Patriarch of Jerusalem Sophronius, as a theologian, preacher and hymnographer

Contents I. A brief outline of the life and church-practical activities of St. Sophronia II. A list of all the works of St. that have reached us and have not reached us. Sophrony, indicating genuine and inauthentic 1. Saint Sophrony, as a theologian I. Properties of God II. About the Trinity III. The teaching of St. Sophronia on the Angels IV. Creation and fall of the first people V. Incarnation of the Son of God VI. The end of the century, the resurrection of the dead and the Last Judgment 2. Saint Sophronius as a preacher I. The general nature of the sermons of St. Sophronia II. Distinctive features of the sermons of St. Sophronia III. Review of the contents of the sermons of Saint Sophronius IV. Sermons of a panegyric nature V. External techniques of presentation in the sermons of St. Sophrony 3. St. Sophrony as a hymn writer I. The internal character of the penitential hymns of St. Sophronia and their contents II. The internal character and content of the hymns of St. Sophronius on the Days of St. Easter to Ascension III. The outer side of the hymns of St. Sophronia. IV. Anacreontic poems of St. Sophronia A. Poems of a historical nature b. Poems of a lyric-epic nature. The metrical side of the poems of St. Sophronia About the lord candidate Paul and about his mother Mary, who died in God (XXII). XIX. On the Ascension and about myself Between the hierarchical persons of the Eastern Church of the 6th and 7th centuries. St. Sophrony undoubtedly occupies one of the most prominent places. This place is given to him by his piety, learning and extraordinary zeal in defending the purity of the Orthodox faith, which was subject to distortion by heretics. About the piety of St. Sophronius is very eloquently told by his life and his writings. About the learning of St. Sophrony is evidenced by the name “sophist” or philosopher, given to him by his contemporaries and worn by him in the monastic rank. The learning of St. Sophrony deserves attention all the more because he lived at a time when, due to various unfavorable circumstances, education in general and spiritual education in particular was in great decline. The extraordinary jealousy of St. Sophrony's message about the purity of the Orthodox faith is confirmed, on the one hand, by his creations, and on the other, by his activities against the Monothelite heresy. This virtue of St. Sophronia, very important in itself, should be all the more appreciated because in his time it was quite rare. One can even say that in the 7th century there was only one more or less prominent representative and guardian of the Orthodox faith. Sophrony. At a time when not only secular power, but also spiritual power (in the person of Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, Pope Honorius and other bishops) clearly took the side of the Monothelite heresy, St. Sophronius, while still in the rank of a simple monk, energetically opposed this heresy and did not cease to refute it until the end of his life. In view of what has been said, it is clear that the life and works of St. Sophrony deserves full attention and study. But, unfortunately, information about the life and work of St. Sophrony's works are not so abundant and varied that one could draw from them a completely holistic and complete moral image of the saint. About the life of St. Sophrony before his acquaintance in the Lavra of St. Feodosia with Blessed. We know almost nothing about John Moschus. Very little is also known about the life and work of St. Sophrony during his patriarchate. However, the existing information is sufficient to present the moral image of St. Sophronia in the light is quite clear and definite. We find this information from Theophanes Chronograph, in Spiritual Luga, and from other writers 1. But the most important source of information about the life and work of St. Sophrony is served by his creations. But many of them were unknown for a long time, and known ones were published separately and by different scientists. Thus, some of the works of St. Sophronius (for example, the Council Epistle, etc.) is found in the acts of the VI and VII Ecumenical Councils, others in the acts of the saints, published by Balland 2, and in the preaching Library (T. I, p. 672), published by Combefis, one (verses about Symeon the God-Receiver) is given by Allatius (in diatriba de Symeon. p. 5), an excerpt from another (a word of praise to John the Theologian) was published by Balland in the Library of the Ancient Fathers (T. III. p. 252), etc. In the present century, many new works of St. have been discovered. Sophronius and, in addition, a more or less complete collection of all his creations appeared. The honor of discovering many of St. Sophronia belongs to the famous scientist Mai, and a more or less complete collection of the works of St. We find Sophronius in Minya 3. We say more or less because in Min we do not find all the works of St. Sophronia, for example. he does not have a “word on the Baptism of the Savior” and two epigrams published by Jacobs in his ontology, namely, there is no epigram “on the Skull Stone and on the burial place of the Savior” 4. However, in Min's edition only a few works of St. are missing. Sophronius, and therefore we can say that at present we have a fairly complete collection of all the works of St. Sophronia. both previously known and discovered relatively recently. But the works of St. Sophronia still remains completely unexplored. We find almost no research on the works of St. Sophronia not only in our theological literature 5, but even in foreign literature. In Cellier 6 and Dupin 7 we find only a short list of the works of St. Sophrony and a brief overview of the contents of the conciliar message. But about the general character of the theological, oratorical and poetic works of St. Sophrony, these scientists do not express any judgments. This reveals the need for a special study of the works of St. Sophrony in terms of their general nature and content. Not all creations of St. Sophrony are directly related to our task, but in order to get a clear idea of ​​the personality of St. Sophrony, and about the nature of his creations, we considered it necessary to study all his works. From the works of St. Sophrony, which are closely related to the task of our research, only the following exist in Russian: the conciliar epistle 8, a small excerpt from the word for the Nativity of Christ 9 and an excerpt from the word for the week of the cross 10. The plan of our essay is determined by its very topic; it should include a study of the works of St. Sophrony - theological, preaching and poetic. But for the sake of completeness of the essay, we first offer a brief image of the life and church-practical activities of St. Sophronius, and then we make a detailed list of all his creations, both those that have reached us and those that have not, indicating which ones are genuine and those that are not. Indicate the authentic and inauthentic creations of St. We found Sophronius all the more necessary because Min does not have such a division between genuine and inauthentic creations, or better to say, he recognizes the creations of St. as genuine and inauthentic. Sophronius, since they confirm some Roman Catholic tendencies. When identifying inauthentic works of St. Sophronius, from among the genuine ones, we were guided mainly by their content and the opinions of ancient writers. After the biographical section, we move on to the very subject of the essay - the study of the theological, preaching and poetic works of St. Sophronia. At the conclusion of the essay, we give a brief overview and characteristics from the outside and inside of those poetic works of St. Sophronius, which were assigned to him for private use, and we end our work with a literal translation of two poems by the Jerusalem patriarch. I. A brief outline of the life and church-practical activities of St. Sophronia In the absence of certain historical indications, it is almost impossible to accurately determine the year of birth of St. Sophronia. The only thing we can say with certainty about the time of birth of this patriarch is that he was born in the second half of the 6th century, around 560. The birthplace of St. Sophronius was in the city of Damascus 11, and his parents were pious and wealthy citizens of this city of Plinth and Myra 12. The initial education of St. Sophrony received in the house of his parents and under their direct guidance, and his parents, as pious people, began to raise their son, from his earliest years, in a strictly Christian spirit and introduced him to the truths of the Christian faith. We find an indication of this, among other things, in the conciliar letter of St. Sophronius, where he testifies that he sets forth “what he learned from the beginning, being born and raised in the holy universal Church, and what he was accustomed to think from childhood” 13. In his youth, St. Sophrony also studied various secular sciences, for example. rhetoric and dialectics, and was so successful in these sciences that he earned the honorable name of sophist or philosopher 14. But worldly fame and secular knowledge did not satisfy the saint. Sophronia. His soul thirsted for higher, divine knowledge, and therefore, along with the secular sciences, St. Sophrony studied the Holy Scriptures and patristic works even more zealously. At the same time, St. Sophrony did not limit himself to the theoretical assimilation of theological knowledge, but supplemented this knowledge with spiritual experience acquired during his long travels through countries famous for ascetics and educated men. To this end, following the example of many famous Christian teachers, St. Sophrony visited the monasteries of Palestine, Syria and Egypt. From Damascus, he headed, apparently, first of all to Palestine, where at that time the monastic laurels and monastic churches flourished, and asceticism reached the same high degree of perfection as it had achieved in Egypt. Here, in the monastery of St. Theodosius the Great, located two hours from Jerusalem, St. Sophronius met John Moschus, a monk of the said monk. This I. Moschus became a friend, teacher and leader of St. Sophronia. Together with his new teacher, Sophronius made long wanderings through the monasteries of Palestine, Antioch and Egypt, everywhere studying high examples of asceticism and completing his spiritual development and theological education. John Moschus was a learned man and a great lover of spiritual education. In his “Spiritual Meadow” it is said that during his stay in Alexandria he had a fairly close acquaintance, “due to science,” with one ascetic and philosopher Theodore 15. The same work also says that John Moschus also made acquaintance in Alexandria with a certain Cosmas Scholasticus, and that he used not only the instructions of this learned man, but also his books, since he collected more books than any of the Alexandrians 16. From the same Spiritual Meadow we learn that John initially lived in the Iliot Lavra, on the banks of the Jordan and spent ten years here 17, that he visited the cells of Jordanian hermits 18 and probably spent a lot of time with them. According to John's own testimony 19, during the reign of Tiberius he traveled to the Oasis. John does not speak about the reason for this trip to Egypt, but it is possible that he was sent there to fight heretics. Upon returning to Palestine, John settled in the monastery of St. Feodosia. Meanwhile, St. Sophronius, guided, perhaps, partly by the desire to gain, in conversations with Palestinian monks, who were then famous for their piety and spiritual exploits, the highest spiritual wisdom, and partly, perhaps, for the worship of St. places, also arrived in Palestine and visited, among other things, the monastery of St. Feodosia. It was here that St. met for the first time. Sophronniy with bl. John 20 and here that close friendship began between them, which never separated them. This friendship was a consequence of the similarity of the aspirations of the persons who became friends and their direction. In fact, both persons who became friends - St. Sophrony and Bl. John Moschus - they were deeply religious and pious people, both were highly educated people who sought to enrich themselves with useful knowledge, especially soul-saving knowledge. But St. Sophrony was younger in years and less rich in spiritual experience, and therefore in this friendship he had a subordinate role. Being a friend of John, St. Sophrony was at the same time his student. However, John always addresses St. Sophronius, as with a friend, and not as with a student, as equal with equal, calling him either a master 21, then a sophist 22, or simply a friend 23. Having met and made friends with John, St. Sophrony travels with him to various eastern monasteries. The beginning of these wanderings dates back to 579, and their goal was the acquisition of higher spiritual wisdom 24. After spending some time in the monastery of St. Theodosius and having received many edifying lessons here 25, St. Sophrony and John began to visit other Palestinian monasteries for the same purpose of edification. So, they were in the monastery of St. Gerasim 26, visited the Bashep Lavra 27, the monastery of St. Peter 28, Euphemia V. 29, bypassed St. places of Jerusalem 30 and finally arrived at the Lavra of St. Savva 31. Having listened to many edifying instructions here, the pious wanderers headed their way to Antioch 32, where they listened with special attention to the Cilician hermits 33. From Antioch, visiting various monasteries 34 along the way, St. Sophronius and John arrived in Alexandria through Sinai 35. Before arriving in Alexandria, St. Sophronius traveled in secular clothes 36, in the mantle of a philosopher, but in Alexandria he decided to take monastic orders and was tonsured by the hand of his mentor 37. In Alexandria, rich in spiritual sages and monasteries, St. Sophronius and John spent their time in their usual activities, i.e. in visiting various monasteries and in conversations with learned Alexandrian monks 38. St. Sophronius and John visited not only the monasteries that were in Alexandria itself, but also the monasteries that were in the vicinity of Alexandria, and even reached the famous Thebaid 39. As learned and very pious people, St. Sophrony and John attracted the attention of the then Patriarch of Alexandria. John the Merciful, who decided to use their learning to fight the heretics who were disturbing the Alexandrian church at that time. This fact is clearly evidenced by the life writer of John the Merciful, Leontius of Cyprus. He writes: “according to his desire, God sent him (i.e., the patriarch) wise and worthy men - John and Sophrony; they were for him faithful advisers, whom he obeyed like fathers, and to whom he was grateful, like steadfast warriors who fought for faith and piety. Strengthened by the Holy Spirit, they argued with their wisdom with the Severians and other wicked heretics who were in our country - and, like good shepherds, many monasteries and monasteries, many churches were snatched from the mouths of these beasts” 40. From the given testimony of the biography of Bl. John the Merciful, it is clear that St. Sophronius and John, during their stay in Alexandria, not only engaged in conversations with pious and learned monks, not only visited various Alexandrian monasteries, but also waged a long, diligent and, apparently, quite successful struggle against heretics, for which they enjoyed great trust and respect from John the Merciful. One might also think that for the scholarship and successful refutation of the heretics of St. Sophronius and John enjoyed considerable fame and respect throughout Alexandria. During his stay in Alexandria, St. Sophrony had a serious eye problem. According to the Greek Menaia, this disease was a consequence of constant reading 41 . All the best Alexandrian doctors unanimously argued that this disease would lead to blindness and could not provide any help to the patient. Therefore St. Sophrony, having lost hope of receiving healing from people, turned for help to the martyrs Cyrus and John, at whose tomb many miracles were then performed. At the same time, St. Sophronius made a vow that if he received healing from the saints, he would describe for the edification of generations the miracles that took place at their tomb. The miracle happened, St. Sophronius received complete healing by faith and therefore considered it his duty in Alexandria to fulfill the vow he had made, i.e. describe the miracles of the above-mentioned saints. Having stayed in Alexandria for quite a long time, St. Sophronius and John, in view of the danger threatening Egypt from the Persians, finally had to leave this city and went to the island of Cyprus. For the same reason he left Alexandria and St. John the Merciful went to the same island of Cyprus, the place of his homeland 42, where he soon died (620). According to the testimony of the Greek Mena, St. Sophronius wrote to St. I gave a word of praise to John the Merciful and mourned his death with many tears 43. From the island of Cyprus St. Sophronius and John went to the island of Samos 44, also visited Constantinople 45 and, having venerated the sacred places of this city, went to Rome 46, meaning to venerate the shrines and be consoled by the faith of Western Christians. In Rome St. Sophrony suffered a misfortune: his friend and teacher, Blessed One, died here. John. Dying bl. John, bequeathed to St. Sophronius and other disciples, who, besides St. Sophronia, who still had eleven, moved his body to Sinai and buried it there; if it was impossible to fulfill this due to the invasion of the barbarians, he bequeathed to bury his body in the monastery of St. Feodosia 47. Fulfilling the will of his beloved teacher, St. Sophronius soon went east, and learned in Askolon that the path to Sinai was occupied by enemies 48 and arrived in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem St. Sophronius found the primate of the monastery, St. Theodosius - Presbyter George and, having handed over to him the will of Bl. John, together with him and the brethren and monks of the monastery of St. Theodosius who were in Jerusalem, carried the body of the bl. John to the named monastery and buried him there with honor 49. After this, St. Sophrony finally settled in the monastery of St. Theodosius, deciding to spend the rest of his 50 days in it. But St. was not destined for long. Sophronia enjoy the peace and tranquility in a peaceful abode. The Monothelite heresy that appeared in the depths of the Church called him to fight with its followers. Monothelitism was nothing more than a further continuation and development of the Monophysite heresy. In fact, the Monophysites, allowing in Jesus Christ only one divine nature, which absorbed human nature, thereby already allowed in Jesus Christ only one will and one action, although they have not yet expressed this. The Council of Chalcedon, which condemned this heresy, did not stop its existence. Having ceased to exist openly, heresy continued to exist hidden, and was only waiting for an opportunity to manifest itself in a new form. Already soon after the Council of Chalcedon, some bishops, recognizing two natures in Jesus Christ, began to allow in Him one will and one action, as a consequence of the unity of the divine personality 51. But the actual culprit of the new heresy was Theodore, Bishop of Faran, who developed it in a word to Sergius, Bishop of Arsinoe 52; and its defenders and distributors were: Sergius, bishop. Constantinople, descended from Jacobite parents 53, Cyrus, primate of Phasis, who later became, as if as a reward for heresy, the bishop of Alexandria, and finally Athanasius, patriarch of Antioch (formerly the Jacobite patriarch). The emperor himself took the side of heresy. Irakli, next. circumstances. In Hierapolis, Heraclius met with Athanasius (then Jacobite Patriarch) and began to exhort him to accept the Chalcedonian confession, promising him the Patriarchate of Antochina for this 54. Athanasius feignedly replied that he recognized the Council of Chalcedon, admitting two natures in Jesus Christ, but for his part he asked Heraclius: is it necessary to recognize two actions in Jesus Christ or one. Heraclius turned to Bishop Sergius for a solution to this issue. Constantinople, and to Cyrus, bishop. Fasidas 55. Sergius and Cyrus answered Heraclius that it was necessary to recognize in Jesus Christ one will and one action and that this teaching could serve as a means of reconciling heretics with the Church 56 . The emperor, who in every possible way wanted to pacify the church and, with the help of religious unity, achieve political unity, decided to use the proposed means, and soon promulgated a decree (ξχθεσις, 630), by which he invited both Orthodox and heretics to recognize in Jesus Christ one will and one action. The task of reconciling the heretics with the Church was entrusted to Cyrus, now the Patriarch of Alexandria, who, in order to carry out the assignment entrusted to him, issued nine members with anathema; in the seventh term, he defends the Manothelitian heresy with all his might and threatens with the strictest anathema to those who do not accept it 57. With the help of these members, Cyrus easily added a significant number of Jacobites and Theodosians to the Church. The heretics were even very pleased with this connection and said: “We did not go to the Council of Chalcedon, but the Council came to us, for whoever affirms one action in I. Christ, he confesses in Him one nature” 58. Obviously, the purity of the Orthodox faith was in danger, since monothelitism was recognized not only by secular authorities, but also by spiritual ones; and it really began to spread quickly. At this time St. Sophrony on the defense of Orthodoxy. Around the time Cyrus unveiled his members, we see him already in Alexandria. It is unknown what prompted St. Sophronius to leave the peaceful monastery - either the disasters of Palestine, or the desire to counteract the new heresy, which declared itself after the Imperial Decree (ξχθεσις᾿ a) with particular force in Alexandria. It can be assumed that St. Sophronius arrived in Alexandria under the influence of both reasons. But be that as it may, the arrival of St. Sophronius's visit to Alexandria was very timely, although, however, at first his opposition to the heresy was unsuccessful. Cyrus, before publishing his members, proposed them for consideration by St. Sophronius, who was then famous for his learning and piety not only in Alexandria, where the memory of his former exploits was vividly preserved, but throughout almost the entire East 59. Cyrus, perhaps, had in mind to win over St. Sophronia; but St. Sophronius, as soon as he read the named members, immediately saw their unorthodoxy and, throwing himself at the feet of Cyrus, with tears asked him not to publish his members, because they contained the heresy of Apollinaris: a council was formed (in 633); the Monophysites willingly agreed with Cyrus because Cyrus's thoughts were an expression of their opinion, and not of the Orthodox Church 60. After this St. Sophronius went to Constantinople, wanting to have a personal conversation with Patr. Sergius explain to him what danger threatens Orthodoxy and encourage him to act against Cyrus. But Sergius, an inveterate Monothelite and, one might say, the main culprit and spreader of heresy, was difficult to win over to the side of Orthodoxy. Pointing out those beneficial fruits achieved by the members of Cyrus, i.e. to reconcile the heretics with the Church, Sergius resolutely refused to condemn these members (actually the seventh). Having failed to achieve his goal in Constantinople, St. Sophrony returned to Palestine with deep sadness in his soul. Meanwhile, by this time the Patriarch of Jerusalem Modest (died in 634) had died and St. was unanimously elected in his place by both the clergy and the people. Sophronius 61, who enjoyed great fame throughout Palestine for his learning and devotion to Orthodoxy. This is the election of St. Sophrony to the patriarchal throne of Jerusalem, as can be seen from his conciliar message, happened against his will, and he took the holy throne only by yielding to the general desire 62. Having entered the patriarchal see, St. Sophronius immediately convened a council, condemned monothelitism and sent the acts of the council, along with his message, to Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and to Honorius, Pope of Rome 63. In his message, St. Sophronius mainly dwells on explaining the question of the relationship between the two natures in Jesus Christ - divine and human, refuting and anathematizing both the error of Nestorius and the error of Eutyches. Proving that in Jesus Christ the divine and human natures were united inseparably and inseparably, St. Sophrony from here already deduces the inconsistency of monothelitism, arguing that in Jesus Christ, as the God-man, two actions must be recognized - divine and human. St. Sophronius, with his letter, obviously meant to present the Orthodox teaching on a controversial issue as clearly and thoroughly as possible and thereby encourage, if not Sergius, an inveterate heretic, then at least Honorius, the Pope of Rome, to take the side of Orthodoxy and oppose heresy. But this goal was not achieved in relation to Honorius either, because Sergius, a very cunning and intelligent man, managed to win him over in his favor in advance. Having learned through rumors about the election of St. Sophronius to the Jerusalem see, and rightly expecting strong opposition to heresy on his part, Sergius took precautions. He wrote a letter to Honorius in which, not entirely correctly conveying the circumstances of the birth of the new heresy, he tries to justify it, referring to the forged letter of Mina, the Patriarch of Constantinople to Pope Vigilius, which contains various paternal testimonies about one action and one will in Jesus Christ - and also based on the expression of St. Leo, Pope of Rome, that each nature in Jesus Christ acts with the participation of another nature. In general, in this message, Sergius presents himself as a man who very jealously guards the peace and tranquility of the Church, as well as a defender of the teachings allegedly betrayed by the fathers. Oh St. Sergius speaks of Sophronia as an ignorant person who cannot justify his teachings with the works of his fathers. Sergius writes to Honorius that when he demanded from St. Sophronius to prove his teaching with evidence from the fathers, he was not able to do this 64. These words of Sergius cannot be trusted, since it is impossible to admit that St. Sophronius, who subsequently collected 600 passages from the fathers of the church against monothelitism, was not able, at the suggestion of Sergius, to bring at least a few passages from the fathers in favor of the teaching that he so ardently defended. Thanks to such a cunningly composed message, Sergius managed to win over Pope Honorius to his side, misleading him with his message. Under such circumstances, St. Sophronius decided to use one more remedy against the heretics. According to the testimony of Stephen, Bishop of Dor, he collected and published 600 passages from the holy fathers confirming the doctrine of two wills. But, according to the testimony of the same Stephen, this collection of St. Sophronius only further aroused and armed the heretics 65 against himself. St. Sophronius, however, did not lose heart. Believing that Honorius took the side of heresy only through a misunderstanding, he intended to personally go to Rome and there explain the true state of affairs in the East. But the political disasters of Palestine did not allow him to carry out this intention and he sent the aforementioned Bishop of Dorsk, Stephen, to Rome, obliging him with an oath on Golgotha ​​to make every effort to call the West to the defense of Orthodoxy. Bishop Stephen himself reports that St. Sophronius, having brought him to Golgotha, addressed him with the following words: “Remember that you will give an answer to the Crucified One in this place when He comes to judge the living and the dead, if you are careless and neglect the danger in which His saint is now. faith. Do what I myself cannot do due to the Saracen invasion. If necessary, go around the universe, try to overcome all obstacles, just to reach Rome, open there before St. men, in truth, everything that is happening in our countries, and do not stop begging until they give the final decision to defeat the enemies of the faith and completely reject the newly introduced teaching” 66. Frightened by such a spell, Stephen soon went west and, despite all sorts of obstacles he encountered on the way from the Monothelites who tried to stop him, finally reached Rome 67. Meanwhile, the activities of St. Sophronia for the benefit of Orthodoxy weakened significantly, since Palestine and even Jerusalem itself were in serious danger from Muslims. Under such circumstances, St. Sophrony could no longer devote all his activities to the fight against heretics, being forced, like a good shepherd, to take care of the external well-being and safety of his flock. St. Sophronius not only encouraged and consoled his flock during the two-year siege of Jerusalem by Muslims, but even had a decisive influence on the fate of the city itself and its population. When it became impossible to withstand the siege any longer, St. Sophronius, appearing at the Muslim camp, announced that the city was ready to surrender under certain conditions, but only personally to the Caliph Omar himself. Omar arrived from Mecca and at the request of St. Sophronia not only promised to spare the city and population, but also to grant it freedom of religion and legitimize the inviolability of Christian churches. 68 However, even under such relatively good conditions, St. It was hard for Sophrony to see St. the city and its shrines are in the hands of Muslims and therefore he was not afraid to say to Omar himself: “behold, the abomination of desolation is in a more holy place” 69. St. Sophronius died in 538, “triumphant, as Theophan put it, in victory over the inventions of the Monothelites, over Sergius and Pyrrhus” 70 . From a review of the life and work of St. Sophrony cannot help but see that he was the most zealous defender of the Orthodox faith and opponent of heretics. But Saint Sophronius during his lifetime was not destined to see the beneficial fruits of his selfless activity in defense of Orthodoxy: the works of St. Sophronius were crowned with success only after his death. Bishop Stephen, frightened (as he himself relates) by the obligation the patriarch entrusted to him in such a sacred place and with such a formidable spell, fulfilled the task entrusted to him with great zeal. He worked in Rome for ten whole years, begging everyone to stand for the faith of the fathers, and finally achieved what he wanted. Pope Martin I convened a large council in the Lateran (648), at which monothelitism was condemned. Thus, Orthodoxy, the defender of which in the beginning was, one might say, only one St. Sophrony, began to gradually gain the upper hand; it finally triumphed at the VI Ecumenical Council, which, in consideration of the merits of St. Sophronius, in the defense of Orthodoxy, decided, among other things, to include his name in the sacred diptychs, and the church, grateful to the zealot of Orthodoxy, honors his memory annually on March 11. II. A list of all the works of St. that have reached us and have not reached us. Sophronia indicating genuine and inauthentic St. Sophronius, as a writer, left behind many creations; but, unfortunately, not all of them have come down to us 71, and of those that have come down to us with his name, not all belong to him. According to the content of the works of St. Sophronies are quite diverse and can be divided into the following groups: dogmatic-polemical, moral-dogmatic, historical, liturgical, poetic and laudatory words. 1. Dogmatic-polemical works include: a) a conciliar letter addressed to St. Sophronius to Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and to Honorius, Pope of Rome. It was read and approved at the VI Ecumenical Council 72. b) Treatise on the incarnation of one of the persons of the Most Rev. Trinity, directed, like the conciliar message, against the Monothelites. About this treatise those closest to St. The writers do not mention Sophronia, from which we can conclude that he was not universally known; The reason for the little-known and little-spread of the treatise could be the Monothelites, who, noticing the dogmatic power of this treatise and recognizing it as dangerous for themselves, hid it or even destroyed it. Nevertheless, the existing evidence about this work is quite sufficient to recognize St. Sophronia 73. c) The word about the baptism of the Savior 74. 