresne and in the *Acta Sanctorum* for June, day 24, vol. IV, p. 736; as noted by Kollarius in the *Supplement to Lambecius' Commentaries*, vol. I, p. 253 seq. In codex Coislin. 307. See Montfaucon, *Catalogus codicum Coislinianorum*, p. 424, 24 February. Paris, in five manuscripts of the public library, according to the *Catalogus manuscriptorum*, etc., vol. II. HARL.

22. *Troparia, Canones*, etc. Troparia or hymns, etc. Many of this kind, in the name of the Studite, are published in Greek in the Octoechos, the Menaia, and other Greek books. Therefore, understand it as our monk Theodore, whose *Canon Catanycticus* or hymn is sung at night concerning Christ.

NOTES. ...preserved, together with the beginnings of each, which he enumerated at length, distinguished the difference of some and added other observations, Mingarelli, in *Catalogus codicum Graecorum Nanianorum*, p. 88-100, and p. 126-131. From the catechesis 29 of the former codex, he published, p. 91, the passage concerning Saint Thaddeus the martyr. Ibid., in codex 81, are 130 catecheses, the beginnings of which, omitting however the titles, Mingarelli set forth, ibid., p. 162 seqq. First he noted that they were edited by Livineius, but arranged in a different order and translated into Latin, yet in some places so obscurely that they are barely intelligible. Then, p. 164, seqq., three catecheses, no. 37, which is in Livineius 41, *On the lives*; then 110, in Livineius 114, *On...* etc.; then 121, in Livineius 135, *On obedience*, etc.; he published them in Greek as a specimen. Ibid., in codex 82, the same catecheses, concerning which see Mingarelli, l.c., p. 169. — Ibid., in codex 228, no. 9, the title... beginning: "I now attempt to speak to you all." See *Catalogus*, cit. p. 420. Florence, in the Laurentian codex, V, no. 1, plut. 55, *Catechesis parva*, comprised in 124 chapters. See Bandini, *Catalogus codicum Graecorum Laurentianorum*, vol. II, p. 239. The same, consisting of 134 sermons, Paris, in codex 893, no. 1, public library, and no. 4, Theodore's short poems and epigrams of various subjects. — 131 Catecheses, ibid., in codex 1018, no. 2; but at the end occur some iambic verses in praise of the author. Concerning the Neapolitan codices, see above, in vol. V, p. 791, no. 243; and p. 798, no. 5. Add a little below, to no. 23. HARL. (p) Gretserus criticizes Livineius's translation, *Rerum variarum*, lib. 1, cap. 2, p. 10. (q) Concerning the invention of the head of Saint John the Baptist, consult Cangius's *Constantinopolis Christiana*, lib. IV, p. 101. Elias du Pin, *Bibliotheca Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum*, vol. XVIII, p. 142, edition of Amsterdam, and *Memorie Trevultiane* of 1708, p. 418 seq.

^A Servatorem is mentioned in a manuscript in the possession of Lambecius, V, p. 268, (r). Theodorus Studita and Joseph (bishop of Thessalonica), his brother, are praised as poets of canons by Codinus, *Origg. CPol.*, c. 104, p. 50. Nicephorus Callistus in the *Synaxarium*: "First of all," etc. But the great poet Cosmas was the first of all to devise three odes, as a type, I suppose, of the holy and life-giving Trinity, in the great and holy week of the passion of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ; from whom the remaining Fathers, and especially among them Theodorus and Joseph the Studites, emulated him, composing in the other weeks of the holy and great Quadragesima, and handing them down to the Studites' own monastery, producing and arranging those odes more and more. Also famous among the Greeks as authors of hymns and songs are the emperor Theodorus Ducas Lascaris, whose ^B *Canon of Supplication to the All-Holy Theotokos* is described in the *Paracleticus*, p. 181. Likewise Theodorus Costonita, Theodorus Santaberenus, etc., not to mention Theodorus Prodromus, who illustrated the hymns of Cosmas and Damascene with a commentary. But let us proceed to speak of the writings of Theodorus Studita, to whom some learned men also attribute the life of Theophanes the Confessor (s), which Lipomanus, Surius, and Henschenius published in Latin on March 12, and Combefisius, having described it from the Barberini manuscript, prefixed it in Greek with a Latin version to the *Chronicle of Theophanes* published at Paris in 1655, in folio. There is also attributed to him in certain codices an *Oration on the Nativity of the Mother of God*, which begins: *Λαμπρῶς πανηγυρίζει ἡ κτίσις σήμερον*. But by the authority of more codices it is ascribed to John Damascene, among whose works it has appeared in Greek and Latin with the version of Allatius, vol. II of the new edition, p. 849 (u). The unedited writings of Theodorus Studita, which are commemorated by Jacobus Baunius in the *Elenchus* of his works (v).

23. The so-called *Magna Catechesis* (x), comprised of three members or parts: of which one is a *Catechesis*, containing 44 sermons; the second is a *Menologium*, with 33 sermons; the third is a *Didaskalia*, completed by 137 sermons: A book containing (besides the 134 sermons of the *Small Catechesis*, concerning which see above n. 15) the catecheses collected from all the catecheses of our holy Father and confessor Theodorus Studita, which are also to be recited on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and on the greater feasts of the whole year, just as they are composed. The author of his *Life* mentions this on page 21. It exists in the royal Greek manuscript, Paris 2340. In the Paris codex, however, and in the Paulinus Lipsiensis, after those *Catecheses*, it reads as follows: *Θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον, ἡ γραφὴ δὲ ᾿Αρσενίου, ἐτελειώθη μηνὶ Ἰουνίῳ δωδεκάτῃ, Ἰνδικτ. ιδ᾽ ἔτους εχμδ᾽ βασιλεύοντος Ιωάννου τοῦ Πορφυρογεννήτου*. This gift of God: the hand of Arsenius wrote it, completed in the month of June, on the twelfth day, in the fourteenth indiction of the year 6644, in the reign of John Porphyrogenitus: which year falls, by the calculation of the Greeks, in the year of Christ 1136, in which Calo-Joannes, son of Alexius Comnenus, was in the nineteenth year of the reign of Isaac. FABR. ^C The 29 titles of the *Catecheses* V. in Barvetius's *Catalogue of the Escorial Manuscripts* [which Philippus Labbeus had reprinted, and as a kind of Supplement III, added to his *Nova bibliotheca mss. librorum*, p. 175 seq., *Græcorum, Latinorum et Gallicorum, seu Specimini antiquarum lectionum Græcorum, Latinarum et Gallicarum*, Paris, 1653, 4; where on p. 188, he speaks of the *Magnae Catecheses* of Theodorus Studita], and in Oudin, vol. II, *De scriptor. eccles.*, p. 36. FABR. Fabricius had reviewed the manuscript catechetical sermons of this Theodorus Studita for the feast days of the whole year below in vol. XII, p. 275, seq. And, since I have noticed that many scholars cite that index of Fabricius, I thought it would be neither inconvenient nor ungrateful if I should restore it here in its entirety in its place, as if by right of postliminy. First, however, it is helpful, besides the codices mentioned by Fabricius in this place and by me above, n. 15, to append the knowledge of others, in which the *Magna Catechesis* is especially contained. There exist, therefore, in the Paris codex 5391, in the public library, 170 selected catecheses, to be recited on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and yet also on the greater feasts of the whole year, in the *Catechesis*, as he says ^D

^A compiler of the Catalogue of the Royal Parisian Codices, vol. II, p. 172, to each of which is prefixed an argument, comprised in a monostich iambic verse. This codex was written in the year of Christ 1136 by the hand of the monk Arsenius, as he himself left attested in iambic trimeter verses, published by Du Cange in *Constantinopolis Christiana*, book IV, page 152. — Ibid., in codices 1104 and 892, a Life of Theodore is prefixed. In the Nanian codices (besides the catechetical sermons cited above from the catalogue at n. 15), codex 61, which contains first twenty-two catecheses of Theodore, then contained another two hundred thirty of the holy abbot, some of which are now missing (Mingarelli carefully recounts them individually in the *Catalogue of the Greek Codices of the Nani Library*, pages 68–87); and codex 85, in which 28 catecheses have been translated into the Greek vernacular tongue. — In the Turin codex 327, the author of the *Catalogue of the Greek Codices of Turin*, pp. 405–410, has set down both the titles and the beginnings of each, and has observed that many occur in this index of which Fabricius made no mention, and which the author believes are without doubt unpublished: he has also indicated which of them have already seen the light of day in the Latin edition. — In Moscow, in the synodal codex 361, there are 126 catecheses. — In codex 362, in which some have been lost; but others, which are missing in the former, have been added; and in codex 363, in which are the first 74 that are read in codex 361; there is also included catechesis 28, which codex 361 lacks, and after catechesis 60 another is inserted, which begins: “Brothers and fathers, we are already toward it.” See Matthaei’s *Notitia*, p. 239, seq., edited in 8vo. — In Madrid, in the royal codex 4, which Iriarte set forth extensively and diligently in his *Catalogue of the Greek Codices of Madrid*, pp. 5–19. Contained therein are primarily 163 catecheses of Theodore the Studite, distributed into two books, whose titles and beginnings he collated with those titles and beginnings which Montfaucon reports in the Coislinian library codices 271 and 272, though he compared the titles only with the titles of the sermons, an extremely ample index of which is provided by Fabricius. Furthermore, he notes which individual ones—and they are many—are missing in the Coislinian codices, and on page 8 he observes that all the catecheses of the first book are absent from the index of Fabricius, and that not one of them has to this day appeared in print, either in Greek or Latin; whereas on page 18 he says that the 134 sermons of the second book are called the Small Catechesis. — To these catecheses belong, unless I am mistaken, the orations which are in the codices of the Parisian public library, in codex 755, n. 21, Oration pronounced on the vigil of the holy lights: *Of the lights, the preliminaries*; n. 20, Oration pronounced on the vigil of the Nativity of Christ; n. 15, *Of the blessed light-bringer*: Oration for the adoration of our Savior, pronounced on the fourth day of Lent: *Of a day of well-doing and temperance*; in codex 815, n. 7, Catechesis on imitating the passions of Christ: and n. 8, On those Christians killed in Bulgaria; in codex 887, n. 2, On the Trinity; in codex 1181, in the Appendix, on the birthday of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In codex 1491, n. 12, is his funeral oration for his own mother. I shall therefore submit those things which Fabricius formerly provided in volume XII. ^B HARL. “I have obtained,” says Fabricius, “a codex which was once the property of our *blessed* Rudolph Capellus, in which occur fifty-one catecheses of Theodore, described by the hand of the aforementioned Capellus, and hitherto unpublished in Greek. Prefixed, however, is an index of 217 sermons, by which the so-called Great Catechesis was completed, such as also exists in manuscript in the library of the Most Christian King, as well as in the codex of the Pauline Library of Leipzig. It is useful to describe those titles in this place, and at the same time to append the numbers of those sermons which are already extant in print from them, but only in Latin from the version of Jo. Livineius, using two Roman codices.”

Index of Catechetical Sermons of Theodore the Studite, for the feasts of the whole year. The larger numbers correspond to the Latin of Livineius, the smaller Arabic ones included in parentheses correspond to the Greek manuscript codex.

I [1]. On the need to pass our whole life in a state of struggle. 1. The second day of the week of renewal, or that which follows the day of Easter. II [2]. That we ought to die the voluntary death, and on good order. 2. In memory of B. Domitianus: that it is necessary for us to die a constant voluntary death, and on modesty. In the Sunday of Thomas, or the first after Easter. III [3]. That it is necessary for us to walk worthily of the monastic profession, and because we have not been persecuted for the Lord. 3. That we must pursue a life worthy of the monastic profession and the persecution which we have sustained for the Lord. Sunday of the Myrrh-bearers, or the second after Easter. IV [4]. On the need to heed the ruinous types and ways of sin for ourselves. 4. On applying circumspection, and the ruinous places and ways of sin. Sunday of the Paralytic, or the third after Easter.

NOTES (y) There is also in the Turin codex 70, with the title: *Sermon on the Holy Fathers*, and the compiler of the Catalogue of the Greek Codices of Turin, p. 174, observes that this sermon is sought in vain in the libraries of Oudin and Fabricius. HARL. (z) The version of Livineius is criticized by Jac. Gretser in *Rerum variarum*, book I, cap. 2. (a) The mention of this St. Domitianus in that catechesis is in these words: *Such is the blessed Domitianus whom we have remembered with the saints, how he practiced his way of life, and having accomplished his end with few labors and struggles, a man humble according to the flesh, but whom God exalted because he chose virtue and loved God, according to that which is written: For those who honor me I will honor, and those who despise me will be despised* (I Sam. II, 30). (b) Erroneously edited in the *Bibliotheca Patrum* of Lyon as *de molestia*.

^A 5. That we must be fragrant through the acquisition of virtues. On Wednesday of Mid-Pentecost. 6. On the fearful judgment, and on passing the days of the present life circumspectly. On the Sunday of the Samaritan Woman, or the fourth after Pascha. 7. On detachment and temperance. On the Sunday of the Blind Man, or the fifth after Pascha. 8. On the Ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that we must live among ourselves according to the will of God. On the Wednesday before the week of the Ascension. 9. That we must partake of the holy things with a pure conscience. Delivered on the feast of the Ascension. 10. That we must be careful with various foods, and on temperance. On the Sunday of the Holy Fathers, or after the Ascension. 11. On the descent of the Holy Spirit, and the death of the humble Euprepianus. On the Sunday of Pentecost. 12. That not only those who pour out their blood are martyrs, but also those who live a godly life. On the Sunday of All Saints, or the first after Pentecost. 13. On renunciation of the world and the things in the world, and teaching on the ready acceptance of the properties of our precise monastic conduct. On the Wednesday before the Sunday of the Meat-fare, or Sexagesima. 14. On the abstinence and confession required of us. On the Friday of the Meat-fare Sunday. 15. On the great and manifest day of our Lord Jesus Christ. Delivered on the day of the Meat-fare Sunday. 16. That we must be confident and stout-hearted in the present persecution. On the Wednesday before the Sunday of the Cheese-fare, when the use of cheese and eggs is omitted. 17. On temperance and prayer. On the Friday before the Sunday of the Cheese-fare, or Quinquagesima. 18. That we must in our thoughts recur to and reconsider the lives of our Fathers, and conduct ourselves similarly to them. On the Saturday of the Cheese-fare. 19. On fasting, and that of the true...

^D NOTES (c) This seventh catechesis was first edited in Greek from the Leipzig codex by Jo. Immanuel Muller in his Dissertation, Leipzig 1722, 4, published by the Studion, Constantinople monastery, pp. 33-36. (d) Livineius: of the unfortunate Cyprian. Concerning Euprepianus, Theodore states these things in his catechesis: "Have you not heard what has befallen the wretched Euprepianus? For it has just been reported to us that he has died. And he has died—alas for my misery—not a temporal death, but he has been entangled in the eternal one, having severed his life with that Eve. Alas for what has befallen the poor man. You know how formerly the lamp shone above his head, in faith and in running the race. Was he not long since shut up with me in confession? Was he not advanced to the rank of steward in the Sakkoudion? Was he not tested with trials on account of the present confession, having been scourged twice and having endured them excellently? Then, having the money-box of the monastery as steward, and being tempted by the gold and entangled by avarice like Judas, he betrayed, alas, Christ; having stripped off the profession of virginity, and having purchased for himself, in the manner of Gehazi, fields and vineyards...

^A of the submissive and obedient person, true fasting is the cutting off of one's own will, 19. On the Sunday of Tyrophagus (Cheesefaring). 20. On fasting and impassibility, delivered at the beginning of the fasts, 20. On the Wednesday of the first week of Lent. 21. On adorning our incorruptible house through the acquisition of the virtues, 21. On the Friday of the first week of fasting. 22. Exhortatory discourse on the entry of the Holy Lent, and on the second coming, 22. On the Saturday of the first week. ^B 23. That we should not overextend ourselves beyond our power in our studies for God, but rather nourish the soul with spiritual contemplations, 23. On the Sunday of the first week of fasting. 24. On guarding the soul from soul-destroying passions, 24. On Wednesday of the second week. 25. On concord and love, and on enduring the toils of virtue courageously for the sake of obtaining the kingdom of heaven, 25. On the Friday of the second week. 26. On our passing the days of fasting gently and easily in the hope of the endless life, 26. On the Sunday of the second week of fasting. 27. On the sudden departure from this life, and instruction on securely keeping our senses and our mind from base desires, 27. On Wednesday of the third week of fasting. ^C 28. That we ought not to submit ourselves to trials, and on fasting, 28. On the Friday of the third week. 29. Historical account of the Christians slain in Bulgaria in the Holy Lent, 29. On the Sunday of the third week of fasting. 30. That this Pascha is a type of the future and eternal Pascha, and on patience and fortitude, 30. On Wednesday of the middle week of fasting. 31. That this is the meaning of celebrating and keeping Pascha in the Lord God daily: the mortification of the passions and the resurrection of virtues, 31. On the Friday of the middle week. ^D 32. On the midpoint of the Holy Lent, and encouragement towards the continuation of our asceticism, 32. On the Sunday of the fourth week. 33. That those who have passed their life in trials and distresses [attain] a certain painless and ineffable...

NOTE. (e) V. Cat. codd. Gr. Nanian. pag. 94, n. 58. (f) In this catechesis, Theodore makes mention of Plato, our holy father, the imitator of the great Forerunner, whose admonition of the adulterous king we are honored to commemorate today. [Alexander having been promoted to the priesthood.] For you have surely heard what the wretched Alexander has done. He renounced both the submission and the confession [of faith]. And whence has he come to this state, if not from the fact that he is isolated—a state I often fault in those who are isolated—and from his having become a lover of money, like Judas? Both, therefore, betrayed the Lord of glory: the one to the Jews, and the other to those of like mind with the Jews, the Iconoclasts.

^A enjoying pleasure. Wednesday of the fifth week.

54. Regarding abstinence not only from foods, but also from evil affections. Spoken during the holy Great Fast, 34. On the Wednesday of the fifth week.

35. That we ought to bear every kind of torment in imitation of Christ and the saints, 38. On Friday of the fifth week.

36. Regarding continence and humility, 35. On the Saturday of the Akathistos hymn, ^B where it is sung by the people standing through the night without sitting.

37. That we must always be renewed toward the front through endurance of the visible and invisible temptations that befall us, 33. On Sunday of the fifth week.

38. Regarding the arrangement of the fasts, and instruction before the opening of the monastery, 35. On Wednesday of Palm Week.

39. That we must guard ourselves from the devil’s craftiness, and regarding not wandering off, 39. On Friday of Palm Week.

40. That we ought not to be careless after the passing of the holy Great Fast, lest we lose the virtues we have previously achieved, and regarding ^C the feast of Palms and the passion of the Savior, 40. On the Saturday of Lazarus.

41. Regarding our excellent conduct, spoken in the week of Palms, 41. On Palm Sunday.

42. Regarding the saving passion, and instruction on humility and patience, 42. On Great and Holy Wednesday.

43. Regarding the saving passion, and about concord, 43. On Great and Holy Thursday.

44. Regarding the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, 44. On Great and Holy Friday.

In the month of September, at the beginning of the indiction. With God, the beginning of the menologium.

45. Regarding the insurmountable gift of God, and love for Him, and hatred ^D of the devil, and regarding humility. Spoken at the beginning of the year, 45.

46. That we should not introduce the thorns and thistles of the passions, but bear the grapes of virtue, 46. In the same month, at the vintage.

47. That we should not cast ourselves down into shameful passions, nor consider pleasure to be sweet, 47. In the same month, the 14th day, on the Exaltation of the precious Cross.

48. Regarding the spiritual seed, and watching in divine meditations, 48. In the same month, the 26th day, at the sowing.

^A XXVIII [49]. Regarding faith, and that we should not spend our life aimlessly and in vain, and that present things are a dream and a shadow compared to the future. 49. Month of October, 6th day, at the sowing.

XXX [50]. Regarding the unutterable care of the Master Christ, and the security of our life according to God. 50. Month of November, 6th day, in memory of holy Paul the Confessor.

XXXI [51]. Regarding the future judgment, and that the present persecution has become for some material for virtue, and for others for vice. 51. Month of the same, 11th day, in memory of our holy Father and Confessor Theodore the Studite.

[52] That we shall receive eternal rewards for the trials we endure in our martyrdom-like obedience. 52.

XXXII [53]. Regarding the Nativity ^B of the Savior, and maintaining our ascetic or monastic life with intensity. 53.

[54]. That we ought to imitate the simplicity of children, because of Christ, who for our sake became an infant. 54.

XXXIV [55]. Regarding departure from this life, and the rest in the kingdom of heaven. 55.

XXXV [56]. Regarding virginity, and the return of Brother Memnon. 56.

[57]. Regarding the feast of the holy Theophany. 57.

XXXVII [58]. That we must not feast with carousals and drunkenness, and regarding the remembrance of death. 58.

XXXVI [59]. Regarding being grounded in our confession, and regarding the falling asleep of Brother Theodulus, spoken between the festivals. 59.

XXXVII [60]. Regarding the beneficence of God, and the drawing upward of our God-captured and beautiful life. 60.

XXXVIII [61]. On imitating the lives of the Fathers, ^C and on our remaining in that to which we were called by God. 61.

XXXIX [62]. That we ought to be zealous for the lives of our holy Fathers. 62.

XL [63]. Regarding our living in newness of life, as we have promised through the holy habit. 63.

XLI [64]. That nothing among men is blessed, except virtue. For this alone is worthy of beatitude. 64.

NOTES

(i) In this Catechesis, he makes mention of holy Paul the Confessor with these words: "Just as we have heard of the now eulogized blessed Confessor Paul, whose rewards and struggles were as great as they were, which we also, imitating..."

(j) Theodore himself speaks thus of himself immediately at the beginning of this sermon or catechesis: "Brothers and fathers, I have been ill, and again I have been recalled by your prayers. But until when are we to come to 'again'? The day of death shall surely come, ^D when there will be no place for 'again,' separating me from you and sending me forth from the things of here. Yet one must not for this reason account it an orphanage, since it has no place for 'again,' separating me from you and sending me forth from the things of here. Yet one must not for this reason account it an orphanage, since it is established among Greek monks that the reading of the catecheses of Theodore is frequented during the sacred offices, with the brothers standing and listening, while the ecclesiarch reads them publicly, as Allatius noted, *De Dominicis Græcorum*, § 9.

(k) See Lambecius III, p. 479 seq. Kollarius above at the writings of Theodore the Studite. 20. HARL.

65. On viewing the lives of the Fathers, that we may emulate their attainments. ^A 65 XLII.

66. That we should imitate the sufferings of the Lord. 66 LXII.

67. On the incarnate economy of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that we must celebrate it spiritually. Spoken on the day of the Annunciation. 67 LXIV.

