Monday, September 11, 2023

Asad Rustom on the Era of Patriarch Cyril al-Za'im (III): Euthymius al-Sayfi

Translated from: Asad Rustum, Kanisat Madinat Allah Antakya al-'Uzma [The Church of the Great City of God Antioch], Jounieh: Editions St. Paul (1988), vol. 3, pp. 111-119.

Part I here.

Part II here.

Rome completes its mission: Athanasius kept to the truce and was unable to return to the patriarchal see, so Rome undertook to complete its plan and in 1697 the attention of the Jesuit priest Verseau was drawn to Balamand Monastery because he was familiar with the monks and "the schism has a great affair there because they all belong to the Rum millet." Fr Verseau repeatedly attempted to enter Balamand in order to expound on the Catholic faith, but he failed. Then two disciples of the Jesuit fathers felt the monastic calling and chose Balamand as their place to serve God, "and Fr Verseau started to visit them and guide them, warning about the danger in that monastery." It was then confirmed that they were firm in their Catholicism and so he took them on as a tool for Roman propaganda among the monks. He increased his visits to the monastery and became acquainted with all the monks, taking part in the monastery's gatherings without any impediment. "In order to please them all," he praised Saint Basil the Great and read accounts of him to them. He then put into the hands of his two friends books by Fr Clisson and Fr Nau. In 1704, five of the monks of Balamand sent a petition to the Congregation de Propaganda Fide that included the following:

"We present to Your Resplendent Majesty that we are your servants, numbering five people from the millet of the Arab Rum, monks of the path of Saint Basil the Great, who were reared from our childhood in the Catholic religion, always submitting to the Supreme Pontiff, His All-Holiness. Nevertheless, in these lands we have not found the freedom to perfect the way of life for salvation of the soul as is necessary in monasticism due to the country's lack of stability and the rule of the nations over it and the disorder of the monasteries and monks. We have presented our situation to Your Resplendent Majesty so that if you decree and command us, we will come before you about this matter. We ask that you grant us, out of the charity of the Holy Church, a humble place where we may take refuge alone, either in Rome or outside it and for you to grant us there the necessary food and ascetic drink sufficient for the body and nothing else, so that we may serve God in our place as much as possible and pray for Your Resplendent Majesty.

Balamand, in the region of Tripoli of Syria on November 1, 1704. Your servant, the hieromonk Macarius. Your servant, the hieromonk Gerasimus. Your pitiful servant, the hieromonk Hanania. Your pitiful servant the hieromonk Nasrallah. Your servant the hierodeacon George."

The Monastery of Saint John, Choueir: At this very moment, two young men from Aleppo arrived at Balamand, desiring to practice chastity and asceticism. Father Nasrallah from Aleppo advised them "to go to Mount Lebanon and search for an empty place. Afterwards, we will come to you and make a canonical monastic order, because in this monastery one cannot live in freedom of faith because in it there are recalcitrant people and associating with them is not beneficial." They heeded his advice and went and found a monastery called Mar Yuhanna al-Choueir, and sent them news about it.

This monastery was humble in the beginning, only containing a small church named after John the Baptist and a humble room that was home to an ascetic from the Sawaya family of Choueir. Choueir was suffering from a feud between its two big families, the Maja'is and the Sawaya. When the dispute arose between the two patriarchs, Athanasius and Cyril, one group sided with the former and the other with the latter. The Maja'is supported Cyril, so the Sawaya decided to support Athanasius. The Maja'is won over the majority of the families of Choueir and the Sawaya were prevented from praying in the Church of Our Lady, the village church, so they began to pray in the Church of Saint John mentioned above. In this way, the Monastery of Saint John is not named merely after its being found in the area of Choueir, but also after the Choueirite ascetic who founded it and his Choueirite family members who made its church their place of worship, defending those monks claiming obedience to Rome who took refuge there.

