The Sarcophagus of St. John Chrysostom in Komani, Georgia

St. John spent three years in exile, and reposed as an exile on the Feast of the Elevation of the Precious and Life-giving Cross, September 14, 407, in the town of Komani in Georgia (Abkhazia). Before his repose, the Holy Apostles John and Peter appeared to him, as did the Holy Martyr Basilisk (May 22) in whose church he received Communion for the last time. His last words were, "Glory be to God for all things," and with that, the soul of the golden-mouthed patriarch was taken into Paradise.

The Church of St. Basilisk still exists in Komani where St. John received his final Communion, as well as the sarcophagus in which the relics of St. John Chrysostom originally rested before being transferred to Constantinople. The Monastery of St. John Chrysostom is the place of St. John's exile and his repose.


In July 1993 it also became a place of conflict when 500 natives were slaughtered, as the video below shows. More photos of the monastery can be seen here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: The Return of the Relics of St. John Chrysostom and St. Gregory the Theologian to Constantinople

In 2004, responding to the request of His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, and recognizing the importance of St. John Chrysostom and St. Gregory the Theologian to Orthodox Christians around the world, Pope John Paul II agreed to return the relics of these two great Fathers of the Church and Ecumenical Teachers to their original resting place in the Ecumenical Patriarchate. This program (produced by GOTelecom and funded by the Archons of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of the Order of St. Andrew) highlights the moving Ecumenical Service at the Vatican and the Service at the Ecumenical Patriarchate while informing the viewer of the historical significance of these saints.

Read more here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople

By St. Nikolai Velimirovich

John was born in Antioch in the year 354. His father, Secundus, was an imperial commander and his mother's name was Anthusa. Studying Greek philosophy, John became disgusted with Hellenic paganism and adopted the Christian Faith as the one and all-embracing truth. Meletius, Patriarch of Antioch, baptized John, and his parents also subsequently received baptism.

Following his parents' repose, John was tonsured a monk and lived a strict life of asceticism. He then wrote a book, On the Priesthood, after which the Holy Apostles John and Peter appeared to him, and prophesied that he would have a life of great service, great grace and great suffering. When he was to be ordained a priest, an angel of God appeared simultaneously to John and to Patriarch Flavian (Meletius's successor). While the patriarch was ordaining John, a shining white dove was seen hovering over John's head.

Glorified for his wisdom, asceticism and power of words, John was chosen as Patriarch of Constantinople at the behest of Emperor Arcadius. As patriarch, he governed the Church for six years with unequalled zeal and wisdom. He sent missionaries to the pagan Celts and Scythians and eradicated simony in the Church, deposing many bishops guilty of this vice. He extended the charitable works of the Church and wrote a special order of the Divine Liturgy. He shamed the heretics, denounced Empress Eudoxia, interpreted Holy Scripture with his golden mind and tongue, and bequeathed the Church many precious books of his homilies. The people glorified him, the envious loathed him, and the Empress, on two occasions, sent him into exile.

John spent three years in exile, and reposed as an exile on the Feast of the Elevation of the Precious and Life-giving Cross, September 14, 407, in the town of Komani in Georgia. Before his repose, the Holy Apostles John and Peter appeared to him again, as did the Holy Martyr Basilisk (May 22) in whose church he received Communion for the last time. His last words were, "Glory be to God for all things," and with that, the soul of the golden-mouthed patriarch was taken into Paradise. Chrysostom's head reposes in the Church of the Dormition in Moscow, and his body reposes in the Vatican in Rome.


Reflection

Punishment and reward! Both of these are in the hands of God. But, as this earthly life is only a shadow of the true life in the heavens, so punishment and reward here on earth are only a shadow of true punishment and reward in eternity.

The principle persecutors of the saint of God Chrysostom were Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria and Empress Eudoxia. After Chrysostom's martyric death, bitter punishment befell them both. Theophilus went mad, and Eudoxia was banished from the imperial court by Emperor Arcadius. Eudoxia soon became ill with an incurable disease - wounds opened up all over her body, and worms came out of her wounds. Such was the stench that she gave off, that it was not easy for a person on the street to pass by her house. Physicians used all the most powerful perfumes and incense if only to overcome the stench from the wicked empress, but had little success. The empress finally died in corruption and agony. Even after death, the hand of God lay heavy on her. The coffin containing her body shook day and night for a full thirty-four years until Emperor Theodosius translated the relics of St. John Chrysostom to Constantinople.

But what happened to Chrysostom after his repose? Reward - such reward as only God can give. Adeltius, the Arabian bishop who received the exiled Chrysostom into his home in Cucusus, prayed to God after Chrysostom's repose that He reveal to him where John's soul was to be found. Adeltius then had a vision while at prayer. It was as though he were out of himself, and was led through the heavens by a radiant youth who showed him the hierarchs, pastors and teachers of the Church in order, calling each of them by name - but he did not see John. Then that angel of God led him to the passage out of Paradise, and Adeltius was downcast. When the angel asked him why he was sad, Adeltius replied that he was sorry that he had not seen his beloved teacher, John Chrysostom. The angel replied: "No man who is still in the flesh can see him, for he is at God's throne with the Cherubim and Seraphim."


HYMN OF PRAISE: Saint John Chrysostom

The Church glorifies St. John
The "Golden-mouth", blessed by God,
Christ's great soldier,
Who is the adornment and boast of the Church:
Profound of heart and mind,
And a golden-stringed harp of words.
He plumbed the depths of mysteries,
And found the pearl that shines as the stars.
Exalted in mind to heaven's height,
He expounded divine truth;
And his vision is true throughout history.
He gave all to the Son of God.
He revealed to us the horrors of sin,
And the virtues that adorn a man;
He showed us the most precious mysteries,
And all the sweet richness of Paradise.
Evangelist, interpreter of the Gospel
And bearer of spiritual joy,
Zealous for Christ like an apostle,
He would accept no injustice.
He was tormented like any martyr,
And received his torment as a pledge of salvation.
This servant of Christ showed himself true;
Therefore, the Church glorifies Chrysostom.

Apolytikion in the Plagal of the Fourth Tone
The grace of your words illuminated the universe like a shining beacon. It amassed treasures of munificence in the world. It demonstrated the greatness of humility, teaching us by your own words; therefore, O Father John Chrysostom, intercede to Christ the Logos for the salvation of our souls.

Kontakion in the Plagal of the Second Tone
You received divine grace from Heaven, and by your own lips taught all to worship the One God in Trinity. All-blessed, venerable John Chrysostom, deservedly, we praise you for you are a teacher clearly revealing things divine.

A Note on the Feasts of St. John Chrysostom

The following feasts of St. John Chrysostom are celebrated by the Church:

November 13 - His repose (which was transferred from Sept. 14)

December 15 - His enthronement as Patriarch of Constantinople

January 27 - The transfer of his relics to Constantinople

January 30 - The feast of the Three Hierarchs

February 26 - His ordination as a priest

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Disgraced Serbian Bishop Artemije Threatens To Start "New Church"

November 12, 2010
EarthTimes

The disgraced Serbian Orthodox Bishop Artemije has demanded that he be reinstated as the Kosovo eparch, warning that he would otherwise start a "new church," the daily Blic said Friday.

The Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) stripped Artemije of authority over the Kosovo eparchy in February over his "inability to govern" and shortcomings in fiscal and material accounting.

He was also banned from performing services amid concerns within SPC that he may split the church.

A group of radical monks from two monasteries in the Kosovo eparchy, which also covers a part of southern Serbia, rebelled against SPC after Artemije's ouster.

Now Artemije, "writing from exile in the Sisatovac monastery" in northern Serbia, is alleging that he was "sentenced without court and sentence," Blic quoting his letter to the SPC synod as saying.

Artemije spoke for himself and the rebellious monks, the newspaper said. The group represents the far-right wing within the church and may have support from some of the SPC bishops.

Artemije's threats come ahead of a meeting of the SPC assembly on November 17. The SPC, which traditionally aims to keep the public out of its affairs, did not immediately comment on Artemije's letter.

The mutiny could further strain already fragile relations between reformists and hardliners within the SPC leadership, who have been unable to agree on issues ranging from ties with renegade orthodox churches in Macedonia and Montenegro to the form of the liturgy.

