Andrew Thomas the Holy Fools - A Theological Enquiry Ph.D. Thesis, 2009 2009

8/11/2019 Andrew Thomas the Holy Fools - A Theological Enquiry Ph.D. Thesis, 2009 2009

1/232

THE HOLY FOOLS:

A THEOLOGICALENQUIRY

Andrew Thomas

Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of

Philosophy

May 200


2/232

Abstract

!hat is the significance of the deployment of madness in the early "hristian ascetic

e#perience of holiness$ The first %y&antine holy fools ' themselves critics of monastic orders

' represent the consistent and logical conclusion of the theology and practice of the early

"hristian ascetics( and in particular that of the followers of Anthony and Pachomius) The

flight to the desert of the first "hristian anchorites and coenobites was an attempt to transform

the e#perience and theology of holiness in church and society by transgressing the rules and

thoughts of the city in a practical outwor*ing of negative theology) The transgressive

behaviour of the holy fools renewed that transformation by accepting neither secular nor

religious truth and life) !here desert fathers and mothers had transformed the production of

norms by their obedience and ascetic transcendence of human life( holy fools undermined the

religious production of norms through their masterless obedience( defeat of vainglory( and

foreignness to self) The transformation of the production of ethical *nowledge amongst early

"hristian ascetics ' through control of passions( representations( and silence ' was followed

through by the holy fools+ apophatic babble and re,ection of religious loci of *nowledge

production in liturgy( confession( religious community and ecclesial authority) As a

continuation of ascetic methods of reforming the self+s relation to society by brutal truth-

telling and truth-hearing( the holy fools used self-ostracising insult and laughter to follow

divine truth into the periphery without legislating universal modesty and submission to group

truths) As such( the holy fools e#emplify the practices most idealised in early "hristian

asceticism ' humility( suspicion of fi#ed orders and truths( apophatic criti.ue of doctrine and

legislation ' with renewed innovation and commitment to city life) They applied the strategic

moves and principles of negative theology to the "hristian theology and practice of holiness

through aspiring to desert freedom( the practice of ignorance( and the unserious self)


3/232

Table of Contents

Abstract))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))2Table of "ontents)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/

Abbreviations Ancient 1iterature))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))3Ac*nowledgements))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))4Introduction...............................................................................................................................8

1: Becoin! Unnor"#...........................................................................................................$%

5)56 Negative 7bedience))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))281.1.1: Understanding Obedience......................................................................................311.1.2: Political Obedience................................................................................................361.1.3: Foolery as Religious Emancipation.......................................................................4

5)26 9oolery and negations6 the shape of ascetic re,ection)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))331.2.1: !egati"e #$eology..................................................................................................4%1.2.2: &pop$atic 'i"ersity................................................................................................(3

5)/6 Ascetic Positivism6 the sine .ua non of renunciation))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))):;1.3.1: Place.......................................................................................................................()1.3.2: Prayer.....................................................................................................................611.3.3: *lot$ing Practices..................................................................................................64

5)36 oliness6 Dissociation))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))8:

$: &r"cti'ed I!nor"nce............................................................................................................8(

2)56 Practices of Thought in the Desert))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));:2.1.1: Praise and +lame: spea,ing et$ics........................................................................-62.1.2: 'eat$: escaping rom et$ics...................................................................................)12.1.3: /it$dra0al rom t$e 0orld: c$allenging et$ics...................................................1(

2)26 Ascetic


4/232

Abbreviations (Ancient Literature)

Unless otherwise indicated( translations are those listed in the bibliography)

Numbering in ancient te#ts is in general according to chapter) The anonymous collection ofapop$t$egmata partumis numbered according to !ard+s edition)

eference to Bree* and 1atin te#ts has been to Migne( unless otherwise indicated)

&cta anctorum &cta anctorum

&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9 &pop$t$egmata Patrum 8alp$.9

lib. grad. liber graduum

$. mon. $istoria monac$orum in &egypto

&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9 &pop$t$egmata Patrum 87,. syst.9

". dan. scet. "ita 'anielis cetiotis

&pop$. Patr. 8at9 &pop$t$egmata Patrum 8at.9

&pop$. Patr. 8anon9 &pop$t$egmata Patrum 8anon9

Athanasius Ale#andrinus ". &nton. ita &ntoniiAugustinus >ipponensis c. mend. contra mendacium

Enc$. Enc$iridion

de ci". dei de ci"itate dei contra paganos

con. *onessionum

doctr. c$r. 'e 'octrina *$ristiana

lib.art. de libero arbitrio

mend. de mendacio

op. mon. de opere monac$orum

de trin de trinitate

%arsanuphius and Cohannes resp. responsiones%asilius Magnus leg. lib. gent. ad adolescentes de legendis libris

gentilium

ascet. 1 sermo asceticus 1

ascet 2 sermo asceticus 2

d. bapt. de baptismo libro duo

ascet. disc. sermo eiusdem de ascetica disciplina

$om. 1 $omilia 1 ad"ersus eos ui irascuntur

$om. 2 $omilia 2 de $umilitate

reg. us. regulae usius tractatae

moral. moralia

renunt sermo de renuntiatione saeculi

;ud. de ;udicio dei

"assianus Cohannes de institutis 'e institutis coenobiorum*ollationes *ollationes

"icero Marcus Tullius tusc. disp. #usculanae 'isputationes"lemens Ale#andrinus str. stromateis


5/232

"limacus ohn scal. scala paradisiDenys Areopagitus c.$. de caelesti $ierarc$ia

d.n. de di"inis nominibus

e.$. de ecclesiastica $ierarc$ia

myst. de mystica t$eologia

Diogenes 1aertius "it. p$il. itae P$ilosop$orum


6/232

Acknowledgements

?i# years have now passed since C e#plained to my wife that C could not write a

doctoral thesis because C did not have an idea) ?ince that time( C have benefited from

conversations with friends( colleagues( students and strangers that have managed to persuade

me that this was a correct assessment of the situation( but that C should still write)

To wor* and thin* several hundred miles from your academic home is always a

challenge( and the Department of Theology and eligious ?tudies not least the ever helpful

and sympathetic anet 1ongley have been more than accommodating) A special than*s must

go to my supervisor Philip Boodchild( who has always been polite enough to ma*e my

glaring mista*es seem natural ones( and who has never given a comment that has not been

worth acting on) >is *een discernment( absurdly well informed thought( and his patient(

effective academic effort will always stand out in my mind as a model of philosophical wor*)

ecent years have also seen the development of an enormously resourceful group of

research students at the department( and C have gained a great deal from their passion and

insight into the tas* of doing good theology and philosophy) The all too rare conversations C

have had with Ale# Andrews( eff %iebighauser( Anthony Paul ?mith( Michael 7+Neill

%urns( %en @aut&er( and Thomas 1ynch have been both inspiring and informative)C owe a further debt of gratitude to the 9aculty of Theology at the University of 7slo)

Not only have they generously e#tended library hospitality even when C have not had formal

lin*s to the institution( but C have been accepted into their academic discussions both over

lunch and in seminars) Cn particular( ?turla ?tFlsett( @,etil >afstad(


7/232

forced me to ,ustify my arguments and give up those that no longer hold water) !ithout these(

my thoughts would have long ago spiralled off into self-glorifying nonsense) My than*s go

especially to >arald Torgauten( Tom "lar*( and most of all to my ever honest( ever surprising

wife( >elene Thomas) These have long been my readers and my audience( and they are

responsible for my coherence) The remaining nonsense is all of my own creating( but C hope

that they will continue the wor* they have started in helping me to eradicate it)


8/232

Introduction

The holy fool is no stranger to the modern world) The name is used to describebeatni*s( truth-telling weirdos( and modern ascetics) Ct doesn+t matter what you are reacting

to( so long as you challenge established truths in innovative ways( you are a holy fool)

This study is based on the assumption that it does matter what you are reacting to) The

starting point determines the range of answers available) ?pea*ing of the holy fools of late

anti.uity in the same breath as modern egelian starting point( but it is also founded

on the dogma of the infinity and ine#haustibility of Bod( who always e#ceeds and transcends

our current thoughts)

Ct is because of the theological practice of the early "hristian ascetics that holy fools '

who mar* their departure precisely from the norms( *nowledge( and saintly selfhood of

monasticism ' are called holy rather than simply foolish) Ct does not simply ta*e a trailbla&ing


9/232

holy man to transform the e#perience of holiness) Ct ta*es a transformed reception too)

I"ontinuity is but the phenomenon of a discontinuity)J5

C will therefore attempt to draw up the common features and conversions enacted in

the emergence of the holy fools amongst early "hristian ascetics) ?hared theologies made itpossible for contemporaries to identify them as holyK conversions are what catch our attention

and theirs( constituting a criti.ue that elicits transformation) !e could say that the one ma*es

them holy( whilst the other ma*es them foolish)

