Author: protopresbiter Alexander Schmemann

In the Arian controversy, as in a knot, many threads are gathered, many questions are joined. This is the beginning of the great theological controversies in which almost five centuries of the history of the Church will pass and which will leave us as a heritage the inspired writings of the fathers and teachers of the Church, together with the precise formulations of the ecumenical councils. However, this struggle for the Truth is soon complicated by the involvement of state power. It ceases to be purely ecclesiastical and acquires a new state dimension. Thus, in its course, the faith of the Church was not only refined, but also the slow and painful birth of a Christian Byzantium took place. Outwardly, the fourth century is probably one of the most tragic in the history of the Church – it was then that the theme of the Christian world was put into its real depth for the first time, that idea and that vision were born that will never be completely erased from the church consciousness.

The dispute began in Alexandria, the capital of Christian thought. Arius, a learned Alexandrian presbyter and preacher, began to teach that Christ, though the son of God, must necessarily be recognized as created in time—one of God’s creations, since birth cannot but be an occurrence in time. He was born of God for the creation of the world, an instrument of creation, and therefore there was a time when He was not. Therefore, the Son of God is completely different from the Father and unlike Him.

It is difficult for the modern ecclesiastical society, for which theological interests are generally alien (they are only unnecessary and dangerous assumptions), to understand, in the first place, how such a teaching could have arisen, which obviously goes against the most basic positions of Christianity, and, secondly, the resonance of this controversy for five whole decades, during which it did not cease to tear the Church apart. In order to understand this, it is necessary to feel, in the words of Archpriest Georgi Florovski, the fact that for the Christians of those times, theology was really a vital matter, a spiritual feat, a confession of faith and a creative solution to life’s problems, that apparently arguing about words and formulas, they actually defended and defended precisely the vital – today they would call it the practical or existential meaning of Christianity, which is contained in the word salvation. Because salvation is not a magical, externally performed action – it is a gift from God, the achievement of which depends on the complete perception and assimilation by man. In this situation, however, theology, i.e. the insight, expression and confession of the Truth through the means of the word, is revealed as a higher, royal vocation of man; in it, man’s participation in the meaning of divine things is restored, man’s birthright in the world as a rational person. Theology is the revelation, in the concepts of reason, of the faith of the Church – not the verification of this faith by the means of reason and not subordination to reason, but quite the opposite – the extension of reason itself to the Revelation, its agreement with the true and evident faith. Faith precedes theology, and therefore theological development can be spoken of as a gradual perception and refinement of the originally complete faith. From the example of Origen, we see that the first attempts in this direction were imperfect and even turned out to be heretical. However, this only shows how difficult it was to find the right words to express the faith; centuries were to pass until the thought itself was assimilated into the spirit of Christianity.

By faith in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, i.e. with the experience of the Triune God, the Church has lived since its first days. The meaning of the Gospel is in the Revelation of the Trinity as perfect unity, perfect love and perfect life. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the Father, and the communion of the Holy Spirit – we can find this liturgical blessing everywhere in the messages of St. Ap. Pavel. However, if in the Revelation about the Triune God are the source of our salvation and the power of the Christian life, then this Revelation must also enlighten the human mind, expand it to comprehend the mystery that was revealed to us by Christ.

Because accepting the Truth always means effort, crisis and aging. Natural reason confronts Revelation as a contradiction and a paradox. How can the original belief of the Church in the Triune God be reconciled with such an undoubted affirmation of His unity – with that monotheism, in whose name Christians, following the Jews, reject every form of paganism? This faith must be revealed; the experience must be explained. Thus, the first fundamental theological question arises in the church’s consciousness – the question of the Trinity.

* * *

Arius is wrong when he approaches the resolution of the theological question about St. Trinity exclusively as a philosopher who looks at everything from the point of view of logic. There are two cornerstones and vital in the proper sense of the word truths of Christianity: about the One God and about the salvation of the world accomplished by the Son of God. However, Arius perceives these truths as abstract situations. He is a convinced monotheist, but not in the spirit of the Old Testament, but in the spirit of the philosophical monotheism prevailing in the Hellenistic world at that time, namely – recognition of some One or One, which lies at the basis of everything that exists as its beginning and as unifying principle of everything plural. God is One, and in Him there can be no multiplicity; but since He has His Son, that Son is already different from Him and therefore cannot be God. The Son is born, but the birth is the coming into being of something that did not yet exist. The Son is born for the sake of creation, for the salvation of creation, but He is not God in that single and absolute sense in which God is the Father. Arianism thus manifests itself as an attempt to rationalize Christianity. In this experience, it is not the living religious experience that fertilizes thought and makes it see and understand things that it previously did not understand, but on the contrary, the experience of faith dries up in the course of logical analysis and is turned into an abstract construction. Arianism, however, is in tune with the age. It offers both a strict monotheism and a rejection of everything irrational and incomprehensible. It is accessible to the average mind who seeks a reasonable faith rather than the actual Tradition of the Church with its biblical, realistic images and expressions. As one historian has rightly remarked, Arianism deprived Christianity of its living religious content, turned it into theism—into cosmology and morality.

The first reaction against Arianism is the reaction of the living faith, which feels shaken by this perversion of the very sanctuary of the Church. Arius was condemned by his own bishop, Alexander of Alexandria. However, this is only a condemnation, not an answer. In his answer, Bishop Alexander himself gets confused and fails to find the right words. For his part, Arius turned for support to his former friends from the school of the famous Antiochian theologian Lucian. As educated theologians, many of them occupy episcopal chairs. Special attention should be paid here to the two Eusebians – Eusebius of Caesarea, the first church historian (whose Church History is one of our most important sources for the life of the early Church), and Eusebius of Nicomedia, later baptized imp. Constantine the Great. It must be said that they support Arius not only for personal reasons. During these years, the intelligentsia grew in the Church, which thirsted for a reasonable explanation of the faith and for which the Church’s teaching suffered from a lack of philosophical character. In this sense, Arianism seems perfectly adequate as a modern interpretation of church teaching, acceptable to the broad circles of educated people. Thus, the local Alexandrian dispute spread gradually throughout the East.

