Grigory Benevich
“The Sabbath in St. Maximus the Confessor” // Studi sull'Oriente Cristiano, v.9,
no.1, 2005, pp. 63-80.
THE SABBATH IN ST. MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR
Give a portion to seven and also to eight
Eccl: 11. 2.
At first sight, it is possible to say that the three communities of the "Abrahamic religions"
(Muslims, Jews and Christians), may be called the people of the Friday, of the Sabbath and of the
Sunday respectively. As for the Jews, in their Havdalah payer, which marks the end of the Sabbath
and separates it from the first day of the week, they clearly connect the difference between the
Sabbath and the weekdays with the difference between the Jews and other nations and they bless
God for creating both of these differences (1).
As for Christians at first glance it may seem that Sunday, as the day consecrated to God, is
replaced for them the Jewish Sabbath. According to the 29th rule of the Laodicean Council, it is
forbidden for Christians to celebrate the Sabbath. In the Roman Church, perhaps already in the third
century, the Sabbath fast was established, which has been interpreted as a continuation of the fast on
Friday in memory of Christ's death.
The Muslim Friday, as a day consecrated to the Creator who created the world in six days
and man on the sixth day, has also been established in opposition to both Jews and Christians.
This simple scheme of separation of the three great religions, as regards their holy day of the
week, becomes, however, much more complicated if one acknowledges that in the Eastern Church it
was forbidden to fast on the Sabbath (see the 64th rule of the Holy Apostles). One should also note
that in the Christian Church in the East from the first century Saturday (as well as Sunday) has been
the day when the Liturgy has been celebrated. Also, in the Apostolic Constitution it has been stated
that Christians should celebrate their Liturgy on the Sabbath in remembrance of creation of the
world by God (see Constit. Apost. L.7.23, 36; 8.33 and 2. 59).
Thus, the 29th rule of the Laodicean Council has been interpreted in the East as a prohibition
on celebrating the Sabbath with the Jews, that is, like the Jews. At the same time, the Sabbath
celebration has not been rejected altogether as happened in the West. It has been liturgically
transfigured in Christ, through whom the world has been created and renewed.
The practice of the Eastern Church appeared to be inclusive of the Jewish tradition of
Sabbath celebration. As for the Latin Church, the situation with the Sabbath was also not so simple.
In the West in the Middle Ages the day of the Sabbath was said to have been dedicated to Mary and
the liturgy on Saturday has been celebrated in her memory (2).
It might be important in this context to study the theological interpretation of the meaning of
"Sabbath" in the different systems of Christian (and Jewish) thought. It might be possible to
investigate the relationship between God and creation through the understanding of "Sabbath" in
both liturgical practice and theology.
1
In this respect, St. Maximus's theology appears to be the most interesting. Besides, St.
Maximus was perhaps the first to elaborate on the mystical theology of the Sabbath in the Orthodox
Church. Moreover, his mystical theology of the seventh day is closely connected with his
interpretation of the sixth and eighth days. Thus, all problems raised by the Abrahamic religions
seem to be included in St. Maximus' theology.
At the same time, for any scholar of Maximus, it is clear that the notion of "Sabbath" plays
an important role in his thought. It is closely connected with his idea of "st=si~ " – the final state of
all beings in God. It is one of those "last things" which are so attractive to our mind, and so
complicated to understand because of their simplicity.
The most important places in Maximus devoted to "Sabbath", which I would like to discuss,
are found in his "Gnostic Chapters" (Gn. Ch.) and in the last (65th) answer from "Quaestiones ad
Thalassium" (Thal).
St. Maximus was probably the first to elaborate on a mystical theology of the Sabbath in
Christian thought. However, it would be misleading to separate him from the whole Christian
tradition. Spiritual or allegorical interpretation of the Sabbath can be found in Jewish rabbinical
thought, in Philo, and in the Fathers.
It is impossible to discuss all these interpretations now, and it is always hard to speak about
any direct influence on St Maximus. However, if we take, say, St Basil's understanding of the
Sabbath ("true Sabbaths are the rest (or, the place of rest) prepared for the people of God; because
these (Sabbaths) are true, God accepts them. And these Sabbaths of rest are approached by the one
in whom the world is crucified, one approaches them after one's complete removal from worldly
things, and one's entrance into one's own place of spiritual peace", In. Is. 1. 13, PG 30. 178) we
may find a lot of common features with Maximus' thought.
Even the most interesting of St. Maximus' distinctions between "Sabbath", "Sabbaths" and
"Sabbaths of Sabbaths", which I shall discuss later, can be found already in St. Isidor of Pelusium
(Epist. 110, lib. III, PG 78, 816CD) (3).
However, I believe that both allegorical interpretations of the Sabbath and its understanding
in the framework of Biblical historical exegesis are united in St. Maximus under one common head,
that is Christ, "who recapitulates all things in himself" (Amb. PG 91. 1080 AB).
One of the most important predecessors of Maximus here is St. Epiphanius of Cyprus who
clearly stated that nobody but Christ is our true Sabbath. Epiphanius speaks about Christ as "the
Great Sabbath who has given us rest from our sins"(see Adv. Haer. 30. 32, PG 41.464 ff). He says
that "in Christ, in whom the Father and the Holy Spirit found their rest, in Him all saints receive
their rest, resting from sins"(ibid). "Christ is the Great Sabbath, the type (tvpo~) of which was the
small Sabbath, which served before his parousia and had been established by Him according to the
Law, and has been abolished in Him and fulfilled in the Good News (of Christ)" (ibid). (4)
As for St. Maximus, this understanding of Christ (and God in general) as the Sabbath, is
fundamental for his theology of the Sabbath. Maximus himself clearly states, reinterpreting the
commandment of the Sabbath observance, that "God did not want men to venerate the days of the
week, when He commanded them to venerate the Sabbath and the first days of their months, because
in this case … He would have prescribed veneration of the creature instead of the Creator. In this
case, the days would have become the object of cult (for them). No, He has shown to them how to
honor Him symbolically with the help of days. For He himself is the Sabbath, being the repose for
torments of the soul [which it suffers] in the body and the cessation of pain justly inflicted"( 65 Thal.
