St. Jerome reports that in his time it was disputed who the first hermit had been. Some said it was Antony. He himself, on information from some disciples of Antony, claimed that it was a certain Paul of Thebes, who had taken up the eremitical life at the time of the Decian persecution (Hier. vita Pauli 1).56 Athanasius claimed that Antony was the first to take up the desert anachōrēsis. However, he mentions that before this time, each one who wished to live the ascetic life would practice it not far from his own village. It was to one of these that Antony went to learn about the ascetic life (Vita Anton. 3-4). A similar situation is suggested in the Lives of Pachomius, who attached himself to an old man named Palamon to learn the ascetic life (Vita prima 6). How this practice came to exist and how widespread it was remains obscure.
Whether or not Antony was the first hermit, there is no doubt that his example and his fame, particularly as spread by Athanasius, gave a great impetus to the eremitical movement in northern Egypt and eventually far beyond the borders of Egypt. Our principal source of knowledge about Antony is the Life written by Athanasius. In evaluating the picture given by Athanasius, several things must be kept in mind. Although Athanasius had known Antony personally and is supposed to have written his Life soon after the saint’s death in 356, his motivation in writing (which he says was at the request of monks in foreign parts) was to spread monasticism. Gregory of Nazianzen, in his own eulogy of Athanasius, says that “the learned bishop in writing this life was really promulgating the precepts of the ideal monastic life in the guise of a story” (Greg.Naz. orat. 21,5).57 In addition to this, Athanasius, the greatest champion of orthodoxy in the fourth century, probably wanted to enlist the aid of the saint against Arianism: Antony would now play the role of intercessor from heaven, as he had previously been defender of the faith on earth. He may also have had an eye on the pagan world and wished to show that the Christian was also an initiate of mysteries, also sought and attained perfection, and that Christian wisdom was superior to that of the pagans (Vita Anton. 14,72).58
According to Athanasius, Antony was born about A.D. 251 in Middle Egypt of well-to-do parents. The early death of his parents left him as guardian of his only sister. One day, when he was about twenty years old, he entered the church and heard the reading “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell all that you have . . . .” (Matt 19:21). So he went home, distributed his farm of two hundred acres to the townspeople, sold his other belongings and gave the money to the poor, retaining only a small sum for his sister. Once again he went to church and heard the exhortation not to be solicitous about tomorrow (Matt 6:34). So he distributed his remaining money to the poor, put his sister in the care of a community of pious women and began to practice the ascetic life near his home by seeking to imitate an old man who had practiced asceticism since his youth (Vita Anton. 3). Later he went to live in some tombs much farther from the village and remained there until he was thirty-five, fighting off the temptations of the flesh and demons. Then he decided to go to the desert. This was regarded as an innovation, since there was as yet no such custom (Vita Anton. 11). He crossed to the eastern side of the Nile and shut himself up in a deserted fort on the edge of the desert at Pispir, which became known as his “outer mountain.” This would have been at about the beginning of the reign of Diocletian. After twenty years, Antony was visited by friends who wished to copy his holy life. They broke down the door, and Antony emerged “as one initiated into sacred mysteries and filled with the Spirit of God” (Vita Anton. 14). This sentence is often taken as evidence that Athanasius had his eye on the mystery cults and quest for perfection of the pagan world.
