Saint Leo the Great's First Homily on the Ascension of Christ

Saint Leo the Great (Sermon 73 - On the Lord's Ascension)

I. The events recorded as happening after the Resurrection were intended to convince us of its truth

Since the blessed and glorious Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the Divine power in three days raised the true Temple of God, which the wickedness of the Jews had overthrown, the sacred forty days, dearly-beloved, are today ended, which by most holy appointment were devoted to our most profitable instruction, so that, during the period that the Lord thus protracted the lingering of His bodily presence, our faith in the Resurrection might be fortified by needful proofs. For Christ's Death had much disturbed the disciples' hearts, and a kind of torpor of distrust had crept over their grief-laden minds at His torture on the cross, at His giving up the ghost, at His lifeless body's burial. For, when the holy women, as the Gospel-story has revealed, brought word of the stone rolled away from the tomb, the sepulchre emptied of the body, and the angels bearing witness to the living Lord, their words seemed like ravings to the Apostles and other disciples. Which doubtfulness, the result of human weakness, the Spirit of Truth would most assuredly not have permitted to exist in His own preacher's breasts, had not their trembling anxiety and careful hesitation laid the foundations of our faith. It was our perplexities and our dangers that were provided for in the Apostles: it was ourselves who in these men were taught how to meet the cavillings of the ungodly and the arguments of earthly wisdom. We are instructed by their lookings, we are taught by their hearings, we are convinced by their handlings. Let us give thanks to the Divine management and the holy Father who allowed the necessary slowness of belief. Others doubted, that we might not doubt.

II. And therefore they are in the highest degree instructive

Those days, therefore, dearly-beloved, which intervened between the Lord's Resurrection and Ascension did not pass by in uneventful leisure, but great mysteries were ratified in them, deep truths revealed. In them the fear of awful death was removed, and the immortality not only of the soul but also of the flesh established. In them, through the Lord's breathing upon them, the Holy Ghost is poured upon all the Apostles, and to the blessed Apostle Peter beyond the rest the care of the Lord's flock is entrusted, in addition to the keys of the kingdom. Then it was that the Lord joined the two disciples as a companion on the way, and, to the sweeping away of all the clouds of our uncertainty, upbraided them with the slowness of their timorous hearts. Their enlightened hearts catch the flame of faith, and lukewarm as they have been, are made to burn while the Lord unfolds the Scriptures. In the breaking of bread also their eyes are opened as they eat with Him: how far more blessed is the opening of their eyes, to whom the glorification of their nature is revealed than that of our first parents, on whom fell the disastrous consequences of their transgression.

III. They prove the Resurrection of the flesh

And in the course of these and other miracles, when the disciples were harassed by bewildering thoughts, and the Lord had appeared in their midst and said, "Peace be unto you" , that what was passing through their hearts might not be their fixed opinion (for they thought they saw a spirit not flesh), He refutes their thoughts so discordant with the Truth, offers to the doubters' eyes the marks of the cross that remained in His hands and feet, and invites them to handle Him with careful scrutiny, because the traces of the nails and spear had been retained to heal the wounds of unbelieving hearts, so that not with wavering faith, but with most steadfast knowledge they might comprehend that the Nature which had been lain in the sepulchre was to sit on God the Father's throne.

IV. Christ's ascension has given us greater privileges and joys than the devil had taken from us

Accordingly, dearly-beloved, throughout this time which elapsed between the Lord's Resurrection and Ascension, God's Providence had this in view, to teach and impress upon both the eyes and hearts of His own people that the Lord Jesus Christ might be acknowledged to have as truly risen, as He was truly born, suffered, and died. And hence the most blessed Apostles and all the disciples, who had been both bewildered at His death on the cross and backward in believing His Resurrection, were so strengthened by the clearness of the truth that when the Lord entered the heights of heaven, not only were they affected with no sadness, but were even filled with great joy. And truly great and unspeakable was their cause for joy, when in the sight of the holy multitude, above the dignity of all heavenly creatures, the Nature of mankind went up, to pass above the angels' ranks and to rise beyond the archangels' heights, and to have Its uplifting limited by no elevation until, received to sit with the Eternal Father, It should be associated on the throne with His glory, to Whose Nature It was united in the Son. Since then Christ's Ascension is our uplifting, and the hope of the Body is raised, whither the glory of the Head has gone before, let us exult, dearly-beloved, with worthy joy and delight in the loyal paying of thanks. For today not only are we confirmed as possessors of paradise, but have also in Christ penetrated the heights of heaven, and have gained still greater things through Christ's unspeakable grace than we had lost through the devil's malice. For us, whom our virulent enemy had driven out from the bliss of our first abode, the Son of God has made members of Himself and placed at the right hand of the Father, with Whom He lives and reigns in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God for ever and ever. Amen.

Source: Translated by Charles Lett Feltoe. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 12. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1895.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. .

Hymns of the Feast of the Ascension of Christ

Apolytikion (Fourth Tone)
O Christ our God, You ascended in Glory and gladdened Your disciples by the promise of the Holy Spirit. Your blessing assured them that You are the Son of God, the Redeemer of the world.

Kontakion (Plagal of the Second Tone)
O Christ our God, upon fulfilling Your dispensation for our sake, You ascended in Glory, uniting the earthly with the heavenly. You were never separate but remained inseparable, and cried out to those who love You, "I am with you and no one is against you."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Theotokos at the Resurrection of Christ

The Gospels and the tradition of the Church are pretty clear that two women first saw the risen Lord. We know one was Saint Mary Magdalene who is exclusively spoken of in the Gospel of John, and the other we know was another Mary but the identity initially is not told exactly which Mary this is. The tradition of the Fathers is clear that this Mary was the mother of Jesus, the Theotokos.

One way we know this is from the iconographic tradition of the Church where two women are depicted together as being first witnesses of the risen Jesus. The woman in red, the traditional cloak color for the Theotokos, is the Virgin Mary, who is also sometimes depicted with her name engraved near her halo. this depiction goes back centuries, the earliest of which that we know of comes from a miniature of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection in the Rabula Codex (Syria and Palestine, dated 586-587 A.D.). The scenes first show two holy women at the tomb and the second at the feet of Christ. One of the women has a halo, which indicates that she is the Blessed Virgin Mary. These scenes became the standard iconography on the Sunday of the Holy Myrrhbearers during the Paschal season, and even flourished in the Middle Ages of the West as well.

We also have indication that the Theotokos was the first witness to the resurrection of Christ from several sources in the apocryphal literature of the early church. Though most of these writings are rejected as heretical or non-canonical, they still indicate a belief that was circulated among the early christians.

Origen (3rd cent.) speaks of a text named Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, and indicates that the following tradition existed already in the second century:

"She [the Virgin Mary] opened her eyes, for they were lowered in order not to view the earth, scene of so many dreadful events. She said to Him with joy, 'Rabboni, my Lord, my God, my Son, thou art resurrected, indeed resurrected.' She wished to hold Him in order to kiss Him upon the mouth. But He prevented her and pleaded with her, saying, 'My mother, do not touch me. Wait a little, for this is the garment which My Father has given me when He resurrected me. It is not possible for anything of flesh to touch me until I go into heaven.

"This body is however the one in which I passed nine months in thy loins ... Know these things, O my mother. This flesh is that which I received in thee. This is that which has reposed in my tomb. This is also that which is resurrected today, that which now stands before thee. Fix your eyes upon my hands and upon my feet. O Mary, my mother, know that it is I, whom thou hast nourished. Doubt not, O my mother, that I am thy son. It is I who left thee in the care of John at the moment when I was raised on the Cross.

"'Now therefore, O my mother, hasten to tell my brothers, and say to them... According to the words which I have told to you, go into Galilee: You shall see me. Hasten, for it is not possible for me to go into heaven with my Father, no longer to see you more.'"

A more known work, the Book of the Resurrection of Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle, known to Saint Jerome, and probably from the fourth century or late third century, contains a detailed account of Mary's search for the body of Jesus, and Jesus' subsequent appearance to her:

"And the Saviour appeared and in their presence mounted on the chariot of the Father of the Universe, and He cried out in the language of His Godhead, saying, 'Mari Khar Marih' whereof the interpretation is, 'Mary, the mother of the Son of God.' Then Mary, who knew the interpretation of the words said, 'Hramboune Kathiathaari Mirth'; whereof the interpretation is, 'The Son of the Almighty, and the Master, and Son.' And He said unto her, 'Hail, My mother. Hail, My ark. Hail, thou who has sustained the life of the whole world'....Then our Saviour stretched out His right hand, which was full of blessing, and He blessed the womb of Mary His mother... The womb of Mary is blessed by God the Father and by the Holy Spirit as well..."

These apocryphal texts indicate the love and reverence for Mary by the early writers. Their romanced accounts attempt to put into words Christ's own gratitude to Mary. There is another body of literature, however, that deals with this theme from the perspective of speculative theology. These are the catechetical and homiletic sources of the early centuries.

Tatian was the first writer in the second century to indicate that the Theotokos saw the risen Lord on the day of His Resurrection. However, he seems to have confused the Virgin Mary with Mary Magdalene in his account of the episode of the "Noli me tangere" or "Do Not Touch Me" (the title given to iconography of Christ's encounter with Mary Magdalene). More significantly he also raised the point what was to become the fundamental thesis of all the most orthodox writers touching the subject - that a meeting at which Christ announced his resurrection to his mother was no less than a logical necessity in the completion of his ministry.

Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (ca. 315- ca. 386) wrote a Discourse on Mary Theotokos in which the Virgin is made to speak to the Apostles James, Peter, and John, ten years after the Resurrection:

"Ye saw the sufferings which the Jews inflicted upon Him when He was raised up on the Cross, and that they put Him to death, and that His Father raised Him up from the dead on the third day. And I went to the tomb, and He appeared unto me, and He spake unto me, saying, 'Go and inform My brethren what things ye have seen. Let those whom My Father hath loved come to Galilee.'"

Among the Greek-speaking Fathers, John Chrysostom and Gregory of Nyssa identify the Virgin Mary as one of the women in the post-resurrection scene. In the West, St. Ambrose (4th cent.) notes that Mary deserved to see Christ after his Resurrection. Ambrose's discussion is particularly interesting in that he relates the symbolism of Christ's unused tomb to that of the Virgin womb; so he remarks that Christ's rising from the dead repeats the Virgin birth. Sedulius the Poet (5th cent.), takes up this theme and expands the imagery of the womb and the tomb.

