ON BL. SIMON OF VLADIMIR, BISHOP OF VLADIMIR AND SUZDAL,
§ I. His birth, his monastic life at Kiev, his episcopate and cult, collected from various authors.
[Bl. Simon, born of an honourable, but (as it seems) not noble family, lived at the end of the XII century in the Kiev Caves monastery;] Simon, whom others call Simeon, perhaps because he received that name in sacred baptism, to be afterwards changed in religion, is one of the most celebrated prelates of the XIII century, not only conspicuous in doctrine and letters, but also to be commended for the sanctity of his morals, and therefore referred by his countrymen into the roll of the saints. In what year he saw the light, or of what family he was born, cannot be defined with certainty; yet it is right to conjecture that he first saw the light between the year 1160 and 1170, as will seem probable from the rest of the series of his life. That he drew his origin from parents honourable indeed but not of more noble family may be suspected on account of the words with which he himself addresses Polycarp, most closely joined to him not only in affection, but also in the flesh Moscow Patericon, fol. 136, in the Life of Polycarp, in the Life of St. Nicholas the Devout, a prince turned monk. For he speaks thus: Have you spurned riches? You had none. Or glory? But you had not attained even this, but rather you have made a step from poverty to glory and every good Kalajdovich, Literary Monuments of the XII Century, p. 246 … However that may be, we have ascertained this alone, that Simon, having spurned the world, received the religious habit in the Caves monastery of Kiev, and lived there up to the end of the XII century: in which interval of time we have seen at greater length in the Commentary on St. Arethas that he lived with Bl. Arethas the monk, by no means surviving at the beginning of the XIII century, and also with Bl. Titus the presbyter, and his companion Evagrius, whose dreadful and unexpected death he himself narrates in the Life of the former, as an eye-witness. Now death, precious in the sight of the Lord, took Titus in the year 1196, Evagrius being already dead [Patericon, in the Life of Bl. Titus, Moscow edition; Strahl, Beiträge zur russischen Geschichte, p. 136].
[2] [where, when he had profited much from the reading of the Lives of the saints, he is summoned to Vladimir to be the first hegumen of the monastery of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary:] Having become a monk, Simon proposed to himself to imitate manfully the virtues of Blessed Anthony and Theodosius; learning diligently the study of silence and prayer from Anthony, fraternal charity and zeal from Theodosius, humility and obedience from the other holy fathers; and contemplating all the virtues joined together in the Blessed Virgin Mary as in a most bright mirror. For he pursued with peculiar cult and affection this most holy patroness of the Caves monastery, as is also related in the Elogium to be published below. And while he instructed his heart and mind by such great examples and formed them in the religious virtues, he by no means neglected to cultivate his understanding also, but rather he was assiduous in reading the Lives of the fathers of the Caves and other writings contributing to piety; and his own volumes testify that from this he gathered abundant fruits; of which below. Since therefore both his excellently ordered morals and his uncommon doctrine commended the man, hence it came about that he was elected hegumen of the monastery of Vladimir, sacred to the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and having received the customary blessing, he bade farewell to his Kiev cell.
[3] [he discharged this office very probably from the year 1197, but certainly in the years 1206 and 1214. He was confessor of Mary, wife of Vsevolod, the grand duke.] When this happened is not altogether clear; yet the year 1197 can most probably be assigned. For it is established that the monastery of the Nativity of Vladimir was erected in the year 1192 [Martynov, Monuments of Antiquities of the Art of Architecture, fascicle IX, pp. 87 and following, and Corpus of Annals, vol. I, pp. 172, 174] and solemnly consecrated by John, bishop of Rostov, in the year 1197. And that this was distinguished, so that it at one time snatched the palm from all the other monasteries which then stood in that chief city, the annalists are the authors [Compare Dmitrievski, On the Origins of Vladimir on the Klyazma, p. 282, Petersburg edition, 1802. Compare also Macarius, archbishop of Tambov, History of the Russian Church, vol. III, p. 43]; who are to be believed in this matter chiefly for this reason, that the superiors of that monastery, to be taken up to the episcopal see,
and to be honoured with the title of archimandrite, the custom grew in chiefly from that time Macarius, ibid.; Corpus of Annals, vol. I, p. 192. Now it seems little credible that a monastery of so great a name lacked its head up to the year 1215, namely for almost twenty years, or that Simon leaped from a Kiev cell to the see of Vladimir, no interval of hegumenate coming between, as the author of the Hagiological Dictionary wrongly intimates Compare article St. Simon, bishop of Vladimir, p. 251, following the common Patericon In the Life of St. Simon, fol. 233. Certainly all agree that Simon was hegumen in the year 1214; but whether he had presided over that monastery from the year 1197 I should not dare to define, all the authors whom I have been permitted to turn over being silent on this matter; yet I hold it as a persuasion that it is most probable. Certainly no other is named before Simon; and he, already in the year 1206, is most clearly related in the annals to have discharged the office of hegumen [Corpus of Annals, at the year 1206, vol. I, p. 178. Arcybysev, Narrative of Russia, at the same year, vol. I, p. 269. Pogodin in the Disquisitions on the history of Russia, vol. I, p. 174]. For it is narrated at this year that the wife of the grand duke Vsevolod died, Mary by name, distinguished for piety and charity toward the needy, and clothed in the monastic habit in the monastery which she herself had founded; and that at her burial there was present among others Simon the hegumen, who had been her confessor; and this man certainly is not to be distinguished from ours. It seems very probable therefore that Simon had long been hegumen; which opinion would undoubtedly have turned out most firm, if only the opportunity had been given of inquiring further.