P.G. 90. 757 C). Maximus is speaking about God, but it goes without saying that here he simply
makes no difference between God and Christ.
Now if God, according to Maximus, is the only true Sabbath, what does he mean by
describing the Sabbath as "the detachment of the rational soul which has by practice completely
thrown off the marks of sin( See Gn. Ch. 1. 37, PG 90. 1097C.)?” We meet here two different
approaches to the Sabbath. On the one hand, the Sabbath is God (or Christ), on the other hand, the
Sabbath is the state of the faithful, that state which is possible to achieve only in God. Both aspects
of the Sabbath are inseparable for Maximus, because he follows the Orthodox doctrine, "according
to which creation exists by participation in God, who alone exists "by himself" (5). Thus, there is no
contradiction between these two approaches to the Sabbath. Moreover, only through this double
perspective can Maximus' concept be properly understood.
As is well known, in his Trinitarian theology Maximus follows a general scheme, expressed
by the triad of essence (o8sja), power (dvn¼mi~), and act (6n1rgeia). The same triad Maximus
applies to man, who exists by participation in God. In this context this triad is parallel to the triad of
genesis, movement and the immobile state in God (6).
Within this framework, one may analyze all the threefold structures, which Maximus
elaborates speaking about the Sabbath or about the mystery of the Three days. These structures
underlie his thought even when he does not express it explicitly. One may take for example this
definition of the Sabbath, "The Sabbath is (firstly), a perfect inactivity of the passions, (secondly),
total cessation of the mind's movement around the creatures, and (thirdly), its perfect
passage(di=b¼si~) to God" (distinction is mine, Thal. 65, PG 90. 756).
However, in the saying of St. Basil, quoted above, one may find the same threefold structure,
"the Sabbaths are approached by [distinction is mine] (firstly), one in whom the world is crucified,
(secondly), one approaches them after one's complete removal from worldly things, and (thirdly),
after one's entrance into one's own place of spiritual peace." It is clear that both descriptions have
their source in a spiritual exegesis of both the Biblical narrative of the passage of the people of Israel
from Egypt through the desert to the Holy Land and of the great mystery of the Three days of
Christ's death and resurrection. Maximus clearly reveals this source both in Thal. 65 and in his
Chapters on Knowledge.
Moreover, as is well known, he interprets this structure within the concept of a three-fold
spiritual development, that is of the "practical philosophy", "natural contemplation" and "mystical
theology". On the other hand, this structure finds a parallel in the mystery of three sacraments –
baptism, chrismation and holy communion.
Such is the general framework for the analysis of Maximus's interpretation of the Sabbath.
There is a danger, however, of getting entirely lost in these infinite mutual reflections of the threefold structures.
2
Structural analysis of Maximus' triads becomes even more problematic if one recalls that
there are some parallels to these structures both in Greek philosophy and in Judaism. One can even
find an interpretation of the Sabbath in Judaism which, at first glance, fits into Maximus' scheme.
Isaak Arama (Yizhak Akedat, a Jewish-Spanish thinker of the XVI century) says, for example, that,
"the Sabbath teaches the three fundamental principles of Judaism: belief in creatio ex nihilo, in
Revelation (because the Sabbath is the time when the Torah is studied) and in the world to come (of
which the Sabbath is a foretaste)"(7). To understand how this view differs from that of St.
Maximus, one needs to make a more detailed analysis.
Let me start with Maximus' understanding of God as the Sabbath, "He himself is the Sabbath,
being the repose for the torments of the soul in the body and the cessation of pain justly inflicted". I
believe that Maximus here does not simply mean that after death our souls find their place
somewhere in Heaven, being freed from suffering flesh. His thought is more profound. He speaks
not about the abolition of the torments of the soul in the body, but about their repose. Here one
meets with the Orthodox idea of the "suffering of sufferings" (or impassible passions), which has
been elaborated in connection with Christ's sufferings on the Cross (8).
Being in Christ (who is our true Sabbath), argues St. Maximus, one may participate in the
same kind of grace. This same grace is called elsewhere (again in connection with the Sabbath), "a
perfect inactivity of the passions"(Thal 65 PG 90. 756). Or, it is said that "Sabbath is the
detachment (#p=qeia) of the rational soul which has by practice completely thrown off the marks
(t+ stjgmata) of sin." (Gn.. Ch. 1. 37, PG 90. 1097 C). In all these examples we clearly see that
Maximus does not speak about the death in its ordinary sense. However, such words and phrases as
"torture"(m3cqo~), "ulcer" (t+ stjgmata) and inactivity of passions" clearly points to both Christ's
impassible sufferings and that very grace of these sufferings which may be given to those who make
the Sabbath in Christ.
Comparing this understanding of the Sabbath with that of Isaak Arama, one may note that for
Maximus the Sabbath is a state, an experience, not just some way of learning about creation ex
nihilo. Moreover, it may be shown that such experience is real experience of "nothingness", of that
"baptism into Christ Jesus", which is the "baptism into His death"(Rom. 6. 3.).
In our "ordinary", fallen state we feel not like creatures, created out of nothing. "I am", "I"
"myself" "have" "my" "being"(as I have my body). However, at the same time it is also true that
"my" "being" "has" "me". Or in the words of St. Maximus, "(my) soul dominates the body without
willing it deliberately and is dominated by it; without choice it gives it life by the very fact of being
in it; and by nature it is liable to sufferings and pains because its innate power is susceptible to them
(Ep. 12. PG 91 488 D)” (9).
Such a state is nothing else but "passible sufferings", or passions. We suffer as creatures.
However, the reason for this suffering is nothing other than our way of being in which we,
ourselves, "have" "our" "being", behaving like gods. This sinful way of being, in which each of us
behaves like a god, results, according to Maximus, in the struggle of one man with another and
constitutes the "world" (described in 1 Jn. 2. 16).