In the East, the theme begins to be more prominent in the ninth century. The earliest known source is found in a homily of George, Metropolitan of Nicomedia, on the Presence of the Virgin at the Sepulcher. As Breckenridge writes:

"George of Nicomedia avoided the pitfalls of scriptural inconcordance by suggesting that the Virgin can be assumed to have been present at the sepulcher on Easter morning before the other women arrived; he intimated that the reason she was not mentioned is that the texts speak only of the women who came to the tomb; while she was already there. In other words, Christ's mother, the only one of his followers to have had perfect confidence in his ultimate triumph, remained at his tomb from the time of its sealing until that of the arrival of the other women on Easter morning. George described the long vigil by the silent tomb, and finally the prayer of Mary to her Son, in which she expressed complete faith in his glorification, requesting only that he vouchsafe her a glimpse of him when he did arise from the dead: "When you have come, and the joy of Resurrection is accomplished, first of all, appear to announce this to your Mother." And so, although, as George readily acknowledged, the Scriptures say nothing of it... George proceeded to describe it, not at all in terms of the sort of encounter between two people given by the gospels in the case of Mary Magdalene or the other women, but as a mighty vision of glory, worthy only of an apocalypse... His solution is essentially the one employed by several later Byzantine writers such as Metaphrastes, Theophanes Krameus, and Gregory Palamas."

Saint Gregory Palamas, in his Sermon on the Sunday of the Myrrhbearing Women, addresses the issue directly and offers an apologetic for the case that the Theotokos indeed appeared first at the tomb of Christ. Below is a detailed account given in the book by Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos in his book Gregory Palamas As A Hagiorite:

"In the homily of St. Gregory Palamas for the Sunday of the Myrrh-bearing Women, analysing the holy texts of the Scriptures with many reasonings, he ends by concluding that the Theotokos saw the Risen Christ and indeed saw him before the other women, and she alone was granted to clasp his feet. But let us look more analytically at this teaching.

"The Myrrh-bearing Women followed Christ 'with the Mother of the Lord' and remained with her and made ready to anoint the Body of Christ with spices. According to Mark the Evangelist, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary sat in front of the tomb and watched the burial of Christ. The phrase 'the other Mary' meant 'the Mother of God herself in any case'. The Panagia was also called Mary the mother of James and Joses, who were children of Joseph her betrothed, by another woman.

"According to St. Gregory Palamas, the Panagia was the first to come to the tomb with Mary Magdalene. 'First of all the Theotokos came to the tomb of the Son of God...'. The other Mary 'was the Mother of God in any case'. All the other myrrh-bearing women went to the tomb after the earthquake and the flight of the guards, and therefore they found the tomb opened and the stone rolled away. However, 'the Virgin Mother was present when the earthquake took place, and when the stone was rolled away and the tomb opened, and the guards were present'. The guards fled after the earthquake, 'but the Mother of God was elated at the sight'. At the same time St. Gregory Palamas teaches that that life-bearing tomb was opened for the Theotokos and it was also for her that the angel of the Lord flashed like lightning because it is for the Theotokos and through the Theotokos that all the good things were opened. According to St. Gregory, this angel was the archangel Gabriel, the one who at the Annunciation said to her: 'Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favour with God' (Luke 1, 30). As soon as he saw her hastening to the tomb, he too hastened to announce to her the resurrection of her Son.

"The women fleeing from the tomb were seized with fear and great joy. According to St Gregory Palamas, fear was in the other women and Mary Magdalene, while the word joy is said about the Mother of God 'because she understood the words of the angel and surrendered completely to the light, being completely purified and divinely favoured, and with all these things she knew the truth and believed in the archangel since he had for a long time appeared credible to her because of his deeds'. The Panagia was favoured, she had been made pure and had attained deification; she had also seen the archangel Gabriel and been assured at that time of the credibility of his word, and therefore also now she was granted this great experience.

"With the information about the resurrection of Christ which was given by the archangel Gabriel, the Panagia, 'joined by the other women', went back to where she had been. Then Christ appeared and said 'Greetings'. The Evangelist says: 'They came to him, clasped his feet, and worshipped him' (Matt. 28, 9). St. Gregory Palamas says that just as the Theotokos alone of all the women understood the meaning of the angel's words, so also she was the first of the women 'both to see and to know the risen one, and she was the first to fall down and clasp his feet and become his apostle to the Apostles'.

"Mary Magdalene was not with the Mother of Christ when the Lord met her. This is seen first from the fact that when Mary Magdalene had just met the Apostle Peter she said to him: 'They have taken my Lord away, and I don't know where they have put him'; second from the fact that she was weeping, because she thought that they had taken Christ, she did not recognise Christ, and Christ did not let her come near Him. So therefore the ever-virgin Mary was the first to come to the tomb and she first received the message of the resurrection. Then came the other myrrh-bearers as well.

"St. Gregory Palamas uses all these things to interpret the related accounts of the Evangelists. But he adds that the Panagia was the first to see the resurrected Christ, was counted worthy of divine conversation, became an ear-witness of his, touched him with her hands, 'as was right and just'. Actually this is right and just. For, on the one hand, we cannot believe that all the other women went to the tomb but not His Mother, nor that Christ gave the joy of his appearance to all the others first and not to His Mother. Therefore it was both 'right' and 'just' that his first appearance was to be to the Panagia.

"But the point is why did the Evangelists not speak clearly, but wrote it in a shadowy way. And at this point St. Gregory indicates that the Evangelists did not refer to it openly, 'not wanting to offer the Mother as witness, lest they give unbelievers reason for suspicion'. There was a possibility that the unbelievers, as soon as they heard that the Mother of Christ saw Him first, might doubt the resurrection. St. Gregory says that now that is not the case, because this is being said to the faithful."



Sources:
1. James D. Breckenridge, "Et Prima Vidit: The Iconography of the Appearance of Christ to His Mother," Art Bulletin, 39 (1957);
2. http://www.vic.com/~tscon/pelagia/htm/b1.en.saint_gregory_palamas_as_a_hagiorite.09.htm#s13d;
3. http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/eastertriduum.html#item2.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint John the Russian, a New Confessor and His Incorrupt Relics

Saint John the Russian (Feast Day - May 27)

The Life of Our Father Among the Saints

John the Russian

Whose Venerable Relics Repose in New Prokopion on the Greek Island of Evvia

"Undeteriorated relics are, in our tradition, the indisputable evidence of theosis, or in other words the fulfillment of the Church’s ascetic therapy." - Fr. John Romanides

The Holy Confessor John the Russian was born in Little Russia around 1690, and was raised in piety and love for the Church of God. Upon attaining the age of maturity he was called to military service, and he served as a simple soldier in the army of Peter I and took part in the Russo-Turkish War. During the Prutsk Campaign of 1711 he and other soldiers were captured by the Tatars, who handed him over to the commander of the Turkish cavalry. He took his Russian captive home with him to Asia Minor, to the village of Prokopion.

The Turks tried to convert the Christian soldiers to the Moslem faith with threats and flattery, but those who resisted were beaten and tortured. Some, alas, denied Christ and became Moslems, hoping to improve their lot. St John was not swayed by the promise of earthly delights, and he bravely endured the humiliation and beatings.

His master tortured him often in the hope that his slave would accept Islam. St John resolutely resisted the will of his master saying, "You cannot turn me from my holy Faith by threats, nor with promises of riches and pleasures. I will obey your orders willingly, if you will leave me free to follow my religion. I would rather surrender my head to you than to change my faith. I was born a Christian, and I shall die a Christian."

St John's bold words and firm faith, as well as his humility and meekness, finally softened the fierce heart of his master. He left John in peace, and no longer tried to make him renounce Christianity. The saint lived in the stable and took care of his master's animals, rejoicing because his bed was a manger such as the one in which the Savior was born.

From morning until late evening the saint served his Turkish master, fulfilling all his commands. He performed his duties in the winter cold and summer heat, half naked and barefoot. Other slaves frequently mocked him, seeing his zeal. St John never became angry with them, but on the contrary, he helped them when he could, and comforted them in their misfortune.

The saint's kindness and gentle nature had its effect on the souls of both the master and the slaves. The Agha and his wife came to love him, and offered him a small room near the hayloft. St John did not accept it, preferring to remain in the stable with the animals. Here he slept on the hay, covered only by an old coat. So the stable became his hermitage, where he prayed and chanted Psalms.

St John brought a blessing to his master simply by living in his household. The cavalry officer became rich, and was soon one of the most powerful men in Prokopion. He knew very well why his home had been blessed, and he did not hesitate to tell others.

Sometimes St John left the stable at night and went to the church of the Great Martyr George, where he kept vigil in the narthex. On Saturdays and Feast days, he received the Holy Mysteries of Christ.

During this time St John continued to serve his master as before, and despite his own poverty, he always helped the needy and the sick, and shared his meager food with them.

One day, the officer left Prokopion and went to Mecca on pilgrimage. A few days later, his wife gave a banquet and invited her husband's friends and relatives, asking them to pray for her husband's safe return. St John served at the table, and he put down a dish of pilaf, his master's favorite food. The hostess said, "How much pleasure your master would have if he could be here to eat this pilaf with us." St John asked for a dish of pilaf, saying that he would send it to his master in Mecca. The guests laughed when they heard his words. The mistress, however, ordered the cook to give him a dish of pilaf, thinking he would eat it himself, or give it to some poor family.

Taking the dish, St John went into the stable and prayed that God would send it to his master. He had no doubt that God would send the pilaf to his master in a supernatural manner. The plate disappeared before his eyes, and he went into the house to tell his mistress that he had sent the pilaf to his master.

After some time, the master returned home with the copper plate which had held the pilaf. He told his household that on a certain day (the very day of the banquet), he returned from the mosque to the home where he was staying. Although the room was locked, he found a plate of steaming pilaf on the table. Unable to explain who had brought the food, or how anyone could enter the locked room, the officer examined the plate. To his amazement, he saw his own name engraved on the copper plate. In spite of his confusion, he ate the meal with great relish.

When the officer's family heard this story, they marveled. His wife told him of how John had asked for a plate of pilaf to send to his master in Mecca, and how they all laughed when John came back and said that it had been sent. Now they saw that what the saint had said was true (Compare the story of Habakkuk, who miraculously brought a dish of pottage to Daniel in the lions' den [Dan. 14:33-39] in the Septuagint).

Toward the end of his difficult life St John fell ill, and sensed the nearness of his end. He summoned the priest so that he could receive Holy Communion. The priest, fearing to go to the residence of the Turkish commander openly with the Holy Gifts, enclosed the life-giving Mysteries in an apple and brought them to St John.

St John glorified the Lord, received the Body and Blood of Christ, and then reposed. The holy Confessor John the Russian went to the Lord Whom he loved on May 27, 1730. When they reported to the master that his servant John had died, he summoned the priests and gave them the body of St John for Christian burial. Almost all the Christian inhabitants of Prokopion came to the funeral, and they accompanied the body of the saint to the Christian cemetery.

Three and a half years later the priest was miraculously informed in a dream that the relics of St John had remained incorrupt. Soon the relics of the saint were transferred to the church of the holy Great Martyr George and placed in a special reliquary. The new saint of God began to be glorified by countless miracles of grace, accounts of which spread to the remote cities and villages. Christian believers from various places came to Prokopion to venerate the holy relics of St John the Russian and they received healing through his prayers. The new saint came to be venerated not only by Orthodox Christians, but also by Armenians, and even Turks, who prayed to the Russian saint, "Servant of God, in your mercy, do not disdain us."