[4] [Although Vladimir was then a most powerful city, it was yet subject to the bishop of Rostov. The lamentable wars arisen about the year 1212 from the testament of Vsevolod.] Now Vladimir was then the chief seat of the grand duke and easily the head of all Russia; thronged with churches and monasteries, and already strong in so great an authority that it came near to turning out a second metropolis, rival of Kiev, Andrew Bogolyubski seeing to this, but the patriarch of Constantinople refusing. For the patriarch refused to comply with these wishes, chiefly for this reason, that the church of Vladimir, although strong in political matters, yet had no grade in ecclesiastical ones; being at that time destitute of its own pastor; and so, just like Suzdal, which formerly had its own bishops, belonging to the diocese of Rostov. Further, in the time of Simon there ruled the church of Rostov together with those of Vladimir, Suzdal and Pereyaslav a bishop John by name, who held this dignity from the year 1190 up to the year 1214. It cannot be said therefore that the church of Vladimir was bereft of its pastor for some time, as the Patericon will have it In the Life of Simon, fol. 233; for up to this day it had not had its own bishop, but was ruled by the prelate of Rostov, in whose diocese it previously lay. And at Vladimir reigned Vsevolod III, parent of George and Constantine, distinguished with the ducal crown from the year 1176 to 1212. He, when he was near death, committed the helm of the kingdom not to Constantine, who was the eldest by birth and already ruled Rostov, but to George, second by birth (for Vsevolod had six sons), Bishop John and others of the clerics so urging, among whom we think that Simon too is to be listed. This partition stood forth as a deplorable fount of dissensions among the brothers and of wars. For when Constantine received the matter, moved with anger, he raised his brow, to speak with the annals Arcybysev, Narrative, vol. I, p. 283, against those who urged it, but chiefly against George, and he determined forthwith to claim for himself the whole region of Vladimir and Suzdal, three other brothers being summoned to his assistance.
[5] [The grand duchy of Suzdal is split into two parts, one consisting of Vladimir and Suzdal under Prince George, the other of Rostov and Pereyaslav under Prince Constantine.] Meanwhile the grand duchy of Suzdal was split into two parts, of which George ruled the one, namely Vladimir and Suzdal, while Constantine governed the other, of Rostov and Pereyaslav. And since the princes were very strong in authority in the churches subject to their dominion, and were arbiters and chief authors in electing bishops, and since moreover each prince bore most ill that the same prelate should sit at Vladimir and Rostov, hence it arose that the political partition was soon followed by an ecclesiastical one.
