“I Wish I Could Always Weep Like That”

Abba Poemen and Mary at the Cross:

On the Origins of Byzantine Devotion to the Mother of God
Forthcoming in Niki Tsironis, ed., Lament as Performance in Byzantium
(London and New York: Routledge)

Fr. Maximos Constas

Introduction
Scholarly interest in the history of devotion to the Mother of God has grown
exponentially over the last few decades.1 Though the secondary literature is as diverse
as it is extensive, there has been considerable focus on the large body of texts and
images representing Mary’s sorrowful response to Christ’s suffering and death on the
cross, an event which is central to Christian theology and liturgy. Within this focus,
the theme of the Virgin’s lament has proven to be an especially fruitful area of
scholarly study, a discourse which in many ways can trace its point of origin to
Margaret Alexiou’s groundbreaking study on Greek ritual lament originally published
in 1974.2

The historical development of the Virgin’s lament is intertwined with evolving forms
of Greek Christian liturgical piety, which scholars, using terminology imported from
the study of medieval literature, describe as “affective piety” or “affective
spirituality,” that is, highly emotional forms of devotion often associated with the
Mother of God standing at the cross at the time of the Passion.3 Though emblematic
of the later medieval Stabat Mater tradition, and popularized through the musical
settings of Palestrina and Vivaldi, so-called affective Marian piety has its roots in the
Byzantine world, and is a potentially promising subject for the comparative study of
Byzantine and Medieval liturgy and spirituality.

The initial flowering of this tradition took place in the middle Byzantine period (ca.
843-1204), when the new piety emerged as a central component in the iconophile
response to Iconoclasm, a phenomenon that art historians have studied at length.4
Heightened attention to the Virgin’s suffering at the time of the Passion is also
evident in a number of contemporary Marian texts, including the Life of the Virgin by
1
For an overview, see Averil Cameron’s introduction to The Cult of the Mother of God in
Byzantium: Texts and Images, ed. Leslie Brubaker and Mary B. Cunningham (Ashgate: Farnham,
2011), 1-5.
2
Margaret Alexiou, Ritual, Religion, and Art: The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition, 2nd ed.
(Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002). Alexiou’s treatment of the Virgin’s lament, though
pioneering, was necessarily limited by the scope of her study; but see also her article, “The Lament of
the Virgin in Byzantine Literature and Modern Greek Folk-Song,” Byzantine and Modern Greek
Studies 1 (1975): 111-40.
3
See Sarah McNamer, Affective Meditation and the Invention of Medieval Compassion
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010).
4
See, for example, Niki Tsironis, “The Mother of God in the Iconoclastic Controversy,” in
Mother of God: Representations of the Virgin in Byzantine Art, ed. Maria Vassilaki (Milan: Skira,
2000), 27-39; 453-63; Kathleen Corrigan, “Text and Image on an Icon of the Crucifixion at Mount
Sinai,” in The Sacred Image East and West, ed. Robert Ousterhout and Leslie Brubaker (Urbana-
Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1994), 45-62; and Maximos Constas, “Poetry and Painting in
the Middle Byzantine Period: A Bilateral Icon from Kastoria and the Stavrotheotokia of Joseph the
Hymnographer,” in Viewing Greece: Cultural and Political Agency in the Medieval and Early Modern
Mediterranean, ed. Sharon Gerstel (Turnhout: Brepols, 2016), 12-32.
 2

Epiphanius the Monk (written ca. 783-813), the ninth-century sermons of George of
Nikomedia (active after ca. 860), the tenth-century Life of the Virgin by Symeon
Metaphrastes (d. ca. 1000), the Life of the Virgin by John Geometres (ca. 935/40-
1000), and the Life of the Virgin mistakenly attributed to the seventh-century writer
Maximus the Confessor.5 The latter was almost certainly written, not in the seventh
century, but in the middle Byzantine period, in proximity to the works mentioned
above, all of which share a large number of common elements. Despite recent
attempts to ascribe the Life to Maximos Confessor, patristic scholars have been
reluctant to accept the attribution, and the seventh-century dating has not found wide
acceptance.6

Earlier centuries, by comparison, showed comparatively little interest in affective

forms of Marian piety, and in general portrayed the Virgin as a highly stylized figure
detached from emotions, devoid of any sentimentality, and functioning more as a
doctrinal cipher (the “Theotokos” of the Council of Ephesus) than a compassionate
and sorrowful mother. 7 As is well known, the poetical works of Romanos the
Melodist, a sixth-century hymnographer, stand out as an exception to this rule,
anticipating the lyrical developments of later periods.8

This paper, which aims to contribute to the ongoing study of the history of Byzantine
devotion to the Mother of God, considers a fascinating passage from the
Apophthegmata Patrum or Sayings of the Desert Fathers. The saying in question has
been noted by specialists in the literature of early Egyptian monasticism, but in
general has escaped the attention of scholars interested in the history of the cult of the
Virgin in the patristic and Byzantine periods. The saying belongs to Abba Poemen, a
Desert Father who flourished in the late fourth to mid-fifth centuries, and concerns a
vision of the Mother of God at the Cross.