In the year 1881 a portion of the relics of St John were transferred to the Russian monastery of the holy Great Martyr Panteleimon by the monks of Mount Athos, after they were miraculously saved by the Saint during a dangerous journey.

Construction of a new church was begun in 1886, through the contributions of the monastery and the inhabitants of Prokopion. This was necessary because the church of the holy Great Martyr George, where the relics of St John were enshrined, had fallen into disrepair.

On August 15, 1898 the new church dedicated to St John the Russian was consecrated by the Metropolitan John of Caesarea, with the blessing of the Ecumenical Patriarch Constantine V.

In 1924, an exchange of the populations of Greece and Turkey took place. Many Moslems moved out of Greece, and many Christians moved out of Turkey. The inhabitants of Prokopion, when they moved to the island of Evvia, took with them part of the relics of St John the Russian.

For several decades the relics were in the church of Sts Constantine and Helen at New Prokopion on Evvia, and in 1951 they were transferred into a new church dedicated to St John the Russian. Thousands of pilgrims flocked here from all the corners of Greece, particularly on his Feast, May 27. St John the Russian is widely venerated on Mount Athos, particularly in the Russian monastery of St Panteleimon.

St John's help is sought by travelers, and by those transporting things.

SOME MIRACLES OF SAINT JOHN

The Saint performed many wonders even after his blessed repose. A descendent of the Agha told many of the following miracle: "My children would not live except for a short time, and would die while yet infants. Their unfortunate mother, after she had lost hope in the wisdom of medicine, fled without my knowledge to the relics of the slave John, so that be might grant her a little child which would not die while yet young, so that we also might rejoice to see it as a young man or even a young girl .... In truth the righteous John heard the supplication of my wife. God granted us a strong little boy whom we called, as you know, Kole Guvan Oglu (that is, "Son of the Slave John"), and he lives through the power of God and the prayers of John even until today."

Several times St. John has appeared in dreams and visions warning of impending dangers. Once he warned some Greek school children that the roof was about to fall; they had time enough to jump underneath their desks and when the roof fell, its beams came down upon the desks without striking even one of the children.

More recently we have heard about the miraculous healings of two severe cases of meningitis – one a 19 year old shepherd boy in southern Greece and the other a 3-year old boy in London.

Today a part of the right hand of St. John is enshrined in a special silver reliquary in the Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston, where many people come to venerate it and to ask the prayers of this simple Confessor of the Christian faith, knowing that the Lord – Who resisteth the proud – hears speedily the prayers of the meek.

(Based on a Life by Photios Kontoglou. The Orthodox Word, June-July, 1967)


Apolytikion in the Fourth Tone
He that hath called thee from earth unto the heavenly abodes doth even after thy death keep thy body unharmed, O righteous one; for thou wast carried off as a prisoner into Asia wherein also, O John, thou didst win Christ as thy friend. Wherefore do thou beseech him that our souls be saved.

Kontakion in the Fourth Tone
The holy memory, O righteous father, of thine illustrious contests hath come today gladdening the souls of those who venerate thee with reverence and faith, O John.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

On Faith and Reason: Selections From Saint John Chrysostom

[Below are some excerpts from Saint John Chrysostom, found throughout his writings, that deal with the relationship between Faith and Reason. For Saint John, there is not a contradiction between Faith and Reason when used for their own purpose, since both are gifts of God, but he does demonstrate and drive home strongly that Faith is far superior to Reason. Moreover he continuously warns against misusing Reason to be an enemy of Faith. Reasoning should not interfere in matters of Faith, because Reason cannot even hope to comprehend the transcendent nature of Faith. Reason cannot enlighten Faith, but Faith can enlighten Reason. Reason diminishes Faith because it limits it and does not allow it to grow. And Faith that does not increase eventually withers and dies. At the same time Reason unenlightened by Faith is like being born and raised in a dark prison cell, confined and unaware of the world beyond your limited experience. Reason can never move us beyond its own ignorance and it serves its purpose only when it drives a person to deeper Faith. -J.S.]

"In that God has bestowed upon us benefits that surpass man's reasoning, suitably enough He has brought in faith. It is not possible to be steadfast when demanding reasons. For behold all of our noble doctrines --- how destitute they are of reasoning, and dependent upon faith alone. [For example,] God is not anywhere, and is everywhere. What has less reason in it than this? Each - by itself - is full of difficulty. ... He was not made, He made not Himself, He never began to be. What reasoning will receive this, if there be not faith?"

"If any one should tell you descend into the deep, and trace out things at the bottom of the sea, you would not tolerate the command. Therefore, when no one compels you, why do you willingly seek to comprehend the unsearchable abyss [of our divine dogma with your reasoning]? I beseech you, do not do this. Instead, let us sail upwards --- not floating, for we shall soon be weary and sink; but using the divine Scriptures, as some vessel, let us unfurl the sails of faith. If we sail in them, then the Word of God will be present with us as our Navigator...."

"This is the work of faith: If you believe, suffer all things; if you do not suffer, you do not believe. For are not the things promised [so great], that he who believes would choose to suffer even ten thousand deaths? The kingdom of heaven is set before him --- and immortality, and eternal life. Therefore, whoever believes will suffer all things. Then faith is shown through his works. In truth, one might have said: Not merely did you believe, but through your works you manifested it --- through your steadfastness, through your zeal."

"Where faith exists, there is no need of question. Where there is no room for curiosity, questions are superfluous. Questioning is the subversion of faith. For he that seeks, has not yet found. He who questions cannot believe. Therefore, it is [St. Paul's] advice that we should not be occupied with questions; since, if we question, it is not faith. For faith sets reasoning at rest. ..."

"But why then does Christ say, 'Keep on seeking and ye shall find, keep on knocking and it shall be opened unto you' (Matt. vii. 7); and, 'Keep on searching the Scriptures, for in them you think to have eternal life (John 5:39)? With regards to 'seeking', it refers to prayer and vehement desire. And He invites us to, 'Keep on searching the Scriptures,' not in order to introduce the labors of questioning, but to end them --- so that we may ascertain and settle their true meaning; not that we may be always questioning, but that we may be done with it. ..."

"And [St. Paul] rightly said, 'Command some not to teach different doctrines, nor to give heed to fables, and endless genealogies, which produce questions rather than the dispensation of God, which is in faith' (I Timothy 1:4). Justly has he said, 'the dispensation of God.' For great are the blessings, which God is willing to dispense; but the greatness of them is not conceived by reasoning. This must, then, be the work of faith, which is the best medicine of our souls. This questioning, therefore, is opposed to the dispensation of God. For [this is] what is dispensed by faith: To receive His mercies and become better men; to doubt and dispute of nothing; but to repose in confidence."

"It is not faith merely to profess belief, but to do works worthy of faith; ... for sound doctrines avail nothing towards our salvation, if our life is corrupt. ... For even though we have all faith and all knowledge of the Scriptures, yet if we are naked and destitute of the protection derived from (holy) living, there is nothing to hinder us from being hurried into the fire of hell; and burning for ever in the unquenchable flame. For as they who have done good shall rise to life everlasting, so they who have dared the contrary shall rise to everlasting punishment; which never has an end. Let us, therefore, manifest all eagerness not to waste the gain, which accrues to us from a right faith, by our vile actions; but becoming well-pleasing to Him by these [i.e., our actions] also, boldly to look upon Christ. No happiness can be equal to this."

"Some, who seek out everything by reasoning, turn aside from the faith; but reasoning produces shipwreck, while faith is as a safe ship. For where there is no faith, there is no knowledge; when anything springs from our reasonings, it is not [true] knowledge."

"What the wisdom of men cannot discover, faith abundantly comprehends and achieves. Therefore, let us cling to this; and not commit to reasonings what concerns ourselves. For tell me, why have not the Greeks been able to find out anything? Did they not know all the wisdom of the heathen? Why then could they not prevail against fishermen and tentmakers, and unlearned persons? Was it not because the one committed all to argument, the others to faith?"

"Therefore, [St. Paul] shows that the greatest things are attained through faith; and not through reasonings. And how does he show this, tell me? It is manifest, he says, that God made: the things which are, out of things which are not; things which appear, out of things which appear not; things which subsist, out of things which subsist not. ... For reason suggests nothing of this kind; but on the contrary, that the things which appear are [formed] out of things which appear."`

"Where is the proof ... that God made these things [i.e., all of the visible and invisible creation]? Reason does not suggest it; no one was present when it was done. [Therefore], how is it shown? It is plainly the result of faith. "Through faith," [St. Paul exclaims], we understand that the worlds were made. Why "through faith"? Because "the things which are seen have not come into being out of things which appear." (Hebrews 11:3) For this is Faith."

"Moved with fear,[Noah] prepared an ark" (Hebrews 11:7). Reason indeed suggested nothing of this sort; for "they were marrying and being given in marriage" (Luke 17:27); the air was clear, there were no signs [of change], but nevertheless he feared: "By faith"[St. Paul says], "Noah being warned by God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house" (Hebrews 11:7)." ... Faith is all. If [faith] stabilizes the heart, then it stands in security. It follows that Faith gives stability, consequently reasonings shake. For Faith is contrary to reasoning."

"Faith needs: a generous and vigorous soul; and one rising above all things of sense; and passing beyond the weakness of human reasonings. For it is not possible to become a believer, other than by raising one's self above the common customs [of the world]."

"Everywhere, beloved, we have need of faith --- the mother of blessings, the medicine of salvation; and without this, it is impossible to possess any one of the great doctrines. Without this, men are like those who attempt to cross the open sea without a ship; who - for a little while - hold out by swimming, using both bands and feet. However, when they have advanced farther, they are quickly swamped by the waves. In like manner, those who use their own reasonings, before they have learned anything, suffer shipwreck; as also Paul says, "Who concerning faith have made shipwreck." (1 Tim. i. 19.) In order that this not be the case with us, let us hold fast to the sacred anchor [of faith]..."

"This is what we [should] learn: rather to raise questions, not to solve the questions that are raised. For even if we do solve them, we have not solved them altogether; but (only) as far as man's reasoning goes. The proper solution of such questions is faith --- knowing: that God does all things justly and mercifully, and for the best; that to comprehend the reason of them is impossible. This is the one solution, and no better one exists... This is a chief characteristic of faith: to leave all the consequences of this lower world, and [thereby] seek that which is above nature; ... cast out the feebleness of forethought; and accept everything from the Power of God."

"Faith requires obedience, and not curiosity; and when God commands, one ought to be obedient, not curious."

"There is need not only of faith, but also of a spiritual way of life --- that we may keep the Spirit that was given once for all."

"Faith is - indeed - great, and brings salvation; and without it, never is it possible to be saved."

"For the wonderful qualities of faith are two: that it both accomplishes great things, and suffers great things; and regards the suffering as nothing."

"Wherefore I entreat you: let us use much diligence --- both to stand in the right faith, and to show forth an excellent life."

And a few by Saint Basil the Great...

"We must neither doubt nor hesitate respecting the words of the Lord, but be fully persuaded that every word of God is true and possible --- even if nature rebels; for therein is the test of faith."

