Search Results

The words of His Holiness Pope Shenouda III on June 8th (Year Unknown) regarding the life of Saint Abraam, the Bishop of Fayoum and Giza — [The day] after tomorrow is the Feast of Saint Anba Abraam, Bishop of Fayoum. For this reason, there are people who travel tomorrow in order to go attend his Feast at Dayr al-Azab in Fayoum. The story of Saint Anba Abraam contains many exceedingly beautiful things, to which we must attend. The first thing regarding Anba Abraam that I wish to tell you is — there is not found an age [] devoid of saints. Meaning — I read a strange word by an orthodox writer, in his book titled Orthodoxy, [and] at the beginning of the book, he says that the Church lived fifteen centuries in the mire of ignorance, and in the depths of darkness. Of course, a difficult thing [to say]. No age [] has passed over the Church that did not have a light [] shining to the people. There is a verse that says: “God does not leave Himself without a witness.”[1] Meaning, for example — in the beginning of the nineteenth century, in the age of Pope Botros al-Gawli, and the governor Muhammad Ali, [recording cuts, but it is contextually likely that the missing statement is akin to “Anba Abraam was born”] and filled the world with sanctity and love and a good example for all. So do not pass an unjust judgment as to anyone. Perhaps God might use a monk in the life of solitude and contemplation and prayer, and perhaps He might use another monk in the life of service and guidance, as He used Anba Abraam, Bishop of Fayoum, while he was a monk, and filled the world with service and was a saint more righteous than hundreds of those who live as solitaries in the cells. In his age also many of his disciples were saints. The same pope who lived in his age was among the scholars of the Church and her saints, who was Pope Cyril V. What is the virtue that was found in Anba Abraam? The first virtue is the virtue of giving — the virtue of mercy; love for the poor. Anba Abraam, the Bishop of Fayoum, excelled in this matter to the furthest extent. The greatest thing in him [] was not that he merely gave [] — many people give — [] but that he gave to all, [he] gave all that he possessed, even if he had nothing left. Many give, but few give to all. Here is the distinguishing characteristic of Anba Abraam. And [as to] the one who gives to all, [this] signifies that he has died a complete death towards money and the love of money, and wealth and the love of wealth, and ownership and the love of ownership, [and] the world and the love of the world. The love of all things comes to have no value, meaning that money has lost its value in his sight, and [so also with] ownership generally. So it was possible for a poor man to approach him, and he would give to him all the money he had. Once, a governor visited him and gave him ten gold pound coins — he loved him, and left them for him. In the past, a gold pound coin was quite effective. A poor person [also] visited him, so he took the ten gold pound coins and gave them to that poor person. Ten gold pound coins today would equal four hundred [or] five hundred Egyptian pounds at least. Even if he did not have money, he would give anything [he had]. A poor woman visited him and he did not have any money, [so] he took the shawl that he was wearing and gave it to her. They brought to him a new cloth from which to make a new outer garment, and he gave it to [another] poor woman. Once, they brought him furniture for the diocesan headquarters [المطرانية], because its furniture was weak, and a woman came to him asking for a trousseau for her daughter, who was to be married, so he summoned a few cars and loaded up the headquarters’ furniture on them and they left, and the congregation came and found nothing. And once, at the beginning of his reign — the congregation could leave the funds with him — they wanted to renovate the headquarters because its structure was dilapidated, so they collected a hundred pounds — [equivalent] to more than a thousand now — and when they returned and asked him “Your Grace, where is the money, because the contractor is coming,” he told them “I have built above.” “Building above” meaning he lost the money — he spent it on the poor. So since that time they no longer gave him the funds whenever there was a project, because he would distribute any money with him. He was a man who kept nothing for himself, [] and he was generous in giving [] to a degree that pained the trustees or his employees, because he would squander everything. When he became the head of the Monastery of al-Muharraq, he would spend to a great extent. And despite their great love for him, and great respect for him, and belief in his great holiness, and their election of him as the head of the Monastery, they said that such a man would exhaust the Monastery’s funds, so they expelled him from the leadership because he would spend the money on the poor. He was not upset. In one instance, they took him to [serve as] trustee of the diocese of al-Minya — before he became a bishop, while he was a priest — and the headquarters was immediately transformed into a guesthouse for the poor and needy, and instead of being filled with noblemen and prominent people who would come to arrange the affairs [of the diocese], it became filled with the poor and underprivileged, so they sent him back to his monastery. The virtue of giving in him reached quite an unusual level in that he did not like to keep anything for himself. He loved to remain poor and to have nothing for himself; his furniture at the headquarters was simple, and his clothing was simple, and if they brought him anything, he would give it away to the people, and he remained this way. And some foreigners visited him and were amazed by his simplicity and learned a lesson.[2] What does it mean that they learned a lesson? Everyone can dress luxuriously, but few are those who prefer simplicity. The first thing for him was giving, and this is the first virtue in his life. The second thing was miracles. When our Lord found in him the love of the people and the willingness to give to the people, He entrusted to him another talent to give to the people — that is, the gift of healing and exorcising demons. Since his heart was gentle and merciful, and because when our Lord granted him a gift, he utilized it well, He gave him the gift of healing the sick in order for him to complete by it his merciful work. This kind man, who is remembered for mercy and giving, was also a man firm as to the matters of the Church. So among the famous things about him is that he despised divorce and did not agree to divorce anyone, carrying out the principles of the Bible that there be no divorce except in the case of adultery.[3] And he would identify with what is found in Malachi the prophet, when our Lord said “I hate divorce,”[4] and he never consented to a marriage that violated the canons of the Church. Saint Anba Abraam was also famed for humility — [he was] a humble man. The cantor, or master (عريف), of the church was praising, and it seems that he did not proceed in the tune [of the hymn] harmoniously with the others. So he alerted him to this issue and rebuked him for it. The following day, he did not find him in the church, [because he was] upset. So he told them, “let us go to where he is,” and he walked to his house and said to him, “I have sinned, my brother, toward you, do not be upset and come back to the church,” to the extent that the man wept when he saw the metropolitan coming to him all the way to his house to apologize to him, and apologizing to him over a matter in which he was right, in which he had not wronged him. He was a very humble man, and he preferred never to distinguish between rich and poor whatsoever. He would rebuke his chef when he would make one sort of food for the rich and another sort for the poor. [] So he mixed [both sorts of food] together and told him, “give them of this mixture, to the rich and the poor, everyone together. With us there is no such thing as rich and poor.” For this he was beloved, because he was a humble man and loved to live with the poor. He spent his whole life with only the rank of bishop, and when they wished to make him a metropolitan, he declined and was content with the rank of bishop. He was also renowned for prayer and worship, alongside his concern for the poor. It is said about him that he would shut himself in for days, during which he would not be seen, devoted to the work of prayer. And it is said that he would live among the spirit-borne, and sometimes he would spend a very long time in contemplating one phrase from the Psalms, or spend many hours in praying a single Psalm. He was a man of contemplation. This man was a great saint in his age, and until now the Church confesses his sainthood and some bishoprics build altars in his name. He bears witness to the fact that God does not leave Himself without a witness in any age, and that holiness is not confined to the fourth century, or the fifth, or the apostolic age, having ended at that time. Each age has its saints. — [1] Acts 14:17 [2] (Tr.) As one example, see S.H. Leeder, Modern Sons of the Pharaohs, 265-304. [3] See Matthew 5:32, 19:9 [4] Malachi 2:16 — To hear the original audio of this sermon, please visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Dad2B1cVHM

August 2, 1902 — Azer Youssef Atta is born in Damanhur, in the governorate of Beheira, to Youssef and Esther Atta — the third of six children and a member of a pious, ecclesial family — and baptized shortly thereafter at Saint Mary’s Church in Mahmoudeya, Beheira. 1907 — Azer accompanies his family in relocating to Tukh al-Nasara, Governorate of Menoufia, where they would reside until 1910. Here, he would complete his primary schooling and, notably, memorize the Gospel of John in its entirety. During these years, Azer and his family made a pilgrimage in November of each year to Ibyar for the festival of Saint Mina, where Azer would often be found foregoing the festivities taking place outside the church in order to attend the liturgical services — the beginnings of his intimate, personal, and lifelong relationship with Saint Mina, and already a clear indicator of not only his lifelong personal love for the altar, but also, more importantly, his sound spirituality, ecclesiology, and liturgical theology. 1910 — Azer and his family relocate once more, to Alexandria, where he would live until leaving the world for the monastery. This year, the Virgin Mary appears in Azer’s family home on Nile Street, “with her luminous garments and glittering crown,” healing a member of his family and leaving a lasting impression on his life such that he noted in 1968, in an interview with Akhbar Al-Youm newspaper, that the image of this visitation had always remained since the encounter “a source of radiant blessing in my family’s home. She instilled faith in our souls, and we all grew up with this love for her. This holy, blessed event has never left my mind.” [The front page of the May 11, 1968 Akhbar al-Youm newspaper, featuring an interview with Pope Kyrillos regarding the Zeitun Apparitions] 1920 — Azer completes his schooling and earns his baccalaureate. Shortly thereafter, he begins employment as an account manager with Thomas Cook & Son, a British company. Before beginning his shift every day, Azer would attend the morning prayers at Saint Mark’s Cathedral in Mahatet al-Ramleh, Alexandria. After work, he would visit his mentor, Archdeacon Iskander Hanna — who would ultimately prove instrumental in convincing Azer’s family to agree to his pursuit of the monastic life — for guidance. In the evenings, he would spend his time alone in his room, praying and reading the Scriptures, as he longed for the monastic life. [Azer Youssef Atta] June 1927 — Azer resigns from his position at Thomas Cook & Son. Upon being confronted by his older brother regarding this decision, he replied: “Which is preferable? A holy life and real internal happiness, or the suffering and painful life one must live in the secular world?” July 27, 1927 — Azer departs Alexandria to join the Baramos (Ⲡⲁⲣⲱⲙⲉⲟⲥ) Monastery, where he quickly becomes the disciple of Fr. Abdelmassih al-Masudi, a renowned scholar and saintly ascetic. During his novitiate, Azer undertook the most difficult and unpleasant tasks of the monastery with obedient gratitude, concern, and complete faithfulness — serving the elder monks, cleaning their cells, washing their clothes, and even carrying out the duties of the monastery kitchen. Amidst and despite these tasks, Azer diligently continued his prayers, study of the Scriptures, and daily liturgical practice. February 9, 1928 — At the request of his mentor, Fr. Abdelmassih, Azer publishes the first of what would ultimately total 23 volumes of a monthly theological periodical titled Harbor of Salvation, in which he presented various excerpts from Patristic and desert literature while contributing personal theological discourses and narratives containing either autobiographical notes or quotations from contemporary Christian writings. Every one of the fifty copies prepared of each volume was meticulously handwritten by Azer. February 24–25, 1928 — Azer is tonsured as a monk at the Baramos Monastery by the name Fr. Mina al-Baramosy, at the unanimous nomination of the monks and with the abbot’s approval. July 18, 1931 — Fr. Mina al-Baramosy is ordained to the presbyterate by Bishop Demetrius of Menoufia. At his ordination, as at his monastic tonsuring, he wept bitterly and openly, bringing all who were in attendance to tears. Upon being ordained, Pope Youannis XIX personally requested that Fr. Mina complete his forty days’ preparation at the Cathedral of Saint Mark in Alexandria, and to receive the oblation there. It appears that Fr. Mina underwent this period of preparation and instruction at the hands of Pope Youannis himself. 1931–1933 — Following Fr. Mina’s ordination, Pope Youannis requested that he undertake theological studies at the newly established Clerical College in Helwan — a request that arose from Pope Youannis’ convictions as to the importance of formal theological education for monks. Fr. Mina acquiesced out of obedience to the patriarch. During the period of his studies, in which he is noted to have been quite successful, Fr. Mina and his new friend, Fr. Kyrillos of the Monastery of Saint Paul the Anchorite, prayed every day the prayers of the raising of incense, the praises, and the Divine Liturgy, and even succeeded in having this schedule adopted as the official daily schedule of their theological school. At one evening raising of incense presided over by Fr. Mina at the School, Pope Youannis unexpectedly arrived and attended as Fr. Mina delivered the homily, which lasted a full hour. In light of the richness and power of that homily, Pope Youannis blessed Fr. Mina, praying that he would be “a pillar of the Church of God,” and expressed to the Dean of the School that he intended to ordain Fr. Mina to the episcopacy. Upon learning of this intention, in early 1933, Fr. Mina abruptly, immediately, and secretly left the School in the middle of the night, fleeing by train to the White Monastery of Saint Shenouda over 260 miles away. Shortly thereafter, by August 1933, he had returned to the Baramos Monastery, choosing the second of two choices presented to him by Pope Youannis after formally declining the episcopacy. December 1933/January 1934 — After several months of negotiation and debate between Fr. Mina and the monks of the Baramos Monastery, Fr. Mina finally obtains permission to commence the solitary life he had long desired, and departs the monastery for a cave he had previously discovered during the journey of his return to the monastery in mid-1933, which had been carved out by one Hegumen Sarabamon. Before departing, Fr. Mina promised his mentor, Fr. Abdelmassih al-Masudi, to return to the monastery each week for the liturgical prayers commencing on Saturday evening and concluding with the Sunday Liturgy. His first night in the cave was, in his own words, incredibly fearful, characterized by “terrible sounds and forceful earthquakes” brought about by the demons. Yet Fr. Mina describes that he felt God’s “invisible power” that night, so that the fear departed from him. At this cave, Fr. Mina continued in daily prayers, prostrations, and scriptural and patristic reading, and was once especially visited there by Pope Youannis, despite his being eighty years old, out of his desire to receive a “blessing from the cave that had become holy through the spiritual struggle of” Fr. Mina. April 4, 1936 — Fr. Mina the Solitary departs the Baramos Monastery on Lazarus Saturday to accompany and serve seven elderly monks in their expulsion from the Monastery, and takes up residence with them first at the Monastery of Archangel Michael in Old Cairo, and then in a two-story rented house nearby. Soon thereafter, Fr. Mina personally intercedes for them with Pope Youannis, who has mercy on them and permits their return to their Monastery. While Fr. Mina did not hesitate to take upon himself the responsibility of serving and defending the seven monks, this came at the cost of his beloved cave — a sacrifice that caused him much grief. June 1936 — As the seven monks return to their Monastery, Fr. Mina obtains permission from the pope to reside in a remote, abandoned windmill in the Eastern Mountain, on the outskirts of Old Cairo, discerning that he would “receive God’s comforting grace” there. He subsequently obtains special permission to reside there from the Director of the Arabic Antiquities Organization, as the place was a protected site, and signs a lease for the place on June 23, 1936, providing for a monthly rent of only half a piaster. While living at the windmill, Fr. Mina returned to the Monastery of Archangel Michael each Sunday to attend the Divine Liturgy, quietly leaving immediately after the conclusion of the service. Otherwise, his days began at 2 AM with the midnight watches of the Agpeya, followed by the midnight praises, baking the offertory bread, offering the morning raising of incense, and celebrating the Divine Liturgy along with those who would come to attend the prayers with him, whose numbers only increased in proportion to his spreading renown as a blessed, prayerful, and wonder-working monk. October 28, 1941 — Fr. Mina is evicted from the windmill by the governing authorities due to a purported archaeological excavation that, conveniently, was claimed to be required precisely beneath the windmill — which, it should be said, never actually occurred. From this day until late 1943, Fr. Mina was without a permanent residence, moving from place to place, including staying at the Monastery of Archangel Michael in Old Cairo and the Church of Saint Mary at Babylon in Old Cairo, and even having no choice, on at least one occasion, but to sleep on the pavement in front of a locked church. Late 1943 — Fr. Mina is appointed abbot of the Monastery of Saint Samuel by Metropolitan Athanasius of Beni Suef, and arrives there in late December of the same year to find it in severe disrepair. Yet Fr. Mina expressed that he perceived it as being, spiritually, indescribably beautiful and overflowing with blessings and grace. Fr. Mina immediately began the work of effectuating the necessary repairs and even expansions at the monastery and its off-campus center, until he had restored it and rendered it once again inhabitable. He then left there his disciple, Fr. Mina the Younger, to oversee the daily affairs of the monks (and eventually become its abbot in 1954), while he returned in early 1945 to reside in his windmill once again. From there, he cared for the monastery from afar, sending several letters to its monks and visiting them from time to time. Mid-1945 to Mid-1946 — After only residing at the windmill for a few months, Fr. Mina is evicted once again. He therefore again resorts to moving between the Monastery of Archangel Michael and the Church of Saint Mary at Babylon, and even, at one point, spends forty days with his family in Alexandria for lack of living accommodations. Amidst these relocations, he is appointed, against his will, the father confessor of the Saint Mercurius Convent in Old Cairo. Finally, in mid-1946, following a papal decree requiring all monks to return to their respective monasteries, Fr. Mina requests and is granted by Pope Yousab II official permission to pray at the Monastery of Archangel Michael in Old Cairo. 1947–1959 — In early 1947, while Fr. Mina was residing in a small room at the Monastery of Archangel Michael, he learns — possibly, according to his own vague words, from his dear friend, Saint Mina — that a neighboring property was for sale. Shortly thereafter, he succeeds in purchasing the property, and that at a 33% discount provided by its prior owner upon learning that it would be for Saint Mina. According to Fr. Mina, an old lady was present for the discussion and paid the required sum “on the spot.” And so commenced the construction of the Monastery of Saint Mina in Old Cairo, which was consecrated at the end of the same year by none other than Metropolitan Athanasius of Beni Suef, along with Metropolitan Abraam of Giza. It was in this place that Fr. Mina continued to carry out his customary schedule of daily prayers, beginning at midnight, while attending to the needs of the many students who, being attracted by his piety, simplicity, wisdom, and prayerfulness, began to gather around him and become his disciples. It is said that he only ventured beyond the gates of the Monastery once in over a decade, only to undergo a necessary appendectomy. Among the activities he either carried out or oversaw at the Monastery during this period were daily hymn and Coptic language classes for children, the assembling of a reference library, lectures for young adults, and even vocational training programs. He even built a boarding house on the property to host students coming to attend Cairo University from out-of-town, who were only accepted to reside there if they had a letter of recommendation from their parish priest and agreed to adhere to the monastery’s rules and attend the Divine Liturgy regularly. And so countless disciples, especially from among the well educated and spiritually sincere members of the Sunday School Movement, were attracted to Fr. Mina and became regular attendees and students at Saint Mina’s Monastery, finding in Fr. Mina acceptance and encouragement, much-needed guidance, a pious example, and heartfelt fatherhood — all of which they unfortunately often lacked in their home parishes — all while witnessing his life of unceasing prayer and the many signs God regularly performed at his hands there. These disciples included, most notably, Zareef Abdullah (a founder of the Sunday School Movement in Giza, and later ordained Fr. Boulos Boulos, the first member of the Sunday School Movement to be ordained to the priesthood), Waheeb Zaky (later Fr. Salib Suriel, a well-respected teacher of the Coptic Church in the twentieth century who had been a disciple of Fr. Mina since 1936, while he was still living at the windmill), Saad Aziz, who would be tonsured a monk by Fr. Mina himself on April 14, 1948 by the name of Makary at Saint Mina’s Monastery and eventually become Anba Samuel of Ecumenical and Social Services, Waheeb Atallah, who had initially become a disciple of Fr. Mina at the windmill and would ultimately become Bishop Gregorios of Higher Theological Studies, Coptic Culture, and Scientific Research, Abdelmessih Bishara, who would succeed Metropolitan Athanasius of Beni Suef as Bishop Athanasius of Beni Suef, Soliman Rizk, who would become Bishop Mina Ava Mina and ultimately be appointed abbot of the Monastery of Saint Mina that would one day be built by Fr. Mina after his enthronement as Pope Kyrillos VI, Mikhail Ibrahim, who would ultimately be ordained Fr. Mikhail Ibrahim, and countless other future clergymen and faithful servants of the Church. Perhaps foremost among the disciples of Fr. Mina at the Monastery of Saint Mina was a young member of the Sunday School Movement in Saint Anthony’s Church in Shubra, Nazir Gayed, who would eventually become Fr. Antonios al-Suryani, then Bishop Shenouda of Christian Education, and finally succeed his mentor in the papacy as none other than Pope Shenouda III. During these years, while within the gates of the Monastery of Saint Mina was a paradise of piety and prayer and a safe haven for many, outside grew, among certain ecclesial hierarchs and influential figures, especially within the patriarchate, animosity and disdain for Fr. Mina, leading to various attempts at thwarting his efforts, suppressing his growing influence, and even an attempt, foiled at the last minute, to kidnap him so as to forcibly remove him from the Monastery and isolate him from his many disciples. Despite these tribulations, Fr. Mina persisted unfazed in his life of solitude and ceaseless prayer, being supported firstly by God’s grace and secondly by the love of his disciples and the defensive interventions of his supporters from among the episcopacy, most especially Metropolitan Athanasius of Beni Suef. April 19, 1959 — Having been nominated to the papacy against his will and without his knowledge by Metropolitan Athanasius of Beni Suef, and having received the third-highest number of votes in the final election, Fr. Mina is selected by altar ballot as the 116th pope of Alexandria and patriarch of the See of Saint Mark. He learns of the announcement as he prays the Divine Liturgy at Saint Mina’s Monastery in Old Cairo and begins to weep, being heard praying, by those around him after the service: “I have always lived as a solitary, my God, and I would have continued to live and die solitary. But you have not wanted it. My God, may your will be done, for your will is impenetrable and you are mysterious, O Lord.” May 9, 1959 — Fr. Mina travels to the Baramos Monastery— his first time returning since he left it on April 4, 1936 — and thereafter visits the remaining monasteries of Wadi al-Natrun. At the Syrian Monastery, his disciple, Nazir Gayed, who had five years prior become a monk there under the name Fr. Antonios al-Suryani, is asked to deliver an address in his presence, during which Fr. Mina weeps openly. That evening, Fr. Mina returns to Cairo, where he is welcomed by thousands of believers, and arrives at the cathedral, where he prays the evening raising of incense, according to his custom, before retiring to his room. May 10, 1959 — At 2:30 AM, Fr. Mina requests that the guard of the papal residence open the doors of the church, where he prays, as a matter of course, the midnight and morning praises and morning raising of incense, before attending the early liturgy as a mere attendee, as he would pray the later Liturgy during his ordination to the papacy that very day. And so, only a few hours later, Fr. Mina is ordained Pope Kyrillos VI, weeping throughout the entirety of the ordination service and even asking Bishop Lucas of Manfalout to deliver his personal address to the congregation in his stead. Therein, Pope Kyrillos VI movingly expresses his sense of awe before the great responsibility with which he has been entrusted, his trust in God’s grace and support, his deep love for the flock, and his hope that the clergy and laity would work cooperatively with him for the edification of the Church of God. Among his concluding remarks, he says: “may we disappear that He may appear with His blessed glory. I ask the Lord that He may grant us all oneness of spirit and heart and thought, that we may work together with one mind and one will, that is the will of the Holy Spirit, Who has guided the Church throughout her long glorious history. And we have one holy goal: the glory of God and the service of Truth and the highest aspirations.” After the liturgy, Pope Kyrillos stands and refuses to sit, despite the heat of the day and the lengthy prayers that had just concluded, while he greets, one person at a time, the thousands in attendance at the blessed event — in stark contrast to the closed-door policies of his predecessor, who had installed iron bars on the windows of the patriarchate and erected a barricade there. Pope Kyrillos would henceforth become perhaps the most accessible patriarch in the Church’s storied history. Each day, following his usual morning prayers, which began at approximately three in the morning and concluded at around eight in the morning, he would meet with countless visitors amidst his other obligations — whether official meetings or other papal duties — until six in the evening, when he would “go to his work” of praying the evening praises and the evening raising of incense, after which he would continue to receive guests until about midnight. These visitors came to him for a multitude of reasons — personal and professional problems, guidance, complaints, demon possession, illnesses of various sorts, or merely to receive his blessing — and invariably found in him a patient smile, a listening ear, penetrating insight, timely austerity, clarity of mind, gifts of healing, prophecy, and exorcism, a warm sense of humor, and a gracious and fatherly heart that was all-encompassing. Meanwhile, the pope maintained his ascetical disposition and preference for silence — his food was almost entirely comprised of simple bread, spices, and cooked vegetables, and his clothing consisted of a coarse inner garment, a leather belt, the monastic Eskim, a lighter outer garment, an outer cassock, a shawl, and a tattered pair of shoes which he never exchanged or repaired. His sleep was short and interrupted, on a thin brass bed with a light covering regardless of the season, on which he slept in a rigid position on his side, with legs unbent. In all, a man of prayer, silence, and unfathomable simplicity, whose exalted rank paradoxically engendered within him an even deeper prayerfulness, humility, simplicity, patience, and life of asceticism, much to the dismay of many among the clergy and laity, who carried out a brutal campaign of hostility, slander, and defamation against him, especially during the early years of his papacy. June 7, 1959 — Pope Kyrillos consecrates the first bishop of his papacy, Metropolitan Basil IV of Jerusalem, a former student of Saint Archdeacon Habib Girgis who had gone on to earn a doctorate degree from the School of Theology at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. The See of Jerusalem had been vacant for three years, since the repose of its previous Metropolitan, James II of Jerusalem, in 1956, and so His Holiness made it a matter of urgent priority to consecrate a metropolitan for it immediately following his own consecration. Upon hearing of the pope’s intention to ordain him, Metropolitan Basil IV, then Hegumen Cyril al-Antoni, escaped and went into hiding, only to then relent and accept the ordination at the pleas of his personal acquaintances and upon discerning the will of God. June 22, 1959 — Pope Kyrillos VI journeys into the desert at Mariout, as one of his first official acts as patriarch, to consecrate the site, and initiate the (re)establishment of Saint Mina’s Monastery in the same desert where, until a millennium before, his shrine and monastery had attracted countless pilgrims from all over the Christian