The saying is remarkable for several reasons. First, it is generally believed that the
Apophthegmata as a whole studiously avoids mentioning the Mother of God.
Poemen’s saying obviously challenges such a view. As we shall see, the saying not
only provides us with one the earliest examples of what can reasonably be called
affective Marian piety, but it is also an early evocation of Mary as a model for
monastic virtue, inasmuch as Poemen wishes to transpose Mary’s sorrow at the cross

5
For discussion, see Mary B. Cunningham, “The Life of the Virgin Mary according to Middle
Byzantine Preachers and Hagiographers: Changing Contexts and Perspectives,” Apocrypha 27 (2016):
137-59; and Maximos Constas, “The Story of an Edition: John Geometres, The Life of the Virgin
Mary,” in The Reception of the Mother of God in Byzantium: Marian Narratives in Texts and Images,
ed. Thomas Arentzen and Mary B. Cunningham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
forthcoming).
6
On this question, see Phil Booth, “On the Life of the Virgin Attributed to Maximus the
Confessor,” Journal of Theological Studies 66 (2015): 149-203.
7
See Ioli Kalavrezou, “Images of the Mother: When the Virgin Mary Became Meter Theou,”
Dumbarton Oaks Papers 44 (1990): 165-172.
8
But see Kristina Alveteg, “In Silence We Speak: Romanos Melodos and Mary at the Cross,”
Studia Patristica 42 (2006): 279-84, who demonstrates that emotional states are presented by Romanos
not for their own sake, but rather to be sublimated in a movement toward contemplation and silence.
See also Mary Cunningham, “The Reception of Romanos in Middle Byzantine Homiletics and
Hymnography,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 62 (2008): 251-60; Thomas Arentzen, The Virgin in Song:
Mary in the Poetry of Romanos (Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017); and Sarah
Gador-Whyte, Theology and Poetry in Early Byzantium: The Kontakia of Romanos the Melodist
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017).
 3

into a way of life. Second, Poemen’s vision of Mary occurs in a moment of “ecstasy,”
which tells us something important about the experiential context in which early
devotion to the Mother of God emerged. Unfortunately, historical and sociological
studies of the Apophthegmata tend to neglect the ecstatic, visionary, and supernatural
experiences the work describes, though these were obviously important to the Desert
Fathers themselves, for whom they were natural and expected.9 Finally, it is also
remarkable that Poemen’s saying, apart from any didactic purpose it may have had, is
the disclosure of a deeply personal experience. Such disclosures are relatively rare in
the Apophthegmata, and when they do occur they exhibit a strong reluctance to speak
of ecstatic or visionary experiences.10

The saying under consideration, then, presents a number of intriguing features that
will be considered below. To anticipate my conclusions, I argue that Poemen is drawn
to the Mother of God, and seeks to imitate her weeping, based on two motivating
factors that are closely intertwined: his signature interest in the monastic virtues of
mourning and compunction (πένθος), and his sustained, prayerful meditation on a
passage of sacred Scripture. We can safely assume that the passage in question was
John 19:25, which alone tells us that, at the time of the Passion: “The mother of Jesus
was standing by the cross.” Before proceeding, it will be helpful to cite the saying in
question:

Abba Joseph related that Abba Isaac said, “I was sitting with Abba Poemen
one day and I saw him in ecstasy, and since I was on terms of great freedom of
speech with him, I prostrated myself before him and begged him,” saying,
“Tell me where you were.” He was forced to answer and he said, “My thought
was there with Saint Mary, the Mother of God, as she stood and wept by the
cross of the Saviour. I wish I could always weep like that.”11

Διηγήσατο ὁ ἀββᾶς Ἰωσὴφ, ὅτι εἶπεν ὁ ἀββᾶς Ἰσαὰκ, ὅτι Ἐκαθήµην ποτὲ πρὸς
τὸν ἀββᾶν Ποιµένα· καὶ εἶδον αὐτὸν ἐν ἐκστάσει γενόµενον· καὶ ἐπειδὴ εἶχον
πρὸς αὐτὸν πολλὴν παῤῥησίαν, ἔβαλον αὐτῷ µετάνοιαν, καὶ παρεκάλεσα
αὐτὸν, λέγων· Εἰπέ µοι, ποῦ ἦς; Ὁ δὲ ἀναγκασθεὶς εἶπεν· Ὁ ἐµὸς λογισµὸς,
ὅπου ἡ ἁγία Μαρία ἡ Θεοτόκος ἕστηκε, καὶ ἔκλαιεν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ τοῦ
Σωτῆρος· καὶ ἐγὼ ἤθελον πάντοτε οὕτως κλαίειν.12

In what follows, I begin my study of this passage with a brief biographical sketch of
Abba Poemen, after which I consider a number of parallel Marian texts from the
Apophthegmata and related literature. I then turn to an analysis of Poemen’s
“ecstatic” experience, which I examine in light of similar experiences described in the