Christ does not know such a struggle, precisely because He is not of this world. His
hypostasis is the pre-eternal hypostatsis of God. As for us, we cannot get rid of our sinful way of
being, of our passions, until we accept Christ as our God and Savior, until we are baptized in Christ
(10).
Such baptism implies that state of "nothingness", that "crucifixion of the world"(as "my
being") which has been mentioned by St Basil in the context of the first state of the Sabbath. Such
"baptism" is not only a sacrament, but the sacrament itself corresponds to the state of the faithful in
which the first stage of the Sabbath is realized (11). Another name for this state is "apatheia" (12).
3
The next stage in Maximus' three-fold scheme is the stage of "Sabbaths". They are
characterized as "the freedom of the rational soul, which by natural contemplation in the Spirit, has
put down this natural activity oriented towards sensibility" (Gn.. Ch. 1. 38, PG 90. 1097 C). What
draws my attention in this description first of all is the notion of freedom. Speaking about God in
Thal. 65, Maximus says, that God is (firstly) the Sabbath, (secondly) Passover and (thirdly)
Pentecost. This threefold scheme, evidently, corresponds to the scheme from the Gnostic Chapters
(1. 36-38) that is of Sabbath, Sabbaths and Sabbaths of Sabbaths.
It is clear that "Sabbaths of Sabbaths"(that is seven times seven) is a parallel to Pentecost.
However, strange as it may seem, Sabbaths in their turn, correspond to the Passover. Maximus says
that God is "the liberator (6leuqerwt/~) of those who are oppressed by the miserable slavery of
sin"(Thal. 65, PG 90. 757).
It is important to note in this context that the idea of liberation (and freedom in general) is
closely connected in the Eastern Orthodox tradition with the Sabbath as the Seventh day (if one
speaks about the mystery of three days of Christ's death and resurrection). The Seventh day (or
Sabbath) is the day of Christ's descent into hell and the liberation of the souls, which languish there.
This interpretation of the Sabbath, as not so much a day of mourning Christ's death, but
rather a day of joy about his descent into hell and the liberation of the souls which await Him there,
can be found in the Church's hymnography of the Sabbath (and of the Great Sabbath especially) and
in such Fathers of the Eastern Church as St Gregory Palamas (13).
This problem deserves special analysis, but it seems that in the Latin Church the Sabbath has
been treated as a continuation of Friday (such was the reason for the establishing of the Sabbath fast
(14)), in the Eastern Church this day is an image of Sunday (the day of Resurrection). The Sabbath
according to Palamas, as well as for Maximus, is a day of renewal of creation through Christ's death
and descent into hell. This day is a day of resurrection of the souls (that's why it is an image of the
Eighth day, the day of general Resurrection). That is the reason, I believe, why one may find in
Maximus a parallel between the Seventh day and the Passover. God is the Passover, because in
Christ one's soul finds its freedom.
However, if we now recall that the Sixth day corresponds to the impassible sufferings, we
may say that the "hell" from which the soul is freed (already in this life) is nothing other than this
impassible passion. Thus, the liberation of the Seventh day can be understood in this context as the
next step in the mystery of spiritual passage (di=b¼si~) through "nothingness" (in God) towards
freedom in Christ (15).
Only by sharing in Christ's freedom, can man celebrate the Seventh day, the day of renewal
of creation. God has blessed the Seventh day of creation, argues Palamas, because God foresaw the
renewal of creation, which had to happen on this day through the mission of Christ (see PG 151,
280D).
The meaning of this renewal may be grasped through Maximus' concept of the Sabbaths as
"the freedom of the rational soul, which by natural contemplation in the Spirit, has put down this
natural activity oriented towards sensibility." Nothing purely "sensible" remains for one who
follows the logos of his nature. "Under the Law, writes Maximus, ... the Sabbath is honored by rest.
But under the Gospel, which brings in the restoration (kat=st¼sin) of intelligible things, it is
brightened by the noble performance of good works."(Gn. Ch. 1. 35. PG 90. 1097 A).
Thus, the state of "Sabbaths" is characterized for Maximus by two different, though
inseparable things: "natural contemplation" and "performance of good works". These two aspects of
"Sabbaths" are united in the Holy Spirit. (it is clearly said that "natural contemplation takes place "in
the Spirit", that is by the grace of the Holy Spirit). On the one hand, according to Maximus, "natural
contemplation" is not just a contemplation of beings but a "gathering up the principles of
creatures"(see Gn. Ch. 1. 35). On the other hand, these principles of creatures are not principles of
things which are "beings in themselves", but principles of our (Christ-like) behavior as regards these
creatures. Thus, these principles are revealed to us not just in "theory", but in the performance of
virtues (or good works). One must not forget that the very notion of "logos" is conceived by
Maximus as an action (6n1rgeia) of divine Logos (16), and to contemplate such "logos" one needs to
participate in this action (17).
Contrary to Jewish thought, in which the Sabbath is the day of theoretical knowledge, both
through Scripture and symbolic behavior, and the day of rest from works (18), the Orthodox
understanding of the Sabbath, as it is revealed in St. Maximus and St. Gregory Palamas, does not
presuppose any opposition of "works" and knowledge. In this context, one may understand the
prescriptions of both the 29-th rule of the Laodicean Council (to act on the Sabbath), and of the 16th rule of the same Council (to read the Gospels and other Holy writings on the Sabbath). Thus the
Jewish understanding of the Sabbath as the day, which teaches Revelation, because on the Sabbath
the Torah is studied, is included and transfigured in Maximus's thought. (For confirmation of such
understanding of the Seventh day see also "Gnostic Chapters" 2. 64-65).