At this point, the imp intervenes in the dispute. Constantine the Great. We must try to imagine what the conversion of the emperor himself meant for the Church – after three centuries of persecution – in order to understand why the court of St. Constantine became a center of attraction, not only for the opportunists and careerists, but and for those who, inspired by the victory of Christ, dream of spreading this victory throughout the world. In a short time, the emperor and the Empire turn into providential instruments of the Kingdom of Christ. A circle of Christian advisers was immediately formed around St. Constantine the Great – something like his unofficial headquarters, in which very early, in fact, from the very beginning of Constantine’s appearance in the East, the Nicomedian bishop Eusebius occupied a prominent place – the first of the unfortunate series of court bishops53. Of course, Constantine himself was not able to navigate the essence of the theological dispute, but he was shocked by the emergence of a new dispute in the Church precisely in the years of his full celebration. The victory over Licinius in 324 definitively confirmed his one-man power and before him the image of an Empire, united not only politically, but also internally spiritually renewed by a single Church. However, instead of realizing these dreams of his, he is faced with the sad reality of new disputes and divisions. It is very likely that the idea of ​​a council of all the bishops, as a means of settling the dispute, was suggested to him by his Christian advisers. St. However, Constantine wished to make this council a symbol and crowning of his victory, as well as of the new position of the Church in the Roman Empire. Thus, in the spring of 325, the First Ecumenical Council was convened in Nicaea – ecumenical not because of the number of bishops present (the Tradition of the Church sets this number at 318), but from the point of view of its design and purpose (1). And indeed, for the first time after the long centuries of semi-legal existence, bishops from all corners of the Church gathered in Nicaea, many of whom still bear the scars of wounds and bodily injuries received during the Diocletian persecution. What a tangible experience of celebration and victory! To this is added the splendor of the reception, the unprecedented solemnity of the welcome, the generosity and kindness of the emperor – factors that cannot but strengthen the joyful confidence at the beginning of a new era, the faith in the actual victory of Christ over the world. This is how Constantine himself perceived the council above all. He scheduled its opening on the day of the twentieth anniversary of his rule. He wants this day to pass in parade and joy, not in the disputes he hates. In his speech to the bishops on the opening day of the council, he says that disputes between them are more dangerous than wars and other conflicts, and give him the most grief of all.

Of course, the importance of the Council of Nicaea is above all in the great victory of the Truth withheld from it. No protocols or acts have been preserved from this council, as from other ecumenical councils. It is only known that the council condemned Arianism and in the traditional content of the Baptismal Creed (2) introduced a new specification of the relationship of the Son to the Father, calling the Son one with the Father, i.e. having that essence which the Father has, and therefore equal to Him in Godhead. The term used, according to Vasily Bolotov, is so precise that it excludes any possibility of reinterpretation (3). With it, Arianism was condemned unconditionally. This very term, however, remained for many years a stone of stumbling and temptation, leading the Church into prolonged turmoil.

This turmoil filled the next fifty-six years – until the convening of the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in 381. In the course of its development, of course, individual themes must be distinguished, but their mutual connection must always be sought. Almost equally, these themes determine the course of the subsequent history of the Church – a history in which there is hardly another half-century that has been so decisive.

Externally, the reason for the continuation of this turmoil is that, although condemned, the Arians not only did not surrender, but with the help of the most complicated intrigues they managed to attract the state power to their side. With this, the first major topic is set – the participation of the emperor in the life of the Church. From now on we will say that from this point of view the balance sheet of the fourth century is more than negative; it is even tragic. Here, however, it is necessary to immediately determine the second topic of the Arian dispute – the celebration of the Arians would have been impossible even with the help of the emperor, in the event that the Church, which had condemned Arius with complete unanimity, had proved to be united in this condemnation and especially in the acceptance of the doctrine proclaimed at Nicaea. However, this is not what happens. The Council of Nicaea brings confusion and doubt into minds, which begs the question of the theological content of the post-Nicene controversy. And precisely in this is the positive meaning of the fourth century, which clearly shows the categorical power of the Truth in church life even in hopeless circumstances.

Most of the participants of the council took lightly the condemnation of Arianism, in which they saw a too obvious distortion of the primitive Tradition of the Church. However, the matter is quite different with the disclosure of the positive doctrine of the Trinity, which is contained in the term oneness. This word was proposed and practically imposed on St. Constantine, and through him on the council itself, by a small group of far-sighted and courageous theologians who understood the inadequacy of the condemnation of Arius and the need to cut the Tradition of the Church into clear concepts. To the majority of the bishops of the council, however, the word is foreign and unintelligible; with it, for the first time, a philosophical term, which is foreign to the Holy Scriptures, was introduced into the teaching of faith. At the same time, this term is suspect, since the oneness can return the Church to the recently overcome temptation of Sabelianism, which merges the Father and the Son into one entity. Nevertheless, the council – at the express request of the emperor – accepted this term in the Creed, without, however, delving much into its meaning. The bishops think that what is important is the condemnation of heresy, and as for the Creed – practically every local church has its own symbol, which agrees with all the others in substance, though not quite literally.

In this way, outwardly, the council ended successfully, if we do not consider the repeated, after Donatism, mistake of Constantine, who sent Arius and his like-minded people into exile and thus once again mixed the judgment of the Church with the judgment of Caesar.

This is precisely where the group of court bishops we mentioned above manifests itself. This group was composed exclusively of friends of Arius, and at their head was Eusebius of Nicomedia. These are men forced to accept the condemnation of their friend, but only in view of the unanimity of the majority of the bishops of Nicaea, while in fact they do so only with a contrite heart and a thought of revenge. To declare openly against the Council is impossible for them, and therefore they resort to the means of intrigue. Taking advantage of the bishops’ indifference to the positive revelation of the Nicene Creed, they decided simply not to mention it, but to direct all their energies to that handful of theologians who alone grasped the full meaning of the term oneness. Denunciations and accusations are underway that have nothing to do with theology. Their first victim was Eustathius of Antioch, whom they succeeded in defaming in the eyes of the emperor and causing him to be sent into exile. After their success, for many years, the young – newly elected – Alexandrian bishop St. Athanasius the Great (328–373), who in all probability was the main inspirer of the Nicaean unity, became the main object of their intrigues. And again in the same way, without entering into any theological dispute with him, the enemies of the Council of Nicaea succeeded in obtaining his condemnation on the charge of some canonical offences—first at the episcopal council of Tire in 331, and then by the exile of St. Athanasius by order of the emperor to Trier on the Rhine. St. Constantine the Great could not tolerate troublemakers, and it was precisely as such that they managed to present the Bishop of Alexandria before him. Having achieved the removal of St. Athanasius, it was not difficult for the court bishops to restore to Alexandria Arius himself, who signed some vague penance in this connection, after which he was received into communion. St. Constantine, who probably never managed to understand the essence of the dispute, thinks that everything is already in order – peace has been achieved in the Church again, and only enemies of this peace can recall things that have remained in the past. The opportunists are celebrating on all fronts in the apparent misunderstanding and silence of the entire Church.

