Encomium on the Great Euthymios, Bishop of Madytos (George of Cyprus) - 1 of 3

GEORGE OF CYPRUS

ENCOMIUM ON THE GREAT EUTHYMIOS, BISHOP OF MADYTOS

PUBLISHED BY VASILIOS ANTONIADIS [1]

From manuscript codex no. 363 of the “Synodal Library” in Moscow, the Russian Archimandrite Arseny published three years ago a noteworthy product of ecclesiastical rhetoric from the 13th century, the “Encomium on the Great Euthymius, Bishop of Madytos” (10th century), a work of George of Cyprus, later known under the monastic name Gregory,[2] Patriarch of Constantinople (1283–1289). This edition, accompanied also by a Russian translation, is not the first fruit of the scholarly labors of Father Arseny; and anyone who almost daily finds him in the Synodal Library diligently engaged in copying ancient codices readily acknowledges that the venerable servant of the Church has chosen the good portion.

Despite the voluminous and costly editions already produced, there still remains no small amount of work toward the preparation of a complete and critically reliable edition of the “Greek Patrology.” Not only are there still many unpublished works preserved in libraries of both East and West, but even the text of those already published does not in all respects meet the demands of critical scholarship. For this reason, we ought gladly and gratefully to welcome every effort, even one that contributes only a little to this completion.

The edition of Father Arseny, judged by strict critical standards, is incomplete. The Greek text is faulty in many places. Anyone familiar with the idioms of the Greek language easily understands that the arrangement of the elements of the syntactical period is not always successful. But what is far more serious is that in many passages — especially in the first part of the discourse — the text is so corrupted that the reader is unable to derive any meaning at all that fits with what precedes or follows.

Before consulting the manuscript from which the edition was made, I attributed a large portion of the errors of the published text to the poor condition of the codex, and at times, in order to grasp the meaning, I resorted initially to conjectures. But comparison of the published text with the manuscript, which I carried out during my stay in Moscow, immediately convinced me that it was unnecessary to labor over conjectures. With very few exceptions, the manuscript — although difficult to read — is in excellent condition and is free even from orthographic errors.

Undoubtedly, no small portion of the deficiencies of Father Arseny’s edition are nothing other than typographical oversights.[3] It must also be assumed that certain mistakes occurred in the process of copying, which is unavoidable and quite excusable. Nevertheless, there remain many others which cannot be explained otherwise than by supposing that the editor placed his own conjectures above the authority of the manuscript.

Given the condition of the Greek text, the Russian translation — which in any case falters in places — cannot be faithful and accurate. But it would be hasty and unjust to conclude from this that the work of Father Arseny is worthless and useless. Only one who has never undergone such labors, who has never experienced the difficulties of first copying a difficult manuscript or of producing the first edition of ancient authors, could judge so. The perfection of human works is neither absolute nor achieved all at once, and the first step is always uncertain. If the present second edition of the Greek text surpasses the first, this superiority is due in large part to the prior labor of Father Arseny.

The division of the discourse into paragraphs is not based on the manuscript, which is written continuously and without interruption, but was made for convenience, according to the various parts of rhetorical composition and the principal ideas governing each section. The structure of our discourse is as follows:

A. Proem, revolving around the development of the idea that the orator is not worthy of blame for having chosen Euthymios as the subject of his discourse — a man distinguished in virtue and glorified by miracles, though flourishing in later times and thus seeming to fall behind those saints who shone earlier. The orator would indeed be blameworthy for daring to praise such a man, if he did not do so unwillingly, yielding to the persistent exhortations of a distinguished hierarch, a worthy successor of the saint being praised (1).

B. First Part, containing the life and deeds of Euthymios up to his death (2–17). Passing from the proem to the development of the subject, and briefly indicating that the praise of Euthymios lies not in worldly nobility or outward splendor but in spiritual achievements (2), the orator begins his account with Euthymios’ entrance into the monastery and dedication to the monastic life (3), then describes how from the very beginning he excelled in natural and acquired virtues and spiritual struggles (4), especially in humility (5), how he later withdrew from the monastery to live a stricter and harsher life in solitude (6), how he was subsequently called to the priesthood and the episcopal office (7–8), and finally how he governed the Church entrusted to him as a true shepherd, benefiting his flock by word, example, works of philanthropy, and the power of miracles (9–16), taking care even for the future of his Church, as may be inferred from what he undertook shortly before his death (17).