world. This had long been a desire and hope of Pope Kyrillos — in 1937, he had requested permission from Pope Youannis XIX to commence this project, only to be told, rather sarcastically, “have we finished rebuilding the cities to begin rebuilding the desert?” Then, in 1943, he had tried once more to obtain permission for the undertaking, only to once again fall short of success; and finally, in 1946, he had asked his brother Hanna to assist in obtaining the necessary clearances, again to no avail. This situation persisted until March 5, 1958, when, after the death of Pope Yousab II, the Maglis finally decided to rebuild Saint Mina’s Monastery. In correspondence written that night, Pope Kyrillos, then still Fr. Mina, elatedly declared: “I was so happy and glad for this news to the extent that I could not go to sleep before writing this letter. . .” In another letter prepared the same night, he wrote: “I plead to the almighty Lord Jesus to declare his will and grant me the desire of my heart, to see with my eyes the renovation of this monastery.” However, the issue of the Monastery would be cast aside amidst the climate of the day and Fr. Mina’s election and enthronement, until this fateful day when he arrived to the site in the desolate wilderness of Mariout to consecrate the place and commence the long-awaited restoration. Soon thereafter, on November 27, 1959, two days after the annual commemoration of the martyrdom of Saint Mina, Pope Kyrillos would return to celebrate a liturgy at the tomb of Saint Mina before driving to a nearby site and laying the foundation stone for what would eventually become the great Monastery of Saint Mina there. Upon his arrival that day, rain fell in that area, ending a longstanding drought. The project was met with woeful disdain at all levels, both inside and outside the Church — one western scholar comments, now, in hindsight, quite comically: “who, one wonders, will visit it? Who needs it?” And many Copts, even among the clergy, repeated the same bewildered phrase: “he is taking the money of the Copts and throwing it in the sand!” But Pope Kyrillos saw in the place what many if not all of his contemporaries failed to discern: a divinely ordained opportunity to revive the veneration of a long-forgotten and yet still entirely alive and active saint, and along with it the life of genuine prayer and sound monasticism practiced in public view, thereby inspiring to the same manner of life, with the aid of the multitude of miracles performed there, all who came to receive the blessing of the place, who had been largely deprived of the life of prayer and the experience of genuinely pious clergymen in the unfortunate decades preceding the papacy of Pope Kyrillos, due to the overwhelmingly weak and confused state of ecclesial life and administration during that period. June 29, 1959 — Only one week after his consecration of the site of the Monastery of Saint Mina in Mariout, as one of his first acts as patriarch, Pope Kyrillos declares the autocephaly of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and elevates its head, Abune Basilios, to the rank of Patriarch-Catholicos. In this step, Pope Kyrillos heals a decades-long dispute between the Coptic and Ethiopian Churches, wherein the Coptic Church had refused to grant independence to the Ethiopian Church. In immediately permitting the Ethiopian Church to receive its independence, Pope Kyrillos overturns over 1500 years of precedent wherein the Coptic patriarch retained the authority to nominate and consecrate the head of the Ethiopian Church. In so doing, he effectively salvages the relationship between the two Churches and inaugurates a new era of equality between them. October 12, 1959 — Pope Kyrillos secures a meeting with President Gamal Abdel Nasser with the help of an acquaintance after a tense five months wherein the president refused to visit the pope. Upon arriving to the presidential palace, Pope Kyrillos is met with antagonism and discourtesy by the president. Not feeling particularly welcomed, he abruptly concludes the brief meeting with the words: “enough. I leave you to God. I leave you to God.” He immediately leaves for the patriarchate, where he prays the evening raising of incense upon arriving before continuing his evening as usual and returning to his cell at midnight. Only two hours later, his acquaintance, who had initially arranged the aforementioned meeting, frantically knocks on the door of the patriarchate exclaiming that the president was calling for the pope immediately. After some hesitation, given the late hour, the attendant permitted the man to go himself to knock on the pope’s door. As they approached his room, and before they could knock, Pope Kyrillos opened the door already dressed in his patriarchal attire and made his way towards them, saying: “come, let us go quickly!” Upon arriving, this time to the president’s family residence, Pope Kyrillos exits the vehicle and says: “where is she?” It had happened that the president’s daughter had suddenly fallen ill the prior day, and no diagnosis could be found. Thus, the president felt in his heart that this was related to his disdainful conduct towards Pope Kyrillos and the pope’s rebuke. The pope, seemingly made aware by divine revelation of what had occurred, entered the home alone and prayed for the sick girl, and at once she was restored to perfect health. At the sight of his miraculously healed daughter, the president declared: “from this moment, I will call you my father, and in the future, do not go to the presidential palace, but rather when you meet me, you meet me in my own house. And these children are like your children. Pray for us just as you do for your family.” From then on, Nasser’s disposition towards the pope, and the Copts more generally, took a drastic turn. While previously he had been a negative critic of the Copts and largely uninterested in either their concerns or their newly enthroned pope, now, suddenly, he esteemed Pope Kyrillos greatly in the public eye and was favorable towards the Copts, with his children even contributing the monies for the purchase of the land that would ultimately become the Monastery of Saint Mina in Mariout. Even the president’s own family and closest circle were deeply puzzled by the special concern, admiration, and endearment Nasser exhibited towards Pope Kyrillos. This was, however, not surprising to the pope, who, upon being gently pressed on one occasion by Tamav Iriny, the late saintly abbess of the Monastery of Abu Sefein in Old Cairo, about the flattering words spoken to him by the president in a conversation between them that she had overheard, responded: “has God not shown him miracles?” October 26, 1960 — Pope Kyrillos visits Ethiopia for a two-week pastoral tour, the fourth such patriarchal visit in the previous 1500 years. He is hosted for the duration of his stay by Emperor Haile Selassie in his personal imperial residence, where Pope Kyrillos would casually interact with the lions on the property. This would be the first of two visits by Pope Kyrillos to Ethiopia. The trip concluded with a two-day pastoral visit to Eritrea. June 22, 1961 — At a Synodal meeting at which a certain bishop was to be examined for doctrinal issues, which bishop had also been issuing insulting and derogatory letters against Pope Kyrillos VI, the pope remarks: “do not mention any accusations against [the bishop] that are related to me. I forgive him and am forgoing my rights.” This was entirely in line with His Holiness’ invariable disposition towards those who defamed and derided him: immediate forgiveness and, often, a convicting quip indicative of his awareness of the person’s opposition. September 9, 1962 — Pope Kyrillos ordains Fr. Macarius al-Suryani, one of his longtime disciples, as Bishop Athanasius of Beni Suef and Bahnasa. Bishop Athanasius would oversee the same diocese that was before him shepherded by Metropolitan Athanasius, who had for many years defended Pope Kyrillos prior to his patriarchate, and who had even nominated him for the papacy. Bishop Athanasius was the first “Sunday School monk” ordained by Pope Kyrillos to the episcopacy, and would go on to serve the Church for almost forty years as a “model and epitome of a diocesan bishop.” September 23, 1962 — Pope Kyrillos summons Fr. Antonios al-Suryani, formerly Nazir Gayed (who, notably, had been a disciple of the pope since his days at the Monastery of Saint Mina in Old Cairo), urgently from his cave outside the Syrian Monastery. He sends to him Bishop Theophilus, the bishop of the monastery, to call him to the patriarchate. Upon arriving, in his sandy garments, he is met with interrogation by Pope Kyrillos regarding his attire and a recent incident at the Syrian Monastery before the pope asks him regarding the reasons for his purported “refusal” to work with him. Fr. Antonios wittily counters every suggestion by Pope Kyrillos that would have him leave his cave to return to the world in order to work with the pope. As he attempts to leave, Fr. Antonios performs a customary prostration before the patriarch, at which time, in the blink of an eye, Pope Kyrillos takes hold of his head with his unusually large hands and declares: “Shenouda, Bishop of Education!” Bishop Theophilus joins in the moment by likewise placing his hands on Fr. Antonios’ head, before Pope Kyrillos instructs Fr. Antonios that he is not permitted to leave the patriarchate until his ordination takes place the following Sunday, September 30, 1962. Fr. Antonios spends that week at the patriarchate deeply mournful, weeping bitterly and lamenting his impending ordination. In a letter he penned in response to one congratulatory correspondence following his ordination, he writes: “as a matter of fact, a letter of consolation, not of congratulation, was fit for the occasion. How can a monk be congratulated on leaving the calmness of the wilderness and abiding again amidst the disturbance of the city? . . . For me, indeed, it is a matter of shame. I remember that day of my consecration to the episcopacy with tears and lamentation.” September 30, 1962 — On the morning of the day appointed by Pope Kyrillos for the ordination of Fr. Antonios to the episcopacy, he escorts Fr. Antonios down a staircase of the patriarchate on the way to the church along with a group of those in attendance. Suddenly, he stops, standing still on the staircase for some time in deep prayer as those around them stand by perplexed. Then, just as suddenly, Pope Kyrillos exclaims: “go, get his brother! Quickly! Go, get his brother!” By his brother, Pope Kyrillos was referring to Fr. Makary al-Suryani, who was then serving as the patriarchal secretary. Ever since Pope Kyrillos was Fr. Mina at the Monastery of Saint Mina in Old Cairo, Fr. Makary had been his disciple, beginning as Saad Aziz — his name prior to tonsuring. He had even been ordained by Fr. Mina at that very monastery in 1948, as the first of the “Sunday School monks.” And so, upon being summoned, Fr. Makary comes down the stairs where the pope and Fr. Antonios stood, at which time the pope instructs him to “stand next to [his] brother.” And so that day, His Holiness ordains Fr. Antonios as Bishop Shenouda for the Theological College and Clerical Institutes, and Fr. Makary as Bishop Samuel for Ecumenical, Public, and Social Affairs. With these two brilliant men, Pope Kyrillos inaugurated for the first time in Christian history the position of the “general bishop” to oversee not a physical diocese, but a conceptual one. This reform in the functional structure of the episcopacy, especially in light of the eminent personnel carefully selected by Pope Kyrillos — including not only Bishops Shenouda and Samuel, but also Fr. Pakhom al-Muharraqi, previously Waheeb Atallah, a disciple of Pope Kyrillos since his time at the windmill, who would be ordained on May 10, 1967 as Bishop Gregorios of Higher Studies, Coptic Culture, and Scientific Research — would enable widespread and far-reaching reform, advancement, and ministry in every area of ecclesial significance both throughout Egypt and abroad. It is unsurprising that Pope Kyrillos empowered, sponsored, and chose for episcopal ordination such brilliant servants, all of whom possessing a sincere ecclesial spirit, to serve in these consequential roles — his administrative vision, in harmony with his spiritual disposition, was keen to empower those with the requisite spiritual and intellectual qualifications. As a well-known priest in his day, Fr. Youssef Asaad, summarizes: “[Pope Kyrillos] never worked alone, but always let others participate with him . . . If someone was celebrating the Liturgy in a way that was pleasing to the people, he rejoiced greatly, saying: ‘bring him to pray with me.’ If someone was talented in preaching . . . He would sit and listen to the homily like any other person in the congregation.” Indeed, Pope Kyrillos himself specifically expressed in his first homily, delivered at his ordination, that this would be his method (and, truly, ought to be the method of every genuine servant of God): “may we disappear that He may appear with His blessed glory.” Late 1962 — Metropolitan Youannis of Giza, who had been ordained in a questionable manner by the prior patriarch, embarks on a campaign to collect signatures in support of a petition to depose Pope Kyrillos, alleging that His Holiness was an uneducated man and overly preoccupied with prayer. Thus he travels throughout Egypt to gather signatures, turning many clergy and laity, as well as several bishops, against the pope. Upon being informed of the plot while praying the evening raising of incense at the cathedral in Alexandria, Pope Kyrillos addresses Saint Mark saying: “this will be the last time I come here to you . . . I will go to the desert and never return if this man’s project succeeds.” The next morning, Metropolitan Youannis is found dead at his residence, having mistakenly consumed, during a coughing fit in the middle of the night, a pesticide from a bottle inadvertently placed next to his medicine bottle on his nightstand. At his funeral, Pope Kyrillos was heard weeping: “all of this, for what? A few pieces of paper with signatures?!” For forty days after that metropolitan’s death, and despite his act of gross disloyalty, Pope Kyrillos commemorated him in every Divine Liturgy. And so it was with each of those who opposed and ridiculed him from among the clergy — with the passing of each of them, Pope Kyrillos would mourn the passing of “his son,” saying: “it is as if a part of my spirit has been taken from me.” Throughout his papacy, Pope Kyrillos kept closest to him those who opposed and challenged him, implicitly finding in them protection for his humility — even the letters found among his personal belongings after his departure were invariably those that insulted and defamed him. He did not keep even one fragment that expressed or contained the slightest hint of positivity or praise towards him, perfectly embodying the words of his teacher, Isaac the Syrian: “honor flees from before the man who runs after it; but he who flees from it, the same will it hunt down, and will become to all men a herald of his humility.” March 31, 1963 — Following the death of Metropolitan Youannis of Giza, Pope Kyrillos ordains another of his disciples, Fr. Mettias al-Suryani, as Bishop Domadius of Giza. While Metropolitan Youannis had long resisted Pope Kyrillos, and with him the entirety of the Sunday School movement, Bishop Domadius was a faithful disciple to Pope Kyrillos and a supporter of the Sunday School movement. His ordination would therefore prove instrumental in bringing the spirit and vision of the pope into Giza, opening up the diocese to the spiritual reform process taking place throughout the rest of Egypt during His Holiness’ reign. January 13, 1965 — Pope Kyrillos visits Ethiopia for the second time in order to preside over the Inaugural Oriental Orthodox Conference in Addis Ababa, becoming the first patriarch in history to visit the country twice. Upon disembarking his flight, he is greeted by a military salute and thousands of cheering believers along with Emperor Haile Selassie. Having brought with him the offerings and arrived fasting, his first words to the Emperor are: “I would like to go to the church to pray a Liturgy.” And so he first celebrates the Divine Liturgy before inaugurating the Conference. May 9, 1965 — Pope Kyrillos travels from Saint Mina’s Monastery in Mariout to Cairo to meet Nasser for the first time in several years. Beginning in early 1964, the Copts had begun once again to face institutional and governmental discrimination, with church building permits revoked, church renovations forcibly halted, and congregations being forcibly removed from their parishes. A church in Helwan Gardens was seized, and another was destroyed by a Muslim mob. While Pope Kyrillos repeatedly wrote to Nasser regarding these concerns, he received no response. And so, in March 1965, the Synod convened and requested of Pope Kyrillos that he go to the president directly. However, given the unpredictability of the situation and the fact that he had not spoken to the president in several years, he instead spent the entirety of Great Lent that year in Alexandria, before proceeding to celebrate the Pascha at his beloved Monastery of Saint Mina in Mariout. On the eve of the Feast of the Resurrection, Pope Kyrillos suddenly ordered that all visitors to the Monastery, even his own relatives, immediately depart, and that the Monastery’s generators be turned off. That night, he chose to forego attending the communal Festal liturgy in favor of celebrating a later candlelit liturgy, beginning at 1:30 AM, with only a few monks, throughout which he wept bitterly. Immediately after the conclusion of the service, Pope Kyrillos said to his disciple, Fr. Raphael Ava Mina, “my son, shouldn’t you go and feed the visitors?” Perplexed, Fr. Raphael responded: “what visitors? You sent them all home.” To this the pope remarked: “my son, shouldn’t you ask them first? The church is filled to the last space, there was not a single empty spot . . . may their prayers be with us.” He then turned towards the seemingly empty church and said: “go in peace, go in peace, remember us in your prayers,” before making the sign of the cross over the place and leaving. Having prayed the Feast with the spirit-borne believers, whom he and no one else in attendance could see, the pope’s prayers for the Church would soon be answered. The very next day, he was informed that Nasser requested a meeting with him, and so, on May 9, 1965, Pope Kyrillos travels to Cairo to meet him. At this meeting, Nasser informs him that he had not heard anything about him for some time, and that he had discovered that a certain minister had sabotaged the situation by preventing the pope’s correspondences from reaching the president. Nasser had discovered a dossier rife with the requests and concerns of the pope, and so called for the pope. Nasser immediately removed the obstructive minister and personally investigated and resolved each of the issues noted in the dossier, resuming the friendship between himself and Pope Kyrillos and even being the one to suggest that the pope consider building a new patriarchate instead of the “old cathedral” in Azbakeya, which was surrounded by markets and at that point in need of renovation. The Cathedral of Saint Mark and the Anba Rweiss Complex, built with the help of a substantial monetary contribution from Nasser’s government, would soon become that new patriarchate. July 24, 1965 — The foundation stone of the new cathedral is laid at a great celebration attended by Pope Kyrillos and Nasser, among many other believers and officials. April 24, 1967 — At the beginning of the Holy Pascha week, His Holiness Pope Kyrillos commences the process of preparing the Holy Myron (Chrism) by gathering the ingredients for the monumental occasion, which had only taken place 25 times prior in the Coptic Church’s history. In preparation for the event, His Holiness had commissioned Dr. Youssef Mansour to prepare a book on the Holy Myron, which research considered over nine manuscripts. For five days, in the early mornings throughout the Holy Pascha week, the Holy Myron was slowly prepared and consecrated, with the personal involvement of His Holiness and many of the Metropolitans and Bishops of the Oriental Orthodox Churches. All the books of the Bible were read audibly throughout the entire process of preparation. On the eve of Thursday of the Holy Pascha week, the Holy Myron was placed beside the altar, and on Covenant Thursday, after the prayer of the Ninth Hour, His Holiness prayed over the Holy Myron. At the conclusion of the Covenant Thursday service, the Holy Myron was moved to the balcony of the great sanctuary, where it stayed until the Feast of the Resurrection (April 30, 1967). On the Feast of the Resurrection, after the Divine Liturgy, the combination of the existing and new Holy Myron commenced, continuing daily until the process was completed on Tuesday, May 2, 1967. May 10, 1967 — Pope Kyrillos ordains Waheeb Atallah, who was his disciple since his days at the windmill, to the episcopacy as His Grace Bishop Gregorios of Higher Theological Studies, Coptic Culture, and Scientific Research, as well as His Grace Bishop Paulos for the diocese of Helwan and Massara. Later on the same day, Pope Kyrillos meets with Nasser in connection with various issues regarding the operations of al-Maglis al-Melli and related financial concerns. At this visit, Nasser congratulates His Holiness on the eighth anniversary of his ordination, at which time the pope curiously places his hand on Nasser’s chest, saying: “I place my hand on the hand of God, as it is written: ‘the king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord.’” That night, a government official notifies Pope Kyrillos that Nasser’s chest pain had resolved the moment the pope touched his chest. Although Nasser had a history of cardiac issues, including a suspected heart attack in 1965, these were hidden from public knowledge and even Nasser’s own wife. Nevertheless, in his characteristic clairvoyance, Pope Kyrillos was seemingly aware of the president’s angina, and acted in his typical manner by subtly, without pomp or any degree of showmanship, healing the president. August 24, 1967 — Excavations on the new cathedral grounds begin. Only ten months later, on June 25, 1968, the new cathedral would be consecrated, during the year of the 1900th anniversary of the martyrdom of Saint Mark, in the presence of Pope Kyrillos, Nasser, Emperor Haile Selassie, several patriarchs, countless believers, government officials, and delegations from all over the world, and more than six thousand Egyptians and foreigners. The very next day, June 26, 1968, a relic of Saint Mark — which had been translated from Rome to Cairo the day before the cathedral’s inauguration and received at the airport by Pope Kyrillos himself along with Mar Ignatius Yacoub III and a great number of clergymen, several heads of religions and Christian denominations, and thousands of Egyptians, both Christian and Muslim — would be processed from al-Azbakeya to the new cathedral, where a Divine Liturgy would be prayed and a great celebration held, with the chest containing the relic being placed beneath the altar of the new cathedral. April 2, 1968 — The Marian Apparitions commence at the Church of the Virgin Mary in Zeitun, Egypt. One week later, on April 9, the Virgin appears there once again, and thereafter the apparitions become more frequent, occurring up to twice or more every week for several years, ending in 1971. Pope Kyrillos immediately forms a specialized committee headed by His Grace Bishop Gregorios to conduct a thorough and searching investigation, and on May 4, 1968, the Patriarchate issues an official statement confirming the validity of the apparitions. However, His Holiness does not personally attend the mass gatherings or otherwise make an effort to witness the apparitions firsthand. When asked about his absence, he noted the particular protocol applicable to his visit to any church, his desire not to influence the people regarding the apparitions, his intention to visit the church upon the completion of an icon for the church which he had commissioned depicting the Virgin’s apparition, and the fact that he had seen the Virgin Mary “since his youth,” including in her appearance and miracle in 1910 at his family’s home in Alexandria, an event which he stated “never left [his] mind.” He continued his response: “Now that millions have witnessed the apparition of the Virgin Mary above the Church of Zeitoun, and news of this apparition has spread from one end of the earth to the other . . . and witnesses have testified to this wondrous appearance, in this unique form in which she has never appeared before anywhere on earth . . . we bow down to God, praising Him for His support for us. . .” [The published statement of the Coptic Orthodox Church authenticating the Zeitun Apparitions] 1968–1970 — When not at his beloved Monastery of Saint Mina, Pope Kyrillos continues in his daily routine of rising in the early morning to pray the morning praises, morning raising of incense, and Divine Liturgy — even in the still unfinished cathedral, without windows or heating — before meeting with the multitudes of his spiritual children who would come to him, to hear their problems, bless them, and pray for them. He would then proceed to the church once more for the evening praises, evening raising of incense, and midnight praises before once again meeting his visitors until late in the night, when he would return to his room and shut his door. Throughout this time, his final illnesses had begun, causing him to sometimes carry out this daily routine amidst high fevers and other severe symptoms. May 1970 — Upon concluding a visit to the Monastery of Saint Mina, Pope Kyrillos bids the monks farewell with unusual tearfulness and great emotion. Overcome by tears, he confers with Hegumen Mina Ava Mina, the monastery abbot, before giving him monastic head coverings for each of the monks. He then proceeds to offer a special praise for Saint Mark and Saint Mina in both of the monastery churches, while holding an icon of Saint Mark which he had kept since his days of solitude in the desert. He then enters his car and attempts to smile at those standing by, but his tears continue to fall. This would be his final visit to his beloved monastery. June 1970–March 1971 — Pope Kyrillos begins to delegate tasks and entrust various duties to his disciples and certain priests and bishops. He arranges envelopes for the widows and brethren of the Lord, among whom were many he had supported in secret for many years. Meanwhile, his illness continues to worsen, and he is confined to bedrest against his wishes on several occasions, preventing him from attending the liturgical prayers he so dearly loved and so forcing him to hear these broadcast live from the church through speakers he had requested that his disciple, Fr. Raphael Ava Mina, set up for him in his room. He remained so attentive to the prayers, even in this state, that after they would conclude, when the celebrants would come to receive his blessing, he would urge them not to rush the service, gently correct them if they erred in pronouncing a word, and encourage them not to neglect to pray certain parts of the Liturgy, such as the Litanies after the Gospel, that some had become accustomed to skipping. As he had throughout his papacy, he would also frequently sit at his window, or on his balcony, listening to those below as they mocked or complained of him, and he would say to himself: “they are justified in what they say.” March 7, 1971 — Despite his ongoing illnesses, including a most recent bout of influenza, Pope Kyrillos insists to pray the Divine Liturgy, in direct contravention of his physicians’ orders. The following day, he invites his secretary into his room and solemnly advises him: “take care of the Church, Father; attend to its needs. . . May God be with you and attend to your affairs.” March 9, 1971 — At 5:30 AM, Pope Kyrillos hears the prayers through the speaker in his room before receiving his visitors. He comforts each of them as he had done with his secretary: “May God attend to your affairs.” After a few hours, His Holiness comes to the door to ask whether any visitors remained. He then raises his cross, looks around at those around him, and repeats again, “May God attend to your affairs,” before shutting the door of his room, at which time he becomes light-headed and collapses. A disciple assists His Holiness to his bed and calls for a physician — by the time he arrives, at 10:30 AM, Pope Kyrillos has already reposed in the Lord. At this time, those closest to His Holiness enter the room to find him wearing his coarse inner garment. They vest him in ornate liturgical vestments rarely worn by him, having not yet read his will, which required that he be buried in his simple garments. Upon examining his private desk drawers, they find letters rife with insults and derision — the only letters His Holiness, in his typical fashion, had deemed worthy of preservation. March 10, 1971 — The pure body of His Holiness is seated upon the patriarchal throne in the cathedral, on which he rarely sat during his papacy. Hundreds of thousands of mourners flock to the cathedral to receive the blessing of his body, and to bid farewell to their beloved father. Approximately seven thousand refuse to depart the cathedral, remaining there in a prayerful and tearful vigil until 5 AM the following day. March 11, 1971 — The body of His Holiness is prepared for his funeral. The papal staff is placed in his left hand and a cross in his right hand. The locum tenens, Bishop Antonios of Suhag, eulogizes His Holiness, and at the conclusion of the service, His Holiness is laid to rest beneath the cathedral. His body would ultimately be transferred, on November 23, 1972, to the Monastery of Saint Mina, which he willed to be his final resting place — the monastery where his body remains until this day. — “Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct.” Hebrews 13:7 — Sources: Daniel Fanous, The Silent Patriarch: Kyrillos VI (1902–1971). Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2019. John Watson, Abba Kyrillos: Patriarch and Solitary, Coptic Church Review, Volume 17, Numbers 1 and 2 (Spring/Summer 1996). Collected Egyptian Newspaper Articles relating to Pope Kyrillos VI (courtesy of Coptic Studies in Egypt): Part 1: 1959–1965 (121 pages); Part 2: 1966–2001 (150 pages). Magdi Guirguis & Nelly van Doorn-Harder, The Emergence of the Modern Coptic Papacy. The Popes of Egypt: A History of the Coptic Church and Its Patriarchs, Volume 3. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2011. Edward Wakin, A Lonely Minority: The Modern Story of Egypt’s Copts. Revised edition, 2000. Nelly van Doorn-Harder, “Kyrillos VI (1902–1971): Planner, Patriarch and Saint,” Nelly van Doorn-Harder and Kari Vogt (ed.), Between Desert and City: The Coptic Orthodox Church Today. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. Recorded interviews and lectures of the personal testimonies and eyewitness accounts of personal disciples and spiritual children of Saint Pope Kyrillos VI.