But Constantine’s days were drawing to a close. In the same year 336, when St. Athanasius was exiled, he celebrated his last – thirtieth – anniversary from the beginning of his reign. However, the empire is now ruled by another Constantine. Over the years, the mystical mood that has lived in him since his childhood grows. At the end of his days, even the interests of the state took a backseat to this mood. The speeches and celebrations of this ante-mortal jubilee were illumined by that light which grew more and more strongly in his soul, and shortly before his death hands were laid on him, he became famous and no longer wore his royal robes. His longtime dream was to be baptized in the waters of the Jordan, but this did not come true. Constantine was baptized by Eusebius of Nicomedia, and from that moment on he lived with the joyous assurance of the nearness of Christ and His eternal light. St. Constantine the Great died on the sunny noon of Pentecost. Whatever his faults, and perhaps even his crimes in his personal life (such as the murder of his son Crisp – a dark family drama that remains unsolved until the end), we can hardly doubt that he is a man who invariably he aspired to God, lived with the thirst for the absolute and wanted to establish on earth the radiance of heavenly justice and beauty. The greatest earthly hopes of the Church, her dreams for the celebration of Christ in the world, are connected with his name. This is also the reason why the love of the Church and her gratitude to him prove to be stronger than the merciless but fickle and often superficial judgment of historians.

Notes:

1. Until the rise of Constantinople (formerly Byzantium) as the new capital of the Empire and a significant ecclesiastical center, Nicomedia (today the city of Izmit, about 100 km east of Istanbul in Turkey) played a leading role in the region, including as an ecclesiastical center in whose diocese Byzantium itself is also located. In Nicomedia at the end of the 3rd and the beginning of the 4th century is the palace of the imp. Diocletian (284–305), after in 286 he introduced the well-known tetrarchy system into the administration of the Roman Empire. Nicomedia also played the role of the interim capital of Constantine the Great himself until the official proclamation of Constantinople.

2. At the time of the First Ecumenical Council, Nicaea (today the city of Iznik, southeast of Istanbul, on the shores of Lake Nicaea) was also a leading center in the region, with which Nicomedia competed as the capital of the province of Bithynia. In Nicaea Emp. Constantine I had a palace in which the said council was opened (May 20, 325). In the thirteenth century, during the Latin rule in Constantinople (1204–1261), Nicaea was the strongest center of Byzantine power. (Bel. trans.)

3. Here we are talking about the Baptismal symbol of the Church of Caesarea, which was proposed to the council by Eusebius of Caesarea, and not about any Baptismal symbol of the Church in general. The beginning of the 4th century was a time when the churches in some places still used different, although they agreed with each other in the most important, baptismal symbols. See below. (Bel. trans.)

4. See: Bolotov, V. Cit. cf., item IV. M., 1994 (phototyped), p. 41.

Source: From the Bulgarian edition of the book “The Historical Path of Orthodoxy”, Protopr. Alexander Schmemann, IC “Omofor”, Sofia, 2009.

Photo: Fresco of the First Council of Nicaea (325).

51. Beware of signing contracts that bind them, especially if there are any benefits and lures on the fishing line. This can involve you in an organization that will limit and force your freedom and free will, and in effect you will turn out to be a god-fighter and an ungodly person, than which there is nothing more dangerous and destructive.

52. For important and responsible matters, ask for a written order.

53. Don’t have illusions and don’t enjoy mirages. Many of those who seem to you to be well-off, if you look more carefully into their lives, you will find that they have entangled themselves in such nets that they will never be able to get out of them, and will perish as they are here. on earth as well as in eternity. For example, ask yourself the question: “Why do many who seem to be prosperous smoke, drink and serve the vices that enslave them?”

54. Be absolutely humble in front of everyone. Being low to the ground, there is nowhere to push you to smash your head. If you don’t stick your nose out, you won’t be hit by a deadly bullet. Earthly life is a forest.

55. It is better not to talk about the things that excite the passions.

56. The human soul is an impregnable fortress. God has entrusted the keys to it to us. We are the ones who, by our obedience to demons, are handing these keys into the hands of the wicked to destroy us.

57. Those whom you judge and accuse, you take upon yourself their guilt.

58. The most profitable investment, the most profitable deposit is virtue and charity.

59. God favors nothing so much as the removal of pride clinging to the soul. However your relations and circumstances may change towards you, your soul must remain in the same unaltered simple and virtuous disposition and condition.

60. It is better to sit at an empty table than at a table with harmful and poisonous dishes.

61. Strive with all your might for virtue, but hope more in the Lord than in your good works.

62. What you suffer for only gets a price if you don’t pollute it with your powerless words and self-promotion.

63. Imps are afraid of order.

64. Often the external unity of people leads to deep internal disunity.

65. If you do not get rid of your loose behavior with people, you will fail in all your affairs and you will never be prosperous.

66. The carnal man will betray you even if you warn him.

67. When the devil cannot fail you in matters of faith, he incites you to condemnation, fornication, anger, to trap you in moral sin.

68. Hard and gentle! Meek and firm!

69. Authority is connected with dignified Christian humility. The right view is to do everything in your power in the direction of your aspirations. Only then pray, expecting everything from God’s mercy.

70. The question is not whether you are right or wrong. It all comes down to opportunity. If you do not have the opportunity now, postpone the battle or your intention until you gather strength and means, keep silent and wait for the time.

71. Trust no one and do not reveal your heart.

72. For nothing in the world do not slander, slander and judge even in relation to your greatest enemies. Do not ally yourself with the powerful and the rich. Don’t testify, especially in divorce cases.

73. You should always be a man! But is it manly to judge, debauchery and chatter hot-not-boiling?!

74. For every good thing the devil has made a false duplicate, which you must be able to recognize.

75. Do not be like a horse that any man and rabies can eat. Be serious, firm and steady.

76. No attempt to stop the decaying process in the Church. This is pointless and dangerous today! Use God’s commandments and avoid talking about religion and politics. The power is in silence, prayer, self-absorption in one’s own heart cell. Be invisible like a beetle under a leaf. Guard your conscience, by no means flaunting it or discrediting it in front of anyone. Don’t be direct and specific, or probe the subtleties in front of people. If you do not observe this, then they will force you to change your faith.

77. Remember your sins and you will be convinced that you are always worthy of punishment.

78. Anger does not arise from disease, but from pride. In order not to give in to irritability and anger, you should not rush. Be very careful about yourself not to offend anyone with the appearance of contempt.

79. If you accept people in the name of God, then everyone will be kind to you.

80. Work hard in your affairs and you will drive away laziness, despondency and boredom, and if you pray patiently, you will be delivered from many evils.