C. Second Part, containing the heavenly glory and blessedness of Euthymios before God, attested by the miracles he performed after death (18–24), such as the cleansing of the widow’s son from leprosy by oil from the lamp burning above his shrine (19), the healing of a wealthy man from Byzantium from a severe illness by myrrh flowing from his relics (20), the restoration of sight to a blind woman by the same myrrh (21), the revival of a withered hand through contact with his relics (22), the calming of a storm at sea by pouring oil from his lamp (23), and the deliverance of a soldier from captivity through the invocation of his name and his appearance in a dream (24).

D. Conclusion (25).

At the Theological School of Halki Theological School, December 1891.

Notes:

[1] A Greek scholar and editor of ecclesiastical texts active in the late 19th century, associated with the scholarly circles of the Halki Theological School.

[2] The author is called George in codex 363 (13th century), but Gregory in codex 292 (17th century), in which is also found the encomium of the Cypriot author on the Great Martyr Saint George, which is likewise contained in codex 363.

[3] For example, on pages 8–9 of the edition, between the words “fatherland formerly” and “and such things,” two words are missing: “and ancestors,” which, however, appear in the Russian translation as supplied from the Greek text. Likewise, on page 27, between the word “being carried away” and the following words “in spirit,” the word “beginning” (or “setting out”) is missing, though it appears in the translation. Such cases are not rare.

ENCOMIUM ON THE GREAT EUTHYMIUS, BISHOP OF MADYTOS

WRITTEN BY GEORGE OF CYPRUS AT THE REQUEST OF THE SACRED MELETIOS OF ATHENS, WHO AT THAT TIME WAS PRESIDING OVER THE CHURCH OF MADYTOS

1. I think that no one at all can justly reproach us if — just as some of those before us have each taken as the subject of their own discourses one or another of the blessed and God-loving men — we too shall make Euthymios, who is greatly wondrous through his imitation of and union with God by virtue, the occasion of the present discourse. For even if he comes after others in time and appeared much later than they in life, nevertheless he sought God no less than any of them; rather, he loved Him fervently and followed Him, and throughout his whole life, as much as anyone else, he chose to serve Him. Therefore he is worthy to enjoy not only praise from us men, but — if there is any renown among the angels for virtue and for radiant achievements — he is worthy also of that.

Nor is even this a great thing for one who has attained what is greater. For where God Himself glorifies him eternally and makes his glory manifest through his works — that is, through the miracles performed daily, by which, as by certain marks and memorials, He attests the blessedness that belongs to the elect — how could praise from creation add anything great or extraordinary to him?

Therefore this is not to be reproached: for God is no respecter of persons, as we have heard; nor, neglecting to test deeds, does He examine time; nor does He prefer and justify those who came earlier rather than others, but only those who have achieved virtue — whether their achievement came later or earlier. Of these, he who has proved first in such things possesses his worth in heaven, and most justly would also receive from us praise according to our ability — since from this two most excellent things follow: first, that we pay the most just debt of all debts by praising virtue and the share and nature of the good; and second, that we provide no small or contemptible benefit to those who wish to attend to such matters here below, by bringing into the open, as a pillar and example of a good life, something that had previously been hidden.

But this, indeed, is very much worthy of reproach: that although such a discourse properly belongs to others — namely to those who are pure and purified in tongue and mind throughout their whole life, and not merely for a time — we, being so defiled and not heeding Wisdom, which says that praise from a sinful mouth is not fitting, have rashly committed ourselves to this task. Therefore I seem to myself almost not to perceive the One who says: “Why do you recount the ordinances of God?” and “Who has required these things from your hands?” — words by which, through Isaiah and earlier through David, God reproaches those who dare to bear fruit in speech or in anything else without worthiness.

Accordingly, I would rightly have withdrawn from the discourse, placing my hand upon my mouth, fearing the just reproach — were it not that a certain man from elsewhere, one of those of the Spirit, holy in other respects and divine, and indeed distinguished by the dignity of great high-priesthood, having learned something — who knows what — or recognizing in us something favorable, constrained me and pressed me toward the discourse. He promised two things: that he would assist and support me by his prayers, and that he would take upon himself the whole burden of the bold undertaking; and he added a third, even a threat — that he would be ready rather to reproach without excuse those who do not undertake it than to condemn those who do. For, he says, the one being praised, for the sake of this undertaking, will be forgiving — provided only that we omit nothing within our power — and compassionate toward us, as those who have both speech and life; since he himself was of a great soul in life, merciful, and an imitator of the loving-kindness of God — and now even more so, inasmuch as, having left the body and departed from the state of humiliation,[1] he is with God and has come nearer to that nature which alone is loving toward mankind, impassible, and the fountain of compassion.