2. Essays of a moral and dogmatic nature. This type of writing includes the words: a) on the Nativity of Christ, b) on the Presentation, c) on the Exaltation of the Venerable Cross and on St. Resurrection (i.e. on the day of renewal of the Church of the Resurrection 75, d) for the veneration of the Honorable and Life-Giving Cross (on the week of the Cross), e) for the Annunciation, f) an excerpt from the word for Epiphany 76 and finally g) a treatise on confession of sins. This treatise was opened on May 77. In it St. Sophrony condemns those people who run away from strict, but experienced and knowledgeable confessors, and turn to inexperienced and uneducated confessors. Condemning this kind of people, St. Sophronius points out to them that when they want to be healed from some physical illness, they usually turn to experienced doctors for help, and not to ignoramuses, and advises them to do the same in the case when they want to heal themselves from some spiritual illness. The duty of a confessor, according to St. Sophronia, this is a very difficult matter that requires considerable experience and considerable education. Developing this idea, St. Sophrony says that there is a different way of confessing for secular people, some for spiritual people, some for the rich, some for the poor, some for the young, some for the old, etc., and that just as a doctor knows herbs in relation to each disease and uses different remedies in relation to various diseases, so a spiritual doctor must know what the disease of the soul is, what consists of weakness of thought, confusion of the heart, adultery of the spirit, greed, lies, perjury, and, accordingly with this, use one or another remedy. But in addition to education and experience, the confessor, in the opinion of St. Sophrony, must also be distinguished by virtues: whoever himself cannot expel vices from his soul will not be able to help others; finally, the confessor must also know the canons, the most important of which are St. Sophronius gives at the end of his work. 3. Works of a historical nature: a) the life of Mary of Egypt, written by St. Sophronius in the Lavra of St. Theodosius on his return from Rome 78. Some passages from the life of Mary of Egypt were read at the VII Ecumenical Council 79. The Life of Mary of Egypt, both in its subject and in its external beauty, according to the description of this subject, is a highly sublime and edifying creation, and therefore St. the church decreed that this work should be read annually during Lent. b) Description of the miracles of St. Cyrus and John. This is the work of St. Sophronius is still very little known. In terms of its volume, compared with other works of St. Sophrony it is very extensive, and in its content it is purely historical. However, this work is not without a dogmatic element, namely: it contains evidence of the transubstantiation of bread and wine into the true Body and Blood of Christ in the sacrament of the Eucharist. We will present this evidence. Thus, in the description of the 37th miracle performed over the subdeacon John, who belonged to the heresy of Theodosius and Severus and had a thorn in both eyes, it is said that St. Cyrus and John, before healing the sick man, wished to convert him to Orthodoxy and therefore, “rising from their bed and taking John by the hand, they led him to the divine altar and, placing him here, gave him holy bread, which became (γενόμενον) the life-giving Body of Christ; then, taking the cup from the mysterious meal, they gave him divine milk to drink.” – We find similar evidence of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the description of the 38th miracle that happened over the heretic Stephen, who also had a thorn in both eyes. St. Sophronius narrates that St. Cyrus and John, appearing to this heretic (in a dream), gave him clean bread, which had an image of a cross on it. Stephen lowered this bread three times, and the saints again served it to him. When Stephen lowered the bread for the third time, the saints expressed a desire to hear him say: amen, amen, amen, meaning by this the acceptance of the Holy Mysteries, “because, continues St. Sophrony, with these words we answer the priests when they offer us the life-giving and saving Body and Blood of the Lord, and thus we testify with our own lips that what is offered to us weekly as spiritual food and for the remission of sins is true.” Describing the 39th miracle performed over the heretic Peter the Monophysite, St. Sophronius says that when St. Cyrus and John saw that Peter really wanted to receive healing from them, they told him: “go to the precious Jordan (the Alexandrians call the baptismal font by this name, because Christ our Lord was baptized in the Jordan River to cleanse us) and, having washed your hands there, accept the mysteries of Christ, showing by folding your hands the blessed acceptance of the Body of Christ and Blood.” Finally, about the sacrament of the Eucharist of St. Sophronius speaks even when describing the 36th miracle performed over the heretic subdeacon Theodore, who suffered from gout. When St. The martyrs exhorted this heretic to join the Church and partake of the Holy Mysteries; he, evading this, asked to receive oil from the lamps that burned in front of their shrine. On this occasion, St. Sophrovnius discusses the high importance of the sacrament of the Eucharist and its superiority over consecrated oil. He writes: “and I myself agree that the oil burned in the lamps before the saints is holy, but what is it in comparison with the One who sanctifies the saints themselves? and I think that oil has power against diseases, but what is it in comparison with Christ, Who is wisdom and power?... I also say that oil is worthy of honor, as burned in such a place (at the tomb of the saints), but what is it in comparison with Him who sits on chariots? For all creatures, not only earthly, but also heavenly: thrones, principalities, authorities, dominions, powers, cherubim and seraphim... serve as the seat of God; and if there are any other invisible creatures known to God alone, then they all desire and consider it good to bear the yoke of slavery and serve Him (Christ).” True, in these words there is no direct indication of the transubstantiation of bread and wine into the true Body and Blood of Christ in the sacrament of the Eucharist, but this transubstantiation is automatically assumed here, since St. Sophrony compares the sacred oil with Jesus Christ Himself. In the description of the same 36th miracle, from which we have just given an excerpt, there is one place that speaks in favor of the veneration of icons and was read at the VII Ecumenical Council 80. It is here that it is said that when the mentioned subdeacon (Theodore) persisted in heresy and did not want to partake of the Holy Mysteries, the martyrs, appearing to him in a dream, led him to one shining and terrible-looking church, the top of which touched the sky; in this church there was a very large and amazing image, in the middle of which there was an image of Jesus Christ, and on the sides there were images of John the Baptist and the Mother of God. Cyrus and John fell before the icon three times, asking Theodora for healing, and finally, their prayer was heard - the sick man recovered. But the work in question by St. Sophronia, in addition to the above thoughts, is of considerable interest as a purely historical work. It could serve as a significant aid in studying the life and morals of the Alexandrians at the beginning of the 7th century 81. In his work, St. Sophronius does not describe all the miracles of the martyrs Cyrus and John, but only 70, namely those that the author himself was an eyewitness, or about which he heard from other eyewitnesses 82. When describing each miracle of St. Sophrony first briefly introduces the person on whom the miracle was performed, indicating his title, position in society, material condition, moral qualities, etc.; then he indicates the illness of the person who turned to the martyrs for help, its cause, and finally describes the miracle itself, the healing of the illness. To get acquainted with the nature of these miracles, we offer here a description of some of them. At the end of the work of St. Sophrony describes a miracle performed on himself - namely, his miraculous healing from an eye disease. The essay about the miracles of the martyrs Cyrus and John was written in a very pious spirit and with deep reverence for the martyrs. The language of the essay is lively and fascinating, and in places even elegant. c) To the historical works of St. Sophronius should also include two biographies of torment. Cyrus and John - one complete, and the other without beginning. Affiliation of St. The sophrony of these biographies is proved by their language and way of presenting events. In their content they have great similarities (even in expressions) with the praiseworthy words of St. martyrs, where the most important circumstances of their lives are also conveyed. The second biography (without a beginning) serves as a complement to the first, but in general has a very great similarity with it. 4. Works of a liturgical nature should include, first of all, a) the interpretation of St. Sophronia on the liturgy, found by May in the Vatican codices and placed by him in the "Specilegrum Romanum". 1840 t. IV. This is the creation of St. Sophronia in the Mayan edition has the following inscription: “a word containing a general outline of church history and a detailed explanation of everything that happens in divine rites.” Unfortunately, Mayem found and published only an excerpt from this word, interrupted by a Cherubic song. This passage is of very great importance for resolving the issue of the state of the liturgical rite during St. Sophronia, i.e. in the 7th century. It represents the most excellent and sublime interpretation of the meaning of both the accessories of the church (mainly the altar) and the liturgical actions. b) In addition to the interpretation of the liturgy, St. Sophrony was still in the rank of hieromonk, during his stay in the Lavra of St. Theodosius, after returning from Rome, revised and corrected the Jerusalem Rule of St. Savva, upset during the conquest of Jerusalem by the Persians in 614. Simeon of Thessaloniki testifies to this 83. 5. St. Sophronius, as has been said, left behind many works of a poetic nature. Some of his poetic works of St. Sophronius intended for church use, and others for private edification. To the first kind of poetic works of St. Sophrony owns the triparts published by Mayemg 84, troparia or self-vocal stichera on the hours of the pre-celebration of the Nativity of Christ and the Great Heel 85, stichera with a prayer for the blessing of water on the day of Epiphany and stichera to St. Simeon the Divnogorets 86. St. left a lot. Sophrony of poetic works and for private edification. To such works of St. Sophronius includes his Anacreontic songs and epigrams. Anacreontic songs of St. Sophronia has been preserved to us 23: for the Annunciation, for the Nativity of Christ, for the adoration of the Magi, for the Presentation of the Lord, for the Baptism of Christ, for the Resurrection of Lazarus, for the Meeting of Christ by the Vayami, for John the Theologian, for the First Martyr Stephen, for the First Martyr. Thekla, about the Last Supper, about St. Paul, about his exploits, about the capture of Jerusalem by the Persians, about himself, about the prodigal son, about the Egyptian martyrs, about Narses, Bishop of Ascalon, about the honorable cross, about Father Mena, about Paul, about the desire to see St. the city and finally about Joseph. From St. Sophronius has also reached us with several beautiful epigrams: on the forehead stone, on the burial place of wanderers, and two on John the Merciful 87. 6) Preserved to us from St. Sophrony and several words of praise, namely: a) the word of praise of St. John the Baptist, b) St. to the chief apostles Peter and Paul, c) a word in honor of the archangels, angels and other heavenly powers, d) a word of praise from St. martyrs Cyrus and John and e) St. John the Theologian. From the last word, however, only a small excerpt has reached us, containing, among other things, the idea that Solomia, the wife of Zebedee, the mother of St. John the Theologian, was the daughter of Joseph, the betrothed of the St. Virgin, who, besides Solomia, had two more daughters - Anna and Maria. There are indications of other genuine works of St. Sophronia, but have not reached us. To the lost works of St. Sophronius includes: a) two books containing 600 paternal testimonies in favor of the doctrine of two wills in Jesus Christ 88, b) the laudatory word of St. John the Merciful 89 and c) St. John Chrysostom at 90 and finally d) some hymns. That not all the hymns of St. have reached us. Sophronia, this can be concluded from the file stored in Imp. Vienna Library parchment Greek manuscript. This manuscript is attributed to St. Sophronius the canons from the week of the publican and the Pharisee to the week of all saints, and meanwhile in the triodion opened by May, the canons of St. Sophronia begins right from Lent and continues only until the Ascension 91. But besides the authentic creations of St. Sophronia, his name is associated with quite a few inauthentic creations; Moreover, between the inauthentic creations of St. Sophronius there are several, which, although some writers mention them, but the content of which does not allow them to be attributed to St. Sophronia - at least in the form in which they currently exist. In their present form, these creations contain some non-Orthodox thoughts, obviously introduced into them by zealots of Roman Catholic dogma, since it is difficult to admit that St. Sophrony, the most Orthodox hierarch of his time, who thoroughly knew Holy Scripture and Church Tradition, could share this kind of delusion. To this category of inauthentic creations of St. Sophronius includes: a) a passage about the baptism of the apostles 92. This passage is very short and is nothing more than an excerpt from some comments of St. Sophronia, made by someone else's hand, as indicated in the passage itself. A summary of this passage can be presented as follows. “Since some, the passage says, perplexed, asked (us) by whom the apostles were baptized, and if they themselves were not baptized, how they baptized others, then our humility was called to a careful study of this question; and so we found in the comments of St. Sophrony that our Lord and God Jesus Christ baptized with his own hands only St. Peter, Peter baptized Andrei, Andrei baptized James and John, and James and John baptized all the other apostles. The same Sophronius, the author of the passage continues, also says that our immaculate Lady Theotokos was baptized by St. Peter with St. Evangelist John." Thus, the very passage about the baptism of the apostles, as can be seen from its content, does not belong to St. Sophronius - only the main idea of ​​this passage is attributed to him, which is that Jesus Christ baptized with his own hands only one apostle. Peter, and the rest of the apostles and even Pr. The Mother of God was already baptized by St. Peter. But this thought cannot belong to St. Sophronius for the sole reason that it contradicts Holy Scripture and Church Tradition. As you know, the Evangelist John directly says that Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples (Chapter 4, Art. 2). Tertullian reasons about these words of the evangelist in this way: “let no one be indignant at the fact that He (the Lord) Himself did not baptize. For into whom would He baptize? to repentance? but then He would be no different from the Forerunner. For remission of sins? but He gave it by word. In Yourself? but He was not yet dying. In the Holy Spirit? But the Holy Spirit has not yet been sent from the Father. To the Church? But it had not yet been created by the apostles. So the disciples baptized and, moreover, with the baptism of John the Baptist - let no one think otherwise” 93. The same thought is expressed by Blessed. Augustine 94 and St. John Chrysostom 95. From this it is clear that St. Sophrony, who thoroughly knew both the Tradition of the Church and Holy Scripture, could not express such an inconsistency as lies in the passage attributed to him about the baptism of the apostles. The idea of ​​the primacy of the Apostle Peter was unfairly imposed on St. Sophronius, zealots of Roman Catholic tendencies. b) An excerpt about the labors, exploits and travels of the apostles Peter and Paul 96. This passage, which is actually a brief description of the life and travels of one Apostle Peter, due to the inconsistencies contained in it, also cannot be attributed to St. Sophronia. It is in it that it is said that the Apostle Peter, an eyewitness of the Transfiguration of the Lord, was the first to hear the voice that he was entrusted with leadership over the world and the apostles and that he chose Matthew as an apostle. These thoughts, which are not at all justified by Holy Scripture, cannot belong to St. Sophronia is forced to suspect Roman scientists of forgery 97. In addition to the above-mentioned works, the inauthenticity of which is evident from the nature of their content, St. The following are also unreasonably attributed to Sophronius: a) a word on the Amorite martyrs 98. This word, as can be seen from its content, was written under the emperor Theophilus (829–842), two centuries after St. Sophronia, when the Amorite martyrs actually labored. The inauthenticity of this word was discovered by May 99. b) Apology of St. Vasily regarding the words φόσις χαί ούσία. Only a very small excerpt has survived from this work. It is attributed to St. Sophronius is only mentioned by Photius 100, and even then indefinitely. Above, Photius says (cod. V) that against Eunomius and in defense of St. Basil was written by Theodore of Antioch, and then adds (cod. V) that Sophronius also wrote about the same subject, without specifying which Sophronius. Most writers attribute this work to Sophronius, a friend of Blessed Jerome 101. c) Passage on virginity 102. None of the ancient writers of St. He does not attribute it to Sophronius, from which we can undoubtedly conclude that the named passage does not belong to him. This passage, in all likelihood, belongs to Sophrony, a friend of the blessed one. Jerome, since among the latter’s works there is also an essay on virginity 103. d) Biography of the Venerable Martyr Anastasius the Persian. This work, due to lack of evidence, also cannot be attributed to St. Sophronia. Only Baronius mentions the writer of this work, and even then vaguely. He says that the life of Anastasius the Persian was described either by Antiochus (a monk) or by Sophronius, who was also famous at that time among church writers 104 . e) Spiritual meadow. The author of this creation is recognized as St. Sophronius St. John of Damascus 105 and the fathers of the VIIth Ecumenical Council 106. But Photius, known for his learning, attributes this creation to the blessed one. John Moschus 107, which is confirmed by the content of creation, it is the author of the Spiritual Meadow who speaks of Sophronius as an outsider 108 and calls him either a sophist or a brother 109. In addition, the preface to the Spiritual Meadow states that the book is dedicated to “the sophist Sophronius, beloved in Christ.” However, from the contents of the Spiritual Meadow it is also clear that St. took an active part in its compilation. Sophrony 110. With the participation of St. Sophrony in the compilation of the Spiritual Meadow, as well as the fact that St. Sophronius, who transmitted this creation to posterity, was more famous than John Moschus, and it is necessary to explain the fact that the Spiritual Meadow was sometimes attributed to St. Sophrony, and not the real author of his blessed. John Moschus. f) In Greek and Slavic books of hours named after St. Sophrony is inscribed with another well-known evening song: Quiet Light. But this song cannot belong to St. Sophronius, since St. Basil the Great speaks of it as ancient in his time 111. In addition, this song is read in the oldest Alexandrian copy of the Bible by 70 interpreters, written in the 4th century. It is possible that this song is attributed to St. Sophronia because he introduced it into general use in the Palestinian churches. I. Saint Sophronius as a theologian St. Sophronius left behind only one work of a purely theological nature; we mean the conciliar letter addressed to Pope Honorius and Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople. St. Sophronius composed this message shortly after his accession to the patriarchal see, following the established custom in the church for bishops, after their consecration, to confess their faith in writing in special letters before the oldest bishops. But in messages of this kind, bishops usually limited themselves to a brief presentation of the most important dogmas, defined and approved by the church at former ecumenical and local councils. In general, these messages were not extensive, and since the bishops wrote them in order to show their Orthodoxy, right-mindedness and unity of faith with the Universal Church, they tried to present the professed dogmas as accurately as possible and close to the definitions of the church, basing these dogmas not so much on the speculative arguments of their minds, but on the authority of the church that accepted and approved these dogmas. Hence the brevity, accuracy and punctuality of messages of this kind. The conciliar letter of St. is distinguished by exactly the same character. Sophronia. A complete theological system cannot be found in it; Only the most important dogmas of the Christian faith are set forth here, and in many places it is very close to the conciliar definitions and writings of famous church fathers, for example. Cyril of Alexandria and Leo, Pope. However, some dogmas of St. Sophronius sets out quite thoroughly, for example. dogmas about the Most Holy. The Trinity, about the incarnation and about the relationship in Jesus Christ of two natures - divine and human. Dogma of the Most Holy Trinity St. Sophronius expounds quite fully and thoroughly, although he says after presenting this dogma that the brevity of this kind of messages does not allow him to talk more about it. But with even greater thoroughness, strength and obviousness, St. Sophronius expounds the doctrine of the relationship in the person of Jesus Christ of two natures - divine and human. The doctrine of the relationship of two natures in Jesus Christ is explained and expounded by St. Sophronius in his message is as complete, thorough and comprehensive as one could wish for. This is explained by the fact that St. Sophronius, writing his message, had in mind not only to confess his faith before the elder bishops, but at the same time to show them what view he held on the heresy of Monothelitism that had appeared at that time, which stood in close connection with the Monophysite heresy. However, St. Sophronius wanted not only to show the elder bishops how he thought about the Monothelite heresy, but at the same time to encourage them to hold the same view of the heresy, because, as is known, at first the heresy had on its side not only Patriarch Sergius, but even Pope Honorius, who, perhaps due to a misunderstanding, provided it with some patronage. St. Sophronius was the first to understand the importance of the Monothelite error and the danger that this error threatened the purity of faith, and he resisted it in every possible way. Therefore, to refute this heresy, St. Sophronius in his epistle tries to show and prove the true teaching about the relationship of two natures in Jesus Christ, contrasting this teaching with the errors of Nestorius and Eutyches. In contrast to these heretics, St. Sophronius proves that in Jesus Christ two natures - divine and human - were united inseparably (against Nestorius) and unmerged (against Eutyches), that they retained all their natural properties, so that Jesus Christ was a true man and a true God and therefore, as the God-man, had two actions and two wills. In his conciliar letter, St. Sophronius also touches on some other points of Christian doctrine, but he does not dwell on them for as long and does not explain them with such thoroughness as on the dogma of the incarnation of the Son of God. Some theological thoughts and reasoning are also found in other works of St. Sophrony and mainly in his sermons, although, however, in them St. Sophronius talks for the most part about the same dogmas that he touched on in his conciliar message. In general, the theological teaching of St. Sophrony is not distinguished by its completeness, and his theology is not distinguished by the originality of logical argumentation. The only thing that differs most completely is his teaching about two actions and wills in the person of Jesus Christ, revealed by him on the basis of the dogma already approved by the church about the inseparable and unmerged presence in Jesus Christ of two natures - divine and human. But the incompleteness of St. Sophrony, as a theologian, is easily explained, on the one hand, by the state of theological thought in his time, and on the other, by the personal characteristics of his character. The seventh century, when St. lived and acted. Sophronius, was a century of significant decline in spiritual enlightenment in general and in theological thought in particular. The reasons for this were as follows. The most important theological questions that required clarification had already been resolved by the church at previous ecumenical councils, with the participation of the most famous church fathers. New complex questions that could provoke theological thought to independent and serious research in the field of objects of faith did not arise, with the exception of the question of two wills in Jesus Christ, the solution to which was already given by the fathers who fought against Monophysitism. The religious enthusiasm that had been evident during the controversy waned considerably. The material of Orthodox Christian dogma was given and developed earlier, so that the theologians of the sixth, seventh and eighth centuries had only to collect this material, study it and apply it to the circumstances of their time, as indeed they did. Moreover, it even seemed dangerous to the theologians of these centuries to embark on new dogmatic research, since this presented the opportunity to deviate from the teachings of the ancient fathers and sin against Orthodoxy. In view of this mood and the decline in theological thought in the seventh century, the designated features of St. Sophronius, as a theologian, become understandable. But, on the other hand, this trait can also be explained by the characteristics of the character of St. Sophronia. Exactly, St. Although Sophrony knew the Holy Scripture thoroughly and deeply understood the most sublime Christian dogmas, however, as can be seen from his writings, he was little inclined to abstract, speculative thinking. St. Sophronius by nature was more of a poet than a theologian-philosopher; Possessing a tender and impressionable soul, also gifted with a largely poetic mood, St. Sophrony felt a much greater need for the outpouring of his inner states than for resolving issues that lay beyond the scope of human knowledge and could not be analyzed by human thought, and most importantly, had already been positively defined by the councils. In the same cases when St. Sophrony talks about some dogmas, he always sets out these dogmas in connection with the refutation of heresies that distorted these dogmas. St. reveals most in his works. Sophronius the dogma about the incarnation of the Son of God and in connection with this most refutes the heresies that distorted this dogma, i.e. Nestorianism and Monophysitism. To these heresies, however, St. Sophrony paid special attention because in his time they were still quite strong and widespread and therefore threatened the purity of the Orthodox faith with considerable danger. Nestorianism during St. Sophronius dominated mainly in Persia, and Eutychianism outraged not only the east, but also the west. In view of the still significant strength of these heresies in the seventh century, St. Sophrony refutes them not only in his conciliar message, but also in each of his words, thereby revealing an extraordinary love for the Orthodox faith and concern for preserving this faith pure and undamaged. After the general remarks made about St. Sophronia, as a theologian, let us proceed to the very exposition of the theological teaching of St. Sophrony, extracting it from various works of the holy father. About the properties of God in the works of St. Sophronius not only does not find a complete and detailed teaching, but even some of the properties of God are not mentioned. This is explained by the fact that St. Sophronius, as already said, left behind very few works of a purely theological nature and content; but he did not specifically touch upon the question and properties of God; He only touches on some of them by chance and does not enter into a detailed discussion about them. Let us cite from the works of St. Sophronia those places that contain an indication of one or another property of God. Omniscience. About the omniscience of God St. Sorphonius speaks in praise of St. Cyrus and John. Arguing that Cyrus and John, despite the difference in their titles (Cyrus was a monk, and John a warrior), maintained complete unanimity among themselves and were not inferior to each other in piety, St. Sophronius adds that “therefore, the Lord and Master of all, who knows everything before it happens, who tests the hearts of people and sees with ever-watchful eyes their secret thoughts, honored the martyrs with the same glory” 112. In the same eulogy to the martyrs Cyrus and John, St. Sophronius, pointing out the impossibility of counting all the miracles performed by the martyrs, since there were a lot of them, says that “these miracles are known to God alone, who knows the number of stars and gives them names, who measures the waters with a handful, the sky with the palm of the hand and the whole earth with a span, who knows the number of raindrops and the sand of the sea” 113. The omnipotence of God. We find a brief remark about this property of God in the word on the Annunciation. Archangel Gabriel, sent to preach the good news to St. The ineffable conception of the Virgin, responding to the words of the Blessed Virgin - “how this will happen, even without a husband I know” (Luke 1:34) - says “that for God everything is possible, what to desire for him, too, what to produce, for He is the most powerful (δυνατώταος) Creator of all creatures and nothing can resist Him” 114 . We find a similar remark about the omnipotence of God in the word for the Nativity of Christ. Here St. Sophronius, discussing the abolition of the consequences of the sin of the forefathers by the incarnation of the Son of God, among other things, says that “the Most Mighty (potentissimus) Liberator and Redeemer of them (i.e. people) through His birth and resurrection revealed Himself as a mediator (between God and people), the true Liberator and Redeemer, for there is nothing that would overcome (vincat) power God's. The Lord kills and resurrects, takes to hell and brings out, as it is written (1 Samuel 11:6) and nothing can resist His almighty beck (nutus)” 115. God's justice. About this property of God, St. Sophronius briefly mentions in his eulogy to St. Cyrus and John in the following words: “The Lord is a impartial Judge, in His hands is the righteous weight, and He gives everyone a reward according to their deeds” 116. The infinity and unlimitedness of God's being. About this property of God in the word for the Presentation of the Lord by St. Sophronius reasons in this way: “Who will explain the passage of God from one place to another? (St. Sophronius here refers to the presentation of Jesus Christ to the church on the fortieth day after His birth). He who hears about the appearance of the indescribable God, about His transition from place to place, how can he not ridicule the one who says this and introduces the incomprehensible and incredible into the minds of people? However, the indescribable one appears (although the pagans condemn this news), the one who, like God, does not have a natural circumference (ambitum) appears; infinite in nature and power (finite nature is an accessory to finite power), appears in the likeness of people” 117. About the infinity of God's being, St. Sophronius, as we see, expresses himself somewhat philosophically, pointing out that infinity is a necessary property of God, with which the pagans also agree, while finitude is a distinctive feature of all other creatures. Omnipresence. About the omnipresence of God, St. Sophronius speaks when describing the XXXII miracle performed on one pagan - Agapius. This Agapius, who traded silver in Byzantium, was convicted of paganism and therefore had to suffer a certain punishment. But with the help of money, he escaped punishment and fled to Alexandria, intending to hide there. On this occasion St. Sophronius notes that this pagan “did not know that the Divine power is present everywhere, fills everything, has an indescribable substance, contains everything and is above all, just as the prophet Isaiah speaks against those who thought to keep it (the power) in a certain place: “What house will you build for Me, says the Lord, or where is the place of My rest? Am I not the one who fills heaven and earth? Everything is appointed for the habitation of God: heaven and countless hosts of angels, the earth and everything that is on it - people and animals, the air and birds flying in the air, the sea and everything that is in the waters, in short, everything visible and invisible, as David says: I will walk from Your Spirit and from Your presence I will flee, etc.” 118. About the property of God’s omnipresence, as can be seen from the above excerpt, St. Sophronius expresses himself quite fully, although, however, at the same time as the omnipresence of God, the above excerpt also speaks of the infinity of God’s being, by the very connection of these properties: since if God is an infinite being, then it is self-evident that He must also be everywhere present, all-filling. It is also impossible not to notice that about the property of the omnipresence of God, St. Sophronius expresses himself somewhat vaguely when he says that the habitat of God is not only people, but also all animals that fly in the air and swim in the seas. But this expression must be understood in the sense that everything that lives by its very existence manifests in itself the creative and providential power of God. St. expounds and explains much more fully and thoroughly. Sophronius church teaching on the Trinity. The dogma of the trinity of persons in God with the unity of God’s being is one of the most important, but at the same time the most incomprehensible Christian dogmas. The importance and incomprehensibility of this dogma for the human mind was the reason that this dogma, from the very first times of Christianity, was subjected to strong attacks and distortions by heretics. Moreover, some