"Let the simplicity of Faith be stronger than the deduction of reason."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins and Faustus of Riez Were Not Semi-Pelagians

Saint Vincent of Lerins (Feast Day - May 24)

By John Sanidopoulos

Saints John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins and Faustus of Riez are Orthodox Church Fathers. The West has designated these Fathers as Semi-Pelagians out of convenience because they opposed the Augustinian doctrines of the total bondage of the will, of the priority and irresistibility of grace, and of rigid predestination. In fact, these Fathers of the Church were influenced by Saint John Chrysostom and Saint Basil the Great, who could be better viewed as Synergists. Synergistic Soteriology is Orthodox Soteriology, and it is opposed to the errors of Pelagius and Augustine. In other words, these three Fathers took the moderate route in opposing two grave errors: the self-made, man-based salvation of Pelagianism and the monergistic, deterministic salvation of Augustine.

Saint John Cassian expressed his views concerning the relation of grace and freedom in his Conferences according to the tradition he received from the Greek-speaking Fathers by whom he was taught. With unmistakable reference to the Bishop of Hippo, he had endeavored in his thirteenth chapter of Conferences to demonstrate from Biblical examples that God frequently awaits the good impulses of the natural will before coming to its assistance with His supernatural grace; while the grace often preceded the will, as in the case of Matthew and Peter, on the other hand the will frequently preceded the grace, as in the case of Zacchæus and the Good Thief on the Cross. Furthermore, in his Institutes, Saint John shows in chapters 20-22 what he learned from his teacher Paphnutios that there is no salvation apart from the cooperation (synergeia) of man's free-will along with divine grace. Without identifying Augustine by name, Saint Vincent condemned Augustine's doctrine of grace and predestination as well, calling it heresy to teach of "a certain great and special and altogether personal grace of God [which is given to the predestined elect] without any labor  without any effort, without any industry, even though they neither ask, nor seek, nor knock" (Saint Vincent, Commonitorium, ch. 26). Augustine had already passed away in 430, while this refutation was written in 434 to support the teachings of Saint John Cassian. In refuting the doctrines of Augustine, these two Fathers emphasized the cooperation of man's free-will and God's grace not just initially in the process of salvation but throughout one's lifetime.

Augustine was not named in these refutations out of respect for his attempt to combat the heresy of Pelagius. Augustine, more known as a speculative theologian and largely unaware of the traditions of the Greek-speaking Fathers, took his refutation of Pelagius to an opposite extreme to the point of nearly obliterating human free-will. The exchanges between Augustine and the Fathers of the West were respectful and they never labelled each other as heretics, just erring friends. The polemics only started after the death of Augustine by his disciple Prosper who falsely labelled the Fathers of the West as "enemies of grace".

Since false teachers often employ the use of Holy Scripture and manipulate it towards their own teachings, Saint Vincent offers three tests of accurate, Orthodox interpretation of Holy Scripture according to the tradition taught to him by the Greek-speaking Fathers: universality, meaning the entire Church adheres to the teaching; antiquity, meaning the teaching was always taught from the time of the apostolic successors; and consent, meaning that Ecumenical Synods, Fathers and bishops harmoniously agree the teaching is true. He also demonstrates that if any one of these three criteria are compromised, then the faithful should look to the other criteria to establish truth. These three criteria also were used by Saint Vincent to refute the novel doctrines of Augustine.

That Augustine was in error is evident by his frequent use of Scripture to tweak his novel views. In fact, Augustine himself admitted that he once believed in Synergism, or what he calls "a similar error", until he examined what the Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 4:7. Preferring his own interpretation to the consensus of the Holy Fathers, Augustine fell into error. That Saints John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins, and Faustus of Riez were upholding the doctrines of the Greek Fathers is clear from their writings and the fact that they do not deny any established doctrine as Augustine does, but confront a deviation of this doctrine in the person of the unnamed Augustine and his disciples.

Saint Faustus of Riez was the successor of Saint John Cassian and upheld all his teachings. To the doctrine of predestination taught by Augustine and his followers such as Lucidus, Saint Faustus responded that those who ascribe salvation entirely to the will of man (Pelagius) or to irresistible grace (Augustine) fall into heathen folly. In a letter to Lucidus he wrote: "We assert that whoever is lost is lost by his own volition, but that he could have obtained salvation by grace had he cooperated with it. On the other hand, whoever, by means of [this] cooperation attains perfection may, of his own fault, his own negligence, fall and lose it and [become] lost. Certainly we exclude all personal boasting, for we declare that all that we have has been gratuitously received from God's hand" (Epistle to Lucidus, 53:683). Saint Faustus by no means defended Augustinian doctrines as many contemporary Orthodox defenders of Augustine claim, but such a preposterous claim is refuted by the above quotation. Furthermore, the cooperation between God's grace and man's free-will described in the above passage reveals that Saint Faustus also was not a Semi-Pelagian.

In 475, the Synod of Arles condemned Augustine's teaching of predestination. The Synod of Lyons in the fifth century, under the Archbishop of Lyons Saint Patiens, did the same. In 829, the Synod of Paris again condemned Augustine's teaching of irresistible grace and reaffirmed the Orthodox Christian doctrine of Synergism. At the Synod of Mainz in 848, under Saint Hincmar, Augustine's doctrine of double predestination was again condemned. It was not until the Frankish theologians begun studying Augustine during the time of Charlemagne that the tides changed in the churches of the West and divided itself into a hopeless mess. Even now, in the 21st century, one of the many major divisions in Protestantism is over the question of predestination and irresistible grace.

It has been assumed that the Second Synod of Orange in 529 condemned the views of the so-called "Semi-Pelagians" John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins, Faustus of Riez and others. This is a complete misunderstanding of the Synod as Gaul at the time was predominantly Orthodox and largely untainted by Augustine's novel doctrines. A careful examination of the 25 Canons formulated by the bishops of Gaul reveals in fact the upholding of the Orthodox doctrine of Synergism and both a condemnation of the errors of Pelagius as well as those of Augustine, though again out of respect Augustine is not named. That Augustine is refuted here is further evidenced in the writings of Saint Gregory of Tours who never cites Augustine in his works, though he does show admiration for Saint John Cassian as a guide for monasticism in Gaul.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Book Review: "Greek Orthodox Patrology" by Panagiotes K. Chrestou

For those who are not familiar with the late Dr. Panagiotes Chrestou, he is without a doubt the greatest patristics scholar of the twentieth century and has yet to be surpassed. A foretaste of his genius is presented in this volume which introduces the reader to the study of the Church Fathers. One should keep in mind that this volume, translated by another patristics scholar Fr. George Dragas, consists of only about half of the first volume introduction to Professor Chrestou's 5-volume magnum opus. The second half of the introduction is forthcoming.

According to Fr. Dragas: "His [Dr. Chrestou's] Greek Patrology in 5 volumes, written in Greek and comprising some 3,300 pages, is the most updated Patrology around the world, surpassing any other in thoroughness and extensiveness, and it would have been the indespensible textbook in this field worldwide had it been translated into a more commonly used language, like English..." When all 5 volumes are translated, no doubt it will achieve this status.

This first half of the first volume "gives a birds eye view of Greek Orthodox Patrology, and elucidates in a thorough and succinct way such basic topics as: who the Fathers are; the historical context of patristic literature; the nature and characteristics of Greek patristic literature; and the seven major periods of Greek patristic literature from AD 90 through 1453, the capture of Constantinople." Furthermore, it examines not only the writings of those we know today as Fathers, but examines all the ecclesiastical authors, whether Orthodox or heretical, who wrote in Greek from the beginning of the Christian era to the capture of Constantinople in 1453. It is the Fathers who constitute the nucleus of this examination as they gave the tone of life from post-apostolic times throughout the entirety of the history of the Roman Empire after Constantine the Great.

The effort of Professor Chrestou is meant to revitalize Greek patristic scholarship not only at the academic level, but also as the direct inheritance of Orthodox Christianity. As he says: "It is the Fathers who move the threads of Holy Tradition." The organic unity between the writings and lives of the Church Fathers with Orthodox theology is indispensible for a comprehensve understanding of patrology.

This is not another mere catalogue of names and writings of the Church Fathers. Professor Chrestou understood well that this does little to benefit students of the Fathers and he avoided it as much as possible. In this and other forthcoming volumes there will be presented a "new type of Patrology" as Dr. Chrestou called it. This is not merely a dry systematic exposition of texts and bibliographies and the problems they address, but this is primarily a Patrology with personality. According to the author, it "brings to the fore the personalities of particular authors by projecting those points in their activity and teaching which allow the reader to acquire a full image of them."

If your looking for a dry Patrology with no personality and you have no desire to understand the context of the Church Fathers, this volume is not for you. If you are looking to enhance and broaden your view of patristics and Greco/Roman literature, then you will welcome this volume as an indespensible part of your library.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Evgeny Rodionov the New Martyr of Chechnya

Below is a story of the courage and faith of a young man in Post-Soviet Russia whose memory we celebrate on May 23rd and August 20th.

Evgeny Aleksandrovich Rodionov was born thirty minutes after midnight on May 23, 1977 in the village of Satino-Russkoye near Moscow in what was then the Soviet Union. According to his mother, as a boy in this small village, all he really wanted was to be a cook. When he was eleven years old, Evgeny Rodionov received from his grandmother a little Cross on a chain. He wanted to wear it to school, but his mother, then an atheist, warned him against it, since the communist authorities frowned on such things. Evgeny wore it anyway and refused to ever take it off.

In 1995 Evgeny turned eighteen and was drafted into the Russian armed forces as is required for all Russian men. Right before being drafted, Evgeny was baptized in the Russian Orthodox Church on his own accord seperate from his parents who were still atheists. For his duty he was chosen to work in a frontier guard unit (something of a mix between the US Border Patrol and the National Guard) and sent for training in the Kalingrad area of what was formerly East Prussia. After training he was sent to the border of Chechnya and posted near the town of Galashki. This was towards the end of the controversial First Chechnyan War. On the night of February 14, 1996, just six months after he started his service, Evgeny and three comrades were captured by a force of Muslim Chechen guerillas who were disguised in an ambulance while the Russian soldiers were manning a checkpoint.


According to a report in Pravda from 2003:

"They [Evgeny and the soldiers with him] patrolled the border between the republics of Chechnya and Ingushetia. Their control and registration post was located some 200 meters far from the security detachment. The post was just a small cabin, without any light or wire communication. The cabin did not even have a military support, in spite of the fact that it was a single cabin on the mountainous road, which was used for carrying weapons, ammunition, captives, drugs and so on. The border guards stopped an ambulance vehicle to check it. More than ten armed Chechens got out of the vehicle. Needless to mention that it was very easy for them to cope with young inexperienced soldiers. The guys showed as much resistance as they could, but the outcome of the fight was evident before it even started."