9
This reflects the view that the Apophthegmata is essentially a collection of picturesque tales
of rural peasants purveying a kind of primitive folk wisdom, unconcerned with, and indeed suspicious
of, visions and mystical experiences. However, such an anti-theological reading is demonstrably false,
ignoring, among other things, the influence of Origen and Evagrius, and can easily be refuted by a
perusal of the contents.
10
As noted by Graham Gould, The Desert Fathers on Monastic Community (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1993), 180-81, who cites the saying by Poemen among his examples.
11
English translation slightly modified from Benedicta Ward, The Sayings of the Desert
Fathers. The Alphabetical Collection (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1984), 187, no. 144.
12
PG 65:357B. This saying was also included, in slightly simplified form, in the Systematic
Collection, under the thematic heading of “Compunction” (κατάνυξις), and is available in a modern
critical edition (SC 387, p. 166, no. 31).
 4

collection. The study concludes with a discussion of Poemen’s interest in

compunctive weeping, and the role played by the prayerful contemplation of
Scripture, which I believe is the key to understanding Poemen’s experience and the
nature of his devotion to the Mother of God.

Abba Poemen
Abba Poemen (ca. 340-450) is rightly recognized as one of the greatest of the
Egyptian Desert Fathers, and has been called the “hero of the Apophthegmata.”13 A
much sought-after spiritual guide and teacher, he is the most frequently cited father in
the Apophthegmata, surpassing even Anthony the Great. Altogether Poemen is
survived by more than 200 sayings, which comprise roughly a fourth of the entire
collection.14 Despite the abundance of this material, we know little about his life, but
are fairly well informed about his thought and activity as a monk and spiritual teacher.
One biographical detail seems clear: Poemen was the leader of the last generation of
Desert Fathers when, in 407, a tribe of barbarian raiders devastated the monastic
settlement of Scetis, which had been founded a century earlier by Macarius the
Egyptian, and was one of the greatest monastic centers in the entire Christian world.
The destruction of Scetis forced the survivors to flee first to other points along the
Nile, and ultimately to Palestine.15

The disruption and resulting diaspora created the need to collect and write down the
stories and sayings of the earlier desert monks. What eventually became known as the
Apophthegmata Patrum (or the Gerontikon or Paterikon) was shaped and organized
by Poemen and his circle, who succeeded in creating not only a new literary genre but
also one of classic texts of monastic spirituality: The Sayings of the Desert Fathers
(often referred to as the “Alphabetic Collection”). It is a collection of more than 1000
sayings or brief narratives recording the words and activities of 130 prominent monks,
ascetics, and solitaries, arranged in alphabetical order of their names. Many of these
same sayings and stories are contained in a “Systematic Collection” (in which the
sayings are arranged by theme or topic), together with new and/or anonymous
material, comprising around 1200 items, along with a smaller “Anonymous
Collection” of sayings. As stated a moment ago, nearly one quarter of the sayings in
the Alphabetic Collection is comprised of sayings or stories about Poemen, who is
clearly the most prominent personage in the entire work.16

13
Jeremy Driscoll, “Exegetical Procedures in the Desert Monk Poemen,” Mysterium Christi:
Symbolgegenwart und theologische Bedeutung. Festschrift für Basil Studer, ed. M. Löhrer and E.
Salman, Studia Anselmiana 116 (Rome: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 1995), 156; reprinted in id.,
Steps to Spiritual Perfection: Studies on Spiritual Progress in Evagrius Ponticus (New York/Mahwah:
The Newman Press, 2005), 123-24.
14
See Jean-Claude Guy, Les Apophthegemes des pères: Collection systématique, chapitres 1-
IX, Sources Chrétiennes 387 (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1993), 77-79, who gives the following
figures for Poemen: more than 200 sayings from the alphabetical collection; 16 unique sayings from
the systematic collection; 21 additional sayings from subsequent collections; and 25 mentions in other
sayings where he is not the primary speaker.
15
See William Harmless, “Remembering Poemen Remembering: The Desert Fathers and the
Spirituality of Memory,” Church History 69 (2000): 483-84, who cites the earlier bibliography; and id.,
Desert Christians: An Introduction to the Literature of Early Monasticism (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2004), 204-15.
16
Harmless, “Remembering Poemen,” 484-486; and id., Desert Christians, 169-73, is helpful
in sorting out this complex body of literature; see also Gould, Desert Fathers, 1-25; and Douglas
Burton-Christie, The Word in the Desert: Scripture and the Quest for Holiness in Early Christian
 5

