Jad Ganem: The Feast of Martyrdom

 

Arabic original here.

 

 

The Feast of Martyrdom

 

The Feast of Saint Joseph of Damascus and his companions comes this year at a moment fraught with pain and hope, as the memory of martyrdom and confession of the faith is renewed in the heart of Damascus, a city that still breathes faith despite its wounds. On June 22, 2025, while the faithful were celebrating the Divine Liturgy in the Church of Mar Elias in Dweilaa, the souls of a number of them were taken up to the face of the Father, their faith crowned with the martyrdom of blood, once more announcing that the Church of Antioch has continued to bear the cross of martyrdom on her shoulders for two thousand year.

In this context, the Feast of Saint Joseph of Damascus, who was martyred in the massacres of 1860, takes on renewed significance. The Church of Antioch, throughout the Middle East, has always been a church of martyrs and confessors. Her soil has been watered with the blood of saints and with the tears and agonies of confessors. Her martyrdoms are not a distant memory, but rather a reality that is repeated, giving life to the Church’s body in every generation. The Orthodox faith came to us in Antioch not through conferences, publications, or lectures, but thanks to thousands of martyrs and confessors who lived out the Gospel to the end.

Today, as Antiochians celebrate Saint Joseph of Damascus and his companions— the location of whose relics the Church does not know, and whose name is still not borne by any church or temple in the diocese of Damascus, despite new churches having been built after the declaration of their sainthood— an urgent appeal is made to the Holy Synod of Antioch not to repeat what has happened with those saints. The martyrs of the Church of Mar Elias in Dweilaa deserve to be inscribed in the Antiochian Synaxarion and to have an annual feast designated for them, on which the Church can start to commemorate their names and seek their intercession. They did not seek martyrdom, but it came to them while they were praying. They became a living offering on the Lord’s altar and they deserve to be honored not only with tears, but also with praise and hope. Moreover, the church in which they were martyred has been sanctified by their blood and it deserves to be consecrated to them and to bear their name as well.

Amidst the grief and the psychological pressure following this heinous crime, it may have escaped the attention of church officials that it is important to designate a common burial site for the martyrs, which will become a site for people to pray and seek blessings, a sign that the Church does not forget her martyrs, but honors their relics just as she honors their souls. Martyrs are not buried like other people who have died and everything that their blood has touched on the territory of the church now deserves to be honored as saints’ relics.

At the current moment, with all its pain and hardship, it is imperative that we do not limit ourselves to the political dimensions of what occurred. Rather, it places before us theological, pastoral and historical responsibilities that the Antiochian Church cannot postpone or ignore. The blood of the martyrs is not only the seed of faith. It is also a call to vigilance, veneration and reorientation by declaring the sainthood of the martyrs of the faith who died throughout the See of Antioch in recent years, whether in the city of Antioch, Mount Lebanon, or Damascus, in order to proclaim that Antioch does not forget her martyrs and she seeks their intercession.

Will the commemoration of June 22, 2025 mark a new page in the Church’s veneration of martyrdom in Antioch? Will the Holy Synod take the initiative to declare a common feast for them? Will the diocese of Damascus take the initiative to consecrate the church in which they were martyred in their name? Perhaps the time has come to recall that martyrdom and apostolicity are two important aspects of holiness in Antioch, no less important than asceticism and monasticism. Just as holiness has flourished in sketes and monasteries, it also continues to flourish in the faces of those who offer their life as an offering of love to Christ and in the martyrdom of those who proclaim the Gospel and bear witness to it with patience and hope amidst suffering and death.

 

 

Met Antony Bashir on the Melkite Catholics (1957)

At the beginning of the re-establishment of the Word as the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America's official magazine, Metropolitan Antony Bashir wrote a series of articles introducing readers to the various Christian communities of Syria and Lebanon. They are of great interest for understanding ecumenical attitudes within the Patriarchate of Antioch in the mid-20th century.

The following is taken from The Word / Al-Kalemat vol. 1, issue 5 (May 1957), pp. 115-118, accessed through the The Hoda Z. Nassour and Herbert R. Nassour Jr., MD, Archive of Lebanese Diaspora, here.

 

 

Reasonable Facsimile.... The Melkites

by Metropolitan Antony Bashir

Of all the Christian bodies of Syria and Lebanon, the Melkites present the Orthodox writer with the most difficult exercise in charity. While those who are now born into the group are undoubtedly sincere in their beliefs, the schism did not originate in religious conviction and its subsequent aggressive missionary campaign has been conducted on the lowest possible level.

To avoid controversy, the historical facts in this outline have been taken from the works of the Roman Catholic apologist, the Reverend Adrian Fortescue. Quotation marks, except where otherwise noted, indicate excerpts from his posthumous book THE UNIATE EASTERN CHURCHES. The standard Orthodox histories, and the history of the Patriarchate of Antioch by the Anglican John Mason Neale, are more severe in their analysis of the beginnings of the Melkites. Since the history of the group after the schism contains no little evidence of internal tensions, it is kinder to rely on Roman Catholic sources for the story.

 

The Schism

When Rome fell away from the Church for the last time after the schism of 1054 the entire East remained Orthodox, except for the Nestorians and others who had already set up independent organizations. In 1057 Patriarch Theodosius III went to Constantinople to join forces with the Patriarch Michael who had excommunicated the Pope. When the Crusaders took Antioch in 1098, John IV was Patriarch. The Latins expelled him and intruded a Latin bishop in the see. After the Byzantines accepted the union of the Papacy at Florence in 1442, the Patriarchy of Antioch convened a Synod in Constantinople and together with the other Orthodox Patriarchs rejected the terms of the Florentine union.

In the middle of the seventeenth century the Jesuits opened missions in the Middle East and tried to tempt the Orthodox into union with Rome. The Jesuits played on the anti-Greek feeling of some of the Syrian bishops, and several of them accepted union with Rome, including a bishop Euthymius of Tyre. The Patriarch Cyril V played with the idea of union, but he was succeeded in 1720 by the Patriarch Athanasius IV, who put an end to these intrigues and imprisoned the leaders of the union party, including Euthymius of Tyre.