[6] [Hence, John abdicating the bishopric of Rostov, there arises the division of the diocese. Pachomius becomes bishop of Rostov, and Simon in the year 1214 bishop of Vladimir and Suzdal.] And indeed Bishop John, unable to put an end to the dissensions of the brothers, having freely abdicated the bishopric, withdrew in the year 1214 into the Suzdal monastery of SS. Cosmas and Damian according to some Annals, vol. VII, p. 119, but according to the old annalist into the Bogolyubov monastery [Corpus of Annals, vol. I, p. 185. Macarius, History of the Russian Church, vol. III, p. 39 and note 90]; and there he met his last day. In whose place Constantine substituted Pachomius, hegumen of St. Peter at Rostov, and his confessor. Pachomius received the sacred grade of the episcopate at Kiev in the month of November 1214; and in the month of January of the same year (for the year began with the month of March) he returned to Rostov. George did likewise: for the nobles and ecclesiastical men, having gathered, named Simon bishop by common vote, and sent him to Kiev; where in the same year Annals, vol. I, p. 185; vol. VII, p. 119 he was consecrated bishop by Matthew the metropolitan (1200 – 1220). And because, by the witness of the Patericon in the Life of Simon, placed at the end Fol. 231 verso, Moscow edition, Simon bore the episcopal crozier for the space of twelve years, who is more certain than certain to have died on the 22nd day of the month of May of the year 1226 Annals, vol. I, p. 190, vol. VII, p. 133, hence it follows that the election and ordination took place in the year 1214. Simon therefore was the first in order bishop of Vladimir and Suzdal, after the renewed separation from the diocese of Rostov, and by no means dependent on the prelate of Rostov.
[7] Our prelate, as we have seen, fell into very difficult times, and the gloom of tribulation soon clouded the splendour of his honours. [Bl. Simon follows the fortunes of Prince George; whence, ordered into exile in the year 1216, he returns in the following year to Suzdal; and in the year 1219 to Vladimir, where he writes the letter to Polycarp.] For George, conquered by his elder brother in the battle of Lipitsa in the year 1216, together with ten thousand men also lost the helm of the kingdom and was forced to go into exile at Radilov; which city is placed on the left bank of the Volga, about twenty leagues distant from Lower Novgorod. The exiled prince was accompanied by certain of his closest friends, among whom our Simon. In the next following year he returned to Vladimir together with George, with whom Constantine had determined to enter on peace, and fidelity having been exacted from him, he partitioned the kingdom anew, on the condition that George should receive Suzdal, and should also at some time receive Vladimir. Matters being thus composed, George was sent back to Suzdal, rich in gifts, but richer in hope. And while Simon was staying at Suzdal, devoting himself to raising from the foundations a church in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary, behold there came to Vladimir the bishop of Polotsk, Vladimir, in the year 1218, loaded with most precious treasures, namely with venerable relics of the Lord's Cross, of St. Longinus and of St. Magdalene, brought from Constantinople. Constantine, an excellent worshipper of sacred relics, received him with the highest honour and a great concourse of the people, on the day sacred to St. Longinus; and the gifts having been laid up in the church of St. Demetrius, he ordered a church to be erected in the same city under the name of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross or the Exalted Cross; which in the space of five months, being of wood, was finished and opened to public cult. When Constantine had died, in the year 1219, on the 8th day of February, Simon was restored to his church, George to the kingdom. In the same year he dedicated at Vladimir the church of the Nativity, over which he had once presided as hegumen, with the greater rite and the greatest pomp. Nor does anything else remain to be said for illustrating the last part of the pontiff's life, except that he then composed his famous letter to Polycarp; of which we have already tasted something beforehand, and shall say more presently.
[8] [In the year 1226 he is laid up first in the church of Vladimir, then in that of the Kiev Caves.] At length, when he had discharged the office of pontificate for twelve years Patericon, Moscow edition, fol. 235 verso, he departed from the living in the year 1226, in the month of May, on the 22nd day, clothed in the great schema, as custom at that time bore Corpus of Annals, vol. I, p. 190; vol. VII, p. 119. His body, laid up in the cathedral church of Vladimir, was then translated to the Caves monastery; which he had said that he desired in the letter to Polycarp Moscow Patericon, fol. 235. Karamzin calls the translation into doubt History of the Russian Empire, vol. III, note 171, edition of 1818; but he brings no reasons for doubting. It is certain however that among the bishops whose bodies are preserved in the cathedral church of Vladimir Simon, certainly the most celebrated of all, is sought in vain Ratsin, On the Monasteries and Churches of Russia, p. 56, edition of 1852; and on the other hand the historiographer just praised himself does not deny that to those visiting the Kiev Caves it is shown today to be looked at In the place cited. And Herbinius indicates the place most accurately, namely the cave of Anthony, at the very entrance, as is shown in the first table added to his little work at p. 36.