Rome's Only Man: One of the individuals in obedience to Rome, submitting to its bishop, was Euthymius al-Sayfi, metropolitan of Tyre and Sidon (1682-1723). He was born in Damascus around the year 1643 with the name Mikhail ibn Musa al-Sayfi, growing up there. He studied in the community's school at the patriarchal residence and received special attention from the priest Jirjis Bariq, imbibing Catholicism from his youth. This priest Jirjis had traveled to Rome and adopted Catholicism there. When Mikhail was young, he frequented the monastery of the Jesuit and Capuchin fathers and they attracted him to themselves, increasing his obedience and submission. He became close with the patriarchal vicar Neophytus al-Saqizi, learning Greek and the art of Byzantine chant from him. Perhaps Neophytus himself ordained Mikhail as a deacon and then priest in 1666.

Jeremiah, the metropolitan of Tyre and Sidon died around 1680 and the Latin missionaries encouraged the Rum notables in Sidon to elect the priest Mikhail al-Sayfi. Patriarch Cyril III agreed and consecrated him as metropolitan of Tyre and Sidon in 1682, giving him the name Euthymius. The first activity that this new bishop undertook was that he hurried to send a copy of his confession of the Catholic faith to Pope Innocent XII, with the Capucin father Accursio. This father Accursio was the teacher of the new bishop's confession in Damascus. Part of what is contained in the confession is as follows:

"I have rejected the error and schism of the Rum for some time and I have confessed the Catholic faith at the hands of the missionary monks in Syria. Now, by the grace of God, I have become bishop over the See of Tyre and Sidon and I must offer the necessary obedience to you and reference to your holy see, imitating the holy fathers Athanasius the Great, John Chrystostom and all the holy fathers whom the Roman Church has received in the time of their struggle and persecution. I do not need to mention the rejection, imprisonment, humiliation, loss of money I have endured and the enmity from the Muslims, along with some of the Rum and their clergy, especially their patriarch called Cyril, on account of my confession of the Catholic faith."

The archdiocese of Tyre and Sidon was large but not very populated, so the new bishop worked to populate it by encouraging migration there. He agreed in May of 1686 with the Rum notables in Sidon to write to those Christians who were willing, to invite them to reside in Sidon. The qadi of Sidon issued a deed for this that still exists to this day. He then rebuilt the Church in Sidon with his own money and formally issued a deed for this on April 11, 1690. It is no surprise that such a deed was necessary because Islamic law forbids the construction of churches and monks' cells but permits the renovation and preservation of old ones.

The most important thing that Euthymius undertook during this initial period of his episcopacy was that he established the Salvatorian monastic order to spread the principles of union with Rome and submission to its bishop. This work started in Sidon where, before 1700, he gathered together a number of monks to live a common, canonically-ordered life with him at the Machmoucha farm near Joun. The Salvatorian priest Constantine Bacha believes that the metropolitan's disciples numbered, at the end of the 17th century, no less than ten and that they were unable to live in Sidon and its surroundings without being subject to every accusation and every hardship from the army and others, so they rented the Machmoucha farm from its owner, the qadi Sheikh Qablan, to live and work there. They did not do this for long before, by the care of the Savior, their monastery in His name was established in 1711. Euthymius composed a special rule for its monks, news of which spread among people until it reached Aleppo. His letter to a friend in Aleppo preserves some of what the Salvatorian monks practiced in the beginning and some of the principles that Euthymius had in mind. His friend, a bishop, wrote in objection to Euthymius' permitting his monks to eat oil and fish during fasts. The latter responded:

"It does not escape your knowledge, if you ponder and see the weakness and decline of the millet and its lack of the necessary knowledge and spiritual sciences. We have seen many with weak temperaments and good zeal, who had a little knowledge and wanted to have a pure life, ordered by keeping the three vows that are the foundation of all monastic orders, so that they might benefit their millet by their activity and knowledge. But they forsook entering monasticism on account of its harshness of living now among us and so fell short of completing their good intention. When I realized that this particular reason was preventing the universal good, I used the authority of binding and loosening given to me by God and His Church to issue an order, indeed to issue a compulsion, known to all on account of its being issued and entering into force. This was so that worship in this manner would be something by choice rather than compulsion. It is not as it is now, practiced by others openly and rejected by the majority in secret. Moreover, so that we would not imitate the harshness of some previous shepherds who used their authority to bind and not to loosen, nor even less should I curse rather than bless those in whom God's words through the Prophet Micah are fulfilled: 'Eat the meat of my people and break their bones.' For this reason, we see their state as they have caused great losses for this pure path and for the excellent Christian faith. My intention as well, if it so happens, is for such as these to be separated from the other monks only in their abode and means of living, and to agree with them in keeping the three vows and the rest of the other rules, since they are under the obedience of one leader. If our intention is not achieved with them, then God has proof against the stubborn."