Series Introduction On an unassuming day in late May of the year 325 A.D., in the lakeside city of Nicaea, 318[1] bishops from all across the Roman Empire came together at the invitation of the Emperor in what would become one of the most venerated and consequential events in Christian history. Their convocation, necessitated by novel — and yet, upon closer examination, not entirely original — doctrinal contentions maintained by a popular and elderly Alexandrian presbyter, Arius, along with his supporters and fellow heretics, carried the potential for either vindication of the Faith delivered by Christ “once for all to the saints,”[2] or formal acceptance by the Church of an entirely heretical doctrinal framework. Despite the gravity of the Council of Nicaea, the first “ecumenical”[3] council in the Church’s history, and its central role in the eventual triumph of Orthodoxy over what amounted to a threatening and popularly attractive deviant dogmatic system, its historical background, doctrinal concerns, and subsequent legacy remain until today relatively obscure and unfamiliar to the average Christian. Indeed, besides perhaps limited superficial awareness of the occurrence of this council, and potentially also an association of the great Saint Athanasius with it, if even that, the ordinary believer is — and this is a disheartening and lamentable fact — woefully unaware of its monumental significance. In our humble effort to contribute to remedying the foregoing, especially on this 1700th anniversary of the Council, by providing a serviceable introduction to its history, import, and legacy, we will begin by providing an overview of the “makings,” character, and life of Saint Athanasius the Apostolic, whose theological acumen and spiritual prodigiousness became renowned even from a young age and proved timely — even divinely-prepared — for the ecclesial contentions of his lifetime. Abba Athanasius emerges from the doctrinal battlegrounds of the Nicene era as the victorious defender of Orthodox Christianity, one may add at great personal cost[4] and not without the invaluable assistance and support of several other faithful, pious, and theologically adept believers from among both the clergy and the laity, and his unshakeable personality, deep piety, and heartfelt defense of his Faith — rather than some theoretical set of impersonal dogmatic tenets — deserve careful attention, if only for the sake of spiritual edification and inspiration to piety and doctrinal concern. Having so introduced Athanasius, albeit in necessarily cursory fashion, we will proceed to highlight the theological, social, and ecclesial backgrounds and contexts that underpinned the subject theological dispute, along with a discussion of the catalyst behind it, Arius of Alexandria, his dogmatic ideas which later came to be collectively known as Arianism, along with its many variants, and his repeated clashes with the Alexandrian Church between 313 and 325 A.D. in the lead-up to the Council. Finally, we will dedicate the third entry of our series to a discussion of the aftermath of the Council, especially the chaotic and volatile period that lasted until approximately 381 A.D. and caused immense suffering to both the Church generally and Athanasius and his fellow supporters and defenders of Nicaea specifically. It is our hope that by God’s grace, this limited series will serve as a helpful introductory foray into the contentious world of fourth-century Christianity, and an inspiring and convicting opportunity for readers to develop a deeper understanding and appreciation not only of Saint Athanasius and his defense of the Faith against Arianism, but also of the truly nuanced and consequential nature of theological debate and the immense sacrifice the Fathers of the Church offered, due to their unwavering faithfulness, in order to preserve and deliver the Faith they had received and which they were entrusted by the Lord to uphold, proclaim, and transmit in His Church. The Makings and Character of Saint Athanasius the Apostolic It would doubtless be remiss, for our purposes, to commence our discussion of the Council of Nicaea and the Arian Controversy without first examining the makings and character of the man who emerged from that unenviable period as the Champion of Orthodoxy — Saint Athanasius the Apostolic. It would, without exaggeration, be impossible to either adequately capture the magnitude of the Church’s triumph over Arianism — which at one point had enamored and captivated almost the whole of Christendom — or elicit from this unfortunate period of the Church’s history perhaps any modicum of spiritual edification without properly understanding, inasmuch as we are able, the man who, against all odds and in opposition to, almost literally, the whole word, possessed the clarity of mind and soundness of understanding to be able to properly comprehend and synthesize what had been handed down in the Church from the beginning, had undergone the requisite education and training to be able to distinguish nuanced deviations from sound doctrine and respond to them clearly and forcefully, and stood firm, despite great personal loss, against a popular, attractive, and politically connected heresy. Indeed, to understand and appreciate the Nicene victory over Arianism, one must first understand and appreciate Athanasius. Athanasius was born to a pious and wealthy Egyptian Christian family in or around 298 A.D. He was baptized in his infancy, and it was his family that planted within him the seed of truth, nourished him in the Christian life, and facilitated the earliest and most important years of his physical, spiritual, and intellectual development. While we know little about his parents from his writings, we are certain that they routinely attended the liturgical services of the Church, bringing with them little Athanasius. He routinely attended Divine Liturgies, baptisms, weddings, and all other services in the Church, and, as we will see shortly, he was incredibly attentive during these, soaking in the prayers, hymns, readings, and ecclesial atmosphere since his infancy. It was therefore his family that constituted the first formative force that influenced his life, character, and thought. The liturgical experience, to which he was accustomed and in which he was raised, left an indelible mark on the life of our saint. It is clear from the historical data that Athanasius was quite familiar since a young age with the liturgical prayers of the Church. For instance, a famous story recorded about him by several early Christian historians tells that one day, Pope Alexander spotted young Athanasius playing with his friends by the seashore in Alexandria. As he watched them play, he recognized that they were acting out the liturgy of baptism, and so when he had called them over and investigated their play, he discovered that Athanasius, who fulfilled the role of the bishop in the act, conducted the rite precisely and with great enthusiasm and reverence.[5] But how could Athanasius do so without reference to the liturgical rubrics or texts unless he had memorized the prayer and rite of baptism, and how could he have done so if he had not already, despite his young age, attended many baptisms and paid close attention to and participated in the celebration? Athanasius did not abandon this liturgical mode of life as he grew; even after he became patriarch, he practiced the liturgical life faithfully, competently, and with great love and care. This is easily appreciated, for instance, in his recounting that, after he had already become the bishop of Alexandria, he was once in the church praying the Midnight Praises (Tasbeha), when at the time of the Second Canticle (Ϩⲱⲥ), more than five thousand guards seized upon the church to arrest him. As a faithful shepherd, Athanasius insisted that all those present first be permitted to depart unharmed; when all had departed, the guards entered the church to find it empty, with even Athanasius having managed to secretly flee.[6] All throughout his life, Athanasius was keen to observe the liturgical worship of his beloved Church, and the influence of that liturgical experience is clearly perceptible in the stories about him as well as his own writings. It suffices to read his beautiful Letter to Marcellinus on the Psalms to see how deeply and lovingly Athanasius approached the life of prayer and what great familiarity and facility he had with the Psalter, which was, of course, a main liturgical book both in the practice of the Egyptian churches and among the monastics in his day. Beyond liturgical worship, Athanasius was deeply influenced by the persecution that arose in his early youth. From the time that he was a young boy until his mid-teens, Athanasius lived through the so-called Diocletianic Persecution, which lasted from 303 A.D. until 313 A.D. Thus, Athanasius experienced the most severe era of early Christian persecution from when he was about five years old until he was about fifteen. He likely prayed in hiding along with his fellow believers during these years; perhaps he, like many other Christians, was forced to flee his home along with his family; and he saw at least some among his teachers, relatives, and friends martyred for the sake of Christ.[7] This experience, particularly during these formative years, left a profound mark on his spirituality, intellectual framework, and theological understanding, so much so that when writing his first great treatise, Against the Heathen and On the Incarnation, only a few years after the persecution ended — that is, when he was only about 18 or 20 years old — Athanasius considers as among the most powerful witnesses to the truth of the resurrection of our Lord, besides the purity and chastity of young Christian men and women, which he undoubtedly practiced and saw among his friends and fellow believers in his young age, the courage and peace of the men and women who went with joy to their martyrdom.[8] Had he not seen such men and women with his own eyes, or been educated by, or perhaps even related to, some of them, he would not have been able to speak with such force and in so moving a way about them, and he might not have appreciated the convicting power of their witness or its implications when understood in light of the sound Faith of Christ. And so Athanasius, having seen martyrdom up close and personally, was able to hold fast to the truth of Christ when faced with a new form of persecution and personal suffering for His sake. In addition to his upbringing by pious parents, liturgical practice, and experience of the Great Persecution, Athanasius was deeply influenced by his discipleship — to the renowned monastic elders of his day and to Pope Alexander himself — and especially the ascetical life with which he had through that discipleship been introduced and become quite accustomed. He enjoyed a close personal relationship with the great Abba Antony, even being within his inner circle and “pouring water on his hands,”[9] a sign of personal trust and close discipleship. He spent so much time with Antony, in fact, that when he was asked to write the account of that saint’s life, he was able to prepare his great work, The Life of Antony, predominantly from memory, but for supportive reliance on other disciples of Antony who had perhaps spent more time with him or had been present for events in his life for which Athanasius had been absent.[10] And Abba Antony, of course, deeply respected and loved his disciple Athanasius, to the point of leaving the inner mountain and traveling to Alexandria at the request of Athanasius and the other “bishops and all the brethren” to assist them in their opposition to Arianism[11] — one of only two or three times that Antony left the desert to visit the city after undertaking the monastic life — and bequeathing to him one of the only two garments he owned at the time of his departure.[12] Besides Antony, Athanasius was also well acquainted with Abba Pachomius, seeking even to ordain him to the presbytery, which ordination Pachomius famously refused by going into hiding until Athanasius agreed not to move forward with it.[13] And certainly Athanasius was closely acquainted and associated with many great monastics in his day, visiting the monasteries in a pastoral capacity, ordaining bishops from among the monks — for the first time in Christian history — in order to assist him, given their renowned theological training and intellectual prowess, in opposing Arianism and defending the Faith of Nicaea, and even being able to take refuge among the monks of the Egyptian desert during his third and fourth (of five) exiles, receiving during those exiles news of ongoing events and communicating with his flock through loyal and skilled messengers acting within an established and effective system of monastic communication. Of course, his discipleship to the great Pope Alexander, his predecessor in the papacy, is also well known. It was that patriarch who first “discovered” Athanasius, as mentioned above, and who facilitated his theological education in the School of Alexandria, ordained him when he was still in his early twenties to the diaconate due to his rare brilliance, spiritual and academic excellence, piety of life, and sincerity in discipleship, and granted him to accompany him to the great Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., and to participate there in defending the Faith against the Arians. In this manner, Athanasius was well-discipled — to spiritually faithful and theologically competent teachers and elders — and embodied the spirit of sound discipleship, and was therefore able to deliver the true faith and spirit of Christ to his own disciples and to the following generation of believers, both due to his personal receipt of that doctrine and spirit from those who held fast to, properly understood, and lived according to it and, as we will now see, also through his formal education and theological training. Beyond the aforementioned factors, and in tandem with them, Athanasius was influenced by his academic and theological training and study. As previously noted, Pope Alexander ensured that the young Athanasius obtained the highest caliber of education in his day, and in the information known of Athanasius’ life prior to his encountering Pope Alexander, it is likewise clear that his own parents emphasized his education in their own right when he was a young boy. Athanasius therefore benefitted greatly from a sound, well-rounded education, and was thus well trained in Greek philosophy, rhetoric, logic, grammar, literature, Greco-Roman religion, and other disciplines. It was this training, along with his mastery of the Scriptures, that ultimately proved most useful to him, enabling him to recognize, understand, and refute Arius’ doctrinal framework and theological misunderstandings, and persuade the believers of the truth and reasonableness of Orthodoxy, with not only scriptural arguments, but also by using philosophy, reason, and other pertinent disciplines.[14] The foregoing influences, great and impactful as they were in the life of the great defender of Orthodoxy, were, it must be said, insufficient on their own to produce the spiritually, intellectually, and doctrinally imposing, albeit physically unimpressive, Athanasius. Indeed, what bound these together and produced in Athanasius the unique, inspiring, and indefatigable heart, mind and spirit he possessed throughout his life were none other than, first, a profound knowledge and mastery of the Scriptures, and, second, an extraordinary and inextinguishable love for Christ. Athanasius was renowned for and deeply influenced by an encyclopedic knowledge of the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers who preceded him. He memorized the Scriptures, like many of the saints from the early Church until today, and this mastery of the Scriptures was key to his ability to correct and refute the Arians, since they relied on many verses and passages from the Scriptures, but taken out of context, interpreted inconsistently and disharmoniously with the patristic tradition, and used manipulatively — eisegetically — to further their arguments and agendas. Athanasius’ scriptural knowledge and understanding of the work of the saints and biblical interpreters who came before him — along with his faithful spirit — enabled him to properly understand the verses utilized by the Arians, correct, expose, and masterfully counter their manipulative and unfaithful usage of them, and thereby safeguard the believers from his time until today from the error of that ignominious heresy. Meanwhile, an illimitable and deeply personal love of Christ and the Church — a palpable piety and sincere theological humility — was perhaps the central driving force behind Athanasius’ impassioned, lifelong commitment to and defense of the Nicene cause and the extermination of Arianism. As one scholar summarized, “[i]t was not as a theologian, but as a believing soul in need of a Saviour, that Athanasius approached the mystery of Christ.”[15] And as another beautifully expressed: “Athanasius was on fire with the love of Christ . . . His love of Christ is the key to his whole life and also to his writings.”[16] Athanasius was therefore not, as some have come to conceive of theology, an academic or speculative theologian to whom matters of doctrine were objects of mere intellectual interest and theoretical contemplation. Rather, he was, in every respect, a “great Christian pastor”[17] to whom “Christianity is not a dead system of doctrine and statements of faith, but living faith in Jesus Christ.”[18] And so, despite the great difficulties he suffered at the hands of the Arians and their political and religious supporters, “[t]he glory of God and the welfare of the Church absorbed him fully at all times.”[19] The influences in the life, understanding, and character of this great saint — of which we have here spoken in cursory fashion and with words that of necessity fall short of conveying the full sense of his nobility and splendor — must be understood collectively. They worked together in him both to render him the saint that he became, by God’s grace and his own uncompromising conviction to the life with God until the last breath, and to enable him to defend the Faith of Christ and to overcome the monstrous threat of Arianism — one that could have eliminated sound Orthodoxy from the world entirely. As one considers Abba Athanasius, the insufficiency of words in adequately conveying to the reader even a glimpse of his greatness becomes obvious. And yet, despite that inadequacy, through them one immediately recognizes in him an awe-inspiring and decisive resoluteness worthy of wholehearted imitation.[20] He was in every respect human — having his share of flaws, weaknesses, and biases, as with any other person, but with a dynamic, enthusiastic, and active personality distinguished by deep piety, singularity of purpose, clarity of thought, unmistakable loyalty, uncompromisable dignity, infectious joy, and a lighthearted sense of humor. It was this Athanasius who, by God’s grace, would rise to the occasion of refuting and resisting Arius and his fellow heretics — from whom, as will be seen, there emerged in Athanasius’ lifetime several groups divided along various theological lines — and to whom Orthodox Christianity would forever be indebted as perhaps its greatest defender. — [1] Evagrius, Ecclesiastical History 3.31; Athanasius, Epistle to the African Bishops; Hilarius, Contra Constantium; Jerome, Chronicon; Rufinus, Ecclesiastical History 10.1. [2] Jude 3. [3] That is, universal, or having representation from, and applicability to, the entire [Christian] world (oikoumene). [4] See, e.g., Rufinus, Ecclesiastical History 10.15: “But he had such struggles to undergo in the church for the integrity of the faith that the following passage seems to have been written about him too: ‘I will show him how much he will have to suffer for my name.’ For the whole world conspired to persecute him and the princes of the earth were moved, nations, kingdoms, and armies gathered against him. But he guarded that divine utterance which runs: ‘If camps are set up against me, my heart will not fear, if battle is waged against me, in him will I hope.’ But because his deeds are so outstanding that their greatness does not allow me to omit any of them, yet their number compels me to pass over very many, and thus my mind is troubled by uncertainty, unable to decide which to keep and which to pass over. We shall therefore relate a few of the pertinent matters, leaving the rest to be told by his fame, which will, however, doubtless find itself recounting the lesser things. For it will discover nothing that it could add.” [5] For the complete telling of this account, see Socrates, Ecclesiastical History 1.15; Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 2.17; Rufinus, Ecclesiastical History 10.15. [6] For the full account in Athanasius’ own words, see Athanasius, Apologia de Fuga 24. [7] See On the Incarnation 56. [8] Id. at 28, 48, 52. [9] See Life of Antony, Prologue. [10] Ibid. [11] Id. at 69-71. [12] Id. at 91. [13] The Bohairic Life of Pachomius 28. [14] It suffices to read his Against the Arians to see how well Athanasius comprehends these disciplines and capitalizes on his knowledge of them to pick apart Arius’ belief system and theological assertions. [15] Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Athanasius: Select Works and Letters (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers II.IV), xv. [16] Dominic Unger, “A Special Aspect of Athanasian Soteriology,” Franciscan Studies 6 (1946), 30. [17] W. Emery Barnes, “Athanasius” in Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, gen. ed. Volume 2, 170-171. [18] Friedrich Lauchert, Die Lehre Des Heiligen Athanasius des Grossen (Leipzig: Gustav Fock Verlag, 1895), 12. [19] Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Athanasius: Select Works and Letters (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers II.IV), lxvii. [20] It was this sublime character of Athanasius that led St. Gregory of Nazianzus to declare: “In praising Athanasius, I shall be praising virtue. To speak of him and to praise virtue are identical, because he had, or, to speak more truly, has embraced virtue in its entirety.” (Oration 21.1). —

Introduction Digital technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Virtual Reality, and Social Media today predominate the non-physical online realm, transcending time and space and allowing for instantaneous communication and connectivity from any location globally. With this unprecedented technological proliferation, the notion of remoteness is quickly becoming obsolete, as even in the deserts, one can be completely engaged in and connected to a world of communication and information. Despite the overbearing inescapability of this modern immersive condition, the desert still lends her wisdom, for there can be found until today the richest Christian men and women following in the footsteps of those who have sought for centuries to fulfill through monasticism the high calling of Christianity. The founder of this monastic movement, Antony of Egypt, himself retreated to the desert in a quest to live out the Christian Faith in complete devotion, being convinced that the message of Christianity must be internalized and transfigured within himself so that he might fulfill the Lord’s command to be perfect. [1] Equipped with this conviction, Antony forsook all his possessions and began his long journey into the inner desert — a journey to perfect virtue and true Christlikeness — ultimately becoming the lamp of monasticism (as he is called in the Coptic Orthodox Tradition) and an example for all Christians. Antony recognized that Christianity properly lived requires unwavering personal devotion and complete integration into one’s life — the Christian is required to “put on Christ” (Romans 13:14) and not be “conformed to this world” (Romans 12:2). As online technological advancements continue to gain prevalence in people’s daily lives, imposing upon Christians a new “gospel,” a conscious consideration of the necessary features of the human experience according to the Christian framework is perhaps more necessary today than ever before. [2] Of these advancements, Artificial Intelligence, being by its very nature antithetical to and devoid of any measure of living experience, raises especially alarming concerns, particularly for evangelization and the Christian life. In contrast to several of those concerns, however, stands the life and standard of Antony, which remains until today a grounding example for Christian believers and emphasizes several features of the human experience which they must consciously guard within themselves in the face of the threats posed by these technologies. Encountering Antony of Egypt Journeying from his village to the desert, Antony sought to fulfill the calling of Christian discipleship to Christ, creating a balanced environment conducive to Christian formation [3] and not evading any component of the human experience. Athanasius’ description, in The Life of Antony , of Antony's emergence from the Roman fort in response to the demands of the masses depicts this state of balance that Antony achieved: “…Antony came forth as out of a shrine, as one initiated into sacred mysteries and filled with the spirit of God. It was the first time that he showed himself outside the fort to those who came to him. When they saw him, they were astonished to see that his body had kept its former appearance, that it was neither obese from want of exercise, not emaciated from his fasting and struggles with the demons: he was the same man they had known before his retirement. Again, the state of his soul was pure, for it was neither contracted by grief, nor dissipated by pleasure, not pervaded by jollity or dejection…No, he had himself completely under control — a man guided by reason and stable in his character.” [4] The balance of personal development with interpersonal communication and communal connection which Antony maintained deserves not only admiration, but also emulation, [5] for he became thereby the model of a complete Christian — “the man of God.” [6] Antony and the Self The primary resources pertaining to Antony — The Life of Antony , his sayings, and his letters — depict and emphasize the absolute necessity of sound identity formation in Christian experience, dependent upon scriptural internalization, virtue attainment, and enlightened self-understanding. This formation led Antony to order his life in submission to the Scriptures and thereby to become a conduit for the Lord to permeate the lives of his disciples. From a young age, Antony knew the Scriptures, contemplated upon them often, and took them personally. Upon hearing the Gospel being read in church shortly after his parents’ death, he submitted to its teaching and allowed it to radically transform his life. It was the Scriptures, after all, that initiated his journey into the wilderness. In his later encounters with demons, his mastery of the Scriptures is especially evident, as he used them as his shield to overcome demonic attacks. [7] His scriptural formation also flows seamlessly into his teaching: when many came to learn from him, he said to them, “The Scriptures are really sufficient for our instruction.” [8] Similarly, when asked what one must do “in order to please God,” he responded “…always have God before your eyes; whatever you do, do it according to the testimony of the holy Scriptures.” [9] His second letter, [10] moreover, is almost entirely formulated out of scriptural passages woven together. By thus internalizing the Scriptures, and that through memorization rather than relying on any exterior aids to merely read them, [11] Antony succeeded to embody them in his real lived experience. “[L]ike a wise bee,” [12] Antony built upon his scriptural grounding by cultivating within himself the good qualities he observed in virtuous people: “He observed the graciousness of one, the earnestness at prayer in another; studied the even temper of one and the kindheartedness of another…and in one and all alike he marked especially devotion to Christ and the love they had for one another.” [13] Understanding the necessity of good works, [14] he urgently worked to internalize and assimilate virtuous qualities in himself [15] rather than simply observing and admiring virtuous people. He would later teach his disciples: “Really, [virtue] is not far from us, nor is its home apart from us; no, the thing is within us, and its accomplishment is easy if we but have the will. Greeks go abroad and cross the sea to study letters; but we have no need to go abroad for the Kingdom of Heaven nor to cross the sea to obtain virtue.” [16] By pursuing virtue, Antony became a powerful witness to the Lord, so that those whom he imitated [17] identified him as “God’s Friend” even though he strove to surpass them in virtuosity. [18] His virtue thus became a powerful instrument of evangelization and exhortation, attracting many to the desert to encounter and imitate him. [19] Having learned the Scriptures and become virtuous, Antony recognized and frequently emphasized the importance of knowing oneself. Echoing the advice of Paul the Apostle to Timothy (1 Timothy 4:16), he advised his disciples to know themselves — at least six times in his first seven Letters — for “he who knows himself knows God and his dispensations for his creatures.” [20] He consequently identified any doctrinal or behavioral deviance from the Faith of the Church as a result of improper self-understanding and a failure to cultivate the fruits of the Spirit in oneself: “As for Arius…that man has begun a great task, an unsealable wound. If he had known himself, his tongue would not have spoken about what he did not know. It is, however, manifest, that he did not know himself.” [21] In knowing himself, moreover, Antony recognized his natural dependence upon his brethren in the Faith, and was for this reason deeply concerned with his neighbors in the world as they struggled against general laxity in spiritual life [22] and consequent heresy. He therefore takes up the medium of writing in order to exhort them to take personally and submit to the true Christian Faith: “I beseech you, my beloved in the Lord, who are joint heirs with the saints, to raise up your minds in the fear of God.” [23] Antony and Community Believing that “…he who loves his neighbor loves God, and he who loves God loves his own soul,” [24] Antony sought his salvation not only in the context of solitude, but also in that of interaction and communication with others. Upon commencing his monastic commitment, Antony first discipled himself to an elder, and sought to maintain this discipleship when he desired to venture deeper into the desert: “He met the old man referred to above [25] and begged him to live with him in the desert.” [26] Later, he would become a father and teacher to monks, [27] caring not only for their spiritual wellbeing, but also for their physical nourishment: “…seeing that people were coming to him again, he began to raise a few vegetables too, that the visitor might have a little something to restore him after the weariness of that hard road.” [28] Later, when he was ninety years old, Antony sought out Paul of Thebes, who had undertaken monasticism prior to him, and traveled to visit and converse with him. [29] Interestingly, the first question Paul asked Antony was “how fares the human race?” [30] While Antony and Paul retreated to the desert, seeking in its stillness to discern the voice of God, they nevertheless remained deeply connected to the city and community of believers, understanding, in Antony’s own words, that “our life and our death is with our neighbour.” [31] Evidently, Antony did not leave for the desert to escape from human interaction, but rather out of his longing for a deeply contemplative atmosphere, away from the distractions of the city, in order to live in complete relation with God, [32] recognizing that “silence is necessary for prayer and for effective communication.” [33] He therefore remained connected to and interested in the affairs of the city, saying to those who came to him, for example: “Be you, therefore, like children and bring to your father what you know and tell it, while I, being your senior, share with you my knowledge and my experience.” [34] Having heard of the spread of Arianism, Antony traveled to Alexandria to encourage the faithful in their defense of the orthodox Faith: “The entire city ran together to see Antony. Pagans, too, and even their so-called priests came to the church saying: ‘We would like to see the man of God’ — for so they all called him…and, indeed, as many became Christians in those few days as one would have seen in a year.” [35] At the time of the persecution under Maximin, Antony went again to the city, longing to suffer martyrdom, and “ministered to the confessors in the mines and in the prisons.” [36] His care for the edification and salvation of all is evident even in his interaction with Emperor Constantine, who had written to him. Although he “did not like to accept letters, saying that he did not know what to answer to such things,” he decided to write back to Emperor Constantine simply so that he could exhort him “not to think highly of the things of this world, but rather to bear in mind the judgment to come; and to know that Christ alone is the true and eternal King. He begged them to show themselves humane and to have a regard for justice and for the poor.” [37] The importance of interpersonal communication and community to Antony is therefore easily perceptible. Along