The tas* is therefore restricted to the earliest "hristian holy fools) Parallels in other

religions( places( and times are no doubt interesting( and may even help us to understand the

material in hand) These are not( however( the domain of this study) Two reasons motivate the

choice6 firstly( in order to posit a genuine parallel( a thoroughgoing understanding isnecessary of each phenomenon( so that the parallel itself adds no new *nowledge concerning

either of them( but mere illustrations of particular features) ?econdly( even though the theme

of this wor* is ostensibly a set of historical religious figures( my underlying interest is an

understanding of the e#perience and theology of holiness( as it is negotiated in Theology+s

classical era( in the wa*e of one of the most far-reaching transformations "hristianity has

undergone( namely the birth of monasticism)


10/232

inhibitions for the sa*e of worship):Therefore( this study will concentrate on the uni.ue

theology of one of these groups ' namely the early "hristian %y&antine holy fools ' in order

to e#amine that way of thin*ing in all its specificity) The common features of a "hristian

theology of madness will have to wait for another day)


11/232


12/232

compared with and set in the conte#t of monasticism6 the e#egetical problems involved in

identifying authentic holy fools notwithstanding( de acto fools who were generally

identifiable and *nown figures in Dostoevs*y+s ussia appear in the conte#t of monasteries(

with and over against the conventional religious)5/!hen later interpetations refer to holy

foolishness as a way of relating to "hristian asceticism( then( they will also be relevant to the

study of the earliest holy fools)

!hat do these restrictions leave us with$ Cf we are to only regard those stories written

before 1eontius of Neapolis that use the word Hsalos+ to refer to those that embrace the life of

feigning madness for "hrist+s sa*e( a coherent group of te#ts emerges6

Csidora of Tabennesiotes( who was abused by her entire monastery for her madness

until her holiness is revealed by an angel to Piteroum cf)below( on page23K53

Abba Mar* the fool who moved to Ale#andria to play the fool at the baths of

>ippo( and who was discovered by Abba Daniel of ?cetisK5:

the anonymous mon* living in the community around abba ?ilvanus in Palestine

who laughed and fooled around in public( but in private counted his good and bad

thoughts by ma*ing piles of pebbles( only allowing himself to eat if the good

outweighed the badK54

?ymeon the holy fool( whose long "itaby 1eontius of Neapolis58 represents Hthe

pinnacle of the literarydevelopment of the ideas of holy foolery+5; describing a

flight from the world through the common life( the desert( and the madness of the

city( where ?ymeon moc*s( steals( and shits his way through the last days of his life

in a fest of holy foolishness( always hiding( always provocative)

5/9ather Therapon is a monastic authority and holy fool in Dostoevs*y( 53L5;;06 C=)5K ?emyon Qa*ovlevichthe holy fool ' though treated as a prophet ' is attended by mon*s( and connected to a local monastery6Dostoevs*y( 2000L5;826 CC):)ii53&pop$. Patr. 8at9:=CCC)5 Palladius( $. aus.:C=)5:cf) now the e#cellent critical collection by %ritt Dahlman of the Daniel te#ts6 ". dan. scet.The story of Mar*the holy fool appears in chapter 2)54&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:=CCC)/2

581eontius( ". ym.( based at least partly on the short chapter on H?ymeon the mon*+ in


13/232

?o the holy fools material itself ,ustifies an e#amination of the te#ts that appear at this

time from the fourth to the seventh century and location oly oman is concerns regarding the literature are fairly clear( however( and his

5


14/232

approach to it was demonstrated both in his short analyses and in his wor* on the philosophy

of late anti.uity)28 The method adopted here is perhaps best demonstrated in the two

tra,ectories of Platonic thought outlined in 9oucault+s final lecture series)

?ocrates+ psychagogical practice lies at the heart of much of 9oucault+s later thought(stretched as it was between analyses of Platonism on the one hand and @ant+s article on


15/232

The following analyses of holy fools and early "hristian asceticism will be primarily

guided by the concerns of the latter tra,ectory) !here theories of the soul and the other world

are treated( it will be for the sa*e of the understanding of the truth-telling that concerns and is

produced by the true way of life)

A number of conse.uences follow from this focus) 9irstly( the traditional division of

Patristics into the more theoretical te#ts of Augustine( the "appadocian fathers( etc over

against the hagiographical te#ts of church histories( stories and sayings of mon*s( and so on

will not hold) The theory and practice of the self are constantly playing off each other)

Metaphysical theories of the other world and the eternal soul have practical implications for

ascetic heroes( and particular practices of death and hope will sometimes re.uire a particular

metaphysic( and sometimes allow metaphysical fle#ibility) Neither can be studied in isolation)

?econdly( "hristian asceticism can not be read as a mere continuation of either the

platonic tradition or the cynic ascetic tradition) Cn the monastic "hristianity of late anti.uity(

the possibility of truth-telling re.uired a particular ascetic practice( and ascetic practice

produced and assumed a set of truth games) !hilst "ynic philosophers more or less ignored

metaphysics( and neoplatonists eschewed the radical life transformations of cynics and

mon*s( "hristian philosophers united the life of withdrawal with the life of the soul) The

desert is where you save your soul)/0

Thirdly( theology contains a vital reference to practice in two directions) 7n the one

hand( truth-telling is grounded in practice) 7nly particular games of truth and habits of

mastery over one+s thought will allow the emergence of truth about the other life of Bod and

the soul) 7n the other hand( life is assessed not only against the standards of truth( but against

those of the divine life) Cn short( truth produces and is produced by holiness)

Cllustrations of this principle can be found in the analysis of dispassion below( section

2)5)26 Death6 escaping from ethics) The notion of the dispassion of Bod has troubled

theologians for some time) Brounding it in the practice of dispassion will add to our

understanding of how ancient theologians thought through the attribute( for e#ample

demonstrating that it is by no means incommensurate with love( that it is concerned with

social convention( manipulation( and *nowledge) 7n the other hand( the practice itself is

driven to a great e#tent because of the theology of divine impassibility)

A further illustration concerns the account given below of negative theology( or

apophaticism section C)2)5 below) !hilst the theme will first be confronted in practical

/09oucault 2006 22;)


16/232

terms ' the re,ection of the city( particular forms of life( and conventional shapes of holiness

as non-divine ' ascetic practice is both driven by and a mode of producing intellectual

apophaticism) 9or this reason( we will first confront it in the section on ways of transforming

norms and then later in the description of the transformation of *nowledge)

9oucault himself did not directly address the emergence of early "hristian asceticism

by which C mean both the anchoritic movements of Anthony and the cenobitic institutions of

Pachomius as they arose in the e describes the practice of total obedience as a

precursor to the governmental systems that united practices of asceticism to civic loyality) To

this purpose( 9oucault+s histories portray one form of obedience to ecclesiastic authorities as a

mode of heteronomy) Cn fact( obedience was only allied to institutional hierarchy in certain

conte#ts namely particular cenobitic institutions and some time after the emergence of

monasticism) The obedience elaborated as a practice of the self amongst early "hristian

ascetics was long entirely independent of ecclesiastical order( and chapter one below sets out

a grammar of obedience at odds with 9oucault+s depressing picture of a governmental

techni.ue that in practice undermined the self confidence produced by mystical e#perience)/2

Cnstead of aping 9oucault+s critical studies( then( we will embrace his program of re-

launching the .uestion of what way of life is necessary for telling the truth( what techni.ues

allow a transformation of morals( and what relation to the self is generated by these

transformations$ !e will e#amine the hagiographical and theoretical reflections on asceticism

as interrogations of life and self)

The .uestion that is being as*ed throughout these tas*s is6 what is the significance of

the deployment of madness in the "hristian e#perience of holiness$ Addressing this .uestion

will further involve steering between the two tendencies to assert an absolute brea* with the

contemporary religious practice( and so to deny the fool+s holiness( and the tendency to claim

/5Cn 9oucault 2006 20)/29oucault 2006 /02-/0;) "f) also the governmental analysis of obedience in lectures of 9oucault 2008 L2003622nd9ebruary and 5stMarch)


17/232

complete continuity with e#isting e#perience of holiness( and so to deny the fool+s

foolishness)

The identification of transformations in the e#perience of holiness presents three

primary sub-.uestions65) >ow are the norms of the holy and the unholy transformed$