Abba Poemen, the Mother of God, and the Apophthegmata

Poemen was by all accounts a charismatic and influential spiritual teacher, and
representative of the mainstream tradition. This, together with the critical role of his
“school” in compiling the Apophthegmata, make it unlikely that the sayings attributed
to him would contain ideas or practices that were unusual, random, or unorthodox.
Instead, they would reflect what was canonical within the tradition, and provide us, in
the case of the Marian saying under consideration, with a precious glimpse into a
world of devotion that is not otherwise well attested. It is important to underline this
fact, since it is a commonplace among modern scholars that the Apophthegmata
Patrum studiously avoids references to the Mother of God, with the implication that
the Desert Fathers had no place for Marian devotions, of which they were disdainful
and suspicious.17 One scholar, for example, notes that “the Virgin is strikingly absent
from the Apophthegmata Patrum collections,” adding that “one saying is explicitly
critical of Marian devotion.” 18 However, this is somewhat misleading, since the
saying in question has to do with abandoning the worship of the Holy Trinity for the
glorification of Mary, which was considered blasphemous, not for its devotion to
Mary, but for its rejection of the Trinity.19 While the saying in question does not
substantiate the author’s claim, his general contention is correct: the Apophthegmata
does not contain many references to the Mother of God. However, the sayings that do
contain Marian material have not received the attention appropriate to their potential
place in the history of early devotion to the Mother of God.

In addition to the saying by Poemen, there is another saying that comes under the
name of no less a figure than Paul the Simple, a disciple of Anthony the Great. It is a
detailed account of Marian intercession on behalf of the dead. In this lengthy saying,
Paul beseeches the “holy Theotokos” to reveal to him the state of his disciple who
died having lived a sinful life. After praying for several days, the saint entered a state
of “ecstasy” (ἐγενόµην ἐν ἐκστάσει)—which is the same phrase used in the Poemen
saying, to which we shall return in a moment—and saw his disciple in an inert and
petrified condition. Deeply distressed by this, and returning from his state of ecstasy,
Paul subsequently made “charitable donations and offerings” (ἐλεηµοσύνας καὶ
προσφοράς) on behalf of his disciple, “beseeching the holy Theotokos to have pity on
him and intercede to God on his behalf.” Several days later, during which Paul had
also undertaken a strict fast, the Mother of God appeared to him, and the two engage
in a dialogue in which the Virgin agrees to arrange for the release of the disciple from

Monasticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 76-95. See also James G. Williams, Those Who
Ponder Proverbs: Aphoristic Thinking and Biblical Literature (Sheffield: The Almond Press, 1981).
17
E.g., S. Kent Brown, “Coptic and Greek Inscriptions from Christian Egypt: A Brief
Review,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity, ed. Birger A. Pearson and James E. Goehring
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 36.
18
Arentzen, Virgin in Song, 76, and n. 136, who does not directly cite the saying in question,
but refers the reader to Elizabeth Bolman, “The Enigmatic Coptic Galaktotrophousa and the Cult of the
Virgin Mary in Egypt,” in Images of the Mother of God: Perceptions of the Theotokos in Byzantium,
ed. Maria Vassilaki (Ashgate: Aldershot, 2005), 16, who paraphrases the saying.
19
See the parallel argument in Epiphanius, Panarion 79, who condemns a Marian sect (the
“Kollyridians”) for performing a Eucharistic service in honor of Mary, arguing that Mary should be
“honored” (ἐν τιµῇ ἔστω ἡ Μαρία) by Christians, but only God, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, should
be “worshiped” (προσκυνείσθω) (GCS 3:482, lines 15-16).
 6

his torment. In a subsequent vision, Paul sees his disciple, but now “joyful and
laughing,” who tells him: “Father, your prayers (πρεσβεῖαι) have propitiated
(δυσώπησαν) the all-holy (παναγίαν) Theotokos, for she loves you greatly. She
pleaded with the Savior and he loosed me from my fetters, for I was tightly bound by
the chains of my sins.” The story concludes with a final exchange between Paul and
the Mother of God, in which she encourages him “to be mindful (µέµνησο) of the
deceased brother through his prayers, almsgiving, and offerings.”20

Another saying, which is of Palestinian provenance, includes a vision of Mary

standing at the cross. In this lengthy account, a disciple questions his master, a certain
John, who was an anchorite at the lavra of Heptastomos, about the fate of Jerusalem
during the Persian siege of the city in 614. While “meditating” (ἀδολεσχῶν) on this
question, John was “snatched away” (ἁρπαγέντα)—a word that often functions as a
synonym for “ecstasy”—to the site of Christ’s crucifixion in the Church of the Holy
Sepulcher, where a large crowd of the faithful was asking the Lord for mercy. John
then beheld Christ himself nailed to the cross, and saw “the all-holy Theotokos, the
Mistress of the world, importuning (δυσωποῦσαν) on the people’s behalf.” However,
Christ rejects their petitions, and John learns that the city will not be spared and that
he himself will die by decapitation. When the vision (ὀπτασία) ends, the Persians
enter the city, John is killed, and the disciple flees in terror.21