68. On virginity. 68 LXV.

69. On the mortification of the passions, and spiritual harvest. 69 XVI.

70. On our godly way of life, and not trembling in trials. (Added by Livineius: After the commemoration of Saint Theodore Stratelates.) 70 XIV. ^B

71. On the spiritual harvest, and the intensified asceticism of the servants of Christ. 71 XVII.

72. Dogmatic [discourse] on the honor and veneration of the holy icons. 72 XV.

73. On patience, and receiving those who come for renunciation. After the forty days of the holy apostles. 73 XIX.

74. On lack of attachment to the pleasures of this life, and desire for eternal goods. 74 XVIII. ^C

75. That we must preserve the beauty of the soul and its undefiled radiance, and on repentance. *On Transfiguration*. 75 XX.

76. On the spiritual celebration held here, and the entreaty for the kingdom of the heavens. In the dormition of the holy Theotokos. 76 XXIII.

77. On the falling asleep of John, the most holy metropolitan of Chalcedon, and that we shall recognize one another in the resurrection. 77 XXII.

Second part of the Sermons.

^D 78. Doctrine on peace. *First Sunday*. 78 XI.

79. That we must spend our life with reverence and love for God, and on the falling asleep of our brother Eudocimus. *Second Sunday*. 79 XII.

80. On the remembrance of death, and the defense of our past life before the fearful tribunal. *Third Sunday*. 80 XIII.

81. On the remembrance of death; in which [is reflected] also the falling asleep of Michael, the most holy metropolitan of Synada. 81 XXI.

82. That one should not act by partiality toward the brotherhood, the steward, or anyone else in the tasks entrusted to them, but with compassion and brotherly love, so that God may be glorified. 82 XLIV.

83. Reproof of brothers who have acted disorderly, and instructive teaching on good order. 83 XLV.

^A XLVI [84]. On peace and gentleness, kindness and virginity, 7. XLVII [85]. That we must not allow evil thoughts to persist in us, and on not striking (anyone), 8. XLVIII [86]. On obedience, concord, and peace, 9. LXXIV [87]. Against Michael, who reigned impiously, and concerning the perverted faith... and that we should not be surprised when we encounter temptations, 10. LXXV [88]. That those who have chosen to live according to God must be without boldness (in sin); and on bearing painful things with gratitude, looking toward the future reward, 11. LXXVI [89]. On the remembrance of death, and on hating the world and the things of the world, 12. LXXVII [90]. On our true and unadulterated obedience and concord, and on keeping the divine commandments, 13. LXXVIII [91]. On listening attentively to the divine Scriptures, 14. LXXIX [92]. That we must not be discouraged, but be courageous for the work to which God has called us, 15. LXXX [93]. Instruction on faith, 16. LXXXI [94]. On love for the head (superior), and on not being occupied with the vanities of life, but stretching forward towards better things, 17. LXXXII [95]. On cleansing ourselves from every defilement through God-given repentance, 18. LXXXIII [96]. Prayer of thanksgiving for providing well for our brethren who visit us, 19. LXXXIV [97]. That we must not give an occasion to those who seek an occasion, and on struggling against the passions, 20. LXXXV [98]. Instruction on fleeing from destructive pleasure, 21. ^B LXXXVI [99]. On thanksgiving, and on not faltering in times of temptation, 22. LXXXVII [100]. On poverty, and on not living in isolation, 23. LXXXVIII [101]. On the remembrance of death, 24. LXXXIX [102]. That we must perform our salvation with all eagerness and intent, 25. XC [103]. That we must not open the door to the devil by accepting evil thoughts, 26. XCI [104]. On eagerly resisting the war of the wretched demons, 27. XCII [105]. That we must not deliberate (or argue) during the duration of the persecution, but refer the matter to God, 28. XCIII [106]. On those who have been enticed by the pleasures of the flesh, and who have been recalled again through repentance, 29. ^{C D}

NOTES. (m) Livineius added the bracketed text from his own manuscript. (n) Livineius read "of concord," but translates it by "confession."

^A 107. Of those things which are thought to be burdensome in the coenobitic life, but which are very joyful because of the hope laid up for us in heaven.

108. Of the narrow and afflicted way, and the good inn of eternal life.

109. Of the departure of brother Carterius, and teaching concerning concord and peace.

110. That we must turn away from those who have fallen into penance, and have subsequently joined themselves to sectaries.

111. Of yielding to the superior, and bearing the rewards of obedience with thanksgiving.

112. Of fastening ourselves to the fear of God so as to escape the soul-destroying onsets of the demons: and of psalmody.

113. That we ought to direct the mind rightly toward the ineffable beauties of God’s creation.

114. Of the incarnation of Christ the Master, and the lamentation for our brothers who have apostatized; and teaching that we ourselves should be firm and constant.

115. Of the craftiness of the deceitful serpent, and how, by walking in true humility and the royal ^B path, we may escape his multiform devices.

116. Of keeping the divine commandments, and of the just threat against the negligent.

117. Of sincere and true love and obedience toward the superior, and of the fearful posture of the just Judge.

118. Of purifying ourselves from the passions, and taking up the toils of virtue.

119. Of guiding the voyage of our life soberly and vigilantly.

120. Of the remembrance of death, and that we should not be negligent in the participation of the holy mysteries.

121. That we ought to be swift and eager for the contests of virtue.

122. Of the passing of brother Theosostus, and of living piously and holily.

123. Of our joyful life, and of not being despondent in the struggle against the adversary.

124. Of patience and compunction.

125. Of the last day and the appearing ^C of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

126. Of faith and love, and virginity.

127. Of the monastic life, and of standing against the heresy already present.

^A 128. On the memory of death, and the falling asleep of the brother Jacob, and on repentance, 51. 129. On the visible and invisible temptations and afflictions that assail us, and on attaining the blessed life, 52. 130. On the fall of the brother Memnon, and an exhortation not to be alone, so that we may avoid the soul-destroying passions that arise in us through the senses, 53. 131. On the security of an unswerving confession and of our submission, and on intense attentiveness and the rousing of one's duties, 54. 132. That he who seeks God through the keeping of the divine commandments is undismayed at the time of departure by the interference of the demons, and on the memory of death, and of love, 55.

^B 133. That those who are crucified to the world ought not to gape at the vanities of life, but rather to improve themselves toward better things, 56. 134. On the memory of death, and on the passing of a certain venerable elder, 57. 135. On serving the Lord persistently and joyfully, and on running the course of our ascetic life with intensity, 58. 136. On advancing tirelessly in our spiritual journey, hating the pleasures of the present life, and on our blessed monastery, 59. 137. On our not opening a door to the passions, but rather remaining outside of unnatural desires, 60.

^C 138. On obedience, and on being eager for every duty with faith and a pure heart, 61. 139. That those who are crucified to the world through true renunciation and obedience ought to bear the separation of the body with joy, 62. 140. On standing courageously and bravely against the human temptations that are kindled, 63. 141. On obedience and the cutting off of self-will, 64. 142. That one must struggle against invisible enemies with persistent attentiveness. And on having escaped the company of heretics, 65.

^D 143. On the memory of death, and on virginity, 66. 144. On the godly life and our blessed conduct, 67. 145. On the falling asleep of the brother Gregory, and on our always being prepared for the departure, 68. 146. On life-giving confession, and that one must share with others whatever gift each has received, 69. 147. On not taking exception to the rebukes of the hegumen. And that through many afflictions we must enter into the kingdom of heaven, 70.

148. That it behooves us to perform the duties of our ministry with a pure conscience, and not to discharge the things of the Lord negligently. ^A 149. That we ought to be fixed in the fear of God, lest we be mastered by our own desires. 150. That we must endure hunger, thirst, and every other affliction even unto death, as we promised God in our congregation. 151. That we must not hold secret councils to discuss matters that lead to the destruction of our souls. 152. That we must endure all the sorrows that befall us in our monastic life, so that we may attain the kingdom of heaven. ^B 153. That we must not be distracted by the pleasures of this life, since we are God’s and have left all things behind. 154. That we must hasten and show manliness in our spiritual strivings, so that we may obtain the crowns of patience. 155. That we ought not to lose heart or despair in the temptations which befall us from the enemy. 156. That we must endure the fire of desire and the burden of monastic exercise, and not grow weary in the waves of temptation. 157. That we must remain in the confession and the calling wherewith God has called us, and not lose our hard-won and much-desired achievements through lukewarmness. ^C 158. That we must fence our souls with the virtues, for many are they who war against us from on high. 159. On thanksgiving and patience. 160. That we must constrain ourselves in the spiritual struggle, and not vaunt ourselves. 161. That we must be sober and perform the admirable acts of blessed submission, and be attentive to ourselves. 162. That we are greatly benefited and make progress when we are instructed and taught. 163. That we must preserve our spiritual life without corruption. ^D 164. On our excellent submission, and on considering nothing to be greater than it. 165. That we must bear with thanksgiving those things in our life according to Christ which are painful. 166. That we must not neglect our own salvation even unto death. 167. That we must look to one thing alone, namely, the salvation of our souls. 168. That we must not be sluggish, but ready to obey the commandments of God. 169. That our humble catechetical instruction is wont to bring no small gain to our souls by the grace of Christ.

NOTICE. INDEX OF CATECHETICAL SERMONS

[170]. That for those who run well, the crowns of righteousness are laid up. 413. [171]. That we must cast off all listlessness, and be wide awake for spiritual work. 414. [172]. On preparing ourselves through virtues in the encounters of the enemy. 415. [173]. On giving heed to the threats and teachings of the holy Fathers. 416. [174]. On brothers who have run away, and on giving heed to ourselves. 417. [175]. That we must not hide evil thoughts, but triumph over them through confession. 418. [176]. On the fearful day of judgment, and on him who apostatized and brought us ^B before worldly tribunals in the Jewish fashion. 419. [177]. On easily bearing the stadium of our excellent subjection. 420. [178]. That continence is for a little while, but virtue remains forever. 421. [179]. On thanksgiving and good order. 422. [180]. On imitating the lives of holy men, and enduring tasks nobly. 423. [181]. On zeal and diligence in our excellent way of life. 424. [182]. On patience towards the brothers in Saccudium. 425. [183]. On our spiritual warfare against the brothers in Saccudium and at Saint Christopher. 426. [184]. A thanksgiving to the brothers in Saccudium. 427. [185]. On our joyful subjection towards the brothers in Saccudium. 428. [186]. That the superior must lay down his soul for his own flock, and on the zeal and diligence of our life according to God, and on guarding ourselves from the snares of the devil. 429. [187]. That we must be in struggle and care in the spiritual stadium until death, so that we may be crowned with the crowns of righteousness by the King of all, God. 430. [188]. On guarding ourselves from evil companionship, and from useless and untime- ^C ly forwardness, and on our bearing the ascetic hardships with patience in the hope of the breadth and enjoyment of eternal goods. 431. [189]. On the earthquake that occurred at hand, and the consummation of this age, and an exhortatory teaching on zeal and diligence for the performance of the commandments of God. 432. [190]. On love for the superior, and on patience and endurance so as not to disgrace any of the things set before us in our angelic habit. 433. [191]. That virtue is rough and steep, while vice is easy to grasp and downward-sloping, and for this reason...

we must strive and struggle to ascend to that very pinnacle of virtue, that we may attain the eternal prize.

[192]. On the care of the rational sheep of Christ, and on the departure of our brothers, and the security of our life according to God. ^A

[193]. That we must consider what we are, whence we have come, what we have become, and whither we shall again go, so that, having lived a good life, we may receive eternal rewards.

[194]. That a superior must do and see to everything for those who are running the stadium of martyrdom by obedience, such as brings contentment, so that, having carried off the victory against their enemies, they may be repaid with eternal crowns by God, the dispenser of the contest.

[195]. On the love of the Master Christ for us, and that one attains virtue with much labor and sweat, and that we must not be negligent toward our toils, so that we may attain the kingdom of heaven. ^B

[196]. That we must perform with intensity and strength those things that contribute to the salvation of the soul, and on abstinence from murmuring during changes of service.

[197]. That a superior must lay down his soul for the rational sheep, as one who will render an account for each one on the day of judgment, and on the cutting off of one's own wills.

[198]. On the vote of the hegumen of the Dalmatos monastery, and on humility, that this is the true knowledge which excels worldly wisdom. ^C

[199]. Exhortatory, and how one must resist the assaults of the devil.

[200]. Both exhortatory and laudatory.

[201]. Compunctive, and on the falling asleep of the lord Raphael, who truly conducted himself as a subject.

[202]. That by arming ourselves with the weapons of virtue we easily resist the bitter and Assyrian-minded devil, casting down his varied and manifold machinations.

[203]. On the progress of our venerable life, and on being warmly awakened to our duties, since the work is referred to God, and on not leading the brotherhood in a servile manner, but in a brotherly one. ^D

[204]. Exhortatory, and how one must resist and ward off the assaults of the devil, for we have need of much sobriety every single day.

[205]. That we must compete and war in our spiritual warfare against the opposing thoughts that fall upon us, so that we may receive from Christ, the dispenser of the contest, the prizes of victory.

[206]. On the guarding and purification of our senses…

and the declaring of evil thoughts. ^A [207]. On the flight of the brother Elpidius, and the return of Euthalius, and on performing one’s work with intention according to our allotted strength. [208]. On our imitating our God-bearing Fathers, of avoiding shameful passions, of watchfulness, and of the labor of the work according to our soul. [209]. That we must guard our monastic life blamelessly and uncorruptedly, and on enduring every temptation even unto death for the commandment of God. [210]. That those who are heads of the community must lead the brotherhood in a way worthy of God, and on the exactness of our life in God, and on our escaping pernicious license. ^B [211]. On enduring the hardships of obedience, and on accepting the reproofs of the superior with kindness, and herein also on living according to the imitation of our holy Fathers. [212]. On searching the divine Scriptures, so that we may not be ignorant of the multiform devices of the devil. [213]. That we must stand courageously for the contest of obedience, and on paying heed to the teachings of the God-bearing Fathers, and not gaping after vain and transitory things. ^C [214]. That whoever possesses an unbroken faith toward the superior, and treasures up for himself additions of virtues day after day, will be deemed worthy to be numbered in the lot of the saints. [215]. On paying heed to the teachings of the Fathers, and not gaping after present things, but looking toward the things to be. [216]. On mourning for those of our brothers who have fallen away, and on controlling our tongues. [217]. On not being negligent in our duties, but keeping watch for one’s own salvation.

Panegyric volume, etc.

which exists in the royal codex 273, and in the transcript of Sirmond. It is published, as I have said, in Greek and Latin, with Francis Combefis as interpreter, in the French book of Du Cange, concerning the head of Saint John the Baptist. VII.) Encomium on the holy apostle and evangelist John the Theologian(q): it exists in the royal codex 273, from which we have it copied by Sirmond. VIII.) On the veneration of the cross, in royal codices 143 and 276. It exists in the manuscript codex of Metaphrastes (Colbertine 450), in the month of December. ^A Life, page 25 C. But they exist in the Vatican Greek codex 430, then in the transcripts of Sirmond and Arcudius [and in codex Coislin. 212. V. Montfaucon, Cat. codd. Coisl. 272. HARL.]

27. Scholium on the particular ascetical pieces of the great Basil. We have it described in Greek by the hand of Sirmond. Arcudius also described it from the Vatican Greek codex 431. FABR. See Lambecius 3, page 315, edition 4. Kollar, and p. 317 concerning codex cæs. 65. — Paris in the public library, codices 476, 896, n. 3; also added is a Latin interpretation, 1202, n. 5. — Moscow in codices 241, 242, and 243, with the ascetical works of Basil the Great. V. Matthaei, Notitia mss. Mosquens. synod. p. 156 and 157, 8vo edition. HARL.

29. Brevis institutio Theodori Studitæ, in manuscript codex 32 of the Jesuit college of Paris, which has the title:

Διδασκαλία πάνυ ὠφέλιμος ἐκτεθεῖσα παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων Πατέρων

30. Constitutiones monasterii Studitarum. We have a Greek transcript by a learned man. FABR. Iriart noting in the catalogue of Greek codices of Madrid, p. 19, that there are at the end of the codex four leaves, which seem to contain fragments of monastic precepts from the constitutions of the monastery of the Studites, 1) mutilated without title and beginning; 2) concerning Holy Lent, beginning Τελῶμεν; 3) concerning the quantity of food and drink and the proper order at tables (Iriart in the Nesselian catalogue of the Vienna library, part v, page 139, n. 3, observes that the ascetical rule of Theodore the Studite concerning the quantity of food is mentioned; but that it begins far differently than the chapter in the Madrid codex); 4) concerning proportion in monasteries, and two other chapters, whose titles and contexts, partly torn, partly worn away by age, cannot be read. It seems that "Concerning the prefects of monasteries, not to be angered" in the Mazarine codex pertains to those constitutions. V. Montfaucon, Bibl. biblioth. mss. II, p. 1316. A. HARL. ^C

31. Opus de dispensatione in universum. Against the Moechians(s), without doubt. The author himself mentions it, book 1, epistle 49, page 349.

32. Quaterniones sive Syntagma (adversus Moechianos), in which Theodore offers and weaves together no opinion of his own, but only the documents and precepts of the divine Fathers, as he himself says, lib. 1, ep. 43, page 333.

33. Quaterniones etc., in which the impious iconoclastic dogmas are expounded and refuted; sent by Theodore to the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, and to various monasteries: as is clear from Theodore, lib. II, ep. 14, page 401 d, 404 c, 407 d, 411 b.

34. Invectiva adversus iconomachos etc. He mentions this work himself at the beginning of the first Antirrheticus, page 89 b.

35. Libellus et quaterniones quatuordecim, in which are contained sermons and lives of the brethren in metric verses. Theodore mentions it, lib. II, ep. 61, page 484 d. ^D

36. Triodia in sanctam Quadragesimam etc. Mention is made of it in the Life, page 69 a.

37. Liber versibus iambicis, concerning the creation and fall of the first man, etc., and concerning Cain, Enoch, Noe, etc., and concerning the entire heresy of the Iconomachs. Author of the Life, page 28 a.

38. S. Patris nostri Theodori Studitæ de quantitate et qualitate ciborum. In codex 46, n. 3, Græc. Hist. eccl. mss. of the Imperial Vienna library. See Lambecius lib. VIII, p. 456. [p. 957. Kollar. Add. ad n. 30. ex Iriart. cat. ascripta. HARL.]

NOTES. (q) V. supra, n. 21. HARL. (r) At Lambecius, VIII, p. 451 [s. p. 947. ed. Kollar.

Ἐκ τῶν ὅρων τοῦ ὁσίου Πατρὸς ἡμῶν Θεοδώρου καὶ Ομολογητοῦ, τοῦ Στουδίτου, περὶ τῆς ἑβδομάδος τῆς Τυροφάγου ὅτι ἐν ταύτῃ οἱ μὴ μεταέχοντες τυροῦ, ἀναθέματι καθυποβάλλονται.

39. Hymn concerning the life and solitude of St. John the Baptist. Michael mentions this in the Life of Theodore, p. 28 ^A.

40. Certain shorter pericopes: one, concerning the penalties to which parents are to be subjected if an infant should die unbaptized within the seventh or the fortieth day. This is in the *Canonarium* of the Jesuit College in Paris. Two others, in an ancient collection of a certain Greek concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit against the Latins, which in the Royal Codex is titled *Confession concerning the Trinity*. Sirmond transcribed these two fragments in Greek from the Vallicellani Codex.

The omissions of the most learned Baunius may be added to these.

41. Oration on the life and praises of the great Arsenius, from which Allatius cites a passage in his book on Purgatory, p. 733. Concerning Arsenius the anchorite, on Mount Scetis in Libya, circa 455 A.D. It begins: “Αστὴρ ἀειφανὴς ἡμῖν” [A star shining forever for us], with an interpretation by Joannes Pinus, S. J., in vol. IV of *Acta Sanctorum*, July 19, pp. 617-631. More on this Arsenius ibid., p. 605: ms. Bodleian, see *Catalogus manuscriptorum*, p. 418; see E. Læscher, *Edle-Fruchte*, III, p. 459. FABRICIUS. In the Coislin Codex, p. 418. HARLEIUS.

[In the *Catalogus manuscriptorum Angliæ*, etc., vol. I, no. 280, in codex Cromwell 103: *Testimony of Theodore the Studite*. It begins: “ἀκούων τοῦ θείου Δαβίδ, λέγοντος” [hearing of the divine David, saying]. — In codex Baroccianus 91, and codex Th. Roe 18, under no. 264 of the catalogue: *Questions and answers: concerning those ordained presbyters*. — In codex Laudi 36, under no. 688 of the catalogue: *Excerpts from the Studite*. — In Montfaucon, *Bibliotheca Coisliniana*, p. 113, codex 39: *To Naucratius concerning polygamy*; ibid.: *Fragments or Excerpts*, pp. 191, 198 (bis), and 412. — A fragment in the codices of the Paris Public Library, 1754, where the Artzibarius is discussed, and 3100. — In Florence, in the Laurentian codices 36, 5, plut. 5; and 12, 3, plut. 9, a fragment concerning the Holy Spirit; see Bandini, *Catalogus codicum graecorum Laurentianae*, I, p. 61 (where he notes that the fragments are presented by Leo Allatius against Hottinger, ch. 19, p. 421, and *concerning the agreement* of the books II, ch. 13, § 4) and p. 407. — Codex VI, 8, plut 89: *Fragment concerning the predetermination and foreknowledge of God*, “ἐκ τοῦ εἰς τοὺς ἀπ᾽ αἰώνων κεκειμημένους τροπάριον” [from the troparion for those who have been laid to rest from the ages]. See Bandini, loc. cit. III, p. 295. The same, vol. I, pp. 99, 348, and 434, notes that Theodore is cited in the *Exposition of the sacred precepts*; then by Joannes Cantacuzenus against Palamas, and in the *Thesaurus of the orthodox faith*. Add above, in this volume, p. 280. HARLEIUS.]

