#monophysites

[byzantine-suggestions]

Theodora's wikipedia page is a good example of when wikipedia is not an exceptionally reliable source

[liefdesleven]

miss my beautiful very dry christianity class it was gorgeous the professor was Not charismatic in any way the slides were Not well designed it was an extensive historical overview beginning of christianity to modern times it was so dry and i learned so much and had the time of my life

[alysvolatile]

If anything, I think my exhaustive research into early Christian heresies vis a vis the Byzantine/Roman Empire makes me *more* fun at parties, not less.

[wisdomfish]

The Creed of Chalcedon set forth the normative theological standard concerning the two natures of Jesus Christ (divine and human), thus rejecting various christological heresies (such as Monophysitism, the doctrine that there is only one nature in Christ, a belief still held by the Coptic Church).

Samples, Kenneth Richard. ‘Without a Doubt: Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions. p. 55

[heresylog]

Heresy.

It doesn't matter if it's your OC, you shouldn't lewd a minor

Finneas is a 24 year old grown man.

[tenth-sentence]

Some Egyptian theorists retorted that Jesus had really just one (purely divine) nature, and by the 630s so many people had died over this question that plenty of One-Nature* Christians in Syria and Egypt positively welcomed the Muslims.

*The technical term is Monophysite, from the Greek for "one nature."

"Why the West Rules – For Now: The patterns of history and what they reveal about the future" - Ian Morris

[sybillum]

the Nine Saints

ethiopia, c. 15-16 centuries

a group of nine missionaries from various regions of the Byzantine Empire, who came to Ethiopia during the Council of Chalcedon 451, a very divisive and complicated period of the Early Church’s history, played a pivotal role in bringing Christian faith into the land as the primary faith. 

‘Chronicle of Axum’ stated about all saints that: ‘in the days of Amiamid, many monks came from Rum, who fill’d all the Empire; Nine of them stay’d in Tigre, and each of them erected a Church of his own Name’. 

not much is present about their hagiographies, at least in english, so all that i could acquire on them shall be presented below. only eight are depicted on the icon.

abba Pantelewon

abba Garima

abba Liquanos

abba Aftse

abba Aragawi

either abba Yem’ata or abba Alef

abba Guba

abba Tsahma

1. abba Pantelewon

borne in a noble Byzantine family (470-522), he eventually became a monk, who is associated with the founding of Pantelewon monastery. in 480 AD he fled to Axum, the capital city of Ethiopia, among with other 8 saints, who were all, just as him, escaping the Chalcedonian Council 451 (declared Monophysitism a heresy). in another tradition, abba Pantelewon enclosed himself in a tower for 45 years, and this tower, later, was identified as Pantelewon Monastery near Axum. abba Pantelewon is also regarded as a skilled exorcist, considered to have casted out evil spirits and brought peace to turmoiled regions. 

2. abba Garima (Isaac/Yeshaq)

his hagiography was written in around late 15th century. his father was king of Rum (Byzantium) and after his death, abba Garima was a king for 7 years - up until abba Pantelewon summoned him to be a monk. this way, abba Garima spent 5 years with abba Pantelewon, until he went on his own way and established a monastery at Mädära, where he spent about 20 years of his life. there, he became known as an exorcist and wonderworker. monastic tradition holds that the Garima gospels (three ancient ethiopic manuscripts containing all four Gospels and supplements like lists of Gospel chapters. Garima 2 is held as the earliest existing complete illuminated Christian manuscript) were composed by abba Garima himself. 

3. abba Liquanos

is known as composer of hymns, prayers and liturgies, that are still used within the tradition of Ethiopic Orthodox Church. was probably from Constantinople, but later moved to Däbrä Qwänasel monastery. 

4. abba Aftse

has a syriac name, so probably came from Edessa. according to his hagiography, he travelled from Asia Minor to Rome, where he met abba Garima. they travelled together to Ethiopia and he founded a monastery in Yeha as a center of learning and spiritual guidance. abba Aftse is known as a healer. 