81. When a gloomy mood attacks you, do not forget to rebuke yourself, remembering how guilty you are before God. Realize that you are not worthy of anything better and you will immediately get relief from dark, unpleasant thoughts. If you feel restless, repeat often: “Seek peace.”

82. Self-justification is a great sin. You keep sinning, then keep repenting. Thus, in the end, if death finds you in remorse, you will be saved. Do you regret it? Then with alms straighten your life and cleanse yourself from your sins.

83. When you are at enmity against someone, you offend God, and please the devil – an enemy.

84. There are no trifles in the world. Everything in the world has its price and consequences.

85. Failure to follow the advice of the wise leads to misfortune.

86. True repentance does not require days and years, but often, as with the thief on the cross, only a moment.

87. Great good and evil always begin from the small and the imperceptible.

88. Do not forget that the robber was a robber for thirty years and, having repented, entered Paradise, and Judas was with the Lord all his life, but in the end he betrayed Him.

89. If they praise you, do not say anything, relax your head and eyes and be silent, or else indicate the reason – God’s gift.

90. Do good only for God and do not pay any attention to the choir’s ingratitude. Expect reward only from the Lord. If you expect any thanks here on earth, you labor in vain and suffer privations in vain. Man is by nature ungrateful.

91. Our attention must be directed to our inner life so that we do not notice what is happening around us. Then we will not judge. Let us not be too bitter about the injustices here and treat them indifferently. Justice does not live on our land. We await a new heaven and a new earth where righteousness dwells. Don’t be bitter if people don’t value you and are unfair. You work for God, not for people. Show mercy to others, but be strict with yourself. You will not be responsible for others, so watch not them, but yourself, because you will only be responsible for yourself.

92. It is better to anticipate and be silent than to speak and then regret.

93. He who thinks he has virtue loses it.

94. Do not pray or do alms so that you are seen! This is Christ’s command.

95. He is wise who sees the good in everyone and the bad in himself; the stupid sees the bad in everyone, and considers himself the most worthy.

96. When you wake up, say: “Glory be to You, God!” and do not remember your dreams.

97. When you work, say to yourself: “Lord, have mercy!”.

98. Do not speak in church, such a habit brings sorrows.

99. When you pray diligently, beware – temptations will follow.

100. After confession and communion, ask God to protect you from returning to your former sins. If you want to do something that you shouldn’t, remember that you will have to confess it and God may not forgive you, precisely because you persist, knowing that it is not good, but you do it.

101. If you do not believe in signs and dreams and the like, they will not come true.

102. With people, especially those who are not of your sex, you should not treat freely, so as not to serve as a temptation.

103. The beam you have in your eyes when you judge others is pride – you must first of all remove it from yourself. The proud is healed by God with inner sorrows, and the humble endures everything that comes from people, telling himself that he is worthy of it. Be respectful to everyone, but not flattering. Bow and go quickly. Look to the earth, for there you will go. Humility requires yielding to others by submitting to the younger and considering yourself the worst. He who gives in gains more. Humble yourself and all your works will start. If someone is angry with you, ask them why. If someone is angry with you, please them. Keep quiet in front of everyone and everyone will love you.

104. When you are angry with someone, it is better to joke. Don’t be rude. When asked for advice, it’s best to say, “I don’t know what to say.” Laugh a little. Laughter casts out the fear of God.

105. If blasphemous thoughts about God and holy things assail you, or you condemn, reproach yourself in pride, and pay no attention to your thoughts.

106. In order to keep the fear of God in yourself, fulfill His commands, asking Him to help you in this.

107. You must not be a people pleaser. You better keep quiet. Silence is superior to people-pleasing.

108. Do not tell where what is being done and do not pass on other people’s affairs.

109. God loves works.

110. While we are on earth, we cannot be without sorrows anywhere.

111. Always adhere to the rule: where you do not foresee success, do not begin to act there.

112. Life for God – this is our earthly vocation.

113. On earth we need no attachments, neither to wealth, nor to fame, nor to fame, nor to pleasures. Everything is temporary and after the narrow and dark grave, they will not follow us.

114. In order for your prayers to be heard, first pray for your enemies, so that God will help you, despite the fact that you have become His enemy with your sins. Secondly, stretch out your hands to those in need and according to your strength, satisfy them, because only in this way you will be able to reach the height of the merciful God. Third, don’t forget to ask God to strengthen your faith. After that, it is necessary to be humble, so that God’s blessings can flow to this lowland.

115. In your attitude towards people and especially towards your friends, always keep in mind a thought that is contained in the oldest book of the Bible, dedicated to the long-suffering Job: “He who condemns his friend to a spoil, his children’s eyes run out.” In connection with this thought St. John Chrysostom noted that God is not offended by anything as much as by the offense we inflict on our friends. And you always be kind to your friends, even when, as people, they have sinned against you in some way.

116. Your successes will be so much greater, the clearer the image of the virtues you draw in your heart.

117. Do you have a competition coming up or another decisive and important moment in your life? Before that, it is necessary to concentrate – this is done with silence and prayer. Go into seclusion and in this way instill in your soul a gracious power that alone can bestow lasting victory.

118. Almost always, when we are in good physical and mental condition, breakdowns happen. It is because we forget ourselves. We drop the position of caution and restraint. Successes are most easily lost the moment they are won. The ancient ascetics taught us to adhere to a moderate but constant diet and behavior. Be very careful exactly when you feel the best because of some success of yours. The fruits of your many efforts can be lost in a moment of carelessness.

119. Christ demands that we be like children. The child feels confident holding his father’s hand. He has no doubt that the good father will give him whatever he wants. When we pray to God, we should have that same childlike, living faith in our Heavenly Father. This is one of the conditions for our prayers to be heard. It is a gift from God, and therefore before you pray for any need, first of all, ask God to deliver you from disbelief and strengthen your faith.

120. I have observed you that during the singing you get moved and shed tears. This is a very clear proof of the touch of Divine power and grace to your heart. However, be careful not to fool yourself (self-seduce, seduce yourself). In general, feelings are something impermanent and we shouldn’t trust them too much. But especially for spiritual singing, it is known that many of the saints received strong faith thanks to it. And you are doing well to listen to our wonderful church choir.

Note: The soul-beneficial teachings of Archbishop Seraphim Sobolev were recorded by his spiritual child, Nikola Mutafchiev, and were published in the book “The Sofia Wonderworker Seraphim for the Secrets of Victory”, Sofia, 2003.