Euthymius, Bishop of those Submitting to Rome (1702): Some of the bishops rejected the harm that had come to the Church on account of the schism and arrogance stormed in their minds, so they wrote to Euthymius around 1694 so that he would be their leader and the flock would have one shepherd. Then an understanding was reached between Athanasius and Cyril and Cyril became the sole patriarch. His heart was set on hindering the activities of the missionaries and not facilitating their interests. He refrained from sending to the sultan recognition of the priests who befriended the missionaries and worked under their guidance. Athanasius went back on what he had promised Rome at the beginning of the affair. In 1700, Clement XI (1700-1720) took charge of the See of Rome. Euthymius wrote to congratulate the new pope and renew his submission. On February 24, 1701 he composed a new letter in which he explained the situation in the Patriarchate of Antioch and requested to be the "vicar of the pope in the East" in order to give him the authority to recognize Catholic bishops outside his diocese. He mentioned the desire of the metropolitans to install him as patriarch of Antioch and he attached the document that they had signed, but he said that he had little reach and could not accept their request because he was subject to "the authority of the Muslims." Therefore he only sought "the authority of the dhimmis."

The Propaganda Fide studied Euthymius' request in a session held for this purpose on December 6, 1701 and accepted the metropolitan of Tyre and Sidon's request for a period of seven years by a decision brought before the pope. Clement XI accepted the congregation's decision and ordered that it be acted upon and the following message was sent to Euthymius:

"To sayyid Euthymius, metropolitan of Sidon and the Rum in all the Patriarchate of Antioch where there are no Catholic bishops: On Wednesday, July 19, 1702 in the regular audience of the revered father assistant, the Most Holy Father granted, according to what was presented to him, to the aforementioned petitioner these rights for a period of seven years, such that he may in no way exercise them outside the boundaries of the aforementioned patriarchate or in dioceses in which there are Catholic bishops."

The Book al-Dalala al-Lami'a (The Shining Proof, 1710): The Jesuit father Michel Nau resorted to writing in order to convince the Rum to obey and submit to Rome and during the time of the Patriarch Macarius he composed a book entitled The Argument of the Holy Roman Church for its Orthodoxy and Right Worship. The Orthodox fathers were not convinced by this, particularly the monks of the Holy Sepulcher. At the beginning of the 18th century, they translated into Arabic a letter by Zacharias, bishop of Adana, in defense of the holy traditions, explaining Rome's program and revealing the secret falsehoods of its manner of action. They then distributed it in the territory of Antioch and it was on everyone's tongues and was circulated about. On June 10, 1704, Euthymius wrote to the Propaganda Fide saying, "The schismatic members of the eparchy of Jerusalem have prepared the book of Zacharias, the bishop of Adana, which is filled with blasphemies against the opinion of the Church of Rome. They have translated it into Arabic and published it in our country, in the jurisdiction of the See of Antioch, to spread the poison that is found within it." Euthymius adds that he undertook to write a book that "elevates the honor of the Holy Roman Church and puts her opponents to shame." He asked to be supplied with the writings of John Cariafili [?] refuting Zacharias, the refutation of Neilos [Kabasilas] of Thessaloniki, books by (Cardinal) Bessarion, the metropolitan of Nicaea, the books of Demetrius Kydones, and the book of Pierre Courfois [?] about the service of the mysteries and purgatory because they were necessary for him. Euthymius sent his manuscript to Rome and it was approved by Cardinal Barberini and so "The Shining Proof between the two poles of the Universal Church, containing the agreement of the Eastern Rum Orthodox Church with the Universal, Western Church of Rome and their unity in one opinion and one Christian faith" appeared in Rome in 1710 with a subvention from the Propaganda Fide.