with offering his guidance to the monastic community that was forming around him, seeking in the process to balance his social interaction with personal reflection, Antony communicated with Christian believers generally through visits and letters. In a word, having actively and intentionally submitted to and identified with the Christian message, Antony permitted it to mold him into an icon of the Lord Jesus, becoming in the process the image of what it means to be a truly living human, “the glory of God.” [38] His witness and life therefore became the inspiration for the monastic movement until today, converting and leading countless people into a deeper love of and life with Christ. Artificial Intelligence and the Human Experience Contrary to the immersive, incarnate, and deeply personal experience of Christianity as expressed and lived in the person of Antony of Egypt, modern technologies discarnate the human experience, being deeply formative and developmental, even at the neurological level. [39] Moreover, as Neil Postman points out: “Technology…carries with it a program, an agenda, and a philosophy that may or may not be life-enhancing and that therefore require scrutiny, criticism, and control.” [40] It is necessary, then, to examine the place of digital technologies in the human experience, especially as humanity furthers its dependence on such mediums. Indeed, “a discarnate world, like the one we now live in, is a tremendous menace to an incarnate Church.” [41] Artificial Intelligence and the Self Artificial Intelligence, more than the digital technologies that preceded it, is a deeply non-human technology, facilitating creation without human involvement and depriving products of the human element that was previously inherent to their production. Romano Guardini, in observing the rise of machine reliance, makes an important distinction: in times past, “people did, of course, use tools and aids in great numbers and with great delicacy. But these were only supports, extending the range of activity of natural human organs…and a limit was always set to make possible direct and living execution.” [42] With the availability of Artificial Intelligence, however, a human can simply command technology to produce a desired product, and within moments, that product is packaged together irrespective of that person’s knowledge, skillset, or experience, and without their contribution. Walter Ong comments: “Knowledge is hard to come by and precious, and society regards highly those wise old men and women who specialize in conserving it, who know and can tell the stories of the days of old. By storing knowledge outside the mind, writing and, even more, print downgrade the figures of the wise old man and the wise old woman, repeaters of the past, in favor of younger discoverers of something new.” [43] Because the need to internalize information is minimized by Artificial Intelligence, its user is made perpetually dependent upon it, rendering it the arbiter of truth, knowledge, and goodness: “The manner in which one asks a search engine, the algorithms of an artificial intelligence, or a computer for answers to questions that concern private life reveals that one relates to the device and its response with a fideistic attitude.” [44] Such technology therefore divests the human of humanity, substituting knowledge and firsthand experience with emptiness and reliance on exterior aids for information and fulfillment. Artificial Intelligence and Community Artificial Intelligence’s divestment of humanity’s humanity also carries communal consequences. As a powerful analytical tool, Artificial Intelligence introduces a novel way of thinking: “This knowledge does not inspect; it analyzes. It does not construct a picture of the world, but a formula. Its desire is to achieve power so as to bring force to bear on things, a law that can be formulated rationally. Here we have the basis and character of its dominion: compulsion, arbitrary compulsion devoid of all respect.” [45] Establishing a new primary residence for humanity within the virtual world and introducing a new role for humanity as spectator rather than creator, Artificial Intelligence threatens humanity’s very nature: “What takes place here is not human, at least if we measure the human by the human beings who lived before us. It is not natural if we measure the natural by nature as it once was.” [46] Having identified such trends in the early stages of the technological age, Guardini remarks: “A system of machines is engulfing life. It defends itself. It seeks free air and a secure basis. Can life retain its living character in this system?” [47] Only in the ecclesial community, “the place where the experience of God creates communion and the sharing of life,” [48] in the real, physical world, can life retain its living character. [49] Christianity, as experienced by Antony, is wholly concerned with reality, and is inherently meant for life — personal and communal experience. Through primarily physical means of encounter and perception, one most effectively “tastes” (Psalm 34:8) the Christian message and becomes transformed by it, allowing it to permeate his encounters with others. It was in this way that Antony succeeded to inspire others to venture deeper into the Faith. His effort in evangelization and exhortation flourished without the aid of any sophisticated technologies because it was purely and wholly incarnate. Michelle Borras identified that “since the Gospel is a message of the incarnate Love that alone saves, it can only be proclaimed adequately in an incarnate way…The Gospel must always have a ‘face.’” [50] Because Antony internalized the Christian message and lived through it, thereby allowing it to reflect the love of Christ to others, the Gospel in him indeed had a face — the face of Christ. Conclusion The monastic movement was inaugurated by Antony as Christian men and women imitated him by flocking to the desert to embody and live out the Christian message of discipleship to Christ. Understanding that the Faith must be taken personally, Antony and all who imitated him left the world for the desert in order to focus on fulfilling the divine commandments. Thus, in writing The Life of Antony , Athanasius exhorts his readers “to model [their] lives after his zeal” [51] and advises that his biography be read even to pagans. [52] Artificial Intelligence, being by nature an external and non-human tool of creation, is in contrast an obstacle to venturing into a personal and intimate relationship with God, developing within the human an authenticity-limiting exterior dependency in creativity, communication, and informational retention. Artificial Intelligence’s inability to capture or express human life and spirit is evident in a simple yet revealing exercise: when tasked with writing a doxology for Antony, ChatGPT produced a biographical, impersonal, and detached composition [53] in comparison to the personal and exhortatory doxology for Antony authored by Coptic Orthodox believers for liturgical prayer. [54] If we “hope for the word of God to dwell in us richly in the digital age,” [55] Artificial Intelligence and similar technologies must be thoroughly examined in light of the ethos of Christianity, with those among these technologies that do not comport with the Christian “spirit and life” [56] being actively guarded against, lest by becoming tools of evangelization and mediums for Faith delivery and formation, they compromise rather than uphold the message and spirit of Christianity. — [1] He reached this understanding through hearing the words of the Scriptures being read during the liturgical service: “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven, and come, follow Me” (Matthew 19:21); “Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow” (Matthew 6:34). Antony understood these divinely-inspired words as being “directed especially to him” ( See Athanasius, The Life of Antony 2-3, in Robert T. Meyer, Ancient Christian Writers: The Works of the Fathers in Translation, Volume 10: St. Athanasius: The Life of Saint Antony , 19-21). [2] Daniella Zsupan-Jerome notes: “After [the Word], communication of his good news becomes the Spirit-led task of the Church. This age-old mission to communicate is at the heart of the Church. From this perspective, the digital media are but the latest chapter in the long story of how the Church has gone about expressing this identity and mission to communicate” ( Connected Toward Communion: The Church and Social Communication in the Digital Age , 2). [3] Daniella Zsupan-Jerome offers a definition to Christian formation as being “part of the language of articulating the task of catechesis, the process by which believers are nurtured toward conversion of mind and heart to Jesus Christ” ( Ibid. , 10-11). [4] Athanasius, The Life of Antony 14 (Meyer, 32) [5] See Ibid. , Prologue (Meyer, 17) [6] See Ibid. , 93 (Meyer, 96) [7] See e.g., Ibid ., 6-7, (Meyer, 23-26) [8] Ibid. , 16 (Meyer, 33) Antony sought to understand the Scriptures even through personal encounters with the saints. When he found difficulty with a passage of Scripture, for example, he did not first seek to discover its meaning in books, but rather “went out into the desert…a long way off and stood there praying, crying in a loud voice, ‘God, send Moses, to make me understand this saying.’ Then there came a voice speaking with him” (Benedicta Ward, The Sayings of the Desert Fathers , 7 (Anthony the Great, Saying 26)). [9] Benedicta Ward, The Sayings of the Desert Fathers , 2 (Anthony the Great, Saying 3) [10] See Samuel Rubenson, The Letters of St. Antony: Monasticism and the Making of a Saint , 203-205 [11] “Again, he was so attentive at the reading of the Scripture lessons that nothing escaped him: he retained everything and so his memory served him in place of books” (Athanasius, The Life of Antony 3 (Meyer, 21)). In response to those who sought to discredit him for not receiving any schooling, Antony also said: “…one who has a sound mind has no need of letters” ( Ibid. , 73 (Meyer, 80)). [12] Athanasius, The Life of Antony 3 (Meyer, 20) [13] Ibid. , 4 (Meyer, 21) [14] See e.g. , Matthew 5:16; James 2:14-26; Titus 2 [15] See Athanasius, The Life of Antony 4 (Meyer, 21-22) [16] Ibid. , 20 (Meyer, 37) [17] See 1 Corinthians 11:1 [18] Athanasius, The Life of Antony 4 (Meyer, 21) [19] See e.g. , Ibid. , 46 (Meyer, 59-60) [20] See e.g. , Rubenson, 208 [21] Ibid. , 211 [22] “The Peace of Constantine, which brought about mass conversions, had the paradoxical effect of diminishing the lay contribution to the activity and holiness of the Church. Monasticism is a witness to this fact; for the monk is not a layman, and his status is to be explained as a reaction against the growth of mediocrity in the ranks of the simple faithful. The fervent part took its stand deliberately, and as an institution, over against the majority of the flock. This is no matter for surprise; the ideal conditions for a full Christian life do not coincide with taking things easy” (Henri de Riedmatten, “The Part of the Laity in the History of the Church” in Blackfriars , November 1958, Vol. 39, No. 464, p. 458). [23] Rubenson, 230 [24] Ibid. , 222 [25] See Athanasius, The Life of Antony 3 (Meyer, 20) [26] Ibid. , 11 (Meyer, 29) [27] Ibid. , 14 (Meyer, 32-33) [28] Ibid. , 50 (Meyer, 63) [29] See Jerome, The Life of Paulus the First Hermit [30] Ibid., 10 [31] Ward, 3 (Anthony the Great, Saying 9) [32] “This making a City of the Wilderness was no mere flight, nor a rejection of matter as evil…It was rooted in a stark realism of faith in God and acceptance of the battle which is not against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual things of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Derwas Chitty, The Desert A City , xvi). [33] Fr. Jonah Lynch, FSCB and Michelle K. Borras, Technology and the New Evangelization: Criteria for Discernment , 30 [34] Athanasius, The Life of Antony 16 (Meyer, 33-34) [35] Ibid. , 70 (Meyer, 79) [36] Ibid. , 46 (Meyer, 59) [37] Ibid. , 81 (Meyer, 87) [38] See Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV.XX.VII [39] “Gutenberg attaches itself to the left hemisphere [of the brain]; the oral, the acoustic and consequently the electric, to the right hemisphere” (Marshall McLuhan, The Medium and the Light: Reflections on Religion , 52). [40] Neil Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology , 185 [41] McLuhan, 50 [42] Romano Guardini, Letters from Lake Como: Explorations in Technology and the Human Race , 66 [43] Walter J. Ong, Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word , 41 [44] Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, Directory for Catechesis 366 [45] Guardini, 44 [46] Ibid. , 73 [47] Ibid. , 49 [48] Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization , Directory for Catechesis 372 [49] Timothy O’Malley, emphasizing the importance of liturgical participation to evangelization efforts, writes: “Liturgical prayer is essential to the new evangelization. Precisely, because in every liturgical rite, we human beings return to our vocation as those made in the image and likeness of God. We are capacitated for the kind of self-gift, which comes to transfigure society. Those who return to our sacramental life should encounter there a beautiful and humanizing liturgy, one that elevates the desires of the human heart, allowing them to become an offering of love to the Father. We are immersed in a cosmos in which the primary narrative is not one of grasping, seizing, but the prodigal logic of self-gift. Lay communities, connected to parishes, may incarnate this liturgical life in concrete ways in cities and rural areas as we seek to manifest to the world that wisdom of a Catholic life, given over to the sacramental logic of the triune God” ( Liturgy and the New Evangelization: Practicing the Art of Self-Giving Love , 132). [50] Lynch and Borras, 27-28 [51] Athanasius, The Life of Antony Prologue (Meyer, 17) [52] See Ibid. , 94 (Meyer, 98) [53] The ChatGPT -produced doxology reads: “Praise be to Antony, the desert’s sage, whose wisdom guided countless souls on pilgrimage. In solitude he found divine embrace, a beacon of light for all seeking grace. With fervent heart and humble ways, he taught love, compassion, and righteous praise. In Egypt’s sands, his spirit soared high, a timeless legacy that will never die. Amen.” [54] “Remove from your hearts the thoughts of evil and the pretentious images that darken the mind. Contemplate with understanding the great miracles of our blessed father, my great lord Abba Antony — this is he who became our guide and harbor for salvation; he invited us with joy to the eternal life. The fragrance of his virtues delighted our souls, like the blossomed aroma in the Paradise. Let us truly be confirmed in the upright faith of the great Antony, proclaiming and saying: ‘I sought and I found; I asked and I was given; I knocked and I believed that it will be opened for me’ ( see Matthew 7:7-8; Jerome, The Life of Paulus the First Hermit 9 ). Hail to our father Antony, the lamp of monasticism; hail to our father Abba Paul, the beloved of Christ. Pray to the Lord on our behalf, O my masters and fathers who love their children, Abba Antony and Abba Paul, that He may forgive us our sins” (Coptic Doxology for St. Antony). [55] See Zsupan-Jerome, xv [56] See John 6:63 — This paper is an adaptation of course work submitted for “Evangelization, Media, & Technology,” offered by Dr. Brett Robinson in Summer 2023 at the University of Notre Dame. I express my gratitude to Dr. Robinson for his helpful guidance and encouragement, and wish to acknowledge his efforts in the preparation and delivery of this course, which provided the framework of this paper and many resources used throughout. — Cover Art: Gawdat Gabra, The Treasures of Coptic Art, 94 (Coptic Icon depicting the visit of St. Antony (left) to St. Paul of Thebes (Old Cairo, Monastery of St. Mercurius)).

The Discourse which Saint Athanasius, Archbishop of Rakote, pronounced concerning the passage in the Gospel of Saint Matthew, “The kingdom which is in the heavens is like unto a rich man, who came out in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard.” The Lord says in the Gospel of Matthew: [1] The kingdom which is in the heavens is like unto a certain rich man, who came out in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. He made an agreement with the laborers [to pay them] a stater a day, [and] he sent them into his vineyard. He came out [again] at the third hour, and he saw others standing in the market, and they were idle. He said unto these others, “Go into my vineyard, and that of which you are worthy I will give unto you;” and they went in. He came out again at the sixth hour, and again at the ninth hour [and saw other laborers], and he did the same with these. When, however, he came out again at the eleventh hour, he saw others standing [in the market]. He said unto them, “For what reason do you stand in this place the whole day doing nothing?” They said unto him, “Because no man has hired us.” He said unto them, “Go into my vineyard.” Now let us inquire carefully, and let us learn what are these kinds of laborers, and what this vineyard is, and who is this master. In the first place, the Master in this vineyard is God the Father, who has governed His creatures (or, creation) from the beginning. And moreover, He speaks with them through the prophet who has made known to us that the vineyard of the Lord of Hosts is the House of Israel, and the men of Judah are the new and beloved plant. [2] The laborers whom He hired in the beginning are Moses, and Aaron, and Joshua the son of Nun. He called unto Moses in the land of Midian, saying, “Come, go down into Egypt, and you shall bring out My people from that land. And you shall labor in My vineyard in commandments, and decrees, and ordinances.” [3] And He covenanted with them for a stater, that is, Moses was to have the honorable rank of prophet, and Aaron was to hold the office of high priest over His people, and they were to serve [Him]. Those who were hired at the third hour were the Judges, whom He appointed to be over His people; “him of whom you are worthy will I give unto you.” They were not prophets, and they were not apostles, but they were those who were worthy of the title of ‘judge.’ Those who were hired at the sixth hour, and at the ninth hour, were Samuel, and David, and all the [other] Prophets. Samuel worked in the vineyard with a horn. [4] David transplanted a slip of the vine from the land of Egypt, and he cultivated it with the psaltery. Hosea found Israel to be like a vine in the desert in some respects, for he said, “Israel is a branch of a vine which is good, and his fruit is abundant.” [5] Those who were hired at the eleventh hour were the Apostles, whom He found to be idle the whole day. And they were idle in respect of the works of iniquity of all kinds, because no one had hired them, and the Devil could not hire them for the service of idols. He could not hire John the Baptist for the peddlers in the place of eating and drinking. Peter He could not hire for the service of unbelief. Andrew He could not hire in polluted marriage, and He could not make him to become the servant of a woman. For this reason he was called “Boanerges,” that is to say, “Son of the thunder of heaven.” [6] Therefore could no one hire them on earth to make them to work for him, and to give them wages according to what they were worth. Therefore were their wages abundant in the heavens. Therefore does the Savior say concerning all the Apostles, “O My Father, the men whom You have given Me from the world have I found to be chosen vessels.” [7] And again, “Of those whom You have given Me have I lost none,” [8] and, “No man is able to come to Me except through My Father, who has sent Me to draw him.” [9] Behold, these words make us to know that it is the Father who hires the laborers for His vineyard. Who is this Governor? I say, it is the Lord Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God, in whose hand are all the possessions of God, which is a mystery. His power is in Israel and in the other nations, for He Himself said, “The Father loves the Son, and has given everything into His hand.” [10] The Son says, “To Him belongs the inheritance.” The Governor says, “It is He who gives wages unto those who labor, and the whole world is under His rule.” Therefore the key of David is in His hand, and He is the vine. [11] Therefore it is He who rejoices in all His creatures. He is the Bread. [12] Therefore it is He who gives meat and drink to all His creation. Now when the evening had come, the lord of the vineyard said unto his steward, “Call the laborers, give them their wages; begin with the last and continue until you come to the first; give unto each a stater.” [13] The Father said to the Son, “Either at the last day or today, You know [best], call the laborers and give them their wages, all the laborers who have labored for the race of men, give them the wages of their work.” Paul says, “Now certain men God placed in the Church, the first being the Apostles,” [14] unto whom He began to give [their] wages; and the second were the Prophets, et cetera . The first [laborers] came, thinking that they would receive more [than the others]. Hearken unto Him, for He said, “I say unto you, very many of the Prophets and Kings have desired eagerly to see the things which you see, and have not seen them.” [15] The stater which He gave unto them was the honor of Apostleship, and the Holy Offering. And, the Scripture says, when they had taken the stater, they murmured against the lord of the vineyard and said, “Why is it? These last have only labored for one hour, and yet you have paid them the same amount as you have paid to us.” Now, who are these who murmured and were envious of the laborers who came in last except the scribes and Pharisees, who had themselves been sent to labor in the vineyard? It is against these that the Scripture cries out saying, “Why have you burned up My vineyard? And why are the possessions plundered from the poor in your houses?” [16] For they themselves received the Law as the commands of angels, but they did not keep it, and they murmured against the Lord saying, “The disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast. [17] Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? They do not wash their hands when they eat their bread, [18] they eat, they drink, they make merry. Even the Apostles cut down the ears of corn [19] and eat before Your very face, and they wander about at large in the world.” It was these very men that murmured saying, “Why have Your disciples made the Sabbath to be of no effect?”, who were envious of these last who were the laborers in truth. And the lord [of the vineyard] made answer, and said unto one of them, “Friend, I have done you no injustice. Did I not agree with you for one stater? Take what is yours and depart.” [20] And who was it who made all these complaints? I say that it was none other than he unto whom it was said, “Friend, that for which you have come, do,” [21] that is to say, it was Judas, who betrayed the Savior, and who spoke with great murmurings saying, “Why did they not sell the ointment for three hundred staters and give them to the poor?” [22] If you did care for the poor, O betrayer, why did you steal their property from the money box of the treasury? Or was your eye evil because I am good? [23] Now because he was a wicked man he stole the money which was cast into it ( i.e. , the money box). And the Savior Himself was good to him, and He showed Himself long-suffering in respect of him, for He said unto him, “I have not the power to do what I wish with the offerings that they bring.” This was God’s defense of him: “I, who am God, have not the power to pay more wages than those which a man shall earn, and I judge those who shall work wickedness.” These are the testimonies, and the murmurings of Judas: he murmured with his tongue, and he was cruel and merciless in his heart. He was a wicked man in his soul, he was a thief with his hands, and he was shameless in respect of his eyes. And when they were eating, the Apostles watched that they might not let their hands touch those of the Savior in the bowl, for they were afraid, and said, “Who are we that we should eat with God?” But Judas, the man with no right perception, did not hesitate to put his hand into the bowl with the Savior, and he was eager to dip his piece of bread at the same time, and to eat before the Savior. The Savior said nothing in order that we might understand. When the disciples had asked Him, “Who, then, is it that shall betray You?” He gave them a sign of the lack of right perception in Judas, saying, “He who shall dip his hand with Me into the bowl first is he who shall betray Me,” [24] and He said unto him, “That which you shall do, do quickly.” [25] For the Savior made haste to work out the salvation of His creation on the Cross, according to the wish and commandment of His Father. You will not find that He put out of the way, or was careless about that for which He had come, or that He was afraid of death; but He made manifest His readiness for the Cross like a valiant martyr, and [as is fitting of] God who is without fear. Therefore did He urge Judas onward, saying, “That which you shall do, do quickly. Hasten onward, for all these created beings are hindered; they await you, and moreover, they await Me. Those beings who are in the heavens await Me, and those beings who are in the abyss and chaos await you. My Father is with Me, and He will help Me; the Devil is with you, and he stands by your side, at your right hand, and he will help you. Those who are in the gates which are in the heavens, that is, the holy angels, will crown Me, and the avenging powers are making Amente [26] ready for you.” And He urged him onward with these words, “Hasten, for I am ready for the whips (or, scourgings).” Rightly therefore did Esdras say, “The creature may not hasten more than the Creator.” [27] Now since Judas was he who should betray Him, why did He cry out to him, “Friend, I do you no injustice”? Though He said to him, “Your eye is evil, but I Myself am good,” the Savior did not withhold the speech of friendship from him until the hour in which he betrayed Him. He called him “friend,” but he thought of enmity. He gave him the bag that held the money, and he became a thief. He chose him as a disciple, but he meditated guile. He chose him as a man, but he became a devil. O Judas, what is it that you did? And what did you gain when you did betray the Lord? You wasted your life and lost this great honor — the glory of Apostleship. For who is above his lot? After the appellation of “Angel” comes the title of “Apostle.” Now a man hardly considers his son to be worthy to eat with him, yet it was a helpless servant who was made to eat with his God, and Jesus, our Lord, considered him to be worthy to do so. He ate with the tax-gatherers, and He drank with Judas, the lawless man, and a pestilent man reached out his hand with [that of] God. This wretched man lost his life, and accepted death for himself; he exalted himself above his worth, and he fell down on to the ground according to his worth. Jesus chose him with the Apostles, and he lost his Apostleship. He was chosen to be an heir, and he himself abandoned [his] inheritance. Now the Apostles were the heirs of the Savior, and they were the light of the world, but Judas did not wish to give forth light. They were the salt of the earth, but Judas did not wish to purge away what was polluted. They were those whom God set in the Church, but Judas did not wish to continue with them. Therefore he was removed from the measure of manhood, and he became the portion of the Devil. Woe to you, O Judas! In what did you benefit yourself? Better is Cain, who killed a man, than Judas, who killed God. Better is Saul, who hated a man, than Judas, who hated God. Better is the hardheartedness of Pharaoh towards the people than the hardheartedness of Judas towards God. Better is the deceit of Balaam than the wickedness of Judas. Better is the rebellious speech of Korah in the desert than the stiffneckedness of Judas in Jerusalem. Better is Achar (Achan), who stole the accursed thing, than Judas, who stole the gifts of charity. Better is the arrogance of Absalom in respect of David than the contumacy of Judas in respect of God. Better is the evil counsel to David of Ahitophel, who hanged himself and died, than the condemnation of Judas, who hanged himself and is in Tartaros [28] , against the Savior. Better, by far, are the cursings by Shimei of David than the scorn of the Savior by Judas. Of far less evil was the bloody murder by Joab, which he committed in sheer wickedness, than the murder by Judas, which he committed in pitilessness. Better is the love money by Gehazi, who became a leper, than the avariciousness of Judas, who went to destruction. The sin of Jeroboam was less than the wickedness of Judas, for Jeroboam [only] made false gods, but Judas rejected the True God. “Friend, I do you no injustice; take that which is yours and depart.” [29] O evil friend Judas, it was not the Savior who did you injustice, but you yourself; take your curse, and depart into Amente! Now with Judas being in this state, Matthias [30] entered in and received the blessing, and became a disciple of the Master in his stead. He became an Apostle, he preached, and he sent forth light into the countries [round about]. He made himself salt, and purified souls; he made himself a servant, and was in subjection to God; he became a beloved son of the Lord Jesus Christ, the King of all, the Lord of all, the Glory of all, who rules all, who shall judge all, who shows compassion upon all, who does acts of mercy to all, who sustains all, who destroys all, who transforms all, who makes all new, who makes all glad, and through whom all endures. And now, O man, come and embark in the ship of salvation, which is the faith of the Church. It has two steering oars, from which it is guided, and these are the Testaments, upon which, if you meditate, they will bring you to a good place for tying up your boat. It has a mast, which is the Cross of the Lord, and a rudder: these are your hands which are stretched out in prayer to God. It has a sail which bears it forward, that is the Power of God, which directs you into every good course. It has a guiding pole, which is the Bishop in the Church. It has a helmsman to steer it, who is Jesus, who directs the course of the universe. The sailors on board are the clergy who are in the Church and who minister. There is a cargo borne upon it, and these are the Christian people. You shall arrive in a port, in a fair haven, that is to say, the harbor of Jesus, which is the heavenly Jerusalem. You shall inherit the things promised by God, that is to say, His good things, and you shall rest yourself with your fellow citizens, who are the angels and all the saints. And now behold, O my brethren, we have passed the whole day in exercising ourselves in the word, so that we might at length set the matter, to which we put our hands, upon its feet. And now, let us give thanks unto God, and unto the Holy Spirit, who has opened for us our mouth in speech, and has put into our mouth the words, in order that we may say the things which the Logos has bestowed upon us, which will benefit greatly our own souls and the souls of those who hear us. Let us ascribe blessing to the Logos, who has blessed us with the Holy Spirit. It is He, moreover, who spoke saying, “When they speak with you, take no thought as to what you shall say, for it shall be given unto you in that hour what you shall say. For it shall not be you who shall speak, but the Spirit of our Father who shall speak in you.” [31] And now let us ascribe glory to God, God Almighty, who has sent unto us the King, the Christ, through whom we bless and praise the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit — the consubstantial Trinity, from all ages to all ages. Amen. — [1] Matthew 20:1-16 [2] Isaiah 5:7 [3] See  Exodus 3:10 [4] See  1 Samuel 16:13 [5] Hosea 10:1 [6] (Ed.) This could be a conflation of persons or a transcription error where the transcriptionist missed some line(s) where the speaker continues to name the disciples until he reaches James and John. The irregularity here is also acknowledged by the original translator, E.A. Wallis Budge, with a marginal note “ sic. ” and without further elaboration. [7] See  John 17:6 [8] John 17:12; 18:9 [9] John 6:44 [10] John 3:35 [11] See  John 15:1 [12] See  John 6:35 [13] See  Matthew 20:8 [14] 1 Corinthians 12:28 [15] Matthew 13:17 [16] Isaiah 3:14 [17] Matthew 9:14 [18] Matthew 15:2 [19] Matthew 12:1 [20] Matthew 20:13 [21] John 13:27 [22] Mark 14:5 [23] See  Matthew 20:15 [24] Matthew 26:23 [25] John 13:27 [26] Hades, or Sheol. [27] 2 Esdras 5:44 [28] Hades, or Sheol. [29] Matthew 20:13, 14 [30] Acts 1:26 [31] Matthew 10:19-20 — E.A. Wallis Budge, Coptic Homilies in the Dialect of Upper Egypt: Edited From the Papyrus Codex Oriental 5001 in the British Museum, 80-89,   226-234 (Minor adaptations to the original translation have been made, primarily modernizing archaic terminology for ease of reading).  To access the original: https://archive.org/details/coptichomiliesin00budgrich . DossPress.com  is a place for Christian men and women to collaborate for the sake of our common edification by sharing their written works. As we strive to uphold a standard of doctrinal and spiritual soundness in the articles shared, we note nonetheless that the thoughts expressed in each article remain the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Doss Press.