Antony then performed miracles and preached the love of Christ to all who came to see him. In a famous passage, Athanasius ties the development of the monastic life to Antony’s preaching: “He induced many to take up the monastic life. And so now monasteries also sprang up in the mountains, and the desert was populated with monks who left their own people and registered themselves for citizenship in heaven” (Vita Anton. 14). This picture appears to be historically premature, but the aim of Athanasius may have been to show that monasticism was an institution before the peace of the Church.59
At the end of the persecution of Maximin Daia in 311, Antony appeared in Alexandria to encourage the martyrs, while even hoping for martyrdom for himself. He was not martyred and returned to his cell “a daily martyr to his conscience, ever fighting the battles of the faith” (Vita Anton. 47). The end of the persecutions meant more visitors for Antony, and so to recover his solitude he decided to move to a location closer to the Red Sea that was reached by traveling several days with a caravan through the desert. This new retreat became known as his “inner mountain.” He did not, however, remain there continuously, and on one occasion at least, he went to Alexandria (about A.D. 338) to denounce the Arians and show support for Athanasius. According to Athanasius, Antony’s fame was so great that even Constantine and his sons wrote to him (Vita Anton. 81). Finally, when he felt his end approaching (Athanasius claims that he was 105 years old), Antony took two companions with him to his inner mountain, where he died in A.D. 356, leaving to Athanasius his sheepskin and a cloak.
Soon after his death, if not before, Antony came to be regarded as the founder and father of monasticism. He was not of course a founder in the sense of later figures such as Dominic or Ignatius, but was rather, due especially to the influence of Athanasius’ writing, an archetype or model for the orthodox hermit. His original settlement at Pispir, where he was succeeded by his disciple Ammonas, became a center of the solitary life in Egypt. His disciples or imitators were instrumental in spreading monasticism elsewhere, even outside of Egypt, and later on monastic settlements sought to find a connection with Antony even when there had been none originally.60
Of particular importance for the course of later monastic history are the settlements at Nitria, Cellia (or the Cells) and Scetis. According to Palladius, the colony of hermits at Nitria had been founded by Amoun (Pallad. hist.laus. 8). The latter had been forced to marry at about age twenty-two, but on his wedding night persuaded his bride that they should both live a celibate life. This they did, living in the same house for eighteen years until she consented to allow him to leave her for the desert. Amoun then built himself two domed cells on the mountain of Nitria, where he lived for twenty-two years, attracting many disciples and imitators. This would have been about A.D. 330. According to Athanasius (Vita Anton. 60), Amoun was well known to Antony, having often come to see him, and when he died, Antony had a vision of his soul being taken to heaven. Rufinus tells us that when he visited Nitria (about A.D. 373), there were about three thousand monks living there (Ruf. hist.eccles. 2,3). Palladius says that when he visited the place (about A.D. 390), there were almost five thousand monks at Nitria and about six hundred living in the Great Desert (Pallad. hist.laus. 7,2).
This group of monks living farther out in the desert formed what was known as Cellia. Its foundation was said to have occurred in connection with a visit of Antony to see Amoun at Nitria. Apparently Amoun was concerned that because of the increase of numbers at Nitria, there was insufficient solitude, and he asked Antony’s advice. Antony suggested they take a walk after their meal in the afternoon. They walked until sunset, when Antony pointed out that those who desired greater solitude could build at that spot, which was said to be twelve miles from Nitria. Other sources give a lesser distance.
About forty miles to the south in the Wadi-el-Natrun, in what was known as the desert of Scetis, another monastic settlement was started about the same time as Nitria by Macarius the Egyptian. He too was soon joined by others; he too is recorded as having visited Antony. Originally there was no priest at Scetis, and Macarius is said to have traveled forty miles to attend Mass at Nitria. By the time of Cassian, there were four congregations or churches at Scetis (Cassian. conl. 10,2) Monastic life has continued there to this day.61
Our knowledge of the monastic life at Nitria and Scetis comes chiefly from Palladius and the
Historia monachorum. According to the former, there were some fifty monasteries at Nitria; the monks dwelt singly, in small groups or in groups as large as 210 (Pallad. dial. 17). Recent excavations as well as ancient writers suggest that some of the dwellings among the Cells, especially those of the more famous hermits, were comparatively elaborate, consisting of several rooms and an enclosed courtyard, including within it a well.62 According to Palladius, all the monks of both Nitria and the Cells were supplied with bread by seven bakeries (Pallad. hist.laus. 7). A great church was built at Nitria, which was used only on Saturdays and Sundays, and near it stood a guesthouse. Guests were allowed a week of leisure and were then put to work in the garden, bakery or kitchen. Palladius says that there were also doctors and pastry cooks at Nitria, and that wine was sold there. The monks all worked at making linen to earn their living. At Scetis the monks produced rope and baskets, which they sold to passing caravans, but they would also hire themselves out at harvest time to work in the fields.
