Chapter 107
On Attention in Prayer and the Spirit of the Labor of Prayer
107.2.1 May the mercy of God be with you, most reverend Father. Agapius!
107.3.1 I’m very glad to begin our conversation again—may God bless your brotherly love in the Lord! It’s very comforting to see that your zeal for interior work remains strong in you and holds your attention.
107.4.1 Within my ability, I will resolve your perplexities and questions.
107.5.1 ‘Can one stand in prayer to the Theotokos and the Saints with attention in the heart?’ Yes, one can. Where else should one stand, if not there? Every prayer must come from the heart. Therefore, attention must be there as well. The difference in prayer consists only in the understanding and faith with which we pray. It’s all the same, like a prostration: we bow before an icon of the Saviour—to the Saviour; before an icon of the Mother of God—to the Mother of God. A prostration is a prostration—there’s no difference in the outward form. The difference lies entirely in the spirit and meaning of the prostration.
107.6.1 “Is there any difference between praying with attention inwardly in the heart, or attending to the words of the prayer with lips, with a humble and repentant feeling? And with constant remembrance of God, omnipresent and all-seeing, with fear and reverence?”—These last words (which I have underlined) constitute the spirit of prayer.[1] And whoever possesses this stands in the heart: he has no time to think about words or lips, and such thoughts don’t even occur to him. These words – ‘attending at the lips’ – are a new invention; they’re found nowhere in the holy Fathers. Someone else has come up with this: to stand with attention at the tip of the tongue. Long ago there were clever people who held their attention on the navel – and they were called ‘navel-gazers,’ and these fashionable folk of ours should be called ‘tongue-gazers’ and ‘lip-gazers’... Look, your own underlined words constitute the essence of prayer;[2] all the rest – bowing the head, restricting the breath, sitting on a chair, drawing the words of prayer in through the nostrils, and these – the tip of the tongue and the lips – whether they’re there or not, it’s all just external trappings with nothing essential about them.
107.7.1 Maximus Kapsokalivis (in the Philokalia) gave the model for the labor of prayer. He prayed for two years before a little flame kindled in his heart. This was a gift of grace: and from that point on, he had unceasing prayer, truly spiritual. Until then he had warm and earnest prayer, but true prayer came to him after that spark.[3] This, fathers and brothers, you must keep in attention, care, and concern. The setting of the labor of prayer is not essential. And in this setting, a certain warmth comes into the heart; but this is our own labor, not the gift of grace. To consider even this grace-filled is spiritual delusion. So says Nikephoros, so Ignatius and Kallistos... and others.
107.8.1 I don’t understand the second question. You say something about the help of lips and tongue, yet the words are spoken in the heart... If in the heart, then why this thought about lips and tongue? You must throw out everything external... Have what is underlined above, and that’s all. Stand like that and make prostrations, crying out: ‘Lord, have mercy!’ and so on...
107.9.1 “Can one say: Lord, Jesus Christ, through the Theotokos have mercy on us”? Yes, one can. But where did the question come from? Don’t we cry out in church: “Holy, Holy, Holy are you, O God, through the Theotokos have mercy on us!” — Can one say “us” instead of the word “me”? Yes, one can. When the prayer is for oneself: “me”; when it is for all or many: “us”.
107.10.1 A thought about silence and solitude—that’s a good thought. But you’re already sitting alone, and when you’re alone, who is there to talk to? Yet sometimes it’s quite good to have a word with a brother who shares your mind.[4] Besides, you’re in the church... If at that moment, as you’re leaving, a brother asks you something, would you really snap at him like a lion?[5] So here’s what I think you should do: church and cell—that’s the binding law; don’t go anywhere without real necessity; Don’t visit the brothers’ cells, but you may take a walk through the forest so that together with every breath you may praise the Lord. Especially, though, to test whether your soul stands firm in attention within the heart. And this is not bad for your health either. Don’t push yourself into conversation, but when someone brings up a spiritual need, you should speak with him kindly. It’s the same as putting capital to work. But to remain silent when people even ask you is the same as hiding money in a chest and keeping it without any profit from it.
107.11.1 When tears come of their own accord in compunction, let them flow; but when they don’t come, compunction of the heart alone is enough. You can stir yourself up to tears and weep; but you shouldn’t count this as anything, even though tears always soften the heart.
107.12.1 O. A-lu.[6] One thing is disclosure of thoughts, and another is confession. The first is an ascetic rule of eldership; the second is a sacrament of the Church. In what sense have disciples been assigned to you—to hear their confessions, absolve them, and impose penances on them, or simply to listen to their disclosure of thoughts, give them guidance, scatter their confusion, clarify their doubts, and comfort them? Only in the latter sense. According to the sayings of the Fathers, the disclosure of thoughts itself is salvific for the soul, without any additions. The one receiving the disclosure may say, ‘Well, it’s nothing, God will forgive,’ and add, ‘Do a few prostrations’... But this is not what happens in the sacrament of confession – this is a fatherly blessing. This way of handling things applies to venial sins; here the disclosure itself grants forgiveness. But an open violation of a commandment is absolved by the action of the sacrament of confession.
107.13.1 Which sins can be dealt with by disclosure alone, and which require confession – let the elders decide this among themselves, by common counsel. You, as a hieromonk, may perform the sacrament of confession for your disciples, and this will be true absolution, and if you impose a penance, it will be cleansing. But should you do this on your own, or ask the abbot? In the monastery there is a common spiritual father—a penitent.[7] Confession apart from him is something new in the monastery. But no one in the monastery can introduce anything new without the abbot’s will. So you should ask the abbot. But if you should find it convenient at some point to celebrate the sacrament of confession, there will be no sin in that—for you have the authority to do so—but only a breach of monastic order. How you should proceed is up to you to decide.[8] I would say: if it won’t cause any disorder in the monastery, perform the sacrament of confession for your disciples when necessary... according to the Trebnik – but it’s better to ask the abbot for permission.
107.14.1 May the Lord bless you!
107.15.1 Be saved![9] I ask for your prayers.
107.16.1 Your well-wisher, Bishop Theophan.
107.17.1 .