2) >ow is the *nowledge of the holy transformed$

/) >ow is the relation of the self to society in its holy and profane manifestations

reconfigured$//

%ecause these three elements of e#perience ' norms( *nowledge( and the self+srelation to society ' are all addressed at a profound level by the early "hristian ascetics( the

transformation elicited by the holy fools is unli*ely to be limited to simple transitions in

practical norms( the assertion of one voice in the discussion of religious *nowledge( and the

institution of one new social form of religion) Cnstead( attention will be directed to the ways in

which early "hristian ascetics and holy fools ali*e transform and undermine the activities that

ma*e norms( *nowledge( and the self-society relation possible) !hat does this mean in

practice$1. Cn addressing norm-ma*ing activities( the holy fools insert their abnormality into the

way of life of the desert fathers and mothers through their development of the discipline of

obedience( their practices of radical dissociation( and their solutions to the practical problem

of vainglory) These disciplines are themselves practices that ma*e it possible to ta*e a critical

stance to systems of norms) 7bedience ' a dominating theme throughout ascetic literature in

late anti.uity and the early middle ages ' denies the necessity of an agent+s actions being

entirely motivated by their own will) %y brac*eting the moral ,udgment of the obedient mon*or nun( a space for critical assessment of that ,udgment is carved out) Dissociation has a

similar function( where the moral agent becomes a stranger to herself in order to wor* on her

thought and action( and how they relate to one another) The problem of vainglory is not

simply concerned with morality( but the effects a moral action can have on the self) These are

all disciplines that wor* on norm-ma*ing activity) They do not merely change the morality

//The a#es used here are adapted from those outlined by 9oucault in his lectures of 5;/6 cf) 9oucault( 200;63-8)


18/232

they have received) They are ways in which morality as such can be e#amined( assessed( and

transformed)

Against this bac*ground( the holy fools appear as challenging the holiness of ascetic

norm-ma*ing activity) They clearly embrace aspects of the religious life( but in such a way asto clash with the values and traditions of mainstream "hristian monasticism) %y echoing

classic instances of obedient acts( practising absolute dissociation( and playing around the sin

of vainglory( they modify the way in which holiness had come to be e#perienced) They

represent a challenge to "hristian asceticism from within) This challenge is the sub,ect of part

one)

$. >ow is *nowledge of the holy produced and transformed by the holy fools$ A *ey

mode of gaining control over the production of *nowledge amongst the early "hristianascetics was mastery over the passions) Disciplines and practices were deployed to have an

effect on passions( which in turn allowed the thin*ing agent to e#ercise choice on how things

were represented) The ascetic production and criti.ue of *nowledge was activated both in the

realm of social *nowledge ' reconceptualising money( gender( politics ' and in that of

theology)

The holy fools continue this program of denying the institutions and practices that

support *nowledge by .uestioning the *nowledge of both the religious and secular realms)

They undermine the practices and *nowledge that configure gender( mar*et( and religion

through playing with and ma*ing contingent divisions that seemed necessary) Cn their

freedom from passion( they refuse to let holiness underwrite the present) Bod-tal* ta*es place

within the conte#t of established values and meanings) The attribution of goodness to Bod

then orders hierarchies of goodness and godliness in the world) Cn this respect( the social order

of "hristendom in late anti.uity was a theological order) >oly fools can be seen enacting a

practical apophatic theology that ta*es seriously the challenges posed by the conventions and

practices intertwined with meanings and utterances) !ith their denial of forms of life and

their play on religious acts( they perform the twin elements of apophaticism6 criti.ue and play(

or the "ia negati"a and the "ia dissimilis) Ct is such practices of *nowledge that we will

discuss in part two)

%. The holy fools address the problem of the self+s relation to society by their approach

to the universal demand of holiness) The early "hristian ascetics had appropriated the

philosophical techni.ue of fearless speech by transforming it into a hermeneutic) The

"hristian is obliged to hear true speech from anyone) The location of heroic *nowledge had


19/232

thereby been transferred from the individual philosophical spea*er to the mass of listeners(

thus posing the problem that had been underlying ancient philosophy ever since ?ocrates6 if

social and personal transformation is to be valued( who is to be re.uired and who enabled to

attain to those values$

The issue determines the holiness and the possibility of holiness for both religious and

secular) Cf the infinite demands of self-*nowledge and self-transformation are universally

obliging( then everyone has to be a mon*) Cf they apply only to a few( then the political and

personal power that results from philosophical and ascetic techni.ues is restricted to a few

aristocrats) These problems are particularly relevant to the range( public communication( and

obligations of the dogma( techni.ues( and e#perts of philosophy( and are relevant as a

framewor* of interpretation both for ancient truth-telling techni.ues and for ascetic

techni.ues of ethics li*e the humour and humility of early "hristian ascetics and holy fools) Cf

humility is a resource for the brac*eting and transformation of norms and *nowledge( how is

that resource affected if it becomes a demand rather than a choice$ And what are the political

implications of restricting the demand to a specific group of religious$

The holy fools+ response to the challenge of universal asceticism betrays a more

sophisticated approach to the self+s relation to society than might be e#pected outside the

ecclesiological debate ta*ing place at the time between Augustine and Pelagius) Cn particular(

their practice of humility owes more to their fidelity to the "hristian story than to the political

and utilitarian techni.ues of their secular counterparts) As such( they are acutely aware of the

dangers of ascetic and philosophical accounts of the self that appeal to a momentous identity

that must be defended and ta*en seriously) These problems and issues are addressed in part

three)

All these three .uestions ' concerning norms( *nowledge( and the self+s relation to

society ' are part of a larger investigation6 what role does the asceticism inhabited and

transformed by the holy fools play in the theology and e#perience of holiness of their time$ Cn

order to ma*e sense whilst treating the historical problems of the bac*ground and contribution

of holy fools( C will need to assume an understanding of asceticism) Ct is unavoidable ' and

desirable ' that the understanding of asceticism be transformed by these accounts) Ct is also

necessary to mar* out a starting point)

Cn what follows( C will start by assuming that asceticism is a form of self-training that

encompasses techni.ues of physical regulation what one eats( where one stays( what one

produces and says and rational practice what one thin*s and says( how one feels( when and


20/232

to whom one gives an account of oneself with a view to determining the shape of one+s life)

Cn the conte#t of the "hristian tradition( C am particularly interested in those who aspired to

live a Hphilosophical life+( cultivating virtual and real solitude and practicing spiritual

disciplines such as fasting and regular prayer) This tradition culminates in( but is not restricted

to( the two precedents set by Pachomius who founded monastic institutions of the common

life ' the Hcenobites+ and Anthony who initiated the tradition of "hristian desert hermits '

the Hanchorites+) Ct is to the immediate forerunners of these e)g) 7rigen( "lement and more

importantly their e#plicit successors e)g) the desert fathers and mothers( %asil of "aesarea(


21/232

are ruled out by theology are bound to be selected according to criteria determined by one+s

e#perience of holy renunciation) 1inguistic reference is part of an entire language( and there

are no sections of a language that are entirely segregated from the whole( least of all the

various elements of religious language)

7ne final note on the normativity of the holy fools) !hilst C have focused on these

particular figures out of scholarly affection( C am not attempting here to present them as model

theologians or "hristians) C do not claim to Hhave found( on all essential points( the final

solution of the problems+ of Theology with this thesis)/3Cnstead( the portrayal of asceticism

throughout the wor* attempts to steer between the do#ological view of asceticism that has

become typical of certain Hpoetic+ ethical thin*ers(/:and the un.uestioning critical view that

assumes we *now precisely what is wrong with asceticism without having to state it)

Cn theological terms( this thesis is written under the aegis of the doctrine of creatio e5

ni$ilo) Nothing is assumed to be evil at the outset( but neither is anything unambiguous) umility is a recurring theme in this thesis) Ct is the virtue lying behind the criti.ue of

norms inherent in the foolish re,ection of vainglory in part oneK it drives the positing of

contingency in the criti.ue of *nowledge in part twoK it ultimately becomes problematic as

constituting the relation of the self to society in part three) Ct plays a vital distinguishing role

in the practice of negative theology6 is Bod un*nowable because our *nowledge is faulted or

because ?he is mysterious$/8Ct is the main ob,ective of most of the ascetic techni.ues we shall

spea* of in this study) Ct is also( however( a main ob,ective for techni.ues of governmentality6

that we should *now our tiny and insignificant place in the world) The negotiation of these

difficulties ' between abandoning humility and manipulating itK between espousing it and

enforcing it ' is an ongoing problem solved neither by the holy fools nor by any theory of

asceticism that C have encountered)

The merit of the holy fools is their assertion of contingency in an established ascetic

order) The contemporary relevance of this study of asceticism could be brought out by a study

/3 !ittgenstein( 545L5256 introduction)/:This would apply to anyone wanting to construct their Hlife as a wor* of art+( but C am thin*ing specifically of

Nehamas( 5; McBushin( 2008 71eary( 2002)