Read also: Retired Bishop To Establish "New Church"?

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Mysterious Greek Orthodox Monastery In Arizona?

An investigation reported on February 9, 2006 of St. Anthony's Monastery in Arizona by KVOA Tucson is featured below which obviously and understandably shows a lot of misunderstanding about Orthodox monasticism, but also sheds light on some authentic concerns of how this monastery refuses to confront the concerns and possible misunderstandings of hundreds with open communication. If the monastery can't openly communicate its mission, then it only leaves one to wonder what it has to hide.




Related links:

St. Anthony's Orthodox Monastery in Arizona

A Greek Pilgrim Visits St. Anthony's Monastery in Arizona

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Columba and the Loch Ness Monster

The event described below by St. Adomnan (c. 690) in his Vita Sancti Columbae is said to have happened in 565 AD:

Concerning a certain water beast driven away by the power of the blessed man's prayer.

Also at another time, when the blessed man was for a number of days in the province of the Picts, he had to cross the river Nes [Ness]. When he reached its bank, he saw a poor fellow being buried by other inhabitants; and the buriers said that, while swimming not long before, he had been seized and most savagely bitten by a water beast. Some men, going to his rescue in a wooden boat, though too late, had put out hooks and caught hold of his wretched corpse. When the blessed man heard this, he ordered notwithstanding that one of his companions should swim out and bring back to him, by sailing, a boat that stood on the opposite bank. Hearing this order of the holy and memorable man, Lugne mocu‑Min obeyed without delay, and putting off his clothes, excepting his tunic, plunged into the water. But the monster, whose appetite had earlier been not so much sated as whetted for prey, lurked in the depth of the river. Feeling the water above disturbed by Lugne's swimming, it suddenly swam up to the surface, and with gaping mouth and with great roaring rushed towards the man swimming in the middle of the stream. While all that were there, barbarians and even the brothers, were struck down with extreme terror, the blessed man, who was watching, raised his holy hand and drew the saving sign of the Cross in the empty air; and then, invoking the name of God, he commanded the savage beast, and said: "You will go no further. Do not touch the man; turn back speedily". Then, hearing this command of the saint, the beast, as if pulled back with ropes, fled terrified in swift retreat; although it had before approached so close to Lugne as he swam that there was no more than the length of one short pole between man and beast. Then seeing that the beast had withdrawn and that their fellow-soldier Lugne had returned to them unharmed and safe, in the boat, the brothers with great amazement glorified God in the blessed man. And also the pagan barbarians who were there at the time, impelled by the magnitude of this miracle that they themselves had seen, magnified the God of the Christians.


Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Elder Epiphanios Theodoropoulos On Psychiatric Illnesses and Demonic Possession

Elder Epiphanios was asked:

"Many Christians maintain that psychiatric illnesses are due to demonic influence and, with this viewpoint, they reject the use of psychiatric medicines. What do you have to say about this position?"

"A certain percentage and, furthermore, a small percentage of 'psychiatric patients' are really possessed. The majority, however, of psychiatric patients are not possessed nor are the manifestations of their psychiatric illnesses due to demonic influence."

"And how can we tell that there is a possession, when it is such?"

"The Church diagnoses possession from the position of the sufferer as regards the Sacred Sacraments: Divine Communion, Confession, etc. Or as regards the Gospel, the Precious Cross, the sacred relics or the holy icons and, in general, sacred things."

Father --- tells me that at Saint Gerasimos of Kefallonia they used to place the Holy Scripture or some icon on the back of a possessed person lying face-down - that is, without them seeing in order to exclude the possibility of suggestion - and then the possessed person would tremble, a thing which would not occur when they would place other types of books or objects on him."

"Do we have any example of psychosis among the saints?"

"Certainly. I will off hand mention to you Saint Olympia the Deaconess. After the exile of Holy Chrysostom, her Spiritual Father, she suffered depression and this saint consoled her with his letters reminding her of the divine reward for those who are persecuted in the name of the Lord."

"Do epileptics have a demon?"

"Not all. In many of these, the brain simply is ailing and this has as a result the manifestation of seizures, deafness, etc. - manifestations similar to the ones of those possessed, as they appear in the Gospels."

"Why did the Lord do so many miracles with the possessed?"

"So that the superiority of the Lord's power over the demons would be made manifest and so that the people would believe in Him. These miracles seem a lot in number, because it is likely that God allowed the devil to bother people more at that time, without the possibility being excluded that the number of the possessed people might have been the same as the number of those of all ages."

From Counsels For Life: From the Life and Teachings of Father Epiphanios Theodoropoulos, pp. 204-205.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Church of Saint Nilus the Myrrhgusher in Piraeus

In 1928, at the initiative of Helen Mamai, a resident of Piraeus who hailed from the village of Hagios Petros in Kinouria (the village from where St. Nilus was from), a club was formed called the "Brotherhood of the Lords and Ladies of Saint Nilus the Myrrhgusher" whose sole purpose was to build the first and only church dedicated to Saint Nilus in all of Greece. The land on which the church was built is in Hatzikyriakio of Piraeus, near Hatzikyriakio Orphanage and the Naval Academy, at the corners George Theotokis, Herodotus, Antonios Theoharis, Spyridon Trikoupis (Γεωργίου Θεοτόκη, Ηροδότου, Αντωνίου Θεοχάρη, Σπυρίδωνος Τρικούπη).

Construction on the church began in 1928 and was used for worship in 1931. Originally it was a private church, but at the instruction of the Archbishop of Athens it became a public parish in 1932. Because it was initially a small church, in 1956 the building was expanded and today it stands as one of the largest churches in the entire Metropolis of Piraeus.


For the life of St. Nilus, who is commemorated on November 12 and May 7, read also: Saint Nilus the Myrrh-Gusher and His Prophecies

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Remembering the Miracle of Saint Spyridon in 1718

Commemoration of the Miracle of Saint Spyridon in 1718 (Feast Day - November 12)

By Archimandrite Nektarios Ziompolas

After Corfu's deliverance from a siege by the Turks, owing to the protection of St. Spyridon the Wonderworker, on 11 August 1716, Andrea Pisani, the governor and general of Corfu, wished to do something in order to thank the saint for his great benefaction concerning the aforementioned deliverance. He consulted a papal theologian, Francisco Frangipani, as to what he should do and what would be best and well-pleasing to the saint.

The theologian said that it would be a very good and holy deed to build a precious marble altar inside the Church of St. Spyridon, so that they could perform a Latin Mass inside. He said: "Your Excellency can hear the Mass in your own language when you are present there." The theologian's counsel pleased the governor, and he ordered that the materials be prepared at once.

However, before the materials were made ready, it seemed appropriate to him to call the priests of that church (where the relics of the divine Spyridon were housed) and find out in what way they could be of assistance. As soon as they heard the unexpected news, they told him bluntly that this was a dangerous innovation, and they wished in no way to help him with his plan. The governor replied angrily that even if they were not willing to help, as the supreme authority he would do as he wished and would command that the materials be gathered outside the saint's church without fail. So there was gathered together asbestos, plaster, marble, and a slab from select marble, superbly crafted for an altar.

That night in a dream, the governor saw a man in a monastic habit saying to him: "Why are you bothering me, and why are you upsetting my children (i.e., the priests)? Know that what you are intending to do is not in your interest." At daybreak he called the theologian into his room (that is, the one who gave him the idea) and related to him the dream in detail. The theologian said: "As Christians, we are obliged in no way to believe dreams, nor are we to accept them at all as real. You should certainly consider this, my lord, to be an obvious temptation of the devil, with which the adversary troubles the good, in order to amuse himself and impede such a most-pious deed." The governor calmed down, fully convinced by the theologian's words.

That night, the governor again saw the same monk in a dream threatening him harshly saying: "Know, most certainly, that if you bother my holy house, you will regret it, as it is of no profit." The ruler was terrified by this steadfast decree. He did not again wait for daybreak, but straightaway called for the theologian. He told him every detail about the vision, described his faint-heartedness and said that he was overcome by such fear, that he not dare go through with the task. Then the theologian speaking up and poising himself nobly, said: "My lord, know, that if you grow timid from doing this holy deed that you have decided upon, you will appear to people as not being of proper judgement, since you believe in dreams conjured up by the devil."