Upon capture they were held in the cellar of an abandoned house for 100 days as ransom demands were sent to their families. Kidnapping and demanding ransom was almost a cottage industry in Chechnya during that time period. They kept Evgeny hanging by his wrists in a basement. They starved and beat him. Rodionov's ransom was reported to be 50 million rubles (1.6 million dollars) - at the time an impossible sum. Another report says it may have been in the $10,000 range. Whatever it was, the ransom was not met.

Chechen field commander Rusland Haihoroev (also spelled Khaikhoroyev in some sources) eventually beheaded Evgeny with a rusted saw that took over an hour to complete on May 23, 1996 (his 19th birthday) near the settlement of Bamut. His body, along with four other Russian prisoners were placed in a bomb crater outside the village of Alexeevskaya and covered up with lime and dirt. Haihoroev stated later in an interview that he only killed Rodionov after the soldier denied conversion to Islam and refused to give up his Orthodox Cross, while two others with him had converted to Islam. Russian troops occupied the village where Evgeny was murdered the following day after the execution.

Evgeny's mother, Lubov Rodionova, was informed that her son had deserted the army. She did not believe the news and went to look for him in Chechnya. She stayed there for ten months chasing down leads and questioning anyone who would talk to her. It was months before she found out that he had in fact been killed. This news came when she found the Chechens who had held her son prisoner and then killed him. Rusland Haihoroev, the leader of the Chechen gang, told her seventeen times over the course of seventeen seperate meetings, that she had born a bad son who refused to adopt Islam and join the separatists in their fight against Russia. “Your son had a choice to stay alive. He could convert to Islam, but he did not agree to take his Cross off. He also tried to escape once,” said Haihoroev to Evgeny's mother. She finally agreed to pay Haihoroev some 100,000 rubles (about $4000 US) to take her to his gravesite in the forests outside of Alexeevskaya. This was money she did not have, so she had to sell her apartment to finance the deal. Chechens in Moscow handled the deal and when all was done Haihoroev showed her where his body was. There late at night, with the assistance of the military, she was able to exhume his body. She found her sons headless body together with the Cross he wore and died for among his bones and stained with small drops of blood. The head was discarded in another place. According to Evgeny's mother, this event took place in the following way:

“When I came to Chechnya in the middle of February, a living private cost ten million rubles. This price was 50 million in August. A friend of mine was told to pay 250 million rubles for her son, since he was an officer. It was nighttime when I and some sappers digging the pit, in which the bodies of four Russian soldiers were thrown. I was praying all the time, hoping that my Evgeny was not going to be there. I could not and did not want to believe that he was murdered. When we were taking out the remnants, I recognized his boots. However, I still refused to accept the fact of his death, until someone found his Cross. Then I fainted.”


Lubov took Evgeny’s body away along with the bodies of his murdered friends. She returned to Moscow with the aide of the Russian Orthodox Church and buried him. When Lubov Rodionova came back home, Evgeny’s father died five days after the funeral. He could not stand the loss of his son.

“We know that he had to go through horrible, long-lasting sufferings that could be compared to the ones of great martyrs in ancient times. They were beheaded, dismembered, but they remained devoted to Jesus Christ anyway,” priest Alexander Shargunov said during the requiem in Evgeny Rodionov’s memory.

Evgeny was posthumously awarded the Order of Courage by the Army. Lubov Rodionova later returned to Chechnya on a second trip and recovered her sons head.

Haihoroev himself and his bodyguards were killed on August 23, 1999 in a fight between his group and a rival Chechen band.

The soldier's fate would have probably been forgotten, if a Central TV film crew had not come to the village where Evgeny's relics now lie six years later to shoot a short report on a Cross being set on a restored church. Parishioners told the reporters about the heroic deed of the son and the courage of the mother, who had buried him in his homeland. They filed the story as a separate report. A year later a huge devotion spread throughout Russia and the entire world.


The New York Times reported in 2003:

"In pamphlets, songs and poems, in sermons and on Web sites, Private Rodionov's story has become a parable of religious devotion and Russian nationalism. The young soldier, it is said, was killed by Muslim rebels seven years ago because he refused to renounce his religion or remove the small silver Cross he kept around his neck...

"As his story has spread, pilgrims have begun appearing in this small village just west of Moscow, where his mother, Lubov, 51, tends his grave on an icy hillside beside an old whitewashed church. Some military veterans have laid their medals by his graveside in a gesture of homage. People in distress have left handwritten notes asking for his intercession. In a church near St. Petersburg, his full-length image stands at the altar beside icons of the Virgin Mary, the Archangel Michael, Jesus and Nicholas II, the last of the czars, who was canonized three years ago.

"Aleksandr Makeyev, a paratroop officer who heads a foundatioion to assist soldiers, said he had seen soldiers kneeling in prayer before an image of Private Rodionov. 'The kids in Chechnya, they feel they've been abandoned by the state and abandoned by their commanders,' he told the newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets. 'They don't know who to appeal to for help, but they understand that Zhenya is one of them,' he said, using Private Rodionov's nickname. 'You can say he is the first soldier-saint.'

"Among the photographs of her son that Mrs. Rodionov spreads on her kitchen table are laminated cards that she says some soldiers carry with them for luck. They bear his image along with a prayer:

"Thy martyr, Evgeny, O Lord, in his sufferings has received an incorruptible crown from Thee, our God, for having Thy strength he has brought down his torturers, has defeated the powerless insolence of demons. Through his prayers save our souls."

Icons and pictures of this young man Evgeny spread around Russia very quickly and he was hailed as a New Martyr for Christ. In these icons sometimes he wears a uniform, sometimes a red robe (which is a way he appears in visions to the faithful, especially soldiers and children), sometimes armed, sometimes holding a Cross of martyrdom, but always with his halo. The picture distributed of him shows Evgeny wearing the Cross around his neck for which he died. Miracles have been occurring in connection with Evgeny's relics as well. During a religious procession in commemoration of Martyr Evgeny on November 20, 2002 the icon with the image of the soldier started secreting sweet-scented myrrh.


A sign in memory of the brave Evgeny was put at the entrance to the school where he studied. There was also a documentary released about him. People’s donations made it possible to put a two-meter (6 ft.) high Orthodox Cross on his grave which is located in the village of Satino-Russkoye, near Podolsk, in the Moscow region. People come to visit his grave from the most distant parts of Russia. A WWII veteran once came to visit Evgeny’s grave and he took off his military decoration – the Bravery Medal – and put in on the tombstone. The writings on Evgeny’s grave Cross run: “Russian soldier Evgeny Rodionov is buried here. He defended his Fatherland and did not disavow Christ. He was executed on May 23, 1996, on the outskirts of Bamut.”

His own Cross, the one that he refused to give up, his mother has donated to St. Nicholas Church in Ordinka, Moscow.


Because of the huge devotion to the New Martyr Evgeny, the pious faithful sought official canonization from the Moscow Patriarchate. Initially they refused and this divided the Orthodox in Russia. Maksim Maksimov, secretary of the canonization commission, explained the Synod's position in Tserkovny Vestnik (Church Bulletin), the official publication of the Russian Orthodox Church. His arguments can be summarised in three points: the only evidence that the soldier was executed for this faith is the testimony of his mother, who in her love made a god of her son; the Russian Orthodox Church has never canonized anyone killed at war; the period of new martyrs ended with the collapse of the Bolshevik regime. However, he emphasised, the deceased can be honoured without canonization. Patriarch Alexy of Moscow personally blessed the popular account of Evgeny's life, but worried that his cult would balloon into anti-Muslim rage.

Opponents of the decision, including well-known priest Alexander Shargunov, argued that an outbreak of people's love is enough for the truth; that Evgeny's grave works miracles, curing the sick and reconciling enemies. They also point out that the solider did not die at war but in captivity, and that to say that the time of martyrs is over is near heresy.

Evgeny was officially declared a Saint on August 20, 2002. A Church in his name was built in Hankala, near Groziniy. It is the only Orthodox Church in Chechnya.

Evgeny's mother, who never before set foot in a church, is now an Orthodox Christian believer, saved by the example of her son, the Holy Martyr Evgeny Rodionov. Eventually the faithful helped her to raise enough money to buy a new home.


Evgeny Rodionov’s biography was published in a booklet that came out in 2002. The book was called The New Martyr of Christ, Warrior Evgeny. The fifth edition of this booklet was the one blessed by Patriarch Alexy. It was written by priest Alexander Shargunov who is a noted communist and nationalist which in turn has been the cause of speculation regarding the truth of his tale. Some say Fr. Alexander merely contemporized a story from Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov (Book III, Chapter 7, “Disputation”) to promote Russian interests in the Chechnyan War. Though this tale of Dostoevsky, which is based on actual events as described by Dostoevsky in his Diary of a Writer (1877), is very similar to the story of Evgeny, this only testifies to the possibility of its actuality. This argument does not hold up when the testimony of Evgeny's mother and executioner bear testimony to the truth of the tale, as well as the fact that there is video evidence to prove Evgeny was beheaded and countless stories of miracles reported by the pious faithful. Evgeny's relics also testify to the truth of the story.

There are a few videos being ciculated on the internet of Russians being beheaded by Muslim Chechens. In fact, there are over 400+ hours of such videos known. They say that a video was made by the Chechens of Saint Evegni's death as well, though its whereabouts are unknown. According to one person who has examined all these videos, as well as the execution of Saint Evgeny: "They used the rusted old saw, and slowly sawed his head off. Everything was filmed, and when Lubov Rodionova came to see the field commander who did it, he gave her a tape with her son's execution on it." I must warn my readers that these videos are very gruesome and are best avoided, as they will likely leave your mind in a frenzy for a few seconds as they did to me. The Chechens preferred this atrocious method of execution because they followed a legend saying that a decapitated victim would not come for the murderer after death.

Below is a tribute video to the New Martyr Evgeny Rodionova


The video below depicts two Russian kids on the Chechen side who were converted to avoid death and they also killed Russian POW's to prove their loyalty. Eventually they were caught planting an IED and were put in jail for life .. possibly even death penalty. One of the kids, Kostiya, disowned his mother on Chechen video and accepted "Allah" as his new "mother". This video shows the bravery and courage of Saint Evgeny who refused to convert and kill his own countrymen by choosing death instead.


Below is a 10-minute video worth watching, though only in Russian, from the documentary of Saint Evgeny. Warning: there is a short scene of an initial beheading at the 3:20 mark and a sheep beheading at the 4:35 mark. If someone knows Russian, it would be appreciated to translate this for me:

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Orthodoxy of Tom Hanks

An interesting article recently appeared regarding Tom Hanks and his happiness in being Greek Orthodox (below). But how Orthodox is Tom Hanks? Though he is not very vocal about his Orthodox faith, we can get a few glimpses of his Orthodoxy through his interviews and many successful films.

Tom Hanks was an adherent of a number of different Christian denominations while growing up, including Catholic, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon), Nazarene, and a Fundamentalist Christian group. His jump from one faith to another mainly was due to the various relationships his divorced parents got into that left him with a very troubled and confused childhood. From an interview published in George magazine, April 1998:

"The major religion I was exposed to in the first 10 years of my life was Catholicism. My stepmother became a Mormon. My aunt, whom I lived with for a long time, was a Nazarene, which is kind of ultra-super Methodist, and in high school, all my friends were Jews. For years I went to Wednesday-night Bible studies with my church group. So I had this peripatetic overview of various faiths, and the one thing I got from that was the intellectual pursuit involved. There was a lot of great stuff to think about. What were the four spiritual laws? Are you a post-tribulationist or a pre-tribulationist?"