[In the Name of the Father,] the Son, and the Holy Spirit — one God. Amen. Glory be to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and always and unto the age of ages and eon of eons. Amen.  Our good God, we are between Your hands, You are the good Teacher, because You are God and we believe that You are God. We beseech You, O Lord, to teach us [] so that we may be perfect as You are perfect and holy as You are holy. O Creator of the universe and Renewer of the times, renew our hearts. O Satisfier of all with good things at all times, show us Your salvation, O our good Savior. O Keeper of the covenant and mercy, do not cast us off forever. Have mercy on us.  In the power of Your promise, O Lord, yes, in the power of Your promise, I open my mouth. O beloved, if ours is the principle about which our teacher Paul the apostle said, “for me to live is Christ,” [1] we know with full certainty that if we serve, it is not we ourselves who serve, but [we serve] through Christ who is ours, in Whom is our life. No one has served Christ except the one who has loved Christ, and no one can love Christ except the one who has first experienced His love. And if we have loved and experienced the love of God and His support for us, we would begin to love one another, and this is the sign that we love Christ: “By this they will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another.” [2] If we loved one another, we would feel the responsibility that is on the shoulder of each one of us toward his beloved and toward his brother. If we loved one another, we would feel the responsibility that is on each one of us toward his brother whom he loves, and here begins the responsibility that prompts us to the service. And if we feel a responsibility that prompts us to the service, we must know the purpose for which we serve one another. If we knew the purpose, we would not get lost, and our service would not be unfocused, but our service would have a known purpose []. Do you know the purpose of the service? The purpose of our service to one another [] is not our service to one another first, but the primary purpose is that I serve for the salvation of my own soul first. And when I serve for the salvation of my soul, I have experienced salvation working within me and I have experienced the love of God, and thus I will declare it, as Christ said to the one whom He healed []: “Go and tell how much the Lord has done for you.” [3] Because if I have not experienced the work of God in me and the love of God in me, I cannot speak, and if I speak theoretically, there is no benefit. But if it is my life — if my tongue is silent and my life speaks — in this is the true benefit.  You want to serve and you want to tell your brothers about your experience — first, we said we cannot serve unless we love the Lord, and we cannot love our Lord unless we experience His love and His benefactions. Therefore we must sit and contemplate every morning and every evening before we pray; before we praise God, sit and contemplate the benefactions of God toward us — what goodness He has shown us — one by one, not cumulatively, because when we know the benefactions of God one by one, we will give thanks, and naturally man is a servant of benefaction. When we contemplate the benefactions of God, love — the love of God — will begin to work in our hearts and we will be occupied with the One who does good to us.  My beloved, if you want to serve, place your hand in the hand of everyone who unites with you in the purpose. The meaning now, the meaning of this word, is that you, O servant, let there be fellowship between you and your fellow servants in the one purpose, and everyone you see who serves for the right purpose, place your hand in his hand.  And what is the right purpose? The one you see serving himself first, searching within his soul for its salvation, the one you see searching in his labors to find rest — put your hand in his hand and be assured of him, because as he strives for the salvation of his own soul, if he experiences this salvation and receives it from God, he will declare it to others and will share with you in the service of others. This is the positive side, but there is also a negative side: do not interfere with the affairs of one who differs with you in the purpose, as this becomes a hinderance, because we want all people to fit our terms, and this is not right. Do not interfere in the affairs of the one you find differing with you in the purpose, but one thing only is upon you: that you pray for him. And when you pray for him, your prayer, emanating from a loving heart, will be answered and you will gain him, and then this difference will transform into agreement, and when we agree in the purpose, we place our hands in one other’s hands, and when we put our hands in one another’s hands, the work will succeed. If you say, “I will pray for him” — I do not say to pray for only the one with whom you differed, but at the same time do not deprive him of your service. Serve all lest you lose the purpose. You intended the salvation of your soul — this is the purpose, part of the purpose — and the second part is the salvation of your brothers because you have loved them, and the one who loves guides his brothers, whom he loves, to that which he has tasted and found sweet and pleasant and in which he has found strength and joy and delight. And do not have a purpose except the consecration of yourself first — your soul first — for its salvation. And when you consecrate your soul for its salvation, you will benefit your Church. You will begin to serve the Church because you will have reformed a member of the members of the Church. And if we served our souls and if each one reformed himself — we are many members in the Church — necessarily the other members would take from us [] and would gain and profit. Know that if you desire to serve the Church — you have served yourself and were able to experience the love of God and experienced that He is able to change your weaknesses into strength and grant you victory so that you may have triumph. Have you experienced? — then you will begin to consecrate your life to the service of the Church.  And consecrating your life to the service of the Church is not only for the small, but also for the great. Do not underestimate yourself [in teaching] an elder; I am not telling you to teach him with your tongue, but let him look to you and find you a good example. You, O small one, show him that you are not by yourself but by the power of God working in you, by Christ with whom you have fellowship, Christ [] who loved you and loves you. Christ loved you and loves you and loves all.  Let the [soul] of the [elder] be consecrated to this purpose, that he begins to save his soul; he will take you as an [] example, and in truth he will not take you as an example, but he will take Christ who is in you so that He will be in him also. And at the same time, consecrate yourself to building the small souls: build [them] to love the Church, teach [them] the right principles, teach [them] the golden rules, and make [them] feel the effect of the Church rites. Teach him. Teach him!  Beautiful is the name to which Sunday School was changed. I feel that the Holy Spirit was in this change of name, in their changing it to Ecclesial Discipline. Once we began to learn superficial teaching, we became weary, but when we were in the offices — and of course you do not know the offices [] of the masters and sages, in which was the strike of the [stick], the strike of the blind master, wondering where the strike would land, [and it would land] wherever it fell — once we stopped saying that we “learned the Arabic,” and long ago they would say “learned the Arabic” to mean “learned the Psalms.” Once we stopped memorizing the Psalms, and our psalms began to emerge from our own minds, in personal prayers, superficiality commenced. We desire, if we are to teach the young children, to teach them within the embrace of the Church.  Hear, O my brothers: the Sunday School teacher is found in two states — a good condition and a bad condition, far be it from all of you. He is a living example of prayer, so if he consecrates himself and his service first to the service of his own soul, he will [] become an example of prayer, or, far be it from you, an example of deadly stumbling to evil, God forbid.  You have a duty to follow the first example — in persevering in prayer and reading the Holy Bible daily, in the morning and the evening, not reading in order to teach people, but reading in order to teach us the way and guide our steps. Reading so as to act according to it, how to become an example of prayer.  Also sacrifice! Sacrifice for the sake of the name of Christ by which you are called! As to the name of Christ by which you are called, we say to Him regarding this name: “Have mercy on us for the sake of Your name which is called upon us.” [4] Meaning we intercede by the name by which we are called! [] Sacrifice for the sake of this name which is a cause of your salvation, which is an intercessor for you.  This is the positive side, and the other, which we do not want to do, is the negative side. Beware of that other side.  Beware of stumbling! How do you beware of this issue? Persevere in repentance! And what is the meaning of repentance? The mystery. The mystery of repentance, which is the mystery of confession. Examine yourself at the end of the day and examine yourself in the morning for every small and great thing. Have regret, and ask God to grant you a desire for repentance, so that you might be saved and so that you do not stumble or cause anyone to stumble. Because we must ask of God: please, cast away from us the evil spirit of stumbling; do not let us stumble because of anyone and do not let us cause anyone to stumble, because both are sin and both are a net that may ensnare us and others. May God save us from it.  Repent! If you feel defeated, repent! And if you feel weak, commune, because communion is placed on the altar to renew the strength of the believers, to renew the strength of those who approach and partake of it. The Fathers said that the Christian believer who does not commune for forty days becomes weak, and if he becomes weak, he is overcome, and if he is overcome, what will the result be? Joy? Of course not. But there will be grief. Approach! It happens that we do not approach unless we are worthy, but how are we worthy? We are worthy in that we know our sins, and we are worthy in being victors by repenting of [them] and forsaking [them], and so He grants us to approach the mystery so as to receive power, which grants us to walk in the procession of repentance; it grants us to walk, it supports us and helps us.  Hear! Hear! The saintly fathers said that prayer is the mother of the virtues. Therefore Christ said, “Pray always and do not lose heart.” [5] Prayer is the ladder to heaven, lifting you from below to above. Prayer is food for the soul, because it is the food of angels, so it becomes food for us, to satisfy us. The joy of the saints! O how joyful it is when a person has a friend and sits to speak with him! How much more when we all desire to speak to our Heavenly Father. Prayer is a son in the presence of his Father, speaking with Him; it is joy for the children. If we are children of God, we must always speak to our Father. Do not neglect it. When we neglect it, we become weary. Prayer also has an important point. Do not ask for matters to proceed and take place according to your desire — you must have a plan and faith that God knows more than you what is right for you. Can one know better than his father?  Listen, I will not forget a story related in front of me about an Arab man. This Arab had a son, and God blessed this son so he gradually rose in governmental positions until he became a counselor. He came to visit his father, [] but when his father learned that the son had come, he did not rise to meet him outside, because he knew that he was a good son. The father rose to meet the lost son because he wanted to [restore him], [6] but this Arab knew that his son was polite. He did not rise to meet him outside. The son entered to greet his father, and all who were present with his father stood because he was a high-ranking counselor. He first held his father’s hand, bent down and kissed it, and then greeted those present, and his father told those present to be seated but did not tell him to be seated, so he remained standing and refused to sit, until his father told him: “Praise God for safety, go inside and greet the rest of the family.”  My children, no matter how exalted the son becomes, he cannot rise above his father, and no matter how ignorant the father is, it is not possible for his son to boast over him in his knowledge. The eye cannot rise above the eyebrow ever. The eye is [prominent], and the eyebrow is barren, yet the eyebrow is above the eye. No matter how the son rises in knowledge and has honors and baccalaureates, and whatever else of the current sciences — which I cannot pronounce [] — no matter what the son achieves, and no matter how ignorant the father is of [basic things], absolve me, no matter how ignorant the father is of [basic things], still the son does not rise above the father ever.  Your Heavenly Father knows more than you, and knows what is best for you. [7] So do not ask for something according to your desire in prayer, but ask Him — express to Him your desire and thereafter place this desire before the will of God: “Let Your will and Your purpose be done, O God, our God, for You know what is best more than I do.”  Do not neglect reading the Bible, for the words of God themselves said about it that it is a lamp, [8] and Christ said it is life: “Search the Scriptures, for in them is life.” [9] Whoever does not read the Bible, my brothers, is like a man walking in the wilderness without knowing the path, without a map and without a guide. The guide in our life [is] the word of God which points us to what is right, points us to what is good, and thus you can guide others.  Do not read the Bible only to teach the children, or to teach others; read the Bible, the word of God, as a guide for yourself, as a teacher for yourself, as a mentor for yourself first. And when you read the word so that it guides you and teaches you, you will experience the power of the words working within you. And when you have experienced, you will hear the voice of Christ saying to you, “Go and tell how God worked in you.” With His word! It changed conditions, it changed the circumstances, and it can change and have an effective impact on the souls of others. You also have another thing upon you, O Sunday School teacher, or teacher of the School of Ecclesial Discipline. He who knows his own faults is not repulsed by the faults of others. Do you know why we are repulsed by the faults of others? Because we do not know our own faults. Examine yourself! Know your fault! You will find that the faults of others are no longer faults before you, but what you will find before you will be your own fault, and you will want to strive to correct it.  They presented the woman who was caught in that act to Christ because they had forgotten their sins and forgotten their faults, but they saw the fault of the poor, pitiable, defeated woman who was overcome by Satan, who was overcome by sin. [10] They presented her. They presented her in order to test Christ and try Him! But to those who came to test Him, He taught a useful lesson for their souls. He told them: “Carry out the Law, but whoever strikes her with the first stone should be without sin. Whoever among you is without sin, let him cast the first stone.” [11] And they began examining their own souls. Then the sin of the woman disappeared from before them, and one by one they quietly retreated.  []   And also, if we contemplate our sins, we are not repulsed at the sins of others, nor do we become upset with them. We become preoccupied with correcting our own souls, and the primary purpose is restored: what are we doing? Dedicating our service to correcting ourselves first.  Not only this, [but] if I know my sin, there is a benefit: I would not become repulsed at the sins of my brothers, and all my brothers will be beloved before my eyes as righteous people. But I will also hold myself accountable and judge myself regarding my sin, and whoever judges himself is never judged by anyone — even God does not judge the one who judges himself!  Whoever judges himself says to Him, “I have sinned! Have mercy on me! I am not worthy of standing between your hands!” He says, “[] I will not hold you accountable because you confessed and asked forgiveness; I will not judge you.” But we do not judge ourselves; rather, we judge others. And while we judge others, we judge our own souls with [their] condemnation from the mouth of God!  Know your sin and you will not be repulsed by the sin of others. Judge yourself so that you are not judged by others, even those whom you have wronged. When you say to him, “I have sinned, my brother, forgive me,” regardless of what may be in his heart from the effect of your wrong toward him, you will find him forgiving.  Also, do not think of the old sin, as thinking about it renews it for you. Know that the old sin that has passed, and about which you have confessed, and which has ended, and which has gone far from you, if it is renewed, it is Satan renewing it to tire you; he renews it so that you fall into it. Therefore, do not think of it; think of the new continually, and leave the old behind. “Forget what is behind and push toward what is ahead.” [12] Also, it is common for someone to insult you; think of your insulter — not that he is offensive; do not think he is offensive! Do not think that he casts words like stones, that wounded you or hurt you. No! — think of your insulter as having freed you from false glory, because false glory causes you to fall short of eternal glory. Whoever insults you and does not say a good word has prevented false glory from you. Therefore, you will attain perfect glory. The man came out to curse David the prophet, and David’s men were behind him. “An impolite man! Leave us to kill him!” “How? God has provided him to curse me! So that false glory does not affect me or deprive me of the perfect glory, the everlasting glory.” [13] If you want to be a servant of the word of the Lord, serving for the salvation of your soul first and for the salvation of others, know that when you justify yourself, you fall into the most evil of vices. Therefore, Christ did not forget to open our minds to this matter. If you do all righteousness, do not say, “I am righteous.” If anything is attributed to you, do not say, “I am righteous.” But “if you do all righteousness, say, ‘I am an unprofitable servant.’” [14] Who among us is without sin, dear ones? Tell me.  Leave aside the sins of times past; let us focus on the sins of today. And leave aside the sins from morning to evening; rather, let each of us merely contemplate how his thoughts were after eating, or while eating; how his thoughts were when he was sleeping a little at noon; how his thoughts were while he was coming to church now. If we think but a little, we will find that there were deviant thoughts.  Do yourself a favor, do not justify yourself, because if you justify yourself, this is a great sin. But say, “there is no servant without sin, and no master without forgiveness. Forgive me, O Lord!” [15] Many times do we sin by our breaths: perhaps you might wonder how we might sin by our breaths. We see someone who bothered us a little, or did something which, according to my thought, is unpleasant, and we cannot talk, so we [scoff or huff]. Meaning we find even with our breaths [means of committing sin].  Sin is sinful. [16] It softens and solidifies. Flee from it, my beloved. Do not hate trials. Do not think that life is easy. But rejoice in trials, because by your struggle against trials, and in trials, you draw near to God and worship [Him].  Many of us hate difficult circumstances and hardships, but hardships are exceedingly sweet! “Call me in trouble, and I will save you.” [17] You draw near to God in the hardship. The sailor does not know God except at the time of drowning. Here is drowning — hardships! Call Him! And there is a great difference between you and the sailor. The sailor guides a ship, but you guide your soul. The sailor guides the ship to the port, but you guide your soul to the harbor of salvation! There are many hardships, there are many waves, there are many whirlwinds, there is uncomfortable wind which causes you to hold the rudders of the ship and pull, there are many things. Rejoice at the existence of these hardships, and do not rejoice that these hardships will end. Look to God, and when you look to God, you will draw near to Him, and He is near to you. Know that if you desire to be in holiness and desire to be in perfection, holiness does not spring up except from the ground of humility. If you desire to be a saint, like God, humble yourself like God. “Learn from me; I am gentle and lowly [in heart].” [18] What a wonder! The God of gods became the Son of Man so as to become poor, the King of kings who extends His hand so as to satisfy every living thing with goodness, had no place to lay His head. Glory to You! Humble yourself, my beloved, and your holiness will appear, and you will be perfected in glory — the glory which will lift you up higher and higher, not only higher, not above the people, but there, to bring you to Heaven. Glory to You, Lord. Grant me! Grant me!  Also, a point that one of the brethren mentioned to me on our way here. Do not hate the sinner, because if you hate the sinner, you will not pray for him, and if you pray for him, our Lord will not hear. The Lord says: “Do you ask for your brother while your heart is black toward him?” If you will hate, hate the sin that holds your brother captive! Ask our Lord for your eyes to become cleansed [toward] your brother. But if you hate the sinner, then here the matter becomes, forgive me, that I hate myself, because am I righteous? I am not righteous, and if I am not righteous, why do I hate the sinner? As I seek salvation for myself from sin, so I should seek for my brother salvation from sin. Listen! Sometimes we have an opportunity to see people watching each other and criticizing each other. No, this is not love. O teacher of the schools of Ecclesial Discipline, it is not love to see two looking at each other and adding to each other’s sins, because you place your brother in a position of judgment and condemnation. And as you wish for your brother, so it will be for you. But rejoice when you see your brothers’ hearts changed, their thoughts aligned, their hands joined together as we said in the beginning. If you wish to serve, place your hand in the hand of everyone whose purpose aligns with your purpose. But whoever disagrees with you in purpose, leave him; do not interfere in his matters, only pray for him. []  If you have experienced the love of God, and if our Lord has supported you in times of difficulty, support others. Encourage with your prayers the righteous so he may increase in righteousness. As we say, “those who are upright, protect them.” [19] And should you only encourage the righteous? No, but also encourage the sinner with your prayers — “and those who are fallen, raise up.” [20] Do not say to the sinner, “your prayers are not accepted.” Let us pray to God! Tell him to pray, and if he says to you, “I am a sinner,” say to him: “Christ will rejoice to hear your voice, O sinner.” Tell him there is a popular song that says: “Come, O sinner, come, the door is open.” Yes, encourage him. Encourage him, and when you encourage him, he will open [his heart], you will [gain] him; he will not flee from you. Encourage the weary so that he may find rest by your prayers. Encourage the weak in soul — if you see that you are able — according to your ability. There are many weak souls. The Bible says: “We who are strong ought to bear the scruples of the weak.” [21] Not to become repulsed; if we are strong, if we have the ability, but do not [belittle him] — all are weak. Encourage the weak; encourage the weak in soul and he will be strengthened.  Do not cast behind you the one who is careless! Remind him of the Law of God! Encourage him to not be careless! [] Encourage the beginner, so that he may bear fruit. The one who begins anything is fearful. Many young people say: “[I] want to serve in Sunday School, but I am not able.” O, my son, you are not the one who serves, but God. For the sake of His children, He gives you the grace by which you can serve yourself and serve others. If there is someone carrying hatred in his heart and wants to take revenge, encourage him [to forgive] with your love. Do not distance yourself from him. No! Embrace him. Encourage him with your love, and within himself, though his heart is bad, when he finds someone embracing him, he begins to forgive — even the one he hates. O my brothers, the purpose of our service is the salvation of our souls and the salvation of others’ souls, because the Lord came not for the righteous but for sinners, the sinners “of whom I am chief.” [22] When we encourage the one who hates, [] the storm that came upon him will dissipate; because our heart is full of love [], he will become calm []. When you embrace the one who is vengeful, he will regret his sin.  I heard a story long ago that one of the foreign missionary woman was in Ismailia, and she was serving in the clinics — the clinics of free treatment that serve the poor like me. Perhaps one is not poor because he has no money, and perhaps another is poor because his soul loves money, so he loves what is free. People always love what is free. [] She began to go to these people, kiss them, and [speak with them] — “What do you have?” And she would go to this one and that one, and to the rude one [], speak with her, embrace her, and kiss her, in order to [encourage them], saying to them, “May God heal you, may Christ heal you.” One woman said to her: “You are an English woman and you love filth?” She said to her: “[] I was like them, and He embraced me in His bosom! See His love!” When you encourage the captive, he repents; he will find the goodness that is in your heart. The goodness that is in your heart will overwhelm him. They do not paint white beneath black, lest the black overwhelm the white. But you, when you draw near, oh white one, to the black one, God will grant your whiteness to affect the blackness and the blackness will lighten. Draw near and the power of God will work.  Do not see someone upset and not smile toward him. Offer a smile to the one who is downcast and you will find that he will be overcome — but do not smile mockingly; smile with love and you will find that he will smile. [] Listen! One was sitting in a group and sneezed, and found that the rest also sneezed. Why? What is the secret? There is a secret. Souls desire to become like one another. Smile toward the one who is burdened, whose countenance is burdened, and encourage the fearful by your smile so that he knows that [] no matter how many fears surround a person, “If God is with us, who can be against us?” [23] These fears cannot affect us. He is protecting us, we are in His bosom.  Encourage with your words — your words are important — your pleasant words toward the one who is in need of a word of compassion. [] Gladden the one who is depressed with a word of reassurance, that his is the gift of peace, the peace which cannot be granted by the world, but [which comes from] One alone: Jesus. [] And not only this — the matter is not only words and a smile — something theoretical — but we seek the practical matter: encourage everyone in need of service by working with him so as to win him; the issue is not only encouragement with words or a smile, or such things, but also with work. Stretch out your hand!  Someone carrying a bag, who is tired and frazzled and for whom the bag is too heavy — extend your hand! The bag with two handles is carried by two. “May I help you in carrying this basket? May I help you in carrying this bag?” Do not be sparing. Labor with him and help him. [] Even if you do not know him. He will know that in you there is a secret.  Do not flee from the one who seeks mercy from you. Draw near to him! [] If someone asks you for something, put your hand in your pocket, [] extend your hand with mercy! [] The Disciples shrunk back, they said to Him “there are only five loaves, but what can these do for this many people?” He said to them, “Do not be afraid; bring them.” [24] Give what you have, as much as you are able. When you give as much as you are able, give more than half an hour, give more and more.  Encourage. Encourage with your work, your hand and your pocket. Encourage with your money. [] [See] your table, there are no less than seven types [of food]. You may say, “How are there seven types?” I will count them for you.  [] Is there a table without bread? There is bread. Is there a table without salt? There is salt! Is there a table without tomatoes, without water? There is water! Here are three which do not leave the table, even if you are not wealthy. [] One has four types [of food] and another cannot find [food to eat]. [] There are many who are poor and needy, encourage them with the things that God has granted you, and when you encourage him, you will gain him.  Encourage from your heart every servant and those you serve. []  Lift your heart to God so that He may grant you the grace of service — the service of your own soul first. Lift your heart for the sake of your brother servants, so our Lord may grant them grace in the service of their own souls first, [] to save them, and of others also.  To Him be glory. To Him be majesty. To Him be worship now and forever.  — [1] Philippians 1:21 [2] John 13:35 [3] Mark 5:19 [4] See e.g. , The Divine Liturgy of St. Basil: The Commemoration of the Saints [5] Luke 18:1 [6] See  Luke 15:20 [7] See  Matthew 6:8 [8] See  Psalm 119:105 [9] See  John 5:39 [10] See  John 8:1-11; This was a common theme in the teaching and guidance of Fr. Mikhail Ibrahim. [11] John 8:7 [12] Philippians 3:13 [13] See  2 Samuel 16:5-14 [14] Luke 17:10 [15] See e.g. , The Hymns of the Great Lent Season in the Coptic Orthodox Church [16] See  Romans 7:13 [17] Psalm 50:15 [18] Matthew 11:29 [19] See  The Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory: The Litanies [20] Ibid . [21] Romans 15:1 [22] See  1 Timothy 1:15; The Agpeya: The Conclusion of Every Hour [23] Romans 8:31 [24] See  Matthew 14:18; John 6:9 — To hear the original audio of this sermon, please visit: https://app.box.com/s/f1irtnalpi7kln27pnmrvboep9sh8bpa   Fr. Mikhail Ibrahim, born Mikhail Ibrahim Youssef in 1899 in Qafr Abdou, Quisna, Egypt, was raised in a devout household and formed deeply by the Church from a young age. He worked for many years as a police clerk before being ordained to the priesthood in 1951 to serve his home church in Qafr Abdou, after the departure of its priest. His civic life was characterized by integrity, seriousness, and zealous service wherever he was stationed; even then he was known for establishing spiritual communities and leading a pious and active ecclesial life.  He was well known even as a layman to many saints of his day, including St. Pope Kyrillos VI and His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, who related at his funeral that while residing at the Church of Saint Mina in Old Cairo as a layman himself, he would see him come to that church, prostrate himself outside at the front of the church, and again several times between the front door of the church and its altar before standing to pray in deep prayer.  After his ordination, he served his village in all humility and dedication before being caused to depart to Cairo, where he was brought into the service of the Church of Saint Mark in Shubra by its shepherd, Father Morcos Dawoud, which parish he continued to serve until his repose on March 26, 1975. His ministry in Shubra was marked by continued fruitfulness and expanding spiritual influence — he shepherded his parish with all purity and selflessness, was granted countless disciples, whom he guided with profound humility and wisdom, and was known for his seriousness, depth of prayer, simplicity, and complete dependence on God. Whenever anyone brought a problem to him, he would say, “let us pray, my son,” and assign a saint to handle the concern, and when anyone complained to him of having been wronged by another, he would simply respond, “this is Satan, my son, this is Satan,” in view of redirecting the complainant to discerning that sin originates from the devil and not from the one who sins, who is rather a victim enslaved by him — a common theme in his teaching. He was not a man of much public teaching — in fact, the translated homily and the corresponding Arabic recording herein represent the only known recorded lecture for Fr. Mikhail, despite his renown as a wise teacher and trusted counselor to many, including several of the Church’s saints of the twentieth century, in personal discipleship and confession.  Upon his departure, Pope Shenouda III, who was his disciple and son in confession for many years — and who officiated his funeral, at which he delivered a deeply moving eulogy, in which he called him a “profound guide,” “loving heart,” and “immense power” — requested that he be buried beneath the altar of the Great Cathedral of St. Mark, because, in his own words, “he was a public man who belongs to no single church, whose children are in every place and every village and every city, who should not be reserved for one place, but who should be buried [in the Cathedral], in a public place,” and, as His Holiness publicly admitted, he also privately wanted his pure body to remain near, as a support to him.   DossPress.com  is a place for Christian men and women to collaborate for the sake of our common edification by sharing their written works. As we strive to uphold a standard of doctrinal and spiritual soundness in the articles shared, we note nonetheless that the thoughts expressed in each article remain the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Doss Press.