[9] [Although he departed from the living on the 22nd of May, yet his memory is recalled with less solemn rite on the 10th, that he may be associated with St. Simon the Zealot.] That Simon died on the 22nd day of May we have just said, relying on the testimony of the Annals; nonetheless his memory is commonly celebrated on the tenth day of the same month, at which he is shown by the Menaea, the Prologue, the Patericon, the Menology of the Eastern Church, by the author Versinski, the Historical Dictionary of the saints of the Russian church P. 251, the Syrigian Canon of the saints of the Caves in the book of Akathists, published at Kiev in the year 1705 Fol. 229 verso. That this is the death-day of Simon was indeed asserted by the metropolitan Eugenius Historical Dictionary of the Writers of the Russian Church, vol. II, p. 218, deceived certainly by the authority of the Common Patericon; but wrongly. For it both openly conflicts with the testimonies of the Annals, and rests on an authority which, where chronological matters are treated, is altogether least, or rather none. Besides, that the death-day of Simon was hidden from the editors of the Patericon may be gathered even from this, that on the tenth day of May is venerated the memory of St. Simon the apostle, surnamed the Zealot: which manner of associating saints of the same name was in use both among the Greeks and also among the Latins, as we have more richly proved in the preliminary Commentary on St. Arethas. As for the cult, nothing else occurs to be said here, except that in the Kiev Caves monastery the memory of Simon is celebrated with a somewhat more solemn rite, since
with the polyeleos Eugenius, Description of the Kiev Caves Lavra, p. 106, that is, with the recitation of psalm 135 employed, in which the word mercy recurs so many times, on account of which it has received the Greek name of polyeleos. The rest you will find said where the cult of St. Arethas is treated. It remains that we discourse of certain things concerning the writings of Simon, and vindicate them from every stain of heterodoxy.
§ II. The writings of Bl. Simon, bishop of Vladimir.
[In the letter given to Polycarp, a monk tempted and aiming at a hegumenate or even a bishopric, he admonishes him concerning the duty of a monk,] Among the various writings which are commonly attributed to Bishop Simon, the chief place is held by the letter to Polycarp the monk, which we have already mentioned above, where we treated of the Patericon. It begins with these words: Brother, sit in silence, and recollecting your mind say to yourself: O man, did you not come here for this reason, having bidden farewell to the world and to parents according to the flesh, that you might take thought for the salvation of your soul? And yet you by no means follow spiritual things. To what end then do you bear the name of monk? Do you think that a black garment will free you from torments? Behold princes and magnates and all your friends proclaim you blessed, saying: He is blessed, because he has held the world and its glory in hatred, and, earthly things being spurned, is intent solely on heavenly things. But you by no means live as befits a monk. Wherefore a great fear invades me on your account: lest, while those who now call you blessed enjoy peace, having gained the kingdom of heaven, we, handed over to torments, should groan bitterly, and there should be no one to have mercy on you, perishing of your own will. Rise, brother, rise and, solicitous for your soul, serve the Lord with fear and humble prudence Kalajdovich, Literary Monuments of the XII Century, p. 248 … There then follow admonitions most useful to younger monks, being full of piety and of the oracles of Christian prudence. We have intimated elsewhere on what occasion the author wrote this letter. For Polycarp, joined to Simon not only in affection but also in the flesh, was labouring under the fever of ambition, and was pressed by so great a desire of honours and of commanding, that he abandoned the Caves monastery for a time, hoping that it would come about that he should be set over another monastery of Kiev, and indeed should strew for himself a way to the bishopric. Simon, to restore his sick friend to health, uses now threats, now reasons, now paternal charity, trying everything to bring back the erring one to the way of perfection.