5. abba Aragawi

was a disciple of Coptic monk Pachomius the Great (a founder of Cenobitic monasticism). after twelve years at the court of king Ella Amida of Axum, he and the nun Edna, his friend, travelled to found Debre Damo monastery. as the legend states, when he was at the base of the mountain, on the top of which Debre Damo is located, a large green serpent slithered to him, and st Michael the archangel appeared, giving abba Aragawi instructions on how to build the monastery. after that, the serpent coiled itself around the monk and aided in travelling up the mountain to do the angel’s bidding. 

6. abba Yemata OR Alef

abba Yemata: a charismatic preacher, who travelled far and wide preaching the Gospel and founding churches in distant areas. currently has a church of Abuna Yemata Guh dedicated to him.

abba Alef: travelled north and reached Bi’isa, founded a monastery there (Gär’alta, Endärta woreda, Tigray region) and was a missionary to the local people.

7. abba Guba

probably coming from Cilicia, he was a fellow monk of abba Pantelewon. after that, he moved to the desert of Bäräka. he is known as a healer, who established a monastery in Madara for medical needs and spiritual comfort of the community. 

8. abba Tsahma

originally coming from, possibly, Antioch, he moved to Ethiopia and, establishing the monastery there, this devout scholar devoted his life to studying the Scriptures and evangelising, educating people on Christian faith. 

sources:

The Nine Saints

The Legend of Saint Abuna Aragawi Monastery

Aleteia.org

Dictionary of African Christian Biography

[max1461]

Assumption: you're a mormon fundamentalist taliban osama bin laden marxist leninist dengist sinn fein lincolnite gay war criminal chechen separatist montagnard proto-feminist yudkowskyan shining path gay narco peshmerga taiping heavenly kingdom shinto anti-woke anti-cash quaker jesuit nudist jain dharma undecided major FREEMASON thinfluencer lesbo-croatian seinfeld muslim brotherhood narnia hippocratic oath monophysite rhodesian bush war "five points" of calvinism descartes ted kaczynski wagner group neoliberal zanu pf deep ecology champagne socialist

largely correct

[racefortheironthrone]

How did all the heresies and theological arguments of the Late Roman Empire lead to "the Arab caliphates getting a decent navy and winning the Battle of the Masts"?

This is actually a fascinating story about the nature of the religious world and religious politics in the Late Roman and Byzantine Empires and the Rashidun Caliphate.

Because heresies and theological arguments tended to start at the level of bishops and patriarchs fighting with the bishops and patriarchs of other metropoles (and that filters out to which missionaries were sent where), there were strong regional variations as to which position was in the local majority.

Skipping over the Arian controversy because it's not relevant to the Battle of the Masts, Cyril of Alexandria was the leader of the Monophysite faction ("physis" meaning "nature," i.e Christ has one nature, which tracks with the Council of Nicaea's declaration that he had one "essence"), and his dyophysite (meaning two "natures") rivals were based out of Antioch - and Alexandria and thus Egypt became Monophysite. However, Constantinople and Anatolia were dyophysite and worked to make sure that the Second Council of Ephesus and the Council of Chalcedon declared monophysitism a heresy and dyophysitism as Orthodoxy, thus leading to the Chalcedonian Schism.

Following on from this, the emperors Justin II and Justinian I were Orthodox. Now, Justinian tried to end the Schism through the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, but this didn't really work and it remained state policy to persecute Monophysites. However, the empress Theodora was Monophysite and acted as patroness and political defender of Monophysites throughout the empire - which made her very popular in Egypt...and with the Greens in the Hippodrome, who were also Monophysites. Naturally, if the Greens were Monophysite, the Blues were Orthodox, because why not turn your sports rivalry into a religious rivalry and a pseudo-political party system? It's not called the Byzantine Empire because it's simple.