/4see 7scar !ilde+s ecstatic appreciation of his prison e#perience in de proundis6 !ilde( 2008L55/)/8This is the theme in Turner+s recent magisterial treatment in Turner( 2003( where he suggests that we shouldnot thin* Bod to e#ist in a banal contained way( but that we have never really understood e#istence)


22/232

of the ways in which we are tempted and re.uired to reflect upon our own training of the self

today( which could include analyses of popular psychology( secular repentance( care

institutions( or national insurances)/;Cn order to see how these disciplines are neither evil nor

unambiguous( though( they will have to appear in their contingency and e#posure to

description) Cn short( their holiness must be ta*en away) Ct is precisely this process ' the

deprivation of the holiness of everyday values ' that the holy fools enable) Not in order to

condemn mon*s( for e#ample( are both ridiculed and commended( but in order to clear a

space for thought( laughter and evaluation) Cn order to see the world as creation6 as divine( but

not Bod)

Ct is in the conte#t of this ambiguity and art that the holy fools have a great deal to say

about contemporary and ancient asceticism( through their infinite demands( their

transcendence of ethics( their laughter( and their moc*ery of heterogeneity) That is the tenor

of my dodgy do#ology)

/;in short( it could include all the devices and domains studied by contemporary governmentality studies C amthin*ing particularly of those inspired by foucauldians "olin Bordon and Ni*olas ose( for which( see %arry( etal)( 54 %urchell( et al)( 55)


23/232

2/

1: Becoming Unnormal

!it( an Ht be thy will( put me into good foolingV Those wits that thin* they have thee(

do very oft prove foolsK and C( that am sure C lac* thee( may pass for a wise manK for

what says Wuinapalus$ H%etter a witty fool than a foolish wit)+5

!hat is the nature of the transgression of holy fools$ At what level is their challenge

to the norms of their ascetic bac*ground pitched$ >ow do they conform to and transform the

tradition of ascetic self-ostracism( and what practices allow this transformation$

Cn this first part( we will address the way in which norms are formed( enforced( and

transgressed in the ascetic conte#t in which holy fools narratives are set) !e will set aside thevarious debates on specific casuistry ' how long a mon* should fast for( how to deal with

persistent family trouble( whether to visit other mon*s ' and focus on attitudes to rulings(

issues of conformity( and the ,udgement of success and failure in ascetic morality) Attention

will in this way not simply be paid to the fact of the transformation of holiness( but its

technology)

Cn order to e#amine norms at such a level( we will first elucidate a prominent mode of

moral action in the asceticism of late anti.uity( namely obedience( and as* how it wastransformed in the tradition of the holy fools) Then we will turn to the minimalist trend in

monasticism( and in particular what was reserved from the ma#im to renounce all received

norms) This will reveal an entire economy of conformity and transcendence regarding ascetic

rules) 9inally( we will address two interpretations of holy fools+ relation to their ascetic

bac*ground( in terms of the casuistry of vainglory itself a mode of relating to moral value(

and the practice of dissociation from self and society)

A note on ascetic sources6 this part will primarily consist in an interpretation of the&pop$t$egmata Patrumcollections) A strange choice( perhaps( because they are famously

unreliable as historical material)2They originated as oral tradition( and we only have te#tual

translations)/They cover an e#tensive period of time at least the length of the fourth century(

and there is substantial evidence of heavy editing on the part of later generations)

5?ha*espeare( 5;6 CC):

2?ee ubenson( 5:6 5; for some reasons for this)/ Cntroduction to the te#tual problems can be found in Buy+s introduction to the Bree* ?ystematic te#ts( in&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:2/-/:( and in "hryssavgis( 200/6 -55 >armless( 20006 3;3-3;4)


24/232

23

Their status in the tradition( however( is unparalleled) 1ater witnesses such as Eosimus

l) 38:-:2:3(fathers %arsanuphius and ohn l) :20-::0$:(ohn Moschus l) :8;-454and

ohannes "limacus :8:-4:08demonstrate the stature of the te#ts in the period of ?ymeon of


25/232

2:

collection(5/and by including cross references in the margin of the te#t itself) There is no such

inde# for the 1atin collection) These factors all ma*e study of these epoch-ma*ing te#ts a

little unwieldy)

Cn order to support my interpretation of the te#ts( C will be referring to four othercategories of material6

5) "assian+s writings( which were written down in 1atin some time after his ,ourneys

in owever( they are so different in form the

>nstitutes14 describe the rule of the desert fathers and the eight temptations of


26/232

24

was based in Palestine( and is largely critical of the anchoritic tradition( 5 with

which he is nevertheless familiar)

3) 1ater interpretation6 the &pop$t$egmata Patrum provided later asceticism with a

touchstone for authentic monasticism in the conte#t of growing multiplicity)201ater

interpreters such as %arsanuphius and ohn(25ohn "limacus(22ohn Moschus and

those he met in his piritual eado0(2/and Eosimus23help us to understand how

the te#ts were applied and interpreted around the time of the holy fools studied here

and their hagiographers)

5e)g) in %asilius( renunt)20As described by


27/232

28

1.1: Negative Obedience

Ct is remar*ably difficult to identify behaviour that would be considered mad in

anti.uity( given that the practices of giving away one+s money( getting na*ed in public( and

living in the desert on one loaf of bread per wee* ' all standard( easily recognisable monastic

tas*s familiar to the "hristian of late anti.uity ' are hardly li*ely to be counted normal in

occidental society todayV There is an element of modern madness in all asceticism)

The problem is not uni.ue to modern secular observers though) Cndeed( the desert

mon*s appear to have seen it as their lot to be considered mad by the world( as their founding

father Anthony the Breat once put it6 HA time is coming when men will go mad( and when

they see someone who is not mad( they will attac* him( saying IQou are mad( you are not li*e

us)J+2: Ct is possible( however( to isolate certain acts that seem to have been recounted to

religious and secular ali*e specifically because of their weirdness) Mon*s did e#treme things

' even those who were not designated holy fools ' for e#treme reasons)

Cn what follows( C will give an outline of the various *inds of strange behaviour

e#hibited amongst early "hristian ascetics before or apart from holy fools( and determine their

motivation) The practice of obedience is the main reason for weird behaviour amongst these


28/232

2;

This is not a particularly subversive transgression( however( as it is a result of practical

reasoning based on accepted norms) The mon* still lives by autonomous ethics rather than

obedience) >e prioritises one rule over another( rather than undermining a set of rules and

rule-ma*ing practices) Ct may seem transgressive( but it is hardly weird6 when another mon*

draws the diametrically opposite conclusion( it stri*es us not as abnormal( but as simply

interesting)28There is a possibility for conversation)

7ther incidents go further( as they brea* laws almost gratuitously) >ere( the form is

clear6 a brother as*s another brother to do something( and the latter does it without

.uestioning the former+s ,udgement for a moment)

Ct was said that Abba ?aios and Abba Moue lived together) Abba ?aios was very obedient( but

he was very rigid) To test him( the old man said to him( HBo and steal)+ Through obedienceAbba ?aios went to steal from the brethren( giving than*s to the 1ord in everything) Abba Moue

too* the things and returned them secretly)2;

Ct is not certain what the tradition thin*s about this particular trend ' the story is

followed immediately in the &pop$t$egmatawith a story of how Abba Moue abandoned

Abba ?aios on the road( fainting from e#haustion( and as*ed the brothers to collect him

Hbecause he is lying there helpless+) Cs the radically obedient mon* helpless$ The point stands

however that transgressive behaviour is recorded as being caused and ,ustified by the

principle of obedience) The principle is to Hobey in everything( even if the matter appears to

you to be sinful+)2This should hopefully rid us of the idea that obedience was a necessarily

normalising force in anti.uity) 7bedience as a discipline is in this case independent of the

moral law or common rule( and sinning against a director is worse than sinning against Bod)/0

The second category( of distorted interpretation( is also recorded as an instance of

obedience) Mon*s go out of their way to agree with the verdict of their companion out of

obedience) This form of obedience can be found both on the part of ,unior mon*s e)g) where

he agrees with his master+s identification of a boar as a deer/5( and on the part of elder

mon*s6

28$. mon.:C)53fK Abba Alonius recommends lying specifically to hide murderers from magistrates6 &pop$. Patr.8alp$9:Alonius 3K an anonymous abba lies for the benefit of a soul &pop$. Patr. 8anon9:2K "limacus discountslying out of prudent motives6 "limacus(scal.:?tep 52)2;&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:?aius 5)

2%arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:2;;) These matters include murder according to letter 45:)/0"limacus(scal.:?tep 3&pop$. Patr. 8anon9:5:;/5&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Mar*( disciple of abba ?ilvanus 2