heretics, recognizing the impossibility of reconciling the trinity of persons with the unity or unity of God, considered themselves to have the right in the name of the unity of God either to unconditionally reject the existence in God of other persons except one, or to understand by them only different forms and manifestations of the same divine person; these were mainly the Sabellians 119; other heretics, allowing for the hypostasis of persons, found it necessary to recognize the true and essential deity only in one Father; As for the Son and the Spirit, they represented them separately from the Father and standing below him; they represented the Son as the creation of the Father, and the Spirit as the creation of the Son. This is what Ariana taught 120. Sabellianism and Arianism were the main heresies that distorted the dogma of the Trinity. The Sabellians, under the pretext of wanting to maintain the unity of God, rejected the hypostasis of persons; The Arians, on the contrary, accepting the hypostasis of divine persons, rejected their consubstantiality. In view of this, the church fathers, in the fight against these heresies, were forced, on the one hand, to prove the hypostasis of divine persons, and on the other, their coexistence. From these two sides and against these two heresies, the dogma of the Trinity and St. reveals. Sophrony. But by the time of St. Sophronia, i.e. by the seventh century, the way of understanding this dogma had long been explained by the church and formulated in precise terms; therefore St. Sophrony, professing his faith in the Trinity, only sets out the doctrine about it in the form in which it was presented and explained by the church and as it was preserved in the minds of Orthodox believers. His faith in the Most Rev. Trinity St. Sophronius briefly expresses in these words: “(I believe) in the Trinity, consubstantial, consubstantial, and co-throne, consubstantial, identical in nature and identical in glory; into a single deity, having one common primacy (συγχαφαλαιομένην), and into a single united common dominion, knowing neither personal fusion nor hypostatic division. Because we believe in the Trinity in one, and we glorify the one in the Trinity: in the Trinity, because there are three hypostases, and in one because of the oneness of the Divine” 121. Having expressed in brief but essential terms the doctrine of the Trinity, St. Sophronius further expounds this teaching in more detail, bearing in mind, as already said, on the one hand, the Arians, who rejected the consubstantiality of divine persons, and on the other, the Sabellians, who rejected the hypostasis of divine persons. Arians St. Sophronius contrasts the Orthodox teaching about the unity of God in essence, and the Sabellian teaching about the hypostasis of the Trinity. Contrary to the Arians of St. Sophrony confesses one God and preaches one Divinity, although it is known in a trinity of persons; proclaims one Lord, and recognizes only one Lordship, although it is known in three hypostases. According to St. Sophronia, God, as God, is one and therefore He does not split into three Gods, does not pass into three deities. The Lord, as Lord, is one and therefore He does not pass into three Lords, and is not revealed in three dominions, as the Arians teach. This is what St. teaches. Sophronius on the unity of God's being against the Arians, who argued that Jesus Christ is essentially God less than the Father, and the Holy Spirit is not God, but the creation of the Son of God. – Against Sabellian St. Sophronius writes that although the one God is proclaimed in three hypostases and worshiped in three persons, He should not be recognized as merged or merging Himself into one hypostasis that cannot be counted. Sabellian St. Sophrony, by the way, proposes the following question: “Where, most wicked, is the Trinity, if, in your opinion, the Trinity is reduced into one person and if It flows into one united hypostasis?” A similar question is proposed by St. Sophronius and Arians, saying: “Where, mad ones, is the unit, if the unit is reduced to three essences and multiplies into three deities?” And then St. Sophrony adds that “both are wicked for the Orthodox, and neither singularity in relation to hypostases, nor trinity in relation to natures completely agrees with piety.” Refuting Arian and Sabellian, or better to say, explaining the Orthodox doctrine of the Trinity in contrast to these heretics, St. Sophronius also points out that agreeing with the Arians means leaning towards paganism (polytheism), and agreeing with the Sabellians means leaning towards Judaism 122. Continuing further with an explanation of the Orthodox teaching about the trinity of divine persons with the unity of being, St. Sophronius says that in the true concept of God, unity and plurality, “one” and “three” are appropriate, but only “one” should not be understood as Sabellius understood it, who saw only one everywhere and removed all hypostatic plurality; on the other hand, “three” should not be understood as Arius understood it, eliminating the unity of God’s being. But “one” must be understood in relation to the essence of the Divine, and “three” in relation to the three hypostases. St. Sophronius says that the three (persons) in which the Divinity is located are one and that this one is the three in which the Divinity is located. Further, Saint Sophronius continues, “that one is taken for three not because it is one, and three are called one not because it is three. It would be strange and full of all sorts of foolishness. The same thing is calculated and does not allow calculation: it is calculated in relation to its hypostases, and does not allow calculation in relation to the singularity of the Divine.” Calculus, according to the teachings of St. Sophronia, refers to the hypostases, of which there are three; The being of God cannot be counted, since otherwise the unity of command (μοναρχία) would be violated. Every number, according to the teachings of St. Sophronius, has as its companion difference, and difference leads to number, therefore, allowing calculation in relation to essence, one would have to admit Arian tritheism. St. Sophrony also says that the Orthodox teaching about the Trinity does not preach either three Gods or three essences, and does not even know any Gods or essences at all, but knows only one beginning, one Deity, one kingdom, one power, one action, one will, etc. Orthodox teaching about the unity of God's being with the trinity of hypostatic persons of St. Sophronius beautifully depicts it in the following words: “The Father is perfect God, the Son is perfect God and the Holy Spirit is perfect God, since each of these persons also has one, indivisible, lacking and perfect Divinity - the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are not called one, another and third, and therefore they are preached by those who are taught by God as God, God and God: but these three are one God, because the Father is not another God, and the Son is not another God, and the Holy Spirit is not another God, since the Father is not another nature, and the Son is not another nature, and likewise the Holy Spirit is not another nature” 123. Some kind of proof of the trinity of divine persons with the unity of the being of St. Sophronius sees that the six-winged Seraphim, who know theology more than us (δεολογίας λόου), chanting “Holy” three times, then added: “Lord of hosts.” According to St. Sophronia, the threefold repetition of the word “Holy” indicates the trinity of persons in God, and the words: “Lord of Hosts” - to unity in essence 124. This is what St. teaches. Sophronius on the unity of God's being in the trinity of hypostatic persons. The Orthodox teaching about the Trinity from these two sides is explained by St. Sophronius is quite complete and thorough, although, however, he often repeats the same thoughts in only different expressions. From what was said by St. Sophronius about the Trinity also partially clarifies the attitude of the persons of the Most Holy. Trinity to the being of God. More clearly about this subject, St. Sophronius teaches this way. The Divinity inseparably and completely fills each of the three persons and resides entirely in them, revealing itself in three different hypostases. Moreover, “The Father, being God the Father, and no longer being either the Son or the Holy Spirit, is essentially the same as the Son and the Holy Spirit. And the Son, being God the Son and no longer being either the Father or the Holy Spirit, is preached by nature as the same as the Father and the Holy Spirit. And the Holy Spirit, being God the Holy Spirit, and not being regarded as the Father and not being accepted as the Son, is essentially accepted as the same as the Father and the Son” 125. But despite the identity of the being, there are three faces of the Most Holy. Trinity also has its own distinctive properties. For these properties St. Sophronius points out at the beginning of his conciliar message when he says that the only begotten Son of God is eternally and impassively born from God the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from God the Father. The birth of the Son from the Father is also spoken of in other works of St. Sophronia. So, in the word on the Annunciation, the Archangel Gabriel, explaining Pr. Virgin the mystery of the incarnation, calls the Son of God One, born from one Father 126 and pointing out Pr. To the Virgin that the Son of God who is to be born from Her, on the one hand, will have the same substance (substantia) with Her, and on the other, will be of the same nature (natura) with God (the Father), adds that “God (the Father), giving birth to the Son, could not give birth to Him unlike Himself and unequal to Himself, but He gave birth to Him having the same essence with Himself, completely similar to Himself and completely equal to Himself in all natural properties 127. In his homily for the Presentation, the righteous Sophronius says that believers are called sons of God by grace and that “He alone (i.e. Christ) was born from God the Father by nature (secundum naturam) and consubstantial with Him (consubstantialis), He alone was born from the Father and is recognized as His only begotten Son”... 128. – As for the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father, we find an indication of this only in the conciliar letter of St. Sophronius, however, the indication is very clear for the Orthodox teaching about the relationship of the third person to the Most Holy One. The Trinity to the first persons is very important. This passage reads like this: “I believe... and in the Holy Spirit who proceeds from God the Father” 129. In these words St. Sophronius professes his faith, as well as that of the entire Eastern Church, in the procession of the Holy Spirit from only one Father, from which it is clear that the Eastern Church at the time of St. Sophronia did not at all know the doctrine that later became established in the West about the procession of the Holy Spirit and from the Son. His teaching about the Trinity, set out in the conciliar epistle, St. Sophronius ends with the following significant words, directed mainly against the Arians: “So, the Trinity is a Trinity perfect not only in the perfection of the one Divinity, but it is also perfect and pre-divine, in glory and eternity and in the kingdom indivisible and inalienable. There is nothing in this Trinity, either created, or auxiliary, or incidental, that did not exist before and that would come after. So, the Father was never without the Son, nor the Son without the Father, but there was always the same immutable Trinity" 130. It should be noted that Gregory of Neocaesarea 131 ends his confession of faith in the Trinity with exactly the same words, from which one must conclude that the above words of St. Sophronius borrowed entirely from the confession of faith of St. Gregory. But in general, the teaching about the Trinity of St. Sophrony presents it in detail, using already developed terms and expressions, and partly using new words. III. The teaching of St. Sophronia about angels The Christian teaching about angels was, one might say, fully explained by the preceding saints. Sophronius by the church fathers. Therefore, in his teaching about angels, he only repeats the thoughts of previous fathers. Nevertheless, his teaching about angels is of no little interest in itself, due to the expressions that characterize the activity and being of angels, and also because it serves as an expression of the teaching about angels in the seventh century of the entire Eastern Church. His belief in the existence of angels of St. Sophrony expresses it in the conciliar message when he writes: “(I believe) in one God the Father... the creator of everything visible and invisible.” But the teaching about the angels of St. Sophronius actually sets out in his laudatory speech to St. archangels, angels and other heavenly powers. About the creation of angels by St. Sophronius says that the Savior, God the Word, who created heaven and earth and everything in them with one wave (nutu), assumed in thought to create angels and carried out his assumption in practice. Angels, according to the teachings of St. Sophronius, were created by God before man, as can be seen from the expression that soon after the angels, with equal artistry, God created man from the dust of the earth, little less than the angels (Ps. 8:6). Angels, like people, according to the teachings of St. Sophronia, created in the image and likeness of God. He calls angels an expressive likeness of the divine image (expressum divinae similitudinis simulacrum), “the image of God,” “a mirror,” etc. 132 – As for the nature of angels, St. the patriarch calls them immaterial beings (materiae expertes), incorporeal (incorporabilis) and even outright spirits (spiritus). However, he does not imagine their spirituality to be as perfect as the spirituality of a divine being. Perhaps, in contrast to the spiritual angelic nature from the divine, he calls angels heavenly bodies (coelestia corpora) and attributes to them extreme subtlety (sublititas) and flexibility (agilitas). These expressions show that although St. Sophrony recognized angels as free from gross materiality, but did not recognize full spirituality in them, but thought that angels are not alien to some kind of corporeality, but only sui generis corporeality - extremely subtle and flexible. However, a similar opinion was expressed by other church writers, who believed that angels, as limited beings, cannot have full spirituality 133. Angels, according to St. Sophronia, grow and improve; Due to the lightness and flexibility of their nature, they go around the sky with the fastest run (cursu expeditissimo) and run through the air with the fastest movement (motu cellerimo). As for the number of angels, St. Sophrony admits quite a lot of them. This is evident from the fact that he uses the expressions in relation to angels: “immeasurable multitude”, “innumerable army”, and says that angels fill the sky and the ether. Saint Sophronius also allows for a certain kind of degree among angels and lists all nine ranks, while trying to indicate the characteristics of each rank. The ranks of angels are listed by St. Sophronius in this order: 1) Seraphim, 2) Cherubim, 3) Thrones, 4) Dominions, 5) Powers, 6) Powers, 7) Principalities, 8) Angels and 9) Archangels. It is known that all these names of angelic ranks are found in Holy Scripture, but many church fathers, speaking about angels, mention only some ranks. For the first time we find a complete listing of all nine ranks of angels in St. Gregory the Great, in the sixth century, who, however, does not list the ranks of angels in the same order as St. Sophrony 134. But St. Sophronius, as already said, not only lists all the ranks of angels, but even indicates some of their features. He says about the seraphim that they are adorned with six wings and, being placed in the first rank of the heavenly troops, with their ardor and jealousy they kindle and warm the other angels. Cherubs are full of eyes and are four-shaped in shape (quadroformia). They are abundantly gifted with spiritual powers akin to their form. Thrones are seats and carriers of the Great God, but nevertheless they are alien to any slavery and humiliation. The dominions got their name because they express divine authority through their position. Authorities bear this name because they cannot be subject to any slavery and are endowed with power and strength. The forces are gifted with firmness of spirit and irresistible strength of strength. They resemble the strength and power of God. The principles received their name from God, who Himself is alien to any beginning (in relation to time). To the angels and archangels of St. Sophronius addresses the following words: “Oh, you, the rest of the Angels and Archangels, an impenetrable wreath, a most excellent phalanx, an inaccessible highness, immense greatness, an incomparable face (chorus), a knowledge that surpasses all study, a quality that surpasses all reflection, a subtlety that knows no measure, a flexibility to which nothing can be compared, an infinitely numerous order, indescribable speed" 135, etc. On the purpose of the angels of St. Sophrony doesn't say anything directly. But some idea of ​​this can be formed on the basis of the expressions used in relation to angels. Yes, St. Sophronius calls the angels servants of the King of all, horses, armies, apostles, heralds, prophets, evangelists, guardians, patrons, defenders, leaders, distributors of rewards (libripendes), counters (calcutores), overseers, lamps, clouds, hills, mountains, intercessors, shipmen, ships, rulers, musicians, etc. The above expressions indicate that angels are servants of God and organs of God's providence for the world and in particular for man. St. Sophronius also believes that every person has his own guardian angel. This is evident from the fact that he calls angels the guardians (custodes) and companions (comites) of every person. Since St. Sophronius calls angels the companions of every person, from which we can conclude that he admits guardian angels not only for Christians, but for all people in general 136. One might also think that St. Sophrony believes that there are guardian angels for entire nations; at least he calls Archangel Gabriel the leader and patron of the Jewish people 137. IV. Creation and fall of the first people In the doctrine of the creation and fall of the first people, St. Sophronius limits himself to simply conveying the biblical narrative about this, without expressing any special judgments that would cause any objections or bewilderment. Therefore, we, for our part, will not dwell long on the doctrine of the creation and fall of man, but will limit ourselves to only conveying it in brief terms. The first people, according to the teachings of St. Sophronia, were created soon after the angels; they were created in the image and likeness of God and not much different from the angels (Ps. 8:6) 138. Their nature consisted of a rational soul and body 139, and the human soul, in contrast to everything sensible, is holy. Sophronius ascribes immortality not by nature, but by grace 140. This makes it clear why St. Sophronius, along with the immortality of the soul, also allows for the possibility of death for it, although the death of the soul, according to him, is of a different kind than the death of the body. “It’s different,” says St. Sophronius, the death of the body and otherwise the death of the soul, for the death of the soul leads to sin, as the head of this department, James, the brother of the Lord, writes (1:16), and the death of the body comes from the separation of the elements of which every essence (essentia) consists” 141. Since the first people were created in the image and likeness of God, then for this very reason they were already gifted with free will 142. Endowed with such great gifts, the first people were appointed kings over all earthly creatures and received the earthly paradise with all its benefits at their disposal. But so that the first people would not consider their nature, which had only the likeness of God, to be the nature of God Himself, or in other words, to remind the first people of their limitations, a well-known commandment was given to them 143. However, Adam, deceived by the serpent and the wife, thought of himself as God, wanted to steal the dignity of nature and for this received a worthy punishment 144, he was deprived of his royal dignity, was expelled from paradise, condemned to crying, labor, sorrow and, most painful of all, suffered a well-deserved death, transformation into the earth from which he was taken 145. Before his fall, man was the most blessed inhabitant and owner of paradise, lived his life without labor and care, was naked and did not need clothing, was not afraid of changes in the air, did not suffer from cold and scorching heat, did not feel suffering and illness, was not afraid of wild animals, etc. But having transgressed the commandment of God, man lost all this and, with his madness, became like unreasonable cattle 146. Through the fall of the first people, according to the teachings of St. Sophronius, it also happened that people, having forgotten the Creator and Ruler of the whole world, called the creations of their hands gods and ascribed to idols the honor that belongs to God alone 147. But God, who at the beginning created man in His own image and likeness and loved him more than all other creations 148, did not leave him in such a plight, but, as a lover of mankind, took pity on him, and having compassion, had mercy on him and granted him salvation 149. The promise of this redemption and salvation of fallen man was given to Abraham and repeated to David 150 . Abraham was told that through his seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed, and David was told with an oath that when the written law was fulfilled and the current age came to an end, then God would raise up from his loins a king of glory, whom he would place on his throne 151 . But the means for the redemption of fallen man was chosen by God, the most extraordinary and for the human mind extremely incredible, this is precisely the incarnation, the incarnation of the Son of God, the second person of the Holy One. Trinity 152. The Christian teaching about the incarnation of the Son of God is quite fully expounded in the works of St. Sophronia. This completeness, as we have already said, is explained by the fact that the heresies that distorted this dogma, namely Nestorianism and Monophysitism, during the time of St. Sophronius were still quite strong and widespread, and therefore quite dangerous for the purity of the Orthodox faith. In view of this, St. Sophrony, as a caring shepherd, wanting to warn believers against being carried away by the above-mentioned heresies, considered it important to explain the dogma of the incarnation as comprehensively and thoroughly as possible. He speaks about the dogma of the incarnation not only in the conciliar epistle, but also in almost all the sermons that have reached us. It must be said, however, that St. Sophronius, explaining with possible thoroughness the dogma of the incarnation, had in mind not only to counteract the above heresies, but at the same time to show the absurdity of the Monothelite heresy, which stood in close connection with Monophysitism and asserted that in Jesus Christ one must recognize one will and one action. This last goal of St. Sophronius achieves mainly by refuting Monophysitism, since Monothelitism was only a further continuation of this heresy. Incarnation of the Son of God St. Sophrony considers it a phenomenon that inspires the deepest reverence and is highly incomprehensible to our minds. The greatness and incomprehensibility of the incarnation of the Son of God by St. Sophrony expresses in these words: “The Son of God, the King and Lord of all, who is rich, clothes himself in our poverty in order to enrich us poor with His eternal blessings; The Uncreated, on the contrary, the Creator of all things now deigns to appear to creation in order to make us partakers of His divine nature; The immaterial and not involved in any addition is made flesh and blood for us in order to clothe our mortal and corruptible bodies with incorruptibility and immortality; The Limitless and Indescribable One in Divinity appears in the outline of the flesh to open for us the entrance to His boundless and immeasurable kingdom; Most Holy and Unparticipated in any sin, or, as the Apostle says: Whoever has committed sin, neither will deceit be found in His mouth (1 Peter 2:22), counts Himself among sinners and appears in the likeness of the flesh of sin (Rom. 8, 3); The Son, free and by nature, is counted with the slaves in His Father’s house, in order to make us slaves free sons of God” 153; and again: “He who is known as the eternal God becomes incarnate and becomes a true man. He who is in the depths of the eternal Father is carried in the womb of his mother and, unlimited by time, takes on a temporary beginning” 154. But precisely because of the incomprehensibility of the dogma of the incarnation, many heretics rejected it, or, better to say, misunderstood it. Such were, by the way, the Manichaeans and Valentinians. These heretics argued that Jesus Christ did not take on a real body, but only an apparent one. In contrast to these heretics, St. Sophronius teaches that Jesus Christ did not incarnate imaginarily, but it is true and in fact that He accepted “our entire composition (φόραμα), i.e. flesh, consubstantial with us, and a rational soul, homogeneous with our souls, and a mind, completely identical with our mind” 155. This thought of St. Sophronius repeats very often 156 and probably directs it not only against the Manichaeans and Valentinians, but also against the Apollinarians, who taught that Jesus Christ took only human flesh, and instead of a soul he had a Divinity 157. Repeatedly St. Sophronius also proves in his works the idea that God the Word became incarnate, as is typical for us, “not through union with a previously existing body, or through union with a previously existing soul,” but that, on the contrary, they only received their being (i.e., soul and body) when God the Word united with them” 158. “I took on this flesh,” says St. elsewhere. Sophronius, not, as it were, already ready and previously existing, which He seemed to have just united with Himself inseparably, but - flesh that received being along with conception, at the very union of the Word with it, so that its very composition and composition coincided and was contemporary with this union” 159. St. Sophronius teaches that the body and soul of Jesus Christ did not for a moment precede the union of God the Word with them, but that (the flesh of Jesus Christ) together (became) both flesh (simply) and together the flesh of God the Word; together with (simply) animate rational flesh, together also with the animate rational flesh of God the Word” 160. St. Sophronius also rejects the idea that the body of Jesus Christ before His incarnation could have belonged to some person like us, and then united with God the Word. The spiritualized body of Jesus Christ, according to him, received its existence from the immaculate blood of St. The Virgin did not exist even before the union of God the Word with him. If the body of Jesus Christ had its own independent and personal existence even before the union of Jesus Christ with it, then it, according to St. Sophronius, could not be accepted into personal union with God the Word 161. Proving that the body of Jesus Christ did not exist before His incarnation, St. Sophronius, as he himself says, means mainly Paul of Samosata and Nestorius. The idea of ​​the pre-existence of the flesh of Christ is also attributed to Nestorius by Leo the Great 162. Indeed, this thought is very closely related to the Nestorian error and can even serve as an initial beginning for it. But the main point of the Nestorian heresy is that Jesus Christ was only a simple man, with whom the Divinity was subsequently united for the holiness of life. According to Nestorius, God lived in Jesus Christ, acted and adapted him to Himself, but without being born with Him, He did not suffer or die, and therefore Jesus Christ was only the God-bearer (Θεόφορος) Immanuel, and not the God-man; from here Ave. The Virgin, according to Nestorius, cannot be called and considered the Mother of God, but only the Mother of Christ. This was the main delusion of Nestorius, and it is against this that St. armed himself with particular force. Sophronius, proving that the two natures in Jesus Christ were united hypostatically and inseparably, forming a single whole. St. Sophronius repeats more than once that one must recognize one Son and Christ, and not two Sons and Christs, as Nestorius teaches. “We glorify in Him (i.e. in Jesus Christ), says St. Sophronius, not two Christs and Sons, of which one, being the Son and Christ by grace, does the miraculous, and the other, being the Son and Christ by grace, does the humble. Although we teach that two images act together, each according to its natural peculiarity; but we say that the One and the same Son and Christ naturally accomplishes the high and the lowly, according to the natural and essential quality of each of His two natures, because these natures..., being clearly cognizable as two, appeared in one hypostasis" 163. The fact that Jesus Christ performed divine and human actions, in the opinion of St. Sophronius, should not serve as a reason for joy for Nestorius, because divine and human actions were performed by the same Jesus Christ. He performed human actions as a man, and divine ones as God. “One and the same Christ and Son,” says St. Sophrony, accomplishes both divine and human. As God, He performed miracles, but as a man, He performed base and human things." 