An anonymous saying from Egypt provides us with verbatim conceptual and

linguistic parallels to the saying of Poemen. An elder occupying a small cell was
visited by a monk and a virgin, who remained with him until the morning. That night,
as the elder slept, the two visitors succumbed to temptation and sinned. In the
morning, the elder greeted them cheerfully and sent them on their way. Overcome by
remorse, they soon returned to the elder’s cell and confessed their sin, asking the elder
if he was unaware of what had taken place. When he replied that indeed he was
aware, the monk asked him: “Then where was your mind (ποῦ ἦν ὁ λογισµός σου) at
that time?” “My mind,” the elder said, “at that time was there where (ὅπου) Christ
was crucified, and I stood there weeping (στήκων καὶ κλαίων).” The account
concludes by noting that the visitors repented of their sin, and in time became “chosen
vessels.”22

In a collection of Edifying Tales of the Sinai Fathers compiled by Anastasius of Sinai

in the seventh century, the Mother of God is mentioned in two separate tales. In the
first, she appears to a paralytic confined to the monastery infirmary, and instructs him
to seek the prayer of the abbot, who had the gift of healing. In the second, empty vats
of oil are replenished through her intercession. 23 In the Spiritual Meadow, a

20
Text and translation (slightly modified) from John Wortley, The Anonymous Sayings of the
Desert Fathers: A Select Edition and Compete English Translation (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2013), no. 599, pp. 479-81.
21
Wortley, Anonymous Sayings, no. 761, pp. 621-23; note that no. 761bis (p. 623) describes a
similar vision (ἐν ἐκστάσει) of the crucified Christ in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, but while the
visionary sees the two thieves and a number of angels, he does not mention the Mother of God. See the
parallel passage in the Life of St Porphyrius of Gaza: ἐγενόµην ἐν ἐκστάσει, καὶ ὁρῶ τὸν σωτῆρα
καθηλώµενον ἐν σταυρῷ (ed. Henri Grégoire, Marc le Diacre, Vie de Porphyre, évêque de Gaza
[Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1930], 7.11).
22
Wortley, Anonymous Sayings, no. 13, p. 15.
23
Daniel F. Caner, History and Hagiography from the Late Antique Sinai, Translated Texts
for Historians, vol. 53 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2010), 182, 184; cf. 187.
 7

contemporary collection of tales compiled by John Moschus, the Mother of God is the
focus of ten tales, involving Marian intercession, miraculous Marian icons, and
dramatic Marian apparitions.24

Before concluding this survey, which is not intended to be exhaustive, we should also
mention the work of Poemen’s older Egyptian contemporary, Athanasius of
Alexandria, whose Letters to Virgins and On Virginity present a highly developed
theology of virginity understood as a foundational virtue for the ascetic and spiritual
life, for which the Theotokos serves as the primary model and exemplar.25 Turning,
finally, to contemporary material culture, a recent study of Egyptian liturgical texts
and amulets has brought forward a rich body of additional evidence.26 The latter
suggests that texts alone are often a narrow basis upon which to reconstruct an entire
culture, and thus the place of Mary in both popular devotion and the spiritual lives of
monks may have been much greater than the Sayings of the Desert Fathers alone
would suggest, although the evidence of these texts is by no means negligible.

Ecstasy, Rapture, and Vision

The world of the Apophthegmata, despite its general emphasis on the more practical
aspects of ascetic life, is nonetheless a world filled with ecstatic visions and
supernatural phenomena. Such phenomena are familiar to us from contemporary
works such as the Life of Anthony and the Life of Pachomius, and they are also
attested in the Apophthegmata.27 This is not the place for a detailed examination of
the ecstatic visions and other mystical experiences recounted in the Sayings of the
Desert Fathers, but it will be helpful to cite two examples from the sayings of Abba
Silvanus, which bear directly on the saying of Poemen.

We are told that Silvanus’ disciple once found him in a state of ecstasy (ἐν ἐκστάσει),
which lasted for several hours. Upon asking him what took place during that time,
Silvanus said he had merely been ill and indisposed. However, after persistent
questioning, Silvanus acknowledged that: “I was taken up (ἡρπάγην) to heaven and I
saw the glory of God, and I stayed there until now, when I was sent away.”28 In
another saying, Silvanus, in full view of the community, “entered a state of ecstasy”
(ἐγένετο ἐν ἐκστάσει), and fell to the ground where he remained for a considerable
period of time. He awoke weeping, and initially refused to speak. After being
questioned by the other monks, he revealed that he was “taken up” (ἡρπάγην) and saw