29/232

2

>e too* the fish( intentionally coo*ed some of it badly( and offered it to the old man who ate it

without saying anything) Then he said to him( HCs it good( old man$+ >e replied( HCt is very

good)+ Afterwards he brought him a little that was well coo*ed and said( H7ld man( C have

spoiled it(+ and he replied( HQes you have spoiled it a little)+ Then Abba Athre said to me( HDo

you see how obedience is intrinsic to the old man$+/2

7bedience for early "hristian ascetics could be associated with control over one+s

understanding and perception of the world) There is even an e#ample of two ascetics who did

not manage to follow this principle( both insisting on their identification of a bird( resulting in

conflict)// Cn "hristian asceticism( obedience e#erted an influence upon *nowledge and

perception)

%y far the most common category of obedient cra&y behaviour( however( is that of thecra?y tas,sgiven by mon*s to teach their disciples) This *ind of story is attested in different

sources6 "assian/3tells of disciples who water a dry stic* ##iv( throw out their supply of oil

##v( and try to move an enormous boulder single-handedly ##viK disciples can put

themselves in great danger at the behest of their spiritual director6

Ct was said of Abba ohn( the disciple of Abba Paul( that his obedience was very great) Now

there were some tombs thereabouts where a hyena lived) The old man saw some dung in the

place( and told ohn to go and fetch it) >e said( HAnd what shall C do about the hyena( abba$+The old man said to him( ,o*ingly( HCf she sets upon you( tie her up and bring her here)+ ?o in the

evening( the brother went there) And lo( the hyena fell upon him) According to the old man+s

instruction( he rushed to catch her) %ut the hyena ran away) >e pursued her saying( HMy abba

says C am to tie you up)+ >e sei&ed her and bound her) Now the old man was uneasy and sat

waiting for him) !hen he returned( he brought the hyena on a rope) !hen the old man saw this

he was filled with wonder( but he wanted to humiliate him( so he struc* him and said( H9ool(

why have you brought a silly dog here$+ Then the old man set her free at once and let her go)/:

At this point( we encounter the entire spread of reasonable and unreasonable

obedience( from the drudgery of serving food to the scandal of throwing one+s child into the

/2&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Pistos 5 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:=)40 O the first part of&pop$. Patr. 8at9:=)3/)"f) also the related story of the father that ate lamp oil given by his foolish disciple in &pop$. Patr. 8anon9:5)The tradition is appreciated in later generations) "f) %arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.: ;32 ' H?trive hard(however( to reach the point of accepting Lthe words of the fathers( even when they tell you that dar*ness islight)+ s.uare brac*ets original)//&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Nicetas 5 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:=CC)//

/3in "assianus( *ollationes:C=)/:&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:ohn( disciple of Abba Paul 5 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:C=): O&pop$. Patr. 8at9:C=)3


30/232

/0

fire from which the father is always saved( in an Abrahamic way/4) The ?ystematic

collections of sayings of the desert fathers have a chapter dedicated to obedience recounting

these tas*s) As we have seen( not all of the desert fathers and mothers restricted themselves to

reasonable re.uests)

The significance of these stories emerges both in their parallels with the behaviour of

the holy fools elaborated below andin the way in which they interrupt the ascetic+s normal

conduct) 7bedience brac*ets the importance of community norms( shared understandings( and

the sense of human limitation) All these factors license a contingent relation to normality and

reason( as well as an openness regarding the very practice of establishing and creating norms)

!hen these parallels are borne in mind( the distinction between holy fools and other

mon*s and nuns of the time is not as great) Cn fact( ?ymeon the holy fool echoes some ofthese stories in his life) The most obvious one is Abba ohn+s hyena story( which resembles

?ymeon+s dRbut in e dragged the dog as he ran and entered the

gate)/8

!e also witness ?ymeon stealing from his employers for no apparent reason) As soon

as he is paid to sell beans for a bean seller on the street( who had been good enough to ta*e

him in( he gave out half of the food( and ate the other half) /;Abba Mar* the holy fool also

steals from the mar*et( distributing his ill-gotten goods to the fools that surround him6 the

holy fools cover the category of transgressive cra&y behaviour e#tensively)/As regards cra&y

interpretation( ?ymeon accepts the accusation that he is responsible for the pregnancy of a

woman who falsely claimed to have been raped by him( and refuses to protest his innocence)30

!hat do these parallels in the contemporary monastic literature tell us about the

behaviour of holy fools$ Cf there is nothing to separate the holy fool from the odd behaviour

of his predecessors( why should we mar* them out as a group$ >aving noted the continuity of

the account( we now need to identify the discontinuity)

The *ey feature that distinguishes these actions from those of previous ascetics is the

lac* of command)


31/232

/5

usually their superiors without .uestioning or ,udging their actions) The holy fools have no

obvious reason to do what they do) Their acts defy the interpretation given to those outlined

above( and the narrator is often reluctant to comment on them himself) "ertainly the story of

the tied up dog has thwarted interpreters eager to see some significance in it)35

Cf we are to characterise the holy fools+ distinctive behaviour as monastic subversion

torn loose from obedience( then this is a brea* from the contemporary ascetic ethos) !e

argued above that obedience was central to all instances of weird behaviour amongst the

desert fathers and mothers) A number of te#ts witness to the priority of obedience above other

virtues generally considered synonymous with the religious life6 continenceK32 self controlK3/

and solitude)33

?o it would seem that a proper understanding of the holy fools will re.uire a properaccount of the practice of obedience in anti.uity) Cn the following( C will outline an approach

to this sub,ect by first clearing the ground of modern problems( and then s*etching out an

interpretation around an unremar*able e#ample of obedience) The analysis will wor* towards

an understanding of the strategy of obedience( and its relationship to practices of dissociation)

1.1.1: Understanding Obedience

7bedience ta*es many forms( and "hristian asceticism has gone cycles of

transformations and re-creations in its two millennium history) The problems arising from the

notion of religious obedience today would not necessarily apply to the practices of the ascetic

communities of the


32/232

/2

?econdly( monastic obedience was not necessarily a virtue connected to a hierarchy)34

7bedience is praised repeatedly in the sayings of the desert fathers( but these stories never

include a bishop) Cn fact( .uite the opposite is true6 bishops are ridiculed and taunted amongst

the desert fathers( and considered failures in humility)38The case is a little more complicated

with reference to the abbaand the disciple and particularly in coenobitic monasticism( 3;

which is clearly a relationship of authority) >owever( the number of stories referring to

obedience on the part of the abba to a disciple cf)over( on page 2( and brothers obeying

wea*er brothers3would lead the reader to believe that obedience is a virtue e#ercised in

relation to people as such( particularly amongst brothers and sisters( and not solely to those in

authority)

Three old men( of whom one had a bad reputation( came one day to Abba Achilles) The firstas*ed him( H9ather( ma*e me a fishing-net)+ HC will not ma*e you one(+ he replied) Then the

second said( H7f your charity ma*e one( so that we may have a souvenir of you in the

monastery+) %ut he said( HC do not have time)+ Then the third one( who had a bad reputation(

said( HMa*e me a fishing net( so that C may have something from your hands( 9ather)+ Abba

Achilles answered him at once( H9or you( C will ma*e one)+:0

Ct is worth emphasising this point about the mobility of the relationship of obedience(

because of the obvious connection it has to a criti.ue of the power inherent in asceticism) 9orsome critical theorists( obedience is the decisive factor that turned liberating anti.ue

philosophy into controlling discipline):5Cf asceticism is a method for producing a group of

docile people:2then the value of obedience becomes a tool of societal control wielded by a

small group) Ct is oligarchy+s plaything)

Now C thin* it would be ingenuous to deny that the relationship between two solitaries

is a power relation as soon as obedience becomes a factor) There are naturally at least two sets

34"lar*( 5;;6 4/: "hryssavgis( 200/6 40( although contrast %asil of "aesarea+s writings on the common life6 HCnoticed that as long as the common obedience of the others to some one leader was maintained( all wasdiscipline and harmony in the whole groupK+ %asilius( ;ud.: Y2K H?ince it is in every way fitting that thecommunity be obedient and under sub,ection to a superior+ %asilius( ascet. 1) This trend dominated the receptionhistory of "hristian asceticism6 %arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:232)38Moschus(prat.:5)3;cf) the references above( in footnote 346 %asil repeatedly uses the Pauline model of obedience to the secularauthority6 %asilius( ascet 2)3e)g) brother Acacius in "limacus(scal.:?tep 3) "f) also %arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:252):0&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Achilles 5 O&pop$. Patr. 8at9:)5; O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:)5;) "f) also&pop$.