ANOTHER NOTICE,

Theodore, of the Studion monastery over which he himself presided, called Studite, was an author of great reputation. He himself endured much for the defense of the sacred images and ecclesiastical institutions, so that his entire life, as the common saying goes, was passed under an angry star and an ill-omened spirit. His excessive miseries, imprisonments, exiles, and oppressions have been pursued at length and learnedly by Michael the monk and another uncertain author who wrote his life. The work of Michael the monk begins: “Πολλὸν μὲν τῶν ἁγίων κατὰ διαφόρους χώρας” [Many of the saints in various regions]. The work of the uncertain author, which is preserved in my manuscript, begins: “Καὶ πᾶσι μὲν ἡδὺς καὶ τοῦ παντὸς ἄξιος ὁ μέγας Πατὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ διδάσκαλος Θεόδωρος” (1) [And to all indeed sweet and worthy of everything is our great Father and teacher Theodore]. That it is by John, one might say with no light conjecture, I do not know by whom, since at the end of the life it is read: “Θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον, καὶ πόνος Ἰωάννου” [God's gift, and the labor of John] (2). Unless that labor could be understood not as the composition, but also as the copying. Truly, since in the said codex other items are described in the same character and with a similar note of writing, and it has nowhere mentioned said labor until after the life of Theodore, perhaps it is not unreasonably understood as the composition. But let others judge that. Furthermore, there was had, concerning his passing, a long epistolary discourse of Naucratius the monk, a disciple of so great a father, to his spiritual brothers and fathers (3). For not only his disciples, but many others as well, exercised their talent and pen in praising him and in recounting his achievements, as Michael the monk indicated in his *Life*.

There would be no end if we were to attempt to collect here what others have written in his praises. I shall append only certain troparia from my manuscript, by which I might show openly how great this man was in the Church of God. The first is: “Your ascetic life, with the practices of virtues, O wise one, having shone forth like the sun, gathers, and gathers all piously toward the path of salvation, blessed Theodore; those in ignorance of the ignorance and passions, and of many transgressions, guides toward divine knowledge through the teachings of your works, the beautiful one; but even now do not cease to be an intercessor for your flock to Christ.” II. “Your zeal toward God clearly testifies for you the grace of the Baptist, O God-bearer; for those who corrupt themselves with the act of adultery...

^A clearly you have exposed the beauty of the Church, Theodore; for with boldness, openly and powerfully, with divine courage, and as though with arrows, you have fenced off the incarnation of the Lord by your writing.” III. “As an excellent husbandman, you have planted a new vine for God, O wise one, and watered with abundance of the word of teaching the multitudes of monks, O all-blessed Theodore; for the Queen [of cities] you have revealed as the City of God in this [vine], in which, having increased in beauty, she stretched out her branches, bearing fruit as a confession of the faith of Orthodoxy.” IV. “As a dual-natured, ever-flowing spring pouring out waters in the world, we faithfully and piously run to you; from there comes the discourse of your teachings, which you pour out to us richly from your honey-dropping lips; but, O sacred-minded Father, do not forget your flock, that we may be delivered from every necessity, and corruption, and from the passions, O sanctified Father Theodore.” V. “The virtue that blossoms in faith, and the endurance in your ascetic discipline, draws all to the hymnody of your achievements, O all-blessed Theodore; whence, with your divine melodies, you have clearly released to us the variety of flowers; wherefore the choirs of the bodiless ones assemble, and the Church celebrates your memory, mystically boasting; do not cease to intercede with Christ the God for the salvation of our souls.”

^B Now let us speak of his writings. Possevinus reports that he left two fragments: the other an epistle to his son Naucratius, in which he deals with heresies and schism; the other a fragment in which he deals with the honor to be deferred to the holy images, and [states that it] exists in the third volume of the *Bibliotheca sanctorum Patrum* of Bignæus, in the second edition. The work itself had appeared earlier at Antwerp in the year 1558, joined to the three books of John of Damascus against those who traduce and accuse the holy images. He also wrote a catechetical epistle to those who were in prison for the sake of the cult of the sacred images, whom he exhorted to stand firm in the Catholic faith, which we read in the ninth volume of the *Annals* of Cardinal Baronius under the year 914; just as we read another catechetical one by the same Studite to the brothers under the year 818; and another of the same argument, and another on Eustratius concealing his fall, which is number 16 in the Columnensian codex, from which Baronius took it. There is also a disputation of the Studite himself against the Emperor Constantine Copronymus in the year 795. But these are minor items, and far from the more illustrious writings. Wherefore his greater writings are to be enumerated; from which labor Sirmond would have easily liberated us, if he had finally brought to light this father, whom he has been bringing forth for such a long time; but since he has not done so up to this point, let us compile a catalog of such works as we have been able to collect.

He wrote other and various orations on the praises of different saints, and on the solemnities of the Church. And this book, in which orations of this kind were contained, he called

Panegyric

These are unpublished, so far as I know.

Oration on the Dormition of our holy Lady the Theotokos

Oration on the Nativity of John the Forerunner

Oration on the Decapitation of the Forerunner

^A I have in my possession his catechetical oration for the Sunday of the Resurrection. Beginning: "What is this, beloved brothers and lovers of the feast?" It was reported to me that the most learned Sirmond had abandoned the labor of editing this Father, because he had not yet been able to obtain most of his orations on various saints, which were reported to be lurking in the Escorial. I fear he was deceived by some sciolist, who, upon running through his catecheses and seeing various solemnities and names of saints placed before them (such as: *On Easter. On the Transfiguration. On the memory of Michael, most holy metropolitan of Synada. On the memory of John, metropolitan of Chalcedon. On the Vigil of the Dormition of the Theotokos. On the beginning of the Indiction. On the memory of the martyr Thaddaeus. On Saint Paul the Confessor. On the memory of Saint Basil, and of Chrysostom, and of Saint Ephrem. On the Annunciation.* In Pascha. In transfigurationem. In memoriam Michaelis sanctissimi metropolitæ Synadorum. In memoriam Joannis metropolitæ Chalcedonensis. In vigiliam Deiparæ dormitionis. In principium indictionis. In memoriam martyris Thaddæi. In sanctum Paulum homologetam. In memoriam sancti Basilii, Chrysostomi, et sancti Ephræm. In annuntiationem, et similia), he imagined that these were diverse orations on various saints and solemnities delivered by the same man, and distinct from the catecheses preserved in that same place; this is what also happened to Possevino, who, after mentioning one hundred and thirty-five catecheses translated from the Greek and published at Antwerp by the efforts of Andreas Schott, mentions one hundred and thirty-four sermons for the feasts of the whole year issued there by Joannes Bellerus in the year 1603, translated by Joannes Livineius, which, however, Gesner testifies are indeed Theodore's catecheses: "Some years ago, the catecheses of the same Theodore were published, translated from the Greek by Joannes Livineius." His catecheses were published in Latin, as we have said, by the Antwerp editors through the efforts of Andreas Schott, and in Greek they are found here and there in Italy in the Vatican, Altempsian, and Barberini collections, and among the Germans in the Bavarian library. It should be known, furthermore, that Theodore composed two books of catecheses, of which he called the one the *Little Catechesis*, containing one hundred and thirty-four sermons which he dictated from his own mouth to his disciples; the other is the *Great Catechesis*, in which he explains in more prolix discourse the institutions of the monks and the doctrine by which they might attain the perfect method of that life. The author of his life gives a fuller account (chap. 35). As for the catecheses currently at hand, since they match the number of the *Little Catechesis* and consist of briefer colloquies, it is clearly manifest that it is the *Little Catechesis*. As to whether the *Greater* one lurks anywhere, it is a matter for more curious investigation. ^B He also wrote a dogmatic book, in which he refutes the attackers of the images with most powerful arguments, and spiritedly scores the evil deeds of princes. Among these orations must be reckoned those that still survive in the Barberini collection and in the royal Parisian codex 7091. *Antirrheticus primus contra Iconomachos* (First Antirrhetic against the Iconoclasts). Beginning: "It is the time to speak, but not to be silent, for whoever is in any way able." *Antirrheticus secundus contra eosdem* (Second Antirrhetic against the same). Beginning: "The word of truth is of one sort." *Antirrheticus tertius contra eosdem* (Third Antirrhetic against the same). Beginning: "David, the chanter of songs, with one missile of stone." And this one is divided into four chapters. By the same: *Criminatio et refutatio impiorum poematum Joannis, Ignatii, Sergii, et Stephani novorum Christi oppugnatorum* (Crimination and refutation of the impious poems of John, Ignatius, Sergius, and Stephen, the new attackers of Christ). Beginning: *Problemata quædam ad Iconomachos, asserentes Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum non effigiari secundum corpoream formam, capitibus quindecim* (Certain problems to the Iconoclasts, asserting that our Lord Jesus Christ is not to be depicted according to bodily form, in fifteen chapters). Beginning: "If out of two natures, and in two natures." By the same: *Adversus oppugnatores imaginum capita septem* (Against the attackers of images, seven chapters). Beginning: "It is to deify, so that from the very composition of the word..." By the same: *Epistola ad patrem suum Platonem de adoratione venerandarum imaginum* (Epistola to his father Plato concerning the adoration of the venerable images). Beginning: "We comfort ourselves by speaking to our holy head." ^C He has five books of letters, in which one can perceive a brave and constant spirit, not subject to miseries, nor to tortures, nor to the threats of princes. Many exist, written during his first, second, and third exiles, in the Vatican, Barberini, and Vallicelliana libraries in Rome, from which those that contain the history

that were already translated into Latin long ago by Sirmond, I believe that the rest also [could be] in the way of forming a proper volume. Michael the monk also treats these writings of Theodore quite clearly in his life of him.

^A *Ascetic Chapters*, κεφάλαια ἀσκητικά. P. “Nothing else is the ascetic life.” In the Barberini library, num. 250.

Various Canons and Troparia, which are sung to this day in the churches of the Greeks. The greater part of the canons he composed himself along with his brother Joseph, [while] in the temple of Saint Romanus, where he lay hidden, fleeing the threats of Leo the Iconoclast. The *Origins of Constantinople* [are] not yet edited (cf. *Imper. Orient.*, lib. I, ed. Paris, p. 55, with variant readings). “Saint Helena built [the temple of] Saint Romanus, and near it she placed the holy shrine and the relic of Daniel, and [the relics] of the great martyr Nicetas (ed. *Romani*) and of many other prophets, which she brought from Jerusalem after going there to touch the precious cross; it is said, moreover, that the poets of the canons, Theodore and Joseph the Studites, sat there fleeing for fear of the Syrian-born, iconoclastic Leo, and composed the canons; and five hundred years passed from the time the temple was built until the dwelling there of the aforementioned poets.” Saint Helena built the temple of Saint Romanus, and near it [she placed] the holy shrine, and deposited the body of Daniel and of the great martyr Nicetas, and of many other prophets, which she brought from Jerusalem when she went there to the venerable precious cross. The rumor is that the composers of the canons, Theodore and Joseph the Studites, for fear of Leo the Iconoclast, who was Syrian-born, fled thither, and while dwelling there, composed the canons. But five hundred years had passed since the temple had been built, up to the dwelling of the said poets.

But since songs of this kind abounded in the *Triodion* (a book of the Greeks, ecclesiastical, of which we speak elsewhere), or even occupied the better part of it, just as those of Joseph also [did], it came about that that book was named [the book] of Theodore and Joseph. In the Royal Library at Paris, cod. 1351: “Triodion with God, beginning from the Publican and Pharisee, ending at the just Lazarus; work of Joseph, and Theodore the Studite.” *Triodion with God, beginning from the Publican and Pharisee, ending at the just Lazarus, the work of Joseph and Theodore the Studite.* This, however, as I have already said, is asserted not because the whole book belongs to Theodore and Joseph—for there are also troparia and canons of others—but because the greater part of it is referred to these two.

He wrote, furthermore, the *Hypotyposis* of the monastery of the Stoudion. “The *Hypotyposis*, with God, of the state of the monastery of the Stoudion.” *Hypotyposis, by the grace of God, of the manner of living of the monastery of the Stoudion.* P. “Since there are many and diverse [customs] in holy monasteries.”

Item, the *Typicon* containing the entire order of the ecclesiastical state. In which the order of reciting the ecclesiastical office for each day is set forth. It is a manuscript in the Barberini library. Concerning the *Typica*, just as concerning the *Triodion*, we have said more in our dissertation on the ecclesiastical books of the Greeks.

Item, *Epitimia* (Penitentials), by which punishments are set for those who have strayed in their duty, or have committed faults. P. “He who is not found at the entrance of the *Glory in the Highest*.”

He also composed a *Testament* before he died. P. “Hearing God saying [to] David: ‘I have been prepared.’”

In iambic verse, moreover, he followed the origins and fall of the first parent, the envy of Cain, the deeds of Enoch, Noah, and other patriarchs, and also the heresy of the Iconoclasts. By the same species of meter, he set forth for the ministers of the monastery the duties proper to each, from the superior of all to the last and lowest. Of these, some remain, which are held in the Vatican, Barberini, and Altemps [libraries] at Rome, and at Saint John at Carbonaria in Naples. He also treated other matters of varied subject.

In the troparion of Theodore the Studite which says: “By the depth of thy judgments, O Christ, thou hast most wisely predetermined for each the end of life, the place, and the manner. Wherefore, those whom the grave has covered in every land, in thy judgment save, O all-merciful.” *By the depth of thy judgments, O Christ, thou hast most wisely predetermined the end of each one's life...*

place and manner; wherefore those whom the sepulcher covered in every region, [you will be] in your judgment most mercifully safe. A sufficiently learned exposition by Michael Glycas among his manuscript letters is in my possession. Gesner also writes that there exists a book of our Studite, *De futura restitutione* (Possevinus translates it as *resurrection*, in Greek it is *ἀποκαταστάσεως*), but he does not indicate the location, nor where it may be found.

Beyond the writings hitherto enumerated by Allatius, there are in our edition in the aforementioned volume these: 1. Judgment on the compendium of the rules of St. Basil. 2. Explanation of the Liturgy of the Presanctified. 3. Brief supplements of the letters. 4. Chronical Catechesis. 5. On confession and satisfaction. 6. Certain questions. Moreover, Allatius omitted mention of several of the orations, which you have in our book, either printed or commemorated. A. M.

PREFACE TO THE POSTHUMOUS SIRMONDIAN EDITION

^A Who and how great a man Theodore the Studite was, whether one considers the holiness of his life and his illustrious deeds, or his doctrine, eloquence, and the monuments of his genius; and how great the authority and reputation of the man was in the Eastern Church, is amply taught, both by the Life by Michael the monk, who lived with him and wrote it with care—which we have placed at the front of Theodore’s own works—and also by the testimonies of the ancients regarding him which we have collected: and finally by the truly brilliant eulogies, which we have added from Baronius’s *Annales*, in which that greatest cardinal, a man of the keenest and highest candor, so frequently and so lavishly commends Theodore the Studite and his writings, as if he could not, in words, attain the opinion he had formed of him, and could not satisfy himself in praising him.

And truly, who would not follow up a man of this kind with such honors as he deserves, whose eloquence, inspired by God, both taught the Churches and refuted the age? For it is permitted here to usurp what was said by Maximus of Turin concerning Cyprian (in hom. 2, *in Natali D. Cypriani*), to whom, if you except the apex of the episcopacy and the titles of martyrdom, Theodore can certainly be likened on many counts. He was entirely (Ibid.), in Theodore just as in Cyprian, a fullness of spiritual wisdom against the errors of the devil, and an untiring constancy of a Christian heart against the persecutions of the world. Verily, he is here admirable, and to be celebrated by the studies of all everywhere: whom holiness consecrated as a priest, skill as a teacher, [and] faith all but as a martyr: certainly an exile for Christ, often bound, and most cruelly beaten with scourges: in the meanwhile most prepared for martyrdom, and daily so awaiting the punishment of death, that a crown could be ascribed to him each day ^B (Pontius in *Vita S. Cypriani*). But he who had been divinely given in most difficult times for the defense of faith and piety, Theodore, was truly preserved longer: because there had to be one who, while the insolent and bitter rampage of the enemy was wasting the people of God, could—with the remedy of a celestial medicine applied according to the nature of the wound—either cut [the wound] for the time being, or encourage [those who were] wounded and struck by the art of the attacking enemy; who [could] foster those innumerable monks and virgins unto a discipline befitting modesty, and constrain them with certain bridles unto a habit worthy of holiness: who could teach repentance to the fallen, truth to heretics, unity to schismatics, peace and the evangelical law to the sons of God: through whom, if not the Gentiles, at least the blasphemous heretics might be vanquished: by whom Christian men of softer disposition might be consoled concerning the loss of their own by the hope of future things: who might raise up the martyrs by the exhortation of divine discourse: who might animate the confessors, reserved as survivors according to the example of martyrdom, with the incentive of the celestial trumpet (Ibid.). Indeed, all these things were so proper to the great Cyprian, that they correspond wondrously to Theodore the Studite.

And that we may say something concerning the greatness of his spirit, which also shone forth most especially in Cyprian: who, reading those things which Theodore performed and wrote against the nefarious adulterous marriage of Constantine, when he opposed himself almost alone to the power of the greatest emperor on behalf of the house of God and the evangelical law; who, I ask, reading these things, would not also there admire that constancy, that strength of apostolic heart with which Cyprian wrote to Pope Cornelius (epist. 3 lib. 1) about those ^C powerful men Fortunatus and Felicissimus, who had been cast out of the Church: "If there are any who think they can force their entry into the Church with terrors: let them know for certain that the Church of the Lord stands closed against such, and that the camp of Christ, unconquered and strong, and fortified by the Lord’s protection, does not yield to threats. The priest of God, holding the Gospel and keeping the precepts of Christ, can be killed, he cannot be vanquished."

Nor did they stand forth as similar only in virtues and actions, but also in their writings not a little. And first, just as in the books which Cyprian wrote on behalf of the true God against the worshippers of idols, on behalf of Christ against the Jews, and on behalf of the unity of the Church against the Novatians, we admire not only the knowledge of all histories and the splendor of his words and meanings, as does Jerome (epist. 84 *Ad Magnum*), but we also admire his understanding of the Scriptures and the dogmas of the faith: so in Theodore’s *Antirrhetics*, and others

^A regarding his work against the heresy of the Iconoclasts, in addition to the abundance and polish of his diction, the dialectical acumen and subtlety with which he presses his adversaries, unmasks their wiles, refutes their cavils, and destroys their every fortification, are such that he compels the assent of any sound mind; beyond these, there shines forth a signal skill in the divine Scriptures and in the discovery of arguments from the heart of theology. And although so many men outstanding in doctrine have since fought against that same heresy, we see that they have almost all fought with the same weapons and with the same weight of arguments, as if these were the most certain.

But it is especially his epistles, written in a cause ^B not very different, that strongly recommend both Cyprian and Theodore: the one to strengthen his own Africans in faith against the fury of tyrants and the enemies of the Christian name; the other to confirm the Oriental Church in the profession of orthodox doctrine against heretical emperors. Furthermore, in the epistles of both there surely breathes the same ardor of faith, piety, and divine charity, the same zeal for divine things and contempt for human ones: in both cases, the power to persuade is both sweet and effective, penetrating deeply into the soul, leaving behind certain sweet stings, and fiercely inflaming it with love for the true and the right. Nor was Theodore lacking in that which Lactantius (lib. v, cap. 1) attributes to Cyprian: an intellect at once ready, copious, ^C sweet, and—which is the greatest praise of speech—clear. Yet Cyprian is more pressed and constrained, as is the habit of African writers, and denser in his maxims; Theodore’s oration, in accordance with the Greek genius, is more copious and expansive. Finally, just as it is possible to see in Cyprian’s epistles the form and image of the more ancient Church and its discipline, so one may know—principally from Theodore alone—the state of the Greek, and indeed the universal, Church in the eighth and ninth centuries: its faith, doctrine, holy rites, and morals.

Moreover, it happens to Cyprian that, carried away by a vast hatred of any heresy and schism and by a zeal for ecclesiastical unity, he sometimes wandered a little from the right path: so too, while Theodore ^D vehemently attacks the heretics of his own age, while he execrates their communion, and studies by all means to deter others from it and to recall them, he wrote some things from time to time that stand in need of excuse or at least of benign interpretation, especially concerning the matter of the sacraments.

He himself does not deny baptism to heretics, as Cyprian did, unless they did not baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. And in this way he means for the Apostolic canon LXVIII to be understood (epist. 40, lib. 1), in which it was decreed that those who had been ordained or baptized by heretics could be neither clerics nor faithful: Theodore, I say, restricts this to those sects that did not consecrate baptism by the invocation of the Trinity. But he seems to have withheld other sacraments from the Iconomachs, especially the Eucharist. Indeed, in a certain epistle (epist. 187, lib. 11), he denies that those who have died in the communion of heretics are partakers of the body and blood of the Lord in their departure, for he says that that bread is heretical, and not the body of Christ. Even more clearly ^A and expressly in another place (epist. 24, lib. 11), he says that communion with heretics is not bread common to Christians, but poison; however much they may use the prayers of the orthodox (under which name the ancients often refer to the mystical sacramental formulas) in divine things. For those prayers are wrongly understood among them, and what the words signify is not believed. Wherefore, although they may employ an orthodox rite, they speak in vain, or rather play games, and treat the liturgy with insult. Just as jugglers abuse divine canticles amidst the rites of demons.

Algerus indeed collected (lib. 111, *De sacram. Euchar.* cap. 1) some similar sayings of the Fathers: among which is that of Pope Pelagius in a certain epistle (*Ad Viatorem, sive Victorem, et Pancratium*): "You must abstain from the sacrifices of schismatics, or rather their sacrileges... It is not the body of Christ which the ^B schismatic fashions." We omit others which are to be read in Algerus, whose response is (cap. 12) that the words of Pelagius are not to be taken as if a schismatic does not essentially fashion the true body of Christ in the sacrament, but that they must be understood of the mystical body: so that the sense is that the body of Christ, which is the Church, cannot be fashioned or composed by schismatics; and Pelagius himself explains his mind entirely in that manner in Gratian (can. xxxiv, 24, q. 1), where the same passage from that pontifical epistle is recited, but somewhat longer. But to the other dicta of the Fathers, Algerus responds (Ibid.) that they signify naught else than that the sacraments of heretics are harmful and deadly to the heretics themselves or their accomplices, that is, that they can be neither administered nor received without ^C ruinous sin.

But the passage from Theodore, the latter one at least, does not seem to be capable of being mitigated by a similar response; rather, it seems to affirm quite openly that the power and efficacy of that sacrament depend on the faith of those who administer it.

He also seems to have considered sacred ordinations, which had been performed by heretical bishops or by those deposed for crime, as void and null. Thus, writing to Naucratius (lib. 1, epist. 40), he says that those whom an heretical bishop has ordained cannot be considered among the true ministers of God. And in an epistle (lib. 11, epist. 215) to Methodius the monk (which we have vindicated for Theodore, although the illustrious Joannes Cotelerius published it (Monum. Eccl. Gr. t. III) under the name of Patriarch Nicephorus), he was questioned ^D regarding a certain presbyter ordained by a bishop who had been deposed for a crime. "Since," he says, "the absurdity is manifest, you ought not even to have asked about this crime; for Christ said: 'A bad tree cannot bear good fruit' (Matt. vii, 18). Wherefore, even if he has received penance from his own superior, or even from some holy man, he is not thereby absolved such that he can perform a sacred act." But in these things he seems to have held what, after his own custom,

^A had been a subject for debate for a long time. Although the opinion of the greater number of authorities was always that the same judgment should be made regarding the other sacraments as for baptism, yet this was not yet established among all and confessed, as it was afterwards.