164 Proving against Neastorius that the body of Jesus Christ did not exist before His incarnation, that God the Word united with this body simultaneously with its conception and that the divine and human natures in Jesus Christ always remained inseparable, St. Sophrony thereby confesses the truth that Pr. The Virgin can and should be called the Mother of God, and not the Mother of Christ or the Mother of Man, as Nestorius taught. St. Sophronius, touching upon the Nestorian heresy, always insists that Pr. The Virgin should be called the Mother of God, and he touches on the Nestorian heresy in almost all of his creations. In the conciliar letter, for example, St. Sophronius says that “It Itself (i.e., the Word) who gave birth to the Virgin observes and shows Her in the proper sense and in truth as the Mother of God, even if the extravagant Nestorius was furious and his godless army cried and howled and was again tormented with him” 165. A similar thought of St. Sophrony also expresses this in his homily on the Nativity of Christ. Here he says that the Lord Jesus Christ “out of His extreme mercy came into the world like all people, but as the most obvious proof of His omnipotent Divinity, He preserved the Virgin who gave birth to Him, immaculate, and through this clearly showed the Mother of God in her” 166 . At the same time as Nestorius, St. Sophronius also refutes Eutyches. As is known, Eutyches taught that the divine and human natures were separated before the incarnation, and in the incarnation humanity was absorbed by the Divine, like a drop of honey or bile in the sea, from which he concluded that the body of Christ is not consubstantial with either the Virgin Mary or us, and Christ at birth had only the essence of the Word. In contrast to this teaching of Eutyches, St. Sophronius proves that the divine and human natures in Jesus Christ were united without fusion, preserving all their natural characteristics, so that Jesus Christ was fully human and fully God. He says that “God the Word is God the Word, and not flesh, although He took on flesh, rationally animated, and united it hypostatically by a natural union. This flesh is flesh rationally animated, and not the Word, although it is contemplated as the flesh of God the Word” 167. St. Sophronius also asserts “that the peculiarities of natures and the difference of the combined ones have been preserved, both what is called natural and consists of quality, and that which is conceivable in the essential and consists of quantity” 168 . In his homily for the Presentation, talking about the bringing of Jesus Christ into the church by Joseph and Mary, and seeing in this a clear sign of the human nature of Jesus Christ, St. Sophronius writes: “Where is Eutyches, worthy of damnation (execrandus), who denies the flesh of the Lord - that He was of the same nature with us? For why is it said that “the Word became flesh” (John 1:14), if the nature of the flesh “was not accepted by Him”? And further: “how did it (i.e., the Word) become a man like us, if it did not have the same body and the same soul with us?” Refutation of the heresy of St. Eutyches Sophrony also sees in the words of the Evangelist Luke: “when the days of their purification were fulfilled” (2, 22). Having cited these words, St. Sophronius asks: “What purification, disgusting Eutyches, if the flesh in Christ was not real, if human nature was not united with the Word? Did the divine nature, alien to the body, need any purification? What stain could be found in the Divinity, alien to the flesh? However, He (i.e. Jesus) fulfilled this custom of people, especially in view of the madness and amazing stupidity of the Manichaeans” 169. A similar argument against the heresy of St. Eutyches. Sophrony also leads in the Word on the Baptism of the Savior. “How was (Jesus Christ) baptized,” St. Eutyches asks in this word. Sofrovny, if he was alien to the flesh? or how could He who had no flesh bow under the hand of the Baptist? Touch, continues St. Sophrony, is possible only in relation to bodies, and what is alien to the flesh cannot be the subject of touch” 170. But the main argument against the heresy of Eutyches for St. Sophronia serves that Jesus Christ performed not only divine actions, but also human ones; difference in actions, according to the teachings of St. Sophronia, speaks of the difference in essences, natures, and since Jesus Christ performed actions not only divine, but also human, it clearly follows that Jesus Christ was not only true God, but also true man, and that the divine and human natures, united in Jesus Christ hypostatically, remain unfused. If human nature had been absorbed by the divine, then Jesus Christ would have performed only divine deeds, while He also performed human deeds. But since divine and human works were performed by the same Son and Christ, recognizing that the two natures in Jesus Christ remained unfused, St. Sophronius at the same time admits that they remained inseparable (against Nestorius), constituting one whole. In general, St. Sophronius very energetically refutes both the heresy of Eutyches and the heresy of Nestorius, contrasting these heresies with the Orthodox teaching on the incarnation. “We,” says St. Sophrony, we are not afraid of Nestorius’s section, nor do we respect Eutyches’ changes. Because we do not say, like the empty-headed Nestorius, that the union is relative, and we do not talk idle talk, as if condescension (consists) in the sameness of honor and likeness of will and in the impulse and sameness of desires, and we also do not speak in vain, like the God-rejected Eutyches, about any merger and change of God the Word and rationally animated flesh, or about the union of natures and essences and images from which a wonderful combination took place in Christ. Therefore, following the royal and middle path, we turn away from fusion and hate dissection, but spiritually we honor one unfused and together inseparable union of deity and humanity, which alone can be allowed through a natural and hypostatic union” 171. Having refuted the heresy of Nestorius and Eutyches and explained the Orthodox teaching about the incarnation, St. Sophronius, further, proceeds to refuting monothelitism, the inconsistency of which naturally followed from what was said by St. Sophronius against Nestorius and Eutyches. In fact, if the divine and human natures of Jesus Christ retained all their natural characteristics, as St. Sophrony, then from here it is self-evident that in Jesus Christ we must recognize two wills and two actions 172. Expressing this thought, St. Sophrony writes: “we confess this and that natural action in this and that being and nature, from which an unfused union was created for us in Christ and made the one Christ and Son fully God, Who must also be recognized as fully man.” And also: “their (i.e. Nestorius and Eutyches) we consider as nothing, and we recognize in both natures both actions, that is, essential and natural, as well as mutual, inseparably arising from one and the other being and nature due to the natural and essential quality innate to it, and at the same time the inseparable and unfused interaction of one and the other being that accompanies it" 173 . In confirmation of the idea that two actions must be recognized in Jesus Christ, St. Sophrony lists in some detail both the divine actions of Jesus Christ and the human ones, and he allows in Jesus Christ this kind of action that occupied, as it were, some middle position, containing both something divine and something human, and in relation to which he uses the very term that the Monothelites used to express their error, namely the term “divinely Θεανδρίχός ) action" 174. But with this term St. Sophronius, of course, does not at all connect the meaning that the Monothelites gave him, who with this term expressed the idea that in Jesus Christ one must recognize one will and one action. St. Sophronius uses this term because it well denotes those average actions that he allowed in Jesus Christ. About these very average actions of St. Sophronius expresses himself in this way: “we believe that all sayings are His (i.e. Christ), although some of them are befitting of God, and others are again befitting of man, and others occupy some kind of middle position, as having in themselves both befitting of God and human. We say that the same power belongs to the so-called common and godly action, which in its essence is not identical, but heterogeneous and different, as the divinely spoken Dionysius, raptured from the Areopagus by the divine Paul, called it, since it contains within itself both what is fitting for God and what is human and, through a very skillful and complex expression, fully designates every action of both beings and natures” 175. This is the teaching of St. Sophronia on the Incarnation. About other truths of the Christian faith of St. Sophronius does not expand, but is limited only to pointing out these truths. Somewhat more holy. Sophrony speaks of the end of the present world, the resurrection of the dead and the Last Judgment. To review the teachings of St. Sophrony we move on to these truths of the Christian faith. VI. The end of the century, the resurrection of the dead and the Last Judgment St. Sophronius depicts the end of the century in accordance with the narration of this in Holy Scripture (Matthew 24). He says that when the end of the world comes, the heavens will shake and the earth will be shaken in its foundations. The elements will separate, the sun will turn black and the moon will turn to blood, the strong winds will cause the stars to fall from the sky and unripe fruits from the fig trees. Demons and the underworld will be seized with horror, all elements will be dissolved like wax from the face of fire and will be thrown into the abysses of the earth, the image of this world will pass away and a righteous and formidable Judge will appear in the light, surrounded by angels and saints. From the sound of the Archangel trumpet, all the dead will rise, the seas and rivers will throw out the dead they contained, and those who remain alive will immediately die and change 176. Speaking about the resurrection of the dead, St. Sophronius, by the way, condemns Origen and his followers, who, according to him, “insanely reject the resurrection of these bodies with which we are now clothed, and stupidly babble a lot of things that are worthy of their wicked fables.” From these words of St. Sophronius, and especially from the further course of speech, it is clear that he does not mean some peculiarity of Origen in the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, but attributes to him a complete denial of the resurrection of the dead. But Origen's writings do not give any reason to attribute to him the denial of the resurrection of the dead. On the contrary, in the writings of Origen we find direct and clear indications that he allowed the resurrection of the dead and even in the very bodies that we now have, 177 although, however, he also had his own original view of the teaching of Scripture about the resurrection of bodies. Namely, he thought that the resurrected bodies would not be composed of coarse particles, since, in his opinion, the coarseness and corruption of the body would make an eternity of bliss or torment impossible 178 . In general, it can be admitted that Origen’s teaching on the resurrection of the dead does not entirely agree with the teaching on this subject of the Church, but there is absolutely no reason to assert that Origen completely rejected the resurrection of the dead. About Origen and his followers St. Sophrony also says that they “reject the planting of paradise, do not want (to admit) that Adam was created in the flesh, condemn the formation of Eve from him, deny the voice of the serpent, do not allow the harmonious distribution of heavenly bodies to be established by God in this way, but fantasize that it occurred as a result of the initial condemnation and transformation..., they want there to be an end to punishment, they admit complete damage to everything sensible, they talk about the restoration of all intelligent beings: angels, people, demons, and again merge their different properties into a mythical singularity. (They say) that Christ is no different from us; They teach about Him mockingly, and not as we piously preach about Him...” As is known, Origen, due to his excessive predilection for the allegorical interpretation of Holy Scripture, actually made mistakes in explaining some issues of Christian dogma. But it would be unfair to attribute all the above errors to Origen. Origen, for example, did err in the doctrine of the creation of the material world, which, according to him, appeared as a result of the fall of spirits, as well as in the doctrine of the repentance of demons, but he did not at all allow for “complete damage to everything sensible.” On the contrary, he clearly taught that in our hearts there are also good inclinations that lie dormant for a long time, but then awaken and, moreover, as if by themselves, unexpectedly (in cant. 11.21). In no case can it be attributed to Origen that he taught about Jesus Christ “mockingly” and said that He is no different from us. It is known that Origen was distinguished by deep piety and did not at all blaspheme the objects of faith; if he sometimes made some errors in his teaching about one or another subject of faith, he did not present these errors as undoubted truth and always treated the teachings of the Church with respect. In general, St. Sophronius, apparently, was not at all a fan of Origen and fully shared the incorrect view of Origen that had developed by his time. St. Sophronius not only condemns Origen for his actual errors, but also attributes to him many things that are not contained in Origen’s works. He calls Origen and his followers even downright insane and says that they (the unfortunate ones) from the devilish and wicked treasure of their hearts extract thousands of absurdities, killing with them the souls of people for whom Christ deigned to die and for whose atonement He shed His divine blood 179 . Such censure of a husband who was distinguished not only by extraordinary learning, but also by deep piety, can be explained, on the one hand, by the jealousy of St. Sophrony to the purity of the Orthodox faith, threatened in his time by various dangers from numerous heresies, and on the other hand, by a great decline in the authority of Origen in the seventh century, which in turn occurred due to the lack of religious and philosophical education, one of the representatives of which was Origen. Picture of the Last Judgment of St. Sophronius depicts the words of the Gospel 180, so we will limit ourselves here only to the remark that St. Sophronius, referring to Origen and his followers, insists with particular force on the eternity of torment in the future life. “We,” says St. Sophronius, having been drunk with the various milk of the right, immaculate and reasonable faith and having tasted the good word of God, rejecting all their dark teachings and being free from all their incoherent idle talk (i.e. Origen and his followers)... we believe that after this life that other life will continue forever, and we also accept endless punishment” 181. From the review we have presented of the theological thoughts of St. It is clear from Sophrony that he knew and understood Christian dogmas as well as possible, and presented them in precise and definite expressions. Therefore, it is difficult to agree with the opinion of Photius that St. Sophronius did not have a solid knowledge of divine dogmas 182; creations of St. Sophronius does not justify such a view, and Photius himself does not confirm his words in any way. On the contrary, it seems to us that St. Sophrony reveals not only a solid knowledge of Christian dogmas, but also a deep understanding of them. It is known that St. Sophronius was one of the first to understand the essence of the Monothelite error, despite the fact that at first it was hidden behind dark and vague expressions, apparently even in agreement with the spirit of Christian doctrine 183 . The judgments of St. Sophronius about the Monothelite heresy are so weighty and thorough that the sixth ecumenical council not only approved them, but also accepted them as the basis for its dogmatic definitions. It should be noted, however, that the polemic of St. Sophronia against monothelites is not complete. Thus, arguing with them on the issue of two actions in Jesus Christ, St. Sophrony almost does not talk about two wills at all. Perhaps this should be explained by the fact that the doctrine of two wills follows naturally from the doctrine of two actions. II. Saint Sophronius as a preacher As a preacher, St. Sophronius belongs to that period of time, which in the history of preaching is known as Byzantine (529–1453). The peculiarities of this period in the nature and direction of preaching practice should naturally have been reflected in the nature of the oratorical activity of St. Sophronia; therefore, before moving on to the analysis and characterization of the oratorical works of St. Sophronia, we consider it necessary to say a few words about the state of preaching in the Byzantine period and its features. However, little can be said about the state of preaching in the Byzantine period, since information about this is scanty and fragmentary. Very few sermons from this period have been published and even fewer have been studied. What is certain is that the preaching did not stop during this period; The church, now, as always, was zealously concerned about the development and maintenance of preaching. So the fifth-sixth ecumenical council or Trullian (692) 19 by its rule commands the bishops to teach the people and clergy every day. But this rule also contains something characteristic; namely, by commanding to teach, it requires presbyters and bishops to explain the word of God as the ancient fathers explained it. With this decree, the council, of course, did not at all intend to restrict independence in preaching activities, but issued this decree due to the lack of experienced original preachers. Indeed, at this time we notice a significant decline in preaching activity. The sermon wants to shine only through artificiality, external gloss and the predominance of rhetoric. But with such a general character, the sermon in its content and techniques diversifies and takes on the following three directions: 1) rhetorical-panegyric, 2) moral-educational and 3) social-historical. St. Sophronius, as an orator, undoubtedly belongs to the first direction, i.e. to rhetorical-panegyric, and can serve as a very prominent representative of it. The distinctive features of sermons of this direction are external artificiality, dramatic techniques and lyrical outpourings of feeling, reminiscent of the tone of church hymns. Sometimes in sermons of this trend one encounters unverified legends and quotations from ancient classical works, for example, verses from Homer and various mythological tales. It must be said, however, that St. Sophrony does not share all the shortcomings of the rhetorical-panegyric direction and can be considered a representative of this direction in the best sense of the word. I. The general nature of the sermons of St. Sophronia St. Sophronius, we said, serves as a representative of the rhetorical-panegyric direction of preaching. Rhetoric in the sermons of St. Sophronia is expressed primarily by an abundance of eloquent words, not so much revealing and clarifying certain truths as depicting their sublimity and greatness. An excellent example of such a manifestation of rhetoric in the sermons of St. Sophronius can serve as an excerpt from the words of St. Sophronia on Epiphany 184. Here is this passage: “The supernatural Trinity (ύπερούσιος), truly good, truly Divine, omnipotent, all-seeing, indivisible, immense, the culprit of the nature of rational beings, innate (έμφυτος) goodness, unapproachable light, enlightening every person coming into the world: enlighten me too Thy unworthy servant, enlighten my mental eyes, so that I too may dare to glorify Your immeasurable goodness and power. May my prayer be heard for the sake of the coming people and may my sins not prevent the Holy Spirit from descending here. Let me also cry out to you without condemnation: we praise you, all-good, all-powerful, eternal king, we praise you, the Creator and Author of the world. We praise You, born from a Father without a mother and from a mother without a Father. For on the previous holiday we saw You as a baby, 185 and now we see You as a mature man. Today the festive time has come for us, the face (χόρος) of the saints gathers with us and the angels celebrate together with people: for today the grace of the Holy Spirit descends on the waters in the form of a dove. Today the never-setting sun rises and the world is illuminated by the light of the Lord. Today the moon shines with clear rays on the world and light-like (φωτοειδεις) stars illuminate the earth with the brilliance of (strong) light. Today the clouds are raining justice on humanity. Today the Uncreated voluntarily bends under the hand of his own creature. Today the Prophet and Forerunner approaches the Lord and embraces fear, seeing the Lord, who descended (to earth) for your sake. Today, the waters of the Jordan are transformed into medicine by the presence of the Lord. Today, all nature is watered by mysterious waves. Today the crimes of mortals are washed by the wave of the Jordan. Today paradise opens for people and the sun of truth illuminates us. Today we are freed from ancient sorrow and, as the new Israel, we have achieved salvation. Today we, taken out of darkness, have been illuminated by divine light. Today, with the appearance of the Lord, the darkness of the world has been dispersed. Today every creation is illuminated from above. Today's error is resolved (stopped) and the coming of the Lord opens the way to salvation. Today heaven and earth triumph, heaven communicates with earth. Today the holy and loud (μεγαλοφονος) council of the faithful rejoices. Today the Lord comes to the Baptist to lift up the entire human race. Today the Lord bends down before His own slave to free us from the yoke of slavery. Today land and sea share the joy of the world, and the world is filled with joy. The waters saw you, Lord, they saw you and were afraid. Jordan turned back, seeing the fire of the Divine bodily descending on you. Jordan turned back, seeing the Holy Spirit descending on you in the form of a dove and flying around you. Jordan turned back, seeing that the invisible Lord had become visible, that the Creator had become incarnate and appeared in the form of a servant. The Jordan turned back and the mountains jumped when they saw the Lord. The clouds uttered a voice, marveling that He who is light from light, true God from true God, had come (in the flesh). Today we contemplate the Lord's feast on the Jordan, the transmutation of death, the destruction of error, the captivity of hell, we see the Lord coming to the Jordan and giving the world the font of salvation. Therefore, I, Your sinful and unworthy servant, narrating the greatness of Your miracles, cry out to You in contrition” 186, etc.... This is where the passage ends. As we see, this entire rather large passage is only an image of the grandeur and solemnity of the celebrated event, and does not at all contain a positive disclosure of any moralizing or dogmatic truth. Another word of St. is distinguished by the same sublime and rhetorical character. Sophrony on the Epiphany, which has come down to us intact. “Again the light appears and again I am illuminated (so begins St. Sophrony is his own word). The shine shone again and I was illuminated again. The joyful face of things has smiled again, and I am again filled with joy. Everything is light and extremely shining. Everything gives off an extraordinary brilliance, revealing the glory of God. The powers of heaven rejoice, the earth rejoices with heaven, celebrating our illumination. Let the mountains leap like rams, and let the hills leap, and let movements of this kind fill people with joy. Let the waters of the sea run and serve as an image of sin, spread wide and like the sea. The Jordan turned back for my sake, because as a result of my spiritual birth from water I became innocent, like a child, and free from all filth. May they see the birth of salvation, may they see the light that has shone upon me, may they see slavery overthrown, may they perceive the brilliance of my purity, may they see the birth that took place not from carnal lust, but from God. Carnal birth is earthly, but this is heavenly... The Lord comes to the slave, wanting to make me a slave free, the King bends down before the warrior, wanting to elevate me to His Heavenly Kingdom. He appears to the Forerunner, Who by His nature is indescribable, and sends the Forerunner to precede Him, to proclaim His saving coming and to announce His divine appearance. The Source of life comes to the Jordan and to the waves of the Jordan and pours out a sea of ​​immortality; comes to the Jordan and demands baptism and, as it were, cleansing, He who is pure from all filth and Himself baptizes with the Spirit” 187, etc. From the above excerpts it is clear that the memory of the coming of the Lord to the Jordan and the baptism by John aroused in the preacher a strong feeling of reverence, which in turn was manifested by abundant rhetoric. All other sermons of St. are distinguished by the same rhetorical character. Sophrony, especially sermons on major holidays, for example. at Christmas, at the Annunciation. In the word on the Annunciation there are somewhat fewer rhetorical tirades than in other poems, but even here there are quite a few of them. Here, for example, is one of these tirades: “I, the least, act as the proclaimer of these truths (of course, the gospel of Arch. Gabriel the Pr. Virgin) to you alone, sons of faith and piety 188, I appeal with a strong voice, I proclaim and say: good news, good news, good news! the good news of our Savior, the good news of God who became incarnate for us, the good news of the divine coming to us, the good news of God who took on human nature for us, the good news of God’s conception without a seed, the good news of God carried in the virgin’s womb, the good news of God united with the flesh without change, the good news by the power of which we, the miserable ones, rise, We are deified, we become gods by grace. I am no longer afraid of destruction, I am no longer afraid of passions, I am no longer afraid of the criminal devil, I am no longer afraid of his dark ambushes, I am no longer horrified by his open tyranny; but we are all seen as gods, we are all counted among the heavenly countenance, we are all made citizens of the heavenly city of Jerusalem, for there is our stay, there we will receive an inheritance and an indescribable dwelling place” 189. Then the speaker continues his speech in the same way. We took all the above excerpts almost by luck and could have cited many other similar excerpts; however, we will stop here, since our thought is fully confirmed by the excerpts that have already been made. Rhetoric in the sermons of St. Sophronia also manifests itself in the form of many exclamations and frequently repeated questions. Thus, in a word of praise to the martyrs Cyrus and John, St. Sophronius exclaims: “Oh, the duo of saints, through which God is the object of wonder, for God is marvelous in His saints! O two martyrs through whom the world rejoices! O two righteous people, through whom the world is renewed! O duo of saints, through whom faith is established! O blessed two, through whom the pious are glorified! O two zealots, through whom delusion is destroyed! O two strong ones, through which the devil is defeated! O two armed men, through whom demons are punished! O duo of pious ones, through which idols are cast into the abyss!” 190, etc. It appears a lot in the sermons of St. Sophrony and questions, but the questions do not follow one another, like the exclamations in the above excerpt, but are scattered throughout the sermons, giving them variety and liveliness. However, it is sometimes suggested in the sermons of St. Sophronia asked three or four questions together, for example: “God abides on earth and who will not ascend to heaven? God, born of the Virgin, moves among men, and who today will not become divine? Who, coming closer to Him, will not be struck by the holiness of virginity and will not be encouraged to abstinence? And again: “What could be more remarkable for a reverent soul than the birth of the great and good God? What could be more worthy of celebration? What could be more joyful than the resurrection of the Lord from the dead? What is more worthy of glorification? 191. These are the main forms of manifestation of rhetoric in the sermons of St. Sophronia. – But along with rhetoric in the sermons of St. Sophrony also notices the predominance of panegyricism. St. Sophrony in his sermons not only depicts the greatness of the remembered events, but also glorifies and magnifies these events, and he often expresses his glorification in the form of an akathist, with the appeal “Rejoice.” This way of expressing laudatory thoughts must be explained by the influence of the then recently appeared and very popular akathist to the Mother of God, written by George of Pisidia, a contemporary of St. Sophronia 192. In the word for the Annunciation of St. Sophrony glorifies Pr. Virgo: “Rejoice, birth of heavenly joy! Hail, mother of the highest joy! Rejoice, fatherland of saving joy! Rejoice, cause of immortal joy! Rejoice, mysterious haven of indescribable joy! Rejoice, field of eternal joy! Rejoice, most blessed source of inexhaustible joy! Rejoice, God-bearing receptacle of eternal joy! Rejoice, tree green with life-giving joy! Rejoice, unbrided Mother of God (άνύμφευτος)! Rejoice, ever-virgin Virgin! Rejoice, the most wondrous sight of all” 193. In the word for the week of the Worship of the Cross we find a similar glorification of St. Cross. In this word of St. Sophronius calls on believers to glorify St. The cross with these words: “Rejoice, valuable cross, on which the Son of God Himself and the Word stood with outstretched hands and reconciled us with the Father! Rejoice, cross, through the saving mediation of which our feelings are cleansed from all filth! Rejoice, cross, which brought untold joy to our fathers by nailing it to you! Rejoice, cross, who dulled the flame of the sword, which through you gave access (to paradise) to the prudent thief! Rejoice, cross, in possession of which we, a faithful and holy people, offer you with worship to Christ and God, who deigned to be nailed to you” 194. In the laudatory speech of St. Martyrs Cyrus and John St. Sophronius calls out: “Rejoice, holy duo, present before God and bestowing blessings on people! Rejoice, revered duo, residing in heaven and never leaving earth! Rejoice, holy duo, rejoicing with the angels and looking at people” 195, etc. Next to this form of glorification, long laudatory monologues can be placed, put into the mouths of the persons appearing in the sermon. For example, in the word for the Annunciation, the Archangel Gabriel addresses the following speech to the Mother of God: “You have adorned the nature of people and surpassed the ranks of angels. You darken the shining Archangels with Your light. You sit above the Thrones. You surpass the height of the Dominions. You are more powerful than the Beginnings and Forces. You are superior to the many-eyed Cherubim and the six-winged Seraphim. You surpass every creature in Your purity, which is why you were worthy to conceive and give birth to the Creator of every creature, to become the Mother of God” 196, etc. and again: “in truth, “blessed are You among women,” because through You the blessing of the Father shone for people and freed them from the ancient curse. In truth, “blessed are You among women,” because through You Your ancestors find salvation, since You give birth to the Savior, Who will prepare divine salvation for them. In truth, “Blessed are You among women,” because without seed You conceived a fruit 197 that spreads blessing throughout the entire earth and frees it from curse. In truth, “blessed are you among women,” because, being a woman by nature, you nevertheless became the Mother of God” 198, etc. Similar laudatory tirades in the sermons of St. Sophronia is very common. There are even entire sermons that from beginning to end represent, as it were, one solemn hymn to the remembered event, such as, for example, sermons on the Nativity of Christ, on the baptism of the Savior, etc. The main tone of the sermons of St. Sophronia is solemn and sublime, which is explained by the rhetorical and panegyric direction of these sermons. This solemn tone in the sermons of St. Sophronia is maintained very strictly. It does not disappear even when the preacher speaks about the plight of Palestine, which was endangered by Muslims, as, for example, in the word for the Nativity of Christ and the Epiphany. The only difference is that in such cases the solemn tone takes on a sad imprint and is dissolved by a somewhat quiet sadness. II. Distinctive features of the sermons of St. Sophronia Having determined the general nature and direction of the sermons of St. Sophronius, we consider it necessary to point out those features of these sermons that no longer follow from the general direction that St. Sophrony, as an orator, and from his individual mood, the sermons of St. are distinguished. Sophronia from other sermons of the same direction. The distinctive features of the sermons of St. Sophrony must be attributed first of all to piety, which in them very noticeably makes itself felt everywhere, declaring itself with the sincerity of warm speech, and sometimes with the religious animation of the speaker. The sincerity and religious animation of the speaker are especially noticeable in the Easter word to the Archangels and other heavenly powers. This word, strictly speaking, does not have the character of words of praise. It is rather a prayerful cry of the saint for the relief of the burdens of life, the correction of shortcomings, and most importantly for justification at the terrible and righteous judgment, about which the saint. Sophrony speaks in some detail, and paints a very vivid picture of him. With its sincerity and genuine contrition for sins, this word makes a very strong impression on the reader. It very often turns into a warm prayer to the angels, archangels and the Savior Himself, and the speaker seems to forget about his listeners and asks the angels and the Savior for benefits only for himself and his family and relatives. To the Archangel Michael St. Sophrony makes the following prayer: “Oh, Most Holy Michael, enlighten the inner eyes of my soul, strengthen my heart, shaken by the sorrows of this life; lift my thought, which gravitates towards the earth, to heavenly prudence; strengthen your fallen hands in the fight against ordinary enemies; strengthen your weakened legs so that they do not leave the path leading to heaven; lighten the burden of my sins and heal the stinking wounds of lust; lighten also the other burdens of my labors and efforts. And again, in deed and in the name of Michael, I ask you and, as far as I can, I beg that when you take me out of the circle of this life, you will be peaceful and cheerful, so that, taking me from the dark places of the underworld and hiding me under the honorable cover of your wings, you will lead me to the places of the amazing tabernacle” 199. St. makes a similar prayer. Sophronius and to the Archangel Gabriel, in which he among other things calls out: “Again and again, O Gabriel, giver of joy, I ask and beseech you: graciously visit me, oppressed by sorrow, fill my spirit with divine power... join me through your mediation to the face of the saints and place me safe in places abounding in all blessings”" 200. But especially touching is the prayer of St. Sophronia to all angels. In it, he asks the angels that when they come for his soul, they will be merciful and condescending towards him. He begged them to lift with their right hand the scales that they were laden with evil deeds, and that instead of the good deeds that one is allowed to hope for, they would offer the mercy of a benevolent God. St. Sophrony also asks the angels to intercede so that the disasters and illnesses he suffered in life would be accepted in place of eternal torment, and that on the day of judgment they would be his intercessors and make him, along with all those around him, whose names the Lord knows, a participant in eternal joy. In prayer to the Savior St. Sophrony asks himself and his family to be justified at the Last Judgment. All these prayers breathe a rare sincerity and warmth of feeling, and when reading the words in the original, a rather strong impression is obtained. In addition to piety and sincerity, in the sermons of St. Sophrony also notices extreme zeal for the purity of the Orthodox faith. Jealousy of St. Sophronia for the purity of the Orthodox faith is manifested in the fact that in almost every word he refutes the Nestorians and Eutychians and defends the Orthodox teaching about the incarnation of the Son of God. As has been noted before, the Nestorians and Eutychians during St. Sophronius were still quite strong, so St. Sophronius, every time he speaks about the person of Jesus Christ, certainly reveals the teaching perverted by the above-mentioned heretics about the relationship of two natures in Jesus Christ. So, for example, in the word on St. Apostles Peter and Paul St. Sophrony, as can be seen from the content of this word, did not at all mean to reveal the Orthodox teaching about the dogma of the incarnation, and meanwhile, speaking about the election of the apostles by Jesus Christ, he immediately briefly outlines the Orthodox teaching about the relationship of two natures in Jesus Christ. Jealousy of St. Sophronia for the purity of the Orthodox faith is also manifested by a strict attitude towards heretics. In his sermons St. Sophronius more than once invites believers to expel from their midst those (people) who distort this or that dogma. Thus, in