Patr. 8at9:C=)58&pop$. Patr. 8anon9:545 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:C=)28):5e)g) in %ernauer( 20026 ( who describes obedience as the essence of fascism p8; McBushin( 20086 54:-548(

582 >unter( 546 5:4 Davidson( 200;):2as it is appropriated to do in the modern prison and asylum systems - cf) 9oucault( 55L58:6 2/;f 9oucault(2004L200/6 583( 23)


33/232

//

of interests( with strategic moves available on both sides) The fact that one commands( and

the other obeys( perhaps against their common sense or will( implies that the power flows in

one direction) >owever( when the strategic moves available to the mon* can include a

reversal of this relationship( the situation gains a game-li*e character) !hat is missing is an

institutional or scientific fi#ing of the definition of Hgovernor+ and Hgoverned+(:/ clearly

identifiable in oligarchies which could be enforced by myths of genealogy or anthropological

myths of race inferiority for e#ample or disciplinary societies which could be enforced by

*nowledge of criminal tendencies or ethico-evolutionary laws) Cn this way( the techni.ue of

obedience in certain desert communities resembles 9oucault+s description of playful ?M

practices in its being unafraid of strategic power and unwilling to espouse techni.ues that

emphasise unidirectional flows and hide the possibility of resistance6

!hat stri*es me with regard to ?M is how it differs from social power) !hat characteri&es

power:3is the fact that it is a strategic relation which has been stabili&ed through institutions) ?o

the mobility in power relations is limited( and there are strongholds that are very( very difficult

to suppress because they have been institutionali&ed and are now very pervasive in courts(

codes( and so on) X 7n this point( the ?M game is very interesting because it is a strategic

relation( but it is always fluid)::

Ct may indeed be true to say that some early "hristians did actually thin* of obedienceto a spiritual guide as a goal in itself( with the latter occupying a similar place to absolute faith

in @ier*egaard+s thought(:4but there is good reason to see the discipline of obedience as a

means to a further end):89or some( obedience can be their rule of life ' .uite independently of

law( or rule( or will - until they die) :;7bedience is sufficient for them) 9or others( obedience

is most important at the beginning of the monastic life(: and can lead to another habit

entirely) Ct is for this reason( then( that we can as* the .uestion6 what role does obedience play

in the desert fathers+ establishment of norms$ Biven that it challenges one set of behaviours(what is its ob,ective and function in positive terms$

:/=eyne( 58L58;6 540):39oucault+s argument only really ma*es sense if this sentence refers to socialpower( and not power in general)The interview was originally in


34/232

/3

A good e#ample of the result of obedience C want to focus on can be seen in the story

of a mon* from ?cythia who came to be guided by one of the old men in the desert) C will give

the aphophthegmaton in full( as we will be going through it step by step6

A brother in ?cetis( on his way to the harvest( approached a great old man and said to him(

HAbba( tell me what to do( for C+m going away to the harvest)+ The old man says to him( HAnd if

C tell you( will you heed me$+ The brother says( HC will obey you)+ obedio tibiS0Akou&sw sou ?o

the old man said to him( HCf you will heed me( rise and ta*e leave of this harvest( then come and

C will command you concerning what you will do)+ And going out( the brother too* leave of the

harvest( and then came to the old man) The old man said to him( HBo into your cell and spend

the ne#t fifty days eating bread with salt once a day( and then C will command you something

else)+ And going out( he spent his days thus( and then he came bac* to the old man) ?o the old

man( seeing that he was a real wor*er LoperariusS@erga/thj( taught him how to sit in his cell)

The brother left for his cell( and there prostrated himself( face to the ground for three days and

three nights( weeping before Bod) And afterwards( when thoughts said to him( HQou have risen(

you have become great(+ he himself Lrestraining the vices of his thoughts( humbly 40brought

forth his defects( saying( HAnd where are all my errors$+ %ut if they again spo*e to him( HQou

have done much that you are unaware of(+ he also spo*e( H%ut C will do service Lleitourgei/a

to Bod( and C believe that he will deal mercifully with me)+ ?o succumbing( the spirits Lof evil

thoughts45revealed themselves to him visibly( saying( H!e have been buffeted by you)+ >e said

to them( H>ow$+ They said to him( HCf we raise you up( you run to humilityK if we humble you(

you return to the heights)+42

Upon being as*ed what the young mon* should do( the old man first elicits a

commitment to obedience) Ct is only once the young mon* has committed himself to

obedience by renouncing wor*( fasting( and showing himself to be devoted to the tas* set him

that the old man then introduces him to the monastic life proper( by e#plaining to him how to

sit4/

in his cell)?itting in one+s cell was the particular activity of the desert ascetics) Ct wor*ed not

simply as a necessity of life( but as a virtuous form of life meant to combat demons and

produce goodness in religious ascetics) Ct is difficult to discover any one ethical code for the

desert fathers and mothers based on their sayings in the&pop$t$egmata Patrum"assian is

40This phrase is only found in the 1atin6 Htemperans vitia cogitationum suarum+)45This specification is only found in the 1atin6 Hmalarum cogitationum+)42My translation from the Bree* of&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:C=)2/( with reference to the 1atin of&pop$. Patr.

8at9:C=)53) The story is also recorded in&pop$. Patr. 8anon9:5:)4/The 1atin Hesse in cella sua+ is a tempting phrase ' Hhow to be in the cell+ ' but it is almost certainly amistranslation6 Hsedere in cella+ is more fre.uently attested in the&pop$. Patr. 8at9)


35/232

/:

another case entirely) !hat they have in common( though( is the practice of sitting in one+s

cell) Cn this story( it constitutes the initiation of the novice into the ways of the desert fathers

and mothers) Cn other stories( it is both an ethical precept43and the boundary mar*er of their

way of life cf) the discussion below( on page :-45)4:

The way this mon* is in his cell is an e#ample of the direction in which obedience is

meant to lead) The young mon* goes down to his cell( lies prostrate on the ground for three

days and three nights weeping( and notably develops a particular relationship to his thoughts)

Presumably as a result of the directions of the old man( the mon* controls his thoughts 1atin6

cogitationesSBree*6 logismoi and his vision 1atin6 conspectus in such a way as to ad,ust

them according to his will) >e is able to choose which of his memories he should remember(

what to have before his eyes)

There are two points to be made about this progression) 9irstly( the final state( in

which the mon* defeats the demons( is not characterised as much by a rule as by a techni.ue)

Ct is a techni.ue of control over one+s thoughts and vision) 7bedience results in a certain

relation to the norms of the self which is structured by the "hristian story( 44 whereby the

mon* can actually ma*e a choice as regards the way he is rather than be a passive receiver of

impressions( visions( etc) ?o we still have no reference to the law( te#t( or common rule(

merely a criti.ue of the sources of the self) As ohannes "limacus has it( in the chapter that

resonates most with the desert fathers of all his steps in the 1adder of Divine Ascent(

Hobedience is self-mistrust up to one+s dying day( in every matter( even the good)+48

The second point to be made is that in the final state( the mon*+s thoughts and visions

are sub,ect to him with the same docility( the same un.uestioning obedience with which he

placed himself in submission to the old man) The obedience has been transferred from an

inter-sub,ective phenomenon into an intra-sub,ective phenomenon) !hat had been a two

person relation has developed into a habit of individual thought) ust as the mon* did what his

spiritual father commanded( his thoughts do what he commands)4;

This latter interpretation of obedience is so counter-intuitive that it will need to be

bac*ed up by more than my e#egesis of one te#t) A factor that argues in its favour is that ideal

43&pop$. Patr. 8at9:CC) O&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Moses 4 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:CC)5)4: H?icut pisces( si tardaverint in sicco( moriunturK ita et monachi tardantes e#tra cellam( aut cum virissaecularibus immorantes( a .uietis proposito revolvuntur+(&pop$. Patr. 8at9:O &pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Anthony50 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:CC)5

44>umility+s basis in the "hristian story is discussed below( on page208)48"limacus(scal.:?tep 3) "f) also %arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:2:/)4;The body can also be obedient6 %arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:5:)


36/232

/4

obedience is praised for being instantaneous) A story that arises in a number of sources4

concerns a disciple called Mar*( who is called upon by an abbawhilst he is wor*ing on a

manuscript) The proof of his obedience is evidenced by the fact that Mar* did not complete

the letter H7+ before running to appear before the old man) ?o the old man+s love for him on

account of his obedience is vindicated by Mar*+s immediate response to his voice)80