As is well known, Maximus does not build a wall of separation between "the book of
creation" and the Scriptures. Through his concept of divine thoughts (logoi), revealed in both
books, reflected in one other, he manages to unite these things. However, and this is not less
important, this unity can be fulfilled only in Christ-like virtues, only in action, inseparable from
contemplation (in the same way in which Christ (the Logos) is inseparable from the Holy Spirit and
the Spirit from Christ). Even Maximus' description of "Sabbaths" as freedom of the rational soul in
the Spirit" (Gn.. Ch. 1. 38) points to the participation of the believer in the grace of the Holy Trinity
and his likeness to Christ, baptized in the Jordan and revealed in the Spirit as the beloved Son of
God.
4
The last stage of Maximus' triad is the "Sabaths of Sabbaths". In the mystery of the Three
days this stage corresponds to the Eighth day (19). "Sabbaths of Sabbaths" for Maximus is a state of
deification or final " st=si~" in God (20). Here is St. Basil's description of it: "One approaches (this
state) after one's entrance into one's own place of spiritual peace (or rest), being in which one will
not be moved from one's place... (In Is.ibid).” Both, Basil's and Maximus' descriptions, I believe,
have one biblical source – Hebr.(4:10-11) (21).
On the other hand, this rest and peace has been connected in the Bible with the pouring out
of the Holy Spirit and the prophecy about the final rest of the people of God in secure dwellings (Is.
32.15-18)(22).
In Thal. 65 Maximus, speaking about God as our Pentecost, gives a detailed explanation of
the meaning of these "resting places"(23). It is clear from this description that Maximus understands
the "dwelling places" of Is. 32: 18 or of Jn: 14. 2. ("In My Father's house there are many dwelling
places") as God's thoughts, «principles», or "councils" about everything, which is moved by these
principles. Thus, Pentecost is God Himself, God as the place of final rest and meaning (or "name")
of every being, though God Himself (according to His essence) surpasses all His divine thoughts.
However, this final meaning of every being is transparent only for those who themselves have found
their rest in God in the state of Pentecost. These saints have the Grace of Apostles, that is, in the
Holy Spirit they have their rest in the Son, who Himself is entirely in the Father. "The mystery of
Pentecost consists in the immediate union with Providence of those whom this Providence knew
before, that is, the union of nature with logos [of each person] according to the plan of Providence",
writes Maximus (Thal. 65, PG 90, 760; ed. Laga/Steel 65.549-552.).
It is important to note in this context that one can find in Maximus not only the notion of the
“logos of nature” but also the notion of the logos of each particular rational being. Here is a place
from Ambigua 7 (2 ad Jn) where this idea may be found: “Thus, each spiritual and rational [being],
i.e. angels and human beings, according to that very logos (that is in God and to God (Jn. 1:1)) by
which it was created is called “a participle of God” for the reason of its logos preexistent in God
(as it has been already said). It goes without saying, that if [such creature] moves according to it
[i.e. its logos], it will be in God, in whom the logos of its being preexists as [its] beginning and
reason” (PG 91, 1080).
The last union of the deified creature with God is characterized by two aspects; on the one
hand, by rest, because being together with the Son in the Father, the saints find their rest and peace
in supernatural passivity in God, being unable to know God's essence, and finding their limit and
simplicity in it (24); however, on the other hand, their rest is characterized by Maximus as evermoving rest, because all the principles of the Holy Trinity, which are in the Son, are given to the
saints through Christ in the Holy Spirit and the saints participate in the fullness of God's glory
sharing in all the treasures of God.
What is important here is that for St. Maximus this state corresponds to the mystery of the
eighth day, that is, the day of Resurrection, and the day of Holy Communion. Maximus speaks here
not just about some state after one's life, but about the state, which corresponds, to perfect
participation in the holy sacraments.
Here we come to the real key for Maximus' threefold structure: "Sabbath", "Sabbaths" and
"Sabbaths of Sabbaths". Each liturgy begins with the words of priest: Blessed be the Kingdom of
the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now (n$n) and in the ages (kaJ #ej) and in the ages of
ages (kaJ e>~ toV~ a>^na~ t^n a>9nwn)".
Now, as Maximus himself put it: "scripture... knows the ages of time, as when it says that
man 'shall toil in this age (e>~ t4n a>9na) and shall live until its end' (Ps. 48.10)"(Thal. 22) (25).
These ages, argues Maximus, were characterized by the performance of good works and
contemplation. They correspond, I believe, to the notion of "present"(or present life in God) and to
the concept of "Sabbaths" in Maximus' threefold scheme. As for the notion of the "Sabbath," it
corresponds, according to Maximus, to the end of the struggle of the soul with its body. This state
marks the end of all "good-evil-doing". It includes all our "past", surpassing it through the
actualization of our baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity. In this state one integrates and
transcends all God's works "which began in time", that is, "all beings which have non-being before
being"(see Gn. Ch. 1. 48, PG 90. 1099A).
This state of "baptism" corresponds to "now" in the blessing of the liturgy and to the state of
the "Sabbath" in Maximus' scheme. In this "now" all "fallen"(or "old") time finds its repose and
new time, the time, which is in God, begins. It is that very instant of "now"(or "today"), about
which the wise thief once heard, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with me in Paradise"(Lk.:
23.43). It is also that very "today" which corresponds to the mystery of baptism as the embodiment
of Christ in the believer: "Though art My Son, today I have begotten Thee"(Ps.2.7).
As for the state of "Sabbaths" it corresponds to the notion of "ages". It is the state of
participation in God's "works which did not happen to begin to be in time... for example goodness,..
life, immortality, simplicity, immutability, and infinity and such things which are essentially
contemplated in regard to (God); they are also God's works, and yet they did not begin in time...
For all virtue is without beginning, not having any time previous to itself"(ibid 1.48,PG 90 1099A).
However, as Maximus put it, "God infinitely transcends all things which participate (which have
non-being before being) or are participated (which are essentially contemplated in regard to God)
(ibid. 1. 49). And all "will be lower than man who is in God thanks to Grace” (see Gn. Ch. 2. 27).