With this confidence, therefore, he bids us boldly give ourselves to the discourse and undertake it with all our strength, first calling upon that Saint’s grace as our helper. And so, since it is necessary to obey, let him be invoked and present — working, among his other wonders, this also: to show us beforehand the path of the discourse, to smooth it, and to guide us straight toward it as far as possible.

_______________________________

[4] Thus it stands in the manuscript; the reading “being at home (in the body)” (ἐνδημῶν) would be required according to 2 Corinthians 5:8.

+ + +

ΓΕΩΡΓΙΟΥ ΚΥΠΡΙΟΥ

ΕΓΚΩΜΙΟΝ ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΜΕΓΑΝ ΕΥΘΥΜΙΟΝ, ΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΝ ΜΑΔΥΤΩΝ

ΕΚΔΙΔΟΜΕΝΟΝ ΥΠΟ Β. ΑΝΤΩΝΙΑΔΟΥ

Ἐκ τοῦ ὑπ ̓ ἀριθμὸν 363 χειρογράφου κώδικος τῆς ἐν Μόσχα «Συνοδικῆς Βιβλιοθήκης» ἐξέδωκε πρὸ τριετίας ὁ Ῥῶσσος ̓Αρχιμανδρίτης ̓Αρσένιος οὐκ εὐκαταφρόνητον προϊὸν τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ῥητορείας κατὰ τὸν ιγον αἰῶνα, «Ἐγκώμιον εἰς τὸν μέγαν Εὐθύμιον, ἐπίσκοπον Μαδύτων» (10ος αἰών), ἔργον Γεωργίου Κυπρίου, τοῦ μετὰ ταῦτα ὑπὸ τὸ μοναχικὸν ὄνομα Γρηγορίου (1) γνωστοῦ πατριάρχου Κωνσταντινουπόλεως (1283-1289). Ἡ ἔκδοσις αὕτη, συνοδευομένη καὶ ὑπὸ ῥωσσικῆς μεταφράσεως, δὲν εἶναι ὁ πρῶτος καρπὸς τῶν ἐπιστημονικῶν ἐνασχολήσεων τοῦ πατρὸς ̓Αρσενίου, καὶ ὁ καθ ̓ ἑκάστην σχεδόν εὑρίσκων αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ Συνοδικῇ Βιβλιοθήκῃ ἐπιμελῶς καταγινόμενον περὶ τὴν ἀντιγραφὴν ἀρχαίων κωδίκων προθύμως ἀνομολογεῖ ὅτι ὁ σεβάσμιος λειτουργὸς τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐξελέξατο τὴν καλὴν μερίδα. Μεθ ̓ ὅλας τὰς ὀγκώδεις καὶ πολυδαπάνους ἐκδόσεις ὑπολείπεται ἔτι οὐ μικρὰ ἐργασία πρὸς κατάρτισιν πλήρους ὁπωσοῦν καὶ ἐξηκριβωμένης ἐκδόσεως τῆς «Ἑλληνικῆς Πατρολογίας ». Οὐ μόνον ὑπάρχουσιν ἔτι ἱκανὰ ἀνέκδοτα σωζόμενα ἐν ταῖς κατὰ ̓Ανατολὴν καὶ Δύσιν βιβλιοθήκαις, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ κείμενον τῶν ἤδη ἐκδεδομένων δὲν ἀνταποκρίνεται ἐν πᾶσι πρὸς τὰς ἀπαιτήσεις τῆς Κριτικῆς. Διὰ τοῦτο ὀφείλομεν ἄσμενοι καὶ εὐγνωμόνως νὰ ὑποδεχώμεθα πᾶσαν ἐργασίαν, καὶ μικρὸν συμβαλλομένην πρὸς τὴν ῥηθεῖσαν συμπλήρωσιν.