Hanks joined the Greek Orthodox Church when he married his wife Rita Wilson in 1988 and has since found his stability there. They attend Saint Sophia's Greek Orthodox Church in Los Angeles and his spiritual father is Fr. Robert Stephanopoulos (his son George is the famous political commentator and his daughter is a nun of the ROCOR church in the Holy Land). Tom has stated that he enjoys being Orthodox because the people at his church don't bother him too much and the atmosphere helps him meditate on the bigger questions. Furthermore, Tom and his family are well-known for attending the daily services of Holy Week.

Rita Wilson has written about various Greek Orthodox traditions and they were both producers in the highly popular film My Big Fat Greek Wedding by Nia Vardalos. Vardalos' upcoming film (to be released June 5, 2009) My Life In Ruins, a comedy about a Greek-American tour guide in Greece, is also produced by Tom Hanks by his studio The Playtone Company. This same studio also produced Mama Mia! which is set in Greece. All these movies reflect the faith and heritage of his wife Rita, while Hanks presents more subtle theological messages in his films that have not been without controversy.


Hanks is most controversial for his role as Robert Langdon in the film The Davinci Code as well as Angels and Demons. While these books and movies promote theological heresy and historical revisionism, Hanks has always promoted these movies as having no basis in fact and endorses them as a means to ponder the big questions of life. Regarding what these questions are, Hanks says:

"I must say that when I go to church, and I do go to church, I ponder the mystery. I meditate on the, 'why?' of 'Why people are as they are,' and 'Why bad things happen to good people,' and 'Why good things happen to bad people.' ... The mystery is what I think is, almost, the grand unifying theory of all mankind."

When asked whether his wife Rita had any qualms about a story that has been condemned from Greek churches, he said: "No, absolutely not. My heritage, and that of my wife, suggests that our sins have been taken away, not our brains."

When asked about his personal views on God, Hanks is far from dogmatic and Orthodox in his thinking. It's a very personal matter to him and his upbringing probably had a lot to do with his inclusivistic approach to the subject. He says:

"My parents divorced so often that I've seen a lot of different sort of religions down the line. My wife is Greek Orthodox and I've been converted. My kids have been baptized in the same font in which she was baptized at our cathedral in town. But I still believe in being able to leave the heavens to those who want to interpret the heavens as they see fit."

This "open-minded" attitude even steers into moral issues. In 1993 Hanks starred in a film called Philadelphia revolving around HIV/AIDS, homosexuality and homophobia which earned him an Academy Award for Best Actor In A Leading Role. This role made Hanks into a Gay Rights icon which he proudly embraced. In his acceptance speech he said the following about his role and his inspiration:

"I would not be standing here if it weren't for two very important men in my life. Two that I haven't spoken with in a while but I had the pleasure of the other night: Mr Rawley Farnsworth, who was my high school drama teacher, who taught me to act well the part, there all the glory lies.

"And one of my classmates under Mr Farnsworth, Mr John Gilkerson. I mention their names because they are two of the finest gay Americans, two wonderful men that I had the good fortune to be associated with, to fall under their inspiration at such a young age. I wish my babies could have the same sort of teacher, the same sort of friends.

"And there lies my dilemma here tonight. I know that my work in this case is magnified by the fact that the streets of Heaven are too crowded with angels. We know their names. They number 1,000 for each of the red ribbons we wear here tonight.

"They finally rest in the warm embrace of the gracious Creator of us all. A healing embrace that cools their fevers, that clears their skin, and allows their eyes to see the simple, self-evident commonsense truth that is made manifest by the benevolent Creator of us all, and was written down on paper by wise men, tolerant men, in the city of Philadelphia 200 years ago. God bless you all, God have mercy on us all, and God bless America."

The revelation about his gay teacher inspired the 1997 film In and Out, starring Kevin Kline as an English Literature teacher who is outed by a former student in a smilar way.


Furthermore, Hanks is very open about his approval of same-sex marriage. According to Wkipedia:

"Hanks was extremely public with his opinion and opposition to Proposition 8 that amended the California constitution to define marriage as a union only between a man and a woman. Hanks and those in opposition raised over USD$44 million in contrast to the supporters' $38 million, but Prop 8 passed with 52% of the vote.

"Hanks went on to blame supporters of Prop 8 as un-American and attacked the LDS (Mormon) church members — major proponents of the bill — for their views on marriage and their role in supporting the bill. About a week later, Hanks apologized for the remark, saying that nothing is more American than voting one's conscience, and that is what the supporters of Prop 8 did."

As far as Tom Hanks being an Orthodox Christian, I would say for him it is more about being part of a faith and cultural tradition than anything else. It can be best symbolized from a famous scene in My Big Fat Greek Wedding when Toula’s fiance is baptized in a rite that is a complete mystery to him. Afterwards, he shows her his new Cross and says: “I’m Greek now.”

For someone who attends the daily services of Holy Week, though few other times throughout the year, it's unfortunate Tom is not more vocal about his Orthodox faith. Could it be because there are contradictions between his faith as an Orthodox Christian with his inclusivistic attitude regarding who God is as well as his moral stance in favor of same-sex marriage? Could it be his lack of education in Orthodoxy? Maybe he doesn't want to sound as snobby as some of his fellow celebrities involved in Scientology and Kabbalism? Perhaps it is all of the above, and he also wants to maintain an individualist attitude with regards to his philosophical outlook on life, and not be bound to the particular views of his faith. At the end of the day, he is still a great entertainer who aims to please his audience and is formed within an individualistic and liberal Hollywood milieu.

Tom Hanks is Happy to be a Member of the Orthodox Church

Moscow, May 21 2009, Interfax - Hollywood actor Tom Hanks appreciates his membership in the Orthodox Church and intends to raise his four children in similar vein.

"I am aware that it is vitally important to come to church and contemplate those substantial questions put up by Orthodoxy and the answers it offers," Hanks said in an interview published by Argumenty i Fakty.

According to him, when a man arrives at a decision to marry and have children, "it is crucial to define spiritual heritage of a future family at this stage."

"I consider Greek Orthodoxy my own spiritual heritage. I got married in the same church where my wife had been baptized. My children were baptized in the same baptismal font as my wife," Tom Hanks said.

According to Hanks, this makes his family "a part of the large universal Church".

"We go to church on rare occasions, but when we do, we have dinner together and discuss our feelings after that," he added.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Vision of Saint Paisios Regarding the Exalted State of the Monastic Life

This icon of Saint Paisios the Great depicts a vision he had of Saint Constantine the Great, his contemporary who passed away before him. Below are the words which Saint Constantine spoke to this great ascetic.

"I am Constantine the Great...
I descended from heaven to reveal to you
the glory which monks receive
in heaven, and the closeness and boldness
they have towards Christ...
I blame myself and I condemn myself,
for not having been granted this great rank of the Monastics...
I am unable to bear the loss, which I experienced...

I do not have the same boldness as the Monastics,
nor equal honor towards them...."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Historic Truth Regarding Macedonia: A Letter to President Barack Obama

Alexander the Great of Macedonia

[On May 18th, 200 Classical Scholars from around the world, sent a letter to the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama. Since then the list of co-signers has grown to 222, all listed below. For all the evidence supporting the arguments in this letter and the documentation sent along with it to the President, please visit here. -J.S]

May 18, 2009

The Honorable Barack Obama
President, United States of America
White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama,

We, the undersigned scholars of Graeco-Roman antiquity, respectfully request that you intervene to clean up some of the historical debris left in southeast Europe by the previous U.S. administration.

On November 4, 2004, two days after the re-election of President George W. Bush, his administration unilaterally recognized the “Republic of Macedonia.” This action not only abrogated geographic and historic fact, but it also has unleashed a dangerous epidemic of historical revisionism, of which the most obvious symptom is the misappropriation by the government in Skopje of the most famous of Macedonians, Alexander the Great.

We believe that this silliness has gone too far, and that the U.S.A. has no business in supporting the subversion of history. Let us review facts. (The documentation for these facts [here in boldface] can be found attached and at: http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html)

The land in question, with its modern capital at Skopje, was called Paionia in antiquity. Mts. Barnous and Orbelos (which form today the northern limits of Greece) provide a natural barrier that separated, and separates, Macedonia from its northern neighbor. The only real connection is along the Axios/Vardar River and even this valley “does not form a line of communication because it is divided by gorges.”

While it is true that the Paionians were subdued by Philip II, father of Alexander, in 358 B.C. they were not Macedonians and did not live in Macedonia. Likewise, for example, the Egyptians, who were subdued by Alexander, may have been ruled by Macedonians, including the famous Cleopatra, but they were never Macedonians themselves, and Egypt was never called Macedonia.

Rather, Macedonia and Macedonian Greeks have been located for at least 2,500 years just where the modern Greek province of Macedonia is. Exactly this same relationship is true for Attica and Athenian Greeks, Argos and Argive Greeks, Corinth and Corinthian Greeks, etc.

We do not understand how the modern inhabitants of ancient Paionia, who speak Slavic – a language introduced into the Balkans about a millennium after the death of Alexander – can claim him as their national hero. Alexander the Great was thoroughly and indisputably Greek. His great-great-great grandfather, Alexander I, competed in the Olympic Games where participation was limited to Greeks.

Even before Alexander I, the Macedonians traced their ancestry to Argos, and many of their kings used the head of Herakles - the quintessential Greek hero - on their coins.

Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia– wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, and in Greek. While in Macedonia, Euripides also wrote the Bacchai, again in Greek. Presumably the Macedonian audience could understand what he wrote and what they heard.

Alexander’s father, Philip, won several equestrian victories at Olympia and Delphi, the two most Hellenic of all the sanctuaries in ancient Greece where non-Greeks were not allowed to compete. Even more significantly, Philip was appointed to conduct the Pythian Games at Delphi in 346 B.C. In other words, Alexander the Great’s father and his ancestors were thoroughly Greek. Greek was the language used by Demosthenes and his delegation from Athens when they paid visits to Philip, also in 346 B.C. Another northern Greek, Aristotle, went off to study for nearly 20 years in the Academy of Plato. Aristotle subsequently returned to Macedonia and became the tutor of Alexander III. They used Greek in their classroom which can still be seen near Naoussa in Macedonia.

Alexander carried with him throughout his conquests Aristotle’s edition of Homer’s Iliad. Alexander also spread Greek language and culture throughout his empire, founding cities and establishing centers of learning. Hence inscriptions concerning such typical Greek institutions as the gymnasium are found as far away as Afghanistan. They are all written in Greek.

The questions follow: Why was Greek the lingua franca all over Alexander’s empire if he was a “Macedonian”? Why was the New Testament, for example, written in Greek?