Thus, Maximus speaks about the last state of deification, about the "future ages" (or ages of
ages, or Sabbaths of Sabbaths). "But in the coming ages, we shall undergo transformation into the
grace of deification... At that point our passivity will be supernatural, and there will be no limit to
the divine activity in infinitely deifying those who are passive [in God] (Thal 22. ibid).” Though
Maximus speaks here about the "age to come", we must not be mistaken. These "ages of ages" (this
Pentecost) is not just an after-life state, this state is received in the Holy Communion, on the stage of
Eighth day's state, through celebration of the Liturgy.
However, it is one thing to participate in the Liturgy, and another thing to be a bishop(or
priest), to celebrate Liturgy in God. This grace of holy priesthood, grace of the Apostles, is the last
stage of deification according to Maximus (see Gn. Ch. 2. 19). The grace of the seventh day
corresponds to the participation of the faithful in Holy Communion (in the body and blood of Christ,
or, according to Maximus, in Christ-like virtues and knowledge of His divine principles (see Thal.
35). The grace of the eighth day, on the other hand, includes the grace of the seventh day (as a
prototype includes its image). However, this grace corresponds not to the flesh and blood of Christ
but to His "bones", to those principles which are concealed in Christ's Godhead (see Thal.35). These
"bones" are the "bones" of the Church, divine principles that are "dwelling places" of all the faithful.
On the other hand, they may be understood as the portions of Holy Communion which are given to
them. Each faithful receives his own portion, together with his name. However, the priest who
celebrates the Liturgy, being in God, knows from experience that all portions, and each portion in
the One Holy Spirit is One Christ, who is in the One Father. This participation in God's and Christ's
simplicity and oneness which remain simple in spite of the plurality of the "dwelling places" in the
"house of the Father", that is Christ's body, is the highest stage of deification for Maximus(see Gn.
Ch. 1. 82-83; 2. 19).
Speaking about the "bones" Maximus certainly points to the deification of the body and the
holy relics of the saints (26). These relics, however, lie in the foundation of the altar as the
beginning and the deposit of the "age to come". Now, since all "past" is integrated in the concept of
the "Sabbath", or divine "now"(or "today"), all "present" is given in "Sabbaths", or "ages", and all
future is fulfilled in "Sabbaths of Sabbaths", or "ages of ages”, one may say that the very beginning
of the liturgy, and its essence is nothing other than the consecration of time (both past, present and
future) to the Holy Trinity. It is that consecration, which has been already fulfilled by the Son of
God, and which has never stopped in the Church since the time of the Apostles. This consecration,
however, is nothing other than the consecration to God of all humanity (and through men of all
creatures in general), since there is no man, whose principle would have not been in God (27).
To end this discussion, I would like to stress that Maximus' three-fold scheme: " g1nesi~" – "
kjnhsi~"- " st=si~" should be understood in the framework of another scheme: "Sabbath""Sabbaths"-"Sabbaths of Sabbaths". Each stage of this scheme of the spiritual development implies
a different kind of "stasis", that is, repose of passions, constancy in freedom(or in Christ-like virtues)
and ever-moving rest in God (28).
NOTES
(1) The same parallel may be found in the prayers of the beginning of the Sabbath. Among Jewish
teachers one may find even some condemnation of "the sons of Noah" who rest on the Sabbath (for
the Biblical source of this idea see Ezek: 20. 12, see also “B. Jubil. 2. 28-31.”
(2) In 1269 Bonaventure convoked his fourth general chapter at Assisi, in which it was enacted that
a Mass be sung every Saturday throughout the order in honor of the blessed Virgin (see The
Catholic Encyclopedia, N.Y. 1907, p. 650). One may also find out that the fast on the Sabbath was
connected with the veneration of Mary. For example, "at the Council of Avingion (1337) it was
emphasized the duty of abstinence on Saturday for beneficed persons and ecclesiastics, in honor of
the blessed Virgin, a practice begun three centuries earlier on the occasion of the Truce of God, but
no longer universal (ibid, v. II, p. 160).”
(3) St. Isidor does not give an allegorical interpretation of the Jewish feasts, he simply states that
besides the Sabbath the Jews called every feast by the name of the Sabbath (thus, according to this
interpretation, one may say that the Sabbaths are nothing else but several days of feast, say, seven
days of azymes). As for the Sabbaths of the Sabbaths it is the case of coincidence of the usual
Sabbath with the days of some feast.
In spite of my interest in this passage, I do not mean that St. Isidor is the source of Maximus'
famous distinction. As it was noted by von Balthazar (see Balthasar H.U. Kosmische Liturgie (2
Aufl), S.613), the source is possibly Philo, though in one recent piece of research it has been shown
that the tradition of celebrating Pentecost each seventh Sabbath, or better the Sabbath-Sunday night
was known in the early Church, especially in Ethiopia (see B. Lurie, Etapi proniknovenia
gimnographicheskih elementov v structuru vsenoschnogo bdenia Ierusalimskogo tipa, in
Byzantinorossica, v 1, St. Petersburg, 1995, p 155). There is also another possible source which
might have influenced Maximus, "The Apostolic Constitution" (see especially L.7. 36, where
mystical theology of the Sabbath and the mystery of "Seven" in the Old Testament is discussed.
Similarities with Maximus' Thal. 65 are really striking). In any case it is important to remember that
as early as in St. Irenaeus one may find the idea that each day of the week is the Sabbath for
Christians, because on each day they worship God and abstain from evil-doing (see Adv. Haer. 4.
XVI.1; see this thought already in Justin, Dial. XII. 3). St Irenaeus also says that the Sabbath points
to the Kingdom of God in which the person who worships God, will find his rest and will participate
in God's meal (ibid).
One may mention, also, a recent study by Arkadi Choufrine [Gnosis, Theophany, Theosis.
