ИСТИНА

In 1881, Bishop Anthony Vadkovsky suggested the existence of two parallel trends, “didactic” and “solemn”, in the Byzantine Homiletics. According to his opinion the second tendency receives strong predominance starting from the 5th century AD. More than 100 years later this distinction still remains relevant and is shared by most researchers of the Byzantine sermon. Among generally considered features of the "ceremonial" flow one can mention the predominance of festal sermons and the preacher's commitment to a specific ancient rhetoric toolkit characteristic of the epideictic eloquence. According to V. Valiavitcharska (2013), the Byzantine Homiletics at some degree succeeds the so-called “Asianic” oratory, characterized by splitting the speech to short cola, connected by common rhythmical patterns and rhymed endings. It should be noted that most of the theoretical arguments concerning the Byzantine Homiletics expressed so far are mainly based on the material not later than the 10th century. Thus it might be interesting to examine their applicability to a later time. The Byzantine Homiletics of the 12th century is primarily characterized by the appearance of great homiliaries, containing a large number of relatively short sermons which combine binding to a specific holiday with the exegetical orientation. However, this type of preaching is not found in the works of educated bishops of the period in question, such as Eustathius of Thessalonica or Michael Choniates. Keeping the commitment to the festive teachings, these authors attempt to harmoniously combine the “ideas” described in Hermogenes' theory of eloquence. For this reason homoeoteleuta, isokola and similar rhetorical devices are only of limited use in their sermons. The same applies to rhetorical questions, exclamations and inner dialogue. However, even more typical for their heritage are so called cathecheseis, devoted to the theme of the Lent. These teachings, including an element of the solemn eloquence (panegyrics, praising the merits of fasting), for the most part deal with the explanation of the moral norms, mandatory for the Christian. The preacher, exactly conforming the requirements of ancient rhetoric, was trying to convince his audience with the power of his arguments, rather than to charm his listeners' ears. These features seem particularly significant in comparison with the style of St. Neophyte the Recluse, who, not possessing a classical education, at the same time often demonstrates his commitment to so-called “hymnic passages” (the term proposed by T. Antonopoulou). These considerations lead us to the question whether it is possible to talk about a sort of revival of the “Attic” style of eloquence in the Byzantine preaching of the Comnenian time, while “Asianism” remained the choice of less educated preachers.