About the author: Archbishop Seraphim (Sobolev) of Boguchar is one of the most prominent clergymen of our time. Bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church, whose episcopal ministry is almost entirely in Bulgaria. He was solemnly glorified as a newly canonized saint – Unfathomable joy overwhelmed the souls of thousands of Christians who filled the patriarchal cathedral “St. Alexander Nevsky”, to become part of this significant spiritual celebration ¬ the glorification of St. Seraphim, Archbishop Bogucharski, Sofia Miracle Worker, which took place on February 26, 2016.

Photo: Miraculous Icon of Ever-Virgin Mother of God. Batchkovo monastery – Bulgaria / Ikoni Mahnevi, https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100057324623799

The Highest Artist-God-in everything that had to be done, using His almighty power, that is, the Son, for “through Him everything came into being, and without Him nothing came into being” (John 1, 3), in the beginning and before everything else he created heaven and earth and called into being, although they never existed. If, perhaps, someone asks how and from where, then he will hear from us the following wise and truly excellent word: “Who knew the mind of the Lord? Or who was His adviser?” (Rom. 11:34).

… In each of the created deeds, the Creator was the Word, and only His wave gave life to everything. Saint Cyril of Alexandria. Creations, part 4, M., 1886, p. 9-11.

First of all, believe that there is one God who created everything, who brought everything out of nothing into being. He embraces everything. Himself being immense, and can neither be defined by the word nor comprehended by the mind. Shepherd Ermas. Monuments of ancient Christian writing in Russian translation, vol. 1, M., 1860, p. 254.

…The Creator created one whole world, so that the arrangement of many worlds would not lead to the idea of ​​many Creators. Since the creation is one, we believe that its Creator is one. Saint Athanasius the Great. Creations, part 1, M., 1851, p. 65.

Since the Egyptians deified the visible creature and the Israelites, having lived with them for a long time, became involved in the same wickedness, then Moses, of necessity, offers them the doctrine of creation and clearly teaches that the creature has a beginning of being and that the Creator is the God of all. Blessed Theodoret of Kirsky. Creations, part 1. M., 1855, p. 7.

… If God is not alone eternal and everything else did not come from Him, then He is not God either. And if the world is co-eternal with God, therefore, equal to Him in being, then it is equal to God both in immutability, and in infinity, and in everything, which means that there is another God. But two eternal and common beginnings cannot be admitted according to the ideas of sound reason. Tertullian. Bishop Macarius (Bulgakov). Orthodox dogmatic theology, vol. 2, St. Petersburg, 1851, p. 10-11)*.

God created the invisible and visible world; and soul and body He also created.

…Some say that creatures have co-existed with God from eternity; but this is impossible. For how can from eternity coexist with the Infinite in everything, beings who are finite in everything, and how are they actually creatures if they are co-eternal with the Creator? But so say the Hellenes, who introduce God as the Creator not of nature, but only of qualities. We, recognizing God as omnipotent, say that He is the Creator not only of qualities, but also of natures endowed with qualities. If so, then the creatures from eternity did not exist with God.

… The all-sufficient God brought creatures from non-existence into existence, not because he needed anything, but so that they, according to their ability to perceive, partaking of His blessedness, would enjoy and that He Himself would rejoice in His deeds, seeing them rejoicing and always insatiably satiated by the insatiable. Saint Maximus the Confessor (68, 151, 155, 148).

… The very creation points to the One who created it, the very deed announces the One who produced it, and the world preaches the One who arranged it. The whole Church throughout the world received this tradition from the apostles.

The Creator of the world is the Word of God, and this is our Lord, Who in the last times became a man and existed in this world, invisibly contains everything created and is embedded in all creation, because the Word of God governs and disposes of everything; and for this He apparently came to his own, and became flesh, and prostrated himself on a tree, in order to restore everything in Himself. Saint Irenaeus of Lyons. Works. SPb., 1900, p. 130-131 485-486.

Before the world arose, there was only the Living and Boundless God. When the world was called into being from non-existence, God, of course, did not become limited, all the fullness of life and infinity remained with Him. But this fullness of life and infinity was also expressed in creatures, living and limited, of which there are immeasurably many, and all of them are endowed with life. Archpriest John Sergiev, vol. 1, M., 1894, p. 282-283.

By the action of the will of God, the worlds, visible and invisible, were created, man was created and redeemed, all events, public and private, have been and are taking place, from which shines, like the sun from heaven, God’s Goodness, God’s Omnipotence, God’s Wisdom. Bishop Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) (109, 80).

God created the world out of nothing

People can do something not out of nothing, but through matter. But God, in fact, surpasses people by the fact that He Himself called to being the matter of His creation, which did not exist before. Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (113, 149).

Just as a potter, who with the same skill made thousands of vessels, did not exhaust either art or strength, so the Creator of this universe, having a creative power not only sufficient for one world, but infinitely surpassing it, brought into being all the greatness of the visible with one wave of will. (4, 6). God does not create His creatures out of Himself, but through His activity brings them into being, just as a person who makes something with his hands does not produce his work out of himself. Saint Basil the Great (113, 150).

To imagine that God formed the world from ready-made matter would mean to equate his creativity with human art, which always needs some kind of substance (for example, a potter needs clay, a builder needs brick and stone, a carpenter and shipbuilder- in wood, a weaver in wool, a tanner in leather, a painter in paint, etc.), and not to understand the difference between man and God, not to understand that it is impossible for an image to have everything that the Prototype has. Blessed Theophylact (113, 149).

It is necessary to imagine everything in God as a whole: the will, wisdom, power and essence of things. If this is really so, then let no one trouble himself by searching and asking about matter, how and where it comes from, like those who say: if God is immaterial, then where does matter come from? How did the quantitative come from the non-quantitative, the visible from the invisible?.. To all such questions about matter, we have one answer: we must not assume that the Wisdom of God is not omnipotent and His Omnipotence is not wise. On the contrary, one must adhere to the idea that one is inseparable from the other, that both turn out to be one and the same, so that the other is seen along with the one. If in one and the same God there is wisdom and power, then He could not but know how to find the substance for the creation of beings, and could not but have the necessary power to realize thought. Saint Gregory of Nyssa (113, 149).

What would be great if God created the world from ready-made matter? And with us, an artist, having received a substance from someone, forms anything from it. But the power of God is manifested in this, that He produced from nothing whatever He willed.

… God brought everything from non-existence into existence, so that His greatness could be known from the creations. Saint Theophilus of Antioch (Bishop Macarius (Bulgakov), p. 14, 32).

Moses, making a forty-day fast on the mountain, sees God in knowledge, as it is written, and not in fortune-telling, and converses with Him, and speaks as someone speaks to his friend. He was taught by God, and he himself teaches about Him, teaches that God is eternal and does not depend on anything, but he also recognizes the non-existent as being, and from non-existence brings everything into being, and does not allow it to return to non-existence, – He Who in the beginning, with a wave and a single desire, produced from nothing the entire visible creation. Saint Gregory Palamas (65, 69).