Even though Theodora was a Green, Justinian supported the Blues, which meant that no matter what your sports team or religious views or pseudo-partisanship you could support the imperial family. (Indeed, many historians think that the two at least somewhat arranged their religious and sports affiliations with this in mind.) This worked...up until the Nika riots ended up with Belisarius turning the Imperial army on the sports fans turned revolutionary rioters in the Hippodrome, leading to the deaths of as many as 30,000 people.

And so it went, with Alexandria tending to be the losers in the monoergism vs. dyoergism (does Christ have one "energy" or two?) debate, and the monolethitism vs. dyolethetism (does Christ have one "will" or two?) debate. Notably, these debates saw the Emperors of the time trying to get the Church to adopt a compromise (both monoergism and monothelitism were essentially an attempt by the Emperor Heraclius and his Patriarch to find a new theological formulation that the Alexandrians could live with while pointing urgently in the direction of first the Persians and then the Arabs) and failing due to religious partisans digging in their heels, or Emperors siding violently with one side or the other, ironically in the name of Imperial unity.

And this brings us to the Arab Conquest that gave birth to the Rashidun Caliphate. Now, the Christian population of Alexandria was not exactly thrilled about suddenly being ruled over by Muslim Arabs in 642...but in a genius stroke of enlightened self-interest, the Rashidun Caliphate adopted a policy whereby non-Muslim subjects (dhimmis) would be left alone in terms of religious matters as long as they paid their jizya taxes on non-Muslims (with the idea being to create a financial incentive to convert). While this wasn't the most popular, the Alexandrians realized that having to pay religious taxes and then getting left alone in peace and quiet to be Monophysite was a much better deal than having to pay Byzantine imperial taxes and getting religiously persecuted all the damn time.

This mattered geostrategically, because the Port of Alexandria was one of the largest ports in the Mediterranean, and thus had one of the largest shipyards and a lot of shipbuilders, and a hell of a lot of trained ex-Roman sailors and marines who were heavily Monophysite. These recently-unemployed sailors and marines were very happy to work for the Rashidun Caliphate, especially when the Caliphs started to shift resources into the navy to combat Byzantine dominance on the seas. Thus, only a few years after the Rashidun conquest of Egypt in 642, the Arab navy was suddenly able to fight on equal terms with the Byzantine navy - and then started kicking their ass.

This at last brings us to the Battle of the Masts in 655, where an Arab fleet (crewed mostly by Monophysite Egyptians) of 200 ships under the command of admiral Abu al-A'war came into contact with a Byzantine fleet of 500 ships led by the Emperor Constans II off the coast of Lycia...and smashed it to pieces. According to the historian al-Tabari, it was called the Battle of the Masts because there were rough seas and both fleets lashed themselves together to allow for marine boarding operations, so that soldiers were literally crossing from mast to mast. Constans II supposedly only managed to escape by changing uniforms with one of his subordinates as a disguise.

The defeat was so crippling that Constantinople was brought under siege for the first time by the Rashidun that same year, although that brief siege (the brevity of which is why historians refer to the siege of 674-678 as the "First Arab Siege of Constantinople") was unsuccessful due to a storm that sunk the Arab ships carrying the artillery and siege engines that the land army was counting on. Naturally, the Byzantines attributed this storm and the first Arab civil war that broke out in 655 (which bought the Byzantines some desperately-needed breathing room) to divine intervention.

Just to show how the past is always with us, I wanted to share a bit of a statement by the Coptic Orthodox Church of the Southern United States:

"The Coptic Orthodox Church was accused of being 'Monophysite' in the Council of Chalcedon. The term monophysite comes from two Greek words meaning "single nature". Monophysitism merged Christ's humanity into His divinity so that effectively it meant that in Christ there was only one single nature, a divine nature. This is NOT what the Coptic Orthodox believes. We believe that "Christ's divinity parted not from His humanity, not for a single moment nor a twinkling of an eye" and we recite this statement in every liturgy. As a result, we are Miaphysite and not Monophysite. Miaphysitism (one nature) means the Lord Jesus Christ is perfect human and perfect divine and these two natures are united together without mingling, nor confusion, nor alteration in one nature; the nature of God incarnate."