The governor was filled with courage by these words and as day came on, which was the 11th of November 1718, he went to the church of the saint so as to venerate. He was accompanied by those of his court (along with the city's engineer) in order to measure the area according to length, width, and height for the construction of the altar. At that time, the oldest of the priests, Marinos Voulgaris Sakellarios, and the priest in charge, Spyridon Voulgaris (the great protopresbyter), stood before the governor and with humble voices begged him not to go through with such a modification, as it might not seem best to the saint. When he heard them, however, he flew into a rage, threatening that if they did not do as he wished and become silent, he would send them to Venice in chains, to be thrown into prison, never again to see the light of day. "I am not intending to do some unlawful deed," he said, "but to set up an altar, a holy and God-pleasing work!" The priests were cast into despair and terror-stricken by his threats, and with the other Orthodox present - who were not few - they ran towards divine assistance. Opening the holy reliquary of our great father, they chanted a Paraklesis, shedding abundant tears, hoping to hinder the governor's bad intention.

At around midnight on November 12th, the day on which the craftsmen expected to start their work, there was lightening and thunder - thunderbolts, one after the other. It was then that the guard of the governor's residence saw a monk approaching him holding a lit torch in his hand. The guard, according to procedure, asked him once, and then twice: "Who are you? Where are you going?" And seeing as he did not receive an answer, he lifted his musket in order to kill the visitor. But then the monk answered: "I am Spyridon." As soon as he said this he grabbed the guard by the arm and threw him with great force out into Spianada Square in the city of Corfu, close to the Church of the Crucifixion. There the guard found himself standing upright on both feet holding his gun as he had been before. Immediately following this, the saint lit the store house of the castle on fire. The extreme heat caused the buildings that were inside the governor's palace and everything around it to collapse. The governor was killed inside, his neck having been crushed between two beams in such a way that it was as though they had been placed there for that purpose. The theologian was found outside the walls of the citadel in a ditch, into which all the squalor of the city sewer drained and flowed, holding his private parts in his hand. Many others were also killed, both men and women, some belonging to the court and others not, about nine-hundred souls. Around that time two other fearsome signs also took place.

First: That same night, a large silver oil lamp that the governor had hung before the saint's relics as an offering fell to the ground and its base broke into pieces, in spite of having been hung with a very strong chain. None of the numerous other oil lamps fell or suffered anything similar. And what happened to the oil lamp (or rather, the base) is apparent still today, because it was again hung up in the same manner it was found as evidence of the incident.

Second: At the exact same moment (as was confirmed later by those who looked into the matter) a flaming arrow - a thunderbolt of lightening to be precise - struck the picture of the governor in Venice and burnt it up, without anything else in the house suffering any harm. His brothers and relatives immediately interpreted this as a bad omen concerning the governor.

The rest of the Latin laymen and clergy, or rather the "Prevedore" as they were called, the Latin bishop, other officials and private citizens, as many as lived in the city of Corfu (for it was the home of the bishop's palace and many others), these are who I call the rest, gave the command that the aforementioned building materials be taken from the Saint's church. They made use of the materials elsewhere, save the marble slab which had been cut for the altar. This was reverently taken to their so-called "duomo," that is the cathedral of their own metropolis, into the great altar. It can still be seen there today resting low on its side.

The soldier, who had been the guard at the castle on that day, was roused and crying out in a loud voice, declared: "Saint Spyridon did these great and fearful things." And he would tell the whole story in great detail. Therefore, the Latins, not wanting to bear the shame, sent him away to Italy three days later.

This is the story of the frightful and monumental event that took place in the city of Corfu, owing to the most-divine Spyridon - quick to listen and patron of the city and of the whole Church. We must now consider carefully and in detail those circumstances, which prove the event undeniable, so that the enemies of the truth cannot blather, saying that the arson at the store house was a coincidence, from which the governor and those around him died.

Ἀπολυτίκιον Ήχος α'
Της Συνόδου της πρώτης, ώσπερ πάλαι υπέρμαχος, ούτω νυν υψών ανεφάνης την εκκλησίαν Χριστού και γαρ μακράν του Ναού σου εξωθείς, και άρδην εν πυρί κατέστρεψας, και εις το άσβεστον απέπεμψας σαφώς, Λατίνων γόνους, ως στρεβλούντας την θεολογίαν σου δόξα τω σε βραβεύσαντι ημίν` δόξα τω σε δοξάσαντι` δόξα το διά σου υψώσαντι ημάς Σπυρίδων μέγιστε.

Source: Ouranou Crisis (Judgement from Heaven), Athens, 2007.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

St. John the Merciful: We Ought Never Commune From Heretics

Another thing the blessed man taught and insisted upon with all was never on any occasion whatsoever to associate with heretics and, above all, never to take Holy Communion with them, 'even if', the blessed man said, 'you remain without communicating all your life, if through stress of circumstances you cannot find a community of the Catholic Church. For if, having legally married a wife in this world of the flesh, we are forbidden by God and by the laws to desert her and be united to another woman, even though we have to spend a long time separated from her in a distant country, and shall incur punishment if we violate our vows, how then shall we, who have been Joined to God through the Orthodox faith and the Catholic Church - as the apostle says: "I espoused you to one husband that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ" [2 Cor 11:2] - how shall we escape from sharing in that punishment which in the world to come awaits heretics, if we defile the Orthodox and holy faith by adulterous communion with heretics?'

'For communion', he said, 'has been so called because he who has communion has things in common and agrees with those with whom he has communion. Therefore I implore you earnestly, children, never to go near the oratories of the heretics in order to communicate there.'

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Myrrh & Blood-Streaming Icons in Zajecar, Serbia

A friend from Serbia sent me some very interesting photos of myrrh and blood streaming items from an Orthodox Christian household which include the following: various icons, a photo and icon of St. Theodore the Studite (Nov. 11), a statue of the Mother of God, a brass Cross, and a prayer rope which contains a holy relic of St. Theodore the Studite. They belong to a family who live in Zajecar of Serbia, and according to them, some of the icons started streaming myrrh and blood prior to the civil war in former Yugoslavia (1990), while the other items started recently in 2007. The prayer rope was given to Milan Dimitrijević (the owner of the home where this is taking place) while on pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Everything else was acquired in Serbia.

Of special interest is that the brass Cross streams blood from the area of the five wounds of Christ, the photograph of St. Theodore is a print that was taken of a fresco in a church, the statue also streams myrrh, and the prayer rope is kept in a jar to catch the myrrh which continuously flows (there is always an abundant supply for pilgrims who come to be anointed by the holy myrrh).

This holy myrrh has healing properties as well. For example, a young woman from Belgrade who had stage four cancer applied the holy myrrh on herself regularly for months. Upon examination, doctors were in awe to find that her cancer had gone into remission. (Interestingly, the young woman was initially in doubt over the authenticity of the divine origin of this miracle, and during this time of doubt her cancer would go into exacerbation.)

Some people see this miracle as a sign from above, others see it as divine grace visiting the faithful to aid in their spiritual and physical healing. It seems both are valid explanations.

There is also a link in Serbian here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Elder Epiphanios Theodoropoulos On Psychiatric Medications

Elder Epiphanios was asked:

"Are Christians allowed to take psychiatric medicines? Because many maintain that anxiety, depression, melancholy and, in general, psychiatric disorders of the soul are healed only with spiritual life: that is, with prayer, going to church, confession, Holy Communion, etc."

"When necessary, the Christian must also take them."

"But what can these medications do to the soul of man?"

"We must clarify from the beginning that the so-called psychiatric medicines or tranquilizers - that is, these material substances - cannot in any way give man's soul the longed-for calmness, nor to bring consolation and hope to the soul of a mother, for example, whose son has died, nor even to deliver the conscience of a man from the guilt of the sins which he has committed. These gifts "come down only from above, from the Father of lights." And only the celebrants (the priests and, furthermore, the spiritual fathers) of the Church are able to heal these conditions of people."

"Then why did you say that psychiatric medications are necessary?"