[11] [concerning the sin of ambition and teaches how so many distinguished men came forth from the Caves monastery.] I think, brother, he says, that God has not permitted you to act thus without cause; for he hates pride, and therefore he has cast you out, as he once also cast Satan down from the heavens, because you have refused to obey your lord the archimandrite Acindynus, a holy man. The Caves monastery, like the sea, keeps nothing putrid, but casts it out, etc. Kalajdovich, Literary Monuments of the XII Century, p. 253. And below: I see you aiming at dignities and seeking glory not with God, but with men… You say: Am I unworthy of a like office (understand the hegumenate)? Or lower than that steward, or a brother mounting higher? Your desires being frustrated, you are disturbed. You go from cell to cell, you gather the brothers, you tell useless things to those gathered, saying: Does our hegumen or steward think that salvation cannot be found except here? Brother, these are diabolical undertakings, and the works of those like you In the place cited, p. 254. And he keeps Polycarp from aiming at dignities in this manner: Brother, perfection does not consist in our being praised by men, but in discipline of life and cleanness of heart well preserved. For this is the cause, brother, why so many bishops have come forth from the Caves monastery. For as Christ the Lord sent the Apostles into the whole circle of the lands, so into all the land of the Russians a number of bishops have been sent by the lady of this monastery, the most holy Mother of God. Of whom the first was Leontius, hieromartyr of Rostov, whom the unbelievers indeed punished with death, but God presented with incorruption, to be reckoned in the heavenly city with those two Varangians, once slain for Christ. Of Hilarion the metropolitan you have read what is had in the Life of St. Anthony, from whom he received the tonsure, and was found worthy also of the priesthood. Each one knows its prelate: Pereyaslav Nicholas and Ephraem, Rostov Isaiah, Novgorod Germanus and Niphon, Vladimir Stephen, Yuriev Marinus, Polotsk Menna, Tmutorakan Nicholas, Chernigov Theoctistus, Turov Lawrence, Belgorod Luke, Suzdal Ephraem. But if you wish to count them all, turn over the older annals of Rostov: you will find there more than thirty; indeed you will exceed the number fifty, if only you go forward to our times. Understand then, brother, how great is the fame of this monastery; be confounded, do penance, and return quickly to the peaceful life unknowing of disturbance to which God has called you Ibid., p. 256.
[12] [He opens his desire of returning to that asceterium. That letter was written between 8 Sept. 1225, on which he dedicated the church of Suzdal, and 22 May 1226, on which he died.] It will be sufficient to have brought these few things, that it may be understood of how great account this writing of Simon is to be held, whether for outlining the ecclesiastical matters of the XII and XIII century, or for knowing more deeply the morals of Polycarp, and for delineating more exactly the character and likeness of the author himself. And that it was written between the year 1225 and 1226, the last words of the letter make plain, which sound thus: I indeed would gladly leave the bishopric, to submit myself to the hegumen (of the Kiev Caves); but by what thing I am hindered from obtaining this does not escape you. Who does not know that I, the sinner Simon, the bishop, preside both over this cathedral church, which is the glory of Vladimir, and over another, which I myself took care to raise at Suzdal? That so many cities and vills lie subject to me, and that I enjoy tithes throughout the whole region, to be paid to my humility? What then? I shall speak before God, I should judge all that glory and power as dung, provided that I were permitted to live in the Caves monastery or to lie there on the ground like filth, and to be trampled by the feet of others, or to stand at the gate like one of the beggars Ibid., p. 257. Now the church of Suzdal of which there is here discourse was consecrated by Simon himself, in the year 1225, on the 8th day of September [Corpus of Annals, vol. I, p. 190. Macarius, History of the Russian Church, vol. III, note 253]. Since therefore in the following year, in the month of May, the most pious prelate exchanged earthly glory for heavenly, it is natural to conclude that that letter was written in the interval of time which parts the dedication of the church of Suzdal from the death-day of Simon.
[13] [Bl. Simon wrote moreover the Origins of the Caves, in which the passage on the conversion of a certain Varangian either is interpolated] Besides the letter Simon wrote, as we have declared elsewhere, a Narrative of the origins of the Caves monastery and of its wonderful foundation, in which also of the ark of Theodosius. Now we hold it as our persuasion that this narrative is Catholic. Nor is what is read there of a certain Simon the Varangian an obstacle. For it is narrated Patericon, fol. 97, edition of 1759 that that Simon, sprung from a noble family, and also a distinguished benefactor of the Caves monastery, after he had been instructed by St. Theodosius, rejected the folly of the Latins, and embraced the true faith in Jesus Christ together with his presbyters and 3000 countrymen. Further, that this passage of the narrative is corrupted no one will deny, unless he goes blind in the midday light. For that St. Theodosius was exceedingly Catholic, and most devoted to the Roman see, is a matter placed beyond controversy; in no way therefore could he keep anyone from the faith of the Latins, which he himself professed, or hold the Catholic religion to be foolish or less acceptable to God. These are the dreams and inventions of more recent non-Catholics. And in truth, since they have dared to attribute to that same St. Theodosius that notorious writing On the faith of the Varangians (that is, Latins), inscribed to Prince Yaroslav, and everywhere sprinkled with the leaven of schism, others taking it away from him [Philaret, Patrology, vol. III, p. 412. Kubarev, Disquisition on the Patericon, p. 3], what wonder if their elders, seized by the disease of interpolating customary among heretics, took care to have two or three little words inserted into the genuine text of the author, to make Simon the Varangian a schismatic from a Catholic man? Moreover it has been proved, the very writers of Russia assenting, that the common edition of the Patericon is of very suspect credit, as we have abundantly declared in another place.