Studies in Clement of Alexandria's Appropriation of His Background, Patristic Studies vol. 5, Peter
Lang, 2002], which deals with Clement’s retrieval of the equation, found in Philo (and partly
already in Aristobulus), between the Light of Gen. 1:3-5 (also called “Day One”), the Seventh Day
of Creation, and God’s Logos. Choufrine shows that Clement elaborates upon the thought of his
Jewish predecessors by extending this equation to include the Eighth Day of Christian eschatology
and the Today of Ps. 2:7, applied in the account (as known to Clement) of Jesus’ baptism to Jesus’
generation from the Father. In this context, baptismal “illumination” for Clement means the
incarnation of the Logos, as the uncreated Light, in the faithful. It thus functions as a paradigm for
deification, which Clement understands as the faithful's participation in the eternal generation of the
Logos and, thereby, in all of the above mentioned “Days,” including the Seventh (i.e. the Sabbath).
St. Maximus, who held Clement in high esteem, might have been directly influenced by him in this
regard. As will be shown in the present article, St. Maximus also uses the idea of the Sabbath to
describe the beginning of one’s life in Christ. However, unlike Clement, he develops in addition the
idea of the "Sabbaths" and that of the "Sabbaths of Sabbaths." In this way St. Maximus elaborates
upon the idea of the Seventh Day that he might find in the earlier Tradition. He could find there,
also, the idea of the three stages: purification from passions, illumination, and infinite progress in
gnosis. However, Clement, at least, does not link all these stages with the notion of the Seventh Day.
This is the major "formal" difference regarding "the Sabbath theology" between him and St.
Maximus.
As for the passage from Basil’s In. Is. 1. 13, PG 30. 178, Maximus refers to it directly in his
Amb. Io. 2. PG. 1080 D.
(4) The understanding of Christ as the Sabbath or the peace of Christians is familiar to each
Orthodox believer from the liturgical prayer of supplication for the deceased: "For you are the
resurrection and the life and peace of your departed servants, oh Christ our God..." J. Danielou
thinks that in early Jewish-Christian literature Christ was understood as the Sabbath (see Theologie
du judeo-christianisme, P. 1991 p. 209). He also sees the same idea in Col II. 16.
(5) See John Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Christian Thought, N.Y. 1987, p. 134.
(6) See J.Meyendorff, ibid.
(7) See Encyclopaedia Judaica, Jerusalem, 1972 v.14, col.565. It might be interesting to compare
this statement with that from the Apostolic Constitution, "The Sabbath is the ceasing of the creation,
the completion of the world, and the inquiry after laws and the grateful praise to God for the
blessing He has bestowed upon men"(L.7.36). The last stage clearly points to celebration of the
Liturgy on the Sabbath.
St John Chrysostom also points to three meanings of rest interpreting Hebr. 4. The first is the
Sabbath of God's rest from his works of creation, the second is the rest (or Sabbath) of the Jews in
the Promised Land, and the third is the rest of the faithful in the Kingdom of Heaven (see In. Ep.
Ad. Heb. PG 63. 53).
(8) See on this matter Crouzel H. La passion de l'impassible. // L'homme devant Dieu. Melanges
offert au P.H. de Lubac. P., 1963, p. 269-279.
(9) Cited by Nicholas Madden, Studia Patristica v. 28, 1993. p. 175.
(10) In one's fallen state, one possesses one's body, that very flesh which one opposes to any other
"flesh" and to the whole world. One tries to protect one's body and to bring it pleasures to insure
oneself of one's being. This is the source, according to Maximus, of one's passions: avoidance of
pain and striving for pleasures.
As for Christ, he had no need of constituting his being through his body. His human nature
found its being in the pre-eternal hypostasis of the Son of God. This is the reason why Christ did
not strive for pleasures or avoid pain. Being totally in his Father, even while being in the world, He
did not oppose his body to the world and to other men.
(11) At first glance, it may seem that Maximus speaks about this state not as about baptism but as
about the result of a long period of ascetical practice, as the "detachment of the rational soul which
has by practice completely thrown off the marks of sin". But what else is the end of ascetical
practice in which one fights with the "evil inclinations of one's flesh", but the realization of the state
of impassible sufferings, in which there is already no fight of one's soul with one's flesh, but Christ
lives in us as the only subject of both "our" soul and body? What else is "apateia", but the
"crucifixion of the world" which corresponds to the mystery of baptism in Christ's death and to the
"clothing in Christ (Gal: 3. 27)?” The grace of this state is given to us in the sacrament, but even
after the sacrament, its grace may have need of a long period of ascetical practice to be realized (see
Thal. 6) On the other hand, the grace of baptism can be realised even without the rite, as happened
with some martyrs, who were baptized by blood (see Const. Apost.L.5.6.).
(12) As Lars Thunberg has noted, Maximus' concept of positive pain is closely connected for him
with the interpretation of Luke 23: 43, the narrative about the wise thief crucified together with
Christ. "The prudence of the penitent thief is interpreted as his acceptance of pain as a voluntary
mortification, by which he is prepared to enter into the paradise of higher knowledge."(Microcosm
and Mediator, Lund 1965, p. 410).
What is important here, however, is that "positive pain" is positive if only, "it is no longer I
who live, but Christ who lives in me.” Otherwise, all "voluntary suffering" appears to be a sort of
masochism. Such is the context for the understanding of Maximus' description of God as the
Sabbath, "He Himself is the Sabbath being the repose for the torments of the soul in the body and
the cessation of pain justly inflicted (as a punishment for sins)" (Thal. 65). Being accepted by
Christ, the wise thief does not suffer and die for his own sins, but he shares in Christ's grace of
impassible suffering out of love for men (philanthropia).
(13) Here one must note that Palamas' Sermon number XVII (In qua ostenditur Sabbati et
Dominicae mysterium), develops Maximus' main ideas on the Sabbath and can be treated as an
important context for understanding Maximus' concept of the Sabbath. Both Fathers belong to one
tradition.
(14) As is well known, the point of fasting on the Sabbath was the first among the problems raised
by patriarch Photius in his famous Encyclical to the "archiepiscopal thrones of the East" in 867. The
custom of fasting on Saturday was not canonical according to Photius. Above all, he has written
concerning this problem: "The neglect of even slight traditions can lead to contempt for all
doctrine"(PG. 102. 724).