To those who had fallen into the Iconoclastic heresy and subsequently returned to the Church, Theodore seems to have been more severe than the custom of that time and the institutions of the Church would bear. For he wishes clerics to be received only under this law: that, having even performed penance, they should be deprived of all ecclesiastical honor (epist. 191, lib. ii), the reader being barred from reading, the deacon from ministry, and the priest from the sacrifice (epist. 6, lib. ii), and they could not be restored by any bishop (epist. 119, lib. ii); the bishop, finally, should resign his episcopacy (epist. 20, lib. ii), until an orthodox synod should convene ^B which might grant full absolution (epist. 11 and 96, lib. ii). Laymen and monks, however, were not to participate in the holy mysteries, except in death. Indeed, that discipline flourished for some centuries, such that clerics who had defected to heretics, upon returning to the Church, were never admitted to sacred ministries, nor to anything but lay communion. For it had been established in the Church, says Augustine (epist. 50), that no one, after the penance for any crime, should receive the clerical state, or return to the clerical state, or remain in the clerical state. But gradually this severity was relaxed. The First Nicene Synod restored the Novatians with their honors, and not long before, Pope Cornelius, writing to Cyprian (epist. 46), says: "We ordered Maximus ^C the presbyter (who was returning from Novatus) to recognize his own place." Especially since Maximus, and those who were received with him, professed that they had been deceived by Novatus and had cleaved to him for only a few days, and had always in their hearts been in favor of the Church. Moreover, in the Alexandrian Synod, convened in the year of Christ 362, when the question was instituted concerning those bishops and presbyters who had subscribed to the Arian perfidy at Ariminum; many indeed of the confessors, fervent with the heat of the faith, as Rufinus writes (Hist. lib. i, cap. 28), were of the opinion that no one should thereafter be received into the priesthood who had in any way defiled himself with the contagion of heretical communion. Nevertheless, it was decided by common decree, says Athanasius (Ad Rufinianum), who presided over the synod, that in this and everywhere in the world, whoever had fallen by their own free will and had been in the vanguard of impiety, if they repented, should indeed be pardoned but not restored to the number of the clergy. ^D Those, however, who were not the authors but had been compelled by necessity and violence, it seemed good to them indeed to be pardoned and restored to their place among the clergy: especially since they had given a probable defense and excuse. Just like those bishops who had suffered deception at the Ariminum synod. Later, finally, milder action was taken with all who had fallen into heresy, even with clerics who, having condemned their error, sought pardon. Examples of this matter were collected by Jean Morin (loc. jam cit.). Otherwise, some ancient Catholic doctors considered that heretics, or those deposed or excommunicated, in consecrating the Eucharist or in ordaining, accomplish nothing, nor do they confect the body of Christ or the sacrament of ordination; and that the power and character which they had held, having been abolished by ecclesiastical deposition, cannot be restored except by a new ordination: testimonies of whom were collected by the most erudite man Jean Morin in his *Commentary on the Sacred Ordinations of the Church* (part iii, exerc. 5). One now we shall hear is Gratian, who, discussing the matter in 1, q. 1, after canon 45, concludes thus: that what Augustine says—that the sacraments of Christ ministered by heretics do not lack their effect—ought to be understood not of all sacraments generally, but of baptism. And after canon 74: It is evident, he says, that ecclesiastical sacraments besides baptism, as stated above, cannot be ministered by heretics. For concerning baptism, although at one time it was contended against most fiercely, yet it was much earlier adjudicated, and fully, as Augustine says, by the oracle of a synod

^A Theodore brings forward arguments against these things (epist. 2, lib. II), first, that deserters ought not to be received in such a manner, as if they had never before been in the Church. Next (ibid.), there is no slight difference to be made between this or that heresy: nay (lib. I, epist. 40), those are properly heretics only who attack the very head of the Christian religion—that is, who assail the faith of the Trinity—while others, such as the Meletians, etc., should be considered rather as schismatics. He asserts that the heresy of the Iconoclasts, however, is the most terrible of all, compounded of the errors of Marcion, Manes, Arius, and Photinus, and indeed similar and twin to the impiety of Jews and Gentiles; and that, finally, those who return from it should be received as those who had abjured the name of the Lord.

But because, in the Seventh Synod—the memory of which was then fresh—many bishops coming from that heresy had been received with their honors unimpaired after having published a confession of the Catholic faith, it might perhaps appear that Theodore did not sufficiently reverence the decrees of a general council. And indeed it appears from his own letters that he was sometimes accused of not acknowledging that synod as ecumenical, a matter of which we shall speak later. Now, as far as concerns the reintegration of those who lapsed, he certainly nowhere affirmed that they could not be rightfully restored to their former state; but he only wished the matter to be referred to a synod to be convened at an opportune time, which could render judgment by its own right, just as the Nicene Council had done. And, in truth, the Nicene Fathers had not written a canon or law which would define and prescribe for the future what was to be done in similar cases. ^B Finally, for his defense, one must note what he wrote (lib. I, epist. 38) concerning the monks who had insisted in the Sixth Synod that those converted from the heresy of the Iconoclasts should not be admitted to the priesthood, and who had raised a question concerning ordinations performed among heretics. These men—Sabbas and Theoctistus—he says, did not indeed resist the restoration of all the bishops returning from the heresy of the Iconoclasts to their former ranks, but they resisted the chief leaders of the heresy, according to the words of Saint Athanasius, which certainly was not absurd. But after the synod then assembled judged that all were to be received, following the example of the Fourth Holy Synod, they too consented, for in this there was no transgression of any necessary matter. It is also to be noted what he writes regarding Tarasius (lib. I, epist. 53), who had been the author of the reintegration of the lapsed in that synod above all others: "What was the cause for which we differed from Tarasius? Faith? Yet he was openly orthodox, he followed the sacred synods... Was it the reception of those returning from heresy? But this was not instituted by him for the first time, since they had been received by the holy Fathers in a threefold manner."

What difficulty can arise from Dionysius's book regarding the number of sacraments among the ancient Greeks, Leo Allatius has eruditely treated and explained in chapter 16 of Book II, *On the Perpetual Consent of the Western and Eastern Church*. In this passage, he also praises other authors who have enumerated the monastic profession among the sacraments, and he explains, in many words, the sense in which this ought to be understood. ^C Specifically, regarding this passage of Theodore the Studite, he states that the sacraments are not being viewed there in as much as they possess the power of effecting grace, but in as much as they complete the hierarchy of the Church, or distinguish the faithful from the unfaithful in some singular way; and in both these senses the profession of monks is rightly called a sacrament, since monks, on account of their pursuit of a holier life, are especially suited to adorn the hierarchy and for the sacred orders, and then, by their monastic institutions, Christians are distinguished from all others. Just as the anointing of those who have died piously is an insignia of Christians. And this is what Theodore says: if one of those six were taken away, Christians would become like heathens. Allatius warns, moreover, that the name "mysteries" among Greek writers extends more broadly than what are properly termed "sacraments" among the Latins. Finally, he notes that Theodore's primary aim is to prove, especially by the authority of Dionysius, that the monastic state was established by him who was also the author of the other sacraments, so that one who doubts the divine institution of that state can no less doubt the institution of any other sacrament; for if the matter stands thus, then Christians would become like heathens, who lack all the sacraments of the Christian Church. More may be read in Allatius himself. That in the letter to Gregory (lib. II, epist. 155), only six sacraments are numbered, and among these the fifth is on monastic perfection and the sixth on the holy departed—it is understood that Theodore means those sacraments, or rather mysteries, about which Saint Dionysius (whom he also cites) writes in his book *On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy*.

The indissoluble bond of matrimony seems to be relaxed in his letter to Albeneca (lib. II, epist. 51); where, to a most noble woman meditating on entering the monastic life while leaving her husband, he says that she must first, by all possible means, endeavor to entice this permission from her husband: but if he persists in refusing, "Then," says Theodore, "if such a great love of God inflames you, you will do that which pleases Him, even if the husband is unwilling." ^D We omit what is handed down concerning the most holy man Theonas (Cassian, *Collat.* 21), who, after five years of marriage, dismissed his wife, despite her being unwilling and protesting, and betook himself to a monastery, since he was manfully, as he said, grasping the sentiment of Christ: "He who does not hate father... and wife, etc." (Luke xiv, 26), whose action Cassian, who narrates it, does not dare to approve, just as neither does he dare to condemn it, for the reason that, not only the Fathers who knew Theonas

^A adorned with the degree of deacon before other holy men, but even God Himself seemed to approve, who had rendered the same man illustrious by the working of miracles. Since, therefore, Theonas, by a special instinct of God—who then dissolved the bond of which He is Himself the author—may deservedly be believed to have taken that counsel, perhaps Theodore suspected something similar regarding that illustrious woman. For the words of the epistle seem to hint at this in some way: "Great indeed is that which you have sought, and arduous, not only on account of the sublimity of that heavenly life, but also because you are bound to a husband, from whom it is a great undertaking to be separated; for God joined both together, who then shall put them asunder? He, of course, who joined them, and who compels one to progress toward a more excellent way of life."

But very similar to Theodore’s epistle is a passage of Basil in the *Regulae fusius disputatae* (interrog. 12), where it is taught by what rite those who are joined in matrimony ought to be admitted to the religious life. "They must be questioned," he says, "whether they do this with the consent of the other party, according to the precept of the Apostle; for the husband," he says, "has not power over his own body" (I Cor. VII, 4). And if it be discovered that this is done by them, then he who approaches ought to be admitted with many witnesses present, ^B since there is nothing that ought to be held in higher regard than the commands of God. If, however, the other party dissents, as being less solicitous about how to please God, here it is fitting to remember what has been said by the Apostle: "In peace God has called us" (ibid. 15). And if one must obey the precept of the Lord, who said: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father... and his wife" (Luke XIV, 26), etc. For there is nothing that should be held in higher regard than that the commands of God should be obeyed. However, we know that most of them attained the end they desired through earnest prayer and assiduous fasting; for the Lord often compels those who are obstinate in every respect, gradually, even through bodily necessity, so that they consent to the righteous judgment of the other party. Bellarmine (De monachis, lib. II, cap. 38) says that Basil perhaps speaks of a marriage that is valid but not yet consummated. If, however, he speaks of a consummated one (which is certainly much more likely), three things are commanded by him there: first, that he who approaches thus should be asked whether he acts with the consent of his wife. Next, if the wife refuses, he must still obey the precept of Christ: "He who does not hate," etc. But since these two things are in conflict, Basil immediately adds that some have obtained by prayers from God that the spouse, struck by illness, was compelled to grant consent. Thus, the holy bishop wants this, namely, that a married person, if he desires to become a monk, should first endeavor to obtain the consent of his wife; if he cannot, let him pray to God that He may instill the same mind in the wife, and then at last he may attain his desire: and at the same time both obey the Apostle, while he does not abandon an unwilling spouse, and Christ, while he prefers His love to the love of his wife. And yet Theodore, in the epistle of which we are speaking, seems to follow in the footsteps of Basil, whom he also cites. For first he admonishes that woman to endeavor to obtain from her husband permission to depart, as much as lies in her power: for thus he will also ^C be inclined to add himself to the monastic life; but if he does not consent, then, if a certain more vehement love of God inflames her, she will do what has pleased Him. But presently he says, as if correcting the statement: "But this matter has much difficulty... Hold, therefore, to the excellent institute of life in which you are engaged; for I hear of your illustrious deeds, and how, having abdicated the familiarity of princes, you have leisure for yourself alone and for good things. For even in this kind of life you can attain salvation, even with a husband. Afterward, as the Lord shall grant, so will you act, not grieving your husband, but rather bending him through divine conversation" (Epist. lib. I, epist. 27; lib. II, epist. 72).

Regarding the synod after the sixth, as he himself calls it (which is also called the *Quinisext*, as an appendix or supplement to the fifth and sixth; and it is called *Trullan* from the place where it was convened), he speaks everywhere very honorably; he praises its canons (Antir. II, n. 38), as sacred, divine, and worthy of God, and the voices of the divine Fathers: by their authority he defends the honor of the sacred images everywhere (Refut. poem. In Iconom., n. 35); he says it was received by the five patriarchs; finally, he calls that synod (Antir. II, n. 38) a holy ecumenical [council], just as it had called itself.

But those things which the best authors have written about that assembly differ greatly from these eulogies: Bede (*De sex aet. in Justiniano*) and Marianus Scotus (*in Chronico*), who call it an erratic synod; Paul the Deacon, who calls it a synod of error (*De rebus Langobard.* lib. vi, cap. 11); Anastasius the Librarian (*in Praef. ad synodum VII*), who says that the rules established there were not only long unknown in the Latin Church and not at all interpreted, but were not even to be found in the archives of other patriarchal sees, even those that use the Greek language: and this for the reason that none of those sees, at the time those canons were published, was present either to promulgate or consent, or at least to be on the spot. Moreover, Pope Sergius (Anastasius in *Vita Sergii*) could be brought neither by prayers nor by threats to receive them, and then, after they had been sent to John VII (id. in *Vita Joan. VII*), who was Greek by nationality, so that he might at least amend them, they were sent back by that pontiff in the same state in which he had received them. Other testimonies of the ancients similar to these, which exist against Theodore Balsamon and other later Greeks who equate that synod entirely with the ecumenical ones, we omit: for the more ancient writers of Greek annals, Theophanes, Cedrenus, Zonaras, Constantine Manasses, Glycas, make no mention of that assembly, as if they wished it to be buried in silence, as Baronius remarked (ad an. 692, num. 14). Indeed, Theophanes mentions the types or canons which were said to be of the sixth council, and inquires at what time they were promulgated; but of the synod gathered for that purpose, not a word. Finally, no prudent person would say it was legitimately gathered in the Holy Spirit, as Baronius says (ibid., num. 5), in which, with venerable antiquity exploded, everything [that is] ^D disreputable to itself

^A claimed, and sanctioned things openly contrary to the orthodox decrees.

However, Theodore the Studite had truly most weighty authorities for his judgment concerning that synod. For, in the first place, Saint Tarasius the patriarch, bound to the Roman Church, in letters to the three patriarchs which were read in the sixth ecumenical synod (Act 3), says: "I also receive the canons brought forth from the holy sixth synod, in which it is stated: 'In some pictures of venerable images, the Lamb, etc.':" which is the Trullan canon 82. And when, in the same synod (Act 4), Elias the presbyter had read the same canon from an instrument containing the definitions of the holy and universal sixth synod, and some, as it appears, were objecting; Tarasius rebuked them with a grave discourse, affirming that this was the very document which the SS. Fathers had signed: then he asserted the credibility of the authors of the Trullan canons; namely, that those same bishops who in the sixth synod had condemned the error of the Monothelites, had come together after four or five years and issued those canons: and that this is clear from their own subscriptions. Finally, when in another session of the same synod (Act 6), Epiphanius the deacon again praised the same canon concerning images as one of the rules which the Fathers of the sixth synod, gathered under Justinian by divine will, had issued: then no one is read to have objected anymore. And Tarasius’ successor Nicephorus, in his little work of twelve chapters against the Iconoclasts (*Biblioth. PP. Lugd.*, tom. XIV): "What," he says, "were rightly and piously handed down and decreed by the Fathers of the holy sixth synod, these they rejected and trampled underfoot. For thus our divine Fathers, when in some pictures of venerable images the Lamb, etc." And in the apologetic oration against the same heretics inscribed to the same Nicephorus (*Apud Allatium De consens.*, lib. 1, cap. 27), those canons of the holy sixth synod are praised at length. Nor should John of Damascus be passed over, who in the third oration on images, towards the end, cites the holy sixth council celebrated under Justinian, concerning the fifth holy council: "In some pictures of holy images, the Lamb is depicted, etc."

Furthermore, the Roman pontiff Adrian I, in letters to Tarasius the patriarch, which were likewise read in the VII synod (Act 14), says: "I receive all the holy synods with all the rules which were rightfully and divinely promulgated by them: among which is contained: 'In some venerable [pictures], etc.'," and presently he calls this rule a testimony of the orthodox faith. And the same pontiff in his epistle to King Charles regarding the Nicene II synod (*Coll. Concil. Labb.*, tom. VIII, pag. 915), answering some who objected that the testimony of the sixth synod had nothing to do with the adoration of images: "For this reason," he says, "they brought forth the testimony about the holy sixth synod, that they might clearly show that already, when the holy sixth synod was held, in ancient times, they venerated sacred images and painted histories." Wherefore, that holy ^A sixth synod faithfully establishing its own canons in an orthodox manner, thus ordained, saying: "In some pictures of venerable images, the Lamb, etc."

Moreover, Anastasius himself, from whom most of the points of objection against the Trullan council are drawn, in the preface to the eighth synod to Adrian II, after he had affirmed that the Church admits the rules and institutions of all entirely probable Fathers and holy councils—those only which do not conflict with the true faith, nor with honest morals, and which do not in the slightest degree fight against the decrees of the Roman See, but rather powerfully combat their adversaries, that is, the heretics—then he adds: "Therefore, the rules which the Greeks claim were issued by the sixth synod, the principal See admits in this synod (the eighth) in such a way that in no way are those from them to be received which are found to be adverse to the prior canons, or to the decrees of the pontiffs of this see, or certainly to good morals."

From this, indeed, learned men conjecture (Christian Lupus in *Notis ad Canones Trull.*, pag. 1077) that some Roman prelate, perhaps Constantine, in a meeting at Constantinople with the Emperor Justinian, had selected and approved certain canons from the whole number of the Trullan canons. And indeed Adrian, 58 years after Constantine, says that he does not receive all, but as we have seen, those which were rightfully and divinely promulgated. Thus, in like manner, Tarasius, Nicephorus, and Theodore the Studite were able to praise some rules of the quinisext synod as holy and legitimate, and to use their authority. We omit what some have noted (Franc. Combefis. in *Auctario PP. Gr.*, tom. II, pag. 209); when Justinian had sent the Trullan chapters to Pope John VIII, earnestly requesting that he confirm what seemed worthy and exclude others: and when the pontiff, timorous through human frailty, had sent the same back to the prince just as he had received them, as Anastasius testifies in the *Life of John VII*: [the Greeks] perhaps interpreted the matter such that John tacitly approved them, or certainly permitted them to their own conscience.

Now, however, that we may add something concerning canon 82, whose authority Theodore frequently uses; we know there are weighty authors (Baronius, *ad an.* 692, n. 44; Bart. Caranza), who contend that it was never approved by the Roman Church: since, they say, it forbade that Christ should be painted in the figure of a lamb: which kind of images the Roman Church always held in use and honor. But Bellarmine (*De imag.*, lib. II, cap. 8) says of the same canon: "It does not forbid those images, but only prefers before them images of Christ in human form." And Gretser explains Bellarmine's opinion more fully (lib. II *De S. cruce*, cap. 12), [noting] that human form was surely more apt to stir the memory of Christ's life in the flesh, and of His torments and salutary death, just as the canon says. Later, however, Petavius (*De incarnat.*, lib. XV, cap. 13) states against Bellarmine: "It is manifestly decreed in that canon, that not

more of Christ in the figure of a lamb, but rather of a man, should be expressed. Yet to us, the interpretation of Bellarmine and Gretser appears truer, especially since the ancients—not only Greeks but also Latins, and Pope Adrian himself—have praised that canon for the sacred veneration of images without any exception. For are we to think that they either did not see the flaw and the fault, or, having done so, did not admonish [the Church] about it, lest they appear to approve of it? Furthermore, the Fathers of the Trullan Council call images in which the lamb is expressed "venerable" or "holy," and immediately afterwards say they embrace the ancient figures and shadows as symbols and signs of the truth handed down to the Church, however much they may prefer grace and truth over them. Therefore, what they subsequently decree—that Christ should henceforth be expressed in human form in place of the old lamb—should not be understood as if they were completely abrogating the form of the lamb, but only that they wished the human form to be preferred from then on.

But Theodore drew upon himself the stain of ill-will, primarily through his letter to the monk Arsenius (lib. I, epist. 38), which, as Baronius says (ad an. 787, n. 63), was hardly worthy of a catholic man, and which was not only abusive to Patriarch Tarasius, but also contained certain reckless and openly false statements against the Second Council of Nicaea. As far as Tarasius is concerned: Sabbas and other monks, men of severity, and burning with zeal for the faith and ecclesiastical discipline, ^C grudgingly endured that, as already stated, those converted from the Iconoclast heresy had been received into communion and rank at the Sixth Council, with Tarasius favoring and supporting them more than any other. And when, after the council was completed, the same patriarch received all those who had lapsed and were repentant with singular kindness, for that reason the monks, and Theodore among them, became more alienated from Tarasius.

But of greater moment are the things that concern the council itself. Therefore, after the letter to Arsenius (lib. I, epist. 38) noted that excessive leniency and indulgence toward the lapsed, it then says, "Rome, indeed, in no way approved of these things; far from it: nor did it hold the council itself as ecumenical, but as a local one, and one that had corrected an error peculiar to those regions." "For," it continues, "the vicars of the other patriarchs were not those who sat on behalf of them": this is false. Indeed, the Romans had come here sent not on account of the council, but for another cause. Wherefore, as it is reported, they were even deposed after their return by him who had sent them, although they pleaded that they had been compelled. Others, however, were from the East, but persuaded and induced by our people, and not sent by the patriarchs, who knew nothing—not even afterwards—on account of, of course, the fear of the gentiles. Our own men did this, however, so that they might more easily draw the people clinging to the heresy to the orthodox faith when the ecumenical council was convened.

That this letter was forged and attributed to Theodore by his own adversaries is the suspicion of Baronius and certain others. However, it was able to provide some handle for accusation, both because of the man’s severity toward those who had lapsed into heresy, and because he calls that council "holy" in more than one place ^D and speaks of it as having been gathered to establish the truth (in the Epitaph of Plato): yet he does not add the title of "ecumenical." And in the subscription of the orthodox, after (page 155) he praised the six holy ecumenical councils, and others of various regions that consent to the ecumenical ones, and the one that followed the sixth, he proceeds thus: "And not to mention the second Nicene synod, etc.," as if separating it from the ecumenical ones.