7bedience is internalised as a virtue( and mon*s are encouraged to be with themselves

in solitude as their spiritual guides were with them in community) 85Cf this is the case( we

might e#pect the forms of cra&y obedience mentioned over on page 2; also to be

internalised( and certainly as regards cra&y interpretation( we see this result6 mon*s e#ert a

freedom of choice as regards what they see and hear6

Then Abba Abraham said to him( HCf you were to find a woman lying on your mat when you

entered your cell would you thin* that it is not a woman$+ HNo(+ he replied( H%ut C should

struggle against my thoughts so as not to touch her)+ Then Abba Abraham said( HThen you have

not destroyed the passion( but it still lives in you although it is controlled)+82

1.1.2: Political Obedience

To go even further in our interpretation of obedience( attention must be drawn to the

victory achieved by ascetics in their cells) Cn the instance mentioned overon page /3 the

mon* from ?cythia defeated demons( who had tried to change his attitude towards the world

through bringing certain of his thoughts to his attention) >ere it should be noted that although

the demons are obviously independent agents( it was the mon*+s own thoughts that were the

ob,ect of suspicion) The demons were not attac*ing the body( but the mon*+s own mind( his

relation to his self( his form of life) 8/Ct is in this way that it ma*es sense to spea* of spiritual

battle6 in the attempt to gain mastery over one+s thought( ta*ing it bac* from e#ternal

influences in the world) The assertion of this *ind of obedience is the struggle for agency and

self-determination)

7bedience towards one+s direction or director is considered no more an act of

submission than disobedience is)


37/232

/8

chosen by the demon( or society( or tradition cf) the .uote by Pierre >adot( under( on page

/)


38/232

/;

having or not having an influence upon one+s obedience) %ob Dylan was therefore describing

ancient society as well as his own time when he wrote6

Might li*e to wear cotton( might li*e to wear sil*(

Might li*e to drin* whis*ey( might li*e to drin* mil*(

Qou might li*e to eat caviar( you might li*e to eat bread(

Qou may be sleeping on the floor( sleeping in a *ing-si&ed bed

%ut youre gonna have to serve somebody( yes indeed

Qoure gonna have to serve somebody(

!ell( it may be the devil or it may be the 1ord

%ut youre gonna have to serve somebody);5

The deployment of asceticism in late anti.uity did involve wor* upon norms of

behaviour( and ta*ing control of one+s obedience was a first step in becoming free from the

forms of being in the world necessary for urban citi&en participation) ?o obedience is not ,ust

a matter of conforming one+s will to something( but also tearing it loose from another order(

as >erbert Mc"abe has pointed out6

our obedience( our solidarity with the community( is the way in which we find oursel"es)

7bedience for us is not a denial of self but a discovery of self) 9or ' to say it again ' obedience

is not the suppression of our will in favour of someone else+s( it is learning to live in

community( in solidarity( which is simply learning to live) 7f course to discover yourself is to

unlearn as well as to learnK it is to abandon a notion of yourself that you had before in favour of

a new and deeper one);2

The notion of obedience ' which would later be a touchstone of good citi&enship;/'was in anti.uity a tool of sanctification( setting a life apart from the ways of the ma,ority)

Although this sounds very religious both in the modern and in the traditional sense( the very

point of most philosophical disciplines in late anti.uity ' li*e e#amining one+s thoughts(

being vigilant( and calling principles to mind ' was to aristocratically separate oneself from

common suppositions and attitudes) This necessarily involved a certain amount of ostracising

;5Dylan( 58) "f) also %arsanuphius+ contrast of "hristian grace to human rule in %arsanuphius and Cohannes(

resp.:2/);2Mc"abe( 2000L5;86 2/5);/"f) the value of Hpassive obedience+ in %er*eley( 5:/L5852 and Mill( 5L5;:6 CC)


39/232

/

society( as opinions and preconceptions are the building bloc*s of common life);3 Cn this

respect( far from being the tool of conformity to the law( enforcing normal standards with

military discipline( obedience was a philosophical techni.ue naturally growing out of Plato+s

wor*( re,ecting as it does the preconceptions and insecure opinions of the masses) "onsider

the following passage from is father died( and his mother6 he was cut off by an untimely death( whilst abroad)+

>ear the opposing analyses( tear yourself away from those voices( oppose one form of life with

another);4

e also tal*s about dealing with distress(

uncertainty( and scepticism( and the mental actions to be ta*en against them) This *ind of

attitude has recently been argued ' by the li*es of Pierre >adot( Ale#ander Nehamas( and

Paul abbow ' to constitute the essence of ancient philosophy( from ?ocrates to Plotinus);8

The action e#horted by this *ind of ancient philosophy involves ta*ing control of one+s

attitudes in an act of self mastery( and separating oneself from the attitudes that present

themselves in those around one)

Ct is precisely for this that spiritual e#ercises are intended) Their goal is a *ind of self-formation(

or paideia( which is to teach us to live( not in conformity with human pre,udices and social

conventions ' for social life is itself a product of the passions ' but in conformity with the

nature of man( which is none other than reason) adot( 2002L5: Nehamas( 5; abbow( 5:3);;>adot( 5:6 502 - cf) also "lar*( 5;;6 4/2( 4/:)


40/232

30

recommendation of widows staying single and young women remaining virgins provo*ed

comment( and indeed anger directed at early "hristian communities);The entire movement of

early "hristian asceticism was one of revolt and independence from society at large) Monastic

communities bro*e away from secular groups both physically and spiritually) Physically(

because they retreated to the desert and communities outside the cityK spiritually( because they

problematised the configuration of their relationship to their body( perceptions( thoughts( and

language)

This brea* epitomises the behaviour of the holy fool) After ?ymeon had spent a

number of years in the desert( fasting( praying( and through silence separating himself from

all earthly bonds( he decided to return to the city in order to Hmoc* the world+ e)mpaizw' to

ridicule( ma*e dance( ma*e fun of) >e and ohn had already spent a good deal of time and

attention in tearing themselves away from their families( not least their female dependents)

Now ?ymeon decided to engage with the world( through consciously ma*ing an effort to be

contrary to it)

1.1.3: Foolery as Religious Emancipation

Cn 1eontius+ narrative( the life of ?ymeon is punctuated by ruptures in ?ymeon+s life(

as he steadily forsa*es more and more of the world) 9irst he leaves his career and normal life

by adopting coenobitic monasticism) Then he abandons the common life of the monastery for

the desert) Cn the desert( he abandons his family( both in terms of obligation and emotionally)

9inally( he abandons the solitude of the desert and embraces the city) This final step can be

interpreted as an ascetic move against asceticism( as he forsa*es the outer trappings of the

religious life including obedience to a spiritual father or brother( whilst internalising them)

>is vocation is an ethical move of abandoning the vainglory of religion and constructing an

internal solitude cf) under(on page 8/)

H%eware( be on your guard( brother ?ymeon( unless as the desert gathered together( the world

dispersesK and as silence helped( commotion hindersK and as much as *eeping watch brought(

you lose through sleep) %e on your guard( brother( lest the delusion of worldly things corrupt the

prudence of the monastic life) %eware( lest the fruit from the privation of women( from whom

Bod has saved you until today( be destroyed by spending time with them) %eware( lest the love

of possessions carry off poverty( lest foods fatten the body( which fasting had melted away)

%eware( brother( lest you lose your compunction through laughter and your prayer through your

carelessness) %eware( please( lest when your face laughs( your mind be dissolvedK lest when;%rown( 5;;6 ch) 5)


41/232

35

your hands fondle( your soul fondles as wellK lest when your mouth eats( your heart eats as wellK

lest when your feet wal*( your inner silence dances along rec*lesslyK and to spea* concisely( lest

as much as the body does outwardly( the soul does inwardly) %ut if L533 you receive strength

entirely from Bod( brother( so that whatever the forms( or words( or actions the body ma*es(

your mind and your heart remain unmoved and untroubled and in no way are defiled or harmed

by them( truly C re,oice in your salvationX+0

The behaviour of the holy fool can be seen in continuity with the asceticism of the

time6 that much has been demonstrated before)5Moreover( it has to be seen in such a conte#t)

Cf it is not narrated as a form of late anti.ue or early medieval asceticism( then there is no

sense in which they are holy fools6 they are simply fools) Their holiness consists in their

conformity with the values that they at least apparently re,ect) This is the challenge faced by

their hagiographers) The challenge to interpretation is to give an account of both the foolish

element and the recognition of holiness therein)

!e should understand ?ymeon+s foolery as a step in asceticism( away from the

specific relationships of asceticism) ?o for e#ample( late anti.ue mon*s restrict their eating by

fasting and table fellowship at wee*ends with the eucharist( and in doing so separate

themselves from the eating habits of their society)2Cnstead of eating together with family and

friends( two or three times per day( food bought from the mar*et( priced according to its taste

and nourishment( they deliberately ate alone( once a day or less( food which had no taste and

was not especially nourishing( or with their spiritual family gathered around a ritual of

remembrance) Practices obviously varied( but moderation was the rule( and the aim of the

asceticism appeared to be to become acutely aware of Hwhere you are and what you want+)/