From an early date, the settlements at Nitria and the Cells had their own priests, who came under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Hermopolis Parva. Palladius says that when he stayed at Nitria, there were eight priests, but only the senior priest celebrated the liturgy and preached. These seem to have formed a kind of governing body. However, the government must have been fairly loose, for Palladius also says that the monks of Nitria followed “different ways of life, each as he can or will” (Pallad. hist.laus. 7). There was no formal novitiate or profession of vows. A newcomer sought out an older monk whom he might serve as a kind of apprentice and thus learn from him and imitate him. The styles of life ranged from quasi-cenobitic at Nitria itself to the completely eremitical of the Cells. Such a system was open to the abuse of ascetic rivalry and the other aberrations to which the literature bears witness. The eremitic style of monastic life has had severe critics in the ancient world as well as in the modern world. Of the former, the most eloquent, as we shall see, was St. Basil.
The early development of monasticism in Palestine and Syria is shrouded in somewhat greater obscurity than that in Egypt, but it seems to have developed along basically eremitical lines.63 According to Jerome, monasticism in Palestine owed its origin to Hilarion, a native of the area, who studied at Alexandria and spent a few months with Antony (Hier. vita Hil. 10). Returning home at age fifteen, he took up the eremitical life about the year 307 near Gaza, where he spent twenty-two years in solitude. Then others began to join him and imitate him, establishing monasteries throughout the land. One of his disciples was Epiphanius, whose monastery was located at Eleutheropolis, between Gaza and Jerusalem. It is possible that Jerome obtained the historical core of his account of Hilarion from him.64 Another figure alleged to have founded monasticism in Palestine even before the time of Antony in Egypt is St. Chariton. Little is known of him, and his biography seems to have been composed out of a desire to make the origins of Palestinian monasticism independent of Egypt.65 The characteristic form of monasticism in the Judaean wilderness was the “laura,” a cluster of hermitages around a church and other common facilities. Lauras were often located on the sides of cliffs, as for example at Douka above Jericho and Mar Saba on the Wadi Kedron.
It seems impossible to pinpoint the origins of monasticism in Syria. By the time Jerome came to the desert of Chalcis in 375, numerous colonies of hermits existed in the desert east of Antioch.66 To what extent this development had been influenced by the earlier movement in Egypt is a disputed matter.67 The most important figure of the ascetic movement of the fourth century in Syria was unquestionably Ephraim, a deacon and poet, who lived at Nisibis and later at Edessa, where he died in 373. In his poetry he celebrated the lives of other famous ascetics, such as Abraham Kidunaja and Julian Saba. In Ephraim, however, the ascetical movement was still closely aligned with pastoral considerations. For this reason some would prefer to term his style of life “pre-monastic.”68
6. PACHOMIUS AND CENOBITIC MONASTICISM 69
The warnings against the dangers of the solitary life and the insistence on the cenobitic life as a preparation for the eremitical life by writers such as Cassian and St. Benedict have led many writers to conclude that the cenobitic life was a development from, or adaptation of, the original eremitic inspiration.70 The precise relationship between the eremitic and cenobitic movements remains a matter of much discussion.71 It is clear, however, that in the fourth century Pachomius was regarded as the founder of a distinct movement with its own inspiration and goal, which was not merely to prepare for the eremitic life. This is the significance of an often quoted passage in which Theodore, one of Pachomius’ early disciples and successors, recalls Pachomius as saying:
At the moment in our generation in Egypt, I see three principal things which are prospering with the aid of God and men. The first is the blessed athlete, the holy Apa Athanasius, the archbishop of Alexandria, who is fighting even to death for the faith. The second is our holy father Antony, who is the perfect model of the anchoritic life. The third is this koinōnia, which is the model for everyone who wishes to gather souls together for God’s sake in order to help them become perfect (Vita sa5).72