[shrike-dyke]

i was actually genuinely hoping for a textbox bc i was sad einojuhani rautavaara wasn't on there

The problem with studying Catholic heresies is that they literally made a hobby out of inventing fully realised heretical theologies in order to accuse each other of subscribing to them. Basically every single one comes with a big asterisk noting that it's unclear whether anyone ever actually believed this, or whether some random theologian just made up a guy to get mad at – and the worst part is that you absolutely cannot tell just from looking at them, because the heresies we do have evidence of actual practice for are, if anything, even weirder. Like, the guys who thought Jesus was a hologram were 100% real, so you can't rule anything out!

[wisdomfish]

The earliest Christian creedal statement was most likely the simple yet profound New Testament proclamation, “Jesus is Lord! Saying “Jesus is Lord” (Greek: Kyrios Iesous) was the New Testament equivalent of saying, “Jesus is Yahweh” (the Lord God). This declaration of Jesus’ Lordship as the Messiah and Savior set first-century Christians apart both from Judaism and from the Romans’ worship of Caesar. Acknowledging Jesus as Lord lies at the heart of the Christian faith...

For Protestants, the authority of the creeds is not intrinsic but rather derived from Scripture. According to the Protestant principle of ‘sola Scriptura’ even creeds are subject to the supreme authority—the written Word of God. While creeds provide a valuable summary of universal Christian beliefs, they are not divinely inspired… Creeds are at least conceivably open to correction, reform, or modification, but always in light of Scripture...

The Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed identify the three divine Persons of the Trinity (Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit), focusing on their unique roles in redemption… Because too many Christian churches today fail to focus adequately on the full triune nature of God, many Christians live as functional Unitarians… The creeds which reflect a balanced trinitarianism can serve as a helpful corrective to today’s theological imbalances and lack of theological training...

The church fathers formulated the Nicene Creed in large part to address the Arian heresy that denied the unqualified deity of Jesus Christ by making him a creature. Arianism is still seen today in the theology of Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christadelphiams, and Iglesia ni Cristo...

The Athanasian Creed sets forth the Christian doctrine of the Trinity (three in unity), rejecting both polytheism (the belief in more than one god) and modalism (belief that the one God merely changes modes of expression). Polytheism is evident today in Mormonism, and modalism lives on in the United Pentecostal Church (Jesus only)...

The Creed of Chalcedon set forth the normative theological standard concerning the two natures of Jesus Christ (divine and human), thus rejecting various christological heresies (such as Monophysitism, the doctrine that there is only one nature in Christ, a belief still held by the Coptic Church)...

A creed is not, and was never meant to be, a substitute for personal faith. It attempts to give substance to a personal faith that already exists. You do not become a Christian by reciting a creed. Rather the creed provides a useful summary of the main points of your faith...

Contrary to the message too often heard in churches today, doctrine and theology are critical to an individual's spiritual growth and can provide a much-needed biblical foundation to stand on...

~ Kenneth R. Samples; Alister E. McGrath

[byzantine-suggestions]

@suburbanbeatnik OK SO:

As far as the “mixing up different historical eras” problem goes, this actually happens in a lot of different novels. Theodora by Samuel Edwards is the most blatant example I can think of at the moment—near the end of the book, a horde of Huns, inexplicably led by Khosrow, starts marching on Constantinople while Justinian is in his plague coma, and Theodora sells the crown jewels (I don’t believe the narrative specifies the buyer) to fund Belisarius and his troops, who are the city’s last defense. Khosrow is similar to Mehmed II, Theodora takes on the role of Anna of Savoy, and the overall political situation is implied to be very bad for Byzantium, with Constantinople on the brink of total failure and most of the empire's territory gone. (Like, there’s discussion of Justinian and Theodora meeting the invaders at the gates so they can die together, because they think the whole empire is collapsing.) The story does end with the Byzantines winning (using Greek fire, another anachronism), and Theodora gets her jewels back (I do not remember how), but yeah, the author completely blended two very different periods together. Different variants of this exact plot appear in different novels—a *lot* of books treat the 540s as politically similar to the 1200s or 1300s, and a *lot* of books have Theodora sell her crown for some reason or another, usually to fund the defense of the City or one of Justinian’s schemes. (One book–maybe one of the ones by Marié Heese? I can’t think of the title, sorry)—had her sell her jewels to fund the building of the Hagia Sophia. (She gets them back in that book, too—I think Narses literally just discovers an enormous stockpile of gold somewhere, and that fixes the financial problems.) And a lot of different books put Belisarius in a Heraclius or Basil-like role, although I’m less well-versed in Belisarius books than I am in Theodora books. (The Sarantine Mosaic by Guy Gavriel Kay definitely did this—the character of Leontes is pretty much Heraclius and Belisarius combined, while Valerius and Aliana are straightforward Justinian and Theodora equivalents, except for the fact Aliana is the equivalent of an iconodule rather than a Monophysite. But that gets a pass, imo, because it’s not pretending to be totally accurate.)

Religious inaccuracies and mixups are also really common overall, especially in older books. One Victorian-era book called Blue and Green, or the Gift of God: A Novel of Old Constantinople was very bad with this, presumably because the author was a British Protestant who made no secret of his disdain for the “pagan heathenism” of the Byzantine Empire. (His descriptions of religious ceremonies are very funny, because he describes them as, like, Christian ceremonies, if Christian ceremonies had strippers and drugs. The inciting incident of Theodora’s spiral into prostitution is her doing an erotic dance at a respectable, aristocratic wedding—not a bachelor party, an actual wedding—and this is presented as normal.) Really, you can probably just check out any Byzantine book from before, say, the 1980s on archive.org, and there’ll be weird religious anachronisms all over the place. Lots of authors bring iconoclasm or the East-West Schism (the one that happened in 1054) into the sixth century, I guess because those are more recognizable and dramatic than the Monophysite thing. Authors tend to put Justinian and Theodora on the opposite sides of these conflicts, and Theodora is usually on whatever side they consider “wrong,” which differs significantly from book to book depending on the author’s religious leanings.

Regarding the Theodora/Macedonia thing—Ross Laidlaw’s Justinian: The Sleepless One definitely did this (there were a couple of cringe sex scenes in this book—he always referred to Macedonia as “the other one,” I guess to avoid saying her name a bunch of times? It’d be like “Theodora felt the other one’s lips...” and so on. It sounded so strange.) Macedonia was Theodora’s main love interest—Theodora does marry Justinian, and she likes him well enough as a person, but she’s pretty explicitly gay and uninterested in men, and she has an affair with Macedonia until Macedonia dies in an earthquake. I believe Stella Duffy’s Actress, Empress, Whore duology also had Theodora and Macedonia hook up, but Duffy’s sex scenes were less fetishistic and cringeworthy, and their relationship didn’t last for the entirety of the novel. Theodora having sex (or sexually charged interactions) with Antonina, Macedonia and her other female friends is reasonably common in shitty Theodora novels in general, but it’s never, like, a plot point. It’s just an excuse for the author to write about attractive young women getting it on in the Roman baths, or whatever other fetish-y nonsense piques his interest.

These points aren’t even the weirdest things about most of these books, though. I should just sit down one day and do a full post about all of the absurd things that happen in Justinian and Theodora stories, because shit gets real weird in most of them. Messy historical anachronisms and fetish-y male-gaze lesbian sex scenes are nowhere near the strangest aspects of some of these books—remind me, one day, to talk about all of the Penis Diseases these authors invent to explain away Justinian and Theodora's infertility.

[chaotic-theatrical-weaver]

Christological Heresies as Steven Universe characters:

For @provider-of-guardians and @mhmm-thatsinteresting, because this is a very niche crossover that only you two would care about.