"Listen, anxiety and depression in people are caused not only by such above-mentioned factors, or even from financial ruin or from repression of their personalities and loss of self-esteem, etc., but also from factors which originate in the nervous system (the brain) of man - in other words, from the disturbance of the higher functions of the brain, such as emotion, thought, will, etc. This type of anxiety or depression, etc. is improved or even healed with psychiatric medicines, medicines, that is, which act on the brain functions in such a way as to bring them back to their normal rhythm.

To put it more simply, many Christians focus their attention on the immaterial component of man - that is, the soul, attributing to her alone the manifestations of anxiety, melancholy, etc. and thus they reject the medicines given the fact that matter cannot affect the immaterial. They forget though, that man also has a body. And because the brain, through which the soul is expressed, is an instrument of the body, with material means (that is, with medicines or earlier on with insulin comas or electroshock) its disturbances must be dealt with."

"What do you mean when you say that soul expresses itself through the brain?"

"An image which we can use to describe the relationship of soul and brain is the violin with the violinist. Just as even the best musician cannot make good music if the the violin is broken or unstrung, in the same manner man's behavior will not be whole (see 2 Tim. 3:17) if his brain presents a certain disturbance, in which case the soul cannot be expressed correctly. It is precisely this disturbance of the brain that certain medicines help correct and so aid the soul in expressing itself correctly."

"Let me ask something else. Can intense sacramental life or fervent prayer heal these disturbances of the brain?"

"Of course, God can do a miracle for these sufferings. The question, however, which was posed to me in the beginning was something else. I was asked if Christians are allowed to use psychiatric medicines. And to this I respond undoubtedly: Yes!

Simultaneously, however, I also ask you: Why don't you ask the same questions about bronchial asthma, for example, or eczema or migraine headaches or glaucoma or intestinal ulcers, etc. etc.? Let us finally realize that anxiety or melancholy, etc. does not come only from the disturbance of the soul, but also from the disturbance of the brain or from a combination of the two. In the final case, psychological support is also needed (the solution of problems, selfless assistance, behavior salted with the salt of discernment, so that those who pose such problems do not feel difficulty from the manifestations of our love, examination from an educated, pious psychiatrist who will also enlighten them about the nature of the disturbances, the invocation of divine aid, the approaching to the Sacraments of the Church, etc.) and simultaneously a medical therapy."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Miracle of Saint Menas in El Alamein in 1942

Fresco from the Holy Cell of St. Menas, Great Lavra Monastery, Mount Athos.

In June 1942, during the North-Africa campaign that was decisive for the outcome of the Second World War, the German forces under the command of General Rommel were on their way to Alexandria, and happened to make a halt near a place which the Arabs call El Alamein (the place of Menas). An ancient ruined church nearby in Abu Mena was dedicated to Saint Menas; there some people say he is buried. Here the weaker Allied forces including some Greeks confronted the numerically and militarily superior German army, and the result of the coming battle of El Alamein seemed certain. During the first night of engagement, Saint Menas appeared in the midst of the German camp at the head of a caravan of camels, exactly as he was shown on the walls of the ruined church in one of the frescoes depicting his miracles. This astounding and terrifying apparition so undermined German morale that it contributed to the brilliant victory of the Allies.

Winston Churchill said of this victory: "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." He also wrote: "Before Alamein we never had a victory. After Alamein, we never had a defeat."

The Egyptian Gazette refers to this miracle in its November 10, 1942 issue. On November 11, 1942 the Patriarch of Alexandria Christophoros II celebrated the feast of Saint Menas in the Church of Saint Savvas and gave thanks to God for this miracle. The Church of Saint Menas was restored by the Coptic Church on November 27, 1959. These events helped revive the celebration of Saint Menas.

Read also:

Saint Menas the Great Martyr and Miracle Worker

First Battle of El Alamein

Second Battle of El Alamein

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

St. Theodore the Studite and the Problem of the Paulicians

By Hieromonk Patapios

It is well known to students of the Byzantine Church that St. Theodore the Studite, together with his followers, underwent all manner of cruel treatment at the hands of the State for his resistance to error and compromise in ecclesiastical affairs. A perusal of his voluminous correspondence is sufficient to reveal this. But what about his attitude to others who were on the receiving end of persecution from the imperial authorities? Out of nearly five hundred letters there survive two in which he addresses the problem of dealing with heretical movements. Neither letter has ever previously been translated into English, nor has much attention been paid to St. Theodore's views on those who lay outside the pale of the Church.

After being released from his second period of exile in 811, St.Theodore interceded with Emperor Michael I Rangabe on two separate occasions to refrain from killing those who were, or were considered to be, enemies of the Empire. I shall begin by describing these cases in brief, although for the purposes of this paper I am going to concentrate on the first case. After putting the persecution of the Paulicians in its historical context, I shall turn to a consideration of Theodore's arguments against applying the death penalty to heretics.

In his Chronographia St. Theophanes the Confessor relates how "out of great zeal for God" Emperor Michael I "moved against the Manichaeans (now known as Paulicians ) and Athinganoi in Phrygia and Lycaonia." At the recommendation of Patriarch Nicephoros "he decreed them liable to capital punishment." Nonetheless, "thanks to other, malignant, advisors he let the pretext of repentance mitigate I this-those captured by heresy cannot repent." According to Theophanes, these advisors mistakenly believed that it was unlawful for priests to use capital punishment for the suppression of heresy. He cites the episode from Acts in which Ananias and Sapphira expire on being reproved by the Apostle Peter for lying to God and tempting His Spirit, and suggests that those opposed the use of force against "men who are absolutely impure in spirit and body and who worship demons" are enemies of the Apostles, and thereby of the Church (1).

In the following year Krum, the Khan of the Bulgarians, who had made a number of gains against the Byzantine Empire in the region of Mesembria, sent an embassy to Emperor Michael, in which he proposed inter alia that "fugitives from each side were to be returned to it, even if they had conspired against the state." Once again, Theophanes blames certain "evil advisors" for dissuading the Emperor from accepting such peace terms. Out of false piety, stupidity and disregard for public affairs, they "declared that it was improper to return fugitives," citing as Biblical warrant the statement of Christ: "Him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out." (2)

The Athinganoi need not detain us long. They were a Judaizing sect based, according to St. Theophanes, in Phrygia and Lycaonia. He first mentions them unfavorably in connection with Emperor Nicephoros I, whom he denounces as a "fiery friend of the Manichaeans and his near neighbors the Athinganoi." Nicephoros apparently had invited the Athinganoi to sacrifice a bull in order to put down a rebellion by one Bardanios. Theophanes is dismayed to report that the members of this sect were granted lands and allowed to carry on their business without fear (3).

The origin of the Paulicians is still a matter for scholarly debate. Although their beliefs were characterized by later writers like Peter of Sicily and Patriarch Photios as being Manichcean, they actually bore a closer resemblance to those of Marcion. At any rate, the Paulicians were certainly a dualist sect. The cardinal point of their teaching was "the distinction between the good God, lord of heaven and creator of souls, who alone must be adored, and the bad God, the demiurge, creator and lord of the sensible world" (4). As such, they considered all matter to be evil. They believed that mankind was fallen, but ascribed a happy outcome to this fall on the ground that it had elicited a compassionate response from the good God. Some of them thought that Christ was endowed with a celestial body, since He could not have taken one from the earth, which was the domain of the bad God. Others believed that He was an angel sent by the good God. In neither case did they acknowledge Him to be the Redeemer in anything like the traditional sense; they viewed Him above all as a moral teacher. They rejected all the sacraments, especially Baptism and the Eucharist. Most significantly for our purposes, however, they refused to venerate the Cross, the Saints and the holy Icons. In true Marcionite fashion they rejected the Old Testament in its entirety. From the New Testament they accepted the Gospels and the Epistles of St. Paul, although some of them were willing to admit the Epistles of Saints James, John and Jude, as well as the Acts of the Apostles, to their canon of Scripture.