[14] or it is to be interpreted of the Slavic rite. In very truth the aforesaid passage could admit a kindly interpretation, if you suppose namely that there is treated there not of faith or dogmas, but of religion in general, or rather of rite, so that under the word faith rite is to be understood; which two things it is customary to use promiscuously among the Russians even of our age. For then all things would be reconciled, nor would the words just cited signify anything else than the passing of Simon from the Latin rite to the Slavic, or even from the folly of pagans to the wisdom of Christians: for the more ancient Russians were accustomed to distinguish any Westerners by the name of Latins. We could, I say, interpret that passage, whoever at length its author may be, more kindly; but the former manner of explaining pleases more, and that so much the more, because that Simon rashly mixed faith with rite or dogmas with ceremonies, things so unlike, could not be said without injury to so great a name, and on the other hand it is established among all that the Common Patericon came forth from the workshop of non-Catholics, and swarms with most foul faults.
[15] [The Lives of St. Anthony of the Caves and of Niphon of Novgorod falsely attributed to Bl. Simon; doubtfully the continuation of the Chronicle of Nestor.] There was attributed moreover to Bl. Simon the Life of St. Anthony, which is read in the first part of the Patericon, and also the Life of Niphon, bishop of Novgorod, added at the end of the same work; but both writings had altogether other authors, and today they are commonly taken away from Bl. Simon. Finally Simon is related to have continued the Chronicle of Nestor (from the year 1200 to 1225), using in composing this work the ample library of the Grand Duke Constantine, whom for that reason he names most friendly to letters, and proclaims as it were a Maecenas. Tatishchev testifies to this in the History of Russia [Book I, part I, p. 58, chap. 5, n. 2. Compare Eugenius, Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Writers, article Simon, vol. II, p. 218] and adds that he had a certain transcript of the Simonian chronicle in his hands. And although today no traces of that chronicle are found, and so it cannot be placed for certain among the genuine works of Simon, yet it is not therefore to be sent off among the spurious ones, as if it were an invention of Tatishchev's. For there are very many things which that most excellent investigator of Russian history has handed down to us in his work, drawn from older manuscript codices, unknown indeed to us today, and censured by some more harshly than is right, which yet in our age have been acknowledged as true and vindicated from the calumnies of Schlözer and others [Compare Testament de Basile Tatistchef, d'après un ms. de la Bibl. impér. de Paris, preface, Paris, 1860]. Let these things said of the writings of our Bl. Simon suffice. There follows the Elogium of the blessed man; which
may be a specimen of Russian hagiography, more abundant in words than in things.
ELOGIUM
Of Bl. Simon, bishop of Vladimir.
From the Moscow Patericon of the year 1759, at the 10th day of May.
Arethas, monk of the Caves. (Bl.)
Simon, bishop of Vladimir. (Bl.)
FROM THE MOSCOW PATERICON.
Bl. Simon, to be compared to Simon son of Onias, What Jesus son of Sirach once related of Simon son of Onias, saying: “Simon son of Onias, the great priest, who in his life propped up * the house and in his days strengthened the temple a;” and again: “As the morning star in the midst of a cloud, and as the full moon shines in its days; and as the shining sun, so he shone forth in the house of God b;” these same things we must say of our Venerable Father Simon, bishop of Vladimir and Suzdal, who stood forth as the second biographer of the saints of the Caves after Nestor. In very truth that prelate both raised the house of God, and strengthened the church of Christ now by sanctity of life, now by teachings from the lives of the saints, no otherwise than those good pastors whom the Lord promised to his people Israel by the mouth of Jeremiah the prophet, saying: “I will give you pastors according to my heart and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine c,” so that the likenesses and designations with which Simon son of Onias, pontiff of the old law, is adorned, all excellently fit Simon too, prelate of Vladimir and Suzdal.