When the Patriarch Athanasius died in 1724, nominated for his successor was a certain monk Silvester, who was supported by the people of Aleppo. There was a rivalry between the communities of Aleppo and Damascus and some Damascine laymen hurriedly met and elected another man to block the election of Silvester. The Damascene candidate was Seraphim Tanos, a nephew of Euthymius of Tyre, who had had him educated in Rome. He was consecrated a Patriarch by two dissidents and took the name of Cyril VI.

Silvester appealed to the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constantinople who had him ordained and then deposed Cyril who fled to Lebanon. To rule as Patriarch of Antioch under the Turks it was necessary to have Government approval. The Turks naturally gave this to Silvester, the candidate of the Orthodox Church, which was an officially recognized religious body in the Ottoman Empire. This is not a unique situation in Christian history; the modern Roman Catholic bishops of Poland and Hungary must have the recognition of their Communist governments, or they may not take office. Until shortly before World War I, the Austrian emperor passed on the candidates for the Papacy after their election by the Cardinals, and could, and did, veto elections. In addition, Seraphim-Cyril was elected by a self-constituted synod in which no bishops took part. In view of all of this, the Papal contention that Cyril was somehow the "true" successor of the Orthodox Patriarchs of Antioch is ridiculous.

Cyril Tanos's early years had many difficulties with his followers, with the Latin missionaries, and with the Maronites who persistently converted his supporters, and in 1759, he nominated his 27 year old great-nephew Ignatius Gauhar to succeed him, and resigned.

Ignatius took the name Athanasius V but the Melkites appealed to Rome against him and the Pope appointed the Metropolitan of  Aleppo as Patriarch. He reigned, as Maximos II, for only a year while Gauhar protested but finally compromised and accepted the see of Sidon. When Hakim died, Gauhar again made an attempt to become Patriarch, but had to defer to Theodosius VI Dahan. When this man died in 1788, Gauhar finally became Patriarch.

 

An Abortive Reversion to Orthodoxy

After the brief reign of Cyril VII (Sayegh), the Patriarchate was occupied by Agapios Matar who ruled as Agapios III from 1796 to 1812. During his term the group developed strong Orthodox tendencies which Rome crushed with considerable difficulty.

The story begins with Germanos Adam, a native of Aleppo, and the first real scholar the Melkites produced. Adam was educated in Rome and was fluent in five languages. In Italy he was friendly with Latin theologians of the Anti-Papal party which existed among Roman Catholic intellectuals until driven underground by the Vatican Council in 1870. Adam returned to Syria to become Metropolitan of Acre and, in 1777, of Aleppo, the chief center of the Melkite schism. Both he and his Patriarch had continuous trouble with the Latin agents in the Levant, and in 1806 the Patriarch convened a Synod at Karkafah. Papal apologists consider Adam the moving spirit at Karkafah.

Karkafah was attended by the Patriarch, nine Melkite bishops, and the Maronite Patriarch, the Papal Visitor, an Italian named Gandolfi, and various other clergy including an Allepian named Michael Mazlum, who was to support Adam's Orthodox ideas for the rest of his life.

The Synod passed a series of dogmatic decrees which are quite Orthodox: the whole Church is infallible, not the Pope, a Council is superior to the Pope, who is simply an honorary primate, like an Orthodox Patriarch. All present at the Synod signed the decrees including the Papal Visitor. Fortescue says "The only explanation of this seems to be that he did not know enough Arabic to understand what they were!"

Adam was also Orthodox in holding that the consecration in the Liturgy takes place at the Epiclesis, not at the words of Institution, as the Latins claim. He died in 1809, and in 1816  Pope Pius VII condemned all of his writings. In 1835 Pope Gregory condemned Karkafah, but the Orthodox influence lived on.

 

Melkite Orthodoxy Defeated

When Agapius III died, the Melkites were led by several short-lived hierarchs, under one of whom, Ignatius V (Kattan), 1816-1833, the Melkites were freed from the civil authority of the Orthodox, and placed under the Uniate Armenians.

Kattan's successor was Michael Mazlum, whom Fortescue calls "by far the greatest man of the Melkite Church". Most Orthodox would agree, for Mazlum, who ruled as Patriarch Maximos III until 1855, was thoroughly Orthodox in his view of the Church. He was ordained to the priesthood by Germanos Adam, and was secretary of the Synod of Karkafah. Although he had no formal education, he became rector of a Melkite seminary, and in 1810 was ordained Metropolitan of Aleppo. The Papacy refused to accept him for the post, but the Patriarchate and the bishop refused to submit to the Roman order. Mazlum went to Rome to defend himself, but was persuaded to resign the see of Aleppo, and the seminary he had headed was closed because of its Orthodox tendencies.

Mazlum remained in Europe until 1831 when he returned to Syria accompanied by two Jesuits as guardians. "As soon as they landed in Syria he dodged his Jesuits" (Fortescue), and when the Patriarch died two years later the bishops elected Mazlum in his place. "The papal delegate warned them that they must not elect Mazlum". Rome finally confirmed him after he formally condemned the Synod of Karkafah.

Mazlum, who took the name of Maximos III, held a Synod before his confirmation by Rome on the theory "that synods may be held without the intervention of the Pope". The Papacy submitted and approved the Synod. He turned the Jesuits out of the Patriarchal seminary, required the Melkites in Egypt and Palestine to use the Byzantine rite, and in 1846 he obtained separate civil status for the Melkites from the Turks.

The Melkites were constantly torn by disedifying internal dissentions, schisms and quarrels during the reign of Maximos. The curious may find them outlined in Fortescue. Of greater interest to the Orthodox reader is the fact that Maximos held a Synod at Jerusalem in 1849 which Rome refused to approve, partly because it repeated the anti-Papal ideas of Karkafah. After this Synod the Patriarch quarreled with the Metropolitan of Beirut and was "summoned to Rome" to give an account of himself.  He refused to go. "It is even said that very grave remonstrances were about to be sent to him by Propaganda when he sickened and died".

