Folia Canonica 5. (2002)

STUDIES - W. Becket Soule: Hermits in Current Eastern Catholic Legislation; CCEO cc. 481-485

152

W. BECKET SOULE

fornis of eremiticism in imitation of the ancient and authentic tradition, and these new forms may even be practiced by members of non-monastic institutes of consecrated life (c. 570).

The solitary spirit of eremiticism, with the desire for union with God through prayer, penance and separation from other people, was deeply felt in the ancient Eastern church. It is clear that the eremitic life preceded the cenobitic life by some years, and accompanied it and continued to be practiced alongside it, notwithstanding the preference of Saint Basil and other fathers for the cenobitic life.11 The first maj or figures and advocates of the eremitical life were Saint Antony (250 - 356) and Saint Paul of the Desert (c. 230 — 342); this life was spread throughout the East, and was understood as the fruit of the evangelical counsels sown by Christ and found expression in various forms.12

Among the Armenians, the eremitical life became joined to the cenobitic life, since there were numerous monasteries of cenobites which had, in addition to the cenobitic monks, cells of solitaries or hermits as well.13

A slightly modified form of the eremitical life was the lavra (or skete), formed as a colony of solitaries. Although they dwelt alone in a cave or hut during the week, on Saturday they gathered at the lavra in the church to celebrate the liturgy, returning on Sunday evening to their own cells.14

The Council in Trullo (691) promulgated some norms for the practice of the eremitical life. Canon 41 of that council declared that the prospective hermit should spend three years of study in a monastery community before taking up the

The canons of Postquam Apostolicis remained in effect (with two significant modifications) from 21 November 1952 until the entry into force of the current CCEO in 1991.

1 “I consider that life passed in company with a number of persons in the same habitation is more advantageous in many respects. My reasons are, first, that no one of us is self-sufficient as regard bodily necessities, but we require one another’s aid in supplying our needs. ... But a life passed in solitude is concerned only with the private service of individual needs. This is openly opposed to the law of love which the Apostle fulfilled, who sought not what was profitable to himself but to many that they might be saved. Furthermore, a person living in solitary retirement will not readily discern his own defects, since he has no one to admonish and correct him with mildness and compassion.” S. Basil, Regula fusius tractata, n. 7, PG 31,928-931; Eng. trans. M. Wagner, Saint Basil: Ascetical Works (Fathers of the Church Series 9) New York 1950, 248. Cf. T. SPIDLÍK, The Spirituality of the Christian East. CS 79, Kalamazoo, 1986, 214.

12 For the Syrians, see E. Beck, Ascétisme et Monachisme chez S. Ephrem, in L’Orient Syrien 3 (1958) 273-298. Cf. SPIDLÍK, The Spirituality (nt. 11), 211-213; Id., Les eremites en Orient in Dictionnaire d'histoire et géographie ecclesiastique, Paris, 1963 vol. XV, 766-771.

13 G. Amaduni, Le rôle historique des Hieromoines arméniens, (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 153), Rome, 1948, 284, 298-300.

14 SPIDLÍK, The Spirituality (nt. 11), 213; L. Brehier, Le monde byzantin. II. Les Institutions de l’Empire Byzantin, Paris, 1949, 530-531.