[2] [in the Caves monastery he reads the Lives of the saints and tries to imitate them.] This Simon then, when he saw himself clothed in the holy habit of monks in the Caves monastery, which shone adorned with the holy fathers, as with intellectual stars, moon and sun, after the manner of the sky, at once applied his effort to reading through the Lives of the fathers of the Caves, who once lived pleasing to God and equalling the stars in number, that he might most diligently express their virtues and morals in himself. For he frequently considered the actions of the Venerable Theodosius the founder, who like the moon increased the number of those stars; whose morals therefore he also imitated. He turned over assiduously in his mind the truly excellent deeds of the coryphaeus of the Caves, Anthony, who, like the shining sun, illumined all with the rays of good works; whose angelic course Simon therefore strove to attain. And indeed he learned humble obedience from the Fathers, who served that sun and moon, like frequent stars; and the zeal of labours and common exercises above the other brothers he borrowed from Bl. Theodosius, the shining moon, which excels the choir of the stars in light. Finally the angelic way of life pleasing to God in silence he inherited from St. Anthony, who in his solitary life showed the course of the sun, which puts the other lights to flight by its brightness. Whence it came about that, representing in himself as in a kind of mirror those spiritual lights of the virtues, the stars, I mean, the moon and the sun, he could send forth a threefold light; indeed no otherwise than the pontiff of the old law, Simon too turned out as a morning star, and as a perfect moon and as a shining sun in the churches of the Most High d. For he worthily served in the Caves monastery the Most Holy Mother of God, who ascended as the rising dawn, fair as the moon, chosen as the sun; whose most humble obedience, ardour of praying, and zeal of silence and divine contemplations he strove to emulate manfully and as far as is right.
[3] [Promoted to the see of Vladimir and Suzdal, he discharges there the office of the sun] When therefore Bl. Simon was thus sending forth the rays of good works and virtues on every side up to the most remote regions, behold the church of Vladimir and Suzdal e was left empty of pontifical honour, although, by the witness of St. John in the Apocalypse, it befits the church to be adorned with a starry crown. For at that time the church of Vladimir and Suzdal lacked a pastor, as sometimes the sky may be seen without the most bright sun or without the perfect moon; nor could one any longer use the words of the Psalmist: His throne as the sun in my sight and as the perfect moon for ever [f]. So Christ the Lord, supreme pastor of all, as he once handed over his sheep to be fed to Blessed Simon on account of his love, so he deigned to raise this Simon also, on account of his distinguished love toward the Most Holy Mother of God, to the see of the city of Vladimir, preserved by God. And that church was adorned with a sparkling crown of stars, and its throne shone as the sun, and as the perfect moon. For that good pastor, placed in a sublime grade, became famous far and wide for his virtues, and as a morning star, and as a perfect moon and bright sun, he illumined the faithful with the light of doctrine, kindled them with the fire of charity, and finally gave them life with supernal grace implored by prayers poured out to God. For he, while he considered that the morning star is the indicator of the vanishing night, and the forerunner of the coming day, strove to keep the sheep entrusted to him from the works of darkness, namely sins, and to teach them the works of light, steeped in the light of grace. And when he turned over in his mind that the sun and moon continually keep watch over the universal sky as two lights, he strove with all skill to provide for his flock, whereby he might render his throne as the bright sun and as the perfect moon, representing in himself in some way the vigilance of both.
[4] [he recalls in mind the Lives of the fathers of the Caves, and strives to become like Simon the pontiff, praised in Ecclesiasticus;] And while he fed the flock committed to him by God with all care and diligence, and discharged the pastoral office worthily, as befits a good administrator, he by no means gave up to oblivion or neglected the contests of the monastic life; but rather he diligently kept in his heart the acts and deeds of the fathers of the Caves, and he never without gladness recalled that he had been clothed in the angelic form g in the Kiev monastery, and had enjoyed their fellowship. Wherefore Simon besought them to intercede for him, and also by their protection and auspices, the grace of God helping, he ruled his see so well, that he also deserved the remaining praises and likenesses with which we read Simon the pontiff to be honoured in the Old Testament. Now those encomia sound thus: As the shining bow, it says, among the clouds of glory, as the flower of roses in the days of spring, and as the lilies which are at the passing of the water, and as incense fragrant in the days of summer. As shining fire and incense burning in the fire. As a solid vessel of gold, adorned with every precious stone. As an olive sprouting and a cypress, lifting itself up into height h. Further, those pastoral virtues which are here related to be mystically figured are also excellently fitted to our pontiff, as a most excellent pastor. For he was most zealous in preserving among his people peace, which the bow of heaven or rainbow indicates. Patience, which the thorns growing with the roses represent, he taught others by example, and took care to plant it in the spiritual garden of the faithful. And while he commended continence and most entire purity both by word and by example, he was inserting as it were white lilies into hearts; and pouring out prayers to God for all, he recalled to memory the shoot of fragrant Lebanon. Likewise, because in adversity he rendered thanks to God, and instructed his kinsmen to imitate him in this, therefore he smelled sweet as incense burning in the fire. And he showed the likeness of a golden vessel on account of his heavenly wisdom and charity; and finally he was equalled to a sprouting olive on account of his mercy toward his neighbour, and to a cypress on account of his lofty and continual contemplation.