If everything happened by itself without Providence, as the Epicureans assert, then everything would have to happen in the same way and be the same, and not different; in the universe, as in a single body, everything would have to be the sun or the moon, and with people the whole body would have to be either a hand, or an eye, or a foot. But none of this is now; we see that one is the sun, the other is the moon, and the other is the earth; and in human bodies also one is the foot, the other is the arm, the other is the head. And such a routine makes it clear that all this did not happen by itself, and even shows that everything was preceded by a reason from which one can recognize both the God who put in order and created the universe.

If God is not Himself the original cause of matter, but every being creates from ready-made matter, then it is obvious that He is powerless, because He is not able to produce anything real without matter, just as a woodcarver, no doubt, cannot make any things without wood. Saint Athanasius the Great (113, 149).

The universe was created, and God did not create it from Himself to be the same as He Himself is. On the contrary, He created her out of nothing, so that there would be no equal either to Him by Whom she was created, or to His Son, through Whom she was created … Out of nothing God created everything, but from Himself He did not create, but begot equal to Himself, whom we we call the Son of God. Blessed Augustine (113, 150).

The created world did not originate from the essence of God, but by the will and power of God it was brought from non-existence into existence… Birth consists in the fact that from the essence of the one who gives birth comes what is born, equal to him in essence. Creation and creation consists in the fact that what is created and created comes from outside, and not from the essence of the creator or creator, and, without any doubt, is not similar to him in essence. Saint John of Damascus (113, 150).

From nothing created (God the world) to glorify His greatness. Tertullian (Bishop Macarius (Bulgakov), p. 32).

So, let no one ask from what substance God made such great and wonderful creatures; He made everything out of nothing. Lactantius, Bishop Macarius (Bulgakov), p. 14.

According to Scripture, heaven, earth, fire, air and water were created from nothing. The light that was created on the first day, and everything else that was created after it, was already created from what was before. For when Moses speaks of being created out of nothing, he uses the word “created”: “God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). Venerable Ephraim the Syrian. Creations, part 8, M., 1853, p. 259.

…On the first day, God, according to His almighty word, created everything from non-existence, and on the other days He already creates everything from what existed (created on the first day). Saint John Chrysostom (40, 755).

Photo: Icon of Ever-Virgin Mother of God / Ikoni Mahnevi, https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100057324623799

(to be continued)

The Balkan Peninsula, as a crossroads between the Middle East and Europe, as well as a center of cultural interaction between the peoples of the East and the West, is the subject of serious attention from the Church of Christ. Shortly after the holding of the Apostolic Council, probably at the beginning of the second half of the year 51 AD. Paul begins his second missionary journey. We must note that the first Christian history, the Acts of the Holy Apostles, although it recreates the stages of geographical distribution of Christian communities from Eastern Asia to Rome, aims to reveal the inclusion of not only Jews, but also Gentiles to Christianity.

The sources for the preaching of the Apostle Paul are found in the Holy Scriptures themselves. During the second evangelistic journey of the apostle, the Spirit of God did not allow Christian preaching in the regions of Asia Minor, but brought the apostle to Troas together with Ap. Silas, Timothy and Luke. App. Luke tells how in Troas “a vision appeared to Paul at night: a man, a Macedonian, was standing before him, begging him and saying: “Go to Macedonia and help us!” After this vision, we immediately asked to leave for Macedonia, because we understood , that the Lord has called us to preach the Gospel there. And since we were traveling from Troas, we came directly to Samothrace, and the next day to Naples, and from there to Philippi, which in that part of Macedonia is the first city – a Roman colony” (Acts 16:9-12).

Reaching Philippi is no coincidence through the island of Samothraki. The preaching of Christ’s faith in Europe began here – the thousand-year-old Balkan Thracian place of worship. It is interesting why preaching was not allowed in the Asia Minor provinces. It is suggested that St. Paul is most likely responding to the invitation of the Macedonians from Philippi, who later play a defining role in his environment, but on the other hand, how can these Philippians (Macedonians) end up with him when we know that his companions were of Asia Minor origin? From this we judge that App. Pavel, who knows Greek, takes with him people from the local Eurasian population. He used their linguistic knowledge among non-Greek speakers. The mission of Ap. Pavel is “organized according to the model of capillary penetration”. The apostle did not seek to cover a large space as a territory, but rather to build strongholds that would become bases of departure for subsequent preaching. For this purpose, he skillfully and successfully used both the infrastructure of the empire and the network of the ancient city (polis) with its specific cores. It goes around the important centers and cities at the crossroads, which are a kind of gathering places for the inhabitants of the district. People often go there because they are the seat of the administration and the courts. In practice, the word reached more people than it would have if the apostle had traveled from place to place. This has also been noted by the analysts of his missionary route.

St. Paul firstly headed for the famous Via Egnatia, making a detour to Athens and Corinth. General observations, however, show that a group of his disciples managed to connect the so-called “Central” (diagonal) road leading from Rome to Byzantium and passing through Vindobona (present-day Vienna), Sirmium (present-day Sremska Mitrovica), Naisos ( present-day Nis), Serdika (present-day Sofia), Philipopol (present-day Plovdiv), Adrianople (Adrien), Byzantium, which will be discussed below. Other apostles were appointed to instruct the newly converted believers: the evangelist Luke in Philippi, Silas and Timothy in Berea. Later in his Epistle to the Romans ap. Paul explicitly confirms the fulfillment of his task by saying that he “delivered the teaching of Christ as far as Illyricum” (Rom. 15:19). In his notes on the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Romans, bl. Theophylact Bulgarian writes: “the apostle Paul says: “because I spread the gospel from Jerusalem and the surrounding area even to Illyricum”. Do you want proof of what I am talking about, says (App. Paul)? Look at the large number of my students – from Jerusalem to Illyricum, which coincides with the borders of today’s Bulgaria. He did not say: I have preached, but fulfilled the gospel, to show that his word was not fruitless, but effective. Lest you think that he walked on a straight and broad road. “And the surrounding area,” he says, i.e. I have gone through the nations, preaching both to the north and to the south…”

St. app. Luke speaks of Philippi as “the first city in this part of Macedonia” (πρώτη της μερίδος Μακεδονίας πόλις, κολωνία) (Acts 16:12). Some think that the apostle errs in using the word μερίς (part), and justify their contention by saying that it never signified a periphery, a province, or any geographical division. It is assumed that some error was originally present in the text, and someone, wishing to correct it, replaced it with the word “μερίς”.

