Sts. Barsanuphius and John (6th c.)

JOHN CHRYSSAVGIS

In the early 6th century Barsanuphius, an Egyptian monk, entered the hilly region of Thavatha in Southern Palestine (near Gaza) as a recluse, acquiring a remarkable reputa­tion for discernment and compassion. Abba Seridos, who attended to Barsanuphius as his scribe, was later appointed abbot of a monastery created to organize the increasing number of monks that gradually gathered around the elder. The community included workshops, two guest-houses, a hospital, and a large church where women, too, could receive instruction. Seridos acted as mediator for those wishing to submit questions in writing. Since Seridos did not know Coptic, he would write in Greek. Some time between 525 and 527, another hermit, John, came to live beside Barsanuphius, who became known as the “Great Old Man”; John was called the “Other Old Man.” The two shared the same way of life and supported one another’s ministry. John’s attendant and scribe was Dorotheus of Gaza (later an important spiritual writer in his own right).

John’s letters were more “institutional,” responding to practical matters; those of Barsanuphius were more “inspirational,” responding to spiritual problems. Their authority is uniquely refreshing. At a time when monastic life in the West was becoming increasingly more regulated, Palestinian monasticism preserved flexibility and fluidity. The letters are not a monastic “rule”; they are very personal in style and content.

While scholarship sometimes emphasizes the more “extraordinary” characteristics of the desert elders, Barsanuphius and John are less spectacular. Sensational miracles and exceptional charismas are hardly the most striking feature of their spirituality; they defy the romanticized hagiographical picture of the Late Antique holy man. They do not provide wisdom on request; nor do they attempt to solve all problems presented before them. Their purpose is to inspire and to exhort.

In all, there are approximately 850 letters. Almost 400 of these letters (the longer ones) belong to Barsanuphius, while almost 450 letters belong to John. Whereas early monastic literature has concentrated on monastic development, the correspondence ofBarsanuphius and John redresses a balance in this regard, focusing much attention on the concerns of lay persons. The letters involve more or less all of the main actors of the period, with the exception of women. They include monks from the monastery of Abba Seridos and simple laypersons from the surrounding community, through to high- ranking political officials and ecclesiastical leaders; bishops ask about ordinations; lay people inquire about illness and healing, legal and economic matters, marriage and death, property rights and popular supersti­tions. The ascetic teaching of the letters includes such concepts as gratitude in all circumstances and constant joy, as well as two terms that they coin, namely “not reck­oning oneself as anything” and avoiding “the pretense to rights.”

Beyond scriptural references, relatively few proper names are recorded in the let­ters, which continue the tradition of the

Apophthegmata Patrum. Through Doroth- eus of Gaza, Theodore the Studite also accepts the authority of their teachings, whose extensive influence is evident in John Klimakos and, through John, in Symeon the New Theologian and the 14th-century Hesychasts. Barsanuphius and John are litur­gically commemorated on February 6.

REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

Chryssavgis, J. (2003) Letters from the Desert: A Selection of the Spiritual Correspondence of Barsanuphius and John. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press.

Hevelone-Harper, J. L. (2005) Disciples of the Desert: Monks, Laity, and Spiritual Authority in Sixth- Century Gaza. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Sts. Constantine (Cyril) (ca. 826–869) and Methodios (815–885)

BRENDA LLEWELLYN IHSSEN

Brothers Constantine-Cyril and Methodios were born, raised, and educated in Thessaloniki, an area populated by Slavs for several centuries before them. Their heritage is uncertain, but their home was probably bilingual, Greek and Slavic. Constantine stud­ied at Constantinople under the guidance of future patriarch Photios, and was elevated to chartophylax, a position he resigned in favor of a monastic vocation. Constantine was appointed professor of philosophy at the imperial university, his brother Methodios was appointed archon of an unnamed Slavic territory, a position he also renounced in favor of monasticism. The brothers were united again for a diplomatic and religious mission in the Crimea, where their talents with languages and apologetics were tested in conversation with Jewish and Islamic- influenced Khazars, as well as the Rus.

Facing territorial pressure from Germans and Bulgars, Moravian Prince Rastislav requested that Byzantine Emperor Michael III (842–67) send a bishop and teacher to provide ecclesiastical instruction in Slavonic for building national unity and consciousness, and intellectual and reli­gious culture among various tribes in the territory known to historians as “Greater Moravia.” A secondary goal was a diplo­matic alliance with Byzantium, which would be able to provide political protec­tion for Moravia from menacing neighbors. The brothers, with language and diplomatic skills recently tested on their mission in the Crimea, were suited for the appointment. Prior to the departure and under Cyril’s supervision, a team translated sacred texts from Greek into Slavonic using a rough Slavic alphabet that possibly existed in a rudimentary form prior to Rastislav’s request. As developed and finally attributed to Constantine, Glagolitic is a creative and original alphabet that is a testament to his talents as a philologist.

Though the embassy was received favor­ably in Moravia, German Catholic clergy bitterly opposed their work on the grounds that the gospel ought to be preached only in three languages: Hebrew, Greek, or Latin (trilingualism). This argument would be dismissed by Pope Hadrian II, who greeted the brothers when they arrived to appeal in Rome in 867 with native Slavic clergy to be ordained, and offering the relics of St. Clement (currently at rest in the Basilica di San Clemente). While in Rome the brothers learned of Emperor Michael III’s death and the deposition of Patriarch Photios; Constantine, who was ill, recog­nized that he would likely die in Rome, and subsequently took solemn monastic vows, electing the name “Cyril.” Since transfer to Constantinople was impractical,

Cyril’s body was also buried in the Basilica di San Clemente at Methodios’ request.

Methodios was consecrated as arch­bishop and returned to Moravia, where he faced mounting opposition from Frankish clergy. After successfully defending his Orthodoxy in Constantinople he returned to Moravia and labored to complete a full translation of the Bible into the vernacular before he died in 884.

The brothers are central figures in the history of Slavic Orthodoxy. In addition to the alphabet and the transmission of sacred texts, they were responsible for transmitting the wider context of meaning for what was translated. Subsequently, the Slavic world inherited the harvest of their labors in the form of a literary, spiritual, theological, and artistic tradition which is marked to this day in the unique character of the Slavic Orthodox people.

SEE ALSO: St. Photios the Great (ca. 810-ca. 893)

REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

Dvornik, F. (1970) Byzantine Missions Among the Slavs: SS. Constantine-Cyril and Methodius. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Soulis, G. C. (1965) “The Legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 19.

Tachiaos, A. N. (2001) Cyril and Methodius of Thessalonica: The Acculturation of the Slavs. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press.

Vlasto, A. P. (1970) The Entry of the Slavs into Christendom: An Introduction to the Medieval History of the Slavs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.