But in other places he expressly names it as "ecumenical" (Epist. lib. II, epist. 172 and 176), and affirms that it was accepted by the five, that is, by all the patriarchs (Epist. lib. II, epist. 127). And finally, in an encounter with Patriarch Nicephorus, he cleared himself and openly professed what he thought about that council, and at the same time about Tarasius, as he himself recounts in his letter to Peter of Nicaea: where, among other things, he says (Epist. lib. II, epist. 127): "Furthermore, when mention was made of the blessed Lord Tarasius (for they had said that we had even withdrawn from him and that we called the second holy council in Nicaea a local one), we proved that we hold both him among the holy Fathers, and that we confess the council in words and in writings to be ecumenical." He adds, however: "Although at some time, in some way, and to some people we may have answered differently. These are things which, just like those things which were done differently at that time, it is not necessary to inquire into now and stir up again. For that provides cause for tumult, etc." By these words he seems to confess an error; although these last words perhaps pertain only to the dissension with Tarasius.

But if he hesitated for some time to attribute to the Nicene council that which was due, there were others who, without the stigma of heresy or schism, initially refused to recognize the authority of that council. For it is clear, as Sirmond noted (in *Admonitione de can. 2 Francford.*, tom. II Conc. Gall., page 131), that the authors of both the Council of Frankfurt and the Caroline books were so situated regarding the question of images that they contended they had to deal not with an ecumenical council, but with a "peculiar" synod of the Greeks, as they called it. For so they profess throughout those books (lib. Car. Mag. cap. 18; ibid. lib. III, cap. 11), and they complain that it arrogates to itself the name of universal or seventh council, when they denied that it could be called ecumenical, to which only the Greeks had gathered, and to which the Churches of the remaining provinces had not been convoked, nor had their opinion been sought by letters in the ecclesiastical manner. And indeed, if we weigh the matter on its own merits, there seemed to be sufficient cause why they did not yet hold the council, to which the suffrages of so many provinces and almost all the West were still lacking, to be ecumenical. Nor did Adrian himself show that he felt otherwise; he who, as Hincmar teaches (*ad Laudunensem*, cap. 20), sent the council brought from Greece into Gaul, and ordered a council to be convened for its sake by Charles, and replied to the Caroline books, by which it was attacked, in such a way that he nowhere opposes to them the name and authority of an ecumenical council. Therefore, as I said, the Gauls had in this part [of their argument] wherewith they might defend themselves. And Petavius (lib. XV *De incarnat.*, cap. 11), when he himself

^A affirms that the seventh synod was received by Adrian as among the ecumenical ones, adds nevertheless that the Catholics of the Western Church protested at the beginning, yet without any detriment to communion and peace; he shows by the testimony of Anastasius the Librarian that that synod was not yet accepted by certain Gauls even eighty years and more later. Nor, as he says further, did the Gallican Church embrace the seventh ecumenical synod except gradually, along with the veneration of sacred images.

Next, when Theodore wrote things concerning the Nicene synod that could stir up offense, perhaps no papal letters had yet come to the East in which the Roman see testified that it considered the decrees of the synod ratified. Adrian certainly, in the letter already praised above to Charles, King of the Franks, by which he refuted those who had opposed the Nicene synod (which letter Labbe judges to have been written after the Council of Frankfurt, and therefore seven years after the Nicene, which is indeed very likely), says of course: "We have received the synod itself"; but he adds shortly after: "We have as yet returned no answer on behalf of that synod to the same emperor (of the Greeks), fearing, etc." And perhaps he never returned one later, since he died in the year following the Council of Frankfurt. Yet he everywhere declares (Epist. lib. II, epist. 129, at the end) that the certainty of the faith must be sought from the Roman see; that the judgment of that see (epist. 86) ought to be requested and accepted by the universal Church; that by it (epist. 74) the faithful are united among themselves and with the other patriarchs; that to it (epist. 79) the supreme power of an ecumenical synod is deferred; that national synods also ought to be approved by it.

Finally, learned men have noted (see Christian Lupus in his Notes to council VII, p. 1241) that the Roman Church did not accept every single thing from that synod, and that there are indeed certain flaws in its canons. And Anastasius the Librarian himself says in his preface to that synod: "It is indeed to be noted that there are found in this synod some things from the canons and sentences of the Apostles and the Sixth Universal Synod (namely, the Trullan) which, in being interpreted by us, are neither held nor admitted." Finally, grave men also believe (Ibid.) that neither the individual actions of the synod, nor the entirety of the interrogations and opinions of the bishops existing there, were confirmed by the Roman Church, but only the common decree of faith. Furthermore, Theodore was always the fiercest defender of that decree (Epist. lib. II, epist. 72): he affirms that it was therefore easily received by the five patriarchs, and thus also by the Roman Church; and consequently he embraced it as the decree of an ecumenical synod.

We have noted in the margin of the book that in his letter ^B to the monk Lucian (Epist. lib. II, epist. 50), the absolution he imparts to a penitent was not that proper to the sacrament, or for sins. But it was a different absolution, namely from punishments: of which there are other examples, both from the book of John the Faster, then brought forth in his Commentary on the Discipline of Penance (lib. VII, cap. 25) from a certain manuscript Euchologion. John Morinus, in regard to this matter, first notes that it was the custom among the Greeks that such absolution would not be given before penance, unless very rarely, and by *oikonomia* and indulgence; then, that a general absolution from sins was sometimes inserted into it; finally, that this was the opinion of the Greeks, that by that subsequent absolution the former was perfected and in a certain manner completed. Wherefore in some of his formulas, the priest prays to God that He may grant the penitent perfect and entire remission: that He may make all malediction and excommunication void: that is, that He may forgive not only the faults, but the punishments as well. Therefore, from that passage of Theodore, no argument whatsoever can be deduced for so-called "epistolary" sacramental absolution. And indeed, that the sacrament of penance, whether in the Greek or in the Latin Church, was never ministered unless to those present, can be certified by this one thing alone—to omit other matters—that in ancient monuments, in the canons of councils, in the writings of the Fathers, sacramental absolution is designated by the term "imposition of hands": but one cannot impose hands unless the person is present.

That the Christian baptism cannot be fulfilled unless by water is the constant opinion of Catholics. Theodore, however, seems to have thought otherwise (Epist. lib. II, epist. 157). "From necessity," he says, "there is a change of law; and indeed in ancient times we see such things done, and that this one, with sand poured over him in desert places, because death was imminent, baptized and was baptized; and another in another way." He then subjoins that which certain ancients wrote concerning boys baptized by Athanasius while he was a boy, and concerning Bishop Alexander approving that baptism.

There seems to be no doubt that he referred to the story which is narrated in the *Spiritual Meadow* (cap. 176): of a young Hebrew who, while journeying through desert and arid places, was suddenly struck by a grave illness and, being near to death as he thought, asked his companions, who were Christians, not to allow him to die without baptism. And when they replied that neither water nor a priest was present there, although they said that both were required by the laws of baptism: nevertheless, the sick man, who was pleading earnestly, ordered someone, Industrius by name, to pour sand over his head three times, with these words: "Theodorus is baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," and the young man immediately recovered. But Bishop Dionysius, to whom the matter was reported, indeed hesitated for some time because of the miracle of the health restored; yet, with the consent of the clergy, he ordered that that Jew should be baptized with water. A completely similar example, or rather the same one, Nicephorus Callisti later inserted into his books (lib. III, cap. ult.): and there too Bishop Dionysius, whoever he was, is reported to have ordered that that Jew should receive the baptism of water. Which if

Theodorus judged otherwise of that "sand-baptism" (for in the first words, "to have baptized" and "to have been baptized," they appear to be the same as if he said that that baptism had not been in vain, but that the man had been truly baptized—even if this opinion of his is not entirely clear), but if he so thought, it must be admitted that he was entirely in error.

There will perhaps be those to whom even those things which he hands down concerning the use of ambiguous words and, as they call them, mental restrictions, are not at all pleasing (Epist. lib. II, 39). Athanasius the monk had asked him whether it was permitted to lie when it was a question of a friend’s life. He answers, following the opinion of the great Basil (Regul. brev. interrog. 76), that lying is condemned by Christ without any distinction at all. ^A But he immediately adds that what Athanasius had called a lie is not truly a lie. Then he declares his own mind with these examples: "A girl comes to me whom a ravisher is pursuing: she prays: 'Do not betray me to the ravisher.' Therefore, to him who asks: 'Has the girl come here?' if I deny it, I am not lying; not because I think the girl is not in the house, but because by my reticence I deny that any crime is to be admitted in my presence. Another example again: Someone has entrusted a sword to me; soon he asks for it back to kill himself with it. If I shall say: 'I neither know nor have I received it,' I am not lying; for I deny that I know or have received it, so that I may not hand over the sword to you for your death."

There will not be wanting those, as we have said, who will think that this opinion of a man otherwise most holy and a persistent champion of evangelical severity everywhere (which he proposed only hesitantly and timidly, as it is a very difficult and slippery matter) is defending lying and fraud under a certain guise of right and good. And they will oppose many highly weighty authorities: especially Augustine, who they will contend, in the same examples—that is, where even someone's life or chastity is in the greatest danger—ordains what is entirely contrary to Theodorus (De mendacio, ch. 6 and 7). ^B It is not the place here for a more accurate treatment of this question, which is most difficult and full of hidden depths, as Augustine himself calls it (Enchir., ch. 8). We shall only, for the present, and to explain the mind of Theodorus, briefly touch upon what distinguished theologians—and among them Joannes Malderus, Bishop of Antwerp, in a singular treatise (*De restrictionum mentalium abusu*)—have explained: the sum of which is almost this: that no lie can ever be just, as Augustine says (De mendacio, ch. 15). Furthermore, that not only a lie in the divine Scriptures, but every fallacy, and especially a "double tongue," is condemned (Prov. VIII, 13; 1 Tim. III, 8), and that candor and simplicity are commended. Not that it is not sometimes permitted, indeed even necessary, to hide and cover the truth: "It is good to hide the secret of a king" (Tob. XII, 7). "He who is of a faithful mind conceals what is entrusted by a friend" (Prov. XI, 13).

Now, however, concerning ambiguous and tacitly restricted words, they say they are then free of lying when the circumstances of things, persons, or other external signs are such that, as though they were certain voices, they are able in some way to indicate and supply what is lacking to the speech, and what is held in the mind of the speaker: or at least when, ^C from those circumstances, a prudent man can understand that there are sufficiently just causes why you do not wish to bring forth a matter, however well known to you it might be. Concerning which matter, that saying of St. Hilary (lib. IV *De Trin.*) is well-known: "The understanding of things said is to be taken from the causes of the speaking." This is to say, it must be gathered not from the words alone, but simultaneously from various adjunct matters. Thus, in those things which are said in play and jest, the look or gesture of the speaker causes us to receive the words often in a contrary sense, and to understand that it is mere jest, not a fallacy and a lie. Likewise, in order for restricted locutions to be legitimate, those doctors require that some light be able to shine from somewhere, and that a skillful man be able to scent that not only the words themselves are to be attended to at that time. And although that external signification added to the words happens to be obscure, nevertheless, by its aid, a lie can be avoided. For it is certainly one thing to speak or signify a matter obscurely; another, to say what is false and to lie.

But if the reticence and restriction conceived in the mind of the speaker can by no means be indicated to others in any way, and cannot even cast a suspicion that there are some grave and just causes why you should not speak the truth openly; then, whether the mind restricts the words or does not restrict them, they say it makes no difference. ^D For a restriction that is tacit and entirely hidden changes neither the things themselves nor the meaning of the words: and therefore there will now be nothing to prevent the words, if they are openly false, from deceiving even the most acute, and thus falling into the sin of a lie.

However, those authors warn that, although a mental restriction, when compared to the manner which they require, may be free from the vice of lying, it must still be seen to that the matter is not a snare to anyone, nor an injury done to anyone. They add that not even so should that artifice be used, except very sparingly; partly because something is committed against the simplicity and candor of speech, and partly because no slight inconveniences can arise from it. For by the more frequent use of such restrictions, the authority of the speaker will be not a little diminished, which nevertheless everyone ought to preserve and guard. Furthermore, there is nothing, as Chrysostom noted (Hom. 14, in Ephes.), that begets hatreds and enmities as much as to be deceived and deluded.

They also warn that when you speak of your own accord and are not at all interrogated, then it can scarcely ever happen that these wrappings of truth are not akin to some fault. But if an importunate interrogation urges, and you nevertheless have a right to conceal the truth (which right everyone has in some matters), nay, if you cannot betray the matter without grave evil looming from it either for yourself or for another: then indeed they say it is permitted, when there is nothing else available by which you may elude the questioner, to use an ambiguous, suspended, and tacitly restricted speech, provided that there accompany it, as a defense of the restriction, circumstances of the kind we described a little before. For then there is no danger that a lie...

might be imputed to you, if the hearer is deceived either by his own imprudence or by the nature of the situation. ^A To use an example alongside that of Theodore: to one asking for a sword for a wicked purpose, you reply: "I do not have a sword"—meaning in your mind: "...that I would wish or ought to offer you now." What the fragmentary response keeps silent, the very facts or circumstances speak, or rather, cry out. Regarding a secret of your faith committed to you, you say: "I do not know"—meaning you understand: "...in such a way that I must report or can betray it." You do not lie. Furthermore, the response, even if truncated, is not only accommodated to the facts themselves, but also to your mind (for from those words and signs a meaning is fashioned clearly consonant with the mind of the speaker), and indeed is sufficiently accommodated to the mind of the questioner as well. For you have responded to that which the questioner wished, or at any rate could have wished, to know from you. For he is not to be thought to have wished, nor could he rightfully wish, that those things be opened to him which, for most just reasons, ought to have remained hidden; and any sensible man understands this well enough.

There are very many instances of this matter, not only in testimonies and authorities, but also in the examples of holy men, and even divine examples. We bring forward a singular one. What Christ said: "But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father" (Mark XIII, 31). Saint Augustine explains this in the following way (conc. 1 in psal. XXXVI): "God willed that that day be usefully hidden, so that the heart might always be prepared..." Because, truly, Christ was sent to us as a master, He also said that the Son of Man does not know that day, because it was not in His teaching Office that it be known by us through Him. And the same author in another place (In psal. LIX): "The day of the Lord’s coming itself can also be rightly numbered among the secrets of the Son. For it was said of that day that no one would know it, nor the Son of Man." What, then, is so hidden as that which is said to be hidden even from the Judge himself? Not for the sake of knowing, but for the sake of revealing. Likewise, Hilary says (lib. IX De Trin.), that because knowledge is sometimes to be hidden, therefore ignorance is also to be professed. Then he continues thus: "Christ therefore denies that He knows, so that the knowledge might be able to be hidden: lest the security of knowledge should excite a negligence of dissimulated faith." Chrysostom (hom. 2 in Act.) says that Christ cast a certain darkness upon the apostles by fear when He said that He did not know; then, he says, "How, if a child asks for something he does not need, or indeed something that could harm him, we hide it from him and show him empty hands, saying: 'Look, we do not have it'; just so did He act toward the apostles. They sought to receive, He denied that He had it." What then? Are You ignorant of those things which are the Father's? Or do You know Him, but ignore what He does? Far be it! But He acts as if He did not know. For it is the duty of a teacher to teach not what the disciple wants, but what it is profitable to learn. Similar things concerning that place in the Gospel ^B are written by Basil (lib. II Contra Eunomium), Ambrose (lib. V De Fide, cap. 8), Jerome (in cap. XXIV Matth.), Isidore of Pelusium (lib. II, epist. 117), and others: and they explain the words of Christ in this way, and understand them so, as if He had said: "The Son does not know that day, so as to reveal it to you"; or, because He is the Master of men, He ought to hide from men that which it is in their interest to ignore. In this they recognize silence, or mental restriction, and that this is sufficient so that any suspicion of a lie might be far from divine words.

Furthermore, it is now sufficiently clear from these things that the examples brought forward from the letter of Theodore are likewise free from the vice of lying. For as for the tacitely restricted responses he suggests therein, there is surely no prudent man who cannot easily understand them, in such a state of affairs, just as Theodore himself expounds. Nor does Augustine, or other Fathers or theologians, contradict this, at least not the vast majority and those of pre-eminent standing. And indeed, they all contend for this one thing, that it is not at all permissible to lie: to which Theodore entirely assents. And Augustine indeed says (in psal. V): "That truly, which does not have a double heart, is not even to be called a lie." As, for example, if a sword is entrusted to someone, and he promises that he will return it, when the one who entrusted it has asked for it—if by chance he demands his sword back while raging, it is manifest that it should not then be returned, lest he kill himself or others, until his sanity is restored. Here, therefore, he does not have a double heart; because, when he promised that he would return it to the one asking, he was not thinking that the man might ask for it while raging. And in another place (De mendacio, cap. 2): "The fault of the liar," he says, "is in the desire to deceive in his own mind when speaking." And yet, if that same man cannot prevent a crime in any other way than by this response: "I neither know, nor have I received"—namely, that I might hand over to death that which he secretly contemplates; will his cause then be stronger for him to be considered as having a double heart? Will it not be more justly believed that he responded thus from a desire to save the man, rather than to deceive? ^C Finally, concerning that which the letter of Theodore adds regarding the tacit restriction, such as we have defended: "It is a wickedness, however, that this be done for my own sake, lest I die: for then it is a lie; nor is one to swear at all, neither for his own safety nor for that of another, for the violation of the law is manifest." This doctrine is surely not to be called looser: on the contrary, if we hear Malderus and other most sober authors, it is even excessively severe. But perhaps Theodore, a monk writing to a monk, understood there the law promulgated by the Emperor Marcian, by which it was provided that clerics should not be constrained to swear: "Because," says the Emperor, "by ecclesiastical rules and canon established of old by the most blessed bishops, clerics are forbidden to swear" (Cod. Th. lib. I, tit. 3, leg. 25). That this edict of Marcian pertained especially to the Constantinopolitan clerics is suggested by Henry I in his diploma (Goldast. Consuet. imp. pag. 77), in which he himself decided that the constitution of the divine Marcian ought to be understood as having pertained

^A to the clerics of all churches generally. And indeed it is well enough established that the Greeks, more than others, have abhorred every kind of oath, so much so that when Pope Honorius III (Extrav. de verb. sign. cap. 51. See Lud. Tomassin, Tract. de juram. cap. 2) was dealing with the reconciliation of certain rebellious Greek monks to the Church, and they could in no way be induced to take an oath according to the form of the Church, he ordered them to be received on this occasion with only a manual promise, and that something be detracted from the severity of the requirement.

But perhaps we have dwelled longer on these matters than the laws of a preface allow; if other things occur that may seem to have been stated by Theodore somewhat obscurely or harshly, we leave them to be examined and judged by learned men. It is sufficiently clear that he burned with a very keen zeal for the orthodox faith, and that he was deeply studious of ancient discipline and most observant of the Roman Church, as the parent and teacher of others. Finally, there are very many things in his writings that are not only most salubrious, but truly distinguished and excellent, and very opportune for illustrating and confirming the Catholic doctrine and for confounding the heresies of our own times. Indeed, to note one place among many, who would not be moved by what he transmits regarding the form of daily prayer (lib. 1, ep. 42), as if prescribed by the Fathers? And especially these words: "These things done, invoke the holy Mother of God, that she may have mercy on you; the holy angels, and the angel whom you have as the guardian of your life, that he may guard and protect you; the Forerunner, the apostles, all the saints, and especially those whom you have been accustomed to invoke, and him whose memory is celebrated on that day," etc. In this, I say, who would not recognize the wonderful consensus of faith and piety between the Greeks and the Latins, between the earlier ages and the later?

Sirmond, shortly before his death, was preparing for an edition most of the works of this outstanding writer, both in Greek and Latin, which have not yet seen the light (as Philippe Labbé testifies in his *Dissertation on Ecclesiastical Writers*, vol. II, p. 403), ^B and most especially the letters, most of which he had once rendered into Latin for the favor of Cardinal Baronius; which are read inserted in the *Ecclesiastical Annals*, etc. And whatever that tireless man had been able to seek out and collect over a long space of time, he had transcribed with his own hand, some even two or three times. As for us, we have decided to commit to print, and to append to the other works of Sirmond, at least those for which we have found a Latin interpretation completed by him, or at least begun. That the Life of Theodore was entirely complete, and all his letters rendered into Latin by Sirmond and handed over to Baronius, seems in no doubt at all. But whether he kept a copy of them for himself, we do not know. None was certainly found in his cabinets; wherefore we had to have recourse to the *Annals* of Baronius. But there, the Life of Theodore is lacking and mutilated, ^C and not even a third part of the letters, and only fragments of many others, are present. Furthermore, certain papers, not unlearned, as it seems, written by hand, which the most illustrious man Stephan Baluze sent to himself from Rome by the most eminent Cardinal Casanata, an egregious patron of letters and literary men, and which he communicated to us out of his singular kindness, brought no further help; in these there were several of Theodore’s letters expressed in Latin, which we easily believe to be part of the Sirmondian labor, and from there we have taken the interpretation of six or seven letters.

Exemplars of the Greek text of excellent quality were at hand for this edition, especially a very extensive and accurate Royal codex, which the most illustrious abbot, Camille Le Tellier—custodian of the Royal Library, and, of all who now exist, by far the most well-stocked, and the more worthy of this charge because he is already a great ornament by virtue of his own preeminence of talent, outstanding erudition, liberal arts, and learning—granted to us to use, and with an extraordinary goodwill, has wholeheartedly favored and most willingly accommodated the studies and labors of others. We also had some transcripts made from Vatican exemplars by the hand of the man most learned in Greek and Latin, Peter Arcudius: which Cardinal Francesco Barberini, then dean of the Sacred College, a man to be celebrated with immortal praise for his excellent merits toward the Church and especially sacred letters, had sent hither many years ago, since it would have been very pleasing to him that the books of Theodore the Studite were published for the public utility, and at the same time that this last work of Sirmond, whom that excellent man had held most dear and always esteemed most highly, should come to light; just as the letters which he wrote to him at various times, now published by us for the first time among the letters of Sirmond himself, testify.

But we have most especially followed the copies which Sirmond, a most diligent man, had transcribed from the most approved books and had reviewed at his leisure. If we have found any various readings in other codices that could be of any importance, we have noted them in the margin of the book. In the Royal book, however, the order of Theodore’s letters seemed more disturbed. Wherefore we have retained the order which Sirmond had arranged, ^D as it is more accommodated to the account of history and the times. We have added a double numbering for each letter, as in the Sirmondian transcripts and the Royal codex. The latter number undoubtedly denotes a collection of Theodore’s letters, somewhat larger and by a thousand or so.

Finally, just as Sirmond placed a chronological digest of thirty years—a Synopsis covering those things contained in those minor works—at the *Collectanea* of Anastasius the Librarian, and likewise another of eight years at the beginning of the works of Facundus of Hermiane, so Theodore the Studite seemed to demand a similar labor from us. Therefore, we have distinguished his deeds and writings in a chronological Synopsis by years.

CHRONOLOGICAL SYNOPSIS, ARRANGING THE ACTS, WRITINGS, AND ESPECIALLY THE EPISTLES OF ST. THEODORE THE STUDITE IN ORDER OF YEARS, DRAWN FROM HIS OWN LIFE AND EPISTLES.