Ἡ ἔκδοσις τοῦ πατρὸς ̓Αρσενίου κατὰ αὐστηρὰν Κριτικὴν εἶναι ἀτελής. Τὸ ἑλληνικὸν κείμενον χωλαίνει ἐν πολλοῖς. Ὁ ἐξῳκειωμένος πρὸς τὰ ἰδιώματα τοῦ ἕλληνος λόγου ἀκόπως κατανοεῖ ὅτι ἡ διάταξις τῶν μελῶν τῆς συντακτικῆς περιόδου δὲν εἶναι πάντοτε ἐπιτυχής. Ἀλλ ̓ ὅ,τι πολλῷ σπουδαιότερον, ἐν πολλοῖς χωρίοις, μάλιστα ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ μέρει τοῦ λόγου, τὸ κείμενον εἶναι οὕτω παρεφθαρμένον, ὥστε ὁ ἀναγνώστης ἀδυνατεῖ νὰ πορισθῇ ἔννοιάν τινα, ὁπωσοῦν προσαρμοζομένην πρός τε τὰ ἡγούμενα καὶ τὰ ἑπόμενα. Πρὶν ἢ συμβουλευθῶ τὸν κώδικα, ἐξ οὗ ἐγένετο ἡ ἔκδοσις, μέγα μέρος τῶν σφαλμάτων τοῦ ἐκδοθέντος κειμένου ἀπέδιδον εἰς τὴν κακὴν τοῦ κώδικος κατάστασιν, καὶ ἐνιαχοῦ πρὸς εὐόδωσιν τοῦ νοῦ κατέφυγον ἐν ἀρχῇ εἰς εἰκασίας. ̓Αλλ ̓ ἡ παραβολὴ τοῦ ἐκδεδομένου πρὸς τὸ χειρόγραφον, ἣν ἐποιησάμην κατὰ τὴν ἐν Μόσχᾳ διαμονήν μου, ἔπεισέ με παραχρῆμα ὅτι εἶναι περιττὸν νὰ πονῶ περὶ εἰκασίας. Πλὴν ὀλιγίστων ἐξαιρέσεων τὸ χειρόγραφον, καίπερ δυσανάγνωστον, εὑρίσκεται ἐν ἀρίστῃ καταστάσει, ἀπήλλακται δὲ καὶ ὀρθογραφικῶν λαθῶν. ̓Αναντιρρήτως οὐ μικρὸν μέρος τῶν ἐλλείψεων τῆς ἐκδόσεως τοῦ πατρὸς ̓Αρσενίου οὐδὲν ἄλλο εἰσὶν ἢ παροράματα τυπογραφικά (2). Ὑποθετέον ὡσαύτως ὅτι λάθη τινὰ ἐγένοντο καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀντιγραφήν, τοῦθ ̓ ὅπερ ἀναπόφευ κτον καὶ λίαν συγγνωστόν. ̓Αλλ ̓ οὐδὲν ἦττον ὑπολείπονται ἄλλα οὐκ ὀλίγα, ἅτινα ἀδύνατον νὰ ἐξηγήσωμεν ἄλλως, ἢ ὑποτιθέντες ὅτι ὁ ἐκδότης suas conjecturas codicis auctoritati anteposuit.

Πρὸς κατάδειξιν τῶν λεγομένων, ὅτι αἱ γραφαὶ τοῦ χειρογράφου κώδικος προκριτώτεραι τῆς ἐκδόσεως, καὶ ὅτι δευτέρα ἐπιδιωρθωμένη μετατύπωσις τοῦ ἡμετέρου λόγου ἀπαραίτητος, παρατίθεμεν ἐνταῦθα ἐκ μόνου τοῦ προοιμίου τὰς διαφορὰς ἀμφοτέρων τῶν κειμένων.

Οὕτως ἔχοντος τοῦ ἑλληνικοῦ κειμένου, βεβαίως ἡ ῥωσσικὴ μετάφρασις, καὶ ἄλλως ἐνιαχοῦ χωλαίνουσα, δὲν δύναται νὰ ἦναι πιστὴ καὶ ἀκριβής. ̓Αλλὰ θὰ ἦτο κατεσπευσμένον καὶ ἄδικον νὰ συμπερά νωμεν ἐντεῦθεν ὅτι τὸ ἔργον τοῦ πατρὸς ̓Αρσενίου εἶναι οὐδενὸς ἄξιον καὶ ἀνωφελές. Οὕτω δύναται νὰ κρίνῃ μόνον ὁ μηδέποτε ὑποβληθεὶς εἰς τοιούτους κόπους, ὁ μηδέποτε δοκιμάσας, τίνας ἔχει δυσχερείας ἡ πρώτη ἀντιγραφὴ δυσαναγνώστου χειρογράφου, ἡ πρώτη ἔκδοσις ἀρχαίων συγγραφέων. Ἡ τελειότης τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἔργων οὔτε εἶναι ἀπόλυτος οὔτε κατορθοῦται διὰ μιᾶς, καὶ τὸ πρῶτον βῆμα εἶναι πάντοτε σφαλερόν. Ἐὰν ἡ παροῦσα δευτέρα ἔκδοσις τοῦ ἑλληνικοῦ κειμένου ὑπερέχῃ τῆς πρώτης, ἡ ὑπεροχὴ αὕτη τὸ πλεῖστον ὀφείλεται τῇ προηγηθείσῃ ἐργασίᾳ τοῦ πατρὸς ̓Αρσενίου.

