Venerable Akepsimas, Hermit of Kyrrhos

Saint Akepsimas of Kyrrhos

On the third of November we celebrate another of the great fourth-century ascetics of the desert, Saint Akepsimas of Kyrrhos. The life of this great and holy solitary of Syria – who, it must be owned, was one of the more eccentric of the anchorites treated in this work – was written down by Blessed Theodoret of Kyrrhos in his History of the Monks of Syria. The juxtaposition of this saint’s life with that of his contemporary Saint Mausimas, the village priest of Kyrrhos, offers a striking contrast – one living happily among people and doing works of kindness for the poor; the other one living for sixty years in total solitude.

At the same time lived Akepsimas, whose fame extends throughout the East. Immuring himself in a cell, he persevered for sixty years neither being seen nor speaking. Turning into himself and contemplating God, he received consolation from this, in accordance with the prophecy that says, ‘Take delight in the Lord, and may he grant you the requests of your heart.’ He received the food that was brought to him by stretching his hand through a small hole. To prevent his being exposed to those who wished to see him, the hole was not dug straight through the thickness of the wall, but obliquely, being made in the shape of a curve. (The food brought him was lentils soaked in water.)

Once a week he came out at night to draw sufficient water from the nearby spring. On one occasion a shepherd pastoring his animals at a distance, when it was dark, saw him move. Presuming it was a wolf—for he was bent double, laden with a quantity of iron—he got his sling ready to shoot a stone. But when his hand lost all movement for a long time and could not launch the stone, until the man of God had drawn the water and returned, he realised his mistake, and after daybreak repaired to the retreat of virtue, related what had happened and begged forgiveness. He received the remission of his sin, not by hearing a voice speak but learning of his goodwill from the gestures of his hand.

Someone else, wishing out of malign curiosity to discover what he spent all his time doing, had the presumption to climb up a plane-tree that grew alongside the enclosure. But he immediately reaped the fruits of his presumption: with half his body paralysed, from the crown of his head to his feet, he became a suppliant accusing himself of his sin. The other predicted that his health would be restored by the cutting down of the plane-tree—for the prevent another doing the same deed and suffering the same penalty, he ordered the tree to be cut down immediately. The cutting down of the tree was followed by the remission of the punishment. Such was the self-control this inspired man exercised; such was the grace he had received from the Umpire.

When about to set out on his migration from here, he foretold that he would come to the end of his life after fifty days, and received everyone who wished to see him. The leader of the Church, on his arrival, pressed him to accept the yoke of a priest. ‘I know, father,’ he said, ‘both the elevation of your philosophy and the excess of my poverty, but entrusted as I am with the episcopal office, it is in virtue of the latter not of the former that I perform ordinations. Accept then (he continued) the gift of the priesthood, a gift to which my hand ministers, but which is supplied by the grace of the all-Holy Spirit.’

To this he is said to have replied: ‘Since I am emigrating from here in a few days, I shall not quarrel about this. If I were going to live for a long time, I would utterly have fled from the heavy and fearful burden of the priesthood, terrified at answering for the deposit. But since in no long time I shall depart and leave what is here, I shall accept obediently what you command.’ And so at once, without any compulsion, the one awaited the grace on bended knee, and the other laying on his hand ministered to the Spirit.

After surviving the priesthood for a few days, he exchanged one life for another, and took up the one without old age or sorrow in place of the one full of anxiety. Everyone wished to seize his body and proposed to carry it off to his own village, but someone resolved the dispute by revealing the oaths of the saint, saying the saint had extracted oaths to commit it to burial in this same place.

Thus it was that the citizens of heaven attended to frugality even after death; neither when alive could they endure to entertain haughty thoughts, not after death did they grasp at honour from men. Instead, they transferred all their love to the Bridegroom, like modest women who are eager to be loved and praised by their spouses but despise adulation from others. Because of this the Bridegroom made them celebrated even against their will, and gave them an abundant share of renown among men; for whenever someone pursues the things of God and asks for the things of heaven, he adds to these things innumerable others, granting their requests many times over. This he enacted when he said, ‘Ask for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all the rest shall be added to you’. And again: ‘He who leaves father and mother and brothers and wife and children, for my sake and for the Gospel, in this age will receive a hundredfold and in the age to come will inherit æternal life’. This he both declared and accomplished. May we, instructed by the word and example and supported by the prayers of these men, be able to ‘press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call in Christ Jesus our Lord’.

Robert Louis Wilken, professor-emeritus of the history of Christianity at the University of Virginia, makes an interesting observation about Theodoret’s editorial choices here. The juxtaposition of Saint Akepsimas’s life with that of Saint Mausimas is meant to draw a contrast between their chosen vocations: one lived in the village, among people; the other withdrew from all human contact until the very end of his life. Blessed Theodoret may, indeed, be trying to draw attention to the diversity of the Syrian ascetic disciplines. His panegyric praise of both men indicates that he is trying to remain neutral in regard to his own preferences.

The commonalities and contrasts between Saint Akepsimas and Saint Marōn are also evident and significant: in this case, what they wished for their remains and how their relics were actually treated. Here, Theodoret is not trying to remain neutral. The lay followers of Marōn fought a bitter, bloody war over his relics and carried him off, against his express wishes that he be buried alongside his teacher Saint Zebinas the Elder. Blessed Theodoret’s attitude toward the faction which carried off Saint Marōn’s relics is clearly disapproving, and he explicitly says that ‘sufficient for us instead of his tomb is his memory’. On the other hand, the followers of Akepsimas nearly came to blows over the question of where he should be buried, before it was settled that he should be buried in his own cell. Blessed Theodoret clearly commends the peaceful way in which the dispute over Saint Akepsimas’s relics was resolved, and in accord with his own wishes.

Still, here we must exclaim along with Blessed Theodoret, regarding the hesychast Saint Akepsimas as well as his fellow ascetics in Syria: ‘How great and how many are the athletes of virtue and with which crowns they are decked!’ May they all continue to pray for us. Holy and venerable Akepsimas, silent contemplator of the mysteries of the divine, pray unto Christ our God that our souls may be saved!