the homily on the Annunciation he says: “Let the Sabellians, Marcellians, Arians, Eunomians, Eudoxians, Asterians and all the like, who follow wickedness and distort the dogmas of the economy, be expelled from our assembly; and also (may they be expelled) those who are able to find the truth are the Petrians, the Severians and every thousand-tongued and thousand-tongued heresy of the Abethalites” 201. St. makes a similar exhortation. Sophrony to his listeners and in the word for the Presentation 202. But St. Sophronius has an unfavorable attitude not only towards heretics, but also towards all representatives of pagan learning in general. Thus, he calls on believers to expel Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, and others from their congregations along with the heretics. These philosophers, according to St. Sophronia, they themselves do not know what they are saying, and they are defeated by the fishing rod (i.e., the teaching of the apostles" 203. Such dislike for pagan philosophers and their followers was inspired by St. Sophrony with the awareness of the high advantages of Christian teaching over all the inventions of the human mind. III. Review of the contents of Saint Sophronius' sermons The content of the sermons of St. Sophronia embraces dogmatic and moral truths. But, strictly speaking, the range of dogmatic and moral truths in the sermons of St. Sophronia is far from extensive. In his sermons St. Sophronius reveals only the dogma of the Incarnation, as the one most distorted in his time by heretics, and in his word on the Annunciation he also touches on the dogma of the Trinity. By revealing other dogmas in his sermons, St. Sophrony is not engaged. But since the teaching of St. Sophronius on the dogma of the incarnation was outlined earlier, but here we will review only the moral teaching in the sermons of St. Sophronia, who is also not rich. St. Sophrony in his sermons for the most part does not engage in detailed development of any moral truth, but limits himself only to pointing out certain moral truths and calling for their implementation in life and, in general, for correction and repentance. St. Sophronius does not always even indicate exactly what vices he demands correction from his listeners. In his sermons there is no living depiction of vices from which one could form an idea of ​​the state of morals of his contemporary society. From the sermons of St. Sophrony, one can only conclude that his contemporary society was not distinguished by particularly pure morals, since, calling his listeners to correction, St. Sophronius, by the way, says that the disasters that overtook Palestine are a consequence of God’s wrath for their sins. For example, in his homily for the Baptism of the Savior, he asks: “Where do wars and frequent attacks by barbarians come from? Why are crowds of Saracens attacking us? Why does human blood constantly flow and bodies (of people) become food for kites? Why is the cross of Christ reviled? Why is Christ Himself, who has given us real triumph, blasphemed by the pagans, as a result of which He calls out to us: for your sake my name is blasphemed by the pagans (Isa. 52:5)? - and the answer to all these questions is St. Sophrony finds in the vicious life of people why he calls everyone to correction, promising for this the Kingdom of Heaven and liberation from earthly disasters 204. We find a similar view of the cause of the disasters that befell Palestine and the call to repentance in the word for the Nativity of Christ 205. Calling his listeners to correction, St. Sophrony sometimes points out the virtues with which they should adorn themselves. So, in the word for the Presentation of St. Sophrony demands from his listeners, in order to meet the Lord with dignity, moderation, purity, innocence, forgetfulness of injustices, meekness of morals, benevolence, love for neighbors and mercy 206. But St. Sophrony only points out these virtues and invites them to their implementation, and does not engage in a more or less detailed disclosure of moral teaching. St. spreads somewhat. Sophrony only talks about the following moralizing topics, namely: the need to combine good deeds with faith, mutual love and humility, as well as the meaning and benefits of fasting. – About the need to combine the good deeds of St. with faith. Sophronius speaks in a word on the Nativity of Christ. In this word of St. Sophronius, having pointed out that the sword of the Saracens does not allow the usual journey to Bethlehem and that it guards Bethlehem like the sword of the archangel that guarded paradise after Adam was expelled from it, calls his listeners to repentance and among other things says that he greatly fears for them, lest they should labor in vain, observing faith alone without good works. St. Sophronius teaches that faith alone without good works cannot save, and reinforces his words with a reference to the Apostle James (2, 17). He. Sophrony asks: “how can we maintain the right course if we do not try to decorate our faith with good deeds, if we do not arm our souls with the light wings of acts of mercy” 207 . He demands from his listeners that they adorn themselves with good deeds to the same extent as they are adorned with faith, and the need to combine good deeds with faith is confirmed by the words of the Lord, who said: “Not everyone says to Me, Lord. Lord, he will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but do the will of My Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:55), and again: “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments (John. 14 12); You are naturally my friends, and whatever you do, I command as much” (John 15:14). Under this condition, i.e. if good deeds are combined with faith, St. Sophronius promises his listeners liberation from the sword of the Saracens and the happiness of contemplating divine Bethlehem close and at the very place of the birth of the Lord to sing this magnificent song: “glory to God on high and on earth peace, good will towards men” 208. Teaching about love and mercy of St. Sophrony reveals in the word on the ap. Peter and Paul. In this word of St. Sophronius first of all points out that St. The apostles Peter and Paul maintained complete mutual love among themselves and were united by inextricable friendship, which is why their memory is celebrated on the same day. Having shown his listeners a worthy example to follow in the mutual love of the apostles, and noticing that St. the apostles encourage mutual love not only by their example, but also by their teaching, St. Sophronius then cites this very teaching. Namely, he points out that, according to the teachings of St. Paul, love is above all gifts, that it does not wish harm to others, does not rejoice in unrighteousness (1 Cor. 13:4) and unites people into one body and one spirit, confirming them in the hope of calling and showing them as participants in eternal life. St. Sophronius cites in authentic words the teaching about love and St. Peter (1 Peter, 1, 22), and then denounces his listeners for doing things contrary to the instructions of the apostles, that they not only do not love each other, but even hate each other as enemies, while enmity and hatred are the products of the evil spirit. “We are sick with a serious disease of hatred,” says St. Sophrony, and are obsessed with mutual enmity, while it is the source of all evil.” After this St. Sophrony calls on his listeners to follow the example and teaching of the celebrated apostles, to cast aside enmity and be imbued with mutual love in order to become their true disciples and inherit heavenly blessings with them 209. In the word on the apostles Peter and Paul, St. Sophronius also calls his listeners to the virtue of humility, an example of which he points to in these same apostles. The Humility of the Apostles Peter and Paul St. Sophronius sees that they took fourth place after the Nativity of Christ, and lost third to the first martyr Stephen 210. St. Sophronius says that the greatness of martyrdom is incomparably lower than the greatness of the apostleship and that the apostles Peter and Paul gave up third place to the first martyr Stephen, and took fourth place for themselves, fulfilling the commandment of the Savior, who said: “Whoever wants to be great among you must be the servant of all; and whoever wants to be first among you must be a slave to all." 211 Having pointed out an example of humility in the apostles, St. Sophronius then calls on his listeners to imitate this example and promises eternal and endless benefits for this. About the benefits and significance of fasting by St. Sophronius discusses in his homily for the week of the Worship of the Cross. In this word of St. Sophronius says that “fasting, when observed continuously and with great care, suppresses and pacifies, as if with some kind of bridle, any immoderate lust of the flesh, and thereby stops the harm to which it is exposed through immoderate pleasure, and stops it with the goal that the flesh, left to the mercy of its own lusts and voluptuousness, would not be carried away through this and sank into the abyss.” destruction and spirit, for, according to the ap. Paul, the flesh and the spirit are in constant struggle with each other: “the flesh lusts after the spirit; and the spirit is against the flesh, and these resist one another” (Gal. 5:17). To pacify this battle, says St. Sophrony, the Lord, offers us this saving fast of Pentecost, offers us so that during it we can accomplish the feat valiantly set before us, overcome the temptations of the spirits of malice surrounding us, and by the purity of life, having destroyed sinful ulcers in the soul, we are honored to worthily worship the holy resurrection, and thus those who have been purified have already seen the glory of the most pure God, and have stood with Him for a new life and with Him became co-glorified" 212. St. Sophrony, in his sermons, repeats and develops in more or less detail only the indicated moral truths, and does not stop at revealing other moral topics. St. Sophronius in his sermons is not so much concerned with revealing some moral truths as with depicting the greatness of the subject of the sermon and glorifying it. To demonstrate the nature of sermons with moral content, we will analyze his word on the Exaltation of the Honorable Cross and on the Resurrection (on the day of the renovation of the church). This word begins with these words: “The holiday and triumph of the Cross has come, who will not jump? Announcement of the Resurrection, who will not rejoice?” Then St. Sophrony, explaining the reason for the joy to which he calls, points to the blessings that were brought to the world by St. Cross and Resurrection. Namely, he says that the cross, through Him crucified on it, tore up the handwriting that was inscribed on our sinners, freed us from the bonds of sin and filled us with all joy. – And the Resurrection destroyed the destruction of death, dispersed the darkness of the underworld, called the dead from their graves, wiped away tears from every face and endowed everyone with grace. At the same time, St. Sophrony says that the fullness of the benefits brought by the Resurrection extends exclusively to everyone, since the Lord does not have the habit of distributing His benefits only to a few - He has no partiality. Next, St. Sophrony, making a kind of moral application from all that has been said, cries out: “The memory of the Cross is being perfected, which of the people will not crucify himself?.. Renewal of the Resurrection, which of the people will not renew himself? The cross rises to a height, and who will not mysteriously rise from the ground? for where the liberator ascends, the liberated one must ascend there... Today the Resurrection appears, continues the saint. Sophronius, illuminating and decorating everything with his coming, and tomorrow the Cross will appear... The Resurrection (appears), striking death, and the Cross (appears), scattering crowds of demons; The Resurrection (appears), announcing that through it death has been destroyed, and the Cross (appears), announcing that through it every insolence of demons and every disastrous attempt to damage souls has been defeated.” Then St. Sophrony solves the question of why it was established by the ancestors to celebrate the Resurrection before the Cross, whereas in the beginning it was completely different, i.e. St. The Cross was celebrated before the Resurrection 213. St. Sophronius finds it difficult to definitively resolve this issue, but believes that such a change was made by the ancestors for the purpose that the believers, having celebrated the Resurrection, the beginning of a new life, and then seeing the Exaltation of the Honorable Cross, a faithful companion to the guides both at sea and on land, would thereby be even more established in the new life. Moving after this to the depiction of the greatness of the remembered events, St. Sophronius cries out: “What could be more sublime than these blessed celebrations? What could be holier than these meetings, these common holidays? How can we not be filled with joy and rejoice when we celebrate these holidays? The glory of the Resurrection and the radiant veneration of the Cross are the trophies of our salvation.” Further St. Sophronius again points to those benefits that were delivered to the world by the Cross and Resurrection (of Christ), and invites his listeners to celebrate the Cross and Resurrection not in feasting and drunkenness, not in lust and debauchery, not in quarrels and envy (Rom. 13:13), but to celebrate as required by the objects of the holiday, i.e. The Cross and Resurrection, and the Cross and Resurrection require that those who venerate them celebrate them in a way that is beneficial and soul-saving for themselves. The speaker also calls on his listeners to ensure that, while celebrating the Resurrection and the Cross, they love the new life and crucify their passions, so that they can cry out along with the Apostle: I have been crucified with Christ, I live not for this purpose, but Christ lives in me (Gal. 2:19). In conclusion, St. Sophronius demands from his listeners to fulfill everything that they heard from him, promising for this the Kingdom of Heaven and eternal life. – As we see, the content of this word does not represent a coherent and comprehensive development of any moral truth. The preacher depicts in it mainly the greatness of the events of the holiday, and speaks about some of the virtues to which he calls his listeners only in the form of brief moral applications. Other sermons of a moral nature are distinguished by the same character, as a result of which their content or the moral teaching of St. Sophronia is impossible. In general, the range of moralizing topics in the sermons of St. Sophronia (we repeat) is far from extensive; moral teaching is not a predominant element - for example, the word on the Annunciation, which is very extensive in scope, does not contain almost any moral teaching. It is almost entirely filled with the presentation of a long dialogue between Pr. Virgin and the Archangel Gabriel who appeared to Her with the gospel. Even the conclusion of this word contains only an indication of the greatness and importance of the message conveyed by the preacher, and not a call to some virtues, as St. usually ends his sermons. Sophrony. – St.’s sermons are not rich. Sophrony and dogmatic content: in them, as we said, only the dogma of the incarnation is revealed. But in this case, one wonders what constitutes the content of the sermons of St. Sophronia? (although these sermons are few, only twelve (with those that have come down to us in fragments), but they are quite extensive in scope). To this we answer that the sermons of St. Sophronia is filled mainly with rhetorical and panegyric tirades, depictions of the greatness of the subjects of sermons and glorification of them, and sometimes prayerful appeals to them. This nature of the content of the sermons of St. Sophronia is explained by their rhetorical-panegyric direction. IV. Sermons of a panegyric nature Words of a panegyric nature include: the word of St. John the Baptist, St. martyrs Cyrus and John and St. Angels and Archangels. The last word, however, does not have the character of words of praise, although the title refers it to such words. In it, the preacher addresses separately each of the nine ranks of angels and, having indicated the characteristics of each rank based on its name, asks for certain benefits according to these characteristics; for example, to the Dominions (rank of angels) of St. Sophronius speaks with the following words: “O revered Dominions, who received this name because through your office you express Divine authority and take part in heavenly blessings, let me control those disorders of the soul that corrupt thought, and overcome, to the last breath of life, the devil’s ambushes that so greatly confuse my spirit.” The preacher addresses the same appeals and petitions to all other orders of angels and separately to Archangel Michael and Gabriel, and ends his word with a prayer to the Savior Himself. Obviously, this word, in its content, cannot be classified as words of a commendable nature, since it is not praise that predominates, but prayer. The praiseworthy word of St. is distinguished by a different character. John the Baptist and St. martyrs Cyrus and John. These words are quite panegyric in nature. The speaker begins his speech on John the Baptist with a prayerful appeal to St. John, in which he asks for his assistance in praising him. “O voice of the Word, cries St. Sophrony, give us a voice! Lamp of light, give us shine! Forerunner of the Word, give us ease of speech, so that today, rejoicing, we worthily glorify you with praise.” Having pointed out the need to glorify St. John and, moreover, more than his parents, since more benefits were received from him, St. Sophronius again turns to St. for help in praising him. John and says that without his help it is impossible to glorify him in a worthy way. St. Sophrony also notes that those who do not know the simplicity of the speaker’s words expect from him a speech corresponding to the dignity of the subject of the sermon, and when he, with his weak forces, does not achieve what is expected, they do not show him any leniency. But despite the weakness of one’s own strength and the inability to glorify St. John in a worthy manner, the speaker nevertheless considers it necessary to glorify him as much as possible, to the best of his ability, so that by his silence he does not become like those nine lepers who, having received healing, did not thank the Lord for it. Then, proceeding to the glorification of St. John, the speaker expresses confusion at his many miracles, and says that he does not know where to begin. “What should I say first? The speaker addresses St. John, is it about your birth, which the Archangel Gabriel announced to the world as the beginning of joy? Is it about your supernatural conception? About the inner leap that showed God to the world?... Shall I say about the Jordan, in which you cleansed the people, and in which Christ cleansed you, choosing you as the minister of His baptism? Shall I tell you about the freedom with which you defeated kings and rulers, with which you also defeated King Herod, although you lost your fear due to the lust of your wife? Shall I tell you about the honest position of your head, according to which you appeared as a forerunner not only on earth, but also in the underworld, announcing to those who were there about the coming saving redemption?.. What should I put in first place, and what in second?” Finally, the preacher decides that, following the example of those who intend to praise someone and have abundant material for this, he will put the most important thing first, and leave only praise at the end. Having decided to state the main thing first and leave the praise at the end, the speaker, as he himself admits, begins from afar, precisely with the fall of Adam. According to him, Adam, having sinned, thereby brought curse and death on the entire human race, for the redemption of which the second person, the Most Holy One, was predestined to incarnate. Trinity. The promise of redemption was given to Abraham and repeated to David. All the prophets and righteous men of Israel wanted to see the Redeemer before they departed from this life, but only a few were worthy of this, namely the righteous Simeon, the prophetess Anna, Joseph and the high priest Zechariah. It further tells how Zechariah, having entered the Holy of Holies, saw an angel there who told him the news of the birth of a son from him (Luke 1:14-17), and how he did not believe this news, for which he was deprived of his tongue. At the same time, the speaker describes in some detail how doubt arose in Zechariah’s soul about the possibility of having such an extraordinary son in his old age. He says that Zechariah began to bring to his mind all the cases of extraordinary birth from the Old Testament, as well as all the wonderful righteous people of the Old Testament, and, comparing the birth of John with other cases of extraordinary birth and John himself with other righteous people, he found that John surpasses all the righteous and his birth is more wonderful than all births, and therefore, doubting the possibility of having such an extraordinary son, he asked Archangel: “Why do I know this? for I am old, and my wife is advanced in years” (Luke 1:18). Zechariah, according to St. Sophrony, did not understand what was being communicated because he bore the personality of the law, which constrains and restrains the voice. Elizabeth, according to him, discovered more faith, because as soon as she saw Pr. The Virgin greeted Her with the words: “Blessed are You among women, and blessed is the fruit of Your womb” (Luke 1:42). But nevertheless, St. Sophronius finds Zechariah a man of great righteousness, and by the way because, as the Evangelist says, filled with the Holy Spirit, he predicted the future greatness of his son (Luke 1, 76-78). In general, St. Sophronius proves that Zechariah and Elizabeth were great righteous people, since they succeeded not only in the Old Law, but also in the New. Proving the righteousness of Zechariah and Elizabeth, St. Sophronius wants to further enhance the moral virtues of John the Baptist. It is known that panegyrist speakers included in their praise the persons being glorified, among other things, their origin from pious or generally famous parents in one respect or another. About St. himself John the speaker says that he combined the advantages of both covenants, and was superior to all the prophets, since he alone prophesied while still in his mother’s womb. Exactly when Pr. The Virgin arrived to Elizabeth, then John, recognizing the Lord in the Virgin’s womb, made it known by leaps or movements that He was present who had come to wipe away tears from every face. St. Sophronius describes these very movements and gives them a prophetic meaning. “He stretched out his finger,” says the speaker, and showed the Lamb of God, who came to bear the sins of the world, stretched out his hands, and depicted the banner of the cross, stood upright, and mysteriously announced the general resurrection, and while in his mother’s womb, he appeared as if hidden in the tomb.” The speaker further says that St. John strongly opposed his mother, who kept him as if in captivity and prevented him from preaching; therefore Elizabeth gave up her vote to St. John and he glorified St. Virgin with the words: “Blessed is the fruit of Your womb, and from where do I receive this, may the Mother of my Lord come within me.” However, St. John was not satisfied with this and turned to the Lord with a complaint against his mother, saying: “Lord, You sent me so that I would herald Your ineffable coming, and my mother keeps me bound, You order me to cry, and she holds her tongue, You sent me to precede You, but she hinders me; but You are the master of nature, and if You command, the commanded will be fulfilled. Just order, and my mother will no longer be able to restrain me, just say (the word), and what is said will immediately be fulfilled, because Your power is equal to Your desire, and everything serves Your almighty power.” But on the part of the Lord, the speaker continues, no command followed, because He Himself deigned to submit to the laws of nature, having become man for us. The Lord only said to John: “Leave it, for all righteousness must be fulfilled” (Matthew III. XV). Hearing these words, St. John calmed down, but was very afraid of the uncertainty of the time when he would be born and begin his preaching. Next, the speaker talks about the circumstances of the birth of John the Baptist and points out, among other things, that Zechariah, having pronounced the name “John,” at the same time wrote it down on a tablet. In this double designation of the name that Zechariah wished to give to his son, St. Sophronius sees a reference to Jews and pagans. According to him, the image of the name “John” on the letter pointed to the Jews who served the written law, and the pronunciation of the name “John” pointed to the pagans who approached the law in spirit. – The speaker also sees the superiority of John over all the righteous in the fact that he left his mother for the desert, alienating everything human. And he went into the desert not in order to compete with Moses and Elijah, whom he surpassed, but in order to compete with the angels, whose name he deserved to bear. The speaker ends his speech with the awareness of the insufficiency of his praises and the inconsistency of their reality with the merits of St. John. Therefore he asks St. John of condescension, referring to human weakness and the fact that the liturgy is to be celebrated 214. The speaker also asks St. John to always be with believers and assist them in fulfilling the law of the spirit. – This is the content of the praiseworthy word of St. John the Baptist. We have outlined the content of this word in some detail because it, due to the connection in the development of thoughts that serve to reveal one specific idea, as well as due to the grace and harmony of its external presentation, is considered one of the best oratorical works of St. Sophronia 215. The main idea of ​​this word is that St. John the Baptist surpasses all those born of wives, except the Pr. Virgin Mary. Proving this idea, the speaker reviews the entire life of St. John, notes the most important circumstances in his life, also points to the piety of his parents and praises him for all this. This word is quite extensive in scope; it would probably take at least one hour to pronounce it. - As for the praiseworthy word of St. martyrs Cyrus and John, then it constitutes, as it were, an introduction to the work of St. Sophronia: “SS. Cyri et Ioannis miracula,” and, in all likelihood, was not uttered. This laudatory word, as well as the mentioned essay, were written by St. Sophronius, as if in gratitude to the martyrs for the healing they received from an eye disease. Praising the martyrs, the speaker takes the beginning of his speech from Holy Scripture, and refers to the martyrs the words spoken by the Savior to the apostles, namely: “you are the light of the world, you are the salt of the earth” (Matthew 5:13-14). Next, the speaker talks about the closest internal unity of the martyrs, despite the difference in their external positions (Cyrus was a monk, and John was a warrior), as well as about the death of the martyrs and their burial in the church of St. Mark, who accepted them with joy and offered them to God with the words: here I am and the children whom God gave me (Isa. 8:18). Then the word tells about the transfer of the remains of the martyrs from the church of St. Mark to the Church of the Evangelists, located in the fortress of Menoufa, and the reason for this transfer is also indicated. This was the reason for the desire to counteract the demon (i.e., idol) that appeared in the mentioned fortress, who spread the rumor about himself that he performed miracles and thereby seduced many believers. In the Church of the Evangelists, the martyrs, according to the speaker, performed many miracles, of which he expresses the intention to describe only 70, namely the most reliable miracles, which either he himself witnessed, or about which eyewitnesses reported to him. By describing modern and most reliable miracles, the speaker hopes to arouse faith in the truth of miracles performed before. This is, in the most general terms, the content of the praiseworthy words of St. martyrs Cyrus and John. In its merits, this word cannot be equal to the praiseworthy word of St. John the Baptist. It does not have such animation and such harmony as in the laudatory word of St. John, but it was written with great reverence for the martyrs and breathes with sincerity and warmth of feeling. V. External techniques of presentation in the sermons of St. Sophronia According to the outer side of the sermon of St. Sophronia should be considered quite elegant and eloquent. It is clear that the preacher had significant oratorical talent and received significant rhetorical education 216. The preacher's speech flows freely, smoothly and uncontrollably. The word on the Annunciation is very extensive in scope, and yet at the conclusion of this word the preacher says that he is holding back his speech, which tends to flow even further, only in view of the fatigue of the listeners 217. Such a statement by the speaker is quite natural, because his speech is really distinguished by the nature of lightness and freedom, which, perhaps, should explain the very significant volume of most of his sermons. But with ease and freedom, the speech of St. Sophronia is distinguished, on the other hand, by an uneven and restless character. Speech of St. Sophronia is constantly interrupted by questions and exclamations; the speaker moves from narration to glorifying the subject of the sermon and vice versa. - In the construction of the sermons of St. Sophrony notices some artificiality, which manifests itself, among other things, in the fact that the speaker in his sermons speaks mostly about two subjects, and he constantly moves from one subject to another, compares these subjects and indicates their significance in the matter of our salvation. So in the word for the Nativity of Christ, the preacher speaks not only about the incarnation of the Son of God, but also about His resurrection from the dead, and the preacher does this because the Nativity of Christ happened then on Sunday. Having called Jesus Christ the sun of righteousness in this word, the speaker says that this sun on the celebrated day rises for the world in a double way, illuminates it with a double brilliance and gives it double joy. On the one hand, this sun, says the preacher, rises from a virgin’s womb, and on the other, it rises from the depths of hell. With its rise (from the virgin’s womb) it fills the desecrated souls of people with indescribable joy and by rising from the dead it crushes miserable death and takes away from it all those it contained. Here, the watchful shepherds, says the speaker, hear an angel telling them the joyful news that in the city of David Christ God, the Savior of the whole world, was born, through whom we are saved and made sons of God by grace; and there the luminous women, disciples of Christ, hear the Lord Himself crying: rejoice! etc. St. speaks about two things. Sophrony also in the word for the week of the Worship of the Cross, for the Exaltation of the Venerable Cross and for St. Resurrection (i.e. on the day of the renovation of the church) and in other words. The first word speaks about the cross and fasting, and the second about the cross and the resurrection (of Christ). The second word begins like this: “The holiday and triumph of the cross has come, who will not jump? Announcement of the Resurrection, who will not rejoice?” And then the preacher alternately points out the blessings brought to the world by St. the cross and resurrection (of Christ) and calls on his listeners to take advantage of these benefits and succeed in moral life. Exposition of the sermons of St. Sophronia, being elegant in itself, is varied and enlivened by the following oratorical techniques: comparisons or likenings, allegories or symbolism, and, finally, some kind of drama. Comparisons used by St. Sophronius, are almost always successful. They are borrowed by him both from everyday life and from Holy Scripture. Indicative of the nature of the St. Sophronium of comparisons we will give several examples of these comparisons. So in the word for the week of the Worship of the Cross to St. Sophrony compares the effect of fasting on a person’s soul with the effect of useful medicines that heal various bodily ailments. But let us quote the true words of St. Sophronia: “Doctors,” says the speaker, as soon as they notice the first signs of a disease that threatens you, usually hasten to skillfully prepare a medicine from a mixture of different medicines, and, acting through it on the stomach, completely cure the disease and remove it from the body, so that the patient no longer feels any attacks of illness and does not suffer from any painful sensation... Our good and philanthropic God acts almost similarly to this, offering us now healing medicine for every disease, i.e. a real holy and saving fast" 218. In the same word, St. Sophrony encourages his listeners to diligently carry out the feats of fasting and repentance by pointing to the example of a traveler who, although he feels tired due to the length of the journey, however, having rest in mind, willingly continues the journey he has begun 219. But besides comparisons borrowed from everyday life, St. Sophrony, as we said, also takes comparisons from Holy Scripture. An example of this kind of comparison is found in the word for the Nativity of Christ. In this word of St. Sophronius, pointing out the impossibility of making the usual journey from Jerusalem to Bethlehem in order to sing this magnificent song at