The juxtaposition in this passage between Antony and koinōnia is quite significant for understanding the spirit of Pachomian monasticism. Disciples were drawn to Antony and other famous ascetics because they recognized in them the gift of the Spirit and wished to become like them.73 This was probably true in the case of Pachomius as well, but he succeeded in shifting attention, to a certain extent, away from himself and to the community as the locus of the Spirit. The Pachomian community is not just a grouping of individuals around a spiritual father, but a fellowship of brothers, a koinōnia.74
The term koinōnia is undoubtedly the key concept of Pachomian monasticism.75 Here it refers to the congregation or union of monasteries that had developed under Pachomius’ guidance. A New Testament term, it has often been translated into English as ‘fellowship,’ ‘communion’ or ‘sharing.’ In 1 Cor 10:16, it is used to refer to the communion in the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, and in 1 John 1:3, it refers to the participation Christians have with one another in the life of the Trinity. Most important, however, is the text in Acts 2:42, where Luke uses it to describe the early Christian community. The ideal of imitating the life of the earliest Christian community pervades the Pachomian literature.
Although the basic inspiration of Pachomian monasticism is clear, the stages by which this distinctive ideal developed are not quite so clear. The various lives of Pachomius and his successors have been influenced, at least in part, by Athanasius’ Life of Antony and have acquired much material of a legendary and edifying character.76 However, the main lines of the traditional story of Pachomius are the following.77 Pachomius was born of pagan parents in the Thebaid in Upper Egypt in the last years of the third century. During the civil war between Licinius and Maximin, he was drafted into the army at the age of twenty. While the recruits were being taken north, they were shut up in a prison for the night. The people of the town brought them food, and when Pachomius inquired who these kind people were, he was told they were Christians. Because of this incident, the young man resolved to serve the human race his whole life (Vita prima 5; Vita bo 8).
After a short time, the war ended and the draftees were released. Pachomius found his way to the village of Šeneset (the Greek says Chenoboskeia), where he was soon baptized as a Christian. After he had spent three years ministering to the needs of the people in this area, he decided to become an anchorite. He sought out an old man named Palamon and asked him to teach him this way of life. The old man agreed reluctantly. Pachomius spent several years learning from and imitating this anchorite. While he was walking one day at some distance, he came to the abandoned village of Tabennesi. There, while praying, he heard the voice of an angel telling him to remain there and build a house because many would come to him to become monks. This he did, and he was soon joined by a number of disciples, including his brothe
r John. Another day Pachomius was downcast and puzzling over the will of God for him. An angel appeared to him and told him that the will of God was that he should serve the human race in order to reconcile it to God. Pachomius responded, “I am seeking the will of God and you tell me to serve men!” Then the angel repeated three times, “The will of God is that you serve men in order to call them to him” (Vita sa3). Whatever may be the historical reliability of these incidents, they certainly illustrate the spirit of Pachomian monasticism, a spirit very different from that of the anchoritic life in which Pachomius supposedly began.
Monastic life at Tabennesi probably began about A.D. 320. It is difficult to trace the development of the structure of Pachomian monasticism.78 However, the fully developed monastery was a fairly elaborate affair, capable of accommodating several hundred monks. It contained a number of residence houses, each with its own housemaster and deputy, and was surrounded by a wall.79 In addition to the living quarters for the monks, there was also a gatehouse, a guesthouse, an infirmary, a kitchen, a refectory and an assembly hall (synaxis) used for common prayer. Various tasks were rotated among the different houses. A “steward” or “superior” was appointed to care for the management of the whole establishment. Outside the walls the monks raised their own food, and they used the old tombs on the edge of the desert as their cemetery.
RB 1980- The Rule Of St Benedict Page 6