[5] He commits the Lives of the fathers of the Caves to letters. Nor did Simon think it enough to store up all those virtues once acquired in the Caves monastery, carved on the tablets of his heart, but pressed by fiery zeal, and taking thought for the good of his neighbour, he determined to open the fount from which he himself had drawn them, to hand down in writing, I mean, the lives of the fathers of the Caves, and first of all to snatch from oblivion, to be preserved for the use of posterity, those things which either were only turned over on the lips of men, or, even if they had ever been handed down in writing, had yet miserably perished together with the volumes, by the injury of the times and of the warlike tumults by which Russia is accustomed to be disturbed. That he might attain this, wherever he came upon eye-witnesses or ear-witnesses of the matter, he inquired with all care what they knew of the miracles of the Caves monastery, and like an ingenious bee he gathered into one from every side the notices of things, with such success that he illumined his countrymen in a kind of new way with the threefold light of the stars, moon and sun. For he wrote of the miracles of Blessed Anthony i, the most shining sun of Kiev; moreover, he delineated for us the wonderful tomb of Blessed Theodosius, to be equalled to the perfect moon; he also sketched the origins of the church of the Caves, not unlike the sky, all of which are read mixed into the narrative of Nestor in the first part of the Patericon. Moreover he handed down orally to Polycarp the monk several lives of the more ancient Blessed of the Caves, which are had written down by the same man in the second part of the Patericon. Finally he himself narrated the virtues and miracles of the other fathers, adding a letter to Polycarp divinely inspired.
[6] [Hence it is clear how pious he was and by how great a desire for the Caves monastery he was held. After an episcopate of twelve years he dies and is buried in the Kiev caves, where his body is preserved incorrupt.] From which writings there is made manifest both Simon's distinguished devotion toward the Most Holy Mother of God, and his cult of Blessed Anthony and Theodosius, so great that he would willingly have remained through his whole life in the Caves monastery, sacred to the Virgin assumed into heaven, always present there in spirit and heart, although absent in body. For as Simon Peter loved the Lord Jesus more ardently than the others, so Simon, bishop of Vladimir, is to be judged to have loved the Most Holy Mother of God and her Kiev Caves house above all others. There was then to be seen in the Caves sky that great apocalyptic sign k, a woman, I mean, clothed with the sun and moon, that is, a bride not knowing a husband, the most pure Mother of God, and under her feet a bright crown of stars. For that good pastor, shining as a star and moon and sun with holy works, showed proofs of so great a humility that, although adorned with the episcopal dignity, he by no means hesitated to write to Polycarp that he wished, if it could be done, like refuse and filth to be trampled underfoot by all in the Caves monastery, on which matter he discourses fully in the letter. Finally the excellent pastor endured many labours, and fed the sheep entrusted to him not with mortal food, but with life-giving nourishment, I mean with the Lives of the saints of the Caves, with the proofs of sanctity and with the frequency of his writings. And after he had discharged the pastoral office for twelve years, he went back to the pastors sitting on the twelve thrones, or rather to the head of all pastors, Jesus Christ, by good right to be crowned with an unfading garland of glory. Whose venerable body was laid up in the Caves, as he himself had desired, and lies there still entire and incorrupt l, to the glory and honour of God One and Three, the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
ANNOTATIONS.
the letter to Polycarp, the passage of which we recited above in no. 11, recalls Stephen and Ephraem, monks of the Caves, of whom the former had occupied the see of Vladimir, the latter that of Suzdal. But at the end of the XII century John, prelate of Rostov, held at once the sees of Vladimir, Suzdal and Pereyaslav. What was done in the year 1214 and afterwards, see in the Commentary on Bl. Simon, nos. 5, 6 and 7.
f. Ps. LXXXVIII, v. 38.
* in the Slavonic extruxit.