In the year of Christ 759, the 18th of Constantine Copronymus, Theodore is born at Constantinople to noble and pious parents, Photinus and Theoctista, who themselves later embraced the monastic life. Photinus held the quaestorship of the imperial revenues, a very high magistracy; Theoctista was the sister of Plato, an archimandrite ^A of great renown at that time (Vita, pp. 2, 3).

In the year 781, Theodore renounces the world, and with his brothers Euthymius and Joseph (of whom Joseph later was Archbishop of Thessalonica) and his entire family, he begins the monastic life at the monastery of Saccudion, over which Plato presided (Vita, page 5).

In the year 784, he is initiated into the priesthood at Constantinople by Patriarch Tarasius (Ibid., p. 10).

In the year 794, Plato is struck by a grave illness and, believing death to be imminent, transfers the prefecture of the Saccudion monastery to Theodore, though he was unwilling and reluctant (Ibid., p. 12).

In the year 795, the Emperor Constantine, son of Leo IV and Irene, repudiates his wife Maria—whom he had been forced to accept by his mother—on the pretext that she had conspired against his life; and in the month of August he marries Theodote, a lady of the bedchamber, joining the union not by the Patriarch of Constantinople, as was the custom in imperial marriages, but by Joseph, the *oikonomos* of that same Church. Furthermore, when the Patriarch Tarasius had resisted this nefarious marriage to the best of his ability, and had absolutely refused to celebrate the nuptials or crown the concubine, he did, when the deed was done, severely rebuke the emperor; yet he would not deprive him of communion, lest he provoke the young man, who was burning with lust and threatening to become an enemy of the icons by the example of his ancestors. Theodore, however, openly declares that Constantine is to be held as excommunicated: he and Plato renounce the communion of Tarasius, as one who acted too leniently in this matter (Ibid., p. 13). Hence arose great disturbances in the Eastern Church; many disapproved of this action of Theodore. Among them, Stephen the *a secretis*, in a meeting with Theodore, had argued that only heresy was a legitimate cause for breaking communion, and that no one was permitted to rebuke a bishop outside of a matter of faith. Theodore refutes Stephen in an epistle (Book I, 5) written to him, and demonstrates how grave the emperor's crime was in an epistle (I, 4) to Nicephorus the *praepositus*, his own cousin.

Michael, he says in the *Life* of Theodore, p. 16, also sent epistles and documents to the bishop of the city of Rome, informing him of what had transpired and what he had endured from the emperors when he sought to restrain their intemperance; from him, he received answers in turn, in which the Pontiff extolled his prudence and constant spirit ^B with divine praises. But the epistle of Theodore written at that time to the Roman pontiff is not extant.

Meanwhile, the emperor, concealing his anger, attempts to sway Theodore, whom he knew to be held in high regard by all for his sanctity. And first he sends to him new Augusta Theodote, who was related to Theodore by blood, with gifts; then he himself arrives at his monastery under the pretext of some business; but all the monks shun the sight of the emperor. Wherefore, stung by fury, he orders Theodore, along with eleven monks, first to be scourged with rods, then to be deported to Thessalonica (though they did not go into exile until the following year), and Plato to be shut up in Constantinople within the palace in the monastery of Saint Sergius and the church of Saint Michael (Vita, p. 14). During this time, Theodore sent a letter (I, 6) to his mother Theoctista, who was very gravely ill, while he was still residing in his monastery, as can be understood from the letter itself.

In the year 796, Theodore arrives at Thessalonica, the place of his exile, on the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin. From there, at no great interval, he sent three epistles (I, 1, 2, 3) to Plato, in which he vehemently exhorts him and the other monks to persist in the defense of truth and piety they had undertaken; then he also explains the manner and order of his entire journey, just as Plato had requested.

In the year 797, Emperor Constantine is seized by order of his mother Irene, blinded, and dies a few days later. Irene, having obtained the throne, immediately directs her attention to restoring peace to the Church. Joseph the *oikonomos*, who had joined the adulterous marriage, is deposed; Plato is led out of confinement; the exiles are recalled; and as Theodore returns to Constantinople, almost the whole city, and the Augusta herself with the Patriarch, go to meet him. Fleeing honors and public ^C life, he obtains from Irene permission to return to his own monastery (Vita, p. 16).

In the year 798, he was there applying himself to the strenuous work of restoring monastic discipline, when he is compelled to withdraw with his own into the city on account of the incursions of the Saracens and Arabs. The Augusta grants him the monastery of Studios, most noble in the city, which had been devastated by Constantine Copronymus. A great many flock there to Theodore, drawn by the man’s renown, and surrender themselves to be trained in his monastic institutes (Vita, p. 17).

And at this point, Michael, author of the *Life* of Theodore, and after him Baronius, commemorate the writings of Theodore; namely, the Monastic Institutions composed in iambic verses; the Small Catechism consisting of one hundred and thirty-four sermons, which he himself had delivered before the brethren; — Catech[etic]

institutions, wherein the noble precepts of the cenobites were explained individually; a Panegyric volume, containing excellent orations for the feast days of the Lord, the Mother of God, and Saint John the Baptist; — likewise a book in iambic verses concerning the creation and fall of our first parent, etc., and concerning the whole heresy of the Iconoclasts; and certain other things (Vita, pp. 19, 21).

Anno 801. — Irene Augusta remits civil tributes to the Byzantines: and Theodore celebrates this munificence of hers in an epistle (I, 6) written to her.

Anno 802. — Nicephorus, general Logothete, having ejected Irene, occupies the empire on the 31st of October.

Anno 806. — Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople, dies on the 25th of February. Emperor Nicephorus consults with Plato and Theodore regarding the election of a new patriarch. Theodore, through an epistle (I, 16), advises that no one be chosen other than one who has ascended by degrees in order from the lowest to the highest. But Nicephorus—a layman at the time, although otherwise distinguished by piety—is imposed upon the patriarchal seat, very much against its will, and is consecrated on the 12th of April, the very Sunday of Holy Pascha.

Shortly after, Emperor Nicephorus convenes a synod of several bishops, by whom Joseph the steward ^B is restored to his former rank, with the consent of the new patriarch, who, being unskilled in ecclesiastical discipline, was more easily led to the opinion of others, since he also feared that the emperor might plot something more atrocious against the Church (Vita, pp. 22, 23).

He refused to hear them himself. For this same reason, I wrote, in the name of Joseph, Archbishop of Thessalonica, an epistle (I, 25) to the same Simeon, in which Joseph complains that he was barred from access to the emperor, and demonstrates how rightly he himself had been made archbishop, contrary to the calumnies of certain people. Furthermore, Theodore complains in an epistle (I, 26), written in those same days to the steward Simeon, that this Simeon had not acted altogether sincerely in that business.

Finally, when Theodore saw that he and his own were daily more hated by the patriarch, as if they were schismatics and rebels, he writes an apologetic epistle (I, 25) to him. He also wrote back to Basil, abbot of the monastery of Saint Sabas—then residing in Rome and an old friend, who had nevertheless indicated that he was renouncing communion with him as if he were a schismatic—an epistle (I, 28) somewhat more sharp against him, and also against Pope Leo, about whom he had heard false reports, being more agitated as though they were not showing themselves sufficiently just in contending for justice and piety.

The day after the synod was held, Theodore wrote an epistle (I, 30) to the patriarch, beseeching him not to receive the steward: he himself could not approach the sacred mysteries in which Joseph participated. He complains that the patriarch did not reply in an epistle (I, 26) to the monk Simeon.

Anno 808. — It had been two years that Plato, Theodore, and Joseph, Archbishop of Thessalonica and brother of Theodore, were abstaining from the communion of Patriarch Nicephorus, because of the steward Joseph who had been received by him, albeit secretly. The Logothete of the Drome brought the matter into the open. Therefore Theodore, foreseeing an impending storm, explains to the monks of Saccudion, by an epistle (I, 31), for what just causes he had withdrawn from the patriarch; and when some excused the deed of the steward, and said that Constantine’s second marriage could have been rightly performed by dispensation, Theodore, in an epistle (I, 24) written to Theoctistus the Magister, argues for a legitimate dispensation against the destruction of the canons, and refutes the objections of his adversaries. On the same matter, he wrote two epistles in the name of Plato, that they might have more authority, to the monk Simeon, a kinsman of Emperor Nicephorus, of which the one (I, 21) begs him to soften the emperor’s mind and to avert the impending storm. The other (I, 22) discourses at length against the steward, the destroyer of the canons, and again beseeches Simeon.

Anno 809. — He defends his secession from the patriarch and clears himself against the rumors of men in an epistle (I, 32) written to Nicolaus the Chartulary, and protests that he bears no alien spirit toward the patriarch, and that he desires the peace of the Church as much as possible.

Meanwhile, a synod is convened at Constantinople against him in the month of January; to which Plato is dragged by force by military hand. There it was decreed: that Constantine’s marriage with Theodote ought to be called legitimate by way of dispensation; that kings are not bound by divine laws; that those who had then contended even to bloodshed for the sacred canons ought not be said to have done so following the example of the Forerunner or Chrysostom; that bishops have power over the canons. Finally, all who did not consent to these things were subjected to anathema: and Theodore, Plato, and Joseph the brother of Theodore were relegated to an island not far from Byzantium, and there each was shut away in his own separate prison. Then the emperor tempts the disciples of Theodore, bereft of their master, in every way: and when he could not bend them, he hands them over to strict confinement. Theodore records these things in many epistles, but especially in that which he sent to Pope Leo through Epiphanius, which does not exist, having been suppressed by the author lest it fall into the hands of the enemy. But later he sent Eustathius to the same pontiff with an epistle (I, 33) in which, after he had exposed what had been done in the two adulterous synods (as he himself calls them), he implores the aid of the apostolic see.

Leo, in response to the former letter received through Epiphanius, wrote back an epistle full of paternal love, which has perished; but what kind of letter it was is shown by the third epistle of Theodore to Leo (I, 34), which is inscribed in the name of both Plato and Theodore, although they were then separated by prison. In it, moreover, he again argues most sharply against the new dogmas of his adversaries.

^A He also refutes the rumor, spread about himself and Plato, that they were siding with certain heretics. To Basil, abbot of St. Sabas, he again sent a letter (I, 35) in the name of both Plato and himself, in which he asks primarily for a legitimate synod to be convened against the Moechians.

At the same time, he gave a letter (I, 30) to Euprepianus, encouraging him to constancy in the faith while simultaneously refuting the errors of the Moechians; then in a letter (I, 38) to Arsenius he refutes those who claimed that sins could be excused by dispensation; and he writes (I, 39) to Theophilus the abbot on the same argument, at the same time answering those who wondered why Theodore called them heretics, with whom he himself had previously communed. And he argues in a letter (I, 48) to Athanasius that the error of the Moechians had passed into heresy. And because his adversaries were abusing the examples of the Apostles and the older Fathers, who had sometimes made use of a dispensation; Theodore, at the strong urging of his brother Joseph, wrote the book *On Dispensation*, not, as he says (I, 49), from his own ingenuity, but from the opinions of the Fathers. He celebrates in two letters to Naucratius (I, 50) the noble confessors who had died in that persecution. And he writes back (I, 43) to Archbishop Joseph, comforting him in his deep grief.

Anno 811. — Nicephorus the Emperor having been killed on July 22 in an expedition against the Bulgarians, just as Theodore had predicted to him, and his son Stauracius having died not long afterward from the wounds he had received in the same war, Michael Curopalates attained the empire on October 2. Wishing to remove dissensions and restore peace to the Church of Constantinople, he promises freedom to the confessors in exile and those held in prison, on the condition that Patriarch Nicephorus should revoke what had been done wrongly, and then all would return to his communion. The condition being accepted, Plato and Theodore were restored to their monasteries, and Theodore's letter (I, 56) to Antonius, or Antoninus the abbot, who himself was also being held shackled with his brothers, shows that they were the intercessors to ensure that others similarly consented.

Anno 812. — Saint Plato, worn out by old age and labors, died on March 19, in the 97th year of his age, and his funeral was celebrated by Patriarch Nicephorus with an incredible crowd of people. Theodore wrote a funeral oration for him, which, having been rendered into Latin by William Sirlet, afterward cardinal, was published by Aloysius Lipomanus in volume VII of *De Vitis Sanctorum Patrum*, page 275, and from Lipomanus by Laurentius Surius on December 16. This was later published in Greek by Henschenius and Papebrochius, with a new Latin translation, in the *Acta Sanctorum* of April, volume I.

Anno 814. — Leo the Armenian, who had succeeded Michael Balbus—who abdicated the empire on June 11 of the previous year—began ^B to wage war against the holy images in that year. And first, he summons to the palace the bishops and heads of monasteries, together with the patriarch: when many others were also present, and not a few among them were infected with the iconoclastic contagion, he orders a free disputation concerning the images to be instituted. Most of the bishops and archimandrites refuse; among others, Theodore, having delivered a long speech, lays bare the emperor's wicked plans, and then admonishes him that, while civil and military affairs were indeed committed to his judgment and power, the judgment concerning ecclesiastical matters belonged to priests and teachers alone (*Vita*, p. 30).

Gravely moved, Leo ejects everyone from his sight; and when they had returned home, an edict of the emperor is immediately delivered to each one, by which they are forbidden to have any discourse about the faith, for the sake of either teaching, or disputing, or even talking. Not a few abbots promise in writing to do what was requested. Theodore, on the contrary, asserts that it is a sin to be silent in a cause of the faith: and he writes a letter (lib. II, 2) on this matter, as if it were an encyclical, to all the monks. Then he raises up and strengthens the wavering patriarch, and afterward, when he had been driven from his see and city on account of his noble confession, he congratulates him by letter (II, 18); and when the adversaries, having driven out the patriarch and the orthodox priests, were casting down, breaking, and burning the holy images everywhere, and treating them with every kind of insult; Theodore, on the feast of Palms, in order to inflame those at his Studium, orders them in a solemn supplication to carry an image of Christ around the circuit of the Studite monastery (*Vita*, p. 38).

Theodotus, a heretical man, having been intruded into the patriarchal see, the bishops and archimandrites are again called into the patriarchate: and when they were very much ^C eager to avoid the council of the impious, Theodore encourages them in their purpose and writes a letter (II, 1) in the name of the superiors to the pseudo-synod, the gist of which was that, as they were bound to Patriarch Nicephorus as their head, they could not approach the synod in his absence.

For this reason, Theodore is sent into exile by the emperor and consigned to prison (*Vita*, p. 39). He writes several letters from his chains: first an epistle (II, 8) that is dogmatic or catechetical, to all those who were likewise sent into exile or even kept in chains, or who had fled elsewhere to avoid the storm. Then, when Bardas, breaking into the Studite house, had beaten the monk Thaddaeus to the point of death, Theodore celebrated this new martyr in a letter (II, 3) written to Naucratius.

Anno 815. — The emperor, when he saw that the exiled monks were daily gaining greater courage for the defense of the faith, changed his plan and recalled them. But after a few days, he handed them over to a certain wicked man, John, to be tortured: and when they professed that they would sooner lose their lives than their faith, the adversaries tried to persuade them that the empire demanded nothing else

^A than that they should once, with the patriarch Theodotus (II, 22), communicate by way of a testament to the brethren; that it would be free for them afterwards to return to their monasteries and to retain their opinion as they pleased. Seduced by this fraud, many were led into communion with the pseudo-patriarch, especially since he publicly laid an anathema upon all those who would not adore the image of Christ. Theodore, who had not been recalled from exile, lest he should confirm others in the faith by his presence and discourses; after he heard of the shipwreck of many brethren, being vehemently moved, deplored the downfall of those who had fallen in letters written to his brother Joseph (II, 9) and to Naucratius (II, 10). When this came to the ears of the emperor, he sent a certain Nicetas, who was to beat Theodore most cruelly and deport him into a more distant exile. But Nicetas, softened by the sight of Theodore, used a pious fraud and evaded the emperor’s orders regarding the infliction of stripes (Life, p. 40).

Anno 816. When, while in the very prison, Theodore had recalled a certain cleric from heresy to the Catholic faith, the fame of this matter was brought to the city; by the command of Leo, he was beaten most severely together with his disciple Nicolaus, and both were handed over to stricter custody, to be killed there by cruel hunger. But a certain holy virgin secretly sent food to them, for whose kindness Theodore expresses his gratitude in a letter written to her (II, 94). Meanwhile, when many of those whom the heretics had led astray, detesting the crime they had committed, returned to their own and requested to be received by them; Theodore, being advised of this matter by Naucratius, wrote many letters, especially about receiving the lapsed (II, 6, 19, 20, 32, 40, 45, 50, 68, 95, 101, 119, 154, 202, 211). Then also, writing to his disciple Thalelaeus (II, 59), he responds to various questions pertaining to ecclesiastical discipline. Likewise, he writes a letter (II, 59) to thirty nuns who had endured prison and scourging for Christ, and exhorts them to perseverance. He also highly praises Queen Maria, who had once been divorced by Constantine, the son of Irene, and thrust into a monastery, in a letter (II, 182), because she had suffered exile for the faith. And when Maria’s daughter, who was then Augusta, summoned her mother to her in the palace, he strongly dissuades her, that she might not in any way commune with the heretics in the palace.

At the same time, he wrote two letters (II, 4, 26) to Bishop Theophylact of Nicomedia, in which he both praises his fortitude in the defense of the Catholic faith and deplores the miserable state of the Church. And he wrote as many (II, 41, 70) to Theophilus, the prelate of the Ephesians, who had also endured grave tortures for the faith. He also celebrates Joseph, Archbishop of Thessalonica, an equally renowned champion of the Catholic faith, in a letter written to him (II, 31) in which he laments the fall and apostasy from the faith of certain men: principally Leontius, formerly a monk, who had previously adhered to the Manichaeans, and at that time was like a standard-bearer of the Iconoclasts, and had invaded the monasteries of Saccudion and Studium. He also praises in a letter (II, 25) the prelate of the Nicene fathers, who, having faltered for a short time, was raised up after his fall and had strenuously defended the cause of the Catholics, and for that reason had been ejected from his bishopric. Likewise, he wrote a letter common to all the exiled bishops (II, 87), exhorting them to confirm the others by their authority and example. Finally, it can hardly be believed how many letters he wrote at this time, hortatory for martyrdom, catechetical for instruction, dogmatic against the objections of heretics, consolatory for fellow captives, mournful for the lapsed, and canonical for those repenting... The sum exceeds two hundred letters, which Theodore wrote during the time of persecution while he was in exile and detained in prison (Baron. an. 816, n. 25).

Anno 817. This year he wrote to the four patriarchs: namely to the Roman pontiff who was then Paschal I (II, 12), to the prelate of Jerusalem (II, 15), and a common letter to the patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandria (II, 14), in which letters he commemorated how the image of Christ had been contumeliously treated by the persecutors, while all the orthodox had been sent to prison and exile. Then he urged each one to offer help to the faith and truth which were in peril (Life, p. 42). He also wrote on this subject to two abbots, one of the Laura of Saint Sabas (II, 16), the other of the Laura of Saint Chariton (II, 17). To the letters to the patriarchs, however, he added a work composed by himself against the Iconoclast heresy. What he achieved by these letters, he explains in another letter to the Patriarch of Jerusalem, the mention of which will be in the year 821.

In order to retard the ardor of the confessors of Christ, the heretics ^B openly declared that the palm of martyrdom was hoped for in vain by the Catholics for those tortures which they had endured for the sake of images: that it was one thing to shed blood for Christ, another to shed it for His image. Theodore, therefore, in order to refute these, showed in several letters that the honor of the image and the prototype is one and the same; consequently, that those who denied the image of Christ, by them Christ was denied: that those who suffered for the image of Christ, suffered for Christ Himself (II, 21, 25).

Also in this year, almost overcome by hardships, and thinking that he would not long be a survivor, he wrote a letter...

Anno 818. When Theodore, still in chains, had received letters from Pope Paschal, he wrote again to the same pontiff (II, 13) through Epiphanius, whom he ordered to set out for Rome for this reason (II, 35). And when he understood that his Studites and others were wandering outside their monasteries because of the persecution, he wrote a catechetical letter to the brethren dispersed everywhere (II, 37), in which he both exhorts them to patience and at the same time... ^{C D}

^A primis admonet (first, he warns them) not to be led away from the institutes and holiness of monastic life by the custom of men and the enticements of pleasures. In this same year, legates from the Roman Pontiff Paschal arrived in Constantinople, with letters by which the heresy of the Iconoclasts was refuted. Theodore mentions this embassy in his catechetical letter to his own (II, 66) against these same Iconoclasts. By this embassy, the spirits of the orthodox were kindled toward the profession of the Catholic faith and the detestation of heresy; and of those who had been led away, many were brought back to the path. Hence arose a sharper persecution. Wherefore Theodore sent many letters from his prison by which he might console and strengthen his own. Then he wrote to Simeon and nine others who were in hiding concerning those who offered themselves voluntarily to martyrdom (II, 44); then also appears the letter written to Leo the patrician and *sacellarius* (II, 56), in which he sets forth the bitterness of the persecution. Likewise, the one to the patrician Irene (II, 68), by which he adds courage to the noble woman who, having fallen at first, then confessed the Catholic faith and endured even scourgings; as also the one to the layman Gregoras (II, 55), who was the first from the palace to descend into the arena of Catholic defense. At that time he also consoled with a letter the Studite brethren (II, 58), when that persecutor, Leontius, once a monk, raged most cruelly against them. He also wrote a letter to the monk Simeon (II, 30) in which he signifies that a new type of martyrdom was being employed by the heretics, namely, that they were attempting to weary and break the orthodox through long and harsh journeys. At the same time, writing to Naucratius (II, 61), he sent a book or twelve quires, in which he had included the Sermons and Lives of the Fathers in meter. Then also he celebrated in letters (II, 100) given to Hypatus the monk James, an illustrious confessor of Christ, who had died.

Anno 819. When a certain letter by Theodore had fallen into the hands of the emperor, the prefect of the East was sent to the holy abbot, showed him that letter, and ordered the man to be beaten most severely until his very last breath, in the month of February. Then, three months later, Theodore was transferred to Smyrna, as he himself recounts in his letter (II, 38) which he gave from the Smyrnan prison soon after to his scattered brethren. In this new and stricter custody, he was whipped three times, with a hundred blows each time. Concerning which matter he again wrote a catechetical letter to the scattered brethren (II, 62). Afterward, the captain of the guard attempted to sway the man, who remained undaunted and unbroken by any tortures, with blandishments and every kind of service, as is told in the letter (II, 63) to Naucratius.