It was distributed and so in 1712 the oikonomos of the Church of Aleppo refuted it in a letter which, as it appears, remains in manuscript. This oikonomos was known to Euthymius as "someone with knowledge, keeping the rites of the Rum perfectly, supporting and defending them." The book al-Dalala al-Lami'a attracted the attention of the Orthodox patriarchs and metropolitans and they mention it in the excommunication that was issued in 1718 against Euthymius and those who strayed with him, because he "composed books on his own and drew on testimonies as he saw fit and attributed them to the Holy Eastern Church."

Euthymius Gets Ready: Euthymius issued commands according to whim and in September 1713 observed that "the eparchy of Antioch is good soil in need of workers" and that its patriarch, Cyril, was "a man lacking knowledge who hates the Roman Church" but he did he did not dare to offer offer obedience before the patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria. He believed that the bishop of Saydnaya, Gerasimus al-Shami, was "a man at God's gate, his holiness is a measure of wine and the wine remains in his cell, Christ be pleased with him;" that the bishop of Maaloula and Qara was "a recalcitrant, heretical Cypriot;" that the bishop of of Baalbek was "a Cypriot with good intentions, if God blesses him with a teacher he might agree with everything we want;" that the bishop of Homs was "hapless in religion and this world;" that the bishop of Hamat was "a Cypriot strong in unbelief and in insulting the religion of the Church and of us. For two years, he has been present with us in activities of his. We honored him and gave him abundant charity and advised him as much as possible. From that day, he ceased the insults but he remains in his unbelief;" that the metropolitan of Beirut "previously believed in the Church and honored and glorified the Church of Rome. For this reason, we conferred upon him some charitable support and invited him to Sidon. We explained to him the shortcomings and the error that has befallen the Church of the Rum after the schism;" that regarding the bishop of Tripoli "some of the missionary monks have testified that he is Catholic, but I have not discerned any signs of Catholicism in him. Perhaps he had confessed the truth under the influence of a certain hope and when the hope was lost, he returned like a dog to his vomit;" that the metropolitan of Lattakia was a "heretical Chiot, ignorant of religion. He barks and snaps with heresy without being aware of it;" that regarding the Patriarch of Aleppo [i.e., Athanasius Dabbas] "he is known in Rome as a Catholic and is known to me as a climber [? مساقل ];" that the metropolitan of Adana was "an insolent Cypriot, an enemy of God and His Church;" that the metropolitan of Diyarbakir was likewise a Cypriot, that the metropolitan of Erzerum was from its eyalet and the metropolitan of Cyprus was from the eyalet of Erzerum. It is well-known that this traffic was widespread at that time and existed on both sides.

In this way, Euthymius, Rome's only bishop in the dioceses of Antioch, attempted to attract bishops to Catholicism with methods that might not all be legitimate. As for the Jacobites, attracting them was far-off in his view "and would be more attainable through force." Here it should be remarked that true unity is not achieved through money and force, but through the Holy Spirit and love, which does not seek for itself and does not think ill, but takes its time, accompanies, trusts and is patient.

Bp Constantine Kayyal: The Rich Young Man

Arabic original here.

The Rich Young Man

"What should I do to inherit eternal life?" This is the question that every person who aspires to a good life asks, in order to attain the crown of holiness.

The young man in today's Gospel reading is no different from other young men who wish to live a good life, and this desire and longing for a good life is planted in us because we were created in the image and likeness of God.

This is because Jesus waits for all of us. No matter what questions, cares and worries we bear, He wants to hear them with love. He is neither a psychiatrist nor an ethics professor, but rather Lord and Savior, because He is all love and only gives love.

Since doing good deeds and works of mercy does not in itself mean avoiding sin, you must go beyond all these things and follow Jesus, who waits for you. You must become free of your concern for yourself, of your selfishness, of every earthly thing, follow your Teacher and be a living bridge that connects God and people.