 

After Maximos III

The next Patriarch was Clement Bahuth. During his reign the Julian Calendar was replaced by the Gregorian, "At once there was an enormous uproar", (Fortescue) and "a considerable number of Melkites" left the Melkites. Fortescue says, "by 1865 nearly all were converted" to Rome. Clement's successor was Gregory Yusuf who attended the Vatican Council and voted against the Papal Primacy and Infallibility. On his death Peter IV was elected, "At one time Orthodox papers spread the rumor that Peter had tendencies away from Rome and towards their Church. This was, of course, indignantly denied" (Fortescue). Peter was succeeded by the Patriarchs Cyril VIII (Giha), Demitrous Kaidy, and Cyril IX (Mogabgab), Maximos IV (Sayegh) (1947-).

 

The Name "Melkite"

The name Melkite is derived from a Semitic word for king, Malak. It was used after the Council of Chalcedon to distinguish those who accepted the decree of the Council, which was supported by the Emperor, i.e. "King", of Byzantium. Thus it was applied to the Orthodox when Seraphim Tanos left the Orthodox Church. He used the name Melkite for his organization, to differentiate it from Orthodoxy. In the United States the group is often called "Syrian Greek Catholic".

 

The "Historic Succession" of Antioch

 Fortescue, Attwater, Archdale King and other Papal writers insist that the Melkite Patriarch is the "historical successor" of the original Patriarchal line of Antioch. Their reason for doing so is obscure, for even if we admit that Tanos was the legitimate "historical successor" of Athanasius IV, and he was not, what is gained? The Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lutheran Bishop of Sweden, and the [Old Catholic] Archbishop of Utrecht are the "historical successors" of the Catholic bishops of their sees, but this is no advantage to them, nor to Rome.

Tanos left the Church, in doing so he forfeited whatever rights or titles he may have had. When the Melkite bishop Makarios Samman submitted to the Orthodox Church after 1845 he was rebaptized, rechrismated and reordained before he was allowed to act as a bishop. In more recent conversions, Melkite sacraments have been accepted by oeconomia.

 

Organization and Present State

The group is headed by a hierarch called the "Patriarch of Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem and all the East", who has residences at Cairo, Beirut and Damascus. There are some thirteen bishops, a number of the parish clergy are married, but there are several religious orders in the Western pattern. One congregation, the Shuwairite Basilians, was founded by two renegades from the monastery of Balamand near Tripoli, one of whom later returned to Orthodox unity. The religious orders of men have been the center of much of the intrigue and dissention in the Melkite group. Recent Papal statistics place the total number of Melkites in the world at 166,214.

Met Antony Bashir on the Maronites (1957)

At the beginning of the re-establishment of the Word as the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America's official magazine, Metropolitan Antony Bashir wrote a series of articles introducing readers to the various Christian communities of Syria and Lebanon. They are of great interest for understanding ecumenical attitudes within the Patriarchate of Antioch in the mid-20th century.

The following is taken from The Word / Al-Kalemat vol. 1, issue 3 (March 1957), pp.  60-63, 66, 83, accessed through the The Hoda Z. Nassour and Herbert R. Nassour Jr., MD, Archive of Lebanese Diaspora, here.

 

 The Mountaineers: The Maronites

by Metropolitan Antony Bashir

From the tenth century the Mountains of Lebanon have sheltered one of the most fascinating Christian bodies of the Middle East. The Maronites are the descendants of hardy mountaineers whose ancestors fled persecution on the plains of Syria, and whose mountain-hung villages bred a community that is almost a nation as well as a Church.

The would-be historian of the Maronites is faced at the outset by a serious difficulty: There are two versions of Maronite history, the one maintained by the Maronites themselves, and the other accepted by the Orthodox, Roman (Latin) Catholics, and all other historians. In justice to these faithful people, who have contributed so much to the Arab Christian cause, we shall present both accounts of the Maronites, and in both instances we shall rely on Roman Catholic histories. If Orthodox and Maronite writers have been less charitable to each other in the past, it is high time that both remember that they are Christian.

The Maronite Version

According to Maronite historians their communion began with the Monks, and neighboring villages, of an ancient monastery at Beit Marun on the banks of the Orontes river between Emesa, Modern Homs, and Apamea in Syria. The monks stoutly resisted the Monophysite heresy of the Jacobites and were eminently loyal to the Orthodox faith. Since the west had not yet separated from the Orthodox Church, Maronite writers say that their community was always faithful to the Pope of Rome, as in common with all Roman Catholics, they believe him to have headed the Church from Apostolic times. In the 7th Century the Maronites had their own bishops, and by 685 one of them, John Maro, took over the Patriarchate of Antioch. The Emperor Justin II tried to force them into heresy, but the Maronites resisted and under the leadership of the Patriarch defeated the Byzantines at Amium in 699. John Maro died in 707 and the Maronites revere him as St. John Maro, with a feast day on March 2. Pressed between the Byzantines and invading Arabs the Maronites emigrated to the Mts. of Lebanon from the 7th Century onward, and some two or three hundred years later the Patriarch also moved, and the Monastery of Beiut Marun was destroyed. The Maronites were unavoidably isolated from the rest of the Roman Church, but remained faithful to it, and when the Crusaders came from the West, formal contact was reestablished in 1182 and never since broken.

The Orthodox and Roman Catholic Version

On the major features of Maronite history the Orthodox and Roman Catholics are in substantial agreement, as are all other non-Maronite scholars.

The Monastery of Beit-Marun was founded on the Orontes in about 410 by the disciples of a recluse, St. Maro, who was a fellow-student of St. John Chrysostom at Antioch. The monastery became an outpost of Byzantine culture and remained Orthodox after Chalcedon, when the Monophysites left the Church. Persecuted by the Jacobites, the Monks were loyal to Byzantium and in 628 the Emperor Heraclius visited Beit Marun and showered it with gifts and privileges.

Heraclius hoped to consolidate his Syrian frontier against he advancing Arabs by establishing religious unity, and in 638 he promoted a compromise creed designed to satisfy both the Orthodox and the Monophysites. Unfortunately the creed avoided the difficulty of "one nature" by affirming one will in Christ. This was the heresy of Monotheletism (from the Greek monos, one, and thelema, will). The Monophysites were pleased by what appeared to be a Victory for their view, and Pope Honorius of Rome and Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople agreed to the compromise as did many others.

The Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem, however, refused to acquiesce in the new heresy, and rallied the Church against it. In 680 an Oecumenical Council, the sixth, it was condemned, along with the heresiarchs Pope Honorius of Rome and Sergius of Constantinople.

When the Emperors returned to Orthodoxy, the Monks of Beit Marun remained Monothelite. Many witnesses, accepted by both Orthodox and Roman Catholic historians, testify to this: Michael the Syrian, a Chronicler, St. Germanus of Constantinople, St. John of Damascus and others. Roman Catholics add that the Maronites must have been heretics because no letter was sent to them from Rome before 1215.

After the Maronites had removed to Lebanon and the Crusaders arrived, the Latin bishops who accepted them into communion with the Papacy called the Maronites heretics. A Crusader Chronicler, William of Tyre, wrote,

"After they had adhered for 300 years to the erroneous teaching of a heresiarch named Maro, after whom they were called Maronites, and being separated from the true Church... came to the 3 Latin Patriarchs of Antioch, Amaoury, and renouncing their error were united to the true Church with their Patriarch and some bishops... There were more than 40,000 of them... The error of Maro was and is... that in J.C.... there is only one will. After their schism they had adopted other evil beliefs." Jacques de Vitry, Crusader of Lyre, wrote that they had been out of the "Church nearly 500 years," following "Maro, a heretic, who taught that there was in Jesus but one will..."

After the Crusades

Whichever account of the early Maronites is endorsed by the reader, the history is fairly certain after the first Union with the Papacy. The Maronites did not all enter the Roman obedience at one time, those on Cyprus submitting as late as 1445. The Maronites were not required to adopt the Latin rite, and were very tenacious of their own customs. An observer had written that, "it was not quite clear whether the Maronites became Roman Catholics, or the Pope became a Maronite!"

In the 16th Century  two Councils brought the Maronites closer to the Papal Norm, but in 1936 the Council of the Lebanon gave the Maronite communion the character that it has since preserved. This Council, attended by 14 Maronite and 2 other Papal bishops, marks the real break with the historical past of the Maronites and the beginning of a new era. A letter circulated before the Council outlined the abuses to be corrected: The bishops, by ancient custom, had a number of women living with them; the sacrament was not reserved for the sick; the clergy sold the holy oils and marriage dispensations; there were too many bishops and the diocesan boundaries were not fixed; the Maronites of Aleppo were celebrating the Liturgy in Arabic, and priests were making their own Arabic translations of the Syriac service books. The Council of the Lebanon reformed these abuses and ordered the addition of the Papal interpolation, the filioque, to the Creed, the mention of the Pope's name in the liturgy, the restriction of confirmation to bishops rather than priests. The Maronites were ordered to use unleavened western altar bread in the future, and the laity were forbidden to receive the wine in communion. A previous council, in 1606, had adopted the Gregorian calendar.

In 1753 Pope Benedict Lambertini settled a quarrel between the Maronites and the newly converted Melkites. The Maronites were converting Melkites into Maronites and the Melkite leader Seraphim Tanos fought back by destroying pictures of St. John Maro, whom he called a Monothelite. A few years later Rome intervened again to suppress the activities of a nun of Aleppo, Anne Ajjemi, who developed rather wild fancies and gained the support of the Maronite Patriarch Joseph Estephan. The Patriarch was suspended by the Pope from 1779 to 1784.

The Maronites in Lebanon were led by an Emir under the Turks, but were always in danger of Moslem persecution. The Druses, a deviation of Islam, were also ruled by an Emir appointed by the Ottomans, and in 1845 the Maronite and Druse Emirs declared war on each other. In 1860 while the Turkish authorities looked on, the Druses attacked the Maronites and in less than a month 360 villages were destroyed, 600 Churches and monasteries were ruined, and almost 8,000 Maronites were killed. France intervened to protect the Maronites and Lebanon was given a new form of government designed to maintain peace.

The Maronite Church jealously guarded its independence through the centuries and accepted the Papacy on its own terms. Roman Catholic writers say that the Maronite Patriarch Paul Masad refused to attend the Vatican Council in 1870 for fear of losing his independence, and the four Maronite bishops who did attend voted against Papal infallibility right to the end. During World War II some of the bishops declared their independence, but unity was restored, and when the late Patriarch Peter Arida died, Rome disregarded the rights of the bishops to elect and appointed a successor. Thus it appears that Maronite autonomy is a thing of the past.

Size and Organization

The Maronites claim some half million members, most of them in Lebanon. There are over forty parishes in the United States. The head of the Church, under the Pope is called the "Patriarch of Antioch and All the East", who resides at Bkerke or Dimam in Lebanon. There are normally about a dozen Metropolitans and bishops assisting the Patriarch, and the Maronites keep alive the ancient office of Chorbishop. These prelates are priests who wear the Mitre, carry the crosier, and administer confirmation and minor orders. There are about 1,000 monks and 400 Nuns in the Church, and the Monasteries own approximately one-third of the real estate in Lebanon.

The People

The Maronite laity are similar in life and social status to the Orthodox, although more of them are located in remote villages. Roman Catholic writers say, "the general standard of ecclesiastical education is not high". This is not surprising when one recalls the persecutions the communion has suffered, and the difficult lot of the married village priests, who must often farm for a living.

Churches, Services and Vestments

The official Maronite liturgical language is Syriac, although Arabic is used for many services, and since Syriac is a dead language among the people, the rubrics (directions) in the liturgical books are written in "Karshuni": Arabic written in Syriac characters. The services are similar to those used by the Arab Orthodox before the Byzantine rite was introduced by the Greeks, and to those still used by the Jacobites, but many revisions have been made under Roman influence. In 1952 the epiclesis was dropped, and the liturgy commonly used today is adapted from the Roman (Latin) mass. The Latin altar bread is used, and Latin vestments are more common than the ancient Syriac style used by the Jacobites. Ashes are used at the beginning of Lent, [as are] the Latin rosary, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, and most late Latin devotions. Maran, the hermit, has feast days on February 9 and July 31, and the Patriarch John Maron, March 2nd. The Church buildings and furniture are identical with those of the Latins.