the very place of the Lord’s birth: “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace, good will toward men”..., says that the position of the Jerusalemites is likened to the position of Adam expelled from paradise, who, although he saw paradise with his eyes, could not enter it, since it was guarded by fire sword. “We can sing hymns in this place without hindrance,” says St. Sophrony, but we are not worthy and cannot see the manger and that heavenly and supreme cave (in which the Lord was born), thereby becoming like the culprit of our race - Adam, expelled from paradise for falling into criminal sin; because just as Adam, expelled from paradise, saw the garden of paradise only with his eyes (for he settled not far from it), and the entrance to paradise for him was closed with a fiery sword, so we, having Bethlehem, which received the Lord, in our neighborhood, however, cannot enter it. But Bethlehem is not guarded by a fiery sword, like paradise, but by the sword of the Saracens, full of all cruelty” 220. The situation of the Egyptians, who were unable to make the usual journey to Bethlehem, St. Sophronius in the same word also compares it with the situation of King David, when he, being in difficult circumstances, wanted to drink water from the Bethlehem reservoir, but could not satisfy his desire due to the fact that Bethlehem was surrounded by Philistine troops. These are the more or less common comparisons used by St. Sophronius in his sermons. But in general it must be said that comparisons in the sermons of St. Sophronias are not particularly common and are almost always brief. Another method of preaching presentation by St. Sophrony is allegory or symbolism. The allegorical method of interpreting Holy Scripture enjoyed great respect among former church teachers, especially among the followers of the Alexandrian school. In the sermons of St. Sophronius we find only some remnants of this exegetical technique. Allegory in the sermons of St. Sophronia confines himself to a simple indication of the mysterious meaning that the preacher recognizes behind this or that biblical fact, and expresses himself in a few and brief words. But let us give some examples of allegorical interpretations of St. Sophronia. So, in the word for the Presentation of St. Sophronius says that the dove, which returned in the evening to Noah's ark with an olive branch in its mouth and announced the end of the flood, prefigured the blessed coming of Christ that was to take place after the end of time 221. In the circumstance that John the Baptist left the house of his parents and settled in a desert area, St. Sophronius sees an indication that Jesus Christ will leave the synagogue of the fathers and settle in the desert church of the nations (pagans) and that this will continue even until the time of the second coming. His thought to St. Sophrony confirms with the words of the Savior: “All your houses are left desolate" (Matthew 23:38), referring these words to the Jews 222. But in addition to this kind of brief allegories, in the sermons of St. Sophrony there is one allegory that has assumed significant proportions. This allegory is found in the word for the Nativity of Christ. In this word, as we have already noted, St. Sophronius, by the way, compares the situation of the Jerusalemites, deprived of the opportunity to travel to Bethlehem, with the situation of David, who wanted to drink water from the Bethlehem cistern, but could not satisfy his desire due to the fact that Bethlehem was in the hands of the Philistines. Having made this comparison, St. Sophronius further adds that the water that King David wanted to drink should not be understood. ordinary water, but living water, which Jesus Christ spoke about in conversations with the Samaritan woman (John. 4), or in other words, by this water we must understand Jesus Christ Himself, and by the cistern that King David speaks of, we must understand Prov. A virgin who carried God the Word, the source of life. King David strongly desired to see this cistern and this living water with both spiritual eyes and physical eyes: the first, as a prophet, and the second, as a righteous man. And so, inflamed by this desire, he said: oh, if only someone would give me something to drink from the cistern located near the gates of Bethlehem! (2 Kings 23:15). But having expressed himself in this way, King David, in the opinion of St. Sophronia did not mean sensual water at all, and meanwhile three brave bodyguards, having learned the king’s desire and thinking that he was overcome by ordinary thirst, rushed to the enemy camp, drew water from the indicated tank and brought it to David (2 Sam. 23, 15-17). But the divine man, continues St. Zephanius did not want to drink from the water that was delivered with danger to human life, and thereby predicted that the Jews would renounce this living water, i.e. rejected Christ. The inclination of St. Sophrony to the allegorical interpretation of Holy Scripture is revealed, among other things, in the fact that he recognizes a special mysterious meaning behind some numbers. Thus, in the preface to his essay “SS. Cyri et Ioannis miracula" St. Sophronnius says that he proposed to describe only seventy miracles because seven is a mysterious number, and ten is a perfect number. Mysterious, in relation to miracles, means a secret way of healing, and perfect means the infinity of healing. The mystery of the seven, according to St. Sophronia, visible from Holy Scripture. Thus, God rested from His work on the seventh day, established the celebration of Easter for seven days, and commanded the construction of a seven-candle candlestick. Enoch was the seventh from Adam, and Moses the seventh from Abraham, the apostles elected seven deacons, etc. The number ten, according to St. Sophronia, there is a perfect number because it is the end of units and the beginning of tens. The basis for this opinion of St. Sophrony finds in the frequent repetition of the number ten in Holy Scripture. So, Noah was tenth from Adam, Abraham offered Melchizedek a tenth of his spoils, the Jews gave tithes to God, God gave the Ten Commandments, etc. St. Sophronius finds that the numbers seven and ten are used together in Holy Scripture. So, Jesus Christ, in addition to the twelve apostles, chose seventy more, the prophet Daniel predicted that the Messiah would appear in seventy weeks, the Jews were in Babylonian captivity for seventy years, Jesus Christ was the seventy-seventh from Adam and ordered to forgive his brother (sins) up to seventy times seventy times. In this view of the numbers seven and ten one cannot help but see some influence on St. Sophrony of the so-called science of numbers, the founder of which is considered to be Epiphanius of Cyprus, who wrote an essay “on the secrets of numbers” 223. According to this science, honest numbers were considered perfect, and the perfection of these numbers was determined by objects suitable for these numbers, deliberately selected from a variety of creatures and historical and natural phenomena. But allegorism is not the only method used by St. Sophrony when explaining the Holy Scriptures. Often St. Sophronius dispenses with this method, interpreting Holy Scripture in a more natural way. He explains the meaning of the Savior’s baptism, for example, in this way. Baptism from water and spirit, he says, is a necessary condition for salvation, since the Savior told Nicodemus that unless one is born of water and spirit, (he) cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven (John 3:5). Thus, according to this teaching, all the Old Testament righteous, as those who had not received baptism, should have been deprived of future bliss. Meanwhile, it would be unfair if the prophets and patriarchs, who led a pious life and pleased God in everything, were alienated from the Kingdom of Heaven simply because they lived before Christ and therefore did not receive baptism. Jesus Christ, who represented the personality of the entire human race, which is why he often called himself the son of man, was baptized, according to St. Sophronia, precisely for these righteous people, wanting to give them access to the Kingdom of Heaven 224. A similar non-allegorical interpretation is used by St. Sophrony and when explaining the meaning of the turtle doves and doves offered to the Lord by Joseph and Mary for the baby Jesus brought to the church. Answering the question he asked himself, why were turtledoves and doves offered to the Lord for the baby Jesus, St. Sophronius says that this was done because turtle doves and pigeons are considered the purest among all flying creatures and, in addition, they also possess virtues that can be very instructive for people who are spiritually contemplative. It is the pigeons that are distinguished by their gentleness, for which they were called simple by the Savior (Matthew 10:16), and the turtle doves by their moderation and chastity. In confirmation of the said virtue of turtle doves, St. Sophrony points out that a male who has outlived his female no longer enters into marital cohabitation with another female, but spends the rest of his life as a widower, and that the female does the same if she outlives her male 225 . – But in general it must be said that St. Sophronius does little to explain St. The Scriptures and the given examples of such explanation are almost the only ones in his sermons. The third distinctive feature of the preaching exposition of St. Sophronia is a drama, manifested in the fact that St. Sophrony sometimes introduces quite long dialogues into his sermons. These dialogues are usually based on the gospel story, but significantly expanded and developed by the inventiveness of the speaker. We find a very long dialogue in the word for the Annunciation. In this word the Gospel story about the Annunciation of St. Virgo the speaker expands significantly. He puts into the mouth of the Archangel Gabriel not only the Gospel words of the gospel of Pr. Virgin, but at the same time a detailed explanation of these words, combined with the glorification of the Mother of God. The dialogue is conducted in the order of the gospel story (Luke 1:28–38). First, the archangel develops and explains in great detail the words of the gospel: “Rejoice, full of grace! The Lord is with You; blessed are You among women,” and he separately explains the meaning of each of these three expressions: “Rejoice, full of grace” - “The Lord is with You” and finally, “blessed are You among women.” Next, the confusion of the Pr is depicted. The Virgin regarding the archangel's gospel and Her cautious attitude towards this gospel. The reason for the cautious attitude towards the received gospel of St. Sophrony sees that Pr. The virgin was afraid of seduction from the evil one, who once seduced Eve. Archangel Gabriel, seeing the confusion of the Pr. Virgin and guessing Her thoughts, says to her: “Do not be afraid, Mary, for I am not like the one who seduced Your mother (Eve), I am not like the one who seduced a man, I am not like the one who expelled Your parents from the sweet paradise,” etc. The Archangel continues his speech in this manner for a long time and then adds: “Do not be afraid, Mary, for You have found immortal grace from God, You have found extraordinary grace from God, You have found desired grace from God, You have found most excellent grace from God, You have found saving grace from God,” etc. like that. Archangel, exhorting Ave. The virgin is not afraid of him, says that he himself is overwhelmed with fear and trembles at Her, because he is only a servant of God, and She will be the mother of God. “Why are You afraid of someone who himself fears You? asks the arch. Gabriel Ave. Virgo, why are You afraid of someone who is himself afraid of Your dignity? Why do You tremble the one who is himself amazed by Your grace,” etc. “Do not be afraid, Mary,” continues the archangel, for you have found grace from God, and you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a Son, and you will call His name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (Luke 1:30-33). Having spoken these words, the archangel then explains them. “You will conceive in the womb,” he says, but do not think about conceiving other women, for You will conceive in the womb without seed, with an ineffable, divine conception, apart from marital intercourse. “You will give birth to a Son,” whose nature is not subject to time and death, but Who has an eternal nature; “You will give birth to a Son,” who will be visible in the flesh, but who remains invisible in His incorporeal being, etc. “And you shall call His name Jesus,” which means Savior, so that from the very name it would be revealed that His birth will be saving for all people.” Explaining, further, the words “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High,” Archangel Gabriel says that he who is to be born of Pr. The child of the Virgin is always great and is always the Son of the Most High, and that the expressions “will be” and “will be called” are used in relation to His human nature. - To this greeting from the Archangel Pr. The Virgin, knowing the laws of human birth and feeling completely innocent, answers: “How will it be when I don’t know my husband? How can I believe your words, continues Virgo, when they are so far removed from the laws of human birth? I know many wives who give birth, but I do not call one who would give birth outside of marital intercourse. How can what you say happen to me, who does not know these ways of nature? How can I be a mother when I don't know my husband? Ave. The Virgin also indicates that She is doomed to perpetual virginity, that She was raised in the church from her earliest years and never lived in the company of men. Ave. The Virgin, however, does not reject the archangel’s gospel, but only finds this gospel inconsistent with the laws of human nature and therefore demands some clarification from the archangel. The Archangel, in turn, answers Pr. Virgin, that he knows the purity of Her virginity, knows that She was raised in the church and that Joseph is considered Her husband only in name. The Archangel also says that, although he himself is not human by nature, he nevertheless knows that people are born only as a result of conjugal communication between a husband and his wife, and to understand his words he offers Pr. Virgo to raise his thoughts from the base to the heavenly, since the birth he predicted will take place outside the laws of nature, will take place in a supernatural way. At the same time, the archangel, as proof of the possibility of the supernatural birth he predicts, points to the omnipotence of God, according to which the laws of human birth can be bypassed. But Pr. The virgin was not entirely satisfied with this answer from the archangel. Having pointed out that God, by His power, can really do whatever He pleases, she, however, notes that such a manless birth has never happened before. She says that there were cases when women gave birth who had suffered from infertility for a long time, such as, for example, Sarah, Rebecca, Anna, the mother of Samuel, and Anna Her mother, who gave birth to Her only after a long period of infertility, but it never happened that a virgin gave birth, as the archangel promises her. Next Ave. The Virgin again repeats that She does not reject the archangel’s gospel, but only demands an explanation of the matter. “Answering you,” She turns to the archangel, I did not say that this would not happen, because I do not know the husband, but I said: how will it be when I do not know the husband?.. I do not offer words of disbelief, but I only ask for clarification of the matter.” To this the Archangel Gabriel answers Pr. The Virgin, that just as these women, being barren, by the grace of God, became mothers, so She, being a virgin, thanks to the omnipotence of God, will become a mother apart from passion and marital intercourse. The Archangel also says that I cannot indicate another virgin who would give birth, because such a virgin has never existed and never will be, since the only begotten Son of God “throughout the centuries” is incarnated only once. In confirmation that a virgin has never given birth and will never give birth, the archangel points to the words of the prophet Isaiah, who said: “Behold, a virgin will conceive in her womb”... (Is. 7:14), and not “behold, a virgin will conceive in her womb.” Then, explaining Pr. To the Virgin, the very way of Her conception, the archangel says: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you: by the same thing that is holy and will be born, he will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). In conclusion, the archangel points out Pr. The Virgin that Elizabeth, Her relative, also conceived, although she was considered barren, because for God it is equally possible to make a mother both a barren woman and a virgin. In turn, Pr. The virgin, believing the words of the archangel, answered with humility: “Behold the handmaid of the Lord: wake me according to your word” (Luke 1:38) 226. We find a similar dialogue, but not so long, in the word for the Baptism of the Savior. This dialogue is conducted between the Savior and John the Baptist. John for a long time refuses to baptize the Savior, finding himself unworthy for this, and baptizes the Savior only by yielding to His command. – These are the main features of the preaching exposition of St. Sophronia. To these features, however, we can add one more, this is precisely the picturesque nature of the images; so, for example, in the word for the Presentation of St. Sophrony, inviting believers to meet the Lord, among other things, addresses them with the following words: “Who will meet the Lord first? Who will be the first to see God with his eyes?.. Who will be the first to accept God? Who will be the first to carry God in his arms?” 227, etc. In the word for the Annunciation of St. Sophronius invites believers to listen attentively to what he will announce to them, in these words: “So, all gather together, all hasten, all get ahead of each other, putting on the wings of a dove, so that you can fly and rest pleasantly in Christ. All of you, with the speed of a deer, hasten to hear the heavenly message, to believe the gospel angel, to hear the good news of the coming of God, so that we too, seeing you ready to listen to the highest gospel, rejoicing and glorifying God, exclaim: good news, good news, good news, confirming our faith in the threefold proclamation of the news.” 228 According to the volume of his sermon, St. Sophronia are not the same. Among them there are some that are very extensive, and there are those that are no more extensive in scope than modern sermons. The word on the Annunciation is very extensive. It would probably take at least an hour and a half to pronounce. The words on the Presentation of the Lord and on John the Baptist are somewhat less extensive. The remaining words are not very extensive. From an analysis of the sermons of St. Sophrony cannot help but see that, despite many advantages, they are not without some shortcomings. Such shortcomings include mainly the strong predominance of rhetoric and panegyricism in them. True, rhetoric and panegyricism in the sermons of St. Sophronius is not distinguished by dryness and tension: the speech of St. Sophronia is always imbued with warmth of feeling and breathes sincerity. But nevertheless, rhetoric and panegyricism are harmful to the sermons of St. Sophrony in the sense that it deprives them of completeness of content. In addition, rhetoric and panegyricism are partly the reason for the absence of St. Sophronia of strict thematics. The idea developed in this or that sermon by rhetorical and panegyric tirades is, as it were, drowned out and made invisible. But this lack of sermons of St. Sophronia is greatly redeemed by their virtues. Such virtues include the deep piety with which the sermons of St. Sophrony, sincerity and warmth of feeling, vividness of image and beauty of speech. From the outside of the sermon of St. Sophronia are completely processed and finished. They make a good impression on the reader, although sometimes they seem tedious due to the detailed development of some private thoughts. III. St. Sophronius as a hymn writer A song to God is a necessary expression of a person’s prayerful feelings and religious aspirations; Therefore, religious chants existed not only in the Old Testament church, which even in the most distant times sang songs in praise of the God of Israel, but the same chants existed among all ancient peoples who performed their divine services more or less solemnly. By their nature, religious chants are works of a purely poetic nature. But the soul, not content with ordinary language to express its religious states, is not content with an ordinary voice. Under the influence of strong religious feelings, the tone of the voice doubles, takes on a different measure, different direction and extension, and in a word turns into singing. Thus, singing owes its origin mainly to religion, because religion is most capable of touching the soul and making a deep and strong impression on it. Since hymns serve as a natural and necessary manifestation of religious feeling, it is clear that they would soon appear in the Christian church, especially since their use was sanctified by the example of Jesus Christ (Matthew 26:30) and His apostles (Acts 16:25). Indeed, we see that already at the very beginning of the existence of the Christian church, men with sublime feelings, with fiery speech appear, and compose many songs breathing pure Christian piety. But Christian chants were written not only to satisfy religious needs, but also to protect Christianity from various attacks from heretics. Thus, it is known that when the heretics Vardesan and his son Armonius attracted many Christians to their side with their hymns, St. Ephraim the Syrian began to compose his own Orthodox hymns to counter the heretics. He fought with the same means against heretics - Arians and St. John Chrysostom. Arius and his cunning and unscrupulous followers used all the power of poetry and the most solemn atmosphere to instill their teaching in the minds and hearts of gullible people. In order to counteract the heretics, St. John Chrysostom himself composed many spiritual hymns, and introduced many of those composed earlier into public use 229 . Thus, the content of Christian chants served not only as an expression of religious feeling, but was also determined by the circumstances in which the church found itself at one time or another. In the first three centuries, when Jesus Christ was blasphemed by pagans and Jews, the subject of Christian chants was the glorification of His Divinity. Since the fourth century, the primary subject for inspired Christian hymns has been the incarnation of the Son of God. By the seventh century, when St. lived and acted. Sophrony, dogmatic disputes have weakened significantly, and therefore Christian chants, in accordance with the needs of the time, have already taken on a different character, namely the dogmatic character of the chants was replaced by a penitential one. The penitential nature of the chants was caused, on the one hand, by the decline of Christian piety, and on the other, by external political disasters - attacks on the Greek empire by the Persians and Saracens. A significant part of the hymns of St. are distinguished by the same penitential character. Sophrony, namely his three songs on St. Pentecost. The remaining hymns of St. Sophronia, i.e. chants from Easter to Ascension inclusive, of a solemn nature. Here we note that the hymns of St. Sophronius were unknown for a long time and were published only in the forties of this century by the famous scientist May 230. Published hymns of St. Sophronius with an ancient handwritten (Vatican) triodion, which also contains the hymns of John of Damascus, Joseph, Theodore and Clement of the Studites, Sergius of Jerusalem and others. The number of tricantos of St. published by May. Sophronia is very extensive, up to 955 troparia. In the current triodion, neither in Greek nor in Slavic, there is not one of them. Songs of the imp. The Lions placed in the Vatican triodion show that in the 10th century the triodicion of St. Sophronia were still in church use. But since it was customary in the Studite monastery to use only the songs of the Studite fathers, the three-songs of St. Sophronia began to gradually fall out of use, as studio customs spread to other monasteries and churches. But let’s move on to the actual analysis of the hymns of St. Sophrony, and let us first focus on the chants of a penitential nature, and then consider the chants of a solemn nature. I. The internal character of the penitential hymns of St. Sophronia and their contents Trisongs of St. Sophrony on St. Pentecostals are imbued with a deep and sincere feeling of contrition for sins and are distinguished by the strength and sublimity of their thoughts. According to these internal qualities, the three-songs of St. Sophronius is in no way inferior to the great or touching canon of his famous contemporary St. Andrew of Crete (who died, however, much later than St. Sophronius in 713). But according to the nature of the content and the method of revealing penitential thoughts, the three songs of St. Sophronius differ significantly from the great canon of St. Andrey. In his canon, St. Andrei surveys with his spiritual gaze many of the events of both testaments, sets out these events in the spirit of deep heartfelt contrition and, with extraordinary skill, applying each of them to the state of the sinful soul, extracts from here strong incentives for correction and repentance. In the development of the penitential thoughts of St. Sophrony follows a different method. He draws inspiration for correction and repentance not from a review of biblical events and their application to the state of the fallen soul, but from pious reflections on the sinfulness of the soul and the danger that threatens it from this. Delving into himself and reviewing his entire past life and deeds, the hymn writer finds himself to have sinned and offended God more than all people, and therefore encourages his soul to repentance, reminding it of the Last Judgment and recommending Christian fasting as a means to repentance; fasting, according to the songwriter, should consist not so much in abstinence from food, but in abstinence from passions, victory over them. The hymn writer often interrupts his thoughts with a warm prayer to the Savior, to the heavenly powers, to St. apostles and martyrs. The hymnographer prays to the Savior for the granting of a spirit of contrition and for the merciful remission of sins, and asks the heavenly powers, apostles and martyrs for protection and intercession before God. In his prayers, the hymnographer does not forget the Orthodox Christians who have departed from this life, asking them for mercy and repose in peaceful heavenly monasteries. Some trisongs borrow their content from remembered events, e.g. Trisongs for Lazarus Saturday, Palm Sunday and Holy Week. All penitential thoughts are expressed by the hymnographer in the spirit of deep contrition for sins and breathe sincerity and the warmth of pious feelings. But the hymns to St. Petersburg are especially beautiful. Mother of God. In these hymns St. Sophrony, in very apt and varied expressions, depicts either the ever-virginity of the Mother of God, or Her ineffable birth, or Her significance for the human race. As an indication of the inner nature of the hymns of St. Sophrony and the way of revealing repentant thoughts in them, we will give some examples of these chants. So, the hymn writer, finding himself, as we said, to have offended God more than all people, cries out with sincere contrition: “Woe is me, who am I and what am I doing, foolish, committing sin and not fearing the Lord? I am justly condemned, good and righteous Judge, but turn me and save me, save the one who offended You more than all people.” “Which fallen sinner has ever offended God so much? Who was so obedient to the movements of evil impulses and revealed in himself (such) a haven of sin as I am pathetic? But, God, who crucified Himself out of mercy, have pity on me.” “Having rejected the bread of angels, I chose debauchery and wickedness as food, becoming like these cattle; but accept me as I turn, O Heavenly Father, as one of Your hired servants.” In no less sincere words, the hymn writer encourages his soul to correction and repentance, reminding it of the Last Judgment. He writes: “throw away, soul, the sleep of disastrous peace and stay vigilantly awake over the Divine commandments; The Bridegroom is approaching: take the lamp and hasten to meet Him.” Weep, soul, cry, turn, but repent: the hour has approached, the Judge is at the door, hasten to justify yourself and cry out: I have sinned, O Merciful One, but as you are good and merciful, have pity on me.” “Throw away, my soul, the disastrous multitude of sins, adorn yourself with long fasting, feed on the divine commandments, which by faith give you the possession of eternal life.” Encouraging his soul to repentance through fasting, the hymn writer at the same time proves the power and significance of fasting with some examples from Old Testament history. “Moses, having purified himself through fasting, writes St. Sophrony, I saw the one true God: cleanse yourself, my soul, by fasting, in order to draw closer to the lover of mankind, Christ.” “Strengthened by the fire of fasting, the pious youths extinguished the flame with divine dew; we, too, with fasting will extinguish the fire of all passions, so that we may avoid the flames of Gehenna.” “Elisha once, after fasting, raised the son of Shunamite, clearly strengthened in spirit: we too, the faithful, mortified by the desires of the passions, will renew ourselves through life-giving fasting.” “Fasting made Moses a contemplator of God, and raised Elijah to a fiery chariot; hasten also, soul, to abstain from harmful thoughts in order to free yourself from shameful seduction.” Showing exactly what true fasting consists of, St. Sophrony writes: “abstain from passions and save yourself, wretched soul, for abstaining from food for truly seekers is not fasting if they do not correct themselves.” “Abstain, my soul, from evil and laziness, from anger and from all sin, because Jesus, the greatest lover of mankind, seeks such abstinence.” Often the hymnographer addresses all believers with an exhortation to repent, for example: “Let us, faithful ones, purify the body with fasting, the spirit with abstinence, the soul with tears, so that we may meet the Pure One with joy and see the saving passions raised for us by the Passionless One.” Let us strive for purity and avoid debauchery, let us gird our loins with moderation, so that we may appear pure before our pure Savior, who seeks only purity in everything.” “Let us abstain from all passion, softening our flesh with fasting, and let us drink with zeal the drink of contrition, singing: bless your deeds.” Crucifying with Him who was crucified for us, let us mortify the members of our flesh in prayer and genuflection.” But realizing the weakness of his own deeds for the fight against evil and his passions, the hymn writer, as we said, constantly interrupts images of the sinfulness of the soul and exhortations to repentance with warm prayer to the Savior, the heavenly powers, the apostles and martyrs. The hymnographer cries out to the Savior: “who died nailed to the cross, revive my soul, killed by sin, and grant me (strength) to fulfill Your commandments and see Your revered resurrection.” “Lamb of God, who as God takes away the sins of the world, save me, overwhelmed by the waves of iniquity, and guide me to the haven of repentance.” I am completely burdened with the weight of depraved deeds, Savior, and, living among people, I cry to You, Lover of Mankind: heal the incurable ulcers of my soul with Your revered ulcers, so that I may praise Your Divinity.” In prayer appeals to angels, the hymnist sometimes lists all the angelic ranks, for example: “Angels, Powers, Principalities, Archangels, Dominions, Powers, Thrones, Cherubim and Seraphim! pray to God, the giver of blessings, to grant remission of sins and freedom from passions.” “Principalities, Powers, Thrones, Cherubim, Dominions, Powers, Seraphim, Angels, Archangels! Pray to God that during Lent we will do what is pleasing to Him, and that through this we will inherit glory as good servants.” But in general, prayer appeals to angels in the three-canticle of St. Sophronia is not found very often. We find much more prayer requests to the apostles and martyrs. The hymnographer calls out to the apostles: “glorious apostles, who scattered the darkness of darkness and appeared as lamps of the Sun of righteousness, illuminate me, darkened by the cunning of the evil one.” “Take coals from the supernatural fire, burn the forest of my passions, divine apostles of the Lord.” The hymn writer also addresses the martyrs with similar prayer appeals for assistance and help in the matter of moral correction, for example: “Oh, martyrs, heavenly stars standing before Christ, illuminate our thoughts and give strength to fulfill the pure and sanctifying commandments of God.” “Oh, martyrs, who have cast off corruptible flesh, and by divine will put on incorruptible flesh, and who now stand before Him who for us took flesh from the immaculate Virgin, clothe me, wickedly naked, with holy clothing.” Some three songs of St. Sophronia borrows its content, as we said, from remembered events, such as, for example, the three songs for the week of Vai and for Holy Week. In the three songs for the week of Vai, the solemn entry of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem is depicted and all the faithful are invited to meet the Lord with the Vai of virtues. “To the meek Christ who sat on a donkey’s colt,” writes St. Sophrony, let us offer you meekness and cry to Him: he who goes into suffering, blessed are You, Lord.” “Let us dispel the darkness of passions with luminous