As we know, the last and most important point in this Letter of Photius deals with the
problem of the Filioque. On the local Council in 879-880 Photius did not raise, as far as we know,
the question of the Sabbath fast because he managed to convince the Latins to sign the Credo
without the Filioque. Thus, it is clear that the problem with the Sabbath fast was not crucial for him
as such. However, it seems that since the problem of Filioque was not solved this problem also
deserves our attention.
There is a striking parallel between these two questions. In the Eastern tradition Friday was
the day of fasting, both the Sabbath and the Sunday were the days for liturgy, and fasting was
forbidden on the Sabbath. Thus, we clearly see that here the Sabbath is connected with Sunday (as
an image with its prototype) and both are different in this respect from Friday. On the other hand, in
the West there was a different tendency: to connect the Sabbath with Friday. Pope Innocent I
explained that on Friday the Roman Church fasts because of the suffering of our Lord, and one must
not exempt the Sabbath because this day is in the middle between suffering and joy. It goes without
saying, writes the Pope, that in accordance with Church tradition there must not be any liturgy on
the Sabbath, and it should be kept as a day of fasting (see Denkwurdigkeiten der Christ.-Katolischen
Kirche. s. 126. Band 5, Theil 2. 1829).
In interpretation of the Sabbath, the stress has been made in the West on Christ's lying in the
tomb, and in the East on his descent into hell and liberation of souls (resurrection of the souls).
Bearing in mind that in the mystical theology of St. Maximus the triad of the sixth, seventh
and eighth days has a parallel with the triad of "substance", "power" and "act", and this triad, in its
turn, is analogous to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, one may find a striking coincidence
between the first and the last (fifth) point in the Letter of Photius. In the East, as we know, the Son
and the Holy Spirit relate to the Father as to their source and beginning. Such is their common
feature. What about the Sabbath and the Sunday? They are also have their source in the Friday and
differ in this respect from it.
On the other hand, in the West according to the traditional understanding of the Filioque,
both the Father and the Son are the source of the Spirit. In the same way, one may find that the sixth
and the seventh day were united in this tradition in their relation to the eighth day.
(15) What is crucial here is Maximus' understanding of freedom. This freedom is not the freedom of
choice between good and evil, but a natural human will, restored for us in Christ. Our "gnomic will"
(deliberative choice) is not natural precisely because it is not the will of nature, but the will of an
individual, of one who constitutes one's "own" being, one's "world". It is impossible to get rid of this
"freedom" of choice between good and evil (that choice which inevitably constitutes "evil" as
something real while rejecting it) until we are not in Christ and "the world" is not "crucified" for us.
However, after death with Christ and the restoration of our nature (as created by God out of
nothing) we may share in the grace of freedom of Christ's humanity. As Fr. John Meyendorff put it,
sharing in Christ's renewed humanity "man possesses a natural will, and that will is the freedom of
nature in conformity with divine freedom and unable to lead to anything but the Good" (ibid, p.
139).
(16) See Meyendorff, ibid. p. 136
(17) Thus the state of "Sabbaths" is a state of freedom as regards our knowledge, because it is not
just scientific knowledge of creatures, but our life in Christ, however, it is also freedom as regards
our "deeds" because they are not just human deeds but participation in God's knowledge. St Basil's
understanding of the Sabbath as "complete removal from worldly things", and Maximus's
description of it as "total cessation of movement of the mind around the creatures"(Thal 65), do not
contradict such understanding. "Complete removal from worldly things" means nothing other than
removal from the things which are "in the world". However, it does not mean removal from what is
in God, that is, God's creation. In the same way, "total cessation of movement of the mind around
creatures" means nothing other than "making the Sabbath in one's mind and keeping one's
imagination free from passions"(see Gn. Ch. 1. 53, PG 90. 1101 D) which is possible only in
"gathering the principles of creatures" in the spiritual contemplation. However, Maximus clearly
shows that even this state of "Sabbaths" (i.e. of contemplation and virtues) has its limits and
imperfection (see, for example, Gn. Ch. 1. 82-3). It is important to note in this context that Origen
in his understanding of "Sabbath" seems to be stopped here, at the stage of virtues, "Where is the
spiritual place of the soul? Justice is its place, and truth, and wisdom and sanctity and everything
else what Christ is. This is the place of the soul. This is the place which it must not leave (for it) to
keep true Sabbaths"(Hom. Num. XXIII. 4. PG 12. 750 B). Thus, though Origen refers later in this
context to Jo. XV.5., it seems that it is not Christ himself who is the Sabbath of the soul for Origen
but "what Christ is" – omnia quae Christus est – (or what is "around" Christ).
(18) For Philo, the Sabbath as the day of contemplation is opposed to the weekdays as the days of
work (see for example, De vita Mosis, L.III. Opera Omnia 686, or De vita contemplativa, I, Op.
Omn. 894,). In the same way the Sabbath is opposed to all other days as "timelessness" (or eternity)
to "time", or as "sacred" to "profane" (for modern interpretation of the Sabbath in Judaism see, for
example, Aryeh Kaplan "Subbota den' vechnosti" (the Sabbath is the day of eternity), Jerusalem
1979, p. 29ff (Russian translation). It is interesting that Origen's interpretation of the Sabbath in
Hom. in Num. XXIII. 4; PG XII, 749 is closer to the Jewish understanding than to Maximus'.
(19) As Maximus describes it: "The one who has become worthy of the eighth day is risen from the
dead, that is from what is less than God: sensible and intelligible things, words and thoughts, and he
lives a blessed life of God" (Gn. Ch. 1.54, PG 90. 1104A). This description, which clearly points to
the state of deification, correlate to the so-called Sabbaths of Sabbaths, that is, "the spiritual peace
of the rational soul which, having withdrawn the mind even from all the more divine principles
which are in beings, dwells entirely in God alone in a loving ecstasy, and has rendered itself by
mystical theology totally immobile in God (ibid. 1. 39).”