A New Saint

The Maronites in America are currently promoting the canonization of a monk of Lebanon, "Mar Sharbel". Father Sharbel of Beka Kafra was born in 1837 and in due course became a monk. He lived for fifteen years in a monastery at Annaya in Lebanon, and then spent 25 years as a hermit near the community. In December 1898 he became suddenly ill while celebrating the liturgy, and shortly died. His reputation for sanctity attracted pilgrims and in 1928 Rome asked to begin the process of declaring him a saint. In 1949 his grave was opened and his body was found undecayed, the attendant publicity gave great impetus to his popularity, and it is believed that the Papacy will soon add his name to the Calendar of Saints. A number of our illustrations show scenes at Father Sharbel's grave and monastery.

Met Ephrem (Kyriakos) on the Centurion's Faith

 Arabic original here. 

The Centurion

The centurion is a pagan who had perfect faith in Christ and said to Him, "Only speak a word, and my servant will be healed" (Matthew 8:8).

After this, the Lord states that from among the pagans, there are those who will "sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven  but those who consider themselves to be sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. " (Matthew 8:11-13).

Here the Evangelist Matthew indicates evangelism, since he closes his gospel with it, saying, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19).

All of this is in order to tell all the nations about the salvation that was achieved in Christ, in faith in His redemption and His love for humankind, and also to say that the good news can be spread even in our world today, despite the spread and predominance of secularism or hearts hardened by paganism.

The Apostle Paul says that we "are justified by faith" (Romans 5:1). Here also the Lord Jesus tells the centurion, "Go your way; and as you have believed, so let it be done for you" (Matthew 8:13).

Where do you think we find this lived faith? True faith is not necessarily tied to a certain dogma and it is not tied to a certain rite or a certain canon. It is tied to profound humility: "Lord, I am not worthy that You should come under my roof. But only speak a word, and my servant will be healed" (Matthew 8:8).

Here is where the word of God is found. This word is not necessarily found in a specific denomination or in a specific dogma.

The centurion believed that Jesus' word would be active at the center of his life. His faith was within, in obedience to God's word. This obedience does not contradict an doctrine.

Without this inner longing, dogma leads to a dead faith. "I am a man under authority," obedience and trust in God's word and its rule. All of this gives us security and salvation.

+Ephrem

Metropolitan of Tripoli, al-Koura and their Dependencies  

 

Met Antony Bashir on the Syrian non-Chalcedonians (1957)

At the beginning of the re-establishment of the Word as Antiochian Archdiocese of North America's official magazine, Metropolitan Antony Bashir wrote a series of articles introducing readers to the various Christian communities of Syria and Lebanon. They are of great interest for understanding ecumenical attitudes within the Patriarchate of Antioch in the mid-20th century.

 The following is taken from The Word / Al-Kalemat vol. 1, issue 2 (February 1957), pp. 31-34, accessed through the The Hoda Z. Nassour and Herbert R. Nassour Jr., MD, Archive of Lebanese Diaspora, here.

 

 

The Syrian Church... The Jacobites

by Metropolitan Antony Bashir

The modern world is sometimes startled to find the headlines devoted to a tiny and ancient religious body which uses the language of Jesus in its services, and has been divided from most of Christendom for centuries. In 1948 the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the oldest portions of the Hebrew Old Testament yet discovered, were purchased and brought to the United States by Mar Athanasius Jesus Samuel, Jacobite Metropolitan of Jerusalem, and in 1953 part of the Zone, or cincture, of the Blessed Virgin Mary was discovered in an ancient Syrian Jacobite church in Homs, Syria. Thus this almost forgotten Christian community drew the attention of the Twentieth Century world twice in a decade.

The communion known to historians as the "Jacobite" church is called in colloquial Arabic the "Syrian" church. The title is entirely appropriate, for the group was born of the intrigues of a Syrian Empress of Byzantium with a Christian Arab Sheikh, spread by the untiring zeal of a fanatical Syrian monk, and embraced by Syrians who opposed their ancient tongue and traditions to the Greek veneer of the official Orthodoxy of the Late Roman Empire.

At the Oecumenical Council of Chalcedon in 451 the Orthodox Church defined the important truth that Jesus Christ was both true God and true man: a perfect link between the Creator and fallen humanity. The Council acted against teachers who felt that in any union of God and man human nature would be absorbed. The heretics saw in a balanced Divine-human Christ a sort of blasphemous denial of the omnipotence of God. The Orthodox understood that Christ must represent both God and man if He were to be the Saviour of humanity. The heretics were called Monophysites (from the Greek, mone physis "one nature" i.e. the Divine) because they believed in the identity of the human nature and the Divine nature of our Lord.

Theological arguments concerning the exact relationship between the two natures in Christ are not popular today. It is doubtful if they ever were. The individuals who made up the masses that enthusiastically opposed the decrees of Chalcedon and proclaimed one nature in our Lord were not greater theologians than is the modern man on the street. The average citizen neither understood nor appreciated subtle discussions about the nature of Jesus, although many simple believers might be suspicious of any opinion that seemed to make the Saviour less divine. Nevertheless whole provinces of the Byzantine empire fell from Orthodoxy, and to this day the Christians of Armenia, Egypt and parts of Syria, as well as Ethiopia, are "Monophysite." The explanation is perhaps as much found in politics as theology.

When the decrees of Chalcedon were endorsed by the imperial Greek authorities many in the outlying districts of the empire found a religious excuse for their opposition to the government. The Armenians were never happy subjects of Byzantium, and the Egyptians, with their own language and distinctive traditions in faith and life, were able to replace all of the Orthodox bishops with Monophysites.

The new ideas were carried from Egypt into Syria and found ready acceptance with Syrian patriots who welcomed any theories unpopular at the capital. The Emperor Justinian I (527-565) determined to make an end of the heresy, expelled all Monophysite bishops and demanded a formal profession of Orthodoxy from all church officials. His wife, Theodora, of Syrian blood, took a different view, probably out of sympathy for her people, and to the ingenuity of this ostensibly Orthodox Empress can be attributed the existence of the Syrian Jacobite communion.