H.H. Pope Shenouda III, 1989 In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: One God. Amen.  Being that this week is the Week of Prayer, I would like to speak to you about Prayer. Prayer according to its simplest meaning is a dialogue with God. But is it a dialogue of the tongue or that of the heart? Doubtless it is a dialogue of the heart. For this reason, the Lord Christ rebuked those who pray with their lips only, saying: “these people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me” (Matthew 15:8).  Thus, prayer is not merely words. Nor is it merely recitations or memorized utterances. But prayer is firstly the longing for God [] as David the Prophet says: “my soul longs for you, O God, as a thirsty land longs for water” (Psalms 143:6). And he also says: “O God, you are my God, my soul thirsts for you” (Psalms 63:1). And he says again: “as the deer longs” — the male deer which gallops quickly and tires [as a result] — “as the deer longs for the fountains of water, so my soul longs for You, O God.” (Psalms 42:1) The more your soul longs for God, and speaks to Him as a result of this longing, the more you feel that you are speaking to Him from your heart and benefit from prayer. [] For prayer is not merely a longing, but it is a longing that springs forth from love. Thus prayer begins firstly in the heart as love, is then elevated to the mind as thought, and finally the tongue utters it as word. But it is in the first instance love. Love! [David] tells Him, “Oh how beloved is your name, O Lord, for it is my meditation all the day” (Psalms 119:97). Out of his love for God, the name of God is on his tongue and mind all day long in meditation. He also says to Him, “in your name I will lift up my hands; my soul will be satisfied as with the richest of foods” (Psalms 63:4-5).  So prayer is satisfaction for the soul. Just as the flesh is nourished by food, so also the soul is nourished by being in the presence of God, and by conversing with God, and with the connection of the heart with our Lord. This is nourishment for the soul. If you pray and do not feel satisfied, then you are not truly praying. Prayer, as I have said, is love. Just as a droplet of water journeys until it pours into the great sea and unites with it, so also does the heart of man journey so as to unite with the heart of God and become joined to Him. And the first matter [here] is prayer. For this reason, prayer was said to be a golden bridge connecting the creature to the Creator. [] It was also said that prayer is likened to the ladder of Jacob which connected earth and heaven. Prayer was also said to be the language of the angels, or the praise of the angels.  Imagine — the Seraphim were standing before the throne of God saying, “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of Sabaoth” (Isaiah 6:3), being satisfied with this love and their souls being satiated by it. This is prayer. Believe me, many claim that they converse with God while in fact they do not pray. They do not pray because they merely utter words without any feeling or emotion.  For this reason, prayer is connectedness [1] with God. [] In prayer you find a connection between yourself and God. You connect with God. As in the Divine Liturgy when we say, “stand [earnestly].” [2] You develop a connection between yourself and God such that you experience being in the presence of God. [] This is prayer. It is not mere words. You experience the presence of God and being with God, and the connection between you both.  Some think prayer to be words they utter or beautiful phrases they say. It is not so. I will give you an example. You see these lights — there are small bulbs and a large spotlight [] — imagine you have incredibly powerful lightbulbs — a bulb with the power of many volts — but it has no electric current running through it. What would be the benefit of this lightbulb to you? What is the benefit of a powerful lightbulb if the electric current is absent from it? In your prayers, you must feel this current running through your veins.  You feel pleasure in being with God [] so that even when you try to stop praying or cease from prayer, you find it difficult to do so. One stands to pray, and every time he tries to conclude the prayer, he says: “Lord let me spend some more time with You… [] a few more minutes… let me have some more time.” He is unable to leave Him! [] As it says in the Song of Songs, “I held him and would not let him go” (3:4). I can’t leave him! This is prayer.  This sort of prayer purifies the heart, [] because man, when he finds himself in the presence of God, is purified thereby. Even if a sinful thought comes to him, he is ashamed of it, saying: “My thoughts were just with God, how can I now mingle it with evil?” If any external warfare comes to him, you find him impervious to it, fortified by the inner purity which he obtains from prayer.  Deep prayer leads man to renounce the entire world, because after he finds himself in the presence of God, everything else becomes trivial in his eyes. For this reason, the Spiritual Elder [3] said: “the love of God alienated me” — that is, rendered me a stranger — “from mankind and the things of mankind.”  St. John of Assiut was once asked, “what is pure prayer?” He told them “it is death to the world,” meaning when one is praying, this world is wholly absent from his mind; because of his preoccupation with God, he no longer feels the present world.  Prayer is an honor for man — a great honor, for him to speak with God. There are many who occupy prestigious positions with whom you cannot speak. But God, out of His humility, permits you to speak with Him, even while He is the Lord of Lords and King of Kings and Creator of all. Thus, prayer is an honor with respect to man, and humility with respect to God. Of His humility He communicates with us. [] Do not dare to think that when you pray, you give to God anything at all — time, words. No. In prayer you receive and do not give. Just as we say to God in the Divine Liturgy, “You are not in need my worship, but rather I am in need of Your Lordship.” You need  to be found with God. You need  to speak with Him. You need  to receive from His love.  Imagine, regarding the pleasure of prayer, that David, when he prayed his psalms [] did not find the flute sufficient. We read in history that David had a large musical ensemble — a substantial chorus — one with a flute and one with a harp and another with an oud and another with stringed instruments and another with timbrels and another with cymbals and another with a trumpet — all of the musical instruments in his day, and sometimes the number would reach seventy people! And he prayed his psalms with the wondrous pleasure of music, and told them “Selah,” meaning “let us stop here and change the melody.” [] For this reason, sometimes prayer is a song sung by the soul to God. Imagine standing and singing to God! Where does this singing come from? For this reason he says, “sing to the Lord a new song” (Psalms 96:1). [] A song! One who rejoices in another — who loves another — and sings to Him. And God rejoices with this heart — this musical heart, in which one does not pluck the strings of the oud, but instead the strings of his heart, so that the words that spring from it are a beautiful song in the hearing of God.  See Miriam the Prophetess, the sister of Moses! She held the timbrel in her hand and sang to God! [] And we, do we not sing? We certainly sing! From this we see that our hymns are prayer. See the words, “Agios, Agios, Agios, Holy, Holy, Holy.” In joyful times we sing “Agios” to Him in a joyful hymn, and with melisma. And in mournful times, in the Passion Week, we sing “Agios” to Him in a mournful tone. And in Ⲕⲟⲓⲁϩⲕ we say it in a different way. And every time we say “Holy,” we say it to Him in a different way. The psalmody, is it not a prayer? But it is a song we sing to the Lord. We stand before God singing, rejoicing — one rejoicing greatly in God, and, seeing Him, sings for joy! []  For this reason we find praises — spiritual songs. The Bible says, “with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, making melody in your hearts to God” (Ephesians 5:19). [] Indeed, singing always springs forth from inner feeling. And we stand before God singing always: people rejoicing in God and singing to Him. How? When we come to read the gospel, we say it in a melody in the Church; when we come to read the Psalm, we sing it to Him. We have Psalms which, when the chanter stands to chant them, he says them with the fullness of love in his heart before God.  And the prayers and hymns of the Divine Liturgy are sung. For this reason, I am uncomfortable with those who rush through the Liturgy in a few minutes and without care for its hymns. No singing! What will God say to such people? “Is there no feeling? Do the strings of your heart not move?” In every word we say in the Liturgy, we sing. We sing before God, saying to Him: “Lord I am overjoyed in You [] and will sing to you all day and night!”  Long ago, each Psalm had its own hymn, and they said it in chant. Just like the hymns we have in the Second, Third, and Fourth ϩⲱⲥ. These are all Psalms. Here is the heart that prays.  But for one to pray with his tongue while his mind wanders in other things, where is the connection between him and God? Where is the dialogue between him and God? What is more, where is the etiquette of discussion between him and God? Do you speak to God while you are distracted, or while your senses are distracted; praying while looking here and there?  From here, prayer requires certain qualities so that it may be considered an acceptable prayer before God. There are prayers that are acceptable and those that are not.  To offer an acceptable prayer before God, the first point is to pray with understanding. While speaking, you understand the meaning of each word. You say, “Our Father who art in Heaven,” and every word is understood and has its depth, and is uttered in harmony between the tongue and the mind and the heart and the spirit and the flesh and the whole person. For this reason, you find in our hymns: “my heart and my tongue praise the Trinity” — “ⲡⲁϩⲏⲧ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲁⲗⲁⲥ.” []  Prayer does not only involve the tongue. Your tongue speaks, while your mind is occupied with the same words, while your heart experiences the same feeling, while your spirit calls to the Lord. And your body also participates: in kneeling with meekness, prostrating, lifting up your hands, your eyes directed upwards. In all of this, your body participates with your spirit. Thus, prayer encompasses the whole person: mind, heart, spirit, flesh, and tongue together.  For this reason, the one who prays often closes his eyes so as not to be distracted by or think about whatever is in front of him. He does not feel [] what happens around him. He leaves everything and devotes himself to God.  Prayer with understanding denotes meaning every word you say. For example, when you say to Him, “Thy kingdom come,” your mind should contemplate the meaning of the kingdom of God, how His kingdom rules over your heart, how His kingdom may spread among the people, how His kingdom may spread among those nations who do not yet know Him, how His kingdom may rule over the mind and heart and flesh and spirit, how His kingdom is the longing for the eternal kingdom. And you say the word “kingdom” as you find yourself entering into the deepest depths of this kingdom. Meaning every word; praying with understanding.  And if you pray with understanding, you will find that you also pray with concentration. [] Your mind will be occupied with the words, without deviation of thought or distraction. You will find yourself concentrating on the words and their meanings. You will pray with understanding, with concentration, and with depth, as David says, “out of the depths I have cried to You O Lord” (Psalms 130:1). Out of the depths! Out of the depths of my heart. Out of the depths of my mind. Out of the depths of my need for You. Out of the depths of my desires. Out of the depths in which I have fallen, I am lifted up to You and say: “Out of the depths I have cried to You, O Lord” (Psalms 130.1). You are in my inner depths, and I will to also reach Your depths.  The one who prays such prayer, which is with love and understanding, will necessarily also pray fervently. Because he pours himself out before God. See Hannah, who became Samuel’s mother. The Bible says that she “prayed a prayer” (1 Samuel 1.9-10). [] What does this mean? It was not just any prayer! [] She prayed a prayer which bore all the fullness of the meaning of the word. Her lips merely moved, as her heart was ablaze for God. To the point that Eli the Priest thought her to be drunk. Because she poured herself out as an offering before God. Imagine the term “pouring” himself out; a soul being “poured” out before God. I cannot find in the Arabic language words sufficient to express how one pours himself out, but you understand it. One who pours himself out before God. His soul is wrung out and he pours it into the hearing and heart of God, telling Him, “my very self is poured out before You.”  He who pours himself out before God does not have any awareness of his surroundings. If he is conscious of his surroundings, then his mind has become distracted and he is not poured out before God. The fervency of his prayer may be evident in his language, in his eyes, in his tears — from the extent of the fervency within him — in his love. He prays! You feel that this person prays.  You may find two priests standing before the altar praying the Divine Liturgy, but you feel that one is praying and one is not. He is not praying, he is only saying  the Liturgy. You may find two chanting a spiritual song, but only one chanting it from the depths of his heart so that you feel that he truly chants it, while for the other it is mere words. Words and musical melodies without spirit. [] She “prayed a prayer.” She poured herself out before God. Hannah. I read this very expression also concerning Elijah the Prophet in the fifth chapter of the Epistle of our teacher James. He says: “Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed a prayer that the heavens would not rain” (James 5:17). “Prayed a prayer” means not just any words. “Prayer” here means true prayer.  One might stand for fifteen minutes speaking, and the angels would say, “why isn’t this fellow praying?” You might say, “You see him speaking!” And they would say, “these are just words. There’s no prayer. It is only words but not prayer.” But there is another sort of person — when he stands up for prayer, you find that the twenty four priests from the Book of Revelation take the golden censers in their hands and retrieve the prayer and take it up with them ( see  Revelation 8:3). If you ask one of them why, he would say, “this is a prayer, I can’t leave it. I must store it in my golden censer and lift it up to God as a fragrance of incense.” The angels sitting in heaven would smell the sweet aroma of the incense coming from earth and ask, “what is this beautiful fragrance of incense?” And they would be told, “Oh, so and so is praying.” []  For this reason, just as God rejoices in our prayer, so also do the angels. They participate with us. [] They empower us in prayer, give us spirit, and take our prayers and ascend with them. Just as it was written about Jacob’s ladder, that there were angels ascending and descending on it ( see  Genesis 28:12). Ascending with the prayers from the earth, and descending with God’s response to them. The angels are always ascending and descending with our prayers.  The angels in heaven, when they hear someone praying, say to one another: “come, we have work today!” What is that work? “We will take [the prayers] and ascend and descend and connect heaven and earth!” Hence why it is said that prayer shakes the heavens. Not the earth. The heavens. The heavenly hosts. When a saint stands for prayer, they stand for prayer with him, participating with him, feeling that he is one of them — that he is one of the earthly angels from among the heavenly humans. Just like the angels. Or is prayer mere words? Does every person who says “I am praying” truly pray? No! What does “prayed a prayer” mean? It means not just any words. I would that you understand what prayer is and how to pray.  Do you realize that if we pray for oneness with this spirit, it would be accomplished immediately? Why? Because then souls are [truly] standing before God. God — what can I say, Lord? Just as He says in the Psalms, to the soul that pours itself out before Him in prayer, “turn your eyes from me, for they have overcome me” (Song of Solomon 6:5). [4] God says, “enough, I can’t withstand it any longer. Whatever you want I will give you. Enough.” How could God tell someone, “for your eyes have overcome me?” What is this [wonder]. In language I do not know an interpretation, but in the spirit we may understand its meaning. As it was said, “God was overcome by His compassion.” [5] Out of His love. He sees before Him a person who has been transformed into an angel on earth, speaking with Him in truth.  When God encounters hundreds of people, one of whom speaks to Him with a wandering mind, and another speaks to Him and then runs away, and another speaks to Him for a short while and then says “enough, I am bored of prayer,” and then finds one steadfast and speaking to Him with all love, He says “I can’t leave this person.” So what does He do? He grants that the Holy Spirit intercede for him with unutterable expressions, so that he is no longer praying but the Holy Spirit works in him and gives him the fervency ( see  Galatians 4:6). [] Just like one who says “heat up the car so it can run.” The Holy Spirit “heats up this car,” so it can run and ascend to the heavens.  There are those who have specialized in prayer. They have become specialists in prayer. Their work is prayer, such as the monks and solitaries and hermits. And there are those on earth who give to God some of their time, and there are those who give to God the leftovers of their time, and there are those who say to God, “go away for now and when it is more convenient I will call for you again,” as the [procurator, Felix,] told Paul (Acts 24:25).  For prayer to be accepted before God, it must also be offered with humility and lowliness of heart. Humility. Our Lord gave us an example in the prayer of the Pharisee and that of the tax collector. The prayer of the tax collector was accepted because it was offered with a humble heart, but the prayer of the Pharisee was not accepted. Not every prayer is accepted; the one who humbles himself before God[, that one’s prayer is accepted]. For this reason, you find some who speak to God with an unbefitting boldness, whereas we bow our heads and prostrate on the ground and sign the cross and ask Him to “make us worthy to say ‘Our Father.’” [] “I am not worthy to stand before You. Who am I? ‘I am a worm and not a man’ (Psalms 22:6), as David says. Who am I to put myself between the angels and archangels and the Seraphim and Cherubim to speak to You? Who am I? I am but dust! ‘I have taken it on myself to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes,’ (Genesis 18:27),” as Abraham the Father of Fathers said. For this reason the one who prays with humility prays with meekness.  One might say, “I am a son, and I have my rights as a son.” What rights are you speaking of, beloved? Are we discussing rights? Tell Him, “Lord, I am unworthy of anything. ‘I am unworthy to be called Your son’ (Luke 15:19). It is true that You have called me a son out of Your love, but I have not abided as a son. I am utterly cast down. How can I speak to You?” With lowliness of heart, one prostrates, one kneels, one lifts up his hands, and begins a beginning that evidences his humility before God. It is true that God called you a son. But does His calling you a son lead you to lose your meekness or respect for Him, or to pray with a prideful heart? All of this is unfitting. Do you need more [evidence] than the Cherubim and Seraphim? They stand before God praying. How? “With two wings they cover their faces, and with two they cover their feet” (Isaiah 6:2). They stand ashamed before God, covering their faces for their inability to look toward the great glory of God. [] For this reason, when the priest prays the Reconciliation Prayer in the Divine Liturgy, he holds a handkerchief [over his eyes], and so does the deacon across from him. Why? For their inability to lift their eyes toward God; ashamed before God and the divine glory, so they cover their eyes from the glory of God. But there is another who holds the handkerchief without understanding its meaning, [saying] “well, this is what they taught us in church.” As for the person who stands before God in meekness and lowliness of heart, God does not forget his lowliness of heart. He truly prays. He recognizes before Whom he stands. He is standing before the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. See Moses, after he spent some time with Him, how his face was so radiant that the people could not look to him when he came down [from the mountain]. And that only because he spent a little time with Him. John the Beloved, who leaned on His chest, when God appeared to him in the Book of Revelation, said, “I fell at his feet as one dead” (Revelation 1:17). Why? For the greatness of God.  Your love for God and favor with Him should not lead you to lose your meekness before God. Your favor [with Him] might otherwise lead you to merely say words, like the one who prays while seated at mealtime. “Why are you sitting, brother? To Whom are you speaking?” He says, “I’m sitting to eat.” Are you sitting to eat or sitting to pray? Whenever I am in a foreign country and they ask me to pray before eating, I stand and they all follow suit. They are used to praying over the meal while seated. Is there no respect when speaking to God? Stand before Him with meekness. Tell Him, “thank you Lord for granting me food for my body. Grant me also food for my spirit.” And pray from your heart.  Many in the church pray while seated, and if someone tells one to stand, he says, “stand? You forget that we’re in the twentieth century, the age of technology, which exhausts the flesh and robs us of our energy. Before, the people were strong and could stand, but now the people are tired.” Remain as you are, O tired one, and pray prayers that are as tired as you, which do not ascend to the heights. When you stand to pray while tired, God will grant you the strength and energy to stand, because as you give, so you receive, and you receive what you give and say to Him, “of Your own we have given You” (1 Chronicles 29:14). Prayer needs meekness; to stand before God meekly. But for the one who stands before God while his legs are moving, his hands are moving, his eyes are looking around, as if he is praying with a wind-up, this is not prayer. If this one stands in the army, and they tell him to stand still, he would. If one stands still before an officer or a sergeant, how much more should he do so before God? Pray with meekness, pray with concentration, pray with respect and reverence before God.  Pray also with faith. He says, “whatever you ask for in prayer will be yours, if you only have faith” (Mark 11:24). Many times one prays but does not believe that what he asks will happen. He just prays to fulfill the obligation. But without faith. We need people to pray with faith — faith that he stands before God, and that God will respond, and that God will respond with whatever is good, regardless of the outcome. [] Prayer with persistence, never tiring. This is prayer. [] Prayer before God with spirit and thought, with love and feeling, and with concentration. This is all regarding the depth of prayer.  The one who experiences the beauty and tastes the sweetness of prayer loves to pray at all times. He loves that his mind is preoccupied with God at all times. He never tires from prayer. He does not say: “I don’t have time.” How do you not have time? As I have said to some, “do you not have time? See David the Prophet. He was a king and commander in chief of the army and led the people and had a large family and difficult circumstances, but regardless, he prayed evening and morning and at noontime” ( see Psalms 55:17). And he told Him, “seven times every day I do I praise You for your righteous judgments” (Psalms 119:164). Only during the day? He also told him, “I remembered you on my bed,” (Psalms 63:6), when he came to sleep, and “in the morning watches [I sang to you]” (Psalm 5:3), [] and “my eyes stay open through the watches of the night that I might meditate on your word” (Psalms 119:148), [and] “at midnight I arise to praise You for your righteous judgments” (Psalms 119.62). And after all this, he tells Him: “O God, you are my God, early will I seek You. My soul thirsts for you…” (Psalms 63:1). After all this, your soul [still] thirsts for Him?  This is the one who wants to pray. He does not tire from prayer, he is patient, he prays with long-suffering, and whenever Satan says “enough,” he tells him, “depart from me, you have no business with me. This is between me and God.” [] — [1] Arabic: سلاه [2] lit. “stand intently/earnestly;” Arabic: نقف بإتصال [3] i.e. John of Dalyatha [4] In instances such as this, when His Holiness misremembers the source of a verse or passage, it is important to note that His Holiness, in his usual manner, delivers the majority of his homily from memory and without much, if any, reference to written materials). [5] See  Monday Ⲑⲉⲟⲧⲟⲕⲓⲁ, Fifth Part — To hear the sermon by His Holiness Pope Shenouda III in its original Arabic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIrTdvbo1Jg (Starting at 45:05 in the video)

A translation of the First Papal Sermon of His Holiness Pope Kyrillos VI, delivered at his enthronement by the late Metropolitan Anba Lucas — May 10, 1959. — Our beloved brethren, the fathers, the metropolitans and bishops, and our dear children, the priests and deacons and all the people everywhere in the See of St. Mark. Grace and blessing and peace from God our Father and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I thank my good God, the Lord of Glory, who has called me and chosen my weakness for this holy service, not worthily, but out of the abundance of His grace, for the purpose of shepherding His blessed people and for the service, that the sign of His glory may be exalted, and for the preparation of individuals as well as nations for the inheritance of eternal life. Beloved, I feel in myself the responsibility that has been placed on my shoulder, and the holy deposit that has been tied around my neck, and these talents that have been delivered to me from the Lord of the Church – these talents in which I must invest to bear fruit and multiply. But who am I? It is the grace of God that works in us and with us. Certainly, He who has called me will assist me in the apostolic service. I trust in His blessed promise: “I will go before you and make the crooked places straight; I will break the gates of brass and cut asunder the bars of iron” (Is. 45:2). My entire trust is in the mercies of our God, who says to His Church: “‘For a brief moment I have forsaken you, but with great mercies I will gather you. With a little wrath I hid My face from you for a moment; But with everlasting kindness I will have mercy on you,’ Says the Lord, your Redeemer.” (Is. 54:7-8). What does the human need more than the service of the Spirit in this age of materialism, infidelity, atheism, and deviant intellectual tendencies? What will benefit the people except that they see Christ in our lives, and smell His beautiful fragrance in us. The Church is entrusted with a dangerous mission in the moment that the world is currently going through. She must establish faith in the hearts, and spread virtue, and send peace and tranquility to every troubled soul, so that stability may ensue and joy may increase. For the message of the Lord Christ is the inauguration of a better life for the people: “I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly” (John 10:10). That is the pure, calm, purifying, and active life, which constitutes the good, productive citizen and the active member of the Church, who knows to be honest always to God and to country, cooperating with all with the spirit of collegiality and brotherhood. I rely on the support of God and your love, which I hold dearly, needing the spirit of the saintly fathers and [walking in] the footsteps of the past patriarchs, the successors of Saint Mark the Apostle, who fought the good fight and completed their struggle and kept the Faith and delivered to us the holy deposit. I wish that I may open to you my heart, that you may see the deep love that covers all, that is the love that pours forth from the heart of our Savior, who loved us and redeemed us by His blood. I ask all to persevere in the offering up of prayers for the sake of the peace of the Church and for my weakness, and for the sake of all servants and workers. “You who call on the Lord, give yourselves no rest, and give him no rest” until He confirms and grants that His Church “may offer praise on the earth” (Is. 62:6-7). If our mission is so great and dangerous, then this matter calls for the unity of powers and efforts, that we may complete our work with joy. I am confident that our brethren the metropolitans and bishops, our blessed children the priests and deacons, the members of the general and individual lay councils, the various entities and active societies, and all servants in the vineyard of the Lord, will all work together in cooperation with us in love and loyalty, with self-sacrifice and the denial of the ego, in harmony with the leadership and the grace of the Great Shepherd of shepherds; may we disappear that He may appear with His blessed glory. I ask the Lord that He may grant us all oneness of spirit and heart and thought, that we may work together with one mind and one will, that is the will of the Holy Spirit, Who has guided the Church throughout her long glorious history. And we have one holy goal: the glory of God and the service of Truth and the highest aspirations. I do not aspire to anything and “neither is my soul haughtily raised within me” (Ps. 131:1), except that I may complete my struggle joyfully, and the service that I have taken from the Lord Jesus, knowing that you are my joy and pleasure and crown of boasting (cf. 1 Thess. 2:19). My joy is in your success, and my pleasure is in the steadfastness of your faith and the power of your hope and the increase of your love (cf. 1 Thess. 1:3). May the God of all love and peace shepherd the people of the United Arab Republic and keep the life of the President Gamal Abdel Nasser, the president of the Republic, and aid with wisdom and peace his struggle and hard work for the sake of peace and the liberty of the peoples. We also convey the sincerest greetings and our Apostolic blessings to the beloved blessed Orthodox brother, the honorable emperor Haile Selassie I, the emperor of Ethiopia, and to the honorable empress and princes, and our brothers the Metropolitan Anba Basilious, and all the bishops and priests and deacons and dear Ethiopian congregation. We implore God that He may preserve the congregations of the See of St. Mark, and grant peace and success to its governments in Africa and Asia, for the sake of the establishment and spread of the principles of love and peace in all the world, and to His greatness is due all thanks and glory and honor always and forever. Amen. — If you find this translation lacking or mistaken in any way, due to our own shortcomings and weakness and not those of our fellow workers, please let us know so we may correct it. Please pray for those who took part in this work and may this be for your edification. The link to the video is below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGlZN37UFuk

In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – One God. Amen.   [General Announcements] As you know, of course, we started the Nativity Fast last Thursday. And as I always tell you, fasting is not about what we eat on the material side; it is about what we eat on the spiritual side. We give up something of the material in order to receive more and more of the spiritual, so that we may enter into a system. The Fast itself is not the goal. In the last days, we will not tell God that we have fasted. Fasting is a means — a way, a method, a training period — so that we may reach Jesus Christ our Lord, approach Him, and come closer to Him. Fasting is emptying  ourselves. We empty our senses of the things that do not glorify God. In our minds and our hearts, we are often concerned with what we will do, our future, how we may gain more money, and how to put ourselves in better situations — just me, me, me — while canceling others. This is not Christianity. Christianity is to cancel  yourself and to think about others, to feel  about others — and not just to feel, but to do something. It is not enough to say, “I feel sorry for that person,” and leave it at that. No! If you feel sorry, do something about it! Are you praying for him? Are you befriending him? Are you asking what he needs? Are you giving him more and more of what you have? Or am I selfish, keeping everything for myself? I must empty  — empty myself and fill others. The second point is this: to carry the Cross means to show the Cross and not be ashamed of it. In this society, sometimes we are ashamed of the Cross. Do you know where the Cross was discovered? [] It was discovered under a heap of garbage. The Cross was buried under filth. And this is what we are doing in our lives — we are throwing garbage on the Cross! We are Christians, yet we allow garbage to heap up like mountains over the Cross, and the Cross lies deep below. No one sees our Christianity anymore. In our lives, we have priorities, and Christianity is the last of them. We push it down, and on top of it — as I said just now — we might place our future, our friends, our lusts, our desires — everything but the Cross — while the Cross remains deep below. We must elevate the Cross! Where was the Cross erected? Was it in a valley? It was on a high mountain. Golgotha is a high mountain, to show the whole world. And that is why in the church, we place the Cross on the domes, and over the highest point of the church. We must show our Christianity and not be ashamed of or cover it. Sometimes we are ashamed. Here, they wear the cross as an ornament, but they do not know the Cross. Yet we are proud of those in societies where the Cross and Christianity are persecuted, and still they wear and show the cross — not merely as gold, but they show that they are Christians. They speak as Christians, act as Christians, cooperate with others as Christians, and preach Christ who is in them, not speak empty words [as they do] in our society and then shy away [from revealing their Christianity]. We are not stating the principles of our faith or of our Church. One fasts and then becomes ashamed lest others mock him — no! I am not telling you to display that you are fasting, but when someone does not know fasting, it is your duty to show him what fasting is by practicing fasting and to show others its purpose and use. The devil now shows himself everywhere. Have you ever seen the devil shy? No. He shows himself openly — in the media, among your friends, in every place. The devil pushes himself forward. Yet the Holy Spirit whom you carry is the power of our Lord — the power of God — and this power is far stronger than the power of the devil. If you allow the powers of the devil to act while you remain silent and negative, doing nothing, then you will give an account. In school, show that you are a Christian. At work, show that you are a Christian. Do not simply adopt what is in the world. For example, when people around us tell improper jokes or use inappropriate language, because we want to share with them we say the same things so that they do not say that we are odd, or weird, or different. No! Some participate [in such things], and what happens to the Cross? The Cross is buried. It may be bad words, curses, and [crude] jokes, and the Cross becomes buried under it all. So take care. Where is the Cross in your life? Where is your Christianity? The third and final point is this: carrying the Cross is to bear  the Cross — to accept suffering. The Cross sometimes means suffering. None of us is without a cross. Everyone has certain weaknesses, temptations, and difficult times. We will not rid ourselves of these things except in heaven. As long as we are in this world, we will experience suffering, weakness, misfortune, and our own faults.  How can we accept the Cross? We accept the Cross when we think of others. Sometimes we fail to appreciate what we have. If I have a problem, I allow it to overwhelm me and [consume] me, and forget all the other positives in my life — all the graces God has given me. I forget everything good; the devil causes you to focus only on the dark part so that you fall into despair, and to think “what is this quality of life?” But he blinds you to all the other things that you have — all the other gifts God has provided you. So first, if I am in tribulation — if I am sick, if I fail an exam, if I lose a friend, if I am betrayed — I must not allow myself to be consumed by it. Think about the positive points in your life, and more importantly, think about those who carry heavier crosses than you. I am now standing on my feet; some people cannot stand. Some people cannot sit. Some people cannot breathe. Some people have congenital defects. [Now,] speaking to parents — sometimes, we say, “Our children do this or that.” We are blessed with our kids. They are a blessing from God. You are blessed by your parents. So think of those in greater difficulty and say, “I thank You, Lord.” Do not let the devil trap you in prolonged suffering. Get out of it! Otherwise, it will consume you and lead you into despair and depression. Get out of it! Think! There was a man who said to God, “You have given me a very heavy cross that I cannot carry. Why?” Then he fell asleep, and Jesus took him into a room filled with crosses and said, “Choose any cross you want in this room. If you wish to give up your cross, go ahead. Choose any other sort of suffering that you want.” The man found a very small cross and said, “My Lord, I will choose this one.” The Lord said, “Read whose cross it is.” He chose the smallest cross, so He told him, “What is the name of the person carrying this cross? Read it!” And he found that it bore his own name. Meaning the Lord is telling him, “I am giving you the least; be thankful!” This is the first point. The second point is to remember always how I will be rewarded later. Whatever suffering we experience is temporary. One day it will end. But for every suffering that I bear, for every suffering that I accept with thanksgiving, I will be rewarded for it eternally. I will be rewarded with eternal glory. As I have told you, the devil’s job is always to bring you into despair. Say: “No. Even if God allows this suffering, He allows it for me so that I may partake of His glory later.” If you carry the Cross now, you will live the Resurrection later. The Cross — the phase of the Cross — is not forever. It ends at Golgotha, and afterward comes the joy of the Resurrection. And one more thing: whenever God gives you a cross to carry, He carries it with you. He loves you. You are His child. You are precious to Him. He will never allow you to carry the cross alone. Have you seen the film The Passion of the Christ ? In one scene, when Simon carries the Cross with Jesus walking with him, Simon could carry it and continue walking. Once Jesus took one step away from the Cross, what happened to Simon? He fell. We cannot carry suffering alone. Jesus is with you in every temptation, every suffering, every pain. He feels you! He is closer to you in times of suffering than other times because He is a father. He is a loving father. He would never allow his son to suffer while watching from afar. He will approach you and carry you. You already know the story of the footprints in the sand — He is there, carrying you in the temptation.  So we ask Him to grant us to enjoy the Cross, show the Cross, apply the Cross, reveal the Cross to others, and bear the Cross for the eternal glory with Him. To Him is glory forever and ever. Amen. — To hear the original audio of this sermon, please visit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnWk9_MH-mY .   Fr. Sorial Sorial of blessed memory was born Eliya Sorial on January 6, 1957 in Khartoum, Sudan – one of seven children, including His Grace Bishop Karas of blessed memory, who was the first bishop of the Coptic Orthodox Church in the United States and the first abbot of the Church’s first monastery outside of Egypt, in California. Fr. Sorial graduated from Khartoum Medical University with an M.D. in April 1981 and received his Ph.D from London University in 1989. In 1994, H.H. Pope Shenouda III ordained Eliya as Fr. Sorial to serve the altar of St. Mary and St. Abraam Coptic Orthodox Church in Brighton, England. After two years, His Holiness sent Fr. Sorial and his family to serve at St. George and St. Shenouda Coptic Orthodox Church, Jersey City, NJ, USA alongside Hegumen Fr. Antonios Ragheb of blessed memory and Fr. Dawoud Bebawy. On February 7, 2007, Fr. Sorial was elevated to the rank of Hegumen. After a difficult battle with pancreatic cancer, Fr. Sorial reposed in the Lord on February 15, 2008. He was characterized by a profound humility and gentleness, tirelessness in service, simplicity, peacefulness, tears in prayer, and deep love for the Church’s prayers, praises, and hymnology, and is remembered by his beloved congregation and the many people whom he discipled. Cover Photo: Fr. Sorial Sorial (right) pictured alongside Fr. Dawoud Bebawy (left) at St. George & St. Shenouda Coptic Orthodox Church, Jersey City, NJ.   DossPress.com  is a place for Christian men and women to collaborate for the sake of our common edification by sharing their written works. As we strive to uphold a standard of doctrinal and spiritual soundness in the articles shared, we note nonetheless that the thoughts expressed in each article remain the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Doss Press.