Such attitudes as these, along with their opposition to any kind of ecclesiastical hierarchy, were not likely to endear the Paulicians to the Byzantine authorities. Nevertheless, Emperor Constantine V Copronymos, who in 752 had succeeded in recapturing the territories of Theodosiopolis and Melitene from the Armenians and had taken some of them prisoner, resettled them in Thrace three years later. Theophanes notes that they were responsible for spreading the Paulician heresy (5). It is possible that they were subsequently caught up in the events surrounding the Seventh (Ecumenical Synod. In 786 Empress Irene and Patriarch Tarasios convened a Synod to restore the veneration of Icons, but the Bishops were prevented from sitting by "the troops of the scholarii , the excubitores , and the rest of the imperial guards," who "bared their blades to attack the bishops and abbots with death" (6). Theophanes makes no explicit reference to the Paulicians at this point in his account. However, in his third Antirrhetic against Constantine V Patriarch Nicephoros relates that those who had been alienated or had fallen into distress sought after a religion in which icons and reminders of Christ's incarnation did not appear, and so "they found one that had appealed to them for some time, I mean the unbelief and atheism of the Manichaeans, which was in harmony with their opinions and permitted them to do as they pleased" (7). Although St. Nicephoros does not mention the Paulicians in this passage, Paul Lemerle argues that it is "very suggestive of what happened in the time of Irene" and is also "the most clear regarding the relation, otherwise very occasional and superficial, between iconoclasm and Paulicianism, a kind of religious refuge for those who could not any longer profess iconoclasm and refused to profess iconodulia" (8).

Whatever the truth of their involvement with the Iconoclast Controversy, the Paulicians appear to have enjoyed a period of relative toleration under Emperor Nicephoros (9). During this period one of the leaders of the sect, Sergios, who was motivated by an almost evangelical zeal to spread the teachings of Paulicianism, (10) "made the majority of his missionary journeys, apparently without being disturbed" (11). Earlier on I mentioned Theophanes ' rather jaundiced account of Emperor Nicephoros ' relations with the Athinganoi. It seems that in addition to their religious zeal the Paulicians were known for their military prowess (12), which they manifested in helping Nicephoros to quell the revolt by General Bardanes Tourkos in 803 (13). But Theophanes connected this willingness on the part of Nicephoros to harness the energies of the Paulicians with the subsequent reverses suffered by the Byzantines at the hands of Khan Krum of the Bulgarians. "This was the wrath of God condemning Nikephoros 'madness; because of it, what appeared to be his successes (over which he had boasted) rapidly crumbled". At the same time "people stopped censuring the wicked doctrines of the presumptuous heresies which opposed God: the many Paulicians, Athinganoi, Iconoclasts, Tetraditoi" (14). It is often claimed that the military failures of iconodule emperors caused iconoclastic counter-reactions. Here, if Theophanes is to be believed, we see an example of such a counter-reaction resulting from earlier concessions granted to openly iconoclast sects like the Paulicians. Theophanes explains the resurgence of iconoclast sentiment as a delayed result of divine displeasure at imperial laxity shown towards the enemies of the Church.

As Paul Alexander puts it, "the decision to persecute the Paulicians was related, on the one hand, to Byzantium's defeats during the war against the Bulgars and, on the other hand, to the highly effective missionary work carried out by the Paulician movement under one of its greatest 'teachers,' Sergios" (15). At this period the threat that they posed to the Empire was religious rather than military. Later in the ninth century they were to become more of a military problem, largely as a result of the severe persecutions unleashed against them(16).

So much for the historical aspects of this issue. What sort of justifications were proposed for reacting against heresy with the kind of harshness that Michael I began to employ until he was dissuaded by "evil advisors" like St. Theodore? As we have already seen, St. Theophanes praises this Emperor for his great zeal and piety, which makes sense, given that Michael was Orthodox in his beliefs, and perhaps more so than his predecessor Nicephoros (17). A desire to defend the Faith was certainly reason enough to undertake coercive measures against dissidents. This, however, is about as far as we can legitimately go in trying to account for the attitudes of the authorities. Alexander points out that "except for the treatises against the Paulicians, the surviving literature reflects the point of view of the Anti- Moechians and the Iconophiles." As a result, "any study of the argumentation used by the persecutors must be based on sources emanating from their victims" (18). In the case of the Paulicians we have the History of the Manichceans by Peter of Sicily. But this work does not have much to say about the persecution of the sect in the second decade of the ninth century, and still less about the grounds alleged for the need to eradicate them. Apart from a brief passage in the Vita of Patriarch Nicephoros, we are compelled to rely entirely on the Chronographia of St. Theophanes and two letters by St. Theodore. The difficulties to be encountered in analyzing both the course of events and the reasons underlying them are clearly brought out by Venance Grumel in his masterly survey of documents pertaining to the history of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Theophanes mentions that Michael decreed the death penalty against the Paulicians "at the behest of the holy patriarch Nikephoros and other pious men" (19). The text of the recommendations (εἰσηγήσεις) made by the Patriarch has been lost. However, in the Vita of St. Nicephoros by the Deacon Ignatios there is a reference to an ἔγγραφος τόμος by Nicephoros to Michael in which he informed the Emperor about the religious beliefs and practices of the Jews, the Phrygians and the Manichaeans (20). But, as Grumel observes, the Vita "does not speak of the death penalty, but says simply that the Patriarch obtained the interdiction of the public worship" of these three groups. The hagiographer "avoids anything that could recall a quarrel of his hero with the great champions of Orthodoxy that the Studites were" (21). For his part, Theophanes says nothing about the Jews, while Theodore speaks only about the Paulicians. Apart from the reference to capital punishment in Theophanes, the only other indications of the imperial sentence of death against the heretics are in Peter of Sicily and St. Photios (22).

We have already seen how Theophanes attempts to justify the application of capital punishment to the Paulicians. He claims that those who denied that clergy had the right to resort to such measures to suppress heresy were opposed to Holy Scripture in every respect, but he cites only the example of Ananias and Sapphira to support this claim. Owing to the paucity of extant sources on the side of the hardliners we do not know what other passages were used to justify the death penalty in this case. So it is to St. Theodore that we must now turn for the other side of the story.

The first of the two letters in question was written sometime between 815 and 818 to one Leo, a dealer in perfumes. Theodore was already in exile for the third time as a result of the renewal of iconoclasm by Emperor Leo V the Armenian. Addressing Leo as "an ardent zealot," he observes "what kind of fire it is that burns the Church of God, evidently fed by previous fuels." He ascribes the present turmoil in the Church over the veneration of Icons to the "adulterous wedding ceremony" performed for Constantine VI, which led to the Moechian controversy, to the "persecutions, imprisonments, exiles and earthquakes" that occurred in the wake of the illicit marriage, to the events surrounding the earlier Simoniac controversy (23), and finally to what happened in the case of the Paulicians. In connection with the Simoniac affair he points out that "the Church is not accustomed to vindicate herself by means of whippings, exiles and imprisonments" (24). He then states that "ecclesiastical law does not bring knife, sword and whips against anyone; for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword" (25). Like Theophanes he bases his views on Scripture, but he does not believe that clergy should be using any kind of force, let alone capital punishment, against dissenters.

St. Theodore's views on this subject emerge much more clearly from a letter to Bishop Theophilos of Ephesus, one of the few Iconodule Hierarchs at that time. This letter is dated sometime between 821 and his death in 826. Theodore begins by registering his dismay at the increase of quarrels and dissensions among the defenders of the holy Icons, but resolves to defend the truth as he sees it. Theophilos had evidently written a letter to one of Theodore's fellow-strugglers, Athanasios, in which he took the Studite to task for advising "neither that the Manichaeans should be killed nor that they should not be killed." It is not entirely clear why the issue is framed in these terms. Surely it would have made more sense to reproach Theodore for advising that they should not be killed. Perhaps he was trying to adopt a position of neutrality. At any rate, the following words suggest that St. Theodore had come out against killing the Manichaeans, that is, the Paulicians : "but if we had conceded it, we should have done the greatest and noblest deed" (26).

At this point in his letter St. Theodore has recourse to the exegetical homilies on St. Matthew's Gospel by St. John Chrysostomos : "and that He called the heretics tares, evidently both those of that time and those who would come later, that is, all heretics, let us listen to Chrysostom interpreting this very point" (28). The householder, that is, Christ the Master, forbade the servants to gather the tares "in order to hinder wars from arising, and blood and slaughter. For it is not right to put heretics to death, since an implacable war would be brought into the world" (29). St. Theodore then continues his citation of Chrysostomos : "What else does He mean by lest ye root up also the wheat with them than this, that if you are going to take up arms and slaughter heretics, many of the saints must of necessity be slain together with them?" (30) He adds that "this has happened even in our times; for bloodshed and slaughter have filled our world and many of the saints have departed at the same time" (31).