Here Jesus focuses on the commandments that order our relationship to our neighbor, among them worship, which requires two things: the first is with regard to God and the second with regard to the neighbor.

In order to proceed towards the kingdom, you must be free of fornication and preserve your life and the life of your neighbor. Otherwise, you are infringing on another's possession. You must be committed to the orphan and honor your parents and support them. The young man responded:

"I have done all this since my childhood. What do I still lack?"

So Jesus said to him, "Sell everything you have and come follow me."

That means, get rid of everything and follow the Lord. Join Him and commit to the path of perfection. But on account of his heart's attachment to what his hands possessed, the young man went away sad.

Therefore, live a life of giving, so that you may feel true happiness. Do not be like this young man who was attached to his wealth. Trust that everything is possible with God and He alone is able to help you, support you and lift you up to Himself.

Yes! The young man went away sad like any person living on earth, while the Christian is a person created for heaven. It is true that the Christian lives on earth, but he is not of the people of the earth. He is a heavenly person born from above, born in water and the Spirit. His concern is heaven and his mind is on heaven.

His faith is translated into good deeds that benefit others so that he may inherit eternal life. But here we must be aware that we do not inherit eternal life while we are sitting in our places, but rather when we are active and act in love, because the kingdom of heaven does not come to us ready-made. The kingdom is taken by force and we must rightly deserve it.

This is eternal life. It is not in obeying the laws and rules and keeping the divine commandments, for the Ten Commandments have no value if word is not attached to deed and if man is not the purpose for which these commandments exit.

Dear reader, always remember the Lord's words in his famous Sermon on the Mount, "Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

Our only treasure is not in banks, in income or in possessions, but rather in heaven. This treasure is good works, mercy and love for one's neighbor. It is faith in God and acting according to His will so that we may inherit the desired kingdom.

Bishop Constantine Kayyal

Abbot of the Patriarchal Monastery of Saint Elias, Shwayya

Thursday, September 7, 2023

Fr Jack (Khalil): The Transfiguration in the Teaching of the Apostle Peter

 Arabic original here.

The Event of the Transfiguration in the Teaching of the Apostle Peter

We read in the first chapter of the Second Epistle of the Apostle Peter a passage that summarizes our steadfast faith in the Lord Jesus as God and Savior and how we act according to His calling us and choosing us to be a chosen people and holy nation for Him.

God has promised us that in His kingdom we will be partakers of the divine nature and He has given us everything for life in knowledge of Christ.

On the basis of this profound knowledge and deeply-rooted faith, we flee the corruption of lust which is in this world, we expend every effort and offer in our faith virtue (2 Peter 4-5) so that we may bear fruit for the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Apostle Peter does not stop reminding the faithful of the necessity of remaining steadfast in virtue and truth.

Truth, in the language of the Bible, is God's will, which we do not disappoint if we rely on it as the path for our life.

The Apostle is eager to remind because he feels the approach of his departure from this world and the end of his mission of sharing the good news of what he witnessed with his own eyes and heard himself from Christ.

The Apostle had already informed them verbally of his having beheld the greatness and glory of Christ-- that is, His divinity-- but he repeats the account of the transfiguration that he witnessed on the holy mountain in the company of James and John, because of the importance he attaches to this event on a personal level.

We thank God that we have in this passage an additional narrative of  the Transfiguration alongside the narrative of the Gospels, which makes for multiple testimonies, confirming the historicity of this event according to the standards of historians.

Nevertheless, believers do not need every letter written about Jesus to be confirmed, "for prophecy never came by the will of man," as the Apostle Peter says.

The event of Christ's divinity showing forth before the eyes of His apostles is a sign of power and proof of the never-ending life in Him.

The Apostle Peter looks at this event as a lamp shining forth in a dark place. That is, he walks in life following the light of this event, until daybreak.

Followers of Christ in every time and place must remember these things in order to struggle in virtue and persevere in truth.