The answers are clear: Alexander the Great was Greek, not Slavic, and Slavs and their language were nowhere near Alexander or his homeland until 1000 years later. This brings us back to the geographic area known in antiquity as Paionia. Why would the people who live there now call themselves Macedonians and their land Macedonia? Why would they abduct a completely Greek figure and make him their national hero?

The ancient Paionians may or may not have been Greek, but they certainly became Greekish, and they were never Slavs. They were also not Macedonians. Ancient Paionia was a part of the Macedonian Empire. So were Ionia and Syria and Palestine and Egypt and Mesopotamia and Babylonia and Bactria and many more. They may thus have become “Macedonian” temporarily, but none was ever “Macedonia”. The theft of Philip and Alexander by a land that was never Macedonia cannot be justified.

The traditions of ancient Paionia could be adopted by the current residents of that geographical area with considerable justification. But the extension of the geographic term “Macedonia” to cover southern Yugoslavia cannot. Even in the late 19th century, this misuse implied unhealthy territorial aspirations.

The same motivation is to be seen in school maps that show the pseudo-greater Macedonia, stretching from Skopje to Mt. Olympus and labeled in Slavic. The same map and its claims are in calendars, bumper stickers, bank notes, etc., that have been circulating in the new state ever since it declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. Why would a poor land-locked new state attempt such historical nonsense? Why would it brazenly mock and provoke its neighbor?

However one might like to characterize such behavior, it is clearly not a force for historical accuracy, nor for stability in the Balkans. It is sad that the United States of America has abetted and encouraged such behavior.

We call upon you, Mr. President, to help - in whatever ways you deem appropriate - the government in Skopje to understand that it cannot build a national identity at the expense of historic truth. Our common international society cannot survive when history is ignored, much less when history is fabricated.

Sincerely,

NAME TITLE INSTITUTION

Harry C. Avery, Professor of Classics, University of Pittsburgh (USA)

Dr. Dirk Backendorf. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz (Germany)

Elizabeth C. Banks, Associate Professor of Classics (ret.), University of Kansas (USA)

Luigi Beschi, professore emerito di Archeologia Classica, Università di Firenze (Italy)

Josine H. Blok, professor of Ancient History and Classical Civilization, Utrecht University (The Netherlands)

Alan Boegehold, Emeritus Professor of Classics, Brown University (USA)

Efrosyni Boutsikas, Lecturer of Classical Archaeology, University of Kent (UK)

Keith Bradley, Eli J. and Helen Shaheen Professor of Classics, Concurrent Professor of History, University of Notre Dame (USA)

Stanley M. Burstein, Professor Emeritus, California State University, Los Angeles (USA)

Francis Cairns, Professor of Classical Languages, The Florida State University (USA)

John McK. Camp II, Agora Excavations and Professor of Archaeology, ASCSA, Athens (Greece)

Paul Cartledge, A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture, University of Cambridge (UK)

Paavo Castrén, Professor of Classical Philology Emeritus, University of Helsinki (Finland)

William Cavanagh, Professor of Aegean Prehistory, University of Nottingham (UK)

Angelos Chaniotis, Professor, Senior Research Fellow, All Souls College, Oxford (UK)

Paul Christesen, Professor of Ancient Greek History, Dartmouth College (USA)

Ada Cohen, Associate Professor of Art History, Dartmouth College (USA)

Randall M. Colaizzi, Lecturer in Classical Studies, University of Massachusetts-Boston (USA)

Kathleen M. Coleman, Professor of Latin, Harvard University (USA)

Michael B. Cosmopoulos, Ph.D., Professor and Endowed Chair in Greek Archaeology, University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA)

Kevin F. Daly, Assistant Professor of Classics, Bucknell University (USA)

Wolfgang Decker, Professor emeritus of sport history, Deutsche Sporthochschule, Köln (Germany)

Luc Deitz, Ausserplanmässiger Professor of Mediaeval and Renaissance Latin, University of Trier (Germany), and Curator of manuscripts and rare books, National Library of Luxembourg (Luxembourg)

Michael Dewar, Professor of Classics, University of Toronto (Canada)

John D. Dillery, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Virginia (USA)

Sheila Dillon, Associate Professor, Depts. of Art, Art History & Visual Studies and Classical Studies, Duke University (USA)

Douglas Domingo-Forasté, Professor of Classics, California State University, Long Beach (USA)

Pierre Ducrey, professeur honoraire, Université de Lausanne (Switzerland)

Roger Dunkle, Professor of Classics Emeritus, Brooklyn College, City University of New York (USA)

Michael M. Eisman, Associate Professor Ancient History and Classical Archaeology, Department of History, Temple University (USA)

Mostafa El-Abbadi, Professor Emeritus, University of Alexandria (Egypt)

R. Malcolm Errington, Professor für Alte Geschichte (Emeritus) Philipps-Universität, Marburg (Germany)

Panagiotis Faklaris, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)

Denis Feeney, Giger Professor of Latin, Princeton University (USA)

Elizabeth A. Fisher, Professor of Classics and Art History, Randolph-Macon College (USA)

Nick Fisher, Professor of Ancient History, Cardiff University (UK)

R. Leon Fitts, Asbury J Clarke Professor of Classical Studies, Emeritus, FSA, Scot., Dickinson Colllege (USA)

John M. Fossey FRSC, FSA, Emeritus Professor of Art History (and Archaeology), McGill Univertsity, Montreal, and Curator of Archaeology, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (Canada)

Robin Lane Fox, University Reader in Ancient History, New College, Oxford (UK)

Rainer Friedrich, Professor of Classics Emeritus, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S. (Canada)

Heide Froning, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Marburg (Germany)

Peter Funke, Professor of Ancient History, University of Muenster (Germany)

Traianos Gagos, Professor of Greek and Papyrology, University of Michigan (USA)

Robert Garland, Roy D. and Margaret B. Wooster Professor of the Classics, Colgate University, Hamilton NY (USA)

Douglas E. Gerber, Professor Emeritus of Classical Studies, University of Western Ontario (Canada)

Hans R. Goette, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Giessen (Germany); German Archaeological Institute, Berlin (Germany)

Sander M. Goldberg, Professor of Classics, UCLA (USA)

Erich S. Gruen, Gladys Rehard Wood Professor of History and Classics, Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)

Christian Habicht, Professor of Ancient History, Emeritus, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton (USA)

Donald C. Haggis, Nicholas A. Cassas Term Professor of Greek Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)

Judith P. Hallett, Professor of Classics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (USA)

Prof. Paul B. Harvey, Jr. Head, Department of Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, The Pennsylvania State University (USA)

Eleni Hasaki, Associate Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Arizona (USA)

Miltiades B. Hatzopoulos, Director, Research Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity, National Research Foundation, Athens (Greece)

Wolf-Dieter Heilmeyer, Prof. Dr., Freie Universität Berlin und Antikensammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (Germany)

Steven W. Hirsch, Associate Professor of Classics and History, Tufts University (USA)

Karl-J. Hölkeskamp, Professor of Ancient History, University of Cologne (Germany)

Frank L. Holt, Professor of Ancient History, University of Houston (USA)

Dan Hooley, Professor of Classics, University of Missouri (USA)

Meredith C. Hoppin, Gagliardi Professor of Classical Languages, Williams College, Williamstown, MA (USA)

Caroline M. Houser, Professor of Art History Emerita, Smith College (USA) and Affiliated Professor, University of Washington (USA)

Georgia Kafka, Visiting Professor of Modern Greek Language, Literature and History, University of New Brunswick (Canada)

Anthony Kaldellis, Professor of Greek and Latin, The Ohio State University (USA)

Andromache Karanika, Assistant Professor of Classics, University of California, Irvine (USA)

Robert A. Kaster, Professor of Classics and Kennedy Foundation Professor of Latin, Princeton University (USA)

Vassiliki Kekela, Adjunct Professor of Greek Studies, Classics Department, Hunter College, City University of New York (USA)

Dietmar Kienast, Professor Emeritus of Ancient History, University of Duesseldorf (Germany)

Karl Kilinski II, University Distinguished Teaching Professor, Southern Methodist University (USA)

Dr. Florian Knauss, associate director, Staatliche Antikensammlungen und Glyptothek Muenchen (Germany)

Denis Knoepfler, Professor of Greek Epigraphy and History, Collège de France (Paris)

Ortwin Knorr, Associate Professor of Classics, Willamette University (USA)

Robert B. Koehl, Professor of Archaeology, Department of Classical and Oriental Studies Hunter College, City University of New York (USA)

Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)

Ann Olga Koloski-Ostrow, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Classical Studies, Brandeis University (USA)

Eric J. Kondratieff, Assistant Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Department of Greek & Roman Classics, Temple University

Haritini Kotsidu, Apl. Prof. Dr. für Klassische Archäologie, Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt/M. (Germany)

Lambrini Koutoussaki, Dr., Lecturer of Classical Archaeology, University of Zürich (Switzerland)

David Kovacs, Hugh H. Obear Professor of Classics, University of Virginia (USA)

Peter Krentz, W. R. Grey Professor of Classics and History, Davidson College (USA)

Friedrich Krinzinger, Professor of Classical Archaeology Emeritus, University of Vienna (Austria)

Michael Kumpf, Professor of Classics, Valparaiso University (USA)

Donald G. Kyle, Professor of History, University of Texas at Arlington (USA)

Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Helmut Kyrieleis, former president of the German Archaeological Institute, Berlin (Germany)

Gerald V. Lalonde, Benedict Professor of Classics, Grinnell College (USA)

Steven Lattimore, Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of California, Los Angeles (USA)

Francis M. Lazarus, President, University of Dallas (USA)

Mary R. Lefkowitz, Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities, Emerita, Wellesley College (USA)

Iphigeneia Leventi, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaly (Greece)

Daniel B. Levine, Professor of Classical Studies, University of Arkansas (USA)

Christina Leypold, Dr. phil., Archaeological Institute, University of Zurich (Switzerland)

Vayos Liapis, Associate Professor of Greek, Centre d’Études Classiques & Département de Philosophie, Université de Montréal (Canada)

Hugh Lloyd-Jones, Professor of Greek Emeritus, University of Oxford (UK)

Yannis Lolos, Assistant Professor, History, Archaeology, and Anthropology, University of Thessaly (Greece)

Stanley Lombardo, Professor of Classics, University of Kansas, USA

Anthony Long, Professor of Classics and Irving G. Stone Professor of Literature, University of California, Berkeley (USA)

Julia Lougovaya, Assistant Professor, Department of Classics, Columbia University (USA)

A.D. Macro, Hobart Professor of Classical Languages emeritus, Trinity College (USA)

John Magee, Professor, Department of Classics, Director, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto (Canada)

Dr. Christofilis Maggidis, Associate Professor of Archaeology, Dickinson College (USA)

Jeannette Marchand, Assistant Professor of Classics, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio (USA)

Richard P. Martin, Antony and Isabelle Raubitschek Professor in Classics, Stanford University

Maria Mavroudi, Professor of Byzantine History, University of California, Berkeley (USA)

Alexander Mazarakis Ainian, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaly (Greece)

James R. McCredie, Sherman Fairchild Professor emeritus; Director, Excavations in Samothrace Institute of Fine Arts, New York University (USA)

James C. McKeown, Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin-Madison (USA)

Robert A. Mechikoff, Professor and Life Member of the International Society of Olympic Historians, San Diego State University (USA)

Andreas Mehl, Professor of Ancient History, Universitaet Halle-Wittenberg (Germany)

Harald Mielsch, Professor of Classical Archeology, University of Bonn (Germany)

Stephen G. Miller, Professor of Classical Archaeology Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)

Phillip Mitsis, A.S. Onassis Professor of Classics and Philosophy, New York University (USA)

Peter Franz Mittag, Professor für Alte Geschichte, Universität zu Köln (Germany)

David Gordon Mitten, James Loeb Professor of Classical Art and Archaeology, Harvard University (USA)

Margaret S. Mook, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, Iowa State University (USA)

Anatole Mori, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, University of Missouri- Columbia (USA)

Jennifer Sheridan Moss, Associate Professor, Wayne State University (USA)

Ioannis Mylonopoulos, Assistant Professor of Greek Art History and Archaeology, Columbia University, New York (USA).