It is interesting to note that Theodore does not quote St. John's commentary in its entirety. He omits his observation that if heretics are incurably diseased, punishment will eventually overtake them without harm to the Faithful, and that it is therefore better to wait for the proper season, to let nature take its course, as it were. He also fails to take into account Chrysostomos ' point that the tares have the potential for becoming wheat, that is, that heretics may finally repent of their errors, if given time. "He does not, therefore, forbid us to check heretics, to stop their mouths, to eradicate their freedom of speech, and to break up their assemblies and confederacies, but He does forbid us to kill and slay them" (32). As we shall see from what follows, St. Theodore brings out more clearly than St. John the idea that heretics should be taught rather than punished. He does not advocate even the kinds of repressive measures that St. John concedes to those in authority. This may be the reason why he does not include this passage from St. John's homily.

Theodore finds Scriptural warrant for his position in the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. To the servants who ask whether they should gather up the tares that have been sown in the field of wheat by the enemy, the householder responds that they should not, lest in gathering the tares they should also root up the wheat with them. Both wheat and tares should be left to grow together until the harvest (27).

Theodore goes even further than St. John in the next section of his letter: "And what do we say about not allowing heretics to be killed? It is not given to us even to pray against them." He quotes from an epistle of St. Dionysios in which the Areopagite tells a cautionary tale about the Apostle Carpos, who had prayed against heretics that they should be removed from life (33). Theodore adds that "we should not pray against heretics, but for them, as the Lord indicated at the time of His Passion, when He said to His own Father: 'Father, forgive them their sin; for they know not what they do'" (34).

St. Theodore cites the Areopagite again a little later in the letter when he mentions the passage in the St. Luke's Gospel in which the disciples ask Christ to command fire to come down from Heaven and consume a Samaritan village. The people of this village had not prepared to receive Christ, and so the disciples thought that they deserved to be destroyed as were the Samaritans by the command of Elias (35). St. Dionysios explains that "the disciples did not please Jesus when He heard these examples, since at that time they were not partakers of the gentle and good Spirit. For our most divine Establisher of mysteries told them to teach in gentleness those who were opposed to the teaching of God; He said that it is necessary for those in ignorance to be taught, not punished" (36). As further confirmation of what Dionysios says, St. Theodore cites a passage from St. Ignatios' Epistle to the Philadeiphians: "We must hate those who hate God and waste away on account of His enemies, but we must not persecute or strike them, as do the nations who do not know God" (37). He amplifies this with the remark that if we must not strike them, still less must we kill them.

Towards the end of his letter St. Theodore deals with two examples of Saints from the past that had been urged as objections to his more lenient approach to the treatment of heretics. St. Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain had apparently recommended a monarch to take punitive measures against a nation that was slaughtering Christian people. Theodore responds that he himself is now exhorting the Emperor to do the same, "to make war on the Scythians and the Arabs, who are slaying the people of God, and not to spare them. In the latter case the war is against enemies, but in the former it is against the heretics who are subjects of the Empire" (38). As for the case of St. John the Faster, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Theodore denies that he ordered magicians to be impaled, being of the opinion rather that he permitted it: "for they were murderers, against whom those in power should not be prevented from putting Roman law into practice; they 'bear not the sword in vain... they are revengers upon him that doeth evil'" (39). He concludes this section of the letter by maintaining that "one should not allow them to use it against those for whom the Lord has forbidden it; for although it is permitted for those who rule over bodies to punish those caught in bodily wrongdoing, it is not permitted for them to punish those who transgress in spiritual matters. This belongs to those who rule over souls, whose means of correction are excommunications and other penalties" (40). In other words, St. Theodore believes that it is perfectly acceptable for those in authority to use force and even violence against the enemies of the Empire and against subjects of the Empire who commit serious crimes. Whether heretics merit capital punishment, therefore, depends on their civic status. The Paulicians evidently fell within the boundaries of the Empire during the reign of Michael I. This was fortunate for them, since Theodore was able to prevail upon the Emperor to desist from putting them to death.

St. Theodore concludes his letter to Bishop Theophilos with the following words: "we have said boldly to our Most Blessed Patriarch that the Church does not avenge herself by the sword (and he agreed), and to the Emperors who committed the slaughter, to the first, "God was not pleased by such a slaying," and to the second, who demanded a defense for the slaying, "sooner will my head be removed than I would consent to this" (41).

As for the fate of the Paulicians after Theodore had successfully interceded for them, it seems that the severe persecution meted out to them by Leo V and Michael II drove them into the arms of the Muslims. Some of them joined the army of the rebel Thomas the Slav in his campaign against Michael II, while others, under the leadership of the charismatic Sergios, established an independent state on the upper Euphrates, which lay within Arab territory. By now they had become a military threat to the Empire, and this may well have led to the harsh action taken against them by Empress Theodora in the early 840s. 42 In the light of the Paulicians ' subsequent militancy, it is interesting to speculate what kind of policy St. Theodore would have recommended the later rulers of Byzantium to adopt against them.

As a historical footnote, I think it is worth adding that over a century later Patriarch Theophylact of Constantinople wrote a letter to King Peter of Bulgaria in which he advised him to refrain from inflicting the death penalty on the Bogomils, who had assumed the religious mantle of the Paulicians. After admitting that the civil laws of Christians prescribe capital punishment for heretics, "especially when they see the evil creeping up, advancing, and causing damage to many people," he nonetheless tells the King that he, as a Churchman, does not and cannot allow it, "in case they look to a conversion of repentance, either all or some of them, and God, Who alone loves mankind and is merciful cures them" (43). It seems that the note of caution and moderation introduced by St. Theodore in the previous century had not disappeared from Byzantine ecclesiastical policy.

It would perhaps be anachronistic to conclude, on the basis of this investigation, that St. Theodore was a champion of human rights, still less a pacifist. He was certainly willing to concede to the State the right, even the duty, to crush foreign invaders. However, he clearly believed that religious dissenters who lived within the confines of the Empire should be persuaded rather than forced to abandon their erroreous beliefs and practices. Contrary to St. Theophanes, he emphatically rejected the idea that clergy had any business recommending the emperor to inflict the death penalty on heretics. He also denied that the correction of heretics was the responsibility of the State. It was up to the Church to apply whatever canonical sanctions she saw fit in order to chastize those in error. Coming from one who had suffered as much as he did from the imperial authorities for his defense of the Canons and the Icons, this attitude of moderation is all the more impressive.

Notes

(1)495, trans. Harry Turtledove, The Chronicle of Theophanes (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982), pp. 174-175.

(2) 497-498, ibid., pp. 176-177. The reference is to St. John 6:37.

(3) 488, ibid., p. 169.

(4) R. Janin, "Pauliciens," in Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique, vol. XII. 1 (Paris: Librairie Letouzey, 1933), col. 57.

(5)429, ibid., p. 118. According to Milan Loos, a "movement which thus consistently discarded the whole system of dogma, worship and organization of the church was bound to come into conflict with the Byzantine state, which was too [sic] closely involved with the Orthodox church. No doubt when iconoclasm was at its height, under Constantine V, the persecution of the Paulicians slackened" (Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages [Prague: Academia, 1974], p. 36). Steven Runciman states that the iconoclast emperors must have felt sympathy for the Paulicians and even that Constantine V held views suggesting a Paulician origin (The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1947], pp. 38-39). (6)Theophanes462, ibid., p. 146.

(7) PG 100, 501BC.

(8)"L'histoire des Pauliciens d'Asie Mineure d'après les sources grecques," Travaux et Memoires 5 (1973), p. 80.

(9)If we believ e Theophanes' account of Nicephorus, then we must believe that the Emperor almost joined the heresy of Paulicians " (Pavlos E. Niavis, The Reign of the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus I (AD 802-811) [Athens: Historical Publications St. D. Vasilopoulos, 1987], p. 116).

(10)According to Runciman, "Once converted, he flung himself into the movement; and under his guidance Paulicianism reached its heyday. His letters have the true ring of the missionary. From East to West, from North to South have I hastened, preaching the Gospel of Christ, tramping on my feet"' (Medieval Manichee, p. 36).