The showing forth of Christ's divinity, His cross and His resurrection from the dead, unlike Greek mythology and the mythologies of ancient peoples, are not "fabricated myths" where we do not know who saw them or who reported them. Rather, they are established events that were witnessed and reported by servants of the word and eyewitnesses to them.

We believe that "holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" and they reported the glory that they saw and the voice of the Father which they heard, "This is My beloved Son in whom I am well-pleased."

This beloved Son is the truth in which we abide by faith, love and virtue.

Archimandrite Jack (Khalil)

Saint John of Damascus Institute of Theology-- Balamand

Monday, August 21, 2023

Fr Alexander Treiger: The Macarian Homilies and Maximus the Confessor as Sources of al-Firdaws al-ʿaqlī (The Noetic Paradise)

 The Macarian Homilies and Maximus the Confessor as Sources of al-Firdaws al-ʿaqlī (The Noetic Paradise)

 Abstract:

Al-Firdaws al-ʿaqlī (The Noetic Paradise) is an anonymous patristic treatise on spiritual life, which, as far as currently known, is lost in the original Greek and preserved only in Arabic. The purpose of the present contribution is to explore two of the principal sources of the Firdaws: the Macarian Homilies and the writings of St. Maximus the Confessor. This source-critical examination is a crucial preliminary step towards contextualizing the Firdaws and determining more precisely the location and time of its composition.

 

Read and download the full article here. 

Wednesday, August 9, 2023

Fr Touma (Bitar): Holiness and Sainthood: Fr Elias Morcos

 Arabic original here.

Holiness and Sainthood: Fr Elias Morcos

A saint isn't someone without sin. So he is not a "good person". The Teacher already affirmed that no one is good except for God! A saint is a repentant sinner. In repentance, there are two fundamental things:

A repentant person is someone who is aware of and knows his sin, not only those that he previously committed, but also those that he is committing now. This means that sin is not limited to a certain act, a certain idea, or even disobedience to a certain commandment. Sin is a continuous existential state. Man lives in sin so long as he does not live in love! Of course, sins can appear in deviant behavior, a stray thought, a distorted sense or things like this.

But what does it mean for sin to be a continuous existential state? The inner being is the heart. It is man's central point. It is what makes a person himself. It is you. It is yourself. Your identity is present in it. It is your spirit. It is the deepest thing in you, out of which your intention and all your purposes come, what defines your goals, to which everything returns, as though it squeezes out the sap of everything that comes to you, with or without your awareness. Thus the focus of the light within you is the existential state that you are in.

Sin, as a constant existential state, exposes that God's love is not within you. Perhaps it does not expose you in front of people, but it exposes you in front of your Lord, first and last. Despite this, if I ask, existentially, "What is my sin?," you have the only true answer: there is no love in me! I do not mean by this that I do not love, but that God's love "is not in me" so that I may love with God's love. And if I do not love with God's love, then my love-- if I claim it-- is for myself and from myself and thus is a shortcoming.

But how can I discern whether my love is from God or from myself?

So long as my love is from myself, I feel as though I have achieved my goal and come to be without sin. But if my love is from God, I experience in the deepest and most painful way what sin is. Sin appears to me as harm to the beloved! My sin, whether yesterday or now, is set up before me, at every time and in every situation. Or, in the words of the Prophet David, "My sin is always before me." It is only within this framework that the reality of the Chosen Apostle Paul's words may be understood: "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am first" (1 Timothy 1:15).

It is worth pointing out that the recollection of sin does not stop with forgiveness, but becomes more painful the more one grows in the love of God. Nothing is more painful than to wound the beloved! This, by your Lord's dispensation, is so that one will not forget his sin, so he will not return to it. God forgives, of course, but He does not forget and He does not want us to forget... for our own good!

The second fundamental thing with regard repentance is that repentance is more than return from sin, whatever that sin may be. Repentance is a constant path in which one seeks God's love in obedience. One does not seek only to repent, but all the more so, one seeks to be repentant. If one sins, one returns from his sin. But if one is repentant, then he constantly seeks love as his own breath.