Justinian's repressive measures would have deprived the Monophysites of clergy, as those already ordained died, and no new candidates could be consecrated or ordained. With no bishops or priests to lead it the heretical party would disappear. Before this happened, however, the Empress took secret measures of her own. Among her proteges in Constantinople was a Syrian monk of humble and holy life, Jacob, to be surnamed "Bardai." Attracted by his reputation as a miracle-worker, Theodora brought him to the capital, but he shunned the court and spent his days in the strictest retirement in a suburban monastery.

When the effects of Justianian's regulations began to be felt in Syria a certain Harith ibn-Jaballah, Sheikh of the Christian Ghassanid Arabs, appealed to the Syrian patriotism of the Empress. Theodora responded at once. The Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria was in prison in Constantinople, and the Empress arranged to have him consecrate Jacob Bardai to the episcopate in 543.

His new commission transformed Jacob from a retiring contemplative into an active missionary. He left is monastic retreat and spent the remaining fort-odd years of his life feverishly travelling through Syria and the Empire planting the seeds of the new faith. In disguise, and avoiding the imperial police and the Orthodox bishops, he encouraged the persecuted sectarians to remain faithful, and founded new communities. Jacob centered his activity in Syria, and Monophysitism grew as a Syrian protest against the Empire. By the time of his death in 578 Jacob Bardai is alleged to have ordained thousands of priests and almost one hundred bishops, including one who assumed the title, "Patriarch of Antioch," and whose successors head the communion today.

Even during the life of the energetic Jacob the new organization was plagued by internal dissentions. After the first burst of missionary activity which brought so many Syrian Christians into the Jacobite fold a decline ensued, and the Monophysite community has never since been numerically strong in Syria. The Orthodox were still using the ancient Syriac rite, and to many of the faithful in the Levant the Empire was cosmopolitan rather than Greek. While the Byzantine Empire controlled the Middle East the Orthodox Church enjoyed government support and was never seriously threatened by the Jacobites.

In the middle seventh century the Moslem Arabs took Syria from Byzantium, and the Jacobites were granted civil recognition similar to that accorded the Orthodox. The Jacobites had served as a sort of fifth column for the advancing Arabs, and were rewarded and patronized by the new masters of the land. The great golden age of the Jacobite community lasted from shortly after the Arab conquest until the arrival of the Turks.

In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the Jacobites developed a tradition of scholarship inherited from Syrian Orthodoxy. At a time when learning revived in both east and west, the Jacobites produced remarkable scholars in theology, history and the sciences; men who were the peer of any Christian savant of the time.

Among many whose names stand out in the history of Christian learning, the most notable was Gregory Abdul-Faraj, known as Barhebraeus. Acquainted with Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Syriac, he left a history which is the most important source of information for his period. He was a scientist, as well as a bishop and theologian, and wrote treatises on medicine, mathematics and astronomy. He died in 1286 and the movement has not since produced outstanding scholars in great numbers.

In the twelfth century the Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch presided over twenty Metropolitans, and some one hundred and twenty bishops in the Levant, but in the fourteenth century severe Moslem persecution began and the communion has lost ground ever since. During World War I thousands of Jacobites were slaughtered by the Turks, and there are only 80,000 or 90,000 left today.

 

Relations with Orthodoxy

The Jacobites are socially and culturally related to the Greek Orthodox of Syria and Lebanon, where some 10,000 of them still live. The Patriarch lives in Homs, and governs the communion with the assistance of a Holy Synod of Metropolitans. The bulk of the faithful live in Irak, and there are five parishes in the United States. Relations with the Orthodox Church are cordial, and in some places, notably Malabar in India, periodical meetings are held to discuss reunion. One of our illustrations shows a recent meeting between our Patriarch and the Jacobite leader. In Jerusalem the two communities share the privileges of several shrines, and a Monophysite hierarch is associated with the Orthodox Patriarch in the Holy Fire ceremony of Easter Eve at the Holy Sepulchre.

There is, of course, no question of reunion or intercommunion until the Jacobites indicate their profession of full Orthodox faith by acceptance of all of the Oecumenical Councils, and purify their rites of certain expressions indicative of classical Monophysitism.

 

The Jacobite World

As the Syrian Orthodox are part of the world-wide Orthodox Catholic Church, so the Jacobites are but one section of a larger unity. There are some 8,000,000 Monophysites in the world, the largest bodies being the Armenian national church, and the Coptic communion in Egypt, while the Syrian Jacobites, the Ethiopians and the church in Malabar, India, are smaller branches of the same fellowship. In theory all of these bodies reject all of the Oecumenical Councils except the first three, and are officially committed to the denial of two natures in Christ. In all other matters their belief is generally that of the Orthodox Church. In the event of reunion they would not be expected to substitute the Byzantine rite for the ancient forms which were used by their ancestors before the schism.

 

Liturgy and Customs

The Jacobites use a Liturgy much like that originally employed by all the Christians in Syria, and later replaced by the Greek rite for the Orthodox. The liturgical language is a form of Aramaic, commonly believed to be the tongue spoken by Jesus Christ, and some communities of Jacobites still speak it. Most of those in Syria have Arabic as the vernacular, but all retain Aramaic in the church service. The Liturgy and rites for the sacraments have the general flavor of those used by the Orthodox, but there are many major and minor differences, a few of them related to the distinctive beliefs of the Monophysites. The sign of the cross is made from left to right, as in the west. Jacobites commonly ordain many minor clergy, i.e., deacons, subdeacons, readers, etc., who have secular employment, but assist at Sunday and other services.

 

The Name

The name Monophysite refers to the special emphasis on our Lord's nature, and is used in technical studies of the movement. In the Arabic vernacular the Monophysite communion is referred to as the "Syrian" Church, a very apt title as we have seen. They call themselves "Syrian Orthodox," since they regard themselves as orthodox and the Orthodox as "diophysite" ("two-nature") heretics. The name Jacobite, commonly used in western histories, is derived from their famous apostle, Jacob Bardai. "Bardai" is a nickname referring to the disreputable clothing Jacob is supposed to have worn to avoid detection by the police. Some Jacobites in the United States call themselves Assyrians. This name does not make identification any simpler, since Anglican missionaries called the Nestorians "Assyrians" in the last century, and they too have since used it.