prayers, and, carrying the branches of virtues, let us hasten to meet Christ, Who now sits on a colt and is preparing to suffer for our salvation.” “Hermits and Kenobites, who through abstinence and prayer have subjugated their indomitable flesh to the Word, come out to meet Christ, riding on a colt and coming to suffer.” “Hosts of monks, appear like spiritual lambs to meet the Chief Shepherd Christ, carrying branches, for the Lord comes to the slaughter. On Holy Week of St. Sophronius left few chants, but there are several chants for almost every day of this week. The content of these chants is a depiction of the actions of our Lord Jesus Christ in the last days of His earthly life, and these actions are sometimes depicted in the words of the Gospel, which in themselves are as sublime and powerful as they are instructive and touching for any pious listener. Let us give some examples of these chants. Monday. “Then you will prove to be My disciples when you fulfill My commandments,” You said, Savior, coming to the revered passion through which everyone receives dispassion, crying out: priests, bless.” “Imitate Me, who saw Himself as God,” You, Christ, said to Your disciples, coming to the divine passion; whoever wants to be first and greatest, let him be a servant of all, crying out; nations, exalt Christ forever." “Let us all come together, let us go up today to the Mount of Olives, and there we will hear what the Lord says to those who love Him, teaching them about His second coming.” “Let us all become like spiritual lamps, having the oil of good works, for the Bridegroom suddenly comes; If we are not ready, then we will knock on the door in vain: we will not deserve compassion.” Wednesday. “The wicked Sanhedrin gathers and wickedly decides to kill You, Christ, the life of all, with the help of Judas.” “The supper in the leper’s house turned out to be detrimental to the reconciliation of all; By coming to her, the harlot received absolution from many sins.” Friday. “How do you come to suffer for us, Good One? How will you stand before the judgment seat of Pilate? the riches of Your mercy are immeasurable.” Saturday. “We see You, Christ, who accepted voluntary death according to the flesh as a soul among the dead, liberating, resurrecting, enlightening souls and giving life” 231. – Very numerous and beautiful, as we said, are the hymns to St. Mother of God. They attract attention by some of the words used in them in relation to Pr. Mother of God with apt expressions. Here are a few examples of these chants. “The Most High will dwell in Your womb,” writes St. Sophronius, having made You the most expansive of heaven; therefore, they glorify You, Virgo, the invincible help of people, all deeds.” “Faithful, let us please the Virgin, the uncut mountain (άλάτόμητον), the luminous lamp, the easy ladder, the meadow of God.” “Rejoice, holy church, fleece watered from heaven, source of immortality; keep Your flock, O Lady, unharmed from all enemies.” “The mountain that cannot be cut, the closed door that is higher than the heavens and every creature, the beauty of Jacob, the golden urn and the mother of the Lord - we will please the nations.” “We have known You, O Virgin, as the urn of the Divine, the ark, the table, the candelabra, the throne of God, the chamber and the fountain leading to eternal life of those who sing: bless every creature.” In one of the hymns to the Holy Mother of God, among other things, there are two wills in Jesus Christ, a subject of general controversy during the time of St. Sophronius. This is the hymn: “In two wills and natures, You gave birth to us, O Virgin, the only begotten Son, the Father, who took on human flesh in order to make you participants in Your Divine nature.” In other hymns to Pr. Her ever-virginity is depicted to the Mother of God and prayers are sent to Her for intercession before God. These are the main thoughts developed in the Trisongs of St. Sophronia on Lent. As we see, there are a lot of these thoughts and they are very diverse. But no matter what the songwriter speaks about, his words always breathe sincere and deep contrition for sins. In the penitential hymns of St. Sophrony sees everywhere the bitter cry of the soul, grieving over its sins and seeking justification and pardon; The intense and deep repentant feeling of the pious author is visible everywhere. Repentant hymns of St. Sophrony is not the dry fruit of idle thought, practicing in various types of verbal creativity, but works that are completely, so to speak, felt and experienced, and therefore distinguished by sincerity and naturalness. In general, piety, depth and warmth of feeling and sublimity of thoughts constitute integral features of all the penitential hymns of St. Sophronia; but these features cannot so much be proven as they are felt when directly reading the hymns of St. Sophronia, why, when analyzing these hymns, we tried to bring them as many as possible. II. The internal character and content of the hymns of St. Sophronius on the Days of St. Easter to Ascension By their internal character, the hymns for the days from Easter to the Ascension represent, as it were, one solemn and sublime hymn to the risen Savior who crushed the power of death and hell. Moreover, the hymnographer, glorifying the Savior, speaks not only about His resurrection and the circumstances surrounding the resurrection, but at the same time speaks about the suffering of the Savior, since the suffering of the Savior also served to His glory. The hymn writer also very vividly depicts the Savior’s descent into hell, the horror of hell and the Savior’s liberation of all the righteous from it. But the main subject of hymns for the days from Easter to the Ascension is the Resurrection of the Savior and the circumstances surrounding the resurrection. In an abundance of joyful feelings about the memory of this greatest event, the hymn writer calls heaven and earth, all believers and even inanimate nature to the triumph and glorification of God. As an indication of the inner character of the solemn hymns of St. Sophrony and the way of revealing the indicated thoughts in them, we will give some examples of these chants. Speaking about the suffering of the Savior, as an event that prompts us to glorify God, the hymn writer usually points to the horror produced by the suffering of the Savior in inanimate nature, and expresses his thoughts in such beautiful words: “the sun, seeing You - the Word, the unsetting Sun, crucified among the evildoers, was darkened: the hills and mountains shook, hell was afraid and freed all those whom it held captive and who glorify You." “As soon as the sun saw You, Sun of righteousness, stretched out on the cross, it immediately hid its rays, the stones, struck with horror, scattered, hell freed all those whom it contained and who glorify Your power, Almighty, through whom all come to life.” The hymn writer depicts the Savior’s descent into hell and the liberation of the righteous from there in the following words: “Fear opened to You, Savior, the gates of hell, and, struck by fear, the gatekeepers (of hell), seeing You in the clothing of vengeance, fled from Your presence.” “The terrified hell, having seen You, Christ, the almighty king, descended with your soul, freed all those imprisoned for centuries and glorifying Your love for mankind.” But especially sublime and solemn, we said, are those hymns in which the resurrection of the Savior and its consequences for the human race are depicted. Here are some examples of these chants: “Peoples, today clasp your hands in praise, for Christ is risen, having raised with Him all the dead, who cry out with a loud voice: Blessed is the Lord God of our fathers.” “Rejoice, earth, rejoice, heaven, leap for joy, mortals: the Lord has risen, having corrected death and freed forever those who were kept in bonds and glorifying the joyful and solemn Easter.” “Rejoice, heaven, leap for joy, all the earth: today He has risen from the dead, He who gives life to everyone.” “All nations, clasp your hands, sing songs; The immortal Lord has risen, crushing the power of death and reigning over all the earth.” “The saving Easter, the Easter of the resurrection of souls, the day of joy and gladness - let us rejoice and glorify Christ with the sacred songs, through whom we are all saved.” The hymnographer also calls for this universal joy. The Mother of God, using in relation to Her, as in the Three Canticles for the Forty Day, some apt epithets, for example, he calls out: “Rejoice, pure Virgin, the seat of the Creator, the spiritual paradise of the Lord, the sky, the throne, the palace in which the Lord, having settled, crushed the power of hell and brought out of it all who were there.” “Rejoice, Virgin most pleasing to God, restoration of the fallen, liberation from the curse, impenetrable gates, cloud of light, who gave birth to joy and salvation to the world. Rejoice, uncultivated land, Rejoice, help of those who cry: bless the Lord.” The hymn-writer also very often talks about how the wives of the mortar bearer, who went to the tomb of the Savior to anoint His body with myrrh, learned about His resurrection, and how they rejoiced at it. “Early in the morning the myrrh-bearers hurriedly went to the tomb, writes for example. St. Sophronius to see the One who gives life, but instead of Him they saw an angel who said to them: The Creator of all has risen, weep no more.” “The angel of God said to the weeping women: Rejoice, and hasten to tell the apostles that the Lord has risen, and that He will meet you in Galilee, as He said before His suffering.” “The women carried fragrances to You as if you were dead, but seeing that You had risen, they rejoiced along with the apostles, glorifying You, the Lord. This is the content of the Easter canon of St. Sophronia. Comparing this canon in terms of content with the Easter canon of St. John of Damascus, one cannot help but see that it is far from being distinguished by such completeness of content and variety of thoughts as the Easter canon of St. John of Damascus. Contents of the Easter canon of St. Sophronia embraces only a few thoughts, which the hymnographer repeats many times in almost identical expressions. True, there are few main thoughts in the Paschal canon of St. John of Damascus, but through various apt comparisons they are revealed extremely fully and comprehensively. The greatness and importance of Easter in the canon of St. John of Damascus is depicted much more clearly and fully than in the canon of St. Sophronia. But the Easter canon of St. Sophronius, is inferior to the same canon of St. John of Damascus in terms of the completeness of content and variety of thoughts, is not inferior to him in terms of the sincerity and depth of the enthusiastic and joyful feelings evoked by the event of the holiday, which, moreover, pour out in the same abundant streams of true eloquence as in the Easter canon of St. John of Damascus. Between the Easter canon of St. Sophronius and the same canon of St. John of Damascus, however, one can notice some similarities in content. So, for example, the following troparion from the Easter canon of St. Sophronia, namely: “Brilliant Easter is a feast of holidays and a triumph of triumphs: faithful, let us cry out to the conqueror of hell: You have accomplished an amazing thing by resurrecting us; “Glory to Thy power” - this troparion with the expression: “Easter is the feast of feasts and the triumph of triumphs” reminds us of the eighth Irmos of the Paschal canon of St. John of Damascus: “This is the appointed and holy day”..., in which Easter is also called the feast of feasts and the solemnity of solemnities. Troparion from the Easter canon of St. Sophronia: “Yesterday I was killed with You, who was killed for me, and now I am resurrected with You, having You as my true life and the redemptive Passover of my soul” - very reminiscent of one of the troparions of the 3rd ode of the Paschal canon of St. John of Damascus, namely: “Yesterday I was buried in Thee, O Christ; today I am risen to Thee,” etc. Troparion: “Oh, most sacred Pascha, who cleanses the whole world, oh, Word of God and Power, grant us, on the day of judgment forever, to glorify Your three-day resurrection,” reminds us of the following troparion from the 9th canto of St. John of Damascus: “O great and most sacred Easter, O Christ, O Wisdom and Word of God and Power,” etc. Troparion: “You did not damage the seal of the stone in Your resurrection, our Lord, just as in Your birth You did not damage the enclosed womb of the One who gave birth to You, preserving Her as a Virgin” - has a great similarity with the following troparion of the 6th canon of the Paschal canon of St. John of Damascus: “Having preserved the works of the sign, Christ, you rose from the grave, the keys of the Virgin were not harmed at your birth, and you opened the doors of heaven.” – In their external form, the Easter hymns of St. Sophronia is quite beautiful. The sincere and sublime feeling of delight evoked in the soul of the pious hymnographer by the memory of the Easter event found expression in lively and captivating speech. Another main subject of the solemn chants of St. Sophronia is the ascension of Jesus Christ to heaven. Hymns for the Ascension of the Lord were left to St. There are quite a few sophroniums and they are very diverse in content. They either glorify the ascension of Jesus Christ, or depict the horror and surprise of the angels at the sight of the Lord ascending to heaven in human flesh, or remember various benefits shown by the Lord in His earthly life to the human race, or present the blessings of God that followed the Lord’s ascension to heaven. But the hymn writer reveals a particularly abundant source of spiritual delight for the souls of the pious in the thought that Jesus Christ, apparently leaving the earth, ascended into heaven with that very nature of ours, which he assumed during the incarnation, making this nature capable of ascending above the Angels and Archangels, and seating him in His person on the most high throne, at the right hand of the Father. The hymn writer dwells on this thought with special love, and... Finding in it a source of joy and consolation, he calls all nations and every creature in general to the glorification of Jesus Christ. The hymn writer depicts the very event of the holiday and the circumstances surrounding it in the following words: “On the wings of Cherubim, You ascend in glory, O Lord, in the presence of Your disciples, who incessantly cry: all the works of the Lord, bless the Lord.” The cloud, like nothing else, receives You from Mount Olive in the presence of Your pious disciples, crying out in fear: do not leave us orphans, whom You have loved according to Your ineffable mercy.” “Send us, O Merciful One, the Holy Spirit,” the wise disciples cried, that He might teach us true wisdom.” “Seeing the amazing ascension of the Lord, the disciples cried out: send us the Holy Spirit and do not leave your servants orphans who confess you as the Most Holy God and man.” “To the disciples, who were amazed at the ascension of the Lord and speculated about it, the angels said: Men of Galilee, as you now see Him ascending, so you will see Him descending again to judge all.” But with special love, as we said, the hymn writer dwells on the idea that Jesus Christ ascended to heaven in our nature and thus exalted this nature above the Angels and Archangels; expressing this thought, he writes: “Having destroyed the mediastinum of hostility, You, the eternal Word, reunited people with the Father, and, ascending to heaven in our nature, which you accepted, exalted it above the Angels and Powers.” “Having filled the earth with glory, You ascended into heaven with indescribable greatness, bringing to the Father our nature received by Your mercy, and the angelic powers glorified Your mercy.” “You descended to us without a body, but you return with our nature, which you accepted, and with fear the heavenly gates open before you; The angels, seeing this, were amazed at Your mercy towards us.” In the abundance of joyful and grateful feelings evoked by the thought of the ascension of Jesus Christ to heaven in our flesh, the hymn writer calls all nations to the joy and glorification of Jesus Christ in the following words: “Praise God, O peoples, and exalt, sing with one voice: Christ the king is exalted in glory to the place from whence he came to save us who cry: Let every creature praise the Lord.” “Sing and glorify, all you who inhabit the earth, for today He is received in glory, Who has joined us mortals forever to the inhabitants of heaven.” “Peoples, clasp your hands and sing to God with joy, for behold, Christ is received in glory and sits at the right hand of the Father, an eternal participant in the same throne.” “Having ascended together to the height of contemplation, let us contemplate the eternal Word, ascended and sitting at the right side of the Father.” Speaking about the ascension of the Savior into heaven, the hymn writer, among other things, presents the matter in such a way that the highest angelic ranks were announced about the ascension by the lower angels; he, for example, writes: “Open the gates and find out extraordinary things,” said the pissed off angelic powers to the highest; He who reigns over all ascends to us, having assumed human nature and deified people out of His extraordinary love and endless mercy.” “Open the gates of heaven and let in the incarnate God: Who are you talking about? The angelic forces asked the sent ones: the sent ones (angels) answered: continually give praise to Him through Whom all things were created.” In the last three songs for the Ascension, the descent of the Holy Spirit on the apostles is sung, for example: “Behold, the Holy Spirit will descend to earth in the form of tongues of fire, so that the disciples of the Word, created from dust, will turn out to be fiery men to glorify Him as the Lover of Mankind.” “After You ascended into heaven, You, O Good One, sent to Your disciples the Comforter, the Spirit of truth, Who taught them.” – Comparing the content of the canon of St. Sophronius on the Ascension with the canons now in use for the same feast of St. John of Damascus and Joseph the hymnographer, one cannot help but see that there is a great similarity between these canons. In the cacoon of St. Sophronius on the Ascension reveals the same thoughts that are revealed in the canons on the same feast of Sts. John of Damascus and Joseph the hymnist; Moreover, the content of the canon of St. Sophronia is much more extensive than the content of each of the mentioned canons, taken separately. One might even say that the canon of St. Sophronia on the Ascension embraces the content of the canons of both named hymnographers. In general, the canon of St. Sophronia on the Ascension is distinguished by its significant completeness of content and variety of thoughts, presented, moreover, in a very beautiful and picturesque speech. In addition, this canon of St. Sophronia, like others, however, his canons, is distinguished by the naturalness and sincerity of the joyful feelings expressed in him. For all these merits, the canon of St. Sophronius on the Ascension, it seems to us, is one of his best canons. III. The outer side of the hymns of St. Sophronia. All canons of St. SoPhronia are written in three songs, i.e. consist of an irmos and three troparia. Not only the canons for the Fourth Day were written in Trisongs, but also the canons for the days from Easter to the Ascension (inclusive). At the beginning of most of the canons left by various hymnals and now used in our church, the so-called acrostics (άχροστιχίς; in Slavic: krastrochie or kragranesie) are usually placed, i.e. such sayings, of which the letters, each separately, are repeated in sequential order in the initial letters of all irmos and troparia, and this acrostic sometimes contains the main idea of ​​the entire canon. At the beginning of the canons of St. Sophronius, written by him for different times and holidays and therefore differing in the subjects of their content, we do not find such acrostics. But instead of general acrostics for the entire canon for one or another holiday in the canons of St. Sophronius we find something like an acrostic poem above each three-song. Each three-canticle in the canons of St. Sophronia has a special short inscription, sometimes expressing one or another thought incompletely, and these inscriptions for the most part have no internal relation to the three songs at the beginning of which they appear. These inscriptions cannot be called acrostics, since the troparia that follow them do not begin with the letters of which they are composed. Here are some examples of these inscriptions: “Who among mortals has heard such things.” "The desert has flourished." "You were born from a virgin." "Liberator of all." “But through the disease of disobedience, Eve” (subtitle – destroyed us). "For I am your God." “The wicked will not see” (God). "Luminous Cloud" "From the Flame to the Saints." “Isaiah, rejoice: the virgin has conceived.” "Enlighten yourself, enlighten yourself." "On the sea of ​​life." "You. Lord, the light that illuminates the world,” etc. – In appearance, the canons of St. Sophronia are composed with the same care as in their content, but they are largely characterized by intricacy and artificiality. This artificiality of the external structure of the hymn of St. Sophronia manifests itself primarily in the strong predominance of figurative expressions, comparisons, likenings and, in general, all kinds of rhetorical devices. For example, St. Sophrony writes: “Virgin, who raised the uncultivated ear of heaven, feed my hungry and humble soul.” “Being rivers from a spiritual source, apostles, pour life-giving water into a pure heart, destroy the waves of sin with your prayers and lead them to the path of salvation.” “Grant me, Christ, to sail calmly on the ocean of sobriety, reflecting the waves of my thoughts, and lead me into the haven of resurrection.” Thrown into the sea of ​​sins, into the depths of despair, into the waves of empty speculation and storms of passions, I cry: abyss of mercy, help me, water me with your mercy and grant remission of sins.” “You have plowed the earth, divine apostles, with the divine plow of the cross and made it fruitful, sprouting piety; Therefore, glorifying Christ, we thank you with humble lips.” “Having renewed our thoughts with the divine plow of heavenly fasting, let us bring a harvest of virtues, so that, taking advantage of eternal and inexhaustible food, we will never become hungry.” “Throw away, soul, the intoxication of passions and seek through fasting the cleansing wine of tears, joyful to the heart, calming passions and turning the fire of the flesh into ash; hasten to Christ, who was drunk for you, and you will live forever.” “Constricted by a storm of thoughts, drowned by waves of passions and greatly shaken by the stormy movement of lusts, I hastened to the quiet and calm sea of ​​fasting. Guided in it by the saving cross, lead me, O Merciful One, to the haven of salvation.” “Immersed in the sea of ​​negligence and already drowned by the waves of Your right hand, like Peter, save me, O Lover of Mankind.” “Killed by many sins of negligence, I am squeezed in a grave, feeling the heavy stone of despair above me; but raise him up according to Your mercy, O Lord, and raise me up, as you once raised Lazarus.” “Resurrect me, O Christ, sleeping in the sleep of carelessness on the bed of lusts.” “Infected with the stench of sinful wounds, I lie in the tomb of carelessness, and therefore I cry to You: resurrect me, save me, so that I too may meet You with the branches of virtues, crying out: Hosanna in the highest.” “Irrigate, all-immaculate, with drops of Your mercy my thought, dried up by the flames of sin, and light the extinguished lamp of my heart.” “Like an animated vine, You have given birth to us a ripe Cluster of Grapes, from which the wine of remission flows to mortals and which dries up the intoxication of sin.” Artificiality in the construction of the hymns of St. Sophronia, in addition to the predominance of figurative expressions in them, also manifests itself in a special comparison and deliberate repetition of the same words, aimed at promoting the beauty of speech, for example: “With the wood of the cross You extinguished, Christ, the flame of fire; Having stretched out your hands, You freed from the hands of the enemy the one who incontinently stretched out his hands to the fruit. “Having fallen asleep on the cross, Lord, You turned the dominion of death into a dream, for You said: Lazarus, friend, fell asleep, but I am going to wake him up.” “The stones, seeing You, the stone of life, nailed to the wood of the cross, scattered in horror, the sun was darkened, and the earth shook in its foundations.” “I, wounded by the fruit of the tree and the deception of the serpent, You, the wounded Word, freed me from the curse, having become a curse for us.” “The evil that came from the tree, You destroyed, Jesus the Word, our innocent Easter, through the tree and by Your death You resurrected those whom the tree had killed.” Finally, the artificiality of the construction of St. Sophronius’s chants is also manifested in various oppositions, serving, on the one hand, as an external decoration of speech, and on the other, contributing to a more expressive transmission of one or another thought. Here are some examples of these oppositions: “Having left the night of pleasures, let us, all faithful, diligently approach the light of abstinence, so that we may prove worthy of the heavenly feast.” “Like coals of material fire, burn my material passions, apostles, kindling in me the love of doing works of love.” “Unburnt by the fire of the Divine, most pure, burn the material movements of my passions, so that I always glorify You, Virgin.” These are the main features that we noticed in the external character of the chants of St. Sophronia. The canons of St. Sophrony's eloquent prose and are always distinguished by the importance and sacred decorum, corresponding to the holiness of Christian worship. IV. Anacreontic poems of St. Sophronia Anacreontic poems of St. Sophronius, as well as his chants and some other works, remained unknown for a long time. They were discovered and made public only in the forties of this century, and the honor of opening and making them public belongs to the famous scientist Peter Matranga. Peter Matranga discovered the Anacreontic poems of St. Sophronia in this way. Reviewing the notes of Allius in the Vatican Library, Matranga found in them a list of some odes to St. Sophronia, made by the hand of Allius himself; Moreover, Allatius stated that the names of the odes of St. Sophronius was borrowed by him from the Codex of Sirlet. In this codex of Sirlet, found by Matranga in the Barbinian Library, all those poems of St. were found. Sophrony, which were listed in the notes of Allation. Then the Anacreontic poems of St. Sophronia were soon published. – In terms of their internal character and content, the Anacreontic poems of St. Sophronia can be divided into two categories, namely historical and lyric-epic. The following poems belong to the first category: on the Annunciation, on the Nativity of Christ, on the Presentation, on the Baptism of Christ, on the resurrection of Lazarus, on Palm Sunday, on the adoration of the Magi, on the Last Supper, on St. ap. Paul, about the exploits of St. Paul, about John the Theologian, about St. First Martyr Stephen, about St. First Martyr Thekla, about Narses, Bishop of Ascalon, and about dogmas, about the honorable Cross, about Father Min, falsely accused under the Emperor. Focquet is that he supported Maurice's son Theodosius, and finally, a poem about Joseph. Only a few poems belong to the second category, namely: about the Ascension and about oneself, about one’s desire to see holy places and St. hail and, finally, a dialogue about the lord candidate Paul and His mother Mary, who died in God. I. Poems of a historical nature The subjects of historical poems, as the titles of these poems show, are either gospel events, or certain saints, or various clergy, for some reason either close to the heart of St. Sophronia. But whatever St. would talk about in his poems. Sophrony, he almost always limits himself only to the presentation of historical information related to the subjects of the poems. Poems about various gospel events contain only a simple transmission of the gospel stories about these events. All other poems of a historical nature are similar in content 232. There is, however, in these poems something that actually belongs to St. Sophronia, these are precisely the beginnings of the poems. Saint Sophronius almost always begins his poems not directly with a presentation of historical information related to the subject of these poems, but precedes this presentation with small introductions, the content for which he himself finds. In addition, his poems by St. Sophrony very beautifully and poetically diversifies and enlivens with certain kinds of refrains, which in their content also belong to him. These refrains, consisting of a couplet or a couplet and a tercet, contain either praise of the subject of the poem, or a prayerful appeal to it, or, finally, an expression of the joyful feelings evoked by the subject of the poem. They breathe true poetry and serve as a significant decoration for poems. But the beginnings of the poems are especially good; they are so replete with beautiful images, expressed in an elegant Form, that, according to Matranga, their author could be recognized as an excellent writer of the golden age of Greece 233. Let us give some of these principles; for example, the poem for Candlemas begins with these words: “With the Virgin mother carrying a baby in her arms, I go to the holy house of God (church). Give the book, Luke, bring the zither, prophet, so that I can offer the born Lord a double hymn...” 234. At the beginning of the poem on the Last Supper of St. Sophronius writes: “Lead me, divine lyre, to the divine Supper, so that I may take part with the Lord in the Mystical meal. For it is fitting now to glorify the divine power of Christ - the end of the representative law written by Moses.” But the beginning of the poem about St. Petersburg is especially characteristic. Pavle. This beginning reads like this: “Bee of virtues, Paul, lead me to your hives, so that, having collected your honey, I may become a participant in the divine food. King of hymns, prophet, tune the zither so that I can sing with worthy songs the chief of virtues.” No less beautiful is the beginning of the poem about John the Theologian. This is the beginning: “Let the host of saints come forward and give praise to the saint; Let the choir of virgins form a beautiful hymn to the virgin, for, having an unclean tongue and defiled lips, I am not able to sing a pure hymn to the son of thunder.” The last two beginnings of St. Sophronia Matranga, in her comments on these poems, recognizes them as quite beautiful 235. But with the exception of these beautiful beginnings, as well as the refrains that we mentioned earlier, the historical poems of St. Sophrony contain a simple transmission of various historical information, and therefore we will not engage in a detailed analysis of the content of these poems. We will analyze only one poem of a historical nature, namely a poem about Narses, Bishop of Ascalon, and about dogmas. We focus our attention on this poem because it seems to us the best of the historical poems. At the beginning of this poem, the poet turns to Narses and asks him for help in composing a worthy hymn for him. Having then indicated the fatherland of Narses and named the name of his father, the poet proceeds to the glorification of Narses itself. He calls him the new glorious Daniel and says that for his wisdom he was made commander of the imperial palaces. Then the poet, in the form of a refrain, invites all citizens of Ascalon to glorify their high priest: “the upcoming host of all citizens, glorify the high priest with the sacred flute.” It is further said that the emperor, surprised by the virtues of Narses, made him shepherd (i.e. bishop) of Ascalon 236. Moving on to the depiction of the very virtues of Narses, the poet, in view of the numerousness of these virtues, expresses his difficulty as to where to begin. He writes: “glorifying St. father, where should I begin my song? from the abundance of my father’s virtues, I feel that my thought is breaking off. The virtues of St. the shepherd is sweeter than marshmallows.” The poet considers the first virtue of Narses to be his purity of faith, the fact that he taught and preached correctly about all the most important Christian dogmas. It is further said that Narses was not only an adornment of dogmas, but at the same time he was also a nourisher of the poor, a father of orphans, a protector of the oppressed, a supporter of the weak, and in general was everything to everyone in order to save everyone. The poet ends his poem by glorifying the inhabitants of Ascalon, who acquired such a shepherd for themselves. This entire poem from beginning to end is imbued with sincerity and warmth of feeling. The poet speaks about the subject of the poem with love and passion. From the outside, the poem seems quite artistic. II. Poems of a lyric-epic nature Poems of a lyrical-epic nature, as we have already said, include the following three poems: about the Ascension and about oneself, about love for St. church and St. in places and, finally, a poem about the gentleman candidate Paul and his mother Mary, fettered in God. These three poems seem beautiful to us in every way. When reading these poems, one involuntarily feels the charm of true poetry, testifying to a significant share of the poetic mood of their author. All these three poems breathe a kind of quiet sadness, are imbued with a mournful-elegiac tone and reveal in St. Sophronia a gentle and poetic soul. In view of the significant merits of these poems, we will focus our attention on each of them