Ἡ εἰς παραγράφους διαίρεσις τοῦ λόγου δὲν βασίζεται ἐπὶ τοῦ κώδικος, γεγραμμένου συνεχῶς καὶ ἀδιακόπως, ἀλλ ̓ ἐγένετο χάριν εὐκολίας, καὶ δὴ κατὰ τὰ διάφορα μέρη τοῦ ῥητορικοῦ λόγου καὶ τὰς ἀρχούσας ἐν ἑκάστῳ μέρει ἐννοίας. Ἔστι δὲ ἡ οἰκονομία τοῦ ἡμετέρου λόγου τοιαύτη·

Α. Προοίμιον, περιστρεφόμενον περὶ τὴν ἀνάπτυξιν τῆς ἐννοίας, ὅτι ὁ ῥήτωρ οὐδεμιᾶς ἐστι μομφῆς ἄξιος, ὡς θέμα τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ λαβὼν τὸν Εὐθύμιον, ἄνδρα διαπρέψαντα μὲν ἐπ ̓ ἀρετῇ καὶ δοξασθέντα τοῖς θαύμασιν, ἀκμάσαντα ὅμως ἐν χρόνοις μεταγενεστέροις καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο ὑπολειπόμενον τῶν πρότερον ἀναλαμψάντων ἁγίων. Θὰ ἦτο ὁ ῥήτωρ ἀξιόμεμπτος, ὡς τολμῶν νὰ ἐγκωμιάσῃ τοιοῦτον ἄνδρα, ἐὰν μὴ ἔπραττε τοῦτο ἄκων, ὑπείκων ταῖς ἐπιμόνοις προτροπαῖς ἱεράρχου διαπρεποῦς, ἀξίου διαδόχου τοῦ ἐγκωμιαζομένου ἁγίου (α ).

Β. Μέρος πρῶτον, περιλαμβάνον τὸν βίον καὶ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ Εὐθυμίου μέχρι τῆς τελευτῆς αὐτοῦ (β-ιζ ). Μεταβαίνων ὁ ῥήτωρ ἀπὸ τοῦ προοιμίου εἰς τὴν ἀνάπτυξιν τοῦ θέματος τοῦ λόγου, καὶ διὰ βραχέων ὑποδείξας ὅτι τὸν Εὐθυμίου ἔπαινον ἀποτελοῦσιν οὐχὶ ἡ κατὰ κόσμον εὐγένεια καὶ λάμψις ἐξωτερική, ἀλλὰ κατορθώματα πνευματικὰ (β ), ἄρχεται τῆς τούτων ἀφηγήσεως ἀπὸ τῆς εἰσαγωγῆς τοῦ Εὐθυμίου εἰς τὸ μοναστήριον καὶ ἀφιερώσεως εἰς τὸν μοναχικὸν βίον (γ), ἔπειτα δὲ διαγράφει ἐφεξῆς, πῶς ἐνταῦθα ἀπὸ πρώτης ἀρχῆς διέπρεπε καὶ κατ ̓ ἄλλας μὲν φυσικάς τε καὶ ἐπικτήτους ἀρετὰς καὶ τοὺς πνευματικοὺς ἀγῶνας (δ), μάλιστα δὲ κατὰ τὴν ταπεινοφροσύνην (ε), πῶς ἔπειτα ἀπεμακρύνθη τοῦ μοναστηρίου, ἵνα ἐν τῇ ἀπομονώσει διάγῃ βίον αὐστηρότερον καὶ τραχύτερον (Γ), πῶς ἐντεῦθεν ἐκλήθη εἰς ἱερωσύνην καὶ τὸ ἀρχιερατικὸν ἀξίωμα (ζ-η), καὶ τελευταῖον πῶς διῴκησε τὴν ἐμπιστευθεῖσαν αὐτῷ ἐκκλησίαν, ὡς ἀληθὴς ποιμὴν παρεχόμενος ἑαυτὸν χρήσιμον τῇ ἑαυτοῦ ποίμνῃ καὶ λόγῳ καὶ παραδείγματι καὶ ἔργοις φιλανθρωπίας πάσης καὶ τῇ τῶν θαυμάτων δυνάμει (θ-ις), μεριμνῶν μάλιστα καὶ περὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἐκκλησίας, ὡς ἔστιν εἰκάσαι ἐξ ὧν ἐπεχείρησε καὶ ἔπραξε μικρὸν πρὸ τῆς τελευτῆς αὐτοῦ (ιζ).