 

The Future

The animosity which accompanied the origin of the Jacobites has long since worn away; a faith which is identical in all but 3% of doctrine binds Jacobite and Orthodox in a common heritage. Both have suffered and died for this faith at the hands of common enemies; both have shed their blood for their one Lord. The path to reunion would imply sacrifices on both sides: the Orthodox would be required to admit to equal use the ancient Syrian rite once abandoned for the rite of Byzantium, and the Jacobites to acknowledge the tradition of the seven Councils. No where in the ecclesiastical world are Orthodox and Monophysites closer together, geographically and in cultural heritage, than in Syria, and it should be the special function of Syrian Orthodox and Syrian Jacobites to heal this ancient rift. Old prejudices die slowly, but with knowledge comes understanding, and with understanding love, and in love those of the most divergent of opinions may meet in Him who is supreme love.

Future Met Ilyas Kurban on the Orthodox Youth Movement (1957)

The following is taken from The Word / Al-Kalemat vol. 1, issue 8 (October 1957), pp.  204 and 212, accessed through the The Hoda Z. Nassour and Herbert R. Nassour Jr., MD, Archive of Lebanese Diaspora, here.

 

The Orthodox Youth Movement in Syria and Lebanon

by Father Ilyas Kurban, St. George's of Boston

The Orthodox Youth movement in the Middle East is one of the most important features of the life of the Antiochian Church. This Church has suffered very much since the Arabic conquest and even before that day. The Antiochian Church had, and still has, to fight on various fronts. The Church has to fight her enemies from within and from without, the internal enemies as well as the external ones.

The fact that the Moslems conquered all the Middle East caused the Church to lose approximately all its followers. From that moment, it ceased to be a dynamic and active power in propagating the faith; its contribution to the whole body of the Church in dogma and Theology in general, and to the defense of the principles of Christianity and Orthodoxy against heresies greatly decreased. For a long time, life in the Church was stagnant, ineffective, and non-constructive due to these historical factors.

From the seventeenth century on, the Orthodox Church had to face two other intruding powers, this time from the West. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism prepared a common attack to put an end to the remnant of an ancient and glorious Church. The competition between the two outside parties gave the Orthodox Church a rest and the opportunity to survive in spite of the fact that a great part of the Orthodox Christians were converted to Catholicism; the success of the Protestant group was limited to an individual basis.

From then on, there have been quite a few attempts to revive the Orthodox faith. The contribution of the Greeks at that time was meager because Greece was under Turkish pressure. The Russian Orthodox Imperial Society built quite a few schools all over the country to relieve the Orthodox from the influence of the educational system of both the invading parties, but this effort came to an end by the success of the Communist revolution in Russia. Few attempts were made on a local basis, but these were not vital and decisive steps to revive the Orthodox Church.

March 16, 1942 is a great day in the history of the Church in Syria and Lebanon. On that day, a handful of students at St. Joseph's Jesuit University in Beirut came together and decided to form a movement aiming at the revival of the Orthodox Church, and to enable it to continue its universal message of salvation. The Church, which suffered so long, is really the militant Church on earth, the Holy Spirit is within it and will be forever.

The younger people realized from the very beginning and comprehended the real substance of the message of the Church. The Church does not need political and social influence or any other temporal recognition. What we need is a complete and profound reformation. The whole crisis is a spiritual one, and the retrogration does not belong to the essence of the Church and Her teaching, but to us, to the clergy and laity, and to other historical factors. The present crisis is a universal one, and it is a separation of man and civilization from God. Consequently, we have what we call modern materialism and its various aspects in philosophy, arts, ethics, and in social life.

The present civilization is a deformed one because of its separation from God, and it is the task of the young Orthodox generation to make possible the return to God through the Church. No renewal or progress is possible except through Jesus and the Holy Spirit, the Giver of Life. There is no meaning to the whole history if Jesus is not in the middle of this history. History is a movement of regeneration and perfection in Christ. It is a process of divinization and it is not a vertical movement, but rather an horizontal one. The aim is God and not an unknown vacuum. Our problem is that man is again trying to make out of himself God, without the help of God. The Orthodox Youth movement, understanding these facts, is trying to re-Christianize all the Orthodox people in order that they may be able to comprehend the essence of Christianity, to comprehend man and the world through Jesus. In order to attain this purpose, the first aim of the youth is to pray and to participate in the Holy Sacraments. This spiritual comprehension and knowledge of God may become a reality as a result of common prayer and a continuous meditation and contemplation in the absolute existence of God. Love of the children of God may then become a fact and a reality.

The principles of the Orthodox Youth movement are:

1. The movement is a spiritual one calling all the members of the Church, especially the young generation, to a spiritual, ethical, cultural and social movement.

2. The movement believes that the spiritual and ethical movement depends, first, in participating in the religious services and in learning the teachings of the Church and the strengthening of the Christian faith, not only among the young people, but among Orthodox people in general.

3. The movement endeavors to develop an Orthodox culture, based upon the spirit of the Church.

4. All social activities must be based upon the Christian principles.

5. The movement disapproves of denominational fanaticism, but it gives much consideration to the clinging to Orthodox principles as a necessary condition in improving religious life and of creating fraternal bonds with all the Christian Churches.

6. The movement contributes to the whole ecumenical Christian movement, and it is a part of the whole Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The movement has five thousand followers of both sexes all over Syria and Lebanon. The focus of activity is centered in Beirut, Tripoli and Latakia. The movement is divided into centers and branches. An intensive program of study is required of every group. The program is set up by a religious education committee. Many social and other activities are involved. Every center is directed by various committees, headed by the President of the Center. A general council and a general secretary direct the whole administration of the movement.