However, archaeological finds from Fayum (Egypt) show that the colonists there, many of whom came from Macedonia, used the word “μερίς” to distinguish the regions of the province. In this way, it is established that “Luke had a good idea of ​​the geographical terminology used in Macedonia”. Archeology “corrects” the pessimists and proves St. Luke right. The Philippian women, who were the first to be enlightened by the apostolic preaching, were proselytes – Macedonians and Phrygians, and they prayed to the Jewish God, identifying him with the ancient Thracian-Phrygian deity “Vedyu” – “Βέδυ”. To this deity, the Macedonians owe, according to legend, the salvation of their dynasty[9]. Archaeologists have confirmed with accuracy the topographical information described in Acts. According to Prof. Thompson, from the result of their excavations, carried out from 1914 to 1938, we have obtained “accurate information about the place where the Gospel was first preached in Europe”.

After Philippi ap. Paul continued through the cities of Amphipolis (near the village of Neochori), Apollonia (on the way between Amphipolis and Thessaloniki), Thessaloniki, Veria, establishing church communities everywhere. His disciples spread his work in Macedonia, Illyria, and Thrace despite opposition from interested Gentiles and Jews (see Acts 16:9-12 and Acts 16 and 17 in general). According to ancient church tradition, St. Ap. Paul also preached in Thrace. More specifically, the hypothesis that Nicopolis, which is mentioned in (Titus 3:12), is identical with Nicopolis ad Nestum, located on the banks of the river Mesta, is also proposed. Some researchers mark the city on geographical maps showing the path of ap. Paul. Archaeological excavations and diocesan lists reveal that it was a well-known episcopal center as early as the 4th-5th centuries. Thus, by God’s suggestion, the ethno-cultural region of Thrace-Macedonia is indissolubly present in the history of Christianity from the 1st century. Paul’s assessment of this region is a model of blameless faith and participation in the grace of Christ. According to St. Ap. Paul, who felt called to preserve Christ’s teaching without impurities, the churches here were a model for the entire Christianizing world at that time.

About the sermon of St. Ap. Andrei has an extensive historical and literary book. On the one hand, there is the rich apocryphal literature, and on the other, there are the short catalogs of the apostolic missionary journeys. But the most essential problem is how to differentiate historical fragments from apocryphal legendary layers and correctly interpret the extremely mysterious geography of Scythia and ethnonym nomenclature (Scythians, Myrmidons, Anthropophagi, etc.)? Another question raised by scholarship is: do the legends about St. Andrew have a political aspect to the rise to the throne of Constantinople? One of the possible answers is that the Church of Constantinople supposedly does not feel particularly confident in its status, determined at the Second Ecumenical Council in 381 and confirmed by rule 28 of the IV Ecumenical Council in 451. Hence the tendency to compensate for the absence of reliable historical tradition through ad hoc legends and apocrypha. This is how the establishment of the Constantinople Cathedral of the brother of the ap. Peter – app. Andrei Parvozvani, also called “Parvozvanna”. However, this is not true, because there are various legends about almost all the apostles. The Eparchy of Constantinople derives its authority not simply from its founder from the number of apostles, but from its early Christian history, with which it can already compete with the claims of primacy of the Roman Curia. These statements may logically lead to such an opinion, but the 28th rule of the IV Ecumenical Council, with its interpretation by the canonists, introduces us to another angle of the problem. The explanations given by Ep. Nicodemus (Milash) gives us a clear idea that in the 6th century the Roman Church accepted the decisions of the 4th Ecumenical Council and until then there was no need to assert any apostolic authority. Moreover, the popes until the 9th century did not claim any absolute, universal, infallible, divine authority of their see. The Church, led by the Holy Spirit, foresaw that it was possible for Rome to deviate from the purity of the faith, and therefore established that the Constantinople Cathedral should be the first after it, equal in honor and second in administrative magnitude. Following the development of the criticism of the sources for the apostle Andrew, one cannot fail to notice that it makes a circle and, after a period of extreme skepticism, again approaches the traditional conclusions. These conclusions are that the activity of St. Ap. Andrei developed precisely on the Balkan Peninsula. Church tradition about St. Andrew was recorded by the early Christian writer Eusebius of Caesarea. He informs us that “to Thomas, as the legend narrates, Parthia fell by lot, to Andrew – Scythia…”. Similar information was also recorded by authors or sources such as Tertullian, Epiphanius, Synaxar of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Menology of Basil II. From the analysis of the text, recorded by Eusebius and going back to Origen, we can date this tradition to the end of the II – beginning. of the 3rd century. The witnesses of the sermon of the ap. Andrew in Thrace and Scythia are a whole host. Eusebius also repeats Rufinus (“as it has been handed down to us”) and Eucherius of Lyons († 449) (“as history tells”). To them we will add Isidore of Ispalia, who also affirms that the apostle Andrew received a share to preach in Scythia and Achaia. The notice of St. Hippolytus of Rome, who was a student of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, is also authoritative. In his short treatise on the twelve apostles, he writes: “Apostle Andrew afterwards, having preached to the Scythians and Thracians, suffered death on the cross in Patras of Achaea, where he was crucified on an olive tree and buried there.” Dorotheus spoke even more fully about this preaching of Andrew: “Andrew, brother of the apostle Peter, went around all Byzantium, all Thrace and Scythia and preached the Gospel.” Even with a possible interpolation of the authorship of St. Hippolytus or Dorotheus, we have no reason to doubt the veracity of the information presented. Indirect confirmation of St. Andrew’s apostolic preaching is also found in St. John Chrysostom, who delivers a special eulogy for the apostles, where he says the following: “Andrew enlightens the wise men of Hellas.” Here “Hellada” is not some toponymic fiction, but a real people, similar to all the others mentioned by the Saint of Constantinople, delineating the geographical regions of the apostolic preaching. It is unreasonable to believe that app. Andrew preached in Scythia, but not in Thrace. Finally, again, the entire church tradition tells us that the activity of Ap. Andrei is developing in the Eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula. In Dobrudja, on the border between present-day Bulgaria and Romania, there are the following toponyms – “St. Andrew’s stream” and the “cave of St. Andrey”, where today the monastery “St. Andrei” “about whom legends related to st. Andrey and his three students Ina, Pina and Rima”. Some folk songs in Dobruja and on the left side of the Prut River remind of a missionary mission of St. Andrew in these lands. The power of the tradition about the preaching of the Apostle Andrew is so prevalent in the peoples who inhabited the so-called Scythia that even the Bulgarians of Altsek in Italy in the 7th century wore Andrew’s cross in a Hyksos shape. And it spread throughout Medieval Christian Europe, so that in the 14th century in Scotland, the nobles who considered themselves Scythian heirs could ask the Pope for ecclesiastical independence from England, citing Andrew’s sermon among the Scythians as an argument. Information has also been found about another apostle who preached in the Balkans – St. Ap. Philip. He is one “among the 7 deacons who baptized Simeon and the eunuch, was the bishop of Scythian Thrace”.