!hen ?ymeon comes to town( he also separated himself from the eating habits of his

society( but in a completely different way) >e is also in control of his desire for food having

fasted in secret for a wee* before this incident( but he demonstrates this control by eating

insatiably in the street not at a table) >e eats superhuman amounts of lupines( on the street(

whilst giving out all the goods he has been employed to sell)3This is a form of asceticism(

but not the form recognisable at the time)

01eontius( ". ym.:CCC)53/f)5cf) on page 2( and Borainoff( 5;/6 chapter 5 Cvanov( 2004L536 chapter 5 @rueger( 546 chapter /)2Palladius( $. aus.:=CCC)2)/%arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:3 >ence the practice of eating a little every day so as to avoid gluttonouslyending the period of fasting &pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Agathon 20( and eating a great deal if re.uired by hospitality

&pop$. Patr. 8at9:CCC)/ O&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:"assian / O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:CCC)/ "assianus( deinstitutis:=)2:)31eontius( ". ym.:C=)534)


42/232

32

?ymeon brea*s away from contemporary forms of gender relations in a similar way)

"ontemporary mon*s would ' instead of supporting their mothers and pursuing their women

contemporaries ' flee from women in order to be alone with other men) %oth mothers and

wives were dangerous because they placed the mon* within a natural family rather than in the

family of Bod ' they were a sign of worldliness): This *ind of behaviour radically

undermined the political unit of the household( and male leadership of women( who were

proof of his honour and virility)

?ymeon transgresses the forms of life of the time( but not in order to embrace a new

community of asceticism) >e openly befriends prostitutes( for e#ample( and demands fidelity

of them)4>onest women in church( on the other hand( he pelts with nuts) ?imilarly( he sits

loose to gender mar*ers6 whilst those in the city had two sets of baths for the se#es( and those

in the desert did not even allow that degree of sharing( ?ymeon deliberately goes into the

wrong bath area) And all this he accomplishes on account of his severe asceticism( through

e#erting power over his self and controlling his actions) After this last episode( for e#ample(

his confidant( Deacon ohn( as*s him6

H9or Bod+s sa*e( father( how did you feel when you entered into the women+s bath$+ >e said(

H%elieve me( child( ,ust as a piece of wood goes with other pieces of wood( thus was C there) 9or

C felt neither that C had a body nor that C had entered among bodies( but the whole of my mindwas on Bod+s wor*( and C did not part from >im)+8

This is the case in many of the mar*ers of asceticism at the time6 "assian goes to great

lengths to describe the attire of the desert mon*s( that separate them out from the society of

their time(;but ?ymeon puts all his clothes on his headKmon*s stay silent for months out of

fear of accidentally saying something wrong500' Agathon *ept a stone in his mouth for three

years in order not to say anything505' but ?ymeon babbles away li*e one possessedK502 the

desert fathers wor* hard in their cell to earn their *eep by ma*ing ropes( whereas ?ymeon

:%rown( 5856 2)41eontius( ". ym.:C=)5:4)81eontius( ". ym.:C=)53) The Daniel of ?cetis hagiography( which is deeply mar*ed by the holy fool ethosincluding in its corpus the story of abba Mar* the fool( includes two stories of cross-dressing ascetics6Athanasia who pretended to be a man( and Anastasia who pretended to be a eunuch) ". dan. scet.:8 and ;)Another is described in Moschus(prat.:580);"assianus( de institutis:boo* C - cf) also Palladius( $. aus.:CC)1eontius( ". ym.:C=)53;)500cf) the e#hortations to silence in %arsanuphius and Cohannes( resp.:28( 2;/ et passim( Moschus(prat.:48(

5:4( 5;8)505&pop$. Patr. 8at9:C=)8 O&pop$. Patr. 87,. syst.9:C=)8 O&pop$. Patr. 8alp$9:Agathon 5:)5021eontius( ". ym.:C=)5::)


43/232

3/

wanders the streets dancing( playing( begging( and gallivanting with prostitutesK50/"hristians

mar* time by following the liturgy of holy wee* with fasting and prayer( but ?ymeon gorges

himself with ca*es on >oly Thursday)503All this he is enabled to do by the freedom he attains

by his spiritual e#ercise6

!hen Lohn saw him on >oly Thursday sitting in the ca*e shop having eaten since early

morning( he said to him( H>ow much does it cost( 9ool$+ And he said to him( holding forty

noumia in his hand( H>ere+s my follis( stupid(+ showing that he was eating after forty days of

fasting)50:

Ct is through these ascetic disciplines of transgression( through his obedience cut loose

from community( sitting loose to the necessities of society and the traditions of anti-social

religious life( that ?ymeon the holy fool attempts to separate himself from the necessity of the

forms of life presented to him in the city and in the desert) >e removes himself from both of

them by moc*ery( discipline( and obeying the voice from nowhere) As such( his practice

represents a thoroughgoing development of "hristian asceticism( understood as a practice of

freedom and a re,ection of history+s necessity)

50/1eontius( ". ym.:C=)5:4)5031eontius( ". ym.:C=)5:4f)50:1eontius( ". ym.:C=(5:8)


44/232

33

1.: !ooler" and negations: t#e s#a$e of ascetic re%ection

>oly fools deny the constructive elements of early "hristian asceticism( including

their theology and practices of holiness) %ut given the e#treme renunciation that characterises

the asceticism of their time( the .uestion arises6 what e#actly is being denied here$ And if

their spiritual practice denies the Bod-reference of asceticism( what holiness or theology is

left them$

The prior .uestion( then( is what grounds have we for giving a theological

interpretation to the early "hristian ascetics( when those most clearly mar*ed out by their

ascetic practice do not appear to have written theological treatises$


45/232

3:

This new inspiration is not seen only at moments of conversion( however) Ascetics are

e#tremely suspicious of Plato( however much he is wor*ed into the Theology of the age) 50;

?imilarly( the %ible becomes an integral part of their way of life) 50Although it is difficult to

gauge the importance of e#egetical debate in monastic communities( 550 the sayings of the

fathers and mothers are peppered with .uotations from the ?criptures)

The %ible is also the basis of the liturgy at the time) Again it is often forgotten that

early "hristian ascetics followed a liturgy)555 9ar from being grouchy hermits immersed in

their own thoughts( their days and wee*s were punctuated by gatherings for the celebration of

the eucharist with psalms and prayers thesyna5is) They also *ept to a cycle of psalms)

These things set ancient "hristian ascetics apart from the philosophers of the time)

Although it was common practice( for e#ample( to memorise phrases and .uotations so thatthey were to hand when needed Diogenes 1aertius552represents a collection of these( and


46/232

34

This form of humility and faith is simply not to be found among ancient

philosophers)554The values behind most spiritual e#ercises appear to be freedom as we have

e#plained above( and release from suffering) ?o


47/232

38

!hen his death drew near( the brethren saw him weeping and they said to him HTruly( 9ather(

are you also afraid$+ HCndeed(+ he answered them( Hthe fear which is mine at this hour has been

with me ever since C became a mon*)+55

"omparing "icero+s frame of mind with Arsenius( we can see that whilst the former+sspiritual e#ercise was intended to eliminate sadness( fear( and humility( the latter+s

consideration of death actually provo*ed it) !hilst "icero+s writings inspire confidence( those

of the desert fathers undermine all confidence in one+s own righteousness( and pre-empt the

,udgement of Bod by blaming themselves for their sins)520

Mistrust in one+s own good deeds diverts trust towards the mercy of Bod) The ancient

"hristian ascetic could never be sure that she had done right( but could still trust in the mercy

of Bod6 HC shall have no confidence until C meet Bod)+525

This again results in the practice ofhumility and trust( as outlined in the story of obedience cf) over(on page /36 C am neither

confident nor condemned) >owever( the practice of blaming oneself is to be found throughout

the "hristian tradition of asceticism in late anti.uity)522

Ct is in these ways that( although we can see clear lines of continuity between ancient

philosophical and early "hristian asceticism( providing an account of these latter that left out

theological considerations would lead to substantial lacunae) Cndeed( the continuity can also

be seen in precisely those areas where C have pointed out essential discontinuity ' ?toicavoidance of sadness must have influenced "hristian accounts of the sin of listnessness

Haccidie+( and "hristian values of humility gained in sophistication through contemporary

philosophical debate on the attainability of the sage and the good life ' but the practices of

thought( together with the forms of elaboration and e#planation( had irreversibly ac.uired a

vital reference to

Documents

Andrew Thomas the Holy Fools - A Theological Enquiry Ph.D. Thesis, 2009 2009