Γ. Μέρος δεύτερον, περιλαμβάνον τὴν ἐν οὐρανοῖς παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ δόξαν καὶ μακαριότητα τοῦ Εὐθυμίου, μαρτυρουμένην ἐξ ὧν ἐνήργησε θαυμάτων μετὰ θάνατον (ιη-κδ), οἷα ἡ κάθαρσις τῆς λέπρας τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς χήρας ἐλαίῳ τοῦ ἄνωθεν τῆς θήκης αὐτοῦ καιομένου λύχνου (ιθ), ἡ θεραπεία τοῦ ἐκ Βυζαντίου πλουσίου ἀπὸ νόσου χαλεπῆς μύρῳ βλύζοντι ἐκ τῆς λάρνακος αὐτοῦ (κ), ἀνάβλεψις γυναικὸς τυφλῆς τῷ αὐτῷ μύρῳ (κα), ἀναζώωσις τῆς ἐξηραμμένης χειρὸς ἀνδρὸς τῇ προσψαύσει τῶν λειψάνων αὐτοῦ (κβ), κατάπαυσις τοῦ τῆς θαλάσσης κλύδωνος τῇ ἐπιχύσει ἐλαίου ἐκ τοῦ λύχνου αὐτοῦ (κγ), καὶ ἡ ἀπαλλαγὴ στρατιώτου ἀπὸ αἰχμαλωσίας τῇ ἐπικλήσει τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ καὶ παρουσίᾳ καθ ̓ ὕπνον (κδ).

Δ. Επίλογος (κε).

Ἐν τῇ Θεολογικῇ Σχολῇ Χάλκης μηνὶ Δεκεμβρίῳ 1891


(1) Γεώργιος ὀνομάζεται ὁ συγγραφεὺς ἐν τῷ κώδικι 363 (ιγ ́ ἑκατοντ.), Γρηγόριος δὲ ἐν τῷ κώδικι 292 (ιζ' ἑκατοντ.), ἐν ᾧ εὕρηται τὸ ἐγκώμιον τοῦ Κυπρίου εἰς τὸν Μεγαλομάρτυρα Γεώργιον, εὑρισκόμενον καὶ ἐν τῷ κώδ. 363.

(2) Ἐπὶ παραδείγματι, ἐν σελίσι 8-9 τῆς ἐκδόσεως μεταξὺ τῶν λέξεων «πατρίδα πρότερον» καὶ «καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα», ἐλλείπουσι δύο λέξεις «καὶ προγόνους», ἐν ᾧ ἐν τῇ ῥωσσικῇ μεταφράσει εὕρηται τὸ ἐκ τοῦ ἑλληνικοῦ κειμένου λείπον. Ὁμοίως ἐν σελίδι 27 μεταξὺ τῆς λέξεως «παρασυρόμενοι» καὶ τῶν ἑξῆς «μὲν τῷ πνεύματι» λείπει ἡ λέ ξις «ἐναρχόμενοι» ἀπαντῶσα ἐν τῇ μεταφράσει. Τοιαῦτα δὲν εἶναι σπάνια.

ΤΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΥ ΚΥΠΡΙΟΥ 

ΕΓΚΩΜΙΟΝ ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΜΕΓΑΝ ΕΥΘΥΜΙΟΝ ΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΝ ΜΑΔΥΤΩΝ

ΕΞ ΑΙΤΗΣΕΩΣ ΓΡΑΦΕΝ ΤΟΥ ΑΘΗΝΩΝ ΙΕΡΟΥ ΜΕΛΕΤΙΟΥ ΠΡΟΕΔΡΕΥΟΝΤΟΣ ΤΟTE ΤΗΣ ΜΑΔΥΤΩΝ ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣ

α. Ἐπιτιμᾶν δικαίως ἡμῖν οἶμαι τὸν ἁπάντων οὐδένα, εἰ, καθάπερ τινὲς τῶν πρὸ ἡμῶν, ἄλλος ἄλλον τινὰ τῶν μακαρίων καὶ θεο φιλῶν ἀνδρῶν ὑπόθεσιν τῶν οἰκείων λόγων προέθεντο, καὶ ἡμεῖς Εὐθύμιον τὸν πολὺν ἐν θαύμασι διὰ τὴν ἐξ ἀρετῆς πρὸς Θεὸν μίμησιν καὶ οἰκείωσιν τοῦ παρόντος λόγου ποιήσομεν ἀφορμήν. Εἰ γὰρ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ὑποβέβηκε τῷ χρόνῳ καὶ πολὺ μετ ̓ ἐκείνους ὕστερος ἀνεφάνη τῷ βίῳ, ὅτι δ ̓ ὅμως ἧττον οὐδενὸς Θεὸν ἐξεζήτησεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ σφοδρῶς ἠγάπησε καὶ ἠκολούθησε καὶ διὰ βίου παντός, εἰ καί τις ἕτερος, θεραπεύειν προήρηται, οὐ μόνον τῆς παρ ̓ ἡμῶν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ ̓ εἴ τις ἐπ ̓ ἀρετῇ τοῦδε τοῦ γένους καὶ λαμπροῖς κατορθώμασιν εὐφημία καὶ παρ ̓ ἀγγέλων ἐστί, καὶ ταύτης δίκαιος ἀπολαύειν ἐστί. Καὶ οὐδὲ τοῦτο μέγα τῷ τετυχηκότι τοῦ μείζονος. Ὅπου γὰρ αὐτὸν Θεὸς αἰωνίως δοξάζει καὶ τὴν δόξαν τοῖς ἔργοις δήλην καθίστησι, τοῖς καθ ̓ ἡμέραν δηλαδὴ θαύμασιν, οἷς πολλάκις, ὡς δή τισι χαρακτῆρσι καὶ ὑπομνήμασι, τὴν ἔχουσαν τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς πιστοῦται μακαριότητα, πῶς ἂν αὐτῷ τι φέροι μέγα καὶ ὑπερφυὲς ὁ παρὰ τῆς κτίσεως ἔπαινος; Οὔκουν τοῦτ ̓ ἐπιτιμητέον ἐστίν· ὅτι μηδὲ προσωπολήπτης ὁ Θεός, καθώσπερ ἠκούσαμεν, οὐδ ̓ ἀφεὶς δοκιμάζειν τὰς πράξεις ἐξετάζει τὸν χρόνον, οὐδὲ τοὺς προειληφότας τῶν ἄλλων μᾶλλον προκρίνει καὶ δικαιοῖ, τοὺς δὲ κατορθώσαντας μόνους, εἴθ ̓ ὕστερον εἴτε πρότερον τὸ κατόρθωμα γέγονεν. Ὧν ἐκεῖνος τὰ πρῶτα γενόμενος ἔχει μὲν τὴν ἀξίαν ἐν οὐρανοῖς, ἔχοι δ ̓ ἂν καὶ μάλα δικαίως καὶ τὸν κατὰ δύναμιν ἔπαινον παρ ̓ ἡμῶν, δύο δὴ τὰ κάλλιστα μετιόντων ἐκ τούτου, χρέος ἁπάντων δικαιότατον ἀποτιννύναι χρεῶν, ἀρετὴν καὶ τὴν τοῦ καλοῦ μοῖραν καὶ φύσιν ἐγκωμιάζοντας, καὶ δεύτερον τοῖς ὧδε τὸν νοῦν προσέχειν ἐθέλουσιν οὐ φαύλην τινὰ προξενεῖν τὴν ὄνησιν οὐδ ̓ εὐκαταφρόνητον, στήλην καλοῦ βίου καὶ παράδειγμα τοσοῦτον, κρυπτόμενα τέως, εἰς μέσον παράγοντας. ̓Αλλ' ἐκεῖνό γε καὶ λίαν ἐπιτιμήσεως ἄξιον, ὅτι τοῦ λόγου μᾶλλον