24
John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow 26, 45-48, 50, 61, 75, 175, 180 (PG 87:2872D-2873A;
2900B-2904B; 2905BC; 2913C; 2928AC; 3014B; 3052AC); cf. Derek Kreuger, “Mary at the
Threshold: The Mother of God as Guardian in Seventh-Century Palestinian Miracle Accounts,” in The
Cult of the Mother of God in Byzantium, ed. Brubaker and Cunningham, 31-51.
25
Trans. David Brakke, Athanasios and Asceticism (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins,
1995), 274-91; 292-302; 303-309.
26
Theodore De Bruyn, “Appeals to the Intercessions of Mary in Greek Liturgical and
Paraliturgical Texts from Egypt,” in Presbeia Theotokou: The Intercessory Role of Mary across Times
and Places in Byzantium (4th-9th Century), ed. Leena Peltomaa, Andreas Külzer, and Pauine Allen
(Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Presbeia Theotokou, 115-29.
27
Among the small number of studies on this subject, see Antoine Guillaumont, “Les visions
mystiques dans le monachisme oriental chrétien,” in Les visions mystiques. Colloque organize par le
Secrétariat d’État à la Culture, Paris, 17-18 mars 1976. Nouvelles de l’Institut Catholique de Paris
(février 1977), 116-27; reprinted in id., Aux origines du monachisme chrétien, Spiritualité orientale 30
(Bégrolles-en-Mauges: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1979), 136-47; and the remarks of Gould, Desert
Fathers, 177-82.
28
PG 65:409A; trans. Ward, no. 3, 222-23.
 8

the Last Judgment, in which many monks were punished while many laymen entered
the kingdom of heaven. The saying concludes by noting that for the rest of his life
Silvanus was “full of compunction (ἐπένθει), and never wanted to leave his cell.”29

In these sayings, one notes the use of the language of ecstasy in relation to visionary
experience, and, in the second saying, the resulting feeling of compunction that is
instilled in the visionary. The key phrase, ἐν ἐκστάσει γίνεται, which also occurs in
the saying of Poemen, appears elsewhere in the Apophthegmata in identical contexts,
where it clearly functions as a kind of formula.30 The phrase likewise appears in the
Life of Anthony, which was a foundational text for Egyptian monasticism.31 We might
expect the Life of Anthony to be the source of this formulaic phrase, but the author of
the Life has himself adopted it from an earlier source, namely, the New Testament,
where it is used to describe the visionary experiences of Peter and Paul. In the case of
Peter, we are told that, while fasting and praying on a rooftop in Joppa, a “state of
ecstasy came upon him and he saw the heavens opened” (ἐγένετο ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἔκστασις
καὶ θεωρεῖ τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀνεῳγµένον) (Acts 10:9-11). In Paul’s case, the account is
given in the first person, and describes events that took place shortly after his
conversion. Paul states that, when he returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the
temple, he “fell into a state of ecstasy” (γενέσθαι µε ἐν ἐκστάσει),” and “saw” (ἰδεῖν)
the Lord who warned him to flee the city (Acts 22:17-19).32

Given the formulaic language of “ecstasy” and its frequent association with visionary
experiences, it would seem reasonable to conclude that Poemen’s account describes
an ecstatic vision. However, closer examination reveals that this is not necessarily the
case, if by “vision” we mean an object of sight that is apprehended in a manner
analogous to sensory visual perception, for the simple reason that nothing like this is
directly reported in the saying.33 While some of the sayings cited above indeed
describe an individual ecstatically transported back in time to a biblical event, such as
the Crucifixion, or across space to a remote physical location, this is not explicitly
stated in the saying under consideration. Poemen simply says that his “thought”
(λογισµός)34 was with the Mother of God, which is not necessarily an experience of

29
PG 65:408D; trans. Ward, no. 2, 222.
30
See, for example, PG 65:208D; 428D; and the Anonymous Collection (Wortley): no. 211, p.
150; no. 254, p. 172; cf. no. 135, p. 94 (ἐν ἐκστάσει καὶ ἁρπαγῆναι); and above, n. 20.
31
Athanasius of Alexandria, Life of Anthony 82: ἐν ἐκστάσει γέγονε καὶ πολὺς ἦν ἐν τῇ
θεωρίᾳ (SC 400:346, line 13); cf. Ps.-Athanasius, Doctrina ad Antiochum ducem 2.17: γέγονεν ἐν
ἐκστάσει (ed. William Dindorf, Athanasii Alexandrini, Praecepta ad Antiochum [Leipzig: T.O. Weigel,
1857], 32, line 25); and id., Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem 127, which suggests that visions seen
after death by those who expire but return to life in a few hours are not post mortem experiences, but
visions of the soul that “take place in a state of ecstasy” (ἐν ἐκστάσει γίνονται) (PG 28:677C).
32
Both of these biblical visions are brought together in a discussion on “ecstasy” by Gregory
of Nyssa, Commentary on the Song of Songs 10 (GNO 6:309-310). That David was “in a state of
ecstasy” when he said “all men are liars” (Ps 115:2) also figures prominently in Nyssa’s remarks.
33
See Didymus of Alexandria, Commentary on Acts, who offers multiple definitions of the
term “ecstasy,” including passing beyond ordinary sense perception, along with the complete cessation
of such perception, which he denies in the case of Peter’s vision, since Peter was able to understand
and communicate what he saw while in a state of ecstasy (PG 39:1677AC).
34
Ward (above, n. 11) renders λογισµός as “thought,” although it can also be understood as
“mind” or even “thoughts” in the plural; the translation in SC 387:167 likewise renders the word as
“pensée.” The Doctrina patrum de incarnatione Verbi defines λογισµός as a “movement of the soul
toward something” (κίνησις ψυχῆς περί τι), and again as “the first mental representation that arises in
the intellect” (τὸ πρῶτον ἐν τῷ νοΐ ἀνελθὸν νόηµα) (ed. Franz Diekamp [Münster in Westfalen:
Aschendorff, 1907], 262, line 25; 263, line 9). See also the 6th-century text, often appended to the end
 9