The contribution of the movement to the Church is great. It has inspired quite a few members to join the holy priesthood. A convent for young women is now a reality. Pamphlets and books for Sunday School use are available in large quantities. Schools of all kinds were built and are directed by the members of the movement. A monthly review is issued on a very high level; theological and educational subjects are treated besides many other subjects. A revival of Church music is seen. Choirs are formed everywhere, in every city and in every village. A new Orthodox culture has been formed.

Bishop Romanos Hannat Interviewed in an-Nahar

 Arabic original here.

Greek Orthodox Patriarchal Vicar to an-Nahar: It is the duty of the state to protect Christians and I do not take back my words.

Bishop Romanos Hannat, patriarchal vicar of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East, stated that Syrian Christians want the Syrian state to bear its responsibility for protecting them and to undertake the necessary measures for this, explaining that "we do not want and are not seeking outside reassurances."

Speaking with an-Nahar in Damascus, he said that, "Our hand is always extended to participate with all elements of society to build up Syria, and this has not happened yet."

Here is the text of the discussion:

Sayyidna, are you happy with the results of the investigations being conducted by the Interior Ministry about the suicide bombing that bloodied the Church of Mar Elias?

We have not yet officially seen the investigations that took place and we have not received any report from the Interior Ministry because until now there has not been any communication with them. We have only received the news that is circulating on social media which everyone has seen.

Have you received and guarantees or reassurances that Christians will be protected and be able to worship freely?

In his speech, His Beatitude [Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and All the East John X Yazigi] pointedly stated in all simplicity that this is the duty of the state. We do not want and are not seeking outside reassurances because we have a state and when we say that the state bears responsibility, it means that we do not want any outside reassurances. Rather, we want the Syrian state to take the necessary measures. As you have heard, the authorities have started taking measures and it may take some time. Therefore, we place all responsibility in the hands of the state to take the necessary measures, without looking to the outside world.

You have said on more than one occasion that "our hand is extended to the government." What response have you received?

When His Beatitude says that our hand is outstretched, he means being ready to cooperate. This applies to all public life, with the aim of working to rebuild Syria, which has suffered greatly and has had enough. Our hand is always extended to participate with all elements of society to build up Syria, and this has not happened yet. Syrian society is not one color, but many-colored. To achieve a beautiful painting, all colors must be included, not just black or white, but this has not happened yet. It requires listening, so that we don't reach a stage where some ask why they have been excluded. I am a Syrian just like the other Syrians. The issue is simple.

Sayyidna, a debate erupted on social media over a talk you had with a delegation from the governorate about the number of children that Christian families have. You were accused of marginalizing Muslim victims and some described Patriarch Yazigi's speech as sectarian and inflammatory. How do you respond?

The patriarch was very clear and very transparent in his speech. His speech was that of a father and not of a politician.

His speech was paternal and patriotic, in all simplicity. Reading the speech in its words, it only has this loving, open meaning, while interpreting the speech is a personal matter.

As for the issue of children, it is very simple. Syrian Christian couples have one or two children. If that child is lost, the family has no one to console them, while the family that has ten children and loses one of them still has nine to console them. I hope that no family, large or small, loses a member. This is the essence of what I said and I do not take it back. My words embody humanity in every sense of the word, but how others interpret the issue is none of my business. I respect the opinions of everyone. Others need to respect our opinion. I was saying this while there were victims on the ground in front of me. I was walking over pieces of flesh and human remains. I lived through it and we picked up human remains with our own hands. We pray that God will have mercy on those martyrs who offered their life for the sake of man, for the sake of Christians throughout the world, and for the sake of every person who desires to live in simplicity, calm and peace. This is what we hope the state will undertake to achieve, and we have full confidence.

What message do you address to Syrians in general and Christians in particular?

I do not wish to address my words to the Christian community. I address my words to Syrians. I only wish to speak as a Syrian person. Every person is free in his belief. Brothers in a single house do not all bear the same name. Each one has his own existence and his own importance. My message is to all Syrians and I speak as a Syrian: let's dispense with particular discourse and let all our discourse be national, for we exist in this country as Syrians. Let us all be brothers. Nations are not built without a national discourse.

Met Silouan (Muci)'s Condolance Letter to Patriarch John X

 Arabic original here.

 

Brumana, June 23, 2025

His Beatitude the Honorable Patriarch John X,

Their Eminences the Honorable Metropolitans and Bishops in our Antiochian Church,

Christ is risen! Indeed He is risen!

On behalf of myself, of my predecessor His Eminence Metropolitan Georges (Khodr), and of the clergy and members of the archdiocese, I offer condolences to our father and Patriarch John X for the martyrs of the Church of Saint Elias, Dweilaa (Damascus), who offered themselves as a sacrifice with the bloodless sacrifice in which they came to partake. The One who offers it joined with them, unbeknownst to those who intended to harm, terrorize and intimidate.

In this way, the Conqueror of death shared with us His victory over every form of death that surrounds us, which seeks to catch us in its clutches to kill within us all our faith in Him before rending our bodies on altars other than the one He chose for our sanctification.

The affliction is painful, no doubt. But the consolation of the Holy Lamb is even greater because He was pleased to bear us in it and endure it, as at the time of His salvific Passion, to repel its deadly poison from us and to give us life by His grace, which can raise us up in this affliction as ones faithful to Him in bearing it and remaining steadfast in it. Our souls are consoled by the faith of our steadfast families, their zealous children and their dedicated pastors. They are the crown of our Church placed upon her wounds on accoutn of her faith in Christ.

As I greet your fatherhood and brotherhood in Christ, and am consoled by your patience, I join my prayer to your prayer so that the crown of glory may be added to the martyrs of our Church, that the hearts of their families may be comforted, and that those afflicted may find wellness and healing, recalling the words of the Good Shepherd, who redeems our sins and transgressions by His precious blood, “Be of good cheer, for I have overcome the world.”

May the Lord shower upon all His grace, by which He honored the saints of our Antiochian Church who welcomed their brothers yesterday in the heavenly mansions, on the day we celebrate their common feast.

Asking for your prayers,

+Silouan

Metropolitan of Jbeil, Batroun and their Dependencies (Mount Lebanon)