(11) Lemerle, "L'histoire des Pauliciens," p. 80.

(12) J.M.Hussey cites "their aggressive militancy and the close-knit nature of their communities" (The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986], p. 157). According to G.H. Huxley, "Wise emperors had valued the fighting qualities of the Paulicians instead of alienating them" ("The Historical Geography of the Paulician and Tondrakian Heresies," in Medieval Armenian Culture [ Chico, CA : Scholars Press, 1983], p. 82).

(13) Niavis, Reign, p. 116.

(14)496, op. cit., p. 175.

(15)"Religious Persecution and Resistance in the Byzantine Empire of the Eighth and Ninth Centuries: Methods and Justifications," Speculum 52 (1977), p. 245.

(16) Ibid., p. 253.

(17) On the other hand, Paul Alexander cites hagiographic texts that extol Nicephoros ' piety and concludes that "among his contemporaries Nicephorus had the reputation of being not only an extremely able general and administrator but also an orthodox Christian" (The Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958], pp. 72-73).

(18)"Religious Persecution and Resistance," p. 253.

(19)495, op. cit., p. 174: "ἀποφηνάμενος ταῖς Νικηφόρου, τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου πατριάρχου, καί ἄλλων εὐσεβῶν εἰσηγήσεσιν".

(20) PG 100:69BC.

(22) Les Regestes desActes du Patriarcatde Constantinople, vol. I, fasc. II (Chalcedon [ Kadikoy ]: Socii Assumptionistae, 1936), no. 384.

(22) PG 104:1301A (Peter); PG 102:77A (St. Photios ).

(23) At the Seventh (Ecumenical Synod there was much disagreement between those who upheld a rigorist interpretation of the Canons and those who were prepared to be more flexible over how to deal with those Bishops who had paid money for their offices during the first wave of iconoclasm.

(24) Ep . 94 (Ep. 23 in Nova Patrum Bibliotheca VIII.1, ed. J. Cozza - Luzi (Rome 1871), p. 21) ed. Georgios Fatouros, Theodori Studitae Epistulae, vol. II (Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 31.2; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1992), p. 214.

(25) The quotation is from St. Matthew 26:52.

(26) Ep. 455 (Ep. II.155 in Migne, PG 99: 1484 AB), Fatouros p. 654.

(27) St. Matthew 13: 24- 30.

(28)Ep . 455 (PG99: 1481D) Fatouros, p. 654. (29) Homilies on the Gospel according to St. Matthew 46. 1 (PG 58: 477).

(30) ibid. 46.2.

(31) Ep. 455, ibid.

(32) Homilies on St. Matthew, ibid.

(33) Let us again hear the Lord, saying to Saint Carpos, as is indicated through the voice of the all-wise Dionysios : 'Strike Me from now on; for I am ready once more to suffer for the salvation of men, and this is pleasing to Me, as long as other men do not sin. But see whether it is good for you to exchange the habitation in the chasm with the serpents for that with God and the good angels who love mankind'" (ibid. The quotation comes from St. Dionysios' Epistle 8.6 [PG 3:1100C]).

(34)St. Luke 23:34.

(35)St. Luke 9:54; IV Kings 1:9-12.

(36) Ep . 8.5; PG 3- 1096 C .

(37) Philadelphians 3:5 [longer version]; PG 5:821B. Paul Alexander suggests that this passage is a late 4th century interpolation by an unknown heretic, either Apollinarian or Arian ("Religious Persecution and Resistance," p. 254).

(38) Ep. 455 (PG 99:1485B), Fatouros, p. 647.

(39) Romans 13:4.

(40) Ep. 455, ibid.

(41) ibid.

(42)Runciman, Medieval Manichee, pp. 39-40. According to some chroniclers, as many as 100,000 Paulicians perished under Theodora, but there is no way of corroborating this figure.

(43)Ivan Dujcev, "L'epistola sui Bogomili del patriarca costantinopolitano Teofilatto," in Melanges Eugene Tisserant, vol. II (Studi e Testi 232; Citta del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1964), p. 89.

Source: The Greek Orthodox Theological Review vol. 43, n. 1-4, Brookline Massachussets 1998, p. 143- 154.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Serbian Church to Honor Gary-born St. Varnava

By Chas Reilly
November 10, 2010
NWI Times

From his childhood in Gary to his death in Yugoslavia, St. Varnava always protected his faith and was dedicated to a Christian life.

St. Varnava is the first American-born Serbian to be proclaimed an Orthodox saint, said the Rev. Thomas Kazich, who also is a Gary native.

St. Sava Serbian Orthodox Church will honor St. Varnava during a service at 6 p.m. Thursday at the church, 9191 Mississippi St., Merrillville. Kazich, with the Serbian Diocese of North America, and the Rev. Marko Matic, a priest at St. Sava, will be involved in the service.

"Not that many people know we have a saint in our neighborhood," Matic said.

Varnava was born in Gary in 1914 and lived at a home near 12th Avenue and Madison Street, Kazich said.

Varnava, whose secular name was Vojislav Nastic, was the first person baptized at St. Sava when it was located in Gary.

"He grew up in a very spiritual family," Matic said.

He also served as an alter boy at the church.

"He was at the services every Sunday," Kazich said.

Varnava went to Froebel Elementary School while he and his family lived in Gary for about nine years. They moved Yugoslavia in 1923, Kazich said.

When he finished the equivalent of high school, Varnava's father took him to see Bishop Nicholai Velimirovich to receive the bishop's blessing to study theology.

"As (Varnava) wrote, 'Theology is the science of sciences,' " Kazich said.

The bishop gave him his blessing, and he started his studies.

Kazich said Varnava's family was influential in his upbringing in the church. He said everyone in the church has a spiritual guide, and "his spiritual father was his own father."

Varnava was ordained a priest in the early 1940s, and the Serbian Church elected him to become a bishop in 1947, Kazich said.

Varnava began to preach against the Communist way of life after becoming a bishop, and Yugoslavia's Communist government arrested him on treason charges.

During his trial, Varnava wasn't allowed to deliver a final defense plea because "it was feared that he would expose and reveal the government's criminal, terroristic and tyrannical policies," according to a report written by Kazich.

In 1948, Varnava was sentenced to 11 years at one of the worst prisons at the time in Yugoslavia, Kazich said.

He spent about three years there, and the government intended to kill him when he was being transferred to another prison, Kazich said. He was placed on a train car with other prisoners, and the government ran another train into the car, he said.

Varnava survived the crash, but his legs were broken.

"And he suffered from that for the rest of his life," Kazich said.

Due to health problems, Varnava was released from prison in 1951, but he always was under guard by the Communist government until he died in 1964.

Kazich said Varnava died under suspicious circumstances, and many believe he was poisoned. He said an autopsy couldn't be conducted at the time.

Kazich said Varnava's family knew he didn't have a history of illness. He also wrote letters to them about his good health prior to his death.

No matter the circumstances, Varnava always remained "a follower of Christ," Matic said.

"He became one of the strongest protectors of his faith," he said.

Matic said Varnava remains an inspiration to many at the church.

"People still talk about him," Matic said.

St. Varnava was canonized about five years ago.

Kazich said canonization in the Orthodox Church differs from the process used in the Catholic Church.

The process "begins locally, at the grass-roots level, perhaps where the holy person was born, lived and worked," Kazich said.

"The love and veneration of the faithful spread to other areas," he said. "The hierarchy of the local church then undertake to examine all records left by the person and if this proves satisfactory, then the last part of the act is performed and canonization is announced and a service of glorification takes place."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Christianity's Place in the Middle East

Overextrapolating from the al-Qaida church attack plays into the hands of radicals wanting to push the clash-of-civilisations myth.

Chris Phillips
November 11, 2010
Guardian.co.uk

The brutal attack on a Baghdad church by al-Qaida in Iraq last week, together with subsequent attacks this week, has prompted a renewed interest in the declining numbers of Christians in the Arab world. While some commentators have limited their views to the tragedy unfolding in Iraq, others have generalised about the doomed fate of Christians across the region.