Much like the Church’s rites, iconography presents a unique and powerful avenue for depicting and expressing the spiritual and divine components of religious experience through physical means. The simple admiration of the artistic forms and expression of icons is therefore itself a formative experience. In learning to read an icon, one gleans a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the meaning and significance which icons portray, especially because icons are not merely artistic depictions but also expressions of theology and spirituality. Through a multifaceted reading of iconography — including narrative-based, cultural, and theological approaches — one begins to uncover the unique, compelling, and significant meanings of icons without demeaning, devaluing, or misinterpreting them. Indeed, a sound reading of icons requires an approach that considers the complex interplay between visual art, storytelling, cultural symbolism, and religious tradition. The Narrative-Based Approach Icons are most commonly interpreted through the textual and oral narratives which they depict. The illustration of a particular story enables readers to utilize their imaginative faculties, envision the story more concretely, and therefore cultivate a deeper comprehension of and resonation with the narrative. Both the cognitive and aesthetic characteristics of icons are important. The use of colors and beautifully designed artwork conveys the significance of the narrative and inspires a more immersive experience of the text itself. By recalling the story which an icon presents, one can breathe life into an otherwise two-dimensional canvas. In early Coptic manuscripts, icons were commonly used to depict scenes found in the Gospels, inviting readers to imagine and place themselves within the story and thereby gain a deeper understanding and experience of it.  Figure 1: A Coptic manuscript of the Gospels dating to 1250 A.D., including icons of Jesus’ arrest and trial (left: folio 56v) and His baptism in the Jordan River (right: folio 66r) (Bibliothèque de Fels (Fels Library), Institut Catholique de Paris, Ms. Copte-Arabe 1 ). Figure 2: An icon of the Holy Family on its journey to Egypt. The Arabic text reads “Out of Egypt I called My Son (Matthew 2:15)” As one example, in Figure 1, the depiction of the baptism of Christ in the Jordan River moves the manuscript’s reader to visually imagine the unfolding scene — to feel the water splash against his skin, hear the rumblings of the gathered crowd, and even smell the fish. By engaging these senses, the icon translates a static narrative into an experienceable event. This exercise primarily carries an educational purpose. For this reason, instructive details were not uncommon; they further facilitated the educational emphases of the narrative-based approach. For instance, in Figure 2, the related prophecy of Hosea 11:1 which is referenced in Matthew 2:15 is directly incorporated into an icon of the Holy Family’s flight to Egypt. The interrelation of the narrative and the icon is inextricable. Just as an icon informs a deeper experience of a written or orally-delivered narrative, apart from the narrative, an icon falls short in delivering its experiential intentions. Remaining with the example of Figure 2, unless one connects the image with the narrative of the Holy Family’s flight to Egypt, he fails to uncover the deep symbolism and spiritually-applicable lessons which the icon depicts. Ascertaining these characters to be the Holy Family, and understanding the environment and contexts which the Gospel narratives express in relation to this specific experience in the incarnate life of Christ, opens up the icon to become an illustration of sacrificial fatherhood, in the person of Joseph who walks on foot and leads his family away from the comfort of home into uncertainty in Egypt, and endearing motherhood, in the person of Mary who swaddles Jesus and holds Him in her arms. In considering an icon through its narrative, and especially those that are widely known, iconography becomes a powerful medium for deeper reflection and education. Further, the experiential nature of iconography, and the narrative-based approach, is not bound by culture or theological mastery. While many individuals may feel ill-equipped or unable to relate to the cultural and theological roots of an icon, the narrative-based approach bridges the gap between readers and the narrative’s author, enabling readers to enter palpably and with all their senses into the narrative itself. However, icons are written within a particular cultural context and are naturally expressive of theology, and thus, a holistic approach to reading icons is necessary. While the narrative-based outlook carries important benefits, it should not be divorced from other approaches. The Cultural Approach Reading icons through the lens of their writers’ cultures, societal contexts, and artistic traditions facilitates a deeper experience of the icons’ depictions and a more refined appreciation for their message. Cultural considerations uncover the complexity behind the composition of an icon. To illustrate the importance of this approach, Pharaonic art was often adapted for use by Coptic iconographers in third-century Egypt. They found in the artwork of Isis nursing Horus inspiration for portraying the Virgin nursing the Christ Child, and associated Horus’ slaying Apophis with St. George’s slaying the dragon. [1] Figure 3: Isis nursing Horus (top left); the Virgin nursing Christ (top right); Horus slaying Apep (Apophis) (bottom left); Saint George slaying the dragon (bottom right). The visual similarities between Pharaonic art and Coptic iconography, especially in the above example, are fascinating: the Virgin holds Christ in the same manner that Isis holds Horus, both infants sit on the left side of their mothers, and both mothers are depicted with large eyes and as smiling. Given these strong resemblances, it is believed that the Egyptians were familiar with the pagan gods well into the fourth century A.D. and that such iconographic connections sought to assimilate former pagans. Rather than deny the background and certain cultural components of the Egyptian pagans, iconographers provided them with the means by which to incorporate their cultural identity into the experience of worship within the framework of their newly-accepted Christian beliefs. Since the Christian Faith is holistic and cannot be confined or compartmentalized into a mere aspect of the believer’s life, the acceptance of the Christian Faith by the Egyptians quickly affected their cultural expression. They yearned to use their culture to honor God, even in the artwork which they produced. Within this same context, the appropriation of pagan themes and narratives in Coptic art was not only an instrument of assimilation, but also emphasized the superiority of the Christian Faith to the pagan beliefs. In keeping with the earlier example of Horus, Horus’ royal assent to avenge his father gives way to the Lord’s superior salvific act for all mankind. The interrelation and inseparability of both the cultural and narrative approaches to reading icons are therefore evident. Further, the cultural approach enhances the understanding of artistic traditions. The influence of ancient Egyptian art on early Coptic art is perceived in Coptic iconographers’ use of gold leaf. Similarly, the use of intricate patterns and shapes in later icons testifies to the influence of Islamic art. As Egypt experienced a variety of artistic traditions over several millennia, such as Pharaonic art, Islamic art, and Western art, the cultural connection situates the icon within its appropriate place in the larger scheme of history. At the same time, because icons carry religious and spiritual foundations, they are not meant to be relegated to a historical setting. The narrative and cultural methods must therefore be united to a theological approach. The Theological Approach The reading of icons requires discernment of what they are depicting — not only the narratives they are expressing in visual form, but also the dogmatic, doctrinal, and spiritual underpinnings and implications of that narrative. For this reason, icons are referred to as being written  rather than drawn . In the Coptic tradition, the most significant aspect of iconography is the religious teaching which icons uphold and express. In a profound way, iconographers use symbolism and imagery to convey and deliver a deep teaching apprehensible even to an illiterate and uneducated viewer. A common feature of icons of the Virgin Mary, such as Figure 4, is the placement of three stars on her veil — one above her forehead, and one at each shoulder. This detail serves a deeper purpose than adornment: it may be understood as expressive of the Church’s understanding of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God — before, during, and after her pregnancy with the Lord Jesus Christ. Figure 4: A medieval Coptic icon of the Nativity of the Lord Jesus Christ. The true richness of an icon is found in its spiritual depth. Ultimately, a theological reading of icons is an invitation into their most central purpose. By vivifying the most minuscule details of an icon, such as the stars on the Virgin’s veil, the theological approach transcends the narrative and cultural considerations. The disproportionately large eyes, ears, and heads of figures in Coptic iconography reflect the spiritual qualities of vigilance and contemplation; the smaller mouths and noses may similarly emphasize the spiritual dangers of an idle tongue and sensual pleasures. The diligent search for the theological significances of all aspects of icons is vital to their fullest experience and comprehension. Icons serve as spiritual windows and are a medium for veneration, meditation, and divine presence, enabling one to enter into the spiritual encounter of God Himself. Personal devotion is therefore an integral component in engaging with iconography. In one story of St. Mary of Egypt, the saint venerates the Virgin Mary through her icon, out of which she had heard a voice directing her to the life of asceticism. [2] Personal devotion, rooted in a multifaceted approach to and reading of the icon, enabled Mary of Egypt to encounter the blessed Virgin intimately and venture into the life of asceticism in the worship of Christ. Importantly, veneration and personal devotion must be distinguished from worship. Neither the icons nor their depicted stories are the subject of worship, though they are important facilitators for the worship of God. The theological reading, alongside the narrative-based and cultural approaches, allows for icons to unveil the profound depths of their depicted experiences and invite viewers into those very experiences to obtain the virtues and spiritual fruits they offer. Conclusion As expressions of art, icons move the spirit and inspire devotion in a myriad of ways. Iconography, therefore, cannot be confined to a specific methodological or systematic evaluation. A rich and holistic reading of icons, then, requires the incorporation of a variety of perspectives and a multifaceted approach. By weaving together consideration for icons’ narratives, cultural contexts, and theological significances, viewers and readers of icons become able to better understand and truly appreciate the complex interplays at work in iconography. At all times, at the heart of iconography is the invitation to personally encounter the Lord of the Church, and, having gazed at the beauty and reverberations of the life with Him, take up the journey towards perfection and virtue in the company of His saints. — [1] See  George Makary, “History,” George Makary Coptic Icons . [2] See  Wallis Budge, “ID 107: Story of and Homily on Saint Mary of Egypt, the Desert Mother previously driven by lust, who promises the Icon of the Virgin Mary that she will become a nun (sometimes in two parts),” Wendy Laura Belcher, Jeremy Brown, Mehari Worku, and Dawit Muluneh (ed.), Täˀammərä Maryam (Miracle of Mary) Stories (Princeton: Princeton Ethiopian, Eritrean, and Egyptian Miracles of Mary project ). — Mark Dawod serves as a Reader at St. Mark's Coptic Orthodox Church in Jersey City, New Jersey. He is a graduate of Princeton University and a current student at Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, pursuing a career in medicine. This paper is an adaptation of course work submitted for "Healing & Justice: The Virgin Mary in African Literature & Art," offered by Dr. Wendy Belcher in Spring 2023 at Princeton University. DossPress.com  is a place for Christian men and women to collaborate for the sake of our common edification by sharing their written works. As we strive to uphold a standard of doctrinal and spiritual soundness in the articles shared, we note nonetheless that the thoughts expressed in each article remain the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Doss Press.

“Of the several paths that lead to virtue, the broadest and the most promising is the way of imitation.” [1] In a short article on the pursuit of virtue, the renowned theologian Robert Louis Wilken rightly emphasizes the importance of imitation to the human experience and its bearings on spiritual life: “without examples, without imitation, there can be no human life or civilization, no art or culture, no virtue or holiness.” [2] In every aspect of human life, imitation and apprenticeship are integral. Children receive their most powerful formation through relation — namely, interacting with and observing and emulating their parents — such that the atmosphere in which they are reared as infants plays a significant role in their formation into adults. Likewise, self-expression and the creation of art draw inspiration from experience: by observation and emulation, a person forms their own unique personality and an artist develops their own style. Similarly, the development of thought progresses by way of discipleship and apprenticeship.  The transmission of the experience of God was primarily accomplished, in the history of humanity and particularly among the Israelites, through imitation. As the Creator of all things, God made Himself known to Adam and Eve, [3] so that by abiding in His presence and interacting with Him, they would remain in the Image after which they were made. Even after their sin and consequent expulsion from the Garden, [4] Adam and Eve were not abandoned to the end [5] by God, but continued in a then-altered relation with Him. In this way, by relation and experience — albeit in a limited and “veiled” [6] manner — the experience of God would be delivered from person to person. By narrating their own personal experience of God and that of their ancestors to their children, [7] the Israelites handed down faith in God to each generation. This same system of discipleship is observed in the ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ: by taking flesh and becoming Man, God enabled humanity to abide once more in His presence and to observe Him, know Him, interact with Him, and experience Him deeply and most intimately. Thus, as Wilken remarks in a later article: “Christian faith lives by the simple act of handing down what others have passed on to us.” [8] This experiential nature of Christian life provides a most integral foundation to the pastoral dimension of liturgical administration, especially as it relates to the place, role, and function of children in the Church’s liturgical celebrations. The Christian life necessarily flows from observation and experience guided, informed, and contextualized by the necessary component of understanding. It requires holistic involvement and cannot be relegated merely to the intellectual dimension of the human experience. Christian education is life  delivered and received through an incarnate experience, requiring the whole Church. In his work Foundations for Christian Education,  John Boojamra notes:  “The whole Church educates. Not only is every person the object of the Church’s educational efforts, but every member of the Church is the subject of the Church’s educational effort. The whole Church educates in all of her life. The greatest error we can make is to identify education with children and school.” [9] As such, the worshipping community fulfills a central function in the upbringing and education of the Church’s members: “…people, both children and adults, become Christians not by learning about Christianity but by being integrated into an existing Church through experiencing the rites, symbols, and stories of the community.” [10] This systematic approach to Christian education comes to life beautifully in the experience of St. Athanasius of Alexandria, who has deservedly garnered the world’s attention in 2025 as a result of the 1700th anniversary of the convening of the Church in 325 A.D. for the Council of Nicaea. Approximately 27 years before this Council, Athanasius was born into a faithful Christian family amidst a time of turmoil in the Empire. Despite the severe hardship and persecution of the Christians, Michael Molloy describes: “While just a ‘babe in arms’ [Athanasius] accompanied his parents to the services of the Church. And as everyone there prayed and worshipped, so he prayed and worshipped, too — as babies do. Before he was old enough to walk, the life of faith and worship were familiar to him: the music of the Psalter, the chiming of the bells, the fragrance of the incense, the glimmer of the candles, the chanting of the prayers, the sprinkling of the holy water, the gaze of the icons, [and] the taste of the Eucharist.” [11] This liturgical environment became deeply formative to the young Athanasius: “It is clear from the historical data that Athanasius was quite familiar since a young age with the liturgical prayers of the Church. For instance, a famous story recorded about him by several early Christian historians tells that one day, Pope Alexander spotted young Athanasius playing with his friends by the seashore in Alexandria. As he watched them play, he recognized that they were acting out the liturgy of baptism, and so when he had called them over and investigated their play, he discovered that Athanasius, who fulfilled the role of the bishop in the act, conducted the rite precisely and with great enthusiasm and reverence.” [12] Through a liturgically-integrated formation, paired with a living discipleship to his family, Alexander, Antony, and others, Athanasius grew up into the pillar of Orthodoxy we know and are greatly indebted to today.  While the importance of liturgy to faith formation cannot be understated, pastoral philosophies lead to a variety of approaches to liturgical participation with regard to children. These must be considered thoughtfully, if we hope through them to deliver the life of Faith to our children. As the great liturgical scholar, Fr. Alexander Schmemann, observed:  “Whether we want it or not, we are challenged today with the tremendously difficult task of rethinking Church tradition as a whole, of applying it in a situation radically different from that of the past. It will take more than one generation to solve this problem, but we must at least face it and also become aware of its meaning.” [13] The Cognitive Approach For some, the Divine Liturgy is approached from a cognitive, or intellectualistic, perspective. This position argues that the efficacy of the liturgical service hinges upon the worshippers’ mental comprehension of the liturgy and its prayers, readings, and rites. If young children and infants are incapable of understanding the liturgy, it follows that these should not participate in the liturgy. In a disheartening article, Roman Catholic priest Fr. Michael White writes: “There is something in Catholic Church culture that insists kids belong in the sanctuary for Mass. I must say I don’t totally understand it, but it is definitely a Catholic thing. Part of the thinking is that sheer exposure to the service imbues them with grace and other good things in some kind of effortless and mindless sort of way. But if they can’t understand the readings and they cannot take Communion, it is unclear what they are ‘receiving’ Sacramentally.” [14] Further, infants are critiqued for disrupting the services and preventing their parents and other worshipers from devoting their full attention to the service — liturgical “crimes” which justify their seclusion in isolated crying rooms or exclusion entirely from the liturgical gathering. [15] While a wise pastor would not advise parents to leave their children at home when they come for the liturgical services, he explores alternatives. Fr. White concludes: “This is why we invest in our children’s programs. We love the children of this parish so much we want them to have a great time and learn to love the Lord too, through age appropriate messages and worship. Meanwhile their parents can devote their full attention to worship.” [16] However, in elevating the intellect to a place of primary importance, a presumption is introduced in which the liturgy is understood as communicating theology and the Faith of the Church merely through information. As a result, liturgy comes to be understood as being “intended for adults.” [17] Consequently, it becomes subjected to an eisegetical approach: rather than allowing liturgy to itself nurture and instruct the faithful as it is intended and perfectly equipped to do, an imposition is introduced. For instance, “children’s liturgies” are established where young children are gathered apart from adults to attend a distilled version of the liturgical service violated with interruptive comments and educative lessons. This fission of the family enables the adults to participate in a different service without the “distractions” of their children, as the “children’s liturgy” is rendered a makeshift classroom, equipped with human instructors and students, so as to deliver an intellectually apprehensible experience of the sacrament. However, as Timothy O’Malley brilliantly responds to Fr. White’s article, “[i]f participation in the Eucharistic liturgy requires the same degree of intellectual capacity as a scholarly lecture, the fruits of the Eucharistic life are reserved only for those with the appropriate intellectual understanding.” [18] While understanding certainly comprises an important component to benefiting from the liturgy, “when one reduces the liturgical act to ‘understanding,’ then there is an erasure of the contemplative, aesthetic, and thus embodied formation that is integral to a worshipful existence.” [19] Beholding  is as integral as comprehending  the liturgy. This is especially relevant for infants and young children. [20] In a fascinating study, Mark Johnson reveals how the human person generates meaning through embodied movement, even before self-consciousness has fully developed: “[Babies and children] must learn to understand what is happening to them — what they are experiencing and what they are doing…We thus grow into a meaningful world by learning how to ‘take the measure’ of our ongoing, flowing, continuous experience. We grow into the ability to experience meaning, and we grow into shared, interpersonal meanings and experiences.” [21] Without immersion into the worshipping community, children are deprived of its formative experience. In returning to Wilken’s opening article, “before we can become doers we first must be spectators.” [22] This underlies the destructive dangers of dividing the worshipping community, especially by age. [23] Separated from their parents, children are robbed of the opportunity to observe and imitate them, and the natural progression of their growth from babes in arms to reverent adults is thereby stunted. While children may not be able to comprehend the sermon and other components of the liturgy, they are “discovering in the act of Eucharistic worship according to [their] capacity that this act really matters…They are learning the very meaning of what it means to be a liturgical creature even as they sleep in their mother’s or father’s arms during the Eucharistic liturgy.” [24] Hand-in-hand with their children, parents and adults likewise cultivate for themselves an atmosphere of edification, being invited to return again to the act of beholding  liturgy. O’Malley beautifully shares: “My toddler daughter does get bored at Mass. And my act of worship is not to whisk her away to some room where she can encounter God without me. Instead, it is to perform an act of worship where I slowly take her around the church…She is learning a worshipful mode of existence not through speech, not through some alternative liturgy appropriate to her toddlerhood. And as she learns, so do I. I learn once more to delight in genuflecting, in chanting, in singing, in beholding.” [25] As beholders of liturgy, children require the stimulation of all their senses. The liturgy itself facilitates the satisfaction of this need: the smell of the incense, the gaze of the iconography, the beauty of the architecture, and the symphony of the hymns and prayers altogether  deliver and make possible the transformative experience of the liturgy for the entire worshipping community — children and adults alike.  Therefore, as Fr. Schmemann asserts: “[T]he first duty of parents and educators is to ‘Let the children come…and do not hinder them’ (Matt. 19:14) from attending Church. It is in church that children must hear the word ‘God’ for the first time. In a classroom it is difficult to understand, it remains abstract; but in church it is ‘in its own element.’ In our childhood we have the capacity to understand, not intellectually, but with our whole being, that there is no greater joy on earth than to be in church, to participate in church services, to breathe the fragrance of the Kingdom of Heaven, which is ‘joy and peace in the Holy Spirit’ (Rom. 14:17).” [26] This consideration uncovers a different approach to the involvement of children in the liturgical setting. The Sensory Approach While some approach the liturgy from a perspective of cognitive primacy, others prefer a sensory approach. Proponents of this position maintain that by involving children in the liturgical service directly, such as through the ranks of Chanter [27] and Reader, this participation will correlate to their edification and their liturgical responsibilities will root them within the ecclesial community. This approach, however, falls short on various fronts.  At the ecclesial level, the sensory-driven approach is not without infringement. The bestowal of ecclesial ranks upon children carries no Scriptural foundation, and in fact violates the teaching of the Scriptures regarding ordination. Ordination into the ranks of the Church was exclusively for the sake of the benefit of the service: the ranks were not means of establishing personal edification. The seven deacons selected by the Apostles in Acts 6 were ordained for the sake of the community, and not necessarily for their own upbuilding. [28] The servant is expected, in imitation of the Lord Jesus Christ, to pour himself out for the sake of those whom he serves. [29] For this reason, the criteria for election and ordination were exacting. In his advice to his disciple Timothy, the apostle Paul writes: “Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands;” [30] “Deacons likewise must be serious, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for gain; they must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then if they prove themselves blameless let them serve as deacons.” [31] The ecclesial ranks, being central to the administration of the liturgical services, impart a grave accountability to God which requires understanding, a blameless manner of life, a wealth of spiritual experience, a certain mastery of the Church’s hymnology and ritual orders, and an ability to read and rightly interpret the Church’s liturgical texts and Scriptural readings. Thus, at the personal level, the ordination of children fails to account for sound human development and age-appropriate capabilities. People learn developmentally and “differently at different ages; they learn more efficiently, effectively, and meaningfully as they mature, because all learning is relational and contextual.” [32] The Lord Jesus Christ, being Himself the creator of man, understood and illustrated a proper approach to social ministry that takes into account such developmental considerations. In her book Our Church and Our Children , Sophie Koulomzin remarks: “Another aspect of the method of teaching of Jesus Christ is that He approaches each person at that person’s own particular level of development.” [33] The ordination of children into the ranks of the Church constitutes a failure to recognize their learning stages and abilities. It prematurely places upon them significant responsibilities which they are unable to adequately fulfill. Before infants can receive solid foods, they are nurtured and receive all that is necessary for their growth through their mother’s milk; circumventing this stage of their growth and feeding them with solid, nutrient-rich foods would place the infant at risk of death. Similarly, the premature conferral of ecclesial responsibility to children without their adequate preparation and before they are appropriately nurtured and formed to effectively fulfill the duties proper to the ranks to which they are ordained directly accrues to their detriment. Meanwhile, the sensory approach engenders interpersonal conflicts within the worshipping community, particularly by inventing an occasion for stumbling for those upon whom the Church does not confer her ecclesial orders. For instance, the adolescent girl who does not yet understand the different gender-designated entrustments given to both men and women in God’s design for the human and in His arrangement for the Church will certainly feel unfairly treated when she finds her infant brother struggling at the service of the altar — a service which, due to her more advanced age, experience, and understanding, apart from her gender, she would be entirely justified in believing herself more adequately prepared to fulfill. In response, some seek to remedy this artificial contention through advocating for the conferral of new ecclesial ranks and the invention of orders for female chanters to vest and participate in novel ways in the administration of the liturgical service. [34] These, however, only give rise to further divisions and distinctions within the communal body, such as by relegating the service of chanting only to the vested choruses, thereby relegating the rest of the assembled believers to the position of spectators, whereas the liturgical hymns and congregational responses are not the responsibility or purview of a select few, but of all the faithful together, so that, as St. Ignatius of Antioch says, “with one voice and one mind, taking the key-note of God, you may sing in unison with one voice through Jesus Christ to the Father, and He may hear you and recognize you, in your good works, as members of His Son.” [35] These interpersonal hindrances likewise uncover further issues related to the ordination of children. At the communal level, the direct involvement of children in administering the liturgical service creates barriers to offering a well-ordered and aesthetically pleasing prayer, since children are neither capable nor trained to deliver the deeply profound and transformative beauty of the liturgical experience in its requisite fullness. “The liturgy is art, translated into terms of life,” writes Romano Guardini. [36] The aesthetic dimensions of the liturgical services are important: the content and form of the liturgy cannot be divorced of each other. Beauty befits the house of God. As the Psalmist proclaims: “One thing have I asked of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord , and to inquire in His temple.” [37] Liturgy “should be celebrated with the utmost perfection,” [38] because “liturgical celebration ideally should provide access to an experience of beauty, an encounter with beauty and an opportunity to become co-creators of beauty in God’s presence.” [39] Clare Johnson further elaborates: “What is less-than-beautiful in the manner of celebrating the liturgy thus must be avoided at all costs. If what is at stake is the faith-life of believers, which poor celebrations risk weakening or destroying, then good celebrations, beautiful celebrations, are vital because the encounter with Christ’s beauty in the liturgy is that which changes us/opens us up to desire the promotion of what we have experienced: exposure to God’s beauty prompts us both to promote and emulate that beauty beyond the realm of the liturgical.” [40] Through the aesthetic components of liturgy, worshippers are granted to enter into the essential act of beholding liturgy, and through it, to encounter most perfectly — that is, with all of their faculties — the beauty and presence of God. Through liturgical beauty, then, “the Church evangelizes and is herself evangelized.” [41] Dom Gérard Calvet expounds: “…one enters the Church by two doors: the door of the intelligence and the door of beauty…[The beauty of the liturgy] deserves to be called the splendour of the truth . It opens to the small and the great alike the treasures of its magnificence: the beauty of psalmody, sacred chants and texts, candles, harmony of movement and dignity of bearing. With sovereign art the liturgy exercises a truly seductive influence on souls, whom it touches directly, even before the spirit perceives its influence.” [42] The poorly administered service therefore fails to communicate this profound depth and beauty of the Church’s life. [43] Accordingly, children struggle to enter into the act of beholding, for either the beauty which they ought to behold is masked behind cacophony or their allocated responsibilities in the administration and celebration of the services overburden them, discourage them, and take them away from the act of beholding altogether, with the adults also themselves consequently experiencing often insurmountable barriers to both beholding and comprehending liturgy. An Integrated Approach The integration of both the experiential and intellectual components is therefore essential to the work of liturgy. Shawn Tribe, the founder of the Liturgical Arts Journal , explains: “That our experiences, actions and other external dimensions of life generally have a profound influence upon us, forming us, moving us and so forth, is really a matter of common sense and experience. We are creatures founded in both of these aspects and we live and respond accordingly. What is true of life in general is also true of the liturgical and ecclesiastical life.” [44] When each is considered in isolation or as more important than the other, an imbalance is introduced. A haphazardly-implemented model of pastoral care, as it pertains to the liturgical experience, therefore carries the potential of disturbing and distorting the efficacious work of the liturgy. The administration of the Church’s liturgical services must be carefully and thoughtfully assessed, especially as the believers of every generation are guarantors of the Church’s liturgical tradition. The Church has safeguarded and delivered to the believers a holistic model of formation, attending to both their physical and metaphysical needs. Thus, the apostle Paul, providing a paradigm for ministers, prays: “May the God of peace Himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” [45] At the heart of this work of nurturing and raising healthy members of the Body of Christ is the life of liturgy, and “indeed, in a very real sense liturgy is not only at the heart of the Church’s life; liturgy is the Church’s life.” [46] From the altar, every other aspect of the Church’s life and service flows. [47] Fr. Schmemann therefore asserts: “What then should Christian education be, if not the introduction into this life of the Church, an unfolding of its meaning, its contents and its purpose? And how can it introduce anyone into this life, if not by participation in the liturgical services on the one hand, and their explanation on the other hand? ‘O taste and see how good is the Lord’: first taste, then see — i.e. understand. The method of liturgical catechesis is truly the Orthodox method of religious education because it proceeds from the Church and because the Church is its goal.” [48] Similarly, Boojamra notes: “Roots in the Church can be built only by a step-by-step participation in the life of the Church as well as by an increasing understanding of what the Church is.” [49] Accordingly, the pastoral model which excludes children from the liturgical gathering deprives them of the intimate experience of the Church’s life. The creation of special liturgies for children likewise inflicts damage upon their sound formation, separating them from parents and equating the act of worship with an academic endeavor. What is needed, then, is to administer the liturgical service with careful attention to both its intellectual and contemplative details. As important as the sermon and theological exposition of the day’s Scriptural readings is the ritual itself, as well as the hymnology, iconography, architecture, and every other physical component of the ecclesial experience. By fostering an atmosphere of aesthetic and intellectual beauty together, all the faithful, each according to their unique capabilities, gifts, personality, and character, are enabled to fully enjoy and benefit from the divine gift which God has freely offered to man in and through liturgy. Within such an atmosphere, we must allow children to be  children, and as their caregivers, nourish them by the presence of the Lord, who said: “Let the children come to Me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” [50] — [1] Robert Louis Wilken, “The Lives of the Saints and the Pursuit of Virtue,” First Things  (December 1990) [2] Ibid. [3] See  Genesis 3:8 [4] See  Genesis 3:23-24 [5] See  The Divine Liturgy of St. Basil: The Anaphora [6] See e.g. , 2 Corinthians 3:12-18 [7] See e.g. , Deuteronomy 4 [8] Robert Louis Wilken, “Hand On What You Have Received,” First Things  (June 2014) [9] John Boojamra, Foundations for Christian Education , 21-22 [10] Ibid ., 30-31 [11] Michael E. Molloy, Champion of Truth: The Life of Saint Athanasius , 3 [12] Anthony A. Doss, “Athanasius, Arianism, and the Council of Nicaea — Part One: The Makings and Character of Saint Athanasius of Alexandria,” Doss Press  (May 2025) [13] Fr. Alexander Schmemann, Liturgy and Life: Christian Development Through Liturgical Experience , 14 [14] Fr. Michael White, “Why We Don’t Encourage (little) Kids In Church,” Make Church Matter  (January 2019) [15] Ibid. [16] Ibid. [17] Ibid. [18] Timothy O’Malley, “The Liturgy Is for (Little) Kids,” Church Life Journal  (January 2019) [19] Ibid . [20] “We do not have special children’s services, because we realize that our experience of the services of the Church is not merely rational. Even if a child cannot yet understand all that is happening, he can see, hear, smell, taste, and touch for himself, and experience the presence of the Holy Spirit. We must not deprive our children of this experience; we must prepare them to appreciate it, to look forward to it, and to participate in it by prayer and in as many other ways as possible” (Sister Magdalen, Children in the Church Today: An Orthodox Perspective , 59). [21] Mark Johnson, The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human Understanding , 35 [22] Robert Louis Wilken, “The Lives of the Saints and the Pursuit of Virtue,” First Things  (December 1990) [23] The division of the ecclesial community by any means is addressed in the second century by Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote to the Philadelphians: “Be zealous, then, in the observance of one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord, Jesus Christ, and one chalice that brings union in His blood. There is one altar, as there is one bishop with the priests and deacons, who are my fellow workers. And so, whatever you do, let it be done in the name of God” (Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians  § 4).  [24] Timothy O’Malley, “The Liturgy Is for (Little) Kids,” Church Life Journal  (January 2019) [25] Ibid. [26] Fr. Alexander Schmemann, Liturgy and Life: Christian Development Through Liturgical Experience , 16 [27] For a helpful discussion regarding the role and order of the Chanter, see  Daniel N. Girgis, “On the Order of Chanter in the Coptic Tradition,” Living Tradition — Daniel Girgis’ Blog (November 2025). [28] See  Acts 6:1-6 [29] See  Hegumen Antonios Ragheb, Ten Commandments For Sunday School Servants , 8-9 [30] 1 Timothy 5:22 [31] 1 Timothy 3:8-10 [32] John Boojamra, Foundations for Christian Education , 10 [33] Sophie Koulomzin, Our Church and Our Children , 25 [34] The subject of deaconesses remains outside the purview of this paper. However, for a nuanced historical presentation regarding deaconesses, see  Aimé Georges Martimort, Deaconesses: An Historical Study . In it, Martimort pertinently writes: “…the Byzantine tradition, to the extent that it was a living tradition, did not assign any liturgical role to deaconesses at all, as we have had occasion to verify” (Aimé Georges Martimort, Deaconesses: An Historical Study , 246). He concludes: “For the fact is that the ancient institution of deaconesses, even in its own time, was encumbered with not a few ambiguities, as we have seen. In my opinion, if the restoration of the institution of deaconesses were indeed to be sought after so many centuries, such a restoration itself could only be fraught with ambiguity. The real importance and efficaciousness of the role of women in the Church has always been vividly perceived in the consciousness of the hierarchy and of the faithful as much more broad than the historical role that deaconesses in fact played. And perhaps a proposal based on an ‘archaeological’ institution might even obscure the fact that the call to serve the Church is urgently addressed today to all  women, especially in the area of the transmission of Faith and works of charity” ( Ibid. , 250). [35] Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians  § 4. Importantly, this does not negate the specific role of the Chanter in preserving, delivering, and leading the congregation in the responses, praises, and hymns of the Church, according to their respective structures. [36] Romano Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy , 73 [37] Psalm 27:4; As it relates to our earlier point, before  the Psalmist inquires, he beholds. [38] See  Inter Oecumenici, Instruction on Implementing the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy  § 13 [39] Clare V. Johnson, “Portals to Transcendence,” Maxwell E. Johnson, Timothy O’Malley, and Demetrio S. Yocum, At the Heart of the Liturgy: Conversations with Nathan D. Mitchell’s ‘Amen Corners,’ 1991-2012 , 94 [40] Ibid ., 96-97 [41] Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium § 24 [42] Dom Gérard Calvet OSB, Four Benefits of the Liturgy , 19-20 [43] “Adults who sing, or read, or serve, or share in the prayer of the congregation, must take care to do their part in a manner worthy of God, so as to inspire those present, and especially so as not to put off the children and others present who are not committed church members” (Sister Magdalen, Children in the Church Today: An Orthodox Perspective , 62). [44] Shawn Tribe, “The Importance of Liturgical Beauty,” Liturgical Arts Journal (March 2018) [45] 1 Thessalonians 5:23 [46] Robert F. Taft, “The Liturgy in the Life of the Church,” Logos: A Journal of Eastern Christian Studies, Volume 40 (1999) Nos. 104 , 188 [47] “In the Orthodox experience, Christian catechesis is comprehensible and truly possible only within the context of worship, i.e., within the living experience and expression of the faith. Worship encompasses the whole of Christian life, for worship is ‘liturgy’ in the widest possible sense, meaning both liturgical celebration in the gathered community and witness and service to Christ in the world” (Constance J. Tarasar, “The Orthodox Experience,” John H. Westerhoff III and O.C. Edwards Jr. (ed.), A Faithful Church: Issues in the History of Catechesis , 236). [48] Fr. Alexander Schmemann, Liturgy and Life: Christian Development Through Liturgical Experience , 13 [49] John Boojamra, Foundations for Christian Education , 21 [50] Matthew 19:14 — Cover Art: Adam van Noort, Christ Among Children (c. 16th/17th century).

“[Y]ou see in yourself word and understanding, an imitation of the very Mind and Word. Again, God is love…the Fashioner of our nature has made this to be our feature too.” —  St. Gregory of Nyssa,  On the Making of Man 5.2 These words of St. Gregory wonderfully and concisely capture the human condition as being made in the Image and Likeness of God. Often, despite striving to reach the measure of God’s love and to cultivate pure, selfless hearts in accordance with His example, we find ourselves unable to love as He loves, and may even realize that we can go so far as to hurt those whom we love the most. “Why is this the case,” we may wonder. In his Epistle to the Romans, St. Paul provides an insightful response: “ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” [1] As a result of sin and the corruption which it caused to human nature, humanity is unable to offer a perfect love apart from God who is Himself love. In its very essence, sin — the corruption that marred God’s “very good” [2]  creation – is separation . [3]  After Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate from the fruit of the tree, the results of their sin were realized: they perceived their nakedness and their differences, and suddenly, the unity and harmony which they previously enjoyed was replaced with separation both from one another, and, as they would quickly discover, from God as well. [4]  In their response to God, the mark of selfishness likewise becomes evident: “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.” [5]  Indeed, selfishness and self-interest become those characteristics which divide and separate us from others, and, ultimately, from God. I. The Body of Christ: “As it is, there are many parts, but one body.” [6] In contrast with the separation and division which entered into the human condition through sin is the oneness of the Body of the sinless One — the Church. St. Paul, in writing to the Corinthians, exhorts them towards unity: “[b]ut God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.” [7] A failure to cultivate this oneness on the part of the believers, which requires the selfless carrying of one another’s burdens and sufferings, keeps the walls of separation strong. St. Basil the Great echoes this teaching of St. Paul, explaining that it is selfishness that leads to the destruction of community and the loss of true love; to seek one’s own advantage is to deny the command to love one another as Christ has loved us. [8] Self-interest, as St. Basil reveals, becomes the foundation of failure within relations. For instance, a spouse who demands to be treated according to their own “love language” and disregards that of their partner practices an imperfect, selfish love; likewise, a child who expresses frustration in their parents’ failure to understand them while denying them the opportunity to understand them, or even a parent who exerts their own preferences on their child without attempting to understand their child and their differences from them, similarly practice an imperfect love. The expectations of what another “should do” in a relationship, or what one “deserves” from a relationship, ought not be divorced from the kind of love which God both instructs us to establish and exemplifies in His relation with us. Regarding selfish love and its faults, the Scriptures speak at length. In the Song of Songs, we observe the separation that results from self-interested expectations and selfishness. There, King Solomon tells of the Shulamite’s troubled night which begins when he seeks her and receives no answer. Upon hearing his voice, the Shulamite says: “I sleep, but my heart is awake; It is the voice of my beloved! He knocks, saying, ‘Open for me, my sister, my love, my dove, my perfect one; For my head is covered with dew, my locks with the drops of the night.’ I have taken off my robe; how can I put it on again? I have washed my feet; how can I defile them? My beloved put his hand by the latch of the door, and my heart yearned for him. I arose to open for my beloved, and my hands dripped with myrrh, My fingers with liquid myrrh, on the handles of the lock. I opened for my beloved, but my beloved had turned away and was gone. My heart leaped up when he spoke. I sought him, but I could not find him; I called him, but he gave me no answer. The watchmen who went about the city found me. They struck me, they wounded me; the keepers of the walls took my veil away from me. I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if you find my beloved, that you tell him I am lovesick!” [9] While the Shulamite hears her beloved’s voice and is overjoyed at the opportunity to see him, her self-concern delays her and causes her to just miss her bridegroom who was waiting for her at the door. Her self-awareness and hesitancy in putting her robe back on and defiling her feet again to open the door for her bridegroom directly cause her to miss him — he leaves before she reaches him. Suddenly, what was once a door separating them became much more, and the Shulamite found herself struck, wounded, and lovesick for her beloved who was just behind the door waiting for her. [10]  Augustine writes of selfishness in love, that “two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly by the love of self, even to the contempt of God; and the heavenly by the love of God, even to the contempt of self.” [11] Despite the presence of deep love, one’s self-centered orientation causes harm both to himself and to those whom he strives to love, sometimes even unknowingly and alongside good intentions. This inclination and weakness thus make something as simple (though crucial to the spiritual life) as love feel almost impossible. St. Paul describes this spiritual struggle, stating: “For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.  For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.” [12] It is then evident that absent God’s hand and guidance, humanity alone cannot truly love perfectly. Its love remains imperfect because humanity fell from the Image after which it was created — that of Him who is Himself perfect love. The effects of this selfish love are innumerable, as discussed, and appear most clearly in one’s blindness to the needs of others in preference to their own desires. As St. Basil writes “[y]es, while the glitter of gold so allures you, you fail to notice how great are the groans of the needy that follow you wherever you go.” [13] The route to true, Christ-like, holy love is kenosis , or self-emptying. [14] From the life of His Holiness Pope Kyrillos VI, and most prominently his self-denial, we may extrapolate a framework and blueprint for the self-emptying love that Christ models for us and towards which He exhorts us. We are told by Fr. Daniel Fanous in his biographical work on Pope Kyrillos VI that “Kyrillos was utterly convinced that…unity must in a very real sense be kenotic, that is, self-emptying . [He believed that] [e]ach competing voice of reform…must, without compromise, ‘disappear’ that Christ might appear and heal his despondent Church.” [15] It is His Holiness’ conscious emptying of his own desires, thoughts, and preferences that laid the groundwork for the positive Church reforms of his papacy. What allowed His Holiness Pope Kyrillos VI to lead the Church towards edification and flourishing was this deep faith and conviction that God, and not himself or any man, is the beneficent Pantocrator  who cares and provides for His Bride, the Church. Modeling ourselves after this saint’s example requires us to acknowledge and recognize Christ’s hand in our lives. Despite our weaknesses and shortcomings, He assures us, saying, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness.” [16] It is He who helps carry the crosses of His children each day, and it is likewise He who ultimately died on the Cross for them. This sacrificial, kenotic act is precisely what He exhorts His children to emulate and exemplify in their dealings with each person. In order to take up this journey of conformity to Christ, and of walking with Him towards perfection, we must first discern the condition of imperfect love. St. Paul writes to the Ephesians: “Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave Himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.” [17] By looking to Him who is Love, we can see most clearly the perfect love which beckons us to walk according to His steps. This perspective enables us to trust in His love and care for those whom we seek to love. Augustine, in his Expositions on the Psalms , instructs us to entrust those whom we love — and even our enemies — to Him, for His love is perfect. [18] In submitting ourselves to Him, we fulfill the advice of the Apostle Peter, “casting all [our] cares upon Him,” including also those whom we love, and their wellbeing, “for He cares for [us].” [19] This is the ultimate and perfect act of love — giving our whole being to Him who loves us most perfectly, even to the point of death on our behalf. [20] II. Christ: Meeting our Bridegroom As Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden as a result of their sin, God was already working the ultimate plan of their restoration to and reunification with Him. While humanity would experience many highs and lows in its journey to its Beloved, He patiently watched, guided, and prepared His bride — the Church, His chosen People — in anticipation of the wedding feast ahead. Much like the Shulamite bride on her troubled night, humanity’s selfish and self-centered tendencies often led it to miss its Bridegroom, even when He was to be found just behind the door. While Christ “stand[s] at the door and knock[s]” [21] we may frequently find ourselves still occupied with putting on our robes or worried about soiling our feet. In contrast, the Lord’s selfless love leads Him to the road to Golgotha, to His betrothal to His Church, not with the finest of robes, but rather with a striped back and crown of thorns. Through this dichotomy, human love is assuredly differentiated from divine love. Many fathers of the Church therefore caution against this self-seeking approach to one’s relationship with God. For example, St. Basil writes: “[A] beginning is made by detaching oneself from all external goods: property, vainglory, life in society, [and] useless desires, after the example of the Lord’s holy disciples. James and John left their father Zebedee and the very boat upon which their whole livelihood depended. Matthew left his counting house and followed the Lord, not merely leaving behind the profits of his occupation but also paying no attention to the dangers which were sure to befall both himself and his family at the hands of the magistrates because he had left the tax accounts unfinished. To Paul, finally, the whole world was crucified, and he to the world.” [22] By cultivating this selfless love for God and all His creation, we come to learn the truth of the Lord’s saying, “My yoke is easy, and My burden is light,” [23] for when one loves God for Who He is, and not merely on account of the blessings He provides, he realizes the profound joy and gladness that ensue from walking with the Lord. The Scriptures warn against seeking Christ merely for material purposes. When the Lord was sought by the multitudes after they were miraculously fed by Him, He emphasizes this perspective to them: “Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled.” [24] Correcting their improper approach, He continues: “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.” [25] Apart from the Lord’s direct teaching in the Gospels, the Old Testament likewise carries this message. In the experience of Job, it is evident that if Job’s love for God was founded in the material wealth and many blessings he enjoyed, he would have surely turned away from Him when those things were abruptly taken from him in his trial by the devil. Rather, Job’s love for God Himself allowed him to remain steadfast and faithful, even when his own wife and close friends goaded him to “curse God and die.” [26] The pursuit of ease and personal gain in this life prevents one from enjoying the presence of God and blinds his eyes from seeing Christ because it rather fixes his attention on himself. Thus, St. Augustine plainly reflects: “he loves You too little who loves anything with You, which he loves not for You.” [27] St. John Chrysostom similarly exhorts his hearers: “He came to do away with the old things, to call us to a greater country. Therefore He does all, to deliver us from things unnecessary, and from our affection for the earth. For this cause He mentioned the heathens also, saying that the Gentiles seek after these things; they whose whole labor is for the present life, who have no regard for the things to come, nor any thought of Heaven. But to you not these present are chief things, but other than these. For we were not born for this end, that we should eat and drink and be clothed, but that we might please God, and attain unto the good things to come. Therefore as things here are secondary in our labor, so also in our prayers let them be secondary.” [28] By seeking God for His own sake, we receive the means by which to obtain perfect love. When one finds God, he finds love, for God is just that — love . It is only with and through God that we can learn to love perfectly. For this reason, St. Macarius the Great writes that “[t]he lamp is always burning and shining, but when it is specially trimmed, it kindles up with intoxication of the love of God; and then again by God’s dispensation it gives in, and though the light is always there, it is comparatively dull.” [29] Indeed, as the Scriptures reveal: “without Me you can do nothing,” [30] and “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” [31] From the spiritual journey of the Apostle Peter, this worldview comes to life. The Gospels do not shy away from displaying the shortcomings of even the closest disciples of Christ, for the edification of His followers thereafter. Shortly before the Pascha of our Lord, St. Peter exclaims, “[e]ven if all are made to stumble because of You, I will never be made to stumble.” [32] When Christ tells him that he will deny Him, he responds emphatically, “[e]ven if I have to die with You, I will not deny You!” [33] Shortly thereafter, as the rooster crows, we find St. Peter struck deeply by Christ’s words to him and weeping bitterly. [34] It is only after the Resurrection of Christ that St. Peter is shown how to love Him. Christ reveals to him the sacrificial nature of perfect love, calling him to feed His lambs, tend His sheep, and feed His sheep. [35] The love which the Lord embodies, teaches, and shows His disciples is palpably self-emptying. It is centered around serving others: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” [36] In its foundation, the quintessential ingredient for knowing and experiencing this love is therefore service   — looking away from one’s personal gain for the sake of others. While venturing into this love is as treading into uncharted waters, when we fix our gaze on Him who is Himself love, who is able not only to walk on water, but also to enable St. Peter to do the same, we find ourselves capable of walking confidently towards Him. [37] And like St. Peter, only when we begin to fear for ourselves and our own good, happiness, and gain do we consequently find ourselves sinking quickly. [38] In spite of our own shortcomings, God is faithful to extend His hand and pull us out of the depths and into His secure, nurturing, and loving embrace. [39] St. Macarius the Great neatly summarizes this teaching, writing that “faithful souls receive that divine and heavenly fire…and that fire forms a heavenly image upon their humanity.” [40] By seeking to be reconciled once again to the Image of God after which we were created, through the grace of God, we are able to perfect our otherwise imperfect love, for “we love Him because He first loved us.” [41] — [1] Romans 3:23 NKJV (Hereinafter, all Scriptural references are taken from the New King James Version). [2]  See Genesis 1:31. [3] “But your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2). [4] "For if sin sunders and dissevers man from God, surely righteousness will be a bond of union, and will somehow set us by the side of God Himself, with nothing to part us." (St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on John ); See generally Genesis. [5] Genesis 3:12. [6] 1 Corinthians 12:20. [7] 1 Corinthians 12: 24-26. [8]  See generally St. Basil of Caesarea, On Social Justice , Homily 2, To the Rich . [9] Song of Songs 5:2-8. [10] It is pertinent to note that this does not only apply to human relationships, but also one’s relationship with God. As the Song of Songs is a representation of Christ’s love of His Church, one cannot discuss this Scriptural book without noting that it is this same selfishness that separates us from Christ, even when He knocks at the door. [11] St. Augustine, City of God, Book XIV, Chapter 13 . [12] Romans 7:15-20. [13]  See C. Paul Schroeder, On Social Justice: St. Basil the Great , 64   (SVS Press, 2009). [14]  See Philippians 2:5-7. [15] Fr. Daniel Fanous, A Silent Patriarch: Kyrillos VI: Life and Legacy , 226. [16] 2 Corinthians 12:9. [17] Ephesians 5:1-2. [18]  See Augustine,  Expositions on the Psalms  (Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers, Series I, vol. 8, pg. 210). [19] 1 Peter 5:7. [20] It would be regretful to not note that in Christ’s unceasing and immense mercy, even our mere acknowledgement that we have hurt those we love, and our repentance and will to place them into His perfect hands despite what it may mean for us, not only results in what is best for them but also provides us immense spiritual blessing. [21]  See Revelation 3:20. [22] St. Basil of Caesarea, Long Rules  8. [23] Matthew 11:30. [24] John 6:26. [25] John 6:27. [26] Job 2:9; see generally Job. [27] St. Augustine, Confessions, X.29. [28] St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew 22.4. [29] Macarius, Homily 8.2 (A.J. Mason, The Fifty Spiritual Homilies of St. Macarius the Egyptian , 66). [30] John 15:5. [31] Philippians 4:13. [32] Matthew 26:33. [33] Matthew 26:35. [34] Matthew 26:75. [35] John 21:15-17. [36] Mark 10:45. [37] Matthew 14. [38]  Ibid. [39]  Ibid. [40] Macarius , Homily 11.2 (Mason, 80). [41] 1 John 4:19. — Hilana Said is a Coptic Orthodox Christian and a licensed attorney. She graduated from Albany Law School in 2023. Hilana developed a love for academic reading and writing during her time on the Executive Board of the Albany Law Review. Her deep faith and Coptic Orthodox heritage play an integral role in her personal and professional life and serve as constant inspiration for her academic pursuits. Cover Image by Johann Sadeler. DossPress.com  is a place for Christian men and women to collaborate for the sake of our common edification by sharing their written works. As we strive to uphold a standard of doctrinal and spiritual soundness in the articles shared, we note nonetheless that the thoughts expressed in each article remain the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Doss Press.