vision, but can also describe a process of meditation or reflection yielding an insight
(θεωρία), as in prayerful reflection on a passage of Scripture.35 To be sure, Poemen
was noticeably in a different state or condition, and had to be asked “where” he was
(ποῦ ἦς;), which means that, if only momentarily, he was not “there.” 36 He
acknowledges the reality of his “absence,” and responds by saying that “his thought
was there (ὅπου) with the Mother of God as she stood and wept by the cross,” which
if nothing else conveys the sense of a real intensity of presence to the event described.
Poemen’s ecstatic transport was, it seems, an intensification of the experience of
prayerful and meditative reflection on the image of the Mother of God in the Gospel
of John, and manifests a deep spiritual and emotional connection between the one so
transported and the object of his thought.37

The Contemplation of Scripture

If Poemen’s ecstatic experience of Mary at the cross was the result of prayerful and
meditative reflection on the scene of the crucifixion described in the Gospel, it is
unsurprising that his thoughts were drawn to such a moment, since monasticism was
by definition the way of the cross, of self-denial and self-sacrifice, and Christ had
commanded his followers to take up their cross every day (Lk 9:23). Poemen’s
attention, however, was not drawn to Christ or the cross, but rather to the weeping of
Mary, “standing by the cross of Jesus” (Jn 19:25). Inspired by the Beatitudes—which
pronounce a blessing on the “sorrowful” (οἱ πενθοῦντες) and promise that they will be
“comforted—the virtue of sorrow or compunction (πένθος) was a core element of
desert spirituality. In Poemen’s own words: “Weeping is the way that Scripture and
our fathers have handed down to us; truly there is no other way than this.”38

In the Apophthegmata, Poemen is portrayed as a great advocate of penthos.39 The

theme is not unique to him, though nearly half of the sayings in the Apophthegmata
touching on this virtue are found among the sayings of Poemen, who therefore would
have naturally been drawn to the image of Mary weeping—and it is noteworthy that
the saying in question was included in the Systematic Collection under

of the Apophthegmata, edited by Jean-Claude Guy, “Un entretien monastique sur la contemplation,”
Recherhces de science religieuse 50 (1962): 230-41, which alternately uses the word λογισµός as both
“intellect” (νοῦς) and an “evil thought” (cf. 237, n. 2).
35
In higher states of prayer, the visualization of mental images was strongly discouraged; cf.
Evagrius, On Prayer 66: “When you pray do not form images of the divine within yourself, nor allow
your mind to be impressed with any form”; and ibid., 114: “Make no attempt at all to receive a figure
or form or color during the time of prayer” (PG 79:1181A; 1192D).
36
Not unlike being “lost in one’s thoughts,” or “drifting away” in a moment of reverie, but
one suspects that Poemen experienced something qualitatively different than mere distraction of mind
or daydreaming.
37
According to Origen, Paul’s “rapture” (ἀρπαγη) to the third heaven, a term we have seen
used as a synonym of “ecstasy,” was the model for the soul’s passage from visible to invisible realities,
and, at the same time, for the transformation of the biblical text from “letter to spirit” (2 Cor 3:6; Rom
2:29; 7:6); cf. Maximos Constas, “The Reception of Paul and Pauline Theology in the Byzantine
Period,” in Byzantium and the New Testament, ed. Derek Kreuger and Robert Nelson (Washington,
D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2016), 150-51.
38
PG 65:353A; trans. Ward, Sayings, 184, no. 119; cf. Evagrius, On Prayer 5: “First pray for
the gift of tears” (PG 79:1168D).
39
Here I am indebted to the work of Harmless, “Remembering Poemen,” 490-93; cf. Burton
Christie, Word in the Desert, 185-92; Irénée Hausherr, Penthos: The Doctrine of Compunction in the
Christian East, trans. Anselm Hufstader (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1982); and Hannah
Hunt, Joy-Bearing Grief: Tears of Contrition in the Writings of the Early Syrian and Byzantine Fathers
(Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004), esp. 41-49.
 10