How can obedience in the relationship with God make love grow? Obedience is the path of effacement for the sake of the beloved, so that he may appear within us. Not my will, but thy will! This is the mystery of perfect existence in perfect self-concealment. Your face, O Lord, I seek! My existence comes to be in you, not in myself. You become the object of my desire. It is you that I seek. This is the mystery of God! The mystery of love! The mystery of His being love! The mystery of the Holy Trinity! Man was created to be an icon of this mystery. Therefore, obedience is greater, in a certain sense, than love. Not love as existence that creates, but love as an unseen existence, completely hidden, in which you seek not yourself, but Him, your Lord. If this were not the case, then "Life for me is Christ" would not mean that obedience is the desire for unity in the Spirit. Not for Christ or in Christ, but Christ Himself! "I in them and You in Me... just as You, O Father, are in Me and I in You."

Obedience in sin is subservience, estrangement, dominance, oppression, something repulsive! While obedience in love is something else entirely: trust, certainty, surrender, and then peace, joy, the realization of existence and eternal life.

So a saint is a model of repentance!

Is Fr Elias (Morcos) a saint in this sense?

Canonically, this is in principle declared by the Holy Synod of Antioch. And this is the tradition as it has come down to us.

Nevertheless, in the deep sense of holiness, without the slightest doubt Fr Elias is a saint.

Four things bear witness to his repentance: his tears, his prayer, his poverty and his love. Assuredly, his tears permeated everything. He acquired them through struggle and toil, through putting his sin and shortcoming before himself at all times, through putting himself below others, forcefully, and then, through his persistence! It does not escape me that he acquired him first of all by God's grace. It is no exaggeration to say that no one crosses the threshold of the kingdom without tears. These are not the tears of emotions or what belongs to the soul and body. These are existential tears. The deep inner heart is in pain: for oneself, for others, for God Himself because we do not love Him enough! For His love, for His kindness, for His gentleness. One who does not cry for God does not know Him!

Among the sayings of St Isaac the Syrian: "He who is able to weep for himself for an hour is greater than one who teaches the entire universe. And he who discerns the depth of his infirmities is greater than one who beholds the angels."

Fr Elias wept as he breathed. He stood at prayer and tears welled up. They flowed quietly. He heard of someone's pain and wept. Like this, automatically. Spontaneously. Without effort. With ease, his heart ached.

He would laugh, joke, chat and play like children then, after a few moments, if he stood to pray or if someone asked him to pray for them, he would find himself in a different existential state and would weep. Strange! His tears were always present. Like something normal in his daily habits. He would appear like everyone and at the same time it was as though, in his being, he was easily moved on another level, steadily, like someone who had no connection to what was around him.

And what should I say about his prayer? His tears revealed the identity of his prayer. He prayed like someone going out from the world into the world. Prayer was always his desired dwelling-place. He was aware that a son of Adam is called to become an instrument of prayer. His concern was not with the form of the prayer, but with standing, in the heart, before the Most High. For him, being a monk is for praying. Prayer was the groundwater of all reading, writing, working, thinking, sowing, building and relationship that he undertook. He wept to pray and prayed to weep. The value of everything that came or was brought to him was for it to be a source of prayer and a scope for prayer. Therefore, his eye was not on anything but to abide in God's eye.

If I had to talk about his poverty, I would say one thing about it: According to him, wherever there was a trace of a possession, there was no place for a monk or for God in his heart. His ragged sock stayed ragged for years. As for the broken chair and the shaky table, he did not think to repair them and was not even feel that there was anything strange about them being in the condition they were in. Nothing here was what he was seeking. "Your face, O Lord, I seek." He accepted everything with its faults and didn't pay attention. According to the image of his Teacher, he wanted to be: "You are of this world but I am not of this world." He accepted. He didn't seek anything. He was content with everything. When he was given, he took. If he was not given, he did not seek. He gave. Things were asked of him or were not asked of him. A little or a lot had the same value for him. Poverty, with him, is concealed by silence. It is not an object of study, but an ordinary part of life with God.