Gnosticism: Holo-Pearl

Arianism: Connie

Apollinarianism: Frybo puppeteered by gem shards

Nestorianism: White Diamond (the Son) mind-controlling Pink Pearl (Jesus)

Monophysitism: Steg

[apilgrimpassingby]

Jargon Explainer for This Post

Christology

Chalcedonianism: The Christology held to by the vast majority of Christians - Christ has two natures, divine and human, and these are inseparably conjoined, but nonetheless there remains a real distinction between them. This contrasts with...

Nestorianism: A heretical Christology that makes a strong separation of the human and divine natures; for example, a Nestorian could say that Jesus died on the Cross, or even that Christ died on the Cross, but not that God the Son died on the Cross. This is heretical for several reasons, but the most obvious is this - if God the Son did not die, then only the human nature died for us, and so the Incarnation was kind of pointless.

Monophysitism: This term covers two Christologies. Firstly, the heterodox (but not, in my opinion, heretical) Christology of Miaphysitism, which states that Christ had one nature, which was both divine and human, and secondly, Eutychianism, a heretical Christology that states that Christ's divinity wholly swallowed up His humanity, to the point that He had no real humanity. This is heretical for several reasons, but the most obvious is that, if Christ was just God in a human suit, the Incarnation was kind of pointless.

Sacramentologies

Lutheran Sacramentology: Baptism with water is united to baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the bread and wine to the Body and Blood of Christ, to such an extent that whosoever receives one receives the other. Lutherans believe in consubstantiation; Christ is bodily present "in, with and under" (to use Luther's formulation) the bread and wine, and the Sacrament is both bread and wine and the Body and Blood of Christ.

Roman Catholic Sacramentology: Much the same as the above, with the difference that they believe in transubstantiation - the essence (or substance) of bread and wine is replaced with the essence of the Body and Blood of Christ, such that it ceases to have anything other than the appearance of bread and wine.

Orthodox Sacramentology: Orthodox don't like theological theories, but their view is very close to the Lutheran view.

(It's worth interjecting that all these positions would state that God is bound to but not bound by the Sacraments - it's possible for unbaptised people to be saved, and for people to receive Christ without the Eucharist, even if that's an abnormal situation).

Reformed Sacramentology: Baptism with water is united with baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the bread and wine to the Body and Blood of Christ, but not to such an extent that whosoever receives one receives the other - only the elect receive the divine elements of the Sacraments. Reformed believe in spiritual presence; Christ's divine nature is present in the Eucharist, but not His human nature, and hence He is spiritually but not bodily present in the Sacrament.

Baptist Sacramentology: Baptism with water is separate from baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the bread and wine from the Body and Blood of Christ, to such an extent that receiving one is no guarantee of receiving another. While some Baptists affirm that the Sacraments are means of grace, pretty much all of them would deny that Christ is specially present in the Eucharist or that baptism saves.

[orthodoxydaily]

Feast,Saints&Reading: Sunday, March 24, 2024

march 11_march24

First Sunday of the Great Lent: Triumph of Orthodoxy

The first Sunday of Great Lent is called the Sunday of Orthodoxy because it commemorates the Holy Icons's restoration and the Orthodox Faith's triumph against the terrible heresy of the Iconoclasts, i.e., those heretics who refused to honor the Holy Icons. For over a hundred years, the Church was disturbed by the evil doctrine of iconoclasm.

The first Emperor to persecute the Church was Leo the Isaurian, and the last was Theophilos, the spouse of Saint Theodora (February 11), who reigned after her husband's death and re-established Orthodoxy in the time of Patriarch Methodios (June 14). Empress Theodora proclaimed publicly that we do not kiss the Icons as a sign of worship, nor do we honor them as "gods," but as images of their prototypes.

In the year 843, on the first Sunday of the Fast, Saint Theodora and her son, Emperor Michael, venerated the Holy Icons together with the clergy and the people. Since that time this event has been commemorated every year, because it was definitively determined that we do not worship the Icons, but we honor and glorify all the Saints who are depicted on them. We worship only the Triune God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and no one else, neither a Saint, nor an Angel.