“Compunction.”40 Thus the experience described in the saying is the result both of
biblical meditation and a particular focus on compunction and weeping that was
peculiar to Poemen. This is poignantly illustrated in yet another saying, in which
Poemen saw a woman in a cemetery “in great sorrow and weeping bitterly” (δεινῶς
κοπτοµένη καὶ κλαίουσαν πικρῶς).41 Moved by her grief, Poemen inquired as to the
cause of her sorrow, and learned that she had lost her husband, her son, and a brother.
He turned to the monk who was with him and said: “If a man does not put to death all
his carnal desires and acquire compunction (πένθος) like this, he cannot become a
monk. Truly the whole of this woman’s life and mind (νοῦς) are turned to
compunction.” 42 What Poemen was able to read and contemplate in the text of
Scripture was also available to him in the social world of late-antique Egypt. Both
Mary weeping for her son, and the woman weeping for her family, exemplified the
single-minded devotion to the spirit of penthos called for by Scripture, and served as
intense reminders to those struggling in monastic life of the depth to which their own
commitment must reach if they are to fulfill their calling.43

In Poemen’s powerful experience of ecstasy, which brought him into the presence of
the Mother of God standing on the summit of Golgotha, it was her weeping that stood
out in his mind more than anything else in the narrative: “I wish I could always weep
like that.” In his remarks on this passage, Douglas Burton-Christie notes that while
Poemen was obviously influenced by his reading and hearing of the biblical passage
in question, his experience of the text was also shaped by his own personal piety.
Nowhere in the Gospels is Mary said to “weep,” nor is any other kind of emotional
response ascribed to her in the accounts of the Passion.44 The weeping that Poemen
saw and valued so highly in the person of Mary was in part the fruit of his own
contemplation of the sacred text, emerging from the “sense of intimacy he had
cultivated with the Mother of God through years spent in her company.”45 In his
interpretation of the sacred text, which instilled within him the desire to imitate the
weeping of Mary at the cross, Poemen did not simply choose a text to illustrate his
point, but entered the world of the text, and allowed that world to enter him.

Conclusion
The saying of Abba Poemen considered in this study is an important early witness to
what is often described as “affective Marian piety.” And because Poemen expresses
his desire to imitate the weeping of Mary at the cross, it is also an early example of
imitatio Mariae. As William Harmless has observed, the saying “has an almost
medieval flavor about it,” 46 but it is from the desert of late-antique Egypt, and looks
forward to a tradition that will have a long and rich history in Byzantine Christianity.

40
See above, n. 12.
41
These same expressions are voiced by the Mother of God in the later Byzantine lament of
the Virgin; cf. Constas, “Painting and Poetry,” 29-30.
42
PG 65:340BC; trans. Ward, 177, no. 72.
43
Burton Christie, Word in the Desert, 186-87.
44
Luke describes a group of women who, following Jesus to the place of his crucifixion, were
“bewailing and lamenting” (ἐκόπτοντο καὶ ἐθρήνουν) him, while he in turn tells them “not to weep”
(µὴ κλαίετε) (Lk 23:27). John describes Mary Magdalene “weeping (κλαίουσα) outside the tomb” (Jn
20:11).
45
Burton-Christie, Word in the Desert, 189-90.
46
Harmless, Desert Christians, 207.
 11

Rather than see the saying as rooted in anything like the Marian liturgical devotions
that were characteristic of later periods, this paper has argued that the particular image
of the Mother of God—which includes Poemen’s response to that image—was shaped
by the monastic contemplation of Scripture and the great value that Poemen himself
placed on the virtue of compunctive weeping. This suggests a rather different point of
origin for Byzantine devotion to the Mother of God (and in particular for the Virgin’s
lament) than what historians of liturgy and literature usually propose. At the same
time, we can be certain that the vast and complex system of Byzantine devotion to the
Mother of God had multiple and equally complex points of origin. The process of
development was a slow movement gathering energy and inspiration from multiple
sources, many of which are no longer clear to us; other sources, like the saying of
Abba Poemen, survived solely thanks to the discrete disclosure of a personal
experience shared reluctantly with a friend, and then written down and carefully
copied from one tenuous parchment to another.

Finally, Poemen’s interest in the Mother of God would also seem to reveal an early
moment in the process when a new source or exemplar for monastic compunction was
born. Biblical examples of sorrow and repentance were available in abundance: the
exiled Adam, the fallen David, the penitent Peter, the Prodigal Son, the thief and the
harlot, to mention only a few. Mary’s exemplary weeping, on the other hand, was not
in response to personal sin, and suggests a new paradigm for compunction, modeled
on a mother’s love for her lost son. It was not sin or the loss of salvation that made
her weep, but the love of God, for tears are the sign of God’s presence. Weeping is
the way of Scripture, and Poemen found that way in an emotional identification with
Mary, who became for him the archetype of transformative sorrow and suffering. To
suffer with her, or like her, was to place oneself closer to Christ, who is the focus of
her sorrow, and thus to share in the blessings and privileges of his mother. Poemen’s
identification with the Mother of God occurred through a powerful experience,
described as a state of “ecstasy,” which is perhaps best understood in this instance as
an intensification of prayerful reflection on Scripture. Such an experience generates a
deep connection between God and the one who goes outside himself in a movement
of inward transformation. It was precisely through his identification with the Mother
of God that Poemen was able to pass beyond the ordinary world into the spiritual
world, for she became his intercessor and mediator, a living threshold to the infinite
life of God.