And his love? His heart broke over people's pain, suffering and hardship. In contrast to the monastic way of life, he sought to visit and console people. He would go from house to house. Friendship for him was a holy obligation. He did not avoid what other people considered to be an annoyance. His prayer motivated him to be with people, not to avoid people. The time, for him, was a time of suffering and people need consolation.

Fr Elias was a monk, but not necessarily like other monks in his style. He combined strictness in how he treated himself with compassion for people and animals. He was free in his conscience, easy in his affections. He was not harsh with anyone. He was very merciful. He did not burden anyone by causing him to feel sin. His purpose was to lighten people's loads.

Most of what Fr Elias taught me is that the Lord is near and that it is always possible for you to start anew. But let know one injure the beloved! The pain of sin is in its seed. Your Lord weeps for you! The important thing, O servant, is not to hurt yourself.

Fr Elias was an outstanding teacher, a school of the heart. Therefore, he appeared in my eyes as the image of Antioch, formed by the convolutions of these lands.

Do not forget us, Abouna Elias, even if we have forgotten you! Your prayer is our provision.

Archimandrite Touma (Bitar)

Abbot of the Monastery of St Silouan the Athonite-- Douma, Lebanon

Sunday, July 30, 2023


Monday, August 7, 2023

Met Ephrem (Kyriakos): The Transfiguration

 Arabic original here.

The Transfiguration

Christ's human nature was transfigured with the light of the divinity dwelling within Him.

The eyes of the apostles' hearts were opened by the Holy Spirit so that they could see Christ's divinity on His human face.

Today we too can see the face of Christ shining through the mysteries of the Church-- the Eucharist, for example-- and even through the face of our neighbor. This is because our neighbor is also a member in Christ's body, the Church.

There is also, of course, the Bible. Through it, we can discover the face of Christ, if we read it through the lens of the Holy Spirit.

In the Bible, there are lights in Paul's Epistles and in the Psalms, for example. In it, and also in the depths of our heart, we discover the luminous face. It says in the Epistle of the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 1:19):

"We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts."

The dark place is this world in which we live and the Bible is none other than the luminous lamp which is the face of Christ. The morning star is Christ Himself, the sun of justice made manifest within us.

Saint Silouan says, "Humility is the light through which we can see the true light."

Saint Irenaeus in the second century also says, "The vision of God and His glory is man's perfect life." God created us so that we might see His face. This is the purpose of creation. The purpose of the economy of salvation is for us to see God's eternal face.

On Mount Tabor, the apostles beheld the light of divinity on Christ's face, which caused them to realize the mystery of the cross, to realize that the cross is the path or resurrection for Christ and for us.

Which means that it is within our ability, even in this present life, to have a foretaste of seeing the Lord's eternal face.

The great joy that lies in seeing God is the uncreated light.

+Ephrem

Metropolitan of Tripoli, al-Koura and their Dependencies

Wednesday, August 2, 2023

Hasan Çolak: When a Catholic is invested as the Orthodox patriarch of Antioch (Open-Access)

Hasan Çolak, "When a Catholic is invested as the Orthodox patriarch of Antioch: Serafeim/Kyrillos Tanas and the Ottoman central administration in 1745," Collectanea Christiana Orientalia 20 (2023): 29-55.

Abstract:

While a lot has been written on the earlier phases of the Antiochian Schism of 1724, the rivalry between Serafeim/Kyrillos Tanas and Silvestros in the 1740s is mostly noted in passing. This article introduces the unpublished and often-ignored Ottoman documents relating to Kyrillos’ brief tenure, most notably his berat of investiture preserved in the Ottoman Archives. The article has three major purposes: First, it establishes a solid chronological context, which adds a more global nature to this episode. Second, by contextualizing the episode with special focus on the Ottoman dynamics, it searches for the major reasons for Kyrillos’ appointment by the Ottoman administration through a discussion of his discourse presenting himself as a reliable partner with the Porte. Third, it analyzes Kyrillos’ unpublished berat in comparison with the earlier and later berats and a contemporary French translation preserved in the Archives nationales in Paris.
 
Read and download the entire article here.