Anno 820. As the holy confessor daily awaited death from the heretics, he gave a letter as a witness of his joy to Naucratius (II, 71), and this he wrote as the last under the reign of Leo. Bardas, a most bitter persecutor of Catholics, lying sick in Smyrna with a most grave disease, is healed by the prayers of Theodore, when he had promised ^B that after his recovery he would henceforth live according to his prescript. But when he had shortly after returned to his natural character and heresy, he was once again seized by the disease and died there (Vita Theod., p. 47).

Anno 821. Leo the Armenian having been killed among the sacred rites at the very end of the previous year on the day of the Lord’s Nativity, Michael the Stammerer seized the empire and soon freed the Catholics from chains and exile. Theodore, having been informed of these things through letters from Naucratius who was staying in Constantinople, wrote to Michael the new emperor (II, 74) and praises him wondrously, thinking him orthodox. He also writes to Naucratius (II, 73) about the death of Leo the Armenian, proclaiming it a divine vengeance. He also gave letters to John the *logothete* (II, 80) on exactly the same subject. Soon he himself, after the seventh year from when he had been ejected, was recalled to Constantinople; he set out on the journey, is received everywhere with the greatest rejoicing of all, and performs many miracles on the journey (Vita Theod., p. 49, 50). When he visited Patriarch Nicephorus on the way, the monk Agapetus came there, sent by the bishops exiled in Cherson, to whom it was also commanded that he should greet Theodore. And on this occasion, Theodore wrote a letter (II, 92) to those bishops. From there he set out for Constantinople; the patriarch remaining with some bishops, because the heretic Theodotus still held the see.

At the same time he wrote two letters, which do not exist, to a certain hermit Theoctistus, so that he might amend the man who was defending depraved and heretical dogmas: just as he himself testifies in another letter (II, 138) written three years later to the same man, which will also be mentioned in its proper place.

Meanwhile, the emperor orders that the bishops, both orthodox and Iconoclasts, should meet together to discuss the sacred dogmas. The orthodox refuse again, since ecclesiastical laws forbid them to approach a council with heretics. They demand, nevertheless, to be heard by the emperor: and to this effect there exists a letter written by Theodore, as it is believed, in the name of all the bishops and superiors (II, 86). Therefore, having been admitted to the emperor, they ask that their Churches be restored to them, with the heretics who had occupied them cast out. And they dispute much in favor of the sacred images ^C against the Iconoclastic heresy. Michael responds that the things which are said by them are excellent; wherefore let them remain, if they please, in their opinion: but since he himself had never worshipped any image, he wished to remain likewise in his former opinion: not, however, forbidding that images be erected everywhere, except in the royal city. Theodore withdrew to the places of Crescens, and writes to Patriarch Nicephorus concerning what had just been done. And when Nicephorus had written back that he was vehemently grieved that because of the death of Leo peace had not yet been restored to the Church, Theodore consoles him and bids him hope for better things (II, 79). Meanwhile, a certain Thomas attempts to transfer the empire to himself. Therefore, while the emperor is entirely occupied in matters of war, Theodo-

enjoying great peace in Constantinople, he uses this opportunity both in sermons and in writings, and in every possible way, to restore the Catholic faith and piety. For this reason, he wrote at that same time a catechetical letter (II, 90) to his monks who were still dispersed in various places. And when Eustratius, one of his superiors who had given his hand to the heretics, sought to disguise his crime and pretend he was innocent, Theodore wrote a letter (II, 106) to him personally, in which he lovingly invites the man to a confession of his transgression and to penance. Not long after, he is driven from the city again along with many others, as he himself testifies in a letter (II, 121) which he wrote back to Thomas, the patriarch of Jerusalem, who had congratulated him on his return shortly before in a letter.

Year 822. — The tyrant Thomas besieges Constantinople in the month of December. For this reason, Theodore is compelled to take refuge in the city (Vita, p. 57). ^A

Year 823. — Emperor Michael, fearing that the orthodox might join the ranks of the tyrant, attempts to reconcile them with the heretics: and for this purpose, he summons everyone to a mutual gathering. The Catholics refuse, as is their custom: but Theodore, in the name of all, states what ought to be done to compose the peace of the Church in a letter written to Leo the sakellarios (II, 129). Then, so that they might not appear to be avoiding the meeting or fostering error or discord out of distrust of his cause, he again sends an apologetic letter (II, 199) to the Emperors Michael and his son Theophilus in the name of all. Afterwards, when the tyrant Thomas was brought under the power of Michael, Theodore again departs from the city and takes up his seat on the island of the Acritae, and from there he frequently holds discussions with the patriarch Nicephorus. But although a great intimacy existed between the two, there were nonetheless those among the enemies of Theodore who claimed that he avoided community with Nicephorus. This slander he therefore refutes in a letter (II, 127) to Peter, bishop of Nicaea. ^B

Whether or not the legates of Louis indeed set out to Emperor Michael and delivered to him the acts of the Paris Conference is unknown, says Baronius. However, the Oriental orthodox were far from accepting that reconciliation of the Gauls concerning the sacred images which we have mentioned. For you will learn this from the letter (II, 171) of Theodore the Studite written to Nicetas the monk, from whom he had received a book containing doctrine of that kind (Annal. eccl. ann. 825, no. 54).

Likewise in the year 825, Theodore gave a letter (II, 116) to the most famous anchorite Joannicius, whom he had visited a year before; although it was addressed to John the hermit, do not think, says Baronius, that this person was different from Joannicius: for at the end of the letter (II, 166) written to Theoctistus, he calls him the same John. For John was his proper name, whereas Joannicius had been used as a diminutive from childhood. Theodore was asking this man to call to himself the hermit Theoctistus—who, previously entangled in certain heretical opinions, was already returning to his senses—and to imbue him with Catholic and sound doctrine. He had written a letter (II, 138) to Theoctistus himself, in which he argued against his errors and tried to recall him to a good state of mind. Finally, when Theoctistus had sent a pamphlet as a witness of his penance and of the right faith, he writes a letter (II, 166) to him in which the errors of that hermit are reviewed, and the formula of the Catholic faith is prescribed, which Theoctistus must sign in the presence of Joannicius. ^C

Year 826. — Theodore, worn out by hardships, labors, and disease, having handed over his will to his own, migrates from this life on Sunday, November 11. His sacred body was transferred to the Princes' Island (Vita, p. 61).

Meanwhile, Basil, the son of Leo the Armenian, who had been castrated by the order of Michael, and had lost the use of his voice by that wound, receives his voice back divinely at the statue of Saint Gregory Nazianzen, and joins the Catholics for the defense of the sacred images together with his mother Theodora, or Theodosia, who had been thrust into a monastery. This is according to the Curopalates, and Cedrenus himself. Theodore congratulates Theodora and Basil, who had publicly professed that they would not flee from death for the sake of the Catholic faith, by a letter (II, 204) written to them, and confirms them in their resolution. ^D

Years 824, 825. — When the legates of the Greek emperors Michael and Theophilus had come to Gaul to King Louis the Pious, and among other matters had set forth the schism which was taking place in the Eastern Church over the images—which some contended should be adored, while others contended should not be—and had signified that for this reason they would also go to Rome to the pontiff; Louis, out of a desire to compose peace, directed the bishops, with the permission of the pontiff, to assemble at the palace in Paris and to collect the sentiments of the holy Fathers concerning the images, to provide help, as he said, for what might appear to be the future resolution. "They had received this collection... when Louis had accepted it... he soon sent to Rome to Eugenius, etc." Thus Sirmond, tom. II of the Councils of Gaul, p. 459. Furthermore, those bishops in this Collection of theirs, Sirmond continues, attempt to twist the sentiments of the holy Fathers so that they might establish that the icons—contrary to what they wished to appear—should not be adored with undue worship.

The author of the *Life of Saint Nicholas the Studite* (extant in volume II of the *Auctarium Bibliothecae Patrum Graecorum*), himself a Studite monk and a disciple of the same Nicholas, describes the final moments of Theodore’s life and his very death in this manner: "When the Caesar Michael... had forbidden the worshipers of the venerable images from dwelling within the city, our holy Fathers Theodore and Nicholas... departing to the place designed above, adjacent to the gulf of Prusa, were dwelling there. But when Thomas, the seducer of the people, was exercising his rage upon the Roman world, by order of the emperor they returned, even against their will, to the royal city: and departing thence shortly after, they sought an island near the promontory of Acritas named after the great martyr Tryphon: where finally, after many struggles, the glorious father and most blessed Theodore [finished his life]

and he departed with the greatest fame of his name on the 11th of November. His blessed tabernacle was then translated to the island called Principus, and committed to a glorious and holy burial. But certain sacred doctors of the Church have written of this... and committed his notable deeds to letters for perpetual memory: namely, Naucratius, a disciple of Theodore and companion in his labors, and Michael the monk, also a disciple of Theodore. For Naucratius ^A (Auctar. ibid.) wrote an epistle concerning the death of Saint Theodore to the Fathers and spiritual Brothers scattered everywhere, and those enduring persecution for the Lord’s sake; in which he describes the death of the most holy archimandrite at length. Michael, however, wrote the Life of Theodore, which now appears in Greek and Latin.

Anno 844. The body of Saint Theodore, eighteen years after his death, being sound and incorrupt and fragrant with a very sweet odor, was translated to Constantinople with great pomp and buried in the Studite monastery (Vita Theod., p. 62). The same is also mentioned in the Life of Saint Nicholas.

Furthermore, in this chronological synopsis, we have enumerated only those epistles ^B which carry some note of a certain time; and likewise, of the other writings of Theodore, only those whose date was noted either in the Life of Theodore or in his epistles. As for the rest, whether epistles or books, it is neither important for history to know their chronological order, nor does any other reason appear why one should labor over it. We believe, however, that the epistles were arranged either in the very order in which they were sent, or at least in an order not much different. Wherefore, since the first book contains those which Theodore wrote during the principate of Constantine V, Irene, Nicephorus, and Michael Curopalates against the Moechian heresy, as he calls it, it is likely that even others which are intermingled with these pertain to the same times. And since the second book contains those which were written from the first year of Leo the Armenian, in which the Iconoclastic persecution broke out again, up to the death of Theodore, ^C in defense of faith and piety against that nefarious heresy, it seems sufficiently probable that others as well, of a different subject matter which the same book contains, are also to be referred to those same times.

ANG. MAI PREFACE

1. Because the great Cardinal Baronius greatly desired that the writings of Saint Theodorus Studites be diligently collected and published in print (1), the most learned man Jacques Sirmond, S.J., began to accomplish this toward the end of his long life, though already before this he had handed over many of the Studite’s epistles, translated by himself from Greek into Latin, to Baronius for publication in his *Annals* as occasion required. Yet, Sirmond having been translated to the heavens, the fifth volume of his works, already almost ready for the press, appeared posthumously, containing the principal writings of the Studite, that is, the *Antirrhetics* against the Iconoclasts, two books of epistles, and a book of iambic verses. But it is sufficiently apparent that another full volume of the Studite’s writings to be edited is to be expected: for if, by adding the supplements we now provide ^D to those published by Sirmond, there are joined many unpublished epistles which are preserved at Paris, as we mentioned below, p. 99, as well as the larger collection of catecheses about which we also speak on p. 77, and finally also the troparia still lurking in manuscripts; that Sirmondian volume, with this new mass of writings, will be completely matched. Indeed, it is evident from the editor’s Preface that Sirmond had labored on the Studite’s writings, where many of these are named: and then also from the epistle of Holstenius 77, ed. Paris, p. 365, to Sirmond in these words: "I send to you the troparia of Saint Theodore the Studite which alone remained to be described in the collection of his works: for I hope that the panegyrical sermons have already reached you."

II. Having considered these things, I decided to continue the edition of the Studite. And because I had now committed to print Saint Nicephorus, his contemporary and intimate friend, I judged him to be a most fitting companion to be joined with him in the same volume. For in truth, how great a reputation Nicephorus attained among the patriarchs, just so great a one did Theodore attain among the holy archimandrites: and both were born in the same country, lived in the same age, both were famous for many writings, for their mutual exchange of letters, for an orthodox confession against the Iconoclasts, for ecclesiastical fortitude, for holiness of life, and especially for their obedience to the Roman See (2). Therefore...

NOTES

^A tradition. The See is Peter's, from which the certainty of the faith is to be received. Through it the faithful are united with the other patriarchs and among themselves. The sanctuary of the universal Church against the storms of all heresies. The Roman bishop is the prince of all. The supreme Father of fathers. The first apostolic head of the universal Church. The prelate of the first see. The coryphaeus of the patriarchs. The prince of the pastors of the Church which is under heaven. His principate is divine. It is necessary that whatever new thing is done in the Church be referred to him. This has been observed from the beginning. Christ [has granted] the keys through the intermediate person of Peter. The orthodox synod cannot be celebrated without the Roman Pontiff, so this tradition holds. To him belongs the power that the ecumenical council should be confirmed by him. To him it is necessary to recur for the settlement of the troubles of the Church of Constantinople. You see, reader, what has been the opinion of the two greatest men of the ninth century regarding the Greek Church, [and] of Rome. By the primacy and authority of the judgment of both, namely Theodore and Nicephorus. We have seen how (in *Spicil. Rom.* vol. X, p. 293), they grant to the most holy Nicholas in his epistle to the Romans, that the Church should concede the prerogative of ecclesiastical superiority (*προνόμιον ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ὑπεροχῆς*): which primacy, even Photius admits in his epistle to Nicholas the Pope, even though he later, in his enmity, acted badly, which we have destroyed, restoring it in its integrity in our *Bibliotheca* of the Roman Pontiffs, vol. IV, p. 51. Why, then, do the later ones, raging against the Roman See, and denying obedience to it, Photius and Cerularius, turn a deaf ear?

PREFACE OF ANGELO MAI

^A Having examined the codices of the Vatican Library, I have discovered eight panegyric orations—not counting those already published, as I noted in the addendum on p. 77—all of which were unpublished in Greek, though three had been published in Latin; namely, those on the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, and on the apostles John and Bartholomew, the last of which I found later and therefore could only place at the end of the volume. I have made them all Latin myself, omitting the Latin of the previous interpreters, Anastasius and Combefis. For although I do not prefer my own Latinity to anyone else's, still, the work of others often did not please me, either because it was too harsh and obscure, or because it abounded in many errors of poorly understood Greek. Therefore, in order that the eight orations might have a uniform character, a new interpretation had to be managed by us, or at least, in those three, passages had to be interpolated throughout. Arcudius certainly neglected them, having sent them long ago to Sirmond in Gaul, although the latter, overtaken by death, left them untouched. And indeed, in the paschal oration, that fragment of Chrysostom occurs which no critic in the future will fail to consider genuine, especially since it is also read under the name of Chrysostom in the Nanian codex 70, in the possession of Mittarelli, and indeed joined with our Studite. In the sixth oration, on the passing or *metastasis* of the Mother of God, Theodore pours out his pious soul toward the Divine one. What shall I say of the seventh and eighth? Although these pleased me less, the eighth ^B certainly pleased Anastasius the Librarian a thousand years ago, who honored it with his interpretation and praise; it also pleased Allatius, who had undertaken in his *Symmicta* to publish it in Greek. The seventh pleased the interpreter Combefis, who did not hesitate to call it most elegant. But the other six prior ones certainly pleased Sirmond, who had destined them for the press. As for those long since published, the one *On the Cross* pleased Gretser; *On the Nativity of the Mother of God* pleased Lequien; *On the Invention of the Head of the Holy Forerunner* pleased Du Cange; and *On the Great Arsenius and on Plato the Master* pleased the Bollandists. For whatever is produced that has been written by men of great learning and sanctity, that indeed cannot lack all utility or merit.

III. Furthermore, it appears that these panegyric orations were delivered by Theodore when he was not yet abbot, but still a youth, and subject to the hegumens (such as Plato, whose funeral he later decorated with an oration). This is clear, both explicitly from IV, p. 34 and 42; V, p. 52, 62, and also from VIII, p. 151, and also because the elocution is more turgid and more ornate than is due, with unusual words connected in a bold composition; it overflows and flourishes, nor does it bear the calm gentleness of age or the gravity of an hegumen, nor does it sufficiently follow the canons of mature criticism. But perhaps someone will ask what I think of these panegyrics. I certainly think not a little of the first oration, because it delivers a full doctrine on angels from the Old and New Testament, as the Church of the East and likewise of the West holds it. Therefore, this oration would have been useful to theological writers on angelic matters, had they known it. There are indeed in it opinions not only of a certain and dogmatic nature, but also many others that are pious, probable, and consonant with the teachings of the saints. To offer at least one example where Theodore says on p. 34, regarding the guardianship of individual places or things committed by God to angels, behold, Saint Augustine is in agreement in question 79, with these words: "Every visible thing in this world has an angelic power set over it, as the divine Scripture testifies in several places." The second oration also, on the baptism of Christ and our own, is almost entirely dogmatic. The third, concerning...

IV. After I had prepared a sufficiently laborious edition of these orations, with my own interpretation and notes, I immediately turned my mind to inquiring into other writings of Theodore. Therefore, I first obtained the 110 *Epitimia*, which present the image of monastic severity among the Greeks; then the precious Scholion which the Studite had placed before his own edition of the lesser Ascetic works of Saint Basil, so as to remove the scruple from those doubting about their author. Afterward, there offered itself to me the Studite's brief explanation of the Mass of the Presanctified; which also gave me the opportunity of describing certain very beautiful pictures of the Greek Mass, and also of publishing the almost unknown notice of the liturgy of Saint Epiphanius, bishop of the Cypriots. Indeed, I was extremely eager to increase the number of published letters of Theodore, but that hope almost failed me, as I said on p. 99: and so I was content with a very brief increase.

^A The Studite had already written a broad list of penances, yet he did not refuse to dictate another, smaller one, consisting almost entirely of daily punishments, which we shall also read with profit. There has also been added to me, from the Vatican codices, another brief work by the Studite concerning various questions. Finally, since I had said on p. 77 that I desired the Greek text of the sermon in which Theodore had lauded the holy Apostle Bartholomew, I caught sight of it at last, unexpectedly, on the lowest shelves of the Vatican Library, and with that discovery, I brought the volume to a close. Although hymns by the Studite are indeed found in the pontifical codices, of which only a very small part appears in the printed Triodion, it will not be possible to publish these pious hymns of the Studite, written in prose but overflowing with honeyed piety, until another volume and time, God willing.

Indeed, the smaller collection of the Studite’s Catecheses is not contained in one Vatican codex, consisting of 134 sermons, which Livineius edited only in Latin: but the larger collection of 217 sermons, of which Fabricius speaks, is missing, as I said on p. 77. However, I could not have included both in this volume, now sufficiently full; thus, a complete Greek edition of the Catecheses awaits a future editor, whether myself or another. Yet this happened to me unexpectedly and pleasantly: I found another Catechesis of the Studite, absolutely unheard of by philologists, I believe, entitled *Chronicle or Annals*, because in it is described the rule of fasts for the entire year; therefore, having eagerly seized this Catechesis at once, I set it aside for my volume.

After this, I read in a very ancient codex another monument of the ascetic discipline by which the Studite monastery, over which Theodore presided, was governed. Although another author wrote that document, the whole doctrine and legislation are Theodore’s, and were dictated and established by him, almost word for word, while he held the office of hegumen there. This, therefore, is an exact ordering of the divine office, and an accurate description of the fasts during the forty days and of the abstinences of the whole year; from which the religious piety and marvelous austerity of the old Greek Church shine forth for us. To this, moreover, for the sake of comparison, I have added an excerpt from the constitutions of the monastery of Saumur, notorious in the West, taken from a Gallican codex. Still indulging in research, I found a little book of our Theodore *On Confession and Satisfaction*, which I believe no one had mentioned, consisting of 28 chapters, which one might assign either to the Collections of Penitential Canons or to those of Morinus.

^B V. The life of Theodore the Studite, edited at length and accurately by Michael the monk, exists in the Sirmondian volume. And indeed, a notable part of it was that tragedy of Constantine, the son of Irene, who disturbed the Church with his adulterous marriage: resisting this crime primarily, Theodore suffered many evils—namely, exiles, scourges, hunger, and other such hardships. This matter is narrated not once in the Vatican codices as well; and we ourselves have explained the matter, whether in *Script. vet.* t. III, with the writing of Methodius the monk, or in *Spicilegii Rom.* t. VI, pref. p. 22 et seqq., with the authorities of Methodius the Patriarch and others.

TESTIMONIES OF THE ANCIENTS

Theophanes on the fourth year of Emperor Nicephorus, p. 407.

On the twelfth day of the month of April, on the great Sunday of Easter, the most holy Patriarch Nicephorus, formerly secretary, was elected by the suffrage of all the people and the priests, and furthermore of the emperors. ^C But Plato and Theodore, hegumens of the monastery of the Studites, did not agree with the ordination of Nicephorus; rather, they stood firmly against it, having meditated a schism—supposedly having a reasonable cause: that it was not fitting for someone to leap suddenly from the status of laymen to the supreme height of the episcopacy. When Emperor Nicephorus wished to expel them from the city, he was restrained by the contrary opinion of some who pointed out that the ordination of the patriarch would become odious if the monks—up to seven hundred—serving under Theodore, and his monastery, which was so famous, were to be dispersed.

And on the twelfth day of the month of April, on the great Sunday of Easter, the most holy Patriarch Nicephorus, formerly a secretary, was ordained, by the vote of all the people and of the priests, and moreover also of the emperors. But Plato and Theodore, the hegumens of the monastery of the Studites, did not consent to the ordination of Nicephorus; but they were vehemently opposed to it, having meditated a schism, alleging a seemingly reasonable cause: that one ought not to leap suddenly from the rank of laymen to the episcopacy. To whom, when Emperor Nicephorus wished to banish them from the city, he was turned aside; as some advised that the ordination of the patriarch would not be praiseworthy, upon the dissolution of such a monastery of seven hundred monks, approximately, being marshaled under Theodore. ^D Theodore the hegumen of the Studites, and Jo-

Idem on the seventh year of Emperor Nicephorus, p. 409.

Theodore the superior of the Studium, and his bro-

brother Joseph, archbishop of Thessalonica, together with Plato the recluse, and the rest of their monks, withdrew from the communion of Nicephorus, the most holy patriarch, on account of Joseph the oeconomos, who had illicitly crowned Constantine and Theodota.

From the Encyclical of Naucratius the Confessor, on the obit of St. Theodore the Studite, edited in the Auctarium Combefisianum of the Bibliotheca Patrum Graecorum, Vol. II, p. 855.

