Toward a Theology of Eros: Transfiguring Passion at the Limits of Discipline

Homoerotic Spectacle and the Monastic Body in Symeon the New Theologian

 Homoerotic Spectacle and the Monastic Body in Symeon the New Theologian D E R E K K R U E G E R Symeon the New Theologian (949–1022), arguably the most important Byzantine religious thinker between John of Damascus in the eighth century and Gregory Palamas in the fourteenth, often presents salvation as a heavenly marriage.1 Scholars have long noted Symeon’s frequent use of erotic and nuptial imagery to explore the relationship between the monk and God.2 What scholars have generally failed to notice or account for is that much of this imagery is homoerotic. In contrast to more common tendencies to celebrate the consummation of male divinity with a monk’s feminized soul, Symeon emphasizes the masculinity of the monk’s body. I will argue that Symeon employs same-sex desires in order to emphasize the male monastic body as a locus of theōsis, the deification of humanity. In his Tenth Ethical Discourse, Symeon invokes a homoerotic parable to assist in the formation of monastic spirituality. Despite excellent scholarly work on Symeon’s theology and on the striking images that he employs to describe the encounter with the divine, this passage has tended to be overlooked or set aside. The text in question is a performance of male same-sex desire and fantasy that structures expectations of salvation . In presenting the male monastic body as the object of God’s eros, the parable invokes themes also found among Symeon’s Hymns on Divine Love. As a whole, the Tenth Ethical Discourse explicates the meaning of the ‘‘Day of the Lord,’’ and highlights the place of the repentant sinner 100 兩 t o wa r d a t h e ol o g y o f e ro s in God’s work of redemption. In his story, which Symeon terms a paradeigma , an ‘‘illustration’’ or ‘‘example,’’ an emperor takes a repentant rebel to his bed.3 To illustrate the joy that God might feel at the return of a rebellious subject, the story contains echoes of the parable of the prodigal son, but the narrative soon moves to the bedroom, where it remains. Scholars have been unable to determine whether Symeon composed the Ethical Discourses while he was the abbot of the Constantinopolitan monastery of Saint Mamas between 1003 and 1009, or later, during his exile across the Bosporus, where he led a small community at the Oratory of Saint Marina.4 The original performative context for the Tenth Ethical Discourse also remains unclear: We do not know whether Symeon preached it aloud or intended it for a reading audience beyond his monastery.5 If the latter, the literary document mimics the form of an oral discourse complete with frequent performance indicators like direct address in the vocative to ‘‘my brothers’’ and ‘‘beloved ones.’’6 Nevertheless , the category of performance, broadly conceived, provides an interpretative framework in which to consider the deployment of homoerotic imagery in ascetic instruction and raises questions about the place of homoeroticism in middle Byzantine male monastic formation. The parable tells of ‘‘the emperor of the Christians’’ and a rebel who had fought for many years against him. ‘‘He received messages on several occasions from the emperor of the Christians that he should come to him, and be with him, and be honored with great gifts and reign with him’’ (Ethical Discourses 10.239–241). After many years, the prodigal became disillusioned with his rebellion and decided to obey the emperor, who had been sending him messages, believing that the emperor would not count the tardiness of his response against him; he had heard of the emperor’s compassion and goodness. The imperial context may invoke Byzantine political and military realities during the reign of Basil II, with rebels changing sides in wars against the emperor. But Symeon’s interest lies in the delights of reconciliation. When he approached the emperor and embraced his feet, he wept and asked forgiveness. Seized by unexpected joy, that good emperor d e re k k ru e g er 兩 101 immediately accepted him, wondering at his conversion and humility . The man, instead of making bold as he had thought he would and demanding honors for the love and trust he had proven to the emperor by abandoning the rebel [leader] and approaching the other ’s kingdom, instead lies mourning over his tardiness and the crimes for which he had previously been...