General written sources for the spread of Christianity

There is basic source data for the associates of the app. Paul and Andrew, who continue their work. Their number is exceeded only by the apostles from Asia Minor and the Middle East[28]. More than 20 apostles preached Christianity on the Balkan peninsula, and those who suffered for the faith numbered hundreds, even thousands. At the head of the Christian communities in Serdica, Philippopolis, Sirmium and in Tomi (Constanza) as early as the middle of the first century, there were bishops from the narrowest circle of Christ’s disciples, whom the Church marks as the “seventy apostles”. It is no coincidence that one of the ancient biographies claims that St. Cornelius was from Thrace, Italy. We have reason to see the presence of the Balkan inhabitants first in the act of transmission of the new faith from the Jews who preserved the true worship of God to the Gentiles, among whom were the Balkan inhabitants. Their contact with the God-protected people of Israel has been documented since the period of the campaigns of Alexander the Great, and this has also been proven archeologically. Many Macedonians at that time inhabited Samaria, and Hellenes the coastal cities such as Gaza, Ascalon, Caesarea, Ptolemais, etc. The road from the Adriatic to the Danube, from where eastern traders moved to Italy and Pannonia, had a certain share in the early penetration of Christianity. So that the lands of the Balkan Peninsula are not only a place for spreading, but also a way for Christianity to penetrate into Europe. The reception, lively preaching and development of the Christian life of the principles bequeathed by the apostles themselves in these churches did not stop in the following years. Tertullian says that the succession in the churches founded by the apostle Paul was preserved until his time.

Let’s also look at the general reports about the spread of Christianity in the Balkans in the period I – V centuries. The chronology ranges from the II – III centuries, and the majority of the existing information is from the period IV – V centuries. The early reports are with panegyric in nature, they do not seek to fix the spread of Christianity in the Balkan region, but highlight its triumphal march throughout the Ecumenium. The earliest message of this kind is the testimony of the famous Christian ideologue Quinta Florenta Septimius Tertullian. He testifies that in the 2nd century. Christianity had already penetrated among the Getae, Dacian, Sarmatian and Scythian tribes. This is what the text says: “Et Galliarum diversae nations et Britanorum inaccesa Romanis loca, Christo vero subdita, et Sarmaturum et Dacorum et Germanorum et Scytharum et abditarum multarum gentium et provinciarum et insularum nobis ignotarum et quae enumerare minus possemus”. There are opinions that Tertullian is an apologist and for this reason, he uses a lot of exaggerations and hyperboles. As an argument in support of this distrust, they consider a passage from a commentary on Origen’s book as an interpretation of the Gospel of St. Ap. Matthew. He believes that the Gospel has not yet been preached in the lands around the Danube. By the way, Origen’s work is also apologetic, as shown by the fact that the Alexandrian author wishes to answer the pagan Porphyry, who denies the truth of the words of the Savior (Matt. 24:14). The pagan philosopher believed that evangelism was complete and the world should no longer exist. Elsewhere, Origen writes that Christianity attracted a large number of followers among “every nation and race of men,” which means that it also spread among the barbarian world. Another writer who confirms that Christianity existed around the Danube River is Arnobius, who claims that there were Christians among the Alemanni, the Persians and the Scythians[32]. The next moment in the process of Christianization was the Gothic invasions of the 3rd century. There is indirect confirmation from the pages of the “Carmen’s Apologetics” by the poet Commodianus. He informs that the Goths took many captives, among them Christians, who also preached among the barbarians living around the Danube. The same is confirmed by the church historian Sozomen, who mentions that the Goths living around the Danube took many captives from Thrace and Asia, among them many Christians. These Christians healed many sick people and many Goths accepted their faith. The statement of Socrates [34] that some part of the Sarmatians, after the defeat they suffered by the troops of the imp. Constantine in 322 became Christians, it is also confirmed by Jerome, who describes the triumph of Christ over the demons in his letter to Laetus: “From India, from Persia and from Ethiopia we every hour welcomed crowds of monks, the Armenians laid aside their quivers, the Huns learn the psalter, and warm the Scythian cold with the warmth of their faith – the golden and blond Geth army is surrounded by church tents. Perhaps that is why they fight against us with a bravery equal to ours, because they profess the same faith”. Ergo, Christianity was already spread in the lands south of the Danube, so that it could successfully seek its followers in the areas north of the river. The father of Church history, Eusebius, rarely mentions Balkan Christianity, but we know that he was a selective writer. As Prof. Helzer also says, knowing about the work of Africanus, Eusebius did not use his information because it was already known to the public, but looked for other sources. He mentions bishops of Anchialo and Debelt. Aelius Julius Publius is known to have signed the epistle of Serapion of Antioch to Cyric and Ponticus, in which he also gave the following testimony about Sotas, the bishop of Anchia: “Aelius Publius Julius, bishop of the colony of Debeltus in Thrace, I call God to witness that the blessed Sotas, bishop of Anchia, wanted to cast out the wicked spirit of Priscilla, but the hypocrites did not allow him”. Another Christian historian confirms that Christianity penetrated deeply into the Balkan Roman provinces: “the Hellenes, the Macedonians and the Illyrians… professed their faith freely because Constantine ruled there.” At the First Ecumenical Council in Nicaea, many bishops from the Thracian and Illyrian lands took part, and this is mentioned by all church historians, such as Eusebius, Socrates and Sozomen. Testimonies were also recorded by St. Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 300-373). We know that as a participant in the Council of Serdika in 343, he came to the Balkans. He indicates the peoples who accepted the “word of Christ” – the Scythians, the Ethiopians, the Persians, the Armenians, the Goths.

St. John Chrysostom delivered a sermon in a Gothic church, using as a metaphor, different animals – leopards, lions and lambs, to which peoples accepting Christianity are likened. The secularist point of view of some authors leads to an overexposure of the importance of the empire for the spread of the faith, namely, the sermon of St. John reveals to us that it was actually the work of the apostles and their assistants. The church is first of all a divine organism, and secondarily it also has its administrative institutions.

Photo: A page from Ulfila’s Silver Bible from the 5th century, “priest” is translated with the word god / Public Domain