The Holy Prophets Moses, Aaron, and Samuel were initially commemorated on this Sunday. The Alleluia verses appointed for today’s Liturgy reflect this older usage.

SAINT SOPHRONIUS, PATRIARCH OF JERUSALEM (638)

Saint Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, was born in Damascus around 560. From his youth, he was distinguished for his piety and love of classical studies. He was incredibly proficient in philosophy, and so he was known as Sophronius the Wise. The future hierarch, however, sought the true philosophy of monasticism and conversations with desert dwellers.

He arrived in Jerusalem at the monastery of Saint Theodosius, and there he became close with the hieromonk John Moschus, becoming his spiritual son and submitting himself to him in obedience. They visited several monasteries, writing down the lives and spiritual wisdom of the ascetics they met. From these notes emerged their renowned book, the LEIMONARION or SPIRITUAL MEADOW, which was highly esteemed at the Seventh Ecumenical Council.

To save themselves from the devastating incursions of the Persians, Saints John and Sophronius left Palestine and went to Antioch, and from there they went to Egypt. In Egypt, Saint Sophronius became seriously ill. During this time he decided to become a monk and was tonsured by Saint John Moschus.

After Saint Sophronius recovered his health, they both decided to remain in Alexandria. There they were received by the holy Patriarch John the Merciful (November 12), to whom they rendered great aid in the struggle against the Monophysite heresy. At Alexandria Saint Sophronius had an affliction of the eyes, and he turned with prayer and faith to the holy Unmercenaries Cyrus and John (January 31), and he received healing in a church named for them. In gratitude, Saint Sophronius then wrote the Lives of these holy Unmercenaries.

When the barbarians began to threaten Alexandria, Patriarch John, accompanied by Saints Sophronius and John Moschus, set out for Constantinople, but he died along the way. Saints John Moschus and Sophronius then set out for Rome with eighteen other monks. Saint John Moschus died at Rome. His body was taken to Jerusalem by Saint Sophronius and buried at the monastery of Saint Theodosius.

In the year 628, Patriarch Zacharias of Jerusalem (609-633) returned from his captivity in Persia. After his death, the patriarchal throne was occupied for two years by Saint Modestus (December 18). After the death of Saint Modestus, Saint Sophronius was chosen Patriarch. Saint Sophronius toiled much for the welfare of the Jerusalem Church as its primate (634-644).

Toward the end of his life, Saint Sophronius and his flock lived through a two year siege of Jerusalem by the Moslems. Worn down by hunger, the Christians finally agreed to open the city gates, on the condition that the enemy spare the holy places. But this condition was not fulfilled, and Saint Sophronius died in grief over the desecration of the Christian holy places.

Written works by Patriarch Sophronius have come down to us in the area of dogmatics, and likewise his “Excursus on the Liturgy,” the Life of Saint Mary of Egypt (April 1), and also about 950 troparia and stikheras from Pascha to the Ascension.

While still a hieromonk, Saint Sophronius reviewed and corrected the Rule of the monastery of Saint Savva the Sanctified (December 5). The saint’s three Canons for the Holy Forty-Day Great Fast are included in the contemporary Lenten Triodion.

Source: Orthodox Church in America_OCA

HEBREWS 11:24-26, 11:32-12:2

24 By faith Moses, when he became of age, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, 25 choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin, 26 esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward. 32 And what more shall I say? For the time would fail me to tell of Gideon and Barak and Samson and Jephthah, also of David and Samuel and the prophets: 33 who through faith subdued kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, became valiant in battle, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. 35 Women received their dead raised to life again. Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection. 36 Still others had trials of mockings and scourgings, yes, and of chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, were sawn in two, were tempted, and were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented- 38 of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth. 39 And all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, 40 God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us.

1 Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

JOHN 1:43-51

43 The following day Jesus wanted to go to Galilee, and He found Philip and said to him, "Follow Me." 44 Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote-Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." 46 And Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see." 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" 48 Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." 49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!" 50 Jesus answered and said to him, "Because I said to you, 'I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these." 51 And He said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man."