Richard Neudecker, PD of Classical Archaeology, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom (Italy)

James M.L. Newhard, Associate Professor of Classics, College of Charleston (USA)

Carole E. Newlands, Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin, Madison (USA)

John Maxwell O'Brien, Professor of History, Queens College, City University of New York (USA)

James J. O'Hara, Paddison Professor of Latin, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (USA)

Martin Ostwald, Professor of Classics (ret.), Swarthmore College and Professor of Classical Studies (ret.), University of Pennsylvania (USA)

Olga Palagia, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)

Vassiliki Panoussi, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, The College of William and Mary (USA)

Maria C. Pantelia, Professor of Classics, University of California, Irvine (USA)

Pantos A.Pantos, Adjunct Faculty, Department of History, Archaeology and Social Anthropology, University of Thessaly (Greece)

Anthony J. Papalas, Professor of Ancient History, East Carolina University (USA)

Nassos Papalexandrou, Associate Professor, The University of Texas at Austin (USA)

Polyvia Parara, Visiting Assistant Professor of Greek Language and Civilization, Department of Classics, Georgetown University (USA)

Richard W. Parker, Associate Professor of Classics, Brock University (Canada)

Robert Parker, Wykeham Professor of Ancient History, New College, Oxford (UK)

Anastasia-Erasmia Peponi, Associate Professor of Classics, Stanford University (USA)

Jacques Perreault, Professor of Greek archaeology, Université de Montréal, Québec (Canada)

Yanis Pikoulas, Associate Professor of Ancient Greek History, University of Thessaly (Greece)

John Pollini, Professor of Classical Art & Archaeology, University of Southern California (USA)

David Potter, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Greek and Latin. The University of Michigan (USA)

Robert L. Pounder, Professor Emeritus of Classics, Vassar College (USA)

Nikolaos Poulopoulos, Assistant Professor in History and Chair in Modern Greek Studies, McGill University (Canada)

William H. Race, George L. Paddison Professor of Classics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)

John T. Ramsey, Professor of Classics, University of Illinois at Chicago (USA)

Karl Reber, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Lausanne (Switzerland)

Rush Rehm, Professor of Classics and Drama, Stanford University (USA)

Werner Riess, Associate Professor of Classics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)

Robert H. Rivkin, Ancient Studies Department, University of Maryland Baltimore County (USA)

Barbara Saylor Rodgers, Professor of Classics, The University of Vermont (USA)

Robert H. Rodgers. Lyman-Roberts Professor of Classical Languages and Literature, University of Vermont (USA)

Nathan Rosenstein, Professor of Ancient History, The Ohio State University (USA)

John C. Rouman, Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of New Hampshire, (USA)

Dr. James Roy, Reader in Greek History (retired), University of Nottingham (UK)

Steven H. Rutledge, Associate Professor of Classics, Department of Classics, University of Maryland, College Park (USA)

Christina A. Salowey, Associate Professor of Classics, Hollins University (USA)

Guy D. R. Sanders, Resident Director of Corinth Excavations, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Greece)

Theodore Scaltsas, Professor of Ancient Greek Philosophy, University of Edinburgh (UK)

Thomas F. Scanlon, Professor of Classics, University of California, Riverside (USA)

Bernhard Schmaltz, Prof. Dr. Archäologisches Institut der CAU, Kiel (Germany)

Rolf M. Schneider, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Ludwig-Maximilians- Universität München (Germany)

Peter Scholz, Professor of Ancient History and Culture, University of Stuttgart (Germany)

Christof Schuler, director, Commission for Ancient History and Epigraphy of the German Archaeological Institute, Munich (Germany)

Paul D. Scotton, Assoociate Professor Classical Archaeology and Classics, California State University Long Beach (USA)

Danuta Shanzer, Professor of Classics and Medieval Studies, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Fellow of the Medieval Academy of America (USA)

James P. Sickinger, Associate Professor of Classics, Florida State University (USA)

Marilyn B. Skinner 
Professor of Classics, 
University of Arizona (USA)

Niall W. Slater, Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Latin and Greek, Emory University (USA)

Peter M. Smith, Associate Professor of Classics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)

Dr. Philip J. Smith, Research Associate in Classical Studies, McGill University (Canada)

Susan Kirkpatrick Smith Assistant Professor of Anthropology Kennesaw State University (USA)

Antony Snodgrass, Professor Emeritus of Classical Archaeology, University of Cambridge (UK)

Theodosia Stefanidou-Tiveriou, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece).

Andrew Stewart, Nicholas C. Petris Professor of Greek Studies, University of California, Berkeley (USA)

Oliver Stoll, Univ.-Prof. Dr., Alte Geschichte/ Ancient History,Universität Passau (Germany)

Richard Stoneman, Honorary Fellow, University of Exeter (England)

Ronald Stroud, Klio Distinguished Professor of Classical Languages and Literature Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)

Sarah Culpepper Stroup, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Washington (USA)

Nancy Sultan, Professor and Director, Greek & Roman Studies, Illinois Wesleyan University (USA)

David W. Tandy, Professor of Classics, University of Tennessee (USA)

James Tatum, Aaron Lawrence Professor of Classics, Dartmouth College

Martha C. Taylor, Associate Professor of Classics, Loyola College in Maryland

Petros Themelis, Professor Emeritus of Classical Archaeology, Athens (Greece)

Eberhard Thomas, Priv.-Doz. Dr.,Archäologisches Institut der Universität zu Köln (Germany)

Michalis Tiverios, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)

Michael K. Toumazou, Professor of Classics, Davidson College (USA)

Stephen V. Tracy, Professor of Greek and Latin Emeritus, Ohio State University (USA)

Prof. Dr. Erich Trapp, Austrian Academy of Sciences/Vienna resp. University of Bonn (Germany)

Stephen M. Trzaskoma, Associate Professor of Classics, University of New Hampshire (USA)

Vasiliki Tsamakda, Professor of Christian Archaeology and Byzantine History of Art, University of Mainz (Germany)

Christopher Tuplin, Professor of Ancient History, University of Liverpool (UK)

Gretchen Umholtz, Lecturer, Classics and Art History, University of Massachusetts, Boston (USA)

Panos Valavanis, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)

Athanassios Vergados, Visiting Assistant Professor of Classics, Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA

Christina Vester, Assistant Professor of Classics, University of Waterloo (Canada)

Emmanuel Voutiras, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)

Speros Vryonis, Jr., Alexander S. Onassis Professor (Emeritus) of Hellenic Civilization and Culture, New York University (USA)

Michael B. Walbank, Professor Emeritus of Greek, Latin & Ancient History, The University of Calgary (Canada)

Bonna D. Wescoat, Associate Professor, Art History and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, Emory University (USA)

E. Hector Williams, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of British Columbia (Canada)

Roger J. A. Wilson, Professor of the Archaeology of the Roman Empire, and Director, Centre for the Study of Ancient Sicily, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada)

Engelbert Winter, Professor for Ancient History, University of Münster (Germany)

Timothy F. Winters, Ph.D. Alumni Assn. Distinguished Professor of Classics, Austin Peay State University (USA)

Michael Zahrnt, Professor für Alte Geschichte, Universität zu Köln (Germany)

Paul Zanker, Professor Emeritus of Classical Studies, University of Munich (Germany)



200 signatures as of May 18th 2009.

For the growing list of scholars, please go to the Addenda.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



cc: J. Biden, Vice President, USA

H. Clinton, Secretary of State USA

P. Gordon, Asst. Secretary-designate, European and Eurasian Affairs

H.L Berman, Chair, House Committee on Foreign Affairs

I. Ros-Lehtinen, Ranking Member, House Committee on Foreign Affairs

J. Kerry, Chair, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

R.G. Lugar, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

R. Menendez, United States Senator from New Jersey.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Addenda


12 Scholars added on May 19th 2009:

Mariana Anagnostopoulos, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, California State University, Fresno (USA)

John P. Anton, Distinguished Professor of Greek Philosophy and Culture University of South Florida (USA)

Effie F. Athanassopoulos, Associate Professor 
Anthropology and Classics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln (USA)

Leonidas Bargeliotes, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Athens, President of the Olympic Center for Philosophy and Culture (Greece)

Joseph W. Day, Professor of Classics, Wabash College (USA)

Christos C. Evangeliou, Professor of Ancient Hellenic Philosophy, Towson University, Maryland, Honorary President of International Association for Greek Philosophy (USA)

Eleni Kalokairinou, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Secretary of the Olympic Center of Philosophy and Culture (Cyprus)

Lilian Karali, Professor of Prehistoric and Environmental Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)

Anna Marmodoro, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford (UK)

Marion Meyer, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Vienna(Austria)

Jessica L. Nitschke, Assistant Professor of Classics, Georgetown University (USA)

David C.Young, Professor of Classics Emeritus, University of Florida (USA)


10 Scholars added on May 20th 2009:

Maria Ypsilanti, Assistant Professor of Ancient Greek Literature, University of Cyprus

Christos Panayides, Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of Nicosia, (Cyprus)

Anagnostis P. Agelarakis, Professor of Anthropology, Adelphi University (USA)

Dr. Irma Wehgartner, Curator of the Martin von Wagner Museum der Universität Würzburg (Germany)

Dr. Ioannis Georganas, Researcher, Department of History and Archaeology, Foundation of the Hellenic World (Greece)

Maria Papaioannou, Assistant Professor in Classical Archaeology, University of New Brunswick (Canada)

Chryssa Maltezou, Professor emeritus, University of Athens, Director of the Hellenic Institute of Byzantine and Postbyzantine Studies in Venice (Italy)

Myrto Dragona-Monachou, Professor emerita of Philosophy, University of Athens (Greece)

David L. Berkey, Assistant Professor of History, California State University, Fresno (USA)

Stephan Heilen, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (USA)

Tweet

Share on Tumblr