One article in Foreign Policy went so far as to suggest the church attack might spell "the end of Christianity in the Middle East" altogether. Yet such generalisations play into the hands of radicals wanting to perpetuate the clash-of-civilisations myth. Though anti-Christian feeling may be rising on the extreme radical fringe of some Arab societies such as Iraq, this should not obscure the harmony that has long been a characteristic of other parts of the Arab world.

In Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Jordan and, most rapidly, Iraq, the Christian community is shrinking and, in places, life is becoming more uncomfortable. Attacks on Coptic Christians in Egypt have risen and many complain of institutional discrimination by the state. Similarly, Christians living in Hamas-ruled Gaza complain of a lack of protection against occasional attacks by extremists.

In this context, the attacks in Baghdad only serve to escalate fears of potential persecution, especially after al-Qaida in Iraq declared Arab Christians a "legitimate target". Indeed, it claimed the attacks were to avenge the imprisonment of two Muslim women it claims are being held by Coptic priests in Egypt, suggesting an internationalisation of its campaign beyond Iraq across the Arab world.

However, as Robert Fisk has suggested, declining Christian numbers could also be largely due to demographics and favourable immigration conditions rather than increased persecution.

First, Christians tend to have smaller families than Muslims – a long-term trend that cannot be linked to recent political events. Second, with the exception of Iraq (where there was a dramatic increase in departures after the 2003 invasion), Christian migration from the Arab world has been a process spanning several generations, rather than a sudden reaction. Migration westward began in the late 19th century and has never really ceased, not even during the era of Christian political dominance in Lebanon from the 1920s to 1950s. Sixty-three per cent of Arab Americans are Christians, which has helped facilitate further immigration to the US, as existing family ties are favoured. While bouts of political instability, such as the Lebanese civil war and the Iraq war, have at times catalysed migration, it must be seen as a long-term trend rather than a gauge of increased anti-Christian feeling.

In fact, large parts of the Arab world remain tolerant and display deep inter-communal harmony. The fact that most of Iraq's displaced Christians have fled not to the west but to other Arab states, notably Syria and Jordan, seems to illustrate this.

In Jordan, the Hashemite monarchy has long styled itself as the protector of the minority 6% who are Christians. Seats are reserved in parliament, Christians make up a significant portion of the business community, and Christian strongholds such as the town of Madaba are central attractions in Jordan's tourist industry.

While Jordan is a religious society, it is important to note that in the University of Maryland's 2010 Arab attitudes survey, only 16% of Jordanians listed Islam as their primary identity, compared with 31% of Egyptians and 61% of Moroccans. In contrast, 58% saw themselves primarily as Jordanian, and a further 19% as Arab, both being identities that don't just tolerate Christians, but see them as equals.

Syria, too, has a strong record protecting Christians. Historically it was a safe haven for Armenian Christians fleeing the Turkish massacres of the first world war. Today, about 10% of Syrians are Christian and, while diminishing in numbers, they retain a privileged position. Christian religious festivals are publicly celebrated, Christians hold key positions in business and government, and the state even provides free electricity and water to churches and offers tax breaks to priests.

Ideologically, the ruling Ba'athists are secular, even though the constitution demands the president be a Muslim, while the ruling elite, themselves from the Alawi sect, see the benefit of supporting another minority. Not surprisingly, most Christians speak positively of the government, seeing it as a protector from radical Islam – a myth that the regime is happy to perpetuate.

Of course, the Syrian and Jordanian regimes fall down on several other counts. Both are dictatorships with poor human rights records. While both regimes offer equality and cultural freedoms to their Christians, they deprive other groups of rights, notably the Kurds in Syria and some Palestinians in Jordan. Yet on the specific issue of religious freedom for Christians they counter the claims that Arab governments are allowing increased discrimination and persecution.

Moreover, at a broader societal level across the region, it seems wholly unjust to suggest Arab Muslims are suddenly turning on their Christian compatriots. A radical fringe in each state may share the extremist views of al-Qaida, but that does not mean they are accepted by mainstream society. Even Islamists such as Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood expressed their disgust at the Baghdad bombings, and called for Cairo to protect its churches. This issue varies across the region more than generalist commentators are allowing for.

Christian numbers may be diminishing and the radical fringe may sadly be gaining the upper hand in certain pockets such as Iraq, which the international community should rightly condemn. However, the Arab world in general remains a place where Christians and Muslims have lived side by side for centuries, and look certain to continue doing so. Perhaps we should be celebrating this fact rather than exaggerating the extent to which the whole region is suddenly becoming anti-Christian.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Holy Martyr Stefan of Decani, King of Serbia

St. Stefan of Decani (Feast Day - November 11)

The Holy Martyr Stefan of Decani, King of Serbia was strangled in his old age. When he was blinded, St. Nicholas appeared to him in the church at Ovche Polje (Field of the Sheep) and showed him his eyes saying: "Stefan, be not afraid: behold your eyes in my palm. In due time, I will return them to you." Stefan spent five years in Constantinople as a prisoner in the Monastery of the Pantocrator. By his wisdom and asceticism, his meekness and piety, his patience and benevolence, Stefan not only surpassed all the monks in his monastery, but all monks in Constantinople. When five years had passed, St. Nicholas again appeared to him and said: "I came to fulfill my promise." He then traced the sign of the Cross on the blind king, and Stefan received his sight. In thanksgiving to God, Stefan built the Church of Decani, one of the most marvelous works of Byzantine artistic beauty, and one of the most famous monuments of Serbian piety. The holy King Stefan, with St. Sava and the holy Prince Lazar, constitute a most glorious trinity of holiness, nobility and self-sacrifice - the gift of the Serbian people. St. Stefan lived his earthly life as a martyr, and died as a martyr in the year 1336, receiving the wreath of immortal glory from the Almighty God Whom he had faithfully served.

Reflection

If ever there was a holy king who sat on the throne of an earthly kingdom, that was the holy King Stefan of Decani. The Greeks, who otherwise considered the Slavs barbarians, were amazed at the beauty of St. Stefan's soul as one of the rarest wonders of the time. When the Emperor Cantacuzene sent the abbot of the Monastery of the Pantocrator to Milutin on some official business, King Milutin inquired about his son Stefan. "O King, are you asking me about the second Job?" the abbot replied. "Be assured that his poverty stands above your royal greatness." For his part, the Byzantine emperor acted very cruelly toward the blind Stefan: he confined him to one area of the court and forbade everyone access to him. After that, he sent him to the Monastery of the Pantocrator, hoping that the monastery would force him into strict monastic asceticism, and that he would become weak and perish there. But God preserved the Blessed Stefan and he endured the ascetic labor of fasting and prayer like the best of monks. They began to speak of his wisdom throughout all of Constantinople, and the emperor began to respect him and often sought advice from him. For example, St. Stefan contributed to the defeat of the infamous heresy of Barlaam, against which St. Gregory of Palamas fought. Barlaam then resided in Constantinople, and by skillful intrigue, had won over many high-ranking clerics and civil officials to his way of thinking. In perplexity, the emperor summoned Stefan and asked him what he should do. The wise Stefan replied with the words of the Psalmist: "Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate Thee?" (Psalm 139:21), and also said: "Dangerous men must be banished from society." Heeding this, Emperor Cantacuzene drove Barlaam from the capital with dishonor.

HYMN OF PRAISE: The Holy Martyr Stefan of Decani, King of Serbia

Tortured and persecuted, Holy King Stefan of Decani
Endured pains and persecutions as a true Christian.
And when it seemed he was defeated by all,
He was actually victorious, powerful and unscathed.
He defeated his father by patient endurance,
And Cantacuzene by profound wisdom.
With silence he overcame malicious Simonida,
And with trust in God he overcame King Shishman.
He was even more powerful than his mighty son-
For those who do not sin are always more powerful.
Earthly power always ends without a glimmer,
But there is no end to heavenly power.
King Stefan of Decani, meek and beloved,
Drew his strength from heavenly power:
His power and glory were from Christ,
And from Christ was his life, throne and sovereignty.
Stefan understood this, and this he confessed;
That is why he defeated all adversaries in the end.
Pray for us, O wondrous king,
That God may grant us salvation and mercy.

Read also:

The Healing of St. Stefan of Decani by St. Nicholas

Visoki Decani Serbian Orthodox Monastery

Tweet

Share on Tumblr