(20) Maximus characterizes this "stasis" as the dwelling of the rational soul in God "in a loving
ecstasy"(see Gn. Ch. 1. 39.). Thus "stasis" appears to be obtained in "ecstasis". On the other hand,
describing "the most general virtue of love" in Ambigua, Maximus writes that "in beginners it is
productive of ecstasy, in those moved under its influence it is productive of progress, and those who
have arrived at its goal it is productive of union"(PG 91, 1249B, cited by Panayiotis Nellas,
Deification in Christ, N.Y. 1987 p. 218). This difference, however, can be clarified if one
understands the "ecstasy" of beginners as the "ecstasy" of God in man and the final ecstasy as
"ecstasy" of man in God. What is important here is that the last "ecstasy"is the ecstasy of the man in
whom God already dwells. Thus, at the last stage, man's ecstasy in God is nothing other than God's
return to Himself together with man (this return, however, as it clear, includes man's freedom and
free natural movement during the state of "progress"). As for the ground of this process of
deification with its three stages, it is certainly trinitarian: three hypostasies of one simple nature.
(21)"For the one who has entered his rest has himself rested from his works as God did from His.
Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest..."
(22)"Until the Spirit is poured out upon us from on high... And the work of the righteous will be
peace, and service of righteousness, quietness and confidence forever. Then my people will live in a
peaceful habitation, and in secure dwellings and in undisturbed resting places".
(23)"God is Pentecost, being the beginning and the end of all beings and their principle (logos), in
which everything has been established by nature. It is necessary for the certain state, in which
everything is moved, to find its end through the appearance (parousia) of the state of peace(or rest),
in which there would have been no end and limit for that peace, in which all movement of the
moved would have ceased. It is a state of immediate unity of nature with Providence and its finding
of the simple and constant logos and immobility"(PG. 90 757Cff).
(24) See on this matter Thal. 22.
(25) Cited by P. Blowers, Exegesis and Spiritual Pedagogy in Maximus the Confessor, Indiana
1991, p.130.
(26) As the seventh day is the day of "resurrection of the soul", the eighth day corresponds to the
resurrection of the whole man. Thus, the state of the "loving ecstasy" of the soul, which
characterizes deification, has nothing in common with disembodiment of the soul. On the contrary,
the bodies of the saints receive the same deification as the soul. As St. Gregory of Nyssa has put it,
"both the body and the soul have one beginning according to (one) logos – their original position
according to the will of God" (see, "On the creation of man" ch. XXIX). Having in mind this
thought, one can say that the state of peace in one's "logos" is impossible without deification of both
soul and body, that is the real experience of resurrection.
(27) Comparing this mystery of the eighth day with its absence in Judaism, one may add some
important observations. There was a popular Jewish belief that demons, especially Lilith (a
"shadow" of Eve who is an "image" of St. Mary) are more powerful on Saturday night, and that the
outgoing of the Sabbath was the hour when the lost souls go back to Gehenna (during the Sabbath,
as some said they enjoy the rest from their punishment). "An atmosphere of fear thus surrounded
Saturday night and many curious customs were attached to it and to the Havdolah ceremony(see The
Jewish Festivals by Hayyim Schauss, Schocek books, N.Y. 1988 p. 34). Thus the very opposition of
the sacred and profane (time and timelessness – the Sabbath according to Jewish teaches represent
"timelessness of God"), this very opposition leads to certain "fears.”
One may find some hints of the same "fears" in the Catholic idea of the "Sabbatine
privilege"(see The Catholic Encyclopedia, N.Y. 1907, v. XII, 290d), which consisted essentially in
the early liberation from purgatory through special intercession and petition of Mary, which she
graciously exercises in favor of her devoted servants preferably, as we may assume, on the day
consecrated to her, the Saturday. One of the ways to obtain this privilege was to fast on the Sabbath.
Perhaps, that the very notion of "Purgatory" (as the middle place between Paradise and Hell
is parallel to the middle place of the Sabbath between Friday and Sunday in the Latin tradition.
There is another striking similarity between the Jewish and Catholic traditions. In Jewish
tradition, the Sabbath is personified as "Queen Sabbath.” On the other hand, in the Latin Church the
Sabbath is consecrated to the Virgin Mary. This consecration means that Mary is the Queen of the
Sabbath, which is not identical, I believe, with the "Queen Sabbath.” The "Queen Sabbath" is the
personification of the Sabbath, which is understood as a "Queen" over other days of the week.
However, in the Latin tradition, the Virgin Mary is understood as the Queen of the Sabbath, which
corresponds to the Latin teaching that she is above all other creatures.
As for the Orthodox tradition, the Sabbath here is a day of remembrance, firstly of the holy
martyrs, and secondly of all the deceased. The Church is asking the martyrs, who already
participate in the grace of the eighth day, to pray for all the deceased, and for the living, helping
them to approach God and to find their eighth day, the day of peace and resurrection. The Sabbath
is not consecrated in this Church to the Theotokos, precisely because she is not "above" all creatures
in this tradition, but most holy of all creatures. She is not the Queen of the Sabbath, for the
Orthodox Christians, I believe, but She is "the seventh day", which is entirely in the "eighth day.”
(28) I would like to note that there is still another possible approach to the theme of Sabbath, which
was elaborated by J. Danielou (Bible et liturgie, P. 1951, pp 304-314). Danielou argues that for the
Jews the Sabbath expressed the consecration of time to God while the Temple expressed the
consecration of space. However, one may say, I believe, that a new, real consecration of space to
God has been realized on the sixth day by Christ's Cross and a new, consecration of time (or history)
has been realized on the seventh day by Christ's liberation of the souls. As for the eighth day, it may
be treated as a coincidence of these two consecrations. Both space and time are consecrated on the
day of Resurrection to God, and the entire world becomes the image of the Church.
* I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Arkadi Choufrine who has kindly helped me with
editing and translating of the present article.