^A Our common Father has fallen asleep, he who was truly a disciple and imitator of Christ, the vessel of election, the mouth of the Church, the glory of the priests, the firmament of the faith, the rule of monks, the evangelical shepherd, the apostolic heart, the preeminent confessor, the willing martyr, the sun of Orthodoxy, the ecumenical teacher. And oh, the hearing of it! Our common Father has fallen asleep, the most loud-voiced herald of the truth, the ever-flowing fountain of doctrine, he who possessed a myriad of minds in his God-seeing governance, the admirable counselor, the faithful steward of the mysteries of God, the citizen of the heavenly Jerusalem, the purified intellect, the golden soul, the door of repentance, the source of dogmas, the sweet-sounding lyre of the Spirit, the dwelling-place of the blessed and primordial Trinity...

^B Our common Father has fallen asleep, the earthly angel and heavenly man, the most pure temple of virginity, he who was manifold and multiform in the varied wisdom of the Spirit, the intense thinker, the genuine servant of Christ, the beautiful-browed eye of the body of Christ, the athlete of patience, and the conqueror of the iconoclastic heresy, the weapon of justice, the fountain of alms, the exact guardian of the Lord’s laws, the treasury of virtues, pleasant in his words, and easy of access in his manner... The tongue that flowed with gold is bound, the interpreter of divine dogmas; the hand that wrote beautifully is at rest, having enriched the world with epistles, and turned many to the acknowledgment of the truth; the beautiful feet have stood still, which endured through all-night vigils, and preached peace and good things to many; the most perspicacious mind has found rest, which searched the depths of the Spirit, and foresaw things from afar, and looked ahead most excellently; the body lies hidden beneath the earth, practiced in ascetic labors, and which endured many exiles, and prisons, and stripes, and abductions. For such, most blessed ones, was our Father; and to say it in the same way, the father and teacher of many; the second Abraham, whose blessing from God was exceptional, and whose seed was beyond number; the imitator of the Forerunner, the emulator of Elijah, the Phinehas of grace, the new Samuel, elected from among thousands; whose virtue many cities, regions, and islands celebrate, and whose life and contests the ends of the earth deservedly proclaim. Who ever loved virtue, or hated vice, as much as he? ^C Who ever loved God so greatly and was so loved by Him? Who ever was so zealous with the zeal of the Lord?

preferring nothing to His love, even unto death? Who ever traced the lives of the saints and emulated them with insatiable ardor? Who ever so mortified, to use the words of the Apostle, the members which are upon the earth, and purified himself, rendering himself a temple of the living God? Who ever acted as a leader and drew up an army against the enemy, and joining battle with such happy success, overthrew them with a most noble victory? Who was more acute than he in foreseeing the future? Who, with such a steady and firm temper of soul, was capable of moving to action more swiftly than a lightning flash? ^A

Paulus Diaconus, Book XXIV of the Historia Miscella

Theodorus, hegumen of the Studium, and Joseph his brother, the Archbishop of Thessalonica, together with the recluse Plato and their other monks, withdrew from the communion of the most holy Patriarch Tarasius because of Joseph the vicedominus, who had prevaricated in crowning Constantine and Theodota. Then the Emperor Nicephorus, having found the opportunity, gathered the bishops and hegumens together and commanded a synod to be celebrated against them, by which they were cast out from the monastery and the city and sentenced to exile, in the month of January, in the second indiction.

Anastasius the Librarian in the Preface to the Sermon of S. Theodore the Studite on S. Bartholomew the Apostle. Spicilegium Dacherianum, vol. III, p. 13

Theodorus, that is, a certain priest in the city of Constantinople, lived in the times of the Roman Pontiffs Adrian and Leo; he was a man truly wonderful, who excelled not only in the constancy of his faith, but also in the grace of knowledge and in the virtues of signs. He was appointed abbot of two imperial and distinguished monasteries, the Studium and the Saccudion. Remaining always in communion with the Apostolic See, he repressed the babblings of heretics and the madness of the emperors with the constancy of his faith, even while suffering torments, and being full of the grace of the Holy Spirit, he composed many small works. ^B

From the Greek Menæa

On the eleventh day of the month of November, the memory of our holy Father Theodore, hegumen of the Studium.

Thrice-blessed Theodore, expect great rewards for your life, which was lived well and then brought to its end.

He was born during the reign of Constantine Copronymus, to pious parents, Photinus and Theoctista. Devoted to virtue from boyhood, he was trained in literary studies and raised to the highest peak of knowledge. Embracing thereafter the monastic life, and excelling in every kind of virtue, he was initiated with the chrism of the priesthood by the great Tarasius; and when the holy Plato, who was at that time hegumen of the monastery of the Studium [or Saccudion], had resigned, this blessed man accepted the leadership, guiding the flock entrusted to him well and pasturing them in healthful fields. And so this great Theodore, and Tarasius who is numbered among the saints—the latter was cast out of the Church, while the former, after being lashed with whips, was relegated to Thessalonica by Constantine, the son of Queen Irene, because [the emperor], having cast aside his legitimate wife, had taken another, and was heavily [reproached] by the saints. ^C

NOTES

(2) Thus the royal codex; for what is enclosed here in brackets is not read in Combefisius.

^A and preparing his flesh to be scourged. "For this," he said, "is to me something long-wished for and expected." But that compassionate man, who was merciful in the very deed, when he saw those honorable flanks of his, which time and fasting had utterly wasted away, felt his very soul wholly moved, and neither dared to attend to them nor even to touch them at all, much less to torment them with hands or scourges. Whence, having devised a clever plan within himself—so as both to seem to defer to the emperor and to deceive those present—he took the skin of a sheep that had been flayed, and placing it upon the shoulders of the man, he inflicted the scourges upon that, just as it was, planning that he should be left alone with him, due to the respect he felt for the man and the wasting of his flesh. And so that he might also have drops of blood from the wounds to show, that same man (O benevolent mind!) punctured his own arm with an iron tool, and having dipped the scourge into the blood that flowed from it, he brought it forth and showed it, stained with flesh and blood. He himself also gasped outwardly, feigning exhaustion. And having been blessed by the holy man and sent off with his prayers, the God-loving man went on his way, having received such an extraordinary reward for a most noble deed. Yet the divine father did not appear any weaker thereafter, nor did he yield his stance even the least bit, as if he had been persuaded by some fear; but the more he saw the terrors before his eyes, the more courageous he himself remained. At every opportunity he suggested useful things to many others, and besides others, to his own students who were serving in various parts of the world; to them he reminded them even more of saving truths, that they should not yield their minds to the sight of any of those present, but with an unshaken soul preserve their confession and save the unity of the faith. "Great, and truly great," he said, "is the temptation that has overtaken us, but greater still is the recompense from it for those who suffer, being something ineffable and secret, and worthy of God the giver of riches; so that even if we were dying daily, it happened that we could bring in a thousandfold of what we would receive in return." And when he heard that some of them had faltered slightly and given way in their thoughts, as if in a long imprisonment and the violence of the passion; these too he drew back with appropriate words, and strengthened them again against what was to come, and healed their weakness of heart; they themselves requested forgiveness for the fact that they had turned their thoughts away for a short time. Thus in mind and word was the Father toward all; thus even in terrible and distressing circumstances he preserved his care for all. The noble man also sent letters to the four patriarchs, having done this very wisely and reasonably... ^B by those men for this reason. But after Constantine was blinded and despoiled of the kingdom, Theodore was recalled from exile. But the great Theodore was once again exiled to the Lake of Apollonias; and from there he was again sent to the Anatolic Theme, where, having received a hundred lashes upon his back, he endured them nobly; and subsequently he was tormented with severe scourges by a military commander. And having been sent from there to Smyrna, he was shut up in a most foul prison; and he was placed upon the rack for torture. But when he too was torn from the kingdom, and Michael received the scepter, the great Theodore was recalled from his chains and exile; and having remained for a little while, he was with his friends; and after a good departure he rested in the Lord. He was in his stature thin, pale in face, with greying hair, and bald.

From the manuscript of our Parisian college, which bears the title:

From the Synaxarion of our Parisian college of the Society of Jesus, November 11th.

^A July 15. The same day, the memory of our holy Father Joseph the Confessor, Archbishop of Thessalonica, is celebrated.

The Translation of the Relics of the Holy Theodorus and Joseph to Constantinople. From the MS of the Ambrosian Library, lit. O, 14, 6, January.

We celebrate the translation of our holy Fathers and confessors, Theodore, abbot of Studium, and Joseph, his brother, who was Archbishop of Thessalonica. They were born of Photinus and Theoctiste, and lived under the reign of Theophilus. Because of the veneration of the holy and sacred icons, the holy Theodore indeed suffered various exiles, blows, and scourges, as a distinguished confessor of Christ; ^B but in the reign of Michael the Amorian he was released from his bonds and recalled from exile. Having enjoyed a brief respite from his sufferings, he rested in the Lord with good hope, and his body was deposited on the island of the Prince. His own brother, the Archbishop Joseph, also having been familiar with various prisons and having fought against other hardships, reached his eternal rest on the fourteenth day of July. Their sacred and holy bodies were carried with solemn pomp to the imperial city after eighteen years (for then the war against the Churches, which the hateful Theophilus had stirred up, had ceased). This translation was performed primarily by the most holy patriarch, who was Methodius. The entire clergy and monks, and a multitude of seculars from the city, flocking with lamps and the burning of incense, finding the bodies intact and still fragrant with a wonderful odor, received them with uplifted hands and placed them in the tomb of the holy Plato. ^C And they performed funeral rites for him with alacrity, as was fitting.

From the Synaxarion of our Parisian College, February 4.

The same day, the memory of our holy Father Nicholas the Confessor, the Studite, is celebrated. This saint was born from the island of Crete. Desiring to see his kinsman Theophanes, he came to Constantinople; and having found him enrolled among the brethren of Studium, he also himself embraced the monastic life. Having been trained there in all learning, and having been thoroughly instructed in the manner of the monastic life, he was ordained a presbyter; for he had reached the highest peak of virtue. What followed? The divine Nicholas was condemned to ^D exile along with Theodore, the abbot of the monastery. Being recalled from there by Leo, who was justly called by the name of a beast and was an enemy of Christ, they were beaten with ox-hide scourges because they were worshippers of the divine icons. Then they were cast into custody, and again being interrogated, they were beaten and, bound in chains, were thrown into prison. And when they had endured hunger, thirst, and nakedness there for three years, they were sent away to Smyrna, where, being beaten with scourges and cast into prison, they were fettered with wooden stocks. After twenty months had passed, Leo died and was taken to divine judgment. Then the blessed confessors were released.

^A They arrived at Chalcedon and, having greeted the thrice-blessed Patriarch Nicephorus, both dwelt there. Shortly after, by order of the Emperor Michael, they were relegated to Prusa, and then to Acrita, where Theodore, that man of many struggles, departed to the Lord. But when the Emperor Michael had passed away and his son Theophilus had seized the empire, a grave war was again fanned against the worshipers of religion. Yet when Theophilus himself was also taken from the living, and the most holy Theodora and her son Michael assumed the administration of the empire, peace was established. Afterward, Basil the Macedonian received the rule of the empire; having persuaded with many entreaties that holy and much-striving man Nicholas, he installed him as hegumen of [the monastery of] Studios. ^B Thus, having finished such great and mighty struggles and worn down by much hardship, [Nicholas], at over seventy years of age, finished his course and rested in peace.

Epigram on our holy Father and Confessor Theodore, hegumen of the Studios.

Our holy and great Father, the servant of Christ and confessor Theodore, the world-renowned hegumen of the Studios, fell asleep in the Lord. He who also wrote this holy and soul-profiting book in the twelfth year of his third exile for the truth of Christ, on the island of the holy and great martyr Tryphon, near the place called Acrita in the province of Bithynia, on the eleventh of November, the first day, at the sixth hour, in the fifth indiction, in the year from the creation of the world 6335. ^C But to summarize in one word the outstanding deeds of our holy Father: from early youth he was perfect in mind and endowed with grace. He was received into the monastery, and taking up the cross of the Lord in the twenty-second year of his age, he submitted his neck to His yoke, having according to the Gospel renounced the world. Having lived holily and as a father, subject for thirteen years in the best manner, and having run the course of athletic obedience courageously, he succeeded to the hegumenal office by divine election. In this, he excelled for thirty-two years, mortifying the members that are upon the earth with ascetic labors and persistent abstinence, in accordance with the Apostle. ^D Devoted to all virtues, just as another [might be] to one, he endured many hardships and various temptations, both for the exact keeping of the commandments and for the research and study of the divine Scriptures, each one individually. He built very many monasteries, led many to the knowledge of the truth,

^A having been named father and teacher of many, whom he led to God and brought to the peak of perfection. Thus, called by grace, and foreknown and predestined before he was born, he ascended to the level of confession; and burning with divine love in this, and vying with lawful zeal, he surpassed many, for he dared to profess the truth more freely than anyone else, and to preach it both in word and in writing, as the writings from him bear witness, which caused the persecutors to rage even more fiercely against him, and to condemn him to many blows, exiles, and imprisonments. Persisting in these things holily and without any offense, and, if I may say so, re-blooming, the most valiant Father having finished his many labors, at the sixty-seventh year of his present life, was released from the body and migrated to the Lord, added to his holy and blessed ^B fathers, and enjoying eternal goods with them, advanced in age and full of days. These things I have described as if in an obscure image; as if drawing a drop from the sea, and weaving one from thousands, I record these excellent deeds of this thrice-blessed Father, exercised in long-standing struggles, the noble acts of this voluntary martyr, and the rays of his virtues. By whose intercessions, being illuminated by the light of knowledge, and having served the Lord in a manner pleasing to Him, and having obtained the remission of sins, may we, the humble, attain the kingdom of heaven. Amen.

Ex Græcorum Menologio Sirleti cardinalis. Canisii tom. II, p. 908.

Die 11 Novembris, commemoration of our holy Father Theodore, surnamed the Studite. He was, under the Emperor Constantine Copronymus, ^C educated in divine letters, and distinguished by the holiness of his life; after a venerable exile, he was sent away; under the Emperor Michael he was recalled, and a little later he rested in the Lord. [[Plato, abbot of the monastery of the Studites, was often sent into exile...]]

Ex Menologio Basilii imperatoris. Cod. Vatic. n. 1613.

On the same day, a memorial is celebrated of our holy Father Theodore, the most holy superior of the monastery of the Studites. He was born in Constantinople during the reign of Constantine Callinicus. Having attained the knowledge of all subjects, he withdrew during the reign of Irene to the monastery of Saccudion; he became a monk under his uncle Plato, and was ordained a presbyter by the patriarch Tarasius. Then, at thirty years of age, he became the superior of the monastery under him. He was exiled ^D to Thessalonica, because he would not consent to the emperor's adultery. But he was recalled by the Empress Irene, and refreshed by an allowance from the queen of the Saracens, he took charge of the Studite monastery; but he was again driven into exile for a similar cause by the Emperor Nicephorus, who was slain in Bulgaria. Afterward, he was relegated on account of the holy images by Leo the

^A Iconoclast; and having suffered much for the sake of piety, and having struggled, and having composed hymns to God, he departed to the Lord in a very advanced old age.

Cardinal Baronius' testimonies concerning both Theodore and the Sirmondian interpretation.

*Ad an. 798, n. 7.* So far concerning the writings of Theodore the Studite, Michael his disciple: which indeed seem in great part to be desired. But those letters which we obtained from the Colonna library, pertaining to the Annals, these, along with his Life written by the said Michael, Sirmondus the Parisian theologian, professor of the Society of Jesus, at my request rendered into Latin; for which name not I alone, but the whole Christian religion owes him much. We shall render them in their places according to the order of time. I wish some learned man might be found who, with more leisure, might one day bring forth to the light all the excellent monuments of this most holy and most learned man from the hiding-places of various libraries, and bestow them upon the Latin tongue for the benefit of all.

*Ad an. 814, n. 23.* They indeed survive (Theodore's Letters); for it was by a great benefit of God that they, and others of the same subject, written during this urgent persecution, were preserved intact until our times. ^B The same old codex of the Colonna library, which has been often cited above, holds them; which, when it belonged to the most learned Cardinal Sirleto, was bought from his heirs by Ascanio Colonna, cardinal deacon, who deserved so well of ecclesiastical antiquities, so that it might remain in Rome and not be transferred elsewhere.

*Ad an. 814, n. 43.* These things he himself writes concerning the manifold letters [written] in prison, which, having been divinely guarded so that almost all remained intact to these times, and having been kept unharmed in these and other shipwrecks of the Eastern Church, we again and again give most great thanks to God Himself, the best and greatest. But in order that you, reader, might also yourself possess these riches, we have judged it worth the effort to describe some of them here for you according to the order of time; inasmuch as they proceed decorated as if by certain necklaces of gold and gems, namely, chains, blows, wheals, and glorious ^C sacred stigmata of Christ: and [because] they, written in an apostolic spirit, also represent the apostolic diction.

*Ad an. 816, n. 24.* You see from these, reader, that all the orthodox had refuge in one person concerning doubtful matters: he was left in that church, which a heretical patriarch occupied, as a vocal divine oracle for all who questioned him, already crying out even more vehemently with the voice of blood, so that clearly even in Theodore the apostolic sentiment might appear tested by experience, which the apostle Paul says concerning himself: "For the Gospel I labor even unto bonds, as an evildoer: but the word of God is not bound." [II Tim. II, 8.] For neither by prison, nor by bonds, nor by guards could he be hindered or crossed, nor could he be prohibited by threats or punishments, or deterred by terrors, nor restrained by repeated beatings, or narrowed and tightened by fasting, or detained by the least thing, so that he would not persevere in spirit and run freely, and the word of God, on the wings of the Spirit, might run ^D far and wide through the whole Eastern world, like a silvered dove [Ps. LXVII, 14.] whithersoever it wills by the will of the flyer. It can scarcely be believed how many letters he wrote at this time: hortatory for martyrdom, catechetical for instruction, dogmatic against the objections of heretics, consolatory to fellow-captives, mournful to the lapsed, canonical to those repenting, containing remedies from the prescription of the canons: so that clearly one would say he was constituted in the highest leisure and greatest freedom, who would consider all that was written by him at this time, and that many notaries had served him, that servants had stood by providing tablets from the gathered cupboards, and preparing wax for writing: and that he would have believed that very many couriers, girded for the journey, ready, to be sent into diverse parts of the world, had always stood ready before the doors... The sum exceeds two hundred letters, which Theodore wrote while an exile and in prison during the time of persecution. Even the rules themselves survive, [a few] of which, those known to pertain more to the context of history, we have taken care to transcribe here for you by the individual years in which they were written, fragrant indeed with the odor of the apostolic spirit, and referring to their glorious stigmata, while as many letters [there are], so many wheals of a glorious confession they represent to the readers, and manifest on the chart the streams of blood flowing from his body.

*Ad an. 825, n. 72.* But how much the letters of this same most holy man are to be valued, God Himself, through a notable miracle com

proves, which Michael the Studite, his disciple and a faithful writer, describes in this way (See the *Life of Theodore*, col. 214). From these things, reader, you may understand how many annals are woven into the historical epistles of Theodore, as many as the precious gems shining in a crown woven together. But if you consider their force, you would say they are so many thunderbolts sent from heaven, by which all hagiomachs and iconoclasts, those foolish innovators and the dregs of heretics, are struck and ^A powerfully crushed. For even this one man, to show him as a defender of Catholic dogma, a friend of God, fully endowed with wisdom and knowledge, famous for repeated confessions, adorned with blood often shed, shining with a life established from youth in the best morals, and illuminated by mighty miracles, is enough for victory: since on the side of those others they have only the most wicked men of all to show. *Ad an. 826, n. 50.* But let us now bring forth the last eulogy of the Holy Father, namely that which he himself wrote and handed down to his own as a Testament, a deposit of spiritual riches, hitherto unknown to the Latins, which we bring forth from the same Colonna codex—which we know also exists written in Greek in the Sforza library—having been translated into our language by the same Sirmond, a professor of the Society of Jesus at Paris: «He, therefore, as you heard recently, did not abandon the zeal by which he could benefit his own while living, so that he might profit them even after death; he wished to leave his will attested by a public monument. For when he was held by that most grievous infirmity, as you heard, and could neither speak to those present because of the anguish of his afflicted spirit everything he desired, nor did he have the faculty of speaking at length, even if he wished, that divine [will], burning more with charity than with fever, having taken up a pen without a witness, wrote down such a testament,» etc. ^B

*Regarding Theodore, and matters pertaining to him, the following may also be seen:*

The encyclical of Naucratius the Confessor on the death of St. Theodore the Studite, vol. II of the *Auctarium* to the *Bibliotheca PP. Græc.*, p. 855; The *Life of St. Platon*, authored by his nephew and disciple St. Theodore the Studite, in Henschenius for April 4: Latin p. 364; Greek at the end of the same volume, p. XLVI; The *Life of St. Nicolaus of the Studites, Archimandrite*, vol. II of the *Auctarium* to the *Bibliotheca PP. Græc.*, p. 890; also in Bollandus for February 4, p. 538; The *Life of St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople*, in Henschenius for March 13: Latin p. 293; Greek p. 704; The *Life of St. Nicetas, Hegumen of Medikion*, authored by his disciple Theosterictus, in Henschenius for April 3: Latin p. 253; Greek at the end of the same volume, p. XXII; ^C The *Life of St. Tarasius, Patriarch of Constantinople*, authored by Ignatius his disciple, who was present when he died; ibid. for February 25, p. 572; The *Life of St. Theophanes, Abbot of Sygriane*, ibid. for March 12, Latin p. 213; Greek p. 700.

LIFE AND CONVERSATION OF OUR HOLY FATHER AND CONFESSOR THEODORE, PREPOSITUS OF THE STUDITES, WRITTEN BY MICHAEL THE MONK

^A Our great Father and confessor Theodore is indeed acceptable to all and worthy of every honor, seeing that he shone forth brilliantly both in the exercise of his life and in the trials which he endured for Christ. Distinguishing himself in both, he possessed a surpassing and incomparable virtue. Yet he is far more delightful and beneficial to those who have entered upon the monastic life and have submitted themselves to a more excellent discipline. For these, not least of all others, both honor and cherish him. They hold his injunctions as a kind of inviolable law, constantly making him the delight of their tongues and binding themselves to him with ineffable longing. Because he loved Christ above all things, he found that all men in turn loved him and deemed him worthy of the greatest honor. Certainly, for those who wish to recognize how great is the glory that this wonderful man has attained in this age—not to mention the glory of the life to come, the enjoyment of which is ineffable—it is possible to see both monks and laymen moved to applaud him, adhering to him with every affection, and ^B attributing the renown of their own brilliance and virtue to that brilliant man. For I pass over the celebrated monastery of Studios, of which he himself was the teacher and instructor; how they never cease to honor him with ambitious honors, regarding the divinely inspired man as a prodigy. Indeed, having been so instructed by him and formed for a superior way of life, they themselves have become a model of piety and a standard of virtue for the many. For these excellent men have gathered together into their own souls, as if into a common treasury, whatever is at once most beautiful and most useful. ^C