separately. Let's start with a poem about the Ascension and about ourselves. First of all, we note that the title of this poem is not entirely accurate, does not fully correspond to its content, since it says almost nothing about the Ascension. The subject of the poem is only its author, or, better to say, the author’s desire to see and visit the saints dear to him. places. Being away from St. city ​​and St. places, St. Sophrony expresses an ardent desire to visit these places and kiss them. Imagining himself as if in Jerusalem, St. Sophrony lovingly lists the places he will visit and kiss. Namely, he says that he will visit and kiss Mount Olive (Olive), from which the Lord ascended to heaven, and from this mountain he will enjoy the beautiful view of St. hail during sunset. “How sweet,” cries St. Sophronius, marvel at your beauty from Mount Olive, O St. hail! A very strong desire is expressed by St. Sophrony also visit Bethlehem, where the King of all was born. At the same time, St. Sophrony very well describes the splendor of the church built at the birthplace of the Savior. The columns of this church, according to the description of St. Sophronia, shone with gold and precious stones and were decorated with amazing art. The vault and ceilings of the church shone like a decoration of the sky. St. Sophronius says that, having entered this church, he will venerate the stone that received the baby of God - with his lips, eyes and head, in order to extract benefits from it. St. Sophronius also expresses a desire to venerate the divine manger, through which he was nourished by the word of God. It should be noted that the description of an imaginary journey through St. in places breathes extreme love for these places and testifies to the deep piety of St. Sophronia. Further St. Sophrony remembers some of his friends - Vasily and Sophrony and expresses a sincere desire to see them. “Oh, Father Vasily, how I would kiss your head now,” cries St. Sophronniy. The poet addresses his friend Sophrony with the following words: “the joy of my heart, the joy of my parents, the adornment of wisdom, where will I find you, prudent Sophrony? Will I see your venerable face, which I greatly desire, mourning day and night? A stream of tears flows from my eyes when, sobbing, I bring your face to mind. For you, friend and son, out of divine respect for you, I have chosen as a consolation and companion in my old age. Have you really forgotten, dear Sophrony, forgotten me, whom you promised to love like a son? I have lost you, my dear, at a time when I am overwhelmed by many different calamities and I am dragging out a painful old age without you. Having left worldly life, I assumed to live and die with you, and God knows how I separated from you. I once assumed that I would live, far from the bustle of the world, in my dearest monastery, even until the end of my life... You will find the sorrows of my heart, friend, endless, and the earth watered with my tears.” About Sophrony and Vasily, to whom St. Sophrony was so attached in soul, it is impossible to say anything definite. Both of them were probably monks of the Lavra of St. Feodosia. A special affection, as can be seen from the poem, of St. Sophrony had affection for the monk Sophrony. The very reason for writing the poem was probably a letter from this friend to St. Sophronius, in which he asked St. Sophronia notify him about her life. And here is St. Sophronius, being away from St. places and deprived of peace and silence, he writes to his friend the saddest melody, mourns the absence of his friend in the most touching words. In general, the analyzed poem has a truly poetic character. It breathes with sincerity and warmth of feeling. From beginning to end it is permeated with a strongly mournful elegiac tone. Poem about love for St. church and St. in some places it is very similar in character and content to the first half of the poem already analyzed. In this poem, as in the one already analyzed, St. Sophrony speaks of his desire to visit holy places. This poem begins with these words: “how I would now like to approach the gates of St. the city of Jerusalem and enter into it, for St. love for St. hail always fills my heart abundantly.” Having testified about his love for St. city, St. Sophrony further lists the places he would like to visit. First of all, he expresses a desire to visit the Church of the Resurrection, built on the spot from which the King of all rose from the dead, having trampled upon the dominion of death. St. Sophronius says that he would kiss the soil in this place, admire the huge dome of the church, and bow down to St. the tomb and the Holy Cross found by Queen Helena; then he would visit Zion and, prostrating himself, would kiss the stone on which the Lord was scourged. and the place where He heard His sentence, and would have bowed to the tomb of the Mother of God and other holy places. The poem ends with the glorification of the Mount of Olives, from which the Lord ascended to heaven. This entire poem from beginning to end is imbued with a warm feeling of love for holy places and testifies to the deep piety of St. Sophronia. The general tone of this poem, like the previous one, is mournfully elegiac. With its sincerity and sincerity, it is capable of touching any reader. From an aesthetic and artistic point of view, this poem is also beautiful. The language of the poem is precise and expressive, although not decorated with any rhetorical ornaments. Warm feeling of love for St. places and a sincere desire to visit these places found a completely appropriate expression in the poem being analyzed. But the best poem of St. Sophrony needs to recognize the poem about the candidate Paul and his mother Mary, who died in God. This poem is a rather long dialogue between the candidate Paul and his deceased mother Mary. The dialogue begins with Paul expressing his deep contrition over the death of his mother, who died at a time when, due to various unfavorable circumstances for religion and faith, moral support from his mother was especially necessary for him. “How much grief should I lament,” Paul cries, “and how many tears should I shed, having lost such kind protection in my mother Mary? disastrous winds (heresies) rise from the abyss of sin and threaten to capsize the ship of human life. From the darkness of sin the greatest clouds appear, which, increasing more and more, threaten to disturb life even to the extreme.” Paul complains that, while “swimming on the ocean of life,” he is exposed to great danger from these clouds and sinful darknesses. The mother, consoling her son, points out to him that law of nature, according to which everything that creeps on the earth is subject to the corruption of death, and by virtue of which she also departed from this life into eternal life. Next, the son continues to depict his plight, and the mother, in turn, gives him some advice on how he should behave in order to avoid various trials. Namely, she advises her son to always raise his mind to God and curse new dogmas with their inventors who renounce the shepherds of the church, be a support for the elderly, an abundance for the poor, a defense for those suffering injustice, etc. To this Paul replies that he has an unclean heart and needs his mother’s assistance for his correction. Paul also recalls his former happy life, when, protected by the prayers of his mother from all evils, he had God as his patron and mourns the death of his mother. The mother consoles her son with the fact that with a pious life he will continue to have God as his constant patron and in conclusion asks the Most Holy. Trinity save him from sad death. Both persons depicted in the dialogue, mother and son, are depicted as deeply pious. The son grieves over the death of his mother mainly because he has lost her guidance to a moral and pious life, and the mother, comforting her son, gives him various edifying lessons. The speech of mother and son breathes sincerity and sincerity. From the outside, the poem is also beautiful. Matranga finds this poem to be the best. He says that if this poem were given more pathetic harmony of sounds, then it would be able to touch the most callous soul 237. Let us add here that scientists speak with great praise of other poems by St. Sophroniah. Allatius, for example, recognizes all the poems of St. Sophronia the most graceful, the most reverent and the sweetest 238. According to Matranga, the poems of St. Sophronia is all the more noteworthy because they were written at a time when literature was in great decline, and expresses surprise that St. Sophrony, thrown among various disasters, could write flowery, beautiful poems and decorated with poetic charms 239. One cannot but agree with the opinion of the mentioned scientists. Poems by St. Sophrony, indeed, have many poetic merits. Events and persons in them are depicted brightly and vividly, piety and warmth of feeling are heard everywhere, the verse is distinguished by its lightness and sonority. But all these advantages can be adequately appreciated only by reading the poems in the Greek text. III. The metrical side of the poems of St. Sophronia According to its external structure, the ode to St. Sophronia belongs to those verses that are known as anacreontic, and which were in fairly wide use among the ancient Greeks. The peculiarity of these verses is that they mix all kinds of meters. The lyrical poet Anacreon became famous in ancient times for poems of this nature, from whom they received their name. In the poems of St. Sophronia constantly alternates between the following meters: iambic, spondee, dactyl and anapest, and the last foot is almost always catalectus (i.e. it lacks one syllable). For example, the first verse of the first ode represents a combination of anapest, iambic and catalectus. This verse reads: ‘ άπό πνεδ μάτός θέοί ο . In the first dipode we find anapest and iambic, and in the second iambic and catalectus. Between the poems of St. Sophronia, however, there are also those that are written almost exclusively in one anapest, and one can even count quite a few such poems, up to 12, starting from the 8th to the 21st, excluding the 16th. Poems begin mostly with anapest and dactyl and very rarely with a spondee. Poems by St. Sophrony is divided into stanzas consisting of four verses, and every fourth stanza, and sometimes every tenth, has, as it were, some kind of conclusion, consisting of either a couplet, or two and three lines. In terms of its volume, the ode to St. Sophronia is not very extensive, but there are not very short ones between them. They contain no less than 90 verses and no more than 126; the number of verses of all odes reaches 2113. About the lord candidate Paul and about his mother Mary, who died in God (XXII). What sadness to lament And how many tears must I shed, Having lost priceless help?! Here the evil wind is raging, Rising from the sinful abyss, And the ship of life is not mighty He is in a hurry to crush the end. A huge cloud 240 rises From the dark abyss of sin, That life is completely darkened. On the Zhigei Sea we caught up And all my life they have been outraged, It's preventing me from swimming calmly. Doomed to death and decay. Having Christ as a life friend, Don't be afraid of the violent winds. God, who once created everything, This is the destiny appointed for everyone, So that those who came from the earth They returned to the same land again. And to me, who was once born, Now, mother, answer me, Confused by great sorrow, So that the burden of sorrow and sorrow I could take mine off my heart. After your death, O our helper, The fear of enemy spears troubles my spirit. Oh, how sorrowful your soul is I would soften it, my dear son! Because you can't bear it None of all mortals endured Such a great multitude of disasters, - I'm suffocating from sighs and tears, When I contemplate the confusion of life. Son, lift up your humble mind To the heavenly Father and the Son - And you will avoid the predatory wolves. The power of crushing enemies. Thunder you new teachings 241 Those who rejected spiritual shepherds And the patron of the offended. I have always lived sinfully and uncleanly Help me clean them, So that I can lift them up to God... I, Pavel, was happy with you, You returned before me To the cold land, dear! But you are still stronger than me: The Lord is more kind to you. Your life is one piety, You spent it entirely in God; Your heartfelt prayers Your maternal motives And I led a happy life. Why did misfortune befall me? After your death, O sweetest mother! Be enlightened by the light of Christ And have faith in your heart, - Then you will burn, dear son, Serving the Heavenly Trinity - The key to your earthly success. The Lord will receive you again, When from your sinful deeds You to a life pure and holy You will be converted in body and soul. And your entire earthly life God will patronize. When with those who are persistent in sins You will break the harmful union. From ill-fated death, my son! May the Triune God protect you. XIX. On the Ascension and about myself I will come to the Mount of Olives, From which Christ ascended. On it is the deepest wisdom I will praise you to the best of my ability, Then I will reach the cover, Where they listened to the Word of Christ, Where in the sky He told secrets To your faithful interlocutors. Then through the big gate I'll go up the steps, To contemplate the holy city In the rainbow light of sunset. How sweet and pleasant, O holy city, Admire you from the heights of Olives! Then I'll head to the tomb Who gave him back his life with a word. Drawn by love for sacred things, I will continue my path, And soon I will come to Vfelehem, Where in the manger the King of the world was born. I'll go to the amazing portico, In the triconcha - holy places - Oh, if only Christ, born in Bethlehem, Let me see the affairs of Bethlehem! There is a marvelous work of art there!.. At the sight of shining columns, Decorated with gold, stones, I will see beautiful vaults there, Similar in brilliance to the sky, - Everything is the height of perfection, everything is wonderful! Where is the Virgin, Queen of Heaven, Christ - man and God. I will add lips, eyes and head, So that they may be illuminated from the holy place. Bow down like the Magi I will come to the sacred manger, Where the long-awaited light shone Where did I receive enlightenment from? Then I will enter the cave, Where the corpses of babies were buried, Alarmed by the rumor of a royal birth. Oh, Father Vasily, most prudent, How I would kiss you now! I'll see my patriarch there With the people and the sacred clergy, A host of the best monks. To you, friendly Vasily, I am devoted with all my heart, As a close relative, - I honor you as a saint. You know, blessed one, the reason Will I see your image, venerable Sophrony? I miss him night and day! From my eyes the tears are burning Streams flow abundantly, I treat you as a friend and son, We love and love with our hearts, And I thought that you would be a support You are in my decrepit old age... Have you already forgotten me, oh my son? Whom in the host of monks you loved, Extreme grief befell me. When I broke up with you, - I was dragging myself into old age then And many disasters upset me. When I leave this worldly life, And God knows how I was separated from you! Live the rest of your life In the beloved lavra (holy) - Far from the bustle of the world.... You would be convinced of that, my dear, See also Balland. Acta SS. Mart. t. 2, at Le Quien. Orient. Christ, t. 3., in Baronius, Annal. Eccles. t. VII-VIII. See April 2 Vita S. Marias and Februar. t. 1 p.m. 274. Patrolog. curs. compl. Ser. gr. t. 87. A brochure existing in Russian theological literature entitled: “St. Sophrony, Patriarch of Jerusalem" (Kyiv, 1853), contains a brief image of only those creations of St. Sophronia. which were known at the time the brochure was written. Acts of all. cathedrals in Russian trans., vol. 6, pp. 296–346; Christian reading, 1840 Part IV. Sunday reading, 16th year. Sunday reading, 17th year. Bolland. acta SS. Mar. t. II. p. 65. St. himself points to Damascus as the place of his homeland. Sophrony. Describing the 70th miracle performed at the tomb of the martyrs Cyrus and John over himself, he says that “the name of the one who wrote this is Sophronius, the city is the capital of Damascus, the fatherland is Phenicia, not seaside, but the same name as Mount Laban, in which the main city is Damascus.” Acts everyone cathedral in Russian translation vol. 6, p. 300. Bolland, acta SS. Mar. t. II p. 65. Calls St. a sophist. Sophronia John Moschus in the preface to the Spiritual Meadow and in the 9th, 101 and other chapters of the same work. Biblioth. Phot. cod. 199. p. 519. Meadow. Spirit. Ch. 4, 22, 23, 91, 100, 102, 103, 108. Ch. 3, 11, 127, 166, 184. Ch. 30, 31, 60, 55, 78, 89, etc. Meadow. Spirit. Ch. 69, 70, 171, 102. Bolland. acta ss. Ian. t. II, paragraph 60. Bolland. in acta ss. Mar. t. II, p. 67. Fleury. Hist. Eccles. t. 8. p. 253. Le Quien. Orient. Christ, t. 8.255. Le Quien, Orient. Christ, t. III, p. 65. Consil. Later. t. 6. p. 162; Fleury. Hist. Eccles. t. 8. p. 258. Lateran. Syn. Secr. 1. 2. Hist. sext. Syn. ap. Bin. t. V. p. 219.; Later. Syn. sub Martino. 1. Secret. 2.ap. Bin. t. IV. p. 672. Avctor. hist. miscall lib. 18. Cedren et Zonar. inHeracl. Acts everyone personal r. And. vol. 6, p. 401. Diction de Theolog. Berg t. V. p. 434. Acts everyone personal r. And. vol. 6, p. 13. In the same place - personal. after, p. 298. Acts Sun. personal vol. 6, p. 298; Letter from Sergius to Honorius. Acts Sun. personal in the river And. vol. 6, p. 13. Syn. Later, sub. Martino I. in. secr. 2.ap. Bin. t. IV. p. 675. Later. Syn. sub. Mart. I.ap. Bin. t. IV. p. 673. Theoph. Chronogr. p. 281. S.; Fleury. hist. Eccles. t. 8. p. 337; Ibid. p. 284. Muravyova main. Jerus. I, 280–300. Le Quien. Christ. Orient, t. III. p. 65. Regarding the year of the death of St. Sophrony among ancient writers there is great disagreement. What is certain is that St. Sophronius died between 638 and 644. There is, apparently, reason to think that St. Sophronius died towards the end of this period of time, since from the words of Theophanes it is clear that he lived for some time even after his accession to Constant. the patriarchal see of Pyrrhus, which happened in 639. In addition, Pyrrhus, in his dispute with St. Maximus in 645 incidentally uses the following expression: Σοφρονιος ό μιχρώ πρόσθεν Πατιάρχης γενόμενος ... If St. Sophronius died long before the mentioned dispute, then Pyrrhus would not have expressed himself in this way. Baron. Annall. T. VIII. ad an. 636. V. Baronius, among other things, says that those few works of St. Sophronius, which have come down to us, sufficiently confirm that he was a very learned and eloquent man and therefore deserves to be numbered among the most famous teachers of the Eastern Church. Cathedral Epistle of St. Sophronius was published in the acts of the VI Ecumenical Council by Binia, vol. 3, p. 158–185; also in Lyabbey, vol. 6. r. 852. Part of this message ed. in Fabricii Bibl. gr. t. 8, p. 354–358, under the title: “de haerisibus s. Sophronii." There are two translations of this message in Russian: one in Christ. Readings for the 40th year, part IV, and the other in act. everyone cathedrals in Russian translation, published. at Kazan. D. Academy. T. 6th, no. 11, pp. 296–346. The Sixth Ecumenical Council made a conciliar letter to St. Sophronia has this review: “We looked at it, they write oo. this council, and the conciliar messages of Sophronius of blessed memory, former patriarch of the holy city of Christ our God Jerusalem, and, finding them in agreement with the teachings of the apostles and saints. glorious fathers, recognized them as Orthodox and accepted them as useful saints of the Catholic and Apostolic Church." D. sun. With. in the river pp. 13. From the quoted words of the VI Fathers. cathedral, it is clear that at this cathedral, in addition to the message of St. Sophronius, his other messages were also read, but have not reached us. One of these messages from St. Sophronius probably wrote to Pope Honorius when he sent Bishop Stephen of Dor to the west. Vid. Labb. Nov. Bibl. MS. p. 90; Tillem. memoir. Eccles. vol. 5 ad vit. Cyri; Kaveh, referring to Lyabbey, also attributes St. Sophronb. this treatise (Hist. Liter. Vol. 1. p. 579); this treatise has not yet been published and is kept in manuscript in the Royal Library of Paris (cod. 2198. Cave in hoc cit.); in the said library, Cellier also saw this treatise (t. 17, p. 615), and Dupin, apparently, even read it (Nov. Bibl. vol., VI, pp. 16–17). Dupin considers this treatise to be the second epistle of St. Sophrony to Sergius, n. of Constantinople (ibid.). This word, unable to recognize its undoubted affiliation with St. Sophronius, which is clearly confirmed by its general character and content (it contains references to the contemporary political disasters of Palestine to St. Sophronius), is not included in Min’s list of the works of St. Sophronia is not even mentioned. It is at Combephysis Biblioth. Concionat. v. 1, p. 672–677. From the inscription of this word, by the way, it is clear that it was written by St. Sophronius is still a monk. In the inscription of this word we read: Sophronii monach. sanctissimi postea patriarchae Hierosolymitani, oratio.. The ancient writers do not mention this passage, but the general nature of this passage gives the right to recognize St. Sophronia. The passage is entitled: ποημα Σωφρονίου, πατριάρχσυ Ί εροσολύμωγ. The content of its yasio shows that it forms part of the word for Epiphany. Ang. Mai. Spreileg Rom t. III, p. XV. Le Quien. T. III, p. 265. In 4 act. conc. Nicaeni ap. Biniam. p. 658. Syn. sec. Nicaen. act. 4. ed. Florent. t. XIII, col. 57. The relics of the martyrs Cyrus and John were in Alexandria, and most of the miracles described by St. Sophronius, was committed against the Alexandrians. The miracles of the martyrs during the patriarchate of John the Merciful were described, i.e. between 610 and 620 years. Ss. Cyr. et Ioan. mir. VII. Laudes in Ss. Cyrum et Ioannem. Le Quien. Orient. Christ. T. III, p. 266. In the manuscript, the Jerusalem charter is inscribed with the following words: “The Jerusalem charter for the church succession of the Lavra of our holy and God-bearing father Savva, compiled and written (συντεθέν χαί συγγραθέν) by the Holy Father and Hieromonk, Mr. Sophronius; the same adherence is observed in many Jerusalem solitudes.” Montfaucon. Bibl. coisl. p. 561. Specil. Bom. t. 4. 1840. Three Songs of St. Sophronius is also reprinted in Min, t. 87. See historical. review singers, Philaret Ave., p. 175. His memory is celebrated on May 21. Patrolog. curs, compl. gr. t. 87, p. 4009. About this creation of St. Sophronia testifies to Stephen, bishop. Dorsky, at the Lateran Council, which was under Pope Martin 1. In seer. 2. ar. Bin. T. IV. Ar. Bolland. t. 2. Ianuar. XXIII. n. 2. Lambec. Bibl. Caesar. p. 575 in not. Cellier. t. 17. p. 615 et sq. Lambetius, listing the authors who wrote about St. John Chrysostom, says: postea (id est scripsit) Sophron. Patriarcha Herosolymitanus. Bibl. Caes. t. VIII. p. 637; Cellier t. 17, p. 615 et sq. Lambes. Bibl. Caes. t. VIII. p. 569. It is Lambetius who says that the mentioned manuscript is attributed to St. Sophronia: cantica cum antiquis notis musicis, a Dominica publicani et pharisaei usque ad festam omnium sanctorum cantari solita, quorum primum incepit: μή προσευχώμεθα φαρεσαιχώς άδελφοί etc. Lambec. t. III. p. 52. Other writers also mention this passage without referring to Lambetius, for example. Fabric, t. VIII. p. 199; Cave. Hist. liter, v. 1. p. 579. Tertull. lib. de Baptism. c. II. It is attributed to St. Sophronia. Fabric. Bibl. gr. t. 8. p. 199. and Cave. Hist. Liter. v. I.p. 579. Dupin also denies that this passage belongs to St. Sophronia. Vol. VI. r. 17. This word is attributed to St. Sophronia: Allac. De Simeon, scrip, dia-triba. p. 92; Fabr. Bibi. gr. t. 8, p. 200. This word in patr. gr. c. With. t 87 no - it is found in Combefis in the Biblioth. Concionat. Fabric. Bibl. gr. t. VIII p. 197. Cellier. T. 17, p. 615; Dupin. vol. VI. p. 17; Rev. Filaret in history doctrine about oo. The church attributes this passage to St. Sophronia, but he does not confirm his words in any way. T. 3. p. 219, pr. 14. This passage was published by May. Specil. Rom. t. VI. p. 170; in patr. gr. With. c. t. 87 this passage does not exist. Fabr. Bibl. gr. t. III. p. 195. Ave. Philaret unjustifiably attributes the passage about the virginity of St. Sophronia. See uk. date Annal. t. VIII ad. 627, no. 1. Lib. 1. De imaginibus, t. 1. p. 328, edit. novae; II, p. 344; Nicephor. Lib. VIII. Hist. cap. 41. Bin. t. III. p. 562, 613, 614 et 615. Cod. 190, et Heriberti Rosweidi prolegomena ad vitas patrum, p. 20 seq. About the Holy Spirit. vol. V, ch. 29. Lavdes in. ss. Cyrum et Ioannem. Patr. c. c. gr. t. 87, p. 335, n. 14. Oratio II. in. ss. Deiparae Aununtiationem, – in Patr. With. c. gr. t. 87. p. 3263 n. XXXV. Orat. I in Christi Natalitia, – in. Patrol, p. c. t. 87, 3, p. 3203. Lavdes in ss. Cur. et Ioan. n. 14. Patr. With. c. t. 87, 3, p. 3395. Orat. III. De Hypapante n. 6. R. s. With. t. 87, 3, r. 3290. Ss. Cyri et Ioannis miraculum XXXII. Patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. p. 3526. Athanas. orat. contr. arian. IV. n. 12 et 13. Theodoret. Haer fab. lib. IV. cap. IV. Conciliar Epistle, - Russian translation, in Acts. universe. Councils, vol. 6–8, p. 301. Sob. The message is in act. Sun. personal in Russian lane vol. 6, p. 303, and in general the teaching of St. We offer Sophronius on the Trinity mainly according to his own. message, since in other creations he touches little on this dogma. Cathedral sent. - in action universe. personal in the river p.t. 6th p. 306. Orat. II. S. Deiparae Annunt. n. III, - The same opinion is expressed by St. John of Damascus in epist. ad. Jordan. cap. II. Opp. I. 483; nov. edit, t. II. Sob. Message. Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6th p. 306. Orat. II. In ss. Deiparae Annuntiationem. n. XXX. Orat. III. De Hypapante Cap. IV. n. 16. Sob. Sent. Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6th p. 301. Sob. last Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6th p. 308. Orat. panegyr. ad Origen. c. 4. The opinion that angels are created in the image of God is shared by other fathers, for example. Kirill Alex. advers. antropom. c. 4; John of Damascus De fide orthodox. lib. II. c. 3; Dionysius the Areopagite De divin. nomin. c. 4. etc. That's what St. thought. Gregory the Theologian (Orat. 40 n. 7); Chrysostom (in Genes. Homil. 22. n. 2), etc. In Evang. lib. II. homil. 34.n. 7. Orat. VI. De ss. Angelis et Archangelis. Other fathers held the same opinion, for example. Gregory of Nyssa (De vit. Mos. t. I. p. 194) and bl. Augustine (De civitate Dei. XX. 14). But this opinion is not shared by all church fathers; some of them thought that guardian angels were given only to Christians. So they thought, for example, Vasily V. (Homil. in psalm. 48. V. 15), Kirill Alex. (Contr. Iulian. lib. IV. t. VI. p. 122), etc. Orat. VI. De ss. Angelis et Archangelis. And in general all the judgments of St. Sophronia about angels is borrowed from this word. Orat. VI. De ss. Ang et. Archang. Orat. II. In 8. Deiparae Annunt. n. XI Orat. IV. In Exaltat. Cruis. Sob. Message. Acts everyone personal in the river pt. 6th, p. 328. Ss. Cyri et Ioannis miraculum. XXVIII. Orat. II. In Deiparae Annunt. n. XI. Orat. VI. De Ang. et. Archang. Orat. II. In Deiparae Annunt. n. XII. Orat. VII. Encomion in s. John Baptist, n. 4. Orat. II. In S. Dieparae Annunt. n. XIII. About the promise given to Adam, St. Sofr. does not mention. Orat. VII. Encom. in S. Ioan. Bapt. n. V. Orat. VI. De Ang. etyu Archang. Orat. in Christi Natalia. Sob. Message. Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6th p. 309. Orat. II. In ss. Deiparae Annunt. nn. XXXVI. XLII. XLV; Sermo de Salvatoris Baptismo. In Biblioth. Concionat. t. 1. p. 672; Orat. I.In. Christi Natalitia etc. Sozomen. I.VI. c. 25; Epiphan. haeres. 77.n. 22. Sob. last Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6th. p. 310. Orat. I. In Christi Natalitia. Cathedral message. Acts everyone personal in the river p. t. 6 and p. 310; Orat. II. In. S. Deiparae Annunt. n. XLV. Vid. epist. 59, ad cl. et pleb. Constantinop., cap. 5; epist. 102 ad episcop. Galliar, cap. 3, et serm. 28, in Nativit. Dom. 8, cap. 5, edit. Bailer. Cathedral ate. Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6 4. p. 317. Sob. Last Acts everyone personal in the river pt. 6th, p. 311. Orat. I. In Christi Natalit.; Orat. II. In s. Deip. Annuntiation. n. XXXVI; Orat. III. De Hypapante, cap. 11.n. VIII. Sob. Message. Acts everyone personal in the river p.t. 6th p. 318. Orat. III. De Hypapante. Cap. II.11. VIII. IX. Sermo de Salvatoris Baptismo. In. Bibl. Coucionat. t. 1. p. 672. Sob. Message. Acts everyone personal in the river pt. 6th, p. 313. St. Sophronius, however, speaks only about two actions in I. Christ, for some reason keeping silent about two wills. Vid. VII art. Cyr. in. act. 13 sext. syn. ap. Bin. t. V. p. 217–319. Sob. Message. Acts everyone personal in the river pt. 6th, p. 325. Orat. VI. De Ang. et Archang. De princ. II, 10; III. 6. Sob. Message. Acts Sun. personal in the river pt. 6th, p. 330. Orat. VI De Angel, et. Orchang.; ss. Cyr et. Ioannis miraculum XXIX. This is the opinion about St. Photius expresses Sophronia in a review of his Sob. Message. Let us quote the original words of Photius: Legi epistolam synodicam Sophronii Part. Hierosol. Honorio Romano imperatori missam (Photius means Pope Honorius). Naes epistola plena est pietate, novis passim verbis, ut equi pollus sallibus gavdeus, nisi quod rectam opinionem diligenter examinet, et sacrorum dogmatum non fortuitam esse cognitionem ostendit Bibl. Phot. Cod. CCXXI, p. 322. Not agreeing with Photius that St. Sophrony did not firmly know Christian dogmas, we fully agree that in his own way. message of St. Sophronius does not have a strict sequence and that, in fact, according to Photius, he goes, as it were, in leaps and bounds. Eg. “One and the same Christ and Son performs divine and human actions by one God-man, according to the expression of St. Dionysius, by action” (acts of the universal society in r.p.t. 6th, p. 400). This passage is entitled: ποίημα Σοφρονίου πατριάρχου Ί εροσολύμων. Of course, the holiday of the Nativity of Christ. Patr. Curs. Complete. t. 87, 3, p. Sermo de Salvat. Baptismo, in Bibl. Concionat. t. I.p. 672–677. Above St. Sophronius says that heretics are unworthy to hear the news communicated to them and therefore must be expelled from the church. Orat. 11. In SS. Deiparae Annunt. n. XLVIII. Laudes in SS. Cyrum et Ioannem. n. X. Patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. Orat. I. In Christi Natalitia. Patr. With. With. t. 87, 3. This akathist was compiled by George of Pisidia on the occasion of the miraculous deliverance of Constantinople from the Persians and Avars, who besieged Tsar City from land and sea in 626 AD, etc. Greek. imperial Irakli and Patr. Sergie. Orat. II. In S. Deiparae Annunt. n. XVIII. patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. Orat. V. De festo s. crucis. Patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. Lavdes in ss. Cyrum et Ioannem, patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. Orat. 11. In ss. Deiparae Annunt. n. XVIII. It should be noted that, according to St. Sophronia, Ave. The Virgin conceived the God-Man in her womb even before the gospel of Arch. Gabriel. Therefore he puts Arch into his mouth. Gabriel these words: jam concepisti, ex quo illud ave protuli... Ibid. n. XXXVI. Orat. VI. De ss. Angelis et Archarigelis. Orat. 11. In ss. Deiparae Annuntiationen. n. V. Patr. With. c. t. 87. Orat. In Hypapante. Cap. III. n. 11. Patr. With. c. t. 87. Sermo de Salvat. Baptismo. Biblioth. Concionat. v. I.p. 677. Orat. In Christi Natalia. Patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. Orat. III. De Hypapante, cap. V.n. 23. Orat. VII. In SS. Petrum et Paulum. nn. IV. V. In the Jerusalem Church the memory of St. Peter and Paul was celebrated on the 4th day after the Nativity of Christ, and on the third day the memory of the first martyr Stephen was celebrated, as in the Russian Church. Orat. in SS. Petr. et Paulum.Patr. With. c. t. 87, 3. Orat. V. De festo crucis. Patr. With. With. t. 87, 3. The word under discussion was spoken on Sunday, which was also the day of the church renewal, and on the next day the Exaltation of the Honorable Cross was celebrated. From this it is clear that during St. Sophronia's teachings were delivered immediately after the Gospel. It is known that in his youth, among other sciences, St. Sophrony also studied rhetoric. Act. ss. Mart. XI. t. II. n. I Orat. II. In ss. Deiparae Annutiat n. L. Orat. V. De festo crucis. Orat. 1. In Christi Natalitia. Orat. De Hypapante. cap. V.n. XXI. Encom. in S. Ioan. Baptist, n. XIX. Περί τών άριθρών μυστηρίων. P. gr. With. With. t. XLIII. p. 507–518. Sermo de Salvat. Baptismo. Biblioth. Concionat. v. 1. p. 672–677. Orat. De Hypapante. P. gr. c. c. t. 87. Orat. II. In. S. Deip. Anuunt. P. gr. With. With. t. 87. Orat. III. De Hypapante. P. gr. With. c. t. 87. Orat. II. In. S. Deiparae Annunt. Specileg. Roman, t. 4. Romae. 1840. We distribute these chants by day based on the correspondence of their content with the events remembered on one or another day of Holy Week. In Triodion St. Sophronius there is no such distribution. Poems about the capture of St. cities by the Persians, about himself or about a miracle and about the Egyptian martyrs have come down to us in the most insignificant passages, from which it is quite difficult to determine their nature. Praefatio P. Matrangae in anacreontica s. Sophronii. The previous poem talks about the worship of the Magi to the Lord born in Bethlehem. P. Matrangae notae. P. gr. With. With . t. 87, p. 3776. It is difficult to decide which emperor he was. P. Matrangae notae. P. gr. With. With. t. 87, p. 3830. By wind cloud we mean heresies. Of course, monothelitism.