ἡμῶν ἑταίροις προσήκοντος, τοῖς καθαροῖς δηλονότι καὶ διὰ βίου παντός, ἀλλὰ μὴ πρόσκαιρα, καὶ γλῶτταν καὶ νοῦν ἡγνισμένοις, ἡμεῖς τοσοῦτον ῥυπῶντες καὶ μὴ τὸ τῆς Σοφίας ὑπειδόμενοι, οὐχ ὡραῖον εἶναι λεγούσης τὸν ἐξ ἁμαρτωλοῦ στόματος ἔπαινον, εἰς τοῦτον θρασέως καθήκαμεν ἑαυτούς. Διὸ καὶ δοκῶ μοι μόνον οὐκ ἐπαισθάνεσθαι λέγοντος· «ἵνα τί σὺ ἐκδιηγῇ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ δικαιώματα;» καί «τίς ταῦτα ἐξεζήτησεν ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν σου ; » ἃ διὰ Ἡσαΐου· πάλαι καὶ Δαυίδ τοῖς ἢ λόγον ἤ τι ἕτερον καρποφορεῖν ἀνάγνως ἀποτολμῶσιν ὀνειδίζει Θεός. Ὅθεν καὶ ἀπέστην ἂν δεόντως τοῦ λόγου, χεῖρα θεὶς ἐπὶ στόματος, τὸ τῆς ἐπιτιμήσεως εὔλογον δείσας, εἰ μή μοι τις ἑτέρωθεν ἀνὴρ τῶν τοῦ Πνεύματος, ἱερὸς τὰ τ ̓ ἄλλα καὶ θεῖος, καὶ δὴ καὶ μεγάλης ἐμπρέπων ἀρχιερωσύνης ὑψώματι, οὐκ οἶδα τί μαθὼν ἢ τί δεξιὸν ἡμῖν συνειδώς, βίᾳ κατέχων ἐπέκειτο καὶ πρὸς τὸν λόγον ὤθει, δύο ταῦτα καθυπισχνούμενος, βοηθεῖν καὶ συναίρεσθαι ταῖς εὐχαῖς, καὶ τὸ τοῦ τολμήματος ἅπαν ἄχθος εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἀναδέχεσθαι, καὶ τρίτον προστιθείς τι καὶ ἀπειλῆς, ὡς ἕτοιμον εἶναι μᾶλλον ἀσύγγνωστα μὴ ἐπιχειροῦσιν ἐπιτιμᾶν, ἢ ἐπιχειροῦντας ἀξιοῦν κατακρίσεως· τὸν γὰρ ἐγκωμιαζόμενόν φησι τῆςδε τῆς ἐγχειρήσεως ἕνεκεν, μόνον ἂν τῶν εἰς δύναμιν ἡκόντων οὐδὲν ἐλλίπωμεν, συγγνώμονά τε ἔσεσθαι, ὡς ἄρα καὶ ἔχομεν λόγου καὶ βίου, καὶ συμπαθῆ· ἐπειδὴ καὶ μεγαλόψυχός τις ἦν ἐν τῷ βίῳ καὶ οἰκτίρμων καὶ Θεοῦ φιλανθρωπίαν μιμούμενος, καὶ νῦν ἔτι μᾶλλον ἂν εἴη, ὅσῳ καὶ τὸ σῶμα καταλείψας τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἐκδημῶν (1) ἐστι πρὸς Θεὸν καὶ τῇ μόνῃ φιλανθρώπῳ φύσει καὶ ἀπαθεῖ καὶ πηγῇ τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν ἐγγύτερον γέγονεν. Ταύτῃ δὴ καὶ θαρρούντως ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἐπιδιδόναι τῷ λόγῳ κελεύει καὶ δυνάμει τῇ πάσῃ ἐγχειρεῖν, πάμπρωτα τὴν ἐκείνου χάριν ἐπικεκλημένους συλλήπτορα. Καὶ γοῦν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ὑπακούειν ἀνάγκη, ἐπικεκλήσθω καὶ παρέστω, ἐκεῖνο μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων θαυματουργοῦσα, τὸ τὴν ὁδὸν ἡμῖν τοῦ λόγου καὶ προδεικνύναι καὶ προευμαρίζειν καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀπλανῶς ὡς οἷόν τε κατευθύνειν.

(1) Οὕτως ἐν τῷ κώδικι· «ἐνδημῶν» θὰ ἀπήτει 2 Κορ. 5, 8.

 

PART TWO